[00:03:36]
>> GOOD? GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY 11TH,
[Call to Order: Invocation,]
2025, CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING, WHICH IS NOW IN ORDER.THIS MORNING, WE HAVE OUR INVOCATION BY REVEREND GREGORY BLACKSTON OF IN GOD WE TRUST OF DENTON, AND THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SO IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE RISE.
REVEREND, THANK YOU FOR COMING HERE.
>> THANK YOU, SIR [NOISE] LET'S PRAY.
FATHER GOD, WE COME IN THE NAME OF JESUS, LORD GOD.
LORD AS I STAND TO PRAY FOR OUR CAROLINECO COMMISSIONERS AND ALL THOSE THAT WORK WITH THEM AND FOR THEM, I PRAY THAT YOU WILL STRENGTHEN THEM WITH WISDOM AND GRACE FOR THE HEAVY BURDENS THAT THEY CARRY.
MAY THEY MANAGE THEIR TEAMS AND PROJECTS WITH LOVE.
HELP LEAD THEM IN MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION THAT ALIGN WITH WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ACCOMPLISH IN YOUR WILL AND IN YOUR PLAN.
GOD, GIVE THEM WISDOM ON HOW TO BEST REPRESENT EVERYONE, GIVE OUR LEADERS CARE SO THAT EVEN WHEN THINGS GET HARD, THEY WILL CONTINUE BOLDLY REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUENTS' NEEDS.
MAY EACH PUT A HIGH VALUE ON JUSTICE,
[00:05:01]
RIGHTEOUSNESS, HONESTY, AND SERVICE, GOD, AND WE ASK THAT YOU WOULD EVEN BLESS THIS COUNTY AND MAKE IT BETTER, LORD, MAKE IT WHOLE.BIND PEOPLE TOGETHER, LORD LIKE NEVER BEFORE, LORD GOD.
WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL BLESS EVERY DEPARTMENT THAT OPERATES, IN JESUS' NAME, AMEN.
>> Y'ALL, WE'LL NOW HAVE OUR OPENING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK DURING OUR OPENING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD?
[Public Comment]
YES, MA'AM. PLEASE COME UP TO THE TABLE HERE. STATES YOUR NAME.I LIVE IN RIVERTON AVENUE IN DENTON.
CAME TO COMMENT ON THE ISSUE WHICH EVIDENTLY AROSE ABOUT THE FRONT DOOR OF THE COURTHOUSE.
WHEN WE FIRST MOVED IN HERE, I ADMIRED THE BACK OF THE COURTHOUSE BECAUSE I HAVE A GRANDFATHER WHO WAS A BRICKLAYER AND IT'S A DIFFERENT BRICK, AND THE STYLE BETWEEN THE FRONT OF THE COURTHOUSE AND THE BACK WAS MARKET.
I AM OLD ENOUGH THAT I REMEMBER THE BRICK DORMITORIES AT UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, AND THAT'S WHAT I SAID TO MY HUSBAND.
THE FRONT IS LIKE THE DORMS BECAUSE WE'RE BOTH OLD, IN UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND.
PROBABLY ALL HIGH RISES NOW [NOISE] BUT IT WAS A VERY COMPREHENSIVE ARTICLE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST LIKE OLD ANTIQUE THINGS.
I'M VERY FOND OF MY HUSBAND FOR THAT REASON.
I CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY SOMEBODY WOULD WANT TO PUT AN ANTIQUE DOOR ON THE FRONT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND FRONT OF THE COURTHOUSE.
ALSO, I THINK MOST CITIZENS OF THE COUNTY WOULD NOT APPRECIATE, WHAT I'M SURE WOULD BE AN EXTREMELY HIGH RATE TO GET WHATEVER IS A MARKEDLY OLD-LOOKING DOOR AND STILL HAVE THE NECESSARY SECURITY.
WE UNFORTUNATELY LIVE IN A TIME WHEN THE SECURITY MARKING THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR PROPERTY TO BE, X-RAY OR WHATEVER IT IS.
ALSO, I'VE SEEN YOUTUBE VIDEOS WHERE PEOPLE ARE JUMPING OVER TO GET TO THE JUDGE IN A CASE.
THAT'S THE LIFE WE LIVE IN AND AS I SAID, I THINK MOST PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY, AND THERE ARE NECESSARY EXPENDITURES IN THE COUNTY, AND I THINK THAT'S A NECESSARY EXPENDITURE.
THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR IT DOES NOT HAVE TO LOOK MUD BRICK, MUD UGLY ON THE FRONT, BUT THOSE SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD COME FROM THE SECURITY PEOPLE WHO WILL BE INVOLVED.
I'M SURE THERE CAN BE AN ATTRACTIVE DOOR THAT'S ALSO SECURE.
I THINK MOST PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY WOULD REALLY PREFER WHERE NECESSARY MONEY GOES TOWARD PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY.
WE'RE ONE OF THE POOR COUNTIES IN THE STATE, AND I THINK WE HAVE LOTS OF GOOD THINGS WE CAN DO FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY BEFORE THERE WOULD BE AN UNNECESSARY EXPENDITURE. THANK YOU.
>> YOU'RE NOT OLD. IF YOU SAY YOU'RE OLD, YOU MAKE ME OLD [LAUGHTER]
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE SOLAR SITUATION.
>> I WAS VERY GLAD TO SEE THAT THE OLD LANDFILL WILL BE USED FOR SOLAR, THAT SEEMS A GREAT USE FOR AFFECTED LAND, LET'S SAY.
THE PROJECT THAT'S HAPPENING BETWEEN GREENSBORO AND GOLDSBORO, TO ME, IS UPSETTING SO MUCH.
WHAT WAS IRRIGATED FARMLAND IS BEING USED FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES.
I WOULD HOPE AND I WOULD THINK THAT LAND THAT GETS USED FOR SOLAR SHOULD BE LAND THAT'S MARGINAL AT BEST FOR FARMING OR MUCH OF ANYTHING, MAYBE IT DOESN'T DRAIN WELL, NASTY CLAY.
I DON'T KNOW. BUT AS A FARM OWNER, I DO GET OFFERS ALL THE TIME FROM SOLAR THINGS AND I RECYCLE THOSE.
I'M NOT INTERESTED IN THAT, I WANT FARMLAND.
[00:10:01]
>> TIP. WE ARE FIGHTING TO TRY TO PUT REASONABLE GUIDELINES IN TO TRY TO DIRECT SOLAR TO THE TYPES OF AREAS THAT YOU DESCRIBED, BUT THE STATE HAS SET VERY AMBITIOUS RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS, AND THEY ARE BASICALLY BRUSHING US OUT OF THE WAY.
>> NO, I COMMEND YOU FOR [OVERLAPPING] WORKING ON THAT.
>> JUST SO THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT ALL AUTHORITY THAT THE THREE OF US HAVE HERE IS DELEGATED TO US BY THE STATE.
REALLY THE WAY THE CONSTITUTION, STRUCTURE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENT IS THAT THE POWER RESIDES WITH THE STATES.
IF THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING, THEY CAN COME IN AND TAKE BACK WHATEVER THEY HAVE DELEGATED TO US, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING AT THIS POINT.
>> I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION AND MAYBE YOU DON'T KNOW.
IT'S NOT REALLY IN YOUR BETA WICK, BUT THE POWER THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE GENERATED FROM THAT BIG PROJECT UP THERE, I KNOW IT GOES INTO THE GRID SOMEWHERE AND SOMEHOW, ETC, BUT IF IT WAS JUST USING CAROLINE COUNTY, IS THERE ANY IDEA OF HOW MUCH OF OUR POWER THAT WOULD GENERATE OR COULD GENERATE?
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE USE HERE.
BUT I DO KNOW THAT IT IS GOING ON THE GRID AND IT GOES EAST COAST-WIDE, POSSIBLY EVEN NATIONWIDE, SO WE DO HEAVILY TAX THAT.
CURRENTLY, IT DOES GO INTO AN INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT, IT COMES OUT OF AN AG ASSESSMENT, GOES INTO AN INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROPERTY VALUE, SO THERE IS A LARGE INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE THAT THE COUNTY RECEIVES.
WE ALSO CHARGE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ON ELECTRICAL GENERATION EQUIPMENT.
THERE IS A SIZABLE TAX BILL THAT GOES TO THE DEVELOPER OR TO THE COMPANY FOR ALL THE PANELS AND THE POWER GENERATION EQUIPMENT AS WELL.
BUT IN RELATION TO HOW MUCH POWER THE COUNTY USES, I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT STAT ANYWHERE.
I'M SURE IT'S AROUND SOMEWHERE.
>> I THINK IT GOES TO THE GRID AND IT'S DISTRIBUTED FROM THERE.
I'VE HEARD SOME PEOPLE, THERE WAS ONE PERSON THAT LIVES UP IN THAT AREA WHO WAS MAD BECAUSE WE HADN'T NEGOTIATED SOME KIND OF A DEAL WHERE THAT ELECTRIC WOULD GO TO HIS HOUSE OR I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.
WE DON'T NEGOTIATE DEALS WITH UTILITY COMPANIES.
LOOK, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS AS WE GO FORWARD, BUT I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT BACK IN 2017, WE HELD A NUMBER OF HEARINGS.
WE HAD INPUT FROM SOLAR COMPANIES, WE HAD INPUT FROM FARMERS, WE HAD INPUT FROM EVERYONE.
WE CAME UP WITH THIS ORDINANCE OF CAPPING THE SOLAR AT 2,000 ACRES.
THE PROBLEM THAT WE FACE HERE TODAY AND THE PROBLEM THAT WE FACED AT THAT POINT WAS IT'S DIFFICULT TO TELL SOMEONE YOU DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO SELL YOUR FARM OR LEASE YOUR FARM.
AT THAT TIME, WHEN YOU THINK BACK TO 2017, SOLAR WAS REALLY NEW. IT WAS JUST COMING.
YOU KNOW WHAT IT COSTS TO GROW AN ACRE OF CORN OR AN ACRE OF SOYBEANS.
WHEN SOMEBODY WALKS IN AND HANDS YOU SOMETHING AND SAYS, HERE, I GUARANTEE, I'M GOING TO PAY YOU THIS MUCH MONEY AND ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS SIT IN YOUR HOUSE, LOOK, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO JUMPED AT IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY FEEL IT'S STILL A GOOD IDEA.
WE JUST SENT OUT A LETTER AND A 34-POINT QUESTIONNAIRE TO PEOPLE ASKING THEM TO CONSIDER, NOT TELLING THEM THEY CAN'T, BUT ASKING THEM TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE HISTORICAL PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN GENERATED BY THIS.
PEOPLE WERE TOLD, WE'LL TAKE THESE PANELS OFF, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GO RIGHT BACK IN AND FARM.
NO, YOU WON'T. THEY'RE STRIPPING TOPSOIL.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO.
