County Council - Regular Meeting

You ready, Sherry? I call this meeting of the Lancaster County Council to order. I ask that the clerk note for record at a quorum of council present that public notice of the meeting, including the meeting agenda, has been posted the required length of time in the lobby. and the county administration building and on the county website and the news media was notified of the meeting time and place. I welcome you to the county council meeting. Before we go any further, I would like to recognize our new county administrator that's here. This is his first meeting. I'd like to welcome him and I'd like to turn it over to you if you'd like to say a few comments, Brian, Brian Tucker.

See, I'm still learning how to work the microphone too. I'm happy to be here. This has been a great opportunity. It is a great opportunity. I appreciate you all giving me a two and a half week head start before my first meeting to make sure that y'all still wanted me. So I'm glad to be here and I appreciate the opportunity and just looking forward to get to work. Thank you. Thank you.

For y'all that don't know, Mr. Tucker is a Lancaster resident. Comes to us from the city of Myrtle Beach where he was an assistant city manager. Before that, served, I think, eight years as economic development director for Georgetown County. He's worked for several chamber of commerce organizations in the state. Unfortunately, he's a Clemson graduate. And him and his wife Margaret have two grown daughters. And we all welcome y'all to Lancaster County.

I would ask that you take a moment to turn off all pagers. Put on vibrating cell phones. Thank you if you're not wearing any hats or caps in the council chambers. Please be considered to others in the room by refraining from conversations during the meeting. I ask that you please stand and join counsel for the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by the invocation given this evening by Council Member Charlene McGrill.

I pledge allegiance to the and justice for all.

Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we thank you for the opportunity to gather in service to our community. Grant us the wisdom to make wise decisions and respect in others' discussions. Help us to seek the common good, listen with open minds, and work together for the benefit of all citizens. Amen.

Okay, Councilman Carnes will be via Zoom tonight, so he will be joining us. Also, we will have a roll call vote tonight because of that, that he gets the opportunity to vote. We'll move on into the approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second. I got a motion and a second. Ms. McGriff? Second. Mr. Harper? Roll call, please.

Stuart Graham.

Aye.

Charlene McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller.

Approve.

Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approve. Bryant Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes.

Approved.

All right, this 7-0 vote, thank you. All right, we'll move on into our citizens' comments. We now come to two citizens' comments. Please bear in mind that this is not a period of dialogue with council or a question and answer period. This is your opportunity to address council with your concerns. I ask that you address your remarks to council as a body and not to any individual council member. Please speak into microphones, state your name and address for the record, and you will have up to three minutes to address counsel. Your time will start, won't start until you have provided your name and address. Okay. The first one is Robert Kenley. Did I pronounce that right?

Kenley.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, council members, county staff and fellow residents. My name is Robert Kinley and I live at 2078 Clarion Drive in the Shelly Woods neighborhood directly adjacent to the 71 acre tract before you tonight. When a project like this comes, when a project like this comes before you, it's easy to focus on maps, numbers, and technical details, but behind every line on a site plan are real people, real homes, and real expectations about the growth and how the growth should happen. This is the second reading. I won't revisit the details you've already reviewed. Instead, I'd like to share what isn't captured on the site plan. Over the past nine months, I've been involved in this process from the beginning. As a neighboring resident, I've had concerns about how this rezoning might affect my family and my community. What stood out to me wasn't that every concern was eliminated, it was how those concerns were addressed. CF Smith has continued to make a consistent effort to engage with nearby residents. They've listened, responded, and remained accessible. Most importantly, they treated the community input as something to incorporate and not to avoid. As a result, the plan improved. The enhanced buffering, berms, fencing, landscaping, setbacks, and commitments in the memorandum of understanding reflect what can happen when meaningful dialogue occurs early in the process. Growth in Lancaster County is inevitable. The real question is how it happens. Residents want growth that respects the people who are already here. Throughout this process, I've come to value working with a developer who remains engaged and accountable. My experience with C.F. Smith has reinforced that trust. Before any construction begins, something important has already been established, a relationship built on communication and respect. That is what responsible development looks like. My hope is that this becomes the expectation, not the exception. Let this project serve as a reminder that when developers and communities work together, the outcome is stronger for everyone involved. I urge you and future developers in Lancaster County to continue setting the standard, engage early, listen sincerely, and build with the community, not just within it. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

All right, Lori Sestar.

Hey, y'all. My name's Lori Sestar, and I'm the owner of the property, me and my husband are the owner of the property located at 101 Lakefront Drive in Lancaster. And we're just requesting the rezoning of our property to allow our daughter to place a mobile home on the family land. It's been, the land has been in our family for many years and the surrounding properties are also owned by family members. Our family supports this request and has no objections to our daughter and her family living on the property. My husband and I are getting older and having our daughter and her family nearby would provide valuable assistance and support as our needs increase. In addition, we just found out our daughter's gonna have a little one, and it's a little boy, we just found out, so that's even more beneficial. And we just wanna live close together. And given the cost of living today, and especially the high cost of constructing a new home, placing a mobile home on our property is much more practical and affordable housing and option for our daughter and her growing family. And the mobile home looks more like a modular, and they will have brick underpinning, so it's not gonna be an eyesore. The arrangement would just allow us to keep our family together, and that's kind of what we were asking. So we respectfully ask for your favorable consideration of the rezoning request, and we thank you for your time, consideration, and all the service you do to the citizens of Lancaster. And go Gamecocks.

Thank you. Congratulations on the grandchild. John Saul.

