Jul 09, 2025 Planning Commission

[00:00:33]

OF US BREEDING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER KEITH BILBRAY FROM THE COUNTY REPRESENTING IS KRYSTAL DEDS

[Call to Order]

FIRST THING ON THE AGENDA IS THE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW FOR THE TWIN MAPLES FARM MISCANTHUS PROJECT.

[MDP Clearinghouse Review - Twin Maples Farm Miscanthus Project]

EVERYONE, I ASSUME, HAS HAD A CHANCE TO READ LESLIE'S STAFF REPORT.

THIS IS A CLEARINGHOUSE PROJECT REVIEW FOR AGRO FOR THE TWIN MAPLE'S FARM AND THE LUCY FARMS PROJECTS IN BOTH CAROLINE AND DORCHESTER COUNTY. AND AS PART OF THE WORK PROCESS CAROLINE COUNTY IS INVITED TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS ON THESE PROPOSED PROJECTS. AND THIS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OUR LOCAL PLANS, PROGRAMS AND OBJECTIVES. AND THIS IS NOT ONLY CAROLINE COUNTY THAT'S INVITED TO COMMENT ON THESE PROJECTS.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, BOTH CAROLINE AND DORCHESTER COUNTY'S MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ENVIRONMENT, NATURAL RESOURCES AND TRANSPORTATION AND THE MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY WERE ALSO REQUESTED TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE COMMENTS.

HENCE AND THIS PROPOSED CLEARINGHOUSE PROJECT REVIEW IS THE CONSERVATION INNOVATION FUND IS APPLYING TO MDE BAY RESTORATION FUND FOR FUNDING UNDER THE MARYLAND CLEAN WATER COMMERCE ACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICES TO BE CONDUCTED ON THESE TWO FORMS IN DORCHESTER AND CAROLINE COUNTIES. AND IF YOU RECALL, THIS PROJECT WAS BEFORE YOU BACK IN 2023.

I ACTUALLY THOUGHT IT WAS LAST YEAR IN 2024, BUT IT WAS 2023 WHEN THEY CAME BEFORE US THE FIRST TIME.

AND BACK IN 2023, WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSED THIS MEMBERS HAD VOTED TO SUBMIT A RESPONSE TO THE PROJECT THAT INCLUDED AN R-2, WHICH WAS CONTINGENT UPON CERTAIN ITEMS, AND THAT IT WAS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH COUNTY PLANS, PROGRAMS AND OBJECTIVES. BUT YOU PROVIDED A COMMENT TO STATE THAT CAROLINE COUNTY'S WATER QUALITY GOALS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND ON SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS, RELY ON THE BAY RESTORATION FUND FOR NITROGEN REMOVAL UPGRADES AND THE DIVERSION OF THE BRF.

FUNDING TO NON WASTEWATER RELATED PROJECTS LIKE THIS ONE.

RESULTS IN NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO OUR ABILITY AS A COUNTY TO ACHIEVE OUR NUTRIENT REDUCTIONS FROM THE WASTEWATER SOURCES, PARTICULARLY INVOLVING SEPTIC SYSTEMS, AND THEY RELY SOLELY ON THAT BRF FUNDING AS A GRANT SOURCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS.

I WOULD TAKE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY STILL HAVE THAT SAME OPINION FOR THE PROJECT AGAIN, AND THE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE GIVE IT AN R-2 CONTINGENT UPON CERTAIN ITEMS CODE CONSISTENT WITH COUNTY PLANS, PROGRAMS AND OBJECTIVES UPON CERTAIN ACTIONS BEING TAKEN, PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING COMMENT CAROLINE COUNTY'S WATER QUALITY GOALS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND ON SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS RELY ON THE BAY RESTORATION FUND FUNDING FOR NITROGEN REMOVAL UPGRADES.

THE DIVERSION OF BRF FUNDING TO. NON WASTEWATER RELATED PROJECTS RESULTS IN NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO ACHIEVE NUTRIENT REDUCTIONS FROM WASTEWATER SOURCES, PARTICULARLY IN THE SEPTIC SECTOR, WHICH RELIES SOLELY ON THE BRF FUNDING AS A GRANT SOURCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS.

THEREFORE, WHILE WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE VALUE OF THE PROJECT, THE COUNTY URGES THE STATE AND THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO FULFILL THE BRF FUNDING COMMITMENT TO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND ON SITE SEPTIC SYSTEM NUTRIENT UPGRADES BEFORE DIVERTING THE BRF SOURCES RESOURCES TO DIFFERENT SECTORS.

AND IT'S NUMBER FOUR, I BELIEVE, ON THE RANKING.

YES, BECAUSE NUMBER THREE IS THE GRANTS FOR THE CLEAN WATER COMMERCE ACT PROJECT, WHICH IS THIS ONE.

AND THEN CONNECTING COMMUNITIES SERVED BY SKEPTICS TO BE IN R IS NUMBER FOUR.

SO WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE ABOUT REARRANGING THOSE.

YES PRIORITIES. BUT THAT'S A HOLE, RIGHT? AND AFTER YOU DISCUSS THAT STAFF DID MEET WITH THE DIRECTOR OF MDS

[00:05:08]

AND, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD APPRECIATED THE COUNTY'S RESPONSE AND SAID THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD OUR CONCERNS AND THAT IF THE COUNTY WANTED TO REQUEST THE LEGISLATURE TO TO CHANGE THE PRIORITIZATION, THAT WE COULD DO THAT THROUGH A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE. WELL, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR PLANS BETWEEN SOLAR PANELS, SAND AND SWITCHGRASS, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY AGRICULTURE LEFT IN THIS COUNTY.

TRADITIONAL AG I DON'T I DON'T LIKE THIS SUBSIDY.

THE BAY REST RESTORATION FUND WAS SET UP. IT'S PAID OUT OF FLUSH TAX MONEY FOR SEWER AND WATER.

WHY ARE WE NOW TAKING IT AND DIVERTING IT FROM SEWAGE TREATMENT INTO AN ALTERNATIVE CROP THAT'S GOING TO SUBSIDIZE POTENTIALLY THE POULTRY INDUSTRY FOR BETTING? SO THEN THE ONLY SO WE TALKED ABOUT THIS PRETTY HEAVILY IN THE WORKSHOP.

SO AND WE NEED TO REPRIORITIZE THIS. THIS PARTICULAR FUNDING IS COMING AHEAD OF WHAT WE WANTED TO ADDRESS. WE WANTED TO ADDRESS.

RIGHT. AND NOTHING'S CHANGED. I MEAN WE WE GET THE LEGISLATURE TO CHANGE.

THAT IS THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO CAROLINE COUNTY.

I'VE BEEN OVER THERE AND TESTIFIED. I CAN TELL YOU THEY DON'T CARE WHAT WE SAY.

WELL, IF WE DON'T MAKE AN EFFORT, MDA SAID THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT IT.

YEAH. I MEAN, LAST TIME WHEN WE TALKED TO THEM, MDE HAD SAID THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT AND SUPPORT IT.

WELL, IF THEY SUPPORT IT THEN YES, MAYBE WE THAT WE HAD A GOOD POSSIBILITY OF IT BEING SUCCESSFUL IF WE WERE TO SEEK A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE ALONG WITH MDE SUPPORT OF IT.

RIGHT. TO PRIORITIZE IT. TO PRIORITIZE. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M LOOKING AT THIS CORRECTLY.

SO BETWEEN THESE TWO PEOPLE, ONE ENTITY IN DORCHESTER COUNTY AND ONE IN CAROLINE.

THESE ARE RELATIVELY MID, PROBABLY MID SIZED FARMERS IN THE AREA IN BOTH COUNTIES.

THEY'RE GOING TO GET $9.1 MILLION OVER TEN YEARS.

YES BETWEEN THE TWO TWO ENTITIES. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THAT'S IN YOUR PACKAGE, I CAN'T I CAN'T ANY MORE ADAMANTLY OPPOSED.

YOU'LL SEE THE THAT'S A LOT OF SKEPTICS. YEAH.

FARM IN DORCHESTER. YOU COULD YOU COULD HOOK UP THE ENTIRE NORTH END OF THE COUNTY.

YOU COULD TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING FOR 20 YEARS BETWEEN MARY ELLEN HENDERSON AND TEMPLE VILLE WITH THIS. AND AND THIS MONEY WOULD GO TO SERVE A THOUSAND PEOPLE AS OPPOSED TO TWO.

SO REPRIORITIZING IS GOING TO TAKE A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THAT NUMBER THE WAY THAT IT SITS.

YEAH. BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S AHEAD OF. WHAT WE NEED.

RIGHT. YEAH. THE CLEAN WATER COMMERCE ACT PROJECTS ARE AHEAD OF.

AND I THINK FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS THIS PARTICULAR TYPE PROJECT IS GOING TO TAKE MORE NITROGEN OUT OF THE GROUND THAN AM I RIGHT? SAYING THAT THEN SKEPTICS CONNECTING TO A COMMUNITY FACILITY.

YEAH. OR WASTEWATER? YEAH. THAT'S THE REASON WHY IT'S PRIORITIZED THAT WAY.

AND THE ONLY WAY WE CAN CHANGE IT IS LEGISLATIVELY TO ASK FOR THE RANKING TO BE CHANGED.

WELL, NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE 2023. SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE TURN IT DOWN, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN WE GET IT DONE? WE CAN'T KEEP THE R TO IF NOTHING IS CHANGED.

SO IN WHAT DID WE WHAT CODE DID WE GIVE IT IN IN 2023.

IN 2023 WE AT THE AUGUST MEETING WE HAD RECOMMENDED AN R TWO CONTINGENT UPON CERTAIN ITEMS CODE. THEN I REMEMBER THAT I THOUGHT I WAS JUST MET WITH MDG AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND DISCUSS THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONCERNS, TO WHICH, YOU KNOW, SEEK A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE IS WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT.

AND THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT WE CHANGE OUR CODE TO AN R1 INSTEAD OF AN R2, AND R1 WAS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH PLANS,

[00:10:05]

HAS ANYONE REACHED OUT TO DORCHESTER TO SEE WHAT THEIR TAKE IS? SO OLIVIA TRIED TO CALL THEM TODAY. SHE WAS UNABLE TO TALK TO THE DIRECTOR TODAY.

WE WERE HOPING TO. DORCHESTER HAS A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SITUATION.

THEY HAVE SALTWATER INTRUSION, AND SOMETIMES THIS MISCANTHUS GRASS IS THE ONLY THING THAT'LL GROW THERE.

SO THEY MAY BE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION. BUT ONCE THIS STUFF GETS ESTABLISHED, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT IT BACK INTO TRADITIONAL FARMING AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK THE ROOTS. IT'S A PERENNIAL CROP, RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE ROOTS OUT. THE ROOTS GROW LIKE 5 OR 6FT IN THE GROUND.

YEAH. SO IT'S I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST AS EASY AS, YOU KNOW, IF THESE SUBSIDIES DRY UP EVENTUALLY OR IF IT'S JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF GOVERNMENT MEDDLING.

WHAT I MEAN, IT'S FREE MARKET SHOULD BE A FREE MARKET SOCIETY.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GIVE IT A HARSHER CODE.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO, BUT. WELL, WE RECOMMEND DOING WHAT WE ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED THE FIRST TIME, WHICH WAS THE R2 CODE SAYING IT'S CONTINGENT UPON CERTAIN ITEMS. LAST TIME AFTER YOU VOTED. WE BROUGHT IT BACK AT THE RECOMMENDATION OF MD TO CHANGE IT TO AN R1, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO GO BACK WITH AN R2.

GOTCHA. I'D LIKE TO SEE IT R3. AND YOUR REASON? REASON IS, IS THAT IT'S ANOTHER ATTACK ON TRADITIONAL AGRICULTURE IN CAROLINA COUNTY.

BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, BETWEEN THE, YOU KNOW, THE VIABILITY, THE SAME ARGUMENTS THAT WE USE FOR SOLAR THAT IT DOESN'T SO IT IT DOESN'T CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THE SUPPORT SERVICES THAT GO TOWARDS SUPPORTING AGRICULTURE REMAIN VIABLE. YOU KNOW, IT UNDERMINES THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY, I THINK.

AND IT'S ANOTHER. I MEAN, LIKE I SAY, IT'S ANOTHER ATTACK ON THE TRADITIONAL CROPS THAT HAVE BEEN GROWN HERE.

BUT. AND AS FAR AS THE NUTRIENT VALUE. I EXPLAINED THIS EARLIER.

WHEN THEY CUT THAT, IT'S DEAD. SO IT'S LOST ALL ITS NUTRIENT VALUE BACK INTO THE SOIL.

SO WHAT ARE YOU GAINING? WELL, THEY HARVEST, THEY CUT IT AND THEN HAUL IT AWAY.

I KNOW, BUT IF YOU CUT IT AS GREEN, YOU'RE TAKING THE NUTRIENT VALUE AWAY.

BUT WHEN YOU CUT IT DEAD LIKE THEY DO, THE NUTRIENT VALUE HAS GONE BACK TO THE SOIL.

IT HAS DRAINED BACK OUT. IF THEY CUT IT GREEN, LIKE SILAGE OR HAY, YOU'RE TAKING THAT NUTRIENT VALUE AWAY.

BUT AS LESLEY EXPLAINED TO ME, WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS THE AG CROPS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PLANTED THERE AND THAT NUTRIENT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN APPLIED BECAUSE YOU DON'T APPLY FERTILIZER TO THE MISCANTHUS, RIGHT? AND YOU DO TO OTHER CROPS. BUT THEN AGAIN, I DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING A CROP AWAY.

YOU'RE GETTING 200 BUSHEL CORN OFF OF 200 POUNDS OF NITROGEN.

THAT NITROGEN IS NOT IN THE WATER. YEAH. THE WHOLE IDEA BEHIND THE NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN IS TO NOT PUT MORE NUTRIENTS ON THE GROUND THAN IT NEEDS. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. DON'T LEAVE ANY LEFT IN THE SOIL.

YOU WANT TO USE EVERYTHING THAT'S THERE. SO IF IT'S JUST GOING UP IN THE CROP AND THEN GOING BACK IN THE SOIL, WHAT HAVE YOU GAINED. HOW LONG DOES THOSE CROPS TAKE TO REGENERATE.

ONCE THEY CUT. ANYBODY KNOW THE MISCANTHUS. FOR IT TO START GROWING AGAIN.

IS THERE A THEY CUT IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY CUT IT YEARLY OR NOT.

