County Council - Regular Meeting

I'd like to welcome everyone out tonight for this Kershaw County Council meeting, September 22nd, 2026. Thank you for coming out tonight. We've been called to order. We have Councilman Tucker listed for the invocation, but he's calling in remotely due to work. I'll go ahead and offer the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance tonight. We'll proceed to that point. Let us pray. Dear Heavenly Father, we're thankful for our many blessings. We're grateful for our lives this day, for the breath that we have, for our families, for our responsibilities that help us grow, the challenges and trials in

Thank you everyone. Next up gentlemen is item number four adoption of the agenda. Do we have a motion on the agenda?

I'll make a motion. We got adopt the agenda.

We have a motion from Mr. Shoemaker. Is there a second on the agenda? We have a second. Any discussion on the agenda? Seeing no discussion from those who were present, Mr. Tucker, any discussion and how do you vote?

That's a yes vote on discussion remotely from Mr. Tucker. All those who are present and voting, raise your hand if you're in favor. It is unanimous for the record, Ms. Hanna, the agenda is approved. Next up, we have a series of proclamations and resolutions. The first one is related to honoring the headquarters, the 117th Engineer Brigade Task Force Castle and accepting an American flag flown in honor of Kershaw County. I would make a motion. I'd like to second the motion. Okay. Um, Ms. Parler, do we have anyone here tonight? Okay. The Mr. Titus is here. Where's Mr. Titus. Oh, I'm sorry. I cou

Sergeant Major, we'd like to hear a few words from you when we get there.

Thank you, sir. Thank you, Sergeant Major, and welcome home. Any other discussion or questions from those who are present?

Thank you, Mr. Cunningham for putting that on the agenda. Mr. Jones, yes, sir.

Any other discussion? I'll share just a set of facts I learned last night from one of our Medal of Honor recipients from Kershaw County. So South Carolina, speaking to what we just heard, South Carolina I think is still one of the highest per capita participants in the armed services. Over 40 million Americans have served in the armed services, And there's roughly 3,500 Medal of Honor recipients. And there's only 65 or so living at a given time, like today. And four of those have come from Kershaw County, which is the highest per capita tied in the state with, I think, Spartanburg. And so ther

Thank you, Mr. Brazel. Any other comments or discussion from those who are present? Mr. Tucker, anything remotely on this proclamation?

Thank you very much, Mr. Tucker. Well, let's move it to a vote. All in favor, raise your hand who are present in voting. It's unanimous for those who are present in voting. Mr. Tucker, how do you vote?

That's a yes. And we'll save the photo op for whenever the flag gets in the room being retrieved from somewhere on the premises of the county right now. Thank you very much for being here tonight. If you can hang out just a moment longer, we'll do a picture whenever the flag arrives. With that one, again if you like.

Thank you very much, gentlemen. That moves us to the next proclamation placed on the agenda by Councilman Tomlinson regarding FFA. Do we have a motion? Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion. Is there a second? We have a second on the proclamation. Mr. Tomlinson, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's my honor to recognize the Woollard Technology Center Kershaw County Future Farmers of America chapter and all your accolades and awards that you all got at the state. convention and headed towards national. So I'm going to read a little bit of the proclamation and then name out some of the individual awards, and then afterwards we'll have the group come up for a picture. Whereas the Willard Technology Center Kershaw County Future Formers of America chapter provides students throughout Kershaw County with opportunities to develop leadership, personal growth, career

Thank you, Mr. Tomlinson. Mr. Cato, you have the second.

I just want to thank y'all for coming out tonight. I want to thank Councilman Tomlinson for putting this on the agenda. I'm extremely proud to see y'all here because the FFA was a big part of my high school days, and that was a long time ago. But we had things such as soil judging, swine judging, cattle judging. We did it all. And we actually won our district multiple years in a row, and we were very proud of that. But it's nice to see the young people taking part in the agriculture and the conservation of this land. So it means a lot tonight to see young people interested in that kind of stuf

mr tucker mr tucker any discussion remotely yes uh congratulations and i vote yes that's a yes vote for mr tucker remotely i'll just mention that out of the 3 300 counties that the department of agriculture monitors in our country kershaw county most recently was number one for profits per capita for farms. And you really don't think about that, but we really swing way above our weight in Kershaw County. So I look forward to you all having a bright future, and thanks for what you're doing. For those who are present and voting, raise your hand if you're in favor. Ms. Hannett's unanimous for the

Audrey, would you like to come up and say a few words? Then we'll get the picture.

