County Council - Regular Meeting

You're live, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, everybody. I'd like to call this Greenville County Council regular meeting to order. Sorry for the tardiness. We were busy at work in the committee room. We will get started with the invocation. I'll call on Councilor Farmer.

I'd like to call up Chaplain Kenya Permenter to say the invocation.

We ask you to forgive us of anything we said and anything we've done not pleasing unto you, because we desire to be in right standing with you before we are in right standing with others. And so, Father, I pray that 2 Chronicles 7, 14, and 15, as you said, if my people who are called by my name, who will humble themselves, seek their face, and turn from their wicked ways, then will I heal from heaven and heal the land. And then in 15, you said, my ears and my eyes will be attentive to hear the prayer in this place. So, Father, tonight, in the name of Jesus, as we've humbled ourselves, Lord, We ask that you would hear our prayers. We ask that you would bring reason to every conversation, to every argument. Let there be balance through the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus. And we give you glory and we give you praise. In Jesus' name, amen. Amen.

Thank you very much. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Next on the agenda is the approval of minutes.

Move approval of our minutes from our June 2nd meeting.

Thank you. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Next on the agenda, we're at appearances on current agenda items. Ms. Stone?

Mr. Chairman, we have 13 speakers. The first is John Slipke, and his topic is 9A, the county budget. All right.

Welcome, sir.

Good evening. My name is John Slipke. I reside at 43 Tyndall Avenue in Greenville. I've lived in Greenville County since 1997. I am vice chairman of the Greenville Transit Authority Board of Directors. I'm here this evening representing the GTA board, but also speaking as a Greenville County resident in support of the adoption of the county's 2027 budget. This year's budget recognizes several operational and infrastructure challenges facing Greenville County. Given these challenges, the budget places the right priority on public safety, infrastructure investment, and employee retention, as well as fiscal responsibility. In my opinion, the proposed budget represents the best possible outcomes given the operational and financial realities facing the county. I must comment at this time on the proposed amendment that would reduce county funding of Greenlink by $2 million. First, everyone must understand that a $2 million reduction in county funding for Greenlink has a much larger budget impact. With this reduction in local funding, Greenlink would also lose approximately $2 million in federal matching funds. A budget impact of that magnitude would result IN A REDUCTION OF AT LEAST A THIRD OF GREENLAND'S FIXED ROUTE SERVICES. THIS WOULD ALSO RESULT IN THE REDUCTION OF PARATRANSIT SERVICES. ALL THIS WOULD AFFECT HUNDREDS OF COUNTY RESIDENTS WHO RELY ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO GET TO WORK, SHOP FOR GROCERIES, SEE THEIR DOCTORS. THE GTA BOARD AND GREENLAND MANAGEMENT IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING EFFICIENT EFFECTIVE AND INNOVATIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES. Greenlink is one of the few public transit agencies that has experienced an increase in fixed route ridership since the pandemic. Greenlink has recently implemented a number of initiatives that have improved service, and more improvements are planned over the next six months. Most importantly, Greenlink is now operating out of a modern, upgraded maintenance facility that will allow for more efficient operations and the capacity to expand services in the future. Greenlink is growing and providing improved service. It is now in the process of developing the 2026 Transit Development Plan, its roadmap for aligning future transit investments with the region's growth and development plans. Now is not the time to reduce funding for public transportation. Greenlink has momentum and a commitment TO A MODERN EFFICIENT PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM. I URGE YOU TO NOT APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND ADOPT THE 2020,000 BUDGET AS PROPOSED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. CHAIRMAN, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SIERRA FISER AND HER TOPIC IS COUNTY BUDGET SHAW AMENDMENT.

WELCOME.

HELLO.

Hi, I'm S. Fieser. I'm here to speak out against Shaw's Amendment 1, introducing cutting funding to the city public transportation by $2 million and affordable housing by $950. Cuts to such resources such as Greenlink and affordable housing are quite honestly a slap in the face to our lower socioeconomic working class citizens, our black and brown residents whose studies have shown are two to three times more likely to not own a personal vehicle, and also our homeless population. Greenlink has increased its ridership to 750 rides in 2023 from 2000 in 2021. In addition to paratransit ridership increasing 21% in that same amount of time. Additionally, Greenlink actually is better for our, keeping funding for Greenlink is actually better for our economy. For every $1 spent by Greenville County taxpayers towards Greenlink, it produces $80 more in economic activity going towards Greenville County. At a time, there is policy after policy that hurt most underprivileged citizens. This is one such example of consistently hurting those within our community, making it harder for them to grow and succeed. It will only make issues of poverty worse at a time where there is rising unemployment and the cost of basic goods continue to rise. This is also not to mention affordable housing being cut as well. 33% of Greenville County residents were considered cost stressed in 2025, as well as 30% are paying more than their monthly income towards housing. In addition to that, the cost of housing has increased 135% faster than the national average. As I mentioned, unemployment is rising. The cost of housing continues to get more expensive as people move into our area, as our towns continue to get gentrified, making our black and brown residents, our disabled residents, and our older adult residents at most risk of being pushed out of our metropolitan areas. The last thing we should do is cut any money to affordable housing. I implore the councilpersons, if you care about the residents of Greenville County, your constituents, then you will vote against such an amendment. I implore everyone here today to take note of how everyone in the council votes today, because a favor and vote of this amendment is a vote against all of us. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Jeff Lawson. His topic is 9A, County Budget, Shaw Amendment.

Welcome.

I'm Dr. Jeff Lawson. I've resided at 20 Crescent Avenue, Greenville, South Carolina, since July 1979. I appear before the council today in opposition of item 9A, Steve Shaw Amendment 1. Greenlink is the primary public transportation system available for Greenville County residents currently. Greenlink has most recently had its buses, most of its buses, on a 30-minute schedule. They've also proposed new area routes, one that will service travelers' rest, enhance riders' ability to travel to travelers' rest from downtown Greenville and vice versa. It will also increase Furman students' ability to travel to travelers' rest, where now there is only a university-provided option once a week on Sunday from 7 to 9 p.m. I've also suggested that Greenlink reduce There are weekend rates to encourage patrons who plan to spend more than three hours in downtown Greenville, or if possibly if the Traveler's Rest proposed bus route is approved to reduce the inconvenience of finding parking in downtown Greenville and Traveler's Rest. I therefore request that the council does not approve Shaw Amendment No. 1 to reduce Greenlink funding by $2 million. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hi, good evening everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today and the excellent work that you do here in the County of Greenfield to keep us safe and productive. That work absolutely must continue. I am someone who sometimes rides the Greenlink transit bus in order to get to employment and healthcare needs. I am someone that has an invisible disability as well. I've also been homeless and the way that I combated that was with public transportation. Everyone wants to say pull yourself up by the bootstraps, but then cut the funding and the resource necessary for eager people to do so. And so I greatly implore everyone to please vote and keep Greenville Transit not only funded, but we cannot compete where we do not compare. There are people coming from New Jersey, New York, Different people that want to be employed here, bus drivers specifically, where the minimum pay for bus drivers is about $20 to $25 an hour. And if you come from another state or another place where you have 10 years of experience, you're getting $40 an hour to relocate to an amazing city. We can't compete with that, but we do want those people here. We do want them here to be able to drive for and with us. and they also have the know-how to be able to combat the traffic that we have and cutting transportation specifically in the Woodruff Road area and areas through Prisma Health and different employers would be detrimental. We already do not have transportation service to Lockheed Martin, BMW, some of our billion dollar grossing employers that need employees, GE, We do not have transit service, Michelin. They need employees. The airport, I have never been and lived in a city where we did not have bus service to our airport. And that is of great detriment. We also are short-staffed at the airport. And if you've ever been to the airport and your favorite restaurant is closed, that is because they are short-staffed, there's no bus service. TO OUR AIRPORT. SO I JUST LOOK AND ASK AND IMPLORE YOU TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT. OUR TRANSIT SERVICE IS SEVERELY UNDERFUNDED. WE ARE THE LOWEST IN SOUTH CAROLINA IN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND THAT IS WHY THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICE THAT WE HAVE IS SEMI-EFFECTIVE. WE COULD BE MORE THAN EFFECTIVE WITH GREEN LINK TRANSPORTATION LEADERSHIP AND ALSO GTA AND EVERYONE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. WE HAVE THE LEADERSHIP. We need the funding. And I stand on the backs of everyone, the tens of thousands of people that ride transportation that cannot make it tonight because they're either working, can't get here, that we need this service. And I implore you to be able to keep that in the budget. Councilman Shaw, you've recently spoken about a safer, more connected Greenville. The recent tragic events at Haywood Mall underscores the importance to easily accessible, robust, affordable, accessible, TRANSIT FOR EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR TEENS AND YOUNG ADULTS TO STAY PRODUCTIVE IN FURTHER STEERING THEM AWAY FROM TROUBLE. I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTIVENESS TO THIS MATTER. HAVE AN EXCELLENT EVENING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS AMANDA D. AND HER TOPIC IS 9A, COUNTY BUDGET SHAW AMENDMENT.

WELCOME.

Good evening. My name is Jordan. I am a person with autism, and I use the Greenville County Paratransit bus. As someone who was homeless, I relied on the prepaid card you could get. The prepaid bus passes and access to affordable, accessible transportation were life-changing. I'm here today to speak about how the penny tax should allocate 10% split for more transit funding. Reliable bus service helps people with disabilities get to work, medical appointments, and daily activities on their own. Expanding transportation options give people more freedom and self-sufficiency, reducing reliance on government services, family members, or costly specialized transportation. Many young individuals with disabilities, myself included, have been adopted by older parents who may not be able to provide transportation. The fixed route bus is more affordable than paratransit. As someone who is gaining independence, having access to affordable transportation makes it possible to work, socialize, and do all the things they want and need to do without worrying about how to get there or whether or not they can afford it. They can contribute to the city. As a 20-year-old with disabilities, I want to go out and work and spend money in the community, but this can be limited when you do not have affordable transportation. As Greenville keeps growing, the bus system needs to grow with it so that people like me can access the work opportunities and businesses moving to our community. A penny tax is a cost-effective way to improve transportation access for everyone. By expanding a regular bus service, communities may reduce pressure on more expensive transportation programs while providing a service that benefits seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and working families alike. There should be safer, more affordable options for people regardless of disability to access transportation. So if we increase the amount we spend on transportation, specifically Greenville Paratransit, we increase the number of people spending money on transportation going towards the city. City Council, I stand here today not just to speak for myself, but for people with disabilities who are unable to be here to advocate for themselves and to improvise the importance of affordable and accessible transportation. Having access to affordable and accessible transportation promotes independence, not dependence, supports a stronger workforce and a local economy, and makes a small investment that saves money over time. Finally, advocating a 10% share of transit funding will ensure the bus system remains an essential and life-changing resort in our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Michelle Shara, and her topic is 9B, Augusta Arbor II, Philo.

Welcome.

