[00:00:01]
AND ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
AND, UH, WE'RE DONE, THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION HAS BEEN PUBLISHED AND POSTED AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH SOUTH CAROLINA FOYER.
[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
UH, NOW I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA, PLEASE.DO I SEE ANY VOLUNTEERS OUT THERE? CHAIRMAN? I WILL HAPPY TO BE VERY MUCH.
WAS THAT GERALD? YES, I'LL BE THE SECOND.
ALRIGHT, MR. UH, CATHERINE IS A SECOND.
AND MR. DAWSON, UH, WITHOUT CORRECTION, UH, ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THAT EXCEPTION? WE WILL APPROVE THE MIRROR TO ITEM NUMBER SIX UNDER DISCUSSION ITEMS, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION REGARDING PUBLIC TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 14, 2020]
THANK YOU, JOE.I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 14TH, MR. CHAIRMAN, SECOND BARREL.
THANK YOU GERALD FOR THE SECOND.
UH, WITHOUT, UH, EXCEPTION, WE'LL APPROVE THEM.
ARE THERE ANY EXCEPTIONS THAT EXCEPTION WILL BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN? AND THAT
[6. DISCUSSION REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENT CURRENT PRACTICES AND OPTIONS]
BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, UNDER DISCUSSION ITEMS, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENT, CURRENT PRACTICES AND OPTIONS, OR MAYBE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.I KNOW JOE, I THINK YOU HAD SOME COMMENTS YOU WANTED TO MAKE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
WE HAVE STARTED A NEW PROCESS AS OF TODAY FOR INDIVIDUALS.
THEY ARE ABLE TO GO INTO THE COUNTY WEBSITE, WHICH IS THE BUFORD COUNTY SC.GOV.
UM, WHEN YOU GO TO THE WEBSITE, THE FIRST THING YOU SEE NEXT TO THE LOGO IS I WANT TO, WHEN YOU CLICK ON THAT, YOU GO TO THE FOURTH ITEM DOWN, WHICH IS, UM, UH, COUNTY, UH, DRESSING COUNTY COUNCIL.
YOU CLICK ON THAT COMES UP WITH A MENU FOR YOU TO PUT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS ALL OF THE PERTINENT INFORMATION AND A BOX FOR YOU TO SAY WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY AND WHAT ITEM YOU WANT TO DO TO DEAL WITH.
AND I HAVE THE LIST THAT WAS DONE FOR THE MEETING TODAY THERE.
UM, THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE, CAUSE THIS IS BRAND NEW.
UH, DO THOSE PEOPLE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ACTUALLY COME INTO THE MEETING AND READ THEIR STATEMENT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? OR AM I THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE READING THEIR STATES AS ADMINISTRATION? NO CLERK TO COUNCIL? NO.
UM, I THINK AT THIS MOMENT, THAT'S THE FIRST STEP OF IT IS THAT THEY EMAIL AND WE READ THEM IN AND THEN WE'RE WORKING ON, UM, GETTING ACCESS.
SO IF THEY, IF THERE'S SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO CALL IN, OBVIOUSLY THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO EMAIL IN A STATEMENT ONCE WE GET THAT FEATURE GOING.
IT'S A WORK IN PROGRESS, BUT WE'VE GOTTEN LOTS OF GOOD REVIEWS ON THIS STUFF.
SO THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE MAKING NOW.
EVERYBODY'S HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK OVER THAT FORM.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS THAT THEY LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? ALL RIGHT.
[7. DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER POSITION]
NONE.WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER POSITION.
UH, THANK EVERYBODY WHO ARE AWARE OF THE, OF THE PUBLICITY THAT'S BEEN SURROUNDING NEPOTISTIC GROUP ITEM.
AND, UH, THEY DIDN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT WE AGREED IN PRINCIPLE THAT WE NEEDED A COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER OF SOME SORT.
UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE.
ONE I CAN THROW ONE OUT ON THE TABLE.
UM, JOE CRAWLEY, WHO, UH, WHO OWNS AND OPERATES A INSIDE TRACK HAS SOME EXCELLENT REPORTERS, FORMER REPORTERS, UH, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS AND OTHERS ON HIS STAFF.
AND IN THEORY, WE COULD CONTRACT WITH JOE TO PERFORM, UH, TO HAVE HIS, HAVE YOU AS AN ORGANIZATION.
AGAIN, THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT, BUT THERE MAY BE OTHER THOUGHTS.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO THROW OUT ON THE TABLE
[00:05:01]
FOR DISCUSSION REGARDING A POSSIBLE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER FOR COUNCIL MR. CHAIRMAN? THIS IS STU YES.I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH SOMEBODY IN THAT BUSINESS AND THEY SAID THAT THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD FOLKS OUT THERE AT REASONABLE PRICES THAT GOOD WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THIS TYPE OF THING.
SO I THINK IT LENDS ITSELF TO, UM, ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS.
AND I THINK THE APPLICATION COULD INCLUDE SUBCONTRACTING AS YOU POINTED OUT WITH JOE, BUT I THINK WE PROBABLY OWE IT TO THE PUBLIC TO GIVE PEOPLE A CHANCE TO APPLY FOR THE JOB.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE PUT OUT A, UH, A REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DIRECTED.
I WOULD THINK TO EITHER THE PERSONNEL OR TO OUR CLERK, TO COUNCIL, WHICH, WHICH WE'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS.