John Saul, Sweet Briar Drive, Indian Land. Ladies and gentlemen of the Lancaster County Council, first I would like to thank CF Smith Property Group and particularly John Parker, who's not here tonight, I believe. for meeting so often with so many members of the Indian Land community and adjusting their development plans in accordance with suggestions from those neighbors so closely affected by the development of the property in question. However, I'm at a loss to understand how they can undertake this huge project with all the time and money invested so far without a firm commitment by a tenant capable of occupying a big box store similar to Costco, Walmart, or even Home Depot. Maybe they have one but are unable to provide the name due to contractual reasons or some other privacy requirement. A number of people I've spoken to find this very odd that even now we cannot be presented with who our potentially very large and very impactful new neighbor might be. My neighborhood, the retreat of Rayfield, where my wife and I have lived for the past eight years, anxiously hopes to benefit from safer access onto Highway 521 and egress back into our neighborhood as a result of the installation of a much-needed traffic signal at Halifax and Murphy Drive at the main entrance to our neighborhood, resulting from the development of the proposed new shopping center. However, I am not yet convinced that the potential reward of a traffic signal is worth the risk associated with all that potentially accompanies such a large commercial development and the resulting increased traffic and already overwhelmed highway infrastructure. Even more concerning is that the rezoning request from low-density residential to regional business leaves the door wide open for potentially building high-density apartments on this 71-acre property should there be some sort of hiccup with the development of the shopping center by C.S. Smith or even some other developer should the property be sold or transferred during the development process. Per the ordinance 2026-2012, section 1B, the future land use category of the subject property is core mixed use, which the Lancaster County 2040 Comprehensive Plan describes as intended to facilitate the ongoing development of the primary urban centers in the Panhandle. These areas should accommodate a wide range of higher density housing as well as major commercial and mixed use developments. These areas should help to support a transition to a more urban environment over time with improved transportation connections, greater walkability, and more amenities for residents. May I just add that I believe the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is wrong in its provision for higher density housing for this particular property using the regional business zoning designation. By the way, the Parkstone and Indian Land apartment complex just to the north of this property is zoned regional business. So I hope you can understand my concern about any possible potential for high density residential development on this property. Therefore, I respectfully request that the Lancaster County Council deny rezoning ordinance 2026-12 from low density residential per the ordinance and change the zoning designation to general business. Thank you for hearing my request. Please vote accordingly. Gene Toll.

Good evening, Jean Doyle, 6030 Kings Canyon Way, Lancaster. Thank you, gentlemen. It's good to see everybody after a little bit of a break. Three things. First, welcome to Mr. Tucker as our new county administrator. I'm sure that everybody's been looking forward to working with you. Welcome back. Hope you can help the county council staff and the residents lead Lancaster into a bigger, greater, and better future. second of all I had I took the opportunity to come to the last live ad hoc UDO meeting a few weeks ago Mr. Harper Mr. Luis Mr. Graham the planning commission members the consultants that were working on it it was a great discussion it was very focused it was very succinct it was very particular I was really impressed with the amount of work that you have accomplished so is it perfect I'd like to think it is but I'm pretty sure somewhere along the line maybe not right away But a few years down the road somebody's gonna find something that they didn't like about it But I do want everybody to know how much work has been put into it and how good it really looks so far third the budget it was a long process a lot of people put a lot of work into it, but I was I I was pretty surprised. At the end of the budget discussion at the last meeting, there were some very pointed questions from Mr. Luis and Mr. Graham about certain line items in the budget. And department heads were asked to come up and answer their questions. And I can tell you, they didn't do a very good job. Was it a ton of money? It was $100,000 here and $50,000 there, so on and so forth. I'm just flabbergasted. I don't know if any of these department heads or any of you have ever worked in the private sector. I have, and I could never put forth a budget that I've had to put forth without specific direction for how funds were going to be used, whether it was plus or minus. Even if I took money out of a budget, I had to give good reasons about why I was taking it out. I was just very disappointed that only two people out of seven really had anything to say. Those of us in Indian Land, Mr. Luis and Mr. Graham, you represent the rich folks in Lancaster County. We are probably more comfortable than many people are. But those of you who represent people that are less well-off than we are, you in particular should be really paying attention to every single penny in the budget. I'll be probably paying a lot more attention to what's going on with the budget. You've agreed to be more transparent as we move forward. I'm going to be looking to see how much of that money, extra money that people ask for, gets spent. I'm actually looking forward to seeing the final budget for the year that just ended, seeing how much money was left over. So, again, you represent the constituents. Even though I can only vote for one of you up there, I feel as though you represent me as well so i hope you keep that in the mind in the future thank you very much uh kathy storm

Good evening. Welcome, Mr. Tucker. Glad to have you here and look forward to working with you. My name is Kathy Storm, 5025 Redwood Grove Trail, Indian Land. First, I would like to speak about the rezoning of the property on 521. The remaining problem that we have had for a long time is infrastructure. That has not changed. Nothing more has been done to provide Any more infrastructure, the roads are still in the same condition. We go through the frustration of driving on 521 every time we leave our homes and try to go anywhere in the community. I really am against the rezoning and I ask that you vote against that. Also, I wanted to talk about the budget. I, you know, celebrating 250 years of independence in this country was a moment of joy and pride in our country. And I couldn't help but think about the meeting that we had just gone through on the budget. And the people who seemed to be upset that there was any questioning of the numbers and how they were being spent. And I mean, really downright insults to Mr. Luis. And yes, we are his cheering squad because he looks out for his constituents. And we would like to think that all of you are looking at this entire county. My thing has been for a long time, let's stop looking at Indian land per se. There is a division against the rest of the county, against Indian land. I mean, we came here unbeknownst that we were buying in certain areas and that we were going to be almost seen as maybe they think that we have too much money. I guarantee that's not true. But at any rate, I would like to see the fact that all areas, medical, government, all people are a little mistrustful these days. And we would like to see more transparency. Thank you very much.

uh susie pro pro esther sorry if i butchered your name my name is susan prosher at 2290 hartwell lane indian land good evening council members CF Smith is requesting to change the zoning from low density residential to regional business, which allows apartments. Approval of this zone change would take place prior to the updated UDO, which staff is asking to extend 90 more days. At neighborhood meetings, planning commission meetings, and county council meetings, CF Smith has consistently said that the shopping center is a community center, not a regional center. As such, I am requesting that the zone change be revised to general business, which would still allow the shopping center to go in, but not apartments. All council members acknowledge their concerns about this proposed shopping center at prior council meetings. Please do what you can now to ensure a win-win for area residents, the county, and C.F. Smith. Thank you.

Thank you. Barbara Scannell.