IT WASN'T EXPLAINED ABOUT TAXES.
WHO'S GOING TO PAY THE INCREASE IN TAXES? ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE COMING BACK NOW.
LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, WHEN DEALS HAVE BEEN MADE AND
[00:15:02]
PEOPLE STOP SEEING THE DOLLAR SIGNS AND START SEEING THE REALITY, THEN THEY COME BACK, AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY WANT US TO DEAL WITH.WELL, YOU DIDN'T BRING US YOUR LEASES TO LOOK AT BEFORE YOU SIGNED THEM.
RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A BILL RIGHT HERE THAT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED, WAS DROPPED ON ONE OF THE LAST DAYS BEFORE ANYBODY REALLY COULD TALK ABOUT IT OR LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE.
THIS BASICALLY PREEMPTS EVERY COUNTY FROM BASICALLY ANY CONTROL OF NOT ONLY SITING OF UTILITY-SCALE OR FACILITIES BUT EVEN THE TAXING OF IT.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT EVERYBODY WAS WAITING FOR AND IT GOT DROPPED LAST WEEK, AND IT'S FROM WESTERN SHORE PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT THE WESTERN SHORE SHOULD BE LEFT AND ALL THE SOLAR PANELS SHOULD COME OVER HERE.
THERE WERE COURT CASES THAT WERE FILED BACK IN 2016, 2017, WHERE THE COURTS RULED THAT THE STATE HAD THE RIGHT TO OVERRIDE OR PREEMPT COUNTIES WHEN IT CAME TO LAND CONTROL OR ZONING.
WHEN WE CAME BACK AND SAID, WELL, WAIT A BIT, YOU CAN'T OVERWRITE, THEY SAID YEAH.
IS IT WASHINGTON COUNTY? WASHINGTON COUNTY VERSUS THE STATE OF MARYLAND.
HERE'S WHAT THE COURT RULED. LONG DUMB ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, BUT NO.
WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THE ELECTRIC'S BEING USED.
>> THERE'S ANOTHER ENTITY HERE INVOLVED THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
IT'S A PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, WHICH IS PRETTY MUCH STACKED.
AGAIN, IT'S ALREADY SET UP TO HANDLE THIS AND FAST-TRACK EVERYTHING THAT THEY WANT TO DO.
THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DOESN'T EVEN PUT UP ANY ROADBLOCKS.
THEY JUST PUT A RUBBER STAMP ON IT AND IT MOVES ON THROUGH THE DOOR.
THEY'RE THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THIS.
>> IN THIS STORY, WE WILL DEFINITELY BALANCE COST AND I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO SEE A POLISHED ALUMINUM DOOR THAT REALLY DID NOT FIT THE LOOK OF THE FRONT OF THE COURTHOUSE.
WE'LL BALANCE THAT OUT AND MAKE SURE IT'S SOMETHING EXORBITANT THAT'S TOO COSTLY, BUT WE'LL WORK THROUGH THAT.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL SO THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? MOVING ALONG.
ACTUALLY, BEFORE WE GO IN, I WANT TO BRING UP ONE THING.
IT'S TIME SENSITIVE, SO I'M GOING TO JUMP IN THE AGENDA HERE.
I HAD A CALL WITH SENATOR CHRIS WEST OF BALTIMORE COUNTY YESTERDAY, ZOOM CALL.
HE HAD HEARD ABOUT OUR OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 606, WHICH OUR INTERPRETATION WAS THAT IT GAVE FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL TO A TENANT TO PURCHASE A HOUSE AND PROPERTY FROM THE LANDLORD SHOULD THE LANDLORD LIST THE PROPERTY FOR SALE.
THAT LAW ACTUALLY PASSED LAST YEAR, WHICH WE DID NOT REALIZE THAT, AND THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO CLEAN UP THE LAW THAT WAS PASSED.
I THINK THAT'S A RECURRING THEME THAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IS THAT THEY JUST THROW SOMETHING UP AGAINST THE WALL, AND THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND CLEAN IT UP LATER.
WHAT HE DESCRIBED TO ME WAS A SITUATION WHERE A RENTAL PROPERTY IS SOLD TO A THIRD-PARTY PURCHASER.
THE THIRD-PARTY PURCHASER ATTEMPTS TO GET TITLE INSURANCE, CORRECT? IT MAY BE BETTER FOR YOU TO LAY OUT THE PROCESS BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT BETTER THAN I DO.
>> WHAT IT DOES IS IT ENCUMBERS LIKE A MORTGAGE OR AN EASEMENT.
PERSON'S REAL ESTATE, IF IT HAPPENS TO HAVE A COUPLE OF TENANTS IN IT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED, IT WOULD INCLUDE YOU MIGHT HAVE A FARM AND YOU'D HAVE A FARMHOUSE ON IT THAT YOU'VE BEEN RENTING OUT TO SOMEBODY.
WHAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S BILL HAS DONE, AND I'M NOT SURE IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL, IS TAKEN AWAY THAT RIGHT OF THE LANDOWNER TO FREELY SELL HIS PROPERTY WITH NO COMPENSATION.
THEY HAVE IMPOSED THIS RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL, WHICH IS A TYPE OF OPTION.
[00:20:03]
THERE'S NOTHING IN THE LAND RECORDS ON YOUR PROPERTY.THERE'S THIS STATUTE THAT CREATED OUT OF THIN AIR, THIS RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.
IF YOU SELL A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND YOU HAVE NOT GOTTEN A RELEASE OF THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL, THEN YOU HAVEN'T CONVEYED FEE SIMPLE MARKETABLE TITLE.
THE TITLE INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE A TITLE SEARCH PERFORMED, THEY REVIEW THE STATE OF THE TITLE AND I THINK WHAT WAS GOING ON WAS THAT THE TITLE COMPANIES WERE GOING, FIRST OF ALL, WHO WERE THE TENANTS AT THE TIME THAT YOU GOT THE FIRST CONTRACT THAT YOU WANT TO CONSUMMATE YOUR CONTRACT, BUT YOU HAVE TO PIVOT AND OFFER IT TO EXISTING TENANTS.
EITHER ONE OF THEM, TWO OF THEM, THREE OF THEM.
THE WHOLE THING IS A MESS AND SO WHAT IS THE TITLE SEARCH PERSON SUPPOSED TO DO? THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CHAIN OF TITLE THAT SAYS THERE'S A RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL, BUT THE STATE STATUTE SAYS THERE IS.
WE HAVE TO BE SATISFIED THAT WE'RE NOT VIOLATING THAT RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.
THE WHOLE THING IS A MESS AND POORLY THOUGHT OUT AND POORLY WRITTEN AND NOT SURE IS CONSTITUTION.
>> THE SHORT OF IT WAS, WHAT SENATOR WEST LAID OUT TO ME WAS A SITUATION WHERE TITLE COMPANY EXCLUDES COVERAGE SHOULD THEY BE SUED BY A TENANT WHO WASN'T OFFERED FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL.
THE LENDER SEES THAT EXCLUSION AND SAYS, WAIT A MINUTE, WE'RE NOT LOANING YOU THE MONEY BECAUSE THIS TENANT COULD COME BACK AND SUE YOU BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS OWNER DIDN'T GIVE THEM FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL.
IT'S BLOWING UP ALL KINDS OF DEALS ACROSS THE STATE.
THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE WORDING IN CODE OR TO BASICALLY ONLY ALLOW A TENANT TO SUE THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND NOT THE NEW OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
HE THINKS THAT THIS IS A POSSIBLE WAY TO GIVE TITLE COMPANY OR INSURANCE COMPANIES ENOUGH INSULATION TO ACTUALLY ISSUE A POLICY, WHICH AS STEWART AND I DISCUSSED YESTERDAY, WE DON'T THINK THAT THAT NECESSARILY IS THE CASE, BUT ANYWAY, IT'S A FIX.
WELL, MY ASK IS IS THAT WE JUST RETRACT OUR LETTER OF OPPOSITION AND JUST LET IT GO.
>> THERE ARE GOING TO BE ABOUT 3,000 BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO BE INTRODUCED DURING THIS LEGISLATURE AND YOU COULD TIE THOSE WORDS TO JUST ABOUT 2,800 OF THEM.
POORLY WRITTEN, POORLY THOUGHT ABOUT.
AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO, IF YOU OWN A HOUSE, YOU'RE RENTING IT TO SOMEONE AND YOU DECIDE TO SELL THAT HOUSE, YOU SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELL THAT HOUSE.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE AN OFFER, IF THE TENANT WANTS TO BUY IT? FINE. YOU SHOULD NOT BE HELD UP.
MY QUESTION WOULD BE, HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO WAIT?
>> IT LAYS ALL THAT OUT IN THE STATUTE, IT'S LIKE FIVE DAYS.
>> WHAT TENANT IS GOING TO BE ABLE REALISTICALLY TO GO AND GET A MORTGAGE IN FIVE DAYS? IS THAT WHAT IT'S SAYING? THAT THEY GOT TO GO BORROW THE MONEY TO BUY THE HOUSE?
>> THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT A 30 DAY PROVISION. YOU HAVE TO FILE.
>> THERE'S ALL KINDS OF DATES.
>> THE OWNER HAS TO FILE A NOTICE WITH THE STATE OFFICE OF LANDLORD AND TENANT RELATIONS.
THIS CONTRACT THAT YOU'VE GOT FROM A POTENTIAL BUYER WHO IS NOW FILED WITH THE STATE.
>> BUT HOW IS A LANDLORD SUPPOSED TO KNOW ALL THIS?
THERE'S THE OLD SAYING THAT, IT'S EVERYBODY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE LAW, BUT IF YOU FIGURE OUT HOW MANY LAWS ARE PASSED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, A STATE LEVEL, AND YOU GUYS PASS LAWS ON THE COUNTY LEVEL, AND IF YOU LIVE IN THE TOWN, THERE'S MORE.
IT PASSED ANYWAY, AND HERE WE ARE NOW AS A CLEANUP.
ANYWAY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE WITHDRAWAL OR LETTER OF OPPOSITION FOR SENATE BILL 606.
[00:25:01]
>> MOTION SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE?
>> YOU HAVE TO PUT THAT REQUEST INTO WITHDRAWAL, FASCINATING.
>> THE REASON I JUMPED BECAUSE OF THAT HEARING IS TODAY.
WE WANT TO GET TO THAT RETRACTED BEFORE.
I NEED TO SEND HIM AN EMAIL AS WELL, LETTING HIM KNOW THAT WE VOTED TO DO THAT.
CAN YOU GET CINDY TO SEND SENATOR WEST OFFICE THAT? THANK YOU FOR THAT. SORRY TO JUMP IN THERE.
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, STEWART BARROLL, COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE LAW WITH A DISCUSSION OF CAROLINE COUNTY SOLAR.
