►
Description
City of Charleston Army Corps 3x3 Advisory Committee 7/28/21
A
Okay,
so
let's
go
ahead
and
take
roll
call
council,
member
wearing
council
members
seekings.
I
see
you
out
there
dan
bautista.
I
see
you,
mr
warner.
Doug
warner.
Are
you
one
yet?
I
do
not
see
doug.
A
Okay,
he
said
that
okay,
I
see
bob
good
morning
bob,
mr
green.
I
don't
see
mr
green
on
yet
susan.
I
see
you
welcome
cassian.
I
see
you
welcome
kevin.
Welcome,
laura
welcome,
jordy
welcome.
I
don't
see
dennis
frazier,
mr
maybank,
I
see
you
and
then
I
see
our
chairperson,
mr
morrison.
I
do
see
that
we
have
a
couple
of
guests
this
morning.
We've
got
mayor,
teckenberg
is
joining
us
as
well
as
council.
Member
jackson
is
joining
us
as
well,
and
I
don't
know
who
mk
is
so
mk.
A
Thanks
all
right,
so
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you,
mr
chairman,
and
perhaps
maybe
the
mayor
wants
to
say
a
few
words
before
we
kick
off.
F
Well,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
wanted
to
sign
on
with
y'all
for
a
little
while
this
morning,
and
mostly
thank
you
for
all
the
time
and
effort
thought
you're
putting
into
this
committee
work
it's
so
important
to
our
city's
future.
F
I've
been
getting
updates
from
mark
and
looking
at
the
communication
from
kailyn,
I
I
think
you've
had
some
remarkable
information
brought
to
you
and,
as
I
said,
I
can't
think
of
anything
more
important
if
you
look
down
the
road,
50
or
100
years
to
be
thinking
about
this
and
how
we're
going
to
protect
our
city.
So
just
thanks
everybody,
and
I'm
I'm
glad
to
be
with
you
this
morning
and
listen
in.
C
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
and
we're
we
couldn't
agree
more
on
on
all
fronts.
We
certainly
appreciate
it
and
you
know
further
to
that
point.
We
are
our
first
meetings
of
our
working
groups
this
week.
So
our
first
agenda
item
is
to
go
through
working
group
reports
and
you
know
with
that
in
mind.
You
know.
A
lot
of
this
was
was
kickoff
and
introductory
on
the
working
groups,
but
we,
I
think,
create
a
few
and
a
few
pretty
neat
need
action.
Come
as
a
result.
C
You
know
with
that
said.
You
know,
I
guess
susan
you're
first
on
my
screen,
so
you
you
drew
the
straw
to
to
be
first.
As
far
as
giving
a
report,
would
you
mind,
I
think,
there's
some
pretty
neat
updates
from
the
communications
work
group.
Would
you
mind
giving
those
updates.
B
I'm
happy
to
do
that.
Thank
you
and
thanks
for
joining
us
mayor,
techenberg,
doug
warner
and
jordy,
and
I
met
last
thursday
and
we
got
right
to
work.
It's
a
terrific
people
to
work
with.
B
We
decided
that
we
need
to
communicate
better,
which
is
a
a
sort
of
standard
thing
that
we
hear
in
this
in
the
city,
and
so
rather
than
talk
about
talking
about
it,
we
figured
out
what
we
needed
to
say
and
to
whom
rather
quickly,
and
we
we
determined
that,
since
the
the
water
management
plan
is
in
the
works
and
will
come
before
council,
I
guess
or
be
presented
in
a
couple
of
weeks
that
we
wanted
to
produce
on
behalf
of
the
advisory
committee,
what
doug
called
a
white
paper.
B
I
I
think
a
white
paper
implies
sort
of
a
long
treatise
on
something,
but
this
is
really
going
to
be
a
kind
of
a
one-pager
that
maybe
could
be
folded
in
four,
and
I
did
send
out
the
copy
that
that
I
wrote
that
we
all
agreed
on
to
to
start
to
kick
it
off.
B
Doug
was
terrific
in
coming
forth
and
and
suggesting
that
we
do
this
marketing
tool
basically
of
communication
in
the
same
way
that
that
he
apparently
produced
for
the
central
business
district,
which
is
an
attractive
four
color
piece
that
has
we'll
have
a
map
and
some
flooding
information
and
some
financial
information
in
it
as
well
as
as
you
could
see,
from
the
copy
that
I
sent
last
night,
I'm
sorry
it
was
so
late.
We
weren't
sure
about
when
to
send
what
so
I
I
welcome.
We
welcome
any
comments.
B
The
other
thought
that
we
have
is
that
the
advisory
committee,
which
is
going
to
be
ongoing
because
this
project
is
ongoing,
should
have
its
own
website,
and
so
we
will
begin
to
work
on
that.
There
was
some
discussion
among
us
doing
the
the
communications
or
public
relations
or,
however,
you
want
to
describe
this
effort.
B
B
Of
course
that
involves
budget,
and
I
don't
know
if
there
is
any
budget,
but
that
was
a
discussion
on
the
table
for
the
longer
term,
because
we
we
are,
the
three
of
us
are
not
in
a
position
to
do
all
this
communications
work
there's
a
lot
to
it
and
I
can
send
you
later
a
kind
of
an
outline
of
what
our
our
business
plan
looked
like,
but
communicating
regularly
and
through
various
media,
including
social
media,
is
going
to
be
really
important
because
it's
the
public
and
our
representatives
in
in
the
city
council,
in
columbia
and
elsewhere,
who
are
going
to
pay
for
this
doug,
was
very
emphatic
about
the
idea
that
we
need
to
stress
the
the
financials
here
and
to
try
to
break
down
and
put
on
paper
a
kind
of
a
ballpark
figure
of
what
a
project
and
potentially
other
projects
might
cost
our
community
over
time
and
I'll.
B
Let
him
speak
to
that
when
he
comes
to
our
next
meeting,
but
it's
clear
that
property
taxes
or
some
kind
of
I
know
tax
is
a
dirty
word
in
south
carolina.
But
in
order
to
survive,
the
people
have
to
take
care
of
their
community,
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
able
to
say
that
it's
been
the
giant
elephant.
It's
been
an
elephant
family
in
the
living
room.
Since
I
started
working
on
flooding,
so
we
are
now
going
to
call
it
for
what
it
is.
B
We
need
to
pay
to
take
care
of
ourselves,
so
that
will
be
part
of
this
one-page
publication
so
to
speak
and
doug
said
that
his
either
he
or
his
group
will
be
putting
together
a
draft
layout
next
week,
and
we
can
send
that
along
to
you
for
your
comments,
the
copy
that
I
wrote
earlier.
We
all
agreed
on-
and
I
welcome
your
comments
between
now
and
next
week.
B
Anytime,
you,
you
know,
whenever
you
have
a
chance
to
read
it,
it
is
meant
to
be
simply
an
overview
of
what
sort
of
is
going
on
in
flooding
now
in
charleston.
So
that's
where
we
are,
and
I'm
anxious
to
hear
from
from
laura
and
from
kashin
about
their
committees,
because
we're
going
to
be
using
information
from
them
to
communicate
out
there
to
the
world.
So
thanks,
if
you
have
any
questions,
yeah.
C
Thank
you,
susan,
not
not
see
anybody's
hands.
So
if
anybody
have
questions,
please
please
interrupt,
but
the
I
I
was
able
to
listen
on
the
meeting.
It
was
a
great
meeting.
I
think
this
poor
document
is
going
to
incorporate
a
lot
of
what
we
learned
so
far
as
as
well
as
a
lot
of
the
work
products
from
the
other
working
groups,
and
so
I
think
it's
exciting
it's
something
that
you
know.
C
I
think
we
heard
about
we're
not
just
still
a
piece
of
the
thunder
from
from
your
report,
but
I
think
we
heard
about
in
the
in
the
rosemont.
You
know
the
rosemont
tour
and
meeting
was
hey.
We
really
need
something
that
is
distilled,
and
we
can
you
know
summarize
we
can
easily
understand.
So
I
think
that's
that's
going
to
be
helpful,
not
just
for
the
gentleman
that
made
that
comment
in
the
meeting,
but
you
know,
I
think,
for
everybody
so
appreciate
your
hard
work
there.
C
E
Absolutely
good
morning,
everyone,
our
funding
working
group,
met
last
wednesday,
and
so
we
we
feel
like.
We
have
kind
of
a
difficult
task
ahead
of
us,
given
the
scope
of
the
cost
of
the
project,
and
so
we
we
decided
that
we
really
needed
to
learn
from
best
practices
from
other
successful
projects.
E
Looking
at
other
successful
core
projects,
I'm
drawing
from
jordy's
work
at
the
port
and
and
barbara
melvin's
work
with
their
successful
core
project
with
the
harbor
deepening
other
successful
three
by
three
flood
mitigation
projects,
learning
from
how
those
were
funded,
cedar,
rapids
and
norfolk.
How
that
that
call
share
split
was
conducted
between
local
partners
in
the
state.
How
was
the
non-federal
sponsor
call
share
achieved
for
these
projects
and
how
we
can
then
apply
those
lessons
to
charleston
perimeter
protection.
E
You
know
regional
and
statewide
economics
importance
for
the
project
tying
that
to
jobs
commuters,
who
rely
on
the
peninsula
for
work.
The
regional
tourism
impact
the
peninsula's
role
in
economic
development,
the
peninsula's
medical
importance
to
the
region
and
starting
to
initiate
discussions
with
local
government
leaders
and
legislative
delegation
on
the
project.