Hi. My name is Michelle Shara. I live at 203 Chandler Street. A lot of things on this agenda tonight are pretty wild to me. Under item 9B, you're about to give a third reading to a fee-in-lieu of tax agreement for Augusta Arbor II, formerly known as Augusta Arbor II. $35 million development. That agreement freezes the property's value and locks its tax rate for 30 years. So as it appreciates, the school and county services that property taxes pay for see none of that growth. Fee in lieu of tax agreements were created to attract high-paying manufacturing jobs to South Carolina, not to pad the profit margins of out-of-state landlords. And the number of jobs this developer in writing is committed to creating is zero. Zero jobs and a 30-year tax break. The sole performance trigger is 80% occupancy, which is a completely hollow metric in a booming housing market. That developer will fill those units regardless. Our community is the one left absorbing the traffic and infrastructure strain. And at the same time, we have the Shaw budget amendment under 9A cutting $2 million from Greenlink, our grossly underfunded public transit system, and clawing back nearly $1 million in much-needed affordable housing funds. So let's spell this out. The people who have to ride that unreliable bus because they can't afford a car and the working families who need to help buying a home oftentimes in the same neighborhood they grew up in Those are the people being told to pay for our first responders to get a raise. So don't tell this community that there is no money and then turn around on the very same agenda and hand it to corporations that aren't even promising to hire anybody. Granting a tax break to an out-of-state residential developer while cutting public transit funding would be a directed betrayal of Greenville County taxpayers and that's the people that you work for. The money is right here in the deals you keep signing and you are choosing to ignore it and we are paying attention.

Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Teresa Mann, and her topic is 9A, County Budget, Shaw Amendment. Welcome.

Good evening. My name is Teresa Mann, and I'm here today to advocate for our wonderful public transportation services provided by Greenville Transit. I've lived in Greenville, South Carolina, for almost my entire life, and I'm proud to call this beautiful city home. Public transportation has always been a part of my life, My grandmother and great aunt never drove, so their primary means of transportation was the bus system. As a child, I was always eager to ride along with them. Because of those experiences, riding the bus is nothing new to me. Funding a strong public transit system in Greenville County is extremely important. Per the news last week, Councilman Steve Shaw submitted an amendment to cut $2 million from Greenlink in the 2027 budget. I'm not quite sure or understand why he would think that this would be a good step forward for our community. The county's funding doesn't exist in a vacuum. That $2 million cut would trigger losses and federal matches, pushing total cuts upwards of $4 million. That would lead to shattered routes, lost jobs, and a system that couldn't serve its thousands of riders. This is a critical moment for everyone who believes in a stronger, more connected Greenville. We need your help and counsel. I support reliable transportation that connects residents to jobs, to health care, to education, university, and other essential services. That is why I'm asking the council not only to support the proposed penny tax, but to ensure that it includes funding for public transit. Public transportation has been reliable means for many, many years in helping people connect other areas in this community. Continued funding is essential. There's many reasons, but only a few are, and most important are people getting to work. There are a lot of people in our community who do not have cars and It also provides transportation to their doctor's appointments and other medical appointments. I remember hearing discussion years ago about possibly using the railroad lines for transportation, but those plans never came into fruition. That's the reason it makes even more sense to continue investing and improving what we already have existing. whether people are commuting to work, visiting downtown, attending classes at university, enjoying sporting events, visiting new soccer facilities or other attractions. Public transportation provides a convenient, economical, and efficient way to travel while reducing traffic on our roads.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Anna Thomas. Her topic is 9A, County Budget Shaw Amendment.

Welcome. Good evening. My name is Anna Thomas, and I'm a proud resident of Greenville County District 24. I'd like to first point out to you that as of the end of 2025, tens of thousands of people rode Greenlink according to Greenville's own GIS data. I'm one of these people, and I rely on Greenlink to get to work, to get to school, and even just to run errands. Second, I'd like to point out that according to Greenville Connect's study, every $1 put into Greenlink generates $80. in economic returns. That is an 8,000% return on investment. More people using the buses reduces traffic, it reduces wear on the roads, and it reduces burden on the taxpayer. Please, for the sake of not just everyday Greenville residents, but for business owners and for yourselves and the rest of our public servants, do not cut Greenlink's budget. Do not deny us all of this net good. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Storm Bruner. Topic is 9A, County Budget, Shaw Amendment.

You're welcome. Good evening, Council. My name is Storm Bruner. I live out by Bob Jones University in District 22. I'm here to comment on Item 9A, Shaw's Amendment 1. Many people have already told you the numbers perspective on why we should invest in public transportation and affordable housing. I'm going to speak a little bit about the experiences of the people that I have had the pleasure of working with. As someone who works with the unhoused, I can say that they rely heavily on Greenlink and any hope of becoming housed lies in affordable housing programs and especially in this housing market. To make cuts to these programs is downright cruel. A couple of my friends who are unhoused need Greenlink to have any hope of getting a job. I hear y'all often say, well, we don't have money. Meanwhile, y'all give tax breaks to corporations like in 9B. There's never any money for working people, but we always have tax breaks for big corporations. There's an answer to this, tax big corporations. But there's not enough of you up there who are willing to make that happen. That's why today I am announcing my candidacy for County Council District 22. This callousness and neglect cannot stand. Greenville County needs a council that will serve them and not corporate greed. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Ms. Stone?

Our next speaker is Alicia Kay, and her topic is County Budget, Shaw Amendment.

Hello, my name is Alicia Kay. I've been a Greenville resident for about four years. When I first moved to Greenville, I didn't have a car, both because I couldn't afford it and also because I have driving anxiety from one friend dying from a car crash and another becoming a vegetable. When I first moved to Greenville, I lived legitimately across the street at Biscuit Head, and I was lucky enough to get a job over on Augusta Road. I was lucky because there's a Greenlink bus station right across the street from my house and right down the road from where I work. Unfortunately, Greenlink is not funded enough. Buses only come once an hour, which is atrocious. The bus stop in front of my house I had to be at work at 8.30 and the bus would come at 8.45. I would either be a half hour early to work or a half hour late. And I work at a daycare, so I leave when the kids leave. And if I miss that bus to go home, I don't have a ride. I have to walk in the sweltering heat or pay for an Uber, which is about the same cost as deodorant these days. I would really, really urge you to think about if you know off the top of your head if people who use the bus are able to make these meetings every week. and I want you to think about the voices you aren't hearing and vote for all of your constituents, not just the ones that you hear from. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Excuse me. The next speaker is Gray McClendon. His topic is 9A, County Budget, Public Safety.

Welcome. Hi, Council. My name is Gray McClendon, and I am a citizen of District 19. I came to talk today about something I have noticed in the last meeting and during this election cycle. Hopefully it is innocent, but none more so not meaningful. I believe that is the conflation of public safety and the sheriff's office. The sheriff's office is a tool for the council to use to provide public safety, but it is not the entire toolbox. And when they are stretched thin responding to every call in the county, that stretches them thin, that wears them out, and that increases their burnout. Now, I think the officers will tell you that they are not the best responder for every call. Mental health, drug addiction, neighbor disputes, They are high-value assets to the county, and using them for these are a misuse of allocations. Now, public safety falls on the shoulders of the council, and it is not an off-the-shelf item that you can pick up. We need to get out into the community, to the crime hotspots, and find tailored approach to these incidences. Now, unlike the police, local governments do have the broad authority to allocate resources, direct activity of agencies, change policies, and engage a wider variety of stakeholders. You can act in both supportive and punitive ways. You act via both regulatory agencies that can pursue civil remedies at places and agencies that can directly address environmental and social factors that drive crime at hotspots. Now, for example, Responses from the county can include lighting dimly lit neighborhoods, holding landlords accountable so that their rentals comply with code so that people live in decent spaces, using public meetings to highlight property owners who fail to address chronic public nuisance issues, empowering supporting neighborhood efforts to beautify, self-police, and self-serve themselves, and blight removal, such as repurposing abandoned lots and demolishing abandoned buildings and homes. Now these focusing on situational prevention over arrests help avoid potentially negative effects of some policing approaches, such as undermining trust and collaboration between locals and the police, especially in marginalized communities. These creative solutions are the types of solutions that we the public expect from so proudly called fiscal responsible delegates spending our tax dollars. What drew me here to speak tonight was Councillor Shaw's amendment. And I have to ask that, don't you think that we deserve more than faceless budget cocks passing in and out of the council and stripping the funding from already underfunded public services and piling it on to what is already the largest line item in the budget? Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Bennett Mears, and his topic is county budget, Shaw amendment.

Welcome.

Good evening. My name is Bennett Mears, and I'm a resident of District 23, proudly represented by Councilman Mitchell. Thank you for the chance to speak. Councilman Shaw and I once talked after a GPATS meeting about how Greenville County needs an efficient transportation system. I agreed with him then, and I still do. And that's exactly why I'm asking the council to protect Greenville's funding tonight, or Greenlink's funding tonight. Greenlink is part of the infrastructure that keeps this county working. Every weekday, it carries thousands of riders, workers commuting to their jobs, students getting to class, seniors and people with disabilities reaching appointments and errands they couldn't otherwise make. For a growing county competing for employers and residents, a functioning transit system isn't charity, it's a basic asset the same as roads or water. And I'd ask this council to look hard at the math because this cut is not fiscally responsible. It is the opposite. Our local dollars unlock federal matching funds. If we cut this local share, we do not just lose that money. We lose out on federal dollars on the table that we'd otherwise bring home to Greenville. That's our own tax money going to other counties instead of ours. Slashing this budget by two-thirds doesn't save money so much as forfeit it. A two-thirds... REDUCTION IS NOT A PROPORTIONAL TRIM TO SERVICE. FIXED COSTS DON'T FALL AT THE SAME RATE AS THE BUDGET. SO A CUT THIS SIZE MEANS ELIMINATING ROUTES, NOT JUST TIGHTENING THEM. RIDERS ON THOSE ROUTES LOSE ACCESS TO WORK AND THE PRIOR INVESTMENT IN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE NO LONGER RETURNS ITS VALUE. I'M NOT ASKING THE COUNCIL TO SPEND RECKLESSLY. I'M ASKING TO MAKE THE FINANCIALLY SOUND CHOICE, PROTECT THE SERVICE THAT MOVES REAL PEOPLE TO REAL JOBS AND BRINGS OUR FEDERAL DOLLARS HOME TO GREENVILLE. PLEASE KEEP GREEN LINK FUNDED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. CHAIRMAN, OUR LAST SPEAKER IS MARGARET MENDOZA.

POINT OF PRIVILEGE. I JUST ASKED, SINCE HE DID MENTION HE TALKED TO ME AT SOME PLACE AND I SAID SOMETHING, COULD I ASK HIM TO PLEASE

No. Well, I just want to repeat. I think the public need to be able to address us without us having.

Well, I understand that, but I couldn't hear it. I don't even know where he said I said something. It was outside of a GPATS meeting. Excuse me?

It was outside of a GPATS meeting.

I don't go to GPATS meetings. I've never had a GPATS meeting. I've never been to one.

Okay.

Yeah. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, the last speaker is Margaret McGinty, and her topic is 9A, County Budget Shaw Amendments.

Welcome.

Hi, my name is Margaret McGinty. I live at 104 Mason Street in Mr. Mitchell's district. I would like to speak to you about funding for Greenlink by first speaking about funding for roads. You're planning to spend $27.5 million on road rehabilitation and maintenance. MEANWHILE, YOU'RE RELUCTANT TO GIVE GREEN LINK A MERE $3 MILLION IN FUNDING, WHICH COUNCILMEMBER SHAW WOULD LIKE TO GET BY A FURTHER $2 MILLION. Back in February, Councilmember McGahee told the Greenville News that until 2025, the county had never allocated more than $12 million a year to roads. He enthused that with the increased funding, the county was making an attempt to get us where we need to be. And if we continue to kick the can down the road, it's going to be a worse situation. Just imagine if county council applied that same reasoning and enthusiasm to supporting Greenlink. double the funding, and get the system to where it needs to be, because the longer you wait, the more expensive it's going to be. You all know the benefits of a transit system. It's an economic driver, it's better for the environment, it eases traffic congestion, it reduces the need for parking, it's healthier for citizens and communities, etc., etc. Yet, you give Greenlink a mere pittance. According to the county's paving program overview, Staff addresses the worst performing segments of roads while also timing preventive treatments to extend the life of roads in fair or good condition, then works progressively through the network. Again, imagine if county council were to give Greenlink that kind of support, shored it up where it was weakest, gave it timely assistance to keep it running smoothly, planned for the long-term fitness of the system, and applied improvements progressively throughout the network. And if the county supported funding for transit the way it does for roads, it would get a far better return on the investment. Because funding roads is simply throwing money down a pothole. Roads are an asset that depreciates instantly. Your $27.5 million for roads is like the minimum payment on a credit card debt. It keeps you afloat, but it doesn't get you anywhere. Greenlink, on the other hand, is an asset that can only increase in value. Even with minimal funding, Greenlink is increasing route frequency and will soon have a service to the Greenville Spartanburg Airport. Its fleet is becoming more energy efficient and environmentally friendly. In closing, let me add this. In the past, I've advocated for buses on behalf of people who don't have the option of driving a car. That argument never gets much sympathy. So I thought maybe I should shift my sympathies. Maybe the reason that all those people are out in their cars and, by the way, tearing up your roads is because they don't have another choice. So I'm going to advocate for the people in the cars. They drive because they can't ride the bus. Thank you.

