Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

This conference will now be recorded.

Call to order.

Pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I am duly qualified.

That I am duly qualified.

According to the constitution of the state of South Carolina.

According to the constitution of the great state of South Carolina. To exercise the duties of a board. To exercise the duties of this board.

A zoning appeals member.

Zoning the board of appeals member.

For the town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina.

the town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina.

The position to which I have been appointed.

The position to which I have been appointed.

I will.

I will.

To the best of my knowledge and ability.

To the best of my knowledge and ability. Discharge the duties thereof. Discharge the duties thereof.

And preserve, protect, and defend.

Preserve, protect, and defend.

The Constitution of the State of South Carolina.

The Constitution of the State of South Carolina.

And the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the United States. So help me God. Further, I solemnly swear that during my time as an appointed official for the town of Surfside Beach, I will equally, fairly, and impartially to the best of my ability and limited skill exercise the trust reposed upon me

And I will use the best endeavors.

And I will use the best endeavors.

To preserve the peace and carry into effect.

I'm going to get you there.

I preserve the peace and carry into effect.

To preserve the peace and carry into effect according to the law, the purposes for which I have been appointed. So help me. Since it's been 35 years since I conducted a meeting, probably the student legislature, I'm going to insert the chairman's prayer, which is Lord, don't let me screw this up. The next thing on the agenda is minutes for approval. We do not have any minutes. Approval of the agenda. The agenda was posted and was sent out by email. Does anybody have a motion to approve the agenda as sent to us? So moved. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. So the agenda is approved. So the next thing we have is public comments. As a reminder, please keep your comments to the agenda item that we have here. And you have five minutes, which if you'll notice, there is a timer up here. So just if you'll look up there every now and again and kind of keep track of it. I may give you just a second or two more, but we'll have to call time when it is time. With that being said, do we have public comments on the agenda item? And if you would, please state your name and your address.

Good evening, Carolyn Pravlick, 512 13th Avenue North. To me, the question, that is presented to you is the question that should be first answered. And it's the question, the one posited by the director, that whether or not there's a commercial use of the property or whether certain businesses are allowed to conduct business in the R3 district. Whether the use or the activity is allowed in the R3 district. depends on our use table. And I submit that the use table does not allow the rental of golf carts in the R3 district. If you start with Section 17394 in our ordinances, it tells you how the use table should be interpreted. And if there's a blank or an empty space in the use table, the use is not allowed. So if you look at our use table, which I hope some of you have to see, here it is.

It went away.

It went away? Oh no. I think he touched the screen. Okay, so the use table does not have, the use table does not have any space in the block for golf cart rental in the R3 district. It's blank. So that means under the instructions in 17394, the use is not allowed. And you can see if you look at the use table that I've highlighted it in green here, r3 is here and it has p's and c's as uh explained in the directions in 17394 for certain things related to dwellings and accommodations and things like that but as you scroll down and you get to golf carts In fact, as you scroll down, there's nothing in the R3 column all the way down other than allowing the residential and accommodation uses.

I've highlighted right here, gulf cart rental and sales and services.

And you can see if you read across to the green column, there's no letter there. It's not a permitted use, it's not a conditional use. And so I would submit that you need to reject what the director is offering as his opinion. His opinion is based on whether or not putting the golf carts there converts the property to a commercial use. I don't think that's the question. I think the question is whether or not the use, the business, the activity, is allowed in the R3 district. And under our use table, it's not. If it's to be used, the use table needs to be altered via the appropriate processes. Now, how does the S2 group do their thing? They, I think, conduct their business in C1, where golf cart rentals are allowed. and then they deliver the rented golf cart to the property so that the customer has use of the golf cart. That's not what is happening when the golf carts are deposited at these rental properties. No customer has been created yet. The customer is dealing with the golf cart rental business

in the r3 district which i submit is not permitted under the town ordinances thank you very much thank you we have any more public comments on the agenda yes again please state your name and your address alan carlson 330 15th avenue south so i think just common sense as residential see so that's my whole thing it's just like everybody else sort of kind plays fair in the situation where they have their shores and like she was just saying so I'd like to see residential stay residential and then there goes a lot of people live full-time and we didn't archery so and then I'm not saying that there is but it sure seems like quitting

Thank you, thank you sir we have any further public comments I'm Michael Rawls 508 highway 17 most business. I'm the owner of RDR for cars and We are the company everybody is talking about. One thing I need to ask is, is there a difference in the zoning between a golf cart and a low-speed vehicle? Because I don't rent golf carts. I rent low-speed vehicles, every single one of them. I ask that if that differs from people that rent tour out of their homes. Also, every single residence that we have a cart placed at is a licensed short-term rental house with a business license attached to it. We don't randomly take carts out and drop them off and hope somebody comes up and rents them. They are contracted with the homeowner where the homeowner is permitted use of the cart when they are in town. They are also contracted with the vacation rental company. Again, we're not out just throwing random carts out there. What we are trying to do is provide a safer, easier, more convenient way to rent a cart. One single cart dedicated to the person that is staying at that residence. Can somebody illegally, criminally trespass onto the property and rent the cart if it's not being utilized? They could do that, but they're breaking the law. They're trespassing. We don't advertise that the carts are there. for the random public to come up and rent them. They do not show on the app that you can go there and rent them. They are advertised by the homeowner, the vacation rental company, the convenience of already having a low-speed vehicle there. In doing it this way, it eliminates nine trucks and nine trailers driving through Surfside Beach. I have over 200 units in this area now. I don't plan on bringing more, but I also don't want to be delivering these with trucks and trailers. It just doesn't make sense if the cart can safely be placed at a property that is a short-term vacation rental home, where the customer that is staying there is aware the cart is there. 97.3% of our rentals done this summer were done by pre-booking, no different than any of the other golf cart companies. The only difference is I didn't have to move the cart. They were aware that the cart was there. They paid for the cart through our reservation system at our business, our physical location. The QR codes that you guys are going to hear about. The QR codes is more than an advertisement for the cart. It doesn't say, hey, here we are, come rent right here. My signs of my carts are smaller than any other company in town. qr code is the actual functionality of the cart it handles the locking system of the cart you download an app you scan the qr system once you put in your reservation number or pay for the cart the cart unlocks you can remotely monitor that cart you can remotely control that cart as the consumer meaning you go out to dinner in your car you don't want your teenage kids taking off on the cart you lock it by the push of a button. We're just more innovative than any other company out there. There is nothing in any of the ordinances that talks about what I'm doing because it's never been done before. I just ask that you look at the whole, look at what we bring to town, the employment opportunities, which we have, the revenue generating stream that we have. Of the 200 carts, there is only like 20 inside of Surfside City Limit. Everything else is outside of it. Not to mention that the 70 carts that we house at our actual physical walk-up rental location, where you come in the doors, we greet you. So I believe that Mr. Marks' ruling was correct. when he was told incorrect information. He was told that we were putting cards, multiple cards at one address and advertising for customers to go there to rent the cards. That's not what was going on. It's one cart per address, dedicated, contracted to be there. okay by the homeowner okay by the vacation rental companies utilization by the homeowner it's no different than leasing the homeowner a car it's no different than the homeowners that include their cars in vacation rentals they do it all over town what's the difference what's the difference between what i do and what thorough does thank you thank you sir