DID YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON IT? YEAH, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER, UM, AND ASHLEY THAT MIGHT KNOW BETTER AND FOR THIS LEVEL OF POSITION, WHETHER WE NEED TO GO OUTSIDE OR JUST DO IT INSIDE, I'M KIND OF COMFORTABLE EITHER WAY.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THAT? ON LET'S DO EDIT SUGGESTION.
ANYBODY ELSE? WE ALSO HAVE A JOB DESCRIPTION THAT SHOULD BE SENT OUT TO ALL COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS SO THEY CAN SEE THE KINDS OF THINGS WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN A COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER.
I THINK, UH, SARAH, YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THAT DESCRIPTION.
I BELIEVE SHARE THAT WITH ALL MEMBERS, ALL MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND, UM, I'LL, I'LL PUT TOGETHER A, A SUGGESTION ON HOW WE MIGHT WANT TO ADVERTISE THIS POSITION AND SEND IT OUT TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THEIR COMMENTS.
UM, SO THAT, UH, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT ALL WE CAN DO FOR NOW.
ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO COMMENT? I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, PAUL.
WELL, LISTS ALSO BE ADVERTISED INTERNALLY AMONG THE 1200 EMPLOYEES WE HAVE IN THE COUNTY.
I WOULD THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BECAUSE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT.
WHO, I'VE GOT A COMMENT QUESTION, COMMENT BEING, UM, I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT JOB DESCRIPTION.
IT SEEMS THAT IT SEEMS IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT PREMATURE TO BE MOVING FORWARD WITHOUT HAVING THE JOB DESCRIPTION, UM, TOTALLY VETTED BY COUNCIL.
SO THAT'D BE MY FIRST COMMENT.
UM, AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS A QUESTION.
UM, HOW MANY OTHER COUNTIES, OTHER KIND OF COUNCILS HAVE A COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER OR CIO OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.
I'VE TALKED TO SDAC ABOUT IS QUITE A FEW.
I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN EXACT NUMBER, BUT IF YOU'D LET ME SEE AND SEE WHAT THE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT WITHOUT.
I WOULD JUST BE INTERESTED TO, UM, TO KNOW IF THEY HAVE JOB DESCRIPTIONS THAT WE COULD LOOK AT THAT WOULD COMPARE OFTEN SEE, UM, SOME OF THE WORK THAT, UH, THOSE FOLKS ARE DOING IN THOSE OTHER COUNTIES.
SO WE CAN GET AN IDEA AS FAR AS WHAT THEY DO, THEIR SCOPE OF WORK, HOW THEY OPERATE, HOW THEY OPERATE WITH COUNCIL, INTERACT WITH COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
I THINK YOUR IDEA IS A GOOD ONE ABOUT, UH, MAKING SURE THAT EVERY MEMBER OF COUNCIL HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A LOOK AND COMMENT IF THEY WISH ON THE, ON THE PROPOSED JOB DESCRIPTION, WHICH AS YOU SAY, MAY, IT MAY CHANGE DEPENDING ON WHAT WE RUN INTO.
ANYTHING ELSE? CHRIS? MR. CHAIRMAN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MAYBE I MISSED IT.
HAVE WE TAKEN A VOTE ON WHETHER TO ACTUALLY DO THIS OR NOT? UM, AND I DON'T RECALL EVER TALKING ABOUT WHAT KIND OF MONEY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT STICKING ON THIS, UH, WHERE THAT'S GOING TO COME FROM AND SO FORTH? UH, WELL, YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT THIS, THERE WASN'T AN ISSUE OF MONEY BECAUSE THE INDIVIDUAL WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS ALREADY ON THE PAYROLL.
SO THAT'S THE REASON IT DIDN'T COME UP, BUT I THINK YOUR POINT'S WELL TAKEN.
AND I THINK WHEN THE, UH, WHEN THE JOB DESCRIPTION GETS DISTRIBUTED, DISTRIBUTED TO ALL OF US, WE TAKE A LOOK AT, WE CAN, UH, WE CAN DO SOME RESEARCH AND FIND OUT WHAT, UH, WHAT THOSE NUMBERS, WHAT THE RANGE OF THOSE NUMBERS MIGHT LOOK LIKE AND SHARE THAT WITH COUNCIL.
[00:10:01]
FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER DISCUSSION, LET'S MOVE[8. REVIEW OPEN ITEMS WITH ALL COMMITTEE CHAIRS]
ON TO, UH, OPEN ITEMS. WE'RE ALL COMMITTED CHAIRS.I DON'T KNOW THE BEST WAY TO, TO ADDRESS THIS.
UM, I HAVE, UH, PREVIOUSLY FORWARDED TO ALL OF YOU.
I THINK THE BEST LIST I CAN PUT TOGETHER OF THE ITEMS THAT, THAT ARE HANGING FIRE, IF YOU WILL, OR THAT ARE OUTSTANDING FOR THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.
AND, AND HOW THOSE HAVE BEEN BROKEN DOWN TO THE INDIVIDUAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
IS THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY COMMITTEE CHAIRS AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ADMINISTRATION, UH, AND, UM, THAT DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THAT, OF THAT LIST THAT APPLIES TO THEIR AREA.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH OUR WHILE TO GO THROUGH ANY OF THESE TO HELP COMMITTEE CHAIRS PRIORITIZE THE RIGHT ITEMS OR WHETHER YOU'D RATHER YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT SOLAR OR SOLAR AS THE CASE MAY BE, BUT THERE ARE SOME, UH, COMMITTEES ARE, OUR HABIT ARE MORE BURDENED THAN OTHERS.
