Sep 10, 2024 Caroline County Commissioners Meeting

>> CORRECT?

>> PARTICULARLY ONE MORE LARGE ONE.

>> CRYSTAL, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT IDEAS MAKO HAS BEEN FLOATING TO US RIGHT NOW.

THEY HAVEN'T SETTLED ON ANYTHING, CORRECT? AND WE ARE GOING TO INVITE THEM TO COME IN, BUT THEY'VE ASKED YOU FOR SOME DOCUMENTATION ON DIFFERENT IDEAS.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY HAVE A SOLAR WORK GROUP THAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SINCE THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND FROM EVERYTHING THAT LEGISLATIVE STAFF HAS BEEN HEARING, THAT THERE WILL LIKELY BE PREEMPTION BILLS THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED THIS SESSION AND YOU KNOW, WITH THIS ADMINISTRATION'S TEN YEAR GOAL TO BE 100% RENEWABLE.

THEY FEEL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT HEADWAY IN THAT PREEMPTION, AND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO PROTECT THE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AUTHORITY IN SOME MEANINGFUL WAY FOR THE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO US, WHETHER IT'S SETBACKS, LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, PRESERVATION OF OUR AG LAND, AND COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF STANDARDS ACROSS THE STATE IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING, GRADING, DECOMMISSIONING, SETBACKS THAT ARE STANDARD THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY.

THE OTHER PART OF WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON IS A MAPPING EXERCISE.

THEY'VE ASKED EACH COUNTY TO PUT TOGETHER

[01:10:02]

A MAP OF YOUR TRANSMISSION LINES THAT COME THROUGH YOUR COUNTY WITH A TWO MILE RADIUS ON EACH SIDE THAT WOULD BE IDENTIFIED AS THE SOLAR CORRIDOR BECAUSE THAT TWO MILE RADIUS IS WHERE THEY WANT TO BE.

IT'S THE CHEAPEST AND LESS COSTLY PLACE TO PUT IT.

THE FURTHER OUT THEY GO YOU'VE GOT TO BUILD UP THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE IT.

AND TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT IN THAT SOLAR CORRIDOR THAT WE WOULD TAKE OUT, OUR AREAS OF PRESERVATION OR WETLANDS OR FORESTED AREAS OVER 70%, OUR RECEIVING AREAS AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS TO SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AFTERWARDS.

AND THE GOAL WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO FOCUS THE DEVELOP OR THE SOLAR WITHIN THAT CORRIDOR.

AND THE BENEFIT OF BEING IN THE CORRIDOR IS IF THEY WERE TAKING PRESERVATION LAND, WE WOULD GET THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY US FOR THAT.

AND IT WOULD BE A CHEAPER PAYMENT IN THE CORRIDOR VERSUS OUTSIDE OF THE CORRIDOR.

>> YOU MEAN IF THEY'RE TAKING LAND THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER A PRESERVATION?

>> NO. LESLIE, DO YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE?

>> GET IN THE HOT SEAT.

>> I'M IN THE HOT SEAT. IF THE COUNTY HAS ESTABLISHED PRESERVATION AREAS, WHETHER IT'S HISTORIC, AGRICULTURAL ANY CATEGORY, FOR EXAMPLE, A RURAL LEGACY AREA, WHICH IS PRIMARILY FOR AGRICULTURE, PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA, THOSE ARE CONSIDERED EASEMENT ELIGIBLE LANDS.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYTHING IN THERE IS AN EASEMENT.

IT JUST MEANS IF YOU HAVE A PROPERTY WITHIN THAT DESIGNATED AREA, YOU ARE ELIGIBLE FOR AN EASEMENT PROGRAM, IF ONE EXISTS.

SO IF SOLAR DEVELOPER WAS LOOKING AT LAND THAT WAS IN ONE OF THOSE AREAS, AND THE COUNTY'S PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA IS VIRTUALLY THE WHOLE COUNTY.

OUR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA IS MOST OF THE COUNTY.

CERTAINLY MOST OF THE RURAL AREA, THEN THAT DEVELOPER WOULD UNDER THIS PROPOSAL, THIS IS NOT IN STONE, BE OBLIGATED TO PURCHASE AN EASEMENT OR PUT IN MONEY TOWARDS WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AN EASEMENT COST HAD THAT PROPERTY GONE INTO RURAL LEGACY, THERE ISN'T REALLY A MOUTH AREA.

OUR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA IS TARGETED FOR MOUTH EASEMENTS, BUT THEY'RE NOT RESTRICTED TO THAT.

I THINK THE THINKING IS THEY WOULD LOOK AT WHAT THE AVERAGE COST TO PURCHASE AN EASEMENT IS PER ACRE AND SET A LIMIT FOR THE DEVELOPER WITHIN THIS SOLAR CORRIDOR TO PAY THAT PER ACRE COST INTO A FUND THAT WOULD BE PAID DIRECTLY TO THE COUNTY.

THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE THE MONEY.

AND THEN THE COUNTY COULD USE THAT MONEY TO PURCHASE EASEMENTS IN ITS PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA WHEREVER THEY DETERMINED.

>> CAN THIS BE ANY WORSE?

>> NO.

>> IT'S JUST BEING MORE RIDICULOUS IF YOU SIT AROUND AND TRY TO THINK UP SOMETHING THIS STUPID.

>> HAVE WE EXPERIENCED SOLAR RAISED PURCHASING OUT OF EASEMENTS? PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN SOLD INTO LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAMS.

>> MOUTH EASEMENTS ARE PERMANENT AND THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY IN ALL OF THE OPTIONS WE'VE SEEN IN THE DRAFT LEGISLATION.

YOU CAN'T PURCHASE A PROPERTY THAT IS UNDER AN AG EASEMENT.

>> DANNY, I THOUGHT WE HAD AN INFLUX OF LAND PRESERVATION MONEY, AND I THOUGHT IT WAS IN PART FROM PEOPLE PURCHASING OUT OF EASEMENTS.

>> WE HAVE. I'D HAVE TO PULL THE SPECIFIC DEED AND SEE WHAT TYPE OF AG PRO THEY'RE IN, BUT WE'VE HAD A COUPLE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS COME IN.

>> NOT FOR SOLAR THOUGH.

BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY IN THE DRAFT LEGISLATION THAT THEY CANNOT UNDO A MOUTH AG EASEMENT ON ANY OF THAT.

>> THESE ACRES WERE DEDUCTED FROM THE AMOUNT OF ACRES THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, INCLUDING THE 2000 ACRES.

>> IT'S AT LEAST WOULD IT BE THE TDR PROGRAM TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RATE PROGRAMS PURCHASED. THAT'S SEVEN.

>> NO, BECAUSE WE KEEP IT ALL SPECIFIED IN THE INDIVIDUAL FUNDS IT WOULD IDENTIFIES THE 23 AND 24.

I'LL PULL WHAT SPECIFIC PROPERTIES THEY ARE.

WE HAVEN'T RECORDED AND REVIEWED THAT.

>> HOW MANY HOW MANY ACRES OF LAND ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN THIS TWO MILE QUARTER?

>> POTENTIALLY?

>> POTENTIALLY.

>> WHEN WE BACK OUT, RECEIVING AREAS, PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS, GROWTH AREAS, WETLANDS, PARCELS WITH MORE THAN 70% WOODED LAND COVERAGE, CRITICAL AREA, TRYING TO THINK OF EVERYTHING.

DNR PROPERTIES, ANY ZONING THAT ISN'T RURAL, WE'RE LEFT WITH ABOUT 40,000.

[01:15:03]

>> FORTY THOUSAND.

>> FORTY THOUSAND, APPROXIMATELY.

WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE LIST OF WHAT DON'T WE WANT, WHICH IS PART OF THE EXERCISE THAT MAKO IS HAVING US DO.

TOMORROW NIGHT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER PRIORITY LANDS?

>> SO WE ARE GOING FROM OUR LIMIT OF TWO TO 40?

>> NOT NECESSARILY. THE EXERCISE IS TO START LOOKING AT WHAT WE CONSIDER PRIORITIES, AND THIS IS A STARTING POINT, THE TWO MILE BUFFER AROUND TRANSMISSION LINES.

>> A THOUSAND. YOU'VE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME.

I HAVE TOO, AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU THAT THE PLAN HERE IS GOING TO BE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THEIR NEW ACREAGE AMOUNT TO 40,000 ACRES FROM OUR TWO.

THEY CAN COME UP WITH ALL THE PLANS THEY WANT.

THEY CAN COME UP WITH ALL THE GREAT LANGUAGE THAT THEY WANT.

OUR LIMIT IS 2000 ACRES.

AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, WHEN WE REACH THAT 2000 ACRE LIMIT.

WE'RE DONE PUTTING SOLAR ON OUR AGRICULTURE.

I LOOK FORWARD TO MAKING [INAUDIBLE].

IT WILL BE A GREAT DISCUSSION.

THE NEXT PERSON AND I THINK IT'S FAIR THAT WE GIVE STAFF DIRECTION.

THE NEXT PROJECT THAT COMES IN, THAT PUTS US OVER THAT 2000 ACRE LIMIT.

MY DIRECTION IS YOU DON'T REVIEW IT AND YOU NOTIFY THE APPLICANT.

>> OR THEY'VE GOT TO STAY WITHIN TWO.

AND THE NEXT APPLICANT THAT COMES IN, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO DO AS ME.

YOU GOT TO DO WHAT YOU WANT, BUT I'M TELLING YOU THIS IS ANOTHER FIGHT THAT WE BETTER GEAR UP FOR.

I'M NOT GOING TO SEE THIS COUNT OF COVERAGE IS ALL ABOUT.

I'M NOT GOING TO DO IT. GO AHEAD.

>> I'M WITH LARRY. I'M 2000. I'M DONE.

ANYBODY COMES IN AND FAILS TO MEET THAT, JUST GIVE IT BACK TO THEM.

WE RESPECTFULLY DECLINE YOUR BUSINESS.

>> I AGREE. 100% WITH THAT DIRECTION.

I WILL STEWART, JUMP IN, CORRECT ME IF I LAY THIS OUT WRONG.

THE WAY OUR GOVERNMENT IS STRUCTURED, THE POWER REALLY LIES WITH THE STATE.

ANY AUTHORITY THAT WE HAVE AS A COUNTY IS DELEGATED TO US BY THE STATE.

IF THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING, AT ANY TIME, THE STATE CAN COME IN AND SAY, COUNTY, WE DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR POSITION, WE'RE TAKING THAT AUTHORITY BACK AND YOU NO LONGER HAVE THE ABILITY TO REGULATE IN THAT AREA, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> ARE ALL STATES PRETTY MUCH STRUCTURED THAT WAY?

>> AS FAR AS I KNOW, YES.

>> IT'S THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION DELEGATED THE AUTHORITY TO THE STATES.

>> THEN FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT DOWN TO MUNICIPALITIES AND COUNTIES.

>> COUNTIES.

>> TAXES IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE OTHER WAY.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY SET UP THE OTHER WAY,

>> THAT WAS THE INTENT.

>> THEY CAN TAKE IT. THEY CAN, BUT I'M NOT HANDING IT TO HIM. I'M NOT GOING TO.

THIS IS MORE AND MORE ALL THE TIME, I THINK WHAT WE FIND UP HERE IS WE GET ALL DRESSED UP AND COME UP HERE AND PRETEND THAT WE MAKE DECISION? I'M GOING TO MAKE THAT DECISION RIGHT UP UNTIL THE END.

THEY CAN COME GET IT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO WILLINGLY DO IT. I'M NOT.

WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS UP UNTIL DAF.

THOSE WERE SOME OF THE MORE CONTENTIOUS MEETINGS THAT WE HAD.

WHAT WE HAD WAS WE HAD FARMERS IN HERE, AND THE SPLIT WAS PEOPLE WHO OWNED FARMLAND WHOSE POINT WAS, IT'S MY LAND.

I SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO WHAT I WANT TO DO IT AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO COME ALONG AND OFFER ME MONEY PER ACRE THAT IS MORE THAN I WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE IF I GO OUT HERE AND SPEND 12 HOURS A DAY ON A TRACTOR IN THE SUN, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE HAD PEOPLE WHOSE BUSINESS IT WAS TO TILL THE LAND UNDER LEASE AGREEMENTS OR UNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE FARM OWNERS.

THEY DIDN'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE AWAY

[01:20:03]

THE INVENTORY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO FARM THE LAND.

I DISTINCTLY REMEMBER SITTING HERE AND WE HAD THESE PEOPLE ON THIS SIDE AND THOSE PEOPLE ON THAT SIDE.

I DON'T KNOW ANY OF YOU WERE HERE.

YOU WERE PROBABLY HERE FOR THAT.

IT'S A TOUGH DECISION, BUT WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND I THINK WE REACHED A REASONABLE COMPROMISE WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES THAT WERE TILLABLE IN THE COUNTY.

WE TOOK OUT THE ADD PRESERVATION LAND, WE TOOK OUT ALL THE THINGS YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT, AND WE CAME UP WITH THIS NUMBER.

I'M ALREADY HEARING ABOUT PRESENTATIONS AND PROMISES THAT WERE MADE TO FARMERS BY THE SOLAR COMPANIES THAT ARE NOT HAPPENING.

I GUARANTEE YOU JUST AS SURE AS I'M SITTING HERE, WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO ARE GOING TO COME TO US AND SAY, WELL, THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE GOING TO DO THIS, AND THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT.

WELL, THEY GO YOU GUYS NEED TO GET AND THESE ARE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE BETWEEN THE SOLAR COMPANY WHO A LOT OF THEM HAVE BEEN SOLD TWO OR THREE TIMES SINCE THESE AGREEMENTS WERE ENTERED INTO.

NOW I HAVE A FEELING THAT SOME OF THESE DEALS ARE NOT AS GOOD AS PEOPLE THOUGHT THEY WERE.

BUT THAT'S BETWEEN THEM AND THE SOLAR COMPANY.

THIS IS ANOTHER FIGHT THAT'S COMING.

SEEMS LIKE WE JUST ROTATE THEM.

WE GET ONE, AND THEN [NOISE] WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE.

BUT IF THE STATE OF MARYLAND AND I KNOW ALL THESE WONDERFUL PLANS ARE GOING TO BE MADE, AND ALL THESE STUDIES ARE GOING TO BE DONE AND ALL THIS.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE STATE OF MARYLAND WANTS TO COME INTO THIS COUNTY AND TELL US WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AS FAR AS REGULATING THAT LAND USE.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND ONE OF THE MAIN DECISIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES WE HAVE AS COMMISSIONERS, IN ADDITION TO BUDGETING IS LAND USE, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT AWAY.

>> YEAH. BECAUSE THEY DON'T AGREE.

>> [INAUDIBLE] BEING EASY TAKE.

>> EDUCATE ME ON THIS.

WHO REALLY BENEFITS FROM THE SOLAR? THE CITIES BENEFIT FROM THIS.

THEY'RE THE ONES THAT GET THE ENERGY FROM THE SOLAR, NOT US.

>> I'LL LET MATT ANSWER THAT, BUT WE HAD THE [OVERLAPPING].

>> EDUCATE ME ON THAT.

>> WE HAVE COMMUNITY SCALE SOLAR, WHICH THAT DOES BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY, BUT THE OTHER PROJECTS LIKE WAYPOST AND CHERRYWOOD, THOSE LARGER SCALES DO NOT DIRECTLY.

>> THOSE PROJECTS ARE BASICALLY FOR UTILITY COMPANIES TO GET WHERE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE STATE-MANDATED RENEWABLE ENERGY.

THAT COST SAVINGS IS NEVER GOING TO BE PASSED DOWN TO THAT CUSTOMER DOWN.

THE COMMUNITY SOLAR ONES, THE SMALLER ONES THAT PEOPLE CAN BUY INTO, LIKE A MINIATURE COOP, BASICALLY.

THEY'LL SEE SOME REDUCTIONS.

BUT THE LARGER PROJECTS, THERE'S NO WAY.

>> THE NEXT THING, I'M SORRY, STEWART, I AGREE WITH THE LARRY ON EVERYTHING YOU ARE SAYING, THEY'RE GOING TO ATTACK HOW MANY ACRES WE CAN GO AT AND GO PREEMINENT.

BUT THE NEXT STEP IS, IT'LL BE ATTACHED TO IT IS ON HOW TO BE TAXED, AND LIMITED TO BE TAXED ON.

THEN YOU'RE HANDCUFFED AGAIN.

RIGHT NOW, WE'RE BENEFITING FROM THE TAX BENEFIT OF IT, BUT THAT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING 40,000 ACRES, I'M JUST TALKING HYPOTHETICALLY, AND THEY COME SAYING, WELL, YOU CAN'T MAKE THEY'RE GOING TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU CAN MAKE OFF OF TAXES TO A CERTAIN POINT.

THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP LINK TO IT.

IT'S A NEVER-ENDING PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHERE LARRY'S GOING. IT'S NEVER GOING TO END.

>> I WAS ON THE TABLE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO GET IT REMOVED THROUGH OUR LOBBYISTS AND THROUGH MACOIC.

>> THE OTHER THING IN THINKING ABOUT THIS COURT ORDER THING, THEY'RE BASICALLY PICKING AND CHOOSING WHO CAN SELL THEIR LAND.

IF YOU HAPPEN TO BE A FARMER WHO OWNS PROPERTY IN THAT TWO MILE, WHAT IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE THAT? [NOISE]

>> THEY'RE STILL ELIGIBLE TO DO THE PROJECT, BUT I THINK THE INTENT IS TO STEER THEM CLOSER TO TRANSMISSION.

>> WELL, IT SHOULDN'T BE STEERING THEM OUT.

IT'S A FREE MARKET. IT SHOULDN'T BE STEERING ANYBODY ANYWAY.

>> WELL, AND THAT'S MY HEARTBURN WITH THE WHOLE THING.

IT'S NOT A FREE MARKET BECAUSE IT'S SUBSIDIZED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

IF THIS WAS A TRUE FREE MARKET ENTERPRISE, THEN IT WOULD BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION,

[01:25:03]

BUT IT'S NOT VIABLE.

IT'S BEING PROPPED UP, AND WE'VE ALL EXPERIENCED PERIODS OF TURMOIL WHEN THE HOUSE OF CARDS THAT GOVERNMENT AND ITS INFINITE WISDOM SETS UP WHEN IT ALL COMES FALLING DOWN.

I THINK THAT'S MY BIGGEST FEAR IS THAT A NEW TECHNOLOGY IS DEVELOPED, OR THE SUBSIDIES GO AWAY THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE, PRESIDENTIAL CHANGE OR POLITICAL SENTIMENT, AND THE HOUSE OF CARDS COMES FALLING DOWN, AND WE'RE LEFT WITH UNVIABLE SYSTEMS ALL OVER THE COUNTY THAT ARE.

>> THE BLUEPRINT.

>> YEAH.

>> SAME THING. THE BLUEPRINT IS A GOOD IDEA THAT EVERYBODY THOUGHT ABOUT, AND NOW THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO IT AND THAT HOUSE THAT CARD I'M TELLING YOU THE BOTTOM ROW THESE CARDS ARE TO GET BECAUSE LOOK AT THE STATE BUDGET.

>> YEARS AGO WHEN YOU HAVE POWER LINES WENT TO YOUR FARM, YOUR FARM IS BASICALLY WORTHLESS.

YOU CAN'T DO IRRIGATION.

IT'S BASICALLY YOU CAN'T BUILD WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ANYTHING.

NOW IT'S WORTH PLENTY OF MONEY BECAUSE OF THE RULE.

>> STEWART DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED?

>> THE COUNTY HAS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IT HAS A ZONING ORDINANCE.

THAT PRE-EXISTED WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED, MY RESEARCH INDICATES IS THAT ALTHOUGH A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE PEOPLE THAT PARTICIPATE IN THE DONATION, IF YOU WILL, OR THE USE OF THEIR LAND FOR SOLAR PROJECTS IN CAROLINE COUNTY, SOME OF THEM MAY GO LOOKING TO BE INCLUDED IN A SOLAR PROJECT AND REACH OUT.

BUT BY AND LARGE, WHAT IS HAPPENING IS OUR STATE COMPANIES ARE SENDING UNSOLICITED MAILINGS TO OUR FARMERS AND THEY'RE USING COMPANIES THAT SPECIALIZE IN ALMOST LIKE AERIAL SURVEYS OF, THAT PART OF CAROLINE COUNTY, WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH ALL OF IT, IS IDEAL FOR SOLAR.

THEY TELL THIS TO THE SOLAR COMPANIES, GIVE THEM A LIST OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEY WRITE TO THESE FOLKS.

MY IMPRESSION IS MOST OF THEM NEVER CONSULT AN ATTORNEY FOR THE LEGALITIES, AND I'M FINDING THAT THE PEOPLE THAT SIGN THEM UP FOR THESE LEASES ARE NOT NECESSARILY GIVING THEM AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF WHAT THEIR LIABILITIES ARE OR WHAT CAN HAPPEN TO THEIR LAND.

WE HAD SOMEONE TESTIFY IN FRONT OF US IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE LAST MEETING WHO SAID, "THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY TOLD ME.