Thank you very much. So we will move now to public hearings. We'll start with A, Granville County Library Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Millage. Councilor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was engaged in listening. Item 6A, Granville County Library 2027 Budget Millage. THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS BEING HELD FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR THE GREENVILLE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2026 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2027, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ANNUAL ADVALORUM PROPERTY TAX MILLAGE LEVY FOR LIBRARY PURPOSES. MADAM CLERK, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS?

MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. COLLINS, WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU. THERE BEING NO FURTHER SPEAKERS, I DECLARE THIS PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.

Thank you. We'll now move to B, Old Mill Estate Special Tax District Millage Request. Councillor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Old Mill Estate Special Tax District Millage Request. This public hearing is being held for the purpose of receiving comments from the public regarding an ordinance to approve the Old Mill Estate Special Tax District Commissioner's request for an increase to its current ad valorem property tax millage levy. Madam Clerk, are there any speakers?

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Collins, we have no speakers for this public hearing.

Thank you. There being no speakers, I declare this public hearing closed.

Thank you, Councillor Collins. Next on public hearings, we have C, Transportation Penny Sales Tax and Use Tax and Referendum. Councillor McGehee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This public hearing is being held for the purpose of receiving comments for the public regarding an ordinance to levy and impose a 1% sales and use tax subject to a referendum with Greenville County. pursuant to Section 43730 of the Code of Laws of South Carolina in 1976 as amended, to define the specific purposes and designate the projects for which the proceeds of the tax may be used, to provide the maximum time for which such tax may be imposed, to provide the estimated cost of the projects funded from the proceeds of the tax, to provide for a countywide referendum on the imposition of the sales and use tax and the issuance of general obligation bonds, and to prescribe the contents of the ballot questions in the referendum. to provide for the conduct of the referendum by the Board of Elections and voter registration of Greenville County, to provide for the administration of the tax, if approved, to provide for the payment of the tax, if approved, and to provide for other matters relating thereunto. Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers on this?

Mr. Chairman, Mr. McGahee, we have five speakers in favor. And the first is Buster Greggs. Buster Greggs.

Welcome. Welcome.

Good evening. My name is Buster Greggs. I recently graduated from Moore High School, and this fall I plan to attend Greenwood Technical College to study education. I currently reside at the District 26 area in Pilsner, South Carolina. I'm here not as an expert, but as a grandson and a great-grandson of farmers. More than 50 years ago, my grandfather bought a farm next to the one his father owned. Today, my grandparents still live there and work that land. To my family, it's more than a farm. It's our history, our memories, and our connection to the generation that came before us. Over the years, developers have offered my grandparents a lot of money to sell their property. Some of those offers could have changed our family's financial future, but they chose something different. They chose to protect our family's legacy. They placed the farm under a conservation easement, knowing it meant giving up the highest financial value of their land. What they gained instead was the assurance that future generations of our family will be able to experience the same place that has shaped our lives for decades. It's not just our family that benefits. Because of their decision, Greenwood County keeps more than 100 acres of productive farmland. People can continue buying locally grown food, and we preserve open space in the county that continues to grow rapidly. My grandfather had every right to sell. He could have taken the money and walked away. Instead, he chose to think about the future. Tonight, you have an opportunity to help other families make that same choice. Not every landowner will choose conservation, and that's their right. But some families like mine would choose to preserve their land if given the opportunity. The proposal before you is not about taking away property rights, it's about creating options. It's about supporting responsible growth while also preserving the farms, forests, and open spaces that make Gribble County special. Most importantly, it's about what kind of county my generation will inherit. I hope you support this plan and help ensure that future generations have the same opportunity my parents gave me. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Leon Koukanis.

Welcome.

Good evening, Chairman and Council Members. My name is Leona Koukainis. I first came to Greenville in 2000 and bought my first home with my husband in 2009. I live on Mountain View Avenue, and I'm the mother of four children ages 6 to 16 in Greenville County Public Schools. Like most parents, I spend a lot of time thinking about my children's future. I think about the roads they travel every day on the way to school, sports practice, and their friends' homes. And I think about the kind of community that they will inherit when they become adults. As a parent, safety comes first. Every morning, thousands of Greenville County parents put their children on school buses, in cars, or behind the wheel and hope that they return home safely. We all know the reality. Traffic is getting worse. Roads are more congested. Dangerous intersections are becoming more dangerous. Too many families have experienced the heartbreak that comes from a serious accident. But investing in safer roads isn't just about asphalt. It's about protecting our children. And to that, I want to say that roads are only part of the story. As a mother, I'm equally concerned about something else I see every day, and that's that our children are spending more time indoors and more time staring at screens than any generation before them. Phones, tablets, video games, social media. Many kids today spend hours each day in front of a screen and only minutes outdoors. And we shouldn't be surprised when we see rising rates of anxiety, depression, obesity, social isolation among our young people. And the solution isn't complicated. Children need places to explore. They need safe places to ride their bikes, places to go for walks, trails to explore, fields to play ball, places to experience nature. They need parks, greenways, open spaces, and access to the outdoors. And the research is clear. Time spent outside improves physical health, reduces stress, improves concentration, and strengthens mental health. As parents, we know this instinctively. Our kids are different after they've spent a day outside. They're healthier, happier, they're more connected. The proposal before you tonight invests in both of these priorities. It helps make our roads safer. It helps preserve the parks, the green spaces, and the natural areas that support the health of our children. And it does so in a way that spreads the cost broadly, asking visitors and businesses to help invest in the community that they benefit from as well. This is not simply a transportation plan. And it is not simply a conservation plan. It is an investment in the next generation. One day my children will ask what we did when Greenville County was growing so quickly. Did we plan ahead? Did we make our roads safer? Did we preserve those places where families could enjoy the outdoors? Or did we wait until those opportunities were gone? I believe we have a chance to do something positive for our children and our grandchildren. I HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT THIS PLAN AND DOUBLE THE ALLOCATION TO GREEN SPACE WHILE WE HAVE LANDS TO PROTECT. THANK YOU.

Chairman and council members, my name is Melinda Smith. I'm a retired cardiologist and a longtime Greenville County resident. I live at 154 River Place in beautiful downtown Greenville. During my career, I spent decades helping patients live stronger, longer, healthier lives. And one thing I learned is that health is about much more than medical treatments. Health is shaped by the communities we build. Safe roads reduce injuries and fatalities. Parks and green spaces improve both the mental and physical health of our communities. Transit connects people to jobs, health care, education, and opportunities they might otherwise never reach. And in many ways, the proposal before you tonight is a public health proposal. And for me, transit is also deeply personal. My son Scott is an adult with autism. He lives independently. He has a job. He contributes to our community, and like any parent, I'm very proud of him. But Scott does not drive. Public transit is not a convenience for him. It is a lifeline. It's what allows him to get to work and maintain his independence and dignity. It's what allows him to participate in the community and do the activities he enjoys. And Scott is not alone. Every day, transit serves seniors who no longer drive, individuals with disabilities, young adults getting started in life, workers commuting to their jobs, and residents trying to access health care and essential services. But the value of transit extends far beyond those who depend on it. Just imagine being able to attend a concert or a game or spend time at a downtown event or in the park. without fighting traffic or searching for expensive parking. Imagine a transportation system that gives people choices, a system that reduces congestion, improves mobility, and makes Greenville easier to navigate for everybody. As a physician, I understand that prevention is usually much less expensive than treatment. The same principle applies to infrastructure. Investing in safer roads reduces crashes. Investing in parks promotes healthier lifestyles. Investing in transit creates opportunities and independence while reducing congestion and improving quality of life. These are not separate investments. They're connected investments in the health, safety, and well-being of our community. The question before you tonight is not simply how we can move people from place to place. It's what kind of county we want to be, a county that invests in opportunity, a county that supports independence, a county that creates healthier and more enjoyable communities for all of its residents. For my son Scott and for thousands of others whose stories may never be heard from this podium, I hope you will support this plan. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Casey Schwager.

Welcome. Good evening. My name is Casey Schwager. I'm a resident of Greenville County, and I've been working on the upstate's highways, bridges, and roads for just shy of 25 years. I'm here today simply to present the facts as I understand them. I've received a lot of questions concerning the state of our infrastructure and congestion. but most people don't know about the historical low funding compared to the rapid growth that we have experienced. Yes, the state of South Carolina does allocate a small percentage of 10.8% of the gas tax to county funds. Of that total, only 6% actually goes to Greenville County. Did you know the state maintains less than 50% of the roads in Greenville County? Did you also know not only does Greenville County have the largest amount of lane miles per county in the state at just over 4,000 miles, Greenville County also has the largest maintained and owned system in the state at 2,621 miles. Spartanburg County and Horry County have the second and third largest county maintained systems behind Greenville. Of the next five highest county road maintained systems in the state, three already have the penny program, including Spartanburg and Horry County, and Lexington is scheduled to vote on theirs in November. In December, Frank Rainwater, Executive Director of the South Carolina Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office, gave a presentation to the South Carolina House Transportation Committee. In that presentation, Mr. Rainwater showed delegates that purchasing power changed from the late 80s to 2024. Due to inflation, what could be purchased in the late 80s for $100 now costs $254 in 2024. That's a 154% increase. DOT and South Carolina Asphalt Pavement Association estimates are 24 to 33 percent just since 2017 alone. Contrast that to the county road maintenance fee of $15 enacted in 1993. This was increased to $25 in 2017 and, of course, reinstated after a court challenge in 2022. This equates to only a 67 percent increase. Greenville County is almost 90 percent short. The dollar fixes less and less every year. Understand the field redirection in 2025 has only helped replace funds that are going to road maintenance fee to pay bonds for projects already committed At the same time population has increased in this county by nearly 80% since 1990 This of course brings with it an increase in County maintained infrastructure According to the US Census Bureau Bureau Greenville County is expected to increase by greater than 30% from 2020 to 2040 It is estimated that 11% of that growth has already happened in the past five years. Bottom line, the state is not stepping in or can be expected to solve this lack of funding for county roads. Greenville County only gets 6% of the total C fund budget and has the largest county system to maintain. This won't change the formula based on miles. On the subject of transit, I will simply say this. We should support those who need the county transit system. It is the right thing to do. On the subject of green space, You heard my comments on the population growth here. Preserving green space is preserving what makes Greenville, Greenville.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, our last speaker is Lucas McDonald.

Welcome.

Hi, I'm Lucas. This is my first time doing this and I'm very anxious. So I'm going to take a breath. Thank y'all for being here. Thank everyone for being here.

