►
From YouTube: City of Charleston Committee on Real Estate 4/12/2021
Description
City of Charleston Committee on Real Estate 4/12/2021
B
B
E
B
F
B
B
Let
me
stay
for
the
record.
Everybody
that
my
wife,
mary
shead,
represents
hph
properties
on
permitting
issues
dealing
with
wetland
matters.
Those
are
not
issues
that
are
with
the
city
of
of
charleston.
I've
checked
with
a
ethics
professor
to
make
sure
that
would
not
be
a
violation.
I
was
assured
it
does
not.
B
I
could
recuse
myself
for
the
appearances
of
recusing
myself
unless
someone
has
an
objection,
I'm
not
planning
on
on
doing
that.
Anybody
have
a
question
about
that,
but
her
firm
does
not
represent
the
applicant
as
to
this
particular
agreement
and
there's
nothing
before
the
city
in
which
she
is
involved
in
I'll.
Entertain
any
comments
about
that,
but
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
was
clear
and
on
the
record
that
there
was
no
conflict
of
interest.
B
G
G
The
original
development
agreement
was
executed
on
august
1st
of
2015,
and
the
term
was
for
five
years,
and
we've
been
negotiating
now
for
many
months
to
finalize
the
agreement
on
the
terms
for
this
first
amendment,
which
will
extend
the
development
agreement
for
another
five
years.
Can
everybody
still
hear
me?
Okay,.
G
Okay,
great
so
the
new
term
of
the
development
agreement.
Pursuant
to
this
first
amendment
will
be
august
1st
of
2020
to
august
1st
of
2025,
and
then
I'm
just
going
to
highlight
you
know
what
the
what
the
big
changes
are.
So
the
first
section
deals
with
the
stormwater
management,
and
this
first
amendment
is
going
to
clarify
that
the
development
of
the
property
is
going
to
be
subject
to
the
city's
current
stormwater
regulations
that
are,
in
effect
at
the
time
of
submission
of
a
completed
construction
activity
application.
G
G
G
So
this
means
that
in
the
beginning,
it
will
be
an
advantage
for
the
city
because
it
will
hold
excess
water
from
the
church,
creek
basin
area
and
provide
a
short-term
retention
solution
for
the
church.
Creek
basin,
the
design
and
location
of
the
pond
will
be
subject
to
the
city's
design
review
committee's
approval,
and
the
developer
is
also
going
to
convey
recreational
easements
around
the
pond
so
that
the
public
can
use
it
now.
G
G
As
this
is
going
to
be
serving.
You
know
the
greater
church
creek
area
in
the
beginning
of
the
development,
so
the
remaining
15
acres
is
still
going
to
be
reserved
for
the
city
to
purchase
for
park
space
and
the
developer
has,
and
the
owner
have
agreed
to
sell
this
to
the
city
at
a
discounted
price.
Instead
of
the
fair
market
value,
the
price
will
be
based
on
a
park
use
appraisal
rather
than
the
fair
market
value.
G
The
this
is
an
option
to
purchase
it's
not
an
obligation,
so
the
city
is
not
required
to
purchase
it.
It's
you
know,
but
the
city
would
would
very
much
like
to
have
this
property
specifically
for
active
park.
Space
such
as
athletic
fields,
the
15
acres
could
be
conveyed
as
one
15-acre
park,
or
it
could
be
two
separate
parks
of
ten
and
five
acres.
Each.
G
So
again,
the
city
has
the
option
to
purchase
the
property
within
three
years
of
the
recording
date
of
the
final
subdivision
plot,
and
there
are
a
few
more
details
you
know
having
to
do
with
a
park
conveyance,
but
we've
really
put
a
lot
of
terms
in
there
about
the
developable
developability
of
the
15
acres
to
be
perfect
for
athletic
fields.
So
that's
really
what
we're
looking
for
and
then
all
other
terms
and
conditions
of
the
original
development
agreement
are
going
to
remain
unchanged.
G
B
G
Yes,
there
are,
there
are
two
tracks
that
are
similarly
called
long
savannah.
This
one,
though,
is
also
known
as
village
green,
so
there
is
a
larger
tract
known
as
long
savannah,
which
is
owned
by
a
different
owner,
different
development
agreement
that
development
agreement
was
executed
on
august
1st
of
2015
just
like
this
one,
but
it
was
a
20-year
development
agreement.
It
was
for
over
a
thousand
acres.
G
H
G
Yes,
that's
correct:
a
large
piece
was
sold
to
the
county
and
a
large
piece
was
sold
to
the
city
and
I
believe
it
was
had
used
the
green
belt
funding
for
that
and
that's
what
I
think
is
called
it's
off
of
the
bear
swamp
road
right
and
so
that
park
space
is
mostly
passive
park
space.
There's
a
lot
of
swamp
land
in
there.
I
believe-
and
so
there
probably
will
not
be
athletic
fields
in
that
particular
area.
G
B
E
E
Okay,
so
I
I
know
that
when
you,
you
said
in
your
memo
that
once
this
agreement
expired
on
august,
1st
2020,
both
parties
have
been
negotiating
in
good
faith
to
work
through
some
of
these
changes.
What
will
now
be
the
amendment
first
amendment?
I?
I
do
think
that
it
would
be
great
to
have
that
explanation
on
record,
though
from
the
mayor.
