Water Supply and Resources Committee

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA WATER SUPPLY COMMITTEE Monday, June 5, 2017 Municipal Complex, Building A, Public Meeting Room 1 100 Ann Edwards Lane Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Minutes Members Present: Mark Smith, Chair, Gary Santos and Joe Bustos Staff: Eric DeMoura, Town Administrator Also Present: Clay Duffie, General Manager, Mount Pleasant Waterworks; Nicole Bates, Customer Communications Manager; Dionna Ebeling, Community Engagement & Communications Director Mr. Smith called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. 1. Approval of Minutes from the May 1, 2017 meeting Mr. Santos moved for approval; seconded by Mr. Bustos. All present voted in favor. 2. Public Comments Will Haynie, 316 Mallard Court, asked if there would be an opportunity to comment when an agenda item is addressed? Mr. Smith responded in the affirmative. 3. Presentation by Mount Pleasant Waterworks regarding Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project and Communication Plan Mr. Duffie stated that this is a very exciting project for Mount Pleasant Waterworks (MPW). He stated that it is “smart metering”. Mr. Duffie stated that they have developed a logo for this project, which will be a large project for MPW.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 2 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that their current meter reading system is called Automated Meter Reading (AMR), which is a drive by system, where vehicles equipped with a computer drive by and read the meters. He stated that unfortunately, the system is approximately twelve years old and MPW is experiencing some issues with this program. He mentioned that this program has not met MPW’s expectations, as there are a number of misreads which require the technicians to go back out and do a visual reading. He stated that it also only provides MPW with minimal data. He stated that they have four billing cycles a month, or one each week; however, in terms of determining nonrevenue, the system only provides MPW with limited data.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 3 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that they anticipate a two year completion date, with the project starting in July 2017. He stated that this is a $15 million dollar project and they will be utilizing the Sensus FlexNet system for the AMI (Advanced Metering Infrastructure). He stated that MPW went through an interview process to select a contractor and selected US Bronco Services out of Ohio who was ranked very high. Mr. Duffie explained AMI, where a smart meter sends a signal to a communication antenna which then transmits to a secured database. MPW will have three antennas throughout their service area. He stated that the meter itself reads the consumption every hour, so MPW has an hourly reading from each of their customers. He stated that this information then goes to the Sensus Analytics programmer to bill the customers.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 4 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that the Smart Meter looks very similar to the previous AMR’s. He stated that there will be a smart meter antenna, which will transfer the information to regional antennas. Mr. Duffie stated that the benefits to the customers with the hourly readings will allow them to track consumption and assist with managing customer’s costs. He stated that the billing will be closer to the reading date. He stated that with this program, they will be able to assist with problem solving and provide feedback hour by hour on consumption. It will provide better communications with the customers.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 5 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that the benefits to MPW is a better relationship with the customer, as well as increased efficiency, operations, non-revenue water analysis, workforce management, safety and security. It will also reduce labor and travel and reduce the carbon footprint. He stated that they can build the entire system, read the meter on the first of the month and the first of the next month, do a thirty day reading and compare this to the thirty day production numbers to determine their nonrevenue water. He stated that this will be a tremendous benefit for MPW in managing their nonrevenue water and determine where there may be leakage in the system, do the repair and conserve more water. Mr. Duffie stated that they expect that there will be concerns about privacy and how the information will be used. He assured that this information will be kept very private. There were also some concerns about radio frequency and creating and stated that the smart meters send out much less radio frequencies than the everyday activity from microwaves and cellular phones.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 6 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that the biggest issue MPW expects is going to be with landscaping. He stated that because the AMR system is a remote read system, MPW has not surveyed every meter setting in the past 10 to 12 years. He stated that many things have happened since that time in terms of landscaping on top or around the meters, as well as trees growing up around them, creating issues with the ability for the new system to be read by the antenna remotely. He stated another example is ground covering, as well as Sweetgrass and pampas grass covering the meters. Mr. Duffie stated that the illustration above shows what the new meters should look like installed. It should be implanted in grass or low lying landscape so that the meter lid and the transmitter are exposed, in order to provide a clear path to the antenna so meter readings can be read.