[4:41] adjourned.
[4:41] Don
[4:43] t fool yourself. I was
[4:45] pointing to you. All right,
[4:46] good evening. I
[4:47] d like to call
[4:49] the MARCH 13, 2025 meeting of
[4:50] the Greenville City Council to
[4:50] order. I
[4:51] m Mayor pj Connolly.
[4:52] I
[4:53] ll be presiding over
[4:53] tonight
[4:55] s meeting. Uh, first, I
[4:57] will call it myself for the
[4:58] invocation, followed by the
[5:00] Pledge of Allegiance. If you
[5:01] join me for a moment of silence.
[5:11] Thank you. Please stand for the
[5:17] Pledge of allegiance. I pledge
[5:20] allegiance to the flag of the
[5:21] United States of America and to
[5:24] the Republic for which it
[5:28] stands one nation with the
[5:33] liberty and justice for all.
[5:34] MADAM Clerk, will you please
[5:37] call the roll? Yes, sir. Mayor
[5:39] Connelly. Here, Mayor Prote
[5:42] Daniels. Council member Foreman
[5:45] here. Council member Blackburn.
[5:48] Councilor Scali here.
[5:49] COUNCILMAN Robinson. Heis here.
[5:51] Mayor Connelly, you have a, a
[5:52] quorum. Thank you very much.
[5:53] Now we move on to the approval
[5:53] of tonight
[5:55] s agenda. MR. Man,
[5:55] there any recommended changes?
[5:56] I have no changes, ma
[5:57] am. All
[5:59] right. Second, all right, most
[5:59] have been made by Councillor
[6:00] Mayor Willis, seconded by
[6:01] Councilor member Scully. All
[6:02] those in favor say aye. I
[6:02] m
[6:04] supposed to say nay. Motion
[6:05] passes 60. Thank you very much.
[6:05] We
[6:07] ll move on to special
[6:18] recognitions. I
[6:18] d like to ask
[6:32] Phyllis House to come forward.
[6:40] Mm Tonight we are here to honor
[6:41] Phyllis in her retirement from
[6:43] the city of Greenville. And I
[6:44] would like to uh to give you a
[6:46] little bit of background about
[6:47] Phyllis and her years here with
[6:49] the city. Prior to joining the
[6:51] city of Greenville, Phyllis
[6:53] dedicated 15 years of her life
[6:55] as a social worker for Pitt
[6:56] County government before
[6:58] deciding to take a step back to
[7:00] focus on her family. She
[7:03] reentered the workforce in
[7:04] NOVEMBER of 2004, taking on a
[7:06] part-time role with the city at
[7:07] the Greenville Aquatics and
[7:10] Fitness Center, where she
[7:10] helped with processing
[7:11] memberships and providing great
[7:15] customer service. In 2010, she
[7:16] was promoted to designated part
[7:18] time as a member coordinator at
[7:20] the Aquatics and Fitness Center,
[7:23] and in JUNE of 2021, she earned
[7:26] a very deserving promotion to
[7:26] full-time staff support
[7:29] specialist 3, where she still
[7:31] handled all memberships and
[7:33] increased membership engagement.
[7:33] Phillips
[7:34] beloved by the
[7:36] members and all of her
[7:37] co-workers at the aquatics and
[7:39] Fitness Center, but she is best
[7:42] known for her cooking, and I
[7:42] m
[7:42] sure it
[7:43] s awesome. She is the
[7:44] The two-time back to back
[7:47] champion of the city
[7:48] s 2023 and
[7:52] 2024, United Way Chili Cookoff,
[7:55] and the 2024 United Way dessert
[7:56] competition. And I
[7:56] m formally
[7:59] invite Phyllis back next year,
[8:00] uh, to defend her titles. And
[8:01] for the longest period of time,
[8:03] we thought it was rigged by a
[8:04] fire rescue, so I know it
[8:05] s
[8:08] gotta be good. Phyllis has
[8:10] truly made a positive impact on
[8:11] many Greenville residents and
[8:14] visitors. We will all MISS Her
[8:15] professionalism, organization,
[8:17] and of course her cooking.
[8:19] Phyllis, we congratulate you on
[8:21] a great career, and we thank
[8:22] you for everything that you
[8:24] have done to make the lives of
[8:25] all those at the Aquatic Center
[8:27] and all over the city of
[8:28] Greenville better. It
[8:29] s because
[8:31] of you that we, that when you
[8:32] represent everything great
[8:33] about this community. Thank you,
[8:53] Phyllis. Now I
[8:54] d like to ask
[9:01] Frank Coghlin to come forward.
[9:13] Uh Right. We are also here
[9:14] tonight to congratulate Frank
[9:16] on his retirement with the city
[9:17] of Greenville. And I do want to
[9:18] give a little bit of background
[9:21] about Frank as well. Frank
[9:22] dedicated 20 years of service
[9:24] to the citizens of Greenville,
[9:26] retiring as an ems specialist
[9:28] with Greenville Fire Rescue.
[9:29] Throughout his career, Frank
[9:31] was renowned for his skills as
[9:32] a paramedic. His ability to
[9:34] teach. And it
[9:35] s not for
[9:38] mentoring new employees. His
[9:39] extensive knowledge and
[9:39] expertise save countless of
[9:43] lives. And is approachable,
[9:44] caring personality left a
[9:45] lasting impression on everyone
[9:47] who worked with him. When Frank
[9:49] showed up at an emergency, his
[9:51] supervisors, peers, and
[9:52] subordinates always felt better
[9:55] having him there. Frank was a
[9:57] beloved figure around the
[9:58] station, always embodying the
[10:01] role of the senior man. Who
[10:02] insured everything ran smoothly.
[10:05] Beyond his professional
[10:06] accomplishments, Frank was also
[10:10] known for his culinary talents,
[10:12] especially his famous Chicago
[10:13] style deep dish pizza, which
[10:14] became a favorite among his
[10:17] colleagues. Frank
[10:17] s retirement
[10:19] marks the end of an era, but
[10:20] his legacy will continue to
[10:22] inspire and impact the lives of
[10:25] those who are fortunate enough
[10:26] to work alongside him. I
[10:26] ve
[10:28] known Frank for a long time.
[10:30] And I can tell you, you will
[10:32] not find a better guy than this
[10:34] right here. And a a better
[10:35] steward of everything great
[10:36] about the city of Greenville
[10:37] and the life that you have
[10:38] impacted in the life that you
[10:40] have saved. We will never be
[10:42] able to thank you enough for
[10:42] all you
[10:43] ve done to for the
[10:44] service of this city. So thank
[10:45] you from on the bottom of my
[10:46] heart, thank you for everything
[10:46] you
[11:08] ve done. I would now like
[11:11] to invite Haley, Stacy. Kevin
[11:12] and Lindsey Yentz, uh, to join
[11:14] me on stage. Along with Chief
[11:45] Deb. I like to give you a
[11:47] little bit of background. About
[11:49] something that happened on
[11:52] FEBRUARY 10th of this year. On
[11:56] FEBRUARY 10, 2025 at 4:59 P.M.
[11:57] Greenville Fire Rescue received
[12:00] a call. For a female in cardiac
[12:02] arrest with cpr in progress at
[12:03] the Murphy Center on the ecu
[12:09] campus. Upon arrival, ems found
[12:11] ecu athletic staff performing
[12:13] bystander cpr and using an aed.
[12:15] The life saving actions of the
[12:17] ecu athletic staff include a
[12:19] high quality cpr and multiple
[12:22] defibrillations with the aed.
[12:24] With their assistance,
[12:26] Greenville Fire Rescue staff
[12:28] continued high quality cpr with
[12:29] advanced life support measures
[12:31] until return of spontaneous
[12:32] circulation was achieved. MS.
[12:34] Yentz It
[12:35] s a testament to the
[12:37] importance of early recognition
[12:40] of sudden cardiac arrest,
[12:42] bystander cpr and aed use. In
[12:43] early activation of the 911
[12:46] system. And That
[12:47] s a lot of
[12:48] technical words to say that we
[12:50] have a living miracle. Uh, on
[12:52] stage here tonight. And I
[12:53] ve,
[12:53] I
[12:54] ve said this over and over
[12:58] over the last couple of weeks.
[12:59] That on that day, GOD laid his
[13:04] hands on you. And also he had
[13:05] the right people there at the
[13:07] right time. Our fire rescue
[13:09] staff and the staff of ecu to
[13:11] also lay their hands on you.
[13:14] And it is a remarkable about
[13:15] how many different ways this
[13:17] could have gone, but I know
[13:17] it
[13:19] s all said and done, that
[13:20] you had the best staff in the
[13:21] whole and Wire world
[13:23] surrounding you at that point
[13:26] in time, and thank GOD above
[13:27] that he had the desire to see
[13:30] you live another day and to
[13:32] fulfill a very healthy life. So
[13:34] at this point in time, I would
[13:37] like to call forward all of
[13:38] those that were instrumental in
[13:40] performing the life saving
[13:41] measures for Haley. And I
[13:41] d
[13:43] like you to please come forward
[13:44] as call out your name if you
[13:44] re
[13:47] here. If athletic staff
[13:50] involved were McKenzie Martin.
[13:52] Rachel Wilkerson. Taylor
[13:57] Lefever. And Nate Clark. From
[13:58] the Greenville Fire Rescue team.
[14:01] We had Jay Knapp. Lieutenant
[14:06] Jim Lewis. Ashton Stewart Zach
[14:11] Price Elizabeth Jackson. Marcus
[14:14] Brown. Battalion Chief Bryant
[14:17] Bedard. Battalion Chief David
[14:20] Brown. And Captain Brandon
[14:38] Lockler. Again, you will not
[14:40] find a better group of
[14:44] individuals. Who every single
[14:47] day dedicate their lives. To uh
[14:48] to serving this community. I
[14:49] say they
[14:50] re the ones that are
[14:51] behind the scenes, you never
[14:52] even know they
[14:53] re there, but I
[14:55] can guarantee this community
[14:56] that they impact every single
[14:58] aspect of your life. And I
[14:58] ll
[15:00] say a prayer for their lives
[15:02] and every all of other students,
[15:03] every single night, because I
[15:03] know they
[15:04] re out there doing
[15:05] everything they can to protect
[15:08] our community. And Haley, I
[15:09] just say thank GOD that he laid
[15:11] his hands on you that day, and
[15:13] I am so proud of the and just
[15:14] thankful for the life that
[15:15] you
[15:16] re gonna have ahead of you.
[15:39] So thank you. I Oh Oh pushing
[16:21] on. I. Yeah Yeah Yes. Ok. A
[16:31] quarter of them. Put up in my
[16:34] car. Two hours. An eye on that.
[16:37] Yeah I know. Wild. Um-hum. I
[16:42] said, All right, we will now
[16:43] open the public comment period.
[16:44] The public comment period is a
[16:45] period reserved for comments by
[16:46] the public, items that were or
[16:48] scheduled to be a subject of a
[16:48] public hearing conducted at the
[16:49] same meeting or another meeting
[16:50] or the same week shall not be
[16:51] discussed. A total of 30
[16:53] minutes is allocated with each
[16:55] individual uh individual being
[16:56] allowed no more than 3 minutes.
[16:57] Individuals who registered with
[16:58] the city clerk to speak will
[16:59] speak in the order registered
[17:01] until the allotted 30 minutes
[17:02] expires. If time remains after
[17:03] all persons who have registered
[17:04] to have spoken, individuals who
[17:06] did not register will have an
[17:07] opportunity to speak until the
[17:08] allotted 30 minutes expires.
[17:10] MADAM Clerk, First speaker? Yes,
[17:12] sir. Our first speaker is MS.
[17:14] Patsy Duke. MISS Duke, you have
[17:15] 3 minutes to address the mayor
[17:27] and council. Yeah How do you
[17:29] wanna. That podium right there,
[17:29] ma
[17:38] am. Hello, my name is Patsy
[17:38] Duke, and I
[17:39] m PRESIDENT Of
[17:42] Relief. Relief is a tree group
[17:44] here in Greenville that you
[17:46] help work with because our
[17:47] group raises money for trees
[17:49] and the city of Greenville
[17:49] s
[17:50] public works department plants
[17:53] them. So we work hard together
[17:55] to make a beautiful green. I
[17:56] m
[17:57] here tonight though to ask for
[18:00] your help on an issue, uh, of
[18:01] trees, more, having more trees
[18:04] in our city. The residents of
[18:05] Greenville would like to see
[18:06] more trees planted in
[18:09] Greenville. And we want to save
[18:12] trees from being cut down. And
[18:13] this opinion is well documented.
[18:16] In the horizon
[18:18] s 2026 plan. And
[18:20] in the results of the udo open
[18:21] houses that were held by
[18:23] Inspire, the city
[18:23] s udo
[18:27] consultant. Right now,
[18:28] Greenville
[18:29] s canopy tree
[18:32] coverage is only 34%. Other
[18:33] cities in North Carolina have
[18:36] more people, more buildings,
[18:39] more concrete, more cars. And
[18:40] yet they enjoy a better tree
[18:44] canopy than we do. Cities like
[18:46] Charlotte, Raleigh, and Durham
[18:49] enjoy a tree canopy of 47, 48,
[18:52] and 52%. Even Wilmington is in
[18:54] better shape than Greenville.
[18:58] Prior to Hurricane Florence.
[18:58] Wilmington had 48% tree canopy
[19:01] coverage. And after the
[19:02] hurricane, it was estimated to
[19:06] be at 41%. But Greenville has
[19:11] 34%. How do these cities do it?
[19:14] These cities have people, more
[19:15] people, more concrete, and more
[19:18] cars. And somehow they managed
[19:21] to have more trees. Well, it
[19:21] s
[19:26] not by accident. They work for
[19:28] They employ urban foresters and
[19:29] arborists to be involved in the
[19:33] planning stages of development.
[19:34] They have ordinances that
[19:34] prevent trees from being cut
[19:38] down. They have ordinances that
[19:41] require tree planting.
[19:43] Sometimes even in new
[19:43] residential developments that
[19:47] are devoid of trees. They
[19:49] inspect to see if the trees of
[19:50] commercial properties are still
[19:52] there. Or if they need to be
[19:56] replanted. They treat their
[19:58] trees as the assets to the
[20:01] community that they are. And
[20:02] many of Greenville
[20:02] s residents
[20:05] would like to see our city work
[20:07] for a greater tree canopy. We
[20:10] need your help. Trees are a
[20:12] valuable resource. And we need
[20:14] to find ways to save the ones
[20:17] we have. To plant them where we
[20:17] don
[20:20] t already have them. And as
[20:22] a member of relief and as a
[20:24] member of our community. I come
[20:26] before you just say. That we
[20:28] would like to work with the
[20:31] city of Greenville to help our
[20:33] city accomplish this goal of a
[20:36] greener ring. Thank you. Thank
[20:36] you. Thank you, MS. She
[20:37] s good.
[20:41] That was around. She
[20:41] s clerk,
[20:45] our next speaker. Yes, sir.
[20:45] Next speaker, I
[20:46] m sorry, it
[20:47] s
[20:50] only marked as eca. Speak about
[20:55] concerns. We can come back to
[20:59] that speaker. Ok. Next speaker
[21:00] is MISS Rebecca Powers. MS.
[21:01] Powers, you have 3 minutes to
[21:06] address the mayor and council.
[21:08] Good evening council and Mayor.
[21:09] First, thank you for your
[21:11] service. You
[21:11] re extraordinary
[21:15] people. And you appreciate it.
[21:15] I
[21:17] m here right now to talk to
[21:19] you and follow up with what
[21:20] MISS Duke said. I
[21:25] m Wanting to.
[21:27] On behalf of many others, ask
[21:31] you all. To ask city staff.
[21:34] Work on a tree ordinance. That
[21:35] would preserve the trees that
[21:39] we currently have. Work on
[21:39] increasing the canopy trees,
[21:42] which are the big trees that
[21:43] provide the shade and all the
[21:48] glorious look of a city. And
[21:50] Very importantly, hire a
[21:53] full-time arborist. A full-time
[21:55] urban forester. Because this
[21:55] isn
[21:57] t something that just the
[21:59] volunteers can do, we sure try
[22:01] every, every year we plant. 100
[22:03] some trees. But it
[22:03] s bigger
[22:07] than us. And we need your help
[22:09] and that urban forester would
[22:10] be the person to do it, to have
[22:13] that expertise. Thank you.
[22:15] Thank you, MS. Powers. Thank
[22:16] you, MADAM Clark, our next
[22:19] Speaker. Yes, sir. Next speaker
[22:20] is Doctor Newman. Doctor Newman,
[22:22] you have 3 minutes to address
[22:23] the mayor and council. Doctor
[22:24] Newman, I
[22:24] d just like to know
[22:26] you had also noted up here to
[22:28] speak about the flag amendment,
[22:30] and that would be right during
[22:34] public hearing. Hello, good
[22:36] evening. Good evening. First, I
[22:38] want to start by thanking MR.
[22:40] Octagon, our director of Parks
[22:41] and Rec, I think he
[22:43] s here. He
[22:45] was here, yes, uh, I contacted
[22:48] him recently about 2 issues.
[22:50] One was a massive illegal
[22:52] dumping at what is the site of
[22:55] future East Side Park. And, uh,
[22:56] he followed up on that, called
[22:59] me, gave me an update, and told
[23:01] me how that situation would be
[23:04] remedied. I also called him
[23:06] after this very bizarre winter
[23:08] storm we had, and there was a
[23:09] section of the Greenway, which
[23:13] is on the north side of First
[23:14] Street Apartments, completely
[23:15] shaded, and I think it was 2
[23:17] days, maybe 3 days after the
[23:18] storm, it was still covered
[23:20] with a sheet of ice. So I
[23:21] called him, he said, yes, our
[23:22] crew hasn
[23:23] t been able to get
[23:24] out because of the ice, but
[23:24] we
[23:26] re gonna get out there
[23:27] tomorrow, so it was just great,
[23:29] you know, he was so responsive
[23:32] and so polite, and I really
[23:34] appreciated that. So I do want
[23:36] to, uh, echo some, some
[23:39] comments that have been made
[23:40] here previously tonight, and
[23:42] you all are very aware of this.
[23:45] People have come and spoken
[23:47] repeatedly about this. In the
[23:50] udo process, the community made
[23:51] very clear how they feel about
[23:55] trees. A big piece of that is
[23:56] two things that I have
[23:58] mentioned previously. And first
[24:00] I want to say I think every
[24:01] time I have come and spoken
[24:02] with you, I
[24:05] ve said I was so
[24:07] excited when this council came
[24:09] on board because you represent
[24:11] two important things.
[24:15] Possibility. An opportunity.
[24:17] Possibility to do things
[24:20] differently. We have 34% tree
[24:21] canopy because things have not
[24:22] been done in a thoughtful way
[24:26] in the past. Previous city
[24:28] councils, previous mayors,
[24:29] previous contractors and
[24:31] developers did not honor. What
[24:32] the community is now telling
[24:35] you is important. So we need a
[24:37] change of mindset. With
[24:39] contractors and developers, we
[24:41] see what their methods have
[24:43] done that cannot continue.
[24:43] That
[24:44] s the opportunity to say
[24:47] no, we have a chance to do
[24:48] things differently, and you can.
[24:50] One of the things I
[24:51] d like to
[24:53] suggest that I think would be
[24:54] really helpful in addressing
[24:57] solutions. I work with experts
[25:00] at ecu, experts in geology,
[25:03] hydrology, botany, watershed,
[25:04] uh, management, how to do that
[25:06] in an integrated way, and this
[25:08] is not to diminish the
[25:10] expertise of our stormwater
[25:11] engineers or planning
[25:13] department, just saying we have
[25:15] incredible experts at ecu. I
[25:17] would like for those people to
[25:19] be invited to workshops so that
[25:21] you could listen to the things
[25:23] that they have to say. These
[25:24] are people renowned in their
[25:27] field, their, their consultants
[25:29] that are are employed by all
[25:31] sorts of people to address
[25:32] critical environmental issues.
[25:33] And I didn
[25:34] t realize all these
[25:35] things until I started working
[25:37] with them. And then I realized,
[25:39] well, how would the average
[25:41] person know about these things?
[25:42] So I, I think it
[25:43] s really
[25:45] important that you have this
[25:46] background information because
[25:48] of how much it impacts the way
[25:49] you think about the decisions
[25:50] you
[25:50] re going to make. Uh, so
[25:51] I
[25:52] d like to follow up on this
[25:54] workshop idea. Thank you. I
[25:55] appreciate your service. Doctor
[25:56] Newman. Thanks, Doctor Newman.
[25:58] MADAM Clerk, our next speaker.
[26:00] Yes, sir. Next speaker is Ms
[26:01] Anne Maxwell. MISS Maxwell, you
[26:02] have 3 minutes to dress the
[26:12] mayor and council. Hello
[26:13] everyone. I
[26:15] m going to talk
[26:16] about trees outside because as
[26:17] I
[26:18] ve listened tonight, um, at
[26:20] all the positive things that
[26:21] have happened in Greenville. I
[26:24] want The tree issue to also be
[26:28] positive, and it is not now.
[26:30] Because when there was a tree
[26:32] assessment done and our tree
[26:36] canopy was 34%. And all over
[26:39] the state, it was much higher.
[26:40] And even talking to a developer,
[26:41] he said it
[26:42] s harder for us to
[26:43] keep the trees because of what
[26:46] we have to do the sites in
[26:47] eastern North Carolina, but
[26:50] then I look at Wilmington,
[26:51] certainly eastern North
[26:53] Carolina and they have a much
[26:55] higher tree canopy than us, so
[26:57] I know we can do something. And
[27:00] in the assessment, it has a
[27:01] wealth of information that can
[27:06] be used by the city to set a
[27:06] community-wide tree canopy gold.
[27:11] And one of the things that um
[27:13] has been has really not helped
[27:15] us is to have only a part-time
[27:20] arborist. Because this we need
[27:24] to have a full-time urban
[27:26] forester in this city because
[27:28] currently our arbors works in
[27:32] public works, and he helps with
[27:33] the public trees and that kind
[27:36] of thing, but there is nobody
[27:37] working with our planning
[27:40] department. Where most of the
[27:43] trees are cut. Um, and it
[27:44] s sad
[27:47] to me because when now when a
[27:49] developer presents a site plan
[27:51] to the plant staff, and it
[27:52] s
[27:53] approved, the developer can
[27:58] clear cut the property. And so
[27:59] all of our wonderful trees are
[28:02] leaving us. Um, and I
[28:03] ve worked
[28:05] I worked on a committee for
[28:08] almost a year, that put a lot
[28:11] of time in this, and I wish
[28:15] that you all would have. Um And
[28:17] your pike with relief and a
[28:19] friend of hers who
[28:19] s an urban
[28:22] forester, meet with you all at
[28:24] your next workshop session and
[28:28] go over what we put in our plan
[28:31] because we read the plans for
[28:33] cities all over North Carolina,
[28:35] and it was just really sad to
[28:36] see that Greenville didn
[28:37] t. We
[28:37] didn
[28:40] t have a plan. And when,
[28:44] and I saw the book from um
[28:45] Wilmington, where they, they
[28:50] have a, the Wilmington Urban
[28:51] Forestry plan and it
[28:51] s a
[28:54] beautiful book where they spell
[28:55] out everything what needs to be
[28:58] planted, where, why. Another
[29:04] sad piece is that We have 30%,
[29:07] 34% tree canopy and 30%
[29:10] impervious surface. So there
[29:11] s
[29:12] a lot that we have a plan that
[29:15] would be helpful. So thank you
[29:16] very much. Thank you. Thank you.
[29:19] Thank you, MISS Maxwell. Our
[29:20] next speaker. You don
[29:21] t have
[29:22] any additional registered
[29:22] speakers. Anyone else I
[29:23] d like
[29:23] to speak during the public
[29:24] comment period, please come
[29:25] forward, state your name for
[29:29] the record. You have 3 minutes.
[29:34] Yeah Do we want to go back and
[29:38] try this, or eca. MR. And MRS.
[29:39] Eca, you have 3 minutes to
[29:53] dress the mayor and council.
[29:54] See none we
[29:54] ll close the public
[29:55] comment period. We
[29:56] ll move on
[29:58] to appointments, MADAM Clerk,
[30:02] when you are ready. Um, first
[30:03] board is the Affordable housing
[30:04] loan Committee, COUNCILMAN
[30:08] Foreman. Uh, that is, um,
[30:10] Probably most, one of our most
[30:12] efficient boards, uh, but I
[30:12] m
[30:13] going to wait until next month
[30:15] so that I can contact them to
[30:16] make sure they want to be real.
[30:16] Ok. Yes, ma
[30:19] am. Next we have
[30:20] the board of adjustment Council
[30:21] member Blackburn. I
[30:22] d like to
[30:26] appoint Jeremy Jordan. Do we
[30:29] have a second? A second.
[30:30] Motions been made by Councilor
[30:33] Blackburn, say goodbye. Council
[30:35] member Willis, all those in
[30:37] favor say aye as opposed to say
[30:38] nay. Motion passes 6 to 0.
[30:40] Congratulations, MR. Jordan. Ok.
[30:42] Next we have the historic
[30:42] preservation Commission,
[30:46] Council member Blackburn. Yes,
[30:46] um, I
[30:49] d like to appoint a she,
[30:52] a shish Kachandani. He
[30:52] s
[30:55] actually a doctor Kajaani, uh,
[30:56] Susan Daughtry and Catherine
[30:58] Marriott. Ok. All right,
[30:58] motion
[30:59] s been made by council
[31:01] member Blackburn, seconded by
[31:02] Mayor Protem Daniels. All those
[31:04] in favor say aye, as opposed
[31:12] say nay. Motion passes. Doctor.
[31:13] Hanan Chande done. That was
[31:15] different than the first time
[31:17] you said and I apologize for,
[31:19] for not doing a good job, but I,
[31:20] but I know him as a she, so I
[31:23] just, I. What were the other
[31:25] two? Uh, Susan Daughtry and
[31:26] Catherine Marriott.
[31:28] Congratulations to all the new
[31:31] appointed commissioners. Ok.
[31:32] Next we have the human
[31:33] relations Council. Council
[31:37] member Willis. Yes, um, I have,
[31:38] and a couple of them mayor
[31:39] wanted to be here tonight. So
[31:39] if you
[31:40] re in the audience, if
[31:42] you could just wave at me, um,
[31:44] Donald Rivers. Yeah, here you
[31:46] go. Hi, MR. Rivers, um, Ashley
[31:51] Oaks. And uh summer bad one,
[31:51] and that
[31:55] s s a m a r. Summer.
[31:56] All right, motion has been made
[31:57] by Council Mayor Willis,
[31:58] seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
[32:00] Daniels. All those in favor say
[32:02] hi, as opposed to say nay.
[32:03] Motion passes 60.
[32:07] Congratulations to our new. Hrc
[32:11] hrc members. Welcome back. Next
[32:13] we have the multimodal
[32:14] transportation commission
[32:15] council member Scully. Thank
[32:16] you. I
[32:17] d like to reappoint, uh,
[32:22] James Bird. Kelly Gonzalez,
[32:24] Arcena Dixon, Catherine Dale,
[32:27] and Joey x Austin. That leaves
[32:28] one position that I
[32:29] d like to
[32:31] appoint next month. So motion
[32:31] s
[32:32] been made by council member
[32:33] Scully seconded by Council
[32:35] member Willis. All those in
[32:36] favor say aye, as opposed to
[32:38] say nay motion passes 6 to 0.
[32:40] Congratulations, MR. Bird, MISS
[32:44] Gonzalez. Dixie MISS Dixon,
[32:46] MISS Dale, and MR. Austin.
[32:49] There we go. Next we have the
[32:49] police community relations
[32:50] Committee. Again, this is a
[32:51] direct appointment, does not
[32:53] need a second or a vote. Um,
[32:55] council member Blackburn. I
[32:55] d
[32:56] like to appoint, uh, Greg
[32:59] Rubble. All right,
[33:02] congratulations MR. Rubble. Ok,
[33:04] and finally we have the youth
[33:05] council, council member Willis.
[33:06] Yes, so if you
[33:07] re here, if you
[33:09] wave at me, MISS Maya Swaggerty.
[33:14] Um, MS. Kinzie Letchworth. And
[33:15] MR. Daniel Mills. MR. Mills,
[33:17] can you stand up? You look so
[33:19] nice. Thank you for being here
[33:20] and congrats. Oh, I
[33:22] m sorry,
[33:24] not yet. All right, motions
[33:25] were made by Councillor Will,
[33:27] seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
[33:29] Daniels, all those in favor say
[33:31] aye I suppose say nay.
[33:33] Congratulations.
[33:34] Congratulations.
[33:34] Congratulations, MISS
[33:36] Letchworth, and MR. Mills,
[33:38] right? All right,
[33:40] congratulations. And that
[33:41] concludes our appointments. All
[33:43] right. Thank you very much.
[33:43] We
[33:45] ll now move on to the
[33:46] consent agenda. MR. Manager.
[33:50] Thank you, Mayor. Item number 5,
[33:51] amendment to previously entered
[33:52] lease with boys and Girls Clubs
[33:55] of the coastal plain. A North
[33:56] Carolina nonprofit corporation
[33:57] for property situated within
[33:58] the city of Greenville County,
[34:00] North Carolina, known as
[34:02] Lucille and w w w Gorham
[34:03] Intergenerational Center
[34:05] located at 1100 Ward Street,
[34:07] 1101 Ward Street. I number 6,
[34:09] resolution of intent to close a
[34:11] portion of Grand Avenue. I have
[34:13] number 7, resolution accepting
[34:15] dedication of rights of way and
[34:15] easements for Katie Farms phase
[34:18] one. Item number 8, resolution
[34:19] and deed of release for
[34:21] abandonment of a 10 ft wide
[34:23] sewer easement across tax
[34:25] parcel number 48303. Number 9,
[34:27] resolution for the issuance of
[34:29] a of new debt for Greenville
[34:30] Utilities Commission combined
[34:32] Enterprise System revenue bonds
[34:34] Series 2025. And item number 10,
[34:35] various tax refunds greater
[34:44] than $100. All right. Motion to
[34:46] approve. No, no, no, no. I had
[34:48] a question about that, that no.
[34:49] I had a question about that,
[34:54] that 10. What
[34:54] s today
[34:55] s date? 5
[34:56] through 10 5 through 10. All
[34:57] right. Most have been made by
[34:58] Blackburn, seconded by
[34:59] Councilor Mayor Robinson, all
[35:01] those in favor say aye, I
[35:03] suppose, say nay. Motion passes
[35:06] 6th year I need to take a quick
[35:09] break MAY MAY all right, we
[35:09] ll
[35:10] move on to new business, which
[35:11] is the public hearings. This is
[35:12] the policy of the public
[35:13] hearings adopted by the city
[35:15] council, the petitioner, or
[35:15] representative of the
[35:16] petitioner and a leader of
[35:18] those in opposition will each
[35:19] have 10 minutes. Persons
[35:20] following them will have up to
[35:21] 3 minutes each with a total for
[35:22] each side and no more than 30
[35:23] minutes. Additionally, I want
[35:24] to remind those in attendance
[35:27] to extend the courtesy to
[35:28] persons speaking during the
[35:30] public hearings. And to the
[35:31] city council during discussion
[35:32] comments made by members of the
[35:34] public are to occur only during
[35:36] the public hearing in the loud
[35:37] as allowed by the mayor in
[35:38] accordance with the adopt the
[35:39] policy of the city council.
[35:40] There should be no
[35:41] interruptions of speakers or
[35:43] council members. Including his
[35:44] expressions of support or
[35:45] disagreements, verbally or by
[35:46] applause, as this is
[35:47] distracting and makes
[35:48] discussion difficult. We ask
[35:50] for your cooperation. Thank you.
[35:52] MR. Manager, our first public
[35:54] hearing. Thank you, Mayor. Item
[35:56] number 11, ordinance to annex
[35:58] MAY farm lot one property
[36:00] involving 4.697 acres located
[36:01] at the northwestern corner of
[36:03] the intersection of East 10th
[36:04] Street and evolve way. I
[36:05] ll now
[36:06] call forward for city planner
[36:06] Chris Kelly for the
[36:10] presentation. Good evening,
[36:11] Mayor and COUNCILMAN. Good
[36:14] evening. This property is
[36:15] located in the eastern part of
[36:17] the city, more specifically,
[36:19] this property is located at the
[36:20] northwestern corner of the
[36:21] intersection of East 10th
[36:23] Street and evolved Way north of
[36:24] the property is Lowe
[36:25] s and you
[36:26] have Oak Down Way, which is a
[36:29] signalized light. This property
[36:30] is located in the Hardy Creek
[36:32] watershed, and if stormwater
[36:33] rules apply, will require 10
[36:35] year detention. The property is
[36:36] also located in the primary
[36:38] service area on the tier growth
[36:40] map, and will be located in, uh,
[36:41] city council voting district
[36:44] number 4. This property is
[36:44] anticipated to yield 30,000
[36:46] square feet of commercial use,
[36:47] with an estimated tax value of
[36:48] $4 million and I
[36:49] ll be happy to
[36:50] answer any questions. All right,
[36:54] any questions for MR. Kelly.
[36:54] What
[36:55] s the current zoning on
[36:57] the property? Cg General
[36:59] Commercial. Thank you. Any
[37:04] other questions? Does it meet
[37:07] our horizons plan? Yes, sir. Ok.
[37:17] I believe so. A. Do you know
[37:19] the intended use for the
[37:21] property? Um, as of right now,
[37:21] I believe it
[37:23] s just a variation
[37:28] of commercial ucg allow. Well,
[37:30] I did, I did do some a deep
[37:31] dive on this, and I don
[37:31] t want
[37:32] to take your time away, but
[37:32] it
[37:34] s supposed to be used for a
[37:35] tropical smoothie, uh,
[37:37] commercial center. It will
[37:38] feature 4 separate, if I
[37:39] ve got
[37:41] this correct, um, 4 separate,
[37:42] uh, commercial entities, one of
[37:44] them being a tropical smoothie.
[37:47] But keep in mind moting based
[37:49] off of just the zoe. Now this
[37:52] is a side plan. And this is an
[37:54] annexation, not a rezoning.
[37:58] There is a. Ok, all right.
[38:02] Tight plans under review. Right.
[38:05] Any other questions? If we
[38:07] annex today with the I playing
[38:09] come back to us or would that,
[38:14] yeah. Can they develop this
[38:15] property while remaining in the
[38:21] county? Mhm So That
[38:24] s a very
[38:25] difficult question. Can they
[38:26] develop the property in the
[38:27] same way while remaining
[38:28] outside of the city limits.
[38:29] What are they applying for
[38:34] annexation? The property is
[38:36] currently zoned commercial.
[38:36] They
[38:37] re asking to annex so they
[38:41] can tie on to sewer. Um, and I
[38:42] do, I believe there
[38:43] s a site
[38:44] plan under review, but I do not
[38:46] know what that is. However,
[38:48] counsel never sees site plans.
[38:48] So you, you
[38:49] re not going to see
[38:52] it. At a council meeting. I
[38:55] have a hard time, um, proven
[38:56] something that I don
[38:56] t know the
[38:59] traffic study for us are really
[39:00] dangerous stretch of road there
[39:01] if this will help you, I
[39:02] ll go
[39:03] ahead and and say. So it
[39:04] s
[39:04] already been preliminary
[39:08] platted. So this is one lot out
[39:09] of several different pieces.
[39:10] I
[39:12] m gonna dial back just to
[39:16] Make sure I get to an aerial.
[39:16] I
[39:18] m going opposite. I apologize.
[39:18] I
[39:22] m sorry. Here we go. So, This,
[39:23] uh, the property you see right
[39:26] now is in red. The balance of
[39:28] the property here is developing
[39:32] into multifamily. This is part
[39:34] of a larger subdivision.
[39:36] Subdivision has already been
[39:38] approved. That was approved
[39:40] with dot and city engineering
[39:43] as far as the streets and, um,
[39:47] Any driveways. This property
[39:48] with these apartments, you will
[39:49] be able, whether it
[39:51] s this lot
[39:51] or the apartments themselves,
[39:51] you
[39:53] ll be able to go down to
[39:55] Oak Down Way. Come up, this is
[39:56] a signalized intersection, so
[39:56] you
[39:57] ll be able to make a left
[40:01] hand turn at the stoplight. The
[40:02] driveway here evolve way,
[40:02] that
[40:03] s a right in and a right
[40:05] out. You will not be able to
[40:09] make a left hand turn. And so
[40:10] as part of dot
[40:10] s review and
[40:13] approval. And city engineering.
[40:17] That, those parts have already.
[40:19] Basically been taken care of as
[40:22] far as any kind of uh traffic
[40:23] impacts, and that is why it
[40:24] s a
[40:26] ride in and ride out and not a
[40:28] left-hand turn. So there
[40:29] ll be
[40:31] like lane dividers put in the
[40:33] middle delineators or perhaps
[40:34] the medians, um, that would
[40:35] keep someone coming out and
[40:37] making a left hand turn. Can do
[40:43] it. Ok. So follow up questions
[40:43] here. I
[40:44] ve not heard about
[40:46] medians. Are, are there plans
[40:48] for meetings? I, I can
[40:49] t tell
[40:50] you right off the top. All I
[40:51] can say is it
[40:51] s a ride in and a
[40:53] ride out. Because that
[40:54] s one of
[40:55] the issues and, and I don
[40:55] t
[40:56] want to verge into comments
[40:57] just yet, but that
[40:57] s, that
[40:57] s
[40:59] one of the, the, the issues
[41:02] with this request to annex is
[41:02] that there
[41:03] s nothing there.
[41:03] It
[41:03] s, it
[41:04] s wide open. There
[41:04] s
[41:05] no, there
[41:07] s no stoplight,
[41:07] there
[41:08] s no lane dividers.