Do we have anybody else from the public that would like to speak to the matter? All right, seeing no one further, we'll move now into official business. The first item of which is board elections. So we have a chairman and a vice chairman, and I'll open up for the chairman first. all the nominations for chairman.

Even though he is not present, I would like to move that Darryl be elected chairman. I'll second.

Anybody else for nominations? Then we'll close the nominations all in favor of Darryl. Will you say yes? Yes.

Okay.

We will pass along the bad news. We'll now open up the election slate for Vice Chairman. Do we have any nominations for Vice Chairman?

I would like to move that you, Mr. Murdoch, remain our Vice Chairman. You're doing an excellent job.

Thank you for that. Do I have a second? Is there anybody else that would like to take this opportunity? All right, we'll close the nominations then. All in favor of Phil Burnock as vice chairman, say aye. Aye. Okay, thank you, congrats. All right, board bylaws. I have with me, that was emailed to me, Board of Zoning Appeals Rules and Procedures, Town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina, 2010 edition. It is my understanding that this edition is the latest edition. However, I was going to ask Mark, did you modify these?

Okay.

No, I did not modify those.

Okay.

Then we're going to go ahead and I'm going to go ahead and open up the floor for a motion to accept The Board of Zoning Appeals Rules and Procedures, Town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina, 2010 edition, as are board bylaws. Can I have a piece of that? Okay. Okay. And do I have a second for this? I'll second. Okay. Do we have any discussion on that? Okay. Then I'll go ahead and take a vote. All in favor of accepting the, again, Board of Zoning Appeals, Rules of Procedure, Town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina, 2010 edition bylaws, please say aye. All right, so moving into item C, the appeal of the director's decision. We do have two members that have not had the benefit of being at a meeting previously, nor having had any education yet. With that being the case, at some level, it would not necessarily be instructive for you to have been here for any previous meetings, because this is a very different matter. Normally, 99% of the time, we handle appeals where an individual inside of their property that is violative in some way of the zoning rules. And they will come to us and say, I'm in violation of X. I would like to do Y, which is in violation of X. Can you see yourselves towards giving us Z result, which is different than what X allows? There's a standard that we have to go through which has four criteria. And we look at that standard and we make that determination. It's what I would call providing equity based upon the circumstances. That is not what we're doing here. What we're doing here is we are answering or we are sitting here as an appeal for the director of decision And I'm actually going to, under the rules of procedure here, I'm actually going to ask that the city start with their presentation, because I think that that would be, I think that would be instructive here. But I'm going to read off here, the appeal of the ZA 2026, appeal of the director's decision, an appeal pursuant to section 17-221 subsection 1 and section 17.223, subsection A of the Surfside Municipal Code from a decision and interpretation issued by the planning, building, and zoning director, development administrator, zoning administrator in the administration and enforcement of chapter 17. Appeal is brought by Rodney Schilling, which is the president of S2 Carts, appealing the director's decision to legally allow the staging of golf carts at vacation homes allowing visitors to secure carts through QR code walked up rentals, which I guess is asserting as a commercial activity in a residential zone. So again, I'm going to ask that the city actually start us off by, since you're going to be, you are being appealed, I think we need to hear what your determination is so that we can then hear the appeal of that determination. So Mark, if you would start, please.

mr chair i need to recuse myself from this particular agenda item and vote due to my personal and professional relationship with the owners of one of my golf projects okay thank you for that and that is that i will open that up is anybody else that feels necessary to recuse themselves okay all right we're going to let you out of this one okay

