Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the open session on Thursday, May 21st, 2026 for the Board of Carroll County Commissioners. As we always do, we'll begin with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silent reflection. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I hope everybody is doing well today, and our agenda is a little bit out of typical order because a couple of us have a few previous obligations we have to take care of, but so first up on today's agenda is the FY27 budget adoption, and Ted, I'll kick it right over to you and Heidi. Thank you.

OK, so we've been through a process that included your deliberations, releasing a proposed budget, public hearing, another meeting to consider any other changes you wanted to make. Today, we're here to take the formal vote to put all that into place. There are three separate actions for you today. One is to set water and sewer rates for our utilities enterprise fund. The second is to set tax rates. There are no changes in tax rates. And the third is to adopt the FY27 budget. Nothing more I need to say. We just need to move to those three actions then.

Any actions or direction from the board? First, to begin with the resolution on the water and sewer rates.

I make a motion that we approve the water and sewer rates for the next budget year as noted.

All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion. We have a second. Is there any discussion?

Yes, when we talked about these a few weeks ago, I'd ask for some time to look at them, because hopefully you've studied the chart that was sent to us a month or two ago. They're very different throughout the county. They're very high in certain areas, and they're very low in certain areas. And it's a challenge for all of our towns and everybody to keep up with the wastewater treatment plant and for some of the stuff we're now doing with PFAS. And there's a lot of money available to offset those costs. And myself and the delegation has spent a lot of time trying to help the towns. One is Manchester, just got $23 million. And I applaud them. I applaud our delegation for going after that money for Manchester, because Manchester communicated the need. And our delegation, Senator Reedy and all of them went to bat for them and got the money to offset their costs for this upgrade, because they're a small town. We're trying to do the same for Union Bridge. We've tried for New Windsor. They still have high rates. But for years, we've been working to get money from the state to help with those areas. But the areas in Carroll County are controlled. The county unincorporated areas and Hampstead are served by Maryland Environmental Services. And it's the county. The county takes care of the wastewater part of that. and in my years i've never seen a request or an advocacy i'm not sure for money to offset those costs as well and i don't know how it works with environmental services and i want to understand it better because the costs just keep going up and everybody says oh it's enterprise it's got to cover itself well maybe with some of those we got to make sure those funds are being requested for the county's service areas, and there's others as well. But anybody on county service, I think there's 26,000 of them, if I'm correct. And I know in my district, they've gone up tremendously. And it's just, well, we've got to do this. And I just wanted some time to figure some of it out. And if we're asking for the right grants for the unincorporated areas, which is, again, Maryland Environmental Services does Hampstead, and it does the whole Freedom area, and it does some others.

It just does the Freedom one.

It does.

Carroll County does the Hampstead wastewater treatment.

Well, they have the similar rates.

Yeah, no, no.

But I want to understand how we come up with the rates. And I visited the wastewater treatment plant and saw what they do. And that's all fine. But I would like to understand how, because they're so different. And I know that Westminster's done a phenomenal job. on theirs their town they've gotten lots of grants because they've got a very good system very forward-thinking system in place but the areas that we control i would like to make sure there is that we the board of commissioners and our staff are going after all the resources that are available for it because our rates are very very high and um whether the county is running it and sending the rates or mayor environmental services is running it and sending the rates i would like to See what goes into that and so I voted against moving it forward before and I'm gonna vote against it again For that reason is because I want the scrutiny of this board on the rates for the part They control just like the towns are doing a really good job of scrutinizing theirs and in reaching out for those resources that are available And I'm not sure I'm not I've not seen it in my years of looking at the money that comes into the county for this I haven't seen it in the book that we get a list of every year of all the money that the state sends us. And I would just like to make sure we're tapping into everything. So that's why I'd asked for a couple of months to have a chance to look at it. Haven't had a time. I didn't know that rates were going up so much because I'm not on that plan. And so I wasn't aware of it. I just read it in the paper and bigger hay. But now that I'm looking at it, I just think there needs to be some more attention. And it is my district that's mostly affected. I know Hampstead's affected by the county-run piece of it. So I'm going to be voting against it for that reason. I'm going to still pursue it and try to dig into it. But we're digging into a lot of things that haven't had a lot of attention. All right. Is there any other discussion?

Well, I don't disagree with the notion that we should be taking a look at things. We should always be looking at things. issues like this when it costs taxpayers money and it doesn't hurt to uh do that and we it's probably overdue that we do that i'm still going to vote for the rates because i i i think we can do both um and i don't think it's going to be too late to take a look at that in the future because it's going to take a little while so all right any other discussion hearing none all those in favor aye aye all those opposed no four to one commissioner krebs uh dissents

All right, so up next, we have resolution for the property and the income taxes. And these are all staying the same. They are not being raised. Do we have any discussion or action from the board? Motion to approve the tax rate for the upcoming budget. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion?

Just truly appreciate you bringing up the fact for the public that we have not adjusted the property nor the income tax rates I know sometimes there is some I guess confusion regarding that and I understand why and for the public Obviously, a big portion of the property tax rates are assessment-based, which is not on our end. That is the state. So I do appreciate you bringing that up this morning.

Thank you very much for that comment, Commissioner.

To piggyback that, our first year here, we discussed changing tax rates. And my philosophy on everything we do, you need to discuss it. It needs to be transparent. We need to talk about it. We chose not to raise it. And the first two years of our four years, the budget was tough. We we actually placed one time money places we shouldn't just to try to get through it now. I guess we look semi smart because the last two years have been better and, and I'm glad we didn't do it, but I'm glad we discussed it and people got to see, um, us go back and forth. And I'm glad you mentioned it today.

Well said any other discussion on the, I just want to mention every year that I met with past boards of commissioners and they always talked about the hadn't changed the rates forever. And it was, I was consistent for many, many years, those that were here. you don't need to change the rate because assessments go up every year. And they have for many, many, many, many years. And my assessment went up. And it's not the state. It's the value of your home. And the state comes in and assesses it. And you can argue or not, but costs of homes have gone up, as we all know. My assessment went up 41%. And it's phased in over 5% over eight years. So we have the money coming in at 5%, which is more than inflation. And we're required to report the constant yield. What would it be if we didn't raise it at all? And obviously, costs go up, and we have to cover costs of schools and everything. But we have everyone who owns a home. I could almost say, certainly, everyone that owns a home, assessments have gone up in the last few years because of house value. So we are getting the revenue in. And the rate is one thing. We should never have to change the rate as long as we are in a community that the values stay stable. Hopefully, they won't drop. So we're bringing in very robust revenues from property taxes. And we also get, we don't have a cap on commercial property or rental property, which means you get their full assessment. So if theirs goes up the 41%, you get it all. So our rates, our amount of money we're bringing in from property taxes has gone up very, very generously. So we shouldn't even be having to talk about the rate. I appreciate you saying that. But the state is the value of the home. And if we wanted to keep it down, we could lower the cap or put no cap like in Talbot County. And that way, you'd have it flat, and you'd never collect any extra money. But that's not what we chose to do. I just want to be clear, because everybody out there listening, I know you're saying, gosh, my bill went up last year. Yes, it did. And so it will keep going up as long as housing values stay stable. Hopefully it's going to level off, and then we are going to be in a little bit of a problem because we're hoping they level off. But then our revenue coming in is not going to be the 5% that we have the cap on it. So if you look at a budget, the line item from last year versus this year is much greater for property taxes than it was last year because of the assessments going up and the values of the homes going up.

Thank you very much. My appraisal went up and my income tax went up and I was happy about both.