I'M LOOKING AT, UH, NATURAL RESOURCES THAT ARE HERE.
FINANCE HAS 12 COMMUNITY SERVICES HAS FIVE, UH, COMMUNICATIONS TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE HAS, UH, FOUR, UH, OPPRESSION HAS 10.
AND OF COURSE THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
SO DOES ANYONE NEED ANYTHING FROM THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, BUT IF THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO, I WOULD SAY WHEN YOU PRIORITIZE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK IN WITH JOE, UH, JUST TO GET SOME SENSE OF WHAT, UH, WHAT HE SEES AS THE, UH, HIGHEST PRIORITIES.
SO YOUR MAKE SURE YOUR, YOUR THINKING IS ALIGNED AS BEST AS POSSIBLE.
ANYBODY WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT OR NEED ANYTHING? THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE? YES, SIR.
THIS IS A LIST THAT WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY CHAIR OR THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS AND SHARED FROM TIME TO TIME, UH, WITH THE REST OF COUNCIL SO THAT THEY COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, INDICATE IF THERE'S SOMETHING MISSING OR SOMETHING THAT I HAVE A DIFFERENT PRIORITY, BUT I VIEW THAT THIS IS A TASK, BUT THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS ON IT.
WELL, I'LL SAY THAT AGAIN, THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS SHOULD WATCH TO MAINTAIN THE LIST.
WELL, THEN EACH COMMITTEE TO YOUR HANDS.
AND THIS IS A GENTLE REMINDER THAT THE CHEERS THAT, UH, THAT THOSE ITEMS NEED TO BE PRIORITIZED AND PUT ON THE AGENDA AS AT THE EARLIEST CONVENIENCE OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS, ANYBODY ELSE ON THE, UH, OPEN ITEMS, WE'RE ALL COMMITTED CHAIRS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY.
[9. MILLAGE DISCUSSION]
UH, NOW BRING US TO ITEM NUMBER NINE ON OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS, WHICH IS MILLAGE DISCUSSION.UH, I DON'T THINK I HAVE HERE WHEN WE PASSED OUR ORDINANCE, THE VERBAL OR WRITTEN PART OF THE ORDINANCE HAD ONE SET OF NUMBERS AND, AND THE ACTUAL COMPONENTS DIDN'T ADD UP TO THAT.
AND SO, UM, THEN THE, UH, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE AUDITOR, UH, TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO CHANGE THE, UH, THE MILLAGE FOR A POOR PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY.
I E UM, RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS FROM 4.8 TO 5.8.
AND, UH, IT'S, UH, IT'S VERY CONFUSING TO ANYBODY.
AND I'M SURE SOME OF YOU HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN CALLS TODAY.
I KNOW I HAVE FOR CONSTITUENTS WHO, UH, WHO ARE CONCERNED THAT WE ARE RAISING THEIR TAXES.
AND OF COURSE, AS EVERYONE ON THIS MEETING KNOWS WHAT I WAS NEVER, OUR INTENT.
OUR INTENT WAS TO HAVE A MILLAGE NEUTRAL BUDGET THIS YEAR, AND THE ADMINISTRATION DID A GOOD JOB OF THAT WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE FIRE DISTRICTS AND, AND THE, UH, OTHER, UH, THE OTHER ENTITIES THAT SIT IN VILLAGE.
SO, UH, ACTUALLY YOU LOOK LIKE YOU, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU JUST POPPED UP INADVERTENTLY OR WHETHER YOU POPPED UP BECAUSE YOU WANT TO MAKE THE FIRST COMMENT, BUT IF THAT'S THE CASE, ALL YOURS, THANK YOU, MR. SUMMERVILLE.
SO LET'S START FROM THE BEGINNING.
UM, WHEN I SAY AT THE BEGINNING, I MEAN, WHEN WE WERE CREATING BUDGETS, SO WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS BUDGET, UM, YOU MAY RECALL THEY BORROWED $75 MILLION AND THEY WORKED WITH THEIR BOND COUNCIL AND WITH THEIR FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND THE COUNTY HAS THE SAME FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND BOND.
ALSO, WE WORK WITH THEM AS WELL IN ESTABLISHING WHAT OUR DEBT NUMBERS SHOULD BE.
UM, AND SO, BUT I CAN ALSO, FINANCIAL ADVISOR
[00:15:01]
SAID FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, IT SHOULD BE 36.6 FOR THEIR DEBT.AND SO THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL PASS THAT'S, WHAT'S IN YOUR BUDGET ORDINANCE.
AND THEN FOR THE COUNTY, UH, WE ALL HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT KEEPING MILLAGE FLAT, AS YOU MENTIONED, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT STAFF DID.
UM, WE SENT THE, UH, THE MILLAGE FOR REAL PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND FOR DEBT WHERE IT NEEDED TO BE SO THAT WE DIDN'T INCREASE TAXES.
AND WE DID THAT, UM, IN COOPERATION WITH OUR BOND COUNSEL AND WITH, UH, OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, JUST AS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DID WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WOULD AT 4.8, THAT THAT WOULD UTILIZE SOME FUND BALANCE.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, AT SOME POINT, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN, UM, MAYBE AUGUST THE AUDITOR CAME IN AND CHANGED REAL PROPERTY PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY, CHANGED IT FROM 4.8 TO 5.8, AND THEN HE DECREASED THE SCHOOL'S DEBT MILLAGE FROM 36.6 TO 36.3.