[41:08] There
[41:09] s nothing but a blind
[41:11] curve and, and, and, and
[41:14] whatever, um, so. Ok, whatever,
[41:14] that
[41:15] s subjective, but there,
[41:15] there
[41:15] s, there
[41:16] s not that and
[41:17] to my knowledge, because we
[41:17] ve
[41:19] worked an awful lot already
[41:19] with dot and we
[41:20] ve talked with
[41:21] dot and we
[41:22] ve sent requests to
[41:24] dot to my knowledge, I, I know
[41:27] of no plans to. Remediate in
[41:32] any way this area. Um So if,
[41:33] you know, if it
[41:34] s right in and
[41:36] right out, I, I. I don
[41:36] t know
[41:36] how that
[41:37] s going to be enforced.
[41:40] You
[41:42] re probably going to have a
[41:43] median in the driveway. That
[41:43] s
[41:44] going to force you to make a
[41:47] right-hand turn. But not, we
[41:47] don
[41:48] t know medians on 10th
[41:52] Street. I mean, in the driveway
[41:53] itself, um, a follow-up
[41:55] question to that. Do you know
[41:56] when, um, this, and I don
[41:56] t
[41:57] want to put you on the spot,
[41:59] but do you know when this was
[42:03] zoned commercial. This has been
[42:07] zone commercial one. Yeah, 2008.
[42:09] I was going to say 10 years, so
[42:11] that would be pretty good. So
[42:14] is it fair to say that since
[42:14] 2008, that
[42:15] s 10, my math isn
[42:15] t
[42:19] the best, but, um, 1615 years?
[42:21] Plus The conditions have
[42:24] changed in this area. Is that a
[42:25] fair statement? Uh, I don
[42:25] t
[42:26] want to put you on the spot,
[42:28] but I mean with more
[42:29] development around they still
[42:32] do a percentage every year to
[42:35] build in for build out. And
[42:36] they still take into
[42:38] consideration things as they
[42:38] re
[42:39] being developed, kind of like
[42:42] in a checkbook. So they
[42:42] re
[42:44] keeping up with the traffic. Ok,
[42:48] thank you. Again, you, you feel
[42:49] confident that they
[42:49] ll be
[42:50] delineators, but on the 10th
[42:51] Street I can
[42:52] t say that. I wish
[42:53] i could, but I don
[42:55] t know. I
[42:55] m
[42:57] gonna ask um. Our director of
[42:59] Engineering Lisa Kirby, to come
[43:01] up and speak to them. I MAY
[43:02] have to defer or traffic
[43:03] engineer who
[43:03] s with me tonight,
[43:05] but, um, no, to our knowledge,
[43:07] there are no medians going in
[43:08] on 10th Street. Um, so you are
[43:10] correct in that, um, we have
[43:11] not been informed by dot that
[43:13] there are medians going in on
[43:16] 10th Street. However, at the
[43:17] driveway, um, to Shante
[43:18] s point,
[43:19] there will be, we call it a
[43:21] pork chop, but it prevents left
[43:22] turns. It forces you to go
[43:24] right, um, and only allows
[43:25] right in, would be a dual pork
[43:28] chop, so it kind of looks like
[43:29] a triangle in the driveway. Are
[43:31] they, uh, enforced? And
[43:34] enforceable. Um, they are
[43:39] enforceable, yes. Thank you.
[43:42] Was there another question? So
[43:43] there
[43:44] s a light here on I would
[43:46] just feel a lot better if there
[43:47] were delineators in the street,
[43:48] and the pork chop. Cause it
[43:49] s
[43:50] Those exist throughout the city
[43:52] and I see people taking lefts
[43:53] into them all the time and they
[43:53] don
[43:54] t. I don
[43:55] t think they
[43:58] prevent It MAY even make it
[43:59] dangerous in some, some points
[43:59] when somebody
[44:00] s trying to do
[44:01] something they
[44:01] re not supposed
[44:03] to, um. And, and, and I would
[44:07] just say. Even delineators
[44:07] aren
[44:08] t 100% sure fail safe. I
[44:10] mean, we, we actually did a
[44:12] site visit and with some
[44:12] delineators and we saw a car
[44:14] just do a u-turn right there in
[44:15] the middle. So I mean whether
[44:16] it
[44:17] s a pork chop or delineator,
[44:19] you know, this is the best, um,
[44:20] method that we have to be able
[44:21] to control that left turn,
[44:24] right turn. And I think the
[44:24] issue I
[44:25] m really must sticking
[44:26] with me is there
[44:27] s a giant
[44:27] apartment complex that
[44:29] s gonna
[44:30] wrap around this property. And
[44:30] we don
[44:30] t know how that
[44:31] s going
[44:32] to impact traffic, and then if
[44:35] you add a a multi-unit
[44:37] commercial property there. Um,
[44:38] with a business like Tropical
[44:39] community, that
[44:39] s gonna be
[44:41] really busy. I, I just really
[44:43] worry about the 10th Street
[44:44] being able to handle that load
[44:47] in that section. It is a blind
[44:47] curve and there
[44:48] s not much
[44:50] infrastructure there at all to
[44:51] prevent accidents from
[44:54] happening, so, um, I worry
[44:56] about that, um, up and down
[44:58] 10th Street, but that section
[44:59] in particular between Lowe
[45:00] s
[45:01] and Walmart, there
[45:01] s the curve
[45:01] there, it
[45:03] s just And there
[45:03] s a
[45:03] doctor
[45:04] s office going across
[45:04] the street. There
[45:05] s just a ton
[45:06] of stuff going in there all at
[45:08] the same time and and. I wish
[45:09] we could slow roll this a
[45:13] little bit to to. See how
[45:13] that
[45:16] s gonna impact the, the uh,
[45:20] traffic on the street, um. I
[45:21] Any other questions for our
[45:24] staff? If they meet the
[45:24] requirements for the next
[45:25] session, we can
[45:25] t turn down,
[45:28] can we, can we? Yeah, you can,
[45:31] you can, you can do that. Ok.
[45:37] All right, any other questions?
[45:38] All right. Public hearings now
[45:40] open. Those be on behalf of the
[45:41] applicant Ma forward. Please
[45:41] state your name for the record.
[45:43] The first person has 10 minutes.
[45:52] All others have 3 minutes. Are
[46:02] you speaking in favor? Just
[46:07] just a guess. All right, see
[46:09] none. Those in opposition to
[46:10] the applicant MAY come forward.
[46:11] Please state your name for the
[46:13] record. First person has 10
[46:14] minutes, all others have 3
[46:16] minutes. You get a whole 10
[46:20] minutes. Oh, I don
[46:20] t need that
[46:22] long. Thanks for it. I, unless
[46:23] I really lose my train of
[46:25] thought here, but Rebecca
[46:27] Powers, am I supposed to give
[46:29] my address because this is my
[46:32] neighborhood and so I live and
[46:33] breathe this area and I use Oak
[46:36] Down, who was mentioning that
[46:37] Oak Down all the time and the
[46:38] light because I can
[46:38] t get out
[46:40] of my neighborhood otherwise.
[46:41] And I think we
[46:42] re gonna have
[46:43] 50,000 people move into those
[46:46] apartments. 50. I don
[46:47] t know
[46:50] how many, but a whole lot if
[46:50] you haven
[46:52] t seen them, they
[46:52] re
[46:54] just huge. And how those folks
[46:55] are gonna get in and out of
[46:57] their homes. I
[46:58] m worried too,
[46:59] Matt. I just, I don
[47:00] t, I can
[47:00] t
[47:03] imagine it happening. But it
[47:03] s
[47:05] gonna happen, so back to what
[47:07] was said about when it was
[47:08] zoned commercial and the
[47:09] horizons plan, that was a long
[47:13] time ago. And I read the packet
[47:15] in the agenda and tried to
[47:16] understand what was going to
[47:18] happen tonight. And I
[47:19] m so glad
[47:20] you asked about voting it yes
[47:23] or no. I couldn
[47:23] t understand
[47:27] where we were in this process.
[47:28] And when the young man sitting
[47:29] beside MISS Gooby, I didn
[47:29] t
[47:33] catch your name. I think he
[47:35] said hm MR. Kelly. I think it
[47:40] was him who said, What do you
[47:42] what do you call the plat
[47:42] zoning won
[47:44] t come back to you.
[47:46] So if you say yes tonight, it
[47:46] s
[47:48] a done deal. Oh, that
[47:48] s not
[47:50] right. Um, I
[47:51] m also the
[47:53] PRESIDENT Of my neighborhood
[47:54] association, and we don
[47:54] t know
[47:56] anything about this, and I
[47:56] don
[47:58] t know that anybody in the
[47:59] other neighborhoods do because
[47:59] it hasn
[48:02] t come up. And then
[48:02] I
[48:03] ve also been thinking since i
[48:05] read in the agenda and on the
[48:07] packet. I can
[48:08] t think of one
[48:11] other tropical smoothie.
[48:13] Anywhere in our city that
[48:13] s
[48:14] just surrounded by all this
[48:18] housing. Right up around it.
[48:18] I
[48:20] m thinking of that one and
[48:21] maybe the mayor can think of
[48:21] one, but I
[48:22] m thinking of the
[48:24] one out on Arlington and
[48:24] Dickinson. It
[48:25] s sitting there.
[48:25] Yeah, there
[48:27] s housing, but it
[48:27] s
[48:28] way over there and they have
[48:30] their own light. Oh, and they
[48:33] went out of business or
[48:34] something. Oh They
[48:36] re by a
[48:37] hotel now because it
[48:38] s not good
[48:41] to be interested because So I
[48:42] have a lot of issues right
[48:44] there and I hope what we can do
[48:48] tonight is Got 7 more minutes,
[48:57] but, uh. I should say I
[48:57] ve got
[49:02] the floor right? So, um, No, I
[49:04] do want to know, and I don
[49:04] t
[49:05] think that we were told by the
[49:06] planners if it
[49:08] s currently etj.
[49:08] Because it
[49:09] s sitting right
[49:12] there in other parts of the. Of
[49:13] the city and I think you said
[49:18] they want to. No, no, Just
[49:18] sitting here I
[49:20] m sorry. I can
[49:23] help. Oh Oh Well, about the
[49:26] sewer, um, tying into our water
[49:28] and sewer. So somehow that has
[49:33] to do with being The next, um,
[49:33] I just can
[49:34] t, I understand if
[49:34] there
[49:36] s, you know, we already
[49:37] have a dentist there, that big
[49:39] dentist, you know, that
[49:41] beautiful dentist, eastern
[49:42] dentistry, and you know, that
[49:42] fits in. There
[49:43] s not a lot of
[49:46] terrible traffic, but someplace
[49:46] else that
[49:47] s more commercial,
[49:47] that
[49:48] s not an office kind of
[49:50] place where people are just
[49:52] there a limited time. Um Please
[49:59] say no to the annex. Thank you.
[50:00] Unless I can respond to
[50:02] something you asked me. Ok, I
[50:02] would think it
[50:03] s in the etj
[50:04] though. Did, did you ask if
[50:04] it
[50:06] s in the atj? Were you going
[50:07] to respond to that? If you have
[50:08] zone and you
[50:09] re in the city
[50:11] limits for the etj. That is
[50:13] your only option. So this is in
[50:15] the etj. Ok, because they are,
[50:16] ok, so can
[50:17] t they use the water,
[50:18] and that
[50:19] s really what they
[50:22] want, but. I guess can
[50:23] t we not
[50:24] without any exception. And we
[50:24] don
[50:26] t have any ruling over etj
[50:27] because that
[50:29] s a county
[50:30] commissioners or we do that too?
[50:32] Um-hum. Just sitting. Ok. What
[50:34] they want is to tie into our
[50:35] sewer system, um, and that, and
[50:36] the only way they can do that
[50:38] is to be annexed. Is to be
[50:44] annexed. Hm. And to be annexed
[50:46] with already a plat in place, a
[50:47] done deal. 5 minutes I give
[50:50] back to you. I, I concede or I
[50:52] give back to you my 5 minutes.
[50:53] Thank you. Thanks, Doctor
[50:55] Powers. We appreciate that.
[50:56] Anyone else that
[50:56] s in
[50:57] opposition to the applicant MAY
[50:58] come forward. Please state your
[50:59] name for the record.
[51:01] Fortunately, you only have 3
[51:03] minutes. It
[51:04] s not a problem. My
[51:05] name is Mark Parker, and I
[51:05] m
[51:07] very familiar with that area.
[51:08] My boys live over there and
[51:10] when I was teaching them how to
[51:12] drive, I used to have to tell
[51:13] them when traffic is traffic is
[51:15] always busy in the morning and
[51:16] the afternoons. I used to tell
[51:17] them like, if you need to make
[51:20] a left, actually make a right,
[51:21] go to Lowe
[51:22] s and then make a,
[51:24] make a little Ui in the parking
[51:26] lot and then go back to your
[51:27] direction because I mean people
[51:29] are speeding back and forth and
[51:30] a lot of time with the traffic.
[51:30] Surveys you
[51:31] re not looking at,
[51:31] you
[51:32] re not talking to the
[51:35] people who live in the areas.
[51:38] Who see it 24/7 morning, noon,
[51:41] dusk, dawn, weekends, weekdays,
[51:42] rush hour, and that
[51:42] s gonna be
[51:44] a lot with all those apartments,
[51:44] and we
[51:45] re talking about
[51:46] commercial buildings, people go
[51:47] on the tropical smoothie. It is
[51:49] a popular place. I use it a lot
[51:51] myself. I love it, but That
[51:52] s
[51:54] gonna be a lot of disturbance,
[51:55] um, and just disruption to the
[51:56] people who live in River Hills
[51:57] and the surrounding communities.
[52:00] And We already got a report
[52:02] today in the news that we are
[52:04] like what? In top in the
[52:05] country or bad drivers in North
[52:06] Carolina, Greenwood, North
[52:07] Carolina. It
[52:08] s only gonna be a
[52:09] bunch more accidents. It
[52:09] s only
[52:11] gonna be worse. I work in
[52:11] healthcare. I
[52:12] ve x-rayed plenty
[52:14] of people on the back porch.
[52:14] I
[52:15] ve seen people from, from
[52:19] birth. Accidents to the morgue.
[52:19] So I
[52:20] ve seen all the whole
[52:24] spectrum. So I would say no. I
[52:24] don
[52:24] t think we should go with
[52:28] it. Thank you. Thank you.
[52:29] Anyone else like to speak in
[52:30] opposition to the aa. MAY come
[52:31] forward. Please state your name
[52:32] for the record. You have 3
[52:37] minutes. Hi, um, my name is
[52:39] Pedro, um, and I would also say
[52:42] no, um, like the other two
[52:43] speakers before me, I
[52:43] m also
[52:45] very familiar with that area,
[52:48] um, my, um, my aunt lives in
[52:50] Grisland, so when I was going
[52:52] to ecu I would actually have to
[52:54] drive up that road every single
[52:55] day, um, and like the gentleman
[52:57] before me said, it gets very
[52:59] busy, um, during the mornings
[53:02] and, you know, the afternoon,
[53:04] um, the rush hour traffic and
[53:04] um I just, I don
[53:04] t think they
[53:06] have. A good idea of what
[53:06] they
[53:07] re gonna do with the
[53:12] traffic. Um, and like, um, like,
[53:12] um, I think it
[53:13] s uh MR. Scully.
[53:15] Yes, sir, thank you um, you
[53:16] know, I think he
[53:16] s, he
[53:17] s very
[53:18] right, you know, he would like
[53:19] to know better what they
[53:20] re
[53:20] gonna do if there
[53:21] s gonna be a
[53:22] meeting or whatever. I think
[53:22] that
[53:23] s, that
[53:25] s very important
[53:26] to know before approving an
[53:28] annexation, um. Which I also
[53:31] took a little bit of issue with
[53:32] um uh the planners. I
[53:33] m not
[53:34] sure the proper term for them,
[53:36] but them saying that you guys
[53:36] don
[53:37] t get the plans. You
[53:38] basically don
[53:39] t have a sale
[53:40] until, you know, you basically
[53:42] just say yes or no, and then
[53:42] after that it
[53:44] s just whatever
[53:45] they wanna do or whatever
[53:45] they
[53:46] re gonna do, you know, I,
[53:48] I think maybe we should know
[53:49] better what
[53:50] s gonna happen
[53:51] before saying, yes, that
[53:51] s fine,
[53:52] or no, it
[53:54] s not fine. And um,
[53:56] like the, the lady said, um, in
[53:57] the beginning, there
[53:57] s a big,
[53:58] big. Apartment complex. It
[53:59] actually looks pretty nice. I
[54:01] was thinking maybe I might move
[54:03] there, but if they put um a
[54:04] traffic like I didn
[54:04] t know
[54:06] there was gonna be like a
[54:06] commercial center, maybe I
[54:07] wouldn
[54:08] t want to live next to a
[54:09] commercial center, you know,
[54:11] maybe I just want to drive into
[54:12] my apartment complex, not have
[54:14] to drive by a bunch of
[54:14] businesses, even though it is
[54:15] by the lows, but that
[54:16] s, that
[54:16] s
[54:17] not that bad. Lowe
[54:17] s is pretty
[54:19] good for, for deals and stuff.
[54:21] But um, yeah, that
[54:22] s all, um, I
[54:23] just, I think maybe more
[54:26] information is needed for the
[54:27] traffic, especially because
[54:29] that turn on the where the
[54:31] graveyards are, it is very like,
[54:32] um, like MR. Scully said, it
[54:33] was, it
[54:36] s a blind turn and like
[54:37] the gentleman before me said,
[54:38] turning left there is not gonna
[54:40] happen, but when you add a
[54:42] bunch of people, um, that live
[54:44] there, they get comfortable and
[54:44] they
[54:46] re gonna turn left and
[54:47] that might cause more accidents
[54:48] in that area, but that
[54:49] s all I
[54:51] have. Thank you. Thank you.
[54:52] Sweetheart, what was your name
[54:55] again? Pedro. What
[54:55] s your last
[54:58] name? For now. Thank you. Thank
[55:02] you. All right, anyone else
[55:02] who
[55:03] d like to speak in
[55:05] opposition to the applicant,
[55:06] please come forward and state
[55:08] your name for the record. You
[55:10] have 3 wonderful nuts. Again.
[55:13] When I look at that, I see a
[55:14] lot of trees. You
[55:16] re lucky we
[55:18] know and if we, if we don
[55:19] t
[55:21] protect those trees at 34% is
[55:25] going to go down. And I don
[55:25] t
[55:26] know right now since we don
[55:26] t
[55:30] have a, a tree survey in
[55:33] Greenville. We need to have an
[55:35] urban forester who can look at
[55:40] our cities. Canopy and see if
[55:42] we have heritage trees because
[55:44] on this property there MAY be
[55:46] heritage trees and, and I
[55:47] looked it up to tell you
[55:50] exactly, and that is a tree
[55:52] designated as significant due
[55:54] to its historical, cultural,
[55:57] ecological, or its age, size,
[55:59] or unique qualities. And we
[56:01] have not identified any of that
[56:03] in Greenville, so we lose our
[56:04] heritage trees. What are we
[56:06] going to lose on that property.
[56:09] What can be done to save them.
[56:11] Somebody suggested a land trust.
[56:12] I don
[56:12] t know if that would work.
[56:16] I have no idea, but I just know
[56:19] that if we just let this go the
[56:20] way of all the other
[56:22] development, we are going to
[56:25] lose more trees. And that
[56:27] really bothers me because that
[56:29] affects all of us. It affects
[56:33] our health. And in fact, I was
[56:35] reading an article today about
[56:38] how in Kentucky they actually
[56:39] are planting trees to help with
[56:43] asthma. So this is very, you
[56:45] know, I. It
[56:47] s important Thank
[56:49] you. Thanks, MS. Maxwell. Thank
[56:51] you. Anyone else that likes to
[56:52] speak in opposition to the
[56:53] applicant, please come forward,
[56:56] state your name for the record.
[56:59] You have 3 minutes. Hello,
[57:02] Yoshi Newman. There are 2 votes
[57:03] that you
[57:06] re gonna take tonight.
[57:06] For which it
[57:08] s imperative that
[57:09] you vote no, and this is one of
[57:13] them. When I moved to
[57:16] Greenville 11.5 years ago. Uh,
[57:17] I live right there by Lowe
[57:17] s in
[57:18] that neighborhood tucked back
[57:20] in there. So I was leaving the
[57:22] neighborhood and headed toward
[57:25] campus, and it was dark.
[57:28] Terminal is right there and so
[57:28] there
[57:28] s the boat landing access
[57:33] that way. There was a truck.
[57:37] With a big boat and a trailer
[57:39] that came barreling down that
[57:44] road and totaled. My beautiful
[57:46] little bmw z3 Roadster. Totaled
[57:50] it. Fortunately, I got out and
[57:51] walked away. I actually was
[57:53] able to put the bumper in my
[57:57] truck and go back to my house.
[58:00] That was over 10 years ago. The
[58:01] complex that
[58:02] s there, uh, that
[58:04] is currently under construction,
[58:07] evolve at the Pines. There are
[58:11] no pines there. Evolve at the
[58:12] pines hundreds of units,
[58:14] hundreds of cars. I will also
[58:16] remind you that at the
[58:17] intersection of Port Terminal
[58:19] and 10th, a couple of years ago
[58:24] or so. A housing development
[58:26] was approved there despite
[58:27] objections from residences in
[58:28] the area. It
[58:30] s near a flood
[58:33] plain, Fort Port Terminal has
[58:35] been flooded repeatedly. There
[58:36] was a helicopter evacuation of
[58:38] people who lived on Port
[58:41] Terminal Road. Still, Hundreds
[58:43] of housing units sitting right
[58:45] there on uh port terminal in
[58:48] 10th, no stoplight. That evolve
[58:49] at the Pines for which there
[58:49] s
[58:53] no pines. No stoplight. So
[58:53] we
[58:55] ve got hundreds of cars and
[58:57] as MR. Walker explained, the
[58:59] traffic studies, while those
[58:59] don
[59:01] t seem to have any impact
[59:04] on decisions, they do have an
[59:06] impact on drivers
[59:07] real lived
[59:09] experience. My poor total
[59:10] little car. Now, you know, I
[59:10] mean, I don
[59:11] t mean to make
[59:13] light of that, but it is a
[59:15] dangerous, dangerous road. It
[59:17] is not supposed to be another.
[59:18] Greenville Boulevard, which is
[59:22] not a boulevard. So the the the
[59:26] section of East 10th. From, uh,
[59:28] Greenville, not Boulevard, up
[59:31] to Brook Valley or, uh, Copper
[59:34] Creek is solid businesses with
[59:35] cars coming in multiple
[59:36] directions, and pedestrians
[59:37] going back and forth. It
[59:38] s
[59:40] awful. This is not what we
[59:42] should have happening in our
[59:44] city, so no, no commercial
[59:47] development in that area. Keep
[59:49] it safe and we also have two
[59:51] cemeteries right there. So we
[59:53] have funeral processions on a
[59:55] regular basis. You know,
[59:56] drivers get impatient. They
[59:57] re
[59:58] on their way somewhere. People
[1:00:00] are going to be zooming around
[1:00:02] to get around a funeral
[1:00:04] procession. So this is one of
[1:00:06] the 2 votes tonight for which
[1:00:07] it
[1:00:08] s very important that you
[1:00:08] vote no. There
[1:00:09] s no good reason
[1:00:12] in my mind to vote yes. Thank
[1:00:14] you. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:00:15] Anyone else like to speak in
[1:00:16] opposition to the Africa MAY
[1:00:16] come forward. Please state your
[1:00:17] name for the record. You have 3
[1:00:25] minutes. Good evening, Mr.
[1:00:26] Mayor, counsel. My name is
[1:00:29] Brian Fagundas. So the things
[1:00:30] that I
[1:00:30] m opposed to echo a lot
[1:00:31] of what
[1:00:32] s been said. I
[1:00:33] m
[1:00:34] opposed to unsafe traffic,
[1:00:37] opposed to Getting rid of
[1:00:37] things and and I
[1:00:39] ll call it not
[1:00:40] smart development, but I do
[1:00:41] want to remind you guys, the
[1:00:43] city regulates subdivision. The
[1:00:45] city has a requirement for
[1:00:46] annexation to provide utility
[1:00:48] services from Bro Utilities. I
[1:00:49] just want to remind you guys
[1:00:53] that. The annexation is the
[1:00:56] next step for this site. The
[1:00:56] zoning
[1:00:57] s been in place, the
[1:00:58] uses in that district would be
[1:01:02] by right. If uses require a
[1:01:03] board of adjustment approval or
[1:01:04] specific uses, then they
[1:01:04] ll go
[1:01:07] for special use. Just wanted to
[1:01:10] remind you guys of uh. Thank
[1:01:13] you. Alright, anybody else
[1:01:13] who
[1:01:15] d like to speak? In
[1:01:16] opposition to the African
[1:01:17] American, please state your
[1:01:17] name for the record. You have 3
[1:01:29] minutes. See none public
[1:01:30] hearing is now closed, open for
[1:01:32] a board discussion or a motion.
[1:01:33] Council member Blackburn, thank
[1:01:35] you so much and thank you to
[1:01:37] everyone who came tonight to
[1:01:39] speak and so many good points
[1:01:39] have been raised. I
[1:01:40] m gonna do
[1:01:43] my best to summarize them. Um,
[1:01:44] we said never again will we
[1:01:46] have a Greenville Boulevard.
[1:01:49] Well, too late. Years of
[1:01:50] indiscriminate commercial
[1:01:52] zoning, but also population
[1:01:53] growth have resulted in what we
[1:01:56] have on 10th Street East. This
[1:02:01] request would bring a 4.6 acre.
[1:02:02] Commercial center anchored by
[1:02:03] the Tropical smoothie. While
[1:02:03] I
[1:02:05] d love to have a smoothie
[1:02:07] shop across the street to
[1:02:08] approve this annexation without
[1:02:09] safety improvements would be
[1:02:13] reckless. The same issues we
[1:02:14] faced beforehand on Port
[1:02:15] Terminal Road with that
[1:02:17] commercial request. Um, are, uh,
[1:02:19] the, the same issues that we
[1:02:21] faced then are now, uh, uh, we,
[1:02:23] we face them, but they
[1:02:23] re
[1:02:26] exponentially more serious. The
[1:02:27] stakes are incredibly high here
[1:02:28] and I think that the
[1:02:30] description of the car accident
[1:02:32] is chilling. That was 11 years
[1:02:35] ago. The new apartments will
[1:02:36] bring in hundreds of new
[1:02:37] residents to this exact
[1:02:40] location. The new pediatrics
[1:02:41] office at the corner of, uh,
[1:02:43] River Hill Drive and 10th
[1:02:44] Street is opening up and it
[1:02:44] s
[1:02:46] going to bring in probably 100s
[1:02:50] of trips a day. Every day.
[1:02:52] Beyond the Food Lion and, um,
[1:02:54] even outside the city limits,
[1:02:57] we see more and more growth.
[1:02:58] All the way headed down to
[1:03:00] Black Jack Simpson and
[1:03:01] Chockainity along 33 East.
[1:03:03] Growth is good. This is a good
[1:03:05] thing. Glad to see the growth.
[1:03:08] But until 10th Street has some
[1:03:09] improvements, we cannot
[1:03:11] continue to be reckless with
[1:03:15] our decisions. 10th Street has
[1:03:16] been largely unchanged in, I
[1:03:18] dare to say 20 years. We got a
[1:03:21] stoplight at Cowra Beach and we
[1:03:23] got that. Why? Because a young
[1:03:26] man died there. Young man died
[1:03:29] there. We do not want that
[1:03:32] blood on our hands again. 10th
[1:03:33] Street was designed as a
[1:03:35] thoroughfare. Get you from
[1:03:39] Greenville. Points east. It
[1:03:41] lacks the infrastructure to
[1:03:42] safely carry the load we
[1:03:42] re
[1:03:45] asking of it today. Dividers,
[1:03:48] safety ones, lane demarcation,
[1:03:50] and reduced speed down to 35
[1:03:53] miles an hour. Most critically,
[1:03:55] it lacks traffic signals.
[1:03:56] Indeed, the traffic flow out
[1:03:58] there, as has been described,
[1:04:01] resembles a kind of a wildcard
[1:04:07] zone, anything goes. So Taking
[1:04:09] all of this into consideration.
[1:04:11] We are headed in a bad
[1:04:12] direction on 10th Street East
[1:04:14] until we get the infrastructure
[1:04:16] improvements that we need and
[1:04:18] we can halt this bad direction.
[1:04:21] We can take some time to do
[1:04:23] things the right way and, um, I
[1:04:25] also want to, uh, mention the
[1:04:26] heritage trees that I believe
[1:04:28] are also on this site. There
[1:04:28] s
[1:04:29] some old pines, they
[1:04:30] re
[1:04:30] distinctive. They
[1:04:31] re cedars,
[1:04:31] and they
[1:04:32] ve been there a long
[1:04:37] time. So with all of these
[1:04:38] considerations. I move to deny
[1:04:44] this annexation request. Mayor,
[1:04:46] I, I would just like to make a
[1:04:47] few points to to make sure the
[1:04:49] council understands. The, uh,
[1:04:50] the site plan that has been
[1:04:52] presented does have the pork
[1:04:52] chop that is to protect the
[1:04:55] traffic. To limit the, the
[1:04:58] left-hand turns. The only
[1:04:59] reason we know anything about
[1:05:01] tropical smoothie. The fact
[1:05:02] that there is a slight plane.
[1:05:02] There
[1:05:04] s a lot of annexations
[1:05:05] and rezonings that we don
[1:05:05] t
[1:05:05] know what
[1:05:07] s going to go there.
[1:05:08] But that property is owned by
[1:05:10] right, people have the right to
[1:05:11] move forward with development
[1:05:13] on that property. The 10th
[1:05:14] Street traffic, uh, uh, I
[1:05:15] ve
[1:05:17] said over and over again, yes,
[1:05:18] 10th Street, Memorial Drive. We
[1:05:20] have a lot of, of Of
[1:05:21] thoroughfares that are very
[1:05:23] important to us and that are
[1:05:26] that are that are um. That are,
[1:05:28] uh, unsafe in many ways, but
[1:05:28] ultimately what we
[1:05:29] re saying
[1:05:31] here is that are we going to
[1:05:32] basically just stop all
[1:05:33] development until 10th Street
[1:05:34] until dot does something. I
[1:05:35] mean, if that
[1:05:35] s what we
[1:05:35] re
[1:05:37] saying, we need to make sure
[1:05:38] that in dot understands that.
[1:05:39] But remember, we
[1:05:40] re only can
[1:05:41] stop it for those that you
[1:05:41] re
[1:05:44] not annexed. Or they have not
[1:05:45] had, um, the, the proper
[1:05:47] rezoning. Everyone else and in
[1:05:48] many ways it might
[1:05:50] disenfranchise those that are
[1:05:52] not annexed or have a, a, a
[1:05:54] proper zoning that
[1:05:54] s also
[1:05:55] authorized or supported by
[1:05:57] other Horizons plan. We just
[1:05:59] got to take that into
[1:05:59] consideration. I
[1:05:59] m just putting
[1:06:02] out points there. And then also,
[1:06:03] I think we also have to
[1:06:04] understand if we
[1:06:04] re, uh, if
[1:06:05] we
[1:06:06] re talking about uh looking
[1:06:07] at site plans that have already
[1:06:10] that That for a property that
[1:06:10] s
[1:06:12] already, um, would be allowed
[1:06:13] by right of use of that
[1:06:14] property, then we could just,
[1:06:15] we could put a stifle to
[1:06:18] development. As well, so I just
[1:06:20] wanna make those points. All
[1:06:20] right, there
[1:06:21] s been a motion
[1:06:26] made. Is there a second? I like
[1:06:26] she
[1:06:27] s been seconded by couples.
[1:06:28] Will you repeat the motion for
[1:06:30] me? Uh, motion to deny the
[1:06:34] request to annex. Um All right,
[1:06:35] Council member just you open up
[1:06:37] for comments. I like to comment,
[1:06:39] absolutely. First off, I, when
[1:06:40] we dealt with a similar issue
[1:06:42] as much on a smaller basis with
[1:06:44] the, uh, Port Comer Road. I
[1:06:46] went out and tried to get some
[1:06:47] education about the number of
[1:06:48] accidents and calls for service
[1:06:49] pedestrians, all that kind of
[1:06:52] stuff. If you recall, this
[1:06:53] council recall, very few and in
[1:06:54] fact had actually gone down one
[1:06:58] year. So I understand the
[1:07:00] opinion about The safety of
[1:07:02] this saying. But in reality,
[1:07:03] the facts don
[1:07:04] t support that.
[1:07:06] If you go make the inquiries,
[1:07:07] it does not support those
[1:07:09] opinions. You can disagree with
[1:07:11] me, but it do the diligence of
[1:07:12] calling and determining how
[1:07:13] many accidents happen, where
[1:07:15] they are, pedestrian strikes
[1:07:17] calls for emt and service in
[1:07:18] that regard, does not support
[1:07:19] that. I recognize there
[1:07:19] s a lot
[1:07:20] of traffic on that roadway just
[1:07:23] like there is in Arlington,
[1:07:24] pretty much every major
[1:07:25] thoroughfare in Greenville has
[1:07:26] traffic in the morning and the
[1:07:28] afternoon. My office is on
[1:07:29] Arlington Boulevard. It
[1:07:29] s crazy
[1:07:31] in the morning, crazy in the
[1:07:31] afternoon. How you deal with
[1:07:32] some of that, which we
[1:07:33] re not,
[1:07:35] which is a a part and parcel of
[1:07:36] this is you do traffic
[1:07:38] enforcement. And then you
[1:07:39] enforce those traffic tickets
[1:07:41] cited. And not, and not let
[1:07:42] them go on the buy side so
[1:07:44] people learn their lesson about
[1:07:46] speeding. We have to make
[1:07:47] assumptions that people are
[1:07:48] going to abide by the law when
[1:07:49] they don
[1:07:50] t, you take them and
[1:07:52] prosecute them. Simple as that.
[1:07:53] And so if you
[1:07:54] ve got a right in,
[1:07:55] right out, you
[1:07:55] re supposed to
[1:07:58] turn right out, right in. That
[1:07:58] means traffic only flowing in
[1:08:00] one direction. We have to
[1:08:01] assume people are going to
[1:08:03] follow the law. They don
[1:08:03] t you
[1:08:04] enforce the law against them.
[1:08:07] And so It doesn
[1:08:08] t support those
[1:08:10] opinions with the facts. And
[1:08:11] then second, the only way we
[1:08:13] can grow this city is if we
[1:08:16] develop it. And so basically as
[1:08:17] city manager said, do we just
[1:08:18] put all development on hold? On
[1:08:21] this section. I mean, is that
[1:08:21] what we
[1:08:23] re prepared to do?
[1:08:24] Because recognizing this is
[1:08:25] something that a lot of our
[1:08:26] citizens don
[1:08:28] t recognize. About
[1:08:31] 65 or 70% of our, our, uh,
[1:08:32] budget comes from real estate
[1:08:34] taxes and then property taxes.
[1:08:36] And one of the things we have a
[1:08:36] disadvantage is we can
[1:08:37] t tax
[1:08:39] all the property ecu has, which
[1:08:40] is millions and millions of
[1:08:42] dollars, as well as a hospital.
[1:08:43] So for us to grow, we
[1:08:43] ve got to
[1:08:46] grow by development. This is
[1:08:48] done properly. This is just the
[1:08:49] beginning process. They still
[1:08:50] got to go through a lot of
[1:08:51] hoops to get whatever they
[1:08:51] re
[1:08:53] going to put there put there.
[1:08:53] And so it
[1:08:55] s a $4 million piece
[1:08:56] of property and then you, it
[1:08:58] can only get bigger. And so,
[1:09:00] What do we say to a person
[1:09:00] s
[1:09:01] develop their piece of land.
[1:09:01] Well, we
[1:09:02] re going to put you on
[1:09:03] hold indefinitely until we
[1:09:05] decide what dot is going to do.
[1:09:07] Every city that develops has
[1:09:09] the same problem. Every single
[1:09:10] city, nobody can tell me
[1:09:11] otherwise or challenge me with
[1:09:12] the facts because every city,
[1:09:15] go to Raleigh. Go to Wilmington.
[1:09:16] They all have the same problem
[1:09:19] as you grow. And so, you know,
[1:09:19] if we
[1:09:20] ve got the right in and
[1:09:21] right out and you
[1:09:22] ve got the
[1:09:25] turnoff of oak down, uh, way, I
[1:09:26] mean, I went out there the
[1:09:28] other day looking at this piece
[1:09:29] of property and drove out
[1:09:31] during lunchtime, be very
[1:09:32] little traffic, and this is
[1:09:33] lunchtime, but I bet if you see
[1:09:33] it at 8 o
[1:09:34] clock in the morning,
[1:09:34] it
[1:09:35] s probably a lot of traffic,
[1:09:35] 5 o
[1:09:36] clock in the afternoon, a
[1:09:38] lot of traffic like there is in
[1:09:40] Arlington, Greenville Boulevard,
[1:09:42] uh, 14th Street, Memorial Drive,
[1:09:43] Highway 11, you can name every
[1:09:45] single one of them. You know, I
[1:09:46] just think that at some point,
[1:09:47] we don
[1:09:47] t, we shouldn
[1:09:48] t be
[1:09:48] picking and choosing which one.
[1:09:49] Developing or saying we
[1:09:50] re
[1:09:51] gonna stop all development
[1:09:52] because this has been a
[1:09:53] position of some people in this
[1:09:54] council, even for something as
[1:09:56] small as like the, the shop
[1:09:58] that was going to go on Portar
[1:09:59] Road. There
[1:09:59] s been no evidence
[1:10:00] that this is going to exceed
[1:10:02] the traffic volume of the
[1:10:02] highway, or that it
[1:10:03] s going to
[1:10:04] contribute to accents or some
[1:10:06] major traffic problem on this,
[1:10:07] uh, excuse me, accent problem
[1:10:09] on this highway. And again,
[1:10:11] look at the facts. So for all
[1:10:11] those reasons, I
[1:10:12] m, I
[1:10:12] m going
[1:10:14] to devote, vote against the
[1:10:14] motion is currently on the
[1:10:18] floor. You hear their comments?