Good. I'm glad for you. All right, is there any other discussion on the tax rates for FY27? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries unanimously. And last but not least, with the FY27 budget, we come to the actual budget itself. Any discussion or direction from the board? Motion to approve the FY27 budget. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Budget is passed unanimously. Thank you, Ted. Thank you, Heidi. Thank you for everything.

And it was passed unanimously for the second year in a row, which probably hasn't happened too many times. So thank you, guys.

Thank you to all of my colleagues for all the work that you've put into the budget over the last several months as well. All right. Up next on our agenda, we have self-storage deferral ordinance and possible modification. So I think probably, I'm sure we probably have some public comments. And my suggestion to the board, without objection, we'll have Chris give us a brief kind of refresher on where we are. Then we'll hear from anybody who's here for public comment or anybody on the line who's for public comment. And then we can get into a discussion ourselves about potential directions forward. Does that work for everybody?

Sounds good.

All right, Chris. Good morning, commissioners.

Good morning. Yes.

So as you're very aware, back in December, the board passed a deferral on self-service storage facilities. That deferral was for three months. And then a month or so back, you extended that until September of this year. The deferral is for the final approval of projects. There are currently three projects that are in the development review process. Two of those projects are very, very early on in the process. We've only had concept plans submitted. There is one project, Carroll Highlands, which, when the deferral went into place, was very far along, was close to having all technical approvals. Over the past couple months, they've continued to work with our technical agencies, and as I believe it was two weeks ago, three weeks ago, they had received all technical approvals from the agencies that review projects. So in a non-deferral environment, we would have scheduled them for the June Planning and Zoning Commission for the final review and approval of the Carroll Highlands project. But because of the deferral, we have not scheduled them for that meeting. And so I am here to answer any questions that you may have.

The other two projects you mentioned, the other one is located in the Freedom area, and the third one, is that in Taylorsville?

No, they're both in the Freedom area. Yes, one is on Barthola Road, the other is on Monroe.

All right. Yeah, I think there's some additional ones forthcoming, but OK.

All right, well, thank you very much for that, Chris. I'm sure we'll have some more questions for you in a little while.

One quick question, if I might. The other two projects that Commissioner Guerin just inquired about, where are they in process?

So very, very early on, they've made their first submission for a concept review, and that's about as far as they've gone. So our staff is currently working Doing all the normal technical reviews and providing comment letters and and so on and there'll be a couple months of going back and forth Making sure they they address all the appropriate regulations.

Thank you

And Chris, could you tell us? This came up, I guess, back in the fall. And we identified four problem areas that we didn't think were aligned with the code. And we're handling them different ways with consultants. So this particular one we did as a storage facility, because that's what had presented itself for years. It had been fought for years. And there's lots of questions whether the process even was applied appropriately. I won't get into all that right this moment. But we decided in the fall. We deferred the storage facilities. But then we also had a work session, because after we looked at the storage facility, we say, well, it didn't just change storage facilities from took the word mini out and just let it be storage facilities. We changed the bulk requirements. if anybody knows what that is, it means how high, so far from the property line, and that was changed pretty dramatically on the corridor where we're talking about, which is the Liberty Road corridor. So the bulk requirements changed from local businesses, which are there now, small little businesses that were houses, they turned into a barber shop or turned into a nail salon or whatever and now it's changed the bulk requirements that on each of these properties now we can have it's pretty the highest density c2 and c3 are almost the same in the code of what they're allowed but the bulk piece of that they can be 10 foot from a property line and 15 feet it's different things so when we realized that that changed we just targeted storage facilities but then we said you know what it might be a storage facility today but tomorrow it could be A data center, which we haven't defined yet. I'm just making that up. We haven't defined it. It could be that, because right now it could be a warehouse. It could be a data center, because we don't have it defined. So we said, you know what? We need to look at this whole corridor. And we had a work session on it. And we decided, I know that some of my colleagues said their folks don't mind it in their areas at all. They didn't want to change it for their areas. They don't mind the density. They don't mind the sizes of these things. Their folks are fine with it. Fine. So how do we do it just for the people in my area that care about it on their main street? So we said we're going to do a corridor study that was requested in the 2001 master plan, a boulevard district, which is the same thing. That never happened because we don't have anybody responsible for implementing our master plans. Even though we spend years putting them together, they just never move forward. So we never did the boulevard district. So we said, you know what? We already had that laid out. How can we do an overlay district? So as a group, our board decided to task the planning department, your department, with laying out an overlay district for the area all the way up 26, it was defined, and a little bit up Route 32. And we were fine with that. That way it would address everything, not just this one use of this new storage facility, which had just come out. We don't have any of them in the county yet because they took the word mini out. No one really realized that when that was occurring. It was never discussed as a wish in the Freedom Plan or any of the plans, Carroll County Plan or Freedom Plan. So we decided as a board to ask you to do the Carter study. I thought it was moving along. I forget what month. Do you remember what month that was when we had that work session? I don't recall the month.

But as you may recall, last week we were here to and the board approved the contract for the consultant who will be working on that. And so currently our procurement office is working on establishing that contract. I believe I signed it just earlier this week. And so that will be going to the consultant. We'll be engaging the consultant. The schedule that the consultant laid out was an approximately eight-month schedule, but as we've discussed, we've got a lot of things going on over the summer and this is going to require a lot of engagement with the public and the Planning and Zoning Commission and so on. I think eight months is aggressive, but per the board's direction, we are moving forward with that small area study, which could potentially have an overlay district for the Freedom Area.

