County Council - Regular Meeting

Committee into session. First and foremost, let me advise the audience about live video. All Lexington County committees are being broadcast live on the Lexington County Spectrum Channel 1302 and Lexington County's website meeting portal. The committee meetings filmed today will be available for viewing anytime on demand at our county website. I would remind our council members to speak aloud and clear. And after each motion, please confirm who made the motion and the second, and then open the floor for discussion before vote. With that said, I believe that initially we are going to go into executive session. Is that correct, Eric? That's correct. So I would make a motion that we go into executive session for contract negotiation and legal briefing on matters protected by the attorney-client privilege pursuant to South Carolina Code Section 30-4-78-2. Second. All right. I made the motion, and Charlie made the second. Any comment or question? All in favor? Anyone opposed? We are going into executive session for how long, Garrett?

An hour. All right.

We're coming out of executive session with the one... That's a different vote. Vote. Scroll down for a second. Yeah.

Cockles phone going off.

to keep it so if he started talking, I could... The executive session with one vote to be taken. Ms. Kerrigan, I think you're going to carry it forward from there.

Yes. I move to approve the contract to purchase approximately 202.79 acres on Southbound Road for economic development purposes.

Second.

All right. I made the motion. Mr. Cullen made the second. Any comment or question? Hearing none, all in favor? Anyone opposed? Motion passes. And I believe that concludes economic development for today. We are adjourned.

Order, order, health and human services. First of all, we have approval to accept Library Services and Technology Act Continuing Ed Grant Award for Jay Seacrest.

Thank you. My first grant request is to accept an award for continuing education for one of our staff members to attend the Public Library Association Conference. We've already budgeted for the conference, but the reward would reimburse us the bulk of that cost. Josie Sechrist is our branch librarian at the Chapin Branch. The total cost for her to attend the conference, including her salary, would be $2,701. The grant would reimburse the library system $1,566. What would remain was just part of the operating piece there and $977 of her in-kind staff salary. The total cost then to the library would be $158. That's my request.

Any questions? I seek a motion. Move to approve. by Councilman Bishop and a second by Councilwoman Wessinger. Any comments or questions? All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes.

right we have another one for ignorant okay roll the g tough one um lauren is the assistant branch librarian at lexington maine and been with us several years this request is for the same conference public library association and lauren's total costs for attending would be two thousand five hundred and seven dollars reimburse the library system $1,571, which would leave $936 remaining. Part of that, luckily, is an in-kind match with her salary, and the library, again in this case, would only have the $158 left. Okay.

Anybody have any questions? Motion. Move to approve.

Second.

Motion by Councilman Bishop, second by Councilwoman Wessinger. Any comments or questions? All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes. Now we have Jordan.

Lauren Jordan works with our KC West Columbia branch in the reference department. She's attending library school, and we are able to apply for a tuition reimbursement grant on her behalf. These grants reimburse the student, or kind of the conduit, up to 66% of their tuition costs in a said semester. The title cost for her semester is $2,342, and we would be able to request that reimbursement of $1,546 on her behalf.

I moved. Second. We have a motion by Councilwoman Westinger, second by Councilman Bishop. Any comments or questions? All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes.

Thank you. We really appreciate it.

Right.

It's really great for staff morale and retention. Thank you all.

Yes, ma'am. Now we have approval to apply for the 2026 Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Planning and Training Grant. Emergency Services, Jennifer Neal.

Before we get started, I just want to tell Council how appreciative I am of Jennifer and her staff and all of Emergency Services for this past weekend storm. They were there. They did not leave. They slept there. They made sure that citizens were absolutely taken care of. I'm preparing for another one this weekend already, but I just wanted to acknowledge and say thank you publicly to her for what they were able to accomplish and all of Emergency Services this past weekend.

So thank you. Good afternoon. Today I'm here to apply for the The Hazards Materials Emergency Preparedness Grant. This is a federally sponsored grant for hazmat training and response. If approved, we would apply for $5,950. There is a 20% match. This can be done through salary, so that's what we would do. This grant will be utilized to get battery preparedness training for our hazmat response team at the fire department. There is a a needed increase for this sort of training with the more electrical vehicles we have on the road, and this would ensure that they are better able to respond to an incident to protect our citizens and the community better.

