Oh you're not going to be able to do that.

Exactly.

That's crazy.

All right.

Whenever she tells me we are set.

We're good?

That guy is having a lot of things.

All right, everybody.

That was wimpy.

I know.

Sorry.

Let me call to order the uh Mount Pleasant Town Council special meeting for this Tuesday, January thirteenth, twenty twenty six.

Uh item two is public comment.

Is there anyone here?

Anyone here for public comment?

If you're here for public comment, please come forward, give your name and address in two and a half minutes.

Anyone for public comment?

All right.

If not, public comment is closed.

Item three, executive session for legal and contractual matters.

Uh item one is discussion of possible action regarding economic development incentive package.

Number two is a contractual matter related to the Gary Santos Recreation Park.

Section B is consideration of applications for the planning commission, for which there's one, the historic district preservation commission, for which there will be two.

Um appointments, not not uh applications.

And three is uh one vacancy on the board of zoning appeals.

Do we have a motion to go into executive session for the reasons stated?

Any discussion?

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All right.

The motion carries, and we are in executive session.

Oh, sorry.

If you guys have to do it, you guys are eight.

Now that I know everyone, I think when I get this.

Thank you.

I never heard that's not even yet.

Yeah, I know.

Yeah, okay.

Okay, we have reconvened from executive session in our five PM special town council meeting.

No action was taken and no votes were cast.

Do we have a motion on item three A one, please economic development and Senate passage?

Yes, may I have a mission?

Take action as discussed in executive session.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Yes, sir.

I won't certificate like it did at the last meeting in regards to this, but I'll just say I truly believe this is not something our citizens want us to do.

So I'm a solid note.

No.

All right.

Motion carries.

Second.

Motion is second.

Is there any discussion?

All in favor, please say I oppose motion carries.

I must recuse myself.

So Mr.

Motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Motion made and seconded to reappoint Gary Davis to serve on the planning commission.

Any discussion?

Hearing none, call for the question.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Ayes happened.

Mr.

Davis is reappointed to the planning commission.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor Pro Tim.

On number two, do we have a motion, please?

I move to reappoint Megan Gravat and Warren Player to the Historic District Preservation Commission.

We have a motion and a second.

Any discussion.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right.

Motion carries.

Item three, please.

I move to reappoint Mr.

Giles Branch to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Second.

Motion and second.

Any discussion.

All in favor, please say aye.

All right.

Motion carries.

Um that concludes the executive session portion.

Item five is recognition of Wando bans for state championship.

Are they tonight?

I don't believe they were able to come.

I think so.

Yeah.

Is that right?

I don't see them.

All right.

So we want to recognize them in absentia anyway, and uh great job.

You know, they have a long history.

I think it's more championships than uh maybe all the athletic teams combined, but it is a standard of excellence and uh makes our our town proud.

So item six for the special town council meeting, then we stand adjourned.

The clerk needs a couple of minutes to reset the computer to prepare for our regular monthly meeting.

So just hold on.

You ready?

All right, I am going to heed council member Rambo's admonition to um use the gavel like a man, so let me call to order the states or the January 13th regular monthly meeting of the Mount Pleasant town council.

Thank you all for being here.

Before we start, I want to mention that yesterday was our local national hero, uh Major General James E.

Livingston's birthday, and um we are proud to have him as a member of our community.

Appreciate his service to our country and for inspiring us for all the greatness that he embodies.

So uh General, uh happy birthday, one one day late.

Our prayer will be led by Rich Robinson, and then after that, I will call up VFW Post 10624 to lead us in the pledge.

So please stand.

Good evening.

I invite you to join me in prayer.

Almighty God, as we come before you today, we just ask that you give out your wisdom, your grace, your knowledge, your understanding because you know this community.

You know each of our hearts, and you know all the ways that we bring our gifts and our talents and our hearts to better our community.

God, we ask for your blessing upon those who serve our first responders, our uh government leaders, and all those who make this community an amazing place for us and bless each and everyone here that we may hear your wisdom and guidance and love for this community, and it's in your name we pray, amen.

Amen.

Would members of the VFW please come up and lead us on the pledge?

All right, please play, present arms.

Aye, please of America and which is one nation under the liberty of justice for all thank you.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate your service.

Item three is approval of the agenda.

May I have a motion, please?

Move for approval, Mr.

Chairman.

Motion and second, any discussion.

Um Mr.

Pagarini, was there an item that we need to move?

Um, when we get to the uh consent agenda, we can discuss that as to whether it's necessary.

Okay.

We don't need to move it.

We don't need to move it now.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

The motion is to approve the agenda.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Agenda is approved.

Item four, public hearings, awards, and presentations.

Tonight we present the Crespo Award, and I will ask Kate Miller to come forward and handle the honors for us.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Whereas the Mount Pleasant Historical Commission is charged with promoting the preservation, understanding, and appreciation of the town's physical and cultural heritage, and created the Cresco Historical Stewardship Award to recognize an individual, organization, or group that has done exemplary work in preserving, studying, restoring, or promoting the history of Mount Pleasant.

And whereas Miss Lynette White, founder of the Plantation Singers, has dedicated her life to the preservation, education, and celebration of Gallagee culture.

And whereas Miss White formed the Plantation Singers in June of 1996 to provide a platform to educate the public about the Gulageechee heritage.

And the group performs locally, including their annual performance for the town's Black History Month, which uh will be on the 14th.

So mark your calendars.

Of February.

Of February, yes.

February 14th.

February 14th.

And also has performed internationally, sharing the richness of Gallagher's around the world.

And whereas Miss White has worked tirelessly to involve retirees and engage younger generations, including her ta her daughter, Tadia, and has spoken in local schools at Boon Hall Plantation to educate both children and adults about the history, culture, and traditions of the Gullah Geechee people.

And in September of 2022, Miss White launched her own radio show, Gullah Voices, on Ulm Radio to share stories and preserve the region's unique heritage.

And now, therefore, I, for our mayor, Kate Miller, on behalf of Mount Pleasant Historical Commission, is honored to present on this day, January 13th, 2026, the annual Cresco Historical Stewardship Award to Miss Lynette White.

Okay, Cigas.

Come on up here.

Come on, come on up here.

Okay.

Come on up here.

Maybe I'll move within me.

Okay, come on, meaning.

Come on.

Come on the side over here.

I I I'm still directly.

Congratulations.

Thank you for all the ready for the vote.

Come on.

Come on.

Yeah.

You guys will take a few steps back so we can be in line here.

Ready?

Everybody right here.

Yeah.

That's all I'm like in a lot of people.

Right here.

Thank you.

That looks sick.

The only thing surprised is that.

Oh thank you.

So performance.

By the way, Colonel Channel, he said he's going to look to see you there on February 14.

I have you.

Thank you.

Okay, singers.

This last house we go take for more things.

That'd be good, wouldn't it?

All right.

Thank y'all all for being here.

Lynette, thank you for all you do for us for our communities.

The heart and soul.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

All right.

Item five, approval of the minutes from December 9th, 25, and the support of special and regular town council meetings and the November financial statement.

We have a motion to approve in a second.

Any discussion.

All in favor, please say aye.

Give me a post.

All right, motion carries.

Item six is public comment.

If you are here to make a public comment, please come forward when your name is called, name and address in two and a half minutes, please.

Mr.

DeMore.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I have three speakers signed up.

The first is David Spedden.

David Spedden, 3429, Tumor Kiln Circle, Mount Pleasant.

Happy New Year.

And looking at all your smiling faces, you're ready to attack the new year.

That's good to see.

But it's a new year, and we still have the same issue.

We don't have a clear update on what's going on with 41.

I was at the public uh meeting a couple of weeks ago when they were talking about the priorities for the county.

I spoke to Mr.

Sass.

I talked to some of the project team.

