Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] [Music]

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. N. [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] All right. Uh, good afternoon everyone. Like to welcome you to the September planning commission session for the city of Columbia. False start. All right. All right. Multiple staff members are here today to ensure that the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and members of the public are able to participate in the meeting at the appropriate times. If you are here today and would like to speak about a case, please provide your name clearly into the microphone and please be sure to sign in either at the

back of the room or at the podium for documentation purposes. If you're here to today to speak about a case, you must speak up when the chairperson calls for public comment. I'll go ahead and call the role. Uh, Mr. Cook here, Miss Davis here, Mr. HARP here, Mr. Hulcom here, Mr. Osorio here, Miss Cubny here, and Mr. Con here.

We have a quorum. I'll give a brief overview of the meeting format. Uh applicants with requests before the planning commission are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time should include but is not limited to an overview of the project, case history, and any pertinent meetings held regarding the request. And this time also includes all persons presenting on behalf of the applicant such as attorneys, engineers, and architects. The time limit does not include any questions asked by the planning commission or staff regarding request. And during the public comment period, members of the general public are given the opportunity to address their concerns in intervals of 2 minutes. And after the public comment period, applicants have 5 minutes to respond. The administrator has a timer and will make presenters aware of when their time has expired. The planning commission reserves the right to amend these procedures on a case-by case basis and I haven't reviewed that. Are there any changes to the agenda?

There have not been any changes since publication.

Thank you. All right. Uh we'll begin with the consent agenda. The planning commission uses the consent agenda to approve non-controversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. Examples of such items on the consent agenda include the approval of site plans, annexations, and street names. If a member of the planning commission or the general public would like to discuss an item on the consent agenda, you must speak up after the consent agenda is read. Then that item is removed from the consent agenda and considered during the regular agenda on the meeting. The planning commission will then approve the remaining consent agenda items. And will staff please review the consent agenda?

Certainly. Uh the first item is to approve the August 14th, 2025 minutes. Um the next item is under future land use amendment and zoning amendment for a pending annexation which is annex- 2022-0017 on the southwest side of Holloway Road. request recommendation on the assignment of the land use classification of urban edge residential small lot UE1 and the assignment of zoning of residential single family small lot RSF3 for a pending annexation. The property is currently classified as neighborhood medium density and zoned residential 2 R2 by Richland County. Next is annex-2025-000018 930 Brantley Street requests recommendation on the assignment of the land use classification of urban edge mixed residential and the assignment of zoning of residential single family large lot RSF-1 for a pending annexation. The property is currently classified as mixed residential high density and a priority investment area and zoned R2 by Richland County. Next is a zoning text amendment TA-2025-000012 request recommendation to amend the unified development ordinance chapter 17 article 3 zoning districts section 17-3.2 two residential base zoning districts RDMV residential two family mill village district to modify requirements for two family dwellings there's a preliminary plat review splat-2025-0021 approximately 30.2 2 acres at the 8300 and 8,400 block of Old Perville Road. Request preliminary plat approval for

the construction of a 122 lot single family residential subdivision, Cypress Bend. The properties are zoned RSF3 residential single family small lot district. And finally, a major site plan review SP plan-2025-00001214 through 1236 Greg Street, 1912 through 1924 Lady Street, 1221 Greg Street, and 1306 Barnwell Street. Request major site plan approval for the construction of a three-building 30 314 unit multifamily residential development and parking garage. The Greg Street Apartments. The properties are zoned CAC APAVZ and MU1 APAVZ uh community activity center corridor and mixed use within the airport vicinity zone overlay district. And there is a traffic study included with that in the packet. And that concludes the consent agenda.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the planning commission who would like to have an item removed from the consent agenda? Are there any members of the public that would like you? Uh I'm Jim Daniel. I would like to have item six removed from the consent agreement. This is the uh property on Greg Street. Thank you. All right. Um, can I get a motion to remove item six from the consent agenda to the regular agenda? Mr. Chair, I motion that we move item six from the consent agenda to the regular agenda.

All right, we have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. Um, item number six will be moved from the consent agenda to the regular agenda. Um, all right. Having done that, can I get a motion for the approval of the August minutes and the remaining consent agenda? I motion for an approval of the August 2025 minutes and the remainder of the consent agenda. We've got a motion. Can I get a second?