THEY DO CUT IT EVERY YEAR. IT'S ONCE A YEAR. I MEAN IT'S, IT'S NOT VERY LONG.

I THINK WHEN IT CUTS IT. I'M GONNA SAY WINTER.

I MEAN, IT'S DEAD. OH, YEAH. YEAH. LATE. AND THEN IT'S COMING BACK.

THRIVING BY APRIL.

SO BASICALLY A CONTINUOUS CYCLING OF THE NUTRIENTS.

YEAH. YEAH. IT'S UP AND IT'S DOWN. NOW THEY CUT IT WHEN IT WAS GREEN.

LIKE I SAID YOU'RE YOU'RE TAKING THOSE NUTRIENTS AWAY.

TO ME THAT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL. RIGHT. WELL YOU GUYS WERE IN THE BRIEFING.

[00:15:03]

ANY THOUGHTS THIS YEAR? I WOULD I'LL HAVE TO ASK, ESPECIALLY THE OTHER TWO NEXT MEETING, ESPECIALLY IF MDE IS GOING TO BE BEHIND IT.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD US IN 2023 THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT IT, THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD.

SO IT WOULD FOR PRIORITIZE THIS FUNDING TO GO TOWARDS CONNECTING SEPTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE AHEAD OF IT WOULD BE AHEAD OF THE FUNDS THERE FOR THIS. RIGHT. BUT IT WOULD BE BUT NOT $10 MILLION.

YEAH, IT WOULD BE AHEAD OF THE GRANTS FOR THE CLEAN WATER COMMERCE ACT.

BUT I MEAN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THIS THE BAY RESTORATION FUND COMES OUT, IT'S THE FLUSH TAX THAT WE PAY EVERY YEAR AS A PART OF OUR PROPERTY TAXES.

IT'S LIKE $50, RIGHT? WHAT IS IT? 60. EVERY RESIDENT IN TOWN AND IN THE IN THE COUNTIES.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S TWO SEPARATE FUNDS.

THERE'S A FUND. EVERYBODY THAT LIVES IN A MUNICIPALITY OR IS CONNECTED TO A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, THEIR $60 GOES INTO ONE FUND. AND EVERYONE THAT LIVES ON A SEPTIC SYSTEM, THEIR MONEY GOES INTO ANOTHER FUND.

NOT SURE, BUT I THINK I THINK THAT'S THE CASE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, FROM 2023 WHEN WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION.

BUT THAT MONEY IF I IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE MONEY FROM THE MUNICIPALITIES OR ANYONE WHO'S HOOKED TO A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.

THAT'S THE MONEY THAT THIS IS COMING OUT OF BECAUSE THEY'VE UPGRADED ALL THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS.

THE MONEY THAT GOES TO SEPTIC SYSTEMS, NITROGEN PRODUCING TANKS.

THAT KIND OF STUFF I THINK IS STILL BEING USED FOR.

AND YEAH, I THINK THAT'S THE CASE. SO I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND PLACES TO USE THIS MONEY NOW BECAUSE ALL OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS ARE MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN UPGRADED.

THEY'VE BEEN UPGRADED THE INNER. BUT THEY STILL NEED WORK DONE TO THEM. RIGHT. RIGHT.

SO. SO LAST TIME THIS CAME BEFORE US, WE HAD ACRES THAT WENT ALONG WITH IT.

ARE THE ACRES THE SAME? AND THEY INCREASE FROM LAST TIME? I DON'T KNOW IF THEY PROVIDED US LAST TIME IT WAS OR BECAUSE IT THERE WAS I THINK I REMEMBER.

I REMEMBER THAT 110 ACRES OR SOMETHING, AND ONE WAS 171 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT THE POULTRY INDUSTRY IS EVEN STILL USING THIS STUFF IS BETTING I, I, SOMEONE HAD TOLD ME THAT THEY KIND OF BACKED OFF OF USING IT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT DOESN'T LAST AS LONG.

IT WAS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PINE SHAVINGS BECAUSE THE PINE SHAVINGS WERE HARD TO COME BY.

RIGHT. IT WORKS GOOD FOR HORSE BETTING, I KNOW THAT.

YEAH. THE MISCANTHUS YEAH. LAST LONGER, EASIER TO SIFT AND.

YEAH. YEAH. THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE ANY ACREAGES THIS TIME.

THEY JUST PROVIDED THE MAP SHOWING THE FARMS. RIGHT.

WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON IT? I MEAN, I THINK WE OUGHT TO GO FOR A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE.

THIS IS WHAT I THINK. AND THEN. I MEAN, LIKE.

REPRIORITIZE. AND THEN. I MEAN, I'M NOT A I'M NOT.

I MEAN, OUR ORIGINAL. DISCUSSION AND VOTE LAST YEAR WAS TO TO GIVE IT AN R2.

BUT AFTER TALKING WITH MDE, WE CHANGED IT TO AN R1.

BUT WE'RE BACK TO THE STANCE OF R2 AND PROVIDING THE SAME COMMENT THAT WE DID BEFORE.

BUT NOTHING HAS CHANGED. IT'S NOT BEEN DEPRIORITIZED.

NO. NO.

SO WHERE ARE WE GOING? R2 OR R3? WHAT IS. CAN YOU READ OUR TWO? DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE? RIGHT HERE? I DON'T HAVE THEM.

[00:20:01]

AND IT'S NOT EDIBLE TO DEER, SO IT DISPLACES.

IT GIVES HABITAT, BUT IT PUSHES THEIR FEEDING TO OTHER NEIGHBORING FARMS THAT ARE STILL GROWING TRADITIONAL CROPS.

THAT'S A COMPLAINT. I'VE HEARD OF A FARMER IN DORCHESTER THAT'S NEXT TO A LOT OF IT.

I MEAN, WHAT'S OUR BENEFIT? WHAT'S OUR BENEFIT IF WE GO WITH AN R3? IS IT GOING TO I MEAN, IT'S JUST BASICALLY LET THEM KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT HAPPY AND UNSUPPORTIVE OF THE WAY THEY'RE DOING IT.

I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH IT. MAYBE THEY DON'T.

I MEAN, HERE'S THE OTHER THING, TOO. THEY DON'T NEED US TO REQUEST THE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE.

MD COULD PUT IN FOR THE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE. THERE'S DEPARTMENT BILLS EVERY SESSION.

WELL, RIGHT. BUT THEY DON'T NEED US TO TELL THEM WE DON'T APPROVE IT FOR THEM TO GIVE THE MONEY EITHER.

THIS IS JUST A FORMALITY. YEAH. SO I MEAN, LIKE, I, I WOULD, I, I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO, TO SWITCHING IT TO GO WITH R3 AND, AND LET'S SEE WHAT'S GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN GOING WITH THE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE.

AND I'LL BRING THAT UP AT THE NEXT COMMISSIONER MEETING TO SEE IF I CAN GET A CONSENSUS AND TALK TO MAKO.

AND YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK IF WE PUSH, IF WE PUSH FOR THE LEGISLATIVE CHANGE AND GO WITH THE R3, THEN I WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION RIGHT. BUT I MEAN, IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO WITH A LEGISLATIVE CHANGE, IT'S KIND OF FOOLISH FOR US TO SAY, YEAH, LOOK, HERE'S ANOTHER, HERE'S ANOTHER ONE.

I KNOW THE TOWN OF DENTON HAS BEEN AFTER A SLUDGE PRESS FOREVER TO DRY THE SLUDGE, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE REED BED LIKE THEY DO NOW.

AND THEY ARE ALWAYS DENIED. AND BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE FUNDING.

RIGHT. I MEAN, THEY WE NEED TO REPRIORITIZE. SO.

SO THAT WOULD. YEAH. WELL BE AND I'M SURE THERE'S OTHER PLANS I'M SURE ORIGINALLY ONE SOMETHING MIDDLESBORO, GREENSBORO. I'M SURE THEY ALL COULD USE SOMETHING TO MAKE THOSE PLANTS RUN MORE EFFICIENTLY.

SO. LESLIE'S HAD TO EXPLODE IF WE DO OUR PART. SHE DIDN'T WANT US TO GO HARD TWO LAST TIME, BUT I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ASSIGN AN R3 CODE THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT. WE HAVE A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. SO MOTION AND SECOND FOR AN R3 ON THE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW OF THE TWIN MAPLES MISCANTHUS PROJECT. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION IS PASSED. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS

[Draft Legislation - Agricultural and Fishery Products Processing Plants]

CRYSTAL. OKAY. SO WE'VE HAD A LONG STANDING SETBACK FOR OUR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND FISHERY PROCESSING PLANTS. WE DID ADD FISHERIES A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO THAT WASN'T IN OUR ORIGINAL ZONING ORDINANCE.

WE DID ADD THAT, BUT WE DIDN'T REVIEW ALL THE EXISTING FACILITIES AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS WHEN WE ADDED THE FISHERY PART OF THE ZONING.

AND IN REVIEWING THOSE AND LOOKING AT ANY NEW FACILITIES IN TERMS OF GRAIN OPERATIONS, PARTICULARLY NOT ALL AG PROCESSING FACILITIES, IN TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER AG PRACTICES THAT WE HAVE IN THE COUNTY, PARTICULARLY POULTRY OPERATIONS, OTHER THINGS THAT MAY CREATE NOISE, DUST, TRAFFIC SMELLS ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THE EGG? WHY WOULD WE TREAT THE GRAIN PROCESSING FACILITIES ANY DIFFERENTLY THAN WE WOULD TREAT A POULTRY OPERATION? A POULTRY OPERATION IS A PERMITTED USE SUBJECT TO A 200 FOOT SETBACK.

THAT'S IT. THEY THEY MEET ALL OF THE CRITERIA.

THEY WOULD BE GRANTED A BUILDING PERMIT. OUR GRAIN PROCESSING FACILITIES, IF THEY ARE IN A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY, MEANING YOU'RE TAKING PRODUCT THAT IS NOT YOUR OWN AND BRINGING IN FOR STORAGE ANY PROPERTY OWNER CURRENTLY IN THE RURAL ZONE COULD PUT UP THEIR OWN STORAGE TANKS TO STORE THEIR OWN PRODUCT, BUT THIS WOULD BE AN OPERATION THAT WOULD BE NOT FROM PRODUCTS HARVESTED ON THE SITE. AND THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO REDUCE THAT FROM A 500 FOOT SETBACK TO A 200 FOOT SETBACK,

[00:25:06]

AND AG PROCESSING FACILITIES DO ALSO HAVE ONE OTHER LEVEL OF APPROVAL ALREADY, WHICH IS THEY REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE EXEMPTION BEFORE THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.

SO THERE WOULD BE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN APPLICATION THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE FOR A GREEN FACILITY AND PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS TO PROVIDE COMMENTS IF THEY FELT THAT WAS GOING TO IMPACT THEM IN SOME WAY.

AND THE BZA WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLACE CONDITIONS ON THAT OPERATION, WHETHER IT MAY BE IN TERMS OF LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC, PUTTING UP A VEGETATIVE SCREENING, IMPLEMENTING A DUST CONTROL PLAN, ANYTHING OF THAT, THAT NATURE COULD BE ADDRESSED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

SO STAFF WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND A REDUCTION IN THAT SETBACK FROM 500 TO 200.

AND ONE OF THE OTHER CLEANUP ITEMS IN THERE IS IT CURRENTLY SAYS IN THE LANGUAGE BLENDING, PACKAGING, STORAGE AND MILLING. I MEAN, LOOKING AT THAT, SOME HAVE HAD THE INTERPRETATION.

I MEAN, I HAVE TO DO ALL OF THEM TO BE CLASSIFIED AS AN AG PROCESSING FACILITY, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS EVER THE INTENT.

I THINK IF YOU WERE DOING ANY OF THOSE ACTIVITIES, SO IT SHOULD BE AN AND OR AND NOT AN AND AS A CLEANUP IN THE LANGUAGE.

OKAY. ON THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT B. WHAT CONSTITUTE PROCESSING OF FISH OR SEAFOOD. WHAT IS. IS THAT REALLY TAKING OYSTERS OUT OF A BUSHEL BASKET AND WASHING THEM.

IS THAT PROCESSING. I MEAN I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IS THAT'S 500FT.

RIGHT. AM I READING THAT CORRECT OR I'M NOT? I'M SURE THAT'S IN MY STAFF REPORT AND IT'S NOT COOPERATING WITH ME.

ANY COMMERCIAL SLAUGHTERING AND OR PROCESSING OF FARM ANIMALS, FISH OR SEAFOOD SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST 500FT FROM ALL LOT LINES ON A COMMERCIAL LEVEL. OKAY, SO THAT MEANS I HAVE TO HAVE A LOT THAT'S 1000FT WIDE IN ORDER TO PUT UP A COMMERCIAL. SEAFOOD HOUSE. THAT'S. WHAT IS IT? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT CONSTITUTES THAT.

I'M GOING TO PULL UP THE CODE DEFINITION ONE SECOND HERE.

I DON'T WANT TO TELL YOU WRONG. RIGHT. LIKE IF YOU GET A BUSHEL IF YOU'RE RETAIL SEAFOOD RETAIL YOU GET A BUSHEL OF JUST HARVESTED OYSTERS AND YOU'RE WASHING THEM OFF FOR RESALE.

IS THAT GOING TO BE CONSIDERED PROCESSING. RIGHT.

OR SHUCKING AND PUTTING THEM INTO COURTS. AND WE HAVE NO RESTRICTION ON THAT RIGHT NOW.

ONE SECOND, PULLING UP THE CODE. WELL, I BROUGHT MY BOOK.

I FOUND IT A WHOLE LOT FASTER. SO THE DEFINITION OF AN AG AND FISHERY PRODUCTS PROCESSING PLANT IS A FACILITY THAT INVOLVES THE OPERATIONS OF PROCESSING, PREPARING, OR PACKAGING AGRICULTURAL OR FISHERY PRODUCTS WHICH ARE NOT GROWN OR HARVESTED ON THE SITE, BUT RATHER BROUGHT TO THE SITE FOR PROCESSING FROM ONE OR MORE SOURCES.

RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT COMMERCIAL PART OF IT COMES IN.

BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GROWING YOUR OWN PRODUCT, STORING YOUR OWN PRODUCT, PROCESSING IT, THAT'S PERMITTED. IT'S WHEN YOU'RE BRINGING IN FROM OTHER SOURCES. RIGHT.

BUT THIS COULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ALL THE SEAFOOD RETAILERS LIKE, I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT MY QUESTION WOULD BE.