They claim that they've reached out and that they're trying to set up a meeting.

So I don't know who they reached out to.

They didn't want to say, and I've heard from our side, we're reaching out as well.

So it'd be really great if somebody could say we've made a connection, we've got a date, there's gonna be a meeting.

But one of the things the project team said during that meeting is that they had committed by January the 15th to have a detailed update that they were going to share with us.

So I don't know if anyone has said anything like that to you.

If they haven't, if I can help, let me know.

I'll reach out to my contacts and try to coordinate if you're running in the walls.

Plus, there was a reorder of the leadership with Charleston County.

This might be an ideal opportunity to have them all sit down, go through everything in detail as to where we are with the future plan is and if there's any room in changing their decision about Oil Hill Park.

If not, then we need to talk about alternatives.

So please make this a priority.

I know you're working for priorities for the future and the 2026 sales tax.

I see this as a key linchpin to convince the people of Mount Pleasant to vote one way or another.

And we're looking at your leadership to help guide us as to what's right.

Because we also want to take care of the larger community because we all travel to all of them, and we wouldn't be able to do that on the right infrastructure, the right roads, and not become a little Atlanta.

So please keep up the work.

Thank you.

Richard Habersham.

Good evening, happy new year to everybody.

Um I just got a few issues um to talk about.

Um the thing is that it when um the town annexed property out of the settlement community into the town.

Um uh annexation came up last month.

You'll put the sign out in the middle of the day.

You know, didn't give us time to react or make a comment when found out if we was not, you know, couldn't come to the meeting.

Um we had that and then and property owners, we don't try to stop nobody for you know going into town or whatever.

But if you buy a property in in the in our community, we would like you know, the for you with a property owner to respect the zoning that's already there.

If you got water and sewer, that's good.

If you want to do something with your property, we don't have a problem with that.

But you're trying to circumvent the county zoning and come into the town of Mount Pleasant, you know, is something else, just like that property that is requested annotation.

They were running a business on there at one point, and Charleston County stopped them.

So I don't know what you want to do now if they want to run that business again and come into the town, but you have to realize that you're in a community and you just can't come in and change the change the zoning to what you like.

It's like going into um the doors west and park west.

You can't go just go in there and change everything.

So when people come in to rezone, you know, just to circumvent the the zoning for Mount Pleasant and the county.

They shouldn't just come into town of Mount Pleasant for that.

And the last part I got to say, um Philip is in on the historical register.

And and uh the main thing that we got on the rest of is our land patent, how the land was developed.

So the old village.

We have it something for the um for Mount Pleasant and the county as is historic.

So if uh you taking probably out of our community, are y'all gonna put that under the historic commission?

Because we are on the national register, and we want that same protection that the county gives us.

We want the town to give us the same recognition too.

Thank you.

Fred Smalls.

I'm Fred Smalls.

I live at 2959 Elijah Smalls Road in the Phillips community.

I'm speaking in opposition to the proposal to annex property out of the Phillips community into the town of Mount Pleasant.

The property in question is located at 1651 Highway 41.

It's directly across the street from my parents' house.

It's also right in the center of our community.

All of the African American communities are facing destruction and are disappearing due to annexation over development and roads and highways being built through our communities.

We don't have to look far to see what has been done with this.

Go right down Highway 17, which used to be four months.

If you look along the sideway, all those houses, people are gone.

But they used to be a community there.

Annexation over development.

So we're asking this committee to take a good look at this and really think about what's happening here and not grant this proposal.

Thank you.

That's all I have signed up, Mr.

Mayor.

All right.

Is there anyone to speak who did not have the opportunity to sign up?

Same rules, please.

Name address, three and a half, two and a half minutes, I'm sorry.

Good evening, Council Mike Manhorn Iron Bridge Drive.

Um I just want to bring a public awareness to a safety issue that we have along the 17 corridors, especially around the town center area.

Uh when you're looking from vending to our arms connector, uh we've had quite a few residents uh in the last couple months that uh have been hit in that area, as well as an individual that lost their life.

Um, you know, somewhere could be an individual situation, but I would like to see us put some type of traffic uh uh thing in there, whether it be the crossing lights that we have that we have in different areas that way when an individual is crossing, uh especially along like well the Montclair areas with all those residents that live in that area there.

If we can have some type of traffic calming or awareness device put in place there, um, you know, I think we'd serve the residents a great deal, especially those that are going to and from the town celebrate or want to be for for dinner, movies, whatever the case may be, but just that corridor seems to be a lot of traffic issues going on lately.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Mars Snipe Richardson.

My address is 2755 Earl Johnson Lane, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.

I'm the current president of the Hamlin Beach community.

Um as we're talking about annexation out of the historic districts, not just only the historic districts, all of the Dalahechi communities in the Mount Pleasant area being close to annex for water for sewer.

We're asking that this this committee please stop annexing these properties in.

We're working very hard to protect and preserve the culture character and history of our communities.

The annexation and the forced annexation with your ordinance 51.092 forces residents who want to build a home to handnex because they want sewer.

And we truly don't believe that's fair.

And then when they get the information from Mount Pleasant Waterworks, they send them here, they have to sign documents stating that even if they're not contiguous to Mount Pleasant, they have to sign this document saying they will be forced to annex it once they become contiguous.

So we're asking if you're not gonna force other areas, if someone like to say it's in Charleston County or in the town of Mount Pleasant and doesn't want Charleston County Mount Pleasant Roads, are they able to annex out of Mount Pleasant in the Charleston County if they're contiguous?

I don't think this board will want them to do that.

So we're just asking for the same protection.

And if you're going to annex our areas, we're asking that you put something in place to allow us to be a historic district in the town of Mount Pleasant.

The same protection you do for the old village, we're asking for those protections in our areas.

I made a request to Towson County to do a a one-on-one to prevent the historic preservation.

That meeting is on January 20th, 2026 at 6 p.m.

at the Lawney Hamilton Building.

We're asking that your staff please come to this meeting to see what we're trying to do to protect our areas.

Here's a notification.

They announced it on the news.

Here's a notification.

That meeting is next week.

Please attend if you can.

And we're just asking for the same protection, the same respect, the same dignity.

We are working very hard in our communities to save us.

So we're asking you to please, and we thank you for all the work that you've done thus far as we work together to protect and perceive and make the quality of life better for all of us in the Mont Pleasant area.

Thank you.

Anyone else for public comment, please?

All right.

Public comment is closed.

Thank you very much.

That was item six.

Item number seven, consent agenda items.

So mayor.

Yes, sir.

This is the part.

Um I've been uh approached with a potential amendment to item 7C.

Mr.

Tinky, is that still something we wish to do?

Yes.

Okay, the appropriate motion would be to remove item 7C from the consent agenda.

7B.

Replace it at 10B2, and we'll address it at the end.

That's I think it's 7B.

Not C.

I thought it was about 7B.

About the water.

Yes, uh perpetually, and that's item C.

Okay, I'm sorry.

I'm on the wrong okay.

Okay, so yes, yes, yes.

So I move, I move to uh move that item as stated by council.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and a second, and let's be clear we're in section seven, consent agenda items, and this is item C, and this will go to 10 B2.

10B2.

10 Bravo 2 Bwo.

All right.

Motion to second any discussion.

All in favor, please say I.

Aye.

All right, motion carries.

Move to approve consent agenda item seven A and B.

Second.

All right.

Any discussion?

All in favor, please say aye.

All right.

Motion carries.

Final reading of ordinances A and B.

Yes.

All right.

So this moves us to section eight.

Uh new business.

Ms.

Reeves.

Yes, sir.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Uh, this first one is first reading for an ordinance to rezone a property from R1 to AB1.

Um, this is up in North Mount Pleasant.

Uh, it was built in 2007 in the county.