Second. All right. Have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed. All right. Consent agenda and the minutes pass. We'll move to the regular agenda.

All right. That's going to take us to item number six, SLAN 20250012. And this project entails the construction of a three-building multifamily residential development and associated parking garage within the 12200 block of Greg and the 1200 block of Barnwell Street. The proposed development will contain 314 apartments and amenity space. Um off- streetet parking will be provided in a surface parking lot and a six-story parking garage. In addition, long-term parking and short-term bicycle parking will be provided in the parking garage and the applicant is present and can explain their case. Mr. Chair, I need to recuse myself this particular item.

All right. Thank you. We need you. Can you note that? All right. Uh, is the applicant here? Yes. Would you like to speak to the project? [Music]

Hello, I'm Chandler Colbertson. I wasn't planning to speak today. We had somebody that was supposed to be here to speak on behalf, but I can hopefully answer any questions until they get here. Any commission members have any questions for the applicant?

Did you have any issues with any any of the staff comments? Uh, no. Okay. I thought I read through and didn't personally see any concerns. So, right. Uh, I guess if we can see what the issues were and then give you the opportunity to come back. Sure. We're happy to address any issues there may be. Thank you. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman. I'm Jim Daniel. I don't have any actual oppositions to the project. Here's my issue. Y'all got three items before y'all today for new projects. One, does the staff do any type of analysis on the need for these projects? Two, does your body do any analysis on the need for these projects? Let me just tell you what's in the pipeline right now. The gateway at Gadston Green just opened. That's 940 beds. That's for student housing. The university also has in addition to the honors college of,00 apartments which should probably be two years or three years away. So we're talking 2,000 new university units. Uh Core Apartments has announced 485 student beds on Main Street. They've also announced 418 beds, which they say is market rate next door. The verve at Blossom Street, which is coming out of the ground, uh, should be open this fall, is 695 units. We have proposed 1221 Greg, 800 beds. We have 1027 and 10 1125 rosewood which are going to be I don't know I understand town houses but when you look at these in mass do we need anything else right now in the pipeline with what we've already got we've overstressed in our neighborhood I'm president will neighborhood association with a developer coming in and building 10 student occupied houses they're they're selling to mom and dad for $450 to $700 and there are four and five bedrooms in

there cramming four and five people in each one of them. Uh we're getting ready to challenge series of these but that block basically is is gone. I mean is no longer a single family block. It's a student housing block. They'll be here for two years and then they'll go and somebody else will buy. So when you look at what we're looking at here, you got 2,000 for the university. You've got antique, you got Kors doing 900, Verb is doing 700, that's 1,600. You got Greg is 800, that's 2400. I don't know what the Rosewood is, but I mean, we could be talking 3,000 new units in the next two years. Who is going to fill these? There's a nine bit there's a nine unit apartment right now under under that's being developed at the corner of Rosewood. Uh was by the first citizens bank. They've got nine units, three bedrooms each, $1,000 per bed. From what I can see, they've only leased three. Online they say they've got three available. I don't know. But that's a brand new project. Cadillac $1,000 a bed and it's not leasing up. and they missed the window for spring semester, I would say. So, I guess they're going to have to sit on $9,000 loss for till January. But I don't know whether you guys are looking at the big picture. What I see is y'all are rubber stamping every application that comes before you for new housing apartments without looking at the big picture. What's in the pipeline? What's just come online? and how does it fit with what's being proposed? You got to assume that Mr. Coverson's project is going to be geared towards students cuz it's right up the street. Maybe not. But, uh, you know, at some point in time, y'all are the gatekeepers.

Y'all are the ones that are supposed to be saying, "Wait a minute. Do you have any data that supports the renting or sale of these properties? If you don't do that, you're not doing your job. Thank you. So, I I appreciate the comments and just for sentiment towards that. We I appreciate you sharing that cuz that's something I keep a close eye on given how much of that's been coming through in the last two to three years. Um I think and there's been a lot in the back run the last three years, not as well. and you look at the ones in Olympia,

uh I don't I don't know whether the city's economic development's responsibility to tell you we don't need anymore right now. Oh yeah, we need some more and here's the type we need. But I don't if you aren't getting that information, how do you make a decision on there? Yes. I think there's currently I could be at this moment in time slightly off, but I think there's a shortage of 4,000 beds. Yeah. I I don't know the exact numbers, but they changed. There's two websites that I'm happy to give you later that have all this data. Well, you know, part of it is moving into our neighborhood. Okay.