My name is Barbara Scannell. I live at 8016 Carolina Lakes Way in Indian Land. Good evening council members. I have again run out of time to print one for everybody but it will be in the minutes and I'm asking that you share. Again, I am speaking about the CS Smith. I appreciate the gentleman who spoke for Shelly Woods. The issue I have with the last packet, and I may have missed it, but I did not see everything he talked about in the MOU that is listed in the current packet. And if I'm wrong, I apologize. It also did not include things for the Shelly Woods and the people living on the apartments and everything. They may have a diagram that shows a traffic signal But it's not in the MOU. So what I've passed out is something which I am asking that they actually include these things in the MOU and delay the vote until it happens. And the reason being, as you all know, if it's not in the MOU, just a nice little diagram. doesn't hold them to it so when i'm actually putting in here just like there's the 80 foot buffer and 20 foot deep berm and large trees and eight foot tall palisade fence for the shelly wood development if it's in there i apologize if i missed it but you do the same thing for the folks that live in laurel hill and also the apartments the other thing i'm looking at it showed in their last diagram that looks like there is going to be a continuation along the service road to carolina commons which will help the people living in the apartments and the We're the shopping center and that abuts it because right now, it's just about impossible to make a left turn out of the shopping center, either onto Shelly Mullis or onto 521. I have seen traffic accidents and so many near misses, it's not even funny. You put another couple thousand parking spaces with that many people coming in and out, we're gonna have even more problems. And as far as how to get those numbers, all you need to do is check with your 911 public safety. communication center because they can pull out at that location where the traffic accidents were for you the other thing so I'm asking you to look at that and that you put in the traffic signal and I'm also a suggest at the corner of Murphy Drive and the 521 that goes straight across to the tree that refilled because those people again have the same problem trying to get in and out they have to make a right then a left and go north and i've gone to friends there and it's really dangerous getting out of that too So I'm asking for that. I'm also asking you to look at putting traffic signals, not like what you have at Shelly, Mullis, and Henry Harris, but the smaller ones like they have in the shopping center where Harris Teeter is off of. And they have roundabouts. and if they could put roundabouts in each location and the MOU so that information is contained in there and that that service road, the traffic signal and the roundabouts go in before they do any other developments so people could get in and out safely from all of the developments. Thank you for your time and I appreciate you listening.

Thank you. Sherry, do we have any electronic comments?

yes sir we had four electronic comments you each have physical copies at your seats of these and then copies will be attached to the minutes peter lewis wrote in regarding his opposition to and his concerns about a data center in lancaster county karen saul wrote in regarding her opposition to 2026 2012 John Saul, who spoke earlier regarding his opposition to 2026-2012, and Nancy DiDia wrote in regarding her opposition to 2026-2050 and 2026-2052. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, we don't have any special presentations, so we'll move into consent agenda. Do I have a motion to approve? So moved. Second. I've got a motion. Mr. Hosea and Mr. Harper's a second. Roll call, please.

Do we need to go through?

We need to go through all the numbers.

The motion should include everything in the consent agenda.

Do we need to restate the motion?

Do you want to name those items under the consent?

If you could just say that you moved to approve the consent agenda items A through, I think it's I, that'd be perfect.

Okay, who made that motion?

I make a motion to approve consent agenda items A through I. I'll second.

Stuart Graham.

Aye.

Charlene McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller. Approve. Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approve. Bryant Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes. Mr. Carnes, are you still there? Move on.

Is he there? He's not, but we can move to the next item.

Okay, we'll move on, okay. All right, we'll move on into our non-consent agenda. We're getting into our first reading of Ordinance 2026-2047. It's an ordinance to authorize and provide for the issuance and sale of not to exceed 23 million principal amount, Lancaster County, South Carolina Roslyn Residential Improvement District assessment revenue bonds in one or more series to provide for the execution of a second supplemental indenture, a bond purchase agreement, a continuing disclosure agreement, and other related documents for the new bonds to approve a preliminary limited offering memorandum and authorized and limited offering memorandum, each related to such bonds to make other covenants and agreements in connection with foregoing and provide for matters related thereto. Okay, Michael Season. Okay.

Good evening, members of council. Nice to see you. My name is Michael Season. I'm with Burr Foreman. Frannie Heiser and I, of course, serve as the county's bond council. It's nice to be in front of you again. I'm reminded of a quote from Mark Twain. If I had more time, I'd write a shorter ordinance title, so I apologize for that. The ordinance... for you tonight relates to the roslyn improvement district which of course is located on 521 north of the town the district was created in 2020 later amended in 2022 the the county issued as the first tranche of a series of bonds in 2025 $15 million of bonds in order to fund completed public infrastructure that was installed by the developer for the subdivision. I think it funded about $13.5 million of which the developer had actually completed about $47 million. So there's a good bit of infrastructure that already has been put in. All of the proceeds of the 2025 bonds have been expended. The developer, which is Lenar Carolinas, has now requested that the county issue a second and final tranche of bonds for the subdivision to fund similar completed infrastructure. In the agenda item summary, I think it says that they've completed $25.6 million of additional improvements. It's actually closer to $36 million. So they've done a substantial amount of work in the area. The bonds that are to be approved tonight, requested to be approved tonight, not to exceed $23 million, of which about $17.5 million would be made available to purchase the infrastructure that's already been completed. So the work has already been done. The proceeds would be dispersed at or very close to after closing. Something else that I would point out in connection with each of these bonds, let me back up. These bonds are all revenue bonds, so they are not payable from general taxes. They're not payable from property taxes. They're not payable from any other revenue stream. They're simply paid from the assessments that are levied on the property owners that live within the district and only that district. They're not payable from any other county source. under the terms of the ordinance that established the improvement district, the amount of the assessment that's annually billed to those property owners, the maximum amount that can be billed is $1,550, can't exceed that amount. And indeed the developer or the district collects that amount from property owners to the extent that they've already moved into the subdivision. These bonds would be sold in a limited public offering, which means that there would be a placement agent, an investment banker that was hired to place them with financial institutions and accredited investors. These would not be publicly distributed, no sales to widows and orphans and that sort of thing, and in significant denominations. In connection with the issuance under state law, the property owner is required to pay a fee to the county when the bonds are issued. It's equal to 4% of the principal amount of the bonds. So after the first tranche was issued last year, the developer paid $600,000 to the county about 10 days after the issuance. That was applied by the county as part of the source for the regional park that's located near Roslyn Development. The 4% fee for these bonds, if they were all issued, which they would be expected to be, based on a $23 million principal amount, would be $920,000. So that money would go to the county at or shortly after the closing, probably within seven to 10 days. I also have asked John Hardy with Lennar Carolinas to attend. I know that I love talking about bonds, but oftentimes you guys like to talk about the status of the development or like to know kind of what's happening within the development. So I've brought Mr. Hardy here to answer any questions about the development, if there are any. This time, if there are any questions, I'd love to entertain them.

