►
Description
City of Charleston Army Corps 3x3 Advisory Committee 11/3/21
A
As
always,
thank
you
everybody.
For
your
time,
alan.
I
see
you're
on
we're,
we're
excited
for
you
and
sad
to
see
you
leave
very
bittersweet.
So
thank
you
for
all
your
hard
work
on
this.
Let's
see
so
a
couple,
quick
recommendations
or
a
couple,
quick
notes.
As
far
as
agenda
goes
today,
two
received
two
additional
recommendations.
A
One
is
with
regards
to
continued
committee
engagement
and
that
comes
from
susan
lyons
and
also
natural
and
nature-based
solutions
coming
from
laura
cantrell
and
she
is
going
to
be.
I
said,
she'd
be
a
couple
minutes
late,
but
the
walking
walking
us
through
that
today,
all
from
prior
to
going
through
that.
Also
we
have
an
update
on
the
finance
strategy.
Amy
was
not,
unfortunately,
not
able
to
join
us.
A
As
far
as
timing
goes,
you
know
what
I
say
is
that
we
present
at
the
november
23rd
city
council
meeting
that
still
gives
lots
of
time,
language
and
distribute
also
say
as
opposed
to
having
another
meeting
next
week,
but
I
would
say
everybody
take
that
time.
That
would
be
alive
for
that.
I'm
going
to
send
out
language
once
dale
dale
should
be
back
with
us
on
monday,
send
out
language
for
everybody.
Take
a
look
at
comment
on,
and
so
I'd
say
use
that
time.
A
B
Sure
they
say
good
dale
sends
his
apologies.
He
is
out
on
medical
leave
this
week
and
will
be
back
in
action
next
week,
and
so,
if
there's
any
questions
that
I
can't
answer
regarding
updates
in
general
or
with
this
finance
strategy,
I
will
take
those
questions
to
dale
and
amy
and
get
your
response
as
soon
as
possible.
Really
quick
before
I
pull
up
the
finance
slides
dale
wanted
to
relay
some
updates
that
we've
been
doing
with
public
engagement.
B
I
think
some
of
you
tuned
in
on
the
21st
we
had
the
council
workshop
with
the
u.s
army
corps,
our
design,
division,
stormwater
and
dale.
We
also
had
a
couple
community
meetings.
In
the
past
two
weeks
we
had
a
meeting
with
the
gaston
borough
neighborhood
there
on
the
east
side
as
well
as
sat
in
the
wagner,
terrace
virtual
neighborhood
meeting,
and
we
had
the
rosemont
community
meeting
that
was
led
by
the
army
corps
two
weekends
ago.
We've
also
continued
engagement
with
some
stakeholders.
B
We've
met
with
the
west
edge
board,
coastal
conservation
league,
the
realtors
morrison
yards
and
the
charleston
visitors
bureau,
and
we
continue
to
have
engagement
with
the
metro
chamber.
I
sent
that
link
to
dale's
presentation
from
a
few
weeks
ago,
and
councilman
seekings
and
dale
have
also
been
giving
updates
to
their
regional
policy
advocacy
committees
and
further
we
had
a
meeting
last
week.
B
Additionally,
we've
continued
engagement
with
our
congressional
delegation
and
are
in
talks
with
our
d.c
consultants
in
senator
graham's
office
about
some
order
requests
that
will
be
going
in
for
next
year
and
depending
you
know,
if
the
city
and
council
votes
to
move
to
ped,
that's
something
that
we
would
want
to
have
authorized
in
word
of
next
year.
So
that
could
begin
and
then
additionally,
I
know
that
there
were
some
requests
for
general
kelly.
The
south
atlantic
division
commander
is
going
to
be
in
town
to
present
to
council
on
november
9th.
B
We
did
put
a
request
for
him
to
come
before
the
committee.
We're
still
we're
still
waiting
for
that,
so
that
may
be
a
fly
by
your
seat.
If
he's
able
to
do
that-
and
I
will
send
out
any
updates
on
that
and
furthermore
we
are
the
army
corps
has
sent
us
over.
Their
comment.
Period
ended
october
25th
and
we
are
tracking
and
digesting
some
of
those
public
comments
that
came
in
as
well.
C
B
C
B
How
to
fun
ped?
Is
everybody
seeing
that
now?
Okay,
great
so
dale
first
presented
this
to
the
council
on
the
21st,
and
this
strategy
and
numbers
were
developed
in
coordination
with
the
cfo,
so
you'll
see
that
the
first
slide
focuses
on
ped.
There
was
a
more
focus
on
the
ped
numbers,
because
that's
really
the
decision
that
the
city
is
at
right
at
this
point
because
remember
for
construction,
the
city
is
only
going
to
commit
to
the
construction
funding.
B
If
we
decide
that
we
want
to
buy
the
plan,
that's
designed
and
developed
in
ped
and
again
at
any
point
in
pet.
The
city
can
terminate
the
study
pause.
The
study
so
we'll
start
with
the
first
numbers
here.
So
the
army
corps
gave
us
an
estimate
of
17
million
dollars
over
three
to
four
years
for
the
costs
in
ped.
B
The
sources
that
they
identified
were
to
begin
with
the
tourism
fund,
which
accounts
for
on
the
peninsula,
the
hospitality
and
the
accommodations
tax.
So
amy
projected
a
10-year
surplus
of
those
numbers
through
the
life
of
ped,
and
we
we
designated
50
of
that
surplus,
could
be
used
to
cover
pet
costs.
For
that
three
to
four
years
now,
just
remember
that
for
the
peninsula,
both
the
accommodation
and
hospitality
can
only
be
used
in
areas
of
the
city
that
are
deemed
in
the
tourist
districts.
