[00:00:08]
          IT IS. >> CAN WE HAVE EVERYBODY MUTE PLEASE? 
          [1. CALL TO ORDER]
IT IS MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, AE COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA. SO I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME. PLEASE RESPOND THAT YOU ARE 
          HERE, MR. CULVER. PRESENT MR. DAWSON HERE. >> MR. FLEW WELLING ON HERE. 
          >> MR. GLOVER HERE. MR. HERBERT SHUN PRESIDENT. >> MISS HOWARD HERE. 
          MR. LAWSON PARK LOST IN HERE. >> MR. MCKELLEN. >> MR. MCKELLEN HE'S HERE. 
          I GUESS HE JUST STEPPED AWAY. OK. >> MR. RUDMAN HERE. 
          MR. SOMERVILLE PRESIDENT AND CHAIR PARSON IS HERE. ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT TO CONDUCT ORDER. WE DO HAVE SOME SPECIAL GUESTS THIS EVENING. 
          SENATOR TOM DAVIS IS GOING TO BE JOINING US. MR. CRAIG WYNN TO BE HERE. 
          MEMBERS OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT CARE A COURT TRAILED TONYA CROSBY, GAIA ARE GOING TO BE IN ON THE MEETING AS WELL. WOULD YOU ALL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE TO THE FLAG AN INDICATION INVOCATION WHICH WILL BE CONDUCTED BY VISE CHAIR PAUL SOMERVILLE. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STAND. ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE BY YOUR HEADS AND JOIN ME LORD MAKE US AN INSTRUMENT OF YOUR PEACE WHERE THERE IS HATRED LET US BRING LOVE WHERE THERE IS A FENCE LET SPRING PARDON WHERE THERE IS DISCORD LET SPRING UNION WHERE THERE IS ERROR LET US BRING TRUTH WHERE THERE IS DOUBT. LET US BRING FAITH WHERE THERE IS DESPAIR. LET US BRING HOPE WHERE THERE IS DARKNESS. 
          LET US BRING YOUR LIGHT WHERE THERE IS SADNESS LET US BRING JOY. 
          OH MASTER LET ME NOT SEEK AS MUCH TO BE CONSOLED AS TO CONSOLE, TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS TO UNDERSTAND, TO BE LOVED, AS TO LOVE OR TO GET IN GIVING ONE RECEIVES IT IS IN SELF FORGETTING THAT ONE FINDS IT IS IN PARDONING THAT ONE IS PARDONED IT IS IN DYING THAT ONE IS RAISED TO ETERNAL LIFE. A MAN THANK YOU MR SOMERVILLE PUBLIC NOTICE OF THIS MEETING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED, POSTED AND DISTRIBUTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SOUTH CAROLINA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT ALSO KNOWN AS FIRE BEFORE WE APPROVE THE AGENDA I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A 
          [4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
MEMBER OF COUNCIL MOVE TO MAKE THE AGENDA CHANGES AS FOLLOWS I'D LIKE TO HAVE ITEMS 12 13 14 AND 17 TAKEN UP BEFORE OR THE CONSENT AGENDA IS DONE BASED UPON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THOSE 
          ITEMS THEY MAY WELL BE. >> CONSIDERED PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT WILL ALSO ADD THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BESIDES THE CONSENT GIANT AGENDA ITEMS ONE THROUGH EIGHT FROM THE REGULAR AGENDA WE WILL MOVE ITEM NUMBER 19 20 21 22 23 27 29 30 31 AND 32. 
          >> MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE AGENDA THAT WAY, MR. CHAIRMAN? I MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE AGENDA AS STATED. THANK YOU MR. FLOWING. 
          MAY I HAVE A SECOND PLEASE? SECOND TO DO RIGHT. MR. RUDMAN IT HAS DULY BEEN MOTION AND SECONDED TO REARRANGE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. 
          >> THIS WILL BE DONE WITHOUT EXCEPTION. ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS BY ANY COUNCIL MEMBER GOATS MR. RODMAN ? WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE 
          [00:05:03]
GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT THAT 278? GREAT TO HAVE CRAIG WITH US AND SENATOR DAVIS, WE MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE SOME ACTION BASED ON THOSE DISCUSSIONS. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE ACTION FOLLOWING THEIR 
          PRESENTATIONS. >> OK. THAT IS THE MOTION. 
          OK. SO THE MOTION YOU GOT THE. >> WHICH ITEM WAS THAT, SIR? THAT WOULD BE LIKE AFTER 8:00 AND 9:00 AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS BY CRAIG WIN FROM SC D O T AND DAVIS THERE MAY BE POSSIBLE ACTIONS THAT COUNSEL CONSIDER. 
          WOULD YOU ACCEPT THAT AS AN ADDITIONAL CHANGE, MR. FLOW ALLEN? 
          >> YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S IMPLICIT IN THEIR WAY. THE AGENDA IS PREPARED, SIR. 
          OK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO AGAIN THE AGENDA HAS BEEN CHANGED SO IF THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS THE AGENDA WILL BE APPROVED AS CHANGED. ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS SEEING NONE? THE AGENDA IS NOW APPROVED. MAY I HAVE A MOTION SECOND FOR 
          THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JULY 1 AND JULY 13, 2020. >> SIR, BEFORE WE MOVE BEFORE WE DO THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. 
          >> OH MY GOODNESS. THANK YOU, BRIAN. I'M ON MY HEAD OF MYSELF SO I 
          COULD START WITH MR. CHAIRMAN. >> OKAY, SO BRIAN MAKES THE MOTION. 
          I'M SORRY. WHO MADE THE SECOND MIKE? MIKE MADE THE SECOND. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT HAS BEEN DULY MOTIONED AND SECONDED PROPERLY TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. THIS WILL BE DONE WITHOUT EXCEPTION. 
          ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS? SEEING NO EXCEPTIONS. THE AGENDA IS APPROVED AS 
          [5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – July 1, 2020, July 13, 2020.]
AMENDED. NOW WE CAN DO THE MINUTES OF JULY 1 AND 13 ILO FOR APPROVAL 
          OF THE MINUTES. THANK YOU MR. FLOWING. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          THANK YOU, MISS HOWARD, ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS SEEING NO DISCUSSIONS. 
          IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED IN SECOND AND WE WILL TAKE ACTION WITHOUT EXCEPTION. 
          ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES SEEING NO EXCEPTIONS, MINUTES ARE 
          [6. CITIZEN COMMENT]
APPROVED. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS OUR CITIZEN COMMENTS. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL CATEGORIES OF CITIZEN COMMENTS. THEY ARE ABOUT THE ROADWAY EXPANSION EMAILS REGARDING THAT AND WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THOSE THAT I WILL TAKE UP. 
          THE SECOND SET IS ABOUT THE RETIRED EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS. 
          THERE IS ONE EMAIL TO THAT THE LOUD NOISE EMAILS BECAUSE THAT IS ON THE AGENDA FOR A ACTION. 
          AND FINALLY THE IMPACT FEE EMAILS. SO I AM GOING TO BEGIN WITH THE ONE SINGLE ITEM ABOUT THE RETIREE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS. 
          THIS IS FROM I A C AT HEART GRAY DOT COM. IT IS WRITTEN HONORABLE CHAIRMAN PARSIMONY AND MEMBERS THANK YOU FOR SERVING US AS COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS. 
          THIS IS ANOTHER PLEA ON BEHALF OF MORE THAN 50 RETIRED BEAUFORT COUNTY EMPLOYEES WHO REQUEST WERE NOT ACTED UPON IN THE OUT OF COURT LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT FASHION TO REMEDY THE COUNCIL. THE COUNTIES DENIAL OF HEALTH BENEFITS COVERAGE FOR ABOUT 40 RETIRED ONLY EMPLOYEES MONTHS HAVE NOW PASSED SINCE WE HAVE INDIVIDUAL AND COLLECTIVELY ATTEMPTED TO GAIN DISCUSSION ON MORAL AND ETHICAL FAIRNESS IN YOUR ACTION NOT TO INCLUDE ALL RETIRED EMPLOYEES IN YOUR DECISION TO REMEDY WHAT WAS CONSIDERED A WRONG THAT IMPACTED ALL OF US. THIS IS NOT WHAT WE HAVE COLLECTIVELY GIVEN HUNDREDS OF YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE EXPECTED FROM OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS. 
          AGAIN WE REQUEST THAT WE BE TREATED WITH THE SAME RESPECT AND FAIRNESS YOU AFFORDED THE GROUP OF RETIREES WHO LAWSUIT YOU SETTLED OUTSIDE THE COURT SYSTEM. 
          THANK YOU. SIGN MORRIS CAMPBELL WHO IS THE GROUP SPOKESMAN THE NEXT SET OF EMAILS DOES COME FROM A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS ABOUT THE ROADWAY EXPANSION EMAILS. 
          IT IS A GROUP THAT SAYS SENT A LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 14TH TO SENATOR DAVIS. 
          THE BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL TOWN COUNCIL OF HILTON HEAD COUNTY AND TOWN ADMINISTER LETTERS. WE JUST RECEIVED A COPY OF MR. REDMOND'S PLAN FOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW. A FEW HOURS AGO VIA AN INDIRECT PATH AND ARE APPALLED THAT ONCE 
          [00:10:05]
AGAIN THIS PROJECT APPEARS TO BE HIJACKED BY A INSIDERS. MR. RODMAN IS NOT LISTENING TO HIS CONSTITUENTS, IS NOT REFLECTING OUR REQUEST OF AUGUST 14TH 2020. 
          IN FACT, NO ONE ON COUNTY COUNCIL HAS RESPOND TO OUR REQUEST. 
          THERE ARE MANY THINGS WRONG WITH HIS PROPOSAL AND WE ONLY HAVE A FEW HOURS TO PREPARE A RESPONSE. BELOW IS AN INITIAL BULLET LIST OF OUR CONCERNS. 
          MR. RODMAN CALLS FOR DISCUSSION AT THE CAUCUS IN FULL COUNTY COUNCIL THIS AFTERNOON. 
          THIS ITEM AND ESPECIALLY HIS PLAN WERE NOT ON THE AGENDA AND NOT IN ANY AVAILABLE HANDOUTS TO THE PUBLIC. IT WOULD THEREFORE BE OUT OF ORDER TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS OR VOTE FOR APPROVAL AT THE MEETING TODAY. MR. RODMAN TRUNCATED COMMUNITY CONCERNS INTO THREE QUESTIONS FOR HIS OWN PURPOSES. SIMILARLY, MR RODMAN ATTRIBUTES THOUGHTS TO PEOPLE FOR HIS OWN PURPOSES WITHOUT THEIR CONCURRENCE. 
          MR. RODMAN BARELY MENTIONS THE GRAVE CONCERNS FOR THE STONY COMMUNITY. 
          MR. RODMAN NEGLECTS TO DEFINE THE SCOPE AS FROM MOSS CREEK TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY. 
          THE SCOPE OF WORK CONTAINS NO PROVISION FOR OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS OF ANY OF THE PLANS FOR EXAMPLE AND END TRAFFIC THROUGHPUT. TOTAL COST ENVIRONMENTAL AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ITEMS MANDATING THE NEED FOR AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW. THE SCOPE OF WORK CONTAINS NO REFERENCE TO THE USE OF COMPUTER SIMULATION METHODS TO MEASURE AND END TRAFFIC FLOWS. IN FACT, IN EVALUATING A CONTRACTOR IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT WE LOOK AT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH USE OF THESE TOOLS. 
          WE ARE CONCERNED THAT THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW REMAIN TRULY INDEPENDENT AND IS NOT BIASED BY HAVING A CONTRACTOR BEING PART OF OR RELATED TO THE SVOD SC DOJ TEAM OR INFLUENCED BY X PARTY COMMUNICATION WITHIN FLUENT ANNUAL COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          THERE MUST BE PROTECTIONS SO AS THE OVERSIGHT TEAM IS NOT STACKED AS IT WAS THE TOWN'S COURT OR COMMITTEE WERE CONCERNED THAT THE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES WILL BE TRUNCATED TO SOMEHOW BRING THE RODMAN SHARP STONY FLYOVER PLAN TO THE TOP AT AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS SUCH AS REVERSE LANE LIGHT RE TIMING, INTERSECTION OPTIMIZATION AND BYPASS OPTIONS . ALL OF THESE SHOULD BE QUANTIFIED A MEASURED AGAINST THE MINIMAL PLAN. WE SEE NO PROVISION FOR THAT MR. RODMAN'S PLAN. 
          WHILE MR. RODMAN ACKNOWLEDGES THAT SOME LEVEL OF CONGESTION IS ACCEPTABLE, HIS PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCLUDE A COMPARISON OF THE VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT COST IN ORDER FOR THE COUNTY AND TOWN COUNCILS TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE. MR. RODMAN DOES HAVE A VALID POINT. AT THE TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT SINCE THE END OF 2019. IT'S IMPORTANT THEREFORE TO CRAFT A FAIR AND USEFUL SCOPE OF WORK AND GET STARTED IMMEDIATELY. BUT COMMUNITY CONCERNS MUST BE HONORED IN THAT SCOPE OF WORK. AND SINCERELY, DIEDRICH ADVOCATE STEVEN BAER PATSY BRYSON RECENT PRINCE GRAY SMITH RESIDENTS FOR THE RIGHT QUARTER OVER FORTY ONE HUNDRED PETITIONS SIGNATURES. THIS ONE COMES FROM BETTY LEE PLEASE. 
          NEXT THE IDEA OF EXPANDING ROADWAY AND BRIDGES IS ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND. 
          I HAVE GROWN UP HERE SINCE 1956. I'M WATCHING THIS BEAUTIFUL PARADISE BE DESTROYED. RESIDENTS HAVE LEARNED TO LIVE WITH THE TRAFFIC IN SUMMER MONTHS. THAT IS VISITORS COMING ON VACATION CAN BE PATIENT. 
          TO GET THEIR RESPECTIVE RENTALS ,TRAFFIC IS THIS IS THE SUMMER IS COMMON IN SO MANY PLACES. 
          PLEASE, PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT TAKE AWAY ANY MORE LAND AND HOMES FOR THIS RIDICULOUS IDEA. 
          THIS COMES FROM RPI N C K AT HA GRAY. RETHINK THE PLANS FOR 278. 
          WHEN I RETURNED TO THE FUNKY ISLAND IN 1998 I MADE MYSELF A PROMINENT PROMISE AS THERE WERE AND ARE SUFFICIENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES HUSKY. I WOULD LIMIT MY CONCERN AND ACTIVITY TO ONLY THOSE ISSUES DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE ISLAND I LOVE. 
          I DID NOT EVEN WORK TO HELP MY COUSIN SAVE PINKNEY COLONY FROM DEVELOPMENT. 
          NOW 28 YEARS LATER I FIND TWO OFF ISLAND ISSUES COMPELLING MY ATTENTION. 
          THE FIRST BEING UNWISE DEVELOPMENT ON BAY POINT ISLAND WHICH I SPENT MUCH OF MY CHILDHOOD MY POSITION OPPOSING AN EQUAL RESORT IS WELL KNOWN AND ON RECORD. 
          THE SECOND IS THE WIDENING OF TWO U.S. 278 AND THE SUBSEQUENT DESTRUCTION OF HISTORIC GULLAH COMMUNITY. AS YOU ARE NO DOUBT AWARE, THESE BOUND BOWERS BRIDGE DATES FROM THE FIRST BRIDGES TO HAD IN 1956. THIS SPAN MUST BE REPLACED. 
          [00:15:03]
ALSO THIS CONSTRUCTION GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSTRUCT UNDERPASS FOR SAVE WESTBOUND ACCESS TO THE S.S. LANDING IN PLANNED FERRY TERMINAL 4 DISCUSSED TO FUSTY HOWEVER AN ENTIRE SET OF NEW CYCLING SIX LANE BRIDGES IN ATTENDANCE SIX LANE HIGHWAY PLUS TWO MORE LANES OF ACCESS ROADS ON THE HILTON HEAD SIDE FOR A TOTAL OF EIGHT LANES COMES WITH AN UNACCEPTABLE AESTHETIC AND SOCIAL COST. DO WE REALLY WANT ENTRY TO HILTON HEAD TO LOOK LIKE A LOS ANGELES SUBURB? REMEMBER THESE GULLAH WERE ONCE SLAVES ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS AGO THEY GOT LAND WITH FREEDOM AND IN THE PAST CENTURY AND A HALF THEY HAVE STRUGGLED TO HOLD ON AND TODAY RETAINED VERY LITTLE OF IT. 
          THIS NOTION TO TAKE THEIR LAND SO A FLUENT WHITE FOLKS CAN HAVE CAN GET TO SEE PINES 20 MINUTES SOONER IS A TRAVESTY AND AN ABOMINATION. MEANWHILE, SINCERE OTHER OTHERWISE CLUELESS INDIVIDUALS ARE DEMANDING CERTAIN GATED COMMUNITIES DROP PLANTATION FROM THEIR NAMES WHILE IGNORING THE PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF STONEY. 
          THE REAL RACIAL INJUSTICE. THIS IS IRONIC AND IN THE EXTREME AS THE AUTHOR OF 15 BOOKS ABOUT THE LOW COUNTRY AND A LIFELONG ADVOCATE FOR THE GOAL OF PEOPLE, I URGE YOU TO NIX THE SIX REPLACE THE EAST BOUND BOWERS SPAN IMPROVED SAFETY ACCESS TO PICNIC ISLAND AND LEAVE THE REST AND THE GULLAH ALONE. THEY HAVE SUFFERED ENOUGH. 
          SINCERELY ROGER PINCKNEY TO FUNKY ISLAND. THE NEXT HOUR ABOUT THE LOUD NOISE EMAILS I WANT TO ASK A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. 
          WHO DETERMINES IF A VEHICLE IS TOO LOUD? A CITIZEN OR PERHAPS POLICE OFFICER? WILL IT BE A SUBJECTIVE CALL? OR WILL ENFORCERS OF THIS ORDINANCE CARRY DECIBEL METERS? WILL THESE METERS NEED TO BE CALIBRATED FOR EACH SUPPOSED INFRACTION AS BREATH ANALYZERS ARE? I BELIEVE THAT THE LAW PERTAINING TO VEHICULAR NOISE IS COVERED BY THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THEIR VEHICULAR CODES. IF ENACTED, WHAT TO LENGTH IS THE COUNTY PREPARED TO GO TO DEFEND THIS POLICY AS ANYONE COME UP WITH A COST ANALYSIS TO DEFEND THIS IDEA IF CHALLENGED VEHICULAR NOISE SEEMS SO TRANSIENT THAT I CAN'T SEE IT AS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. 
          IS IT TRULY ABOUT VEHICLES OR ABOUT NOISE? IF IT'S ABOUT NOISE? WHAT ABOUT LAW MOORE'S BARKING DOGS AND DOGS. THE MARINE AIR BASE WILL THAT NOISE BE EXEMPTED? THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION SEEMS TO BE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS. 
          PLEASE FORWARD THIS QUESTION AND CONCERNS TO THE COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, RICHARD LOUDON. HONORABLE COUNT. COUNCIL MEMBERS BILL FULLER SAYS ABATE THE SOUTH CARROLL ABATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA OPPOSES YOUR PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE. 
          WE WILL AGGRESSIVELY CHALLENGE IN COURT ANY LAWS THAT DIFFER FROM THE SOUTH CAROLINA'S UNIFORM TRAFFIC CODES. MYRTLE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA HAS A SIMILAR ORDINANCE ON THE BOOKS FOR YEARS BUT HAS YET TO BROUGHT A SINGLE CASE TO COURT. USING THE DECIBEL METER THIS IS DUE TO AN UPPER COURT PUTTING THEM ON NOTICE THAT IT IS NOT IN HIM IN LINE WITH STATE LAW KINDLY REGARDS. BILL FULLER AND HE PUTS THE ABATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA LEGISLATIVE NOTICE THERE. AND FINALLY TORT LAWS TIE. OSBORNE SAYS WITH REFERENCE TO THE PROPOSED NOISE ORDINANCE ON SEPTEMBER 14TH PLEASE FORWARD THIS LETTER ATTENTION TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL ON BEHALF JASPER BEAUFORT ABATE WHICH I AM THE ASSISTANT OR DATER TY OSBORNE AND THEN FINALLY ON IMPACT FEES. AN ANONYMOUS SAID A RESIDENT OF HILL THAT IRELAND ALREADY CONTRIBUTE TO BEAUFORT COUNTY'S OVERALL BUDGET INCLUDING LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES. ESSENTIALLY WHAT THESE NEW FEES ARE GOING TO MAKE HILTON HEAD RESIDENTS PAY PAY. WE ARE PAYING TWICE. WE ALREADY PAY AND DESERVE TO BE PROTECTED WITHOUT PAYING MORE. YOU HAVEN'T PROVED THAT YOU ARE GOING TO GIVE US ANYTHING FOR ADDITIONAL MONEY IF THE DEPARTMENT NEEDS MORE MONEY. 
          THE WHOLE COUNTY SHOULD PAY NOT JUST THE ISLAND RESIDENTS PLEASE. 
          JOHN WHITE SAYS PLEASE ACCEPT THIS AS MY OBJECTION TO DOUBLE TAXING MY WIFE AND I FOR POLICE COVERAGE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND . I EXPECT MY REP REPRESENTATIVES TO TRULY REPRESENT OUR WISHES AND CONCERNS. KAREN RYAN SAYS PLEASE REPEAL THE ORDINANCE TO CHARGE HILTON HEAD ISLAND UNFAIRLY FOR THE BEAUFORT COUNTY SHERIFF SURFACE WHICH WE ALREADY PAY FOR. THIS IS UNFAIR AND INEQUITABLE. NO OTHER BEAUFORT COUNTY TOWNS HAVE THIS FEE AND WE ALREADY PAY FAIRLY FOR THE SERVICE RECEIPT. 
          WE FEEL WE RECEIVE DANIEL MOHN SAYS I FEEL THIS ASSESSMENT ON HILTON HEAD RESIDENTS IS 
          [00:20:06]
UTTERLY UNFAIR AND I HOPE THE COUNTY COUNCIL WILL RECONSIDER PROPOSING THE TAX KRISTA. 
          I GUESS THAT'S RELATION SAYS I STRONGLY URGE TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED FEE INCREASE TO BE IMPOSED. MANY OF US ALREADY PAY SECURITY FEES FOR OUR INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITIES AND I RESENT HAVING TO PAY UP TO THREE TIMES MORE FOR THE SAME SERVICES FOR THE REST OF THE COUNTY. LEE MCCOLLUM SAYS PLEASE DO NOT TAX RESIDENTS HILTON HEAD TWICE FOR BEAUFORT COUNTY SHERIFF SERVICES. WE ALREADY PAY A MORE MAJOR PORTION OF THE BUDGET PAUL SYDNEY. THE ACTION BY COUNTY COUNCIL TO IMPLODE IMPOSE THIS SUPPLEMENTAL FEE ON HILTON HEAD IS ABSURD UNLESS YOU INTEND TO REDUCE THE TAXES BY A COMPARABLE AMOUNT. I SEE NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS UNILATERAL ACTION. PERHAPS YOU NEED TO CONSIDER APPLYING THIS EXCISE TAX TO ALL THE TAXPAYERS IN UNINCORPORATED UNKNOWN CORPORATE ID AREAS OF THE COUNTY. 
          LET'S SEE HOW THAT IS RECEIVED . I WOULD FULLY SUPPORT HILTON HEAD ISLAND MOVING FORWARD LEGAL ACTION TO PREVENT THIS FEE OR IF UNSUCCESSFUL TO ESTABLISH OUR OWN POLICE AGENCY LEAVING THE COUNTY TO DEAL WITH THE EXCESS IN BEAUFORT COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT MIKE FLINT SAYS PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE DETAILS OF THIS GROSSLY UNFAIR DOUBLE TAXATION IF RECEIVED VERY FAIR PROPOSAL FOR THIS SETTLEMENT FROM HILTON HEAD. 