AND I'M GOING TO. AM I ALLOWED TO SAY NAMES? YEAH.

I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT BLOUSY FOOD, HE CAN'T BE HE HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OPEN UP A FACILITY.

CORRECT. BASED ON THIS. AND THAT WAS AT THE TIME WE ADOPTED THE FISHERY PRODUCTS PROCESSING PLANT.

RIGHT. BUT I'M SAYING IF HE NOW. SO NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO OPEN THAT UP.

BASED ON WHAT THIS IS GOING TO BE, UNLESS THEY HAVE A LOT THAT IS 1000FT BY 1000FT.

THAT BY THE WAY, IF I'M READING IT CORRECTLY.

SO WHY DOES THAT I MEAN WHY WHY WOULD THAT NOT BE 200FT AS WELL AS AGAIN THAT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.

YEAH. WHAT IS IT RIGHT NOW? CRYSTAL. IS THERE ANYTHING IN OUR CODE 500 507.

[00:30:03]

SO YES. SO IT'S 500 FOOT SETBACK. IF THAT. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT.

LET ME PULL IT UP HERE WAS THAT WAS ADDED IN AT THAT TIME I'M GUESSING.

RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT WASN'T IN THE ORIGINAL. SO YES.

FISHERY ACTIVITY FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED IN THE VILLAGE CENTERS.

VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE RURAL AND R-1. AND THEY HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS THAT STATE THE OWNER AND OPERATOR MUST MAINTAIN AN ACTIVE COMMERCIAL FISHING LICENSE WITH DNR.

WHOLESALE OR RETAIL SALES ARE PERMITTED, PROVIDED THE MAJORITY OF PRODUCTS SOLD ARE HARVESTED BY THE OWNER, AND RETAIL SPACE IS LIMITED TO 750FT². SO THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO HAVE A SEAFOOD MARKET IN IN ONE OF OUR VILLAGES, AS LONG AS IT'S 750FT², AND THAT THE MAJORITY OF YOUR PRODUCTS THAT YOU'RE SELLING ARE.

THE OWNER OPERATOR WHO HOLDS A LICENSE, HOLDS A COMMERCIAL FISHING LICENSE.

SO I GUESS WHERE I'M AT, WERE YOU LOOKING AT KEITH FOR.

B? B? OKAY. ON THE PROPOSED TEXT. OKAY.

SO I HAD ASKED, LIKE, WHY THE GRAIN WAS EVEN AT 500FT, BUT MAYBE BECAUSE THE FISH AND SEAFOOD WERE AT 500FT.

I'M OKAY WITH THE 200FT. YEAH. AND I DID CHECK WITH OTHER EASTERN SHORE COUNTIES, AND THEY RANGED ANYWHERE FROM 100 TO 300.

EVERYBODY DEFINED IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. SOME DIDN'T REALLY CALL OUT GRAIN.

IT WAS LUMPED IN WITH OTHER THINGS. BUT ON AVERAGE, 200FT WAS WHAT WAS HERE ON THE EASTERN SHORE FOR SETBACKS FOR THESE TYPES OF OPERATIONS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SEND A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION WITH AN AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE SETBACK FOR, FOR THE COMMERCIAL SLAUGHTERING AND OR PROCESSING OF FARM ANIMALS.

FISH OR SEAFOOD SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST 200FT AS OPPOSED TO 500.

AND ONE AND I THINK WITH. YEAH. GO AHEAD. FINISH.

NO. WITH THAT PROPOSED CHANGE, I WOULD SAY OF SENDING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

BECAUSE ONE THING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER IS, YOU KNOW, WITH THE SLAUGHTERING AND PROCESSING OF FARM ANIMALS, YOU'RE GOING TO TEND TO HAVE A SMELL. YOU KNOW, EVEN WITH FISHERY ACTIVITIES.

THAT WOULD BE WHY I THINK IT'S AT A 500 FOOT VERSUS A 200 FOOT.

BECAUSE YOU HAVE A MORE OF A SMELL INVOLVED. THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT THAN A GRAIN FACILITY.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THAT SAME ODOR. CHICKEN HOUSE.

CHICKEN HOUSE. WELL THAT'S 200FT. YEAH. BUT I MEAN LIKE GRIFF SEAFOOD WAS OUT THERE AT CLAYTON FARMS. HE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED. RIGHT. BECAUSE IT WAS TOO CLOSE TO 4 OR 4.

BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT PROCESSING. STEAMING. SHOCKING AND STEAMING. THE CRABS. SHUCKING OYSTERS. YOU'RE SPLITTING HAIRS.

DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DEFINITION IS. PROCESSING IS OPENING A CAN OF WORMS. TRAVIS. I MEAN, I WOULD IF THERE'S. IF YOU'RE THINKING OF WANTING TO CHANGE, MAKE A CARVE OUT FOR SEAFOOD RETAIL.

WE HAVEN'T REALLY LOOKED INTO THAT TO REALLY I WOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD TODAY.

WITH THAT. WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT AND INVESTIGATE IT. AND AGAIN, ONCE WE'RE FINISHED WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A DEEP DIVE INTO THE ZONING ORDINANCE ENTIRELY, WHICH WE HAVE NOT DONE IN A LONG, LONG TIME. SO THAT WOULD BE THE TIME TO ADDRESS SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

SO REMEMBER ME AND WE HAVE HAD WE DON'T GET COMMERCIAL GRAIN FACILITIES EVERY DAY.

APPLICATIONS. I MEAN, I CAN'T RECALL A NEW ONE IN A LONG TIME.

YEAH. AND THE EXISTING ONES WE HAVE, ANYTIME THEY'VE EVER HAD TO EXPAND, REPLACE A STORAGE TANK, ADD AN ADDITIONAL STORAGE TANK. NONE OF THEM MEET THE SETBACKS, SO THEY ALL END UP HAVING TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE.

BECAUSE ALL OF THEM ARE SITUATED IN A FASHION, THEY DON'T MEET 500FT.

SO WE'VE HAD TO GRANT VARIANCES FOR THEM. RIGHT.

AND WE SHOULD CARVE THAT OUT. THAT SHOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO COME.

IF YOU HAVE A PREEXISTING FACILITY, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE AHEAD OF TIME.

[00:35:02]

A LOT OF THEM AREN'T EVEN 200FT. I MEAN, LOOK AT MOUNT AIRY AND RIDGELY AND KAMIN.

SO. AND THEY'RE ALL FACILITIES THAT EXISTED PRIOR TO THE ZONING REGULATIONS.

SO I WISH WE'D GO BACK TO THAT. I WOULDN'T HAVE A JOB.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE WE HAVE A MOTION FOR A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WELL AMENDED, JUST TO GIVE A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION WITHOUT THE SETBACK.

AND THEN WE CAN CRYSTAL CAN LOOK INTO THAT IF WE CAN DO A CARVE OUT FOR MAYBE PRIMARY RETAIL.

BUT WOULD THAT BE IT THE ZONING TIME? LIKE WHEN WE GET DONE WITH COMPREHENSIVE, WE DON'T HAVE.

DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT NOW? WELL WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD ANOTHER LIKE BULLET POINT.

WELL WE'D TAKE OUT THE SEAFOOD PROCESSING AND AND DEFINE IT A LITTLE MORE PRECISELY.

RIGHT. LIKE TO SAY THAT IF YOU'RE STEAMING CRABS AND, YOU KNOW, SHUCKING OYSTERS FOR RETAIL OR WASHING OR THIS, THAT DOES OR, YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY, LIKE ON A MASS SCALE.

I DON'T KNOW, YOU'D HAVE TO BREAK IT DOWN SOMEHOW TO SOMEONE WHO'S ACTUALLY DOING IT ON A MASS SCALE.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DO IT BY EMPLOYEES. AND AGAIN, IT COULD BE ALL IN HOW YOU'RE DETERMINING WHAT YOU'RE DETERMINING AS PROCESSING.

IF IT'S SIMPLY STEAMING CRAB SHUCKING OYSTERS FOR SALE VERSUS, YOU KNOW, MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF FISH OR WHATEVER YOU'RE BRINGING IN AND CUTTING UP AND REPACKAGING AND SENDING OUT AND SENDING OUT TO RESTAURANTS IN A MUCH LARGER QUANTITY THAN WHAT A SOLE OPERATOR MAY DO, RIGHT? YOU CAN LOOK AT DIFFERENT LEVELS AND DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH LEVEL.

YEAH. BUT DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT TO SPEND A LITTLE MORE TIME ON LOOKING AT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE TEXT AMENDMENT.

AND I WOULD RECOMMEND WE DO IT WHEN WE DO THE ZONING REWRITE OR WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THERE.

YEAH.

SO YOUR MOTION STILL GOES MOTION FOR A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION IN SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY I, I, I. ALL OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES ON TO THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ANNUAL REPORT.

[Maryland Department of Planning Annual Report]

LET ME STOP CLANKING OVER HERE. SORRY. THEY HAVE A SHORT FORM AND A LONG FORM.

AND LUCKY FOR ME, IT WAS THE SHORT FORM THAT WE GOT TO USE THIS YEAR.

IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO READ THROUGH IT, THEY ARE BASICALLY LOOKING AT HOW MANY PERMITS WERE ISSUED.

HOW MANY OF THEM WERE IN THE PFA, LOCALLY FUNDED AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION AREAS? AND THEN WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST WITH ANNUAL REPORTS AS WELL AS THE FIVE YEAR MID CYCLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND.

THEY ALSO ASK FOR. ANY GROWTH RELATED CHANGES INCLUDING LAND USE, ZONING, NEW SCHOOLS OR SCHOOL CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH YOUR COUNTY MASTER WATER AND SEWER PLAN, UPDATES OR AMENDMENTS OR ANNEXATIONS THAT CHANGE THE INCORPORATED BOUNDARIES.

AND IF YES, YOU LIST WHAT THEY ARE. SO IN 2024, ELLSBERG ANNEX 9.796 ACRES OF LAND INTO THE TOWN.

THAT ANNEXATION SUPPORTED THE GROWTH AND ANNEXATION GOALS OF THE FEDERAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS WELL AS CAROLINE COUNTY PLANS AND POLICIES REGARDING THE ORDERLY AND EFFICIENT TRANSITION OF LAND AND MUNICIPAL GROWTH AREAS THROUGH MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION AND SUBSEQUENT EXTENSION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES.

THEY ALSO ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT DID YOUR COUNTY IDENTIFY AND OR IMPLEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING GENERAL PLANNING TOPICS TO IMPROVE THE LOCAL PLANNING OR DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

AND FOR CAROLINE COUNTY, IT WAS GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE SENSITIVE AREA PRESERVATION.

AND THOSE WERE WITH TWO PROJECTS THE COMMUNITY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, THE STORMWATER PROJECTS IN THE RURAL VILLAGE OF JONESTOWN THAT WAS DESIGNED AND

[00:40:07]

THERE WAS A LARGE SCALE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PRACTICES AT NORTH COUNTY PARK NEAR GREENSBORO, WHICH WAS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF MULTIPLE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WITHIN THE CRITICAL AREA AT CAROLINE COUNTY NORTH PARK, INCLUDING ONE LITTLE OVER AN ACRE OF DELMARVA BAY WETLANDS A LITTLE MORE THAN 500FT OF REGENERATIVE STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND 9000FT² OF BIO RETENTION. THERE. MY FAVORITE QUESTION.

ARE THERE ANY ISSUES THAT MDP CAN ASSIST WITH IN 24 2024? IF YES, PLEASE DESCRIBE IF YOU'VE READ WHAT I PUT IN HERE.

THIS WAS THE SHORT VERSION. I WAS WRITING A THESIS AS I WAS ANGRILY TYPING, BUT I'LL READ WHAT'S IN HERE. SO CAROLINE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY FACING TWO MAJOR CHALLENGES.

THE FIRST AFFECTS MUCH OF THE EASTERN SHORE, WHILE THE SECOND IS A STATEWIDE ISSUE THAT MOST MARYLAND COUNTIES ARE ACTIVELY STRUGGLING TO ADDRESS. A STRONG SHOW OF SUPPORT AND PARTNERSHIP FROM THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, WHICH WE CALL MDP, WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATIVE.

APPRECIATE IT AS WE WORK TO FIND EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS AND MOVE FORWARD ON BOTH FRONTS.

FIRST ONE LARGE SCALE SOLAR DEVELOPMENT. CAROLINE COUNTY, ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHER COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS MARYLAND'S EASTERN SHORE, ARE ALARMED BY THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE SCALE SOLAR PROJECTS ON PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND.

SOME OF THE MOST VALUABLE AGRICULTURAL LAND IN THE COUNTRY.

WHILE WE SUPPORT RENEWABLE ENERGY GOALS AND RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSITIONING TO CLEAN ENERGY, THIS MUST NOT COME AT THE COST OF LOSING THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AND RURAL CHARACTER THAT ARE THE FOUNDATION OF THE COUNTY'S ECONOMY AND IDENTITY.

THE EASTERN SHORE IS HOME TO SOME OF THE MOST PRODUCTIVE FARMLAND IN THE COUNTRY, AND ITS PRESERVATION IS CRITICAL NOT ONLY FOR OUR LOCAL ECONOMY, BUT FOR THE OVERALL FOOD SECURITY IN THE NATION.

WE URGE MDP TO JOIN IN WORKING WITH STATE LEADERS AND AGENCIES TO TAKE A MORE BALANCED AND THOUGHTFUL APPROACH WITH THE FOLLOWING.

REEVALUATE THE CRITERIA FOR SOLAR FARM LOCATIONS.

PRIORITIZE BROWNFIELDS LANDS WITH MARGINAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS OR POOR SOILS.

BUILT ENVIRONMENTS LIKE YOUR ROOFTOPS. PARKING LOTS WITH A RANKING ORDER THAT MUST BE MET AS A LAST RESORT.

IF PRIME AGRICULTURAL LAND MUST BE USED FOR SOLAR INSTALLATIONS, THEY SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO SUPPORT CONTINUED AGRICULTURAL USE BENEATH AND AROUND THE PANELS. REQUIRE COMMUNITY AND UTILITY SCALE SOLAR INSTALLATIONS TO ALLOCATE A PORTION OF THE POWER THEY GENERATE FOR USE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION WHERE THE PROJECT IS LOCATED. INCREASED LOCAL INPUT AND REGULATORY CONTROL.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY SHOULD BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SITING AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY WITH LOCAL LAND USE PRIORITIES.

