[I. OPENING]
[00:00:11]
AFTERNOON. WE'RE GOING TO START THE COMMISSION MEETING FOR MAY 20TH. 5 P.M. MEETING. WE WILL STAND AND REMAIN STANDING FOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. WE HAVE PASTOR ANDY HARPER, PLANT CITY METHODIST CHURCH, WHO WILL LEAD US IN PRAYER. THEN WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SCOTT WHO WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALMIGHTY FATHER, ALMIGHTY GOD, WE GATHER TODAY TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF OUR COMMUNITY AND TO SEEK THE WISDOM AND GUIDANCE IN ALL OUR DECISIONS. GRANT US THE STRENGTH IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION FOR ALL INVOLVED.
MAY WE LEAD WITH INTEGRITY, SPEAK WITH HONESTY, AND ACT WITH COMPASSION. WE PRAY FOR OUR LEADERS AS WELL AS OUR NATIONAL LEADERS. FATHER, JUST NOT TODAY, BUT EVERY DAY AND OUR DAILY PRAYER LIFE. MAY OUR EFFORTS TODAY REFLECT YOU IN EVERY WAY BY SHOWING JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, AND THE RESPONSIBILITY ENTRUSTED TO US BY THOSE WE SERVE. BLESS THIS MEETING AND ALL THOSE WHO ARE PRESENT. IN JESUS NAME WE PRAY. AMEN. AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO START OUT WITH THE
[III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA/MINUTES]
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MINUTES. FIRST APPROVAL WILL BE FOR THE AGENDA TONIGHT. DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE REVIEWING THE MINUTES FOR WORK SESSION ON MAY 6TH, 2025. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. MOTION? SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE THE MINUTES FOR MAY 13TH AGENDA. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? MAKE A MOTION SECOND. ALL RIGHT.ALL RIGHT. SO I'M GOING TO PASS IT OVER TO THE COUNTY MANAGER FOR SPECIAL BUSINESS. DID I MISS ONE? I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. MAY 6TH AND FIVE. MAY 1620. WE HAVE A MOTION. SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL
[IV. Special Business]
RIGHT, SO NOW WE CAN MOVE ON TO SPECIAL BUSINESS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR.COMMISSIONERS. FIRST ITEM ON THIS EVENING'S AGENDA IS THE REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY PART TIME POSITION FOR JUVENILE COURT. MICHELLE BOWMAN IS HERE AS IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BASED ON HER REQUEST. WE BELIEVE IT TO BE A NET NEUTRAL POSITION. AND AGAIN, THIS IS A TEMPORARY AD, AND HOPEFULLY WE'VE GOT SOME GOOD CANDIDATES THAT ARE AVAILABLE THAT CAN TAKE ON THE ROLE. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. NO QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. MOTION.
