* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [1. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:02] MONDAY, MAY 18TH AND I'M CALLING THE PUBLIC FACILITIES COMMITTEE. UH, MEETING TO ORDER. UH, IF WE COULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. A PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TWO THROUGH THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE REPUBLIC 40 STANDS. ONE. NATION, NATION UNDER GOD, LIBERTY, AND JUSTICE. ALL RIGHT. AND SARAH, THIS, UH, MEETING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AND POSTED IN COMPLIANCE BEFORE YOU. YES SIR. IT HAS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, MAY I GET A [4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ] MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA? SO MOVED. I'LL SECOND IT. ALRIGHT. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE TWO AMENDMENTS TO OUR AGENDA. THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS TO TAKE ITEM NINE L, WHICH IS THE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ORDINANCE CHAPTER 1 0 2 WATERWAYS AND MOVE THAT UP TO EIGHT B AS AN ACTION ITEM. AND THE SECOND IS I RECOMMEND THAT ADMINISTRATION CONDUCT, UH, A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE POTENTIAL PURCHASE OF THE FORMER GLASSWORKS PROPERTY AND BUILDING AND REPURPOSING THE BUILDING FOR A USE AS A PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING. AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THIS COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? I'LL, I'LL SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU LARRY. SO THAT ARE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS. ARE YOU TAKING, IS THAT ONE MOTION OR TWO ON THAT? ONE IS GLASSWORK, ONE IS MOVING THE WATERWAYS? YES. THERE, THERE THERE ARE TWO MOTIONS, SORRY. OKAY. 11 MAKING, UM, NINE L MM-HMM . AS EIGHT B AND THEN ADDING THIS ITEM THAT I JUST, OKAY. LARRY, IS THAT A MOTION? IS THAT A SECOND FOR BOTH THOSE MOTIONS? YES, IT IS. ALRIGHT, SOUNDS GOOD. WE'LL TAKE THE NINE L MOVING IT TO EIGHT B FIRST. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? OBJECTION TO THAT CHANGE? MM-HMM. ANYBODY ONLINE? ALRIGHT, SEE NO OBJECTION. THAT IS APPROVED THAT WE MOVE TO EIGHT B. MOVING TO THE SECOND, UH, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR GLASSWORKS. UH, DID YOU HAVE A PLACEMENT ON THAT ONE? ON THE AGENDA? UH, WE COULD PROBABLY DO THAT AS EIGHT C. EIGHT C. OKAY. AND IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO ADDING THAT TO THE AGENDA DISCUSSION? YEAH, DISCUSSION OR DISCUSSION IS DISCUSSION? YEAH. BY ALL MEANS. WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED FUNDS TO RENOVATE THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING. UM, I DO NOT THINK DO HAVE THE FUNDS. NO, I SAID WE DO DO HAVE THE FUNDS, BUT IT'S USING THE EXISTING SITE AND EXISTING, UM, BUILDING RENOVATION. WE ALL ALL APPROVED THAT WHEN WE HAD OUR MEETINGS, UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR YEAR. SO I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF LOOKING AT ANOTHER LOCATION BESIDES THE LOCATION THAT WE HAVE. ALRIGHT. DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT ONE? WELL, IT'S JUST A DISCUSSION. NO, IT'S NOT. NO, NO, NO. IT'S MOTION. AGENDA ITEM. DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? VOTE TO, TO AMEND THE AGENDA ON THE AGENDA. OH, OKAY. THAT'S ALL. WE'RE, THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. PLEASE ROLL. CALL, VOTE. SARAH. COUNCIL MEMBER PASSIT? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MCALLEN? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER DAWSON? YES. CHAIR HOWARD? NO. VICE CHAIR TABER? NO. COUNCIL MEMBER LAWSON. MARK LAWSON? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER REEDS? YES. COMMITTEE, VICE CHAIR. BARTHOLOMEW? YES. THE MOTION PASSES. ALRIGHT. AND THAT WILL BE PLACED ON EIGHT C. ALRIGHT, NOW CAN WE HAVE A VOTE ON THE AGENDA AS AMENDED? IS THERE ANY OBJECTION ON THAT? DO WE NEED TO ROLL CALL THAT ONE. WHAT'S THE POINT? NO, I'M JUST ASKING, JUST ASKING. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THE AMENDED AGENDA SAYING NONE. THE AGENDA IS AMENDED AS STATED IN THE MOTIONS. ALRIGHT, NOW, UH, MOVING FORWARD TO [5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ] ITEM FIVE, THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, UH, FROM APRIL 20TH, 2026. UH, MAY I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THAT ONE? SO A MOTION. ALRIGHT, UH, I GOT JOE AND THEN PAULA, I GOT YOU A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE, ON THE MINUTES? SEEING NO DISCUSSION, CAN THIS BE, UH, PASSED WITH NO OBJECTION APPROVING? NO OBJECTION. ALRIGHT. MINUTES ARE APPROVED. UH, NOW [6. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD – 15 MINUTES TOTAL ] MOVING INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, UH, WE DO HAVE 15 MINUTES ALLOCATED FOR IT. HOWEVER, WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE SIGNED UP THEN THAT 15 MINUTES REQUIRES, UH, DO WE WANT TO DO IT NOW? GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND. IS THERE A MOTION FOR THAT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. A MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT, SO WE GOT A MOTION TO EXTEND FROM, [00:05:01] UH, TAB AND SECOND FROM TOM. HOW MANY DO WE HAVE? IT'S JUST, UH, FOUR OVER THE LIMIT. THAT'S FINE. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION? YEAH. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO EXTEND TO ALLOW THE FOUR ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS? YEAH. ALRIGHT, THAT IS APPROVED. AND NOW WE CAN JUMP INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. I'M NOT GONNA READ THE WHOLE STATEMENT 'CAUSE I THINK MOST OF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE, UH, BUT YOU ALREADY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. AND THE FIRST ONE UP IS MICHAEL HUBBARD. SIR, HOW YOU DOING? HEY, GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, MY NAME IS MIKE HUBBARD. I'M THE CHAIR OF THE DFOS ALLEN COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO, UH, THANK THE STAFF AND THE COUNTY COUNCIL FOR THE EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKING PLACE THESE LAST FEW MONTHS ON THE WATERWAYS ORDINANCE. UM, FROM THE, UH, PERSPECTIVE OF THE DUSKY ISLAND COMMUNITY. THE APRIL WORKSHOP WAS, UH, ESPECIALLY PRODUCTIVE AND HELPFUL AND WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE. UH, I WANT TO ALSO THANK, UH, UH, COUNCILMAN LAWSON FOR HIS TIME AND EFFORT, UH, ON IN THIS, UM, ENDEAVOR. UM, AS EVERYONE HERE KNOWS, DUSKY ALLEN IS DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER PART OF BEAUFORT COUNTY. UH, WE'RE AN ISLAND WITHOUT A BRIDGE. SO WHEN IT COMES TO BRINGING FREIGHT OVER, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US. UM, WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAINTAIN FREIGHT ACCESS THROUGH THE PUBLIC BOAT LANDING PRIMARILY THROUGH, UH, CROSS ISLAND, UM, BOAT RAMP TO, UH, DE FASQUE ISLAND. UH, THE BARGES THAT COME SUPPORT, UH, BRING GROCERIES, RESTAURANT SUPPLIES, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUEL, LANDSCAPING MATERIALS, AND OTHER NECESSITIES THAT SUPPORT THE DAILY LIFE ON THE ISLAND. THEY SERVE THE RESIDENTS, RESTAURANTS, SMALL BUSINESSES, FARMS AND NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AND COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS. OUR GOAL IS NOT TO AVOID REASONABLE REGULATION. IN FACT, THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU, WHICH INCLUDED IN YOUR MEETING PACKET SPECIFICALLY INCLUDES LICENSING REQUIREMENTS, COAST GUARD COMPLIANCE, INSURANCE STANDARDS, SAFETY REGULATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS. WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS CLARITY AND FAIRNESS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE ORDINANCE SHOULD CLEARLY DISTINGUISH ESSENTIAL FREIGHT OPERATIONS FROM RECREATIONAL AND VISITOR ORIENTED MARINE ACTIVITIES. WE ALSO BELIEVE QUALIFIED FREIGHT OPERATORS SERVING DUSKY SHOULD HAVE REASONABLE NON-DISCRIMINATORY ACCESS TO COUNTY LANDINGS WITHOUT DEPENDING ON EXCLUSIVE CONTRACTS OR DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS. THE PROPOSAL WE'VE SUBMITTED TO YOU IS INTENDED TO ACCOMPLISH EXACTLY THAT WHILE STILL FULLY PRESERVING THE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY TO REGULATE SAFETY, OPERATIONS AND PUBLIC ACCESS. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THESE AMENDMENTS RECOGNIZE A BASIC REALITY. RELIABLE FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION IS ESSENTIAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND ECONOMIC WELLBEING OF THE DUSKY COMMUNITY. WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS PROCESS AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO WORK COLLABORATIVE WITH THE COUNCIL STAFF AS THE ORDINANCE MOVES FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MS. HUBBARD. UH, NEXT UP IS JEFF GALE. THREE MINUTES. SORRY. GOOD THING. GOOD EVENING COUNSEL. UH, THANK YOU. FIRST, I WANNA SINCERELY THANK YOU GUYS FOR THIS IS OUR THIRD TIME UP HERE SPEAKING AND GOING OVER THESE, UH, WATERWAY ALLIANCES AND, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH YOU GUYS. UM, I KNOW THAT THE DISCUSSION HASN'T BEEN EASY AND WE TRULY APPRECIATE THAT, ESPECIALLY THANKS TO COUNCILMAN MARK LAWSON, UH, DSKY COUNSEL MY CUPBOARD AND, UH, DYLAN KID FOR THE HELP AND WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US THROUGH THIS PROCESS. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS PROPOSAL REALLY ISN'T ABOUT CLARITY, FAIRNESS, IT'S RECOGNIZING THE REALITY OF HOW THE FUSS SKI ISLAND FUNCTIONS. AND THIS IS GONNA KIND OF GO IN LINE WITH, UH, WHAT MIKE WAS JUST SAYING. BUT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHANGES IN THE, UM, AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE IS THE DEFINITION FOR WHAT A BARGE IS. WE ARE NOT A FERRY SERVICE. WE'RE NOT TRANSPORTING PEOPLE, WE'RE NOT FISHING, NOT WATCHING DOLPHINS. WE ARE LITERALLY SHIPPING CARGO TO AND FROM. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS PUTTING IN BARGES AS A DEFINED DEFINITION AS SOMETHING SEPARATE THAN WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE IN PLACE. UM, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE ALSO RECOGNIZED THAT TRANSPORTING CARGO VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES TO, TO DUSKY ISLAND IS ESSENTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE ISLAND RESIDENTS. ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT IN THE ORDINANCE IS TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY. SO WE'VE PUT IN LANGUAGE THAT REQUIRES OPERATORS TO MAINTAIN LICENSING, INSURANCE, SAFETY, COMPLIANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AND PROPER VESSEL MAINTENANCE, WHICH WE ARE, WHICH WE BELIEVE ARE REASONABLE STANDARDS AND WE SUPPORT THEM AT THE SAME TIME. THE PROPOSAL ALSO CREATES FAIR NON DISCRETION. , IT'S ALRIGHT. OH MAN. UM, ACCESS TO [00:10:01] STANDARDS SO OPERATORS CAN CONTINUE SERVING THE ISLAND WITHOUT UNCERTAINTY AND OR INCONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT. STRONG STANDARDS AND FAIR ACCESS CAN COEXIST. THIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT REMOVE OVERSIGHT. IT SIMPLY CREATES CLEAR DEFINITIONS, CLEAR RULES AND FRAMEWORK THAT RECOGNIZES THE ESSENTIAL ROLE OF THESE SERVICES PLAY FOR FUSIA ISLAND. AGAIN, THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR TIME AND HEARING US OUT AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO COLLABORATING WITH YOU GUYS IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU. UH, NEXT UP IS CORY CUNNINGHAM. GOOD AFTERNOON COUNCIL. THANKS FOR LETTING ME TALK. UH, I'M CORY CUNNINGHAM. I'M A US COAST GUARD, UH, CERTIFIED MASTER CAPTAIN. UH, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THIS ISSUE BEGAN WITH CONCERNS REGARDING ABANDONED VESSELS AND THEN ACCESS AND PUBLIC SAFETY AT BUFORT COUNTY BOAT LANDINGS. YET THROUGH FOIA REQUESTS, PUBLIC RECORDS AND CONTINUED DISCUSSION, MANY OF THE BROADER CLAIMS SURROUNDING ACCESS AND SAFETY HAVE NOT APPEARED SUBSTANTIATED, PARTICULARLY AT LOCATIONS LIKE CROSS ISLAND, WHERE LITTLE EVIDENCE OF AN ONGOING OPERATIONAL PROBLEM HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED. OVER TIME, THE RATIONALE CONTINUED TO SHIFT. WHAT BEGAN AS A DISCUSSION SURROUNDING SAFETY AND ACCESS HAS INCREASINGLY EVOLVED INTO DISCUSSIONS CENTERED AROUND COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS, FEES, AND FINANCIAL FAIRNESS. AT THE SAME TIME, REPEATED CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED REGARDING LICENSING, INSURANCE AND PROFESSIONALISM AMONG LOCAL CAPTAINS, DESPITE MAINTAINING FULL COMPLIANCE IN SERVING THIS COMMUNITY RESPONSIBLY FOR YEARS. UH, WHAT MANY OF US CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE WITH IS THIS, WHY HAS SO MUCH TIME LOBBYING EFFORT, PUBLIC PRESSURE AND PROPOSED REGULATION BEEN DIRECTED TOWARD RESTRICTING A RELATIVELY SMALL GROUP OF LOCAL WORKING CAPTAINS OPERATING FROM PUBLIC RESOURCES THAT ARE HISTORICALLY ACCESSIBLE TO ALL. AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, AT WHAT POINT DOES STEWARDSHIP OF A PUBLIC RESOURCE BEGIN TO DRIFT INTO SELECTIVE ACCESS THAT ADVANTAGES SOME COMMERCIAL INTERESTS OVER OTHERS? THESE BOAT LANDINGS WERE BUILT AND MAINTAINED FOR THE PUBLIC NOT TO FUNCTION AS GATE KEPT E AN ECONOMIC TERRITORY FOR THOSE WITH GREATER INFLUENCE FUNDING OR LOBBYING ACCESS. I SAY THAT RESPECTIVELY AND SINCERELY. I ALSO BELIEVE MANY RESIDENTS ARE NOT OPPOSED TO REASONABLE STRUCTURE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. WHAT CONCERNS PEOPLE IS THE APPEARANCE OF SELECTIVE BURDEN, UNEQUAL ACCESS, AND THE GRADUAL NORMALIZATION OF ADDITIONAL COSTS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT SMALLER OPERATORS WHILE BENEFITING MORE ESTABLISHED INTEREST. SO I WOULD SIMPLY LEAVE COUNSEL WITH THIS QUESTION. HOW DO WE PRESERVE BOTH PROTECTION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS FOR ORDINARY WORKING PEOPLE? IF ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE INCREASINGLY DEPENDS ON WHO CAN AFFORD ADDITIONAL FEES, POLITICAL INFLUENCE OR PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT, UM, AND HOW DO WE ENSURE PUBLIC BUFORT COUNTY'S PUBLIC RESOURCES REMAIN GENUINE, GENUINELY PUBLIC, NOT MERELY PUBLIC IN NAME, BUT IMP PRACTICAL REALITY FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE RESPONSIBLY USED THEM FOR GENERATIONS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SINCERELY THANK THE COUNCIL FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO ALL SIDES OF THIS ISSUE AND FOR WORKING TO CORRECT AND CLARIFY THE ORDINANCE IN A WAY THAT HELPS PRESERVE THE LONGSTANDING TRADI TRADITION OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO BEAUFORT COUNTY'S BOAT LANDINGS. THESE RAMPS HAVE SERVED GENERATIONS OF RESIDENTS WORKING CAPTAINS, FAMILIES AND VISITORS ALIKE, AND WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND STEWARDSHIP OF THESE IMPORTANT PUBLIC RESOURCES. THANK YOU MS. GAN. UH, DID SHOULD GO HOME ALREADY. UH, LARRY, I THINK YOU'RE, DON'T THINK YOU'RE ON MUTE. SORRY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HEARD ME. ANYWAY, UH, NEXT UP IS, UH, MR. PHILIP SMITH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN, GUYS, WE'VE BEEN HERE A BUNCH. YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD IT FROM EVERYBODY. YOU JUST HEARD IT FROM THAT GENTLEMAN RIGHT THERE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC ACCESS, COMMERCIAL ACCESS, DIFFERENT THAN PUBLIC ACCESS. I DIDN'T EVEN WANNA START WITH THIS. SAT DOWN, LISTENED THROUGH YOUR ENTIRE BUDGET MEETING. AMAZING. YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE USING ELECTRIC CARS, YOU'RE BUILDING CHARGES FOR ELECTRIC CARS. YOU CHARGE FOR THOSE, YOU CHARGE FOR BASEBALL FIELDS, YOU CHARGE FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO IN THIS COUNTY CHARGING AT A BOAT RAMP. THE END GAME TO THIS IS NOT PUTTING ANYBODY OUT OF BUSINESS. IT'S ACTUALLY THE COUNTY WORKING WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY IN BUSINESS. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE CONSUMER PAY FOR IT JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER MARINA IN THIS TOWN. THE CONSUMER PACE WHERE IT ACTUALLY, I'VE HEARD LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD, IT DOESN'T REALLY LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD. WHAT IT DOES IS IT GETS PEOPLE PAYING EQUAL, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD CHARGE LESS MONEY AT A BOAT RAMP 'CAUSE THEY DON'T PAY THAT. SO THAT ACTUALLY MAKES IT EASIER FOR THEM TO PUT THE OTHER PEOPLE OUT OF BUSINESS. SO NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT PUTTING ANYBODY OUTTA BUSINESS. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR HERE IS [00:15:01] TO CHARGE A REASONABLE FEE FOR THEM TO OPERATE OFF OF THERE. YOU MAKE SURE THEY'RE COMPLIANT SO YOU DON'T GET SUED IF THERE'S ANY ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN THERE AND YOU LIMIT THOSE THINGS. NOW WE'LL GO TO THE CARGO. THE CARGO I TALKED ABOUT IMMENSELY BEFORE. THE ACCESS DIFFERENCE IS 2.5 MILES FROM BUCKINGHAM LANDING TO BROAD OR TO UH, PALMETTO BAY, 2.5 MILE DIFFERENCE. AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO CROSS OR CROSS CALABOGIE SOUND. I'VE BEEN BY MORE LIGHTHOUSES THAN THESE GUYS HAVE BEEN BY OUTHOUSES. WHEN YOU HAVE TO CROSS KIB BOOGIE SOUND IN A NORTH WIND WITH AN INCOMING TIDE OR A SOUTH WIND WITH AN OUTCOMING TIDE, THAT CAR GOES IN JEOPARDY. IF YOU'RE ALREADY ON THAT WEST SIDE OF THE SOUND, YOU'RE IN A SAFER ZONE. NOW THE TRUCKS DON'T HAVE TO COME ON A HILTON HEAD WITH THE GROCERIES. IT MAKES IT CHEAPER FOR THEM TO GET THEIR CARGO TO THAT SPOT AT BUCKINGHAM LANDING. AND THAT LANDING IS LIGHTLY USED COMPARED TO THE OTHER LANDINGS. SO IT MAKES SENSE FOR Y'ALL TO DO THAT AND MAKE THAT A SINGLE CARGO LANDING WAY MORE SENSE THAN FIGHTING WITH ALL THE OTHER PUBLIC INTERESTS AND THE OTHER COMMERCIAL INTERESTS AT BROAD CREEK. SO YOU GOT WAYS TO DO THIS GUYS SMART WAYS AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR ZERO SUM BUDGET, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE FIRST MEETING, YOU'VE GOTTA WAY TO GENERATE INCOME. I'VE NEVER SEEN POLITICIANS LOOK AWAY FROM A WAY TO GENERATE INCOME. SO IF YOU CAN GENERATE INCOME, INCREASE THE BEAUTY AND THE USEFULNESS OF THESE LANDINGS, YOU GOT A GREAT THING TO WORK WITH. THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU MS. SMITH. ALRIGHT, NEXT UP IS, UM, I GUESS BYRON, I'M SORRY, I CANNOT READ THE HANDWRITING ON THAT ONE. BRIAN. BYRON. BYRON. BYRON, SORRY. BYRON SEWELL. GOTCHA MAN. THANK YOU. SPEEDING. MY NAME IS BYRON SEWELL. I'M A 53-YEAR-OLD NATIVE OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND, A LICENSED CAPTAIN AND OWNER OF NATIVE SON ADVENTURE. I SPENT MY LIFE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND MEANS EVERYTHING TO ME. OVER 90% OF MY BUSINESS ALREADY RUNS FROM MARINAS, BUT I'M HERE BECAUSE I KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO KEEP OUR PUBLIC LANDINGS OPEN FOR LOCAL WATERMEN, FISHERMEN, FAMILIES, AND SMALL BUSINESSES. LANDINGS LIKE THESE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS LONG BEFORE BRIDGES, MARINAS, AND RESORTS. THEY'RE PART OF OUR CULTURE AND WORKING HISTORY OF THE LOW COUNTRY AND SHOULD NOT BECOME CONTROLLED BY BIG MONEY OR SPECIAL INTERESTS. THESE SMALL LOCAL CAPTAINS AND GUIDES DEPEND ON HEALTHY WATERWAYS, WILDLIFE, AND PRESERVING OUR NATURAL EN ENVIRONMENT, PROTECTING THESE LANDINGS IS PROTECTING OUR HERITAGE. THAT'S IT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. NOW MOVING INTO THE EXPANDED LIST HERE. UH, WE HAVE KEITH WALSTON, AFTERNOON COMMITTEE MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR EXTENDING THE COMMENT PERIOD FOR A FEW MINUTES. OUT OF RESPECT FOR YOU AND EVERYBODY ELSE HERE. I'M NOT GONNA REPEAT EVERYTHING WE'VE ALL SAID OVER AND OVER, LIKE PHIL SAID, WE'VE BEEN UP HERE A BUNCH OF TIMES. IT'S JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUT ANYBODY OUTTA BUSINESS. NOBODY WANTS TO PUT ANYBODY OUTTA BUSINESS. WE WANNA PUT IN A PROCESS THAT PUTS IN SOME CONTROL AND SOME ORDER IN THE BOAT LANDINGS AND IT'S REALLY VERY SIMPLE. PERMIT AND BUSINESS LICENSE, THE PROPER COMMERCIAL, MARINE GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE AND AN APPLICABLE USER FEE THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT CREATES A REVENUE STREAM FOR THE COUNTY. AND THAT'S IT. THAT'S REALLY ALL IT IS. IT'S NOT ABOUT PUTTING PEOPLE OUTTA BUSINESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, NEXT ON THE LIST IS, UH, JOSH, IS IT, UH, 12 MEYER? UM, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD ACTUALLY. I THINK EVERYBODY DID A GREAT JOB, CAPTAIN COREY, I LIKED YOURS THE BEST. I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY WELL DONE. UH, SAY. UM, IT'S, IT'S GREAT TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS. IT'S THE FIRST TIME I HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH LIKE, POLITICS, REALLY. LIKE YOU GUYS HAVE A WHAT A NEAT THING THAT YOU GUYS ARE ABLE TO DO. LIKE BECOME, YOU'RE IN HERE ALL THE TIME AND PEOPLE ARE I LIKE IT. YEAH, IT'S JUST KIND OF NEAT. MY FAVORITE PART WAS THE PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE. UM, AND THAT'S FOR REAL. I, UH, SO I'M, I AM ACTUALLY AN EAGLE SCOUT AND IT'S BEEN A, YOU DON'T, YOU USED TO GET UP IN SCHOOL AND LIKE DO THE THING AND YOU JUST DON'T GET THAT, THAT OPTION ANYMORE. UM, JUST, JUST WANT TO TOUCH ON THE FAIRNESS ISSUE AND MAYBE THE USER FEE. UM, NOBODY I DON'T THINK IS TRYING TO SUGGEST THAT IN ANY WAY. THE PUBLIC DOCS ARE TRYING TO COMPETE WITH MARINAS. UH, THE PUBLIC DOCS ARE LITERALLY JUST A DOC. MARINAS HAVE BATHROOMS, RESTAURANTS, UH, PEOPLE THERE TO HELP YOU. YOU CAN BUY GAS, YOU CAN DO ALL THIS STUFF. AND MY, I KNOW WE PAY A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY MONTHLY TO THE MARINA THAT WE GENERALLY DOCK AT. UM, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT GOOD IT IS TO CHARGE A MINIMAL FEE ON THESE LITTLE TIMES. LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE ONE I USE MOST IS THE CROSS ISLAND BRIDGE. THE ENTIRE DOCK, PROBABLY LIKE THE [00:20:01] FLOATING PART, COST, I DON'T KNOW, 10 GRAND OR SOMETHING. IT DOES COULDN'T POSSIBLY COST THAT MUCH MONEY, UM, EXCEPT NOW THE ONE THAT WE WERE AT LAST WEEK OR THE TIME BEFORE THAT. WHAT WAS IT? OH, OLD. OLD, UH, THE ONE I PARKED AT THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE. WHAT WAS IT? OLD OLD TOWN BLUFFTON. HAVE YOU GUYS BEEN TO THIS DOCK? IT IS GORGEOUS AND I JUST WANNA SAY IT'S PROBABLY EPE WOOD. AND IF WE WANNA HAVE A SMOKE, LET'S GET THE EPE WOOD DOWN AT CROSS ISLAND BRIDGE. IT IS GORGEOUS, BEAUTIFUL, AND AWESOME. THAT'S ALL I GOTTA SAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, NOW MOVING IN. NEXT SPEAKER IS, UH, ROBERT ALEXANDER. MY NAME IS ROBERT ALEXANDER. I OWN, UH, GREEN HAIR AND ADVENTURES FISHING COMPANY, BEAUFORD DOLPHIN ADVENTURES BOAT TOUR COMPANY HERE IN BEAUFORD AND PORT ROYAL. UH, I HAVE FOUR CAPTAINS THAT WORK FOR ME. WE CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMY, THE TOURISM OF BEAUFORT HERE. UH, WE HAVE TWO, ONE OF MY BOATS OPERATES AT A MARINA, ONE OF MY BOATS. O2 OF MY BOATS OPERATE OFF OF PUBLIC BOAT LANDINGS. SO I UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES OF THIS, UM, DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE BEEN HAVING. AND I WANT TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR WHAT WE CURRENT, HOW THE COURT ORDINANCE IS CURRENTLY STATED. UM, I DO ALSO WANNA STATE THAT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, IN ORDER FOR ME TO LEGALLY OPERATE IN BEAUFORD COUNTY AS A BOAT CAPTAIN TO OFFER THE TOURS THAT I DO, THE FISHING CHARTERS THAT I OFFER, I'M CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO HAVE MY CAPTAIN'S LICENSE THAT IS RENEWED EVERY FIVE YEARS. THERE'S A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT CAPTAIN'S LICENSE. UM, THERE'S A DRUG CONSORTIUM THAT I'M REQUIRED TO BE A PART OF, UM, AND ALL MY CAPTAINS AS WELL, OR REQUIRED TO BE PART OF THAT. I'M REQUIRED TO HAVE COMMERCIAL INSURANCE THAT FOR ALL MY OPERATIONS, ALL MY BOATS. I ALSO, UM, AM REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE THAT'S JUST A REQUIREMENT OF DOING BUSINESS HERE IN BEAUFORT COUNTY. UM, WHICH WE HAVE ALL THOSE THINGS. AGAIN, JUST WANTED TO SUPPORT, REITERATE MY SUPPORT FOR THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALEXANDER. UH, LAST ON THE LIST HERE IS, UH, PATRICK COUGHLIN. UH, DID, DID YOU WANNA, OKAY. I CAN, WELL, LET ME TAKE HOME 'CAUSE I ALREADY TOOK YOU OFF THE LIST, BUT I I CAN GET YOU BACK ON. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO. YEAH, COME ON UP. YEAH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOOD. UH, I JUST WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, WE GOT HERE IN A CRAZY WAY, NOBODY SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THIS EXCEPT COUNTY STAFF RECOGNIZED AN ISSUE THAT ENFORCEMENT WA WASN'T HAPPENING. THE COUNTY WAS FAILING US AND THE CROSS ISLAND BOAT RAMP HAS BEEN A MESS. AND I THINK EVERYBODY HERE CAN AGREE TO THAT. BUT THE COUNTY CAME AND PUT UP AN ORDINANCE IN THE BEGINNING AND THE COUNTY SAID, HEY, WE NEED TO CLARIFY WHAT CONSTITUTES COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY. AND THAT'S WHERE I DECIDED TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS. ONCE AFTER THAT ORIGINALLY CHANGED AROUND COUNCIL HERE STARTED GOING AGAINST WHAT COUNTY STAFF WAS SAYING, IT MADE A COMPLETE 360. IT WENT FROM, HEY, LET'S IDENTIFY WHAT COMMERCIAL REALLY IS TO OPEN IT UP TO EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL. NOBODY WANTS TO PUT ANYBODY OUTTA BUSINESS, BUT IT'S ONLY FAIR TO REGULATE WHAT GOES ON. THE COUNTY SHOULDN'T BE SUBSIDIZING ANYBODY OVER ANOTHER PERSON. THE COUNTY SHOULD LOOK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SAME STANDARDS ARE FULFILLED. LICENSING A FEE, DRUG TESTS, THE STUFF THAT MOST OF THESE GUYS DO ANYWAY. BUT IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE. IT SHOULDN'T BE OPEN TO THE WORLD. WE'VE SEEN WHAT THIS DOES IN OTHER PLACES. WE'RE STARTING TO SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING ALREADY. I THINK Y'ALL JUST NEED TO, TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. NOBODY IS LOOKING TO PUT ANYONE OUTTA BUSINESS. THERE'S PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY, ESPECIALLY ON HILTON HEAD FOR EVERY, EVERYONE BEING A COMMON SENSE APPROACH ON THIS WOULDN'T CAUSE THAT MUCH OF A HARDSHIP LIKE SOME PEOPLE ARE SAYING. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. HEATHER, DID YOU WANNA GET BACK UP HERE? AND HEATHER WRATH FOR THE RECORD ON BEHALF OF THE LOW COUNTRY WATERWAYS ALLIANCE. SO A COUPLE OF THINGS, TWO SPEAKERS AGO, I THINK THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME FROM BEAUFORT WAS ROBERT. UM, I'M TOTALLY IN AGREEMENT. HE'S PART OF A CONSORTIUM. HE GETS DRUG TESTED, COAST GUARD CERTIFIED INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. WE GET ALL OF THAT AND MOST OF THE OPERATORS BEHIND US ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING. BUT GUESS WHAT, A LOT OF THEM AT THE CROSS ISLAND ARE NOT. THEY'RE COMING OVER FROM SAVANNAH. THEY'RE DOING OTHER THINGS WITH OUR PUBLIC BOAT LANDINGS. AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PERMIT PROCESS. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE COMMERCIAL MARINE LIABILITY INSURANCE AT A MINIMUM OF A MILLION DOLLARS TO PROTECT THE COUNTY. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A USER FEE SO THAT WE CAN IMPROVE OUR LANDINGS LIKE WE HEARD FROM JOSH, THAT IS HAPPENING IN BLUFFTON. WE WANT TO INSTALL BEAUTIFUL BATHROOMS, PICNIC TABLES, ET CETERA, SO THAT THIS CAN BE A USER DESTINATION EXPERIENCE. WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW THOUGH, IS WE'RE SEEING IT TURN INTO A BARGE OPERATION. I WAS DOWN THERE THIS MORNING, Y'ALL, [00:25:01] THERE WERE TOILETS BEING PULLED OFF OF A BARGE WITH A FORKLIFT. THERE'S NOTHING IN PLACE TO PROTECT THE MARINE SANCTUARY ASPECT OF THAT POLLUTION CLEANUP, ET CETERA. THOSE TOILETS FALL OVER FROM SOME EVENT THAT OCCURRED AT SUN BARRIER ISLAND. AND WHERE'S THE CLEANUP? WHERE ARE, WHERE'S THE OIL MITIGATION? WHERE'S THE TRASH? WHERE'S THE BATHROOMS? WHERE ARE THESE LANDINGS IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO REALLY HANDLE THIS COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY? BECAUSE THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. I WATCHED IT HAPPEN ALONG WITH ROLL OFF TRUCKS IN THE PARKING LOT, PARKED OVERNIGHT. I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THE LANDINGS. AND YES, YOU HAVE USERS FROM SAVANNAH COMING OVER AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE COAST GUARD CERTIFICATION AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE DRUG TESTING AND THEY CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE THE INSURANCE. SO AGAIN, AG, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THESE OPERATORS BEHIND US. I AM TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS COMING BECAUSE WE KNOW FROM OTHER AREAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AS WELL AS WHAT'S HAPPENED IN FLORIDA AND OTHER AREAS, WE KNOW WHAT'S COMING WITH THESE OPERATORS COMING INTO THE MARKET AND UM, YOU KNOW, REALLY CAUSING CHAOS. SO I APPRECIATE Y'ALL, I APPRECIATE STAFF, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT, THAT DID NOT SIGN UP THAT WANTS TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND, AND PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS. UM, NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE [7. ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT ] ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, A COUPLE JUST QUICK REPORTS. UH, ONE, I DON'T HAVE ALL THE PICTURES, BUT WE'LL GET MORE PICTURES. WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF WORK PERFORMED OVER THE LAST TWO OR THREE MONTHS ON MELROSE LANDING. UM, AND THAT WORK IS 95% DONE. WE HAVE REPAIRED AND IMPROVED THE PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS. WE'VE REPAIRED THE DOCK, UM, BOTH WHERE THE, THE BOAT LANDS AND THE DOCK, UH, ALL THE FACIAL BOARDS THAT YOU'RE WALKING DOWN THE LONG LENGTH OF THE DOCK. UM, WE'RE WORKING ON REPAIRS TO THE FLOATS. UM, BOTH THE COMMERCIAL FLOAT, THE FIRST ONE FROM THE LAND. UM, AND THEN LASTLY, WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS THE DOCK AT THE END OR THE, THE HOUSE AT THE END OF THE DOCK TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S IN GOOD SHAPE SO THAT WE CAN OPEN THAT UP AS A COVERED, UH, PROTECTION FOR, FOR VISITORS AS THEY WAIT TO, TO BOARD THE FERRY. SO, UM, MORE TO COME. WE'LL GET SOME GOOD PICTURES TO SHOW THAT OFF AND HOPEFULLY A, A DRONE SHOT OR A VIDEO AS WELL. SO YOU GET A GOOD FEELING THAT. SECONDLY, THERE WAS A QUESTION, I THINK TAB HAD MADE IT IN AN EMAIL. OF COURSE THIS IS A QUESTION THAT WAS PROBABLY FROM TAB. UM, BUT ANYHOW, IT WAS REGARD TO TRAFFIC ON ONE 70 IN PARTICULAR AT THE OIL FIELD AREA AND SOME OF THE INTERSECTION, UM, TIMING AND SUCH. SO TO SPEAK TO THAT REAL QUICK, I WANNA GIVE BRIAN JUST A FEW SECONDS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'VE DONE RECENTLY OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO AND WHERE THE TRAFFIC IS REGARDS TO THAT AREA. SO, AND THAT'LL CONCLUDE MY REPORT. THANK Y'ALL. UM, SO I THINK THE QUESTION WAS REALLY ABOUT SEASONAL TIMING ON THE, UH, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, UH, STARTING AT 4 62, THEN AT OLD FIELD EAST AR AND THEN AT ARGENT BOULEVARD. SO WE HAVE BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK IN THIS STRETCH GOING BACK TO THE ONE 70 NEAR TERM PROJECT. AND WITH THAT WE INSTALLED THE SIGNAL AT OLD FIELD. UM, WHEN WE DID THAT, WE WENT AHEAD AND PUT ALL THREE OF THOSE SIGNALS IN THAT SHORT STRETCH THERE IN COORDINATION. SO ALL THE TIMING PLANS ARE WORKING TOGETHER AND SO AS YOU'RE GOING THROUGH, IT SHOULD BE CREATING LESS HASSLE FOR EVERYBODY. UM, I KNOW THAT'S A PAIN POINT THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, BUT UM, WE'RE DOING OUR BEST. SO WE DID THAT, WE PUT THE NEW TIMINGS IN IN JANUARY, 2025, THEN COME MARCH, APRIL, WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS. YOU KNOW, IT REALLY, WHEN WE FIRST PULLED 'EM IN DID GREAT. WE REDUCED THE TRAVEL TIMES TWO TO 5% COMING THROUGH THERE, BUT IT DIDN'T LAST FOR LONG. WE STARTED GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS SAYING THAT WAS WORSE THAN IT WAS BEFORE. SO HAD OUR CONSULTANT TO GO BACK AND TAKE ANOTHER LOOK. WHAT THEY FOUND IS THAT BETWEEN JANUARY AND APRIL, UM, AND PRETTY MUCH EVERY YEAR THE COUNTS GO UP OF VEHICLES GOING THROUGH, THEY'RE FROM ABOUT 30,000 TO ABOUT OVER 40,000. SO WE'RE SEEING AN INCREASE OF ALMOST 30% OF TRAFFIC VOLUME OVER THE FIRST FEW MONTHS OF THE YEAR, ALMOST EVERY YEAR. SO DONE IS THEY CREATED A SEASONAL TIMING PLAN OUT THERE. UM, IT'S MEANT TO RUN FROM APRIL THROUGH SEPTEMBER THIS YEAR. WE ACTUALLY STARTED IT IN MARCH. UM, BUT IT WAS TRAVIS PAID UP A LITTLE BIT EARLIER. SO WHAT THEY'VE DONE [00:30:01] IS IT ESSENTIALLY EXTENDS THE GREEN TIME ON 1 70 10 TO 20 SECONDS DURING THAT PEAK HOUR. UM, SO WHAT YOU'RE DOING THERE IS YOU'RE ALSO MAKING THE SIDE STREET, UM, WAIT A LITTLE BIT LONGER, WHICH IS WHY WE AREN'T IMPLEMENTING IT YEAR ROUND. BUT THAT 10 TO 20%, OR 10 TO 20 SECONDS EXTRA ON THE MAIN LINE HAS SEEN, UH, TRAVEL TIME REDUCE BETWEEN 10 AND 50% DEPENDING ON THE TIME OF DAY. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE SEASONAL TIMING THROUGH THERE AND WHY WE'RE DOING IT, WHAT WHAT WE SAW. SO, AND THAT'S RIGHT NOW THE SEASONAL TIME? YES MA'AM. IT'S GOT THAT 10 TO 22ND TIME LONGER. WE START GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS EARLIER THIS YEAR. SO THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE I THINK IN MARCH. AND SINCE THEN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE HAD ANY MORE ADDITIONAL COMPLAINTS COME IN. SO I'LL BE INTERESTED TO KNOW. I'M SORRY, I'D BE INTERESTED TO KNOW IF THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS REDUCE OR INCREASE AND WE'RE RUNNING THE RED LIGHTS. YEAH, WE CAN CHECK ON THAT ALSO. AND I KNOW THERE IS A STATE BILL THAT'S BEING TALKED ABOUT, ABOUT RED LIGHT CAMERAS, SO WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHERE THAT GOES. ALSO, WHAT I'VE SEEN I COME THROUGH THERE QUITE OFTEN IS IN THE MORNINGS THE HEADING TOWARDS BUFORT, UM, THE LEFT HAND LANE THAT CROSSES ONE 70 ONTO 4 62. SURE. THAT RECENTLY HAS BEEN BACKING UP INTO THE SECOND LANE, WHICH IS CAUSING TRAFFIC AND ACCIDENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WHETHER YOU LEAVE THAT, THAT LIGHT OPEN LONGER. BUT AGAIN, IF SOMEBODY NEEDS TO LOOK AT IT, 'CAUSE AGAIN, THAT THAT ACTUALLY GETS KIND OF WHATEVER THAT THAT LEFT HAND LANE BACKS UP IN. SO YOU ONLY HAVE ONE SET OF TRAFFIC AND EVERYONE'S COMING THROUGH. SO NO, DEFINITELY JUST A RECOMMENDATION. AND WE ARE WORKING ON THE 4 62 REALIGNMENT, SO HOPEFULLY WITH THAT, WHENEVER THAT ONE COMES FORWARD THAT CAN HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES ALSO. BUT WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR, OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU, BRIAN. THANK YOU JARED, I APPRECIATE THAT. UH, NOW MOVING INTO [8.a. A presentation of an EMS Headquarters Station at Cooler Tract - Frank Stroncheck, Facilities Director, (5 minutes) ] THE, UH, PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ITEMS, WE HAVE EIGHT A A PRESENTATION OF AN EMS HEADQUARTERS, UH, STATIONED AT COOLER TRACK. UH, FRANK, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GONNA BE, OR YEAH, I'M GONNA TEE IT UP AND THEN FRANK'S GONNA, ALL RIGHT, HE'S GONNA DELIVER TO GOODS. SO ON THIS ONE, THIS IS, UM, AT OUR COOLER TRACK. WE TALK A LOT ABOUT THE COOLER TRACK. WE HAVEN'T SHOWN A LOT OF PROGRESS. THIS IS OUR FIRST STEP AT SHOWING PROGRESS TO GIVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP OF WHAT WE THINK IS THE RIGHT NEXT STEP. AND, UM, ON THAT, OBVIOUSLY IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY CAMPUS LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER HAS BEEN A BIG PUSH. UM, BUT WE, WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF UNKNOWNS ON THAT. AND WHAT THIS IS, AND, AND FRANK PUT THIS TOGETHER, HE AND HIS GROUP, UM, WHAT WE DO KNOW IS WE KNOW WE HAVE AN EMS STATION THAT'S A REQUIREMENT AS FAR AS THE PURCHASE. AND WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE A EMS HEADQUARTER THAT IS IN DESPERATE NEED. SO IT SEEMS LIKE A FAIR COMBINATION THAT WE PUT THOSE TWO TOGETHER. WE ALSO KNOW THE LOCATION OF THAT, UM, WHICH WILL BE AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE RELOCATED 4 62 THAT BRIAN MENTIONED. SO WE DON'T HAVE FULL CLARITY ON WHAT THE, THE TOTAL 115 ACRES WILL BE, BUT FOR THIS FIVE OR SIX ACRES AND THE SPECIFIC LOCATION OF THIS FIVE OR SIX ACRES, WE FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT FOR IT TO MAKE A NEXT STEP FORWARD. SO THIS IS JUST DISCUSSION. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AT THE END IS SORT OF, UM, SOME FEEDBACK AND HEAD NOD. AND WITH THAT, IF THAT IS OUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO PUT FORTH AN RFQ TO GET THE DESIGN STARTED FOR THIS FIRST STEP. SO THAT'S IT. SO THANK YOU JARED. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. UM, REALLY EXCITED TO BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT BE BEAUFORT COUNTY EMS AT COOLER TRACK. SO BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL'S TOP PRIORITIES HERE. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN WAS ADOPTED IN 2022. WE HAVE A 115 ACRE TRACK THAT'S ALREADY ACQUIRED. THERE'S $9.5 MILLION IN BONDS ISSUED TO BEGIN THIS IMPLEMENTATION DECISION. MOVE FORWARD WITH THE EM EMS HEADQUARTERS. NOW THE BIGGER VISION, LONG-TERM PUBLIC SAFETY CAMPUS, EMS HEADQUARTERS, EMERGENCY DISPATCH, SHERIFF'S, EVIDENCE, LOCKERS, DNA LAB OR WHATEVER MAY JOIN WITH EMS PHASE DELIVERY OVER THE NEXT 6, 7, 10, 15 YEARS DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO END UP PUTTING OUT THERE. UH, FOUNDATION FOR FUTURE BEAUFORT COUNTY GROWTH. CURRENT EMS CHALLENGES, UH, THE CURRENT EMS BUILDING WAS BUILT IN 1966. FACILITY CONDITION INDEX TRENDING IS WORSE. IMMEDIATE REPAIRS NEED ARE INCREASING, NOT ALIGNED WITH MODERN EMS OPERATIONS. THE FINDINGS FROM THE FACILITIES CONDITIONS IS THAT THE AGING ELECTRICAL HVAC AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS CONTINUE TO H FIRE ALARM SAFETY CONCERNS, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, INCREASING COSTS, HIGH PRIORITY SYSTEMS TIED TO MISSION RISK. THE FINANCIAL REALITY, [00:35:02] THE RENOVATION VERSUS REPLACEMENT IS ALREADY REACHING ITS TIPPING POINT. ONGOING REPAIRS PROVIDE DIMINISHED RETURNS AND REPLACEMENT IS MORE COST EFFECTIVE THAN LONG TERM RISK OF WAITING IF WE WAIT, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE WILL COMPOUND AND INCREASE FACILITIES DEGRADE OVER TIME. OPERATIONAL INEFFICIENCIES CONTINUE HIGHER LONG TERM COSTS TO THE COUNTY. WHY EMS FIRST? WELL, IT'S REQUIRED UNDER THE COOL TRACK COOLER TRACK AGREEMENT. UH, IT ADDRESSES THE IMMEDIATE OPERATIONAL NEED, LOWER COMPLEXITY THAN ANY OTHER PROJECTS OR BUILDINGS. AND HIGH VISIBILITY AND IMPACT STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE. THIS ACTIVATES THE COOLER TRACK CAMPUS. IT BUILDS INFRASTRUCTURE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS. IT CREATES MOMENTUM ACROSS DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHES FLAGSHIP FACILITY. HERE ARE SOME PICTURES OF OUR CURRENT EMS STATION. HERE'S A PARKING LOT IN THE INTERIOR BUILDING. HERE'S SOME MORE INTERIOR SHOTS AND EXTERIOR SHOTS OF A PARKING LOT. HERE'S A RESTROOM TRAINING ROOM, SOME MORE INTERIOR SHOTS AND ONE EXTERIOR SHOT. THAT'S WHAT WE LOOK LIKE. NOW HERE'S WHAT WE CAN LOOK LIKE. UH, HERE'S A CONCEPTUAL TRACK OF THE COOLER TRACK. THE EMS IS RIGHT THERE. AND PHASE ONE WOULD BE EMS. AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE PHASE 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, WHATEVER THAT IS, WHATEVER IT IS, WE WOULD, UH, CONSIDER PUTTING NEXT TO THE EMS TO BUILD THIS OUT PROGRAM, UH, IN THE NEW EMS WOULD HAVE FOUR TO SIX BAYS. IT WOULD OPERATE 24 7 ADMINISTRATION OFFICES, TRAINING AND MEETING ROOMS, STAFF WELLNESS AND SUPPORT AREAS. THE ACCELERATED STRATEGY PROPOSAL SKIPPED A CONCEPTIONAL, UH, PLANNING MOVE DIRECTLY INTO DESIGN, SAVE APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS, DELIVER FASTER. OUR TIMELINE, ZERO TO SIX MONTHS DESIGN KICKOFF, SIX TO 18 MONTHS DESIGN AND PERMITTING, 18 TO 30 MONTHS CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONAL WITHIN 2.5 YEARS. CLOSING MESSAGE IS WE HAVE A PLANNED AND THE LAND AND FUNDING STARTED THE FACILITY CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT DEMAND THAT WE DO SOMETHING. EMS HEADQUARTERS IS THE LOGICAL FIRST STEP. NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT. YES. UM, WHEN I CAME ON COUNCIL IN 2015, THEY TOOK ME ON A TOUR OF THAT BUILDING. IT WAS TERRIBLE THEN, UM, IT'S STILL EVEN WORSE NOW. UH, I I STRONGLY THINK WE SHOULD MARCH FORWARD AND GET THIS DONE. IT'S GONNA TAKE, IT'S GONNA TAKE TIME, BUT, UM, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE YEARS AGO AND IT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED IN NUMEROUS MEETINGS AND NUMEROUS STRATEGIC PLANNING THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE. THIS IS A GOOD LOCATION FOR IT, YOU KNOW, POPULATION GROWTH, UM, IS ALONG THAT CORRIDOR OFTEN, UH, THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE. YEAH. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. GOT YOUR HAND UP. UM, FIRST QUESTION IS, IN THE CIP FOR 2027, WE HAVE EMS HEADQUARTERS RENOVATION FOR 610,000. DOES THAT PRECLUDE, UH, IF WE PUT THIS IN EFFECT, DOES THAT NOT HAPPEN? OR DO WE STILL NEED TO DO RENOVATION WHILE WE MOVE ON THIS? THAT WOULD, UH, CERTAINLY CREATE A NEED TO DISCUSS. IF WE DO PUT $600,000 INTO IT, IF WE SEE SOME MERIT AND MOVEMENT MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION, WE WOULD PROBABLY PUT IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT FOR SOME MINOR UPGRADES IF WE ARE MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION AS OPPOSED TO THE WHOLE $600,000. AND WHEN IS THE COOLER TRACK? UM, EMS SUPPOSED TO BE, WHEN'S IT REQUIRED TO BE BUILT? I DON'T REMEMBER. THREE YEARS. OR IS IT FIVE YEARS? HOW MANY YEARS ARE LEFT? IT WAS 10 YEARS AT THE END OF CLOSING. UM, WE CLOSED ON IT IN NOVEMBER OF 23. SO WE'RE TWO AND A HALF YEARS IN, WE'VE GOT SEVEN AND A HALF YEARS TO GET IT COMPLETED. THE ALSO IN THERE WAS, UH, A HALF TO A NICE TWO, NOT A HALF TO, BUT THEY'D LIKE TO GET START BEFORE 2028. IT WAS A EXTRA CONDITION. IT WASN'T A THOU SHALL CONDITION. WE, WE CONSTANTLY HEAR MAINTENANCE DEFERRED. RIGHT? SO THIS IS RHETORICAL DON'T ANSWER, BUT WHY DO WE KEEP DEFERRING MAINTENANCE JUST BECAUSE OF MONEY, IN WHICH CASE WE NEED TO FUNNEL OUR MONEY MORE APPROPRIATELY. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT. I JUST THREW IT OUT THERE. I THINK THERE MAY BE AN ANSWER THOUGH, BUT IF I MAY. YEAH, I THINK THERE IS. 'CAUSE WE'VE DONE THE FACILITY STUDY, SO WE KNOW NOW WHERE [00:40:01] OUR CHALLENGES ARE IN FACILITY. SO WE DO, WE ARE GONNA HAVE A PLAN GOING FORWARD FOR FACILITY MAINTENANCE, WHICH THIS TEAM WORKED ON TO BRING FORWARD. I THINK TO ECHO THAT, I KNOW IT WAS RHETORICAL, BUT IT'S A GOOD COMMENT IS, UM, ALL THE BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE ON THIS 12 ACRE CAMPUS, UM, THEY WERE REALLY CONSTRUCTED IN THE LATE EIGHTIES AND EARLY NINETIES, AND THERE HASN'T BEEN A TON OF MAINTENANCE FOR WHATEVER REASON OVER THE LAST 35 YEARS. SO, UM, WE'RE FEELING THAT DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, SO THERE WAS A LOT OF NEED FOR CAPITAL. IT GOT INVESTED. THERE HASN'T BEEN A LOT OF NEED OR HASN'T BEEN A LOT OF EMPHASIS PUT IN, UM, KEEPING UP WITH THOSE SYSTEMS. ONE MORE QUESTION. WHAT DOES IT MEAN, SKIP CONCEPTUAL DELAY? IF THAT'S POSSIBLE, WHY DON'T WE JUST SKIP THAT FOR EVERY PROJECT? IT IS, IT IS THE, ON THIS ONE. UM, I THINK THE CONCEPTUAL PART IS TO DETAIL THE SCOPE. UM, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NINE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS FOR PUBLIC WORKS OR PUBLIC SAFETY CAMPUS THERE, UM, WE REALLY GOTTA DEFINE, IS THIS JUST THE EMS STATION? IS THIS THE EMS PLUS HEADQUARTERS? IS THIS THE EMS PLUS? ANYTHING ELSE? AND, UM, AND THEN NOT ONLY THAT IS WE'VE ALSO, SINCE THIS IS THE, IT'S NOT JUST A PAD, THIS IS, YOU'VE ALSO GOTTA DO THE ENTRANCE ROAD AND THE WATER AND SEWER, UM, AND GAS TO GET IT INTO THE SITE. SO THERE'S A LITTLE BIT EXTRA THAT NEEDS TO BE DEFINED THAT WOULD BE IN THE CONCEPTUAL FACE. I AGREE. HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, PLEASE, LARRY, I GOT JOE UP NEXT AND I'LL GET TO YOU. IT'S OKAY. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I GOT THANKS, LARRY. YOU HIT THAT WHAT? I WAS GONNA SAY IT, IT'S EM BUT WHAT JUST EMS OR EMS IN ITS ENTIRETY. PLUS I THOUGHT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FIRE EMS AND THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO PUT A FIRE STATION AS WELL. THE REQUIREMENT IN THE CLOSING WITH OLDFIELD, UM, IS EMERGENCY SERVICES. SO EMS DOES CHECK THAT BOX. HOWEVER, I THINK THE, AND WE TALKED ABOUT IT, STATION 39 WITH CHIEF HYMAN. UM, THEY HAVE TWO PLANNED AREAS. ONE IS HERE IN OKEE ARE IN, UH, THIS SECTION AND ONE IS IN PALMETTO BLUFF. SO THIS COULD ALIGN AS A SIMILAR STATION WHERE IT'S A COMBINED EMS FIRE. UM, THAT WOULD BE A DETAIL THAT WE'D WORK OUT IN THE CONCEPTUAL PLANNING PART AS WELL. AND I, I'M IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE PART OF THE EMS PROBLEM WE HAVE FOR THE STATION THAT'S IN KSE IS THEY DON'T HAVE AN AMBULANCE THERE. THIS WOULD SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. SO I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE ON THIS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. I I, JOE ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU AS WELL. OH, I'M SORRY, LARRY, YOU'RE NEXT. I'M SORRY. YEAH, THANKS. HEY, HEY, SARAH, IF YOU'RE THERE, WOULD YOU PULL THAT SLIDE UP OF THE COOLER TRACK WITH THE PROPOSED BUILDING ON IT, PLEASE? OKAY. HEY JARED, I'VE, I'VE TALKED TO YOU. IT'S GONE. JARED, THAT ONE. YEAH. GOOD. THANK YOU. I, JARED, I'VE TALKED TO YOU IN THE PAST ABOUT THIS AND THAT'S THE EMS STATION ON THE CORNER OF ONE 70 AND THAT CONSTRUCTION ROAD THAT GOES INTO THE BACK OF OLD FIELD, RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. SO IS THIS THE, IS THIS WHAT'S GOING TO EVENTUALLY END UP ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY NEXT TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER BEING ANCHORED BY THE, UH, EMS STATION, UH, WHEN THEY MOVE THAT ROAD TO WHEREVER IT'S GOING? UM, AND THEN THEY'RE TALKING OF COURSE ABOUT A TRAFFIC LIGHT AS WELL, BUT ALL OF THESE OTHER THINGS WILL START TO APPEAR ON THAT PROPERTY THERE. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE THAT YOU JUST MOVED, PLEASE? THIS ONE RIGHT HERE I THINK DESCRIBES WHAT YOU'RE GETTING TO. UM, SO YOU CAN SEE IN THE, THE LIGHT BLUE LINE IS THE DASH OF THE ACREAGE. UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THE EMS, THAT'S THE LOCATION THAT WE'RE INTENDING IT TO BE. THAT WAY THEY CAN GET RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT OF THERE AND, AND GET EITHER SIDE OF, UH, ONE 70. UM, RIGHT. AND SO THE AREA TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN IS THE SECTION THAT WE BOUGHT FROM OLDFIELD. RIGHT. UM, THAT HAS, AND SO, UM, THE, THE MAJORITY OF THE AVAILABLE LAND IS GONNA BE TO THE, TO THE WEST AND SOUTH OVER THERE. SO WE STILL HAVE PLENTY OF FLEXIBILITY, BUT THIS IS KIND OF PUTTING THE STAKE IN AS FAR AS WHERE THE LOCATION, WE ALSO AS PART OF THE PURCHASE FROM OLD FIELD, HAVE TO GIVE THEM A SECOND ACCESS. SO THEY HAVE ACCESS THIS TO THIS RELOCATED SIGNAL. AND SO THIS IS JUST DRAWN IN THERE. THAT MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT LOCATION, BUT THIS IS KIND OF JUST A CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT OF, OF WHERE THESE ITEMS WOULD TAKE PLACE. YEAH. IS, ARE THOSE HOUSES THAT ARE BACKED UP TO THE END OF THE OLD FIELD PROPERTY THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE PARKING LOT WHERE THE EMS IS GOING TO BE PLACED? YES, BUT IN THE UH, UH, CLOSING DOCUMENTS, WE HAVE A 50 FOOT, UM, VEGETATIVE BUFFER AROUND THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE. SO, UM, THERE ARE HOUSES THERE [00:45:01] AND, AND EVEN IN THIS LAYOUT, EMS IS FAR AWAY FROM THAT BACK PROPERTY LINE. IT'D BE UP NEAR ONE 70. YEAH, I THINK THOSE HOUSES HAVE A 50 FOOT BUFFER TOO BEHIND THEM. BUT I'M NOT REALLY POSITIVE ABOUT THAT. I WOULD JUST, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, ANYWAY. I CAN GET, I CAN GET A PICTURE OF THE SLIDE LATER ON. IT'S OKAY. I DON'T NEED TO SEE IT AGAIN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JARED. APPRECIATE IT. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS ANY COMMENTS? NO. DOES MIKE YEAH, JUST ONE COMMENT, UM, ON THE EXISTING SITE FOR THE HEADQUARTERS, THERE'S ALSO A STATION THERE. THE CITY OF BEAUFORT IS STILL INTERESTED IN PARTNERING WITH US ON SHOULD WE MOVE THIS AND THE DISPOSITION OF THE EXISTING SITE AND PUTTING A, UM, EMS STATION IN ONE OF THEIR FIRE STATIONS. SO THAT IS STILL A POSSIBILITY. OKAY. AND WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY, GOING TO JOE'S POINT, I I'M PUBLIC SAFETY IS ONE OF THE FORWARD FACING THINGS THAT THAT GOVERNMENT DOES AND ACTUALLY DOES A GREAT JOB AT. I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FIRE AND EMS AND, AND GET THAT DONE. I MEAN THAT AREA'S GROWING OUT THERE. WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND GET IT DONE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND ROCK AND ROLL WITH THIS. IT'S, IT'S BEEN NEEDED SINCE 2015 . YEAH. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. UM, AGAIN, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OF THERE, ANYBODY ONLINE? I DON'T WANNA MISS Y'ALL, SO, SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE GIVE YOU THE GO AHEAD TO NOW START MOVING THIS ALONG AT A MORE RAPID PACE. YEAH, I DON'T THINK, UH, WE NEED A FORMAL MOTION. I MEAN, YOU CAN IF YOU'D LIKE TO, BUT WHAT WE'RE HEARING, AND LET ME REPEAT IT, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STEPPING FORWARD IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, IS THAT WE SEE A LOT OF HEAD NODS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. UM, OBVIOUSLY IT'LL COME BACK TO YOU, UM, WE'LL GIVE UPDATES ALONG THE WAY, BUT WE, OUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO PUT OUT AN RFQ TO GET THE DESIGN ELEMENTS STARTED AND, UH, MOVE FORWARD ON THE PROJECT WITH THE FUNDING AND THEN WORK ON THE COST ESTIMATING. AGAIN, THAT'LL BE PARAMOUNT TO AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO SCOPE WHAT THIS WILL BE AND THE OVERALL COST. IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE IN THAT NINE AND A HALF MILLION. WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU LATER ON THAT. I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION. THE DNA BUILDING. UM, IT IS, WE DON'T OWN THAT, DO WE? I KNOW WE'VE RENOVATED, WELL MAYBE WE DO OWN IT. SO OUR DA BUILDING, IT'S OUT AT BIV. YEP. MM-HMM . UM, WE DO OWN THAT FACILITY. WE DO. OKAY. IT'S OUT NEAR BIV FIVE. WE'VE DONE SOME RENOVATIONS, WE'VE DONE SOME RECENT RENOVATIONS ON THE ROOF. HVAC. WE HAVE IT, IT IS GONE ACTUALLY FROM THE FACILITIES CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT FROM A D THREE YEARS AGO TO A B NOW WITH THE, UH, IMPROVEMENTS. THANK YOU. BUT, BUT THEY ARE TRAILERS, I MEAN, SO IT'S NOT A, A LONG-TERM LOCATION. UM, SO THAT WAS, THIS WOULD BE A LONG-TERM LOCATION, NOT IN THIS EMS STATION, BUT PUBLIC, UM, DOWN THERE. ALRIGHT. UH, THANK Y'ALL FOR, FOR THAT PRESENTATION. AND EVEN THOUGH WE'RE STILL UNDERNEATH THE [9.l. An Ordinance amending Beaufort County Ordinance Chapter 102 Waterways. Article 1, sections 102–1 definitions, Article II, division 1, section 102-27, purpose, section 102-28, penalties, section 102-29, general prohibitions, section 102-30, dock rules, section 102-31, landing rules, division II, section 102-61, description, division 3, section 102-95, description, section 102-98, penalties, section 102-99 general prohibitions, section 102-100, dock rules, section 102-101, landing rules, Article III, section 102-133, definitions, section 102-134, penalties, section 102-136, student riders, section 102-137, public ridership. (FISCAL IMPACT: ) - Dylan Kidd ] PRESENTATION CATEGORY, I BELIEVE JOE'S AMENDMENT MOVED THE NINE L TO NOW EIGHT BB AS AN ACTION ITEM. YEAH, AS AN ACTION ITEM. SO, UH, DYLAN, ARE YOU PRESENTING THAT ONE? IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN NINE A AND I AM SORRY. CAN I GET A, A MOTION AND A SECOND? THIS ON FLOOR? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL THANK YOU. AND IS THERE ANY OBJECTION BEFORE OPENING IT UP? DISCUSSION? NO. OKAY. DYLAN. AFTERNOON. GOOD TO BE WITH YOU AGAIN. UM, I WANTED TO GIVE A, A A BRIEF RUNDOWN OF WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY AND THEN TO GIVE SOME OPTIONS FOR WHAT WE HAVE MOVING FORWARD TO COUNCIL, HOPEFULLY, UM, WITH WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION OR AMENDMENTS THAT COMMITTEE MIGHT FIND APPROPRIATE. UM, AS I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF, BEEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK OVER THE COURSE OF THIS, BUT IT'S BEEN A, A TRULY COLLABORATIVE PROCESS. SO YOU'LL RECALL THAT I BELIEVE IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR AT PFC, WE SUBMITTED THE VERSION OF THE WATERWAYS EMITTED WATERWAYS ORDINANCE THAT HAS THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED TEXT THAT WAS IN YOUR, UM, BACKUP. UM, AND THAT WAS OUR ORIGINAL CHANGES THAT WE HAD PROPOSED. UM, AND ONE OF THEM THAT I WANTED TO FLAG, BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS GENERALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL AND HAS NOT BEEN ALTERED AT THIS POINT, WAS THE LIMITATION ON POINTS OF SALE. SO WE WERE SAYING THAT TO RELIEVE ANY CONGESTION ISSUES, WE WERE NO LONGER GOING TO PERMIT TO THE EXTENT WE EVER DID, THE ABILITY TO BRING A, YOU KNOW, A TRAILER FULL OF JET SKIS OR KAYAKS INTO A COUNTY PARKING LOT, RENT THEM RIGHT THERE AND HAVE THEM TAKEN OUT ONTO THE WATER. SO THAT WAS AMONG THE INITIAL AMENDMENTS. UM, AND I THINK THAT ONE HAS BEEN WELL RECEIVED. UM, IN NOVEMBER WE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL EDITS THAT YOU SEE, UM, ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE TEXT. UM, THOSE INCLUDED, UM, SOME PROVISIONS FOR THE ABILITY FOR, UM, COUNTY OPERATIONS TO HAVE SPACE ON THE LANDINGS, ET CETERA. UM, IT HAD SOME SPECIFICATIONS FOR MOVEMENT OF CARGO AND IT HAD THE ORIGINAL LIMITATION ON COMMERCIAL TOURS. WE HAD SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT. AND WE CAME TO THE JANUARY PFC WHERE WE HAD THE LANGUAGE IN GREEN ADDED, AND THAT WAS AN ADDITIONAL DEFINITION [00:50:01] FOR CHARTERS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF CHARTERS. UH, WE HAD A SECTION IN THERE FOR PURVEYORS OF WATERCRAFT, LIKE FOLKS WHO WANTED TO TEST DRIVE BOATS OR WHO DID MAINTENANCE ON BOATS TO GO OUT AND TEST THEM OFF OF COUNTY LANDINGS. AND WE SAID THAT THAT WAS AN ACCEPTABLE USE, UM, BASED ON COMMITTEE FEEDBACK. UM, AND THEN WE, WE INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL TOUR'S LICENSING LIMIT TO WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS, WHICH IS THE LIMIT OF YOUR GIVEN LICENSE, BUT NOT TO EXCEED 12, UH, AGAIN, AIMED AT THE CONGESTION AND PARKING ISSUES THERE. UM, AND THEN WE ALSO ADDED THE EXEMPTION FOR BARGES TO AND FROM DUSSE ISLAND IN FEBRUARY. WE AGAIN CAME BACK TO PFC AND WE ADDED, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC CHARGER DEFINITIONS, THE TIME VOYAGE, UM, IN BAREBOAT CHARTER. UH, AND WE ADDED AN ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION FOR, UH, BARGES TO, UH, TO AND FROM OTHER BARRIER ISLANDS. SO THEN WE HAD OUR WORKSHOP IN APRIL. UM, AND OBVIOUSLY WE, WE HEARD FEEDBACK FROM ALL SIDES OF THE ISSUE THERE. UM, WE RECEIVED, UM, SOME TOPICS OF DISCUSSION AND SOME ADDITIONAL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION REGARDING INSURANCE PERMITTING, LICENSING, UM, USER FEES, AND, AND THEN WE ALSO ADD SOME, HAD SOME REQUESTS FROM THE DUSKY ISLAND COUNCIL ABOUT SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE INCLUDED TO PROTECT, UM, DUSKYS OPERATIONS AS WELL. UM, AND OF COURSE, DURING THIS WHOLE TIME WE HAVE ALSO HAD OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PAGE THAT HAS BEEN RUN ON OUR WEBSITE. SO THANK YOU TO HANNAH NICHOLS, OUR PIO FOR GETTING US THE FEEDBACK, UM, FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL. SO WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY, WE HAVE OUR ORDINANCE THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED OVER THESE MANY MONTHS BASED UPON FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED, UH, FROM COMMITTEE. UM, WE HAVE, AND THAT HAS BEEN REFLECTED FROM THE FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL. UH, WE ARE, SO WE HAVE PROPOSED THAT VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE TO YOU ALL TODAY. AND THEN WE ALSO OBVIOUSLY HAVE SOME, UH, SOME POSSIBILITIES FOR ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, WHATEVER, UM, COMMITTEE FEELS AS APPROPRIATE TO FORWARD TO COUNCIL. SO ON THAT FRONT WE HAVE, THE FIRST THING I WANT TO DO IS TO DISCUSS, UM, A POINT ABOUT THE BUSINESS LICENSING THAT WE DISCUSSED AT THE WORKSHOP. UM, AT THAT TIME I BELIEVE I WAS SPEAKING WITH, UM, MR. GLOVER. I HAD IN MY MIND SOME, SOME INSTANCES WHERE BUSINESS LICENSING, WE HAD REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION, BUT WE DO NOT REQUIRE PROOF OF INSURANCE TO APPROVE A BUSINESS LICENSE. WE DON'T HAVE, THAT'S NOT IN THE ORDINANCE. SO WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DENY A BUSINESS LICENSE TO SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT PROVIDE US WITH PROOF OF INSURANCE. SO I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR PURPOSES OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IN TERMS OF ANY POTENTIAL, UH, POTENTIAL PERMITTING OR ENFORCEMENT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER, UH, MOVING FORWARD. SO IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT, UH, IT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT IT WOULD BE A SEPARATE PERMIT PROCESS. IT COULD STILL BE HANDLED BY THE OFFICE OF BUSINESS LICENSING, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE SOMETHING LIKE YOUR LICENSE, PROOF OF INSURANCE AND ANY FEE THAT COMMITTEE OR COUNSEL DEEMS APPROPRIATE. AND THAT COULD BE HANDLED, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY SIMPLY, UM, WITHOUT EXPANDING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RESOURCES. BUT THAT WOULD BE, UM, THE WAY WE WOULD WANT THAT. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND GOING IF WE WANT TO PURSUE THE ADDITIONAL REGULATION THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE. UM, THE, SO, AND THEN AS TO THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS REQUESTED BY, UM, DAUFUSKIE ISLAND AND FUSSY ISLAND COUNCIL, WE WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE AND SEE WHAT, IF ANY OF IT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR, UH, ADDITION TO THE ORDINANCE. UM, AND LOOKING AT THAT, THE DEFINITION FOR BARGE SERVICE AND LAND CRAFT SERVICE, UM, I, I DO NOT FEEL WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE GOT IN THERE. I CERTAINLY HAVE NO OBJECTION IF COMMITTEE WANTED TO ADD THAT. UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS ANY OTHERS, THE SECTION 1 0 2 31 F THAT IS PROPOSED, UM, I THINK THAT COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCE AS WELL. IF COMMITTEE OR COUNCIL WANTED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT WE WERE PERMITTING, YOU KNOW, TO AND FROM DUSKY ISLAND, I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS NECESSARY BECAUSE AS WRITTEN, THE BARGES ARE EXEMPTED GOING TO AND FROM DUSKY AND OTHER BARRIER ISLANDS FROM THE REQUIREMENTS. SO I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S NECESSARY, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, UM, WHAT IS AND IS NOT PERMITTED, UM, ON S TWO DUSKY AND BARGES, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. THERE WERE SOME OTHER, UM, SUGGESTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS LANGUAGE. SOME OF THEM I, I THINK WOULD ALLOW CARGO BARGES AT ALL COUNTY LANDINGS REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO AND FROM. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE WILL OF COMMITTEE, UM, AS TO THIS ORDINANCE AND THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE TAKING ON RIGHT NOW. BUT THAT IS AN OPTION AS ARE THE OTHERS THAT ARE CONTAINED IN YOUR BACKUPS. UH, I KNOW THAT WE DISCUSSED, UM, ENFORCEMENT AS WELL. OBVIOUSLY THAT IS AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. UM, WE HAVE HAD, UH, SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT SOME OPTIONS. [00:55:01] ULTIMATELY, IF COMMITTEE AND THEREFORE COUNCIL MAKE THESE, UH, CHANGES, MAKE THESE AMENDMENTS, IT IS GOING TO BE COUNCIL'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ENFORCE THEM. SO IT, I, WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT EXACTLY WE'RE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING, IT'S DIFFICULT TO SAY THE EXACT LEVEL OF ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES INCREASE THAT WE WOULD BE ASKING FOR. UM, SO THAT WOULD BE MAYBE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO REVISIT DOWN THE LINE. BUT WE DO HAVE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED. UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS BY ITS NATURE, IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLAINT DRIVEN, IT'S GOING TO BE SPOT CHECK DRIVEN. WE MAY BE ABLE TO LEVERAGE OUR IT CAPABILITIES TO DO SOME TO SORT OF MONITORING. UM, WE MAY ALSO BE ABLE TO DEPUTIZE OUR PUBLIC WORK STAFF AS CODE ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERALLY INVOLVED WITH THE, THE LANDINGS AND WATER FACILITIES. UM, AND IT ALSO MAY LOOK LIKE SOMETHING WITH, UM, AGREEMENTS WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES TO EXPAND OUR ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITY THROUGH THEIR RESOURCES AS WELL. SO THERE ARE OPTIONS. IT'S JUST GOING TO, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE WHAT EXACTLY WE ARE ADDING, UM, AND WHAT EXACTLY WE ARE BEING ASKED TO ENFORCE BEFORE WE CAN SAY WHAT EXACTLY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT INCREASES, CHANGES, WHAT HAVE YOU, UM, WE MIGHT ULTIMATELY NEED. SO I BELIEVE THOSE ARE ALL THE NOTES I HAD FOR YOU JUST TO CATCH UP AS TO WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY, BUT I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT I MAY HAVE. OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION. UM, SORRY. SO HIS HAND GO FIRST, TOM, FIRST OF ALL, UM, SOMEBODY HAD MENTIONED IT IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, UM, THE OPEN PROCESS WE'VE HAD, I THINK I'LL SECOND THAT AND SAY THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST OPEN DIALOGUE WE'VE HAD WITH OUR PEOPLE THAT WE WORK FOR. IT'S GREAT. WE ALSO HEARD EVERYBODY TALK ABOUT NOT PUTTING ANYBODY OUTTA BUSINESS. ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL. WE HEARD TO REALLY MAKE A GOOD ORDINANCE AND IF WE'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING AND CHANGE IT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BUSINESS LICENSE, INSURANCE, PROOF OF INSURANCE FEES, REASONABLE FEES AND ENFORCEMENT IN MY AM I TO ASSUME THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED TODAY WITH THIS OUR, UH, THIS DISCUSSION IN WHAT WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON OR THERE'S GONNA BE SOMETHING MISSING IN THAT. YOU'VE SAID A LOT, I APPRECIATE IT, BUT CUT RIGHT TO THE CHASE. BE CLEAR. BUSINESS LICENSE INSURANCE FEES ENFORCEMENT. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW? IF THAT IS THE WILL OF COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEE VOTES TO MOVE THIS ITEM FORWARD TO COUNCIL OR TO COME BACK TO COMMITTEE WITH THAT LANGUAGE, WE CAN DO WHATEVER COMMITTEE REQUESTS THAT WE DO. WE CAN ADD A PROVISION LIKE THAT TO BE CONSIDERED AT FIRST READING COUNCIL. WE CAN ADD THAT PROVISION AND BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. UM, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO FLESH OUT WHAT EXACTLY WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ADD THERE. SO I THINK IT WOULD TAKE SOME DISCUSSION AND SOME INDICATION FROM COMMITTEE AS TO WHICH EXACT PROVISIONS THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ANOTHER ADDITION TO THIS ORDINANCE SETTING OUT, LIKE THIS IS GOING TO BE OUR PERMIT AND OUR PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. AND SO WE'D HAVE TO GET SOME EXACT LANGUAGES TO WHAT EXACTLY WE WANT THAT TO BE. IF IT IS THE WILL OF COMMITTEE THAT WE DO THAT. DYLAN, I GOTTA SAY, I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR EFFORTS. I THINK IT'S BEEN CHALLENGING ALL THE WAY AROUND. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME BACK AND FORTH LISTENING TO EVERYBODY, GREAT IDEAS. I JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT A HALF MEASURE TOGETHER AND COME BACK AND, AND AGAIN, IF MY COLLEAGUES HERE SEE IT DIFFERENTLY, I WANNA HEAR IT ALL BECAUSE I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. BUT WE'VE HEARD FROM EVERYBODY, THERE'S FOUR BASIC PARAMETERS AND WE GOT A GREAT GROUP OF PEOPLE. SO AGAIN, I'D LIKE MY COLLEAGUES TO HELP ME UNDERSTAND BUSINESS LICENSE, INSURANCE, PROOF FEES AND ENFORCEMENT. AND AGAIN, I, I JUST DON'T WANT TO DANCE AROUND THAT. I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM HERE AND WHAT KIND OF LAW WE'RE GONNA PUT INTO PLACE. THAT'S IT. IS THAT FAIR, MR. CHAIRMAN, ONE QUESTION. WHEN TOM'S FINISHED, LARRY, UH, JOE HAD HIS HAND UP NEXT, AND THEN MARK, THEN I'LL GET TO YOU IS OKAY. HE ALWAYS HAS HIS HAND UP BEFORE ME. . OKAY. HE, HE WAS OUT THE GATE WITH IT UP. ALRIGHT, I'LL GET TO YOU, I'LL GET TO YOU. I REITERATE WHAT HE SAID. THOSE FOUR THINGS I HEARD YOU SAY, WE MAY NEED TO DO THEM A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE IF WE PUT IT IN THE ORDINANCE, WE HAVE TO SPELL OUT A LOT MORE THINGS AND THAT WE MAY NEED TO DO THE LICENSING A LITTLE BIT SEPARATE. I WOULD LEAVE IT TO ADMINISTRATION TO TELL US THIS MAY BE THE MOST EFFICIENT, EFFECTIVE WAY OF DOING THAT. I ALSO HEARD SOMEBODY IN THE PUBLIC TALK ABOUT SOMEBODY FROM SAVANNAH COMES OVER AND USES OUR FACILITIES. WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE LICENSED INSURED, PAY ANY FEES IF YOU USE OUR FACILITIES. ARE YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE IF YOU ARE NOT A COUNTY RESIDENT? IF YOU ARE, IF YOU ARE CONDUCTING BUSINESS ACTIVITIES WITHIN BEAUFORT COUNTY, YOU ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE A BEAUFORT COUNTY BUSINESS LICENSE. BUT AGAIN, IT IS, THAT'S REVENUE COLLECTION. IT ULTIMATELY, IT GETS REFERRED TO [01:00:01] AS A BUSINESS LICENSE TAX BECAUSE IT IS PURELY RIGHT. REVENUE COLLECTION. IT IS NOT REGULATORY, WHICH GOES TO TOM'S POINT OF ENFORCEMENT. CERTAINLY. OKAY. CERTAINLY. ALRIGHT, MARK? UM, YES, AND, AND AT SOME POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE AMENDMENT TOKY. UH, IT'S IN THE BACKUP PAGES, UM, UH, 36 THROUGH 38, I THINK, WHICH AGAIN, IT, IT IS NOT NO BIG CHANGES, JUST DEFINES MORE ABOUT BARGE SERVICE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AT THIS, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT, UM, AND I LOOK AT THIS, THE FACT THAT, THAT THE HIT THE, THE BRIDGE TO HILTON HEAD, THE BURN BRIDGE WASN'T BUILT UNTIL 1956. YOU KNOW, SO EVERYTHING GOING EVEN TO HILTON HEAD ISLAND WAS FROM BARGES AND BOATS AND THAT, THAT, AND, AND ALL OF OUR OYSTERMEN, UM, AND FISHERMEN AND, AND A LOT OF SHRIMPERS USED THE, THE PUBLIC LANDING. SO THEY'VE BEEN USED, THE PUBLIC LANDINGS HAVE BEEN USED FOR BOTH COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE FOR GENERATIONS, FOR HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF YEARS. SO, UM, I SEE THAT CONTINUE, WHICH AGAIN, THIS ORDINANCE ALLOWS THAT TO, TO CONTINUE. UM, SO DFOS, ESPECIALLY NOW THAT KILTON HAS A BRIDGE, UNLESS WE HAVE A BILLION DOLLARS, DFOS IS NEVER GONNA HAVE A BRIDGE. UM, SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THEM, THAT WE ALLOW THEM ACCESS, UM, THAT'S AVAILABLE TO THEM FOR, FOR FUTURE USE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. FREE TRADE. THAT KEEPS THINGS TO, TO A, A MINIMUM WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, NOT OVERTAXING THEM. 'CAUSE AGAIN, IT, IT, IT IS A BRIDGE LESS ISLAND. SO, UM, AND THAT'S HOW THIS ORDINANCE STARTED WAS THE FACT THAT, UH, WE HAD SOMEONE LEAVE A BOAT AT A, AT ONE OF OUR DOCKS AND WE WENT TO GO REMOVE IT AND FOUND OUT WE HAD NO RIGHT TO REMOVE IT. AND SO WE SAID, OH, WE NEED TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT WE CAN HAVE LEGAL WAY TO GO REMOVE. AND WE FOUND OUT THEN WE NEEDED ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT CAME ALONG WITH IT. IF WE'RE GONNA DO IT, WE NEED TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY AND, AND IN THE CORRECT WAY. SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S TAKEN THIS LONG. UM, I, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, PEOPLE NEEDING TO HAVE A LICENSE, NEEDING TO HAVE INSURANCE. UM, I THINK THAT IF WE THOUGH TRY TO PUT IT INTO THIS ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW, IT'S GONNA THEN PUSH THIS BACK FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS TO ACTUALLY, AND WE DON'T HAVE AN ENFORCEMENT. WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY CREATE ENFORCEMENT. UM, SO I, I'D ALMOST THINK THAT WOULD BE A SECONDARY THING THAT WE WOULD DO, BUT MOVE FORWARD, UM, UM, NOW WITH WHAT WE HAVE, WE'VE COME SO CLOSE AND TO, TO DERAIL IT AND MOVE IT OFF, UM, AND, AND, AND GO FROM HERE. SO AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO TOSKY. UM, UM, SO, AND, AND I THINK EVEN THE REST OF THE COUNTY, UM, AS WELL NEEDS TO HAVE THIS ORDINANCE SO PEOPLE CAN USE BOAT LANDINGS AND FOR COMMERCIAL AS WELL AS, AS I MENTIONED, I MEAN, I'M, I'LL TURN MY, THE FLOOR OVER, BUT AGAIN, BEFORE WE'RE DONE HERE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE AMENDMENT TO ADD IN THAT, THAT THE FAST, UH, THE LAST COUPLE, UM, ITEMS THAT, UM, DUSKY CAME WITH US, AND AGAIN, AS YOU READ THROUGH THEM, THERE'S NOTHING THAT IS, IS, IS MUCH DIFFERENT. BUT IT GIVES A DIFFERENT WORDING THAT, THAT GIVES EMPHASIS, UM, TO THEM HAVING FREE TRADE, UH, FOR BARGES TO, TO DUSKY. UNDERSTOOD. AND THANK YOU. AND LARRY? YEAH, I JUST HAVE, UH, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? I JUST HAVE ONE, ONE QUESTION. SEE YOU. AND HEY. UH, WHEN, WHEN, THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS TO THIS AND I THINK TOM'S UM, BREAKING OUT THE FOUR ESSENTIAL ITEMS ARE, ARE VERY ACCURATE. BUT I WANTED TO ASK DYLAN, DO YOU THINK THERE WOULD BE ANOTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL? DO YOU THINK THERE WOULD BE ANY BENEFIT HERE TO HAVING TWO SEPARATE ORDINANCES? ONE CLEARLY DEALING WITH BARGES AND THE OTHER, DEALING WITH ALL THE OTHER ISSUES SURROUNDING THE USE OF THESE PUBLIC DOCKS BY TOURISTS AND SMALL BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE WHO NEED LICENSES AND WHO NEED INSURANCE AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS. WOULD IT BE ANY SIMPLER TO JUST ISOLATE THE BARGE SERVICE IN A SIMPLE KIND OF ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT SEEMS LESS COMPLICATED, AND THEN PUT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS SOMEWHERE ELSE SO THAT IF YOU EVER HAD TO GO TO MAGISTRATE'S COURT WITH THIS, YOU COULD BRING IN THE PARTICULAR ORDINANCE THAT YOU HAVE RATHER THAN THIS GIANT ORDINANCE THAT DEALS WITH ALL THESE DIFFERENT ISSUES. SO CURRENTLY THE, UM, THE BARGE, UM, STIPULATIONS AND AND SECTION IS CONTAINED WITHIN 1 0 2 31, WHICH IS THE LANDING RULES. THAT IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD EXPECT THE BARGES TO GO TO AND FROM PRIMARILY. UM, AND SO I THINK WHAT WE TRIED TO DO WAS CONSOLIDATE IF, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, AND ACTUALLY WE CAN SEE THE CURRENT ORDINANCE HAS IT KIND OF BROKEN OUT BY LOCATION. AND WE, WHAT WE WANTED TO DO WAS TO STANDARDIZE IT ACROSS, YOU KNOW, EVERYWHERE IN THE COUNTY THAT, THAT MADE SENSE. OBVIOUSLY, THERE ARE NO ARGUMENT HERE THAT DUSKY, YOU KNOW, HAS ITS OWN CASE FOR ITS OWN CIRCUMSTANCES. UM, SO IF WE WANTED TO BREAK IT OUT, UM, I THINK IT COULD BE DONE. I I JUST, WE DID IT, WE WENT ABOUT THIS BY TYPE OF [01:05:01] FACILITY AS OPPOSED TO GEOGRAPHICALLY JUST BECAUSE WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO CONSULT IT. AND PART OF THAT WAS PUTTING IN THAT STANDARDIZED PENALTY PROVISION SO THAT WE HAD THE ABILITY TO EASILY, MORE EASILY, UM, GET INTO MAGISTRATE COURT AS YOU SUGGESTED, UM, AND, AND HAVE THE STANDARD PENALTIES FOR, UM, EVERY WATERWAYS ORDINANCE VIOLATION, UM, TO THE EXTENT THEY OCCUR. SO, UM, THERE COULD BE, THERE'S ALWAYS THE ABILITY TO PUT IN, YOU KNOW, A, A SEPARATE PENALTIES SECTION. WE HAVE AN OFFENSES SECTION OBVIOUSLY WITHIN OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES. WE COULD ADDRESS IT THAT WAY IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT COMMITTEE WAS INTERESTED IN. UM, I, I'M REALLY, I'M ABLE TO DO, UH, HOPEFULLY WHATEVER COMMITTEE IS, UH, INCLINED TO DO. OKAY, THANKS. SO I'M NOT CLEAR ON HOW ARE WE GONNA, HOW ARE WE GONNA ENFORCE THIS? IF SOMEONE COMES FROM SAVANNAH, THEY DON'T HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE IN BEAUFORT COUNTY, ARE WE GONNA HAVE SOMEONE OUT THERE 24 7 MONITORING THAT? IT DEPENDS. ARE WE GONNA HAVE CAMERAS OR SOMETHING? IT DEPENDS ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE FROM THEM. I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE UNDER OUR ORDINANCE THAT EVERYONE HAVE A SPECIFIC PERMIT ISSUED BY BEAUFORT COUNTY THAT REQUIRES THEM TO SUBMIT INSURANCE, THEIR LICENSE, A FEE, ET CETERA, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE INCREASED PERSONNEL OR INCREASED TECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES TO MONITOR THAT. IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT EFFECTIVELY FOR ALL THE COUNTY DOCS, IT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, NOW SOME THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN MUNICIPALITIES, PERHAPS WE'D BE ABLE TO EXPLORE WORKING WITH THEM TO INCREASE OUR, OKAY. ALL THE COUNTY DOCS, THEY WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO ALL OF THEM UNLESS THE MUNICIPALITIES WANTED TO TAKE OVER ENFORCEMENT OR OTHERWISE WORK WITH US. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE? I KNOW I, I HAVE ONE COMMENT I WANNA MAKE TOO. UM, I, I THINK THIS THING'S BEEN, IT'S BEEN GREAT TO HAVE THE BACK AND FORTH AND THE DIALOGUE AND THE WORKSHOPS. YOU KNOW, I, I HEAR AND SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE, THE ARGUMENT HERE, BUT FOR ME PERSONALLY, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO GET IT PASSED AS WRITTEN WITH, WITH SOME MINOR AMENDMENTS, UH, FOR DUSKY FOCUS ON ENFORCEMENT, GENERATE THAT DATA, ESPECIALLY GETTING INTO PEAK SEASON. AND THEN IF WE NEED TO MAKE ON THE PARTICULARIZED CHANGES FOR THE CROSS ISLAND, WE CAN COME BACK AND REVISIT THAT. OR IF WE WANNA PUT IN THE ADDITIONAL, UH, REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS THE, THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AND, AND PERMITTING USER FEES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE CAN ADDRESS THAT SEPARATELY. UM, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK. THERE'S PLENTY OF RE RESERVE SECTIONS IN THIS ORDINANCE WHERE WE CAN PLUG AND PLAY AND WORK ON IT LATER AS WELL. BUT I THINK GETTING THAT ENFORCEMENT DATA IS, IS GONNA BE KEY TO DIRECT WHERE WE GO AND HOW WE DO IT. SO I'D LIKE TO DO THAT FIRST. I, I KNOW I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF HERE ON THAT ONE, BUT, UM, I AGREE, MR. THAT'S, THAT'S MY COMMENTS ON THAT, BUT I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER. WELL JUST, YEAH, YEAH, JUST ONE. I I I LIKE WHERE WE'RE GOING WITH THIS. I'D LIKE THE COMRADERY HERE, MR. MOORE, WHAT ARE GONNA, WHAT ARE WE GONNA HAVE FOR SAFEGUARDS TO ACTUALLY COME BACK TO ENFORCEMENT, TO INSURANCE, TO FEES? UH, I MEAN, TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS, WE TALK, WE TALK A GREAT GAME, AND BELIEVE ME, I, I VALUE EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE TO THIS POINT. WHAT COULD WE DO THAT YOU ENSURE WE GET THIS DONE, THE WHAT WE NEED TO DO? UH, YES SIR. ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE ORDINANCE, LIKE FAST? WELL, THE ORDINANCE I AGREE WITH DAVID. NOW LET'S GET FORWARD, GO FORWARD. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE YOU ALL HAVE SOME, UH, OPTIONS IN THE PACKET HERE TO MAKE, UH, ANY, UH, RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS YOU MIGHT WANT. WE GET CLEAR DIRECTION AND IN TERMS OF THE ENFORCEMENT, THAT WOULD BE UP TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND OUR STAFF. BUT I THINK YOU ALL ARE GONNA SET THE POLICY, SET THE REQUIREMENTS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED FROM COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL. BUT I JUST WANT, I WANT SOME LANGUAGE THAT SAYS WE WILL COME BACK AND ADDRESS ONCE WE GET THIS FIRST THING DONE. SECONDLY, I JUST WANNA GO WITH, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT UPDATES TO THIS OR, WELL, WHAT WE AGREE TO SURE. WHAT WE'RE AGREEING TO NOW ON INSURANCE AND ENFORCEMENT. SURE. I MEAN, WE TALKED TO ORDINANCE FIRST, PASS IT, AND THEN THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WOULD BE MY, TO PAULA'S POINT, A COUPLE TIMES OVER THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS I'VE BEEN TO THE CROSS ISLAND, I'VE MET A GENTLEMAN AND HIS TWO KIDS, THEY COME HERE FROM GEORGIA AND THEY BOAT THREE, FOUR TIMES A MONTH MINIMUM. THEY NEVER PAY. THEY SAY IT'S JUST A GREAT AREA, EASY IN AND OUT ACCESS, AND THEY DON'T PAY A THING. SO AGAIN, THAT'S HAPPENING NOW. SO THAT'S PART OF THAT ENFORCEMENT, BUT OKAY, LISTEN, WELL, THAT WOULD BE, SO IF IT'S NOT FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY, OUR, THE CURRENT DRAFT OF THE ORDINANCE IS NOT GONNA HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THAT. THAT'S GOOD. IF THAT'S A PRIVATE PERSON COMING TO AND FROM OUR LANDINGS THERE, THERE'S NO PERFECT. THAT'S GOOD. EXCELLENT. OKAY, MARK. YEAH, AND LET ME JUST PIGGYBACK OFF THAT, THAT I, I'M A BIG VOTER AND THERE'S MANY TIMES I'M AT THE LANDING AND THERE'S PEOPLE FROM SAVANNAH OR FROM JASPER COUNTY. YOU GO TO NORTHERN BUFORT COUNTY AND PEOPLE FROM CARLTON COUNTY ARE COMING TO USE OUR LANDINGS. AND, AND SOME OF THEM ARE, ARE PRIVATE, SOME OF THEM ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE FI COMMERCIALLY FISHING OR WHATEVER THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING. SO, UM, I'VE, I'VE HEARD THAT COMPLAINT FROM WHEN OUR LANDINGS ARE FULL OVER, [01:10:01] YOU KNOW, 4TH OF JULY MEMORIAL DAY COMING UP, THAT, THAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, WE'RE GONNA KEEP THESE PEOPLE OUT. BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT COME ON VACATION AND BRING THEIR OWN BOATS OR HERE ON VACATION THAT USE THE LANDINGS AS WELL AS, AS AS PRIVATE STUFF. BUT, UM, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS, IS MAKE AN AMENDMENT AND I HAD DYLAN GO THROUGH AND GO AHEAD. SO FIRST BEFORE I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR ON WHICH ONE. SO THERE ARE SIX PROPOSED ADDITIONS WITHIN THAT BACKUP. UM, THERE ARE, WE WILL SEE FIRST ONE IS 7 29, 31, 31 F, AND 31 G. SOME OF THESE DO GO INTO THE REGULATORY SCHEME THAT THE REST OF THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT. SO I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT AND MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S AWARE TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE INTENDING TO ADD. SO THE FIRST ONE, WE HAVE THE DEFINITION OF BARGE SERVICE AND LANDING CRAFT SERVICE. THE SECOND ONE WE HAVE, UM, AN UPDATE TO THE, THE PURPOSE SECTION, UM, WHICH RECOGNIZES DUSKYS UNIQUE SITUATION. THE THIRD PROVIDES FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING OF CARGO FOR COMMERCIAL FREIGHT PURPOSES AT ALL COUNTY LANDINGS. SO THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY EVERY BARGE SERVICE COULD UNLOAD AND UNLOAD FREELY AT COUNTY LANDINGS WITHOUT ANY SORT OF REGULATION. UM, SO, UH, THE FOURTH, UH, IS A SPECIFIC PERMISSION IN 1 0 2 31 FOR BARGES, FARIES, AND LANDING CRAFT, UM, TO UTILIZE FOR ACTIVE UNLOADING AND UNLOADING OF COMMERCIAL CARGO. UM, AND NUMBER FIVE IS THE DUSKY ISLAND ESSENTIAL BARGE SERVICE ACCESS. SO THAT IS SPECIFIC STIPULATIONS REGARDING WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO ON DUSKY TO. UM, AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS THE ONE THAT I WAS NOTING HERE, COMMERCIAL BARGE OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS. AND THAT REQUIRES, UM, SOME INSURANCE AND LICENSING AND OTHER THINGS, UM, THAT WE WOULD BE, WE WOULD THEREFORE, IF WE WERE DOING THAT, WE WOULD BE DOING WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS EXPANDING THE REGULATORY CAPACITY, UM, IN A WAY THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE DONE IN ANOTHER SECTION OF AN ORDINANCE YET. SO JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT FOR PURPOSES OF MOVING FORWARD. ALRIGHT. SO, AND, AND DYLAN, WHENEVER I SENT YOU THE STUFF, WE, YOU, WHEN I LOOKED AT, I WAS, OH, THIS IS WHAT YOU LOOKING AT WHAT WE HAD SENT OVER. SO, OR IS THERE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW OF WHAT WE'VE GOT COMING UP THAT YOU SAY WE, WE SHOULDN'T DO AT THIS POINT? UM, SINCE YOU KNOW THIS ORDINANCE INSIDE AND OUT BETTER THAN I DO, I MEAN, I'VE READ IT, BUT TELL ME WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AS AN AMENDMENT ME TO MAKE THAT WOULD ADD TO THE ORDINANCE? YES, SIR. SO, UM, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THE, THE DEFINITIONS, AS I SAID EARLIER, I DON'T THE, UH, FOR BARGE SERVICE AND LANDING CRAFT SERVICE, I THINK THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN THE REST OF THE ORDINANCE. SO THAT IS THE FIRST ONE THAT WAS SUGGESTED. AND THEN IF WE'D LIKE TO GET VERY SPECIFIC, THE FIFTH, UH, OPTION THAT WAS RECOMMENDED IS THE ESSENTIAL BARGE SERVICE ACCESS. UH, AND THAT, UM, IS SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT, UH, DUSKY, UH, OPERATIONS ARE PERMITTED TO DO, BUT IT DOES NOT CONTAIN, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL REGULATORY STEPS THAT ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE OTHER STEP. UM, OTHER PARTS OF THE ORDINANCE. SO IF, IF I WERE RECOMMENDING ON BEHALF OF STAFF, I WOULD SAY, UH, NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER FIVE. RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING TOO. SO, BECAUSE THE, THE LAST ONE, NUMBER SIX, HAS LICENSING AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE NOT OTHERWISE CONTAINED WITHIN THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE. WELL, THAT'S WHEN WE SAID MAYBE YOU WANT TO DO IT ANOTHER WAY. IT YES SIR. AFTER WE GATHER SOME DATA, I THINK IT, WE'D BE ABLE TO ADDRESS IT AT THAT TIME. OKAY. SO I, I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE WOULD DO EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE REGULATION PART OF IT, WHICH WILL COME UNDER OUR SEPARATE ORDINANCE LATER ON. UM, AND ADD THIS OTHER LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE GOT IN HERE AS JUST PART OF THE, THE OVERALL ORDINANCE THAT HELPS TO PROTECT, YOU KNOW, BAR ASKING RIGHT NOW IS COVERED THAT THEY CAN GO AND USE THE, THE BARED SERVICE. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. YEAH. SCROLL DOWN TO, UM, SO WE'LL GET BACK TO YOUR, YOUR MOTHER. SORRY. SORRY, WE, WE'LL GET BACK TO HIM. I DON'T WANNA, SHE HAD HER HAND UP FOR A SECOND. I'LL SECOND IT, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION. I'LL SECOND HIS MOTION. OKAY. OKAY. BUT SCROLL DOWN TO 1 0 2 THIRD 30, SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE PLEASE. UH, LANDING RULE SERVICE, UM, I THINK THE CONCERN ABOUT COMMERCIAL, OR WE'RE GONNA ADD THE COMMERCIAL BARGE OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS AS PART OF THIS, THAT WAS THE REGULATORY ONE THAT I MENTIONED, THAT THAT ONE GOES BEYOND. AND SO I, I BELIEVE AS I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION TO AMEND IT WAS EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THAT ONE, BECAUSE IT, FOR THAT ONE, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT COMING BACK AND DOING AT A LATER TIME. BUT THAT, BUT WHEN, WHEN THAT IS ADDED, THAT WILL COVER IF SOMEONE'S, YOU KNOW, POLLUTING, ET CETERA. UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT TIME COMES TOO WOULD BE, IT COULD BE ANYBODY, IF I CAN CHIME IN ON THAT ONE. THERE ARE SO MANY FEDERAL REGULATIONS. OH YEAH. YOU DON'T NEED IT. THAT GOVERN OIL SPILLS AND [01:15:01] CLEAN UP AND EVERYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES. I MEAN THAT IT'S ALREADY, IT'S ALREADY COVERED IN YEAH, IT'S ALREADY COVERED IN STATE LOSS. YEAH, BUT I, I AGREE. I THINK COMING BACK, WE'RE NOT DONE WITH THIS. I DON'T THINK WE'RE DONE WITH THIS BY ANY MEANS. SO I, I KNOW WE'LL BE BACK AND, AND FIGURING OUT THE REST OF THE, THE REGULATORY SCHEME HERE, BUT I THINK WE HAVE A GOOD, GOOD BASIS. RIGHT. A COMMERCIAL BARGE OPERATOR IS, IF HE'S NOT ALREADY COMPLIANT WITH STATE AND FEDERAL , THIS IS GOING TO COUNTY COUNCIL FOR THE INITIAL READING OF THE ORDINANCE, WE HAD A FIRST AND A SECOND. IS THAT CLEAR ON THE, ON THE MOTION? OKAY. UH, DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE, OR HOW? IS THERE ANYBODY ON, LET ME ASK FIRST BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE VOTE. GERALD, LARRY, DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? WAS THAT A NOPE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, AND WE DON'T NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE. CAN THIS MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT OBJECTION? ALRIGHT. YOU WANT THIS TIME SENSITIVE? SO IT'S AT THE NEXT COUNCIL? YEAH, LET'S GET, SINCE WE'RE GETTING INTO THE, THE BUSY SEASON, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT FORWARD TIME SENSITIVE. UH, BUT THAT WAS, HEY, DAVID? YES, DAVID, LARRY, ONE THING WE'RE WE'RE GONNA INSIST ON INSURANCE FOR ALL COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES, RIGHT? WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA COME BACK AND, AND REVISIT THAT, BUT I MEAN, THAT ISN'T, OKAY. DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING IT FOR ALL COMMERCIAL? NOT NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME IN THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE. I THINK WE'RE GONNA CREATE A COME BACK ON A SECOND ORDINANCE AFTER WE CO COLLECT SOME DATA WITH ENFORCEMENT. WELL, WE'RE TALKING HERE ABOUT LIABILITY IS RIGHT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. OKAY. I, OKAY. DI DYLAN, DID YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT ONE MORE TIME? UH, IT WOULD ONLY BE THAT IF WE, IF WE HAD AN ADDED REQUIREMENT FOR INSURANCE, IT WOULD BE EXPANDING OUR REGULATORY SCHEME AND CAPACITY. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD A SEPARATE SECTION TO THIS ORDINANCE, UM, REQUIRING INSURANCE. AND THEN THAT WOULD HAVE RAMIFICATIONS OBVIOUSLY FOR ENFORCEMENT. UH, AGAIN, IT'S, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT COMMITTEE WISHES TO DO, WE CAN DO IT. I BELIEVE THAT THE NOTION WAS THAT WE WOULD GO FORWARD WITH THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES HERE. WE WOULD GATHER SOME, SOME DATA ON THE, ANY ISSUES THAT ARISE WITH THAT, AND THEN WE WOULD COME BACK AND LOOK AT THE PERMITTING ISSUE WITH LICENSE, UM, THE, ANY FEES THAT WE ARE SEEKING TO IMPOSE, UM, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YEAH, I WAS JUST BRINGING UP, BECAUSE I THOUGHT IF SOMEONE'S USING OUR LANDINGS AND THERE'S AN INCIDENT AND THE PERSON DOESN'T HAVE A LIABILITY INSURANCE, WHO ARE THEY GONNA SUE? I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, BY THE WAY. YES, SIR. IT IS A DAVID, IT'S A VALID CONCERN. YES. READY FOR ME, AND THIS IS THE POINT I WAS ASKING BEFORE, HOW DO WE SAFEGUARD THAT WE WILL COME BACK? WE, WE TALKED ABOUT GETTING IT DONE. WELL, LET'S CREATE ANOTHER ORDINANCE, AND NOW I'M HEARING, WELL, WE SHOULD COME BACK AND WE'RE THINKING ABOUT IT AND ALL. ARE WE AGREEING RIGHT HERE NOW TO GET THIS ORIGINAL ORDINANCE THAT WE WANT TO DO OVER THE HURDLE, GET IT TO COUNCIL. BUT DO WE AGREE AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE WILL ADDRESS IT AND NOT THINK ABOUT IT? AND MAYBE AN OPTION WE OWE? I MEAN, HOW LONG WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TOGETHER ON THIS. LET'S NOT, YOU KNOW, MAKE BELIEVE HERE. I I'M JUST SAYING LET'S PUT LANGUAGE HERE. NOW, NOT IN AN ORDINANCE, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST STEP. THERE IS INSURANCE AND THERE'S A ENFORCEMENT STEP THAT WE'RE GONNA DO. WHY CAN'T WE COMMIT TO THAT RIGHT NOW? I, I, I THINK WE HAVE, IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S JUST NOT ON THE FLOOR FOR US TO, TO VOTE. FAIR ENOUGH. I I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. YEAH, BRIAN. YEAH, BRIAN, YOU CAN DO A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND THEN RAISE IT AGAIN AND THEN ADD THAT SEC. WHY, WHY WOULD WE NEED TO RECONSIDER? BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY ADOPTED, ALREADY MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS GOING FORWARD. NO. YEAH, YEAH. WE HAVEN'T VOTED. WE MADE THE MOTION TO GO FORWARD. WE MADE AN AMENDMENT. WE HAVEN'T VOTED. OH, WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON THAT. VOTED ON THE AMENDMENT AND WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON THE ORDINANCE WITH THE AMENDMENT. IS THERE A NEED FOR A ROLL CALL? AND HE SAID, NO, NO, THAT WAS FOR THE AMENDMENT. WE, WE, WE STILL HAVE THE MAIN, THE MAIN MOTION'S STILL PENDING RIGHT NOW. SO I, I SAW SOME PEOPLE POPPING IN, SO WE HELD OFF ON THE VOTE ON THAT. BUT THE THANKS, THE, THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN AMENDED. THAT WAS APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION. BUT NOW WE HAVE THE MAIN MOTION BEFORE IS AS AMENDED AND, AND IS THERE, BUT IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY ON THIS? I, I, TOM, I, I THINK WE'RE ALL COMMITTING TO COME BACK AND, AND ANALYZING THIS WITH ADDITIONAL DATA. I I APPRECIATE THAT. IT'S PERFECT. THANK YOU. AND IF, AND IF I MAY, I, I THINK ONE OF THE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES WE HAD WAS THE A THOUSAND DOLLARS FINE AND THE, THE LACK OF DUE PROCESS WITH THE, WITH TRYING TO ISSUE TICKETS. SO I THINK BRINGING THAT BACK INTO $500 PUTS IT BACK INTO THE MAGISTRATE COURT AND BRINGS THE ABILITY FOR US TO ISSUE THOSE TICKETS AND GET IN FRONT OF A JUDGE. AM I CORRECT IN THAT IT IS NOW STANDARDIZED? THERE IS ONE PROCEDURE, THERE'S ONE PATH. SO HOPEFULLY THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE FEASIBLE. SO YOU GET PROSECUTE 'EM MORE WORK FOR YOU, . YES. ALRIGHT. UM, BUT YEAH, IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO MOVING THIS FORWARD AS AMENDED TO COUNSEL AND TIME SENSITIVE IN NATURE? ALRIGHT, UH, ONLINE, WAS THERE ANY OBJECTION? ONLINE. [01:20:02] ALRIGHT. GOT A THUMBS UP. ALRIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD. YEP. IT'LL MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL AS TIME SENSITIVE AND AS AMENDED. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, DYLAN. UH, THAT MOVES US INTO OUR NEXT ONE, UH, ITEM EIGHT C, WHICH IS THE GLASS. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING WITH US. YES. WHICH IS THE GLASSWORKS, WAS THAT A, THAT WAS A FEASIBILITY STUDY, CORRECT? YES. YES. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ IT AGAIN? YEAH, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, JUST FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. WELL ACTUALLY, JOE, IF YOU WANT TO WAIT A MINUTE, LET THE ROOM CLEAR OUT HERE. THANK YOU. NOT A, NOT A COMPLETELY EMPTY ROOM . NOT YET. NOT YET. JOE, IF YOU COULD PLEASE READ THE, READ THE ITEM AGAIN. RECOMMEND THAT THE ADMINISTRATION, ADMINISTRATION CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE POTENTIAL PURCHASE OF THE FORMER GLASSWORKS PROPERTY AND BUILDING AND REPURPOSING THE BUILDING FOR USE AS THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING. AND WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS. THAT'S JOE, THIS WAS AN ACTION ITEM, CORRECT. EVEN THOUGH IT, IT IS AN ACTION ITEM. OKAY. UM, CAN I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND? SO THAT WAS YOUR MOTION ON THAT. CAN I GET A SECOND ON THAT? I THINK I DID SECOND THAT. WELL, THAT WAS EARLIER FOR THE AMENDING OF THE AGENDA. NOW WE'RE ACTUALLY AT THE ITEM. OKAY, WELL I'LL PASS ANOTHER SECOND. THERE YOU GO. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT A FIRST AND SECOND AND IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT? I KNOW WE WEREN'T, WE, WE CAN DISCUSS IT. UM, WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS AT THE STAFF LEVEL AND IT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE'S $25 MILLION AVAILABLE IN THE BOND, THE GEO BOND FOR PUBLIC WORKS. SO WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE EXISTING SITE AND THE POSSIBILITY OF THE GLASSWORK. SO I KNOW, UH, JARED MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND WE WERE ACTUALLY CONSIDERING BRINGING THIS TO YOU ALL LATER. BUT, UM, SHOULD YOU PASS THIS, BUT THEN WE COULD GO AND SPEND FUNDS TO EXAMINE THE SITE. IT'S AN OLDER FACILITY. IT'S, I BELIEVE BUILT IN THE SEVENTIES AND THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, IT'S INSIDE THE CITY AS I RECALL THE CITY BUFORT. SO THERE'D BE SOME THINGS WE'D HAVE TO EVALUATE IN TERMS OF COULD IT BE USED, BUT WE CAN ABSOLUTELY GO DO THAT WITH YOU ALL'S DIRECTION. ALICE? IT IT'S IN THE, IT'S IN THE, HAS ANYONE EVER BEEN IN THAT THAT'S ON STAFF? I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY. IT, JUST FOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION, FOR THE RECORD, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE GLASSWORKS BUILDING THAT'S LOCATED IN THE BEAUFORT INDUSTRIAL PARK IN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT, SOUTH CAROLINA. YEAH, AND IT'S, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S CURRENTLY FOR SALE. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE PEOPLE, UM, STAFF BRADLEY'S BEEN THROUGH IT AS WELL AS JASON BESSINGER. UH, I DON'T THINK FRANK WAS ON THAT AND MAYBE ONE OTHER OR TOO. SO A COUPLE PEOPLE PUT EYES ON IT, AND THAT'S BEEN A YEAR AGO. WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING, UH, WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANY MONEY TO ACTIVELY DO ANY DUE DILIGENCE ON IT, I THINK. HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS IT? 85,000. 85,000. WHAT'S THE CURRENT, UM, BUILDING THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING SQUARE, UH, 12,000 THAT JUST FOR THE FRONT, NOT INCLUDING THE SHOP. WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, COMBINED WITH PUBLIC WORKS IS ABOUT 15,000 SQUARE FEET WITH ABOUT FIVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS THAT ARE SCATTERED. YEAH. SO AS PART, PART OF THE PUBLIC WORKS PLAN, IT WAS CONSOLIDATE ALL THE BUILDINGS AND PUT 'EM IN ONE. SO WE HAVE ONE HVAC ONE ROOF, ALL THAT STUFF. UM, 85,000 IS MORE ROOM THAN PUBLIC WORKS NEEDS, BUT WHAT IT COULD PROVIDE POTENTIALLY, THIS IS STUFF WE WOULD EXPLORE, IS OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS, FACILITIES. THEY HAVE, THERE'S, THEY'RE IN TWO BUILDINGS THERE IN BIV AND AT SHANKLIN ROAD. UM, THEY HAVE A NEED ALSO TO, OR A GOAL TO, TO BUILD LIKE A MINI HOME DEPOT. SO THEY HAVE ALL THEIR SUPPLIES AT HAND VERSUS HAVING TO GO TO LOWE'S DAILY. UM, MOSQUITO CONTROL, THEY HAVE A NEED FOR A LAB. THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING LAB IN THERE. IT WOULD NEED TO BE UPDATED POTENTIALLY, BUT THOSE ARE A POTENTIAL USE AS WELL. IT ALSO INCLUDES 35 ACRES. UM, SO OF USABLE, WE HAVE A LOT OF ACREAGE AT SHANKLIN, BUT A LOT. UM, SO AS WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE PUBLIC WORKS LAYOUT, IT'S BEEN A CONFINED, WHAT DO WE BUILD FIRST SO THAT WE CAN STAGE CONSTRUCTION? SO THERE'S 35 ACRES PLUS THE BUILDING, THE BUILDING PLUS 35 ACRES, AND SOME OF IT'S WOODY. DOES THIS ELIMINATE ANYTHING AND THEN BEING USED IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? NO, THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE INDUSTRIAL PARK PROPER. UM, SO THE INDUSTRIAL PARK IS, IS, IT STARTS ON SHO ROAD AND THEN GOES BEHIND IT AND THEN THE THREE ROADS BACK TO SHORE AND I CAN'T THINK OF THAT. YEAH, WE'RE ALWAYS WORRIED ABOUT PRODUCT FOR INDUSTRIAL, I MEAN FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. HOW OLD IS THE BUILDING? THE GLASSWORK BUILT IN 77. 1977. 1977. I HAVE ANOTHER CONCERN. UM, WHEN THE AIR STATION DECIDED THAT, WELL, WHEN THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS DECIDED THAT THE F 30 FIVES WOULD COME TO TO BEAUFORT FOR A TRAINING FACILITY, [01:25:01] WE HAD HANGERS THERE. PERFECTLY GOOD HANGERS, BUT THEY WERE BUILT IN THE 1960S. THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE SECURITY, THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE HVAC, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE BELLS AND WHISTLES, AND IT WAS, IT WAS CHEAPER TO JUST TEAR 'EM DOWN AND START OVER AGAIN FOR THE F 30 FIVES. THAT'S MY CONCERN. IS IT, AND I I UNDERSTAND THIS FEASIBILITY STUDY, HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE GONNA SPEND ON IT? I HAVEN'T, I REALLY DON'T HAVE AS MUCH PROBLEM WITH THAT. IS IT, ARE WE JUST THROWING GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD? I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE FEASIBILITY, I THINK THERE'S TWO PARTS OF THE FEASIBILITY. HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? THE FEASIBILITY STUDY? UM, WE DON'T HAVE AN ESTIMATE YET. UM, ON THE STUDIES I WOULD GARNER IN THE 50 TO A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS RANGE, UH, JUST AS A PLACEHOLDER. UM, THERE'S TWO PARTS. THERE'S A CONDITION ASSESSMENT. WHAT, SO WHAT WE DID ON ALL OF OUR OTHER FACILITIES, WE CAN GET THAT LEVEL OF CONDITION ASSESSMENT. JUST HOW, WHAT SHAPE IT IS. AND THEN ALSO WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO CONVERT IT TO OUR NEEDS, UM, FROM A BUILDING CODES PERSPECTIVE AND A ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVES IN THE CITY OF, IN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT. SO WE'D HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEIR BUILDING OFFICIAL AND DEPARTMENT. UM, BUT THOSE WOULD BE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT FIRST TO EVEN MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER IT'S WORTHWHILE BEFORE WE WOULD GET INTO ANYTHING FURTHER. IF I MAY, TWO THINGS ON THAT ONE. I THINK THE LAST TIME I WAS THERE, THERE WAS A LOT OF GOOD EQUIPMENT JUST SITTING OUT IN THE SUN. UH, WOULD THERE BE INSIDE OF THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE STORAGE YARD AS WELL? YEAH, SO THERE'S A, I THINK A COUPLE ACRES PAVED RIGHT NOW AS PARKING LOT. UM, SO THAT WOULD BE LOOKED AT. AND, UM, AS FAR AS THERE WAS SOME EQUIPMENT INSIDE THE BUILDING, SO THAT WOULD BE, WHETHER THAT'S INCLUDED OR NOT, IF THERE WAS A POTENTIAL SALE, IF IT GOT THAT FAR. UM, THE BUILDING ITSELF ALSO, WHEN GLASSWORKS MOVED INTO IT, THEY BOUGHT IT, THEY SPENT $3 MILLION PLUS IN RENOVATING. SO IT'S GOT SOME NEW RENOVATED FEATURES TO IT. UM, BUT THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT MORE CLOSELY AS WELL. SECOND PART OF OF MY QUESTION WITH THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, IS THERE ANY APPETITE? AND IT'S TOO EARLY TO KNOW REALLY, BUT WOULD THE CITY OF BEAUFORT HAVE A NEED OPERATION? I MEAN, THEY HAVE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATION OFF BURTON HILL, UM, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT, WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE, BUT IT COULD NOT, THERE MIGHT BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY. COULD BE LOOKED AT. YEAH, I, I AGREE WITH YOU, DAVID. THAT WOULD, BECAUSE IT, YOU DRIVE BY THERE, IT'S CROWDED WHERE THEIR PUBLIC WORKS IS. UM, SO THERE MIGHT BE, IT COULD BE A DISCUSSION. MR. CHAIR, ONE OTHER COMMENT. WE HAVE DESIGN ONGOING AT THE CURRENT SITE. SO IF, IF WE WERE TO PROCEED WITH GLASSWORKS, THEN THAT WOULD MODIFY THAT DESIGN POTENTIALLY. UM, JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE. BUT WE'VE ALREADY SPENT MONEY ON DESIGN ON THE EXISTING SITE. I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION ON THAT, WITH THE DESIGN THAT'S ONGOING, WHAT WOULD WE DO WITH THAT BUILDING? UM, I KNOW OFFICE SPACE IS ALWAYS A NEED HERE, BUT WHAT WOULD THEY, IS THERE A PLAN FOR IT OR USE FOR IT OR YOU COULD, YOU COULD HAVE OPEN SPACE. I MEAN, WE'VE ALSO GOT OUR FLEET THERE AS WELL, SO THAT'S PART OF IT. YEAH, SO ALL ALL THESE ARE THINGS WE'D NEED TO, UM, HAVE MORE DISCUSSION ON. BUT YEAH, YOU COULD BE OPEN SPACE. YOU COULD UM, YOU COULD USE IT PARTIALLY, UH, AND YOU COULD REDEVELOP A, A SHOP THERE. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS WAS STAGING, KEEPING ACCESS AND AVAILABLE ACCESS WHILE CONSTRUCTION WAS GOING ON, THAT THAT COULD BE IMPROVED IN THAT PROCESS. IF YOU'RE ONLY DEALING WITH A, UH, THE SHOP IS A LITTLE BIT MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD OF A BUILDING. IT'S MORE OF A PRE-MANUFACTURED TYPE OF STEEL BUILDING. UM, SO THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE ON WHAT THE FUTURE USE COULD BE. WHAT PERCENTAGE DESIGN IS THE, UM, PUB CURRENT PUBLIC WORKS? IT'S NOT VERY FAR. IT'S IN 10%. PRELIMINARY. 50%. 10, 15%. SO WE'VE HAD SEVERAL REMUNERATION, LIKE DIFFERENT DESIGNS. UM, AND WHERE WE ARE NOW, WE JUST GOT A QUOTE BACK THIS WEEK FROM THE DESIGN FIRM TO GIVE US AN UPDATED PLAN BASED OFF THE LATEST CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD, WHAT THE INTENDED USE WOULD BE. AND, UM, THEY'VE GIVEN US A SCOPE AND FEE TO TAKE IT TO A PRELIMINARY DESIGN IN ORDER TO PUT IT OUT TO BID. THE PLAN WAS TO HAVE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK TO BASICALLY, BECAUSE IT'S A STAGE CONSTRUCTION ON THE CONFINED SITE AT PUBLIC WORKS PROPER, UM, TO HAVE A CONTRACTOR ON BOARD AS PART OF THE PROCESS SO WE CAN DESIGN IT WITH THEM, HELP 'EM COST ESTIMATE ALONG THE WAY. SO BASICALLY THEY WOULD GET US FROM A 10 OR 15% TO A 30%. THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. I'D LIKE TO MOTION THAT WE, UM, NOT GO FORWARD UNTIL WE GET A BETTER ESTIMATE ON HOW MUCH THIS FEASIBILITY SECOND IT, YEAH. INSTANT. I'D JUST LIKE TO KNOW, IS IT 50? IS IT A HUNDRED? IS IT 200,000? YEAH. ALRIGHT. [01:30:01] UH, DO WE NEED TO ROLL COVID ON THAT? I, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY CAN'T HAPPEN UNTIL THE NEW BUDGET AND WE GOTTA FIND A PLACE TO TAKE THE MONEY IN THE NEW BUDGET BECAUSE OUR CONTINGENCY HAS GONE TO POT. WE WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH ADMINISTRATOR AND FINANCE ON THIS. MY THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT THIS WOULD FIT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE, UM, WE HAVE TWO SOURCES OF FUNDS. WE HAVE EXISTING FUNDING FOR THE DESIGN. WE HAVE ABOUT $300,000 AVAILABLE ON THAT FUNDING SOURCE, UM, THAT COULD BE USED FOR THIS OR THE, THE BONDING FUNDS THAT ARE SITTING THERE FOR PUBLIC WORKS. SO THIS IS BEING EXPLORED FOR PUBLIC WORKS. THOSE AGAIN, I'D HAVE, WE NEED TO COORDINATE WITH FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION. I, I KNOW WE GOT A HAD A MOTION TO SAY, CAN YOU REITERATE YOUR MOTION? WAS THAT, UH, JUST LIKE TO AMEND, UM, JOE PASSMAN MOTION THAT, THAT WE, UM, WE GET A MORE CONCRETE ESTIMATE ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY. I MEAN, I HEARD 50,000, I HEARD A HUNDRED THOUSAND, UM, SOMETHING IN WRITING. DO YOU HAVE A A DATE CERTAIN YOU WANNA PUT THAT TO OR? I THINK WE COULD USE ONCALL, RIGHT? FOR THIS. UH, WE CAN DEFINITELY USE ONCALL ON THE CONDITION ASSESSMENT IN BRIGHTLY. UM, WE'LL WE COULD WORK EITHER WITH OUR EXISTING CONTRACT ON ARCHITECTURE OR ON CALL. YEAH, I THINK SO. SO WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE ON THAT AMENDED, UH, MOTION. IT IS PROPERLY. MOTION AND SECONDED. UH, CHAIR HOWARD? UM, YES. VICE CHAIR TABER? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER PASSMAN. OH, COUNCIL MEMBER MCALLEN? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER DAWSON? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER LAWSON. MARK LAWSON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER REEDS? YES. COMMITTEE, VICE CHAIR. BARTHOLOMEW? NO, THE MOTION PASSES. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD DEFEAT THE, UNDER THE, THE MAIN MOTION THAT WAS BEFORE US WITH THE AMENDED. 'CAUSE YOU ESSENTIALLY POSTPONED IT JUST TILL WE GET AN ESTIMATE, A CONCRETE ESTIMATE. THAT'S ALL I THAT'S WHAT MY MO EXACTLY. YEAH, IT'S NOT A NO IS A POSTPONEMENT. YEAH. YEAH. THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR A DATE CERTAIN. BUT, UM, THAT WAS, AND THAT WAS AN ON-CALL SERVICE, SO WE CAN PROBABLY GET THAT BACK PRETTY QUICK. WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO THE NEXT COMMITTEE OR I'M JUST, I THINK WE COULD HAVE A QUOTE BY THE NEXT COMMITTEE. WE, UM, WE'LL BE ABLE TO, YES. AND IF IT'S AT THE COMMITTEE THRESHOLD, WHICH IT PROBABLY WILL BE, I COULD JUST APPROVE IT TO BE DONE. BE DONE. YEAH. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THAT EVEN THOUGH WE WERE DOING AGENDA ITEMS, [9.a. An Ordinance Providing for a 2026 Transportation Sales Tax Referendum (FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed ordinance would authorize a referendum for a transportation sales tax program estimated at approximately $780 million over an eight-year collection period. Sales tax revenues would be restricted to the transportation projects and purposes included in the ordinance and referendum materials. The County may also consider bonding or other financing strategies to accelerate project delivery where financially prudent and consistent with the approved program. ) - Jared Fralix, Assistant County Administrator (15 minutes)] THAT NOW TAKES US INTO THE AGENDA ITEMS SECTION. UM, NOW WE'RE AT NINE A, UH, WHICH IS AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A 2026 TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX REFERENDUM. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD AUTHORIZE A REFERENDUM FOR A TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX PROGRAM ESTIMATED AT APPROXIMATELY 780 MILLION OVER AN EIGHT YEAR COLLECTION PERIOD. SALES TAX REVENUES WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO THE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AND PURPOSES INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE AND REFERENDUM MATERIALS. THE COUNTY MAY ALSO CONSIDER BONDING OR OTHER FINANCING STRATEGIES TO ACCELERATE PROJECT DELIVERY WHERE FINANCIALLY PRUDENT AND CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PROGRAM. UH, MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ON THE FLOOR? SO MOVED. SO, RIGHT. UM, FLOOR IS YOURS. ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS OUR SALES TAX THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. UM, THIS IS THE ORDINANCE VERSION OF THE PRESENTATION THAT CHAIR SOKA GAVE LAST, UM, MONDAY NIGHT AT AT COUNCIL MEETING. SO, JUST TO REITERATE, WHAT'S PROPOSED IS A AND WE ALSO HAVE, UM, JEREMY COOK ONLINE. HE'S OUR BOND COUNCIL, UM, TO HELP US. HE WAS, HE HELPED DRAFT THE ORDINANCE ORIGINALLY WHEN WE WERE PROPOSING IT IN 2024. WE TOOK THAT VERSION AND UPDATED IT FOR TODAY. UM, BUT TO REITERATE, SO THIS IS A EIGHT YEAR, $780 MILLION SALES TAX, UM, FOR THIS NOVEMBER. UM, WHAT WE DID IS, AGAIN, WE TOOK THE PREVIOUS VERSION AND UPDATED IT WITH THE NEW DATES. UM, ONE THING THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADDITION TO THE PROJECTS WAS AN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. UH, THERE WASN'T A LOT OF DISCUSSION OR DIRECTION FROM THE CURRENT TAC COMMITTEE ON TO COUNSEL WHAT THAT SHOULD LOOK LIKE, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT IT PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY LAST TIME IN, IN 2023 OR 2024. [01:35:01] AND IT WAS MODELED AFTER THE BEAUFORT SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, CLOCK CITIZEN LED OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. SO WHAT WE HAVE OF PROVISION IN SECTION 2.15 IS A SEVEN MEMBER COMMITTEE, UM, THREE COUNCIL, THREE APPOINTED FROM COUNTY COUNCIL, AND ONE FROM EACH OF THE FOUR MUNICIPALITIES THAT WOULD STAY WITH THE PROGRAM IF APPROVED AT THE BALLOT. UM, THAT THAT CITIZEN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WILL GET STARTED, UM, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT YEAR. AND, UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE DETAILS OF THE ORDINANCE. UM, BE HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT ANY SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECTS. ONE THING ALSO TO NOTE, AND THIS CAME UP AND THERE'S BACKUP IN THERE, UM, IT DIDN'T COME UP THROUGH THE COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSION, BUT WHEN WE MET WITH BOND COUNCIL AFTER THE RECOMMENDATIONS CAME FROM THE LAST TAC MEETING, UM, ONE THING TO NOTE IS THE REVENUES COLLECTED ARE BASED OFF THE LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED FROM DOR THE 780 OVER EIGHT YEARS. UM, THERE'S ONE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS SALES TAX IN PREVIOUS YEARS BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN AMENDMENT TO THE STATUTE ON HOW THAT REVENUE COLLECTION WAS CALCULATED. AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE, THE STATUTE WAS UPDATED TO INCLUDE UNPREPARED FOODS. SO THE PRO PROJECTED REVENUES, UM, THEY TOOK THE GREEN SPACE SALES TAX AS THE BASE, AS OUR CURRENT COUNTY BASE PROJECTED THAT FORWARD. UM, THAT ONE DOES NOT HAVE UNPREPARED FOODS. THEY ADDED, IF YOU SCROLL DOWN, UM, A COUPLE SLIDES, I THINK IT'S ON GOOD ALL THE WAY TO THE END. NUMBER FIVE, UM, YOU'LL SEE THIS. AND SO THERE'S THE PROJECTED GREEN SPACE ON THE LEFT, A SECOND COLUMN, THE UNPREPARED FOODS ADJUSTMENTS, AND THEN THE, THE ADDITION OF THAT IS THE, THE FOURTH COLUMN, WHAT THIS SAX IS PROPOSED. SO, UM, THAT CAME UP IN OUR DISCUSSION WITH BOND COUNCIL. SO JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THAT FACT, THAT'S WHAT THE $780 MILLION EIGHT YEARS IS BASED UPON THOSE NUMBERS. SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU AND WE'LL GLADLY TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. OH MY GOODNESS. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANY FURTHER? YEAH, ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED BY ONE OF THE MUNICIPALITIES, I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER. THE QUESTION WAS, WE GENERATE X PERCENT OF THE SALES TAX REVENUE, SO WE SHOULD GET X PERCENT. AND I BELIEVE SOMEBODY ASKED DOR, WHAT ARE THE X PERCENTS? DO YOU HAVE THAT? I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT IN GENERAL, UM, DOR PUBLISHES THE ANNUAL LIST OF ALL TAX RECEIVED IN THE STATE AND THEY BREAK DOWN VARIOUS DIFFERENT TAX, THE, THE SALE TAX, PROPERTY TAX, ALL SORTS OF TAX, UM, FOR SALES TAX. AND THEY EVEN BREAK IT DOWN PER MUNICIPALITY AND UNINCORPORATED. UM, I BELIEVE THE MOST RECENT DATA WAS IN THE 30% WAS HOW MUCH UNINCORPORATED AND ABOUT HILTON HEAD WAS AROUND 30%. AND THEN THE REST OF THE THREE OTHERS, UH, MUNICIPALITIES ADDED UP THE REMAINDER 40% BECAUSE I BELIEVE SOME PEOPLE ON HILTON HEAD BELIEVE THEY GENERATE 62% OF THE REVENUE. AND YOU'RE SAYING IT'S 35 OR 30, IT'S IN THE 30% IS WHAT HILTON HEAD. AND, UM, OVER THE LAST YEARS, THAT'S TRENDED DOWN AS THE OTHER AREAS HAVE GROWN. SO BLUFFTON HAS GROWN. I SAW GERALD HAS, LEMME CHIME IN IF I MAY. YEP. YES SIR. ALRIGHT. I, I WANNA SPEAK TO TABS CONCERN ABOUT THE, THE FUNDING OF THE DIRT ROADS. AND IIII WANNA SAY THIS AS I POLITE, AS I CANTON, UM, WE CAN'T PUT THIS REFEREND REFERENDUM TOGETHER AND DISCOUNT THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE ON THESE DIRT ROADS AND THEY, AND, AND EXPECT THEM TO PARTICIPATE. UH, I LOST, I LOST AND EXPECT THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN, IN THIS REFERENDUM. THE, THE COUNTY'S POSITION FROM PRIOR CONSULT IS THAT WE INITIATED A, A DIRT ROAD PAVING PROGRAM TO PAVE ALL THE DIRT ROADS IN THE COUNTY, COUNT IN, IN THE COUNTY. AND THAT WAY IT WOULD, UH, IT WOULD RELIEVE THE, UH, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FROM THE, UH, FOR THE NEED OF ACTUALLY GRADING AND UPGRADING THESE ROADS TO MAKE IT PASSABLE FOR THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE ON THEM. SOME OF THESE ROADS CAN BE VERY, UM, UH, UH, HARD TO MAINTAIN AND COST, UH, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT A LOT OF MANPOWER AND MATERIAL TO KEEP THESE ROAD PASSABLE FOR SOME OF THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE ON THEM. SO THE GOAL OF PAVING ALL THE DIRT ROADS IN THE COUNTY WOULD THEN [01:40:02] FREE UP THE, UH, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF HAVING TO GRADE UP TO HAVING TO GRADE AND UPKEEP THESE ROADS AND MAINTAIN THESE ROADS SO THAT THEY'RE PASSABLE. AND SO THAT, THAT'S HOW THE PROGRAM CAME INTO EXISTENCE. THE, THE, UM, THE PENNY SALE TAX WAS A MEANS OF EXPEDITING THAT PROCESS. UH, OVER THE YEARS WE'VE GOTTEN MANY OF THE ROADS PAVED, BUT IN THIS REFERENDUM IT SHOWS THAT WE STILL HAVE 18 DIRT ROADS IN THE COUNTY THAT NEEDS TO BE PAVED. AND SO THIS IS, THIS IS A MEANS OF EXPEDITING THAT PROCESS. SO AM AM I CORRECT? I SAID IT. I I JUST SHARE THAT WITH YOU FOR CLARITY. I HEAR THAT AT CTC, THEY TAKE THEIR 3 MILLION WHATEVER AND THEY PAVE SO MANY MILES OF DIRT ROADS A YEAR AND THEY DO RA REPAVING. SO ARE WE GOING TO TAKE THE MONEY FROM CTC PRACTICAL AND TAKE IT INSTEAD OF THEM DOING PIECEMEAL HERE AND THERE? PUT IT IN WITH OUR, OUR LIST. SO CTC TRADITIONALLY IS USING THEIR MONEY TO RESURFACE ROADS, NOT PAVE DIRT ROADS. SO WE USE, WELL THEY DO THREE MILES A YEAR. HE TOLD ME, I LISTEN, NOT A DIRT, NOT A DIRT ROAD PAVING. SO A DIRT ROAD PAVING IS PAID FROM OUR TAG FUND. AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE DO THAT FROM. SO THIS, UH, WE HAVE 75 MILES APPROXIMATELY OF DIRT ROADS, DIRTS REMAINING. UM, THIS GETS US, UH, A GOOD BOOST, BUT IT DOESN'T COMPLETE AT ALL. SO WE WOULD CONTINUE THE PROGRAM. WHAT THIS DOES IS ALL THE, UH, ROADS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE RIGHT AWAY TODAY, UM, SHOWED UP ON THIS LIST. UH, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF OBTAINING RIGHT OF WAY TO PERFECT OUR RIGHT OF WAY IN GENERAL ON OUR DIRT ROADS AND OUR MAINTENANCE ONLY ROADS. AND SO WE WOULD CONTINUE GETTING NEW RIGHT OF WAY AND PAVING WITH OUR TAG FUNDS. SO WE WILL TAKE THE TAG FUNDS THAT CTC RELEGATES, I MEAN, THEY'RE GONNA OPERATE OPPOSITE THE REFERENDUM. SO CTC USES THEIR MONEY TO PAVE ROADS, THEY PAVE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE ON DOTS, ROADS, AND THEN A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE ON, ON COUNTY AND SECONDARY ROADS. THAT'S HOW THEY INTEND TO SPEND THEIR FUNDING. SO WE WOULD BASICALLY THIS, IF THIS PASSED, THIS WOULD TAKE UP OUR EXISTING FIVE YEAR PAVING PLAN. UH, WE WOULD DO ANOTHER FIVE YEAR PAVING PLAN AND CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD. WE'D HAVE SALES TAX ROADS THAT ARE BEING PERFORMED AND THEN TAG FUNDS, UM, AND CONTINUE BOTH EFFORTS TO MEET THAT GOAL OF PAVING OUR ROADS IN BEAUFORT COUNTY. THE REASON THEY CAN'T BE MERGED SO THAT THE RESIDENTS KNOW WE'RE MAKING MAXIMUM USE OF THE TAG FUNDS AND THE REFERENDUM. YEAH, THAT COULD DEFINITELY BE BROADCASTED. I MEAN I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING RESIDENTS WOULD APPRECIATE. NOT EVERYTHING'S COMING OUT OF THE SALES TAX. WE USE OUR TAG FUNDS. YEAH, WE COULD DEFINITELY REITERATE THAT. DAVID, JUST ONE MORE QUESTION HERE. HANG ON. I GOT A PROCEDURAL THING I NEED TO DEAL WITH. UH, YOU JUMPED IN EARLY AND JUMPED THE GUN WITH A SECOND ON HIS MOTION. YES SIR. EVEN THOUGH HE WASN'T QUITE FORMALIZED WITH IT. CAN WE RETRACT THAT? I CAN, I'LL RETRACT IT. SURE. OKAY. YOU TRACKED YOUR MOTION. ALRIGHT. SARAH, YOU HAPPY NOW? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. ARE YOU HAPPY? YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY WE, WE HAD A OKAY AMENDMENT. WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT. I'VE BEEN, I'VE OVER HERE GOING. YEAH. ONE QUICK TO FOLLOW UP ON TAB AND HER QUESTION ABOUT MUNICIPALITY OR WHERE THE TAXES GENERATOR FROM. WOULD YOU FOLLOW UP AND SEND THIS COUNCIL? EXACTLY. THE MOST RECENT ONE? YES. THEY'RE USUALLY, THEY'RE USUALLY BEHIND A YEAR OR SO. UM, BUT WE'LL GET THE LATEST ONE THAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE ON THE DOR WEBSITE AND SEND THAT TO OUT TO ALL THE COUNCIL. THANK YOU, SIR. IT'S, IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL DOCUMENT, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL ZONE INTO BEAUFORT COUNTY. BRING IT DOWN FOR US FOR EACH MUNICIPALITY. THAT'S PERFECT. BEFORE HE GETS TO HIS, UM, AMENDMENT, UH, FOR OUR BOND COUNCILS WHO'S BEEN PATIENTLY SITTING THERE. QUESTION TWO TALKS ABOUT, UM, ISSUANCE OF BONDS UP TO $780 MILLION, WHICH IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT, IS IT NECESSARY TO PUT ALL $780 MILLION OUT THERE? YEAH. UM, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND THE ANSWER IS NO, IT'S NOT. I MEAN, OFTEN WE SEE THAT YOU KEEP THE NUMBER THE SAME JUST SO THERE'S NOT MULTIPLE NUMBERS CIRCULATING WITHIN A REFERENDUM. BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SCENARIO UNDER WHICH, UM, YOU, YOU WOULD DO THAT 'CAUSE UM, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY THAT QUICKLY MM-HMM . UM, SO YOU WOULDN'T WANNA BORROW THAT MUCH ALL AT ONCE OR EVEN IN TOTAL. SO THERE'S NO MAGIC TO THAT NUMBER. AND LAST TIME COUNSEL DIDN'T USE THE SAME NUMBER, BUT IT, IT CAN CREATE SOME QUESTION SOMETIMES. OH, I KNOW ABOUT WHY IS THIS NUMBER LESS? AND SO THAT, THAT'S WHY IT'S THERE. BUT IT, IT'S NOT NECESSARY OR REQUIRED THAT IT BE THE SAME. [01:45:01] DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN 20? YEAH, IT DOES. 'CAUSE IT IS VERY CONFUSING FOR THE PUBLIC. THEY THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DO $780 MILLION AND $780 MILLION. SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE FRAMED VERY CAREFULLY SO THAT THEY ARE KNOWING THAT IT'S ONE $780 MILLION OVER X NUMBER OF YEARS. BUT WE'RE ALLOWED TO GO UP TO THE $780 MILLION TO FINANCE THE PROJECT. I BELIEVE IN 2024. ON THE REFERENDUM ON THE BALLOT QUESTION, IT WAS 10 YEARS, $950 MILLION WAS THE PROGRAM. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION WAS $515 MILLION IF I RECALL. SO WE DID HAVE IT SEPARATED DIFFERENTLY. UM, BUT YES, BUT YOU SHOULD, SHOULD BE SOMETHING WE DISCUSS BEFORE WE HAVE THE FINAL THIRD READING. ABSOLUTELY. ALRIGHT, SO I CAN, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE? SO I CAN, LARRY, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? IS GOOD. GOOD. OKAY. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DICTA UP HERE AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE IT CLEAR. ARE WE DOING A, A FORMAL MOTION TO AMEND OR ARE WE DOING A RECOMMENDATION TO, TO REMOVE SOME THINGS? WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE PREFERRED METHOD OF STAFF AT THIS MOMENT? RECOMMENDATION, FIRST READING THERE. SO WE HAVE THE FULL COUNCIL HERE. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE LEAVE, SO THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA. SO, ALRIGHT, SO THE RECOMMENDATION AND JUMP IN IF I MISS SOMETHING, IS TO REMOVE THE UNPREPARED FOOD AND TO ADDRESS THE MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM TAB. TAB THAT YOU HAD BROUGHT UP. AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS TWO LOCATIONS THAT YOU NOTED AND THEN IT'S ON THE BALLOT. YEAH. AND ON THE BALLOT IS, WERE WERE THERE ANY OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS COMING FROM THIS BODY TO MOVE FORWARD TO FIRST READING MAKING NINE YEARS. NINE YEARS? YEAH. OKAY. IN ORDER TO COLLECT THE DOLLAR LINE. YEAH, WE SHOULD HAVE IT, UH, NINE YEARS. OKAY. TO EQUAL TO $780 MILLION. WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, UM, STAFF, STAFF CLEAR ON, ON THAT? YES. ALRIGHT. UM, AND I GUESS WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO ACTUALLY FORMALLY VOTE ON THIS. IS THERE, UH, ANY ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS? JUST BE CLEAR, THIS IS TIME SENSITIVE GOING TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. ALL OF THE ITEMS ARE, I'M SENSITIVE GOING TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. YEAH. OKAY. UM, ALRIGHT. IS THERE ROLL ANY REASON FOR A ROLL CALL? OH YEAH, SORRY GERALD, HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE CHANGED IT FROM EIGHT YEARS TO NINE. UH, WE'RE REMOVING THE, WE'RE ASKING STAFF TO REMOVE THE UNPREPARED FOOD AS IT STANDS NOW, THE EIGHT YEARS AT 780 MILLION HAS UNPREPARED FOOD AS BEING TAXED. SO AS A, FOR OUR RESIDENTS, WE'RE REMOVING THE UNPREPARED FOOD. WHAT? BUT IT'LL ADD ANOTHER YEAR TO IT FOR COLLECTION. THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL JUST BECAUSE OF UNPREPARED FOOD. ANOTHER YEAR. ANOTHER YEAR, YEAH. 12, 14% OF THE TOTAL. SO, WELL, I, I, I DON'T KNOW. YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAD OUR, UM, WE HAD OUR, HAD OUR COMMITTEE SPEND A LOT OF TIME PUTTING THIS, THE, THIS, UM, REFERENDUM TOGETHER. AND FOR US TO COME BACK NOW TO MAKE CHANGES, UH, IS MORE OR LESS LIKE EE EVEN THOUGH WE WILL TRY TO JUSTIFY THAT WE'RE REMOVING THE, THE, THE PREPARED FOOD. NO, IT, IT, IT IS UNPREPARED. LIKE IT IS UNPREPARED FOOD PREPARED FOR UNPREPARED FOOD E EVEN THOUGH WE'RE REMOVING THAT, IT IS MORE OR LESS LIKE WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKING AWAY THE CREDIT THAT THEY PUT IN FOR, UH, ACTUALLY PUTTING THIS WHOLE REFERENDUM TOGETHER FOR US. I, I, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IT. WE KEEP WELL BUILDING ON THAT, UM, THE LETTER FROM DOR, WAS THAT EVER CIRCULATED TO THE TAC? IT WAS, UM, IT WAS JUST, IT WASN'T SPECIFIC. IT DIDN'T COME UP AS A QUESTION, UM, STAFF WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T BRING IT UP AS, IT DIDN'T COME UP UNTIL WE HAD DISCUSSION WITH THE BOND ATTORNEY AND AFTER, AFTER IT. SO THAT'S WHERE IT CAME UP. I THINK THE INTENT IS STILL THERE. LIKE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING RIGHT NOW, UM, IS THE SAME PRO. YOU'RE NOT SUBTRACTING, YOU'RE NOT TAKING PROJECTS OFF, YOU'RE NOT MOVING PROJECTS. THE INTENT WAS THERE, THE DISCUSSION THAT THE TAC COMMITTEE WAS SIX TO 10 YEARS AND THEN THEY GOT TO EIGHT YEARS. UM, SO IT'S STILL IN THE, I I WOULD THINK IN THE SAME, UH, INTENT THAT THEY WERE, UM, BROADCASTING. IT WAS JUST THIS TECHNICAL PIECE THAT, THAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH NOW. CHAIRMAN, ONE THING, YES, I THINK TAC WOULD BE PLEASED WITH OUR EFFORTS TODAY. I DON'T THINK THEY KNEW ABOUT THIS UNPREPARED FOODS, RIGHT? SO, UH, WHAT I'M SAYING IS, UH, GERALD'S, YOU KNOW, MAYBE OFF BASE HERE IN A SENSE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT [01:50:01] WE SHOULD DO. THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS. SO I THINK THIS IS GOOD. THIS IS GOOD WORK. ALRIGHT JOE. I WAS GONNA SAY THE INTENT OF THE TAC COMMITTEE WAS TO DO ALL OF THESE PROJECTS AND THEY CAME UP WITH AN AMOUNT OF MONEY WITHIN THE PARAMETERS. THEY WERE ARGUING OVER SIX TO 10 YEARS. CAME UP WITH EIGHT YEARS, $780 MILLION. THIS IS HONORING THAT, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT ONE MORE YEAR BECAUSE NO ONE WAS AWARE AT THE TIME THAT THEY FINALIZED THESE THAT UNPREPARED FOODS WAS PART OF THE PROCESS. SO I'M OKAY WITH GOING ONE MORE YEAR AND, AND I HAVE A QUESTION. DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS TO MOVE IT FORWARD TO COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE NATURE. WE STILL HAVE A VERY LONG AGENDA TO GET THROUGH AND IT'S YES. YES. ROLL CALL VOTE. OKAY. UH, MADAM CLERK ROLL CALL. COUNCIL MEMBER, PASS IT. YES. VICE CHAIR VERNICK? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. MCALLEN, YOU'RE MUTED. I VOTE NO, I DON'T WANT THE NINE YEARS. I WANNA LEAVE IT AS EIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER. DAWSON? NO. COUNCIL MEMBER LAWSON. MARK LAWSON? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER RES? YES. COMMITTEE, VICE CHAIR BARTHOLOMEW? YES. THE MOTION PASSES. FIVE TWO. ALRIGHT, UH, NOW MOVING INTO UH, NINE [9.b. A resolution for a Third Addendum to the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Town of Hilton Head Island for the St. James Baptist Church Relocation Project (FISCAL IMPACT: The cost for additional services being provided under this MOA amendment totals $159,000. The funding source for this change is available within the overall project budget of $9,840,000.) - Jared Fralix, ACA- Infrastructure (5 minutes) ] BA RESOLUTION FOR A THIRD ADDENDUM TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD ISLAND FOR THE ST. JAMES BAPTIST CHURCH RELOCATION PROJECT. UH, MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION? GO AHEAD. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. ALRIGHT. SECOND IT. WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS SO MANY TIMES, I DON'T THINK WE, YEAH. ALL RIGHT. JARED, IS THERE ANYTHING NEW OR INTERESTING TO BRING FORWARD ON THIS? THIS IS JUST EXTENDING THE, OUR PROJECT MANAGER, YOUR CHURCH PARTNERS THROUGH THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. SO THAT'S THE SHORT. ALRIGHT. UH, CAN WE MOVE THIS IS, IS THIS TIME SENSITIVE? I HEARD THAT THE REMAINING ITEMS ARE TIME SENSITIVE. IS THAT CORRECT? IS I THINK ALL ITEMS ARE PLANNED TO MOVE FORWARD? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. IS THERE UM, ANY OBJECTION TO MOVING THIS FORWARD? NO. NO. ALRIGHT. IT WILL MOVE FORWARD TO COUNSEL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS. UH, MOVING INTO NINE [9.c. A Memorandum of Understanding with SC DOT for an encroachment permit regarding "Welcome to Beaufort County Signs" (FISCAL IMPACT: ) - Jared Fralix, Assistant County Administrator, 5 min ] CA MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH S-E-D-O-T FOR AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT REGARDING WELCOME TO BEAUFORT COUNTY SIGNS END QUOTE. I'LL MOVE THAT. ALRIGHT, JOE, SECOND IT. AND MARK, JARED, ANYTHING ON THAT? SO THIS IS KEEP BEAUFORT BEAUTIFUL. YEAH, THIS IS THE SIGN THAT WE SAW ON 2 78. WE'VE GOT THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, BUT PART OF THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS A SECONDARY FOLLOW UP. SO THIS ALLOWS THE COUNTY THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO AND MAINTAIN, OPERATE, CUT AROUND THE, UM, JUST KEEP IT IN GOOD CONDITION. SO THIS IS IN ADDITION TO THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT REQUIRED BY DO DT. I WANNA GO QUICK THROUGH THESE, BUT I WANT DON'T WANNA GO TOO QUICK. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR, OR COMMENTS? SURE. ALRIGHT. UH, CAN THIS MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL WITH NO OBJECTION ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS? YEAH, IT'S AN MOU SO YEAH, IT'S, I'M JUST GOING THROUGH IT. JUST MAKING SURE. ALRIGHT, NOW WE'RE MOVING INTO NINE [9.d. Contract award to D. Anderson Construction, Inc. for the construction of Saint James Baptist Church and the Relocation of Cherry Hill School ($7,716,534.00) (FISCAL IMPACT: The project will be funded through the previously established and approved funding sources as part of the overall project budget. No new funding sources are requested as part of this action. The project cost is $7,015,030.91, with a 10% contingency of $701,503.09, for a total contract award of $7,716,534.00.) - Jared Fralix, Assistant County Administrator (5 minutes) ] D UH, CONTRACT AWARD TO D ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ST. JAMES BAPTIST CHURCH AND THE RELOCATION OF CHERRY HILL SCHOOL. I'M NOT GONNA READ, SO MOVE MARCH 2ND. SO I GOT JOE ON THE, ON THE MOTION AND TOM ON THE SECOND. ALRIGHT. THIS ONE IS, WE'RE SPENDING A LITTLE BIT OF TIME ON JUST TO SING PRAISE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING. SO THIS, WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS. WE PUT THIS OUT TO BID IN DECEMBER. WE'VE GOT BIDS THAT IN FEBRUARY WE HAD FIVE BIDS, WE HAD NINE HAD THE PRE-BID, UH, FIVE ENDED UP GIVING US BID. WE RANKED THEM, WE HAD A, A COMMITTEE MADE OF THE COUNTY TOWN CHURCH, UM, STAFF AND OUR CONSULTANT, YOUR CHURCH PARTNERS. UH, WE RANKED THEM, WE INTERVIEWED THE TOP THREE. WE RE RANKED THEM AND WE CAME UP WITH OUR HIGHEST RANKED OFFER, WHICH IS DEE ANDERSON. UM, WE GAVE OPPORTUNITY, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH AND HAD A BEST AND FINAL OFFER AND HE CAME IN WITH THE FINAL VERSION AT 7,000,001, UH, $15,030 91 CENTS. AND SO IT WAS 2.4, 2.5% BELOW OUR ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE. SO ALWAYS A GREAT THING ON BUDGET. AND WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY, THE TOTAL VALUE THERE IS $7.7 MILLION. ALL THIS WILL BE FUNDED OUT OF OUR, UM, DEFINED $9.8 MILLION PROJECT BUDGET. AND WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE WITH HEALTHY CONTINGENCY. ALRIGHT, UH, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NO. ALRIGHT. WHAT ABOUT ANYBODY ONLINE? GOOD TO GO. I WAS ON ONE, GERALD. OKAY. SORRY. YEAH, I SEE LARRY'S GONE. ALRIGHT. UH, CAN THIS MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS WITH NO OBJECTION? YES. ALRIGHT. IT'LL MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL [01:55:01] MOVING INTO [9.e. A Contract to TK Builders, LLC for the Scott Community Center Renovations ($197,066.49) (FISCAL IMPACT: The contract fee is for the construction of the Scott Community Center Renovation in the amount of $179,151.35 plus a 10% contingency ($17,915.14) bringing the total request to $197,066.49. The funding for this project will be from 4000-80-1600-54420 with a current balance of $110,349 and 4013-80-1600-54420 with a current balance of $87,651. The total available funding of the two accounts is $198,000.) - Robert Gecy, Project Manager - Capital Projects (5 mins) ] NINE EA CONTRACT TO TK BUILDERS LLC FOR THE SCOTT COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF $197,000 AND 197,000, $66 AND 49 CENTS ALL MOVED. ALRIGHT, GOT JOE ON THE MOTION. I'LL SECOND IT TAB ON THE SECOND. I DO WANNA COMMENT, ROBERT, THE TOTAL AVAILABLE FUNDING OF THE TWO ACCOUNTS IS 198,000. SO YOU ACTUALLY SPENT ALL THE MONEY, IS THAT WHAT THIS IS WHAT I'M READING THIS RIGHT, SO I CAN, YOU'RE COMING OUT AT 1 97, 0 66 AND IT SAYS YOU HAVE 190. WE HAD, WE HAD TO MOVE FUNDS FROM OTHER SAVINGS AND CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS TO GET THAT, SO WE BUTTONED THAT UP. UM, SO INCLUDES THE 10% CONTINGENCY AS PART OF THAT. UM, BUT WE HAD PROJECT SAVINGS FROM OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE HAD COMPLETED, SO RIGHT THERE WE'RE RIGHT THERE. YEP. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANY, UH, BACKGROUND INFORMATION THAT YOU CAN SHARE FOR THE PUBLIC? UH, CERTAINLY. UM, UH, AGAIN, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN, UH, UH, BID OUT. THIS WAS THE SECOND BIDDING. WE HAD A CONTRACTOR THAT, UH, BACKED OUT OF THE FIRST, WE FELT LIKE THEY HAD UNDERBID THE JOB. UH, WE FEEL THAT THESE NUMBERS ARE VERY CO UH, CONFIDENT IN THESE NUMBERS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY ALL ALIGN VERY WELL. TK BUILDERS CAME IN AS A LOW BIDDER OUT OF NINE BIDDERS. UM, THE PROJECT SHOULD LAST APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED, 120 DAYS FROM NOTICE TO PROCEED. SO A ABOUT FOUR MONTHS AND, UH, SHOULD BE COMPLETED RELATIVELY EASILY. AS FAR AS, UH, IT, IT'S REALLY JUST INTERIOR RENOVATION, FLOORING, UH, PAINT AND UH, CEILING TILES, ET CETERA, LIGHTING. AND IT'LL BE CLOSE WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT. IT IS EVERYTHING. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, CAN THIS MOVE FORWARD ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS TO COUNTY COUNCIL WITH NO OBJECTION. MM-HMM . SEEING NO OBJECTION, IT WILL BE MOVED FORWARD [9.f. A Change Order to Nix Construction for the Buckwalter Recreation Athletic Complex Expansion (BRACE) Project ($5,132,600.00) (Contingent upon final approval of budget amendment) (FISCAL IMPACT: The Change Order amount is for the construction of the additional soccer fields for the Buckwalter Recreation Athletic Complex Expansion project, in the amount of $4,666,000.00, plus a 10% contingency ($466,600.00), bringing the total request to $5,132,600.00. The funding for this change order will be from two funds: $490,110 from the Parks & Rec Impact fees account 2650-60-0000-54420-I2652 with a current balance of $9,428,747.80, and $4,642,490 funds resulting from the General Fund -Fund Balance appropriation in account 4000-80-1600-54420) - Robert Gecy - Project Manager, Capital Projects (5 Min) ] MOVING IN NINE FA CHANGE ORDER TO NICK'S CONSTRUCTION FOR THE BUCK WALTER RECREATION ATHLETIC COMPLEX EXPANSION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000,132. UH, 5 MILLION 132 600. THANK YOU. YEP. THIS IS BETWEEN ME AND LOGAN. THIS IS WHERE WE ARE. TAB DO I HAVE A SECOND? LEMME SOFT SECOND THAT. ALRIGHT. MARK, I, I MARK ON THE THAT'S ALL RIGHT. WE COULD SHARE ALL. SO AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS A CHANGE ORDER OF COURSE FOR THE FUNDING THAT, UH, COUNCIL IS WORKING ON APPROVING RIGHT NOW. I THINK IT'S GOING TO FINAL READING NEXT WEEK, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY. AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THIS CHANGE ORDER SO THAT IT COULD PIGGYBACK ON WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE FUNDING. UM, AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE SOUTHERN FIELDS FIELD SIX N SEVEN. UH, THIS WOULD BE THE COMPLETE ENTIRETY OF THE PROJECT AS BID. AND AGAIN, NICK'S CONSTRUCTION CAME IN AS THE LOW BIDDER OVERALL ON THE ENTIRE PROJECT. UM, THIS IS, UH, ANTICIPATED TO BE, UH, 18 PLUS MONTHS, UH, FROM NOTICE TO PROCEED. AND ONCE THEY GET STARTED, UH, AGAIN, THAT IT, IT WILL MOVE ALONG. BUT IT IS A BIG, BIG PROJECT. THERE IS A LOT INVOLVED AS FAR AS SITE PREPARATION, DRAINAGE, STORM WATER, UH, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION. IT, IT IS A MASSIVE PROJECT. PARKING LOT OVER 400 PARKING LOT SPACES. YEAH, RIGHT. IS THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NO. ALRIGHT. CAN THIS BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS WITH NO OBJECTION? YES, PLEASE. SEEING NO OBJECTION, IT WILL BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNCIL, UH, MOVING [9.g. A Change Order to MUSCO Sports Lighting for the Buckwalter Recreation Athletic Complex Expansion (BRACE) Project ($593,890.00) (Contingent upon final approval of budget amendment) (FISCAL IMPACT: The change order amount is for the installation of the Sports Lighting for the Buckwalter Recreation Athletic Complex Expansion Soccer Fields 6 & 7 in the amount of $539,900.00 plus a 10% contingency ($53,990.00), bringing the total request to $593,890.00. The funding for this change order will be from the General Fund -Fund Balance appropriation into account 4000-80-1600-54420) - Robert Gecy - Project Manager, Capital Projects (5 Min.) ] INTO NINE G, WHICH IS TIED TO THE SAME, UH, PROJECT, BUT IT'S A CHANGE ORDER TO MUSCOW SPORTS LIGHTING FOR THE BUCK WALL TO RECREATION ATHLETIC COMPLEX EXPANSION PROJECT. UH, IT IS CONTINGENT UPON FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET AMENDMENT. I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. ALL RIGHT. TAB WITH THE MOTION. CAN I GET A SECOND ON THAT? SURE. IT'S TOM ON THE SECOND. WHERE'S YOURS AGAIN? YES SIR. SAME THING. THIS IS UH, THIS IS THE LIGHTING FOR FIELD SIX AND SEVEN. THIS IS MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING. UH, THIS IS AGAIN DONE UNDER A SOLE SOURCE, UH, UH, SOURCE WELL CONTRACT ACTUALLY, UM, THIS IS THE CHANGE ORDER FOR THOSE FIELDS AND THIS PIGGYBACKS ALONG WITH THE PROJECT. IT WILL NOT ADD ANY ADDITIONAL TIME TO THE PROJECT TIMELINE. THIS WILL BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EXISTING PROJECT. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, COULD THIS BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL WITH NO OBJECTION AND ON A TIME BASIS? YES. SEEING NONE IT WILL BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL. UH, [9.h. An Ordinance Authorizing the Acceptance of Drainage Easements Associated with Drainage Systems in the Bay Pines Subdivision (FISCAL IMPACT: Acquiring these drainage easements will have no fiscal impact at this time.) - Taylor Brewer, Stormwater Manager (5 minutes) ] NOW WE'RE GETTING INTO NINE H. THANK YOU. AND ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH DRAINAGE SYSTEMS IN THE BAY PINE SUBDIVISION. SOLE MOVED. ALRIGHT, GOT TOM MOTION. CAN I GET A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. ALRIGHT, I GOT JOE ON THE SECOND. HELLO. TAKE WHAT IS YOURS? UM, THESE ARE THE EASEMENTS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT THAT'S ON THE AGENDA ITEM NEXT FOR THE UP UPSIZING, THE CROSS LINE PIPES THAT CROSS UNDER BAY PINES. UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THAT? WOULD THIS FINALIZE THAT PROJECT? [02:00:01] I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA. YES MA'AM. AS FAR AS BEAUFORT COUNTY'S PART, UM, TOWN OF HILTON HEAD HAS TAKEN OVER THE UM, ULTIMATE OUTFALL AND WE'LL BE REWORKING THAT PART OF IT THAT WILL MAKE THE PROJECT COHESIVE. THIS IS WHERE I WENT OUT TO SEE CORRECT TO TAB YOU'RE SPOT ON AND TAYLOR AND THE ENTIRE TEAM, I'M TELLING YOU NOW, THIS HAS BEEN AN INCREDIBLE PROJECT. ALMOST TWO YEARS IN THE MAKING AND A LOT OF CHALLENGES, BUT A LOT OF GREAT WORK IS THAT IS DONE. IF YOU GUYS GET A CHANCE, WE'LL DO ANOTHER TOUR. YOU COULD SEE THAT WHOLE AREA. UM, IT'S DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU SHOULD DO A TOUR WHEN IT'S POURING RAIN. YEAH, WELL LISTEN AND IT'S GONNA WORK WELL, BUT TAYLOR, GREAT JOB. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND IS THIS ALSO TIME SENSITIVE? YES SIR. ALRIGHT, SO CAN THIS MOVE FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS WITH NO OBJECTION. SEEING NO OBJECTION. IT WILL BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNSEL [9.i. Approval of a Contract to Jarrell Brothers for Bay Pines Drainage Improvements ($269,507.60) (FISCAL IMPACT: This project will be funded through the Stormwater Utility Fund Account #5025-90-9020-54420 with an available balance of $8,376,918.09.) - Taylor Brewer, Stormwater Manager (5 minutes) ] MOVING INTO NINE I THE APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT TO, IS IT GERALD BROTHERS? YES, SIR. UH, FOR BAY PINE'S DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. UH, SO MOVED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU SECOND JOE. ALRIGHT, ONCE AGAIN, THE FLOOR IS YOURS. UM, WE DID HAVE SOME CONCERN OVER THE DISCREPANCY IN THE TOP BIDDER, BUT WE DID MEET WITH GERALD BROTHERS AND WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO, UM, COMPLETE THIS PROJECT IN A TIMELY MANNER. SO WE WORKED WITH THEM BEFORE. UM, WE HAVE NOT, BUT WE HAVE WORKED WITH A COMPANY THAT THEY TOOK OVER, UM, ALL OF THEIR WORKERS. SO WE ARE COMPETENT IN THEIR SKILLS. ANY ANY QUESTION, QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION? YES. I MIGHT ASK? YEAH, BY ALL MEANS. YEAH. UM, DOES THIS WORK INCLUDE, UM, WORKING IN THE ENTIRE, UH, SUBDIVISION OF CLEANING OUT THE, THE UH, THE UH, THE CULVERTS IN THE, IN THE SUBDIVISION AS WELL AS THE OUTFALL DITCH THAT RUNS ALONG UH, BAY PINES ROAD? YES SIR. WE'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY CLEANED OUT THE DITCH. UM, AND UPSIZING THESE CROSS LINE PIPES WILL ALLOW THE ROAD AND NEIGHBORHOOD TO DRAIN TO THAT MAJ MAJOR DRAINAGE DITCH THAT RUNS BEHIND THE HOUSES. GREAT. THANK YOU. TREMENDOUS WORK. AGAIN, TAYLOR ON THIS IF YOU TAB WHEN WE WERE THERE, YOU SAW IT IN ONE WAY. NOW IT'S VAST DIFFERENCE TO IT. SO CAN'T WAIT TO SEE WHERE THEY WERE UPROOTING ALL THE TREES AND IT'S INCREDIBLE RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S, HEY, IT'S GONNA WORK, IT'S GONNA DO VERY WELL. SO THANK YOU. ANY, ANYTHING FURTHER? NOPE. NOPE. AND IS THIS ALSO TIME SENSITIVE? OKAY. ALRIGHT. UH, CAN THIS BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS? WITHOUT OBJECTION. SEEING NO OBJECTION. THIS WILL BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL. [9.j. Contract award to NIX Construction for upgrades to Station Creek Boat Landing ($589,300.00) (FISCAL IMPACT: The contract fee for materials and construction is $535,728.32. Staff recommends a 10% contingency of $53,571.68, bringing the total requested budget to $589,300. The funding for this project from Local H-Tax account 2002-10-0000-54500-PW with a balance of $674,525.) - Bryan Bauer, PE, Director (5 minutes) ] ALL RIGHT. UH, NINE JA CONTRACT AWARD TO NICK'S CONSTRUCTION FOR UPGRADES TO STATION CREEK BOAT LANDING, UH, IN THE AMOUNT OF $589,300. UH, MAY HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. SO MOVED THIS JOE, I'LL SECOND IT. AND MARK YOURS BRIAN? YEAH, SO THIS IS THE REPLACE THE FLOATING DOCK AT STATION CREEK BOAT LANDING. UH, IT'S GONNA INCLUDE NEW GROUND OUT PAD. UM, WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE FROM 110 FOOT TO ABOUT 160 FOOT OF FLOATING DOCK. UM, AND NEW CONCRETE PILES. SO WE RECEIVED TWO BIDS AND NICK'S CONSTRUCTION WITH THE LOW BID. ALRIGHT, ANY, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS? ALRIGHT. UH, AND THIS IS ALSO TIME SENSITIVE. IS THIS THE ONLY NON NON-TIME SENSITIVE ONE? SHOULD WE JUST KEEP IT TOGETHER? GREAT. KEEP GOING. LET'S END IT. I WON'T ARGUE. ALL RIGHT. I'LL KEEP IT TIME SENSITIVE. HOW ABOUT THAT? ALL RIGHT. UH, CAN THIS BE MOVED FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION? ALL RIGHT. SEE IF NO OBJECTIONS WOULD FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL [9.k. An Ordinance Authorizing a Lease Agreement between Beaufort County and the General Services Administration (GSA) for Transportation Security Administration (TSA) use within the Hilton Head Island Airport terminal. (FISCAL IMPACT: The revised lease agreement (Lease No. GS-04P LSC02919) increases the rentable square footage from 500 sq ft to 874 sq ft, with a 10-year term, a 5-year firm period, and annual rent of approximately $29,500, inclusive of operating costs, an increase of $12,000 annually.) - Jon Rembold, Airports Director - 5 minutes] NINE K. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION USE WITHIN THE HILTON HEAD ISLAND AIRPORT TERMINAL. JOHN, I SEE YOU'RE COMING UP. YOU'VE BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME FOR THIS, SO, SO MOVED CHAIR. ALRIGHT. I SEE TOM WITH THE, WITH THE MOTION AND JOE WITH THE SECOND AND FLOOR IS YOUR BUT NOT MUCH TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE. TSA OCCUPIES SPACE WITHIN THE TERMINAL. THEY PAY FOR THAT. GSA MANAGES ALL THE LEASES FOR TSA. THIS IS, THAT'S ALL THIS IS. I'M SORRY. SORRY YOU HAD TO WAIT SO LONG. IT'S OKAY. WE, WE JUST NEED OUR MONEY TO COME IN ON TIME. I LOVE SEEING YOU 'CAUSE YOU'RE ALWAYS BRINGING MONEY IN. YOU'RE RARELY ASKING FOR MONEY. I HAVE UH, TWO QUESTIONS. ONE, IS IT TIME SENSITIVE ? YES. YES, OF COURSE. IT'S OKAY. OKAY, GOTCHA. AND THEN TWO UH, I SAW, I BELIEVE I SAW IT WAS FOR A 10 YEAR PURITY. UH, I SAW A FIVE YEAR INITIAL AND THERE WAS A YEARLY FOR A TOTAL OF 10. RIGHT. DOES THAT LINE UP WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT WE PASSED? LIMITING TO FIVE YEAR CONTRACTS. THIS IS THE FEDS AND THIS, SO WE'LL JUST OPERATE, THIS IS EAT WHAT THEY SERVE US. FAIR ENOUGH. THE FIVE YEAR YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS IN THE PROCUREMENT CODE FOR CONTRACTS. BUT THIS IS A LEASE. WE HAVE LEASES. THAT LEFT ENOUGH. ALRIGHT, IS [02:05:01] THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR CONCERNS? NO. CAN THIS BE COUNTY COUNSEL WITH NO OBJECTION? YES. ALL RIGHT. ON A TIME SENSITIVE BASIS. THANK YOU. THERE YOU GO. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANKS FOR WAITING. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BODY TODAY? SEEING NONE. WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 6 52. I THINK YOU STILL BEAT ME. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.