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 7 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that MPW is hoping that Town Council will approve an ordinance that will support this. He stated that there are a series of ordinances that they have asked Town Council to approve. He stated that one of the primary ordinances is that the meter cannot be blocked. He stated that there have been situations where barriers have been put on top of the meter, and some have built decks over their meters. He stated that these are barriers that will hinder the meter reading system from working properly. He stated that the main ordinance will state that you cannot allow vegetation to become established, other than low lying grass, within two feet of the meter. He stated that this is a primary ordinance that MPW will be relying upon in terms of dealing with customers that have allowed vegetation to encroach upon the meter setting. He stated that this is one of the main reasons MPW is before this Committee today to share this information, as well as with Council and staff. He stated that they expect there will be customers that will resist MPW’s request to remove that vegetation to clear the way so that they can (1)  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 8 of 20 install the meter setting and (2) that it will operate properly now and in the future. Mr. Duffie stated that one of the biggest items MPW will be working on and deploying is their communications plan. He stated that they will have early education to help disseminate the information out to the customers. He stated that part of the plan is to discuss with Committee and Council, as well as information out in the newspapers. He stated that they will be increasing the awareness and the issues they will be expecting. He stated that they will be sending out postcards to customers letting them know when they will be in their area to install the meters. He stated that MPW plans to start with approximately 3,200 problem meters first, which are located all over the Town. He stated that they will use these meters as a pilot to determine what to expect in terms of what issues to expect. He stated that they will begin installing the problem meters in July and should be completed in September, which will provide MPW with feedback on how the program will work. MPW will then begin systematically installing meters throughout the Town and advancing information to those customers who are about to see the trucks and contractors working on the meters. He stated that the installation will take approximately two years to complete the project. He stated that once the installation has been completed, MPW will need to continue to communicate with the customers regarding any issues relative to landscaping and the barriers that could prohibit the proper operation of the system.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 9 of 20 Mr. Duffie stated that they would be utilizing the above mentioned tools, as well as linking with the Town’s website. He stated that the contractor, US Bronco will have their trucks out in the neighborhoods and the logo illustrated below will be on both the vehicles as well as their apparel. Mr. Duffie stated that the project manager will be moving to Mount Pleasant and is committed to stay here for the entire project. Mr. Smith stated MPW will have a profile of his typical household usage, and if he goes on an extended vacation and there is a leak in his home, with the new system, MPW is able to be proactive in alerting him that he has an abnormal usage of water typically associated with a leak. He stated that this could save his home from potential flooding. Mr. Duffie stated that the system notifies alerts if there is continuous use. If MPW sees continuous use hour after hour and they have proper information to contact the customer, they will email or text the customer. He stated that continuous use with some customers is not abnormal; however, it may be  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 10 of 20 abnormal for a typical household. He also added that increased use may not always be abnormal, as well, because in the summer, customers change the water in their hot tubs, fill their swimming pools, etc. He stated that a continuous use is not typically normal and would alert that there could be a problem. Mr. Smith asked if a customer should expect to see a change in their bill as a result of this improvement. Mr. Duffie stated that they may see an increase. He stated that meters decline over years and may under-read consumption. He stated that with the new meters, it will capture all the consumption being used. Mr. Santos stated that he put down sod and his lawn watering increased. He stated that he received a call from MPW advising that more water was being used than normal. Mr. Duffie stated that this showed up within the month; however, with the new system, MPW will know within hours. Mr. Smith asked if any other municipalities in the State have implemented this system. Ms. Nicole Bates stated that Berkeley County has implemented it. Mr. Bustos asked about the location of the towers and their height. Mr. Duffie stated that they will be transmitting from existing towers in the Town. Mr. Bustos stated with the meter box and the antenna on top, what happens when lawn mowers go over the top of it, and who will be responsible for replacing it if damaged. Mr. Duffie stated that part of the program with the contractor is to ensure the meters are set so that normal mowing will not affect the meter. He stated that these are the low profile antennas. He stated that hopefully the customers will realize and recognize where their meters are located and adjust their lawnmower setting so that it does not hit the antenna. He stated that in the initial installation, this will be part of the contractor’s responsibility, which will be to ensure the meters are set at grade.