SECOND. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSED. ALL RIGHT. THIS MORNING WE HAD A DISCUSSION THIS MORNING ABOUT A THE JUVENILE COURTS REQUEST TO ACCEPT THE SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING FOR THE INFANT AND TODDLER COURT PROGRAM. DO YOU MIND COMING UP? JUST EXPLAIN IT AGAIN. AGAIN? JUST. IT'S A NEW PROGRAM, AND I'M LESS FAMILIAR THAN THE OTHER ACCOUNTABILITY COURTS. YEAH, IT'S A NEW PROGRAM FROM HRSA TO GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY. AND WE WERE AWARDED $60,000 INITIALLY, AND THEY GAVE $18,585 SUPPLEMENTAL TO CONTRACT WITH THE PEER SUPPORT SPECIALIST OR FATHERHOOD ENGAGEMENT SUPPORTER. THERE IS NO NO GRANT MATCH AT ALL. IS THERE? NO NO MATCH, BUT IT IS A REIMBURSABLE GRANT. ANY QUESTIONS? NO. OKAY. OKAY. THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM. NEXT ITEM IS CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR FY 20. SIX 407. AND YOU WANT TO COME UP AND ADDRESS THAT REAL QUICK. WE HAVE RECEIVED FOUR INDIVIDUAL AWARDS, BUT THEY WILL BE ALL FOUR, ALL
[00:05:04]
FROM THE SAME PLACE FOR THE FOUR ACCOUNTABILITY COURTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE COUNTY. FELONY ADULT DRUG COURT HAD 243,631, $243,631 AWARD WITH THE COUNTY MATCH OF 42,009 AND 94 FAMILY TREATMENT COURT 171,590 591 WITH 30,000 $30,281. MATCH UNTIL COURT AWARD WAS FOR 194,345, WITH A $29,152 MATCH, AND THE DUI COURT HAD MATCH OR SORRY, AN AWARD OF 147,425, WITH THE COUNTY MATCH OF $26,016, AND ALL OF THOSE MATCHES WOULD COME OUT OF THE DATE FUND. SO THIS WOULD BE FOR THE MAJORITY OF OUR OPERATING FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 26. SO. JUST LOOK AT OUR SHEET. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A CORRECTION TO THE MENTAL HEALTH COURT ACTUALLY IS 165 $165,193 WITH A MATCH OF $29,152 THAT TOTALED THE MATCH, PLUS WHAT THEY WERE FUNDING US IS THAT 194? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? I HAD A QUESTION ON THE MENTAL HEALTH COURT, NOT ON THE GRANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT WE HAD A WORK SESSION PREVIOUSLY AND WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MENTAL HEALTH AND, AND I GUESS WHAT FIRST RESPONDERS ARE EXPERIENCING AND THROUGH THE COURT IS I KNOW, MAYBE NOT TODAY, BUT IS THERE A WAY THAT AT SOME POINT, MAYBE A WORK SESSION OR SOMETHING, WE COULD WORK? SO FOR MYSELF AND MAYBE OTHERS UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE MORE, MAYBE A ROLE WHERE WE COULD PLAY TO HELP MORE IN THAT? ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. SO IF YOU WANT TO GET THE COUNTY MANAGER OR SOMETHING TO MAKE THAT SO I CAN GET WITH ERIC AND WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN, I WOULD DEFINITELY LOVE THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS IN REFERENCE TO THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE ACCOUNTABILITY COURT'S FY 26? OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION SECOND. MOTION CARRIED. GO TO THE NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THE LAST ITEM UNDER OUR SPECIAL BUSINESS IS A PURCHASE FOR STORAGE CONTAINERS. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M SURE, JAMES, YOU PROBABLY GOT SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THE TOTAL COST IS $29,325. THAT WOULD COME FROM SPLOST FIVE AND EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT. ONE THING WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT. HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE THEM TO GET THEM HERE? UNFORTUNATELY. TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE IN THEIR COMPANY IS MUCH MORE. TIMEFRAME. BUT. YEAH. I'M NOT SURE THE ANSWER TO THAT. EXCELLENT QUESTION. THANK. YOU.
WE CAN FIND OUT AND I'LL SEND SOMETHING OUT TO THE FULL BOARD TOMORROW. IMPORTANT FOR US.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS THAT WE DO AND WE HAVE THREE OF THE QUOTES. AND ALL THREE ARE FAIRLY COMFORTABLE IN OUR PACKET. IF WE WERE TO FIND OUT THIS MORNING FOR SOME VERY LONG, DEEP. INSPECTION. OR SOMETHING. FOR OF THESE ARE VERY CLOSE AND I THINK OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
SO LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS SECOND. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSED.