Questions? Seek a motion. Move to approve. Second. I have a motion by Councilman Bishop, second by Councilwoman Westinger. Any comments or questions? All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, ma'am. Health and Human Services is adjourned.

All right. Next up is the Justice Committee. We'll call it into session. And is Judge Johnson here?

We're a little early. Good thing I'm not on this committee.

Yeah, I'd be in trouble, wouldn't I? I apologize for the interruption. We are requesting, we the magistrates are requesting that you respectfully approve the contract between the town of Lexington. and the county for an associate physician to assist with judicial duties for Judge Larry Saunders. I believe you received the letter of request in your packet and a copy of the contract as well. Do you have any questions for me?

Has there ever been a reason why any of these magistrates sign a contract with the municipality and find themselves with a conflict there?

Have they ever had a conflict? I don't know. I do not know the answer to the question. Is it entirely possible? Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

I do not know the question. If I'm answering your question correctly.

You are. If there were to be a conflict, would you just alternate a different magistrate to hold court in that, or could that happen under the contract?

No, that could not happen under the contract. They would have to conflict it out. They would have to recuse themselves and send it to another court. Send it to another court, but another magistrate couldn't hear it. That's correct, ma'am. Based on the way the contract is written, another magistrate cannot just step into it. What other court would it go to? Well, no, no, they could send it to a magistrate's court, but a magistrate could not step into that court. In other words, if it was Town of Lexington, they could conflict it out to the Lexington Magistrates Court or the Oak Grove Magistrates Court.

Oh, that's what I was asking. Basically, that's what I was asking. It could be one of the other magistrates that would go over there. I got you. That's what I was asking. Okay. Anybody else have any questions? Okay. I would seek a motion to approve.

I second it.

You've got to pick a motion. You've got to make a motion. Oh, I thought she did. She's calling for a motion.

Okay. Make a motion to approve the municipal judge agreement for the town of Lexington.

We have a motion by Councilman Fisher and a second by Councilman Cullum. Any comment or question? All in favor? Anyone opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Judge.

Thank you all very much.

All right. And it looks like that is it for the Justice Committee.

We are adjourned.

Very good. Thank you, Mr. Kerrick. The Committee of the Whole is now open. Approval of a resolution recognizing the South Atlanta Poultry Festival. I think I have somebody I know that will move to approve, Mr. Chair. Second. Motion by Mr. Brigham. Second by Mr. Bishop. Any discussion? All in favor? All opposed? And the approval is passed. Special discussion or discussion on possible vote of accommodation tax special fund designation.

Jessica, do you want to take it?

Y'all have a packet at your chair? Yes.

And with this, can I ask a question with the accommodation tax, the special funds? In the past, it's been 30% to one entity. But if I read the law correctly, you don't have to do 30% to one industry. You can break it up.

10 here, 15 here, 10 here, or 10, 10, and 10.

So it doesn't have to be all 30 to one. It could be anything in between that to the others.

I can't answer your question. I don't know the answer to that.

No, that is, yeah, that is true.

It could be broken up, correct, Jeff? It could be broken up. If you recall in the past, 30% had gone to Lake Murray Country. And there's some discussion to just make sure. It's been a long time since we've... Since we visited this, we brought in, there was presentations given by Riverbank Zoo, the Columbia Metropolitan Convention Center and Visitors Bureau, Capital City, Lake Murray Country, Regional Tourism Board, Ice House Amphitheater, and Adventure for your consideration about where do you want to go with the 30% or breaking it up. So those are the entities. It's on the first page that you have here for your consideration.

I would like to break it up. If you guys are in agreeance with that, just deciding how to break it up.

Why? There's only one organization that actually places advertisement for the entire list. All five of those are all covered under one entity.

Or we could divvy up the 30% to give more to some of these other agencies in addition to still giving some to that other entity.

I understand the premise of we can, but I'm just asking why. I mean, the accommodations tax is generated through a room night. People that are... Item C are the ones that are advertising and bringing more room nights into the region than probably all the other ones combined.

So give them some and then give some of the other ones some, perhaps. Why not? Why not, Todd?

