 Good afternoon, Madam Clark. Could you read the roll, please? Good afternoon, certainly. Mr. Taylor? Ms. Herbert? Here. Dr. Bussells? Mr. Brennan? Present. Mr. McDowell? Yes. Mr. Duvall? Present. Mayor Rickiman? Here. Could you stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, universal in liberty and justice for all. Reverend McDowell, could you give us a word of prayer, please? Need to pray. Let us bow our heads. Gracious creator, for your abundant goodness, for your mercies, for grace that is sometimes overwhelming. We gather in this room today to discuss and yet to be sensitized to the needs of this city and for every community it represents, touch us collectively and yet individually so that your spirit and your presence might abide with us. In your name, we pray. It's waiting on Erica. Yes, sir. I mean, if you go for it. OK, we do have several amendments to the agenda. As you all consider your adoption of it today, the deferral of consideration of item 23 and the deferral of consideration of item 24, adding Gatsen Street property to executive session item 33. That would be under the discussion of negotiations to instant to propose contractual arrangements pursuant to South Carolina code 34782. And the addition of the receipt of legal advice related to matters covered by attorney client privilege pursuant to South Carolina code 34782 Columbia College Drive resolution number R-2022-064 and resolution number R-2022-066. Those would be the amendments, Mayor. Mr. Mayor. Mr. Ball. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion. We defer item 17 back to the Planning Commission. Is there a second discussion? This is the buffer zone. And the neighborhoods have been engaged in a lot of negotiations with the mayor's office. And the mayor has been very good about meeting with them. There are solutions available that the neighborhood agree to, and the mayor's office agrees to. But they can't be put in at this level. They have to go back to the Planning Commission to be approved and come back to the council. I think it would be a real good gesture of good faith by the council to wait a few days, a few weeks, to get this back. There's nothing pending. We took three years of negotiation to adopt the Columbia Compass. We can take another few weeks to make a vital amendment to it. And I would ask the council to support sending this to the Planning Commission. And then we can have a unanimous council when it comes back. I have a subsequent motion to put forth, which means we will vote on second reading. We will take the said language that we have drawn up and file an amendment to the amendment at the Planning Commission and let it follow the process that it should follow. And I'd like a second. Second. So we have competing motions. And so we're in a discussion period. What we've seen here is a draft of an ordinance that we've spent time working with, with meeting with neighborhoods, those who chose to join in. We took examples, showed how it affects. There's been a lot of discussion around it, but changing the language prior to the reading requires it to go out five more months. It's not like you can just change the schedule and change things around and meet it the way you want. There's a process. We committed to make the amendment with the folks who were in the room. We listened to what they asked. We went through a distinct process. We were at a decision about moving Columbia forward. And we have a great opportunity here. And I've heard from lots of neighborhood people who are supportive. Lots of landowners, business owners, all looking for a way so that we can move our city forward that we can grow and this, this is a great amendment to our ordinance to move forward. We've got language and we can work these parallel paths so that we can continue with the momentum that is going forward in our city. Ms. Herbert? I just wanted to make sure my position is clear on these. The language that we have today, and of course, I'm looking at it with the lawyer hat, so forgive me and I look at what we will have arguments over in the future. And as I previously said, that the language is not clear as written to me or if I had to argue one side of it or the other. So today, I can't vote yes on the ordinance as presented. I don't feel comfortable voting on the suggested language or the amended language because I don't think I have a copy of it. Gave me a copy. Yeah, I don't think I have it. How are we getting passing down? So I just wanted to make sure folks understand, I do understand the intent. I do agree with what we're trying to do with the ordinance. I agree with it. But just as a lawyer, I can't vote for language that I think is less than perfect. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Devoe. Reverend MacDonald. Just a question. Is second reading contingent upon changing the language prior to the second reading or after the second reading? It has to be after. You can't change the language prior to. It's not allowed by the law. Well, that gives me a little reservations with that, with not having an opportunity to change that language prior to the reading and the second reading of this literature. Okay. I have asked Ms. Hampton to prepare the amended to be presented. I'm willing to sign it tonight and have it sent through as I committed to, but we're not gonna restart the process. We can do this parallel pass and it allows us to keep the momentum that's going here. And I think it'd be a great mistake if we didn't move forward. Any other comments, questions? Mr. Mayor? Yes, Mr. Taylor? I haven't been in business in the city of Columbia for some 30 something years. And frankly, having been disappointed in the business friendly approach and the difficulty that we've made it in some cases, not necessarily intentionally, but unintentionally, for people to make it difficult for them to improve their property. And one of the things, I mean, think with me for a second. If I ask you to improve your property and you go and you would make an investment, what's the first thing that happens? The taxes go up. So you have to pay more taxes when you make your property look better. And then we make it incrementally more expensive every time. I, you know, looking at this, I don't understand, I have to be candid with you. And I've probably done more development than anybody in this room. You okay, need some water? Do you want a bottle of water? What important making this? We're not removing any trees. We're saying if you wanna redevelop your building and the landscaping code calls for you to take up parking places, we're waiving that. And today I believe if you have to, if you don't want to build a buffer, you build a wall. So it's not like buffers are required. And so the problem is we've had cases. I mean, legitimate true examples where people spent millions of dollars to make abandoned buildings look better. And we went to take away 40, 50, 60% of their parking to put in stuff that wasn't required when the buildings look bad. And then ask them to rent parking. That's right. So I mean, that's all we're doing here. And I would say to everybody in the room, if we're fortunate enough, if we're fortunate enough to have to deal with this six or eight times in a given year, and most of it's going to be small businesses, smaller buildings, then we'd be great as a city. So I just, I'm at a loss for why we would even hesitate on this. We're not removing the landscape completely either. It would only affect the area that's affected by the parking. And that's it. And so the majority of the properties in the areas that we're talking about are non-conforming. Not one of them are conforming to today's standard. So we're levelizing the play field to allow the small businesses to thrive and grow and create some energy, investment, and opportunities in our community. I have to say I'm disappointed. I just want to add because I think this has, I think by not doing this, it affects our lower income communities where we have lower property values more so than anywhere else in the city. Our planning group and stormwater group put up a presentation that showed some redevelopment of some shopping centers where the sales wouldn't have happened. I think this is, I have to tell you, it's a very elitist thing to be against this in my personal opinion. It's because it has a negative effect, I think, on our most affordable areas where we need redevelopment and we need improvements of these buildings in these small businesses. Mr. Mayor, Mr. DeBall, I don't think that this council or this city wants us to choose between being business friendly and being friendly to the neighborhoods that have existed in the city of Columbia. This ordinance is not going to prevent any development as soon as we get it passed through the planning commission. You are not delaying anything more than two or three months at the most and I think we ought to honor the neighborhoods by letting the process be clean, go back to the planning commission, getting the ordinance in good shape. It's not going to ruin the city of Columbia to be patient and wait a little bit. Mr. DeVall, others have protected what we call a slow death and I think that's what we're after here in this case with a delay. I don't think there's any need and I can tell you having been the secretary of commerce and talked with people all throughout the city of Columbia, these type things where we add additional cost, I mean serious additional cost has cost us significant investment in the city of Columbia. I want to vote on this, vote on the subsequent motion first and if it passes the first motion, that would be the rule right there, attorney. And if it passes the first motion is nullified. That's correct. I think it's important to recognize as I'm hearing all of you all that the end goal for all of us is the same and that is to make it easier for us to make a vibrant thriving city. And so I just, I think it makes sense that we're trying to meet in the middle by potentially allowing this amendment to go through as written and then working with the planning commission to continue to make some of those changes. I think that's a happy compromise to ensure that we still have a process in which neighborhoods can participate and engage with as the mayor signs that amendment immediately after this vote. Ms. Hampton has already prepared the amendment to be executed tonight by myself. Point of clarification, who puts in that application if it passes the amendment? Is that from staff? Is that from Ms. Hampton? I'll be the applicant. I'll sign it right now. And there can be more than one applicant, correct? So I mean, I'm, you know, it could be all of council if we decide that we want to put that application in together. Which I would be supportive of. Mr. Reverend. Yes, the issue right now is whether or not communities have the kind of wiggle room to at least discuss these things in an open forum. That has not taken place. The mayor has been right on point. He's met with some communities. But in order to make this thing work, it has to be holistically, conversationally talked about. So we'll send that, Mr. Mayor. I moved to the previous question. Ms. Erica, could you call the roll please? This is the subsequent- Let's make sure, Ms. Clerk, that what we're voting on. The mayor recommends subsequent motion to approve item 17 and proceed with filing an amendment with the planning commission. It was seconded by Mr. Taylor. The question's been called. Madam Clerk, could you read the roll please? Yes, sir. Mr. Taylor. Ms. Herbert. No. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. No. Mr. Duvall. No. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Thank you. Madam City Manager, can we go back to the amendments on the agenda, because we need to approve those? I can't hear you. You all have a motion to approve those amendments? Do we, I think we're gonna have to restate it since we had subsequent motions go in between. Thank you. So the amendments to the agenda that I previously stated, you want me to restate those? Did defer consideration of item 23. Okay. Deterioration item 24. Add Gadsden Street property to executive session item 33. And then add receipt of legal advice related to matters covered by attorney crime privilege pursuant to SC code 30-4-7 to Columbia College Drive Resolution R-2022-064 Resolution R-2022-066. That's my motion. Is there a second? It's been seconded. Point of order, Mr. Mayor. The motion to defer item 17 came in the adoption of the agenda. It was not a point, a place to substantive change. No, you asked for a point of privilege, sir. Say what? You asked for it separately. It wasn't part of the original motion. I made the motion to defer item 17. Separately from this. Because she made them, she brought it forth and then you made a motion to defer 17. This is separate. The moderation is separate. That's why I'm making a new motion because all of that died because of my secondary. So now I have made a motion for this and I'm asking for a second. You're putting 17 back on the agenda? No, it's passed, it's done. Well, that's my point of order. I don't think it can pass because it wasn't properly before the body. It was us, we were adopting them in. Where's my lawyer? Howard, I need to understand. I don't understand. Based on where we are right now, we passed item number 17. No. I don't think we did. I think we were debating whether or not it'd be put on the agenda or not. And so the debate, I can see that Mr. Rickerman is going to probably win whom we get to item 17, but I think it's not properly before the body. Thank you all are at the point to adopt the agenda as outlined now. And then if you wanted to, I guess, further clarify item 17, you could take up another motion. I don't, I think we're back to where we started, essentially, but I think that was the point is that 17 is not off the agenda. This is separate. And that was Mr. Wilson. Yes sir. And that was the point of order. I think Mr. I think the point of order is you're saying that 17, even though we talked about it and voted on the modification of 17, that 17 is still on the agenda in a modified way. Yes. Is that correct? Yes. That's what we're all saying. All right. This is separate. That's what I was saying. 17 was not taken away. 17 becomes. Make your motion to do the thing when it gets accepted. Well, 17 has to become language that is consistent with what the subsequent motion was. Now, 17 gets voted as the item on the agenda. Well, we still gotta change the language. We still gotta change the language for item 17 because it became a subsequent motion that passed. No, sir. I think that Mayor Rickerman's motion was essentially reiterating item 17 as it already was on the agenda originally. And so when the motion passed for his subsequent motion, it pretty much stayed the item as it always was on your agenda. It essentially became the main motion. Yes, sir. And there too became item number 17. As it always has been on the agenda, not with any amendments or anything to it though. It would have the amendments because otherwise it would have been the original. It has to incorporate. That's correct. That the mayor said. And that's my point is that if it's not incorporated. The mayor can't make an amendment to it until you all vote on it. I can't make an amendment to the vote. Yeah. You would be so kind. Would you withdraw your motion, both motions until the appropriate time and let's proceed with the adoption of the agenda as amended. And we have at least 10 people who have signed up to speak on the item. So I understand why we do need to get some clarity, but if we could get the agenda adopted and kind of go from there. My understanding is still on the agenda and it will be voted on at the appropriate time. Yes, sir. Absolutely. Correct? Yes, sir. With the necessary amendments, subsequent amendments attached to it. Is that correct? Be part of my motion. I would respectfully request that Mr. Duvall and the mayor both withdraw their motions and let's hear from the people and then have any discussion when we get to 17. So I don't know. Wait a minute. Go for it. You have a subsequent. Mr. Duvall put this ball in this court. And that's what I'm trying to pull it out. So procedurally, if 17 wasn't on the agenda, there wouldn't be an opportunity for the public to comment, correct? It's on the agenda. Okay, so that's what we thought we'd put it on, that it's gonna stay on the agenda so folks can talk. Grace, man. Yeah, and we'll be voting on it at that point. Yes, sir. That's why I asked her to restate the amendments. Well, if she's at Madam Clerk, are you asking us to withdraw both of the motions? Respectfully. For 17. Daniel, if you go first, because you've had a subsequent motion. Madam Clerk, at your recommendation, I will withdraw my second, my subsequent amendment to item 17 and we'll restate it at the appropriate time. Thank you, Mayor. Madam Clerk, I would withdraw my principle motion to defer item 17 and we can debate it when we get to 17. Thank you. I have a motion for the adoption of the agenda, Mayor. I've made the motion. Can I have a second? Second. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McGowell. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor recommends. Aye. Thank you. And Mayor recommends not to further muddy the water, but just so that we have just some clarity as well as efficiency with the use of our time, it appears from our public input for agenda items, those who have signed up mostly are for item 17. That is correct. While we do have the opportunity usually to have public input on agenda items prior to the presentations, I would respectfully ask that we allow Mr. Derek Huggins to move forward with his presentation because he is short on time. And then if we could either go back to 17 immediately or wait and allow the public input when we get to item 17. But if you all want to take that up immediately thereafter presentations, that is fine as well. Well, I would suggest that we allow Mr. Huggins to go ahead and then immediately after that, go ahead and take the public input so we can stay in as close to order as the agenda that's published as possible. Thank you, Mayor Acomman. At this time, we have presentations, the first and only being an update from the comment. Mr. Derek Huggins, interim chief executive officer and executive director of the comment. Hey, Derek. Thank you. I do appreciate this opportunity to come speak to you. I'll give you a quick update. On two issues that have been brought to me from my board members, Ms. Herbert and Mr. Brennan. Given the update on Lucius Road Project, the Superstop, it is a movement ahead. We're at state and completion by the end of September. It will have 16 bus bays. So you will see a litigation of congestion on Sumpter Street and we're very excited about this parcel. And you're gonna see all the different types of Superstops all across the county. So that's where we are with that. I appreciate the support to get the signalization done. It could not have done, could not have happened without the signalization and Mr. Brennan was definitely helpful there and Mayor Acomman. And also the second thing that we wanted to talk about was homelessness. And there's a couple of issues that were brought up like four or five, but I want you to know that we're working very closely with the city manager, also Chief Holbrook to start a collaboration to move forward on correcting a lot of issues and we'll be very timely on giving you input and giving you updates. I might ask the Director of Operations just to clarify a couple of things with trust passing and the protocol of trust passing. And then some of the things that we already do during inclement weather. And just so you'd be aware of some of the things that we're doing to help with the homeless issues. I'm the Director of Operations for the county. And as far as the homeless population is challenging. We do have a trust passing process. And anytime we trust pass a person, they have five days to appeal. The appeal process comes to the comment and we have a staff that reviews the appeal process. For the most part, if it's something minor, we let them back on the bus or let them back on the premises. So I would say about 80% of the people that are trust pass, they are issue a copy of the trust pass notice. And most of them, they refuse to take their copy or they'll take it and tear it