CONDUCT REGIONAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS. UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BROADER USE, ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SOLAR INSTALLATIONS ACROSS THE COUNTY LINES. THE EASTERN SHORE REGION HAS UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAKE CERTAIN CLEAN ENERGY OPTIONS MORE VIABLE THAN OTHERS.

HOWEVER, THE EASTERN SHORE SHOULD NOT BE DISPROPORTIONATELY BURDENED IN THE PURSUIT OF CLEAN ENERGY TO EFFECTIVELY ADVANCE MARYLAND'S TRANSITION TO A LOW CARBON FUTURE.

A COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE STUDY OF ALL VIABLE FORMS OF CLEAN ENERGY SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN.

THIS STUDY WOULD ASSESS THE TECHNICAL, GEOGRAPHIC, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTALLY FEASIBILITY OF CLEAN ENERGY SOURCES ACROSS ALL REGIONS OF THE STATE. BASED ON THE FINDINGS, THE STUDY WOULD GUIDE PROPOSED UPDATES TO MARYLAND'S ENERGY REGULATIONS, ZONING CODES, AND INCENTIVE PROGRAMS INCORPORATING INPUT FROM THE COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE STATE.

THE STATEWIDE APPROACH WOULD PROVIDE A DATA DRIVEN ROADMAP FOR EXPANDING MARYLAND'S CLEAN ENERGY PORTFOLIO, WHILE SUPPORTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP.

SO I'LL TAKE A DEEP BREATH BEFORE I GO ON TO THE NEXT ONE.

HOUSING. WITH THE LATEST HOUSING MANDATES AND THE ONGOING HOUSING SHORTAGE ACROSS THE STATE AND THE NATION.

IT IS INCREASINGLY CLEAR THAT MANY OBSTACLES TO MEETING THESE REQUIREMENTS AND GOALS ACTUALLY COME FROM STATE LEVEL REGULATIONS.

WHILE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS ARE PREPARED TO ACCOMMODATE RESPONSIBLE GROWTH, SEVERAL STATE REGULATIONS CREATE SIGNIFICANT DELAYS AND INCREASE COSTS,

[00:45:07]

FOR EXAMPLE, EXPANDED ON SITE SEPTIC SEWAGE RESERVE AREAS SRE REQUIREMENTS THAT RESULT IN MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF TWO ACRES, WHICH ADDS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO THE COST TO BUILD A HOME.

DENIED ACCESS LINE REQUIREMENTS THAT PREVENT EXISTING HOMES WITH AGING SEPTIC SYSTEMS FROM CONNECTING TO PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEMS. SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS THAT CAN ADD 10,000 TO $15,000 TO THE COST TO BUILD A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME EV CHARGING STATION COMPATIBLE. CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS AT 1000 TO $2000 TO THE COST TO BUILD ANY HOME.

AND I JUST WANT TO QUALIFY. IT'S MAKING IT READY SO THAT IF YOU DID PUT THAT IN, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY PUTTING IN THE EV CHARGING STATION.

REGULATORY CHANGES TO BAY RESTORATION FUND. THE SEPTIC FUNDING PRIORITIES RESULTED IN LIMITED BRF FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR UPGRADES OF AGING OR FAILING SUBJECTS, WHICH HAS RESULTED IN THE NECESSITY FOR HOLDING TANKS AND INCREASING ABANDONMENT OF HOMES AND A CONSEQUENT REDUCTION IN HOUSING STOCK.

RECENT UPDATES TO MARYLAND'S RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CODE REQUIRE EXPANDED INSULATION REQUIREMENTS, ENHANCED AIR SEALING, IMPROVED HVAC EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, TO NAME A FEW OF THE OTHER ADDITIONAL MEASURES FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION.

THE COST INCREASE RANGES FROM 4000 1000 TO $10,000 PER HOME.

A THOROUGH ASSESSMENT OF STATE REGULATIONS IS NEEDED TO IDENTIFY AND AMEND THOSE THAT RESTRICT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY, GLAD I CAN'T TAKE MY BLOOD PRESSURE RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT. SO THIS WILL BE GOING ON WITH ANY OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, CHANGES, ADDITIONS.

CRYSTAL WOULD SIGN AND WE SEND THAT UP TO THE STATE.

EVERYTHING LOOKS GOOD TO ME. I MEAN, ONE THING THAT JUMPS OUT AT ME IS THAT THERE 34 OF THE NONRESIDENTIAL PERMITS WERE OUR NEW RESIDENTIAL PERMITS, I SHOULD SAY, WERE ISSUED IN NON PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS.

SO THAT SHOULD JUMP OUT THAT OUR PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS ARE IN THE WRONG PLACES, OR PEOPLE FROM TWO BUILT IN THE PRIORITY FUNDING AREA TO 34 NOT DON'T WANT TO GO IN OR DON'T WANT TO BUILD IN OUR PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS.

I THINK PART OF THAT WOULD RELY ON THE SIZE OF THE LOTS, BECAUSE THESE ARE OUR PFAS ARE GENERALLY IN OUR VILLAGES, WHICH TEND TO HAVE SMALLER LOT SIZES. SO IF IT'S AN EXISTING LOT THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO EITHER REDEVELOP AND THEY CAN'T GET WHAT THEY NEED FOR AN SRA THERE TO BE ABLE TO BUILD. SO I THINK THAT'S RESTRICTING THEM BECAUSE THOSE PFAS ARE ON TOP AND SKEPTICS.

AND I THINK THOSE NUMBERS ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE PREVIOUS ANNUAL REPORT THAT WENT OUT.

IT WAS EITHER TWO AND 34 OR 2 AND 32. SO IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING.

BUT THE PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS ARE DIFFICULT TO CHANGE.

RIGHT. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHEN THEY WERE CREATED, CAROLINE COUNTY DIDN'T PARTICIPATE IN THE STATE, JUST CAME IN AND SAID, OKAY, WELL, HERE THEY ARE.

WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU WHERE THEY ARE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T TELL US WHERE YOU WANTED THEM TO GO.

AND IT'S DIFFICULT TO CHANGE THEM NOW. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD SHOULD BE DIFFICULT, BUT YOU CAN AND RE.

CAN WE CHANGE THE PROBLEM? IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE.

I THINK AT ONE TIME IT WAS SAID WE DON'T WANT TO LET GO OF THEM.

NO. RIGHT. NO, DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO LET GO OF THEM.

NO. IS IT. IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD PUT ON? ASSISTANCE IN RELOCATING OR REASSESSING WHERE OUR EFFORTS ARE? OR IS THAT NOT REALLY. WE CAN JUST MAKE THAT REQUEST WITHOUT IT BEING IN OUR ANNUAL REPORT.

DON'T WE LOOK AT THAT ON A HAPPY FACE? YEAH, I FEEL LIKE WE'VE LOOKED AT THAT BEFORE.

LIKE AS AN ANNUAL REVIEW. RIGHT. I DON'T THINK SO.

NOT ANNUAL. IT'S BEEN A WHILE. BUT I REMEMBER LOOKING AT IT.

MAYBE IT'S WHEN. KATHLEEN. DO YOU REMEMBER? SO IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT IF YOU WANTED TO HAVE STAFF LOOK AT AND YOU ALL LOOK OUT AS WELL AND COME BACK AND PUT TOGETHER A REQUEST AND ASK FOR ASSISTANCE.

AND WALKING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND ALSO THEIR ASSISTANCE IN CHANGING, YOU KNOW, TAKING THESE OUT.

PUTTING THESE IN WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT. OKAY.

I FEEL LIKE WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, BUT IT'S BEEN A WHILE, I'M PRETTY SURE, BECAUSE I REMEMBER, OKAY, COLOR. I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE STUFF THAT WAS ON THERE WHEN WE DID THE SETBACK CHANGES.

WE LOOKED AT ALL OF. I THOUGHT WE LOOKED AT ALL THAT, BUT BUT I REMEMBER LESLIE SAYING THAT IT WAS VERY

[00:50:08]

SO I DON'T KNOW. WE CAN LOOK AT IT LATER. I MEAN, I, I APPROVED THE LETTER AS WRITTEN AND, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST ADD A NOTE IF, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ADD SOMETHING IN THERE ABOUT REEVALUATING OR FEES TO TO GO AHEAD AND DO THAT IF IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. IF A SEPARATE REQUEST IS FINE, THEN WE'LL JUST PUT IN A SEPARATE WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO.

I'M HAPPY TO ADD IT. I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE LOOKS GOOD.

I APPRECIATE THE THE TIME AND PUTTING THAT TOGETHER.

WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED LOCALLY FUNDED AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION? ACRES. WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT THAT YOU'RE ASKING ME? NUMBER TWO, I KNOW THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE MARYLAND, BUT WHAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF A LOCAL? OH, FOR. SO WHEN YOU PUT A FARM INTO AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND PRESERVE IT, AND THEN YOU HAVE TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO SELL. WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE.

LIKE THEY'RE ASKING ONE OF THE THINGS, HOW MANY TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, YOU KNOW, WERE EITHER ALLOCATED TO A FARM THAT WAS PUT INTO AG PRESERVATION. ACRES IN VALUE. HOW MANY BUILDING? LOTS THAT RETIRE. THERE WASN'T ANYTHING TO PUT BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING THAT'S IN MOUTH.

AND THAT'S WHAT THE MAJORITY RIGHT NOW ARE. SOME COUNTIES HAVE ENOUGH DISCRETIONARY MONEY THEY PUT ASIDE AND OPERATE THEIR OWN LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAMS. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE HERE IS THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, WHICH NOBODY HAS PARTICIPATED IN OR USED IN YEARS.

SOME COUNTIES HAVE LIKE A PA FUND, AND THEY'LL BUY X NUMBER EVERY YEAR AND RETIRE THOSE TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

EASTERN SHORE LAND CONSERVANCY. WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED LOCAL? NO. ALL RIGHT. YEAH. I'M LIKE A BUILDING. THE ONLY BUILDING LOTS THAT RETIRE IS BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING ADDED TO AN ADJACENT LOT TO GET ENOUGH ACREAGE TO BUILD A HOUSE ON BECAUSE OF THE SEPTIC CONSTRAINTS.

IT LOOKS GOOD TO ME. I'VE GOT ONE. NOW A CONSTITUENT WANTS TO BUILD A HOUSE WHERE A TRAILER WAS. AND THE HOUSE? THE ONLY WAY HE CAN MEET THE SETBACKS AND BUILD THE SIZE HOUSE THAT HE WANTS TO BUILD.

THE HOUSE IS GOING TO GO LIKE, TWO FEET INTO HIS SEWAGE RESERVE AREA.

SO CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO GET THE SRE SHIFTED TWO FEET? WOW. MIGHT AS WELL BE A MILE. BUT I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD THE HOUSE IN THE SAME SHAPE OF A TRAILER.

I REALLY I'M BEING SERIOUS. THAT'S WHERE I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO GO WITH THAT, BECAUSE THE LOT WAS SO SMALL.

OR BUILDS OF THEM.

SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION? YEP. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE LETTER OF REPORT.

I'LL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ON TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, STARTING WITH

[Comprehensive Plan Update]

[Transportation Chapter - Final Draft]

THERE'S ONLY ONE SMALL CHANGE THAT'S NOT REFLECTED IN HERE.

HANNAH POINTED OUT THAT THE MAP BROKE UP. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE EIGHT.

WELL, ACTUALLY, IF YOU START ON PAGE SIX, IT SAYS UNPAVED ROADS.

AND THEN PAGE SEVEN IS THE MAP OF THE UNPAVED ROADS.

AND THEN WHEN YOU GO TO PAGE EIGHT, YOU HAVE THE REST OF THE INFORMATION ON THE UNPAVED ROADS.

AND SHE JUST POINTED OUT AND CONSISTENTLY IT SHOULD FLOW WHERE THE MAP IS RIGHT AFTER THE UNPAVED ROADS INFORMATION. SO I WORKED ON THAT TODAY AND JUST REARRANGED IT.

SO IT'S JUST RELOCATING THE MAP. NOTHING ELSE HAS CHANGED FROM WHAT YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT HERE.

SO IF EVERYTHING LOOKS GOOD AND YOU ALL APPROVE THIS, YOU WON'T SEE IT AGAIN UNTIL WE COME BACK WITH THE WHOLE ENCHILADA.

[00:55:06]

YEAH. AND ISSUES AND THINGS THAT WE WERE DEALING WITH.

SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION. THE LITTLE PIECE OF JOAN'S CORNER THAT'S SHOWN.

CAN COME OFF NOW. SHE POINTED THAT OUT. OH, HE DID THAT DID HE? OKAY. HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE GETTING A FEW MORE CROSSED OFF THERE TOO.

SO WHEN YOU SHIFTED THAT DOWN, IT DIDN'T, LIKE, AFFECT ANYTHING ELSE FURTHER? THE ONLY THING. WELL IT THREW MARGINS OFF AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO IT'S ALL GOOD. OKAY. IT'S ALL GOOD. MADE ME GO GET A SECOND CUP OF COFFEE AND I.

I POWERED THROUGH IT, BUT IT MAKES SENSE IF YOU'RE READING ABOUT ANY SPECIFIC ITEM LIKE THIS ONE AND THERE'S A MAP WITH IT, THAT MAP SHOULD FOLLOW RIGHT AFTER, NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

SO IT'S SOMETHING MORE ATTENTION TO DETAIL ON OUR SIDE.

IT'S ALL GOOD. IF WE DIDN'T CATCH IT NOW, YOU'D CAUGHT IT AT THE END AND WE WOULD FIX IT THEN.

BUT WE'LL FIX IT NOW. SO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ONLY SEPARATELY.

CORRECT? YES, PLEASE. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION ON TRANSPORTATION? NO.

I'M READY FOR A MOTION. WE NEED A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECEIVE THE REPORT.

LET'S BRING IT. I'LL SECOND APPROVE TO APPROVE THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER FINAL DRAFT.

YEAH. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. TRANSPORTATION IS DONE ON TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES.

[Community Facilities Chapter for Review]

AND THE RED LINE, WHICH GETS KIND OF HARD TO READ, BUT ANYTHING THAT IS IN RED THAT'S THE NEW WORDING PROPOSED.

ANYTHING THAT HAS A STRIKEOUT AND RED. THAT WAS WHAT WAS IN THE 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WE ARE TAKING OUT.

AND I AM JUST GOING TO, LIKE IN THE PAST, READ THROUGH THE OBJECTIVES.