          AND FINALLY I AM REASONABLY CLEAR ON THE POSITION TAKEN BY HILTON HEAD ISLAND TOWN COUNCIL ON OUR SHARE OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE SERVICE TO HILTON HEAD ISLAND. 
          >> I'M VERY INTERESTED IN GETTING AN EXPLANATION FROM COUNCIL REGARDING THEIR ALLOCATION OF FUNDING REQUIRED BY HILTON HEAD TO COMPENSATE THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENTS. 
          THANK YOU IN ADVANCE SONNY HUNTLEY. MAKE SURE THE HILTON HEAD RESIDENTS ARE NOT TAXED TWICE. THIS IS FROM STEVEN WATSON AND ACTION BY THE COUNTY COUNCIL TO IMPOSE THIS SUPPLEMENTAL FEE IS ABSURD UNLESS YOU IT'S THE EXACT SAME WORDING BUT IT'S FROM PAUL JOHNNIE AGAIN. AND THOSE ARE THE ITEMS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED IN OUR FIRST SESSION OF PUBLIC INPUT AND SO WE WILL END THAT PUBLIC INPUT NOW AND GO ON TO THE AGENDA. 
          AND IF ANY NEW INFORMATION COMES IN, WE WILL ATTACK TAKE THAT INTO THE SECOND SESSION IN ORDER TO MOVE THIS ALONG. IS THERE ANYTHING PRESSING ABOUT LIAISON OR COMMITTEE REPORTS AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE. WE WILL MOVE ON AND RECEIVE A 
          [8. US 278 CORRIDOR PROJECT UPDATE BY SCDOT]
PRESENTATION ABOUT US 78 QUARTER PROJECT UPDATE FROM SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THAT WILL BE HANDLED BY CRAIG WYNN. GREG, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US 
          AND WE TURNED IT OVER TO YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, KAREN . 
          >> CRAIG, WERE YOU ABLE TO SHARE YOUR SCREEN? YES, I CAN SHARE MY THOUGHTS. 
          >> GOOD IDEA, SARA. >> YOU GUYS WILL SEE THAT WE ARE I AGREE WITH THE COUNSEL OF I HAVE A SHORT UPDATE ON WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE PROCESS BUT ALSO MORE DISCUSS THE INTERSECTIONS THAT SQUIRE POPE ROADS SMALL'S ROAD AS WELL AS THE INTERSECTIONS ON JEJU ISLAND. 
          SORRY I'M HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. TO MOVE TO THE NEXT LINE. 
          [00:25:05]
          >> CRAIG, DO YOU HAVE IT? >> YOU CAN EMAIL ME SO FAST I CAN PUT IT UP. 
          YEAH. ACTUALLY SAYS GIVE ME TWO HOURS TO EVEN LET ME TRY SHARING IN A DIFFERENT WAY. THAT LOOKS FINE IF YOU CAN SCROLL THROUGH THAT WAY. 
          >> OK. SEE IF THIS THERE WILL BE A FEW SLIDES I'LL SKIP OVER IN THIS PRESENTATION. THEY'RE JUST THERE FOR REFERENCE SO I'LL MAKE SURE I GET ALL THE EXTRA. THE FIRST THING TO DISCUSS IS THAT THE PURPOSE IN NEED OF THE PROJECT A PERSON NEED IS FIRST TO ADDRESS THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIENCIES AT THE EASTBOUND MAGGIE CREEK BRIDGE AND THEN REDUCE CONGESTION ALONG THE U.S. TO 78 OR MORE STREET DRIVE TO SMASH WELLS ROAD AT ONE POINT WE HAD INCREASED CAPACITY IN THIS BUT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH NEPA WE'VE REMOVED INCREASED CAPACITY IN ADDRESSING THAT TO REDUCE 
          CONGESTION AFTER IF INCREASED PASSES NEED. >> SO THIS THIS SHOWING THE NEPA PROCESS AND WHERE WE'RE AT SO RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'RE DEVELOPING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE AND PREPARING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CURRENTLY WORKING ON IT. IT'S UNDER REVIEW THE JYOTI WILL BE GOING PORTIONS I WILL 
          BE GOING TO FH AND THE 8 FOR YOU. >> WE'RE WORKING ON FINALIZING A COUPLE OF AGREEMENTS WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AT THE ALLEN WE'RE TRYING TO FINALIZE AS WELL AS A MEMORY MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE FISH WILDLIFE SERVICE CERTAINLY A COUPLE OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES ON THE ISLAND AS WELL. 
          >> SO I'M HERE. >> YEAH, WE'RE CURRENTLY AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THESE AT THE PUBLIC HERE. WE CAN REFINE THAT ALTERNATIVES AND ADDRESS PUBLIC CONCERNS AND MINIMIZE IMPACTS. AND THEN THEN AFTER THAT WE FINALIZE THE METHODS. SO THAT'S THE MITIGATE COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE SUNNI COMMUNITY ON MITIGATION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND HAD FOUR MEETINGS OVER THE LAST THREE WEEKS TO DISCUSS COMMUNITY MITIGATION. AND I THINK WE'RE MAKING SOME PROGRESS THERE. 
          WE PLAN ON HAVING ANOTHER ONE EITHER NEXT WEEK OR THE FOLLOWING WEEK TO GO THROUGH SOME OTHER IDEAS AS WELL. SO GOING BACK THROUGH THE ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT FLOW 
          CHART. >> SO THERE WERE SIXTEEN POINT A RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES AND THERE ALL SHOW ON ON THE SCREEN HERE AND ALL THIS INFORMATION IS ON OUR WEBSITE AS WELL WITH EACH OF THESE NUMBERED IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THEM. SO PULMONARY RANGE WAS NO BUILD LOOKING AT WIDENING YOUR ALIGNMENT TALIBAN MANAGEMENT, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, MASS TRANSIT SO EACH OF THE CHILD MAN MANAGEMENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT MASS TRANSIT WERE ELIMINATED AS STANDALONE ALTERNATIVES BASED ON THE EVALUATION CRITERIA THEY CAN ALL BE INCORPORATED INTO OUR FIRM ALTERNATE SO THAT INITIAL EVALUATION CRITERIA WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE JSF BASED WETLANDS PROTECTED LANDS RIGHT AWAY. AMPAD CONSISTS OF A PENNY ALLEN WALLET REFUGEE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND FROM THERE WE WERE WE WERE DOWN TO THE NINE LIVES OF ALTERNATIVES AND WENT TO SIX AND THEN MADE A FEW MODIFICATIONS TO MAKE TO MAKE THIRTY THREE OF THOSE ALTERNATIVES MORE CONSISTENT REFINEMENTS WITHIN THE LIMELIGHT TO MAKE THEM VIABLE 
          TO CARRY FORWARD. >> THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH NINE. 
          SO THOSE NINE ARE CURRENTLY BEING EVALUATED FOR THE PERSON THE TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE DO ANY WELL ON STRUCTURES SO STRUCTURES THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS HIT BY FINAL JOBS AND STARTED SPECIES CULTURAL RESOURCES NOISE HAS MATERIAL PROJECT CAUSES INCONSISTENCY WITH PIGALLE WILDLIFE REFUGE AND THEN WE PLAN ON HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING IT'S TERRIBLY 
          SET FOR JANUARY. >> RIGHT NOW WE'RE FINALIZING SOME OF THE DOCUMENTATION NOW ON THE RUN THROUGH THE ALTERNATIVES UPDATE. SO THIS IS SORRY I APOLOGIZE 
          [00:30:07]
THERE. SO THIS IS REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE 1. 
          SO THIS IS JUST WHINING OR REPLACING THE E MACKIN CREEK BRIDGE AND WHY ME THE OTHER THREE BRIDGES OUT. IT ALSO INCLUDES WIDENING WITHIN THE MAINLINE FROM OUR ON THE HILTON HEAD ISLAND FROM FOUR TO SIX LANES IN THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR ON THE EACH OF THE WHILE ATTORNEYS ARE GOING TO INCLUDE THIS FRONTAGE ROAD ON JENKINS ISLAND TO HELP SERVICE MEMBERS CO HALL ISLAND AND ALSO WITHIN THE HARBOR. SO THAT THAT HELPS US CREATE RITE AID RIGHT OUT THROUGH THROUGH A MAJORITY OF THE SCHOOL AUNTIE TO IS REPLACING HE THOUGHT MALCOLM CREEK BRIDGE TO THE NORTH AND THEN INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS ON YOU ALL MAY 
          INCLUDE IMPROVEMENTS UPON THE ISLAND AS WELL. >> ALL A THREE IS REPLACING EAST VALLEY. IT WOULD BE BOTH CREATING A NEW BRIDGE EASTBOUND OR MAKIN CREEK IN WEST IS PRETTY SPOT OVER SCHOOL CREEK AND THEN RETAINING THE EXISTING WESTBOUND BRIDGES A WINDING ALRIGHT FOR IS A SIX LANE FACILITY ACROSS THE SOUTHERN TIP AND A PINKY CHALLENGE AND THEN INCLUDES THE SAME IMPROVEMENTS ON HELM HEAD ALREADY FOR A WAS ONE OF THOSE 
          FIRST REFINEMENTS. >> SO IN COORDINATION WITH THE FISH WILDLIFE SERVICE THEY ASKED FOR US TO BE TIGHT AS POSSIBLE EXISTING CORPS OR THROUGH THE ISLAND SO WE'RE ABLE TO TIME THAT OUT AND CREATE THE RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT UNDERPASS ON THE ISLAND ARE A 
          FIVE AS AGAIN NEW. >> SO THIS IS VERY SIMILAR FOR THE BRIDGE STRUCTURES TO A THREE THAT IT'S REPLACING THE EAST AND WEST BROM ARE EAST BOUND BRIDGES OVER MACKIE IN SCOPE CREEP WHY THE OTHER TWO BRIDGES BUT IT GOES SOUTH OF THE POWERLINE EASEMENT AND THEN 
          TIES BACK IN AN OLD WARLORDS ROAD SMASH WALLS. >> SO HERE IS ALREADY FINE. 
          >> HEY I'M SORRY ALREADY FI WAS UTILIZING THE POWERLINE IS ABOUT FIVE A IS SOUTH CAROLINA IT WAS BETWEEN NOW ARE A SIX HAVE THE SAME ALIGNMENT ACROSS ISLAND IS ALREADY OR. 
          >> AND THEN A TIE AND THEN IT WENT DOWN THE POWER LINE EASEMENT AND THEN ARE A SIX A TIGHTENS UP ALONG THE ISLAND AS WAS SOUTH OF THE POWER LINE EASY ON JENKINS I'M SO HERE HERE'S ALL OF THE ALIGNMENTS TOGETHER. SO THERE IS THERE'S THE NINE REASONS ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT THROUGH THE CORRIDOR. THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS SOME OF THE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH THOSE ALTERNATIVES THE ONES THAT ARE SHOWN THAT WERE ON THE CHART EARLIER THEY'RE ALL VERY SIMILAR FOR EACH OF THE ALTERNATIVE. 
          SO THIS IS WHERE WE STARTED TO SEE SOME SOME DIFFERENCE IN THE ALTERNATIVE. 
          SO THE FIRST THING WE LIKE I WAS DELINEATE WETLANDS YOU SEE THAT RANGES FROM 18 ACRES TO ABOUT 30 AND A HALF ACRES RIGHT WAY RANGES FROM TWENTY SEVEN POINT TWO UP TO SEVENTY TWO ACRES. RELOCATIONS ARE FROM 10 TO 20. AND WE WERE ABLE TO WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REDUCE THOSE RELOCATIONS DOWN INTO UNDER FIVE FOOT JORDAN. 
          >> IT'S ALL SET FOR 5 5 8, 6 AND 6 AND THAT'S THAT SAME WHAT IS THE MEANING CURRENT SEISMIC DESIGN STANDARDS. SO THE EXISTING BRANCHES WHERE INSTALLED PRIOR TO THE DFT SEISMIC DESIGN CENTERS BEING IMPLEMENTED. SO IF DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF BRIDGES OF THEIR PLACE WOULD BE THE NUMBER OF BRIDGES THAT MEET THE CURRENT SIZE DESIGN STANDARDS. SO EVERYTHING BEYOND ARE A THREE REPLACES AT LEAST TWO OF THE BRIDGES AND WOULD HAVE A SEISMIC CITED BRIDGE IN ONE DIRECTION AND ONE DIRECTION WOULD MAINTAIN ACCESS IN THE EVENT OF A SEISMIC SEISMIC EVENT IN THE LAST CRITERIA IS 
          THE CONSTRUCTION DURATION. >> SO THAT RANGES FROM THREE YEARS TO FIVE AND A HALF YEARS 
          AND THE BAY. >> THE BIGGEST THING THAT'S FACTORING INTO THAT IS CONSTRUCTION STAGING LIKE ARI FOR FOR A AND 6 AND 6 THEY ARE ABLE OF THE BRIDGE AND ARE ALL ABLE TO BE BUILT OFF ALIGNMENT WITHOUT IMPACTING THE EXISTING TRAFFIC. 
          >> SO ONLY WIDENING WOULD HAPPEN ALONG THE CORRIDOR. AND ANOTHER WAY THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION DURATION IS TO ONLY WIDEN YES TO 78 ON HELM HEADED ONE 
          DIRECTION. >> SO NOW TO PUSH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION TO ONE SIDE OF THE SO THE NEXT THING THAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IS THE INTERSECTION CONCEPTS. 
          [00:35:01]
          >> SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE SCARBOROUGH BRIDESMAID AS WELL AS ROAD INTERSECTION CONCEPTS. 
          SO HERE'S THE STUDY AREA. ITS BASE ENCOMPASSES SCARPA ROAD TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY INCLUDES OLD WILD HORSE ROAD IN SPANISH WALLS WHILE ROAD. 
          SO HERE'S THE EXISTING INTERSECTION LAYOUT FOR 2018 AS WELL AS TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE. 
          SO IT'S CRAPO ROAD YOU HAVE A A THREE THREE LANES AND A THREE AND THEN RIGHT ONE THOSE LANES HAS A RIGHT TURN THEN YOU HAVE A DEDICATED LEFT TURN IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION SCARP HOPE ROAD SOUTHBOUND HAS A RIGHT TURN A THIRD AND A LEFT AND YOU'RE SITTING IN THE AM YOU HAVE A LEVEL OF SERVICE A AND THE P.M. THAT'S OPERATING ALONG WITH SERVICE HALF. 
          SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE SOME OF THE DEGRADATION OF TRAFFIC FROM THAT THE SIGNAL PERFORMANCE OF THAT SIGNAL AND THEN EXPERIENCE WHILE YOU HAVE A B AND B AM IN A D AND THE P.M. AGAIN YOU HAVE ONE LEFT TURN LANE THREE THROUGH LANES WITH THE RIGHT 
          AND THEN WESTBOUND YOU HAVE FOR THREE LANES IN THE LEFT TURN. >> SO THEN YOU KNOW LOOK IT VERY KIND OF LEVEL OF SERVICE AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. SO ANY TIME WE'RE LOOKING FOR MAINLINE LEVEL SERVICE WE WANT TO HAVE IN TWENTY FIVE YEARS HAVE AT LEAST A LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR EACH OF THE ALTERNATIVES WE'RE ABLE TO MAINTAIN A LEVEL RECEIVED WORD FOR THE MAIN HIGH LEVEL SERVICE THE INTERSECTION. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT MAINLINE LEVEL SERVICE THAT'S LOOKING AT 1 MILE SEGMENTS WITHIN THE CORRIDOR AND THOSE SEGMENTS THE ONES THAT ARE IMPACTED BY BRIGHT BY INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE ONCE YOU GET CLOSE 
          UP TO THE INTERSECTION THEN INTERSECTION LEVEL SERVICE. >> SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WE'RE LOOKING AT DIRECTIONAL DELAY LEVEL LEVEL OF SERVICE WHICH IS THE TIME DELAY FOR THE ENTIRE INTERSECTION LIKE AC RATIO IN A Q ONCE AGAIN THIS SHOWS A OF SERVICE D THAT'S THIRTY FIVE TO FIFTY FIVE SECONDS A DELAY AND THAT WOULD MEET THAT NEED SOME TIME TO HEAL HEADS EXISTING CHANGE INTERSECTIONS AS ON TURNOVER AND THEY ONLY HAVE ONE INTERSECTION THAT FAILS AND THAT IS SQUIRE HOPE ROAD AGAIN HERE'S A LEVEL 30 WHERE YOU START APPROACHING UNSAFE CONDITIONS WITH INCREASING CONGESTION NO DOUBT EXCESSIVE 
          BACKUPS KNOW IN URBAN SETTINGS A DESIRABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE. >> WE ARE TRYING TO SHOOT FOR A LEVEL SERVICE SEE IF POSSIBLE WITH OUR INTERSECTION SENSE A FLEET FREE FLOW CONDITION WITH MODERATE CONGESTION ENTER MADE VEHICLES WADE THROUGH MORE THAN ONE SINGLE THERE'S OCCASIONAL BACKUP ON THE EXPORT INTERSECTION CONCEPT SO WE LOOKED AT 14 INTERSECTIONS AND WE HAVE ADDED TWO MORE INTERSECTIONS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH AND ASK FOR ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT JUST THE SCARP HUB WHICH IS THE FIRST FOUR WE ASSUME THAT SPANISH WELLS WOULD BE OPTIMIZED LANES WAS OPTIMIZED LANES IS OPTIMIZING THE NUMBER LANES NECESSARY TO CREATE A ACCEPTABLE LEVEL SERVICE THAT COULD BE DOING LEFT HER HAND TURN LANES YOUR RIGHT HAND TURN LANES OR ADDITIONAL THREE LANES SO FAR HOPE ROAD LIKE A JUG HANDLE DISPLACE LEFT A CONTINUOUS GREEN TEA AND A FLYOVER AND THEN SWELLS SWELLS WE LOOK TO DETECT DETOUR NORTHBOUND LEFT HALFTIME INTERCHANGE A FLYOVER AND SPACE LEFT AND THEN WHEN WE LOOK AT MULTIPLE WHICH IS BOTH INTERSECTIONS AS WELL AS ALL THE WILD HORSE ROAD LOOK TO OPTIMIZE THE LANES FLASH FROM STAR POP WITH SMASH WALLS AND THAT SIGNALS A WALL COURSE TO T INTERSECTION OH WILD HORSE AND SPANISH WALLS AND ROUNDABOUTS WITH UNDERPASS SMASH WALLS ROUNDABOUTS LEFT TURNS IN A DUCK AND THEN SOME SEE IF THROUGH HERE SO THIS IS THE INTERSECTION CONCEPT SUMMARY SO 
          THIS IS THE FOUR THAT WERE CHOSEN TO ADVANCE. >> I HAVE DETAILED DRAWINGS COMING UP THOSE FOUR THAT WERE ADVANCED SO PREFERRED CONCEPT ONE WAS THE JUG HANDLE WHICH GIVES THE LEVEL SERVICE D OF BOTH INTERSECTIONS SO THAT THE SCORE WAS EITHER GREEN, YELLOW 
          OR RED. >> SO GREEN MEANS BASICALLY NOTHING WAS CHANGED ON IT RED. 
          >> YOU'RE STARTING TO GET YELLOW STARTING AS AN WAS RIGHT ACQUISITION COST OR THE OBSTRUCTIONS. THE SECOND ONE CARRY FORWARD A FLYOVER. 
          THE THIRD WAS OPTIMIZED LANES WHICH AGAIN GIVES YOU ULCERS D AT BOTH INTERSECTIONS AND THE FOURTH ONE WAS SAVING A LOT AS A WILD HORSE WHICH GIVES US A LEVEL OF SERVICE. 
          BCSE AND WE WERE ABLE TO ACTUALLY RECENTLY IMPROVE THAT TO BCBS. 
          SO HERE IS THE OVERVIEW OF THE JUG HANDLE AT SQUIRE POPE ROAD . 
          [00:40:02]
SO YOU CAN SEE YOU AND I HAVE ZOOMED IN ON EACH OF THESE INTERSECTIONS SO IF SOMEONE WERE PREVIOUSLY TAKING A LEFT ON DESCRIBE HOW PROUD THEY WOULD EXIT RIGHT NOW THE TABLE AND THEN YOUR ACROSS THE SIGNAL TO SCARP OPRAH. SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ELIMINATE LEFT HAND TURNS. THAT GIVES US THE LEVEL OF SERVICE D. 
          AND THE SAME THING AT SPANISH MILLS ROAD. SO HERE IS A A ZOOMED IN IMAGE OF THE JUG HANDLE IT SCARP ROAD. AGAIN YOU CAN SEE THE THREE THREE LINES IN THE RIGHT HAND TURN. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE RIGHT HAND EXIT FOR THE CABLE. AGAIN YOU HAVE OFFERED ALMOST ALL OF THESE OR NOT HAVE A DUAL RIGHT HAND TURN OFF AS FAR PRO-GROWTH AS HARPO ROAD YOUR TWO HEAVY MOMENTS ON YOUR RIGHT HAND TURNS ON. YES, 270 WESTBOUND AND YES, 2 7 8 EASTERN ONTO SQUIRE POPE ROAD . HERE IS A ZEN VERSION OF SPANISH WALLS ROAD UNDER THIS. 
          SO THIS IS A MAXIMIZE LINE SO YOU HAVE A BASICALLY DUAL THREE LANES ON THE NORTH SIDE. 
          I TRAVELED THROUGH A LANES HERE. YOU HAVE DUAL LEFT HAND TURN LANES OFF THE SPANISH WALLS A LOT THROUGH IT AND RIGHT AGAIN YOU HAVE ONE LEFT HAND TURN 
          EACH DIRECTION THREE THREE LANES AND A RIGHT HAND TURN. >> INTERSECTION THE FIRST CONCEPT TWO FLYOVER SUA POPE ROAD AGAIN YOUR HOME YOU WOULD EXIT, RIGHT? IT WOULD BRIDGE OUR 278 TIME DOWN ON THE OTHER SIDE AND SCORPIO ROAD AND THEN CONTINUED TO CARRY INTO THE MERGE BACK IN TEAM SCORE THAT GIVES A LEVEL SERVICE IN EACH OF THOSE INTERSECTIONS AND A SPANISH OLD WARHORSE. THAT'S EXACT SAME AS THE PREVIOUS WAS UNDER CONCEPT ONE YOU GET HERE'S A ZOOMED IN FLYOVER SO IT'S EXIT RIGHT? 
          >> AND THEN BEFORE YOU GET TO CHINA AND DRIVE IT GOES OVER BRIDGE TEN OVER BRIDGE AND THE PIG GIVES THE OUTLINE OF THE BRIDGE THAT MAY NEED TO BE EXTENDED. 
          THIS WAS BECOMES A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THESE INTERSECTIONS TO CARRY THROUGH. 
          YOU CAN SEE GOT A BUSINESS RELOCATION HERE. YOU'VE GOT SOME HOUSING RELOCATIONS HERE AS WELL. IT'S ALL THREE SOME HOUSE RELOCATIONS THE SAME CONCEPT OF SPANISH WELLS. SO HERE'S THE THIRD ALTERNATIVE IS OPTIMIZED LANES AGAIN YOU GET A LOT OF SERVICE D AT EACH LEVEL. BUT AS YOU SAY ZOOMING INTO EACH OF THEM ESQUIRE POPE ROAD YOU END UP WITH DUAL LEFT HAND TURN LANES THAT HAVE SIX HUNDRED FEET STORAGE. THAT'S SIX HUNDRED FEET OF STORAGE PUSHES YOU SIGNIFICANTLY BACK WITHIN STONEY TO WIDEN THE ROAD OUT TO PROVIDE FOR STORAGE. 
