[0:00] You're ready.
[0:17] » All right, let's call the meeting in
order. We'll start with the pledge of
[0:21] allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[0:26] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation
[0:31] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[0:35] » Thank you. Theresa, please take the
role.
[0:37] » Okay. Mayor Jones
>> here.
[0:39] » Here.
>> Carlson,
[0:40] » yes.
>> Here.
[0:42] » Matson
>> here. Jilling
[0:44] » here. And Bowen is absent with notice.
>> All right. Do we have a motion to
[0:49] approve the agenda for tonight's
meeting?
[0:52] Make a motion to approve the agenda for
tonight.
[0:55] » Second.
>> Any discussion?
[1:00] » Hearing none. We'll vote. Carlson,
>> yes.
[1:02] » Matson,
>> yes.
[1:03] » Gil, yes.
>> Yes.
[1:05] » Shilling, [snorts]
>> yes.
[1:07] » All right. We have one item on the
agenda tonight. It's to review, discuss,
[1:12] and approve the real estate transfer
between the city of Hartford and Gateway
[1:16] Hartford. Before we start, I have one of
our uh one of the members from Gateway
[1:22] Hartford who had asked if he could have
a second to introduce himself. So, I
[1:26] would like to ask Keith Matis up to the
podium.
[1:33] » Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
>> You bet. Those that don't know me, I'm
[1:36] Keith Matis.
Couple guys see your face, but I should
[1:41] put a name.
Anyway, uh I'm the president of GHI.
[1:48] So, and I just kind of wanted to make
myself uh [clears throat]
[1:52] introduce myself to everybody so you
know who I am, which I do know mostly
[1:58] competitive. But I've been here in town
for 30 years and your population's
[2:03] double and then some. I know we got some
light industrial buildings in coming.
[2:10] Pretty good looking stuff. Good good
direction.
[2:14] So um because of that lagoons get a
little small outdated we got to build a
[2:20] new treatment plant which we did with
what was that 9.4 million
[2:26] » grant
>> grant. Yeah.
[2:28] » Yeah. So thank you guys for that. But
here's what it did do. It doubled my
[2:34] utility bill.
It was $48
[2:39] times two.
It's a little tough at times. Get that
[2:45] off there as soon as you can.
[clears throat]
[2:49] » We'd love to do that.
>> Anyway, that gets us to this point.
[2:55] There isn't a hard deadline on moving
dirt, mitigating the ground, but there
[3:00] is with some grants, federal money. So,
including one that has a January 28th
[3:08] deadline. So pushing that side of
things.
[3:14] » Thank you. Thank you, Keith.
>> Thanks.
[3:18] » All right. The way I'm uh proposing
we're going to move this forward, I'm
[3:22] going to give you some background on on
this uh
[3:27] [clears throat] transfer of paperwork
and the resolution. We'll open it up if
[3:31] anybody has any questions, comments.
They'll be more than free to come up and
[3:36] address. the council then will discuss
and we'll move forward.
[3:42] So I'll start with this. Uh
city's been working on setting up a
[3:47] special project entity which we have
done to assist with the lagoon
[3:51] remediation repurposing of this land for
future development.
[3:56] This special project entity is known as
Gateway Hartford Inc. This entity will
[4:00] be able to apply for grant funding to
remediate the lagoons and help the
[4:05] future land transfer as needed. In order
to secure grant funding for remediation,
[4:10] the lagoon land will need to be
transferred to Gateway Hartford, Inc.
[4:15] Once transferred to Gateway Hartford,
Inc., they will work to remediate the
[4:18] lagoons, work on the master plan for the
area, develop and market as needed.
[4:24] In order to move forward, this transfer
involved two steps.
[4:29] One, the council will need to approve
the real estate transfer agreement which
[4:33] lays out the agreement between the city
of Hartford and Gateway Hartford, Inc.
[4:37] for the land transfer, remediation, and
eventual development.
[4:42] Key items to note in the agreement are
GHI has been created, Greater Gateway
[4:49] Hartford has been created as a nonprofit
economic development corp to help
[4:54] facilitate the remediation of the
lagoons and redevelopment of the
[4:57] property and surrounding area.
Gateway Hartford, Inc. is eligible for
[5:03] brownfield grants and for the for this
remediation which the city is not
[5:09] eligible for being the contaminant.