EVERY CHAPTER HAS OBJECTIVES. AND THEN AT THE VERY END THAT HAS THE IMPLEMENTATION TO MATCH THE OBJECTIVES.

AND I TRIED TO KEEP THESE IN ORDER SO THAT THEY MATCHED.

AND I'LL ACTUALLY GO AND MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE, THEY MATCH A LITTLE MORE ON THE PREVIOUS ONE.

SO THE OBJECTIVES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMMUNITY FACILITIES ARE DEFINED TO INCLUDE RECREATION AND PARK FACILITIES, EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, LIBRARIES, MUSEUM AND CULTURAL RESOURCES, EMERGENCY SERVICES AND PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND COURT FACILITIES, AND PUBLIC WORK FACILITIES.

I'M SURE YOU SAY FACILITIES A LOT, DON'T WE? SO THE OBJECTIVES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES INCLUDE TO PROMOTE EFFECTIVE INTERAGENCY COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE MUNICIPAL, COUNTY AND STATE AGENCIES AND ENTITIES IN THE PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRAMING OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES THAT ALIGN WITH THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES, GOALS AND LONG TERM VISION OUTLINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ASSESS AND PROVIDE SUFFICIENT PARK LANDS, OPEN SPACE, LANDS AND RECREATION FACILITIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO MEET BOTH CURRENT COMMUNITY NEEDS AND PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH.

TO ENSURE THE PROVISION OF A SAFE, RELIABLE SUPPLY OF POTABLE WATER AND ADEQUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT FOR ALL COUNTY RESIDENTS.

TO ENCOURAGE MUNICIPALITIES TO ANNEX ADJACENT AREAS THAT LACK ADEQUATE PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER SERVICES.

TO PROMOTE EFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE EXPANSION.

TO CONCENTRATE GROWTH WITHIN PRIORITY FUNDING AREAS.

OUR PHASE THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT. TO MAXIMIZE THE USE OF EXISTING OR PLANNED PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, REDUCE SPRAWL AND PROMOTE FISCALLY AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.

TO ENSURE THAT ALL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON THE AVAILABILITY AND CAPACITY OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES,

[01:00:01]

TO COORDINATE WITH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ENTITIES TO CITE AND DESIGN PUBLIC FACILITIES IN A MANNER THAT SUPPORTS THE COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES GROWTH MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES, AND TO GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE IN A WAY THAT STRENGTHENS EMERGENCY CAPABILITIES AND ENHANCES BROADBAND ACCESS TO SUPPORT BUSINESS GROWTH AND COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY. AND THEN IF YOU GO TO.

PAGE 20. SO THE IMPLEMENTATION FOR THOSE GOALS REQUIRE INTER-AGENCY REVIEWS DURING THE FACILITY PLANNING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROCESS.

CREATE JOINT USE AGREEMENTS FOR FACILITIES SHARED AMONG JURISDICTIONS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE LAND PRESERVATION PARKS AND RECREATION PLAN, ALSO KNOWN AS THE LP. PRIORITIZE IMPROVEMENTS AND EXPANSIONS FOR EXISTING RECREATION FACILITIES AND LAND ACQUISITIONS.

POSITIONS. COORDINATE WATER AND SEWER PLANNING WITH MUNICIPALITIES THROUGH AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE WATER AND SEWER PLAN.

ASSIST WITH SECURING FUNDING FOR UPGRADES TO AGING WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE, AND IMPLEMENT CONSERVATION PROGRAMS TO REDUCE WATER DEMAND, IDENTIFY PRIORITY ANNEXATION AREAS, AND ENCOURAGE ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS THAT INCLUDE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PLANS.

COORDINATE WITH THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING MDP FOR ANNEXATION CONSISTENCY REVIEWS, ALIGN ZONING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMING WITH PFAS, ALONG WITH PROVIDING INCENTIVES FOR INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN PFAS.

REQUIRE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY ANALYSIS DURING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DELAY OR PHASE PROJECTS THAT EXCEED SERVICE CAPACITY UNTIL IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE.

COORDINATE SCHOOL AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING WITH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS.

USE GIS BASED SUITABILITY ANALYSIS TO GUIDE PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER FACILITY SITING.

AND ENGAGE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS EARLY IN THE SITING PROCESS.

REQUIRE CONFORMANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAPS FOR NEW FACILITY PROPOSALS.

UPDATE A COUNTYWIDE BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE MAP AND GAP ANALYSIS.

PARTNER WITH PROVIDERS TO EXPAND BROADBAND TO UNDERSERVED AREAS AND REQUIRE BROADBAND READY DESIGN STANDARDS IN ALL NEW SUBDIVISION AND MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS.

INCORPORATE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS INTO ALL PUBLIC FACILITY PLANS.

COORDINATE WITH SURROUNDING JURISDICTIONS TO ENHANCE THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE HEALTH AND MEDICAL FACILITIES THROUGHOUT THE UPPER AND MID SHORE REGIONS.

AND THEN THERE'S A LOT IN BETWEEN. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN HOPEFULLY TRY TO ANSWER.

ONE THING I THINK WE SHOULD EDIT ON PG TEAM. THE PDF I THINK IT'S 18 MID SHORE REGIONAL LANDFILL. PAGE 18. I THINK WE SHOULD INCLUDE THE EXTENSION AGREEMENT THROUGH 20 AT LEAST 2042.

YOU THINK CRYSTAL'S SOME WORDING THAT INDICATES.

YEAH. SINCE WE'VE PDF PAGE 18 IS PAGE 17 IN THE DOCUMENT.

YEP. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO THE VERY TOP, THE VERY FIRST I THINK IN GENEVA.

SO WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO CHANGE THAT TO. I THINK WE SHOULD JUST ADD THAT AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED TO FILL THE LANDFILL TO CAPACITY TO NOT WASTE THE SPACE.

AND WHEN DID WE DO THAT? 2024? YES, YES, IT WAS LAST YEAR.

AND PROJECTED LIFE OF THE LANDFILL IS THROUGH 2042 NOW.

OR UNTIL FULL. OKAY. SO WOULD YOU TAKE THE 2030 OUT LIKE IT'S SLATED TO OPERATE FROM 2011 TO 2030? IT WAS. AND THEN BASED ON I WOULD JUST TAKE ALL OF THAT OUT LIKE THE HOST FEE PAYMENT THAT THE COUNTY IS NOW GETTING FOR THOSE REMAINING FOR THE YEARS, OR IS THAT REALLY NOT IMPORTANT? IT GIVES MORE CONTEXT TO THE DECISION TO EXTEND THE LANDFILL BECAUSE THAT WAS CONTROVERSIAL.

I CAN PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION THAN JUST AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED.

I CAN LOOK THAT UP. YEAH. THERE'S A THERE'S A HOST A HOST FEE THAT'S THAT THE COUNTY RECEIVES WHICH ESCALATES AFTER 2030.

IT DOUBLES. ACTUALLY, I THINK WE'RE RECEIVING LIKE $400,000 A YEAR FROM NOW.

I THINK IT WAS FOR TRYING TO FIND IT FROM NOW UNTIL 2030, AND THEN AFTER 2030, IT DOUBLES.

[01:05:05]

YEAH. YEAH. SO WE WERE ABLE TO KEEP THE FREE HOMEOWNER DROP OFF.

WE DIDN'T HAVE TO TRANSPORT OUR TRASH TO ANOTHER COUNTY.

THE INCREASED EXPENSE FOR THAT. AND MEZ AGREED TO PAVE RIVER ROAD, AND THEY PAVED ANOTHER ROAD OUT THERE. SO. AND PAVING IS ON THEIR WAY BECAUSE I CAME THROUGH THERE TODAY.

YEAH, THEY JUST GOT IT DONE. I THINK SO. SO I WILL TAKE OUT THAT COMPLETE PORTION OF THE SENTENCE I'LL TAKE OUT AND IS SLATED TO OPERATE FROM 2011 THROUGH 2030 AND PUT IN. OR YOU COULD SAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY AGREED.

ORIGINALLY AGREEMENT WAS TILL 2030. BUT NOW THAT THERE'S BEEN AN OKAY.

YEAH, WE CAN LEAVE THAT IN THERE AND THEN JUST THAT'S FINE.

AND THEN IT'S STILL TRUE AFTER THAT TIME. IF IT'S 2042 OR WHEN IT GETS TO THE FULL, THAT IT WOULD THEN BE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY.

YES. OKAY. THEN WHAT I'M HEARING IS QUEEN ANNE'S AND KENT ARE GONNA FIND A SPOT TOGETHER AND PROBABLY BUILD ONE THE LAST 40 YEARS. OKAY. OKAY. MR. PRESIDENT MADE IT.

HEY, CAN I ASK THAT? CAN I ASK A QUESTION RELATED TO THE TO THE PLANT REDEVELOPMENT HERE? IS THERE IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN IN THE PLAN TO, TO SET ASIDE SITES OR TO ENCOURAGE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AREAS THAT COULD BE USED BY NONPROFITS TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE UNDERSERVED? YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M THINKING OF IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH, LIKE, AARON'S PLACE OR HIS HEALTH MINISTRY? I, I REPRESENT BOTH OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS, AND ALL THE EMPLOYERS ARE CURRENTLY TRYING TO FIND A NEW LOCATION FOR THOSE ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE THEY GOT THROWN AT THEIR HANDS.

AND I JUST WATCHING THEM SCROLL THROUGH THIS AND SEEM LIKE THIS WAS AN APPROPRIATE DOCUMENT WHERE YOU MIGHT WANT TO SORT OF ENCOURAGE A SET ASIDE OR SOME CHANGES IN THE IN THE CODES OR THE ZONES TO, TO ALLOW PLACES LIKE THAT TO GROW OR EXIST.

WOULD THAT LAND IN THIS CHAPTER OR. WELL BEING A COMMUNITY IT'S.

SO ALL ALL PROPERTY HAS A SPECIFIC ZONE. AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROPERTY THAT IS ZONED FOR THE USE IS IT THAT THERE AREN'T PARCELS AVAILABLE OR THERE AREN'T BUILDINGS OR THAT'S NOT ZONED FOR THAT USE, AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT.

SO I WOULD SAY IT GOES INTO TWO, TWO AREAS. THERE'S VERY LITTLE PROPERTY THAT I'M AWARE OF THIS ACTUALLY ZONED FOR NONPROFITS LIKE HOMELESS SHELTERS OR FOOD PANTRIES. RIGHT. THEN THERE ARE PROPERTIES THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO THAT.

YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, WE'RE ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT TO BUY THE MEETINGHOUSE ROAD PROPERTY, THE FORMER ELECTRIC FACILITY, AND THAT IS ZONED IN A MANNER, I BELIEVE IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO DEVELOP IT APPROPRIATELY INTO A MULTI-USE KIND OF FACILITY.

SO WE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR A REZONING IN ORDER TO GET THAT DONE.

AND CURRENTLY, OUR ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR SPECIFIC USE CATEGORIES FOR SHELTERS OR FOOD PANTRY DISTRIBUTION, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THERE'S THERE'S NOT A CARVE OUT IN OUR USES FOR THOSE SPECIFIC CATEGORIES, WHICH MAKES IT CHALLENGING TO FOR THEM TO LOCATE SOMEWHERE IN THE COUNTY. SO THIS WOULD COME UP AS PART OF THE OVERALL ZONING CODE REWRITE.

AND I HAVE A VERY LONG LIST ALREADY IN THE SHORT SIX MONTHS.

AND DEFINITIONS IS HUGE. LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT ZONING AS FAR AS USES.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU START OFF WITH NO ZONING AT ALL, AS THE YEARS PROGRESS, WHEN YOU DO HAVE ZONING, YOU HAVE MINIMAL STANDARDS AND USES, AND THEN YOU REALLY HAVE TO ADD MORE DETAIL AND MORE.

MORE THINGS COME ALONG OVER TIME AND THINGS CHANGE.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN A WHOLE COTTAGE INDUSTRY NOW.

NOT A BAD THING. COVID HAD A FEW GOOD THINGS COME OUT OF IT.

SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT.

AND I JUST MADE MYSELF A NOTE TO ADD THAT TO MY LIST, TO LOOK AT PARCELS THAT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE

[01:10:08]

WOULD IT BE HELPFUL FOR US TO DRAFT A COUPLE OF PAGES AND SEND IT OVER TO YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION? YOU CAN CERTAINLY. I MEAN, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. YEAH.

NOW THE ZONING WRITE THE ZONING CODE UPDATE WILL HAPPEN AFTER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ADOPTED THAT IS SLATED FOR NEXT SUMMER 2026. FINGERS CROSSED.

BECAUSE THAT'S A VERY AGGRESSIVE SCHEDULE TO GET ALL OF THIS THROUGH AND DONE AND APPROVED.

SO JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE, IT'S NOT LIKE THE END OF THIS YEAR.

BUT YES, I WELCOME ANY COMMENTS. ANY. ALL RIGHT.

AND THERE I NOTICED ON YOUR CALENDAR THERE'S A, THERE'S A SORT OF OUTREACH OUTREACH VIEW OF THE ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SOMETIME IN NOVEMBER. I THINK IT IS ON OCTOBER.

YEAH. NOVEMBER IS JUST A SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETING THAT WE'RE DOING IN OCTOBER.

THE ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS. MOST OF IT WILL BE HAPPENING 2026 AS A WHOLE. THE DRAFT PLAN WOULD GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HOPEFULLY IN JANUARY.

THEN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN FEBRUARY. WE ALSO SEND THAT DRAFT PLAN OUT TO OTHER COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES ADJACENT.

THAT IS ALSO THE END OF FEBRUARY. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ALSO GETS IT FOR A REVIEW, AND THEY SEND IT OUT TO FOUR DIFFERENT AGENCIES.

AND COMMENTS COME BACK. I BELIEVE IT'S 60 DAYS.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT APRIL AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FINAL DRAFT, WITH THE ATTACHED COMMENTS FROM MDP. AND I'M VERY HESITANT AT SAYING THAT OUT LOUD.

I'M AN OPTIMISTIC, BUT I DON'T THINK APRIL I'M SHOOTING FOR IT.

THAT'S MY TARGET. BUT I'LL SAY I'VE HAD A LOT OF ISSUES WITH OUR INDUSTRIAL ZONED AREAS ANYWAY, BECAUSE A LOT OF THEM AREN'T. A LOT OF THE LAND INSIDE OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREAS ARE NOT USED FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES.

AND A LOT OF THAT IS BECAUSE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS.