THEY'RE COMING IN THERE AND THEY'RE DISTURBING THE TOP SOIL AND THEY'RE GRADING IT.

ALL THESE ENGINEERING PLANS FOR THE SOIL.

THEY TOLD ME ALL THEY WERE GOING TO DO WAS COME IN, PUT THE PILINGS INTO MY FIELD, AND WHEN THE THING IS DONE, LIFTED UP, WE CAN GO RIGHT BACK TO FARMING." WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S GOING ON, AND THEIR ENGINEER ENDED UP TESTIFYING THAT, WELL, WE DO GRADE IT, AND WE PILE IT UP IN A PILE, BUT WE DON'T REMOVE IT FROM THE SITE, AND IT STAYS THERE.

THEN I GUESS WHEN THE SOLAR COMES OUT, SOMEBODY'S GOING TO GO OUT THERE WITH A BULLDOZER AND PUT THAT TOPSOIL BACK ON THE FARM.

THERE'S A LOT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, IF YOU WILL, OR FARMER PROTECTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED WHERE PEOPLE ARE TOLD ONE THING AND THE LAWYERS FROM OUT OF STATE ARE DRAFTING THESE THINGS UP, WHICH BY THE WAY, THE COUNTY APPARENTLY IS NOT BEING SHOWN THESE LEASES, AM I CORRECT? YOU'RE SEEING A RECORDED MEMORANDUM OF LEASE, WHICH IS A SHORT FORM SHOVED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.

IT'S A CLOUD ON THE TITLE TO THE FARMLAND, AND IT'S NOTICED TO THE PUBLIC THAT THERE IS A LEASE, WHICH YOU DON'T GET TO SEE.

AT SOME POINT WE GOT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THIS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK EVERYBODY WHO SIGNS UP TO BE PART OF THESE SOLAR ARRAYS REALLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE DEAL ENTAILS.

>> GUESS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO COME? RIGHT IN HERE.

BEING THE ULTIMATE PESSIMIST THAT I ALWAYS AM, I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT I SEE COMING DOWN THE LINE.

YOU'LL HAVE THIS CORRIDOR AND PEOPLE WON'T HAVE ANY CHOICE ABOUT WHETHER THEY SELL THEIR LAND.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE CORRIDOR THAT'S GOING TO BE DESIGNATED FOR SOLAR, AND THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO YOU AND SAY, WELL, YOU GOT TO SELL IT TO THEM BECAUSE WE NEED THIS LAND.

WE GOT TO PUT SOLAR ON THOSE FARMS. WE KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO SELL IT, BUT HERE'S YOUR PRICE YOU'RE GOING TO GET.

I DON'T KNOW, MAN. I TELL YOU; THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF MANY THAT.

>> YOU KNOW WHAT I FIND AMAZING, THE MIDDLE EAST HAS PLENTY OF SUN FOR EVERYBODY.

THEY DON'T EVEN MESS WITH THIS.

WHAT THEY'RE DEVELOPING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.

[01:30:01]

BUT YEAH, WE'RE MESSING WITH SOLAR PANELS. I DON'T GET IT.

>> BECAUSE SOMEBODY THINKS IT'S A GOOD IDEA.

>> YEAH, RIGHT.

>> JUST A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT I HAD HEARD AND I'M NOT, I'M JUST THROWING THEM OUT THERE.

THE OTHER THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD IS THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PERCENTAGE CAP.

HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? JUST LIKE 4%? I THINK IT WAS THROWN OUT THERE, 2% OF YOUR LAND COULD BE DEVELOPED IN SOLAR IN EACH COUNTY.

>> YEAH, I HAVE HEARD THAT.

>> THAT WAS SOMETHING I THINK I HAVE HEARD, WHICH 2% WOULD STILL BE WAY MORE THAN WHAT WE HAVE.

THAT'D BE WHAT ARE WE 200,000 ACRES, SO IT'D BE 4,000 ACRES.

THE OTHER THING THAT I HAD HEARD KICKED AROUND WAS TALBOT COUNTY'S POINT SYSTEM THAT THEY IMPLEMENTED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHERE THEY RATED THE PROPERTY BASED ON THE AGLAND POINT SYSTEM.

IF IT SCORED OVER 240 POINTS, IT WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE FOR SOLAR DEVELOPMENT.

>> PROHIBITED.

>> PROHIBITED, YEAH.

>> THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS PRIME AND STATE DESIGNATED LANDS OF IMPORTANCE OR HIGH VALUE AGRICULTURAL LAND.

>> RIGHT.

>> AS A RESOURCE THAT IS FINITE AND CRITICAL TO OUR ECONOMY, NOT JUST PRIMARY ECONOMY, BUT ALSO SUPPORT ECONOMY AND SUPPORT BUSINESSES TO THE AGRI INDUSTRY.

THAT'S ANOTHER THING WE'RE LOOKING AT IS BEING ABLE TO CARVE THAT OUT, WHICH IS A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF THE COUNTY.

IT'S HARD TO FIND A SPOT THAT ISN'T EITHER PRIME FARMLAND OR FARMLAND OF STATE WIDE IMPORTANCE AGRICULTURALLY.

>> I THINK WE HAVE SOME PROTECTIONS THAT ARE REAL AND VALID, NOT JUST FOR OUR OWN ECONOMY, BUT ON A LARGER REGIONAL ECONOMY.

I THINK WE HAVE SOME PRETTY STRONG LAKES TO STAND ON AND WHAT I THINK WE'LL BE LOOKING AT IS THAT RANKING.

WE DO WE WHERE IS OUR HIGHEST VALUE.

AND IS THIS IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN A COLD LIGHT OF COST EFFECTIVENESS, THAT MIGHT BE ONE PART OF THE MATRIX THAT WE LOOKED AT FOR TAKING LAND OUT OF CONSIDERATION FOR SOLAR ELIGIBILITY.

I THINK WE HAVE A REALLY STRONG CASE FOR THAT.

>> WE HAVE A RECENT EXAMPLE OF A CHANGE THAT A SOLAR COMPANY MADE TO ADHERE TO OUR 200 FOOT BUFFER SET OUR SETBACK REQUIREMENT.

IN MY OPINION, THAT'S WORKING.

THAT'S PUSHING THE SOLAR BACK OFF THE ROADS, MOVING THE SCREENING BACK.

IT'S IT'S LESS OF AN EYE WAR AND PROTECTS YOU KNOW, THERE'S I'M ASSUMING THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE AGRICULTURAL FARMING DONE AROUND THE PERIMETER.

WE DO HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WORKING THAT WE CAN TALK TO THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO COME AFTER THE SETBACKS AS WELL, I THINK. SOUNDS LIKE.

>> WE ARE WE CURRENTLY WITH THE DECOMMISSIONING ISSUE?

>> DECOMMISSIONING IS THE RESTORATION OF THE FARM TO ITS CONDITION PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE SOLAR, AND WHAT, HAPPENED WITH ONE OF THE LARGE ONE THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW THAT'S STILL IN THE PROCESS.

THEY HAD ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION A DECOMMISSIONING PLAN, WHICH ESTIMATED IT WOULD COST $15 MILLION TO RESTORE THE SITE.

THEY CALCULATED THE SALVAGE VALUE OF THE EQUIPMENT, DEDUCTED THAT AND WERE INFORMING THE PLANNING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THAT THEY WOULD ONLY POST A DECOMMISSIONING BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $5 MILLION.

THAT OF COURSE, WAS SOMETHING THEY TOLD THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND WHICH GOT INITIAL APPROVAL, APPARENTLY.

THEN THEY LATER COME TO THE COUNTY AND SUBMIT THAT PLAN.

AT THAT POINT, WE RAISED AN ISSUE AND AN OBJECTION ABOUT IT.

CRYSTAL CAME IN BEFORE YOU BACK ON AUGUST 6 AND LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT DEVELOPER, PLUS RIDGELY COLBURN, CAME IN WITH THOSE DECOMMISSIONING PLANS WHERE THEY WOULD DEDUCT THE SALVAGE VALUE.

AND YOU ALL INFORMED HER THAT THOSE APPLICANTS SHOULD BE TOLD YOU ARE NOT GETTING A DEDUCTION FOR SALVAGE VALUE.

YOU WERE GOING TO POST THE FULL ESTIMATED COSTS OF DECOMMISSIONING BECAUSE THE SALVAGE VALUE IS SMOKE AND MIRRORS.

[01:35:05]

THERE'S NO WAY TO ESTIMATE 20 TO 30 YEARS FROM NOW WHAT THE SALVAGE VALUE OF THIS EQUIPMENT WILL BE, NUMBER 1, MAYBE SO OUTDATED BY THEN THAT THERE'S NOT REALLY MUCH OF A MARKET FOR IT.

SECONDLY, THESE SOLAR PROJECTS ALWAYS HAVE FINANCING STATEMENTS ON THE EQUIPMENT.

THE EQUIPMENT TITLE TO THE EQUIPMENT IS PLEDGED TO THE THIRD PARTY CREDITORS.

THAT IS OF RECORD.

THEREFORE, NOBODY CAN SELL THE EQUIPMENT WITHOUT A RELEASE FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITORS WHO MIGHT HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED MULTIPLE TIMES.

YOU'D HAVE TO TRACK DOWN WHOEVER THE CURRENT CREDITOR IS, GET A SIGNATURE, FILE IT WITH THE STATE.

YOU'VE NOW GOT CLEAR TITLE TO THEN SELL THE EQUIPMENT.

THE WHOLE THING, AND IT'S BEEN GOING ON NOT JUST THESE APPLICANTS, AND THEY BACKED OFF.

THEY HAVE RESUBMITTED THEIR PLANS.

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION SENT US A REQUEST FROM STAFF SAYING WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON.

WHY DID CAROLINE COUNTY REVISE ITS DECOMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS? I WROTE THEM BACK AND SAID, WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING AND EXPLAINED THE DEFICIENCIES IN DEDUCTING SALVAGE VALUE, AND INFORMED THEM THAT THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT AND THREE OTHER STATES SPECIFICALLY HAVE IT IN THEIR LAW THAT YOU ARE NOT GETTING A DEDUCTION FOR SALVAGE VALUE.

MARYLAND IS SILENT. THERE IS NO STATUTE IN MARYLAND.

THERE MIGHT TURN OUT TO BE 11 DAY.

BUT I THINK AND I HAVE NOT HAD A RESPONSE FROM THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, 20 PEOPLE ON THAT E MAIL, INCLUDING THE DEVELOPERS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS.

NOBODY'S RESPONDED YET.

>> YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH A IF THEY WALK AWAY FROM THIS, YOU'LL END UP WITH A FARMER.

I MEAN, THE WAY THAT THIS WAS SOLD IN THE PAST WAS, IF WE TAKE THESE OUT, YOU'D BE GET A TRACTOR OUT THERE TOMORROW. THAT'S NOT TRUE.

YOU POTENTIALLY COULD END UP WITH THE LAND BEING GIVEN BACK TO YOU WITH THESE THINGS ON IT.

YOU'RE THE GUY THAT GOT TO GO FIND OUT WHAT TO DO WITH IT. GOOD LUCK SELLING THEM.

I DON'T KNOW WHO'S BUYING THEM. I'VE SAID TOO MUCH.

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT ON THE TAX AND THE TRANSFER.

SO IT IS CORRECT.

IT'S NOT OUT OF AG PREV, IT'S OUT OF AG ITSELF.

THE STATE HAS US IMPOSE AN AGRICULTURAL TRANSFER TAX.

THAT MONEY IS COLLECTED AND SET ASIDE AND IS USED FOR PART OF OUR MOUTH REPORTING THAT WE REPORT EACH YEAR TO CONTINUE TO BUY.

>> BECAUSE OF TRANSFER OF AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY, THE FUNDS ARE GROWING, NOT PURCHASING OUT OF EASEMENT.

WELL, IT IS OUT OF AGRICULTURAL TO A DIFFERENT USE.

OKAY. BE USED FOR FUTURE EASEMENTS.

WE REPORT BETH DOS REPORT EACH YEAR BETWEEN THE TWO PRESERVATION AND THE TRANSFER TAX.

> EVEN A PROPERTY OWNER NOT TRANSFERRING OWNERSHIP, JUST TAKING YOU OUT OF AG INTO COMMERCIAL HAS TO PAY INTO THAT TRANSFER HAS TO PAY.

>> IT IS OUT OF AGRICULTURAL, AND IT HAS THERE'S A WHOLE LIST OF HOW MANY ACRES AND WHAT PERCENTAGE THAT FORMULATES INTO THAT.

WE DO NOT CALCULATE THAT OR GET ANYTHING OTHER THAN A STATEMENT FROM THE STATE THAT SAYS, HEY, THEY MUST PAY.

X ON THAT AND THAT WILL SET THAT ASIDE.

>> WITHOUT SEEING WITHOUT HAVING KNOWLEDGE OF THE LEASES, IT'S UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHO'S GOING TO PAY WHEN IT SWITCHES FROM AG TO AG TO COMMERCIAL, IT'S UP TO THEM TO DECIDE WHO'S GOING TO PAY THAT? THE TOTAL TAX.

YES. THE LEASE PART HAS MADE ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL SET OF ISSUES FOR OUR OFFICE AS WELL.

SO IF YOU RECORD A LEASE THAT'S FOR A TERM OVER SEVEN YEARS, YOU HAVE TO PAY TRANSFER OR RECREATION TAX ON IT.

WE ACTUALLY JUST HAD THIS WEEK WHERE DEVELOPER IS LOOKING TO RECORD A LEASE, AND THEY GIVE US THE CLIFF NOTES VERSION OF IT GOING, I'M GOING TO PAY 35 YEARS AT THIS RATE.

TELL ME WHAT THE TAXES SO I CAN RECORD THAT MEMORANDUM OF A LEASE, WHICH AS STEWART HAS MENTIONED IS A CONDENSED VERSION.

WE'RE THEY'RE GIVING US LITTLE PIECES SO WE CAN TRY TO CALCULATE OUT WHAT THEIR TAXES, BUT WE NEVER GET THE FULL DOCUMENT TO LOOK THROUGH TO SEE WHAT OTHER CONSIDERATION THAT THEY MAY OWE ON IS IN THERE.

WE FOR YEARS, HAVE NEVER HAD ANY OF THOSE COME THROUGH UNTIL THE PAST TWO YEARS OR SO.

>> MATT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE MEMORANDUMS OF LEASE THAT YOU DID SEE FOR THESE SOLAR PROJECTS HAVE A TENDENCY TO EVEN THOUGH IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A 20 TO 30 YEAR PROJECT, THE INITIAL TERM IS STATED TO BE FIVE YEARS WITH OPTIONS TO RENEW? CORRECT. FOR MULTIPLE YEARS, AND THAT'S TO AVOID THE TEN THE RECORD CORRECT.

[01:40:02]

THAT'S A LOOPHOLE THAT REALLY OUGHT TO BE CLOSED.

BUT SEE, WE DON'T HAVE THE LEASES.

I THINK THE COUNTY OUGHT TO INSIST ON SEEING THE LEASES.

>> I JUST HOPE THAT EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THIS UNDERSTAND WHO'S PAYING WAY.

BECAUSE I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY HAD A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS WHERE ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN CHANGED AND THE PERSON DOING IT DIDN'T REALIZE IT.

>> WELL, I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHEN THAT CHANGE IN ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE.

DOES IT TAKE PLACE EVERY THREE YEARS, OR IT TAKE PLACE IMMEDIATELY UPON THE CHANGE IN USE> YOU SHOULD CHANGE IMMEDIATELY UPON.

YES. WE SHOULD SEE THAT WHEN THAT HAPPENED.

>> IN SOLAR'S CASE, WOULD IT BE WHEN THE SOLAR PANELS CAME ONLINE OR WOULD IT BE WHEN THEY STARTED DRIVING THE POSTS IN THE GROUND WHEN THEY OBTAINED THE PERMIT? WHEN WOULD IT COME OUT OF AG ASSESSMENT AND GO INTO COMMERCIAL ASSESSMENT? AND WHO NOTIFIES DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS THAT THAT CHANGE HAS OCCURRED?

>> TO I'D SAY PROBABLY PERMIT, THEY GET COPIES OF BUILDING PERMITS, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY TRIGGER WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO DO ASSESSMENTS.

>> WE NEED TO KEEP AN EYE ON THE ASSESSMENT OFFICE AND MAKE SURE THOSE CHANGES ARE TAKING PLACE?

>> I SPECIFICALLY, WE'VE SEEN IT WITH THE MINING FOR ANY OF THE SUNDER GRAVEL THAT OCCURS, ARE STARTING TO SEE THAT WITH THE SOLAR.

>> IN MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE LOCAL ASSESSMENT OFFICE IS THAT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY DO THAT THREE YEAR CYCLE, UNLESS THEY GET A PERMIT FROM US THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO FLAG IN THEIR SYSTEM THAT THERE'S A PERMIT ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE.

NOW THEY WILL START CHECKING IT EARLIER THAN THAT THREE YEAR CYCLE.

>> I GOT A FEELING THEY MISSED ONE.

>> WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT LATER, BUT WE WERE MORE THAN HAPPY TO LOOK THEM UP AND SEE IF WE'VE RECEIVED ANYTHING.

GOOD. THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU. DON'T GO FAR.

YOU'RE ON THE AGENDA AGAIN. HERE LIVE BACK.

NEXT UP, WE HAVE AT START,

[Kat Stork, Shore Strategies LLC & Robert Zimberoff, Director, Economic Development & Tourism]

SHORE STRATEGIES, LLC, AND ROBERT ZIMMERHOF,

[Federalsburg Better Together Partnership Agreement]

DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM, WITH A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FELSBURG BETTER TOGETHER PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. GOOD MORNING.

>> GOOG MORNING.

>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. THANKS FOR HAVING US.

I'M BOB ZIMBER OFF, CAROLINE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM DIRECTOR.

NEXT TO ME IS AT STORK OF SHORE STRATEGIES, FEDERAL SBURG BETTER TOGETHER AND CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER. I'M HERE TODAY.

WE'RE HERE TODAY WITH AN UPDATE ON THE GOVERNOR'S ENOUGH ACT INITIATIVE, AND I WOULD SAY OUR RESPONSE TO IT.

I'M GOING TO OFFER YOU A BRIEF HIGH LEVEL VIEW AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO CAT TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND DETAILS.

THIS IS ALSO RELEVANT TO LATER ON ON THE CONSENT AGENDAS, THE FEDERALS BURG BETTER TOGETHER PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO SIGN. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.

THE ENOUGH STANDS FOR ENGAGING NEIGHBORHOODS, ORGANIZATIONS, UNIONS, GOVERNMENTS, AND HOUSEHOLDS.

ESSENTIALLY, IT'S A REALLY, VERY HIGHLY COMPETITIVE GRANT.

IT'S DRIVEN BY ZIP CODES AND CENSUS TRACKS.

GREENSBORO AND FEDERALS BURG ARE ELIGIBLE.

CAT JUST TOLD ME TODAY THAT EVIDENTLY THEY GOT 500 LETTERS OF INTENT.

AND WE ARE GOING FOR TRACK TWO, AND ONLY SEVEN AWARDS WILL BE MADE FOR TRACK 2.

WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT FEDERALSBURG TODAY.

THERE'S WORK IN GREENSBORO 2, BUT THERE ARE SEPARATE TRACKS OR EXCUSE ME, SEPARATE ZIP CODE, SEPARATE APPLICATIONS.

THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT ARE THE THREE ENTITIES THAT NEED TO BE AT THE TABLE TO EVEN QUALIFY OR ALREADY WORKING TOGETHER.

THAT BEING CORRECT CORRECT I BELIEVE IF I'M WRONG, AT WITH CAROLINE BERT TOGETHER AND FEDERALS BURG BETTER TOGETHER, CAROLINE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND SUSAN WITH THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL.

YOU CAN APPLY FOR THREE DIFFERENT TRACKS.

ONE IS TRACK 1, THAT WOULD BE A PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENTS FOR FEDERALS BERG, WE'RE GOING FOR TRACK 2 BECAUSE THANKS TO CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER, THAT PARTNERSHIP ALREADY EXISTS.

FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PUTTING TOGETHER A PRETTY GOOD COMPETITIVE APPLICATION, THANKS TO THE WORK THAT HAS ALREADY DONE.

WHAT ENOUGH IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER IS VERY WELL ALIGNED WITH FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN.

TRACK 3 WOULD BE IMPLEMENTATION.

WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET, BUT THE IDEA IS TO GO FOR FUNDS FOR TRACK 2 AND THEN IMPLEMENT.

IF WE GET THE FUNDS, IMPLEMENTATION WOULD COME NEXT.

>> WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THERE'S FUNDS FOR IMPLEMENTATION TO?

[01:45:02]

>> WELL, I WAS ABOUT TO TURN IT OVER TO CAT. YES, SIR.

>> YOU'RE CONFUSING. JUST EXPLAIN. JUST START OFF.

>> THAT'S THE ENOUGH ACT, AND WHAT DOES IT DO DOES? >. SURE. THE ENO ACT WAS PART OF LEGISLATION THAT WENT THROUGH DURING THE 2024 SESSION.

IT'S GOVERNOR MOORE'S ANTI POVERTY CAMPAIGN INITIATIVE.