[1:10:22] I have, um, a few comments. Uh,
[1:10:24] number one, when we look at
[1:10:28] supporting facts. Um, not just
[1:10:30] the facts of the number of
[1:10:32] trips coming in and out of that
[1:10:35] business, but the fact that we
[1:10:36] have already exceeded exceeded
[1:10:38] the amount of traffic that was
[1:10:39] planned to go up and down 10th
[1:10:43] Street. That is Uh, pretty well
[1:10:47] known fact, right, we know that
[1:10:49] we have an imbalance of the
[1:10:51] amount of traffic that
[1:10:52] s going
[1:10:54] on that road with the amount of
[1:10:56] residential properties um going
[1:10:59] there and we know that it is
[1:11:00] unsafe like we really know that.
[1:11:03] Um, when we talk about growing
[1:11:05] our city for development. Yes,
[1:11:07] we all want to see growth, but
[1:11:08] we want to see responsible
[1:11:14] growth. And gas stations, smoke
[1:11:17] shops, um, and, uh, restaurants,
[1:11:18] I don
[1:11:20] t look at as. Growth or
[1:11:27] development. Um So, uh, And,
[1:11:29] and whatever we do decide, it
[1:11:30] should be creating jobs. It
[1:11:31] should be creating jobs that
[1:11:34] pay livable wages. Um, all of
[1:11:37] those things so that we can
[1:11:40] utilize what we consider growth
[1:11:41] and development to actually
[1:11:42] address some of the root issues
[1:11:44] that we have in our community,
[1:11:46] which is housing and food
[1:11:49] insecurity. So, um, if it
[1:11:49] s not
[1:11:52] paying livable wages, number
[1:11:56] one, number 2, Offering a
[1:12:00] number of jobs that would
[1:12:01] actually uh create some
[1:12:02] economic opportunities for some
[1:12:04] of our citizens, then I don
[1:12:04] t
[1:12:07] know that I necessarily
[1:12:09] consider it responsible growth
[1:12:11] and development, um, and then
[1:12:14] lastly, what do we say to
[1:12:15] property owners and developers,
[1:12:17] I have a couple of things that
[1:12:17] I
[1:12:19] d like to say to property
[1:12:21] owners and developers. Number
[1:12:22] one, this city belongs to our
[1:12:24] residents. We
[1:12:28] re voted in by
[1:12:30] our residents. Um I am elected
[1:12:32] to represent them. I
[1:12:33] m not
[1:12:35] elected to represent special
[1:12:38] interests or developers. Um, so
[1:12:38] that
[1:12:40] s number one. Now I do
[1:12:40] believe in growth and
[1:12:42] development. And I do support
[1:12:46] that. But I support that when
[1:12:48] number one, you have
[1:12:49] communicated with our citizens
[1:12:50] and you have considered how
[1:12:51] your actions are going to
[1:12:55] impact their day to day lived
[1:12:58] experiences and number 2. Um,
[1:13:00] that you have considered how we
[1:13:03] need to protect and preserve
[1:13:04] the quality of life of our
[1:13:09] community. And part of that is
[1:13:11] considering what type of trees
[1:13:13] and vegetation is on properties.
[1:13:15] I think that we need to set
[1:13:17] some standards for what we want
[1:13:21] in our city, and we need to set
[1:13:22] standards even for a property
[1:13:23] owners and developers that this
[1:13:25] is how we would like you to
[1:13:27] move forward. When you want to
[1:13:32] be a business here. Um, So, uh,
[1:13:34] I appreciate. All of my
[1:13:37] co-counsel. But I will
[1:13:38] reiterate what I
[1:13:39] m elected to
[1:13:40] represent and I do that
[1:13:44] unapologetically. Just as a
[1:13:46] question. I was wondering if
[1:13:47] our traffic engineer could
[1:13:49] answer a question real quick
[1:13:50] about the traffic count that
[1:13:51] there was a statement that was
[1:13:55] made that Street exceeds the
[1:13:59] limit for the traffic count. I
[1:14:00] thought I remembered that being
[1:14:08] said before. Yes, sir. So
[1:14:08] there
[1:14:09] s a statement that was
[1:14:12] made about the traffic count in
[1:14:12] That we
[1:14:13] ve already exceeded the.
[1:14:16] I guess the allowable amount of
[1:14:17] traffic on 10th Street, is that
[1:14:17] I don
[1:14:18] t know what the exact
[1:14:20] capacity is, but the current
[1:14:25] adt is is 20. 2 24,000. And
[1:14:25] that
[1:14:27] s not at capacity as far
[1:14:29] as the roadway section goes.
[1:14:30] First place you
[1:14:30] re gonna lose
[1:14:31] capacity is at the
[1:14:35] intersections. Repeat that. I
[1:14:36] m
[1:14:37] sorry. I just want to hear him
[1:14:39] clearly. I, I didn
[1:14:39] t, I
[1:14:40] m sorry,
[1:14:41] I didn
[1:14:42] t hear that last part so
[1:14:45] I can hear you clearly. Zip sip
[1:14:47] the capacity of the roadway
[1:14:49] itself, which is basically a
[1:14:51] five-lane section is in
[1:14:53] excessive with the current adts,
[1:14:56] which is about 22, 24,000. So
[1:14:57] it
[1:14:58] s not exceeding capacity.
[1:14:59] The roadway section. We
[1:14:59] re
[1:15:00] going to first find the loss of,
[1:15:04] of Of uh capacity is at the
[1:15:07] intersections. Ok. So the
[1:15:11] section itself is Support can
[1:15:13] support this traffic, plus the
[1:15:14] residential development plus
[1:15:16] the small commercial pocket. As
[1:15:19] far as the section goes. And if
[1:15:22] I MAY, 10th Street, however, at
[1:15:24] this point was designated or
[1:15:25] was designed to be a
[1:15:26] thoroughfare and not a
[1:15:27] commercial corridor. That
[1:15:28] s
[1:15:28] true and that wouldn
[1:15:29] t, that
[1:15:30] would improve the capacity, yes.
[1:15:34] Right. Ok. Only because of the
[1:15:37] restrictions by the median. And
[1:15:37] that
[1:15:38] s the only reason. So when
[1:15:38] you have it doesn
[1:15:39] t, it doesn
[1:15:39] t
[1:15:41] add a travel lane. Going from
[1:15:42] what we have now. To a
[1:15:45] thoroughfare. So when you have
[1:15:48] a, a, a road, this designated
[1:15:50] designed as a thoroughfare that
[1:15:52] becomes a commercial corridor.
[1:15:52] You
[1:15:53] ve got the philosophy of
[1:15:54] moving people from point a to
[1:15:55] point b as fast as possible,
[1:15:56] but all of a sudden you
[1:15:58] ve got,
[1:16:01] uh, businesses and, uh,
[1:16:02] apartment complexes and
[1:16:02] dentist
[1:16:03] s office and pediatrics
[1:16:05] office and uh boat repair shops
[1:16:06] and all kinds of things
[1:16:08] happening that were not
[1:16:09] initially part of that
[1:16:11] assessment, but the difference
[1:16:12] in capacity comes because of
[1:16:16] the median. The median
[1:16:17] restricting access, especially
[1:16:19] the left turns. That
[1:16:20] s, that
[1:16:21] s
[1:16:22] where the improved capacity
[1:16:23] really comes from because it
[1:16:23] doesn
[1:16:24] t add a lane, it doesn
[1:16:24] t
[1:16:26] add a through lane. It
[1:16:26] s still
[1:16:28] gonna be 2 lanes in each
[1:16:29] direction, which the center
[1:16:30] turn. It would have a center
[1:16:31] median. That, that
[1:16:32] s, that
[1:16:33] s.
[1:16:35] That would be the next step.
[1:16:36] But we do not have a center
[1:16:37] median. There
[1:16:38] s just a a middle
[1:16:39] crazy lane. It
[1:16:39] s yeah, it
[1:16:40] s
[1:16:40] it
[1:16:43] d be an access management
[1:16:44] project to to improve the
[1:16:45] access management. Yes. Thank
[1:16:48] you. One other question for, I
[1:16:53] guess our city. Staff, um,
[1:16:55] Would we consider this to be
[1:16:56] like a mixed use development. I
[1:16:59] know these are two separate.
[1:17:00] Parcels and probably two
[1:17:01] separate owners. Would you
[1:17:02] consider this to be a mixed-use
[1:17:05] development. What
[1:17:07] s in red is
[1:17:07] just commercial or office.
[1:17:10] Right. So mixed use would
[1:17:10] typically mean you you
[1:17:11] re
[1:17:12] adding in a residential, the
[1:17:13] residential is wrapped around
[1:17:17] it. So holistically, yes,
[1:17:18] because we still have a back
[1:17:20] portion. That will eventually
[1:17:22] come in as well. Sure, I mean,
[1:17:22] that
[1:17:22] s, that
[1:17:23] s kind of what I
[1:17:25] meant. So as far as what is the
[1:17:25] city
[1:17:28] s. Stance on that, is that
[1:17:30] something the city supports?
[1:17:32] Because the city is in favor of
[1:17:36] this, correct? Right, this is,
[1:17:39] this was rezoned. 10 years ago.
[1:17:41] Um, what they are proposing to
[1:17:44] do is buy right, that means
[1:17:48] that that is, um, Reviewed by
[1:17:51] staff at City dot guc staff.
[1:17:51] That
[1:17:53] s why, um, we talked about
[1:17:54] city council doesn
[1:17:54] t see site
[1:17:58] plans. So And then again, this
[1:18:00] has already had dot involvement
[1:18:02] and approval on it. So it is,
[1:18:02] it
[1:18:03] s, it
[1:18:04] s gone through all of
[1:18:06] those hoops of review and
[1:18:08] approval. This is the
[1:18:10] essentially the last step that
[1:18:13] would be, um, That would come
[1:18:14] before council, I guess is what
[1:18:14] i
[1:18:17] m trying to say. So
[1:18:19] essentially if this were to be
[1:18:22] denied tonight. I go, maybe I
[1:18:24] might need some help from a, uh,
[1:18:26] an attorney too. With this,
[1:18:27] we
[1:18:27] re essentially telling the
[1:18:28] property owner that they cannot
[1:18:32] do anything with their. I will
[1:18:35] say this. I believe there is an
[1:18:37] avenue for them. She still gets
[1:18:39] sore. To still be able to
[1:18:48] develop. Any other questions or
[1:18:51] comments? Are we legally able
[1:18:54] to refuse annexation? Mm Uh,
[1:18:56] yes, this is a legislative
[1:18:58] decision and um This in the
[1:19:02] will of counsel, so. Mhm. It,
[1:19:02] oh, go ahead, ma
[1:19:05] am. I Just
[1:19:08] have a couple of Comments, um,
[1:19:10] Just the amount of development
[1:19:10] that
[1:19:11] s going in, again, I think
[1:19:12] we just need to slow down a
[1:19:13] little bit. There
[1:19:13] s a huge
[1:19:14] apartment complex, big doctor
[1:19:14] s
[1:19:18] office. Uh, gas stations stuff
[1:19:19] going down the street, um,
[1:19:19] there
[1:19:21] s just a lot going on at
[1:19:22] the same time, and My hope is
[1:19:24] that we find a way to slow this
[1:19:27] down a little bit, um. Because
[1:19:27] we
[1:19:29] re not stopping development.
[1:19:30] Development is happening all
[1:19:32] over the place, um, especially
[1:19:33] on 10th Street. There
[1:19:33] s a huge
[1:19:34] apartment complex coming online.
[1:19:35] There
[1:19:36] s a wah wah coming down
[1:19:37] the street. Um, there
[1:19:38] s brand
[1:19:39] new stores all up and down the
[1:19:40] street there. We
[1:19:40] re not
[1:19:43] stopping development. Um, but
[1:19:45] this is very different than the,
[1:19:46] the parcel we passed a couple
[1:19:48] of weeks ago. This is, is right
[1:19:50] on 10th Street. Um, it
[1:19:51] s right
[1:19:53] on a blind curve. And it
[1:19:53] s
[1:19:55] right in front of a gigantic
[1:19:56] apartment complex that
[1:19:56] s going
[1:20:00] to come online. Um And I I wish
[1:20:02] there was a stoplight at River
[1:20:03] Hills cause then it would be
[1:20:05] sort of sandwiched by two stop
[1:20:07] lights that would make a little
[1:20:08] bit easier, uh, you
[1:20:09] d have some
[1:20:10] breaks in the traffic at least.
[1:20:13] Um, and I wish that there was
[1:20:15] better access to Oakdown. I
[1:20:16] don
[1:20:16] t believe that anybody
[1:20:19] using that. Um, shopping center
[1:20:21] is gonna go through the
[1:20:22] apartment complex and out to
[1:20:26] the light, um. And this is very
[1:20:29] present to me, um. The, the
[1:20:31] safety of our city, my daughter
[1:20:33] was in a a car accident last
[1:20:35] week and, um, totaled her car,
[1:20:37] um, we was on Greenville
[1:20:39] Boulevard, but, um, It
[1:20:40] s a
[1:20:41] similar sort of issue. So it
[1:20:41] s
[1:20:44] just very presents to me, uh,
[1:20:46] sitting here in this chair
[1:20:47] today cause I know how
[1:20:48] dangerous it is, and I don
[1:20:48] t
[1:20:50] want to put anybody else
[1:20:50] s
[1:20:52] child at risk, um, driving up
[1:20:54] and down that road. So I, and I
[1:20:54] just don
[1:20:55] t have enough
[1:20:58] information today to make Um,
[1:20:59] an educated decision about this.
[1:21:03] i really Um, with all respect
[1:21:04] to you, council member in
[1:21:07] Blackburn. I, I would like to
[1:21:08] see us table this uh so that we
[1:21:09] have the opportunity to learn
[1:21:12] more about it. That possibility,
[1:21:13] Councilors, what, what
[1:21:15] information would you like to,
[1:21:15] you don
[1:21:17] t have I would like to
[1:21:19] learn more about the setup of
[1:21:20] the of the business and what
[1:21:21] the site plan looks like if
[1:21:21] it
[1:21:24] s legal for me to have that
[1:21:25] information, um, and I would
[1:21:27] like to know more about the
[1:21:28] setup of the streetscape in the
[1:21:30] apartment complex. What is the
[1:21:32] access like to Oaktown Way from
[1:21:34] that. I would like to know if
[1:21:35] we
[1:21:37] re following. Um The ideas
[1:21:41] set up. That we have setbacks
[1:21:42] created and Backstreets to
[1:21:43] allow for traffic to go from
[1:21:44] one place to the other without
[1:21:45] having to go on to the main
[1:21:47] thoroughfare. Um, they just
[1:21:49] have a lot of questions, um, I
[1:21:50] also want to know more about
[1:21:51] the trees that are there. I was
[1:21:54] out there today at 11:30 A.M.
[1:21:56] The traffic was very busy, um,
[1:21:57] I had a hard time getting in
[1:22:00] and out, um, to evolve way, um,
[1:22:01] and when I got onto the
[1:22:02] property, it
[1:22:03] s a beautiful
[1:22:04] piece of property. It
[1:22:04] s
[1:22:06] sandwiched in between that
[1:22:08] giant apartment complex, but
[1:22:08] it
[1:22:09] s gorgeous. There
[1:22:09] s really
[1:22:12] nice grove of cedar trees that
[1:22:13] are very old, um, that we need
[1:22:16] to learn about, um, and I I
[1:22:18] would hate that our city loses
[1:22:19] one more, uh, beautiful place.
[1:22:20] And I don
[1:22:20] t know that it
[1:22:21] s
[1:22:22] possible to save it, but could
[1:22:24] we work with the developer in
[1:22:26] order to try to, to save some
[1:22:27] of that growth, some of those
[1:22:30] trees, um, are there ways For
[1:22:32] us to, to work with them, uh,
[1:22:35] to develop in a more
[1:22:36] sustainable way, um, so I just
[1:22:37] have a lot of questions and,
[1:22:39] and, and, and again, I would
[1:22:41] remind council that, um, What
[1:22:42] would, what would the situation
[1:22:43] would be if we did not have a
[1:22:44] site plan. Sitting in front of
[1:22:47] us right now, which is 90 99%
[1:22:48] of the annex sessions that we
[1:22:49] have, we don
[1:22:49] t have not gotten
[1:22:52] to that point yet. So we
[1:22:52] re, I
[1:22:53] think we
[1:22:53] re, we
[1:22:53] re, we
[1:22:54] re
[1:22:55] treating this one different
[1:22:56] because just because it has a
[1:22:58] sighting. Well, no, no, I mean,
[1:22:59] again I go back to, sir, with
[1:23:01] all due respect, I believe it
[1:23:02] is different because it is a, a
[1:23:03] very busy road. It
[1:23:04] s on a blind
[1:23:05] curve and it
[1:23:07] s in front of a
[1:23:08] brand new massive apartment
[1:23:11] complex. I, I think it does
[1:23:12] demand special attention
[1:23:13] because of the, the, the danger
[1:23:16] it. You know, poses towards my
[1:23:18] constituents in District 4. How
[1:23:19] would that decision be
[1:23:19] different if there wasn
[1:23:19] t a
[1:23:23] site plan. But for me, it
[1:23:23] wouldn
[1:23:26] t be different, um, and
[1:23:26] i know that there
[1:23:28] s the thought
[1:23:29] process of stifling development,
[1:23:31] um, I, I, I don
[1:23:32] t see it as
[1:23:34] much as stifling development. I
[1:23:35] think that for years our
[1:23:36] council has been weighted
[1:23:39] towards development. Often at
[1:23:41] the expense of the day to day
[1:23:42] lived experience of of of
[1:23:44] citizens and so for me it goes
[1:23:47] back to us needing to set some
[1:23:48] standards for our community, um,
[1:23:51] that are balanced. With the
[1:23:53] growth and development that we
[1:23:55] all desire, um, with the day to
[1:23:56] day lived experience and
[1:23:57] quality of life of our citizens.
[1:24:00] Um, so for me it wouldn
[1:24:01] t be
[1:24:02] that much different. And I
[1:24:02] d
[1:24:04] like to address something that
[1:24:06] perennially comes up. People
[1:24:07] being against development.
[1:24:08] That
[1:24:09] s a broad statement that
[1:24:11] is absolutely untrue. As
[1:24:12] council member Foreman just
[1:24:13] said, we are, we all want to
[1:24:16] see our city grow. We want to
[1:24:18] see it grow in responsible ways,
[1:24:19] and when you don
[1:24:19] t have
[1:24:20] infrastructure in place and
[1:24:20] when it
[1:24:21] s. When it
[1:24:24] s already a
[1:24:25] demonstratedly dangerous area.
[1:24:25] You
[1:24:26] re adding more stuff to it
[1:24:27] and as council member Scully
[1:24:28] said, you
[1:24:29] ve got this very,
[1:24:30] very large apartment complex
[1:24:34] taking shape. Until there are
[1:24:35] some improvements. We
[1:24:35] re not
[1:24:37] saying no development ever, no
[1:24:39] commercial, uh, activity ever,
[1:24:41] but until we have that
[1:24:42] infrastructure that should have
[1:24:44] been in place 10 years ago.
[1:24:47] Until we have that in place,
[1:24:47] it
[1:24:48] s just irresponsible and
[1:24:50] reckless to move forward with
[1:24:53] more commercial activity. MR.
[1:24:57] Attorney, um, just a question.
[1:25:00] Uh, by denying the request,
[1:25:02] does that put the city in an
[1:25:05] adverse position legally. Again,
[1:25:06] I think it
[1:25:06] s the legislative
[1:25:08] position, uh, it
[1:25:08] s legislative
[1:25:09] decision. I don
[1:25:09] t think it
[1:25:09] s
[1:25:11] adverse. It
[1:25:12] s it for the
[1:25:13] jurisdiction of the council to
[1:25:16] make that, that call. Um I
[1:25:17] don
[1:25:17] t, I don
[1:25:18] t know what
[1:25:19] options the developer would
[1:25:20] have if it is denied. I think
[1:25:20] it
[1:25:23] s in the etj and They, they
[1:25:24] would have maybe problems
[1:25:26] getting sore, but um. Because
[1:25:26] essentially they
[1:25:27] ve gone
[1:25:28] through the entire process,
[1:25:31] they paid. I guess probably
[1:25:34] lots of money for due diligence.
[1:25:34] They
[1:25:35] ve probably done
[1:25:36] environmental studies, they
[1:25:36] ve
[1:25:39] done a plat. And then they
[1:25:39] ve
[1:25:41] come to the city. For
[1:25:42] annexation and if the city
[1:25:45] denies it. They essentially
[1:25:46] cannot move forward. I know, I
[1:25:48] think our planner had said that
[1:25:48] there
[1:25:49] s a possibility that
[1:25:49] there
[1:25:50] s a way that they could
[1:25:53] still move forward with it. So
[1:25:54] in your opinion, you don
[1:25:54] t
[1:25:55] think that would put the city
[1:25:58] in a adverse position. I would
[1:25:59] need to research that Mayor,
[1:26:00] but uh it
[1:26:00] s a legislative
[1:26:01] decision. It
[1:26:01] s in the
[1:26:02] jurisdiction of the council to
[1:26:04] make the call here, um. You
[1:26:06] know, I do know, um, council
[1:26:07] member Scully asks for a motion
[1:26:09] to table, so that
[1:26:10] s something
[1:26:11] y
[1:26:11] all need to on the floor. So
[1:26:13] it was a recommendation. You
[1:26:14] know, there
[1:26:14] s a, the main
[1:26:16] motion on the floor is to deny
[1:26:17] and if you
[1:26:18] re making a motion
[1:26:19] to table or really a motion to
[1:26:22] postpone. That would take
[1:26:24] precedence, but is that Is
[1:26:25] there a second, you need to, a
[1:26:26] point of order, Mayor. I think
[1:26:27] you MAY want to see if there
[1:26:27] s
[1:26:31] a second to that. Is there a
[1:26:32] second motion to I would like
[1:26:34] to make a motion to postpone. I
[1:26:39] second. All right. So there
[1:26:39] s a
[1:26:43] motion made by Councilor Scully,
[1:26:43] seconded by council member,
[1:26:44] when we, I mean, you
[1:26:44] re
[1:26:47] postponing to what? To next
[1:26:49] month and to what date would
[1:26:52] you like this? Next month would
[1:26:53] be would be clarification, that
[1:26:54] was the main motion to deny it,
[1:26:57] but under Robert rules, a
[1:26:58] motion to postpone this takes
[1:26:59] precedence and they that
[1:26:59] s in
[1:27:00] you all
[1:27:01] s jurisdiction, so. Yes,
[1:27:03] sir. Thank you. All right, um,
[1:27:06] as far as clarification. City
[1:27:08] staff, do you need any
[1:27:10] clarification of what material
[1:27:13] that you need or what
[1:27:14] additional information, uh, the
[1:27:15] attorney can take care of the
[1:27:17] legal side, but what additional
[1:27:19] information would you like? I
[1:27:21] would like to know more about
[1:27:21] those trees. I
[1:27:23] d like to know.
[1:27:26] If any plans are made to put
[1:27:27] delineators or median on 10th
[1:27:29] Street. I
[1:27:31] d like to know. More
[1:27:32] about the infrastructure, the
[1:27:34] apartment complex and access to
[1:27:35] Oaktown Way from the commercial
[1:27:43] site. Everything else? Thank
[1:27:46] you very much. All right. Any
[1:27:47] other discussion before we take
[1:27:50] a vote on the motion? Yes, I, I
[1:27:53] have a comment. I really
[1:27:53] appreciate the thoughtfulness
[1:27:54] that Council member Scully has
[1:27:56] brought to this conversation
[1:27:57] and understand that, uh,
[1:27:59] because I feel very strongly
[1:28:00] about wanting to deny this, I
[1:28:00] m
[1:28:01] going to go ahead and vote
[1:28:02] against the motion to table,
[1:28:03] but I appreciate the
[1:28:04] thoughtfulness that you brought.
[1:28:06] To raising that as an option
[1:28:09] for us. Ok. Any other
[1:28:14] discussion. I get a show of
[1:28:18] hands, me. As far as The boat,
[1:28:20] yeah. Yeah, I can do that, yeah,
[1:28:21] absolutely. All right, so all
[1:28:24] those in favor. Of tabling this
[1:28:26] we said the next next month, is
[1:28:28] that correct? Mhm. Yes, sir. Do
[1:28:32] we have a specific date? So,
[1:28:34] the Thursday, yes, hold on.
[1:28:35] Just for the applicant
[1:28:36] s
[1:28:37] purpose so they know and
[1:28:39] anybody else. APRIL 10th. APRIL
[1:28:41] 10th and just to clarify the
[1:28:42] public hearing has been closed,
[1:28:45] this would be just simply for a
[1:28:46] discussion and a vote. Ok. All
[1:28:48] right, all those in favor
[1:28:53] please raise your hand. Ok.
[1:28:58] Those opposed, raise your hand.
[1:29:03] And I am in favor. Ok. So,
[1:29:09] Motion passes. 43. All right.
[1:29:09] Move on to the next public
[1:29:11] hearing. Thank you, Mayor. Item
[1:29:13] number 12 ordinance to annex
[1:29:14] the enclave, phase one property
[1:29:18] involving a total of 10.5683
[1:29:20] acres located at 520 plus or
[1:29:22] minus feet west of lt Hardy
[1:29:23] Road and south of the northern
[1:29:27] Suffolk. The Norfolk Southern
[1:29:28] Railroad call forward or uh
[1:29:29] city planner, Chris Kelly for
[1:29:33] the presentation. This property
[1:29:35] is located in the eastern part
[1:29:37] of the city, more specifically,
[1:29:39] this property is located 520 ft
[1:29:42] west of lt Hardy Road. And
[1:29:44] south of the Norfolk Southern
[1:29:45] Railroad, uh, just added
[1:29:46] reference north this is Walmart.
[1:29:49] This property is located in the
[1:29:50] Hardy Creek watershed, and if
[1:29:52] stormwater rules apply, it
[1:29:54] would require 10-year detention,
[1:29:56] the property is also located in
[1:29:57] primary service aerial and I
[1:29:59] growth map will be located in
[1:30:00] City council voting district
[1:30:03] number 4. This property is
[1:30:04] anticipated to yield 40
[1:30:05] multi-family units with an
[1:30:07] estimated tax value of $11
[1:30:08] million. I
[1:30:08] d be happy to answer
[1:30:09] any questions. All right, any
[1:30:18] questions for MR. Kelly? See
[1:30:19] none public hearings now open.
[1:30:20] Those speak on behalf of the
[1:30:21] applicant MAY come forward.
[1:30:21] Please state your name for the
[1:30:23] record. The first person has 10
[1:30:25] minutes. All others have 3
[1:30:44] minutes. See none. Those in
[1:30:44] opposition to the African MAY
[1:30:45] come forward, please state your
[1:30:46] name for the record. First
[1:30:48] person has 10 minutes, all
[1:31:06] others have 3 minutes. I ain
[1:31:06] t
[1:31:07] seen none. The public hearings
[1:31:07] now closed. I
[1:31:08] m for board
[1:31:09] discussion our motion to
[1:31:13] approve. I have some questions.
[1:31:14] Is there a is there a second?
[1:31:14] I
[1:31:16] d be happy to go ahead. Is
[1:31:18] there a second. All right,
[1:31:18] motion
[1:31:19] s been made by council
[1:31:20] member Robinson seconded by
[1:31:21] Councilor Scully. Councillor
[1:31:23] Mayor Blackburn, uh, yes, I
[1:31:24] have some questions and this,
[1:31:27] uh. Annexation raises some of
[1:31:29] the same issues, although
[1:31:31] perhaps not as acutely. Um, is
[1:31:33] it possible to get a view, uh,
[1:31:35] going back that kind of shows
[1:31:35] the area. I know we
[1:31:37] ve got, you
[1:31:39] know, Elsie Hardy, but is it
[1:31:40] possible to get, uh, I don
[1:31:40] t
[1:31:41] know, just almost like a Google
[1:31:42] map view. This is the same area.
[1:31:49] And, um, This is where we
[1:31:49] ve
[1:31:53] had, um, Rezonings, rezoning
[1:31:56] requests and, um, a lot of
[1:31:57] opposition because, again, the
[1:31:58] infrastructure is just not in
[1:32:00] place. Where will, if you don
[1:32:00] t
[1:32:02] mind, uh, MR. Kelly, where will
[1:32:05] the entrance and exit for this,
[1:32:05] uh, development be. Is that
[1:32:07] gonna be on lt Hardy Road? Yes,
[1:32:07] ma
[1:32:11] am. When we did this
[1:32:12] Previously, ok, we did the
[1:32:14] rezoning. This is the
[1:32:15] annexation. Ok, all right, so
[1:32:15] we, it
[1:32:16] s already been rezoned
[1:32:17] and I, which I did not support,
[1:32:19] so this is the next step for
[1:32:20] this. Yes, ma
[1:32:24] am. And so
[1:32:24] they
[1:32:25] re requesting annexation
[1:32:26] so they can have sewer. Yes,
[1:32:26] ma
[1:32:32] am. Um 10 acres, about how
[1:32:33] many can you tell me about how
[1:32:34] many units are gonna be on this
[1:32:37] property? Uh, phase one will
[1:32:39] include 40 multi-family units.
[1:32:40] And about how many, in other
[1:32:42] words, about how many, have any
[1:32:43] idea how many people, how many
[1:32:44] trips, that kind of thing. I
[1:32:47] know, traffic wise, no man, but
[1:32:49] people calculated at 87 number
[1:32:53] of people. 87 people. A lot, a
[1:32:56] lot of These are, um Do, are
[1:33:00] these the townhouses? Um Yes,
[1:33:00] ma
[1:33:04] am. Yeah. Ok. Ok, ok. So a
[1:33:06] little bit less intensive. Then
[1:33:09] uh say a multifamily. It, it
[1:33:09] s
[1:33:11] still multifamily. Right, but
[1:33:13] not like the, uh, the Louis and
[1:33:15] the 3, the 3 to an apartment
[1:33:17] kind of thing. I, if I remember
[1:33:19] when the rezoning came up. They
[1:33:21] have the cars can stay, uh, or
[1:33:22] can be parked underneath that
[1:33:25] kind of thing there. I don
[1:33:25] t
[1:33:26] know exactly. I don
[1:33:27] t know. Ok,
[1:33:30] all right. Thank you. Um, Chris,
[1:33:31] I have a question. You
[1:33:33] mentioned that, um, we don
[1:33:33] t
[1:33:34] know the increased number of
[1:33:35] trips. Is there a reason why we
[1:33:35] don
[1:33:37] t know for this one when
[1:33:41] not in others, we do know the
[1:33:42] increased number of traffic
[1:33:44] from traffic engineering during
[1:33:44] the rezoning before the
[1:33:45] annexation. No, ma
[1:33:46] am. Ok, got
[1:33:50] you. Thank you. All right, any
[1:33:53] other questions or discussions?
[1:33:57] Got a motion on the table. Mhm.
[1:34:02] All right. Motion is to approve
[1:34:04] the annexation, all those in
[1:34:06] favor say a those opposed say
[1:34:10] nay. Oh Oh that was a, I
[1:34:11] m
[1:34:12] really torn. I
[1:34:13] m really torn
[1:34:13] because I have the same concern.
[1:34:14] Well, we gotta, we gotta, we
[1:34:17] gotta be yes or no right now. I
[1:34:19] have the same concerns, but, um,
[1:34:19] they
[1:34:21] re slightly different. So,
[1:34:23] um, and we, for the record, we
[1:34:25] do, uh, appreciate the
[1:34:27] increased tax base, and I think
[1:34:27] that
[1:34:27] s important for
[1:34:29] development of this size, they
[1:34:30] do need to work immediately
[1:34:32] because I know the construction
[1:34:33] is already taking place. The
[1:34:35] clerk needs a yay or nay.
[1:34:35] Otherwise it
[1:34:37] s going to be 60.
[1:34:40] So I will, I will vote to
[1:34:40] approve this motion passes 6th
[1:34:42] year. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:34:43] Alright, we
[1:34:44] ll move on to the
[1:34:45] next public hearing. Thank you,
[1:34:48] Mayor. Item number 13 ordinance
[1:34:50] to annex Langston Farms phase
[1:34:54] 11, Section 3 and 4a property
[1:34:55] involving 10.4643 acres located
[1:34:58] at the current term terminus of
[1:35:00] De Meadow Drive in call forward
[1:35:01] or city planner Chris Kelly for
[1:35:08] the presentation. Um This
[1:35:09] property is located in the
[1:35:11] southwestern quadrant of the
[1:35:13] city, more specifically located
[1:35:14] at the current terminus of De
[1:35:17] Meadow Drive. This property
[1:35:18] drains to the Swift Swift Creek
[1:35:20] watershed, and if stormwater
[1:35:22] rules apply, will require a 25
[1:35:23] year detention. This property
[1:35:25] is also located in the primary
[1:35:26] service area on shared growth
[1:35:27] map, and we, and we
[1:35:28] ll be
[1:35:29] located at city council ot
[1:35:31] district number 2. This
[1:35:33] property is anticipated to
[1:35:34] yield 33 single-family lots
[1:35:38] with an estimated tax value of
[1:35:40] $8,250,000. I
[1:35:41] ll be happy to
[1:35:42] answer any questions for MR.
[1:35:50] Kelly? Sina, thank you very
[1:35:52] much. Public hearing is now
[1:35:53] open. Those who speak on behalf
[1:35:54] of the African MAY come forward.
[1:35:54] Please state your name for the
[1:35:56] record. The first person has 10
[1:35:57] minutes. All others have 3
[1:36:09] minutes. See none those in
[1:36:10] opposition to the outcome MAY
[1:36:10] come forward. Please state your
[1:36:11] name for the record. The first
[1:36:13] person has 10 minutes. All
[1:36:27] others have 3 minutes. See none.
[1:36:30] The public hearing is now
[1:36:31] closed, open for a board
[1:36:33] discussion or a motion. Motion
[1:36:34] to approve. Second. All right.
[1:36:34] Motion
[1:36:35] s been made by
[1:36:35] COUNCILMAN Robinson, seconded
[1:36:36] by COUNCILMAN Willis. Any other
[1:36:42] discussion? All those in favor
[1:36:45] say aye, as opposed say nay.
[1:36:46] Motion passed 60 on to the next
[1:36:48] public hearing. Thank you,
[1:36:49] Mayor. Item number 14,
[1:36:51] ordinance requested by Pitt
[1:36:52] County City of Greenville
[1:36:55] Airport Authority to rezone
[1:36:56] 29.719 acres located along the
[1:36:58] southern right of way of the
[1:37:00] Western Belbore Road in 1700
[1:37:01] plus amount of feet west of
[1:37:05] North Memorial Drive from ra20
[1:37:07] residential agriculture are not
[1:37:09] as residential single family
[1:37:11] and r6mh residential mobile
[1:37:13] home to iu on offensive
[1:37:13] industry. I
[1:37:14] ll now call forward
[1:37:16] our city, uh, chief planner,
[1:37:17] Shanti Guy for the presentation.
[1:37:24] Right. Good evening. Good
[1:37:26] evening. Um, this policy is
[1:37:27] located this policy. I
[1:37:29] m sorry,
[1:37:30] this property is located in the
[1:37:31] northern section of the city.
[1:37:33] Um, it
[1:37:33] s more specifically
[1:37:35] located, this would be North
[1:37:36] Memorial Drive on your
[1:37:38] right-hand side. Um, you see,
[1:37:39] uh, to your left and to the
[1:37:40] south, that
[1:37:41] s going to be the
[1:37:43] airport runways, um, in the
[1:37:45] corner, this is the dot
[1:37:46] Division 2 equipment shop. This
[1:37:49] is Belvoir Road. Property is
[1:37:52] shown outlined in yellow. But 2
[1:37:52] stars on this cause I
[1:37:53] m, I want
[1:37:54] to show you two different
[1:37:55] pictures and I just want to
[1:37:57] give you an idea of where these
[1:37:59] pictures are taken. Um, so this
[1:38:02] first picture, so this is, uh,
[1:38:03] the star that
[1:38:04] s directly south
[1:38:05] of Hop Tyson Road. So you
[1:38:05] re,
[1:38:05] you
[1:38:07] re looking to the south.
[1:38:08] That would be the airport in
[1:38:11] the uh on the horizon. And then
[1:38:13] this is the one closest to the
[1:38:14] runway. And again, you can see
[1:38:18] the airport in the horizon.
[1:38:19] Total property is almost 30
[1:38:24] acres. Um, some of the property
[1:38:25] is located in what we would
[1:38:27] call a special hazard area,
[1:38:29] which is basically the blue
[1:38:30] that you see. The property does
[1:38:32] drain to the Parker
[1:38:33] s Creek
[1:38:34] watershed. If stormwater rules,
[1:38:38] um, Apply, it would require
[1:38:40] 10-year detention, nitrogen and
[1:38:41] phosphorus reduction, and
[1:38:41] they
[1:38:43] re also MAY be
[1:38:43] jurisdictional wetlands,
[1:38:44] streams, and riparian buffers
[1:38:48] on the property. The requested
[1:38:50] zoning could generate a net
[1:38:52] increase of 262 trips per day.
[1:38:55] We were looking at this between,
[1:38:57] um, it is currently zoned
[1:38:57] residential and the industrial
[1:39:01] use. So under its current
[1:39:03] zoning, the property could
[1:39:05] yield about 55 single family
[1:39:06] homes and under the requested
[1:39:09] zoning, it could accommodate
[1:39:11] about 150,000 square feet of
[1:39:15] industrial or warehouse space.