And just from my point of view, when we had the work session, it was storage facilities, but it was the corridor. We decided we need to fix the whole corridor. This is just one use, and we've got two more. We're going to have 20 of these. It's the only place in town you can do it. It's the only place anybody can find that you're allowed to do this. We tasked the Planning Commission to do that. I thought it was in the fall, like October, November, whenever the work session was. We realized it was not just about a storage facility. And we thought it was moving forward. We thought the staff was taking it. I asked you about it like in March or April. You said, you know, we're overworked. I understand that. We're down some people. I understand that. Now we've got to hire out to do it. I thought it was actually happening. I thought the staff was working on it, because it had been months since we'd made that decision to do the corridor study and the overlay. In the meantime, so I find that out. And you said, well, we're interviewing. We're putting the RFP. And I know there's a lot of work on the desk. We've created this work by just not being attentive years ago when this all happened. You weren't there. I'm sorry. Maybe you were somewhere. So I thought this stuff was moving forward. I didn't know that we were now going to have another. We approved it last week. It's now almost June. And now they're going to take eight months. And now it's not going to be done in time. And we've promised all of these bodies, they all want some certainty. And we also told them they could move forward with their projects. I thought it was a bad idea, because I knew exactly what was going to happen. They're going to push the limit, all this stuff, and get it to the end, and then say, oh, please grandfather us in. that's exactly i would do the same thing if i were them it was a bad idea to allow that gave him false hope i was very clear with the ones i met with every one of them that talked to him and said certain ones are okay and there's certain ones that are no they're not okay this was one of them the retirement villages was another one very clear that was not the expectation move forward at your own risk and this gentleman did move forward at his own risk knowing that a prior person had been there before and put a plan out the community was against it for two years They actually hired a lawyer. They took it to court. The guy, I thought, saw the writing on the wall and left. It should have been changed then. Well, nobody would have been harmed. And I guess in full disclosure, I hope that property owner and attorneys represent fully disclosed the conditions that were underlying, whether there was easements on property said no building or whether this was under under discussion of whether Arizona was applied properly. I don't think that it was. So they knew it was a problem, but they still moved forward. And then even when we did the deferral, they still moved forward again at their own risk. And now we're saying, oh, we couldn't be sued. OK, they moved forward at their own risk knowing that this was a problem area. No one in the state has anything like this next to a neighborhood, or no one in Carroll County has it on their main street. So they took the risk, and now they're coming back saying, gosh, I hope those folks feel sorry for me. I feel sorry for him for not having the certainty. But my frustration is that I thought we were moving forward with our Carter study, and it would have been very clear that we were not going to allow the bulk and the size next to neighborhoods, and it would be It's our Main Street. It's my Main Street. It's Eldersburg Main Street. It's going to devalue, our community is going to change. It's 260 feet long. It's almost the size of a football field. Okay, I just picture it and it just, people are writing to you and writing to us saying they're angry. You have no idea how angry I am because this was allowed to happen and it has been over years and years and years that it should have and could have been fixed. I'm disappointed that my predecessor met with these people over and over and over. How many meetings they had? I mean, I don't know how you guys have put up with it. I'd be angry too. Meetings and meetings and did nothing about fixing it or changing it. You can meet with people forever and say all these nice things. You don't do anything. Act on it and fix it. And it's not fair to the developers, but this developer knew very well when he came in the history of the project that there's nothing you can do to put lipstick on a pig. I mean, it's a big, huge monstrosity. So, and it's not just about the neighbors. It's also about everyone on the Boulevard District that we want a facade of improvements just like Finksburg did, just like Main Street of Westminster, like Main Street of Tawny Town. We're moving in the opposite direction. We're not making things better. We are literally turning ourselves into places in the state that we don't want to be. And I'm not sure if that's on purpose or not. Everyone went into this with their eyes open. My biggest frustration is that we have been so delayed in fixing it. And it's so delayed, and I didn't know we weren't doing the work. Because our staff has spent a lot of time working on billboards for a lobbyist, spending their time for a lobbyist. That's the definition of a lobbyist. They should have been doing it themselves. Our staff was working on their project and not working on the stuff that we directed them to do. So all this time, we're way behind. We've got Wallace Montgomery coming in. I'm asking, at what point is this thing going to be built? This is why they're coming in. I thought this stuff was coming to the Planning Commission. We promised the developers that we'd give them, we'd push this stuff through. And we just awarded a contract that's now going to take eight months. And we weren't aware, I don't know if anybody else was aware, that this had been so delayed. I thought it was going to be presented very quickly. And it was being worked on. I had no idea no one was working on it.

So I honestly cannot remember the date of the work session where we discussed the small area amendment. My recollection is that it was this past February, March time frame. And then we went through the process of the procurement process and so on, which takes time. So I would be happy to put together a timeline, and I'll provide that to the board.

and I think the timeline is much prior to that and again this was just the deferral was because that one use at that time but we realize it's the whole corridor I mean right now I just heard from somebody that you all know they're losing their rent on their business because now they're taking those properties and they're not renting anymore because they're gonna sell them to put these uses there the entire corridor is changing this is not just one little storage facility it's like wow look what we can do in Carroll County And we are now delaying it for eight more months. And you got a question. I was under the full impression that our staff was working on it. I had no idea that it was being delayed to get this done. And I apologize to the people out there that have been, I don't know how you put up with it. And we keep your calm. And it's not just you having these meetings at this time of the morning. People work in my district. I've never seen another county that does not have their meetings that are suitable for the citizens to better participate. People have come to meeting after meeting after meeting. We've gotten tons of emails. People are angry. They're angry because their elected officials don't do what they want. Nowhere else, if this was happening in your district right now, you'd be in the same boat. And we complain about we spent a lot of money. We're about getting sued. We spent a lot of money to fight NPRP, and I agree with that. That project is no more detrimental to those folks than it's going to be to our community with this storage facility. And we have control over it right here. We've had control over it. It should never have been allowed. Nowhere was this anticipated in our Freedom Master Plan. And I've been over that before about the non-transparency of understanding this. They found out about it because a sign was laying on the ground because we put signs up that blow over. And they picked the sign up, oh, a storage facility is going here. Really, it should never have been done like that. And I'm not sure who we work for. I work for my citizens. I'm not a not in my backyard person. I believe you have to have some growth. That's not what this is. It's not at all. And I'm disappointed that we haven't taken it more seriously. And this developer has not taken it seriously. I think they know, hey, we got some weak links that might. And I can't even understand why anyone cares what happens in my district. and pushes something like this when they don't even live anywhere near there. I wouldn't respect the people in my own district. I've always respected the people in these other areas, always. I've always respected Westminster. I've respected Tawny Town. I've respected Hampstead and Manchester, and have fought for everything they've asked us to do. What's good for their people? And I'd like the same to be done for mine. And the storage man, I feel bad for him. We also have another study. We have all these studies finally happening, and I appreciate that. We have another study of a road alignment called Ridenour. Commissioner, if I might. Yeah, I would like to finish.

I want to hear from the, we will have a chance to discuss among ourselves.

No, I would like to finish my comments. Right on our way, we just put out a 150-some thousand dollar study. Appreciate that. We had a road on the books for 40 years that has never been planned. One little teeny piece has been done with like 100 feet. That's it. OK, you told us this would take 150 to 100 years and be billions of dollars to buy all the properties. This study we're getting done is right in the alignment of this storage facility and these people's homes. We don't have the study back. What if it comes and said, hey, you could go in front here. Maybe that's a piece we could use. So we have all these moving parts, and we say we're making these things align, but we're not. If we vote to take the deferral away, which I am adamantly opposed to, and every person who's written this is opposed to it, We have all these moving parts, and why bother doing all of it if we're going to just keep moving forward and making it more difficult to ever fix the issues that have never been addressed in my area? And unfortunately, there's not been the people there to put the stuff in place that need to occur. And we've got a lot of years to make up for. And stopping making it worse is a part of that. It's already in bad shape. So I'm asking about the piece of why this was delayed so that we could have been finishing this now instead of eight months from now. Yes, I will get that information and provide it to the board.

All right, we're going to move into public comment now.

I have a legitimate question I'd like to ask. This board reviewed bulk storage requirements. You did a good work session presentation and showed all kinds of commercial sites throughout the Carroll County in all five districts.

When was that, two years ago? That was about two years ago, maybe a little bit more than that, yes.

Okay, thank you.

I just have a quick comment and this is not by any means to be adversarial or contrary to my colleagues up here yes we all serve our districts we all know that our titles County Commissioner which means we serve all the people of Carroll County I know there's been times in the past where various colleagues have given their input quite strongly on things in other districts. I'm not here to get into that this morning, but the point I'm going to make right now very simply is this. I think it's exceptionally unjust to make comments regarding our staff when our staff, in my opinion, is above reproach. I've never seen nor seen any evidence that our staff has gone outside of the scope of their work. I don't disagree with you about having frustrations about what is going on in your district. I don't disagree with you having irritation and frustration as well as the public regarding how various things have occurred over the past couple years. But I do not think it's acceptable to throw our staff under the bus because I have never seen, and if there is evidence, I'd like to see it brought forward to the five of us.

I will do that.

I will do that. And I'm not trying to be argumentative this morning. I would like to see the specifics as to the who and the what. Because to me, I don't want to see our entire staff group together. So if there's specific bad actors, let's have those conversations. And I appreciate that.

I will do that. I appreciate that opportunity.

All right. So now we will move into public comment. Roberta, do we have anybody here for public comment?

Yes. Joseph Lynch.