IT IS GEARED TOWARD ESTABLISHING IN CENSUS TRACTS THAT HAVE AT LEAST 30% CHILD POVERTY RATES, COLLECTIVE, COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY DRIVEN EFFORTS TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES.

IN ORDER FOR A CENSUS TRACT TO BE ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR THE FUNDS.

THEY HAVE TO MEET THAT CHILD POVERTY RATE.

FEDERALS BERG'S CHILD POVERTY RATE RIGHT NOW IS 38 PLUS CHANGE PERCENT.

GREENSBORO, WHICH IS THE OTHER ELIGIBLE COMMUNITY IN CAROLINE IS SITTING AT ABOUT 31% CHILD POVERTY RIGHT NOW WITHIN THEIR CENSUS TRACK.

THAT'S THE MUNICIPALITY PLUS THE AREA RIGHT AROUND IT IN THE CENSUS TRACT IN THAT AREA.

>> THEY HAVE TO BE SERVED BY A COMMUNITY SCHOOL.

AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE A GOVERNMENT ENTITY THAT'S WILLING TO BE A PARTNER, AS WELL AS A COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATION THAT'S WILLING TO BE A PARTNER.

IN FEDERALSBURG, IN THE CENSUS TRACK IN FEDERALSBURG, THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG IS A LEAD ENTITY.

CAROLINE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH THE COMMUNITY FEDERALSBURG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS A LEAD ENTITY ON THE PROJECT.

AND THEN THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL AS THE BACKBONE ORGANIZATION FOR CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER IS SERVING AS THE COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATION AND THE COORDINATOR WILL BE COORDINATING THE PROJECT WITH THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG.

FISCAL AGENT FOR THE PROJECT WILL BE THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG.

AND THE GOAL IS REALLY ABOUT TAKING THE WORK THAT WE HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS AS THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL AND CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER, THE NEEDS ASSESSMENTS THAT WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED, THE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HELD TO IDENTIFY WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHAT THE NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY ARE, AND WORKING SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THAT SMALL AREA OF THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, AND THE CENSUS TRACT AROUND IT TO DEVELOP AN ACTION PLAN, A COMMUNITY BASED ACTION PLAN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATION NON PROFIT PARTNERS, ANY GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAT ARE WORKING IN THAT COMMUNITY.

SO THAT COULD BE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, SOCIAL SERVICES, COUNTY OPERATIONS LIKE RECREATION AND PARKS, CAN BE PARTNERS IN THE PROJECT.

BUT AT TRACK 2, THE IDEA IS THAT WE'RE TAKING WHAT WE KNOW AND WE'RE BUILDING AN ACTION PLAN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE IDENTIFIED NEEDS WITHIN THOSE COMMUNITIES.

TRACK 1 IS IF THERE IS NOT A PARTNERSHIP YET, IF THE PARTNERSHIP IS NOT AS STRONG.

WE HAVE A VERY STRONG PARTNERSHIP IN FEDERALSBURG, OUT OF THE CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER WORK, AND ALSO THE RESPONSE OF THAT COMMUNITY TO CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER.

THERE'S BEEN TREMENDOUS ENGAGEMENT FROM THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE TOWN, FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN THE TOWN, AS WELL AS THOSE PARTNERING ORGANIZATIONS ALL THE WAY FROM THE VERY LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH COUNTY AND STATE AGENCIES.

>> SO THIS IS JUST BUILDING AN ACTION PLAN?

>> IT'S JUST BUILDING AN ACTION PLAN.

>> AND WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT? WHAT KIND OF ACTIVITIES?

>> SO IT'S IDENTIFYING WHAT THE DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THAT THE COMMUNITY MAY IDENTIFY.

IF THERE'S A NEED FOR COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING AT THE FEDERALSBURG ACTIVITY CENTER, THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE FUNDED IN LATER ROUNDS OF FUNDING.

IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THAT TRACK 3 FUNDING, WHEN IT BECOMES AVAILABLE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE ACTION PLAN IN ORDER TO DO THAT.

WE'RE HERE TO ASK FOR THE COUNTY'S PARTNERSHIP IN SUPPORTING THE WORK.

THERE'S NO RESPONSIBILITY ON THE COUNTY IN TERMS OF MANAGEMENT OF THE PROJECT OR ENGAGEMENT IN PROVIDING ANY OF THOSE DIRECT SERVICES.

WE WANT YOU AT THE TABLE TO BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING WITHIN THAT CENSUS TRACK.

AND WE'D LIKE YOU TO BE A PART OF HELPING US IDENTIFY WHAT'S NEEDED IN OUR COMMUNITY.

AND WHERE ARE THERE SOURCES OUTSIDE OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT THAT CAN HELP TO SUPPORT THAT.

[01:50:04]

AS WELL AS ARE THERE FEE BASED SERVICES? IS THERE ENTREPRENEURIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES? PART OF THIS IS ABOUT BRINGING BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRY INTO THE DIALOGUES ABOUT WHAT ARE NEEDED WITHIN COMMUNITY SERVICES TO MEET THE ONGOING FUTURE NEEDS OF THAT COMMUNITY.

OVERALL, THERE ARE GOING TO BE 10 AWARDS AT THAT TRACK 1, WHICH IS WHERE GREENSBORO IS PUT IN A LETTER OF INTENT FOR, WHICH IS REALLY ABOUT BRINGING THE PARTNERSHIP TOGETHER.

AT TRACK 2, THERE ARE SEVEN AWARDS STATEWIDE.

AT TRACK 3, THERE WILL ONLY BE THREE AWARDS THIS YEAR.

TRACK 2, WE FEEL, WE'RE VERY STRONGLY POSITIONED FOR THAT WORK BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR WITH CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER.

>> SO THE SEVEN WHO BUILD ACTION PLANS, ONLY THREE ARE GOING TO GET FUNDED.

>> NO. THERE ARE THREE BEING FUNDED THIS YEAR AT TRACK 3.

IN LATER YEARS, THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR OTHER FUNDING.

I THINK THAT THE IMPORTANT THING WITH THIS TOO IS THAT THIS WORK IS GOING TO GO ON WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE SUCCESSFUL IN THIS APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG OR NOT.

THERE WAS A CARVE OUT OF ENOUGH FUNDING THAT WAS DIRECTED SPECIFICALLY TO LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARDS TO ALSO SUPPORT THIS IDEA OF CAPACITY BUILDING.

SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE ARE SUCCESSFUL IN THIS COMPETITIVE APPLICATION OR NOT, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY $157,000 THAT'S GOING TO COME IN THROUGH THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS TYPE OF CAPACITY BUILDING, NOT JUST IN FEDERALSBURG, BUT ACROSS THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

AND TO POSITION OUR NON PROFITS TO BE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY LEVERAGE PHILANTHROPIC DOLLARS AND DOLLARS FROM OTHER AREAS THAT THEY MAY NOT ALREADY BE AWARE OF, TO STRENGTHEN THE CAPACITY OF OUR NON PROFITS TO WRITE GRANTS, TO MANAGE GRANTS, TO DO THE FISCAL MANAGEMENT BEHIND IT.

THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE BUILT INTO THE CAPACITY BUILDING LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD FUNDING THAT IS SECURED BASED UPON THE FORMULA THAT THE LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD IS FUNDED THROUGH THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FOR CHILDREN.

WE JUST HAPPEN TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT WE CAN WE CAN BRING IN ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS ISSUES WITH THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

AND WE'RE JUST ASKING YOU TO BE A PART OF HELPING US TO DESIGN THAT ACTION PLAN.

>> OKAY.

>> COMMISSIONER BOARDS.

>> TRACK 2, THAT YOU'RE APPLYING FOR FEDERALSBURG, WILL YOU GET ANY MONETARY GRANT? YOU SAID 150,000?

>> YOU CAN YOU CAN APPLY FOR UP TO $300,000.

THOSE FUNDS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE FISCAL AGENT WHO MANAGES THEM WILL BE THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, AND IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL.

AND THIS PARTNERSHIP THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR FROM ALL COMMUNITY MEMBERS, DECISIONS WILL BE MADE ABOUT HOW THOSE DOLLARS ARE USED.

BUT THE DOLLARS ARE TO BE USED TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ACTION PLAN, NOT TO PROVIDE DIRECT SERVICES.

>> [OVERLAPPING] SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, THE $300,000 IS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE?

>> NO, IT'S REALLY TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND PARTNERS THAT ARE INVOLVED TO HELP TO ENGAGE THEIR CLIENTS, THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, IN BEING A PART OF THE PROCESS.

IT WILL BE USED TO FUND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, FOOD FOR COMMUNITY MEETINGS, INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE TO COME OUT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I MENTIONED THIS MORNING TO BOB, THAT I'M REALLY INTERESTED BOTH FROM IN THE LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD CAPACITY BUILDING PART OF THE FUNDING, BUT ALSO THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG IS POTENTIALLY TO BUILD OUT SOME STAFFING CAPACITY TO DO DATA MANAGEMENT BECAUSE ALL OF THIS IS SO BUILT AROUND DATA.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE RUN UP AGAINST WHEN WE DO, AND I WORK WITH A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS TO WRITE GRANTS, IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY MANAGING THE DATA TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO BUILDING THE CAPACITY IN ONE OF OUR PARTNERS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE THAT WORK.

IT IS NOT DIRECTED TO ADMINISTRATION OTHER THAN THE ACTUAL WRITING OF THE PROJECT.

WE CAN APPLY FOR UP TO $300,000.

[01:55:02]

I MEAN, WE'RE WORKING ON THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW.

I THINK IT'S SITTING RIGHT NOW AT ABOUT $125,000.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT JUST GRABBING EVERY DOLLAR WE CAN.

IT'S ABOUT REALLY INTENTIONALLY LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN BUILDING A PLAN THAT THEY ARE A PART OF.

>> DO YOU HAVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG?

>> THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG WILL SIGN THIS SAME AGREEMENT.

THEY'VE ALREADY SIGNED THE AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE THAT'S A PART OF YOUR CONSENT AGENDA TODAY.

[BACKGROUND] AND IT REALLY JUST THIS OUTLINES IT.

THIS OUTLINES REALLY THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS.

THE LAST LINE BEFORE YOUR SIGNATURE IS THE FEDERALSBURG BETTER TOGETHER LEAD ENTITY.

LEAD ENTITIES, WHICH INCLUDE, AGAIN, TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, CAROLINE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF IT?

>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE AGREEMENT.

>> HERE WE GO.

>> NO [OVERLAPPING]

>> THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG IS A LEAD ENTITY RUN WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.

AND AGAIN, THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL, THEY WILL SIGN AS LEAD ENTITIES.

EVERYONE ELSE IS BEING ASKED TO SIGN AS A PARTNER.

AND THE LAST LINE BEFORE THE SIGNATURE LINE IS THAT IT'S AN INTENT TO SUPPORT WHAT IS GOING ON.

IT IS NOT BINDING.

CERTAINLY STEWART, I'M SURE WE WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

BUT IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG ATTORNEY PRIOR TO THAT.

>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ADMINISTRATION, I KNOW THAT THE LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD HAS PILLARS THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE.

HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT THAN THAT? I MEAN, WHY WOULD IT?

>> IT'S JUST AN EXPANSION OF THAT WORKS.

>> IT'S DUPLICATIVE.

>> BUT ALL OF THESE FALL WITHIN THOSE PILLARS?

>> BUT THE PILLARS KEEP CHANGING.

>> THEY'RE COMBINED INTO FOUR PRIORITY AREAS NOW.

>> WHAT ROLE WILL THE LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD HAVE IN ADMINISTRATION OF THIS?

>> IN THIS PROJECT?

>> YEAH.

>> THE LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD IS ACTING AS THE QUARTERBACK.

>> THAT'S AN OFFICIAL PRESENTATION.

>> THAT IS BEING USED BY THIS INITIATIVE TO DO THE COLLECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF DATA MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING AND THOSE COMPONENTS OF IT AND WORK WITH THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, WHO WILL BE THE FISCAL.

>> AND I'M ASSUMING THAT IN GREENSBORO, THE GREENSBORO TOWN COUNCIL WILL BE THE LEGAL ELECTED BODY INVOLVED IN THIS?

>> YES. THEY WILL BE THE ELECTED PARTNER IN THIS.

THERE HAS NOT BEEN A DETERMINATION YET BY THAT GROUP WHO WILL BE THE LEAD FISCAL AGENT OR THE QUARTERBACK ORGANIZATION.

THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL CAN ONLY SERVE AS A QUARTERBACK ON ONE OF THESE COMPETITIVE INITIATIVES IN ONE COMMUNITY.

THEY CAN'T DO BOTH. IT'S WRITTEN INTO THE NOTICE OF FUNDING.

>> AND DIRECTIONS.

>> DOES ALL OF FEDERALSBURG FALL INTO ONE CENSUS TRACK?

>> AND ALL OF GREENSBORO FALLS INTO ON CENSUS TRACK?

>> SO THE REASON THAT THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, PRESTON AND RIDGELY WERE NOT ELIGIBLE WAS BECAUSE OF THE PERCENTAGES OF POVERTY?

>>THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE WERE ABLE TO SET OUR OWN BOUNDARIES AROUND THAT CENSUS TRACK.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC TO THAT CENSUS TRACK.

SO FOR THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, PROPOSAL, THEY ARE NOT JUST LOOKING AT THEIR CENSUS TRACT, BUT THEY'VE WRAPPED IT AROUND TO THE ZIP CODE SO THAT THEY CAN ALSO INCLUDE THE SCHOOLS COLONEL MIDDLE AND COLONEL HIGH.

SINCE SINCE FEDERALSBURG ELEMENT, WE HAVE SUCH A TRACK THAT WE FEED RIGHT FROM ONE SCHOOL TO ANOTHER, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.

WE WERE ABLE TO AND WE VERIFIED WITH THE STATE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO EXPAND OUR GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE THE CATCHMENT AREA AROUND THE SCHOOL.

>> AND I'VE BEEN JUMPING TO A CONCLUSION THIS WHOLE TIME.

I ACTUALLY HAVE TO ASK THE ELIGIBLE AREAS, THE CENSUS TRACKS WERE DETERMINED BY THE STATE MORE OR LESS?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY WERE NOT DETERMINED BY US.

THE PRIORITY AREAS WERE BASED UPON, YOU HAVE TO BE AT A LEVEL WHERE YOU'RE OVER 30% CHILD POVERTY IN THAT IN THAT CENSUS TRACK.

>> SO HOW IS THIS GOING TO HELP CHILD POVERTY?

[02:00:08]

>> I WOULD HOPE THAT THE WAY THAT IT HELPS CHILD POVERTY IS THAT WE ARE WORKING TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY WAYS THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN SUPPORT BUILDING OUT PROGRAMS AND SUPPORTS THAT MOVE PEOPLE OUT OF POVERTY.

WHETHER THAT'S CREATING NEW JOBS, APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS, WHETHER THAT'S PROVIDING AFTER SCHOOL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES THAT SUPPORT STUDENTS SUCCESS, WHICH THEN ASSIST THEM IN MOVING ON IN THEIR CRADLE TO CAREER DEVELOPMENT SO THAT THEY WILL HAVE STABLE HOUSEHOLD INCOMES WHEN THEY FINISH WITH SCHOOL AND MOVE INTO OUR WORK FORCES.

>> I AGREE WITH THAT.

EDUCATION IS THE KEY TO ENDING CHILD POVERTY.

BUT WHAT BOTHERS ME IS THE PEOPLE THAT IS IMPLEMENTED TO THE MAXIMUM SO KIDS UNDERSTAND AND ARE EDUCATED TO THE EXTENT.

WHAT I GET TIRED OF AT IS, WHEN WE GET THESE GRANTS AND WE WENT OVER THIS COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, IS, IT ALL GOES TO ADMINISTRATIVE.

WHAT YOU TOLD ME HERE IN THIS TRACT 2, EVEN THOUGH YOU SAID IT WASN'T ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICALLY, IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE.

FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHAT YOU JUST TOLD ME.

BECAUSE YOU'RE HIRING SOMEBODY TO DO DATA, YOU'RE HIRING SOMEBODY FOR THIS, THAT'S WHAT BOTHERS ME BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE HOOPS, AND AT THE END, YOU'RE HOPING TO GET THIS BIG POT OF MONEY, WHICH I FEEL CAN HELP CHILD POVERTY BECAUSE WHEN YOU EDUCATE KIDS, LIKE I SAID, IT'S THE ONLY WAY OUT.

BUT TO GET TO THAT POINT, IT JUST TAKES FOREVER.

IT'S FRUSTRATING BECAUSE YOU GOT TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE WHOOPS.

>> IT IS.

>> SO MUCH TIME AND EFFORT IS SPENT IN IDENTIFYING.

>> WE KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM.

>> WHAT TIME AND ENERGY IS SPENT IN IMPLEMENTING, THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE BECAUSE WE GO THROUGH THESE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

WE HAVE ALL THIS INPUT.

WE COME UP WITH ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT WE SAY NEED TO BE DONE. NOTHING EVER GETS DONE.

>> IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE AT THIS POINT.

>> IS THERE MONEY IN THIS PROGRAM TO IMPLEMENT WHAT WE DECIDE NEEDS TO BE DONE?

>> NOT AT THE POINT THAT WE'RE ELIGIBLE FOR BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE ACTION PLAN.

WE TALKED IN OUR LAST PARTNER MEETING ABOUT THIS.

WE REALLY FEEL THAT WE ARE AT THE POINT WHERE WE MIGHT NOT BE SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE IT'S SO HIGHLY COMPETITIVE WITH ONLY THREE APPLICATIONS BEING FUNDED AT TRACT 3 THIS YEAR.

BUT WE FEEL THAT BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THESE GROUPS OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS AND THE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE COULD IMPLEMENT RIGHT NOW.

THERE'S FULL RECOGNITION OF WHERE THE NEEDS ARE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED FOR YEARS IN IDENTIFYING PROGRAMS AND IDENTIFYING PLANS.

FIRST OF ALL, I'M ABSOLUTELY AMAZED THAT FEDERALSBURG AND GREENSBORO WOULD QUALIFY, BUT THE OTHER COMMUNITIES IN OUR COUNTY AREN'T ELIGIBLE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT DATA THAT SAYS THAT RIDGELY DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THESE FUNDS OR THAT PRESTON DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR THESE FUNDS, NUMBER 1.

NUMBER TWO, WE GO TO ALL THIS WORK.

YOU GUYS GO TO ALL THIS WORK, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE COMPETING AGAINST MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, WHO HAVE ENTIRE STAFFS WHO DO NOTHING BUT THIS.

THAT'S WHERE I THINK MY FRUSTRATION COMES IS THAT WE DO ALL THIS AND WE GET TO THIS POINT AND WE SAY, HERE'S ALL THE PROGRAMS, HERE'S ALL THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO, BUT WE DIDN'T GET THE MONEY TO DO IT.

>> I AGREE WITH THE FRUSTRATION.

I REALLY DO REGARDING DATA.

IN A WAY, IT'S THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG, AND IT'S BEEN AN ISSUE THAT I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH SINCE, I WOULD SAY, JOINED THE PUBLIC SECTOR FOR YEARS.

YOU HAVE TO ESTABLISH A BASELINE.

YOU HAVE TO SHOW WHERE YOU ARE, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO SHOW WHAT YOU ACHIEVED ONCE YOU RECEIVE FUNDING.

WELL, IT'S VERY, VERY CHALLENGING TO ESTABLISH A BASELINE, AND IT'S VERY, VERY CHALLENGING TO SHOW CHANGE.

NOW THAT I'M IN THIS ROLE, I'M SEEING JUST HOW VERY EXPENSIVE IT IS TO SUBSCRIBE TO DATABASED SERVICES WHERE ALL INFORMATION IS AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. IT'S NOT CHEAP.

[02:05:09]

>> BOB, THE PROBLEM IS, I THINK THE NEXT STEP IS, IF WE'RE NOT SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THIS MONEY, THEN I THINK THE PERCEPTION IS GOING TO BE, WELL, WE NEED ALL THESE THINGS.

WHY DON'T WE JUST GO BACK AND ASK THE COUNTY?

>> SURE.

>> WHY DON'T WE JUST GO BACK IN AND ASK THESE GUYS BECAUSE THEY GOT ALL THIS MONEY LAYING AROUND.

WHY DON'T WE GO BACK AND ASK THEM? I DON'T WANT TO PROLONG.

>> WHAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO DO IS TO AGREE TO SUPPORT THIS PLAN.

THERE'S NO OBLIGATION FROM US TO DO ANYTHING EXCEPT SIGN THIS AGREEMENT THAT WE WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO MOVE FORWARD TO COME UP WITH YOUR DATA.

I'M GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT RELUCTANT TO SIGN THIS UNTIL I FIND OUT WHY THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN THIS COUNTY AREN'T ELIGIBLE FOR IT.

THAT'S MY QUESTION. BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCE IN POVERTY IN GREENSBORO OR FEDERALSBURG THAN THERE IS IN THE OTHER TOWNS.

IF SOMEBODY COMES BACK AND TELLS ME, WE CAN PROVE TO YOU THAT THERE ISN'T, OKAY.