[1:39:16] The future land use plan, uh,
[1:39:16] I
[1:39:17] m going to start here at the
[1:39:20] corner, which is at Memorial in
[1:39:23] Belvoir Road, um, the dot, uh,
[1:39:25] equipment office that is
[1:39:26] recommended for office
[1:39:27] institutional. You can see how
[1:39:29] that continues to the west. You
[1:39:31] have a little bit on the
[1:39:32] southern side of Belvoir Road
[1:39:35] and then the rest is
[1:39:36] recommended for industrial and
[1:39:41] logistics. Um, while this
[1:39:42] request is from the airport,
[1:39:44] the city and the county do have
[1:39:46] control over the property. Um,
[1:39:48] you MAY remember that city
[1:39:49] council did ask the airport to
[1:39:51] have at least one public
[1:39:54] meeting at the time when you
[1:39:54] authorize the rezoning
[1:39:56] application, um, the airport
[1:39:59] did hold two different meetings,
[1:40:00] um, AUGUST 6th and NOVEMBER
[1:40:00] 14th. I don
[1:40:02] t want to steal
[1:40:02] their, their thunder. I
[1:40:02] ll let
[1:40:03] them tell you about their
[1:40:04] meetings, but I did want to
[1:40:06] remind you that you did ask
[1:40:08] them to do that. Um, in staff
[1:40:08] s
[1:40:10] opinion, um, the requested
[1:40:11] zoning isn
[1:40:12] t compliance with
[1:40:14] future land use plans. And the
[1:40:17] horizons plan. Uh, staff
[1:40:19] recommends approval and pnz at
[1:40:21] their FEBRUARY 18th unanimously
[1:40:22] recommended approval of the
[1:40:23] request as well, and I
[1:40:24] ll be
[1:40:26] happy to answer any questions.
[1:40:32] Any questions for MISS Gooby?
[1:40:35] Thank you very much. Public
[1:40:35] hearings now open. Those who
[1:40:36] speak on behalf of the
[1:40:36] applicant MAY come forward.
[1:40:37] Please state your name for the
[1:40:40] record. The first person has 10
[1:40:41] minutes. All others have 3
[1:40:50] minutes. Good evening. Good
[1:40:52] evening. How
[1:40:55] s everybody? Good
[1:40:57] I need to lean one way or the
[1:40:59] other. Good evening, MR. Mayor,
[1:41:01] uh, council members and staff.
[1:41:02] My name is Drake Brinkley. I
[1:41:02] m
[1:41:03] a commercial real estate
[1:41:04] attorney and land use attorney
[1:41:05] here in Greenville with Warden
[1:41:06] Smith. I
[1:41:07] m here on behalf of
[1:41:09] the applicant, the Pitt County
[1:41:10] Greenville Airport Authority.
[1:41:12] We have a team of folks with us
[1:41:12] back there. They
[1:41:13] re all here to
[1:41:14] answer any questions towards
[1:41:15] the end that we MAY need, that
[1:41:17] you MAY have, excuse me. We
[1:41:17] ve
[1:41:19] got Bill Hopper in the back,
[1:41:21] the executive director of the
[1:41:22] Airport Authority, John Banks,
[1:41:24] CHAIRMAN Of the board of the
[1:41:25] Airport Authority, Terry Mundy,
[1:41:28] vice CHAIRMAN Of the Airport
[1:41:29] Authority, Brian Foundis is on
[1:41:31] the team with Art Consulting
[1:41:32] principal professional engineer,
[1:41:34] and the one person you MAY not
[1:41:35] know is Cara Veel here. Uh,
[1:41:35] she
[1:41:37] s also a professional
[1:41:38] engineer with McFarlane Johnson.
[1:41:38] She
[1:41:40] s kind of the faa expert on
[1:41:41] the team. Um, I
[1:41:41] m gonna speak
[1:41:43] for a few minutes and then
[1:41:44] Cairo will come up as well and
[1:41:46] speak and if you have any
[1:41:46] questions about faa, she would
[1:41:48] be the one to ask those
[1:41:49] questions to. But, but truly,
[1:41:50] if you have any questions, any
[1:41:52] of the team members are here to
[1:41:54] answer those questions. Um,
[1:41:56] this is a very important
[1:41:57] project for our airport. If
[1:41:57] there
[1:41:58] s one thing I can say
[1:42:00] tonight, this is an extremely
[1:42:01] important project for our
[1:42:03] airport. This is extremely
[1:42:05] important project for economic
[1:42:06] development, for wait for Pitt
[1:42:08] County, Greenville, the whole
[1:42:09] region. This is extremely
[1:42:10] important project. The airport
[1:42:12] has been working on this
[1:42:13] project for approximately 18
[1:42:14] months. So there
[1:42:14] s been a lot
[1:42:16] of time and a lot of expense
[1:42:19] put into this project. Um, as
[1:42:19] always, Ms Gooby
[1:42:21] s done a great
[1:42:22] job summarizing the application
[1:42:24] rather than going through all
[1:42:25] the technical and restating all
[1:42:25] that again. Um, I
[1:42:26] d like to say
[1:42:28] that we agree with all the
[1:42:29] technical portions of her
[1:42:31] summary. Uh, and we appreciate
[1:42:31] staff
[1:42:32] s recommendation of
[1:42:33] approval of this request. Um,
[1:42:34] I
[1:42:35] d also like to reiterate that
[1:42:37] planning a zoning commissions
[1:42:38] did unanimously recommend the
[1:42:41] approval of this request. There
[1:42:42] are a few things I do want to
[1:42:44] point out, um, the 5 parcels
[1:42:45] that were on the map a minute
[1:42:46] ago, they are all, if you
[1:42:48] notice, within the footprint of
[1:42:49] the airport. So they
[1:42:50] re already
[1:42:51] kind of on airport land is, is
[1:42:51] what I
[1:42:52] d say. And if you looked
[1:42:54] at it, you would think it is,
[1:42:55] it is part of the airport
[1:42:57] because it is right at the
[1:42:59] airport. Um. The purpose of the
[1:43:01] rezoning request is to allow
[1:43:02] for certain airport development
[1:43:04] that is compatible with
[1:43:05] existing airport operations.
[1:43:06] And to rezone that to
[1:43:08] unoffensive industry. Um, the
[1:43:10] one thing I will say too though
[1:43:11] is this application is way
[1:43:13] different than a lot of other
[1:43:13] rezoning applications from a
[1:43:16] practical standpoint. Ok? And
[1:43:18] the reason for that is because
[1:43:20] the faa is gonna have their
[1:43:22] hand over this, this whole area,
[1:43:25] ok? And so, uh, although a
[1:43:27] rezoning request does, as you
[1:43:28] all know, allow folks to build
[1:43:30] whatever is within the specific
[1:43:32] category. If the city code
[1:43:33] allows this many uses, the faa
[1:43:35] is gonna shrink that down quite
[1:43:38] a bit, ok? And so from an faa
[1:43:40] standpoint, we can only really
[1:43:41] use this property for
[1:43:42] aeronautical purposes, ok? And
[1:43:44] so from the faa standpoint,
[1:43:44] it
[1:43:45] s like charter aircraft.
[1:43:47] Business, uh, facilities,
[1:43:49] corporate hangars, aircraft
[1:43:50] maintenance, you know, charging
[1:43:51] stations for electric aircraft.
[1:43:53] Things like this are
[1:43:55] aeronautical type of support
[1:43:57] services, ok? Um, the airport
[1:43:59] has limited space and property
[1:43:59] available for development, and
[1:44:01] these properties have been
[1:44:02] previously identified for
[1:44:04] actually a number of years for
[1:44:04] this type of expansion and
[1:44:08] development. Um To summarize
[1:44:09] some of MISS Gooby
[1:44:10] s comments
[1:44:12] earlier, the, the current
[1:44:13] comprehensive plans and,
[1:44:15] frankly, prior comprehensive
[1:44:16] plans have expressly identified
[1:44:17] this area for the type of
[1:44:18] development allowed in on
[1:44:20] defensive industry. And the
[1:44:21] future land use plan designates
[1:44:24] a majority of this property as,
[1:44:24] uh, industrial logistics, like
[1:44:26] she said, which is
[1:44:28] characterized by warehouse and
[1:44:29] like manufacturing and includes
[1:44:31] the airport area. Uh, the comp
[1:44:33] plan goes on over and over
[1:44:33] again to emphasize the
[1:44:35] importance of the airport as an
[1:44:37] economic growth driver. I think
[1:44:38] we probably hopefully all agree
[1:44:40] on that, um, for the city and
[1:44:42] the surrounding area. And
[1:44:42] there
[1:44:42] s some statistics that
[1:44:44] have come out about that
[1:44:46] recently in a recent 2025 North
[1:44:48] Carolina State of aviation
[1:44:50] report. Overall, North Carolina
[1:44:52] airports created $88 billion
[1:44:54] worth of spending and output,
[1:44:58] um, accounts for 11% of the
[1:44:58] state
[1:45:00] s gdp supports 427,000
[1:45:01] jobs and generates 4.8. Billion
[1:45:02] dollars in state and local tax
[1:45:06] revenues. Um, so really what,
[1:45:06] what we
[1:45:08] re doing here is we are
[1:45:09] creating jobs. That
[1:45:09] s what
[1:45:10] we
[1:45:11] re trying to do. Uh, the
[1:45:14] airport is trying to, to Have
[1:45:16] support services there on their
[1:45:17] property to help and it, yes,
[1:45:18] if the things go the way we
[1:45:20] want them to go, yes, it would
[1:45:21] create jobs at the airport. But
[1:45:22] the other thing it does is
[1:45:24] support all the other
[1:45:25] businesses in our region,
[1:45:27] frankly, the region economic
[1:45:29] development here has to have a
[1:45:29] thriving airport at the end of
[1:45:30] the day. And that
[1:45:31] s what the
[1:45:32] airport is here is asking you
[1:45:35] to support that. Um, I do need
[1:45:36] to briefly mention on the
[1:45:37] community engagement for sure,
[1:45:37] that
[1:45:38] s a huge piece of this.
[1:45:40] And, and yes, we have had a
[1:45:42] number of, of meetings to be as
[1:45:43] transparent with everybody, uh,
[1:45:45] and get input from the
[1:45:46] surrounding property owners.
[1:45:47] Yes, it was not technically
[1:45:49] required of it, of us. We
[1:45:49] ve
[1:45:51] actually had 3 meetings, not 2.
[1:45:53] The first meeting was held, uh,
[1:45:55] more than a year ago back on
[1:45:57] OCTOBER 17, 2023, there was a
[1:45:59] second meeting on AUGUST 6,
[1:46:02] 2024, a third meeting on
[1:46:05] NOVEMBER 14th of 2024. Um, The
[1:46:07] airport engaged consultants to
[1:46:08] develop comprehensive visuals
[1:46:09] just to show the different
[1:46:10] types of things that could be
[1:46:13] done out there, um, we notified
[1:46:14] everybody for these meetings
[1:46:15] within the 250 ft radius. And
[1:46:17] as the, as we have more and
[1:46:18] more meetings and more people
[1:46:19] were interested in coming to
[1:46:20] those meetings. We then invited
[1:46:21] those people back even if they
[1:46:23] were outside of the 250 ft
[1:46:25] radius to the extent we had
[1:46:28] contact information, etc. Um I
[1:46:29] personally attended two of
[1:46:30] those meetings. I didn
[1:46:30] t attend
[1:46:30] the first one. I don
[1:46:31] t know if
[1:46:32] I was engaged at that point,
[1:46:33] but I attended two of those
[1:46:34] meetings. I felt like they went
[1:46:36] very well, um, at the final
[1:46:38] meeting. There were no negative
[1:46:40] comments about the project and
[1:46:43] the development of the project.
[1:46:44] Um, and so, now, one thing I do
[1:46:46] also want to say is that this
[1:46:48] is not the end for public
[1:46:50] engagement on this project. The
[1:46:52] faa also requires that. So it
[1:46:52] s,
[1:46:52] it
[1:46:53] s outside of the, the city
[1:46:53] s
[1:46:54] area, but, but there
[1:46:55] s, there
[1:46:56] s
[1:46:57] other opportunity for public
[1:46:58] engagement on this project as
[1:46:59] we move forward, which is a
[1:47:00] great opportunity for me to
[1:47:02] pass it off to to Cairo to
[1:47:03] explain some of that. But, um,
[1:47:04] but certainly if you have any
[1:47:06] questions before I do that, I
[1:47:06] m
[1:47:10] happy to, to take them. I don
[1:47:10] t
[1:47:12] know that I have questions as
[1:47:13] much as I do comment at this
[1:47:14] point, can I make a comment as
[1:47:15] home? Would you like me to wait?
[1:47:19] Probably just want to ask
[1:47:20] questions right now and then we
[1:47:21] can comment as soon as we close
[1:47:24] the public hearing. Ok. Thank
[1:47:33] you. One. My name is Kara
[1:47:34] Vogley, and I
[1:47:34] m a civil
[1:47:35] engineer with my friend Johnson.
[1:47:39] These North 24 parcels are
[1:47:40] owned and maintained by the
[1:47:41] airport and are part of the
[1:47:43] airfield footprint. However,
[1:47:44] the airport is limited in what
[1:47:45] it can do with the property
[1:47:47] under the current zoning and is
[1:47:49] also limited by the faa if the
[1:47:50] airport wants access to federal
[1:47:54] funding. Some of these faa
[1:47:55] design restrictions include
[1:47:57] using the land for airfield
[1:47:58] purposes, limiting the height
[1:47:59] of structures and objects which
[1:48:01] we call Part 77. And making
[1:48:03] sure the location of structures,
[1:48:05] objects, taxiways, aircraft
[1:48:07] parking, access roads, and more
[1:48:09] are outside of the appropriate
[1:48:12] airfield safety zones. Maintain
[1:48:13] access to this federal funding,
[1:48:15] the airport must abide by these
[1:48:16] faa design regulations and
[1:48:18] grant assurances. Which are
[1:48:19] specific requirements to
[1:48:20] maintain and operate the
[1:48:22] airport in a safe and
[1:48:24] serviceable condition. Limit
[1:48:25] airspace hazards. Use airport
[1:48:28] revenue properly. Ensure fair
[1:48:31] access for all users and more.
[1:48:32] The airport layoff plan is a
[1:48:34] document that we develop and
[1:48:35] submit to the faa that shows
[1:48:36] the 20 year future plan of the
[1:48:38] airport. This plan also shows
[1:48:40] where usable land is located
[1:48:41] based on those faa restrictions.
[1:48:44] And this shows that the North
[1:48:45] 24 site is the most suitable
[1:48:47] option. This land has direct
[1:48:49] access to the existing runway
[1:48:50] and taxiway and is large enough
[1:48:52] for development. The requested
[1:48:56] rezoning. We line the North 24
[1:48:58] property more closely with the
[1:48:59] existing airfield footprint,
[1:49:01] allowing for its use for
[1:49:02] various aviation-related
[1:49:03] purposes like Drake mentioned,
[1:49:04] charter aircraft, corporate
[1:49:08] hangars, and so on. The airport
[1:49:09] has encouraged community
[1:49:10] engagement, and we
[1:49:10] ll continue
[1:49:12] this as there will be a formal
[1:49:13] public comment period during
[1:49:14] the environmental assessment
[1:49:17] process. Once the faa
[1:49:18] requirements are met, the
[1:49:19] design process will begin with
[1:49:22] the following steps. We must
[1:49:25] develop and evaluate salt site
[1:49:26] alternatives to determine the
[1:49:26] specific use and layout of the
[1:49:29] property. And then create a pen
[1:49:31] and ink change to the airport
[1:49:32] layout plan with the preferred
[1:49:34] alternative. Then we
[1:49:35] ll gather
[1:49:37] data including assessments of
[1:49:38] cultural resources, noise and
[1:49:38] air quality, and traffic
[1:49:42] impacts. Then draft and submit
[1:49:43] the environmental assessment
[1:49:44] report, along with public
[1:49:46] comments and responses. Then
[1:49:47] the faa will review the
[1:49:49] submission and make a final
[1:49:50] decision on whether to proceed
[1:49:52] with the project. Again, the
[1:49:54] purpose of this rezoning is to
[1:49:56] have the ability to provide
[1:49:57] supporting uses immediately
[1:49:58] adjacent to the airport and to
[1:50:01] continue to grow and provide
[1:50:02] quality air air services for
[1:50:03] the city of Greenville and the
[1:50:07] surrounding area. Their custo
[1:50:08] own subject property is
[1:50:09] consistent with the existing
[1:50:11] zoning in the area, the
[1:50:12] development trends and the
[1:50:12] city
[1:50:15] s comprehensive plan. We
[1:50:16] respectfully request your
[1:50:18] approval of this rezoning
[1:50:19] application and our team is
[1:50:20] here to answer any questions
[1:50:22] you guys have. Thank you. Any
[1:50:29] questions? All right, thank you.
[1:50:33] Anyone else that would like to
[1:50:34] speak on behalf of the app MAY
[1:50:35] come forward. Please state your
[1:50:36] name for the record. You have 3
[1:51:04] minutes. Um, my name is Deborah
[1:51:08] Goldberg. And my husband and I
[1:51:10] stay in that neighboring area
[1:51:13] by the airport. And I would
[1:51:16] like to say again, like um.
[1:51:18] This black ones it but not
[1:51:19] against development, but they
[1:51:21] really want it. We caught a
[1:51:22] flight out of DECEMBER of last
[1:51:25] year. It was awesome. We love
[1:51:27] it we love the convenience, you
[1:51:29] know, just literally being able
[1:51:30] to almost touch the door and
[1:51:31] drive out, catch, catch a
[1:51:35] flight. It was great. Um, the
[1:51:35] only thing I
[1:51:36] m wanted to ask is.
[1:51:41] I think it was NOVEMBER 14th.
[1:51:45] There was a meeting And One of
[1:51:46] the meetings, I know at the end
[1:51:48] of last year. You guys showed
[1:51:50] where it was gonna be. A lot of
[1:51:53] things. Um, Open network like
[1:51:56] that little. Kind of like a
[1:51:57] line and then a little square
[1:52:00] coming out. So with the concern
[1:52:01] about the trees, are you guys
[1:52:03] still gonna, I know several
[1:52:04] plans if I
[1:52:06] m not mistaken. So
[1:52:08] is there gonna be a line of
[1:52:09] trees that will be planted up
[1:52:10] in there to kind of be like a
[1:52:13] filter. More than any kind of
[1:52:14] noise or air pollution or
[1:52:32] sounds. I Um again, Brian
[1:52:34] Pagundis, uh, the short version
[1:52:36] is the city has ordinances that
[1:52:38] are gonna require since the
[1:52:40] airport is a more intense land
[1:52:41] use than the neighbors against
[1:52:43] it where you guys live. Ok. The
[1:52:44] city has ordinances that are
[1:52:45] going to require us to have a
[1:52:49] vegetated buffer. Between the
[1:52:51] airport property and you guys.
[1:52:53] So my expectation is at minimum,
[1:52:55] you end up with evergreen.
[1:52:57] Plantings and a fence. MAY even
[1:52:59] end up with a berm, an earthen
[1:53:02] berm. Between as well with that
[1:53:04] vegetation MAY wind up on. So
[1:53:05] picture a hill with trees on it
[1:53:07] and then a fence, so you, you
[1:53:08] have. There, there
[1:53:09] s a couple
[1:53:12] of different things that, that.
[1:53:13] Impose that one is city
[1:53:15] regulation, the other will be
[1:53:16] dealing with the faa through
[1:53:18] their process with some of the
[1:53:19] requirements that part of the
[1:53:21] environmental assessment that
[1:53:22] Noises a consideration, so
[1:53:22] that
[1:53:23] ll be part of part of you
[1:53:24] help for some of that. And is
[1:53:27] it And I directly that there
[1:53:27] s
[1:53:30] going to be another, about it
[1:53:32] ok and just make sure
[1:53:32] everything, Correct. There
[1:53:32] s
[1:53:35] really safe and, Correct,
[1:53:35] there
[1:53:36] s public notification as
[1:53:38] part of that process, and part
[1:53:40] of that is notification and
[1:53:40] subsequent meetings and that
[1:53:40] s
[1:53:41] all open to the public and you
[1:53:45] guys will be notified. So that,
[1:53:48] that, um, tree barrier that.
[1:53:50] That, is that going to also go,
[1:53:52] so when you turn, when you come
[1:53:52] off of that, let
[1:53:53] s go. You
[1:53:59] trying on Just that that down
[1:54:03] there too as well. Just that
[1:54:03] I
[1:54:04] m not entirely sure if I
[1:54:05] m
[1:54:08] Following you, but basically
[1:54:09] anywhere the airport property
[1:54:09] that
[1:54:11] s being developed adjoins.
[1:54:14] The periphery, this this
[1:54:15] residential, it
[1:54:15] ll require that
[1:54:16] buffer. Ok. So, it
[1:54:17] ll probably
[1:54:21] be that. That little on that
[1:54:22] street and then you turn. This
[1:54:23] is a, there
[1:54:24] s a fence right
[1:54:26] there too, so yeah, it, it MAY,
[1:54:26] I don
[1:54:27] t know for sure if it
[1:54:27] ll
[1:54:28] turn the corner, but it MAY
[1:54:29] turn the corner. There are a
[1:54:30] lot of utility easements in
[1:54:32] that area, so that could
[1:54:33] prevent, you know, that you
[1:54:35] basically where West bellboard
[1:54:36] dead ends now that could
[1:54:37] prevent some of those across
[1:54:39] the dead end, end of the street
[1:54:41] there. Ok. Can I ask a quick
[1:54:44] question for point of clarity
[1:54:46] for those citizens, um, and so
[1:54:48] that is, uh, the vegetation
[1:54:51] buffer is like 500. Uh, feet
[1:54:52] from the backyard of those
[1:54:54] citizens on that side is that,
[1:54:55] is that correct? I
[1:54:55] ve been
[1:54:57] making up a number if I told
[1:54:59] you yes or no. I, I was just
[1:55:01] wondering if that was correct.
[1:55:01] So it
[1:55:03] ll run the line with,
[1:55:04] with the back what we call the
[1:55:05] north side of the airport
[1:55:09] property. Thank you. So help.
[1:55:10] Thank you. Thank you guys.
[1:55:13] Thanks, MS. Goldberg. Anyone
[1:55:15] else that would like to speak
[1:55:17] in favor of the app MAY come
[1:55:18] forward. You have 3 minutes.
[1:55:19] Please state your name for the
[1:55:31] record. All right, see none.
[1:55:32] Those in opposition to the
[1:55:33] applicant MAY come forward.
[1:55:34] Please state your name for the
[1:55:36] record. The first person has 10
[1:55:37] minutes, all others have 3
[1:55:52] minutes. All right, see no
[1:55:53] public hearing is now closed,
[1:55:54] open for a board discussion or
[1:55:57] a motion. Motion to approve.
[1:55:59] Seconds. All right, so I got a
[1:55:59] motion by Council member
[1:56:01] Robinson, seconded by Council
[1:56:04] member Scully. Council member
[1:56:06] Willis, my comment was I
[1:56:09] appreciate the airports, um,
[1:56:10] due diligence and um adhering
[1:56:12] to our requests and seemingly
[1:56:14] going beyond that with the 3
[1:56:16] meetings, um, as opposed to the
[1:56:16] one, so that
[1:56:18] s noted. Mhm All
[1:56:20] right, any other comments? I do.
[1:56:23] I agree. Um, I also want to
[1:56:26] commend you all, um, and thank
[1:56:28] you for listening, uh, as far
[1:56:29] as uh doing community
[1:56:31] engagement. I know I can
[1:56:32] sometimes come across as tough
[1:56:36] on these topics. Um, but, um,
[1:56:40] that thought process for me. No,
[1:56:41] um, that thought process for me
[1:56:43] is an order of operations, and
[1:56:44] that order of operations is
[1:56:46] that if we put people first, we
[1:56:48] cannot go wrong. We don
[1:56:49] t make
[1:56:50] decisions that impact people
[1:56:53] without them. And so the uh
[1:56:54] extensive amount of community
[1:56:55] engagement that you guys did
[1:56:59] made a difference. Um You all
[1:57:02] turned apprehension. In
[1:57:07] advocacy. I personally went out
[1:57:09] to Oelbo Road with uh members
[1:57:12] of Nora and talked to citizens
[1:57:15] that live on that little strip
[1:57:19] um behind that area and um
[1:57:19] particularly MR. William
[1:57:23] Wilkins. Shared with me that
[1:57:27] not only did you all do the, uh,
[1:57:28] meetings that we requested and
[1:57:29] we all remember that first
[1:57:31] meeting, it was kind of a hot
[1:57:34] mess. Um, but it developed and
[1:57:37] grew throughout to where the
[1:57:38] citizens started supporting you
[1:57:39] and that was because they had
[1:57:42] input. Um, he was very
[1:57:44] appreciative of the fact that
[1:57:45] not only did we have those
[1:57:46] meetings and what you all don
[1:57:46] t
[1:57:49] know is that I had meetings
[1:57:49] personally in between those
[1:57:52] meetings. Um, because one of
[1:57:55] the questions that they had,
[1:57:57] they did not understand what we
[1:57:58] were talking about about
[1:58:00] expansion. When citizens think
[1:58:01] of expansion, they think that
[1:58:04] you all are asking for us to
[1:58:05] bring in more flights to
[1:58:08] accommodate them. And helping
[1:58:09] them understand that no, they
[1:58:12] want to bring in bunkers to
[1:58:14] service, uh, private jets and
[1:58:15] bring in more income, which
[1:58:17] will bring in more tax dollars
[1:58:19] and blah, you know, so on and
[1:58:23] so forth, um. So your efforts.
[1:58:27] Made the difference. And for
[1:58:28] everyone else, that is the
[1:58:29] example that I
[1:58:30] m saying about
[1:58:33] us setting standards. On what
[1:58:37] we expect. Developers to do
[1:58:40] when they want to build in our
[1:58:43] city or our etj or expand. Um,
[1:58:45] you all set the example of how
[1:58:47] to do that and to listen to our
[1:58:48] citizens and I so greatly
[1:58:52] appreciate you. All right, any
[1:58:53] other comments or discussion
[1:58:58] before we vote? All right. All
[1:59:00] those in favor say aye, those
[1:59:03] pose say nay. Motion passes 6
[1:59:05] to 0. Move on to item number 15,
[1:59:07] MR. Manager. Yeah, no, you
[1:59:07] re
[1:59:10] fine, last but not least I
[1:59:10] m
[1:59:13] number 15. Ordnance requested
[1:59:15] by the planning and Development
[1:59:16] Services Department to amend
[1:59:20] Title 9, chapter 4 article in
[1:59:23] Signs section 233, special
[1:59:24] provisions for certain signs by
[1:59:26] adding a definition in
[1:59:27] standards for official
[1:59:29] government flags in the
[1:59:32] following zoning districts, cg
[1:59:35] General Commercial ch Heavy
[1:59:38] commercial piu plan on
[1:59:39] offensive industry pr planning
[1:59:41] industry. Are you on offensive
[1:59:44] industry and, uh, industry with
[1:59:46] a maximum flagpole height not
[1:59:49] to exceed 130 ft at grade and a
[1:59:51] maximum flag size of no more
[1:59:53] than 3200 square feet. I will
[1:59:55] now ask our chief planner
[1:59:55] Shante Gubi to give the
[2:00:01] presentation. So I
[2:00:02] m gonna
[2:00:04] start with just a little brief
[2:00:04] history. I don
[2:00:05] t want to
[2:00:05] belabor the point, but I kind
[2:00:08] of just want to bring this up
[2:00:11] to current, how we got here, um,
[2:00:13] in OCTOBER of last year, staff
[2:00:14] received a complaint about a
[2:00:17] very large flag, um, staff, uh,
[2:00:19] did go out, do a site visit, um.
[2:00:23] On OCTOBER 31st, a notice of
[2:00:25] violation was sent to the
[2:00:26] property owner, uh, due to the
[2:00:29] size of the flag. So, NOVEMBER
[2:00:31] 12th, uh, Camping World did
[2:00:32] contact staff concerning the
[2:00:35] notice of violation. Um Staff
[2:00:38] did explain to them the issue,
[2:00:40] which was currently, um, our
[2:00:42] ordinance only allows a 216
[2:00:43] square foot flag, and there
[2:00:47] s
[2:00:47] appeared to be much larger than
[2:00:47] that. Um, they did let us know
[2:00:48] their flag was 3200 square feet.
[2:00:52] Um, we discussed, uh, possible
[2:00:54] remedy, which was to amend the
[2:00:55] ordinance or a text amendment
[2:00:58] like we have here every month.
[2:01:01] Um, we explained the process in
[2:01:03] NOVEMBER 5th, 15th, Camping
[2:01:06] World submitted a text
[2:01:08] amendment that, um, would
[2:01:09] remedy their situation as far
[2:01:10] as the size of the flag and the
[2:01:13] flagpole. Um, after reviewing
[2:01:15] it, staff did notify Camping
[2:01:16] World that we would have to
[2:01:19] recommend, uh, the text
[2:01:21] amendment as they, um, uh, had
[2:01:23] proposed it. We did not receive
[2:01:24] any follow-up from Camping
[2:01:27] World, um, but for the lack of
[2:01:28] communication on Camp and world
[2:01:30] side, there is always a
[2:01:32] possibility that city staff and
[2:01:34] Camp and World, um, could have
[2:01:36] possibly come up to come up
[2:01:39] with a text amendment, um, that
[2:01:40] could have remedied their
[2:01:43] situation. This tax amendment
[2:01:45] went forward DECEMBER 17th,
[2:01:47] planning and zoning recommended
[2:01:48] denial. That same request came
[2:01:51] to council in JANUARY of this
[2:01:52] year, council recommended
[2:01:58] denial. And so, um, we are back
[2:01:59] because counsel asked staff to
[2:02:01] bring forth a text amendment.
[2:02:03] So I just wanna just. Go ahead
[2:02:05] and talk about what, uh, what
[2:02:08] we have right now. So I took
[2:02:09] this photograph JANUARY 28th.
[2:02:10] This was taken across the
[2:02:13] street from, uh, the ice
[2:02:15] skating rink. So you have their
[2:02:17] flagpole, which is 130 ft, and
[2:02:18] that
[2:02:19] s essentially the piece
[2:02:21] that you see, right? You have a
[2:02:22] flag that
[2:02:25] s 40 by 80. Which is
[2:02:27] 3200 square feet. And then I
[2:02:29] also wanted to provide you sort
[2:02:32] of a plot plan of where this
[2:02:33] flagpole actually is on the
[2:02:36] property because it is so large,
[2:02:38] you tend to not have an idea of
[2:02:40] how far back it is from the
[2:02:41] road. So I
[2:02:41] ve put a yellow star.
[2:02:44] Um, across the street. This
[2:02:46] would be, um, the ice skating
[2:02:49] rink. And so just easy measure,
[2:02:49] it
[2:02:50] s about 100 ft from the
[2:02:51] right of way off of Red Banks
[2:02:57] Road. It is 155 ft from Evans
[2:02:58] Street and then from the corner
[2:02:59] itself it
[2:03:02] s about 220 ft. So
[2:03:05] this is a summary of what
[2:03:05] Camping World
[2:03:07] s request was, um,
[2:03:11] it was for non-commercial flags.
[2:03:13] It involved 16 different
[2:03:13] non-residential zoning
[2:03:17] districts. It allowed 3
[2:03:19] flagpoles, 3 flags. That would
[2:03:23] be a total of 9 flags with a
[2:03:25] total square footage of 28,000
[2:03:29] square feet. Maximum maximum
[2:03:31] flagpole height 130 ft. There
[2:03:34] was no minimum lot size for a
[2:03:37] qualifying property. Um, there
[2:03:39] was no zoning permit required,
[2:03:40] only a building permit because
[2:03:42] the flagpole and the way that
[2:03:42] it
[2:03:44] s installed. And then there
[2:03:44] weren
[2:03:45] t any setbacks for the
[2:03:49] flagpole itself. So this is a
[2:03:50] map, you
[2:03:52] ve seen it before.
[2:03:55] This map illustrates, um, the
[2:03:57] properties of the 16
[2:03:57] non-residential zoning
[2:03:59] districts. So the zoning
[2:04:00] districts you see on the
[2:04:01] right-hand side, those are
[2:04:06] illustrated on the map as red.
[2:04:09] Just a very easy graphic of
[2:04:12] what their text amendment 3
[2:04:14] flagpoles, 3 flags each, up to
[2:04:20] 3200 square square feet. So As
[2:04:22] staff was directed to come up
[2:04:26] with um a text amendment, uh,
[2:04:28] we looked at what we saw were
[2:04:31] the defense the dis the
[2:04:33] deficiencies with the original
[2:04:34] request, and I want to go
[2:04:36] through what we looked at and
[2:04:39] then how we sought to correct
[2:04:40] those. Um, the first thing we
[2:04:43] looked at was the flag type at
[2:04:44] that time they
[2:04:45] re text
[2:04:46] amendment was non-commercial,
[2:04:50] which is very broad. So we have
[2:04:52] limited this to official
[2:04:53] government flags have a
[2:04:55] definition of a few slides back
[2:04:56] that we
[2:04:57] ll get to. We also
[2:04:58] looked at the zoning districts
[2:05:01] and a way to reduce those
[2:05:02] zoning districts. So we have
[2:05:06] reduced it from. The 16 that
[2:05:09] they asked to 6. We added a
[2:05:10] minimum property size. It
[2:05:10] s a
[2:05:12] large flag, so we decided there
[2:05:15] should be some kind of
[2:05:16] clarifier in the size of
[2:05:18] property that could have a flag
[2:05:21] that size. So we have added in
[2:05:22] a minimum size of at least 5
[2:05:26] acres. Also with this text
[2:05:27] amendment, we reduced it down
[2:05:30] very simply. One flagpole, one
[2:05:35] flag up to 3200 square feet. We
[2:05:36] added setback requirements. So
[2:05:37] essentially we
[2:05:38] re treating the
[2:05:40] flag as a structure, or the
[2:05:42] flagpole itself. So the
[2:05:44] flagpole has to abide by the
[2:05:46] setbacks of the zoning district
[2:05:46] it
[2:05:50] s in. And then, um, the last
[2:05:53] thing we did was we included a
[2:05:57] zoning approval. Um, the, Um,
[2:05:59] their text amendment. Tried to
[2:06:01] put the flags in a category of
[2:06:02] where they didn
[2:06:04] t have to be
[2:06:06] approved by zoning. So we have
[2:06:08] added that flags in in this
[2:06:09] category. I, I
[2:06:09] ll, I
[2:06:11] ll call it,
[2:06:14] um, does have to go through, um,
[2:06:15] a zoning permit, uh, or zoning
[2:06:17] compliance permit. It already
[2:06:19] has to have a building permit
[2:06:19] because again, it
[2:06:20] s a 130 ft
[2:06:25] flat pole. So just a quick
[2:06:27] summary again, uh, we distilled
[2:06:31] this down to only 6 districts.
[2:06:31] Those districts are
[2:06:33] non-residential. One pole, one
[2:06:38] flag. Up to 3200 square feet.
[2:06:40] Flagpole height stays the same.
[2:06:41] Property has to be a minimum of
[2:06:44] 5 acres. Um, still requires
[2:06:45] building permit, but you
[2:06:45] ll
[2:06:46] also be required a zoning
[2:06:50] permit. And again, the flagpole
[2:06:51] was treated um as a structure,
[2:06:54] so it will have to abide by the
[2:06:59] setbacks for that district. So
[2:07:00] this map shows you right-hand
[2:07:01] side, you have those 6
[2:07:04] districts that we listed. And
[2:07:06] then those districts are shown
[2:07:10] on red. We also sifted out any
[2:07:12] properties less than 5 acres.
[2:07:14] So the best way I can describe
[2:07:16] this to you isunities is what
[2:07:18] this red map looks like or what
[2:07:19] this red map sort of
[2:07:23] illustrating. Again, one flag,
[2:07:28] one pole. For flat type, we
[2:07:30] added a definition for official
[2:07:33] government flags. So again,
[2:07:34] these standards only apply to
[2:07:37] this kind of flag. We have
[2:07:40] added a specific definition.
[2:07:42] This is actually borrowed from
[2:07:44] North Carolina General statutes.
[2:07:46] So flags in this category would
[2:07:49] be the flag of the us flags of
[2:07:51] nations recognized by the us,
[2:07:54] the North Carolina state flag.
[2:07:56] Flag of a state or a territory
[2:08:00] of the us and then number 5,
[2:08:01] flags of political subdivisions,
[2:08:04] essentially a county or a city
[2:08:08] flag within the us. Some
[2:08:10] additional standards that we
[2:08:12] have added, um, it MAY have
[2:08:14] indirect lighting. So again,
[2:08:17] like from the ground up. Um, we
[2:08:19] did add a measurement, which is
[2:08:20] 1 ft candle. Again, that
[2:08:20] s very
[2:08:25] dim. Um Another, another piece
[2:08:27] that we added in is that the
[2:08:29] flagpole in the flag has to be
[2:08:31] an accessory to a primary use.