All right, with that being said, then Mark, if you'll please go. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. You have my written determination and my staff report, so I'm not going to read either of them to you tonight. Instead, what I want to do is explain the case in fairly simple terms. The issue before you this evening is whether the placement of a golf cart at a residential rental property where that cart is available only to the authorized occupants of that property changes the use of that property from residential to commercial. My determination was it does not. The facts are important. These golf carts are placed on private residential property with the owner's permission. They are intended for the occupants of that particular dwelling. They are not available to the general public. There is no office, no employee, no signage, no walk-up rental counter, and no public rental activity occurring at the residence. The property is not being used as a centralized staging or distribution point for golf carts serving unrelated customers. In other words, the property is still functioning as a residential property. That was the basis of my decision. Zoning regulates the use of land, does not ordinarily turn a residential property into a commercial establishment merely because a commercial transaction exists somewhere in the background. That distinction is important. Because if we adopt the opposite interpretation, the consequences become very broad, very quickly. Suppose a family rents a vacation home and orders a pizza. They pay for it electronically, and the pizza is delivered to the residents. That does not make that residence a restaurant. Suppose they rent a kayak, a bicycle, a surfboard, beach chairs, umbrellas, and have those delivered to the house prior to their arrival. that does not transform the house into a kayak shop, bicycle rental store, surf shop, or beach equipment establishment. Suppose the use of Uber or Lyft and a commercially operated vehicle arrives at the residence to pick them up. That does not make the residence a taxi stand. Suppose a linen company delivers towels and sheets. A cleaning company services the house. A cable company provides internet. A plumber provides a service call. A grocery delivery company brings food. In every one of these examples, a commercial transaction has occurred and a business has provided something to a residential property, but the land remains residential. The same principle applies here. The staff report explains that the relevant question is not who owns the golf cart or what contractual relationship may exist between a property owner, property manager, lodging operator or a third party golf cart company. The relevant question is how the property itself is functioning. Here, the property is not functioning as a golf cart rental establishment. There's no showroom. There's no customer service counter. There's no rental office. There's no dispatch facility. There's no inventory yard. There's no evidence that members of the general public can independently come to the property and rent a cart. Instead, the golf cart is available to the occupants of the residence in much the same way that those bicycles, those surfboards, kayaks and beach equipment and other recreational amenities might have been made available to the same occupants. That is why I characterized the golf cart as an accessory amenity incidental to the principal residential lodging use. I also want to emphasize that my determination was not unlimited. If the facts were different, my decision would be different. If multiple carts were being stored in a residential lot as inventory, if members of the general public were coming to that property to rent carts, if the property were being used as a staging or distribution point for off-site customers, or if employees advertising related customer turnover or other business activity were occurring there, that could support a very different zoning conclusion. But those are the facts before you. There is also a preliminary issue I believe the board should consider before reaching the merits of the appeal. And that is what is called standing. Our ordinance does not provide an appeal to anyone who simply disagrees with the decision of the zoning administrator. It provides an appeal to a person aggrieved. That phrase has meaning. The appeal materials, as reflected in my staff report, do not identify a particular property owned by the appellant that has been adversely affected by my determination. And they do not identify a specific zoning-related injury resulting from that decision. If the appellant's claimed injury is simply that my interpretation allows another commercial operator to compete with his business, that competition may cost him customers or revenue, I believe the board should ask a very fundamental question. Is that the kind of injury that makes someone an aggrieved party for purposes of a zoning appeal? Zoning laws regulate land use. They address matters such as compatibility, traffic, noise, intensity of use, property impacts, neighborhood character, and the appropriate location of different uses. They are not generally intended to insulate one private business from lawful economic competition. So if the appellant's asserted grievance is essentially this interpretation allows someone else to compete with my business, then I respectfully submit that the board has a substantial basis to question whether he has demonstrated the type of special zoning related injury necessary to qualify as an aggrieved party. That threshold issue should be considered first. If the board determines that the appellant has not demonstrated standing, then the appeal can be disposed of without reaching the substantive zoning issue. If the board determines that he does have standing, then I would ask you to consider the actual land use occurring on these properties. And on that question, my determination remains resolute. straightforward the placement and use of a golf cart that is a residential property with the exclusive use of the authorized occupants of that property do not by itself transform that residential property into a commercial golf cart rental business the property remains residential for those reasons i respectfully ask the board to uphold the zoning administrators determined and to deny the appeal thank you mr chairman

this thing, Mark, because there were multiple emails that went out because the course was postponed one time, and there was, or twice, okay. And because some of those emails had attachments, I just want to make sure that we have documents correct. So what you were just reading off of, the summary was the town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina Board of Zoning Appeals staff report, which is a total of one, two, five, six pages. Is that correct? Okay. All right. And thank you for that. And I would say too, I'm going to have the appellate come up next. Also, for purposes here, anything that you're referencing, Where is this, the appellate here? Okay. Anything that you're referencing that is a writing that we should be taking into consideration, please do make reference to that so that we can make sure that we are looking at it. Because what I do not want is for there to be a document that one of us is looking at and the others are not, or that you might think that we're looking at and we're not. And you received all of that. Well, I'll tell you what, let's go ahead and have you come up. So we'll have the appellate next. And I'll have you give your name and address. And then also, of course, you can take up your appeal.

Right. Rod Schilling, S2 Golf Garden, 780 Highway 17 South, Surfside View South. Before I address the merits of the approval, I respectfully request that the board members disclose on the record whether they have received any communication from the zoning administrator, town staff, the town attorney, and any third party regarding the substance of this appeal outside of its formerly known staff report. I make this request to protect the integrity of the proceedings and preserve my due process.

Okay, this is your opportunity to present your appeal? Yep. This is not an interaction between us?

at this point sure i just want to make sure that that's on the record okay on the staff report and here let me give you these just in case something's missing out of there i do not know what you guys have received or what you have received

And if you would provide some foundation for this, in other words, just tell us what this is.

This is what was behind my application for the appeal. This is everything that I brought forward to him so he could make his determination. I assumed that he was gonna say that in my instance, I was not agreed, and I think that needs to be addressed first and foremost. I am an agreed party under the South Carolina Code, Section 629.800 . That statute gives appeal rights to any party agreed. It does not require property ownership, and the president of S2 Golf Cars licensed golf cart rental business in Surfside Beach. The zoning administrator's determination exempts a direct competitor for more than 20 requirements of the municipal code that S2 Golf Cars must satisfy every day. Requirements I paid for, applied for, and maintain. They're required to me when I open the business. That is a direct concrete and direct economic injury. The town's own appeal application confirms that any Greek party may appeal. I respectfully request that the board deny the standing challenge and proceed to the merits.

There's been no motion or anything made.

Yeah, he's asking. Okay. So to get right through with what he had in his report that he sent to y'all, there was definitely more codes that were addressed within that packet that I gave you guys that showed where this exists as an issue with us. He claims in his report that there's not a transaction being made at the location of the rental home, but there is. In this packet, as you flip through there, you'll see where the cards are backed in. There's clearly 24, rent me 24 hours a day. You can rent these cards. You can walk up with a QR code. My receipt's on the very back two pages. I walked up, rented it. You can say it's against the law to do it, but it doesn't show that. In the company's own admission, if you go to the website, and I've got it here, we can look at the YouTube video explaining how to rent the car, how you go about getting the product at the residence. At no point during the video, the YouTube video, does it explain that You can't, if you're not renting the house, you can't use it. These cards are staged everywhere. And I know that they're advertised on Surfside Realty and maybe some other ones as well. And there's no reason for that to change. You can definitely advertise. All we're saying is don't make me deliver it. If I have a customer that rents a home and I bring two carts to the house because they asked for two carts and there's two carts already parked there, i have to call this company and ask them to remove so they have parking for their family it becomes an issue now is that the issue as far as his determination of whether this is legal or not no what i'm saying is if the act of actually going to the home and making that transaction at the house it is that is illegal it's against the ordinances of surfside beach You can't do it. It doesn't hold water to compare it to a surf shop or a bike shop or a pizza delivery guy or anything like that. Those transactions are not being made at the home. Those transactions are made at another location, in a C1 location. They make the transaction and then the product is brought to the house. Just like every one of us, whether it's Graham or Surfside Golf Cars and Beach Rentals, or Ajax or anybody else, they go to the C1, they rent that vehicle, that vehicle then is at that location for that customer while they're at the location. We're not asking for RDR for cars to go out of business. We're saying, play by the same rules everybody else does. He thinks that yes, it's a new idea and it's great for everybody, Problem is, it does create issues. It creates parking problems, but it also creates the fact that those carts are being rented somewhere besides the C1. The rental district is the rental district. You put a cart underneath every house like it's wanted, next thing you know, there's a slingshot there. Next thing you know, who knows? Maybe someday we start having vending machines out there, right? We can say that they're just for the, homeowner to go down and buy soda or candy or something else or ice machines or whatever. But if a commercial company comes in and says, I'm going to put an ice machine so they can sell ice underneath every single house, that is a transaction that's commercial under that house. All we're saying is rent it from the C1, have it delivered prior to your rental, have it picked up after your rental so everybody can have their parking space. and everybody can do business the way it's allotted. I don't think that it's asking too much to do that. Now, as far as merit goes about what he has on his cards, and I brought this up before, but if you'd like, you can look at the video.

