[00:01:02]
>> YEAH. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE SEPTEMBER 9, 2025, CAROLINE COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING, WHICH IS NOW IN ORDER.
THIS MORNING, WE HAVE OUR INVOCATION BY PASTOR DOUG MORLEY OF GREATER IMPACT CHURCH OF GREENSBORO, AND THAT'LL BE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
SO IF EVERYONE CAN PLEASE RISE. PASTOR.
>> ISAIAH 40 SAYS, "THE LORD IS THE EVERLASTING GOD, THE CREATOR OF THE ENDS OF THE EARTH.
HE WILL NOT GROW TIRED OR WEARY, AND HIS UNDERSTANDINGS NO ONE CAN FATHOM.
HE GIVES STRENGTH TO THE WEARY AND INCREASES THE POWER OF THE WEAK.
EVEN YOUTH GROW TIRED AND WEARY AND YOUNG MEN STUMBLE AND FALL.
BUT THOSE WHO HOPE, WHO TRUST, WHO WAIT UPON THE LORD WILL RENEW THEIR STRENGTH.
THEY WILL SOAR ON WINGS LIKE EAGLES.
THEY WILL RUN AND NOT GROW WEARY.
THEY WILL WALK AND NOT BE FAINTED." WE CLAIM THE PROMISE, GOD, THAT YOU ARE THE ONE WHO GIVES US GRACE AND STRENGTH TO DO THE WORK THAT YOU'VE CALLED US TO DO.
WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THESE COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE GIVING LEADERSHIP TO OUR COMMUNITY.
[Call to Order: Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance; Agenda Review]
WE PRAY RIGHT NOW, LORD FOR WISDOM AND GUIDANCE AND THE AGENDA THAT THEY WILL BE LOOKING AT TODAY.WE THANK YOU FOR THE TIME AND THE INVESTMENT THAT THEY GIVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE DECISIONS ARE WISE AND THAT THESE DECISIONS ARE BEST SUITED FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THEIR CARE AND CONCERN FOR OUR COMMUNITY, LORD, AND WE PRAY YOUR BLESSING UPON THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES, WATCH OVER AND KEEP THEM.
AND BE WITH ALL WHO ARE GATHERED HERE TODAY, HELP US TO KNOW THAT YOU'RE NEAR.
WE'RE ALSO THANKFUL FATHER FOR THIS MONTH THAT WE RECOGNIZE NATIONAL RECOVERY, AND WE PRAY FOR THOSE WHO ARE DEALING WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND TRYING TO GET OVER THAT.
WE'RE ALSO THANKFUL LORD FOR THE AGENCIES AND THE INDIVIDUALS WHO COME IN AND SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE AND HELP PEOPLE THROUGH THESE TIMES.
WE ASK LORD THAT YOU WOULD JUST BLESS THIS DAY NOW, AND MAY WE BE STRENGTHENED BECAUSE WE PUT OUR FAITH, OUR HOPE, AND OUR TRUST IN YOU, AND WE ASK IT IN JESUS NAME.
>> OKAY. OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS
[Proclamation—for September as Caroline Goes Purple “Substance Use Awareness Month”]
THIS MORNING IS A PROCLAMATION FOR SEPTEMBER AS CAROLINE GOES PURPLE SUBSTANCE USE AWARENESS MONTH, AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER BARTS IS GOING TO READ THE PROCLAMATION FOR US.>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO COME UP FOR THE CAROLINE GOES PURPLE? PLEASE. DON'T BE SHY.
>> I GUESS I'LL SAY SOMETHING BEFORE WE START, BUT I MEAN, I KNOW WE DO SEPTEMBERS GO PURPLE MONTH, BUT I SEE YOU GUYS ALL YEAR LONG PROMOTING, IT'S PURPLE MONTH EVERY MONTH, AND CAROLINE COUNTY, THE WORK YOU GUYS DO.
I MEAN, YOU AT ALL THE FUNCTIONS, RECOVERIES AT ALL THE CHURCHES.
I THINK CAROLINE COUNTY TRIES TO DO THE BEST TO SUPPORT THEIR COMMUNITY.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU BEFORE I START.
WHEREAS, CAROLINE GOES PURPLE IS A SUBSTANCE USE AWARENESS PREVENTION INITIATIVE SPONSORED BY DRUG FREE CAROLINE, CREATED TO ENGAGE OUR COMMUNITY AND YOUTH TO STAND UP AGAINST SUBSTANCE USE, AND WHEREAS CAROLINE GOES PURPLE FOCUSED ON COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, ACTIVITIES,
[00:05:03]
INCLUDING SHARING EDUCATIONAL MESSAGES, PURPLE CLUBS IN MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOLS, OUTREACH TO THE CIVIC GROUPS, HEALTH, AND RESOURCE FAIRS, AND A COMMUNITY FILM SCREENING.AND WHEREAS, THE PROJECT IS SUPPORTED BY LOCAL BUSINESSES, PUBLIC AGENCIES, TREATMENT PROVIDERS, SUPPORT GROUPS AND THE RECOVERY COMMUNITY.
AND WHEREAS, CAROLINE GOES PURPLE, ENCOURAGES EVERYONE TO GET INVOLVED HAVE A NEW CONVERSATION WITH THEIR KIDS ABOUT THE DANGERS OF PRESCRIPTION USE AND JOIN THE MOVEMENT TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY ON SUBSTANCE USE AND END OF STIGMA SURROUNDING SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY PROCLAIMED BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER OF CAROLINE COUNTY, MARYLAND, THAT SEPTEMBER 2025 IS CAROLINE GOES PURPLE MONTH, AND THAT ALL CITIZENS ARE ENCOURAGED TO RECOGNIZE THAT MANY OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE STRUGGLING WITH ADDICTION.
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER ALSO CALL UPON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, BUSINESSES AND SCHOOLS IN CAROLINE COUNTY TO RECOMMIT A COMMUNITY TO INCREASING AWARENESS AND UNDERSTANDING OF SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS.
TOGETHER, THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMITTED SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE REGION CAN HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON ADDICTION AND PREVENTION IN CAROLINE COUNTY.
SIGNED THIS NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025, J TRAVIS BREEDING, PRESIDENT, LARRY C PORTER, VICE PRESIDENT, AND MYSELF AND FRANKLIN BARTS COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO.
>> YES. THANK YOU ALL, MR. PORTER.
>> YEAH, I KNOW THIS IS AN EVERYDAY JOB FOR YOU GUYS, NOT JUST ONE.
SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR WHAT YOU DID. [BACKGROUND]
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL DO THIS FIRST, AND THEN I WILL.
>> THE COURTHOUSE IS PURPLE THIS MONTH, TOO.
OH, THAT'S AWESOME. THANK YOU.
>> THIS SATURDAY IS PURPLE PADDLE.
THANK YOU, JAMIE FOR REMINDING ME.
PURPLE PADDLE AT MARTINE. PLEASE COME JOIN.
SEPTEMBER 20 IS THE MEMORY WALK THAT IS GOING TO BE A PRESTON PARK.
IT STARTS AT 9:00 A.M. WE HAVE A PURPLE GAME ON SEPTEMBER 24 AT HERN IS GOING TO BE THE GIRLS VOLLEYBALL TEAMS.
>> YEAH. I DON'T THINK SO. THANK YOU.
>> THIS PURPLE SUNDAY AND AREAS OUR CHURCHES TO PRAY FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE.
>> CORRECT. SORRY. MAKE SURE GOES PURPLE SEPTEMBER 22. [BACKGROUND]
NEXT ITEM WE HAVE IS ROBIN K HALL,
[Discussion on Environmental Health Services Fee Schedule]
HEALTH OFFICER AND JOSH PARKER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WITH A DISCUSSION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE FEE SCHEDULE.>> GOOD MORNING. SO IN YOUR PACKET, YOU HAD A DRAFT OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH [NOISE] FEE SCHEDULE.
SO JOSH AND I WE'VE REVIEWED THE FEE SCHEDULE, IT HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2005.
>> SO NOT ONLY DID WE DO A PROPOSE, BUT WE ALSO DID A DOCUMENT THAT HAS CHANGED JUSTIFICATION.
AND WE WANTED TO BRING THIS TO THE COMMISSIONERS TODAY FOR DISCUSSION.
IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT IT, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH BOARD OF HEALTH HAS TO BE THAT'S ONE OF THE DUTIES OF BOARD OF HEALTH.
JOSH ANALYZED OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES EXPENDITURES, COLLECTIONS.
[00:10:05]
OF COURSE, YOU KNOW THAT OVER EVEN THE LAST FOUR YEARS AND SALARIES, WE'VE HAD A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN SALARIES.I THINK THAT WE HAVE THIS LAST YEAR, FY 25, WE WERE ABLE TO REALLY BUILD OUR STAFF OUT.
WE HAD AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH TRAINEE THAT JUST RECEIVED LICENSURE, I DON'T KNOW, SIX MONTHS AGO.
SO THAT INDIVIDUAL, THE PLAN IS TO CONVERT THEM TO A MERIT STAFF MEMBER.
WE ALSO CONVERTED SUPPORT STAFF THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY CONTRACTUAL SECRETARY, CONVERTED THEM TO A MERIT STAFF MEMBER AS WELL.
SO REALLY SOLIDIFYING THAT TEAM IS IMPORTANT AS WELL AS THINKING ABOUT SUCCESSION. I KNOW WE'VE DONE THAT.
SO AND LOOKING AT THE FEE SCHEDULE, WE WANTED TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN LINE WITH PLANNING AND CODES FEES AS WELL.
SO I THINK THAT SOME OF THE CHANGES ONE OF THE MOST PROMINENT CHANGES IS THE ALL IN ONE, IF IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE CHANGES JUSTIFICATION.
AND I'D LIKE FOR JOSH TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT OUR CURRENT FEES FOR SOIL AND SIT EVALUATION, AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS AN ALL IN ONE FOR THAT. JOSH.
>> SO CURRENTLY, WHEN PEOPLE COME AND APPLY FOR A PER TEST, A SOLE AND SIT EVALUATION, WE CHARGE THEM THE INITIAL FEE.
BUT THEN THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF FEES THAT FOLLOW THAT KIND OF SLOW UP THE PROCESS.
SO LIKE, IF THEY NEED WET SEASON TESTING, IF THEY NEED A SAND AMOUNT TEST, THERE'S ALWAYS THESE ADDITIONAL FEES.
AND THEN ONCE IT'S ALL DONE, THEN WE HIT YOU WITH THE PLAT FEE FOR REVIEWING THE PLATE.
SO I PROPOSE PUTTING IT ALL A ONE FEE, THEY PAY UPFRONT.
IT SPEEDS UP THE PROCESS BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME, THE GUYS TRY TO DO THE WORK IN THE FIELD THE SAME DAY.
AND THEN YOU GOT CHASE DOWN THE MONEY, BASICALLY.
YOU GOT THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF CHASING DOWN THE MONEY, DOING THE RECEIPTS, YOU KNOW, DOING FIVE RECEIPTS COMPARED TO ONE IS IT'S STILL TIME.
AND THAT WAY, IT'S ALL DONE UP FRONT.
SO THAT WAY, WHEN YOU WALK IN, IT'S GOING TO BE ONE FEE.
ONCE EVERYTHING'S, THERE'S NO EXTRA FEE INVOLVED UNTIL YOU WANT A SEPTIC PERMIT.
AND THAT WAY, OUR PEOPLE CAN BE IN THE FIELD KNOWING IF THEY GOT TO DO SOME TESTING, WE DON'T HAVE TO CHASE THEM DOWN OR PUTTING ON THEIR SCHEDULE, PEOPLE PAY IT LATE.
THAT WAY YOU KNOW, OUR FEES ALL DONE UP FRONT.
>> YEAH. THE PROPOSED FEE THAT WE HAVE HERE.
IT ACTUALLY INDICATES A DISCOUNTED RATE, WHICH IS DISCOUNTED FROM OUR CURRENT FEES BECAUSE YOU'RE ELIMINATING SOME OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE EFFORT, AND YOU'RE ALSO ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SITE VISITS.
WE HAVE WHEN OUR SANITARIUMS ARE GOING OUT, THERE'S OFTENTIMES THAT THEY CAN DO MORE THAN ONE SITE VISIT AND INSPECTION AT A TIME, BUT THEY GET HELD UP BECAUSE THE NEXT STEP HASN'T BEEN PAID FOR YET.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE ELEMENT OF COMMUNICATION.
OFTENTIMES YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW HOUSE.
HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU DO THAT, RIGHT? MAYBE ONCE, TWICE IN A LIFETIME.
WHEN INDIVIDUALS ARE PAYING OR CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING, THERE ARE SOME ASSUMPTIONS THAT IT'S ALL PAID FOR, AND IN REALITY, WE'RE SITTING THERE WAITING FOR THEM TO COME IN AND PAY.
WE'VE SENT THE COMMUNICATION, BUT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONFUSION, MAYBE THEY DIDN'T GET IT, WHATEVER.
SO IT'S BEING HELD UP THAT WAY.
SO THE DISCOUNT RATE IS A REFLECTION OF A REDUCING SITE VISITS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING TIME.
WE'VE LOOKED AT OUR FEE SCHEDULE, WELL, ACTUALLY, OUR COLLECTIONS OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND THE COVERAGE BETWEEN THE COLLECTIONS AND THE EXPENDITURE HAS PRETTY MUCH REMAINED ABOUT THE SAME.
THERE ARE SOME AREAS THOUGH THAT I THINK WHEN WE GET THROUGH THIS.
WE'VE IDENTIFIED AS NEEDING TO INCREASE BECAUSE IT TAKES TIME, OR WE NEED TO WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A FEE, AND WE SHOULD HAVE A FEE TO ACCOUNT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COST.
SO THAT WAS THE FIRST ONE THAT WE HAD.
>> SO IF I CAN, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON.
SO THE SOIL SITE EVALUATION APPLICATION, ALL IN ONE RESIDENTIAL FEE.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT IS DOING THE INITIAL SOIL EVALUATION, THE TEST HOLE.
THAT'S ANALYZING THAT SOIL, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT OVER 80% OF THE SOIL EVALUATIONS IN CAROLINE COUNTY REQUIRE WET SEASON.
[00:15:07]
>> PRETTY MUCH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO WET SEASON TESTING.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S INCLUDED OR IS THAT ON TOP? SO THAT'S ALL ON TOP.
>> SO PASSING AN ALL OF ONE FEE, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO PAY THE SAME THING UP FRONT?
>> AND IF WE NEED TO DO WET SEASON TESTING, IT'S ALREADY PAID.
>> IT'S COVERED. WE DID LEAVE BASICALLY, THE ALL CART, LIKE, WHAT THE ONES ARE FOR WHEN WE DO LIKE A SEPTIC REPAIR.
WE NEED TO DO A SAND MOUND TEST BECAUSE YOU, IT'S AN EXISTING HOUSE, AND WE NEED TO SAND MOWN BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS SUPER OLD AND DOESN'T COMPLY.
SO WE DID LEAVE THOSE OTHER FEES BELOW THERE IN CASE WE NEED THEM FOR REPAIRS.
BUT MOVING FORWARD, IF THERE'S LIKE AN IMPLEMENTATION DATE, MOVING FORWARD, EVERYBODY'S GOING TO PAY UPFRONT A SINGLE FEE.
>> SO IF IT IS ONE OF THE FEW SOIL EVALUATIONS THAT TAKES PLACE IN THE COUNTY THAT DOESN'T WOULDN'T REQUIRE WET SEASON TESTING, IT MAY BE BETTER FOR YOU TO PAY EACH INDIVIDUAL JUST PAY FOR THE SOIL TEST ONLY IF YOU HAVE REALLY HIGH PIECE OF LAND WITH REALLY SANDY SOIL POTENTIALLY?
>> YEAH. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE MOUNT TESTING.
>> SO THAT'S IN A COUNTY CODE.
SO IT'S A DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENTAL RIGHT TRANSFER FEE.
SO I THINK IT'S FOR LIKE FARM PRESERVATION.
FROM MY INTERPRETATION IS, LIKE, LIKE A DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENTAL TRANSFER RATE.
IT'S SOMETHING IN COUNTY CODE.
I THINK I REFERENCED THE CODE IN THERE.
BUT IT'S IN OUR COUNTY CODE, SO IT'S SOMETHING REQUIRED BY COUNTY CODE.
>> YEAH. THIS FEE IS REQUIRED FOR A REVIEW ALLOWED BY COUNTY CODE THAT REQUIRES TESTING.
THE FEE INCREASE REFLECTS THE PROPOSED WET SEASON TESTING FEE.
>> YEAH. SO I'VE NOT SEEN ONE DONE SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE.
>> THAT WOULD BE REFLECTS THE PROPOSED WET SEASON TESTING.
SO IS THAT IN ADDITION TO WET SEASON? LIKE IF THEY HAD TO HAVE WET SEASON AND A TRANSFER OR IS IT ON TOP OF?
>> I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CODE AGAIN.
IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I ACTUALLY LOOKED AT THE CODE.
>> YEAH. THIS IS ONE WE CAN COME BACK.
LIKE I SAID, DEFINITELY THIS IS DISCUSSION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TRANSFER.
>> OKAY. YEAH, WE'LL GET SOME FEEDBACK ON THAT ONE.
I MEAN, IF THAT GOES IN TO A SEPARATE POT OF MONEY THAT'S SUPPOSED TO GO TO SOMETHING ELSE, I DON'T KNOW.
>> THE PLAT FEE. HOW OFTEN IS THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT IS WHAT'S THE PLAT FEE.
>> EVERY TIME WE GET A PLAT IN DOESN'T MATTER WHAT IT'S FOR, WE CHARGE A $90 REVIEW FEE.
THAT IS BASICALLY OUR REVIEW TIME, OUR PROCESSING TIME, AND OUR SIGNATURE ON THE PLAT.
>> BUT HERE YOU HAVE INCLUDES A PLAT FEE AND DOESN'T INCLUDE A PLAT FEE.
THAT'S NOT A RECORDATION FEE OR WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO?
>> WE'VE THE 01, I DON'T KNOW WHY I SEPARATED THOSE.
I SAID, IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE WE ACTUALLY DID THIS.
I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE A WHILE.
>> I THOUGHT THAT WE HAD INSTANCES WHERE SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO PERK IT, BUT NOT.
>> WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD THAT SITUATION.
SOME PEOPLE DO ALL THE WORK, BUT THEY DON'T PLAT.
THE PERK TECHNICALLY IS NOT DONE UNTIL WE ACTUALLY RECORD IT.
BUT SOME PEOPLE THEY JUST DON'T DO IT FOR WHATEVER THE REASONS THEY HAVE.
>> SO THEY WALK THEY GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS, BUT THEY DON'T DELINEATE WHERE THE SRA IS SUPPOSED TO BE OR IS GOING TO BE AND THEN RECORD IT?
>> OFFICIALLY RECORDED AND PUT IT ON A PLAT.
>> NOW, WHY WOULD YOU NOT DO THAT TO GIVE YOU THE FLEXIBILITY TO MOVE THE SRA AROUND?
THE COUPLE OF TIMES IT'S HAPPENED.
IT'S BEEN VERY WEIRD SITUATIONS.
I DON'T I CAN'T THEY DO ALL THE WORK.
THEY WANT TO AND THEY WANT TO KEEP THE PLATE AND THEY WANT TO KEEP THE IDEA THAT THEY CAN ESTABLISH IT, BUT NOT ACTUALLY ESTABLISH IT, THEN THE IDEA OF SOMEBODY COULD BE DOING SUBDIVISION.
THE ONE I'M THINKING IN PARTICULAR, THEY HAVE FIVE AREAS THEY'VE DONE THE WORK, BUT THEY NEVER RECORDED THE PLATE.
FOR WHATEVER, FOR THEIR PERSONAL REASONS.
>> THAT IS JUST A REVIEW FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.
[00:20:04]
APPLY OR FILING THE PLAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE PLAT.YOU HAVE TO COME UP HERE TO THE RECORD.
>> COME UP HERE AND THEY RECORD THE PLAT.
THE SURVEY DOES ALL THEIR WORK.
WE GET ALL THE SIGNATURES, THEN THEY COME AND ACTUALLY RECORD THE PLAT HERE.
>> IT'S SENT TO YOU TO REVIEW IT?
>> IT GETS OUR SIGNATURE AS THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED IT.
THAT'S LIKE THERE'S VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT.
>> THEY HAVE TO HAVE THAT BEFORE THEY BRING IT UP HERE?
>> THEN THE REST OF THESE ARE JUST INCREASES.
>> I DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PLAT EVALUATION APPLICATION SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PLAT?
>> IT'S ON ANOTHER PAGE THERE.
THIS WAS ANOTHER ONE COMBINING, RIGHT NOW, FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION FOR PRIVATE SEPTIC.
WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT FEE IS 150 PER LOT.
THEN WE ALSO HAVE, PLAT EVALUATION, PUBLIC WATER SEWER, $70, AND YOU CAN SEE MINOR, 180 AND APPLICATION FOR THE SRA REVISION IS $90.
WE WANT TO COMBINE THAT AS $90 A LOT ACROSS THE BOARD, REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE OF THE PROJECT.
THE TYPE OF PLAT REVIEWED, IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING THAT WE'RE REVIEWING.
WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH RESUBMISSIONS ON THESE.
THAT IS ANOTHER OF THE NEW FEES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO IMPLEMENT.
AS WE'RE CALLING IT A RESUBMISSION FEE.
