How you doing? >> I'm good.
» Danny Danny called me that one day this week or I guess
maybe Friday or Saturday, I don't know. And he just showed up and I called him
back. And I called his voice and I'm like
Who is this? He said Danny. So I thought it was Danny and so he got so much going
on. He was calling me about a car to pick up.
» [laughter] >> And I think what was he calling you
about? >> A car somebody was selling a right-hand
drive mail truck. I don't know. I was like
I thought it was Danny. >> [laughter]
» Oh yeah, he'll be trying to call him at work. He'll call me.
» Yeah, I was really thinking it was Danny.
» [clears throat] >> Is that your Pepsi?
» Yeah. >> Is it really?
» Yeah, I'm thinking it was Yeah, cuz she's not going to be here. So I figured
I better get some extra space.
I went to the eye doctor today. I had my eyes done. I can't I can see y'all and I
can't see y'all now. >> That's probably a good thing.
» I need you ready?
I already you ready?
» Thank you for being here tonight. We'll call this meeting to order.
We do have a quorum present and we will start with invocation by council member
Natalie Cox. >> Good evening everyone.
Dear Lord, we thank you for this day. We thank you for the sunshine. We also
thank you for the rain, Lord. We thank you for all those that turned out today
that have a concern about the city, Lord. I ask that you Um, that we make
the right decision and what's pleasing to this town, Lord.
And I ask that you be with our children, our school teachers as everybody starts
back to school to tomorrow. In your name we pray. Amen.
» Amen. >> [clears throat]
» I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
» Okay.
Now is our time for public comment. I know we got a lot of people here that
may not come to council meetings all the time, so I just want to make sure that
everybody knows exactly how how these things go.
Um, you know, city council meetings are basically purpose is for council to
discuss and act on issues in a public setting. So we're this meeting is for us
to be talking with each other. Um, we do offer we're not required to offer time
for public comment, but we do cuz it's a courtesy to our citizens.
Um, our ordinance allows for a total of 20 minutes, but we going to let
everybody speak that signed up. Um,
most cities or a lot of cities allow only citizens who live inside the city
limits to speak, but we going to let everybody talk.
Um, everybody's got 2 minutes to make comments.
It's um, it's not a question and answer time, so be organized and be ready.
Please state your name clearly and when you begin. Miss Lewis, right there, wave
your hand. Miss Lewis will have a timer that will sound at the 2-minute mark.
Um, when when your 2 minutes are up, please
respect the citizens coming after you and on their time and stop when the
alarm sounds. If you have notes that you want to
have attached to anything, you can leave those with Ms. Lewis. So, Ms. Lewis, we
will ask you to call our citizens and we will
continue on. >> Ms. Jeanie Browning.
» Good evening. >> Good evening.
» Uh pleasure to see you again.
Um I am simply giving you a report about what I said last time.
Uh I was talking about the planning stages of some events in Clinton
and uh we had our annual third annual Art Clinton 2026 Festival.
Uh that entailed 119 works of art, 42 artists from 12 cities
on display in 17 Clinton businesses. We gave away $2,000 in cash awards given
to 13 exhibiting artists. We had 28 painters in the outdoor art
battles consisting of 11 adults and 17 children on the square.
And we also had five sales of artworks during the festival.
So, artists and visitors came to our city from Laurens, Greenwood, Whitmire,
Mount Holly, Honea Path, Lake Greenwood, Donalds, Union, Rock Hill, Spartanburg,
and Anderson. Uh
I want to invite you to our next event. You have this in your
papers already passed out. Uh you have the information for the
gallery on one side. On the reverse, there's an invitation.
Uh Uh you're invited to the Clinton Art Gallery's next themed
exhibit for the month of August. It is Let's Face It. It's a portrait exhibit
of faces, and over 20 artists have already
submitted work, and I have more coming this week.
We have both traditional artwork, realistic, and also abstract and
whimsical. The reception is August the 11th
at 6:30 p.m. at 113 North Broad Street, and you're all invited.
Uh thank you, Mr. Smith, for attending our last reception for Art Clinton. Your
presence was noted and appreciated. I appreciate your support, and uh
hope to see you soon. Thank you. >> Thank you.
» Miss Sarah Whitman.
» Hello. Um my name is Sarah Whitman, and I'm
going to be discussing uh Cambridge Farms development. So, I live at 23
Cambridge Road, which is the first house uh right on the corner when entering the
Mary Oaks neighborhood. Um and there is no doubt that this um developmental plan
will bring much more additional traffic, noise, and safety concerns to Highway
56, which will directly affect my house and my family. The SCDOT had previously
reviewed a traffic study and required right turn lanes at both proposed
entrances, and that an additional right of way may be needed.
If this development is passed, how does the city of Clinton plan to take the
SCDOT findings into consideration? Who will be funding the necessary
improvements? On May 8th, 2025, the Laurens County
senior planner wrote that two accesses for over 500 homes would be a traffic
nightmare inside and outside of the project.
The plan before the city today has the same two access points, but now includes
a commercial parcel, which would bring even more cars to the area. If traffic
and entrances were an issue then, the problem will only increase with this new
proposal. Has the city completed a new traffic study to include how a
commercial parcel will affect traffic? Motorists already go well beyond the
speed limit on Highway 56. Are there plans to reduce the speed limit coming
into this stretch of highway from both directions?
Or to add speed patrols to help ensure the safety of the families who already
live and drive this stretch of road daily?
Residents deserve to have these questions answered before any new zoning
is approved. The city deserves smart and responsible growth, and unfortunately, I
do not believe Cambridge Cambridge Farms fits the bill, which is why I
respectfully ask you to put safety first and vote no today. Thank you.
» Thank you. >> Mr. Ed Gooch.
» My name is Ed Gooch, [clears throat] and I come to talk to you in the name of
uh safety. I could make this really short and say
what she said. But uh
I want you council members to consider
driving down Broad Street from the north to the south.
And coming to that place at the uh southern end Broad Street where the road
diverges, and you've got Highway 72 on the right,
and you've got Highway 56 on the left. And then I want you to uh continue
imagining, if you will, going down 56. Nice four-lane,
well-developed, speed limit is uh 35, I believe.
And then you come down to the National Healthcare. I think you all know where
that is. And the road narrows, four lanes become
two lanes. Not only that, the speed limit rises
from 35 to 45. Now, I live in the neighborhood across
uh the road from 56 on the eastern side of 56, across from the area where
development is being proposed. So, um I um get to see a lot of the
folks that drive on 56. I get to deal with them. Some of them don't know what
uh 45 really means. I I think they read it a little bit higher than that.
I only ask you, please, to consider the impact of
um a development on the traffic that Highway 56 will bear
uh if the development occurs. And I ask you to consider that in your
deliberations. Thank you for listening to me.
» Thank you. >> Mr. Corey Cannon.
» [clears throat]
» Council, good evening. My name is Corey Cannon. My wife, Sue, and I reside at
207 Mixon Drive, about 30 seconds from the proposed subdivision.
I arrive before you tonight to discuss uh
the negative issues that will be caused by this subdivision.
The proposed zoning has five zoning categories.
An agricultural district, three residential districts,
and then a commercial district. If you think we need more commercial
district, please walk down the streets in
Clinton. We've got ample
space for commercial development there.
Trafficability. Yes, I believe that the plan supports
turn lanes in the Cambridge Farms uh southbound, but northbound don't
believe there's any plan uh to widen the road, provide for passing lanes
northbound.
Density. We have over 2,000 approved building
sites in the city of Clinton.
Do we really need any more? Emergency services.
If this subdivision materializes, we will need to add fire and police
protection. Stormwater management.
Bush River is inundated with flooding now.
When the subdivision is built and the property is denuded,
the runoff will be significant. Yes, it can be designed for 100-year flood,
but that doesn't mean there won't be a 500-year flood back-to-back.
I prefer that the property remain timber land and undisturbed, but that's not
within my purview. I just don't support this annexation
as it stands. You must make an informed decision, and
I'm sure you will.
Just think about this. If this subdivision was proposed in your
neighborhood, would you be in favor of the annexation?
I surely hope not. And in conclusion, I would request tonight, strongly
request recommend that you table this action for the following reasons.
Would you table till you have all the facts?
Secondly, until all council members can be present
and cast their vote. Added to litigation has been completed
between Lawrence County and the developer.
Thank you so much for your time. I do appreciate the process. Might not agree
with what's going on, but I appreciate the process. Thank you.
» Thank you. >> [clears throat and cough]
» Miss Betsy Washam.
Hello, I'm Betsy Washam. I live on Nottingham Nottingham Road.
And I address you tonight as elected governmental gatekeepers of Clinton.
Your job is to guard what comes into Clinton and protect the community from
harm. I quote from one of you sitting board
members from a recent publication. "We're seeing new housing developments
and some industrial expansion, but it's important that we grow in a way that
enhances employment opportunities and quality of life for all citizens. Simply
adding businesses or residences isn't enough. We need to make decisions today
that will set Clinton up for success, not just the next few years, but for
future generations." End quote. My question is, will Cambridge Farm
enhance quality of life or simply add residencies? Will Cambridge Farm
generate a or will it bring a generational
type of living or temporary stay? I have been surveying our community and
talking personally to residents. I have met, for example, five households
who have moved here in the last year to get away from the situation this
developer is trying to impose on Clinton. They came here because the
Clinton community is not like Greenville, Charleston, Beaufort, and
other cities that have unfettered residential expansion. These people all
seem to be solid folks who want to put down roots, stay in Clinton, and enhance
it. None of them live in houses or on small lots like this developer wants you
to agree to. Are we setting Clinton up for success?
That's the question tonight. Consider carefully
the impact, your legacy. It will be
This decision will impact at least a generation out whom each of you may long
be gone from. So, I thank you for your time, and I ask
that you also consider taking the
information and your experience from other housing projects that have gone on
in Clinton and applying that to this. Thank you.
» Thank you, ma'am.
» [clears throat] >> Mr. Tommy Pinson.
» Thank you. My name is Tommy Pinson. I live out in Mayeaux.
We have been My family's been here for 46 years now, moved up from Georgia.
When we came into town, there was no housing available,
but plenty of industry. Right around now,
we We very little industry. Our streets are empty almost with
empty uh buildings.
But we got plenty of houses. Any neighborhood you want to go into
is empty and has housing available. I ask you to take a good hard look at
what we need in the city of Clinton and in here in
Lowndes County as far as what is really good for the people here
in town. The idea of putting
450 houses into a neighborhood when there's already
plenty available just does not seem what we need at this
time. The last time I was here, we were
talking about if we made everything R1. Now all of a sudden we're talking about
R1, R2, R3, and commercial. Sooner or later we have to make a
decision. What is really needed for the city? Is it more housing
or is it something else where we can provide more for our residents?
Thank you. >> Thank you, sir.
» Mr. Michael Corley.
» Good evening. My name is Michael Corley. I'm a Clinton native, uh but also the
deputy director of the South Carolina Environmental Law Project, which is an
organization that among other things works statewide to ensure the lawful
functioning of land use decisions. The question I'll pose to you all
tonight is what does this project mean for the relationship between the city
and the county? And I ask that because, of course, this
is not the first time we've been presented with this project. It's been
before you previously. So, what happened?
Well, what happened is the developer made the conscious decision to stop
pursuing camp city approval a city process in favor of pursuing county
approval and a county process. That was his choice. Developer chose the county
approval process. And that gamble did not pay off.
Um this subdivision was unanimously denied by Lawrence County Planning
Commission. Do you believe that? Unanimously denied. Uh in my line of
work, I wish I saw that more often. Um do you know how many projects are
proceeding in the county right now? They're everywhere. All of those
proceeding with no problem. This one unanimously denied.
So what did the developer then do in response to that denial?
What he did was sue the county. Sue the county because he didn't agree with the
decision. And by doing that, chose to continue the county process. Chose to
continue pursuing the county approval by his own choice by filing this lawsuit.
That lawsuit, the one that he chose to file, is still pending. Whatever lawyer
talk you may hear tonight, whatever kind of obfuscation you may try to hear of
the basic facts, look up the docket number in the court of appeals. His case
that he chose to file about the county process is still pending. Which means
that the county process he chose to pursue is ongoing.
So in light of those things, I have to wonder what are we doing here
in the room tonight? Is the city really willing to step in
and save this developer from the choices he made to pursue the county process at
the cost of treading all over the county's authority?
There's already an answer to that question though, and you have to look no
further than the comprehensive plan that you all just issued. Just went out to
the public. Hasn't even had a chance to be effective yet. And that comprehensive
plan is supposed to guide the future Clinton, which I am very excited about.
But if it's going to guide the future Clinton, we can't ignore it before it
even has a chance to take action, which is what is called for tonight. Because
what that comprehensive plan says specifically in relation to annexation,
okay? Quote, "Coordination with Lawrence County will be critical in managing
growth along the city's fringe. Coordination with Lawrence County along
the fringe. It also says
the comprehensive plan urges a collaborative approach to development.
Collaborative approach. It It urges a It says that county coordination is
essential. Does the action requested of you today reflect, quote, coordination
with the county? Does the action requested of you today reflect a
collaborative approach with the county? Clearly it doesn't because if you
advance the annexation, you're invalidating the county process, the
county approval, that the developer himself chose to pursue.
» Thank you, Mr. Corley. >> Respect the county, respect the comp
plan, defer to section. >> Thank you.
» [clears throat] >> Ms. Teresa Corley.
» I'm not as smart as the last Corley, I'll wait to tell you.
» [laughter] >> I live in the neighborhood across
Highway 56 from the proposed development. I'm very opposed to the
development. I realize that Clinton needs to grow, but realistically, is
this the right way to go? I've been to every meeting concerning
the proposed development. At every meeting, we've heard about
their traffic study and how few cars come down Highway 56 in a day.
I do not know who or when this study was done. I've lived there 42-plus years and
I have never seen a traffic study being conducted. I've also talked to some
neighbors and nobody else has seen one happen, either.
Today, I decided to do my own traffic study.
I sat in a parking lot on Highway 56 for 1 hour, sweating it up, from 12:16 to
1:15 p.m. 444 cars and 37 18-wheelers, a lot of them were from Georgia, passed
by. I have a tally sheet right here that
I'll gladly share with you. That is a far cry from the count that
they have given you. I could tell you that I am thin, young, and beautiful,
but we all know it ain't so.
Do a traffic study yourself. Don't do it in the middle of the night like they
must have done. >> [clears throat]
» We want and need growth, but please be considerate of the lifelong residents of
this community. I want Clinton to be a place that I tell people I'm from and
say it with pride. I always have. Please do what you know is right.
Thank you. >> Thank you.
» Mr. Nick Nichols.
» I want to give you all a copy of the 2019
» Just give that to give that to Miss Miss Lewis and we'll she'll pass it out to
us. >> There we go.
There's plenty of them. Oh.
Which I think is still in effect. Um
It states in there on wetlands on page uh 21 and 22
that uh
before any activity takes place on proper property, either the maps or
personnel from the Corps of Engineers should be consulted.
Because of the position of the city along ridges between two drainage
basins, the only area with flood potential are
along Bush River and Shell Creek.
Controlling this development is
the potential dangerous areas would benefit the citizens of Clinton.
I think yesterday we had a little over 2 in of rain.
And the citizens of Clinton felt
development >> [clears throat]
» with Shell Creek Manor. I think uh
Calvert Avenue got flooded a little bit yesterday.
Well, I know it did. We we were out riding after the storm.
So, and there's no rooftops down there yet.
But, when there's rooftops down there, and you put 500 plus rooftops
on Bush River, and Shell Creek dumps into Bush River,
then it's going to be a problem. So,
before you vote yes,
please have this study. Call these folks.
And get it done. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Miss Charlotte Strickland.
» I'm Charlotte Strickland. I'm a native Clintonian, and after much research done
by many citizens, I'd like to share some alarming inaccuracies that developer
Patrick McNair made at the Planning Commission meeting last month.
He walked the commission through a Lexington neighborhood he presented as
his own work. A partner and I built this neighborhood, and this is what we did
citing it as the model for Cambridge Commons.
Pin location on Long Ridge Drive is a Stanley Martin Homes community in
Lexington, which Veranda has no affiliation with.
According to the Stanley Martin Homes website, they're the developers for
Longview subdivision, which Patrick McNair claims is his own.
Patrick and his partner once worked for Stanley Martin Homes before starting
Veranda. According to the Veranda website, Veranda Homes was founded in
2024, and this is confirmed by the South Carolina Patent Office.
Veranda's own website history page makes no claim of founding in 1993 as he
stated at the last meeting. They describe partnering with local
developers. I suspect that this is what we might get
here. As of 2 years ago, they were operating
in the red and when he was questioned about that, he skirted around the issue
saying that all companies are in the red their first year.
But he had previously said they've been in operation since 1993.
He went on and on about this being his development. Longview that he claimed
this this project was begun in 2015 by Essex Home and was purchased by Stanley
Martin Homes in 2020. Patrick Minyard and his partner once worked for Essex
Homes. There's no mention of Patrick in Longview's recorded chain
of title. I've heard a planning commission member
and a and a council member say that people in these surrounding
neighborhoods on 56 don't live in the city limits and they don't matter.