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 11 of 20 Mr. Bustos stated that there have been flooding issues in the Town and asked if this would affect the smart meters. Mr. Duffie stated that as long as the antenna is above the water level, it will work; however, if the water rises above the antenna, it will not transmit. He stated that these meters store the hourly readings whether or not it transmits the information to the tower. Once the antenna is clear, it will send all the accumulated readings. Elton Carrier, 313 King Street, stated that he was following up on a portion of Mr. Bustos comments earlier. He stated that his meter is in the right of way and is driven and parked on continuously from people going to the Darby Building. He stated that many residents in the Old Village have their meters in the right of way and most are under ground. Mr. Duffie stated that there will be several situations where meters will have to be relocated, such as in a driveway, under trees, etc. He stated that the contractor will not charge MPW the first time. He stated that they will contact the homeowner or business owner to let them know there is an issue with the meter and will be making adjustments. He stated that if the meter is in the right of way, the moving of that meter is going to be MPW’s responsibility. He stated that there are some instances where the meters are up in homeowner’s yards and stated that this will likely be an issue for a homeowner. He stated that years ago, MPW was not as careful about the placement of the water meters. He stated that if it is on private property, they must first secure permission from the homeowner or business owner to move the meter back into the right of way. He stated that this is a good opportunity to clean things up system-wide. Jim Owens, 1197 Island View Drive, stated that at a time when they are attempting to determine job creation and there are meter readers currently on staff with MPW, he asked Mr. Duffie what he intends to do with that workforce. Mr. Duffie stated that MPW does not anticipate a layoff and in fact, MPW will re-engineer the meter readers. He stated that their skill sets will change and instead of doing readings from the computer in the vehicle, they will be dealing with system problems. He stated that the system is not maintenance free and  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 12 of 20 MPW does not anticipate laying off any meter readers in order to implement the new program. He stated that they will stay in the meter reading department. He stated that during the two year implementation of the new system, the contractor stated that they do plan to employ other labor locally as well. Mr. Bustos stated that if the meter is in the right of way where the mailman or others drive right over it, he mentioned that much of the parking in the Old Village is off street. Mr. Duffie stated that in some areas, the meters will be moved out of those traffic patterns ad relocated and in some cases, they will have to secure it. Pat Sullivan, 1002 Plantation Court, stated that her meter is located between the sidewalk and her driveway in Snee Farms and there is grass all around it. She asked if they would be digging up the grass. Mr. Duffie responded in the negative and in most cases, the only thing that will happen when the installer comes out is he will take the lid off of the existing meter base, install the new meter and put the antenna up. Ms. Sullivan stated that an irrigation meter was also mentioned. She stated that if a resident does not have one currently, will the new installations have any effect on adding an irrigation meter. Mr. Duffie stated that it will not; however, it will let you know how much water you are consuming to irrigate the property which will provide an idea of whether it is more cost effective to add an irrigation meter or not. It will help analyze water consumption. 4. Update on Maguro Enterprises SCDHEC Water Withdrawal Request Mr. Smith stated that he would like to commend the Post & Courier for doing a good job keeping the community informed. He thanked those who were able to attend the two public hearings. Mr. Duffie stated that the Technical Advisory Committee of the BCD Council of Governments will be formed with a new chairman. He stated that there will be new members added and will review the first three new permit requests as soon as a meeting is scheduled. He stated that the Google Maguro permit modification is up for review at the time and to his knowledge will not be  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 13 of 20 reviewed until after the first three permits have been addressed. He stated that they are hoping to have the meeting in June or July to review these permits. Mr. Smith stated that he and other officials have received copies of the State and Federal elected officials’ communications to SCDHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control), in reference to this and it is his understanding that there is no