SO WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT HE HAS TAKEN UNILATERAL ACTION AND INCREASED TAXES WITHOUT THE GOVERNING BODIES, AUTHORITY AND APPROVAL.
HE'S DECREASED THE REVENUE FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SO WHAT WE PRESENTED TO YOU BEFORE, UM, WAS AN AMENDMENT, UM, SO THAT YOU WOULD CHANGE IN THE BODY OF THE ORDINANCE.
UH, WE WOULD CORRECT THAT FROM 60, I BELIEVE IT'S 65.22, UH, TO, UM, LET'S SEE, HE'S HELPED ME OUT 64.
SO, UM, UNLESS YOU WANT TO RAISE TAXES AND HAVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UM, BRINGING IN $600,000 LESS THAN WHAT WAS INTENDED, UM, I THINK YOU AND KURT, YOU CAN, YOU CAN CHIME IN HERE TOO, IN TERMS OF, UM, THE MANDAMUS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, BUT I THINK YOU WILL NEED TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE AUDITOR, UM, TO MAKE HIM CHANGE IT ON THE TAX BILL.
SO THAT REFLECTS WHAT YOU WERE APPROVED IN YOUR BUDGET ORDINANCES.
THE, THE, THE, THE, THE LAW IS THAT, UM, THERE'S A STATUTE SECTION FOUR DASH 15 DASH ONE 50, WHICH SAYS THAT THE, THERE SHALL BE LEVY LEVIED ANNUALLY BY THE COUNTY AUDITOR, AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON BONDS AND AMOUNT SUFFICIENT.
IT IS NOT A DISCRETIONARY NUMBER.
IT IS ACTUALLY JUST SAID, IT'S, IT'S FIXED BY WHEN THE BONDS ARE SOLD, YOU'LL HAVE DEBT, SERVICE TABLES, AND A SINKING FUND.
THAT'S A MATHEMATICAL IT'S BASED UPON THE LIFE OF THE BOND, TURNS TO THE BONDS AND THE INTEREST RATE.
AND THERE'S A, A SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT CASE STACKHOUSE VERSUS FLOYD.
IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THE ACT GIVES NO SUCH DISCRETIONARY POWER TO THE AUDITOR, BUT RATHER COMPELLED HIM TO LEVY OUT AT LEAST ANNUALLY ATTACK, SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST IT'S.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT IS A JOB FOR THE AUDITOR TO DO, BUT IT'S NOT A DISCRETIONARY JOB.
AND IT'S, IT'S A, WHAT'S CALLED A MINISTERIAL DUTY.
IF I AGREE IT'S MINISTERIAL, BUT HERE'S MY QUESTION IS WHO COMPUTED THE 4.8 IN THE FIRST PLACE.
IF THE AUDITOR CHANGED IT TO 5.8, THEN SOMEBODY MUST HAVE COMPUTED THE 4.8.
DOES ANYBODY KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT? SO STAND UP, ESTABLISH THE 4.8.
AGAIN, WE DID THAT, UM, IN COORDINATION WITH OUR BOND COUNSEL AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR.
SO AS FAR AS STAFF IS CONCERNED, 4.8 IS, IS THE CORRECT NUMBER.
IT JUST TO GENERATE THE MONEY THAT WE NEED FOR THE FOUR QUARTERS OF DEBT PAYMENT FOR 2020, 2112.
UM, NOW THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, I ASSUME THE SCHOOL, THE SCHOOL BOARD SAID THE 36.6 AND IT GOT TO THE AUDITOR AND FOR REASONS UNKNOWN TO US, HE CHANGED IT TO 36.3.
SO FROM OUR STANDPOINT, WE DON'T, I MEAN, WE DON'T SET, WE DON'T SET.
UM, WHERE WOULD THIS 36.6, THIS WAS DEBT MILLAGE OR, OR OUR OPERATING MILLAGE.
SO WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THAT AT ALL.
I MEAN, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A MINISTERIAL DUTY IN THAT.
I DON'T THINK BECAUSE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SETS THEIR OWN DENVILLE
[00:20:02]
AND SENDS IT ON TO THE AUDITOR.I MEAN, MAY, MAY USE THIS FOR A CONDUIT, BUT THAT WOULD BE IT.
AM I MISSING SOMETHING THERE? WELL, SO I BELIEVE HE APPROVED A, AN ORDINANCE.
SO A BUDGET ORDINANCE FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND I BELIEVE THE ORDINANCE SPEAKS TO DEBT MILLAGE FOR THE SCHOOL, CORRECT? CORRECT.
WELL, THAT'S ONE, BUT I'VE NEVER HAVE UNDERSTOOD IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY ROLE IN THE SETTING OF THE DEAD MILLAGE FOR THE SCHOOL.
I, WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO GET INTO THIS.
IT'S NOT THAT CRITICAL TO THIS DISCUSSION, BUT WHY WOULD WE HAVE ANY ROLE IN IT AT ALL? IT SEEMS TO ME, IT OUGHT TO GO FROM THE SCHOOL, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO THE AUDITOR, THIS IS OUR DEAD MILLAGE.
AND THEN OF COURSE THE OPERATING MILLAGE COMES THROUGH US BECAUSE WE APPROVE IT.
SO, BUT IN ANY EVENT, IN ANY EVENT, WHETHER IT CAME THROUGH US, WHICH IT DID BECAME PART OF OUR ORDINANCE, WHICH IT DID, IT WAS 36.6, IT GOT TO THE AUDITOR.