E
We
also
talked
about
some
potential
potential
funding
sources
within
the
city,
charleston
county
and
then
through
the
state
as
well,
and
we
would
like
to
have
engage
with
the
city
in
a
follow-up
discussion
and
have
requested
through
kailyn
a
follow-up
meet
kayla
and
mark
follow-up
meeting
with
the
city
cfo
or
her
representative,
because
we
wanted
to
learn
a
little
bit
more
about
municipal
bonds
and
how
the
city,
typically
funds,
capital
improvement
projects,
and
so
we've
sent
some
dates
out
that
we
are,
our
working
group
is
potentially
available
and
we're
just
waiting
to
hear
back.
A
Yeah
she's
been
on
vacation
all
week,
so
I've
got
that
on
my
to-do
list
when
she
gets
back
to
get
back.
Okay,
some
dates
she's
out
of
town
all
week.
E
And
that
that
was
the
the
you
know
the
discussion
as
it
went,
but
we
are
sort
of
in
fact,
finding
and
research
mode
and
trying
to
learn
some
best
practices
from
other
projects
that
were
successful
here
in
south
carolina
and
other
places
and
how
we
can
apply
that
knowledge
to
the
task
at
hand.
C
Thank
you
very
much
cash.
It
was
a
also
listen.
That
was
a
great
great
meeting
and
good
said
good
fact.
Finding
which
important
place
to
be
right
now
is
particularly
as
it
relates
to
funding,
as
well
as
everything
else
laura
and
and
herbert
as
well.
Laura,
would
you
mind
giving
an
update
on
the
eis
committee
and
now
our
our
meeting
and
tour
win
as
well
or
excuse
me,
the
working
document.
G
Yes,
thank
you.
I'm
happy
to
give
a
report
on
the
eis
working
group,
environmental
impact
statement,
working
group
kevin
herbert
cashton,
and
I
are
members
of
that
group
and
I
will
share
some
highlights
and
then
ask
them
to
add
anything
that
I
may
have
missed
or
correct
anything
that
that
I
got
wrong.
We
are
our
discussion,
revolved
around
kind
of
two
different
categories:
comments
and
suggestions
that
are
specific
to
the
eais
process
itself
and
then
some
other
general
observations.
G
We
also
feel
strongly
that
neis
needs
to
give
proper
consideration
to
nature-based
solutions,
including
an
actual
cost-benefit
analysis
and
and
the
corps
needs
to
commit
to
avoid
and
minimize
impact
to
historic
properties,
both
in
the
alignment
and
in
the
design
of
a
perimeter
protection
system,
and
we
also
believe
that
the
corps
needs
to
look
at
the
same
amount
of
sea
level
rise
that
the
city
is
looking
at.
G
We
understand
that
there
are
constraints
in
the
course
methodology,
but
there's
a
range
at
which
they
can
can
look
at
sea
level
rise
projections,
and
we
believe
that
those
projections
should
as
closely
match
what
the
city
is
looking
at
as
possible
and,
in
addition,
consideration
of
long-term
questions
about
sea
level
rise
beyond
the
50
years.
G
We
also
had
discussion
about
just
in
general,
the
long
term.
You
know
beyond
the
lifespan
of
the
50-year
projection
and
also
what
are
long-term
maintenance
costs.
How
is
it
being
designed
for
beyond
50
years.
G
G
I
know
that
that
is
in
the
works
and
we're
we're
eager
to
see
it,
but
then
I'll
just
share
a
few
other
they'll
echo
some
things
that
we've
already
talked
about
from
other
working
groups
that
are
just
more
general
process
needs
and,
and
clarifications
first,
is
to
have
a
better
undertale
understanding
of
the
timing.
G
Specifically,
you
know
something
that
the
committee
can
use
to
clarify
timing
for
the
army
corps,
work
for
city
actions
and
for
the
role
of
this
advisory
committee
and
mark.
Thank
you
for
sending
a
timeline
so
something
else
that
we
talked
about
when
we
were
together
on
friday.
So
that's
really
helpful
about
being
able.
You
heard
me
at
the
last
meeting.
You
know
an
important
part
of
good
process
is
understanding
timing
and
having
clear
expectations.
So
that's
very
helpful.
G
Another
point
that
we
talked
about
is
that
there's
opportunity
to
get
started
on
the
community,
the
rose,
mount
community
resilience
planning,
I
mean
that's
my
terminology
and
and
you've
heard
sherwood
design
engineers
with
their
recommendations
about
how
that
could
get
started.
That's
not
the
only
way,
but
it
it
offers
one
pathway.
G
But
the
point
is
we:
don't
have
to
wait
for
the
army
corps
process
to
move
forward
to
get
started
on
that
and
kind
of
related,
but
also
broader
than
just
that
particular
effort
and
the
rose
mount
community
is
keep
in
mind
that
there
is
there's
a
need
to
think
about
how
the
city
will
fund
things
that
transcend
what
the
core
is
going
to
cover
and
and
also
keep
in
mind
that
there's
significant
funding
available
now
for
green
infrastructure.
G
So
thinking
about
a
project
like
the
rosemount
community
and
some
resilience
planning
and
the
kind
of
federal
resources
and
other
kind
of
grant
opportunities
that
are
available
being
able
to
start
on
that
sooner
than
later,
it
would
be
something
that
our
work
group
thinks
is
important,
okay,
so
work
group.
What
did
I
miss.
H
H
C
Harbor,
do
you
want
to
provide
any
additional
thoughts
on
on
that
walking
tour
your
take
on
it
or
it
to
me,
it
was
great
and
just
to
you
know,
give
the
give
the
high
level
the
core
herbert
mark
laura.
C
A
number
of
other
folks
met
in
the
community
center
on
the
southern
end
of
the
rosemont
community
and
had
a
great
meeting
that
the
corps
met
and
presented
their
plan
and
their
thoughts
and
several
community
members
community
leaders-
and
it
was
a,
I
think,
very
successful
meeting.
We
went
and
walked
the
rosemont
community
and
talked
about
you
know
from
any
practical.
F
C
Interesting
and
especially
good
to
meet
with,
since
we
all
have
waterfront
homes,
saying
hey
here:
marshfront
homes,
I
should
say
saying:
hey
how
I
get
impacted
when
we
do
have
a
flood
tide
or
some
sort
of
high
tide
and
here's
the
reality
of
it
and
here's.
Why
and
so
herbert
I
you
know
that
was
just
a
high
level
on
it.
I'd
love
to
hear
your
thoughts
on
on
the
detail
on
how
it
went
and
your
general
take.
H
H
We
met
him
like
he
said
in
them
in
the
community
center,
and
it
was
quite
good
to
hear
the
input
from
the
army
corps
as
to
their
their
their
planning
as
to
include
rosemount
in
the
mitigation
of
the
overall
plan
for
storm
surge
and
flooding
protection,
as
well
as
the
other
entities
laura's
group-
and
there
was
a
gentleman
and
a
young
lady,
I
can't
remember
their
name
who
they
were,
but
they
showed
interest
in
looking
at
what
we
were
doing
as
far
as
the
tour
and
our
planning
and
as
we
walked
the
area
and
going
down
to
the
marsh
area
where
the
shoreline
is,
there
were
some
residents
that
we
were
able
to
talk
with
and
they
get
like.
H
You
said
they
gave
their
input,
which
was
added
on
to
what
we
were
looking
at
as
to
how
important
it
is
to
like
include
rosemont
in
the
planning
and
what
we
need
to
like
look
at
the
residents.
H
I
talked
to
them
the
day
after
and
some
of
them,
and
they
were
quite
impressed
with
the
idea
that
we
came
out
to
like
show
interest
and
what
we
were
planning
on
doing
and
appreciated
their
input,
allowing
them
to
give
their
input
as
to
what
they
felt
about
helping
to
try
and
give
them
a
suit,
a
better
sense
of
security,
and
that
the
city
is
willing
to
make
plans
to
like
help
them
in
mitigating
any
flooding
or
storm
surge
to
help
protect
and
preserve
that
community.
H
I
I
was
in
my
concern,
I
was
quite
pleased,
especially
listening
to
the
army
corps
when
in
their
lane,
in
their
statements,
their
language
and
how
they
said
that
they
were
going
to
put
that
language
about
the
mitigation
for
rosemount
in
the
in
the
documentary
form,
and
so
the
community
leaders
and
residents
were
quite
pleased,
and
so
am
I
at
this
point
and
again
I
want
to
appreciate
everybody
for
the
names
mentioned
and
for
the
names
not
mentioned
your,
your
your
effort
and
participation
is
really
appreciated.
C
F
Mr
chairman,
before
we
leave,
could
I
ask
a
follow-up
question
about
rosemount
and
the
feedback
from
the
citizens
there?
I
was
a
reason
being.
I
was
a
little
surprised
when
I
met
with
one
of
the
leaders
a
week
ago
from
rosemount.
She
asked
me
about
the
wall
going
around
rosemount
and
I
said,
wait
a
minute.
You
know
I
think,
for
some
time
now
the
court
has
been
talking
about
not
extending
the
wall
up
that
far
but
doing
other
forms
of
mitigation.
F
Herbert,
do
you
feel
like
it's
pretty
clear
now
to
the
citizens
up
there
of
the
direction
that
the
mitigation
would
occur
in
other
in
other
means,
rather
than
having
a
wall
around
the
neighborhood.
H
The
environmental
impact
and
the
idea
that
they
don't
want
to
have
the
community
walled
off
from
the
shoreline
and
as
to
the
the
see
the
marshland
and
so
in
in
listening
to
what
the
the
suggested
options
are,
they
are
more
more
in
tune
to
like
appreciating
one
of
those
options
that
would
work
for
rosemount.