This grant if awarded will save the
[5:15] taxpayers approximately $2.8 million in
funds that would otherwise be at the
[5:21] taxpayers's expense.
Resolution 2026-3
[5:27] will transfer the land. All associated
cap costs for the trans with the
[5:31] transfer would be paid for by each
respective party.
[5:36] Gate Gateway Hartford will be obligated
to apply for grants for the lagoon
[5:41] remediation, develop a master plan for
the area and move forward with
[5:46] developing including platting, zoning,
infrastructure and marketing. If the
[5:51] lagoons cannot be remediated for
whatever reason by Gateway Hartford, the
[5:57] land would revert back to the city. The
city can also demand reconveyance of the
[6:03] land if greater if Gateway Hartford does
not carry out the duties per agreement.
[6:10] Once Greater Gateway Hartford, Inc. has
completed its agreed upon task, this
[6:16] entity will dissolve and any net
proceeds will revert back to the city.
[6:23] Along with this, the council number two
council also needs to approve resolution
[6:28] 2026-3
which will transfer the land to Gateway
[6:32] Hartford.
All right, that's what we're going to
[6:38] discuss. Anybody in the crowd want to
have anything they'd like to say?
[6:45] » A couple questions.
>> Yep. Go ahead. [clears throat] Say who
[6:48] you are so the camera knows. Monarch
Anderson.
[6:52] Um, so what does the development look
like? I know that we don't have a plan
[6:56] or I'm guessing you don't have an
overall plan,
[6:58] » right?
>> But when I hear the city or this entity
[7:02] would then develop that area.
Would would the intention be to have
[7:07] those like build ready lots or is that
get rid of the the ponds, get it, you
[7:14] know, grid it out and then sell to a
developer that would then come in and
[7:20] develop. What would the intention be
there?
[7:24] That would be the that would be the plan
to get the get the lagoons remediated,
[7:31] [clears throat] get them to what do they
call that? uh level ready. Is that what
[7:37] they call that?
>> Shovel ready.
[7:39] » Shovel ready or whatever they call that?
And then begin the process at that point
[7:44] to market it to developers. And if I
misspoke Mark and said the city's going
[7:50] to the city won't be developing this.
>> Well, that that was my question, I
[7:53] guess.
>> Yeah. No, the city's not going to be
[7:55] developing. If I said that,
>> I miss Oh, we're once we transfer the
[8:00] land to Gateway Hartford. Yeah. They're
going to be in charge of making all this
[8:05] happen.
>> But Gateway Hartford, would they develop
[8:07] that then for build ready lots or is
that just a mitigate ponds, grade things
[8:12] out
>> and get it ready
[8:14] » ready and then a developer would come
in, build roads
[8:18] and put infrastructure in. What does
that look like?
[8:23] » TBD.
There's no plan at the moment,
[8:27] » right,
>> to do that. Um, I think the
[8:30] conversation's been had to reach out to
developers and work with them to see
[8:37] what they provide for a plan. The only
plan the the city and Gateway Arford has
[8:43] to um use as a point of reference at
this point is the plan that ISG had put
[8:49] together a couple years ago.
[clears throat] So, we'll start there.
[8:53] Um, but as far as if we try to solicit,
you know, developers to just purchase
[8:59] the whole 72 acres, that'd be ideal and
then it's done.
[9:04] But
>> that was my question, I guess, as
[9:08] » somebody that's in that.
>> Yep.
[9:10] » You know, the risk
>> and all that that goes along with it.
[9:14] The cost, the risk, you know, I was just
curious if that's something the city was
[9:18] looking at taking on or if that's
something that, you know, the taxpayers
[9:22] would want to avoid.
>> Well, that's why this uh first piece of
[9:26] transferring to the nonprofit that can
apply for the remediation grant, it's
[9:30] huge.
>> Yeah. I mean, if that honestly
[9:33] » there's a lot of value in the land for
the city and offset other costs.
[9:38] » If that doesn't happen and the land
reverts back to the city and we're back
[9:42] to square one that I mean that changes
this whole deal, I will tell you.
[9:47] » No, I I understand that. It's obviously
you don't know what
[9:50] » I mean we don't have an extra look like
>> Yeah. We don't have an extra 3 million
[9:54] laying around that we're ready to go do
that if that happened.
[9:57] » Yep.
