[00:02:38]
>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE DECEMBER 17, 2024, CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING, WHICH IS NOW IN ORDER.
THIS MORNING, WE HAVE OUR INVOCATION BY REVEREND DAN GEDMAN OF GLOBAL METHODIST CHURCH OF DENTON, AND THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
EVERYONE CAN PLEASE RISE. THANK YOU, REVEREND GEDMAN.
>> LET US PRAY. ALMIGHTY GOD WE THANK YOU.
WE THANK YOU FOR THE BLESSINGS OF THIS DAY, FOR THE WORK OF WHICH YOU HAVE CALLED US UNTO AND WE PRAY LORD, THAT WE WILL FULFILL YOUR WILL THIS DAY.
BLESS OUR COMMISSIONERS AND ALL WHO WORK HERE THIS DAY, LORD, WITH WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO FULFILL YOUR WILL, IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE SET IN ORDER FOR US TO CONTINUE TO FULFILL THOSE THINGS.
GRACIOUS GOD, HELP US IN THESE WE PRAY IN THE NAME OF JESUS OUR LORD, AMEN.
[Call to Order: Invocation – Rev. Dan Gedman, Global Methodist Church of Denton, Pledge of Allegiance; Agenda Review]
>> THE COMMISSIONERS MET IN CLOSED SESSION DURING
[President’s Report Out]
THE DECEMBER 10 MEETING TO CONDUCT EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS AND GET UPDATES FROM LEGAL COUNCIL UNDER AUTHORITY 2014 MARYLAND CODE STATE GOVERNMENT 3-35 B1 AND 7.THE ATTENDEES WERE THE COMMISSIONERS, ADMINISTRATOR FREEMAN, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOX, PIO, JENNIFER RIDLEY, ATTORNEY BARREL, ATTORNEY GABLER, AND PLANNING AND CODES DIRECTOR CRYSTAL DADS.
WITH THAT REPORT OUT, WE WILL MOVE INTO OUR OPENING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK
[Public Comment]
DURING THE OPENING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD THIS MORNING? NONE BEING SEEN, WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS A SPECIAL RECOGNITION TO[Special Recognition to William Hildebrand]
WILLIAM HILDEBRAND FOR 18 YEARS OF SERVICE AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER BARTS HAS THE RECOGNITION. GO AHEAD.
>> COME UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE.
[00:05:03]
>> BEFORE ME, I HAVE A PROCLAMATION OF SPECIAL RECOGNITION OF WILLIAM HILDEBRAND FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
WHEREAS, DEDICATED INDIVIDUALS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY HAVING COMMITTED YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE VITAL FIELD EMERGING MANAGEMENT, CONSISTENTLY DEMONSTRATING A WAVERING COMMITMENT TO THE SAFETY AND WELL BEING OF OUR CITIZENS DURING TIMES OF CRISIS.
WHEREAS, THEIR EXPERTISE, LEADERSHIP, AND TIRELESS EFFORTS, AND PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, RECOVERY, AND MITIGATION PLAY A CRUCIAL ROLE IN SAFEGUARDING OUR COMMUNITY FROM NATURAL DISASTERS, EMERGENCIES, AND OTHER THREATS.
NOW, THEREFORE, WE, THE CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSION DO HEREBY PROCLAIM DECEMBER 17, 2024, A DAY OF SPECIAL RECOGNITION OF WILLIAM HILDEBRAND, WHO HAS DEDICATED 18 YEARS TO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, COMMENDING HIS INVALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS AND UNWAVERING DEDICATION TO THE STATE OF MARYLAND AND CAROLINE COUNTY.
WE ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS TO EXPRESS THEIR GRATITUDE TO WILLIAM HILDEBRAND FOR HIS EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE AND TO CONTINUE SUPPORTING THE VITAL WORK OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND AND CAROLINE COUNTY.
A WITNESS WHEREOF, WE HAVE HERE TO SET OUR HAND AND SEAL ON THIS, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER IN THE YEAR 2024, SIGN, J. TRAVIS BREEDING PRESIDENT, LARRY CE PORTER, VICE PRESIDENT AND MYSELF AND FRANKLIN BARTS COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU, WILLIAM, FOR YOUR SERVICE, DEDICATION, EMERGENT MANAGEMENT AND TO PROTECTING PEOPLE IN JUST OVERALL TO CAROLINE COUNTY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CONGRATULATIONS. [APPLAUSE] YOU'RE RETIRING, WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO FROM HERE?
>> FROM HERE, I TURN INTO EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE, AND TODAY IS MY LAST DAY OF WORK.
>> CONGRATULATIONS, AND HOPE YOU ENJOY YOUR RETIREMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
>> YOU WANT TO COME UP FOR A PICTURE? [BACKGROUND]
>> MOVING ALONG HERE. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WE HAVE MR. STEVE KLEIN,
[Steve Kline, President & CEO, Eastern Shore Land Conservancy]
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF EASTERN SHORE LAND CONSERVANCY WITH A SOLAR ENERGY DISCUSSION. MORNING, MR. KLEIN.[Solar Energy Discussion]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING IN AND YOU DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE WITH US.
WE JUST SPENT THREE DAYS AT WINTER MEGO, LARGELY DISCUSSING THIS TOPIC.
>> WELL, GOOD MORNING, PRESIDENT BRADING, VICE PRESIDENT PORTER.
COMMISSIONER BARTS. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR TODAY.
I AM THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE EASTERN SHORE LAND CONSERVANCY.
WE ARE MARYLAND'S LARGEST REGIONAL LAND TRUST.
WE OPERATE IN A SIX COUNTY REGION FROM CECIL TO DORCHESTER COUNTY, AND HAVE PROTECTED 58,000 ACRES ON 331 CONSERVATION EASEMENTS, INCLUDING 5,544 ACRES RIGHT HERE IN CAROLINE COUNTY ON 35 EASEMENTS.
WE ALSO OWN THE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE 206 ACRE LYNCH PRESERVE IN CAROLINE COUNTY AS WELL ON THE BANKS OF THE CHOP TANK.
I ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO VISIT.
[00:10:02]
I'M ALSO A FORMER COUNCIL PRESIDENT OF THE CENTERVILLE TOWN COUNCIL, SO I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.ESLC WORKS TO PROTECT WHAT WE ALL KNOW MAKES THE EASTERN SHORE FEEL LIKE HOME.
PRODUCTIVE FARMLAND, OPEN SPACE, SCENIC VISTAS, FORESTS, THRIVING SMALL TOWNS LIKE DENTON, A PLACE THAT BRINGS YOUR BLOOD PRESSURE DOWN.
ESLC BELIEVES THAT ONE OF THE BIGGEST THREATS TO OUR EASTERN SHORE IS THE SIGHTING OF LARGE SOLAR ARRAYS ON PRODUCTIVE FARMLAND, LIKE THE ONGOING PROJECT HERE IN CAROLINE COUNTY, THAT WILL SEE THOUSANDS OF ACRES WIND UP ON THE WRONG SIDE OF A SOLAR PANEL.
ARMED WITH A STATE PERMISSION SLIP FROM THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, SOLAR COMPANIES, AS YOU KNOW, CAN RUN ROUGHSHOD OVER COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING RULES.
THERE IS OFTEN, MUCH ATTENTION GIVEN TO COMPLICATED REGULATIONS FOR THESE SITES RELATED TO PROPERTY LINE, SETBACKS, BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS, NATIVE PLANTINGS, SOIL TYPE RESTRICTIONS.
BUT AS YOU ALL KNOW, COMPLEX STIPULATIONS ARE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE, ESPECIALLY OVER THE COURSE OF DECADES.
WHAT ESLC ENCOURAGES CAROLINE COUNTY TO ADOPT IS A PER ACRE MITIGATION FEE, SIMILAR IN NATURE TO ONES ALREADY ADOPTED IN BOTH TALBOT AND QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTIES.
IN TALBOT, THE MITIGATION FEE IS BASED ON MARYLAND AG LAMB PRESERVATION FOUNDATION, FAIR MARKET APPRAISAL AVERAGES. THAT'S MLP.
IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, THE SYSTEM ASSESSES A HALF PERCENT TRANSFER TAX ON PROJECTS CONVERTING FARM LAND TO SOLAR, AND ALL OF THOSE FUNDS ARE ALLOCATED FOR LAND PRESERVATION PROJECTS.
AFTER CONVERSION, PROPERTIES IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY THAT HOST SOLAR ARE TAXED AT A COMMERCIAL RATE AT A LITTLE MORE THAN $2 PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE.
THE FIRST MILLION DOLLAR OF THIS TAX ARE EARMARKED FOR LAND PRESERVATION WITH THE REMAINDER GOING TO THE GENERAL FUND ANNUALLY.
WHILE BOTH COUNTIES HAVE ADOPTED A DIFFERENT APPROACH.
BOTH COUNTIES USE SUBSTANTIALLY ALL OF THEIR FEES ON LAND CONSERVATION.
ESLC STRONGLY BELIEVES THE BEST WAY TO PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LAND AGAINST ALL OF THE THREATS IT FACES IS PERMANENT CONSERVATIONS LIKE THE ONES WE WRITE.
IF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE INTERESTED, ESLC STANDS READY TO ASSIST YOU IN CRAFTING A SOLAR MITIGATION POLICY THAT WORKS FOR CAROLINE COUNTY.
THANKS FOR THE TIME. HAPPY HOLIDAYS, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU'VE GOT.
>> MR. KLEIN, THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GO BACK AND I DID A LITTLE TIMELINE.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE 2016 WHEN THE DISCUSSION OF SOLAR PREEMPTION CAME INTO BEING.
THERE'S BEEN A GOOD AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION ON FACEBOOK ABOUT OUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS.
WE'VE BEEN CALLED SELL OUTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE BECAUSE PEOPLE, FOR SOME REASON, THINK THAT WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S JUST BEEN ANY COUNTY THAT'S FOUGHT HARDER AGAINST COVERING FARM LAND WITH SOLAR PANELS IN CAROLINE COUNTY.
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THE MARYLAND LEGISLATURE HAS SEEN FIT TO TAKE POSITIONS AND GO TO COURT AND GET COURT CASES THAT ACTUALLY PREEMPT US FROM CONTROL WITH THE EXCEPTION.
WE'VE HAD TO ACTUALLY FIGHT VERY HARD TO EVEN KEEP CONTROL OF BUFFERING AND SETBACKS AND SO ON.
I THINK, WE'VE TRIED TO BE REASONABLE IN THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY OTHER AVENUE THAN WE'RE GOING TO GO EXCEPT TO GO TO COURT.
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE WE'RE GOING TO END UP.
WE ARE HAVING CHAIRMAN KORMAN COME HERE ON FRIDAY.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK WITH HIM ABOUT THIS.
I KNOW DELEGATE GRACE HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING SET THAT UP.
I'M ON STATE CRITICAL AREAS COMMISSION AND I HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW AND I'M GOING TO BE VERY INTERESTED TO FIND OUT WHERE THE CRITICAL AREAS COMMISSION IS ON THIS BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HEARD A WORD, FRANKLY.
TO ME, IF THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH COVERING LAND WITH BLACKTOP, THERE OUGHT TO BE SOME CONCERN ABOUT COVERING ACRES OF LAND WITH SOLAR PANELS, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM, SO I'M GOING TO ASK THAT QUESTION TOMORROW.
I THINK THE DILEMMA THAT WE FIND OURSELVES IN, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO I KNOW EVERYONE IS THE RIGHT OF THE FARMER, TO DO WITH HIS LAND WHAT HE WANTS AND COMING FROM A FARMING FAMILY,
[00:15:05]
FARMERS ARE VERY INDEPENDENT PEOPLE.WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN AND SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE YOU THIS OFFER, AND YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE MONEY ON YOUR LAND.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO SET UP HERE AND SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T.
BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOME TYPE OF LIMITATIONS AND THERE HAS TO BE SOME TYPE OF CONTROL.
THE EASEMENT SITUATION, I THINK, IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT.
MY CONCERN IS THAT ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PRESERVE ENOUGH LAND? ARE WE GOING TO WIN THE FIGHT IN THE RACE HERE, TO USE LAND FOR SOLAR AT THE RATE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PRESERVE IT.
THE PROGRAM THAT THE COUNTY CAME UP WITH BACK IN 2017 WAS TO TRY TO USE INFORMATION THAT CAME DIRECTLY FROM THE SOLAR COMPANIES.
THROUGH THE MARYLAND ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF VIABLE ACRES OF LAND IN CAROLINE COUNTY THAT COULD BE USED, BASED ON THE TRANSMISSION ABILITY.
BASED ON THE TRANSMISSION LINES THAT WE HAD IN THIS COUNTY, HOW MANY ACRES WERE FEASIBLE, FOR US TO BE TO ALLOW TO BE USED FOR SOLAR BASED ON THAT CAPACITY.
THAT'S HOW WE DRAFTED THAT ORDINANCE.
NOW, WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT NUMBER RIGHT NOW.
I HAVE A FEELING WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER IT.
I KNOW THAT I GET SOMETHING IN THE MAIL REGULARLY FROM SOLAR COMPANIES WANT TO COME TALK TO ME ABOUT OUR FARM.
THEY DON'T WANT TO COME TO MY HOUSE.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS WAS NOT JUST A SITUATION WHERE WE DUG OUR HEELS IN AND SAID, NO, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO HAVE A SOLAR PANEL IN THIS COUNTY.
WE VERY MUCH TRIED TO BE PROACTIVE AND WE TRIED TO BE COLLABORATIVE WITH THE SOLAR COMPANIES WITH MACO WITH ALL THE PEOPLE.
I CAN REMEMBER VERY CLEARLY HAVING PUBLIC HEARINGS IN THIS ROOM WHERE WE HAD ONE HALF OF THE ROOM.
WAS SITTING THERE STARING AT ME SAYING, YOU CAN'T TELL US WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH OUR LAND.
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO LEASE OUR LAND, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELL OUR LAND.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROOM WITH A CHAIR IN THE MIDDLE WAS YOU CAN'T LET THEM COVER THIS COUNTY WITH SOLAR PANELS.
THAT WAS THE DILEMMA AND STILL CONTINUES TO BE THE DILEMMA THAT WE'RE IN.
>> I JUST THINK THAT, AS COMMISSIONER BREEDING SAID, THERE WAS A LOT OF SESSIONS AND A LOT OF TALK ABOUT SOLAR TO THE POINT WHERE THERE WAS A VERY POINTED QUESTION AND I WAS NOT IN THE SESSION, BUT I'VE HEARD ABOUT IT.
I THINK OTHERS WERE OF ONE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY, I BELIEVE, TO WHEN THE QUESTION WAS RAISED ABOUT, MARYLAND HAS SET THESE RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS, WHICH I DON'T THINK ARE ATTAINABLE, BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WHEN WE REACH A POINT WHERE WE'RE DOING AWAY WITH FOSSIL FUELS AND WE CAN'T GENERATE ENOUGH ELECTRIC? I THINK HIS ANSWER HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE BUBONIC PLAGUE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THIS IS THE ANSWER.
WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE? WE'VE SET GOALS THAT ARE NOT ATTAINABLE AND MY BIGGEST FEAR IN THIS IS THAT WHEN WE GET TO A POINT WHERE WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ATTAIN THOSE GOALS, THEN MORE DRASTIC MEASURES ARE GOING TO BE PUT INTO PLACE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, WE'RE NO LONGER GOING TO NEGOTIATE FOR YOUR LAND, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE YOUR LAND AND THAT'S MY BIGGEST FEAR.
EVERYBODY WILL DENY THAT AND EVERYBODY WILL SAY, NO.
IT IS REALLY A PROBLEM AND I'M CERTAINLY INTERESTED IN LOOKING INTO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF EASEMENTS, IT WOULD MEAN CREATING A WHOLE LEVEL OF BUREAUCRACY HERE FOR US, BUT THE MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION LAND IS A GREAT PROGRAM.
IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE ASKED REPEATEDLY AND BEEN TOLD, IT'S UNTOUCHABLE.
IF FARM LAND IS IN AN EASEMENT, YOU CAN'T TOUCH IT FOR NOW.
I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD WAY TO MAYBE MOVE FORWARD.
AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU COMING IN.
I THINK WE HAD A GOOD CONVERSATION ON THE PHONE,
[00:20:03]
WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THEM.I'M JUST REACHING OUT HERE FOR ALL OF THESE AGENCIES WHO ARE LEGITIMATELY INTERESTED IN PRESERVING LAND.
>> WE RECENTLY APPROVED A SMALL SOLAR PROJECT THAT WENT ON AN ABANDONED LANDFILL.
THOSE ARE THE PLACES THAT I THINK IT SHOULD GO, AND NOT ON PRIME FARMLAND.
THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY MORE OF THAT.
>> THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY MORE FARM LAND.
WHEN WE COVER THE LAND UP IN 20-YEAR INCREMENTS OR 25-YEAR LEASES, THE LAND IS NOT GOING TO BE THE SAME.
WE'RE ALREADY HAVING FARMERS WHO ARE COMING BACK TO US ANECDOTALLY AND SAYING, THE COMPANY THAT I SIGNED MY LEASE WITH HAS BEEN SOLD THREE TIMES.
>> THESE ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE THAT I SIGNED THE LEASE WITH AND THEY'RE NOT REALLY DOING THE THINGS THEY TOLD ME THEY WERE GOING TO DO.
MY ANSWER TO THAT IS YOU DIDN'T BRING YOUR LEASE TO US TO LOOK AT.
IN FACT, OUR ATTORNEY HAS GENERATED A VERY THOROUGH LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE THAT IS GOING TO GO OUT OR HAS GONE OUT OR GETTING READY TO GO OUT TO FARMERS IN THIS COUNTY THROUGH OUR FARM BUREAU THAT IS GOING TO LIST ABOUT 30 THINGS THAT YOU SHOULD BE TALKING TO THESE SOLAR COMPANIES ABOUT.
WHO PAYS THE INCREASE IN TAXES? WHO DOES DECOMMISSIONING? HOW DOES THE DECOMMISSIONING WORK? IF THIS SOLAR COMPANY COMES IN AND SIGNS A LEASE WITH YOU AND GOES OUT AND STARTS STRIPPING YOUR TOPSOIL, WAS THAT IN THE DEAL? WE'VE ALSO EVEN TALKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING LEASES REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE COUNTY BEFORE YOU ENTER INTO THEM.
THAT'S GOING PRETTY FAR, BUT IF I WERE DOING THIS, I WOULD WANT SOMEBODY LOOKING AT THIS OTHER THAN ME, WHO'S JUST POOR DUMB GUY FROM GREENSBURG SITTING OUT HERE LOOKING AT THIS THING, TRYING TO READ IT AND PRETEND I KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
THOSE ARE THE MEASURES THAT WE'VE TAKEN.
THIS WILL BE ANOTHER WAY TO GO, BUT I WILL EMPHASIZE, WE ARE ALMOST FIGHTING THIS BATTLE ON TWO FRONTS.
WE'RE FIGHTING IT WITH THE SOLAR COMPANIES.
LOOK, I'M A MEMBER AND I LOVE OUR FARM BUREAU, BUT THE LOCAL FARM BUREAUS HAVE TAKEN A HANDS-OFF POSITION ON THIS BY SAYING, WE DON'T WANT TO BY TELLING US WHAT WE CAN DO WITH OUR LAND.
THIS IS MY SOLAR BOOK THAT I GOT THAT HAS ALL THE ORDINANCES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OVER THE YEARS SINCE 2016.
WE'RE GOING INTO 20 YEARS ON THIS, BUT I JUST THINK THAT WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE PEOPLE THAT I TALKED TO IS THAT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY BACKING OFF ON THIS, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DOUBLING DOWN HERE ON RENEWABLE ENERGY.
I THINK IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH GOING FORWARD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING IN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION AND YOUR ACTIONS.
>> IF I COULD JUST INTERJECT, SIR, I WOULD JUST SAY WE ESTIMATE REGION WIDE, I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER FOR CAROLINE COUNTY SPECIFICALLY, BUT 60% OF FARMLAND IS NON-OPERATOR OWNED IN OPERATING REGION.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO EDUCATE STATE LEGISLATORS ABOUT IS USING TERMS LIKE FARMERS MAKING THE DECISION TO PUT SOLAR ON THEIR PLACE, AS YOU KNOW, IN MANY CASES, IT'S NOT A FARMER MAKING DECISION, IT'S A LAND OWNER.
WE ALSO ESTIMATE THAT FOR EVERY 2,500 ACRES OF SOLAR WE GET ON AG LAND, WE'RE PUTTING A FARMER OUT OF BUSINESS.
THE THING ABOUT THE EASEMENT IDEA IS THAT IT MEETS YOU BOTH WAYS.
FOR THOSE WHO ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN DOING THIS FROM A PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS STANDPOINT, THEY CAN CERTAINLY HAVE THEIR AGREEMENT WITH THE SOLAR COMPANY.
FOR FOLKS THAT WANT TO PROTECT THEIR PLACE WITH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT, AND THAT'S THEIR RIGHT AS WELL AND WE HAVE THE FUNDING THROUGH THIS MITIGATION FEE TO PAY FOR THAT.
IN OUR MIND, IT ADDRESSES THE PROPERTY RIGHTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.
THE THING I'LL MENTIONED ABOUT THE GOALS YOU MENTIONED THE STATE'S RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS, THE STATE HAS A LOT OF LEGISLATIVE GOALS.
THE STATES GOT GOALS FOR LAND CONSERVATION, WATER QUALITY, YOU NAME IT.
HOUSING. THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF GOALS.
THIS IS THE ONLY ONE WITH A FOR-PROFIT SECTOR STANDING TO MAKE LOTS OF MONEY BY USING THAT LEGISLATIVE GOAL AS A CUDGEL TO SAY,
[00:25:01]
RULES BE DAMNED, WE ARE GOING TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL NO MATTER WHAT IT TAKES.YOU MENTIONED THIS IDEA OF HOW MANY ACRES? THERE IS SIMPLY NO ACCURATE WAY TO MEASURE HOW MANY ACRES ARE GOING TO BE COVERED UP WITH SOLAR PANELS.
TEN YEARS AGO, MAYBE IT WAS 2,000 ACRES IN CAROLINE COUNTY.
EVERY SINGLE LAND OWNER, AS YOU SAID, YOURSELF, IN THIS COUNTY, IS GETTING MAIL ONCE A WEEK FROM SOLAR COMPANIES TRYING TO PUT THEIR LAND IN SOLAR.
THE SOLAR COMPANIES ARE NOT GOING TO STOP BECAUSE SOMEBODY SAYS THERE'S A CERTAIN TARGET ACREAGE IN CAROLINE COUNTY.
THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP ON DOING IT.
I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THIS POWER IS NOT COMING TO CAROLINE COUNTY, IT'S NOT GOING TO GREENSBURG OR DENTON.
IT'S GOING ON THE GRID, IT'S A 12-STATE INTER-TRANSMISSION GRID, THAT POWER CAN GO AS FAR AWAY AS ILLINOIS.
WE ARE PUTTING FARMLAND UNDER A PANEL TO POWER RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS IN CHICAGO, POTENTIALLY, OR INDIANA, OHIO, ON THIS PJM GRID.
>> AGAIN, I WILL EMPHASIZE THAT WHEN YOU TAKE FARM LAND OUT OF PRODUCTION, IT ISN'T JUST NUMBERS THAT GO ON A PIECE OF PAPER.
WHEN YOU TAKE FARM LAND OUT OF PRODUCTION, YOU'RE AFFECTING THE SEED SALESMAN, THE FERTILIZER SALESMAN, THE TRACTOR SALESMAN, THE PERSON WHO FIXES THE TRACTORS, YOU'RE AFFECTING EVERY ASPECT OF AGRICULTURE.
ONCE THAT ACRE OF LAND IS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING IT BACK FOR 20 YEARS AND I WILL ARGUE WITH ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO TELL ME, YOU CAN JUST TAKE THEM OFF AND START FARMING AGAIN.
IT HAS A LEVEL-BY-LEVEL EFFECT ON LAND.
I DON'T KNOW. I WON'T GO INTO IT BECAUSE I'M RUNNING ALONG HERE, BUT WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOUCHED ON THE BAIT-AND-SWITCH GAME THAT WAS PLAYED ON US WITH THE BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEMS, WHERE WE WERE INITIALLY TOLD TO PUT A BILL IN AND THEN WE WERE TOLD TO TAKE IT ALL OUT BECAUSE THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE WAS GOING TO ADDRESS IT THROUGH REGULATION CHANGE AND THEN THEY CAME IN AND SAID, "NO, WE'RE NOT." I COULDN'T EVEN THINK OF ANYTHING THAT WAS MORE ATROCIOUS THAN THAT.
WE STILL DON'T HAVE A RESOLUTION TO THAT AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS IN OUR CHECKLIST THAT WE'RE SENDING.
MOST PEOPLE WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEM.
THEY DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DANGERS ARE TO OUR FIRE COMPANIES, OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.
YOU MENTIONED IT, THE EYES JUST GLAZE OVER.
I MENTIONED IT A COUPLE OF TIMES DOWN AT MACO AND I COULD SEE PEOPLE JUST GOING LIKE, "I DON'T HEAR YOU." IT'S SERIOUS AND IT'S A PROBLEM THAT WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS.