Ms. Audrey, yes, ma'am. If you could pull the mic down so we could hear you.

Thank you so much. Absolutely. And we're looking forward to welcoming national champions when y'all get home at the end of October.

Important reminder that my granddad who grew up in an agrarian family would always tell us, he said, you can't eat your furniture, you can't eat your car. For us here up on the dais, you can't eat your wood trim, you can't eat your legal documents, you can't eat your money. We need farmers. Thanks again. Let's give him a hand.

If you want to bring your group up. Anybody else?

There we go. One, two, three. Keep looking. Congratulations.

For those who were here for the last proclamation, you can feel welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting if you like. If not, we'll give you a moment to clear out if you want to move on to whatever you might have going on tonight.

Thank you, gentlemen. That moves us to the next item on the agenda, which is item number 6A. With common consent and without objection, I would request that we move this to the next agenda for the first meeting in October. I just got a message from some of the family, the McKenzie family, that they were not able to make it tonight due to some unforeseen circumstances, and they would like to move it to the first meeting in October. Any objection? Okay. Ms. Hanna, if you'd note that and put it on the first meeting in October. Mr. Bowes, next up we have public comments. No objection from Mr. Tucker. Thank you. Mr. Bowes.

Let me get how many do we have signed up?

Six speakers. And the first one was who again?

Ms. Arnold. Yes, ma'am. I'll just let you know before you start, this is a time for questions. Council to hear from the public. They'll put up a time indicator right there in front of you. And it's not a question and an answer. We look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Thank you for coming out tonight, Ms. Arnold. Mr. DuBose, who do we have signed up next?

Thank you for coming out tonight, Mr. Curley. Mr. DuBose, who do we have signed up next?

Ms. Robinson, yes, ma'am. If you would pull the mic down just a little bit.

Ms. Robinson, I'll just let you know your time has expired. Would you be able to conclude your remarks, please?

And they'll make sure that these get returned to you.

I'm sure some council members might want to see that, but it's not appropriate for right now.

Mr. DuBose, do we have a contact number for Ms. Robinson?

Thanks for coming out tonight. Mr. DuBose, who do we have signed up next?

Thanks for coming out tonight, Ms. McCaskill. Mr. DuBose, who do we have signed up as number five?

Thanks for coming out tonight, Mr. Lee. Mr. DuBose, who is speaker number six?

Thank you, Ms. Franklin Moore. Mr. DeBose, does that conclude public comment? That concludes public comment. No votes required. That moves us on to public hearings. This is item number 8A. No votes required. Do we have anybody signed up for item number 8A? This is a public hearing regarding moratorium on data centers, data processing facilities, cryptocurrency mining operations, data processing facilities, and the like is listed in the agenda.

We have one speaker signed up. We'll open up the public hearing. Ms. Knatzer.

The time is yours. I think some people might be writing your name down or making notes otherwise, but we'd love to hear from you.

Thank you, Ms. Knatzer. Mr. DuBose, am I correct? We have no one else signed up? That will conclude public comment, or excuse me, public hearing for item number 8A. And that moves us to item number 9A, approval of the minutes. Do we have a motion on the minutes?

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve.

Mr. Thompson has a motion. Is there a second on the minutes?

We have a second on the minutes. Any discussion on the minutes? Seeing no discussion from those who are present, Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely? No, sir, and I vote yes. That's a yes vote on the minutes remotely from Mr. Tucker. All those who are present and voting, raise your hand if you're in favor on the minutes. It is unanimous, Ms. Hanna. All have voted in favor. The minutes are approved. Gentlemen, we next have a series of ordinances that we'll get into, and that will be the bulk of the business for tonight. No executive sessions or other business to handle. Let's get to the first o

I make a motion we adopt this ordinance on first reading.

Mr. Shoemake has a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Tomlinson has the second. Mr. Shoemake, you have the floor.