Atlantic County from here
[10:02] » uh or
>> but what I want to say is there's
[10:05] anformational meeting tomorrow night
with ISG and developers some of our
[10:10] people will be there with concepts
>> what
[10:16] kind of preliminary news too yeah and
really to talk about how are we going to
[10:21] go how what do we got to do to get this
grant application one you know
[10:25] » yeah that's a big piece of it
>> and that's a huge piece of this deal so
[10:29] you're asking asking questions that if
we're acting like we're we don't cuz we
[10:33] don't know. I mean, there's things we
just don't know.
[10:35] » Yeah.
>> I think that's why it's important to
[10:38] have the provisions in the agreement,
>> right?
[10:41] » If it if they don't if Gateway Hartford
can't secure grants, then we've got a
[10:46] whole other the land needs to come back
and we need to re-evaluate.
[10:50] » Sure. Yeah. I mean, our hope is is that
we don't get to the point where we can't
[10:57] get it remediated, comes back to the
city, we can't find other sources to
[11:02] grant this deal, and the state comes to
us and says, "Oh, by the way, what are
[11:07] you guys going to do with this?"
>> Yeah. There's Yeah. impacts the value
[11:11] obviously. So,
cuz the way it sits right now,
[11:16] I don't know if a if a developer would
come in and say, "Oh, yeah. I'll buy
[11:21] this on the betting on the fact that I
can get all this done."
[11:25] » Sure.
>> You know what I mean?
[11:26] » Yep.
>> Okay.
[11:30] » Thank you.
>> You bet.
[11:37] » Anybody else?
I guess I'll say a few things here. So
[11:44] Eric Bucking here. So your meeting
tomorrow night for theformational
[11:48] meeting
>> Yep.
[11:50] » is after the land transfer. So that So
just like Keith said, everybody's got a
[11:55] lot of questions. You don't know how
this is going to go. Correct.
[11:58] But let's just start by transferring the
land without questions. And that's those
[12:02] are the right steps.
>> You have to transfer the land so that we
[12:06] can apply for the grant by the 28th of
January.
[12:09] » And what is that grant? We know how much
that grant is.
[12:12] » It's open-ended at this point, isn't it?
>> It is. I mean, obviously, it's through
[12:16] the state, but basically the dollar
amount will be up to the state. So, it's
[12:20] it's not capped at like 600,000 or
800,000 or whatnot. You could possibly
[12:24] get the full amount. Not saying we will,
but
[12:26] » So, we have an engineers estimate that
we'll base our grant request on.
[12:29] » Yes, we will request. They
[clears throat] will request for the
[12:32] whole thing. So if you let's say you get
800,000 or a million bucks,
[12:37] what will you do with the shortfall or
what will you do with that million bucks
[12:41] if you are granted that that doesn't
complete that project?
[12:48] » That's a great question. Um
come back to the city and ask for the
[12:53] balance to refinish the remediation. The
intent of Gateway Hartford is to
[12:58] remediate the property
[13:02] to get it ready so it could be so it's a
sellable lot
[13:05] » because you can't just leave it. It's
contaminated,
[13:08] » right?
>> So 2 million's less than 3 million.
[13:13] So anything we get would be a bonus. I
think timing and speed is always the
[13:18] question.
>> Yeah. And the number's always been out
[13:20] there. It has it's never been a secret
that it's going to cost the the price
[13:25] has increased
>> pretty substantially like everything but
[13:28] it it started out at a million to
remediate it and then it went to7 and
[13:32] now it's at three. So, is there anything
in your guys's bylaws or
[13:38] um
articles of corporation that state
[13:44] like let's say you get let's say you get
a million you get a million dollar
[13:47] grant. You start with a million dollars
worth of dirt. The nonprofit becomes
[13:53] essentially inoperable because there's
no funds and there's a million dollar
[13:59] property already. Is there any
safeguards in those articles stating
[14:03] that you can't just go and sell that
said land
[14:08] to a
any developer or any organization for a
[14:13] dollar just to get it out when I need
to. Somebody says, "Hey, I want to come
[14:17] in and I'm going to do I'm going to
bring project XYZ into this into this
[14:22] land and I'll buy it from you for a buck
and do the remainder of the mediation."
[14:27] Well, I think speaking from my
experience with federal grants in other
[14:32] settings, if we take money for a purpose
and don't complete that purpose,
[14:38] you didn't fulfill the requirements of
the grant. So, I don't know if the city
[14:44] get a third of what you need, would you
even can you technically start your
[14:47] project?