Whoever
else
you
know
agreed
that
we
would
negotiate
for
more
than
six
months,
it's
going
on
eight
months
right
and.
G
Absolutely
the
the
owner
actually
reached
out
to
the
city's
legal
department,
probably
over
a
year
ago,
so
these
negotiations
have
been
going
on.
You
know
long
before
I
even
got
involved
in
the
project
last
summer,
but
because
of
covet
and
so
many
different
obstacles
that
we've
had
along
the
way
not
being
able
to
meet
in
person
and
doing
a
lot
of
things.
It's
just
really
slowed
our
process
down.
G
G
E
Thank
you.
I,
I
think
that's
an
important
explanation,
because
without
reading
your
memo
first,
I
looked
at
the
list.
I
looked
at
the
actual
amendment
and
then
my
my
my
original
dumb
question
was
well
why?
What
what
incentivizes
us
to
even
give
this
extension,
because
it
has
officially
expired.
So
I
I
appreciate
that
explanation
of
good
faith,
negotiation
being
on
the
record
thanks.
G
G
G
However,
some
of
the
extra
things
such
as
this
15
acre
park,
space
and
and
some
other
details
would
not
be
included.
The
pud
is
really
just
the
bare
bones
regulatory
document
for
developing,
but
the
development
agreement
you
know,
has
a
lot
more
detail
fleshed
out
in
it,
and
you
know
I
would
say
it's
it's
beneficial
for
the
city,
as
well
as
the
owner
and
developer,
to
have
the
development
agreement
in
place.
G
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
committee
members,
and
first
thank
you
to
sterling
for
all
her.
Many
hours
of
work
on
this
she's
really
done
an
excellent
job
y'all
and
she
really
was
hurting
cats.
There
were
a
lot
of
moving
pieces
as
she
described
and-
and
I
I'm
sure
I
know
the
primary
one
was
related
to
the
stormwater
management
in
this
special
protection
area
of
the
church,
creek
basin
and
and
to
make
clear
that
the
property
is
subject
to
our
current
improved
stormwater
regulations,
which
was
just
critical.
F
If
the
older
regulations
had
applied
it's,
I
don't
even
know
that
they
had
to
build
a
retention
pond
at
all
and
then
to
take
it
to
17
and
a
half
acres
is
to
comply
with.
The
current
regulations
is,
is
a
big
benefit
to
the
church,
creek
drainage
basin.
So
you
notice
in
neighborhood
11
up
there
that
most
of
it,
and
particularly
compared
to
the
larger
track,
is
high
ground.
F
You
see
it's
purple,
mostly
purple,
so
what
we've
learned,
of
course,
through
all
the
dutch
dialogue
processes,
even
with
the
high
ground,
if
you
can
create
storage
for
water
and
let
it
drain
off
at
a
slower
rate
than
what
it
naturally
does,
you're
really
benefiting
everybody
in
the
in
the
basin.
So
I
my
hat's
off,
because
taylor,
bush
and
and
his
folks
really
recognize
by
attending
our
dutch
dialogues
meetings,
that
this
could
be
a
benefit
to
the
whole
basin
and
the
idea
for
enlarging
this
pond
really
came
to
them
from
them.
F
We
needed
an
outer
west
actually
so
so
this
this
agreement
really
comes
with
some
benefits
to
the
city
and
for
connectivity
as
well.
You
note
that
that
black
line
at
the
road
going
off
to
the
right
that
actually
connects
with
the
existing
village
green
neighborhood
and
would
feed
out
to
highway
61..
F
Likewise,
the
new
glenn
mcconnell
extension
or
long
savannah
parkway
comes
up
into
the
belly
of
this
property,
so
some
important
connections
occur
here
from
a
transportation
point
of
view
as
well
and
and
seriously
the
the
taylor
and
his
team
have
worked
in
good
faith,
so
I
would
recommend
we
approve
this.
I
think
there's
good
benefits
all
the
way
around.
C
I
do
think
it's
a
good
idea
for
us
to
walk
in
the
applicability
of
the
new
stormwater
regs.
It's
my
understanding
that
the
city's
sort
of
default
position
on
this
issue
is
that
if
you
hadn't
submitted
a
caa
prior
to
was
it
july
first
of
last
year,
you're
gonna
be
held
to
the
new
regs,
but
I
think
with
the
development
agreement.
That
kind
of
might
not
be
the
analysis,
because
the
whole
purpose
of
the
development
agreement
is
to
freeze
the
regulations
in
effect
at
the
time.
C
So
so
a
long
way
of
saying,
I
see
the
value
in
enshrining
that
requirement
for
this
to
undergo
the
new
stormwater
regulations.
In
this
amendment,
I
think
that's
not
just
that
the
city
is
actually
getting
something
there.
So,
while
I'm
not,
you
know,
y'all
know
where
I
stand
when
it
comes
to
developments
kind
of
in
the
in
the
more
sprawl
type
category.
You
know
this
kind
is
what
it
is,
and
you
know
I
think
we're
certainly
making
it
a
better
development
with
these
amendments.
So.
B
I
For
our
overall
plan,
I
guess
is,
is
basically
what
concerns
me
there,
giving
up
giving
up
an
additional
10
acres
that
we
could
have
potentially
had.