H
I
know
one
of
the
surveying
teams,
the
sherwood
survey.
They
gave
non-structural
options
as
a
way
of
mitigating
the
water
and
rosemount
is
like
in
agreement
with
that.
They
they
don't
have
the
engineering
skills
or
the
that
kind
of
concept,
so
they
they.
They
are
trusting
the
engineers
to
like
look
at
what
we
suggested.
As
far
as
a
recommendation.
G
Could
I
have
offered
a
related
observation,
mr
mayor?
It
might
be
helpful
for
you
to
hear
some
of
the
things
that
that
we
heard
when
we
talked
to
residents
during
that
walking
tour
they're
they're
related
to
any
perimeter
protection
planning
non-structural.
You
know
all
the
things
that
this
committee
is
talking
about
and
also
just
have
to
do
with
the
overall
resilience
of
the
community
and
things
that
they're
experiencing
right.
G
Now
we
heard
from
more
than
one
resident
who
is
experience
experiencing
frustration,
because
there
have
been
some
road
improvements,
some
repaving
that
has
changed
the
way
the
water
is
flowing
and
there's
a
lack
of
understanding,
lack
of
clarity
about
whose
responsibility
to
address
that
is
it
the
city
of
charleston?
Is
it
north
charleston?
Is
it
the
county?
Is
it
the
state?
You
know
there
are
there's
a
lot
of
confusion
about
that.
G
There
was
also
a
situation
where
some
residents
went
out
and
built
a
dock,
but
they
didn't
have
the
right
permits,
but
they
didn't
know
who
to
talk
to
or
how
to
get
them.
You
know
so
there's
a
real
lack
of
kind
of
awareness
and
ability
to
connect
to
the
right
governmental
processes
with
the
kinds
of
real-time
situations
that
they're
facing
right
now.
F
Understood,
that's
all
often
the
case
when
you
talk
about
roadways,
because
you
know
county
state,
no
funding
to
the
city
that
that
that's
not
an
uncommon
concern
or
misunderstanding.
Thank
you.
C
Great
well,
thank
you
for
the
clarification
mayor,
tuckerberg
and
the
question
certainly
appreciate
that
and
herbert
laura
as
well.
So
with
that
said,
I
I'm
turned
turned
over
to
mark
to
kind
of
walk
through
the
email.
Yesterday
I
know
everybody
hasn't
had
a
chance
to
to
review
it
and
maybe
some
having
some
haven't
marge.
You
wouldn't
mind
giving
a
quick
background.
What's
there
and
then
we
can
want
you
to
launch
into
the
discussion.
A
Sure,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
so
because
I
number
one
I
I've
wanted
to
do
this,
but
I
got
a
lot
of
requests
from
members
of
the
committee
and
we've
been
working
diligently
to
find
ways
to
get
this
information
out
ahead
of
what
you
see
in
the
timeline
that
I
that
I
sent
you
what
you
have.
What
I
said
yesterday
is
the
draft
document.
A
A
There
are
some
cities
in
the
country
that
didn't
do
that
and-
and
I
don't
think
that
worked
well
for
them
and
we
as
the
city
of
charleston,
have
taken
a
very,
very
involved
approach
in
working
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
and
so
what
you
see
in
front
of
you
is
reflective
of
the
amount
of
involvement
that
we've
had,
including
this
committee.
A
So
those
comments
are
preliminary
drafts.
We
they're
ahead
of
the
release
of
the
draft
plan,
which
the
draft
plan
is
being
put
together.
Right
now
I
know
that
for
a
fact,
and
so
we
needed
to
get
a
placeholder
in
for
the
city
comments
and
particularly
in
the
areas
that
we
wanted
to
comment
about.
Specifically
to
laura
your
point.
A
I
think
it's
a
valid
one
kale-
and
I
sat
here
the
other
day
and
looked
at
all
the
different
timelines
city
and
army
corps,
and
we
just
our
head
just-
was
spinning
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
put
it
all
together.
So
the
the
timeline
that
I
sent.
A
You
is
the
result
of
that
effort,
and
hopefully
it
provided
some
clarity,
but
I
think
the
big
one
is
that
on
the
army
is
right
now
putting
together
the
draft
plan
and
keep
in
mind
it
comes
from
all
over
the
country,
and
they
have
one
group
that
just
sits
and
writes
it,
and
then
it
gets
sent
out
to
everybody
for
review.
A
They
will
send
that
report
to
noaa
on
three
september
and
10
september.
We
will
see
that
draft
report
that
will
be
made
public.
That
will
start
a
45-day
comment
period,
just
as
we
did
in
the
past,
and
that
will
be
an
opportunity
for
all
of
the
public
all
of
the
groups,
including
this
group
and
the
city,
to
provide
additional
comments
as
they
see
fit.
Now,
of
course,
the
city
has
plenty
of
opportunity
to
comment
throughout
the
process
being
part
of
the
the
working
group
and
on
25
october
I
put
26
down.
A
I
checked
with
them
yesterday,
it's
actually
25
october
they'll,
stop
taking
comments
and
they'll
publish
the
final
report.
Based
on
those
comments,
I
do
want
to
say
as
best
as
I
understand
it
lori.
You
asked
the
second
question
and
I
want
to
answer
it.
The
the
eis
and
the
draft
report
are
going
to
be
one
of
the
same.
Those
topics
about
the
eis
will
be
addressed
in
the
draft
report,
so
you
will
see
the
first
discussion
on
those
eis
topics
on
10
september.
That's
the
best.
A
I
understand
it
and
I
ask
that
question
often,
so
I
will
keep
asking
it
until
I
get
clarity
on
that.
So
back
to
the
the
second
document
that
I
sent
you
and
I
would
love
if,
if
any
of
you
have
comments
about
how
I
can
make
the
timeline
better,
please
send
them
to
me.
I
will
try
to
do
that
and
send
them
back
out.
Yes,.
A
Yeah,
that's
my
understanding
and
they're
integrated
into
one
I'm
meeting
with
the
the
leader
of
the
eis
this
afternoon
at
two
o'clock
and
I'll
get
clarity
on
that.
A
A
I
Had
your
hand
up
yeah,
quick
question
mark
thanks
for
putting
the
timeline
together
very
helpful
where,
in
the
timeline,
I
remember
you
saying
november
was
a
very
important
date,
because
at
that
point,
that's
where
council
needs
to
weigh
in
on
whether
or
not
to
proceed.
Is
that
does
that
come
after
the
october
2050
was
that.
A
At
what
point
is
it
it'll
we'll
have
to
line
that
up
with
I'll
have
to
talk
with
the
mayor
and
we'll
look
at
the
you
know,
as
the
city
council
and
the
mayor
work
together
to
put
their
recommendations,
it's
the
army
is
going
to
be
looking
for
a
letter
from
us
in
november
that
two
two
points
one's
going
to
say
whether
we
do
or
don't
support
the
plan
and
two's
gonna,
be
it's
what
they
call
a
financial
capability
document.
I
A
Okay,
yeah,
we
can
we'll
make
maybe
a
couple
of
page
document
to
add
some
of
the
additional
stuff
mark.
C
E
C
A
plug
for
the
working
group-
oh
sorry,
mark
just
to
jump
in
real
quick
before
we
move
on
in
an
effort
not
to
duplicate
efforts,
it
could
be
good
to
work
in
conjunction
with
the
communications
working
group
in
the
creation
of
a
four
piece
document.
It's
something
that
accomplishes
all
these
goals
and
is
already
you
know
already
already
underway,
and
we
can
use
to
combine
combined
efforts
there.
So
sorry
to
jump
in
just
want
to
mention
that
before
we
transit.
G
G
I
think
that
I
agree
with
that,
and
so
it's
not
a
bud.
It's
an
and,
I
think,
a
more
detailed,
more
granular
timeline
for
this
committee's
purposes
and
it's
a
gantt
chart
or
something
that
helps
us
understand
the
layers
of
what's
going
on.
So
if
you
got
the
core
with
its
deadlines
and
markers,
you've
got
the
work
that
this
committee
is
doing.
You've
got
the
work
that
the
city
is
doing
and
I
understand
not,
everything
is
nailed
down,
but
there's
some
major
moments
like
november,
where
we
know
something
important
is
going
to
happen.
G
So
you
know
I
I
I
think
that
more
more
is
better
in
this
instance.
So
don't
worry
about
it
getting
too
busy.
I
think
we
need
the
information
so
that
we
can
understand
how
we
can
as
contribute
to
progress.
Now,
I'm
done.
E
A
Okay,
if
we're
done
with
timelines,
I
will
move
on
to
the
draft
comments.
Preliminary
draft
comments
and
what
I,
what
I,
what
I've
said
in
the
email
and
what
I'll
ask
you
to
do
is
respond
directly
to
kailyn,
and
I
that
just
helps
keep
things
very.
We
understand
who
sent
us
what
and
we've
been
doing
that
on
all
of
the
input.
We
also
have
a
meeting
scheduled
on
august
5th,
with
all
of
the
city
department
heads
where
we're
gonna.
A
Actually,
you
know
see
if
there's
more
comments
from
city
department
said:
they've
already
had
one
chance
to
go
through
it,
but
we
don't.
We
don't
want
to
take
this
slightly.
I
did
not
want
to
go
through
these
comments
line
by
line
because
that
would
take
several
hours,
but
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
just
jump
through
and
see.
A
If
any
of
you,
your
reaction,
your
thoughts,
I
appreciate
bob
what
you
sent
back,
but
generally,
I
think
it
would
be
important
to
hear
from
this
committee
before
I
go
and
take
these
comments
and-
and
you
know,
go
ahead
and
share
them
even
more
broadly
with
members
of
the
city,
staff
and
members
of
city
council,
what
your
overall
reaction
was
and
then
also
any
specific
areas
that
you
think
we
should
maybe
focus
on
that
are
not
in
here
and
again.