>> I don't think that would be wise.
[14:51] Obviously, it's going to be a board
decision, but for me, as I played that
[14:54] out, that Gateway Hartford would have to
come to the city and say, "Okay, this is
[14:59] what we got for a grant as the
contaminator, the polluter in the
[15:02] property.
Let's work to find the other 2 million."
[15:07] » Grants usually come with a specified
time frame to
[15:12] complete and
you continue to follow up as it's
[15:17] required in the grant.
The intent is not for Gateway Artford to
[15:22] one-third it or half weigh it or 3/4 it.
It's to completely get it remediated and
[15:27] give it back to the city
>> or
[15:31] in other words the city [clears throat]
>> if you are granted 3 million essentially
[15:36] you're like hey this project is going to
work. We're going to grant it back to
[15:38] the city. It's possible,
[15:42] » but there's also nothing saying that
>> once that land gets transferred, there's
[15:48] nothing saying that it can't be sold to
another entity as well once it's in that
[15:52] nonprofit, even us as a development
foundation. There's nothing saying that
[15:55] we can't sell our land as a nonprofit to
any given organization for a dollar.
[16:02] » Um,
>> in [clears throat] my reading,
[16:05] » I think this Yeah, go ahead, sir. In my
reading, it can be sold for the purposes
[16:10] of economic development,
but if they cannot complete the
[16:16] remediation,
they can't just they they have to
[16:20] complete the remediation otherwise it
comes back to the city, the land,
[16:26] » which is what bullet five says,
>> so in your sit in your scenario,
[16:33] if that were to happen, the only way
that that could happen would be the
[16:37] agreement of the party purchasing it for
a dollar. In your case, there would have
[16:42] to be an agreement in place that they
would fully agree
[16:44] » immediately.
>> Correct.
[16:50] » Yeah. That in the reconveyance here it
says there's an alternate to
[16:54] reconveyance.
uh Gateway and the city may agree that
[16:59] Gateway may sell the property to a
mutually agreeable third party which
[17:04] will then assume responsibility for
remediation of the lagoon site for
[17:08] future re redevelopment.
>> So
[17:14] what would the
[17:18] so yeah I mean obviously if you guys are
granted the 2.8 billion,
[17:22] 3 million, whatever it is. It's great
because now all of a sudden you have an
[17:25] asset that you could essentially
possibly market to a developer to um you
[17:31] know it's interstate project should be
minimum 30 $40,000 acre land. It should
[17:36] be good asset to the city but um not to
the city to gay Hartford with the intent
[17:43] that if there's any money left when it's
all said and done comes back to the city
[17:47] at that point. We're not going to get
money off the land until everything's
[17:52] said and done and it's all sold. That's
the way it's written.
[17:59] I mean, we're not going to be selling
every parcel and taking a chunk. This
[18:04] thing has to be finished. They got to
sell 71 acres and have it done
[18:08] » and then they're done.
>> Then they dissolve. Then the money Well,
[18:11] if there's anything left, then it comes
back.
[18:16] That's how we That's how we drew it up.
That's why we wanted it wanted it drawn
[18:20] up. So
yeah, it says in the event Gateway
[18:25] Hartford or its successor by assignment
merger or reorganization is unable to
[18:30] carry out its duties under this
agreement
[18:34] or attempts to sell, assign or lease to
a private third party developer, city
[18:39] shall have the right but not the
obligation to demand gateway reconvey
[18:42] the entire property back to the city.
So we either drag it across the finish
[18:48] line or we give it back to the city.
[18:53] » I guess one other concern and it kind of
is leading to
[18:58] um
what Mark had to say with Mark said
[19:03] obviously I'm on the HABF board. We have
a 40 acre development and 140 some acre
[19:09] parcel of land which Travis you and I
have had that discussion about that 140
[19:13] acre parcel of land. it's not that
desirable piece of land. Um,
[19:19] feel like there needs to be something
done with that. But
[19:23] as an outside developer looking into the
city of Hartford,
[19:27] knowing that there's
100, we have like 180 acres, 160 to 180
[19:35] acres of land to develop and now all of
a sudden there's another nonprofit
[19:40] developing 70 more acres.
How does an outside developer looking in
[19:46] see Hartford as a very inviting
community as a developer?