up. And on the copy, it states what the appeal process is. So they don't even look at that. So it'll be like days later or weeks later when they call us at the comment and say, what do I need to do to get back on the bus or to visit your premises? So even at that, the five days are gone. We still try to work with them because we know they need transportation as well. But we do have a process. And also we do provide transportation for inclement weather. That's a certain time of the year when it's real cold. We provide transportation to the shelters and to go back to the shelter and bring them back to the comment center. Chris Bowers. So the process only considers homeless persons being given a ticket. What's the responsibility of the comment into? I'm trying to see whether or not that's elongated or whether that's just the mode of operation. Someone is homeless, they get a ticket, they tear it up and they come back. What other resources or are there resources to prevent that from happening over and over again? So when they're issued a copy of the trespass notice, what are you saying? Most of them will call us anyway. Either they're called personally, themselves, or they have a representative that will call for them to see what can be done. There are other questions, Mr. Taylor. Mr. Mayor, just a couple of quick questions. I mean, in the second one, I don't think you can answer today. I just want to ask it because I just think it's something we can consider. I mean, we are working with the police department on reducing some bus stops that are with issues and stuff down there. And we'll get some communication back on that. Thank you, I appreciate that. Now, second one, and I promise you, this is not a trap question by any measure, but the bus system gets a significant amount of money each year from the penny tax, correct? And the numbers I've seen in the past, I mean, it's like $17, $18 million from the penny tax, something in that neighborhood. And the fares that we collect are in the $2 million range. I mean, should we as a community, especially in Richland County, begin to have a conversation of how we might make the bus system free for everybody? It to me, it gives me, I've always had some real concern with the working folks in town that pay the penny tax and then have to pay to ride the bus. And I think one of the ways that we can separate ourselves from other cities out there is to have a really quality, free public transportation system. And again, not really looking for the answer today, but I just think that's something that we really ought to consider as a community as a way to set ourselves apart from other places. And I'll work closely with the seat of manager and maybe even attend a work session with you and just discuss it in full. Okay. Thank you, sir. I appreciate the consideration of it. I just think it's a way to make Columbia even more special place. And frankly, again, looking after the little guy, and I just, I think it could be a really cool thing. Thank you, sir. Mr. Brennan. Mr. Huggins, thank you so much for coming to speak with us today. I, at our service committee, subcommittee last week, was very interested in the use of technology to help with our safety and beautification efforts with the comment on your routes. Can you just give us a general, I guess, update on how you interact with technology, both on the buses, and then also our wonderful fleet drivers that I know the recruitment and retention is something we struggle with. And I think our operator does a wonderful job bringing in new talent to help us using their communication skills, what they see on the routes to help our public works department, our CPD and other public safety outlets keep not only the city safe, but also beautiful. I just had a meeting yesterday with Chief Holbrook and we discussed that. More collaboration, more cameras, more vehicle arrival times, being specific and knowing who's on the bus. And then when we have a problem, we have the cameras in the work collectively with CPD or if it's Richland County to be able to make sure our passengers are safe at all times and our drivers. One of the things that we have to be very careful about is putting our drivers in arms way. And we have to have Ms. Bowers and Mr. Cooke talk to the drivers and they are the first line and we respond to them and whenever there is a problem, we try to make sure that we own it basically. So I agree with you, working closely with the city and sharing that kind of information, that technology will make it a safer place for our... Great, thanks for your operations. Mr. Huggins, one of the questions I keep getting from folks is can we get an update on Lucius Road and then how the routes may change? Do you have any kind of little quick insight you can give us on how that will move forward? Okay, so we're getting to what is called centralization decentralization. Right now is the centralized route where everything transfers down, drives down to lower and something. So what you're gonna see more of is with these super stops, people can stay in their districts and not have to come all the way downtown. So you won't have that pulsing on Sumpter Street, that staging on Sumpter Street that you normally see. So you won't see as many people at the stops. They'll be more dispersed, they'll be more decentralized but they're able to get to where they're going much quicker and stay in their district and not having to come all the way downtown and then go back out. Thank you, sir. There any other questions from Mr. Huggins? I look forward to attending your work session to give more information with the questions that were brought up. Thank you very much. Thank you both for being here this evening. Thank you so much, Derek and his team and counsel, you will find an item on the agenda this evening regarding the encroachment to help move forward the Lucius Rowe project as well. Thank you. With that, may I recommend I think you would like to go back to the public input on agenda items at this time? I would. I would. The first person who signed up and this is the time for only for folks who've signed up for agenda items to speak. Anybody else that will be at the end of our session. So I have Mr. Bill Strangler for item 17. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Bill Stangler. Stangler, sorry. And I'm going to speak today about the development standards and the proposed ordinance. And I'm going to try and keep my comments brief because you all have read the letter I hope that I sent to council before and there are numerous other people who want to speak on this issue. The primary concerns of my organization revolve around impacts to stormwater. The city is currently facing numerous stormwater issues from water quality impairments to our urban waterways and rivers to issues like urban flooding that we've seen time and again. I've worked on numerous watershed improvement plans with the city, collaborative projects to develop plans for the Saluda and Congere River watersheds Rocky Branch, Smith Branch and what we see time and again from those plans is that redevelopment is one of our key opportunities to reduce stormwater runoff in the city of Columbia, especially in these highly urbanized watersheds like downtown, like Rocky Branch, like Smith Branch. So this proposed ordinance is a, and I'm actually going to use a phrase that staff use when they discussed it, it is a lost opportunity. So not having redevelopment sites have to come into compliance with the current landscape requirements and current development standards is a lost opportunity for reducing stormwater impacts. And we heard some analysis from staff and I was at that work session and I think there were some pieces missing from that. Staff said, looking at these sites you would have, and again I'm a bit confused on what would apply here. The analysis they did seemed to suggest that if you were to lose any single parking space you didn't have to comply with the landscape ordinance at all, not just for the one parking space. It's not correct. The analysis showed on those drawings. So is it just the one parking spot where you don't have to comply or is it overall? But it also failed to account for the additional benefits that those landscaping requirements do provide. So we just looked at impervious surface quick by the numbers, but not what actually having those trees and having those landscape buffers would actually do and that would actually increase the absorption of stormwater and reduce stormwater runoff more than that 2.5 to 3% that I heard staff say, but even more to the point, those numbers two and a half to 3% are significant. That's actually a big deal when you're looking at these highly urbanized watersheds that are covered in concrete and asphalt. So I don't dismiss that as something, oh well that's just a small percentage. Those cumulative impacts of being able to get clawback that little bit of concrete here and there is a dramatic improvement for these watersheds that we've been working for years and years to try and improve. So that is a concern of mine. I've got a few other concerns here as well. We hear about parking and how businesses are gonna be forced to go rent offsite parking or spend a lot of money. Council is, as I've heard, going to investigate changes to parking. You guys are apparently looking at changing the requirements for parking. So wouldn't this go hand in hand with that? If you're saying we're gonna reduce parking, why are we fighting so hard to save these parking spots right now that it won't be required later on? Is there perhaps a way to say that this would only apply where you have required parking that would be lost and not what could be described as excess parking after you guys change this parking ordinance? And the other piece here is the city has a process to allow variances for these design standards, development standards as they are. They're very rarely denied. So if this is truly a burden on someone coming in, there is a process in place right now that exists for folks to say, hey, this is gonna be really hard for us to do. Can we get a variance? Rather than just say I am against things, I would like to propose something that