B
B
Eighty
percent
of
that
was
deemed
to
be
in
the
tourist
tourism
district
phase,
two
high
and
low
battery,
a
hundred
percent
of
that
was
deemed
and
east
side.
Fifty
percent
and
wagner
terrace,
not
in
the
tourist
district,
so
zero
percent
of
that
could
go
for
that
phase
and
then
the
way
you
break
that
down
a
little
more
specifically
so,
for
example,
phase
three.
B
B
So
amy
is
amy
projected
a
surplus
in
the
city
would
have
in
its
account
for
the
tourism
fund,
which
would
be
encompass,
the
hospitality
and
the
accommodations
taxes.
She
said
she
presented
this
10-year
surplus
two
ways
and
means
so
council
should
be
aware
of
it.
I
can
I
can
ping
amy
on
any
additional.
B
E
Hey
keith,
I
talked
her
at
length
about
this.
What
she's
projecting
is
a
surplus
based
on
currently
and
known
capital
projects
needs
that
would
be
funded
by
hospitality
and
accommodations
on
the
peninsula.
So
and
she's
she's
predicted
projected
that
surplus
based
on
current
projected
capital
projects.
F
E
E
F
E
F
B
I
can
get
a
little
more
clarity
on
that
for
you
bob
to
report
back,
but
my
understanding
is
as
councilman
seeking
that
you
know
annually.
The
army
corps
will
come
to
us
with
what
they're
going
to
request
for
the
budget,
and
this
would
the
surplus
would
go
into
each
year
prior
to
that
would
go
into
a
sort
of
savings
account
that
the
cff
cfo
would
set
up
that.
You
know
the
money,
then
the
city
could
use
in
each
annual
phase,
but
it
would
be
on
an
annual
basis
and
obviously
it's
a
10-year
projection.
G
A
A
A
B
B
Again,
at
any
time
in
ped,
the
city
can
pause.
The
army
corps
on
an
annual
basis
is
going
to
come
to
the
city
and
say
we're
putting
in
this
request
to
congress
for
this
project
this
year,
they're
not
going
to
put
that
request
in.
If
the
city
says
you
know
we
had
a
tough
year,
you
know
pandemic
hurricane.
What
have
you
if
we
can't
meet
our
match,
then
they're
not
going
to
request
the
money
to
appropriate
it
and
they'll
put
a
pause.
E
It's
finance
related,
so
susan,
just
to
answer
your
question
really
briefly,
I
think
kalyn
gave
it.
The
right
answer
I
mean
amy
is
a
very
conservative
projectionist
based
on
what
we
know
today.
Those
are
the
projections
of
the
surplus
and
the
hospitality
funds
and
the
accommodations
funds,
but
all
bets
are
off
for
something
untoward.
Unexpected
comes.
I
mean
for
everything
not
just
for
this
project,
but
for
any
projects
that
are
either
in
whole
or
in
part
funded
through
hospitality
and
accommodations
dollars,
we're
at
the
mercy
of
the
economic
situation
of
the
day.
E
The
week
the
month
the
year
it
looks
like
things
are
going
to
be
good.
I
mean
we
had
the
busiest
year
we
a
month,
we've
ever
had
at
our
airport
last
month,
but
again
things
can
change
on
a
moment's
notice,
like
we
saw
in
2020,
I
mean
we
went
from
full
speed
to
hitting
a
wall
in
a
day.
So
again,
that's
just
something
that
we're
going
to
have
to
deal
with,
not
with
just
this
project
but
many,
including
low
battery,
by
the
way,
as
we
look
forward.
B
For
example,
the
city
put
in
a
request
to
the
state
to
use
some
to
get
some
recovery
funds
for
low
battery
and
a
couple
other
priority
projects.
They
they
punted
that
decision
of
where
that
money
goes
to
next
year,
so
say
the
low
battery
gets
that
funding
from
the
state
or
from
another
federal
grant
program.
Some
of
that
money
could
be
redistributed
as
well
in
the
future
for
for
for
ped.
D
D
B
If
we
do
get
that
storm
and
we
did
move
into
ped,
we
could
there's
a
very
good
possibility
that
we
would
get
an
influx
of
federal
funding
for
whatever
you
know,
disaster
recovery,
and
if
we
had
a
plan
on
the
table
I
mean
our
35
cost
share
could
go
down
to
zero
percent.
That's
that's
a
possibility
too.
So
if
we
moved
into
ped
and
a
storm
came,
and
we
had
our
plan
on
the
shelf
so
to
speak,
that
could
generate
more
federal
funding
coming
in
quicker
as
well.
In
that
scenario,.
F
I
would
make
one
additional
observation
and
I
think
this
really
needs
to
be
pressure
tested
for
reasonability.
You
know
one
one
comparability
issue
in
this
math
is
that
you
know
where
there's
going
to
be
competing
interests
for
those
surplus
dollars,
and
you
know
we're
comparing
future
projections
of
surplus
against
currently
planned
capital
projects.
F
C
A
C
B
C
B
Obviously
with
the
high
bcr,
it's
a
likelihood
that
that
would
be
included
and
happen
if
we
so
requested
it
in
the
army
corps.
You
know
with
the
final
chief's
report
and
the
support
of
the
non-federal
sponsor,
but,
yes,
everything
would
have
to
be
come
with
a
funding,
federal
funding
from
from
congress
to
the
army
corps.
A
Two
just
two
quick
follow-up
ones
here
one
is
is
herbert.