Let me get a motion and all first.

Motion to approve.

i got a motion to approve got a second miss mcgriff uh okay all right discussion anybody go ahead anybody got any discussion uh do you mind giving us an update on sure i don't mind at all as you know the entry monumentation has been in for quite some time the road the main boulevard is all the way uh through um to the back road about a mile and a half back And the name of the road escapes me. I'm having a senior moment, I'm sorry. Old Hickory, excuse me. We also installed a nine-foot meandering sidewalk so that people can walk both ways instead of your typical five-foot sidewalk in most communities. We have sold 194 homes through Sunday night. We have closed 158 families through Sunday night as well. We have 54 homes under construction that are inventory homes for those folks that need immediate inventory. And we're really excited. The amenity is under construction. Pickleball Courts, Bocce Ball, a huge amenity building. I think it's 18 to 20,000 square feet amenity building so that those folks can live, work, and play right there on site. Any questions you might have? Thank you so much.

Thank you. All right. Roll call vote, please.

Stuart Graham. Approved. Charlene McGriff.

Approved.

Billy Mosteller.

Approved.

Jose Luis.

Aye.

Bryant Neal.

Approved.

Steve Harper. Approved. Brian Carnes.

Mr. Carnes is still not there. Okay. We'll move on here. Okay. This will be non-consent agenda item B, public hearing and first reading of ordinance 2026-2048, an ordinance of the County Council of Lancaster County, South Carolina, standing ordinance number 2025-1992, the nine-month residential development moratorium. an additional 90 days reaffirming the findings of a county council providing for some severe ability and providing for an effective date miss kato we don't have a we had a public hearing but nobody signed up for it thank you council um

We have in front of you an extension request to extend the moratorium for an extra 90 days. The reason why the request is because we are real close to having the new UDO finished. So we're hoping that that will be completed with third reading about October the 12th for the UDO. So we're in the extension would be till November the 9th, 2026. I'd be glad to answer any questions if you have any.

Okay, let's get a motion, then we'll go into discussion. Need a motion.

Make a motion to approve.

Second. Okay, got a motion and a second.

Just got a question. When is the moratorium up and when will the 90 days start?

That I don't know exactly when the end of the moratorium will end, the current moratorium.

Do you have any idea, Janie? Thank you.

All right. Roll call, please.

Stuart Graham. Approve. Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller. Approve. Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approve. Brian Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes.

All right, still no answer. Okay.

Does he need to be announced to vote, or does it matter?

Okay.

All right, we'll move on to item C, public hearing and first reading of ordinance 2026-2050, an ordinance to amend the official zoning map of Lancaster County to rezone approximately 32.89 acres, which is located at 11632 Harrisburg Road from Light Industrial to Institutional District. The Planning Commission recommended denial by unanimous vote, and the planning staff also recommended denial of the request. Ms. Cato. We could do have a public hearing. Hold on a second, I'm sorry. We arrived at the place for agenda for public hearings. Public hearings provide an opportunity for the public to express to council their views on the matter that is subject of the public hearing. Each public hearing will be conducted in accordance with requirements of state and local law. Please keep in mind that a public hearing is not a forum for the public to engage in a discussion or dialogue with council members. Your comments and views are to be addressed to the council as a whole. Each person will be given three minutes to make their comments. Please speak to the microphone before you begin your comments. Please state your name and address on the record. Your three minutes will start when you provided your name and address. Okay, the first one is Skip Paltow. Sorry, Ms. Cato, I'll call you back in a second.

good evening council members um my name is skip powell um i live at 5029 lake miss drive in lake wiley south carolina um one of the owners of the property located on harrisburg road that's we're requesting the rezoning um thank you for the opportunity um you guys to hear um what we're asking for when the building was developed over two decades ago It was a standalone structure surrounded by completely undeveloped land. And that's totally changed in the last few years. Today it's completely surrounded by residential neighborhoods and our county has really grown. So right now the best use of this property has really changed. from one of an industrial type to institutional, which would bring that building into a better use for a charter school. Lancaster County wisely develops the 160 corridor with a lot of industrial properties. This property, however, is located quite a bit away from that and the direct access routes in. and so it' s really an isolated industrial property surrounded by homes it' s really become an anomaly and I believe it' s time for that industrial property zoning has met its and run its course. For many years, PCI group was in that building. We were, as I proudly would say, we were great corporate citizens for the county. We went out of our way as best we could to limit the noise at night, do sound abatement through trees and structures around the building, because we were cognizant of the neighborhood and the effect that a manufacturer would have on the residents that live close by to the building. As I said, we worked diligently to minimize the truck noise, reduce activity and be respectful of our neighbors. A future owner with the current zoning is not bound by state a good corporate citizen. So there's no guarantees that truck traffic could be limited, noise abatement would continue, and the company would be cognizant of their effect on the local surrounding neighborhoods. The rezoning provides an opportunity to transition this property to use that is far more compatible with the neighborhoods that surround it, and giving a new purpose to an existing building that has been really difficult to market for industrial use. The building served us well at PCI Group for almost two decades, but now has reached its obsolescence as an industrial property. The question before you, is whether the property should remain an isolated industrial site in the middle of residential growth or whether it should become a new use that reflects the community that exists today. I respectfully ask you for your support and the rezoning request.