>> WELL, I THINK THAT THESE WERE THE PARAMETERS THAT WERE SET BY THE STATE AND BY THE GOVERNORS IN THE STATE.

>> I WANT TO KNOW WHO IN THE STATE IS SAYING THAT THE OTHER TOWNS AREN'T ELIGIBLE.

>> IT'S BASED ON CENSUS TRACT.

IT'S JUST BASED ON CENSUS TRACT DATA.

IT'S JUST BASED ON WHAT'S SHOWING UP YOUR CENSUS TRACT.

IN THOSE, THEY PICKED THE CENSUS TRACT AS WHAT THEY WERE USING TO IDENTIFY, AND THEY PICKED THE BASELINE OF 30% CHILD POVERTY.

THEY PICKED THOSE TWO THINGS.

THE DATA IS THE DATA.

THE CENSUS DATA FOR ORIGINALLY, AND I DON'T HAVE MY COMPUTER IN FRONT OF ME. I CAN'T PULL THAT.

>> YOU CAN MAKE DATA SAY WHATEVER YOU WANTED TO SAY.

MY MY POINT IS, I WANT SOMEONE, AND YOU CAN DO IT.

IF YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION, YOU CAN SHOW ME.

BUT I WANT SOMEONE TO SHOW ME WHERE THERE IS NOT THE SAME AMOUNT OF CHILD POVERTY IN THE OTHER TOWNS THAT THERE ARE IN THESE TWO.

IF YOU SHOW IT TO ME, I'LL LOOK AT IT.

BUT I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T BELIEVE IT.

>> I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF CENSUS TRACT, NOT IN TERMS OF MUNICIPALITY, THOUGH, BECAUSE YOUR CENSUS TRACT IS LARGER THAN YOUR MUNICIPALITY.

WHERE YOU MAY HAVE CHILD POVERTY CENTRALIZED IN RIDGELY, THAT SHOWS UP AS 50% CHILD POVERTY, THE CENSUS TRACT THAT RIDGELY SITS IN THE MIDDLE OF, THEIR CHILD POVERTY RATE MAY BE 50% AND BE OVER IT BECAUSE OF THAT.

IT'S BASED ON THAT GEOGRAPHIC AREA.

>> GIVE ME SOMETHING SO THAT WHEN SOMEONE COMES TO ME FROM RIDGELY OR PRESTON, IF THEY COME TO ME AND SAY, HOW COME YOU GUYS ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT FOR JUST THESE TWO TOWNS? WHY WASN'T MY TOWN AND WHY WASN'T MY AREA INCLUDED? GIVE ME SOMETHING THAT I HAVE SO THAT I CAN SAY, WELL, HERE'S WHY.

>> I THINK THAT THE OTHER THING IS, IF YOU DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SIGNING IT FOR THOSE REASONS, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT.

FOR THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG AND THIS GROUP TO MOVE FORWARD, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE TO SIGN ON.

WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE ALREADY VERY SUPPORTIVE OF EVERYTHING THAT THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL DOES AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, AND THE CAPACITY BUILDING GRANT THAT IS COMING THROUGH, THAT WILL CONTINUE THROUGH THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL LOCAL MANAGEMENT BOARD.

>> IS THERE DEADLINE ON THIS FOR SEPTEMBER SIGNATURE?

>> SEPTEMBER 20TH, IT'S DUE NEXT WEEK.

>> WELL, HOW COME WE JUST GOT IT TODAY? HOW LONG HAVE YOU HAD IT?

>> IT WAS RELEASED ON JULY 1ST.

>> JULY 1ST? BUT WE GET IT THE WEEK BEFORE THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE DUE?

>> WELL, WE INVITED PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE, AND BOB HAS BEEN ATTENDING SINCE JULY.

>> WHAT IS ON OUR AGENDA TODAY, AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I'VE SEEN THIS DOCUMENT.

IF I DON'T SUPPORT THIS, IT WON'T BE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S GOOD, IT'LL BE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S INCLUSIVE ENOUGH.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, I THINK IF SIGNING THE DOCUMENT AND IDENTIFYING WITHIN ONE COMMUNITY DOES NOT GIVE YOU THE PARAMETERS OF THE ENTIRE COUNTY AS YOU REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COUNTY, THAT'S OKAY.

IF THEY'RE GOING TO THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, AND THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL HAS THE QUARTERBACK, AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE APPLICATION,

[02:10:03]

IT WON'T REALLY CHANGE ANYTHING, AND IF IT'S MORE COMFORTABLE FOR YOU NOT TO IDENTIFY SPECIFICALLY WITH DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES, I THINK THAT THAT'S PERFECTLY REASONABLE.

>> WE HAVE THE 17TH, WHICH IS THE NEXT MEETING.

I THINK WE COULD OBVIOUSLY TABLE THIS, GO OVER THE CENSUS TRACTS.

THE CENSUS TRACTS ARE SOMETHING THAT STACY AND I DEAL WITH A LOT, ESPECIALLY BLOCK GRANTS AND THE DIFFERENT THINGS.

IT'S PUBLISHED OUT THERE.

I'M MORE THAN HAPPY. I'M SURE WE CAN PULL THAT DOWN, SHOW SOME OF THAT INFORMATION, AND MAYBE ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS IN BETWEEN NOW AND THE 17TH IF IT'S DUE.

>> BUT IF THE LMB, SO CORRECT ME.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD A COUPLE OF THINGS PROPERLY.

THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL IS RECEIVING 157,000 TO DO THIS COUNTYWIDE? THE EXACT SAME THING.

THIS IS JUST ADDITIONAL MONEY TO DO IT SPECIFICALLY IN FEDERALSBURG AND GREENSBORO IS GOING TO APPLY FOR THE FIRST PART OF IT.

THE OTHER THING THAT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT, I THINK I HEARD THIS, IS, IF THE LMB SIGNS ON TO QUARTERBACK, WHATEVER THE HECK THAT MEANS, THE PROJECT IN FEDERALSBURG, THEY CAN'T DO GREENSBORO.

>> THEY CAN'T BE THE QUARTERBACK AS A PART OF THIS APPLICATION.

THEIR SERVICES AND SUPPORT OF GREENSBORO WILL STILL BE AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT DIRECTED FUNDING IS TO GO TOWARD ANYBODY THAT HAS EITHER BEEN FOUND ELIGIBLE FOR THE TRACT 1 OR ANY OTHER COMMUNITY THAT HAS NOT CURRENTLY BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELIGIBLE.

>> THE OTHER THING IS, SO YOU'RE GATHERING INFORMATION.

WE KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE.

WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? WE KNOW IT'S TRANSPORTATION.

WE KNOW IT'S SECONDARY EDUCATION.

WE KNOW IT'S HIGHER PAYING JOBS.

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO RESEARCH IT AND COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT?

>> A GOOD POINT.

>> I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE TABLE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME INFORMATION JUST WHY THIS WOULDN'T INCLUDE THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

I WOULD MAKE ONE OTHER SUGGESTION.

DON'T BRING ME SOMETHING A WEEK BEFORE IT'S DUE TO TALK TO.

WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO READ, A LOT OF THINGS WE HAVE TO INVESTIGATE.

THESE QUESTIONS COULD HAVE BEEN ANSWERED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME IF YOU'VE HAD THIS SINCE JULY.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK, LARRY.

I THINK THAT IN THE MIDST OF WORKING ON THE PROJECT, TRUE TRANSPARENCY, ON MY PART, IT NEVER CROSSED MY MIND BECAUSE TO ME, THIS IS A TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, THAT US CENSUS, THAT TRACT PROJECT.

YOUR SUPPORT OF IT IS ONLY TO SAY, WE'LL PARTICIPATE IN THOSE MEETINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IF IT HAS HAD BEEN SOMETHING THAT NEEDED YOU TO BE INVOLVED IN IT OTHER THAN JUST AS WE WANT YOU TO BE AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH CAROLINE BETTER TOGETHER, WE WOULD HAVE BROUGHT IT TO YOU FORWARD.

>> BUT WE JUST SPENT 25 MINUTES TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IF WE'RE NOT NEEDED, IF IT'S NOT NECESSARY, THEN WE'VE WASTED JUST 25 MINUTES OF OUR TIME.

MY POINT IS, IF I'M GOING TO SIGN A DOCUMENT SAYING THAT I'M GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN SOMETHING, I NEED TO HAVE THAT DOCUMENT AHEAD OF TIME, I NEED TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT IT, I NEED TO BE ABLE TO INVESTIGATE IT.

WE GOT THIS ON THURSDAY.

I'M NOT TRYING TO BE THE BAD GUY, I'M JUST SAYING THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THIS INFORMATION IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKED.

WE MAY NOT BE IMPORTANT IN THIS PROCESS, BUT IF I SIGN A DOCUMENT, I NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.

MY SUGGESTION IS WE GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, TABLE THIS UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, 17TH.

IF I CAN SEE THAT I THINK THAT WE'RE BEING AS INCLUSIVE AS I THINK WE CAN BE, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS CONCEPT.

>> APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

>> I DON'T I DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT I WOULD EVER INFER THAT YOU WEREN'T IMPORTANT.

THAT WAS NOT. YOUR VOICES ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN THE ROOM.

IN TERMS OF GETTING THESE APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED, I DIDN'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT USING 25 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME WAS IMPORTANT AT THE BEGINNING OF IT,

[02:15:05]

AND I STAND CORRECTED AND THAT IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.

>> YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING?

>> THAT WE REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> WHEN WE START EXCLUDING AREAS, I NEED TO KNOW WHY.

[02:24:09]

>> WAIT, ARE WE BACK? THAT'S FINE.

[LAUGHTER] TURN IT ON AND I'LL GO.

EVERYONE. I'LL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

[Jamie Beechey, Director, Recreation & Parks Department Discussion of LPPI (Local Parks & Playgrounds Infrastructure) Funds for Sharp Road Park]

WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS JAMIE BETTIE, DIRECTOR OF RECREATION AND [NOISE] PARKS.

WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE LPP I LOCAL PARKS AND PLAYGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS FOR THE SHARP ROAD PROJECT. GOOD MORNING, JAMIE.

>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. FOR A LITTLE HISTORICAL CONTEXT.

IN 2021, THE STATE HAD A SPECIAL POT OF FUNDS, LPPI, BEING THE ACRONYM, LOCAL PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND $1,000,000 WAS ALLOCATED TO CAROLINE COUNTY FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS.

[02:25:01]

AT THAT TIME, CAROLINE COUNTY SUB AWARDED 300,000 OF THOSE DOLLARS TO THE TOWN OF DENTON FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO SHARP ROAD PARK AND SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO FOUR STREET PARK.

HERE, ABOUT A MONTH AGO, THE TOWN OF DENTON APPROACHED DNR ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THE REMAINING FUNDS, WHICH IS ABOUT $134,000 AND REORIENT THOSE FUNDS TO OTHER IMPROVEMENTS IN SHARP ROAD PARK THAT THEY HAD NOT IDENTIFIED IN 2021 TO DNR.

ESSENTIALLY, WHAT THEY WERE DOING IN 2021, THEY CONSTRUCTED THE RESTROOM FACILITIES.

THEY DID A LITTLE BIT OF CITING, BUT THEY DIDN'T DO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM, AND ADDITIONALLY, THEY DIDN'T DO SOME OF THE OTHER WORK AT SHARP ROAD PARK, WHICH LEFT THEM WITH $134,000.

AT THIS TIME, THEY'RE ASKING CAROLINE COUNTY TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF THOSE FUNDS, NOT TRANSFER, BUT JUST TO ANOTHER PROJECT, WHICH WOULD BE THE ENTRANCE ROAD, PAVING THE ENTRANCE ROAD AND ADDING PARKING.

WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE IS JUST RUSH STONE, CRUSH AND RUNS TONE.

BUT THEY'RE ASKING THAT WE WOULD APPROVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONVEY THOSE FUNDS TO ANOTHER PART OF THE PROJECT FOR THAT.

>> STILL BEING USED ON SHARPER.

>> STILL BEING USED A SHARPER A A DIFFERENT OUTCOME THAN THEY HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.

>> WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE.

>> IT'S OUR FUNDING.

>> THIS WAS PART OF THE MONEY THAT WAS GOTTEN THROUGH DELICATE GRACE?

>> YES. CORRECT. AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE HAD ALLOCATED 300,000 TO TOWN OF DENTON, 300,000 TO THE TOWN OF BRIDGLEY, AND 50,000 TO THE TOWN OF FEDERALSBURG, OUT OF THAT MILLION DOLLARS [NOISE]

>>DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> I DON'T.

>> QUESTION. THIS IS WHAT THE TOWN WANTS TO DO WITH THE MONEY?

>> CORRECT. IN FAIRNESS, IT WILL BENEFIT US AS WE MOVE INTO OUR CONSTRUCTION PERIOD BECAUSE THAT ENTRY ROAD WILL THEN SERVE AS ACCESS TO OUR PART OF THE PROPERTY.

>> IT'S PARKING THAT COULD BE USED FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE PLUS THE BASKETBALL COURT THAT'S THERE AND THE WALKING PATH.

DID THEY THEY USE SOME OF THIS MONEY FOR THE WALKING PATH AS WELL OR THE ORIGINAL? MAYBE NOT.

>> I DID USE FOR THE BATHROOM.

>> IT WAS A BATHROOM.

>> WELL, THE ORIGINAL WAS SOD AND IRRIGATION.

THEY DIDN'T DO THE SOD OR THE IRRIGATION AND THE BATHROOM APPARENTLY CAME IN UNDER BUDGET.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CHANGE IN SCOPE HERE FOR THIS FUNDING.

>> I WILL SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> WE HAVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THERE TONIGHT 6:00 P.M. WE'LL SEE YOU HERE.

>> AYES HAVE IT.

>> THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.

NEXT UP, DANIEL FOX, DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE CAROLINE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUND DISCUSSION.

>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION OUR CURRENT COLLECTION WHEN IT COMES TO THE CANNABIS TAX AND SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.

STARTING IN 2023, THE STATE PASSED THE CANNABIS REFORM ACT.

ESSENTIALLY LEGALIZING RECREATIONAL CANNABIS.

THE STATE IMPOSED A 9% SALES TAX ON THE SALE OF CANNABIS.

INSIDE OF THAT, 35% OF THE 9% TAX MUST GO TO WHAT THEY'RE CALLING COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUNDS, WHICH YOU'LL SEE THE ACRONYM, CRRF USED ON A LOT OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE HERE.

IN THAT, EACH COUNTY IS ALLOCATED A PERCENTAGE OF THAT 35% COLLECTION.

AIR LINE IS ESSENTIALLY JUST OVER EIGHT TENTHS OF A PERCENT WHEN IT COMES TO THAT CRRF.

YEAH. NOW, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A LARGE NUMBER, BUT LOOKING AT WHAT'S BEEN DISTRIBUTED AND COLLECTED OVER LAST FISCAL YEAR AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING FOR THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, THE LARGER NUMBERS.

FOR FYI 2024, CAROLINE COUNTY RECEIVED $367,496.78.

WE JUST RECEIVED OUR FIRST QUARTER DISTRIBUTION FOR FYI 25.

IT WAS AROUND $65,000.

WE CAN LOOK TO TAKE IN ABOUT $240,000 A YEAR FOR WHAT WE'VE BEEN SHOWING SO FAR.

[02:30:10]

I WILL SAY THAT FIRST FISCAL YEAR DID HAVE TAX AND COLLECTION ON SOME OF THE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH PEOPLE APPLYING TO BE DISTRIBUTORS OR FARMERS OR GROWERS IN THAT, AND THAT'S WHY THAT'S HIGHER.

>> BUT THE REASONING I'M HERE TODAY FOR CONVERSATION OF THIS IS IN THE CODE THAT WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE, EACH COUNTY MUST ESTABLISH A CRF FUND, AND IN THAT, WHAT THE USES FOR THESE FUNDS CAN BE.

AND THE STATE IS VERY SPECIFIC AND WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THESE FUNDS, IT JUST REQUIRES THE COUNTY TO ADOPT AND ESTABLISH THAT THEMSELVES.

IN GENERAL, AS NOTED ON THAT TWO PAGE SHEET THAT I GAVE YOU, FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY BASED INITIATIVES TO BENEFIT LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES, IS A LINE ITEM, FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY BASED INITIATIVES THAT SERVE DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED AREAS, AND THEN WE CAN ALSO TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE ON TOP OF THAT.

TALKING TO THE STEWARD HERE JUST A MINUTE AGO, IT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THE COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE ARE TAKING TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES AND TO ESTABLISHING THEIR CRF FUNDS.

A LOT OF THE SMALLER COUNTIES ARE ADOPTING ONE PAGE LEGISLATIVE BILLS THAT ESSENTIALLY COPY AND PASTE THE STATE ALLOWED USES.

IT SAYS, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH THE FUND, WE'RE GOING TO USE IT IN THESE THREE, FOUR, FIVE MANNERS, AND ADOPT AND GO WITH THIS, SEND THAT TO THE STATE.

WE'VE CHECKED THE BOX AND ABIDE BY THE REGULATIONS.

SOME OF THE LARGER COUNTIES IN RUNDLE, MONTGOMERY, PRINCE GEORGE'S, ARE ADOPTING ESPECIALLY BOARDS, WHERE THEY HAVE 13 PEOPLE BOARDS,

[Daniel Fox, Deputy County Administrator Caroline Community Reinvestment and Repair Fund (CRRF)]

15 PEOPLE BOARDS TO DECIDE HOW THIS MONEY GETS SPENT INSIDE OF THE STATE PARAMETERS.

I THINK FOR A COUNTY OF OUR SIZE AND THE MONEY THAT WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING, A BOARD IS DEFINITELY A CUMBERSOME THING TO MANAGE, ESPECIALLY FOR THE SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE DO GET IN THIS.

SO I'VE PULLED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT EXAMPLES. GARRETT COUNTY.

I KNOW WE HAVE CAROLINE COUNTY HERE OF WHAT THEY'VE ESTABLISHED, WHICH ARE MORE OF THE CONDENSED ADOPTING THE STATE REGULATION OF WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T USE.

I REALLY WANTED TO GET THIS OUT IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS FOR THE FIRST TIME, EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS AND SEE IF THERE WAS ANY INPUT ONTO THOUGHTS OR WHERE YOU GUYS MAY HAVE QUESTIONS WITH THIS MONEY AND FUNDING THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THE CAMPUS TAX.

>> THIS MONEY IS NOT FROM SALE OF CANAAS IN CAROLINE COUNTY.

THIS IS JUST OUR ALLOCATION OF THE STATEWIDE.

>> THAT IS CORRECTION. YES. SO THIS IS NOT SALE OF CAROLINE.

IT IS SALE OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.

>> WHAT'S THE ADMINISTRATIVE AMOUNT?

>> IT CALLS FOR ANY RELATED ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE.

SO IT WOULD BE UP TO THE JURISDICTION TO APPROVE OR DECLARE WHAT THEY FELT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE.

WE, A LOT OF TIMES IN OUR GRANT POLICY, HAVE 10% ADOPTED AS GENERAL ADMINISTRATION, AND THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO SEEK WHEN WE APPLY FOR GRANTS THAT WE MANAGE OR FUNDS, SO I WOULD SAY NOTHING MORE THAN 10.

>> THAT $36,000 A MONTH?

>> YES. AGAIN, I THINK TODAY, I REALLY JUST WANTED TO GET THIS IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS, LET YOU KNOW WHAT OUR REQUIREMENT IS, WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THIS.

WE ARE COLLECTING AND RECEIVING QUARTERLY DISBURSEMENTS FROM THE STATE.

SO THAT'S BEING ACCOUNTED ACCORDINGLY IN A SEPARATE FUND, WE'RE MANAGING THAT.

>> SO IT DOES HAVE TO BE KEPT IN A SEPARATE FUND.

>> HOW HOW IS THIS REPORTED AS FAR AS ALL THE DATA IS CONCERNED.

>> YEAH. SO THIS IS REPORTED UNDER WHAT WE CALL A SPECIAL REVENUE CODE.

SO IT RECEIVES ITS OWN LITTLE REVIEW AND SECTION PUBLISHED IN THE AUDIT.

IT'S PRETTY COMMON.

WE PROBABLY HAVE 20 PLUS OTHER SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS.

AS FAR AS THE STATE REPORTING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPORT EVERY TWO YEARS STARTING AT THE END OF THIS DECEMBER.

I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT REPORT SINCE THIS DECEMBER WILL BE THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE TO REPORT THAT.

[02:35:03]

>> WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH A PLAN AND THEN SOMEONE WILL DO A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER WE'RE COMPLYING WITH OUR PLAN, AND HOW THIS MONEY WAS SPENT?

>> YEAH. THAT'S A VERY BOLD DOWN, YES.

>> BUT WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT REPORTING IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

THAT DETERMINATION WON'T BE MET BY OUR REGULAR AUDITORS WHO DO OUR AUDITING THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW?

>> IT WILL BE SEPARATE OF THAT.

IT WOULD BE FROM THE STATE ALMOST LIKE THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT MONEY WE'RE RECEIVING.

SAME THING, THAT'S SET UP IN A SEPARATE FUND.