Well, because I think what's working now has worked for quite some time. Again, they're producing the most room nights of all those organizations in front of you. And that's where the tax is coming from, the room nights. They're nationally advertising the entire region. Every one of those, Riverbanks, Metropolitan Convention Center, Ice House, and Adventure are all in... the advertising package of Lake Murray Country. See, prior to Lake Murray Country, we had it with the Columbia Metropolitan Convention Center. And we switched it to a Lexington County-based organization, which, again, their advertising is far greater than what they're doing at the Columbia Convention Center. So I don't know why there would be a need to change it.

Well, I think it's fine to change that up from time to time, and this is just my opinion. I know that Lake Murray Country does get a large amount from the state. I don't know how much these other ones get from the state, but I think it would be great to divide it up a little bit, share the love.

I don't have a strong opinion on this.

No discussion, Mr. Chairman. I mean...

What is the suggestion?

I would make a motion that we continue using Capital City Lake Murray Regional as our 30%.

So can we not discuss this a little bit more?

Why don't you just ask if there's no other discussion? And we can discuss it.

I would like to look at taking that 30% and doing 10, 10, and 10 and looking at three entities. And the three entities would be Capital City, Riverbank Sioux, and Adventure. Okay.

So I have a question that I genuinely don't know the answer to, so I'm curious. Maybe, Lynn, you know the answers. Anybody here from the town? Um, so the ice house amphitheater right back here, I know it's in the County, but it's also in the town. And I know that they do a lot of, they have a lot of concerts and it brings a lot of people in. Right. I don't know that it does anything for hotels. I guess they come in locally, but, but I guess they do spend money around. So, um, Outside of us, does anybody know if the towns get extra accommodations taxed or anything, especially with them having hotels in the town? How that works? They get their own.

They get their own.

Whatever they collect within the town.

Just in the town.

Right. I think it's about $100,000. I think the town of Lake City, I could be incorrect, but I believe their percentage like this goes to the chamber. I believe. I'm not positive. It goes to the chamber. I believe. I would have to ask, I'd have to confirm that, but I think I heard, I was attending a meeting yesterday and I think I heard him say that.

Speaking of funding, I think our accommodations tax collections have continued to rise year over year because we were contributing to one project for a period of over 20 years. Right? The lion's share of that time of which they have continued to rise have been under the marketing promotion of capital city lake murray so you got an organization that you're continuing to rise your your roommates which produces the accommodations tax i'm just trying to find one reason why i would change that when the graph is going up so there's also been a leadership change with lake murray country Yeah, and a great lady that's just recently been appointed who's worked with that organization for quite some time, Vicki Davis. Excellent. She's the lady that came and spoke to us.

I've talked to her a few times on the phone since then.

You have?

She's called me. Any of the whole, anybody else have an opinion?

So the only thing I would say, I guess, is... You know, Capital City Lake Murray is in Lexington County. It's in Lexington County. Adventure is not in Lexington County. Okay. The Columbia Metropolitan Convention Center, I mean, God knows they've gotten tons of money. They're not in Lexington County. I guess the Riverbanks Garden is in Lexington County. It's not, but the zoo portion of it is parking over there, but...

I would like the money to... Would you be willing to divvy up some of it for Riverbanks and some for Capital City?

Well, here's the thing about Riverbanks. Obviously, I love them to pieces, but, I mean, they just got a huge bond referendum out of us that was on the ballot. So they got a lot of money coming in over there that others don't get. Again, if Capital City, Lake Murray... advertises for everybody and brings in, they need more money for advertising to bring in for the Ice House Amphitheater, for things in Lexington County. That's just my thought.

I have to agree. I'll second your motion. We have a motion on the floor and a second.

That motion is to give it all to the capital city, Lake Murray.

Leave it as it is. And my suggestion, Charlie, before we get to this point next year, discuss it in advance before we get to this point.

Well, I think that's why we actually have this this year. This was an attempt to actually discuss it ahead of time because normally we've never had the option to even discuss it. It just automatically goes to Lake Murray Country. So this was the attempt to try and discuss it this year and look at the law and how we could divvy that up differently if we chose to do so.

I just don't see anything that's out of proportion. I hear what you're saying.