IT WOULD IT WOULD APPLY TO THE PLAT EVALUATION APPLICATIONS.
I THINK THE RESUBMISSION IS UNDER MISCELLANEOUS.
>> I TALKED TO CHRISTO BASICALLY, I KIND OF USED THE SAME LANGUAGE SHE'S USING ON HER RESUBMITTAL FEE IN PLAN AND CODES.
>> IF I CAN, BACK TO THE RESIDENTIAL SOIL AND SITE EVALUATION.
THE SOIL ONLY IS I HAVE A LOT, I JUST WANT TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY CHANCE THAT IT WILL POTENTIALLY PERK, YOU COULD, WITH A SOIL EVALUATION, POTENTIALLY BE TOLD, THIS LOT IS NOT BUILDABLE, OUT OF THE GATE, CORRECT? THAT'S LIKE A ROLL OF THE DICE EVERY TIME, I BUY 10 ACRES SOMEWHERE AND, I WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE ON IT.
I HAVE NO IDEA IF IT'S NOT PERKED WHEN I PURCHASE IT.
I HAVE NO IDEA IF IT'S BUILDABLE OR NOT.
I HAVE TO GO UP TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND BASICALLY, GAMBLE WITH $270 AND SAY, HEY, CAN YOU COME OUT? I WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE? AM I GOING TO BE ABLE TO BUILD ON HERE?
>> ANY SPOT THAT'S PUT, IT'S A GAMBLE.
WELL, BUT IF YOU PAY IF YOU PAY $1230, AND RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE, YOU'RE TOLD, NO, IT'S NOT BUILDABLE.
THERE WOULD BE NO REFUND OF THAT
>> THAT IS SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED. I DIDN'T SOMETHING THAT'S WE DEFINITELY CAN'T DISCUSS.
>> BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO TRY TO COME IN AND PAY SOIL EVALUATIONS MULTIPLE TIMES, THEY GO SEARCH FOR DIFFERENT SPOTS ON THEIR PROPERTY WHERE THEY COULD POTENTIALLY TAKE THEIR SRA.
>> WE ALSO WHEN THEY COME IN TO, PURCHASING A OR PURCHASING LAND THAT, HAS NOTHING ON.
WE ALSO ARE REVIEWING FILES, IF THERE IS SOMETHING ON FILE, WE UTILIZE THOSE FILES.
THOSE FILES, THE PROPERTY FILES, THEY HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
>> IF A PREVIOUS OWNER HAD A BLOCK
>> IF THEY HAD IT PERKED AT ONE POINT, SOMETIMES WE'VE SEEN, THAT IT PERKED, BUT IT'S CONDITIONAL AS TO, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T MOVE PAST THE NEXT STEP
>> SOME OF THE WHEN WE SAY THAT THE TEST FAILED, WE DENY, AT CERTAIN POINT, ARE WE SAYING IT, YOU KNOW, FAILED AT THE FIRST STEP? THAT'S A VERY RARE OCCASION BECAUSE IF WE FAIL IT JUST BASED ON SOIL, THAT OPENS UP THE LIABILITY.
WELL, WHAT WAS THE WATER TABLE? WHAT WAS THE RATE? YOU KNOW? SOMETIMES WE STILL HAVE TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY GET TO FAILURE?
I LIKE THE IDEA OF, THIS IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST YOU TO GET THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS,
[00:25:02]
BUT I DON'T WANT TO MISLEAD PEOPLE INTO PAYING $1,230 WHEN THEY COULD REALLY GET AN ANSWER A NO ANSWER BY SPENDING 270, RIGHT? OR 360. AND, LIKE I SAID, THEN THE NEXT STEP IS TO GO ON TO THE WET SEASON.>> IF YOU WANT TO WRITE A POLICY THAT WE DO SOME SORT OF REFUND IF IT FAILS JUST ON SOIL ALONE, WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT.
>> I ALSO IN TERMS OF LIKE IN TERMS OF THE REFUND SITUATION, WE'VE HAD INSTANCES BEFORE WHERE I CAN APPROVE THOSE CASE BY CASE.
WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE. WHERE IT'S HAPPENED.
KEEP THAT IN MIND, AS WELL AS OPPOSED TO WRITING A POLICY WHERE IT APPLIES ACROSS THE BOARD.
I JUST I DON'T WANT TO I WANT TO BE FLEXIBLE ENOUGH FOR VERY SPECIFIC CASES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> I'D WANT TO RESEARCH THAT WITH OUR MDE COUNTERPARTS THAT IF, WE FAIL SOMETHING STRAIGHT ON SOIL ALONE, WHAT IS THE REPERCUSSIONS, IF SOMEBODY, APPEALS OUR DECISION.
>> TO MR. BREEDING'S POINT TO THE REFUND.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF SOMEBODY GOES OUT THERE AND DIGS A HOLE FOR THE SOLE ONLY AND IT SAYS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING.
YOU SAY THEY'RE ENTITLED TO A REFUND?
>> THERE'S STILL A TIME FACTOR INVOLVED WITH THEIR TIME.
>> PARTIAL REFUND. YET IF YOU GO IF YOU'RE ON THAT SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU GOT TEN ACRES, YOU GO THERE AND DIG TEN HOLES.
EACH ONE SAYS, NO, YOU CAN'T AND YOU SPEND $3,600, ON EACH HOLE, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO A REFUND ON EACH HOLE BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T GET IT TO.
NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THEY'VE GOT AN ALL INCLUSIVE FEE THAT INCLUDES SOIL ONLY, INCLUDES WET SEASON, INCLUDES A MOUND TESTING.
SO IT INCLUDES ALL IT INCLUDES A THREE WELL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU LIKE PROPOSED $360 FEE, A $600 FEE, AND A $300 FEE.
M IS WHAT? IF IT FAILS AT THE SOIL ONLY, IF THEY LOOK AT THE SOIL AND SAY, NO, IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS A WET SEASON AND IT'S NOT GOING TO PASS A DOWN, SO THERE'S NO NEED IN YOU EVEN TRYING TO DO THAT, YOU'VE ALREADY PAID AN ADDITIONAL $900.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE REFUND.
NO. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT IF YOUR TEST FAILS, YOU GET A REFUND.
>> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING WITH.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE HERE.
>> INSIDE YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE WRONG SHEET, DO YOU HAVE THIS ONE? IT'S RIGHT HERE. IT SAME THING.
SO ALL OF THESE WHAT JOSH AND ROBIN ARE SAYING, ALL OF THESE ARE INCLUDED IN THIS.
>> I THOUGHT YOU MEANT THAT IF THEY JUST THE SOUL ONLY.
>> THE SOIL FERRY IS GOING TO BE PRETTY BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.
YOU HIT THE FIRST FIVE FEET OF CLAY THE HIT WATER.
>> YOU HAVE BLACK EITHER VERY BLACK, STINKY SOILS, OR YOU'RE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE VERY, HEAVY SOILS AND NO SAND IN IT.
>> DOES THE SOIL TESTS INCLUDE THE PIEZOMETERS, AS WELL? IS THAT PART OF THE SOIL TEST? IS THAT WET SEASON TEST?
>> THAT'S PART OF THE WET SEASONING.
THE APPLICANTS REQUIRED TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE SET THEM UP, ACTUALLY PUT THE PIPES IN THE GROUND? WHO'S THE MONITORING AND ALL THAT.
>> THAT'S THE WET SEASON TESTING IS THE PIEZOMETER.
THE SOIL ONLY IS WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXCAVATOR BACK AT A HOLE.
>> SANITARIUM GOES DOWN IN AND CHECKS THE SOIL.
THEN THE MOUND TESTING IS JUST A PERK TEST DONE ON THE SURFACE.
A PERK TEST IS A SQUARE HOLE AND IT MEASURES THE WATER GOING DOWN THE SIDEWALL AND OUT THE BOTTOM.
THE MOUND TESTING IS A ROUND CYLINDER THAT ONLY MEASURES WATER GOING DOWN.
>> THROUGH THE SURFACE, BASIC.
>> IT'S SET IN THE MOST RESTRICTIVE LENS IN THE UPPER 24 ".
THAT'S WHAT THE MAIN DIFFERENCES IN THOSE TESTS ARE.
THAT'S HOW WE GET OUR RATE SO THAT'S HOW WE CAN DESIGN THE SIZE OF THE SYSTEM.
>> THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT NO LONGER DOES THE DESIGN.
THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT JUST GIVES THIS YEARS AGO SPECIFICATION RIGHT.
>> IN THE PAST, WHEN YOU BUILT YOUR HOUSE OUT IN THE COUNTY, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY DESIGNED WHERE THE TANK WENT, WHERE THE DISTRIBUTION BOX WENT, WHERE THE FIELD DRAIN SYSTEM WENT.
MDE NO LONGER ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT.
NOW, NOT ONLY ON TOP OF ALL THESE FEE INCREASES, YOU GOT TO GO OUT AND HIRE SOMEBODY TO DO THAT DESIGN, WHICH USED TO BE DONE INCLUDED IN THESE FEES.
>> WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR CONTRACTOR.
>> HOMEOWNER CAN DESIGN IT, CONTRACTORS CAN DESIGN IT OR YOU GET A THIRD PARTY DESIGN.
[00:30:02]
ANYTHING THAT USUALLY HAS EVEN A SYSTEM THAT HAS A PUMP THAT USES STANDARD TRENCH.WHEN YOU GET TO THE MOUND TESTING, THE BEDS THAT WE USE A LOT OF THESE LPD BEDS, LPD SYSTEMS, THINGS THAT ARE MORE TECHNICAL.
TECHNICALLY, YOUR CONTRACTORS CAN DESIGN.
MOST OF THE CONTRACTORS DON'T WANT TO GET TO ANY KIND OF DESIGN WHATSOEVER.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT CONSULTANTS.
WITH MOUNDS AND MOST OF THE LPDS, WE REQUIRE TO BE SURVEY LOCATED ON THE SITE PLAN TO BEGIN WITH.
>> THE FEE I DON'T IT'S EXPENSIVE ENOUGH.
LOOK, WE ALL SIT HERE AND WE COMPLAIN ABOUT THE COST OF BUILDING HOUSING, FEES, OR TAXES.
I DON'T KNOW. HOW MUCH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HOW BIG IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH BUDGET ROUGHLY?
>> WE HAD FOR FY 25, OUR EXPENDITURES WERE AT 807 ALMOST $880,000.
WE TOOK IN 356 ALMOST 357,000.
BUT THAT INCLUDES SO IN TERMS OF THE BAY RESTORATION FUND APPLICATIONS, WE DO RECEIVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FROM THAT PROGRAM.
>> THE OFFICE'S BUDGET IS 808, A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF OF THAT IS AT 44% IS FEES.
>> IF I COULD ALSO MENTION OF THAT 807, ALMOST 808, 95% OF THAT IS SALARY.
>> FEES, ON THE DIRECTOR LEVEL HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT OUR MEETINGS STATEWIDE.
WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS IN OUR MEETINGS.
ONE OR TWO OF OUR COUNTIES ARE FEE FOR SERVICE, BUT IT ALSO COMES DOWN TO THE VOLUME OF APPLICATIONS THEY RECEIVE.
OUR VOLUME APPLICATIONS, IF WE WERE STRAIGHT FEE FOR SERVICE TO RAISE THAT KIND OF MONEY WOULD BE MUCH MORE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT THERE.
>> HOW MUCH OF THAT 808 COMES FROM THE COUNTY?
>> WELL, THE COUNTY CORE FUNDING THE COUNTY IS REQUIRED.
THE AMOUNT IS LIKE ALMOST IT'S 24 I THINK 24.173 7% OF OUR CORE FUNDING, AND THAT IS THAT IS WHAT IS PAID ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.
>> THE FORMULA FUNDING, MANDATORY CONTRIBUTION THAT THE COUNTY MAKES TOWARDS OTHER GOES TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. THAT'S ABOUT 24%.
YOU'RE THINKING OF THE BUDGET.
44% FEE FOR SERVICE, 24% FROM THE COUNTY.
>> RAISING FEES ARE ALWAYS GOING TO BE CONTROVERSIAL, ESPECIALLY AS I SAID BEFORE, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE SOIL EVALUATION, YOU'RE REALLY GAMBLING.
YOU'RE DIGGING A HOLE AND HOPING YOU CAN.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY OF THEM FAIL?
>> ACTUALLY, I DON'T. I CAN DO SOME RESEARCH?
>> I CAN DO SOME RESEARCH TO FIND OUT WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR FOR HOW MANY OF THESE ACTUALLY FAILED.
ADD THAT WHEN WE DISCUSS IT SOME MORE.
>> LIKE I SAID ALL THESE FEES, WE'RE JUST INCREASING THE COST TO BUILD A HOUSE, TOO. WE'RE DRIVING UP.
>> ACROSS THE BOARD, I TRIED TO STANDARDIZE THE FEES BECAUSE ALL OF OUR STAFF THEY'RE LICENSED TO A CERTAIN LEVEL.
WHY IS THE WORK OF ONE STAFF MEMBER PRICED DIFFERENTLY PER HOUR THAN ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER? THAT SHOWS IN SOME OF THE OTHER PROGRAMMING.
>> WE DID IT WAS ACROSS THE BOARD AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, WE HAVE A LICENSED SANITARIUM THAT HAS MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, WE DID NOT RATE IT AS THAT INDIVIDUAL WORKS ON THIS OR FOOD OR FOOD SEE IF HE WORKS ON THIS, WE DIDN'T DO THAT.
WE APPLIED WHAT THE BASE SALARY FOR A LICENSED.
>> THE AVERAGE FOR THE OFFICE.
IS WHAT I TOOK THINKING MORE OF A BUSINESS MODEL.
SO YOU'RE FOCUSED REALLY SO FAR HAS BEEN ON THE SOLE INSIDE EVALUATION.
[00:35:05]
IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE FOOD HAS REVIEW, THAT'S ABOUT A 16-HOUR REVIEW FROM MY ONE STAFF PERSON.16 HOURS IS ABOUT WHAT WE SPEND ON AN AVERAGE PER PERSON.
AVERAGE IT'S GOING DECENT, YOU KNOW.
>> WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT. MY INTENTION IS TO GO THROUGH THE REST OF HERE.
COMMERCIAL SOIL AND SITE EVALUATION, THAT'S JUST IN LINE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL RIGHT NOW.
IT GETS A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED, RIGHT BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO USE THAT GALLONS PER DAY.
>> WE DO A CONVERSION. SO COMMERCIAL IS BASED ON RESIDENTIALS BASED ON YOUR NUMBER OF BEDROOMS? WE DO A MINIMUM THERE.
SO THE COMMERCIAL IT'S A MULTIPLICATION FACTOR.
IF YOUR COMMERCIAL RESIDENCE IS EQUAL TO BASICALLY A 12 BEDROOM HOUSE, YOU'RE DOING THREE PARKS.
TO GET THAT GET THE RIGHT SIZE AND ESTABLISH THE SRA.
>> SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PERMIT.
RIGHT NOW IT SAYS NOT APPLICABLE A NEW OR REPAIR FEE.
WE'RE PROPOSING A $480 FEE FOR A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM OR A REPAIR.
THIS IS AFTER YOU GET THROUGH THE SOIL TEST, THE PERK TEST, AND OTHER SOIL TESTING, AND INCLUDED IN THAT, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO GENERATE A SPEC.
WE NEED 200 FEET OF TILE LINE, 24 " WIDE, 12 " DEEP WITH ADD AN INVERT OF THIS, WHATEVER.
THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR SOIL EVALUATION.
BUT THEN ACTUALLY WHEN YOU WANT TO INSTALL THE SEPTIC, NOW WE'RE PROPOSING YOU'VE GOT TO COME IN AND PAY AN ADDITIONAL $480 FEE? IS THAT INCLUDED? THAT'S NOT INCLUDED.
>> THAT'S NOT INCLUDED THE BEFORE.
COMPLETING THE PERK IS THAT ONE FEE.
THEN WHENEVER YOU COME INTO YOUR SEPTIC, YOU'RE STARTING ANOTHER APPLICATION PROCESS.
>> WHAT AM I CHARGING RIGHT NOW FOR THAT?
>> FOUR EIGHTY FOR A NEW HOUSE.
>> IT SHOULDN'T BE NOT APPLICABLE, ISN'T 480 THERE.
>> BECAUSE I THINK I MOVED IT DOWN, AND FOR THE INCREASE IN THE SEPTIC PERMIT IS THEY'RE ALL GOING TO PAY 480.
REPAIR CAN BE JUST AS COMPLICATED AS DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR THE REVIEW.
ACTUALLY, IN SOME CASES, THE REPAIRS ARE ACTUALLY MORE COMPLICATED THAN NEW CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY ESTABLISHED THE PERK PROCESS, AND WE HAVE OUR MINIMUM INSPECTS AND WE HAVE A SITE PLAN.
>> DO WE HAVE A REPAIR FEE NOW? MY SEPTICS FAILING.
>> THE NEW IS 480 FOR REPAIR CURRENTLY.
>> RIGHT NOW TODAY, IF I WALK IN THERE AND I'M BUILD A NEW HOUSE, I WANT TO PERMIT TO PUT A NEW SEPTIC SYSTEM IN.
TOMORROW, I WAKE UP, AND MY FIELD DRAIN SYSTEM IS LEAKED GOT SEWAGE ON TOP OF THE GROUND.
THIS IS PROPOSING TO RAISE THAT 480.
>> THE REPAIRS GET COMPLICATED DEPENDING ON WHAT WE HAVE IN THE FILE AND WHAT TYPE OF HOUSE YOU HAVE AND WHEN THE STUFF WAS BUILT.
IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S FAIRLY NEW BUILT 1990S ON, THAT WE HAVE SRA PLATS.
WE HAVE THE SPECS IN THE FILE, EVERYTHING'S THERE.
THAT'S USUALLY A PRETTY SIMPLE REVIEW.
>> IT'S A NEW D BOX, NEW FIELD DRAINS.
>> YES. YOU'RE GOING SIDE BY SIDE, TO BUT WAS THERE.
YOU'RE USUALLY JUST REPLACING EXACTLY WAS THERE, YOU'RE JUST MOVING OVER.
>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY WITH THE REPAIR IS, THAT'S A PLAN FOR POTENTIAL EXPENSE.
YOU SEPTIC FAILS. YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO SEPTIC FAILS, WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO PUT A NEW ONE IN.
>> I'LL GIVE YOU A PRO MY OWN SEPTIC REPAIR AT MY OWN HOUSE.
I HAD A STANDARD TRENCH SYSTEM.
IT GETS REPAIRED WITH A LPD SURFACE SYSTEM BECAUSE I HAVE HIGH GROUNDWATER.
WHEN IT WAS INSTALLED, THE REGULATIONS HAD CHANGED.
THAT WAS DESIGNED BY SOMEBODY ELSE.
WE HAD TO DO SOME DIGGING, GET A SOIL PROFILE, SOME RATES WERE RUN.
THAT WAS ALL DONE UNDER THAT REPAIR.
WE CAN ACTUALLY DESIGN SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE FOR REPAIR.
[00:40:01]
AND THE NEW IS 480 CURRENTLY.YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE THE NEW.
YOU'RE JUST PROPOSING TO TAKE THE REPAIR UP TO.
EXTENDING EXTENDING A PERMIT, I GUESS, MODIFICATION, THAT WOULD BE IF I WANT TO MOVE A SEPTIC TANK OR SHIFT TO FIELD.
>> THE MODIFICATIONS, IT'S YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE PERMIT THAT WAS ALREADY ISSUED.
YOU'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED DESIGN, WE'VE APPROVED IT, BUT YOU WANT TO CHANGE SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
>> PLUMBER CAME OUT OF YOUR NEW HOUSE IN A DIFFERENT SPOT, AND IT'S EASIER FOR YOU TO MOVE THE SEPTIC TANK TEN FEET FOR 90 BUCKS.
>> THINK ABOUT LIKE THE MODIFICATION TO THE SYSTEM IS YOU SUBMITTED A SEPTIC DESIGN.
WE CAN MOVE A TANK AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHARGE SOMEBODY FOR IT.
>> YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE LENGTH OF DRAIN FIELD, THE CONFIGURATION OF THE DRAIN FIELD OR YOU'RE PROPOSING, WELL, WE SET A SAND MOUND WELL, HOW ABOUT AND WE APPROVED A SAND CAN I DO THIS SYSTEM? IT'S LIKE A SEPARATE REVIEW FOR ANOTHER SET OF SPECS.
>> HOW ABOUT HOW ABOUT I'M BUILDING A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE AND I CAN GET BY WITH 100 GALLON SEPTIC TANK, AND THEN I DECIDE, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? I MIGHT EVENTUALLY PUT A BEDROOM ON DOWN THE ROAD, I'D RATHER JUST PUT A 1,500 GALLON IN NOW.
THAT'S GOING TO INCUR A FEE TO CHANGE FROM 100 GALLON TO A 1,500 GALLON TANK?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHEN THEY GET US IN THE SYSTEM, BUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I WILL NOT USUALLY CHARGE SOMEBODY FOR IT.
BECAUSE WE ISSUE WHAT'S CALLED MINIMUM SPECS.
WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU YOU'VE GOT TWO BEDROOM HOUSE, 01,000 GALLON TANK AND THIS MANY FEET OF DRAIN FIELD.
IF YOU WANT TO PUT 1,500 GALLONS AND THEY SPEC 1,500 GALLONS, KNOCK YOURSELF OUT BUT YOU GOT TO HAVE AT LEAST 1,000.