[Discussion of Caroline County Solar]
>> WELL, AS THE COMMISSIONERS WILL RECALL, HAS INTERVENED IN AN APPLICATION TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF CHAPERON SOLAR PAHAR LLC.
THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO INSTRUCT A 3.0 MILLIWATT SOLAR VOLTAIC FACILITY NEAR FEDERALSBURG.
>> CAN YOU BRING YOUR MICROPHONE CLOSE.
>> OH, SORRY. HOPEFULLY, THIS IS A LITTLE BETTER.
MY THROAT IS A LITTLE BIT OFF.
THE COUNTY HAS INTERVENED IN IT.
WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
THE APPLICATION IS IN THIS BINDER.
IT'S ABOUT 200 PAGES. I HAVE READ IT.
WE HAVE OUTSIDE COUNSEL JESSE HAMMOCK OF EASTON, WHO'S DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB OF HELPING THE COUNTY DEAL WITH THIS APPLICATION.
THE APPLICATION INCLUDES PUTTING SOLAR IN A DISTRICT WHERE WE PROHIBITED, AND THE APPLICANT WAS TOLD THAT WHEN IT FIRST CONTACTED PLANNING AND CODES, AND WAS TOLD IT ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED UNDER COMAR WHEN THEY FILE THIS APPLICATION TO HAVE CONTACTED THE COUNTY AND GOTTEN THE COUNTY'S COMMENTS ON ITS APPLICATION.
WELL, AT THE STAGE THAT THEY CONTACTED THE COUNTY, THEY DID NOT HAVE A COMPLETE SITE PLAN.
THEY HAD A GENERAL CONCEPT OF WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO, BUT THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY THE DETAILS THAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BY COMAR.
WHEN WE RECEIVED THIS APPLICATION, THE COUNTY WAS SERVED WITH IT AS THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BE SERVED WITH IT, WE POINTED OUT IN A FILING TO THE PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE THAT THE APPLICATION IS NOT COMPLETE.
DOES NOT HAVE IN IT ALL THE MATERIALS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN IT ACCORDING TO COMAR.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE POWER PLANT RESEARCH PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FILED A PIECE OF PAPER THAT SAID THAT THEY HAD REFUTED IT AND THAT IT WAS COMPLETE.
THE PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE ISSUED AN ORDER, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN IN DECEMBER, I GUESS, THAT THE APPLICATION WAS COMPLETE AND WOULD PROCEED.
WE'VE HAD A PRE-HEARING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, AND SO WE'VE GOT THIS WHOLE THING TRACKED OUT.
THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, ONE IS GOING TO BE VIRTUAL, ONE IS GOING TO BE IN-PERSON.
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARE INVITED TO SIT WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S GOING TO BE HELD IN-PERSON.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION TODAY, BUT EVENTUALLY AS JESSE HAS FOUND FOR US.
THERE ARE SOME ON YOUTUBE, YOU CAN WATCH PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE A CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSIONER HAS SAT UP THERE WITH A PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE.
IT'S VAGUE AS TO WHAT YOUR ROLE IS, BUT YOU CAN SIT UP THERE AND HAVE THE PRESENTATION MADE TO YOU BY THE APPLICANT AND ALSO BY THE OPPONENTS TO THE PROJECT, SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DISCUSS FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, BUT ANYWAY, THAT ONE SO FAR AS OFF TO NOT THE BEST START FOR THE COUNTY, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT IS IN VIOLATION OF COUNTY CODE AND MISREPRESENTED ITS CONTACT WITH THE COUNTY IN THIS APPLICATION.
JESSE AND I ARE PUTTING THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON WHAT IN A CIVIL CASE, YOU WOULD CALL INTERROGATORIES.
THEIR REQUEST FOR DATA THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO ANSWER IN A RELATIVELY SHORT TIME PERIOD,
[00:30:01]
WHEN YOU'RE A PARTY, SUCH AS THE COUNTY IS, YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS IN WRITING THAT THEY HAVE TO FILE ANSWERS TO.EVENTUALLY, THE COUNTY CAN SUBMIT TESTIMONY IN THE FORM OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY FROM PEOPLE SUCH AS OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND CODES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT'S ONE CASE WE'RE WORKING ON.
I WAS OUT SICK LAST WEEK, BUT I CAME BACK TO SEE A STACK, AGAIN, THIS BIG FOR SOMETHING CALLED HALO, WHICH IS ANOTHER SOLAR PROJECT COMING AT US.
THAT'S WHY I HAVEN'T GOT MY HANDS AROUND THAT ONE YET, BUT FOLLOWING IN DIRECTION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE PREPARED A PETITION TO INTERVENE IN THAT ONE AS WELL.
I'M SURE CRYSTAL WOULD KNOW MUCH MORE ABOUT HALO THAN I DO AS TO WHAT IT CONSIST OF.
>> GOOD MORNING. THE HALO PROJECT IS IN NORTH COUNTY.
JUST NORTH OF THE TOWN OF GOLDSBORO.
IT'S ON THE REAR PORTION OF THE FARM.
THERE'S A RAILROAD RIGHT AWAY THAT GOES THROUGH ON THE FARM.
IT WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE REAR PORTION, I BELIEVE, ABOUT 40 ACRES IN SIZE.
THEY MEET ALL OF OUR COUNTY CODE REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS SOLAR CITING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE RECENT CHANGING TO THE 200 FOOT SETBACK.
THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PUT ON NOTICE THAT THEY DO NOT MEET THAT SETBACK.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WHEN THEY WERE PREPARING THEIR PLANS, THAT WAS IN PREPARATION WHEN THEY CHECKED OUR COUNTY CODE, AND WE HADN'T ADOPTED THAT YET, BUT OTHER THAN THAT HIGH LEVEL REVIEW OF WHAT'S GOING ON, THEY MEET ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE 200 FOOT SETBACK ON THE TWO SIDES IN THE REAR.
THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER OWNS THE ONE SIDE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY WOULD GRANT A SETBACK MODIFICATION THAT WE WOULD ALLOW.
THAT LEAVES JUST TWO OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE ADJACENT THAT IT WOULD CONFLICT WITH.
>> WELL, I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, WHEN WE MET WAS IF THEY MEET ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS AND IT'S UNDER THE 2,000 ACRES, ARE WE STILL INTERVENING, YES, BUT ARE WE STILL OPPOSING?
WE'RE GETTING CLOSER TO THE CATCH, BUT WE'RE NOT THERE YET.
>> CRYSTAL, I THINK WE SPOKE LAST WEEK ABOUT POSSIBLY PICKING UP THE PHONE AND CALLING THE APPLICANT?
>> JESSE WAS GOING TO WORK WITH MATT ON HOW WE WERE GOING TO HANDLE THAT.
>> LET ME GO BACK FOR A SECOND TO THE CHABERTON, TO THE ONE BEFORE.
LET ME JUST BREAK AND SEE IF I'VE GOT THIS CORRECT.
THESE PEOPLE APPLIED FOR A SOLAR PROJECT.
THE APPLICATION THEY SUBMITTED WAS NOT COMPLETE?
>> WE NOTIFIED THEM THAT IT WASN'T COMPLETE.
WHAT GROUP WAS IT THAT SAID IT WAS?
>> THEY FILED A CONCEPT PLAN WITH US, AND WE DIDN'T DIG INTO THE DETAILS OF IT BECAUSE FIRST AND FOREMOST, IT DIDN'T MEET THE RIGHT ZONING DISTRICT.
THE IMMEDIATE RESPONSE WAS, WE CAN'T PROCEED WITH ANY APPLICATION BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MEET OUR ZONING.
>> IT WAS NOT ALLOWED IN R1 ZONING, RESIDENTIAL 1, WHICH IS WHAT THIS AREA IS.
WE DIDN'T EVEN DO OR PROVIDE THEM WITH ANY COMMENTS.
>> WHO WAS THE GROUP THAT CAME BACK AND SAID THAT IT WAS?
>> POWER PLANT RESEARCH PROGRAM.
>> POWER PLANT RESEARCH. WHO ARE THEY?
>> PPRP. THEY ARE DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.
>> THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CAME IN AND SAID THAT A PROJECT THAT WE HAD SAID WAS NOT COMPLETE, WAS.
>> WE'RE GETTING STEAM ROLLED BY THE STATE.
>> WELL, WHO'S ON THIS POWER PLANT? THIS IS THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES?
>> BESIDES THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, NOW YOU HAVE ANOTHER ENTITY.
>> THEY'VE ALL BEEN TOLD THAT WE HAVE AN AMBITIOUS RENEWABLE ENERGY GOAL AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE BEEN TOLD. EVERYTHING THAT WE DO IS FUTILE.
>> I KNOW COMMISSIONER BREEDING WATCHED THE PSC HEARING.
I WATCHED IT. I MEAN, THERE WASN'T EVEN A DISCUSSION.
>> THE THE JUDGE LOOKED OVER THE MOTIONS FROM BOTH SIDES AND SAID.
>> THIS WAS A PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION JUDGE.
[00:35:01]
I'VE BEEN TO ONE IN GREENSBORO FIREHOUSE AND ONE IN GOLDSBORO FIREHOUSE.
I CALL IT THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION JUDGE WHO COMES IN AND ACTUALLY YOU GOT TO STAND UP WHEN HE COMES IN THE ROOM AND THE WHOLE THING.
THAT WAS THE ONE WHERE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION JUDGE DID NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT BATTERY STORAGE MEANT, CORRECT?
>> THAT'S THE SAME THING THAT THE JUDGE THAT MADE THIS DECISION, THEY'RE DIFFERENT.
>> WHEN WE SAY JUDGES, THIS IS NOT A JUDGE UP HERE.
THIS IS A PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION JUDGE.
DOES DOES THE CHABERTON PROJECT HAVE BATTERY STORAGE?
>> WELL, THEY CAN AMEND ALL THEY WANT.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DRAW A LINE HERE SOMEWHERE.
WE NEED TO REACH OUT TO DNR AND FIND OUT WHAT DNR IS DOING HERE BECAUSE IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN AND GET INVOLVED IN OVERRULING THIS, THEN WE NEED TO FIND THAT OUT TOO.
YEAH. I GUESS IT IS THE SITUATION, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT DNR HAS TO DO WITH A SOLAR THING IN CAROLINE COUNTY?
>> WELL, THEY DON'T. LOOK WE HAVE ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT COME INTO PLAY HERE.
IT'S INTERESTING DNR WOULD GET INVOLVED IN THIS.
I'M ON THE STATE CRITICAL AREAS COMMISSION, AND I'M ASKING RIGHT NOW, WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE CRITICAL AREAS COMMISSION IN APPROVALS HERE BECAUSE YOU LITERALLY AND I'M EXAGGERATING HERE, BUT NOT MUCH WHERE SOMEONE HAS SOMETHING IN A CRITICAL AREA AND THEY WANT TO PUT A FENCE IN.