This is the video that's online, and I can also show you It's probably hard to hear, but you can see it. If you guys want to pass that up and down, you're welcome to do it. Actually, instead of the video, I'm going to ask, so that this is on the record, because this is going to be very difficult, if you would simply tell us, punitively, what the video shows. Okay, the video shows that you walk up,

There's three different items on the windshield, obviously. The Journey app, the first one that's required through the video to go to is the insurance. You go in and get your insurance, provide your license and your way of payment and everything. You go to the Journey app, download it to your phone, and then you pick that, obviously, that you're going to pay for that car, how long you want to have that car for, and then the transaction is made. there at the house. At that time, it unlocks the car. The keys are in the trunk of the car, in the cooler behind the car. So, I mean, like I said, I did it. I walked out. It was very easy. No different than renting a bike on the side of the road where in the city where they have them, where you can just scan it and drive it and go wherever. But after the transaction is done it unlocks the car and you can take it drive it for however long bring it back in the in the rental and leave it there they ask you to plug it in and then rentals over that's not happening in the c1 that's happening in the artist in the rental district so whether whether the interpretation is is what he what he's saying or not It does not compare to any of those things. It doesn't compare to pizza delivery or a surfboard being rented or a barbecue or anything like that. I mean, Surfside Beach, golf carts and beach rentals, they rent other items too. Everything's delivered. We have the guys that just rent bikes up and down. They don't park them in every house and have the transaction happen at the house. They're called in the C1, then they're delivered to the home. that time that customer gets to enjoy that vehicle or whatever during the time of their rental and then it's returned it does create issues for these other for all of us golf cart companies and it shouldn't be allowed now the The town's attorney also, his statement is in there. Let me read that real quick here. Also on the website, I don't know if you guys noticed this on this thing right here. There's also two other admissions there. We provide a conveniently located placement of rental LSVs directly to your vacation home rental homes within our service area, including Surfside Beach, Bold, Colony, and some other places within Garden City Realty. This allows you to start your coastal exploration without delay. So it's there waiting for you so you can rent it. And below that it says, we also offer walk-up QR code rentals. Scan the QR code on the vehicle, install our app, book your rental and be on your way. I mean, I think that's a direct contradiction to what was said earlier. The town's attorney.

I hope I can see this without glasses. Can you tell us what page that is on? Exhibit D. I'm sorry.

Okay. Yes. Got it. Circling up on this one, I tend to agree with you.

This is from the town's attorney.

I can't think of anything. Circling up, I can't think of anything that is improper about the property rental company entering into an agreement with the golf cart company to supply its rentals with golf carts in accommodation which presumably their renters want. The only thing I can think is that if the allegation is that they're using the residential property as an act as a rental facility for the golf cart company id you pick up check in your cart at the residential property but from what i understand that's not what's going on that's exactly what's going on so the question again is is are we gonna are we gonna look at that use table and say that this is not something that's allowed in the town of Surfside, or do we ignore it and then let it continue and see where it goes from there and where it grows and what other companies come in and start running other things from under the house? If that happens, you became a shopping center underneath your house. If you do it the traditional way, nobody's getting hurt, nobody's losing any money, everybody's not impaired, equitable playing field. And it's what's prosperous not only for the businesses that reside here in Surfside Beach and try to make a living and provide jobs, but for everybody that has a home or wants to be able to park their cars in locations that aren't filled with golf carts that aren't being rented. With that, I'll rest. I hope you guys can understand that. I want to make sure that it's understood that it does affect our business. It does also contradict exactly what the director stated about what's going on and how it's being rented. What it's compared to as far as other business activities that go on, it is commercial. Those other ones, they're not commercial at this site. So we have to keep that in mind. I hope you understand. Thanks.

Okay, if you would stay up there, because I think there's probably going to be some questions. Okay, that'd be great. Which I have one probably to start us off here, but in listening to what the director has said and looking at your, what I've labeled as exhibit two here, starts as planning, building, of field staff decision. It appears that you cite in here factual background, the Zonings Administration determination asserts that no walk-up rental activity occurs. Now, it appears from my hearing of this that the director has established a factual background upon which his decision has been rendered. It sounds to me like what you're saying is that the factual background that he has provided as the foundation for his approval is being violated. Have you approached the director with specific examples and taken him to show him specific examples of the violation of what he has established is the fact pattern that is the basis of his?

Yeah, and the fact that my first meeting with him, I explained to him what was going on. He actually agreed with me. He put together a letter to be served to the company and said that that can't happen. After a week went by, I noticed that none of the cards had been moved and went in and asked him, and he says, well, now we kind of think it's a gray area, and so we're not going to do anything about it. So I did, and I asked him, he says, well, you said there's multiple cars being parked out there. I go, no, I never said that. There might be two cars at a location or one car. The fact remains that it doesn't matter if there's one car or three cars or five cars, there's a transaction being made under the house. It's not allowed in the district. Also in my appeal, I said, I think there's 17 ordinances that I actually, spoke to in there. I don't think they were addressed.

Okay. And again, I'm just trying to keep it simple here. So when you talk about the no walk-up rental activity occurs, that is what his foundational statement is. And you're saying that that is not what is occurring, that there are walk-up rentals that are occurring.

There is. I get it.