Uh in our case in Wheeler Hill, we've got 33 bedrooms that have just come on the market in the last year. Uh the developer has another block to build on. There may be a demand for 4,000, but that doesn't count what's out in the neighborhood. Is that factored in the rentals in Shandon? I see a lot of for rent signs in Shandon right now that I don't normally see. Yeah. Um would the applicant like to speak to that or

I'm happy to answer any specific questions you may have. It sounds like the opposition is more to the aggregate of things going on in Columbia, not specifically our development, but if y'all have any questions about our development, we're happy to address. It sounded like he was a little concerned that uh people were building too many apartments and they wouldn't be able to be filled. Are you concerned about that going forward? No. No. It sounds like there's a demand based on everything that we've researched. Thank you. Any other questions? Do do you plan to market them towards students?

We've set it up intentionally to be market rate, so anybody can be um rented. So, I mean, with its proximity to the university, I'm sure students will be interested, but it won't be we're not looking for any additional student credits. We're not working with the university on any of that. Thank you. Thank you. Um, any further discuss? Mr. Chair, just a question. If if if they're not designated student housing,

is it in our purview in any way to comment on who's going to live in those any any development that goes up, is that not discrimination housing if you were to say students can't live in multif family housing? I mean, it's a good question. And yep, just just a just a point, not not really a question, honestly, a comment. That's correct.

Um, Mr. Chair, I just want to add um and just remind fellow commissioners that while I can empathize with Mr. Daniel's comment, I think we just have to remember what our duty that we're tasked with is. And it's essentially, you know, we have to review the item that's in front of us and if it meets the unified development ordinance and those points on there, you know, we can either um, you know, vote to or recommend it for approval or not. But aside from that, I think we might be getting out of our purview.

No, it's well noted. Thank you. Um, if there's any no further discussion, take a motion. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the request for major site plan approval SP plan 2025-000012. uh upon all staff comments being addressed and that we'll meet all site plan decision standards. Thank you. We've got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. I.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. On to the next item. Okay. Um so now that takes us to the next uh two items on the regular agenda. Um these are items that the commission looked at last month and the commission had deferred. I'll I'll address them both individually, but as with last month, if the commission is willing, it may pay to discuss them both at the same time. Um the the the first one is an annexation future land use map amendment and zoning map amendment for 1027 Rosewood Drive. And um this is an annexation of what is currently a a vacant or actually it's a it's a grass parking area adjacent to Seawwells. And uh this request is to again annex and and to um annex it into the MU2 zoning district. It is currently zoned general commercial in the county. And the the next item on the agenda

is a um zoning map amendment at 11:25 Rosewood Drive. And this is a request for a recommendation to reszone the property from our CAC district, which is community activity center corridor district to our MU2 district, which again is a mixeduse district. Um, I I do know the applicant is is here and I'm sure we'll um be able to provide you with any additional information you'd like and I'd also be glad to answer any questions. Thank you. Is the applicant here? And I would put out I think a few of the commission members were not here last month uh and this was deferred and um I think the applicants had some time maybe to revisit and kind of see if there's some ways to address the concerns from before.

Hey, I'm George McCutchen and if I could pass out uh the site plan and the proposed uh deed restrictions for the property. Um, I will say we had looked at this property uh as a student housing project, about 400 units, um, and decided instead to go back with 71 town homes for, um, professional working people who wanted to be close to downtown. Um, they may also be Gamecock fans because they can see the stadium from there, but um, anyway, that's part of the project and and the process we've been going through for about the last 3 years. So, um, when you see the nice design of the town home project, you'll see, um, as it's handed out to you, um, lots of green space. I was surprised at how much green space we needed to put in there, but I think it's like 20 25% something like that. So, a lot of green space included. And one of the concerns that we ran into that we were unaware of was um a possibility of single family homes, which is kind of a loophole in the uh zoning, which I think in talking with staff, we had gone back after last uh meeting to attempt to find another zoning that would only allow the town homes. And unfortunately, in talking with staff, they said there's nothing else other than this proposed. that they had come up with and recommended to us. Um, however, I think, and I hope I'm not misstating this, uh, Andrew, is that, um, there may be a proposal for a future clarification in the code to separate town homes from single family, uh, possibly. So um what it would be would be to clarify whether a development built on a single

lot is considered to be multif family or town home. So if it would still be a situation where if it was subdivided into a few simple lots those would be considered to be town homes. But um you know if it was on one large lot it would we would consider to be multif family.

