County Council - Regular Meeting

On the left, Mr. Wehrman. Rob Wehrman, District 3.

Katie Pryor, District 5. Larry Brownski, District 2.

Jenny Honeycutt, District 9.

Bill Tootin, County Administrator.

Kristen Salisbury, Clerk of Council.

Herb Sass, District 1.

District 7.

Natalie Hamm, County Attorney.

Thank you all. This time I want to turn it over to Mr. Sass, the Chair of the Board of Trustees.

Hearing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Number two, agenda item, updated Charleston County Economic Development Impact Study. Mr. Johnson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, sir. Appreciate it. All council members, thank you guys for this time this evening. I'd like to introduce you guys to Dr. Joe Yvonne Nessen. He's a research economist with the Darla Moore School of Business at the University of South Carolina. He does a lot of these economic impact studies across the state. He did ours three years ago, and now he's back to give us an update. Thank you all.

Well, good afternoon, everyone. Can you hear me okay? Yes, sir. All right. Thank you. Well, thank you all very much for inviting me to participate with you this afternoon. It's a pleasure to be here to debut and to share the findings of the study that we have conducted over the last several months with CCED documenting their economic impact on Charleston County. And when we look through the data and really do a comprehensive assessment of what this economic impact looks like, the results of the study point to one very simple but very compelling conclusion, which is that CCED, as you see here, is a critical driver of economic growth in Charleston County. And this is the result of the fact that CCED has been responsible for helping to attract and retain businesses in Charleston County over the last 33 years in high demand industries. And that includes everything from advanced manufacturing to healthcare to logistics to professional and technical services. And we can see the results of this in three primary ways, which I'll share with you very briefly this afternoon. First, we can look at the actual economic footprint that CCED helps to generate. And we can see that it extends countywide across all of Charleston County. And that's very easy to observe. When we look at the total impact overall, we see a economic footprint of $26 billion annually. recurring in Charleston County, as you can see here. And that translates to about 79,000 jobs, either directly or indirectly, that are tied to CCED-affiliated business announcements. And this represents a significant percentage of the Charleston County economy, about a quarter overall. You can see if we look at the percentage of GDP, it's about 26% and close to 28% of the total employment base. And this represents not just the businesses themselves that are that come to Charleston County and stay here, but also the multiplier effect. And the multiplier effect, as you can see here, quantified is representative of both supply chain effects, businesses that come into the county, then they utilize local businesses as suppliers, purchasing a variety of materials and inputs and overhead. that that goes to local businesses and supports additional economic activity as well as what we call the household spending multiplier and that's where employees that are hired spend their wages in the local economy in the county and that's where we see an increase in demand for things like restaurants and entertainment businesses construction housing health care those types of sectors that are supported as well So when we put all that together, the supply chain multiplier and the household spending multiplier, that's where we get this $26 billion economic footprint. And again, representing about a fourth of the economic activity of Charleston County overall on an annual basis. Secondly, in addition to the countywide economic footprint that we see, we can also see in this analysis that these impacts largely stay local. So what does that mean? Well, anytime you have a business that locates within a county or within any local region, a certain percentage of the economic activity that they generate is going to be lost outside of that region. For example, any business that has a large supply chain, some of those suppliers are going to be outside of the local region. And from our perspective, that's considered to be lost economic activity because we want businesses to be purchasing materials and supplies locally to the extent that that is possible. And when we look at business activity affiliated with CCED. We see that the majority of the economic activity that is generated stays local, stays within the county, about 92% overall. In addition, we see that businesses of all sizes are supported. both small and medium and large businesses. You can see the distribution there on the right-hand side of your screen. And specifically for small businesses, those with 20 employees or less, we see an economic impact of about 3.3 billion annually and about 16,000 jobs that are supported as a result of the economic activities and the business activity facilitated by CCED. And then finally, the third major point, CCED generates a positive ROI for Charleston County. The third way we can see what the economic footprint looks like overall. So what is an ROI? What is a positive ROI? How can we quantify what that looks like? Well, anytime you have business activity that, or a new business that locates within a county or within any local region, they generate new economic activity, and that in turn generates new tax revenue for the local region, for Charleston County in this case. And so we can look at that tax revenue and assess what and actually quantify what that number looks like. And so in this economic impact analysis, we look at a $26 billion economic footprint in Charleston County that is generated every year. And we can estimate what the tax revenue that is tied to that looks like. So when new dollars are generated in economic activity, that generates new tax revenue. And as you can see here, if we look at that tax revenue that is generated over the last two years, in this case, looking back to FY24 for the most recent year that we have data, And we just compare that to the county level appropriations. We can see that each dollar appropriated helps to leverage about $10.88, so close to $11 in tax revenue for the county. And to put that in perspective, when we look at the tax revenue that is generated, we also looked in the study at several hypothetical scenarios as to what would happen if we were to see a loss in that type of tax revenue as a result of seeing a loss in a partial loss in the economic activity generated by CCED. So specifically, if we look, as you see here, if CCED affiliated activity were to decline by between 25 and 75 percent, that could mean an increase in taxes elsewhere. And if we assume that the loss in tax revenue As a result of the reduction in CCED affiliated business activity, if the loss in tax revenue that would accompany that were to be made up, to be made revenue neutral through increases in property taxes, we'd be looking at an increase of about $950 per year for the average homeowner in the county to offset that. Because in economics, as you all know, we talk about tradeoffs. And so if we see a loss in revenue, a loss in tax revenue in one area, that means that there has to be a change in county services or an offset elsewhere. And this is just one example of what that could look like if we were to see that offset completely through changes in property taxes. So wrapping up, we finish right where we started. CCED, a critical driver of economic growth in Charleston County. We can see that through the sheer size of the annual economic footprint of about $26 billion annually, about 79,000 jobs representing about a fourth of the economic activity in Charleston County. We see that through the fact that most of this economic activity remains local and benefits businesses, both small, midsize, and large. And also, we see that it generates a positive ROI for the County of Charleston overall. So I will stop there. Thank you very much for your attention, and I'll be happy to take any questions.