My receipts are right on the back of the deal. Anybody can do it. Since you have done that, and since he's given you an actual written determination of the county's or the city's position, have you approached him again about enforcing his position? No. Okay.

He was on vacation before the last meeting, so it never took place, and I sent an email asking that it that if the actual agenda had gone out or the announcement had gone out via the paper, I sent an email to Sharon Dyna, never received a return email. So the only thing I've received from Mark since all this happened was a drive that he took and he thought that I was parking my display cars in the right of way, which I'm not. and that he was gonna enforce it. So I never heard a response back from that after I explained to him and sent pictures of the actual companies that are doing that. So the communication has been very light and I haven't been able to communicate. I don't get a response. So it's been kind of shut down, I think, until the hearing took place.

Okay, let me ask this a different way. If the public, because you're asserting that golf carts are not for the sole use of the authorized occupants of the subject property, that there are third parties that are coming onto that subject property and they are renting the golf cart. I'm saying that they can. I understand. What I'm asking is, if the golf cart was not capable of being rented by the public and was only capable of being rented by the subject property owner or their lawful tenants, would you agree that it would be okay at that point?

Absolutely not. Okay. So in that district, in the rental district, it's not allowed. The ordinance is super clear on it. You cannot make a transaction at that home for that, they are deemed a rental, sales and service company, which is only allowed, Mrs. Pravlick I think showed on the deal, I have it here as well, that it's only allowed in the C-1. That transaction has to happen outside of that. It can't happen there. So all of his transactions are done at the C1 and then delivered to the homes? Right. I have no problem with that whatsoever. We're not asking the guy to go out of business. We're asking the guy to do it the way you're supposed to, in the C1. That makes it an even playing field for every golf cart company that's out there delivering these carts and not having to deal with carts that are already being staged there. they're being staged there, and if they're not used, then you consider that storage.

Okay.

Well, I guess what I'm getting to is from an appellate standpoint, if you're appealing his findings of fact, or you're appealing his determination, the foundation of which is his findings of fact, I'm just trying to get to which parts of this you're appealing, because in my mind, there's a difference between enforcement and a determination. So that's what I'm trying to get to is I'm trying to get to if there's a lack of enforcement of that which has already been determined. That is a separate matter. I'm trying to get to what is being appealed as far as the determination. And I think I heard it. Your position is if the golf cart was solely there for the use of the tenants of the property upon which the golf cart was sitting, and no one else could rent it except for those persons that were lawful tenants of that plot owner, it would be your position that the administrator is wrong, that that would not be okay. It was locked down to where just those people could rent it, and the golf cart was sitting there, that that would not be okay. You're appealing that. That's one of your appeals, is that it?

Yeah, my appeal is that as long as the transaction doesn't happen under the house, then we'd be fine. Why would you put a cart there with no signage on it and no way to rent it and just park it there? Because then it becomes storage, and that's not allowed in the rental district either.

Are you privy to any contracts between this other golf cart company and the property owner or the rental company or both? Did you have any of those documents?

No.

Okay. You would though, right? I know.

Aren't you with Surfside Realty?

I'm sorry, what? Aren't you with Surfside Realty? I'm a realtor at Surfside Realty, yes. Have you seen the contracts that are out there? I do not. I'm a third-party contractor over there. Okay. So you don't deal with the rental property? Yeah, I'm not an employee. I'm a realtor. Okay. I mean, technically... Okay, so Surfside Realty is one of the companies. Is that the only company? I think there's a few companies.

Well, at least on his website, he claims that there is.

There's Garden City Realty and a couple others. I'm not privy to any of their contracts. No. Okay. But you don't have any of those contracts, so we don't know what that agreement is between the property owner and the rental company or the property owner and the golf cart company.

The agreement doesn't matter. The agreement within the property owner does not matter. They don't own the golf cart. If they own the golf cart and they offered it up as an amenity to their customers when they came in, plenty of people do that. They do it all the time. They make the money. It's done through the rental process on the rental site at that time, right, as part of their rental. So I guess if he wants to give them a cart and say that they own it, 100%, and that they're making the money, and he's not benefiting from it. Otherwise, it's commercial. It's commercial because he has a location in the C1. Okay. All right.

Thank you. Any of the board have any questions for me? I don't have any questions. Again, I want to make sure that we've got the evidence as presented. I have number one, I have the Board of Zoning Appeals staff report, and number two, I have what you just presented to us, which is the application to appeal staff decision, which is itself labeled with several exhibits as well. At some point, There are three other documents, I think, that was included in the email, which appears a, this appears to be a letter that you wrote to the director. The original? Yes. Would you like for this to be included as part of our packet? Yeah, I would have thought that would have been included. Well, and again, because of the number of emails that went back and forth, I want to make sure that we're all on the same page of what it is. So I'm going to call this number three. And this is three pages, four pages, three pages. And this was your original letter to the director? Yes.

Okay.