political pressure to prioritize or push the Maguro permit through. Mr. Duffie stated that he has not heard anything regarding this. Mr. Smith stated from the beginning, Mount Pleasant Waterworks (MPW) and the Town of Mount Pleasant, in its resolution, has never taken an anti-business stance but only to be good stewards of the natural resources. Mr. Duffie added that MPW has always stated that they were only interested in protecting that resource for the citizens of the Town of Mount Pleasant which is their obligation and intention. He also thanked David Slade and the Post & Courier, who have done an amazing job keeping the public informed on this issue. Mr. Bustos stated that last month, this Committee voted on a Resolution and asked if it was ever executed. Mr. Smith stated that Council voted on October 12, 2016 on a Resolution. He stated that the motion that was made at Committee was the exact Resolution that is already in place. Mr. Bustos stated that also in that meeting, Mayor Page stated that she would draft a letter prior to the Town Council meeting so that members of Town Council could sign it and asked if this ever transpired. Mayor Page responded in the negative and stated that she sent out the information after the vote at SCDHEC and asked Town Council members if they would like to move forward on; however, she did not receive any responses. Mr. Bustos stated that this was not his recollection and still believes that a current resolution is appropriate and this Committee voted and was in favor specifically of a new (resolution), and it did not happen for whatever reason and was not even mentioned in the Committee reports. He stated that this Committee voted on an item to recommend to full Council. He suggested  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 14 of 20 having it on next week’s Town Council agenda as a recommendation from this Committee. Mr. Smith stated as Chairman, he would recommend and fully support that this Committee re-submit and stamp the October 2016 Resolution June 2017 stating that the Town reaffirms the existing Resolution that is dated October 12, 2016 and if there are any further details that are not included in this Resolution, will add to and modify. Mr. Bustos reiterated that this Committee voted on at the May Committee meeting, for a current resolution and if the current resolution is a reaffirmation of something that opposes the Google water request, he would be agreeable. Mr. Smith stated that the interpretation would be more current than October 12, 2016. Mr. Santos stated that there was an excellent article in the paper regarding using water stored in towers and recycling the water to cool as they do in nuclear power plants. He asked if this was an option for Google to use instead of pulling water out of the aquifer. Mr. Duffie stated that there are some recycling with the current Maguro operation in terms of their cooling towers. He stated that a cooling tower loses a great deal of water through evaporation; therefore, one of the consumptions of the water is that it is evaporated. Mr. Santos asked if it will still evaporate if it is covered. Mr. Duffie responded in the affirmative and stated that it is part of the process. He stated that he is not familiar with Google’s specific system, but is attempting to understand it more. Mr. Smith stated that from the beginning, it has been said for Google to treat Berkeley County just as Google in Georgia did using a reclaimed water process. Mr. Duffie stated that as far as he knows, Berkeley County Water and Sanitation Authority has ample water to sell Google. The ground water does not come with a water bill. Elton Carrier, 313 King Street, stated that there was another Letter to the Editor in the newspaper a few weeks ago from one of the Google technicians.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 15 of 20 He stated that there is 280 million gallons flowing through the aquifer every day and asked if this was an accurate statement. Mr. Duffie stated that he does not know where they came up with that number; however, he called the primary contact at the US Geological Survey and he was not aware how that number was derived. He stated that they are going to be putting together a series of information about the aquifers and how they work. He stated that an aquifer is not a flowing river underground, which was in that article. He stated that this is not a true statement. He stated that there is a great deal of misunderstanding about how aquifers work and how an aquifer can be depleted beyond its sustainable capacity. He stated that there is a great deal of information that they are going to educate the decision makers about and those that will be reviewing the permits so that they can better understand how the aquifer systems work, and really look at the true science of this aquifer. Mr. Smith asked if the communication piece that MPW will be coordinating will take a pro-active approach and have an educational series. Mr. Duffie responded in the affirmative. Will Haynie, 316 Mallard Court stated that on the Monday prior to the May meeting, the COG (Council of Governments), passed its approval of the three county area, DHEC passed the use area groundwater plan. He stated that on Tuesday, Mount Pleasant Town Council meeting was held in the evening, and on Wednesday morning, MPW saw fit to go to court to seek an injunction to stop the plan. He stated that as a resident of Mount Pleasant and a member of Town Council, he has questions and would like to point several things out as well. He stated that in the May 