I don't mean any disrespect to anybody, but I want to remind y'all there's not
one department head that works for this city
that lives in the city limits. That's including our city manager.
Many of them live out of town or even out of the county.
That's who's running our city. Of course these citizens matter. These
are Clintonians, too. They're our friends, neighbors, and co-workers. Many
have lived in this area for 50 or 60 years.
They go to church here, they send their kids to school here, they shop here.
They aren't commuters who will be living in this development. They will not be
leaving Clinton to go to work and then come back home.
The Marriott residents buy their power and water from the city and pay 1 and
1/2 times the water that we pay. Our comprehensive plan states that
neighborhoods should always reflect established development patterns within
the city. States that you are to prevent
overcrowding and avoid undue concentration of population and
congestion. This project goes against everything in
the comprehensive [clears throat] plan. I urge you to vote no, prevent
annexation, and against this Veranda project. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Ms. Nancy Garrison.
» [clears throat]
[snorts]
» Good evening. My name is Nancy Garrison and I'm here because of experienced
first hand what can happen when storm water is not adequately managed during
the construction of a large development. Several years ago a subdivision started
the process of being built beside my property. Once the land was cleared and
the vegetation removed, it didn't take major storm. It was modest rainfall, and
sometimes only an inch or two, to send muddy storm water sediment onto our
property. South Carolina DHEC, now the Department of Environmental Services,
cited that project twice for sediment entering the waters of the state.
My family ultimately filed a lawsuit and we prevailed, but I can assure you that
no lawsuit ever makes up for months of damage to your property.
Prevention is far better than trying to repair the damage afterward. The reason
I share that experience is because the same engineering firm that designed that
project is involved in the proposed Kinsley development. I am not here to
say history will repeat itself, but I'm here to say that my experience gives me
every reason to ask this council to carefully examine the storm water design
and downstream impacts before moving forward.
We also know storm water is becoming a growing regional concern. The state of
South Carolina has recognized that rapid development population growth have
increased storm water runoff to the point of existing culverts in the
northern part of Laurens County are being overwhelmed, requiring major
public investment to replace them. They should remind us that growth has
consequences when our infrastructure can't keep up with the pace. This
project drains toward Shell Creek and ultimately Bush River. Those waterways
deserve every protection we can give them. I respectfully ask you to ensure
that storm water design, erosion and sediment controls, downstream impact
analysis, and all environmental reviews are complete before approving
annexation. My experience has taught me one lesson. Once the damage is done, it
is too late to wish more questions had been asked beforehand. Thank you.
» Thank you. >> [cough and clears throat]
» Claire Young? >> Claire Young?
» Hey there. Um my name's Claire Young. I live on Young Road. I just relocated
back here from Charleston, South Carolina. And um I don't think too much
explanation needs to be told as to why I relocated back here from Charleston
because they have
this problem a hundredfold. Um I just, you know, we I could echo everything
that everybody else has said about traffic, about storm water, about where
are all these children? 500 new homes, what are they going to go to Clinton
High School? Are we going to increase the amount of teachers we have?
I just want everybody to think about the quality of life. Um
I think our quality of life in Clinton has been
wonderful. My family's owned a farm here since 1779.
And I would really love for my family in the future to enjoy the same
rural life and beauty of this city that I have enjoyed growing up and and so
glad and proud to return to. So, I just want you to consider the quality of life
for everybody and I appreciate you. I would encourage you to vote no on the
Cambridge as well. Thank you. >> Thank you.
» Woody Robinson
» [clears throat] >> Hello. I am Woody Robinson. I live in
Mary Oaks and my husband Shep is speaking after me. Um
before Shep discusses some financial projections, he wanted me to share a few
things about Veranda. During the past few weeks, Shep has
personally visited all of Veranda's current projects in Greenville,
Columbia, Fountain Inn, and Grey Hawk market areas.
The Veranda projects are typically small, 20 to 50 units/houses,
and do not compare at all to what would be required at Cambridge Farms.
Veranda has squeezed in as many houses/townhouses
as they can in their existing developments.
Most of Veranda's developments are infill developments and are not large
residential suburban neighborhoods. Foxbank in Grey Court is a large
residential development. It's important to note that Veranda is purchasing
roughly 30 of the finished lots with plans to build
houses on the lots. Veranda did not work on the horizontal lot development.
At these projects, Veranda has not done any extensive horizontal development
similar to what would be required at Cambridge Farms.
Nothing indicates that they have the expertise to successfully manage this
type of project, which includes 490 home sites,
seven retention ponds, wetlands mitigation, and roughly 2 miles of road
construction over hilly, rocky terrain. Carl Haslinger, the CEO of Veranda,
seems to be the principal who may have more experience with horizontal land
development versus any Veranda employee. Given the fact that Cambridge Farms is
significantly larger than any other Veranda project, and that it would
require substantial capital to fund, we would have expected Karl to be actively
involved. However, Hassinger has not participated
in any of the other planning commission, city council, or county council public
meetings. Where is Karl? How involved will he be in this project?
Who Everanda has the expertise to execute a major project like Cambridge
Farms? Thank you to each one of you for your
service. I respectfully ask for your vote no tonight. I know the city needs
the impact fees, but as Shep will show next, this project will not produce the
fees it promises. Please consider shifting the focus to bringing
businesses and industries to Clanton to offer jobs to our current residents and
those coming to the 22 homes already committed. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Shep Robinson.
» Uh thank you, Woody.
It has been mentioned frequently during this process that the math does not add
up. In recent weeks, I've analyzed the math
based on the available public information and on reasonable
supportable assumptions. I generated two profit loss scenarios.
My assumptions include the following. Land development costs of $42 million
or $86,000 a lot. >> [clears throat]
» These costs are based on the developers stated infrastructure costs at the plan
planning commission >> [clears throat]
» uh meeting of $30 million plus $2.5 million in estimated land acquisition
cost, a $3 million contingency, $6 million in interest carry, and $500,000
for various fees. The home building costs are based on
published data containing the average building costs per square foot for a
standard mid-range home located in South Carolina in 2026.
Scenario number one uses the developers estimated selling prices as stated at
the PC meeting, which were 300,000 for the R3 homes, 350
for the R2 homes, and 450 for the R1 homes.
Scenario two uses selling prices based on sales comp and market market data in
Clinton. There are no sales comps in Clinton
which support the developers estimates. The prices used in this scenario are 245
for the R3 homes, 260,000 for the R2, and 350 for the R1.
The results of this analysis are staggering. Under scenario number one,
which uses the these developers estimated selling costs, the projected
loss is 37.9 million dollars. Under scenario two, which uses the more
conservative selling prices, the projected loss is 75.4 million dollars.
Obviously, the math really does not add up. This project does not make economic
sense. Under both of these scenarios, the city
of Clinton would suffer financially, and the Clinton community would likely be
forced to look at a failed, uncompleted project for many years.
I've left copies of my analysis right here for everybody. If anybody wants a
copy of my Excel spreadsheet, let me know.
Thank you all for your service, and respectfully ask you to vote no
tonight. >> Thank you.
» Thank you.
» [clears throat] >> Ashley Martin.
» Hello, my name is Ashley Martin, and I live at 106 Shell Creek Court. I also
own the building at 107 East Main Street of Clinton.
Um first I'd like to talk about this project in the sense of it's bounced
back and forth from the city to the county. And like Ms. Poorly, I've been
at almost every meeting. What you said last year when you denied
this project was that it had to be R1 only. That is not the project being
presented today. The neighborhood around this, including
the neighborhood that I live in, has large lots and I know everyone doesn't
want a large lot. And it has traditionally built homes.
They are spread out. That is not what this community that they plan to build
is. 500 homes in one spot is not great.
That's plopping another small town on the outskirts of ours.
Recently, I've heard multiple people say, "We need affordable housing."
And exactly what Shep just said, our median income household income in
Clinton is $44,522.
Who will be purchasing that as an affordable home if that is what we need?
Recently, I listened to Jeff Siegler and sat in a Zoom meeting. He is the Revive
Live or Die person. I want to read what he recently posted.
He said, "We know what people want, so why don't they get it?
Three reasons. One, I think it's the nail on the head.
Low standards. Communities say yes to bad projects
because they're afraid nothing better will come along.
So, they keep accepting less and that's why things keep getting
worse. Two, no actions. Plans and studies are
worthless without swift implementation. Just as Michael Corley said, with our
new plan. No vision.
Cities aren't outcome oriented. They're process driven. Every department
does the its own thing with no overarching vision of what the
place should actually become. Fix these three things and the rest will
fall in place. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Brenda Stewart.
Thank you. I'm a member um a 35-year resident of Mary Oaks and I
know many of you. Appreciate your service.
The developer keeps telling you and everyone else that the lots need R1
size. Size was never the issue with this. R1 requires 70 ft of frontage.
He's asking for RS2 and RS3 so he can build on 50. What 50 lots gets him
is a lot smaller lot, um but not similar to the ones in the surrounding property.
Going from 70 ft to 50 puts about 29% more houses on every foot of road and
pipe he has to build. His cost goes down. Nothing gets better for the
neighborhood. In 2015 your own planning commission
said no and please come back to us with R1. Now he's back with R1, RS2, RS3,
commercial, and ag. That's not the same.
Also, through a FOIA request, I have reviewed the planning commission
training records. Three of of seven members have no proof of the 6-hour
requirement and orientation training required by
state law in order to sit. No certificate, no transcript. All three of
their forms carry signature dates that are not have not yet occurred. October
26th, November 26th, and one was even signed hand signed August 11th, 2028. Go
figure. Three of your seven commissioners appear
to be out of compliance with the requirements, but they're voting on
things as important as this. That seems really wrong.
At the July 14th after the [laughter] vote was taken, oh, I'm sorry, and the
July 14th vote was taken without an answer to an important question.
One of the commissioners asked that that the applicant about a development in
Graycourt. You heard about it recently or earlier.
That damaged a neighbor's property. Um, when he was asked if that was his
property, he said no, but that was an error of omission because standing next
to him was a representative from Bluewater Civil Engineering, and they
were on that project, and that's what the commissioner meant. I know because I
met with him the day before. Um, so I wrote a note and I gave it to
the city planner, and I asked him to please let this be a point of
clarification before the vote. I went up again and asked him to please do that
before the vote. Um, it was not provided to him them until after adjournment. I
wonder why. Um,
lastly, I am also submitting tonight to the clerk a petition against this
development signed by nearly 500 people, all of which are city of Clinton utility
customers. Some of us outside the city limits, we actually get to pay more.
I saw my bill this week, trust me. Um,
this is an important decision and not one you should make lightly. There are
loopholes all day long. They're going to try and plug some of those tonight, but
there are genuine answers you need to get, and I implore you to please look at
your own planning documents and vote no tonight. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» I believe this is uh, Betsy McKay. >> McKinney.
» McKinney.
» Thank you for having this hearing. I appreciate it.
There've been many concerns, valid concerns expressed, and I won't
reiterate on those. I'm just mentioning this from a common
sense standpoint. The outline plan, which is all we've had
to go on, simply does not
add to our neighborhoods the right housing plan.
There's simply too many houses planned on too small of acreage, and that simply
will not work. There's nothing more sad
than a a failed shopping center or failed project.
And I encourage you to consider the validity of what's being proposed and to
use your wisdom to make the right decision. Thank you.
» Thank you, ma'am.
» That's all, sir. >> Thank you.
Thank you. That concludes all of our folks that have signed up. I appreciate
everybody's comments and uh certainly your
» [clears throat] >> your passion and your
thoughts and the research that's been done.
Okay, next on the agenda is the approval of minutes from the July 6th,
2026 council meeting. And um we will
entertain a motion to approve those minutes, that's the will of this group.
» So moved. >> Have a mo- motion from Mr. Smith, second
from Mr. Kirkendall. Um any questions or comments? Any
corrections, additions, deletions?
Not all in favor, please say I. >> I.
» All opposed, no. And [clears throat] the minutes are
approved. Okay, we've got two proclamations.
Um and one is we're going to proclaim August as
Clinton goes back to school month in the city of Clinton.
And I'm very thankful for this cuz I got three grandchildren that have been in my
house all summer. So I said it's a it's a wonderful day
tomorrow. Um
also August as connecting cops to communities month in the city of
Clinton. And um I'll entertain a motion to make
these proclamations if that's the will of this group.
» So moved. >> Motion from Mr. Cook, second from Ms.
Coxwell. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor please say I.
All opposed [cough and clears throat] no, and we are so proclaimed.
Okay, Mr. Medders. >> Thank you, sir. Good evening.
Uh the next item on the agenda is for council to consider first reading of an
ordinance to amend the city of Clinton zoning ordinance uh single family
residence as permitted use in the RM8 zoning district.
Um Mr. Blinder discovered um
recently that we have two properties two subdivisions Autumn Woods and Copeland
Estates that it was originally called. I think it's known as Blossom Meadows now.
Um this is up behind the old Har- Blossom Meadows is up behind the old
Hardee's uh restaurant on Highway 76. And those were
uh permitted for family single family homes in the RH
um MH RMH uh zoning and they were assumed that uh
possibly that the single family homes were allowed in there with mobile homes.
That's what RMH is, the mobile home zoning.
So, uh Mr. Lindler has put together uh
information to take this RMH zoning and add the single
family to it since that's what is actually there now and uh
he is here if you [snorts] have any questions uh
pertaining to this. >> Okay, thank you. Let's get a motion so
we can put it on the floor for discussion.
Have a motion from Ms. Walsh. Is there a second from Mr. Kirkendall? Um okay.
Questions or comments? >> You all feel
» So, I'm a little confused. Now, I know now that you
described them when they were there's actually mobile homes in those
areas? Is that what I'm hearing?
» Right. Originally, Copeland Estates was set up for mobile homes and that's what
went there originally. >> And that What was the date of that?
» Uh Mr. Kirkendall, that was probably back
in 2000s in that neighborhood.
» Okay. >> There's two local gentlemen started that
up there next to Copeland Plaza. >> So,
So, they're in the They're in the city limits.
» They are in the city limits. And they were zoned for mobile homes.
» So, since we changed our ordinance ordinance of no more mobile homes in the
city and I forget when we did that. >> That
» These would have been grandfathered in? >> Yes, sir.
» Okay. >> Yes, sir.
And after that time, uh there were another couple developers came in and
wanted to build single family homes there, which that's their single family
homes there now. And hence the name was changed to
Blossom Meadows. So, we want to clarify and correct the
RMH in those areas to allow single family
homes in the corresponds with the RMH plus the
single-family homes in those two areas now.
» That doesn't open us up for any more mobile home stands, what I'm trying to
clarify. >> Well, it with it being zoned that, yes,
you can put another mobile home there. >> Mhm.
» But it's the mobile homes are already in the
area. There's not a lot left in Blossom Meadows or Cochran Estates, but with it
being zoned that way and having single-family there also,
that's the most
the best way to handle this situation. >> Were you asking if that changes?
» Yes. >> It That It doesn't change that, does it?
Like they're they're currently at You're currently allowed to put mobile homes
there. >> and it's still zoned and you correct me
if I'm wrong. They are. That
that the RMH, the mobile homes, will be allowed also with single-family housing.
» But But you're currently allowed to do that under the current zoning.
» Yes, sir. >> Okay.
» I'm I'm totally confused. >> [laughter]
» I thought our ordinance was that and I forget when we passed this ordinance,
but it's been during my seat on council that we would not in the city limits
allow another home mobile home to be put in city Clinton city limits.
If there were ones already in place, that was okay, but no more additions.
» That's not what this ordinance before you tonight has anything really to do
with. >> Okay.
» Specifically, what this ordinance is saying is that you currently in your RMH
zone, you allow for duplexes. You allow for multi-family residential.
You allow for civic buildings and you allow for mobile and manufactured homes.
It doesn't say anything about residential single family.
In the intent of the of the RMH zone, it says it is intended to accommodate
manufactured housing development in concert with conventional dwellings.
So, your intent of the or- of the district
is to allow for single family and manufactured homes.
When you go into the details of the of the section, it doesn't allow for single
family homes. So, this would allow for single family homes in addition to the
existing uses in that zone as we have allowed apparently in the past.
So, this is clarifying the situation. >> So, you're saying as it's written right
now, a single family home is not supposed to be there.
» We cannot permit, by ordinance, a single family home on a property that's zoned
RMH. >> And that's what that's zoned as right
now. >> Correct. That would allow us to allow
for a single family >> know how many single family homes are
there now? >> There are a number in those two areas
that Mr. Maddox >> So, how did that take place? I mean,
where are we >> I don't know if the ordinance has been
changed at a later time after permitting or if those have been permitted in
error. I don't I can't determine that. >> So, there's probably as many single
family homes as trailers there at this time.
» But if you make this change, then all of those
technically non-conforming single family homes will become conforming.
» My question is, will they be
R1s, R2s, R3s inside the mobile home zone?
What will they be? >> They would be RMH. So, it'd be the
standards that are allowed under the RMH.
» So, a single family home can be built and designated as an RMH?