Anything
that
maybe
you
feel
differently
about.
B
I
do
I
just
wanted
to
say
at
this
point.
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
pulling
all
that
together.
B
I
think
one
of
the
things
that's
been
missing
in
in
our
discussions
has
been
a
focus
on
the
various
presentations
that
we
heard
a
few
weeks
ago
and
what
items
in
those
presentations
the
various
members
of
this
group
might
be
interested
in
pursuing
in
conjunction
with
the
army
corps.
You
know
they
were
terrific
presentations.
B
We
had
a
lot
of
information
coming
to
us,
but
we've
never
had
a
chance
to
discuss
it,
and
I
know
there's
a
deadline
for
this
document,
but
if
we
could
take
some
time
at
some
point
before
we
finalize
this
to
figure
out
which
items
in
the
sherwood
presentation
or
what
alan
davis
said
or
a
variety
of
other
people,
what
are
the
specifics
in
those
alternatives
we
we
would
like
to
pursue
as
a
city.
E
Bob,
if
I
could
sort
of
building
on
that
thought,
we're
doing
comments
ahead
of
seeing
the
updated
proposal.
E
What
might
be
very
useful
for
this
group,
and
also
the
the
public
and
elected
officials,
is
to
see
a
cause
of
change.
I
mean
a
lot
of
people
put
a
lot
of
work
into
understanding
the
specifics
of
the
initial
proposal,
so
a
cause
of
change,
something
you
know
relatively
succinct,
but
what
has
changed
you
know.
I
brought
up
the
example
of
the
berm
off
the
high
battery.
E
You
know
that
was
now
excluded.
What
was
the
rationale
who
supported
that?
What
were
the
implications
from
the
financial
landscape
so
that
that
kind
of
navigation
aid
to
let
us
move
forward
from
the
base
case,
which
was
the
original
proposal
to
what
we're
commenting
on
without
really
knowing?
What's
included?
E
That's
you
know,
sort
of
kind
of
problematic
but
understanding
the
the
genesis
who
proposed
the
change.
What
was
the
rationale
financial
implications?
Does
this
group
support?
Does
the
city
support
you
know
where
the
circumstances?
I
think
I
think
that
would
help
communicate
and
elicit
you
know,
support
and
sponsorship.
E
A
Good
comments
and
you're
right:
it's
challenging
working
on
these
couple,
different
timelines,
so
I
I
can
get
you
all
those
answers.
I
could
even
answer
some
of
those
right
now,
but
I
think
what
we'll
do
is
in
the
interest
of
just
keep
moving
on,
maybe
save
that
for
another
day
or
bob
you
and
I
can
talk
offline
or
or
whatever,
but.
E
I
think
it's
importantly
imported
mark
for
that
to
be
a
new
foundational
understanding
for
everybody.
What
has
changed?
Why
has
it
changed?
Do
we
like
it?
Are
we
pro
or
con
on
it
and
then
that
would
equip
and
inform
people
during
the
comment
period
to
take
a
position.
E
A
Plan,
but
hopefully
something
like
that's
in
there.
You
know
a
summary
of
the
changes.
Oh
through
optimization,
I
can
tell
you
they're,
being
driven
by
the
environment.
They're
being
driven
by
economics,
are
the
two
areas
that
are
really
driving
and
then
the
historical
preservation
and
cultural
peace.
So
everything
that's
kind
of
wrapped
up
in
the
eis
is
what's
driving
is
what
drove
optimization
as
well
as
costs
yeah
susan.
I.
B
Think
there's
some
sense
that
the
public
comment
some
question
as
to
what
the
impact
of
public
comments
have
been,
because
people
were
encouraged
to
send
in
these
comments
and
there
were
500
of
them
or
something
and
then
we
we
don't
know
what
happened.
They
landed
in
a
dark
hole
and
we
don't
know
what
happened
to
them,
and
I,
I
guess
I'll
go
back
to
my
initial
thought,
which
was
when
the
initial
plan
came
out.
B
There
were
these
marvelous
alternatives
that
people
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
putting
together
and
so
forth
and
they're
just
kind
of
hanging
out
there
and
we
don't
know
how
they
might
relate.
Or
is
it
realistic
to
think
that
some
of
those
things
may
be
included
or
all
are
all
of
them
betterments?
I
I
think
we
need
to
understand
that
better.
C
And
this
is
this
is
a
good
I'll,
just
mention,
maybe
worth
kind
of
pushing
comments
back
until
marx
had
a
chance
to
go
through
the
meat
of
the
the
document
that
that
was
sent
out
just
an
effort
to
help
get
all
the
thoughts
out
there
as
we
as
we
continue.
Our
discussion
mark,
I
didn't
know
if
you
wanted
to
go
on
any
specifics
on
the
documentary.
A
A
They've
spent
3.7
million
federal
dollars
to
date,
and
there
is
no
money
left
for
additional
modeling.
They
cannot
include
things
in
the
plan
that
they
cannot
model.
So
a
good
example
is
they
can't
just
put
things
in
they've.
They
have
finished
the
modeling
of
the
areas
where
we
talk
about
unintended
impact,
and
you
heard
up
at
rosemont
the
other
day
about
that
they
put
a
answer
to
that
on.
A
The
frequently
asked
questions
on
their
website
if
they
were
to
go
and
change
the
plan
now,
they'd
have
to
go
back
and
remodel
everything
that
they've
already
modeled.
So
we
to
take
things
from
whether
it's
the
sherwood
report
or
some
of
the
other
reports,
the
biohabitats
report
they
by
by
law
by
regulation,
they
have
to
model
it
and
prove
that
it
works.
A
It
doesn't
work
what
the
financial
impacts
are
and
then
what
the
effects
would
be
around
the
area,
so
they
just
can't
throw
and
I'm
not
suggesting
that
you
are
insinuating,
but
things
to
be
thrown
in
or
put
in.
I
don't
like
that
word
throne,
to
be
put
in
at
the
last
minute
is,
is
just
not
possible
for
them
on
their
timeline.
B
I
I
think
that
I
I
hear
you
we
hear
you.
We
know
that
the
army
is
locked
into
its
process,
but
for
the
city
of
charleston
and
for
this
group
to
decide
that
we
endorse
a
b
or
c
it's
going
to
be
difficult
to
say,
yeah.
Well,
that
would
be
great
if
we
can
do
that
and
we'll
discuss
it
in
three
years.
I
Mark
I
I
echo
susan's
sentiments
because,
in
essence,
there's
been
tremendous
effort
by
this
group
to
come
up
with
ideas
as
to
how
to
make
this
better.
I
mean
from
nature-based
solutions
to
what
we
can
do
with
the
rosemont
area.
I
think
we
have
to
be
clear
that
the
current
alignment
is
what
is
moving
forward
into
the
pet
phase,
just
as
you
said,
there's
no
more
money
for
studies,
there's
no
more
modeling.
I
So
as
as
wonderful
as
there's
been
to
talk
about
all
these
opportunities,
it
seems
to
me
as
though
we're
asking
to
take
a
very
big
leap
of
faith
that
somewhere
down
the
road
there'll,
be
adjustments
or
realignment,
and
it
just
doesn't
seem
the
more
I
keep
hearing
about
how
rigid
this
process
is
and
again
we
don't
even
know
it'll
be
great
for
our
funding
committee.
That
cashion
is
doing
a
phenomenal
job,
leading
to
have
a
discussion
with
the
cfo
because
there's
still
an
uncertainty
as
of
even
if
we
like
certain
betterments.
I
We
have
no
idea
what
those
would
cost
to
fit
into
the
understanding
of
what
a
20
30,
40
50
year
budget
and
cost
schedule
would
look
like.
So
I
think
I
think
that's
my
concerns.
I
think
susan,
I'm
hearing
the
same
thing
from
you
and
from
bob
that
we
need
to
understand
what
we're
recommending
and
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
now
is
we're
recommending
what's
on
paper
and
as
much
as
we
want
to,
you
know,
address
the
environmental
impacts
and
address
the
nature-based
solutions
and
potential
realignment
and
betterments.
E
Well,
just
to
expand
on
that.
We
can't
be
the
first
community
to
experience
the
rigidity
of
this
process
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
there
are
learnings
from
other
communities
that
have
gotten
into
the
pet
face
and
have
subsequently
been
able
to
adapt
their
plans
according
to
community
interests
and
desires.
A
Yeah,
that's
a
great
question
and
that
was
actually
the
focus
of
our
session.
We
did
over
the
keeping
history
above
water,
we
brought
norfolk
in
and
miami
who
hasn't
started
yet,
but
I
actually
had
a
really
interesting
meeting
last
night
with
a
gentleman
in
town
who's
associated
with
the
work
that's
going
on
in
cedar
rapids,
and
so
they
cedar
rapids
are
having
a
very
successful
time
doing
what
you
just
described:
kevin
moving
things
based
on
community
input.
A
Now,
not
all
of
it's
free,
but
the
community
out
there
has
been
willing
to
pay
to
get
things
to
move
in
different
directions,
in
fact,
because
of
the
cost
benefit
analysis
in
cedar
rapids,
one
half
of
the
project
didn't
make
it
on
the
cost
benefit
analysis,
so
the
city
funded
the
entire
project,
just
because
of
a
environmental
justice
issue.
So
it
was
two
sides
of
the
river
the
army
corps
found
and
again.
All
of
this
is
my
understanding.
A
I
would
invite
you
to
look
at
their
project
online,
but
the
army
corps
funded
half
of
it.