[V. Public Hearings]
ALRIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC HEARING. LIKE A MOTION. WE[00:10:01]
ENTERED A PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND MOTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY ONE ITEM FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT IS THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. THIS IS THE FIRST READING, AND IT IS VOTE ELIGIBLE. AND I WILL BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION FROM THE MORNING. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE ASK. SO FOR THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO ESTABLISH A UNIFIED FRAMEWORK FOR ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AND WITH THIS THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, THE UDO DOES REPEAL AND REPLACE FOR APPENDICES IN THE TROUP COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES. AND SO THE FOUR APPENDIX ARE SHOWN THERE. WE HAVE APPENDIX A, TROUP COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, APPENDIX B AIRPORT ZONING, APPENDIX C SUBDIVISIONS, AND APPENDIX D, THE QUALITY DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR. SO THOSE WILL BE REMOVED. AND THEY ARE ALL WITHIN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. NOW TO MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY AND JUST EASIER FOR STAFF AND FOR CITIZENS TO ALSO LOOK AT THAT ORDINANCE OF THE CODE. SO THIS IS THE VISUAL. THE SHOWS, THE FOUR APPENDICES THAT WILL BE REMOVED. THE PUBLIC PROCESS AND REVIEW THE BACKGROUND. THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND STAKEHOLDER INPUT SESSIONS SPANNING SEVERAL YEARS.DRAFTS HAVE BEEN POSTED TO THE COUNTY WEBSITE AS MAJOR UPDATES WERE PERFORMED. THE REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE UDO CAME FROM COUNTY STAFF, SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS, LEGAL COUNSEL, MEETINGS WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS TO, YOU KNOW, VET AND CHECK THE WORK THAT WE ARE PRODUCING. ALSO, A CONSULTANT WAS SECURED TO START THE EFFORT AND DRAFTED THE BASE. UDO, THAT'S BEFORE YOU. THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING COMMISSION HAS PROVIDED TREMENDOUS FEEDBACK THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. AND RIGHT NOW WE ARE AT THE FINAL PHASE OF THE FINAL DRAFT AND IT IS POSTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IT'S AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE. SO THE SUMMARY OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS. THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE UDO WAS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ON APRIL 10TH. MUCH OF THE DISCUSSION FOCUSED ON KENNEL AND LIVESTOCK REGULATIONS, PARTICULARLY AS THEY APPLY TO ANIMAL LIMITS AND FLOODPLAIN AREAS. THE BOARD VOTED OF APPROVAL, AND THEY DID HAVE THREE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISIONS RELATED TO KENNEL AND LIVESTOCK PROVISIONS. SO STAFF TOOK THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AND WENT AHEAD AND MADE THOSE CHANGES IN THE DRAFT. THAT IS BEFORE YOU. FOR THE FIRST ONE, WE DID LOOK AT OMITTING THE FLOODPLAIN RESTRICTIONS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES USED TO HOUSE LIVESTOCK. PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A YOU WERE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE, SAY, A SHED OR A CORRAL OR CATCH PIN IN A FLOODPLAIN. SO WE REMOVED THAT. BUT THAT WILL STILL BE SUBJECT IN SOME INSTANCES TO A BUILDING PERMIT, SAY IF IT'S A SHED OR A STABLE.
SO THAT IS ALSO THE LIVESTOCK RAISING. WE REMOVED THE LIMITS FOR ANIMALS FOR PARCELS OVER THREE ACRES, AND THE LIMITS WERE DEFINED FOR UNDER THREE ACRES. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LIVE ON LESS THAN ONE ACRE, YOU COULD ONLY HAVE SIX HENS, NO ROOSTERS, YOU KNOW, NO HORSES OR COWS IF YOU HAVE LESS THAN THREE ACRES. BUT AFTER THREE ACRES THERE ARE NO LIMITS. YOU JUST HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ABIDE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL STANDARDS AND ALSO SHOW THAT YOU CAN SAFELY AND HUMANELY TAKE CARE OF THOSE ANIMALS FOR THE KENNEL, PROVISION FOR THE COMMERCIAL KENNELS, WE REMOVE THE UNIVERSAL MAXIMUM CAP AND INSTEAD FOR COMMERCIAL KENNELS, THEY WILL SUBMIT A MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT SHOWS THEIR CAPACITY, CAPACITY, JUSTIFICATION AND THEIR ANIMAL CARE PLAN THAT WILL SHOW THAT STAFF TO ANIMAL RATIO AND ALSO FOR THE KENNELS. SO THOSE ARE ONES THAT ARE LISTED AS A HOME OCCUPATION. THEY ARE LIMITED TO TEN ANIMALS, TEN KENNELS. AND THEN ONCE AGAIN WE REMOVED SOME OTHER LANGUAGE THAT REFERENCED A PROHIBITION OF STRUCTURES IN THE FLOODPLAIN. SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE MAJOR CHANGES TO THE UDO SINCE THE LAST DRAFT, SINCE THE LAST PRESENTATION. SO THAT'S PROBABLY MORE THAN A YEAR AGO. SO WE'LL JUST GO THROUGH THOSE.