And then I also have a zoning determination letter from Rodney Schilling. This appears dated May 11th, 2026, which I think was missed. No, that was mis-dated. It should have been April. Okay, well that's, since this was part of your, I'm gonna call this number four, is that okay? Does everybody have a copy of this? And it looks like we have a Board of Zoning Appeals. This looks like another write-up, I'm not sure. that's my uh that's another copy of the firewalls here all right there should there should have been something with the ordinances in there it was also included was this dated june 18 2020 probably okay from from the original meeting that didn't happen Okay, does everybody have a copy that's Appeal Number BZA-2026-001 of Helen Rodney Schilling for the date of June 18, 2026? Yeah, I have it. Okay. Good data. All right, I'm going to call that Exhibit Number 5. Okay. Any other exhibits or any other presentation of evidence here? Alright, thank you. I guess I'll start here, which is This is a very interesting scenario. I remember in law school, there was a saying that bad facts make for bad law. Because usually the worse the facts, the more interesting the law that came out of it. So this is not a particularly great fact situation because in my mind, it touches on multiple levels of almost, kind of, sort of, Sounds like, looks like, walks like, but not quite a duck. With that being said, I do have concerns that we understand that there's a difference between enforcement and us as an appellate body. If we're being told that there is a violation, we are not an enforcement body. That isn't what we do. So the enforcement mechanism, I believe, would be to go to Rodney probably first, Rodney Schilling, and ask for enforcement of that which was already decided. And if that enforcement was not forthcoming, to go to his boss, if the enforcement at that point was not forthcoming to go to his boss and then finally to the city council when it comes to enforcement that is if as an example if the if the city has decided that it is okay for that golf cart to be there so long as it can only be rented by the person that is our personages that are renting the house itself if other persons are renting that golf cart, then that's an enforcement mechanism that needs to be instituted, not an appellate mechanism. I've been thinking about this and in my mind, a determination is if the zoning code says for in the R3 area, thou shalt not build higher than 55 foot. That seems simple enough. But if I go to Bill and I don't know exactly where I'm measuring from and where I'm measuring to, then that 55 foot doesn't make any sense. So if I go to the zoning administrator and I say, okay, 55 foot beginning where and ending where, and the zoning administrator says, you start at the ground level and you measure to the top of the roof, that is 55 foot. That is a determination, okay? That is a determination. We had a not-so-great worded statute that said, thou shalt not build higher than 55 foot. And we have a determination that says, you've got to count from the ground to the top of the tallest part of the roof, okay? If every zoning in the area, in the flood portions of the town, of Georgetown, of Overee County, of Myrtle Beach, if they actually start counting at the base flood elevation, if you have a lot of floods and your base flood elevation is three foot above the ground, if every other area starts at that three foot mark and doesn't start at the ground, then it becomes an appeal to come to us to say that the determination of the administrator is not in keeping with the standard of measurement in the area. That in my mind is an appeal. If my neighbor is building a house and my house is at 55 foot and I look over there and his house is clearly taller than mine, that is an enforcement mechanism. That is for me to call the city and say, hey, that house is bigger than my house. It's taller than my house, under my understanding of what it is that I'm measuring. So that, to me, is the difference in an appeal of a decision or a determination, because there's really two here. There's a factual determination, and then there's his legal determination of how that lands under the zoning code. an appellate decision over his interpretation. That's how I envisioned this when I was looking at this. So I make that distinction because there is a lot of information in here that looks to me to be enforcement mechanism related. Because if someone, if the city has determined that thou shalt not rent that golf cart to anybody else except for the owners of the property and or their tenants, and that is being violated, then the city, it's incumbent upon the city to enforce their determination. So there is a lot of this that looks to be like it's an enforcement thing that we're not here to do. We're here. If anybody has any questions for you, they can ask that. But I just lay that out, and again, as a foundational thing, is how I look at this. So that's... I'll move on to anyone else that would like to weigh in on this.

I'm looking at it from several different... And the original appeal, it listed, as you said, multiple ordinance in violation, among them the signed ordinances. But I agree with Phil, it really boils down in my mind to whether or not that golf cart can sit there and only be used by the person running that house. Now, I drive all the roads in Surfside. I walk all the roads in Surfside. I see all the rental carts everywhere in Surfside, and they are all plastered with advertising of some sort, phone numbers, QR codes, whatever, whatever, whatever. If I see a golf cart parked at a beach access and there's a phone number on there and a QR code and I go up to that and I call that phone number and say, hey, I wanna rent a golf cart. Am I conducting a transaction? If I give them a credit card over the phone, so I'm having a real hard time with saying, no, you can't put a golf cart at this house. and that golf cart can't have the QR code on the side. If the QR code is only used to lock or unlock this golf cart and really has nothing to do with the purchase, then I understand that. But I go back to what Phil said. If this thing is parked and the picture's here, it's way off of the road, it's up under the building, and if somebody walks in there and tries to make the transaction then i think that's a violation but not necessarily the fault of the person that put the golf cart you know i'm i'm really wrestling with this we have had all this information for three months yeah and and i have Believe me, I've read these ornaments of the front words and backwards for those three months, and I'm still wrestling with whether or not the determination was incorrect. And I'm not there. I'm just not there yet. But I also understand So I don't know if I'm able to vote tonight, one way or the other. We have 30 days to make this determination, and given the volume of information, but we also have to make our determinations in public, and they have to be open to the public for discussion. So, correct.

But it is, jumping in again here, but the directors, comments are pertinent, that there is a sliding slope, a very slippery slope. If Air Doctor or one of the other air conditioned services, which has their name emblazoned all over their vans, is servicing the house, I have to believe that if someone walks up off the sidewalk and calls the number that's on the side of the Air Doctor van, the air doctor would be happy to service their house. And maybe even with the people that are sitting right there at the house. Can't speak to that, but they are generally pretty proficient. But as far as it goes, when you come, also speak to something else. Certainly business is allowed to be conducted inside the city limits of Surfside. We charge a license fee for that. There is a lot of business that is conducted inside of Surfside. Now, something else that strikes me, this was referenced somewhere in here that this was an R1, R2, and R3 consideration. I don't know that my answer on R1 and R2 would be a little bit different, would be a little bit more strictly construed. because R3, under its own rules, allow for rentals as a matter of due course. That is an important parcel to those rentals. There's an entire boutique industry set up to service those rentals. Certainly if you walk up to the house and it has a Dunes Rental sign on it, and you call Dunes Rental, you can rent that house. So as the director said, there are pool servicing companies. There are linen companies. There are a whole host of companies, all of which are set up to service in a boutique industry, service industry, specifically for the Arc Reef district. So I think my answer in Arc Reef may be somewhat attenuated by that. because of its very nature.

Well, I think to that point in here, though, it only specifically references R3. It mentions 1 and 2, but the appeal, I think, only specifically references R3.

Anything other than C1. Okay. Is there any other board member, any other board members have any questions? I would like to ask the director, because I've taken kind of a little bit of a hard-line stance between enforcement and appeal here. If you were presented evidence or your department was presented evidence of the golf cart being rented by third parties that are not tenants of the property that the golf cart is sitting on, Would you take enforcement action in that case?

That's a trespassing issue. Okay. I don't deal in trespassing. I deal in land use. Okay.

Well, I would ask Mr. Schilling for just marketing purposes. don't own a home in R3, but I know Bill does and others, but those, there is a business license, individual business license purchased by each individual homeowner, is that correct? Yeah. And obviously the rental companies, their property managers also have business licenses and there are some, assuming there is a contractual arrangement between the homeowner and the rental company of some sort. And when that property manager then goes out to market that property or the individual homeowner goes out to market that property and they have a website and they have all this stuff and they plastered on it, you can get a golf cart or there's a distinguishing LSV you can get an LSV and here's the number and all you have to do you can either rent it when you rent the property and it's all-inclusive or you go separately to this rental company and you rent it directly and it's going to be there when you arrive I don't see how that is necessarily different marketing or advertising than

signs plastered on the side of that lsd oh it is because of the use code table that you saw there if you look at the use code now only if you're conducting the business in r3 they're allowed they're allowed to advertise and do whatever they want there's certain there's certain advertising guidelines and things that are allowed at those rental properties, there is. If you look at the use table, they can do those things. What they can't do is golf cart. That's excluded.