I signed up to speak after getting an email from Greenville Connects and I reached out to the email response saying this. I'm a Greenville native and I've literally never ridden on a Greenlink bus because I've never lived in the part of the city where it goes. I'd love to see that changed. I have a degenerative back condition that makes sitting in my car while driving very painful. Being able to relax as I commute or travel around town would improve my quality of life greatly. I want to say this to the council out loud on Tuesday evening. So here is me fulfilling that promise. I'm very passionate about bettering Greenville's public transit. I think we have the chance to become a model of a stronger car-centric city that turns to something greater and more human-centric. My name is Lusicus MacDonald, and I am speaking in favor of the penny tax being proposed tonight. Numerous times in my life, I have been forced to drive somewhere despite immense debilitating back pain while driving. The saddest part is that I believed driving would solve my transportation needs. I was solely mistaken. My partner is from New York City. They have never needed to drive a day in their life until they moved here. So when we go and visit their family, I get the joy and privilege of riding through the MTA's subway and bus lines, and it's so freeing. Along with my physical disabilities, I have mental ones, and driving stresses all of them. But on public transportation, I write, I draw, I plan, I mentally explore. I look out the window. I people watch. I start conversations, listen to music, read a book. I pray. I smile knowing that the funding comes locally, that the community had enough kindness to fund a bus line for the autistic, disabled, trans person. Because that is what I'm asking for. Empathy for those of us who need it, who want it, and even those who don't know how badly they need it. like fellow disabled drivers who maybe don't need to be driving. Please vote in favor of the penny tax. Give locals the chance to vote to fund something we want and give it to the chance to grow. We can afford this transportation, especially given that the benefits of this far outweigh the cost of the tax. I hope that when people see the increase on the cost, they do not see it as the government stealing more money from tax paying citizens. May they be excited at the fact they have the means to purchase an item or good that is worth enough to be taxed in this way. Be proud that they are taking care of their community one penny at a time. Thank you.

Very much. That concludes our public hearing, so we'll move on to the next agenda item, which is the consent agenda.

Move approval of the consent agenda.

Please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman. Just a point of information from a legal standpoint. To make that public hearing official, do we need to say that there being no further speakers, we declare this public hearing closed? I just want to make sure we don't miss something legally. Okay. Go ahead and do that real quick. Sorry. Sure. Okay. Are there any other further speakers, Madam Clerk?

Yes, sir.

Okay. There being no further speakers, I declare this public hearing closed. Thank you for that, Mr. Chairman.

Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Next on the agenda is resolutions. We'll start with a project on the trail or project OTT textile certification and special source credit agreement. Counselor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Project on the trail project textile certification special source credit agreement. Mr. Chairman, the motion I move forward is the adoption of a resolution to provide certification pursuant to the South Carolina Textile Communities Revitalization Act, South Carolina Code Section 126510 for a certain property located near West Blue Ridge Drive and Old Buncombe Road, formerly part of the Union Bleachery in Greenville, South Carolina.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion? Roll call, please. Roll call has been requested.

Mr. Chairman, you have nine in favor, two in opposition, and one absent.

All right. Thank you. The motion passes. We will move to B, Project on the Trail, Project OTT, Special Source Credit Agreement Joinder Resolution. Councillor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Project on the Trail, Project Odd, Special Source Credit Agreement, joined during resolution. Mr. Chairman, the motion I bring forward for the adoption of a resolution designated in approving the project affiliate so as to allow project affiliate to qualify for benefits pursuant to the certain Special Source Credit Agreement with Greenville County, South Carolina, and other matters related thereto.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion, please say. Roll call. Roll call has been requested.

No, don't.

Mr. Chairman, you have nine in favor, two in opposition, one absent.

Thank you. Motion passes. Next is C, Greater Greenville Sanitation District Annexation 641 Altamont Road. Request for public hearing. Counselor McGehee.

Yes, sir. I'd just like to make the public aware, too, this is not something I presented, but something that comes through my committee, much like Gary Collins reads all the philos, so I get a lot of kickback from this. Okay. Greater Greenville Sanitation District Annexation 641 Altamont Road. Request for public hearing. I move for adoption of resolution requesting to hold a public hearing to consider enlarging the Greater Greenville Sanitation District to include a parcel located at 641 Altamont Road.

All right. Thank you. All in favor of the motion, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Aye. The ayes have it. We'll move to D, Greater Greenville Sanitation District Annexation, 1080 Altamont Road. Request for public hearing. Councilor McGee.

Okay, I move for adoption a resolution requesting to hold a public hearing to consider enlarging the Greater Greenville Sanitation District to include a parcel located at 1080 Altamont Road.

Y'all in favor of the motion, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Next, Greater Greenville Sanitation District annexation, 1000 North Parker Road. Request for public hearing. Councilor McGee.

I move for adoption and resolution requesting to hold a public hearing to consider enlarging the Greater Greenville Sanitation District to include a parcel located at 1000 North Parker Road.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. F, Greater Greenville Sanitation District Annexation, 106 Phillips Avenue. Request for public hearing. Councilor McGehee.

I move for adoption and resolution requesting to hold a public hearing to consider enlarging the Greater Greenville Sanitation District to include a parcel located at 106 Phillips Avenue.

Thank you. All in favor, please say aye.

Aye. That's a poll. A point of information, a point of order. Do you have something, Mr. Hurtani?

Yeah. There was an issue in the application package, and they had asked that that vote not go forward today. And I don't know. I thought that was communicated, but apparently it wasn't. But they need another signatory to... BE ABLE TO EVEN GO THROUGH THIS.

IS THIS THE ONE THAT NEEDED THE TRUST, DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE SIGNATURES?

THIS IS THE ONE WITH THE TRUST, SORRY.

WHAT WOULD BE THE PROPER PROCEDURE FOR THIS THEN, TO HOLD IT?

MOVE TO RECONSIDER IT AT THIS POINT.

WE ALREADY PASSED IT, WE TOOK A VOTE, SO MOVE TO RECONSIDER.

OKAY. SO ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. MOTION TO HOLD ITEM 8F. Everybody understand the motion? All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. It's held. We'll move to G, Greater Greenville Sanitation District Annexation, Willamette Estates Subdivision. Request for public hearing. Councilor McGehee.

I move for adoption of resolution requesting to hold a public hearing to consider enlarging the Greater Greenville Sanitation District to include the Willamette Estates Subdivision.

Thank you. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. And I move to ordinances at third reading. We'll start with A, County of Greenville, fiscal year 2027, budget ordinance. Councilor Bradley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for adoption at third reading an ordinance adopting the County of Greenville fiscal year 2027 budget. Thank you.

And I believe we have several amendments. I'll start with Councilor Russo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you've seen in the memo, my amendment is to add an additional 2% salary increase for public safety.

Thank you. Any discussion on the motion?

Yes. Where would we get the 2% from?

That would be up to council.

Would that have to raise taxes?

Or lower spending somewhere else?

How much is it, the dollar amount?

In the memo, you can see it's $2,289,914. All right. Any other discussion?

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to verify something. We had a discussion in the Budget Committee, and I believe I remember you saying that we were close to our threshold of it impacting our credit. our AAA credit rating if we did this and did not take it from somewhere else?

That is correct. Our fund balance is such that you have a policy in place that requires us to keep between 25% and 35% of our revenue in a fund balance. And so that's the problem we are approaching. An area there that I would not recommend that we get get that close. You know we're basing our Fund balance currently on estimates so until we have final hard numbers It could go either way So would it be prudent to assume that if we had an emergency of some sort a line or something like that?

That it would place us in jeopardy

issues that we could incur that could cause problems. Yes, ma'am.

So when we, if we were to go past that threshold, I'm just making sure everyone, including myself, understands how this impacts the county. If we were to lose that AAA credit rating, it would affect our rates on everything that we owe. Am I not correct? Or anything we borrow going forward?

Absolutely. It would impact our interest rates. It's a credit rating is what it is. It's the best you can possibly have. And if you start changing some of the parameters that goes into that, then it can have an adverse impact. In fact, yesterday we had a rating call with one of our rating agencies and wanted to reaffirm some of the road bonds we have out there, and we went through a whole host of other economic data for the county to ensure that our underlying AAA bond rating is still in effect, that the parameters are still being followed and adhered to.

Okay, thank you. I just want to make sure.

Councilor Tritt? QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATOR AND THEN I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT. I KNOW WE HAD A LIVELY DISCUSSION LAST TWO WEEKS AGO ON BUDGET MATTERS REGARDING THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. WHAT DID WE DECIDE TO DO? WAS IT FIVE AND FIVE ON FOUR AND FOUR ON RAISES FOR COUNTY EMPLOYEES AND What did that end up being?

Four percent across the board.

Across the board, four percent across. And I think last two weeks ago, we were talking about two and a half and five for the sheriffs or something?

Two and a half and five.

Okay. So, you know, Mr. McGahee and I had a lively discussion on that. And I'm, you know, I think we've got to support our men and women in blue. But I don't know that we need to add additional funds to do that. I think there's other ways that we can do it. And so I would be reticent to support this amendment, even though you're my friend, Joey Russo.

Thank you very much. I will say we were able to do 6% in the last budget cycle, so I'm just trying to bring it in line with the same.

All right. Any other discussion? Councilor McGee?

I'd like to remind my colleagues on the dais that we're not the federal government. We can't print money. And as we go about adding fund, adding additional expenditures to this budget, which is already, in my opinion, blossomed out of control, that we are now going to try and add other things without making cuts. We have a fund balance. That's very important. And this fund balance isn't just money that sits in a bank account, we have that. That fund balance allows us to operate throughout the year. We don't collect taxes on a regular schedule. Taxes come in on a sine curve. They come in, they come out. Our expenditures are fairly constant, but my point being is we need that fund balance. As we cut into that fund balance, every year we're putting the county in jeopardy of being in a financial crisis one day. And I'm not saying tomorrow. I'm not hitting the panic button, okay? That's not what I'm saying. What I'm hitting is, The councils before us for 30 years failed to do some things that would have ensured some financial stuff down the road. We as a body need to take a look at the policy we have for how we do taxes, for how we do expenditures, for how we do our budget process. But adding additional funding without cuts and cutting further into our fund balance is a horrible idea for the long-term health of our county.

Thank you, councillor. Mr. Chairman, if I may. Mr. Collins. If that resolution was to pass, public safety, would that include emergency management as well? And would that be an accurate assessment of costs?

That's what we applied the grace to all public safety, which is EMS, emergency management, sheriff's office, coroner, and a number of others. Thank you, Mr. Cornell.

Councilor Schell? Mr. Chairman, does that include the detention center?

Yes, sir.

Okay. And solicitor, public defender? No.

No. Those are clerical-type positions as compared to the frontline public safety.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other discussion? All in favor of a roll call? Roll call has been requested.

Mr. Chairman, you have three in favor, nine in opposition.

Thank you. The motion fails, so we will move to Councilor Long.

Yes. The amendment that I'm opposing is, or I actually have two. One is for our Oversight Ad Hoc Committee. As you know, we've been working on an audit from our Oversight Committee, and we have We have got to the end of that choice. We're getting ready to make a decision on who to do that audit. It is probably going to come within the next week, as long as we can get the committee members there to vote. But we have had a budget for the whole year of half a million dollars, not really knowing how much it was going to cost. But when the budget came out, it was cut from $500,000 to $300,000 and I'm requesting that we vote that same budget back in. We didn't spend a dime of it. Looking at the quotes that we have got, and I'll give you an update right quick, we had 11 people or firms to come and talk, and some were over the $300,000. So I need that budget back to make sure, based on how the vote goes, we can actually hire the firm just to move that budget forward into the next fiscal year is all I'm asking to do.