That person lives at 6503 Carol Islands Road, right next to where the new storage facility wants to go. Well, here we are again. There's no give up on our side, and it seems no one in this county is hearing what we're saying. We reject large commercial enterprises that want to come between two residential neighborhoods. Most of this property in question was originally residential and part of our subdivision. Storage doesn't help employment. Storage doesn't bring a big raise in tax base for the county. does not provide any new benefits to the county citizens because storage is already here and from what we hear more are coming storage seems to be the easy way to fill a commercial space in a county doesn't require any thought imagination just fills the space not surprisingly there are a lot of towns in this county that have no stores whatsoever and seem to be okay with that For about the last six years, our previous commissioner pushed two storage facilities to be built here in District 5 on this property. As all may have observed, the people who live in this area want nothing to do with it. It seems to be a race to fill spaces quickly before any of us understood what was happening. We told our previous commissioner, who seemed to listen, held some town halls, said things we wanted to hear, but nothing changed. Then Susan Krebs came along. She witnessed as a delegate for a long time and resident here as projected as project after project was built in the ready, fire, aim style. she she saw that fast zoning led to fast projects without accounting for infrastructure needs she analyzed what was happening got her facts straight consulted with other counties as to their best practices as well as all the commissioners here and set out to change the way things are done in district 5. obtained agreement with at least two other commissioners here and and set a plan to move forward and now it seems that at least one commissioner here who says no one wants to one commissioner here says no and wants to stop susan from making the changes we all want the development plan is supposed to follow the freedom district plan as written it does not When three commissioners voted a few weeks ago to extend the deferral another six months, so a newly hired consultant could review District 5's future development possibilities, we all were proud of each and every one of you for the fortitude to stand up and give Susan's proposal support. Hiring a consultant was a good idea then. Nothing has changed that makes that a bad idea now. Someone thinks, again, ignoring the wishes of those who live here and leaving nothing different from the development plan we are on now is a good idea. We disagree. We ask that you please let the deferment and the consultant proceed as you voted to. Don't approve the stories until at least the consultation recommendations are reviewed and considered. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Nancy Lynch.

As Joe said, we've lived immediately adjacent to this property for 40 years. On the site plan, it shows the limits of disturbance, and that's the construction zone. It's right on our property line, about seven yards from our house. The building will be further away, but for about a year plus of construction, it's going to be that close to our house. For the past years, I've attended at least 24 meetings, town halls, public comment hearings, parking variance hearings, technical review meetings, planning and zoning commissioner meetings, arguing that the land next to our home is part of the Carroll Highlands subdivision surrounded by homes and it's inappropriate for an enormous self-storage facility in a residential area was zoned incorrectly when it was changed to c2 has a d restriction on it that renders one lot of the four unusable that none of the neighbors in the subdivision knew were aware of the zoning changes and were not able to voice our concerns signs on the property designed to inform the public were vague with no specific information notices in the paper can't be read without a magnifying glass this agenda item that says possible modifications is so vague that the average citizen would have no idea what it's about The briefing paper wasn't published until yesterday. Yes, we got a lawyer with the help of 50 neighbors. And because of that, the first developer, because of the de-restriction, the extreme opposition from the public, and the fact that at the time you were considering limiting storage to industrial zones only, they withdrew their application. and you should have considered that and then five months later Commissioner Rothstein calls us to tell us another storage facility is coming as Susan said the part along Liberty Road will be 37 feet tall it will be lower close to us but along Liberty Road that's the height 260 feet long, 146 wide at its widest part, 89,000 total square feet. As she said, almost the size of a football field. Government is supposed to provide services to its citizens that they need or want. Nobody in our area wants or needs this. You voted for the deferral to pause and examine these types of projects. You've hired a consultant. Keep the deferral in place. Do not grandfather a project that does not belong in our subdivision and no one wants or will use. And if you allow a public hearing to be scheduled, please hold it in the evening in Eldersburg so people can actually attend and participate. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Next, Audrey Novell.

Good morning, commissioners. I apologize for my Kathleen Turner voice, but my allergies are really a mess. Anyway, OK, I'm Audrey Novak. I live at 6505 Carroll Highlands Road in Eldersburg. I am two lots away from the proposed facility. I'm here to request you as commissioners to choose and pass the option to leave the deferral as is. I understand that the proposed Carroll Highlands storage facility has been moved along in the development process since the deferral was passed in December of 2025. Since the county is willing to invest in consultants, who will make reasonable recommendations regarding the appropriate use of C2 zoned properties adjacent to residential properties, you, the commissioners, owe it to your constituents to follow the process. Since 2022, the Carroll Highlands and the surrounding communities have asked that an alternative use be found for the property in question. Two town meetings were held that completely filled the South Carroll Senior Center. Everyone who attended opposed the large storage facility in our community, except for the developers in attendance. When the first developer withdrew, I know this is old history. We've all been saying it, but let's keep saying it. When the first developer withdrew his application, rather than engaging someone who could develop an alternative use for the property, our then commissioner disregarded the community objections. and brought on another developer who made some concessions but not enough to make a 90,000 total square foot, 37.4 foot tall building conform to the character of the surrounding community as stated in the Freedom Master Plan. I understand that the south side of the elevation will only be 16 feet, but the front elevation is what people see when they're coming up Liberty Road and entering Carroll County. I can only imagine the excavation that will take place to build those dimensions, not to mention the traffic overload on Liberty Road that will be impacted as well. you have been elected to serve the people of carroll county not an out-of-state developer shame on you if you feel that the expenses incurred by that developer are more important than the people who have trusted you with your position as carroll county commissioners The final plans for the project were submitted on March 27th, meaning that the developer continued the project at his own risk. And we as citizens trusted that the decision to defer projects not yet approved was made in good faith by you. Please leave the deferral as is. Thank you.

Thank you.

Andrew Sims.

Hello. Hello. I'm Andrew Sims. I live on 6711 Carroll Highlands Road. We've had a lot of people speak about personal impact, but I want to follow back up on some of the things Susan has said and also talk about planning. What are we saying if we approve this? If we approve this in our district, who's next? Mount Airy? Tawny Town? or Hanover, you know, any of these, Hampstead, any of these places are then subject to this. Once you let the beast in, the beast is there. So if you are on the fence about your district, then just say, we've gotta stop this because you can't have this in a county like this. And we've asked for a plan. We also were earlier, we just approved the budget. And that is assuming that house rates go up. If we continue to defile our communities like this, our house rates won't be going up. I guarantee once that property goes up all of those neighborhoods in that direct area, their tax rates are going to start going down and that's going to affect the budget that you need to approve. Also, anyone who is pushing for this against the government or against the people's will, I ask that they open their tax returns because I wonder where your heart is because I believe you're on the take. This is absolutely shameful that this has gone on this long. The people have unilaterally said that they don't want this. As pointed out by others, We are the ones living here. This is an out of state developer. And I think I remember a time in us history where people far away, uh, had a little bit of a protest about, you know, T being forced down on them. So let's just remember that, that ultimately what we want is more important than what some guy in Florida wants, who by the way, isn't even here for his own deferral meeting. So let's keep that in mind too.

Thank you very much.