>> GRESSTRAP FEE, PROBABLY VERY FEW OF THOSE AROUND.
TRANSIENT NON COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM.
>> TRANSIT NON COMMUNITY, THAT IS THE LOWEST LEVEL PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM YOU CAN HAVE.
WE'RE TASKED WITH MONITORING THOSE.
WE ONLY ACTUALLY TAKE WATER SAMPLES OF REGULARLY.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT IS A YEARLY WATER SAMPLE.
ONCE EVERY FIVE YEARS, WE DO A SITE VISIT AND DO AN INSPECTION.
THIS IS A FEDERAL PROGRAM, DELEGATED TO MDE, WHICH WE AGREED TO DO IT FOR THEM.
>> CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF ONE?
>> CLINTON FARMS. PRIME EXAMPLE.
THEY ACTUALLY JUST DID A NEW WELL.
YOU DO THE INITIAL POSSIBILITY, THEN YOU DO THREE QUARTERS AFTER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR BACTERIA SAMPLES STAY NEGATIVE.
ANYTHING THAT'S EXISTING, YOU DO YOUR SAMPLE, YOU'RE THERE ONCE A YEAR.
IF THEY COME BACK WITH A POSITIVE FOR ANY REASON, WE GO BACK AND RESAMPLE.
THEN WE GO BACK IT PUTS THEM AT A MINIMUM A QUARTERLY REVIEW FOR A YEAR.
EVERY QUARTER, WE GO BACK AND DO ANOTHER WATER SAMPLE.
>> NO. THERE ARE WELLS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS ACCESS TO.
>> ANY COMMERCIAL FACILITY BASICALLY THAT HAS A PUBLIC BATHROOM, PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE WALL THAT IS NOT ON A MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM.
>> CLAYTON FARMS IS PUBLIC BATHROOM.
>> BUT THEY CUT AND WASH HANDS SO THAT PUTS THEM ON THE PROGRAM.
>> NOT NECESSARILY BATHROOMS, BUT PUBLIC.
>> THEY'RE ALSO NOW DOING THOSE FOOD TRUCKS WHICH USE THAT WATER AS WELL.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT REALLY PUT THEM ON THE OVER THE EDGE AIRS WHEN THEY STARTED HAVING THE FOOD TRUCKS COME IN AND THEY HOOKED THE WATER TO THOSE FOOD TRUCKS.
>> THIS EVERY YEAR, THEY GOT TO PAY ON 25?
>> THEY GOT TO PAY $125 EVERY YEAR?
>> WELL, THAT'S CURRENT AND THEN 60.
>> THEN THE 60 BECAUSE WELL, IT REQUIRES, LIKE JOSH SAID, A MINIMUM OF FOUR SITE VISITS FOR THE SAMPLING.
>> THE WAY THEY'VE BEEN THEY WORKED IT PREVIOUSLY IS EVERYBODY HAD A YEARLY FEE THAT THEY PAID.
THEN IF WE HAD TO GO BACK QUARTERLY, THEY KEPT CHARGING THEM MORE.
ADMINISTRATIVELY TRACKING ALL THAT IS WEIRD AT ANY GIVEN TIME, 20 OR 30% OF THESE FACILITIES ON THE LIST CAN BE ON A YEARLY SAMPLING.
[00:45:04]
>> YOU'RE PROPOSING TO GO FROM 125 YEARLY PLUS TO 60 FOR EACH TIME YOU COME OUT TO JUST A FLAT 210?
>> YEAH. EVERYBODY PAYS A 210.
WE DON'T WORRY ABOUT BILLING PEOPLE FOR THE SAMPLES WE GO OUT AND TAKE, WHETHER WE GUYS TAKE THE SAMPLERS OR NOT, EVERYBODY SAME FEE.
>> WHO DOES THE TESTING ON THE SAMPLES?
>> STATE LABS NO FEE ASSOCIATED.
>> NO FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
>> IT'S JUST SIMPLY COLLECTING AND SENDING.
>> SENDING IT AND DOING THE PAPERWORK AND THE REPORTING ON OUR SIDE.
>> A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THAT FEE.
>> OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IS THE ONE THAT TAKES THE WATER SAMPLES.
THEN THE LICENSED SANITARIUM IS THE ONE THAT REVIEWS IT.
>> IT'S REVIEWS THE RESULTS THAT ARE SENT BACK.
OKAY. YOU'RE PRIMARILY JUST TESTING FOR BACTERIA.
>> CHEMICALS, BACTERIAS AND NITRATES, ONE.
>> DO YOU CALL BEFORE YOU COME OUT?
>> IT DEPENDS ON THE FACILITY.
I USED TO RUN THIS PROGRAM IN KENT.
IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE FACILITY AND WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
CERTAIN FACILITIES THAT ARE OPEN.
YOU JUST GO AND TAKE THE SAMPLE AND LEAVE OTHER FACILITIES.
>> LIKE RURAL FARMS, YOU'RE NOT GOING AHEAD.
>> DOTS TAVERN IS ONE YOU GOT TO CALL BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT USUALLY OPEN DURING THE DAY.
DAN WHAT'S THE RESTAURANT ON 44 GOING TO BEACH.
HER HOURS ARE CAN BE WEIRD, SO I THINK THEY GOT TO CALL THERE.
IT DEPENDS ON FACILITY AND THE INTERACTION BETWEEN THE PEOPLE.
>> WE'D GET RID OF THE RETEST FEE FOR THEM, YEAH.
ONCE WE IF WE RAISE IT UP TO 210.
>> THE ONLY REASON I ASK IS WE DO THIS PERIODICALLY WITH WHEN WE DO WATER MAIN EXTENSIONS AND STUFF IN TOWNS, AND WHEN WE HIRE OR CALLED VARIOUS LABORATORIES.
I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT SOMETIMES THEY DON'T TAINT THE SAMPLE BY NOT WASHING THEIR HANDS OR SANITIZING THE WHERE THEY PULL THE WATER FROM.
IF THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF BACTERIA ON THE SURFACE, IF YOU TOUCH IT WITH YOUR HAND AND THEN TAKE A SAMPLE.
>> THEY ARE VERY SENSITIVE TASKS.
>> THE SLIGHTEST AMOUNT OF BACTERIA IN THERE CAN CAUSE A POSITIVE.
WITH THIS PROGRAM, THAT'S ONE REASON.
I TELL MY PEOPLE, AND THIS IS WHAT WE DO INTERNALLY, THERE'S TWO KINDS OF TESTS.
YOU HAVE AN ABSENT PRESENT, A YES, NO RESULT, OR A QUANTITATIVE.
DO THE QUANTITATIVE, IT DOESN'T COST US ANYMORE TO DO THE QUANTITATIVE.
WE GET NUMBERS. THE HIGHER NUMBER, OF COURSE, MORE CONCERNED YOU GET.
>> IT DOES HAPPEN, SOMETIMES ARE LOW, SOMETIMES THEY'RE HIGH.
>> BUT EITHER WAY, WE GET A POSITIVE SAMPLE ON THAT INITIAL ROUTINE SAMPLE.
NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE BUSINESS AT ALL.
WE GO BACK AND TAKE MORE SAMPLES TO START WITH.
BEFORE WE JUMP THE GUN ON ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
WAS IT A BAD SAMPLE? WAS IT SAMPLER ERROR? I CAN TELL YOU FROM TAKING THIS.
THERE ARE CERTAIN FACILITIES, YOU DON'T TAKE IT CERTAIN TAPS BECAUSE THEY'RE ALWAYS POSITIVE.
YOU FIND THE GOOD TAP OR YOU TAKE YOUR ROUTINE SAMPLE AT THE GOOD TAP.
>> WELL PERMIT APPLICATION STAY THE SAME.
>> THAT'S LOCK IN BY REGULATION.
>> THEN THE PLAT EVALUATIONS, WHICH WE TOUCHED ON, YOU'RE PROPOSING JUST GO 90.
>> NINETY PER LOT. COMBINING IT ALL.
>> WHICH MAKES SENSE. WE WERE CHARGING 150 FOR A MAJOR SUBDIVISION, WHICH WE HAVEN'T HAD ONE IN A LONG TIME.
BUT MAJORS WHATEVER, FOUR LOTS OVER FIVE?
>> FIVE AND ABOVE. YOU WOULD THINK, WHY WOULD YOU CHARGE MORE? SHOULD BE AN ECONOMY OF SCALE, ACTUALLY, TO DO THOSE PLAT EVALUATION SO 90 ACROSS THE BOARD THERE.
LICENSING [OVERLAPPING] STAYS THE SAME.
>> BACK TO THE PLAT EVALUATION, IS THAT LIKE IF THEY HAVE TO RESUBMIT, THEY HAVE TO PAY, ADD IT ON THE 90 BUCKS OR THAT'S JUST 90? HOW MANY TIMES DO THEY GET TO RESUBMIT TO PLAY?
>> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO RESUBMITTAL FEE.
>> SIMILAR TO PLANNING AND CODES.
>> WHICH I BELIEVE IS ON THE [OVERLAPPING] THIRD APPLICATION OR THE THIRD RESUBMITTAL.
>> WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH THE RESUBMITALS? WHAT'S HAPPENING?
>> MUCH LIKE PLANNING AND CODES, WE HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH OUR SURVEYORS SOMETIMES JUST NOT PUTTING ALL THE STUFF ON THE PLAT.
INTERNALLY, WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION NOW.
[00:50:02]
IF IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED AND IT'S ON OUR SIDE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHARGE THAT RESUBMITTAL FEE.BUT IF THEY'RE SUBMITTING STUFF AND CONSTANTLY RESUBMITTING STUFF FOR WHATEVER THE REASON THE CHANGES, OR NOT ADDING IN ALL THE NOTES FROM THE INITIAL REVIEW, AT A CERTAIN POINT OUR PEOPLE LOOK AT THIS 2, 03, 4 TIMES FOR THE SAME FEE.
THE FOOD SERVICES, ALL THOSE STAY THE SAME.
>> I THINK THE ONE THING THAT WE DID WANT TO BRING UP IS THE TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE DO NOT CHARGE A FEE FOR THAT, AND WE'RE PROPOSING $30, AND THAT WOULD EXCLUDES NON PROFITS WITH A TAX EXEMPT NUMBER.
YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT.
>> NO. FOOD TRUCK IS A LICENSED FOOD ESTABLISHMENT.
THIS IS TEMPORARY. THIS IS SUMMER FEST.
THAT'S A TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT.
IF YOU'RE DOING A TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT AND YOU'RE FOR PROFIT ORGANIZATION, YOU DON'T HAVE A TAX EXEMPT NUMBER.
WE'RE GOING TO CHARGE YOU A TEMPORARY FOOD BECAUSE OUR PEOPLE COME OUT ON SATURDAYS, AND THEY EARN COMP TIME.
THAT'S THE WAY IT'S BEEN FOREVER.
WE FEEL IF YOU'RE AN EXCLUDED ORGANIZATION, SOMEBODY THAT'S A CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION, WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE YOU FOR THAT.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANYBODY LOOK AT CHARGING THEM A FEE TO SOME DEGREE.
WE DO REQUIRE PEOPLE GET THE APPLICATIONS IN TWO WEEKS EARLY SO OUR PEOPLE CAN PLAN FOR ALL THIS STUFF AND HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THEIR STUFF, AND CONTACT THEM.
OTHER COUNTIES DO HAVE A LATE FEE FOR NOT SUBMITTING THEIR PERMITS ON TIME.
WHAT I`M COOKING, WHAT BEING THE MOST.
THEY HAVE A $500 FEE FOR THEIR TEMPORARY FOOD.
THEY CHARGE 200 FOR THEIR TEMPORARY FOOD AND 500 FOR LATE.
>> THERE MAY BE SOME ORGANIZATIONS THAT DON'T HAVE A TAX EXEMPT NUMBER.
I DON'T THINK THE LITTLE LEAGUES SET UP HERE, BUT NOT ALL LITTLE LEAGUES PROBABLY HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING A TAX EXEMPT NUMBER.
I'M NOT SURE POP WARNER FOOTBALL OR CAROLINE SOCCER, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE TAX EXEMPT NUMBERS OR NOT, BUT IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFICULT PROCESS TO GET THROUGH THE IRS TO GET THAT.
A LOT OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS MAY NOT HAVE DONE THAT.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THE BOYS SCOUT TROOP THAT THEY SELL HOT DOGS AND STUFF OUT HERE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL TROOP WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE ACCESS TO A TAX EXEMPT NUMBER.
>> WE CAN WORK SOMETHING INTO OUR SOPS ABOUT THAT.
>> MAYBE THEY DO. I DON'T KNOW.
MAYBE THEY'RE UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF [OVERLAPPING]
>> THOSE ARE VERY OBVIOUS ONES, EASY ONES TO SEE.
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE, WE HAVE SOME ORGANIZATIONS THAT CAN LOOK VERY CHARITABLE, BUT THEY'RE NOT TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS.
>> IT'S REALLY ONLY A FEW EVENTS A YEAR THAT THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
>> FEW MORE EVENTS THAN YOU THINK.
>> YOU'RE THINKING OF THE BIG ONES. THERE'S ALSO LOTS OF SMALL ONES.
CHURCH FISH FRY IS A TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT.
I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S SOME OF THE SOCCER ONES, THEY DO BASICALLY A RECURRING ONE.
>> THE FIRE COMPANY BREAKFASTS AND DINNERS, AND STUFF IS NOT.
>> THEY'RE AN EXCLUDED ORGANIZATION. THEY'RE LIKE A CHURCH.
THEY CAN DO FOOD AT THEIR ESTABLISHMENTS.
THEY BASICALLY ALL HAVE COMMERCIAL KITCHENS, BUT THEY'RE NOT INSPECTED BECAUSE OF THEY'RE EXCLUDED.
>> DID THAT GO FROM THE VFW LEGION AS WELL?
>> THE FIRST ONE HERE, FOOD SERVICE ANNUAL PERMIT, HIGH PRIORITY.
THAT'S 330. RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE NA. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF FOOD PERMITS.
THE LOW IS BASICALLY YOUR CHOP TANK SUPPLY.
THEY SELL CHIPS AND SODA AND ICE CREAM.
THAT'S A LOW PRIORITY. IT'S ALL PRE-PACKAGED.
IT STAYS IN A COOLER. THEY DO NO PREP.
THERE'S NO HAND WASHING, AND THEY'RE NOT PREPPING ANYTHING.
>> JUST TO SELL CHIPS AND SODAS, YOU GOT TO PAY $120 A YEAR?
[00:55:01]
YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S LOW PRIORITY.
>> SO THAT FALLS DOWN INTO 120?
>> YOUR MODERATE STUFF IN THE MIDDLE.
>> YOUR HIGH PRIORITIES OF STUFF THAT'S BASICALLY [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]
>> IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE.
WHAT IS IT FOR, SIR? [LAUGHTER]
>> YOUR MODERATE IS GOING TO BE SOMEPLACE LIKE YOUR 7-ELEVEN.
THEY'RE DOING STUFF STRAIGHT OUT THE FREEZER.
THEY'RE COOKING IT. YOU PUT ON GLOVES, PUT IN THE THING, AND THAT'S IT.
>> THAT'S YOUR MODERATE. YOUR HIGHER PRIORITIES ARE YOUR RESTAURANTS.
ANY PLACE YOU HAVE SOME PLACE WHERE YOU'RE REALLY TAKING RAW INGREDIENTS AND MAKING STUFF FROM SCRATCH.
>> WHAT ARE WE CHARGING FOR A RESTAURANT NOW?
>> RIGHT NOW, IT'S STILL THE SAME AS THE MODERATE.
>> 250. THE DIFFERENCE IS THE NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS PER YEAR ARE, OUR INSPECTOR IS SUPPOSED TO GO OUT, TWO INSPECTIONS COMPARED TO FOUR INSPECTIONS.
>> ESSENTIALLY, THIS WAS HIGH PRIORITY AND MODERATE WERE TOGETHER.
WE WERE CHARGING THE 250 ACROSS THE BOARD FOR THOSE.
WE WANT TO SPLIT OUT THE HIGH PRIORITY AND CHARGE 330 FOR THE HIGH PRIORITY BECAUSE IT REQUIRES ADDITIONAL SITE VISITS AND INSPECTIONS AS OPPOSED TO A MODERATE.
>> WHAT LOW PRIORITY, IS THERE A WAY YOU'D GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT, OR NO? I MEAN, 180. I JUST THINK 180 IS EXTREME IF YOU'RE JUST SELLING CHIPS, SODA AND ICE CREAM. [LAUGHTER]
>> LET US LOOK AT HOW MANY WE HAVE AND THE TIME THAT IT TAKES.
>> [INAUDIBLE] MAKE LATEST, BUT I KNOW IT'S SERIOUS.
WHERE DO FOOD TRUCKS FALL UNDER? WHAT PRIORITY DO THEY FALL?
>> THEY WOULD BE MODERATE OR HIGH, DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY MAKE. IT DEPENDS ON THE FOOD.
>> YOU MEAN WHAT TYPE OF FOOD THEY MAKE?
>> IT DEPENDS ON THE FOOD THEY MAKE, WHETHER THEY'RE MODERATE OR HIGH.
>> I'D HAVE TO GET MY FOOD PERSON FOR THAT BECAUSE I'M REALLY NOT.
WHEN YOU COME IN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, I'M ON LAND SIDE PERSON.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THAT KIND OF STUFF. YOU GET THE STUFF ALL THE REAL HEALTHY.
>> THE FAMOUS CASE THAT I RECALL SOME YEARS AGO AND I HOPE NONE OF YOU WERE HERE, BUT WAS THE KIDS THAT WANTED TO SELL SNOWBALLS ALONG THE ROAD AND THEY WERE TOLD THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE HOT AND COLD RUNNING WATER TO THE STAND.
[OVERLAPPING] PLEASE TELL ME THAT'S NOT [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO OUT AND BUST SNOWBALLS, BUT IF SOMEBODY WANTS DO IT COMMERCIALLY.
IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIKE, A TEMPORARY EVENT
>> THE DIFFERENCE THERE WAS THAT THEY WEREN'T ONCE WHOEVER THE PERSON WAS FOUND OUT THAT THEY WEREN'T CHARGING FOR HIM, BUT ONLY ASKING FOR DONATIONS.
BUT PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO GET SICK, WE'RE JUST CHARGE, I MEAN, DON'T DO THAT.
>>WE DON'T WANT TO GO AFTER KIDS WITH SNOWBALLS.
>> [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE SNOWBALLS IN GENERAL CAN BE VERY
>> WELL, THEY'RE BUYING ICE AND THEY'RE BUYING FLAVORING, AND THEY'RE PUTTING ICE THAT THEY BOUGHT IN A CONE.
>> THEY'RE SHREDDING IT, THEY'RE CLEANING.
YOU STILL HAVE SOME STANDARD SAFETY, [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M GOING TO WRITE THAT RESTAURANTS ARE THE HIGH PRIORITY, BASICALLY, MODERATE, WOULD BE LIKE GAS STATIONS, AND LOW PRIORITY IS JUST LIKE SOMEBODY
>> AS AN ACCESSORY, SELLING SOMETHING LIKE AT A HARDWARE STORE, SELLING CANDY BARS AND THAT STUFF.
>> FOR WHAT? [LAUGHTER] WHAT ARE THEY INSPECTED FOR?
>> THAT I'M NOT 100% SURE [LAUGHTER].
>> WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO OUR PAPERWORK AND DO AN INSPECTION THERE.
>> YOU GET THE LANCE PERSON OR SOMEBODY BRING YOU CANDY BARS AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO TURN AROUND AND ADD MONEY TO THAT AND SELL IT TO SOMEBODY.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE INSPECTING.
>> I THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THE HANDLING OF THOSE ARE DONE [OVERLAPPING]
>> APPROPRIATELY. I MEAN, THERE'S A CHANCE SOMEONE'S CONSUMING THOSE.
>> SOMEBODY COULD BE SELLING EXPIRED FOOD.
>> THAT DOES HAPPEN. WE GET COMPLAINS ABOUT SOMEONE [OVERLAPPING].
>> I GOT MY FOOD PERSON ACTUALLY RIGHT UP REALLY WHAT THEY DO AT THE LOW PRIORITY SO. I WANT TO KNOW.
>> DON'T PUT YOUR PORK RIND BAGS UP IN THE WINDOW WHEN IT GET HOT.
>> I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE CHARGING TO INSPECT FOOD.
[01:00:02]
>> YOU BEING JERKY [LAUGHTER].
>> BECAUSE I MEAN, HONESTLY, THAT COULD APPLY TO ANYTHING.
THAT COULD APPLY TO FUND RAISERS THAT ARE DONE WHERE KIDS GET STUFF AND RESELL THEM. LET'S NOT GET.
>> WELL, THOSE WOULD BE TEMPORARY, I THINK, EVENTS.
>> IF YOU GOT A ICE CREAM TRUCK, IT MIGHT BE 250, BUT IF YOU IF YOU'RE COOKING PIT BEEF, IT'S PROBABLY 330?
>> I'D HAVE TO CONFIRM ALL THAT FOR YOU.
>> I MEAN, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONFIRM.
I'M JUST SAYING IT'S PROBABLY THE SPECTRUM THERE.
>> WELL, THAT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE.
NOW WE UNDERSTAND THE PRIORITIES, WITH THAT BECAUSE I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THAT.
TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT, SINGLE OPERATOR 30, RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE ONE TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT, LATE FEE SO THAT'S IF YOU HAVE TO BASICALLY EXPEDITE THE REVIEW, THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 30.
TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT FOR LARGE EVENTS.
>> THE LARGE EVENT IS CONSIDERED SO WHEN YOU HAVE ALL OF YOUR FOOD VENDORS, BUT YOU HAVE YOU ACTUALLY HAVE AN EVENT COORDINATOR WHO IS HANDLING ALL OF THE PAPERWORK THAT COMES COMES TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND COORDINATES THE INSPECTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> I'M PRETTY SURE OF RIDGE STRAWBERRY FEST, THEY DO THIS.
THEY HAVE THE FOOD PEOPLE CONTACT ONE PERSON FOR THE EVENT.
THAT ONE PERSON CONTACTS OUR OFFICE AND WE'RE ONLY DEALING WITH ONE PERSON WITH MY OFFICE.
>> OR LIKE THE 4OH WHEN WE HAVE THE COUNTY FAIR DO YOUR SECURE LINE FAIR?
>> IF YOU HAVE AN EVENT COORDINATOR WHO THE FOOD VENDORS ARE DEALING WITH THAT EVENT COORDINATOR.
THEY'RE APPLYING BACK AND FORTH AND THEY'RE TAKING CARE OF SETTING UP THE FOOD PEOPLE AND GETTING GETTING THE LIST AND WHERE THEY'RE AT.
>> SO INSTEAD OF EVERYBODY PAYING $30, EACH ONE OF THOSE VENDORS, YOU HAVE THAT ONE COORDINATOR PAYS 90 BUCKS, AND IT COVERS EVERYBODY? RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT CHARGING.
>> WE'RE NOT CHARGING ANYTHING FOR A TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT.
>> WE WOULDN'T BE DOING THAT FOR, LIKE, SUMMER FEST, BECAUSE MOST OF THOSE VENDORS ARE NONPROFIT.
>> ANYWAY. THIS IS ONLY FOR PROFIT.
SO LIKE, 4H THE CAROLINE FAIR, YOU WOULD BECAUSE THOSE VENDORS ARE MAKING FOR PROFIT.
IT LOOKS LIKE FOR THE MODERATE AND HIGH PRIORITY, YOU WANT TO GO FROM 500-1000.
THE LOW PRIORITY STAYS AT 120.
IF I'M OPENING A NEW SPORTING GOODS STORE AND I WANT TO SELL SODAS AND CHIPS, BEFORE I OPEN THE STORE UP, I'VE GOT TO HAVE A PLAN REVIEW DONE?
>> BASICALLY, WHERE I'M SHOWING YOU ON MY FLOOR PLAN WHERE I'M GOING TO LOCATE MY SODA MACHINE AND WHERE I'M GOING TO PUT MY CANDY DISPLAY [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF THERE'S HAND WASHING NEEDED, WHERE'S THE HAND WASHING STATION? THAT STUFF.
>> THIS IS BEFORE I OPENED, PAY 120 AND THEN I GOT TO PAY 180.
>> BUT THIS IS A ONE-TIME FEE.
YOU GOT TO PAY THESE FEES FOR THE REVIEW.
>> IT'S 300 FOR THE FIRST YEAR, 180 EVERY WELL, RIGHT NOW IS 180 FOR 30 DAYS?
>> THE MODERATE TO HIGH PRIORITY RIGHT NOW, YOU'VE GOT THOSE LUMPED TOGETHER AS WELL.
THAT'S 500. YOU WANT TO GO TO 1,000.
>> LIKE I SAID, THAT IS A VERY EXTENSIVE REVIEW FOR OUR STAFF.
IT ALSO GETS VERY COMPLICATED WITH THE STATE WHEN WE HAVE THEY CALL THEM PROTOTYPES OR PROTYPICALS.
IF WE GET A PROTYPICAL, WE DON'T NEED A HASSLE BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY PROVED BY THE STATE.
BUT YOU GET SOMETHING, PROTOTYPICAL WILL BE JERSEY MIKES, DUNKIN DONUTS.
IF THEY'RE PRE APPROVED AND THE STATES ALREADY APPROVED THEM, WE DON'T DO A ASS REVIEW PLAN.
BUT THE STATE HASN'T APPROVED SOMETHING ALONG THE IR.
YOU GET A NEW PUB THAT WANTS TO OPEN UP.
YOU GOT TO LITERALLY IT'S GOING THROUGH AND ACTUALLY DOING ALL THE SPECS, CONFIRMING ALL THE NUMBERS OF THE HOOD, IT HAS ENOUGH CFM TO MOVE THE AIR OUT THE WAY IT NEEDS ALL THE EQUIPMENTS YOU LISTED.
IT'S GOING TO REACH THE RIGHT TEMPERATURES.
IT'S A VERY TECHNICAL REVIEW WITH A LOT OF INFORMATION LOOK UP.
>> A THOUSAND DOLLARS ISN'T GOING TO COVER IT, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> WELL, THE $500 IS NOT GOING TO COVER IT.
[01:05:03]
IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO A PER TEST FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND THE TECHNICALITIES INVOLVED WITH IT.>> A LOT OF TIMES IT INVOLVES MULTIPLE REVIEWS.
CAUSE VERY RARELY DOES ANYBODY EVER GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME?
>> BECAUSE IT'S VERY COMPLICATED.
>> IT'S VERY COMPLICATED BACK AND FORTH. ALLOW THESE PEOPLE.
>> YOU GOT TO HAVE LIKE SAINTS WITHIN SO MANY FEET OF WHERE YOU'RE DOING. THERE'S A LOT.
>> THE ONES THAT ARE THE MOST COMPLICATED ARE THE PEOPLE, THEY HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS.
THEY WANT TO OPEN THE STORE UP.
THEY HAVE PASSION FOR MAKING FOOD, BUT DON'T REALIZE,, THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THE EQUIPMENT.
ALL THE REGULATIONS AND THE REASONS AND WHY YOU NEED.
>> THERE IS AN EDUCATION [INAUDIBLE].
>> YOU CAN'T GO TO LOWS AND BUY REFRIGERATOR.
NO, YOU NEED TO GO BY A COMMERCIAL UNIT AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY?
>> ONCE YOU GET THE REVIEW DONE AND EVERYTHING PASSES, THEN YOU'RE DONE.
>> THEN YOU DROP BACK TO THE 330 OR 250, DEPENDING ON WHETHER YOU'RE MODERATE OR HIGH.
>> THESE REVIEW SHOULD BE DONE WITH OR PRIOR TO BUILDING, ACTUALLY BUILDING SOMETHING.
WE GET A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE, THEY ALREADY START, WE GET AFTER THE FACTS, AND THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED.
WE DO THIS FOR FOOD TRUCKS, THEY WANT TO BUY SOMETHING AND JUST PUT IT TOGETHER AND THEY BUY THEIR OWN STUFF.
>> BUT IN ALL OF THESE FOOD, THESE APPLY COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITY.
IT'S ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY AREA.
>> FOOD FACILITY REINSPECTION FEE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EDUCATIONAL PIECE.
EVERY TIME, YOU REVIEW A FLOOR PLAN OF HOW I'M GOING TO LAY MY COMMERCIAL KITCHEN OUT, AND YOU SAY, NO, YOU DON'T MEET THIS, YOU GOT TO MOVE THIS, DO THIS.
EVERY TIME I RESUBMIT THAT, IT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER 120.
>> THIS IS AN ACTUAL INSPECTION.
WHEN OUR PEOPLE ARE COMING OUT.
>> YOU FAIL AND THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT REINSPECTION, THERE'S A LENGTHY PROCESS FOR PEOPLE TO GO THROUGH.
THE PLAN REVIEW IS DONE SO THAT COMMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
IF YOU HAVE TO BE REINSPECTED, THOSE THINGS HAVE AT LEAST BEEN DISCUSSED ONCE.
>> THIS IS ACTUAL FEE IN THE FACILITY?
>> WE'VE INSPECTED YOU, WE'VE IDENTIFIED DEFICIENCIES, AND YOU REALLY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TO CORRECT THEM.
>> THIS IS PREVENT PEOPLE FROM I DID THIS AND THEN YOU COME OUT AND THEN YOU MISSED THIS.
>> TRYING TO SLIP SOMETHING UP.
>> REPETITIVE JUST WASTING YOUR TIME. I GOT YOU.
>> OTHER PERMITS. WE'RE GETTING THERE, PEOPLE.
>> MOBILE HOME PARK PERMIT ANNUAL.
WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT THERE?
>> WE HAD ONE EDS THE CURRENT, AND THEN 250 PLUS IS THE PROPOSED.
>> THESE ARE MOBILE HOME PARKS JUST IN THE COUNTY THAT ARE IN I THINK THERE'S ONE IN GREENSBORO THAT MAY BE ON TOWN ALSO.
>> IT IS. IT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THEM.
>> PART OF THAT WAS THAT STANDARDIZATION FEE THAT WE DO FOR THE INSPECTIONS.
>> WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? JUST MAKING SURE THE ONSITE DISPOSAL SYSTEM DOESN'T HAVE ANY FAILURES, CHECKING THE WELL CAP.
WE'RE CHECKING THE WELL FACILITY.
WE DON'T CHECK THE WATER FOR THEM.
THERE COMMUNITY SYSTEM, THEY'RE ACTUALLY CHECKED BY MDE.
WE CHECK THE SYSTEM TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT FAILING.
BUT THEN WE ACTUALLY INSPECT THE PARK.
THERE'S NOT A LOT IN THE MOBILE HOME REGS.
MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THEIR 911 NUMBERS UP.
THEY HAVE A COMMUNITY BOARD UP, THE ROADS ARE PASSABLE.
THEY HAVE LIGHTING, OVERALL CONDITIONS.
>> THAT'S THE WAY THE CURRENT FEE IS BASE.
THEY HAVE A BASE, AND THEN HOW MANY UNITS THERE'S A CHARGE THERE.
>> YOU'RE SELLING A FLAT 180 RIGHT NOW.
>> THERE'S A 180 PLUS THERE'S A PER TRAILER CHARGE.
>> WE HAVE SOME FAIRLY LARGE MOBILE HOMES.
>> THAT GO TO 250 PLUS PER TRAILER.
KEEP THE PER TRAILER FEE THE SAME.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS YOU'RE LOOKING.
>> I DON'T OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD NOW.
OR WE CAN GO TO A DIFFERENT FLAT FEE AND DROP THE PER TRAILER CHARGE.
>> YEAH, WE DO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY.
>> I THINK THE PER TRAILER IS FINE.
[01:10:02]
THAT WAY, IT'S COMPARABLE, BUT YEAH, 250.MOBILE HOME PARK PERMIT, SECOND REINSPECTION.
THAT'S IF YOU FIND SOMETHING WRONG.
THEY'VE GOT TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS.
>> THINK JOSH NEEDS TO GIVE SOME BACKGROUND ON THE ANNUAL PERMIT OF THE POOL SITUATION, BECAUSE YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
>> RIGHT NOW, THE REGULATIONS ALREADY PASSED.
THEY'RE WORKING AT ACTUALLY UPDATING OUR COMA REGULATIONS.
THE STATE HAS ADOPTED THE NATIONALS NSIP CODES.
WE'RE GOING TO BE CHANGING ALL THE NAMES OF OUR POOLS TO MEET THOSE CODES.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY COMMERCIAL POOL?
THE SPLASH PAD IS LICENSED AS A POOL.
THE CURRENT REGS REALLY DON'T HAVE A LICENSING FOR SPLASH PADS, BUT THE NEW REGS DO.
>> THOSE ALL PAD COULD BE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE AS WELL.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT IS ALL THAT'S ACTUALLY COMPLAINT DRIVEN.
BELIEVE OR NOT THE BENEDICTINE SCHOOL IS HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE BUT DOESN'T MEET CURRENT REGS.
BECAUSE YOU SLOPES, THINGS CHANGE, BUT UNTIL SOMEBODY COMPLAINS, NOBODY'S GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
THEY'RE ALL REQUIRED TO HAVE OPERATORS, , LICENSED OPERATOR BY THE COUNTY.
>> WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. LET ME GO BACK TO THE ANNUAL PERMIT ALL WITH THIS.
>> YEAH. STILL COMMERCIAL. PRIOR, WE HAD SOME DIFFERENT CHARGES FOR DIFFERENT POOL.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT CHARGING PEOPLE WHO HAVE POOLS IN THEIR YARD.
>> WE HAD ONE THAT WAS AT AT A DAYCARE.
IT WAS AT DAYCARE. THERE WAS ACTUALLY A LICENSE REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT WAS AT DAYCARE AND THE DAYCARE KIDS GOT IN THE POOL.
THEY'RE RETIRED. THERE'S NOT THERE ANYMORE.
BUT THERE WAS SOME DIFFERENT FEE FOR THAT.
THE INSPECTION IS INSPECTION, THE COST TO THE OR THE TIME THE SANITARIUM DOES WILL BE THE SAME.
DDS HAS SOME SLIGHTLY RELAXED RULES BECAUSE IT WAS A BASICALLY A PRIVATE POOL USED FOR A COMMERCIAL PURPOSE.
>> RECREATIONAL CAMP PERMIT ANNUAL. WHAT'S THIS PERTAINING?
>> THIS IS BE MC MARTINA IN TACO.
>> WHERE WOULD HOLLIDAY PARK FALL INTO THIS?
THIS WOULD ALSO BE THE CAMP HERE IN DENTON, THE OLD WESLEY CAMP.
>> I WANT TO GO FROM 120-250 ON THAT.
>> ANYTIME SOMEBODY USES, PUBLIC ACCESS TO WATER AND SOMEBODY HAS ACTUALLY HAS A BEACH.
IN KENT, WE HAD BATTERTON BEACH AND ROCK HALL BEACH, PUBLIC ACCESS, PUBLIC LAND.
THAT'S A NATURAL BATHING BEACH.
OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND IS A NATURAL BATHING BEACH.
SANDY POINT IS NATURAL BATHING BEACH.
THE TWO OR THREE WE HAVE IN A COUNTY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH YOUTH CAMPS.
IF THE YOUTH GET INTO THE WATER, THEY HAVE TO BE AT A LICENSED BEACH. THAT'S THE REASON WE HAVE.
>> GIRL SCOUT CAMP COMETH MARDEL.
>> I WENT SWIMMING. I THINK I DID A FOUR EDGE CAMP, AND WE WENT TO MARDELLA SWIMMING.
THE RIDE BACK. I HAD, LIKE, 30 LEACHES ON ME.
>> THAT'S COUNTY PROPERTY. IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A LICENSE BEACH THERE.
>> HAVE WORRIED ABOUT ME SWIMMING IN THAT POND ANYMORE.
THAT WAS THE ONE LESSON I LEARNED BEFORE EACH CAMP OR WHATEVER CAMP.
THOSE BEACHES, WE ALSO SAMPLE MONTHLY.
[01:15:03]
>> THOSE BEACHES, WE ACTUALLY SAMPLE MONTHLY AND TAKE TO THE STATE LAB, AND THEY GIVE US A BACTERIA RESULT FOR THEM.
IF THE BACTERIA IS HIGH, WE WOULD ACTUALLY ISSUE A SWIM WARNING.
>> BUT, LIKE, WHAT, CHOP TANK.
>> YES. DOESN'T STOP ANY FROM HOPPING IN THE WATER OR WHEREVER THEY WANT TO GO.
BUT IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A FACILITY.
>> GOT YOU. I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO TRY TO PRONOUNCE IT MARY TAKE A SHOT AT THAT.
>> SOME BIRD PERMIT WHAT'S THAT?
>> YOU GOT TO PRONOUNCE THE FIRST WORD.
>> IT'S IT'S FOR STORES TO SELL BIRDS. WE HAVE ONE IN THE COUNTY.
WE NOW HAVE ONE. THE ONE LADIES ACTUALLY RETIRED AND CLOSE TO SHOP UP.
>> THEY SELL BIRDS. IT'S PETCO.
>> ANYBODY THAT SELLS BIRDS IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A PERMIT.
IF WE GET A TRACTOR SUPPLY, SELLING CHICKS, THEY'RE GOING.
>> THAT WILL BE THE SAME AS SELLING CANDY BARS.
>> WHAT'S CHEAPER TO SELL BIRDS THAN IT IS TO SELL.
>> WITH ONLY HAVING ONE I DID NOT MAKE A STAND.
THEY GOT TO HAVE A PERMIT TO SELL ME THAT. RIGHT?
IT'S BEEN PAINFUL, BUT YOU'RE EDUCATED.
>> PUTTING THIS TOGETHER IT HAS TAKEN JOSH AND I QUITE THE AMOUNT OF TIME BECAUSE WE, ALL OF THE RESEARCH THAT WENT INTO LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER COUNTIES WERE DOING.
WHERE WE WERE HEADED IN TERMS OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS AT THE STATE LEVEL, ALL OF THAT, ALONG WITH THE ANALYSIS OF SALARIES AND WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING.
>> FOR THOSE OF YOU WATCHING AT HOME OR FROM YOUR DESK, WE'RE ON THE LAST PAGE.
AFTER THE FACT APPLICATION REVIEW.
>> WE DEFINITELY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS AN ISSUE.
LIKE, SOMEBODY HAS BUILT SOMETHING AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, I DON'T KNOW, FOR WHATEVER REASON, IT'S IDENTIFIED THAT THEY'VE BUILT SOMETHING OR THAT THEY'VE DONE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT INITIALLY REQUIRED AN APPLICATION.
>> WELL, I THINK ACTUALLY WHERE A LOT OF THIS IS COMING FROM IS PEOPLE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE THEY BUY.
BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS HERE WHERE, SOMEONE HAS COME IN TO BUY A HOUSE, AND THE REALTOR HAS GONE TO PLAN AND CODES AND PROBABLY TO TO YOUR OFFICE AND SAID, THERE'S A POOL HERE.
SHOW US WHERE THERE WAS A POOL PERMIT, AND MAGICALLY, THERE ISN'T ONE.
I THINK THAT'S HAPPENING MORE AND MORE ALL THE TIME AS PEOPLE ARE BUYING PROPERTY, THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE ON THAT PROPERTY THAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR ARE LEGAL AND INSPECTED AND APPROVED.
>> WELL, THE ONLY THING, IF YOU'RE OPENING A HARDWARE STORE, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT HAVING A CANDY VENDOR COME IN REQUIRES $180 PERMIT FEE, TOO? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THIS WOULD APPLY TO THEM.
IT WOULD DOUBLE TO 360 IF, I DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL TODAY.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW THAT EITHER. I DIDN'T KNOW YOU HAD TO EXPECT.
>> DO OUR PERMITS FOR THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, DO THEY TRANSFER FROM ONE OWNER TO ANOTHER?
>> NO. THEY DO NOT. IF YOU SELL SOMEPLACE THAT'S LICENSED, YOU HAVE TO COME BACK AND APPLY FOR THE LICENSE?
>> THAT WOULDN'T BE AFTER THE FACT.
IF SOMEONE WERE TO PURCHASE THE BUSINESS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND GET THEIR OWN PERMIT?
>> BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, LIKE, IF I GO RENT STOREFRONT FROM JOHN GRIFFITH OR RICKY BOOK OR OUT IN THE PLAZA, AND I OPEN UP A SPORTING GOODS STORE.
I DECIDE I'M GOING TO SELL NUT RAGES AND PEPSI.
I DIDN'T KNOW I NEEDED THIS PERMIT.
HOW DO WE FIND OUT THAT I'M BREAKING THE LAW.
>> SOME OF THAT IS SOMETIMES WE DON'T. WE REALLY DON'T.
SOME PEOPLE GET BY MANY, MANY YEARS.
MY EXAMPLE OF, LIKE, JUST CANDIES AND STUFF IS PRETTY GENERIC.
[01:20:02]
THE BETTER EXAMPLE I'M SITTING HERE THINK IS IS WALKER'S STORE UP IN MARDEL.I THINK THE BIG SEPARATION WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, LIKE, I THINK IS THE ICE CREAM AND WHEN YOU HAVE A FOUNTAIN DRINK OR COFFEE.
I THINK THOSE ARE LIKE THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO DOUBLE CHECK WITH MY FOOD PERSON. JUST THE CANDY BARS.
I'M NOT 100% SURE WE LICENSED THOUGH JUST I CAN'T EVEN SNACK ON THE COUNTER.
I BELIEVE IT'S THE ICE CREAM, AND THEN THE LICENSED ONE.
>> BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT THE TWO TIME FEE, I THINK IT WOULD BE USED RESPONSIBLY.
LIKE, IF SOMEBODY IS OBVIOUSLY DOING SOMETHING THAT THEY KNOW THEY SHOULDN'T BE DOING AND THEY NEED TO RECTIFY THAT.
THEN THAT DOUBLE THE ORIGINAL PERMIT FEE WOULD COME INTO EFFECT.
>> THIS ALSO GOES ALONG WITH, BUILDING PERMITS AS WELL.
>> THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WE HAD SPOKEN OF EARLIER IN TERMS OF, LIKE, THE SEPTIC DESIGN AND PLATS AND FOOD SERVICE.
>> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SURVEYS.
>> YEAH. THAT PERTAINS SPECIFICALLY TO DAYCARE, LIKE IN HOME DAYCARE, FOSTER CARE.
>> THESE ARE REQUESTED BY ANOTHER AGENCY FOR OUR OFFICE TO DO AN INSPECTION BY A LICENSE OF OUR MAIL SPECIALIST.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THE GENERAL PUBLIC USUALLY APPLIES FOR.
THIS IS A REQUEST FROM ANOTHER AGENCY THAT THEY NEED AN INSPECTION BASICALLY OF THE WELL AND SEPTIC.