Any discussion on the motion? Councilor Seaman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cornell, where is this money currently sitting?

In the current budget, there was $500,000 was placed in for studies. And if you recall, County Council gave us a directive to do a fire department study. That came in at $200,000. Keep in mind, County Council did not allocate any additional funds for us to do that. So we did use the $200,000. FOR THE FIRE STUDY. THERE'S STILL 300,000 IN THE BUDGET, CURRENT YEAR, AND WE WENT AHEAD AND CARRIED THAT 300,000 TO THE NEXT YEAR.

BUT THE LINE ITEM IS FOR, IS LIKE A STUDY LINE ITEM.

YEAH, I MEAN, WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE TYPE LINE ITEMS.

YEAH, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM putting the money back to where it was. My concern is having a committee having a line item because none of the other committees have line items, and so I'd feel more comfortable if we just reinstated the $500,000 to the place where it was in the first budget.

Mr. Chairman, may I? A couple things here. First off, when we voted on this the previous year, it was strategically voted and mentioned that we were going to use this solely for oversight committee purposes only. At that point I did not request a line item because I felt like that would be done and we would be able to see it in the budget. My mistake because I found out that this year some of that money was taken and used for a study without me even being notified. I couldn't even notify our committee because nobody told me. It was put somewhere else. So in order to be transparent, I feel like if we're doing audits, we need to be transparent first, right? So we need to put that money set aside for the oversight committee so it cannot be used for another purpose. And the reason I'm doing it like this is because it was used for another purpose. So I request my amendment to stay the way it is and it was that way for a reason.

And, Councilor Long, I'll just provide this as a friendly suggestion, but just based on that comment, do you want to split those into two separate amendments, so one is to refill and one is to move the line item, or do you just want to leave it as one total?

I want to leave it as one. It's common sense. It's just I'm trying to be transparent, and I'm trying to also, I wouldn't ask somebody to take something else out of their budget. Sorry.

Councilor Seaman. I think that's my concern. No other committees have a budget, and I just think it sets a bad precedent that we're giving committees because ultimately the full council decides on how the money is being spent. And so, again, I'm in favor of having the money available. I just would prefer to see it in the line item where it already exists.

I'm going to leave it as it is. If you look at my next amendment, we have a Board of Tax Assessment that has a $7,000 line item, and it's not even being used. How much more important is this audit?

So everybody understand the motion or any other discussion? All right. All in favor? Roll call. Roll call has been requested.

Mr. Chairman, you have eight in favor, four in opposition.

All right, thank you. So the motion passes. Councilor Long has an additional amendment.

Thank you. This next amendment was brought to my attention by someone on the Board of Assessment Appeals that they have had a budget, a line item budget that has varied, but a high around $10,000, and they never used this budget. And so if you think about it, it only comes into play if someone goes to the tax assessor and says, I don't agree with you, and then it goes through a situation and they decide, well, sorry, that's how it's going to be, or we agree with you and we change it. If that doesn't work out, then it goes to the Board of Tax Assessment and Appeals. evidently this has been sitting here we're not using it for that purpose so after talking with that people on that committee I asked them what they felt like we should do and they said that we felt like we need to take this line item out of the budget we don't get they don't get they're not paid a salary they're not paid mileage there's no reason for that to be in there so I'm not taking their budget item, they're asking for that to be put back into the budget and I wanted to honor that through the Board of Tax Assessment and Appeals and have that taken out.

Okay, thank you. Any discussion on the motion?

Is there any other staff going in on this? I mean, we're not on the front line of doing staff budgets.

Because it was requested by this committee, who is the ones that know. We have a planning commission that does not even have that, and they do a whole lot more work than this committee. And there's no reason to put it out there. If they have mileage or something minimal, they can just request it. There's no reason to have something out here and take up room in our budget when we're not using this. I'm not quarreling with you over substance abuse. I talked to the committee themselves. This is a committee that we appoint. Yeah, I did talk to Joe about it. I mentioned it to Joe.

Actually, this is a little different than the Board U question about it. It's for the Tax Board of Assessment of Adjustment.

Mr. Chairman, it is the Board of Tax Assessment and Appeals.

And they are entitled to a stipend if they meet. So the people you asked were not the ones that get it. It was a different board that this board, and we've reduced this over the years. It's just a placeholder. If they do meet, we do have to pay them. They do get a stipend. That's state law.

All right. Then I would like to amend my amendment. Is that possible? I would like to put this on hold until we verify and talk with them one more time. If that's the case, then we'll move forward and we'll leave it. But I want to be able to talk with them first. Because they came to me.

I understand what you're saying. The only problem is we would be voting on the third reading of the budget, so we wouldn't be able to hold. The amendment would be no good at that point. But we could still check on what you're wanting to inquire about.

will be passed right well at the end of the day if this is incorrect how do we correct it bring it back we would amend the budget essentially is that how we would do it you could you could amend the budget or you can let it be it won't get spent unless they meet well they came to me I'm doing what they asked so I'm gonna verify that so if

Or go ahead and remove it. It's $7,000, so it's not going to make or break anything.

That's my point. There's no reason for it to sit out there as a placeholder.

Well, it's going to sit in fund balance then, so it doesn't really matter.

And that's fine.

Either place works just as well.

Right. That's fine.

Mr. Chairman, to understand the process correctly, and to make sure everybody understands in the crowd as well, if we do away with this, Through the finance committee, that committee can come to the county and say, hey, we're going to meet, we need a stipend, and they'll come to council and approve a stipend, correct?

If that committee meets.

Right, so we're not like tying our hands that they'll never get funding, is my point, is that we can make it a supplemental appropriation through a budget amendment and fund them.

We can do that, or I can find the funds somewhere else and put it in there.

Okay, thank you. I feel like I need to ask this question just from the legal side, but if it's state requirement, are we in any kind of potential gray area by doing that?

Obviously, you would prefer to have stuff aside for something that could occur and that we have a state obligation to do it, but as long as the council gets them paid, At some point, we'll qualify for state law. I think that Mr. Cornell was just making just a prudent plan that we have an obligation. And these conversations, we're getting closer to having some appeals, I think, because I hear from the assessor's office when people have complaints about these things because we talk about the law on it. But they're right. They rarely, if ever, have been met.

Okay. Well, the person I talked with, they hadn't had anything in over three years. So let's call the question, please.

The question was called, but Councilor Collins was wanting to speak, so I think we probably should. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You know, and I understand the money's sitting there, but, you know, we just went through an assessment, and usually that board... IS USUALLY NOT BUSY UNTIL AFTER AN ASSESSMENT YEAR BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN A LOT OF THE APPEALS COME IN AND THEY HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO APPEAL THAT. SO I'M JUST SAYING, I'M SURE TRAFFIC WILL PICK UP IN THE NEXT THREE TO FIVE MONTHS AND I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHY NORMALLY THERE'S A DORMANCY PERIOD BUT THAT FUND IS STILL THERE AS IT CARRIES OVER. LIKE I SAID, WE JUST WENT THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT PERIOD AND There's a lot of questions, and I'm just saying the docket of appeals may be busy. I would just give it to MPA. We could always, that's just my opinion.

I'll just one more time say this. I talked to somebody on the committee, and they talked with the committee, and they said they went through the last assessment. Not one thing came through.

I'm just saying that. So if we can call the question, please.

Any other discussions? All in favor, please say aye.

Roll call. Are we doing the First Amendment or the Second Amendment?

We're to our second. We're through the First Amendment already.

This is the amendment as written. Amendment as written.

Mr. Chairman, you have three in favor, nine in opposition.

All right. So the motion fails. And is that your final motion?

Yeah.

I just had to. Thank you. We'll move on to Councilor Shaw for his amendments.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Look, these things probably aren't going to pass. But I don't base my amendments just on if they're going to pass or not. But a lot of them have a point. So I'd just like you to please give me a second to get to my point quickly. I don't want to hold you up. Number one, I understand a lot of the emotional arguments. My father died when I was 10 years old. I grew up in South Florida, where it's about 100 degrees. Our public transportation was my mom driving the three kids around in a Volkswagen with no air conditioning. The lady who came up and said a public bus is better on her back than a car, that's the one that made me think, is it really? I mean, every time I ride a bus, they're pretty rough. I love riding bus. I was just up in DC area. We're up north. They're great. My point is here that is it really working for Greenville County? And that's the bottom line. And that's why I always tend to be tinkering with it, let's put it. The actual amendment, the reasoning behind it was, I think it's not $3 million, it's $3.5 million a year to subsidize the bus. And every time I asked for Greenville City information, it seems like the latest was that they put in about $1.7. So my biggest gripe is the disparity of what we pay compared to what they pay, and they tend to in my mind, benefit from it more than we do. I also hear from everybody who's honest that they're just not used that much. Yes, there's people who need them, but we tossed around ideas like, is there other ways to spend that money? Somebody did a thought study about it and was like, we can almost buy the people cars who, yes. Or rideshare, and don't forget what rideshare is, it's a two-way street. Not only are you providing transportation from somebody from door to door, very convenient, But you're providing a job for some entrepreneur who's doing the rise here. And you take out all the United States government and everybody else who's got a finger and messing in with that. So anyway, that was the reason for that number, the $2 million. It was to try to get us on par, which still leaves a million and a half. And it was getting us on par with what the city does. Now, number two...

MY GLASSES WILL WORK HERE. DID YOU READ THE MOTION OR YOU JUST GAVE A SPEECH?

HE'S ON ANOTHER POINT. I'M JUST PUTTING IT IN PLAIN ENGLISH. I CAN READ IT IF YOU WANT. I DON'T WANT TO BORE THESE GUYS. IT'S ALREADY WHAT? 745? THAT'S PART OF THE MOTION IS TO TAKE OUT THE REDUCED TO GREEN LINK FROM THE 3.5 MILLION THIS YEAR TO 1.5 MILLION.

CALL THE QUESTION.

