City Council - Special Meeting

Tradition at the city of Rock Hill to have a prayer prior to gabbling the meeting into order. You're welcome to join us if you like. Tonight, council member John Black is gonna lead us.

Let's pray. Almighty and gracious god, thank you. Thank you for your love and mercy, and we appreciate all the many blessings that you cast down on this this the people of this great city, the state, and the country. Please remember and keep in your prayers all the troops that are in harm's way, of course, abroad and and at home. Please bring them home safely.

Please, we continue to pray for those or anyone that experienced any kind of hardships. Oh, lord, we come before you tonight as we as we talk about these issues. Please give us your the knowledge and and your guidance and wisdom to make these decisions on behalf of the people of Rock Hill. Please hear our prayers and continue to be with us. Let us not forget that all that we do, we do in your name. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen.

Amen. I call this meeting on Monday, 04/27/2026 to order. Please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay.

We'll move on to item three. On our agenda, that's considered the approving the consent agenda item three a minutes of the regular session of April in orders to add an uncodified ordinance to this code of the city of Rock Hill to certify 121 Chester Street as an abandoned building site under the Southbound abandoned buildings revival revitalization act, and three c, an ordinance to men chapter 18, motor vehicles and traffic of the code of the city of Rock Hill concerning removal of illegally parked vehicles.

So move approval. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. We'll move on to item four a. Consider second reading and adoption of an ordinance to amend chapter seven annexations of the code of the city of Rock Hill so as to provide for the annexation zoning and award designation of Albright Road, Blackman Street Area 1, lying adjacent to the city limits of the city of Rock Hill. Shana?

Good evening, council. So last time that we met, for first reading, some of the responses from council were how can we lock in some of the things that developer was already agreeing to do with this development as well as adding some of the things you all had concerns about. So, in that time, we've worked with the developer to agree to the following bullet points that we have and I'll briefly go over those. So the first is no cross docks. Having the no cross docks that lessens the possibility of distribution heavy users as those usually prefer those cross dock buildings.

The second is no dock doors visible from Albright Road. That kinda ties into the fifth bullet of providing like heavy landscape in Birmingham to ensure heavy buffering or screening from Albright Road. Maximum 40 foot interior roof height that ensures that, you know, the lessens the ability to have like those higher rack users, those distribution users, the multi building layout as well that promotes a variety of industries and use types. Improve Blackman Street, so Blackman Street, there's a portion of it that's very narrow, it's paved, and then there's a portion that's essentially gravel. The developer will upgrade that to a 24 foot wide section along with any other improvements.

Also, creating a turnaround on Blackman Street. So that's in the southern area of the development that would prevent right turns on the Blackman Street. So prevent folks from kinda going west on Blackman Street towards like the Terminix And Kingdom Hall Building. Also, pursue a traffic light at Albright And Blackman Street. Now, that'll be up to SCDOT.

Of course, Albright Road is an SCDOT's owned and maintained. So, they'll have the final say so about the traffic light and then also convey property to miss Shirley Cottle. Shortly after first reading, staff did meet with miss Shirley Cottle as well as her husband and kind of explained that the developers more than willing to convey the portion of the property that's in question. It's just that that'll happen a little bit later on once the developer has a chance to fully engineer on the drawings for the property and determine, you know, how much they'll need for the road curvature and things like that. That way, we we know the exact amount that'll be conveyed to miss Cottle.

And then the last thing that the developer has agreed to do is exclude uses that are currently in allowed. This would only be in the IG portion, so all of these uses are currently allowed by some mechanism whether it's just permitted and doesn't have any use specific standards or is a conditional use that has use specific standards or is a special exception use. So, I've noted all of these on here. Now, all of the uses that are allowed in the CI portion, which is the portion along Albright Road, those would just be allowed all the uses that are allowed in CI normally. One of the ones that I've highlighted on here is the fuel oil and bottled gas distributor.

So this would be allowed as indoors only. So the reasoning behind that is we don't want, you know, the large bottle tanks that you see at the user that's along Porter Road near the youth new cycle facility, but it would allow for you know bottled gas that you may use during like a medical or dental procedure on in a hospital where they keep all those things inside. And so you wouldn't have like the unsightly large tanks just stored outside. And this is just the the site plan. It's the same layout as before except for the developer has gone in and kinda shown those those buffer areas.

And I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions for Shana?