Thank you. Thank you. Natalia Pansuic. I hope I didn't butcher too bad.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, esteemed council members. My name is Natalia Penasuk. I live at 149 Sharp Street in Welford. And I wanted to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. I'm the founder of the Bridgepoint Charter School, which is tuition-free K-8 public charter school that we hope to bring to Indian land. I want to thank the planning committee for the consideration they gave our application, and today I wanted to bring a little bit more context so we can provide you with a little bit more information on our part. We know that the traffic that is spoken before is the first concern, and we're working directly with the SCDOT to make sure that our site does not disrupt the traffic pattern along Harrisburg Road. and the plans we have previously submitted include additional egress designed to absorb our traffic and property itself. Additionally, our traffic occurs in two short windows on school days only, while the current light industrial zoning can bring truck traffic at any hour of the day. For a corridor that has become almost entirely residential, the school is a better fit. On the facility itself, like Mr. Paul stated, the property that's been marked industrial been consistently declined by other industrial clients with the building that is surrounded by residential area. The building has not changed, but what's around it has. A school uses that fits, that the location has become, and what the community needs. And the good thing is that If we are to renovate, if we are to turn this into a school, it's going to be very minimal impact on the community in terms of any noise or anything. Nobody would even know that we are there renovating inside. And the work with charter schools in bringing educational opportunities to the areas is not new to us. Our team brings more than 20 years 25 years of experience building and renovating charter school facilities, as well as managing charter school in a variety of settings. We know how to create structures, procedures, how to create order to make the school a positive presence in the community we serve. Lancaster County continues to grow, adding many new families with school-age children to the area, and Bridgepoint would add K-8 seats to help relieve the current schools today and meet the future demand as our community grows. We're here to help fill the need, and most importantly, we would like to provide what charter schools are meant to provide, give families a choice. The decision about schooling belongs to the families and the community. We're not here to take anything away from the schools already serving the area. We're here to complement them and to serve families who choose Bridgepoint. The choice is a gift and we would honor it every day. We're grateful for your time this evening and we humbly ask for your support for the rezoning and the site amendment plan. Members of our team are here tonight and would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

you charlie swanson uh good evening council members my name is uh charlie swanson and i live at 4126 wild parkridge in mecklenburg county I'm a 28-year commercial real estate broker working and licensed to do so in the upstate of South Carolina in Charlotte. My career has been focused on industrial and office buildings. To say the least, the subject building is my bread and butter. My profession, we take a great deal of pride in being a problem solver and keeping the peace with all. And being seasoned at my profession, I always go into a project anticipating curve balls and expecting hard things to overcome. That said, in this one and taking on this assignment, I knew I had something that would be of interest and was eager to get underway on this project. There's just a lot of attributes to this building that are very, very positive. In a matter of days of taking on the assignment, I was able to arrange my first property tours. Over the 12 months of marking the property, there have been 20 total valid prospect showings. That's on-site. You don't necessarily get a showing. You have a lot of conversations to prospects and you do a lot of work just to get the showings. I feel very good that we got 20 valid prospects showing to this property. In those on-site meetings, I was able to confirm many of the great things and the reason why I was really excited to take this property on is the quality of the construction, the ceiling heights, 100% HVAC, heavy power, the large site, the building sits back, it's not visible. These are things that light manufacturing and distribution users definitely like. It provides extra parking. All attractive, again, things I was really excited to bring to the market. In all cases, things were very positive on the site and the building. I knew I had a hurdle, though, when I took this on. I knew it was there. We always have hurdles. Nothing's perfect. And that, for this particular use, is the location. i heard it right away i heard man your building's amazing we love it we like your site but i can't get my i can't get my vehicles back there i may be able to get some of my people back there but i cannot get trucks off of 485 521 uh 77 it's it's just so dense now to get them back there it causes a problem secondly i knew it was going to be said too was the type of uses adjacent to all the rooftops A lot of these types of prospects and users are going to make noise. Some are going to emit some odors. Some are going to work 365 days a year every single minute of the day. And they looked at us, me and my teammate, and they said, we can't operate there. We can't do that to the people that are sleeping next door. We don't want to be a bad neighbor. I ask you to really think hard about the use on this site. Thank you. Thank you.

All right, that's all we had signed up. I'd like to close this public hearing. Mr. Cato, you want to come back up? Yeah.

Can I ask that we take a quick break? Chairman Carnes is on the phone and wants to be reconnected. If we could take a five-minute recess, we can reconnect and reconvene.

All right, we'll take a five-minute. All right, thank you. Mr. Carnes back online. Sorry, Mr. Cato.

right miss k2 you up this time for good you up here i ain't gonna sit you down no more sorry thank you council you have a request we have a request from a rezoning um from that's located 1163 Harrisburg Road. And they were requesting to rezone from LI to institutional. And the request is to have a charter school. In addition to that, without rezoning, we would also have an amendment to the comp plan, the future land use plan map. We did not recommend approval. Planning staff did not. Planning Commission also recommended denial because it was not within the future land use plan map. That area is calling for economic and development. And I'll be glad to answer any questions that you may have. and the applicants here, if you need to speak.

And let me get a motion, then we'll start discussion. Need a motion? So moved. A second motion, a second. All right, we need a discussion now from Ms. Cato.

Yeah, this is in my district, and because of all the reasons that they have presented already and that you all have talked about, in particular, the truck traffic that currently would exist under light industrial is extremely concerning. The amount of density that we could have with people that are coming in and out of that facility, just as it regular would be with the current uses that would be in there. The fact that this is a downsizing or a down zoning from where it currently would be makes this fit into kind of where I think we probably should be. I think somebody had mentioned that when this building was built, there wasn't any residential like there is right now around that this was an area that was more prone to that industrial work. Right now, I cannot imagine start seeing semi-truck trailers coming out on that Harrisburg Road site. I mean, that would be a traffic nightmare, and it would be a danger to the public, in my opinion. So I think this is something that we absolutely need to do.

I got a question. Are there any other partials around this that's in the industrial, or is that the only one? I just don't want to put a school in an area where we got something to go on that could be harmful to our children.

No, we have the MDR, we have LDR, we have UR, we have institutional that's already currently out there within that vicinity.

Thank you.

Any more discussion?

I've got a question about the charter schools. Are those South Carolina residents only? Could y'all answer that question? Okay.

Any more discussion? Mr. Carnes, you got any questions? Mr. Carnes, you got any questions? Okay, we'll move on. Roll call, please.

Stuart Graham. Approve. Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller. Approve. Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approve. Bryant Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes.

Okay we got uh we got six approves and one that didn't answer. We'll move on to our next one. Public hearing and first reading of Ordinance 2026-2052, an ordinance to amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan of Lancaster County, South Carolina, of the future land use designation of 32.89 acres, which is located at Harrisburg Road, from Economic Development, to growth area future land use designation. The planning commission recommended denial by unanimous vote and the planning staff also recommended denial of the amendment. We have a public hearing but no one signed up so we'll let Ms. Cato go ahead.