THEN WE BASICALLY DO LIKE A NUISANCE COMPLAINT, LIKE, IS THERE ANY COUNTY NUISANCES THERE? THERE'S NO BIG PILES OF TRASH, THERE'S NO MAJOR OBVIOUS ISSUES THAT MAY ENDANGER YOUR CHILD.
>> THE APPLICANT. BE THE DAYCARE PROVIDER OR WHOEVER.
>> SOMEONE WANTS TO TURN YOUR HOUSE INTO A DAYCARE?
>> NOT ME. BUT IF SOMEONE WANTS TO TURN A HOUSE INTO A DAYCARE, THEN THEY WOULD NEED TO DO THIS.
>> THEY WOULD NEED TO PAY 90 BUCKS AND HAVE THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT COME OUT AND DO AN EVALUATION.
>> THERE'S ACTUALLY PAPERWORK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO PROVIDE TO THE AGENCY THAT THEY'RE APPLYING.
>> THIS WOULD BE PART OF THEIR LICENSE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THAT WOULD BE PART OF THEIR LICENSE.
>> IF YOU'RE DAYCARE, EVERY TWO YEARS, WE INSPECT A DAYCARE.
WE TREAT THEM LIKE A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
WE REQUIRE THAT THE WELLHEAD BE UP TO DATE.
AT RENEWAL, WE REQUIRE THAT THEY HAVE PROOF THAT THEY PUMPED THEIR SYSTEM TO MAINTAIN THEIR SEPTIC TANK AND THAT THEY HAVE AN AFFLUENT FILTER ON THEIR SEPTIC TANK.
A LOT OF THE COUNTIES ARE LOOKING AT THIS WAY, WE DO NOT LOOK AT THE GALLONS PER DAY.
WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ASSESS THE DAYCARE FOR THE SEPTIC DESIGN.
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THE TANK FOR EASY MAINTENANCE.
UNTIL YOU REACH, I BELIEVE IT'S EIGHT KIDS OR MORE, THAT'S ANOTHER LEVEL OF THE LICENSING THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
>> THEN YOU GET INTO THE DESIGN.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU GET INTO DESIGN AT THAT POINT.
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU GOT TO HIRE EMPLOYEE AT THAT POINT.
>> THE TRICKY PART OF THIS, TOO WOULD BE FOOD.
>> THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY PUBLIC. THAT'S STILL PRIVATE, SO WE DON'T LICENSE DAYCARES FOR FOOD.
>> PROPERTY STATUS REPORT. WHAT'S THAT?
>> MDE IS A VERY VOCAL THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE COMMENTS WITHOUT AN OFFICIAL APPLICATION.
THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CREATED MANY YEARS AGO BY, I BELIEVE LEONARD VOLT, ONE OF OUR PREDECESSORS.
IT WAS A WAY TO GENERATE MONEY AND TO GENERATE A RESPONSE FROM OUR AGENCY.
THERE IS A REPORT THAT WE RUN TO GET IN BETTER GRACES WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND TO STILL MAINTAIN THIS PERMIT WAS WE'RE ACTUALLY REVIEWING THE FILE AND DOING A SITE VISIT TO ENSURE.
A LOT OF PEOPLE DID THIS, LIKE THEY DID WITH A PARK TO MAKE SURE THE PARK STAYED GOOD.
THEY ACTUALLY HAD IT. WE HAD TO DO AWAY WITH IT THAT YOUR PARK APPROVAL WAS ONLY GOOD FOR TWO YEARS.
YOU HAD TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY STATUS REPORT TO KEEP IT UPDATED.
WE'VE DONE AWAY WITH THAT REQUIREMENT.
THE PROPERTY STATUS REPORT NOW IS AN OFFICIAL SITE VISIT BY OUR OFFICE, REVIEW OF OUR FILES, IT SAYS, THIS IS EITHER WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION OR OUR FILES TO GENERATE A SEPTIC REPORT, YOU CAN APPLY FOR A SEPTIC PERMIT.
OR IF YOU CAN'T, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE A SEPTIC PERMIT.
>> LET'S GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHEN THIS WOULD BE USED.
[01:25:03]
I THINK THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY TURN CLARIFICATION, LIKE WHEN SOMEONE'S PURCHASING A PROPERTY.>> WHEN SOMEBODY PURCHASE A PROPERTY.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PIA AND A PROPERTY STAT OR A PIA PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST IS, THIS IS WHAT'S IN THE FILE. HERE YOU GO.
A GOOD EXAMPLE WOULD BE THE WASTES SUBDIVISION UP HERE BEHIND THE HIGH SCHOOL.
THERE'S BEEN FIVE LOTS HAVE BEEN REALLY HOT LATELY.
THEY WERE APPROVED IN WHAT 90S, 80S.
YEAR AND A HALF TWO YEARS AGO, WE ACTUALLY SOMEBODY DID A PROPERTY STATUS REPORT ON THEM.
COME TO FIND OUT THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE 90S.
THERE'S A TON OF WETLANDS THERE.
THERE'S A DITCH CLOSE TO AN SRA.
WE DID THE PROPERTY STATUS AND WE LISTED ALL THESE THINGS THAT MAY IMPEDE THEM GETTING A SEPTIC PERMIT FOR IT.
>> YEAH. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE FOR THE SANITARIUM TO COMMENT OFFICIALLY.
>> ON WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW.
BECAUSE THAT PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY-
>> AS OPPOSED TO. HERE'S A PIA REQUEST.
HERE'S THE PLAT, SHOWS AN SRA AND YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET A SEPTIC ONE.
>> AS OPPOSED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER REVIEWING THEM THEMSELVES.
YOU ASKED FOR PIA. YOU'RE JUST GETTING THE INFORMATION THAT'S IN THE FILE.
YOU'RE NOT GETTING A COMMENT ON WHAT THE CURRENT REGULATIONS ARE, WHAT THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS ARE.
PROPERTY STATUS REPORT, THE WORK'S BEING DONE TO PROVIDE THAT INFO FOR YOU.
IT'S LIKE A PRELIMINARY REVIEW AT THAT VERY POINT IN TIME.
>> YEAH. I WANT TO MAKE NOTE OF THIS.
WE CURRENTLY DO NOT DO WATER SAMPLES, BUT WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO PROPOSE THIS FEE BECAUSE IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY, WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE CONDUCTING THOSE WATER SAMPLES.
WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO BILL FOR THE PURPOSE IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS RESPONSE REQUIRED.
>> WHAT'S THE PLUS? I'M ALWAYS NERVOUS WHEN I SEE A PLUS.
>> THIS WOULD BE LIKE A FLOODING SITUATION.
SOME AREA IN THE COUNTY FLOODED.
IT'S GOING TO BE BIG ENOUGH. IT'S GOING TO MAKE STATE AND FEDERAL.
WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND DO WATER SAMPLES TO MAKE SURE THE WELLS ARE GOOD.
THIS WAY, WE CAN ACTUALLY TRACK THAT WE HAVE A FEE.
WE GOT TO DO 100 WATER SAMPLES BECAUSE IT'S COMMUNITY FLOODED.
WE'RE ADDING THAT TO OUR DISASTER RECOVERY, WHICH IS GOING TO GO INTO BASICALLY REIMBURSEMENT SECTION THAT GOES UP HIGHER UP.
>> YOU'RE NOT EXPECTING A PERSON AFFECTED BY THE DISASTER TO PAY THE $30.
>> NO, THIS IS THIS IS MORE OF A FMA BILLING ITEM.
>> THAT'S WHAT'S REALLY INTENDED FOR.
I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE BUSINESS OF WATER SAMPLING FOR ANYBODY.
WHEN WE DO WATER SAMPLE FOR, LIKE, SOMEBODY HAD A WELL PUT IN, OUR STANDARD POLICY IS THAT THEY NEED TO PROVIDE THE WATER SAMPLES FOR THE FIRST FOUR OR FIVE.
A WELL THAT'S NOT PASSING A NEW REPLACEMENT WELL.
THAT'S WHEN WE KICK IN AND WE START SAMPLING AND WE THROW IT UNDER THE WELL PERMITTING FEE.
>> HEALTH DEPARTMENT REVIEW, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY THE WATER SEWER VERIFICATION.
THIS IS I WANT TO BUILD A POLE BUILDING ON MY PROPERTY AND BEFORE I CAN GET A PERMIT, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET A WATER SEWER VERIFICATION OR I WANT TO PUT A PORTABLE BUILDING OVER A CERTAIN SIZE.
I'VE GOT TO GO GET A WATER SEWER VERIFICATION.
>> YEAH. I OWN A HALF ACRE LOT IN HICKMAN, AND THE ASSESSMENT OFFICE IS TELLING ME IT'S A BUILDABLE LOT AND THEY'RE CHARGING ME PROPERTY TAXES ON $50,000 WHEN THE LOT'S NOT WORTH $5,000 BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T BUILD ON IT IF YOU WANTED TO.
I'VE GOT TO COME IN AND PAY $90 TO GET A SANITARIUM TO DO A WATER SEWER VERIFICATION AND PROVE TO ME, GIVE ME A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS, I CAN'T BUILD ON THIS LOT TO TAKE TO THE ASSESSMENT OFFICE TO GET MY ASSESSMENT LOWERED.
>> YEAH, THIS IS THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW FEE.
IN THIS COUNTY, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A FLAT RATE OF $40 PROPOSED 90.
OTHER COUNTIES, THEY WORK THEM A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
MY PREVIOUS COUNTY, IT WAS A PERCENTAGE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT.
WHAT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT GOT WAS BASED ON WHATEVER THE PLANNING OFFICE CODED OUT AT.
[01:30:06]
YOUR LAST EXAMPLE, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COMMENT ON THAT UNLESS WE HAD.THAT'D BE A PROPERTY STATUS REPORT.
IF WE HAVE SOMETHING THE FILES HAS ALREADY FAILED, WE'LL JUST GIVE YOU THAT AND MOVE ON.
>> MOST PEOPLE HAVE PROBABLY DONE THAT NOW.
MOST PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY APPEAL THOSE ASSESSMENTS AT THIS POINT AND GOT THEIR PROPERTY AND NOBODY SUBDIVIDING THOSE LITTLE LOTS ANYMORE.
IT HAPPENED IN THE RURAL VILLAGES WHERE PEOPLE BOUGHT A PROPERTY NEXT TO THEM AND HAD THESE LOTS.
OVER THE YEARS, THE REGULATIONS CHANGED AND BECAME SO ONEROUS THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A CESSPOOL IN AND GET RID OF YOUR WASTEWATER THE WAY THEY USED TO BACK EARLY.
>> WE DID A LOT IN KENT THAT WAY.
WE HAD A LOT OF LOTS THAT WERE BASICALLY THE SAME THING.
>> MY LAST EXAMPLE, A LOT OF THAT'S PROBABLY ALREADY BEEN DONE, AND PEOPLE HAVE DONE THAT.
RETURN CHECK FEE, LATE FEE, CREDIT CARD PROCESSING, SO THE REST OF THE STUFF IS PRETTY BASIC.
>> YEAH. STILL NO CHARGE FOR AUTHORIZATION FORM OR A RESTORATION FUND APPLICATION. WE'LL CHARGE FOR THOSE.
>> ANY IDEA HOW THIS WOULD PUT US IN LINE WITH THE OTHER SURROUNDING COUNTIES?
>> IN GENERAL CONVERSATION FROM OTHER DIRECTORS, AND THIS IS MORE STATEWIDE.
ONE OR TWO APPLICATIONS WERE A LITTLE HIGHER OR APPLICATIONS WERE LIT LOWER.
WE'RE PROBABLY STATEWIDE, WE'RE PROBABLY WITHIN THE AVERAGE.
>> OKAY. NONE OF THESE HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED SINCE 2005? WELL, YOU'VE GIVEN US A LOT TO THINK ABOUT?
>> YEAH. NO. IT WAS NEEDED, AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO PUT THIS TOGETHER FOR A WHILE TO MOVE IT FORWARD.
I DO THINK I NEED TO GO BACK AND, LIKE, I'VE TAKEN NOTES.
WE'LL GO BACK AND WE'LL ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS WE'LL COME BACK AND CONTINUE TO COME.
>> YEAH. WE'VE JUST GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH OF THIS DO WE WANT TO COVER IN FEE FOR SERVICE, HOW MUCH DO WE WANT TO SUBSIDIZE OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND? LIKE I SAID, WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE COST OF HOUSING, AND AS WE INCREASE OUR FEES, WE'RE JUST DRIVING UP THE COST OF THAT. SAME WITH FOOD.
WE HEAR RESTAURANTS ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE PROFITS WITH THE INCREASED COST AND THEN FOR US TO GO ON AND INCREASE THE FEES FOR THEM TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE.
WE JUST GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH WE FEEL.
>> YEAH, BUT I MEAN, THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN 20 YEARS, SO I AND FIVE.
I HADN'T BEEN DONE IN 20 YEARS.
>> BEEN MY EXPERIENCE WITH MOST FEES. THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.
THEY GO IN A 15 OR 20-YEAR CYCLE.
WE JUST RECENTLY WENT THIS WITH DMV.
>> HERE'S A QUESTION. OUR CONTRIBUTION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH BUDGET.
INCREASE THE FEE. IF WE INCREASE THE FEE, THE INCREASED REVENUE THAT COMES IN FROM THE FEE COLLECTION, WHERE DOES THAT MONEY GO? ARE WE OFFSETTING THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTION? ARE WE OFFSETTING THE STATE'S CONTRIBUTION, OR ARE YOU GUYS JUST THROWING A MASSIVE PARTY? [LAUGHTER]
>> I WISH. ESSENTIALLY, WHAT HAPPENS AT THE COUNTY CONTRIBUTION.
THERE ARE VERY SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES THAT WE CAN FUND THROUGH CORE FUNDING.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IS THE PRIMARY ONE.
THE OTHER ONE IS MEDICAL ADULT DAYCARE.
ALSO SOME COMMUNICABLE DISEASE AS WELL.
I CAN'T REMEMBER. THERE'S LIKE, TWO MORE ADMINISTRATION, OF COURSE.
WHEN YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, IF WE ARE SHIFTING SOME OF IT, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'D BE A HUGE SHIFT JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE INCREASES, SALARY ENHANCEMENTS CONTINUE TO MOVE.
I THINK THAT WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT, WE'VE ALSO SEEN INCREASES IN MEDICAL DAYCARE COSTS.
LIKE WE'VE RESTRUCTURED OUR PROGRAM TO TRY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
>> IT JUST IS GOING TO FILTER INTO THOSE OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING WITH THE CORE FUNDING AS A WHOLE.
IT'S NOT LIKE, WE'RE GOING TO SUPPLEMENT ANOTHER VERY SPECIFIC PROGRAM.
IT JUST COVERS THOSE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS ARE
[01:35:03]
ALREADY REQUIRED TO FUND. IT'S JUST GOING TO GO THERE.>> IT SHOULD REDUCE THE COUNTY NOW?
>> WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE FEE INCREASES, BUT SOME OF THEM, BASED ON THE NUMBER, YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL VOLUME WE HAVE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, THE TWO WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE THE PROBABLY THE MOST SEEN INCREASE IN OUR REVENUES IS GOING TO BE THE TEMPORARY FOOD EVENT AT $30 A PIECE.
THE DIFFERENCE IN THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW FEE.
THOSE ARE TWO WHERE WE SEE A LOT OF BUILDING PERMITS.
WE'RE TALKING A DIFFERENCE OF $50.
>> WHAT I'M HERE. IT'LL FREE UP MORE MONEY TO BE USED FOR THE ADULT DAYCARE POTENTIALLY TO-
>> WELL SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS, THE REQUEST HAD BEEN ABOUT A 3% INCREASE EACH YEAR, ACTUALLY, NOT OVER THAT PERIOD WE DONE.
THAT REMAINS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN TERMS OF SALARY WELL, NOT SALARY ENHANCEMENTS, BUT A COST OF LIVING RAISE, NOT SO MUCH SALARY ENHANCEMENTS, BECAUSE WE JUST HAD, LIKE TWO, THREE YEARS AGO, OUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.
>> [OVERLAPPING] RECLASSIFICATION.
>> YEAH, A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TERMS OF SALARY ENHANCEMENT, WHICH WAS NEEDED IN ORDER TO ATTRACT QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS.
IN ORDER TO BECOME AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SANITARIUM, IT'S A RIGOROUS PROCESS.
IT'S NOT ONLY IS IT A COLLEGE DEGREE, BUT THE EXAM ITSELF, IT COVERS THE BROAD SPECTRUM OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.
YOU CAN HAVE SOMEONE WHO HAS A MAIN INTEREST IN LAND LIKE SEPTIC AND WELL.
THE TEST THAT THEY'RE TAKING INVOLVES FOOD SAFETY AS WELL.
ALONG WITH BEING EDUCATED ABOUT RADON AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS.
I FEEL LIKE WHEN WE REVIEWED THIS, WE DEFINITELY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION AND COMBINING SOME OF THEM INDICATES A LITTLE BIT OF SOMEWHAT OF A DISCOUNT.
WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THAT WE ARE ALSO COMMUNITY MEMBERS HERE.
HOW WE WOULD WANT THOSE FEES APPLIED AND UTILIZED.
>> BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HEAR JUST LIKE YOU WILL.
ANY FEE INCREASE IS ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE KICKBACK OF SOME SORT OR ANOTHER.
WE'RE GOING TO HEAR IT, AND WE'RE GOING TO JUSTIFY IT TO THE PEOPLE IN THE MOMENT.
>> ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE?
>> THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.
>> YOU'LL GET BACK TO US ON WHAT THIS TRANSFER COST WAS?
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS TOO.
>> LIKE THE [INAUDIBLE] FEE, DROPPING BACK TO THAT, WHY WOULD YOU NOT GO AHEAD AND RECORD IT? IF YOU WENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THAT WHOLE PROCESS, I'M WONDERING WHY YOU WOULD NOT GO AHEAD AND RECORD IT BUT ANYWAY, OKAY.
>> LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
[01:45:39]
>> GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
[01:45:41]
[OVERLAPPING]>> TO GO TO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE GO TO LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
>> MOTION SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WE ARE HERE TO INTRODUCE A BILL THAT WE WORKSHOPPED LAST MEETING, AND THIS IS LEGISLATIVE BILL 2025-009 CHAPTER 18 COMMISSIONERS AND ACT TO CREATE THE CAROLINE COUNTY COMPENSATION REVIEW COMMISSION.
[• Legislative Bill #2025-009, Chapter 18 Commissioners—An Act to Create the Caroline County Compensation Review Commission]
BY WAY OF BACKGROUND ON THIS, THE CURRENT COMMISSIONER COMPENSATION IS PROVIDED FOR IN A SECTION OF THE COUNTY CODE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN TOUCHED SINCE 2009.WHAT WE HAVE DONE HERE IS PUT TOGETHER A PROPOSED ORDINANCE WHICH INCORPORATES THE EXISTING SECTION AS A SUBSECTION A AND THEN CREATES SOME ADDITIONAL SECTIONS SO THAT WE CAN FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE THAT HAS BEEN CREATED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ARTICLE SECTION 10-302, THERE IS A PROVISION THERE FOR A COUNTY TO ESTABLISH A COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND COMPENSATION AND ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE BODY, WHICH, OF COURSE, IS THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND PROVIDES THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD MEET, MAKE A STUDY AND WOULD RESOLVE BY A RESOLUTION, WHICH THEY WOULD SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BASICALLY BY THE END OF THE TERM, CLOSE TO THE END OF THE TERM, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE COMMISSIONERS TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THE RECOMMENDATION, AND THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO INCREASE THE FIGURES SUGGESTED BY THE COMMISSION.
WE THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD IDEA.
OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE NOT HAD ANY INCREASE SINCE 2009, AS I'VE SAID, JUST AS WE WERE JUST GOING OVER HOW FEES HAVE BEEN INCREASED FOR THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT SINCE 2005, IT'S TIME TO REVIEW THIS AND THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT THE LEGISLATURE SAYS WE CAN DO.
WHAT THIS DOES, IS REPEALS AND REENACTS WITH AMENDMENT SECTION 18-5 COMPENSATION OF CHAPTER 18 COMMISSIONERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONFIRMING THE CURRENT RATES OF COMPENSATION AND ALLOWANCES FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ESTABLISHING A COMPENSATION REVIEW COMMISSION TO UNDERTAKE A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF THE RATE OF CURRENT COMPENSATION AND ALLOWANCES FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION AND ALLOWANCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, PROVIDING FOR THE STAFFING, POWERS, DUTIES, AND APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE COMPENSATION REVIEW COMMISSION AND GENERALLY RELATING TO COMMISSIONER COMPENSATION, AND THE COMPENSATION REVIEW COMMISSION, AND PROVIDING THAT THIS TITLE BE DEEMED A FAIR SUMMARY OF THIS PUBLIC LOCAL LAW FOR ALL PURPOSES.