I
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
your
point
got
addressed,
because
I
think
it's
an
important
one
that
there's
no
like
for
this
50
of
surplus
and
the
percentages
and
the
tourism
areas,
and
all
that
that
doesn't
mean
that
one
location
is
prioritized
as
far
as
the
spending
of
those
dollars
over
another
ev.
The
dollars
will
be
spent
equally
across
the
project.
A
G
I
I
thank
you
mom
hager.
I
hear
you
and
I'm
I'm
listening
to
our
conversations
as
we
have
all
our
meetings
and
and
when
I
don't
hear
rosemont
being
included.
After
all,
the
concerns
have
been
expressed
to
this
committee
and
to
the
council
and
to
the
mayor
when,
when
I
just
heard
the
breakdown
of
the
funding-
and
it
didn't
include
rosemont
as
you
went
around
the
peninsula-
that's
disconcerting
to
me.
G
A
B
B
I
mean
to
the
point
that
in
the
first
phase
it's
80
because
rosemont
isn't
a
tourism
district
so
that
source
of
revenue
wouldn't
be
applied
to
rosemont
in
that
situation,
but
it
could
be
applied
for
that
whole
area
so
but
rosemont
whatever
fund
is
coming
from
the
city
will
be
going
to
rosemont
as
well.
It's
not
going
to
be
left
out
from
the
federal
government
contribution
or
the
city
contract,
and
it
will
be
addressed
in
that
first
phase
of
head
so
so
make
no
mistake
about
it.
Rosemont
is
included.
C
A
E
E
So
we
probably
wouldn't
reserve
them,
because
we'd
have
to
approve
them
on
an
annualized
basis,
so
literally
through
the
ped
phasing
process,
which
is
a
four-phase
process,
you
have
to
look
at
the
city
finance
side
as
an
annualized
phased
process.
The
army
corps
would
come
to
us
saying
the
next
phase.
The
next
year
of
pet
is
going
to
cost
x.
Your
share
is
x,
35
x.
We
then
have
to
at
city
council,
approve
those
dollars
and
identify
where
those
dollars
are
going
to
come
from.
Now
there
is
some
possibility
and
I
have
no
idea.
E
This
is
just
thinking.
I'm
not
saying
this
is
going
to
happen
or
not
that
if
we
we
can
appropriate
more
money
towards
this
project
than
the
corps
asked
for
in
any
year
and
then
put
that
in
the
bank.
That's
actually
how
we
handled-
and
I
thank
my
council
member
fellow
councilmember
councilmember
wearing
for
having
some
foresight
on
this.
That's
how
we
funded
low
battery.
We
actually
took
surplus
money
from
hospitality
and
accommodations
and
over
the
course
of
five
or
six
years,
put
that
money
in
so.
E
Unless
we
put
it
to
a
vote
and
bonded
it,
you
know,
we've
got
caps
on
our
bonding
capability
in
the
city
unless
we
put
it
to
a
referendum
and
then
that
cap
is
not
applicable.
So
it's
possible
that
someone
to
feature
this
could
go
to
referendum.
I
suspect
it's
possible
keith.
If
I
said
anything,
you
disagree
with
please
china.
D
D
You
know
this
is
a
plan,
but
you
wouldn't
buy
a
house
this
way
you
know.
Well,
you
would
I
mean
you
have
to
go,
get
a
mortgage
and
you
have
to
prove
your
income
to
qualify
for
that
month.
Now.
This
is
a
big
project
that
we
all
are
extremely
interested
in,
because
we
know
we
need
to
do
something,
and
my
part
in
this
is
where's
plan
b.
D
If
not
this,
then
what?
Because
you
know
the
last
time
we
were
in
this
meeting,
I
said
this
was
kind
of
like
when
dale
explained
it.
I
said
it
was
kind
of
like
taking
jello
and
throwing
it
up
against
the
wall.
Hoping
it'll
stick
dealing
with
surplus
in
this
era
of
government
for
a
long,
a
long-term
financial
plan
dealing
with
surpluses
with
government.
D
D
I
appreciate
the
stakeholders
around
this
table,
but
even
this
plan
has
been
made
better
as
a
result
of
this
committee.
You
know
my
understanding
is
that
state
ports
authority
has
been
successful
in
having
some
alternatives
to
the
wall,
but
if
they
were
not
around
the
table
voicing
that,
I
doubt
that
that
change
would
take
place.
D
D
D
D
D
We
have
an
expense
to
run
this
city
that
we
don't
have
enough
revenue
to
do
it.
I
don't
care
what
revenue
you're
talking
about
property
taxes,
income
from
the
garages
commit
fees
go
into
building
services
department.
We
have
more
expenses
than
we
have
income
to
do,
that's
the
reality.
We
got
dump
truck.
We
have
trash
truck
drivers
leaving
the
city
because
they
can
double
their
pay
in
the
private
sector.
D
We
down
something
like
30
or
40
police
officers.
So
the
days
of
surpluses,
I
listen
councilman
c
kings.
I
think
you'll
be
right
there
with
me.
We've
been
right
there
saying
great.
We
got
all
these
surpluses,
but
I
haven't
seen
it
and
going
forward
with
the
the
conservative
mantra
through
the
country.
D
You
know
no
new
taxes,
I
think
75
percent
of
general
assembly
had
signed
no
new
tax
pledges.
That's
fine!
If
you
find
a
way
to
take
care
of
inflation,
the
cost
of
government
is
just
flat
out
going
up.
We
have
seven
crews
that
clean
ditches.
We
now
have
two
because
you
can't
hire
people
who
go
out
there
with
pickaxes
and
shovel
1350,
and
I
will
now
I'm
on
a
platform
here,
but
I
just
want
to
give
the
reality
of
this
committee
that.