The
the
half
that
had
a
strong
cost
benefit
analysis
and
then
the
other
half
the
city
took
on
as
a
locally
preferred
plan
funding
the
majority
of
it.
So
they
are
doing
that
and
I
will
see
if
I
can
get
somebody
from
cedar
rapids,
maybe
to
come
and
talk
to
this
group.
I
think
that
might
be
helpful
for
you
to
understand
how
the
ped
process
is
moving
forward.
A
I
do
talk
to
norfolk
frequently
and
they
are
going
back
and
forth.
It's
a
give
and
take
process
through
the
pet
process.
There's
no
question
about
it
and
what's
the
best
approach
through
ped
is
something
that
we
as
a
city
will
need
to
work
on
over
the
next
year.
So
so
those
are
all
good
points
and
questions.
B
F
Mark
mark
was
it
cedar
rapids.
You
were
telling
me
about
that
actually
took
on
the
more
of
the
design
phase
at
their
expense,
so
to
speak
as
part
of
their
contribution
and
let
the
core
respond
to
it,
rather
than
the
other
way.
A
That's
correct
mayor,
so
in
cedar
rapids
they
actually
hired
the
design
and
engineering
firm
to
design
their
parts
of
their
city.
I
did
not
share.
I
think
I
shared
some
of
those
slides
with
this
committee
earlier
that
I
had
gotten
from
cedar
rapids,
but
there's
some
great
work
out
there,
but
you're
right.
A
The
design
firm
and
then
their
firm,
went
and
designed
the
wall
to
army
corps
standards
shared
it
with
the
army,
got
the
thumbs
up
thumbs
down
it's
above
the
cost
that
we
had
originally
thought
because
you've
added
these
betterments.
This
is
what
the
cost
of
the
city
is
going
to
be
negotiating
back
and
forth,
and
then
you
proceed.
I
think
that's
the
that's.
What
I
think
we
put
together
in
this
document
is
that
we
as
a
city
would
like
to
proceed
in
the
same
fashion.
F
It
just
seems
to
me
when
I
heard
that
option
that
it
addresses
some
of
this
discussion
here
right
now.
That
would
put
us
a
bit
more
quite
a
bit
more
in
the
driver's
seat.
Basically,.
A
Well,
all
of
this
is
very
preliminary,
but
I
think
is
if
city
council
approves
a
water
plan
that
would
be
part
of
it
right
there
and
then
you
would
not
want
to
go
out
and
hire
a
design
firm
until
after
one
you
have
a
signed
report
in
august
of
2022.
A
So
again
back
to
the
timeline,
you
would
not
want
to
begin
designing
something.
Until
you
know
you've
got
a
signed
report,
then
you
would
want
to
work
with
the
army
and
find
out
when
they
planned
on
asking
for
their
first
round
of
money
for
the
first
year
of
ped,
and
that
would
be
the
appropriate
time
to
do
it.
A
You
wouldn't
want
to
go
out
and
spend
and
commit
a
contract
ahead
of
one
having
an
approved
report
or
two
having
the
federal
government
being
committed
to
paying
for
it,
because
it's
all
going
to
be
this
is
our
cost
share.
This
all
goes
to
our
caution.
B
A
Well,
yeah
and
that's
that's
been
the
that's,
been
the
they've
not
been
shy
about
sharing
that
that
when
we
get
to
pet
phase
is
when
you
actually
get
the
final
product,
I
don't
think
we
want
to
go.
I
think
it'd
be
a
hard
sell.
Let
me
say
that
to
go
out
and
design
an
entire
wall
on
our
own
dime
and
then
see
if
we
can
get
the
government
to
pay
for
it.
I
think
we'd
have
to
the
smarter
thing
to
do
is
to
work
side
by
side
with
them.
E
And
I've
got
really
super
unstable
internet.
So
if
I
lose
you,
I
apologize,
but
it
seems
to
me
I
mean
just
listening
to
this
conversation.
The
cautionary
tale
of
cedar
rapids
is,
if
we
want
to
be
in
the
driver's
seat,
we've
got
to
pay
to
do
it,
but
you're,
never
really
in
the
driver's
seat.
If
you
pay
to
do
it
because
you've
got
to
design
back
to
the
report
that
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
engineers
finalizes,
what
happens
when
we
went
out
and
hired
our
own.
E
C
Hey
mark
just
thank
you,
councilman
for
seeking
some
quick
thought
on
that.
So
just
to
play
this
out
say
conceptually
we're
fairly
explicit
in
the
comments
saying
you
know
that
the
alignment's
not
acceptable
and
for
a
variety
of
reasons
that
we
need
to
work
through.
How
does
that
play
out
going
forward?
D
C
You
know
we
don't
have
exact
knowledge
on
how
that
could
work
out.
You
know
we
may
not.
I
should
say
what
are
your
thoughts
on
how
that
works
out.
A
You're
asking
me
to
project
the
future
and
speak
for
another
agency,
so
I
prefer
not
to
go
down
that
road,
but
what
I
will
say
to
you
is
this:
these
projects
are
competitive
to
be
funded
throughout
the
country,
as
we've
said
a
couple
of
times,
and
the
way
that
I
early
on
asked,
you
know
one
of
the
things
I
asked
the
committee
was
to
ask
those
three
questions:
do
we
need
this?
A
Do
we
need
a
perimeter
protection
in
the
city
of
charleston,
and
if
so
is
this
can
can
we
work
with
the
army
to
do
this,
because
that's
the
way
you're
going
to
get
65
of
it
paid
for
and
if
not
and
then
what
would
we
need
to
do
to
make
it
acceptable?
A
And
then,
if
not,
what
would
the
city
do
on
its
own?
We
now
know
about
what
the
cost
for
this
is
going
to
be.
We
have
a
very
good
idea.
Four
years
ago,
we
had
no
idea
what
the
cost
for
something
like
this
would
be.
We
now
know
about
how
high
it
needs
to
be.
We
know
about
where
it
needs
to
start
to
stop.
We
know
the
implications
of
you
can't
just
do
this
incrementally
around
you've
got
to
do
it
in
large
sections,
because
if
you
do
it
incrementally
you
could
cause
more
harm
than
good.
A
A
A
It
was
very
clear
in
both
the
perimeter
protection
analysis
report
from
wagner
and
ball
and
those
specific
questions
that
they
asked,
as
well
as
the
keeping
history
above
water
that
we
will
work
with
them,
we'll
have
to
work
with
them
through
the
bed
phase
to
ensure
that
we
get
the
best
that
we
can
hope
for
as
a
city
that
line
on
the
map.
Right
now
is,
and
they've
said
this
publicly.
A
A
We
don't
know,
and
again
we
don't
know
where
that
exact
line
is
going
to
be
until
we
begin
to
put
and
start
digging
and
finding
what
we
find
as
soon
as
we
dig
what
kind
of
real
estate
we're
able
to
acquire.
That's
all
on
the
city,
and
one
thing
it's
important
to
note.
All
of
that
goes
towards
our
cost
share.
A
So
in
terms
of
an
exact
alignment:
you're
not
going
to
get
an
exact
alignment
ahead
of
the
ped
phase
because
of
all
of
those
variables,
and
if
I
were
to
sit
here
and
tell
you
you
could,
I
would
just
be
making
that
up
and
I'm
not
going
to
do
that.
A
I
You
know
it's
a
great
point,
because
I
think
overall,
when
you
think
about
this
project,
I
think
currently,
the
projection
is
that
the
city
share
is
roughly
600
million
and
that's
before,
taking
into
account
what
we
would
encounter
once
we
start
getting
into
the
ground
which,
by
the
way
I
can
guarantee
you
we're
going
to
encounter
a
lot
of
different
things
that
would
move
things
around
and
also
the
real
estate
acquisition.
So
we
could
be
looking
at
a
billion
plus
dollars
of
a
city
investment.
I
I
think
the
question
for
this
committee
would
be
is
the
best
alternative
to
build
the
perimeter
wall
or
to
invest
a
billion
dollars
in
other
infrastructure.
That
could
be
the
result
of
what
we,
what
what
is
garnered
from
the
water
management
plan,
because
now
we're
talking
about
significant
costs
that
could
be
utilized
in
a
better
fashion.
A
I
will
only
offer
that
the
first
thing
that
a
water
management
plan
is
going
to
tell
you
is
you
need
a
perimeter
protection
system.
We've
got
that
already
from
two
reports,
both
the
dutch
dialogues
and
the
perimeter
protection
analysis.
Both
came
to
the
conclusion
that
you
need
a
perimeter
protection
system.
If.
G
B
Can
I
echo
sort
of
what
dan
is
saying?
Would
it
be
possible
to
put
together
a
side
by
side
financial
analysis
of
what
the
army
corps
perimeter
protection
plan
in
its
general
format
affords
us
and
what
our
own
potential
planning
and
design
could
possibly
afford
us
that
looks
more
like
us
than
what
we
think
the
army
corps
might
look
like.
You
know
there
are
a
lot
of
ifs
there,
but
is
there
a
way
to
put
it
side
by
side
so
that
we
understand
better
how
our
billion
dollars
could
be
spent.
C
C
That's
still,
obviously
getting
worked,
not
even
at
a
fine-tuned
level
at
this
point,
but
at
a
high
level
as
far
as
overall
scope,
I
think
that's
what
both
mark
and
dan
and
susan
are
all
referring
to
is
really
the
scope,
as
opposed
to
fine-tuning
the
exact
cost
number
one
and
number
two
just
to
again
relay
the
foundation.