I think city council could do if you move forward on this or not. And that is to better incentivize the green infrastructure and stormwater reductions that we all do wanna see. The city has a stormwater overlay district right now. It's kind of a trial run to see if we could reduce stormwater fees for businesses if they install that type of green infrastructure they wanna see. I would encourage council to expand that, whether it's piecemeal by districts or parts of city or city-wide. And let's get the developers a break on their stormwater fees so that we can see as the constitution of the city, the benefits that we wanna see. And equally as important as that, you have a lot of people in this room who are concerned about these issues from organizations like mine and others to the neighborhoods, bring them to the table. We are here to work together on these things, but we can't do that if we're not around the table. So I encourage you to do that. Finally, take your time on this issue. This is not something to be rushed. I think we're all getting a feel for how this new council is going to work with citizens, with neighborhoods, with organizations. And really, let's be thoughtful about the message this sends to people in the room and who aren't in the room right now that wanna be part of these conversations moving forward. I appreciate the opportunity to speak and I appreciate your time today. I'm happy to answer questions if you have them. Can we ask a question? You're more than welcome to ask a question. Bill, you said that we have an overlay district to look at stormwater fees. So it's, and I think staff would be better equipped to describe how it works right now, but in Gills Creek Watershed, there was an idea to kind of test this out by saying, yeah, if you commit to doing certain things that are, I guess, above and beyond, that you can have your stormwater fee reduced by showing that you've reduced the impact from your properties. Is this an experimental thing for the city? I think that's what it was intended to start as. And I think it's something that can certainly be expanded. And I think the other piece is that is encouraged, dramatically encouraged. I don't know that enough people know about it, but I think it's certainly a piece that could be encouraged by the city and expanded beyond that small footprint right now. And to add to that, anything that's, if you're doing a rebuild over a certain dollar amount, you have to bring everything up to code, which brings stormwater and everything. This doesn't eliminate everything. So we just need to be clear with the public that this is about existing in its existing footprint. You get over a certain threshold. Everything has to be any parking lot that changes into a new building structure all comes into code and we'll have to deal with all of the stormwater and everything to today's code. So just wanted to make sure that point was clear because that wasn't very clear there. But thank you very much for being here today. I have Ms. Catherine Finner. Hi, I'm Catherine Finner, University Hill Neighborhood Association. I am a little bit shocked after hearing Mr. Stangler's things about how much rainwater is gonna be falling. I understand, I live, as many of you know, right across the street from Maxie Gregg Park. And as I said last time, it's very, very hard for me to get out in even minor flash flooding situations, which are frequent. Sandin has terrific problems with that. It's extremely difficult to do that and I'm really shocked to hear just how serious that is. Upstream from us, which is, again, I live at the bottom of the hill, so much of that is all redevelopment. So the fact that new development might not, might have to do better compliance won't really help us very much. We're hoping that we could get more trees to soak up the stuff so that maybe I can get out reliably or get home reliably if I'm stuck out in a storm. But I mean, my real question here is, why this huge rush? I don't understand the rush. There's so much momentum going that I think that a lot of times notice and adequate notice was not given to the neighborhoods. We didn't know what was coming down the thing. There was some sort of cryptic notice of meetings in the committees that wasn't clear at all what it was. I'm not sure you actually met the notice requirements for various things, but why this huge rush when we could just simply slow down, get it right, and literally invite various people to the table who have not been invited to the table to make sure that the language says what it really should say, which is basically sure, we'll give you a variance, which I'm on the Board of Zoning Appeals. We grant almost every single variance somebody wants to do. You check off the boxes, we give it to you, it's no question. So I don't know why we really need to change this at all, but if we did need to change it, let's make sure we do it exactly right. The language that has been promulgated does not match what has been presented to you all. If you would read the language, it's pretty basic stuff. It says if you lose one parking space required or otherwise, you don't have to comply with landscaping requirements for buffer zones, for street protective zones, and the only time that you would have to do it is if the property is larger expanded by more than 75%. That applies to almost no redevelopments. Thank you. Ms. Elizabeth Marks. Good morning. Well, it's afternoon now. I sent a letter earlier to Ms. Wilson, and I know she won't have time to respond, but for the, let me pull this down a little bit. For all intensive purposes, this process has been very opaque. I live at 1908 Henderson Street. I pay attention to what's happening at City Council. I pay attention to what's happening on the boards and commissions. We first found out about this when it showed up in planning. We can find no record of there being a discussion of this amendment in City Council. We understand that it did occur in the Economic Development Committee. If so, it was not advertised in a way that the city neighborhoods could respond. So I've asked for Ms. Wilson to help us in locating some background information on this. We've asked for a list of the city committees where this topic was specifically discussed. We're not asking for any paper copies. All we're asking for is where we can find it online. We can't find it online. The location of the Planning Department's work product containing the studies, research, and justifications for the proposed changes. We can't find any paperwork or work product on the process that led up to this change. We also can't find the location of the hydrology study that was prepared by the Engineering Department and referenced in the recent stormwater presentation to City Council. I wanna emphasize we're not asking for the paper copies of this. We're not asking to have to pay $600 or $700 to get copies of this information. Just tell us where it is. So what we'd like to know is how we got here and why we got here so fast and why there's a rush in putting forth this proposal to change the ordinance. What we're requesting is that this be deferred. I think it's obvious that there isn't a lot of information and what is out there is not clear and that the language is defective. So we are asking that this be deferred. We don't see why you have to vote on it today. We thank you for your time and hope that you will take our concerns seriously. Thank you. Thank you. Bye, Henley. May I recommend members of council? My name is Bye Henley. I live at 104 Alabama Street, Columbia, South Carolina. I wanna thank you for your service to our great city and your ongoing support of our firefighters and the future construction of our new Olympia Firehouse. Today in this state newspaper, the university announced the South Main Street makeover recommended in the 2017 Sasaki design firm. It will include wide stretches of green space to encourage quality development. I found that interesting. An early 1900s land study of Columbia called for greenways along our streams to preserve wetlands to prevent flooding and to provide recreation for its residents. The same study called for more tree lined sidewalks to replace Columbia's quote unquote unsightly and over wide streets. Traditionally, Columbia city planners rarely considered the benefits of green infrastructure resulting in significant loss of canopy and wetland. Our current code happens to take that into account. Derek Grunner, architect for the University of South Carolina couldn't have said it better today in the paper. I believe good ideas always find their place in time. It just sometimes takes extraordinary patience. I support council's efforts to make Columbia a better environment in which small business will thrive as do many here in this room. However, I ask that you exercise extraordinary patience by extending the time you take to make such a significant change to the current code. Doing so will allow good ideas to find their place in the final revision, making our city attractive to business and to those who live, work and play here. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Next up is Ms. Pamela Greenlaw. Good afternoon, mayor, and city council. I am the current chair of the Middles Group of South Carolina Sierra Club and we cover 11 counties, so there's no need for me to give you an address. I'm everywhere. Our mission is to enjoy and explore and protect the earth, engage others in doing the same, and we wanna invite you to do that with us. We do our work through an environmental injustice lens. The first is a justice issue. We do request the postponement making decision and you have done that to a degree about moving these amendments to the UDO until this is seen the light of day. We would like to see a return of the practice that council women and men would hold regular public meetings with their constituents. Remember those days? Okay, and so that these issues can see the full light of day, constituents need to be fully informed, need to ask questions and provide input. The Middles Group does support the city's desire and efforts to do the renovations that are necessary of commercial properties. However, there are mistakes in there that will bring the city to a hotter place by considering only upfront financial costs and not health and other costs. Non-compliant properties in need of renovation can already apply for and receive exemptions. The proposed amendments for relaxing vegetation requirements or eliminating them from properties will reduce opportunities to better manage stormwater, as Mr. Stengler pointed out, and for managing temperatures. U of S C and partners just completed data collection of which many of Sierra Club members participated for heat mapping of the city. And you've seen that, you saw that in the newspaper. Well, they don't have the results yet. We need to know what that is. We need to see the analyses that are gonna be forthcoming. The city could use the information. A lack of green infrastructure in Columbia is resulting in a proliferation of heat islands. If you have a piece of property with exemptions next to another piece of property with exemptions, it's gonna look like Bull Street multiplied. Redevelopment can also provide opportunities to increase tree canopy. Customers jockey for parking spaces under the trees. Don't you do that? You see where the tree is. You're heading for it. And there's a reason for that. They provide more than shade. Through transpiration, they cool the spaces underneath with them, underneath them. And so we do concur with Mr. Stangler's assessments. Take time to examine alternative study what Spartanburg and other cities are doing to develop. Let the ecosystems do the work of protecting water, resources, and the property values. These increased property values also takes care of pavement that is overstressed and crumbles because of sun and heat. People who are walking in exposed areas have no transportation. They need these trees also. So please, Mr. Mayor and Council members, go back and create a time with your constituents to talk about this all-important issue. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Ms. Denise Wellman. Good evening. Good evening Council. So good to see you. I am the President of Cottontown and I wanna thank you for your work on behalf of our great city and your time today. I am here with some additional members of Cottontown as well as a number of stakeholders that you've already heard from. And we do want to affirm again that we do stand against this amendment as it is currently written. And I'm excited to know that thank you for listening to us last week. And I'll be anxious to hear the amendment that you're going to recommend. We feel that it needs to more clearly reflect what is important to the neighborhoods so that we can be protected while the city continues to grow and develop. And things like fences and walls are not clear to us that they are still going to be in there. But I hear that you want to address that and appreciate that. Additionally, we do agree with the riverkeepers and the Sierra Club as we talked about last week that stormwater is a concern for us. And this amendment seems to ignore the cumulative impact of many projects that could have an impact on reducing stormwater runoff. This doesn't affect just small businesses. And I appreciate where you're going with helping small businesses and making some adjustments to the parking if buffers are a problem. But to wholesale eliminate all interior tree plantings in large projects seems to be very problematic to us. And I think the testimony speaks to that. We'd like to suggest that maybe that this only be allowed for small projects, okay? That we will eliminate interior plantings for small projects. And large projects would still need to have some type of infrastructure, green infrastructure to help with stormwater runoff because the data shows that what happened on the 4th of July is not episodic. This is happening more and more and more. And we've got to continue to take care of our city. And I think we can incentivize developers to do things that help our city be pretty as they grow and can help with stormwater runoff at the same time. So thank you for the work you've put into this. Thank you for listening to us. And thank you for the time today. Thank you, Ms. Wellman. Ms. Mary Williams. Hi, thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Mary Williams. I'm here today in a couple of different capacities. I am the incoming vice president of ECHO, the Earl Wood Concern Community Citizens Organization. And then as a member of the community, my husband is a small business owner. I am a member of a women's space of micro small businesses. So small businesses are often at the forefront of my understanding of how things will impact our communities. First and foremost, the language as is in this amendment is very broad. I think that you've heard that from many as well as councilwoman Herbert. And if it is only pertaining to a single parking space and only changing the design and development requirements for that single's parking space, that is not clear here. And I would caution the council in adopting something that is so blatantly unclear to everyone in the room. Additionally, we do agree with the river keepers in Earl Wood and in North Main, excuse me, in general, our area is primed for development. Our area has many unused parking lots, unused or abandoned commercial buildings. However, what we envision for that area is sustainable and thoughtful development. That is not to say that small businesses wouldn't be interested in being in our area if they had to create a buffer or have permeable pavement space or have additional green space. That is to say that we want to attract businesses to our area that have the same type of vision for our community as we do. As I said, my husband is a small business owner. He's a micro business, he's a one man show. He's a commercial and residential electrician. So I've never been accused of being an elitist being a blue collar person. But this in particular is not fleshed out. And I think that there are many small business owners who have ideas about how they can engage with the city and want to engage with the city. If we can get the city to engage in a way that shows the type of development that small business that are already here are looking for, including infrastructure investments that would assist with things like fiber or access, better access for their businesses. Finally, I am also on the bike and pedestrian advisory committee for the city. I haven't seen anybody here on that committee. So let's talk about how to make businesses more accessible to bicycles and pedestrians so that we can all enjoy walking to small businesses, being in neighborhoods, but this is not the way to do it. Thank you. Lee Jennings, Paul Balknight, I saw him here. That brings us to Elaine Cooper and if Paul gets back before we finish this, we'll go back. Yes, ma'am. I'm Elaine Cooper. I'm in between two city council people right now. I've had Will Brennan, but now due to the recent census, I'll be changed to Joe Taylor. So nice to meet you, Joe. I enjoyed your comment about homelessness, about, you know, making the comment free because it has been through COVID. Yes, we should continue that. And I saw a kind, a good side of you with that comment. With that said, I live in an area near Forest and Beltlight close to COVID. I listened to the work session that you sent me a link to. By the way, this is important. I hope you listen. You need to be on mic when you speak at the work session. I could not hear anything because Mr. Rickerman was off mic. I could not hear any comments from Ed McDowell because you were off mic. This is your mic. If you could speak because many of the public cannot hear you unless you're on mic. So I miss many of your points about this. I'm sorry to say. With that said, I speak for the trees. I know, and by the way, Joe, I planted trees and actually got, we've gotten rid of our lawn. We have gotten rid of our lawn because it's not sustainable in the majority of the US nowadays with the water issue throughout the US. And by planting trees and plants, it has not raised our taxes. It has increased the value of our neighborhood and our neighbors are doing the same. We've kind of spread the word of trees. By planting trees, maybe we, businesses haven't been educated about the value of trees. Trees, and we have some links, actually save pavement at businesses. I didn't know if you realized that. It actually can save the cost and the cost of pavement decay over a period of time. That's something to look at when you consider parking spaces pavement that if you actually build a buffer with trees and grow the mainly trees, you will actually save that business and the city from having to repair that pavement, that concrete. That's one interesting point. Other than they've done studies that folks, the public are inclined, more motivated to go to businesses that have green spaces around that. And actually, and also I am, I also noticed in the work session that you were talking about, and I applaud you that you're redeveloping these blighted areas since I actually live very close to Covenant and Toonach. So I couldn't understand really what you were all talking about. And so I actually redrove around that entire perimeter of the area today. And it's ugly as it has been for a while. I can't imagine how it would be improved whatsoever. And it is a huge concrete space with a great deal of parking. I just beg you to think of my son and my grandchildren, which I hope one day to have, in really thinking about our city as you look ahead. Don't rush, don't hurry, listen to the community about taking some time because you will benefit from communities that have a very, a green buffer and trees versus eliminating them. I know I've lived through this issue on the south side of Chicago. And now what do we have on the south side of Chicago, the very far south side, where there were no buffers in certain areas, flooding, mass flooding. So unfortunately, I really did think of jumping out of my bed last night and tell you the truth about going and taking some video and pictures of the incredible storm that happened last night to actually look at some of these areas where there are no storm buffers around these places. Maybe, anyway, so consider trees. Thank you. Thank you. Paul, you missed your term. Would you like to speak? I wanna make sure you're heard. 