THE STATE SENDS US AN EMAIL ONCE A YEAR, TELL US WHAT YOU RECEIVED, HOW YOU SPENT IT, WHAT CATEGORIES.

THEY'VE BEEN TOO CUMBERSOME.

>> IS THERE A TIMELINE LIKE THIS ALL HAS TO BE SPENT WITHIN ONE FISCAL YEAR?

>> NOT THAT I HAVE SEEN THAT THEY'VE COME OUT AND DECLARED, HEY, YOU CANNOT HOLD IT FOR OVER 24 MONTHS OR TWO YEARS.

IT'S ALL RELATIVELY FRESH.

I THINK THE STATE'S REALLY JUST LOOKING TO SEE THAT THE COUNTIES ARE FILING THAT PLAN AND ESTABLISHING THAT FUND.

>> AND DANY, THIS MONEY IS RECEIVED QUARTERLY.

>> QUARTERLY. YES.

>> AND THE $367,496 IS WHAT WE RECEIVED SO FAR?

>> THAT IS WHAT WE RECEIVED AT THE END OF JUNE FOR FISCAL YEAR '24.

>> ONE LUMP SUM. IT WASN'T QUARTERLY.

>> THAT WAS QUARTERLY.

>> IT WAS.

>> YEAH. THAT'S THE TOTAL.

>> AND AGAIN, THAT ONE RAN A LITTLE HIGHER BECAUSE WE RECEIVE ALSO THAT SAME PERCENTAGE FOR WHEN PEOPLE APPLY FOR PERMITS.

SO YOU HAD A BIG RUSH UP FRONT, AND PEOPLE APPLYING TO BE DISTRIBUTORS OR GROWERS, AND WE GOT A EIGHT TENTHS OF THAT SMALL PERCENT OF THOSE AS WELL.

I EXPECT WE'RE LOOKING AROUND $240,000 A YEAR BASED OFF THE LAST COUPLE OF QUARTERS OF ABOUT 60 DEGREE.

>> SO WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO OUR OWN ENOUGH BACK?

>> AND ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING.

>> I'M SORRY.

>> THEY'VE PROVIDED EXAMPLES OF INVESTMENT AREAS.

AGAIN, THEY GIVE YOU THREE BROAD CATEGORIES.

BUT WHEN THE STATE DID THEIR PRESENTATION TO THE ADMINISTRATORS ON THIS, MENTAL HEALTH, SUBSTANCE ABUSE, SERVICES, EDUCATION, AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS WAS ONE OF THE IDENTIFIED AREAS, HOUSING, HOMELESS PREVENTION SERVICES ARE ALSO SOME OF THE CATEGORIES.

THEY WERE VERY SPECIFIC IN THAT YOU CAN'T SUPPLANT FUNDING THAT YOU'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED.

SO IF FOR ALREADY PROVIDING A SERVICE WITH GENERAL FUND MONEY, WE CAN'T SAY, CUT THAT OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND AND MOVE THIS TO THE CRRF.

IT HAS TO BE NEW ADDED ON SERVICES.

>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, COPY THE STATE LANGUAGE AND PUT IT IN OUR BILL.

>> I THINK BETWEEN MYSELF AND THE OFFICE OF LAW, AGAIN, THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OF COUNTIES THAT HAVE ALREADY DRAFTED THIS AND HAVE PASSED IT AND FILED IT WITH THE STATE.

I'M SURE THERE ARE SOME COOKIE CUTTER VERSIONS WE CAN COPY AND CIRCULATE TO THE BOARD FOR REVIEW.

>> YEAH. I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I HAVE SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THAT THAT I DON'T AGREE.

>> BUT CERTAINLY WE'LL DO THAT.

>> DO THEY TALK ABOUT HOUSING.

THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE AFFORDABLE.

MY QUESTION WOULD BE, COULD IT BE USED FOR WORK ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING?

>> YEAH. PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> WE'LL DO IT AT THE END.

>> WE'LL GIVE YOU AMPLE TIME.

>> SO WHAT DO YOU NEED NOW? JUST DIRECTION ON HOW TO DRAFT OUR PLAN?

>> CORRECT. AND I THINK IT SEEMS ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> KEEP IT, IN LINE WITH THE STATE BALL AND WE'LL KEEP IT SIMPLE.

>> WE'LL WORK TO GET SOMETHING DRAFTED AND PROVIDE IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR REVIEW AND ENACTMENT.

>> THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO GO INTO LEGISLATIVE SESSION?

>> SO MOVE.

>> MOTION AND SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> THE AYES HAVE IT. WE HAVE LEGISLATIVE BILL NUMBER 2024-05 FOOD PROCESSING RESIDUAL.

[02:40:08]

WE HAVE SOME STAFF RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS, WHICH I THINK COMMISSIONER PORTER HAS THE LEGISLATION THAT HIGHLIGHTED RECOMMENDED EDITS, AND I WAS IN ON SOME OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS.

I DID HAVE TO LEAVE, SO I'M NOT SURE THAT I AM TOTALLY FAMILIAR WITH ALL OF THOSE.

SO STEWART, DO YOU WANT TO RUN OVER SOME OF THEM?

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER HARD COPIES OF IT?

>> I HAVE A COPY.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> WELL, YOU CAN GO THROUGH IT. I THINK I HAVE IT.

I THINK I KNOW. I HAD IT ON MY COMPUTER. I CAN PULL IT UP.

>> SO STEWART, THE HIGHLIGHTED COPIES ARE THINGS WE'VE TAKEN OUT OR PUT IN ACTUALLY PUT IN.

>> IN THE DEFINITION SECTION, WE'VE ACTUALLY DEFINED THREE ADDITIONAL TERMS, LIQUID FPRS, NG, WHICH IS ON PAGE TWO, MEANS FPRS WITH A MOISTURE CONTENT OF

[Legislative Session: Third Reading & Potential Enactment]

MORE THAN 25% AS CERTIFIED BY THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

>> THAT'S PAGE FOUR.

>> IT'S ON PAGE FOUR. YEAH. SORRY. AND A NEW SUB PARAGRAPH L, SEMI SOLID FPRS.

OUR FPR IS WITH THE MOISTURE CONTENT LESS THAN 25% AS CERTIFIED BY THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.

IN SOME CONVERSATIONS, PEOPLE HAVE REFERRED TO THE SEMI SOLID FPRS AS CAKE, WHICH IS NOT REALLY, I DON'T BELIEVE A DEFINED TERM.

WE'VE ADDED ALSO DEFINITION IN SUBSECTION N STRUCTURE HAS THE SAME MEANING AS SET FORTH IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.

THE NEXT CHANGE IS ON PAGE SEVEN IN SECTION 128-4D, WE HAVE ADDED A CLAUSE HERE THAT A PERSON MAY NOT STORE FPRS IN PILES EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 128-9B, AND IF WE REFER TO THAT, GO TO THAT ON PAGE NINE, AND WE GO INTO STORAGE OF FPRS WITH A MOISTURE CONTENT LESS THAN 25%.

NOW, THIS IS AGAIN, COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS CAKE, I SUPPOSE.

AND IT GIVES THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A STRUCTURE THAT IS HOUSING THIS DRIED FPR.

FIRST OF ALL, THE OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE HAS GOT TO BE LABELED AS SEMI SOLID FOOD PROCESSING RESIDUALS.

THE STRUCTURE HAS TO BE FULLY ENCLOSED AND WEATHER TIGHT TO CONTAIN ODORS, DUST, AND RUNOFF.

THE STRUCTURE SHALL HAVE A STABLE IMPERVIOUS FOUNDATION CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF THE SEMI SOLID FPRS WITHOUT MOVEMENT, ROLLING, OR UNACCEPTABLE SETTLING.

THE FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE BASED ON SOUND ENGINEERING PRACTICES.

THIS IS A RECOGNITION THAT, AND AGAIN, THIS IS A GENERALIZATION THAT FPRS IN A CAKE LIKE FORM ARE NOT QUITE THE NUISANCE TO NEIGHBORS AS THE LIQUID IS.

IT SEEMS TO BE THAT THE DRIER IT IS, THE LESS OBNOXIOUS, THE ODOR, AND PERHAPS LESS OF AN ATTRACTION FOR VECTORS SUCH AS FLIES.

SO IT'S A RELAXING, IF YOU WILL, A SLIGHT RELAXATION OF WHAT OTHERWISE WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DRAFTED THIS.

EVERYTHING, REGARDLESS OF WHAT FORM IT'S IN WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THESE ENGINEERED FACILITIES OR STRUCTURES THAT ARE COVERED, AIRTIGHT, ODOR TIGHT, REALLY WELL BUILT TO THE HIGHEST STANDARD.

AND THIS IS A SLIGHT RELAXATION OF THAT, AS LONG AS THE STRUCTURE IS COVERED AND IS BASICALLY WEATHER TIGHT AND IS NOT GOING TO THEREFORE BE A NUISANCE TO NEIGHBORS THAT IT WOULD BE PERMITTED.

THAT'S THE ESSENCE OF WHAT THAT CHANGE ACCOMPLISHED.

IF WE GO BACK TO NOW PAGE EIGHT, SECTION 128-9 CONTAINERS.

AGAIN, WE'RE MAKING US A DISTINCTION HERE ABOUT THE FPRS WITH A MOISTURE CONTENT GREATER THAN 25%.

IN OTHER WORDS, MORE LIQUID,

[02:45:02]

WHICH IS WHAT HAS BEEN THE MAIN CULPRIT IN THIS COUNTY IN THE PAST.

ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAD IN THE ORIGINAL VERSION ARE GOING TO BE INSISTED UPON FOR THE MORE LIQUID FPRS.

>> EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION, WE DID TRY TO BREAK IT OUT TO CAKE FROM THE LIQUID?

>> COMMISSIONER BERKS, WE'RE SAYING THIS IS IN STRUCTURES ON PAGE 9.

WE'VE ADDED A STRUCTURE USED FOR THE STORAGE OF FPRS WITH A MOISTURE CONTENT LESS THAN 25% AS CERTIFIED BY THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SHOULD HAVE THE FOLLOWING OR SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS.

ITEM 1, THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE CLEARLY LABELED AS SEMI SOLID FOOD PROCESSING RESIDUALS.

NUMBER 2, THE STRUCTURE MUST BE FULLY ENCLOSED AND WATER TIGHT TO CONTAIN ODORS, DUST, AND RUNOFF.

NUMBER 3, THE STRUCTURE SHALL HAVE A STABLE IMPERVIOUS FOUNDATION CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF THE SEMI SOLID FPRS WITHOUT MOVEMENT, ROLLING OR UNACCEPTABLE SETTLING.

THE FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE BASED ON SOUND ENGINEERING PRACTICES.

>> PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU'RE JUST SAYING THEY CAN'T PUT IT IN SOLID PITS?

>> BUT IT'S A CARVE OUT, SO YOU CAN'T PUT IT IN A TANK.

IT'S ALLOWING FOR IF YOU GUYS ARE FOR THAT.

THAT WAS THE MAJOR CHANGE.

>> THE NEXT WOULD BE ON PAGE 14, THIS IS SECTION 128-11, WHICH IS AREAS WHERE STORAGE OF FPRS IS PROHIBITED DOWN IN A SEVEN.

WE HAVE ADDED A CLAUSE SO THAT THE SENTENCE READS WITHIN 500 FEET OF A WATER SOURCE OTHER THAN AN IRRIGATION WELL.

THE IDEA BEING THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF IRRIGATION WELLS IN OUR FIELDS AROUND THE COUNTY AND STATING THAT YOU COULDN'T STORE FPRS WITHIN 500 FEET OF IRRIGATION WELL MAY HAVE BEEN TOO RESTRICTIVE.

>> WE HAVE CRYSTAL HERE AND MEGHAN.

>> HI.

>> THANKS FOR COMING IN. WITH AN INTERACTIVE GIS MAP TO LOOK AT OUR SETBACKS.

THEY'VE DONE SOME EXERCISES WITH THE SETBACKS.

CRYSTAL, IF YOU WANT TO RUN US THROUGH.

>> WOULD YOU RATHER WAIT AND LET STEWART GO THROUGH THE REST OF THE CHANGES AND THEN WE CAN CIRCLE BACK AND TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF SETBACKS.

>> WE CAN DO THAT.

>> WELL WE GOT ONE MORE TO GO. IT'S IN SUBSECTION 9, WHICH IS WITHIN 2,500 FEET OF THE BOUNDARY OF AN INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITY OR PRIORITY FUNDING AREA.

THOSE ARE THE TWO CHANGES WE HAVE MADE IN THE SETBACKS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION NOW.

>> DO YOU WANT TO PAUSE AND DO THAT BEFORE WE FINISH UP?

>> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE THERE ANY OTHER EDITS?

>> WE COULD GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE IF YOU WANT TO FINISH GOING THROUGH THE EDITS, AND THEN WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO THAT.

>>SURE. WE HAVE ADDED IN SECTION 128-14, WHICH IS ISSUANCE OR DENIAL OF PERMIT.

IN A THREE, THE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT ISSUE A PERMIT TO AN APPLICANT IF THE APPLICANT IS SUBJECT TO AN ENFORCEMENT ACTION CONSENT ORDER, ONGOING INVESTIGATION BY THE DEPARTMENT.

WE'VE ADDED THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO THE LIST OF DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE'S A PENDING INVESTIGATION GOING ON FROM ANY OF THESE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING NOW HEALTH DEPARTMENT, THAT THE DEPARTMENT WOULD NOT ISSUE A PERMIT TO THAT APPLICANT.

WE ALSO ADDED THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DOWN IN SUBSECTION 3, WE WOULD NOT ISSUE A PERMIT TO AN APPLICANT IF THERE'S A NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND CODES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

WE'VE JUST INCLUDED THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AS AN ADDITIONAL RED FLAG, IF YOU WILL, TO AN APPLICATION THAT IF THEY'RE IN SOME SORT OF ENFORCEMENT ACTION WITH ANY OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING HEALTH NOW, THEN WE'RE NOT ISSUING A PERMIT.

WE'VE DONE THE SAME.

[02:50:05]

IT'S RECIPROCAL, THE NEXT SECTION 128-15, WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE PERMIT EXPIRES OR NEEDS TO BE RENEWED, WE HAVE ADDED THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO THE LIST OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN THE SECTIONS THAT WOULD BE RED FLAGS FOR RENEWAL OF A STORAGE PERMIT.

THAT IS THE SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES.

>> ALL IN TAKING A LOOK AT SECTION 128-11, THAT IS THE AREAS WE'VE IDENTIFIED WHERE STORAGE OF FPRS WOULD BE PROHIBITED.

WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE WISE TO DO THE EXERCISE AND SEE WHAT THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF ALL OF THOSE SETBACKS AND WHAT AREAS WOULD ULTIMATELY NOT BE AVAILABLE AND WHAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE ONCE WE APPLIED ALL OF THESE STANDARDS.

MEGHAN HAS PUT TOGETHER A MAP THAT SHE'LL BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU EACH OF THOSE SETBACKS INDIVIDUALLY OR AS A WHOLE.

I THOUGHT WE COULD JUST GO AHEAD AND LET HER START SHOWING YOU WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE.

>> CAT NOT EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE.

LIKE FLOODPLAIN, RIVERS, WETLANDS, I PUT THOSE TOGETHER, WATER, WATER TYPE, NATURAL RESOURCES TYPE THINGS ARE IN ONE LAYER.

LET ME START BY OPENING THIS UP.

THAT'S A LAYER VIEW.

THIS IS A LAYER VIEW. WE'LL USE THIS ONE A LITTLE BETTER.

WE CAN START BY SHOWING THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETBACKS, WHICH IS 500 FEET FROM MANY ENVIRONMENTAL SETBACKS OR WATER, I GUESS WE COULD SAY.

THERE'S HOW THAT LOOKS.

IF YOU WANT ACREAGE OF WHAT'S LEFT, I CAN RUN THAT ANALYSIS, IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DO ON THE FLY HERE. I CAN DO THAT.

THAT IS HOW THAT LOOKS. ALSO IN THE ORANGE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT IS STATE OWNED LAND.

THERE'S NEVER GOING TO BE FPRS THERE.

THEY'RE AUTOMATICALLY TAKEN OUT.

THAT IS WHAT JUST AN ENVIRONMENTAL SETBACK WOULD LOOK LIKE.

>> IT'S MAKING THE WHITE AREAS WOULD BE.[OVERLAPPING].

>> THE WHITE AREAS ARE WHAT'S LEFTOVER.

>> CORRECT. THE GREEN AS WELL WOULD BE EXCLUDED.

CAN MOVE ON, TURN THIS ONE OFF.

WE CAN THEN LOOK YOU WANT TO MOVE TO PARCEL.[OVERLAPPING].

LET'S USE OUR PARCEL.

MUNICIPALITIES. ALL THIS IS WHAT YOUR MUNICIPALITY AND PFA SETBACKS, 2,500 FOOT SETBACKS WOULD LOOK LIKE.

THERE'S AROUND YOUR MUNICIPALITIES, THE GREEN, SO ALL THAT AREA WOULD BE EXCLUDED.

>> WE ALSO ADDED THE PFAS, BECAUSE THAT WAS TO COVER OUR SMALL RURAL VILLAGES.

THAT WAS THE BEST WAY TO ESTABLISH WHERE THE BOUNDARIES OF OUR RURAL VILLAGES LIKE BETHM HARMONY, JONESTOWN.

>> I CAN TURN THOSE. THERE ARE YOUR PFAS AND PURPLE.

THOSE WOULD BE ALSO EXCLUDED AREAS FROM DAF.

AGAIN, I CAN GET YOU A NUMBER ON WHAT THAT LEAVES IF YOU WOULD LIKE IT.

>> TRY THE PARCELS AT 500 FOOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINES. YES.

>> LET ME TURN THESE OFF AND WE'LL LOOK AT THE PARCELS.

THIS IS YOUR 500 FOOT PARCEL SETBACKS.

>> THAT TAKES OUT A SIGNIFICANT AREA AT THE 500 FOOT NET MAC.

THEN IF WE MOVE ON TO THE DWELLING 2,500 SETBACKS.

THE ONLY DATA WE HAD WAS IDENTIFIED BY ADDRESSABLE OR NON ADDRESSABLE BUILDING.

THESE PARCELS ARE IDENTIFIED AS HAVING AN ADDRESS TO THEM?

>> YES, SO WHEN YOU SEE THAT INFORMATION UP THERE, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED ADDRESSABLE?

>> THAT IS WHAT THAT ENDS UP LOOKING LIKE.

>> THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST RESTRICTIVE OF THE SETBACKS THAT WE HAVE IS THE 2,500 FOOT SETBACK FROM BUILDINGS OR FROM DWELLINGS.

MEGHAN WAS ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND RUN THAT NUMBER FOR YOU TO KNOW WHAT AVAILABLE ACREAGE WE HAVE?

>> WITH WITH JUST THE ADDRESS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDRESSABLE AND DWELLINGS.

>> I THINK THE PFA, YES.

>> EVERYTHING INCLUDED AND ENDS UP BEING 591 ACRES LEFT.

>> ALL LAYERS ON. ESSENTIALLY.

[02:55:02]

>> THAT EXCLUDES THE WATER.

>> THAT EXCLUDES WATER.

AT 5918.

>> I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

>> THAT WOULD BE THE 2,500 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE DWELLINGS, THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES, AND THE PFAS, AND THE 500 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINES.

IT WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE 500 FOOT ENVIRONMENTAL SETBACKS FROM WETLANDS, STREAMS, BODIES OF WATER, AND IF WE DID THAT'S WHAT LOOKS LIKE.

WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAYER?

>> WITH OR WITHOUT THE WATER?

>> WITHOUT.

>> THIS IS 500 ACRES?

>> 591, ALMOST 600 ACRES.

>> HOW MANY ACRES DO WE HAVE.

>> TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTY FOUR.

>> IT'S A DUAL PERCENTAGE.

>> IT'S 0.2%.

>> WHEN YOU SAY IDENTIFIABLE PARCELS, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE SOME FARMS IN THE COUNTY THAT DO NOT HAVE 911 ADDRESSES.

ARE THOSE THE IDENTIFIABLE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

>> THE ONES THAT ARE IDENTIFIED ARE THOSE DWELLINGS OR STRUCTURES THAT HAVE AN ADDRESS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.

THAT DOES ENCOMPASS A FEW THINGS LIKE OUR POULTRY OPERATIONS.

THEY DO HAVE SEPARATE ADDRESSES FOR POULTRY OPERATIONS, BUT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY HAVE A HOUSE, THEY ARE IN THERE.

WE WOULD HAVE TO GO AND PULL THOSE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS OUT BECAUSE WE DON'T.

>> IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GENERATE THAT ACCURATE.

>> YES. AN ACCURATE OF DWELLINGS BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE BUSINESSES IN THERE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE AN ADDRESS AS WELL.

>> BECAUSE I KNOW, I'VE BEEN CONCERNED OVER THE YEARS ABOUT FARMS THAT DON'T HAVE LIKE IF A FARMER GETS INJURED, WORKING TILLING, THE GROUND, WHAT ADDRESS DO THEY USE TO LOCATE HIM, BUT I HAVE BEEN ASSURED THAT THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH PINGING WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FEET.