So when it says pursue a traffic signal at Blackman Street and Albright Road with SCDOT. Are they saying we would do that, we would bless that, or they just saying they would like to try that?

That they're willing to pursue that. The developer is willing to pursue the traffic light. With our suggestion DOT.

I'm not following. When you say he's willing to pursue it, did we ask them to do that?

I believe there's there was some discussion about the turn. So if there were a light there, it would allow for trucks to essentially it would be safer moving turning left out of that site. For now, we think

they're understand, we asked them are we asking them to pursue a traffic light?

That was one of the things that we agreed to. I believe that it came up during the last discussion. I don't know if it was specifically a traffic light, but providing some safe net mechanism for them to turn left onto Albright Road if need be. If not, the thought is that they turn right onto Albright and take Porter Road.

Alright. So here's my concern is years ago when I was on our fat, we were trying to build a loop sort of around the city of Rock Hill so that you could move traffic seventy two four lane to heckle four lane up, selling these and then you had Anderson Road and that was kind of our loop. So because this developer wants to build a lot of buildings, lot of square footage, create a lot of truck traffic, that doesn't give to me we shouldn't be putting a traffic light on Albright to slow down all the other people that use Albright for for this intended use. I'm trying to understand. I wouldn't be in favor of us asking for a traffic light there because that road was four lane to move traffic.

And putting I fought this battle on selling these, you know, for that traffic light that we put up to the shopping center for nowhere that never got built. But I'm trying to understand who's pushing for the traffic light, us or them. And I don't I don't want us passing this or or maybe council's okay with it, but I don't want us tonight to Make that a condition. To make that a condition that we're saying we're favoring that traffic light. Yeah. I my I would rather us put up opposition to that traffic light.

Yeah. What I'm hearing, Shana, from you is that you thought you heard from us that that's something that we really wanted to be negotiated in.

Yes.

But the last meeting and what council member Sutton said, yeah, not him.

Yeah. Just

Right. Maybe maybe four of us, but it's it's not him.

I think it the what was talked about was the truck traffic coming out of Blackman Road trying to go across to make a left turn coming out the road. Slow as the truck is trying to get out of there would cause accidents and maybe a problem. So I think that's what

might be the reason that site's not great for this for this use. You just you look at the traffic light years gonna put another traffic light on 72 right there. I don't think makes a lot of sense.

And maybe that SCDOT won't even allow the traffic light. There's another one right there at the the Rosa Shopping Center that's not far away. It's not a very high likelihood that they would allow it, but it would be up to SCDOT. But if that's something that we can remove that from the conditions, though.

Because I think you want

truck traffic to come out of there, make a right and go down to 77, go down to get on 77.

No, I didn't want them to go right.

You didn't want them to go right.

No, mean, I think 901 is better suited for them.

Yeah, and it's left because if you go right going to Porter, now you're going through all those different traffic lights right there at McDonald's, there's like two right side by side and then there's another one that is right there at the Porter Road. So going right that way, you're going in the middle of more traffic, more, so it would be better to go left to get to 901 to

go for sure.

And and certain time of day that Albright can get Busy. Backed up with traffic.

So I'm just trying to be clear whatever that bullet point what the developer thinks it means or what we're saying it means, and I'm trying to get clarification.

Okay. Any other discussion?

So I'm just now I guess we just got this updated ordinance that was sitting back here. So this design that they've submitted as it's laid out that is now can't be changed unless city council changes that is that correct

yes that was one conditions we put in the the approval

okay so now you're locking into over whatever that number is over half million square feet, probably closer to 600,000 square feet on three buildings. So they could go more than that without city council approval. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

They got the future commercial supply up. It's top but that's I guess.

That's the CR portion. Commer Commercial industrial. Commercial.

I'm still not crazy about it. I mean, I know we don't have a lot of development in that area, but I feel like we have a lot of land in Rock Hill that is zoned for this exact type project all out along the Interstate 901 in Porter Road that we've done years ago. It just hasn't come out of the ground, and I don't want us one one day to realize we've been overrun with these buildings. We've we've had The church and and folks down Dave Lyle that's kinda asked for this similar thing and we've turned it down. So I just don't know that I'm supportive.

I'm not crazy about the project and and what I think that might do to traffic on Albright.

We get a traffic count. We know how many trucks a day that potentially could be coming out there if if that's all utilized is the the our intended use or potential use.