I THINK THAT OUR LOCAL LEGISLATORS HAVE FOUGHT HARD.
THEY ALWAYS DO, BUT WHAT I HEARD WAS, WELL WE GOT TO WORK WITH THIS BECAUSE THE PLANE'S CRASHING AND WE ONLY WANT TO GET OUT WITH A FEW BROKEN BONES.
I DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT STUFF.
I WANT TO HEAR WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE TO TAKE SOME LOCAL CONTROL? IT USED TO BE AND MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER DELEGATE GRACE IS SEATING BACK THERE, WHO USED TO SIT RIGHT THERE.
THE ONLY REAL CONTROL THAT WE HAD AS COUNTIES WAS LAND CONTROL.
WE COULD CONTROL ZONING. THIS PREEMPTS US.
THIS JUST SAYS, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL WHERE ANY OF THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, WHO BY THE WAY, IF YOU WANT SOME INTERESTING READING, GO BACK AND READ THEIR BIOGRAPHIES, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THAT PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, THEY'RE JUST SAYING TO YOU, "YOU CAN CONTROL A FEW THINGS, BUT WE'RE TAKING OVER CONTROL OF THIS ISSUE AND WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU WHERE THESE THINGS CAN GO." WE SAY OFTEN AND I'M BEGINNING TO THINK MORE AND MORE ALL THE TIME AFTER 14 YEARS, WHAT ARE WE GETTING ALL DRESSED UP AND COMING UP HERE FOR IF WE CAN'T MAKE ANY DECISIONS? IT'S NICE I'D BE PLAYING GOLF RIGHT NOW IF I WASN'T SITTING HERE.
WHAT ARE WE DOING UP HERE? WHAT ARE WE REALLY CONTROLLING? THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
WHEN THOSE SOLAR PANELS, WE'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM PEOPLE, WHAT ARE THEY GETTING READY TO BUILD UP THERE FROM GREENSBURG TO GOLDSBORO? WHAT HOUSES? THERE AIN'T NO HOUSES GOING UP THERE? THE SOLAR PANELS.
WHEN THOSE GO IN, GUESS WHO'S GOING TO GET THE PHONE CALLS.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, IT'S GOING TO BE US.
WHAT DID YOU GUYS LET THEM DO THAT FOR? THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE CAN'T.
RIGHT NOW, AS I SAID HERE, WE WILL BE TOLD WHERE THEY GO.
[00:30:03]
AGAIN, I'VE TAKEN SOME TIME HERE, BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH.I KNOW WE'LL BE IN TOUCH AND PLEASE WE'LL DO IT.
>> I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU STEVE FOR COMING IN.
>> FOR TODAY, BUT I JUST WANT TO ADD TO WHAT LARRY SAID.
AT OUR 2,000 ACRE CAP, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY MORE THAN FAIR.
I THINK IT'S 2,000 ACRES TOO MANY, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE TO MEET THE REASON, BUT OUR 2,000 ACRE CAP IS I THINK MORE FAIR AND IT'S A GOAL THAT WE CAN LIVE WITH.
I KNOW WE OBSTRUCTED PLANNING ZONING, ANYTHING THAT COMES IN AFTER 2,000, WE'RE NOT JUST IGNORED. THAT'S WHERE WE STAND.
I FEEL THE LANDFILL IS THE MOST SUITABLE PLACE TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
JUST TO SAY, HEY, IT TAKES AWAY FROM A 2,000 ACRE CAP, PLUS TWO, HEY, IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE USED AGAIN.
AS FAR AS THE LAND USE, I THINK WE NEED TO STRESS THAT THIS ISN'T TEMPORARY.
EVEN AFTER THE 20 YEARS, I THINK IT'S FOREVER.
IN OTHER WORDS, ONCE [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] IS PULLED UP, IT'S DONE.
YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY.
TO ADD TO YOUR GRID STATEMENT, CHAIRMAN HOOVER STATED LAST WEEK IN MACO THAT IT'S STAYING LOCAL.
THE LAWYER, MR. MUCKLOW HE STATED THAT HE CALLED HIM OUT AND HE'S LIKE, NO, IT'S NOT LOCAL, BUT HE TRIED TO CONVINCE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM THAT IT WAS STAYING LOCAL, BUT WE ALL KNOW OTHERWISE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO SPEED UP A LITTLE BIT HERE.
AS FAR AS WE HAVE MADE STEPS ON ONE PANEL THAT'S COMING IN, WE UP THE SALVAGE BOND TO FULL VALUE, NOT SALVAGE BOND VALUE TO PROTECT US IN CASE THAT IT DOES GO BELLY UP.
I KNOW SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THIS, BUT I USE THE TERM AS SOLAR PANEL PEOPLE ARE THE SAME AS THE MORTGAGE PEOPLE.
WHEN THEY TARGETED OLDER PEOPLE TO TRY TO GET THEIR HOME.
>> REVERSE MORTGAGES. I THANK YOU FOR THAT.
ONE QUESTION I DO HAVE FOR YOU, STEVE, IS, WHAT IS THE LAND CONSERVANCY PLANNING TO DO IF THE STATE COMES IN AND SAY, HEY, EVERYBODY'S PRE-EXEMPT FROM EVERYTHING FROM QUEEN, ANNE, KENT, AND ALL OF THEM.
WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO THAT AND SAY, HEY, THAT DOESN'T FLY ANYMORE?
>> WELL, I THINK WE WOULD OPPOSE THAT AS STRONGLY AS WE COULD.
>> WE'RE ACTUALLY ADVOCATING AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR A STATE MITIGATION FEE.
WOULD ALLOW THINGS LIKE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY AND TALBOT COUNTY TO THE STATE.
>> THEY TOLD US THAT WAS OFF THE TABLE. COMING UP THIS YEAR.
>> WELL, IT COULD BE. I THINK THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS IN THE SOLAR INDUSTRY ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF THE NEXT FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION ON RENEWABLE ENERGY SUBSIDIES.
I THINK THAT THE CHANGES IN THAT SUBSIDY SYSTEM CHANGE THE ECONOMICS ON THE GROUND OF WHETHER OR NOT THESE THINGS PENCIL OUT AT 25 OR $3,000 AN ACRE FOR 25 YEARS, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE SEEING OFFERED ACROSS THIS REGION.
NOW IS A HUGE NUMBER, 10 TIMES AS MUCH AS CASH RENT IN MANY CASES FOR AGRICULTURE.
>> I COULD COMPARE THESE TWO BACK WHEN THEY WERE SUBSIDIZING ETHANOL SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THEY MADE THE CORN PRICE GO CRAZY AND FARMERS WERE DOING WELL.
NOW IT'S LIKE THEY ALMOST CHANGED THE SYSTEM WHERE FARMERS AREN'T DOING WELL WITH CROPS AND, HEY, THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE, PUMPING IT UP. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU.
>> FOR SAVING THE 58,000 ACRES THAT YOU HAD TO SAVE, JUST CONTINUE TO FIGHT, AND WE'RE WORKING HARD HERE.
HE'S A VERY GOOD ADVOCATE OF THIS.
HE'S WORKING HARD IN ANNAPOLIS AS WELL AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE SO FAR.
>> YOU BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON THIS, MR. KLEIN, AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO ELABORATE ON IT A LITTLE MORE.
A SESSION AT WINTER MACO IT WAS SAID THAT THE STATE CAN MEET ITS RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS BY USING LESS THAN 2% OF THE STATE'S USABLE FARM LAND.
DOES ANYBODY REALLY BELIEVE THAT?
>> NOBODY'S WILLING TO COMMIT TO THAT NUMBER AND CRAFT STATUTE BASED ON IT.
WHAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING IN ANNAPOLIS IS, WHAT'S THE STATE WIDE NUMBER FOR AG LANDS? THEN ONCE WE REACH THAT, PRE-EMPTION IS DONE.
NOBODY IS WILLING TO LEGISLATE ON THAT NUMBER.
>> BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.
>> WELL, I THINK THE GOAL IS GOING TO GO UP.
I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE 100% BY SOME NUMBER THAT SOME DATE THAT ENDS IN ZERO OR FIVE.
[00:35:02]
IT'S JUST COMPLETELY ARBITRARY.AS COMMISSIONER PORTER SAID, THEY'RE NOT REACHABLE GOALS.
THE GOAL IS GOING UP, AND WE'RE GETTING FURTHER AWAY FROM THE GOAL EVERY DAY, BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING] THE GOAL THE GOAL IS GOING UP.
>> WELL, ONE THING THAT I REALLY WANTED TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT WAS THE TALBOT COUNTY POINT SYSTEM TO IMPLEMENT THAT POINT SYSTEM INSIDE OF OUR 2000 ACRE CAP TO IN STRATEGICALLY PLACE THE ACREAGE OF SOLAR THAT WE HAVE LEFT, I SHOULD SAY, IN AREAS WHERE WE HAVE LESS PRIME FARM LAND.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OPINION ON OR ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE TALBOT COUNTY?
>> WE HELPED HIM WRITE IT. WE'RE HAPPY TO HELP YOU ALL TOO.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE VERY INTERESTED IN IMPLEMENTING WITH OUR REMAINING.
NOW THE ONE LARGE PROJECT THAT WE HAVE UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW IS APPROXIMATELY 740 ACRES, I BELIEVE, AT THE NORTH END OF THE COUNTY.
WE HOPE THIS FRIDAY, WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE DELEGATE MARK KORMAN, CHAIRMAN OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE UP AND SHOW HIM, THE IMPACTS NOT ONLY OF THE SOLAR, BUT ALSO SURFACE MINING IN PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE COUNTY HAS BEEN UNDER A LOT OF PRESSURE.
IT HAS DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED ONE LARGE FARMER WHO LEASES A LOT OF GROUND AT THE NORTH END OF THE COUNTY TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE APPROXIMATELY 2,500 ACRES, EVERY 2,500 ACRES WE LOSE, WE LOSE A FARMER WHO LEASES OR TILL THAT GROUND.
THAT WAS AN INTERESTING STATISTIC.
I APPRECIATE YOU POINTING THAT OUT.
IT ALSO SEEMED TO ME THAT IT WAS THE OPINION OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, WHICH I HAVE NOT READ THOSE BIOS, BUT I'M ASSUMING THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUAL AN AGRICULTURAL BACKGROUND ON THAT BOARD.
THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE LIKE IT IS A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OR A TRANSMISSION LINE OR A COAL FIRED POWER PLANT, WHERE YOU ARE AFFECTING RELATIVELY MINIMAL AMOUNTS OF LAND AND RELATIVELY MINIMAL IMPACT ON LOCAL ECONOMIES BECAUSE OF THAT.
I THINK THEY'RE TOTALLY MISSING THE BIG PICTURE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MEDDLING IN A VERY LARGE CONTRIBUTOR TO OUR ECONOMY, WHICH IS AGRICULTURE, AND ALL OF THOSE EFFECTS, AND I THINK THEY'RE TOTALLY JUST GLANCING OVER IT OR NOT PAYING ANY ATTENTION TO IT.
BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY THAT IT IS A PUBLIC NEED, WHATEVER THE ACRONYM IS, CPCN WHATEVER THAT PROCESS IS, CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC NEED AND CONVENIENCE OR SOMETHING.
THEY ARE SO USED TO NOT HAVING TO CONSIDER THESE OTHER FACTORS THAT THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERING THESE OTHER FACTORS.
WE SOMEHOW HAVE TO EDUCATE THEM AND TRY TO GET THEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENT, PROCESS OF ANALYSIS THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION HERE.
BUT IT SEEMED TO ME IN THE SESSION THAT OUR ATTORNEY WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE PRESENTERS IN WHO DID A VERY GOOD JOB, I THINK, OF POINTING OUT OUR POSITION THAT THEIR HEADS IN THE SAND.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE RIGHT NOW.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE COUNTY GOVERNMENTS.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO TAKE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE YOURS TO BE VERY LOUD AND VERY VOCAL AND HAVE A UNITED MESSAGE.
I BELIEVE THAT WE'RE WILLING TO DO THAT TO TEAM UP AND TO TRY TO EDUCATE THE DECISION MAKERS.
>> I WOULD JUST SAY MAYBE IN CLOSING ON MY END IS, THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE STATE THAT THINK THIS IS A BETTER LAND USE IN AGRICULTURE.
>> FOR SURE. [LAUGHTER] I AGREE WITH YOU.
THEN THE OTHER THING IS I WAS AT A MEETING A WHILE BACK AND HEARD THIS COMMENT OF THE STATES GOT PLENTY OF AGRICULTURAL LAND.
THAT'S GENERALLY A WESTERN SHORE VIEW, YOU DRIVE OVER HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKENDS A YEAR.
YOU SEE NOTHING BUT FARMLAND ON THE SIDE OF ROUTE 50 OR 404.
YOU THINK WE HAVE PLENTY OF FARM LAND.
I SAID TO THIS PERSON, IT'S TRUE WE DO HAVE PLENTY OF FARM LAND.
MARYLAND HAS TWO MILLION ACRES OF PRODUCTIVE AG LANDS,50 YEARS AGO, WE HAD FOUR MILLION.
WHILE IT'S TRUE, WE STILL HAVE PLENTY, WE'VE LOST HALF OF IT.
THE NEXT 50 YEARS CANNOT TELL THAT SAME STORY.
AGRICULTURE WILL BE AT AN END IF WE KEEP DOWN THIS PATH NOW.
[00:40:04]
>> THEY WERE ALSO VERY HUNG UP ON THE FACT THAT THE STATE OF MARYLAND IMPORTS 40% OF ITS POWER.
SO WHAT? WHO CARES? WHY DO WE HAVE TO GENERATE IT ALL HERE? WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? I'M SURE PENNSYLVANIA IS HAPPY TO SELL US ENERGY.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BIG DEAL IS WITH THAT.
I THINK IT IS IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS TO ME THAT IT'S ABOUT THE IDEOLOGY, THE RENEWABLE ENERGY.
IT'S WHATEVER CRUTCH, WHATEVER POINT THAT THEY CAN USE TO JUSTIFY, REACHING THOSE GOALS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
I THINK WE'RE CLIMBING AN UPHILL, FIGHTING AN UPHILL BATTLE HERE AND I THINK THE BEST CHANCE WE HAVE IS TO UNITE AS MANY VOICES AS WE CAN TO TRY TO PUSH BACK AND SELL OUR POINT OF VIEW.
>> WE WILL WORK WITH YOU ON THAT?
>> YEAH. I WANT TO ADD THAT CHAIRMAN HOVER MEDIA ANALOGY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COAL FIRED PLANTS?
>> SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THAT WELL, ABOUT THE FARM LAND, LIVING NEXT TO SOLAR PANELS AND TAKING UP SIMILAR ACRES, HE SAY, WELL, IT'S NO DIFFERENT SOMEBODY ON THE WESTERN SHORE LIVING NEXT TO A COAL POWER PLANT OR A NUCLEAR PLANT, WHICH OBVIOUSLY TAKES UP LESS SPACE THAN A SOLAR PANEL FIELD.
BUT THEY JUST DIDN'T QUITE GET IT. THEY DON'T.
HOPEFULLY THIS FRIDAY, MAYBE WE CAN I THINK WE'RE TALKING ON DEAF EARS.
>> THE OTHER DISTURBING THING AND THIS GOT GLANCED OVER AS WELL.
I THINK IT WAS A DEVELOPMENT AND A VERY IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT THAT CAME OUT OF THE WINTER MACO SESSIONS WAS THAT THEY DISCUSSED NOT REMOVING ANY FURTHER ENERGY GENERATION SOURCES FROM THE GRID IN MARYLAND.
MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IMPACT WILL THAT HAVE ON THE DECOMMISSIONING OF SOLAR IN THE FUTURE? IF WE ARE HUNG UP ON GENERATING 100% OR MORE OF OUR POWER HERE IN STATE.
IN 20 YEARS, WHEN A LAND OWNER WANTS TO DECOMMISSION AND POTENTIALLY RETURN IT BACK INTO AGRICULTURE.
IS THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION STILL GOING TO HAVE THAT POLICY WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN AND SAY, NO, YOUR POWER IS TOO IMPORTANT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO DECOMMISSION AND TAKE THAT POWER OFF THE GRID? THAT WAS KIND OF GLANCED OVER, BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON.
I DON'T WAS IT IN THE SESSION?
>> DID MR. HOOVER BRING THAT UP? WAS IT? IT WAS BRIEFLY, IT WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT I PICKED UP ON.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DOES THAT MEAN WE'RE NOT REMOVING ANY MORE NATURAL GAS, COAL FIRE NOW, OR DOES THAT MEAN 20 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN A FARMER WANTS TO RETURN HIS LAND OR IS A PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION GO TO STEP IN AND SAY NO?
>> IT COULD MEAN BOTH. I MEAN, I THINK WE'VE SEEN IT IN THE HEADLINES OF THE NEWSPAPERS THAT THIS COUNTRY HAS ACCELERATED AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS TOO QUICKLY AND PUTS PEOPLE'S LIVES IN DANGER DURING TRAUMATIC WEATHER EVENTS.
I SUSPECT WE'RE GOING TO SEE IT IN OTHER PLACES SOON ENOUGH.
PERSONALLY, I THINK AT ESLC, THE DECOMMISSIONING IDEA I THINK IS A SLIM READ TO LEAN ON.
I DON'T THINK THESE THINGS ARE COMING OFF NOW.
THEY DEFINE WE'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN CONSERVATION EASEMENTS BECAUSE THAT GROUND IS UNDER THAT PANEL, YOU CAN TAKE IT OFF AND BOOM OR BACK IN AGRICULTURE.
THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW AGRICULTURE WORKS, SOIL COMPACTION, AND AS MANY PLACES THE SOIL IS GONE.
BUT IT'S NOT CONSERVATION, IT'S NOT LAND PRESERVATION, AND IT'S NOT COMING OFF. IT'S NOT COMING OFF.
WE'RE SHUTTING DOWN TOO MANY ELECTRONS, AND PEOPLE WANT TO PLUG EVERYTHING IN, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE STARVED FOR THIS POWER.
WE'RE STARVED FOR IT NOW, WAIT TILL 30 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN HEAVEN FORBID, WE'VE GOT DATA CENTERS AND EVERYTHING'S ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED MORE POWER, NOT LESS.
>> THEY'RE ALSO NOT DISCUSSING WILDLIFE IMPACTS.
DEER DISPLACEMENT, WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH CROP DAMAGE.
NOW YOU'RE DISPLACING FOOD SOURCE FOR LARGE DEER POPULATIONS THAT WE STRUGGLED TO MAINTAIN.
FLYWAYS WERE PART OF A VERY SENSITIVE FLYWAY WITH CANADIAN GEESE MIGRATION, SNOW GEESE MIGRATION, VARIOUS OTHER WATER FOWL.
NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON THOSE FLYWAYS.
IT'S BLINDERS ON, FULL STEAM AHEAD, AND IT'S VERY CONCERNING.
HOW DO WE MAKE IT DENT IN THAT?
>> BUT SPEAK ON THE DEER PART OF IT, IF YOU TAKE OUT 2000 ACRES OF CORN,
[00:45:03]
SO THE DEER IS JUST GOING TO MOVE OVER TO ANOTHER FARM.BASICALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO RUN THE NEXT FARM OUT OF BUSINESS.
IF YOU SAY, HEY, AFTER EVERY 2,500 ACRES, YOU'RE RUNNING ONE FARM AROUND OF BUSINESS.
THAT DEER MOVES OVER, SO THEY'RE GOING TO EAT THE NEXT 2,500 ACRES OF CORN, THAT PUTS ANOTHER FARM AROUND OF BUSINESS.
I MEAN, IT TO ALLUDE TO HIS STATEMENT, IT HASN'T BEEN FACTORED IN AT ALL AT ALL.
>> WELL, IT'S INTERESTING TO ME WE GO TO SOME OF THESE SESSIONS AND THEY DISCUSS WILDLIFE PASSAGEWAYS, UNDER FREEWAYS, AND THEY BRING ALL THESE THEY WANT TO ADD FUNDING TO STATE HIGHWAY TO DO WILDLIFE CROSSINGS ON MAJOR THOROUGHFARES.
BUT WITH THE SOLAR, YOU CAN BUILD SOLAR PANELS AND FENCE IT IN TO WITHIN 50 FEET OF A ROAD ON BOTH SIDES.
WHERE'S THE PASSAGEWAY THEN? [LAUGHTER] YOU CREATED A PROBLEM HERE AND YOU'RE TOTALLY IGNORING, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY RECREATING THAT WITH THE SOLAR PANEL.
>> BUT WE COULD POINT OUT ALL STUFF AND BE HERE ALL MORNING DISCUSSING IT.
>> MR. KLEIN, IS THERE ANY TRUTH TO THE RUMORS OF A BILL BEING PROPOSED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT WILL ALLOW THE PLACEMENT OF SOLAR PANELS ON CONSERVED AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY THAT IS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT?
>> THAT'S SOMETHING THAT ESLC IS VERY ALARMED ABOUT THE IDEA OF, AND WE ARE TUNED IN AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE SANCTITY OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.
IT CERTAINLY ON OUR CONSERVATION EASEMENTS, SOLAR CAN BE PUT UP ON A FIVE ACRE OR 5%, WHATEVER IS LESS THE MINIMUS BASIS, AND THAT POWER CAN ONLY BE USED ON THE FARM.
WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF FARMS THAT THEY'LL HAVE A PANEL TO POWER THE FARMHOUSE OR GRAIN DRYER, THAT SORT OF THING.
IT CANNOT BE PUT BACK ON THE GRID UNDER THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
MLP EASEMENTS, I THINK COULD POTENTIALLY BE REVISITED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE.
THIS IDEA THAT IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK INTO AGRICULTURE AT SOME TIME OR THAT IT COULD BE FARMED WHILE IT'S UNDER A SOLAR PANEL, THESE IDEAS OF AGRO VOLTAICS.
WE ARE GOING TO STAND PRETTY FIRM AND IT'S MY HOPE THAT CAROLINE COUNTY AND MACO STAYS FIRM THAT MLP EASEMENTS SHOULD NOT BE REVISITED TO INCLUDE UTILITY SCALE SOLAR.
BUT CERTAINLY ON ESLC EASEMENTS, THOSE 58,000 ACRES.
THERE IS NO ROOM FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR SOLAR LEAVING THE PROPERTY.
>> I WOULD MENTION THAT THOSE SMALL SCALE SOLAR THAT POWER CHICKEN HOUSES AND ARE NOT INCLUDED IN OUR CAP.
THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED. I JUST THINK THAT I DON'T KNOW IF DELEGATE GRIST AND JEFF, HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH?
>> YEAH. WE HAVE TWO DISTINGUISHED GUESTS IN THE AUDIENCE.
WELL, SENATOR MASON DELEGATE GRIST.
>> THEY WOULD LIKE TO [LAUGHTER].
>> GREAT TO HEAR HIS COMMENTS [OVERLAPPING].
I THINK IT'S ALL ABOUT HOW YOU INTERPRET THE LAW.
RIGHT NOW THERE IS NOTHING EXPLICIT IN THE LAW THAT SAYS YOU CAN PUT UTILITY SCALE SOLAR ON EASES.
SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR IS THEY WANT TO DEFINE UTILITY SCALE SOLAR AS AGRICULTURE BECAUSE THEY'RE HARVESTING THE AS HARVESTING IF THEY'RE SUCCESSFUL IN DEFINING UTILITY SCALE SOLAR AS AGRICULTURE, THEN THEY CAN.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LONG BILL PUT IN THIS YEAR, JUST TO GET THAT RECORD, AND THEY'LL GET STUCK IN THE DRAWER, THEN THE SAME BILLS, WE'RE GOING TO OFFER ON THE FLOORS AMENDMENT SO WE CAN GET EVERY LEGISLATURE EVERY LEGISLATURE ON RECORD.
THAT WILL BE ONE. WE WANT TO EXPLICITLY SAY THAT YOU CANNOT USE PUT UTILITY SCALE SOLAR ON ONE ACRE. A DOMAIN IS ANOTHER ONE.
YOU EXPLICITLY CANNOT USE DOMAIN.
THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, YOU CAN'T DO IT NOW.
WELL, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEARLY DEFINED IN THE LAW.
THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, NO, AND THEY'RE GOING TO VOTE IT DOWN, AND WE'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, TO THE PUBLIC, THIS IS A TOOL THAT YOU GUYS DECIDED TO KEEP IN YOUR TOOL BOX DOWN THE ROAD.
>> TDRS, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT. SAME THING.
>> I CAN HAVE ONE MORE THING VERY QUICKLY.
>> I HAVEN'T TALKED TO YOU GUYS ABOUT IT YET, BUT WE'RE GETTING COMMENCED A OF BUY IN.
TALBOT COUNTY IS GOING TO HOST A MEETING OF ALL NINE COUNTIES TO TALK ABOUT.
I THINK AHEAD OF THIS MEETING, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL NINE COUNTIES ARE ARE SHARING WHATEVER ZONING LAWS THAT YOU-ALL HAVE ALREADY PASSED, THAT YOU HOPEFULLY, INTEND ON ENFORCING BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME GOOD IDEAS OUT THERE AND IF THERE'S SOME CONSISTENCY AND.