» If we vote >> is already designated
» I understand that, but I'm saying future homes. We can't do anything about the
ones there now, but we have ordinances on the books now and zoning. So, what if
another single-family home is to be built in there, what will it follow as
far as a single-family home? Will it not have any restrictions at all?
» No, you already have restrictions in there that identify your minimum lot
sizes, your minimum lot widths, setbacks, height of the structure, all
that. >> But, that's for mobile homes.
» It's for all of all types of uses. >> [snorts]
» Civic uses, um duplexes,
all that. >> So, are we contradicting ourselves when
we talk about R1 and R2 and R3 and R2S and R3S?
» No, sir. This is just a an additional zone that
you have available to you.
» But, we're building single-family resident homes in there.
» There have been residential single-family homes in these two areas.
» It says the minimum lot size is 5,000 in that.
» Okay. >> Currently.
» So, it would be and it says one housing unit per lot permitted. And so, that has
to follow the lot permit. >> Correct. One per lot.
The only thing we're adding is the allowance for a single-family home to be
permitted. >> Is it Am I hearing this correctly? If If
y'all are concerned about mobile homes, this
this gives each lot in there a chance to be a home instead of a mobile home.
» Correct. >> And if we if we vote no on it,
technically, they should only put mobile homes in MH.
» Or a duplex. >> Or
» Or a multi-family. >> Right.
» building. >> Correct.
» Any other questions? >> [laughter]
[clears throat] >> Has everybody had a questions answered?
» No. >> Okay.
» Keep going. We're okay. We're okay, guys.
» Well, I just I I I clearly understand that
sometime back we had a ordinance for the city of
Clinton that no more additional mobile homes would be be allowed
because of the danger, the fire, everything that's associated with the
safety. That was That was a clear ordinance that
we did. >> I I'm going off memory here,
but I want to say you said that for different residential zones
because there were some mobile homes in R-1
» There were some. >> R-2. If you remove one, they're
grandfathered, but if you remove it, you could not
» You could go back in with one. That's correct.
» But you you have a zone for mobile homes specifically, and that does allow
for a mobile home to be brought in if it >> meets the
» meets certain age requirements. I think it's five It has to be five years or
five >> Five years. That's right.
» That's within your mobile home zoning classification. So, you have that, and
it does allow for that to be brought in. >> It
So, it doesn't allow for old mobile homes to be brought in. It only allows
for for the ones that have been five years or
» Yeah, and I think what Mr. Kirkendall's remembering is that you did put a stop
to bringing mobile homes back into the different residential zoning
classification. >> Whether they be new or old.
» That's correct.
» There's only a handful of these. >> Yeah, how many How many RMH zones are
there? Do you know, Mr. Woman?
» Well, there's um North route, there's two mobile home
parks there. Um
I'm trying to remember from memory.
There's one down on West Centennial Street.
Um And and then those two that were started
out there. >> And so that and that this is limited to
those areas that are already zoned and then it
would be up to this council or future councils if you were to annex something
to change the zoning, but under your intention and mine as well,
we would not be adding more RVs. >> That's right.
But but correct me if I'm wrong, if someone were to come in [clears throat]
to the planning commission and want to have another mobile home park, we do
have that RMH that they could take a look at.
» Right. >> Whether they approved it or not,
that's that would be left to the planning commission.
» Right. >> Because the zoning is there.
» Okay. We're ready to vote on first reading.
Okay, all in favor please say aye. >> Aye.
» All opposed, no. And the motion carries. Thank you.
» Uh next item on the agenda is for council to consider first reading of an
ordinance for annexation and of continuous
» [clears throat and cough] >> real property in the corporate city
limits of Clinton located at the intersection of South Carolina Highway
56 and Cambridge Road identified as Laurens County tax map numbers
617-00-00-028,
617-00-00-015,
and 617-00-00-016.
» Okay, so this is um recommendation from staff and it comes as approval from the
planning commission. Am I correct? >> Okay, so to get this on the table for
discussion, I'll entertain a motion. >> So moved.
» Have a motion from Ms. Walsh. >> Second.
» Second from um Mr. Smith. Okay. Now, oh we're going to get
some information to get to start start on that now, so let's go.
» Can I Can I add a motion? >> No, no, we we've got this motion on the
table, yeah. No, we're not we're not going to do that.
Okay.
» Good evening. >> Good evening.
» How are you? Well, um
I can safely say I'm not here asking for RMH zoning, so I'm a little confused. Uh
but um My name's Patrick McNair. Um and I
just thought I'd start out my We've got a presentation here. I think you all
have it as well on the TV. Um I will try to move through it quickly. I know it's
already been presented to planning commission. I know they're
» They're moving, but we've got it. >> Yeah, you can move it You can move it
that way. We have it in front of us. Um
» No, we we've got it on our TV. >> it toward toward the audience.
» There you go. >> We've got little screens up here.
Um so I thought, you know, I I'd start with
at least introducing our team. I think I missed doing that in the planning
commission. Um and you know, I know there's been some questions on um you
know, our our ability to execute developments or maybe our resume. And so
I'll just give you a quick introduction of the team. Um so myself, Patrick
McNair, uh president of Brand Homes uh and co-owner with my business partner
Paul Passenger, who who is here, by the way. Um and so um
but uh I I in development My family My my father, uncle, grandfather developed
in the state of South Carolina my entire life. Um that's what we did.
Um I moved into sales and then into a
position of the head of finance. Where for Carl, I ran underwriting,
reporting, and banking relationships, securing funding for major projects
like this one for years. Um so I'm very familiar with how to fund
these and am open to any questions on that. Um cuz that's what I did for a
long time. Uh
during that process, secured almost 200 million in bank funding
which gave Essex the fuel to grow to a top 50 builder in the United States.
Built by this guy here. Um
and I'll get more on Carl in a second. Uh at that point, Essex Homes was
purchased by Stanley Martin, so there was a comment on
Stanley Martin finishing Longview. That is correct. It was the back end of
Longview, but it was all developed and started by this group and Essex Homes
which he owned. Um
at that time, we were purchased and Carl and I became executives at Stanley
Martin Homes, which is a national home builder.
Um which we did learn a lot from. Um I was I had the privilege of becoming the
youngest executive in Stanley Martin history by two decades.
Um and uh that was a nod from a president of that company
that has been in home building his entire life who trusted that I could run
an operation, run projects like this. Um and we did. Um and actually we took the
division um that I took over in the market which was here in the Upstate
from last place in the company to first place in the entire nation in the
company under
my leadership. Major projects that I developed ranging
to 4 to 500 lots. There were some questions on that. Um in a 4-year span,
Bridgeport, Carlin, and the Hamptons. You can look that up on Stanley Martin's
website. No, I did not own that company, but I was the division president. I did
underwrite those. I did stand in front of councils like just like this and
develop and see those through. Bridgeport's 500 lots in the center of
Greenville. Very complicated development we executed
and is now the best-selling neighborhood in the entire Upstate for
all builders. And we did execute that that well. Um
projects overseen, underwritten, and obtained funding for Longview is one of
them. Um
Yes, we we we were the team that did that.
Carl Astor, Frank Berry is in the room. He was the head of development for that
project. Um we were Essex Homes. He owned it, we worked for it.
Um and Shaping Place, Four Lakes, over 20
projects in the 100 to 300 to lot range.
Um also um on the homeowners association
board here locally. Um and have won builder of the year
three different times at three different operations.
Um Look, I don't say that to bang on my
chest. That's about as far as you're going to hear me talk about me.
Um you know, I I think there was some
mention of do we have the resume? And I'm just
trying to introduce the people you have here so you at least understand cuz you
don't know us from Adam, right? Um you know, my goal in these meetings,
my goal in what I've done in the past, um we're local home builder.
There are two local home builders I can count in this state
that have the ability to execute a development like this, and we're one of
them. Um
and at the end of the day, we're not here to be the rest of the
guys. I know there was comments, look at the other builders,
look at what they've done. Our entire mission,
I'd still be working in a national home builder right now if that's what I
wanted to do, right? Our our entire mission is to
bring back the reputation that Essex Homes had,
which was the local builder of choice that built a better home and did a
better job. And anyone during that period from 1993 to 2020 in
West Essex, which Essex Homes was operated and owned by this guy right
here, that sold homes or was around it will
confirm that was the mission and the motto. And that's what we're here to do.
And and so most cities and municipalities I as a walk into
welcome us with open arms because we are willing to build a better product. We do
live here. We are local. You don't have to call DC or Texas to go
and get an answer about it. It's not That's not right. It's right
here. We're here. And so our goal is to build something better and I'm going to
show you that in the site plan. Another person I introduced Frank Berry um
He's been in development since 1992. Um He was the head of development back
there in the corner if you raise your hand. [laughter]
Uh he was the head of development for the Longview project and many many
others. Um started as an engineer. Moved into development in 2005.
Responsible for the development of over 4,000 lots and oversaw development
developers on far far more. So yes, like the Foxbank project we are buying lots
from other not the developer. Most home builders of any size do not develop
every single project they have. They balance the portfolio, right? We're
going to develop some. There's some benefit to that, right? In the right
areas with the right project we're going to do that. Some we have good
development relationships so we buy lots from them.
Um He's also the chair of planning
commission in the town of Lexington and has been part of municipal planning and
planning commission since 2003. So we do have somebody on our staff very good
knowledge of what y'all do and by the way
appreciate what y'all do. I know none of this is easy no matter what questions
get asked to me no matter what your decision is. I know
this is all tough and and so I appreciate what you do.
Um Carl Hassinger um
Carl started building homes in 1986. He started Essex in 1993.
He made it through 2008 without any layoffs.
I don't know another builder that did that.
We talk about failed developments a company that's going to have a failed
development
That guy right there made it through '08 without layoffs.
That's pretty strong. Um
He grew Essex to be a top 50 builder in the United States across two states,
five markets selling over 1,000 homes a year. He did
sell to Stanley Martin Homes, became a regional president and executive there
for years. He's experienced in development, home
building, developmental funding. Fun fact about him, he's actually a nuclear
engineer, so he's way smarter than I am. So, I don't know why I'm here talking.
» [laughter]
» Uh and has been on the state housing board for 4 years. So, um he he has
given back to the state in that regard. Um
and so, there's a lot of work that goes into that. And also, I have Heath Davis,
um 8 years of commercial development across
two states, um and has been on the economic
economic, excuse me, development board for Greenwood for almost 3 years.
Was the chair of government relations for Greenwood.
He is local. And his team has been developing and
contracting subdivisions for 30 years. So,
all that to say, I think I might have failed in introducing our team in
planning commission. I know there's been a lot of questions around, can we do it?
Do we know what we're doing? And I at least want to answer that, right? Um and
so, with that said, um and I'll let Heath say some things at the end of
this, but I'm going to run you through here and try to get you through a little
quicker than I had it planned. So, we're at 5 minutes.
Um all right, Cambridge Farms. Uh we go to the next slide, if you don't mind.
» [clears throat] >> Location. Uh I believe it will be six,
right next to the Ingles. Um I think everybody's pretty familiar with
the location. That's been explained many times. We go to the next slide.
Um so, the first plan we brought, yes, we we did bring a plan to the city.
That original plan was 607 lots. Um one of the biggest things that was
brought up in that meeting was the fact that in the R3 classification we were
asking for, there was concern on multi-family. And and totally understand
that, right? I um have no desire to do that here.
I really we want to make our name off of being the single-family home builder.
You know, like many builders, we've had to go in and build some townhome
neighborhoods in certain areas, but that is not our bread and butter. And if you
look at our backlog of what's coming, not what's on our website,
you'll see it's mostly stuff like this because that's where we want to make our
name. We're not going to make our name against
I'm not going to mention the big national names that are in town.
Going against them cost by cost, that's not how we do it, right? We have to be
better. We have to build better. We have to have a better name and have better
subdivisions, or we won't compete. They build 90,000 homes a year. We'll
never compete with that, right? So, we have to be better. We have to build
better. Um
And so, we didn't have any intention on multi-family. And so, R3S zoning was
created with you, you know, that's great. We saw that opportunity and and
R2S. And so, it actually fit the bill even better
[clears throat] for us cuz we had no desire to go multi-family.
And so, with that and also on this version that
we brought you last time, we only had a clubhouse and a pool. Someone pointed
that out and explain why later. So, we we were
at the time, you go to the next slide, please. Um at the time, we were
Well, we are, I guess, in the county and zoned by right. Um we took this site
plan, which is 5.3 lots, a little less, to the county, which is effectively R1,
R2, and R3. You can see the color coordination there.
Um and we did receive a staff approval
letter that said that we were approved by the ordinances, by the law, publicly
posted. Um and you guys know the rest of the
story. Um and if we need questions answered on
that, I know that you're planning there's some question
around around me not being an attorney, and I am not. So,
first admit that. Um we did bring our attorney, Robert Bond's here, was on the
actual case. Um and so, he's the attorney that
actually sat in the courtroom, actually knows all the facts. And so, if you have
any questions on it, our whole team is here to answer
questions for y'all. So, I just want to bring somebody that's more credible than
me so on that. Um and so, if we just go uh uh to the
next slide, go to the next. I think everybody knows
the outcome. Um
So, the new River City plan. Look,
Patrick, if the judge overturned the order and
you have invested in an approved site plan per judge order
and can go forward while you're here. Probably valid question that you might
ask me already. So, I'll throw it out there. Um look, I have
worked with the city for over a year and a half on this project.
I said earlier we're a local builder that makes our name on relationships
and building better neighborhoods and better homes.
This housing development right here is right on the border of the city.
This project can do a lot of great things for the city that I'll list out
on another slide. And I think I'd be remiss to not come
back to the city who has worked for me worked with me, I've had meetings with,
right? Asked for feedback on what the city would want
to bring it into the city and let the city get the revenue and the
benefit from it because we don't plan on this being our
last community in Clinton.
We're the South Carolina We're a local South Carolina builder and
we're going to make our name on building throughout South Carolina. And we do, we
build in in five markets in South Carolina.
Some of the things we added to this, other than reducing lots of what we
could go do with 523 lots, we added an 11-acre
central park amenity that was not on what you saw the first time.
And it was also not on the county plan that is approved.
We also have the pool and the amenity.
And we reduced lots and we added in the commercial. Why did
we add in the commercial? We've had meetings
with the city, with citizens. We have had meetings with
some citizens, and meetings with staff, different members of of commission, etc.
Not to be underhanded, but to ask what does the city want?
And the thing that I heard over and over again was that the city wants
better restaurants, grocery stores, nice boutique retail.
And that's what we intend to do there. That's why I put that there. I'm not a
commercial developer. That is not what I do.
My grandfather was, but I am not. Um
And so, because of that, I brought in an experienced commercial developer. But,
the kind of cycling we could do is all residential, because that's who we are.
We're we're residential home builders. Um
but we had that added that because we had heard so much feedback that
residents wanted restaurants, grocery stores.
Maybe daycare. And so, that's why that was added in there.
Um
With that, the zoning R1, um those lots are bigger than the current R1 lot
minimum. R1 lot minimum 7,100 square feet. Those are 10,500 square feet. R2S,
um those are 8,700 square foot lots. R3S, 7,500 square foot lots.
Small commercial parcel, and then the AR zoning is for the current home. We just,
you know, that's not going to go with the development.
Um we're going to have walking trails,
sidewalks,
major amenities with a central park, athletic field, fire pit, playgrounds.
Put in a lot of infrastructure to make sure that this is something nice,
because what we would like this to be, is I can
promise you >> [clears throat]
» there is nothing like that. And I'm I'm building
and and and I have land throughout Lawrence County. There's nothing like
that in Lawrence County right now. And there are a lot of jobs coming.
With that kind of amenity, with those size lots, there's not.
Um
So, to me, I see this as a destination community.
And that's what we're trying to build here.
Um Next slide.
So, why R2S and R3S? So, one quote from the comp plan, so I
heard "Hey, stick with the comp plan" a lot tonight. I would encourage that.
Um if you look at the section we're in, we're actually uh bringing in a lesser
density than what the use says is called for in that area. Um so, I would stick
with the comp plan. I agree with everybody who has said that. Um
so, residential growth and housing diversity is a quote from the comp plan.
Planned residential development highlights the need for additional
housing capacity. This is the This is the city's comp
plan. I didn't I didn't write this. The need for additional housing capacity
and a broader range of housing types.
Would going in and putting in 500 of the same type house accomplish
that? I think it would, right? And and here's
the reasoning that we're asking for R2S and R3S. Yes,
it is the lot width. Yes, if you see on this exhibit,
if I have a 70-ft wide lot, I have to eat 70 ft of very expensive
infrastructure, which is roads, curb, gutter,
sewer, water lines, a lot of things, right?
So, when you look at the R3S, let's start there.
That section, I believe your emergency services
personnel should be able to live in a neighborhood that's nice like that.
And that addresses the need for additional housing capacity and a
broader range of housing types. Um
Well, at the end of the day, and not just them, teachers, right? Any Anyone
who is looking for an affordable new single family home
with warranties and a nice neighborhood with big amenities.
If I eat an additional 20 ft of all of those infrastructures, all of
the infrastructure into that lot, that is going to add to the cost of the
home, and that buyer is very sensitive on on payment.