D
I
don't
think
we
should
accept.
Surpluses
is
being
the
plan
for
10
years.
I
just
never
seen
a
billion
dollar
project
finance
network
and
I'll
be
happy
to
be
wrong
on
that.
That's
the
reality.
As
I
see
this,
we
need
to
roll
up
the
sleeves
and
go
to
work
and
find
out
truly
how
to
pay.
For
this
thing,.
B
Obviously,
now
it's
looking
incredibly
likely
that
the
state
ports
authority
will
be
enclosed
in
an
updated
alignment,
so
we
thought
it
appropriate
to
request
from
the
state
some
funding
for
ped,
particularly
for
that
for
that
phase.
Three.
So
in
our
discussion
with
the
state
resilience
fund,
they
have
I'm
sorry
with
a
state
resilience
office.
They
have
a
dedicated
dedicated
fund
for
resilience
projects
across
the
state.
B
E
B
E
E
F
C
B
B
C
B
B
You
know,
obviously
you
can
see
through
the
numbers
here
there
there's
going
to
be
a
gap,
but
we
start
with
our
total
city.
Match
is
3.85
that
is
including
ped
and
construction.
So,
if
you're
going
down
the
chart
here,
you
deduct
the
pet
cost
of
17
million.
We've
talked
before
on
the
calls
that,
through
real
estate,
credits
and
easements,
the
city
would
get
130
million,
so
that
leaves
the
total
remaining
construction
costs
at
238
million
you'll
see
that
the
same
same
sources
of
city
funding
were
projected
for
use.
B
Just
to
remember
this
would
not
be
you
know
this
would
be
over
the
projected
time
period
of
construction
which
army
corps
gave
us
eight
years.
It
could
go
a
little
longer,
it
could
go
shorter
if
that
storm
comes
through,
but
again
we
may
get
a
higher
percentage
of
federal
funding
if
we're
in
disaster
recovery
mode,
so
you'll
see
there
in
the
red
is
what
would
be
left
over
if
we
were
to
go
with
those
specific
sources
of
funding.
B
We're
we're
almost
at
102
million
dollars
that
we're
still
in
the
red
in
short,
fall
of
funding
and
below
you'll,
see
some.
Whether
it's
been
discussed
through
this
committee
or
things
that
dale
and
amy
have
started
to
analyze
of
what
could
potentially
be
the
city
could
use
to
cover
that
shortfall
of
funding
over
that
period
of
time.
One
idea
is
mid
for
the
peninsula,
and
this
would
specifically
just
be
you
know.
Getting
funds
from
funds
from
those
folks
on
the
peninsula
would
not
be
city-wide.
B
It's
a
newer
idea,
resilient
resilience,
bonds
and
this
he
tells
me
this
would
not
affect
the
city's
bond
rating
and
it's
leveraging
private
money
he's
working
on
setting
up
some
meetings
with
some
folks
that
are
the
front
runners
in
this
kind
of
world.
So
those
are
the
sort
of
options
that
have
been
identified
to
pay
for
that
shortfall
of
funding.
B
D
B
D
D
C
D
B
And
then,
last
week,
when
initially
sent
these
slides
out,
we
put
a
request
out
for
some
questions
from
the
committee
that
could
be
answered
by
amy
and
dale
ahead
of
time.
We
received
two
questions
from
the
funding
working
group.
So,
mr
chairman,
if,
if
you
approve
I'm
just
going
to
go
over
those
questions,
really
briefly
one
of
the
first
questions
the
funding
group
asked
was
whether,
if
the
city,
why
does
the
city
on
the
timing?
B
We
were
told
by
the
corps
that
over
the
past
month
that
the
vote
from
council
could
potentially
shift
to
january,
if
necessary,
but
the
course
still
going
to
submit
their
report
to
headquarters
regardless
of
the
city
support
or
not,
because
they
need
to
put
a
bow
on
this
project.
They've
been
working
on
for
the
four
years.
B
The
difference
is
that,
if
it's
submitted
to
headquarters
without
the
support
of
the
non-federal,
sponsor
it
all
but
terminates
the
study,
and
then
I
will
just
quote
dale,
let
me
be
clear
without
a
signal
from
the
city
that
it
commits
to
being
a
partner
in
pen.
The
study
will
stop.
There's
no
way
the
corps
will
ask
congress
for
ped
or
any
other
funding
if
there's
not
a
willing
federal
partner.
B
Oh,
no,
no
you're,
you're,
fine!
Those
were
just
those
were
the
two
that
were
submitted
by
the
funding
working
group
prior
to
today's
meeting,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
we
sent
those
answers
to
cash
in
which
I
believe
she
shared
with
the
working
group,
but
wanted
to
share
that
with
me
with
the
entire
with
the
entire
group.
That's
all
I
have
as
far
as
the
presentation
with
with
the
strategy
and
any
follow-up
questions
we
received,
so
we
can.
We
can
open
it
up
for
any
further
discussion
on
this.
A
C
I'm
sure
this
is
stating
the
obvious,
but
as
we
look
at
the
the
unfunded
portion
for
the
project,
construction,
101
million
dollars,
that's
probably
grossly
understated,
given
the
betterments
and
all
the
discussions
that
we've
had
as
we
imagine
what
a
fully
realized
wall
might
look
like
that
serves
the
community.
So
as
we
explore
those
alternative
funding
sources,
I
I
think
will
be
important
to
understand
how
high
is
up
in
each
of
those
categories
of
potential
funding.
C
A
B
H
Yeah
I
had
a
question
about
the
timing.