I WOULD ADD THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO DO WHAT I FOUND WORCESTER COUNTY DOES, WHICH IS THIS WOULD BE A STANDING COMMISSION, BUT THEY WENT AHEAD AND BACK IN 2005, WORCESTER COUNTY INCLUDED IN A RESOLUTION, ESTABLISHING SALARIES, BEGINNING WITH THE 2010 TO 14 TERM AND FOR EACH TERM THEREAFTER, UNLESS REVISED OR RESCINDED BY RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
THE COMMISSIONER'S SALARY SHALL BE AUTOMATICALLY INCREASED AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH TERM EQUAL TO THE COST OF LIVING INCREASE AWARDED TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES DURING THE PRIOR TERM.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU NECESSARILY NEED TO DEAL WITH TODAY, BUT THAT IS AN INTERESTING WAY THAT WORCESTER COUNTY HANDLED IT SO THAT THERE WAS NOT CONSTANT RE-VISITATION,
[01:50:04]
SO DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THIS.THAT WAS AN INTERESTING WAY TO DO IT.
THE CALENDAR FOR THIS BILL, IT'S OBVIOUSLY IT'S BEING INTRODUCED TODAY FOR THE FIRST READING.
A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE SCHEDULED IN THE SATURDAY STORE DEMOCRAT.
THE SECOND READING AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WOULD BE TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16TH.
THE THIRD READING WITH THE POTENTIAL TO AMEND OR ENACT WOULD BE THE 23RD OF SEPTEMBER.
THE ENACTMENT AD WOULD RUN FOR THE THREE CONSECUTIVE SATURDAYS THROUGH THE 11TH.
THE EFFECTIVE DATE WOULD BE SATURDAY NOVEMBER THE 8TH AND I BELIEVE THAT WE'VE ALREADY BEGUN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT THIS COMMISSION IS GOING TO BE STOOD UP AND IS GOING TO NEED FOLKS TO MAN IT, SO WE ARE HOPEFULLY GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE WHO CAN BE APPOINTED AND HAVE THEIR APPOINTMENTS EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER THE 8TH, THE EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS? NO.
>> I WOULD MOVE THAT WE INTRODUCE LEGISLATIVE BILL 2025-009.
THE AYES HAVE IT. GOOD. MOVE FORWARD.
[• Legislative Bill #2025-010, Solar Energy Ordinance]
>> YEAH. AS IT IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED.
>> CRYSTAL, DO YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD FOR THIS NEXT ONE? NEXT, WE ARE HERE FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATIVE BILL NUMBER 2025-010 CHAPTER 175 ZONING.
THIS IS A BILL WHICH WE ARE SUBMITTING TO THE COMMISSIONERS FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE OF THE PASSAGE OF THE RENEWABLE ENERGY CERTAINTY ACT BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY LAST SESSION.
CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS ARE IMPOSED UPON THE COUNTIES WITH RESPECT TO THEIR ORDINANCES CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SOLAR ELECTRIC ENERGY GENERATING FACILITIES.
AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONTROVERSY ABOUT THIS BILL.
IT TOOK AWAY A LOT OF THE LAND USE AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTIES AND STREAMLINED THE PROCESS FOR THE DEVELOPERS, AND WE'VE RUN RIGHT HEAD ON INTO WHAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS SAID ABOUT WHAT WE'VE CALLED BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEGISLATION REFERS TO IT AS ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE, AND MANDATES BASICALLY THAT THE STORAGE DEVICES ARE TO BE GIVEN THE SAME FREEWAY AS THE SOLAR PANELS THEMSELVES, THE SOLAR ARRAYS.
WHAT WE HAVE DONE HERE IS SIMILAR TO OUR COLLEAGUES IN QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY IS WE HAVE PROPOSED A COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION CONTRIBUTION TO THE COUNTY WHEN A SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM IS PERMITTED, I GUESS TO THE PERMIT STAGE, THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A FEE CONTRIBUTION, IF YOU WILL, THAT WILL BE REQUIRED OF THE APPLICANT.
THIS WOULD ALSO BE CHARGED IF THEY WERE COMING IN WITH A FACILITY THAT DIDN'T HAVE ANY PANELS AT ALL, BUT WAS SIMPLY GOING TO BE ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES.
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS NOT IN ITS LEGISLATION, ADDRESSED THE SAFETY HAZARDS OF THE ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS. HOWEVER, WHAT CRYSTAL AND I HAVE DONE IS HAVE INSERTED IN THIS DRAFT ON PAGE 13 OF THE DRAFT, THAT IF THOSE DEVICES ARE GOING TO BE INSTALLED IN CAROLINE COUNTY, THEY'VE GOT TO BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT PUBLISHED EDITION OF
[01:55:02]
THE NFPA 855: STANDARD FOR INSTALLATION OF STATIONARY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS.. >> THOSE ARE SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS.
IT'S REQUIRED US TO GO THROUGH CRYSTAL AND I'VE SPENT A LONG LOT OF TIME GOING THROUGH THE EXISTING ORDINANCES THAT WE HAVE CONCERNING THIS SUBJECT, AND WE'VE HAD TO GET RID OF SOME OF THEM TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE LEGISLATION AND WE'VE HAD TO CREATE NEW ONES, WHICH ARE FORCED UPON US MOST OF THESE PROVISIONS BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S STATUTE.
>> YES. WHAT WE ALSO IDENTIFIED IN THAT SENATE BILL WAS IT DID NOT ADDRESS SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS 1 MEGAWATT OR LESS.
WHAT WE HAVE DID WITH OUR CURRENT AMENDMENTS WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO RETAIN THE EXISTING REGULATIONS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE AND APPLY THOSE REGULATIONS NOW TO 1 MEGAWATT OR LESS? OF COURSE, WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK AND RE EVALUATE THEM IF WE FEEL THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THOSE EXISTING REGULATIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE FOR SOLAR FACILITIES THAT ARE 1 MEGAWATT OR LESS, BUT IT STILL RETAINS PROVISIONS AND STANDARDS FOR THOSE THAT WERE NOT ADDRESSED IN THAT SENATE BILL.
AND THEN WE'RE ADDING THE REGULATIONS IN LINE WITH WHAT'S IN THE SENATE BILL AS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE UNDER OUR SOLAR SECTION.
AND AS STEWART HAD SAID, WE WILL BE ADDING IN THERE A COMPLIANCE FOR THE BATTERY ENERGY TO, AT A MINIMUM, COMPLY WITH THOSE NFPA 855 STANDARDS.
AND THE DETERMINATION ON HOW WE WOULD DETERMINE WHAT THE COMPENSATORY FUND AMOUNT IS THAT WOULD BE DUE AND PAYABLE AT THE TIME WE WOULD ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT IS FOUND ON PAGE 5 UNDER THE DEFINITION OF COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION FUND.
YOU'LL SEE THERE THAT THE AMOUNT IS BASED UPON 50% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL OF THE AREA TAKEN OUT OF CROP PRODUCTION AS DETERMINED BY THE ANNUAL MARYLAND AG LAND PRESERVATION FUND EASEMENT SETTLEMENT PROCESS.
SO WE WOULD FOLLOW THAT SAME PROCESS.
>> I'M GOING TO BE THE BAD GUY HERE.
THAT'S ALL I"M. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A MORATORIUM ON BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE.
NOTHING IN THIS BILL THAT WAS PASSED, IS GOING TO CHANGE MY MIND THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW THEM IN THIS COUNTY.
I DON'T CARE, FRANKLY, I DON'T CARE WHAT THE BILL SAYS.
I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO SET UP HERE AND APPROVE INHERENTLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY OR ANYTHING ELSE.
SYSTEMS THAT WILL BE BROUGHT INTO THIS COUNTY THAT CAN ENDANGER THE LIVES OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.
ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH THE TESTIMONY THAT PRESIDENT READING AND I DID AT THE JOINT SESSION IN ANNAPOLIS.
I DON'T WANT TO USE THE WORD LIE, BUT I WILL, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN LIED TO ABOUT THIS FROM DAY 1.
FROM THE TIME THIS WAS BROUGHT UP, WE HAVE BEEN TOLD BY VARIOUS AGENCIES, VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS THAT THERE WERE GOING TO BE SAFETY PROVISIONS THAT WERE GOING TO BE INTRODUCED IN THIS, THERE ISN'T ANYTHING IN THE BILL THAT WAS PASSED, THE SENATE BILL 931, THERE WAS NOTHING IN THAT BILL, CONTRARY TO WHAT I WAS TOLD ON RECORD IN THAT HEARING THAT ADDRESSES SELF CONTAINED FIRE SUPPRESSION IN THESE SYSTEMS. NOW, I WAS TOLD DOWN WHEN WE WERE AT MACO I STOPPED AND TALKED AT ONE OF THE BOOZE FOR THE MARYLAND STATE FIREMAN'S ASSOCIATION, AND I WAS TOLD AT THAT TIME, AND THAT WAS AUGUST, THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME CHANGES TO THE BILL, BUT THE GUY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE.. UNTIL SOMEBODY CAN TELL ME THAT THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE SAFE, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PROPOSE A HAZARD TO OUR FIREFIGHTERS AND FIRST RESPONDERS, I'M NOT GOING TO AGREE TO INCLUDE THEM IN THIS BILL.
I THINK AND MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE, WHY 50%, WHY NOT 100% OF THE MOUTH EASEMENT? IF WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE MONEY TO PRESERVE FARMLAND,
[02:00:06]
WHY ARE WE ONLY GOING TO DO 50%? I MEAN, I KNOW THIS WAS INTRODUCED AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE.BUT I MEAN, WHAT WOULD THE REASONING BE OR WHY WOULDN'T WE CONSIDER 100% OF THE MOUTH PAY EASEMENT?
>> I THINK IT'S JUST WHAT QUEEN HANNES HAD DONE, SO WE WERE DURING THEIR LEGISLATION.
I COULD CERTAINLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT, GOING TO 100%?
>> I WANT 100%. IT'S GOING TO TAKE US WHERE IS THAT LANGUAGE AT?
>> IT'S ON PAGE 4 [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT'S IT'S GOING TO TAKE US AND I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I GUESS WOULD BE CLARIFIED AND CONTAINED IN THE BILL.
ARE THESE FUNDS GOING TO BE UTILIZED TO ESTABLISH OUR OWN AG PRESERVATION PROGRAM, OR IS IT GOING TO BE USED TO SUPPLEMENT THE STATE PRO OUR SHARE OF THE STATE PROGRAM.
>> WHICH THE STATE PROGRAM IS NOW PRETTY MUCH.
>>ON POLLS. IN ADDITION TO FORCING SOLAR PANELS IN OUR COUNTY ON PRIME FARMLAND, THEY HAVE NOW PAUSED FUNDING FOR TO PRESERVE FARMLAND.
LOOK, I WON'T BE I'M NOT GOING TO, BELABOR THIS.
DO WE DO WE HAVE A APPLICATION OR DO WE HAVE ANY INDICATION OF APPLICATIONS FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS RIGHT NOW?
>> NO. WE HAVE RECEIVED PHONE CALLS INQUIRING ABOUT AVAILABLE PROPERTIES THAT MAY BE SUITED FOR, IN WHICH EVERYONE'S BEEN TOLD THE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY UNDER A MORATORIUM, AND WE'VE RECEIVED NO ADDITIONAL CALLS.
>> BECAUSE IF THERE'S ONE, LET ME KNOW.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS.
I'M NOT GOING TO JUST ROLL OVER ON THIS THING.
I MEAN, I THINK THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE THERE AT THAT HEARING, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THAT QUESTION AND WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS IN THE BILL. IT'S NOT?
>> WELL, I GUESS WE CAN TAKE THE BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE PIECE FIRST.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, AND I AGREE WITH YOUR FRUSTRATION.
I'M TERRIBLY FRUSTRATED WITH THIS ENTIRE BILL THAT'S FORCING US TO MAKE THIS CHANGE.
BUT IF WE STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THE BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE COMPONENT HERE.
THE STATE LEGISLATION CLEARLY PREEMPTS US AND TAKES THAT ABILITY AWAY FROM US TO BAN IT.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT WE CAN'T REQUIRE NFP 855, AND IT DOES NOT SAY THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY EVEN ADD A PROVISION TO SAY THAT EACH UNIT MUST HAVE ITS OWN FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.
IF NFP 855 DOESN'T REQUIRE THAT, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE COULD PUT ALL KINDS OF STIPULATIONS.
BUT IF WE DON'T ADDRESS IT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, STEWART, THAT THE APPLICANT OR THE DEVELOPER WILL JUST MOVE FORWARD, IGNORING THE COUNTY AND DEALING WITH THE POWER PLANT RESEARCH PROJECT AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.
MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT ANY COUNTY INPUT, WITHOUT ANY COUNTY REVIEW, AND BASICALLY PROBABLY GO TO COURT AND FORCE US TO ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT.
ONCE ALL THOSE APPROVALS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED.
IT'S VERY BRIEF, BUT I CAN THE EXACT LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE ABOUT THIS EXACT SUBJECT.
A LOCAL JURISDICTION MAY NOT ONE, ADOPT ZONING LAWS OR OTHER LAWS OR REGULATIONS THAT PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION OF FRONT OF THE METER, ENERGY, STORAGE DEVICES, OR DENY SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FRONT OF THE METER ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION E OF THIS SECTION.
TWO, A LOCAL JURISDICTION SHALL
[02:05:02]
EXPEDITE THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FRONT OF THE METER ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES IF THOSE PLANS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, AND TWO.>> YOU THINK A MORATORIUM FALLS UNDER?
>> YES. FINISHING THE SENTENCE.
A LOCAL JURISDICTION SHALL ADOPT ADOPT.
STANDARD PROCESSES FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FRONT OF THE METER ENERGY STORAGE DEVICES.
THAT IS A MANDATE THEY HAVE IMPOSED ON IT'S RIDICULOUS [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M NOT SHOOTING A MESSENGER.
I'M JUST TELLING YOU I DON'T CARE.
I DON'T CARE. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME.
>> WHAT THEY DO IS GO GET THE APPROVALS WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM US.
>> I WILL VOTE. IF I AM HERE IN THIS CHAIR, I WILL VOTE TO GO TO COURT TO STOP THEM.
I WANT THERE TO BE A JUDGE THAT IS GOING TO RULE THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS.
WHEN SOMEBODY IN OUR FIRE COMPANIES OR SOME OF OUR PEOPLE GET KILLED, I'M GOING TO GO TO THAT JUDGE AND ASK THEM TO MAKE THEM FACE IT.
I DON'T SO [OVERLAPPING]. I MEAN THERE'S JUDGE THAT'S GOING TO SIDE WITH US.
I MEAN, YOU EXPRESSLY I CAN TELL YOU IF THIS CAN BE WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY TO REQUIRE SELF CONTAINED FIRE SUPPRESSION THAT WILL NOT POSE A HAZARD TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, I AM FINE WITH DOING IT THAT WAY.
>> I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY CHANCE WE GOT.
>> BUT WE BETTER MAKE DAMN SURE THAT WHEN WE DO, WE'RE GOING TO PUT STUFF IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO SAVE OUR PEOPLE. WE CAN DO THAT.
I'LL BE OKAY WITH THAT, BUT I WILL NOT DO IT UNLESS THOSE PROVISIONS ARE PUT IN HERE.
AND I THINK I KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO SIT THERE AT THE LEGISLATURE AND TELL ME THAT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO PUT SOMETHING IN OUR ORDINANCE THAT'S GOING TO SAVE OUR LIVES OF OUR PEOPLE, YOU CAN DO THAT.
>> I THINK THAT'S A MUCH MORE DEFENSIBLE ARGUMENT THAN JUST KEEPING THE MORATORIUM IN PLACE.
>> WHO DO WE REACH OUT TO TO HELP WITH WRITING THAT LANGUAGE? I DON'T KNOW.
>> EVERYONE THAT I'VE TALKED TO WHO'S TRIED TO UNDERSTAND THE NFPA 855 STRUGGLES.
>> WELL, THEY CAN'T. YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND.
IT'S WRITTEN, SO YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT.
WE GOT TO MAKE IT AS DETAILED AND AS CONCISE AS WE CAN.
BUT I'M NOT GOING TO AGREE TO JUST LETTING THEM COME IN HERE AND HAVE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TELL US THEY CAN PUT THEM IN HERE, AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.
AND I'LL GO TO COURT. I'LL BE THE FIRST ONE UP THERE, AND IF WE LOSE, WE'LL LOSE.
>> BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING IS NOT PROHIBITING THE SYSTEMS. YOU'RE NOT PREVENTED BY THE STATE BILL FROM DOING EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST PROPOSED. THAT'S MY OPINION.
THEY DIDN'T CLOSE THOSE DOORS.
THEY DIDN'T SAY YOU CAN NOT TOTALLY THAT YOU CANNOT REGULATE IN ANY WAY OTHER THAN WHAT WE DID IN THE STATE STATUTE. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT.
>> JUST LIKE IT JUST LIKE IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT THE FEE?
I THINK CRYSTAL AND I CAN COME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE. I'M LOOKING RIGHT.
I GOT IT ONLINE RIGHT NOW, THIS STANDARD 855, AND THERE'S ALL KINDS OF SECTIONS TO IT AND IT SEEMS TO BE VERY COMPREHENSIVE.
I MEAN, IT MAY ALREADY INCLUDE WHAT IT IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT EACH STORAGE UNIT HAVE ITS OWN FIRE SUPPRESSION BUILT IN.
IF WE JUST ADOPT AND WE DO, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BILL, ON PAGE 13 OF OUR BILL.
>> WE ALSO PUT IN THERE THAT THEY'VE GOT TO BUY THE FIRE COMPANY OF THE EQUIPMENT TO BATTLE THAT TYPE OF FIRE, ANY FIRE COMPANY WITHIN 25 MILES OF THE PROPOSED.
>> I THINK WHEN KATHERINE RESEARCHED SOME OF THAT NFPA, THEY WERE UNDER MAYBE THE 2020 EDITION.
AT THE TIME THE 2023 IS PUBLISHED AND 2026 IS ON IT'S WAY.
>> WE CAN GET REALLY CREATIVE, AND I THINK LET'S DO IT.
THEN MAKE SURE THAT THE FIRE COMPANIES IF THEY
[02:10:01]
DO GET A CALL TO RESPOND, YES, THE EQUIPMENT, WE'RE REQUIRING THE EQUIPMENT TO BE ABLE TO EXTINGUISH A FIRE POTENTIAL FIRE ITSELF, BUT THAT'S ALSO GIVE THE FIRST RESPONDERS PUT IT ON THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDERS AND MAY POTENTIALLY HAVE TO RESPOND.>> WHAT'S THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF NFP A 855.
>> IT'S THE 2023 EDITION, AND THE 2026 IS NOT PUBLISHED YET, BUT SHOULD BE COMING SHORT.
>> IT HAS TO GO THROUGH WHAT A PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AND THE WHOLE THING. COULD BE YEARS.
>> FOR THE 2026? USUALLY WITHIN A YEAR AFTER IT'S PUBLISHED.
I MEAN, USUALLY WITHIN A YEAR AFTER IT'S DEVELOPED, IT'S PUBLISHED AND OUT THERE AVAILABLE.
>> KATHLEEN, YOU SAY THAT IT DOES SAY THAT THERE HAS TO BE A SELF CONTAINED FIRE?
>> I READ THE 2023, I CAN'T SAY THAT DIDN'T I CAN'T OBVIOUSLY CONFIRM THAT BEFORE.
>> JUST RIGHT NOW WHAT WE WROTE IN THERE WAS THE MOST RECENT ADDITION.
NOTHING'S PREVENTING US FROM SAYING, WELL, WE DON'T LIKE THE MOST RECENT ADDITION.
WE WANT THE 2020 OR WE WANT THE 2023.
>> THE OTHER PROBLEM WITH JUST REMOVING ANY REFERENCE TO BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE AND KEEPING OUR MORATORIUM IN PLACES IS THAT THE COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION FEE WOULD NOT APPLY SHOULD SOMEONE GO THROUGH THE PPRP AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OBTAIN STATE APPROVALS TO INSTALL BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM.
WE WOULD END UP CONTESTING IT IN COURT, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE EXPRESSLY PREEMPTED BY THE STATE.
I MEAN, IT CLEARLY SAYS THAT WE CAN'T PREVENT IT.
THEN WE WOULD ALSO MISS OUT ON THE COMPENSATORY LAND PRESERVATION FEE AS WELL.
THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY EVEN THOUGH I AGREE WITH YOU, AND I THINK UNTIL THESE FEDERAL NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS GET A BETTER HANDLE ON THE DANGERS ASSOCIATED WITH BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE.
IT IS PROBABLY BEST THAT WE NOT HAVE ONE.
I KNOW IT'S BEST THAT WE NOT HAVE ANYMORE IN THE COUNTY, BUT I THINK THAT'S BEEN REMOVED FROM OUR DISCRETION.
>> I WANT TO SEE WHAT IT SAYS.
>> IT MAY BE BEST TOO TO SPECIFY THE ADDITION IF WE WANT A SPECIFIC ADDITION, AND WE KNOW SOMETHING IS IN THERE.
>> IF WE WANT TO LOOK THREE YEARS FROM NOW WHEN THE 2026 IS AVAILABLE, WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK AND AMEND AND SAY, WE WANT TO NOW COMPLY WITH THE 2026 VERSUS THE 2020.
>> OR COULD WE JUST PUT IN THE LEGISLATION REGARDLESS OF WHAT NF STANDARD IS.
WE WANT A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.
>> WELL, THE BEAUTY OF THEIR STANDARD IS IT'S GOING TO HAVE ALL THE DETAIL IN THERE FOR US TO SIMPLY BLANDLY SAY.
>> IT COULD BE A GARDEN WHOSE WITH A SPRINKLER ATTACHED TO IT.
>> WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY ENFORCEABILITY TO IT.
WELL, I FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT AND MAKING IT AS STRICT AS WE CAN.
WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS, MR. PARKERS?
>> I'M GOOD WITH THAT. CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE? WHAT IS THE MOUTH? WHAT'S 100% RIGHT NOW OF MOUTH?
>> IT'S NEGOTIATED FOR EACH LEASE.
>> GENERALLY SPEAKING, 4,500, 5,000?
>> THERE'S A SITE WHERE THE PUBLISHED.
DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION, DAVE?
A BALLPARK FIGURE WOULD BE IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE 100%.
YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE BE 100% A MOUTH.
CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME A BALLPARK FIGURE WHERE WE WOULD BE AT? GIVE OR TAKE.
>> FOUR TO FIVE THOUSAND AN ACRE.
>> REPORTER IS SAYING AROUND 5,000 IF YOU GO 50%. YEAH.
>> RIGHT NOW, WE WOULD BE REQUIRING A $2,500 PER ACRE CONTRIBUTION?
>> BE 50%. IN THOSE GENERAL NUMBERS. YES.
TO COMMISSIONER PORTER'S POINT, THEY'VE LIED EVER SINCE HE'S BEEN HERE, THEY'VE LIED TO HIM THE WHOLE TIME.
THIS WHOLE SOLAR THING IS A BIG LIE ANYWAY.
THEY'RE TELLING, EVERYTHING THEY DO IS THEY DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE.
I MEAN, I THINK 100% IS MORE FAIR FOR THE MOUTH.
[02:15:03]
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR AMENDMENTS HERE.
YOU'RE OKAY WITH AN AMENDMENT TO ADD 855 RIGHT NOW, AND WE'LL LOOK AT WHAT'S IN IT.
WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER CHANCE TO AMEND THIS DOWN THE ROAD IF IT DOESN'T HAVE THE PROPER.
>> RIGHT AND MAYBE SPECIFY THE ACTUAL ADDITION.
>> FIRST IS ADOPTED, I'M GOING TO NEED TO SEE WHAT IT SAYS.
>> BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD TODAY FOR PURPOSES OF DIRECTING STAFF ON HOW TO AMEND THE BILL TO AMEND IT TO ADD NFPA 855.
>> IT'S ALREADY IN THERE. WE JUST WANT TO EITHER SPECIFY THE ADDITION, BUT ALSO VERIFY THAT WHATEVER ADDITION WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE HAS THE FIRE SUPPRESSION REQUIREMENTS IN THERE.
>> IT'S ALREADY IN HERE. SORRY ABOUT THAT.
>> WE DON'T NEED TO AMEND THAT.
COMMISSIONER BARTS IS PROPOSING THAT WE AMEND TO GO FROM 50% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL TO 100%.
IS THAT WHAT YOUR PROPOSAL WAS?
>> YES. THINKING ABOUT WHAT LARRY WANTS.
IF THEY GOT ALL THIS MONEY, THEY CAN SURELY.
>> AMEND TO 100% OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?
>> I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING LIKE AVERAGE OF THE MOST RECENT MOUTH EASEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO OVER THE PERIOD LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> IT DOES. IT SAYS DETERMINED BY THE ANNUAL MOUTH EASEMENT SETTLEMENT PROCESS.
I'M SURE THAT IT MUST BE PUBLISHED SOMEWHERE.
>> ON PAGE 5, ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE, IS THAT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO PUT THE NFPA 55?
>> IT'S ACTUALLY ON 13. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIRTEEN. ON THIS ONE HERE, YOU'RE JUST EXPLAINING WHAT ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE IS. I GOT YOU.
SIMPLY STATES AT THIS POINT, INSTALLED AND INSPECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOST RECENT PUBLISHED EDITION.
WE MIGHT WANT TO EVALUATE TO SEE THAT RIGHT NOW IT'S 2023, AND IT WILL EVENTUALLY GO TO 2026.
IF WE WANT TO EVALUATE THAT EVERY CYCLE TO MAKE ENSURE THAT NEVER GETS TAKEN OUT BECAUSE THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY IF WE KEEP THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN, A NEWER VERSION MAY AMEND AND TAKE SOMETHING OUT.
WE'LL LOOK FOR THE ADDITION THAT HAS THE FIRE SUPPRESSION.
>> WHEN YOU SAY IT HAS TO HAVE A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM IN IT, WHICH THEY DON'T HAVE A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM DESIGNED, CORRECT?
>> WELL, KATHLEEN BELIEVES THE 2020 VERSION OF NFPA 55 DID REQUIRE A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.
>> THE 2023 VERSION DOES ALSO. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I JUST WANT TO PROTECT YOURSELF LIKE YOU SAID, THEY DON'T JUST THROW A WATER HOSE AND THE SPRINKLER IN THERE.
THEY HAVE ADEQUATE SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS TO CONTROL POTENTIAL FIRE.
>> I DON'T LIKE ADDING THESE EITHER, BUT I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU, THE MORATORIUM THING, THE SHELF LENGTH IS OVER THERE ON THE MORATORIUM FACT. I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I THINK WE NEED TO PROTECT YOURSELF, LOOK IN THE FUTURE EVEN FURTHER FOR THE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM, LIKE THE ADEQUATE LANGUAGE TO MAKE SURE IT'S DETERRED? BECAUSE WHEN YOU SENT US THAT MEMO THE OTHER DAY ABOUT THE SMALL BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE WITH THE GRANTS.
THEY'RE JUST PUTTING THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR FOR THAT.
IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THEN THEY'LL GO TO THE COMMERCIAL BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE.
>> JUST LIKE WE'RE REQUIRING A COMPENSATORY PRESERVATION FEE, CAN WE REQUIRE A FIRE DEPARTMENT EQUIPMENT FEE FOR BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE ANSWER IS, YES, WHY NOT? I WAS GOING TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING, COMMISSIONER PORTER, I BELIEVE YOU WERE SPONSORING LEGISLATION AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR A MILLION DOLLAR GRANT BUDGET FOR THE EDUCATION OF LOCAL FIRE COMPANIES.
I DON'T HAVE THAT LANGUAGE HANDY, BUT IF SOMEBODY COULD RETRIEVE THAT, I'D LIKE TO.
>> IT WAS CALLED THE SOLAR ARRAY BATTERY TRAINING STORAGE PROGRAM,
[02:20:06]
AND IT WAS A MILLION DOLLARS THAT WOULD BE USED TO TRAIN VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANIES ON FIGHTING FIRES IN BATTERY STORAGE AREAS.THAT WAS WERE A COMMISSION AT THE TIME, DELEGATE BARB WAS THE CHAIRMAN AND HE WOULDN'T LET IT OUT OF HIS COMMITTEE.
>> BECAUSE IT HAD THE WORD SOLAR IN IT?
>> THE ANSWER IS YES. IF YOU'D LIKE, CRYSTAL AND I CAN INSERT THAT LANGUAGE ABOUT EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING.
>> WELL, THE PROBLEM IS THAT I DON'T.
LOOK, MAYBE THIS REVISED NFPA IS TELLING THEM WHAT TYPE OF.
WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS WHAT TYPE OF SYSTEM ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WATER IS GOING TO DO IT.
>> DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF BATTERY AND ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES, THE NFPA 55 LAYS OUT WHAT FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM WOULD BE REQUIRED.
IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS BEING REQUIRED IN ACCESSORY BUILDINGS LIKE THE MAINTENANCE SHED THAT'S NEXT DOOR.
>> WHAT TYPE OF SYSTEM IS IT? DOES IT SAY? [INAUDIBLE] OR POWDER OR SEE THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. I DON'T KNOW.
BECAUSE IF THEY'VE IDENTIFIED THAT, THEN I THINK OUR FIRE COMPANIES NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE FIRE.
>> WE WON'T TAKE UP A LOT OF TIME.
>> YEAH. WHAT IT DOES IS IT REFERENCES AUTOMATIC FIRE CONTROL AND SUPPRESSION SYSTEM SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS AS APPROPRIATE.
DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF INTER STORAGE UNIT, IT THEN REFERS TO NFPA 121575770 2001 OR 2010, WHICH HAS THE DETAIL OF HOW YOU PUT OUT A FIRE FOR THAT PARTICULAR.
>> IT ALSO INCLUDES NFPA 855, INCLUDES EMERGENCY PLANNING AND TRAINING AND HAS SECTIONS RELATED TO EMERGENCY OPERATION AND PLANNING.
IT REFERENCES LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENTS.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH IT ALL THIS SECOND, BUT THERE IS A LOT IN HERE.
>> BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE, INSTEAD OF DOING THE MOST RECENT EDITION, PICK THE EDITION, WHETHER IT'S 2023.
THEN WHEN 2026 IS PUBLISHED, WE CAN ALWAYS LOOK AT IT AND SEE TO MAKE SURE IF WE WANT TO ADOPT THAT VERSION BECAUSE MAYBE IT HAS BETTER STANDARDS AND ENSURE THAT THEY HAVEN'T REMOVED SOMETHING IN THAT MORE RECENT ADDITION.
>> I LIKE THE WAY YOU HAVE IT WRITTEN NOW BECAUSE THE NFPA 55 STANDARDS ARE GOING TO ATTRACT TECHNOLOGY.
>> TECHNOLOGY IN THIS FIELD IS EVOLVING VERY, VERY RAPIDLY.
I THINK, INSTEAD OF US RUNNING THE RISK OF HAVING A NEW STANDARD ADOPTED, AND WE MISS IT DOWN THE ROAD AND BE REGULATING UNDER ANTIQUATED REGULATIONS, I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY KEEP, I LIKE THE WAY YOU HAVE IT.
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT NFPA WOULD TAKE OUT THE FIRE SUPPRESSION.
THE ONLY THING I HAD WAS, SO HOW ARE WE REGULATING SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING STATIONS BETWEEN ONE MEGAWATT AND TWO MEGAWATTS? I'M CONFUSED HERE BECAUSE I DON'T SEE, HOW IS IT THAT ADDRESSED?
>> I THOUGHT THE STATE WAS ANYTHING ABOVE ONE MEGAWATT.
SO IN THE DEFINITIONS WE HAVE A NON ACCESSORY COMMERCIAL FACILITY THAT IS ENGINEERED AND DESIGNED TO PRODUCE ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS OF POWER.
>> THAT WAS OUR EXISTING DEFINITION THAT WAS TITLED COMMERCIAL LARGE SCALE AND SMALL SCALE.
THAT'S THE REVISION SO THAT OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE NOW WOULD NOW REFLECT ON ONE.
>> NOW, WE HAVE FULL AUTHORITY OVER ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS, NON ACCESSORY, RIGHT?
>> SO CAN WE BAN IT? I KNOW THE 2000 ACRE LANGUAGE IS IN HERE,
[02:25:05]
BUT OUR 2000 ACRE CAP IS BLOWN.I DON'T WANT 2000 ACRES OF ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS.
SO THAT KIND OF WHEN I READ THROUGH THAT THIS MORNING, I WAS LIKE, CAN WE JUST BAN IT?
>> THAT'S DEFINITELY OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO DO A COMPLETE REPEAL OF OUR REGS AND HAVE NOTHING.
AT A MINIMUM, RETAIN THEM, BUT DEFINITELY WE EVALUATE WHAT THOSE ARE.
>> WE HAVE FULL AUTHORITY OVER ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS.
>> THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION, ALSO.
>> AT A MINIMUM, IF WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE THAT DRASTIC OF A STEP AT A MINIMUM WE REMOVE THE 2000 ACRE CAP OR MAKE IT A LOT LESS.
>> ONE MEGAWATT IS APPROXIMATELY 5-7 ACRES OF LAND.
>> HOLD ON. HOLD ON. BEFORE WE GET OFF DOWN THAT RABBIT HOLE, HOW ARE WE REGULATING COMMERCIAL SOLAR BETWEEN ONE AND TWO? BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY SOLAR SYSTEM DON'T JUMP IN UNTIL TWO MEGAWATTS.
I WAS AT THE TOP OF PAGE 4 IN THE DEFINITION FOR SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS, NON ACCESSORY, THAT GOES UP TO ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS.
THEN YOU GO DOWN TO COMMUNITY SOLAR GENERATING SYSTEMS.
>> I HAS A CAPACITY TO PRODUCE MORE THAN TWO MEGAWATTS, BUT NOT MORE THAN FIVE.
WE'VE GOT THIS WINDOW BETWEEN ONE MEGAWATT AND TWO MEGAWATTS THAT I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING ANYWHERE.
MAYBE I'M MISSING IT, AND I'M SORRY.
>> THEN WE GET TO THE SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING STATION, WHICH AGAIN, SAYS MORE THAN TWO MEGAWATTS.
>> YES. OVER ON PAGE 5 AT THE BOTTOM, AN ENERGY GENERATING SYSTEM PRODUCING MORE THAN TWO MEGAWATTS.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE AT THE STATE WAS BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND THE SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING.
>> I DON'T THINK THE STATE ADDRESSED IT.
I THINK THEY LEFT THE HOLE IN THEIR LEGISLATION.
>> FOR 1-TWO MEGAWATTS? THERE WAS SOMETHING IN HERE. I'M TRYING TO FIND IT.
>> I THOUGHT THAT WAS COMMUNITY.
COMMUNITY COVERED UP TO TWO, AND THEN ONCE YOU GOT TO TWO, IT WAS WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE UTILITY SCALE LEVEL.
>> THAT'S ON PAGE 7 OF THE STATE BILL.
>> WE DON'T HAVE TO RESOLVE IT RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COVERING.
>> IT IN OUR DEFINITION IN OUR REGS FOR WHAT THE STATE'S NOT PREEMPTING US ON.
>> TWO, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT LAST WEEK IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE UNDER 2, 1.
MAYBE THERE'S AN EXPLANATION OR MAYBE IT'S COVERED SOMEWHERE, AND I'M MISSING IT.
>> THE INTENT WOULD BE TO ALIGN WHATEVER THE STATE IS PREEMPTING US, THAT MEGAWATT AND ABOVE, AND THEN ANYTHING LESS THAN THAT WOULD FALL UNDER OUR NON ACCESSORY, WHETHER IT'S ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS OR UNDER TWO MEGAWATTS.
THEN THE CONSIDERATION FOR MOVING THE 2000 ACRE.
THIS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS.
RIGHT NOW, THIS IS OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS, CORRECT?
>> WE HAVE THE OPTION OF TOTALLY BANNING ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS OR WE HAVE THE OPTION OF CHANGING ANY OF THIS HOWEVER WE WANT.
A, CITING A NON ACCESSORY SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM PRODUCING ONE MEGAWATT OF ELECTRICITY OR LESS THAT COMPLIES WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION MAY BE PERMITTED AS DESCRIBED IN THE TABLE OF USES AS FOLLOWS.
ONE, THE COMBINATION, ADDITIONAL AGGREGATE ACREAGE OF COMMERCIAL SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM UTILIZED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY SHALL NOT EXCEED 2000 ACRES.
>> I'D RATHER HAVE A FIVE ACRE RIG AND A 500 ACRE RIG.
>> BUT THEY WOULD COUNT TOWARDS OUR 5% OF PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA.
>> ANYTHING UNDER A MEGAWATT GETS COUNTED IN THAT? I THOUGHT THAT WAS NOT THEM.
[02:30:01]
>> I MISUNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 2000 ACRE CAP THAT THE COUNTY HAS PRESENTLY? WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE FIVE ACRE?
>> I'M TALKING TO ONE MEGAWATT, THE FIVE ACRE SOLAR ARRAY, WOULD THEY COUNT IF IT WAS IN?
IT DOESN'T SPECIFY IT JUST SAYS 5% OF YOUR PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA.
>> THAT'S ONLY THOSE OF THE SIZE THAT ARE UNDER [INAUDIBLE]
>> IT DOESN'T THAT IT MATTERS WHETHER IT'S COMMUNITY OR COMMERCIAL.
>> CAN'T PUT THAT IN HERE AND SAY IT COUNTS TOWARDS YOUR 5%?
>> IT DOES. I SAY IT DOES BY DEFAULT.
IT JUST DOES. I DON'T SEE WHY WE NEED THE 2000 ACRE LANGUAGE IN HERE. DO YOU?
>> CONSIDERING IT'S BEEN PREEMPTED, YEAH.
>> THAT ONE THROUGH FIVE IS THE SITING REQUIREMENTS, AND WHAT YOU DON'T SEE IN THE BILL IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE EXISTING REST OF THE REGULATIONS THAT WE WOULDN'T BE CHANGING, WHICH ARE THE DESIGN STANDARDS, OUR SETBACKS, THE 200 FOOT, THE DECOMMISSIONING AND ALL OF THE OTHER STANDARDS WE HAVE FOR DESIGN WOULD STILL APPLY.
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW UNDER ONE MEGAWATT TO HAPPEN ON TRANSFERRED DEVELOPMENT.
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW IT ON WHERE TDRS HAVE BEEN LIFTED, PARCELS UNDER LAND PRESERVATION EASEMENTS, AND PARCELS IN THE GREEN BELTS OR GROWTH AREAS.
>> GETTING BACK TO THE ONE MEGAWATT ISSUE, THAT IS IN THE STATE BILL, THEY SPECIFY PROJECTS GREATER THAN ONE MEGAWATT, WHAT THE SETBACKS WOULD HAVE TO BE.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S STILL SPELLED OUT IN OURS. IT WAS.
IT'S VERY CONFUSING, BUT ON PAGE 13 OF BILL 931 WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT SOLAR ENERGY GENERATING STATION THAT PRODUCES MORE THAN ONE MEGAWATT OF ELECTRICITY.
THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY WHAT SETBACKS ARE REQUIRED AMONGST OTHER CRITERIA.
WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT'S REFLECTED IN HERE TOO.
>> JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SENATE BILL.
>> WHEN WE GO THROUGH THIS, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE 2000 ACRE CAP IN THE SUBSECTION 175-46.
MAKING SURE THAT THESE ARRAYS WILL APPLY TO THE 5% ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS SOLAR ARRAY WILL COUNT TOWARDS OUR 5% OF PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA CAT, WHICH I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY IT WOULDN'T.
JUST VERIFY THAT, BUT I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT AMENDMENT.
WE'LL KEEP EVERYTHING ELSE THE SAME.
ONE MEGAWATT OR LESS IS GOING TO BE THE ONLY SOLAR IN OUR REGULATIONS THAT REQUIRE 200 FOOT SETBACK WITH ALL THE SCREENING DECOMMISSIONING AND ALL THAT?
>> THE OTHER PIECE THAT NEEDS TO GO ALONG WITH OUR BILL IS THE AMENDMENT TO THE TABLE OF USES THAT REFLECTS WHAT'S IN THIS LANGUAGE HERE OF WHERE THEY WOULD BE PERMITTED BY ZONING DISTRICT AND HOW?
>> OUR TABLE USES WILL NEED TO BE AMENDED TO REFLECT WHAT WE DETERMINE HERE AS FAR AS WHAT ZONING DISTRICTS IT'S ALLOWED IN BY CATEGORY.
>> DO YOU WANT US TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THE TABLE USES?
>> YES. TO REFLECT WHAT WE'VE PRESENTED HERE IN THE BILL.
DO YOU HAVE TO AMEND THE TABLE USES THAT'S IN THE BILL WE'RE ADOPTING WITHIN THAT.
>> WE NEED WE NEED TO ADOPT IT IN THIS BILL.
[02:35:01]
THE BILL SAYING THESE SOLAR FACILITIES WILL BE PERMITTED IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS.WE JUST NEED TO ALSO AMEND THE TABLE OF USES TO SHOW IT'S ALLOWED IN ALL THOSE DISTRICTS.
>> THAT'LL BE SEPARATE LEGISLATION.
>> IT CAN BE DONE ALL WITHIN THIS.
>> THE TABLE OF USE AMENDMENT.
WHICH IS ALREADY STATED IN HERE.
>> I'M TRYING TO FIGURE HOW TO WORD THE AMENDMENT HERE.
LAY IT OUT FOR ME. LEAVE ME TO THE TROPH HERE.
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY? HOW DO I MAKE THE AMENDMENT MOTION?
>> TO AMEND THE BILL TO INCLUDE CHANGES TO THE TABLE OF USES THAT REFLECT THE PERMITTED DISTRICTS THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED.
>> AMEND THE BILL TO INCLUDE CHANGES TO THE TABLE OF USES THAT REFLECTS THE PERMITTING DISTRICTS AS STATED IN THIS BILL.
>> PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU WRITE THESE OUT FOR US, CRYSTAL.
>> IT'S NOT TOMORROW. DON'T WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW NIGHT?
>> AMEND THE BILL TO INCLUDE THE CHANGES TO THE TABLE OF USES THAT REFLECT REFLECTS ZONING.
SOMETHING. WE ALL KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. ANYTHING ELSE? GOOD.
I'VE GOT FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT WE'LL VOTE ON.
I'LL READ THEM OUT, IF WE CAN DO THEM OR APPROVE THEM ALL AT ONE TIME, OR IF EITHER ONE OF YOU GENTLEMEN HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT, THEN JUST JUST SAY YOU WANT TO PULL ONE OF THEM OUT.
WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE INTRODUCTION OF THIS BILL AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR FOR THIS LEGISLATION AND PROPOSE THE FOUR FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE SHARE OF FAIR MARKET VALUATION OF THE ANNUAL MOUTH SURVEY TO 100%.
THAT WOULD BE ONE AMENDMENT, AMENDMENT 2 WOULD BE TO LOOK AT ADDING A FIRE DEPARTMENT EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING FEE TO THE BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE PORTION OF THIS BILL.