Yeah, so basically what this is, if you look at the actual... Revisions it's a very small revision to what is already our noise ordinance and fire and various things for manufacturing facilities. And what this does is it expands that ordinance to energy infrastructure projects so obviously there's been a lot of talk about the rosemary plant, if it were to exist or any plant like it in the future. Right now, our ordinances are silent on the noise and vibration and fire issues. So this basically takes what we already require for manufacturing facilities and applies it to those energy projects. I

Thank you, Mr. Shoemake. Mr. Tomlinson, you have the second.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief on it. I think this is a good ordinance to include and appreciate staff and Mr. Shoemake's helping with this draft. Any industry coming in needs to be regulated, and that way it can be beneficial for both the industry and adjacent property owners going forward.

Mr. Shoemake, anyone else have anything to say before we hear from Mr. Shoemake again? Mr. Cato?

I agree with Mr. Shoemake on the fact that these help enhance this ordinance. It puts the energy plan, although I'm not in favor of Buford rosemary. I do think that we need to take a look and put them under the same standard as any other industry in Kershaw County. Hopefully, something may happen to where it gets even stricter than this. But I'll I'm in favor of it on first reading until I hear something different or see something different. I believe this is a I guess we could call it a positive step forward.

um thank you mr kato mr jones thank you mr chairman members of county council just a couple of questions one i wish we weren't even having to address this but but we are and here we are um can you tell me how we how are we going to manage the noise how are we going to enforce it what are the standards what are the regulations

Well, I think, if I may answer that question, Mr. Chairman. You know, it's how we, I mean, we have noise enforcement through code enforcement now. It would be enforced in the same way manufacturing ordinances are enforced, and the standards are the same. I can't recite the detail off the top of my head, but they are in the packet. But basically, they would be the exact same standards we impose on all our other manufacturing, and the compliance mechanism would be the same through code enforcement the way it's done now. I assume code enforcement. I guess it's just code enforcement and law enforcement.

Okay. Does anyone want to go before I tell you what I think? Code enforcement is going to, I've never known code enforcement to enforce noise or something like that at manufacturing companies. And of course, obviously we don't have anything here for this, but I would think there would need to be a little bit more Advanced way of enforcing this and I you know, I know this is nobody's intention But it's so easy to sit up here and put an ordinance on the books But then I think we need to have a we need to show how we're going to enforce it And I'm not sure that saying that we're just gonna put ou

Mr. Chairman, if I may. Mr. Jones, you concluded?

I would certainly want to... You're also inside of an industrial park. Exactly. This place is not.

You know, I would like, Mr. Chairman, I would like to see it go back to planning and zoning and for them to not only put this, and this is written, I like the way this is written. I really do like this. But I just would like to see some teeth into it as to what we do, whether it be like what the interstate does, putting those noise barriers up. I'd like to see some kind of direction because if we don't do that on this council, it's not going to happen.

Mr. Jones, certainly if it does pass first reading, there'll be an opportunity to amend or otherwise edit on second and third reading. So to the extent you want to bring something in the form of a motion, I'm sure the council will be glad to entertain it. But before we hear from anyone else present, let's check with Mr. Tucker remotely. He hasn't had an opportunity to speak yet. Mr. Tucker, do you have any commentary, questions, or concerns on item number 10A, first reading?

Are you prepared to state your vote at this time?

That's okay. So item on 10A, we have a yes remote vote from Mr. Tucker. Any other discussion or comments from those who are present before we vote?

Does anybody, the staff or anybody, have any recommendations on enforcement tonight?

Are you directing the question to the staff, Mr. Templer? Yeah.

Any other questions, Mr. Jones? Yeah, if I could. Yes, sir.

You know, I'm willing to support this on first reading if the administrator staff can bring back some kind of written enforcement, something that would kind of give us some direction on how it's going to be enforced.

Yeah, and I guess we probably need to know exactly who. what kind of noise it would be making, because we don't know yet. And I understand that. But if we could maybe just do some research and see if anybody else maybe has done something before us that we maybe can pick up on. And I won't look, folks, I won't regulations on this, this plant noise regulations. I just want to make sure that there's some direction and that I feel comfortable something's going to be done. And not that we would do this, but that it would just sit on a shelf somewhere and never go anywhere else.