It was annexed in, automatically zoned R1.

Um, has operated as a bank all these years, never uh fixed the zoning, and so they're coming in now.

I there's no plan to do anything to the building, they just want to make it right.

So it does fit with the comp plan.

Move to approve it's appropriate for the use of the case.

Second motion and second to approve item eight a one.

Any discussion?

All in favor, please say I.

Motion car.

First reading orders number two six zero zero one.

All right.

All right.

Item two, please.

A two.

Um, this is two and three.

I'll take them together, but they'll need separate votes.

Um, this is to annex and zone a parcel on in on Boston Grill Road.

Um, and it would come in as C C community conservation.

Um, this is the parcel point nine three acres.

It is with located within the um Hamlin Beach Historic Designation.

Um, it is recommended for C C.

Um, and you can see here the the red star is where it is within that um historic overlay.

And the um the uh planning committee uh recommended denial of the annexation, but should it be annexed in the appropriate zoning is CC, and so that the zoning was recommended for approval.

Move to approve commission and committee.

Discussion.

Um is the motion to approve or to motion is to approve the annexation.

Yes, sir.

And a second, all right.

We are in discussion.

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Tinker.

Um I'd like to mirror what um uh some of our speakers spoke about.

If you think about if you lived in uh brickyard, you lived in seaside, you lived in the old village, you have protection.

If you lived in those areas, you you would not be able to annex out of that to try to annex to the property next door.

It would be um people would just think that was humorous.

It wouldn't be possible because they have the protection of an HOA or a POA.

I think it's inappropriate if you have uh properties like this that are in an area that's been historic since after the civil war that they cannot have the protection.

We've been working on three years now to have the same zoning and to have the historic overlay.

And so I think it's we're very close to getting historic overlay, and the next step would be to, for example, not only this one, but uh moving forward to another one, 10 mile, where we would have historic overlay for those.

And so they're not getting protection from the historic overlay in these areas, and it's it's basically eroding or decimating the community.

So I will be a firm no.

All right, Ms.

Rambo.

Um I I want to address a couple of the public comments.

I I think this is one of the biggest misconceptions or misunderstandings about the annexation process.

If we deny annexation, Mount Pleasant Waterwoods has to, by law, provide water and sewer.

So the property is going to get developed.

Our zoning matches the county's zoning.

Us denying annexation is a developer's is a gift to a developer because now they can develop the property without paying town town impact fees, without paying town taxes, but you know the town gets the impact.

Um all of that sounds nice, uh, but again, it if annexation is denied, it's still going to get developed and the develop developer can do it for cheaper because they're going to avoid all the taxes and fees that go along with it.

So I don't understand this argument, quite frankly.

The they don't get the historic overlay.

So if you're in a brickyard, you're an old village, you have an historic overlay that gives you an added level of protection in those areas.

But and we're just asking that we uh have the time and effort, which is we're hearing about the meeting for working through it, so we can have a historic overlay.

Mr.

Ram, but you still have full yes.

So um I I'm glad you put that analogy.

So not all of our neighborhoods have HOAs, nor do people want to live in areas with HOAs.

And there are people in uh that own properties within these historic overlay districts that don't want to be there, they weren't asked if they would like to be there.

Um also that um historic overlay uh um what's it called where you can't do anything for the time being on moratorium, yes, only applies to larger parts, wouldn't even apply to this parcel.

Like they could still build, like anyway.

Mr.

Icon, are you asked to be recognized?

Yes, thank you.

Uh how close are we on the uh you say we're we're we're working on the historic overlay.

Um for the town side is what you're stating.

Uh historic overlay for the town of Mount Pleasant.

So there's um there's three settlement communities east of the Cooper that already have a count of a historic designation.

Uh Hamlin Beach, 10 mile, and the Phillips County.

In the county, that's correct.

Uh the 10 mile community just completed, I think what Mr.

Tinke was referring to, just completed uh the work to um draft and adopt a zoning overlay to protect and to establish guidelines for those protections that they want to they want to have.

The Hammond Beach already has a historic district overlay.

Um they will be the next community to start working towards that zoning, and then I anticipate Phillips will come after that.

Uh but 10 mile was sort of the template.

This is all county, okay.

But what what we staff in the town are working for now is now that the county adopted a zoning overlay for 10 mile, we are starting to draft that and work on that.

And we're gonna actually bring it that to um back to the planning committee in February for further discussion.

But that's for the 10 mile.

But this won't be brought back.

We're voting on this now.

So we just need the other stuff to catch up.

I mean, we're voting on this now.

This is first reading.

Yeah, well, but we can't delay if it just doesn't the process is starting and we're working with the county and with our legal staff to figure out the historic district part, what that looks like.

Um if if the town can adopt that that same historic overlay and how that would work.

Do we um do we create some sort of joint commission?

Because they in the county they go to a commission.

Uh so those are things that we're gonna be working on moving forward.

Those are gonna take a little more time.

The zoning overlay for 10 mile is what we are working on right now, so short term.

Right, so they get annexed in and then the town will come in with the same protections as the county, is what you're stating as as a as a town historic overlay almost.

Is that what you're stating?

If if we had one, if you have one, yes, that's what you're working on.

Yeah.

Uh yeah, we are working on that.

Right now we're working on 10 mile.

Right, but yes, right.

Correct.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Tinky has to be recognized.

Mr.

Rambo, it's not an either-or.

So for example, if you have a historic overlay, that doesn't give you an HOA or a POA.

So for example, you have historic overlay in the old village.

The old village doesn't want a POA or HOA, they adamantly don't want one, but they don't do want historic overlay.

Likewise, if you went into brickyard, that is an HOA or POA, but that does give them a layer of protection above and beyond the zoning that is specific to the characteristics or the unique characteristics that they want in that particular area.

But that does give them a layer of protection above and beyond the zoning that is specific to the characteristics or the unique characteristics that they want in that particular area.

So that's all we're looking for is to be able to for these neighborhoods to have their unique characteristics.

And um I'm I'm gonna vote with the uh planning committee.

All right, so the motion is to approve.

I think we're gonna need a roll call.

Okay, do we first and the motion a yes vote is to approve the annexation?

Ms.

Crosby don't approve.

So no.

Don't approve it.

That would be is enough.

No.

Okay.

Ms.

Crosby votes no.

Ms.

Hyatt.

Yes.

Ms.

Hyatt votes yes.

Mr.

Ikepano.

Yes.

Mr.

Icopana votes yes.

Mr.

Rambo.

Yes.

Mr.

Rambo votes yes.

Mr.

Tinky.

No.

Mr.

Tinky votes no.

Ms.

Whitaker.

Yes.

Ms.

Whittaker votes yes.

Mr.

Brownstein?

Yes.

Mr.

Brownstein votes yes.

Mr.

Chapman.

Yes.

Mr.

Chapman votes yes.

Mayor Heaney.

No.

Mayor Heaney votes no.

So by vote of 6 3, the motion to approve passes.

First reading, ordinance number 2600 two.

Mayor.

Yes, sir.

Question of Ms.

Reid.

Um are we not still in the opportunity to stop anything from happening until uh July.

Is it July or time runs out?

Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

So the moratorium that you all put in place is set to expire July of this year.

And again, that would prevent anybody from subdividing into more than four lots.

Okay, sir.

Move on to item three, B uh A three.

Just as the zoning of the part that was just successfully voted to annex.

And it's moved to approve.

All right.

We have a motion to approve.

And a second.

Any discussion?

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Uh three, thank you.

Um for your presentation.

Is the property currently zoned S3 in the county?

Yes, sir.

And is C C community conservation um equivalent to that county zoning?

Yes, sir.

Um could this property be subdivided into more than one home?

This property is 0.93 acres and it does allow uh three units per acre.