Sorry, Amy Hardesty.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Amy Hardesty. I live at 4185 Jefferson Avenue in Sykesville. In 1955, there was a deed restriction put on part of the parcel limiting the use to residential only. In 2014, that property was purchased for three hundred and eighty three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars and it was designated as BNR in 2018 the freedom plan was adopted and it changed the corridor designation to commercial medium in 2019 Carroll residents received a letter from the property owner offering a thousand dollars the first eight residents who signed away the deed restriction in December of 2019 the comprehensive zoning passed, and the property changed to C2. In 2020, the site plan S-20-0010 was filed. In 2022, the Planning Commission grants a parking variance, and the site plan went to the BZA. In February of 28, I mean, sorry, February 28 of 2023, The Eldersburg residents packed a town hall, and we were told at the time that the property was zoned commercial. It was authorized for the storage facility. Nothing we can do. In May of 23, residents attended another commissioner meeting. The commissioners asked the planning commission to review the zoning, and no action was taken. On January of 2024, there was a public hearing. In February of 2024, there was minor height and setback changes adopted. The first developer backed out. The next month, a new developer announced a new storage facility. And then Susan Krebs came in, and in November of 2025, we have the deferral ordinance drafted. And December 16th of 2025, we had a public hearing. The residents of this community did everything we were supposed to do. We showed up to town halls. We signed petitions. We came to commissioner meetings. We came to public hearings. We asked repeatedly to our elected official to update the zoning that wasn't benefiting, quite the opposite, for the community. Each time, we were told our hands were tied. And each time, the developer was allowed to advance the process. Spending money on plans they knew were contested, we organized, but the board did not listen for years. The deferral exists because this board finally listened. It was supported at a formal public hearing in December of 2025. The only proceeding that created a legal recording, because town halls are not legal recordings. That hearing gave residents a voice town halls never did. Granting an exemption today because this developer has spent money advancing through the process sends one message to this community. That a developer can move fast enough, they can outrun the will of the people they're building next to. The rights of this county, the citizens of this county have spoken repeatedly, patiently, and on the record. I ask this board to represent us, leave the deferral as is.

Thank you.

Thank you. The last commenter here, at least, is Sarah Penn. Spoke too soon.

Morning. Good morning. Good morning. I was really hoping to talk after Kelly, but that's OK. Good morning, commissioners. I will not say it's nice to see you again. It's nothing personal. I'm just exhausted, and I'm running out of PTO, honestly. Our community was built in the 60s and 70s, one of the original American dream neighborhoods. Nice yards, quiet streets, single story homes. Many of us newcomers saw the same thing. Streets where children could roam and throw a ball. Our neighborhood is zoned. The entirety of Carroll Highlands, except for this piece of property, is at R40. which is defined by our county as a low density residential zoning district primarily designed for single family detached homes on large individual lots so imagine my surprise when the county rezoned this property behind my house that was lived on people were living in the house directly behind mine when i purchased my home i want to make that very very clear there was somebody living in that house The county has now approved funds to be spent on a consultant, I think multiple consultants, to ensure we are in alignment with our Freedom Master Plan and that we are keeping our neighborhoods and honoring our neighborhoods, our current neighbors. In the words of the temptations, I ain't too proud to beg, don't leave us, your constituents, in the dust. Please, please keep this deferral in place. I don't know what else we can do. We have come and we have talked and we have talked and I have cried so many times. I don't know if you guys have seen the new aerial view. I can touch the edge of this for my property. It is so insanely close. I can't fathom why we would think in Carroll County, where if you drive a mile in either direction, you hit farmland and cows and horses, which my kid begs for every time we drive by one. why we would think this is okay and why we would allow it. I honestly can't fathom why we've gotten this far in this process. To say that I am a disgruntled member of this community is an understatement. the developer is going to come up here and tell you that these have been allowed and blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, they were mini storages, right? I wouldn't care about a mini storage. I like to see the sunshine and I like to see the stars. I don't know if you guys saw that thing that happened in Virginia where they built that massive thing and the woman then lived in shadow and it made national news. That's going to be me and everybody on my street. We're not going to have the sun. We're going to live in the shadow of this monstrosity for what? And it's going to tank my property value. And that is not fair to a single mom that's worked really, really hard to get where I am. Thank you.

Thank you.

Now I believe this is the last comment card. Kelly Miller.

Good morning. Kelly Schaefer Miller, 73 East Main Street, Westminster, Maryland, 21157. Sarah, I promise next time I'll put my card after yours. I appreciate the time here today. I am here, as you all know, on behalf of Scott Cooper, who is the prospective developer of this site. I'm going to keep my comments here related to the actual request today, or topic, or briefing paper, whatever you want to call it, which is that if you all decide to take action on this, you need to schedule it for public hearing first. So the briefing paper, as it's written, requests a potential modification, and if the board has Sentiment for that, there needs to be a public hearing before anything happens. So today you are not acting on, or at least it's my understanding that you are not acting on an actual extension. You are acting on whether there is a conversation about a modification or not to the deferral. I think that that conversation is worthy. Back in December when the actual deferral was implemented, you will recall that there was great discussion and the result was a modified motion to allow for plans to continue in process. If you go back and you look at all of that discussion, there was contemplation about plans working with the county. This developer has been and continue to work with the county. This building is a three-story building. It is 30,000 square foot footprint. It is 18 feet and 8 inches on the rear elevation. Modifications have been made to this plan throughout its entirety. And even from the get-go, modifications were made from that of the previous developer. I think everybody's been very clear. Everybody understands that this is the second developer making a proposal on this property. Throughout the deferral process, since this board has taken up these topics since December, you all have allowed every single conversation to go to public hearing. So I ask you today that if that's not the sentiment, why not? Why won't we let this go to public hearing? I think it's important that this be heard. This plan has achieved all agency approvals at this point. That is a new thing. That is something different that you all need to take into consideration. So I would request that you... I guess it's that you were given three potential things. The two potential things require public hearing. My request is that you go to public hearing on this topic. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Chris, do we have anybody on the line for public comment?

I have no one on the line, sir.

All right. Thank you very much. Well, I will now open it up the floor to my colleagues for any discussion.

I have a quick question, if I could, Mr. Hines, just for some additional information. So I know there's been a lot of conversation regarding that deed restriction. Is that in place? Has that been removed? What is the status of that and how that works into this whole proposal?

DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE ESSENTIALLY PRIVATE CONTRACTS BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER AND THE SUBSEQUENT PROPERTY OWNERS. SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY ENFORCES. HOWEVER, THE DEVELOPER IS AWARE OF THE DEED RESTRICTION ON THE SINGLE PARCEL THAT IS UNDER THAT RESTRICTION BECAUSE THIS IS A MULTI-PARCEL PROPERTY. AND THERE ARE NO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PARCEL THAT HAS THE DEED RESTRICTION ON IT.

So that would then negate the deed restriction if there's no development on it, correct?

Yes. So the proposed development conforms with the deed restriction.

Yes. Thank you. And right now, as it stands, this referral is set to expire on what exact date again? June? September 18th. No.

No. October 9th.

October 9th. October 9th. I mean, but the existing deferral.

Existing self-service storage facilities. I have September 18th in my notes, but I may be.

I think paper has October 9th.

I have October 9th.

I have October 9th.

September or October? Somewhere in there, yes. September. This is the one you just recently extended. The original deferral.

was three months. So the original deferral was effective December 18 and went to March 18.

OK, March 18. I'm sorry. OK. Just wanted to make sure I understood.

And then it was extended. And I will defer to the county attorney as far as what the final date is.

That makes sense. I just wanted to make sure I understood the timelines.