THEY FINALLY HAVE SATISFIED ME ON THAT ONE, BUT I'M ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT THE GUY THAT'S NOT WORKING IN THE FIELD, GETS HURT. HOW DO YOU LOCATE IT?

>> I CAN SHOW YOU THE ADDRESS LAYER, JUST POINTS AND HOW THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS IN THE COUNTY, AND IT'S IT'S PRETTY BROAD.

WE HAVE 15,609 ADDRESSES IN THE COUNTY, SO AND THAT'S HOW THEY LOOK ON THE MAP.

>> THE QUESTION WILL BE, HAVE WE BEEN TOO RESTRICTIVE?

>> IN PREPARATION, ONE OF THE THINGS, AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT, WE DO HAVE IT AVAILABLE.

WE DID REDUCE THE 2,500 FOOT SETBACK FROM DWELLINGS TO HALF OF THAT AT 12:50, IF YOU WANTED TO SEE WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE.

>> I ALSO HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF A PROPERTY THAT YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH ACREAGE THAT ACTUALLY CHANGES ON THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

IT'S ACTUALLY ACROSS FROM NORTH COUNTY PARK.

>> SHOWS THE 12: 50.

>> SURE. HERE'S MUNICIPALITIES, PFAS ADDRESSABLE DWELLINGS.

THEN YOUR 500 FOOT SET BACK WOULD STAY THE SAME.

THAT ENDS UP. THE WHITE SPACES ARE WHAT ENDS UP BEING WHAT'S LEFTOVER, WHICH IS MORE.

>> HOW MANY ACRES?

>> I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.

>> IF WE WERE GOING TO ENTERTAIN THAT, I WOULD KEEP THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY AT 250 OR 2,500 FEET.

>> WE CAN LOOK AT THAT? MUNICIPALITIES AND PFAS?

>> I WOULD. YES.

>> LET'S DO THAT. THERE'S YOUR OTHER TWO, AND THEN THIS WOULD BE MUNICIPALITIES AND PFAS.

THEY'RE UNDERNEATH. IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARDER TO SEE, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THE WHITE IS STILL SHOWING.

I CAN ZOOM INTO IF YOU WANTED TO SEE PARTICULAR AREAS.

>> IF YOU TURN THE 500 FOOT PARCEL SET BACK LAYER OFF,

[03:00:01]

WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? BUT YOU'RE STILL 2,500 FEET? PUT THE THE I'M SORRY, ADDRESSABLE DWELLINGS, 2,500 SETBACK ON.

>> WE TURN THIS 1,200. OFF.

>> THERE YOU GO.

THAT'S BACK TO ORIGINAL.

LIKE I SAID, I CAN ZOOM IN, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO. SEE MORE DETAIL.

>> IS THERE ANYWHERE YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE?

>> IF YOU LOOK LIKE THE MED THE IDEAL THING WOULD BE THAT MY PERSPECTIVE IS THAT IF YOU WERE GOING TO DO ANYTHING WOULD BE THE ADDRESS DWELLING 1250 SETBACK INSTEAD OF THE 2,500 WOULD BE REALLY COMMON SENSE APPROACH.

THAT'S JUST MY TAKING EVERYTHING ELSE.

I WOULD PROBABLY KEEP IN LINE.

>> CAN YOU SHOW US THAT AGAIN?

>> YES. THE 1250. ABSOLUTELY.

>> THAT MEG AND THAT WOULD PUT THAT UP.

PROBABLY YOU SAY DOUBLE IT.

>> I CAN'T SAY FOR CERTAIN.

>> WE GOT TO PUT THE WATER BACK.

>> DO THE 500 SETBACKS. THAT'S THAT.

THEN THE WATER WETLANDS RIVERS FLOODPLAIN.

I CAN ZOOM INTO SOME PLACE ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT.

OKAY. YOU CAN SEE.

>> IF YOU WOULD ZOOM IN START AT THE TOP OF THE COUNTING AND JUST SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT. THAT WORKS.

>> THERE'S A LITTLE BIT THERE.

>> IS THIS ALL LAYERS ON AT THIS POINT, EXCEPT WE'RE REDUCING THE DWELLING SETBACK TO 1250?

>> YES. THERE'S SOME HERE.

THERE'S SOME HERE HERE, OVER HERE.

>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO YOU KNOW, ONCE THIS IS ADOPTED, IF SOMEONE COMES ALONG AND WANTS TO DO A NEW SUBDIVISION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS.

IF SOMEBODY COMES INTO ONE OF THESE AREAS, WE GOT TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS A POTENTIAL AREA.

WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE PEOPLE BUY LOTS AND FIND OUT THAT OR WE WOULD HAVE TO REVISE THIS.

WELL, THAT WOULD COME UNDER.

>> DOESN'T REALLY JUMP OUT TO ME IS THE AREAS.

>> THAT WOULD COME OUT TO THE ADDRESSABLE WELL IF IT WAS A NEW SUBDIVISION.

>> THOSE INDIVIDUAL HOUSES AND PROPERTY LINES WOULD STILL FOLLOW.

>> UNLESS THERE WAS A STORAGE FACILITY ALREADY THERE.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING THEY WOULD KNOW IT, BUT I MEAN, THAT SHOULD REALLY BE MORE, YOU KNOW, THE REVIEW PROCESS OF IF ANY NEW SUBDIVISION.

>> MEGHAN WAS ALSO ABLE TO TAKE JUST AN EXAMPLE PROPERTY.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON A SPECIFIC PROPERTY WHEN WE APPLY THOSE STANDARDS JUST TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT ACREAGE WE START WITH AND WHAT IS REMAINING FOR THAT FARM ONCE WE APPLY THE SETBACKS.

>> JUST STARTING AT ORIGINAL, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN AND THEN MOVING TO THE 1,200 FOOT SETBACKS.

>> JUST DOESN'T TAKE BE THE PIECE ACROSS FROM THE NORTH COUNTY PARK ON THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SIDE.

>> PURELY EXAMPLE.

[03:05:03]

>> THAT'S THAT.

>> THIS REALLY DOESN'T TAKE IN EFFECT.

LIKE JUST GOT YOUR RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES.

BUT IF A PERSON HAS A JUST A 200 ACRE TRACK, AND THAT'S HIS RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, THEN THAT STILL COULD FALL WITHIN THAT PARAMETERS.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WORDS THERE MIGHT NOT BE ANYBODY AROUND.

IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE PUTTING IN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS.

IF I'M IN A 500 ACRE FARM, AND I PINPOINT MY EXACT AREA IN MY FARM WHERE I CAN PUT THIS TANK, IT MEETS ALL THESE PARAMETERS, THAT'S STILL NOT TAKING THAT IN EFFECT HERE BECAUSE YOU'RE USING RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES.

YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? AS IF I HAVE A 500 ACRE FARM, I GOT A PHYSICAL ADDRESS.

> YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ADDRESS IF YOU HAVE A BUILD HAVE A STRUCT.

>> AT MY HOUSE. I'M USING A RESIDENTIAL, BUT THAT'S MY PROPERTY.

IF I HAVE A 500 PIECE OF LAND AND THAT'S ALL ONE BIG RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS.

I CAN PINPOINT JUST LIKE THEY TAKE IRRIGATION AND THEY PINPOINT IT AND THEY DRAW A CIRCLE TO THIS TYPE OF SYSTEM, I CAN FIND THAT SPOT ON THAT FARM WHERE I CAN PUT THIS TANK THAT MEETS ALL OF THESE PARAMETERS.

CORRECT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU'RE USING A RESIDENTIAL, THERE MIGHT BE SOME RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES THAT STILL WOULD FALL IN THIS PARAMETER THAT WE WOULDN'T KNOW ABOUT UNLESS SOMEBODY WOULD APPLY FOR. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?

>> IF THEY MADE UP AN ADDRESS, WE MIGHT NOT KNOW IT, BUT WE SHOULD HAVE ALL OF OUR ADDRESSES IN OUR SYSTEM.

AGAIN, THIS HAS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN JUST RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS BECAUSE THIS IS IDENTIFYING POULTRY FARMS THAT MAY HAVE AN ADDRESS, ANY BUSINESS IN A COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONE THAT MIGHT HAVE AN ADDRESS.

THEY'RE IN THERE. THERE'S NOT AS MANY OF THOSE.

>> BUT IF IT WAS A IF IT WAS A 500 ACRE FARM AND YOU PUT IT ON THAT FARM, YOU'D HAVE TO PUT IT SO THAT IT WOULD BE 2,500 FEET IN THE NEAREST.

>> I GUESS YOUR QUESTION IS, IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF THAT 100 ACRE FARM AND YOU WANT TO PUT THAT, DO THESE STANDARDS APPLY TO THAT FARM? FROM YOUR DWELLING ON THAT FARM MEET THAT 2,500 FOOT SETBACK.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

>> THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR THAT.

>> THERE IS YOUR DWELLING IN YOUR FARM.

>> WELL, YOU COULD GRANT YOURSELF A SETBACK.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING.

>> I THINK THERE'S LANGUAGE THAT BACK WAIVER.

>> AS LONG AS YOUR DWELLING, YOUR LAND, ALL THAT AND YOU MEET EVERYTHING ELSE, THEN THAT WOULDN'T IMPACT THEM.

>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SITUATED IN A WAY THAT IT WOULDN'T IMPACT NEIGHBORING?

>> THAT 500 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE WOULD COME INTO PLAY THERE.

>> WELL, IF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OBVIOUSLY WAS A HOUSE, THEN YOU WOULD BE INTO THE 1250.

CORRECT? OR 25.

2,500 FEET. DEPENDING AWAY.

>> THAT WOULD STILL APPLY.

>> THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE PERMIT PROCESS THAT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH TO LOCATE WHERE IT WAS GOING TO BE WHERE THE NEAREST.

>> YES. THIS IS WHERE GIS WILL HELP US IDENTIFY WHETHER THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

IT'S THIS HAS BEEN A HELPFUL TOOL IN DOING THIS ACTS TO SEE WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE.

>> THIS STUFF GOES TO KING COUNTY, I'M SURE.

SOME OF THE DAIRY FARMS UP THERE WERE SO BIG THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO IMPACT ANYBODY.

>> I CAN SHOW YOU GUYS PARCEL NORTH OF THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JUST BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE THAT MUNICIPAL AND PFA SETBACK.

>> THIS IS OUR PARCEL LAYER IN THE LIGHT GRAY, THE LITTLE POLYGONS YOU SEE AROUND OUR BUILDINGS.

THIS PARCEL THAT I WILL BE SELECTING HERE IS 336 ACRES TOTAL.

WITH THE 2,500 FOOT MUNICIPALITY BOUNDARY WITH THE 2,500 FOOT PFA BOUNDARY, THE 500 FOOT SETBACK, AND THE 2,500 FOOT ADDRESS DWELLING SETBACK.

I HAVE DONE THE MEASUREMENTS ALREADY.

THIS AREA ENDS UP BEING 16 ACRES LEFT ON THIS 334 ACRE FARM.

WITH THE CHANGE IN BOTH MUNICIPALITIES, THE PAS, AND THE ADDRESSABLE DWELLINGS, I WILL SHOW YOU WHAT THAT ENDS UP BEING.

[03:10:02]

THAT INCLUDES THE WATER TOO.

I HAVE NOT TURNED THAT OFF YET.

THERE'S YOUR 1250 ADDRESS DWELLING IN THE GREEN THERE.

THE BLUE IS STILL THE 500 FOOT SETBACK.

THE LIGHT BLUE IS THE PFA, AND THEN THE MUNICIPALITY BOUNDARIES AT 1,250 FEET.

THIS AREA LEFTOVER ENDS UP BEING ABOUT 124 ACRES UP FROM 16.

>> THIS IS NORFGREENSBG.

>> THIS IS JUST PURELY AN EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTY.

>> WE CAN SWAP OUT A TANK FOR SHOWING. WHAT YOU THINK.

>> THE QUESTION BASICALLY IS, HOW RESTRICTIVE DO WE WANT TO BE.

>> EXACTLY.

>> WITH THAT I MEAN I PROPOSED THAT GETS US DOWN TO 591 ACRES.

>> I WOULD SAY THAT 1250 WOULD BE A START ANYWAY. IT WOULD BE A START.

>> YOU'D STILL LIKE TO KEEP YOUR 2,500 FROM MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES.

>> PFA. YES.

>> EVERYTHING ELSE, JUST AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE 2,500 FROM DWELLING.

>> ITEM 4 WOULD BE WITHIN 1,250 FEET MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AN OCCUPIED DWELLING UNLESS THE OWNER THEREOF HAS PROVIDED A WRITTEN WAIVER CONSENTING TO THE ACTIVITIES BEING CLOSER THAN 1250 FEET.

>> AGAIN, THE 591 ACRES IS PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE WE WEREN'T ABLE TO EXTRACT OUT SOME OF THOSE ADDRESSES THAT WOULD NOT BE DWELLING UNITS.

WE DEFINITELY KNOW WE HAVE SOME FARMS THAT JUST HAVE POULTRY OPERATIONS AND NO DWELLINGS, SO THAT WOULD TAKE THOSE PUT THOSE ACREAGES BACK IN.

>> IT WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO BE USED ON THAT FARM?

>> THE AMOUNT THAT STORED.

>> ANY PART OF THEIR OPERATION FOR OTHER FARMS THAT THEY OWNING IN THE COUNTY, CORRECT STEWART?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT WE'VE RECEIVED AS TO WHETHER SOME FOLKS WOULD LIKE YOU TO RESTRICT IT TO USE OF FPRS ON THE ACTUAL PARCEL AS WE DEFINE IT IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE WITH A PARCEL IS AS OPPOSED TO THEIR AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS, WHICH COULD BE A COMBINATION OF MULTIPLE PARCELS IN CAROLINE COUNTY.

WE HAVE RESTRICTED IT TO CAROLINE COUNTY.

IN OTHER WORDS, THAT THE FPRS THAT ARE BEING STORED ON SITE CANNOT BE TAKEN OUT OF STATE AND APPLIED ON FARMS IN OR EVEN OTHER COUNTIES.

IT IS STRICTLY FOR IN COUNTY AGRICULTURAL OPERATION.

BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A POLICY DECISION FOR THE THREE OF YOU.

YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE.

SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT YOU SHOULD NARROW IT DOWN TO SIMPLY THE PARCEL, THE FPRS ARE APPLIED ON AND NOT ALLOW IT TO BE EXPANSIVE BECAUSE CERTAIN OPERATORS MAY HAVE TEN FARMS. DECIDE TO BUILD.

>> TEN STRUCTURES.

>> WELL, THAT'S IT, IF YOU SAY IT'S GOT TO BE ON THE INDIVIDUAL PARCEL, WELL, THEN YOU'RE REQUIRING THE FARMER THEORETICALLY, TO BUILD A SEPARATE STRUCTURE ON EACH ONE OF HIS TEN FARMS AS OPPOSED TO CONSOLIDATING IT INTO ONE LARGER FACILITY FROM WHICH HE THEN TRUCKS IT TO THE OTHER FARMERS?

>> WE'RE IN THE SITUATION WHERE HE'S WHERE THEY'RE TEARING UP ROADS CREATING PROBLEMS WITH THE TRANSPORT.

>> WELL, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF GETTING A PERMIT IS THAT YOU WOULD ENTER INTO A ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY BEFORE YOU COULD GET YOUR PERMIT TO STORE FPRS IN THE COUNTY.

THAT WOULD BE A ROBIN EATON CHORE, I GUESS, WITH THE OFFICE OF LAW TO TRY TO NEGOTIATE ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD PROTECT THE COUNTY ROADS.

>> CURRENTLY, YOU CAN ONLY STORE FPRS ON THE PROPERTY ON WHICH YOU WERE GOING TO APPLY THEM.

YOU CAN ONLY STORE WHAT YOU CAN APPLY IN ONE YEARS SEASON.

[03:15:02]

>> RIGHT. BUT IT'S AGRICULTURAL OPERATION, WHICH MAY BE BEYOND THE FARM.

YOU'RE STORING THE FPRS.

THE WAY THIS IS DRAFTED PRESENTLY, YOU COULD STORE MORE THAN YOU COULD USE ON THAT ONE PARCEL BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TEN FARMS. YOU CAN BUILD A LARGER FACILITY, STORE A LOT MORE FPRS BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN OPERATION THAT GOES WAY BEYOND THIS ONE PARCEL.

>> I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE OF STORING FOR YOUR ENTIRE OPERATION.

>> I WOULD RATHER HAVE ONE BIG TANK THAN 16 MULTIPLE TANKS.

>> RIGHT. SMALLER TANKS.

>> SMALLER TANKS HERE AND THERE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH STORING FOR YOUR YOUR OWN USE.

>> BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LL IS THAT WHAT THE DLLR.

>> DRRA.

>> DRRA. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TRANSPORT THAT'S GOING TO BECOME A NIGHTMARE FOR ENFORCEMENT TO FORCE.

WE'RE GOING TO SAY IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRANSPORT THIS MATERIAL, THEN YOU'VE GOT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT YOU'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN, TO WHAT EXTENT DO THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT.

WHEN DO THEY HAVE TO DO IT? WELL, WE GET INTO ALL THAT.

I MEAN, ROBIN HE'S GOT A LOT TO DO BACK THERE AND I'M NOT SURE.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE NEGOTIATED INDIVIDUALLY, RIGHT?

>> WELL, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS WE CAN DO.

WE CAN VOTE TO ENACT THE LEGISLATION THE WAY IT IS.

WE CAN VOTE TO ENACT THE LEGISLATION WITH THESE AMENDMENTS.

WE CAN VOTE TO AMEND THE LEGISLATION AND TABLE THE ENACTMENT UNTIL NEXT WEEK, WHICH IS A LEGISLATIVE DAY.

I THINK STEWART MAY WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE STATE REGULATIONS ARE ENACTED.

THE ONLY I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT, AND I DID SPEAK WITH SENATOR MOSE THIS MORNING.

THE PROPOSED EMERGENCY REGULATIONS DID NOT GET VOTED ON BY THE ALR.

YESTERDAY, I THINK THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT OR THE POSITION OF THE AELR WAS THAT MDA HAD REVISED THE REGULATIONS, AND THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE REVISIONS HAD BEEN POSTED AND ADVERTISED THE APPROPRIATE PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE THE REGULATIONS WERE ENACTED, SO THEY WERE NOT CHALLENGED.

SO I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO SECRETARY ATOS.

NOW THEY COULD CONTINUE DOWN THE EMERGENCY PATH, BUT THEY MAY ALSO TAKE THE OPTION OF JUST GOING THE TRADITIONAL REGULATION ADOPTION PROCESS AND AVOID HAVING TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY GO THROUGH THE EMERGENCY REGULATION APPROVAL.

THEY'VE GOT TO GO RIGHT BACK FOR THE PERMANENT REGULATION APPROVAL WITHIN SIX MONTHS.

SO IT ONLY BUYS YOU AND DON'T HOLD ME TO THAT.

IT'S SOME TIME PERIOD.

I SEE SOMEWHERE 3-9 MONTHS.

I THINK IT'S SIX MONTHS, WHERE THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN.

SO THIS COULD DRAG OUT FOR A WHILE.

AND EVEN IF THEY ADOPT THE EMERGENCY REGS, THEY'RE SUBJECT TO CHANGE IN A FEW MONTHS ANYWAY.

SO PART OF ME JUST SAYS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THIS BEHIND US AND ADOPT IT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE.

DO WE WANT TO MAKE THESE AMENDMENTS, LET IT SIT A WEEK? DO WE WANT TO MAKE THESE AMENDMENTS AND APPROVE IT NOW?

>> OUR MORATORIUM RUNS OUT IN NOVEMBER, RIGHT?

>> THAT SEEMS A LONG TIME AGO AWAY.

>> IT'S NOT THAT FAR, IS IT? BUT WE DO HAVE A LEGISLATIVE DAY NEXT TO YOU.

>> WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN VERY COGNIZANT OF PUBLIC INPUT.

WE'VE GOT THIS, THIS IS INCREDIBLE.

THANK YOU, MEGHAN.

GREAT JOB. I'LL DO IT.

[03:20:01]

>> WE DO WANT TO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS THING.

NOW THAT WE SOMEBODY'S GOING TO COME IN AND LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, STRETCH THIS OUT SO I CAN FIND MY HOUSE.

I WANT TO KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE.

I'D LIKE TO GET AS MUCH MORE PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS THING AS WE CAN, BUT I DON'T WANT TO DRAG IT OUT FOREVER.

THAT'S MY DILEMMA HERESO.

>> AND COMMISSIONER PORTER, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR MEGHAN IN TERMS OF HER TIMELINE, BUT WITH AN ADDITIONAL WEEK, WE COULD PROBABLY FINE TUNE THIS A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE WE DID PUT THIS TOGETHER RELATIVELY QUICKLY FOR TODAY.

>> IT WAS GREAT.

>> WE COULD DEFINITELY FINE TUNE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, MAYBE GO THROUGH AND PULL OUT A FEW OF THOSE ADDRESSES FOR POULTRY HARMS BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT'S AND GET YOU SOME MORE DEFINITIVE ACREAGE NUMBERS.

AND LOOKING AT IT AT THAT 1250 FROM DWELLINGS VERSUS THE 2,500.

>> WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT PUBLIC? HOW CAN WE YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE AMENDMENTS WE'VE MADE.

>> WELL, IF WE MAKE AMENDMENTS TODAY, THE CLOCK RUNS ANOTHER 65 DAYS FROM TODAY.

SO EVERY TIME WE AMEND THE BILL, WE HAVE ANOTHER 65 DAYS TO ENACT IT.

IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT FOR 65 DAYS, IT DIES, AND WE HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN.

WE CAN VOTE TODAY TO APPROVE THESE AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING REDUCING THE OCCUPIED DWELLING SETBACK DOWN TO 1,250 FEET, WE CAN POST GET MAKE SURE WE GET UPDATED LANGUAGE OVER TO PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE SO WE CAN GET IT POSTED.

IF YOU CAN POST THIS MAP OUT ONLINE AND WE COULD WITH THAT, I DON'T KNOW, JEN, IF YOU CAN GET IT WITH THE 1250.

IF WE POST THAT WITH THE BILL, AND OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, I'M NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN HAVING ANOTHER.

BUT IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO EMAIL OR OPEN AND SENDING COMMENTS TO US THAT WAY.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE FOR US TO MAKE THIS MAP INTO A PDF AND JUST HAVE ONE LAYER THAT IDENTIFIES ALL THE REST.

>> IT'D BE A LOT EASIER FOR ME.

BECAUSE I COLOR BOND AND I CAN'T.

>> WE CAN DO THAT FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES TO SHOW ALL OF THAT IS ONE.

>> AS LONG AS WE SAY HERE'S THE FINAL DRAFT.

HERE'S THE INTERACTIVE MAP.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING DOING.

IF YOU HAVE WRITTEN COMMENTS, LET US KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.

I'M LIKE YOU. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER, NO.

>> PEOPLE ARE GET BURNED OUT.

>> BUT I THINK I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH DELAYING UNTIL NEXT WEEK?

>> NO.

>> BUT AGAIN, WE'RE RUNNING UP AGAINST OUR YEAH DEADLINE, AND I THINK IT CONCERNS I DON'T WANT TO EXTEND IT AGAIN.

>> I KNOW THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT EXTEND, I WANT THIS BEHIND.

WE SPENT TOO MUCH TIME ON THIS NOW.

>> IT CONCERNS ME A LITTLE BIT.

I'LL TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD THAT THE AELR COMMITTEE DELAYED IT BECAUSE OF ADVERTISING CONCERNS.

I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T THINK AND LOOKING AT THIS MAP, PARTICULARLY IF WE GO TO THE 1250, I DON'T REALLY THINK A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT WE'RE OVER RESTRICTIVE OR WE'RE TRYING TO BAN IT.

I DON'T THINK THAT A CASE CAN BE MADE FOR THAT.

SOMEBODY WILL TRY TO DO IT, BUT I DON'T REALLY FEEL THAT THAT'S A VIABLE ARGUMENT.

WE'RE ALLOWING IT. WE PUT THESE A LOT OF WORK INTO THIS.

HERE'S WHERE YOU CAN DO IT.

>> YOU'LL PUBLISH THAT AS JUST A SINGLE PDF MAP WITH TWO COLORS.

THE PROHIBITED AREAS ALL TOGETHER AS ONE, AND THEN THE OTHER COLOR OF WHAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE LANDS.

WITH THE DO YOU WANT THE ACREAGE AMOUNTS SHOWN?

>> SO YOU'LL SHOW THE ALLOWABLE AREAS AS WELL.

>> CORRECT.

>> COMMISSIONER BING, WHAT TYPE OF COLOR BLINDNESS DO YOU HAVE JUST SO I KNOW? I'M SURE THERE'S RED GREEN.

BECAUSE I'M SURE THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE THAT.

IT'S IMPORTANT IN MAPMAKING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ACCOUNTED FOR. THANK YOU.

>> I APPRECIATE IT. I SEE ALL THE COLORS OF, WELL, I DON'T KNOW.

>> NO. I DO APPRECIATE THAT WE WANT IT TO BE ACCESSIBLE FOR EVERYBODY.

>> SO I WILL ADD ALSO THAT

[03:25:05]

THE AELR REVIEW WAS IT COVERED.

THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE ADVERTISING AND THE REGULATIONS BEING CHALLENGED.

BUT THERE WAS EXTENSIVE QUESTIONING BY BOTH OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE REGULATIONS AND WHAT THEY MEANT AND THE IMPLICATIONS.

BUT ANYWAY, THE OTHER ISSUE, THIS WILL NOT REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE EXCEPTION.

DOES THIS BILL REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING IN ORDER TO OBTAIN?

>> THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING PROVISION UNDER SECTION?.

IT'S IN HERE. I'VE ONLY READ THIS.

>> I KNOW. I'VE READ IT.

>> I SHOULD KNOW IT.

>> I KNOW IT BY ART AS WELL, BUT IT'S EASY TO BREEZE OVER.

>> DO YOU KNOW ON TOP OF YOUR HEAD, WHAT THAT'S UNDER?

>> IT'S EARLY.

>> ISSUANCE OR DENIAL?

>> YEAH. AND THE NOTIFICATION TO VARIOUS PARTIES OF THE APPLICATION BEING FILED?

>> SO YES, 128-13 IS THE PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE APPLICATION.

WE'LL PUBLISH IT IN THE NEWSPAPER, WE'LL DO MAIL OUTS, WE'LL POST IT ON THE WEBSITE.

AND THEN WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF NOTICE, THE COUNTY MAY REQUEST THE DEPARTMENT HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING OR ANY ELECTED EXECUTIVE OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AS WELL COULD HOLD THAT REQUEST TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A HEARING ON EVERY PERMIT.

IT'S NOTIFICATION WILL BE PUT OUT THERE THAT AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND EITHER THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF A MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THAT CORRECT, STEWART?

>> YEAH.

>> THIS BILL WOULD BE A BRAND NEW CHAPTER OF THE COUNTY CODE OF PUBLIC LOCAL LAWS.

SO IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO THE ZONING CHAPTER.

WE DID MAKE AN AMENDMENT IN HERE TO REFER TO A DEFINITION WE USE IN THE ZONING CHAPTER FOR STRUCTURE.

AND WE DID HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT MAKING A AMENDMENT TO OUR ZONING CHAPTER TO IDENTIFY THIS USE IN OUR TABLE OF USES, AND WHETHER WE NEEDED TO DO THAT AS WELL SIDE BY SIDE WITH THIS.

BECAUSE IN CERTAIN CASES WHERE WE HAVE THESE STANDALONE CHAPTERS OF THE COUNTY CODE, SOMETIMES IT'S IDENTIFIED IN THE TABLE USES OF ZONING AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT.

SO I THINK FOR CLARITY, IT MAY BE WISE TO PUT THAT THERE.

>> MAY I POINT OUT SOMETHING ELSE? IN SECTION 12815, THIS IS EXPIRATION OR RENEWAL PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED.

SO IT MAY NOT BE AND THIS IS AGAIN, A POLICY DECISION BY YOU FOLKS IS WHEN SOMEONE APPLIES INITIALLY, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT MANDATORY.

IT IS IF SOMEBODY WHO IS NOTIFIED OF IT REQUESTS A PUBLIC HEARING.

ONCE THE PERMIT IS EXPIRING AND AN APPLICATION IS RECEIVED TO RENEW THE PERMIT, THE WAY THIS IS DRAFTED, AT THE VERY END IN SUBSECTION C, THE DEPARTMENT CANNOT RENEW OR MODIFY THE PERMIT TO STORE FPRS UNLESS THE DEPARTMENT HOLDS A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE RENEWAL OR MODIFICATION.

CRYSTAL MIGHT HAVE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER THAT'S A WHOLE LOT OF EXTRA WORK FOR HER DEPARTMENT TO DO IT, WHETHER ANYBODY REQUESTS IT OR NOT.

BUT THAT'S THE WAY I ORIGINALLY DRAFTED IT.

>> SO THIS WOULD BE AN ANNUAL RENEWAL.

PERMITS WOULD BE VALID FOR ONE YEAR.

>> YOU COULD MAKE IT THAT EVERY TIME IT'S APPLIED FOR RENEWAL, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE SAME NOTICE PROCEDURE AND GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT IT'S NOT MANDATORY ON A RENEWAL.

THE WAY THIS IS PRESENTLY DRAFTED, IT'S A MANDATORY PUBLIC HEARING ON A RENEWAL.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BAD IDEA.

BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE A YEAR RIGHT TO SEE IF THE PERSON IS OPERATING THE WAY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO.

[03:30:04]

IF THEY AREN'T, THEN THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ABOUT WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE RENEWAL.

>> SO DO YOU LIKE THE IDEA OF A MANDATORY AT RENEWAL OR TREAT IT THE SAME WAY WE DO ORIGINALLY, WHICH IS WE DO THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION.

AND THEREFORE, IF SOMEONE IS EXPERIENCING A PROBLEM OR HAS CONCERNS, THEY'D HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN IT WOULD BE HELD.

BUT IF THERE'S NO RESPONSES FROM A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT TO HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> FOR ME, I THINK IT'S THE LATTER.

IF THERE'S NOT ANY PROBLEMS ARE NOT ANY COMPLAINTS, THEN I WOULDN'T SAY.

YOU HAVE YOUR INITIAL PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN EVERY YEAR AT RENEWAL, CITIZENS HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THAT LICENSE IS ISSUED, BUT IT'S NOT MANDATORY.

>> THAT I'M CLEAR, SO IF THE PERSON HAS A STORAGE TANK, AFTER ONE YEAR AFTER THE PERMIT IS ISSUED, EVERYONE APPLICABLE WOULD BE NOTIFIED THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO RENEW THE APPLICATION, AND THAT ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST A HEARING TO TALK ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE APPLICATION?

>> IT'S CORRECT. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

THAT THAT WORKS WELL WITH OUR ALCOHOL BEVERAGE LICENSES.

WE PUT OUT NOTICE WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE RENEWALS, AND IF CITIZENS HAVE CONCERNS, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST THAT PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE WE WOULD RENEW A LICENSE.

OTHERWISE, THEY MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THEY GET THEIR RENEWAL.

>> ALL RIGHT. FOR MOTION PURPOSES, THEN, WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY IS I I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT AND INCORPORATE THE STAFF MODIFICATIONS AS WENT OVER AND WE MODIFY CHAPTER 128-15 TO REQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF NEIGHBORS AND AN OPTION FOR THEM TO REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE AMEND THE DWELLING SETBACK TO SAY, 1,250 FEET AS OPPOSED TO 2,500 FEET.

JUST FOR CLARITY, WE KEEP THE 2,500 FEET FROM THE PFAS AND THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES.

>> OKAY.

>> ARE YOU STILL INCLUDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETBACKS AS WELL? YES. OKAY. YES. THAT STAYS THE SAME.

>> EVERYDAY ALL THE OTHER SETBACKS WILL STAY THE SAME.

WE POST THIS FOR ONE WEEK AND HAVE IT ON OUR AGENDA FOR A LEGISLATIVE SESSION NEXT TUESDAY.

>> AS A SURVEY?

>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> OKAY. MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> OKAY. THE AYES HAVE IT.

THAT STARTS THE CLOCK RUNNING 65 DAYS FROM TODAY?

>> YES IT DOES.

>> FOR ENACTMENT. OKAY.

>> GOOD JOB.

>> APPRECIATE IT, HOPEFULLY I CAN COME BACK AND SHOW YOU MORE MAPS [LAUGHTER] MAYBE MORE FUN MAPS [LAUGHTER].

>> OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

>> OKAY. MOTION TO SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

>> OKAY. THE AYES HAVE IT.

ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS,

[Consent Agenda]

DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? YEAH. COMMISSIONER, YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO DO THAT.

>> I APOLOGIZE. IF I CAN MAKE COMMENT ABOUT THE OPIOID OPERATIONAL COMMAND CENTER ABATEMENT CURRENT PROGRAM.

THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER A LOCAL ABATEMENT PLAN FILED WITH THE STATE TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDING OUTSIDE OF WHAT THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED DIRECTLY TO ITSELF.

THIS PLAN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED IN BETWEEN MY OFFICE AND THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND ROBIN'S HERE TODAY AS WELL AND JESSICA TOOL WITH BEHAVIORAL HEALTH.

THE PLAN WAS OBVIOUSLY CIRCULATED ON THE AGENDA.

JUDGE PRICE HAS RECEIVED IT READ THROUGH IT,

[03:35:04]

AND SHE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT SHE SHARED THAT I EMAILED THE BOARD.

FIRST THING THIS MORNING AND SHE APOLOGIZES FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO BE HERE THIS MORNING TO SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD.

BUT I'LL SUMMARIZE JUST SHORTLY HER COMMENTS.

ESSENTIALLY, THE PLAN AND OUTLINE THAT WE'VE LAID FORWARD HERE TODAY ESTABLISHES A SAY A COMMISSIONER APPOINTED COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT APPLICATIONS OF FUNDING FOR THIS OPIOID MONEY THAT HAS VERY SPECIFIC CARVE OUTS AND RESTRICTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

AGAIN, JUDGE PRICE'S COMMENTS ARE LOOKING TO MAYBE EXPAND ON SOME OF THE CATEGORIES THAT ARE IN THIS PLAN.

IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT WE TABLE THIS FOR ONE WEEK, ALLOW MY OFFICE, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO WORK WITH JUDGE PRICE AND MAKE SURE HER CONCERNS ARE MET WITH THE PLAN AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU GUYS NEXT WEEK FOR ADOPTION AND REVIEW.

>> I WOULD MOVE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL OF THE CLOSED SESSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 3, 2024, AND REAPPOINTMENT LETTERS TO THE CONSTRUCTION TRADE BOARD, AND THE OTHER TWO ITEMS WILL BE TABLED.

>> I SECOND IT.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> THE AYES HAVE IT. OKAY. COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT.

I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH FOR YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO HIT ON AN EMAIL THAT I HAD SENT OUT

[County Administrator’s Report County]

YESTERDAY TO THE BOARD AND JUST EXPAND ON THAT EMAIL IN REGARDS TO DART RHODES.

INTERNALLY, THE OFFICE OF FINANCE, PLANNING AND CODE, SPECIFICALLY LESLIE, AS WELL AS ROBIN AND PUBLIC WORK STAFF HAVE BEEN TAKING A LOOK AT DIRT ROADS AND A LET'S SAY, MORE HOLISTIC APPROACH AT THE COUNTY, SO WE'VE PUT TOGETHER A LISTING IN THE EXCEL FORMAT THAT I PROVIDED TO THE BOARD OF EVERY DIRT ROAD AND DATA THAT WE'RE STARTING TO GATHER ON EACH ROAD, WHETHER IT'S MILEAGE, HOSES FOR MILEAGE, PDA, CROSS SCENES, CROSS PIPES, JUST ANY DATA THAT WE CAN FIND.

WE'VE BEEN INTERACTING WITH THE BOARD OF ED EMERGENCY SERVICES TO TRY TO GATHER AS MANY POINTS OF DATA FOR THIS SPREADSHEET.

WITH THE HOPE THAT WE COULD PURSUE SPECIFICALLY A PROTECT GRANT FOR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, FOR POSSIBLE PAVING OR FIXING OF CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE ROADS.

THAT SPREADSHEET HAS BEEN SHARED WITH THE BOARD.

WE WELCOME ANY COMMENTS THAT THE THREE OF YOU HAVE IN REGARDS TO THIS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SHEET, WE HAVE WEIGHED SOME OF THE CATEGORIES THAT WE KNOW THE PROTECT GRANT WEIGHS SPECIFICALLY THAT IT LIKES TO SEE, WHETHER IT'S IN FLOODPLAINS, WHETHER IT'S WITHIN CRITICAL AREA.

THERE'S DIFFERENT CATEGORIES THAT THEY LIKE IN WAY BETTER AS FAR AS APPLICATION GOES.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING THIS UP TO THE BOARD IF YOU WANTED TO HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA AND LET'S GO THROUGH THIS.

WE CERTAINLY CAN OR INDIVIDUALLY, YOU CAN LOOK THROUGH IT AND COMMENT BACK TO THE GROUP, AND WE'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND PLANNING GOING FORWARD.

>> I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IT, TO GET MORE DETAIL.

>> YEAH. OKAY. YEAH.

>> I MEAN, WE'VE GOT TO [NOISE] HAVE SOME, I THINK OUR POINT WAS THAT WE HAD TO HAVE SOME DATA POINTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT ALL DAY LONG, SO THAT WHEN PEOPLE COME AND SAY, WELL, HOW COME YOU'RE NOT DOING MY ROAD, THEN WE CAN SAY, WELL, THESE ARE THE PARAMETERS THAT WE USE TO DETERMINE WHAT ROADS WE'RE GOING TO DO.

>> WE CAN BEGGING TO BRING HER.

>> WELL, SHE'S ACTUALLY WORKED ON THIS SOME THROUGH LESLIE ON THIS, AND WE HAVE A MAP WITH LAYING THAT SHE'S PUT TOGETHER OF ALL THE DIRT ROADS.

OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN BRING THAT WALK THROUGH IT AND TALK ABOUT THE SHEET AND PRIORITIES THAT WE SEE.

AS A REMINDER, WE DO HAVE ARPA MONEY THAT'S BEEN SET ASIDE TO START SOME PAVING THAT WE'RE WORKING ON.

BUT EVENTUALLY WE'LL NEED TO PICK THE NEXT ONE OR TWO THAT WE WANT TO TARGET.

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE FIRST STEPS WE NEED TO UNDERTAKE TO DECIDE WHAT APPROACH WE REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT AND HAVE THE ANSWERS FOR THE PUBLIC AS YOU MENTIONED TO COMMISSIONER PORTER?

>> OKAY.

>> WHAT DID THAT PUT ON? YEAH. YEP. WE'LL GET THAT SCHEDULED.

REALLY, THAT'S THE ONLY THING I HAD ON MY LIST, UNLESS THERE'S ANY TOPIC YOU GUYS.

>> ON YOU GOT ANYTHING? DANNY? YEAH. OKAY. COUNTY COMMISSIONER OPEN DISCUSSION PERIOD.

[Commissioners Open Discussion Period]

[03:40:01]

COMMISSIONER BARKS, YOU DID ANYTHING? YEAH?

>> DANNY, I DO HAVE JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU.

SIR. TALKING ABOUT SOLAR, WE HAD A PROPOSAL FOR A HOBBS ROAD SAR PROJECT ON THE OLD LANDFILL.

IS THAT MOVING FORWARD OR WHERE ARE WE WITH THAT?

>> IT IS.

>> I'M YET TO FIND OUT TO SEE IF IT'S THERE OR NOT, BUT.

>> IT IS NOT THERE. THEY ARE CURRENTLY WORKING THROUGH PLANNING AND CODES, CRYSTAL MATT [NOISE] I JUST HAD AN EXCHANGE OF EMAILS LAST WEEK ABOUT COMMENTS THAT WILL BE GOING BACK TO THE ENGINEER DEVELOPER.

>> THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BENEFIT ELECTRIC COSTS FOR IT IS FOR US.

>> WELL AS THE BOARD OF ED IS GOING TO RECEIVE THE SAME TYPE OF REBATES.

>> ALL RIGHT. OTHER THING WAS, I WILL BOY IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY WEEK, WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, SAD NEWS, BUT I WILL CERTAINLY MENTION THE PASSING OF JUDGE WISE.

YOU KNOW, HE WAS VERY GOOD FRIEND AND VERY GOOD FRIEND TO THE COUNTY AND VERY SAD.

I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT FOR THE RECORD.

YOU KNOW, AS I STARTED LOOKING INTO HIS INVOLVEMENT, HE REMINDS ME A LITTLE BIT OF FORREST GUM.

NOT NOT NOT IN IT, BUT IN THE IN THE FACT THAT EVERY SIGNIFICANT THING THAT HAPPENED IN THIS COUNTY FOR MANY YEARS, INVOLVED JUDGE WISE.

I MEAN, ALL THE COMMISSIONS THAT HE SERVED ON, ALL THE ALL THE GROUPS.

I MEAN, HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN FORMING CASA.

I MEAN, WHEN YOU REALLY START DRILLING DOWN IN WHAT IMPACT HE HAD ON THIS COUNTY, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY VERY FEW PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD SAY, HAD THAT MUCH OF AN IMPACT.

I MEAN, IT WAS LIKE HE WAS EVERYWHERE.

IT'S A BIG LOSS FOR THE COUNTY, AND FOR FOR ME AS WELL.

JUST KEEP HIS FAMILY IN YOUR THOUGHTS.

[NOISE] THAT'S ALL.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER PORTER.

I HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS.

LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS GOT TOGETHER AND SHARED VIEWS AGREEMENT FOR THE ROAD AT NORTH COUNTY PARK WITH THE TOWN OF GREENSBORO, AND BASICALLY WHAT IT SAYS IS, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THE COUNTY IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE TOWN OF GREENSBORO WILL HANDLE DAY TO DAY MAINTENANCE, SNOW REMOVAL, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

GRASS MOWING. IF YOU GUYS ARE GOOD WITH THAT, I THINK, SHE WAS GOING TO SEND IT OVER TO THE TOWN OF GREENSBORO AND LET THEIR ATTORNEY REVIEW IT AND SEE IF THEY HAD ANY COMMENTS BEFORE IT GOT PUT ON OUR AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.