Chairman? Any questions? I do. All right. Mr. Wurman first. He's on the end.

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Dr. Von Nessen. Maybe a big general question first. When we have these discussions, as we've been having up here over the last few months, it seems to me that a lot of this hinges on a question of the hypothetical of what would things look like without the incentives. I think I generally accept the premise, and I think there's some evidence for it, that, you know, if the incentives were not given that we would see less less investment in the county. Obviously, the incentives are being given to draw in investment that would not otherwise be happening. I guess I am interested in understanding academically, how do we rule out the hypothetical alternative? Are there examples in South Carolina of people making this level of manufacturing investment that would qualify for a FILO but not getting a FILO? Does that ever happen? Are there other case studies? Are there other communities that we can look to and say, this is what happens when you don't engage in this type of incentive policy? You see what I'm saying? And I'm not necessarily talking about the specific companies that we have. I think it's pretty well established that they would, 99% of them, would not be doing the investments they have in our community without the incentives. It's more the idea of would some unidentified theoretical third party come in and do some of the same things without the incentive, which we don't really ever get to know when we give the incentive. And I just want to know how we study that sort of phantom possibility.

Yeah, that's a great question. And it really depends on the industry that we're looking at and the type of incentives. So not all incentive packages are the same. Some are going to have different benefits than others. Some are going to have more benefits than others. And I think when you look at a local region, and you're looking at a specific industry or a specific company that you're looking to recruit, you have to look at, as you said, what are the alternatives and the alternatives for economic growth, the alternative uses for those dollars, and simply what are the tradeoffs there? Because when you're looking at incentives, You're basically, as you mentioned, you're looking to determine to what extent do you want to recruit an individual company or look at particular high demand industry, a type of, a set of jobs that you're looking to establish in a local region. And again, that just depends on the specific industry. In terms of specific examples or studies looking at alternatives, I think there you have to look at what the alternatives would be for the uses of those dollars, what the alternatives would be in terms of economic growth. And if you are looking at industries that are going to drive a local region and you have an opportunity to help to support that level of activity, then once again, that can provide a reason to move forward. But again, it depends on the industry and it depends on the specifics because every incentive package is different.

Understood. Maybe just one question to clarify the sort of average homeowner $900 figure that you've mentioned. My understanding of what you're telling us here is that taking into account, because we had a presentation several months ago that showed the direct money that we are getting from like say the FLO payments and that sort of thing. It sounds like what you're saying is if you take into account the sort of knock-on effects of these investments, the local industries that they support, the sort of secondary suppliers, that sort of thing, all of that cumulatively you've determined is roughly a $950 impact on the tax bill for an average homeowner, obviously?

Yes. Well, it's not an impact. Well, I agree, yes, what you're saying. I would rephrase it slightly and say that if we were to lose the tax revenue that is currently generated by CCED-affiliated businesses, then if we were to make that revenue neutral by collecting those dollars elsewhere, one way to do it could be to raise property taxes. That's not the only way to do it. But if you were to say, we want property taxes to absorb all of that additional cost, and we're going to move forward, then we would likely see that $950 number. That's where that number comes from. It assumes that property taxes absorb all of that lost tax revenue that would take place if we saw the reduction in economic activity.

Okay, and I guess I'm just making clear that when you talk about economic activity, you're saying both the economic activity of the folks we give the incentives to and sort of their affiliated companies, the multiplier effect, their employees spending money in the local economy, et cetera. Yes, that's exactly right.

Mr. Kowalski?

Thank you for your excellent question. presentation, all your excellent work on behalf of the county. Just two quick questions. What does it mean when you said if CCED-affiliated activities were to decline between 25% to 75%? What does that mean and how does that happen? How would that come about? And then I have a quick follow-up question. Thank you.

So that simply means that if we take that $26 billion impact that we currently measure as the impact of CCED, and we say going forward, if that number were to decline by between 25% and 75%, then that as a result would generate less tax revenue. And that's where we get that having to be offset or at least in principle, offset somewhere, which is where we get those property tax estimates from. But it takes that $26 billion current economic impact as the baseline where we are today and said, if that were to go down, here's what a possible implication could be.

So that's based on current and then retroactive estimates. rather than the future?

It would say if that $26 billion impact, which we're seeing today in 2026, if that were to go down by, again, hypothetically, if it were to go down, let's say, to $20 billion or to $18 billion, whatever that number would be, then that's going to lower the tax revenue that is generated for the county. And as a result, that's where we see these secondary potential increases to make up for that loss revenue.

Then the quick follow-up question is I understand, I mean, the tax incentives, they allow the companies to build more, hire more people, and so forth. But then it puts more money in the economy. If they have to pay less in taxes, they can put the money to hire more people, expand. But wouldn't that same principle then apply to everybody that owns a home? Are all businesses to reduce their taxes? Under that theory, that would produce Those employees, just like you said, they'll spend more on housing and restaurants and other things. If we reduce taxes on everybody, then under your theory, wouldn't the same principle apply that those individuals and businesses who now pay what the law requires They also would spend more, expand more, and have more money to build their businesses. Wouldn't that same principle apply?