Well, I'm not done with the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a point of order, please. Pursuant to County Rule 3D4, all motions except motions to adjourn, to recess, to close debate, and to lay on the table shall be debatable. No debate on motion shall begin until the chairman has stated that motion for debate. Considering this, the chairman must allow any member to speak on any motion if they so desire to do so. Each member shall have a maximum of five minutes to speak on the motion under debate. With additional time given by the chairman's discretion, I think we need to let Mr. Shaw finish his comments. You can continue, Councillor Schell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Number two, real quickly, is a clawback. And let me just explain. It's not a defunding of affordable housing. This, to me, demonstrates where we get into trouble when we tax people. We create a pot of money with the government and don't have anything. We don't know what we can't. We don't even spend it that year. Last year there was a million dollar appropriation for affordable housing, but it wasn't just for affordable housing, it was down payment assistance for Greenville County employees. That took about a year to ramp up. So that's where that money's been sitting for a year, $1 million. Nobody, maybe I'm sure somebody will come back and say one guy finally got approved for it. Nobody's been approved for that. If you do get approved, it's a $10,000 down payment assistance. So even if we had five people approved last year, that's $50,000 to run that because it's already run by an existing agency. We're not creating a new agency, it's an existing agency that would simply need $50,000 of the taxpayers' money. Instead, we've got $1 million. Now, some of the guys have already said, in all honesty, they said, well, we still think it's a good idea. Let's let it roll into next year. Well, just appropriate it again next year. Let's take this million and allocate it to things that we know are priorities and that we need this year. That's that one. The last one is simply... the Historic and Natural Resources Trust to take, by the way, I still am for funding the $50,000 to get five people approved. If we wanna have five people, whether they're deputies or they're clerks or whatever they are that need a down payment assistance to help with affordable housing, if we leave 50,000, then there's five people we can do this year. The last thing is the Historic Natural Resources Trust. It gets down to philosophy. It's a very good program. When it was getting, the Natural Historic Resources Trust, when it was getting approved, I got calls from all over the state. Former governors were calling me to approve this thing. I philosophically was not for taking taxpayer money and buying up these conservations with it. But I realized there's good in it, so I gave it a chance. And my vote was a deciding vote to put that thing into action. That's why I get so sensitive about it. When I bring up some funding thing about it, I get accused of not being for the program or whatever. The program wouldn't be here without my vote. And anybody can go back and look at that. All I say is that this is a discretionary thing. We have the animal control folks who last year we went through a big thing where They earned, they had about a million dollars in a private fund that people can go and help with the Second Chance Fund. That thing had built up to a million dollars and wasn't even getting spent. We had to put a rule that they have to spend the money. I think that the historic trust should have the same thing. I think there's enough people that would donate to it. You could get millions of dollars over years. But I don't agree with taking taxpayer money from, it's fine to think of rich people, but hey, we're taking everybody's money, okay? We're taking the lady who's on a fixed income. We're taking the guy trying to get affordable housing. And if they don't pay it, the government comes and takes away whatever you have. So you've got to pay it. So it's a philosophical thing, folks. So I appreciate all the comments about not caring or whatever. I care, but my philosophy is different. Thank you. All right. And then you want to present the motion? Yeah. So I proposed this particular motion, which would reduce the budget by $4 million. And I guess maybe Mr. Tripp would say it should be in two different motions, but one would be to be a one mil, that's about one mil reduction in ad valorem taxes, or four million would supplement the first responder's salary.

Just to go back, we have to entertain the original motion first for the First Amendment, and then you can discuss the next one. I'm sorry, say that again? The motion you just discussed with the three different funding entities, that would be the first motion. Okay, yeah. We have to go through that first.

I would motion that we redirect, I'm not even saying take it away, that we redirect that to first responders, all the same ones we had mentioned before, to increase their salaries as Mr. Russo's amendment would have done.

Mr. Chairman, point of order, if I may ask the administrator and both the lawyer and the county lawyer at this point. The amendment is a reduction of one mil from ad valorem taxes. The amendment as stated now is moving four million from one source to another. Is the amendment contradictory?

Can I go ahead and call this? The original conversation was about a different amendment altogether, I believe, that Councilor Shaw had with Greenlink.

No, no, they're all three together, Mr. Chairman. They're all one amendment that total $4 million, and that would give the taxpayers a one mill reduction in their tax bill. In the alternative, if we don't reduce the mills, we do collect the $4 million, that would go to public safety or first responders' salaries.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman. That's Stephen, not to jump in your... YOUR STUFF HERE, BUT THE AMENDMENTS FOR REDUCTION OF ONE MILL, IF WE REDUCE ONE MILL, THAT TAKES FOUR MILLION OUT OF THE BUDGET, DOESN'T REALLOCATE IT TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR, I THINK IT'S TWO THINGS. IT'S EITHER OR. THAT'S WHY I PUT THE OR. PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN SEPARATED INTO ANOTHER AMENDMENT. HERE'S MY MOTION.

JUST TO HAVE CLARITY, I GUESS IT HAS TO BE THE MOTION AS YOU PRESENTED AS AN AMENDMENT.

Yeah, this is the amendment number one.

If I may, Mr. Chairman, perhaps we do it. Maybe the first amendment could be I want to reduce the green link by two, the clawback, the affordable housing by the $950,000, and the reduced historical natural resources trust by the $1.5 million, and leave it at that. And if that passes, then we can decide what to do with the money.

Sure.

How about that?

That will be, yeah, that will be, we'll know what the deal is. That's it. I appreciate that.

Does everybody understand the motion? And a roll call, please. Roll call is requested.

You have two in favor, ten in opposition.

Motion fails. We'll move to amendment. Amendment served.

Amendment number two is, let me ask the administrator, is the establishment of a public relations position in this current budget?

That is what council requested.

Correct. And I understand there was a retreat and council said, hey, we need to have a public relations position. So when we talk about spending, don't forget, y'all are now buying a new public relations for to get information apparently from us. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, THIS IS TALKING WITH PAST COUNSELORS, THERE'S ONE HERE, MAYBE CAN HELP ME WITH THE FACTS ON THIS, WAS THAT THIS POSITION WAS CREATED YEARS AGO AND IT IS NOW THE PERSON WHO IS AN EXECUTIVE AND HE'S IN GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND HE WAS A FORMER TV ANNOUNCER. SO THAT POSITION STARTED AS PUBLIC RELATIONS FOR COUNCIL.

I would raise a point of order on this. Under state law, we hire three people. I think this would have the act of firing quote unquote, someone that we don't have the opportunity to fire. Besides that, the language of the amendment, I propose that that position is not created. It's already created. You can't uncreate something that's already been created. I think we're in gray area here because we don't hire or fire anybody beyond the three people in front of us.

I appreciate that, Mr. Tripp, but I think you missed a step. You missed the connecting dots. I'm not talking about firing anybody. I'm talking about not creating a new additional position in addition to the public relations people we already have. That's what I'm talking about. Not creating a new position. Because we already have a very well paid, and I appreciate what he does. I like the guy. And maybe, you know, you all have made your thoughts on that. Then my understanding was last year we also, in addition to him, we hired a social media person. Is that, no?

We've had a social media position probably for about the past eight years.

Okay, so we have a public relations executive, basically executive level.

Governmental affairs.

Right. He's governmental affairs, paid salary. He's on the fourth floor executive level with all the big shots. Okay, and again, I'm just trying to keep things rolling here. In addition to that, we've got a social media person. In addition to that, many of us have our own blogs or everything. You know, we communicate with our people. Then I believe, unless it's changed, the county pays a public relations outside person on 1099, or that might have stopped, but we used to pay an outside, basically a lobbyist. I haven't asked you recently if we still have that.

That hadn't occurred for a number of years.

Okay, so maybe a year or so, because I think the last time I asked, maybe. Probably about four years. No, no, it wasn't that long. It was not that long.

No, no, no.

And we can get the records. Anyway, and I'm not putting any of this down. I'm just saying, counsel, my amendment is, do we need another public relations person? Do we need a whole new position to communicate on behalf? And who does it communicate on? Do we control this person or tell that person? And which one of us tells that person what to say and what's our message? So that's the amendment.

Any discussion, I'll start off by saying I don't think we can really tell them anything because that's not one of our employees. But we also did decide that even the municipalities do a better job at messaging the public of our initiatives and what we're doing. So we're trying to do this for the purpose of letting the public know what we're doing in real time rather than three months after the votes are cast. I mean, don't you have a weekly newsletter that goes out that... I would love if the entire county was subscribed to it, so thank you for the promo. But the truth of it is that there's not that many people in the public that get to know what we do.

Well, then do we need a position to try to force them to understand? I don't know if the issue is there.

Chairman, I believe he's made his motion, so.

I had something to say. There was a retreat. We had ample time, notification, and I personally offered you my home. transportation to and from the retreat and you still didn't show and this is what we all agreed on those of us who participated that's all I wanted to say okay and and and I I thank you mr. farmer I do not need your your transportation I actually have my own

I don't remember that offer. I will tell you this, that that retreat was planned without sending a note out to everybody, hey, do we all agree on this date? I had my annual seminar that I put where we teach judges, and we prepare this six months in advance, hotels in Charleston. I have all the receipts. And even if I was there, what does that make a difference to what the... The point is at hand here, whether I was there or not. You think you guys would have not had this position if I was there? Might call the question, please.

Well, I don't think he's actually... He hasn't actually said his motion yet.

I mean, I... You want me to read it off of this? I mean, the proposed budget... Includes a new position of council public relations. I propose that that position is not created and funded. Thank you. Roll call, please.

Roll call has been requested.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you have two in favor, ten in opposition.

Thank you.

Thank you. The motion fails. And then I believe, do you have an additional amendment, Counselor Hsu?

No. Yeah, simply put, I can read it as is, but simply put, my motion is to include in this budget a budget guideline that we go down the process of, similar to this tax thing, but to have a separate millage for our first responders. And I did put the list in the motion. Detention center solicitor. court system, public defender, law enforcement, clerk of court, EMS, basically to investigate getting a separate millage for them that cannot be spent on other things. And then the public can see what's being spent on them. So that's all it is. It's a little nebulous, but it's just starting us down the road to investigating whether we can even do that.

I will say, and I'll turn it over to Councillor Tripp, that I don't disagree with the concept. I would just have to ask our attorney if that would be even considered a budget amendment or something that we would work on outside the scope of this current budget.

I think that would not be a budget amendment. That would be something you'd work outside the scope of this thing. Mr. Shaw and I have discussed it, so I've started researching this stuff. I just haven't gotten done with it because we had So this is something we're working on in our office to see what guidance we can provide on that.

Council Chair.

Budget your maintenance.

Well, again, in our budget, it's not just numbers, it's text. So I wanted to put it in the budget text because the most important thing in there is the text we're finding out because that's where some of these confusions come in. It's not just the numbers, it's what does the text say.

But it doesn't appropriate money, Mr. Shaw. It's not part of the budget.

Yes, but not all of the budget has that. The budget has priorities, goals, visions, all that kind of stuff. But anyway, I'll withdraw it. I just wanted to... I appreciate what our attorney has said that he started to work on that.

Okay. Thank you. And that's the final amendment, I believe. Is there any additional amendment? All right.

Chairman, I'll make a motion that we approve the ordinance as amended.

Understand the motion. Roll call. All requested.

This is for the entire budget, correct? Right. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, you have eight in favor, four in opposition.

Thank you. Motion passes. We will now move to B, which is BRI Augusta Arbor II, QOZBLP, formerly Project Augusta Arbor II, fee in lieu of tax agreement. Councillor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. BRI Augusta Arbor II, QOZBLP, formerly Project Augusta Arbor II, fee in lieu of tax agreement. Mr. Chairman, the motion I move for the adoption of a third reading and ordinance authorizing the execution and delivery of a fee-in-lieu of tax agreement by and between Greenville County, South Carolina, and BRI Augusta Arbor 2-Q-O-Z-B-L-P, formerly Project Augusta Arbor 2. With respect to certain economic development property in the county, whereby such property will be subject to certain payments in lieu of tax and other matters related thereto.

Thank you. Any discussion? Councilor McGehee? Councilor Foreman?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. I'd just like to make sure all my colleagues, before we vote on this philo, basically, to know how they work and make sure the public understands how these work and the economic engine that some of these are. Granted, a few years ago, they were taken advantage of, and there was a few apartment complexes that basically got some friends some great tax breaks. When this council came in and took over, we actually went to the GADC and said, hey, we're going to drive economic, the engine, keep it going. We want to bring high-paying jobs, which is another thing. We don't need more $15 an hour Chick-fil-A jobs. We want high-paying, high-demand, high-technical, highly-educated jobs to come to Greenville County. Those are the jobs we want. Those people pay taxes. They spend money in the county. That's the kind of development we want. If a company comes here with a manufacturing and they believe in manufacturing, according to state law, they don't pay any taxes for five years. Zero. So now they're coming here and paying zero tax. Now, eventually, they'll pay a 10 percent effective tax rate, which is the highest in the whole southeast of any red state. What these fellows allow us to do is attract those companies by saying, hey, we understand that this state law, we can't get changed at 10 percent, allows us to bring you in at three or four percent, whether the initiator is for an extended period of time. Additionally, they begin paying those fee load taxes on day one. Now, there are some of these where this one specifically and some of the ones they're bringing in now that are actually manufacturing facilities that are being built by a developer or whoever, that they have to actually fill that with those companies that bring those high-paying jobs at 80% before they get that. And it has to be done within two years or the FLO goes away. So I asked my colleagues on the bench, we're not giving away Greenville. I can promise you that. I ran on that and I stick to this and I will sit here and discuss this until I'll sit outside with anybody until midnight and we'll talk about it. These are economic engines for Greenville County. We are getting taxes right away and they're bringing high-paying jobs. One of the last ones we just voted on, Magnolia, last week, will bring, I'm probably speaking out of turn, but it's with the defense industry. I was asked personally about some things about it. And I'll tell you, Those are high-paying, high-demand jobs, and it is going to bring some taxes to Greenville County, people who pay high taxes. Those are the kinds of jobs we want. And these Filos, while they have a bad name because of things that happened in the past, I would not be voting for them if I thought it was a boondoggle for developers to get cheaper taxes for the next 30 years on your back. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor Farmer.