We Chris, you wanna help? Yeah.

So we just got communication from a traffic engineer today to begin correspondence about a TIA that'll have to be done for this property. I wanna say it was maybe a 143 trucks a day total given the square footage and the uses.

At maximum use. Yeah.

Yes, sir.

Well, I I am supportive. I think this is a good use of the property out off of Albright Road and what it could bring in tax revenue out in that area in the tax increment district that we have. I assume this is in that tax increment district out that way.

It is.

It is. Okay. Thank you. And I appreciate the developer scaling back the uses it would have upon build out as to the traffic light. I hear, you know, the thing about it is we've got no say in that.

DOT is gonna decide one way or the other based upon the numbers that are there and what impact it has on the way the the road works. So, whether we ask them to go forward and look at that and restrict it or not with the light, really is gonna be out of our control when it's all said and done. I do like that the the square footage that's tucked back in there is hidden with the berm and others so that the use of that property, which right now is a dirt road, so to speak, for a good portion of that and straightening up that road as well could help us sort of see that entire area start to revitalize in a lot of ways. You know, there's a lot of protected area back behind that with the nature preserve and the quarry. So I just don't see this really being usable for any real good development other than what we see here.

That's just my opinion, of course. I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about in that regard just based upon my experience and the like. So if someone will make a motion to second it, I'll support it. I do think this is a good outcome for us.

Well, I do have comment in regards to this development. So, it's in Ward 5 on the South Side Of Rock Hill, and so we are happy to see some some dirt being turned over for some perspective Development on The South Side Of Rock Hill The only concern well one of the concerns that I have is the conversation that I've had with missus cuddle She is still very concerned about this property Her property in the area. And so this is I would really like to. Is there anything in writing that the developers go to make sure that she is whole. I know I've had conversation with her about this, and she's still kinda shaky on that.

So

But they don't own it yet. They don't own it yet. Yeah.

Okay. There's there's language in what would be the annexation ordinance or the rezoning ordinance where the developers essentially saying that he agrees to convey miss Cottle the property whatever mechanism that is even if it comes to quick clean deed if there's no clear title developer is planning on doing that. We met with miss Cottle and her husband shortly after first reading. And she seemed to be she seemed to be appeased that we were helping and helping to fist facilitate the transaction with the developer and to sort of explain to her that is something that'll happen, you know, a little bit later rather than sooner. We go ahead if you go ahead, you know, and conveys the property to her soon after he acquires it, then you may end up with the same situation that we had today with there's additional property that she may think is hers.

So it's better to, you know, wait and see exactly where the road is gonna be and wait to see exactly how much property is left over on the south side of the road so we so that he can give her an exact amount of property.

Okay.

Is there anything limiting hours of operation of truck movement and how late they is this a 24 operation next to residential?

There there isn't anything in IG that limits hours of operations for businesses except for like the the noise ordinance that has like a decibel maximum at the property line. That's the only thing that I can think of, and that's in the municipal code as far as limiting noises and hours of operation.

Any other discussion? I'm sorry.

Was there I know that if I'm not mistaken, this may have been a long, long time ago, but there's a property down on the lower end across from Advance Auto, are they grandfathered like, they have a set time that there's no operation. Is that what you're referring to? They have all operation has to end at like 10:00, if I'm not mistaken.

So we have hours of operations for certain zoning districts such as along Saluda Street, neighborhood commercial, neighborhood office, generally those zoning districts that are compatible next to residential, there's usually that hours of operation of restriction, but none of the none of the uses that aren't excluded would have an hours of operations restriction.

So if they wanted to pay okay.

One of the uses one of the uses that's being excluded for example animal care That has like I believe like an hours operation where you can't have like you know animals outside or something like that but that use is being excluded.

I'd like to make a motion to approve second reading. Second.

We have a motion to second any further discussion. Questions?

Oh, I got one question. Yeah. Is there I know these spec buildings going up. Does he have any tenants warm lined up already or?

Not that I'm aware of, but I believe that the developer intends to market to the manufacturing type users.

Was there mention at one time possible some kind of retail in conjunction with that?

So the reach.

I don't I'm 17 not expected.

Okay. Oh, along the front. Okay.

The front.

Along the front. So the front would allow for retail. That would be commercial industrial, so it does allow for retail uses. So it's quite possible that, you know, you could end up with a fast food user or some sort of retail building up there that the employees of this development we utilize. Okay.