          MASS STORAGE IS NECESSARY TO CYCLE THE SIGNAL TO GET A LEVEL OF SERVICE C SO YOU CAN SEE HOW HEAVY THAT VOLUME IS ON THAT. I'VE HER LEFT HAND TURN AND AGAIN YOU HAVE THE EXACT SAME CONCEPT THAT SPANISH WALLS WORDS WHERE IS MAXIMIZING CONCEPT FOR IS AT SIGNALS OF A 
          WILD HORSE ROAD? >> SO THIS ONE'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN BUT FROM THE TRACK FROM ITS PERSPECTIVE IT WORKS. IT IS A CHANGE IN TRAVEL PATTERNS FOR PEOPLE THAT ALL ZOOM INTO EACH OF THE INTERSECTIONS AND TRY TO 
          EXPLAIN AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE . >> SO WHEN WE WHEN TO ZOOM IN ON SQUIRE POPE ROB WE'RE ABLE TO ELIMINATE THE LEFT HAND TURN LANES ON TWO STAR POPE ROAD WE DRIVE THE DOOR RIGHT HAND TURN LANDS HERE IN YOUR LEFT HAND TURN ON THE CHAMBER, DRIVE THE RIGHT THERE. SO WHAT WORD IS PLACING THESE LEFT HAND TURNS DOWN TO OR WHILE THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW THAT AS YOU'RE COMING DOWN TO ALL ROUND HORSE THERE'S DUAL RECEIVING LINES HERE. SO THE INSIDE LANE HAS THE ABILITY TO EITHER TURN LEFT ONTO OLD WARHORSE OR TO MAKE THE U-TURN AND COME BACK, DISCARD POPULARITY AND TAKE SPOT THE SAME THING. YOU KNOW THEY CAN CONTINUE OLD WARHORSE ROAD AND MERGE INTO AN OLD WILD HORSE AND MORE HORSE YOU CONTINUE ON AND THEN THE SAME THING WITH THE LEFT DOWN FROM YES TO 78 WESTBOUND ON THE SPANISH WALLS IT COMES THAT HERE IS THE SLICE A RIGHT HAND 
          TURN. >> SO BY DOING THIS WE'RE ABLE TO REDUCE THE SIGNAL TIMING TO INCREASE THE CHAPEL SPEED AND TRAVEL TIME THROUGH THE CORRIDOR BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT 
          OF SIGNAL TIME NEEDED FOR THE LEFT HAND TURNS. >> WHAT CAUSES THOSE 
          [00:45:04]
INTERSECTIONS TO START BACK? WELL, WHEN YOU GET BACK UP INTO THE MAIN LINE IT'S A RIVAL TO A WE'VE DONE SIMULATIONS OF THIS. IT'S EASILY SIGNAL TIME IN THROUGH HERE WE'RE ABLE TO CLEAR OUT THIS ENTIRE STORY AND IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE . 
          >> SO HERE IS FOR A CONCEPT FOR AD SPACE WALLS. SO WE'RE ABLE TO REDUCE ONE OF THE THREE LINES THROUGH HERE AS LONG AS IT BECOMES A SINGLE LEFT TURN ON THE 278 BECAUSE WE CAN INCREASE THE SIGNAL TIMING THERE AND HIS RIGHT HAND TO OUR AGENCY'S RIGHT HAND TURN MOVEMENTS ARE WORKING UNDER A MERGE CONDITION SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE SIGNAL. 
          >> THEY HAVE A LANDER SEAT SO THAT THAT WAS EACH OF THOSE TIMES. 
          >> NOW THERE'S THERE'S 270 A RAGING OVER SUAT ROAD AND THEN AN ALTERNATIVE BRIDGING SPANISH FALLS OVER TO SEVEN YEARS AND THIS ONE IS BRIDGING OVER SQUIRE POPE ROAD. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE YOU'RE SIGNIFICANTLY GIVING OUTSIDE THIS CORRIDOR THAT'S NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE FOUR LANES TRAVELING THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE NEXT SLIDE HERE WE'RE UTILIZING RETAINING WALLS ON EACH SIDE OF THIS TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, TIGHTEN THOSE SLOPES UP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. 
          EACH OF THOSE THESE ARE EACH MSE WALLS BUT THEY'RE APPROXIMATELY 950 FEET LONG. 
          TO GET THE ELEVATION OVER CHAMBERLAIN DIAMOND SQUARE POPE ROAD THAT DOES CONSULS TO THE FILL WITHIN THE THE CAUSEWAY AS WELL AND HAVE TO CLOSE OUT IN SIGNIFICANT RELOCATIONS THE NEXT SLIDE HERE SHOWS EVERYTHING IN RED IS A RESIDENTIAL OR BUSINESS RELOCATION. IF YOU LOOK IN THE CORRIDOR AND YELLOW IMPACTED RESIDENTS. 
          >> SO AS YOU CAN SEE THE EMERGED MISSION BASICALLY STARTS AS SOON AS YOU COME OFF 
          THE CAUSEWAY HERE. >> SO WE TYPICALLY DO NOT LIKE TO HAVE DRIVEWAY ACCESS IS WITHIN THE MERGE. SO THIS IS MERGING THOSE LANES WERE THE SAME THING. 
          HERE YOU HAVE A MERGE COMING IN. SO IN EACH ONE OF THESE RED OR RELOCATED BUSINESSES OR PROPERTIES AGAIN YOU'RE SEEING THE SAME RED THREE YEARS WE HAVE SIX RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS THREE LOCATIONS I WILL MENTION UNDER EACH DOWNTURN IS ONE THROUGH FOUR WE END UP HAVING TWO BUSINESS LOCATIONS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT HAVE WE HAVE ZERO RESIDENTIAL RELOCATIONS. 
          >> SO THIS IS THE CONCEPT OF SPANISH WELLS URGING OVER YES TO 78. 
          >> SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE IS THE BRIDGE OVER TO 78 HERE. WE'RE USING OLD WARHORSE ROAD AS THE ACCESS POINT FOR PEOPLE COME DOWN TO 78. SO THEY WOULD TURN ON OLD WARHORSE COME DOWN TO THE SAME THINGS YOU'RE COMING YOU PREVIOUSLY GOING TO HORSE RIDING COMING OUT OLD WARHORSE. YOU CONTINUE UP GOING TO SMASH WALLS, YOU TAKE A RIDE, JUMP THROUGH HERE TO THE ROUND TABLES OR OFF ONTO THE AGAIN. WE HAVE THE TALL RETAINING WALLS REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FLOW WITH IT WHERE WE HAVE TO HAVE IT. 
          YOU KNOW THOSE HILLS EACH OF THE FOUR QUARTERS. >> THEN AGAIN, THIS IS BASICALLY MAKING SQUIRE POPE RODE A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT FOR THE ENTIRE ENTIRE QUARTER SEASON. THERE'S A RESIDENT BUSINESS RELOCATION RIGHT HERE AS WELL 
          AS IMPACT TO EACH BUSINESSES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. >> SO THIS IS KIND OF AGAIN WE'RE SHOWING THE OR WE'RE HAVING INDICATED LEVEL OF SERVICE. 
          >> SO AT THE WALDORF LOT MORE STAFF CONTROL THAT'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT INTERSECTIONS SHOP CONTROL AND NOT WORRIED WE SEE MORE OF THAT LOCATION. AS FAMOUS RAWLS AS UNDER CONTROL ON THE OTHER SIDE IT IS A LOCAL INSURGENCY AND THE MAINLINE WOULD OPERATE A LOCAL SERVICES AS WELL. BUT AGAIN YOU SEE THERE IS NO ONE TO BASICALLY YOU'VE GOT 7 6 3 LOCATIONS YOU KNOW 6 7 RELOCATIONS IN THAT AS WELL AS 20 OTHER IMPACTED STATES. 
          AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A CAREFUL STUDY OUTSIDE OF THE CORPS TO SEE IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL IMPACT TO REDIRECTING THE TRAFFIC OUT TO WILD HORSE AND GUMTREE AS WELL 
          [00:50:02]
AS TRAFFIC THAT WOULD BYPASS IT IF YOU'RE NOT IN A COUNTRY AS WELL AS IN IMPARTIAL SCHOOL SO THAT WE HAVE NOT FINISHED THE TRAFFIC THAT DETAILED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS BUT WE DID DO 
          SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS WITH THE HALFTIME INTERCHANGE. >> THE GAME IS A LOCAL PHARMACY AND AT THE RAMP WALLS AND THEY MIGHT AS WELL SEE THE NEXT THING THAT WE'RE GOING TO 
          CALORIES THEY TAKE A DIAL AND INTERSECTION CONCEPTS. >> SO THIS IS BASICALLY FROM THE BASE OF THE BRIDGE TO JENKINS ROAD OR TO THE CAUSEWAY . 
          >> SO WE LOOKED AT AD SIX ALTERNATIVES IN THIS COURSE AND WE'D LIKE TO DRAW A LINE RIGHT 
          AT GATEWAY CROSSROADS. >> JENKINS AS WELL AS LEFT THE ADDING A LEFT IN THE JENKINS ROAD. RIGHT. AND RIGHT OUT WITH LEFT THE GATEWAY CROSS TREE. WE DID LOOK AT A SUPERSTORE AGAIN THE OPTIMIZE THE NUMBER OF LANES AND THEN OPTIMIZE NUMBER LANES AND RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT. 
          >> ONLY JENKINS ROAD. SO WE'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THOSE SHOULDER THAT PERFORMS AND NOT HAVE A SUMMARY OF THIS. I DO HAVE THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES AS WE PREVIOUSLY SHOWN ON SOME OF THE OTHER INTERSECTION. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT OF GATE GATEWAY CROSS TREE AND JENKINS ROAD. SO EACH OF THOSE WE NEED TO HAVE ACCELERATION MARKETS OF THOSE MOVEMENTS. THEN WE ALSO HAVE THIS EXTENSION WE EXTEND THE BRANCH APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET OF EXTENSION LIMBO HARBORS BACK ENTRANCE TO TIE BACK INTO THE SMALL ISLAND ROAD HERE THAT PROVIDES THE ACCESS FOR LIVABLE HARBOR. BUT IN DOING THAT TO MAKE THIS CONTINUOUSLY RIGHT IN RIGHT NOW 
          IT IMPACTS WHERE THE HARBOR IS GETTING THE ENTRANCE. >> SO BASICALLY GAINING THE ENTRANCE WILL HAVE TO OKATIE AND CROSS TO DRIVE THIS FRONTAGE ROAD HERE ACROSS YOU JOB WOULD BECOME A PUBLIC ROAD TO MAKE THIS ENTIRE CONCEPT WORK AS I'M RUNNING RIGHT OUT. 
          >> SO YOU SEE YOU'VE GOT A LEVEL OF SERVICE BEING SEEN THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE CONCEPT. 
          >> BUT THERE IS THE INCREASED COST OF SEEING THE BRIDGE'S WALLS. 
          >> IT'S ALTERATION LANES. AND I THINK THE BIGGEST ONE IS THE IMPACT TO 2 A.M. HARBOR AND HAPPENED TO MAKE THIS FOR THIS ROAD HEATER A PUBLIC ROAD CONCEPT TO RUN INTO YOU VERY SIMILAR ISSUES WITH HE HAS EXACT SAME ISSUE WITH WINDMILL HARBOR OVER HERE. 
          BUT WE'RE ADDING A LEFT TURN ON JENKINS ROAD HERE THAT DOES THE LEFT TURN OPERATES ALONG THE SERVICE F JUST BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH GAS TRAFFIC TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT THROUGH THERE. 
          EVERYTHING ELSE OPERATES BRC OR THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS WE'RE SHOWING THE WORST CASE SCENARIO FOR EACH OF THESE ALTERNATIVES THE BRIDGE TIE IN IT TOWARDS WINDMILL HARBOR IT IS COVE SO UNDER THIS SCENARIO AND THAT ARE ALL BUT THE ONES THAT CROSS OVER FIVE AND SIX BAYS EQUIVALENT OF THOSE THAT THE CLIENT ROW THAT SERVICES BANNER IS KELVIN HALL. 
          >> NOW IT WOULD BE ELIMINATED BECAUSE THE LOCATION OF. >> SO AGAIN THIS IS THE ONLY ADDITION TO THIS ONE IS ADDED THE LEFT TURN AT CROSS THROUGH DRIVE AND GATEWAY DRIVE TO THE JIGGLED ROAD AND YOU SEE THOSE OPERATING EAGAN HALF'S NEAR THERE AND THAT DOESN'T YOU KNOW WE'RE NOT SEEING A LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR WITH EACH OF THOSE 
          ALTERNATIVES. >> SO THERE IS CONCEPT NUMBER FOUR WHICH IS THE SUPERSCRIPT 
          SIMILAR TO WHAT THE COUNTY I LOOKED AT PREVIOUSLY. >> SO YOU CAN SEE WE'RE OPERATING AT A LEVEL OF SERVICE SEE IT HEY AT THAT AT THE SIGNAL THAT'S AT THE BASE OF THE BASE OF THE BRIDGE. HEY D I THOUGHT THE OTHER SIGNAL FROM THE U-TURN MOVEMENT HE CROSSED YOU DRIVE THE RIGHT HAND TURN OUT OF GATEWAY DRIVERS SWITCH. 
          >> SO AGAIN YOU'RE SEEING SOME OF THESE SOME OF THE SIDE STREETS ARE HAVING TROUBLE GETTING OUT AND MERGING ST. CONCEPT NUMBER FIVE WAS TO OPTIMIZE THE NUMBER OF LIGHT WHICH WOULD PUT A SIGNAL AT COST YOU DRIVE A GATEWAY DRIVE THAT GIVES US A LOWER SERVICE C AND D AT THAT INTERSECTION AS WELL AS ALONG SOURCE B AND C AT GILLIAN'S ROAD. 
          THEN WE WOULD HAVE AN ACCELERATION LANE FOR THE CAMPERS AND THE BOATS COMING OUT OF JENKINS ROAD. SO AGAIN YOU'VE GOT YOUR ADDITIONAL IMPACTS FOR YOUR FOR YOUR ACCELERATION LANE THERE AND THE VOLUME FOR THIS SETS UP DO NOT CURRENTLY MEET A SINGLE WARRANT FOR THE SIGNAL AT CROSS RELAY GATEWAY DRIVE UNDER CONCEPT SIX HERE WHERE WE OPTIMIZE THE NUMBER OF LANES AND THEN WE GO RIGHT IN ONLY THE JENKINS ROAD. 
          SO IF YOU'RE SO I'M DOING AS WRONG THEY'RE COMING OUT. THEY WOULD COME DOWN TO JESUS ROAD COME TO THE HEART ALAN CAN ACTUALLY KNOW THAT HOW IT GAVE WHEN HE TRIED TO SIGNAL AND 
          [00:55:06]
THAT GIVES US A LEVEL OF SERVICE C FOR BOTH A.M. AND P.M. AT THAT AT THE INTERSECTION SO SO THE GOOD THINGS IT DOES OUT OF SIGNAL BUT IF THAT SIGNAL IS OPERATING AT THE SAME LEVEL AS LAST YEAR AS THIS AS THE CALL SO WE'RE ABLE TO MAINTAIN GET ACCESS TO MORE HARDWARE AND REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT THROUGH JENKINS ISLAND UNDER THIS ALTERNATIVE CAN WE PROVIDE AN AT SAFE ACCESS FOR EACH ALL THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEXT DAY I WANT TO GO THROUGH AND CAN COMMUNITY IMPACTS AND MITIGATION. 
          >> SO HERE'S THE POTENTIAL COMMUNITY IMPACTS OF MITIGATION . 
          SO WE HAVE ZERO RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENTS, TWO COMMERCIAL DISPLACEMENTS BECAUSE OF HOW CLOSE THOSE BUILDINGS ARE TO THE EXISTING 278 WE'VE BEEN WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE SOME INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER MEETINGS WITH THE SAUDI COMMUNITY. 
          >> WE ALSO HAVE A LARGER STARTED COMMUNITY MEETINGS AS WELL AND THEN WE BROKE DOWN TO SMALLER GROUPS. WE PLAYED ON MEANING AS A LARGE GROUP AGAIN WE'VE DEVELOPED A FEW ALTERNATIVES FOR CREATING MITIGATION WITH THE SAUDI COMMUNITY. 
          I THINK WE'RE MAKING SOME HEADWAY ON THOSE IMPACTS AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO WORK ON THE MIGRATION STRATEGY FOR MAKING STONE AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL VIOLENT EXTREME IRRIGATION. SO CURRENTLY THERE'S MULTIPLE MITIGATION BANKS WITHIN THE AREA THOSE SALT MARSH WE HAVE CLYDESDALE AND MURRAY HILL BANK BOTH OF THOSE BANKS ARE OFF US 70 GOING SAVANNAH ON THE RIGHT SIDE AND THEN THE FRESHWATER WE HAVE A SUITE WE'VE GONE THROUGH AND SALT MITIGATION BANK SO A MAJORITY OF OUR IT WELL IT IMPACTS ARE CRITICAL AREA. 
          WELL AN IMPASSE OUTSIDE OF PYGMY ISLAND WHERE WE HAVE SOME FRESH MORE ACCESS WE DID RECENTLY NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT LAW TO BRING IN A WHALE AND SPECIALIST FOR POTENTIAL CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE MITIGATION IF EITHER ONE OF THESE BANKS WERE TO NO LONGER HAVE CREDITS WHICH WAS WE'LL HAVE A STRATEGY FOR MITIGATING THE NEXT STEPS SO THAT WE'RE TO HAVE A ANOTHER STAKEHOLDER MEETING THIS FALL WILL PARTICIPATE IN MIDDLE OF OCTOBER FOR THAT AS WELL A NEWSLETTER COMING OUT THE SAME TIME THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER STAKEHOLDER NEWSLETTER AND PUBLIC HEARING ON AN EARLY 20 20 WE'RE SHOOTING FOR A 
          THIRD REGION JANE. >> AND THEN THERE'S THE WAYS TO CONTACT SATURDAY OF A PROJECT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT ALL THE PRESENTATIONS HERE ON OUR PROJECT WEB SITE. 
          >> SO DAVID IS LOOKING FOR ANYTHING WHICH WAS THE TIME AND WE'LL GO ON THE WEB SITE NOW 
          PLEASE SEND EMAIL TO ME OR TO THIS WEB SITE. >> I CAN GET YOU INTO ANY 
          QUESTIONS ABOUT MR. CHAIRMAN. >> I HAVE A QUESTION IF I MIGHT GO AHEAD. 
          >> THANKS, GREG. THIS WILL BE REAL QUICK. >> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. 
          I THOUGHT I READ AT THE VERY BEGINNING THAT INCREASED CAPACITY THAT ONE OF YOUR GOALS WAS TO INCREASE CAPACITY AND THEN YOU SEEMED TO SAY THAT YOU DECIDED NOT TO DO THAT. 
          IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, WHAT WE DID IS WE HAVE INCREASED CAPACITY IN THE PURPOSE THAT NEED TO BE CONSISTENT BUT WE WANTED TO CLEAN THAT UP A LITTLE BIT. 
          >> SO WE DID REDUCE CONGESTION WHICH CAN LEAD TO INCREASED CAPACITY OF DIVERSE SCENARIO. 
          >> INCREASED CAPACITY IS NECESSARY NO FAITH OR IT'S OPERATING. 
          NOW YOU GET A LEVEL OF SERVICE THESE AND YOUR PEAK TIME. >> SO WE ARE APPROACHING CAPACITY AS IS WITH FOUR LINE. SO WHAT WE WANT TO PROJECT OUT EVEN FIVE YEARS IS SIX LANES. 
          WE WILL BE DEFINITELY IN 20 YEARS SIX LIKE THIS. >> ALL RIGHT. 
          SO EACH OF THE ALTERNATIVES DOES HAVE AN ELEMENT OF INCREASING CAPACITY TO SOME EXTENT AT LEAST AS FAR AS REDUCING CAN CONGESTION. YES, CORRECT. 
          WE WERE UNABLE TO. WE INITIALLY LOOKED AT INTERSECTIONS AND TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE AND THE INTERSECTIONS BUT THEN TO KEEP THE VOLUME OF THE VEHICLES IN THE PEAK HOUR WE KNEW THAT, YOU KNOW, SIX LANES WAS NECESSARY. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU, GREG. THANK YOU. 
          >> OTHER QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD. HEY, CRAIG, THIS IS MIKE COVERED MAN. THANK YOU FOR COMING HERE TONIGHT AND PUTTING THAT ON THAT YOUR EAR YOUR DISPLAY HERE. I GOT IT. 
          I GOT A QUESTION THAT MAYBE IT'S EVERYONE WANTS TO KNOW BUT TOO AFRAID TO ASK KIND OF QUESTIONS. I WANT YOU TO SHOOT ME STRAIGHT LITTLE LEVEL OF SERVICE YOU'RE 
          [01:00:02]
LOOKING FOR IS A D AS IN DELTA AS IN THE UNIFORM GRADING SCALE AT THE BOTTOM. 
          >> WHY DO WE WHY DO WE WANT TO HAVE A LEVEL OF SERVICE OF D BEING WE'RE ON IT. 
          I DON'T UNDERSTAND. OKAY. SO TRY TO KIND OF FORGET THE 
          GRADING SCALE OF IT. >> SO LOOK AUTHORITIES WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DOORWAY. 
          SO WE WERE INSIDE LETTERS TO DELAY. SO IF YOU'RE TRYING TO GET A LEVEL OF SERVICE BE THIS CORRIDOR INTO THE PEAK TIME YOU WOULD END UP HAVING WAY TOO MUCH INFRASTRUCTURE OUT THERE. SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A C OR D YOU'RE LOOKING AT WAYS TO 
          OPTIMIZE YOUR FUNDING. >> TO MEET THE PERFORMANCE OF SOME. 
          YEAH. ONCE YOU GET TO LEVEL OF SERVICE D IS ROUGHLY WHAT PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO FEEL. SO YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF A DELAY BUT IT'S 
          NOT GIVING WHERE YOU KNOW WHERE IT IS TODAY. >> SO IT OFFERING TO LEVEL OF SERVICE TO DEAL AND SOMEONE YOU'RE TOLD TO LOOK FOR THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING THAT BALANCES YOUR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY WITH TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE. 
          >> GOTCHA. GOTCHA. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY I STEPPED AWAY FOR A MINUTE, CRAIG. GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. THANKS FOR COMING. 
          I JUST WANT YOU TO EXPAND A BIT IF YOU WOULD ON YOUR COMMENT ON JENKINS ISLAND WHERE YOU ELIMINATE THE ENTRANCE TO THE GATED ENTRANCE TO WINDMILL HARBOR AND OPEN UP CROSS TREE AS A PUBLIC ROAD. COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME A LITTLE BIT BETTER? 
          >> SO BASICALLY WE WOULD HAVE TO THAT THOSE OPTIONS WERE THE FIRST OR IF YOU'RE IN THE ROOM 
          OVER THE RIGHT. >> RIGHT. ALL THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT ENTIRE QUARTER RIGHT. RIGHT OUT. 
          THAT SAID ANYTHING YOU COULD STOP RIGHT THERE. >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? MAKE PUBLIC. SO HERE LET ME GO BACK AND FIND . 
          SO UNDER THIS SCENARIO. SO THAT THEY GAVE THEIR GAY CURRENT TO SEE OUT THERE. 