Well, here we're just saying this is what would happen if the businesses were to decrease their level of economic activity.

I'm sorry. I was inarticulate about the question. I just meant the theory of tax incentives Completely by giving the tax incentives. We're giving them the opportunity to spend money on themselves their businesses That's what I was talking about That theory would also apply if we were to give a sense tax incentives by lower the millage rate Under your theory all homeowners would have more to spend on their homes and all small businesses would have more to hire more people and expand wouldn't that equally that concept apply to to anybody that pays taxes and anybody that has a business.

Well, if you're decreasing taxes in any particular case, that does provide more resources to be spent in other areas. Now, what is that trade-off and what does that look like? I can't speak to that. It depends on the specific policy. But yes, you're looking at those types of trade-offs regardless of the type of tax change. It's just the specific tax change makes a difference in terms of what those trade-offs look like and whether it's revenue neutral, whether it generates revenue, loses revenue, and so forth.

That's all I meant is that anybody who has to pay less taxes has more money to spend on themselves and their business. Yes. Thank you. Yes.

The distinction between anybody having more money to spend and actual philo agreement is the fact that businesses have to commit to providing a certain number of jobs and a certain amount of investment, as opposed to just giving a business owner a tax break who doesn't have to spend that money employing new people or investing in that infrastructure, correct?

Yes, that's correct. And that's why the specific type of tax policy matters, because it can change incentives and it can induce different types of effects. Yes.

Chair, Dr. Von Nessen, I can't help but... Hazard to guess that there must be a relationship in the fact that Charleston County, for the last nine years and maybe for the 10th year coming up, has not done a millage increase. And so I've got to believe that this is contributing to our ability not to have raised the millage.

That's certainly part of it. So I can't speak to the specific policies in terms of what is driving that or the reasons behind those decisions. But yes, we see growth in Charleston County. We see a lot of economic activity. Charleston certainly has been one of the fastest growing in the state in terms of economic activity overall. And that is certainly part of the equation. There's no question about that. I can't speak to the specifics there. But yes, that is definitely part of the story.

Thank you, Dr. Von Nessen. Appreciate you being here. Fellow Gamecock? Yes, sir.

You mentioned in the state a couple questions.

I don't know if you – how do we stack up against other counties in the state, or do you know what our peers look like in the state? And if you know in the region, what do we look like? How do we stack up against other areas of the state?

Just with respect to overall economic growth? Yes, sir. Charleston has consistently been one of the top-growing counties in the state for a number of years, certainly since 2020 and really over the past decade. We've seen strong economic gains overall, very high levels of demand across the board for a variety of reasons. So it certainly ranks consistently near the top across counties in South Carolina.

Do you know or do you think that Charleston County has become too dependent on large employers? I mean, they catch the flash, the headlines, right? But this multiplier effect is amazing. I mean, the small business impact and the employees, $1 equals $10.88 employees. I mean, multiplier effect, that's incredible. Are we too top heavy or is that benefiting all small businesses everywhere in the region?

So it does benefit small businesses in the region. Now, every business, every large business is not necessarily going to support a small business. But in general, yes, we do see these secondary effects that are very significant. And Charleston benefits because it does have a very diversified economy. That's one reason why it is one of the fastest growing and has been the fastest growing in the state, particularly if you look more generally at the Charleston metropolitan region. But having a large set of diverse industries helps. That allows also the development of a large supply chain. We see that again in healthcare and manufacturing, especially in logistics. And more generally we see that Charleston is The growth in Charleston is coming largely from, speaking in general, from manufacturing and logistics and health care, which are really the biggest. Health care is one of the biggest drivers in the country right now across all regions. So you see health care being a primary driver of growth. And logistics and manufacturing more so in the southeast, largely because we're seeing more population growth in this region of the country. That's expected to be true for the foreseeable future. Every projection that you will see for migration patterns in the U.S. will show you that the region of the U.S. expected to see the highest rates of population growth over the next several decades is going to be the southeast. And so that means from a practical perspective that logistics industry is going to be in high demand. and it's going to uh and so that provides real potential for south carolina for charleston and for manufacturing as well companies that want to locate in south carolina and be able to manufacture and then distribute goods to a customer base that's incre a u.s customer base that's increasingly located in in in the southeast and along the eastern seaboard to your knowledge across the state and i think mr merle pointed out last time is there any prohibition against size of businesses that can they can apply with their economic kind of economic development office for incentives Not to my knowledge, no, but I can't speak to that.

You demonstrated clearly through data the benefit to small business. I've got one more observation, but if we need to leave here with one thing today, what would you tell us from Darla Moore School of Business?

One thing, I would say that economic development matters and that when we look ahead, Charleston County, South Carolina in general, but especially Charleston County, has a lot of strong momentum going for it. And with all the trends that we've just talked about, as we look ahead, it's important to continue to build on that momentum going forward. We have a lot of opportunity to be able to do that, and that's going to be very important in order to sustain the high rates of growth.

Because once you slow down the pipeline or turn down the spigot, it takes decades, years to get that rebuilt. Exactly, yes.

