GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO THE RETURN TO ORDER FROM OUR JULY 26TH MEETING. [00:00:07] SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. IS MR. JONES GOING TO BE ON WITH US TONIGHT. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. [INAUDIBLE] FIRST ITEM IS A CLOSED SESSION. [Closed Session] MR. THROWER. YES. HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEMBERS. IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE BOARD TO NOW CONDUCT A CLOSED MEETING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS SET OUT IN THE CODE OF VIRGINIA 1950, AS AMENDED FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES. ONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.2 3711 A 7 AND 8 CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND BRIEFINGS BY STAFF REGARDING THE COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD SELECTION COMMITTEE. NEED A MOTION TO DO SO. SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, AYE. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MEET IN THE BACK IN CLOSED SESSION [INAUDIBLE]. ALL RIGHT WE ARE BACK IN OPEN SESSION. [3. Certification Resolution] SUPERVISOR GILLETTE, WILL YOU READ THE RESOLUTION, PLEASE? WHEREAS THE SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONVENED A CLOSED SESSION ON THIS DATE PURSUANT TO AN AFFIRMATIVE RECORDED VOTE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. AND WHERE SECTION 2.2 3712 D OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA REQUIRES THE CERTIFICATION BY THE BOARD SUCH THAT SUCH CLOSED MEETING WAS CONDUCTED IN CONFORMITY WITH VIRGINIA LAW. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT TO THE BEST OF EACH MEMBER'S KNOWLEDGE, ONLY PUBLIC BUSINESS MATTERS LAWFULLY EXEMPTED FROM OPEN MEETING REQUIREMENTS BY VIRGINIA LAW WERE DISCUSSED IN THE CLOSED MEETING TO WHICH THE CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION APPLIES, AND ONLY SUCH PUBLIC MATTERS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE MOTION CONVENING. THE CLOSED MEETING WERE HEARD, DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED BY THE SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION BE APPROVED. WE HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY, AYE, AYE. OKAY, WE ARE BACK IN OPEN SESSION. ALL LEGAL AND EVERYTHING ELSE. NEXT THING IS THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ALL RISE FOR THAT. 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. SO WE'LL GET TO THE INVOCATION IT'S LIKE I SAW A LITTLE PIECE ON THE NEWS LAST WEEK THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD IN FARGO, NORTH CAROLINA, HAS TAKEN GOD, EXCUSE ME, NORTH DAKOTA HAS TAKEN GOD OUT OF THE PLEDGE BECAUSE IT OFFENDED PEOPLE WHO DID NOT BELIEVE IN GOD. JUST THOUGHT I'D PASS THAT ON. SO. ALL RIGHT. THE INVOCATION. I NEED A VOLUNTEER [INAUDIBLE]. MY PRAYER TONIGHT COMES FROM A PORTION OF A HYMN IN THE HYMNAL AT MY CHURCH. IT WAS COMPOSED IN 1931 BY PASTOR HARRY EMERSON FOSDICK OF THE RIVERSIDE CHURCH IN THE MORNINGSIDE AREA OF UPPER MANHATTAN, NEW YORK. HE SERVED AS PASTOR THERE FROM 1931 TO 1946, EVEN THOUGH COMPOSED 91 YEARS AGO. IT IS VERY APPROPRIATE TO PRESENT TIME. GOD OF GRACE AND GOD OF GLORY ON YOUR PEOPLE FOR YOUR POWER. GROUND YOUR ANCIENT CHURCH'S STORY. BRING HER BROUGHT TO GLORIOUS FLOWER. GRANT US THE WISDOM. GRANT US COURAGE FOR THE FACING OF THIS HOUR. CURE YOUR CHILDREN'S WARRING MADNESS. THEN YOUR PRIDE. THEN OUR PRIDE TO YOUR CONTROL. SHAME OUR WORKING SELFISH [INAUDIBLE]. RICH IN THINGS AND POOR IN SOUL. GRANT US WISDOM AND GRANT US COURAGE. LEST WE MISS YOUR KINGDOMS GOAL. CHECK OUR FEED ON ALL OF THE PLACES, GIRD OUR LIVES THAT THEY MAY BE ARMED WITH ALL CHRISTLIKE GRACES IN THE FIGHT TO SET MEN FREE. GRANT US WISDOM. GRANT US COURAGE THAT WE FAIL. NOT MEN, NOR THEE. SAVE US FROM WEAK RESIGNATION TO THE EVILS WE [INAUDIBLE]. THAT THE SEARCH FOR YOUR SALVATION BE OUR GLORY EVERMORE WHEN WISDOM GRANTS US COURAGE SERVING YOU WHOM WE [00:05:05] ADORE. SERVING YOU WHOM WE ADORE. AMEN. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. NUMBER FOUR. THERE WERE NO ACTIONS ARISING FROM THE CLOSED MEETING. NUMBER FIVE IS THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REDISTRICTING ORDINANCE. [5. Public Hearing - Redistricting Ordinance] AND I'LL LET MS. WRIGHT PRESENT THE PARTICULARS OF THAT. [INAUDIBLE] YEAH, I CAN HEAR YOU FINE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHERE WE LEFT IT LAST TIME IS WE WENT FROM SEVEN DISTRICTS TO FIVE DISTRICTS BECAUSE WE COULDN'T MAKE IT BALANCE WITH SEVEN, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL LINE. THE DECISION TONIGHT IS WHICH ORDINANCE TO ADOPT, WHETHER YOU WANT THE FIVE DISTRICTS WITH ONE SUPERVISOR FROM EACH DISTRICT, OR IF YOU WANT THE FIVE DISTRICTS WITH ONE SUPERVISOR FROM EACH DISTRICT PLUS TWO AT LARGE. WE ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED THE TWO AT LARGE TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND THEY HAVE STRONGLY HINTED THAT THEY'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF OPTIMISM WITH THE CASE BEING OVERTURNED BECAUSE THEY WERE IN LITIGATION WITH THAT LARGE. HOWEVER. MR. RAILY HAS MR. RAILY HAD A CONVERSATION AGAIN WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. AND JUST BECAUSE THAT CASE WAS OVERTURNED, IT'S NOT A GIVEN THAT THEY WOULD APPROVE FUTURE AT LARGE DISTRICTS. BUT THAT IS UP TO YOU GUYS. ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL ANSWER IT, BUT I WON'T DEFER TO RICHARD. ALL RIGHT ONE QUESTION. WHAT DO WE HAVE TO LOSE BY ASKING FOR THE AT LARGE? JUST PUSHING BACK THE PROCESS. AND HAVING TO GIVE A 45 DAY NOTICE AND IT PUTS LAND BEHIND. BUT I MEAN, AS FAR AS IF YOU WANT TO TRY THAT, THAT IS TOTALLY UP TO YOU GUYS. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS SINCE STILL SUGGESTED THAT THEY DO NOT FAVOR AT LARGE DISTRICTS. THAT IS TOTALLY UP TO YOU. WHEN ALL THIS STARTED I THINK THE REASON WAS THEY WERE WAITING FOR TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED IN VIRGINIA BEACH. SO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN VIRGINIA BEACH AND NOW IS TOTALLY NOT REAL CHANGE IN THEIR MIND. CORRECT. BUT, RICHARD. WELL, THE VIRGINIA THE HOLLOWAY CASE IS THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. THE MORE I READ IT, THE MORE UNIQUE IT BECOMES. FIRST OF ALL, IT WAS A 2 TO 1 DECISION WITH THE CHIEF JUDGE DISSENTING. SECONDLY, TO UNDERSTAND THE FACTUAL SITUATION, THE REASON TOO I AM SEEING THE QUESTION BECAME MOOT WAS BECAUSE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY PASSED LEGISLATION WHICH LARGELY ELIMINATED THE AT-LARGE SEATS ON THE DV CITY COUNCIL. IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY GAVE TO THE PLAINTIFFS A LARGE PART OF WHAT THEY WANTED, NOW, DID THEY LEAVE A COUPLE OF AT-LARGE COUNCIL SEATS IN PLAY? YES. BUT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TOOK TO TOOK THE FIRE OUT OF THE FIRE. [INAUDIBLE] AND WHAT ELSE IS UNIQUE ABOUT. THE FOURTH CIRCUIT OPINION IS THAT THERE WERE ALL KINDS OF THE REMARKS IN THERE BY THE AUTHOR OF THE OPINION WHO EFFECTIVELY WHAT WAS DONE IN THE DISTRICT COURT WAS WELL REASONED. AND TO TOP IT ALL, ALL, INSTEAD OF DISMISSING THE ACTUAL VOTE IN THE DISTRICT COURT, THE FOURTH CIRCUIT REMANDED IT SO THAT THE DISTRICT COURT COULD TAKE FURTHER EVIDENCE AND ADDRESS THE VIRGINIA BEACH SITUATION AS IT EXISTED AFTER THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACT. SO AT VERY BEST, THE FOURTH CIRCUIT OPINION, I PERSONALLY THOUGHT WHEN I SAW IT ON TELEVISION, I SAID, THIS IS SOLVING OUR PROBLEM. BUT WHEN YOU READ THE DECISION, THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE SUPERFICIAL TO SAY THAT, MAYBE A LOT [00:10:07] TOO. BUT THEN AFTER DOING MY OWN ANALYSIS, I WENT BACK TO MR. JOHNSON, WHO'S HEAD OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION OF THE VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. AND I SAID. I KNOW YOU READ THE DECISION FOR THE HOLLOWAY AND SHE SAID, YES, I HAVE. ISN'T THAT A CLASSIC CASE OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT PUNTING? IN OTHER WORDS, THEY COULD HAVE RULED ONCE AND FOR ALL ABOUT WHETHER LAW IS GOOD, BAD OR INDIFFERENT. BUT THEY SAID THEY PUNTED. OR MAYBE THEY. AND THEY REMANDED IT BACK TO THE DISTRICT COURT. BOTTOM LINE IS AND YOU ARE FREE TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT AND YOU MAY SEND IT UP THERE WITH FIVE AND TWO AT LARGE AND DID A CERTIFICATE OF NO OBJECTION. THEY'VE HINTED THAT THAT WOULD NOT HAPPEN. ALTHOUGH I WANT TO BE COMPLETELY CANDID, NOBODY HAS SAID THAT IT WOULD NOT BE FORTHCOMING. IT'S JUST BEEN IN AND I THINK I'M PRETTY GOOD SOMETIMES READING BETWEEN THE LINES. ALL RIGHT. SO I FEEL REASONABLY COMFORTABLE IN TELLING YOU THAT IF. YOU PASS IT WITH JUST THE FIVE. I FEEL LIKE WE WOULD GET THE CERTIFICATE IF YOU PASS IT WITH THE TWO AT LARGE. I'M NOT POSITIVE. I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE IN SAYING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, NOT WHAT I THINK. DR. EDWARDS JUST ASKED, WHAT WOULD BE THE CONSEQUENCE WE SEND IT UP THERE AND THEY DON'T GIVE US A CERTIFICATE. THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. [INAUDIBLE] AND THAT IS YOU START YOU HAVE AN OPEN PERIOD OF AT LEAST 30 DAYS WITH ADEQUATE NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU HAVE AT LEAST ONE PUBLIC HEARING IN THERE. YOU PUT IT ON THE COMPANY'S WEBSITE AND YOU PEOPLE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. THEN. DO YOU HAVE A MEETING AND THEN OR IF THEY ARE OBJECTIONS THEN IF YOU CHOOSE TO ACCEPT SOME OF THEM, YOU HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE THAT. IN THE MEANTIME, THERE'S A PROCEDURE THAT GIVES THEM A RIGHT TO GO TO CIRCUIT COURT AND THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE COURT MAKE A DETERMINATION. SO, SUSAN, WHAT SUSAN SAID IS CORRECT, IF YOU DIDN'T GET THE CERTIFICATE. IT WOULD IT WOULD SET US BACK TIME WISE. IN ALL HONESTY, WE WENT WITH CERTIFICATE OF NO OBJECTION BECAUSE WE FELT LIKE IT WOULD SAVE TIME. BUT IT HAS NOT. IT HAS NOT WORKED OUT LIKE YOU WOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED OR WE WOULD ANTICIPATE AT ALL. FEEL FREE AND I KNOW THAT PEOPLE ARE INCLINED TO GO WITH THE FIVE AND TWO. AND THAT'S YOU KNOW, THAT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE. AND WE'LL LIVE WITH THAT. BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU MY IDEA OF WHAT THE COMFORT ZONE IS, AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. RAILY. ALL RIGHT, THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE WE OPEN. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. RAILY? YES, SIR. YES. RICHARD? I DID NOT [INAUDIBLE]. WHAT WAS HIS QUESTION? I JUST SAY IT FOR PUBLIC CLARITY? COULD YOU PLEASE DEFINE WHAT THE CERTIFICATE OF NO OBJECTION MEANS? IT WAS DESIGNED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AS BEING SO OUTSIDE THE STATUTE SETS OUT PROCEDURE AID AND THEN BE ABOUT HOW YOU HAVE THIS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND WHAT THIS AUDIENCE MUST DO. [00:15:10] AND THEN. CITY SAID IN LIEU OF GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, YOU CAN SIMPLY HAVE A. SEND IT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. AND IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ISSUES A CERTIFICATE OF OF NO OBJECTION, YOU BYPASS THE OTHER PROCEDURES THAT I AND LIKE I SAID A FEW MINUTES AGO, THAT GENERAL IDEA IS TO HAVE NO OBJECTION IS IT WOULD SAVE TIME AND PERHAPS MONEY. BUT IT REALLY HASN'T DONE THAT. BUT THE RAMIFICATION WOULD BE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A SHORTCUT. THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO WRITE A LETTER. THEY SAY WE DON'T HAVE AN OBJECTION AND THEN WE ARE HOME FREE. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A QUESTION [INAUDIBLE]. IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINE, WHAT WOULD THAT DO FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION? WELL. I AM NOT A REAL GOOD PROFIT. WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME, WE ARE ACTUALLY HEADING TO THE END OF AUGUST. TIME YOU GIVE THE NOTICE WHICH HAS GOT TO BE 45 DAYS AND GET STARTED. IT'S GOING TO PUT YOU WHAT MAY BE THE END OF OCTOBER AND THEN THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE REGISTRAR HAS TO DO. IT PUTS YOU ON A TIGHT TIME SQUEEZE, ALTHOUGH. HELP ME ON THIS IF YOU CAN. WHAT NOW? CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER AREN'T AFFECTED. THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF BY WHAT THE SUPREME COURT [INAUDIBLE]. THE. ARE THERE ANY? WE DON'T HAVE ANY SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS THIS FALL. NO, WE DO NOT. WE DO NOT WE ONLY HAVE SOME TAX COLLECTIONS ON THAT AND THEY'RE NOT AFFECTED. RIGHT. SO. WE [INAUDIBLE] I THINK THE ANSWER. I BELIEVE THAT WAS [INAUDIBLE]. I BELIEVE THAT THE CORRECT ANSWER WOULD BE, IT WILL BE A TIGHT SQUEEZE THAT THEY HAVE IN PLACE BY NOVEMBER, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT FATAL NOT TO HAVE IT IN PLACE. [INAUDIBLE] I AM PREPARED TO HAVE IT IN PLACE FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. EITHER WAY. OKAY. EITHER WAY, MA'AM. YES, SIR. OKAY. CAN YOU WAIT A MINUTE TO LISTEN TO RICHARD? I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO EVERYBODY CAN FEEL FREE TO COME OUT AND SPEAK. OKAY. YOU'RE ON, SIR. RICHARD, YOU'VE DONE