Thank you, council. So this is an amendment to the comp plan So we would have to amend this from the growth area that's currently shown that was adopted. We would have to amend it to show the institutional. Be an amendment to the comp plan.

Before we go into discussion, I need a motion. So moved. Second. Got a motion and a second. All right, any discussion? No discussion. Roll call, please.

Stewart Graham. Approve. Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller. Approve. Jose Luis. Aye. Steve Harper. Approve. Bryant Neal. Approve. Brian Carnes.

Okay, we got six approves and one no answer. Okay. All right. We've got a third reading of Ordinance 2026, 2039 and the Ordinance to Amend Official Zoning Map. County to rezone approximately 7.09 acres, which is located at 7319 Charlotte Highway from low density residential district to the neighborhood business district. The Planning Commission recommended approval by the unanimous vote of 5-0, and the planning staff also recommended approval of the rezoning request. Passed 7-0 at the June 8, 2026 County Council meeting. Passed 7-0 at the June 22, 2026 County Council meeting. Ms. Cato.

Councilman, you have a rezoning that, this is the third reading, there's been no changes to the rezoning, but I think that councilman's had questions for the applicant. We've reached out to the applicant again to have him here so that he could provide more information on where the addressing or what he was gonna actually do, what the proposed use may be, and I do not see him in attendance here.

Okay, before we start any discussion, let's take a motion. Anybody make a motion? No motion, so this will be denied. Thank you.

have the chairmen wanting to make one more attempt to dial in if you could keep your seats and count to 60 we're going to try to get him back on the phone all right all right we'll pause just a minute and see to get him back on the phone

Hey Jerry.

Alright, I'm not going to touch my Bluetooth anymore. That was. Alright. OK, let's carry on alright.

All right, we're going to item F, second reading of ordinance 2026-2012, an ordinance to amend the official zoning map of Lancaster County to rezone approximately 71.1 acres which is located at Charlotte Highway and Laurel Hill Road from Low Density Residential District to the Regional Business District. The planning staff recommended approval of the rezoning request. However, planning commission recommended denial by unanimous vote. Passed five to two at the February 9th, 2026 County Council meeting. At the February 23rd County Council meeting, Council voted to postpone the second reading until March the 9th. uh county council meeting uh and at the march 9th 2026 council meeting second reading was postponed until connectivity issues were resolved but not later than 60 days at may 11 2026 council meeting second reading was postponed until july the 20th 2026 county council meeting miss kato

We need a motion.

I'll do it after I do let her talk and then I'll ask for a motion. I think we need a- For the discussions. Okay. Before our discussion starts, I'll get a motion then. Go ahead.

Councilman, you have this as second reading to a rezoning request from LDR to RB You wanted the applicant to go back. The request was to go back and look at connectivity, connection. They have since then have documents that were submitted in to where they are going to be able to extend, have connectivity to the north of the site. They're also been working with the DOT along with Park Zone Development to put up a traffic signal. And we have not, staff has not looked at it. We've not done any reviews or commercial site plan reviews of anything of the site. This is just all conceptual because it's just of the rezoning. Well, if there are going, I will add one thing that's new that If they do come in and do the Connector Road to Park Zone and create a parcel in the back, that road will go through the Planning Commission. It will be a county commercial road. So it'll have a preliminary and a final plan approval and a commercial site plan approval. I'll be glad to answer any questions if I can. I believe the applicant's also here as well if you have any questions for them.

Yeah, I think Mr. Johnson wanted to speak, and I approved him to speak. Before we do that, let me get a motion to bring it to the floor.

So moved.

All right, got a motion?

Second.

Okay, Mr. Johnson, you're allowed to come up.

Mr. Monticello. I'm Ben Johnson. I represent C.F. Smith, the applicant. You will recall that questions came up about connection, which was important to the council. And the staff and we have worked hard. The staff researched the connection to the south toward the promenade. That's in a PD plan that's baked into A PD, and at this point, could not legally be enforced against them, but more importantly, the terrain and such make it not feasible. To the north, the Parkstone project owned by a group called Wide Waters and our client, Neil Robinette, Zach, and their team have been working with Parkstone The initial thing we did was get a TIA together, and I'm glad to say that they've worked with DOT and Wide Waters to finalize a conceptual plan for Highway 521 and connectivity that all parties are in agreement with. which takes into account the traffic analysis, the connectivity, and, of course, safety. There is an exhibit, an updated exhibit that we provided.

Is that available? That's available.

Okay, I know it was published online. It reflects the improvements and the agreed upon off-site work. The full movement traffic light at Halifax has been confirmed. and DOT has weighed in, and that's been confirmed. The Parkstone intersection converts to a median that restricts left turning onto 521, but allows left turn movement off of 521 onto the Parkstone development, as well as to the west to serve several businesses on the other side of 521. And then there's an additional left turn into the C.F. Smith development at the midpoint which is being done to alleviate stacking at the lights. And then the relocation of Laurel Hill Road remains the same. Our client and Wide Waters have agreed on business terms. They're exchanging drafts of their agreement now. It will be worked out. And of course, the county has confirmed according to this code, it has to be worked out if the project is to go forward. So we're happy to give this report. Beyond this, we just want to highlight and refresh that this project is a very beneficial project to the community. It's aligned with the future land use plan. As you've seen from the buffers that's in your file, published previously, CF Smith has committed to significant open space, some 10 to 12 acres on the north and south of the project. It's going to alleviate a number of very dangerous traffic situations right now. The retreat people have to go down and make a U-turn to go north. That's going to go away with the relocation of Laurel Hill Road. Our client is going to make significant investment in these improvements. And then of course the project is going to create substantial economic benefit to the county through both property taxes and sales taxes from the commercial project. I wanted to make two quick further comments, if I may, Mr. Chairman. The MOU is separate. It's a road relocation. The project can't be built. The road cuts diagonally across the property. The MOU has exhibits to it that are definitely incorporated into the MOU and that reflect the commitments that our client has made to the neighbors. I'd be glad to talk to anybody about that between now and The other thing is the rezoning ordinance here reflects that the rezoning is being done in order to create a commercial development. The county has every right in its ordinance to reflect that the use will be a commercial development. And it also, as in other ordinances, provides that if it conflicts with any other provision of the code, this ordinance would supersede. And so it's definitely not going to be, it's going to be a commercial development. Your ordinance reflects that it will be, and it could not be otherwise. It could not be built without the relocation of the road. That's a separate matter, but that agreement clearly provides that it would be a commercial project. Thank you very much for your patience with this project. We're glad to be here to have second reading.