And once it's once you zone it IG, then we're out of it. So any tenant, maybe one doing solar panels or anything like that, could come in there with whatever chemicals they wanted and we would have no say. So just making sure we're clear on that. We got three big buildings that you're giving IG zoning to.

The IG now, the solar manufacturing that will be in heavy industrial use, it's not allowed in IG, but it's currently zoned IH. Now it does have separation restrictions that will make it difficult for business like that to locate here. So but the IG would not allow for that.

K. Any other discussion, questions? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Approved. We'll move on to item four b, second reading and adoption of an ordinance to amend the zoning ordinance of the city of Rock Hill code by making certain changes in the official zoning map affecting approximately 71 acres located on Albright Road in Blackmon Street from urban development UD, general commercial GC, and industry heavy IH to industry general IG and commercial industrial CI. Let's wish for council.

I'll make a motion to approve for second reading.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Approved. We'll move on to item four c, second reading and adoption of an ordinance to provide for the disposition by sale of property at 201 East Main Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina by the City of Rock Hill to Collected LLC, formerly known as Co Corporate Holdings LLC. Mister Dillingham.

Mayor, members of council before I start on this item, I just wanted to I I don't know whether I need to be chagrin or proud of miss Marshburn, but some of those questions may have been directed at me, but she was more cogent and thorough and thoughtful than than I

Low bar, Paul. Certainly more certainly more thoughtful.

I'm very I just commend and I'm amazed at the professionalism and knowledge of the city management team and staff, Well

said. Yes.

So for for this item, mayor, members of council, this is coming back before you for second reading and this is at 201 East Main Street. We've now have a full contract, which is attached for your consideration. Collected LLC is is the name of the potential buyer is 650,000, some of the salient terms, $650,000 purchase price, hundred fifty day due diligence period, minimum investment. There is a completion guarantee, there's there's a permit period, there is a period of time where we have to negotiate the design and the use of the building, think, is is presented is to council as a restaurant, which is an underpinning of of why council is is very interested in the project. And I'm happy to answer any questions you have, but the contract's been fully negotiated and it's it's ready to move forward if if council so desires.

Thank you.

Any questions for Paul?

Alright. So let's ask you questions since

I'll try. I'll do my best.

You mentioned a restaurant. If the buyer gets down the road and determines that it's not feasible feasible for a restaurant, Either I guess trying to think would it be after the cease air the CCNR is going to be so detailed that it would show restaurant uses on certain floors or. I guess I'm I'm asking, could they could they pivot and change and make it an office use at some point?

Yes, sir. I'll draw your attention to two items in paragraph five in answer you to your question. There is a there's a potential lease of the property for because we we the city has some present use there. So there's a possibility that there may be some leasing of the space back to us, back to the city, but that's not that's not guaranteed. But more to more pointedly, to answer your question, all these covenants have to be fully fleshed out during due diligence, during the hundred fifty days, which is is been negotiated down a bit and down to a hundred fifty days.

And the use, the upfitting, the look, the design, all those things have to be approved by city, and yes, they would be fleshed out in covenants that run with the land. That is the whole point. So we wouldn't we would those kinds of things will be important now if the developer had totally wants to do something different, the City Council and the City thinks is better than than what's being proposed now, of course, we'll consider that, but that's what this due diligence period is for. And likewise, the the developer has to make sure that that that the project will will cash flow and that it's it will come in on budget and the architectural standards and the designs and the tax credits and everything he's looking for to make the project work are feasible, and that's not guaranteed. And if it's and if it doesn't work out, then then likewise the developer can cancel.

So it's mutual. The city has to be satisfied and the developer has to be satisfied failing which the agreement will will not move forward.

Okay. So the CC and ours are gonna show a restaurant use and design elements or whatever that we would agree to with the buyer. And then potentially down the road if he figured out that wasn't gonna work or something, it would come back to us.

We'd have to count for all that in the CCRs and that this will be under the purview of the city manager and the city manager I'm certain will be in contact and in consultation with City Council because we know is important project for downtown.

So

And so those items would have to be addressed in the CCRs, yes sir.

And do the CC and Rs come back to us for approval?