I just have a procedural question. And something that's sort of disturbed me since I've been here on my very first meeting is that we don't have any rules, official rules. the way we run our meetings. I've never been in an organization where we don't have rules that we follow. Even in my Lions Club, we have rules, Robert's Rules. Every organization anybody's ever worked in has rules. I don't know what our rules are. I know you have a little book over there called Robert's Rules. And once in a while, you look at it. But we don't have them adopted, and we don't follow them. So one of the things that has bothered me, I mean, we've gone through all these processes. And just three weeks ago, we decided we were going to extend these deferrals. Send that to public hearing. There's so many moving parts, I don't even know what we're doing. You don't know the date, I don't know the date, because there's so much stuff going on. How does the public follow this stuff? They've given up. They're so jaded about the Board of Commissioners and what they care about because of just what they've had to go through, whether it's this. Or Route 26, that for 40 years has been supposed to be fixed, and not a dollar was put into it until this year to fix it from a board of commissioners. Yet our population has grown by tens of thousands of people, and not a dollar has been put into it. It makes people be jaded. I'm jaded. It's everyone's responsibility. No one knew it because no one even asked about how much it would cost to get the State Highway to move forward with these little fixes for some of these people. We're putting another curb cut in. We promised State Highway for 40 years we were going to do parallel roads, no more curb cuts. We've got 100 extra curb cuts. Now another one on State Highway. It's just one more, one more, one more. And we've put in one little bit of money to fix this much of the road because nobody's ever asked and nobody's ever done it. Nobody really ever cared. And it's very frustrating to me as a citizen when the Board of Committees, they haven't cared since the Gooch administration, which tried to get some of this stuff fixed. So those frustrations are not just about the storage facility. It's about implementation of a plan. And nobody really knows who's responsible for it because we get afraid. Your staff spends a lot of time on plans, bike plans, freedom plans, comprehensive plans. It's real fancy. No one opens the book after that and is responsible for implementing the plan or seeing if it's aligned with the decisions that are being made in the zoning code. And I say, throw out the plan. We don't look at the plan. The planning commission, do they ever pick up the book and say, hmm, this doesn't fit? Does this zoning fit? This zoning does not fit the plan. It was comprehensive rezoning. The whole corridor was done in mistake, in my opinion. The last director admitted that none of them ever went out and saw the properties. They just looked at maps, and that looked good. Well, go visit where you're going to change these things. And just to do it blindly like that from a map. And they always blame the Planning and Zoning Commission. But the recommendation comes from the staff. And the recommendation from the staff usually came from the developer. Very little changes get made. I know stormwater management. You hold them to that. I wish you'd hold them to some things like safe roads and safe access. But I'm just saying, the finger keeps getting pointed to everyone else. The buck stops with us. You trust your staff. I know that Commissioner Weaver, when the comprehensive rezoning happened, first of all, he voted against the master plans because he didn't trust the person that was there. I didn't trust her either. He voted against all the rezonings because he knew they were done randomly. And comprehensive is the first time we've done it in 30. We've never done comprehensive rezoning in the county like this. It's 154 pages long. It has 30 properties on a page. I don't think anybody on this board even knows what's on it. They didn't vote on it. Commissioner Weaver was wise enough to know that this was not being done right, was not being followed. It was very random, arbitrary. Arbitrariness is something that you can fight in a court. We fight things in court all the time if they want to take us to court. It looks like we have a weak board. That's why they keep doing this, because, oh, people are going to be scared. But we fight for the stuff we believe in. We believe in the transmission lines don't belong here. And you, your taxpayers, are paying for us to fight that. And we've invested in that. Doesn't affect my district at all. But we've got signs in our area saying no transmission lines, because they're unified with the people up there, because they appreciate it, that their view or their farm is going to be taken over. These people have the same homes. They have the same, they care about their stuff as much as someone's farm. i know that recently folks have been out about solar on ag we don't think it's appropriate the board put that we think it should be used for other purposes there's been technical review meetings i know more than all of us have said we don't think it's an appropriate use those farmers are willingly selling their property so they can make a lot of money on it. But we still think that's the wrong thing to do. But we're going to take a stand for that too. But for some reason for this, we can't take a stand. And I know I've been told I should have a town meeting. I don't need to have a town meeting because I know what goes on in my town. I don't need to hear from them, because I'm with them all the time. And I've been with them for 30 years, more than that. I don't have to go have a meeting and them tell me what they want, because I know it. I'm with them. And I stand for them. I always have, and I never will back off. I've got headlines on the paper. Krebs has no fundraiser, has no money. You know what? Because I've spent no time doing anything getting reelected, because I'm worried about fixing problems in my district. I don't care about that stuff. That is not important to me right now. What's important to me right now is fixing this mess. And it's not just this property. It's the entire corridor. And if somebody would pay attention, you're changing the entire cash cow. That's where the resources, where the highest census area of income and property taxes in the county. We have all sorts of folks there. But overall, that's a big deal. People are just moving. They're saying, we can't deal with it anymore. So we're trying to fix that and give people what they want. like they do in the towns. And we appreciate those towns. I wish we were one. But it's not the way it is. And unfortunately, I look at the curb cuts. I look at the massive changes in the zoning from B and R, business, neighborhood, retail, which is all there. And these were residential lots, part of a community. Three of them. And then, slowly, they got conditional uses, to be a plumbing company, to be a plumber that lived upstairs, or to be a, I forget the uses. Little at a time, because they're sitting on the road. Oh, well, now that they're BNR, let's just make them commercial C, and let's make the whole corridor commercial C. It did not follow our own matrix. I've showed you this. We can disagree. Our matrix does not show that it should have ever been changed. It's called comprehensive rezoning. No one's notified. There's some who are supposed to follow it in a newspaper in the back in six font. I don't think that's acceptable. Our whole community. It's all in unincorporated areas. Some places got changed. I can't even look at it all. There's so many changes. And I've said, I hope everybody's looking at their property next to them in all the unincorporated areas, because guess what could come to you? And I don't know. I've never seen someone take an interest in such a negative thing and push it so hard with no benefit. I don't know what the benefit is to our community or our county. Ms. Novak, you forgot to tell them something you told me. She tried to get an appraiser to say, what would be the impact on my property if this thing's next to me? And they could not find another situation where this had been done to even see what the impact was, because no place would let this happen like this. And it's not just their property. It's our entire Main Street. We want our town to look like a Main Street. Planned commercial centers don't look like Main Street. They look like a new ghetto. I mean $2,000 apartments that look like crap. We also, this is not a main street, this is not a facade improvement. I just don't know what is driving it and Ms. Miller, I'm glad you introduced yourself today as who you represent. I literally have never seen anyone be considered a citizen who is a lobbyist paid for by these folks and is the center of all of these decisions, had a seat at the table for all of these decisions that were made. And you know that and I know that there were not citizens at these tables when these definitions were being changed and you were there. It wasn't in the best interest, and our own staff was not acting in the best interest of our citizens at all. And we have those meeting minutes, and there were new citizens there. It is not because they didn't care. You don't have 1,000 people show up for the freedom plan. It says it right in there, 1,000 people show up for these meetings. And you can't tell me that nobody cared about these zoning changes or understood what they meant, because they were not adopted with the maps. It is very unlikely, it should not even be allowed, that you adopt maps and then years later, years later, adopt new definitions that change everything. Who can follow that? They are supposed to be done at the same time. In almost every county I've seen, it's in law. You adopt them at the same time so people know what they're getting. You don't adopt them dribble, dribble, dribble over years and years and let them go in. And then comprehensively do everything. You don't have to notify anybody because it's comprehensive rezoning. We've never done that before. It's impossible to follow. So we need to fix the system. We need to fix this for these people. And stop this, because the developer, I feel for him. No, I don't feel for him, because he should have been told by the property owner, should have been told by his attorney what was going on with this. I believe he should have been disclosed. The same property owner is putting solar panels in our ag land. They're taking advantage of opportunities. Hey, that's what people do. And now we're fighting that. Same people, same names on the deeds. Interesting, speculation. It turns a profit, and that's what America's about. But not when it's against someone else and what they're supposed to do. And our staff and everyone should be with them and helping them. That is our job as elected officials. And your job is to help that as well. Not to defend and put up roadblocks and say, what about this and what about that? We could get sued. Go ahead and sue us. Because we're going to fight for what's right for our community. I've met with everyone. I've talked with this gentleman. And I told the ones that are on deferral, there were several that we've let go because they're They put a lot into it. And in the spirit of what we've got, we're moving them forward. There were several that are not OK. One is the storage facility. I told them that from day one. I told that to the retirement communities. They're not safe. One of them is OK. The rest are not. I do not believe they're safe. And the more I meet with my constituents in these other places where they've been approved, I'm appalled that we have continued to approve projects that are not safe for our elderly citizens to exit and enter and even drive down the street or walk on their sidewalk. in a wheelchair. So we're going to fix it. But the more I meet with these people who feel they're helpless, they're not helpless as long as I'm sitting here. And as you know, I'm missing a family funeral to be here today, someone I grew up with, family triple related to me, to be here because it's that important. So I'm going to ask that you give the respect for the people in my community. And I wanted to ask about the Roberts rules. In Robert's Rules, if we follow it, you cannot bring a subject back up unless you're on the prevailing side of the decision. This keeps coming back up. We decided it three weeks ago. I'm not sure. Since we don't have rules, even though you sit with the book there, I asked our attorney that's supposed to guide us, what does Robert's Rules say about a reconsideration of a motion?