Thank you. Anybody got any questions for Mr. Johnson before he sits down?

We already did the motion. Yeah, I had a couple of questions. So does the developer have to sign this MOU if the rezoning is approved? So what is the obligation of the developer to sign the MOU post-closing?

Well, it can't. Our request has been for months that it be taken up immediately upon approval of third reading of this rezoning.

But there's no obligation. We can't, the county council can't obligate you all to sign this.

Well, we're not going to walk out of a meeting.

We won't leave here. I hear you.

We can't. approved the same night, and really importantly, this is kind of a...

The question is just, is there an obligation? And the answer is no.

The answer is yes.

There's no obligation. We cannot do that. We cannot make the signing of the MOU contingent on the approval of the rezoning. We cannot do that. You're a lawyer. The answer is no. We would get in trouble for that.

We require it.

We cannot require it, is my question.

It's a mutual agreement that we've proposed to the county. It's been reviewed with staff.

The question is, can we require it? Can county council require it, or can the county require it? It's a yes or no question.

The way this would be handled is by mutual agreement.

The answer is no. The answer is no. I appreciate it, but the answer is no. What I'm doing is I'm just providing transparency.

Yes, in good faith, the developer is going to sign the agreement, but there's nothing legally that is going to force the developer to sign the MOU. Is that correct? Is that a fair statement?

Well, business folks handle this all kind of ways. We would reach mutual agreement and tender a signed MOU the night of the meeting. We're scheduling a meeting. here now with staff to go over the MOU.

Mr. Robinette.

I want to address the concerns from a practical standpoint, irrespective of the legalities of it. The leverage the county has with the MOU is that we have no ability to develop the property without relocating Laurel Hill, which is what we're asking of the county to do in that agreement. Without that relocation, we can't develop the property at all. That was the reason the MOU came about to begin with. From a practical standpoint, that's the leverage.

From a legal perspective, you can't. I'm asking Mr. Robinette the question. I appreciate that transparency and that honesty. My next question is, what is the consideration for the MOU to be enforceable?

Mutual agreements.

What's the consideration?

You relocate it. We invest in a 50-foot right-of-way road built according to county standards. The consideration is mutual promise. Now, go back to the first question. What we would do is work out the details of the MOU we think is fair. We're glad to get the county's input. And we would tender to you a signed version of the MOU, the original, that you would have in hand before you vote at third reading. And you would know... then that you have a signed agreement if you decide to approve it on third reading.

I reviewed the MOU. I didn't see a consideration in that document.

Mutual agreement, a promise for a promise.

I hear you. I did not see the consideration. I'm just going to leave it at that. And the reason why I'm asking these questions is, and Mr. Robinette, I appreciate what you are doing, because if this project goes through and you sign these MOUs and you sign and you fulfill these commitments, from what I am seeing, there's not an obligation for you to do that. I understand that you want to change some of the roads and there's some negotiation that would have to happen as we kind of review the project and go through the plans. what i want to make clear is that the county is taking a risk when we rezone these properties we rezone it to a designation that any use under that zoning designation can that be put under that use so if there are restrictions that are put in place afterwards those are on you we have to ensure that we have to try to get as much of enforceability in there we have to look at consideration we have to do all of those things but there is a risk that we are putting in there, and if the project doesn't move forward, those can be called out. So I hear the concerns for the constituents, and that's my biggest concern. It's not what you all are trying to do, and I appreciate that, but a lot of us have been through the recession and everything that happened with that, and things can change very quickly. And when uses like that are allowed and it opens the door, that's when I look at it and I become concerned about all the additional uses that could be done.

I may reply briefly. These three of us here went to law school, and the consideration to support a mutual agreement is a promise exchanged for a promise. And the promise is, if the county will agree to the relocation of the road, our client will undertake it at its expense. That is a binding agreement. As to the rezoning ordinance, it provides that the rezoning is requested in order to create a commercial development. It is within the county's right. It's unusual that I don't go to a jurisdiction that doesn't impose a condition as part of a rezoning. This one provides that it's is in order to build a commercial development. If our client went on a lark and walked in and asked for something else, this ordinance that has been prepared, that is your ordinance, they would say, no, no, no, this is for commercial development. Thank you for your time.

I have nothing else to add, Mr. Mosteller.

A legal point. I definitely did not go to law school.

Lucky to get out of high school.

Good for you. On a MOU, can there be cut off dates or can there be, is this MOU go with the deed or does it go with the property or can it be say a three year, if construction hadn't begun, can it I don't know. I'm just asking.

The county attorney can correct me, but I would suggest that the rezoning is going to happen regardless if there is a timeframe on the MOU that would release those restrictions. I would prefer that the MOU continue on.

We would be happy for that. We look forward to the occasion to sit down with the county and work through the MOU. We'll be careful to keep it separate from this rezoning.

Any other discussion?

Yeah, again, I would echo what Jose said. I appreciate the MOU. I think I like it conceptually. I just want to make sure it means something. And if we do something like this in another situation, this would serve as a way to go down that path. One of my questions is, if it's rezoned and then the developer sells that land or doesn't, I mean, it... I too did not go to law school, so I want to make sure I understand what we're committing to because it looks like if the developer doesn't move forward. Then they're under no obligation, obviously to fulfill the items in the MOU. But if the if the if the developer sells that property and to another developer, is that other developer? required to do the things that are listed in this MOU because otherwise we're rezoning it and then, you know, right.

Okay. Mr. Carnes, you got any comment? Okay, I know we don't have, is there anyone else? Anybody got anything else? All right, roll call, please.

Stuart Graham. I deny. Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller. Approve. Jose Luis.

Nay.

Steve Harper. Approve. Brian Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes.

Okay, so we got four approves and two deny and one no action. Okay, we'll move on into item G. Public hearing and first reading of Ordinance 20262049, an ordinance to amend the UDO, Unified Development Ordinance, Chapter 6, Section 613, Roads, Bridges, and Public Ways to Clarify County Policy on Road Acceptance. Establish criteria for the acceptance of roads into the county road system and provide procedures for county council consideration of road acceptance request. The planning commission recommended approval by a vote of five to one and the planning staff also recommended approval of the text amendment. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second.