[00:50:01]
THIS IS THE CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD A LOT WITH A LOT OF THE LOCAL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND COMMISSIONERS ON THE EASTERN SHORE, IF THERE'S CONSISTENCY WITH A LOT OF OUR ZONING, AS CONSISTENT AS WE CAN POSSIBLY BE, IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT EASIER TO ENFORCE IT.IT'S GOT TO BE A LOT EASIER TO MESSAGE IT TO THE PUBLIC.
IF YOU GUYS DOING IN COURT, WHICH YOU WILL, IT'LL BE EASIER TO DEFEND IT IN COURT TO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE HAVE NINE COUNTIES OUT OF 24 JURISDICTIONS THAT ARE IN LOCKSTEP WITH THEIR LOCAL ZONING LAWS AND THEY CHOOSE ENFORCE IT.
THIS MEETING WHERE, HOPEFULLY, IT WILL HAPPEN BETWEEN THE HOLIDAYS AND [INAUDIBLE] STARTS [INAUDIBLE].
>> REAL QUICKLY TO ADDRESS YOUR POINT, THOUGH.
THE CONCEPT OF USING EASEMENT LAND FOR SOLAR SITING IS SOMETHING THAT IS A VERY POWERFUL VOCAL FEW IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY ARE ADVOCATING, BOTH AN EASEMENT AREA AND NON USABLE LAND LIKE MARSHLAND, TITLE LAND, THINGS LIKE THAT.
TO HAVE THE LAND CONSERVANCY COME OUT WITH A STRONG PERSPECTIVE ON THAT CONCEPT, I THINK WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
WHEN I MENTIONED THE FEW, THE LEAD IS GOING TO BE CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION AND SHORE RIVERS.
THEY'RE HERE LOCALLY ON THE SHORE, THEY'RE CONSERVATION ORIENTED, AND THEY'RE IN THAT GROUP THAT CARRIES A LOT OF WEIGHT IN ANNAPOLIS, AND THE LAND CONSERVANCY IS ALSO, BUT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PERSPECTIVES AND THEIR OWN AGENDA.
HAVING HAVING THEIR INDEPENDENT VIEW ON THIS, I THINK, WOULD BE VERY PERSUASIVE ONCE WE GET INTO TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE [INAUDIBLE] WHEN IT HAPPENS.
>> THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE WITH THE EASEMENT APPROACH IS IT'S A TRADE.
AT BEST, WHAT KIND OF TRADE ARE WE TALKING? ARE WE TALKING A ACRE FOR ACRE TRADE BEST CASE SCENARIO? THAT'S A LOT OF FARM LAND STILL AVAILABLE FOR SOLAR DEVELOPMENT.
>> I THINK THAT'S UP TO YOU. I THINK I WOULD ARGUE IT COULD BE YOU COULD DO MORE THAN ONE TO ONE.
I THINK ONE TO ONE IS A MINIMUM, QUITE FRANKLY.
>> AS LONG AS THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T TAKE THAT ABILITY AWAY FROM US, SAYING THAT WE ARE BEING TOO ONEROUS.
>> WELL, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO LITIGATION.
I THINK THE ACREAGE CAP ON THE COUNTY IS PROBABLY A BIGGER RED FLAG LEGALLY THAN A MITIGATION.
>> WE'VE BEEN TOLD IT'S NOT GOING TO STAND.
MORE THAN LIKELY, BUT NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THAT PREEMPTION PROCESS ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE.
THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION SAYS, YOU HAVE PERMISSION TO BUILD HERE.
IF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T GIVE THE APPROVAL, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? IT HAS NEVER REACHED THAT STAGE OF LITIGATION, CORRECT?
>> IT'S HAPPENING IN KENT COUNTY NOW.
MORGNEC SOLAR, WHICH I JUST WROTE ABOUT IN THE BAY JOURNAL.
MORGNEC SOLAR IS HAPPENING ON THE CLARKE-HOPEWELL FARM JUST EAST AND NORTH OF CHESTERTOWN.
IT WAS LITERALLY CITED FOR 400 UNITS OF HOUSING AND SORT OF NEW TOWN CENTER, VERY NICE DEVELOPMENT THAT ESLC PLAYED A ROLE IN CITING FOR THEM.
I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN KENT COUNTY, YOU CAN PROBABLY SPEAK TO IT IN DETAIL, IS BASICALLY BEING TOLD, YOUR ABILITY TO OBJECT AND NOT APPROVE THESE THINGS IS QUITE LIMITED.
>> BUT THEY'VE HELD HIM UP SO FAR.
>> THAT WAS THE STUDY THAT THE LAWYER FROM KENT COUNTY SPOKE ON UP IN HERE?
>> WELL, I THINK, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO ANOTHER CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE WE HAD, WHICH WAS DAF.
DELEGATE, IS IT NOW SENATOR LOVE, CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION BASICALLY HELPED WRITE OUR LEGISLATION.
I'M TRYING TO REACH OUT TO HER.
I HAVEN'T BEEN SUCCESSFUL YET, BUT I'M TRYING TO REACH OUT TO HER TO TRY TO GAUGE WHERE THE CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION IS ON THIS.
AS I SAID YESTERDAY, TOMORROW IS THE CRITICAL AREA, AND IT'S OUR CHRISTMAS THING, BUT I'VE BEEN KNOWN TO BE THE GRINCH BEFORE, AND I'LL BE THE ONE AGAIN, BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET THE TEMPERATURE OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE HOPE WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF US.
JEFF, I KNOW YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT REPRESENTATION FOR THE NINE COUNTIES AND MOVING FORWARD.
I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GO.
IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DO IT INDIVIDUALLY.
WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO IT.
>> THERE IS A STRONG COALITION OF CONSERVATION GROUPS THAT INCLUDES ESLC,
[00:55:04]
THE LOWER SHORE LAND TRUST, FOREVER MARYLAND, THE CHESAPEAKE CONSERVANCY THAT HAS OPPOSED LEGISLATIVE ATTEMPTS TO RECAST CONSERVATION EASEMENTS, TO SAY THIS IS OKAY TO DO ON CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.I DO WANT TO RE EMPHASIZE THAT THE EASEMENTS THAT I THINK ARE IN THE CROSSHAIRS ARE THOSE MALPF EASEMENTS BECAUSE THERE IS STATE ENFORCEMENT THERE.
WHEREAS ON CONSERVATION EASEMENTS THAT WE HOLD, IT'S JUST NOT ON THE TABLE.
>> IF THEY GET INVOLVED WITH THE MALPF EASEMENTS, IT IS GOING TO BE AN ABSOLUTE BECAUSE I HAVE HAD PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME TO ME WHO HAVE TRIED TO DO SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS BUILDING A BARN ON AN EASEMENT.
THIS IS WHAT THE EASEMENT SAYS.
LESLIE, I'M PUTTING YOU ON A SPOT, AND CRYSTAL, HOW MANY ACRES DO WE HAVE IN MALPF EASEMENTS IN THIS COUNTY ROUGHLY? DO YOU KNOW?
>> I DON'T KNOW, BUT I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU.
>> I CAN FIND OUT PRETTY QUICK. EACH OF OUR COUNTIES IS ABOUT A THIRD PROTECTED.
I DON'T KNOW OFF TOP OF MY HEAD.
I LIVE IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, SO I KNOW IT'S ABOUT 30% PROTECTED.
>> YEAH. ALL ARE ALREADY IN THERE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> EVEN KENT COUNTY? BECAUSE I HAD HEARD THAT KENT WAS VERY LARGELY PRESERVED, BUT IT'S SIMILAR PERCENTAGE.
>> THEY'RE ALL IN THE HIGH 20S OR LOW 30S PROTECTED.
I WOULD JUST SAY, IF YOU LOOK AT HOWARD COUNTY, YOU ASKED ABOUT WHAT'S THE TRADE OFF, WITHIN THE MEMORY OF PEOPLE THAT ARE MY AGE, THEY REMEMBER HOWARD COUNTY BEING A RURAL COUNTY.
I THINK IT'S NOT GOING TO BE 10 YEARS IN CAROLINE COUNTY, BUT 100 YEARS FROM NOW IN CAROLINE COUNTY OR MORE THAN THAT, ACRES ARE EITHER GOING TO BE PROTECTED OR THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
I THINK THAT'S THE BARGAIN THAT WE FACE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S STARING US DOWN THE BARREL NOW, BUT I THINK IF YOU LOOK 100 YEARS AHEAD, IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE PROTECTED OR IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
>> WE HAVE A LOT OF PRESSURES.
WE HAVE GROWTH PRESSURE FROM OUR MUNICIPALITIES, SAND DEPOSITS.
AS WE HAVE A LARGE SAND DEPOSIT AT THE NORTH END OF THE COUNTY, WHICH IS BEING MINED AND NOW SOLAR.
NONE OF THOSE OTHER PRESSURES, I DON'T BELIEVE ARE BEING FACTORED INTO THE EQUATION EITHER.
>> WHEN THOSE SAND EXTRACTIONS CLOSE, THEY SHOULD BE COVERED IN FLOATING PHOTOVOLTAICS.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT LANDFILLS, BROWNFIELD SITES.
BECAUSE NOT VERY MANY WESTERN SHORE LEGISLATORS KNOW WHAT A SAND AND GRAVEL EXTRACTION IS.
>> OR TO BORDERS, TO PHILADELPHIA, BALTIMORE, DC, PROXIMITY.
>> I THINK WHEN THEY'RE CLOSED, THEY FILL UP WITH WATER AND THEY'RE NOT REALLY USEFUL.
>> OUR CLARKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HERE JUST WHISPERED TO ME, 34,900. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? THAT'S HOW MANY ACRES WE HAVE IN MALPF, AND WE ADD TO THAT EACH YEAR, BUT I'M NOT I'M NOT SURPRISED BY A LOT, BUT I WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED IF THEY START FOOLING WITH MALPF EASEMENTS BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN SACRED GROUND FROM THE TIME THAT I'VE EVER BEEN INVOLVED IN ANY OF THIS.
>> THESE TEND TO BE LEGISLATORS THAT DON'T KNOW WHAT MALPF STANDS FOR, I'LL SAY THAT.
>> TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WE'LL LEAVE IT WITH THIS BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN QUITE A WHILE HERE, BUT THERE HAS BEEN NO REPORT OR STUDY DONE ON THE IMPACTS OF THE CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND INTO SOLAR, ANY MEANINGFUL STUDIES.
>> I'M SURE THERE HAVE BEEN. I'M SURE. MAYBE NOT IN MARYLAND.
>> THE EFFECTS ON OUR ECONOMY, HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE GOING TO BE.
HOW MANY ACRES CAN WE CONVERT BEFORE WE START TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT AGRICULTURE?
>> WELL, I WOULD ARGUE NONE. ZERO ACRES.
>> WELL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUY THAT, I CAN ASSURE YOU.
>> NO, THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. MERRY CHRISTMAS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, STEVE. I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.
>> ARE YOU GUYS GOOD? DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE? NO.
>> WE'RE GETTING GOOD AT IT. WE SPEND ENOUGH TIME TALKING.
>> JUST WAITING FOR ALL THOSE DEER THAT ARE GOING TO MOVE AROUND SO HE CAN GET THEM.
>> EVERYBODY GOOD? KEEP MOVING ALONG? OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS A DISCUSSION OF
[Discussion of Administrative Charging Committee (ACC) & Board Overview]
THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE AND BOARD REVIEW.DO OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS WANT TO COME FORWARD? START. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT REPRESENTATION IN THE ROOM.
I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, GENERALLY,
[01:00:03]
THE ROLE OF THE ACC AND PAB AND MAYBE WHAT SOME OF OUR OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AROUND THE STATE ARE SEEING.WE CAN KEEP THE CONVERSATION DIRECTED TOWARDS THE PANEL HERE, THE THREE OF US.
THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
>> ARE YOU READY, COMMISSIONERS?
>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS, MR. PRESIDENT.
I'M THE RESIDENT OF CAROLINE COUNTY.
I HAVE OVER 44 YEARS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE FROM A PATROL OFFICER IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY TO A UNION PRESIDENT TO A STATE UNION PRESIDENT TO A SHERIFF IN CALVERT COUNTY, AND NOW IN MY POSITION ON THIS BOARD.
WHEN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT BILL OF RIGHTS CAME TO AN END IN ANNAPOLIS, I WOULD TELL ANYBODY I DEFENDED THIS BILL OF RIGHTS FOR 18 YEARS, BOTH AS A COMMISSIONER OF THE MARYLAND POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION AND THE STATE LODGE FRATERNAL POLICE PRESIDENT.
I THINK IT WORKED, IT DID GOOD, BUT I UNDERSTAND HOW IT STARTED TO FALL APART.
THE PUBLIC BECAME MORE INVOLVED AND THERE WAS NO DEFENDING THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1972.
WHEN I PUT IN FOR THIS POSITION, I DID IT FOR ONE REASON.
EVEN THOUGH I WAS TOLD BY PROBABLY THE MOST RESPECTED LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADER IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND, ASKED ME NOT TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE ME BE THE FALL PERSON.
I DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT. I DIDN'T TAKE THIS FOR PAY BECAUSE IT PAYS NOTHING.
I DID IT FOR THE LOVE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TO THE CITIZENS OF CAROLINE COUNTY. THAT'S WHY I DO IT.
THAT'S WHY I HAVE DONE IT. THIS COMMISSIONER BOARD OR IS NOT THE ONE THAT PUT ME IN PLACE.
IT WAS THE BOARD PRIOR, BUT COMMISSIONER PORTER WAS PART OF THAT BOARD.
I TAKE GREAT HONOR AS SERVING IT.
I'VE GOT A TREMENDOUS RESPECT FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OF CAROLINE COUNTY, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS OF CAROLINE COUNTY, BUT MOST IMPORTANT, THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY.
THE COMMISSIONERS PUT ME ON THIS BOARD TO LOOK AT ISSUES HAPPENING WITH A CIVILIAN SET OF EYES.
BY PUTTING RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ON THIS BOARD, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE MOST BRILLIANT THING THIS COMMISSION HAS DONE.
NOT EVERY COUNTY DOES THIS, BUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE CONVERSATIONS, WHICH ARE DEEMED PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL, WE HAVE NUMEROUS DISCUSSIONS TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT HAVE NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, THAT HAVE NEVER MADE A TRAFFIC STOP, THAT HAD NEVER HANDCUFFED SOMEBODY, NEVER LOCKED SOMEBODY UP OR HAD TO USE DEADLY FORCE OR FORCE ALONE.
THOSE CONVERSATIONS, AS A RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND NOW WE ALSO HAVE A RETIRED SERGEANT ALSO ON THE BOARD NOW AS OUR CHAIRMAN THAT TO EXPLAIN REASONABLE SUSPICION, THE USE OF FORCE POLICY FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, WHERE IT'S NOW NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE TO TAKE ACTION WHERE IT DIDN'T USED TO BE THAT WAY.
THESE ARE ALL CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAVE.
THESE ARE CLOSED DOOR CONVERSATION.
THESE CONVERSATIONS SOMETIMES ARE HEATED, AND I MEAN REALLY HEATED, BUT WE COME OUT UNITED AND EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS.
FOR ME, AS A RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT, I UNDERSTAND MORE NOW, THE CITIZENS, HOW THEY PERCEIVE SOMETHING.
I AND I LEARNED FROM THIS BOARD FROM THAT POSITION ALONE.
EXCUSED MY SLURRY WORDS, I HAD DENTAL WORK DONE RECENTLY, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I DON'T PRONOUNCE WELL.
I KNOW I'M FROM PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, BUT REALLY, I DON'T TALK THAT BAD SOMETIMES.
THIS HAS COME FULL CIRCLE NOW WITH THIS BOARD.
THIS BOARD HAS A LAWYER THAT YOU ALL PUT IN CHARGE OF IT.
SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE ARE VERY HARD, THEY'RE VERY TOUGH.
SOME OF THE VIDEOS THAT WE WATCH, I WILL TELL YOU ARE FLAT OUT EMBARRASSING, ESPECIALLY AS A RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, TO WATCH SOME THINGS THAT HAPPEN OUT THERE NOW, BUT I WILL TELL YOU, ALL IN ALL, WE ARE HERE FOR THE GROUP THAT WE REPRESENT, THE COMMISSIONERS, THE CITIZENS, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THERE'S NO GUIDANCE TO WHICH WAY PULLS US EITHER WAY.
IT'S AN HONOR TO SERVE ON THE BOARD.
I'VE GIVEN UP MANY HOURS TO THIS BOARD. I BELIEVE IN IT.
WE HAVE A LOT OF SHERIFFS IN THIS ROOM, A LOT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS, MANY OF THAT I KNOW, MANY THAT I WORK WITH. THEY KNOW ME.
I HAVE FOUGHT IN ANNAPOLIS YEAR AFTER YEAR, MOST OF THE TIME AGAINST THEM, BUT THEY STILL RESPECTED THAT, AND IT'S SOMETHING THERE.
AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PAB, I'M NO LONGER THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ACC, CHAIRMAN NAGEL HAS ASKED ME TO SPEAK FIRST BECAUSE YOU PUT A TERM LIMIT FIRST TWO YEARS IN THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION, SO I WAS [INAUDIBLE] IT OUT AS THE CHAIRMAN, BUT I MAINTAINED THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD.
WE HAVE A COUPLE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT.
THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD SOMETIMES UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.
[01:05:01]
I THINK THE LAST MEETING, WE MADE A MOTION TO HAVE OUR ELECT OFFICIALS COME TO ONE OF OUR MEETINGS SO THEY CAN HEAR.AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A SENATOR AND DELEGATE HERE TO PERSUADE THE MAJORITY OF THE LEGISLATORS TO LOOK AT CERTAIN THINGS.
IT HAS TO BE A GROUP EFFORT, AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY IS DEALING WITH IS THE OFFICERS LACK TO EXPUNGE HIS OR HER RECORD.
WE HAVE AN OFFICER NOW THAT'S BEEN EXONERATED TWICE ON AN EXCESSIVE FORCE.
THIS BOARD LOOKED AT EVERY VIDEOTAPE, EVERY OFFICER THAT WORE IT, AND THESE INCIDENTS NEVER EVER HAPPENED, BUT THIS OFFICER NOW, A YOUNG OFFICER, NOW HAS TWO EXCESSIVE FORCE COMPLAINTS IN HIS FILE THAT HE CANNOT GET RID OF, AND THAT'S WRONG.
THAT'S WHAT THE PAB SAID NEEDS TO GO TO OUR DELEGATES, OUR SENATORS, AND LET'S FIGHT THIS IN ANNAPOLIS.
THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY IS NOT A POLITICAL BOARD.
IT COMES FROM THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE DIRECTIONS OF OUR THING.
THERE'S A LOT OF RUMORS GO OUT, A LOT OF THINGS GO OUT, WHY WE DO STUFF, WHY WE DON'T DO STUFF, BUT WE'RE BOUND BY LAW, WE CAN'T DISCUSS IT BECAUSE IT'S CLOSED, AND THAT'S THE WAY IT'S DESIGNED TO BE.
ANY PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS I LOVE TO GIVE, BUT I NEED TO HOLD THEM TO THAT. CHAIRMAN.
>> I'M GOING TO PARLAY ON WHAT PAB CHAIRMAN SAID.
I AGREE THAT IT'S AN HONOR TO BE ON THE BOARD.
WE'RE BOTH RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THERE WERE PURPOSES OF SERVING ON THIS BOARD, AND IT WAS TO BE TO BE ABLE TO BE TRANSPARENT.
THE RUMORS IS WHAT HAS OUR BOARD IN UPROAR RIGHT NOW ABOUT WHAT TO DO AND WHAT NOT TO DO.
WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT THE COMMISSIONERS WANT CERTAIN THINGS DONE.
I ASKED FOR A MEETING AND IN THIS SETTING IS NOT EXACTLY WHAT WE HAD PLANNED.
WE HAD PLANED TO SPEAK WITH THE COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE A MEETING.
BUT I DO WANT TO SAY AT THE LAST PAB BOARD MEETING.
THERE WAS A DEPUTY THERE THAT SHERIFF BAKER BROUGHT, AND THEN HE EXPLAINED HOW INTIMIDATED AND MORTIFIED THIS DEPUTY WAS THAT WE HAD CALLED HIM IN TO ASK HIM A FEW QUESTIONS WHEN HE WAS REQUESTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ACC.
IT'S IRONIC THAT THE SHERIFF WOULD TODAY FILL A ROOM.
IN A PUBLIC MEETING WITH AGENCY LEADERS TO INTIMIDATE A BOARD.
THERE ARE 16 CHIEFS, CAPTAINS, ALL OF WHICH I HAVE TOTAL RESPECT FOR.
THE WAY I FEEL IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY ACT IS A STATE MANDATE, WE GOT TO HAVE IT.
THIS BOARD HAS DONE ITS ABSOLUTE BEST, AT LEAST SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, AND I HAVE COMPLETE FAITH IN MR. BARTLETT WHEN HE WAS RUNNING THAT.
ITS DONE ITS BEST TO BE FAIR, TRANSPARENT, AND HONEST.
SITTING HERE BEFORE THE GROUP OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS THAT ARE HERE AS A RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OF THIS COUNTY IS A LITTLE HURTFUL.
THAT THEY'RE HERE TO GO AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION WHEN THEY KNOW THAT IT'S REQUIRED.
IF THE FIVE PEOPLE WEREN'T ON THIS BOARD THAT ARE ON THIS BOARD, YOU COULD HAVE FIVE ANTI POLICE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD AND COULD BE A TOTAL LIABILITY FOR THE COUNTY.
OR THE TOWNS, TO THE TOWN CHIEFS AND THAT ARE HERE.
I JUST DON'T HAVE ANY SENSE OF THE RESENTMENT TOWARDS THIS VOLUNTEER COMMITTEE, WISHING TO SERVE THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS IN THE PUBLIC ON BEHALF OF THE CAROLINA COUNTY.
REALLY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY OUTSIDE OF A CLOSED MEETING.
>> HOPEFULLY WE CAN KEEP THIS CONSTRUCTIVE AND WE CAN HEAR SOME OF THE ISSUES AND DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION.
THE LAW IS VERY VAGUE AND VERY POORLY WRITTEN.
I THINK HOPEFULLY A LOT OF THE ISSUES ARE IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE STATUTE.
WHAT IT DOES AND DOES NOT DO, AND I'D LIKE TO TOUCH ON THAT LATER, BUT DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? SORRY.
>> JUST REITERATE YOUR POINT THAT IS A VERY VAGUE ISSUE AND [OVERLAPPING] THE BEST WE CAN WITH WHAT WE KNOW.
CAN WE DO THIS? WELL, ACCORDING TO THE STATUTES, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, YOU CAN DO THIS. WE'LL DO THAT.
WE DO OUR BEST TO STAY WITHIN THE LEGAL PARAMETERS THAT ARE SET FORTH.
HOPEFULLY, AS TIME GOES ON AND CASE LAW IS ESTABLISHED,
[01:10:03]
THEN WE'LL NARROW THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO OPERATE IN AND WILL BE MORE CONCRETE TO SEE THAT WE CAN'T.NONE OF US GOT ON THE BOARD FOR OUR OWN.
>> PERSONAL GAIN. I PERSONALLY I WANTED TO BE A FAIR.
I'M A CITIZEN. I'M NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT.
I DO HAVE SOME INSIGHT OF WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE OUT DEALING WITH THE PUBLIC, BUT I'VE NEVER HAD TO HOLD A GUN.
I NEVER HAD MY LIT WELL, I HAVE HAD MY LIFE WRITTEN, BUT, NORMALLY HAS A BACKUP WITH ME.
BUT, WE DO THE BEST OF WE CHEMICAL WE HAVE.
>> I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR SERVICE VOLUNTEERING. I WANT TO START OFF THERE.
I THINK THE THREE OF US CAN, ARE VERY RARELY FEEL SAFE SPEAKING FOR EITHER ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, BUT I THINK I CAN SAFELY SAY THAT WE ALL GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE AND VOLUNTEERING TO BE ON THE BOARD.
>> BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS IS THE SUBPOENA POWER OF THE ACC.
THE LEGISLATION DOES GIVE SUBPOENA POWER.
IT DOESN'T SAY, HOW DO YOU DO IT? IT DOESN'T SAY HOW DO YOU GO THROUGH IT? WE REQUESTED THE OFFICER TO COME.
IT WAS GREAT CONVERSATION INVOLVING THIS OFFICER COMING.
IT WAS TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY ITSELF THAT THIS BOARD FELT, JUST HAVE TO COME THE OFFICER COME IN AND ANSWER ONE SIMPLE QUESTION.
WE HAD A MEETING THE CHAIRMAN'S THE ONLY ONE THAT OFFICER ASKED THIS OFFICER.
WHEN THAT OFFICER ARRIVED THERE, I WALKED OUT TO THE PARK LOT, I SAW HIM, I INTRODUCED MYSELF TO HIM, TOLD HIM MY BACKGROUND, TOLD HIM MY POSITION ON THE BOARD.