But I would appreciate if you would take the opportunity to just do some research and see what you can come up with. And sir, I'd be glad to talk with you before the meeting or during the meeting, whatever. I would like to see something passed, but I'd just like to see a little bit more depth into what we have here.

Thank you, Mr. Tucker. I think we're ready to move it to a vote. Um, we already have a yes, remote vote from Mr. Tucker, all who are present in voting, raise your hand if you're in favor. On item number 10B, excuse me, 10A, 10A, and it is unanimous. All who are present and voting, Ms. Hanna, are in favor. 10A passes. That takes us to item number 10B. This is a second reading. Efforts come back. This is an ordinance to amend the Kershaw County ZLDR regarding section 3, 2.6, exceptions to height limitations, and listing additional related structures. First reading has already been occurred, as i Mr. Shoemake has a motion. Is there a second? Mr. Thompson has a second. Mr. Shoemake, you have the floor.

I mean, we talked a lot about this a lot at first reading, so I think I've said what I need to say.

Thank you, Mr. Shoemake. Mr. Thompson, you have the second.

Yeah, I just have one question. I was looking at the amendment. Is the one-foot setback for each one foot in height the standard that we use with all industries here for setbacks?

So if we had a 100-foot tower and we're looking at 30 yards from somebody's property line, that's going to be 100 foot?

I don't know if council has the appetite, but I wouldn't mind looking at two foot for every one foot in height. I mean, that doesn't kind of change a whole lot, but at least instead of having a 30-yard setback, from a hundred foot, I mean, or 200 foot, you could have, you know, at least a little bit more than half a football field back.

Oh, sorry. Were you good? Yeah. Okay. I was just going to say, we've got a couple of different ideas for amendments and additional regulations and restrictions. I personally am not ready to support an amendment tonight because I've got more questions based on some conversations with planning commission folks and staff. but I think we'll see one come up for third ring. That's just me personally. I've got some questions I need answered before I can support an amendment tonight, but it might actually be more restrictive than some of the ideas that have been put before us.

Absolutely. I'd like to kind of look at that setback and maybe look at some other industry for power plants across the state and kind of get an idea about what they're doing. So that'd be good for third reading.

Of course, everybody knows my feelings on the power plant in general, so there's no need to go there. But there is some issues here that I wanna bring out first. It's my understanding that this is not a recommendation, a positive recommendation for planning and zoning. It's my understanding that planning and zoning has an unfavorable vote coming to the council. You know, as I look over this tonight, the general zoning provisions and the height limitations, it talks about, in the addition to this, it says, or structures and apparatuses associated with energy infrastructure projects. And it talk

Thank you, Mr. Cato. Any other discussion from those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, any discussion on item number 10B? Second reading on an ordinance. No discussion.

Yes, vote remotely for Mr. Tucker. Seeing no further discussion from those who are present on item number 10B, we'll move it to a vote for those who are present and voting. All in favor, raise your hand. That is Shoemake, Connell, and Tomlinson in favor. All opposed on item number 10B. Brazel, Cato, and Jones opposed. 10B passes on second reading. And that moves us on to item number 10C. This is a second reading related to an ordinance to amend the ZLDR, creating a zoning overlay district for a RMPD or residential master planned district. We've had first reading as indicated in the packet. Do

Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion. It's not specifically to adopt, but I basically would move to amend that we remove this item from the agenda today. Um, and basically, uh, I moved that we removed from the agenda and did not appear before us until it's reviewed and considered as part of the holistic ZLDR rewrite. That would be my motion.

All right. We've got a motion and a second. Um, Mr. Brazel, this was originally one of yours. Any, any heartburn about that or?

Okay, the motion is in the form of amending the agenda, amending the agenda to add something requires supermajority amending to remove something does not require that additional restriction. And the motion is a little bit different. Mr. DuBose in the form of we're essentially deferring until it gets reviewed and a council member would just have to proactively place it back on the agenda at some point in the future if they so desired. Correct.

Okay, that's how I'm receiving the motion. Any other discussion from those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely, and how do you vote?