We're in a virtuous, what I would call a virtuous cycle right now, and we have a lot of competitive advantages that are on our side, and it's important, again, to capitalize on that momentum.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'll tell you one thing that stuck with me, and I'll turn it back. This is very impressive. The $950 savings, I guess, for the tax payer per year, I mean, if you slow that train down 25% or 75% and turn off the spigot, that's akin to you wanting a tax increase, a millage increase in my mind. So when you vote to turn the spigot off, you're voting to tax everybody else. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Moody. Mr. Middleton, do you have anything? I'd like to thank you. I'd like to say that I know that from growing up here, when the Navy Yard closed, we faced a really bleak, uncertain future. And that whole thing has been completely turned around now. Yes. And 1 thing I'd like to really commend our economic development folks for is that council and economic development have worked together to try to try to attract more high paying jobs. And we're trying, we're always, we're, we're really trying to find more jobs that we can fit in, in, in neighborhoods, not in neighborhoods, but, like, say, West actually, or or in North Charleston, not just something that has to need a 1000 acre track to land. To be to be used. And I think it's real important that we're doing that. Number one, we're getting higher paying jobs. Number two, those are generally really clean industries. And number three, nobody thinks about this, but what you just talked about, about the taxes, These businesses pay 6% tax rate. Personal property tax rate for me at my house with a 4% ratio is 4%. So these businesses pay the lion's share of the taxes that we collect. They pay the school board tax that the homeowners don't pay anymore. And so it's important for us for a lot of reasons to have these businesses here, and that just happens to be one of them. But I really thank you. I've enjoyed your presentations in the past and always look forward to them. Thank you very much. Thank you for being here.

Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.

Are there any other questions?

No, sir.

Hearing none, thank you, sir. All right.

Thank you very much. Thank you all for your attention.

Thank you. Thank you, Merle. Do you have anything to add? No, sir. Okay. Thank you. I'd like to turn this...

Going to Mr. Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Sass. We are going to start with our Administration Policy and Rules Committee. We have two items on the agenda. The members of this committee is Jenny Costa-Honeycutt, Kyleon Middleton, and Herb Sass, the chairman and myself. Item 1, minutes of May 7, 2026. Move and second it. Any discussion, deletion or addition? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All opposed? Ayes have it. The item in question is item number 2A, policy for funding outside agencies from council contingency. And I think the discussion that we had, we wanted to make everything unilaterally the same. Uniformly Sam so if anybody wants to jump in for discussion you can but we can't vote on this until it comes back at another meeting But I think if we need to all be on the same page all these agencies Whether it's coming from contingency from council or whether it's coming from out of you know, I will grant So any discussion if you want to raise your hand, I'll recognize you We're having Melton chair.

Thank you so much. I would certainly I remember based on the discussion we had last week relative to the one application that came for or one request that came forth and then there were these stipulations added, is that going to be the template or is there some other contemplated trigger, you know, that enables us, so that's what we're going to come up with, or is that what it's going to be?

Well, I think it all depends on council. If they wanted to add something, somebody could say, well, can we add the stipulation, and then if the majority says fine, but I think if we come with a uniform decision, like we do for all staff houses, and then that's it, you know, I don't think you'll see any more amendments added to it.

Certainly.

I think what the chairman was doing is trying to protect, but I think And I think he had to say what we were trying to say, you know, you want to look like you're doing it fair and evenly across the board. And that's why Mr. Moody made a good point to bring this up so we can make it fair and even across the board. And when something like this comes up, if we do a recommendation, staff knows what they have to do.

I think I recommended that and are we then, I know both of us down here, he was lost without me a few, you know, for a week or so, you know, so he was calling, you know, trying to figure out where I was, part of his soul was gone, you know, on this end of the dais. What I'm saying is that I know it was suggested and we kind of moved things forward with the last thing, but are we going to have something more concrete that applies every time? What are we talking about? Are we talking about that same thing that was proposed that applied to the one agency last week? Or are we directing our legal department staff to give us these are the things that would apply to everyone every time somebody requests a council contingency?

Well, I think we already have that in Grant's department. I think Mr. Grant and her team already have that. We're just saying move that over to council contingency.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, set of creating something that we just say, use the template they have now.

Oh, I agree. I just want to, the thing.

Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Literally, the time I did it last year, I went to Ms. Durant, and I got her guidance and her wisdom, and she basically took down the template they've been using. I said, would you just apply it to this? And I guess I didn't maybe enumerate it as openly as I did last time, but it was the same rules. Right. I'd be happy to hear from Ms. Durant if she had anything to offer as far as recommendations.

She put you on the spot, Ms. Durant. I think she's already made her recommendation.

Exactly which question would you like me to answer?

I just, the template that we used, it kind of is formatted from your other practices that y'all do on grants and so forth. And my whole thing was just having someone on staff administrate the funds.

Yes. I mean, we have a number of different policies, all that protect the interest of the taxpayer and federal money. It doesn't matter who it is. A variety of different finance policies, yes. And each one is different. So that's what I'm trying to. To support what your goals are, which is to support an organization that does good in the community, we can do it either way. It doesn't matter. We have policies that would protect us on both sides. It's just a matter of council's preference.

Could we make a directive to staff to maybe offer us their recommendations of a potential template, and then we could discuss that?

Well, we can do that, but we can't do it now. We have to wait until the next meeting. But if that's what you want to do, just direct staff to come up with something and bring it to us at the next meeting. But I think she's already got that. We just need to study it. Some of us need to just study it and look at it, and we will understand why.