I
guess
that's
my
only
concern,
but
it's
something
that
I
would
want
to
look
at
further
to
see
exactly
what
that
does
to
us
and
what
jason
and
laurie's
thoughts
are
on
there.
You
know
those
types
of
things.
B
E
Thanks
yeah,
I
I
would
I
appreciate
hearing
councilmember
sheila's
comments.
I
know
his
dedication
to
you
know
our
kids
needing
recreation
play
playing
field
and
especially
as
much
as
we're
jealous
of
the
conservation
and
the
environment.
So
I
I
have
a
couple
of
I
guess
my
my
assumption
about
that
is
during
the
process
of
negotiating.
E
So
I
would
like
to
note
that
you
know
if
my
assumption
is
correct
and
if
there's
any
expansion
from
the
staff
to
to
explain
that,
but
in
in
the
meantime
I
also
I
I
would
just
like
to
make
sure
that
you
know
we
understand
the
actual
process
and
what
would
be
required
of
this
developer
and
then
what
our
you
know,
what
our
responsibilities
are
in
upholding
that
land
use
development
process.
I
know
they
have
the
pud,
that's
a
permanent
fixture.
E
I
E
If
so,
did
when
you
did
your
years
worth
of
negotiations,
were
you
looking
at
the
entire
development
agreement
as
it
is
today
and
then
picking
out
the
only
things
in
there
that
our
staff
thought
were
beneficial
in
order
to
put
into
some
sort
of
amendment
document
like
this?
Can
you
just
explain
more
about
you
know
the
holistic
part
of
the
process
and
what
our
responsibilities
are
as
a
council.
Thank
you.
G
So
to
answer
the
first
question
that
council
member
sheila
also
brought
up
jason,
kronsberg
and
laurie
yarborough
were
both
very
involved
in
the
negotiations
on
this.
We
talked
a
lot
about
the
types
of
parks
that
we
could
use
for
the
15
acres
and
sort
of
what
configuration
that
would
be
and
what
it
takes
to
build
athletic
fields,
and
so
I
do
feel
like,
of
course,
they
would
love
to
have
the
25
full
acres,
but
I
do
feel
like
they.
They
feel
comfortable
with
the
15
acres.
G
You
know
that's
something
that
they're
comfortable
with
and
feel
like.
We
can
get
some
good
in
neighborhood
athletic
field
space
with
those
15
acres,
and
so
I
did
work
with
them
very
closely
on
this.
As
far
as
you
know
what
else
to
look
at
in
the
development
agreement,
I'd
say
that
you
know
I've
definitely
tried
to
vet
this
out
through
all
of
our
departments.
Obviously,
a
development
agreement
touches
upon
every
single
department
of
the
city.
G
This
really
grew
out
of
the
stormwater
concerns
and
then,
with
the
pond
being
as
big
as
it
is,
you
know
it
was
really
a
matter
of
trying
to
figure
that
out,
but
also
keep
as
much
park
space
for
the
city
that
we
could.
So
we
really
analyzed
all
the
park
space
in
this
area
and
really
tried
to
weigh
it
with
the
storm
water
concerns
and-
and
those
are
really
the
two
biggest
you
know
items
that
we
were
looking
at
as
we
were
reviewing
it
as
far
as
the
process
goes.
G
F
I
mean
the
fact
that
you've
got
that
beautiful,
open
space
with
the
pond
full
of
water
is
part
of
the
amenity
of
the
public
space,
and
so
the
same
thing
will
apply
with
the
17
and
a
half
acre
with
the
right,
as
sterling
mentioned,
for
the
perimeter
of
the
of
the
pond
to
be
a
public
space
and
and
public
use.
So
so
we
we
weren't
gonna.
We
didn't
think
it
was
feasible
to
have
all
25
acres
as
fully
developed,
active
athletic
space
anyway.
I
I
don't
believe
laurie
and
jason
can
confirm
that.
F
So
in
essence,
if
you
count
the
pond
as
a
public
space,
I
mean
you
end
up
with
with
more
than
the
original
25
acres.
Obviously
it
all
plays
out
and
and
the
the
15
acres
was
sized
specifically
to
to
account
for
enough
active
recreation
space,
as
we
would
put
in
a
neighborhood
this
size
anyway.
10
acres
is
the
size
of
a
ackerman
park.
F
B
B
Mr
crossbar,
if
you
all
been
following
much
of
this
discussion,
some
of
the
questions
have
come
up
that
were
kicking
back.
I
guess
for
lack
of
a
better
way
of
saying,
10
acres
out
of
the
original
25
for
recreation
uses
to
towards
the
stormwater
retention
pond,
and
some
some
of
the
questions
that
have
come
up
are:
what
can
we
do
with
with
15
acres?
That
could
be
enough
to
fulfill
the
mission
or
the
intent
of
this
recreational
space
out
in
that
area,
so
laurie
or
jason,
if
y'all
can
answer
that,
give
us
some
insights.
J
So
I'll
try
to
jump
in
here
and
lori
can
fill
in
where
she
where
she
sees
fit,
but
per
the
mayor.
I
think
the
mayor
hit
it
on
the
head
that
you
know
that
recreational
space
that
will
be
accommodated
around
the
pond
with
and
trails
and
and
the
park-like
setting
is
part
of
of
the
whole
idea,
a
five
and
ten
acre
park
site
neighborhood
park.