Sales and rental can occur there, but it doesn't mean that that cart can't be sitting there and available and have been rented through an app or a website or rental agreement or anything else?

Well, it can't just be stored there. So if it's rented, it can be there. I guess one way to put it... How do you know? So if Surfside really wanted to offer these golf carts on a regular basis, and they wanted to rent them throughout the 20-week rental season, and they guaranteed that rental price or whatever to RDR for carts, and said, I'm renting it for the entire summer so my customers have that. It's just built into their price. That would be acceptable.

What if Surfside Rental owns the golf carts and decided to park them at all of the properties that they manage? It happens already. What's the difference between Surfside Realty owning the carts and you owning the carts?

Because if I own a cart, At my home, if I have a golf cart that I want to include in my rental as an amenity, I can do that. I'm not doing a commercial transaction. I don't have a business in C1. What you can't do is offer it up to where you rent it on site there and make that transaction there. That's the problem. That's the whole issue is whether they're conducting business on site. which they are. And I'm not asking for you guys to enforce it. What I'm saying is he made a determination based on the ordinances that are on the books already been serviced. It says you can't do that. Golf cart rentals cannot happen in that district. They just can't happen on the use table. All I'm saying is your decision is that you have to make is to overturn that and say, all I'm saying is we disagree on what the zoning is in that area on that table. If you wanna change the table and it goes to council and they say that, hey, we're gonna allow it, that's fine. All I'm saying is when you read the ordinances and you look at that table, you can't do it. And all you gotta do is say, until it's put in there that you can, We should allow it. That's your job.

Let me ask the question a different way. If the card is already rented when, you know, check-in, check-out day, Saturday and Sunday, if a person checks in on Sunday, 11 o'clock, and the card is already rented.

Yeah, that they've rented it already? Yeah. Before they got there.

Right.

That's how I do business. But it's there. Yes, that's how we do business. Okay. So that's totally, that's totally legal. They took and they made that transaction outside of that home. That home can't be the point of the transaction. It just can't. So all we're saying is make the transaction up in the C1, just like everybody else does in this town. So I now have a question for the RDR guy.

Okay. This is a very unusual situation, so I'm going to allow some dialogue here to try to get to some facts. Actually, it's a dialogue that we can ask questions. I agree.

The free-flowing nature of it is going to be where I'm going to allow a little bit of liberty here. So my question to you is if or when or at any time this summer was there a property rented where the golf cart was not rented and it just sat there.

Yes. Then that answered my question. For a short period of time, right?

Well, if the property wasn't rented, the asset may have stayed at that property. I don't know of any... Carts that were not rented while the guests were staying there. We didn't have to move one cart. We didn't have a request to move one cart out of their way. Now, I do want to clarify some stuff because I do want to be open, honest, and fair. Okay.

This is just a question and answer.

You have me at the question. So what you're saying is that You did not have an instance where the property was occupied and the golf cart was not rented by that occupant.

Not that I'm aware of, no. You gave me authorization to put it on the property. I have permission from both the homeowner and, or, well, if I have permission in contract with the vacation rental company, it is, and they also have permission from the homeowner. Regardless, I have permission from the homeowner at all times. We have to have their permission with insurance purposes. Because our carts are not golf carts, they're low-speed vehicles, our insurance is entirely different. So I have to add these properties on our insurance in the event there is a fire or something like that that is caused by our cart. They have to be an added insurer. Our carts are insured for $4 billion rather than $10 billion.

So you're doing an insurance certificate for each individual residence? I'm sorry, what? So you're doing an insurance certificate for each individual resident with the homeowner additionally insured.

Only if it is the, the property is just owned by the home owner. If it is being managed, meaning that if I, like with some of my vacation rental companies, I have them added as the additional insured. Yes. But if it's, because I do have just regular Airbnb style and regular homeowners that short-term rent their properties.

And then of course we deal with vacation rental companies as well. Is each golf cart specific to a property? In other words, that golf cart does not move around from property to property?

When it is placed there, yes. It's not that it doesn't move around, but while it is there, it is dedicated to that property. It's put into the system with that property. The asset number, all of our carts have asset numbers that are directly tied to VIN numbers. We do have to move them sometimes. We have carts that break down. A house may have a four-passenger cart, which most of them do, and then the customer may want to stay in there with pre-book a six-passenger or two six-passenger carts, so we would remove the four-passenger while they're utilizing the two six-passengers or one six-passenger. And then at the end of that rental, we put it back.

So did you have any instances this summer where the property was occupied and the ball cart was not rented?

Not, it was not rented. The house was not occupied and the cart was not rented.

The house was occupied, but the cart was not rented.

Not that I know of. It does happen every once in a while. But the cart is advertised in the, the description of the rental house. And even when they rent the property, the consumer signs in their rental agreement that there is an LSV there if they choose to use it. And they can choose how they want to rent it, whether it's hourly, daily, or weekly. And different vacation rental companies have different coupon codes that the customer can utilize that gives them a discount for renting through our partnership.

So these carts, aside from the ones that were rare occasion where they're not rented by the occupant, are all rented and paid for prior to check-in?

Not all of them, no. We did seven on-demand rentals in July, five or six on-demand rentals in June. What I mean by on demand, so there's two different ways you can rent a cart. You have the pre-reservation system like every single golf cart company in the country uses. The customer's at the house, they see a Harvey Arthur cart next door, they want one, they pick up the phone, they call, or they go onto the website, they type in what address they're at, they put in their name, what kind of cart they want, they pay for it right there on the spot. The QR code does the same thing. There's a QR code on the windshield. It runs through the app, which The app is what gives you the permissions on the cart and the accessibility in utilizing the cart. You can't utilize the cart without the app. You have to have the app. That's what powers the cart on. And then a key as well. So technically, yes, they can scan the QR code. It brings them into a, once they download the app, and then they, one of the QR codes on the cart is to download the app. It's just for the, whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download the app. the big QR code that has the serial number across the bottom, that serial number is actually the exact serial number that is on the GPS system that runs the remote system of the cart. When you scan that from inside the app, it takes you to our reservation system. Once the app recognizes that you have paid for your cart, it remotely powers the cart on. You'll hear the cart, it says cart unlocked. And then you can access the key and start the car.