Um I think but we did look at the ownership because there was concern that the property owner owned adjacent lots and they were going to combine and then subdivide.

Uh from county tax records, they only own this parcel.

Um I don't anticipate under town standards that they could subdivide given this flag lot.

Um I don't think they would be able to do it.

They would have to ask for waivers and uh get that approved through the planning commission in order to get the subdivision approved.

So I think it would be pretty difficult.

Those waivers are difficult to get from that the planning commission.

They are, and the planning commission has really kind of um gotten a little bit tougher on them, particularly with lots like this and these flag lots.

So yeah.

Thank you.

You bet.

Any other discussion?

All right, all in favor of the motion to approve the zoning CC, please say aye.

Aye.

All opposed, no.

Motion carries.

First reading, ordinance number two six zero zero three.

All right, this next slot or proposal is to annex and zone a lot R3, that would be medium density residential district.

Uh just to give a little bit of context.

This is adjacent to the Lural Lakes subdivision, but it is not part of the subdivision.

So you can see all of this shaded color here is R3, and they are requesting R3, but it is not um part of that subdivision.

Um in the county it is zoned R4.

Um, and they would like to come in, as I said, is R three.

The commission and the committee both recommended denial on that zoning.

And if you look at the comp plan, it really calls for um R one or R2 would be more appropriate.

Um for this area.

Uh well.

Oh, we need to approve the annexation.

All right, we have a motion and do we have a second?

Wait, I hold on.

I'm because he made the motion.

Yes, we do, but we can't do zoning if we have an annex.

I know.

Is your motion?

It's a move.

It's a move point.

Yeah, mine is to deny the annexation.

One was to deny.

One was to approve.

Was there a second on the motion to deny the annexation?

Was yours to deny the annex?

Yes.

I I didn't hear a second there, but I did not either.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

I'll move to approve annexation.

Second on the approval.

Okay.

So the motion is to approve.

I do think so we're in discussion.

I do think that I do think that Laura accidentally possibly seconded Mike's motion.

That's what I was reading.

Yeah, I don't know.

You might have to take it back, Laura.

I don't know.

I'm not the chair.

I didn't hear a second.

Move to approve the annexation.

Okay.

We have a motion second on the annexation.

Right.

So let me let me just ask a question as a point.

So if we annex this, it comes in automatically if there were no requests, right?

Or if that's denied.

It comes in as what?

R1.

R1.

R1.

Okay.

And if y'all haven't seen it, this is, I believe, an uninhabited home.

It's a brick rancher.

It's right across from the entrance to Mount Pleasant Waterworks.

And um and right there.

So it is for all intent and purposes a single family residence.

So R1 would be an appropriate.

It would be appropriate.

And to be clear, um, this is not in a settlement community.

Um so I just want to make sure.

Okay.

All right.

So the motion is to approve the annexation.

Any discussion?

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Hang on.

Did we have some notes?

Two notes.

Okay.

72.

All right.

First reading, ordinance number 2600 four.

So now we are at uh zoning, and the request is for R3 for the Mr.

Chairman to deny.

Second motion to deny.

And we have a second.

Any discussion?

Yes, sir.

Um I drive past this particular property pretty frequently.

It's located right across as stated from Mount Pleasant Waterworks, but also more importantly, White Sides Elementary.

Um if this were rezoned to an R3, it would permit two homes on the site.

I think that's an area where we do not need additional curb cuts.

It's a quite a busy stretch with pedestrian and school traffic.

Uh so I think it's more appropriate as a single single family home.

All right.

Any other discussion?

Just yes, sir.

So yes to denial makes it R1.

Um just to confirm.

So council is aware the town for years has elected to run the annexation and zoning concurrently.

The applicant may very well, if this motion passes denying the zoning, withdraw the annexation request.

So that is an option.

If they do not, and the annexation is ultimately approved, it would come in as R1.

Okay.

And R three was going to fit how many?

Yes.

Just R three would allow a possible subdivision of the property.

So two lots.

Okay.

All right.

The motion is to deny.

Any further discussion?

All in favor of the motion to deny, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Motion carries.

Okay.

And is denied.

First reading ordinance to rezone from AB1 to R2 residential.

This is a third of an acre part located on Earthman Drive.

Yes, sir.

Um so this is uh a couple of lots off of Coleman.

And you know, typically the planning commission would not recommend approval um to rezone property out of our commercial district to residential.

Uh this one is a little bit unique.

Our zoning ordinance was adopted in uh 79 and then again in 81.

This lot was developed with a single family residence in the 60s, so before we even had zoning.

And it has been a resident since that time.

Um the folks that live there actually have lived there all these years, they'd like to age in place.

Uh they came in to get a permit to do an addition to their house so that their only child could move in and um help take care of them, and they realize they can't do anything to their house.

Uh, because it's a non-conforming use, they have to rezone the property.

So there's no release.

Okay.

All right.

We have a motion to approve and a second.

Yes, sir.

Ms.

Rambo.

My only question is is the uh R2 would not allow.

Would that be would that allow division potentially of the property building?

No.

And R2 is the appropriate for that area.

Uh and it would make that lot conforming.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Yes, I believe that's a question.

Yes, who is the second?

Thank you.

All right, you got it?

Yes, sir.

All right.

All in favor of the motion to approve, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carrying first reading.

Ordinance number 2606.

All right.

Item seven is presentation of annual report regarding development agreements.

Yes, this is going to be a short presentation.

Um the first one is Carolina Park.

Um all obligations have been met.

They did recently extend their development agreement.

It's set to terminate in 2028 if there's no further extensions to that.

Our second one is Liberty Hill Farms.

Um, all dedication of open space trail systems, everything has been dedicated to the town as well as the town, as well as the roads with a two-year maintenance bond.

Um they did also two years ago extend theirs for five years, so that will expire in a few years if they don't extend it.

Uh Patriots Annex was actually our third one, but it expired in October, I think, and they did not um come back for approval of an extension of that development agreement.

Um I did want to make it clear that the payment in lieu of taxes is covered under a separate resolution by council.

Um so that is still in effect, although we have not received any funds as of yet um for 2025.

So that's it.

Any questions about uh the development agreement report?

Yes, sir.

On Liberty Hill.

Um they were supposed to do some type of gardening or community garden regarding have they done yet.

Uh Liberty Hill Farms is not a planned development, but it's all developed under that cultural landscape, which I think they're the only development town that we have that zoning for.

Um I think they've they've done everything that they were supposed to do.

I'm not sure that there was a community garden required with that or not.

But that's something we would look into.

But that would be there was a certain number of acres for gardens to be I remember that.

Yeah.

That they were supposed to put in a certain number of square feet, acres, whatever, for gardens for the residents to work in.

Has that been complete?

Uh well the neighborhood's not complete, and that would be covered by zoning and not the development agreement, so that's something that we'll check on and get back to you.

Okay.

But it would have to be done before uh the development's complete and they're in their last phases there.

So I just want to make sure we don't lose track to that uh because that was a significant idea for our community.

So that's why I'm asking.

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Tinker, uh to confirm the trail system is a public trail system and much of it is on the waterfront, is that correct?

Yes, sir, it is public.

Thank you.

All right.

If there's no further questions on item seven, let's move to Section B old business.

Um item one, this has to do with the uh area standards, area ratio standards, neighborhood character preservation.

We we have gotten public input.

We had a booth at the um uh holiday market at the farmers market, and I think 50 or 60 people stop by, but tomorrow night there's also a public input session.

So I think the uh best thing to do on this and Mr.

Pag Marina, if we need a motion is of course to defer it because it doesn't move to defer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, Ms.

Rambo.

All right, just a quick question that's it.

Yeah.

Uh my kid has a game, so I can't be there, but I'd love to be there.

Like what's the best are we gonna get are you all gonna send us like a uh a summary or notes or what's the best way for us to get the feedback that was presented at this meeting if we can't?