J
If
you
will
in
a
neighborhood
again
as
the
mayor
referenced
on
the
sizes
of
those
parks,
it
would
would
give
us
the
provide
us
with
the
ability
to
develop
some
multi-purpose
fields,
ball
courts
and
some
neighborhood
style
park.
Amenities
with.
I
don't
have
anything
off
the
tip
of
my
at
the
tip
of
my
fingers
to
to
reference,
but
for
the
the
spaces
at
moultrie
and
or
ackerman
as
commensurate
park
size
with
multi-purpose
fields,
basketball,
courts,
tennis,
courts,
playgrounds.
J
K
Thank
you,
as
always,
jason
did
a
great
job.
I
mean.
The
only
thing
I'll
add
is
is
that
you
know
we
tried
to
make
sure
that
the
land
was
highland,
that
it
was
going
to
be
what
we
could
use
and
not
be
wetlands
and
and
so
things
that
we
could
use
for
active
spaces,
understanding
that
that
neighborhood
and
those
folks
may
have
some
different
needs
than
what
we
see
today.
K
That
I
think,
would
be
multi-purpose
in
nature,
but
would
allow
for
those
types
of
activities
that
that
we
would
be
offering
programs
or
a
place
that
a
family
could
go
and
play
a
game
of
kickball
or
something
like
that.
So
absolutely
the
biggest
thing
to
me
is
that
it's
it's
highland
and
we're
able
to
use
it
and,
and
it's
it's
multi-purpose
and
it
certainly
fits
those
needs.
E
Thanks,
I
I
know
I'm
probably
beating
a
dead
horse,
but
I
I
do
feel
very
responsible
to
make
sure
that
you
know
whatever
we're
talking
about
is
clear
to
the
public
and
especially
by
the
time
we
would
get
to
a
public
hearing.
So
I
just
like
to
follow
up
with
my
earlier
question
sterling
answered
it
very
well
in
terms
of
you
know.
E
Let's
say
that
none
of
that
happens
is
the.
Does
the
developer
have
the
opportunity
to
then
build
under
the
pud
without
other
deliberations
they
would
they
would
come,
they
would
come
in
with
them.
A
concept
plan
tool
for
subdivision
is
that
is
that
what
could
happen?
Can
they
avoid
getting
a
development
agreement
with
the
city?
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
mrs
joe
burr,
or
maybe
mr
cronberg,
can
answer
this.
How
many
acres
do
we
have
back
at
the
soccer
fields
off
of
eight
myriad
boulevard
there?
I
guess
governor's
park
over
on
daniel's
island
and
then
obviously
a
grand
oaks
park
back
in
there?
What
kind
of
acreage
did
we
have
back
there
with
the
gym
and
those
fields
back
in
there.
J
H
Oh
good,
well,
you're.
Looking
that
up,
let
me
tell
you
why
I'm
asking
that
question.
You
know,
I
don't
think
we
have
any
idea
for
the
size
population
explosion
that
we're
talking
about
when
this
area
gets
developed.
I
can
remember
back
in.
I
think
it
was
15
during
the
raleigh
administration
when
we
were
talking
about
this,
we're
talking
about
that
time,
population
potentially
equating
daniel
island.
Once
you
know
long
savannah
and
all
of
that
gets
developed.
H
L
H
L
H
Public
parks
and
stuff,
like
you
harken
back
to
daniel
island,
this
area
should
not
be
any
less
less
than
so.
I'm
on
I'm
not
going
to
vote
to
support
this
one
for
those
reasons,
but
I
think
when
you
look
at
you
know,
if
we
didn't
have
the
areas
out
there
mary,
you
know
off
of
marietta
boulevard
or
you
know,
grand
oaks
was
certainly
well
planned
and
certainly
have
great
recreation
facilities
there,
but
so
much
of
west
ashley
was
developed
in
years
past
that
didn't
have
the
vision
to
allocate
our
public
space.
H
B
B
The
explosion
of
population
has
taken
over
this
area
in
leaps
and
browns.
We're
talking
about
expanding
the
glenn
mcconnell
parkway
that
the
county
is
in
the
process
of
reviewing
those
plans,
but
you
know:
if
we
can't
to
hold
25
acres,
we
would
have
to
pay
for
it.
Then,
if
we
converted
it
into
10
acres
or
whatever
acres
of
retention,
pond
that's
money
that
we've
spent
that
the
developer
is
going
to
use
or
could
use
instead
of
us
spending
the
money
for
that.
So
there's
the
two
sides.
J
On
the
gis,
so
west
ashley
park
the
four
soccer
fields
in
the
parking
lot,
the
first
set
of
fields
you
come
up
on
when
you
enter
the
park,
that's
about
12
acres,
so
that
doesn't
include
the
ball
fields
on
the
other
side
of
the
park,
but
so
that's
kind
of
a
12
acre
area
with
the
parking,
the
restrooms,
the
playground
and
the
four
multi-purpose
fields.
The
entire
bees
landing
recreation
complex
is
about
10
acres
and
that's
just
the
developed
land.
B
I
Okay,
yeah
all
right.