Yes, vote remotely for Mr. Tucker. Seeing no further discussion from those who are present, we'll move item number 10C to a vote, and this is for indefinite deferral. All in favor, raise your hand. It's unanimous. Ms. Hanna is so deferred. That's item number 10C. That takes us to item number 10D. This is an ordinance approving a private hangar contract at the Kershaw County Airport. establishing the contract rate and related terms and authorizing execution of the contract and all actions necessary to effectuate it. We've had first and second reading. This is third reading. Do we have a motion

Mr. Tomlinson has a motion. Is there a second on 10D? I'll second. Second. We have two seconds. I heard Mr. Shoemake first. I'll defer. Okay. Mr. Shoemake has second. Mr. Thomason, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With this being third reading, we've had a lot of discussion regarding the ordinance. Unless staff has anything to input, I say ready to call the vote.

Okay, any other discussion from those who are present?

Okay, seeing no other discussion. Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely and how do you vote?

That's a yes vote remotely from Mr. Tucker. Let's move it to those who are present and voting. All in favor, raise your hand. And it's unanimous, Ms. Hanna. It is approved on third reading. That is 10D, private hanger contract. Thank you, gentlemen. That moves us to item number 10E. This is another third reading of an ordinance establishing a moratorium for which we had the public hearing tonight. A moratorium related to data centers, data processing facilities, cryptocurrency mining operations, And matters related thereto, data processing facilities, we've had first and second reading. We've

We have a motion and we have a second. Any further discussion? Third. Unfortunately, we don't entertain thirds. Any discussion from those who have first or second? Mr. Thomason was second. Mr. Cato was first.

I think this is a much needed ordinance. We've had a lot of discussion, and we've heard a lot of comments from the public, and I believe this is something that's desperately needed for right now, and that'll give us a year to look into things and see where we need to go from there.

Thank you, Mr. Cato. Mr. Tomlinson? No discussion, Mr. Chairman. Ready to vote. For those who are present, any other discussion?

Just a comment. I would like to thank Ms. Linda Franklin-Moore. I know she contacted me, and I'm sure she probably contacted some of you as well, too. The bottom line is to get this thing kicked off when we did a few weeks back. I think this is good. I think it's great to have this oversight, and I appreciate council's support on this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Jones. Any further discussion for those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely, and how do you vote?

That's a yes vote remotely from Mr. Tucker. For those who are present and voting, raise your hand if you're in favor on third reading. It is unanimous, Ms. Hanna, for the record, and the Ordinance 10E is passed on third reading. That brings us to item number 10F, another third reading that we have. This one's related to an amendment on the ZLDR to add section 34.2-19 related to directional signs for hospitals and medical facilities and to amend section 34.5-1 prohibiting certain signs and sign characters and Section 34.11-2 related to off-premise advertising for exempt directional signs for ho

Mr. Shoemake has the motion. Is there a second? Mr. Brazel has the second. Mr. Shoemake, any discussion on third reading?

No, we've went through this a few times. I think we've explained it pretty well.

Mr. Brazel? Agreed. Any other discussion from those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker. Any discussion on item number 10F, third reading?

Yes, vote remotely from Mr. Tucker. We'll move it to those who are present and voting. All in favor on 10F, third reading, raise your hand. And it is unanimous, Ms. Hanna, and 10F passes on third reading. We have just a couple more third readings to handle. Item number 10G is next up on the agenda. This is related to an ordinance to amend the ZLDR section 342.2-19 and to amend section 52.2 to clarify subdivisions of land. Under exempt subdivision conditions, it's related to larger common plans and and matters as defined by the South Carolina Department of Environmental Services and general per

Thank you so much. Mr. Tomlinson, you have the second.

I'm going to yield to Mr. Shoemake for an amendment. We actually have an amendment. So a lot of what Mr. Brazel said, well, part of what Mr. Brazel said was incorporated to this amendment. So let me just make the motion first. I move that we amend and propose the LDR text to match the document labeled suggest amendments from staff on third reading that was included in the posted agenda materials. And basically, this has some of that, like, for example, the phone number stuff that changes. So basically, it sort of cleans it up so we don't have to come back and amend it again, at least with some

We have a motion to amend before us. Is there a second?