You have to be on the prevailing side to do a motion for reconsideration.

And here we are. He wasn't on the prevailing side. I'm just saying. I'm just saying.

It's in the rules.

No. We don't have rules. Sorry. We need order, and we're trying to conduct a discussion up here. I'm sorry. It is a reconsideration of a decision. It's the exact thing.

Well, you're a legislative body. Each commissioner has the right to propose amendments to legislation.

This is a reconsideration of exactly what we did three weeks ago to extend it. And you can interpret it how you want, but I can tell you even a parliamentarian in Annapolis would say, this is a reconsideration. You were not on the prevailing side, and it shouldn't have even been brought forward. But we don't have any rules that I know of, and they change depending on who wants to make the rules work in their favor, which I think is not a democratic way of running a business, an operation, but that's how we do it here.

Commissioner, let's be very careful about casting aspersions here when you accuse anybody on this board of setting the rules to their favor. You don't have any evidence to that effect. It's wrong.

Okay, Mr. Chair, I'm going to ask you. about the reconsideration of a decision that was made three weeks ago by this body for a good reason. It was four to one. And the person who voted against it has brought this back three weeks later for reconsideration. I'm reading the rules that I see a member to reconsider. It's called the Groundhog Day motion. So, the purpose of reconsidering a vote is to permit correction of a hasty, ill-advised, or erroneous action to take into account added information or a changed situation that's developed since the taking of the vote. Note that a member must have voted with the prevailing side in order to reconsider. This means if the motion passed, the member would have to have voted for it. If the motion failed, the member voted against it. If the vote was tied so that it failed, the member voted against it. The reason for this requirement is obvious, to prevent a disgruntled minority from bringing something up over and over again. If the original motion was debatable, then the motion to reconsider and the motion itself can be debated. If the original motion could not be debated, then the motion to reconsider cannot be debated. This is a simple rule that people follow in every organization. To be able to keep bringing things up, we had a robust debate. I mean, we can vote on it again if you want, but it should never have been brought forth again. We've got to learn how to work. The reason we have all of these controversies is because of a lack of putting this stuff in place and knowing what we're doing to begin with and that's what causes all of this if this stuff was done properly to begin with we wouldn't be here we wouldn't be having all these consultants if there was someone responsible for implementation of plans if people looked and followed the plans we write bicycle plans we write walking path plans we write all these plans and no one's responsible for implementing them and then they blame it on the planning commission who are seven appointed lay people in our county don't even live anywhere near the Freedom District, nice people, they're not even given any direction, except that you're supposed to follow your plan, it says it in state law, that you're supposed to follow your plan. Since we don't look, I've tried to point out many times when this has not been followed, this certainly is in this, to this, there's nothing about increasing commercial density near anything like that in this plan at all, yet that's what was rolled out countywide. It affects our district the most. I think it's going to affect other areas. And they'll see it soon. And they'll say, hey, I tried. But we know it's going to affect these people. And this storage facility guy knew it was going to affect his folks. And I just thought he'd think, hey, let's come to Carroll County. We'll get them on this, because everybody will give in. And I'm not casting dispersions. I am frustrated. I'm very frustrated.

I understand your frustration.

And you should understand my passion.

Can I speak for a second, please? Yes. I understand your frustrations. I think everybody's frustrated in this room. But I'm going to bring up a couple points right now that I think had absolutely no basis in being brought up this morning. Number one, the choice of the term new ghetto. I'm sorry, that's a racial code term. That is very divisive, and I don't appreciate that being brought up. Number one, I mean, if we're going to start going to racial and segregation regarding, you know, minorities, the Jewish people back in the 1600s, I find that exceptionally offensive.

Well, the one I was thinking about is actually white people, and so do not think that that's what I was referring to. It is not at all. I don't know what you were getting at.

All I know is you used the term new ghetto.

Commissioner Gordon has a form.

And the last I checked, and I'm not trying to be argumentative with you this morning, but you have now hit on some personal notes for me personally because you said white people. I have Jewish heritage. I'm white. So let's just leave that out of that. No, you can shake your head, but I find it offensive. If we want to get on the facts of let's talk about deferrals, let's stick on deferrals. I'm fine with that. Whether all of us agree or not, that's fine. But let's stick to the point. And you also mentioned, and I know this has been brought up before, and it's a great question for conversation. And I'm not against this if we want to go that route, and it's up to the people of the county. You mentioned this morning it would be nice if we would be incorporated. Would you like to see District 5 incorporated?

Mr. Gordon, when is the last time that a town has been incorporated in the state of Maryland?

That's irrelevant to the question. OK, I'm just asking. I will tell you the answer.

The answer is it hasn't been a town incorporated in the state of Maryland in over 80 years because it's so difficult. It has not happened. Years ago, the Sykesville, the Freedom Area asked Sykesville if they would take us in. It was like the elephant eating the, or what do you call it, the mouse eating the elephant. because they're small and we were large and we were out of control and it was too much for them to take over. So that has been looked at. I would wish we were incorporated. I wish we were all treated respectfully. I wish our growth area was shrunk like they did for Finksburg because they didn't want to grow. Or I just wish people would, the representation would let us grow like we're supposed to grow. No one has ever said, we were at Springfield yesterday, that property's been there forever. It's a use people wouldn't want in their backyard. Those kind of uses have been accepted in our area for many, many years. We just would like to have it be done in a way just like your towns are, respectfully following a plan, listening to people. And there are people that say, don't put it in my backyard, just like the transmission lines and the solar panels. But we try to find a balance in that. That's why we have plans, and that's why people buy property, so they can have predictability for themselves as well. And if you took my, I have no racial anything in my- I'm not suggesting you are, but I'm just pointing out the fact, please don't use that term again.

I am beyond disturbed at that.

Well, I will take it back. That term is not the same negative racial to me as it is to you.