Well,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
appreciate
it
so
all
right
so
west
ashley
soccer
fields,
12
acres
with
the
park
and
bees
land
10,
but
we've
got
this
comprehensive
plan
and
certainly
it's
got
to
be
calling
for
additional
acreage
for
us,
and
certainly
there's
got
to
be
some
some
requests
in
there
with
our
comprehensive
plan.
Do
we
I
mean?
Is
this
cutting
a
short
on
our
comprehensive
plan
for
for
our
needs?
I
mean.
Certainly,
we've
got
needs
for
more
than
three
soccer
fields.
J
J
J
There
could
be
some
natural
area
that
ties
in
with
the
greater
county
park
trail
trail
system,
but
it's
been
years
and
some
of
the
wetlands
rules
have
changed,
but
I
know
that
there's
about
80
high
eight
acres
in
there-
and
it's
always
I
didn't
know
otherwise,
but
I
thought
we'd
always
anticipated
having
some
athletic
fields
in
there
as
well.
So
it
could
be
a
mixture
mixture
of
uses
in
there
from
from
a
park,
type
programming
aspect.
Okay,.
I
G
The
17.5
acre
pond
would
would
definitely
go
toward
meeting
those
requirements,
I'm
not
sure
if
it
would
meet.
You
know,
100
percent,
of
what
the
requirements
would
be
at
the
time,
but
it
certainly
is
going
to
you
know
help
get
to
that
point
with
the
development,
so
it
will
be
serving
the
development
when
the
development
is
fully
built
out,
but
we
do
have
that
short-term
ability
to
benefit
from
it
in
the
beginning
because
it
will
be
serving
the
greater
church,
creek
area
before
the
full
development
occurs.
B
G
G
L
E
E
B
A
B
E
F
B
B
C
B
Is
that
a
yes
or
no?
I'm
sorry,
that's
a
yes,
okay,
I'll
vote.
Yes,
so
we'll
recommend
it
out
of
committee.
You
know
going
for
the
full
meeting
on
a
three
to
two
vote.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you
all
for
the
input,
the
questions
and
concerns.
I
appreciate,
I
think,
they're
all
very
good
questions
that
we
have
raised
in
councilman
rashili.
B
A
B
A
B
B
B
That
he
that
he
charmed
it
so
thank
thank
you,
councilmember
sheila,
for
doing
that
all
right.
The
next
item
is
dealing
with
the
the
low
line
and
the
governing
use
of
the
fla
of
250
000
for
some
work
on
that,
and
I
think
mr
mcqueeny
is
going
to
lead
us
through
a
discussion
of
of
this
request.
So
can
you
leave
us
off
mr
mcqueeney,
please,
sir,
that
looked
very
dapper
today.
D
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
it
yeah.
This
is
a
so
we,
the
original
mou
was
passed
and
I
believe
october
2019
and
it
sort
of
sets
forth
all
the
conditions
for
the
the
relationship
between
the
city
and
the
low
line.
Just
going
back.
You
know
when
this,
when
the
city
purchased
the
low-lying
property,
it
was
actually
from
the
friends
of
the
low
country
low
line.
D
So
at
this
point,
what
we
are
at
the
final
design,
engineering
and
construction
phase.
You
know,
mostly
in
that
order
or
looking
to
advance
those
phases
based
on
the
conceptual
master
plan,
and
the
low
line
has
has
come
to
the
city,
as
they
did
about
a
year
ago
for
the
phase
one
and
requested
additional
monies
to
begin
in
advance,
the
final
design,
the
engineering
and
the
construct
really
construction
budgeting.
This
would
be
towards
the
construction
for
the
first
phase
of
the
low
line
improvements.
D
The
you
know,
I
think
the
benefit
to
the
city
of
this
relationship
obviously
is
you've
got
a
group
of
people
who
are
very.
I
mean
they're
they're
all
over
this.
This
is
a
huge
project
I
think
I
said
when
I
did
when
I
handled
the
closing
it
was
probably
the
most
complicated
real
estate
transaction
I'd
ever
seen,
the
all
the
various
relationships
that
are
involved.
It's
probably
the
most
complicated
project
I've
ever
seen
because
of
dots
interests.
D
The
cfo
and
corporation
council
would
have
to
approve
it
as
eligible
under
the
second
mou,
and
the
they'd
have
to
actually
approve
the
agreements.
Those
agreements
would
not
be
with
the
city.
They
would
be
with
the
friends
if
there
were
an
agreement
that
needed
the
city
to
be
a
party.
It
would
go
to
city
council,
it
wouldn't
be
subject
to
review
of
the
cfo
or
the
corporation
council.
D
You
know,
I
think
it's
been
a
good
relationship
so
far
and
I
hope
we
continue
to
work
with
these
guys.
I
think,
as
a
model,
we've
used
the
existing
agreements
with
the
charleston
parks
conservancy
for
hampton
park
and
for
other
parks
throughout
the
city.
So
this
is
sort
of
a
common
thing
that
that
we've
done
in
the
past.
That's
been,
I
think,
fairly
successful,
but
I'm.
B
B
H
D
Yes,
sir,
so
the
they'd
have
to
approve
the
contracts
before
the
friends
actually
before
the
money
spent
in
those
contracts
would
be
eligible
for
reimbursement
and
the
contracts
would
have
to,
as
the
agreement
says,
be
part
of
the
final
design,
engineering
and
construction
budgeting
for
the
phase.