Right. And I think when we started this conversation, Lynn, correct me if I'm wrong, the email was sent out to multiple organizations. These are the ones that came back and applied for the 30%. So we did attempt to get some additional organizations to apply for the 30%, but these are the ones that

And we brought them in and did presentations. We were going to discuss it at the last meeting. Unfortunately, we ran out of time. Now, what do we decide today? Because the accommodations tax meeting, I believe, is February the 6th. So we need to decide today and approve this evening so we know going into those meetings where we're at.

Right. So for history purposes, that's why we are actually having this vote today, was to try and get other additional organizations to apply for the 30%, and this is what it shook down to.

Well, based on my responsibility, I got a motion on the floor in a second. Right. So I'm going to take a vote. All in favor? All opposed? The vote is passed, and we'll take that into consideration. Thank you. Let's see here. We do not have to go into executive session. We may. So we'll leave that open. Discussion of possible vote on concurrency. Robbie Derrick.

Actually, Chairman, it does have Mr. Derrick's name there, but really this evolves from some meetings last week. Councilwoman Carey, you wanted to leave this with the discussion?

Yes, I would. So at our last meeting, we entered into a discussion. We had Eric Bland here. Based on everybody's concerns about legalities over concurrency, everybody wanted to know that we had a leg to stand on. I sent a five-page letter to the Attorney General's office. We received an opinion of the Attorney General's office. It was read to you in this room. And I was told that if I would wait to take the vote until today so that Lynn could have two weeks to notify all the superintendents, there were people in this room who had previously not voted for it that would vote for it. So I just want to make sure that we're clear on this. Putting concurrency back to restore it to our concurrency procedures now. Based on what we had before, it would be for the schools, each of the schools, based on the criteria we had set out before, the information that we gather from the school districts, the superintendents, Lynn, you've spoken to each one of the superintendents.

I've talked to all of them except District 4, Dr. Nutter, but I have talked to all of them except him, and we have tried to reach out to him as well.

And there was a consensus by each one of them that it was easy for them to provide us just the...

So I explained to them that the process that we had gone through, that they were in the concurrency, and we were sending them a questionnaire that they had developed, but it was very subjective and so forth. And Council had had some discussion about getting... THE NUMBERS THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS SUBMIT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ON FOR THE 45 TO 130 AND I THINK 180 DAY SUBMISSION FOR WHAT THEIR NUMBERS ARE FOR THEIR SCHOOLS AND THEIR OVERALL DISTRICTS. SO IT WOULD BE FOR THE SCHOOL WITHIN THAT AREA THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE CONCURRENCY AND THE DISTRICT. And all of them that I was able to talk to except for District 4 said that that is public information and they can definitely submit it to us. Some of them, you know, Lexington and Richland 5 said that they already have that information on their website. There's about a two-week delay from when, like the 45 days, maybe between a week to a two-week delay to get it posted, but they would certainly submit to us if we wanted to submit the numbers to the Planning Commission or whatever or to Council or whatever for consideration because those are publicly... That is public information.

And they also said that they submit that information to the South Carolina Department of Education. And that is true because under the Assistance Act of 1996, which is 59-144-100 and 120, it says that the districts must report five-year capital needs and facility capacity to the South Carolina Department of Education every three years. Reports... detail capacity including new construction and relocation of classrooms to meet future needs. So all this information is readily available. All we're asking is for the school districts to send them to us for each of the schools and the school districts. And my personally, when I make the motion, it will be that they go, they come to Robbie Derrick, Robbie Derrick's presents them to the Planning Commission for the Planning Commission's review and consideration, and they'll make a recommendation that comes back to Council.

So the information that you're requesting, it's going to go to the Planning Commission?

Correct.

They're going to make a recommendation?

They're going to make a recommendation for us.

But they're just going to use Department of Education numbers? They're not going to? Okay. That's all I ever asked. It's all I ever asked, black and white. What are you going to tell the state?

I think what county council will have to decide with those numbers is, like with EMS, we have a threshold. If we don't make that, do we go forward or don't? With fire, we have a threshold. Because they submitted numbers, does that mean if they're one student over, is it going to be a no or is it a 10 student? I don't know what that is, but that would probably be something that we need to put in the policy because this is a policy change. We would need to put the policy for your evaluation.

I would say if it's over 95% capacity.

We should have notice.