SEPTIC ONSITE DISPOSAL. THOSE AREAS ARE NOT SERVICED BY SEWER OR WATER.

SO IF YOU IF THE SOILS AREN'T CONDUCIVE FOR ONSITE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THEM ANYWAY.

SO I MEAN AND YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HERE IS THAT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THE PLAN THAT WE'RE WORKING OFF OF NOW IS HOW OLD 2010 IS 15 YEARS OLD, 15 YEARS OLD, AND THE ZONING REZONING WAS DONE AT.

THAT TIME AS WELL. NO, NO. SO REZONING IS HOW OUR ZONING ZONING WAS ADOPTED IN 1967.

AND THERE WAS A RE ADOPTION AND REEVALUATION IN 1982.

THAT'S A YEAR I WAS BORN. AND SINCE THAT TIME, IT HASN'T BEEN CHANGED.

WE'VE HAD TEXT AMENDMENTS. WE DID. AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE REZONING SHORTLY AFTER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WAS ESTABLISH. THE NEW ZONING DISTRICTS FOR THE VILLAGES, THE VILLAGE CENTER AND VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO WE DID DO SOME ZONING CODE UPDATES AT THAT TIME AFTER THE COMP PLAN, BUT WE REALLY DIDN'T TOUCH.

WE DIDN'T DO IT IN ITS ENTIRETY. RIGHT. ACTUALLY TAKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY.

YEAH. SO ALL ALL THE REGULATIONS, STATE REGULATIONS.

SO WHEN WE GET TO THE ZONING CODE. WARNING NOW I'M GOING TO BE PULLING IT APART SENTENCE BY SENTENCE, PIECE BY PIECE BECAUSE IT REALLY NEEDS AN OVERHAUL.

THAT PROCESS IS START IN SEPTEMBER. POTENTIALLY AS SOON AS THIS IS DONE.

YES. AND WE DO. WE'VE BEEN KEEPING A MASTER LIST IN THE OFFICE FOR 15 YEARS.

EVERY TIME WE COME ACROSS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T WORK RIGHT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

BUT IT'S GOING TO TAKE A PAGE BY PAGE FOR YOU TO REALLY GET THIS UP TO DATE.

AND THIS HAPPENS IN EVERY COUNTY. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT POINTING A FINGER OR SAYING ANYTHING AGAINST CAROLINE COUNTY AT ALL.

I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO MISUNDERSTAND THAT. MY, MY, IF I WE'LL PUT TOGETHER A WRITE UP FOR YOU.

I'M SORRY. YOU CAN SEND IT IN EITHER TO MYSELF, TO LESLIE OR CRYSTAL? ANY OF US. THANK YOU.

[01:15:07]

I DO WANT TO POINT OUT. THANKS AGAIN. HANNAH.

TUCKAHOE MEETING HOUSE. I HAD THAT IT WAS BUILT IN 2803.

SO FINGER GETS USED TO TYPING THAT, TOO. I'VE ALREADY CORRECTED IT, SO IT'S 18 OR 3.

JUST IN CASE ANYBODY NOTICES THAT LATER. YEAH.

YEAH. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A ONE, NOT A TWO. I WAS LIKE, I HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL MAYBE.

YEAH. LOOKING WAY DOWN THE ROAD. YEAH. MY RESPONSE TO THAT WAS IF I HAD A CRYSTAL BALL, THAT'S NOT WHAT I WOULD BE LOOKING AT.

SHOULD THERE BE ANYTHING ADDRESSED ABOUT LOCKMAN OR WHAT'S THE PROGRESS ON LOCKMAN? TRAVIS? I MEAN, IS THAT THE NEXT SCHOOL TO BE BUILT OUT OF ALL OF THEM? I MEAN, SHOULD ANYTHING LIKE THAT BE ADDED? WELL.

THE CURRENT FISCAL SITUATION THE STATE FINDS IT IN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL EVER GET IT.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WORTH PUTTING IT. OKAY.

I MEAN, I THINK DISCUSSIONS ARE NOW 2028, BUT I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF IT SLIPPED.

TO 2030 OR. IT'S PROBABLY A $100 MILLION BILL, AND THE STATE PICKS UP BECAUSE OF OUR WEALTH, OUR DISPARITY. I THINK THE STATE COULD PICK UP 92% OF THAT COST.

SO WE COULD BE LOOKING AT $92 MILLION FOR THE STATE TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH, AND THE LOCAL SHARE WOULD BE 8 MILLION.

YEAH. LESLIE AND I ACTUALLY DID TALK ABOUT THAT.

WENT BACK AND FORTH A LITTLE BIT. BUT IT'S LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S SO UNKNOWN.

AND THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS GOING TO LIVE FOR TEN YEARS.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE, BUT YOU WANT A GOOD RELATIVE INFORMATION.

SO THAT'S HOW WE ENDED UP WITH WITH WHAT WE CAN KIND OF KEEP THAT OPEN, MAYBE EDIT IT RIGHT UP TILL THE FINALIZATION OF THIS.

BUT I WOULD, I WOULD SAY I DON'T FORESEE A CHANGE.

AND DENTON ELEMENTARY OR RIDGELEY ELEMENTARY GETTING JUMPING AHEAD OF LOCKMAN.

SO I THINK HE'S PRETTY SAFE TO SAY THAT LOCKMAN WILL BE THE NEXT ONE UP FOR CONSTRUCTION.

WE'RE SHOOTING FOR 2028. BUT THAT'S A REALLY OPTIMISTIC PROJECTION BECAUSE WHEN YOU READ THE NUMBERS, IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE ACKERMAN'S THAT BAD, BUT IT REALLY IS.

I MADE A NOTE THAT WE'LL LOOK AT IT AGAIN AT THE VERY END.

YEAH.

OTHERWISE, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING, GEOFF? SO IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT'S HERE, WE'LL POTENTIALLY HAVE A FINAL NEXT MONTH.

YES. WHAT THE CHANGE IS THAT TRAVIS BROUGHT UP ON PAGE 17. YEP.

SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHANGES OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES.

OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHANGES TO THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? DID THE THE THE CHANGES THAT WE THINK THAT THE CHANGES IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AREAS GET. LASTLY DID THIS.

[01:20:08]

SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. AND SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. HOPEFULLY. SEE THAT NEXT MONTH? YES YOU WILL. SO I HAVE A FEW MORE THINGS. OKAY.

[Public Outreach Info]

AND ALSO FOR THE PUBLIC OUTREACH. FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR TOOK OFF AND ADDED.

SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO HAVE THOSE AS AN UPDATE.

AND AS DISCUSSED BEFORE, YOU'LL SEE OCTOBER 8TH AS NO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

WE'RE DOING A PUBLIC OUTREACH AT THE PRESTON TOWN HALL AT 6:00 FOR THAT MONTH.

AND SO WE ARE GOING TO LOSE A MONTH OF COMPREHENSIVE CHAPTER.

BUT I FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT CONSIDERING THE TURNOUT THAT WE HAD, YOU ALL DID AS WELL, AND WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING SOME MORE ADVERTISING AND FLIERS AND OUTREACH TO TRY TO GET MORE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE AND POSSIBLY EVEN ANOTHER SURVEY BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR.

SO JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO HAVE THAT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT.

NOPE. NOPE. OKAY. WE WERE ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONFERENCE.

THAT'S USUALLY EVERY FALL. AND I REACHED OUT TO MDP AND LAST YEAR AT THE 2024, THEY DECIDED TO GO BY ANNUALLY INSTEAD OF ANNUALLY FOR THIS. SO THE NEXT ONE WILL BE 2026.

NOW THERE ARE A LOT OF, I THINK TEN, MAYBE 12 YEARS ON THE MDP WEBSITE THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT THE ARCHIVE, THE PRESENTATIONS AND EVERYTHING. THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.

JUST TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT SOME OF THE ONES THAT YOU WERE NOT A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER OR COULDN'T ATTEND. AND WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED FOR THAT DATE IN 2026.

OKAY. I FEEL LIKE WE USUALLY SEE IT IN THE SUMMER, SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING.

YEAH. SUMMERTIME OR FALL? SOMETHING AROUND THERE? YEAH. GREAT. AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE.

OKAY. I SEE NO BZA UPDATE. GENEVA. CORRECT. NO UPDATE.

[BZA Update]

[Department Update]

NO. GO AHEAD. BUT. SO OUR TYPICAL PROCESS FOR PASSING A NEW ORDINANCE LIKE THIS WOULD BE TO GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION BEFORE OFFICIAL INTRODUCTION BY THE COMMISSIONERS.

SO I GUESS, FIRST OF ALL, THE QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY HAS PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT WILL ADD A $4,500 PER ACRE FEE ON SOLAR DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS ON PRIME FARMLAND.

THEY HAVE A DESIGNATION, I THINK IT'S SOIL TYPE, SOIL TYPE, A CLASS ONE, ONE AND TWO.

RIGHT. SO WHAT MY REQUEST IS, IS THAT WE KIND OF GIVE A PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A CONCEPT SIMILAR TO WHAT QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY HAS INTRODUCED SO THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND INTRODUCE IT POTENTIALLY, IF THE OFFICE OF LAW AND PLANNING CODES GETS IT DONE PRIOR TO OUR NEXT MEETING, WE WOULD BRING IT HERE AND ASK FOR A RECOMMENDATION ON THE FINAL DRAFT LEGISLATION.

BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO START THE PROCESS AND MOVE THROUGH BOTH THIS BODY AND THE COMMISSIONERS CONCURRENTLY.

IF WE COULD DO THAT. AND LIKE I SAID, BASICALLY IT'S A $4,500 AN ACRE FEE PER ACRE ON PRIME SOILS, CLASS ONE SOILS. THEY HAVE EIGHT SOIL CLASSES, SO IT'LL BE ON THEIR CLASS ONE SOILS ONLY, CLASS ONE, JUST ONE. IT'S GOING TO BE CALLED A COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION CONTRIBUTION.

[01:25:03]

SO IT WOULD GO BACK TO BUY EASEMENTS ON OTHER PROPERTIES.

AND NOW IS THAT ON COMMERCIAL SOLAR OR IS THAT COMMERCIAL OR SOLAR ACROSS THE BOARD.

YEAH, I WOULD ASSUME IT WOULD BE UTILITY SCALE SOLAR BECAUSE THEY'RE ALIGNING THEIR SOLAR REGULATIONS WITH THE CHANGES THAT CAME OUT OF SENATE BILL 931, WITH SOME SETBACKS FROM RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, REQUIREMENTS FOR BUFFERING THAT MAY DIFFER.

SO WHAT ARE YOU THINKING, KEITH? NOT DOING ON THE COMMUNITY GREEN.

NO, I'M NOT NECESSARILY IS WHAT WHAT I WOULDN'T DO IT ON PANELS THAT WERE GOING TO BE LIKE ON A RESIDENCY OR ON A FARM FOR THAT FARM, IF IT'S MEANT FOR THE POWER TO BE SOLD, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY.

THAT'S OKAY. RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT I AND THAT WOULD BE COMMUNITY SOLAR OR COMMERCIAL.

QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY IS FOR SITING A SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEMS, COMMUNITY SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEMS AND ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES.

WHICH WOULD NOT BE SOLAR THAT YOU ARE GENERATING ON SITE FOR USE ON SITE.

OKAY. RIGHT. AND WHO PAYS THE SOLAR COMPANY, THE SOLAR COMPANY THAT OWNS THERE.

I GUESS IT'S I GUESS IT'S PAID DURING THE PERMIT.

RIGHT BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT. SO IT DOESN'T WHEREVER WE WOULD I MEAN, IT'S A ONE TIME FEE.

WELL, ONE COMMISSIONER HAS SUGGESTED THAT IT'D BE A YEARLY FEE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YET.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA THAT MIGHT DRAW AND WIND A LITTLE BIT OF A TARGET ON US.

WHEN DOES THAT TAKE EFFECT? WHEN THEY GET FINAL APPROVAL.

WHEN? WELL, THAT WOULD BE I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN WE WOULD IMPLEMENT IT.

SO IF YOU'VE ALREADY GOT AN APPLICATION IN WILL WE APPLY THIS.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT. I MEAN IT I WOULD STATE THAT WE WOULD DO IT AT THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.

LIKE YOU DON'T GET YOUR BUILDING PERMIT TO START YOUR PROJECT UNTIL YOU'VE PAID IT.

RIGHT. BUT WHO WOULD IT APPLY TO? HOW HOW FAR INTO THE APPLICATION PROCESS.

LIKE WE HAVE A COUPLE THAT ARE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

YEAH. I MEAN, WE WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE AT WHAT POINT DID YOU WANT TO MAKE THIS EFFECTIVE.

IS IT AT THE TIME YOU WRITE LIKE THE SOLAR SETBACKS WHEN WE MADE THE SETBACK, CHANGES TO 200FT.

THAT ONLY LASTED, WHAT, SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE STATE PREEMPTED US? ONE OF THE THINGS TO CONSIDER WITH THAT, WHY WE DIDN'T IMPOSE THAT 200 FOOT SETBACK ON THE PROJECTS THAT WERE ALREADY OUT THERE IS BECAUSE THEY HAD MADE A SIGNIFICANT ENGINEERING. THEY HAD AT MOST OF THE ENGINEERING FINANCIAL INVESTED INTO THAT, BETWEEN THE ENGINEERING OF THE PLANS AND ALREADY ESTABLISHING SOME LEVEL OF COUNTY APPROVAL, BE IT THROUGH A PRELIMINARY APPROVAL WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THROUGH THE BCA, THEY HAD AT LEAST GOTTEN SOME LEVEL OF APPROVAL, RIGHT? SO WE DIDN'T APPLY OUR NEW SETBACKS TO THOSE PROJECTS.

AND IS THAT FEE BASED ON THE ACRES THAT THE PANELS ARE SET ON OR THE PARCEL ACRE ACRES LIKE WE'D CALCULATE OUR.

ACREAGE ON THE DISTURBED AREA. FOR OUR ACREAGE CAP IS CALCULATED ON WHAT IS IDENTIFIED AS THE DISTURBED AREA FOR THE SOLAR FACILITY.

NOT NECESSARILY PANEL ONLY AREA. IT IS BASED ON THE SOME PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING INSIDE THE SCREENING, RIGHT INSIDE THAT FENCED AREA. ANYTHING THAT'S UNUSABLE FOR FARMLAND BASICALLY.