THEY CAN'T EVEN DIG A HOLE FOR THE FENCE POST WITHOUT GOING OUT HERE AND GO.
BUT YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF SOLAR PANELS TO GO ON FIELDS WITHOUT THEM BEING INVOLVED.
WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT WHAT THEIR POSITION IS ON THIS AS WELL.
>> THERE'S A WHOLE HOST OF STATE AGENCIES THAT GET TO REVIEW THE APPLICATION CORRECT.
I MEAN, APPARENTLY, THIS IS WHAT I'M STARTING TO SEE IS THEY DON'T CARE WHAT PLANNING AND CODE SAYS.
ALL THEY RELY ON IS THE POWER PLANT RESEARCH PROJECT INSIDE A DNR, SOME AGENCY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, SOME AGENCY.
HOW MANY DIFFERENT AGENCIES GET TO LOOK AT THIS, WOULD YOU SAY?
I MEAN IT USED TO BE MANY YEARS AGO, YOU HAD SOMETHING CALLED THE A-95 CLEARINGHOUSE WHERE A PROJECT HAD TO GO TO A CLEARINGHOUSE AND ALL OF THE AGENCIES GOT TO COMMENT, AND ONE OF THE PROJECT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH OUR PLANS.
I UNDERSTAND AGENCIES REVIEWING, BUT WHY WOULD AN AGENCY STEP IN AND OVERRIDE OUR PLANNING COMMISSION OR CONTRADICT OUR PLANNING COMMISSION.
I MEAN, REVIEWING IT AND SAYING THAT IT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH DNR IS ONE THING, BUT NOT SAYING THAT'S WHAT GETS ME.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE'VE GOT AN AGENCY WHO'S BASICALLY OVERRIDING OUR DECISION OR STEPPING IN AND CONTRADICTING WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
DID DNR REACH OUT TO YOU ABOUT ANYTHING?
>> NO. THE ONLY CONVERSATIONS WE HAD WITH DNR WAS ON THE CHERRYWOOD SOLAR IN NORTH COUNTY.
PART OF THE CPCN APPROVAL STATED THAT DNR HAD APPROVED A PORTION OF AREA TO BE PUT UNDER FORCE CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
THEN WHEN WE REACHED OUT TO DNR AND SAID HOW ARE YOU TO DO THAT? THEY'RE LIKE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT.
YOU CAN HOLD THE EASEMENT. WE DON'T WANT IT.
BUT THEY REQUIRED IT AS PART OF THAT CPC AND APPROVAL.
BUT THEN WHEN TIME COME TO RECORD EASEMENTS AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, THEY PUNTED IT BACK TO US.
[00:40:01]
>> SO MUCH FOR NOT BEING INVOLVED WITH PROPERTIES WITH EASEMENTS.
>> AS FAR AS THE HALO, I MEAN, AS LONG AS IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, WE DON'T NEED TO OPPOSE IT.
>> WE WERE 400 ACRES LEFT PRIOR TO THIS 40 ACRE, AND WE HAVE THE PRESTON ONE, THEY'RE ADJACENT TO THE TOWN OF PRESTON, AND I THINK THAT'S ACCOUNTED IN THERE WITH THAT 400 STILL REMAINING, JUST NOT THIS 40 ACRE ONE.
>> WELL, THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON.
I MEAN IN THE MEANTIME, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS THIS PENDING BILL THAT COMMISSIONER PORTER WAS TALKING BEGINNING HERE ABOUT THIS WOULD BE A BILL THAT IF IT'S PASSED, PROHIBITS A COUNTY FROM ENACTING ZONING LAWS OR ADOPTING REGULATIONS RESTRICTING OR PROHIBITING THE CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION OF CERTAIN GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR SYSTEMS AND FACILITIES.
I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT BEATING AROUND THE BUSH WITH THIS ONE.
THIS ONE IS RIGHT IN YOUR FACE, COUNTIES.
>> WE'RE HAVING A MEETING TOMORROW MORNING THE MACO LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, AND MACO HAS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO OPPOSE THIS BILL.
NOW, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TOMORROW? I COULDN'T TELL YOU.
JUST GOING ON THE RECORD HERE.
THEY HAVE ESSENTIALLY STRIPPED ALL OF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AUTHORITY OVER SOLAR, LEGALLY, RIGHT?
>> I MEAN, WE'RE SEEING THAT RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGHT EVERY APPLICATION, AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEND TIME AND MONEY, FIGHTING EVERY APPLICATION, AND WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET STEAM ROLLED EVERY TIME.
THAT'S THE WAY IT'S LOOKING, AT LEAST STARTING THIS NEW CASE.
IN A WAY, IF THEY WANT IT I MEAN, THEY'VE ALREADY TAKEN IT.
IT'S JUST GOING TO COST US TIME AND DISTRACTION DEFENDING IT NOW.
THE REALLY EGREGIOUS THINGS IN THIS BILL ARE THE BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE COMPONENT, THE TAXING COMPONENT.
RIGHT NOW, THE PROJECT, IF YOU COMBINE THE PILOT FOR THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX AND THE REAL PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT CHANGE, WE ARE TAXING THAT AT ABOUT $9,370 A MEGAWATT.
UNDER THIS BILL, IT'LL REDUCE THAT TO MAXIMUM OF $5,000 A MEGAWATT.
THEY'RE GOING TO CUT ABOUT HALF OF OUR TAXING ABILITY, TAKE THAT AWAY FROM US IN THIS LEGISLATION? THEY'RE OPENING THE DOOR TO BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE TO GO ANYWHERE.
THEY ARE ALLOWING SALVAGE VALUE TO BE FACTORED IN FOR DECOMMISSIONING.
I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, PART OF ME SITTING HERE, PART OF ME WANTS THEM TO JUST TAKE IT.
WE SIT IN PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE JUST CHANGE THE SETBACKS TO 200 FEET.
>> I MEAN, CAN WE ENFORCE THAT? ULTIMATELY, IT'S UP TO THE PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE.
>> ONCE THEY FILED FOR THE CPCN.
>> IS THAT WHAT IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO? IS THE COUNTY GOING TO BE SITTING IN FRONT OF A PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE SAYING OUR CODE SAYS 200 FEET IS THE MINIMUM SETBACK, AND THAT JUDGE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REDUCE THAT, CORRECT?
>> YOU REMEMBER HER ORDINANCE, AS IT STANDS TODAY, IS STILL VALID.
IT EXISTS AND HAS THE FORCE OF LAW.
AN APPLICANT COMES IN FROM FLORIDA, DECIDES IT SIGNED UP A BUNCH OF FARMERS TO DO A FACILITY.
REGARDLESS OF THE ZONING, REGARDLESS OF ANY OF THE SETBACKS, DESIGNS A PROJECT, TAKES IT IN FOR THE CERTIFICATE.
COUNTY POINTS OUT, IT'S VIOLATES OUR CODE HERE.
[00:45:03]
IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE THERE FOR ALL THESE REASONS.IF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION GRANTS THE APPLICATION A CERTIFICATE THAT OVERRIDES THE EXISTING COUNTY LAW, WHICH STILL CONTINUES TO EXIST.
IT IS SIMPLY IGNORED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PROJECT.
I WAS JUST GOT BLESSED WITH A CERTIFICATE.
WHAT THIS IS SAYING IS A LITTLE BIT, I DON'T KNOW.
THIS SAYS, THE COUNTY'S NOT ALLOWED TO.
>> WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO IMPOSE ANYTHING OVER A 50 FOOT SETBACK, AND YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO IMPOSE ANYTHING OVER A SIX FOOT HIGH SCREENING TREE AND NO MORE THAN 10 PER 100 FEET OR SOMETHING.
I MEAN, IT LAYS OUT EVERYTHING.
>> I THINK THE POINT SHOULD BE MADE HERE THAT WHEN WE GO BACK TO THE TAXING ISSUE.
THIS IS AT A POINT, THIS IS AT A TIME WHEN IN THE CURRENT GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, WE ARE LOOKING AT TOTAL REDUCTIONS TO COUNTIES FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND IN REDUCTIONS OF $283 MILLION.
WE'RE LOOKING AT $143 MILLION BEING PUSHED FROM THE STATE TO THE COUNTIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COVER OF STATE EXPENSES AND THAT'S CALLED BUDGET REDUCTIONS.
IT'S SHIFTING THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PAYING FOR THINGS FROM THE STATE SIDE OF THE LEDGER TO THE COUNTY SIDE OF THE LEDGER.
AT THE TIME WHEN THESE REDUCTIONS AND COST SHIFTS ARE BEING MADE, THEY ARE COMING ALONG AND SAYING THEY'RE RESTRICTING OUR ABILITY TO GENERATE REVENUE THROUGH TAXES.
JUST STOP FOR A SECOND AND THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TELL ME TO FIX IS NOT IN ON THIS THING, YOU GOT A HARD TIME TELLING ME THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE BOUND AND DETERMINED THAT THESE THINGS ARE COMING.
THEY'RE GOING TO OVERRULE YOU AND SAYING WHERE THEY CAN GO, AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO RESTRICT THE AMOUNT THAT YOU CAN TAX THEM.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SITTING UP HERE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW.
$143, MILLION IN THIS CURRENT PROPOSED BUDGET IS BEING SHIFTED FROM THE STATE TO THE COUNTIES.
IN THIS COUNTY RIGHT NOW, WE'RE SETTING HERE, AND DANNY'S BACK THERE.
WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OVER 3 MILLION, AND WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO FOUR AND FOUR IT'S ALL OVER IT'LL BE FIVE.
THAT'S JUST, HERE IT IS, GUYS.
HERE'S YOUR BILL FROM THE STATE.
>> WELL, THE ONLY THING THAT I'M POINTING OUT HERE IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT THESE IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE APPLICATIONS OR INSERT OURSELVES INTO CONVERSATION TO DEFEND, I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M BEING TOLD IS, WE HAVE TO INSERT OURSELVES INTO CONVERSATION TO DEFEND OUR REGULATIONS IN FRONT OF A PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE.
EVERY TIME, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT.
UNLESS THEY VOLUNTARILY ADHERE TO IT.
THE APPLICANT CAN VOLUNTARILY ADHERE AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO, BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, ESPECIALLY NOT WHEN WE GET TO THE 2,000 ACRE CAP.
BECAUSE AT THAT POINT WE'RE GOING TO BE SITTING IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE SAYING, WELL, WE PASSED A 2,000 ACRE CAP, AND EVERY TIME IT'S GOING TO BE THE JUDGE'S DECISION ON WHETHER THAT CAP GETS ADHERED TOO OR NOT.
IT MAY BE A DIFFERENT JUDGE EVERY TIME.
BUT IT'S MONEY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND TO DEFEND THAT POSITION EVERY SINGLE TIME.
JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.