MIC]. YEAH, YOU ALL RIGHT, RICH. YEAH, I'M OKAY. [00:20:03] IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FIVE DISTRICTS. THE ISSUE IS TWO AT LARGE. SO IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFICE SENDS US BACK. THAT IT'S NOT A WE DON'T GET OUR CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FIVE DISTRICTS. WHICH WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE REGISTRAR'S OFFICE ONE BIT. I DON'T THINK THE TWO AT LARGE. MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD WOULDN'T CREATE ANY ANY ADDITIONAL VOTING PRECINCTS. IT WOULDN'T CHANGE WHERE PEOPLE VOTE AT ALL. SO WE IT SEEMS TO ME WE COULD SUBMIT FIVE DISTRICTS WITH TWO AT LARGE. [INAUDIBLE] NO IF YOUR FIVE DISTRICTS AND TWO AT LARGE DIDN'T OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF OBJECTION, THEN YOU HAVE TO START THE PROCESS OVER, AS I'VE OUTLINED. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PIECEMEAL IT. SO WE COULDN'T RAISE THE WHITE FLAG AND SAY. OKAY. I HAD A CONVERSATION LATE THIS AFTERNOON BEFORE I CAME OVER HERE, AND SHE SAID THAT BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO WE'RE TRYING TO GET ALL THE DEALERS, NOT JUST SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY, BUT OTHER LOCALITIES AS WELL, TO MEET THE DEADLINE FOR SENDING OUT VOTER NOTICES BEFORE EARLY VOTING STARTS. BECAUSE ONCE WE MAKE CHANGES, THEN THAT'S GOING TO MEAN THAT EVERYBODY THAT'S A REGISTERED VOTER GETS A VOTER NOTICE TELLING THEM WHERE THEIR NEW PRECINCT MAY BE. IF THERE'S BEEN ANY CHANGES, THEY'LL TELL THEM THE CONGRESSIONAL CHANGES AND THE STATE CHANGES AND THEN THE LOCAL CHANGES AS WELL. SO EVERYBODY WILL GET A VOTER NOTICE. THE THE POINT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER REACHED OUT TO ME BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET AS MUCH ORGANIZATION DONE AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE'D BE READY TO GET IT DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER. TO MAKE THE MAILING DEADLINE, WHICH IS AT THE END OF THIS MONTH, I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE AND IT'S DOABLE. AND SHE SAID THAT SHE HAD HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND THAT WE WERE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE TO GET THINGS FINALIZED AND DONE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE GOING TO ACCEPT THE TWO AT LARGE. IT JUST MEANS THAT ONCE WE MAKE A DECISION, THEY'RE GOING TO REVIEW IT SO THEY WILL KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO. SO WE CAN MAKE THE DEADLINES EITHER WAY. RIGHT. I MEAN, NO, BECAUSE IF THEY TURN IT DOWN, THEN I'M BACK TO WHERE I'VE GOT TO SWITCH EVERYTHING BACK TO THE 13 PRECINCTS VERSUS 11 PRECINCTS, AND IT'LL AFFECT THE NUMBER OF MACHINES I NEED BECAUSE THE TOWN OF CORTLAND. BUT THEY ARE WILLING AT THIS POINT TO HAVE ALL OF THEIR WARDS VOTE IN ONE PLACE, WHICH IS HELPFUL. BUT IT JUST STILL PUTS US BACK TO THAT 13 PRECINCTS VERSUS 11 PRECINCTS AND GETTING IT ALL IN PLACE. THROUGH MY WORK ENGINE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS. AND WE HAVE BEEN TAKING AS MANY STEPS TO GET AHEAD OF THE GAME. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? I HAVE A QUESTION. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS [INAUDIBLE] . ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT RED LINE, I SEE THREE DISTRICTS. IS THERE NO WAY WE COULD JUGGLE THE NORTH SOUTH AND MAKE EACH ONE OF THOSE LITTLE BIT SMALLER IN POPULATION AND HAVE FOUR OVER THERE AND THREE ON THE WEST SIDE? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT'S A POPULATION THING. [INAUDIBLE] IT'S A POPULATION THING. IF WE COULD GET FOUR WITH EACH ONE A SMALLER POPULATION, THEN YOU COULD GET THREE WITH EACH ONE WITH A SMALLER POPULATION. SO I WAS THINKING THAT WOULD WORK OKAY. BUT IT WON'T WORK BECAUSE OF THE POPULATION THAT IS OR ISN'T PRESENT IN. I THINK THE ISSUE IS YOU GOT TO BE WITHIN 5% PLUS OR MINUS DEVIATION WITHIN THE DISTRICTS IS THE ISSUE YOU'RE WORKING AROUND THERE? FRANK URQUHART AGAIN, FIRST OF ALL, COUNCIL, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT INTO THE RECORD THAT YOUR COMMITTEE [00:25:10] THAT WORKED ON THIS ALONGSIDE THIS MEN AND [INAUDIBLE]. ANYWAY, THEY HAVE DONE A TREMENDOUS JOB AND JUMPING THROUGH A WHOLE LOT OF CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATIVE MANDATES. STATE LEGISLATIVE MANDATES. STATE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES. AND ALSO DEALING GREATLY WITH AN