One
portion,
that's
talked
about
in
the
concept
master
plan
attached
to
the
second
memorandum.
D
H
D
H
My
my
I
want
a
clarification
under
this
agreement
who
approves
the
expenditures
and,
under
this
agreement
and
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
mr
mcqueen,
it
would
be
our
cfo
and
corporate
council
and
then
I
asked
on
the
agreement
that's
in
place
now,
not
the
one
that
we're
considering
today.
How
would
that
work?
He
said
the
city
would
do
that.
H
H
I
do
have
a
problem
in
putting
in
particular,
this
agreement
puts
our
cfo
and
our
corporate
council
and
more
of
a
political
position
on
a
project
that
I
think
they've
ever
been
in
before,
in
particular
that
combination.
I
think
that's
a
travesty
for
the
city,
mr
mia,
I'm
looking
at
your
office
right
now
the
countless
meetings.
I
would
suspect
that
you've
had
with
staff
friends
of
the
low
line
and
maybe
I'll,
probably
our
corporate
counseling,
our
cfo
being
there.
H
Those
meetings
aren't
transparent.
Those
meetings.
Council
never
get
copies
of
those
minutes,
and
if
we
don't
have
transparency,
that
means
the
public
doesn't
have
transparency
and
we're
talking
about
millions
of
dollars.
I
go
back
to
the
low
line
before
before
you
became
mayor,
but
shortly
after
you
became
mayor,
this
is
when
jenny,
daring.
K
H
H
H
Advice
should
be
based
on
financial
fundamentals,
not
politics,
and
this
agreement
right
now
puts
them
in
a
position
of
wanting
to
please,
obviously,
if
their
friends
and
potential
contributor
of
yours,
or
to
any
council
member
campaigns
who
are
in
the
rooms,
it
makes
them
part
of
the
political
process.
One
good
thing
about
our
bid
process.
H
It
removes
our
capital
projects
away
from
that,
mr
mayor,
it
removes
our
cfo
away
from
that
process
and
that
works
to
the
benefit
that
the
taxpayers
competitive
bidding
has
worked
for
this
city
when
it
comes
to
linear
parks.
This
would
be
the
fourth
linear
park
that
the
city
has
done.
This
project
from
an
engineering
standpoint
is
nowhere
near
as
complex
as
doing
the
low
battery
wall
high
battery
wall
or
the
curve.
H
What
is
the
reasoning
that
we
should
give
the
taxpayers
dollars
to
private
entities
for
them
to
go
out
and
do
the
bidding
that
has
yet
been
answered?
What
is
the
great
big
advantage
for
them
to
have
no
big
contracts,
because
that,
once
we
approve
the
money
or
the
cfo
approves
the
money
and
the
legal
counsel,
corporate
council,
the
go-to
friends
of
the
law
line,
they
don't
have
to
worry
about
competitive
bidding,
then
they
can
go
out
and
do
single
source
contracts
with
taxpayers
dollars.
H
F
Well,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I
wanted
to
share
a
little
bright
background
and
and
councilman
waring
is
aware
of
this,
that
the
friends
of
lowline
have
been
working
on
this
project.
Well
before
I
got
elected
mayor
and-
and
we
wouldn't
be
at
this
opportunity,
without
their
engagement
and
their
money
and
their
incredible
efforts
over
the
last,
I
think
nearly
10
years
we've
enjoyed
a
very
solid
partnership
with
them,
which,
frankly,
I
think
it's
been
very
transparent,
and
if
you
kept
a
ledger
on
the
money,
I
guess
you
could
argue.
F
We
owe
them
a
bunch
because
they
put
private
dollars
that
they
raised
into
the
purchase
of
the
property,
some
millions
of
dollars.
So
the
benefits
to
our
taxpayers,
assuming
that
you're
correct,
and
I
think
you
are
councilmember
wearing
that.
If,
if
the
whole
concept
we
unanimously
approved
just
a
few
months
ago,
we
all
think
it's
a
good
idea.
F
We
just
want
to
move
continue
a
partnership
that
will
help
move
the
ball
on
down
the
field
and
it
doesn't
even
make
a
commitment
for
millions
of
dollars
in
the
future.
At
this
point
just
to
get
us
designed
to
where
we
know
in
a
firm
figure
what
the
initial
budget
will
will
be,
which
will
be
very
helpful
for
the
friends
to
continue
to
raise
private
dollars
to
defray
taxpayer
expense.
F
To
give
us
the
further
ammunition,
we
need
to
apply
for
grants
for
federal
funding,
as
it
turns
out
we're
at
a
juncture
where
the
congress
has
determined
they
will
reinitiate
something
called
earmarks.
We
believe
we
we
have
the
potential
a
good
potential
to
apply
for
some
federal
dollars
to
help
us
long
term.
With
this
project,
and-
and
I
must
admit
when,
when
years
ago-
and
even
as
you
mentioned
this
morning-
these
big
numbers
get
thrown
about
they.
F
They
are
they're
not
defined
as
well
as
they
need
to
be,
and
they
include
other
things
like
drainage
improvements
and
affordable
housing
development
that,
in
addition
to
the
park,
so
when,
when
those
kinds
of
numbers
have
been
thrown
around
they're
very
for
holistic,
the
holistic
effort
over
the
long
haul.
I
view
what
we're
the
partnership
that
we've
had
with
the
the
friends
as
an
extension
of
our
city.