[2:08:34] So what that means is a vacant
[2:08:34] property would not qualify for
[2:08:37] a flag. It has to have a
[2:08:39] primary use, a restaurant, a
[2:08:41] store, a car wash. Um, of
[2:08:42] course, the flagpole and the
[2:08:43] flag have to remain in good
[2:08:46] repair. And then the last piece,
[2:08:48] um, this is not an uncommon
[2:08:50] rule. Um, the flagpole does
[2:08:52] have to be located 100 ft from
[2:08:53] the intersection of two streets,
[2:08:54] and it showed you on my plot
[2:08:56] plan, it
[2:08:57] s about 220 ft from
[2:09:02] the intersection. This is just
[2:09:05] a a very distilled version to
[2:09:07] compare the differences, uh,
[2:09:09] between the two separate
[2:09:10] requests. So the camp in World
[2:09:13] request is in the center cities,
[2:09:15] uh, request is on the
[2:09:18] right-hand side. Again, we have
[2:09:20] distilled it down from just a
[2:09:22] non-commercial flag to an
[2:09:23] official government flag. Um,
[2:09:24] we, we
[2:09:27] ve reduced it from 16
[2:09:29] districts to 6, reduced it down
[2:09:29] to one flag. We
[2:09:31] ve also added
[2:09:33] in a minimum lot size, you
[2:09:33] re
[2:09:34] gonna have to get zoning
[2:09:36] approval. And again, we
[2:09:36] ve also
[2:09:40] added setbacks as well. A
[2:09:42] comparison of just if you
[2:09:45] looked at the zoning itself and
[2:09:45] how it
[2:09:46] s symbolized um camp in
[2:09:46] World
[2:09:48] s request would be on the
[2:09:50] left-hand side. So again, all
[2:09:51] of those uh red properties,
[2:09:53] again, you could sort of look
[2:09:56] at those as opportunities and
[2:09:56] then staff
[2:09:59] s request, again,
[2:10:01] 6th districts at least 5, acres
[2:10:03] in size. And then just to give
[2:10:06] you some trivia, um, Camping
[2:10:09] World, uh, request included a
[2:10:13] most Um, 1250 parcels. The
[2:10:14] city
[2:10:15] s request is less than 300
[2:10:18] parcels. So again, to give you
[2:10:19] the difference in lessening the
[2:10:26] opportunity. So in staff
[2:10:26] s
[2:10:29] opinion, um, this text
[2:10:31] amendment is in compliance with
[2:10:33] the Horizons plan specifically
[2:10:34] chapter one, Building great
[2:10:36] places. I am not going to read
[2:10:38] all of this to you, just to
[2:10:40] distill it very simply. This is
[2:10:43] talking about the, the visual
[2:10:45] appeal of your street, the
[2:10:46] aesthetics. That is essentially
[2:10:49] what this is getting at. And so
[2:10:49] in staff
[2:10:50] s opinion, this text
[2:10:52] amendment does meet the intent
[2:10:57] of this. Little unusual, so in
[2:11:00] FEBRUARY, uh, planning and
[2:11:00] zoning recommended denial 5 to
[2:11:05] 4. Of the request and then they
[2:11:07] also made a subsequent motion,
[2:11:09] and this was unanimous to
[2:11:10] recommend a council a
[2:11:13] modification. To the text
[2:11:15] amendment. Essentially that the
[2:11:18] maximum flag size should not
[2:11:20] exceed 760 square feet. Where
[2:11:22] that number comes from is tied
[2:11:24] back to flag code. So that
[2:11:24] s
[2:11:26] where the 760 square feet comes
[2:11:29] from. And again, this goes back
[2:11:31] to flag, um, etiquette and
[2:11:34] decorum. And then I just want
[2:11:37] to give you the next steps if
[2:11:38] you approve this request, um,
[2:11:40] the next steps would be
[2:11:41] obviously camp and world would
[2:11:44] have to apply for a zoning
[2:11:45] permit that would also have to
[2:11:49] go back through the the.
[2:11:51] Building permit process, um,
[2:11:52] there would be inspections and
[2:11:54] then hopefully at the very end,
[2:11:55] if they jump through all the
[2:11:57] hoops, they would obtain a
[2:11:59] certificate of compliance. And
[2:12:00] with that, I
[2:12:02] m at the end of my
[2:12:02] slides. I
[2:12:03] ll be glad to answer
[2:12:05] any questions. How many, uh,
[2:12:08] how long of a process is it
[2:12:09] once they apply for the new
[2:12:15] permits. Typically. If, um, the
[2:12:16] zoning permit process is fairly
[2:12:18] quick. I mean, we
[2:12:19] re talking 24
[2:12:21] hour turnaround. Building
[2:12:22] permit, again, if they give us
[2:12:24] everything that we need this,
[2:12:26] this can be done within a
[2:12:27] business week, even sooner if
[2:12:28] they give us everything that we
[2:12:30] need. So this would not be a
[2:12:32] long drawn out process. So
[2:12:32] essentially they could probably
[2:12:33] complete each of these steps
[2:12:36] within a week. Yes. Ok. Thank
[2:12:38] you. Councilor Blackburn.
[2:12:42] Couple of questions. So, um,
[2:12:43] The uh suggestion from planning
[2:12:46] and zoning, uh, to abide by the
[2:12:48] flag code at 760 square feet. I
[2:12:54] appreciated. But My
[2:12:55] understanding is that the flag
[2:12:56] was put up and the flag
[2:12:56] s not
[2:12:59] going anywhere. So in some ways,
[2:13:03] Is it, is it fair to say that
[2:13:06] the. Text amendment that we
[2:13:06] re
[2:13:08] presenting and that we are
[2:13:09] considering tonight is done to
[2:13:10] cover a situation that
[2:13:10] s
[2:13:12] already in place. Is that a
[2:13:15] fair statement? This will
[2:13:17] remedy that situation as far as
[2:13:20] getting them. With the
[2:13:23] regulations in place. That they
[2:13:25] could go through the next steps,
[2:13:26] the, the permits I spoke about
[2:13:27] earlier, and I don
[2:13:27] t want to
[2:13:29] put you on the spot and ask you
[2:13:30] something you can
[2:13:31] t answer, but
[2:13:31] let
[2:13:31] s say, let
[2:13:33] s say we approve
[2:13:34] this and they
[2:13:35] ve got more
[2:13:37] additional hoops, additional,
[2:13:38] uh, uh requirements they should
[2:13:39] should do and let
[2:13:40] s say that
[2:13:44] they yet again fill out uh uh
[2:13:46] uh a false building permit
[2:13:47] request and they erect some
[2:13:49] other kind of flag or do some
[2:13:51] other kind of step. Have, have,
[2:13:54] has so far has our staff been
[2:13:55] able to get compliance with any
[2:13:58] city codes. In any city
[2:13:59] ordinances in regarding this
[2:14:05] flag. I, I will speak to the
[2:14:10] last. Step that we have had
[2:14:14] with them in good faith would
[2:14:15] be the citations that they paid
[2:14:18] near the beginning of when they
[2:14:19] were receiving violations, and
[2:14:21] since then staff has not had
[2:14:24] any feedback from Camping World,
[2:14:25] any communication whatsoever.
[2:14:27] And about how much, uh, uh, in
[2:14:28] citations have they accrued
[2:14:30] already? I have a slide for
[2:14:36] that. So as of today, um,
[2:14:36] they
[2:14:39] ve been cited a total of
[2:14:42] uh almost $9000. They paid 650
[2:14:44] which covers the 1st 4
[2:14:44] citations and then since then
[2:14:45] it
[2:14:47] s been quiet. Thank you. And
[2:14:49] then one last question. Um, I
[2:14:50] think when, when we first
[2:14:53] considered doing some, you know,
[2:14:54] requesting to see some kind of
[2:14:57] text amendment. We have the
[2:14:58] understanding that it could be
[2:14:59] limited to a us flag. It looks
[2:14:59] like that
[2:15:00] s not the case with
[2:15:02] this current amendment. It is
[2:15:04] any flag of any nation
[2:15:05] recognized by the United States.
[2:15:07] Is that right? Within the
[2:15:08] definition, yes, ma
[2:15:08] am. So
[2:15:08] that
[2:15:12] s, uh, a 3200 square foot
[2:15:14] flag that can be put up on a
[2:15:15] 5-acre parcel within these 6
[2:15:16] zoning districts could be a
[2:15:21] Russian flag. Canadian flag.
[2:15:25] Flag of the European Union. A
[2:15:27] flag of Colombia. Am I right?
[2:15:28] Any of these flags would be
[2:15:29] permissible. You
[2:15:30] re correct. Ok.
[2:15:34] Thank you. Well they need to
[2:15:37] pay the citations before. Um,
[2:15:38] filling out the new application.
[2:15:40] I don
[2:15:42] t think we can hold them
[2:15:45] to that, um, but we certainly
[2:15:46] would accept their payment. And
[2:15:49] we would accept their permits.
[2:15:51] You know, we would, we would
[2:15:54] need to pursue our normal
[2:15:56] collection procedures. Which
[2:15:57] would include continuing to
[2:15:58] build for the outstanding
[2:16:00] balances. With include
[2:16:03] penalties and interest. Uh, to
[2:16:05] that, and if that does not
[2:16:05] suffice, then we
[2:16:05] d have to take
[2:16:09] additional measures. What I
[2:16:09] m
[2:16:11] sorry, what are the normal
[2:16:15] procedures for a business that
[2:16:19] With, um Have a construction
[2:16:20] project against city ordinances
[2:16:20] that didn
[2:16:21] t have a flag. Let
[2:16:21] s,
[2:16:21] let
[2:16:22] s forget about the flag for
[2:16:26] a second. If this was another
[2:16:28] business that constructed
[2:16:29] 130-foot structure and, and,
[2:16:31] and did nothing. What would the,
[2:16:32] what would our normal procedure
[2:16:40] look like? To just add a little
[2:16:41] sort of divvy between this, um,
[2:16:46] you know, this flagpole and
[2:16:48] this flag arrived overnight,
[2:16:49] typically a construction
[2:16:51] project is built out in phases
[2:16:53] and there are many things that
[2:16:53] happen, you know, you
[2:16:54] re going
[2:16:55] to put things in the ground,
[2:16:55] then you
[2:16:56] re gonna frame it and
[2:16:57] then you
[2:16:59] re gonna do x. And as
[2:17:01] you go through that process and
[2:17:03] we realize something is wrong,
[2:17:05] then we can do or, or Chief
[2:17:06] building inspector can do
[2:17:06] what
[2:17:08] s called a stop work order.
[2:17:11] And essentially stop you, pause
[2:17:12] you from getting yourself any
[2:17:16] deeper. This situation is much
[2:17:19] different because this happened
[2:17:22] in one afternoon, um, but
[2:17:25] typically we do have, um,
[2:17:27] Safeguards so that when
[2:17:28] something does start to go off
[2:17:30] the rails or we find something
[2:17:32] is going off the rails, we can
[2:17:35] pause the construction. Thank
[2:17:39] you. So if I understand, if we
[2:17:41] pass this amendment, this does
[2:17:42] not waive any penalties or fees
[2:17:44] that they have accumulated and
[2:17:47] will continue to accumulate. If
[2:17:49] we approve this and they get a
[2:17:50] building permit approved. It
[2:17:51] was continued to accrue up
[2:17:54] until that point, right? I
[2:17:55] think what would happen is, is
[2:17:56] we would have two different
[2:17:58] strains, and what I mean by
[2:18:01] that is, is if you approve this
[2:18:02] text amendment tonight. The
[2:18:04] issue with the size of the flag
[2:18:06] stops, right? Then they have to
[2:18:10] start the Permit process for
[2:18:12] set flag, and then and so
[2:18:12] that
[2:18:13] s where we kind of hit a
[2:18:16] soft stop. But then they still
[2:18:17] have to pick up the next step,
[2:18:20] which is to apply for the
[2:18:21] permits. The fines for the size
[2:18:25] of the flat would stop. And
[2:18:26] With the new permit that we
[2:18:29] required to submit this passes.
[2:18:30] Then they had to submit an
[2:18:31] engineer
[2:18:32] s report, which puts
[2:18:34] the engineer on the hook
[2:18:36] liability wise if something in
[2:18:37] the flag fails the schematic
[2:18:41] drawing. Yeah Yes, the safety
[2:18:42] issue. That
[2:18:43] s right, and that
[2:18:43] s
[2:18:44] on the building uh code side,
[2:18:45] but yes, you
[2:18:46] re correct,
[2:18:46] they
[2:18:49] ll have to provide, um,
[2:18:49] either an
[2:18:51] built. Right, of
[2:18:52] what they
[2:18:54] ve done. Or Stardier,
[2:18:56] which is probably not the route
[2:18:56] they would. So, you
[2:18:57] re not just
[2:18:58] going have camping involved,
[2:18:58] you
[2:18:59] re going to have some
[2:18:59] engineer who
[2:19:00] s putting his
[2:19:02] signature. Sign and stamped. In
[2:19:03] terms of liabilities, you
[2:19:03] ve
[2:19:05] got more than just one person,
[2:19:09] just, ok, thank you. Having
[2:19:11] said that, um, with it being a
[2:19:14] building permit, uh, we do know
[2:19:16] that, that this particular flag
[2:19:19] has not been inspected. Right.
[2:19:20] Yes, ma
[2:19:21] am. Um, with that being
[2:19:25] said. Uh, the application was
[2:19:33] for. Uh, 70 ft and we do have.
[2:19:34] Um, foundational requirements
[2:19:36] for the what we have in our
[2:19:40] current ordinance. State
[2:19:42] building code has the specs for
[2:19:44] the height of the flagpole and
[2:19:46] then what was required
[2:19:47] underground essentially. Yes,
[2:19:47] ma
[2:19:49] am. Um, it
[2:19:49] s a requirement
[2:19:53] for The foundation, this
[2:19:55] underground for 130 ft flag.
[2:19:58] Ask me a question one more time.
[2:20:00] So is that to, has that been
[2:20:04] adjusted to scale. For 130 ft
[2:20:05] flag that this is what
[2:20:05] s
[2:20:08] required. Definitely it adjusts
[2:20:11] as the height of the flagpole
[2:20:13] increases. Do we have that
[2:20:14] information? No, ma
[2:20:14] am. That
[2:20:17] would be part of the, the new
[2:20:18] building permit that an
[2:20:20] engineer would have to stamp
[2:20:23] saying that it, it meets the,
[2:20:25] the building code. So with that
[2:20:27] being said, How are we to know
[2:20:29] for a flag that has already
[2:20:32] been erected. That what they
[2:20:36] have. Meats what would be then
[2:20:40] required. Um, I, I don
[2:20:41] t want
[2:20:43] to steal his thunder. We have
[2:20:44] the chief building inspector
[2:20:46] who told me this stuff this
[2:20:48] afternoon, and I think he can
[2:20:50] very eloquently explain it
[2:20:52] better than I can on how that
[2:20:54] can be done. Ok. Ground
[2:20:56] penetrating radar, right? I
[2:21:00] just need to know. Hey, how
[2:21:03] often, how often do we get the
[2:21:04] chief building inspector. This
[2:21:06] is, this is your moment to
[2:21:08] shine right here. I gave her
[2:21:09] all the information today, um,
[2:21:10] would you ask that one more
[2:21:12] time? I
[2:21:15] m sorry. So, um, the
[2:21:16] request was made for what we
[2:21:18] have in ordinance right now
[2:21:20] with the foundation that
[2:21:23] supports that, um, we
[2:21:24] ve done
[2:21:26] or presented this text
[2:21:28] amendment to allow what they
[2:21:33] have already erected. And which
[2:21:34] would require a different
[2:21:36] foundation to support that for
[2:21:39] safety purposes, right? So how
[2:21:41] do we know since that has
[2:21:43] already been erected that.
[2:21:44] Basically there
[2:21:44] s a number of
[2:21:47] ways of doing that they could
[2:21:47] use ground penetrating radar
[2:21:51] they could do that. Um, they
[2:21:52] could possibly do they MAY have
[2:21:53] taken pictures when they put
[2:21:54] this flagpole in, we just don
[2:21:54] t
[2:21:57] know about it. They MAY have
[2:21:58] already had that information.
[2:22:00] Um, the building code or state
[2:22:01] code does allow for an engineer
[2:22:03] to sign off on some concrete
[2:22:05] work. That stuff they MAY have
[2:22:07] already had all this done and
[2:22:07] just haven
[2:22:09] t provided with us.
[2:22:11] But we would require engineered
[2:22:13] documents, some type of
[2:22:14] certification that the
[2:22:16] foundation that is in place is
[2:22:19] in fact what would be designed
[2:22:20] for that flagpole for 130 ft
[2:22:22] for our wind zone and the flag
[2:22:25] size that would be on it. So MR.
[2:22:26] Mills, would you also use the
[2:22:29] construction order? That they
[2:22:30] that they submitted to the
[2:22:31] contract. We would use that.
[2:22:32] Yes, that is correct when they,
[2:22:34] when they submit a new set of
[2:22:36] plans to us for the 1:30 that
[2:22:38] will give us the details of
[2:22:39] actually what will be required
[2:22:40] for this flood and it would
[2:22:42] come from, it would already
[2:22:42] come engineered for our wind
[2:22:45] zone, yes. Now I
[2:22:46] m going to
[2:22:48] potentially put you on the spot
[2:22:49] and I apologize if, if, if it
[2:22:49] s
[2:22:52] not something you uh feel
[2:22:53] comfortable answering just no
[2:22:56] problem. Um, but given what
[2:22:57] we
[2:22:59] ve seen so far, the response
[2:23:00] of this company to city
[2:23:04] requests to comply. Do we have
[2:23:05] a reasonable expectation that
[2:23:06] if they don
[2:23:06] t meet our
[2:23:08] requirements for how that pole
[2:23:11] should be engineered. Do we
[2:23:12] have any reasonable expectation
[2:23:13] that they will change it or
[2:23:16] comply or bring it up to to
[2:23:17] this code any more than they.
[2:23:18] Did not bring it up to the
[2:23:21] previous code. I
[2:23:21] m glad you
[2:23:23] allowed me to defer on this
[2:23:23] question because I, I can
[2:23:24] t
[2:23:26] answer that one. Understood.
[2:23:27] Ask a question. If they don
[2:23:28] t
[2:23:29] supply you with what you think
[2:23:31] is a necessary materials, you
[2:23:31] won
[2:23:33] t issue the building permit.
[2:23:35] Absolutely, that is correct. So
[2:23:36] you
[2:23:37] ve got to receive
[2:23:39] information that you feel
[2:23:41] satisfied that this foundation
[2:23:42] satisfies the structural
[2:23:43] engineering. That
[2:23:43] s been given
[2:23:45] to you by the engineer. Prior
[2:23:47] to we would issue a building
[2:23:48] permit we would have that
[2:23:49] information and we would not
[2:23:51] issue a certificate of
[2:23:52] compliance until that data has
[2:23:53] been provided to us
[2:23:54] satisfactorily. So even though
[2:23:57] we MAY we do pass this
[2:24:00] amendment. Uh They will have a
[2:24:01] billing permit unless they do
[2:24:02] that, so that then they would
[2:24:03] be in violation of the current
[2:24:05] or the one we do amend if we do
[2:24:07] amend it, correct? That is
[2:24:08] correct. Thank you very much.
[2:24:10] And if I MAY follow-up question
[2:24:13] on that point of like just
[2:24:14] process to COUNCILMAN
[2:24:14] Robinson
[2:24:17] s question. They, they
[2:24:18] do not comply. They get this,
[2:24:22] you know, failure to comply.
[2:24:23] What happens then? Do we know
[2:24:25] just in, in terms of the, the
[2:24:27] process, what, what would
[2:24:28] happen then if they do not
[2:24:29] either don
[2:24:29] t provide the
[2:24:30] documents or they can
[2:24:30] t
[2:24:31] demonstrate that they comply
[2:24:33] with our ordinance. They, they
[2:24:35] get this failure to, to, to
[2:24:37] comply with our ordinance, then
[2:24:37] are we, what, what happens then?
[2:24:40] There are avenues for that, and
[2:24:41] I would have to refer to our
[2:24:45] legal department for that. And
[2:24:45] in the zoning context, if
[2:24:45] there
[2:24:46] s a failure to comply,
[2:24:48] you issue a notice of violation
[2:24:48] and you see if it
[2:24:49] s the appeal
[2:24:51] to the board of adjustment and
[2:24:52] after that
[2:24:52] s exhausted, they
[2:24:54] could appeal to to this to the
[2:24:55] superior court, but in this
[2:24:56] instance, Captain World hadn
[2:24:56] t
[2:24:58] appealed anything, so. In terms
[2:24:59] of the zoning violation, for
[2:25:01] instance. We
[2:25:01] re in a posture
[2:25:03] where we can proceed
[2:25:03] immediately to with legal
[2:25:05] remedies, um. With the building
[2:25:08] permit, I would. Um Uh,
[2:25:09] deferred to my building
[2:25:10] inspector about the the
[2:25:11] remedies under state law there,
[2:25:12] but there are there are state
[2:25:13] law remedies for building
[2:25:14] permit violations as well. So,
[2:25:17] um. There are, I mean, there
[2:25:19] there are some steps that we
[2:25:19] could take, um, I
[2:25:20] m, I
[2:25:20] m
[2:25:21] speaking very hypothetical and
[2:25:21] I don
[2:25:22] t like to make
[2:25:24] hypothetical statements. Um,
[2:25:25] but, but if you
[2:25:26] re asking me,
[2:25:27] we would, we would go a route
[2:25:30] that would, would lead us down.
[2:25:32] A pathway to possible
[2:25:34] condemnation and that would
[2:25:34] lead to some legal, I would
[2:25:36] need to defer to our legal
[2:25:37] department on on exactly what
[2:25:38] steps we would take on that
[2:25:40] that that that is right. If, if
[2:25:41] they, if they do not comply
[2:25:42] with the building, with a
[2:25:44] building permit. At that point
[2:25:46] in time after the if this
[2:25:46] textin
[2:25:47] s approved, you would go
[2:25:48] down the road of legal action
[2:25:49] through a condemnation. And
[2:25:51] does that go through board of
[2:25:54] adjustment or is that something
[2:25:56] city initiated? Ok. Ok. Thank
[2:25:59] you very much. Have we had
[2:26:01] situations where people have
[2:26:04] filed permits and I guess not
[2:26:05] done what they
[2:26:05] re supposed to
[2:26:07] do based off the permit that
[2:26:10] they file. Yes. Is it pretty
[2:26:14] common for. City staff. To come
[2:26:16] up with a remedy to be able to
[2:26:19] fix. What the issue is with the.
[2:26:22] I guess violation of the permit
[2:26:23] that they pulled. I would say a
[2:26:25] majority of the time with that
[2:26:32] would be yes. Ok. Thank you.
[2:26:34] Any other questions, comments?
[2:26:40] Mercy staff. You wanna do it
[2:26:42] one more time, MISS Scooby? I
[2:26:42] m
[2:26:44] sorry, you want to do it one
[2:26:45] more time? I, I, I
[2:26:46] ve, I
[2:26:46] ve
[2:26:47] said it so much. I feel like
[2:26:47] I
[2:26:51] m just repeating it on uh, on,
[2:26:53] on replay. Thank you. Thank you
[2:26:56] very much. Public hearing, you
[2:26:59] got a question. Ok. One more
[2:27:00] question. Well, and this MAY be
[2:27:03] not, not be from a scooby, but
[2:27:06] so if this does not Pass
[2:27:07] tonight. What are the
[2:27:11] ramifications. Um We as
[2:27:12] planning would continue to
[2:27:14] issue the notice of violations.
[2:27:14] That
[2:27:14] s, that
[2:27:16] s where this sends
[2:27:19] us because we, um, For us in my
[2:27:20] little world, it
[2:27:21] s a zoning
[2:27:23] issue, so we would continue as
[2:27:28] we have. So legally, where
[2:27:29] would we be, I do believe it
[2:27:32] brings up another question. Of
[2:27:34] what type of action uh do we
[2:27:36] pursue if this does not pass.
[2:27:38] And uh, I think we would have
[2:27:41] to seek the the guidance of our
[2:27:43] in-house counsel. From a legal
[2:27:43] perspective of what that would
[2:27:45] look like. If it doesn
[2:27:46] t pass,
[2:27:49] we, we. Council has the right
[2:27:50] to go on to close session of
[2:27:51] attorney-client privilege to
[2:27:54] talk about legal remedies if Or
[2:27:55] violations of zoning violations,
[2:27:57] building code violations, um.
[2:27:57] You
[2:27:58] re gonna impose penalties
[2:27:59] as you know, you could also. A
[2:28:01] lawsuit, but We could have
[2:28:03] those, you, you have the right
[2:28:04] to have those conversations in
[2:28:05] closed session to talk about
[2:28:10] legal remedies. And, and Does
[2:28:11] that include the cost that the
[2:28:14] city Would incur as far as
[2:28:17] court fees, attorney fees, and
[2:28:18] things like that in terms of
[2:28:19] attorney
[2:28:19] s office, most
[2:28:21] litigation. We engage that
[2:28:22] council because there
[2:28:22] s just 3
[2:28:24] of us and, um, so there would
[2:28:28] be some cost. Uh, when we
[2:28:29] pursue litigation, it just
[2:28:32] costs involved typically. Thank
[2:28:35] you. What a winning lawsuit. Uh,
[2:28:37] when those costs back and uh
[2:28:39] Not typically there are no
[2:28:40] statutes. You know, you have to
[2:28:41] have an attorney fee statute to
[2:28:43] get it to recover your fees for
[2:28:45] cities. General Assembly ain
[2:28:45] t
[2:28:49] giving us that much love
[2:28:49] prevail, there
[2:28:50] s no statute
[2:28:51] typically that allows us to
[2:28:54] recover fes. Council if I
[2:28:55] understand my question counsel.
[2:28:58] So if I understand currently.
[2:29:00] County is getting ready to
[2:29:00] undergo the electronic filing
[2:29:02] system. That
[2:29:02] s been put in
[2:29:05] place all over North Carolina.
[2:29:07] Where everything goes to paper.
[2:29:10] My experience has been as a
[2:29:10] litigator in another district
[2:29:15] that that adds. Typically 2 to
[2:29:15] 34 months to the process
[2:29:17] because they go from 20 to 300
[2:29:18] on a docket to 50. We
[2:29:19] re going
[2:29:21] to that system. In APRIL, late
[2:29:24] APRIL, full blow. And I know
[2:29:24] it
[2:29:25] s going to really drag our
[2:29:26] court system down. It
[2:29:27] s not
[2:29:27] anybody
[2:29:27] s fault. It
[2:29:28] s just the
[2:29:32] software that works. So I would
[2:29:33] suggest probably in a case like
[2:29:34] that, if we did seek litigation.
[2:29:35] I
[2:29:37] m going to suggest it
[2:29:37] s
[2:29:38] probably a year and a half or 2
[2:29:40] year process. And I would say
[2:29:42] probably in excess of a quarter
[2:29:44] million dollars, if not more.
[2:29:44] Yeah, that
[2:29:46] s just my opinion.
[2:29:48] But having been in the legal
[2:29:49] system for almost 39 years, I
[2:29:49] m
[2:29:50] gonna tell you I
[2:29:51] m gonna be
[2:29:52] fairly accurate about it, and
[2:29:52] that
[2:29:53] s at least 1.5 to 2 years
[2:29:54] that we have invested in it if
[2:29:56] we had to go that route. And I
[2:29:57] think as counsel, that
[2:29:57] s
[2:29:59] something we should be. Very
[2:30:00] mildful particularly for
[2:30:01] looking at that kind of money.
[2:30:09] That kind of time period. What?
[2:30:11] Any other questions? Before we
[2:30:13] open up the public comment, the
[2:30:17] public hearing, excuse me. All
[2:30:18] right, see none of the public
[2:30:18] hearing is now open. Those who
[2:30:20] speak on behalf of the
[2:30:20] applicant MAY come forward.
[2:30:21] Please state your name for the
[2:30:23] record. The first person has 10
[2:30:25] minutes, all others have 3
[2:30:42] minutes. See none, those in
[2:30:43] opposition to the applicant MAY
[2:30:44] come forward. Please state your
[2:30:45] name for the record. The first
[2:30:47] person has 10 minutes, all
[2:30:50] others have. 3 minutes. Uh,
[2:30:51] good evening. My name is Mark
[2:30:54] Parker. I spoke on this matter
[2:30:54] before and I
[2:30:56] m hearing a lot of
[2:30:57] verbal gymnastics going up here.
[2:30:58] Talking about the cost and
[2:31:01] stuff like this. Making a
[2:31:02] band-aid for what Captain World
[2:31:03] did in the beginning. Let
[2:31:03] s
[2:31:05] talk about the facts like
[2:31:06] Councilor Robinson talked about
[2:31:08] the facts about traffic and all
[2:31:09] this other stuff about, we
[2:31:10] assume people are going to
[2:31:12] follow the rules and follow the
[2:31:15] law. The camping world follow
[2:31:16] the ordinance? No, let
[2:31:16] s start
[2:31:19] with the facts. They willfully
[2:31:20] disobeyed the orders. That
[2:31:21] s
[2:31:24] number one. So I, they
[2:31:25] willfully decided not to have
[2:31:26] the flag or the flagpole
[2:31:31] inspected. Number 3. They
[2:31:32] willfully dis you know,
[2:31:34] basically this side to disobey
[2:31:34] the council
[2:31:36] s, uh, ruling when
[2:31:38] you said no, um, against the
[2:31:39] flag. We
[2:31:40] re not what gets them
[2:31:41] breaking the ordinance. They
[2:31:42] went on media and all this
[2:31:45] stuff to try to basically try
[2:31:46] to hype everybody up and go off
[2:31:49] my 4th, my 4th point. Basically,
[2:31:51] they use patriotism of the
[2:31:53] people of the symbol of the
[2:31:54] flag as a false flag. If
[2:31:54] anybody don
[2:31:55] t know what false
[2:31:57] flag means, that
[2:31:57] s basically
[2:31:58] taking something and using it
[2:32:02] to be deceptive. And using that
[2:32:02] to sway people
[2:32:03] s opinion. And
[2:32:04] I
[2:32:05] m a veteran, like I said, I
[2:32:06] raised my hands twice for this
[2:32:10] country. That flag is not to be
[2:32:11] disrespected, nor used as a
[2:32:13] propaganda of peace. COUNCILMAN
[2:32:14] Robinson, how are you doing? I
[2:32:16] want to like, so I really wanna
[2:32:18] address you about when you were
[2:32:20] talking about the traffic and
[2:32:21] development about saying that
[2:32:22] you assume everyone is going to
[2:32:25] follow the law. We also assume
[2:32:25] that everybody
[2:32:26] s gonna follow
[2:32:27] the ordinance of the city of
[2:32:29] Greenville have put forth.
[2:32:30] Camping world has not done that.
[2:32:31] And now we
[2:32:32] re just gonna give
[2:32:34] them a pass. They
[2:32:34] ve done this
[2:32:37] all over the country. Seville,
[2:32:39] Tennessee is going through the
[2:32:42] same process right now. Their
[2:32:43] public officials have been
[2:32:45] receiving written threats.
[2:32:48] Bunch of your fear received
[2:32:49] negative um comments. I
[2:32:49] ve read
[2:32:51] the negative comments on
[2:32:52] Facebook. And now they just get
[2:32:54] a pass, but what I, as an
[2:32:56] individual in Greenville, get
[2:32:59] the same respect. Or the same
[2:32:59] courtesy that Camperor was
[2:33:02] getting? No. So why are we
[2:33:03] doing this? Now we
[2:33:04] re talking
[2:33:05] about the legal fees, and
[2:33:05] they
[2:33:06] re going to do a victory
[2:33:08] lap if we do this amendment.
[2:33:08] I
[2:33:09] m totally against it. It
[2:33:13] pisses me off. I am, I mean,
[2:33:13] I
[2:33:15] m tired of it. How we
[2:33:15] re at a
[2:33:17] point in our country now that
[2:33:17] we
[2:33:18] re letting corporations do
[2:33:21] whatever they want to do. And
[2:33:25] we, the people, we, the people.
[2:33:25] Are getting treated as we
[2:33:27] should. Yes, it
[2:33:28] s a beautiful
[2:33:31] flag, but Flagpole was too big,
[2:33:33] flag is too big. Now we want to
[2:33:34] basically put a band-aid on and
[2:33:36] say, ok, hey, let
[2:33:36] s let it make
[2:33:38] it come in compliance so we
[2:33:40] could just move along. They
[2:33:41] have all the money. I mean,
[2:33:42] they have billions of dollars,
[2:33:45] but they only pay $650. Come on.
[2:33:48] Why are we making exceptions
[2:33:51] for them. Now, what would, what
[2:33:52] now, what if I built a flagpole.
[2:33:59] And did and used it for other
[2:34:03] reasons, less than 130 ft. Less
[2:34:05] than the 3200 square feet, and
[2:34:08] I used it to I could put
[2:34:10] different, say, hey, you want
[2:34:11] to put your flag up and talk
[2:34:12] about this, talk about that, or
[2:34:12] I
[2:34:14] ll give you another example.
[2:34:15] All right, we all have our
[2:34:16] sacred symbols. Once somebody
[2:34:18] said, well, I can build a cross
[2:34:21] that is so big. Certain amount.
[2:34:24] I put it that that that height,
[2:34:25] making the dimensions that cry
[2:34:27] by the words, but then what if
[2:34:28] I at night decide, you know
[2:34:29] what? I
[2:34:30] m gonna put kerosene on
[2:34:30] that. I
[2:34:33] m gonna put it on fire.
[2:34:33] Don
[2:34:35] t distort the image. Of
[2:34:37] sacred items in our country,
[2:34:38] and that was, that
[2:34:38] s what
[2:34:38] s
[2:34:39] been done with Camping World.
[2:34:41] In the audience here, we have
[2:34:43] some veterans back here. And
[2:34:43] they can tell you the same
[2:34:46] thing. We are patriotic. We put
[2:34:47] our lives on the line for this
[2:34:49] country. All Kemp world this
[2:34:51] dude, they
[2:34:52] re trying to exert
[2:34:54] their dominance. And they don
[2:34:54] t
[2:34:55] care if they disrupt our
[2:34:56] community, they don
[2:34:56] t care.
[2:34:56] They
[2:34:57] re just gonna move and
[2:34:59] build another facility, do the
[2:34:59] same thing like they
[2:35:00] ve been
[2:35:02] doing all over the country. So
[2:35:05] I firmly stand against it.
[2:35:05] That
[2:35:07] s all I got to say and I
[2:35:07] m,
[2:35:07] and I
[2:35:08] m, I
[2:35:08] m, I
[2:35:09] m actually sad
[2:35:10] to see the shift. You made the
[2:35:12] decision in 1st,, 1st, but then
[2:35:14] GOD at the in the last meeting
[2:35:15] we started seeing people kind
[2:35:17] of say, well, what if we did
[2:35:19] this? If they had did what they
[2:35:21] were supposed to do in the
[2:35:22] beginning, none of this will be
[2:35:23] going on. We wouldn
[2:35:25] t be here
[2:35:27] And just for them, like I said,
[2:35:28] I believe in accountability and
[2:35:30] responsibility. For everyone. I
[2:35:31] don
[2:35:32] t care from the highest to
[2:35:33] the lowest. And that
[2:35:33] s all I
[2:35:35] got to say. Thank you. Thanks,
[2:35:38] MR. Parker. Anyone else who
[2:35:38] d
[2:35:40] like to speak in opposition to
[2:35:41] the applicant MAY come forward.
[2:35:41] Please state your name for the
[2:35:43] record. You have 3 minutes. Uh,
[2:35:45] my name is Pedro. Hello again,
[2:35:46] guys, um. I
[2:35:47] m glad that he
[2:35:49] started me off cause it kinda.
[2:35:51] Clear some stuff up for me.
[2:35:52] This is a clear pattern with
[2:35:55] this company. Um, we have here
[2:35:57] Seville, Tennessee. Same thing,
[2:35:57] they
[2:36:00] re being sued. Uh, court
[2:36:02] date set for 4:15 2025. I
[2:36:03] ll be
[2:36:06] there. Flag not coming down.
[2:36:08] This is from 2020 2017, these
[2:36:10] towns have said no to our
[2:36:12] American flag a camping world.
[2:36:13] Help us change that like you
[2:36:15] did in City of Georgetown. And
[2:36:16] then he lists very, he
[2:36:16] s very
[2:36:18] happy about this, um proud
[2:36:21] about it. Fresno, California,
[2:36:23] Golden, Colorado, Longmont,
[2:36:25] Colorado, Sacramento,
[2:36:26] California, Vacaville,
[2:36:29] California, Woodville, Oregon,
[2:36:30] Bridgeport, New Jersey.
[2:36:32] Kissimmee, Florida. Fountain,
[2:36:34] Colorado, Statesville, North
[2:36:35] Carolina, Olive Branch,
[2:36:36] Mississippi. Hanover County,
[2:36:40] Virginia. This one is actually
[2:36:41] targeted to our council here.
[2:36:43] Dear Greenville, North Carolina,
[2:36:44] Utahed having a city council
[2:36:46] meeting to the public in an
[2:36:47] effort to remove the pressure
[2:36:48] you received. I
[2:36:48] m not gonna
[2:36:50] read the whole thing. This one
[2:36:52] is pretty long. This one is
[2:36:53] Statesville, Hay City of
[2:36:56] Statesville, we have received
[2:36:57] your lawsuit regarding our us
[2:36:59] American flag. It will not come
[2:37:01] down. This one is, again,
[2:37:03] towards you guys, the flag is
[2:37:05] not coming down. And this one,
[2:37:07] this is what I think probably
[2:37:08] is gonna get a lot. Lot of
[2:37:10] people mad. You can find me all
[2:37:12] you want, City of Greenville,
[2:37:14] North Carolina. He will not pay
[2:37:16] these fines, even if we let him
[2:37:17] put his flag up, he
[2:37:18] ll probably
[2:37:18] say that he doesn
[2:37:19] t have to pay
[2:37:20] the fines because you guys
[2:37:22] allowed him to put the flag up.
[2:37:24] This is another one from
[2:37:26] Georgetown, Kentucky. City of
[2:37:27] Georgetown. What
[2:37:28] s up with not
[2:37:30] allowing an American flag a
[2:37:32] camping world. So all that to
[2:37:35] say, this is a pattern with
[2:37:37] Camping World, um, and
[2:37:39] obviously proposing this, um,
[2:37:40] this proposed amendment, it
[2:37:42] would fix the issue with the
[2:37:42] flag, but that
[2:37:43] s not the issue
[2:37:45] really. At the end of the day,
[2:37:47] the issue was not with the flag.
[2:37:47] It
[2:37:49] s a beautiful flag. I am the
[2:37:50] child of immigrants. I love
[2:37:53] that flag. But this flag that
[2:37:53] he
[2:37:55] s put up has brought hate
[2:37:58] online, that is not what the
[2:37:59] American flag stands for,
[2:38:00] because the people that you see
[2:38:01] that say, oh, yes, it
[2:38:02] s good
[2:38:03] that this flag is up. These
[2:38:05] people are not the people that
[2:38:07] actually know what that flag
[2:38:10] means and love that flag. Um,
[2:38:11] the permit that they applied
[2:38:12] for, in my opinion, they should,
[2:38:14] they, it should be condemned
[2:38:16] now. They applied for a permit.
[2:38:17] The permit said that the
[2:38:19] flagpole had to be 70 ft, and
[2:38:21] the, the square footage, 216 ft.
[2:38:24] They knew what they were doing.