They might not qualify for the home. That's the intention of it.
But because of that, and and because I want you to know that I'm not going to
go below 7,500 sq ft, there's a development agreement that's
been put forth that was mentioned at planning, and that was how it was
recommended and approved by planning. Um and I'll go through those bullet
points later. But the development agreement
is me saying I'm here to do what I say I'm going to do.
I am not the other builders or developers who came behind me.
Here to do what I'm I'm I say I'm going to do, and I'm willing to back that up
with a development agreement that restricts me
to where I won't go below 7,500 sq ft. And by the way,
if you look on the right, if I do it on a 50-ft wide lot and leave it at 7,500
sq ft, that's 150 ft of depth, where the people get a much bigger backyard.
Do people fence in their side yard or their back yard?
Their back yard. And the kids play in the back yard.
They're going to get more back yard out of this.
Um next slide. So, these are our homes that'll go in
the R3S. Um
these square feet foot range in the in the low 2,000s.
Um they are bigger than what one of our
competitors' neighborhoods, which if you want to run through the underwriting, it
was mentioned earlier, happy to do that. Um
was mentioned um that competitor between 1,200 and 1,700 sq ft. We don't have a
single house in here that's small. Um and that was used in the comp study
to prove out the numbers, but I'm happy to run through that.
Um, so that's it and I'll say this, looking
at that hopefully you see that that is a our our goal is nicer elevations which
create nicer streetscapes, better landscaping packages which when you pull
up through our neighborhood, you don't wonder
which builder is this on the builder 100 list, right? You pull through our
neighborhood and immediately know this is this is a Veranda Homes community
just like you did when it was an Essex Homes community.
Um, next slide, please. So, this is the R2 S section. So, this
is a little little larger house. Um, you'll run in the mid 2000s to high 2000
square foot range. Um, in this lot size and buyer type which we're trying to hit
multiple buyers within the city, right? Um, you can do two things typically. Uh,
it can be a first move up buyer, uh, two-story home, a little larger,
family that's growing, right? Um, or it can be a move down buyer as you see a
ranch plan right there which is our Redbud plan which is one of our
best-selling homes. >> [clears throat]
» Um, and is being sold. It is the model of Foxbank. Um, it's been mentioned.
Next slide. Um,
so then we have the 52-foot plans. Um, that is your R1.
Um, what's shown there is your what's
popular right now which is the farmhouse style, but we have all kinds of
different elevations, right? [clears throat]
Um, this is what I would call our our bigger luxury home
um, that'll run in the 3000 to 4000 square foot range.
Um, next slide.
» quick question. That would go on what width lot?
» Can I answer her? Come back here.
» Yes, ma'am. What's the question? >> Those those houses
» Yes, ma'am. 75 75-foot wide ma'am.
» And so 52 >> Yes, ma'am.
Yes, ma'am. >> So, you have
» Okay, let's let's let let's let let's let the Let's keep going with the
» Yeah. >> with the
Mr. >> So, the
The deal with these materials I I actually printed them out, but I know
you have them you've been sending they've been sending it you. Um, if
anybody needed them, um, we do have a wetland study.
And so Laura Belanger is here. Sorry, I hope I didn't screw up your last name.
» [laughter] >> But she is the wetlands consultant on
this project. And so I thought I'd bring her along this time. There's been a lot
of questions on it. So I want like I said, I'm open to questions. And so
please ask away. But I want to bring the experts. And so y'all can get the
answers straight from them. And it's not just me up here talking. Um
We have the property survey, the site plan which you've seen.
Um traffic study. Um and yes, that will be updated.
So standard anywhere in the state of South Carolina
that is not updated and reviewed typically in an annexation and zoning
meeting, we update that just before the planning commission meeting for site
plan approval. Um but we did go ahead and get one so we were aware at least of
what the impact would be at least typically
what kind of traffic improvements we would be required to do for budgeting
purposes. So we do have one um and it will be updated before planning
commission meeting for site plan approval. Um and you know
that um
traffic study per SCDOT
Highway 56 the capacity that Highway 56 was
designed for right now what's going through it and
this is not me. It's per SCDOT is at low use right now.
It is. That's not me saying that's a governmental agency who created that.
And actually, interestingly enough right here
is your comp plan, page from your comp plan.
Page 7-5 figure 7.4 average annual daily traffic.
You have five levels of traffic and there's a circle right in front of our
site. This is in the mid level.
This is the city's comp plan. And in the city's comp plan, it says, "Fortunately
for Clinton, the town already benefits from a solid
base of roadway infrastructure built over prior decades,
which provides a strong foundation for mobility and connectivity.
As new residential, commercial, and industrial development moves forward,
future roadway construction will primarily focus on providing new access
to newly developed properties for connecting internal streets,
rather than constructing entirely new primary thoroughfares."
Which applies to this because we, as a developer, will
put in improvements. When new roads are created for access to
new developments, these roadways are typically constructed by private
developers, inspected by the local government, and then either dedicated to
the city or maintained by private entity like a homeowners association. So,
if you don't believe SCDOT or our traffic study engineer, who is licensed,
your own comp plan says it. So,
not up here lying. Um
So, we also have a phase one ESA, um just to make sure the property's free
of environmental hazards. We have that, we've submitted it, you have that, and
utility will serve letters as well. So, all that's done. Next slide, please.
Um benefits to the city, um you know, revenue
is an obvious one. Um you know, look,
I don't have to pay $4,800 impact fees in the county when my current site plan
is approved. Do 490 * $4,800.
Right? I- If If you didn't think I was here in earnest before,
that's a big number.
Um And so, that revenue is obviously a big
number, the tax base is a big number. Um
you know,
also the ballpark and industrial park. This will bring bring jobs to people, no
matter what, right? There's an industrial park coming, there's a
ballpark coming, there's hotels in that, there's restaurants. That is going to
bring people and traffic and and jobs. But for the industrial park to get
filled out with businesses, you're going to need rooftops.
Um I said my my grandfather was in
commercial real estate my whole life. And
my father and uncle did it as well. And the first question that any business
or any restaurant or retailer asked when they walked in that door is how many
rooftops are around them. You're already planning for growth. It's
not a question of if you are. You got an industrial ballpark, you got the
industrial facility, you got all this stuff.
By the way, the empty retail shops, you know how those get filled?
Rooftops. That is the number one thing needed for
anything commercial business or retail.
Um the utilities, um
you know, right now the water capacity largely largely underutilized. I I know
y'all know that. Um so, plenty of room there.
Um jobs, you know, look, this improves quality of life in the
fact that the average median annual income
goes up >> [clears throat]
» with this. We create jobs with the boutique retail, right?
Um we bring in the people that can fill the
businesses that will come, right? Quality of life improves.
Restaurants and grocery stores, like I said, in the in the commercial section,
citizens We we can do that because we heard the citizens were asking for it.
That's literally why we put that in there. Um and the school system right
now is currently so underutilized and at risk in Clinton
that if it is not filled more, it will be enveloped into
the Lauren schools. That is a fact.
Keep the Clinton schools the Clinton schools.
And how do you do that? Rooftops. People.
Right?
Next slide.
So, a lot of things were said earlier.
There's been a lot of questions submitted. I'm not going to take time to
go through each one of these individually cuz I I promise you I'm
trying to get through this. So, just know
we have a whole team here and we're here to answer any of the questions that were
asked earlier. We we actually welcome the questions. I've had some meetings
with citizens just welcoming questions. Um
so, next slide. Uh why Veranda? Local ownership.
» [clears throat] >> Um and I've covered a little bit of
this, so I won't spend too much time on it. Um we did win HBA Greenville's
Builder of the Year this year. I mean, I I you don't do that for doing a terrible
job. Um
uh and a good partner to the city to grow the right way. Um
look, I'm telling you I've worked in the
bigger builder sphere. I know what it looks like and I left it for a reason.
Um what I what we're saying we're going to
do here, we're going to do and it will be better streetscapes and
better homes. Promise that.
If I can give you one [clears throat] promise here.
Um we also have a local partnership with
Heath Davis who has a 10-year track record in commercial.
Strong financial backing with a local approach. As you can imagine selling a
top 50 builder in the United States, we were very sound in financial backing. I
know there's questions on that. [clears throat]
Happy to elaborate on that. Um
and we have documented success with neighborhoods like Long View which was
mentioned earlier. But first, before we go to the tour Long View and I'll leave
you all with the option if you want me to tour you Long View. But um go to the
next slide, please. Um so, our request for approval, what is it? So, this is
the request for approval that was recommended and approved by planning
commission. Um
I mean, I think they did that for a reason.
I think this is a better site plan for the city
than what we have in the county right now. I truly do.
Might be less homes for me, but it's better amenities,
bigger central park, nice boutique retail
to tie into that. I think it becomes a destination. I think it's better.
And I'm willing to pay $4,800 a lot more and come into the city to do it.
Um with that request of R1, R2S, R3S,
commercial and and uh agricultural for the the home that's
that's staying. Um
we request approval with conditions on city council approval of development
agreement with the draft has has been provided. Um
and suggested terms of that agreement. Some of the concerns on R3S, R2S,
Patrick, once we do it, you can go just you can you don't have to leave your
lots at at 7,500 square feet. You can go do as many as you want. So, I'm going to
suggest in that agreement we'll put our money where our mouth is and we will
restrict ourselves to exactly how many lots we're presenting you today.
So, under no circumstance can I go higher than that. Um
true R1, by the way, in in in the first, you know, a year and a half ago as
mentioned, we we we showed we had a presentation and showed how many lots I
could get on 300 acres with true R1. It was 700.
So, we're asking for 409. Um
we would like to restrict ourselves to a 7,500 square foot minimum lot size
because we know that R3S and R2S uh allow smaller lots. So, we want we want
to restrict ourselves to that to make sure you get the lot size of R1.
We will guarantee the 10-plus acre central park in the community.
We will guarantee the amenity package that is shown here, so you know I won't
deviate from what I'm showing you and show you something and and go do
something different later, right? I know you've been you've had some experiences
like that with developers and builders in the past. And so, putting all this on
here is not who we are. Um
the community will be encumbered by an HOA and we'll guarantee that in writing.
I would have done it anyways. It needs to be managed by an HOA and we are very
strict on that. Um all the way down to the fence types. So,
you can't have a chain link fence then a wooden fence then a chain You know what
I mean? We we're very very strict on HOAs. So, we will make [snorts] sure
this is maintained through that. Um we'll also offer a minimum of 18 ft
between house pads. So, one of the concerns with I know R3S and R2S
you don't want this to be one of those communities that I won't name the name
of the builder where you can drive down 385 and see those houses stacked right
on top of each other. I know that. Um
your R1 required width between homes is 15 ft.
Those homes you're looking at are anywhere between 10 to 12 ft.
We're going to offer 18 ft.
that you can handcuff us to that I can't get out of
in the development agreement, which is greater than your R1 width.
It's 15. I'm offering more.
Um and then covenants and restrictions on
commercial use and type. Um as I mentioned earlier, homes have to
come for commercial to come. Commercial won't be built right away.
Homes have to come. They have to see the rooftops so you're not going to get them
to come. Um but those homes and rooftops will get
them to come for sure. Um but
with that said, we don't want to just build anything and honestly, it would
hurt me if I went and built retail that wasn't attractive, right? That wasn't
what I'd call boutique retail, nice restaurants, or a daycare, something
like that. If I built something that was an eyesore right at the front of my
community entrance doesn't help me
at all. And so, I'm going to show you I'm earnest in that.
And within the development agreement submitted, we
listed a long list of items of what we cannot
do, even though it says in that zoning that we can.
We'll take all this out, and honestly, I'm open to adding to it.
Uh we we our goal is boutique retail because it helps our community.
I have no reason to build anything else. Um it ties in our community. It needs to
be nice. Um
» [clears throat] >> And so
with that uh uh said,
that is our request for approval. Um I can take you through the long view if
there's interest, or I can just stop here.
» Questions from council. Can Can we go back to the R1 elevation
slide? I think >> Yes, sir.
» I think the question that some people may have had is how you can fit that,
and I guess you're getting the some from one lot, and
anyway, can you explain that? >> Yes. Uh so, 53 2-ft [clears throat] on
75-ft wide. Um
by the way, R1 is 70-ft wide, so you're 75, so you're wider than that. Um
so, that leaves you with
What is that, Carl? It's 43? 23 ft? Chemical engineer.
» [laughter] >> 23 ft.
Um so,
we said eight Your your your ordinance is 15.
» 23 ft on both sides, but >> No, it's
» Okay. >> 23 total.
» Total. >> Yeah.
» Distributed between the sides, what would happen is one house would be
sitting 11 and 1/2 ft from the property line. The next house on the other lot
would be sitting 11 and 1/2 ft from the property line.
So, you'd have a combined 23 ft between them, although it's not all on one lot,
and that would be and it it the house could vary a little bit, you know, a
foot or two either way on the lot depending on some things, but generally
you have a neighborhood where the spacing between the adjacent houses is
23 ft on the average.
» [clears throat] >> In that
» One thing we did as a company is we always bought bigger lots to put our
houses on than our competitors did because we liked
the larger lots and we felt like it helped our neighborhoods hold their
values and that is one thing in a neighborhood that's got a little more
space between the houses, they generally do hold their value better.
» And and and once again 15 ft total is your R1 ordinance between
the homes, not from the house to the property line, right?
» So like 7 and 1/2 ft to your fence, basically.
That's your R1 zoning, right? And so what I'm what I'm saying is we're bigger
than that, right? We're 23. So we're bigger than R1's width.
» Mr. Mayor, I got several questions and they're going to go to different people.
So if I could kind of run through my questions
counsel, I'll yield to the floor later to you guys.
Right now, our C3 allows for R3 inside of a C3 by ordinance.
That was not taken into consideration to my knowledge by planning commission.
So I'm asking our plan city planner and city manager, what will need to be done
to prohibit at some point in time, whether it's these current developers or
someone else later down the road, from being able to go in there and put an R3
inside that C3 zone.
» The development agreement that they're proposing
specifies that as as one of the
» But that's only with this developer. If they were to sell
that development agreement doesn't necessarily carry to the next. So to me,
if the it could change. It can go to It can go to court. It can change. I'm a
banker. It things can change, okay? It's not guaranteed forever. It can
change. My question, why we going to go against our ordinance before planning
commission and we as a council decide not to leave that R3 inside of a C3?
» I'm confused. What's the Convert the R3 C3 mean commercial?
» Commercial zone. >> about the front
» The commercial zone, the red zone. >> Okay.
» If for some reason they do not get enough retail in there,
they can start putting R3s in there. >> Well, they can't because they'll be
signing a development agreement. But, you're saying someone else could buy it
from them and then do that. >> Well,
I mean, that may be on that list of what they won't do.
But, right now, the ordinance allows for an R3 to be
built in a C3 zone. >> Okay.
» With the development agreement restricting
rental homes from doing that, then in the meantime, we can go back
and review the C3 zoning and make changes that need to be there to prevent
that from happening in the future. >> Okay. Can we
Can that be done prior to our second reading
or final approval? Because I I think we're getting into a lot of
contingencies that do not need to be there.
This is too big a deal for both them and us.
And that is a big contingency in my books.
Okay, that's first question that y'all may need to think on for a minute.
At what point do you guys break even in this project.
Break even. Where you can start making profits.
How many homes will you have to build to break even,
whether they're all ones or two s's or three s's,
or even the commercial? At what point do you break even?
» Do you want to say it again? Here's your own problem, your mic.
» I can't
I can't break it down to an exact number like 23 and a half percent,
but it's a mistake to believe that we would
go in and develop all this property at one time. We would
develop some of the larger lots, some of the
medium lots, and some of the smaller lots, so we would be selling
houses in three price points. So, typically,
you want a neighborhood that pays off for that section of the development at
about 65%. That's when you try to get your land.
Maybe 70% is when the land's paid for, but the individual houses that you would
buy um
we would make the attempt would be to make a profit on each house.
» Yeah, there's there's the development side and the home building side, I would
say. >> Right, I understand. Okay.
So, then that leads me to the question, I I think I heard listening here say you
will not do the horizontal development, you have another developer that would do
that part of the plan building. >> property
through the years in multiple ways, and we have developed some very large
subdivisions individually inside of the companies that we've owned.
Um we have entered into partnerships. Probably
um 2/3 of what we've developed we partnered with other people and brought
them in for for for reasons. and uh so um um
can't say exactly right now, but uh um
» But that's important to us to kind of know who we will be working with and
relying on to build to do all the infrastructure. So
» Right now, plan is for us to build it. That's the plan.
» So you will be able So based on the numbers you shared with the planning
commission, there's a lot of money going to flow out on the front end
» Yes, sir. >> with the infrastructure built out.
» That's pretty typical on a development. You know,
it's heavy on the front end. Um and to clarify on the planning
commission numbers, so there was a number given earlier that said I gave 30
million in infrastructure. So that is 61,000 a lot. Okay? It did It
does It does not cost us 61,000 a lot to develop the infrastructure. That's more
like 40 or 45. So on those numbers that were given, they added 9 million in soft
costs to that 30 30 million number that was and
contingencies that was already in my number.