We
have
recommended
to
council
that
the
city
or
the
city,
in
conjunction
with
the
army
corps,
do
a
resilient
study
for
rosemont
and
that
that
might
dovetail
in
some
way
with
what
the
army
corps
is
planning.
I'm
not
clear
at
all
about
the
timing
on
that
and
who's
going
to
pay
for
that
and
how
that
fits
in
with
this
timeline.
That's
being
put
forward
for
money,
as
well
as
actual
construction
or
mitigation.
B
Thanks
susan,
so
the
rosemont
resiliency
plan
that
was
presented
and
recommended
to
council.
That
really
would
be
a
separate
thing
for
the
city,
because
a
lot
of
the
other
water
management
issues
that
are
in
rosemont
are
not
going
to
be
funded
through
this
project
because
they're
not
surge,
related
you're.
Looking
at
drainage,
storm
water,
a
lot
of
that
ideas,
so
that
that's
something
I
think
that
could
be
wrapped
up
with
the
comprehensive
water
plan
and
coincide
with
this
project.
B
But
it
would
be
really
on
the
city
in
a
separate
city
initiative
separate
than
this
project,
because
this
project
again
is
focused
on
surge
and
a
lot
of
the
other
challenges
and
concerns
in
rosemont
that
are
water,
related,
aren't
related
to
surge,
they're
related.
And
that's
what
this
study
and
this
recommendation
that
the
committee
put
forward
would
address.
B
So
that
would
be
a
separate
thing
and
I
think
that's
something
then,
with
the
resilience
office
in
dale,
would
be
working
to
put
together
present
to
council,
put
in
a
funding
request
for
that,
and
obviously
all
that
takes
a
little
bit
of
time.
But
I
think
it
would
coincide
with
this
project,
but
it
would
be
separate.
H
Now
I
understand
it
would
be
separate.
I
just
don't
understand
how
the
timing
would
work
and
the
money-
and
I
certainly
understand
about
the
surge
issue
but
they're
all
connected
and
it
sort
of
sounded
like
there
was
a
fuzzy
boundary
somehow
between
the
army
corps
and
the
city
and
how
this
might
get
paid
for
and
when.
So.
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
out
there,
because
it's
not
clear
to
me.
G
The
last
storm
that
came
through
the
city
there
was
a
storm
surge
there.
The
residents
validated
that
by
saying
so,
and
so
the
the
concerns
of
the
residents
continue
to
seem
to
be
that
rosemont
isn't
being
addressed
in
this
project
and
it
is,
it
is
clear
to
them
that
they
have
been
excluded
as
far
as
not
looking
at
there
is
the
valid
reasoning
to
like
have
some
mitigation
for
storm
surge.
G
Looking
at
my
conversation
representing
rosemount,
when
I
come
to
this
committee,
I'm
constantly
saying
what
is
going
to
be
done,
what
is
going
to
be
done
and
I
keep
hearing
oh
you're
covered
you're
covered,
but
that's
just
language.
That's
just
words
that
I'm
hearing,
but
I
don't.
I
don't
see
the
language.
B
So
herbert
the
assurance
you
have
is
that
in
the
feasibility
study,
the
army
corps
to
mitigate
surgeries
has
identified
non-structural
measures
in
rosemont,
and
that
was
due
to
elevation
of
rosemont
and
that
the
wall,
like
the
actual
structural
wall,
just
the
engineering
and
the
elevation
wouldn't
have
wouldn't
have
protected
rosemont
from
surge.
So
they
identified
non-structural
measures,
which
is
the
flood
proofing
and
the
elevation.
B
That
is
what
the
army
corps
is
committed
to
doing
for
rosemont
specific
to
surge
into
this
project,
and
that
includes
the
65
federal
funding
and
35
city
match
that
will
cover
the
entirety
of
the
cost
of
elevating
homes
and
flood
proofing
homes
in
rosemont.
That's
what
that's!
What
the
core
is
identified,
so
rosemont
is
included,
they're,
not
included
in
the
structural
sea
wall,
because
the
engineering
and
feasibility,
this
study
decided
it
wasn't
feasible
to
have
that
structure
in
rosemont.
B
So
it's
a
non-structural
is
what
has
been
included
for
rosemont,
first
surge
now
the
rosemont
resiliency
plan
that
was
recommended
from
this
committee
that
would
work
to
identify
the
other
water
management
challenges
in
in
in
roseline.
I
can
help
get
a
little
more
clarity.
You
know.
I
know
that
the
army
corps
spent
a
good
chunk
of
time
out
on
the
12th
in
the
community.
B
They
had
their
lead
civil
engineer
out
there.
I
know
they
put
together
the
pamphlets
they
they
put
together
the
q,
a
of
the
questions
that
were
brought
to
the
city
in
this
committee
for
for
rosemont-
and
you
know,
throughout
this
process
throughout
this
project,
we're
going
to
continue
to
engage
with
roson
as
requested
when
you
continue
to
and
and
I'm
sorry,
that
the
communication
or
the
clarity
of
rosemont
not
being
included,
is,
is
what's
being
presented
to
the
community,
but
but
they
are
included.
It's
just
not
within
the
structure.
B
G
Yeah,
thank
you
caitlyn
for
one.
Let's
be
clear,
the
community
does
not
want
a
wall,
but
but
looking
at
email
that
has
been
sent
to
this
committee
from
various
sources,
nature-based
and
et
cetera,
et
cetera.
There
are
other
alternatives,
and
sometimes
when
I
listen
to
us
in
committee,
it's
like
the
army
corps
of
engineers
has
made
its
mind
up.
That,
like
this
is
their
design
and
we're
not
looking
at
any
other
alternative.