Mr. Chair, I think she has it, but she has different kind of iterations of it based on... various types of organizations and or requests so i think we need to have some you know it may be template a b or c based on who the organization is what they're at because some may be non-profit some may just be good people off the street and they don't have any yeah so i mean and i think they have that because you you wouldn't want if somebody comes for a grant to um do something with affordable housing

You know, you couldn't treat them the same way you have somebody coming in to feed the community because, you know, affordable housing, most of their money are required, you know, which we can do. You know, some of it is needed up front and then some on the back end. But I think when we allocate money, we should make sure these people, you know, spend all their expenses first and then whatever we allocate or whatever we vote on comes on the back end, you know, especially with these affordable housing. You know, you'll hear me talk about that a lot more because... We don't want to say we're going to give $3 million to an organization and we hand them a check, and then they take our money for seed versus having seed money themselves. So I think we did that when we were doing the bike pedestrian over the downtown West Ashley Bridge. Coming into downtown, what we did was we funded the study, and then we said, okay, we're going to put this money in contingency as you all spend. You all submit receipts, and then we will give it back to you to make sure that we had it right. So it's a combination of all, but at the next committee meeting, we can discuss this and then figure out where do we go from here, and I think we'll have more information. Ms. Honeycutt?

I just want to make sure we're talking about the issue before us. How much do we have in council contingency? I thought it was only like $100,000.

It was like $40,000 or something like that.

So I just didn't want to, I was getting confused with the $3 million because I know that this is a policy where we're trying to appropriately and fairly distribute the little amount that we have in council contingency, which is capped at $100,000 right now. And I do think it would be worthwhile, as Reverend Middleton was suggesting, to come up with some whether it's an application or template with parameters to make sure there's accountability for how the money's spent and that sort of thing, and that applies to everyone so that it's not like we favor one group over another. But if we could have that by the next time we meet to discuss this.

A couple of weeks from now when it comes up, we can have that for everybody to look at, and then we can go from there.

Okay.

Mr. Wehrman? No, it's been covered. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

All right. Mr. Sass? Mr. Pryor, I just wanted to reiterate what Ms. Honeycutt said. This is just for council contingency. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. That's what I thought. Okay.

Mr. Moody? No.

I mean, it's a policy that's transparent and fair to everybody, that it's known, that it's measurable. You know, it was a good discussion last week. Those poor kids from Orange Grove were standing there with those robots for 20 minutes while we were talking about this. But, you know, if we want to fund them to go on this international competition, and they want to use that for travel or hotel rooms or whatever, Send us the receipts. If it's whatever else, let's let staff build out a format that shows that money was spent the way it was intended to. And even what's the ROI to what Dr. Von Nissen said? What was the return? How many people did we feed? Let's see the impact.

And also, I was talking to the chairman. about maybe an in-kind, you know, if these people can't afford to go out, they go out and they buy it from, like, from the food bank, and then we pay the food bank instead of giving them the check. You know, there's different ways you can do it. But we can discuss that in a couple of weeks and move forward. So that concludes our Administration Rules and Policies Committee. And so I think we go to planning and public works, where everybody on council gets to participate. We have two items, which is the first item was minutes from May 21.

Second.

Moved and seconded. Any deletions or additions? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed, ayes have it. Item two, extension of the moratorium in the historic district. And I had asked for this to be placed on the agenda because I knew, I think it was in July, I think, when this next one expires, the three we had. And I know those folks are doing some good things in the neighborhood. And these African Americans are these settlement communities, and they didn't want them to run out of time. So we said when we put the first three years, they could come back and we could look into it. But I would like to say I don't want to handicap anybody else whose property is under Contract and you know, they've got a contract on the property now and then this moratorium They're waiting on the moratorium to expire and then we pop it up So I would ask that when we look at this if someone has property that's under contract, you know They would be grandfathered out of this versus just somebody coming in with a new application.

I

Mr. Boykin? Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Reverend. He deferred to you. Thank you so much. I just wanted to ask a question because I know we had the Historic Preservation Commission, and I know several of these historic settlement communities have, you know, kind of gotten themselves on that HPC, and I thought some of those levers were protective, you know, so that even... void a moratorium seem like we have embedded protections for them, you know, based on the HPC ordinances and languages? Am I missing that, or is that not right?

So we do have a few communities who are designated as historic. You know, Ten Mile, Phillips, Bee Field, and Hamlin Beach is our most recent. And then we do have the Hamlin Beach area character appraisal coming through Council's adoption. But we do have some other work going on in the communities, which I can go over if you would like.

I'm just, the question that I'm asking, because again, I'm just trying to make sure that we're not kind of doing this twice or three times over, because again, some of those protections, I thought we were putting the HPC ordinances in place to then protect them from overdevelopment to, you know, deed, not deed restrict, but to limit the amount of density per acre that could go in certain places, and then to avoid, you know, well, the overdevelopment of those particular areas through the HPC.

So the historic designation doesn't control density or lot size, that zoning. So far only Ten Mile has an overlay zoning district that controls that. What the historic district designation does is allow the HPC to decide whether or not the land development, whether that is a subdivision is consistent with the historic character of the area. And then if there are, you know, vertical improvements or other improvements on the site, if that is consistent with the adoption of the historic district. But it doesn't necessarily, it does not control the density. Only the overlay zoning districts do.

I remember the conversations that we had relative, and maybe my mind was going back to 10 Mile, that there were certain zoning elements that were also married to some of that. And maybe moving forward with those HBCs, that may be the way to go, you know, because otherwise we'll be coming back doing moratoriums every single time.

All right. Mr. Chairman and Amherst.

Thank you, Mr. Pryor. Should we have a motion before we continue discussing?

Well, this is a request to consider, so I... I mean, if somebody wants to make a motion, fine. But I think, you know, discussion is good. But I mean, for rule of order, if we want to do that, if somebody wants to make a motion to, you know, defer this until we get more information, or you just want to move forward with it, I mean, if somebody wants to make that motion, Mr.