» Okay. Y'all are too smart of gentlemen not to done your spreadsheets and Excel
Excel spreadsheets. So you know, in the very beginning when we met almost a year
and a half ago in the boardroom across the way over
there, I asked for a lot of things about
seeing profit and loss balance sheets, and I never got them.
They were in the middle of the audit. And
I never got them. >> I think we did give it because a citizen
got a hold of it and spoke about it at the planning commission of the county.
Um >> I was told you were in the middle of the
audit and it wasn't any use till we got through the audit to give them so we
could share that you we could have that information.
» time, we we did get it I don't know maybe it didn't land in your hands, but
I I we did send it to the city cuz that's how the citizen got a hold of it
and shared it with the planning commission in county. Um Um, and and
yes, that was our first 9-months of operation.
» Right. >> Business school
2 to 3 years. >> Sure.
» 2 to 3 years in business is what companies take to start up. Uh, some
take five. Uh, here in year two, this is full second full year, we will profit.
Um, which is ahead of most. >> Okay.
» Um, and Um, I don't have anything else on that. But, uh, yes, sir. I mean, if
you didn't get out, I mean, I did send send to the city.
Um, that's how that person got a hold of it during the
» Okay. >> planning commission. I I
Sorry, I I don't I don't know.
» Can you clarify that? >> Yeah.
» Those those were the first set that they were working on with the auditors, and
that's when it went out to the county. That information went to the county. At
that point, I didn't ask for a second set of records
because they were at the county at that point.
» Okay. >> Can I ask you something?
You don't mind? So, if you go back, can y'all hear
[clears throat] me okay? Well, I thank y'all for coming.
Uh, you know, it's
We got families just like y'all, and we're not here to
have any problems. We're just here for the future.
And I'm sure we're all living it now. So, I I I
I guess y'all where you live and that's your main goal.
It's just for But,
what we are doing a little bit different
is on on a lot of the developments you see now,
they would take this and cut everything out, uh, and bring it down to bare
bones, and you can see red dirt. Okay?
We're not doing that. >> That's right.
» It's a beautiful beautiful property back here. So, everybody Earlier, they were
talking about, well, you know, if you don't manage it, then
we're here, you're going to see nothing but bad stuff.
So, how we're developing this starting with
is in phases, like he said earlier. 1 2 3 to 5 phases.
» And it might take >> 10 to 12 years.
» How long did it take to develop?
» The reason we did the commercial is because your city
asked us to work with them to bring something nice retail or restaurant to
your area. Because
we we already had a plan of close to 600 homes.
So, we worked with your city you city people
to see what we could do here to bring something nice
something that these people in the all communities
something that a family could go in not a vape shop
not a liquor store but something you could take your little kid or grandkid.
But when we did this in phases you know, all this right here your
timber and your and
everything you see that's what we're buying.
Only till you get to the to the fourth and fifth of that this phase two. So, I
want you to understand, too. So, that keeps your cost down.
» Yeah, we >> says 30 million
» Yeah. So, one one of the quotes earlier was that
we would have 20 million dollars in funding outstanding we're paying
interest on. That's not how development of this size works. Um you you divide
that into phases, right? Some some builders do, right? They got a ton of
money and they're they're the big guys and the big players and they'll come in
and just scorch earth, right? They'll just blow everything out, right? But
look, I was in Finance is what I did for him.
Make sure he uses money wisely. I I handled all the relationships with the
bankers. That's what I did. Right? And I and I got deals financed like this many
times over. Never had one not get financed. Um but
» spending 30 million. >> Yeah, but at the end of the day, it
would be >> But at some point you will come close to
that number based on your projections that you work with at this point in
time. That is a real number. >> It is it is it is
» be spent day one, but at some point But it
» be outstanding at one >> Right. That's all I'm saying.
» Yeah, yeah, yeah. It'll be >> Divide that into five, right? And that's
probably at any given time maybe what's outstanding, but yeah, yes, sir. Yeah.
» All right. And I understand why our city staff may have talked about the need for
commercial, but at the same time, we have 25
buildings downtown empty today. And that's a scary thought. Now, we just
had our first meeting last week No.
» Yeah, last week to talk about how can we revitalize our downtown and not let it
die. >> Yes, sir.
» But if we start taking a lot more retail out there or out there, which is going
to happen with the baseball complex and things of that,
» Yes, sir. >> we've got to figure out a way to keep
our downtown or we lose that quality that we you know,
» I agree, and I think 490 homes is a way that you revitalize
that, right? Getting people there. And our site won't just rob that, right?
We're We're It's not like that's the entire downtown of retail, right? I
mean, it you know, it's it will these people are not far from downtown.
They'll drive down there and utilize it. It'll help, hopefully, with that, right?
» But it it is a concern we've got to have to think about whether, you know,
because it's new, it's fresh, it's vibrant looking versus what we have
right now downtown is not. Now, >> One other consideration for that is that
um as far as the commercial goes, that will not be built until later in
the project. You're going to get a lot of homes in that really will service
your downtown for years and years and years without any of that competition.
Um and then at the point which this it gets further in, that's when those
retailers will commit and say, "Okay, well, there's enough people that can go,
you know, frequent downtown, but then now also support this." And they'll do
that math. Like, they won't come to us if if it if it's not supported. Um and
and we just thought it was relevant certain eagles right there. Right, it's
it's that area is designated a commercial corridor in the comp plan and
and so we just thought maybe hey, this is a good
good what If we were going to tie in, we tie in there. It just felt that's what
for us that's why we put it there. >> We had volunteered our services I did to
your city to help grow uh do the theater downtown.
I I did do that. >> The comprehensive plan you have quoted
from and worked with, is that our 2019 plan or is that the draft?
» draft. >> Yes, sir.
» Okay, which we have not been given a copy of. So, we do not have reference to
what you've been working with. >> Okay.
» Um, and yeah. Of course, planning commission still
waiting on receipt. >> Huh?
» We have received it. >> We have electronically but not
» As a group. >> As a group.
» Okay. >> Yeah.
They mean with that. Um
Based on your projections of what you see over a course of time.
We've talked a lot about oh, it's going to be great. The tax revenue will be
fantastic for our city because the impact fees are very designated and very
specific. We need them desperately. But a comment was made in the planning
commission the city was broke. We are not broke.
I just want to clarify that right now. Could we use a lot more money?
Absolutely. Could we do more things, you know, yes, absolutely. But we also know
we're going to have to build more another fire substation, maybe two at
some point. We may need another fire truck. That's what things and will be
used with those impact fees. Based on your schedule of building
and I realize that's a a guessing number right now.
But for us to recognize property tax revenues at what point you
think we're going to see significant [clears throat] dollars coming in
that we can then use in our operating budget.
» Yes, sir. Um well, you know, I would give it every bit
to to to get to building homes, right? From where we stand today, and some of
that is dependent on obviously we've got to create a full set of construction
drawings. That's got to go back to planning and your staff has to review
it. There's all kinds of things that y'all will have control over, right? And
the city that's another good thing too here being with y'all versus the county
is like gives you that control to take to have all those reviews and and
address some questions that were asked, which were good questions.
Um you know, I every bit of two every bit
of two years if not, you know, your two to three to get the homes started.
Um you know, and then from there,
um you know, you're going to run, you know,
every I'd I'd say another I mean, how many homes you're looking for
to get to you the revenue you're looking for or you just want all of it? How long
» No, I'm just wondering how much, you know, would be a a really
a correct and more accurate number to use
» At least another >> financial planning.
» I mean, to get to 100 homes, you're at least another two or three years
depending on market. Right now, the market's slow. And I'm going to that's a
national news. Everybody knows it, right? You know, if you underwrite a
project right now, you're under writing at the dip, right? And it's slow. If it
turns back up, that number could go faster, right? And so, I mean, standing
right here right now with what I know you're I think you're probably everybody
three years get to 100 homes. That's that's solid revenue to me.
You know, I'm I'm not that's not my area of expertise, but
» [laughter]
» Danny, you getting close? >> Yeah, I'm finished.
» All right. I'm like Danny, I'm going to be here a
little bit, so um some of this going to be just
statements, some of it's going to be questions. I don't need deep
in-depth explanation. You said hired you used to to tell it city utilities. will
help our rates." I've asked that question before. Our utility rates will
not go down, no matter how many houses we get. You said there's 18 ft between
houses. There is no house in Mary Oaks that is 18 ft apart. They're right up
there. I deliver their mail. 90% of them are up there. So, that is
not so. Um um my question, I don't need to answer,
why aren't we going against the county? And this is a question. Y'all came to
us, we approved y'alls a R1. We give y'all an opportunity. Y'all went
to the county, y'all did not like our R1. Why did you go to the county?
Because you didn't like the county, so you come back to us.
» So, we got We went back to the county and what we presented was R1.
Well, it was R2, R3 back then, but effectively we're looking for R1, R2s,
R3s. Um and so, that was not
agreed upon. Um once again, I think it doesn't go with the comp plan to build
500 homes of the same type over and over again. Uh comp plan
clearly does not state that that's your goal.
Um it's not our goal, either. Uh let's offer homes in a nice
neighborhood to multiple buyer types and multiple people. I think that the the
emergency services folks and the teachers and everything matter.
» All right. >> Right? They should be able to live in
that neighborhood. >> that. Um
the next one was like you um We did agree to all R1. You said we want
multiple. No, we did not agree to R1, R2, R3. So, no, we did not agree to
multiple. So, um
And y'all didn't like that, that's why y'all went to the county and came back.
As you can see, I'm not a BS, excuse me. Um
You said the width lot for R1 the requirement is 70.
» That's right. >> You're saying if you're going to go
back, you're only going to make it 50. That does not meet R1 requirement.
Um >> Is that a question or is that what
you're saying? >> Okay. Um
» Is that a question or >> And the
» you said, "Okay, so we're actually the county is in litigation right now
addressing this matter." I don't understand why we're even addressing it
until that gets taken care of. Everybody in here, I live in a trailer.
Not ashamed of it. Ain't nobody in here out here live in a mobile home.
Um not ashamed of it. Um but would anybody else want anybody on this board
want this in their subdivision? Does any of y'all live in a subdivision?
Um Uh and I don't I don't like being feel
like we're being pressured. You got two times in this thing that says
um you said uh well, first you said it was
previously approved by the county, which it was not. It was shot down.
Um and then
um in this thing you said, "If the property
is not annexed into the city, the property should be developed in Lawrence
County development standards." Once again, you mentioned that again.
"If the site is not annexed into the city limits, the development will occur
prob- probably with more lots that is currently being proposed here. If and
not annexed, the city is obligated to provide services like fire and police."
So, basically you give us two ultimatums that if we don't accept it, you're going
to the county anyway. So, you're pushing us. You went to the county, but you came
back. >> So, let me answer the question. So, I
with that, I was asked a question um
directly of "What happens if this is denied?" I was asked that question. I
said, "Well, my answer to that, you can look back at the video. My answer to
that was well,
I'd rather not be penned into a corner and have to do that. I'm bringing
something that I think is better here. It's less lots, it has better amenities
to the city, it gives city impact fees. But we are approved in the county. I
have a judge order that states it and yes, anyone on earth can appeal a
decision. There are inmates on death row that appeal decisions. Do Does that make
them correct? No. And I have our attorney here. If anybody want Well, if
anybody wants
» We have an approved site plan. So, if anybody wants He was attorney on the
case. If you have any questions on the appeal itself, happy to have him answer
them. Look, we have a signed order by a judge that agreed with us on three
counts. I've never in my career seen a case won on three counts where the
municipality is hard enough to get one. Three.
It There is If there's 10% of appeals in the United
States that get approved and this one has a less percent chance of that.
I've seen these. And if you want
comments from our attorney who's on the case, sitting in that courtroom.
I mean, would y'all like him to speak on it?
» I have some questions for him. >> Well, I got one more question and I'm
done with the BS. Um Um
This property, he's I don't see him here sitting here, but somebody has offered
the same amount of money to Mr. Wyman or whoever owns this land
as y'all. But they're basically saying his money ain't no good. So, there's
something behind the scenes if this guy is wanting
to purchase for the exact same price. There's something behind the scenes.
» It would be a contract.
» Money talks. >> That's That's Well, no, I mean, a
legally binding contract, which we are out of due diligence on and we are
buying the property. So, no, no one else is going to buy the property. I'm going
to own it. We've already come out of due diligence.
We've already let our money go hard. We are buying the property. We are going to
develop it.
I mean, just being honest. >> He said they're going to develop. Y'all
heard it. Go Kirkwood. I'm done. >> No, no, if I can follow that, thank you.
I just have a question. quick question. Sure.
» to address some of the comments that the young lady made here.
And she was asking, why do we want the R3 zoning before we can do it in our
lot? When I started building houses 40 years
ago, we started building the small lot was 100 ft wide, and people built on big
lots, we used septic tanks, and the lot was a smaller part of the price of the
house. Over the years, lots have become a much more expensive
part of the house. The impact fees, the sewer, the water have have risen and
risen now to where lots are
of the sales price of the house 25%. If you take that back to the raw numbers
of building a house, and we're just talking about sticks and
bricks and labor, a lot is really more like 35-40% of the cost of the house.
It's the builder's response to the change in the economics of of the
nation to build a smaller lot so they can build
houses for people.
And we all know that the the pyramid of people buying houses is much bigger at
the bottom than it is at the top. You have the
wealthy individuals that right now in Greenville are buying houses on acre
lots that are 4,500 sq ft that sell for over a million dollars.
But and I'm on the the South Carolina Board
of Housing Finance and Development. We deal
with affordable housing all the time. There is a huge pool of buyers that need
to be thought about, and I'm not talking about
subsidized housing. I'm talking about your firemen, your teachers,
people that make the 45,000 and their wife
makes 45,000. They want to buy a nice house, but to get on a lot that they can
afford for a house that's 275,000,
325,000, we need to have the small lot because if
we were developing lots that were 120 ft wide now, we would be talking about 120,
150,000 dollars to develop those lots by the time we could develop them and mark
them up and get them to the market. Then we'd be
talking about 600,000, 700,000 dollar houses.
And your buying pool in Clinton for that is
small. So we're we're trying to provide housing
for people for the average person that lives
[clears throat] in Clinton. >> Just coming to what you said, R2 and R3,
we have anywhere the numbers keep changing
anywhere from between 1,200 and 1,900 homes proposed already at that level
that are not R1. So that's why from this level we're trying to get all R1 there
because the 1,900, 1,200 homes are already R2, R3. We've got plenty of
R2 and R3 going up. >> And I think we're giving you a good mix.
You know, I know that over and over again 2,200 homes in the pipeline was
mentioned in planning and and really number one, those aren't getting all
eaten in a year. We know that if you've been through development and you know,
small chunk of that a year. So it's not really contributing 2,200 in a year. Um
the other part is in the state of South Carolina
currently is short almost 90 to 100,000 homes.
2,200 homes ain't going to be a drop in that bucket.
And and believe me, everywhere in the state
is growing. You're seeing it. Your industrial park is coming here. You got
the baseball field coming here. This is the large This is the fastest, highest
influx state in the nation right now. Unless we want to
put up walls, that's not stopping. >> Yep.
» And right now the state is short 90 to 100,000 homes.
And that's data from the HBA happy share.
» Okay, let's go to Mr. Kirkendall. So,
I'm just looking at some of the litigation information that you've got
going on right now. And this is no this is no this is
[clears throat] lawyer question right now.
» Okay. All right. >> But I was surprised to see that you've
got Bush River Sporting Clays and Properties as a partner.
» Seller. No, sir. That's the seller. >> Oh, it's the seller.
» Seller. They were on the case. They were an interested party in the case. Yes,
sir. Just cuz they were the seller and they were being impacted by the
decision, too. So, they decided to sign on. Yes, sir.
Yes, sir. >> That's all we have.
Mr. Smith. >> Um a few minutes ago you said that you
offered to help with the downtown revitalization. Can you say I haven't
heard that? >> Yes, sir.
He was talking about the empty buildings and stuff.
And I told him first asked you all had an economic development group, you know,
inside the city or town. And they are everything. And I told him
that I did would not mind meeting with them
or other business people and see if we could
get someone in those places. Just like I don't mind meeting with Ingles when we
start things down there to see if Ingles would upgrade y'all's Ingles down there.
You know, because Ingles don't want another
another grocery store anywhere, you know.
And we think with this coming and talking to Ingles they would do that for
y'all. I would think. Um you know, but I don't mind like I
said, every one of y'all can have my phone number, but I don't mind helping
y'all try to bring some industry some restaurants or or businesses in. More
than happy to do that at no cost right now. I told him I'd be more happy to
meet with him and help him. >> And he did see each day that he's doing
and has done that in Greenwood and South side Greenwood cuz that's I mean you you
could be a better now, but that's an area that's been largely neglected in
Greenwood for years, right? >> So, in Greenwood, which we had 100%
support, hadn't had anybody upset, uh
is that we're in South end of Greenwood, which I live
there. Uh and we've never had anything like our
neighbors on North end or East end or West end.