Second.

All right, Ms. Cato.

Thank you, Counselor. We have a text amendment that's before you that was requested by administration. And this is just to give criteria on accepting roads. We work with the consultant that's currently working with the UDO to help us write this, as well as send to legal for the verbiage that's in there. We added two things in there being that the county, they would have to provide that they built the county to show that they built at the county standards. And also that they were building a collector road or more. If this gets approved, this will stay within the UDO. It'll just roll over into the new UDO or we can add additional things to it if it does not. I'll be glad to answer any questions I have. We also have Public Works Director here if you have any questions on that.

Yes.

before we get too far. We did have a public hearing on this, if you could just confirm that. Yeah, nobody signed up.

All right, so any discussion with Ms. Cato or our public works director, Mr. Cato? No discussion. Roll call, please.

Stuart Graham.

Approved.

Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mystellar.

Approve.

Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper.

Approve.

Bryant Neal.

Approve.

Brian Carnes.

Aye. And it was approved six and one, no answer. Okay. All right. We'll move into our next one here. Okay. All right, public hearing and first reading of Ordinance 2026-2051. First reading of Ordinance 2026-2053, an ordinance to authorize and approve a multi-county park agreement between Kershaw County, South Carolina and Lancaster County, South Carolina. Will I skip one? Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, 2061. Public hearing and first reading of ordinance 2026-2051 to an ordinance to amend the official map of Lancaster County to rezone approximately 8.53 acres, which is located at Lakefront Drive from the rural neighborhood district to the agriculture district. The Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of 4-1-1. one recusal, and the planning staff stated that the rezoning request met the UDO requirements for approval. Do I have a motion? So moved.

Second.

OK, motion to second. We have a public hearing, but there was no one signed up for it. Any discussion?

I mean, this is surrounded by family property. I don't know how many residents they have, six or seven in that area, so I'm sure I have no objection to it.

Yeah, I know the area also, and like I said, it is family land there, and it's all down way off the road, so a lot of it's not seen in the area anyway, so I don't have any objections either. Any other discussions? Aye. Roll call, please.

Stuart Graham. Approve. Charlie McGriff. Approve. Billy Mosteller.

Approve.

Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approve. Brian Neal. Approve. Brian Carnes.

Okay. We approve six to one, six, four, and one. No answers. I was about to call it that way. Okay, first reading of ordinance 2026-2053, an ordinance to authorize and approve a multi-park agreement between Kershaw County, South Carolina, and Lancaster County, South Carolina, to create and develop a joint county industrial park to be initially located within the geographical boundaries of Kershaw County, South Carolina, and to provide for other matters related to. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second. I got a motion and a second. Okay. Brian Falk, we got any discussion? When he comes up after he gets through, we can ask him questions or discuss it ourselves.

Good evening, council members. Before you is ordinance number 2026-2053 to authorize and approve a multi-county park agreement between Kershaw County in Lancaster County, South Carolina. This was presented to us, requested of us, by Kershaw County. As you know, counties are authorized under Article 8, Section 13 of the South Carolina Constitution together with Section 4-1-170 of the state code to jointly develop an industrial or business park with a contiguous county. Creating a multi-county industrial park, or MCIP, removes the property from the normal ad valorem tax rolls and replaces that obligation with a negotiated fee, the FLO payment. We know this structure well. We managed 30 FLO agreements today, and each one sits inside a multi-county park, just like the one before you tonight. Two things typically hold true in these MCIP agreements. On the cost side, the expense of developing a park in a given county is borne exclusively by that county. On the revenue side, the county where the project physically locates, the host county retains 99% of the revenue and transfers one percent to its partner county. In this instance, Lancaster is the partner county. What makes this opportunity well worth our attention is scale. The prospective investment in Kershaw County is large enough that even our 1% partner share is projected to generate six figures per annum for Lancaster County, recurring revenue with no capital outlay and no obligation on our part beyond entering into the agreement. In short, this is revenue to the county at essentially no cost and no risk, made possible simply by partnering with a county neighbor on a project of significant size. The Economic Development Department recommends approval of this first reading, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Brian, do we know where it's going to be located yet in Kershaw County?

I don't have the exhibit with all the fine details yet. I don't.

Any more discussion? I could take a guess what it is. Any more discussion? Any questions, Mr. Fulk? Okay. Call for the vote.

Stewart Graham.

Approved.

Charlie McGriff. Approved. Billy Mosteller. Approved. Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper. Approved. Bryant Neal.

I want to approve it this time, but I want to get a lot more information on it. I'll get you that, sir. Thank you.

Brian Carnes.

All right, well, I've got approval of six, four, and one, no action. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cook. All right, we'll go into our discussion and action items. Receive information, take desired action regarding removal from a board and commission. Ms. Simpson.

Council members, um, Yoki McCurtain currently represents District 2 on the Planning Commission. She did reach out to me saying that she had moved. I confirmed that her new address is in District 5 and I believe she also reached out to Councilwoman McGriff. I did explain to her that residency on the Planning Commission is required in the district. but we have not heard from her further after that. I think the question now before you, since she has moved and she is no longer a resident in District 2, is do you want to remove her from the Planning Commission?

Can I make a motion for the removal of my board member from District 2?

Second.

Second.

Any discussion? All for the vote.

Stewart Graham. Approved. Charlene McGriff.

Approved.

Billy Mosteller. Approved. Jose Luis.

Aye.

Steve Harper.

Approved.

Bryant Neal.

Approved.

Brian Carnes. Council Member McGriff, can we clarify that is that effective immediately, the removal?

Do we need to put that in the form of a motion?

If you'll just clarify that that was a part of your motion and if there's any objection to that, we'll go back to a roll call. Yes. Thank you.

All right. Approved 6-4 and 1 no answer. Okay. You want to go ahead and take care of item B, Sherry, receive information, take desired action regarding appointments and reappointments to various boards and commissions.

Yes, sir. Council members, this is just for information only to let you and citizens know about current vacancies on various boards and commissions and the term expirations.

All right.

No vote required.

I got you. All right. So that finishes up our action items. And I have a motion for adjournment. So moved. Motion. You don't need a second. This item is adjourned. Thank you all for coming.