HE SAID, NO. I SAID, HAVE YOU TALKED TO A LAWYER? HE SAID, YES.
I SAID, ARE YOU COMFORTABLE COMING INTO THIS MEETING WITHOUT A LAWYER? HE SAID, YES.
IF HE WOULD HAVE SAID NO, I WOULD HAVE WALKED BACK IN THE BOARD AND SAID THE OFFICER IS NOT COMFORTABLE COMING IN.
HE DID AN OUTSTANDING TESTIMONY BEFORE THIS BOARD.
HE DID IT ON HIS OWN, AND HE WAS EXONERATED OF ALL CHARGES.
HE DID THAT. HE EXONERATE HIMSELF BY COMING INTO THE BOARD AND DO IT.
IT WASN'T WE'RE TRYING TO HURT ANYBODY OR DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S WHAT'S LED TO ALL THIS AND THE LETTER WRITING AND ALL THIS OTHER NONSENSE GOING ON.
YOU DIDN'T MAKE THIS LEGISLATION.
I DIDN'T MAKE THIS LEGISLATION.
THAT WAS MADE IT. THEY GAVE IT TO US LIKE THE SOLE PANEL.
>> DEAL WITH IT. I REALIZE I NEVER KNEW IT WAS THAT MUCH MONEY FOR THE LAND.
[LAUGHTER] BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> I DID HAVE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS, AND I JUST I'LL GO AHEAD AND LEAD OFF HERE, BUT WHAT GUIDANCE HAVE YOUR INDIVIDUAL BOARDS, THE PAB AND ACC BEEN GIVEN? SPECIFICALLY, HAS ANYONE COMMUNICATED TO THE BOARDS, WHAT YOUR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES ARE, WHAT THE ACC'S SPECIFIC ROLES ARE, AND WHAT THE PABS ROLES ARE?
>> YES, SIR. WE WENT TO 40 HOURS OF TRAINING, MYSELF AND THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, AND THEN CHAIRMAN NAGEL WENT TO THE SAME TRAINING PUT ON BY THE MARYLAND POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION.
WE HAVE GONE TO A FORM AND THEN THAT WAS DISCUSSED AROUND AROUND THE STATE, WHAT'S GOING ON.
I SPOKE AT THAT FORM ALSO AND TOLD THEM THE ROLE OF THE CAROLINE COUNTY, ACC AND THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE.
THEN WE HAVE GONE TO AN IN SERVICE TRAINING, WHICH WAS A 16 HOUR TRAINING THAT I ATTENDED.
THERE WAS 40 WEEKS, 16 HOURS AND DAILY INPUT FROM THE MARYLAND POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION AND ALSO LEGISLATION AND INPUT AND NOTICES THAT HAVE COME UP, SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS AROUND THE STATE THAT OUR ATTORNEY ADVISES US AT THE MEETING, SAY, [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S SOMETHING THAT ON AT OUR MEETING.
>> WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE ACC? YOUR UNDERSTANDING, WHAT IS THE ACC?
>> ROLE OF THE ACC IS TO REVIEW THE COMPLAINTS THAT ARE MADE, TO SEE IF THEY FIT WITHIN THE PARAMETER OF THE CHARGES THAT WERE ALLEGATED, OR NOT NECESSARILY CHARGE, ACCUSATIONS/CHARGES.
WE CAN SAY THAT BECAUSE WE HADN'T ANY CRIMINAL STUFF. TO SEE IF THEY MET IT.
TO REVIEW THE INTERVIEWS, TO LOOK AT ALL BODY CAM FOOTAGE.
THEN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHETHER SUSTAINED OR NON-SUSTAINED AND THEN MAKE IT UNFOUNDED OR EXONERATED, WHICH ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS UNDER THE NON-SUSTAINED. THAT'S WHAT WE DO.
>> WHAT ABOUT IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, IF YOU SEE ANOTHER OFFENSE OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT WASN'T IN THE COMPLAINT, BUT A WRONGDOING BY THE OFFICER?
>> YOU CANNOT ADDRESS THAT IN THE COMPLAINT.
>> THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A SEPARATE COMPLAINT.
WHAT WE HAVE DETERMINED WHAT WE DO IS WE WILL LET THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY KNOW, WE SOLVE THIS, YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK INTO IT?
[01:15:02]
BUT WE CAN'T MAKE THEM.IF WE GET A COMPLAINT OF BEING UNPROFESSIONAL AND WE SEE A USE OF FORCE THAT WASN'T NECESSARY, THEN WE CAN'T ADDRESS THAT AS US UNTIL THERE IS A COMPLAINT MADE.
BASICALLY, WE CAN'T, WE DON'T HANDLE THE COMPLAINTS.
WE HANDLE THE INVESTIGATION THAT'S DONE BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT.
>> TO GO BY ROLE BACK TO THE PAB, THIS IS TAKEN BACK TO THE PAB.
WHEN WE STARTED OUT, THERE WERE LIKE NUMEROUS INCIDENTS WHERE BODY CAMS WEREN'T TURNED ON. WE DISCUSSED IT.
WE SAT DOWN AND DISCUSSED IT WITH THE SHERIFF.
WE HAD THE OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AGENCIES IN THE COUNTY, AND WE HAVEN'T COME ACROSS THAT IN A YEAR AND A HALF NOW, TAKEN CARE OF.
THE LEADERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT HAD MADE IT CLEAR THEY EMPHASIZED TO THEIR OFFICERS THE IMPORTANCE OF BODY CAM.
BECAUSE MOST OF THE BODY CAMS ARE EXONERATING THESE POLICE OFFICERS FOR WHAT THEY DO.
IF THEY MERELY HAD IT ON, I WOULD HAVE BEEN.
THAT PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT'S THE ROLE OF THE PAB TO ADVISE TO SIT DOWN.
THERE ARE SEVERAL TIMES WHEN I WAS THE CHAIRMAN, I MET WITH THE SHERIFF.
THIS CAME UP. THIS IS A GREAT CONCERN, NOT PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT THE SAFETY OF THE OFFICERS.
JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIFFERENT AGENCIES ON A JOB AND ONE OUTRANKS THE OTHER AND HE DOES SOMETHING TO LET AN INDIVIDUAL GO INTO A DARK ROOM BY HIMSELF AND THEN COME BACK OUT.
AS A SAFETY FACTOR, THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN.
NO CHARGES. WE JUST TOLD THE SHERIFF.
SHERIFF, LOOK AT THIS? HE DID.
>> THE ACC'S ROLE, AS YOUR UNDERSTANDING, IS TO JUST TAKE A COMPLAINT AND ALL THE INVESTIGATIVE MATERIALS PROVIDED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND LOOK AT BOTH AND DETERMINE IF THE COMPLAINT IS VALID OR NOT.
THEN IF IT IS VALID, THEN YOU REFERENCE THE DISCIPLINARY MATRIX AND DETERMINE THE DISCIPLINE THAT THE BOARD FEELS APPROPRIATE AND MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO.
>> [OVERLAPPING] FALL CATEGORY.
>> IT FALLS IN THE PARAMETERS.
>> IT FALLS IN THE PARAMETER, BUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE THAT I STARTED IN NANCY'S CONTINUED AS THE CHAIRMAN.
IN THE MATRIX, IT GIVES YOU A GUIDELINES OF FROM, 0-20 DAYS FOR AN EXAMPLE.
WE HAVE NEVER GONE TO THE MAX.
WE'VE ALWAYS LEFT IT IN THE MIDDLE OR BELOW THE MIDDLE, SO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY HAD THE RIGHT TO RAISE PUNISHMENT.
BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS THAT THEY WANTED IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT BILL OF RIGHTS IS BE THE DISCIPLINE OR LAWS.
>> DOES THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN THEIR INVESTIGATION RECOMMEND DISCIPLINE? IF THEY CAN.
SOMETIMES THEY MAKE A DISCIPLINARY RECOMMENDATION AS WELL?
>> THEY KENNEL CERTAIN ISSUES LIKE A DEPARTMENTAL VEHICLE ACCIDENT THAT THEY RUN INTO ANOTHER POLICE CARS OR A PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR TO WHATEVER IT IS. YES.
>> HOW ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE PAB? SPECIFICALLY, WHAT IS YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE ROLE OF THE PAB?
>> PAB IS A TOUGH BOARD. IT REALLY IS.
IT'S A TOUGH BOARD BECAUSE WE TRY TO EXPLAIN WHAT WE SEE AND WHAT WE DO WITHOUT VIOLATING ANY CLOSED MEETING ISSUES THERE.
WE HAVE TO DO IN GENERAL OF WHAT WE'RE REVIEWING OR WHAT WE'RE SEEING, WHICH IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT.
I THINK THE PAB MEMBERS A LOT DON'T FEEL THEY'RE DOING ANYTHING BECAUSE IT'S REALLY HARD TO EXPLAIN WHAT WE REALLY DO BECAUSE WE CAN'T.
WE JUST COME OUT AND GENERALLY, WE SAY, LAST MONTH, WE HAD FOUR OFFICERS EXONERATED, ONE SUSTAINED WRITTEN REPRIMAND.
WE DON'T SAY THE EIGHT WE MIGHT SAY THE AGENCY HAD NOT 100%, BUT WE DON'T SAY THE OFFICER'S NAME.
WE DON'T SAY ANY DETAILS WHO THE COMPLAINANT IS TO THE PAB.
MY OPINION ON THE MEETINGS WE HAVE, THEY'RE GETTING A LITTLE FRUSTRATED OF TAKING THEIR TIME TO COME HERE AND THEY FEEL THAT THEY HAVE NO ROLE.
>> I'M WONDERING AND WHAT I WANT TO DRILL DOWN ON, IS THE ACC STEPPING ON THE TOES OF THE PAB A LITTLE BIT.
LET ME PREFACE LET ME GIVE YOU MY QUESTION.
BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PAB IS SUPPOSED TO TAKE ALL THE COMPLAINTS, AGGREGATE THEM TOGETHER, AND LOOK FOR TRENDS IN POLICING INSIDE OF THE COUNTY.
NOW, I'M SURE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO LOOK FOR A TREND WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE SIX COMPLAINTS.
IT'S HARD TO FIND A TREND IN SIX COMPLAINTS.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS WHAT THE ROLE OF THE PAB IS SUPPOSED TO TO DO, AND I'M JUST WONDERING, IS THE ACC TAKING ON SOME OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
BUT WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE BODY CAME IN THE BEGINNING, THAT WAS THE TRAIN THAT WE WERE SEEING.
WENT TO THE PAB, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS ARE THERE.
THIS IS THE TRAIN WE'RE SEEING.
WE NEVER SAW IT AGAIN. IN MY OPINION.
>> BUT THEORETICALLY, THAT SHOULD GO TO THE PAB.
I'M JUST GIVING THE REPORT TO THE PAB. I THINK IT WORKED IN THAT.
>> THE LAST THING I HAD QUESTION AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER PORTER, BUT WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAB REPORT AND A TIMELINE?
[01:20:07]
WHEN IS THE DRAFT, HOW IS THE DRAFT REPORT PUT TOGETHER? HOW HOW ARE THE BOARD MEMBERS INVOLVED IN THAT? WHEN DOES THE DRAFT REPORT GET FINALIZED, PRESENTED TO THE BOARD? HOW LONG DO THEY HAVE TO LOOK IT OVER AND VOTE BEFORE THEY VOTE ON IT? IS THERE A PROCESS?>> AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PAB, WE HAD OUR LAST PAB.
WE DO QUARTERLY MEETINGS FOUR TIMES A YEAR.
INSTEAD OF DOING ONE IN DECEMBER THIS TIME WITH THE HOLIDAYS, AND LAST YEAR, WE CAME IN SOME CONFLICTS WITH CHRISTMAS PRAY THAT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS NEEDED THAT.
WE WENT OVER LIKE A PREM TO PUT THIS TOGETHER.
WE WILL TAKE INPUT, WE HEARD INPUT FROM THE THE PAB MEMBERS OF WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND THAT WAS ONE, BASICALLY, HAVE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS COME TO THE NEXT MEETING.
AS A CHAIRMAN, WE GO BY ROBERT RULES AND ORDER.
I STATED IT HAS TO BE A MOTION, THAT MOTION WAS PASSED, SECOND, PROPERLY SECOND, DISCUSSED AND PASSED.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT INVITATION IS GOING OUT YET FOR OUR MARCH MEETING WILL BE.
WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR BEFORE THIS BOARD, WE CAME IN WITH CALLS FOR SERVICE, AND WE TRIED TO PUT IN WE ONLY DID IT WITH ONE AGENCY, AND I DID IT WITH THE CAROLINE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, CALLS FOR SERVICE AND THE AMOUNT OF COMPLAINTS.
THE CALLS FOR SERVICE, I'LL EXAGGERATE.
SAY IT WAS 5,000. FOUR COMPLAINTS OUT OF 5,000 CALLS.
WHAT WE HAVE DONE, WE PLAN TO DO THAT WITH ALL THE AGENCIES THIS TIME, BECAUSE LAST YEAR WAS MORE OF A LEARNING EXPERIENCE.
WE WANT TO DO THAT. I KNOW KIM IS OUT SICK RIGHT NOW FROM AN ACCIDENT SHE'S HAD.
THAT IS IN THE PROCESS DOING AS THE PAB TO PUT IT IN PLACE.
>> THE DRAFT REPORT HASN'T BEEN CIRCULATED YET, BUT IT'S DUE DECEMBER 31ST.
>> DO YOU HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED BETWEEN NOW AND DECEMBER?
WE'LL WRITE IT UP, WE'LL SEND IT OUT, WE'LL HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE APPROVE IT.
IT WAS THE WILL OF THE COMMISSIONER IS ONLY TO HAVE FOUR MEETINGS BECAUSE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF HAVING A LAWYER AT THESE MEETINGS.
WE PROBABLY WILL NOT DO A MEETING? WE WILL DO A DRAFT, SEND IT OUT, GET APPROVAL, GET INPUT, ONCE WE GET CALLS FOR SERVICE IN, AND THEN PUT IT ALL BACK TOGETHER AND TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE SEE IN THE FUTURE.
ONE IS THE EXONERATION ISSUE, WHICH I THINK MY PERSONAL THING, IT'S IMPORTANT.
I RELAYED THAT TO THE PAB AS THEIR CHAIRMAN. WELL, THEY AGREE WITH ME.
>> THE STATUTE THEY HAVE TO MEET QUARTERLY AT A MINIMUM.
>> WHICH IS RIDICULOUS. YOU SHOULD HAVE FOUR MEETINGS IN DECEMBER BEFORE THE REPORTS DO.
HOW DO YOU GENERATE A REPORT, IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE YEAR? IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THE JOB OF THE PAB IS BEING TOTALLY GLANCED OVER AND NOT OCCURRING BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURE.
THE BOARD DOESN'T EVEN GET THE REPORT.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A MEETING TO REVIEW THE REPORT.
THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE NO INPUT, ONE MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
>> AS THE YEAR GOES, COMMISSIONER, WE DO IT WE DO LIKE A SUMMARY ON THIS QUARTER, THIS QUARTER THIS QUARTER.
IT'S ALL COMPILED INTO THE NDD REPORT.
ONCE THE NDA REPORT IS COMPLETE, WE WILL DO A ZOOM MEETING, WE HAVE TO.
WE DO THAT TO REDUCE THE COST OF HAVING AN ATTORNEY COME OUT FOR THAT.
THEN THEY WILL ALL BE GIVEN A COPY OF IT FOR THEIR INPUT, AND IT'S RUNNING SHORT ON TIME? CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY COMING AND THEY MADE CHRISTMAS ON WEDNESDAY PRETTY MUCH RUINS A WHOLE WEEK.
>> BUT NEW YEAR'S FALLS ON WEDNESDAY, THE NEXT WEEK.
>> BUT WE'RE GOING TO GET IT DONE AND THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE GOING TO HAVE IT DONE.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTIVE TO PUT A TIMELINE TOGETHER YEARLY FOR, THIS IS THE DATE, THE DRAFT WILL BE CIRCULATED.
THE MEMBERS WILL HAVE X AMOUNT OF DAYS TO REVIEW THE DRAFT, AND THEN THE MEETING BE SCHEDULED.
THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION TO GIVE THE BOARD ACTUAL INPUT INTO THE GENERATION.
>> WILL THE COMMISSIONS AGREE TO A SPECIAL MEETING ABOVE THE FOUR JUST FOR THAT REPORT?
>> CORPORATE. WE MOVED IT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'D LIKE TO WORK IT IN. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'LL CIRCLE BACK AND GET TO THIS AFTER THE OTHER TWO COMMISSIONERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, BUT THE ISSUE IS, IS WITH THE STATE'S FINANCIAL OUTLOOK, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS NO LONGER GOING TO BE FUNDED BY THE STATE OF MARYLAND.
I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO COME ON THE COUNTY TO SOLELY FUND THIS, BUT BUT ANYWAY, WE CAN TOUCH ON THAT LATER. COMMISSIONER PORTER.
>> I JUST HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ZOOM.
THE ONLY ISSUE I'VE HAD WITH IT IS PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT.
LIKE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON JUST POINTED OUT, ZOOM MEETINGS ARE NOT GOING TO BE PUBLIC.
THAT SHOULD BE A PUBLIC VOTE. WE SHOULD HAVE THE OPINION.
[01:25:03]
ALL PERSONS SHOULD BE AT THAT MEETING AND HAVE DISCUSSION, AND THAT SHOULD BE A SPECIAL MEETING SO WE CAN HAVE INPUT, AND AS WELL AS IT CAN BE A PUBLIC VOTE AND THE PUBLIC MATTER.>> WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. WE'LL MAKE IT WORK.
>> THANK YOU, SHERIFF. WE'LL DISCUSS THAT TO SOME OTHER IDEAS.
>> WELL, THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING IN TODAY.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK GENERALLY HERE AND JUST HAVING BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS SINCE THE BEGINNING, I THINK THIS IS A VERY POORLY WRITTEN BILL, VERY POORLY WRITTEN LEGISLATION.
I'M STILL LOOKING FOR SOME GOOD LEGISLATION COMING.
I'VE BEEN HERE 14 YEARS, I HAVEN'T FOUND ANY YET.
I THINK THIS WAS A BILL OR LEGISLATION THAT WAS WRITTEN BASED ON A PREMISE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE BAD.
I DON'T THINK ANY OF US AGREE WITH THAT.
I THINK THAT YOU'RE ALL HONORABLE PEOPLE.
I RECALL VERY CLEARLY HAVING SAYING WHEN WE SAW THIS, WE'RE LIKE, WE GOT TO CREATE TWO BOARDS, WHERE ARE WE GOING TO FIND THE PEOPLE? WE WENT THROUGH A VERY LONG, EXTENSIVE INTERVIEW PROCESS.
EACH ONE OF YOU WERE INTERVIEWED, IF YOU RECALL WE TOOK THE TIME TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT.
YOUR PRESENCE ON THIS BOARD IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.
MY CONCERN WAS BASICALLY TWO THINGS.
NUMBER ONE, INHERENTLY, WHEN YOU APPOINT PEOPLE, LAW ENFORCEMENT IS A VERY SPECIALIZED SKILL, IT IS A VERY SPECIALIZED OCCUPATION, AND YOU KNOW THAT, NANCY, YOU KNOW THAT.
WHEN YOU TAKE A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THOSE SKILLS AND ARE NOT KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THOSE AND SAY, ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE'RE GOING TO BE IN CHARGE OF OVERSEEING WHAT YOU DO, YOU COULDN'T WRITE A BETTER RECIPE FOR DISASTER AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
I THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME NATURAL CONFLICTS HERE.
>> WHEN THAT BOARD MEETS AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO LOOK AT, WHAT DO YOU DO? DO YOU CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND SAY, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO LOOK AT, AND WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN?
>> BUT GENERALLY, WE BRING THE ATTORNEY IN FOR THAT SO WE DON'T HAVE A COST
>> MY EXPERIENCE OVER THE YEARS HAS BEEN THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT YOU CALL TOGETHER TO HAVE A MEETING AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY'RE REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT, THEY LOOK FOR STUFF TO LOOK AT.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT HAPPENS, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE DONE.
SHOULD THERE BE POLICIES LOOKED AT? SEE, THIS IS WHERE I'M CONFUSED ABOUT LOOKING AT POLICIES AS OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT ACTUAL CASES.
IF YOU'RE CALLING MEETINGS TO ORDER AND SAYING, WE HAD NO BUSINESS TONIGHT, LET'S ALL GO HOME, THAT IS WHAT I HOPE IS GOING ON.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S NOT, BUT I HOPE THAT THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING.
>> I WOULD TELL YOU, I THINK THERE'S ONE THAT THE ACC DID LIKE THAT.
I THINK THAT MEETING LASTED 10 MINUTES.
WE DIDN'T HAVE THE LAWYER THERE BECAUSE WE FELT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BRING THE LAWYER. WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR HIM TO COME IN.
BASICALLY, IT'S READ BY THE STATUTE.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A MONTHLY MEETING.
CONSIDER THIS A MONTHLY MEETING.
ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA? NO, THERE'S NOTHING.
>> THAT WILL BE THIS MONTH TOO.
>> YOU TALK ABOUT LOOKING AT POLICIES.
IF WE DON'T HAVE A COMPLAINT IN FRONT OF US, THERE'S NOTHING FOR US TO LOOK AT.
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU ARE NOT LOOKING AT POLICIES THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OR THE MUNICIPAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
>> WE DON'T DISCUSS WHETHER A POLICY IS A GOOD POLICY OR A BAD POLICY.
WHAT HAPPENS IS, WE GET A COMPLAINT AND WE DETERMINE WHETHER THAT VIOLATES A POLICY.
>> I KNOW THIS WILL ALL BE IN THE REPORT, HOW MANY COMPLAINTS HAVE WE HAD FILED? LET'S SAY IN THE LAST YEAR.
>> KIM IS NOT HERE. UNLESS MARY HAS THEM ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICER.
>> I WOULD ESTIMATE AROUND 10 MAYBE.
>> SEVEN OUT OF HOW MANY CALLS WOULD YOU ESTIMATE?
>> WE DID HAVE ONE THAT WAS OUT OF OUR COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT THE ACC REVIEWED, SO EIGHT TOTAL.
[01:30:06]
>> WELL, IT IS A DNR COMPLAINT.
NONE OF OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES WERE INVOLVED, BUT IT WAS A DNR COMPLAINT AND THEY SENT IT TO OUR ACC TO REVIEW.
THEY NEEDED OUR TRIAL BOARD MEMBERS.
>> THEY NEED OUR TRIAL BOARD MEMBERS, SO THE ACC HAD TO GET THE TRIAL BOARD SET UP AND ALL THAT STUFF.
>> WE DID NOT HEAR THE VOTE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> SEVEN IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SEVEN.
>> [OVERLAPPING] SEVEN COMPLAINTS, EIGHT CASES.
>> HARD FIND A TREND IN SEVEN.
>> YEAH. MY OTHER CONCERN WAS, AND IT'S GOING TO BE EVEN MORE OF A CONCERN AS STATE FUNDING, WHICH I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BREEDING [PHONETIC], THIS IS ONE OF THOSE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU THE MONEY TO START, THEN WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT AWAY.
>> UNLESS DELEGATE GRAYSKIN [PHONETIC] SECURE IT FOR US.
>> YEAH. HE'S SHAKING HIS HEAD NO.
I DO BELIEVE AND I THINK CHIEF PACOR [PHONETIC], YOU WILL REMEMBER IN THE BEGINNING OF THIS, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION, WHICH I THINK WAS VERY WELL-THOUGHT ABOUT THAT MUNICIPALITIES SHOULD HAVE THEIR OWN POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARDS AND ADMINISTRATING CHARGE AND COMMISSIONS.
BECAUSE TO ME, I THINK MUNICIPAL POLICING AND SHERIFF DEPARTMENT POLICING, AND THIS IS JUST ME SITTING UP HERE, NEVER BEEN A POLICE, I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT.
I THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES THAT COME ABOUT, EVEN THE MERE VOLUME OF THE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUNICIPALITIES AND DEPUTIES.
I THINK THAT THAT WAS ONE THING THAT I REALLY HAD A CONCERN ABOUT, BUT LOOK, I THINK WE ALL HAVE GREAT INTENTIONS.
I'M HAPPY TO COME TO ONE OF YOUR MEETINGS, I WILL DO THAT.
I JUST THINK THAT WE HAVE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO COEXIST IN THIS WORLD THAT WE GOT, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE HARD AND IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH.
I DON'T DOUBT FOR A MINUTE THAT SHERIFF BAKER AND SHERIFF BOUNDS BEFORE HIM WOULD TAKE THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GIVE THEM AND, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU GIVE THEM AND IMPLEMENT THEM.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. I THINK IT WILL.
>> BUT I JUST THINK WE'VE REACHED A POINT HERE WHERE THESE, VIBRATIONS OF CONFLICT AREN'T REALLY AS MUCH AS WE THINK THEY ARE, BUT I THINK THAT IT'S, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE PARAMETERS OF THIS BILL AND WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO INTERPRET.
THE BILL IS WRITTEN, IT'S NOT WRITTEN VERY WELL.
WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE INTERPRETATIONS, YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE INTERPRETATIONS, AND I THINK THAT'S JUST WHAT'S DIFFICULT GOING FORWARD BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS ALWAYS GOING TO LOOK AT THINGS AND THINK, WELL, THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT I THINK IT SAYS, THIS IS WHAT I THINK IT SAYS.
I JUST HOPE FROM HERE, I HOPE THIS WILL CLEAR THE AIR. HOPE SO.
IF IT DOESN'T, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE CONFLICT BETWEEN THESE BOARDS.
THEY'RE HERE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE HERE.
THE LAW SAYS THAT THE BOARDS HAVE TO BE HERE.
I THINK WE'VE GOT GOOD PEOPLE ON THE BOARDS.
I ABSOLUTELY THINK WE'VE GOT GOOD PEOPLE IN OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, NOT ONLY OURS, BUT THE VISITING LAW ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE, MY RESPECT FOR ALL OF YOU IS OFF THE CHARTS.
I DO, AND I HOPE I'VE ALWAYS EXPRESSED THAT.
I'M A BIG BELIEVER IN SITTING DOWN IN A ROOM AND LOOKING EACH OTHER IN THE FACE AND STOP EMAILING EACH OTHER AND ALL THAT, LET'S LOOK EACH OTHER IN THE EYE AND SAY, HERE'S MY PROBLEM, HOW DO WE CORRECT IT? HOPEFULLY, THIS IS A GOOD STEP.
THAT'S JUST MY WAY OF DOING THINGS, AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
AGAIN, I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE REPORT.
THEN THE REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE WHEN?
>> I BELIEVE THAT BY LAW, IT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
I THINK LAST YEAR, ONCE THE REPORT WAS GIVEN TO THE COMMISSIONERS, I CAME TO THE BOARD, I THINK IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY, WHEN I GOT PUT ON YOUR AGENDA TO READ THE REPORT TO THE PUBLIC RECORD THROUGH A COMMISSIONERS BOARD.
BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC REPORT, I THINK IT IS.
THE TIME FRAMES, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO LAST YEAR.
ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN AT THE END OF THE YEAR, SO WE TRY TO KEEP THE REPORT CURRENT UP UNTIL WE'RE READY TO PULL THE PLUG.
[01:35:04]
IF WE WANT TO MAKE IT BY DECEMBER 15TH REPORTS DO, WE CAN DO THAT.WE NEED TO KNOW THE TIME TO PULL THE PLUG TO SAY, HERE IT IS INSTEAD OF TRYING TO WAIT TO THE END OF THE YEAR, WHICH LAW SAYS.
>> AGAIN, I WANT TO GO BACK TO, SHERIFF BAKER, THIS IS A VERY LARGE ESTIMATE HERE, BUT HOW MANY CASES WOULD YOU HAVE IN A YEAR THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THESE BOARDS?
>> WE HAD FOUR OR FIVE THIS YEAR.
>> NO. TOTAL CASES, I'M SAYING.
>> YOU'RE GOING FOR THE ACC OR [INAUDIBLE]
>> TOTAL CASES THAT YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BOARD IF THERE HAD BEEN A COMPLAINT.
>> TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND, YOU'VE HAD SEVEN.
>> FOUR OR FIVE. THIS IS THE AGENCY ITSELF, IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT. I SAID SEVEN.
>> SEVEN CASES THAT YOU'VE HAD.
>> WORKED OUT AT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT DENTON AND FEDERALSBURG AND GREENSBURG.
>> I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK, BUT I THINK EVERY ONE OF THE SHERIFF'S OFFICES CASES WERE EXONERATED.
>> OF THOSE CASES THAT YOU HAVE HAD, ALL HAVE BEEN EXONERATED OR HAS THERE BEEN ACTION AGAINST?
>> NO. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
>> THE SHERIFFS ONLY. SHERIFF'S OFFICES ONLY, THEIR FIVE CASES HAVE BEEN EXONERATED.
>> THERE HAS BEEN ACTION AGAINST MUNICIPAL OFFICERS, DISCIPLINARY ACTION.
>> YES. ONE THAT'S WAITING TRIAL BOARD.
>> HOW MANY CASES HAVE NOT BEEN EXONERATED TOTAL?
>> THIS YEAR, BUT NOT AGAINST THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THAT IS AN INDICATION OF THE JOB THAT IS BEING DONE. I DO.
>> THE ONLY GOOD PART ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION, IT'S CITIZENS ON THIS BOARD THAT ARE EXONERATING.
IT'S NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT LEADERS DOING IT THEMSELVES.
>> WELL, LOOK, MY HANG UP WITH THIS LEGISLATION IS, IT WAS CREATED FOR LARGE LAW ENFORCEMENT BUREAUCRACIES.
>> THE SHERIFF IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE ON A FOUR-YEAR CYCLE JUST LIKE THE THREE OF US ARE.
IF WE'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB, HE FACES THE PUBLIC EVERY FOUR YEARS.
OUR LOCAL CHIEFS OF POLICE ANSWER TO ELECTED TOWN COUNCILS WHO ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE BY THEIR ELECTORATE ON A GIVEN CYCLE.
YOU CANNOT GET ANY MORE ACCOUNTABILITY THAN WE ALREADY HAVE IN THESE SMALL COMMUNITIES, SO TAILORING OUR IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS LEGISLATION SO THAT WE DON'T UNDERMINE THE AUTHORITY OF THESE CHIEFS AND SHERIFFS IS MY TOP PRIORITY.
I BELIEVE THE PUBLIC WILL DO WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO EVERY ELECTION CYCLE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THIS LAW.
I THINK MY GUIDANCE OR MY POSITION IS RESPECT THEIR AUTHORITY.
IF YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT REALLY JUMPS OUT, YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO DO SOMETHING, BUT LET'S NOT GO LOOKING FOR GHOSTS WHERE THEY DON'T EXIST.
>> DO YOU THINK THIS BOARD IS DOING THAT?
>> I THINK MAYBE HAS VEERED OUTSIDE OF THE PARAMETERS, A LITTLE BIT EXPANDED MORE THAN WHAT I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN IT.
WITH POLICY REVIEW EARLY ON, THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE GOT INTO THE POLICY.
RECENTLY, WITH CALLING THE OFFICER IN, I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS OF THAT, BUT IF IT WAS TO REVIEW SOMETHING THAT WASN'T CITED IN THE COMPLAINT, THEN I WOULD THINK THAT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN AN EXPANSION IF THAT DID OCCUR, BUT I DON'T KNOW, FOR SURE WHAT HAPPENED THERE.
>> I HAVE SEEN THE VIDEO. YEAH. I WOULD JUST FOLLOW UP WITH WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE LEGISLATION, BUT I I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN THIS ROOM WHO WOULD NOT AGREE THAT CITIZENS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW THAT IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM, IF THEY HAVE A COMPLAINT, THEY SHOULD HAVE A PLACE TO GO.
I THINK THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RATIO OF CALLS THAT WE'VE HAD COMPARED TO
[01:40:01]
THE ACTUAL CASES WHERE CITIZENS HAVE HAD THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN, AND THEY HAVE, BUT YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF CASES WHERE PROBLEMS OR WRONGDOING WAS FOUND, THAT'S ALL YOU GOT TO LOOK AT.I THINK THAT JUST SPEAKS TO NOT ONLY THE JOB THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS DOING IN THIS COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND COUNTY, BUT IT ALSO SPEAKS TO THE JOB THAT THESE BOARDS ARE DOING.
>> I THINK BOARDS ACROSS THE STATE ARE STRUGGLING.
I DON'T THINK IT'S UNIQUE, AND I DO SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOUR ALL SERVICE ON THE BOARD.
I DON'T WANT TO UNDERCUT THAT.
AS I'VE SPOKEN MANY TIMES WITH MR. BARTLETT ABOUT THIS SUBJECT, WE'RE STEPPING ON LAND MINES AS WE GO.
WE'RE BLAZING NEW TERRITORY HERE AND WE'RE FINDING DEFICIENCIES IN THE LEGISLATION AND WHERE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS LIE.
SOMETIMES, UNFORTUNATELY, YOU GOT TO LEARN THE LESSONS THE HARD WAY, AND WE'RE LEARNING A FEW THE HARD WAY.
HOPEFULLY, I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO SOME OF THE OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HERE TO HEAR WHAT THEY'RE SAYING AND TAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S UNIQUE TO US.
I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENING HERE. COMMISSIONER BARTS.
>> GOOD MORNING. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
>> IT'S A LOT OF THINGS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONERS, IT'S A THANKLESS JOB, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR CONFIDENTIALITY, YOUR SERIOUS TO THE TASK.
I KNOW YOU GUYS TAKE THIS SERIOUS BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOMEBODY'S LIVES IN YOUR HANDS, A OFFICER CAN'T HAVE A BAD DAY.
WHEN HE DOES, THEN IT RESULTS IN UNFORTUNATE THINGS.
>> MISS NAGEL, THEY PRETTY MUCH COVERED EVERYTHING, BUT I JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT WE DID SEE THE VIDEO IN THE OFFICER IN QUESTION AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT HAS GOT US HERE TODAY.
THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SUBPOENA POWER THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
NOW, SUBPOENA POWER HAS IT BEEN TRADITIONAL ACROSS THE STATE THAT THIS HAS A CURD SUBPOENA POWER?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEEN SUBPOENAS.
THERE HAVE BEEN BOARDS THAT HAVE CALLED OFFICERS TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF THEM.
I'M NOT SURE IF THEY ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH THE SUBPOENA POWER.
WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE SUBPOENA WE TRIED TO DO, WITHOUT DOING THAT. WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT.
>> YOU JUST ASKED HIM TO COME IN.
>> YEAH. BUT WE HAD A QUESTION THAT ONLY HE COULD ANSWER AND THAT IS WHY WE CALLED HIM BEFORE US TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
EVERYBODY IS SEEING THE BODY WORN CAMERAS, THE LETTER THAT WE WROTE TO THEM.
BEFORE WE EVEN HAD A CHANCE TO RENDER A DECISION IS BASICALLY THE CATALYST OF WHY WE'RE HERE.
ABSOLUTELY. BECAUSE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A CONFIDENTIALITY THING.
AS FAR AS THE SUBPOENA POWER OR QUESTIONING SOMEBODY TO COME BEFORE US, THIS IS WHAT I GO BY.
BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT I WAS TRAINED WITH, I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT OTHER BOARDS REALLY DO AS FAR AS THAT'S CONCERNED.
IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME WHAT THE OTHER BOARDS ARE DOING.
THE OTHER BOARDS IN SOME OF THOSE COUNTIES ARE WHAT GOT US IN THIS POSITION SO I TRY TO STEER CLEAR OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
BECAUSE PG AND THE BIGGER BALTIMORE CITY, THEY GOT US HERE.
TO ALLUDE TO THIS MEETING HERE, I GUESS WHAT WE CLEARED UP FOR ME IS SO AFTER SEEING THE BODY CAM AND SEEING THE VIDEO AND ALL THAT I GUESS WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS HE WAS BEING CALLED IN OR BEING TOLD HE WAS CALLED IN BECAUSE IS A PROCEDURE QUESTION, NOT A COMPLAINT QUESTION AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT STARTED THIS WHOLE BALL ROLLING THING.
>> I CAN TELL YOU THAT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE.
IT WAS A DEFINITION THAT WE HAD LOOKED UP, OF ONE OF THE CHARGES, AND IT WAS ADMINISTRATIVE DEFINITION OF IT, NOT A CRIMINAL DEFINITION.
WE LOOKED IT UP AND WE WANTED TO KNOW WHAT HIS THOUGHT PROCESS WAS.
IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE SHERIFF THINKING THAT WE WERE TRYING TO DETERMINE IF THERE WAS PROBABLE CAUSE, I WANTED TO KNOW.
IF HE FELT THERE WAS PROBABLE CAUSE, THAT ELIMINATED THE HARASSMENT.
HE HAD A REASON TO CONTINUE ASKING OR MAKING THE STATEMENTS THAT HE WAS DOING.
[01:45:02]
WE HAD HIM SAY WHETHER HE FELT HE HAD A REASON TO CONTINUE ASKING.PROBABLE CAUSE, REASONABLE SUSPICION IT WAS A PLAY ON WORDS.
THERE'S THREE PEOPLE ON THIS COMMITTEE THAT ARE CIVILIANS.
THEY MAY HAVE KNOWN IN THEIR OWN WAY THAT HE COULD CONTINUE ASKING THAT QUESTION IF HE WAS TRYING TO ADVANCE HIS INVESTIGATION.
WE WANTED TO KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO DO AND DID HE FEEL LIKE HE WAS ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
AS SOON AS HE SAID, YES, WE WERE DONE.
>> MY CONCERN WITH THE WHOLE THING IS IS THAT IF WE GET INTO INTERPRETING THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES OR ADJUDICATING THOSE THAT IT MAY HAVE AN EFFECT ON POLICING IN GENERAL, AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE WHERE PEOPLE MAY IN ORDER TO AVOID BEING CALLED IN FRONT OF THE ACC, AN OFFICER MAY ALWAYS FOLLOW A PROCEDURE.
I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'RE TAKING THE OFFICERS DISCRETION AWAY WITH FEAR OF BEING CALLED IN FRONT OF THE ACC.
THERE ARE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
I THINK WHAT I WOULD RATHER SEEN IS THE ACC SEND THE QUESTION BACK TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND HAVE THAT AGENCY ASK THE OFFICER AND THEN GIVE IT TO YOU IN WRITING AS OPPOSED TO HAVING THAT PRESSURE.
>> THE REASON THAT WE DIDN'T DO THAT, THAT IS NOT THE TRANSPARENCY INTENT OF THE LAW.
>> WELL, THERE IS NO TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE IT'S A CLOSED SESSION MEETING SO THERE IS NO TRANSPARENCY.
THERE'S TRANSPARENCY FROM THE ACC BUT YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT.
THE TRANSPARENCY IS IN THE PAB REPORT.
>> WE WERE DEFEATED BEFORE WE GOT STARTED ON THIS ISSUE.
>> I HAD A MEETING WITH THE SHERIFF AND WE DISCUSSED SOME OPTIONS.
WHAT I SUGGESTED WAS THAT IF WE HAD SAID THE QUESTION TO HIM AND THEN ON VIDEO, HE COULD ASK THIS DEPUTY AND HE WAS PERFECTLY FINE WITH THAT.
THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS GOING TO BE BRACKET.
WE HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING YET TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST TO THE ACC AND SEE HOW THE OTHER MEMBERS FELT.
>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY FINAL QUESTION.
IF THIS SITUATION OCCURS IN THE FUTURE, HOW WOULD IT BE HANDLED? THE SAME THING, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO. [OVERLAPPING]
>> SITUATION DEPENDENT. IT'LL DEPEND ON WHAT QUESTION IS THAT WE HAVE.
WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE THE INVESTIGATION, SAY, OKAY, THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS HERE AND WE CAN SEND IT BACK AND THAT TABLES IT FOR THAT MONTH UNTIL THE FOLLOWING MONTH WHEN WE GET MORE INFORMATION TO IT.
BUT IT'S COMPLETELY SITUATIONAL DEPENDENT.
WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO GO THROUGH THE AGENCY AND GET OUR QUESTIONS ASKED.
WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO CALL PEOPLE, WE WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF US AND BE ABLE TO MAKE OUR DECISION THE FIRST DAY FIRST TIME.
>> MISS NAGEL, YOU SAID FOR THE TRANSPARENCY PART OF IT.
CAN YOU JUST ELABORATE WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE TRANSPARENCY?
>> IT WASN'T THE LACK OF A INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE.
THERE WAS SOMETHING IN A REPORT WRITTEN BY SERGEANT, THAT WAS IN THE VIDEO FOOTAGE THAT WE DID NOT SEE.
INFORMATION THAT WAS STATED THAT THE DEPUTY DID NOT RESPOND TO IN THAT WAY,
>> YOU FELT YOU'VE BEEN BETTER, SURE HE COMES IN PERSON AND ASKED A QUESTION THAN BEING A CORRESPONDENCE?
>> YES. BECAUSE THIS SAYS THAT I WAS ALLOWED TO, I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO CREATE THIS GREAT BIG STORM.
>> I DON'T TALK ABOUT THIS OUTSIDE OF DOING THIS.
>> I THINK FOR THE OFFICERS STANDPOINT WHEN HE GETS THIS LETTER SAY, HEY HE WANT TO COME INTO THE ACC WE GOT SOME QUESTIONS TO ASK YOU.
NOW, I CAN SAY THIS IF YOU'RE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE COMFORTABLE TO COME IN FRONT OF ANY BOARD BECAUSE YOU MEET PEOPLE ON A DAILY BASIS.
BUT IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE IT MORE DELICATE AND SAY, HEY, WE JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO ASK YOU JUST IN REGARD TO A CERTAIN THING? I DON'T KNOW IF HE MAYBE FELT INTIMIDATED, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S A DEVIL ADVOCATES HERE, I'M TRYING TO PLAY DEVIL ADVOCATES A LITTLE BIT.
>> BUT, SIR, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I'VE BEEN IN THAT POSITION MYSELF.
WHEN I'VE BEEN CALLED IN FOR INCIDENTS HAPPENING WHEN I WAS ON THE JOB IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN SHOOTINGS, DEADLY FORCE, DIFFERENT THINGS.
I'VE BEEN CALLED IN. I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE.
THAT'S WHY I WALKED TO HIS CRUISER.
IDENTIFIED MYSELF, TOLD HIM WHO I WAS,
[01:50:02]
ASKED TO BE TALKED TO A LAWYER IF HE WANTED A LAWYER, AND HE WAS COMFORTABLE WITHOUT COMING IN WITH A LAWYER.I FELT THAT WAS MY DUTY, MY OBLIGATION AS A FELLOW LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND A CITIZEN NOW IN THIS COUNTY REPRESENTING THE BOARD.
I MADE IT THAT WAY, I WAS TOLD THAT WAS INAPPROPRIATE DURING THE PAB MEETING IT'S ON RECORD.
THAT WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR ME TO DO THAT AND I SAID RIGHT THEN, I'D DO IT AGAIN BECAUSE THAT'S HOW MUCH I CARE ABOUT [OVERLAPPING]
>> WELL, THE LETTER WAS A LITTLE BIT AGGRESSIVE [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DON'T LIKE [INAUDIBLE] ATTORNEYS YOU HIRED.
>> WE GOT AN EMAIL [OVERLAPPING].
>> I DO WANT TO SAY THIS, NO LETTERS GET SENT WITH MY SIGNATURE ON IT WITHOUT ME LOOKING AT IT AND APPROVING IT SO THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE YOU SHOULD PROBABLY CONSIDER.
MAKE SURE YOU LOOK AT THE STUFF BEFORE IT GETS SENT OUT BECAUSE THE LETTER WAS A BIT AGGRESSIVE.
I'M NOT SURE WHOSE SIGNATURE WAS A FIXED TO IT, I DON'T REMEMBER THAT, BUT I WOULD INSIST ON REVIEWING THOSE BEFORE THEY GET SENT OUT.
>> BUT THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO ALSO REVIEW THE FACT THAT WE WERE TOLD THAT HE'S NOT COMING IN.
THAT LETTER WAS SENT AFTER WE ARE NOTIFIED HE'S NOT COMING TO THE BOARD.
>> AS A BOARD, I WOULD FIND THAT YOU'RE TOLD, HEY, I CAN DO THIS, BUT IN THE SAME TIME YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, HE'S NOT COMING IN.
AS A BOARD WE ASKED YOU TO DO A JOB SO AS A BOARD, YOU'RE SAYING, [INAUDIBLE] SO THEY DON'T TAKE US SERIOUS SO I CAN TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT IF SOMEBODY TELLS US THAT, I WOULD TAKE OFFENSE AS WELL.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE COMMUNICATION I GUESS PROCESS BREAKS DOWN HERE.
BUT LIKE I SAID BEFORE, I DO FEEL IF YOU'RE A LAW ENFORCEMENT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME IN FRONT OF A BOARD FEEL COMFORTABLE.
>> HE SAID AT A TABLE, WITH US THEN WE RECEIVED A LETTER THAT THE NEXT MORNING HE WAS ORDERED TO MAKE A WRITTEN STATEMENT AGAIN.
THAT'S NOT EVEN FURTHER INTIMIDATING.
>> NO, BY THE SHERIFF. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH HE WAS INTIMIDATED BECAUSE HE DID VERY WELL.
HE DIDN'T HESITATE, HE NEVER SAID HE FELT UNCOMFORTABLE.
>> THAT AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.
>> WE DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN DO WITH THE TRAINING THAT WE'VE HAD AND THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN.
>> YOU'RE HOLDING UP SOMETHING THERE.
CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR EVERYBODY WHAT THAT IS?
IT'S THE RESOURCE GUIDE FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGING COMMITTEE.
THIS IS WHAT WE WERE TRAINED WITH WHEN WE WENT TO THE 40 HOURS OF TRAINING.
I'M NOT INFLUENCED BY WHAT THE SHERIFF OR THE CHIEF SAY, I'M JUST HERE TO DO THIS JOB.
I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT ANY POLICE OFFICERS CHARGED WITH SOMETHING THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE CHARGED WITH.
>> WELL, I WAS GOING TO LET THEM HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK AND THEN HAVE YOU GUYS COME UP AND WHOEVER WANTED TO SPEAK AND POINT OUT WHAT. GO AHEAD.
>> THAT HAS THE DISCIPLINARY MATRIX IN IT SO THAT HAS ALL THE CATEGORIES.
WE HAVE TO DETERMINE THIS VIOLATION FALLS INTO CATEGORY A, B, C, D. THEN THERE'S A LIST OF FELON HERE, DOES HE HAVE ANY OTHER OR DOES THIS OFFICER HAVE ANY OTHER CHARGES IN HIS DISCIPLINARY RECORD AND ONE OF THEM GOES FOR TWO YEARS, ONE OF THEM GOES FOR THREE YEARS.
EACH CATEGORY HAS A DIFFERENT THING SO WE HAVE TO REVIEW ALL THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHERE IT FALLS AND DETERMINE WHAT STEP IN THERE THAT WE WANT PLACE.
>> JOHN, CAN I ASK YOU VERY QUICKLY HERE? IN THE BEGINNING OF THIS, YOU TALKED ABOUT AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY, THAT ONCE AN OFFICER IS EXONERATED AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT CANNOT BE REMOVED FROM HIS RECORD UNDER THE CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES?
>> UNDER CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES, YES.
>> IT WOULD STILL SAY THAT HE HAD BEEN CHARGED.
THAT IS SOMETHING, I'M ON THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE FOR MACO AND THEY'RE ALWAYS ASKING FOR THINGS, AND WE HAVE OUR DELEGATE AND SENATOR.
THAT'S ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE PREPARED TO FIGHT.
>> IF YOU COULD GET ME JUST A SMALL LITTLE WORDING THING HERE THAT I NEED TO SEE.
THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT I WILL ABSOLUTELY BRING UP BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE FAIREST THING TO DO IF SOMEONE IS CHARGED AND EXONERATED, THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE THAT ON THEIR RECORD.
>> THAT'S THE THING, IF YOU HAVE A PERSONAL BIAS AGAINST A CERTAIN OFFICER, YOU CAN CALL AND COMPLAIN EVERY DAY AND AT THE END OF THE YEAR, IT'S GOING TO SHOW ON HIS RECORD, HE'S GOT 360 COMPLAINTS.
[01:55:01]
BUT HE'S GOT 360 COMPLAINTS.>> I BELIEVE THAT MOTION WAS MADE IN SECOND AND PASSED AT THE LAST PAB, SO THAT WILL BE COMING TO YOU AS THE PAB REQUESTED WHICH I THINK IS THE CITIZENS PAB TO OUR [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE STARTING LEGISLATIVE MEETINGS JANUARY 15, THE FIRST ONE SO GET THAT TO ME BEFORE THEN.
I WILL CERTAINLY RAISE THAT POINT, AS FAR AS THE BILLS CONCERNED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU. SHERIFF. I DON'T WANT THIS TO TURN INTO A ARGUMENT BACK AND FORTH ABOUT OUR PAB ACC.
I'D JUST LIKE TO HEAR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS THOUGHTS, MAYBE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SENATOR MOUNTS AND DELEGATE GRACE WHO IS HERE SOME TRENDS THAT THESE DIFFERENT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ARE SEEING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PAB AND ACC.
>> I WAS A LITTLE WORRIED BECAUSE IT REALLY DOESN'T TAKE ME 2.5 HOURS TO GET TO MY OFFICE [LAUGHTER].
WHEN I WALK IN, YOU GUYS WERE TALKING ABOUT SOLAR PANELS, POWER LINES AND DAF, AND IN MY COUNTY, THAT IS THE EXISTENTIAL ISSUE AS WELL.
>> YEAH, ALL THE RURAL COUNTIES ARE FIGHTING SIMILAR BATTLES. SHERIFF.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ACTING PRESENT.
>> I HOPE YOU'RE ENJOYING OUR COMFORTABLE CHAIRS.
>> AS MY UNCLE, USED TO CALL HIM GEORGE BARLEYCORN SO THERE YOU GO.