So, we're finally bringing restaurants down there uh
and and other aspects of businesses along with some homes as well, but we
need those homes to get the businesses. Now, we're starting to do a couple of
those businesses soon uh before the homes get built. Uh but uh but people
are thankful for it. And and that's why I really I mean I respect him. I mean I
really do for coming here. But, we'll do you know, I've offered I think they'll
tell you I've offered my hand if anything I can help y'all with
you know, down here. Plus, it's a possibility we could look for some
grants too and work with y'all uh trying to get those places filled, especially
since you got homes coming here. You know, all over the 2,000 homes.
» And he and I also offered happy to have community meeting and get feedback on
commercial or different elements. Happy to do that. We we have met with some
citizens, but I mean I'm happy to have a community community meeting here that.
Um I mean there's not not every builder and every developer's going to do that.
Right? But, we're the local builder. We did.
» Okay, let's jump in to Mr. Smith. >> Uh Mr. Wham, are you
are you knowledgeable about the county process? Could I ask you a couple
questions about that? >> A little bit. Yes.
» Okay. Um so, when we if we have something already in the city and the
and a developer comes and wants to build it up, it goes to planning commission,
they make a recommendation, and then we vote on whether we to approve it or not.
How is that the same or different from how that process happens in the county?
» It's a little different. Um there's similarities, but uh the county
has I think you you may have read it in that order.
They have what's called the technical review committee.
Which is more of a I'd say the county's approaches maybe more administrative.
Y'all been through it, maybe you can comment on that.
» Yes sir. >> Um
» The TRC. >> Where the TRC could have actually
approved Well, let me back up.
That is not the case anymore. I understand the county has changed that
in large part because of what happened with this development. So,
um the ordinance before said that um either the TRC
uh could approve of plat of [clears throat]
subdivision plan or the planning commission uh and or the planning
commission. So, it left it open so that the TRC could actually approve that plan
without going to the planning commission. And that's actually what
happened, which is actually why they won the
» Mhm. >> lawsuit is because
they had vested rights. The TRC had approved it, that was
that was correct most likely under the county ordinance
at the time. Again, the county has has shifted. I think you probably have to
get both now if you were to bring something before the county.
Um so, the county has a planning commission, but I think before it was
based on if you had a variance, you had to go to the planning commission. If
there was no variance or it was a small subdivision,
the TRC could stamp it and that would allow them to move forward. So,
um >> The county doesn't really have any
zoning, does it? >> Yes sir.
» The county doesn't have any zoning. >> It's up It's up to them.
» I mean, it's No, that's correct. Which adds a layer obviously to this process
because you you have the you have the say in whether or not this
comes into the city. You want this property within the city limits.
[clears throat] And that's effectively what
» In in the >> One of the major differences between
what the county did and >> what you're doing.
» In getting that letter, the the TRC approval letter, what that explains is
every department has to check it to say does it meet your ordinances
that are publicly posted. When a developer goes before a planning
commission with a site plan that robust, with that much due diligence, they've
spent probably over a hundred thousand dollars to get there. Um not very
litigious. You look back at my history, don't have
a lot of those on my rap sheet, but I will tell you this,
when I get an approval letter from TRC that says we have met to the T
publicly posted ordinances and in good faith of those publicly
posted ordinances, spent six figures to get there,
and then it goes and is inexplicably denied by a planning
commission with a TRC approval letter, that's that's why we we found ourselves
in that situation. >> So, as soon as the TRC
gave you approval, you were allowed to build.
» The the site per the judge's order, the TRC approval letter
did confirm that we met all ordinances and that was deemed as an approval.
And correct me if I'm wrong. Um
» Can I make I'm going to have a question for him, too. So, can you step up?
» Um and so, the site plan is approved and vested per the judge's order. It's
on the judge's order. >> I saw that.
» Yes, Judge Vance's order does state that as of
June 23rd, which is when that TRC approval letter came through, uh that
vested rights uh they were vested at that time.
Uh in the alternative, Judge Vance also ruled um that
if uh for argument's sake, if the county was allowed to uh
subject uh [clears throat] Cambridge Farms to the uh dual uh approval process
as they did, which Judge Vance found that that was not proper, um that
the planning commission's decision to with uh to refuse that duplicate
approval was arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion,
and it lacked any legal evidence to support it. Um Judge Vance's order
specifically found that neither the Technical Review Committee nor the
Planning Commission identified any specific deficiencies, uh
non-conformity, or violations of applicable ordinance with the respective
preliminary plat. Um in addition, the order stated that the court finds
the petitioners complied with every applicable requirement of the county's
ordinance and regulations. And so, along with being
um unlawfully subjected to the dual review
process, um their Lawrence County Planning
Commission's decisions arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion.
» So, I'm sure it's part of the process, but I
don't understand it. If you had If the TRC said they approve and you're allowed
to build, how did you end up in front of the
Planning Commission and the County Council?
» So, in front of the county
» Council or in front of Planning? >> Yeah, so we went in front of Planning.
I'm sorry if I misspoke. >> You We were never in front of County
Council? >> There There is no
So, it's open zoning, so we we would not have to go in front of County Council to
ask for zoning. Right now, we're in a zoning annexation meeting.
With open zoning, that step skips, and you go straight to a site plan approval,
which is with Planning Commission, just like you guys. Site plan approval would
be after this if you voted, "Hey, we're good with this today and in the next
reading." Our next step would be we would go and create a
full set of construction drawings, a lot of detail, a lot of questions to ask,
and then we would go in front of your Planning Commission. Well,
that's the step you just go You You can go straight to, don't have
to go straight to, but they tried to push us to even even with the
approval. >> How long do you expect the appeal to
take? >> So, as of right now, initial briefing of
that appeal is not complete. Um I believe off the top of my head, uh this
coming Friday, the first brief from Lawrence County is due. Uh that is
assuming no extensions. Um
initial briefing can take anywhere from probably
two to three months. Um maybe longer depending on
um extensions. As far as the time when that appeal will
be heard in front of the court of appeals, that can range I mean anywhere
from a year to two years. Um after that, the time that it would take for the
court of appeals to issue an opinion uh could be an additional year if not
longer. Um so I mean it could end up being a
multi-year process. >> So, does that have anything to do with
y'all wanting to be in the city because that that just goes
away and >> Like I mean, if we're going to
take the time to go through the appeal process, which
at this point, if you really read the facts of the case, it is very strong.
And correct me if I'm wrong, they cannot bring in any new facts. It is a review
of the facts of the case as it stands. >> Uh
yes, so the appellate um the
standard of your review would be the facts as it was there presented in front
of the planning commission. That record has been set.
Um that was set in the circuit court. >> I mean
So, with that said, we can go forward
with that and and we're willing to fight that battle, go down that route. The
county is going to spend money on that legally.
We will spend money on it. Right? We had a site plan here that
we spent a lot of time on with the city and
made better per the vision of the city.
So, while we're in this process right now, instead of sending
the county down a path where they're going to spend a whole lot of money
and we're going to be be to go do it anyways, you know,
why not take it forward with a city that has seemed
like they appreciate the site plan, appreciate
this and the growth, need it, right,
and can benefit from it. So,
» Mr. Causey, I want to say something. The other week,
uh when he was asked the question, it wasn't that he was being rude. They
said, "Are you going to go ahead no matter if we
approve this or not? If we don't approve it, are you going to
go ahead and build with these 600 something homes?"
And what what he's got in there and what's passed through the county
through that court, then yes, he would. He wouldn't be a
rude man. They asked a direct question about it. So, [clears throat] I want you
to understand that. He wouldn't be a rude man.
» And I'm not being rude to you, you. I I'm really not being rude to you. I have
read the body language the whole time. I was over there. Um
and I have no problem with R1. I voted R1. That's what we passed the first
time. I don't like to be lied to. I don't like
to be BSed. And I'm not talking to you. I think I've been very polite, you as
well. Um I don't mind speaking with him as an
individual. But that's what he told me it's going.
» The way I look at it, it's a 117
117 homes less and you all would
gain the taxation. And and that's the plus side, I guess
you'd say. >> That that brings up a point I wanted to
make, and that's
Planning Commission did approve or recommend that we approve this as all
R1, and we and we did that. And many people in this room were at that
meeting. And at that time, everybody was telling
us, "You have to do what Planning Commission recommends."
And now Planning Commission is recommending we approve this plan, and
they want us to go against what Planning Commission recommends.
So, I don't know what to do with that, but
we have we already approved more lots than this.
Um the the wetlands concerns, all all that
stuff, the traffic, it's all valid. We voted to approve it with more homes.
They've come back, in my opinion, with a better plan.
Um the commercial, people have concerns about that. I think I hope we can
fix the issue with the R3. I think we can, especially if they're going to do a
development agreement that gives us time to do a similar We changed our zoning
based on the concerns from a lot of the crowd
that they were going to build they wouldn't build what they said they
would. But R R2 and R3 allowed multifamily, and people said, "Well, as
soon as you give them that zoning, that's what they'll do." So, we created
two new zoning designations. Um
I think coming back with with R2S and R3S, that's kind of what we
asked them to do. It's fewer homes, and we we fixed the zoning. I know
people still don't like the narrow lots. I I get that. Um that's valid. But, the
main concern I remember from the first meetings was that they would build
multifamily, no matter what we did. Um
to answer your question, Ms. Cogsdell, about would you live there? I would. I
mean, I don't I don't have a problem with this type of neighborhood.
Pool, cabana, 10-acre central park, athletic fields, cooking area, walking
trails. Um I have I have cousins in Missouri
that grew up in a neighborhood very similar to this,
and I was always jealous when I went to their house. I lived in the middle of
nowhere and had one neighbor. And some people want that, but some
people want this. Uh I've I've been in a lot of neighborhoods like this. I've
I've visited in them. I know people that live in them. My mother-in-law lives in
a neighborhood similar to this. The people there all know each other.
They get along. Um
I don't I don't view this as something negative for Clinton. I think if you
asked many people in Clinton, would you rather stay where you're at or move into
this neighborhood, they would choose this neighborhood if they could afford
it. Um
So, that that's just my honest answer. If this was If something like this was
being put in near my house, I'd I would be okay with that. And I'm
just trying to be honest. I know people may not believe that, but that's my
honest take on it. Um
So, the and and to to to talk about the wetlands,
I I've heard from so many people in this room and people that aren't in this
room. I've also heard from a lot of people in the community that aren't here
that speak positively about it, that see the positive attributes, that see how it
will help our city both financially and with a customer base for downtown
businesses. Um it's very hard to be the to be in a
room where a bunch of people are against something and stand up and say, "I think
it's a good idea." So, I don't expect to hear a lot of people in Clinton that
would be positive about it. Um
» Coming here. >> Co- coming here to speak in front of I
mean, and even on like Facebook and things, there's no reason to put your
neck on the line and say, "Well, I I kind of like it or whatever."
Um it just puts you in an awkward spot. >> [cough and clears throat]
» As far as the the I do [snorts] want to clarify a
couple things because the number 2200 has been in the planning commission
meetings and different areas. I tried to get a an actual number on
that, and the number that we have that I got from our planning
um planning department,
thought I had it up here. Uh is it 15 and 30, Phil? 1530.
Um one of them that was on the initial list,
one of them that was on the initial list, we we didn't approve. That was the
one Mr. Meters, can you help me out by the ball our ball fields?
» Red Complex. >> Valley Valley Acres.
» Valley Acres. Um Hampton Woods is already done
building, so they shouldn't be on the approved. They already exist, and I
guess most of them are sold. And what was the other one that was on
our list initially that got us to 1908.
There was one that's no longer. Highland Park, was it?
Okay, Highland Park, they're they've Are they decided not to move forward or
we've Have we done something with that or previous
Okay.
Okay. So, I mean, that may still be a big number for people, but it's it's
different than 2200 and the homes that we have the option to approve tonight
doesn't even get us to 2200 based on what we have
currently approved. Um couple more things I want to say. I
know I'm going kind of long. Uh
the development agreement, I think it's huge.
Um we definitely have to have that in
place, and I think that would ease a lot of people's minds.
Um
The the real issue for me tonight is that
whether or not you think it's a good chance or bad chance, I've read the
court documents. Um I I'm not going to put a percentage
on it. It looks like they have a good case. Y'all got approved before the
moratorium was put in place. Um some people may think that the appeal
has a chance, and maybe it's also people just want that process to happen because
it would delay these guys 2 years. I'm not sure.
Um but it looks like it has a great chance
of being upheld, in my opinion. Um so, the the greatest risk to the city
tonight, in my opinion, is that we don't approve it,
and then they build anyway in the county,
and we've still got the wetlands issue, we've still got flooding, we've still
got traffic. We've mentioned a lot of cons to the project.
Um and there are I I see a lot of positives to it, but we've talked a lot
about the negatives. And the
the best chance of what could happen is that it gets approved in the county
anyway and it's built and those problems all exist anyway and we don't get any of
the impact fees or the taxes. Um
I I've heard a lot of you. I've talked to a lot of you.
The the part that makes this job hard is that even though we hear concerns,
so many of them are valid and and good concerns and things that we're going to
do everything we can to fix. We still have to vote yes or no
on things. And what puts me over the edge, I'll I'm going to vote yes
tonight. What puts me over the edge is knowing
that there's a good chance that it's going to happen anyway.
Um so we've spent all this time talking about do we like the project or not?
But there's still a good chance hanging over our heads that it's going to be
built whether we do like it or not. Um
I haven't taken that as a threat, but I I've I've just seen that's probably the
reality. Um so
acknowledge I I'll just acknowledge the risks involved with voting no or tabling
it. Um
that those are the positive things about it. I obviously don't see neighborhoods
like this as something super negative. I feel like we're talking about data
centers and it's just homes where people are going to live.
Um I understand people don't like it. Some people say, "I don't want to live
that close to my neighbors." If people didn't like this type of neighborhood,
they wouldn't buy the homes. And we have people calling us all the time looking
for exactly this. Um
You add on the risk that I mentioned, that that's why I'm going to vote yes
tonight. That's all I have. >> Corey You Bill Megan and we'll speak
back to Danny. I have no problem with the layout or whatever. All these
amenities are great. And if you remember there in the first time it came through,
it got it was a big issue. And the only way we would pass it was as R1. That's
the only way it got passed. I don't have a problem. If we could go all R1, I
absolutely have no problem with this. I'm
they saying single family, whatever. And I've told this to Megan before. My
trailer does not belong in Mary Oaks. I know that.
And I mean, if it goes all R1, I'll tell you, yes, I'll vote yes. But it right
now, I'm a no. But and I think it's a great layout, but
just you got R1 in the front, well, then you got R3, just say BP and my trailer
at the back. Well, these other 400 homes has got to go back through R1. So, these
people that's done spent $450,000 on a home,
well, you got me and my little beep beep raggedy car coming through this nice
neighborhood. And I'm just saying, I'm not being
smart. I'm just Look, I'm from this side of town. I apologize,
but and I'm not being smart. I'm just stating facts.
» All right. >> And we can agree to disagree.
» Okay. >> My turn.
» Okay. Um so,
um first, can we have your wetlands um expert talk to us about Would that also
Would you also speak to stormwater runoff?
» Uh >> That's someone else.
» Yeah, she have two experts to handle the wetlands.
» Great. I'd love to hear from two strong women. I love it.
Go. >> Uh so, my name's Laura Belanger. I am a
wetland scientist. So, we deal specifically with identifying streams
and wetlands on the undeveloped site. Uh we did our delineation in December of
2024. That's when we bring the field scientists out, and we're looking at
soils, hydrology, vegetation, following Army Corps of Engineers standard
practices. Then we had representatives from the
Army Corps of Engineers out on site at the end of February 2025.
Um so, they have been on site. Um and we have the wetland delineation report. It
identified a total of 9.11 acres of aquatic resources on the
site. Um and that included 6,879
linear feet of tributary. Um
what the Army Corps of Engineers regulates are those aquatic resources
that are protected under the Clean Water Act. And so, that is our very narrow
specialty is all we do is Clean Water Act regulations. So, we get brought out
pretty early in the due diligence timeline.
And so, what does this meet the requirements? Is it
in line with Army Corps of Engineers?
» Yes. So, what they have The way the process works is the first thing that
happens is those resources that are protected under the Clean Water Act are
identified on site. So, that was what happened in December.
And we coordinated with Army Corps of Engineers. If they are going to do any
work within those areas, a permit will have to be obtained from
the Army Corps of Engineers before that can happen and the forest going to have
to authorize that. Um based on their site plan, it looks
like they have avoided the vast majority of impacts
um to aquatic resources the way they've laid everything out.
» Okay. >> So, then it will become a question of
engineering, but the Army Corps has very specific
rules on what they will approve. Um so, for example, road crossings have
very specific culvert requirements. Those were just updated in March of this
year. >> Okay.
» So, that I think the site plan has to get further along to know what those
impacts will be, but they will have to coordinate further with Army Corps for
that. >> Thank you.
» I appreciate scientific expertise, and I especially appreciate seeing women in
STEM. So, thank you. >> Thank you.
» Um so, you can speak to the storm water runoff. That would be fantastic.