11th article that Mr. Slade of the Post and Courier co-wrote and the judge that heard the case, stated that he sees short comings in this plan. Mr. Haynie stated that the Coastal Conservation League released an email that said, “One of the biggest shortcomings of this DHEC plan which is 160+ pages does not address what will happen if the aquifer level starts to fall as it did in the 1970’s”. He stated that the aquifer level can fall and is a threat to our drinking water. He said that in the article that Mr. Slade co- wrote, the attorney for MPW states that, “this whole process started because of Google and MPW stated that after 15 years of delays that this process was started because of Google’s request.” Mr. Haynie asked why Mount Pleasant’s  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 16 of 20 representative to COG would vote to support a plan that everyone else views as having shortcomings in it. He stated that when there was a Council meeting the very next day, until he asked a question about this, why was Council not informed of something that was so significant to our drinking water that had such a significant threat that our own MPW went to court against their own regulatory agency to try and stop the plan. He stated that he has read the injunction and said that there are a lot of holes in that plan. He additionally asked why there was a disconnect at that time between the Town of Mount Pleasant’s vote at COG and the action by MPW. He said that someone got this wrong – either the Town got it wrong by voting to support the Regional Groundwater Plan or MPW got it wrong by going to court to seek an injunction against that plan that the Town is now on the record, by a representative vote, to support. He stated that he is not talking about Google’s request, but the Capacity Use Area Regional Groundwater plan. He asked what needs to be done as a Council to ensure they are informed when votes representing Council are made at a regional body such as COG that puts the Town at odds with their own local utility, in which we have representation, and also have on the agenda a Committee report that Tuesday night (at Town Council meeting). Mr. Smith stated that he will respond to the second portion of the question of what action can be done to ensure moving forward. He stated that as a Water Supply Committee, will take no legal position. He stated that perhaps Mr. Haynie would like to defer this to the Police, Judicial and Legal Committee. He stated that this is the Water Supply Committee and does not believe they have any governing responsibility; however, will defer to Legal Counsel. He stated that he has no other response other than, if Council desires to add some form of an ordinance that they would like to propose in terms of votes by the Mayor or a representative of the Mayor on any of the boards outside of Town Council, this should go before Police, Judicial and Legal Committee. Mr. Pagliarini stated that for any legal action to be taken, Town Council would have to approve. He stated whether it be someone putting an item on the Council agenda or by any of the Committees and then to Council, then legal action could be taken. Mr. Smith stated that regarding the first portion of Mr. Haynie’s question, as Chairman of the Water Supply Committee, he submitted the reports to the  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 17 of 20 Committee and Mount Pleasant Waterworks which were included in his written report. He stated that the information that was available at the time through the works of the Committees and the Commission were properly submitted. Mr. Haynie stated that for information-sake, something that is so monumental that requires MPW to actually go to court, cannot be provided as information at a Council meeting when it happens on Monday, and Council meets on Tuesday. He asked if this was too much to expect. Mr. Smith stated that anything can be expected of any Committee at any time. Mr. Bustos stated that this goes to the heart of what he was discussing prior, because there was a resolution and what he believes he is hearing is that Mr. Smith made a unilateral decision because of a past Resolution, not to include this. Mr. Smith stated that this was not a decision that the Committee Chairman made. Mr. Bustos asked who made the decision. Mr. Smith stated that he is unable to respond to that question. Mr. Bustos again asked who made the decision. He stated that if this Committee voted and made a recommendation to Council and it was unanimous, who made the decision not to put it on the agenda. He said that procedurally, this is wrong. He said that no one Council member has the authority to take a recommendation to Council and set it aside. He stated that full Council may set it aside, but not any individual. Mr. Smith stated that this Committee will still move forward with a reaffirmation of the October 12, 2016 Resolution. Mr. Bustos stated that he does not know, because he has not read that Resolution recently. He stated that there needs to be a Resolution just as this Committee voted on last month that states that the Town is not in favor of the Maguro submittal. Mr. Smith asked if this was in the form of a motion. Mr. Bustos responded in the affirmative. Mr. Santos so moved to second.