>> I THINK A LOT OF THE STUFF, HE KEY ISSUE HERE IS THE ROLE AND THE PARAMETERS THAT THE ACC WORKS IN.
AGAIN, THE LEGISLATION IS SO VAGUE AND IT DEALS WITH INTERPRETATION, BUT THE WAY THAT I INTERPRET IT, THE WAY THE SHERIFF INTERPRETS IT, WE RECEIVE A CITIZENS COMPLAINT, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH THE PAB OR THE CITIZEN DIRECTLY.
WE CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION INTO THAT INCIDENT.
>> THERE'S AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT.
THAT INVESTIGATIVE REPORT IS FORWARDED ON TO THE ACC FOR REVIEW.
NOT FURTHER INVESTIGATION, FOR REVIEW TO SEE IF THERE IS SUBSTANCE OR IT'S NOT SUSTAINED, OR IT'S UNFOUNDED, OR WHICHEVER IT COMES BY.
IF IT IS A SUSTAINED COMPLAINT, THEY RECOMMEND OR THEY DON'T RECOMMEND, THEY IMPOSE DISCIPLINE.
WE AS CHIEFS AND SHERIFFS HAVE NO ABILITY TO CHANGE THAT OTHER THAN INCREASE IT.
THE FEELING THAT WE'RE GETTING IS WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE REPORT WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING BODY CAMERA.
THE REVIEW OF THE BODY CAMERA IS FOR THE PURPOSES OF EITHER PROVING OR DISPROVING THIS COMPLAINT.
IF SOMETHING OFFSHOOTS OUT HERE, THAT GOES BACK TO THE PAB IN THAT QUARTERLY MEETING SAYING, HEY, LOOK, LET'S KEEP AN EYE ON THIS FOR OUR YEAR-END REPORT AND REPORT ON THE TRENDS THAT WE'RE SEEING.
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS INVESTIGATION.
IF THEY WANT TO BRING IT BACK TO US AND SAY, HEY, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT WE SAW, WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT TO SEE IF IT'S A VIOLATION OF ONE OF OUR POLICIES, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CITIZEN COMPLAINT.
WHICH MEANS THAT IT DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE ACC'S GUIDELINES.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THIS.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE SHERIFF DEWEES WHO IS THE MARYLAND SHERIFF ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT, AND HE IS ALSO THE SHERIFF CARROLL COUNTY.
>> THE WESTERN SIDE THAT WAS SO POORLY TALKED ABOUT WHEN I WALKED IN.
[LAUGHTER] LISTEN, IT'S CARROLL COUNTY, AND I'M GOING TO GET OUT OF HERE BEFORE YOU ALL PULL UP THE BRIDGE AND I CAN'T MAKE IT BACK WEST.
I APPRECIATE SHERIFF BAKER ASKING ME TO COME DOWN.
I'M NOT DOWN HERE TO BEAT UP ON THE ACC.
I'M IN MY THIRD TERM AS SHERIFF IN CARROLL COUNTY, I'M A RETIRED CAPTAIN WITH THE MARYLAND STATE POLICE, AND I DO REPRESENT THE OTHER 23 SHERIFFS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF MARYLAND, INCLUDING BALTIMORE CITY.
I DID SEND TO THREE OF YOU A LETTER FROM THE MARYLAND SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION.
YOU GUYS ARE NOT EXPERIENCING ANYTHING THAT MY OFFICE AND EVERY OTHER JURISDICTIONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE IS EXPERIENCING.
EVERY JURISDICTION IS DOING SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE JURISDICTION NEXT TO THEM IS DOING, SO YOU'RE NOT EXPERIENCING ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY ELSE ISN'T EXPERIENCING.
RODNEY WAS RIGHT, LEOBR LAID EVERYTHING OUT FOR US FOREVER.
[02:00:01]
UNFORTUNATELY, JURISDICTIONS AND I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH CALLING THEM OUT PRINCE GEORGE'S, BALTIMORE'S, MONTGOMERY'S, THEY CREATED THIS LEGISLATION FOR A PERCEIVED PROBLEM THAT THEY THINK GOES ON THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE STATE.IF IT'S HAPPENING IN THEIR FRONT YARD, IT HAS TO BE HAPPENING IN YOUR FRONT YARD, AND THAT SIMPLY ISN'T THE CASE.
BUT NONE OF US ARE AGAINST HAVING TRANSPARENCY WITH THE PUBLIC.
I THINK THAT THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I'VE HAD WITH WHAT I'VE SEEN, AND IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN, AN ACC ASK AN INDIVIDUAL TO COME IN AND TESTIFY.
I THINK IT IS A DUE PROCESS ISSUE.
I KNOW RODNEY AND HE'S A GOOD MAN.
BUT I THINK IF SOMEBODY'S GOT TO MEET A DEPUTY OUT IN THE PARKING LOT AND ASK THEM IF THEY NEED AN ATTORNEY, THEN THEY SHOULDN'T BE INVITING THEM IN.
I THINK THAT'S AN OVERREACH OF WHAT THEY SHOULD BE DOING.
THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY THING THAT CONCERN ME.
I THINK YOU GUYS HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
SEND THE QUESTION BACK TO THE SHERIFF OR THE CHIEF AND LET THEM ANSWER IT, AND I GET THAT REGULARLY.
I HAVE 140 PATROL DEPUTIES, WE ANSWER 90-SOME THOUSAND CALLS, AND I ALSO OVERSEE MY DETENTION CENTER THAT HAS 100 DEPUTIES IN IT.
I HAVE A BIG ORGANIZATION, WE HAVE A LOT OF STUFF THAT GOES THROUGH THE ACC, AND IT'S TOTAL COOPERATION.
BUT UNDERSTAND, WE DO, AT TIMES, HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF FRICTION.
BUT WE WORK THROUGH THAT ISSUE AND WE COME OUT WITH AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, BUT IT'S ABOUT MAKING SURE THE PUBLIC GETS WHAT THEY NEED, AND THE DEPUTY AND OFFICER HAVE THE DUE PROCESS THAT THEY EXPECT.
I THINK THAT YOU GUYS HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD WITH COOPERATION BACK AND FORTH WITH THE THREE MEMBERS THAT WERE HERE AND THE SHERIFFS.
>> YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BEING REQUESTED TO ATTEND A ACC.
AGAIN, I KNOW THAT CHIEF BAKER AND MYSELF, AND CHIEF AZIZ IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE MARYLAND CHIEF OF POLICE ASSOCIATION.
THAT QUESTION WAS POSED TO ALL OF US AND ALL THE CHIEFS AND ALL THE SHERIFFS, AND NOBODY RESPONDED BACK THAT THEY HAD SEEN THAT.
IT'S A PRECEDENT THAT I SIMPLY DON'T THINK THAT CAROLINE COUNTY WANTS TO GET INVOLVED IN.
>> LET ME GUESS. PRINCE GEORGE'S, MONTGOMERY, HOWARD, ONE OF THOSE HAVE CALLED IN TO HAVE A [OVERLAPPING].
>> NUMBER 1, I DON'T KNOW THAT PEOPLE ARE KEEPING STATISTICS ON IT, AND THAT EVERY AGENCY IN EVERY COUNTY KNOWS WHETHER OFFICERS ARE BEING CALLED IN.
BUT ALL OF THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD ADMINISTRATORS ARE ON AN EMAIL THREAD AND COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER [NOISE] FREQUENTLY FOR QUESTIONS.
THE CARROLL COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, BETHANY HENDERSON, [NOISE] SENT THIS OUT TO ALL OF HER COMPATRIOTS.
"WE HAVE FREQUENTLY BROUGHT IN OFFICERS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THE BOARD MEMBERS MAY HAVE, AND, IN ONE INSTANCE, GIVE A DEMONSTRATION ON PROPER PROCEDURE."
>> THAT'S WRONG. I HAVE A LIEUTENANT AND A SERGEANT THAT ARE INTERNAL INVESTIGATORS.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT COME IN AND PRESENT THE CASE TO THE ACC.
THERE'S NEVER BEEN A DEPUTY OR AN OFFICER CALLED INTO AN ACC TO TESTIFY ON ANYTHING IN MY COUNTY. I WOULDN'T LET THEM.
>> BUT IT'S GOOD TO CLEAR IT UP.
>> I'D LIKE A CLARIFICATION ON THAT BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT WAS THE PAB CHAIRS.
IF THAT'S THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD CHAIRS.
>> THERE ARE OPEN MEETINGS WHERE CERTAINLY I COULD UNDERSTAND HOW THAT COULD HAPPEN.
>> YOU ARE THE CARROLL COUNTY SHERIFF.
>> AN ACC [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] MEETING IS BASICALLY A HEARING CONCERNING.
>> WE GOT TO GET DONNY A FEW MORE STARS, SHERIFF BAKER.
>> DONNY HAS GOT TO SERVE A FEW MORE TERMS. [LAUGHTER]
I HAVE A LIEUTENANT AND SERGEANT THAT ARE FULL-TIME INTERNAL INVESTIGATORS.
I'M NOT SURE HOW THE CASES ARE PRESENTED HERE.
BUT MY LIEUTENANT AND MY SERGEANT PRESENT THE CASES ALMOST LIKE A GRAND JURY FORM.
THEY PRESENT ALL THE FACTS, THERE'S QUESTIONS BACK AND FORTH.
IF THERE'S CLARIFICATION THAT'S NEEDED, IF THE ACC WANTS THEM TO FOLLOW UP ON SOMETHING THAT THEY'VE LEARNED, THEN THE INTERNAL INVESTIGATORS GO BACK AND THEY GET THAT INFORMATION FROM.
MOST RECENTLY, YES, THERE WAS A DEMONSTRATION DONE BY MY POLICE ACADEMY REGARDING A USE OF FORCE SO THEY COULD EXPLAIN WHAT THEY WERE SEEING IN A VIDEO, I WOULD NEVER ALLOW THE DEPUTY THAT WAS THE ACCUSED TO COME IN AND TESTIFY AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I DON'T CARE WHAT THAT LAW SAYS.
>> BUT MY QUESTION HERE WOULD BE, WHAT DOES THE TRAINING SAY? BECAUSE, NANCY HAS HELD UP A BOOK WHERE THEY HAVE RECEIVED TRAINING.
WHAT DOES THAT INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL SAY AS FAR AS CALLING PEOPLE IN?
>> I'VE TALKED TO WAYNE SILVER.
WAYNE SILVER JUST HAD A TRAINING SESSION WITH CAROLINE COUNTY ACC AND I BELIEVE THE TWO MEMBERS WERE THERE.
[NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] EXACT TRAINING TO THEM, IT WAS BAD POLICY, BAD PROCEDURE, OR NOT TO DO IT.
[02:05:01]
>> THAT WAS THE CALL OF THE ATTORNEY.
I FORWARDED AN EMAIL FROM WAYNE SILVER TO ALL THREE OF THE COMMISSIONERS INDICATING THE SAME IN THAT EMAIL THAT HE HIGHLY RECOMMENDS THIS.
>> I SEE SOME HEAD SHAKING BACK THERE.
MY QUESTION IS, WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS TRAINING, 40-HOUR TRAINING, THEY HAVE GOT A MANUAL THAT THEY GO BY.
WHAT DOES THE MANUAL SAY THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO?
>> MANUAL SAYS THEY CAN CALL THE DEPUTY IN, WITH REPRESENTATION, BUT THAT'S AS FAR AS IT GOES.
THE DEPUTY DOES NOT HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, THE DEPUTY, ONLY HE HAS TO DO IS APPEAR, HE DOES NOT HAVE TO SUBMIT THE QUESTION.
THIS GENTLEMAN HERE IS AN ATTORNEY, AND I WILL LET HIM GO AHEAD.
>> I'M JOSH HAMLIN. I'M THE PAST PRESIDENT OF MARYLAND CHIEFS.
I DID 36 YEARS WITH MONTGOMERY COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, RETIRED AS THE INTERIM CHIEF AND TOOK OVER AS LAW [INAUDIBLE] POLICE CHIEF, I'VE BEEN THERE FOR FIVE YEARS NOW.
[INAUDIBLE] I STARTED WHEN I WAS NINE YEARS OLD.
WHICH SHERIFF BAKER WAS SAYING, I AM ALSO AN ATTORNEY IN MARYLAND, I WOULD TELL YOU THIS, I WOULD MORE DEEPLY INVESTIGATE THE LAW.
BUT IF I WAS ADVISING A CLIENT THAT GOT SUBPOENAED BEFORE A BOARD, I WOULD TELL HIM YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
I THINK IT'S RISKY TO BE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS.
PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MY EXPERIENCE IS, IF THEY HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM OUR INVESTIGATION, I HAVE A CAPTAIN IN CHARGE OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS, I HAVE SERGEANTS AND CORPORALS THAT DO MOST OF THE INVESTIGATIONS.
IF THEY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, THEY SEND THE QUESTIONS BACK TO THE CAPTAIN.
A LOT OF TIMES, THIS ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED.
WE USE OUR AXON SYSTEM TO RECORD OUR INTERVIEWS.
QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED JUST MAYBE WASN'T IN THE REPORT.
THEY COME UP WITH GREAT QUESTIONS.
IF WE HAVE TO BRING THE OFFICER BACK IN, THEY COME BACK.
I CAN ORDER THE OFFICER TO TALK IN THOSE SETTINGS, I CAN'T ORDER THE OFFICER TO TALK TO THE COMMISSION.
I THINK WHAT IT DOES IS, IT POSSIBLY SETS UP THAT.
>> [INAUDIBLE] A WASTE OF TIME. [INAUDIBLE] CONDITION [INAUDIBLE] IF HE IS REFUSING TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, THERE IS A PROBLEM THERE.
>> BUT, AGAIN, I HATE TO KEEP GOING BACK TO THIS.
BUT I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE MANUAL SAYS.
AM I CLEAR IN THIS? I WANT TO GET SOME POSITIVE HEADSHAKES HERE FROM EVERYBODY.
THE MANUAL SAYS OR THE REGULATIONS SAY THAT AN OFFICER CAN BE CALLED BEFORE THE COMMISSION BUT HE DOES NOT HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. IS THAT WHAT IT SAYS?
>> THE LAW SPECIFICALLY SAYS AUTHORIZED HIM TO COME WITH A REPRESENTATIVE.
IT DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
I WAS THE PRESIDENT OF THE MARYLAND SHERIFFS WHEN THE LEGISLATION WAS DRAWN UP BY THE LEGISLATURE.
WE ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION ON THIS OF THE LEGISLATURE.
WE WERE IN ANNAPOLIS ASKING, WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? AUTHORIZE AN INDIVIDUAL TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND BE REPRESENTED.
NO ONE WOULD ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY JUST WANTED TO LEAVE IT RIGHT THERE.
I THINK THAT I'M THE SAME AS SHERIFF DEWEES, I WOULD NEVER LET MY DEPUTY TESTIFY OR BE ASKED ANY QUESTIONS.
OUR ACC WOULD ASK ME QUESTIONS AND SAY, HEY, WE NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS TOPIC, AND THEN I WOULD ANSWER THEM THROUGH OUR INVESTIGATION [INAUDIBLE].
>> IT WOULD BE THE OFFICER'S DECISION WHETHER HE WANTS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR NOT, CORRECT?
>> WELL, ACTUALLY, IF IT'S IN MY HOUSE IN [INAUDIBLE] COUNTY?
>> IT WOULDN'T BE MINE EITHER.
>> IT WOULD NOT BE. IT WOULD BE MY DECISION WHETHER HE OR SHE IS GOING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR NOT.
HE IS MY EMPLOYEE, HE'S NOT THE ACC'S EMPLOYEES, NOT THE COUNTY EMPLOYEE, HE'S SHERIFF CAMPBELL'S EMPLOYEE, AND WE'VE ALL BEEN GOING THROUGH NUMEROUS LAWSUITS ABOUT THE COUNTY'S BAILING OUT, THEY'RE OUR EMPLOYEES, THEY'RE NOT YOUR EMPLOYEES.
IT WOULD BE MY DECISION WHETHER OR NOT HE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO ANSWER [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT WOULDN'T EVEN GET THAT FAR BECAUSE I WOULD SAY, SEND ME THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU WANT ANSWERED OR WHERE THIS INVESTIGATION MAY BE LACKING, AND WE'LL ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> WE'VE HAD THAT. THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL. THAT COMES BACK REGULARLY.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT I GUESS WHERE I'M GETTING HUNG UP HERE IS, WE'RE APPOINTING PEOPLE TO BE ON THIS BOARD, WE'RE GIVING THEM A MANUAL, THEY'RE GOING TO TRAINING.
WHERE IS THE DISCREPANCY HERE BETWEEN WHAT THE MANUAL AND THE TRAINING SAYS AND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING?
[02:10:05]
BECAUSE IF THE MANUAL SAYS THAT THEY ARE ENABLED TO CALL A PERSON BEFORE THEM, IN OUR SITUATION HERE IN THIS COUNTY, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE HANG-UP HAS BEEN.THE PERSON WAS CALLED IN, THE BOARD FELT THAT THEY HAD THE AUTHORITY TO CALL THE OFFICER IN.
I THINK WHAT HAPPENED HERE WAS HUMAN NATURE SAYS TO THIS GUY, OH, MY GOD, I'M GOING TO GO BEFORE THIS BOARD.
I'M GOING TO GET IN TROUBLE HERE.
I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW, AND I DIDN'T ASK THE QUESTION, BUT WHEN JOHN APPROACHED THE GUY IN THE PARKING LOT, WHAT IF HIS ANSWER HAD BEEN, I'M NOT COMING.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO IN. IF YOU TELL ME.
>> JOHN SAID HE SAID HE WOULDN'T HAVE ASKED HIM TO COME IN.
BUT THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS MY DEPUTY ALSO TOLD ME THAT JOHN TOLD HIM THAT THEY HAD ALREADY EXONERATED HIM WITH HARASSMENT, SO HE'D ALREADY EXONERATED THE ENTIRE COMPLAINT. THEN WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ASK HIM?
>> YOU GO IN AND SAY SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE YOUR MIND?
>> I THINK WHERE THE COMMON GROUND, FOR ME, IS, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TRAINING AND INSTRUCTIONS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THESE BOARDS COINCIDES WITH WHAT YOU FEEL, THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO FIND THE COMMON GROUND.
IF THE COMMON GROUND HERE IS, YES, YOU CAN CALL THIS OFFICER BEFORE YOU, BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, AND BECAUSE HE DOESN'T ANSWER QUESTIONS DOESN'T MEAN HE'S GUILTY, HE'S JUST SAYING, I'M NOT GOING TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
>> IN THAT CASE [OVERLAPPING].
>> SHOULD THEY BE CALLED, NO CAN WE.
>> BUT WE'RE TO A POINT, CHIEF.
WHERE, AGAIN, WE HAVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING BY A MANUAL WHICH TELLS THEM THAT THEY CAN CALL THE PERSON.
MY SOLUTION TO IT WOULD BE, TAKE THAT OUT.
IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE CALLED BEFORE THE BOARD, TAKE THAT AUTHORITY AWAY FROM THE BOARD.
>> ALL THE JURISDICTIONS AROUND THE STATE ARE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THIS BOARD CAN SAY THAT.
TRUST ME, EVERYBODY'S DOING SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, REGARDLESS OF THE JURISDICTION YOU GO TO, SET THE PARAMETERS FOR YOUR COUNTY THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF THIS.
>> THAT IS THE WORST POSSIBLE THING THAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN YOU PASS STATE LEGISLATION THAT ALLOWS INTERPRETATION BY LOCAL BOARDS BECAUSE THAT [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE NEVER HAD THAT INTERPRETATION EVER FOR 50-SOME YEARS.
>> THEY'RE TRYING AND FULL EXCLOSURE.
I'VE BEEN ON RADAR BUT SINCE WE BOTH HAD A LOT MORE HAIR.
>> BUT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO A GREAT JOB, JUST LIKE ALL THESE VOIDS ARE ACROSS THE STATE.
EVERYBODY'S HANDED PRETTY BAD DEAL IN THIS LEGISLATION. REPEAT EVERYBODY.
>> IT'S VERY POORLY CONSTRUCTED LEGISLATION.
I'M SURPRISED IT HASN'T BEEN STRUCK FOR VOID FOR VAGUENESS ALREADY.
SOME LEVEL, OF COURSE. I THINK THAT'S COMING ON SOME.
>> I THINK WITH THIS, THEY'RE DOING WHAT THE LAW SAYS.
THE LAW DOESN'T SAY THEY HAVE TO ANSWER.
I CAN ORDER THEM AS POLICE CHIEF.
THEY CAN ORDER THEM THE SHERIFFS TO ANSWER INSIDE OUR INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS, WHICH IS WHY I BELIEVE MORE PROPER AVENUE IS, SEND ME YOUR QUESTION TO THEM. I'LL GET YOU AN ANSWER.
THEN WE CAN AVOID THIS EXTERNAL CONFLICT WHERE IT LOOKS AND I WOULDN'T BLAME LOOK AS A CHIEF, I HAVE ONE RULE.
I'M NOT GOING TO DO THIS WHEN I'M DONE POLICING.
IF IT REPRESENT SOMEBODY THAT SAYS A LAWYER HERE IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ROLE.
I THINK AS A LAWYER, I'D BE VERY CONCERNED MY CLIENT MIGHT MAKE A MISTAKE IN THERE.
THEY'RE NERVOUS THAT THESE ARE DUMB COPS.
NERVOUS SAY SOMETHING OUT OF LINE, MISCONSTRUE SOMETHING, AND THEY YOU JUST SAID SIR AND FURTHER PROBLEMS. I THINK THE WAY TO AVOID THAT IS SEND THE QUESTION BACK.
WE'LL ORDER THEM TO TALK TO THE INTERNAL INVESTIGATOR.
YOU'LL HAVE YOUR ANSWER BECAUSE I CAN GET YOU YOUR ANSWER, AND THEY'RE NOT AT OTHER PEREL, OTHER JEOPARDY BECAUSE I ORDER THEM TO GIVE AN ANSWER.
CANNOT BE USED AGAINST THEM IN A COURT OF LAW SOMEPLACE ELSE.
YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO LIE IF THEY LIE LATER IN COURT OF LAW TO BE USED THERE.
IT DOESN'T PLACE THEM IN THAT EXTERNAL JEOPARDY OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR SOMETHING DOWN THE ROAD THAT THEY NEVER INTENDED TO DO IT.
THEY THEY WEREN'T TENDING TO DECEIVE A LIE.
THEY JUST WALKED INTO SOMETHING THAT GETS MISCONSTRUED.
I THINK THAT'S A SAFER AVENUE TO GO UNTIL THIS LEGISLATION GETS FIXED.
I AM NOT CONFIDENT I'LL STILL BE ALIVE WHEN IT GETS FIXED, BUT HOPEFULLY IT DOES DOWN ROAD.
>> I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ADDRESSING ANYTHING IN IT.
I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
>>YOU STILL KEEP UP A GREAT POINT BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE GARRITY AND ALL THOSE OTHER.
THEY DON'T HAVE THAT LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN THERE.
THEY WANT THE ACC WANTS CALL THEM AGAIN, AND THE COUNTY WANTS TO PAY THE PRIVATE ATTORNEY GO WITH THEM,
[02:15:02]
THEN HEY THAT'S GREAT.BUT WE'RE JUST WE'RE ADDING DOLLAR SIGNS TO THINGS THAT WE REALLY DON'T NEED TO ADD DOLLAR SIGNS TO FOR A HARASSMENT COMPLAINT THAT WAS ALREADY HAD BEEN ADJUDICATED.
I MEAN, WE'RE JUST WE'RE FOR SEVEN COMPLAINTS A YEAR, THERE'S A LOT OF HEADACHE AND A LOT OF BRAIN POWER IN THIS ROOM FOR REALLY NO REASON.
>> YOU WERE IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY?
>> I WASN'T IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY. PG COUNTY.
>> I RECEIVED REQUESTS FOR SOMEBODY TO GO FOR BOARD FROM MY SHOP, YOU GET QUESTIONS BACK.
WE GO BACK AND ASK ME SOMETIMES MY DIRECTOR WILL SAY THE ANSWERS RED HERE.
I JUST DIDN'T CONTEMPLATE EVEN HAVE THAT QUESTION.
I CHECKED THIS MORNING ON MY WAY HERE WHEN I WAS ON 404 WITH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE MARYLAND CHIEFS AND MARYLAND SHERIFFS, AND THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF WHERE AN OFFICER THAT HE'S BEEN CALLED.
>> MR. HAM, AS THE AS THE ATTORNEY HERE.
I ALWAYS HAVE A TENDENCY TO LOOK AT THINGS IN THE WORST CASE SCENARIO.
WHAT IF YOU HAVE A CITIZEN WHO FILES A COMPLAINT AND THE BOARD DOES NOT CALL THE THE OFFICER IN FRONT OF THEM WHEN THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT.
WHAT IF THAT PERSON WANTS TO SAY, I DIDN'T GET A FAIR SHAKE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO QUESTION THE PERSON THAT I MADE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT.
DOES THAT GO BACK TO THE LEGISLATION AND HAVE ANOTHER ATTORNEY SAY, MY CLIENT DIDN'T GET HIS FAIR SHAKE?