          >> YEAH. THE GATES ARE CURRENTLY SITS RIGHT HERE. 
          RIGHT. SO FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO GET TO MINORS COVE IN HOLD ISLAND. 
          YEAH THEY WOULD COME ON COME ON EASTBOUND MAKE THE RIGHT INTO WHEN THE HARBOR COME ALONG CROSS THROUGH HERE. MAKE THE CONNECTION TO THE BACK GATE WITH MY HARDWOOD THEN CROSS UNDER THE CONTINUOUS ROADWAY COME BACK TO HUG ISLAND OR TO OUR THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT 
          YOU MEANT. >> SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE ARE CREATING WITH THIS OPTION IS A PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. CORRECT. 
          >> YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          SO WE ARE LOT YOU ASKED TO LOOK AT RIGHT? >> RIGHT OUT. 
          LET'S USE THESE. MR. CHAIRMAN, GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, CRAIG. 
          GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. THANKS FOR THAT VERY DETAILED PRESENTATION. 
          I WANT TO PIGGYBACK ON COUNCILMAN MCKELLEN WAS WAS ALLUDING TO BUT I I KNOW WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE JENKINS ISLAND PROJECT DISCUSSION FOR QUITE SOME TIME THAT IT SEEMED AS THOUGH THE UNDER THE BRIDGE SOLUTION WAS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ANYWAY FOR JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY IT SEEMS LIKE. BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THE UNDER THE BRIDGE SOLUTION ONLY HAPPENS IF WE TURN THAT ROAD INSIDE OF WINDOW HARBOR INTO A PUBLIC ROAD IS NOT THE CASE OR IS THERE SOME OTHER OPTION IN THERE THAN THAT I POTENTIALLY MESS SO THE UNDER THE UNDER ROAD OPTION WORKS EXCEPT FOR. 
          >> THAT'S RIGHT CONNECTION YOU KNOW THAT RIGHT CONNECTION BACK OVER HERE AND THERE'S WHERE THE BRIDGES ARE HAVING TO COME IN THROUGH HERE BECAUSE OF OTHER CONSIDERATIONS OF POWER LINES ETC. PYGMY ISLAND WHERE THEY'VE ASKED US TO COME ACROSS THEIR SO THAT BRIDGE IS COMING THROUGH HERE SO THERE'S NOT THERE'S NOT REGENCY WHERE THE EXISTING ROAD IS AT FIRST ROAD MOHAMED TO PUT IT BUT AN ACCESS ROAD SO THAT BANNERS CODE SO CONNECT TO UNDER THE BRIDGE 
          OVER OUR TOWN TO HARBOR ISLAND AND THEN UP TO THE SIGNAL. >> SO WE WERE ABLE TO ELIMINATE BUHARI POINT ROAD HERE BUT WE'RE JUST NOT ABLE TO MAKE THAT CONNECTION BACK ACROSS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH BECAUSE IF I COULD FOLLOW UP TO THAT JUST SOME UNDERSTANDING BUT BECAUSE YOU NEED TO GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER NORTH ON HIS SIDE. 
          >> GREG, THAT ESSENTIALLY ELIMINATES THE OPTION OF HAVING THE UNDER THE BRIDGE SOLUTION FOR WINDMILL HARBOR OUTSIDE OF WHAT IS NOW THEIR CURRENTLY THEIR GATED COMMUNITY. 
          CORRECT. SO THAT IMPACTS ASSOCIATE WITH THE POWER LINES AND WERE BASICALLY WHEN WE MET WITH PIG ISLAND AND SO WE HAVE TO MET WITH THEM THEY ASKED US TO BE 
          SOUTH OF THE EXISTING ROAD. >> SO THAT'S THAT'S PUTTING THIS ON THE SOUTH WHEN WE COME ON TO THEM HANDS. WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, BASIC CONSTRUCT ABILITY AND THEN WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE ALL THE EXISTING BRIDGE IT'S TURKISH 
          [01:05:02]
ABILITY AND TO BE ABLE TO WE HAVE TO HAVE 50 FEET OFF THE EXISTING BRIDGES TO CONSTRUCT 
          THOSE LUBRICANTS. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. 
          BEEP BEEP. CRAIG, WILL YOU STAY FOR A FEW MORE MINUTES AND THERE MAY BE A QUESTION FOR YOU AFTER SENATOR DAVIS SPEAKS. SO COULD YOU HANG IN THERE FOR A FEW MINUTES LONGER? OF COURSE. OK, GREAT. 
          [9. UPDATE FROM SENATOR TOM DAVIS]
          >> IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO HEAR FROM SENATOR DAVIS AND THEN KIND OF WRAP UP WHERE WE ARE. SENATOR DAVIS, CAN YOU HEAR ME? 
          >> I THINK I MADE IT MYSELF, YES. OK. 
          FIRST I WANT TO START OUT BY I THINK IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO YOU GUYS COLLECTIVELY OUR GUYS AND GALS COLLECTIVELY SINCE THE STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK MADE THE GRANT TO BEAUFORT COUNTY. SO I WANT TO I WANT TO RECOGNIZE AND YOU DO ALL NEED TO KNOW THE GREAT LEVEL OF SKILL THAT I THINK ASHLEY JACOBS FOR THE COUNTY AND STEVE RILEY FOR THE TOWN HILTON HAD THAT THEY EMPLOYED IN NAVIGATING THIS THROUGH THE PROCESS BY WAY OF PERSPECTIVE THE STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK HAD 360 MILLION DOLLARS TO ALLOCATE STATEWIDE THIS TIME AROUND AND BEFRIEND JASPER COUNTY'S ENDED UP GETTING HALF OF THAT THAT 180 MILLION DOLLARS 120 MILLION FOR THIS CORRIDOR AND THEN FIFTY EIGHT MILLION ALMOST ALMOST 60 MILLION FOR THE INTERCHANGE EXIT 3 AND JASPER COUNTY. 
          SO I I WANT TO START BY BY COMMENDING THOSE EFFORTS THAT WERE TRULY EXTRAORDINARY. 
          SECONDLY, I WANT TO THANK BOTH CRAIG WHEN AND I THINK LELAND COLEMAN IS ALSO ON THE CALL HERE FOR THE OBVIOUS LEVEL OF ATTENTION THEY'VE GIVEN TO THIS PROJECT THE WILLINGNESS TO CONTINUE TO MEET WITH ISLANDERS TO TRY TO IMPROVE THE PLAN JUST THE RESPONSIVENESS AND THE PRESENCE. I THINK THAT'S TO BE COMMENDED. SO I WANT TO WANT TO THANK THEM . ALSO THANK THE COMMITTEE HAS DONE TODAY. 
          I THINK NOW WITH THAT BY WAY OF SOME INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, I WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS AND THEN MAKE A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS AND THEN MAYBE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. I'VE ALWAYS LOOKED AT THIS PROCESS AS HAVING TWO TRACKS. YOU HAD THE FINANCIAL TRACK AND THEN YOU HAD FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD THE DESIGN OR FUNCTIONALITY TRACK AND THEY RAN MORE OR LESS CONCURRENT. 
          AND WE'VE NOW GOTTEN TO THE END OF AND FINALIZE THE FINANCING TRACK WITH I THINK THE ESTIMATED COST 240 MILLION WILL BE COVERED WITH THE 40 MILLION THAT THE D.A. ALREADY HAS IN AN ESCROW TO REPAIR THE BOUNCE BAND COMING ON THE ISLAND 80 MILLION DOLLARS THROUGH THE ONE PENNY SALES TAX THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITIZENS OF BEAUFORT COUNTY LAST FALL. 
          AND THEN THE REMAINING PIECE OF THE LAST PIECE WAS THIS 120 MILLION DOLLAR GRANT FROM THE STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK FOR 240 MILLION DOLLARS. I THINK THAT EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT JUST BECAUSE OF PRICES IN GENERAL AND WHATEVER CHANGES WE MIGHT MAKE TO THIS PROJECT MAY RESULT IN THAT PROJECT COSTS MOVING NORTHWARD OF TWO HUNDRED FORTY MILLION DOLLARS. I'VE ALREADY BEEN IN TOUCH WITH OUR FEDERAL CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION IN REGARD TO POTENTIALLY COVERING THAT DELTA WITH SOME FEDERAL FUNDS AND THE INITIAL FEEDBACK THAT I RECEIVED JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION IS THAT WE GIVEN THE HIGH LEVEL OF LOCAL AND STATE INVOLVEMENT IN THIS PARTICULAR QUARTER A PROJECT THAT IT IS VERY LIKELY THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THOSE ADDITIONAL FEDERAL FUNDS TO COVER WHATEVER DELTA THERE MIGHT BE. NOW THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE SHOULDN'T BE FISCALLY PRUDENT AND LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT COST. 
          I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I'VE ALREADY STARTED TALKING WITH OUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION ABOUT BACKSTOPPING IF IT SOMEHOW GETS HIGHER THAN TWO HUNDRED FORTY MILLION DOLLARS. THE NEXT OBSERVATION I WANT TO MAKE IS IN REGARD TO THAT TO THE NEPA PROCESS ITSELF. AND I THINK CRAIG, WHEN DID AN EXCELLENT JOB OF OUTLINING WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS AND THE VARIOUS BENCHMARKS ALONG THE WAY AND THAT IS ANTICIPATED OR HOPED THAT SOMETIME NEXT SPRING ALL OF THIS PUBLIC COMMENT WE'RE RECEIVING NOW AND THE INCREASED COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT FROM THE VARIOUS CITIZENS GROUPS FROM COUNCIL 
          [01:10:02]
MEMBERS D.A. IT'S ALL VERY TIMELY AND IS WITHIN THE NEPA PROCESS AND IN FACT I WANT TO DISPEL ANY FEAR THAT SOMEHOW BY LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT AND TRYING TO IMPROVE UPON IT AND IN TRYING TO TO INCORPORATE SOME THINGS INTO IT THAT MAY MITIGATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED THAT ISN'T GETTING US OFF THE NEPA TRACK THAT THAT ISN'T SOMEHOW 
          UNREASONABLY DELAYING THE PROJECT. >> IN FACT THE NEPA PROCESS ENCOURAGES AND FACILITATES AND WELCOMES THIS LEVEL OF COMMENTARY AND THIS LEVEL OF PUBLIC INPUT. I MEAN THE VERY PURPOSE OF THE NEPA PROCESS IS SO THE PUBLIC HAS THE RIGHT TO DO EXACTLY WHAT IT'S DOING NOW. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE CONCERN IN REGARD TO SOMEHOW IF WE LOOK AT THIS PROJECT AND TRIED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO ALLEVIATE SOME CONCERNS THAT SOMEHOW WE'RE GETTING OFF THE NEPA TRACK AND WE'RE GOING TO DERAIL THIS PROJECT AND IT'S GOING TO BE DELAYED FOR A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME BECAUSE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE CASE. WE'RE MAKING THESE COMMENTS AT THE RIGHT TIME. AND I WANTED TO MAKE THAT PROCEDURAL OBSERVATION. 
          I ALSO WANT TO TALK IN REGARD TO WHAT I SEE. AND AGAIN, I'M A LAYPERSON HERE. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER BUT EVER SINCE THE FINANCING TRACK OF THIS PROJECT WAS CONCLUDED BY SECURING THE HUNDRED TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE CIB, GETTING THE DOJ TO PROVIDE ITS BLESSING AND THEN HAVING THE JOINT REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVE IT AS WELL AND I ATTENTIVE EACH THOSE MEETINGS TO TO MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING WENT AWRY TO MAKE SURE THAT MONEY STOOD THERE. EVER SINCE THAT FINAL VOTE WAS TAKEN BY THE JOINT BOND COMMITTEE LOCKING DOWN THAT 120 MILLION DOLLAR GRANT I SPENT ALL MY TIME IN REGARD TO THIS PROJECT IN REGARD TO THE SECOND TRACK WHICH IS MEETING WITH ISLANDERS, MEETING WITH COMMUNITY LEADERS, MEETING WITH MEMBERS OF COUNTY COUNCILS WHO HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN THIS TALKING TO STEVE RILEY, ASHLEY JACOBS DOING WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW. 
          AND I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF MY THOUGHTS. AND YOU KNOW AND AGAIN THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE. THEY'RE MY THOUGHTS AND THEY'RE MY OBSERVATIONS AND THEY'RE MY ATTEMPT TO TRY TO PUT INTO LAYMAN'S TERMS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'M HEARING AND THAT MAY LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I'LL MAKE IN JUST JUST A MOMENT. 
          THE FIRST THING AND I THINK YOU KNOW, CRAIG ADDRESSED IT SOMEWHAT AND MAYBE SOME EARLIER ITERATIONS OF THE D.A. PLANTS WEREN'T AS SPECIFIC IN THIS REGARD BUT IN REGARD TO THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECTED SELF IN TERMS OF THE OBJECT. I THINK THERE'S AN EMERGING CONSENSUS THAT WHAT THE PARAMETERS OUGHT TO BE IS MOSS CREEK ON THE WEST END AND A CONNECTIVITY WITH THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY ON THE EAST AND AND THAT BEING THE AMBIT OR THE SCOPE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT I THINK THAT MAY BE IMPLICIT IN A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THAT CRAIG JUST WALKED US THROUGH. BUT I WANTED TO MAKE THAT OBSERVATION BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS IS THAT IN SOME INSTANCES IT MAY HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNTY'S IDEA OF THE SCOPE ON THE EAST SIDE STOPPED AT THE SQUIRE POPE ROAD INTERSECTION AND THAT THE D.A. 
          TS UNDERSTANDING OF THE SCOPE MAY HAVE STOPPED AT THE INTERSECTION OF SPANISH WELLS ROAD AND WILD HORSE. AND I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF EMPHASIZE THAT THE CONSENSUS SEEMS TO BE THE EAST WHERE TERMINUS OF THE SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE CONNECTIVITY TO THE CROSS ON PARKWAY. SO THAT THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT THAT I'D LIKE TO MENTION BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD. THE SECOND THING IS THAT IN REGARD TO EXPANDING THE SCOPE SO THAT IT PROPERLY TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE RELEVANT TRAFFIC FLOWS FROM WALL STREET TO THE CROSS ON PARKWAY THAT ENABLES US TO GET A BETTER IDEA OF TRAFFIC FLOWS AND ENABLES US TO TO LOOK AT A DEFINED UNIVERSE OF TRAFFIC IN PARTICULAR PATTERNS AND THEN USE COMMUTE COMPUTER SIMULATIONS AND GET AN IDEA. 
          WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE AT AT THE PEAK TIMES AND WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE AT NON PEAK TIMES DURING AVERAGE TIMES AND YOU KNOW, ARE THERE ALTERNATIVES OTHER THAN SIMPLY EXPANDING LANES THAT WE COULD EXPLORE WHETHER IT'S IN REGARD TO BYPASS OPTION OR WHETHER IT'S REGARD TO REVERSING LANES AT CERTAIN POINTS IN TIME DURING THE DAY. 
          BUT I THINK THAT THAT PROPERLY DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT ENABLES FOR A VERY SOLID SIMULATION ANALYSIS TO BE DONE TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE TRAFFIC FLOWS AND A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS EXACT PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO TRYING TO SOLVE. AND THEN KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, ANCILLARY TO THAT WOULD BE THIS OBSERVATION AND IT GOES TO I THINK THE QUESTION THAT 
          [01:15:03]
BRIAN ASKED EARLIER ABOUT EXPAND CAPACITY OR MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ENOUGH ENOUGH ROOM FOR A VOLUME OF CARS. I'LL JUST MAKE THE OBSERVATION IS THAT THERE ARE TRADEOFFS HERE AND THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU WANT TO EXPAND CAPACITY AND TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU WANT TO ALLEVIATE IN THAT MANNER CONGESTION AT LIGHTS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE PAVEMENT AND THE VERY FIRST AESTHETIC THING THAT WILL STRIKE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING OFF THE BRIDGES INTO HILTON HEAD, THE VERY FIRST THING THEY'LL SEE WILL BE A CONSIDERABLE EXPANSE OF PAVEMENT. 
          SO I JUST WANT TO I JUST WANT TO SUGGEST THAT AS WE AS WE LOOK AT THESE ALTERNATIVES AND AS WE LOOK AT FUNCTIONALITY AND INCREASING CAPACITY THAT WE WEIGH THAT AGAINST WHAT THAT ENTAILS NECESSARILY WHICH IS GOING TO BE MORE PAVEMENT AND HAVE TO MAKE A VALUE JUDGMENT IN REGARD TO WHICH IS WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT TO US. THE NEXT POINT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THAT. AND CRAIG TOUCHED UPON THIS EARLIER A LITTLE BIT. 
          IF THERE IS AND ALTERNATIVE TO HAVE A BYPASS THAT PROVIDES A DIRECT ROUTE WITHOUT IMPACTING INTERSECTIONS FROM THOSE WHO ARE COMING OVER THE BRIDGES AND THEY WANT TO GET TO THE SOUTH END OF THE ISLAND, THEY WANT TO GO RIGHT TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE ANY NEED OR DESIRE TO GO AHEAD AND GO DOWN BUSINESS TO 78 AND TO GO THROUGH THOSE INTERSECTIONS. WHAT IS THE FEASIBILITY BOTH IN TERMS OF COST IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND IN TERMS OF THE AESTHETICS THAT THAT PARTICULAR ALTERNATIVE WOULD WOULD PROVIDE? THE NEXT POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS IS A LITTLE BIT A LITTLE BIT TOUCHY POLITICALLY BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE MADE AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AS WE LOOK AT ALL THESE OPTIONS TO TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT. IT'S BEYOND DISPUTE THAT THE GROWTH OF HILTON HEAD IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ON HILTON HEAD HAVE DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED THE TRADITIONAL GULF COMMUNITIES. AND YOU'RE SEEING THIS NOW WITH THE HIGHWAY TO 78 CORRIDOR AND ITS IMPACT ON STUDY. BUT YOU'VE ALSO SEEN IT IN OTHER AREAS WITH THE HILTON HEAD ISLAND AIRPORT. YOU SEE THE IMPACT THAT'S HAD ON MITCHELL BILL. YOU'VE SEEN THE IMPACT IT HAD ON ST. JAMES BAPTIST CHURCH WHICH HAD TO BE MOVED FROM THIS HISTORIC LOCATION TO ACCOMMODATE THAT GROWTH. 
          YOU'RE SEEING IT NOW. I PARTICIPATED IN A PUBLIC HEARING THE OTHER NIGHT ABOUT A PROPOSED NEW TRANSFER STATION THAT IS PROPOSED FOR, YOU KNOW, NEAR THE BIG HILL COMMUNITY. 
          YOU KNOW, BY ARBOR NATURE AND AGAIN THESE ARE ALL INCIDENCES GROWTH. 
          THEY'RE ALL INCIDENCES TO DEVELOPMENT. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS THE REST OF THE ISLAND HAS BENEFITED FROM THIS DISPROPORTIONATELY NATIVE ISLANDERS HAVE PAID A PRICE AND THAT NEEDS TO BE RECOGNIZED BY US. 
          I THINK IN THIS PROJECT EXPLICIT RIGHT UPFRONT AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A CONCERTED EFFORT IN MY JUDGMENT TO TO REALLY DIG INTO WHAT CAN WE DO TO MITIGATE THIS IMPACT TO STONEY AND THAT MAY INVOLVE THE USE OF SOME TOWNIE OWN LAND, A TOWN ON LAND. 
          I KNOW THE TOWN OWNS A LOT REAL PROPERTY IN THAT AREA AND THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR US HERE TO TAKE SOME OF THAT TOWN OWN LAND WORKING WITH SOMEBODY LIKE A WOODEN PARTNERS AND BE WOODEN PARTNERS BUT A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR A LAND USE PLANNER OR SOMEBODY THAT HAS EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA AND LOOK AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND NOT ONLY MAKE THE HIGHWAY TO 78 CORRIDOR LESS NEGATIVELY IMPACTFUL ON STONEY BUT TO GO AHEAD AND AND MITIGATE SOME OF THE PRIOR DAMAGES THAT WE'VE DONE TO THAT COMMUNITY AND I THINK THERE'S A REAL OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DO THAT HERE AND. AND I I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLORED IN SOME MORE DETAIL AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. AND I RECOGNIZE THAT ASPECT OF MY OBSERVATION IS REALLY INDEPENDENT OF THE ENGINEERING SIDE AND IS MORE IN REGARD TO THE LAND USE PLANNING OR LAND LAND SCAPE ARCHITECTURE SIDE. BUT I THINK THE TWO GO HAND IN HAND BECAUSE AS YOU TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE STONEY COMMUNITY, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT AND IMPORTANT COMPONENT. THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY IS THE PATH FORWARD AND WHERE WE SHOULD GO FROM HERE. I'VE ALREADY SAID THAT ALL THE COMMENTS WE'RE MAKING NOW, ALL THE COMMUNITY INPUT WE'RE GETTING NOW FROM A WIDE VARIETY OF GROUPS ALL GOOD STUFF, VERY TIMELY, VERY CONSISTENT WITH AND IN FACT ENCOURAGED BY THE NEPA PROCESS. SO WE SHOULD NOT I RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST TO YOU ALL IN 
          [01:20:05]
CONSIDERING WHETHER YOU SHOULD HAVE AN INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING CONSULTANT WHICH I THINK YOU SHOULD AND CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT TO BRING ON A PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 
          LOOK AT WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE STONEY COMMUNITY AS I THINK YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS NOT IN CONSISTENT WITH THE NEPA PROCESS. AND WHILE I RESPECT THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS WAS RECENTLY DONE BY THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD CHIEF ENGINEER MR. LEGGETT IN AND IN TALKING ABOUT WHAT HE SAW FURTHER REFINEMENTS MIGHT BE THOSE SUGGESTIONS IN MY OPINION BY MR. LEGGETT ARE MORE AND THE NATURE OF A PEER REVIEW LOOKING AT THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE MADE BY THE SCADA PARTY IN REGARD TO THEIR EXISTING PLANS PERHAPS SOME VALUE ENGINEERING TO GET EFFICIENCIES AND I HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT'S SOMETHING MORE THAN THAT IS REQUIRED. I THINK SOMETHING MORE THAN SIMPLY A PEER REVIEW IS NECESSARY AND AN OFTEN CLEAR MY COMMENTS BY SAYING THIS I THINK THERE'S A REAL OPPORTUNITY FOR US HERE TO DO SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY FOR HILTON HEAD ISLAND. 
          WE WE'VE GOT A GREAT DELEGATION UP IN COLUMBIA TO TRY TO HELP YOU. 
          YOU'VE GOT A VERY ENGAGED BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL, VERY ENGAGED TOWN OF HILTON HEAD COUNCIL. A LOT OF TALENT THERE. YOU'VE GOT OBVIOUSLY WITH CRAIG WHEN YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY WHO IS IS IS READY WILLING AND ABLE TO TO LISTEN TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. AND WE ALSO HAVE THE ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT OF A LOT OF VERY INTERESTED PARTIES ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND. SO IF WE JUST TAKE AND I WOULD SUGGEST WE TAKE MAYBE A SIX DAY PERIOD TO RETAIN AN INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING CONSULTANT AND TO RETAIN A PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT THAT COULD THEN LOOK AT THESE COMMENTS. 
          AND AGAIN, I'M A LAYPERSON I'M A REAL ESTATE LAWYER. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. 