No discussion. I think Mr. Brazel did it all.

Okay. For a motion to amend, any other discussion from those who are present? Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely on the motion to amend before we get back to the original Brazel motion?

On the Shoemake motion to amend, we've got a yes vote remotely. All in favor on the motion to amend, raise your hand. It is Shoemake, Brazel, Connell, Cato, and Tomlinson in favor. All opposed to the motion to amend. Mr. Jones is opposed. The motion to amend passes. That puts us back on the original Brazel motion now as amended to pass on third reading. Any further discussion on third reading?

Excuse me, I have a couple of questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate y'all always kind of giving me the time. Sometimes I don't think as fast as you guys do. Listen, there are already state law. We're pretty much just marrying state law. Am I correct?

Thank you so much. Let me just say, here's where I have a concern. You know, just more regulation, more regulation. Hear me out enough before you judge me. More regulation. If state law is already there, we have the ability and the power to enforce state law. I don't know why we would necessarily need to, with every state law, have a county ordinance. And I realized that this we're entering a Some different times here, I realize that. That's where my concern is, is that too often, too quick, I think government just thinks more regulation is the way to fix the problem. I don't happen to think t

And I'm glad we can have a conversation. And when someone comes in now without this, they have to still get that, correct? Correct.

Gotcha. Well, I'm confused. Some of us are confused a little bit with it. But I appreciate all the hard work y'all put on it, and I respect that. I'm probably not going to be able to support it. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time.

Yes, sir, Mr. Jones. Gentlemen, we are back after amended on the original browser motion as amended. Any further discussion from those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely and how do you vote on the original as amended?

That's a yes vote remotely from Mr. Tucker on the amended version. So back on the original vote. All in favor who are present in voting, raise your hand. It is Shoemake, Brazel, Connell, Cato, and Tomlinson in favor. All opposed? Mr. Jones opposed. It passes on third reading as amended. That's 10G. And last ordinance for the night. Item number 10H. This is a third reading. It's related to an ordinance to amend the Kershaw County ZLDR section, excuse me, to amend section 5.1.4-5 systems to include fire hydrants and to clarify fire hydrant requirements in major and minor subdivision submissions.

I'll make a motion. Mr. Cato has the motion.

We've been through two of these readings. This is simply something that I asked administration to look into. Because of the rural area, this is what it affects the most in reference to the fire hydrants, and they did so. They've got it corrected, and I asked my colleagues to support third reading.

Thank you, Mr. Cato. Mr. Shoemake, you had a second. Any other discussion from those who are present? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, any discussion remotely and how do you vote?

That's a yes vote remotely from Mr. Tucker. Ms. Hanna, for those who are present and voting on item number 10H, third reading, raise your hand if you're in favor. It is unanimous in favor and passes third reading. That is 10H, Ms. Hanna. That concludes the voting portion of the meeting. We don't have any executive sessions tonight. Can I go first? Yes, sir. Just in case we lose you, Mr. Tucker, please. Do you have any report for us?

Thank you, Mr. Cato. Mr. Tomlinson. I concur with Mr. Cato. No report tonight. Mr. Jones, we're going for a record.

Dangerous. I can't look at no report. Did I say something? Mr. I'm sorry, I didn't hear. Okay. Mr. Brazel, any report?

Thank you, Mr. Brazel. I just want to say one of the sacrifices of serving up here is sometimes you miss your kids' sporting events. It's very difficult, but I want to wish my daughters, Annabelle and Alexis, the twin towers of power at the volleyball net, success tonight in their game. I have no further report. Mr. Templer.

You don't want to talk about your singing?

Oh, no, no, no. I will not be volunteered to sing again.

That's a story for another time. Thank you very much, Mr. Jones. Mr. Templer, any report for us?

Thank you, Mr. Templer. Mr. DeVos, anything non-privileged? No legal briefing. We have no executive sessions or any other items for business. Seek a motion to adjourn. We have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, Mr. Tucker, do we still have you? He had to drop off. He dropped off. Okay. For those who are present and voting in favor of adjournment, raise your hand. We are adjourned.