So we're gonna have sign-in sheets, we're gonna have um we're already starting to get emails, so we're starting to compile all those comments.

So we will provide all the comments to you.

I know there's comments on social media, we can't follow all that, but the ones that come to us and the ones that we get tomorrow night.

Yeah.

Okay, great.

We'll be providing that to you.

That's my only question is when they make sure I got good time.

Yes, sir.

And I know it's short notice, but I think it's really effective when people come in because they don't really know about the the what's being presented a lot of times.

If there's a just a couple different times during that open period, we just stop and give sort of a public comment for people sort of an overview.

I think that really helps them understand what it is.

Y'all will explain it very well, I'm sure.

And uh that that avoids people just clustering around and not really knowing what they're supposed to be asking and what's going on.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

I've got a question.

You know, when you look at this, I know we're not discussing it tonight, but but we've got the tree ordinance of BAR, we're looking at wetlands um setbacks.

It'd be interesting to see because we see these everything we see is in a vacuum.

We're gonna see this in a vacuum, and then wetlands we're gonna see in a vacuum, and the tree ordinance we see in a vacuum, and this is a vacuum.

All of a sudden we shrink, can we shrink, can we shrink, can we shrink property rights of individuals?

It would be interesting to see this as a whole, our cause and effect of all of these coming together because this is a vacuum vote, the tree ordinance was a vacuum vote.

And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it all, but they all affect each other, and when it's brought in together, we wonder why somebody can't add a patio to the back of their house.

Because you put this and this and this and this together, and maybe this allows you to add a patio, but then the tree ordinance with this with the wetlands with the other thing, and next thing you know, I can't add a patio to the back of my yard.

So I think it would be interesting to see this as a total package at some point.

Thank you.

All right, so we have a motion to defer.

And uh is there any further discussion?

All right, that does this mean that it would be brought back next month.

Yes, sir.

Okay, it'll go to the committee first, maybe, and if the committee if y'all decide it's not ready, or you know, there's so much comment that it needs a lot of turn, it does not necessarily have to automatically be on this.

Yeah, I can take it to planning committee uh and we'll have the feedback by then and then get your input.

Okay.

All right, all in favor of the motion to defer, please say aye.

Any poses?

All right, motion cares.

Yes.

Um Mr.

Habersham had a specific location he was thinking about.

It's not on our agenda.

It's on the planning commission agenda for January twenty-first.

So this month's planning commission meeting.

Um it will go for a public hearing and then it'll come to committees and then council in February.

So that's my extension on our yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

I'm sorry to add that.

I'm glad you asked.

I wish I I wanted to make sure I know if you have to put that okay.

This moves us to uh section nine committee action items from the transportation committee.

Um we uh unanimously recommended that the access road, which will be an internal road at the newly named Gary Santos Recreation Park, uh, be named in honor of former Mayor Linda Page.

And um, so that is also a motion um tonight from the committee.

Second doesn't need a second, but but it is a motion.

Uh is there any further discussion?

All right.

Um let me let me add, yeah.

Um I will be voting for this um in a do uh well, Ms.

Page work with her on waterworks.

Um do you think it's a little unusual to uh name something for somebody who's currently an elected official?

Um I don't know, just the food for thought.

I'll be voting for this.

I'm fine with it, but I know a lot of boards, councils uh have that kind of standard.

Um not serving with the town, though.

Yeah, that is true.

And I believe this this also has to go by state law back to the planning commission.

Yeah.

But I'm gonna vote.

To the planning commission.

This is just a recommendation from council.

But but she's not on, she's not a town council.

No, she might s spend the rest of her life in service in different commissions and stuff.

We shouldn't, we shouldn't hold that.

I mean, she could spend a lifetime in commissions giving to the community.

We shouldn't hold that up.

Okay.

All right.

All in favor of the motion, please signify saying I need opposed.

Motion carries.

All right.

Item two, the the big thing uh tonight discussion of possible action to select funding priorities and projects for a possible Charleston County sales tax referendum.

Um Mr.

Chapman has done a lot of work on this because it's his background, he's a transportation engineer.

Um, and he's seen more referenda than all of us uh put together.

Um but one thing is clear from what has been communicated from some county, uh, some of our county county uh representatives and from um the group of mayors that are all working on this.

This does not have to be, and especially not tonight, the be all end all list.

We're not there.

However, the transportation uh committee does have some priorities we would like for y'all to see.

And if we have everybody's acquiescence on this, let's do the real voting at our uh retreat that's coming up, and that gives everybody time to look at these, and one of our biggies is, and we're trying to get clarity on this.

Um if we just give to the county our transportation only fixes, like the big intersection right here at Houston Northcut at 17 and all that, we will be leaving money on the table.

And this is a 4.25 billion dollar referendum.

Um there are many other things that are part of our resiliency infrastructure.

Um drainage.

I I know I'm a dreamer, but I consider undergrounding power lines uh in that.

This I don't think we will ever have another shot at the at a pot of money this size to help us with things like that.

And I said in the committee meeting, and I'll say this again.

I personally, and this is I'm not speaking with council, I personally support Charleston's biggie of the battery extension, uh extending the battery.

Technically, that qualifies because it has a pedestrian aspect because pedestrian transportation bikes, pedestrian cars is all part of all you know, just de facto approved in a not approved, the referendum's not approved, the spending category is approved.

We have resiliency items, um, undergrounding and power lines, some some drainage and all that.

That yes, the road part, the drainage part might be attached to a road, but you know, acquisition of green space is also part of green infrastructure and putting power lines underground is part of resilience.

So we want to make sure that we have thought about all of that and approximate at the retreat what that portion might be, and then we've got time to work out the details of that.

Does that make sense?

Have I confused the issue?

Yes or Ms.

Chapman.

Mayor, you haven't confused the issue.

Um what the county has asked us to do, and why this item is actually on the agenda tonight, is because we previously had projects that were in the last referendum.

Council voted for those projects to send two years ago, maybe less than two now, but two years ago.

What the county has asked is that we resend those projects with the thought that we will these are not our only projects, right?

These are projects that we still think are beneficial, but we will do a full list on the 27th of January, and then submit that as well.

But the point is they are going to be having their consultants start looking at our projects, Charleston's projects, North Charleston's projects, which is a lot.

They would like to have something started for Mount Pleasant, so they can look at, for example, previously the project at 17 in Northcut, I'll read to you what it says.

Construction of overpass or high capacity at great intersection.

Which one?

I don't think we want the overpass.

I think we need to take that out.

I also think because county council has said that was one of the main reasons that they did not include that in the last referendum because they didn't think the overpass was wanted.

And we still we don't either now.

So that's something that needs to come out before it's set.

But county council is asking us to work with them to give them something to start with for what they're doing, and to specifically say that this is simply a preliminary list of our projects tonight, and to have all of the projects looked at in retreat, and to at the end of retreat, have a more detailed list.

But if we could send them something now to get started, that's what they're asking for.

And I'm suggesting we take what was presented to the committee at our meeting at committee Monday.

A week ago Monday.

Then we have done what we were asked to do.

Again, trying to work with County Council, knowing that we've got a lot more coming.

We've got resilience projects.

We've got projects for Ped and Bicycle.

We've got green space we want to give them.

And we want to also have pricing, our own pricing to start with.

What we had previously had some pricing to it.

Which this does.

But they're also going to let their consultants look at it as well, just like they will with the remainder that we send.

But if we give them something to start with, we're trying we're working with them, which we need to be on 41.

Mr.

Spin said.

They they want to work with us to try to come up with something on 41.

To get it underway, hopefully.

But tonight, if we can simply take what was done in 2024 material, then I think we've honored what they asked us to do.

But this is nothing.

It is not complete because I don't think we want the word construction of an overpass in it.