I'd just like to add that... 80% of the fee that these corporations pay goes right to our infrastructure. So we are getting something out of it. It's kind of like paying down your mortgage rate. You throw some more money towards your down payment and your rate goes down. That's kind of the deal.

Thank you, Council Member. Any other discussion? All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Roll call, aye. Roll call has been requested.

YOU HAVE TEN IN FAVOR, TWO IN OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. NEXT WE'RE UP TO SEE GREENVILLE COUNTY LIBRARY FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET MILLAGE. COUNSELOR COLLINS.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Greenville County Library fiscal year 2027 budget millage. Mr. Chairman, the motion I move for an adoption at the third reading in order to approve the appropriation of funds for the Greenville County Library system for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026 and ending June 30, 2027 and to authorize the annual ad valorem property tax millage levy for library purposes.

Thank you. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Next, we'll move to D, Old Mill Estates Special Tax District Millage Request. Councillor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Old Mill Estates Special Tax District Millage Request. Mr. Chairman, the motion I move for adoption at the third reading, an ordinance to approve the Old Mill Estates Special Tax District Commissioners request for an increase to its current Avalon property tax levy.

Thank you. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. When I move to ordinances at second reading, we will start with CZ 2026-026. And I will read this in. Councilor Long is recusing herself from this. Do I need to read the full explanation in council, or is that suitable?

On the rule change? We didn't explicitly say this.

It just needed to be in writing, correct? It needed to be in writing, that's it. I just wanted to make sure we're clear on that. All right. Councilor Bradley.

CZ 2026-026, properly located at 500 South Mountain View Road and North Highway 101, requesting rezoning from POD to C1. The Planning Commission and the committee recommend denial. On behalf of the committee, I move to deny this ordinance at second reading.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. We can knock on the door for Councilor Long real quick. We'll now move on to CZ 2026-027. Council Bradley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Property located at 107 Prospect Street requiring requesting rezoning from R75 to S1. The Planning Commission and the committee recommended approval. On behalf of the committee, I move approval of this ordinance at second reading.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. When I move to B, land development regulations amendment, open space residential development. Council Bradley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On behalf of the committee, I move for approval at second reading an ordinance to amend the Greenville County land development regulation to add new provisions to open space clusters, residential development in Greenville County. I move to substitute, second motion, I guess is how I would do this. I move to substitute this proposed ordinance as presented in the county agenda packet in place of the ordinance that is currently on the floor.

All right, so everybody understand the motion to substitute? All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

I move to hold this ordinance until the corresponding zoning text amendment ordinance catches up and request the Planning Commission review the ordinance at their next meeting and provide counsel with a report and a recommendation.

All in favor of the motion, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Next, we have the Transportation Penny Sales and Use Tax and Referendum. Councillor McGehee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for approval of second reading an ordinance to levy and impose a 1% sales and use tax subject to a referendum with Greenville County pursuant to Section 43730 of the Code of Laws of South Carolina 1976 as amended. to define the specific purposes and designate the projects for which the proceeds of the tax may be used, to provide the maximum time for which such tax may be imposed, to provide the estimated cost of the projects funded from the proceeds of the tax, to provide for a countywide referendum on the imposition of the sales and use tax and the issuance of general obligation bonds, and to prescribe the contents of the ballot questions in the referendum, to provide for the conduct of the referendum by the Board of Elections and voter registration of Greenville County, to provide for the administration of the tax, if approved, and to provide for the payment of tax if approved, and to provide for other matters relating thereunto. Thank you. Councillor Seaman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion that we allow amendments at third reading.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Opposed?

No.

One second.

It needs to be moved. What's on the agenda is not what came out of CAL, so you all will need to move to amend to be consistent with CAL.

Mr. Chairman, I'll withdraw that motion and I will exchange it. I will make that motion later, but first I'll make a motion to amend the ordinance as amended in Committee of the Whole.

All right. Everybody understand the motion? All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it.

Mr. Chairman, then I'd like to make a motion to allow for amendments at third reading.

Everybody understand the motion? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. We will now move to ordinances at... Wait, did we actually vote?

We have to take a vote. Mr. Chairman. And then we... Mr. Chairman, you had a motion to allow for amendments. You need a motion as amended.

Oh, yeah, I know.

Yeah. When are we going to vote on the actual?

Yeah. Gotcha.

This is coming. That's coming next. Okay.

I just want to catch this before we did that as amended. Quick question. It was, I guess, everybody kind of halfway found common ground in our amendments earlier, but then we talked about amendments. Was there some specific thing that we held off on for third reading? No.

Mr. Chairman, my understanding from our conversation in Committee of the Whole, the amendments at 3rd specifically was to clean up some language related to the changes in the percentage allocations between roads, Greenbelt, and transportation, but also to double-check on the language around whether or not council could adjust sort of drive the conversation versus the administrator driving the conversation on the allocation of the funds.

Okay, that's right, I remember. And also I'd like to make the public aware, for people that don't know, we switched it from 1.5 billion, the number that we're working off of, with the percentages, to 1.1 billion, which was an estimate provided by the state DOR, South Carolina Department of Revenue. Furthermore, I'd like to make sure that everyone knows in the original, if you weren't aware of the amendment, it will be, correct me if I'm wrong here, it will be 90% will go to the county, 7% will go to the land trust, Green Belts, and 3% will go to transportation. Just want to make sure everybody in the public knows that that's what was amended, and that still doubles the funding for green, it doesn't double it, but it gives a significant portion more to Green Link, and it gives a significant portion to Green Belts, while the county still gets a significant portion. So there was also discussion, if I may, of removing those from the county budget once this tax is enacted. So essentially, removing almost two mils from the county budget once this tax, if the local tax was, is that wrong? You're shaking your head no. But I mean, essentially, it's two mils worth of material, correct? Well, if you take, well, I mean, how much is a mil? Four million, right? So we're taking, well, more than three and a half. It was almost four and a half on the three percent. Anyway, it'll reduce the county budget by approximately $5 to $7 million. Is that a fair number? I mean, yeah. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just quickly, I'd like to say I really appreciated the conversation committee, the whole. I thought it was thoughtful, and I felt like it was great that we could come together as a group to really move this issue forward and improve. Just hopeful that we can continue to share the news with the community and make sure they're educated on the finer points of this. But really just want to say appreciate the conversation in our earlier meeting today.

Thank you. Dr. Phan. I want to echo what Ms. Seaman said, because we were coming to this, I took some leave in the car before I came in because I just knew this was going to be one of those days. But actually the way this group, and this group is quite contentious a lot of times, but today was really, I think Greenwood County can be proud, the way everybody sat down, nobody got exactly everything they wanted, but there was a willingness to find common ground that we could all live with, work with, and move the ball forward. So I think today was a great exercise in how we can accomplish things when we talk to each other and not at each other, as we so often do. And I want to, Mr. McGee, you and I, you and I don't hardly fool with each other too much at all until here lately. But today was great, and I appreciate it. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Any other comments? We did vote on the substance of the second.

As amended, we got to vote. As amended.

We haven't passed it at second reading yet.

No.

It's coming. All right. That's all I was clearing up. Thank you.

Yes. So I'll make one final motion to, again, approve the motion as amended.

Roll call, please. Roll call has been requested.

Mr. Chairman, you have 10 in favor, 2 in opposition.

All right. Thank you. Motion passes. We will now move to ordinances at first reading. We'll start with... We will now move to ordinances at first reading. We'll start with CZ 2026-029. Councillor Bradley.

I present for first reading zoning docket CZ2026-029.

We will refer this to the Planning and Development Committee. Next is B, Simpsonville Fire Service Area Millage Request. Councilor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Simpsonville Fire Service Area Millage Request. I present for first reading an ordinance to provide for an increase in the operating millage rate levied by the Simpsonville Fire Service Area.

Thank you. That will stay on the council floor. We'll move to C, Simpsonville Fire Service Area General Obligation Bond Issuance. Councillor Collins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Simpsonville Fire Service Area General Obligation Bond Issuance. I present for the first reading of the ordinance to provide for the issuance of a sale of not exceeding $1.2 million. to Greenville County, South Carolina General Obligation Bonds, Simpsonville Fire Service Area project in one or more series to prescribe the purposes for which the proceeds shall be expended to provide for the payment thereof and other matters relating thereto.

Thank you. That will also stay on the council floor. Now move to committee reports. We'll start with Committee of the Whole. Council Bradley.

Yes, sir. On behalf of the committee, I move to appoint Judy Landley to fill the Candleman's Associate seat and Ashley Trampton to fill the at-large seat of the Greenville County Ice Coaters Task Force.

Thank you. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. The ayes have it. We'll now move to Committee on Finance. I have nothing this week, so we'll move now to Committee on Communications and Governmental Affairs. Councilor Farmer.

Mr. Chairman, I'm tired. I don't have anything to report.

Thank you very much. We will move now to Committee on Planning and Development. Councillor Bradley. I'm older and tired, so I have nothing. Had a feeling we were going to get a lot of that tonight. We'll move on to Roads, Infrastructure, and Public Works Committee. Councillor McGahee.

I'll blow V8 for five minutes. Is that okay, Dan? Just kidding. Everybody expect the final draft for third ordinance to come out for the sales and use tax. Look for that and be aware. Be on the lookout.

Thank you. Next, we're at Committee on Public Safety and Human Services. Councilor Collins.

I just want to say thank you to everyone that's in the first responder arena. Thank you for everything you do. You are not forgotten and we are working hard for you.

Next is Oversight Ad Hoc Committee. Councilor Long.

First of all, I'd like to thank everybody for passing the budget so we can pay our audit person, our group, and we hope to have that out in the public this coming week. So we're working on that definitely by month end regardless.

All right. Thank you very much. And we will end this section with short-term rentals ad hoc committee. Counselor Seaman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We had a great meeting the other day, looked at a first draft of the ordinance, and have sent it back to staff for some refinement, and we'll let you know when we're going to meet again. All right.

Thank you very much. We will now move to public comments, and I will turn it over to Ms. Stone.

Mr. Chairman, we have eight speakers. The first is Jim Barnes, and his topic is infrastructure, green space, et cetera.

I think we may have lost Mr. Barnes. Ms. Stone?

Next speaker is Matthew Lindsey, and topic is infrastructure, green space, et cetera.

I think we figured out a way to shorten public comments.

I agree. Next speaker is Bruce Wilson. His topic is county ordinance proposal.

Welcome, sir.