          I'M NOT A LAND USE PLANNER BUT. BUT THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THAT ANALYSIS BY THOSE PROFESSIONALS COUPLED WITH THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO FURTHER ENGAGE AND TAKE SOME OWNERSHIP IN THIS, I REALLY THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS IN FAVOR BY ONE SIDE OVER ANOTHER OR WE'RE NOT GONNA BE IN A SITUATION WHERE ONE SIDE FEELS LIKE IT'S BEEN SHOVED DOWN THEIR THROATS. I THINK WE HAVE A CHANCE HERE TO HAVE A WIN WIN AND I REALLY COMMAND THIS COUNCIL FOR ITS OPENNESS AND ITS WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE IN THIS INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL ANALYSIS FROM AN ENGINEER AND A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND I HOPE THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. AND TO HIS CREDIT. I'VE TALKED TO LELAND CALL IS THE SUPERVISING ENGINEER I THINK IS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR DST AND I'VE ALSO TALKED TO CITY HALL, THE DIRECTOR OF SCADA. THEY WELCOME THIS COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. THEY WANT THIS TO BE SOMETHING THAT HILTON ISLANDERS TAKE OWNERSHIP OF. AND SO I THINK THAT EVERYBODY IS ROWING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND I'M OPTIMISTIC ABOUT OUR ABILITY TO GET THERE AND SO THAT THOSE THOSE ARE YOU KNOW, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN SORT OF BY MY COMMENTS AFTER HAVING BEEN ENGAGED IN THIS PRETTY INTENSELY FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS IN AND I'M PREPARED TO CONTINUE TO BE ENGAGED IN IT FOR THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS TO ACCOMPLISH ALL THESE GOALS. THANK YOU, SENATOR DAVIS 
          QUESTIONS. I SAW MR. CULVERT FIRST. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          SENATOR, THANK YOU FOR FOR BEING HERE. I AT FIRST I WASN'T COMPLETELY ON BOARD BUT AS I STUDIED THIS OVER THE LAST REALLY THE LAST 30 DAYS I SUPPORT THIS THIS THIS THIS REVIEW AND REALLY I YOU KNOW, I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE BUT I APPRECIATE YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP THAT YOU TAKE IN THIS AND HAVE GOTTEN THIS THIS FAR. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS CLEAR AND MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR IN WHAT I HEARD BY DOING THIS WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO DO A THE WHOLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ALL OVER AGAIN. ANOTHER COUPLE OF MILLION BUCKS. 
          IT DOESN'T PUT A SPOKE IN THAT WHEEL AT ALL. DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY 
          THAT I WOULD DEFER TO MR. WYNN IN MR. COLBERT IN THAT REGARD? >> BUT BASED ON MY UNDERSTANDING MR. COVER UP THE NEED FOR PROCESS AND WHERE WE ARE IN THAT NEPA PROCESS IN TERMS OF RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THAT COUPLED WITH THE NATURE OF THE COMMENTS THAT I'VE HEARD THE OBSERVATIONS I'VE HEARD IT DOESN'T SEEM TO 
          [01:25:04]
ME TO BE MATERIALLY INCONSISTENT WITH WITH WHAT THE D.A. HAS DONE TODAY. 
          AND I DON'T ENVISION NOR IS IT MY INTENTION TO GO AHEAD AND EXPRESS WHATEVER IT IS IT'S DONE. IT'S MORE ON THE NATURE OF A VALUE ADD TRYING TO TO LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN DONE. YOU IN THE COMMUNITY REACT TO THAT AND THEN MAKING ADJUSTMENTS IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS THE PROCESS TO MOVE FORWARD MORE OR LESS ON THE SAME TIMETABLE THAT IT'S ALREADY ON. BUT AGAIN I WOULD REFER TO THIS. I WOULD DEFER MR. COLBERT INTO MR. WYNN IN THAT REGARD. 
          BUT BUT THAT'S THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING BASED ON MY ANALYSIS WHICH ADMITTEDLY IS NOWHERE NEAR AS DETAILED AS THERE'S RIGHT UNDERSTANDING IN THIS SO CALLED. 
          GERSON IT'S LIKE WE NEED TO CREATE A BALANCE THERE NEEDS A KEEP ON REFORM. 
          IT IS SAFETY COMPLETELY. SEC IS A PREFER A OLD BOAT. OK. 
          SURE. MIKE WE'RE BASICALLY JURY VOICE A SEAT IN THE IPOD APOLOGIZE. 
          >> I DIDN'T I DIDN'T I DIDN'T GET A LOT I DIDN'T GET A LOT OF THAT. 
          I APOLOGIZE. WOULD LCD OKATIE LIKE TO WEIGH IN AT THIS POINT? 
          HEAR ME NOW. >> NOW. MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          >> HEY, GOOD, GOOD, GOOD. HEY VI, I'M LELAND COLVIN. >> I'M THE DEPUTY SECRETARY AND YOU KNOW THIS YOU DID IT TO APPRECIATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK THAT KOREA HAS DONE WITH THE COUNSELING AND MOVING THE PROJECT FORWARD ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL AND TO IT I ECHO SENATOR DAVIS'S COMMENTS EARLY ON. 
          FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATIONS TO THE COUNTY THAT SUCCESSFUL APPLICATION AND AWARD OF THE CITY FUNDING. SO IT'S IT'S BEEN A IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING. 
          SO CONGRATULATIONS ON THAT. AND SENATOR DAVIS IS CERTAINLY BEEN IN YOUR CORNER AND BACK IN THE COUNTY OFFICE DURING THAT PROCESS. SO FOR STANDPOINT, YES, WE'RE HAPPY A SENATOR THEY JUST SAID ,YOU KNOW, THERE'S A TRADEOFF ANALYSIS HERE. 
          >> SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT EXPAND AND CASSIDY AND PROTECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT MAKES HILTON HEAD HILL WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET ONE SHOT AT THIS AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A A ONE SHOT AND GET THIS TO GET OBJECT . ALL RIGHT. 
          ON BEHALF OF THE COUNCIL AND WE CERTAINLY WELCOME ANY COMMENTS, ANY INDEPENDENT STUDY THAT WOULD MAKE LIFE BETTER. WE'VE LOOKED A LOT OF ALTERNATIVES. 
          I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF BACKGROUND OUT THERE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE A LOT OF WORK FOR ANY TYPE OF INDEPENDENT CONSULTING FIRM OR AN ENGINEERING FIRM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO LOOK AT IF THERE'S OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT WE DIDN'T CONSIDER THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER. I THINK WE'LL BE HAPPY TO DO THAT AS WELL. 
          MR. CHAIRMAN AND NOW AS THEN AS SENATOR DAVIS SAID IS THE PERFECT TIME TO DO THAT ONCE WE GET TO A PUBLIC HEARING. ALMOST EVERY TIME WE GET TO A PUBLIC HEARING WE COME BACK WITH ADDITIONAL IDEAS THAT WE NEED TO GO. WE NEED TO FLUSH THOSE OUT TO THE NEPA PROCESS POST TO POST THE PUBLIC. SO THIS IS DEFINITELY THE RIGHT TIME. THANK YOU FOR COWEN IS GONNA GET ONE TIME TO GET THIS THING RIGHT. READ YOUR ORIGINAL INPUT IF THAT'S THE LITERAL EXAMPLE. 
          >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. MR. RUDMAN. 
          MR. CHAIRMAN AND LET ME BUILD ON SENATOR DAVIS'S COMMENTS WHICH I THINK WHERE WE'RE RIGHT 
          ON. >> YOU KNOW, MY SENSE COMING INTO THIS WAS THAT THERE A CONSENSUS THAT WE OUGHT TO DO THIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW. HE DESCRIBED IT PROPERLY. 
          I SAT BACK AND I LISTENED AND READ READ WHAT PEOPLE ON DIFFERENT SIDES WERE SAYING AND I CAME DOWN TO THAT THERE WERE REALLY THREE QUESTIONS AND I WON'T GO THROUGH THEM AND A LOT OF DETAIL BECAUSE I SENT YOU A COPY OF IT. BUT THE FIRST QUESTION IS AND IT GETS BACK TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE GROWTH GOING TO BE? THE CALCULATION NOW GIVEN TO 
          THAT THE CALCULATIONS ARE CORRECT. >> BUT AT THE SAME TIME THERE'S PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING GEE, WE REALLY NEED X NUMBER OF X NUMBER OF. 
          >> SO I THINK UNLESS WE FOLD THAT IN SOME FORM INTO THIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW, THAT QUESTION IS GOING TO ALWAYS LINGER. I THINK WE'VE GOT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I THINK SECONDLY I THINK DOTY HAS NARROWED DOWN THE AT GREAT ALTERNATIVE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE THROUGH STONEY TO BEING THE USE OF THE OLD WILD HORSE TO SPREAD THE TRAFFIC OUT AND IMPROVE THE LEVELS OF SERVICE AND THE ONE THAT I WAS PART PUTTING FORWARD IS THE BRIDGING OVER TO 78 AT SPANISH WELLS OLD PORT. 
          [01:30:08]
OH YEAH. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THEY'RE RUNNING THOSE HEAD TO HEAD AND WE'LL SEE WHERE THAT ANALYSIS COMES OUT. GREAT CONFIDENCE THAT THEY'LL FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THE RIGHT ONE. SEEMS TO ME THE THIRD THING THAT'S ON THE TABLE IS IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT NEEDS THAT? SOMEBODY SAYS HEY, I HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE THAT'S NOT BEING CONSIDERED. 
          IT SEEMS TO ME THEY NEED TO COME FORWARD NOW AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO THIS THIS PARTICULAR ALTERNATIVE SHOULD BE EVALUATED AND WITHIN REASON IT NEEDS TO BE ADDED IN. 
          BUT WE CAN'T HAVE PEOPLE COMING BACK SIX MONTHS FROM NOW AND SAYING I HAVE A BRILLIANT IDEA. 
          SO MY SENSE IS THOSE THREE ITEMS FORM THE BASIS OF THIS CONSULTING REVIEW, INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND THEN IT SEEMS TO ME THAT I THINK THE COUNTY COULD STEP OUT DO THAT. 
          FOLD THE MONEY OUT OF THE WATER PROJECT BUT AT THE SAME TIME LEAVE IT OPEN FOR THE TOWN TO DIALOG WITH THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND THEY MAY SEE A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE OVERLOOKING BUT AT LEAST WE'VE GOT THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW UNDERWAY AND THEN MAYBE ONE OR TWO THINGS GET ADDED BY THE TOWN SO THAT THAT'S WHERE I AM. I THINK WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US DO THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL AGREE ON WHAT THE SCOPE IS. THANK YOU, MR. JIM AND TERRY YORK. 
          >> I SAW YOU FIRST AND THEN CHRIS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          SENATOR DAVIS, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU. I ECHO EVERYTHING THAT YOU JUST STATED PARTICULARLY AS IT IMPACTS THE GULF COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY HAS NEGATIVELY IMPACT JUST LIKE YOU'VE OUTLINED HISTORICALLY. AND I THINK IF WE CAN DO SOMETHING TO CORRECT THAT GOING FORWARD WILL BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. 
          SO I WILL SUPPORT WHAT YOU JUST OUTLINED IN PARTICULAR THAT YOU WOULD SEEK ADDITIONAL FUNDING AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU. 
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. MR. HER VERSION THAT MR. DAVIS, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND YOUR CONTINUED LEADERSHIP ON ON THIS AND OTHER ISSUES. I'M CURIOUS. 
          JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I'M CURIOUS IF YOU ARE AWARE THAT PETITION THAT'S GONE AROUND THAT ISLAND FOR THE FOR THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND IF YOU'VE SEEN THE SCOPE THAT WE RECEIVED AS FAR AS WHAT THOSE FOLKS WERE SUGGESTING FOR THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT SCOPE OR IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE THINKING THAT WE SHOULD GO DOWN SOME 
          SORT OF DIFFERENT PATH AS FAR. >> YEAH. >> I HAD THAT BRIEFLY, CHRIS A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT. I GUESS I'D MAKE THESE COMMENTS . 
          I THINK THAT THE FRAMEWORK OF WHAT MR. RODMAN PROVIDED CAN BE, YOU KNOW, A POINT OF DEPARTURE WORKING DRAFT. BUT TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE WERE MADE EARLIER, I THINK YOU COULD MAKE EXPLICIT A FEW THINGS THAT I THINK ARE ALREADY IMPLICIT. 
          I MEAN ONE IS A FRANK ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE SAUDI COMMUNITY HAS AND THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVE HERE TO DO SOME JUSTICE TO THAT COMMUNITY BOTH IN TERMS OF IMPROVING THIS PARTICULAR CORRIDOR OR MAYBE MITIGATING SOME PAST ACTIONS. 
          I THINK AGAIN I THINK IT'S IMPLICIT IN WHAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THAT THE SCOPE BE FROM MOSS CREEK TO THE CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY. BUT I THINK MAYBE AN EXPRESS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THAT FACT IS A GOOD IDEA. I THINK HAVING THAT PROPER SCOPE THEN ALLOWS YOU TO DO SOME COMPUTER SIMULATIONS AND SOME TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TO REALLY HELP YOU UNDERSTAND AND HELP US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE ARE THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE ENDEMIC AT ALL TIMES? ARE THEY ARE THEY ONLY PRESENT AT CERTAIN PEAK HOURS OR ARE THERE ARE THERE WAYS TO ADDRESS THOSE THOSE PEAK HOUR PROBLEMS OTHER THAN ADDING ADDITIONAL LANES I THINK MAY BE MAKING MAKING THOSE SORTS OF THINGS EXPRESS IN THE SCOPE. I THINK YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING CONSULTANT I LIKED THE IDEA OF IT BEING A SHORT TIMEFRAME SIXTY DAYS SO EVERYBODY'S ON NOTICE BOTH ON COUNCIL AND IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ENGAGED IN SOME SERIOUS DUE DILIGENCE HERE AND I THINK THAT CREATES THE SENSE OF URGENCY THAT THIS PROJECT WARRANTS. I THINK THAT IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO MAYBE HAVE A MIDPOINT 30 DAY REVIEW OF WHERE THINGS ARE AND AN UPDATE. SO IF ANY COURSE CORRECTIONS NEED TO BE MADE FOR THE REMAINING 30 DAYS THEY CAN BE DONE IN PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA TO 
          [01:35:05]
HAVE SOME SORT OF AN AD HOC GROUP THAT IS FORMED TO TO SORT OF GUIDE, SUPERVISE OR COORDINATE THE PUBLIC'S INTERACTION WITH THE INDEPENDENT CONSULTING ENGINEER AND ALSO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WHICH I THINK IS ALSO IMPORTANT AND THERE OUGHT TO BE THE SORT OF REPRESENTATION ON THAT OVERSIGHT ENTITY SO THAT EVERYBODY FEELS AS IF YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GETTING AN EQUAL SAY AND HOW THE WORK PRODUCT LOOKS. SO SO BUT WITH THOSE THREE OR FOUR CAVEATS WHICH I THINK ARE PERHAPS IMPLICIT IN WHAT MR. ROBERTS PROPOSED MAKING EXPLICIT I THINK WOULD PROBABLY BE HELPFUL TO THE PROCESS. NOW BEFORE WE WRAP THIS UP. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE FOR EITHER LCD OKATIE OR SOME DAVIS? I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND THE OTHERS. OK. 
          MY COMMENTS ARE THIS OK? NO ONE WHO IS GOING TO TAKE THE LEAD FOR THIS INDEPENDENT REVIEW IS THIS HILTON HEAD. THAT SHOULD BE TAKING THE LEAD WITH US SUPPORTING THAT IS IT? COUNTY COUNCIL THAT SHOULD BE TAKING LEAD WITHHELD NED. NUMBER TWO, WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR THIS? IS THIS GOING TO BE PAID BY HILTON HEAD? IS THIS GOING TO BE PAID BY COUNTY COUNCIL? IS THIS GOING TO BE PAID JOINTLY? WHO IS GOING TO MAKE THE DECISION AS TO THE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WOULD BE OR THE INDEPENDENT PERSON TO EVALUATE THIS? I THINK THOSE ARE PERTINENT THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DECIDE IF WE ARE TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          ANY COMMENTS IF YOU CAN OUT OF IT APPROPRIATE FOR ME? >> I MEAN I AM A DECISION MAKER HERE BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT BEAUFORT COUNTY WAS THE PRIMARY APPLICANT IN GETTING THE 120 MILLION DOLLAR GRANT FROM THE CIB WITH THE TOWN OF AND HAD OF COURSE PLAYING A SUPPORTING ROLE. I WOULD SUGGEST PERHAPS THAT THAT BEAUFORT COUNTY INITIALLY TAKE THE LEAD BUT WITH THE STRONG SUGGESTION TO THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD THAT IT'S STEP AND DEFRAY SOME OF THAT COST. BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL POINT ENTITY THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME KANGAROO CITY BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY BEING THE CIB APPLICANT AND BEAUFORT COUNTY BEING THE ONE TO RETAIN AT LEAST INITIALLY WITH CONSULTATION. 
          WELL, IN THE PROCESS OF INPUT FROM THE TOWN BUT THE COUNTY BE THE ONE THAT'S THE ACTUAL PROCURING ENTITY IN REGARD TO THE. THE INDEPENDENT CONSULTING ENGINEER AND TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. BUT AGAIN, THOSE ARE JUST MY THOUGHTS. OTHERWISE YOU COULD GO ABOUT I'M SURE I'D APPRECIATE YOUR 
          INPUT. >> MR. RUDMAN, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP THERE. 
          >> I DO BELIEVE THE COUNTIES THE LOGICAL ONE TO DO IT. I BELIEVE THE COUNTY IS IN THE BEST POSITION TO FUND IT THROUGH FUNDS THAT ARE BEING PUT INTO INTO THE COURT OR ANY WAY. AND I THINK MAYBE A WAY TO LEAVE IT WOULD BE FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR TO COME BACK WITH A SCOPE FOR CONSIDERING EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID 
          TODAY AND TURN THAT AROUND FAIRLY FAIRLY QUICKLY. >> SO THAT WOULD BE MY 
          PROPOSAL. MR. CHAIRMAN, OK. >> DO YOU WANT TO PUT THAT IN 
          THE FORM OF A MOTION? >> I WOULD MOVE THAT THE WE ASK THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO DEVELOP A SCOPE WORK CONSIDERING WHAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED TODAY AND IN ORDER TO LAUNCH AN INDEPENDENT VIEW OF THE COURT OR THE PROJECT OVER THE NEXT 60 DAYS. 
          >> THIS IS YOKO SECONDED. >> THANK YOU. IT HAS BEEN DULY MOVED AND 
          SECONDED. >> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION BY MR. CHAIRMAN MR. FALLIN? THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, I LIKE THE IDEA OF AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND I'M ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT STAFF MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. 
          I WANT TO SAY THAT THAT I I I ENDORSE THIS IDEA. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE POINTS RAISED BY THE PEOPLE IN THE EDITION THAT CHRIS REFERENCED A LITTLE WHILE EARLIER ARE DRESSED IN THE SCOPE OF WORK AND THAT THAT BE INCLUDED IN THAT THE 
          PREPARATION OF OF THAT SCOPE FOR. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          CHRIS, I WOULD ECHO THAT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AS WELL THAT THOSE FOLKS WHO SIGN OUR 
          [01:40:03]
PETITION I SUSPECT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE AFTER THE LETTER FOR PRESENTATION TONIGHT THAT THEY ARE HEARD AS FAR AS OUR SCOPE OF WORK. BUT ALSO THEN I'M NOT SURE IF THIS NEEDS ME AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION OR NOT BUT WE HAVE A 30 DAY REVIEW. 
          SO IN THE MIDPOINT OF THAT REVIEW PROCESS THAT WE GET AN UPDATE WHERE MR. DAVIS SUGGESTED THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CHANGE COURSE, EXPAND THE SCOPE THESE DECREASES GO WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. BUT JUST SO WE HAVE SOME SORT OF A COURSE CORRECTING 
          MECHANISM IF IF WE. ALL RIGHT. >> SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND I CAN ON THE FLOOR. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS. CAN I CALL THE QUESTION? DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? I THINK IT WOULD BE WITHOUT OBJECTION, SIR. 
          >> I DON'T. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO OBJECT? I DON'T THINK SO. 
          SO I'M GOING TO SAY THAT THE IT'S BEEN DULY MOTIONED IN SECOND AND THAT IT WILL BE APPROVED WITHOUT OBJECTION. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SAYING NO OBJECTIONS? THIS ITEM HAS BEEN APPROVED. NOW WE DID RECEIVE A LETTER THAT WAS JUST PUT UP ON THE SCREEN FROM THE COASTAL CONSERVATION LEAGUE REGARDING THIS FUEL. 
          PUT THAT BACK UP, SARAH WITHOUT ME FULLY READING THIS. >> THIS WILL BE SENT AT THREE COUNCIL COUNCILMAN MEMBER THERE COMMENDING THE WORK OF CRAIG WYNNE AND HIS TEAM. 
          THEY'RE MORE RIGOROUS REVIEW. THEY'RE SUPPORTING THE INITIATIVE TO BRING INDEPENDENT CONSULTANTS SO THEY'RE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. AND THIS COMES FROM JESSICA 
          WHITE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> WHAT AM I TO IF I MIGHT? YES, I ASSUME BRIAN IS PROBABLY HAVING PROBABLY FACILITIES MEETING NEXT MONDAY AND THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME IF THE ADMINISTRATOR CAN GET IT DONE AT THAT POINT IN TIME TO COME BACK AND FOR US TO LET THAT COMMITTEE ENDORSE THE SCOPE OF WORK AND WE'RE OFF AND RUNNING. 
          >> I'D BE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT SUIT. OK. 
          [Additional Item]
          AND ASK FOR IT. ALL RIGHT. >> WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND GET THROUGH SOME OF THE AGENDA. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THIS AGENDA UNLESS THERE IS A MOTION SECOND TO EXTEND BEYOND THE 8 O'CLOCK HOUR IF THERE IS NOT. 
          LET'S FIND THAT OUT NOW SO THAT WE CAN TAILOR THE REMAINDER OF THE AGENDA HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT. IT IS NOW 742. IS THERE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE AGENDA PASSED THE 8 O'CLOCK HOUR. MR. RODMAN I WOULD MOVE THAT WE EXTEND FOR NOT MORE THAN ONE HOUR TO THE 9 O'CLOCK SO WE CAN TAKE CARE OF SOME PERTINENT 
          BUSINESS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DELAY. >> SO I MOVED TO THE END OF THE 
          NINE O'CLOCK HOUR. >> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. OK. 
          IT HAS BEEN DULY MOTIONED IN SECOND TO EXTEND THE MEETING FROM 8 TO 9 P.M. THIS EVENING. 
          I ASSUME THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME OBJECTIONS TO THAT. DO I NEED TO A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS? YES, SIR. OK. 
          IT WAS DULY MOTIONED BY MR. RUDMAN. SO YOU WILL VOTE FIRST. 
          MR. RODMAN! YAY! MISS HOWARD? YEAH. MR. COVERT. HI. 
          MR. DAWSON. YES. MR. FAREWELLING. 
          NO. MR. GLOVER. NO. 
          >> MR. HERBERT SCHON? NO. >> MR. LAWSON. 
          MARK LAWSON. >> YES. MR. MCKELLEN? YES. MR. SOMERVILLE? YES. 
          6 7 CHAIR PAXMAN SAYS YES. THE MOTION IS ACCEPTED. EIGHT YES AND THREE. 
          NO. WE WILL ACCEPT EXTEND TO NO LATER THAN NINE O'CLOCK. 
          OK. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP THE CONSENT AGENDA AFTER WE DO SOME OTHER BUSINESS BECAUSE SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO DO WILL AFFECT THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM NUMBER ELEVEN FIRST I'M GOING TO TAKE MY LEAVE. 