And then take the rest of this to start with by county council.

And I would make that in the form of a motion.

I think this would be hyperpony.

Yes, sir, Ms.

I would like to see what an overpass looks like at that intersection.

We have a 632 million dollar bridge that ends at a stoplight 600 yards off of it.

It's the biggest it's where I see all the traffic stop, and then I see they want to add I mean I I know it's on here, third lane to the Bowman Road overpass.

So that's that needs that has so much capacity that they excuse me.

They think it's possible they need a third lane, but yet we're not going to put an overpass at me is not off the table on uh on the uh intersection of uh Houston North Cut a $600 million bridge with a stoplight 600 yards off of it.

Makes no sense.

Mr.

Mayor.

Uh yes, sir.

Yeah, some similar um thought um those just expressed.

Um I don't think that we should um commit ourselves to either an overpass or a high capacity at grade intersection tonight.

Uh I think that we need to leave the door open to both of those uh on this referendum.

Um a fun fact is that um a high capacity at grade intersection may actually take up more land than a Bowman style overpass would be uh another fun fact is that um an at grade high capacity intersection would improve uh the traffic flow by nineteen percent, whereas the construction of an overpass is projected to improve the flow of traffic nearly 40 percent, I think is 30 to 40 percent if memory serves.

So I you know I don't think we're at a uh a point now where we could make that um distinction.

Uh there's some thought that even that grade um intersection would require more land acquisition, that this is very high valued land and may actually be more expensive than um constructing an overpass.

Um I could I guess I couldn't really care less what the the county's opinion of it was in the last failed uh referendum.

Um I think they made a a big big mistake pulling that off of our project list, especially it being the number one priority with 70,000 cars uh flowing through that intersection daily.

Um I'm hopeful that they'll look at this in a new light um with the thought that they need to um create the the road projects that are gonna have the biggest bang for the buck and they're gonna really improve people's quality of life here in Mount Pleasant, and I think that uh it all starts with with that intersection.

Um I would suggest I I agree with Mr.

Chapman that we need to get them this list of projects.

Um I would suggest we move the Daryl Creek Trail realignment up to either number two or number three, uh I think that's an impactful improvement for Carolina Park.

It syncs up the intersection with Lee-Bin Road, uh kind of cleans up a um problematic stretch of road uh in the northern part of town where it's going to be key.

Uh if the county wants to pass a referendum, they're going to need significant support from that area.

I hope that as they're looking at this, they realize that um they're going to need to to come together with us and talk about Highway 41 in a honest uh manner.

Uh, because I think there is a very real political reality that if there is no movement on 41 that this is going to fail in Mount Pleasant.

And um that could potentially tank the entire referendum.

Um I would just ask that we maybe look at Daryl Creek Trail, moving that up in the list.

I think we leave our options open on East and North Cut in 17.

And other than that, I think the rest of the list looks fine.

All of that we will go into great detail and establish priorities at the retreat.

And I just I just want to mention too, one thing since you brought up Highway 41.

This is not about Highway 41.

Um this is about 4.2 billion dollars over the next 25 years.

And it is our leadership moment to give the best list we have.

Um I have I have and I know many others have in conversations with members of county council told them if they want Mount Pleasant support on this, we need movement and we need a satisfactory resolution on Highway 41 now.

So it's it's two separate issues because um I mean we could just throw our hands up and say we don't like what you've done with Highway 41, and and they pass this uh and Mount Pleasant doesn't get our share, and that's a failure of leadership on our part.

So um I think they know that, and when I talk to them, what I tell them is this body, because I know I do speak for everybody, we're trying to help them succeed.

And they're not gonna succeed without the support of all at Mount Pleasant, and they know what that means.

So I just felt like I needed to say that.

Thank you.

Yes, sir, Ms.

Rabbit.

Um my main question, I'm I apologize.

I'm a little confused on what exactly we're voting on tonight.

So we're not voting on this tonight.

We're not voting on this tonight.

No.

Okay.

No, we're not voting.

We we so then my other question can come to staff.

The the committee has done has done a lot of work and we have looked at these things, and then there will be what um Mr.

Marson pricing, some pricing estimates between now and these are working numbers, and as we all know, long-term projects, those numbers can really change.

So there has to be some room for prices to inflate, some inflation space in there.

But we need to look at everything.

Um, this is our shot at infrastructure, both resiliency and transportation, and that's what we need to fill in some gaps about.

Mr.

Mars.

Well, I I think the discussion is all really good because it is about getting a list eventually, but that doesn't happen to have have to happen tonight, obviously.

Um we have buckets categories of projects that they put out there.

That's not set none of this is set in stone.

So the uh a lot of discussion to hone in on what this council feels is a priority.

We're gonna have projects at the retreat, not just these, but some of the other things we talked about at committee.

Um, you know, the the Mount Pleasant Wall um way would now fall into a different funding category.

So there's some flexibility in how our council can make a recommendation on a final project list.

So uh I'm looking forward to presenting that to you at the at the retreat.

Okay.

Yes, ma'am.

I I do think based on Mr.

Chapman's comments, which I agree with, that as a show of good faith we need to officially send even the preliminary list after tonight.

So I just want to make sure tonight after the retreat.

Okay.

Well, I I so I I have my my understanding from what Mr.

Chapman's comments were, maybe I misunderstood.

So Mr.

Chapman, I'd like you to clarify if you don't mind.

But in my discussions, I also talked with some of our county counterparts and they mentioned wanting a preliminary list after tonight.

So that's where I'm I just want to make sure we're being good faith partners.

Um if that's the request that they've made, which was my understanding.

So I may have misunderstood that.

I know I understand we're not setting anything instead.

We're not putting pricing on um your comments.

I appreciate that we've got a lot to continue to talk about at the retreat.

But at least this list being, you know, kind of uh preliminarily preliminarily delivered tomorrow is is was what my understanding of the request from the county.

So I just want to make sure.

Um but Mr.

Chapman, I think I'm gonna have that modify.

No, you don't.

No, you don't.

The whole idea of having this on the agenda tonight was to get started with something.

To get them started with something, and to specifically state that we will not finalize anything until after the retreat on the twenty seventh of January.

Right.

So so I guess we're all saying the same.

This is all public.

They can see this and we can say here's what we're working from.

But it will be a vote of council at the retreat and say this is our official priority list, if that makes sense.

It it makes sense as long as we submit to them something to get started with.

And the whole idea with getting started is basically using what we did two years ago.

That's that was the whole idea of their reports.

Yes.

Kind of question.

What would be the harm in just sending, you know, taking a vote, sending them this list now and then filling in the other detail after the our discussion at the at the retreat.

Only if if we try to go through this with a fine-tooth cone and say this versus that, or if we do this one if we try to do road design uh in one meeting as one agenda item, it that is not in our best interest.

But if we send that these are what we're looking at and um what we will be working on on the 27th, which they already know, um there's no harm in just sending that uh as a s I I'm I'm I guess a little fearful after hearing what Mr.

Chapman said and what Ms.

Whitaker said that we're not giving them what they need on time to be able to kind of flesh out these details.

I guess I just want to make sure that we are holding up our end of the bargain in that scenario.

They have a meeting with their consultant on I think the 30th, and they got the letter, you know, signed by Charleston North Charleston and and uh Mount Pleasant Mayors asking for February 4th, but now but now the new chairman just asked for it on the 30th.

That was the first I'd ever heard of that asking for it on the third.

So if we get it to them by the 30th, then we're still but I don't mind sharing sharing this with them.

No, yeah, Mayor, the whole point was they can get started with this and start getting pricing.

And it's been said, there may be different pricing than we had two years ago for an overpass.

Right.

May not work, may work.

They might get different pricing for the high capacity intersection.

But I'll just go down, don't need to go down the whole list.