I would like to have the full counsel and have Mr. Darby back for this. That's true. I'd like to wait until we have Mr. Darby for the bulletin. Yeah, all right. I would like to make a comment on it.

All right, so why don't we just defer this until maybe our next meeting, but then we still can give Mr. Chairman a chance to make a comment and weigh in on it. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, sir. My understanding is what we did last time was to have a moratorium on major subdivisions in already established historical preservation districts. So that those that were seeking overlay districts would have that protection that no major subdivisions would occur in the interim period. And that's when I agreed to the two years. I thought that was reasonable. I guess I would feel like we would follow that same pattern that do we, and Ms. Mel, this will be for you. Do we have any... historic preservation districts that exist now that are still working on getting their overlay districts.

We have some that we have spoken to about overlay districts. We've spoken to the Phillips community. Hamlin Beach has indicated that they might want to do that next after they do that ACA. Let's see. Some of the other ones that we've met with have been about area character appraisals and becoming historic districts. I'm looking through for the ones specifically about overlays. But those would be the two that we've talked to about overlays.

And when we do this, it applies to all of them equally because they're all in the same category as historic preservation districts. Do you mean when we talk to the – No, I'm talking about when we apply this, it applies to all.

Oh, yes, sir. Okay. Yes, sir.

And so I would be willing to support something in the future if we narrowly tailored it that way for those reasons. But I'd like some kind of time assessment of, you know, what's the projection if these folks want to move forward and achieve that overlay district. Is it, you know, 18 months, two years? I mean, what kind of a – time frame would you estimate that might be required for them to obtain these overlay districts?

I mean, it could be as much as a few years. It just depends on how much consensus there is amongst the community as to what they want.

Thank you, ma'am. Mr.

Worm. Yeah, I'm going to echo, I think, some of Councilman Middleton's thoughts. I think we're sort of on the same page here. I mean, I think it's just not even a secret at this point that, like, You know, if you open these communities up to development, people will buy big tracts of land, and they'll chop them up into about 50 to 100 homes. They'll be pretty close together. They're going to stick out. We've tried to put some stuff into the HPC ordinance to address that sort of thing, but, you know, it doesn't directly govern density, and so there's probably ways that that just can't be touched by HPC. I mean, I'm assuming you can't just outlaw major subdivisions by state law, otherwise that would be what we should just do and get it over with. I'm fine to extend this whenever this comes back up, but I do just think, like, let's just be clear about the goal. That's the type of thing we don't want to have happen. We need to marshal all resources we have available and find out what we can do to have permanent solutions to this rather than coming back every two or three years for moratorium. I mean, I, you know, the idea of sort of having perpetual moratoriums does nag at me a little bit, so that's kind of... my thoughts on it. I mean, I do support, obviously, protecting those communities from, you know, frankly, that type of development. So, I just think if we'd be clear about it and put that on the table, that would hopefully give us a better timeline of how long is that going to take.

Okay. Mr. Grabowski?

The 10 mile and Hamlin are in my district, and I want to be on record that I would extend the moratorium if we don't do this. We had a very detailed economic development presentation, and that will continue to be relentless. As more people move here, I drive by there several times a week on the Wade-McClellan bill and thousands of times over the years, and there's a relentless... You talked about a permanent solution. I'm of the opinion that it will be a permanent vigilance to prevent the historic communities from disappearing because it's right at the end of the development in Mount Pleasant at Dunes West, Park West, and Carolina Park. And if we do this for two years, well, the developers are going to say, okay, we'll wait two years. So, I mean, we have this internal vigilance that will always be a struggle because of the relentless push for more and more development and the ending of our green spaces. And I think that the communities and what they represent are worth fighting to preserve. So I would vote to extend it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Grabowski. I think what I'm going to do is defer this to our – and then to Mr. Sasson. next meeting, Ms. Salisbury, maybe two weeks, whatever you think you need before it runs out. So that gives Mr. Darby a chance to weigh in because he has a lot to say, and I don't want to silence him. He's out sick today, so can you do it like two weeks, three weeks?

Yes, sir. It would be committees on June 18th.

Okay. So we'll defer this to June 18th without any objection. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Sass. Yes.

I have a question. I think I understood that... Can you tell us which ones already have an overlay drastic? And did you say some are considering whether they want to do it?

Yes, only... Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.

Would you just kind of... Give us a lineup, you know, who's doing what and who's doing what. Sure.

Okay, so starting with the overlay district, only 10 Mile of our historic districts has an overlay district. We have four communities with historic district designations, 10 Mile, Phillips, Hamlin Beach, and then Bee Field on James Island. We have spoken with Phillips about possibly doing an overlay district. They have not made any, we haven't had any community meetings or anything like that about it. We've done a community needs assessment with them. Hamlin Beach has indicated that after their area character appraisal, Is adopted they might want to do an overlay We've met with staff or met with folks from the B field community and the low country land trust back in November of 2025 to discuss the process for adopting an area character appraisal, but that's as far as that's gone Stout in we've attended several of their Civic Association meetings the historic district designation process they started that process in 2023 they actually just resubmitted to us on friday and so we're reviewing that information now to see how close they are to the 51 requirements Red Top, they actually have created an area character appraisal. Of course, that hasn't come to council because they aren't, it hasn't gone through the historic district designation process. But they did that through the Gullah Geechee Heritage Preservation Project. They have expressed interest in historic district designation. And we've met with them and the Red Top Improvement Association several times over the years about that. We talked about 10 Mile. Tibwin, we met with Council Member Kabrowski and the folks from Tibwin and the communities in that area back in November about the process to become a historic district and what that means. And then we've also had some meetings with them since then about that process. But they haven't submitted an application. And that's the end of it. Thank you.