[19:51] Our purpose is to remediate the ground
whether that at that point we decide to
[19:55] develop it or sell it to a developer
said that you either see it through the
[20:00] end or give it back to the city
>> but the the board ultimately has
[20:05] ultimate say once it's remediated do we
take the next step is there interest in
[20:08] that or do we give it back to the city
so that's where way back it's TBD if we
[20:16] go back to Mark's comments
>> I mean I guess I'm not a developer so I
[20:20] probably don't view things uh the same
way, but this land is going to be ready
[20:24] for development for years.
>> Few years, probably be
[20:29] » few years, but I mean
>> 27 at their earliest.
[20:32] » Yeah. 27.
>> Yeah. And there are adjacent parcel
[20:36] owners interested in collaborating on
what the development in that area looks
[20:40] like. Um I think if the assumption is
that it will absolutely only be in for
[20:48] sure industrial park I mean I don't know
if that's an absolute
[20:52] » right
>> or is it some other type of
[20:56] » right whatever it is whatever it is as a
nonprofit is I mean even for us as a
[21:01] nonprofit we can we can manipulate the
numbers to bring businesses into town
[21:07] way different than a private developer
can for
[21:10] » I guess What I was trying to say is
>> tough competition for outside
[21:14] development.
>> It might not be a
[21:17] um
a competitor to the type of development
[21:22] that HADF is currently has.
>> I'm not saying I'm saying it's any
[21:28] outside developer potentially. Well, I
guess
[21:32] » that was, you know, the city's creating
competition for somebody like our group
[21:37] that is developing and has land.
>> Well, I don't think a business park is
[21:44] in your development.
>> No, this industrial focus then
[21:48] » this isn't industrial focus,
>> right?
[21:51] » There's also a master plan
>> component that goes with this. We're
[21:55] going to have this thing master planned
out which is going to start shortly.
[21:58] » Yep. if we can get through uh the
paperwork. And the other thing that
[22:05] Gateway Hartford is bound to is that
master plan.
[22:11] We've we've tried to put some guard
rails in there so this deal gets to the
[22:15] end in a fashion that benefits the city.
We I mean we're looking to create, as we
[22:23] called it, Gateway Hartford. We want to
create a nice window into the into the
[22:27] city. It's not an industrial park. It's
a uh what's the
[22:32] » track houses?
>> What's the place that uh we talk about
[22:36] on
>> the Golden Triangle?
[22:37] » Golden Triangle 229 and 229 where they
built City Bank and in there those types
[22:43] of that's
oh Tom's call in
[22:50] » our mess lake to the party. But I I
think you know you mentioned it's right
[22:55] it has that interstate you know
visibility. I think there's other types
[22:59] of businesses that aren't that might be
more interested in that. Not for
[23:04] convenience because certainly it'd be
convenient for indust you know for an
[23:08] industrial park type situation as far as
traffic in and out but it's also pretty
[23:13] attractive in terms of other commercial
development.
[23:15] » I mean I'm sure it would be attractive
to a lot of private developers.
[23:18] » These are really gateway hardford
questions. Do you have any questions
[23:21] regarding the transfer of land?
>> Well, the trans I mean here and it is a
[23:28] Gateway Hartford question as well, but
you're transferring it. You guys both
[23:33] have an interest in Gateway Harford and
obviously you have some information
[23:36] about it.
>> What is our interest?
[23:38] » Aren't you board members?
>> Yeah, but what do you mean by interest?
[23:42] What are you saying? We
>> have the interest of the city.
[23:43] » What are you saying beyond that?
>> I'm saying you're on the board. So,
[23:47] you've obviously had conversation and
And
[23:51] » what are you inferring?
>> I'm saying you have information about
[23:56] what you have intentions for this land
for.
[23:58] » The only intention we have is to get it
transferred, get a master development
[24:02] plan going, get it remediated, get it
>> different businesses about, you know,
[24:07] the
>> same goes. I mean, honestly, there's
[24:10] ideas there.
>> Well, sure there's ideas. I I think if
[24:14] you go back to the point that if you
look at the master plan that the city
[24:17] has what is that that's why it's in part
of what we put forward to Gateway
[24:23] Hartford is has to comport with what
that master plan looks like and that
[24:26] property along the interstate
doesn't look like in the master plan an
[24:31] industrial park
>> the existing
[24:35] » that's my me
>> I I have not talked with Gateway
[24:39] Hartford but when you say it has to
comport with the master plan. When I
[24:44] recall looking at the master plan,
that's what was along that track.