The whole point was they wanted something to get started with so that by the 30th, they had something to work from for us, right?

But it is not our final.

It is not what we feel has to go for us.

Right.

It is what we submitted two years ago, which we got nothing because it didn't pass.

So at least they can start at our at our retreat.

We can possibly make some cost uh cost information available that we could get through stand we've been using before.

We also can then submit as well green belt requests.

Mike and head requests, public transportation requests.

I think we need to make some requests to get more service in Mount Bless in transit.

So if we simply send something to start with the idea that it is our start, and we will have the rest after we have our meeting on the 27th.

That satisfies their request.

It should satisfy us starting the process, and on the 27th, you can do a lot more.

Okay.

Mayor just yes, yes, sir, Mr.

Tinker.

I think I concur that these things have happened quickly, specifically the election of the new chair at County Council.

So some of us served just surreptitiously uh at we're at legislative meetings uh over the past couple days, and we had the opportunity to meet with uh the the new chairman boycott and a number of other people at the time.

And so I think it's um you know, I think they are looking to uh reiterate what how uh Mr.

Chapman's saying.

I think if we give them that preliminary list, it builds confidence.

And uh I think a number uh a number of the people in the room here have all been meeting with county council people to build trust and and rapport greater than we've perhaps ever had before.

So I think we if we give them preliminary lists, that'd be a help.

Do you all want to vote on it on the submitting the preliminary list, making clear that we have not had a vote on our final prioritization, yes or Mr.

Rambo?

I guess I'll just provide a different opinion.

And maybe this is on me.

I don't feel prepared enough to vote on this list.

Like to me, this I know you're saying it's preliminary, but putting my name on something saying I voted on it and approved it, like it there's some serious discussion that needs to happen on some of these items because some of these things will just cause induced demand and more development pressure, and we can't keep winding roads and building overpasses and I I don't know.

I there we need some more.

I just feel like it needs more discussion.

That's that's so let's get some clear.

Is there anything wrong with Mr.

Morrison working with county staff and saying this is the list that we are working on?

These are the type of things that we will be voting on because I agree.

If we vote and send it, they're gonna say, Oh, well, we thought y'all were okay with this, and we're not there yet.

That's that's where I'm coming from.

We can give them information.

This is public information.

Right.

They can you know they can download it from the meeting tonight if they want.

Is that we need kind of your understanding of the yes, sir?

We can do that.

Okay.

Yes.

And you're okay with staff doing that.

Yes, of course.

I think that is the best way to do that.

That's what they're asking for.

Right.

All right.

Yeah.

We're stating this as the working list.

This is this is the working draft, and then there's also green space, and there's resiliency, and there's you know, bike pit and and all of that, which which we are not prepared to vote on tonight.

That's why I don't want to vote on one thing and send it.

Last last time, what was the ones that we prioritized last time that they changed up?

Do you happen to know that?

Number one right here was the one that did not get um approved.

Okay, it was long point and coleman.

Right.

Darrell cream.

I'm sorry, yeah.

Yeah, right.

That were.

Yeah, and we've taken Coleman off the list now because we actually have that funded through TST.

I'm sorry, through uh uh safe streets for all grant.

Right.

And they approved the the other three the last time.

They were not on they were not on the uh question.

Okay.

Okay.

So with Mr.

DeMoro's acquiescence, his staff will share the working draft with county staff, and they've got something to work on.

I think we're all saying the same thing.

Okay.

If that's all right, let's move on.

That's uh item 9A2.

We flip to the back page.

Item 10 is uh new business ordinance authorizing and approving a grant of surplus right away to South Carolina Department of Transportation located at 526 and Hungry Neck Boulevard.

Mr.

Paglerini can explain this.

Uh we got him to explain it at transportation, and we were okay with it.

Yes, sir.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Council, this project occurred almost 20 years ago in 2013.

A prior council did approve grant of this right of way.

It is required per the project agreement.

Apparently, DOT either, well, I don't want to say, but the deed was not recorded.

And they have asked us to clarify this is simply providing access right-of-way that we're required to do by the project agreement.

The reason council must vote, it is state law that to convey any property.

Council must approve the same.

At the same time, this is a contractual agreement entered into by a council some two decades ago.

We have to approve motion to approve.

All right, and I will add that this was unanimously approved at transportation.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All right, motion care.

First reading, orders number two six zero zero seven.

Item B, this is the thing to stop council having to vote.

Mayor if you don't mind that there was a matter removed from uh to this item or to this space on the agenda from our consent agenda, and it is going back to consent agenda item C, an ordinance authorizing approving a grant of perpetual easement and water contract to the Mount Pleasant Waterworks.

This was approved unanimously at the last meeting.

Mr.

Tinky has um Mr.

Tinky, I don't know, words in your mouth, but you did have a conversation with representatives or the representative, Mr.

Clum of MPW.

And if I understand correctly, they did not object to certain language being put in the support.

Uh basic in the uh easement document.

He voice support, he was glad that we found it and you wanted to substitute what is their actual language now that they use and that they have approved as far as the awards.

So I'm just asking if that be substituted.

So yes, sir.

If I I'll I'll first make a motion to approve.

Correct.

Second.

All right.

And the motion to amend, I'll read the language in.

And the motion to amend, I'll read the language in this comes from resolution 03 2024 from Mount Pleasant Waterworks.

It shall be on law for the plant place or uh allowed to become established woody vegetation shrubs or trees or obstruct access in any way over or within five feet of either side of any water main, water service line, water meter, sewer main, sewer lateral, manhole cover or other apparatus owned by Mount Pleasant Waterworks, Mount Pleasant Waterworks must approve any installation or establishment of vegetation, uh Mount Pleasant Waterworks would not be responsible for the repair or replacement of any vegetation or obstruction removed or damaged.

Again, this is a resolution that was approved by Waterworks and sir.

If that is um the language you'd like in there, you can just move to amend as I've described.

I move the amend as described.

Second.

All right.

Any discussion?

All this is on the amendment.

All in favor of the amendment, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Now voting on the uh motion.

I would just like to thank Mr.

Teeky for his studious uh studies of the issues and catching this.

So great job.

All right.

All in favor of the motion to approve.

Please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

It is approved.

Final reading ordinance number two five zero five six.

Okay.

This should move us to um item B old business, correct?

After that, I don't think we have anything else.

And that is extensions of vesting periods and the limitations there too.

As you know, council has been voting on these, and it's a situation where we have to vote, but the answer pretty much has to be yes.

And um we decided that um this would go to the planning commission rather than come to uh council.

Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to move to deny to deny, yes, yes.

Okay.

Um we're in discussion.

What's yes?

Yes, sir.

So um, I I believe that it's important for us to, even though we can only vote typically one way on these vesting uh rights renewals.

I think it's important for us to uh be aware of what's out there uh to potentially flag if something has changed, uh and just ultimately I think we're town council, the box stops with us.

Um let's let's just keep keep handling them the way that we already are any other comments?

My understanding from our discussion of the committee meeting is this does not preclude if it goes to the planning commission and the town council disapproves of their action, we can take action on it.

And we we then can do it so that in no way takes away our council, it just gives another layer of review really by the planning commission, and then which is a great thing, I think, and then it would come to us if we feel like it was inappropriate, and we can so we we don't take it away, right?

Mr.

Pag Morini, is that yes, sir?

That's the way it came out of committee, that's the way it was written.

Okay.

That council under any circumstance has the right essentially to appropriate and vote on this.

There's also a two-way provision if our planning commission feels as if this is beyond their scope or ability, um, they can also pass it up to council.

Okay, Ms.

Chapman.

Um last time one of these came before council.

There was a lot of discussion to put it mildly about why do we have to do this?

Why are we doing what happens if we say no?

A lot of discussion, but I just about everybody here, including me.