OKAY. YOU'VE SEEN THAT SCREENING ONCE THEY PUT THAT SCREENING DOES THAT STUFF ON GREENSBORO ROAD, ALL THAT SCREENING THAT'S DONE. YOU CAN'T FARM THAT. NO, NO.

SO THEN ALL OF THAT ALL OF THAT WOULD BE ALL OF THAT WOULD BE WELL, WE SHOULD HAVE HAD THIS PLACE TWO YEARS, THREE YEARS AGO. SO AT ONE TIME FEE THAT THAT WOULD APPLY TO THE DEVELOPER, WHOEVER'S THE COMPANY IS DEVELOPING THE PROJECT. YEAH. AND JUST SO YOU GUYS KNOW, WE'LL GET THIS BACK BEFORE YOU, BEFORE IT COULD BE ENACTED ANYWAY.

THE COMMISSIONERS CAN AMEND. RIGHT UP UNTIL THE DAY OF ENACTMENT.

WE CAN AMEND AND THEN ENACT. AS LONG AS YOU PUBLISH.

GET IT IN WRITING AND HANDING IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC.

RIGHT. WE DON'T LIKE TO DO THAT. WE COULD DELAY IT.

ANOTHER MEETING. YOU KNOW, IF WE MADE THAT CHANGE, A SIGNIFICANT IF WE MADE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE ON THE DATE THAT WE COULD ENACT, WE WOULD PROBABLY POSTPONE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING TO GIVE TIME.

BUT SO WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS, IS IF WE INTRODUCE IT ABOUT THE SAME TIME YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, WE'LL HAVE AT LEAST THREE OPPORTUNITIES TO AMEND IT TO WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION THIS BODY MAKES AT THE SAME TIME.

IS QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY 4500? YES. THAT'S WHAT.

AND THEY BASED IT OFF. I THINK THE AVERAGE MOUTH EASEMENT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD COST.

[01:30:06]

I COULD DO IT.

SO I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT, IT WOULD JUST BE IF EVERYONE HERE IS OKAY WITH IT, WE'LL DO IT CONCURRENTLY, AS OPPOSED TO FOLLOWING THE TRADITIONAL PROCEDURE OF IF IT GETS DONE.

I MEAN, IT MAY BE A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE STILL TWEAKING STUFF AND IT COMES BACK HERE FIRST ANYWAY.

SO AND THEN WHAT DOES THOSE FUNDS. WHAT ARE THOSE FUNDS GOING TO BE EARMARKED FOR? I WOULD SAY THEY GO INTO A SPECIAL ACCOUNT AND ONLY BE USED TO PURCHASE EASEMENTS ON OTHER FARMS WITHIN THE COUNTY.

WITHIN THE COUNTY? WHY? WHY WOULD I MEAN. TO PREVENT DEVELOPMENT ON OTHER FARMS, SOLAR OR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT? ANYTHING. I'M ALL FOR IT. I MEAN, DOES IT HAVE TO BE THE I GUESS I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THE THE DESIGNATION OF WHERE THE FUNDS ARE GOING TO GO HAVE TO BE THAT STRINGENT.

I MEAN, IF YOU JUST DID THE QUICK MATH BASED ON WHAT THE STATE WANTS CAROLINE COUNTY TO PUT IN AND AND IF THAT WAS APPROVED, YOU'RE LOOKING AT $100 MILLION. SO WHO'S GOING TO GET IF THEY PUT WHAT, 8000 ACRES OF SALT? WAS IT WAS THAT THE 5% THAT WAS GETTING YOUR NUMBERS? 20. WHAT ARE WE CAPPED AT? WE'RE NOT CAPPED AT 20%.

OH, I THINK IT'S LIKE 8000 ACRES. IT'S AROUND 8000 AT THE 5%, 5% OF OUR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA.

OKAY, BUT BUT THAT NUMBER CAN BE CHANGED BY THE LEGISLATURE AT ANY TIME.

AND REALLY THEY CAN GO SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT. A LOT OF THESE ACRES THAT ARE ALREADY IN, LIKE GREENSBORO WON'T BE ACCOUNTED FOR.

YES. THAT'LL GO THAT'LL BE IN THE 8000. THAT WILL BE IN THE 8000.

BUT IF YOU PASS ANYTHING TO GET MONEY PER ACRE, THOSE ACRES THEY'RE RIGHT.

THEY'RE GONE. RIGHT. UNLESS YOU PUT IT, THEN IT'S AT THE TIME OF PERMIT.

THEY HAVEN'T BEEN PERMITTED YET. IT'S ALL CONTINGENT ON WHEN IN THE PROCESS YOU DO IT.

BUT PRIOR TO POWER GENERATING OR. BUT THEY DEFINITELY COUNT TOWARDS YOUR 5%.

RIGHT. I ONLY HAVE ONE GRADE. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW WHY NOT TWO AND THREE. I THOUGHT IT WAS ONE AND TWO. IT IS ONE.

IT'S ONE WHAT I WAS I MEAN WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT WAS ON FARMLAND THAT HAD A USDA DESIGNATION ATTACHED TO IT. SO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE HAS TWO ASSESSMENTS OR DESIGNATIONS THAT THEY PUT ON FARMLAND.

THERE'S FARMLAND OF NATIONWIDE IMPORTANCE, AND THEN THERE'S A USDA DESIGNATION OF FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE.

BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT DIDN'T FIT FOR THEM FOR SOME REASON, MAYBE SOIL TYPES WERE CLEANER, EASIER, SO MAYBE WE COULD LOOK AT WHAT SOIL TYPES CORRELATE WITH THOSE TWO USDA DESIGNATIONS AND USE THEM.

I WOULD I WOULD TRY TO OPEN IT UP MORE THAN JUST CLASS ONE SOILS.

YEAH. WHAT? HOW MUCH OF THE COUNTY DO YOU THINK OF ACTIVE FARMLAND IS CLASS ONE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA? NOT MUCH, I CAN'T SAY. NO, NO.

BUT IT IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ON THE MATH. APPLICATION.

AND USUALLY THAT'S SENT OVER TO SOIL CONSERVATION.

RIGHT. WELL NEXT MEETING WE CAN WE'LL HOPEFULLY HAVE SOMETHING DRAFT AND, AND WE CAN DO A DEEP DIVE INTO IT THEN.

BUT I JUST WANTED IF LIKE I SAID IF EVERYBODY'S GOOD WE MAY DO AN INTRODUCTION DEPENDING ON HOW IT SHAKES OUT PRIOR TO GETTING THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO QUEENAN DEFINES COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION CONTRIBUTION AS A PER ACRE FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION MADE TO THE COUNTY.

WHEN SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING STATIONS AND ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES ARE DEVELOPED ON IDENTIFIED CLASS ONE SOILS.

THE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT WILL BE BASED UPON 50% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUABLE APPRAISAL, AS DETERMINED BY THE ANNUAL EASEMENT SETTLEMENT PROCESS WITHIN THAT COUNTY. WITHIN THAT COUNTY. I'VE GOT THE NUMBERS FOR YOU ON THE ACREAGE.

THIS IS FROM THE LETTER THAT WE SENT OUT TO THE LANDOWNERS.

CAROLINE COUNTY HAS 200,000 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, OF WHICH 91,046% IS CLASSIFIED AS, QUOTE, PRIME FARMLAND, END QUOTE, BY THE USDA, WHICH IS SOIL WITH THE HIGHEST PRODUCTIVITY FOR PRODUCING FOOD CROPS AND THUS IS OF

[01:35:05]

QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY HAS 12,722 ACRES, IS CLASS ONE AND CLASS TWO IS 120,000.

SO MOST OF THEIR ACREAGE IS SOLE CLASS TWO. NOT A LOT OF ONE, MAYBE A WHOLE, BUT.

SO THEY'RE NOT BLOCKING OUT THAT MUCH. IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR MAP, IT'S NOT MUCH.

SO WHAT IF YOU DID PRIME FARMLAND, SINCE THAT'S A SPECIFIC DEFINITION, 46%.

IT SOUNDS LOW TO ME. I KNOW IT'S ALL ABOUT BEING DEFENSIBLE IN COURT, THOUGH, TOO, RIGHT? YEAH. WELL, YOU COULD YOU COULD HAVE A GRADATION.

THE FEE IS HIGHER FOR THE BETTER LAND AND SLIGHTLY LOWER FOR THE LESSER LAND.

RIGHT. AND THEN YOU COULD INCLUDE IT ALL. YEAH.

WHY EXCLUDE ANY OF IT? YEAH. IT SHOULD ALL HAVE A FEE IF IT'S AN ACT OF AGRICULTURE.

CORRECT. CAN YOU BASE IT ON AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT BY TAX ASSESSMENTS? IT'S HOW BIG OF A TARGET DO YOU WANT? AND THE ARGUMENT IS I WANT A TARGET.

I MEAN, THERE'S YOUR ARGUMENT. NATIONAL IMPORTANCE AND STAGING POINTS.

RIGHT. RIGHT. WE MADE ALL THOSE ARGUMENTS LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

AND IT WAS. WELL, THEN YOU ALL GOT ALL THE NOTES.

DIDN'T MAKE THEM AGAIN. YEAH, WELL, AT LEAST YOU USE IT TO MAKE THE FEE ARGUMENT.

YEAH. DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY'S 5% OF THEIR PPA WITH THEIR ACREAGE IS? IT WAS SLIGHTLY MORE THAN OURS, BUT THE COUNTY'S A LOT LARGER.

I REMEMBER LOOKING AT ALL THOSE NUMBERS THERE.

THEIR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA WAS SMALLER THAN OURS, THOUGH I DON'T THINK THEY DESIGNATED AS MUCH AS WE DID.

I BELIEVE WE JUST PUT EVERYTHING IN THE PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA IN AN ATTEMPT AT THE TIME, THINKING WE WERE DOING THE RIGHT THING BECAUSE WE WANTED TO PRESERVE BASICALLY THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

WELL, IT CAME BACK TO BITE US BECAUSE OUR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA WAS SO MUCH LARGER THAN LIKE TALBOT OR QUEEN ANNE, WHO WENT WITH A SMALLER PRESERVATION AREAS. I THINK I THINK TALBOT'S IS SMALLER THAN OURS.

IF I REMEMBER, I HAD ALL THOSE NUMBERS BACK DURING THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, BUT I'VE I'VE MEMORY DUMPED THOSE.

MAKE ROOM FOR SOMETHING ELSE. YOU NEED SOMETHING FOR BOTH.

I DON'T THINK I NEED AN OFFICIAL MOTION OR ANYTHING IF YOU GUYS JUST.

I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GOOD, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? WE'RE NOT.

I'M NOT TRYING TO STEP ON YOUR TOES. I'M JUST TRYING TO MOVE FASTER THAN GOVERNMENT SPEED.

YEAH, SO LONG FOR THAT. NO OFFENSE TO ALL THE COUNTY PEOPLE.

BECAUSE I THINK I REALLY THINK WE SHOULD GET IT IN PLACE.

I HATE TO DO IT TO SOMEBODY AFTER THEY'VE MADE AN APPLICANT OR THEY'VE TALKED TO LANDOWNERS.

THEY'VE BEEN PAYING RETAINERS TO, TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOMEBODY HOLD THE LAND OR WHATEVER.

I THINK WE'RE DOING A, WE'RE BEING MORE JUST BY GETTING IN IN EFFECT.

SO THEY KNOW GOING IN TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.

SO RATHER THAN FINANCIALLY. YEAH. YEAH. WHAT THEY'RE COMMITTING TO.

YEAH. SO YOU WOULDN'T DO WHEN THE BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED.

THAT'S WHEN THEY SAY NO. I THINK WHAT AN APPLICATION SUBMITTAL FOR A NEW PROJECT COMING IN BEFORE IT CAME, BEFORE WE GOT PRELIMINARY. SO THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE TO COME HERE FOR PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL.

ONCE YOU RECEIVE THAT RIGHT, YOU'RE LOCKED IN, RIGHT? RIGHT. SO ANYBODY THAT'S AT THAT STAGE RIGHT NOW WOULD BE WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY THE FEE.

RIGHT. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHY I WANT TO GET A BRAND NEW PROJECT.

CORRECT. YEAH. YEAH. OH, MAN. NOW, THERE MAY BE SOMEBODY RIGHT NOW PAYING A RETAINER.

THERE MAY BE A SOLAR DEVELOPER SOMEWHERE PAYING A RETAINER, AND HAS AN ENGINEER WORKING ON PUTTING A PRELIMINARY PLAN TOGETHER OR GOTTEN ANY LEVEL OF APPROVAL YET. RIGHT. RIGHT. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THAT'S GOING TO BE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE FEE.

YEAH. CRYSTAL. IT'S JUST AN IDEA HERE. BUT I WONDER IF SOME SORT OF A PUBLIC NOTICE COULD BE POSTED ON THE DEPARTMENT WEBSITE,

[01:40:10]

THIS IS COMING AND IT'S GOING TO BE RETROACTIVE.

SO THEY CAN'T WHINE THAT THEY HAD NO ACTUAL NOTICE OF IT WHEN THEY PROCEEDED TO ENTER INTO LEASES OR PURCHASES. YOU CAN MAKE AN ATTACHMENT AS PART OF THE APPLICATION THAT THEY SIGN EVEN.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE OURS MAY BE BROADER THAN WHAT QUEEN ANNE IS TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFICS THAN THIS ONE DOES.

WELL, WHEN YOU GET DONE WITH THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT SAND PITS TO.

DIG IT UP. IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T HURT TO HAVE A MOTION.

THAT. WHY NOT? THAT AT THIS TIME, THE COMMISSION IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS GO FORWARD WITH LEGISLATION SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE QUEEN ANNE'S LEGISLATION.

SO MAYBE WHEN THEY GO, WE DO NOT WANT TO GO ON.

SO WE NEED A MOTION. I'M GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION ON A MOTION.

A MOTION WOULD BE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEND A LETTER TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RECOMMENDING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS PREPARE LEGISLATION SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THE RECENTLY INTRODUCED LEGISLATION IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, WHICH IS REFERRED TO AS THE RENEWABLE ENERGY CERTAINTY ACT.

BASICALLY, IT'S A COMPLIANCE ORDINANCE. SO IF SOMEBODY.

AND THIS IS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COMMISSIONERS WILL DO IN OUR WORKING AT LEAST I'M PRESENTLY WORKING ON THIS EXACT ORDINANCE. SO YOU'RE SIMPLY GIVING THE COMMISSIONERS THE GREEN LIGHT FROM THIS COMMISSION THAT YOU WISH THE COMMISSIONERS TO GO FORWARD WITH LEGISLATION WHICH IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THIS PENDING QUEEN ANNE'S LEGISLATION.