I wanted to know. Thank you. All right, so we are going to defer this until the 18th. And one thing you can check before, I don't think we have to do three readings if we don't create a whole new ordinance, right? We just extend the one we have, right? So you don't have to answer that now. You can let us know by the 18th. You can email us or whatever, but I just want to make sure because I don't think we'll be making a whole new document. Even if we had to make amendments, I think we're just extending what we currently have. Okay. All right. So that concludes our Planning and Public Works Committee agenda. Back to you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr. Pryor. At this time, I want to call our Finance Committee to order. All members of Council are members of this committee, and I serve as chair. Item 1, approval of the minutes. All for approval.

Second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. Ayes have it. Consent agenda 2A, Bees Ferry Landfill.

Move for approval.

Discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Nays? Aye.

Mr. Chairman, 3A through H, there's no need to break these up because all the seats are there, so I'd like to move for approval 3A through H. All right.

Moved and properly seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Okay. I'm sorry, hang on. Hang on a second. If anybody here today that came to be on one of the boards of commissioners, I'd ask you to come on up to the podium so you can take two minutes and talk about your application and your desire to be on the boards.

There's only two of them. That's not the challenge here.

And I'll just say, if you were on one of those prior 3A through 3H, you've already been nominated, so you don't have to say anything unless you want to.

Don't talk your way out of it. My name is Kenneth . I made application for the Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission. It's very interesting this evening to hear some of the discussion about the challenges in Charleston County. The challenge is not whether to grow, but how to grow while we preserve the quality of life that makes Charleston County attractive in the first place. If you look at my resume, I started my career at Charleston Naval Shipyard in 1985. I worked at Spay War for 16 years and then got asked to take a position in Washington, D.C. Throughout that, I maintained my residence in Charleston. Because I knew I wanted to come back. And the reason I wanted to come back was the preservation of the landscape and the environment that we had here. As a long-distance runner for my whole life, I've leveraged the Charleston County Parks facilities and the amenities that we have for my entire time here in Charleston, 41 years. So as I considered what I could bring to the table in becoming a member of Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission, I looked at it through three lenses. One, stewardship. I spent my entire career helping organizations responsibly manage valuable assets and public trust. Second, resilience. Charleston County's parks and recreation system is an increasingly important public asset. We've heard that in the challenges of development and the migration of people into the area. I can contribute experience in long-term resilience, continuity, and risk management, not only in terms of organizational risk management, but the cybersecurity risk management, having been the senior cybersecurity official for the Department of Homeland Security. Charleston County has built one of the most respected PERC systems in the southeast. My interest is not in changing that success, but helping to sustain it. Throughout my career, I've worked at the intersection of governance, strategic planning, risk management, and public service. I believe those experiences can help Charleston County Parks and Recreation Commission continue to expand opportunities for residents while remaining a responsible steward of taxpayer resources and the county's natural and recreational assets. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Bible. Anyone else would like to come up?

My name is Gilbert Bradham. I've been a resident of Charleston County my whole life. I've been an employee of the Medical University for years and since retired from the Medical University, I was with the Medical University Wellness Center working there. So recreation. I've attained, am attaining the fourth graduate degree from the Citadel. I've been embedded in this whole area the whole time. First person people see going in the Wellness Center, the last person they see going out. I've been in law enforcement. I've been in multiple levels. What I see the Parks and Recreation Commission needing is more exposure so that the only thing that people are not doing is going there for the parade of lights. They need to go there on a normal basis ongoing. Recreation is a part of everything that we do. I've been a volunteer with the bridge run for three decades or more. Real estate, I understand backwards and forwards. I'm in commercial real estate. I'm a commercial real estate broker, so I understand the ins and outs of how to handle that in the transactions that happen with the county. My plan also, if so chosen, would be to go to all of the parks, meet everybody, go granular. I have that time and capability at this point in my life to do the same. And I would appreciate it if you could consider my application for this board position. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Stephanie Burgart. This is my second round applying to be on the commission. I'm very interested in joining the commission because I'm an avid nature lover and what they were talking about during the CCED economic impact study, you know, there's people behind that $26 billion and they also want to go out and recreate, rejuvenate. My husband works for Charleston County Parks and Recreation. He's the park manager at Kaw Kaw. We love our county parks. We're, you know, Gold Plus members. And I also, I work for the Nature Conservancy, so our lands, waters are very important to me and my family. And I, as a boomerang local, I like to say, I grew up in South Carolina. I went and I got my master's in environmental education there. out west. And then I came back with always the desire to come back to just continue to steward our lands and waters. And I would like to be able to be more involved in our community and really be able to bring that kind of voice and perspective to the commission. So thank you for your consideration.

Thank you, Ms. Burgott.

Hello everyone. My name is Elise Campaign. I am also applying for the Charleston County Parks and Rec spot. What a great thing it is that there are 10 applications for two spots. It speaks well of just how incredibly strong our parks and rec system is. It would be a privilege to give back to a system that has been a huge asset for my family over the 20 years of living here. I've worked my whole career in public policy, public service, protecting natural resources, and share the passion that you spoke about of having worked extensively locally and nationally on conserving the kind of place that we have that is such a gem in our community. bringing my extensive board experience with Charleston Waterkeeper, Friends of the Refuges, and Friends of Coastal South Carolina, the Mount Pleasant Planning Commission. I just would hit the ground running in service of the Parks and Rec Commission. It would be an honor to serve, and thank you for considering.

Thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone else? All right. Thank you all for coming. At this time, the floor is open for nominations.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to nominate Bible and Edwards.

I'm going with Bradham and King. Burgart and King.

Okay. Mr. Wehrman?

I nominate Abraham.

Okay. Mr. Kabrowski?

I was listening to the people who came to speak, and that changed my mind because I feel we need to defer to people that come. And I'd like to nominate Stephanie Burgett and Alessandra Campaign after hearing them. Okay. Anybody else?

I have a motion to close the meeting.

All right.

Properly made and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Ayes have it. Madam Clerk.

Yes, sir. Okay, I will call out your name, and if you would just say the last name of the two people you would like to vote for. Ms. Honeycutt. Michael Edwards. Mr. Kabrowski.

Burgard and Campaign.

Mr. Middleton.

Burgard King.

Mr Moody.

Miss Edwards, Mr Bible.

Mr Pryor Bradham King. Mr Sass Bradham.

And King.

Mr Worman Everingham

And King.

Mr. Boykin.

Bible and Edwards.

OK. So three, two, two, one, three, one, four. OK. So Miss King definitely moves forward. And then we have a tie between Edwards and Bible for the second slot. We could forward those both to council on Tuesday. We should have a full.

It would be a separate vote. Ms. King automatically goes through and then we'll have a separate vote for the tie.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Moving on to 3J, Charleston Regional Aviation Authority.

I'd like to recommend John Robson Berry.

Any other nominations?

I want to speak. One of the nominations.

Oh, did we nominate anyone else? Move that nomination be closed.

Make sure nobody had to speak on that. I'm sorry.

I asked everybody to come up for all the positions.

I think she didn't realize. I thought she didn't think. Ms. Tillerson, did you want to speak? Yes, please. Mm-hmm.

Good evening, everyone. I just wanted to put my name with a face. My name is Stephanie Tillerson, and I served as a town administrator of Kiowa Island for the past decade. I started in 2015. I live on Johns Island near JZI, and I have spent my career in regional planning and municipal leadership in South Carolina. I'm here tonight because I would consider it a privilege to serve on the Charleston County Aviation Authority Board. The authority's work sits at the intersection of three things I think about every day, which of course is public sector leadership, regional planning, and the relationship between visitors and the community that hosts them. I recognize that there are other strong applicants for this seat, and I respect the process you all are working through tonight. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Thank you, ma'am. I guess one more time, any more nominations from the floor? And now if they want to make a motion to close.

Second. Who's been nominated? Miss Berry. Miss Berry.

Robinson Berry.

Okay. Miss Berry.

All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. I'm clear. I guess none of these. There's one name that's clear. Yes, sir. All right. We'll move on. All right. Moving on to item four. All right. I have a second. Second.

All right.

Any discussion? Question? Yes, sir.

I'm okay with this. Mr. Small's question may be, do you guys, you won't be here. Don't say that. Five-year lease. What I want to make sure we're not getting into is that this is a perpetual $1 lease. We may have needs in the future. Do we see that in a time? That's a big complex out there. We spend a lot of money on disabilities needs to come in or other. I think this is a great goodwill thing and a community service thing to do, but we're going to need that space in some amount of time. And your forward-looking thoughts?

We have a clause in the lease that we get about 90 days out that will send letters if we need to stay. Thank you, sir.

Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. All right.

Moving to... Vote for approval 5A and B. All right. Second.

Any discussion? Second. All right. Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Moving on to item 6A.

Second. All right. Any discussion?

All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. 7A, move to approve. Second. All right. Any discussion?

Question.

Go ahead, Mr. Moody.

Mr. Adams, this funding is for, as I read it, is for trying to get the north bridge replaced. Is that what I'm, am I reading that correctly?

Yes, sir. This is a federal grant specific for replacement or rehabilitation, so it would not apply to a new construction of a standalone bridge. However, we know the DOT is currently studying that bridge for replacement, so this would be an endeavor to continue our partnership with them, encouraging them for replacement of that bridge.

Sweet in the pot. I'm in.

Yes, sir, Mr. Pryor.

Adams, what happens if they come back but don't grant money for a standalone bridge? So will we take that versus waiting to see if we're going to get money for a new bridge?

Mr. Pryor, we're supposed to hear back June 28th on the build grant, which would be a planning grant as well that would be eligible for the standalone bridge.

I just don't want to give up chasing something that we may not have a year. So both of them are on the table, but if everyone comes first, I think we ought to accept and move forward. Yes, sir. Multiple irons in the fire. Yes, sir. Thank you.

Anything further? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Madam Attorney, do we have need to go into executive session to discuss contractual matters and or receive legal advice?

Yes, sir. We have a need for an executive session for items 7B and 7C to receive legal advice regarding right-of-way impacts for the airport connector road project and the TST right-of-way acquisition policy.

All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye.

All right. We will retire to executive session. Okay, we have returned from executive session. We discussed the airport connector road right away. And our TST right-of-way policy, no motions were made, no action was taken.

Mr. Chairman, on item 7B, I move to authorize the settlement amount of $1,850,000 to purchase the property discussed in executive session for right-of-way acquisition for the airport connector road project. Second. Second.

Mr. Pryor seconded.

All right. Any further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed?

Ayes have it. Chairman? Yes, sir. Item 7C, I'll move for legal department head recommendation.

Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. And we are adjourned. Yes, sir.