I'm tired, too. Mr. Chairman. I know I'm usually here as an activist, somebody you might see on TV from time to time, but tonight I'm here as a father. I want you to imagine that your 17-year-old child goes to work and gets into a bad accident and he's dying. And the EMS workers that come, instead of them working on him, they take pictures of him and post it on social media. And the next morning you find out, because your son died, you see these pictures on social media, how would you feel? The problem with that scenario, Mr. Chairman, is it really happened here in Greenville. A 17-year-old kid lost his life at Frankie's Fun Park. And of course there was a group of EMS workers that posted his dead body on social media. Greenville County, which I have respect for, you guys fired them. Three of them, you wrote them up. The problem, Mr. Chairman, is that when they left here, they went somewhere else in Greenville County and got a job in the medical field, and they're working today. And the reason they were able to do that, because there was no laws on the books then, would stop or even put accountability to make sure that nobody would want to do that at all. The reason I'm standing here tonight is twofold. For one, I'm going to be asking that this council pass an ordinance that would make it illegal, punishable by some type of criminal act if a government employee with the county or a contractor were to take a picture of a child that is dead and place it on social media while at work. Further, I'm going to ask that this council please pass a resolution that would support the law or bill that we plan to introduce to the legislators that would pass a state law that would make this a criminal offense to do that. No medical provider should do it. And I know that this body has utmost respect for EMS workers, but I also know that this body respects family. And no mother should ever have to wake up after her son has lost his life and see it on social media because her EMS worker, instead of working on him to try to save his life, was too busy taking a picture to place it on social media. That's why I'm before this body tonight. I know you guys are tired, and so I will end early. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Frank Tamburello, and his topic is cell towers.

Welcome, sir.

Good evening. My name is Frank Tamburello. I live in Saddle Creek subdivision in North Greenfield County. I'm here tonight to advocate for Kelly Long's effort to establish guidelines for cell tower development. I was unable to attend a meeting earlier this afternoon, so I'm here tonight. Just to put it into perspective, a new cell tower went up mere feet away from a property in my development. It provided a very lucrative lease to one person, Tony Langford, but it cost a homeowner about $100,000 when they sold their home. That's just not right. There's a need for regulation to control cell tower growth, minimally to require public hearings so more than one person can express an opinion, and also to establish setback requirements from property lines. Cell towers don't belong in our backyards. I'd also like to comment I'd be in big favor of a one-cent sales tax or a two-cent sales tax if you fix our roads. I've been after someone to fix the roads in my development now going on for two years. Each time I call and make a request, I'm told we're on the list. Anything that you can do to get me off the list would be appreciated.

Thank you very much, sir.

Our next speaker is David Lovell, and his topic is Joe Cornell.

Welcome, sir.

Yes, so my topic is Joseph Cornell, as well as Tracy Tancursley. On June 10th, Joseph Cornell's name was put on a lie. His office told my family, through Tracy Tancursley, that this county has no records about us. None. Well, that is a lie. And he knows it is a lie, and so does Tracy. Because his own employee, your own employee, Rachel Bennett, has written about us by name from a county email account, and we are holding those emails right now. So which is it, Mr. Cornell? incompetence or dishonesty. Either you cannot run a search a fifth grader could run, or you ran it, saw the truth, and buried it. There is no third option, and you are going to answer for it under oath. And the rest of you cowards sitting up there in silence are no better. You all swore an oath to the Constitution, and yet you treat it like toilet paper. I think you are weak, petty, little tyrannical fascist scum who think our family will get tired and disappear if you stonewall us long enough. You fools are dead wrong. You serpents lie to us. You hide from us like weasels. You break the law like common criminals, and you dare us to do something about it. That is not government. That is a criminal racket run by thugs who forgot they work for us. We are not going anywhere. We will stand at this microphone, and we will stand in federal court until every last one of you answers for what you did. And I will add, when I came to sign up to speak, there seems to be an unconstitutional addition that has been made here of asking people for their IDs. That needs to change because you cannot do that. The Supreme Court has ruled very clearly that people have a right to speak anonymously. That means they can come up here with a face mask on, a full hood. They do not have to provide any form of ID. They don't have to give a name. I was told that if I didn't even give my name, that I would not be allowed to speak. That is blatantly unconstitutional. So that needs to be addressed. That needs to be fixed. So there's about 40 seconds left there. Do you guys have anything to say for yourselves?

We leave this time for you to address the chair so they don't speak during this time. You just address us.

Well, it's my time. I'm giving you guys the last 30 seconds.

I'm just telling you as the chair that that's my ruling that you can address us with whatever you'd like to.

Okay.

So I guess that's a no.

All right.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

The next speaker is Jonathan Lavelle, and his topic is fork tongues.

Welcome, sir.

My name is Jonathan Levier. I'm here about a recording that one government swears isn't theirs, and another swears never existed. I call this Forks Tongues, and you're about to see why. On April 27th, the Greenville County Legislative Delegation held a public meeting in this room in front of the very cameras pointed at us right now. My family was here, and what those cameras recorded that night matters to us. And so we asked for it. What we got back was four tons. We asked the delegation, the body that actually held the meeting, they told us in writing that the footage is not a public record within the possession of the Greenville County legislative delegation. Not ours, they hissed, asked the county. So we asked the county. And on June 10th, the county told us it had no records, none. A recording of a public meeting made on this government's own cameras in this government's own building is a public record. It isn't ours and it doesn't exist are not lawful answers and they cannot be true. One of you is lying to the people who pay your salaries. That is not a record system. That is two cowardly offices speaking with forked tongues, a nest of slithering serpents pointing at each other while the recording of what was done to my family quietly vanishes between them. And we did not just ask. Weeks ago, we put the county, the sheriff, and the delegation on written notice to preserve that footage, to stop the cameras from taping over it, and to confirm in writing that you had. We told you litigation is coming and from that moment the law required you to keep it. You said nothing because slithering away from a hard question is the one thing that this county's leadership does well. So I will make you face it out loud on the record with this microphone running where you cannot slither off. Does the April 27th footage still exist? Yes or no? Is anyone aware?

Sir, I'll speak as I can, but you can address the chair, address council, but we wouldn't have that information for you ourselves.

Okay, you don't have the information. Who would have it? The county administrator's office, county facilities and security, or the sheriff's office?

If you would like to reach out to me by email, I'd be happy to talk to you about it and see what I can get for you.

But you don't know the answer now?

No.

Okay. Was it So you wouldn't know if it was preserved the day that we told you to preserve it or if it was taped over Nobody told me so I couldn't really answer that question for you, sir All right, and if it is taped over then we'll want to collect the records of the the name of the person who let it go this council controls the building and these cameras and You don't get to hide behind hiding the grass behind the delegation The April 27th footage needs to be preserved and released. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Ms. Stone?

Mr. Chairman, the next speaker is Joyce LaVier, and her topic is consequences.

Hello. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm a Christian. I'm an Air Force veteran for the Electronic Security Command, and I'm also a widow of a war veteran and a deceased FBI agent who died a wrongful death, for which it's been 27 years nearly. The FBI will not release the full investigative report because they're responsible for his death. I was a young mother with six children, 10 months to 11 years old, left in a terrible situation. still being ignored. Last year, my family asked the officials who represent us for one thing, help getting the truth and justice for my husband's wrongful death. His name was Special Agent Paul Levier. He swore an oath to uphold the law, and unlike the people in this room, he kept it. We followed every rule. We filed the right requests, the right offices. In return, we got cold, indifferent silence. and then the gall to trample the rights of a grieving family were being erased, were being ignored. When our state lawmakers, Greenville County officials, ran over us, the sheriff did not lift a finger to stop it. He joined in. He helped them to obstruct and silence us. I have buried a better man than anyone seated at that table. Every official in this county who swore an oath to defend the Constitution and then broke it as a coward and a fraud. You hide behind procedure. You point at one another and you pray a grieving family will get tired and go home. We will not. It's been 27 years for us. We will not. Elections are coming and so are your consequences. My family will not be silent until every last one of you is voted out and standing in a courtroom answering for what you've done to us. You should be ashamed, and since I doubt you have the shame, the people of this country should be ashamed for you that oath-breaking speak in their name. Is this what you voted for, Greenville County? tyrants in cheap suits who swear an oath and break it with a smirk and then try to muzzle anyone who dares to say so out loud. Is this what you voted for? I met my husband while serving my country in the United States Air Force. The thanks I got was a government that ended his life, buried the truth about how and why the FBI killed my husband, and left me a widow raising six children. And now the officials who are supposed to answer to me sit and tell me in so many words, Thank you for your service. Now shut up and go away. What was done to my family was done in your name and paid for with your money. An official who will break his oath to silence one family will break it for anyone who speaks. And that should make every person in this room furious. We will not rest until the oath breakers are out of office and answering in court. Stand with us. And right behind you on the wall. In God we trust. Exactly what does that mean? When a widow comes before you, when the Lord gives the widow a platform to stand here, if you're a Christian, you know what that means.

Mr. Chairman, the last speaker is Miriam Labier, and her topic is Rachel Bennett. Rachel Bennett.

Madam Clerk, are you saying Rachel Bennett? Is that what you said, the topic? Okay, thank you.

Good evening. My name is Miriam Levier, and I am here about one word this county put in writing to my family. That word is none. On June 10th, the county administrator's office answered our public records request. We had asked in seven separate categories for the county's records about our family. To every single one, The answer came back the same, the county Greenville has no records, none. That is not a mistake, that answer is false, and we can prove it. Her name is Rachel Bennett. She works for Greenville County. She uses a GreenvilleCounty.org email account, and she signs her messages from the Office of Greenville County Legislative Delegation at 301 University Ridge. Miss Bennett has written about my family by name more than once. I know it for a fact because we are holding those emails right now. They were produced to us in writing. So when this county looks at a family in the eye and says it has no records about us, there are only two explanations and both are disgraceful. Either no one bothered to search the account of the very employee who was emailing about us or someone searched it, found us and decided that lying to our faces was easier than telling the truth. A government that does either one has no business saying the word transparency ever again. This is not complicated and it does not take a lawyer. Rachel Bennett is your employee. Her emails sit on your servers. They name my family. That single fact turns your no records in writing with the county's name on it into a falsehood. I am not asking you to take my word for it. I am daring you to check. Search Mrs. Bennett's county account for our name. Search every county employee who touched our requests. Then put it in writing who you searched, what you found, and how on earth the first answer came back empty. If calling a false answer false is too scurrilous or too disruptive for this room, then cut off my microphone tonight on camera and explain that to a judge. My family asked plain questions of our own government and got a one-word falsehood. We are not accepting it, and we are not going away. The truth is the very least this council owes, the people who pay for that email account. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next on the agenda, we have the administrator's report. All right. And that will move to requests and motions by council members. Anything from my colleagues?

I have one.

Councilor McGee?

I just got disparaged by three people. Have any of you contacted me? I don't know. I would like to be contacted, and I'd like maybe just a quick explanation of what's going on. I have no idea what that was all about. I don't know if my colleagues do, but I would like maybe just a quick two-minute. If everyone wants to leave, that's great, but I have absolutely no idea what these people are talking about.

Okay. I would say that we could maybe ask outside. I don't think any of us actually know what that pertains to. So it probably sounds like something that if it's legislative delegation, I didn't want to get into it with citizens, but with state laws and them occupying the room, probably something we should just ask. Sure.

But I mean, yeah, I just want everybody in the public to know this is not something I was aware of. I don't think many of my colleagues are. So We would love to be a part of this. Engage me in that process. I ask you, my email is cmcgahey at greenvillecounty.org. But to disparage us like that has just surprised me, and I'd just like to find out more about what's going on. And if the county did make a mistake, which I'm not admitting we did, I would like to know about it or find out if we did. But, yeah, let's move on from that from there. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? One final motion. All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

We're adjourned.