THAT WOULD BE TWO.THREE, TO AMEND TO REMOVE THE 2000 ACRE CAP IN SUBSECTION 175-47.
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT WOULD BE TO INCLUDE THE CHANGES IN THE ZONING TABLE OF USES.
>> I'M OKAY WITH THOSE. I MAY WANT TO GO BACK AND THINK ABOUT INVOLVEMENT WITH SITE PLAN APPROVAL WITH FIRE COMPANIES TO HAVE THEM BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE SITE PLAN AND FIGURE OUT ROUTES AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WANT TO DO AT THIS POINT, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD INVOLVE THEM AS WELL.
>> THAT CAN BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT THROUGH THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS ADDING THE FIRE COMPANY AS ONE OF THE REVIEWING ENTITIES FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
>> MY MOTION AND THEN THE SECOND.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU FOR WORKING.
I KNOW THIS TOOK A LOT OF TIME AND TRYING TO TAILOR ANOTHER COUNTY'S LEGISLATION TO FIT OURS IS NOT AN EASY TASK, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S THIS COMPLICATED, AND WE'VE AMENDED THIS SOLAR SO MANY TIMES TO REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT'S GONE INTO THIS.
MOTION TO CLOSE THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION? SO MOVED.
>> MOTION TO SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYES HAVE IT. I HAVE LOST THIS.
[2026 Legislative Session Initiatives and Items of Concern]
NEXT UP, JENNIFER ROBLEY, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER WITH THE 2026 LEGISLATIVE SESSION INITIATIVES, AND ITEMS OF CONCERN. JEN.>> REALLY, I JUST GAVE YOU THE UPDATED CPT LETTER,
[02:40:03]
TTP LETTER, AS WELL AS THE REQUEST FROM THE TOWN OF DENTON, WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET THAT WILL BE ADDED TO OUR OFFICIAL ASK THAT WE PRESENT TO THE DELEGATION FOR YOU TO APPROVE.THAT MEETING AGAIN IS SEPTEMBER 16, 09:00 AM AT THE [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING.
>> THE ONLY THING I SAW IN THE LETTER, DO WE STILL WANT PAUL J WIEDEFELD, SECRETARY? HE RESIGNED OR RETIRED?
>> THERE'S A NEW ACTING DIRECTOR.
SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THAT BEFORE YOU SENT THE LETTER.
HE WASN'T AT SUMMER MECO EITHER.
>> WE SENT THIS BACK IN MARCH. HE WAS THERE, YES.
WE JUST ADDED THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS FOR ROUTE 16 AND DOUBLE HILLS ROAD.
>> RIGHT. THE SIGNAL SIGNAL CHANGE.
>> I WILL UPDATE THAT LETTERHEAD.
>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION HERE, SCOTT, DO YOU HAVE A MINUTE TO COME UP?
>> DIDN'T YOU WANT TO MAKE YOU SIT HERE ALL THE TIME AND NOT ASK YOU A QUESTION? YEAH, WE WILL.
>> CAN YOU EXPLAIN OR CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE CURRENT STATUS IS ON THE COMMERCE?
>> THE STATE HIGHWAY REQUEST IS TO BUILD THE GAY STREET SHORE HIGHWAY.
THE LAST THING THAT I REMEMBERED ABOUT THIS WAS IT WAS GOING TO BE A RIGHT TURN IN AND RIGHT TURN OUT.
>> CAN YOU JUST TELL ME WHERE WE ARE.
>> JUST BRIEFLY, WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THE PRIVATE PARTNERS TO COME TO SOME AGREEMENT THAT SUITS THEM TO BUILD THIS ROAD.
AT THAT TIME, WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE ACCESS OR WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE ABILITY TO CREATE THAT INTERSECTION.
THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO KEEP IT TO THE FOREFRONT BECAUSE THIS COULD TAKE A WHILE.
WHILE WE WAIT I DON'T WANT STATE HIGHWAY, THE TOWN DOESN'T WANT STATE HIGHWAY TO SAY, NEVER MIND, WE'RE NOT APPROVING THAT ANYMORE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A BIT OF A DISASTER, REALLY.
THAT'S WHY I KEPT IT IN THE LETTER.
IT'S NOT DONE, IT'S NOT COMPLETE.
WE DO THINK THAT STATE HIGHWAY IS STILL, BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME LETTERS THAT SAY THAT THEY'RE ALLOWING THAT AND WE STILL THINK THEY'LL HOLD TO THAT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANY CHANCES ON THAT.
>> THE CURRENT PLAN IS TO HAVE A DEVELOPER TO BUILD THE ROAD FROM LEGION ROAD WHERE THE BARRICADE IS ACROSS FROM WALMART TO BUILD THAT ROAD OUT TO GAY STREET?
>> HAVING LIGHT THERE NOW, IS THAT THE PLAN WITH THAT'S SECTION?
>> IT'LL BE A FULL SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION.
IT'S BEEN DESIGNED TO STATE HIGHWAY STANDARDS ALREADY.
JUST TO ADD ONE MORE THING, WHEN YOU SAY DEVELOPER, IT'S ACTUALLY DEVELOPERS.
THERE'S AT LEAST THREE INVOLVED WITH THIS AND THEY HAVE NOT COME TO ANY CONSENSUS AS OF TODAY.
IF THEY HAVE, I HAVEN'T HEARD, BUT THEY HAVE NOT COME TO A CONSENSUS THAT THEY'RE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH AS FAR AS HOW THEY PAY AND HOW THEY IMPLEMENT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS ROAD.
>> IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT, THEN THE INTERSECTION DOESN'T GET BUILT?
>> BUT WE THINK THERE'S SOME MOVEMENT RECENTLY. I DON'T KNOW.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY GET A PLAN, AND THEY START ADVANCING, AND THEN SOMETHING BLOWS UP, AND IT STALLS.
BUT I THINK THERE'S A REASON FOR OPTIMISM THAT WE MIGHT START TO SEE SOME ACTIVITY HERE. HOPEFULLY.
>> BECAUSE IF I'M SITTING THERE FROM THE STATE LEVEL, LOOKING AT THIS THING, I'M GOING TO SAY, WE'LL AGREE TO DO THIS, BUT WHO'S GOING TO DO THE REST OF IT? YOU SEE MY POINT.
>> THE STATE'S NOT ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK. THEY'RE NOT DOING ANY OF IT.
THEY'RE PERMITTING IT. THOSE THAT ARE BUILDING THE ROADS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE LIGHT IS GOING TO BE PAID FOR BY DEVELOPERS?
>> CORRECT. YES. WE JUST DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THEM TO WORK THIS OUT.
>> THE INDICATION HAS BEEN SO FAR FROM THE STATE THAT THEY'LL APPROVE THAT?
[02:45:03]
>> BECAUSE IN THE BEGINNING, THEY DIDN'T WANT TO.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. THERE WAS SOME LEGISLATIVE ACTION OR LET ME JUST SAY THERE WERE LEGISLATORS THAT GOT INVOLVED IN THIS THAT WAS BEFORE MY TIME, BUT THAT'S HOW COME WE HAVE THAT ACCESS AND THE ABILITY TO CREATE THAT FULL SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION.
WE JUST DON'T WANT TO LOSE IT. BY WE'RE WAITING FOR THIS TO WORK ITSELF OUT.
>> THERE'S NO THREAT THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE TOWN'S NOT ASKING FOR ANY FUNDING HERE.
THEY'RE JUST ASKING THE STATE NOT TO REEVALUATE APPROVAL TO SIGNALIZE THE INTERCEPTS.
>> THEY'VE INDICATED THEY'LL PERMIT IT NOW.
>> YOU JUST YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT PERMIT ACTIVE?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY NOW.
>> THAT'S ALL. I JUST WANTED TO BECAUSE I WAS LOST THERE.
>> THANKS SCOTT. WITH NO OBJECTION.
I THINK WE DON'T NEED A MOTION OR ANYTHING, BUT WITH NO OBJECTION, JENNIFER CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CTP AND THE LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS.
>> I DID. HE ALREADY HAD IT MONTHS IN ADVANCE.
THAT'S NEXT TUESDAY AT THE HAPS BUILDING.
>> WE'LL HAVE OUR NORMAL AND YOU'LL HAVE YOUR NORMAL MEETING AS WELL.
WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON YOUR-
>> YEAH. I'LL JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IN THE LANGUAGE IT SAYS ADVERTISE AT HAPS.
>> WHEN YOU ADVERTISE, MAKE SURE IT'S AT HAPS.
CONSENT AGENDA, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS.
ANYTHING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER BUCKS?
[Consent Agenda]
>> I THINK ALLISON LEFT. SHE WAS HERE.
>> YEAH. SHE HAD AN APPOINTMENT TO GET TO.
>> THE POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY GRANT, THAT'S HALF OF WHAT WE RECEIVE.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.
>> COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT.
[County Administrator’s Report]
I'M SURE YOU ALREADY NOTICED THEY'RE WORKING ON THE CLOCK TOWER.
WE ARE DOWN TO JUST ONE SMALL PARKING LOT IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
THAT IS EXPECTED TO BE MAYBE 2-3 MONTH PROCESS. IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
IF YOU COME UP TO VISIT US, JUST KNOW PARKING IS TIGHT THAN USUAL.
HAVE YOU SENT THE INVITATIONS FOR THE RETIREMENT PARTY?
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL KNOW, SHERI BRATTON, OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR IS RETIRING AT THE END OF THE MONTH, AND YOU SHOULD ALL HAVE AN INVITATION FOR SEPTEMBER 26 AT 5:00 PM.
DOWN AT THE WHARVES OF CHOP TENT CROSSING. SHERRY STILL HERE.
>> WE ARE A YEAR AND A HALF OUT, BUT REGARDING THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS, JANE AND I ARE WORKING ON IMPROVING SOME MATERIALS FOR CANDIDATES THAT WE CAN HAND THEM RATHER THAN, HOPING, I GUESS TO HAVE THEM HAVE A WAY TO GET QUESTIONS ANSWERED ABOUT DEPARTMENTS RATHER THAN CALLING ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND CALLING ME, MAYBE THEY CAN GET SOME BASIC INFORMATION FOR US, SO WE'RE THINKING LIKE A ONE PAGER FOR EACH DEPARTMENT.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT, WE'RE ALSO WORKING ON THE ONBOARDING PACKET OR WE'RE ABOUT TO START WORKING ON THE ONBOARDING PACKET.
IF THERE'S SOMETHING WHEN YOU BECAME ACCOUNTING COMMISSIONER, THAT YOU WEREN'T TOLD IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF THAT HAD BEEN INCLUDED OR INFORMATION IN THERE THAT WAS TOTALLY USELESS AND YOU NEVER USED.
SHARE THAT WITH US. [LAUGHTER] SO WE CAN MAKE SURE TO IMPROVE THE ON BOARDING PACKET AND MAKE THAT PROCESS EASIER.
NOW THAT'S A WAY DOWN THE ROAD.
THEN THE LAST THING I WANT TO BRING UP IS THE COMMUNITY OF JONESTOWN HAS REQUESTED ONE OR TWO STREET LIGHTS.
APPARENTLY, THERE USED TO BE STREET LIGHTS BY THE PARK AND WHERE SOME OF THE KIDS AND THE RESIDENTS WALK FROM THE PARK TO DOWN THE STREET TOWARDS THEIR RESIDENTS OR WHEREVER.
[02:50:03]
THERE'S NO SIDEWALK THERE. THERE MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE.I THINK LESLIE HAD BEEN WORKING ON SOME GRANTS FOR SIDEWALKS FOR ALL OF OUR RURAL VILLAGES, NOT JUST JONESTOWN.
OF THE LIGHTS WERE TAKEN DOWN FOR SOME REASON IN 2013. NOT SURE WHY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVEN HERE THEN, IF YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION ABOUT THAT.
[BACKGROUND] I HAVE NO IDEA WHY, AND APPARENTLY, THE RECORD DOESN'T REFLECT ANYTHING ABOUT WHY THAT DECISION WAS MADE, SO I DON'T KNOW.
>> JAMIE, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY LIGHTS AT THE PARK? SECURITY LIGHTS, THERE AREN'T ANY.
I CAN'T REMEMBER THE LAST TIME I WAS OUT THERE.
DOESN'T RING A BELL TO YOU THAT RECREATION IN PARKS PAYS FOR IT?
>> THE PARKING LOT AND ACTUALLY EITHER OLIVIA OR LESLIE MENTIONED THAT CONSIDERATION TO PUT THEM BACK.
>> BECAUSE THEY'VE ASKED. TO PURCHASE OR TO PUT HAVE THE LIGHTS PUT IN, I BELIEVE IT'S CHOP TANK ELECTRIC, IT WOULD BE $20 A MONTH PER STREET LIGHT.
WE COULD ALSO PUT SOLAR POWERED LIGHTS THERE THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE AN ELECTRIC CONNECTION.
THEY SELL THEM ON AMAZON FOR STARTERS.
YOU COULD BUY THEM IN ALL KINDS OF PLACES, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY AROUND $300 PLUS A POLE IF YOU PUT IT ON A POLE OR IF YOU PUT IT ON A BUILDING, AND THEN NO ELECTRIC CONNECTION.
THOSE ARE SOME CONSIDERATIONS, TO ME, THAT SEEMS LIKE A EASIER SOLUTION.
BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT JONESTOWN HAS MADE THE REQUEST FOR ONE OR TWO STREET LIGHTS, AND I THINK ONE BY THE PARK AT A MINIMUM, WOULD PROBABLY BE GOOD. YEAH.
>> NO, I'M FINE IF IT GOES ON PARK PROPERTY OR ROAD FRONTAGE WITH THE PARK.
I WOULDN'T GO A MILE DOWN THE ROAD AND PUT, I DON'T WANT TO OPEN THAT CAN OF WORMS BECAUSE WE'LL BE FLOODED WITH STREET LIGHT REQUESTS IN EVERY LITTLE RURAL VILLAGE IN THE COUNTY.
WE HAVE A PARK, AND IT NEEDS TO BE LIT NOT ONLY FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, BUT SAFETY PURPOSES, I'M FINE AS LONG AS THE LIGHTS GO IN PROXIMITY TO THE PARK.
MY GUT FEELING IS PROBABLY JUST GO WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY PROVIDER THAT WAY, THEY HANDLE THE MAINTENANCE OF THEM AS WELL.
FOR 20 BUCKS A MONTH, IF A BALL GOES OUT, THEY HANDLE IT, ALL THAT STUFF.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY WORTH IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE DANNY WANTS TO PUT THAT.
TO ME, IT MAKES SENSE TO PRO PUT IT IN RECREATION AND PARKS, BUT JAMIE JUST VOLUNTEERED TO DO IT.
>> SOUNDS GOOD. COUNTY COMMISSIONER URBAN DISCUSSION PERIOD?
[County Commissioners Open Discussion Period]
>> YOU WANT TO GO TO MR. FORK?
>> YEAH. BRIEFLY, I WAS ASSUMING TODAY WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE MRDC SITUATION, BUT THE DIRECTOR WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT.
THAT'S THE 28TH THAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T KNOW, NOT MUCH WE CAN DO UNTIL WE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THE SITUATION IS.
BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE START TO LOOK AT WHAT WE CAN DO TO TRY AND ADDRESS THE EARLY HEAD START PROGRAM, BUT WITHOUT THE DETAILS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO UNTIL WE HAVE THAT.
AT SOME POINT, CRYSTAL, I NEED TO COME IN AND I NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH YOU AND DISCUSS IN MORE DETAIL THE COUNTRY CLUB STATUS, BECAUSE I'M GETTING KILLED ON THAT.
PEOPLE ARE LIKE, WHY CAN'T THEY DO THIS? WHY CAN'T THEY DO THAT? HAVE WE RECEIVED ANYTHING AT ALL, AN UPDATE? OKAY.
>> WE RECEIVED A REVISED PLANS.
WE WILL GO BACK OUT TO TUCK AND EVERYTHING APPROVED AND ADDRESSED THE SITE PLAN AND WILL GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FINAL SITE PLAN.
>> THEN THAT WOULD ENABLE THEM TO?
>> OKAY. WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME ON THAT? IF EVERYTHING GETS SCHEDULED THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO, WHEN CAN WE?
>> IT'S ON SEPTEMBER WHICH IS THE FOURTH WEDNESDAY OF THIS MONTH.
>> THE EARLIEST IT COULD GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION?
>> IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE OCTOBER.
[02:55:02]
>> BUT YOU FEEL THAT YOU'VE GOT WHAT YOU NEED NOW?
>> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU.
>> THANKS. [NOISE] YESTERDAY,I HAD A TEAMS MEETING WITH BRIAN NORTH AND JUSTIN MOORE AT SHA STRUCTURES DIVISION, WHICH WAS A FOLLOW UP FROM OUR MACO CONVERSATION ABOUT THE BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES AND VARIOUS POTS OF MONEY.
IT WAS A VERY INTERESTING MEETING.
HE SAID THAT THERE WAS RECENT FEDERAL LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, INFRASTRUCTURE AND JOBS ACT OR SOMETHING THAT HAD PROVISIONS WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS INCREASING THE POT OF MONEY THAT WENT TO SPECIFICALLY RURAL COUNTY BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES.
THE STATE OF MARYLAND HAS BEEN STRUGGLING TO GET RURAL COUNTIES TO APPLY FOR BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS.
ACTUALLY, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN HOUNDING THE STATE.
WHY AREN'T YOU SPENDING THIS MONEY? WHY AREN'T YOU SPENDING THIS MONEY? BRIAN IS GOING TO FOLLOW UP WITH JUSTIN OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.
TRY TO GET ALL OF THE STRUCTURES THAT WILL QUALIFY FOR FUNDING.
APPLY AND ACTUALLY TAKE AND APPLY FOR FUNDING FOR THOSE STRUCTURES.
JUSTIN WAS ALSO GOING TO LOOK INTO IF FUNDING WAS AVAILABLE FOR STRUCTURES THAT HAD BEEN CLOSED.
TO GET MONEY TO POTENTIALLY, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AVAILABLE.
AS SOON AS I HEAR BACK FROM BRIAN ON THAT, I'LL LET YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT FUNDING IS AVAILABLE.
>> I THOUGHT WE WERE WORKING ON THIS TWO YEARS AGO.
>> APPARENTLY, THERE'S A FEW STRUCTURES THAT ARE POOR RATED THAT WE CAN THAT WE CAN TRY TO GET 100% FEDERAL FUNDING ON.
THEY'RE WILLING TO HELP US DO IT.
IT'S A DIFFERENT PROGRAM, A NEW PROGRAM.
>> DIFFERENT OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON.
>> YEAH. WE HAVE THREE BRIDGES IN THE PIPELINE RIGHT NOW.
WAS THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD BLOOMERY, LONGSWAMP, AND IT SMITHVILLE, ARE THE THREE THAT ARE IN THE WORKS RIGHT NOW, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER STRUCTURES, TWO OR THREE MORE THAT HAVE A POOR RATING, I THINK, OLD DENTON ROAD, WHICH IS DOWN BY FIVE GOING INTO FELSBURG, AND GREG ROAD MAYBE SO WE CAN GET 100% FUNDING THROUGH THIS PROGRAM FOR THAT, I TOLD THEM TRY TO MOVE FORWARD, REPORT BACK TO US ON IT. WE'LL STAY ON THAT.
>> RURAL PROPERTY, LAND RESERVATION.
>> THIS IS A [INAUDIBLE] BROUGHT THAT UP AND MAYBE THINK OF THIS.
PRIOR TO THIS YEAR, THE STATE JUST TWO WEEKS AGO, ACCORDING TO JUSTIN, OPENED THIS UP TO DESIGN AND LIKE THE PRE-ENGINEERING STUFF AS WELL.
FUNDING IS AVAILABLE NOW FOR THAT.
PRIOR TO TWO WEEKS AGO, IT WAS NOT.
THE COUNTY HAD TO DO ALL OF THAT AND HAVE THE PRE-ENGINEERING STUDIES DONE, WHATEVER IT IS, THE NIPA STUDIES DONE AND DIFFERENT THINGS.
PROBABLY HAVE PROPERTY AND ALL THAT STUFF ALREADY ACQUIRED.
YOU HAD TO HAVE ALL YOUR DUCKS IN A ROW TO ACTUALLY APPLY.
THEY ARE NOW ALLOWING APPLICATIONS TO GO IN RIGHT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
THEY'VE OPENED IT UP TO ACTUALLY MORE PROJECTS, POTENTIAL PROJECTS.
THEY WERE FINDING THAT THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH PROJECTS THAT FAR ALONG IN THE PIPELINE TO SPEND THE MONEY, I THINK. THAT'S A NEW DEVELOPMENT.
BRIAN'S ON IT. THAT'S ALL I HAD.
DO YOU WANT TO DO A CLOSED SESSION?
>> THAT'S RIGHT. PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER.
>> WHAT WHAT TIME DO YOU HAVE TO GET OUT HERE?
>> 12:30. I GOT TO BE ACROSS THE STREET.
[Public Comment]
I GOT A FEW MINUTES. I CAN COME RIGHT BACK. DON'T TAKE HER?>> WE CAN DO A COUPLE OF MINUTES FOR CLOSED.
>> FOR YOU, YOU HAVE STATEMENT.
>> MAKE A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER GENERAL ARTICLE PROVISIONS 3-305B.
[03:00:04]
SENTENCE 7 TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE.>> MOTION SECOND. ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER PORTER.
>> AYE. TAKE A RECESS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.