>> LIKE ONE OF THOSE BAR EXAM QUESTIONS.
THERE'S A POSSIBILITY FOR ANYTHING.
I DON'T IT COULD GO ANYWHERE LIKE THAT.
THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO CALL THEM.
THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT FROM WHAT I'M READING THE LEGISLATION UNLESS COUNTY ATTORNEYS SEES DIFFERENT, THEY CAN BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY.
I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A NEW POINT IF THE QUESTION OR CONCERN THEY HAVE IS ADDRESSED TO THE AGENCY, AND THE AGENCY ADDRESSES IT APPROPRIATELY BY SAYING HERE'S WE ASKED YOUR QUESTIONS.
HERE'S THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS.
YOU WANT TO SEE THE VIDEO OF IT, WE'LL SEND YOU THE LINK TO THE VIDEO, IS THEIR ANSWERS, AND THEY WERE COMPELLED TO ANSWER.
WHICH DOES HAVE A PENALTY ATTACHED TO IT.
>> I JUST WANT TO BRING THIS FULL CIRCLE BACK.
THE ACC'S JOB IS TO REVIEW A COMPLAINT, SUSTAIN IT, AND APPLY DISCIPLINE.
THEY APPLY THE DISCIPLINE, THEY SEND IT BACK TO THE CHIEF.
WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN ANOTHER RABBIT HOLE HERE.
THE CHIEF OFFERS THAT DISCIPLINE TO THAT OFFICER IF IT'S SUSTAINED.
THE OFFICER SAYS, I'M NOT TAKING THAT.
THAT'S WHERE TESTIMONY AND THINGS LIKE THAT COME INTO PLAY.
IT'S NOT THE ACC SEIZURE ROLE TO THEY DON'T REQUEST THE COMPLAINANT TO COME IN TO TELL THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY.
THERE'S NO NEED FOR THE OFFICER THAT'S ACCUSED TO HAVE TO COME IN AND DO THAT.
>> I'M NOT SURE HOW IT'S PRESENTED IN CAROLINE COUNTY, BUT AGAIN, IN MY COUNTY, AN INTERNAL INVESTIGATOR SITS IN FRONT OF THE ACC.
IT'S NOT A PACKET THAT'S SENT TO THE ACC AND FOR THEM TO LOOK THROUGH AND JUST REVIEW AND WRITE OUT A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS.
THERE'S A DIALOGUE BACK AND FORTH WITH THE ACTUAL INTERNAL INVESTIGATOR SO THAT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND.
THAT'S WHAT BETHANY IS ASKING, DOES THAT TAKE PLACE IN EACH COUNTY, NOT THE OFFICERS COME IN AND TESTIFY ON THEIR OWN BEHALF.
DO INTERNAL INVESTIGATORS PRESENT THESE CASES? THERE IS THAT DIALOGUE AND MAYBE THERE'S NO CONFUSION ABOUT, YES, I DID ASKED THAT QUESTION AND IT'S HERE IN THIS PART OF THE VIDEO OR IT'S HERE IN THIS PART OF THE INVESTIGATION.
ALMOST EVERY TIME WE WALK AWAY, THERE'S A CONCLUSION BECAUSE THE INTERNAL INVESTIGATOR THAT ACTUALLY CONDUCTED THE INVESTIGATION IS IN THE ROOM PRESENTING THE CASE?
>> JOHN, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING?
IS LAW. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE BROUGHT AN OFFICER.
THE FIRST TIME WAS DENT CHIEF KNOWS THAT ONE OF HIS OFFICERS CAME INTO THIS BOARD AND DENT FOR TO SIT UP HERE AND SAY THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED, WOULD HAVE HAPPENED TO ONE OF OUR AGENCIES IN HERE, AND HE CAME WITH THEM.
WE CALLED HIM IN TO TRY TO GET A SENSE OF THE INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED.
THIS CASE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS A VERY BIZARRE CASE.
IF I TOLD EVERYBODY THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVERYBODY WOULD REPEAT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING.
[02:20:02]
BECAUSE IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT CASE, BUT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO DISCUSS THAT.BUT I WILL DISCUSS IT IMPROPERLY WITH ANY COMMISSIONERS TO UNDERSTAND THIS.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GO AFTER ANYBODY.
THERE WAS A CRIMINAL GIZATION, HARASSMENT AND A CIVIC THAT WE LOOKED AT BOTH SIDES.
THERE WAS A COMPLAINT OF HARASSMENT DISCOURTES THAT WAS IT.
>> THAT WAS IT CRIMINAL. THAT WAS LOOKED AT BOTH SIDES OF.
>> YOU SAID YOU THE CLAIMS MADE IT INTO TWOS.
WE LOOKED AT THE DEFINITION OF YOU'RE CRIMINALS.
>> CRIMINAL AND CIVIL DEFINITION OF IT.
>> I THINK YOU WERE OVERSTEPPING.
>> WELL, THAT'S GOOD. YOU OFFICER WAS [INAUDIBLE].
>> IF IT HELPS EVERYONE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.
WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS THE SHERIFF AND I HAVE ABOUT ADDRESSING, UNFORTUNATELY, THE STATUTE IS SO POORLY WRITTEN, IT DOES GRANT SUBPOENA POWER TO THE ACC.
HERE'S WHAT I'VE DRAFTED AND I'M SENDING IT TO THE SHERIFF FOR HIS REVIEW AND INPUT.
SUBPOENAS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE ACC OR BY THE CHAIRMAN ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE ACC.
THE ACC MAY NOT REQUEST OR COMPEL A POLICE OFFICER TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ACC UNLESS IT HAS FIRST REQUESTED THE INFORMATION IT SEEKS FROM THE LEA LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
IF STILL NOT SATISFIED, SERVED WRITTEN QUESTIONS UPON THE OFFICER TOGETHER WITH A NOTICE SIGNED BY THE CHAIR OR PRESIDING OFFICER, STATING THAT THE ACC IS IN NEED OF THE OFFICER'S ANSWERS TO MAKE ITS DETERMINATION OF WHETHER AN OFFICER IS TO BE ADMINISTRATIVELY CHARGED.
A COPY OF THE NOTICE AND THE QUESTIONS SHALL BE DELIVERED BY THE CHAIR OR THE PRESIDING OFFICER OR ACC STAFF TO THE HEAD OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY THAT EMPLOYS THE POLICE OFFICER.
WHO SHALL DELIVER SAME TO THE OFFICER AND NOTIFY THE ACC OF THE DATE OF SERVICE.
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER SERVICE, THE OFFICER SHALL PROVIDE TO THE ACC WRITTEN ANSWERS AND ASSIGNED STATEMENT THAT THE ANSWERS ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF THE OFFICER'S KNOWLEDGE INFORMATION AND BELIEF.
SUBPOENAS ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION ARE JUDICIALLY ENFORCEABLE.
BUT THAT IS TO MAKE IT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT ONLY AS A LAST RESORT, WOULD YOU USE THIS POWER THAT THE STATUTE GIVES YOU TO BRING AN OFFICER IN? IT WOULD YOU'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH THESE PRELIMINARY STEPS FIRST, WHICH I THINK WE ALL AGREE, THE LOGICAL THING TO DO IS TO ASK THE AGENCY TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> I WILL SAY THAT WHEN WE WERE ASKED TO HAVE THE DEPUTY COME IN, WE OFFERED ALL THAT, AND WE RETURNED IN.
I WOULD LIKE TO T SOMETHING PRESSES ME INTO BECAUSE I THINK MR. PARSPOKE, WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY EXCESSIVE FORCE COMPLAINTS THAT I KNOW OF IN THE SEVEN COMPLAINTS THIS YEAR.
THEY WERE ALL MOSTLY BRUTE AND DISCOURTEOUS.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE EXCESSIVE OR BRUTALITY COMPLAINT CAME IN.
THERE WAS NO EXCESSIVE FORCE COMPLAINTS.
>> HAVE ALL OF YOU EXPERIENCED OR WHICH OF YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED ISSUES WITH THE PAB OR ACC, I SHOULD SAY, IN YOUR JURISDICTIONS, INVESTIGATING AREAS NOT BROUGHT UP IN A COMPLAINT.
IS THAT A COMMON THREAD? NO. THEY PRETTY MUCH IN PG COUNTY HAVE STUCK IN YOUR CASES IN LAUREL?
>> ANY ISSUES WITH YOUR PAB THINGS THAT WE SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IN THE LEGISLATION [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT REALLY A LOT LIKE YOURS.
THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE NOT VERY USEFUL, THE PAB.
THEY WANT TO THEY WOULD RATHER VENTURE OVER TO THE ACC.
SOME OF THEM DO, AND THEN THEY REALIZE IT'S A LOT OF TIME AND DON'T CARE FOR IT.
BUT PABS ARE JUST HANGING OUT THERE, AND THEY'RE REALLY ONLY PERTINENT FOR AN ANNUAL REPORT, THEY JUST LISTEN, OBSERVE AND SUPPLY ANSWERS LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD.
>> HOW MANY COMPLAINTS DO YOU HAVE ROUGHLY IN?
>> WITH AN AGENCY, MY SIZE 20.
I WOULD TELL YOU, A LOT OF THEM ARE JUST TRAFFIC OFFENSES AND WE DON'T SEND THEM OVER ANYMORE.
PROBABLY MAYBE 7, 8, 10, THAT WOULD BE ACC WORTHY TO LOOK AT.
NOT VERY MANY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE SIZE OF MY ORGANIZATION, AND THE AMOUNT OF CALLS THAT WE ANSWER.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? JOHN, YOU WANT TO ADD?
>> ONE THING THAT I HEARD YOU TALKING EARLIER AND I KNOW IT'S IN YOUR LEGISLATION.
I HAVE A COPY OF YOUR LEGISLATION.
MY ACC DOESN'T MEET EVERY MONTH UNLESS THEY HAVE A CASE.
THEY DON'T HAVE A CASE, THEY DON'T MEET.
THEY'LL SEND OUT THING TO LAW ENFORCEMENT SAYING,
[02:25:03]
IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO YOU MIGHT NOT.THEY'LL SAY, HEY, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CASE HAVE IT IN BY THIS DATE BECAUSE THE ACC HAS 30 DAYS, I THINK BY LAW TO RESPOND.
IF I DON'T HAVE A COMPLAINT BY THAT DATE BEFORE THAT DATE, I SEND EMAIL BACK TO THE PERSON WHO SAYS, NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ECN PD SAYS THE SAME THING.
THEY DON'T HAVE A MEETING. THEY MONTHS WITHOUT MEETING SOMETIMES.
IF THEY DO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO STRUGGLE WITH NOW IS WE HAVE CASES GOING TO COURT.
I HAD A TRAFFIC CITATION TRUNK DRIVES ISSUE.
WHERE I'M NOT GOING TO SEND MY COMPLAINTS UNTIL THE CASE HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED IN THE COURT ANYMORE.
ACC ASK WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT. I HAVEN'T GONE COURT YET.
WE'RE LETTING CASES GO TO COURT AND IT GOES BEYOND THE YEAR IN THE DAY SO BE BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE A YEAR AND A DAY THAT WE CAN TAKE SO TAKE YOUR COURT TAT OVER.
WE'RE NOT SENDING COMPLAINTS TODAY THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO INVESTIGATE THE COMPLAINT UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING VERY SERIOUS WHERE THERE WOULD BE A SUSPENSION OR UNTIL THE CASE IS ADJUDICATED IN COURT.
MANY TIMES ONCE THAT CASE IS ADJUDICATED IN COURT, PERSONS CONVICTED OF WHATEVER ALL OF THE ADAPTIONS ARE FALSE ARREST.
WHETHER YOU'RE LAW ENFORCEMENT OR NOT, THEY'RE NOT A JUDGE AND THEY'RE NOT A JURY.
REALLY THE COURTS TO DECIDE WHETHER IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL ARREST OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL ARREST.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN THEIR FIRST VIEW ANYBODY'S RESTS.
>> WELL, APPRECIATE ALL YOU GENTLEMEN COMING OVER AND PROVIDING US WITH YOUR INPUT.
IT'S TOUGH LAW, HARD TO IMPLEMENT WITH THE VAGUENESS, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING OVER.
>> SENATOR CAN HELP US WITH THAT.
>> SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND.
>> NO. IT'S REPLACEMENT LEGISLATION FOR OUR RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED.
JUST WE'RE WHAT A YEAR INTO THIS.
STEWART'S BEEN WORKING ON LEGISLATION TO TAKE THE PLACE OF OUR RESOLUTION.
>> MY FIRST [INAUDIBLE], IDEA THAT ANNAPOLIS IS GOING TO FIX THE PROBLEM.
>> NOW, WE'RE NOT RELYING ON YOU GUYS. [LAUGHTER].
>> BUT WELL, I THINK THE ONLY ONE SENATOR WOULD BE THE EXPUNGEMENT ISSUES.
>> THAT WOULD BE EXPUNGEMENT HAPPY, EXCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO COPY.
>> EXACTLY. THAT'S RIGHT. BUT I WILL CERTAINLY.
>> LAST YEAR AND LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND IT JUST GOT PUT IT WAS DONE.
>> YEAH. WELL, I CERTAINLY WILL FIGHT TO FIGHT ON THE EXPUNGEMENT.
>> THE SHERIFF WILL GET A COPY OF OUR DRAFT LEGISLATION.
HOPEFULLY, HE'LL CIRCULATE THAT AMONGST YOUR ORGANIZATION.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR INPUT.
>> DO ANY MUNICIPALITIES THAT YOU KNOW OF HAVE THEIR OWN ACC, PAB?
>> IT'S NOT CONTEMPLATED IN THE LAW.
IT'S INTERESTING WHEN YOU ALL BROUGHT THAT UP.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD FOR SOME MUNICIPALITIES TO DO THAT BECAUSE THIS IS SMALL. TOUGH TO DO.
BUT MY CONCERN IS AND I VOICED THIS IN ANNAPOLIS AND ELSEWHERE.
I ONE OF THE LARGEST JURISDICTIONS IN PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
NOBODY FROM MY JURISDICTIONS ON BOARD.
MY OPTION WILL NOT BE TO JUDGE BUT BY LOOKING. I THINK THAT'S FINE.
>> THERE WAS ACTUALLY ENABLING LEGISLATION PUT IN LAST YEAR THAT FAILED THAT WOULD JUST ALLOW MUNICIPALITIES TO FORM THEIR OWN DIDN'T [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT CAME BACK IN AGAIN LAST YEAR, AND I DON'T EVEN THINK IT GOT OUT.
>> IF THEY HAVE THE MEANS IN THE MONEY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE ATTORNEYS AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUST WHAT THE COUNTY'S DOING IN EACH JURISDICTION, IT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY.
IF I WAS A SMALL JURISDICTION, I'D PUSH AGAINST IT AND SAY, I'LL STAY UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF THE COUNTY.
>> THAT'S WHAT OUR FEAR IS IS THAT THE FUNDING IS GOING TO DRY UP.
RIGHT NOW IT'S FLIPPED BY THE STATE.
I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START WRITING THE CHECKS FOR THIS.
MY GOAL WAS TO MAKE THIS RUN AS EFFICIENTLY.
CHIEF BACORN IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THE COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF DENT, AND SHERIFF BAKER IS ON THE SAME CYCLE I AM.
THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT I'M DOING, THEY CAN KICK ME OUT, AND THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT HE'S DOING, THEY CAN KICK HIM OUT OF. [LAUGHTER].
[02:30:01]
>> [LAUGHTER] THERE WERE VERY SPECIFIC GUIDELINES ON THE BOARD MAKEUP BUT NOT REPRESENTATION BY THE MUNICIPALITY.
>> [INAUDIBLE] WE ACTUALLY ALLOW OXFORD TO PLACE POLICE DEPARTMENT AT OXFORD, DOWN HASTON.
>> THEY SELECT THEIR BOARD MEMBERS? [OVERLAPPING].
>> [INAUDIBLE] THEY MAKE A YEAR COUNTY COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE] RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE]
>> WE DO TOO. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I THINK WE DID SEEK INPUT FROM THE MUNICIPALITIES AS WELL.
[02:42:21]
I CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.[02:42:24]
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS A LEGISLATIVE SESSION.DO I HEAR A MOTION GO TO A LEGISLATIVE SESSION? MOTION SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THIS IS THE SECOND READING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR LEGISLATIVE BILL NUMBER 2024-008.
>> I'LL READ THE NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS WAS PUBLISHED OVER THE WEEKEND IN THE STAR DEMOCRAT.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON LEGISLATIVE BILL NUMBER 2024-008, AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 62, NEW SECTION 6210, CAROLINE COUNTY COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUND FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLYING WITH SECTION 1-322 OF THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND CANNABIS ARTICLE.
BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 6210 OF CHAPTER 62, CONTROLLER AND COLLECTOR OF TAXES, OF THE CODE OF PUBLIC LOCAL LAWS OF CAROLINE COUNTY, ESTABLISHING THE CAROLINE COUNTY COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUND AS A NON LAPSING SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING FUNDS FROM THE STATE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUND, ESTABLISHING THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH MONEY DEPOSITED INTO THE CCC RRF MAY BE USED AND MAKING THIS ACT AN EMERGENCY ACT.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THE ABOVE ITEM ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17TH, 2024, BEGINNING AT 9:15 AM. SLIGHTLY LATER.
IN ROOM 106 OF THE CIRCUIT COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 109 MARKET STREET, DENTON, MARYLAND 21629, TO SUBMIT COMMENTS IN WRITING EMAIL INFO AT CAROLINEMD.ORG.
VISIT WEBSITE GIVEN OR MAIL 2109 MARKET STREET, ROOM 123 DENTON MARYLAND 21629.
PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY NEEDING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY SHOULD CONTACT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE AT 410-479-0660.
[Legislative Session: Second Reading & Public Hearing]
THIS WAS PUBLISHED ON THE 14TH.THE FAIR READING OF THE PROPOSED BILL IS CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH I JUST READ.
THE BACKGROUND OF THIS IS THAT THE STATE HAS MANDATED THAT COUNTIES CREATE THEIR OWN VERSION OF THE STATE FUND, WHICH IS TO BE CALLED THE CAROLINE COUNTY COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT AND REPAIR FUND.
THIS LEGISLATION DOES THAT AND WE'VE ALREADY INTRODUCED IT ON 10TH DECEMBER.
THIS IS THE SECOND READING IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[02:45:02]
ASSUMING THE COMMISSIONERS PROCEED WITH IT, THE THIRD READING AND POTENTIAL AMENDMENT OR ENACTMENT WOULD TAKE PLACE ON JANUARY THE 7TH OF 2025.AS AN EMERGENCY BILL, IT WOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE ON THE DATE OF ENACTMENT.
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC INPUT, HAVE WE?
>> STEWART, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT I JUST GOT A TEXT MESSAGE FROM LAKELA PIERCE, WHO WANTED TO KNOW HOW SHE CAN MAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS VIA ONLINE DURING THE MEETING WHEN THERE ISN'T A SECTION AVAILABLE, SO WE RESPONDED HER TO EMAIL THOSE TO INFO@CAROLINEMD.ORG.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF SHE'LL DO IT NOW.
>>WE GET THAT FORWARD IT ON AND WOULD IT BE READ INTO THE RECORD FOR THE THIRD READING?
>> BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING ELSE AND NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP.
>> DO I NEED A MOTION TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING OR CAN I JUST OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING?
>> AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANY COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE BILL.
SEEING NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION.
I KNOW DANNY'S NOT HERE, BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN ANSWER TO OUR INQUIRY ABOUT THE EXPENDITURE AREAS THAT WE CAN SPEND IT.
I ASSUME WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN AN ANSWER BACK.
>> COMMISSIONER PORTER, YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ANOTHER COUNTY COMMISSIONER THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED VERBAL GUIDANCE THAT IT COULD BE SPENT HOWEVER THEY SAW FIT.
BUT I THINK WE'VE RECEIVED THE SAME GUIDANCE.
I JUST DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING YET.
>> I THINK IT WAS AN ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMMISSIONER WHO SAID THAT IT WAS TO BE SELF DETERMINED.
[LAUGHTER] I THINK OUR DECISION IS THAT WE DON'T LIKE DOING SELF DETERMINED THINGS THAT MIGHT COME BACK.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE EITHER WAIT FOR CONFIRMATION ON WHAT AREAS OF WHAT ZIP CODES THE MONEY CAN BE SPENT OR WE GET CONFIRMATION OF SOMETHING VERIFYING THAT IT'S SELF DETERMINED AND THERE WILL BE NO REPERCUSSIONS ON WHERE WE SPEND THE MONEY.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON [INAUDIBLE]?
>> I MOVE WE GO BACK TO REGULAR SESSION.
>> IS IT THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE WOULD PROCEED WITH THE THIRD READING IN OTHER WORDS? I'M FINE WITH IT.
>> MOTION TO SEND THE BILL ON FOR THE THIRD READINGS AT THE SCHEDULE OUTLINED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY BARRE.
>> MOTION AND THE SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> THAT'S JANUARY 17, CORRECT?
>> 7TH. I MOVE, WE GO BACK TO REGULAR SESSION.
>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE.
>> YEAH, LET'S HAVE IT. THERE WILL BE NO PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 7TH.
THAT'S JUST A VOTE AND ENACTMENT.
>> JUST A THIRD READING AND A VOTE.
>> PUBLIC COMMENT SHOULD BE EMAILED TO THE EMAIL ADDRESS, COMMISSION REPORTER LAID OUT BY, I WOULD SAY, JANUARY 1ST TO GIVE US TIME TO REVIEW IT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.
>> JEN YOU WANT TO YOU WANT TO RECONFIRM THAT ADDRESS?
>> OH, INFO@CAROLINEMV.ORG AND I JUST RECEIVED HER TESTIMONY.
IT'S ALSO ON OUR WEBSITE AS WELL.
>> MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA,
[Consent Agenda]
ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA?>> THE BRAMBLE RIVER ROAD PAVING INVOICE, THAT'S JUST TO FINISH THE PAVING ON ON THE ENTIRE SECTION. ROBIN, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> AS YOU KNOW, IT'S GROWN OVER TIME, AND ORIGINALLY WAS JUST THE LIMITATIONS OF THE CULVERT PROJECT.
THEN WE WENT FROM 404 TO CENTRAL AVENUE.
THIS IS FROM 404 ALL THE WAY TO THE DIRT ROAD SECTION OF RIVER ROAD AT [INAUDIBLE].
[02:50:03]
>> THIS IS PAVING ALL OF RIVER ROAD UP TO THE DIRT.
>> YEAH. THERE WAS A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THE CULVERT THAT'S OUT OF THAT THE THE ADDITIONAL THAT YOU ASKED FOR INITIALLY TO CENTRAL AVENUE SO THIS IS EVEN MORE.
OUR TONNAGE RATES HAVE DROPPED FOR THE OVERALL PROJECT.
WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR LESS, BUT IT COSTS US MORE BECAUSE IT'S A MUCH LONGER THE DISTANCE.
>> WHAT IS THE NAME OF THAT ROAD?
>> [OVERLAPPING] RIVER IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE LONGEST ROADS IN THE COUNTY, THAT OR ALL GROVE.
>> SOMEONE ASKED ME ABOUT RIVER ROAD BEING CLOSED AFTER THE FIRST OF THE YEAR AND I SAID IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
IT'S ALMOST A CHERRY LANE WHERE IT'S TO BE CLOSED IN.
IT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE LONGEST ROAD.
>> IT IS PAVING FROM 404 TO HOLLY.
I'M SORRY SO IT'S ALL THE WAY. YEAH.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 17, 2024.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE AYE.
>> THE AYES HAVE IT. COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT.
[County Administrator’s Report]
>> WE DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH TODAY SINCE WE WERE OUT PRETTY MUCH ALL LAST WEEK WITH MACO.
BUT ONE OF THE OUTCOMES OF MACO WAS A MEETING WITH QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY AND KENT COUNTY REGARDING THE REGIONAL DETENTION CENTER WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY AND A COUNTY COMMISSIONER FROM EACH JURISDICTION.
I GUESS I JUST NEED TO CONFIRM THAT STEWART, YOU'RE AVAILABLE ON THE 23RD AND I GUESS TRAVIS IS THE ONE ATTENDING THAT ONE OF YOU IS AVAILABLE ON THE 23RD.
>> IF YOU WANT TO DO IT, I'M FINE.
>> NO, YOU'VE BEEN GOING TO THEM.
>> WELL, WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE IN A WHILE, BUT YEAH.
>> THEY'RE ACTUALLY COMING HERE THIS TIME, [OVERLAPPING].
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM EACH COUNTY.
>> WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED FROM THE BEGINNING.
>> NOT GETTING OUT OF THAT ONE.
>> IT WILL BE ON THE 23RD, BUT IT WILL BE HERE, I THINK IN THIS ROOM, PROBABLY.
>> CAN I MAKE A QUICK COMMENT ABOUT THAT.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING I HAD A PRETTY BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM QUEEN ANNE.
OUR CONCERNS ARE PRETTY MUCH WITH THE AUTHORITY VERSUS THE AGREEMENT, IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? THAT'S ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS ABOUT THE LANGUAGE OR STIPULATIONS THAT ARE IN THOSE TWO APPROACHES.