C
This
conversation
and
number
two
is
that
we
need
to
let
I
think
the
timeline
plays
in
a
very
important
way
to
this
as
far
as
what
costa
outlays
happen
at
what
time
so,
for
example,
the
ped
phase.
C
Obviously
a
very
important
part
of
that
is
designing,
but
I'd
argue
just
as
important,
if
not
more
important
is
understanding
what
our
infrastructure
in
place
looks
like
now,
so
that
we
can
make
a
logic
decision
as
far
as
what
to
do
to
determine
that
scope,
and
it's
something
that
you
know
we
have
some
of
the
information
I
have
all
of
it
as
far
as
what
our
current
storm
water
and
storm
management,
water
management
infrastructure
looks
like
on
the
peninsula
right
now,
and
so
you
know
in
my
mind
that
number's
a
lot
less
than
whether
it's
500
million
250
million
or
whatever
the
number
is,
and
I
think
getting
that
engineering
is
an
important
piece
to
that,
and
that's
just
one
example
right
as
we
go
through
these
phases.
C
So
the
next
you
know
50
years
to
create
a
what
75-year
overall
system
so
yeah
point
being
there.
I
think
that's
an
important
piece
to
take
consideration
as
we
we
have.
This
conversation
is
the
timing
of
expenditures
and
and
how
it
relates,
and
at
what
point
we
can
opt
out.
It
goes
through
the
process
after
certain
expenditures.
A
Yeah,
you
will
see
just
thank
you,
hey
good.
You
will
see
in
the
draft
plan
when
it
comes
out
the
updated
cost
figures
and-
and
it's
important
to
keep
in
mind
since
the
tentative
selective
plan
was
released.
Their
goal
has
been
to
reduce
costs.
A
Okay,
that's
part
of
optimization,
that's
their
charge
from
congress
to
to
go
through
and
look
at
this
and
see
to
make
sure
that
they're
doing
the
best
for
the
federal
interest.
So
again
I
wish
I
wish
I
had
the
numbers
and
I
could
sit
here
and
show
you
the
numbers,
but
you'll
get
a
chance
to
see
them
all.
On
september,
10th.
H
Mark
can
I
make
a
comment
sure,
based
on
what
I'm
hearing
and
from
what
I've
observed
about
cost
in
the
future.
It
always
goes
up.
H
The
other
thing
that
I'm
I'm
looking
at
is
like
hearing
sue
and
dan
and
and
what
we're
looking
at
as
far
as
what
this
committee's
supposed
to
do,
sign
off
on
something
and
and
we're
making
the
statement
that
they
may
be
something
possibly,
we
can
use
other
than
just
the
army
corps
of
engineers,
rendition
and,
and
if
that
is
so
I'd
hate
to
buy
a
horse
that
I
haven't
really
seen
or
evaluated
and
looked
at
and
turned
it
upside
down,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
et
cetera.
H
I
think
that
will
allow
us
an
opportunity
to
do
some
research
and
come
up
with
something
that
will
allow
us
to
feel
good
about
what
we
are
really
going
to
put
our
dollars
to
than
just
on
the
army
corps
of
engineers
and
that's
not
a
knock
against
them
and
their
capabilities
and
the
quality
of
what
they
produce.
It's
the
idea
that
we
are
looking
at
our
monies,
our
future
and
the
objective
is
like
their
objective,
is
to
safeguard
the
city,
so
they
don't
have
to
be,
and
I
hate
using
this
term.
H
So
so
we
we,
I
think
we
will
be
short-changing
ourselves
if
we
don't
look
at
what
was
presented
by
sue,
councilman,
seeking
and
dan
and
and
me
right
now,
and
possibly
other
members
of
the
committee
to
like
have
a
take
a
look-see
at
alternatives,
and
even
if
we
were
to
like
lose
the
the
army
corps
or
get
them
in
a
dither.
J
J
Listening
in
the
whole
time
since
I
signed
on,
but
I
think
it's
a
two-fold
strategy,
I
certainly
appreciate
all
the
comments.
I
mean
we're
really
getting
down
to
the
nuts
and
bolts,
but
I'd
like
to
know,
what's
going
to
be
our
strategy
to
raise
our
match
at
what
point
in
time,
because
that's
going
to
have
to
be
done,
we're
going
to
have
to
raise
money
in
the
event
that
the
court
does
come
through
with
funding
or
in
the
case
that
mr
drayton
just
said.
J
Somehow,
if
that
falls
through
I
mean
the
answer
can't
be,
do
nothing
so
at
what
point
in
time
do
we
have
a
strategy
to
go
out
and
raise
our
600
or
whatever?
It
is
500
million
600
million
700
million
match.
J
I
guess
that's
a
question
for
the
mir.
If
he's
still
on
yeah,
I
see
that
he's.
F
Well,
I'm
still
on
and
cashman
gave
a
report
earlier
about
conversations
they've
been
having,
including
the
the
what
cedar,
rapids
and
norfolk,
and
these
other
three
by
three
projects
have
been
doing
to
achieve
their
match.
F
Yeah,
well,
we
we
we
certainly,
I
recognize
we're
gonna
have
to
have
some
some
local
match
from
from
our
city.
We're
gonna
have
to
leverage
that,
even
at
35
on
the
dollar,
we're
going
to
have
to
leverage
that,
with
with
help
from
from
other
other
levels
of
government
other
than
the
federal
government.
Who
you
know
is
paying
the
65
cent.
F
I
think
one
approach
and
cash-
and
I
don't
know
if
y'all
talked
about
this
at
the
committee,
but
I've
asked
our
planning
department
to
go
ahead
and
use
the
consultant
that
helped
us
put
together
the
municipal
improvement
district
proposal
for
johns
island
to
think
about
municipal
improvement,
district
for
the
entire
peninsula
of
charleston
and
what
kind
of
revenue
we
could
reasonably
generate
for
our
local
match.
F
I
do
believe
that
the
city
of
charleston's,
match
towards
this
project
occurs,
should
include
citizens
from
our
entire
city,
but
also,
I
think,
reasonably
an
extra
chip
put
in
by
those
who
on
the
peninsula
who
who
derived
the
most
benefit
from
the
project
long
term.
F
So
so
that's
why
I'm
thinking
that
perhaps
a
municipal
improvement
district
would
be
a
good
way
to
approach
that
you
know
kind
of
have
one
level:
that's
helped
to
be
paid
for
by
peninsula
residents
and
then
another
level,
either
through
the
storm
water
fee
or
millage,
that's
borne
by
the
city
as
a
whole.
But
it's
clear
to
me
even
to
get
to
our
35
cent.
F
You
know
we
we've
got
to
have
the
county
and
the
state
helping
us
and,
and
that
herbert
I
hear
you
loud
and
clear
and
I'm
not
saying
we
can't
protect
the
city
long
term
without
the
federal
government,
but
boy
having
that.
65
cent
really
really
will
make
a
difference
in
the
long
run.
J
Yeah,
mr
mr
may
I
I
didn't
mean
it,
I'm
not
trying
to
put
you
in
the
spot.
It's
just
that
when
we,
when
I
say
we
in
the
lower
country,
the
tri-county
area,
metro
area,
when
we
have
had
word
capital
infrastructure
projects,
the
answer
has
been
half
cent
sales
tax.
J
If
you
go
to
the
ravenel
bridge
project
and
obviously,
if
you
go
to
526
or
if
you
go
to
the
infrastructure
to
replace,
I
don't
know
60
or
70
schools,
how
many
schools
in
charleston
county
did
we
rebuild
or
substantially
renovate
it
has
been
through
that
sales
tax
option
so
that
the
broadness
of
of
approaching
the
dollars
where
everybody
chips
in
not
just
the
property
tax
owners
or
you
know
putting
one
portion
of
the
city
in
this
case
the
peninsula
against
another
section
of
the
city
or
us
against
them.
J
You
know
it's
not
until
we
all
push
in
the
same
direction
that
we're
going
to
raise.
You
know
half
the
billion
of
a
dollar
match,
or
something
like
that.
So
I
think
that's
something
that
sooner
rather
than
later
I
mean
the
business
district.
I
mean
that's
one
of
the
options.
If
you
want
to
look
at
it
like
that,
but
I
think
I
think
we
need
to
get
to
work
on
that
part.
I
think
sooner
rather
than
later,
because
you
know
right
now.
F
Right
well,
well,
I
concur
and
that's
one
reason
why
I've
asked
them
to
go
ahead
and
start
working
on
some
numbers
from
that
concept.
You
know
the
the
half
count
cent
county
tax
on
the
sales
tax.
F
But
I,
I
kind
of
think
it's
one
of
those
things
where
we
you
know
to
expect
the
county
in
the
state
to
have
a
a
stake
in
this
game.
We
got.
We
got
to
put
our
own
stake
down
first
and
and
let
them
know
what
we're
going
to
be
doing
to
to
to
raise
funds
within
our
own
city
they're,
going
to
want
to
see
that
before
we
go
to
the
county-wide
voters
and
ask
them
for
for
for
additional
help
that
that
that
would
be.
My
thinking
couldn't
agree.
B
Do
you
think
that
that
planning
consultant
who
knows
about
the
municipal
district
could
come
and
talk
to
this
committee
so
that
we
get
some
idea
about
how
that
stuff
works.
A
E
I
A
Let
me
let
me
just
jump
back
to
something
that
we
were
talking
about
in
a
minute.
If
I
could
real
quick-
and
I
know
alan
davis
is
still
on
the
line
so
back
to
the
the
whole
design
of
this,
and
what
this
looks
like
that,
we
in
the
city
of
charleston
have
been
breaking
new
ground
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers.