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 18 of 20 Linda Page, 1458 Short Street, stated that the Resolution does not say that the Town is against the Maguro permit. Mr. Bustos stated that the Resolution that was suggested last month, this is what should be approved. Mr. Santos stated that this is what the motion was, that if it was not included, that it be included. Mr. Smith suggested to Mr. DeMoura that staff resubmit the October 12, 2016 Resolution in support of the request that SCDHEC to require alternatives for groundwater withdrawal permit submitted by Maguro Enterprises and email that to all members of Council and the Mayor so that everyone has an opportunity to review it and bring their comments to Town Council meeting and ensure that this item is on the agenda as well. He asked Mr. Duffie if he had anything to add on behalf of MPW that would be helpful. Mr. Duffie asked if MPW may have the opportunity to comment on the draft Resolution. Jim Owens, 1197 Island View Drive, said that in reference to the Groundwater Management Plan, originally when the injunction was set in place, DHEC was struggling to put together a Groundwater Management Plan. He stated that DHEC has since prepared a draft and MPW questioned the draft due to insufficient information; therefore DHEC is attempting to develop or re-develop a Groundwater Management Plan. He asked Mr. Duffie if anything has been set in place at this time or is DHEC still working on it. Mr. Duffie stated that he is unsure what they will do. He stated that the website stated that they will review and update the Groundwater Management Plan in three to five years. He stated that MPW believes this is too far into the future, as there are concerns about the existing plan as written. He stated that it is his hope with the Technical Advisory Committee and with Ron Mitchum’s leadership, they will be in a position to weigh in on the existing plan and be able to have the board consider immediate modifications to the plan that will enable it to be a more workable document to review permits against. He said that currently, this plan is more of a report than a plan and there are many missing elements of a true management plan, which is what MPW wants to help get into the plan, because they believe it will be a better plan for the  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 19 of 20 entire region. He stated that as it is written currently, there are many gaps in the plan. He stated that it is his hope that they will be able to weigh in on this plan locally, provide the information to DHEC and hopefully, expect a positive response from them. Mr. Owens asked if there was a request to form a Groundwater Management Plan fifteen years ago. Mr. Duffie responded in the affirmative. Mr. Owens stated that it has taken fifteen years to get to this point and there is still no finalized document. Mr. Duffie stated that there is a finalized document. He stated that the Board approved that plan on May 11th and it is being used as a model for other plans throughout the State. MPW believes that they can do a better job with the current plan. Mr. Smith asked who the members are of the Technical Advisory Committee. Mr. Duffie stated that there are approximately fifteen experts. He stated that this Committee is set up to look only at wastewater permits. He stated that there is MPW, Summerville, North Charleston Sewer District, a handful of industries, Conservation League, DNR (Department of Natural Resources), and people in this profession. He stated that the Committee that will review the Groundwater Permits, there will be groundwater permit holders added to that Committee (farmers, industries, golf courses), and hopefully the USGS (United States Geological Survey), that will be added to the Technical Advisory Committee. He stated that there will be approximately 20 members. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Duffie if it was his opinion that MPW believes that the proper stakeholders now have a seat at the table for this significant process moving forward. Mr. Duffie stated that they do now, but did not before, which was MPW’s objection. He stated that their main objection was that the plan did not start locally as the DHEC guidance said it should. He stated that with the planning committee starting to evaluate and propose the plan to DHEC that process was actually in reverse.  Water Supply Committee June 5, 2017 Page 20 of 20 Mr. Smith added that he and Mr. Duffie attended the two public hearings and there were many that were missing. Mr. Smith asked for clarification that the motion that was made to allow the groundwater management plan to move forward included sending it to the Technical Review Committee. Mr. Duffie stated that there was an amendment that Mayor Page made to send it back to the Technical Review Committee. Linda Page, 1458 Short Street, stated that she sits on the COG and is the Secretary/Treasurer and they were asked to approve the plan. She stated that there is no reason for them not to approve the plan, because they were setting the pace. She stated that the amendment was a small consideration that was 100% supported. She stated that the large consideration for the Town of Mount Pleasant and MPW is that they would have the opportunity to have the Technical Review with Mr. Duffie present. She stated that it was very important to move the plan forward to get a plan in place. She stated that they have been working on it for almost twenty years. She stated that it is not perfect, but it is getting there. 5. Adjourn Mr. Smith adjourned the meeting at 9:50 a.m. Mr. Smith reconvened the meeting at 9:51 a.m. to address the motion and second on the floor that was not voted on. All present voted in favor. There being no further business, meeting adjourned at 9:51 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Ashe June 5, 2017