35 years I was in development in the city for Richland Memorial, Palmetto Health and Prisma. And some of those requirements that we had to meet were pretty difficult. Fusy Hayward accused me of raping the land when we were clearing property for a new hospital. You obviously didn't buy air conditioning system from them. Actually, well, we spread it around. But I support changes needed, live in Cotton Town. I have been involved in recruiting the businesses that have developed there. We were always on the defensive. We went on the offensive to get people in there and it's worked and we're supporting those businesses. And I do know there needs to be some change. I know you've been listening to the things we've asked for and I appreciate that. But I really feel like we need to get a little more involvement in it. And I would love the opportunity to have a little more input. I have an idea of what the amendments are, but there's still a lot of people that need the opportunity to talk. I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you, Paul. That concludes all the people who are signed up for the agenda items. Mr. Mayor, that takes us to the Consent Agenda before you have items two through 16 for consideration. Mayor, I'm sorry, can we pull out agenda item eight? Four, separate vote? For a separate vote. Okay, we are going to, so we got a motion for items two through seven and nine through 16. Is there a second? Second. Is there any discussion? Questions? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk, could you read the roll? Mr. Taylor? Aye. Ms. Herbert? Aye. Dr. Bussells? Aye. Mr. Brennan? Yes. Mr. McDowell? Yes. Mr. Duvall? Aye. Mayor Rickerman? Aye. Thank you. Can we have a motion for number eight? Mayor, quick comment before we do that, please. I just want for the record and for council, I've asked Mr. Palin as we go forward on these to just list whether these, as you can read them in the agenda, whether they're renewals replacement or the same and if the price has changed to note that the price has changed. Duly noted, thank you, Mr. Taylor. Can we have a motion for item eight? So moved. Second. Second. Madam, discussion? I just, thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to note, just out of due diligence, we had some discussions, Michael Baker International and being awarded one of these agreements and it's not really in their normal bailiwick. So I just wanted to note for the record who some of the subcontractors are because they're gonna be helping do a substantial amount of the work too. And I have, I'm probably not gonna pronounce these correctly, but one of the subcontractors is Con Resnick and the other subcontractor is Gade House. That's all I have. Did you want some clarity from staff on any of those? I got it, but I think, I just thought it was important to make sure we list the subcontractors. Yeah, Con Resnick's probably one of the very large company in Gade House specializes in a lot of the hood. This is probably one of the most important things that we do at City Council, especially this type of an agreement with the millions of dollars from infrastructure to unsheltered, homeless, to energy, to roads, to small business opportunities, stormwater, future growth, building, right now we're in a time that we've never seen before. But the majority of this money that's available to us is in application process. And what we recognized early in what we were recommended from the folks in Washington, from the White House and the secretaries is to really beef up our team and have folks who can help us take advantage of the money that's out there. We're talking about transforming a community by leveraging federal dollars that we may not see after this four years. This includes Choice Neighborhood. East Central is a plan that was developed by this city 20 years ago. And has been on a shelf. And now we have an opportunity to go after funding to make a difference in our most challenged areas and really build up a community that is... I'm excited about this because we've been working on this for six months to get to a point through an RFP process staff diligently went through to make sure that we left no stone unturned because if we're not prepared, we'll miss opportunities. And quite frankly, we're not at the pace we wanted to be. We wanted to be here further, but we are where we are today. So I appreciate all the questions and back and forth, but this is an opportunity of lifetime. And hopefully we can leverage and really improve everything from infrastructure to small business opportunities, to our parks, to our trails. You mentioned BPAC, this will help us solve some of those issues. Our future, looking at how we deal with some of the significant runoff as we continue to grow, but also encourage a lot of investment by partnering and delivering a lifetime of investment at one time. Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to echo that sentiment. One of the things that we've identified in our work around the prevention of homelessness is how many unique opportunities are coming down the pike on the federal level that we really need to take advantage of, especially as we're thinking about affordable housing and non-congregate housing and really building out options for our population. And so I'm excited to see us go through this rigorous RFP process and then have an infrastructure to support some of these very lengthy and competitive applications for this city. I think it positions us well for a lot of the priorities that we have moving forward and just look forward to working with the staff on really taking advantage of some of those unique opportunities. Making sure however that as we move forward that there is adequate substantial minority participation. I'm impressed with this, but I'm also keenly aware that minority participation subcontractors. Those monies, of course, become a crucial and yet vital part of their existence. And to reiterate that, Reverend McDowell, by one of the things we did in Washington when I had an opportunity to be there was to address the issue with the secretaries about making the requirements around being able to have more participation by our small businesses, especially minority and disadvantaged businesses in our community by lowering some of the standards that they had originally in these, which included lowering the bond capacity that they required, lowering the amount of bank credit that they had to have so that when we get this money that we're able to keep it here locally and build up these small businesses. And I think you've seen council as 100% behind making sure that happens and we are gonna continue that with filling gaps, working with different businesses to make sure that our money stays here in Columbia growing our small businesses. Mr. DeVall. Mr. May, I just wanna come in. You feel enthusiasm for the funds available to local government by the current administration and your recognition of the fact that we need to make sure that they stay there so that the local governments can continue to get funded. Well, I will tell you that what I've been told is that we got a three and a half year run here. And so we either, because at some point this has all gotta be paid back. So we gotta make as much movement forward as we can. Well, the East Central Plan gives us that opportunity to do that. A plan that was, of course, has been on the shift since 2004. And of course, the implementation of East Central Plan provide opportunities not only for our city, but also for every community that it falls within. So yes, sir. Ms. Herbert, did you wanna say something? I saw you ruffling over there. Oh no, you all covered it all. Any more discussion? Hearing none, seeing none. Madam Clark, could you read the roll? Mr. Taylor. Ms. Herbert. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickerman. Aye. Thank you. I wanna proceed to item 17 now, Mayor Rickerman. Yes, ma'am. This is the beginning of the zoning planning matters for second reading, the amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance for non-conforming sites. Ordinance number 2020-068, amending the 1998 code of ordinances of the city of Columbia, South Carolina, Chapter 17, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 5, Development Standards, Section 17, 5.3, landscaping and Section 17, 7.6, non-conforming site features. I have a motion to move forward with the concurrence that at the end of this meeting, I will sign a amendment to go to the planning commission to change the current language that takes into account the language based on meetings that we've had with those who wanted to participate in public discussion with us in meetings that we went through examples and will have that amendment signed today and brought to staff to be recorded. There's a second discussion. For the purposes of the public, would it be possible to read that amendment aloud? Sure. So there are two different sections, obviously. And this will be on record, but this is for just, this is not part of the amendment. I mean, the motion will hand it over, but it calls for the development that consistent of a renovation or reuse of existing structure where the buffer would require reduction in the number of parking spaces in an existing parking lot. And that's under the transitional buffers and that reflects language we discussed. The second is the draft modification is what we're proposing for development, the consistency of renovation or reviews of existing structure. The vegetation portion of the transitional buffer yard is not required where it would result in the removal of an existing parking space in an existing lot. Key words that were asked. The current amendment in street protection yards, the development that consists of renovation or reuse of existing structure where the protective yard would require the reduction in the number of parking spaces in an existing parking lot. The modifications will read for the development that consists of renovation or reuse of an existing structure, the vegetation portion of the street protective yard is not required where it would result in the removal of existing parking lots in existing parking spaces in an existing parking lot. Point of order, Mr. Mayor. Those amendments are not what we're voting on. We're voting on the- That's why I said these aren't. This is discussion, this is part of a motion. What we would be voting on is the ordinance that's presented through the planning commission. With the modification. The modification will be submitted afterwards. You can't modify it during the process. That's what we established earlier. Is there any more discussion? Call for the question. Madam Clerk, do you read the roll? Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. No. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. No. Mr. Duvall. No. Mayor Rickman. Aye. And I will get with Ms. Hampton after this and we'll go ahead and sign and submit the amendment as stated during the discussion period. Item 18 is a zoning planning matter for first reading, the zoning map amendment for 5609 Farrow Road. Ordinance number 2020-067, amending the official zoning map to modify the zoning for 5609 Farrow Road in Richland County. So moved. Second. Is there any discussion? We'll approve the question. Mr. Taylor. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Moving into a period of ordinances for first reading item 19 is ordinance number 2020-076, granting an encroachment to Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority, the CMRTA for the use of the right-of-way area of 3,700 and 3,800 blocks of Lucius Road. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk, can you read the roll? Mr. Taylor, we're voting on item 19. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Item 20 is ordinance number 2020-077, amending the 1998 Code of Ordinances of the City of Columbia, South Carolina, Chapter 2, Administration Article 5, procurement section 2210, purchase and sale of real property, exceptions for certain utilities, project and site acquisitions. Move to approve. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Item 21 is ordinance number 2020-078, approval for conveyance of 0.33 acre portion of the city property located at 1796 Shady Lane, and identified and as listed. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Can you go ahead and read the roll please? Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Resolutions item 22 is resolution number R-2022-063, authorizing city manager that executed 911, communication center consolidation agreement extension. I move approval. So moved. Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Please read the roll. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Deferring items 23 and 24, moving into event resolutions, item 25, resolution number R-2020-041, authorizing consumption of beer and wine only at the tunnel to Tower's 5K Walk Run for injured military and first responders and the 1,100 block of Lincoln Street between Senate Street and Pendleton Street on Friday, September the 9th. Move for approval. Second. Got a set for a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Could you read the roll? Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Item 26 is resolution number R-2020-062, authorizing consumption of beer and wine only at the Rosewood Art and Music Festival at Rosewood Park, 901 South Holly Street and the corner of South Holly Street and Airport Boulevard to South Holly and Gardena Street on Saturday, October the 15th, 2022. Move for approval. Second. A motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Please read the roll. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Item 27, resolution number R-2020-067, authorizing consumption of beer and wine only at the contemporaries present beer and brats on Boyd Plaza on Thursday, September 29th, 2022. Move for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Please read the roll. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Item 28 is resolution number R-2020-070, authorizing consumption of beer and wine only at Distalite's annual holiday festival on Thursday, November the 17th, 2020. Move for approval. Second. Motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk. Please read the roll. Mr. Taylor. Aye. Ms. Herbert. Aye. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mr. Duvall. Aye. Mayor Rickman. Aye. Thank you. Your committee referrals, reports and new business may be taken up, starting with item 29, the Administrative Policy Committee Report, the Honorable Edward H. McDowell, Jr. Mr. Mayor and members of council, we did an overview of our committee's work. Last time there were no concretized recommendations made to council. What I'd like to do is for us to meet again because there has been, there are some issues that we need to firm up and bring to council at a later date. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we asked the Administrative Committee to do was to look at the specified qualifications for some of the committees, like an architect or architect historian or whatever. And I didn't see that in the report that we got from you. So when you go back the second time, ask them to look and see if there are any qualifications that we can, but that's modified. We will. Yes, sir. Anything else for the chairman? Hearing none, seeing none, we'll move to the Honorable Tina N. Herbert for her report on affordable housing task. You read it so well and I intended to defer that report tonight. Would you like to defer it? Yes. Thank you very much. The Honorable Joe E. Taylor, Junior Economic Development and Community Development Committee. Let me say we met on Tuesday, August the 9th. We'll have a standing committee meeting the second Tuesday of every month going forward. We covered, we just overviewed the Economic Development Plan as presented by the city manager and it's going back to the city manager to be final. We'll review it at our next committee meeting and bring it to council. We got an update on the Office of Business Opportunities. We discussed the grease trap program and we're looking for something back to council, back to the committee on that that we're looking up. And we referred some deals. I've asked, and I think this is a really good policy going forward. Our clerk of council does a magnificent job with the summaries and I've asked her if she would, from this point forward, as part of our report include a copy of the committee summary as part of the council summary for these meetings. So you'll have in your, you'll have in the summary, the actual, I guess I'm gonna say summary three times. You'll have the summary of the committee meeting and the summary of the council meeting. If that's something, Mr. Mayor, that y'all think is a good idea. That's overly redundant. I know. I know. We, is that something we're good with? I'm fine with it. Anybody have any objections? That's a link through our online agenda. Yeah, I think that's a good idea. And I wanna commend the clerk for continuing to try to bring us up and get more information out. She's been doing a lot of research, how we can continue to get information out more. Can't make everybody go look at it, but we sure can have it out there. So I really appreciate that. Madam clerk. Item 32, the healthy start funding request. I don't know before we take that up, I didn't know if there were any other reports, referrals. I'm not sure if anybody, did anybody have any referrals for this week for any committees? Is there any new business that needed to be brought forth? Mr. Mayor, I would like to make just one point of information because there were some discussions earlier in this meeting that really gave me a little bit of cause for concern. And people were talking about transparency and stuff. I think we've gone to great lengths on certain things. When it comes to transparency, our committee meetings, we post them, we televise them on the thing with me. Nobody's hiding anything at all. It's not a, we don't vote in the committee meetings. Public hearings at the Planning Commission and the DDRC type things, they're all public, they're all posted. And I just want to make sure that the people who are watching this at home understand that we, and I've been involved in a lot of government stuff, but there is multiple, multiple times that we allow the public to make comments at every single time. And again, I don't want people to think there's any lack of transparency because I think our city manager and our clerk and you, Mr. Mayor, we all work hard to make sure that folks know what we're talking about. Yeah, and I appreciate you saying that. I wanted to say something earlier and I just felt like I needed to address a couple of those issues with some folks directly about because transparency works two ways. You can't pick and choose when you decide to do that. This council has done more than any other council to make sure that our business is done in the public and we make sure everything's available. And it's very important. And I think when people make comments, sometimes it's more emotional and so I'm taking that in as that some of the comments that were made were based on emotion, not on fact. But I do think there's some things that have to be addressed because I do think it's unfair to make the statement that things are done under the dark, especially from some folks who told me they just didn't have time to put it on paper and sit down and have a conversation. They were too busy, but yet they can make the time to make a statement at this podium like that without any facts and it's kind of disappointing. And I hope that in the future, we continue to do things. People engage people from our offices open every day. We're meeting with somebody and bringing folks to the table. So I look forward to continue to improve. Look, we're not perfect. We're human. And if somebody has some better suggestions, we're all ears and we want to move forward. With that, is there any other- Mr. Mayor, may I just- Yes, sir. Say a word. You may. Let's say a word about transparency because it works two ways. That's a two-way street. It works on this side and it works on this side. So it has to be applicable to what we are trying to do as a council and of course, as a city. Please know that anytime you are sitting at this Diaz, a chair and there are disparaging comments made, it's not made personally. It's made collaboratively, almost. Transparency needs to be an issue that will invade our conversation, every conversation, or to be transparent. Not only are we transparent, but our staff also needs to be transparent. So it's an end game for everybody. Not just for us, because if we can be transparent with you, you being transparent with us individually and as a council, I think it works. It works, but it cannot work when there is quote-unquote deceptional transparency. And I think we need to be careful with that. When we use that word, we need to make sure and ensure that all are treated the same way, even if we disagree. All are treated the same way in that we move towards a paradigm that is changing not only individually for our city, but collectively as our city. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You're welcome. Is there anything else? Any new business or referrals? I did have a referral, Mayor. You did? Yes. Yes, ma'am, please go ahead. I'm somewhat deferred to you, but I did wanna make sure we had the food policy committee to come and present. And I know that they have some outstanding requests. I was thinking of maybe referring them to maybe the economic and community development, or where do you think that would fit? That probably would be the proper forum. Okay, I just wanna make sure. Okay, so I would like to refer that to the next scheduled meeting that we have. Food policy council, that's a second, okay. Is that good? Is that it? So we have healthy start funding requests. As y'all know, I brought this forward. I'm a big believer in what they're doing with this healthy start program and its investment. They have asked us with some leftover resilience funding for that. I know there were some questions. I'm hoping those got answered, but I'd like to move this forward at this time for a vote, obviously, because I think it's time to move forward. As you know, this is for the healthy start program, which is building a new facility and obviously with COVID and everything else costs ran, but they had raised all their money to build this facility that provides a discounted, affordable fresh vegetables and fruits to our clientele, which almost, I think it's close to 60 plus percent is delivered within the city limits. And I will not try to, as we talk forward, this facility is located right outside the city limits off a two-notch road, but the majority is needed in our most of our area. So I have a motion to move forward. Is there a second? How much? It's 80,000 out of the resilience fund. We can't have discussion till there's a second. So is there a second or is it die on the vine? Second. Second. Discussion. Mr. Mayor, I have to tell you, I respect what these folks do. And I respect a lot of it comes in the city, but the resilience fund was specifically created for a couple of three things that this just doesn't qualify for. I mean, it was a $10,000 cap intentional and it was for nonprofits that were negatively affected by the COVID situation. And again, as much as I'd like to move forward with this, I think the ask is outside of the parameters of what that fund was created for. And what I'd like to see us do after this is either return that money to another fund that you could expend money for this type thing for or something else, but I just, unfortunately, I just don't think the way that fund was created, this meets the terms and conditions of it. Mr. Mayor. Mayor. Mayor McDowell. One of the things that I raised last time at our last discussion as we discussed this was that it was COVID related. I'm just at, it bothers me at this point, I'm a COVID survivor and there are persons in here who are COVID survivors. Those numbers are gradually increasing. There needs to be some funds. And I think when it was created, it was created with the sole intent of making sure that there was perhaps a nest egg that if things were to surprisingly go up, I find it a little, I agree with you, Joe, that it's going to bother me some to appropriate those funds. I just can't see it right now. Ms. Herbert. And I am a big fan of food share, but I was kind of confused by the attachments because everything referred to food share and not to Healthy Star. Healthy Star is the program. It's the program, okay. So I called over there. The other issue that we have is, according to the budget, food share, which is the organization that we receive it, has already received $25,000 from the fund, which is like one of the largest awards. So this would be a second request and that amount is just a lot higher than the other ones. And I did believe that we did read that it was designed for companies or businesses, nonprofits within the city limits. Unfortunately, the new move that they just made, they were eligible previously, but they've now moved outside of the county, I mean outside of the city limits. You know, resilient fund left over and carried over from the year. You know, I hear all of you, I just, I believe in it, I believe it's the source. You know, we can support it or not support it, but I do think it's a worthy cause and it's one of these things that we've just, we've got to move forward on. I would consider, I think one of the discussions was what do we do with the money that's sitting there now and do we want to repurpose it into another type of fund that will make it eligible or look at another funding source? So are you suggesting that we ask the city manager to create a separate fund that they would be eligible for? That's not really what I was asking. Wow, I mean, it sounded like that, so I had to ask. We get tons of requests in and I think we do have to have a way, oh, because to answer Mr. Taylor's question, they are applying to Richland County, but they're going through a NOFA process. So all I'm saying is I think if we're gonna have requests like this, we need to have a similar pot and a transparent process so that everyone can compete. I know some folks might not want to do that kind of pot, but that's kind of what I am leaning towards, but this is not the appropriate funding source for this request today. I'm just not sure whether or not, Councilwoman Herban, I'm just not repurposing this fund. Does that essentially takes away from perhaps COVID infections over a period of time and having funds there available? I don't think so, I think we decide that. Like I think we send it to the Economic and Community Development Committee, or some such committee unless we can come to a consensus. Don't we do that. As opposed to asking the city manager to have to do it, but I think we can put our heads together. I think we can do that. And if a piece of that or a part of that money could certainly be dedicated for COVID resiliency, I would feel more comfortable in having something in the pot as opposed to not having anything in the pot if it were to break out. I'm on request, we move the question, and then if everybody wants to refer something to a committee and figure out the move forward, but we have motion in a second. Madam Clerk, could you read the roll? Mr. Taylor? Ms. Herbert? No. Dr. Bussells? No. Mr. Brennan? Yes. Mr. McDowell? No. Mr. Duvall? No. Mayor Rickamon? Aye. And I would remind council, I mean this may be in line with councilwoman Herbert's suggestion that on the 23rd, we still had several items to complete that were kind of after the budgetary type matters. And one of them is the idea of a community promotions fund where you all determine if you so choose to as some councils have done in the past. They don't do it every year. You don't have to do it this year. A pot of funds for whatever eligible community-based type programs that you all would deem of interest. If you choose to do that, we would issue a notice of funds availability. There would be a process, transparent, everyone would have the opportunity to apply depending on what you may choose that you want are as eligible things to apply for. That's gonna be on our agenda for the work session. Yes, sir, it is. And so to Reverend McDowell's point, if you all just wanted to leave the resiliency funds in place or if you wanted to repurpose the funds to that effort as you discuss it on the 23rd, I think all of those things you could probably take up at that time. These funds are in a dedicated account and so that's where they'll be until we're directed otherwise. What's the total in that fund currently? I did not bring that with me. Roughly about $300,000. I don't think it was maybe 300 left or thereabouts. The act number. Ms. Kaufman, did you want to confirm that amount? I know I didn't know the dollars and cents to the penny, but I think it's right for you. I didn't bring it with me. It's in your inboxes when we sent it before, but I don't have it in front of me. The remaining amount is 300,000. 300, okay, thank you, Ms. C. What revenue source was Columbia Water on that for the resilience from previous council? It was an action from transferring to the general fund from Water and Sewer, yes. Thank you. At this point, we're back to public input unless anybody has anything else to add because we did have Lee Carroll, I think he might have left. I don't see him anymore. And Ms. Bolden, she was here, but I believe she might have left. But you've touched base with her right, Ms. Belton, thank you. So that's all I had signed up. Is there anybody else that would like to speak at this time? All right, well, hearing none, seeing none. Mr. Mayor, I make a motion to go into executive session for discussion of negotiations in instant to proposed contractual arrangements pursuant to SECO 30-4S78-2 homeless services contract, discussion of employee pursuant to SECO 30-4S78-1 municipal court, discussion of negotiations instant to proposed contractual arrangements pursuant to 30-4S78-2 Gadsden Street property, receipt of legal advice related to matters covered by 20 client privilege pursuant to SECO 30-4S78-2 Columbia College Drive Resolution R22064, Resolution R22066. Is there a second? Second. Madam Clerk, could you read the roll? Mr. Taylor. Ms. Herbert. Dr. Bussells. Aye. Mr. Brennan. Yes. Mr. McDowell. Yes. Mayor, I recommend. Aye. Thank you.