THE QUESTION BECOMES, WHAT CAN WE DO? UM, THIS IS A LEGAL QUESTION.
I, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT WE CAN AMEND OUR EXISTING, A WRIT OF MANDAMUS.
IT HADN'T BEEN 30 DAYS AND THEY HAVEN'T GOTTEN A RESPONSE.
I MAN, THE RIVER WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO, TO FOR WHAT, FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MILLAGE AND FOR THE REAL PROPERTY I E CRITICAL MILLAGE IS THAT THAT SOLVES OUR PROBLEM.
AND THAT CAN BE DEFINITELY RIGHT.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I CAN THINK OF THAT WE COULD DO, AND I GOT THIS SUGGESTION THIS MORNING FROM THE SOUTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY, UH, THEY SUGGESTED HE MIGHT WANT TO PASS A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE FACT, THE FACTS, PLURAL, I GUESS THAT WE PASSED AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING A REAL PROPERTY MILLAGE OF 4.8 AND A SCHOOL DISTRICT DEAD MILLAGE AT 36.6.
AND THAT'S THE WAY WE EXPECT IT TO APPEAR ON THE TAX BILL, OR THAT WOULD JUST BE A REAFFIRMATION OF WHAT WE'VE ALREADY, YOU SAID OUR AWARENESS, BUT IT WOULD, I DON'T THINK WOULD HAVE ANY BINDING LEGAL AUTHORITY, BUT IT WOULD BE COMPELLING IN THE SENSE THAT WE'RE JUST REAFFIRMING TO THE AUDITOR.
THIS IS WHAT WE PASSED, AND THIS IS WHAT WE EXPECT YOU TO PUT ON THERE.
THE ONLY TWIST IN THAT IS BASED ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, CURT, IS THAT, THAT, THAT THE AUDITOR, UH, I CAN'T, I CAN'T REPEAT VERBATIM WHAT YOU SAID, BUT THE AUDITOR HAS THE AUTHORITY OR MINISTERIAL AUTHORITY, I GUESS YOU'D SAY TO, UH, TO SET A DEATH NUMBER, A DEAD MILLAGE NUMBER SUFFICIENT TO BARCELONA.
CAUSE MY MUTE BUTTON KEEPS GOING ON AND OFF.
UH, SHE SAID A DEAD MILLAGE SUFFICIENT TO, UH, TO MEET THE OBLIGATIONS OF EITHER THE, THE, THE, UH, RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS PROGRAM OR THE, OR THE SCHOOL DEBT OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
SO HAVING PASSING A, UH, A RESOLUTION TO SOMETHING WE MIGHT WANT TO KICK AROUND JUST TO KIND OF REAFFIRM, NOT JUST TO THE AUDITORS, BUT TO OUR PUBLIC WHO WONDERS, YOU KNOW, WHO'S ON FIRST HERE BECAUSE WE CLEARLY, WE CLEARLY MADE A DECISION THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO RAISE.
WE'RE HAVING A MILLAGE NEUTRAL BUDGET.
IS THAT EVERYONE THAT EVERYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING? YES.
SO ANYWAY, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
KURT, UM, LET ME ASK YOU, UH, I WAS, I WAS WITH YOU AND THEN YOU LOST WITH, WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THE MINISTERIAL DUTIES THAT THE AUDITOR HAS.
DOES THAT, ARE YOU SAYING THAT HE CAN CHANGE WHAT WE VOTED ON ARBITRARILY OR NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
NO, HE, HE HAS A DUTY, BUT IT'S A MATHEMATICAL DUTY.
HE CAN'T MAKE IT GO PICK A NUMBER.
IS, IS EVERYONE AWARE OF THE AUGUST 18TH EMAIL FROM, UH, AUDITOR BEKAERT HE OUTLINES HOW HE GOT TO THE 5.8
ON AUGUST 18TH, UH, MR. BECKER WROTE AFTER RECEIVING THE 2020 BOND SALE INFORMATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,775,000, THAT INVOLVES RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS DEBT MILLAGE, AND THE COUNTY DEBT MILLAGE, THE MILLAGE NEEDED TO BE LEVIED BASED UPON THE CALCULATION AND INFORMATION PROVIDED ARE AS FOLLOWS
[00:25:01]
BUFORD COUNTY DEBT MILLAGE CHANGES TO 6.0 MILLS FOR THE 2021 BUDGET ORDINANCE THAT LISTS 5.5, AN INCREASE OF 0.5 MILLS.THE COUNTY DEPTH SINKING FUND HAS OVER 21 MILLION BASED UPON THE 2019.
KHAFRA NEARLY TWO FISCAL YEARS OF PAYMENT AT THIS LEVEL AND COULD MORE THAN COVER THE ADDITIONAL 0.5 MILS ESTIMATED TO BE 1,000,030 $5,684 AND 50 CENTS.
THAT 2020 BOND ADDED TO THE COUNTY DEBT MILLAGE BASED UPON THE DEPTH SINKING FUND BALANCE AND THE DEBT MILLAGE.
UM, THE DEBT MILLAGE WILL REMAIN AT 5.5 IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP THE MILLAGE RATES AS LOW AS POSSIBLE.
RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS INCREASES TO 5.8 FROM THE 2020 BUDGET ORDINANCE THAT LISTS 4.8 MILS AN INCREASE OF 1.5 MILLS.
THE DEATH SINKING FUND FOR THE RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS AND WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO MEET THE NEW PNI TOTAL DEBT FOR FISCAL 2021.