[2:38:25] They applied for that, for that
[2:38:27] permit. And they, they
[2:38:28] knowingly said no, we
[2:38:29] re gonna
[2:38:30] do whatever I want because I
[2:38:30] ve
[2:38:31] done it everywhere and nobody
[2:38:32] s
[2:38:33] done anything to me. So I just
[2:38:35] did a little bit of math here.
[2:38:38] The flag that they put up is
[2:38:40] more than 1000 times the size
[2:38:42] that the Greenville City
[2:38:43] Ordinance allows. That
[2:38:45] s time.
[2:38:47] Thank you, thank you for your
[2:38:48] time. Thank you. Anyone else
[2:38:48] you
[2:38:49] d like to speak in
[2:38:50] opposition to the applicant MAY
[2:38:51] come forward. Please state your
[2:38:52] name for the record. You have 3
[2:38:58] minutes. Evening. My name
[2:38:58] s
[2:39:00] Eric Horseman, um. I time this
[2:39:01] out pretty carefully to be 3
[2:39:02] minutes, but I think, uh,
[2:39:02] sounds like you
[2:39:03] re gonna hear
[2:39:04] from a lot of folks who are
[2:39:04] pretty upset about this. I
[2:39:05] m
[2:39:05] just gonna edit out some of
[2:39:07] these things that are repeating
[2:39:07] what they
[2:39:07] re saying, to focus
[2:39:08] on some things I think they
[2:39:09] probably aren
[2:39:10] t gonna tell you,
[2:39:12] uh, so I lived here 15 years,
[2:39:12] um, I
[2:39:13] ve only come to a city
[2:39:13] council meeting a couple of
[2:39:15] times to talk, um, but this
[2:39:16] particular issue has me pretty
[2:39:18] upset. I followed it pretty
[2:39:19] closely, uh, it has been
[2:39:20] frustrated enough to show up
[2:39:21] because I
[2:39:21] m pretty concerned
[2:39:22] that you, the city council, are
[2:39:24] about to approve this text
[2:39:25] amendment solely to make an
[2:39:28] annoyance go away. Uh, and this
[2:39:29] does not serve the citizens of
[2:39:31] Greenville. Uh, I have no
[2:39:33] problem with a big flag, as
[2:39:36] many of us, nobody here does,
[2:39:37] um, my problem is with the
[2:39:39] process, uh, that this has gone
[2:39:39] through, which can
[2:39:40] t bring
[2:39:41] worlds approached this and
[2:39:42] recently how the city council
[2:39:45] has, uh, since JANUARY, uh, has
[2:39:47] responded to that. My concern
[2:39:49] is that this relatively
[2:39:51] unimportant flag issue, uh, is
[2:39:53] the response to it gonna set a
[2:39:55] really unpleasant example. Uh,
[2:39:55] particularly if this is
[2:39:57] approved, I think our local
[2:39:58] government simply rolling over,
[2:39:59] giving up in the face of
[2:40:00] resistance from a little bit of
[2:40:02] resistance from not a state
[2:40:04] corporation. Um, it makes me
[2:40:06] concerned that how can we trust
[2:40:08] the decisions made, uh, by you
[2:40:09] all are benefiting local
[2:40:10] residents rather than these
[2:40:11] corporate interests when the
[2:40:12] two conflict. Here
[2:40:12] s something
[2:40:15] important. Uh, I read the
[2:40:16] proposed text amendment very
[2:40:18] carefully. Uh, I don
[2:40:19] t think
[2:40:19] anyone else has actually
[2:40:21] checked the math in there. One
[2:40:23] thing that the city planner
[2:40:23] didn
[2:40:24] t tell you is that as
[2:40:26] written, uh, the current text
[2:40:27] of the proposed amendment
[2:40:29] includes this text. The hoist
[2:40:31] side of the flag shall not
[2:40:32] exceed 30% of the height of the
[2:40:35] pole, unquote. That 30% is a
[2:40:35] proposed change. I
[2:40:36] m pretty
[2:40:37] sure it came from that original
[2:40:39] camping world, uh, proposal
[2:40:40] that you all got and was maybe
[2:40:42] just copied and pasted into the
[2:40:42] city
[2:40:44] s version, uh, get your
[2:40:45] calculator, check that. You
[2:40:45] ll
[2:40:48] see that 30% of 130 ft is 39 ft.
[2:40:52] Not 40 ft. The 40 ft tall flag
[2:40:52] that
[2:40:54] s currently there. Uh,
[2:40:55] would exceed their post
[2:40:56] allowable flag height, it will
[2:40:58] still be out of compliance if
[2:40:58] you propose what
[2:40:59] s in front of
[2:41:01] you right now. The current back
[2:41:02] is a bit, it
[2:41:04] s a big flag, uh,
[2:41:04] so big, in fact, it
[2:41:04] s
[2:41:06] disrespectful. Uh, it can
[2:41:06] t be
[2:41:08] flown at half-staff. The photo
[2:41:10] that uh, that the city planner
[2:41:12] showed you was during Jimmy
[2:41:12] Carter
[2:41:13] s, uh, period of
[2:41:15] memorial, right? That was
[2:41:16] flying at half staff, lowered
[2:41:17] about 10 ft. That
[2:41:19] s all they
[2:41:20] can do. If Camping Worlds want
[2:41:22] to fly a big flag, that
[2:41:22] s great.
[2:41:23] Let
[2:41:25] s have a respectful,
[2:41:27] reasonable size. Um, the, uh,
[2:41:28] planning and zoning commission
[2:41:29] gave you a reasonable size. You
[2:41:30] can actually go a little bit
[2:41:31] bigger than that according to
[2:41:34] the, uh, the, uh, flag code
[2:41:35] could be as big as 22 ft in
[2:41:37] about le ng th of 43 ft, the
[2:41:38] height of 22 ft, and the height
[2:41:39] of a length of 43 ft. That
[2:41:40] s an
[2:41:41] area of 946 square feet. That
[2:41:41] s
[2:41:44] a pretty big flag. Uh, for the,
[2:41:45] uh, for that size, that size
[2:41:48] pole. Um, and I think I
[2:41:48] ll
[2:41:49] finally conclude by saying that
[2:41:50] um I agree with uh planning and
[2:41:52] zoning commissioner member Alan
[2:41:53] Thomas, who in the FEBRUARY
[2:41:54] discussion talked about having
[2:41:55] a lot more respect for someone
[2:41:57] who wears a tiny flag on their
[2:41:58] uniform and every day, every
[2:41:59] day that somebody like camping
[2:42:01] world, uh, ceo Mark Lamonis.
[2:42:01] I
[2:42:03] ll stop now, uh, but I want
[2:42:04] to say that, um, this has me
[2:42:05] pretty upset, as you can
[2:42:06] probably see, um, and, uh, I
[2:42:08] think you should vote this down
[2:42:10] or adjust this to a reasonable
[2:42:12] size. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:42:12] Anyone else that
[2:42:12] d like to
[2:42:13] speak in opposition to the
[2:42:14] applicant MAY come forward,
[2:42:15] please state your name for the
[2:42:23] record. You have 3 minutes.
[2:42:27] Maxwell and uh This, uh, like,
[2:42:28] uh, Eric just said this issues
[2:42:29] had me pretty upset for a long
[2:42:31] time. Uh, I
[2:42:32] m upset with the
[2:42:33] controversy it
[2:42:33] s brought. I
[2:42:33] m
[2:42:34] upset with how It
[2:42:35] s caused
[2:42:36] people on the council to be
[2:42:37] attacked by citizens of
[2:42:38] Greenville. I
[2:42:39] m really upset
[2:42:41] with the tactics that uh
[2:42:41] Camping World uses, they
[2:42:42] ve
[2:42:45] done it all across the country.
[2:42:45] They
[2:42:46] re paying multi-million
[2:42:49] dollar fines in one state for
[2:42:50] Uh, basically ripping their
[2:42:51] customers off, selling them,
[2:42:51] telling them they
[2:42:52] re selling
[2:42:52] one thing and sell them
[2:42:54] something else. I just saw
[2:42:56] another article in uh
[2:42:57] Charleston, South Carolina.
[2:42:57] They
[2:43:00] ve had complaints
[2:43:02] Constantly since 2009 for um
[2:43:02] misrepresenting what they
[2:43:03] re
[2:43:04] selling to people. Uh, they
[2:43:05] re
[2:43:07] using the flag as advertisement,
[2:43:09] which is against the anything
[2:43:09] that this country should stand
[2:43:13] for. Um The, the way they
[2:43:16] filled out the Uh, permit, um.
[2:43:18] Knowing exactly what they were
[2:43:19] planning on doing. Matter of
[2:43:21] fact, at the earlier meeting,
[2:43:22] the fellow who came
[2:43:23] representing Captain World. Was
[2:43:25] asked specifically, did they
[2:43:26] ever order a flag or pole that
[2:43:28] size? No, we, we never really
[2:43:29] did that. They never were gonna
[2:43:32] do that. Uh, as this guy, uh,
[2:43:34] he, he just read. Uh, where the
[2:43:36] owner of the company, he
[2:43:37] basically is thumbing his nose
[2:43:38] at everybody saying, you know,
[2:43:38] I
[2:43:39] m gonna do what I want to do,
[2:43:40] heck with y
[2:43:43] all. Um, if, if you
[2:43:44] guys approved this, this is
[2:43:46] basically cave and to somebody
[2:43:46] who
[2:43:47] s a bully, and it just
[2:43:49] ticks me off to no end to see
[2:43:51] anybody, uh, come into our
[2:43:51] community. As far as I
[2:43:52] m
[2:43:53] concerned, I wish this company
[2:43:55] never come here. And uh, you
[2:43:55] know, I don
[2:43:56] t know what we can
[2:43:57] do about it, but At least we
[2:43:59] could have a flag that makes
[2:44:00] some sense. This is ridiculous.
[2:44:02] Thank you. Thank you, MR.
[2:44:07] Maxwell. Anyone else would like
[2:44:08] to speak in opposition to the
[2:44:09] applicant MAY come forward.
[2:44:10] Please state your name for the
[2:44:15] record. You have 3 minutes.
[2:44:17] Hello Rebecca Powers. You
[2:44:18] ve
[2:44:20] heard some Very eloquent and
[2:44:23] thorough. Comments about this.
[2:44:26] Um I
[2:44:28] d like to add Something
[2:44:31] new. Um It
[2:44:33] s kind of the two
[2:44:33] issues, the process, but it
[2:44:34] s
[2:44:35] also the flag. And so I
[2:44:35] d like
[2:44:39] to Speak again about the
[2:44:43] symbolism of the flag. And that
[2:44:45] When you see it as it is now,
[2:44:45] it
[2:44:46] s like a mockery. Of our
[2:44:48] flag And it
[2:44:49] s just heart
[2:44:52] wrenching. Because it
[2:44:52] s so
[2:44:55] humongous and wrong. You
[2:44:56] re
[2:44:58] going to have an ordinance. We
[2:45:00] expect people to follow it and
[2:45:04] reinforce the ordinance. This
[2:45:06] flag is a respected symbol of
[2:45:11] our country. And it seems Not
[2:45:14] to be that in this form. And
[2:45:14] it
[2:45:15] s set in a terrible
[2:45:16] precedence. Now we
[2:45:16] re gonna say
[2:45:18] one other thing that came up
[2:45:19] tonight that just um hadn
[2:45:19] t
[2:45:21] occurred to me when you asked
[2:45:23] the building inspector about
[2:45:25] our ordinances changed. And he
[2:45:27] said, if I remember right, he
[2:45:29] said a lot of the time and
[2:45:31] there was a gasp in the room
[2:45:31] because we didn
[2:45:32] t know that,
[2:45:35] but I would like to suggest
[2:45:35] that there
[2:45:37] s never been an
[2:45:39] ordinance changed about the
[2:45:39] American flag flying in
[2:45:42] Greenville. If the building
[2:45:42] s
[2:45:43] inspector had to change
[2:45:44] something, it probably had to
[2:45:46] do we moved the sidewalk a
[2:45:47] little to the right, moved the
[2:45:50] sidewalk a little to the left.
[2:45:50] It
[2:45:51] s not about flying that flag.
[2:45:54] i ask you, please vote no to
[2:45:56] the amendment, put an end to
[2:45:59] this issue. For us, we put it
[2:46:02] on you, it goes legally, but we
[2:46:05] got to do it. Vote no. Thank
[2:46:07] you. Thanks for clarification,
[2:46:08] I didn
[2:46:09] t say the ordinance
[2:46:11] changed. I said, is somebody
[2:46:12] not in compliance with a permit?
[2:46:14] Do they make the correction?
[2:46:15] And then he responded back and
[2:46:17] said. Most of the time, I
[2:46:19] believe. Oh, do they make the,
[2:46:21] oh, I totally misinterpreted
[2:46:22] that. I thought you were asking
[2:46:23] I didn
[2:46:24] t say the ordinance that
[2:46:25] would have to come through the
[2:46:27] city council for approval. Oh,
[2:46:28] I did misunderstand. I thought
[2:46:29] you meant that we just change
[2:46:30] it for them so they
[2:46:31] re, they
[2:46:32] re
[2:46:34] in compliance. No, we ask them
[2:46:37] to be in well, that sounds fair.
[2:46:37] That
[2:46:37] s what we
[2:46:38] re supposed to
[2:46:40] do. Correct. Be in compliance.
[2:46:45] Correct. Thank you. All right.
[2:46:46] Anyone else who
[2:46:46] d like to speak
[2:46:48] in opposition to the app MAY
[2:46:49] come forward. Please state your
[2:46:49] name for the record. You have 3
[2:46:59] minutes. Times one night.
[2:46:59] That
[2:47:03] s a record for me. Uh So I
[2:47:05] said earlier this was one of 2
[2:47:06] votes in which it
[2:47:06] s imperative
[2:47:09] that you vote no. The first
[2:47:10] time you chose otherwise, but
[2:47:10] we
[2:47:12] ll see how that turns out. I
[2:47:14] want to echo something you said
[2:47:15] earlier, council member
[2:47:19] Robinson. Pertaining to Our
[2:47:21] traffic issue on 10th Street,
[2:47:22] we need our traffic department
[2:47:24] to be issuing tickets and
[2:47:25] enforce those tickets. When
[2:47:26] people break the law, you
[2:47:28] enforce the law. You didn
[2:47:28] t say.
[2:47:33] We changed the law for them. We
[2:47:34] just increased the speed limit
[2:47:35] so they
[2:47:35] ll they
[2:47:37] ll be fine now.
[2:47:39] And they would have been fined
[2:47:41] because they were speeding. But
[2:47:41] we
[2:47:42] re just gonna kind of ignore
[2:47:47] that too. Right Am I right? I
[2:47:48] m
[2:47:51] just listening to your comment,
[2:47:52] I did break the law, you
[2:47:57] enforce the law, yes. And you
[2:47:58] are an attorney you are an
[2:48:01] attorney and so, yes. So they
[2:48:02] broke the ordinance. I
[2:48:05] m It
[2:48:06] seems obvious to me that we
[2:48:08] enforce the ordinance. It
[2:48:08] s
[2:48:09] really disturbing that that
[2:48:11] could cost us an estimated 25%
[2:48:13] of a million dollars. I, I
[2:48:13] would say let
[2:48:14] s, you know,
[2:48:14] let
[2:48:15] s, let
[2:48:16] s try and verify
[2:48:17] that number, but I don
[2:48:18] t think
[2:48:18] it
[2:48:20] s right. That someone
[2:48:23] behaves in this way. And you
[2:48:25] just change the ordinance to
[2:48:27] accommodate that behavior.
[2:48:27] We
[2:48:28] re stuck. This person is
[2:48:31] belligerent. But I think we do
[2:48:33] need to hold the line and say
[2:48:33] we
[2:48:35] re not going to change the
[2:48:35] ordinance just to try to
[2:48:40] appease you. So again, this is
[2:48:41] an imperative, no vote. Thank
[2:48:43] you. Thank you Doctor Newman,
[2:48:44] thank you. Anyone else who
[2:48:44] d
[2:48:46] like to speak in opposition to
[2:48:46] the applicant MAY come forward.
[2:48:47] Please state your name for the
[2:49:00] record. You have 3 minutes. Is
[2:49:02] it true that if they lost the
[2:49:04] case, that could be forced to
[2:49:08] pay the fines. Yeah, absolutely.
[2:49:12] Um, we have the right to
[2:49:13] enforce fines and and require
[2:49:15] them to pay. And if they lost
[2:49:16] the case, yes, if we got an
[2:49:16] order, if we got a judgment
[2:49:17] from the court, they would have
[2:49:20] to pay the fines, they didn
[2:49:20] t
[2:49:22] voluntarily pay the fine upon
[2:49:23] demand, and we filed a lawsuit
[2:49:24] and we prevailed, they would
[2:49:25] have, they would have had to
[2:49:26] pay the fines or we could
[2:49:27] reduce it to judgment and place
[2:49:29] a lien on the property. So it
[2:49:29] wouldn
[2:49:32] t cost the city. Because
[2:49:34] if they do the wrong, if, if,
[2:49:34] and I don
[2:49:36] t think that any
[2:49:39] court would ever. Think that
[2:49:41] they are right. Yeah, we have,
[2:49:42] well, you know, we do have
[2:49:44] legal fees to Bring litigation.
[2:49:45] That
[2:49:46] s what we were talking
[2:49:48] about earlier in the if, if
[2:49:50] they lose the case, could you
[2:49:53] not get those litigation fees
[2:49:54] back of a statute in order for
[2:49:55] a party to recover attorney
[2:49:57] fees, there has to be a statute
[2:49:57] that allows it. I
[2:49:57] m not aware
[2:50:00] of a statute that says just
[2:50:01] because the city prevails, the,
[2:50:02] the losing party has to pay the
[2:50:03] city the cost. I
[2:50:04] m not aware of
[2:50:04] that statute. I think the
[2:50:08] answer is no. Mhm ok, I was
[2:50:09] told that you could, but I
[2:50:09] m
[2:50:11] not a lawyer, so I won
[2:50:11] t fight
[2:50:13] about that, but I think it
[2:50:15] would be embarrassing to
[2:50:16] Greenville if we don
[2:50:17] t take
[2:50:19] this to court because we would
[2:50:24] be seen as Kowtowing to a
[2:50:26] business that has come in and
[2:50:28] really caused problems in our
[2:50:29] community, and I
[2:50:31] ve spent time
[2:50:33] looking up what has happened
[2:50:36] with them and other cities and
[2:50:37] as council informant said
[2:50:38] earlier, we need to look at who
[2:50:41] we bring in our city. And
[2:50:44] camping world is not a good
[2:50:47] business because, um, as hat
[2:50:49] wrappers, I was, we were just
[2:50:51] looking at how many lawsuits
[2:50:54] have been brought against them
[2:50:57] from people who have had really
[2:50:59] bad transactions. They
[2:50:59] ve been
[2:51:01] lied to, and I think if you
[2:51:04] start out lying on your form,
[2:51:07] then you continue that. And,
[2:51:09] and I grew growing up, it was
[2:51:11] always a big deal at school,
[2:51:13] whoever was the one who took
[2:51:16] care of the flag, you respected
[2:51:18] that person and you respected
[2:51:21] the flag, and this ordinance
[2:51:21] that
[2:51:23] s being proposed tonight
[2:51:26] really does not meet flag code
[2:51:27] because you
[2:51:28] re supposed to have
[2:51:34] a pole. That is 1/3 or 1/4. The
[2:51:40] length Of I mean, the width of.
[2:51:43] The flag, you must, it must be
[2:51:45] only 1/3 or 1/4 the length of
[2:51:51] the pole. We would need a 240
[2:51:53] ft pole to properly accommodate
[2:51:56] this flag and fly it accurately
[2:51:58] when you have to have it half
[2:51:59] staff. And that
[2:52:02] s time? Ok.
[2:52:03] Thank you. Thank you. All right.
[2:52:04] Anyone else you
[2:52:04] d like to speak
[2:52:05] in opposition to the African
[2:52:06] MAY come forward. Please state
[2:52:07] your name for the record. You
[2:52:29] have 3 minutes. See none public
[2:52:31] hearing is now closed, open for
[2:52:32] board discussion or a motion.
[2:52:37] Scully. Thank you, Mayor. Um.
[2:52:38] This debate is not about the
[2:52:39] American flag. It
[2:52:40] s about the
[2:52:41] illegal actions of camping
[2:52:43] world. This is an impossible
[2:52:45] decision. If we pass the
[2:52:46] amendment, and some people will
[2:52:46] be happy, but we
[2:52:47] re essentially
[2:52:49] saying that if you have enough
[2:52:49] money and influence, you don
[2:52:50] t
[2:52:52] have to follow the law. If we
[2:52:53] deny it, some people will be
[2:52:54] happy, but our staff will
[2:52:55] probably have to sue Camping
[2:52:57] World, taking time and money
[2:52:58] away from more important work
[2:53:00] like public safety and
[2:53:00] affordable housing and other
[2:53:02] things. Staff will also have to
[2:53:04] deal with the hateful emails
[2:53:06] and phone calls from across the
[2:53:07] country because of the
[2:53:08] nationwide media presence of
[2:53:09] Camping World and its owner
[2:53:13] have. So what do we do? After
[2:53:14] much thought, prayer, research,
[2:53:15] and listening to my fellow
[2:53:17] citizens, I believe we need to
[2:53:18] do what is right. We need to
[2:53:20] uphold our laws and demand that
[2:53:21] every citizen and business
[2:53:23] follow the law. And when laws
[2:53:25] need to be changed, we have a
[2:53:26] democratic process that allows
[2:53:27] for that change. Camping World
[2:53:29] broke the law. They provided
[2:53:30] false information on the
[2:53:31] original building permit,
[2:53:32] applying for a pole and flag
[2:53:34] within the current size limits
[2:53:35] knowing they would build a pole
[2:53:37] twice as large as is allowed,
[2:53:39] and then they sent us a text
[2:53:40] amendment asking for 30 30 ft
[2:53:43] poles of the 3,2003 33,200
[2:53:44] square foot flagpoles. They
[2:53:46] knew we could not pass it, and
[2:53:47] that, and that, that would
[2:53:49] allow them to smear a good name
[2:53:50] all across social media and the
[2:53:52] national news. It was a setup
[2:53:53] and tended to create a
[2:53:56] controversy that would get them
[2:53:57] free national exposure, not
[2:53:58] only for camping world but also
[2:53:58] for the owner
[2:53:59] s new show
[2:54:00] getting ready to debut on Fox
[2:54:02] News. It
[2:54:03] s not about patriotism.
[2:54:04] It
[2:54:06] s about using our sacred
[2:54:07] flag to create controversy and
[2:54:09] division to gain more exposure
[2:54:10] and ultimately to make more
[2:54:12] money. I believe this is true
[2:54:12] because they
[2:54:13] ve done this all
[2:54:15] over the country. If they had
[2:54:16] followed the law and applied
[2:54:18] for appropriate text amendment
[2:54:19] before construction, we
[2:54:21] probably would have passed it.
[2:54:23] A good example is next door at
[2:54:24] the Hilton Garden Inn. The
[2:54:25] Hilton wanted a sign on the
[2:54:26] hotel that was louder, larger
[2:54:28] than the code allowed. They
[2:54:29] applied for amendment allowing
[2:54:31] for larger signs downtown and
[2:54:32] we passed it unanimously. It
[2:54:33] s
[2:54:34] a great example of a business
[2:54:35] respecting the laws of a
[2:54:36] community that it
[2:54:37] s joining.
[2:54:39] Camping World has done nothing.
[2:54:40] To work with us through this
[2:54:43] process. If we pass this
[2:54:44] amendment, they will still have
[2:54:45] to pay the fines, apply for a
[2:54:46] new permit, provide building
[2:54:49] plans, and have it inspected by
[2:54:50] city engineers. We have no
[2:54:51] reason to believe that they
[2:54:53] will do any of that and we
[2:54:53] ll
[2:54:55] more likely have to sue them to
[2:54:56] pay the fines and to get access
[2:54:59] to the site. My hope is that
[2:55:00] our patriotism will not be
[2:55:04] questioned. I sit here as a
[2:55:05] servant of this community. As
[2:55:08] do my colleagues. That
[2:55:09] servanthood starts protecting
[2:55:09] the citizens and following the
[2:55:13] law. I am a patriot. I remember
[2:55:14] the honor of hoisting the flag
[2:55:15] when I was in middle school,
[2:55:17] learning how to fold it
[2:55:18] properly, how to raise it
[2:55:20] quickly and proudly and how to
[2:55:22] lower it in reverence. I
[2:55:22] remember being taught how to
[2:55:24] raise it all the way up before
[2:55:25] lowering it back down to half
[2:55:26] staff when our nation was in
[2:55:28] mourning. I also remember the
[2:55:31] honor of my family being given
[2:55:32] a folded flag at the funerals
[2:55:33] of both my grandfathers who
[2:55:36] served in the military. I
[2:55:37] m a
[2:55:39] proud patriotic American and I
[2:55:41] honor our great American flag
[2:55:42] by upholding the laws and
[2:55:43] democratic processes of our
[2:55:45] community. I
[2:55:46] d like to share a
[2:55:47] few quotes from some of the
[2:55:50] citizen emails I received.
[2:55:50] We
[2:55:51] re strongly opposed to a tax
[2:55:53] amendment that would legalize
[2:55:54] oversized American flag camping
[2:55:55] world who knowingly and
[2:55:57] flagrantly has not complied
[2:55:58] with city laws on flag displays.
[2:55:59] It
[2:56:00] s a horrible precedent for
[2:56:03] the city to then change
[2:56:03] regulation and accommodate
[2:56:06] businesses in violation.
[2:56:07] Another one says the flag,
[2:56:08] which is larger than the one
[2:56:11] flown over the us Capitol is a
[2:56:12] distraction to motorists. It
[2:56:13] could not be lowered to half
[2:56:15] staff in honor of important
[2:56:17] Americans who have died. The
[2:56:18] owner of Camping World
[2:56:19] flagrantly violated the
[2:56:20] existing ordinance and has
[2:56:21] refused to pay the fines
[2:56:22] imposed as a result of the
[2:56:24] violation. This kind of
[2:56:25] arrogance should not be
[2:56:27] tolerated, let alone encouraged.
[2:56:29] I know the city of Grimble have
[2:56:30] more important issues to
[2:56:31] address, but when we allow
[2:56:33] people to violate ordinances
[2:56:34] with impunity, we opened the
[2:56:37] door for citizens to disregard
[2:56:37] other regulations which would
[2:56:40] lead to chaos. Another says
[2:56:41] there are plenty of businesses
[2:56:42] who are finding the American
[2:56:43] flag across Greenville city
[2:56:45] limits that are biding by the
[2:56:47] rules set in place in camping
[2:56:49] world should follow suit.
[2:56:50] Another said the camping world
[2:56:51] is not able to follow the
[2:56:53] United States flag code. The
[2:56:54] flag of the United States is
[2:56:56] sacred and should be treated
[2:56:57] with respect. In the us flag
[2:56:59] code, it goes on to detail
[2:57:00] about half staff status. The
[2:57:02] Times when, when it should be
[2:57:04] lowered to half staff. However,
[2:57:05] Camping World was unable to
[2:57:06] follow this because their flag
[2:57:07] would be touching the ground,
[2:57:09] which goes against Section 8.
[2:57:10] Respect for the flag, which
[2:57:11] states the flag should never
[2:57:12] touch anything beneath it, such
[2:57:13] as the ground, the floor, water,
[2:57:16] and merchandise. On a side note,
[2:57:17] respect the flag also states
[2:57:19] that the us flag should not be
[2:57:22] used for advertising. Another
[2:57:23] says there was a period of time
[2:57:25] when our business had to
[2:57:26] relocate to another building in
[2:57:27] Greenville and we had set up
[2:57:28] flag banners to inform everyone
[2:57:29] that we were open after just
[2:57:32] moving. We were informed that
[2:57:33] they could not, we could not
[2:57:34] display those flags because
[2:57:35] they were a distraction to
[2:57:37] drivers on the road. Although
[2:57:38] we disagreed with this, we
[2:57:40] removed the flags. Being a part
[2:57:42] of the community is respecting
[2:57:43] the rules set in place by that
[2:57:47] community. Another says
[2:57:48] Patriotic behavior is
[2:57:50] consistent with being a
[2:57:51] law-abiding citizen and with
[2:57:52] respect to established flag
[2:57:54] etiquette, neither of which is
[2:57:55] demonstrated by camping world
[2:57:55] s
[2:57:57] flag. Please do not disregard
[2:57:59] any aspects of the existing
[2:58:01] flag etiquette for the us flag
[2:58:03] code to appease one business
[2:58:04] and loud screams of a subset of
[2:58:08] our residents. Another says,
[2:58:08] I
[2:58:09] m a law-abiding taxpaying
[2:58:11] citizen of Greenville living
[2:58:12] here for 50+ years, the
[2:58:13] American flag is something I
[2:58:16] hold in reverence. However, I
[2:58:17] live in Lakewood Pines directly
[2:58:19] across Evans Street from
[2:58:20] Camping World, and the giant
[2:58:22] illegal flag display. Since it
[2:58:23] is brightly illuminated at
[2:58:25] night, it looms over our
[2:58:26] tallest trees, and when the
[2:58:27] wind is blowing, I can hear the
[2:58:28] very loud flapping of the
[2:58:30] material, even from inside my
[2:58:31] house with the windows closed.
[2:58:33] I was offended when it was not
[2:58:34] lowered to half-staff to show
[2:58:35] respect for the passing of
[2:58:38] PRESIDENT Carter. That flag is
[2:58:39] not about patriotism, is it, it
[2:58:43] is a marketing ploy. And
[2:58:45] another one says, my father, a
[2:58:46] native Dane, came to this
[2:58:48] country and became a us citizen
[2:58:49] after defeating the Nazis in
[2:58:51] World War ii. His love for this
[2:58:52] country and for the American
[2:58:54] flag was palpable. He taught
[2:58:55] his children to respect the
[2:58:56] flag by folding it, by flying
[2:58:58] it proudly every day, and
[2:58:58] unless it was illuminated, it
[2:59:01] was to be taken down at dusk.
[2:59:02] Half-mast meant raising it
[2:59:03] fully and then bringing it back
[2:59:06] down to 5. Size also mattered
[2:59:08] to display an incorrect size is
[2:59:10] simply wrong. It is
[2:59:11] disrespectful to flaunt the
[2:59:12] stars and stripes in a boastful
[2:59:13] manner. It
[2:59:15] s vulgar at best. We
[2:59:17] are not a boastful community
[2:59:17] that encourages bypassing laws
[2:59:19] that are put into place for a
[2:59:23] reason. The only email I
[2:59:26] received in support. Of The
[2:59:29] ordinance, uh, amendment, the,
[2:59:31] the text amendment, um,
[2:59:33] included some really great
[2:59:33] information about having
[2:59:37] respect for the flag. Uh, and
[2:59:38] one section said a symbol
[2:59:40] deeply embedded with the values
[2:59:42] of, of freedom and democracy.
[2:59:44] Principles upon which the
[2:59:46] United States was founded. It
[2:59:46] signals the country
[2:59:47] s
[2:59:48] commitment to these ideals,
[2:59:49] reminding citizens in the world
[2:59:50] of America
[2:59:51] s dedication to
[2:59:52] upholding freedom and justice
[2:59:54] for all. Whether displayed in a
[2:59:55] school, a government building,
[2:59:56] or a family home, the flag
[2:59:58] continuously serves as a prompt
[2:59:59] for reflection on these core
[3:00:00] values and a call to uphold
[3:00:04] them daily. And my comment on
[3:00:06] that is freedom and democracy.
[3:00:08] Are principles that must be
[3:00:10] held simultaneously. We do not
[3:00:11] have the freedom to do whatever
[3:00:14] we want. We live in a democracy
[3:00:16] of a nation of laws. We elect
[3:00:18] officials to govern and to make
[3:00:19] amendments to the laws when
[3:00:19] necessary, but we don
[3:00:20] t get to
[3:00:20] pick and choose which laws we
[3:00:23] follow. We think law is unjust
[3:00:24] and we follow the democratic
[3:00:25] process and get the law changed.
[3:00:28] Camping World believes it is
[3:00:34] above the law. And in closing,
[3:00:36] George Washington wrote, if to
[3:00:38] please the people, we offer
[3:00:40] what we ourselves disapprove.
[3:00:42] How can we afterward defend our
[3:00:45] work. Let us raise a standard
[3:00:47] to which the wise and the
[3:00:49] honest can repair. The event is
[3:00:52] in the hand of GOD. That
[3:00:53] s to
[3:00:54] say that if I prove something
[3:00:57] tonight that I know is wrong.
[3:00:58] Even to get this mess out of
[3:00:59] the way, to move on to save
[3:01:02] face, to save money. I, I, I
[3:01:02] can
[3:01:04] t defend that going forward.
[3:01:04] I can
[3:01:06] t look my fellow citizens
[3:01:07] in the eye that I love and
[3:01:08] respect and I
[3:01:09] ve shared these,
[3:01:11] you know, very impassioned
[3:01:11] testimonies to me. I can
[3:01:12] t look
[3:01:15] at them. Anymore and and with
[3:01:16] respect, I wouldn
[3:01:17] t expect them
[3:01:18] to respect me cause I
[3:01:18] m, I
[3:01:18] m
[3:01:20] caving. And I just can
[3:01:20] t handle
[3:01:23] that. So I really appreciate
[3:01:24] those words from George
[3:01:26] Washington. Providing me with
[3:01:29] the What I need to move on in
[3:01:32] this moment. Um If to please
[3:01:34] the people we offer what we
[3:01:36] ourselves disapprove. How can
[3:01:37] we afterward defend our work.
[3:01:40] We cannot. I know that Camping
[3:01:41] World has what Camping World
[3:01:44] has done is wrong. They have
[3:01:45] disrespected our community, and
[3:01:46] they have disrespected the
[3:01:48] American flag. And I cannot
[3:01:49] have a vote to approve this
[3:01:52] amendment. Councilmember
[3:01:58] Blackburn. I, I call on you. Ok,
[3:02:02] all right, ok. All right. Be
[3:02:04] kind, um, I can hardly improve
[3:02:07] on, uh, what council member
[3:02:09] Scully has just, uh, shared
[3:02:11] with us. Um, I do think though
[3:02:12] that for the, for the record,
[3:02:14] it is important to speak on
[3:02:17] this because it is an extremely
[3:02:18] important conversation and
[3:02:18] we
[3:02:20] ve faced an enormous amount
[3:02:22] of pressure and, um, And
[3:02:24] frankly, a lot of anger as well
[3:02:28] as a lot of very good support.
[3:02:29] So when I
[3:02:30] ve looked at this, I,
[3:02:31] I, I have to start with the
[3:02:33] question. When someone breaks
[3:02:36] the law. We throw our hands up
[3:02:37] and say, oh well, I guess we
[3:02:38] have to change the law for them.
[3:02:41] If they wrap themselves up in a
[3:02:42] flag when they break the law,
[3:02:45] does that make it ok? If a
[3:02:47] business comes to Greenville
[3:02:49] and asks taxpayers to fund its
[3:02:50] advertising campaign? Do we
[3:02:53] pass the hat for them? And if
[3:02:54] they lie on an official
[3:02:55] government form, does that make
[3:02:58] them patriotic? The issue
[3:03:00] before us tonight is not about
[3:03:00] our country
[3:03:02] s flag. It concerns
[3:03:04] respect for community
[3:03:04] s laws.
[3:03:06] Indeed, we must ask ourselves
[3:03:09] what is patriotic? Is it
[3:03:10] patriotic to lie on an official
[3:03:13] government forum? To deceive a
[3:03:14] community about your true
[3:03:17] intentions. Is it patriotic to
[3:03:19] bully, a modest local
[3:03:21] government, us, whose goals are
[3:03:22] simply to support a good
[3:03:23] quality of life for our
[3:03:26] citizens. Is it patriotic to
[3:03:28] bitterly divide a community? Is
[3:03:30] it patriotic to ask Greenville
[3:03:31] taxpayers to fund your
[3:03:33] marketing campaign. We must be
[3:03:35] crystal clear. This problem did
[3:03:37] not exist until Camping World
[3:03:38] stirred up controversy. They
[3:03:41] made the quiet, noble act of
[3:03:42] flying a flag into a huge
[3:03:44] marketing campaign. Hiding
[3:03:46] behind the flag, this company
[3:03:48] pushed its way forward,
[3:03:49] attracting attention for itself
[3:03:52] and forcing our city staff to
[3:03:53] focus on its lawbreaking. Make
[3:03:54] no mistake, that
[3:03:55] s the request
[3:03:57] here to force the good people
[3:03:58] of Greenville to bend to
[3:04:01] bullying. Do we not have more
[3:04:02] important issues now? Do we not
[3:04:05] have poverty, a lack of housing,
[3:04:07] insufficient healthcare? Do we
[3:04:08] not have children who need our
[3:04:10] focus, who need food and safe
[3:04:12] places to play. Safe
[3:04:14] intersections and learning. Do
[3:04:16] we not have elderly people
[3:04:18] without caretakers? Do we not
[3:04:19] have countless other priorities
[3:04:21] right now. Indeed, those of us
[3:04:25] sitting here. We only want to
[3:04:26] focus on helping and supporting
[3:04:28] our citizens. Providing clean
[3:04:32] air, soil and water. Job
[3:04:33] opportunities, safe streets and
[3:04:36] safety in our homes. Genuine
[3:04:37] economic development like the
[3:04:38] hopeful industrial park we
[3:04:42] toured on Tuesday. We welcomed
[3:04:43] this business into our
[3:04:44] community and what has it done
[3:04:46] in return? Light on its
[3:04:48] building permit application.
[3:04:50] Place itself above all other
[3:04:51] businesses in this community
[3:04:53] who managed to flourish while
[3:04:53] flying the flag according to
[3:04:57] code. Refused to pay fines
[3:04:59] currently totaling over $8000
[3:05:01] and divided our community. So
[3:05:03] the central issue is this, does
[3:05:04] the city give a reward for
[3:05:07] breaking the law? Do we change
[3:05:11] our laws for illegal behavior?