I THINK IT SHOULD REST AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
I BELIEVE WE KNOW OUR COUNTY BETTER THAN ANYBODY ELSE DOES.
CONSTITUENTS CAN COME UP AND TALK TO US AT ANY TIME.
BUT IT GIVES THE ILLUSION THAT WE ARE IN CONTROL WHEN REALLY THE PERSON THAT HAS CONTROL IS A PUBLIC UTILITY LAW JUDGE.
>> APPOINTED BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, WHICH IS APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR.
>> GIVEN STRICT ORDERS TO MEET THE RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.
THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
BUT ANYWAY, WE'LL OPPOSE THIS BILL.
SOUNDS LIKE MACO HOPEFULLY WILL TAKE AN OPPOSITION POSITION, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO FIGHT THE FIGHT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
[00:50:04]
>> I KNOW. THANKS, CRYSTAL. THANK YOU, STEWART.
NEXT UP, DANIEL FOX, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR AND STACEY STEWART, GRANT COORDINATOR WITH THE FISCAL YEAR 2025,
[Fiscal Year 2025 2nd Quarter Budget Report]
SECOND QUARTER BUDGET REPORT. GOOD MORNING.>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.
>> WE COME BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING TO GO OVER OUR SECOND QUARTER OF FY25, WHICH ENDS THE END OF DECEMBER.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR BEING A LITTLE LATER, BUT WITH BUDGET AND EVERYTHING GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN THE OFFICE, FINALLY GOT THIS RECONCILED OUT AND ARE COMING BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING.
I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A COPY OF THIS REPORT.
I'LL TALK THROUGH REVENUE AND WHERE WE'RE AT.
THEN I'LL END UP TURNING IT OVER TO STACY TO GO OVER THE EXPENSE SIDE OF THE REPORT.
JUST STARTING OFF, SAY AT THE VERY TOP OF REVENUE, WE ITEMIZE ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE CONSIDER PROPERTY TAXES.
THAT IS REAL PROPERTY AS WELL AS BUSINESS PERSONAL.
RIGHT NOW, OVERALL, WE'RE AT A 90% COLLECTION RATE, WHICH, BY THE END OF DECEMBER, REALLY 100% OF REAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE OWED, BUT WE DO HAVE SOME STRAGGLERS THAT COME ALONG THROUGH NOW, AND WE'LL BE CAUGHT UP WHEN WE ESSENTIALLY DO OUR TAX SALE IN MAY.
THAT'S REALLY PRETTY TYPICAL WITH WHAT WE SEE THIS TIME OF YEAR.
GOING ON DOWN TO INCOME TAX, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK, WE'RE ABOUT 35% OF INCOME TAX.
THAT'S ALSO FAIRLY TYPICAL FOR THIS TIME OF THE YEAR WITH THE WAY THAT WE RECEIVE PAYMENTS FROM THE STATE.
A LOT OF OUR LARGER PAYMENTS THAT MAKE UP OUR YEARLY TOTAL IN THIS COME AT THE SECOND HALF OF THE YEAR.
SO FAR EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE SEEN WITH INCOME TAX, WE WILL BE OUTPACING WHAT WAS BUDGETED.
REALLY CURIOUS HOW THAT FINISHES OUT FOR THIS YEAR AND PLAYING IN FOR FY26'S BUDGET.
BUT NEXT IN LINE, WE HAVE WHAT WE CONSIDER OTHER LOCAL TAXES.
WE HAVE MOBILE HOME, WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND 45%.
JUST SHY OF THE 50% MARK MAKES SENSE FOR THAT TYPE OF COLLECTION. THEY PAY MONTHLY.
A LOT OF THE DECEMBER PAYMENTS DON'T COME UNTIL THE MIDDLE OF JANUARY.
BEING SHORT, JUST SHY OF THE 50% MAKES SENSE JUST ON WHEN THAT GETS POSTED.
>> A LARGER LINE ITEM THAT'S A LITTLE BIT UNIQUE RIGHT NOW IS RECREATION TAX.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK, WE'RE ABOUT 76% COLLECTED ON RECREATION TAX.
AGAIN, THIS IS A TAX ON THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY OR IT GETS TAXED TO ANY NEW CONSIDERATION OR LOAN BEING PULLED OUT ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS EACH YEAR SEEMS TO OUTPACE ANY PROJECTION THAT WE HAVE WITH INTEREST RATES AT ONE TIME, FAIRLY HIGH.
I KNOW THEY'VE TRICKLED DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
WE STILL ARE SEEING PROPERTIES SELL OR PEOPLE TAKING OUT, REFINANCING MORE AND MORE THAN WHAT I THINK MY OFFICE EXPECTED.
AGAIN, A LOT OF THESE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WE'RE PUTTING TOGETHER FY26 BUDGET, BUT RIGHT NOW THAT IS DEFINITELY OUTPACING OUR PROJECTION.
HIGHWAY USERS, NEXT LINE ITEM, WE'RE AT 32 THAT'S PAID TO US BY THE STATE REALLY ON THEIR SCHEDULE.
MOST OF THOSE PAYMENTS COME AT THE LAST PART OF THE YEAR, AND WE'LL ESSENTIALLY BE MADE WHOLE, BUT THEY DON'T TIME OUT PERFECTLY EACH QUARTER.
I'LL JUMP DOWN TO LICENSE AND PERMITS.
REALLY WITH LICENSE AND PERMITS ARE TIMING OF WHEN THE PERMIT FEE IS RENEWED.
A LOT OF THEM, YOU SEE ARE LITTLE TO NO COLLECTIONS BY THE END OF DECEMBER.
IT'S JUST BECAUSE THAT LICENSE OR PERMIT IS NOT DUE UNTIL, SAY IN APRIL OR A SECOND HALF OF THE YEAR.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT BUILDING PERMITS, YOU SEE WERE 80% COLLECTED.
A LOT OF THAT WITH BUILDING PERMITS IS DUE TO SOME OF THE LARGER PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH IN THE NEW TAX OR THE FEE THAT WE'VE BEEN IMPLEMENTING THIS YEAR WITH HAVING TO PAY FOR SECOND AND THIRD APPLICATIONS.
IT'S STARTING TO SHOW WE ARE HAVING A INCREASED COLLECTION IN THOSE TYPES OF PROJECTS.
AGAIN, SOMETHING WE'LL DEFINITELY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IN DOING FY26.
LUMP TOGETHER ALL OF THE GRANTS.
YOU HAVE FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS.
WHEN WE TAKE A LOOK THROUGH A LOT OF THESE, SOME OF THEM, YOU SEE 0% COLLECT IT.
THAT'S EITHER WE BUILD THEM AT THE END OF THE YEAR AND GET ONE LUMP SUM OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN CASE OF LIKE THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IS JUST SO FAR BEHIND IN PAYING THESE.
I ALWAYS STILL WAITING FOR FY24 [OVERLAPPING] PAYMENTS FOR EMPG.
WE'VE NEVER HAD AN ISSUE NOT GETTING THEM.
[00:55:01]
THEY JUST SOMETIMES CAN TAKE ANYWHERE 8, 10, 12 MONTHS TO GET REIMBURSED FOR THOSE EXPENSES FOR BE THAT AGAIN? SO LIKE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GRANT, WHICH WE USED TO OFFSET SALARIES OUT THE DES IS A FEDERALLY FUNDED GRANT.WE'VE FILLED FOR LAST FISCAL YEAR, BOOKED A RECEIVABLE, AND WE HAVE STILL YET TO ACTUALLY BE PAID FOR THOSE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
AGAIN, THEY'RE TYPICALLY LATE.
>> THROUGH THE HOMELAND SECURITY.
>> IF WE HAVE DONE THAT TO EVERYBODY.
>> SURE, THEY WOULD BE KNOCKING ON OUR DOOR.
>> SO LIKE I SAY, THE STATE GRANTS, REALLY THE SAME THING WITH THOSE, WE BILL BY THE QUARTER ON A LOT OF THEM.
SOME OF THEM HAVE PAID THE FIRST QUARTER, DECEMBER CLOSES OUT, WE BILL THE SECOND QUARTER, AND THAT PAYMENT LAGS AND DOES NOT REFLECT ON THIS REPORT BECAUSE OF IT BEING THE END OF DECEMBER REPORT.
I'LL JUMP ON DOWN TO THE SECOND PAGE, WHICH IS CHARGES FOR SERVICES.
AS WE TAKE A LOOK THROUGH THOSE, STACY AND I TRY TO STAY ON TOP OF A LOT OF THESE FEES FOR SERVICES AND WHERE THEY'RE LOOKING.
IDEALLY SHOULD BE AROUND 50%, WHICH A GOOD BIT OF THEM ARE, BUT THERE ARE A FEW THAT ARE OUTPACING OR UNDERPACING.
JUST DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE PROGRAM.
ONE THING THAT I WILL POINT OUT HERE IS IF YOU JUMP DOWN TO REPAIR SERVICES.
THESE ARE REPAIRS THAT ARE BEING CONDUCTED AT OUR CENTRAL SHOP.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY ARE AT 75% COLLECTION.
THE CENTRAL SHOP HAS BEEN FULLY STAFFED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A WHILE AND ARE ABLE TO DO MORE PROJECTS FOR HAVING THE BOARD VD AND CERTAIN OUTSIDE AGENCIES HAVE WORK DONE THROUGH THEM THAT WE'RE RECEIVING BILLABLE WORK FOR, AND THAT'S REFLECTED THERE.
THE ONE THAT REALLY STICKS OUT, WE HAVE AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT.
IF YOU TAKE A LOOK. THAT'S AT, CLOSE TO 1,800% HIGHER.
THAT IS A IN AND OUT ACCOUNT FOR WHEN WE HAVE INSURANCE SETTLEMENTS.
IF WE HAVE A VEHICLE THAT GOES OUT AND GETS REAR ENDED, WE RECEIVE THE INSURANCE PAYMENT THROUGH THERE, THE DEPARTMENT PAYS FOR THE DEDUCTIBLE, OR IF THERE'S ANY LEGAL CLAIMS. IF WE WERE REIMBURSED FOR LEGAL EXPENSES AND HAVE NOT PAID THOSE OR OFFSET THOSE WITH EXPENSE, THEY HOLD IN THAT ACCOUNT UNTIL THEY ARE SPENT.
IDEALLY, THAT WILL BE SPENT DOWN TO ZERO AND NOT HOLD THAT HIGH NUMBER.
DOWN TO THE LAST COUPLE MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE.
WE LOOK AT INTEREST FOR ABOUT 53%.
WE'VE STILL KEPT A GOOD FUND BALANCE, AND THE RATE THAT WE'RE RECEIVING NOW IS STILL PRETTY COMPETITIVE WITH THE CERTAIN BANKS THAT WE ARE BANKING WITH, SO WE'RE RIGHT ON BOARD TO RECEIVE PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE THAN OUR 2.4 MILLION DOLLAR ESTIMATE AND REST OF THE LINE ITEMS OUT OF THAT ARE FAIRLY IN LINE.