EXTREMELY LATE CENSUS TALLY, WHICH BASICALLY MAKES UP ALL OF THOSE MAPS RIGHT THERE, BECAUSE THEY HAD TO TAKE THE CENSUS BLOCKS AND COME UP WITH ALL THE VOTER RIGHTS MANDATES TO GET YOUR POPULATION DISPARITIES WORKED OUT. AND THAT WAS A DAUNTING JOB. AND THEY HAVE DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB FOR YOU. I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE DONE AN OUTSTANDING JOB. FOR ALL THE LOOPHOLES THAT WERE THROWN AT THEM. DIDN'T HAVE AN ACCOUNTING SPLIT IN HALF WITH A CONGRESSIONAL LINE THAT THEY COULD NOT MOVE THEM. THAT BEING SAID AS FAR AS TRYING TO GO WITH THAT AT LARGE, YOU CAN GO TAKE MORE COUNTY BOARD SEATS OR WHATEVER. YOU'RE STILL FACED WITH THOSE CENSUS I MEAN, VOTER RIGHTS MANDATE THAT SAYS THAT YOUR POPULATION HAS TO BE EQUALLY REPRESENTATIVE. THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE HERE IN THE COUNTY THAT WE ARE HIGHLY RACIALLY SEGREGATED. AND WHEN YOU GO TO START DRAWING LINES, YOU HAVE A BROKEBACK SNAKE TRYING TO GO IN THERE AND GET DIFFERENT THINGS TO MEET THOSE MANDATES THAT YOU NEED TO MEET. SO THAT IS WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. AND THAT'S WHY YOU GUYS HAVE THE TWO PROPOSALS AND THE THINGS YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THE AT-LARGE SEAT. ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE. WELL, LET'S CALL THEM. NOBODY ELSE WILL CLOSE. I WOULD LIKE TO. I JUST WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE US MOVE FORWARD. I THINK IT'S TIME TO MOVE FORWARD. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. ANYBODY ELSE. OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL RIGHT. DISCUSSION AMONG THE BOARD. WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEES, SUSAN, MR. [INAUDIBLE] OR ANYONE ELSE WOULD. HAVING BEEN THROUGH ALL THIS DISCUSSION AND HAD THESE. OPINIONS COME BACK FROM THE AG'S OFFICE. WOULD HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMITTEE. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO [INAUDIBLE] OKAY. I THINK EVERYBODY ON THE COMMITTEE ADDRESS REDISTRICTING [INAUDIBLE]. GREAT OPTIMISM TO SERVE OUR PEOPLE. I WAS A MEMBER OF THAT COMMITTEE, AND I HAVE TO TAKE A SIDE. SO. SO I DON'T MIND TALKING ABOUT IT. PERSONALLY, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US KEEP SEVEN SUPERVISORS. THE REASON IS I THINK WE GET A BETTER REPRESENTATION OF THE WHOLE COUNTY BY HAVING THAT PLUS LIKE WAS DEMONSTRATED AT OUR LAST MEETING WHEN CHRIS IS ON SEVERAL COMMITTEES. AND THAT'S WHAT SEVEN OF US WITH FIVE OF US IS GOING TO BE AS MANY COMMITTEES SPLIT AMONG FIVE PEOPLE INSTEAD. SO THERE ARE REASONS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AS SEVEN, BUT I THINK THE COMPLICATIONS OUTWEIGH MY FEELINGS ABOUT IT. AND I THINK WE NEED TO LIKE [INAUDIBLE] I THINK WE NEED TO GO FORWARD. THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG IN THIS. IT'S A MATTER OF US ANALYZING THE WHOLE SITUATION AND MAKING THE BEST DECISION THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH. AND I THINK IT IS TO HAVE FIVE. WELL, THERE'S KIND OF RIGHT OR WRONG, WE HAVE TO DECIDE THE BEST THING FOR THE COUNTY. I'M A LITTLE LEERY OF FIVE. TONIGHT WE HAVE A QUORUM, I THINK BY ONE. WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE GONE COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. [00:30:06] THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THE FIVE DISTRICTS THERE. I THINK HAVING TWO AT LARGE GIVES A LITTLE BIT MORE VARIANCE FOR THE POPULATION TO VOTE A LITTLE BIT MORE FAIR. UH. THOSE PEOPLE WOULD BE VOTED ON BY THE WHOLE COUNTY, IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. RIGHT. SO. I JUST THINK THAT'D BE A FAIRER SYSTEM. I'D RATHER SEE SEVEN OPINIONS UP HERE THAN FIVE. I AGREE. ANOTHER THING, IF YOU CUT IT BACK TO FIVE, WE'RE JUST GONNA HAVE TO CUT BACK ON THE AMOUNT OF COMMITTEES WE'RE HELD, BECAUSE, I MEAN, I'M ALREADY DOING THREE PLUS THE FOURTH ONE KIND OF FOR THE CITY OF FRANKLIN ON THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. SO I'M DOING THREE FOR THE COUNTY. HOW MANY ARE YOU DOING? I DON'T EVEN KNOW. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN I THINK CHRIS SAID HE WAS DOING SEVEN DIFFERENT COMMITTEES, AND THEN Y'ALL ARE TANGLED UP BECAUSE YOU, THE CHAIRMAN AND THE VICE CHAIRMAN. I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN CUT IT BACK FROM 7 TO 5, BUT IF WE DO, I'D CUT BACK ON WHAT WE DO BECAUSE WE CAN'T JUST TAKE ON MORE ALREADY TAKING ON ENOUGH. EACH OTHER. YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY'S CARRYING THE LOAD WITH SEVEN. YOU CUT IT BACK TO FIVE. YOU'RE JUST GOING ADD LOAD. EVERYBODY IS ALREADY LOADED UP. I THINK SEVEN BETTER GIVES THE PEOPLE MORE OF A VOICE. THEY HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE TO TALK TO RATHER THAN FIVE. WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE DISTRICTS SETTLED. WE'VE GOT THE FIVE DISTRICTS. THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE. WE JUST HAVE TO AT LARGE VOTED BY A VOTED ON BY THE COUNTY. I DON'T SEE I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM WITH IT. OKAY, MADELEINE. NOW, I AGREE WITH ALL THE SAID 100%. THE ONLY THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS OUR GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS AGAIN. IF THEY DON'T APPROVE IT. DOES THAT THREATEN THE POSITION THAT PUTS US IN IN TERMS OF MRS. BURGESS AND EVERYBODY GETTING READY FOR THE DAY LIKE WE ARE? IF IT'S THE BEST THING FOR THE COUNTY, I DON'T MIND GOING THROUGH IT AGAIN. I MEAN, THERE'S THERE COMES A TIME WAS THAT WAS ALL WRONG AND MISUNDERSTAND AND MISS BURGESS SAYING, EITHER WAY, SHE'S READY. WELL, I CAN. I'LL BE READY IF IT'S A FIVE. IF THE FIVE IF YOU VOTED ON FIVE WITH TWO AT LARGE AND IT'S APPROVED, I CAN BE READY. AND OBVIOUSLY THE 13 IS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW. [INAUDIBLE]. NO, BECAUSE THERE WAS NO. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. STAY AS WE ALL KNOW. WHAT'S THE TIMELINE FOR ME AS FAR AS LIKE WHEN ABSENTEE VOTING STARTS? I MEAN, IF I CAN'T GET THIS DONE IN IN PLACE BEFORE ABSENTEE VOTING STARTS, THEN IT'S GOING TO STAY THE SAME UNTIL AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. AND I'VE BEEN WORKING AND STRIVING TOWARDS THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF THE FIVE ARE GOING TO BE IN PLACE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. AND I HAVE TAKEN A LOT OF STEPS TO GET THAT. YOU KNOW, WHILE WE'RE AT IT, LET ME CHANGE THE SUBJECT. BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH HAVING TO BUILD HER A NEW FACILITY. IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN IN THERE. YEAH, I'VE BEEN. I THOUGHT I PUT THAT PLUG IN FOR YOU. WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT [INAUDIBLE]. [INAUDIBLE] DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER? I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, UM, AND I. I'M SURE I'LL SPEAK FOR THE COMMITTEE. WE ALL WANTED IT. WE ALL WANTED SEVEN SUPERVISORS. WE WANTED FIVE ONE FROM EACH DISTRICT AND TWO AT LARGE. WE WANTED TO KEEP IT THE SAME. WE WANTED TO KEEP THE CONTINUITY. THAT'S WHY WE SUBMITTED IT THE WAY WE SUBMITTED IT. THE PROBLEM IS, IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T WANT SEVEN, IS THAT WE ARE NOT OPTIMISTIC THAT SEVEN WILL BE APPROVED. YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU ROLL THE DICE. BUT IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND IN RICHARD'S CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, THEY HAVE ALL BUT COME OUT AND SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE. SO IT'S NOT THAT WE FAVORED FIVE OVER SEVEN. [00:35:03] IF IT WAS UP TO US, WE'D APPROVE AT SEVEN. BUT IT'S NOT OUR DECISION. UM, I MEAN, YOU CAN SEND IT THROUGH AND TRY TO GET THE TWO AT LARGE APPROVED, BUT I THINK IT'S A SLIM CHANCE THAT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. AND THAT'S NOT THE WAY I'VE BEEN HEARING IT, THOUGH, TONIGHT. I'VE BEEN HEARING ITS CHANCES. IT'S THE FIRST SLIM I'VE HEARD. [INAUDIBLE] MR. RAILY, ARE YOU STILL ON MY LINE? I AM. IF. IF WE APPROVE FIVE AND TWO. AND ALONG WITH OUR DECISION, SEND AN AFFIDAVIT, DAVID, TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WITH THE SIGNATURES OF THE COMMITTEE SUPPORTING THE FIVE AND TWO. WOULD THAT STRENGTHEN OUR CASE? SURE IT WOULDN'T HURT IT. NOW IF YOU PUT ME IN THAT POSITION. I WON'T. YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SEVERAL AFFIDAVITS. AND PROBABLY THE MINUTES OF TONIGHT'S MEETING. I MEAN, TO SHOW WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE AND WHY YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU DO. ALL OF THAT WE'VE GOT. IF YOU. WE'LL MAKE THE BEST CASE POSSIBLE. IT'S JUST I'M NOT DOING MY JOB UNLESS I GIVE YOU THE BENEFIT OF WHAT I HEARD AND WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT IT. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? I'M STILL NOT PERFECTLY CLEAR ON WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE SENT IT UP AND IT WASN'T APPROVED. [INAUDIBLE] I THINK NOW WE HAVE TO COME BACK. WE HAVE TO PUT IT IN A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, WELL PUBLICIZED. AND THEN YOU HAVE AT LEAST ONE PUBLIC HEARING. AND THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE GET TO SUGGEST CHANGES. AND IF YOU MAKE THOSE CHANGES, THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AND THEN YOU GO. AND THERE ARE PROVISIONS THAT UNDER THAT PART OF THE SCHEME BEFORE YOU GET TO SEE, AND THAT'S NO OBJECTION THAT ANY AGGRIEVED VOTER COULD BRING AN ACTION IN CIRCUIT COURT. AND THAT WOULD TEND TO TIE THINGS UP. AND STILL, EVEN IF YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY [INAUDIBLE] ACTION, YOU CAN STILL. YOU CAN STILL HAVE A FEDERAL COURT ACTION LIKE THEY DID IN THE HOLLOWAY CASE IN VIRGINIA BEACH OR HAVE ALL OF THE CONTROLS AT. SO THAT'S. I HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. I TRIED TO [INAUDIBLE]. I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT THE TIME LINE, OKAY? IF WE GET BACK, HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT. EXACTLY WHERE WILL THAT PUT US? THAT WILL PUT US NEXT YEAR, THIS NOVEMBER, WITH THE OLD PRECINCT. AND YEAH, WOULD THAT BE LEGAL? OH, BUT IS THAT LEGAL? TO MY KNOWLEDGE, YES. OKAY. SO IF THEY REJECT IT AND PUT ASIDE SIX MONTHS OR 12 MONTHS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT BY DECEMBER, THE END OF DECEMBER, BECAUSE, YEAH, YOU ALL ARE GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT WHEN YOU CAN START FILING PAPERS JANUARY 1ST. SO IT WOULD BE LIKE, OKAY, IS IT WE CAN HAVE THIS ELECTION IF IF THEY KICK IT BACK, WE CAN STILL HAVE OUR ELECTION. SO THAT WOULD BE DUAL. YES. OKAY. ANYBODY WANT TO ROLL? ALL RIGHT. ROLL THE DICE. WE HAVE SEVEN SUPERVISORS, FIVE WITH FIVE AND TWO, SECOND. [INAUDIBLE] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. I WILL GO BY VOICE. OH, VOICE. YES. RIGHT. YES. YES. [00:40:01] I SAY YES. YES. YES. FIVE YESES. WE WILL ROLL THE DICE AND GO FOR FIVE AND TWO. OKAY. WE MOVE ON TO LESS COMPLICATED THINGS. THE LAST MONTH OR TWO, WE HAD A RESOLUTION FROM MR. HUTCHINS ABOUT OUR SODA AND BUTTER. WAIT A MINUTE, MR. CHAIRMAN. NOW, YOU SAID FIVE AND TWO, BUT I THINK THE RECORD SHOULD BE [INAUDIBLE] THAT THAT ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED IN ITS TOTALITY, WHICH SET ASIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICTS, IS PLAINLY THERE, TOO. I THINK YOU GOT TO PASS MORE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEFINITIVE RESOLUTION. I THINK YOU'VE GOT THE VOTES TO DO WHAT YOU WANT. I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPING THE RECORD. WELL, IT WAS ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO AND TWO ON THE LIST. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THAT IS CORRECT. YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK THAT WOULD BE REFERENCES ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO IN THE IN YOUR AGENDA, SIR? THAT'S CORRECT. SO IF WE MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. ORDINANCE NUMBER TWO ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS FIVE SUPERVISORS FOR FIVE DISTRICTS AND TWO AT LARGE. I'M MAKING THAT MOTION, SECOND. AMY FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE'LL VOTE AGAIN. WE HAVE FIVE. YEAH. OKAY. THAT OKAY, RICHARD? YEAH, THAT'S FINE. OKAY. GLAD YOU CALLED OUR HAND ON THAT. OKAY. NUMBER SIX, WE HAVE A RESOLUTION REQUEST FROM MR. [6. Resolution Request from Ash Cutchin - Southern Border/Illegal Immigration] HUTCHENS CONCERNING THE SOUTHERN BORDER, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. AND I BELIEVE EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF THAT. WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO READ THAT? OKAY. I THINK THAT NUMERICAL ERROR A MINUTE. BUT THAT'S. A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SECURING THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND STOPPING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. WHEREAS AMERICA HAS LONG RECOGNIZED THE VALUE AND IMPORTANCE OF IMMIGRANTS TO THE UNITED STATES AND THE EQUAL IMPORTANCE OF IMMIGRANTS AND CITIZENS ADHERING TO THE RULES OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM. AND WHEREAS, WHEN ADMITTED THROUGH A WELL REGULATED SYSTEM, IMMIGRANT STRENGTHEN OUR NATION BY CREATING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES. INCREASING