SO THAT'S WHY HE MADE THE CHANGE HE MADE AT NO TIME.
DID HE SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT CHANGE? JUST THE CHANGE IN RURAL CRITICAL LANDS, BUT THAT THE DEBT SERVICE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO 6.0, BUT HE LEFT IT AT 5.5.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WEIGHS IN ON WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.
IT DOES SPEAK TO WHAT COACH SAID THAT HE, HIS, HIS, UH, RESPONSIBILITIES ARE MATHEMATICAL.
AND SO IF HE HAS A MATHEMATICAL RESPONSIBILITY, HOW CAN HE SAY, WELL, IT SHOULD BE 6.0, BUT WHAT THE HECK? I JUST LET IT GO AT FIVE POINT.
HE ALSO SAID THAT THE, THAT THE, THE RESERVES IN THAT FUND WERE SUFFICIENT TO CARRY THE DISCREPANCY AND THAT THAT'S WHY HE COULD LEAVE THAT ONE THE WAY IT WAS.
AND IT'S THE RURAL AND CRITICAL LANDS PORTION OF IT, WHICH WAS HE THOUGHT INSUFFICIENT TO COVER THE DISCREPANCY OR THE LACK OF NEW MONEY COMING IN.
IT SOUNDS, IT SOUNDS LIKE HE WAS TAKING CARE OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, BUT YOU KNOW, MY REVIEW OF THE EMAIL SEEMS LATE.
HE THOUGHT HE WAS DOING HIS MINISTERIAL DUTIES AND CALCULATING BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF PAYMENTS THAT WERE NECESSARY, THAT, THAT IT IS THAT IT FALLS WITHIN OUR MISTAKE TO NOT ADD THE CATEGORIES CORRECTLY TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH 64.2, AS OPPOSED TO 65.2, WHICH, YOU KNOW, ONE HEADLINE SAYS 65.2.
BUT IF YOU ADD THE COLUMNS TOGETHER, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S FORTUITOUS.
IT'S A LUCKY BREAK FOR US THAT, THAT THE NEW MONEY THAT HE NEEDS, UM, IS, IS THE SAME AS WHAT WE SAID WE WANTED IN TOTAL.
I THINK THE 65.2 IS PROBABLY THE WAY TO GO.
HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A QUESTION, ULTIMATELY, WE SHOULDN'T REALLY HAVE AN ORDINANCE REGARDING DEBT MILLAGE AT ALL, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE INVOLVED IN.
WELL, THAT WAS MY TAKE ON IT, BUT THERE MAY BE, THERE MAY BE SOME HISTORY OF THAT, THAT I DON'T, THAT I CAN'T RECALL OR THAT YOU CAN RECALL.
BUT, UH, BUT LOGIC TELLS ME IF WE HAVE NO, UH, OVERSIGHT ON THEIR DEBT VILLAGE, WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT IT EVER LET ALONE AS A PART OF OUR LOAN HABIT AS PART OF OUR WORK, BUT IN ANY EVENT, IT DID FLOW THROUGH OUR ORDINANCE FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS TIME.
BUT I THINK THE POINT IS WE LET'S LOOK INTO IT FOR NEXT TIME, BUT HERE'S MY QUESTION.
IF, IF THE AUDITOR DETERMINED THAT WE NEEDED SIX MILLS TO, UH, TO MEET THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE RURAL AND CRITICAL FOR 2021, BUT WE COULD, BUT TO 5.8 WOULD SUFFICE BECAUSE WE'RE USING RE WE CAN USE RESERVE FUNDS.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID, RIGHT? UM, THAT'S, THAT'S A DISCRETIONARY DECISION ON HIS PART.
I DON'T WANT TO, I'M WONDERING IS WHO MAKES THE DECISION ULTIMATELY ABOUT WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE RESERVES CAN BE USED FOR I'M I'M NOT SURE THAT REQUIREMENT ISN'T STATUTORY OR ISN'T, THAT'S NOT STATUTORY PART OF THE, PART OF THE BOND GOVERNMENT AS OPPOSED TO A SLUSH FUND THAT WE CAN USE.
I MEAN, THEY, OVER MY DEGRADE ALL FOR DAD.
ANYWAY, KURT, CAN I HAVE YOU REPEAT THAT, UM, THAT SITE OF THE LAW THAT YOU SAID FOR ME, THE CODE SECTION? YES, SIR.
IT'S FOUR DASH 15 DASH ONE 50, AND PICKING UP IN THE CENTER.
[00:30:01]
ANNUALLY BY THE COUNTY AUDITOR AND COLLECTED BY THE COUNTY TREASURER IN THE SAME MANNER.AS OTHER COUNTY TAXES ARE LEVIED AND COLLECT A TAX WITHOUT LIMIT ON ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY IN THE COUNTY, SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE PRINCIPLE AND INTEREST OF SUCH BONDS AS THEY RESPECTIVELY MATURE AND TO CREATE SUCH SINKING FUND AS BEING MAY BE NECESSARY.
THAT'S HIS DISCRETION TO CALCULATE.
LET ME GO BACK FOR JUST AMERICAN, BECAUSE THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE.
SO WE HAD AN ERROR WITH THE, IN THE BODY OF THE BUDGET ORDINANCE WHERE WE NEED TO CORRECT THE TOTAL MILLAGE.
BUT THAT'S BECAUSE WE, WE REALIZED THAT WE NEEDED TO DROP THE A HUNDRED FOR DECIMAL.