WE HAVE OUR MIDSHORE 2 COUNTY HOST FEE, WHERE WE RECEIVED OUR FIRST QUARTER PAYMENT OF $119,000.
THE SECOND QUARTER HAS BEEN BILLED.
IT JUST REFLECTS IN JANUARY BECAUSE OF THE BILLING TIME. TRANSFERS IN.
IF WE TAKE A LOOK, A LOT OF THOSE TRANSFERS COME IN AT THE END OF THE YEAR WHEN WE ACTUALLY CLOSE OUT AND RECONCILE A LOT OF THE FUNDS.
IT'S NOT A SURPRISE TO SEE SOME OF THOSE AT 0% JUST BECAUSE OF THE YOUR TIMING.
WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON REVENUE BEFORE WE HAVE STACY RUN THROUGH EXPENSES OR.
OVERALL, AS A COUNTY, WE'VE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF SPENDING THROUGH THE SECOND QUARTER.
THERE'S ONLY SEVEN DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE SLIGHTLY OVER THE 50% THAT THEY SHOULD BE AT THIS TIME OF THE YEAR.
IF YOU CATCH ANYTHING ALONG THE WAY OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER THEM AFTERWARDS.
THE FIRST FEW DEPARTMENTS ARE ALL GOOD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ETHICS, PROBLEM SOLVING COTS AND PILOT PROGRAMS, THOSE ARE DOLLAR IN AND DOLLAR OUT, THEY'RE STATE FUNDED GRANT PROGRAMS. WE GET REIMBURSEMENTS FOR THOSE ALONG WITH THE FAMILY SERVICE GRANT AS WELL.
THEN WE GET TO OUR COURTS, CIRCUIT COURT AND OPENS COURT ARE ALL WITHIN THE 50%, SLIGHTLY UNDER AT THIS POINT, ALONG WITH STATE'S ATTORNEY, AND ELECTIONS IS ALSO SLIGHTLY UNDER THE 50% RIGHT NOW.
OUR OFFICE, OFFICE OF FINANCE IS SLIGHTLY OVER, BUT THAT'S DUE TO PAYING FOR THE AUDIT SERVICES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND BOND AND INSURANCES THAT WE PAY UPFRONT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCES IS RIGHT AROUND 50% AS WELL.
OUR GENERAL SERVICES, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS PROBABLY OUR HIGHEST ONE RIGHT NOW.
[01:00:02]
WE PAY A LOT OF THAT UP FRONT IN JULY FOR OUR LIABILITY INSURANCE, CASUALTY INSURANCES.OFFICE OF LAW, WHICH I MISSED WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH.
THEY ARE SLIGHTLY OVER, AS YOU CAN SEE, OUR LEGAL SERVICES.
THAT'S CAUSING THEM TO BE SLIGHTLY OVER 50% AT THIS POINT.
IT AND SHERIFF'S OFFICE ARE WELL WITHIN LINE.
RESOURCE OFFICERS ARE ALSO WITHIN 50%.
WE BUILD THEM EVERY QUARTER FOR THAT, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE RIGHT ON LINE WITH THAT.
THE ORIGINALLY CONTRACTED PATROL IS ALSO AT 41%, SO THEY'RE SLIGHTLY UNDER AT THIS POINT THROUGH DECEMBER.
SRO ELEMENTARY, ONCE AGAIN, WE GET REIMBURSED FOR THAT, SO THEY'RE RIGHT ON TRACK FOR THAT AND FIRE COMPANIES AS WELL IS A QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTION AS WELL.
ANIMAL CONTROL IS ALSO WITHIN THE 50% LINE.
THEN WE GET TO EMERGENCY SERVICES.
IF YOU LOOK AT COMMUNICATIONS, THEY ARE SLIGHTLY OVER 50%.
WE DID DISCOVER LOOKING AT SALARY CERTIFICATIONS.
THERE'S A CODING ISSUE THERE WHERE SOME EMPLOYEES BEEN CHARGED TO THE WRONG ACCOUNT.
WE'RE WORKING THROUGH FINDING THAT MISTAKE AND FIXING THAT.
THE GETS CODED TO THE CORRECT LINE THERE.
THAT'S ALSO WHY WORKERS' COMP LOOKS LIKE IT'S OUT OF BLACK AS WELL BECAUSE SOMEONE'S BEING CODED AT THE WRONG RATE FOR WORKERS.
>> THAT WILL REDUCE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT WILL REDUCE THAT LINE ONCE WE MAKE THAT CORRECTION, YES.
YOU CAN WE ALSO PAY LIABILITY INSURANCE UPFRONT, TOO, SO THAT ALSO MAKES THEM BE SLIGHTLY OVER.
LOOKING AT EMERGENCY SERVICES AND EMS, WE HAVE THE SAME ISSUE THERE, SALARIES OTHER.
THAT'S WHERE THEY DO THEIR PUBLIC OUTREACH, AND WE'VE DISCOVERED THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME CODING ISSUES THERE WITH STAFF GETTING CODED INTO THAT LINE ITEM AS WELL UNDER THE OTHER SALARIES.
WE'RE WORKING WITH THE DES TO GET THAT CORRECTED SO THAT WE CAN GET THOSE LINES CLEANED UP.
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IS DOING WELL.
HUMANE SOCIETY IS A QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTION TO THEM AS WELL, AND LIQUOR LICENSES WITHIN THE 50%, AS WELL AS GENERAL ADMIN.
THEN WE GET TO OUR PUBLIC WORKS.
CENTRAL SHOP AND SOLID WASTE ARE ALL WITHIN 50% AS WELL.
JOHNSON GRASS AND MOSQUITOS SAME THING.
THAT'S BUSY IN JULY, AUGUST SEPTEMBER, WHICH IS THE FIRST QUARTER, AND IT SLOWS DOWN NOW, SO THEY'RE STILL RIGHT ON TRACK THERE.
ROADS IS OUR OTHER DEPARTMENT THAT'S SLIGHTLY OVER, AND THAT'S BASICALLY DUE TO TWO LINE ITEMS, ROAD MATERIALS AND GRAVEL BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING ON DIRT ROADS, AS AS WE KEEP FILLING IN DIRT ROADS.
THAT'S WHERE THAT SPENDING IS GOING THERE.
COUNTY BUILDINGS, HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
THEY'RE ALL WITHIN THE 50% IN SOCIAL SERVICES.
EDUCATION, SAME THING, QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTION WITH THEM, RECREATION AND PARKS, RECREATIONS WITH IN LINE, PARK SERVICES IS SLIGHTLY OVER.
DUE TO VEHICLE LEASE, WE PAID OFF A VEHICLE IN THERE, SO THAT MADE THAT LINE ITEM BE A LITTLE HIGH.
THEN THEY ALSO GOT SOME TABLETS THAT TELEPHONE LINE GO SLIGHTLY UP WHEN THEY SWITCH TO THE NEW SYSTEM IN PUBLIC WORKS.
THEN WE GO DOWN THE OTHER ONES, LIBRARY EXTENSIONS, SOIL CONSERVATION, THOSE ARE ALL QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTIONS AS WELL, SO THEY'RE ALL THE 50%.
WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO IT, AND YOU LOOK AT OUR REVENUE AND EXPENSES.
YOU CAN SEE RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL ABOUT 12.9 TO THE GOOD, WHICH IS RIGHT IN LINE WITH ROUGHLY WHERE WE WERE THIS TIME LAST YEAR, WE LOOKED IT UP AND WE'RE ABOUT PACING THE SAME AS LAST YEAR.
>> FOR ANYONE LISTENING, A GOVERNMENT LIKE US THAT RELIES HEAVILY ON PROPERTY TAXES AS OUR HIGHEST REVENUE SOURCE.
WE'RE VERY [LAUGHTER] LIQUID WE HAVE A LOT OF CASH IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR.
AND THEN AS THE SECOND HALF COMES IN, THOSE COLLECTIONS REALLY SLOW DOWN AND WE START SPENDING IT DOWN.
AGAIN, TRY TO HIT TO A ZERO BASE BUDGET BY THE END OF JUNE.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, WHAT STACY AND I HAVE LOOKED AT MOST OF EVERYTHING IS IN LINE AND FAIRLY TYPICAL WITH WHAT WE SEE THIS TIME OF YEAR.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO DEPARTMENTS ON A COUPLE OF LINE ITEMS THAT WE SEE THAT ARE OUT OF LINE AND FROM OUR INITIAL ANALYSIS.
A LOT OF THOSE SHOULD BE GETTING CORRECTED, AND IT'S JUST A CODING ERROR IN THE SYSTEM THAT WE NEED TO CHANGE.
>> JUST REAL QUICK. HOW IS THE 504 MONEY DISTRIBUTED TO THE BAR COMPANIES?
>> WE RECEIVED THAT IN A LUMP SUM FROM THE STATE TYPICALLY AT THE END OF DECEMBER, AND THEN WE PAY THAT TO THEM IN THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY WHEN WE GIVE THEM THEIR NORMAL YEARLY ALLOCATION.
I WILL SAY FOR THIS YEAR, THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH AN INDIVIDUAL FIRE COMPANY NOT SUBMITTING THEIR REPORTS TO THE STATE.
[01:05:01]
IN A TIMELY MANNER.THE STATE PROVIDED US DES A LETTER THAT THEY WERE GOING TO WITHHOLD THAT FUNDING UNTIL THE ONE FIRE COMPANY CORRECTED THAT ACTION.
IT WAS CORRECTED FAIRLY QUICK.
BUT THAT DELAYED THE STATE RELEASING THE FUNDING AND REALLY TOOK THEM TO THE END OF JANUARY.
THE FIRE COMPANIES WERE USED TO RECEIVING IT ESSENTIALLY JANUARY 1.
THIS YEAR, THEY RECEIVED END OF JANUARY.
>> THEY WITHHOLD THE ENTIRE AMOUNT [OVERLAPPING] FOR COUNTY.
>> MAYBE THAT'LL PUT A LITTLE BIT OF PRESSURE ON THE FIRE COMPANIES TO REPORT ALL TIME.
>> CORRECT. I THINK AMONGST THEMSELVES, THEY WERE MEETING AND TRYING TO CORRECT THAT AND MAKE SURE THE FIRE COMPANIES ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR REPORTING.
>> OUR ALLOCATION TO THEM IS QUARTERLY?
>> YEARLY. WE GIVE THAT JANUARY 1ST.
>> JANUARY 1ST SO WAS DONE WITH.
>> RIGHT NOW EVERYTHING THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE AS FAR AS ALLOCATIONS HAS BEEN SENT AND THEY SHOULD HAVE THAT IN THEIR ACCOUNT.
>> YES, SIR. THAT'S IN THE 120?