A
On
that
topic,
at
least
that's
what
they're
telling
us
and
alan
davis,
if
he's
still
there-
and
I
think
he
is-
has
been
working-
he's
been
putting
a
ton
of
hours
in
working
with
the
army
corps
of
engineers
on
this
very
topic
and
is
doing
things
that
really,
quite
frankly,
haven't
been
done
before-
to
ensure
that
one
there's
an
opportunity
for
mitigation
costs
associated
with
the
project
and
two,
but
really
to
put
the
city
of
charleston
to
put
folks
on
notice
that
the
city
of
charleston
is
who
it
is
and
we
are
who
we
are
and
we
design
things
the
way
we
design
them.
D
Yeah
thanks
mark.
I
really
appreciate
that
shout
out.
We
have
been
doing
a
lot
of
work
since
the
beginning
of
the
project.
This
is
very
important
in
terms
of
design.
I
re.
I
reiterated
the
importance
of
urban
design
and
our
involvement
in
the
project
at
the
keeping
history
above
water
panel
that
I
was
on.
I'm.
As
everyone
knows,
the
civic
design
center
is
in
charge
of
protecting
the
public
realm
and
implementing
a
1999
downtown
plan
and
implementing
the
mayor's
vision
for
civic
design
in
the
city
of
charleston.
D
You
know
stepping
back
a
little
bit.
We
were
really
successful
in
in
influencing
the
project
costs
relative
to
the
potential
for
aesthetic
mitigation
working
with
the
landscape,
architect
on
the
core
of
engineers,
using
what's
called
the
v-wrap
system,
a
visual
impact
assessment,
or
something
or
other,
it's
very
technical,
but
we
we
were
able
to
arrive
at
you
know
determination
that
there
would
be
a
significant
impact
and
working
with
that
landscape,
architect
and
a
cost
estimator.
D
On
the
course
side,
we
were
able
to
inject
some
very
basic
ideas
and
some
of
them
very
progressive
and
ambitious
ideas
about
how
to
make
the
wall
fit
better
in
charleston,
just
so
that
we
can
get.
You
know
that
accounted
for
in
the
in
the
cost
estimate,
which
is
also
informative
to
the
core
and
its
teams.
That
will
be
working
with
us
in
ped
that
we
do
have
those
high
expectations
for
design
and
we
are
going
to
want
to
see
this
fit
better
in
the
peninsula,
whether
it's
in
the
historic
district
or
not.
D
So
we
were
able
to
sort
of
inject
that
message,
but
also
those
ideas
and
influence.
The
cost
estimate
overall,
which
I
understand
you'll
be
seeing
in
in
the
future,
the
final
cost
and
how
that
shook
out.
The
other
thing
that
we've
done
is,
in
addition
to
the
great
work
that
mark
has
done
to
lead.
D
What's
called
the
non-federal
sponsor
views
portion
of
the
report,
which
I
think
we've
just
gone
over
today,
we've
contributed
our
own
ideas:
they're
rather
granular,
really
digging
down
the
details
relative
to
what
is
a
streetscape
like
around
the
gates
and
elevating
standards
for
that
it
reiterating
the
importance
of
design
in
charleston,
both
the
legacy
of
our
design,
but
also
the
value
of
design.
D
D
The
next
thing
that
we're
going
to
be
doing
is
producing
one
of
our
design
division
report
booklets.
This
is
sort
of
a
standalone
booklet
that
we
do
for
all
of
our
projects.
If
you
go
on
our
website,
you'll
see,
we've
done
those
for
sam
rittenberg
boulevard
and
with
avondale
and
northbridge
gateway
places
like
that.
You
know
we've,
so
we
often
produce
design
reports.
So,
like
everybody
like
a
lot
of
others
that
have
come
before
us
will
also
be
producing
a
report.
D
But
the
difference
is:
I
think
that
we've
incorporated
all
of
the
great
or
as
many
of
the
great
ideas
as
we
think
are
viable
from
those
previous
reports
and
are
creating
sort
of
a
composite
right.
D
We're
going
to
want
to
work
on
all
those
design
details
and
you
know
to
basically
bring
the
a-game
when
it
comes
to
putting
this
thing
in
the
city,
and
that's
that
would
really
kind
of
put
our
involvement
at
us
at
a
standstill
we'll
be
involved
in
the
integrated
water
plan,
certainly
we'll
be
involved
in
other
things
that
prepare
us
for
ped.
D
Ideally,
there
would
be
a
downtown
plan
in
that
time,
something
that
I've
said
before,
as
you
guys
know,
is
sorely
needed,
because
our
current
downtown
plan
is
is
really
out
of
date,
so
we'll
be
involved
at
that
level
in
the
interim,
and
certainly
when
ped
comes,
we
will
be,
you
know
just
as
involved
as
we
have
been
in
the
project
along
the
way.
So
thank
you.
A
Alan,
I
hope
that
I
hope
that
addresses
some
of
the
the
concerns
that
we
were
here.
We
have
been
really
engaged
on
that
front.
We've
pushed
the
army,
probably
beyond,
where
they've
been.
You
know
where
they've
ever
been
before
in
this
kind
of
work
at
this
phase,
and
so
we
tried
to
highlight
that
at
the
keeping
history
above
water
conference,
you
know
where
we
had
the
army,
as
well
as
everyone
else
out
there
talking
about
how
you
get
through
this.
So
I
will
continue
to
to
push
that.
A
I
think
everyone
in
the
city
will
all
the
way
up
until
november
as
we
push
to
get
what
would
be
the
final
report
and
I
think
bob
you
have
your
hand
raised.
E
Yeah
thanks
mark
thanks
alan
that
was
certainly
informative
from
architecture
standpoint
in
the
decision
making,
so
pet
is
gonna,
be
very
dynamic.
E
There's
a
tension
between
betterment
and
adjustments
to
the
army
corps
plan.
What
is
the
protocol
for
that?
When
does
the
army
corps
project
get
locked
down
from
a
dollar
and
sense
standpoint,
all
these
enhancements
that
we're
desiring
we're
talking
about?
What
is
the
methodology
to
determine
whose
dime
that
is.
A
Yeah,
that's
a
that's
a
great
question
and
a
lot
of
the
work
I
believe.
Okay,
so
I
haven't
been
through
this
yet,
but
a
lot
of
the
work
that
alan's
doing
right
now
is
to
push
a
lot
of
that
to
the
army's
done.
Okay
under
what
they
call
the
visual
mitigation
impact
call
we'll,
hopefully
we'll
get
a
chance
to
see
that
or
we
should
get
a
chance
to
see
that
when
the
draft
report
comes
out,
that
was
the
hope.
A
So
in
ped,
as
I
understand
it
again,
I've
not
been
through
it,
but
this
is,
I
understand
it
and
asking
a
lot
of
questions.
So
I'm
going
to
use
lockwood
drive
as
an
example,
so
lockwood
drive
right
now.
Our
discussion
with
the
army
and
from
city
staff
is
that
lockwood
drive
looks
a
lot
like
the
low
battery
okay.
A
A
That
is
that's
what
we're
heading
into
this
now
the
questions
become.
How
do
you
access
it?
Who
pays
for
any
rails
that
go
on
it?
Who
pays
for
any
street
lights
that
might
want
to
go
on
it?
Those
are
questions
that,
when
you
get
into
pad
you're
going
to
end
up
going
back
and
forth
on,
we
have
said
over
and
over
again
that
for
us,
this
has
to
be
to
the
extent
that
it
can
as
much
of
an
amenity
as
we
can
make
it.
A
We
just
don't
want
a
wall
to
close
off
the
the
water
from
coming
in.
If
we
can
make
it
an
amenity,
make
it
part
of
our
city,
make
it
something
that
people
can,
then
you
know.
What's
the
term
alan
uses
it
it
kind
of
activates
the
perimeter
of
the
the
city,
maybe
even
in
ways
that
it's
not
activated
right
now
with
some
of
these
amenities,
as
we
put
it
together
and
at
the
same
time
protect
the
city.
A
Those
are
those
are
things
that
we're
working
on,
but
bob
to
your
specific
question.
A
lot
of
that
has
worked
out
when
we
get
to
petface.
They
have
a
a
dollar
amount
per
foot
of
wall
and
that's
how
they
do
their
cost
estimating
and
then
the
work
that
allen's
been
doing
is
actually
looking
at
mitigation
costs.
That
would
add
to
that
in
specific
areas.
If
I
got
that
right,
alan.
D
Yeah,
that's
right.
I
just
want
to
remind
everybody.
You
know,
as
as,
since
we
are
local
government,
we
are
beholden
to
the
taxpayers
dollar
and
we
want,
to,
you
know,
be
the
most
efficient
that
we
possibly
can
with
that
dollar
right.
So
if,
if
whatever
bucket
of
money,
you
know
saves
us
whatever,
whatever
bucket
mitigation,
betterments
or
recreation,
that
these
relevant
design
improvements
go
into
we're
going
to
be
seeking
the
one
that
you
know
saves
the
taxpayer
the
most
money,
but
also
achieves
the
highest
benefit
for
the
public
realm
of
the
city.
D
You
know,
so
we
we're
looking
at
all
that
and
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
all
of
that,
especially
in
more
detail
in
the
ped
phase.
Mark,
I'm
glad
you
brought
up
lockwood
lockwood's
a
really
it's.
I
would
say
that
of
of
the
entire
perimeter.
Everyone
has
been
the
most
interested
in
lockwood.
Overall,
it's
it's
gotten
the
most
attention.
It's,
it's
really
honestly
an
easy
target
to
look
at
and
say:
well,
you
know
it
floods
on
a
regular
basis.
D
What
are
we
going
to
do
about
it
and
how
does
that
relate
to
a
street?