Efforts
allows
us
to
multiply
ourselves
to
get
more
good
things
done
for
our
citizens.
F
Very
similar
things
have
occurred
since
I've
been
mayor
so,
for
example,
our
partnership
with
the
parks
conservancy
to
get
a
multi-playground
completely
redone
our
partnership
with
the
formation
of
the
friends
of
the
muni
to
get
the
municipal
golf
course
redone,
and
then.
Lastly,
I
I
I
would
like
to
call
on
amy
just
to
share
from
her
perspective
of
the
accountability
and
the
transparency
of
this,
because
she
agrees
she
can
say
for
herself
that
the
the
document
that
that
mr
mcqueeney
has
helped
draw
up
is,
in
fact
accountable
and
transparent.
F
Again,
I
would
just
make
the
case.
We've
saved
money
through
our
relationship
with
the
friends
by
them.
Pursuing
this
project
by
them
raising
money
they're
committed
to
continue
those
efforts
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
view
it
as
a
benefit
to
our
taxpayers
and
a
way
for
us
to
to
move
forward
with
a
with
a
transformative
project
for
our
city.
F
A
C
C
I
think
that
that's
what
we're
doing
here
and-
and
I
also
think
that
the
mayor
hit
the
nail
on
the
head-
is
that
you
know
public-private
partnerships
are
becoming
the
way
business
is
done
when
it
comes
to
infrastructure
and
there's
simply
a
lot
of
value
that
the
private
sector
can
can
provide
it's
very
important
that
we
as
a
city
make
sure
that
all
the
necessary
protections
and
safeguards
and
transparency
mechanisms
are
in
place.
But
this
is
you
really?
C
I
don't
want
to
put
jason
on
the
spot
here,
but
the
poor
guy's
got
a
lot
on
his
plate.
His
department
is
doing
a
whole
lot
of
things
and,
to
the
extent
we
can
leverage
outside
resources
to
help
in
that
effort
to
sort
of
supplement
the
city's
capacities
to
drive
these
projects.
I
think
it's
a
major
win-win
again,
while
making
sure
that
everybody's
protected
everything's
transparent,
as
I
believe
this
framework
accomplishes.
I
think
that's
something
that
is
not.
C
You
know
out
of
the
norm,
it's
something
that
I
think,
frankly,
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
more
of,
and
the
last
thing
I'll
say
is
that
the
sooner
we
can
get
the
green,
the
low
line
moving
in
a
serious
on
the
ground,
determined
way,
the
more
investment
we're
going
to
see
in
the
tif
district,
the
more
money
we're
going
to
have
to
incorporate
into
our
storm
water
and
affordable
housing
and
other
important
initiatives.
This
is
the
engine.
C
B
Thank
you,
sir,
for
those
comments,
so
miss
warden,
we'll
put
you
on
the
spot
a
little
bit.
Please
ma'am
and
I
think
the
mirror
has
some
specific
questions
regarding
how
this
is
going
to
work
from
a
procedural
standpoint
and
the
issues
raised
about
transparency
and
accountability
that
councilman
ware
brought
up.
Can
you
address
some
of
those
for
us?
Please.
M
M
Tiffs
really
the
development
agreements
that
we
have
to
where
everything
has
to
come
through
us.
It
has,
and
we
have
to
look
at
and
make
sure
all
the
documentation
that
is
there
before
we
actually
will
reimburse
for
those
expenses.
So
that's
really
how
this
is
working.
In
addition
to
that,
I
know
that
jason's
team
will
be
watching
the
project
as
well
and
looking
at
all
of
that-
and
we
also
will
have
a
project
manager
for
the
cooperative
bridge
tiff.
M
B
H
M
K
L
M
Incorporate
more
detail
into
that
when
that
full
agreement
comes
forward,
that
would
have
more
of
the
procurement
side
of
it
in
it.
I
think,
for
now
this
they
were
just
talking
about
just
some
of
the
design
work
and
things
like
that
that
weren't
bigger
contracts,
it
weren't
the
big
construction
contracts
and
things
like
that
right
now
and
we
were
going
to
come
forward
with
a
bigger,
better,
more
informative,
detailed
memorandum
of
understanding
later
for
for
those
transactions.
M
There
will
be
a
more
detailed
memorandum
of
understanding
coming
to
council
that
will
incorporate
a
lot
more
of
those
of
those
items
in
it.
This
is
just
more
for
those
smaller
dollar
items
that
they'll
have
coming
up
for
for
design
and
things
like
that.
It
wasn't
for
any
studies
that
they
have
coming
forward.
It
wasn't
for
the
larger
projects
enough.
D
H
D
L
M
D
D
D
Have
to
come
back,
they
have
to
come
back
to
council
and
and
ask
for
some
way
to
work
that
out,
but
I
think
in
the
meantime,
we'd
like
to
work
out
a
master
agreement.
I
think
this
is
a
you
know.
This
is
this
is
something
that
will
keep
the
ball
forward
and
moving
forward.
I
think
the
main
thing
for
them
is
the
ability
to
fundraise
and
keeping
the
ball
rolling
in
this
respect
allows
them
to
fundraise
without
the
city
committing
well
to
me.