All right. So we think we've got a beautiful project here for this space. Um the ownership the Seawolf family they want to continue the business. They've been a great part of the community for many years contributed a lot to Colombia to uh the university. And we would like for y'all's approval, please. What What questions might I answer?

I I I do want to put out to the commission. I I appreciate the applicant making the effort and providing this, but as far as our motion goes, it it needs to stay independent of the site plan specific to zoning. But u if anyone has any questions for the applicant, please feel free. And if I may, I I would just like to make a statement about the um declaration of covenant that we we we cannot condition any zoning on on having such a thing.

Sure. So, I I just have a general question. I mean, condition on this approval, where are you at as far as being able to to do this project or from a time frame? We're we're under contract and certainly every all contracts are finite. Uh but we think we have enough runway to get this thing done. Uh we have a concept plan. Uh if we get through the zoning stage and we have conceptual site plan approval, then we go to hard civil design. We think that we can have hard civil design done, you know, five, four or five months and then we're we're into the uh actual uh land disturbance permit application process, permits to construct water and sewer and so forth. Uh we're very confident that uh we've got a a builder that is very much in like, you know, with this with this concept with with this uh location. Uh I think it's going to be a product. It's a three-story town home with a four-story walk out on top. It's going to offer a lot of value to the area. Uh we think it's going to be multi-purpose for somebody that wants to buy one and maybe have their sibling, their their kids to to have it while they're in school and then use it afterwards to go to football games or whatnot. Uh we know there's a market for it. Uh there there's there should be a strong demand. It's very quality, good-looking stuff. Uh our home builder is a national home builder. Uh we've gone the extra mile to make sure that this product, you know, is a good, viable, salailable product in this market. So, we're very confident that that we've got a builder. Uh we're very confident if we can get through this temporary issue here, uh that we can get to council. Uh a couple things I want to bring up is that, you know, in

discussions with uh the planning staff, uh we did learn that we could go to the first reading and city council could if they approve it. Uh by law, you could table it for as much as 180 days until the second reading. We did something similar to that in Greenville, South Carolina, a project that we did, a town home project in the downtown city of Greenville, uh to where uh the land owner did not want to the property to necessarily be zoned and annexed into the city if we didn't close on the property. So, we work with the city uh with this with the city manager there and basically we got a letter from the city that's that basically said if we don't close and the property does not reszone. Now, in this particular case, I will say that I think the Seaw Wells would prefer that the property be reszoned versus the situation in in in Greenville. However, um we there could be a pause for sure for 180 days until we give notice of our intent to close. So, the way this thing happens is uh our builder is close to giving us notice to proceed on this project, meaning that they've done all their due diligence. We've given them all the information the geotechnical environmental uh we've given in zoning you know which is the next bar that needs to be checked. So once we get across the zoning threshold uh then we will get notice to proceed from our builder which means you know put the pedal to the metal let's get this thing done uh and let's go full go to full civil design get the CDs and get all the permits in place and then we we then deliver deliver the finished pads for the builder. Uh so that's uh that's the process if you will. Uh but we're very confident to answer your question in a long roundabout way. That that's that's that's my answer. So uh the other thing was uh um you know I I don't know but I on one hand I like this zoning because it does allow you to do a

variety of things without going through a PD. However, this one issue that's hanging out there, no one wants to see single family residential on this site. And I will remind everybody that the price we're paying for this property, single family residential will never be able to support the land cost at that location. Now, that aside, um there's, you know, always a possibility, but I'd say it's a minute possibility you'd ever see res single family residential in this property. So, we would like to respectfully request that we bring it to a vote. Uh let's uh we will endeavor in absolute terms to and the property owners will consent to a deed restriction on the property that would be recorded at closing. um that is is a that deed restriction if you read it uh it is it is irreversible and it withstands well foreclosures and da da da da da a long list of things that could happen that would that would imperil that restriction however I think it's I think it's ironclad restriction that would in perpetuity um the second thing would be again we will ask uh city council to please table it after the after the first reading if we were so fortunate to get them to approve it and they again they can table it up to 180 days by South Carolina law as I understand it. So that's where we are. We again we feel very confident and we're happy to be here uh being city of Columbia to be able to annex something in it's something that I think is going to be a very valuable asset to the community in that location without 400 to 500 bids.