What does that mean?

It means when they report it and they say that it's 77% or 82% or 61% or 100% or 123%, if it's 95% or below, then it's fine. If it's 95% or above, it's a no. But again, that's based on a recommendation by the Planning Commission. And it comes back to council. Because they're a quasi-judicial body. We've all said that. They'll make a recommendation. We'll choose to follow it or we'll choose not to follow it by majority vote on this body. And I think that's the appropriate way to do it. And that would be my motion.

I would second that motion.

May I ask a question? Yes, sir. I'm just trying to understand and School district reports, they've got 95% of their capacity used at a certain school, elementary through high school. And they've got one that's got 80%, right?

We're not doing it by district.

Hold on. I'm just saying that... I know. It's what it is. Go ahead. I'm just... That's not my motion, though. I understand what your motion is. I'm just trying to get some clarity. I think... Can I just lay this out there just to ask? So what we're saying is that if one specific school has 95% and no one's got 80%, there's capacity within that district. I think what I'm hearing is that we're going to set a policy that says if you're 95% in one school, so if there's a development being proposed in that attendance area, We're going to let the school district's attendance lines dictate our zoning. And if I'm wrong about that, I'm just saying you've got capacity within the district that you can realign your attendance areas. Submit this right now. We're in a public forum, and I'd welcome any school district member to say it. I understand it's not popular. I understand 100%. That's not a popular thing for you to have to redistrict students into other schools. What's that got to do with the county council? Your ability to redistrict your internal population. I mean, technically, if you wanted to, you could just let one go to 100%. And by that being a policy, there'd be no development in that attendance area for whenever.

How about we do this to be fair? How about we do this? I'm just asking. To be fair to you, because it is our obligation. The school doesn't get to set out zoning regulations for development. Concurrency is lawful, and we can put it in place. So how about we do this? How about we say if the planning commission comes back and says we would have to be a no on this development, We send that to the school district and say, all right, this is going to be a no. We're giving you 45 days to decide if you want to redistrict that school, and if you don't want to redistrict that school, then we hold at no. On a Planning Commission recommendation?

Yes, they're going to say no.

Okay. But that's up to them. They're charged with rezoning schools. We're charged with zoning housing.

I get it. I'm not arguing. Okay. I'm just telling you right now. Attendance areas will dictate the zoning of the county. I don't, but this is the way. 100%.

I'm not taking any side. The side is we ask for this information. This information has been provided.

Right. And the people in this room said, if you give us two weeks to notify the school districts, we will vote yes to support this.

It goes to planning, and planning will make that determination. Planning will make a recommendation to us. Not county council.

I will vote yes. I will vote yes if we assess this as a district.

That was not the stipulation, Todd. That was not the stipulation. No, it wasn't. It was not the stipulation. You said the Department of Ed numbers. That is the Department of Ed numbers. They send that to the Department of Education. For an entire district. No, they send them for the schools. Time out.

We're not going to get in this back and forth. It ain't happening under this. My watch. It's not happening. We required, we did, or she did, what was asked of her to do.

exactly what she was asked to do and we have a motion and we have a second she did exactly what i asked and i have to agree with her this time and you know how i feel about schools sometimes i know a lot of heartburn but i do have a unique district most of mine's not in concurrency yeah and but i do have another part down there that is and they overwhelmingly would like to see it back That's what it is.

So we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Todd, are you up there?

I'm out here. Can you turn the volume up, please?

Yes.

How many do we have? One, two, three, four, five, six.

Six.

Okay. All opposed? Three motion passes. We're going to spend our time arguing.

I'm all good. All right.

Sorry we're a little early today.

Let's talk about something else.

We've got plenty we can talk about. We are done early today. And just from this point forward, so you'll know, it's been approved by the county attorney and for the department heads here to know, we won't be requiring you to come to council to ask for permission to get a grant. You can apply for the grant. If you get the grant and it costs the county money, then we want to hear about it. But there's no sense in us giving you permission to apply for a grant.

We do have to vote to accept them because that is a budget modification. If approved, it will absolutely come before council for approval.

And hopefully that will give us enough time to really debate the things that matter. All matter, that really matter. With that said, we are adjourned until 4.30? 4.30. Thank you.