L
H
Well,
that
being
the
case,
I'll
go
ahead
and
vote
for
this
thing,
I
don't
want
to
set
a
a
parameter
in
place
where
millions
of
dollars
are
going
to
be
spent
this
way
and
not
competitively
bid
and
putting
our
cfo
and
corporate
council
in
a
position
frankly
having
to
deal
with
politics
when
it
comes
to
the
numbers
of
building
a
linear
park.
This
current
agreement,
I
think,
does
that
if
this
is
strictly
limited
in
that
scope
and
capacity,
then.
L
B
L
Yes,
sir,
just
yes,
sir
just
real
quickly,
two
points
again,
this
agreement
says
if
the
city
is
going
to
be
a
party
to
anything,
it
obviously
needs
to
come
back
to
you
all
for
approval.
I
think
that's
important
to
know,
and
then
the
second
thing
is
in
this
larger
agreement.
We've
talked
about
the
procurement
issues
and
the
need
to
also
include
some
minority
business
requirements
that
you
know
we
did
include
in
the
volvo
agreement
and-
and
we
think
should
also
be
woven
into
a
future
agreement
with
these
folks
too.
E
I
I
just
wanted
to
thank
councilmember
waring.
I'm
really
glad
that
you
know
we
were
able
to
satisfy
your.
Your
very
you
know,
in
my
opinion,
conscientious
and
on
target
questions.
So
no
one
wants
this
private
public
partnership
as
it's
going
to
set
the
stage
for
hopefully
many
many
other
ventures,
especially
as
we
are.
You
know
about
to
take
delivery
to
a
slew
of
amazing
recommendations
from
our
commission
on
equity
inclusion
and
racial
conciliation.
E
We
know
that
we
don't
have
the
resources
that
are
going
to
meet
the
kinds
of
recommendations
that
that
fabulous
group
is
going
to
be
bringing
to
us,
and
I
think,
as
much
as
we
can
get
it
right
to
have
a
long-standing
public-private
partnership
with
people
that
we
have
grown
to
trust
over
the
10
years.
That
they've
been
dedicating
themselves
to
this
and
and
they
are
also
dedicated
to
reworking
their
organization
from
a
closely
held
friends
group.
You
know
that
basically
got
started.
E
I
think,
among
friends,
around
the
historic
charleston
foundation
and
and
the
groups
that
saw
the
low
line
as
a
resource
for
preservation
that
that
they
know
that
they
have
to
widen
their
reach
and
broaden
their
expertise
to
people
that
you
know
would
would
not
have
naturally
been
in
a
friends
group
like
this.
So
I
I
think
it's
all
great,
and
I
really
appreciate
that
you
have,
you
know,
been
able
to
appreciate
the
work
that
the
legal
office
is
doing
on
our
behalf.
E
D
No,
sir,
and
that's
why
we're
kind
of
doing
it
it's
a
little
bit
piecemeal
meal
right
now,
but
we
I
mean
we
do
have
that
bigger
agreement
that
we're
looking
at.
I
just
don't.
I
think
I
I
think
at
this
time
we
didn't
have
funds
identified
to
you
know,
approve
a
bigger
agreement,
but
the
I
think
the
idea
has
always
been
that
it's
sort
of
an
agreement
to
look
at
future
agreements.
D
The
first
one
sets
sort
of
the
bare
minimum.
What
anybody
doing
work
on
city
property
has
to
do
it
this
way,
and
that
includes
all
that.
You
know
what
I
say:
the
environmental,
the
contracting
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
there's
no
there's
a
provision
that
basically
says
that
we're
going
to
both
work
to
identify
monies,
but
that
we
both
understand
it's
going
to
take
private
monies
and
public
monies
moving
forward
to
get
this
done,
and
I
think
that's
with
with
the
community.
What
is
it
called?
Charleston
parks,
conservancy
and
some
other
organizations?
L
D
You
know,
certainly
if
it
if
they
raise
millions
of
dollars
and
want
to
pay
for
the
construction.
I
don't
think
we'll
have
any
objection
as
long
as
they
come
from
city
funds,
but
to
the
extent
they're
spending
city
funds.
This
is
we're
just
allowing
them
what's
approved
in
the
first
addendum
and
the
second
addendum,
but
they've
already
been
approved
for
the
first
in
a
bit.
We've.
D
B
Maybe
at
some
point
in
time
we
do
have
sort
of
this
master
moa
in
which
we've
got
stages
is
how
this
is
going
to
develop
and
sort
of
like
a
check
off,
lift
we
accomplished
stage
one
stage,
two
stage:
three
as
we're
moving
through
this
process,
so
that
we're
not
having
to
go
back
and
re-have
this
discussion
again
and
again.
This
thing
just
keeps
on
moving
on
a
certain
track
that
everybody
sees
what's
going
on.
B
B
B
I
think
that
would
just
be
a
prudent
thing
to
do
to
go
along
and
take
that
into
consideration.
I
I
think
we
have.
We
have
talked
this
through
very
comprehensively
and
I
think
it's
always
a
very
thorough
discussion.
So
I'm
going
to
call
the
the
question
for
a
vote,
I'm
neutral,
so
I
can
hear
you
please
all
those
in
favor
of
item
b
on
our
agenda
signify
by
saying
aye
aye
any
opposed
hearing,
none
the
motion
carriers.
Thank
you
all
very
much
all
right.
Then.