G
B
G
Okay
again,
my
concern
now
hearing
what
you're
saying
I
don't
want
rosemont
to
be
left
behind
and
say
we're
going
to
like.
Have
you
catch
up?
Have
you
catch
up
and
we're
talking
about
funding
and
thank
you,
councilman
warren
we're
looking
at
funding
and
it's
hard
enough
now
to
look
at
funding
for
the
whole
city.
So
now
you're
going
to
incorporate
rosemount
and
again
down
the
line
is
like
no
money
matter
of
fact.
A
Hey
herbert
is
hey
good
I'll
jump
in
here
I
mean
we
do
have
a
rosemont
recommendation.
I
mean
that's,
that's
our
that
that'll
be
part
of
our
document
already
has
been
presented
up.
What
I'd
recommend
is
take
it.
You
know,
take
a
look
at
that
recommendation
and
we
can
recirculate.
If
there's
anything
you
want
to
add.
We
have
the
rosemont
resiliency
study
in
here.
You
know
I
mean,
but
that
is
the
deliverable.
That
goes
right.
That's
in
writing.
So
what
I'd
say?
I
think
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
A
I
don't
think
anybody
disagrees
here.
I
think.
As
far
as
this
committee
and
our
deliverables
and
our
and
our
you
know
the
item
work
items
that
result
from
our
work.
I
think
anything
that
that
you'd
want
to
have
in
there.
Let's
incorporate
right,
I
mean,
let's,
let's
get
that
in
there,
because
that's
really
what
goes
forward
and
what's
going
to
be
the
product
that
comes
from
this
committee's
time,
and
so
you
know
we
can
sit
here
and
talk
about
it
as
much
as
we
want.
A
I
don't
mean
to
sound,
you
know,
I
hope
you
don't
it's
a
little
bit
cavalier
me
to
say,
but
I
mean
let's,
let's
get
in
writing,
let's
go,
you
know
I
mean
now
is
the
time
to
put
that
into
some
sort
of
documentation
and
put
that
forward
for
action,
but
I
I
think
you
know
we
don't
have
to
debate
it.
I
think
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
A
I
think
rosemont
bears
absolutely
bears,
bears
further
study,
so
we're
all
on
the
same
page
there,
and
I
think
we
just
need
to
put
that
in
the
writing
and
make
recommendation
and
go
and
again
I
say
at
the
risk
of
sounding
cavalier,
but
I
just
I
want
to
make
that
point
and
you
know
make
it
clear.
I
think
we're
all
on
a
team
together,
and
this
is
how
we
do
it.
B
G
A
F
At
some
point,
I
think
a
resolution
about
city
staffing,
either
internal
or
external,
to
pull
off
these
projects.
We
talk
about
drainage,
project,
funding
being
segregated
from
potential
three
by
three
funding.
But
beyond
that
focus
expertise,
just
attention
to
detail
all
those
things
that
aren't
dollar
denominated
but
are
critical
to
project
success.
F
We
need
a
plan
for
that
as
well,
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
a
table
of
organization,
a
staffing
plan,
but
we
shouldn't
lose
track
of
that
in
terms
of
projecting
budgetary
requirements,
because
we
don't
have
the
staff
to
pull
off.
You
know
current
projects,
let
alone
ginormous
project
like
three
by
three.
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
point.
Thank
you.
E
Just
briefly
before
we
move
on,
I
know
one
of
the
two
questions
that
was
asked
that
was
posed
by
kalyn
was,
I
think
the
second
question
was
funding
for
other
capital
improvement
projects,
vis-a-vis
water
management-
whether
this
would
anything
we
do
here,
would
impact
them
just
to
be
clear
for
the
large-scale
water
management
projects.
The
one
that's
in
my
mind,
it's
always
on
my
mind,
is
calhoun
west,
which
I-
and
this
is
just
mike
seeking
stocking
thinks
is,
I
think,
is
the
most
important
capital
improvement
project.
That's
currently
unfunded
in
the
city.
E
We
have
not
identified
funding
sources
for
that
either
so,
to
the
extent
there's
competition
for
dollars.
Clearly,
there
will
be
competition
for
dollars
going
forward.
That's
a
half
a
billion
dollar
project,
and
I
can
just
tell
you
that
I,
along
with
others,
want
that
project
to
happen.
Regardless
of
what
happens
here
with
three
by
three.
So
just
I
think
it's
not
quite
100
accurate
to
say
that
that
you
can
segregate
three
by
three
from
other
capital
projects
when
the
sources
for
funding
have
been
identified.
E
For
neither
so
there
will
be
competition
going
forward,
because
if
you
look
at
the
second
page
of
the
projections
that
put
out
there,
one
of
which
is
a
long-term
one-mil
tax
increase,
that's
going
to
take
a
vote
of
council.
So
there's
some
funding
challenges
that
will
also
be
exacerbated
and
multiplied
by.
The
fact
that
we
do
have
other
capital
needs
for
water
management
again,
and
just
so,
it's
clear,
calhoun
west
to
me
is
by
far
the
most
important
by
far.
A
Thank
you,
councilmember
seeking
this
is
an
important
clarification.
Much
appreciated,
I
guess
just
as
kayla
mentioned
that
we're
getting
tight
on
time,
I
asked
laura
laura.
Would
you
mind
walking
us
through
the
the
the
recommendation
you
put
forward?
I
know
it
was,
did
not
make
its
way
on
the
agenda,
but
just
given
the
timing,
but
but
it's
important
and
and
would
love
for
that
reason
would
love
for
you
to
walk
through
it
and.