>> IT SHOWS A ZERO HERE, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE THE TRANSFER DIDN'T HAPPEN UNTIL THEN.
THAT OTHER EXPENSE LINE THAT YOU SEE AT THE TOP OF THAT THAT IS THE LSAT PAYMENTS.
THOSE ARE PAID ON A QUARTERLY BASIS.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING IN THAT LINE ITEM OR THAT DEPARTMENT THAT IS NOT DONE ANNUALLY. THAT'S FLACK QUARTER.
>> WE'RE 63% REVENUE AND 45% EXPENSES. [LAUGHTER]
>> MOVING ALONG LEGISLATIVE SESSION UPDATE, COMMISSIONER PORTER. JEN.
[Legislative Session Update]
>> YEAH, WE'RE STILL CONTINUING TO TRACK THE BILLS.
AGAIN, I THINK THE BIGGEST ONE IS THE SENATE BILL 931.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON.
WE'VE SENT SOME LETTERS OF OPPOSITION ON BILLS.
I DON'T KNOW. THE DEADLINE WAS FRIDAY.
I THINK WE'VE PROBABLY TAKEN OUR POSITIONS ON MOST OF THE BILLS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REVIEW AT THIS POINT.
FROM HERE ON OUT, IT'LL JUST BE HEARINGS AND TESTIFY.
>> I THINK COMMISSIONER BREEDING, YOU'RE GOING TO TESTIFY ON THE HOUSE BILL 717.
>> TOMORROW. YOU'LL BE IN ANNAPOLIS TOMORROW.
>> THURSDAY NIGHT. YEAH. GOOD.
>> AT LEAST NOT THIS AFTERNOON.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
[LAUGHTER] I THINK, A LOT OF BILLS TO BE DROPPED.
A LOT OF SUBTRACTION MODIFICATION BILLS.
DANNY ON TAXES AND YOU KNOW, I'M SURE YOU'RE LOOKING AT THOSE.
I'LL TALK REAL QUICK ON SOMETHING THAT'S COME OUT OVER THE PAST DAY OR TWO WHEN IT COMES TO TAXES.
IT'S LIKE 100 PAGE REPORT THAT'S BEEN PUT OUT BY THE BUREAU OF REVENUE ESTIMATES IN REGARDS TO THE PROPOSED RESTRUCTURING OF STATE INCOME TAX.
AGAIN, I'LL DO A VERY BRIEF SUMMARY.
THIS IS NOT LINE BY LINE, BUT, ESSENTIALLY THE PROPOSAL BY THE GOVERNOR REMOVES ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS FROM. [OVERLAPPING]
>> EVERYBODY THAT'S ASKING US FOR MONEY MORE MONEY THIS YEAR IS LISTENING VERY CLOSELY RIGHT NOW.
>> YEAH. REMOVES THE OPTION TO ITEMIZE TAX YOUR TAXES FOR THE YEAR ON THE STATE LEVEL AND REQUIRES TO DO A STANDARD DEDUCTION.
THEN ALSO RESTRUCTURES THE WAY THE BRACKETS ARE, ESSENTIALLY LOWERING THE LOWER EARNERS AND WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY AND INCREASING IT TO THE HIGHER EARNERS WHO ARE TYPICALLY TAKING THE ITEMIZED DEDUCTION.
LONG STORY SHORT, YOU'RE LOWERING YOUR TAXABLE INCOME FOR CITIZENS OF THE STATE.
[01:10:02]
>> ON THAT LOW END ON THE RAISING AND ON THE HIGH END. [OVERLAPPING]
>> ON THE RAISING AND ON THE HIGH END. WHAT THAT ESSENTIALLY DOES, AND AGAIN, THIS IS VERY BROAD STATEMENT.
>> BY TAXING THE HIGHER EARNERS AT THE HIGHER RATES AND NOT ALLOWING THEM TO ITEMIZE AND REDUCE THAT TAXABLE INCOME, THE STATE IS PROJECTING TO COLLECT ADDITIONAL TAXES ON THAT.
BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE COUNTY LEVEL IS THE POORER COUNTIES NOW HAVE LESS TAXABLE INCOME BECAUSE THEY HAVE, I'M GOING TO SAY POORER END OF THE SPECTRUM RESIDENTS.
FOR CAROLINE COUNTY, WE ARE PROJECTED TO TAKE A LOSS OF ABOUT $1.1 MILLION IN INCOME TAX, WHERE YOU HAVE SOMEBODY LIKE A MONTGOMERY COUNTY WHO IS ON THE RICHER SIDE OF THE COUNTIES, WHO IS PROJECTING TO TAKE $75 MILLION MORE IN INCOME TAX IN NEXT FISCAL YEAR.
CUMULATIVE NET CHANGE FOR THESE CHANGES IS A POSITIVE OF ABOUT $139 MILLION.
BUT THE WAY THAT'S DISTRIBUTED TO COUNTIES IS WE'RE SEEING, AGAIN, THE POORER COUNTIES NOW COLLECTING LESS AND THE RICHER, HIGHER EARNING COUNTIES COLLECTING MORE.
THERE'S AN INTERESTING TABLE YOU HAVE HERE.
I'LL JUST READ THROUGH SOME OF THE TOP COUNTIES THAT ARE SEEN, I'M GOING TO SAY REDUCTIONS, ALLEGHENY, SOMERSET, CAROLINE, GARRETT, WICOMICO, DORCHESTER.
THEN YOU START CUTTING THE MIDDLE THERE.
BUT REALLY THE DISPARITY COUNTIES, THE ONES THAT HAVE TRADITIONALLY GOT GRANTS FOR BEING POOR, WHICH I'LL REMIND ARE BEING CUT THIS YEAR FOR SOME OF THE PROGRAMS ARE NOW GOING TO BE PROJECTED TO TAKE LESS IN INCOME TAX.
AGAIN, THIS IS TWO MINUTES OF 100-PAGE REPORT, BUT THAT'S THE DOWN AND DIRTY FOR US.
>> IT'S BECAUSE WE REALLY DON'T HAVE THE SUPER INCOME.
THERE ARE LITERALLY SOME COUNTIES WHERE I'VE HEARD CASES WHERE A PERSON WOULD MOVE OUT OF THE COUNTY AND IT WOULD AFFECT THEIR INCOME TAX TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'D HAVE TO MAKE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.
WE DON'T HAVE THOSE PEOPLE LIVING HERE OTHER THAN FRANK, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE SUPER WAGE EARNERS HERE, THE HEDGE FUND PEOPLE THAT WE KNOW OF. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
>> AGAIN, THE REPORT THAT WAS DONE BY THE BUREAU REVENUE ESTIMATES, IS REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE THE BREAKDOWN BY COUNTIES, AND THERE'S A ONE PAGE SUMMARY HERE FOR CAROLINE COUNTY AND BASED OFF 2023'S TAX INFORMATION, ESSENTIALLY, 62% OF CAROLINE COUNTY RESIDENTS THAT FILE TAXES WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE A DECREASE IN TAXES.
ONLY THE 9% WOULD SEE AN INCREASE, 29% WOULD BE NO CHANGES.
FOR US, YOU ARE IN A LEADER. YEAH.
>> I'M AGAIN, REALLY CURIOUS TO SEE HOW THIS PLAYS OUT AND WHAT THIS MEANS FOR OUR INCOME TAX FOR THE YEAR.
>> LOOK, THE TAX STRUCTURE, THAT'S A DECISION THAT'S MADE.
IT'S A TAX INCREASE, IS WHAT IT IS, BECAUSE IT'S MORE REVENUE FOR THE STATE.
BUT SOMEHOW THEY FOUND A WAY TO INCREASE TAXES IN THE STATE AND HURT.
>> IF YOU GO DOWN THOSE COUNTIES, YOU'LL SEE THOSE ARE THE COUNTIES THAT PROBABLY COULD LEAST AFFORD ANY REDUCTION.
AGAIN, LOOK, THESE PROJECTIONS AS FAR AS TAXES AND TAX BRACKETS AND STUFF, THAT'S POLICY FOR THE GOVERNOR.
WHAT IRRITATES ME AGAIN IS THE SHIFTING OF THE COST TO THE COUNTIES.
WHEN IT COMES TO THE DISPARITY GRANT, ON ONE HAND, WE'RE NOT POOR, BUT ON EVERY OTHER HAND, WE ARE.
IT'S LIKE EVERY CHART YOU LOOK AT WE'RE WHERE YOU DON'T WANT TO BE.
I THINK EVERYONE'S ACKNOWLEDGING THAT.
HOW WE GOT THERE IS UP FOR DEBATE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT IS PRETTY CLEAR TO ME.
[01:15:08]
I THINK THROUGH THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE HERE THROUGH YOUR WORK, THROUGH BUDGETING, I THINK PROBABLY WE'RE OKAY.THERE ARE SOME COUNTIES I THINK ARE REALLY GOING TO STRUGGLE.
WHILE I CAN FEEL FOR HIM, WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS COUNTY, AND I THINK WE'LL RIDE THIS OUT FOR A WHILE.
>> AGAIN, STACY AND I ARE DEEP INTO BUDGET.
WE'RE ON THE SCHEDULE TO PRESENT ESSENTIALLY THE PRELIMINARY REQUEST AND BUDGET ESTIMATES NEXT TUESDAY.
I'M HOPING TO HAVE OUR PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION END OF THIS WEEK SO WE CAN FINISH UP THAT REPORT AND HAVE YOU GUYS A GOOD PICTURE OF WHAT WE EXPECT.
AGAIN, NOT TO GIVE YOU MY STORY TUESDAY, BUT I THINK WE'LL GET BY.
WE'LL BE ABLE TO MANAGE AND HOLD THE SAME, BUT I THINK IT'S COMPOUNDING THESE THINGS EACH YEAR OVER AND OVER AGAIN WHEN IT COMES TO THE BLUEPRINT BEING THE BIGGEST CHANGE, SEEING THE STATE'S PICTURE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE LAST OF IT IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> WHAT WE WERE TOLD WHAT WE WERE TOLD LAST NIGHT WAS TO PRETTY MUCH IGNORE ALL THIS, BECAUSE IT'S ALL GOING TO CHANGE ANYWAY, BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THE BUDGET.
THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT SO WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO.
>> THAT'S THE TOUGH PART FOR YOU AND I IS HOW DO YOU PUT TOGETHER A COUNTY BUDGET, NOT KNOWING WHAT YOUR LARGEST INCOME STREAMS ARE GOING TO BE AND WHAT YOUR LARGEST EXPENSES ARE GOING TO BE.
IT'LL BE A MOVING TARGET AS WE GO THROUGH THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. WE'LL MAKE IT THROUGH.
>> WHAT I FIND IS HEARTENING IS WE TRIED TO BE CREATIVE AND FIND MR. PORTER OVER THE YEARS TO CREATE REVENUE.
I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE TAX ASSESSMENT, BUT THIS HEAT THAT ALL UP.