Thank you.

But again, in keeping with a little bit more of this open format, I would want to invite the zoning administrator. Did you have any any follow up to any of this? because there's obviously we've heard extensively from both boards here.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a couple of points that I want to make and I want to be respectful of the board's questions. I deal in a very, very narrow band of all of the questions that were asked here tonight. I deal in land use. And one of the comments that was made this evening by a couple of speakers is that unless golf cart is listed in the R3 use table, it's not permitted. That's true. It's not listed. It's not allowed. That's a rental car. That's a rental company conducting business on site in the R3 district, not in transaction. Now, let me give you a simple example that you can all probably relate to. One of the comments this evening was, well, It's okay if the transaction happens offsite, happens offsite. Okay, I had a pizza delivered to my house this week, and I came to the door with cash and paid the pizza person with cash. That's a commercial transaction happening on my property. That is not an illegal use of my residential property going commercial, number one. Number two, let's talk a little bit about the whole trespass issue, because that's a key issue. It's not one that I deal with, but I think it deserves conversation for both of the applicants here. If anybody places a golf cart on a piece of private property and it has a code on it, a telephone number, no one can stop a person on the public sidewalk from shooting it with their phone and doing it. But once that person steps foot on that property, they are now trespassing on that property and they are not allowed to do that. Unfortunately, I don't enforce trespassing. That's the property owner and the rental company who have to be aware of people walking on the private property. Mr. Chairman, I brought something up and I don't mean to beat this horse to death, but I am going to submit to you that the case should simply be dismissed because this person is not an agreed person. And I am going to quote from South Carolina Supreme Court law in a case between ATC South versus Charleston County. And what happened there was there were two cell phone companies. A competing company obtained zoning approval, allowing another tower approximately a mile from the other tower. The original owner challenged the zoning action by the zoning administrator, essentially arguing that allowing its competitor to operate would economically harm ATC. South Carolina Supreme Court rejected that as a sufficient injury for standing. The court stated, whereas here, the potential injury or prejudice is only an increase in business competition. Such injury or prejudice is insufficient to confer standing. I'm gonna make that comment. I want it read into the record because if this goes any further, I'm gonna stand on this. This should have been canceled literally right at this point of the meeting. However, let's move on with sort of the comment. So if the world of zoning and land use were to suggest some of the things that have been suggested this evening, every electric bike company, every pizza company, every rental bike, every surf shop, every surfboard, every paddleboard, every kayak would have to be listed in the list of permitted uses in the R3 district. We all know that doesn't happen because those businesses aren't conducting business in the area. What they're doing is they're simply providing a surf. It's linens. It's a golf cart. It's an electric bike. It's a kayak. So I don't want us getting caught up, and I think that happens because of some of the questions that have been asked. Forget about the golf cart. Think about what I'm telling you. It's a matter of land use. The object is being delivered to a private property for the exclusive use of that property, and that's it. It doesn't matter if the transaction happens on site or in the ether. That's not Up to me. That's not part of land use. I don't decide where they get done. However, even if it gets done on site, it's still not a transaction that would be considered we have to make that. We have to make pizza delivery or pizza unallowed use in R3. We have to make kayak rental unallowed use in R3. That would be absurd. I think we would all agree that would be absurd if we were to do that. That's why those uses aren't listed in the R3 district because the business isn't functioning there. There's no footprint. There's no store. There's no inventory. There's none of those things being located on the site. I'll stand down at that point. Again, this is a very narrow area of zoning that I'm dealing with. that came out this evening is really not part of my world. My world is determining land use. And if allowing golf carts to be placed on a private property like a kayak or a paddle board is an incorrect interpretation on my part, then you should overturn my interpretation. But I would submit to you I don't know how all those other things get delivered to those properties without competing kayak companies coming here and telling me the same thing. Thank you.

All right, do we have any other discussion?

One of the abilities we have as a board is to make a ruling but with caveats attached and and i'm wondering if there's a middle ground here somewhere meaning that we could rule that the golf cart couldn't or the lsb could indeed be placed on a property but it had to be located out of sight of the public. It could only be rented to the person renting that property and the transaction had to take place prior to, I don't know, I'm just, I'm grasping here and trying to figure out if there's a middle ground somewhere. You know, because I don't see any reason why S2 golf carts couldn't be just as creative and reaching agreement with some other, I'll sell it in the box. Property manager.

Yeah, I tell you, I think at this point, in looking at the, what I call exhibit number one, which is the Board of Zoning Appeals staff report, and listening to the comments of the director, and again, reading the contents here, listening to the appellate, I guess my position on this is I support the zoning director's finding. I feel like his fact pattern supports his position. And if there are contrary facts to the findings of facts, then that in my mind is some sort of enforcement something. Whether it's the police for for trespass I don't know but we're not in the enforcement position we're in the pellet position in this case so I'm going to move that we that we deny the appeal specifically I'm saying the appeal of what the zoning board staff and zoning administrator has presented as number one That is the determination and I support that determination. So I move that we deny the appeal. I'll second. Do we have any discussion? Any further discussion?

Okay.

Then we'll call for a vote. For purposes here, let's each vote in turn. So how do you vote? Vote to deny the appeal. I'm sorry?

I deny the appeal.

I would vote yes for the motion.

Okay.

To deny the appeal. So that's to, I, of course, I made the original motion. So I, of course, I vote yes. Yes. No. Okay. So one, two, three, four, four yeses and one no. So the appeal is denied. Oh, hold on, guys. If you guys would please sit down, because we're not quite finished yet. Is there any further board comments? Anything from anybody?

I was going to say, I appreciate everybody's and all your facts that you presented here. I would have an issue if this was happening in R1 and R2, as Bill said, but if it's only happening in R3, it's

okay i appreciate everybody attending as well um look this is none of this is there's very few times we ever have anything up here that is super cut and dry every once in a while we do whether it's working in equity or it's working in this appeal um but i do appreciate everybody's consideration of being here tonight and the comments um and with that i will take a motion to recess second okay All in favor say aye. Aye.