[3:05:13] Can you imagine the mayhem? If
[3:05:14] we changed our laws for every
[3:05:16] lawbreaker. And if that
[3:05:17] lawbreaker hides behind the
[3:05:22] flag, does it make it ok? Last,
[3:05:23] safety has been addressed. The
[3:05:24] flag poses a safety risk. We
[3:05:25] ve
[3:05:26] heard tonight how it poses a
[3:05:27] light and noise risk. It
[3:05:28] s
[3:05:29] almost 3/4 the size of a
[3:05:32] basketball court. In 130 ft
[3:05:32] high, it
[3:05:34] s 13 stories, which is
[3:05:35] higher than anything else in
[3:05:36] Greenville. It
[3:05:36] s not been
[3:05:38] inspected. Greenville is
[3:05:40] central, as we know, to
[3:05:42] hurricanes, tornadoes,
[3:05:43] destructive winds and storms.
[3:05:45] Can we risk a display of this
[3:05:47] size so near two major traffic
[3:05:48] corridors, neighborhoods, other
[3:05:49] businesses and homes. And it
[3:05:50] can
[3:05:52] t be flown at half-mast is
[3:05:53] how it has helped, as has been
[3:05:55] discussed. Finally, from the
[3:05:57] start, this company acted in
[3:05:59] bad faith, lying on his
[3:06:00] building permit application,
[3:06:01] claiming it would comply with
[3:06:05] city laws. And like council
[3:06:06] member Scully described, I
[3:06:06] ve
[3:06:08] heard from many of you and
[3:06:11] overwhelmingly. Overwhelmingly
[3:06:12] You disagree with this text
[3:06:15] amendment. At a very basic
[3:06:16] level, I was elected to serve
[3:06:20] the people. I was also elected
[3:06:21] to, to listen to my own
[3:06:23] conscience. Well, in this case,
[3:06:25] they come together. Researching
[3:06:27] this company, I learned that in
[3:06:29] DECEMBER, Camping World will be
[3:06:31] was required to pay the state
[3:06:33] of Oregon $3.5 million to
[3:06:36] settle a lawsuit involving a
[3:06:37] multi-year consumer protection
[3:06:39] investigation by the Oregon
[3:06:40] Department of Justice. Under
[3:06:42] the terms of the agreement, 3
[3:06:44] million will be used to refund
[3:06:46] customers who paid more than
[3:06:48] the advertised price when
[3:06:49] during negotiations, the
[3:06:50] company would call back
[3:06:51] discounted prices by double
[3:06:54] charging them. So in conclusion,
[3:06:55] we have 3 questions. What
[3:06:56] action is best for our
[3:06:58] community? We were elected to
[3:06:59] serve the people of Greenville
[3:07:02] and act in predictable ways,
[3:07:03] upholding the law and
[3:07:03] fulfilling the will of our
[3:07:06] community. 2, what action
[3:07:09] represents good policy. Our
[3:07:10] ordinances are established for
[3:07:12] the good of all in our city.
[3:07:13] Changing policy in response to
[3:07:17] one violation. Is wrong. And
[3:07:18] finally, what action
[3:07:19] demonstrates the values we
[3:07:21] believe in. Removing this
[3:07:22] oversized flag will show that
[3:07:25] we honor and uphold the dignity
[3:07:26] of our national symbol and obey
[3:07:29] the rule of law. I cannot in
[3:07:31] good, in good conscience
[3:07:32] support this text amendment
[3:07:34] that rewards bad faith actions,
[3:07:36] illegal behavior, and
[3:07:36] dishonoring our nation
[3:07:36] s
[3:07:39] highest symbol. Council Mayor
[3:07:43] Wills. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I,
[3:07:45] um, I really encouraged by the
[3:07:46] civic engagement that I
[3:07:47] ve seen
[3:07:49] tonight and as um council
[3:07:51] member Scully, um, was able to
[3:07:52] reference the different emails
[3:07:52] that we
[3:07:53] ve received. Um, I
[3:07:53] m
[3:07:55] glad that you were able to give
[3:07:57] voice to um what people MAY not
[3:07:58] enlarge might have known about
[3:08:01] in terms of those emails. Um,
[3:08:03] so we are aware that on JANUARY
[3:08:05] 9th, that the council decided
[3:08:09] to, um, Unanimously deny a
[3:08:10] petition by Camping World and
[3:08:13] so I want to give a little
[3:08:15] context as to why then in
[3:08:18] JANUARY there was a flip. So on
[3:08:19] JANUARY 25th of this year as
[3:08:21] the city council concluded our
[3:08:23] annual planning retreat, we
[3:08:25] were advised to go into closed
[3:08:25] session. It wasn
[3:08:26] t until we got
[3:08:28] into closed session that we
[3:08:30] learned one of the topics we
[3:08:30] would be discussing was the
[3:08:33] flag. There was great concern
[3:08:36] about the desired city outcomes,
[3:08:37] the legal ramifications and the
[3:08:40] public perception. After about
[3:08:43] an hour, an hour, y
[3:08:43] all of um
[3:08:45] discussion. I was left with
[3:08:47] only one question. What do I
[3:08:48] consider to be a win in this
[3:08:52] situation. We as a council are
[3:08:54] representation of the city and
[3:08:57] our unity or the lack thereof
[3:08:58] will permeate throughout our
[3:09:02] city. So as a result, my
[3:09:03] contribution to the discussion
[3:09:05] was to yield to whatever
[3:09:08] decision would bring peace. It
[3:09:10] was advised that what would
[3:09:11] bring peace would be to request
[3:09:13] our staff to create a text
[3:09:14] amendment to allow Camping
[3:09:15] World to to fly their current
[3:09:17] flag. Once we came out of
[3:09:19] closed session, we took a vote
[3:09:21] requesting this, requesting the
[3:09:22] staff to, uh, draft that
[3:09:23] amendment and bring it back to
[3:09:24] us, which is why we
[3:09:24] re here
[3:09:30] tonight. Unfortunately, upon.
[3:09:31] Leaving the planning retreat,
[3:09:33] not even about 20 minutes after
[3:09:34] taking that vote, I read on
[3:09:37] social media a post that I felt
[3:09:38] was a complete
[3:09:39] misrepresentation of the
[3:09:40] immense thought and
[3:09:41] consideration that we as a
[3:09:42] council put into making our
[3:09:45] decision. It seemed to
[3:09:46] undermine our purest intentions.
[3:09:49] I felt as though while we
[3:09:50] sought to be united on this
[3:09:52] issue, perhaps we were united
[3:09:54] around the wrong issue. Instead
[3:09:56] of placating a known bully,
[3:09:56] there
[3:09:56] s that word again. I
[3:09:57] ve
[3:09:58] heard it a couple of times
[3:10:00] tonight. Uh, instead of
[3:10:02] placating a known bully, we and
[3:10:03] allowing them to exploit our
[3:10:05] city for profit, national media
[3:10:07] attention, and it is, excuse me,
[3:10:09] instead of placating a known
[3:10:11] bully and allowing them to
[3:10:13] exploit our city for profit and
[3:10:15] national media attention. It is
[3:10:17] my conviction that we should be
[3:10:18] standing firm and united,
[3:10:20] showing that we are smarter
[3:10:21] than the tactic tactics that
[3:10:24] seek to divide us. This issue,
[3:10:25] as stated before, has never
[3:10:27] been about the American flag.
[3:10:28] If it were, I believe that
[3:10:30] Camping World would abide by,
[3:10:31] um, the flag code and its
[3:10:34] standards. Our ordinances,
[3:10:35] regulations, and policies
[3:10:36] should stand in camping world
[3:10:39] should abide by our standards.
[3:10:40] Or face financial or legal
[3:10:43] consequences. I also want to
[3:10:44] note that Camping World can
[3:10:46] still make this right. They can
[3:10:48] take down the flag pole and the
[3:10:49] flag that
[3:10:49] s in violation and
[3:10:51] replace it with what they
[3:10:52] initially said they would
[3:10:55] install via the permit. The
[3:10:57] city could then inspect it, and
[3:10:58] if all goes well, then they
[3:10:59] would be in compliance with the
[3:11:03] city policy. After all, bright
[3:11:04] is still right and wrong is
[3:11:08] still wrong. While I appreciate
[3:11:09] our staff a hearing and
[3:11:11] providing the council with our
[3:11:13] request. It is my intention to
[3:11:14] vote against the drafted
[3:11:15] amendment and I
[3:11:15] m glad to know
[3:11:16] that I
[3:11:17] m not the only one who
[3:11:18] feels that way tonight. Thank
[3:11:22] you, Mayor. Any other comments?
[3:11:22] I
[3:11:26] ll make mine. Um I didn
[3:11:26] t
[3:11:32] write anything. Um, I am not a
[3:11:33] politician. I say that all the
[3:11:36] time. Um, I
[3:11:37] m a public servant,
[3:11:37] and I
[3:11:42] m a servant leader. Uh As
[3:11:45] it relates to this issue, my
[3:11:45] posture has not changed from
[3:11:50] the beginning. So, uh, yes,
[3:11:52] there have been several
[3:11:55] conversations about Uh, camping
[3:11:56] world and flag on different
[3:12:01] dates. My posture. And my
[3:12:03] comments have remained
[3:12:04] consistent every time we
[3:12:07] discussed it. Uh, even on
[3:12:10] JANUARY 25th. There might have
[3:12:11] been some flipping, but I
[3:12:11] didn
[3:12:16] t flip. I was standing 4.
[3:12:18] Us to vote against the flag.
[3:12:20] Even if I had to stand alone
[3:12:23] because like. COUNCILWOMAN
[3:12:24] Willis just said right is right
[3:12:28] and wrong is wrong. Uh, we
[3:12:29] definitely know that they were
[3:12:30] dishonest. I
[3:12:32] m not gonna repeat
[3:12:34] everything, um, one of my
[3:12:36] biggest concerns was safety.
[3:12:37] The flag has not been inspected.
[3:12:44] Um, and, Where it is located is
[3:12:47] a major thoroughfare. And so
[3:12:48] with the dynamics of our
[3:12:53] community. If we were to have a
[3:12:56] hurricane or a strong storm. I
[3:12:59] was really concerned about if
[3:13:02] the post um fail or. If the
[3:13:06] flag came loose and went on
[3:13:08] Evans Street and, you know, uh,
[3:13:09] cover some cars or something
[3:13:11] like that and cause a major
[3:13:14] accident. Um, in addition to
[3:13:21] that, If it were any one else.
[3:13:23] Anywhere else in our city with
[3:13:27] any other type of flag, I asked
[3:13:29] our staff what would you do and
[3:13:32] how would you respond? I don
[3:13:32] t
[3:13:34] feel like I got a completely
[3:13:35] honest answer. I think in
[3:13:39] certain parts of the city, if
[3:13:40] the flag that size with a pole
[3:13:42] that high had been put up, it
[3:13:44] would have already been
[3:13:46] bulldozed down. And the
[3:13:50] so-called patriots that have
[3:13:52] been um abusing people with
[3:13:53] their rhetoric would have been
[3:13:56] out there cheering them on with
[3:13:57] megaphones while they bulldozed.
[3:13:59] So there
[3:14:00] s a lack of
[3:14:04] consistency. When we have
[3:14:05] expectations for what type of
[3:14:07] laws we have in our city and
[3:14:10] who are to uphold them. Uh, the
[3:14:12] amount of money someone has in
[3:14:13] their bank account should not
[3:14:15] dictate that. So that was one
[3:14:19] of the reasons that I again
[3:14:20] consistently every time we
[3:14:20] ve
[3:14:22] had the conversation, have not
[3:14:26] supported. This flag. Lastly,
[3:14:26] there
[3:14:27] s nothing about the flag
[3:14:31] that is official. This is not
[3:14:33] an official governmentaa. It
[3:14:36] does not meet the standards of
[3:14:37] an official government flag,
[3:14:41] not based on our ordinances nor
[3:14:43] based on the ordinances of a
[3:14:45] larger flag that might be flown
[3:14:47] on government buildings. In
[3:14:52] addition to that, Um, it cannot
[3:14:54] meet the requirements of What
[3:14:56] our flags are supposed to meet
[3:14:58] again, not gonna go through
[3:14:59] everything that everyone else
[3:15:01] has gone through, but we can
[3:15:01] t
[3:15:03] fly half staff. And so if it
[3:15:04] doesn
[3:15:05] t meet the standards and
[3:15:05] it can
[3:15:07] t meet the requirements,
[3:15:09] we should not support it. Uh,
[3:15:15] lastly. The bottom line is
[3:15:17] there is a marketing ploy. We
[3:15:22] have been used. To press
[3:15:22] someone
[3:15:25] s marketing efforts.
[3:15:26] And we should not stand for
[3:15:33] that. And we might not want to
[3:15:35] spend tax dollars to uh take
[3:15:37] this to court, but we sometimes
[3:15:38] wanted, we
[3:15:39] re ok with choosing
[3:15:40] tax dollars to take other
[3:15:42] things to court, uh, and I
[3:15:42] m
[3:15:44] not gonna call out any
[3:15:46] particular situations, but
[3:15:46] we
[3:15:48] ve got situations in our
[3:15:49] community where citizens have
[3:15:52] felt wronged. Um, and so we
[3:15:54] need to be consistent and we
[3:15:56] also can find money when we
[3:15:57] need to to support other things.
[3:16:01] So we need to support our
[3:16:04] values first. We need to set
[3:16:05] standards for what we will and
[3:16:06] will not accept in our
[3:16:10] community. And what we will and
[3:16:10] will not uphold in our
[3:16:14] community. Uh, I did not
[3:16:15] support it then. I did not
[3:16:17] support it on any of those
[3:16:19] other dates, I will not support
[3:16:23] it tonight. We need to make
[3:16:26] sure. That we
[3:16:27] re making clear
[3:16:29] what we will and will not
[3:16:32] accept in our community that
[3:16:32] doesn
[3:16:35] t define us as patriots
[3:16:37] or not because what defines us
[3:16:39] as patriots is how we treat
[3:16:43] each other. Not whether or not
[3:16:43] we
[3:16:44] re fine a
[3:16:44] and what size
[3:16:46] it is. That
[3:16:47] s all I have to say.
[3:16:51] Any of the comments? Yes. Mayor
[3:16:56] for Tim Daniels. So, um, I must
[3:16:57] say that I, I agree with what
[3:16:59] everyone is saying. I do
[3:17:01] believe that this is a ploy by
[3:17:04] Camping World. I do believe.
[3:17:08] That this has been done, um.
[3:17:08] And it
[3:17:09] s wrong. I do believe
[3:17:12] that. But my decision is not
[3:17:15] based on camping world. Um, I
[3:17:17] have spoken with. In um,
[3:17:20] council members and Um
[3:17:22] Statesville I
[3:17:23] ve done my
[3:17:23] research. He
[3:17:24] s been doing this
[3:17:27] since 2014. It, it, I mean, it
[3:17:30] just goes on and on and on.
[3:17:31] California spent almost 2 years.
[3:17:34] And then they stated they could
[3:17:38] not afford to move any further.
[3:17:43] Um, we ask the Our city staff.
[3:17:45] To adjust the amendment or How,
[3:17:47] how we want to say it, um, and
[3:17:49] they did just that. They put
[3:17:50] those hours and they put that
[3:17:51] work in, and that is
[3:17:54] appreciated. I, for one, am
[3:17:56] going to vote for this
[3:17:58] amendment, one for the safety
[3:18:00] of our citizens. We need to get
[3:18:02] to that pole to ensure that it
[3:18:04] is safe for the citizens of
[3:18:08] Greenville. And yes, this is a
[3:18:10] a ploy tactic for this
[3:18:14] gentleman, but I am good
[3:18:15] conscience cannot ask taxpayers
[3:18:17] to pay for it. They still,
[3:18:17] they
[3:18:19] ve not paid any fine. So
[3:18:20] the only thing, only people
[3:18:21] that are going to be paying are
[3:18:25] us. They still owe Statesville
[3:18:28] $14,000. They do not pay. And
[3:18:30] yes, it MAY appear that we
[3:18:30] re
[3:18:32] giving in, but I just, there
[3:18:35] are too many other things. That
[3:18:39] we can do with. The needs of
[3:18:40] our citizens and in Greenville.
[3:18:46] Thank you. Robinson. The
[3:18:49] difficulty With this between
[3:18:52] council. And those in the
[3:18:54] audience and those who MAY be
[3:18:57] watching us online. Is that
[3:18:58] unlike a speeding sign that was
[3:18:59] an all, well, if, if you
[3:18:59] re
[3:19:00] speeding, we just raise the
[3:19:02] speed limit. That
[3:19:02] s a bad
[3:19:05] comparison. Because this flag
[3:19:06] is something that means so much
[3:19:09] to so many people. And so for
[3:19:10] everybody that
[3:19:10] s spoken tonight
[3:19:12] and come here and support to
[3:19:14] not do it, there have been an
[3:19:15] equal number probably online
[3:19:17] who have said the same thing,
[3:19:17] but there
[3:19:18] s also just as many
[3:19:20] people who say let it fly. Let
[3:19:21] it fly. It
[3:19:23] s beautiful. And I
[3:19:24] think if you were to take a
[3:19:25] tally, I think it would
[3:19:27] probably be almost a
[3:19:28] fifty-fifty split if we were to
[3:19:30] read the comments of everybody
[3:19:31] that has a viewpoint about this.
[3:19:32] And that
[3:19:33] s why because the flag
[3:19:35] means so much to so many people
[3:19:35] and, and I
[3:19:37] ve had many like
[3:19:37] this
[3:19:38] can
[3:19:38] t be fired at
[3:19:40] half-mast if many of you heard
[3:19:42] my comments when the manager,
[3:19:44] uh, it was basically like a
[3:19:45] cross-examination. You never
[3:19:47] intended to do that. I
[3:19:47] m upset
[3:19:48] because I, I like the rule of
[3:19:49] law. I like you to abide by the
[3:19:51] rule of law. And the marking
[3:19:54] ploy of this is a genius
[3:19:55] because he divides communities
[3:19:56] with something that
[3:19:56] s so near
[3:19:57] and dear to all of us, and
[3:19:58] that
[3:20:00] s the American flag. And,
[3:20:01] and to many people, it
[3:20:01] s very
[3:20:03] near and dear. Those who
[3:20:03] ve
[3:20:04] served, and thank you for your
[3:20:05] service. I have many good
[3:20:06] friends that have served our
[3:20:08] country, many who still serve
[3:20:10] our country and that are very
[3:20:11] hard about how you honor the
[3:20:13] flag and the protocol that you
[3:20:14] do it and how you don
[3:20:14] t do it.
[3:20:15] And I
[3:20:15] ve had an equal number of
[3:20:16] people who have come to me and
[3:20:17] said it
[3:20:18] s a beautiful flag. It
[3:20:19] looks glorious as it flies in
[3:20:20] the wind. Why don
[3:20:21] t let it fly?
[3:20:22] And see, that
[3:20:22] s what divides
[3:20:24] all of us. And that
[3:20:25] s what
[3:20:26] makes it difficult decision.
[3:20:27] This is not like increasing the
[3:20:29] speed limit or doing something
[3:20:30] like that, that we all can
[3:20:31] agree upon. We don
[3:20:32] t raise
[3:20:34] speed limits because you speed.
[3:20:35] This is something that is very
[3:20:36] near. And I think we
[3:20:36] ve even
[3:20:38] said if they had come to us in
[3:20:40] JUNE of last year. This council
[3:20:41] MAY have approved this type of
[3:20:43] amendment. I
[3:20:44] m not trying to
[3:20:45] judge anybody on here, but it
[3:20:46] would have been different but
[3:20:48] they chose not to, because this
[3:20:50] is their marketing ploy. They
[3:20:52] want to keep this stirred up.
[3:20:52] That
[3:20:53] s their entire goal closes
[3:20:55] the more more it keeps stirred
[3:20:56] up, the more it keeps camping
[3:20:59] rolled in the eye, and so you
[3:21:00] get people complaining from all
[3:21:01] over the country calling our
[3:21:03] staff and making threats to
[3:21:04] them about taking this, I mean,
[3:21:04] and so we
[3:21:05] ve had to deal with
[3:21:07] that. So we have our staff
[3:21:08] dealing with that. There
[3:21:08] s a
[3:21:08] number of people who want to
[3:21:09] flag to fly it is. So we
[3:21:10] re up
[3:21:11] here like, what do we do? On
[3:21:12] the one hand, it
[3:21:12] s the rule of
[3:21:16] law. And they violated it. On
[3:21:17] the other hand, it
[3:21:17] s a flag
[3:21:18] that maybe people say should
[3:21:19] fly regardless, the bigger the
[3:21:23] better. So what do we do? Well,
[3:21:25] One of the things we could do
[3:21:26] is we could amend the flag
[3:21:27] minute, they come to us, they
[3:21:27] didn
[3:21:28] t, and they gave some
[3:21:30] ridiculous. Amendment language
[3:21:31] that they knew we weren
[3:21:31] t going
[3:21:34] to pass. It was ridiculous and
[3:21:34] they do that because that
[3:21:35] s in
[3:21:36] fact the exact ploy that they
[3:21:37] do. It
[3:21:38] s a game they play. And
[3:21:40] so then they won a battle
[3:21:42] because it keeps it stirred up.
[3:21:43] And so at the end of the day,
[3:21:45] if we deny this, what do we do
[3:21:47] next? Do we sue them to remove
[3:21:49] the flag because as, as council
[3:21:51] member mayor Prote Daniel said,
[3:21:51] it
[3:21:52] s a safety issue. We can
[3:21:52] t
[3:21:54] get in there. I believe that if,
[3:21:56] if it gets passed and we get in
[3:21:56] there, they
[3:21:57] ll let us inspect
[3:21:58] it and they
[3:21:59] ll pay the fines
[3:22:00] because at that point we
[3:22:00] ve
[3:22:01] taken the air out of their
[3:22:03] sails. They can no longer hide
[3:22:04] behind the flag and say, oh,
[3:22:04] Gloria, you
[3:22:05] re trying to take
[3:22:07] it down. The flag is there. And
[3:22:08] now we
[3:22:08] re saying you
[3:22:09] re not,
[3:22:09] you
[3:22:09] re a bad person because
[3:22:10] you
[3:22:11] re not taking it down. And
[3:22:11] that
[3:22:13] s what makes this decision
[3:22:15] so difficult for all of us. It
[3:22:15] is, it
[3:22:16] s probably the most
[3:22:17] difficult decision I
[3:22:17] ve been
[3:22:18] involved in since I
[3:22:18] ve been on
[3:22:20] council and since I was on
[3:22:21] planning and zoning, and it
[3:22:21] s
[3:22:22] the one decision I
[3:22:23] ve seen
[3:22:23] that
[3:22:24] s divided our community in
[3:22:26] half, if, if not almost to the
[3:22:28] point of being 50/50 on both
[3:22:29] sides. And, you know, on the
[3:22:31] one hand, you want to abide by
[3:22:32] the law, on the other hand, you
[3:22:32] don
[3:22:34] t be involved in litigation.
[3:22:37] And when I give those calls,
[3:22:37] that
[3:22:37] s not some speculated high
[3:22:38] number. That
[3:22:39] s from 39 years of
[3:22:40] doing litigation because that
[3:22:40] s
[3:22:43] what I do every single day. It
[3:22:45] will be that, if not more, and
[3:22:46] probably a year and a half or 2
[3:22:47] years. And if we
[3:22:48] re deny this,
[3:22:48] that
[3:22:49] s what we
[3:22:49] re looking at.
[3:22:50] And, and if we
[3:22:51] re prepared to
[3:22:52] go that route and the council
[3:22:53] votes that way. That
[3:22:54] s our,
[3:22:55] because if you don
[3:22:56] t pass it,
[3:22:56] and what
[3:22:57] s the next step? What
[3:23:01] do we do? And I
[3:23:01] m not through
[3:23:02] yet. Oh, ok, I
[3:23:02] m sorry. I
[3:23:02] ll
[3:23:03] let you know when I
[3:23:04] m through.
[3:23:05] And, and so do we file
[3:23:08] litigation? And go against them
[3:23:10] and you say yes until you start
[3:23:11] realizing, I think you have a
[3:23:12] lot of things we need to move
[3:23:15] on and do other things. We
[3:23:15] start taking taxpayer money and
[3:23:17] funding it into a lawsuit. And
[3:23:18] what one said they finally just
[3:23:19] gave up, they couldn
[3:23:20] t afford
[3:23:22] to spend anymore. There are an
[3:23:23] equal number of people that as
[3:23:25] you shake your heads, no, shake
[3:23:26] your head no, let
[3:23:27] s don
[3:23:27] t do a
[3:23:28] lawsuit. And that
[3:23:29] s what again
[3:23:30] is making this difficult
[3:23:31] decision because you
[3:23:31] re in this
[3:23:32] room, but you
[3:23:32] re not the only
[3:23:35] ones with an opinion. The rest
[3:23:36] of our community have opinions
[3:23:38] likewise, and I guarantee you
[3:23:38] it
[3:23:39] s about fifty-fifty from
[3:23:39] what I
[3:23:40] ve heard and I
[3:23:40] ve read
[3:23:41] just about every comment I
[3:23:42] could try to read, whether it
[3:23:44] was in favor or not in favor,
[3:23:46] because when I first looked at
[3:23:47] this thing, I was the one
[3:23:49] asking this guy about the fraud
[3:23:50] involved in it, about how they
[3:23:50] didn
[3:23:52] t fly at half-mast when
[3:23:52] Jimmy Carter passed away and
[3:23:54] how the, the flag should have
[3:23:54] been. I
[3:23:55] m the one that
[3:23:55] s doing
[3:23:56] all that. But now I
[3:23:56] m looking
[3:23:58] at it from a practical
[3:23:59] standpoint, what do we do as a
[3:24:00] city council next with our
[3:24:01] revenues and how do we spend
[3:24:03] our money and what do we do?
[3:24:05] And again, unlike a speeding
[3:24:06] light, uh, that everybody says
[3:24:06] we can
[3:24:07] t, we don
[3:24:08] t change
[3:24:09] speeding. This is something
[3:24:09] that
[3:24:10] s very different, and
[3:24:10] that
[3:24:11] s why it makes this
[3:24:13] decision so difficult. And I
[3:24:14] remember as a lawyer arguing in
[3:24:16] front of the judges. It
[3:24:16] s very
[3:24:17] difficult to be the judge. It
[3:24:18] s
[3:24:19] easy to be the advocate for one
[3:24:20] side or the other. If you
[3:24:21] re
[3:24:23] advocate for one side, you can
[3:24:24] really advocate good. The other
[3:24:25] side, you can advocate good,
[3:24:26] but then we
[3:24:26] re the judges now,
[3:24:28] we have to make the decision,
[3:24:29] which I want every one of you
[3:24:31] in this room and all of those
[3:24:32] watching, the decisions all of
[3:24:34] us have to make are very
[3:24:34] difficult. They
[3:24:35] re not easy.
[3:24:38] Not, I mean, very difficult. I
[3:24:39] think everybody up here has,
[3:24:41] has really had to think hard
[3:24:42] about this, regardless of what
[3:24:43] their position is and where
[3:24:44] they come down. And so I want
[3:24:45] everybody to know that it
[3:24:46] s
[3:24:47] been very difficult. And so at
[3:24:48] the end of the day, what do we
[3:24:50] do? I mean, really, what do we
[3:24:51] do? Because if we don
[3:24:51] t pass
[3:24:54] this, Then the next step I
[3:24:59] litigation. Or do nothing. And
[3:25:00] so with those comments, I
[3:25:00] ll
[3:25:02] conclude. Thank you. I didn
[3:25:02] t
[3:25:04] mean to cut you off my back.
[3:25:04] I
[3:25:05] m just, no, I appreciate that.
[3:25:06] That
[3:25:06] s fine because I, I
[3:25:08] actually had a legal question.
[3:25:09] Ok, go ahead. I don
[3:25:10] t want to
[3:25:12] get into unauthorized practice
[3:25:12] of law because I know about
[3:25:15] that. But, um, and I
[3:25:15] ve heard
[3:25:18] of this, um, in, in being in
[3:25:19] legal circles, and somebody
[3:25:21] actually just texted it to me,
[3:25:24] which is, um, under, um, I
[3:25:24] think it
[3:25:27] s, uh, unfair trade
[3:25:28] practice, the uh unfair and
[3:25:29] deceptive trade practices, you
[3:25:30] get to treble your damages and
[3:25:36] attorney fees. This is not
[3:25:38] unfair to a trade. Well, again,
[3:25:41] not an attorney, but I am. Ok.
[3:25:41] Well, I
[3:25:42] m, I
[3:25:42] m I
[3:25:43] m asking
[3:25:44] actually gonna ask with with
[3:25:44] respect, I
[3:25:46] m gonna ask our city
[3:25:46] attorney since he
[3:25:47] s going to
[3:25:51] speak for all of us, um. I know
[3:25:51] that that in private litigation.
[3:25:56] You can recover legal fees
[3:25:57] under those circumstances and
[3:25:59] treble damages. Um, so can you
[3:26:02] address? And you MAY have
[3:26:03] already answered this, so I
[3:26:03] m
[3:26:05] just kind of following up. If
[3:26:07] we as a city prevailed in a
[3:26:10] lawsuit. Would we be able to
[3:26:12] recover our legal fees and
[3:26:13] possibly treble damages, in
[3:26:14] order to recover your legal
[3:26:17] fees, you need a specific
[3:26:18] statute that allows the city to
[3:26:21] recover if it prevailed, and we
[3:26:22] would need to research that
[3:26:23] statue to see if that
[3:26:24] s a
[3:26:25] viable claim, unfair trade
[3:26:27] practices in this context. You
[3:26:29] know, they, I think the um We
[3:26:29] don
[3:26:30] t need to get into all this
[3:26:31] in in public either, but we can
[3:26:32] talk about that. But here, you
[3:26:33] know, camping world, I think
[3:26:35] would say. They
[3:26:36] re displaying
[3:26:37] the American flag, not for
[3:26:38] commercial purposes or whatever,
[3:26:38] they would say that they
[3:26:40] re
[3:26:41] Exercising their First
[3:26:42] Amendment right to. Display the
[3:26:44] flag, so, um, like other
[3:26:45] businesses, theirs is just
[3:26:46] larger, so, you know, that
[3:26:48] would have to be researched.
[3:26:49] That would be a novel. We have
[3:26:53] to research that. Kind of an
[3:26:53] inconclusive response at this
[3:26:57] point. Thank you. I
[3:26:58] m the only
[3:26:58] one that hasn
[3:27:01] t commented yet.
[3:27:03] Um, uh, from the beginning,
[3:27:03] I
[3:27:04] ve always said that I thought
[3:27:07] the flag is beautiful, um. I
[3:27:09] enjoy going by it and seeing it
[3:27:10] displayed every single day that
[3:27:14] I go by there. Um I
[3:27:16] wholeheartedly disagree with
[3:27:20] the method of which. The
[3:27:22] company went towards getting a
[3:27:25] permit and filing a permit to
[3:27:28] Erect a pole that was much
[3:27:29] smaller than what was there in
[3:27:31] a flag that was much smaller.
[3:27:32] But ultimately I
[3:27:32] ve, I
[3:27:33] ve said
[3:27:34] this publicly many times at the
[3:27:35] end of the day, there
[3:27:35] s some
[3:27:36] fights that are worth fighting,
[3:27:38] some that are not, and as
[3:27:38] you
[3:27:41] ve seen. Our community has
[3:27:44] gone through a lot over the
[3:27:45] last several months over a
[3:27:46] discussion about an American
[3:27:48] flag. I love the American flag.
[3:27:49] I have people here that have
[3:27:51] talked, we have veterans here
[3:27:52] that have talked in favor and
[3:27:54] against, I think would be, I
[3:27:55] think, uh, the gentleman, MR.
[3:27:57] Parker up here is, was against,
[3:27:57] but I
[3:27:58] ve had other veterans
[3:27:59] that have reached out to me
[3:27:59] through email, through phone
[3:28:01] calls, through text messages
[3:28:03] that are in favor of it. And
[3:28:06] the fact that Um, we
[3:28:06] ve been up
[3:28:07] here and we
[3:28:09] ve made it such a
[3:28:11] divisive issue. And we
[3:28:12] re just
[3:28:13] going to prolong it and make
[3:28:16] this go on and on for an
[3:28:16] extended period of time. It
[3:28:16] s
[3:28:18] not good for our community.
[3:28:18] I
[3:28:19] ve said from the beginning
[3:28:21] that we need to go ahead and
[3:28:22] move forward with this. There
[3:28:22] s
[3:28:23] other issues in our community
[3:28:25] that we need to be dealing with,
[3:28:25] um, you
[3:28:26] ve seen other
[3:28:26] communities that are continuing
[3:28:27] to fight it, Mayor Pro Tem
[3:28:29] Daniels just a few minutes ago
[3:28:30] was talking about another
[3:28:31] community that has spent years.
[3:28:34] Fighting something. And there
[3:28:34] s,
[3:28:34] there
[3:28:36] s no reason for us as a
[3:28:38] community to continue to do it.
[3:28:38] Greenville
[3:28:39] s an amazing city.
[3:28:40] We all live here, we
[3:28:40] ve seen
[3:28:40] the expansion that
[3:28:41] s taken
[3:28:41] place. We
[3:28:42] ve seen great
[3:28:42] development that
[3:28:43] s taken place.
[3:28:44] Uh, we
[3:28:45] ve seen new things that
[3:28:46] have popped up throughout our
[3:28:47] community. We
[3:28:48] ve seen lots of
[3:28:49] revitalization. We
[3:28:49] ve seen new
[3:28:50] projects that have taken place
[3:28:55] over and over. And here we are
[3:28:58] suspending months on end. On a
[3:29:00] flag that is flying on one
[3:29:03] commercial parcel. And you know,
[3:29:04] I think the camping world
[3:29:05] should have to pay all the
[3:29:07] fines, but I think as a city we
[3:29:08] directed the staff to come up
[3:29:11] with an ordinance. Or excuse me,
[3:29:12] a text amendment to change the
[3:29:14] ordinance to be able to allow
[3:29:15] the flag to fly, and here we
[3:29:19] are. A month and a half later.
[3:29:20] And everything that the city
[3:29:24] staff put. Put together and and
[3:29:25] presented to us. Is for nothing.
[3:29:27] It
[3:29:30] s for absolutely nothing. I
[3:29:33] just, in my personal opinion. I
[3:29:33] don
[3:29:33] t, I don
[3:29:34] t think it
[3:29:34] s worth
[3:29:37] continuing to fight it. I, I
[3:29:39] think, uh, council member, uh,
[3:29:40] Robinson and Mayor Prote
[3:29:42] Daniels said it, said it best.
[3:29:42] It
[3:29:43] s time to move on. I mean, I
[3:29:44] feel like it
[3:29:45] s time to move on.
[3:29:45] It
[3:29:47] s time to go and fight a
[3:29:47] fight that
[3:29:49] s worth fighting, um,
[3:29:49] we
[3:29:50] re all Americans, every
[3:29:51] single one of us that
[3:29:51] s in this
[3:29:54] in this room. Um It
[3:29:55] s time for
[3:29:57] us to go ahead and put this
[3:29:58] behind us and by us going up
[3:29:59] here and prolonging this and
[3:30:00] just wanting to fight and punch
[3:30:03] a bully. What are we gonna win?
[3:30:04] Cause as soon as you, as soon
[3:30:05] as you leave, Something
[3:30:06] s gonna
[3:30:07] be on x, right? Something
[3:30:07] s
[3:30:08] gonna be on social media.
[3:30:08] Something
[3:30:09] s gonna be on there
[3:30:10] talking about how the city of
[3:30:11] Greenville told us that we had
[3:30:12] to take our flag down. Are they
[3:30:13] gonna read any of the comments
[3:30:15] that were made up here?
[3:30:15] Absolutely not. They
[3:30:15] re gonna
[3:30:16] read any of those comments.
[3:30:17] What they
[3:30:17] re gonna do is
[3:30:17] they
[3:30:18] re gonna go ahead and
[3:30:20] display Greenville as an
[3:30:21] unpatriotic city, and we
[3:30:21] re
[3:30:23] gonna continue this for months
[3:30:23] on end and we
[3:30:25] re gonna continue
[3:30:26] to get emails, phone calls,
[3:30:26] we
[3:30:28] re gonna get social media
[3:30:29] posts about how we
[3:30:29] re a
[3:30:30] terrible city and every one of
[3:30:31] us in this room knows that
[3:30:31] we
[3:30:32] re not a terrible city.
[3:30:33] We
[3:30:33] re an incredible city. We
[3:30:34] ve
[3:30:34] got great people here. We
[3:30:35] ve
[3:30:35] got great staff that
[3:30:36] s here.
[3:30:38] That takes care of us on a
[3:30:40] daily basis, so and my, my
[3:30:41] personal opinion, I just, I
[3:30:41] don
[3:30:42] t, I don
[3:30:42] t agree with some
[3:30:45] of my colleagues up here about
[3:30:46] going forward and denying this
[3:30:47] request, I think it
[3:30:47] s time for
[3:30:49] us to move on as a community.
[3:30:49] That
[3:30:52] s all I got. I
[3:30:53] d like to
[3:30:56] make a motion to deny. All
[3:30:57] right, motion
[3:30:57] s been made by
[3:30:59] Council member Willis, seconded
[3:31:00] by Council member Scully. Any
[3:31:04] other discussion. All those in
[3:31:09] favor please raise your hand.
[3:31:10] All those opposed, please raise
[3:31:13] your hand. Just, and just for
[3:31:14] the record, I don
[3:31:14] t get a vote,
[3:31:16] but I would be against this
[3:31:20] motion. Ok. Motion to deny um
[3:31:22] passes, 4 to 2. So now that
[3:31:22] it
[3:31:23] s denied, I think it
[3:31:23] s
[3:31:25] incumbent on us as a council to
[3:31:26] provide our city staff with
[3:31:27] direction on what direction
[3:31:27] we
[3:31:32] re supposed to go. Mayor. I
[3:31:34] would inform the council you
[3:31:35] have the right to go into
[3:31:38] closed session. For
[3:31:39] attorney-client privilege on
[3:31:40] this evening or another another
[3:31:42] date you. Do we have to go into?