I
G
I
Sure,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
happy
to
do
that
and
before
I
do,
I
really
want
to
underscore
bob's
point
about
staff
capacity
and
that's
not
related
to
the
recommendations
that
I
put
forward
related
to
nature-based
solutions,
except
that
it's
related
to
everything.
So
I
hope
that
we
will
make
that
an
agenda
item
for
some
further
discussion
and
I
would
love
to
see
us
put
forward
as
a
recommendation
to
council
that
they
figure
out
how
to
have
the
funding
and
capacity
we
need
for
staff
expertise.
It's
going
to
be
really
important.
I
With
regard
to
the
recognition,
I
see
that
it's
up
on
the
slide
and
and
it
circulated
earlier
this
week.
I
won't
read
it
to
you
and
we've.
You
know.
Obviously,
we've
talked
a
lot
about
the
incorporation
of
natural
and
nature-based
features
as
a
strong
preference
and
from
our
perspective,
as
a
conservation
organization.
We
think
that
it's
imperative
to
push
the
core
to
be
implementing
this
project
in
a
way
that
is
as
environmentally
sensitive
as
possible.
I
I
also
shared
with
you
the
comment
letter
that
we
submitted
to
the
core
on
the
draft
eis.
That
was
41
pages
that
you
can
read
at
your
leisure
that
will
go
into
of
course,
a
lot
more
detail
than
I
am
going
to,
and
my
my
motivation
here
was
to
craft
some
language
that
this
committee
could
be
comfortable
from
the
perspective
of
you
know.
I
Multiple
stakeholders
like
we
all,
are
in
making
recommendations
to
to
council,
and
we
continue
to
believe
that
there
is
an
opportunity
for
the
corps
to
incorporate
more
nature-based
features
into
the
design.
You
know
we've.
All
this
committee
has
talked
a
lot
about
how
we're
dealing
with
a
less
than
ideal
process,
we're
being
asked
to
make
for
the
the
city
to
make
an
investment,
a
commitment
to
move
forward
when
they're
still
a
lot
of
questions
that
need
to
be
answered.
I
We
continue
to
believe
that
there
is
more
meaningful
evaluation
and
analysis
of
some
of
these
nature-based
features
that
the
core
can
do.
We
appreciate
that
they
have
taken
some
initial
steps
and
have
included
some
of
these
features,
but
we
think
there's
they
remain
superficial
and
there
are
a
lot
of
questions
about
exactly
why
they
proposed
what
they
did
and
and
where
and
to
what
benefit.
I
Some
things
that
you
know
some
response
that
we've
heard
from
the
core
and
in
discussion
that
that
I've
had
about
this
project
is
to
has
been
that
you
know
the
prior,
that
the
purpose
of
the
course
the
course
mandate
is
to
address
storm
surge.
We
get
that
some
of
the
nature-based
solutions
that
are
in
the
sherwood
design
report
and
many
of
these
other
reports
would
not,
by
themselves
address
storm
surge.
We
get
that
too.
I
We
also
believe
that
many
of
these
nature-based
solutions
make
the
overall
objective
of
the
of
the
wall
as
it's
proposed
by
the
core
more
effective
and
that's
what
we
would
like
to
see
a
significant
evaluation
of.
We
don't
have
all
the
answers,
and
neither
does
the
core.
There
needs
to
be
significant
evaluation
to
overhea,
to
enhance
that
overall,
the
overall
objective
of
the
project
and
including
multiple
benefits.
I
H
Kind
of
mute
here
I
I
did
read
the
41
pages,
and
thank
you
for
that.
I
I
wanted
to
know,
I
guess.
Procedurally,
the
questions
that
you
all
raise
about
the
eis
seem
to
me
to
be
really
serious
and
substantial,
and
I'm
wondering
how
that
lands
on
the
army
corps
and
what
satisfaction
in
in
terms
of
answers,
we
will
have
either
before
the
council
has
to
make
this
decision
or
during
ped.
What
is
the
timing
and
what
is
the
expected
response
situation
to
that?
H
I
Yeah,
so
it's
a
great
question.
I
I
don't
think
that
all
of
the
questions
that
we've
raised
and
others
who
submitted
comments
and
we've
seen
you
know
from
the
from
the
aquarium
and
from
charlestown
neighborhood
association,
just
to
name
a
couple.
I
don't
know
that
all
of
the
answers
are
going
to
be
provided
before
council
will
be
making
its
decision.
So
what
we're
talking
about
is
sort
of
they're,
not
parallel
processes,
but
they
are.
I
All
of
the
comments
that
it's
received
on
the
draft
eis
and
make
a
final
determination-
and
I'm
not
the
expert
on
exactly
when
that
happens,
but
I
think
that
happens
before
we
go
to
ped,
and
you
know
we
frankly,
we
have
some
concerns
about
that
and
because
that's
a
significant
legal
action,
but
that's
you
know,
that's
a
whole
different,
very
important
and
very
related
arena,
and,
as
I've
said
as
in
this
committee,
I've
said
in
discussions
with
dale
with
the
mayor.
I
just
underscore
with
the
core.
I
You
know
we
we,
as
the
conservation
league,
want
to
be.
We
want
to
be
part
of
progress,
we
want
to
be
helpful
and
supportive,
and
our
raising
of
of
concerns
is
to
help
this
be
a
better
project
not
to
try
to
shut
it
down.
We
want
to
be
bringing
our
resources
and
our
expertise
to
improving
this
project.
I
I
Again,
this
is
a
this
is
a
core
question
about
how
they
handle
the
process,
but
I
think
that
what
we
heard
from
wes
is
that
they
will
provide
some
documentation.
Of
I
mean
all
the
all
of
the
comments
are
public
right.