THE FIRST ONE IS FOR THE INSPECTIONS. AND SO THESE CHANGES DID COME OUT OF FOR THE INSPECTIONS COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED FROM THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING COMMISSION PRIOR TO APRIL 10TH. SO IN FEBRUARY, WE MADE THEM AWARE THAT THE DRAFT WAS READY.
WE GAVE THEM A DRAFT COPY, AND WE DID RECEIVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD. SO FOR THIS FIRST ONE, THE SECTION WAS UPDATED TO CLARIFY THAT INSPECTIONS ARE LIMITED TO ACTIVITIES RELATED TO BUILDING PERMITS, BUSINESS LICENSES, OR SPECIAL EVENTS.
SPECIAL USE PERMITS. PRIOR TO THE APRIL MEETING, THEY HAD NOTICED A NEED TO CLARIFY THE
[00:15:07]
LANGUAGE. SO NOW THE LANGUAGE EXPLICITLY STATES THAT INSPECTIONS MAY ONLY OCCUR WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER OR APPLICANT, OR PURSUANT TO A WARRANT IF ACCESS IS DENIED. AND ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS PART OF THAT JUST STANDARD PERMITTING PROCESS, THEN WE HAVE THE SHORT TERM RENTALS. SO THIS ADDED PROVISIONS FOR INHERITED PROPERTIES. RIGHT NOW IN THE CURRENT SHORT TERM RENTAL ORDINANCE THAT'S IN PLACE, YOU HAVE TO OWN A PROPERTY FOR THREE YEARS BEFORE APPLYING. SO WE ADDED LANGUAGE THAT IF SOMEONE INHERITED THE PROPERTY AND THE PERSON THEY INHERITED IT FROM OWNED IT FOR THREE YEARS OR MORE, THEY CAN APPLY FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL. BUT ALL OTHER RULES FOR THAT RENTAL IS IN PLACE. WE HAVE THE WATERSHED PROTECTION.WE REMOVED THE HOGANSVILLE WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT BECAUSE AT THIS POINT THEY DO PURCHASE THEIR WATER FROM OTHER MUNICIPALITIES. AND THE RESERVOIR THAT THAT PROTECTION WAS AROUND IS NO LONGER IN USE FOR THEIR DRINKING WATER. AND WE DO HAVE CHANGES TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. WE HAVE TWO DISTINCT CHANGES. THE FIRST IS THE FAMILY DIVISIONS. WE ADDED LANGUAGE TO ALLOW CHANGES TO PERMIT SUBDIVISION IN CERTAIN CASES. FOR FAMILIES THAT LACK ROAD FRONTAGE ON STANDARD ROADS. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE SUBDIVISION ON SUBSTANDARD ROADS. THAT'S NOT LIMITED TO FAMILY, BUT IT LIMITS THE SIZE OF THE MINIMUM PARCEL TO 50 ACRES. SO THOSE ARE THE KEY CHANGES IN THE UDO SINCE IT WAS LAST BEFORE YOU. SO THE NEXT STEPS WE'RE AT THE FIRST ONE. THIS IS THE FIRST READING. AND THEN WE DO HAVE A SECOND READING, TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 3RD. WE ARE REQUESTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF AUGUST 1ST, 2025, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW STAFF TIME TO MAKE SURE APPLICATIONS WORKFLOWS ALL MATCH THE UDO. IT ALSO GIVES TIME FOR US TO GO THROUGH THE FORMATTING TO MAKE SURE THE NUMBERING IS CORRECT, AND IF THERE'S ANY SCRIVENER'S ERRORS TO CATCH THOSE, HOPEFULLY BEFORE THEY GO TO MUNICODE. BUT ALSO ONCE IT'S AT MUNICODE, THEY'LL ALSO LOOK AT THE FORMATTING AND THE NUMBERING. IF THEY SEE ISSUE, THEY WILL LET US KNOW. AND SO THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. IF I MAY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND ALSO, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS THE FIRST READING. IT'S VOTE ELIGIBLE AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF AUGUST 1ST. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THAT. YES, IT'S SCHEDULED FOR A SECOND. THIS IS THE FIRST ONE. I HAVE A QUESTION. NOTICING IT WAS A32 VOTE. WHERE DID YOU TWO ZONING BOARD MEMBERS, WHAT WAS THE REASON THEY VOTED AGAINST THIS? DO YOU REMEMBER, SIR, I DO THINK THAT BOTH. I DID NOT FIND. WHY DID THEY VOTE? I THINK A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION AT THAT MEETING WAS FOCUSED ON THOSE LIVESTOCK SECTIONS. SO WE WENT IN THERE AND ADDRESSED THOSE. THAT'S COME BACK AFTER YOU ADDRESSED THE LIVESTOCK ISSUE. WE DIDN'T COME BACK FOR ANOTHER VOTE. NO WE DIDN'T. THEY APPROVED IT. NOTING THOSE RECOMMENDING THOSE CHANGES. I JUST I WAS JUST GOING I WAS LOOKING AT THAT. WHEN YOU ASK THAT QUESTION, BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO ASK IF THERE WAS ANY WAY POSSIBLE THAT IT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY THEY VOTE FOR AND WHY THEY VOTE AGAINST. YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. AND THEY DID NOT, IN THE MEETING, STATE A DEFINITE REASON FOR WHY THEY THEY DID NOT VOTE FOR IT. WHEN DOES A COMPREHENSIVE LAND MAP, WHEN DOES IT HAVE TO BE APPROVED. SO IT NEEDS TO BE ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY DCA AT THE END OF OCTOBER. SO WE ARE LOOKING AT HAVING A DRAFT GOING OUT AT THE 1ST OF AUGUST.
AND WE ARE IN ADDITION TO IF YOU HAD ANY CONCERNS COMING OUT ABOUT THE UDO FROM ANY CITIZEN, WE HAVE NOT. OKAY. AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO.
POSTPONE A VOTE ON THIS UNTIL AFTER SECOND READING. CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO READ THIS? I KNOW IT'S A TECHNICALITY, BUT CONSIDERING THE LACK OF THINGS THAT WE PROBABLY NEED TO CALL FOR, THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR AND THOSE WHO WISH. NO. I'M SORRY.
[00:20:01]
OH NO PROBLEM. SORRY. DO YOU HAVE ANYONE IN FAVOR? DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO OPPOSED? OKAY, SO, CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE THIS. IF THERE'S GOTTA BE, YOU GOTTA LOOK INTO THE. IT COULD BE THE FIRST MEETING. COULD BE THE FIRST MEETING IN JUNE, WHICH IS JUNE THE 3RD OR JUNE THE 17TH WOULD BE THE SECOND OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. SO IT PASSES. WE'LL HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA FOR JUNE 3RD. JUNE 3RD. OKAY. CORRECT.YES. YES, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO LEAVE PUBLIC HEARING RETURN. OKAY. SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL RIGHT, SO MEETING IS ADJOURNED. NO, CHAIRMAN. VICE CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ONCE AGAIN, A MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
ALL RIGHT, YOU BASTARDS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.