I KNOW I BROUGHT THIS UP, I THINK A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO, BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ON THAT.

THAT'S MOVING ALONG, I DID SPEAK WITH HER, SHE HAD TO LEAVE, BUT I THINK WE'RE GETTING PRETTY CLOSE TO 100% DRAWINGS, AND WE SHOULD BE READY TO GET THAT PROJECT STARTED HERE BEFORE TOO LONG.

ALSO, LAST FRIDAY, I HAD A MEETING WITH DOCTOR COPPERSMITH, DOCTOR HARPER, OF CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE, DOCTOR SIMMONS OF CAROLINE COUNTY BOARD OF ED AND MILTON AGLE OVER AT CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE.

I WAS BY FAR THE DUMBEST PERSON IN THE ROOM, BUT.

>> I FEEL THAT WAY ALL.

>> [LAUGHTER] THE MEETING WENT WELL.

YOU KNOW, WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF CAROLINE COUNTY BOARD OF ED USING THE NEW CAREER AND TECHNOLOGY BUILDING, THE QUEEN ANNE BUILDING AT PROPOSED QUEEN ANNE BUILDING AT CHESAPEAKE COLLEGE, FOR OUR CAREER AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION PROGRAMMING AT YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY AT NORTH CAROLINE HIGH SCHOOL, BOTH COLONEL RICHARDSON HIGH, AND NORTH CAROLINE HIGH STUDENTS UTILIZE THAT FACILITY.

VERY PRELIMINARY EARLY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT POTENTIALLY SHARING STAFF.

SHARING SPACE, AND HOPEFULLY ALLEVIATING OUR NEED TO BUILD A NEW CAREER IN TECHNOLOGY BUILDING HERE IN CAROLINE COUNTY.

I WANTED TO BRING THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN AMONGST THE THREE OF US.

THE THOUGHT OF SENDING A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE BUILDING NOW,

[03:45:03]

ASSUMING THAT WE CAN UTILIZE THIS FOR OUR OWN HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMMING AND HOPEFULLY SAVE US SOME MONEY IN THE LONG RUN NOT HAVING TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING HERE.

I DON'T KNOW, WHAT YOUR GUYS' THOUGHTS WERE.

I KNOW MY POSITION, BOTH TIMES, HAS BEEN A NO ON SENDING A LETTER OF SUPPORT.

KING COUNTY DID VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.

THAT MEANS THREE OF THE FIVE MEMBER COUNTIES HAVE APPROVED IT, AND WE'RE REALLY ALONG FOR THE RIDE ANYWAY.

IT'S A MOOT POINT AT THIS JUNCTURE.

>> BUT I THINK IT WOULD LOOK GOOD IF WE SEND A LETTER OF SUPPORT AND MAYBE WE COULD HELP THEM OBTAIN SOME MORE STATE FUNDING TO MAYBE EVEN LOWER OUR LOCAL SHARE EVEN MORE.

IF YOU GUYS YOU RE UP FOR IT

>> I THINK THE LETTER OF SUPPORT SHOULD INCLUDE OUR DESIRE FOR OUR STUDENTS, WHAT YOUR DISCUSSION WITH HIM, THANKS FOR HAVING THAT DISCUSSION.

I THINK IT SHOULD INCLUDE THAT STATEMENT, THAT IT SAY THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THIS LETTER OF APPROVAL, ASSUMING THAT OUR STUDENTS ARE GOING TO BENEFIT BY IT SPECIFICALLY?

>> OUR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.

I GUESS I MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO DRAFT A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE NEW QUEEN ANNE TECH BUILDING WITH THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE.

>> THIRD

>> MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> THE AYES HAVE IT. THAT WAS ALL I HAD.

>>AYE.

FOR A CLOSING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

SORRY FOR MAKING YOU WAIT TILL THE END HERE [LAUGHTER].

>> [INAUDIBLE] I JUST WANTED TO COME AND I'M GOING TO TRY AND

[Public Comment]

KEEP IT IN THAT THREE MINUTES TIME BECAUSE I'M TIRED.

I SPEAK ABOUT THE CANNABIS REINVESTMENT FUND.

I WANTED TO ASK MR. FOX, DID YOU READ THE SOCIAL EQUITY SURVEY BASED OFF OF THE LEGISLATION FOR THIS MONEY BECAUSE A SURVEY WAS PUBLISHED DECEMBER 15TH OF 2023.

IT ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT ALL COUNTIES ESTABLISH SOME TYPE OF COMMITTEE OR BOARD TO REPRESENT THAT SPECIFIC COMMUNITY.

TODAY, WHAT I'VE NOTICED IS WE TALKED ABOUT PEOPLE'S VOICES, EQUITABILITY, AND THE EDUCATION WITH GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I DIDN'T SEE THAT WITH THIS.

IT'S LIKE YOU GUYS WANTED TO SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SAY, BUT THE COMMUNITY'S NOT GOING TO HAVE A SAY, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR.

>> YES. THE STATE ACTUALLY DID A PRESENTATION TO ALL THE ADMINISTRATORS FROM ALL THE COUNTIES INCLUDED THE SURVEY ALL THE INFORMATION AS FAR AS FINANCIALS GO.

IN REVIEW AND CONVERSATIONS WITH THE OTHER COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE, IT SEEMS LIKE HALF THE COUNTIES ARE PUTTING COMMITTEES TOGETHER.

DEFINITELY THE LARGER COUNTIES THAT HAVE DEDICATED PEOPLE THAT MANAGE BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, A LOT OF THE SMALLER COUNTIES THAT WE'RE SEEING, LIKE I SAID, GARRETT, CAROL.

I THINK KEN'S LEANING THAT WAY POSSIBLY ARE PUTTING IT MORE INTERNALLY TO THE SIDE.

I WOULDN'T SAY THAT WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY DON'T WANT TO DISREGARD OR THROW THAT ALL THE INPUT OUT, IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE WEIGHED IN ANY DECISION MAKING.

THIS IS REALLY JUST TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ABIDING BY THE STATE'S OBLIGATIONS, BUT I CERTAINLY HEAR AND UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENT TO THAT.

>> BECAUSE I PARTICIPATED IN THAT SURVEY, AND I SEE YOU SEE THE ONLY NINE PEOPLE PARTICIPATED FROM CAROLINE COUNTY.

WHEN I SEE THE TOP 3 OR OR ALL THE THREE I VOTED FOR.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS I HEARD WAS, LIKE, WE DO A LOT OF RESEARCH HERE, BUT WE DON'T IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS. I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE COUNTY IF YOU COULD HIRE OR CREATE.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A BIG COMMITTEE LIKE EVERYBODY.

IT COULD BE TWO OR THREE BODIES, THEY CAN GET THE VOICES OF THOSE IMPACTED PEOPLE TO SEE WHERE THE MONEY SHOULD GO.

FOR EXAMPLE, FOR ME, I BELIEVE YOU GUYS SHOULD GO TO THE SCHOOLS AND TELL THEM TO DROP A NEW YOUTH PROGRAM EVERY SCHOOL IN THE COUNTY.

THEN WITH THAT FIRST ROUND OF FUNDING, WE COULD HAVE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS HOPEFULLY BY NEXT YEAR.

LIKE ORIGINALLY DOESN'T HAVE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS. I KNOW NOT FOR PROFIT TRIED TO ENTERED WITH THEM, AND IT WAS A WHOLE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT THE BUILDING BEING OPEN AND CLOSED.

HOWEVER, I DO HIGHLY BELIEVE THIS FIRST ROUND SHOULD GO TO THE KIDS IN YOUTH PROGRAMS. THERE'S NOT A LOT FOR THEM TO DO.

[03:50:01]

I HAVE A 4-2-YEAR-OLD.

IT'S NOT A LOT FOR THEM TO DO.

IF THE SCHOOLS COULD BE INVOLVED AND DRAFT A NEW PROGRAM, REACH OUT TO OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND SEE WHAT PROGRAMS THAT THEY HAVE THAT MAY BE ENDING TRUANCY, OR OTHER THINGS HELP LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A LOT OF INTERNSHIPS IN DC.

I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY FOR OUR KIDS TO GET TO DC, BUT MAYBE THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT COULD BE INITIATED THAT CAN ASSIST THESE KIDS FOR THESE INTERNSHIPS IN THE SUMMER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT I REALLY HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS TO GET AT LEAST SOMEBODY OUT THERE.

I WOULDN'T CALL THEM A STREET COMMISSIONER.

BUT SOMEONE THAT CAN ACTUALLY START IMPLEMENTING THIS FOR YOU GUYS, AND HOPEFULLY THIS FIRST ROUND COULD REALLY BE DEDICATED TO YOUTH PROGRAMS, AND THEN EVERY QUARTER IN YEAR, COME TOGETHER IS LIKE, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO THIS YEAR? ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT UP THERE WAS MAYBE THIS COULD BE A WAY TO HELP OWNERSHIP IN HOUSING.

MAYBE A GRANT COULD BE CREATED FOR A SPECIFIC GROUP TO HELP ACCESS MAYBE FOR CLOSING COST OR DOWN PAYMENT OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

MENTAL HEALTH, MORE LIKE ON SCHOOL SITE PHYSICIANS THAT POP UP, PROBABLY NOT HIRED BY THE STATE, BUT WORKS WITH THE SCHOOL.

I REALLY THINK THIS FIRST ROUND NEEDS TO GO TO THE KIDS BECAUSE THEY DESERVE IT.

>> WHATEVER WE DO, WE'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, JUST LIKE WE'RE DOING WITH THE DAF.

WHATEVER REGULATION WE PASS TO ADMINISTER THIS FUND, WE'LL GO THROUGH THIS SAME PROCESS WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WE'LL ENTERTAIN THOSE THOUGHTS.

I'M SURE WE'LL HAVE SOME THOUGHT ABOUT HOW HOW IT'S SPENT, MAYBE IT'S A GRANT APPLICATION PROGRAM WHERE PEOPLE COULD APPLY, AND IT WOULD COME IN FRONT OF THE BOARD TO APPROVE.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD DO.

WE COULD HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD EVERY YEAR WRITTEN INTO THE LAW WHERE THE PUBLIC COULD COME IN AND GIVE US IDEAS OF HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY.

WE COULD DO IT THAT WAY.

I'M NOT AWARE OF A BOARD THAT WE HAVE THAT HAS ANY AUTHORITY TO SPEND ANY MONEY WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL.

ALL OF OUR BOARDS ARE ADMINISTRATIVE BOARDS.

>> I AM PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN EXPLORING HOUSING FOR AS WELL.

I THINK THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS TO GET OUR PLAN TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE SAYING, THIS IS OUR PLAN.

WE'VE NOT HAD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO FORM ANYTHING AS FAR AS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

I DO WANT THE MONEY SPENT.

I DON'T WANT THIS MONEY SITTING HERE AND COME BACK IN HERE A YEAR FROM NOW SAYING, WELL, HOW COME WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WITH THAT? YOU FILLED THE SURVEY OUT?

>> YES, I DID.

>> DO YOU CARE ABOUT SHARING.

>> WHAT I CARE ABOUT? MY THOUGHTS ON SOCIAL EQUITY.

WELL, IT HAS TO GO WITH THE BILL BECAUSE IT'S TARGETING THE LOWCOM COMMUNITY, BUT FOR ME IT'S PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY CANABIS.

FOR ME, THAT'S ALL OF US, THE ENTIRE COUNTY, BUT WE HAVE TO TARGET A SPECIFIC GROUP.

I CHOSE HOUSING YOUTH, IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THOSE TOP THREES YOU HAVE BECAUSE WE'RE LIMITED HOUSING HERE.

IT'S HARD TO PURCHASE HOUSES IF YOU CAN'T SAVE.

ANOTHER THING ABOUT THAT GROUP IS THE WORK SCHEDULE.

THEY CAN'T MAKE IT HERE.

EVEN I FEEL THAT WE HAD MEETINGS, YOU STILL WOULDN'T HEAR THOSE VOICES.

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> EMA. BECAUSE EVEN NOW, THERE'S BEEN THINGS TAKING PLACE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY AND WE TELL THEM COME TO THE COUNTY, WELL, WE CAN'T BECAUSE WE HAVE TO WORK, OR WE GOT THIS IT'S NINE O'CLOCK, IT JUST DOESN'T WORK FOR THEIR TIME.

I, FOR ME, WHEN I KNEW ABOUT THIS MONEY, DEFINITELY SAID IT NEEDS TO GO TO BUILDING UP OUR LOW INCOME COMMUNITY WITHIN CAROLINE COUNTY, AND THAT COULD BE HOUSING THE YOUTH PROGRAM HAS SUGGESTED.

I THINK GRANTS SHOULD GO OUT, LET'S SAY THE LOW INCOME COMMUNITY WHO NEEDS SOMETHING DONE ON THEIR ROOF TO BRING THE WHOLE AREA UP TO TAKE BECAUSE YOU KNOW NEIGHBORS COMPLAIN.

I KNOW SOME PEOPLE MIGHT SEE THIS AS UNEQUAL.

BUT OUR LOW INCOME COMMUNITY IS A COLLECTIVE OF MANY RACES, AND I DON'T THINK PEOPLE REALLY SEE THAT.

WE HAVE WHITE, WE HAVE BLACK, WE HAVE LATINAS, WE HAVE ASIAN, EVERYBODY, AND WE'RE THE SECOND POOREST COUNTY.

TO ME, IT'S ALL OF US, NOT JUST THAT SPECIFIC GROUP.

I REALLY BELIEVE YOU GUYS COULD SHINE WITH THIS.

I REALLY DO AND GENUINELY REALLY HELP THE COMMUNITY THAT'S NEEDED, ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE ISSUES WE CAN'T COMBAT OUR OWN FROM THE STATE.

I THINK THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT.

>> IS IT CLEAR WHAT THE MONEY CAN BE SPENT ON YET? ARE THEY STILL PROMULGATING THOSE REGULATIONS?

>> THAT'S JUST GENERAL CATEGORY, CORRECT.

>> THAT'S TYPICAL OF THE STATE.

THEY GO, HERE'S THREE CATEGORIES.

THERE ARE SOME SUGGESTIONS OF THINGS,

[03:55:01]

SPECIFICALLY THE THREE THAT.

>> IS WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE SUBMIT OUR PLAN.

THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION.

BEFORE WE SPEND MONEY.

>> BEFORE WE ALLOCATE MONEY TO A PARTICULAR PROGRAM OR ISSUE, DO WE HAVE TO SUBMIT THAT AND GET APPROVAL BY THE STATE TO DO THAT?

>> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THE ACT.

>> CERTAINLY. HOW I ENVISION IN THE WAY THE STATE HAS LAID THIS OUT, AS FAR AS REQUIRED REPORTING AND ALL OF THAT IS, WE FILE THE PLAN THAT SAYS, HEY, WE'RE ESTABLISHING THIS FUND, AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IT IN THESE CATEGORIES REQUIRED IN THE SETTLEMENT.

THEN THE BOARD WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SAY, HEY, THIS YEAR, WE'VE TAKEN IN $240,000.

LET'S OPEN UP AND WE'RE GOING TO AWARD 10 APPLICATIONS.

ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO APPLY FOR THIS, HOW THAT DETAIL POSTS THE SUBMISSION TO THE STATE IS ALL DETERMINED BY THE BOARD.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE PUBLIC INPUT WOULD BE RECEIVED AND WHERE WE WOULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THAT YEAR OF WHAT WE REALLY AS A GROUP WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY TRY TO MITIGATE OR ATTACK FOR THAT YEAR WITHOUT FUNDING.

THEN POST THAT, I ENVISION THE STATE WILL COME BACK EVERY TWO YEARS AND GO OUT OF THE MAIN THREE CATEGORIES, TELL US HOW YOU SPENT IT AND WHAT PROGRAMS YOU USED IN THOSE THREE CATEGORIES.

I THINK, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE HEAVY HANDED REPORTING LIKE YOU HAVE THROUGH A CDBG GRANT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?

>> I DON'T THINK SO.

>> HERE TODAY.

>> RIGHT NOW.

>> UNTIL SOMEONE SOMEWHERE DOES SOMETHING NOT SUPPOSED TO DO. THEN THEY'LL COME BACK.

>> WHICH IS BOUND TO HAPPEN [LAUGHTER]

>> [INAUDIBLE]

>> I THINK YOU SET UP A BOARD, THEN WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A STAFF MEMBER ADMINISTER THE BOARD.

YOU'RE GOING TO SKIM MONEY OFF BY PAYING A STAFF MEMBER TO MANAGE AND ADMINISTER THE BOARD.

THAT'S LESS MONEY THAT'S GOING TO BE, YOU JUST HEARD US VENT ABOUT WE ALWAYS TALK AND WE NEVER ACT.

THE MORE DIRECT WE MAKE THIS, STILL HAVE THE PUBLIC INPUT PART OF IT.

THAT'S LESS MONEY WE'RE SPENDING ON ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND OTHER THINGS.

>> BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IN ORDER TO SOLICIT PUBLIC INPUT, THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO HAVE TO KNOW THE PARAMETERS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK.

IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE, HERE ARE THE PARAMETERS THAT THIS MONEY HAS TO BE SPENT IN, WE ARE SOLICITING PUBLIC INPUT FOR HOW YOU THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE.

>> MAYBE PRESENT SOME OPTIONS AND JUST SAY, COMMENT ON THESE OPTIONS.

WHICH ONES YOU LIKE WHICH ONES YOU DON'T, THEN ADD OPTIONS IF YOU WANT.

>> CORRECT.

>> I THINK THAT'S A YEAR TO YEAR TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT, MORE THAN LIKELIHOOD PROBABLY STACY IN MY OFFICE WOULD COME FORWARD AND GO, HEY, IT'S THAT TIME OF THE YEAR.

THIS IS HOW MUCH WE HAVE.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE HEARING.

WHAT DOES THE PUBLIC HAVE TO HEAR.

THEN YOU GIVE US THE DIRECTION TO RUN WITH IT AND WE'LL WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO GO AFTER THOSE TYPES OF INITIATIVES.

>> I KNOW, IT'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I FEEL IT COULD BE THE FOUNDATION FOR A YOUTH CENTER IN OUR COUNTY THAT COULD BE FUNDED THROUGH THIS MONEY, OR BUILDING.

WHAT I ENVISION IS LIKE A BUILDING WITH THE INDOOR PARK WHERE KIDS COULD COME AND PLAY THE PARENTS, IT'S GOING TO BE FUNDED THROUGH THAT MONEY.

ALSO EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THAT BUILDING.

IT'S JUST LIKE ONE CENTRAL HUB.

NOW, WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE LEGISLATION, IT DIDN'T DIRECTLY, LIKE YOU SAID, IT DIDN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO, HOW LONG WE HAVE TO TAKE TO SPEND THIS MONEY AND EXHAUST IT.

BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR OUR COUNTY TO HAVE A HUB WHERE ALL THE KIDS AND THEIR FAMILY COULD COME AND HOW THEY HAVE. WHAT'S THAT PLACE? PLASEUM IN EASTON, CABIN FEVER, AND THEN MAYBE ONE PART OF THE WAREHOUSE, LIKE I SEE MAYBE RIGLEYS INDUSTRIAL PARK COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHERE THERE'S SOMEBODY THERE, LIKE I SEE A NON FOR PROFIT WORKING WHERE KIDS CAN FIND OTHER EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES OUTSIDE OF WHAT THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IS GIVING.

IT COULD CLEARLY BE A HUB FOR THEM TO GROW.

IN THE COUNTY BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE ALL JUST SEPARATE IN DIFFERENT SCHOOLS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO BRING TO THE TABLE ABOUT THAT.

I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS MONEY FOR THE NEXT WELL, GOD WILLING HOW LONG I'LL BE ALIVE TO REALLY CHANGE OUR COMMUNITY.

>> WELL, WE'VE GOT TO GET THIS LEGISLATION IN PLACE BEFORE WE CAN DO ANYTHING WITH IT,.

>> YES, SIR.

>> MOST DON'T GO TO SOME ADMINISTRATIVE WE GUESS.

WHEN IT COMES TO GRANTS, THAT'S WHAT MY BIGGEST THING IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT BEFORE IS IT GETS WASTED ON ADMINISTRATIVE STUFF, AND IT DOESN'T GET PUT TO WORK.

>> WE TALKED ABOUT PROBLEMS. WE NEVER SOLVE.

[04:00:02]

>> HERE HE GOES DIRECTLY TO THE SOURCE, AND LIKE I SAY, I DON'T THINK HE COULD BE SPENT WITHOUT COMMUNITY INPUT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT AFFECTS THE MOST HERE AND THERE'S NO STRINGS ON A GRANT PROCESS FROM THE STATE [INAUDIBLE].

>> I REALLY VISION, I COULD REALLY SEE YOU GUYS DOING SOMETHING WITH THIS, AND IT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT.

JUST STAY WITH IT. YOU GOT MY SUPPORT.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE, PUBLIC COMMENT? NONE BEING SEEN.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MOVE.

[Meeting Adjourns]

>> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.