>> BOTH OF US, MAYBE. BUT I WOULD SAY SO MY CONCERNS OR THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE ADDRESSED WITH THEM, THAT I THINK YOUR CONCERNS ALSO STEM FROM THE FACT THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING WHETHER IT'S AN AUTHORITY OR AN AGREEMENT.
SORRY, MY CONCERNS START WITH FIRST, WHETHER IT'S AN AUTHORITY AND AGREEMENT AND HOW THAT UMBRELLA STRUCTURE IS CREATED.
HOW WE'RE OBLIGATED FOR FINANCIAL DOWN THE ROAD, HOW STAFF IS HIRED WHEN THE TRANSITION HAPPENS, WHICH IN MY MIND, THE AUTHORITY VERSUS THE AGREEMENT MODEL WILL BE TOTALLY DIFFERENT IN THAT CAPACITY TO.
I THINK THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE BROUGHT UP WITH THEM WHAT PROCUREMENT POLICY IS USED? HOW DOES THAT IMPACT US?
>> ARE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE REGIONAL DETENTION CENTER PURELY QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY EMPLOYEES, ANSWERABLE TO QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY OFFICIALS?
THE WARDEN IS AN EMPLOYEE OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY? I'M PUTTING QUESTION MARK HERE, AS OPPOSED TO AN INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY, WHICH WOULD BE RUNNING THE FACILITY AND EMPLOYING HIRING ALL OF THAT CONTROLLED BY A THREE COUNTY BOARD.
YOU BASICALLY GOT TWO MODELS THERE.
ONE IS THE AUTHORITY MODEL, WHICH IS A STANDALONE ENTITY INSURED THROUGH LEGIT.
OR BASICALLY A QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY TIMESHARE WHERE IT'S IT TELLS KENT AND CAROLINE HOW MUCH IT OWES ON A MONTHLY OR QUARTERLY BASIS, HOW MUCH IT MUST CONTRIBUTE, BUT IT'S A QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY SHOW.
I THINK THE AGREEMENT HAS IT BEING BASICALLY A QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY SHOW.
>> THERE IS SOME VERY UNUSUAL LANGUAGE.
[02:55:01]
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A DEAL BREAKER, IT'S POLICY.IT'S ENTIRELY UP TO THE THREE COUNTIES.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE THE AUTHORITY WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED LEGISLATIVELY, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. IT CAN BE QUICKER.
>> I GUESS THAT'S THE MAIN CONCERN ABOUT THE TIME FRAME, HOW LONG THIS WOULD TAKE TO GET LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY, HOW FAR THIS WOULD PUSH IT BACK.
STEWART, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT WOULD COMMIT TO AN AUTHORITY OR CANNOT BE DONE?
>> IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DRAFT AN ENFORCEABLE PROVISION LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT AMOUNTS TO AN AGREEMENT TO AGREE WHICH IS NOT ENFORCEABLE.
UNLESS YOU HAVE ALMOST A DRAFT OF THE AUTHORITY DOCUMENTS IN ADVANCE FOR THE COUNTIES RIGHT NOW TO APPROVE IN ADVANCE AND YOU PICK A DATE, WHEN WILL WE ALL SIGN THIS? THE DETAILS WILL KILL YOU.
IT WOULD NOT BECOME SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY ENFORCE.
I THINK WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST WAS A PROVISION ABOUT A GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS FOR AN AUTHORITY WHICH WOULD COMMENCE UPON THE REQUEST OF ANY ONE OF THE THREE COUNTIES TO AGREE UPON THE ENABLING LEGISLATION TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, TO ENABLE THE CREATION OF AN AUTHORITY BECAUSE WE CAN'T CREATE IT WITHOUT THE STATE HAVING ENABLED IT, AUTHORIZED IT.
>> HOW WOULD THE LEGISLATION THROUGH THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BE APPROACHED? COULD IT BE IN THIS COMING YEAR OR IS IT TOO LATE?
>> WELL, LET'S PUT IT THIS WAY, WE DON'T NEED ANYONE ELSE'S AGREEMENT IF WE HAVE A LEGISLATOR OR TWO THAT WOULD SPONSOR THE BILL.
I'VE DONE A DRAFT AND CIRCULATED A DRAFT OF THE STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION AND WE WERE HOPING, OF COURSE, TO HAVE THE CONSENSUS OF ALL THREE COUNTIES THAT YES, LET'S PUT IT THROUGH.
MECO IS VERY INTERESTED IN IT.
THE STATE CORRECTIONS FOLKS HAVE BEEN MONITORING OUR MEETINGS, AS YOU MAY KNOW, AND I THINK THEY WERE FINE WITH IT.
THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO REVIEW IT AND GET THE BALL ROLLING.
BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE INTRODUCED BY OBVIOUSLY A SPONSOR HOPEFULLY PLENTY MORE THAN JUST ONE.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD SERVE THE STATE IN THE FUTURE, TOO, WOULDN'T BE JUST CAROLINE, QUEEN ANNE'S, AND KENT BEING THE RECIPIENTS.
IT WOULD BE POTENTIALLY SOMETHING THAT COULD HAPPEN IN WESTERN MARYLAND OR SOUTHERN MARYLAND AS WELL LIKE VIRGINIA HAS.
APPARENTLY, IS IT PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY? THERE'S A MODEL FOR THIS WE'RE NOT INVENTING THE WHEEL.
>> I GUESS I WOULD. STEWART, I THINK, OVER A YEAR AGO, CIRCULATED THAT DRAFT, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD COMMENTS ON IT FROM THE OTHER JURISDICTION.
>> BUT BACK TO THE ISSUE AND I KNOW THIS WILL BE PART OF OUR DISCUSSION ON THE 23RD.
STEWART HAS ALREADY SAID IT, WHETHER IT'S AN AGREEMENT OR AUTHORITIES IS A DECISION.
WE COULD GO EITHER WAY, BUT HOW WE HAMMER OUT THE AGREEMENT VERSUS HOW WE HAMMER OUT THE AUTHORITY.
THE LANGUAGE IT'S INCLUDED, WHAT WE PUT IN THAT AGREEMENT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHICH WAY WE'RE GOING.
THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN, IT'S A ROUGH DRAFT, AND I'M NOT SURE WHO WROTE IT.
BUT IT'S A ROUGH DRAFT, IT READS PART AUTHORITY AND PART AGREEMENT.
WE'RE JUST NOT FAR ENOUGH ALONG THAT WE CAN AGREE TO ANYTHING, AND I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT MORE COUNTY FUNDING UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE GETTING OURSELVES INTO.
>> NO. WE DID NOT WRITE IT. FOR ME, WE COULD GO WITH AN AGREEMENT,
BUT LET'S HAVE A CONCRETE >> AGREEMENT THAT WE ALL AGREE TO AND UNDERSTAND OR WE CAN GO WITH THE AUTHORITY, BUT RIGHT NOW, WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANYTHING CONCRETE.
>> HASH OUT ALL THE ISSUES WITH A POTENTIAL AGREEMENT OVER AN AUTHORITY.
THE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE WILLING TO DELEGATE THE MANAGEMENT OF THEIR EMPLOYEES TO A BOARD MADE UP OF RESIDENTS OF CAROLINE AND KENT COUNTY BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKING FOR.
WE'RE GOING TO ASK THAT THE WARDEN BE HIRED AT THE DIRECTION
[03:00:02]
OF THIS BOARD WHO WOULD THEN BECOME A QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY EMPLOYEE.THE OTHER PROBLEM WOULD BE THE TRANSFER OF KENT AND CAROLINE EMPLOYEES INTO THE QUEEN ANNE SYSTEM.
IF YOU STICK WITH AN AGREEMENT, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE EMPTYING THE POOL OF EMPLOYEES AND THEN REFILLING IT, IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE WE ARE FILLING IN THE HOLES IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>> STRUCTURE. THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE WITH THE AGREEMENT TAG.
YOU HAD POINTED OUT A FEW MORE HADN'T YOU STEWART OR DOES THAT [INAUDIBLE].
>> SUPPOSE THE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE DISSATISFIED WITH THE WARDEN OR THE DEPUTY WARDEN OR ANYONE ELSE WHO'S IN THE DETENTION CENTER, AND THEY DECIDE, WELL, WE'RE JUST NOT GOING TO PAY HIM OR WE'RE GOING TO TERMINATE HIM.
HE'S IN OUR EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM HIS CONTRACT IS WITH US MEANWHILE, THE BOARD IS VERY HAPPY WITH HIM.
THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY BOARD ARE OR THE DETENTION CENTER BOARD.
WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT IT'S AN IMPASSE OR IT'S A FIAT.
IN OTHER WORDS, IS THE POWER ALWAYS GOING TO BE IN THE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO RUN THIS DETENTION CENTER AS THEY SEE FIT? THESE ARE THE DIFFICULTIES.
THEY'RE NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO RESOLVE AT ALL, WE JUST WANT TO HAVE IT HAVE OUR EYES OPEN, I THINK, WHEN WE FINALLY DECIDE IF WE'RE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS AGREEMENT.
WHAT DOES IT ENTAIL? ASK THE HARD QUESTIONS NOW BEFORE THEY ERUPT DOWN THE ROAD AND EVERYONE GETS UPSET.
>> WELL, MY INITIAL THOUGHT IS THAT IT APPEARED TO ME THAT QUEEN ANNE WAS PUSHING FOR THE AUTHORITY.
>> FOR THE AGREEMENT, YOU MEAN?
>> THEY WERE PUSHING FOR THE AGREEMENT NOT AUTHORITY.
>> HERE IS ONE THING WE COULD DO, AND THAT IS GO FORWARD, EVEN IF IT'S JUST US WITH NO OTHER COUNTY AT THE MOMENT HELPING US SUBMIT THE DRAFT LEGISLATION TO OUR ELECTED DELEGATION AND ASK THEM TO START THE PROCESS OF SPONSORING IT.
MECO WAS MONITORING ALL OF THAT AND HAS SHOWN GREAT INTEREST IN THE CREATION OF THE AUTHORITY.
JUST GENERICALLY ACROSS THE STATE, NOT JUST FOR US.
MAYBE WE COULD DO THAT AND MAKE IT MORE LIKELY IF THAT LEGISLATION GOES THROUGH IT BECOMES EASIER PERHAPS TO DRAW THE OTHER TWO COUNTIES INTO THIS CONSTRUCT ONCE IT IS CREATED AND SET UP BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
LET'S JUST CREATE AUTHORITY BASED ON THIS STATUTE.
>> I THINK ONE OF US NEEDS TO FOLLOW UP WITH DELEGATE GRACE AND SEE WHEN THAT DEADLINE IS, IF WE CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER OUR DECEMBER 23RD MEETING.
>> YOU'RE KILLING ME. I GOT KIDS.
>> DON'T LOOK TO KATHELEEN [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER]
>> ONE OF US NEEDS TO REACH OUT TO JEFF.
CAN YOU SEND HIM AN EMAIL AND SEE WHAT THE DEADLINE TO INTRODUCE SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE?
>> I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE ANY PROBLEM FINDING SPONSORS.
>> WHAT MY FEAR IS IS THE OTHER DELEGATION, THE DELEGATION REPRESENTATIVES FROM OTHER COUNTIES MAY SAY NO, WE DON'T SUPPORT.
IF IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH BACKING IT MAY NOT GO ANYWHERE.
WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THE DECEMBER 23RD MEETING, BUT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DETAILS TO WORK OUT THERE YET.
BUT FOR DIRECTION FROM YOU GUYS, WHAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE? WHAT DO YOU WANT?
>> IT'S NOT A DEAL BREAKER, BUT I LIKE TO SEE AN AUTHORITY.
WHETHER SOMEBODY WORKS FOR AN AUTHORITY, OR THEY WORK FOR QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, YOU'RE STILL WORKING FOR SOMEBODY ELSE.
THEY CAN GET RID OF YOU NO MATTER WHAT.
BUT AS FAR AS AUTHORITY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT, THAT WAY THERE'S NO GROUP LAWSUIT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT'S ONE ENTITY.
[03:05:11]
>> I THINK OUR BIGGEST CONCERN AT THIS POINT IS GOING FORWARD, WHATEVER WE DO, WE SEE OUR EMPLOYEES BEING TREATED FAIRLY, AND WE NOT THROW THEM AWAY.
I WON'T DO THAT. THAT'S BEEN MY BIGGEST CONCERN ALL ALONG IS THAT THIS IS A BENEFIT TO THE EMPLOYEES AND NOT A DETRIMENT TO THEM.
AS LONG AS WE CAN DO THAT, I'M FINE WITH GOING.
MY READING ON THIS THING IS, AND IT'S JUST MY FEELING, IS THAT KENT COUNTY REALLY IS NOT AS CONCERNED AS WE ARE ABOUT THE STRUCTURE.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO REACH A POINT WHERE WE MAY SAY, THE OTHER TWO COUNTIES ARE OKAY.
WE'RE THE ONES THAT ARE SAYING, NO.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.
>> I THINK AUTHORITY PROTECTS.
LIKE I SAID, IF SOMEBODY WORKS FOR QUEEN ANNE'S THEY'RE ALREADY WORKING FOR AN AUTHORITY, SO THEY CAN GET RID OF YOU EITHER WAY.
BUT I THINK THE AUTHORITY DOES PROTECT A LITTLE BIT BETTER PROTECTION FOR EVERYBODY.
>> THEN THE EMPLOYEE ISSUE FROM MY STANDPOINT IS REALLY NOT SO MUCH OF A LONG TERM ISSUE AS JUST MAKING SURE, IN THE TRANSITION, ALL THE EMPLOYEES ARE TREATED FAIRLY.
THE EMPLOYEES THAT WANT TO KEEP THEIR POSITION, OBVIOUSLY, IT MAY NOT BE IN CAROLINE COUNTY ANYMORE, BUT WHO STILL WANT TO BE EMPLOYED, ARE STILL EMPLOYED.
>> IT'LL WORK ITSELF OUT IN THE LONG RUN.
THE INITIAL TRANSITION IS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS GOING TO COME. DO YOU AGREE, CHARLES?
>> THAT'S GOT TO BE SPELLED OUT IN THE AGREEMENT.
>> I DON'T HAVE, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE PLANNING ON RETIRING, HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT TO GO.
BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE PROTECT OUR PEOPLE.
>> TODD MOHN, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, HE DID GATHER INFORMATION FROM ALL THREE JURISDICTIONS ABOUT HOW MANY EMPLOYEES EACH OF US HAD, HOW MANY YEARS OF SERVICE THEY HAD, TO GAUGE LEVELS, AND WHO WAS APPROACHING RETIREMENT.
HE HAS COLLECTED THAT INFORMATION.
BUT WHAT WE FOUND WAS WHEN LOOKING AT THE DESIGN OF THE FACILITY, HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE NEEDED, WE DON'T HAVE A NUMBER FOR THAT YET BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE FACILITY IS CONSTRUCTED.
WHICH IS MORE IN CHARLES, WARDEN SCOTT'S, AREA OF EXPERTISE, NOT MINE.
BUT DEPENDING ON HOW THE SYSTEM IS LAID OUT, WILL DETERMINE HOW MANY EMPLOYEES ARE NEEDED.
EVEN KNOWING THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES DOESN'T REALLY GET US TO OUR ANSWER.
NOT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO WANT TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY UP THERE IF YOU LIVE DOWN IN FEDERALSBURG.
>> BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> IS THAT IT? [NOISE] GOOD. COUNTY COMMISSIONER OPEN DISCUSSION PERIOD.
COMMISSIONER BARTS, DO YOU WANT TO GO FIRST?
[County Commissioners Open Discussion Period]
>> WE JUST GOT BACK FROM MACO I THINK THERE WERE SOME GOOD DISCUSSIONS DOWN THERE PRIMARILY FOR PEOPLE THAT YOU COULD GET TOGETHER AND TALK TO ONE ON ONE.
I THINK THE SESSIONS WERE PRETTY GOOD.
THERE WAS A LOT OF NETWORKING GOING ON DOWN THERE, AND OPPORTUNITIES TO DISCUSS ISSUES.
WHILE I WAS DOWN THERE, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH BRUCE BEREANO, AND HUNTER FAIRCHILD, WHO IS THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPER OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES BUILDING.
I THINK AT THIS POINT THE DETAILS HAVE ALL BEEN WORKED OUT WITH THE DEVELOPER AS FAR AS THE LEASE RATE, AND THAT TYPE OF THING.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S IN THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES BUDGET, AND DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES BUDGET.
THE NEXT GOAL IS TO GET IT INTO THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET AND KEEP IT THERE.
I THINK ALL OF THE GROUNDWORK, LEG WORK, HAS BEEN DONE.
IT'S A MATTER NOW OF JUST MAKING SURE THAT THE FUNDING STAYS THERE.
I THINK THE NUMBERS, AS FAR AS LEASING, IT'S A LOT OF MONEY, BUT I THINK THAT ABSOLUTELY THERE NEEDS TO BE A NEW BUILDING.
[03:10:07]
IT'LL GREATLY IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATION.BRUCE IS ON IT AND HE'S AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
ON THE WAY TO MACO, I SPOKE WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE GREENSBURG FIRE COMPANY, AND WITH THE MAYOR ABOUT THE JOINT USE AGREEMENT OF THE ROAD GOING INTO THE NORTH COUNTY PARK AND THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.
I THINK THAT HAS BEEN IRONED OUT.
I THINK THE HOLDUP WAS, IF THE ROAD NEEDS TO BE RESURFACED WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE.
I THINK, AS FAR AS I KNOW, AND I'M LOOKING FOR WOOD HERE, THOSE ISSUES ARE EITHER BEING RESOLVED, OR HAVE BEEN RESOLVED.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD ANOTHER ROAD IN THERE, WHICH WOULD NOT HAVE MADE ANY SENSE.
I HAD A COUPLE OF CONVERSATIONS WITH ROBIN YESTERDAY ABOUT GOODEN ROAD, MR. [INAUDIBLE] AND I THINK HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO RESOLVE QUESTIONS WITH HIM.
ROBIN, I APPRECIATE YOUR TAKING THE PHONE CALLS AND TALKING.
ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK WITH HIM, OR WHAT IS THE PLAN HERE?
>> I ACTUALLY HAVE A PLAQUE WITH ME TODAY THAT WAS [INAUDIBLE] THIS MEETING'S A LITTLE LONGER THAN I THOUGHT [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER]
>> I JUST THINK IT'S A RESOLVABLE SITUATION.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HIM WANTING TO BE ABLE TO GET FARM EQUIPMENT DOWN THE ROAD, AND WE SHOULD CERTAINLY WORK WITH HIM TOWARD BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.
>> WE DID MAKE THIS SUBMISSION DEADLINE ON THE SHARP ROAD PARK PROJECT TO THE TOWN OF DENTON.
WE ARE SCHEDULED TO BE IN FRONT OF THE TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE JANUARY 28TH MEETING.
THERE HAS BEEN SOME PUBLIC COMMENT OR CONCERN ABOUT LIGHTING THE PLAYING SURFACES THERE.
I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO SOLICIT YOUTH ATHLETIC ORGANIZATIONS TO COME AND SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF BUILDING THE NEW BASEBALL AND SOFTBALL FIELD OUT AT SHARP ROAD BEHIND THE FOOD LINE HERE IN TOWN, AND LIGHTING BOTH OF THOSE FIELDS.
HOPEFULLY, A FUNDING IS AVAILABLE.
I PLAN ON ATTENDING THE JANUARY 28TH MEETING, SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE A PRESENTATION TOGETHER.
I THINK JAMIE IS PROBABLY GOING TO WORK ON THAT, BUT ANY SUPPORT THAT WE CAN GIVE HER IN PUTTING THAT TOGETHER, OUR PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR, JAMIE BEECHEY.
ALSO RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM KIM KRATOVIL, AND SHE HAS ASKED, SHE IS SENATOR BEN CARDIN'S, EASTERN SHORE REPRESENTATIVE, IN REGARDS TO THE FONSI, FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, WHICH WE HAVE A VERBAL CONFIRMATION THAT THE FONSI IS APPROVED, BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE SIGNED FONSI FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
AS OF DECEMBER 14TH, SHE HAD NOT RECEIVED A TIMELINE FOR THE SIGNATURE BACK FROM THEM YET.
I BELIEVE THAT IS THE LAST MAJOR HURDLE, FROM A FUNDING STANDPOINT, THAT WE ARE WAITING FOR BEFORE WE CAN START CONSTRUCTION OF NORTH COUNTY PARK.
THE SHARED ROAD USE AGREEMENT THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT WAS ONE I HAVE NOT HEARD IF WE'RE STILL WAITING ON SOME FORM OF BLESSING FROM STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION TO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO USE THE DNR MONEY TO DO THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STATE HIGHWAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S STILL TIED UP.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
MAYBE JAMIE HAS MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
DELEGATE MARK KORMAN'S VISIT IS THIS FRIDAY.
I STILL NEED A CONTACT FOR CHENEY.
IF I WANTED TO TALK TO BRUCE OR STEVE, AND FIND OUT ACTUALLY HOW LONG THE DELEGATE WAS GOING TO BE IN THE COUNTY, WE MAY NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT ANY OF THESE SURFACE MINING FACILITIES.
BUT I THOUGHT IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA IF I COULD GET US IN TO CHENEY, OR SOME OF THE OTHER FACILITIES TO SHOW THE DELEGATE THE OTHER PRESSURES ON AGRICULTURE OTHER THAN SOLAR.
I HAVE REACHED OUT TO A FEW FACILITY OWNERS, BUT I STILL WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO CHENEY POTENTIALLY, IF THEY HAVE ENOUGH TIME.
IF YOU TALK TO BRUCE OR STEVE, LET ME KNOW HOW LONG HE'S PLANNING ON BEING AROUND.
[03:15:03]
BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL RIGHT THERE TOGETHER.THE SOLAR ARRAY AND A LOT OF THESE SURFACE MINING OPERATIONS ARE RIGHT THERE IN THE SAME VICINITY.
>> I HEARD FROM STEVE THIS MORNING.
HE WANTS TO TALK TO US ABOUT AN ITINERARY.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TO DO IF WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME.
WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE AIB, ACCOUNTABILITY IMPLEMENTATION BOARD FOR BLUEPRINT THAT CAROLINE COUNTY'S IMPLEMENTATION PLAN HAS BEEN APPROVED, AND THAT LETTER WAS DATED DECEMBER 12TH.
WE WERE ALSO NOTIFIED THAT THE FEDERALSBURG BETTER TOGETHER WAS NOT SELECTED AS A TRACK 2, BUT WAS SELECTED AS A TRACK 1 COMMUNITY FOR THE GOVERNOR'S ENOUGH GRANT.
I GOT TO DO A LITTLE MORE RESEARCH AND REFRESH ON WHAT EXACTLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRACK 1 AND TRACK 2 WAS.
I'LL HOLD MY COMMENT UNTIL I GET A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
I THINK I HAVE A HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL MEETING THIS WEEK, I THINK TOMORROW.
MAYBE I CAN GET A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION.
THE FARM BUREAU BANQUET, I BELIEVE WE WERE ALL INVITED TO THAT JANUARY 6TH AT 6:30.
>> CAN I ADD TO THE FRIDAY KORMAN MEETING?
>> BRUCE BEREANO WAS ASKING FOR SOME, I'M SURE YOU'RE GOING TO BRING ANY MAPS OR SUPPLIES OF ANY MAPS THAT LESLIE HAS WITH GIS, WITH THE FARM LAND, WITH PREFERENTIAL FARM LAND.
REMEMBER THE MAP SHE SHOWED US WITH THE PREFERENTIAL FARMLAND?
>> YES. CAN WE GET SOME OF THAT?
>> EVERY MAP WE CAN GET OUR HANDS ON [OVERLAPPING]
>> SHE'S PROBABLY WATCHING, OR SHE CAN GO BACK AND WATCH IT.
>> ANYWAY WE WOULD LIKE SOME MAPS OF CAROLINE COUNTY.
THE AREA THAT WE'RE AT, BUT AN OVERALL MAP, AND PLUS THE AREA WE'RE AT ON PREFERENTIAL FARMLAND, AND JUST HOW IT BREAKS DOWN, AND ALL THAT GOOD INFORMATION.
>> WE HAVE THAT, AND I HAVE YOUR OTHER ONE THAT'S BEING FINALIZED TODAY FOR THE SOLAR [INAUDIBLE]
>> YOU COULD PUT THAT IN YOUR ITINERARY.
>> I THINK JAMIE'S GOT A BIG PRINTER SO YOU CAN PRINT IT OUT BIG.
WE GIVE YOU APPROVAL TO SPEND THE EXTRA MONEY AND PRINT IT BIG.
>> DON'T GET US LITTLE [LAUGHTER] SHEETS. PRINT IT BIG.
>> WE CAN HIRE SOME DRONES AND SET IT ALL UP.
[LAUGHTER] NICE DISPLAY. THAT'S ALL.
>> WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER STATUTORY AUTHORITY GENERAL PROVISION ARTICLE 3-305 (B)7 TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE.
NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER PORTER.
>> COMMISSIONER BREEDING. AYE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.