          >> IS THAT OK? I'M GOING TO DO THE SENATOR DREW DAVIS. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ATTENDING. WE APPRECIATE ALL YOU DO. 
          [11. NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING CDBG APPLICATION FOR THE WHALE BRANCH SIDEWALK PROJECT]
          >> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. OK. 
          >> NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN APPLICATION. NOTICE IS BY GIVING THAT GIVEN THAT ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14 AT 6:00 PM THE BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN APPLICATION TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT 
          [01:45:03]
OF COMMERCE GRANTS ADMISSION ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 18 20 20 FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 
          BLOCK GRANT. >> THIS MEETING IS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE OF HEALTH REASONS BUT IS AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY. PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED IN WRITING TO THE CLERK OF COUNCIL AND CITIZENS CAN ALSO COMMENT DURING THE MEETING THROUGH FACEBOOK LIVE. BEAUFORT COUNTY IS REQUESTING APPROXIMATELY FIVE HUNDRED AND SIXTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS TO US EXTEND A PROTEST PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY ALONG DETOUR ROAD TO SEABROOK ROAD IN THE SEABROOK AREA. THIS PROJECT, IF FUNDED WILL BENEFIT APPROXIMATELY 85 RESIDENTS OF WHICH AT LEAST 51 PERCENT ARE M L M I. 
          WHICH MEANS LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS. THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND THE MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL'S CITIZEN PARTITIONS PARTICIPATION PLAN DEVELOPED IN ANTICIPATION OF PARTICIPATION IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT C D B G PROGRAM. SO THAT HAS BEEN DULY NOTED THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT APPLICATION. OK, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A SERIES OF ITEMS FIRST ITEM 
          [12. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC): ARTICLE 5, SECTION 5.3.20 APPLICABILITY– TO APPLY ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES TO TWO-FAMILY (DUPLEX) RESIDENTIAL]
NUMBER TWELVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING. AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 5 SECTION 5 DOT THREE DOT TWENTY APPLICABILITY TO APPLY ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS 
          AND GUIDELINES TO TWO. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I FELT RIGHT TO INTERRUPT YOU REAL QUICK. 
          I BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR YOU TO ASK IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED REGARDING NUMBER ELEVEN BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING 
          TONIGHT. >> YES. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO, SIR. I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. OK. 
          >> THANK YOU. YES, YOU ARE. YOU ARE CORRECT. 
          SO TO FINISH IT THIS IS THE GUIDELINES FOR TWO FAMILY DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL. 
          ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM? >> SEE? 
          [13. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT THE FRIPP ISLAND PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT, SOUTH CAROLINA, MAY ISSUE NOT EXCEEDING $1,550,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF THE SAID FINDING AND AUTHORIZATION.]
NONE. WE WILL CLOSE. ITEM NUMBER TWELVE. 
          ITEM NUMBER 13 IS A PUBLIC HEARING. AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT THE FRIPP ISLAND PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT S CAROLINA MAY ISSUE NOT EXCEEDING ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF SAID FINDING AN AUTHORIZATION. 
          ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM? NO, SIR. 
          [14. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH "SHORT TERM HOME RENTAL" AS A SPECIAL USE (Part 1 of 2)]
          I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY SAYING NONE. >> ITEM 14 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE MENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH SHORT TERM RENTAL AS A SPECIAL USE. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT 
          REGARDING THIS ITEM? >> NO SIR. I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. 
          BUT IS IS COUNCILMAN RICKOVER CHECKING FACEBOOK? I DON'T HAVE IT. 
          I WAS JUST SURMISED MONITORING AK. >> I'VE GOT IT UP AND THERE'S 
          [17. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY BY BEAUFORT COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA ACTING THROUGH BEAUFORT COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OF NOT EXCEEDING $20,000,000.00 PROMISSORY NOTE AND A CREDIT AGREEMENT; AUTHORIZING PROPER OFFICERS TO DO ALL THINGS NECESSARY OR ADVISABLE; AND OTHER MATTERS INCIDENTAL THERETO.]
NOTHING THERE. OK. FINALLY ITEM NUMBERS. 
          ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTE AND DELIVERY BY BEAUFORT COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA ACTING THROUGH THE BEAUFORT COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL OF NOT EXCEEDING 20 MILLION DOLLAR PROMISSORY NOTE AND A CREDIT AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING PROPER OFFICERS TO ALL THINGS NECESSARY OR ADVISABLE AND OTHER MATTERS INCIDENTAL. THEIR TOO. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ITEM? NO, SIR. I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY. 
          OK. WE'LL CLOSE THAT. THAT MEANS THAT ITEMS NUMBER 12 13, 14 AND 17 ALONG WITH ITEMS. NO. 19, 20, 21, 22. 
          TWENTY THREE TWENTY SEVEN TWENTY NINE THIRTY THIRTY ONE AND THIRTY TWO WILL NOW BE 
          MOVED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> MR. CHAIRMAN I OBJECT TO THAT. 
          I BELIEVE THAT ITEM NUMBER 14 SHOULD BE VOTED ON SEPARATELY. AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THAT MATTER. THAT'S RIGHT. 
          >> YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT. YEAH. SO WE'LL MOVE ALL THOSE. 
          [14. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH "SHORT TERM HOME RENTAL" AS A SPECIAL USE (Part 2 of 2)]
BUT ITEM NUMBER 14 WILL TAKE ITEM NUMBER 14 NOW BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN AND I RECUSE MYSELF. 
          >> YOU CERTAINLY CAN. I'LL HAVE THE AUDIO ON. >> SO YOU DON'T NEED TO NOTIFY 
          ME WHEN YOU'RE DEAD . ALL RIGHT. >> AND YOU WILL FILL OUT THE 
          [01:50:01]
          PROPER FORMAT TOO FOR THE REASON FOR YOUR RECUSAL. >> SARAH'S ALREADY GOT THAT, 
          SIR. EXCELLENT. >> THANK YOU. 
          OK. SO I WILL HAVE A MOTION. AND SECOND FOR ITEM NUMBER 14. 
          SO MOVE. >> MR. CHAIRMAN. OK. 
          MR. MCKELLEN, YOU MADE THE MOTION A CYCLE. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. 
          I HAD A HARD TIME ON MEETING MISS HOWARD. YOU MADE THE SECOND. 
          IT HAS BEEN DULY MOTIONED. AND SECOND FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH SHORT TERM RENTAL AS A SPECIAL USE. WITHOUT OBJECTION THIS WILL BE APPROVED AS STATED. 
          ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SEEING NO OBJECTIONS? THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED. 
          [10. Consent Agenda]
WE ARE NOW GOING TO GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA NOW CONSISTS OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ONE THROUGH EIGHT PLUS ITEMS THAT I INDICATED BEFORE NOW. ITEMS NUMBER WELL 13 17 19 20 21 22 23, 27, 29, 30, 31 AND 
          32. >> MAY I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA? 
          >> SO MOVE. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS BRIAN FLOWING. 
          BRIAN FLOWING MAKES THE MOTION. >> MAY I HAVE A SECOND I'LL SECOND THE MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. HOWE MAKES THE SECOND. OKAY. 
          IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION SEEING NO DISCUSSION THIS WILL BECOME MR. RODMAN? 
          YES. >> I DO THINK FOR THEIR VIEWING PUBLIC THAT YOU OUGHT TO QUICKLY READ THROUGH THE ITEMS I REALIZE IT'S A LONG LIST. I REALIZE WE'RE TIGHT ON TIME BUT IT EVEN IF YOU PARAPHRASE HIM I THINK IT'S USEFUL FOR THE PUBLIC. 
          >> OK. ITEM 12 WHAT A TEXT MEANT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL 13 WAS THE SECOND READING FOR THE FRIPP ISLAND GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF A MILLION 550. WE'VE DONE 14 17 IS A SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE FOR A TWENTY THOUSAND TWENTY MILLION DOLLAR PROMISSORY NOTE FOR HILTON HEAD HOSPITAL. 
          NINETEEN IS A FIRST READING TO AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE A MULTI COUNTY PROPERTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND JASPER COUNTY RELATING TO THE TRASK E SOLDIER PROJECT TWENTY IS THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATE TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AMERICA 21 IS A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF AN EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE RELOCATED DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE GRANTOR 22 AS A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. APPENDIX B TO REMOVE THE MAXIMUM LOTS EIS REQUIREMENT OR MINOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS IN THE D 3 GENERAL NEIGHBORHOOD THE D FOR MIXED USE THE VILLAGE CENTER AND THE GATEWAY QUARTER DISTRICTS UNDER FUSCA ISLAND 23 AS A FIRST READING REGARDING A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT REZONING REQUEST FOR EIGHTEEN POINT THREE ACRES AT THE INTERSECTION OF BAY PINES ROAD AND LAUREL BAY FROM ROAD FROM T TO RURAL AND S1 INDUSTRIAL TO C FOR COMMUNITY CENTER MIXED USE. DISTRICT 27 IS A CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MITCHELL MITCHELL VILLE FREEDOM PARK MASTER PLAN TWENTY NINE THIRTY THIRTY ONE AND THIRTY TWO ARE APPOINTMENTS OF GEORGE RAFFERTY TO THE FUSCA ISLAND FIRE DISTRICT VIRGINIA JENNIE COSE ACT TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. DAVID MIXON THE AIRPORT'S BOARD AND WHO'S TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ALONG WITH THE ORIGINAL CONSENT AND AGENDA ITEMS. SO THEY'VE BEEN DULY APPROVED BY MOTION AND SECOND ON WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION THE D WILL BE OFFERED WITHOUT OBJECTION. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SEEING 
          NO OBJECTION THE CONSENT AGENDA IS PROVE APPROVED. >> OK. 
          [15. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PEPPER HALL AND OKATIE RIVER PARK JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT]
          >> THEREFORE WE ARE NOW GOING TO GO TO THE NEXT ITEM WHICH WILL HAVE SOME DISCUSSION IS A PUBLIC HEARING. AND SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PEPPER HALL AND OKATIE RIVER JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. 
          THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS. IT IS TIME FOR US TO HAVE A 
          [01:55:04]
CONCLUSION TO THIS. SO I AM LOOKING FOR A MOTION BY SOMEONE TO AMEND BECAUSE IT SAYS WE'RE AMENDING THE CARMACK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT . 
          >> CHAIRMAN MR. RUDMAN THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE TO MAKE A MOTION AND I THINK SORRY IF YOU HAVE IT YOU MIGHT PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN SO PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT IT AT THE SAME TIME LEADING UP TO THE MOTION. LET ME JUST GIVE A BRIEF HISTORY OF KIND OF WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE WE GOT YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE. 
          WE GOT SOME FOLKS THAT ARE TUNING IN THE HISTORY OF IT WAS THAT SOMETIME BACK RURAL AND CRITICAL ACQUIRED THE 18 ACRES ALONG THE RIVER AS THE BUFFER AND IT DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY WE ENDED UP AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENT AREA CHANGING THE ZONING TO. 
          >> AND SO IT WAS BY RIGHT ZONING THAT'S IN EFFECT TODAY. SO THAT'S NOT HERE. 
          THE CONCEPT OF THE PARK REALLY CAME FROM TONY CHRISTO WHO IS NOW RETIRED AND WHEN WE GOT TO FIRST READING BACK IN 2008 CAME THE INITIAL INITIAL CONCEPT WAS THAT THE FOUR POINT EIGHT MILLION FOR THE PARKS AND THE ROAD WOULD BE PAID FOR 100 PERCENT BY THE COUNTY. 
          >> THE STAFF AND I GIVE CREDIT FOR THIS. YOU SUGGESTED THAT THERE OUGHT TO BE SOME COST SHARING BECAUSE THERE WAS BENEFIT FOR BOTH PARTIES AND THE THE NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE IS PART OF PUTTING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TOGETHER. 
          AGREED TO DO THAT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WHATEVER ASSESSMENTS WERE PUT IN PLACE THAT NEEDED TO BE REASONABLE AND NOT AFFECT THEIR MARKETABILITY. 
          SO ALL THAT WAS INCORPORATED IN SECOND READING AND THEN I PASSED THE THIRD READING I GUESS BACK IN 2018 EARLY 2019. SO THE BASICALLY WE ENTERED INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MR. GRAVES. IT WAS NOT A LEGAL PARTNERSHIP BUT IT WAS KIND OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND THE BENEFITS ESSENTIALLY WERE THREEFOLD. 
          ONE IS THAT THE COUNTY WAS ABLE TO CONVERT THE BUFFER INTO I THINK WHAT'S GOING TO BE AN ABSOLUTELY GREAT PASSIVE PARK IS CERTAINLY MR. GRAVES THAT ENHANCE HIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE PROXIMITY TO THE PARK. AND I THINK IT WAS A COST REDUCTION FOR BOTH PARTIES SPECIFIC PRESENT PROVISIONS WERE PUT INTO THE AGREEMENT AND THAT WAS THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE ACCESS ROADS THAT WERE INTERNAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND MR. GRAVES PROVIDED CERTAIN RAILWAYS EASEMENTS, TRAILS, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PARKING AND THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME SHARING OF THE THE TWO ROADS THAT ARE INVOLVED. SO THE NEXT THING THAT THAT KIND OF POPPED UP WAS LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION AND ESSENTIALLY THE EXISTING CONDITION ALONG TO 78 IS THERE'S A SIGNAL AT HAMPTON ROADS WHICH WILL BE THE PRIMARY 
          ENTRANCE TO THE DEVELOPMENT. >> GRAY'S ROAD IS RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT AND THAT PARTICULAR SEGMENT OF 278 IS PROBABLY PROJECTED TO BE THE HIGHEST TRAFFIC COUNT IN THE IN THE COUNTY. SO THAT PRE PARK PLAN THAT MR. GRAVES SAID WAS TO USE THE SIGNALS INTERSECTION FOR THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE AND EXIT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT WHEN THE PARK PLAN CAME ALONG THEN IT WAS ADDED WAS TO PAVE GRADES ROAD AND ADD AN ACCESS ROAD THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL AREA TO CONNECT TO THE PASSIVE PARK PART OF THE TRAFFIC SITUATION THAT WE'RE FACED WITH. THERE IS SO CALLED THE U-TURN DILEMMA IF YOU'RE VIEWED THE BIGGER PICTURE. GRAVES ROAD IS A RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING OR GOING ABOUT HALF OF THE TIME IT WORKS FOR A WHILE BECAUSE THEY'RE COMING FROM A DIRECTION CAN MAKE A RIGHT TURN WHEN THEY REALLY WANTED TO MAKE A LEFT TURN TO GO WHERE THEY CAME FROM THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN AND THEN GO TO GO UP A SHORT WAY, GET OVER THREE LANES OF TRAFFIC AND MAKE A U TURN AT THE SIGNAL OR IF YOU'RE COMING FROM SUN CITY YOU WOULD DO THE SAME THING DOWN TOWARD THE CAR DEALERSHIPS. SO I THINK WHAT REALLY HAPPENS LONG TERM WE'VE LEARNED IS THAT THE TRAFFIC TO THE PARK WILL PROBABLY BE SPLIT ABOUT 50 50 BETWEEN THAT COMING FROM THE USING THAT THE APPS ARE USING GRAVE'S ROAD AND THE OTHER HALF USING THE INTERNAL ROADS THROUGH THE THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE THEN CAME TO THE POINT OF THE START IN AUGUST SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT THAT WAS FOLDED INTO THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT AND IS PART OF IMPLEMENTING THAT. 
          [02:00:02]
THE STAFF ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT WE HIRE AN OUTSIDE FIRM TO DEVELOP THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT IN WHAT'S CALLED THE CHARLESTON TERM AND THEY ARE EXPERTS IN THESE AREAS AND BUT THEY GET ASKED THAT GRAVES GO AHEAD AND ACTUALLY HIRE BECAUSE IT WAS MORE CONVENIENT THAN 
          ACTUALLY HAVE HIM HIRE THE FIRM. >> SO IN A SENSE IT WORKING FOR BOTH OF US. WHICH FIRM LOOKED AT IT AND CAME UP WITH A RECOMMENDED TO TWO POINT FOUR MILLION DOLLARS OVER 30 YEARS FOR THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. THE STAFF AGREED THAT THE COST ALLOCATION WAS REASONABLE. 
          BUT AS WE GOT INTO IT IT REALLY PROVED TO BE CONTROVERSIAL AND CUMBERSOME AND THEN NOT BRIAN SUGGESTED THAT PERHAPS A WAY RATHER THAN HAVE THIS LONG COLLECTION PERIOD IN THIS ASSESSMENT DISTRICT THAT MAYBE THERE WAS A WAY THAT THE COUNTY COULD GET PAID BACK. 
          AT THE TIME THAT MR. GRAVES ENDED UP NEGOTIATING AND CLOSING WITH THE SUB DEVELOPERS ,IT PROBABLY BE FIVE, SIX, SEVEN SUB DEVELOPMENTS THAT MAKE THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AND HE ASKED IF I WOULD DISCUSS THAT WITH MR. GRAVES WHICH I WAS DELIGHTED TO DO. 
          AND IN THE COURSE OF THAT CONVERSATION I SUGGESTED TO MR. GRAVES THAT IF WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT, MAYBE ANOTHER STEP WOULD BE TO JUST HAVE HIM FINANCED THE CONSTRUCTION FOR BOTH THE ROAD AND THE PARK. AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT IT INTERNALLY AMONG ALL OF OURSELVES IN PRIOR MEETINGS, I THINK WE ALL PRETTY MUCH CONCLUDED THAT THE BEST THING WE COULD DO WOULD BE TO SCRAP THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT CONCEPT AND MOVE TO A MR. GRAVES 
          PROVIDING THE FINANCING. >> SO IN TERMS OF THE MOTION, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S UP ON THE SCREEN OR NOT. I SEE THAT IT IS. SO LET ME KIND OF READ THIS IF I MIGHT. THE MOTION OF COURSE IS TO AMEND THE PEPPER HALL AND OKATIE RIVER PARK JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1ST OF 2019. 
          AS FOLLOWS WITH EIGHT POINT NINE POINTS AT THE FIRST BEING THAT THE ESTIMATED ONE POINT ONE MILLION COSTS FOR THE RIVER PARK IMPROVEMENTS BE PAID FROM RURAL AND CRITICAL FUNDS AND MR. GRAVES HAS CONSENTED TO MAKE A PERSONAL CONTRIBUTION OF FIFTY THOUSAND TO THE PARK. 
          IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT HE SHOULD MAKE SOME CONTRIBUTION. POINT NUMBER TWO IS THE ESTIMATED THREE POINT SEVEN MILLION COST FOR THE GRAVES AND THE PRIMARY PARK ACCESS ROADS BE SPLIT WITH GRAVES BEARING TWO POINT FOUR MILLION AND THE COUNTY BURYING THE REMAINING ONE POINT THREE MILLION. POINT NUMBER THREE. ANY COST INCREASES OR DECREASES IN EITHER OF THESE TWO PROJECTS WOULD BE SPLIT IN PROPORTION TO THE ORIGINAL PROFIT SHARING NUMBER FOR GRAVES CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE DESIGNATED AS THE SINGLE SOURCE CONTRACT FOR BOTH THE ROAD AND PARK IMPROVEMENTS AS STAFF IS CONCLUDED THAT THE BEAUFORT COUNTY AND SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AND PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 
          NUMBER FIVE. THE SCOPE OF THE WORK FOR BOTH PROJECTS IS TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNTY NUMBER SIX THE COUNTY ACCEPTS MR. GRAVES. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY OFFER TO FINANCE BOTH PROJECTS NUMBER 7. THE COUNTY IS TO REIMBURSE GRAVES CONSTRUCTION AS THE WORK IS COMPLETED ON THE ROADS AS COMPLETION IN FIVE STAGES. NUMBER ONE WHEN THE DESIGN IS FINISHED NUMBER TWO IS WHEN THE SITE WORK IS DONE. NUMBER THREE IS WHEN THE BASE COURSE OF THE ROADS IS LAID DOWN. NUMBER FOUR IS WHEN THE FINAL PAVING IS DONE AND THEN FIVE WOULD BE AT FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND THE COUNTY SHALL REIMBURSE THE GRAVES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST AND THE PROPER CERTIFICATION NUMBER EIGHT. THE CONCEPT OF ESTABLISHING THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO RECOUP COUNTY COSTS FOR THE ROADS AND PARKS TO REVIEW BE REMOVED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND NUMBER NINE. GRAVES TO BE REIMBURSED FOR LEGAL COST INCURRED IN INVESTIGATING THE FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISH SUCH A DISTINCT SUCH A DISTRICT. AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNTY SALT JUST A COUPLE OF CONCLUDING COMMENTS ON ON THAT NUMBER ONE RELATIVE TO THE PASSAGE. 
          THE ONE MILLION THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING COME OUT OF RURAL AND CRITICAL. 
          I THINK THE KEY POINTS ARE THAT IT IS A REGIONAL PARK. I THINK WHEN THE CHARLESTON GROUP LOOKED AT IT THEY SAID IT DIDN'T BELONG IN THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. 
          IT REALLY SOMETHING THE COUNTY SHOULD DO. WE HIRED ANOTHER EXPERT, MR. BEN JOHNSON IN MY INTERPRETATION THAT HE REACHED PRETTY MUCH THE SAME CONCLUSION . THERE WILL ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BUT IT DOESN'T APPLY DIRECTLY HERE. IT WILL GENERATE PROBABLY ANOTHER 900 THOUSAND IN PARK 
          [02:05:02]
IMPACT FEE FEES TO BE USED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. AND LASTLY, GRAVES IS PROVIDING PARKING TRAILS, UTILITY HOOKUPS AND SO ON. RELATIVE TO THE ROADS, THE PROPOSAL WAS THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PAY ONE POINT THREE OR THIRTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE THIRTY THREE POINT SEVEN MILLION NOW. GRAVES OBVIOUSLY GETS SOME BENEFIT WITH HIS PROXIMITY TO THE PARK AND HE DOES GET AN IMPROVED ROAD BACK BACKDOOR ENTRANCE TO HIS DEVELOPMENT. I THINK THE COUNTY GAINS A COUPLE OF THINGS THROUGH THAT THROUGH THIS WHOLE DEAL. THE STORMWATER ISSUE THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME GETS SOLVED STARTING TO GET SOME WATER AND SEWER CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE OF THE NORTH. 
          AND WE KNOW WE HAVE SOME FAILING SYSTEMS UP THERE. OBVIOUSLY SOME EASEMENTS BEING PROVIDED. WE'RE GETTING ROADS, IMPROVED ROADS AND AS A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY LIVE TO THE NORTH, WE KNOW THAT THEY'LL PROBABLY BE DEVELOPMENT THERE AT SOME POINT IN TIME THAT WE'LL USE THE ROAD AND MAYBE THERE'LL BE A BACKDOOR TO BERKELEY. AS I POINTED OUT EARLIER, THE ABOUT HALF OF THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT TO GET TO THE PARK BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY ONE SIGNAL IN THE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ON GRAVE'S ROAD. SO IN A SENSE GRATEFUL AND ALL BY ITSELF PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE WORKED. ALSO GRAVES ASSUMING BOTH THE RISK AND THE INTERESTS OF DOING THE FINANCING AND THAT INTEREST IS PROBABLY NORTH OF TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS THE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD PRODUCE IN THE RANGE OF ONE POINT NINE ROAD IMPACT FEES. AND LASTLY I WOULD SAY THAT IF THE COUNTY IF THE DEVELOPMENT WAS NOT TAKING PLACE AND WE WERE GOING TO DEVELOP THAT PARK WE WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE THE THREE POINT SEVEN THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE ROAD COSTS WOULD PROBABLY GO UP BECAUSE IT WOULD RAISE ROSE WOULD PROBABLY GO FURTHER TO THE NORTH AND WE WOULD HAVE TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS TO GET OVER TO THE PARK. SO REALLY IT'S GOING TO BE COSTING US PROBABLY TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF WHAT IT WOULD COST US IF WE WERE DOING IT ON OUR 
          OWN. >> SO FOR THOSE VARIOUS REASONS ,MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK SHE VOTED TWO POINT FOUR MILLION FOR THE FOR THE GRAVES TO CONTRIBUTE AT ONE POINT THREE 
          FOR THE COUNTY IS EQUITABLE. >> THANK SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN. IT HAS BEEN DULY MOTIONED AND 
          SECOND NOW WE'RE OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND DISCUSSION. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL I'LL I'LL 
          LET MR. SOMERVILLE SPEAK FIRST. >> GO AHEAD. MR. SOME REVOLT. 