Those
are
those
that's
public
record,
you
can
see
all
of
them
and
how
they
are
adjudicating.
The
comment
I
think
they
have,
I
think,
as
part
of
the
anima
process.
A
A
You're
welcome
well
well,
thank
you,
laura
we'll,
as
super
helpful,
great
recommendation.
I
know
it's
been.
It's
been
one
that
we've
had
circled
for
for
since
the
get-go
to
have
on
here,
so
good,
good
language
framed
up
around
it
and
we
can
incorporate
and
then
susan,
I
I
or
do
you
mind
putting
susan's
up
on
the
screen
as
as
you
have
or
you
know,
let
me
say:
first:
are
there
any
other
questions
or
comments
with
regards
to
laura's
recommendation?
B
A
H
C
A
H
A
So
don't
continue
the
language
in
bold
is
what
would
be
incorporated.
Thank
you,
susan
for
drafting
this.
We
don't
need
to
re,
you
know,
read
it,
but
if
you
have
any
associated
commentary
or
anything
color
you'd
like
to
give
on,
I
think
it's
you
know
pretty
straightforward
and
appreciate
your
writing
in
that
manner.
H
I
I
just
re
stating
what
the
ordinance
basically
implies,
and
that
is
that
this
committee
should
continue
doing
its
work
before
during
and
during
ped,
and
that
the
ordinance
allows
for
each
member
to
serve
up
to
two
two-year
terms.
So
we
have
a
ways
to
go
as
a
committee,
and
I
would
just
recommend
to
council
that
whatever
they
need
to
do
to
endorse
that,
but
they
do
it.
F
F
A
H
B
C
F
A
B
B
B
I'm
sorry
I'd
have
to
do
a
little
research
and
check
with
our
legal
department,
I'm
just
thinking
of
some
of
the
the
s.
You
know,
committees
that
I
sit
on,
but
sometimes
it's
I'm
a
designee
for
the
mayor,
which
is
like
a
council
number.
So
we
would
have
to
would
have
to
check
with
the
legal
about
about
that
possibility,
but
it
would
require
an
updated
ordinance.
F
A
Yeah
my
whole
thought
on
it
is.
Is
I
mean
I
don't
know
again
we'll
see
what
everybody
says
and
point
is
it?
I
don't
know
why
they
could
why
you
know
amy
time.
You
know
as
available
couldn't
be
a
regular
attendee
of
this
meeting.
You
know
such
as
you
know,
kailyn
and
dale
are
here,
that'd
be
that'd,
be
my
thought.
I
mean
it
accomplishes
the
same
goal
without
you
know,
practically
speaking,
without
having
to
reinvent
the
ordinance.
B
B
It
doesn't
mean
her
deputy,
but
you
know
obviously
she's
overrun
with
capacity
at
some
point,
so
the
feasibility
of
every
single
meeting,
her
sitting
on,
if
it
doesn't
relate
to
finance,
may
be
maybe
challenging,
but
I
think,
if
you're
putting
it
in
there
that
it's
committed
to
engaging
with
and
how
that's
interpreted
could
be
discussed
in
the
future
depending
on
you
know.
The
topics
that
this
committee's.
F
B
Yeah-
and
I
think
you
know
our
thought
like
a
lot
of
what
the
committee
would
be
doing
if
the
city
decides
to
move
into
pitt
over
the
next
year
would
be
analyzing
that
financing
further,
and
I
think
you
know
our
thought
would
be
we
would
we
would
invite
with
the
chairs.
You
know
bringing
the
agendas
forth.
We
would
have
somebody
on
that
call.
You
know
the
cfo
would
be
invited.
You
know
I
she
was
had
every
intention
of
attending
today
she
had
a
family
emergency,
so
she
wasn't
able
to.
B
Let
me
know
first
thing
this
morning,
but
our
intentions
are
as
we
move
forward
and
these
topics
cover
financing
to
to
include.
So
I
think,
if
you
add
the
cfo
to
that
language,
that
would
that
would
get
those
underlying
intentions,
but
obviously
the
committee's
decision
on
how
they
want
to
interpret
that.
C
Hello,
everybody,
if
I
may
jump
in
on
this,
you
know
there
are
other
departments
and
divisions
within
the
city
beyond
those
that
are
listed
here.
That
will
be
extremely
relevant
to
ped
the
parks
department,
for
example,
jason
kronsberg
chairs,
the
drc.
You
know
the
planning
department
as
a
whole.
You
know
others,
of
course,
and
so
maybe
we
don't
need
to
be
specific
to
to
departments
within
the
city.
C
A
Thanks
makes
sense,
let's
see.
Well,
maybe
we
maybe
maybe
what
we'll
do
is
this?
If
everybody
could
you
know
bob
laura?
You
know
susan.
If
you
have
any
other
commentary,
and
then
I
guess,
aside
from
the
parks
department,
allen,
if
you
have
any
thoughts-
and
I
know
you're
yeah,
if
you
have
any
thoughts,
you
know
please
share
them
with
with
kaelyn
of
groups.
You
should
include
as
far
as
engaging
in
this
process
and
killing
anybody
else.
A
B
B
A
A
Some
language
will
basically
be
what
was
presented
to
to
to
counsel
forget
the
date,
but
the
council,
with
the
addition
of
hey-
let's
you
know
cautiously,
you
know
for
that
kind
of
straw,
vote
cautiously,
move
into
pad,
subject
to
clarification
on
these
series
of
issues,
and
so
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
circulate
that
language,
and
please
again
this
next
week,
instead
of
having
a
meeting
a
week
from
now.
Please
use
that
time.
You
would
use
to
go
ahead.