AMERICA'S SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES. STRENGTHENING OUR TIES WITH OTHER NATIONS, FULFILLING HUMANITARIAN COMMITMENTS AND SUPPORTING FAMILY TIES AND FAMILY VALUES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO BUILD STRONG COMMUNITIES. AND WHEREAS, FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SECURE THE BORDERS, TRACK VISA RECIPIENTS IN THE INTERIOR OR ENFORCE WORKSITE LAWS, HAS ALLOWED ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION TO THRIVE, WITH AN ESTIMATED 11.4 MILLION RESIDENTS LIVING AND WORKING IN THE UNITED STATES WITHOUT LEGAL AUTHORIZATION OR PROPER DOCUMENTATION. AND WHEREAS, THESE 11.4 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH YEAR, DECREASE THE WAGES FOR LEGAL WORKERS, RAISE HEALTH CARE COSTS, AND DEPLETE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA, THAT IT URGES PRESIDENT JOSEPH BIDEN, SENATOR MARK WARNER AND [INAUDIBLE] TO MOVE QUICKLY TO SECURE OUR SOUTHERN BORDER AND WORK VIGOROUSLY TO END ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. AND BE IT FROM RESOLVE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, SUPPORT ALL EFFORTS TO ENFORCE CURRENT IMMIGRATION LAWS CONSISTENTLY AND VIGOROUSLY TO ELIMINATE ILLEGAL ENTRY AT THE BORDERS, VISA OVERSTAYS, WORKING WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION AND EMPLOYING UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO PRESIDENT BIDEN, SENATOR WARNER AND SENATOR KAINE. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS [INAUDIBLE]. I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD RESOLUTION. MAKE A MOTION. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS RESOLUTION, BUT I HAVE A LOT OF EMPATHY FOR YOU. [00:45:05] BUT I HAVE A LOT OF EMPATHY FOR THOSE IMMIGRANTS. AMONG THEM ARE CHILDREN, WOMEN. AND NOT ALL OF THEM ARE ILLEGAL. AND IT'S A THIS THIS IMMIGRATION PROBLEM IS OF THE MAGNITUDE THAT. IT'S SO DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH, BUT I'M JUST HOPING THAT WE CAN BE HUMANE IN WHATEVER TREATMENT WE GIVE PEOPLE. BUT IN TERMS OF IT BEING A PROBLEM AND US RECOGNIZING IT AS A PROBLEM AND VOICING OUR OPINION THAT IT IS A PROBLEM, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. THE RESOLUTION VERY POIGNANTLY SAYS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. YOU KNOW, WE STILL WELCOME PEOPLE. WE'RE THE ONLY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. I THINK THAT REALLY DOES THAT. AND IT'S STRENGTHENED OUR COUNTRY. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. 90% OF THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT REPORTING. LORD KNOWS WHETHER OUR LORD KNOWS HOW MANY CONVICTED FELONS. THE JAILS WERE EMPTIED IN MEXICO AND EL SALVADOR AND GUATEMALA. LORD KNOWS HOW MANY DRUG CARTELS HAVE INFILTRATED US. YOU LIVE IN NEW YORK CITY. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE MORE DOCUMENTATION TO GO DOWN AND BUY YOUR GROCERIES AND COMING ACROSS THE BORDER HERE. I'M FOR I AGREE WITH YOU. THERE ARE A LOT OF CHILDREN. BUT LIKE I SAID, THE EMPHASIS IS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. I THINK WE ALL THIS COUNTRY HAS ALWAYS ACCEPTED THE DOWNTRODDEN AND BUT WE'VE NEVER RUN INTO THIS SITUATION WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY UNCONTROLLED. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT 5% OF THESE PEOPLE ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DRUG CARTELS. HOW MANY TERRORISTS ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN HERE AND FORMING CELLS AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE THEM HERE IN THE NEXT TWO OR THREE OR FOUR YEARS. SO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT? I MEAN, WE'RE LIKE I SAID, SO FAR, 90% OF THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT REPORTING AS THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO. ALL RIGHT, DID. WE HAD A MOTION AND. YEAH I'LL SECOND MAKE A MOTION. MOTION AND THE SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT. I'LL SIGN THESE 3 TO 1 TO EACH OF OUR SENATORS AND TO MR. BIDEN. ANYTHING ELSE ANYBODY MIGHT LIKE TO BRING UP BEFORE WE CLOSE? IT'S BEEN A GOOD MEETING. GLAD TO SEE EVERYBODY HERE. GLAD FOR THE INPUT. IT'S GOOD TO SEE PEOPLE COMING. LIKE I SAID, THE ONLY PLACE YOU CAN DO IT CAN'T DO IT IN RICHMOND. CAN'T DO IT IN WASHINGTON. BUT YOU CAN COME HERE AND DO IT. AND WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO WE ADJOURN. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.