Thank you. Are there any questions from any commissioners? I have one question. I have a concern that you stated earlier, if I understood you correctly, that this was primarily going to be for student housing. Is that correct?

No, this is this is this is market rate for sale. It's going to be pretty pricey, you know, for, you know, so it's not really going to be as suitable for for student. It's definitely not student housing. Now, the plan that was actually on this for this property, it was under contract with the Seaw Wells, I guess, for a couple years, was a student housing, and it was a mega mammoth. 4 500 bed student housing with a a crosswalk from street crossing over the street. I mean, it was mammoth. And that, for whatever reason, didn't work out. We're fortunate that we're here uh to downsize that and to bring a very quality town home product to the marketplace. Uh we think that this uh these town homes are there could be as much as 45 to 50 million in sales um in in this particular pro project and uh I think that that bodess well for the tax base in in the city and uh uh we're happy to be here and appreciate your participation and uh if any more questions I'd be happy to answer.

Thank you for that clarification. I I have one quick question. So is your intention to build this all out then sell them individually? Are you going to build it in phases? I'm just curious about uh it'll be mass it'll be built out it'll be built out in one phase basically. It's it's a with a takedown schedule. Yeah. No, it it will be built out in one phase. I mean we we'll mass grade the property which is not much grading. We're basically we got demolition. We got some asphalt to remove but it'll be built in one phase. Thank you. I think I think we touched this is a question for staff. Um, this still has to come for a site plan approval. Yes. Is that correct?

Yes, it it would require a site plan approval because it is more than 25. Um, actually I I stand corrected. It would be subdivision review because it would be a a subdivision. Makes sense. Are there any further questions from the commissioners? All right. Thank you. Uh, are there any members of the public who would like to speak? Yes.

Jim Daniel, I Jim, I make the same comments I made before. Uh the applicant made a comment that they feel comfortable they these pillons for sale. My question is have they actually done a market study to see if there's a market for these expensive units across in the state fairground. Um and again my position and it's really y'all's job not to rubber stamp just because the they enter what the form says they have to do. Y'all need to look into these things and quit approving projects that maybe don't have a market. Uh maybe that should be passed on to Ryan Coleman, but it looks like to me all you guys do is rubber stamp if the application has all the right words in the right places. You don't go any further than that. And I think that's a real mistake on y'all's part. Thank you.

All right. Are there any other members of the public that would like to comment? All right. Any commission members have any additional questions of staff or the applicant? All right. Mr. Chair, I think the issue last time was that there was a potential that they could have single family detached on there. And from last time to this time, basically nothing's changed. This is the zoning that they'd be able to This is the only zoning that would apply for their project. Correct. I think that is correct. Is that correct?

Correct. Single family detached is still is excuse me is still a permitted use.

Okay. Thank you. My only additional comment is I I would hate for this project to you know fall apart simply because there's the possibility that single family homes could be built on there especially given that as you mentioned I think a site plan would still have to come in front of us. So I think at at that time if if anything's changed, you know, if it's approved today, you know, we could revisit that at that point, but I I would just hate to not move forward with this just because again, there's a possibility and I think um you know, we might want to take the applicant um you know, out of good faith word.

Thank you. Any additional comments? Uh before entertaining a motion, I just would put out that any motion um is completely independent and with nothing to do with the site plan um or the deed any deed restriction that was presented. So Mr. Chair, are we making motions for both at one time or separately? Um we need to do those separate. That would be separate. That's what thought. Okay, we'll do a Which one you want us to do first?

I guess just do seven first since it's first on the agenda and then eight. I make a motion that we recommend approval to reszoning of mixed use district 2 MU2 case annex-2025-0016 located at 1027 Rosewood Drive. All right, I've got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? I'm opposed for the record, but motion passes.