And,
of
course,
as
you
said,
you
know,
it
would
be
a
great
opportunity
to
extend
our
battery
system
around
the
peninsula.
The
work
that
sherwood
did
was
really
great
wagner
and
ball
and
others
lockwood
in
itself
will
be
a
design,
a
design
decision
that
needs
to
be
made
a
design
configuration
to
overcome,
not
an
alignment.
This
decision,
we
agree
with
the
alignment.
D
There
are
other
places
on
the
perimeter
that
we
think
the
alignment
should
be
adjusted
or
reconsidered,
for
example
around
the
port
and
some
of
the
gates
that
are
around
the
medical
district
and
we'll
have
to
sort
of
see
what
happens
when
we
change
that
alignment
and
how
to
integrate
the
wall
into
the
city.
D
When
the
alignment
is
changed
in
its
new
location,
wherever
we
can
find
room
to
accommodate
it,
but
back
to
lockwood
lockwood's
going
to
be
an
interesting
case,
because
while
the
core
has
proposed
a
battery-like
typology,
it
is,
it
has
a
little
bit
further
to
go
before
it's
like
our
low
battery
and
that's
where
we
come
in
okay.
So
we
can
get
to
talk
about
the
the
transitions
to
the
city,
opportunities
for
landscape,
stairs
and
ramps,
and
railing
compositions
materiality
connections
to
adjacent
streets.
D
Everything
that
we've
done
for
low
battery
that
we're
constructing
today
we're
going
to
do
the
same
thing,
if
not
better,
on
lockwood
right,
we
have
we
hold
ourselves
to
that
high
standard.
The
difference
is
going
to
be
the
elevation
that
we
have
to
get
up
to
so
we're.
You
know
it's
a
little
bit
higher
of
a
stair
system.
It's
a
little
bit
steep
river
ramp
things
like
that.
The
army
corps
knows
that
we
are
going
to
be
want
to
look
at
that.
D
They
know
that
by
working
with
us
over
the
past
few
years,
they
know
that
by
things
that
we
have
written
down
so
that
when
ped
comes,
they
know
that
okay,
we
have
this
lockwood
typology,
but
the
city
is
going
to
want
it
to
be
a
little
bit
better.
Let's
work
with
them
to
make
it
as
good
as
it
can
possibly
be.
So
that's
a
good
example
on
on
how
we're
going
to
approach
ped.
D
A
A
B
One
more
question:
alan
just
said:
he's
got
a
memo
in
the
works
to
you
about
a
lot
of
these
design
things.
I
wonder
if
we
could
see
that,
so
we
could
get
a
better
idea
of
what
that
looks
like.
A
Yeah
I'll,
I
have
not
finished
reading
all
of
it
yet,
but
once
I
finish
reading
all
of
it
I'll,
if
alan
doesn't
mind,
I
don't
mind,
sharing
it
with
everybody,
either
yeah.
I
I'm
sorry
yeah
mark,
so
I
know
about
40
minutes
ago
you
were
gonna
get
into
the
the
statements
from
the
city
and
I
think
we
got
sidetracked.
But
if
I
remember
correctly
from
your
correspondence,
this
draft
document
is
something
that
is
going
to
be
included
in
the
september
10th
draft
report
correct.
A
I
A
A
Certainly,
between
yeah
and
I
think
dan
just
to
be
clear,
there's
that
45-day
window
there.
I
think
it's
also
helpful
for
everyone
to
see
the
report
in
total
as
they
consider
what
the
final
comments
would
be,
because
I
think
the
point
was
raised
earlier.
We're
commenting
on
something
that
is.
We
haven't
seen
the
draft
report
yet.
F
F
We'll
have
we
have
a
lot
more
work
to
do,
particularly
after
september
10.
When
the
work
comes
out.
I
I
I
do.
I
have
been
hearing
y'all
with
the
comments
about
a
leap
of
faith
and
going
into
the
dark
and
all
like
that,
but
but
listening
to
the
other
comments
about
the
the
the
method
that
they've
used
in
cedar,
rapids
and
hearing
the
design
work
that
alan
and
his
team
have
been
working
on,
I
do
think
we're
going
to
get
it
to
a
point.
F
I'd
certainly
like
to
think
where
I'm
not
saying
there
won't
be
some
leap
of
faith,
but
it
won't
be
as
big
as
as
as
as
you
as
you
think,
because
we'll
have
those
design
guidelines
in
place,
we
we
will
have
the
ability
to
hire
our
own
designer
and
an
engineering
firm
to
to
present
to
the
core,
rather
than
the
other
way
around.
So
so
I
do
feel
like
it's
gonna.
F
It
doesn't
take
all
the
uncertainty
out
of
all
this,
but
it
does
put
us
a
little
more
in
the
driver's
seat
which,
which
is
a
good
thing.
So
with
that
thought,
I
got
to
sign
off
I'll
talk
to
y'all
soon.
Thank
you.
C
D
Yeah
we
do
have
to
jump
in
just
a
moment.
That
is
a
great
question.
I
propose
that
you
allow
mark
and
I
to
get
together
to
learn
more
about
the
implications
of
what
it
would
be
required
to
to
make
these
more
ambitious
realignments,
as
opposed
to
just
calibrating
a
design
in
a
current
alignment.
Before
I
can
answer
that
question,
so
we
have
a
little
bit
more
information
to
get
yeah.
A
A
The
environment
is
part
of
the
eis
and
therefore
many
agencies
are
going
to
have
to
sign
off
on
the
wall
alignment
as
if
it
were
to
cause
additional
taking
of
wetlands
or
if
it
were
to
involve
additional.
You
know
damage
to
the
wetlands
to
construct
or
whatever
the
second
thing
would
be.
Does
it
change
the
benefits
and
then,
if
the
answer
is
no
to
both
of
those,
then
is
there
additional
cost
for
the
city
to
do
it,
and
that
would
be
considered
a
better
unit
for
the
city
to
do
it.
A
But
those
first
two
things
the
the
we
cannot
reduce
the
you
know
the
the
amount
of
protection
that
we
provide,
because
that's
what
the
army
and
congress
are
going
to
sign
off
on
the
amount
of
protection.
So
we
could
not
take
people
out
of
the
the
perimeter
protection
that
are
currently
inside
of
it
and
we
could
not
go
and
grab
a
whole
bunch
more,
and
I
don't
think
anybody
on
this
call
is
saying
it
a
whole
bunch
more
wetlands
to
to
move
the
alignment
without
going
through
the
relevant
legal
processes.
A
In
order
to
do
that,
so
you
know
the
eis
process.
The
processes
that
are
in
place
to
protect
the
environment,
to
protect
the
people
are
the
things
that
the
army
used
to
optimize
their
plan
and
then
any
additional
cost.
If
we
were
to
move
it
slightly
left
or
right,
I
know
like
the
port
is
a
big
area
of
concern
for
a
lot
of
people,
and
I
addressed
that
specifically
in
the
comments
where
you
know
we're
going
to
negotiate
that
line.
A
A
So
that's
the
negotiation
that
we're
going
to
have
over
the
next
several
months
and
hopefully,
by
the
time
we
get
to
ped
and
real
estate
acquisition,
we
can
go
to
the
army
and
say:
hey.
Look.
We've
successfully
got
the
required
real
estate
easements
to
be
able
to
move
it
jordy.
Did
you
want
to
jump
in
on
that
yeah.
E
I
just
wanted
to
comment
on
that
mark
and
say
you
know,
thank
you
to
you
and
the
city
for
recognizing
that
the
alignment
is
proposed
is
not
acceptable
to
us
and
you
know
continuing
to
work
with
you
all
to.
G
To
find
a
way
forward
on
that
front,
we
appreciate
the
the
partnership
along
those
lines.
I
do
want.
E
To
echo
what
dan
was
saying:
the
concern
about
how
this
process
works,
with
with
commenting
on
the
plan
as
it's
proposed,
and
then
it
not
being
a
possibility
for
you
know
whatever
the
desired
outcome
is
from
this
group
and
from
the
port
and
from
the
city
and
how
it
looks
in
the
end.
So
that
is
just
an
area
that
I
want
to
be.
You
know,
tread
very
carefully
on
and
make
sure
that
we
understand
exactly
how
that
how
that
works
and
what
the
options
are
there.
A
C
C
No,
no,
I
think
time
frame.
You
know
I.
I
certainly
appreciate
everybody's
time
today
and
in
comments,
and
I
think
it's
oh
hey
laura
go
for
it.
G
I
know
we're
trying
to
wrap
up
and
I
need
to
go
as
much
as
you
probably
all
do
too,
but
I
have
real
uncertainty
about
the
august
17th
committee.
Chair
provides
update.
Are
we
going
to
have
another
chance
to
talk
before
that
date?
I
want
to
make
sure
we're
we're
all
clear
and
comfortable
with
what
that
report
looks
like.
A
C
A
Yeah
we
could,
we
could
go
for
two
or
three
hours.
I
love
this
group.
I
just
wish
we
were
all
in
the
same
room
together,
there's
a
lot
of
power
being
in
the
same
room
together.
We
discovered
that
last
week,
but
thank
you
all
please.
Please
continue
to
send
comments
to
me
as
you
have
them.
A
A
To
apologize,
one
last
comment:
I'm
going
to
apologize
in
advance.
I
am
solo
this
week,
so
it's
going
to
take
me
a
while
to
get
the
the
report
posted
just
because
I'm
not
as
fast
as
kailyn
and
I'm
gonna
have
to
go
back
and
review
the
the
video
in
order
to
get
the
comments
right.
So
I
apologize
in
advance.