Not necessarily, but they very well may. I haven't from a legal standpoint, I'm not prepared to answer that, sorry Sean, I'm not as good as you, but but they very well may, but but it would be during this due diligence period. But regardless of whether they come back to you for formal action, because of the way the contracts written, I think you could make the argument that is part of the conveyance and part of what city manager has the authority to approve. You City Council will be directly involved in those in those decisions.

Just to clarify for the public at large, we're on second reading tonight to enter into a contract that would give the buyer, which is the restaurant tour that owns several businesses in South Carolina, one of which is Whitaker's in Fort Mill, another one Whitaker's, I think, in Conway. That buyer would be the grantee under this contract that we've that we'll negotiate. He won't need to worry about someone else stepping in over the next hundred and fifty days, and he'll determine whether it fits his budget, it fits the historical credits, and all that, and we'll get to determine whether what his endgame is fits our vision for downtown. That's the purpose of second reading.

Yes. And as in any contract, there's an implied covenant of good faith. So we'll be working with this developer in good faith to try to make this project move forward.

Which is why we spent so much time on the front end trying to understand what each party wanted, so we could negotiate in good faith.

Yes, sir.

Yeah. And and I don't want my comments to come across negative or that I'm opposed to the project. I just

Yes, sir.

I like to sort of flush some of this out just for the record. Absolutely. So so everybody knows what the deal is going forward.

Any other questions for Paul or discussion? What's the wish of counsel?

So move for a second reading.

Second.

We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Congratulations. We'll move on to item five. Thank you, Paul. You did well. Consider ordinances for first reading and ordinance provided for the disposition by sale of property located on Palmetto Parkway, Rock Hill, South Carolina by the city of Rock Hill to project Palmetto Rock. Mister Dillingham.

Mayor, I have no comments on this one for for reasons of economic development purpose and disclosure purposes, but I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have to the best of my ability.

Any questions for Paul? So move for first reading.

Thank you.

We have a motion and second for first reading. Any discussion, questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Thank you, Paul. We'll move on to item six a, a resolution of the city council, the city of Rock Hill regarding capital improvements plan and impact fees. Mister Bagley.

Mayor, council, good evening. Back during our first budget workshop, we talked about opportunities to revise or or at least revisit our impact fee structure as it is for the fire, water, wastewater. We also proposed there were opportunities there to look at police and road impact fees that we currently don't have if you all should so desire. So there seemed to be some interest at that meeting. So I'm bringing it before you tonight to see if that is indeed the the wishes of the council.

If so, we would like for you to consider this resolution that would then go to the Planning Commission to invoke a study to look at those various different fees and we would get back to you sometime later in the summer. With the responses to that, obviously, the Planning Commission has to look at it. The study would have to be done. They'd make a recommendation that would come back probably sometime August, September. If you all should desire to take up any of those considerations and then we'll go from there. But the first step is tonight if if that is something you want us to to visit.

Okay. Thank you. Any questions for Jimmy? Jimmy, just to to clarify yet again what you said. All tonight's resolution does is start a process where we can learn information to determine whether we want to consider continuing impact fees that we presently charge and potentially increasing them or decrease them. And then likewise, look at potentially new impact fees that might help with road maintenance in the city limits of the city of Rock Hill among other things.

Yes, sir.

Alright. What's the wish of council?

I would make a motion to approve the resolution.

Second.

We have a motion to second. Any further discussion?

Yeah. Go ahead.

Just to kinda echo your comments, I don't think this is certainly not from my standpoint that I'm rubber stamping impact fees, but I'm okay with staff moving forward with the plan just to give us information to look at.

Thank you. Any other discussion? Questions? We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. We'll move on to item seven a. Thank you, Jimmy. Consideration of the PFG business license tax agreement. Leah Youngblood.

Thank you.

This is a request by Kenneth O'Lester Company, which does business as PFG customized distribution for a long term business license tax agreement with the city. It would set annual payments and other increases every year based on a formula that's in the agreement. It's in your packet and staff in the city attorney's office recommend approval.

Any questions for Leah?

So move for approval. Second.

We have a motion to second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. And seven b, consideration of contract agreement between the city of Rock Hill and the Haskell Company. Jimmy Backland.

Mayor, again, good evening. We've talked about upgrades at the wastewater treatment plant now for seems like a dozen years, a decade or so now. Ever since I've been here, we've been upgrading the water plant, the wastewater plant. So here here we are yet again. This proposal has been one that's been negotiated between the city and a company called Haskell.