The idea was with this suggestion was that the planning commission a year ago, two years ago, three or four years ago.

Might have already gone through this once in great detail.

Whereas council might have just gone over it with whatever was done.

And we're gonna need their help.

Going back and looking at it.

The idea was that Planning Commission has that responsibility to start with.

And if it's coming back to be looked at, we want to make sure that they have that opportunity to look in to make sure we're doing the right thing.

And as has already been said if we don't if there's something that we remain work for that we think shouldn't have been done to start with we have the right and the responsibility to work with the Planning Commission to look at it again.

But most of these things just get rushed right over and probably not looked at as they should be.

So that that was the whole reason for doing this.

Yes, ma'am.

I would say I agree with Mr.

Brownstein.

Um I appreciate when these things come before us and the public gets to hear about it again.

It's we're just keeping tabs on what's going on and it's an opportunity for us all to be reminded of what projects are in the in the pipeway.

If it doesn't come before council, I'm you know, I'm not sure how we would know about it and keep the public informed about it.

So I I'm happy with keeping things away we've been doing it.

I'll just have one question.

It was mentioned a little earlier.

It doesn't come automatically from the planning commission to us.

Is that correct?

It could it planning commission can vote on it and then it's done if this were to pass.

Yes, sir.

Right.

There is no automatic council either planning commission could make the request or council could make the request.

Otherwise staff would play as written staff would place it on the planning commission agenda unless told otherwise.

So council may never even know this is even unless you go to the planning commission meeting, may never even know this is happening.

I I I think it's up to us, it's our duty, it's our responsibility, and we should do that.

It's our decision.

I I guess being the old man now of council, um, I've had to vote on these more than any.

I think it's a bad look when we are forced to vote on something and really not given a choice in where the people's elected representatives they think we are supporting what's in that document when most of us are antithetically opposed to most of them.

And um we you know, if we change this, which I certainly think we should, we will know when one comes up.

How many are there now?

Two in the in the works no, I mean in in all.

Uh I'm sorry, how many like like a planned development agreement or or any big vested any big developments that have a vested interest rate?

There there are any number of them that could make a request.

Uh it could be uh council, it would be restricted to PDs, and then of course it would be uh also um impact.

Right impact assessments are the ones generally that you see, and that is related to our impact assessment ordinance, which is a bit unusual.

And I remember, you know, I was on council before I was elected mayor being told why am I voting um on something that I really cannot vote no on, and I think that's bad.

I think it's a bad precedent.

Um and so I think it ought to be at the planning commission and um you know if we have a duty to get it right when we vote on it, we also have a duty um if if the planning commission does it to to know what's going on and we can ask for it.

So I'm I'm gonna vote no on the denial and yes to to make the change.

Ditto.

Just I do that one thing.

So the statement is we can't do anything about it.

The citizens are blaming us for it.

We take the blame for this.

Well, so now we're gonna we'll go we're gonna hyper focus that on an appointed commission to get public comment at them.

I'm aware of the elected official.

I mean, we're gonna we're gonna beat up our commission then on uh on a decision they can't make.

So they have to vote yes on it as well, is what you're stating.

Is that correct?

The commission has to vote.

There's nothing the commission can do about it.

Is that correct?

Sir, the law will remain the same.

Um regardless of where it is.

Some municipalities have it at the staff level.

Um I know that was discussed.

I don't believe it's appropriate for staff.

Oh, you put at staff level was that an optional proposal.

By the way, I would say um that there is a discretionary difference.

Council is elected and and discretion I just don't think it's fair to put out a commission of appointed people where they could be the burden of public comment.

That is what as elected officials we take on.

So that's where I'll leave it.

Sorry.

And in defense of our planning commission that I was on for eight years.

As a result, if they see something coming back to them, it's not right.

They have a better option to go back to the consultant or to the applicant and say you forgot something.

But you did something that you weren't supposed to do.

You added something.

They will have they will have had better knowledge in front of them than we would.

And then if they don't want to go against state law, they can send it to us.

But this automatically gives two different groups a chance to look at it each time it comes back to make sure there was not something changed.

There was one item I remembered on something at the northern closed northern Mount Pleasant.

Which had to do with a hotel.

That the neighborhood in the area was concerned about the access.

It came back to us after they caught it.

And we were able to stop going forward until they changed it.

So that's that's the reason that I suggested using the planning commission.

Because it gives two groups the opportunity in the event there is a change made or a mistake made going forward.

And that again is the mayor mentioned.

When these things come to us, we're told we don't have a choice.

We got we gotta vote for it by state law.

Well we we can we can certainly delay if there's something wrong that the um applicant did in there going forward.

And so that's the reason I like letting the planning commissioner to start with.

Ms.

Hyatt So Mr.

Chapman, you mentioned two it would be reviewed by two bodies, but really this would only send it to the planning commission and not to council.

We wouldn't see it unless there was a some issue.

In the event there's an issue, they're more likely to catch it than we just to add I guess if we want the two layers of review, why doesn't it go to planning commission and they send it to us and they can flag things if they see um I just I think bottom line is it needs to come to us and we need to be big boys and girls and uh um and vote on it.

But I I just want to counter that uh Mr.

Brownstein we hold something that the planning commission does not, and that is we can enforce, we can enact and and actually make law.

They they cannot.

And I think when people vote to send us here, they do not expect us to sit here and do a perfunctory thing and vote yes when in fact we are told that we can't vote no.

And I think that that right that they give us as elected officials is more sacred than that.

And if it falls to a commission, let the commission let the commission just do it.

But I don't like sitting up here as one sent here by the citizens four times now and vote on something and say, hey y'all, I can't vote no.

So I I think that makes a mockery of what we were sent here to do, and the the planning commission, they were not elected, they are appointed by us to do things like that, and that's why I'm a firm believer in this.

But I think just about everyone's had a chance to speak if if we are ready to vote, we're gonna do a roll call vote, a uh a yes vote is to deny the motion is to deny, so will it the clerk call the roll, please?

Ms.

Hyatt, yes, Ms.

Hyatt votes yes, Mr.

Ikafana?

Yes, Mr.

Ikefana votes yes, Mr.

Rambo, no, Mr.

Rambo votes no, Mr.

Tinke?

No, Mr.

Tinky votes no Miss Whitaker, no, Miss Whitaker votes no, Mr.

Brownstein, yes, Mr.

Brownstone votes yes, Mr.

Chapman.

No, Mr.

Chapman votes no, Mr.

Crosby.

No.

Ms.

Crosby votes no, Mayor Heaney.

No.

Motion to approve.

Second.

All right.

So we have a motion to approve.

Do we want to have discussion in reverse?

Uh we have a motion and second.

If there's no discussion, uh, would you please call the roll?

Mr.

Ikafana.

No.

Mr.

Ikefana votes no.

Ms.

Mr.

Rambo, yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Rambo votes yes.

Mr.

Tinky.

Yes.

Mr.

Tinky votes yes.

Ms.

Whitaker.

Yes.

Yes.

Ms.

Whitaker votes yes.

Mr.

Brownstein.

No.

No.

Mr.

Brownstein votes no.

Mr.

Chapman.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Chapman votes yes.

Ms.

Crosby.

Yes.

Yes.

Ms.

Crosby votes yes.

Ms.

Hyatt?

No.

Ms.

Hyatt votes no.

Mayor Haney?

Yes.

Yes.

Mayor Haney votes yes.

Well, remarkably the same score.

Six by six three.

The motion to approve.

Final reading, orders number two five zero five five.

I just want to thank everybody.

That's great discussion.

It's the essence of what we're doing.

And um I don't mind anybody's opinion on that either way.

So thank you all very much for very great and very respectful discussion.

Um so that is item ten B.

Item eleven is to adjourn.

If there is nothing further to come before us, we stand.