» Yes, ma'am. Chrissy Terrell Drake, I'm a partner at
Bluewater Civil Design. Um I'm project manager on this. I've
been involved with it for the past 2 years, so any questions you have, I can
definitely answer. >> Well, tell me what speak to the concerns
that people have um addressed especially regarding um the Bush River.
» Absolutely. So, um just to piggyback off of what Laura was speaking about with
those wetlands, >> [clears throat]
» we're going to have two wetlands crossings for roadways. So, that is
standard permitting procedures that we have to go through. We work with Laura
all the time on those and what those regulations that we have to meet, and
that is specifically because the property is bisected by a tributary. You
cannot get to the back of that property without having an impact. Now, we have
limited that impact to only be the road crossings at this point in time. There's
nothing with our lots. We won't have grading outside of the what has to be
for that road crossing and that culvert in any of the wetland areas, including
there's buffers set to those those wetland areas as well with the
delineations, and we're not near anywhere in those buffers, either.
To piggyback off of some other issues that have come up um specifically with
[clears throat] the Bush River. So, I believe I was asked this at planning
commission, and I think there was just some confusion with the question. I was
being asked to elaborate if there was an Army Corps of
Engineer delineated report for the flooding.
Your flood zones are established by FEMA, which is your Federal Emergency
Management Agency. They do their own studies. They come
through and they evaluate what those zones are. So, on our site specifically
along that back edge, there's small parts of the site that have that zone AE
signature on it. So, in that area, it is a flood zone. We cannot add any fill. We
cannot do any disturbance. And there's a base flood elevation set that we have to
design homes at least 6 ft taller than. I went ahead and ran a preliminary
evaluation of what those base flood elevations are and where our closest
roadway and uh lots that back up to that flood area
is, and we're 20 ft in the air. Above what that established flooding
elevation is by national data. So, there's nothing that we will be
doing in that flood zone. When it comes to storm water, we also
have state regulations that we have to meet.
In the city of Clinton, that goes directly to SEDES.
They evaluate our designs. We have peak rate attenuation that we have to meet
for our development. There's watershed elevations in our ponds that we have to
meet that are all state regulated. And those are who come out, perform
annual inspections, and make sure everything in the site is per design and
up to code. So, there's no
detrimental Let me rephrase Let me rephrase that.
Excuse me. At this point in time with our design
meeting those state regulations, we are going to be at code there.
We have enough space available that we are willing to go above. Just from my
engineering my name is going on these plans. I'm
liable. I'm a state licensed professional engineer. My number is
410730 if you want to look me up. I've got 12 years of experience.
I would not feel comfortable putting my name on these plans without the
designing to the 100-year storm. So, you have my guarantee as a partner
in this company that that will be happening.
We we sign an oath to not harm.
To not perform any engineering that is going to cause issues and harm to
downstream neighbors. So, I I hope that gives you a little bit
of >> reassurance.
» I also again, I appreciate women and still and I appreciate the
the engineering creed >> [clears throat]
» to do no harm. I mean, I I I I think we are
uh as uh
someone who believes in science, we're going to see more floods, more and more
floods. That's just a fact um because um
that's fact. Um so, I at least a 100-year flood standard is
what have to be forward thinking of um but I
I appreciate your input um and addressing the concerns of those um
Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am.
» Um Okay, I've got some other things.
Um >> May I May I May I ask a follow-up
question while she's up here, please? >> Will your report be done in phases as
development occurs based on current structures and then as more added or do
you do it on the front end in the beginning and then it's not done anymore
till it's completed out?
» So, we will look at it as a full build out development for our engineering
calculations that we need. Cuz you have to take into account the whole thing
being developed, all of that impervious area, the areas going into those ponds.
Now, we may break our construction phasing out, but our hydrology and our
report will be analyzed with the full build out.
» Okay. Thank you.
» Um thank you. I appreciate that. Um
So, I
First I'll speak to um the difference between county and city, just my view of
it. Um I know this may not be the exact meaning of home rule, but home rule is
that municipalities get to decide for themselves
what um what is good for our municipality.
And so, to say that because cuz the county
is fighting it, uh whatever terminology we want to use,
that we shouldn't move forward goes against that
at least the spirit of home rule. Again, I'm not assured I know home rule means
some different things. Some has a legal terms to it, but that we have the
capacity as a a council to decide things for our municipality
regardless of what as long as we're following state
law, you know, we don't have to follow county. We we
set more standards for zoning than they do.
We would have more control over things as a part of our city annex. I think
this fits well into our annexation plan, which has in the past we have always
talked about moving out 72 as part of our annexation plan.
I have chosen to live in this community for 18 years. I've raised all of my
children. My youngest is starting her senior year tomorrow. Got a lot going
on, but I love being here to represent our community.
Um, I grew up in a very urban area. Um, houses
very close together that I I lived on a peninsula on a peninsula in Florida.
Probably one of the highest density areas, Pinellas County,
in the country. Um, so I don't know. I grew up okay next to
neighbors. Um,
I live in a high-density area here, College View. I can hear
uh, my neighbor Greg when he pulls into the driveway, which is right next to my
bedroom, and know if he turns the light on or off in his, uh, driveway.
And I I can't throw a ball to the mayor's house, but I know I could kick a
ball to the mayor's house. And three he's three houses down.
Um, I know there's always there's fear with change. There's so much fear with
change. I remember a few years ago when there was change on my street
when Thornwill asked to have a roadway opened to start the farm, and we were
told that children were going to die, that it was unsafe. And as of now, no
children have died on our road. Everyone's been safe, and I think most
people would agree that it's been a positive addition to our city. Um, and I
like being able to pass by it on my daily walk.
Um, I
don't think that commercial growth
on that end of the city is mutually exclusive from growth down here. I think
what we have to do is increase our median income, and the only way to do
that is to increase our population. Um, our schools are not at capacity, and
we do need to increase those. Um,
and we need more teachers. Um, I work in special education, and it is a beast to
find teachers who are adequately certified, who are willing to live. They
all want to live in Greenville, um, and people don't want to commute, and
um we are losing a lot of our qualified
teachers, a lot of teachers that, um, some of you may have had who are aging
out and have hung on for a long time, but will [clears throat] retire at some
point. Um I was, um, in Fountain Inn
uh, this last weekend.
And it was so packed, I we couldn't find
find parking and had to ditch our plans and go somewhere else, and I think those
are issues we could only we would love to dream of having. And 20 years
ago, I think we will all agree that that was not where downtown Fountain Inn was.
It was not the place to be, but it is now, and it's partially because of um,
the growth. And I I know it's scary. I know that change is scary, but we also
have a fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of Clinton. And
if I again, and I don't see it as a threat. I know, I mean, I don't see it
as a threat of they're going to build. That's just a the fact, and
if we don't annex, we are losing out on and we will have to service them with
fire. And if if we annex them, correct me if I'm wrong, Chief.
Um you know, the traffic, as of right now,
that's out of your jurisdiction, correct?
Yes. But if we were to annex, you would be able to patrol that section
of road. For speeding, for
Okay. So that would extend our ability to monitor traffic, speeding, that kind
of thing. Whereas right now, as it stands, without annexation, you would
have you would have no ability Okay.
Um so
I I
have looked at the plans when it was all R1, and it did look a lot more congested
than this. It was that we you lost all of that green space between.
This to me I I and I again, I know this is a
bird's-eye view. Um is
provides a lot more green space than an all R1.
Um and
I I have young adult children who A, think they'll never be able to
afford a home. >> Yeah.
» Period. Um
the job market is dismal
right now for young adults coming out of college.
Um and to
everyone I know has a boomerang child in their house right now.
Um and would love to get them out.
» [laughter]
» This and and this would not I don't you know, not necessarily be affordable to
it, but but they want to have something
to aspire to. And And we are the fastest-growing state in the nation.
More people moved to South Carolina last year than any other state, period.
Um so, those are my Those are my thoughts.
» Okay, thank you. >> You said that Mary Oak, I mean, and I've
told this before. I mean I mean, everybody don't
have to live in Mary Oaks. Everybody don't belong in Mary Oaks. I mean
I mean, anybody can live there, I'm just saying. But, you got these other 1,900
homes that if you can't afford a Mary Oaks home, then
you go to the one of the other 12 or 1,900. I don't I live above my means
just so I can fit in to go in Mary Oaks.
» Okay. >> Can I say one thing
» Sure. We're not getting ready to close yet. I'm going to talk first.
» Well >> Huh.
I really like the design. >> I think
» Thank you. >> most everything we've got going
uh you've come to the table with the more attractive design.
» Thank you. >> But, I have to keep reminding myself
that whether it's 2,200 or if it's 1,400 we have, at least, I'm going to say
around 1,600 homes on the schedule right now.
And we've, you know, we've talked about the schools' concerns about filling
these classrooms. Those deals that we already have
on our schedule is going to make
a a big impact in the city of Clinton. And I know most of our focus has been on
this right now. But, it seems like we've lost focus on
these other areas. But those when we build rooftops where
we've got already approved I want somebody to me that's not going
to impact Clinton like we're like we're parading this to
be.
I'm waiting. >> I don't understand.
» What we have already scheduled to be built in Clinton?
Do you think it's not going to impact the city?
» Of course. >> All right. How much do we need
to get to the goals we're trying to reach?
Do we want to become the upper the upper cities that's just
covered with it? Or do we want to become the Fort Mills
that my cousins that live over there say, "If you can avoid it, please do."
Or Woodruff, "If you can avoid it, please do."
» Well, what we can control is by zoning. And if we don't
» we have. >> If we don't have If we [clears throat]
are not part of the process, if we don't annex, we have no say over that zoning.
And and they can and people can build in the county and do whatever they want.
» So, I don't >> my focus question right now is
have we not established
credibility plans of building homes in this town
already? Signed.
» I I don't understand your question >> Okay.
» about credibility. >> Okay.
We've got homes scheduled and they're building them now at the Commons. 120.
And then we've got those on Vance property. How many of those? 300?
» Vance property was 175 in their [clears throat] first
phase. >> First phase.
» They didn't have any plans for the second phase.
» Okay. All right. The uh The uh Wilder property property?
» 135 town homes. >> All right. Then we've got uh
the Dutton property? >> That was around 70.
» And can you tell me what else we've got cuz we've got to get to 1,500 somewhere.
» We got Shell Creek. >> Yeah.
» That That was
» Town Mountain >> 35 Shell
» Springdale >> I've got the list.
» We've got behind Truman orange juice house over there. No movement on that
one. But we've got what?
» What's up there? >> They came to us with a preliminary
» playing >> And that's one of those that
the 2-year deal is about up on. So, it'll can be referred reverted back to
the original seller.
» Okay. All right. And we've talked about
traffic. Traffic's been a big concern about us cleaning this development up.
The traffic, as I see it, is not going to be such such a bad spot
right there where the the the development's going.
Those employ Those people are probably going to be employed either in Columbia
or in Simpsonville or Spartanburg. Their pattern of traffic is going to flood
that ring road. And the schools like
uh the uh the grammar school Eastside, the Pinewood High School,
the middle school, all those areas are going to be high-density traffic areas.
Because those those vehicles are going to be headed to 385 by 26.
» Okay. >> And the ring road right now is
four-lane. >> And it is a booger. You You You've been
out there during school hours? >> Yes, I have.
» Okay. >> Every day.
» Okay, let me let me let me say something. It Some point The
good thing about being in local government is we get to make all the
easy decisions. And
we get to to hear a lot of different things.
One of the things when you're talking about
um numbers and about all this traffic, I just wonder how we how we made it back
in the '90s because right now we're down 2,000 people
from '96 when Clanton Mills closed and Timken closed. And we're projected to go
down in the next five or seven years 2,000 more. So, you know, we're going to
go from we're worrying about traffic and we're not going to have any traffic.
We're going to be we're we're going to be
uh dark. I've I would
Everybody that's talked to me and I've I've talked to folks, you know, I've
been in this since 1996 and I've uh it's and it's you always do get um
everybody that comes to these meetings is mostly against stuff.
And but we also I've had numbers and numbers of folks that have said
keep going, we're we're doing well, we want to grow. And we do need to grow. We
either grow or you die. Is that's my opinion. I love this place. I'm I'm I'm
like Fred Chapman used to say, Dr. Fred Chapman, he said when he was ran for
school district, he said he was um he was in line at the grocery store one day
and uh he had announced he was going to run
for school board and he was behind two ladies in the grocery store and they
were talking about who was running and they said some Johnny-come-lately just
moved here. He'd only been here 20 years at that point in time. Well, I'm one of
those 55 to 60-year Johnny-come-latelys who chose here, raised my children,
raised my grandchildren, and and love Clanton. And so, I think, you know, what
all of us are doing is trying to balance what's going to be good for Clanton and
what's not. And and I think this is good for Clanton. Um
the traffic Megan talked about um
when all we lost um a lot of folks for a while,
I I had the idea at one point to add on to you would talk about would you want
this near you? Well, my idea was to come down Maple Street where Thornwell Farm
is now, but add another block at least of houses right out there if Thornwell
would have given up some of that pasture.
Um that didn't work obviously, but the um
there was a an outcry on having the farm uh open up. You know, I walk out my
front door and I can look right right into everything and it's turned into the
the only traffic problems we've had is from the same folks that were that
drive drove fast before this thing was built and they've been living there a
long time and I want to say anything. They may be kin to me at
some point. I don't know, but it's it's um
it's really been turned out to be a a good thing.
One of the things that I've done that I've heard over the years we've been
doing economic development, we've been the first back in 2002 when I first got
elected mayor, we were trying to talk to people into
skipping over Fountain Inn and Simpsonville and and Gray Court and
Laurens and coming to Clinton cuz we're in the located in the absolute best spot
in the state right here where these two interstates come together.
Um manufacturers at that point in time said, "We'd love to be there, but you
got no houses. You got no place for people to live."
And you know, we're we're answering that. We're We're not right now
the houses we've got on the books aren't going to grow as much. They're going to
get us hopefully back up to sort of even.
You know, it's I'm so I don't you know the traffic might be more but it might
be the same as when everybody says we had this bustling downtown. Well, now
that you know, we don't have that many people so downtown doesn't bustle as
much. Um I think
what I entered into all of this for was to try
to make us grow in a smart way
and so that this place would be fun. It would be everybody we went to a meeting
Friday night and everybody said we ain't got anything to do. And you know, I
said, well, we're working on that, you know, restaurants and that kind of thing
is what everybody wants. Um all sort of amenities and it requires
people. And that's the the the thing Fat's Cafe
years ago for you know, when it was running fast, we stood out there to talk
them into coming here and they said you don't have enough rooftops. You
can't make it work. And we finally made them we finally got them talked them
into coming and and they realized it you know, we got 50,000 more people that
ride by on the interstate. But it's it's
the decisions are hard. The decisions are are the implications are
um are
ch- you know, they change. They're they're difficult for some folks.
They're not difficult for other folks. Um but this this project um I agree with
Mr. Kirkendall the the is the best plan we've had, I think. The planning
commission approved it and we've we've, you know, I've always voted with the
planning commission so um I think it's a it's a good thing.
It's going to take some work and it's going to take some, you know, folks
getting along and understanding, but um
I think we've talked enough and it's time to
» Can I say one more thing? >> Yeah.
» And I'd like to speak after Ninnie on one thing.
Um we we just received I mean I let me start out different.
Um
we just received all the documents about the court case in the past I don't know
I got some of them today. I tried to read through them as quick as I could.
Um I I just want to reiterate I feel like
and and I would I would ask the people that are against
this project to consider also there is risk involved in this moving forward in
the county. You may think they have a great case and they can win, but there
is risk involved there. They could they could the appeal could lose and this
could go forward in the county. At that time we lose all control over
the product project. We have no development agreement.
We have I don't think the project they presented
to the county included some of the amenities if I'm correct.
» That's correct. >> Um
and we lose all the fees and property taxes and we still have like we
discussed we're covering the police and fire and I know we have a contract and
things, but we we essentially lose control of
the project. Um
I I don't know that I have enough information. I read through the the
court's finding. I have not seen the appeal.
Um maybe that's good information that we need to to deduct for ourself does the
county have a chance on this appeal? Um
but I feel like that's the most important thing to consider tonight not
the merits of the neighborhood because the merits of the neighborhood we can
discuss all night and get in the weeds about lot width and things like that.
But if it's going to go up in the county anyway, I I would ask all of us to
consider what amount of risk are we willing to take for that?
» Right. >> Um because I don't want to see a year or
two from now the appeal fails and it goes up and we're thinking well, we
should have just had it in the city then. Why did we lose out on all that?
If there people on council that feel like they
don't have a good enough sense of what the appeal says or what what's going to
happen how that's going to turn out, I would change my vote
to table it. If if we feel like we can get more information that would help our
decision because I don't I'm not comfortable with the level of
risk right now where I see they're probably going to win in the county.
» You say the county you think the county's going to win or they're going
to win on appeal? >> I've only seen what the court said. I
haven't seen the appeal. But what the courts what the court sent, they're
going to have to get it overturned on three different
» The authorities I mean the county
» What the county's going to have to get it
overturned on three different Is that correct, Mr. Wynn? They have to
win all three or can they just win one? >> Well,
um And I'll I'll let the developer's
attorney talk about this, but um there is no
you don't have any written material beyond that court order.