[24:51] » All right, question.
[clears throat]
[24:55] All right.
Anybody else?
[25:02] If not,
[25:06] we'll move forward. Any action from the
council or discussion that we need to
[25:10] have?
And I just see this as step one and then
[25:16] and then moving on and then we'll have
to monitor as we go along. Absolutely.
[25:20] But this step one is critical for that
uh grant. And then that's why I'll be
[25:24] voting yes for this because uh it's all
about that grant. And then after that
[25:30] » then I'll might be switching votes. Yes.
No. We'll have to see, you know,
[25:34] » just because I don't know. There's too
many unknowns.
[25:36] » Yeah. There's reszoning. There's a lot
of steps. I would say my vote is based
[25:42] on um there's a lot of worry about if
this isn't a perfect plan, what if we
[25:47] don't get the grant, what what is going
to happen if things
[25:52] it's a it's a risk to benefit for me if
this can go well. Gateway Harford can
[25:59] get a sizable grant. It doesn't kill the
city to take care of this remediation
[26:04] from a financial standpoint. And then at
the end of it,
[26:08] if we could sell it outright to a
developer that somehow matches the
[26:12] vision uh in the city plan um and we get
cash back to pay for we talked last
[26:19] week, we need a new water tower in 5 to
10 years. We want a community event
[26:23] center. We want a swimming pool. We
don't have money for that. No one else
[26:26] is going to write us a check to take
care of those things. So, this is our
[26:30] opportunity to make our best step
forward to get money back out of this
[26:35] property and take care of some of the
needs without having more expenses.
[26:40] So, that's why I'm very interested um in
this.
[26:45] » All right.
[26:49] Uh according to our attorney, we could
go into uh executive for legal counsel
[26:55] if we felt the need.
>> I'm I'm about 8 minutes away. I thought
[26:59] the meeting was just seven and I
apologize.
[27:02] » Okay.
>> I think we'll be done before you get
[27:04] here. [laughter]
>> Shut the meter off.
[27:14] Uh is there any questions or concerns
with anybody that we would need to
[27:18] discuss further? If not,
is there any action from the council?
[27:31] I'll make a motion to approve land
transfer to Gateway Hartford, Inc.
[27:37] » Second.
>> Any more discussion?
[27:41] » And can we add to authorize Ardan to
sign an agreement to that?
[27:46] » Sure.
>> And to add that Mayor Ardan Jones can
[27:50] sign the agreement.
>> You want to amend your second?
[27:55] Second that amended motion. Okay.
>> All right. Any more dis any other
[28:00] discussion
[28:03] » hearing? None. We'll vote. Shilling.
>> Yes.
[28:06] » Harach,
>> yes.
[28:07] » Peele,
>> yes.
[28:08] » Matson,
>> yes.
[28:09] » Carlson,
>> yes.
[28:12] » All right. Uh, do we have to vote then
on resolution 2026-3?
[28:16] » Approved the agreement. So now the
resolution was actually transparent.
[28:21] » Yep.
This is uh Erin Shidu, the attorney for
[28:25] Julie Hartford. Yes. I have a bad
connection. I just wanted to confirm.
[28:29] Was there a second on the motion that
was brought?
[28:31] » Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[28:34] » Yep. Thank you, Eric.
All right. The next up is uh resolution
[28:39] 2026-3,
[28:43] which
hold on. Let me get there.
[28:55] was a resolution approving the transfer
of the real estate to Gateway Hartford.
[29:01] » Make a motion uh to approve resolution
2026-3, transfer of real estate to
[29:07] Gateway Hartford, Inc.
>> Second.
[29:10] » Any more discussion on this one?
[29:15] » Hearing none, we'll vote. Carlson,
>> yes. Yes.
[29:18] » Matson.
>> Yes.
[29:19] » Kio.
>> Yes. Parach.
[29:20] » Yes.
>> Shelley.
[29:21] » Yes.
>> All right. Anything to go into executive
[29:26] session for
[29:31] hearing? None. Motion to adjurnn.
>> Some move.
[29:35] » Second. Somebody.
>> I'll second.
[29:39] » All in favor? I thank