It is a construction manager at risk and this is one similar to the project we did the operations there where we would actually start the work, have the engineering team work along with the construction team. So it kinda be a little bit of a design build as you go. At some point, they would give a 30% rendering and and a cost associated at that point. And then as the process continues, it would refine to a final number that we would agree to it, and that's what we would kinda lock in. There is an opportunity for us to to to get out of the contract and kind of settle up at any time should we decide we don't want to extend expand the plant and we certainly can do that.

We'd have to settle up by the cost at that point where we are. But this is a large company. They are are global. They have a headquarters in Jack's Jacksonville, Florida. They have a Charlotte main office. A lot of their folks that would be on our team are in the York County area actually as well. They've got offices in six countries. They build plants like this all all over the world. And we would ask that you consider this agreement tonight. You have the draft agreements, I believe, in your packet.

There was one item that we're still working on. That was our insurance agreement between risk management. Obviously, Anne Morgan, our risk manager, left the city most recently and we're going through picking up, making sure we don't leave out anything. She was already working on with him. Brent Tompkins has been negotiating that on behalf of the city with Spencer Spencer, but I'll be glad to try to answer any questions that may have come up from the documents you have.

Any questions for Jimmy?

So Jimmy, how many people responded to our RFP?

I'll I'll need to double check that. I know they were at least I saw the top three. Not sure if there were others, but we did interview the top three and spent a good bit of time working with those folks to negotiate really where we are today to this agreement. It's been going on for probably about six months.

And we we've done this before with other things, but talk a little bit about the benefits of doing it this way versus putting it out for bid.

The biggest benefit is in this environment, this is gonna be a three to five year project, probably more toward the five. It's like, you know, working on a plant that's operating and that's always hard. If you're building a plant on virgin soil, it's a lot quicker and easier to do because you don't have to keep it running while you're you're doing the upgrades on it. So this would give us the opportunity if we find things out there that we didn't know were there, pipes in the ground or buildings that were not doing what we thought they were supposed to be doing. You can make changes in the field.

When we did the operation center, for instance, we did a lot of value engineering that really we designed this, but it really allowed us to get those extra two buildings for truck sheds and the gas fuel farm because we didn't think we had the money to do that, but really just working with a company that if you get a good one that you can trust and work with it, understands the process, you can make changes as you go and and generally for the benefit and cut cost in areas that that work for both parties. Typically, what a lot of these folks do for the private sector, they try to split those savings and they ask that if they find the savings during the process that you give them a percentage of it. Traditionally, as government, we don't do that. As government, we try to be very fiduciary responsible for the monies that we collect from the taxpayers. So if there's a savings, that all comes back to us.

And again, that's where it's critical to make sure you get someone who understands that process. Yet, they're still willing to make good decisions for you so that you can come come out saving money even if there's no financial gain necessarily for them doing it other than just doing a good job and get a good project out of it.

And have we used this company before on anything?

We have not.

Okay. I mean, would this would this alleviate alleviate some of the problems and issues we've had in the past with some of the past construction companies?

Well, certainly hope so. We we we have one in town today that's working on a filter that failed that we've been working off the last couple years. Obviously, we hope we hope to have better results from one that's proven and will work with us a little a little better than what we have today. Yes, sir.

Any other questions for Jimmy? Don't have a motion?

We need a motion or a second.

So move to approve the agreement with the Hassell company. Second.

I have a motion, second. Any further discussion, Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Alright. We'll move on to item a. Congratulations to Patrick Behringer. You are our smart switch winner and our customer connect winner is Mary Each of you will receive a $50 credit on your next utility bill. Any city council committee reports? Alright. Under miscellaneous business, Jimmy, just a quick second. You can stay there. But we're if we just take a second to talk about where the drought, we're in stage one, what we would hope that people could do in Rock Hill that may help us weather this easier than getting more drastic in the summer, if anything.

Yes, ma'am. This one it's a good question. I did an interview this afternoon with WSCC. So, obviously, words out that things are changing pretty rapidly. There are two things that can declare drought to insurance in South Carolina one is the state can to the drought committee. And they've been existence for for a long time. The second is as part of the top of water read that goes through North Carolina and into South Carolina. There's the DMAG the drought management advisory groups only

one in the nation that I

know that works this way multi state. But back in the early two thousands We revised our drought Ordinance which incorporated by the drought act of 2000 as well as the DMAC being a part of the water management group. And we try to combine those two. So with those two, the state's plan really looks at a lot of information in terms of farming, the drought outlook, the KPI index, whether there's fuel in the woods that could catch on fire, wildfires. It looked at a lot of different things.