          >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. RODMAN'S EXPLANATION OF LAST FRIDAY REMINDS ME THE OLD JOKE ABOUT THE BLACKMAIL BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE UNITED STATES. 
          UNITED STATES WON THE TRACK MEET AND THE NEXT MORNING THE IN THE HEADLINE READ U.S. 
          RUSSIA COMES IN SECOND THE US SECOND TO LAST. THERE ARE A LOT OF WAYS THERE A LOT OF WAYS TO TALK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. BUT MR. RODMAN'S WAY IN MY WAY ARE VERY DIFFERENT. THIS THIS AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE WITH MR. REAGAN WAS NEGOTIATED SEVERAL YEARS AGO OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND DURING THOSE NEGOTIATIONS EVERYTHING THAT EACH PARTY BROUGHT TO THE TABLE WAS DISCUSSED AND GIVEN CREDIT FOR IT WAS VERY GENEROUS TOWARDS MR. GRAVES. HE WAS ABLE TO PUT HIS DETENTION POND FOR HIS STORMWATER RUNOFF ON ON PROPERTY THAT THE COUNTY BOUGHT FOR FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AN ACRE EXTREMELY GENEROUS. 
          MR. GRAVES RECEIVED A WAIVER BUFFERS AGAINST THE PARK FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL WHICH GIVES HIM A LOT MORE SPACE TO BUILD HIS DEVELOPMENT . 
          MR. GRAVES GOT US TO AGREE TO PAY 50 PERCENT OF THE STORMWATER COSTS OF 50 PERCENT OF THE STORMWATER COST AND WE HAD A STORMWATER ENGINEER LOOK AT IT AND SAY WE REALLY ONLY ONLY OWED 3 PERCENT. MY POINT IS THAT MR. GRAVES GOT A REALLY, REALLY GOOD DEAL. 
          ALL WE GOT OUT OF THE DEAL WAS THAT WE WOULD WE WOULD BE ABLE TO RECOVER THE COSTS OF THE PARK AND THE ROADS OVER USING A RIP AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. SO SOMEHOW OR OTHER OUR BEING ABLE TO RECOVER FOUR POINT EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS USING IT AN IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT HAS BEEN CHANGED NOW UNDER MR GARDNER'S PROPOSAL TO INSTEAD OF GETTING ALL OUR MONEY BACK WE PUT OUT WE END UP PUTTING IN TWO POINT FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ONE POINT THREE MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE ROADS AND A ONE POINT ONE MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE PARK. 
          SO I THINK THIS IS A VERY BAD DEAL AS PROPOSED BY MR.. MR. RODMAN. 
          I THINK IT'S JUST GIVING AWAY MORE OF THE VERY LITTLE BIT THAT WE GOT OUT OF THE 
          [02:10:03]
NEGOTIATIONS. I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE MEANINGFUL NEGOTIATIONS AND MR. GRAVES SHOULD PUT SOME OF THE THINGS ON THE TABLE THAT HE GOT SUCH AS THE THINGS THAT I JUST MENTIONED. HE HASN'T DONE THAT. HE'S ONLY ASKED FOR PART OF OUR THE THINGS THAT WE GOT OUT OF THE NEGOTIATION. IN ADDITION TO WHAT HE GOT, I DON'T THINK IT'S EQUITABLE AT ALL. I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST IT AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE OTHER MEMBERS TO VOTE AGAINST IT AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU, MISS HOWARD. >> YES, I'D. I'M NOT GOING TO ADD MUCH TO THAT, BUT I I WANT PEOPLE TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN THIS VOTE WAS TAKEN NONE NONE OF THE A LOT OF THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE NOT ON COUNCIL AND DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON IT. IT WAS A BAD DEAL IS STILL A BAD DEAL. 
          IT'S NOT WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN OUR PACKET. WHAT MUST MR. RODMAN'S PRESENTING AND YES, TONY COSTELLO DID PROPOSE PART BUT THAT NEVER WAS. 
          WE BOUGHT THAT PROPERTY AS A BUFFER AND FOR WATER QUALITY WE DID NOT BUY IT FOR A PARK. 
          THAT'S AN ADDED BENEFIT. AND MR. ROBINSON, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THAT. BUT WE THE COUNTY PAID A PREMIUM PRICE FOR THAT PROPERTY AND WE'RE NOT. THIS IS NOT A GOOD DEAL FOR US WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AND I 
          WILL BE VOTING AGAINST IT. THANK YOU AND THE OTHERS. >> MR. COHEN. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> I AM GOING TO HAVE TO AGREE WITH MR. RODMAN THAT YOU KNOW THIS THIS IN MY OPINION THIS IS A GOOD THING. I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE WITH TWO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS IN NEGOTIATING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE. 
          WE HAVE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD AFTER 50 12 TO 15 YEARS OF OF JUST OBLITERATING THE INTO OUR NOW THE MOVEMENTS OR IS THE EAGLE 
          OR WORRY MIKE, YOU'RE BREAKING UP. >> COME CAN CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? NOW I CAN. OK. 
          WE'RE HAVING A STORM OVER HERE. BUT THE WAY THIS IS A PARK THAT NO MATTER WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS PARK. THIS IS PHENOMENAL. 
          WE HAVE BEEN DELAYING THIS SO LONG AS SOMEONE WHO YOU KNOW, OWNS SEVERAL BUSINESSES. 
          THIS THIS HAS GOT TO BE PUTTING A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON THIS GENTLEMAN AND HIS COMPANIES BECAUSE WE CAN'T LET HIM DO WHAT HE DOES. NOBODY IS GOING TO WANT TO DEVELOP THERE WITH IT WITH IT UP IN THE AIR. SO I WANT TO SEE. 
          LET'S MOVE THIS THING ALONG. PEOPLE ARE EXCITED ABOUT IT. I'M EXCITED ABOUT IT. 
          PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT THAT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS ARE EXCITED ABOUT IT. 
          I'M GOING TO BE VOTING YES. MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. FLOWING. 
          THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, MIKE, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT PEOPLE ARE EXCITED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A PARK OVER THERE. 
          BUT WHEN THIS THING STARTED THAT PROPERTY WAS NEVER THOUGHT THAT IT WAS GONNA BE A PARK. 
          IT REALLY WAS A LATE BREAKING IDEA. IT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ORIGINALLY PLANNED ON DOING. AND FOR US NOW TO COMMIT MONEY THAT WE COULD BE REIMBURSED FOR TO JUST DO AWAY WITH THAT REIMBURSEMENT SEEMS A LITTLE WEIRD TO ME. 
          I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR US TO EXPLAIN IT TO OUR CONSTITUENTS IN A COMPREHENSIVE KIND OF WAY. FOR INSTANCE, MR. RODMAN USES AS PART OF HIS JUSTIFICATION FOR THE COUNTY GIVING UP SOMETHING THAT IT ALREADY HAS IN ITS POCKET REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE ROAD. THE FACT THAT THAT MR. GRAVES IS IMPROVING HIS STORMWATER CAPABILITY ON OUR PROPERTY THAT'S LIKE COMPLETELY FLIPPED . 
          HE'S IMPROVING IT ON OUR PROPERTY. AND NOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GIVE HIM CREDIT FOR HIM THAT HE'S ALREADY USING OUR PROPERTY TO DO IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE WEIRD TO ME. GOOD LUCK EXPLAINING THAT TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS. 
          NUMBER NINE ON THAT LIST IT'S GONE. IF WE COULD HAVE THE MOTION UP ON THE FLOOR AGAIN OR UP ON THE SCREEN THAT NUMBER NINE TALKS ABOUT REIMBURSEMENT OF OF THE LEGAL COSTS AND THE COSTS INVESTIGATING THE FEASIBLE ESTABLISHING THE DISTRICT SHOULD BE SHOULD BE THAT THE COST OF THE COUNTY. THAT WAS ALWAYS TO BE REIMBURSED BY THE THE DISTRICT THAT WE WERE PROPOSING TO THE RESIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OR WHATEVER WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO CALL IT. AND SO IT JUST SEEMS KIND OF 
          [02:15:03]
          GROSS TO ME AND THIS LEAVES SUCH A BAD TASTE IN MY MOUTH. >> I'M I THINK YOU GUYS ARE MAKING A BIG MISTAKE IF YOU VOTE FOR THIS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS, MR. CHAIRMAN? >> MR. IRV SEAN. 
          >> I GOT IT. I'VE GOT A QUESTION. DO WE KNOW OF THE COST THAT WE'RE GOING TO PAY TO GRAVES CONSTRUCTION TO DEVELOP THE PARK? HOW MUCH OF THAT IS OVERHEAD AND PROFIT? IN OTHER WORDS, IS THAT A FURTHER REDUCTION OF A TWO POINT FOUR MILLION THAT MR. GRAVES IS KICKING IN AND BASICALLY A FURTHER INCREASE OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THE COUNTY IS KICKING IN? 
          WE HAVE THAT NUMBER. >> I'M SORRY I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTIONS. 
          >> IT WILL BE THE COST IS ONE POINT ONE MILLION FOR THE PARK TWO POINT FOUR. 
          HE'S KICKING IN WE'RE KICKING IN ONE POINT THREE MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE ROAD. 
          I GUESS THERE'S YEAH I GUESS THE QUESTION IS REALLY THAT THE GRAVES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 
          WHICH IS OWNED BY THE GRACE FAMILY. >> RIGHT. 
          IS GONNA BE DOING THE WORK. ARE THEY GONNA BE FURTHER PROFITING FROM DOING THE WORK OR ARE THEY BASICALLY JUST GIVING IT TO THE COUNTY? COST IS WHAT IS WHAT I'M ASKING ,MR. CHAIRMAN, ACCORDING MR. GREENWAY I'M NOT SURE OF THE ANSWER QUESTION BUT WE DO HAVE A SPREADSHEET THAT WE CAN PROVIDE THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE CHAIN OF COMMAND AND GIVE TO 
          THE COUNTY. >> THAT WAS DONE BY THE GRAVES FAMILY FOR THE ROCHAS CHARGE AND CALL US SO THAT WE COULD BUDGET THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THIS YEAR UNDERNEATH CORRECT DEVELOPMENT TO BRING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THEN WE'RE READY TO VOTE. 
          OBVIOUSLY THERE WILL BE SOME DISSENSION. SO I WILL CALL A ROLL CALL VOTE . I'M SORRY. WE NEED A SECOND. 
          I DON'T REMEMBER WHO WAS THE SECOND I GAVE MR. PUBLIC HEARINGS CHAIRMAN PASSING THAT 
          YOU NEED TO OPEN THE AREA. >> OH, YES. YES. 
          ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WEIGHING IN? >> I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY. 
          >> OKAY. THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. 
          MR REDMAN, YOU MADE THE MOTION. YOU VOTE FIRST. >> YES, MR. KOVAC, YOU MADE 
          THIS BACK. >> CAN YOU GO NEXT? I. 
          MR. DAWSON. >> MR. DAWSON. NO. 
          >> MR. FLOWING? NO. MR. GLOVER. 
          NO MR. HER VERSION. YES. MISS HOWARD. 
          NO. MR. LAWSON. >> MARK LAWSON. 
          YES. >> MR. MCKELLEN. YES. 
          MR. SOMERVILLE. >> MR. SOMERVILLE. ANYBODY SEE IF HE'S ON? 
          I CAN'T SEE HIM. >> I DON'T SEE M.. HE MUST HAVE GOTTEN BOOTED OFF . OKAY. CHAIR SAYS YES. 
          THEREFORE WE HAVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 MR. CHAIRMAN. AND WE NEED TO WAIT FOR MR. SOMMER. THIS IS CLEARLY A TEMPORARY PROBLEM. 
          HE'S BEEN ON THE MEETING, SPOKE TO THIS ISSUE IN THE NEGATIVE AND IT'S IT WOULD BE GROSSLY UNFAIR TO NOT COUNT HIS VOTE. AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE HIM AT AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECONNECT AND AND ADD HIS VOICE TO THE NEGATIVE VOTE NEGATIVE COUNT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LEGAL BUT I WOULD ACCEPT IT IS A NEGATIVE VOTE SINCE HE SAID HE WAS GONNA VOTE THAT YES. 
          >> HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO VOTE NO AND I HAD INCLUDED HIM AS A NO. 
          AND THE ITEM PASSES 6 YES. FIVE. NO, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. OK. HE SEES LOGGING BACK IN AND 
          STU, THANK YOU AS WELL. >> MR. SOMERVILLE, HAVE YOU LOGGED ON STEAM AS YET? 
          [02:20:12]
          HAS ANYBODY SEEN ALL RIGHT. >> IT WILL BE DULY NOTED THAT HIS NO VOTE WAS RECORDED OK. 
          >> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ITEM NUMBER SIXTEEN TO PASS. 
          >> HE DID. THEY SAID NO. YES. 
          HE'S GOING TO TRY TO CALL IN AND YOU CAN MOVE ON. OK. 
          WHICH I THINK IS YOU'RE DOING. >> YES. WE. 
          [16. SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA ("COUNCIL") ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING A SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ("IMPACT FEE") TO BE IMPOSED ON ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTH BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL SERVICE AREA PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020/____; TO ENSURE THAT SCHOOL FACILITY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE AVAILABLE AND ADEQUATE TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEED EXPECTED TO BE GENERATED FROM THE SCHOOL CHILDREN IN NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SOUTH BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL SERVICE AREA BASED ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVMENTS PLAN, AND TO ASSIGN THE COSTS OF SUCH PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ON A PROPROTIONATE SHARE BASIS TO NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE SERVICE AREA; AND ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THE BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND INDIVIDUAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THE TOWNS OF BLUFFTON AND HILTON ISLAND AND THE CITY OF HARDEEVILLE TO ENSURE PROPER IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE]
WE DULY NOTED THAT THE NEXT ITEM IS A SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL FOR A SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE. WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT THE CAUCUS MEETING FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MEMBERS WHO ARE ON THE DISCUSSION SURROUNDING THE FACT OF THE ENTIRE GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE ESTABLISHED. 
          ONE IS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE OTHERS ARE WITH THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD, THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON AND THE CITY OF HARDY VILLE. AND IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING AT THIS POINT IN TIME THAT THOSE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN EXECUTED AT THIS TIME. SO WE WE WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION AND SECOND HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF AMENDING THE MOTION. SO. 
          MAY I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE SECOND READING? >> SO SO MOVED MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. COLBERT IS MAKING THE MOTION NOW. SECOND THAT MOTION PLEASE. 
          MS. HOWARD IS MAKING THIS SECOND. THE DISCUSSION IS FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE HAS AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BEEN ESTABLISHED WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? 
          >> I'M SORRY AND CHAIRMAN PASSED. CAN YOU HEAR ME? IS THIS. YEAH. OK, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE THAT AGREEMENT HAS NOT BEEN CREATED. NO, SIR. OK. 
          >> THANK YOU. OK. WITH THAT IN MIND I'M GOING TO LEAD WHAT I BELIEVE SHOULD BE THE PROPER MOTION. I MOVE THAT THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA KNOWN AS THE COUNCIL ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING A SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE KNOWN AS THE IMPACT FEE TO BE IMPOSED ON ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTH BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOLS SERVICE AREA B POSTPONE UNTIL OCTOBER 12TH 2020 TO ALLOW COUNTY COUNCIL TO ESTABLISH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THE BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND AND INDIVIDUAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND THE TOWNS OF BLUFFTON AND HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND THE CITY OF HARDY VILLE TO ENSURE PROPER IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. 
          SO I SWEAR, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE THE LANGUAGE YOU JUST PROPOSED FOR THE MOTION THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED. I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT PLACE 
          MISS HOWARD MAKES THE SECOND. >> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION THE WAY WE'LL NEED TO DO THIS? 
          >> JOE, JUST SO YOU KNOW YEAH. WE'LL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE CURRENT VOTE. 
          THEN VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE IN MOTION. CORRECT. 
          OK, MR. RODMAN YOU WANT TO DO. MAY I OFFER AN AMENDMENT THAT RATHER A DEBT RATHER THAN A DATE CERTAIN TO BE POSTPONED UNTIL WE HAVE A IPA WITH THE PARTIES NAME COME. 
          >> OK. I WILL ACCEPT THAT GIVEN I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GONNA WORK. 
          >> WE'RE GONNA HAVE A DEADLINE OR IT WON'T GET DONE. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME TIME FRAME TO WORK WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. WE GO BACK TO THOSE EXAMPLES OF WHAT THEY IN THE PLASTIC BAG AND AND THE DOG ORDINANCE YOU KNOW THAT I COULD WE. 
          I COULD SEE CHANGING THE DATE FROM OCTOBER 12TH BUT WE NEED A DATE OUT THERE. 
          THAT'S A FAIR POINT BECAUSE THIS IS ONLY THE SCHOOL IMPACT FEE WE HAVE THE OTHER IMPACT 
          [02:25:01]
FEES THAT WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE INTER GOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS ESTABLISHED. 
          >> SO IF OCTOBER 12TH IS NOT ACCEPTABLE WE CAN AMEND THE AMENDED MOTION I JUST PUT OCTOBER 12TH BECAUSE YOU KNOW TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. WE'RE GOING TO GET AGREEMENTS OR WE'RE NOT. MR. CHAIRMAN, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING BEFORE OCTOBER 
          12TH? >> THAT TODAY YOU GAVE THE OCTOBER 12TH IS A COUNCIL MEETING. WE CAN GO AHEAD AND DELAY IT AT THAT TIME IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY. WE'D SEE THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT PROGRESS TOWARDS OUR STATED GOAL AT I WOULD CONSIDER THE MOTION AS IT SITS ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW WITHOUT 
          AMENDMENT AND WILL AMENDMENT LATER. >> WE NEED TO MR. RUDMAN. 
          >> YEAH, I WOULD WITHDRAW THE MOTION ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T SEEM TO ME IF WE GET TO THE 12TH AND WE DON'T HAVE GOVERNMENT AGREE WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ANYWAY. 
          AND IF WE GOT ONE BEFORE 28 WE COULD TAKE IT BACK UP ON THE TWENTY EIGHT. 
          I STILL YOU THAT BUT I WITHDRAW THE MOTION. >> ALL RIGHT. 
          >> EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THE AMENDED SUBSTITUTE MOTION. DO I NEED TO READ IT AGAIN? PLEASE DON'T SAY YES. WE HAVE 40 MINUTES, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          30 MINUTES. YES, I KNOW, BUT I OFFER THAT. WITHOUT OBJECTION, SIR. 
          THANK YOU. OK. SO THE MOTION IS MADE AND SECONDED WITHOUT OBJECTION IT WILL BE CONSIDERED AS THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. 
          WITHOUT OBJECTION. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SAYING NO OBJECTIONS? THAT IS NOW THE MOTION THAT IS ON THE FLOOR. SO WE HAVE NOW A MOTION AND A SUGGESTION TO POSTPONE THE ACTION UNTIL OCTOBER 12TH. MR. CHAIRMAN, AS MAKER OF THAT MOTION I PROPOSE THAT WITHOUT IT WITHOUT OBJECTION. VERY GOOD. 
          SO IT'S WITHOUT OBJECTION. OK. SINCE THERE IS NO OBJECTIONS IS 
          IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? >> SEEING NO OBJECTION THAT MOTION IS APPROVED AND WE MOVE 
          [18. SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE DECLARING LOUD AND UNNECESSARY VEHICULAR NOISE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND PROVIDING THAT VIOLATIONS ARE A MISDEMEANOR]
ON THE NEXT ITEM. ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE DECLARING LOUD AND UNNECESSARY VEHICULAR VEHICULAR NOISE A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND PROVIDING THAT VIOLATIONS ARE A MISDEMEANOR. MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? 
          SO NO. >> MR. CHAIRMAN. >> MR. MCKELLEN HAS MADE THE 
          MOTION. MAY I HAVE THE SECOND SECOND? >> THAT WAS MR. SOMERVILLE. 
          YES. OK. WELCOME BACK, MR. SOMERVILLE. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. >> OK. IT HAS BEEN MOTIONED AND SECOND USE OF WE'RE NOW READY FOR DISCUSSION. YOU SAW SEVERAL OF THE E MAILS THAT WERE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR MOTION. I'LL BEGIN WITH MR. WELLING. 
          HE RAISED HIS HAND FIRST. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN TOLD TIME AND TIME AGAIN AS WE WORK ON THE SCHEDULING FOR ADDRESSING SECOND READING OF THIS MOTION THAT THIS DID NOT APPLY TO MOTORCYCLES AND YET CLEARLY IT APPLIES TO MOTORCYCLE. 
          AND SO IN ORDER TO TO RELIEVE THAT BURDEN AND YOU KNOW, WE CAN COME BACK IN A MINUTE LATER ON IF WE FIND THAT THE PROBLEM IS NOT ADDRESSED WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THAT IN PARAGRAPH 1 0 1 SUB PARAGRAPH D SET FOR RIGHT NOW IT SETS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE 6 VEHICLE NOISE INCLUDE NOISE FROM CARS, TRUCKS, MOPEDS, MOTORCYCLES, VANS ETC. MOTOR SCOOTERS. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE WORD MOPEDS AND MOTORCYCLES FROM THAT LANGUAGE AND THAT WOULD. 
          AND THEN AT THE END THAT PARAGRAPH THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO MOTORCYCLES AS DELIVERED BY THE MANUFACTURER. AND THEN IN PARAGRAPH E ONE OR TWO EXCEPTIONS PARAGRAPH B I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AT THE END OF THAT COMMA A COMMA AND SAY AS DELIVERED BY THE MANUFACTURERS AND THEN THAT WAY AT LEAST THERE IS ENOUGH SAFETY MEASURES AVAILABLE TO MOTORCYCLISTS THAT THAT THEY GET AT LEAST THE MANUFACTURERS INSTALLED SAFETY EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE THE LOUD X AND IT WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM RECOVERING THEIR ENGINES EXCESSIVELY IN THOSE KINDS OF 
          [02:30:04]
THINGS DRAG RACING THAT KIND OF STUFF. BUT IT WOULD IT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THAT COMFORT OF SAFETY OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY ARE THERE AND TIME THAT IS AN AMENDMENT, SIR. OKAY. MR. FLOWING HAS OFFERED AN 
          AMENDMENT IS THERE RESPECT IN TO HIS AMENDMENT? >> SECOND, MR. GLOVER HAS MADE 
          THE SECOND. >> SO NOW WE DISCUSS HIS AMENDMENT. 
          THEN WE VOTE ON HIS AMENDMENT AND THEN THE REGULAR MOTION INPUT. 
          I SAW MR. CULVERT. YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP. YES, SIR. 
          MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE MR. FLU WELLINGS AMENDMENT AND I WILL SUPPORT THAT. IF IF THAT'S WHAT IT'S COMING DOWN TO OVERALL YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO REMIND EVERYBODY WE REPRESENT THE VAST MAJORITY RATHER IT BE FOR COUNTY IS RURAL. SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I HAVE A DISORDER ORDINANCE EFFECTIVELY STIFF ARMS THOSE FOLKS WHO OWN AND OPERATE A MOTORCYCLE. 
          THIS ORDINANCE PLACES AN UNDUE IN UNNEEDED STRAIN ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO BECOME THE NOISE POLICE YOU KNOW IF THE MUNICIPAL OLDIES WANT TO DO THIS. 
          AND I WOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT THAT IT WOULDN'T BE UNUSUAL. SO BE IT. 
          THESE TYPE OF NOISE ORDINANCES ARE MORE OF A MUNICIPALITY ISSUE, NOT RURAL. 
          AND YOU KNOW, TALKING TO SOME FOLKS IN THE LOCAL LOCAL COMMUNITY BASSETT. 
          OK. THE WITH NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKE BIKERS FOR TRUMP THIS ORDINANCE. EVEN WITH THE TAKE OUT CAN BE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS CAPRICIOUS NOT I THINK THE WHOLE THING SHOULD BE SCRAPPED. IF WE HAVE TO DO IT I AGREE WITH MR. FLUE WILLING THAT WE SHOULD NOT SINGLE OUT MOTORCYCLES, MOTOR SCOOTERS OR MOPEDS WHATEVER OTHER COMMENTS . MR. GRIFFIN. 
          MCKELLEN, YOUR NEXT. THANK YOU. I THINK THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS SIMPLY TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE THE MANUFACTURERS PROVIDED NOISE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS AND INSTALL LOUDER ONES. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS. 
          I THINK ALL THESE OTHER ARGUMENTS ARE FACETIOUS. THANK YOU MR. SERVICE MAN. 
          >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I GENERALLY AND A LITTLE BIT PERPLEXED HOW WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO ENFORCE THIS AND IF WE IF IT'S IF IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE, WHY ARE WE ACTUALLY DOING THIS? THE WAY THAT THE DECIBELS CAN BE MEASURED IS EXTREMELY PRECISE IN THE LANGUAGE IN THIS ORDINANCE. I WONDER IF THAT'S EVEN ENFORCEABLE AT ALL. THAT SAID, IF WE HAVE TO DO THIS AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT. SO LONG AS WE'RE GOING TO ADEQUATELY REMOVE MOTORCYCLES FROM THIS ORDINANCE AND SO LONG AS WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUNISH THOSE THAT ARE IN RURAL AREAS WHO ARE USING VEHICLES IN THE WAY THAT THEY'RE MEANT TO BE USE THEN THEN I'LL SUPPORT IT. 
          BUT I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF YOU KNOW BEFORE THIRD READING WE GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION AS FAR AS HOW'S THE SHERIFF IS PLANNING ON ENFORCING THIS AND IF HE 
          PLANS TO ENFORCE THIS. THANK YOU. >> FAIR POINT. 
          THANK YOU. MR. CULVER, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP AGAIN. 
          I JUST WANT TO RESPOND. YOU I DON'T KNOW IF MR. MCKELLEN WAS A REFERRING TO ME WITH FACETIOUS I TAKE EXCEPTION AT THE BIG UP TO OH NO I DON'T LET'S SEE MR. FORTUNATELY WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING YOU SAID BECAUSE YOUR AUDIO WENT BAD AGAIN. 
          I DIDN'T HEAR ME. SO NOW WE CAN GO. OK, LET ME START OVER. 
          I SAID THAT I DON'T KNOW IF MR. MCKELLEN WAS REFERRING TO ME AS THE FACETIOUS COMMENT HE MADE. 
          I TAKE EXCEPTION WITH THAT. I BELIEVE THIS OVERALL IS BIGGER GOVERNMENT. 
          IF MR. MCKELLEN WANTS TO BE BIG GOVERNMENT, MORE POWER TO YOU. BUT CALLING THINGS FACETIOUS, I 
          THINK IS A LITTLE SIMPLE. THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS TRULY? YOU KNOW, IF IF YOU HAVE MUFFLER SYSTEM THAT IS PUT ON BY THE MANUFACTURER. 
          AND LORD KNOWS NOW THAT BOY, YOU CAN GET AUTOMOBILES THAT HAVE REALLY SOPHISTICATED LOUD SYSTEMS RIGHT FROM THE MANUFACTURER. THAT'S GONNA BE SOMEWHAT 
          [02:35:03]
DIFFICULT. IT MAY WELL BE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE THIS. 
          >> WE DON'T KNOW BUT AND CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, THE THE PURPOSE OF A MOTORCYCLE BEING 
          LOUD OR A MOPED BEING LOUD IS SO THAT YOU CAN HEAR THEM. >> SO THAT'S AN INHERENT IN THIS. SO YEAH, THIS THIS IS GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT ONE. 
          MOVING FORWARD ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? MR. LAWSON? 
          >> YES. I MEAN I REMEMBER THIS GOING BACK THROUGH COMMITTEE AND I'M NOT SURE HOW IT MADE OUT OF COMMITTEE WITH EVERYONE'S SUPPORT. 
          BUT NOW WHERE WE ARE I MEAN OBVIOUSLY I WILL SUPPORT BRIAN WITH HIS AMENDMENT OR HIS EMOTION. BUT AGAIN, I MEAN THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN GOING AFTER FOR A WHILE AND HERE WE ARE NOW SIX MONTHS LATER. YOU KNOW, WE ORIGINALLY STARTED THIS TO BE PART OF OF THE OTHER AUDIENCES IN THE TOWN OF BEAUFORT CITY OF BEAUFORT AND KIND OF MIMIC WHAT THEY HAD. SO THAT WAY IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, COUNTYWIDE. 
          BUT AGAIN, HERE WE ARE MAKING A VOTE. AND I THINK THAT AGAIN I WILL SUPPORT BRIAN'S A MOTION. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE READY TO CALL THE QUESTION ON THIS AND DECIDE IF WE AGREE WITH HIS AMENDMENT. SO THE MOTION OF THE AMENDED MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN AND I'M SORRY I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN WHO DID THE SECOND ON THAT IF 
          YOU REMEMBER WHO THE SECOND WAS BRIAN. >> YES, MR. GLOVER. 
          OH, MR. GLOVER WAS THIS. YES, I DID. OK, OK. 
          SO WITHOUT HAVING TO READ ALL OF IT AGAIN, WE KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN THIS THAT 
          IS REMOVING INFORMATION ABOUT MOPEDS, MOTORCYCLES. >> DID YOU ALSO SAY MOTOR SCOOTERS? YES, SIR. OK. 
          THOUGHT SO. OK. BEGINNING WITH MR. FLUE WELLING. YES, MR. GLOVER? YES. 
          MR. COVERT? YES. MR. DAWSON. 
          NO. MR. HERVEY SHAWN. YES. 
          MISS HOWARD? YES. MR. LAWSON. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. >> SORRY. MARK LAUGHING YES. 
          MR. MCKELLEN. NO, MR RUDMAN YES. MR. SOMERVILLE. 
          YES. AND THE CHAIR WILL SAY YES. SO WE HAVE NINE. 
          YES. AND TWO. NO. 
          WE ARE NOW BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION NOW WHICH WILL BE A SECOND READING. 
          DR. WEARING LOUD NOISE AND VEHICULAR NOISE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE AS AMENDED. 
          IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR MAY I CALL THE QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR. THERE IS A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT HAS COME UP ON FACEBOOK REGARDING THIS. OK. CAN YOU READ THAT PLEASE? SURE. THIS IS FROM A GIB MCKINSEY NOISE ORDINANCE. 
          DASH WOULD APPRECIATE SPECIFIC ANSWERS TO MY QUESTIONS BY PROPONENTS OF THE ORDINANCE. 
          WHY NOW? WHAT ABOUT MOTORCYCLISTS SAFETY? WHY CAN EXISTING LAW HANDLE CURRENT SITUATION? ARE YOU NOT CONCERNED ABOUT PROFILING THERE VIRTUALLY NO PUBLIC INPUT FOR THE MEETING. OKAY, WELL HERE I AM. 
          THERE YOU GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. MCKELLEN AND SECONDED BY MR. SOMERVILLE. IT HAS NOW BEEN AMENDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE 
          WE TAKE A VOTE? >> BRIDESMAID. WHERE? MR. MCKENZIE'S POINT. HOPEFULLY WE'VE ADDRESSED THE THE ISSUE OF MOTORCYCLIST BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE THOSE FOLKS YOU'RE STILL CONCERNED ABOUT THAT TO REACH OUT WITH PUBLIC COMMENT AND HIV EMAIL BETWEEN NOW AND THIRD READINGS THAT THEIR SPECIFIC CONCERNS CAN BE 
          HEARD. GRASS. >> YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY. CALLING THE QUESTION, MR. 
          MCKELLEN, YOU WERE THE MAKER OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION. >> YES. 
          YES. SECOND, MR. SOMERVILLE. >> YES. 
          MR. CULVERT. >> NO. MR. DAWSON. 
          [02:40:05]
          >> YES. MR. FLOWING? YES. 
          MR. GLOVER? >> YES. MR. HER VERSION? YES. MISS HOWARD? YES. 
          CURED LAWSON. >> MARK LAWSON? YES. 
          MR. RODMAN? YES. CHAIR SAYS YES. 
          TEN YES. ONE NO. THE MOTION PASSES AT SECOND 
          [24. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT/REZONING REQUEST FOR 3 PARCELS (R600 021 000 0003 0000; R600 021 000 002A 0000; R600 021 000 003A 0000) ON GRAVES ROAD FROM T2 RURAL TO C3 NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED-USE; APPLICANT: JUDY GRAVES, KEVIN GRAVES, JAN MCKIM]
READING. WE'RE NOW AT ITEM NUMBER TWENTY FOUR FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR THREE PARCELS FROM T TO RURAL TO SEE THREE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE. THE APPLICANTS ARE JUDY GRAVES, KEVIN GRAVES AND JAN MC KIM MAY I HAVE A MOTION MR CHAIRMAN? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. MR SOMERVILLE MAKES THE MOTION 
          I'D LIKE TO SECOND MOTION MR HOWARD MAKES THE SECOND. >> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AREA OF CONCERN ALREADY HAS BEEN RE ZONED IT IS NOW C THREE THESE ARE JUST ADDITIONAL PARTIALS THAT ARE GOING TO GO TO SEE THREE IF MR. GREENWAY IS ON IS THAT THE CORRECT ANSWER 
          MR. GREENWAY THAT IS CORRECT. >> THE MAJORITY OF THE PARCELS ALONG GRANGE ROAD HAVE BEEN ZONE C 3. THERE WILL PROBABLY BE THREE OR FOUR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT OWNED BY THE GREAT FAMILY THAT WILL REMAIN TO TWO OR BUT THE PREDOMINANT PASSES ALONG GREAT ROUTE ARE ALREADY C THREE. THANK YOU. 
          >> IS THERE ANY FURTHER INFORMATION THAT IS NECESSARY BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS? 
          >> GOT A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, MR. HER VERSION. 
          YEAH. MR. GREENWAY, IF WE DO THESE PARCELS AND SEE THREE HOW MANY MORE PARCELS DOES THAT OPEN UP TO AS FAR AS WHAT YOU CAN REQUEST TO BECOME TO SEE THREE? OR IS IT JUST THOSE I FORGET YOU SAID THREE OR FOUR ADDITIONAL PARCELS 32 AND THEN IT'S JUST THE THREE OR FOUR ADDITIONAL PARCELS THAT ARE TO YOU ARE EVERYTHING ELSE SO LONG GRANGE ROAD ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BERKELEY HALL SUBDIVISION EXCEPT THE CLOSURE 
          TO 278. >> THERE IS A PARCEL UP THERE THAT COMMERCIAL AND THAT WILL NOT CHANGE US AND MAKE A PARTIAL ON THE CART BESIDE THE CAR DEALERSHIP NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT. ON THAT FRONT IS THE OTHER SIDE OF GRANGE ROAD BUT THERE'S ONLY THREE OR FOUR PARCELS LEFT THAT ARE T2 ARE THOSE SOME OF THOSE FRONT THE RIVER AND ONE PARTIAL 
          THOUGHT THE BRANCH GRANGER IN. MR. DAWSON YES. >> ERIC WOULD IMPACT WOULD THIS 
          THESE POLICIES RISEN TO I LOST THE AUDIO. >> GERALD, YOU'RE ON MUTE. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? WE CAN. OK. 
          >> WHAT WHAT IMPACT WOULD THE REZONING OF THESE COSTS WITH THE CITY WHAT IMPACT WILL THAT HAVE ON THE NEARBY WATER WATERSHED? I KNOW SOME OF THIS PROPERTY IS CLOSE. THE WATER IS FOR RUNOFF LAND CONTAMINATION. 
          >> IT REALLY I MEAN IT WOULD REALLY DEPEND ON YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND VIEWPOINT IN MY OPINION. I DO NOT THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE ANY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE NUMBER WANTS BASED ON THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY. I'M NOT TRYING TO SHARE MY SCREEN HERE REAL QUICK SO THAT ONE SECOND AND SECOND THAT WOULD THAT WOULD IMPACT WATER 
          QUALITY IN A NEGATIVE WAYS. >> WITH I CAN'T GET TO IT REAL QUICK. 
          I'M SORRY NOT ALLOW ME TO SHARE MY GIANT SCREEN. OKAY. 
          BUT THERE WOULD BE A NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT IF ANY. THERE'S THOSE HOUSES ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY AND THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO CREATE THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE MORE HOUSES THAT WOULD BE 
          AT TENTH. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE CALL THE QUESTION SAYING NONE MR. SOMERVILLE. YOU WERE THE MOTION MAKER. YOU MISS HOWARD, YOU WERE SECOND. YES, MR. CULVER JUST MR. COVERED. 
          HE SAID YES. MR. DOSS, I YES. >> MR. COOLING NO. 
          [02:45:09]
MR. GLOVER I SAID YES OR NO. I FORGOT TO ASK A QUESTION. WAS THIS THE PROPERTY THAT WAS GOING TO USE SEPTIC TANK INSTEAD OF SEWER? ANYWAY, THAT THERE WAS NO THERE IS NO SURE TO THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY AND I DO NOT THINK THAT IT WOULD BE FEASIBLE TO 
          EXTEND A SEWER LINE AT THE PROPERTY FOR THE NUMBER. >> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. 
          THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. SO I SAID NO. MR. HAUSER, SEAN. 
          YES. MR. LAWSON. >> MARK LAWSON. 
          YES. MR. MCKELLEN. NO. 
          MR. RUDMAN. YES. CHAIR PASHMAN SAYS YES. 
          SO WE HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN. EIGHT. 
          YES. THREE. NO. 
          MOTION IS PASSED. NEXT ITEM THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND FOUR MAJOR TAX ONE TO THE HISTORIC MITCHELL VILLE PARK FOR PHASE 1 BUILDOUT OF THE MITCHELL BOWL FREEDOM PARK MASTER PLAN. 
          THE REASON THIS IS ON HERE FOR DISCUSSION IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO WAIVE THE PROCESS. 
          MR. CHAIR. DID YOU SKIP NUMBER TWENTY FIVE ? OH GOSH I DID. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY I SKIPPED NUMBER 
          [25. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC): ARTICLE 5, SECTION 5.6.50.E(2) TO ALLOW FOR MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO BILLBOARDS TO IMPROVE SAFETY STANDARDS DURING HURRICANES AND HIGH WIND EVENTS.]
TWENTY FIVE. YES. THAT'S THE FIRST ORDINANCE OF READING OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING THE TEXT MEN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO BILLBOARDS TO IMPROVE THE SAFETY STANDARDS DURING HURRICANES AND HIGH WINDS BLEW FOR ADOPTION COVE MR. CULVERT SAYS IT MAKES THE MOTION AND MR. FULLER WALLING MAKES THE SECOND DISCUSSION ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS? 
          >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS BECAUSE I PLAN TO VOTE AGAINST IT. 
          OK, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NO OTHERS. MR. KOVAC, YOU MADE THE MOTION BY MR. PHIL WHELAN. YES, MR. DAWSON. YES. 
          MR. GLOVER FOR SAFETY. YES. MR. HER VISION? YES. MISS HOWARD? NO. 
          MR. LAWSON. CLARK LAWSON. YES. 
          MR. MCKELLEN. YES. MR. REDMAN? YES. MR. SOMERVILLE? NO. 
          CHAIR SAYS YES. IT IS 9. YES. 
          [26. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE $575,000.00 FROM THE H-TAX FUND TO THE HISTORIC MITCHELVILLE FREEDOM PARK FOR PHASE I BUILD OUT OF THE MITCHELVILLE FREEDOM PARK MASTER PLAN]
TO NO SUCCESSFUL. NOW WE'RE AT ITEM NUMBER TWENTY SIX. 
          MAY I HAVE A MOTION? AND SECOND PLEASED I'LL MOVE FOR A PER ROOM. 
          MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. SECOND. MR. FLOOR WELLING MADE THE 
          MOTION MR. GLOVER MADE THE SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BELIEVE BOTH DAWSON OH, I'M SORRY MR. DAWSON. YOU WERE THE SECOND I YIELD TO 
          YOU. THANKS. >> OKAY. 
          >> I HAD MR. WHILE MR. GLOVER YOU WERE ON MY SCREEN. THAT'S WHY YOU MAKE THE DAWSON . IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS? 
          >> ONE POINT I HAVE IS IF YOU READ THIS MORNING'S PAPER THERE IS A SUM OF MONEY THAT THE STATE IS PUTTING IN FOR THE TRIVIAL FREEDOM PARK. IS THAT GOING TO BE INCLUDED IN THE FIVE SEVENTY FIVE? IS THAT GOING TO BE REDUCED FROM THE FIVE SEVENTY FIVE ADDED ON TO THE FIVE SEVENTY FIVE. DO WE KNOW THAT MR. CHAIRMAN COULD I SPEAK TO YOU SPEAK TO THAT I CAN SPEAK THIS IS THAT WHEN THEY MADE A PRESENTATION TO US IT WAS MUCH MORE FOR THIS PROJECT THEN THE 575 IN OUR PROPOSAL. 
          >> WE ORIGINALLY SAID UP TO FIVE SEVENTY FIVE AS A MATCHING FUND SO THEY ARE TO RAISE PROBABLY THREE TO FOUR MILLION DOLLARS TOWARD THIS PROJECT AND WE WERE JUST CONTRIBUTING ABOUT 575. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. 
          >> THIS IS FIRST READINGS. WE HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO GET SOME OTHER INFORMATION. 
          SO ARE WE READY TO CALL THE QUESTION BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE 10 MINUTES LEFT AND WE HAVE ONE 
          MORE ITEM TO DO? >> WELL, YOU'RE NOT OFTEN WITHOUT OBJECTION, SIR. 
          [02:50:02]
IF YES. HE'S GOING FOR AN OBJECTION. YEAH. 
          I OFFERED THIS WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> MR. 
          YES. JUST A REAL QUICK COMMENT. >> WE SAID THEY WERE WAITING THE PROPER PROCESS BACKS. THESE FUNDS WERE PROMISED BACK IN 2018. 
          SO I DON'T THINK IT'S EXACTLY FAIR TO SAY THAT WE'RE WAITING TO PROCESS AN ENTIRELY. 
          AND WE SHOULD DISSUADE OTHERS FROM FROM TRYING TO BYPASS THE PROCESS THAT WE PUT INTO PLACE 
          LAST YEAR. >> ABSOLUTELY. OK. 
          SO I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION WITHOUT OBJECTION. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS SAYING NO OBJECTIONS? THE MOTION IS PASSED ON FIRST READING. 
          [28. RECOMMENDATION OF AWARD TO J. BRAGG CONSULTING, INC. RFQ #040920E RFQ ONE-CENT SALES TAX PROGRAM MANAGEMENT]
OUR LAST ITEM BEFORE OUR FINAL CITIZEN COMMENTS IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF AWARD TO JAY BRAGG CONSULTING FOR THE 1 SALES TAX PROGRAM MANAGEMENT. MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? 
          SO MOVED MY SERMON. MR. FLOWING MAKES THE MOTION. >> WHO DID I HEAR THE SECOND 
          FROM? >> COUNCILMAN DAWSON. COUNCILMAN DAWSON MAKES THE SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS THIS PAST TEN TO 
          ONE LAST TIME? >> AND IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION I WILL MOVE TO CALL THE QUESTION WITHOUT EXCEPTION, MR. QUINN ANY GAPS OR ANY EXCEPTIONS? 
          >> MR. WELL YES I'M I HATE THE DELAY HERE IS A ABN BUT WHEN THIS CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS THIS IS A TWO PERSON CONSULTING FIRM GRANT TO PAY THEM ONE POINT EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE WAS I WAS SURELY THERE IS A BUNCH OF SUBCONTRACTORS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE. WE GOT AN EMAIL SUBSEQUENT TO THAT MEETING THAT REALLY THE ONLY SUBCONTRACTOR AMOUNT IS ROUGHLY ABOUT EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS I THINK WHICH IS ROUGHLY IMMATERIAL TO THIS CONTRACT. I THINK IT'S AN OVERWHELMING SUM OF MONEY FOR SUCH A SMALL FIRM. WE WORKING PART TIME. 
          I VOTED AGAINST IT COMING OUT OF COMMITTEE FOR THAT REASON I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST IT THIS TIME AS WELL. VERY GOOD. IS THERE IS THERE ANYONE WHO NEEDS ME TO CALL IT AS A ROLE CALL OR HAS MISSED HER POSITION GOING TO BE THE ONLY OBJECTING COLORFUL ROLL CALL PLEASE. VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT, MR. FLOWING, YOU MADE THE MOTION. I'LL SUPPORT IT FOR NOW. MR. DAWSON, YOU WERE THE SECOND . YES. MR. CULVER. 
          NO. MR. GLOVER. YES. 
          MR. HURD VERSION. NO. MS. HOWARD. YES. MR. LAWSON. 
          MARK LAWSON. YES. MR. MCKELLEN. 
          YES. MR. RUDMAN. YES. 
          MR. SOMERVILLE? YES. CHAIR SAYS YES. 
          [33. CITIZEN COMMENT]
          >> MOTION CARRIES 9 TO 2. WE ARE AT THE LAST CITIZEN COMMENTS. 
          ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS EITHER? PUT IN THE FACEBOOK OR ANY OTHER MEANS YOUR METHODS. 
          ON MY END. EXCELLENT. >> SARAH. 
          DID YOU GET ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I RECEIVED ONE MORE THAN TRANSFER OVER RIGHT NOW. 
          VERY GOOD. THIS ONE SAID WE ALREADY PAY FORTY FIVE PERCENT OF THE ENTIRE LAW ENFORCEMENT BUDGET. STOP BEING GREEDY. I LIVE IN A GATED COMMUNITY. 
          MOST OF YOUR WORK IS COMPLETE BY OUR PRIVATE SECURITY. OK, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          OK. ONCE AGAIN A YEOMAN'S JOB BY COUNTY COUNCIL. 
          WE HAVE GOTTEN THROUGH THIS ALBEIT AN HOUR LATER THAN I WOULD HAVE HOPED WE WOULD DO. 
          BUT WE'VE DONE THE BEST WE CAN. WE HAD A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WE DONE. 
          SO I COMMEND YOU ONCE AGAIN FOR YOUR DILIGENCE, YOUR PERSEVERANCE AND THIS MEETING. 
          UNLESS THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE ANYBODY HAS TO SAY. THIS MEETING WILL BE ADJOU
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.