All right. You want to do the next one? Mhm. Yes. I make a motion that the planning commission recommend approval to reszoning of mixeduse district MU2 for zoning map amendment ZMA 2025-000016 located at 1125 Rosewood Drive. All right, thank you. We've got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed? That's me. Motion passes. Thank you. All right. On to the next. [Music]

Okay. The next item on your agenda is um for the Bull Street development. It it is um sorry, wrong page here. Uh basically the property is generally bound by Bull Street, Colonial Drive, Harden Street, and Calhoun Street. Um and this is a request or re recommendation on a major amendment to a planned development district. And um you know procedurally this this major amendment to a plan development follows the same process as a zoning map amendment. Um and um but there are will not be boundaries changed by this amendment. It it just basically requires that it go to you as the planning commission and then the city council for approval. And so this request is to u modify the maximum allowable height uh for structures within an area defined as a special district within the Bull Street neighborhood plan development district. And um and basically there's a portion of that plan development district that requires this be considered a major change and go through this process. Um regrettably when I was making attachments I did not include the special district. So, let me describe it for you. And and um I also had some technical difficulties. I was trying to print that out for you now and um apparently not successfully connecting to the printer. But um the special district is an area that um is largely on Colonial Drive. Um, it does go all the way up to Bull Street, but goes down about as far as like the S in the word Sabal on on the map here if Yeah. around around there. And um and then it uh there's also a

section of special district along Harden Street to the east of the um the park. So in that area, that's also special district. However, the current regulations do allow that same height that is being proposed, which is up to 10 stories. Um, and so basically, yeah, north of the baseball stadium, uh, along Colonial's uh, Colonial Drive. If if I'm able to get that map, I I've tried to get that map printed. Uh, I'll get it up to you, but that is the area within the plan development district that this change would apply to. Um, the the applicant is present and we'll I'm sure give you a little bit more information.

Thank you. The applicant here.

Hi there. I'm Chandler Cox um with Bull Street Development. Uh thank you for considering the application to amend the um PUD to allow a more specific height limit uh within the Colonial Drive special district. We are asking uh basically these are one on one by one projects. So everything at Bull Street is either designated what we call T4 or T5 and then on case byase basises things can apply for special district. So, as we are asking for this height limit increase, it's not a by right necessarily across the district, even throughout special the special district within it. So, thank you for uh your consideration and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Any commission members have any questions?

All right. Thank you. Um are there any members of the public that have any comments? lively crowd today. Um, all right. Well, no comments can take a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that we recommend approval of the request uh to amend the zoning map uh for the properties uh included in uh God, I got to take out those numbers. Okay. For the property.

Yeah, there you go. Sorry. So, I move that we recommend approval of the request to amend uh ZMA. Where's the number? There we go. 20250017 as it meets the decision standards outline in section uh 17-2.5C in the unified development ordinance. Like that. Thank you. All right, we've got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you.

And that brings us to I guess do we have any other business?

We do have a couple of quick items on other business. Let's see if I can get to the I don't know that it's on here anyway. But um first of all, I just wanted to um thank Miss Davis. This is her last planning commission meeting. Um she's rotating off and um council has made some new appointments. So, thank you for your years of service for agreeing to be vice chair. We really appreciate you and just wanted to acknowledge Miss Davis. Um, and related to that, we do have um some elections since um Miss Davis has been the vice chair. We do have to and I know y'all made some nominations. So, I think Maline's got some um forms for y'all to fill out so that we can have a vice chair. Our bylaws do require us to do elections in January every year. So, this will just be for the remainder of the year to have a vice chair. um in case our chair can't make it. So um and then we've got a couple of new members um that'll be um serving uh next month. Um Kelsey Foster and Clay Brabbom. And um so we'll be seeing them up here next month. So

I meant to I meant to stop and address that. Thank you. But I was also trying to twist her arm to stay on for a little longer. It's it's been my pleasure. I really have enjoyed it in the relationships with everyone. So, I look forward to seeing y'all around Columbia. Well, thank you for your service. Thank you. Pleasure.

Um You have it. It was here when I got here. And I was here when I got here. [Music] And it looks like Mr. Osorio will be our vice chair for the rest of the year. So, thank you and congratulations. Any other business from anybody else? I think we're good.

All right. Oops. I get a motion to adjurnn. Mr. Chair, make a motion to adjurnn. Got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. That's a lot of seconds. Guess we're good. All right. Good afternoon, everyone. So, [Music]