ANY GROUND THAT YOU GAIN TO TRY TO PUT SOME MONEY BACK, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO TAKE IT AWAY.
WE PUT QUITE A BIT AWAY THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS IN THE FUNDS LEVERAGE, WE'VE DONE THAT.
>> WELL, LAST YEAR, WE SAW A REDUCTION IN THE DISPARITY GRANT, SUPPOSEDLY DUE TO FORMULA, WHICH NOBODY REALLY EVER EXPLAINED THAT TO US PROPERLY, BUT APPARENTLY, WE GOT WEALTHIER COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE STATE.
WE SAW REDUCTION IN THAT AND WE SAW A $2.2 MILLION INCREASE IN OUR MANDATORY CONTRIBUTION TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION.
THIS YEAR, WE'RE LOOKING AT AN ADDITIONAL 1.8 MILLION IN ALLOCATION TO THE BOARD OF ED AND ABOUT $1.2 MILLION IN SHIFTS OF THE SDAT OFFICE, FURTHER DISPARITY GRANT REDUCTIONS, TEACHER PENSION SUPPLEMENT REDUCTIONS, SHIFT OF TEACHER PENSION, BASICALLY STATE EXPENDITURES OR STATE LIABILITIES SHIFTED TO THE COUNTY TO PAY FOR, COMMUNITY COLLEGE PENSION.
THAT'S $3 MILLION, NOW THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED BUDGET REDUCES REVENUE BY 1 MILLION SO THERE'S A $4 MILLION SHIFT BEFORE WE EVEN START OUR BUDGET PROCESS.
WHAT WE'RE BEING TOLD IS THAT'S PROBABLY JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.
EXPECT THAT NUMBER TO GET BIGGER.
BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THE LEGISLATURE IS NOT GOING TO CUT ANY MORE SPENDING.
THEY'RE GOING TO ADD SPENDING BACK IN.
WELL, STATE DOESN'T HAVE AN ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAM, SO THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK FOR THE COUNTIES.
THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK TO SHIFT MORE TO THE COUNTIES IS WHAT THE SOLUTION IS GOING TO BE.
>> A LOT OF WHAT SPECIFICALLY THE TEACHER RETIREMENT SUPPLEMENT, THE CURRENT BILL THAT HAS THAT DROPPING 50% THIS YEAR PHASES IT OUT IN '27 SO YOU SEE WHERE THEY'RE SETTING UP TO CUT THIS YEAR, NEXT YEAR, THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO IT.
IT'S ALREADY IN THE BILL TO REMOVE IT COMPLETELY.
>> THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE PENSION IS JUST THE CAMEL'S NOSE UNDER THE TENT THAT YOU HEAR ALL THE TIME.
>> YEAH. NOT TO GET INTO THE WEEDS HERE, BUT IT'S IT'S A THREE PART PENSION.
IT'S OUR LOCAL BOARD OF A SMALL PIECE FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE, AND THERE'S ALSO A SMALL PIECE LABELED AS NON-PUBLIC PLACEMENT.
>> WELL, HOUSE BILL 717 THAT I'M TESTIFYING ON TOMORROW IS A BILL THAT
[01:20:03]
WILL ALLOW US TO USE PROGRAM OPEN SPACE FUNDING FOR DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO BUYING MORE PROPERTY.I BELIEVE THE THREE OF US FEEL LIKE WE OWN ENOUGH PROPERTY AND IN THIS BUDGET CLIMATE, WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO TAKE ANY MORE PROPERTY OFF THE TAX ROLLS AND HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING IT.
WE'RE ASKING THE STATE TO GIVE US THE FREEDOM TO USE THE MONEY THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE USED FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION, AND PLANNING TO BE USED TO DEVELOP SOME OF THE PARKS PROPERTIES THAT WE ALREADY OWN.
THAT'S WHAT I'LL BE TESTIFYING ON TOMORROW.
>> THE OTHER ONE, KIM, FOR WHILE YOU'RE HERE, IS SENATE BILL 625, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY, POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY, UNFOUNDED OR EXONERATED SO WE'RE PUSHING THAT ONE HARD.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S GOING TO GO HONESTLY.
I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY NOT, BUT WE'LL FIGHT WE'LL FIGHT FOR THAT AS HARD AS WE CAN.
>> I KNOW THE LEAS AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICER HOPE THAT GOES THROUGH.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, WE WERE ABLE TO WITHDRAW OUR UNFAVORABLE TESTIMONY ON SENATE BILL 606 FOR THE TENANTS RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL.
>> I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE REALLY ON THAT.
>> GOOD. MOVING ON TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA.
ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA?
[Consent Agenda]
THE ONLY THING I HAD IS, DANNY, ARE THERE ANY BUDGET IMPLICATIONS DUE TO THE CLASS PARK CHANGES?>> I KNOW THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS GETTING PROMOTED.
IS ONE CHANGING TO A CLASS 8, SHERRY? I SAW THAT. IS THAT A HIGHER CLASS THAN WHERE IT IS CURRENT?
THERE WOULD NOT BE AN INCREASE FOR THAT EMPLOYEE BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT CURRENTLY OUTSIDE OF THEIR RANGE AT THIS POINT IN TIME SO WE WOULD PUT PLACE THEM IN THAT RANGE AT THAT LEVEL.
>> THAT BRINGS THE CLASS BACK IN LINE WITH WHERE WE'RE CURRENTLY AT?
>> YES. THERE ARE TWO THAT WOULD BE PROMOTIONS BASED ON THE FACILITY MAINTENANCE WORKER 2.
THEY HAVE RECEIVED A DIFFERENT ADDITIONAL CERTIFICATION IN JULY, WHICH IS ONE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS HAD BEEN DEMOTED BECAUSE OF NOT RECEIVING THAT, AND IT SO PUTS THEM AT THE LEVEL WHERE HE WAS PREVIOUSLY.
>> ESSENTIALLY, THOSE REGARDLESS OF THIS GOING THROUGH WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE CORRECTED ANYWAY.
TO ANSWER THAT, NO, THERE WILL NOT BE ANY.
>> THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL CALLS, BUT IT NEEDED TO BE.
>> CORRECT. IT'S MORE OF A CORRECTION AND CLEANUP OF A LOT OF THOSE SPECS WITH THE LICENSES.
>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> STILL GOOD. THANK YOU, SHERRY. THANK YOU, DAN.
>> I WOULD MOVE WE ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT.
[County Administrator’s Report]
>> WELL, I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH FOR YOU TODAY.
I'LL JUST GIVE YOU A COUPLE MINOR UPDATES AND COMMENTS, I GUESS.
BEEN IN CONTACT WITH BOTH DES AND DPW ROBIN STILL HERE.
I THINK THEY'RE READY FOR THE STORM THAT'S COMING TONIGHT AND INTO TOMORROW.
THE GOOD NEWS WE ALL KNOW, I'M SURE, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE QUITE WARM THE NEXT DAY, SO HOPEFULLY, LIKE THE LAST STORM.
I'M ANTICIPATING WE'LL PROBABLY BE ON LIBERAL LEAVE TOMORROW BASED ON THE WEATHER THAT WE'RE EXPECTING.
I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF AN UPDATE ON SOMETHING I LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE NEOGOV SOFTWARE THAT HUMAN RESOURCES HAS BEEN ROLLING OUT AND IS CONTINUING TO ROLL OUT.
I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT IT HAS AT LEAST SO FAR WITH RECRUITING, MADE THE RECRUITING PROCESS FAR MORE SIMPLER.
I THINK JUST IN TERMS OF GETTING APPLICATIONS PROCESSED, INDIVIDUALS HIRED AND THROUGH OUR PROCESS WITHOUT HAVING TO CIRCULATE MULTIPLE DOCUMENTS AND FIGURE OUT WHO SIGNED LAST.
I THINK IT WAS A VERY GOOD INVESTMENT THAT WE CHOSE TO MAKE FOR THIS BUDGET YEAR.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING WHEN THE EVALUATIONS GET IN THERE IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE GRADE IN STEP PAY SCALE PROCESS.
HAVING THIS IN PLACE WITH THE EVALUATION SHOULD BE A HUGE HELP.
[01:25:01]
THEN THE LAST THING I HAVE, REALLY A NON-UPDATE.COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TODD MON WAS OUT LAST WEEK.
I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM HIM ABOUT THE REGIONAL DETENTION CENTER AND THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WE HAD.
I DID HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE SOME COMMUNICATION WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM KENT COUNTY, BUT AT THIS TIME, WE DO NOT HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SO THAT PROJECT IS SITTING.
>> THANK YOU. COUNTY COMMISSIONER IRVIN DISCUSSION PERIOD. COMMISSIONER PORTERS?
[County Commissioners Open Discussion Period]
I DID CONTACT RECREATION AND PARKS DIRECTOR, JAMIE BEACH YESTERDAY.
I SAW MR. MULLER, WHO RAISED SOME CONCERNS TO ME ABOUT HARMONY PARK AND I RELAYED THOSE TO JAMIE.
I GAVE MR. MULLER MY EMAIL AND ASKED HIM TO E MAIL ME HIS CONCERNS SO I COULD FORWARD THEM TO EVERYONE.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM HIM YET, BUT JAMIE'S AWARE AND SHE WAS GOING TO CALL HIM OR I THINK HE HAD ACTUALLY CALLED HER THAT MORNING.
SHE WAS ON ANOTHER CALL, BUT SHE WAS GOING TO CALL HIM BACK AND I THINK SHE WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR SITTING ON ALL THOSE ZOOM MEETINGS AT LEAST TWICE A WEEK, IN THE EVENINGS, GOING OVER THE BILL REVIEWS.
REPRESENTING THE RURAL COUNTIES AND TRYING TO INFLUENCE MACO.
>> I'VE SAT ON MAYBE 50% OF THEM WITH YOU, SO I KNOW YOU DON'T PULL ANY PUNCHES.
PRETTY MUCH COVERED ALL MY STUFF AS WELL.
WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR CLOSING PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
[Public Comment]
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK HERE AT THE END?>> THANK YOU FOR WORK YOU GUYS DO.
>> THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION TO
[Closed Sessions: To Consult with Counsel to Obtain Legal Advice, and to Consider the Acquisition of Real Property for Public Purposes and Matters Directly Related thereto, Authority: 2014 Md. Code, State Government 3-305 (b) (7) & (3)]
CONSULT WITH COUNSEL TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE AND TO CONSIDER THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE AND MATTERS DIRECTLY RELATED THERE TOO UNDER AUTHORITY 2014 MARYLAND CODE STATE GOVERNMENT 3-305B7 AND 3.>> MOTION AND SECOND. WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE. MR. PORTER.
>> AYE. MR. BREEDING. AYE. COMMISSIONER BARTS.
>> THE AYES HAVE IT, AND WE WILL TAKE A RECESS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.