AND THEN WHEN WE DID THAT, THAT CHANGED THE TOTAL, RIGHT? SO THAT AMOUNT, THAT IS NOT WHAT GOES ON THE TAX BILL, THE INDIVIDUAL, THE, UH, MILLAGE RATES, UH, BELOW THAT IN THE BUDGET ORDINANCE.
THAT'S WHAT GOES ON THE TAX BILL.
AND SO THE CONCERN THAT WE HAVE, MARIA WALLS, OUR TREASURER ON THE LINE, UM, THE CONCERN IS THAT THE BUDGET ORDINANCE IS NOT GOING TO MATCH THE TAX BILL.
SO, UM, IT'S NOT THAT IF THEY'RE 65.2 IN THE BODY OF THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE GET THAT MONEY.
WHAT WE, WHAT WE COLLECT IS WHAT'S SPELLED OUT IN THE WOMAN'S, THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE, I BELIEVE, GROGGY TO CONFUSE IT WITH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE NUMBERS ACTUALLY ADDED UP TO.
AND THE NUMBERS STATED IN THE BODY OF THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT CORRECT? AND THE NUMBER STATED THE BOTTOM OF THE ORDINANCE WAS 65.2, TWO OR 64 65.2, TWO, RIGHT.
SHOULD IT BE 64 POINT SINGLE, RIGHT.
MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN, BUT WHAT IT WAS, BUT IT WAS STATED A 65.2.
AND THEN THE ORDINANCE IS INCORRECT, A 65.22, BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE 64.6.
SO WE HAVE, WELL, HERE'S THE FIRST QUESTION I WOULD ASK IS CAN WE ATTRIBUTE THAT TO SCRIBNER'S ERROR, AS OPPOSED TO DO A MAJOR CHANGE IN THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING THREE READINGS THAT ARE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION, BUT I THINK THERE'S AT LEAST A STRAIGHT FACE ARGUMENT THAT OCCURRED, BUT OKAY.
THERE IS A SCRIBNER FAIR, BUT I WOULD SAY FOR, UM, THAT WE NEED TO, TO HAVE A CORRECT DOCUMENT SINCE IT'S THE BUDGET ORDINANCE, I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, BUT AGAIN, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE.
WE'VE GOT THE SCRIBNER'S THERE, BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE FACT THAT THE AUDITOR HAS CHANGED.
THE MILLAGE AGREED, AGREED, BUT ON OUR PORTION OF IT, WHICH IS THE ORDINANCE ITSELF, I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN'T CLEAN THAT UP BY SIMPLY SAYING THAT IT WAS A SCRIBNER'S THERE AND CORRECT IT TO 64.2 AND THEN DEAL WITH, AS YOU SAY, THE OTHER ISSUES, WHICH IS THE CHANGES MADE BY THE AUDITOR IS FOR THAT FLY CURB.
I BELIEVE IN THINGS SUCH AS BUDGETS THAT ARE SACROSANCT ORDINANCES, IT'S BETTER TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION AND AMEND IT IN THE WAY YOU WOULD EVENT ANY OTHER ORDINANCE.
YOU'RE SAYING THREE RATINGS THAT ARE PUBLIC HEARING AND GET MOVING ON IT.
THEN WE'LL DEAL WITH THE AUDITORS SITUATE.
WELL, WHERE WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THIS UP AT THE COUNCIL MEETING AND WE DO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM THAT IS IMPORTANT TO US.
SO MY SUGGESTION IS THAT WE CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION AT THE COUNCIL MEETING.
CAN WE HEAR FROM MS. THE TREASURER WHILE SHE'S ON THE LINE INPUT? NO.
I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY THAT SHE THOUGHT SHE WAS ALL, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN HER.
IS SHE? OH, UH, MARIA, ARE YOU ON, CAN YOU UNMUTE? IF YOU'RE HONEST.
CAN YOU WANT TO WAIT? YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS OR NOT? OR WOULD YOU NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE? I MEAN, MAKING IT A COMMON IS THIS SAME THING THAT I SAID TWO WEEKS AGO, MY ONLY INTEREST IS THAT OUR TAX FARES UNDERSTAND WHERE THE NUMBERS ON THEIR BILL ARE COMING FROM.
AND IF IT'S NOT FROM COUNCIL, THEN, THEN IT SHOULD BE CLEARLY EXPLAINED.
MY CONCERN WAS THE ORDINANCE NOT MATCHING THE TAX BILL.
AND THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE TO DIRECT A CUSTOMER TO IN THE TREASURER'S OFFICE.
AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, WE GET A LOT
[00:35:01]
OF CALLS QUESTIONING, WHY IS MY BILL THIS MUCH? WHY DID MY BILL GO UP? WHY DID THIS MILLAGE GO UP? WHY DID THIS CHANGE? AND I ALWAYS WANT TO EQUIP MY TEAM WITH THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO DIRECT THE CUSTOMER TO AN ORDINANCE, TO A PARTICULAR MEETING, TO A CALCULATION, WHATEVER THAT IS.AND I BEGAN TO SEE THAT INFORMATION.
IT WAS UNCLEAR AND APPEARED TO ME A SURPRISE IF COUNCIL'S INTENT IS OR AN ORDINANCE, NOT THAT THE TAX BILL, REGARDLESS OF THE REASON THAT IS YOUR DECISION TO MAKE.
WHAT I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH WAS THAT THIS SEEMED UNEXPECTED AND THAT IN MY MIND WAS NOT OKAY.