[3:31:42] You don
[3:31:43] t have to, but you have
[3:31:45] a right to. And we might want
[3:31:46] to do that, I think it would be
[3:31:48] ok if we did it out here
[3:31:50] because I think there was some.
[3:31:52] Understanding that things were
[3:31:52] said in Coo
[3:31:53] s session that the
[3:31:53] public didn
[3:31:54] t get to see. I
[3:31:56] think we should talk about it
[3:31:57] out here in open session so
[3:31:59] everybody can see. And if I MAY,
[3:32:00] I think we
[3:32:01] ve had a long
[3:32:01] meeting. We
[3:32:03] ve had a lot of
[3:32:04] conversation earlier when we
[3:32:06] were uh voting on an issue,
[3:32:09] there was a desire to have more
[3:32:12] information, I think. I am not
[3:32:14] prepared tonight in closed or
[3:32:15] open session to talk about our
[3:32:17] next steps. I need more
[3:32:20] information and let me say I
[3:32:22] appreciate council members,
[3:32:24] Robinson, Mayor Proin Daniels,
[3:32:25] and our mayor for saying we
[3:32:28] need to move on. I also want to
[3:32:31] move on. I want to move on in a
[3:32:33] dignified, correct way. So
[3:32:35] before I can think of any next
[3:32:37] steps I need more time. I need
[3:32:39] more information. We need to
[3:32:41] explore things like is it.
[3:32:43] Feasible to to sue, uh, could
[3:32:44] we recoup legal fees? And I MAY
[3:32:46] come back here in 1 month, 2
[3:32:47] months. I don
[3:32:48] t, I don
[3:32:48] t mind
[3:32:50] changing my vote and saying,
[3:32:52] you know what, we explored this
[3:32:52] and now I
[3:32:53] ve changed my mind.
[3:32:53] We just don
[3:32:54] t have any other
[3:32:58] way. But I think for now, I
[3:32:59] need more information before I
[3:33:03] can. Have any conversation
[3:33:04] about next steps. I mean, I
[3:33:05] guess I would ask what type of
[3:33:06] information is needed? We
[3:33:06] ve
[3:33:08] had a month and a half since we
[3:33:10] made the decision and asked the
[3:33:11] staff to come forward with a
[3:33:12] ordinate a text amendment for
[3:33:16] the ordinance. And we gave them
[3:33:18] completely the wrong.
[3:33:20] Impression on it because we
[3:33:21] completely flipped and so as a
[3:33:22] council, we need to provide
[3:33:23] them with some some clear
[3:33:24] guidelines on what we
[3:33:25] re asking
[3:33:26] them to do and at this point
[3:33:26] you
[3:33:27] ve got a business that
[3:33:27] s
[3:33:28] not in compliance with their
[3:33:30] permit. And we
[3:33:31] re not willing
[3:33:32] to make a decision as a council
[3:33:34] to determine what we do next.
[3:33:36] We have a meeting on MARCH 24th,
[3:33:39] am I right? Monday. I would
[3:33:40] like to suggest, I know we all
[3:33:43] kind of want to move on, but I,
[3:33:45] I think tonight is maybe not
[3:33:46] the night for to discuss this
[3:33:48] in closed or open session. I
[3:33:50] suggest that at our uh uh after
[3:33:52] our MARCH 24th session. Uh, a
[3:33:53] meeting that we go into closed
[3:33:56] session. And have this
[3:33:56] conversation regarding the
[3:34:00] legal issues. And then And I
[3:34:02] just like to say I wasn
[3:34:03] t, I
[3:34:03] m
[3:34:05] sorry, um, go ahead. My vote
[3:34:05] wasn
[3:34:07] t based on just moving on.
[3:34:10] At all. It was based on the
[3:34:12] safety and the ability to get
[3:34:16] to the pole and not wanting. If
[3:34:17] we do litigation for it to be
[3:34:19] on the backs of people, not
[3:34:20] just forget it all and move on,
[3:34:20] that
[3:34:21] s, that
[3:34:21] s not my intent at
[3:34:24] all. Don
[3:34:25] t I say that. Yeah, no,
[3:34:26] and I didn
[3:34:26] t interpret it that
[3:34:27] way, but I think you made a
[3:34:28] valid point, which is, yes, we,
[3:34:30] we, we, we, we will need to
[3:34:33] move on and, I just need more
[3:34:34] information. Can we give the
[3:34:36] staff some directions so they
[3:34:37] know, so they can prepare for
[3:34:39] the 24th, but we
[3:34:40] re what our
[3:34:41] expectation is and what you
[3:34:43] wanna know. I would, I would, I
[3:34:44] mean, I feel like that
[3:34:44] s
[3:34:46] something that we owe them I
[3:34:46] m
[3:34:46] gonna, I won
[3:34:47] t speak on behalf
[3:34:48] of the, the legal aspect of
[3:34:49] this, and I
[3:34:50] ll let the attorney
[3:34:51] do that, but I would just ask
[3:34:53] you, you know, let, let us, let
[3:34:54] us know, do you want it at the
[3:34:55] workshop? Do you want the
[3:34:58] council meeting? Do you want a
[3:35:00] closed session, that way we can,
[3:35:02] that staff can plan accordingly.
[3:35:04] Um, clearly, I mean, I have the
[3:35:05] opinion that, I mean, again,
[3:35:05] I
[3:35:06] m not your lawyer, but I had
[3:35:08] an opinion if you
[3:35:08] re gonna talk
[3:35:11] legality and, and, and, and
[3:35:11] future litigation, you should
[3:35:14] seek. The the guidance of your
[3:35:16] attorney and client attorney.
[3:35:17] Privileged information in a
[3:35:18] closed session, but that
[3:35:18] s
[3:35:18] y
[3:35:18] all, y
[3:35:21] all get excited. Uh,
[3:35:25] my opinion on that is if we um
[3:35:28] are going to do, I, I prefer
[3:35:29] open session because last time
[3:35:31] we discussed it in closed
[3:35:33] session, and again, to
[3:35:34] reiterate, COUNCILWOMAN Willis
[3:35:37] when we came out. Um, what was
[3:35:39] discussed in closed session was
[3:35:41] misrepresented. Um, so either
[3:35:42] if if we
[3:35:43] re gonna do something
[3:35:45] in closed session, then it
[3:35:47] needs to stay closed and that
[3:35:48] s
[3:35:48] everyone
[3:35:49] s mouth stays closed.
[3:35:50] Um, if we
[3:35:52] re going to discuss
[3:35:54] the in open session, then we
[3:35:54] re
[3:35:58] completely transparent. So, um,
[3:36:01] You know, I would, I feel. I
[3:36:01] m
[3:36:02] disappointed because I know
[3:36:05] that my stance was completely
[3:36:06] misrepresented the last time.
[3:36:09] Um, because again, I have
[3:36:10] consistently been against the
[3:36:18] Uh, flag. Being, um, Raised in
[3:36:19] uh uh Evans Street since the
[3:36:20] beginning and I
[3:36:21] m completely
[3:36:22] exhausted with this
[3:36:23] conversation right now, um,
[3:36:24] there are probably a few things
[3:36:27] that I care about least, to be
[3:36:28] honest with everyone that
[3:36:29] s
[3:36:30] watching because we got people
[3:36:31] in our community homeless and
[3:36:35] hungry right now. Amen. Right
[3:36:38] and so, uh, in each meeting I
[3:36:39] have repeated that statement.
[3:36:44] That We have more important
[3:36:45] things and uh that was not
[3:36:46] something that that was on the
[3:36:50] top of my list of priorities
[3:36:51] because there are people in the
[3:36:52] community that need to be
[3:36:56] served. So, um. If we are gonna
[3:36:58] do closed session, then it is
[3:37:00] closed session. We
[3:37:01] re not
[3:37:05] trying to use it to politically
[3:37:06] navigate whoever our we
[3:37:08] consider our constituents to be
[3:37:10] that we are, we
[3:37:10] re having this
[3:37:11] conversation and we
[3:37:12] re
[3:37:13] determining as a council how
[3:37:13] we
[3:37:15] re gonna move forward. Um,
[3:37:15] for me, it
[3:37:16] s going to be
[3:37:17] against, it was against the
[3:37:18] first night, it
[3:37:19] s gonna be
[3:37:21] against the last night. And I
[3:37:22] appreciate, oh, I
[3:37:24] m sorry, I
[3:37:25] appreciate transparency, but i
[3:37:26] also know that there
[3:37:27] s value to
[3:37:28] attorney-client privilege, and
[3:37:28] there
[3:37:29] s a reason you do those
[3:37:30] things in closed session. It
[3:37:30] s
[3:37:31] not to conceal things from the
[3:37:31] public. It
[3:37:33] s that you have to
[3:37:34] have a discussion about your
[3:37:35] legal obligations and legal
[3:37:36] consequences. So I would say we
[3:37:38] need to have that initial
[3:37:39] conversation in closed session.
[3:37:40] Of course, whatever action we
[3:37:42] take comes out. In open session
[3:37:44] But if we want to do that close
[3:37:45] session on the 24th. I
[3:37:46] m here
[3:37:48] for it and my question as far
[3:37:49] as asking staff what additional
[3:37:49] information we need, I
[3:37:50] d say
[3:37:50] let
[3:37:52] s do a deep dive. On, um
[3:37:55] You know, uh, well. What are
[3:37:58] the, the possible next steps.
[3:37:59] Um, and how have they, how,
[3:37:59] how
[3:38:01] s that happen and uh how
[3:38:01] s
[3:38:03] that kind of concluded in other
[3:38:04] communities, um, how is North
[3:38:07] Carolina law different? Uh, can
[3:38:10] we recoup legal fees? Um
[3:38:12] precedent, just your basic
[3:38:14] legal information. You know, as,
[3:38:15] as the board
[3:38:15] s counsel, I would
[3:38:17] advise the council to go into
[3:38:17] closed session. There
[3:38:18] s a
[3:38:20] reason for that. It
[3:38:21] s
[3:38:22] confidentiality strategy and um
[3:38:22] we
[3:38:23] ve disposed of this item and
[3:38:25] I exactly that we talk, it
[3:38:25] doesn
[3:38:26] t sound like council has
[3:38:27] the appetite to do that tonight
[3:38:29] and we can do that. A future
[3:38:29] meeting, that
[3:38:30] s what I would
[3:38:33] advise counsel. So moved. For,
[3:38:34] for what? To go into closed
[3:38:35] session. We
[3:38:36] re going to closed
[3:38:37] session right now at a future
[3:38:40] meeting. Can we just add that
[3:38:43] to the agenda and that we need
[3:38:43] to. I don
[3:38:43] t, I don
[3:38:44] t think you
[3:38:44] need a motion to do that, but
[3:38:50] yeah. So. Ok. I just want to
[3:38:53] add to the um. My appreciation
[3:38:53] for city staff, and I do not
[3:38:55] believe this has been a waste
[3:38:57] of time. Um, they worked really
[3:38:57] hard and we didn
[3:38:59] t pass it, but
[3:39:01] a month and a half has gone by.
[3:39:01] It
[3:39:02] s given our community time
[3:39:03] to discuss this and to form
[3:39:05] their own opinions and to share
[3:39:08] those opinions with us. Uh, our
[3:39:10] pnz board are, um, voted this
[3:39:11] down, and we have to, we don
[3:39:11] t
[3:39:12] need to follow their advice,
[3:39:14] but we need to listen to it and,
[3:39:16] and appreciate it and respect
[3:39:17] it, um. And it
[3:39:18] s given us all
[3:39:20] time to, to really consider the
[3:39:20] facts. It
[3:39:21] s also giving camping
[3:39:22] word an opportunity to do the
[3:39:24] right thing, to communicate
[3:39:26] with us in any way, and they
[3:39:27] have not. They paid the 1st 2
[3:39:28] fines, and they haven
[3:39:29] t done
[3:39:31] anything since then. They have
[3:39:32] not communicated one bit with
[3:39:34] us, so a month and a half, uh,
[3:39:35] gave them the opportunity to
[3:39:37] also do the right thing, and
[3:39:38] they did not. So I don
[3:39:38] t think
[3:39:39] this has been a waste of time.
[3:39:39] It
[3:39:41] s not been a waste of city
[3:39:41] staff
[3:39:43] s energy. I just want to
[3:39:44] share my appreciation for all
[3:39:46] of you, um, for the hard work
[3:39:48] you do, um, and for. You know,
[3:39:49] serving this community well so
[3:39:52] thank you very much. See
[3:39:53] manager
[3:39:55] s report. Uh, just to
[3:39:57] reiterate, we do have a meeting
[3:39:59] on the MARCH 24th. We normally
[3:40:01] do not have that 3rd meeting,
[3:40:02] but we will have a workshop
[3:40:04] starting at 4. And then we will
[3:40:05] go straight into the meeting at
[3:40:06] 6 o
[3:40:08] clock. Um Oh, I
[3:40:10] m sorry.
[3:40:11] Can we go back a little bit. I
[3:40:14] know some of the um
[3:40:16] constituents Acts about a
[3:40:18] workshop regarding. Trees and
[3:40:19] things like that. What would
[3:40:22] that? Entail putting that in
[3:40:24] place. I will, I will talk to
[3:40:25] staff, yes every, I mean, some
[3:40:27] of you might know, we have, um,
[3:40:27] we
[3:40:29] ve been working on the udo
[3:40:31] and the tree, uh, tree aspect
[3:40:31] of that has been a vital part
[3:40:34] of that. So I would suspect
[3:40:35] that when we get in, in, in the
[3:40:36] next several months to talk
[3:40:39] about the udo that will be
[3:40:40] brought up, sorry for the
[3:40:44] interruption. All right, there
[3:40:46] you go. Good. Council Mayor
[3:40:52] Foreman. No more comments. All
[3:40:54] right. COUNCILMAN Blackburn. I
[3:40:56] just would like to, to end on a
[3:40:57] positive note on Tuesday, we
[3:40:59] had a, we took a bus, took 2
[3:41:02] buses to look at a possible, uh,
[3:41:06] industrial park. And, um,
[3:41:09] although our consultants, uh, a
[3:41:10] large group of people, probably
[3:41:12] 50 to 75 people that gathered
[3:41:15] for that, including, uh,
[3:41:16] professional engineers and
[3:41:18] consultants and, um, the city
[3:41:20] council met with the, uh,
[3:41:21] county commissioners and just
[3:41:22] what a great opportunity that
[3:41:24] was. And although they were not
[3:41:26] supposed to say so. I
[3:41:28] definitely got the feeling that
[3:41:30] Greenville site was. If not the
[3:41:33] top site. Ok, I got the feeling
[3:41:36] we were really in a good place.
[3:41:37] That our site looks so
[3:41:39] promising for so many reasons,
[3:41:39] and it
[3:41:41] s, um, something that we
[3:41:42] talk about acting with
[3:41:42] transparency. We
[3:41:43] re trying to
[3:41:44] let everyone know what the
[3:41:46] plans are, what it could be,
[3:41:46] how it
[3:41:47] s gonna unfold. We
[3:41:48] re
[3:41:48] trying to involve anybody,
[3:41:50] every, everybody, but really
[3:41:51] this is something that could be
[3:41:52] just a tremendous opportunity
[3:41:54] for our, our community, and I
[3:41:55] just want to thank our city
[3:41:58] staff who I know spent
[3:42:00] countless hours preparing this
[3:42:01] proposal and just what a, what
[3:42:03] a really positive day that was.
[3:42:03] And so thank you. And that
[3:42:04] s it.
[3:42:08] All right. COUNCILMAN Willis.
[3:42:10] Uh, thank you, Mayor. I
[3:42:11] m so
[3:42:11] happy women
[3:42:12] s History Month to
[3:42:14] all of the women who contribute
[3:42:16] to our society and our
[3:42:17] communities every um every day.
[3:42:22] Um, I know we had some employee
[3:42:23] appreciation activities and um
[3:42:24] different things to love on our
[3:42:26] employees with food trucks and
[3:42:28] whatnot this month and last
[3:42:29] week and so, uh, we just
[3:42:31] appreciate all of the work that
[3:42:33] our staff and employees do on a
[3:42:35] daily basis. I also want to
[3:42:36] brag on two initiatives going
[3:42:37] on in the city that are really
[3:42:40] exciting. So the in good
[3:42:41] company Citizens Academy has
[3:42:44] completed 3 sessions so far, so
[3:42:46] excited um that there are about
[3:42:47] 25 participants with that. The
[3:42:48] first session they talked about
[3:42:49] the city manager
[3:42:50] s office, the
[3:42:50] clerk
[3:42:51] s office, and the city
[3:42:52] attorney
[3:42:52] s office. The second
[3:42:53] session they had a chance to
[3:42:55] learn about fire and rescue and
[3:42:56] the police department, and then
[3:42:57] just last night they learned
[3:42:59] all about public works, so it
[3:42:59] s
[3:43:02] been a really cool experience
[3:43:03] and um really exciting program
[3:43:03] that they
[3:43:05] re involved in. And
[3:43:07] then also our small business
[3:43:08] technical assistance program,
[3:43:11] so a little update about that,
[3:43:12] um, that was uh approved by
[3:43:14] council last year. They are
[3:43:15] about halfway done with their
[3:43:16] cohort. This is about a dozen
[3:43:18] small businesses that are
[3:43:19] getting some very needed one on
[3:43:21] one attention that they might
[3:43:23] not have otherwise gotten
[3:43:24] without this initiative through
[3:43:27] the city, um, led by Monday
[3:43:29] Solutions, um, Monday Solutions
[3:43:30] is a consulting group that
[3:43:32] empowers leaders and businesses
[3:43:33] to not feel overwhelmed and
[3:43:36] feel good about Monday again.
[3:43:37] So these businesses um have
[3:43:38] completed their 6th coaching
[3:43:40] sessions, and they
[3:43:41] ve done 21
[3:43:42] on one coaching sessions. Like
[3:43:43] how many small businesses do
[3:43:45] you know get that type of
[3:43:47] attention. Um, money Solutions
[3:43:49] has helped them establish a web
[3:43:50] presence for some businesses
[3:43:51] that didn
[3:43:53] t previously have one.
[3:43:54] And they
[3:43:55] ve assisted in
[3:43:56] establishing financial
[3:43:56] structures for these businesses.
[3:44:00] Record keeping and establishing
[3:44:02] budget practices. So that
[3:44:02] s um
[3:44:03] the great work that
[3:44:03] s being
[3:44:05] done, initiated by the city
[3:44:07] through Money Solutions, um,
[3:44:09] each and every month on an
[3:44:10] ongoing basis and then as
[3:44:11] council member, Blackburn says
[3:44:14] we had a joint county
[3:44:15] commissioners and city council
[3:44:16] meeting, um, this week, and I
[3:44:19] would love to see that happen
[3:44:21] maybe biannually, MR. C Manager,
[3:44:23] so we need more of that. We
[3:44:24] enjoyed that and um there was a
[3:44:25] lot to glean from it, so thank
[3:44:27] you, thank you, Mayor. Council
[3:44:29] member Scully. Thank you, Mayor.
[3:44:33] Uh Happy Women
[3:44:33] s History Month.
[3:44:35] My girl dad, so I take every
[3:44:37] opportunity to lift up women
[3:44:39] and celebrate women. Got 3
[3:44:42] daughters, um, so proud of them.
[3:44:43] Um, and so happy that we live
[3:44:45] in this time where they have
[3:44:46] every opportunity that they
[3:44:48] have to, to pursue their dreams
[3:44:49] and to do great things in their
[3:44:50] lives, and that
[3:44:51] s all been paid
[3:44:53] for by, uh, women who
[3:44:53] ve come
[3:44:55] before us, uh, and done great
[3:44:56] things in this country and
[3:44:57] around the world, uh, to
[3:44:58] improve the lives of women and
[3:44:59] to give them the opportunities
[3:45:01] they have today. So Happy
[3:45:01] Women
[3:45:04] s History Month. And, uh,
[3:45:06] go girls. Um, And another thing
[3:45:08] I got a great opportunity to
[3:45:09] serve uh Meals on Wheels this
[3:45:12] week over at the, um, Pitt
[3:45:13] County Council on Aging. Um,
[3:45:13] it
[3:45:14] s a really wonderful thing
[3:45:17] to do. It was easy, took about
[3:45:19] an hour. It was super well
[3:45:20] organized. They had a hot box
[3:45:22] with some hot food, a cooler
[3:45:23] with milks and a bag of cake
[3:45:25] and bread, uh, and they had a,
[3:45:26] a little tablet that I took
[3:45:27] with me that showed me exactly
[3:45:28] where to go, what order to
[3:45:30] deliver in, so it
[3:45:30] s most
[3:45:31] efficient. It was really fun. I
[3:45:33] got to interact with some of
[3:45:34] our citizens that need visiting,
[3:45:36] need food. Um, and I also
[3:45:37] learned about some really great
[3:45:39] information from the manager of
[3:45:40] the Pitt County Council on
[3:45:43] Aging, um, told me about the
[3:45:44] services that they offer that
[3:45:45] the people that they serve
[3:45:46] their average income is about,
[3:45:50] I think you said $9700 a year,
[3:45:52] a year, um, uh, poverty level,
[3:45:54] I think he said it was 120 to
[3:45:56] $13,000 a year, so well below
[3:45:59] the poverty level. Um, these
[3:45:59] are individuals that can
[3:46:00] t get
[3:46:01] out of their homes, they can
[3:46:01] t
[3:46:03] drive, they MAY be too sick to
[3:46:04] do those things or too old to
[3:46:06] do those things, so they need.
[3:46:07] Not just the nutrition, but
[3:46:09] they need the visit, the smile,
[3:46:10] the hey, how are you doing
[3:46:11] today? Are you ok? Anything
[3:46:13] else I can get for you? Have a
[3:46:14] great day. Uh, I talked to one
[3:46:15] woman who was like nervous
[3:46:16] about going to the grocery
[3:46:17] store. She hadn
[3:46:18] t been in the
[3:46:19] grocery store in 2 years. She
[3:46:19] was thinking about going that
[3:46:22] day. I was like, you can do it,
[3:46:25] go to the grocery store. Um, so
[3:46:27] just as interactions I had with
[3:46:28] them were so pleasant for me,
[3:46:30] and I know that it really
[3:46:32] brightened their day, um, and
[3:46:33] they really need support over
[3:46:34] at the Pitt County Council on
[3:46:36] Aging. Um, they serve about 400
[3:46:38] people a day, and they have
[3:46:39] about 100 people on their
[3:46:40] waiting list. Um, but they
[3:46:41] don
[3:46:43] t just need money, they
[3:46:44] need money and volunteers, uh,
[3:46:45] because they need the, the
[3:46:46] money to pay for the food, the,
[3:46:47] the stuff to deliver the food,
[3:46:49] but they also need people to
[3:46:51] come and help deliver it. Um,
[3:46:53] So please consider making a a
[3:46:54] monetary donation, uh, making a
[3:46:56] contribution of your time and
[3:46:57] energy, uh, get over there and
[3:46:58] help out. Like I said, it took
[3:46:59] an hour. It was really
[3:47:01] wonderful, pleasant thing to do,
[3:47:03] and I hope all, uh, take
[3:47:04] advantage of that opportunity,
[3:47:06] uh, and help out our community
[3:47:07] and really important impactful
[3:47:08] way. So thank you, Mayor. Thank
[3:47:12] you. Council member Robinson. I
[3:47:14] want to echo what counts from
[3:47:14] Black said and COUNCILMAN
[3:47:18] Willis. The mega site is a game
[3:47:18] changer for the north side of
[3:47:20] the river. It, it
[3:47:20] s going to be
[3:47:21] wonderful. It
[3:47:21] s down the road,
[3:47:24] obviously, but. I believe the
[3:47:26] gentleman said it was
[3:47:26] definitely his favorite site
[3:47:29] and I kind of read that as in
[3:47:30] into the mix and it was
[3:47:31] probably the number one site in
[3:47:33] the state. But it
[3:47:33] s a game
[3:47:34] changer for the north side of
[3:47:36] the river all the way out, in
[3:47:36] my opinion, it
[3:47:38] ll ripple out to
[3:47:40] Bethel and beyond and bring
[3:47:41] everything to the north side of
[3:47:43] the river has really been
[3:47:43] looking for because again, if
[3:47:45] we look at the development of
[3:47:47] East, South, North, and west.
[3:47:48] Um, north side river really
[3:47:51] needs some attention. This
[3:47:52] megasitis, I really think the
[3:47:53] grand slam home run that is
[3:47:55] gonna need, so I hope we
[3:47:57] continue to pursue that and,
[3:47:58] and aggressively, it certainly
[3:47:59] will happen in the next couple
[3:48:00] of years in terms of
[3:48:01] development, but looking at it
[3:48:03] down the road and know that we
[3:48:04] were beginning to get the
[3:48:05] genesis of that program, it
[3:48:06] s
[3:48:07] going to truly be a game
[3:48:08] changer and if you don
[3:48:08] t know
[3:48:09] much about it, please get
[3:48:11] involved. As the city and. Let
[3:48:12] them show you the slides and
[3:48:13] the information that talk about
[3:48:14] the mega site and actually
[3:48:15] right out there. It
[3:48:15] s, it
[3:48:15] s,
[3:48:16] it
[3:48:17] s gonna be a showpiece and a,
[3:48:19] and a true game changer. Uh,
[3:48:23] number 2, On JANUARY 24th to
[3:48:24] JANUARY the 26th, the beast of
[3:48:26] the east was scheduled to come
[3:48:28] here and bring in. Uh, 6
[3:48:32] different states. Almost 1800
[3:48:33] players with about 3000 parents.
[3:48:36] Uh, last year when they came,
[3:48:39] they brought in almost $900,000
[3:48:40] into our community over a
[3:48:41] three-day tournament.
[3:48:45] Unfortunately, Had to send back
[3:48:46] $55,000 of the, of the
[3:48:49] tournament money. Because the
[3:48:51] fields were covered by snow.
[3:48:54] Why do I bring that up? My
[3:48:55] favorite topic, as you well
[3:48:57] know, is a sports complex. Had
[3:49:00] we had Artificial fields and a
[3:49:02] sports complex. Not only could
[3:49:03] they have had 110 teams, they
[3:49:04] probably would have had well
[3:49:06] over 200. Those of you watching
[3:49:07] and those out in the audience,
[3:49:08] the beast of the East and the
[3:49:09] soccer tournament that
[3:49:09] s been
[3:49:12] going on for over, I think 20
[3:49:12] years that involves youth from
[3:49:14] all over our county. They have
[3:49:16] built it up to 110 teams, but
[3:49:16] that
[3:49:17] s kind of the limit
[3:49:17] because they can
[3:49:19] t get any more
[3:49:21] fields and so it was hard
[3:49:23] pressed to send back that
[3:49:24] $55,000 but more importantly,
[3:49:25] it was hard pressed not to see
[3:49:28] almost 5000 players and their
[3:49:30] family members, that
[3:49:30] s not
[3:49:31] including other people that
[3:49:33] might come in and watch this
[3:49:33] tournament that were turned
[3:49:34] away because of our weather,
[3:49:36] and I get it, snow turns away a
[3:49:39] lot of people, but have we had
[3:49:40] artificial turf that that would
[3:49:41] have been probably over 200
[3:49:42] teams and probably over a
[3:49:44] million dollars in our economy
[3:49:45] over 3 days. So that
[3:49:45] s why I
[3:49:46] pushed that out there. They
[3:49:48] reached out to me and I said,
[3:49:49] please share the numbers and
[3:49:51] again, came from North Carolina,
[3:49:52] would have come to North
[3:49:52] Carolina, Virginia, South
[3:49:54] Carolina, Georgia, West
[3:49:55] Virginia, and New Jersey that
[3:49:59] far away to come play soccer.
[3:50:00] Next, my mother
[3:50:01] s birthday was
[3:50:03] MARCH 11th. She would have been
[3:50:04] 97 years old, which is a
[3:50:05] historical day. I
[3:50:06] ll always
[3:50:07] remember it, but This is
[3:50:09] something I really want to brag
[3:50:10] about. I know Mayor, you
[3:50:10] re
[3:50:14] gonna like this. On MARCH 11th,
[3:50:16] Parker Bird became the first
[3:50:17] collegiate athlete to get an
[3:50:19] rbi run batted in as an amputee.
[3:50:22] What an amazing compliment,
[3:50:25] that young man. About 2 years
[3:50:26] ago now was, I mean, he was
[3:50:28] highly recruited, one of the
[3:50:29] best in the country in a
[3:50:30] boating accident, lost his leg
[3:50:33] below his knee. A lot of people
[3:50:35] would consider him dumb. Parker
[3:50:35] said, no, I
[3:50:36] m not done. I
[3:50:36] m
[3:50:38] just beginning. And so his goal
[3:50:41] was to get back and play
[3:50:41] collegiate baseball as an
[3:50:44] amputee. He batted once. And
[3:50:46] that was a record. But on MARCH
[3:50:50] 11th, he took the bat. A and as
[3:50:51] a result a run was batted in,
[3:50:53] and he was the first in
[3:50:54] collegiate career. This young
[3:50:56] man has a testament to you can
[3:50:58] still do it no matter what if
[3:50:59] you have enough drive. So
[3:51:00] Parker, if you
[3:51:01] re watching my
[3:51:02] friend, congratulations to you
[3:51:04] and your family. You keep that
[3:51:06] spirit up because he is a, a
[3:51:08] message to many people who have
[3:51:10] disabilities that anything is
[3:51:12] possible if you want it bad
[3:51:13] enough. So again,
[3:51:15] congratulations to Parker.
[3:51:16] Congratulations finally to our
[3:51:17] two employees who retired.
[3:51:19] Thank you for your service. And
[3:51:21] also again, the testament to
[3:51:22] our EMTs for setting yet again
[3:51:23] another life. I don
[3:51:24] t think it
[3:51:26] was about this time last year.
[3:51:28] When the gentleman, uh, we
[3:51:29] recognized over in Wilson who
[3:51:30] saved a life over there if you
[3:51:34] recall. So this again is a
[3:51:35] testament to our EMTs and the
[3:51:37] quality of service they provide,
[3:51:39] because, but for that. Young
[3:51:40] person would not be here
[3:51:40] tonight, so that
[3:51:41] s a testament
[3:51:42] to GOD
[3:51:43] s will and also good
[3:51:44] medical service. So with that
[3:51:46] mayor, I say one more thing, I
[3:51:47] appreciate everybody. Coming
[3:51:49] out and hearing your voices. I
[3:51:51] MAY not always agree with what
[3:51:53] everybody says and how you and
[3:51:54] I know that and I say that
[3:51:56] because, you know, but I, I
[3:51:57] respect their right to come out
[3:51:59] and, and tell us your opinions
[3:51:59] because that
[3:52:00] s what we
[3:52:00] re
[3:52:03] supposed to hear, so please
[3:52:03] don
[3:52:04] t ever think that any of us
[3:52:04] out here don
[3:52:05] t think you should
[3:52:06] come down. I encourage people
[3:52:08] to come down, let your voices
[3:52:10] be heard by us, not only
[3:52:12] presently online and those
[3:52:14] watching on tv, email us, uh,
[3:52:15] because that
[3:52:15] s extremely
[3:52:16] important for us, particularly
[3:52:17] in very difficult situation.
[3:52:19] And so I hope all of you
[3:52:20] understand that, but please
[3:52:21] continue to come out and
[3:52:22] whether we think you think we
[3:52:23] agree with your opinion or not
[3:52:24] or individually agree with you
[3:52:25] or not, please don
[3:52:26] t let that
[3:52:27] discourage you from reaching
[3:52:29] out to us on other topics
[3:52:30] because this is one issue that
[3:52:32] lots of others to come down the
[3:52:34] road to my council members,
[3:52:34] thank y
[3:52:36] all for weighing such a
[3:52:36] heavy issue because this is
[3:52:38] weight heavy on all of us. I
[3:52:40] know in our staff, so I respect
[3:52:42] all of your decisions, even if
[3:52:42] I don
[3:52:43] t necessarily agree with
[3:52:44] him. I respect every one of
[3:52:45] them and know we, we
[3:52:45] ve got to
[3:52:47] move forward and keep moving to
[3:52:50] keep our city. A lot Growing
[3:52:52] Mayor, thank you. I appreciate
[3:52:55] you letting me comment. Ok.
[3:52:55] It
[3:52:55] s almost 10 o
[3:52:57] clock. Oh, you
[3:52:58] wait till it gets to me to say
[3:53:01] that, um. I got a lot to say.
[3:53:01] No, I
[3:53:02] m joking. Happy Woman
[3:53:02] s
[3:53:05] Month. Um, to all the women who
[3:53:07] have paved the way and who
[3:53:10] continue to do so, we will the
[3:53:11] city of Greenville. We
[3:53:11] ve had
[3:53:14] some videos on our website to
[3:53:15] celebrate women with businesses,
[3:53:16] and we
[3:53:18] ll also be having
[3:53:20] empower her, celebrating women
[3:53:25] in business. On MARCH 20th from
[3:53:28] 6 to 9 P.M. At Coastal fog.
[3:53:29] Come out let
[3:53:29] s celebrate the
[3:53:32] women in our lives, the women
[3:53:34] in small businesses and
[3:53:34] businesses that keep Greenville
[3:53:39] growing. And it is also social
[3:53:40] worker appreciation Month, so
[3:53:40] don
[3:53:41] t forget to thank a social
[3:53:43] worker or take her out for
[3:53:44] coffee, whichever one y
[3:53:44] all
[3:53:48] like to do, um, yeah. That
[3:53:51] works very well for me. Um, and
[3:53:54] I would also, I know. I told
[3:53:55] them the other day I stood in
[3:53:57] for you. And I said, you know,
[3:53:58] for the first time I
[3:53:58] m gonna
[3:53:59] say I
[3:54:00] m glad the mayor
[3:54:01] s not
[3:54:03] here because I had an
[3:54:04] opportunity to attend the
[3:54:05] service award ceremony for our
[3:54:07] staff. Thank you all for all
[3:54:10] the hard work that you do every
[3:54:12] single day. Um, it is
[3:54:14] appreciated and it is valued.
[3:54:17] And speaking of which, I know
[3:54:19] we all know that our chief Ted
[3:54:21] Sas is retiring soon. He
[3:54:21] doesn
[3:54:22] t want to go y
[3:54:23] all, but
[3:54:23] he
[3:54:23] s he
[3:54:26] s retiring, um. And I
[3:54:27] want to publicly thank you for
[3:54:29] the work that you have done. We,
[3:54:31] I know we have some
[3:54:32] appreciations coming forth and
[3:54:34] things like that, but I just
[3:54:36] want to publicly thank you for
[3:54:37] all the long hours and
[3:54:39] dedication that you have put
[3:54:41] into being the chief of police.
[3:54:41] You
[3:54:45] re here. Thank you, Mayor.
[3:54:46] I know he don
[3:54:49] t wear a uniform
[3:54:49] no more now I
[3:54:50] ll be quick. All
[3:54:54] I gotta say is I wanna
[3:54:55] congratulate um my daughter
[3:54:55] s
[3:54:57] travel ball team, um, who I
[3:54:57] m
[3:54:58] fortunate enough to, to be one
[3:55:01] of the coaches, um, last year
[3:55:03] at this time, we were we were
[3:55:04] terrible, um, I think the first
[3:55:06] tournament, I think we went 0
[3:55:10] and 3. And, um, this tournament,
[3:55:12] we went 4-0 and we won the gold
[3:55:14] bracket. We brought on the
[3:55:15] championship, so, uh, it
[3:55:15] s
[3:55:17] amazing what one year, uh,
[3:55:17] we
[3:55:18] ll do for a team, but I will
[3:55:19] say that I think it
[3:55:21] s. The, the
[3:55:23] whole idea and the concept of.
[3:55:25] How important it is to invest
[3:55:27] time and energy into young
[3:55:28] children and to get them to
[3:55:29] grow, um, in multiple different
[3:55:30] ways. It doesn
[3:55:30] t have to be
[3:55:31] through sports, it could be
[3:55:32] through education, it could be
[3:55:34] through anything, teaching them
[3:55:35] something to get them to grow,
[3:55:36] but it
[3:55:37] s incredibly gratifying
[3:55:39] as a an adult to be able to see
[3:55:40] those girls go out there and
[3:55:41] compete at a high level, and so
[3:55:43] I want to say congratulates,
[3:55:45] congratulations to them on
[3:55:46] their hard work. We
[3:55:46] ve got many
[3:55:48] tournaments, but I
[3:55:48] ll piggyback
[3:55:50] off of what council member
[3:55:52] Robinson said, I spent a lot of
[3:55:53] money up in Nashville, North
[3:55:55] Carolina. This last weekend, my
[3:55:56] wife wanted to go out and spend
[3:55:57] some money and when we went
[3:56:01] shopping. She finds a boutique
[3:56:02] anywhere in this world and we
[3:56:03] spent a bunch of money at the
[3:56:06] boutique. We spent money at
[3:56:08] restaurants and it was not in
[3:56:09] Greenville or Pitt County, and
[3:56:10] I think that it
[3:56:11] s important for
[3:56:13] us to understand how much
[3:56:14] commerce takes place, my next
[3:56:15] tournament, I think is in
[3:56:15] Kinston. I think we
[3:56:16] ve got one
[3:56:16] in Redo. We
[3:56:17] ve got one in Rocky
[3:56:19] Mount. But not here in
[3:56:21] Greenville, right? And I think
[3:56:22] that, uh, if you had a chance
[3:56:24] to ask all the different teams
[3:56:27] that were around, uh, that we
[3:56:28] play against if they want to go
[3:56:30] to Red Oak, no offense, Red Oak,
[3:56:31] um, or Greenville, I think they
[3:56:32] pick Greenville every single
[3:56:34] time, so, um, I think it
[3:56:34] s
[3:56:35] important for us to understand
[3:56:36] that there
[3:56:36] s a tremendous
[3:56:37] amount of commerce that goes
[3:56:40] along with that, so. With that,
[3:56:43] I need a motion to adjourn. Our
[3:56:44] motion by Council member
[3:56:45] Robinson, seconded by
[3:56:47] Councillor Blackburn. All those