So, the appeal is just a notice of appeal
that's been filed by the county. And as he mentioned earlier, there will
be briefs that have to be filed. So so all that information is it's not there.
You have that court order is what is available.
» Okay. >> And and that order is where they the
judge ruled in favor of the developer. >> Yeah.
» Um >> So, would you be able to start the
process under that court order?
» My understanding right now is that we would be able to start that process. We
have deemed approval effective as of June 23rd, 2025. However, I think there
will be practical implications of trying to get
um you know, of permit from the county while this is
on appeal. Um however, legally speaking, my understanding is that we are deemed
approved and we are entitled to that. Yes, sir.
» But they could Could they file a stay? >> They could attempt.
I don't know what they would do. I can't really speak to them, but they may have
an ability to try to stop that in some format.
» Yeah. I mean, I I'll I'll finish with that. I'm I'm comfortable tabling if we
feel like we can get more information. Um
but but I I think the worst-case scenario is that it goes up anyway. All
the people's concerns are still there.
» So >> And it's not in the city.
» If I may make a clarification, as far as the initial briefing and what
would be decided, it would all be based >> [sighs]
» on you know, kind of
I don't know off the top of my head what the standard would be for Judge Judge
Bantz's review, um but it would be similar to what Judge Bantz did. Uh the
same arbitrary and capricious analysis. And they would have to find that Judge
Bantz abused his discretion or somehow made an error of law on top of that. So,
they would not necessarily They would be doing a review of, you know, again, what
kind of the same material that was submitted to Judge Bantz. So, as far as
new material coming out, uh the record is set. Um there is, my understanding,
nothing new can be presented. It's all based on what was argued to the Planning
Commission um and what supported that denial. Uh
so, to a certain degree, the record is set.
Um >> So, new information
coming out is They're reviewing
this, right? >> Correct. The record is set.
» I understand. I I would I would be open to hearing from a neutral attorney as
far as like someone that could give an opinion that I can't make on what chance
the appeal has. And I I mean, I would even be interested in hearing from the
people who are against this project, what level of risk are you comfortable
with knowing that we lose all control of it and we have
the best chance we have a development agreement. We have the best chance of
making sure they do exactly what they say they're going to do and we lose
total control if it doesn't go through the city. So
I'm I'm saying I'm open to getting more information where we can.
» And this is first reading, too. It's It's It's not It's not the final.
» Mr. Mayor >> Good.
» I'd like to make a motion to table it for a minimum of 2 weeks from today.
Not to hear more about the design of the plan, not to hear more from pro and con
about why the subdivision is not there, but to review
the proposed comprehensive plan that is out for review,
to get a copy of the development agreement that they're willing that they
presented for us to review and have legal counsel look at from our side and
and then have an independent attorney talk to us a little bit about the
appellate process. Not to be pro or con, just to explain
um what it is for us and then based on that information
we finish the first reading
to go from there. >> I would feel way more comfortable with
that. >> Can I
say something?
Uh Danny, back to your first question. I meant to
answer it and I didn't. Um the development agreement references a
set of covenants that
will run perpetually unless Council
chooses to vote differently. So I did want to point that out. It's a 30-year
It's actually a 30-year term, but it automatically extends for 10 years after
that, successive periods of 10 years, unless
council votes to change that. So, the city is a party to that. I just wanted
to highlight that cuz that's part of that
development agreement. It does have a set of covenants. So, just for your
information, I know you were concerned about the
um C or the R3 and the C3.
» Yeah. Well, and that's the other thing I'd like
» say that's that has not been addressed. >> That's what the other thing I would like
for the city to come back and and tell us how quickly that could be
handled. >> So, so that was one thing. Now, that is
not a prohibited use currently in this draft. That was what I think Mr.
Leishman sent, but I and I didn't get a chance to talk to him. Um but, that was
something that needs to be highlighted. But, that should answer some of that
your question. >> But, to to to Danny's Mr. Smith's point,
and I'm sorry Danny used your first name like that. But, to me, we got a lot of
documents today after 12:00 today that we were supposed to have prepared, to
have studied, understood the ramifications, good or bad, and we were
getting them that late today. To me, for us to make an informed decision
that we feel comfortable for in our own heart
and that we feel like is doing the right decision for this city, then I think we
need the documents well in advance to have that informed decision. And then we
do it more as a work session with this kind of information at hand.
» So, to that, you've got a motion and a second on the floor
which will have to be dealt with. Now, you can do a friendly amendment. I can't
remember who made the motion and who made the second.
» I did. Danny did. >> In other words, before your motion can
be taken up, that really ought to be the the motion has on the floor has to be
dealt with or >> I can offer a substitute motion, can I
not? >> You could do a friendly amendment would
be the would be the way to do it, but >> to my original motion?
» I'm not sure who made the motion. >> No, Megan made the motion.
Oh, you're talking about Oh, you're talking about with first reading A.
» Correct. >> I thought a substitute motion could be
made in the in the middle of a regular motion and that has to be dealt with
before a regular motion can be handled. >> I'd have to check my Robert's Rules of
Order. >> Hamburg.
» [laughter] >> My understanding is you've got a motion
and a second on the floor that >> And was in discussion.
» discussion. >> I brought to the floor a new motion and
it was seconded. >> think that can if you're not the
the the motion maker, I don't think you can offer a sub
» As a sub A substitute motion can be made by anyone.
» I would never entertain a another motion unless the
original motion was dealt with and um and or either amended by the
the person that made the motion. I mean, I think that's the proper way to do it.
So.
» Should we just Well, I'll stand by.
» Well, with this council of six tonight that
I'm just saying that >> Yeah. I I'll
Are you Are you all proposing a maximum of 2
weeks, a minimum of 2 weeks, uh >> I I was just looking at my calendar. I I
don't think we need to prolong this long and on and on.
» No, uh >> But I think as long as we're given the
documentation within the next 3 to 5 working days
then we should that would give us 7 to 9 days to study it by the 17th or 18th.
» And well, I'll be gone the last 2 weeks of August starting the 17th, but some
people might be glad I'm gone, so. [laughter]
And I'll be glad to be gone, too.
» Okay. >> Well, that's easy.
» Um I
I I resend my motion or amend my motion to table it.
Um
» For 2 weeks? >> For 2 weeks.
» Okay. Ms. Walsh um
amends her motion to table this for 2 weeks.
We'll need a second. >> You Well, Mr. Smith has to approve it.
» Oh, I second that. >> Okay. So, I was thinking he might.
Okay. Any any further questions or comments?
» I do um if you take the 2 weeks, then I'm just like I just stated, I'm not
here, so that's kind of just throwing a boat out the window.
» Are you gone >> the 17th the 2 weeks. So, I'll be gone 2
weeks 17th through the I'm going to Texas and Alaska.
» Was 2 weeks part of your motion? >> It was. I can
» You can do it before or after. I have no problem.
» Let's just say before. >> That would be one.
Well, that would give us one. >> Let's try after.
» We could just move it to the next meeting, the 31st.
» No. Um that I think if we move it to the 31st, that gives us 2 weeks if we decide
in part five of this meeting that we move our September
» we just table the dagum thing? >> That would be table to that.
» That is table to it. You got to >> address it in
2 weeks. >> Okay. She's saying August 31st.
» You'll be back by August 31st. >> I don't care.
» When will you be back? >> We'll be gone on the
» We can find a day but I think I think we need to make sure it's a time where we
can all meet and that's the important part. I don't think it would look I
don't think it's right to table and then come back without.
» I agree. >> Ms. Coggins to
» We wait? till the time that every council member is available.
» I second that. >> the rules
» We want you here. >> She made a motion. What do you want to
make her do? >> [laughter]
» I'm good. Whatever. >> Okay.
» Y'all go ahead. >> Well, that would be what we're voting
on, that we would table this to a time that is mutually beneficial
to all seven council members. >> Okay.
And we have a second. >> Second.
» Okay. Anything else?
If not, all in favor, please say aye. >> Aye.
» All opposed, no. Motion carries.
So, we are tabled until >> So, what do [clears throat] we set a day
or no, we just table it until we find >> We table this till we find a day. We're
not going to sit here and scrap it around right now.
» We will have to find a day cuz one of our members is out.
» [clears throat]
» All right. Next Next order of business is Mr.
» Say it again.
» We're still meeting. Thank you.
Please exit quietly. We're still in a meeting. We We're still got other stuff
to talk about.
» Thank you, sir. Um
the next item on the agenda is for city council to consider amending
uh of the agreement memorandum of agreement with the YMCA.
Um the reason I'm asking for this is >> [clears throat]
» um several months ago when we were
working on building the recreation complex and most importantly,
the baseball fields. We had a gentleman on staff that was up
to speed, up to date on everything we needed to do with
keeping the baseball fields playable, and that's a year-round
um task.
Um even though they may not be played on in the you know, in the cold of winter,
but they still have to be taken care of. We lost that gentleman uh
in December of this year December of last year.
And so, I've been working with the YMCA, and they have someone on staff. They
have a couple of guys on staff there that are capable of doing what we need
to do. And I am requesting that we amend this
agreement with the YMCA and give them 54,000
in additional funds uh in addition to what the 223,000 we're giving them now
in order for those two gentlemen to help us uh keep up the uh
baseball fields at the recreation complex.
And as time allows during those those days that they're there, they will also
perform other duties as needed. >> Okay, we have a recommendation from
staff to uh amend the YMCA memo- memorandum of agreement to make sure we
can take care of our um our municipal um
ball fields. I have a motion, Mr. Kirkendall second
from Mr. Smith. Uh
questions or comments? I think it's a good idea.
» Have have have you completely >> [clears throat]
» in your figures, this 54,000? Does it Does that include
I mean, this it being a new position.
Have Has everything been studied pretty good about what it's going to really
take to have that person there.
» They would just provide us with labor to keep those fields. Our budget is in the
city's parks and recreation department. It's funded what we need to do to keep
those fields up. They will drag them.
They will keep the grass cut. They will make sure the grass is fertilized and
weeded as as needed. And they will be there to
line those baseball fields when we have games, between games,
whatever is needed. >> Yeah.
» So, yes, sir. >> Uh
I just know it being such a new position, we've
never owned the recreation facilities such as this.
» Right. >> And uh that that 54 could
may not be enough. >> Well,
it labor-wise labor-wise, uh right now, yes, it will.
And there is some more uh things that we'll bring to
you later on as they develop, but there's a possibility at some point down
the road those fields may be turfed. So,
we would you know, they would still need some attention, but not
what they get what they will have to have right now with having dirt and
grass. >> So, would
would this have to be um renewed annually?
» Yes, ma'am. >> I just want to I know there has been
some comment some There have been comments in the past
about how much money we give the Y. What What's our monthly and then yearly
um >> It's $18,000 a month. It's
18,500 at this time for $222,000 is what's budgeted uh in this year's
budget. >> Okay. And I just I just want to I I mean
I was um previously on the Y board um and
I I that number has not changed in 20 years?
» It's been quite a while. >> At least 15.
» He's averaged this the last 2 years. >> Okay.
» He raised it $500 a month last year and then this year.
» Okay. >> So, we have tried to address that.
» Yeah. Yes, my point is it's not been >> It's not drastic. We have tried to
address it. >> Um so, I I just want it on the record
that um
And these are from um Mr. Nichols, the the head of the Y that
And this does not include all the Our prog- Our money is specifically for
sports programming, correct? Um They've spent 330,000
year-to-date for this calendar year. I I assume they go by um
a fiscal year of the calendar year. So, they're 3/4 of the way through their
year on um programming, which includes all of um the sports plus some senior
programming, um
adult health wellness programming, which are things some some cities are able to
provide. We don't currently provide. So, I
I just want to say that every bit of money that we send them
» Yes, we all speak to >> is being spent on the things we intend
for them to spend it on. >> [cough]
» I just want that on the record. >> I was going to ask, too, is there a job
description for that position?
» We are working on one at this time. I think the Y M C A already has one.
But, since we will That person is employed by the Y.
So, for the additional work, we're going to give them the $54,000
to pay that person. They will not be an employee of the
city. >> So, we're just doing a contract with Y
to do the S. just >> just part of that Y M city contract.
We're not really a hiring a person. >> Exactly.
» I think that that takes us out of all of it.
» Yeah, we don't have to worry about any of that kind of stuff.
» Well, insurance. >> Insurance, benefits, benefits for them.
» Where are we going to get the I mean, then just saying I'm not being smart,
you know, but saying we're broke, you know, where is where we I mean, just
being You know, say can't afford a dog catcher and all that. And I'm on the Y
board. I'm you know, if for anything, but where are we going to get 54,000 to
give it? >> We have a
» budgeted um
position in the parks and recreation complex that is not filled right now.
So, we're going to use that position to fund this with the Y.
» But then okay, and just like you're saying, if John does decide to turf it,
this is we can start over with giving them just an additional 20,000 versus we
don't have to stick with this additional 54,000. If John turfs the fields, you
said it's for a year. If John decides to turf those fields, and they don't need
that maintenance for 54,000 a year, I'm saying are we going to have to continue
to pay that 54,000? >> No. We will We will work Harold and I
will work on this agreement every year going forward.
» But just like to now, they got two maintenance guys, uh Jason and Tommy,
but like people like pay to play sports. Um you know,
they're going to use that to pay them I mean, do you honestly feel like the 54
is the number? I mean, not 25. >> I've talked with
um Brian and Harold about this, and that's
the number that we came up with.
» All right. Um
» [clears throat] >> I can't remember
» We have to vote on it. >> [laughter]
» Where we are. Okay. >> We have to vote.
» All in favor, please say aye. All opposed, no.
And the motion carries. All right. Uh the next item on the agenda the agenda,
I hope will be the easiest. Um
Um as we set our agenda this year, uh we inadvertently named September the 7th as
a meeting date. I don't think anyone wants to come on
Labor Day and and meet, so I'm requesting that we move that day until
September the 14th, which is the following Monday.
» Okay, we have recommendation to move our meeting from Labor Day to September the
14th. >> So moved.
» There's a motion from Mr. Cook's motion. >> Second.
» Second from Mr. Kirkendall. Um
Any questions or comments? Now all in favor, please say aye.
» Aye. >> All opposed, no.
And we are moved there.
» Next item on the agenda is for council to consider a work session date. There's
several of you at at some point over the last year has
has requested that we do some work sessions. And we we conduct some
some talks about some things that may
normally take a long time for us to discuss in a council meeting.
And so um
I have August the 17th, 18th, and 20th for those dates.
» Miss Cogsdill will be gone. >> That's okay.
» No, no, no, you don't you don't get out of this.
Uh-uh. >> I promise I I can miss the other one as
well. >> [laughter]
» Did he say 17, 18, 19? >> 7, 18, and 20. I think the 19th was a a
Wednesday, if I remember correctly. >> And
Oh, August. I'm in the wrong month. Okay.
» It is August. >> Okay.
That's Yeah, I was looking at Friday and Saturday. Like, what?
» And that's just a work session, so we won't take any action. Should you should
be able to be back in >> You you'll be
» I can do both of them, though. >> You can watch us on YouTube.
» Yeah. >> I almost had you, okay.
» So, I'm you know, I'm looking at discussing today. We're going to have a
decent CCDC meeting here in just a few days.
» I'm okay on the 17th or 18th. I can't do the 19th, but I'm good on those.
Monday or Tuesday? >> 17th, 18th, or 20th.
» Oh, I'm sorry. I I'm good on any one of those three days.
» What time we talking about doing that? >> 6:00.
» Do we do it at 5:00? Is that too early?
Natalie won't be here. She's usually the one that, you know, still
especially 17th Oh, yeah. I forgot about Gary. He works, too.
You're way >> How about the 17th?
» Is Is 5:00 too early for you, Gary?
» No, I'll slip out. >> He can do what he wants to do.
» All right. >> Wait a minute.
» We'll do it uh Monday >> Let me put it on my calendar.
» 17th at 5:00 p.m. And I won't keep you for long.
» On Monday?
We'll be done by 7:00, right? I got to say something.
» You want to do it Tuesday?
» Like I said, we're you know, talking about the CCDC.
Um I've got some other things that I'll I'll send out that that we want
we want to talk about and then there's anything that
either of you would like for us to discuss and get bring you information
on, just let me know and we'll we'll get that taken care of on Tuesday.
Um Mayor, that's that's all I have for
tonight.
» Okay.
Y'all really want to do reports and recommendations?
» Nope. >> Nope.
» No. Everything's good, Carl.
» Yeah, we're broke.
» I want to say that. >> No, my comment was taken out of context
cuz in my comment never said the city was broke.
» I don't think you did weren't the one that said it.
» it. >> You weren't the one that said it.
» Yeah, you weren't the one that said it. >> Well, I was quoted that says in the in
the chronicle saying >> Oh, really?
» No, you were not the one that Well, it was said.
» Yeah, [laughter] that didn't come from this council meeting.
» I only got read about it in
» All right. So, we'll enter uh entertain a motion to
adjourn. >> So moved.
» Second. >> Have a motion from Mr. Kirkendall and a
second from Mr. Smith. All in favor, please