The DeepMag group is really just looking at quantity of water. Do we have enough water to sustain the life support systems along the Catawba Watery? And that's the one that really is calling the triggers today, and it really is looking at three different things. One, the the lake levels, which right now really artificially high for this time of year because Duke's really been trying to hold it back. So they've not been using a hydro production like they typically would this time of year.

And then it also looks at the stream flow average for the last six months as well as the drought monitor, US drought monitor for the last three months. Once the lake levels, the target index, once it hits a certain amount, and either one of the other two hit their target, that lowers it into the next stage of drought. To come out of a drought, you have to have all three go up to the next level to to come back up, but going into it, it's the the lake level and then one of the other two. And where we are today is we've not had rain. In the last six, nine months, we should have got about 25 inches of rain and we've had about 10 to 12 in different places.

So we're running a deficit going into the summertime, which is when we really need a lot a lot of water. So we have a situation where this time of year, the amount of water in the reservoirs should be higher, and in March 1, it's gonna go up even higher than that. So the target level is gonna go up because we know with the trees, the irrigation systems, we have that break 200,000,000 gallons of water a day between the 11 lakes in the summertime. So with all of that, that we know that the lakes need to be up. So that's gonna be the trigger that really drives us into the next level.

So currently, we are asking everyone to conserve up to 5% of the water. Think about irrigating your lawns, washing sidewalks, cars, those sort of things. A stage two is a mandatory restriction. So that's where we would then have to enforce actions and tell folks, hey, you can only water two days a week. We'll we'll announce what days of the week those are and then certainly start monitoring water usage to make sure folks that are using what we'd consider excessive could be fees and penalties associated with that.

So the DMAC group is meeting Friday. I got a note just a minute ago, said hold it on your calendar because we're pretty sure based on the amount of rain that's forecasted this week, it's going to go to stage two which will be mandatory restriction starting on Friday. So I think that'll that'll happen. We have 14 after that notification comes out to really get the word out to talk tell folks, hey, this is what the way we're gonna have to do it. Stage three, should it come to that and pray it doesn't, that's where you step it up even more and you look 10 to 20% reductions, and you really start eliminating outside water use altogether, whether it's putting in water in new pools, anything that really is using a lot of waters that might come about.

Stage four is really kind of the Armageddon. That's where everything shut down except drinking water, and you really start bothering businesses about using restrooms and stuff like that. So fortunately, we've never been there. But right now, we're heading into that condition and and starting off a little bit worse than we did back in the drive of record, which was 2,006 and went all the way to 2009.

Okay.

So everybody needs to prepare and start conserving.

Start conserving. Yes. Thank you, Jimmy. Any other miscellaneous business?

I got a question.

Oh, I'm sorry.

What being where we are with this drought, is this enough to put a hold on inter basin transfers from the Catawba Road?

That that's an interesting question, mister Lindsay. I I think I think it's definitely worth looking at. The Katawa Watery Water Management Group just published their ten year report, which is called the integrated water resource plan, and that's out for review right now. It'll be wrapping up end of this month. As a matter of fact, it'll be published in its final form in in June.

In there, it talks about what were to happen, what would happen if we were to have a drought. In particular, I know there's one that's that's out being pursued now for 30,000,000 gallons a day, and we specifically address that in that document and said, should we have another drought of record today, like we did back in 02/1989, what would that do to the folks downstream of of North Carolina particularly? And in our case, it basically would free up thirty more days of having water. So if the IBT were approved already and they were using it to its maximum, we would run out of water in York County thirty days earlier than we would if that didn't happen. So I think that's pretty significant.

The North Carolina legislature hired a group called the Clavatory. It's some academia folks that are studying that today. I'm trying to get on their calendar to get present to them and at least make sure that they're making decisions that they're recommending to the legislature with all eyes open. I'm not sure they're aware we have already studied a lot of the things that they're they're talking about. But that's a good question.

Thank you, Jimmy.

Yes,

sir. Anything else? Any other miscellaneous business? Okay. We're in executive session. Thank you all for coming.