AND WE'LL SEND IT BACK FOR COMMENTS FROM THIS BODY TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE WE ACT.

YES. YEP. GOTCHA. ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BOTH ONE AND TWO, NOT JUST ONE LIKE WE CAN SEE.

RIGHT. MORE INCLUSIVE. YEP. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.

THAT FOR A MOTION. IS THAT THAT STORE JUST. MADE IT.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. YEAH. SO MOVE ON. WHAT? STUART. OKAY. JUST MADE A MOTION. THERE YOU GO.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION IN SECOND TO MOVE FORWARD THAT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. HOW'D THAT ROLL? RIGHT ON. I HIJACKED CRYSTAL'S DEPARTMENT ALL DAY.

[Open Discussion]

SO. ANYTHING ELSE? TRAVIS, I WONDER. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE OR NOT, BUT WHY WOULDN'T WE LOOK AT THAT SAME THING FOR FOR THE.

SURFERS MONEY? YEAH. FOR SURE. YEAH. I MEAN, I MEAN, BECAUSE I MEAN, WE'RE POTENTIALLY TAKING OUT THE PRIME FARMLAND.

YES. THAT'S NEVER GOING TO BE USED AGAIN. YEP.

WOULD THE FUNDS GO IN THE SAME? WELL, YEAH. BECAUSE YOU WOULD BUY YOU'D BUY FARMS SO THEY WOULDN'T DIG THEM UP.

[01:45:04]

DIG IT UP. I MEAN, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING TO LOOK AT WHILE YOU'RE.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST IT'S SOMETHING. YEAH. IF WE'RE IF I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT SOLAR PANELS, WE'RE LOOKING AT THEM AND THEY'RE DIGGING THESE FARMS UP AS QUICK AS THEY CAN, AND THAT'S NOT COMING BACK.

I MEAN, SOLAR PANELS ARE THAT STUFF LEACHES INTO THE GROUND.

WHAT'S IT DO? YEAH. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, THE FARMLAND THAT THE SOLAR IS GOING ON IS NEVER GOING TO GO BACK TO FARMING.

WELL, YOU CAN LOOK AT ALL THE DIRT. THEY'RE MOVING AT THE NORTH END OF THE COUNTY.

THEY'RE PUSHING THE HILLS OFF INTO THE HOLES TO LEVEL IT OUT.

THEY'RE NOT STRIPPING THE TOPSOIL BEFORE THEY DO IT. THEY'RE JUST SHOVELING THE TOPSOIL FROM THE HILLS INTO THE HOLES. SO THE HILLS ARE NEVER GOING TO GROW. YOU KNOW, UP THERE, THE HILLS PROBABLY BURNED UP IN THE SUMMER AND THE HOLES PROBABLY DROWNED OUT.

SO. BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO GROW THE SAME.

NOT TO MENTION ALL THE SOIL, CEMENT AND LIME THAT'S BEING MIXED IN TO BUILD ROADS AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THE OTHER STUFF. SO. YEAH, WE CAN CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY LOOK AT IT.

YOU CAN BUILD DEVELOPMENT. YOU CAN. I MEAN, IF YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT LAND, WHEN WE DIG A SAND PIT, IT'S GONE. THEY'VE DONE DUG A HOLE IN. IT'S GONE.

PUT SOME FISH IN IT. YEAH, YEAH. TOURIST ATTRACTION.

YEAH. LOOK AT ALL WATER. WATERFRONT PROPERTY.

YEP. ALL RIGHT, WELL, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT TOO.

I THINK WE DO IT SEPARATELY BECAUSE I IMAGINE THAT THIS TOGETHER.

YEAH. I IMAGINE THIS BILL IS GOING TO DRAW A LOT OF ATTENTION.

YOU KNOW, IT'S IT MAY BE THE SUBJECT OF. BUT I KIND OF THINK YOU'RE IT'S ONE IN THE SAME.

YEAH. MINDSET OR OR IDEOLOGICAL IDEOLOGY. RIGHT.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? THAT'S PRETTY MUCH COVERS OPEN DISCUSSION. YEAH. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YOU RECEIVED A LETTER THAT FOREIGN ART IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSION OR ISSUES WITH THAT FOR TONIGHT.

THE FARM TO 5.00 VOTES FOR THAT. SANFORD OKAY.

AND NOBODY NOBODY LET US KNOW THAT IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.

YOU TELL US THAT. IT'S THE ONLY DAY I DID NOT GO OUT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WASTED SOME TIME HERE TONIGHT, TOO. IT'S BEEN INTERESTING. DON'T GET ME WRONG, I'M SURE.

BUT YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE. WHERE? IS EVERYTHING BAD OR WHY WAS THAT TAKEN OFF OF THE AGENDA? THEY HAD CHANGES THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE BEFORE IT COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FINAL APPROVAL WAS WHY IT WAS TAKEN FROM THE OFF OF THE AGENDA.

THERE WERE SOME ISSUES WITH THE DECISION THAT CAME OUT OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS THAT LIMITED THE TRUCK COUNT, AND THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD A HIGHER TRUCK COUNT THAN WHAT WAS ALLOWED.

SO THAT HAS TO BE AMENDED BEFORE IT CAN COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT'S ON THE FINAL SITE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE CONDITIONS OF THE BCA WERE.

AND THERE WAS ALSO SOME CONCERN WITH THE LANDSCAPING THAT THEY HAD PROPOSED, WHICH WAS NOT PROPOSED.

AT THE BZA HEARING, IT WAS INDICATED THEY WERE GOING TO PUT A BUFFER A VEGETATIVE BUFFER, BUT THERE WAS NO DETAILS AS TO SIZE OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE. SO WHEN THE FINAL SITE PLAN CAME BACK IN, THE SCREENING THAT THEY WERE PROVIDING WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO PROVIDE EFFECTIVE SCREENING FROM THE ROADWAY. SO THAT ALL HAS TO BE REVIEWED AND UPDATED BEFORE THAT PLAN WILL COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

YES, AND I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT SURE WHEN IF LETTERS WERE SENT OUT, AND I WILL CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED, BECAUSE IT WAS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA JUST LATE LAST WEEK.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF LETTERS GOT OUT BEFORE THE HOLIDAY EVEN THEY GOT THE NAME AND ADDRESS TO DEFEND IT.

SO THEY'RE EITHER ON THE AGENDA OR THEY'RE NOT GETTING IT'S BEEN TAKEN OFF.

AGAIN, YOU COULD CALL IT AN OPEN DISCUSSION. YEAH. UNFORTUNATELY IT USED TO BE EASY WHEN WE HAD PHONE BOOKS AND YOU COULD LOOK EVERYBODY UP, BUT NOW EVERYBODY HAS CELL PHONES AND IT'S HARD TO GET CONTACT INFORMATION FOR ANYBODY OTHER THAN THE MAIL, RIGHT? OKAY. EVERYBODY'S GETTING COMMENTS. EVERYBODY HAS TO PAY THEIR TAXES.

I THINK THAT HAS PHONE NUMBERS TOO. BUT IT'S ALL GOOD.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THAT'S WHY I TOOK YOU OUT IN RELATION TO THE FARM RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

[01:50:02]

THE ONE THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE FARM. WELL, THAT'S WHAT.

IN THE MEETING I WAS IS. I THOUGHT THAT FARM WAS SOLD TO HIM.

I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT THAT SOMEBODY BOUGHT. I THOUGHT HE BOUGHT THAT ONE.

THE GUY THAT OWNED THE PIT? YES. HE BOUGHT IT FOR HIS BROTHER.

FULL SPEED. EXACTLY. I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO TAKE IT.

HE SAID NO. NO. HE WANTS IT FOR HIS SON. IT'S ON THE MAIN HIGHWAY, BUDDY.

YEAH. WHICH, YOU KNOW, YOU SELL IT TO THE SAME MAN.

WHAT DO YOU SAY? HE'S JUST RIGHT. HE PAID FOR IT.

IT'S HIS RIGHT. BUT THEN HE PAID $200,000 MORE THAN WHAT IT'S APPRAISED FOR.

THERE'S ANOTHER REASON HE WAS UNDER THE GROUND ON SOMETHING.

YEAH. SO ISN'T THERE A WAY THEY CAN GO ON THE WEBSITE AND CHECK FOR THE UPDATED AGENDA? YES. THE AGENDAS GET POSTED THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE MEETING DATES.

THE THE FINAL AGENDA. BECAUSE WE HAVE. YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE.

THERE WAS A LADY HERE EARLIER FOR THE SAME REASON WE CAME IN AND DIDN'T SEE NO ONE.

WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED. YEAH. YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE HAVE A WE HAVE A MEETING THE WEEK BEFORE LAST WEEK, WE HAVE A MEETING AND THAT A LOT OF STUFF GETS GOING OVER AND THAT'S THEY'LL MAKE SOME CHANGES BY FRIDAY BECAUSE EVEN A LOT OF THEM DON'T GET THE UPDATED AGENDA UNTIL THE WEEKEND. SO. I HAVE A QUESTION RELATED TO A PRIVATE PROPERTY.

SO AND WHAT I'M REALLY ASKING ABOUT IS THE CAPITAL ZONING CHANGES.

SO I OWN 22 ACRES. I AFTER I BOUGHT IT, I WANTED TO PUT A SECOND HOUSE ON THE ON THE SITE, ON THE PROPERTY AND CURRENT ZONING LIMITS, THE SECOND HOUSE TO AN ACCESSORY DWELLING, WHICH CAN'T BE ANY MORE THAN 1000FT².

SO THAT'S WHAT I BUILT. BUT IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION IN, YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT WOULD BE? SO I NEED TO EXPAND WHAT THAT ACCESSORY DWELLING SIZE MIGHT BE.

AGAIN, THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT IN THE ZONING CODE UPDATES IS LOOKING AGAIN AT ITS ENTIRETY IN.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ON OUR LIST, BECAUSE THE WAY IT'S DETERMINED IS REALLY COMPLEX, AND IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THAT COMPLEX. AND HOW WE MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THE SIZE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

AND THAT WAS CREATED IN 1995 AND AGAIN HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED AT SINCE 95 AND DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE REEVALUATED IN TERMS OF SIZE AND THE LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE PLACED ON IT BACK THEN, THAT MAY NOT BE NEEDED NOW.

YOU CAN ADD THAT TO YOUR LETTER WHEN YOU MAKE IT THE SAME 1.5.

THAT'S FINE BY A NONPROFIT. WOULDN'T THAT BE A POINT IN THE HOUSING CHAPTER AS WELL? MAYBE TO FOR DISCUSSION? I MEAN, NOT SPECIFICS, BUT ENCOURAGE THE HOUSING CHAPTER.

AND ONE OF THE BILLS THAT WAS CAME THROUGH. ANY, ANY PROPERTY, PARCEL OR LOT THAT ALLOWS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOUSE IS PERMITTED TO HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

THAT'S LAW NOW WENT INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY AND THERE ARE A LOT OF COUNTIES THAT NEVER ALLOW ADUS.

AND WITH THAT BEING PASSED, EVEN SOME OF THE ONES THAT HAVE ALWAYS ALLOWED ADUS, THEY HAD LIMITATIONS LIKE 900FT². AND THEY REALIZED, OKAY, MORE AND MORE, WE NEED THESE FOR YOUNGER GENERATION WHO'S TRYING TO GET A HOUSE, THE AGING POPULATION. SO THEY'VE INCREASED LIKE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

SO IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING TO LOOK AT SINCE NOW WE HAVE THAT LAW.

THAT'S WHAT THE ZONING REGULATIONS ARE. WHEN YOU BUILD A HOUSE, YOU'VE GOT TO SET ASIDE SPACE FOR THE FACILITIES TO ALLOW FOR SPRINKLER SYSTEMS, WATER RETENTION. I MEAN, A LOT OF THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS GETTING TAKEN OVER BY OTHER THINGS.

YEAH, I JUST HAVE A PIECE. YOU'VE BEEN IN THIS IN A LONG TIME.

I HAVE. HOW COME HE CAN OWN 22 ACRES AND HE PUT A SECOND HOUSE ON? THAT'S JUST SO I DIDN'T DO WHAT IT WAS DONE BEFORE I WAS COMMISSIONER.

WELL, I MEAN, I MEAN, HERE I GET TO SAY I'M A NEWBIE.

IF I WAS TELLING CALVIN, I'D RATTLE OFF TO YOU WHAT SECTION OF THE PAGE OF THE ORDINANCE BUT YOU HAD IS RIDICULOUS.

MAY HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF SUBDIVIDING. IF YOU SUBDIVIDE, YOU CAN LIKE EACH PARCEL OR LOT IS ALLOWED ONE HOUSE OR ONE HOUSE AND AN ADDITION.

BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT. I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT ALL IN THERE. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT.

USING THE PROPERTY FOR A FAMILY BUSINESS AND TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE FOR SIBLINGS YOU KNOW, SIBLINGS AS WELL AS WELL,

[01:55:08]

YEAH. I'M YOUR. I'M YOUR SISTER. I GET TWO ACRES, FIVE ACRES, WHATEVER IT IS.

AND. SURE. YEAH. BUT SEE. WHEN WE WHEN YOUR SIBLING, WHEN YOUR SIBLING HAS A FALLING OUT AND THEY SELL YOUR TWO ACRES IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR ACTOR 22. EXACTLY.

YEAH. RIGHT. EXACTLY. YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

OH, IT'S EVEN WORSE WHEN YOU GET INTO FAMILY FARMS AND CREATE A COUPLE OF SHOTS FOR THE KIDS WHO GET MARRIED AND THEN DIVORCE.

DIVORCE? YEP. AND JUST NOW YOU HAVE YOUR EX DAUGHTER IN LAW LIVING WITH HER NEW MAN ON THE PHONE.

RIGHT. RIGHT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

YOU HAVE GUNS? YEP. SORRY. PUT DOWN THAT COMPLEXITY.

YEAH. RIGHT. OKAY. IS THAT ALL? YES, I WOULD.

I HOPE I SEE YOU IN OCTOBER. YOU SHOULD COME TO THE PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETING IN OCTOBER.

YES. IT'S ON THE SCHEDULE. I HAVE IT IN PRESTON.

IT'S IN TOWN HALL, OCTOBER 8TH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND.

[Meeting Adjourns]

THANK YOU ALL.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.