SO I'M NOT HERE TO OPINE ON WHAT YOU SHOULD DO.
MY ONE AND ONLY CONCERN IS THAT OUR CUSTOMERS UNDERSTAND WHO IS TAPPING THEM.
AND WHY, WHERE IS THAT NUMBER COMING FROM? MR. CHAIRMAN? MAY I ASK A QUESTION? JUST THE CHAIRMAN.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION? YES, SIR.
IT'S THE 65 NUMBER THAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE, A RAISE IN TAXES.
AND IT'S THE 64 NUMBER A NEUTRAL A REVENUE.
60, THE 64 NUMBERS, MR. BECKETT'S NUMBER AND THE 65 IS THE INADVERTENT SCRIBNER'S ERROR IN THE ORDINANCE.
THE 65.22 IS THE SCRIBNER'S ERROR.
THE 64.2 IS WHAT IT SHOULD BE BASED ON WHAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND WHAT IS MR. AND WHAT IS MR. BECKETT'S PROPOSAL? I THINK HIS IS, HEY, IT'S HELPED ME OUT.
IS IT 65.0, HIS WOULD BE A RAISE IN TAXES AND THE 64 NUMBERS AND WANTING TO TREVOR NEUTRAL.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MIGHT.
UH, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR KURT AND I'M JUST, I'LL JUST TEE THIS UP IF WE, IF WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM AGAIN LATER.
UM, BUT THE BOTTOM OF MR. BECKER'S EMAIL ON THE 18TH SAYS BASED ON STATE LAW, ON AG OPINIONS, THERE IS NO ACTION NEEDED ON THE PART OF COUNTY COUNSEL FOR THE DEBT MILLER SHOULD BE LEVIED BY THE AUDITOR.
I'M CURIOUS IF WE KNOW WHAT AG OPINIONS THOSE ARE, AND IF WE COULD JUST KIND OF GET BROUGHT UP TO SPEED ON THOSE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE AT THIS PARTICULAR SECOND, BUT, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS FOR LATER, I PRESUME HE'S REFERRING TO THE STATUTE THAT I READ, WHICH SAYS THAT IT IS THE AUDITOR'S DUTY TO LET THE DEBT SERVICE MILLAGE, AND THEN IT'S AS INTERPRETED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN STACKHOUSE VERSUS FLOYD.
I DON'T HAVE ANY AGSM OPINIONS.
I'VE GOT THE SUPREME COURT OPINION.
I THINK, AND JOE, I'LL GET OFF OF THIS QUICK, BUT ONE THING I WILL SUGGEST IF WE NEED TO MAKE A FOLLOWING A FOLLOWING LEGAL ADVICE THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A CHANGE IN THE ORDINANCE, THE THREE RATINGS THAT ARE PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE NEED TO GET ON THAT YESTERDAY SO WE CAN GET GUYS GET IT DONE.
DO YOU WANT THAT TO START IN THIS, IN THIS COMMITTEE AS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL? OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST LET IT, LET IT LIE HERE AND THEN INITIATE THE, THE ORDINANCE CHANGE IN COUNCIL? WE CAN DO IT EITHER WAY.
I'M NOT SURE WHICH IS THE MORE COMPLIANT.
WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY AN AGENDA ITEM AT THE COUNCIL MEETING.
WE CAN MAKE THAT DECISION THERE.
AND THEN AS FAR AS THE AUDITOR IS CONCERNED, UM, THE AUDITOR'S NUMBER ONE, ADD UP 64.2, UNLESS, AND UNTIL THE, UM, THE RURAL AND CRITICAL MILLAGE, THE REAL PROPERTY MILLAGE IS REDUCED FROM 5.8 TO 4.8 AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DEBT MILLAGE IS, UH, INCREASE FROM 36.3 TO 36.6.
DOES ANYBODY DISAGREE WITH THAT? UM, SO THE, I GUESS THE, THE ONLY QUESTION IS IF WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE COUNCILMEN TO START START A NEW AMENDMENT TO A MANDATE, UM, TO A MANDATE, THE ORIGINAL BUDGET ORDINANCE, IS THERE ANYTHING WE WANT TO DO IT, IT COMMITTEE TO DEAL WITH THE, UH, WITH THE CHANGES THAT THE AUDITORS MADE AND, UM, I DON'T WANT A PREVIOUS PROFILE.
UM, THE PREVIOUSLY FILED A, WHAT AM I TRYING TO SAY? A MANDAMUS, A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, THEN I THINK THAT'S ABOUT ALL WE CAN DO LEGALLY.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
WELL, LET'S MOVE ON TO, UH, EXECUTIVE SESSION, UM, ITEM NUMBER 10.UH, NEED A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF
[00:40:01]
DISCUSSION OF, UH, SOUTH CAROLINA CODE SECTION 30 DASH FOUR DASH 78, TWO DISCUSSION OF NEGOTIATIONS INCIDENT TWO, A TWO PROPOSED CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS.UM, THAT WOULD BE FOR THE SOUTHERN CAROLINA ALLIANCE, UH, CONTRACT RENEWAL.
DO I HAVE A MESSAGE? I HAVE A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
I'LL MAKE THE MOTION WITHOUT OBJECTION.
UH, I WILL REAL AWARE EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ANY OBJECTION.
UH, WE WILL, WE WILL CONCLUDE OUR OPEN SESSION, AN EXECUTIVE THINKING AS SOON AS THE, UH, IS THE, UH, THE FOLKS.