It's to many people, but we'll leave it at that. I'm not trying to get into a debate about that this morning. But my point to you is if we want to have a functional conversation, and I'm not suggesting we're not, but if we'd like to, why don't we have a conversation about your district bigger than just the deferrals? And I realize, yes, it's been 80 years, but why not? Because the one thing we've dealt with and you've dealt with in Annapolis, we've all dealt with, Are they problems or are they challenges? Because to me, a problem is something we can't overcome. So if this is a challenge, let's sit down and actually look at it. Because I don't disagree with you in a variety of aspects of District 5 being challenged in how it's been treated or how it hasn't been treated. And, you know, in some ways it's not really apples to apples to compare Westminster to District 5 or District 3 to District – they're different. It's like apples to tomatoes. And I'm not saying that to be smart. I just think the reality is Carroll County has always done one thing. I grew up here. I've had generations here. And I'm not putting that out there for anything performative. I'm just making a point. We always do really well when we work together. It didn't matter if it was the power lines out on 140. When they fell, it doesn't matter any of the things. The one thing this community has always done, and I've been exceptionally proud of this community, is no matter where you're from, whether you were here 200 years or you moved here 10 minutes ago, we collaboratively work together. And my point to you this morning is very simply this. We can have differing opinions. We can have different ideas. But when we are attacking each other, we get nothing accomplished for the good of all of us. I'm not suggesting you're attacking us. I'm just stating fact when, you know, If you have things about staff, please bring it up. I think this should have been brought up long ago if there's a staff issue where staff is not acting appropriately. But it's the same with the comment that was made earlier about, well, you know, has anybody opened these books? There's a reason they're given out to us. I'm not going to assume or speak for my other colleagues, but I can tell you, I crack these books and read through it. I know planning and zoning does because they're not being given these just to be given these in a standard format of I'll just take it home and set it on a shelf. Can I speak to everyone's usage of it? No. But we need to work together. That's my point this morning. I'm beyond frustrated. I understand the people here that are frustrated. I understand your frustrations. But we cannot, as a community, beat up on ourselves. We're not going to get anything done. And we're going to go through more meetings about whether it's this topic or some other topic, and we're just going to burn time. And that's my point this morning. And maybe that makes sense and maybe that doesn't to some people. But the reality is we're best when we're united, not divided. I said that the other night in a speech I gave. That was a room that was full of both all political parties and affiliations in front of a group of veterans. So my point right now is let's be united as a county. Let's not divide each other. And let's try to be professional and keep all have cool heads and work together.

And that's why three weeks ago we were united, four to one, to continue these deferrals. And that was my original question. If we were in any other body that I've ever worked in, I've been in many, many, many, many, many boards, we have rules. And we have simplified Robert's rules. When I tell people we don't have any adopted rules, you can't reconsider and bring this stuff back three weeks ago we made a decision four to one and here we are again here they are again here everyone is again and we just keep leading people along if i thought this was some great thing that was going to benefit our county at all I could understand it. I still, for the life of me, can't understand the benefit to our county. We've also all agreed, and I appreciate, moving forward with those consultants so we can address some of these issues once and for all. That's the first time it's ever, well, that's not true. A traffic study was done in 2020 that showed almost every intersection on Route 26 was failing. That was in 2020. Not one penny was put into the budget to leverage any money from State Highway Billions of dollars came into the state of Maryland. And Carroll County probably got the least amount of construction money in these years than probably anybody, even the smallest of counties, because we never leveraged the money to do the projects. We got two sidewalk projects in. And that's it. We've missed out on so much opportunity to fix these problems. And there's really not been that advocacy, because we don't have the towns. I wish we were in a town. I can't change that. I try to feel that there's certain things you can change, and there's certain things I know I can't change. I can't change that. It's not going to happen. They've tried it. And in fact, we'll go there. But this board is responsible. I just wish that we would stick to what we say. The fact that this come back, I don't want to be here. I want to be at the funeral home with my husband and my mother and my family. I'm here because I need to be here because it's come up again. It keeps coming up. That gentleman knew that he was moving forward at his own risk. Oh, now I'm ready. And there's going to be more of those that come forward. Just grandfather me in. Why are we doing all this now? And I go back even to State Highway. No more curb cuts. Yet we keep allowing curb cuts because we haven't finished our plan. So there's so many reasons. And we need to go back to the entire Route 26, this overlay study, because right now all these people are buying these properties because they're saying, wow, look what I can do in Eldersburg. Look what I can do in Carroll County. Let me flock in here and throw this. You would be infuriated like I am. and I'm sorry I'm passionate about it I just I just cannot believe this is happening in my own county with all the energy that myself and others have put in to our community over the years and how I've supported every one of you in your districts for years and years even Wakefield Valley when they Didn't want to let them do what the developer wanted to do. They bankrupted the guy. They ended up, I was there the other night, they ended up with a beautiful project, because that's what their community wanted. In the meantime, they bankrupted a developer who wanted to build a lot of houses there. But they did what was best for the community. This is one big storage facility. I mean, this is, I'm sorry to keep going on. I just, I can't even, I can't even, fathom why we are still here having this discussion and why the energy that's been put into this is like they're going to just jam it down there no matter what. I don't know. I've never felt that kind of arrogance and whatever. I've never felt that toward anything. Maybe I don't know what that is to mean that you focus so much on messing up somebody. I don't know how that evil comes about, but it's there.

All right, Commissioner, you really are starting to go off the rails here. I don't know who you're calling evil.

Anybody who wants to, I don't know, I won't, I guess maybe the person that Fs me all the time and over and over again, the one that calls me obscenities and everybody sits and listens to him, that man right there.

Commissioner, let us. Right after I was called a liar, and trust me. Well, I'm not going to get into it. We are getting so, I'm sorry. I get to comment at any time in this, and I won't be 30 minutes.

I will give you a minute. I want to address something that Commissioner Gordon also did very briefly here. I understand that this is a passionate issue. We do not want to cast aspersions against our colleagues or members of the community or anybody for that matter. All right? This is a complicated situation. It is on the agenda today because a majority of the commissioners voted to add this to a future agenda. It came up on this one. That's why that's here today.

Point of order. This was a vote on an issue. It wasn't a future agenda item. We've already discussed it. This is not an agenda item. This is to reverse something that we just did, which was a vote. That is an action. So it's a reconsideration of an action. OK, that's what it is. This is not just another subject we want on the agenda. It's exactly what a reconsideration of an action is.

There's a couple of different motions here. There's a couple of different outcomes to this. There was a request by a commissioner, and it was voted on in the model that you've demonstrated to us by making motions and taking votes to put things on the agenda, to put this on the agenda. It's on the agenda by majority vote of the commissioners. All right? That's why it's here today.

Can you admit that it is a reconsideration of a vote we just took three weeks ago? It is. It's not just a new agenda item. And I voted against that because of that.

I didn't say it was a new agenda item. You were asking why it's on the agenda today. I'm explaining why it's on the agenda today.

It's a reconsideration of a vote.

Well, in that case, I've got to refer that to the county attorney if it's a point of order question about whether or not this is a true reconsideration of a vote.

We don't have any motions. We have nothing to discuss at this point.

So it's an item on the agenda. It's not an actual motion. Okay. So now I'm going to open up to the rest of the board here for any other discussion. I have a couple questions myself in a few minutes.

Yes. And I understand this is emotional, but facts matter. I have shown you a couple set of rules that I had when we were Board of Ed, and you told me you couldn't follow them. So we can't cherry pick the protocols and such. Very few people use Robert's Rules of Order, and the main reason is because you cherry-pick which one you want. If you follow them all, we'd have voted about it a half hour ago. And the other thing I'd like to say, I keep hearing about property values, and I understand that frustration, and I keep hearing of Liberty Road being called Main Street. my district Hampstead Manchester has named main streets both On Main Street, there were farms. There were a lot of residents. There's also, on Main Street, a Super Walmart, a Dollar General, Ridge Engineering, tractor supplies coming. There was bus companies. There was Black & Decker. There was Joseph Banks. There was a Sheetz. There's the Gary Building in Manchester that used to be my father's hardware store. There's a junkyard in Greenmount. There's a canning factory in Greenmount. There's construction companies' yards that are all grandfathered in. None of those hurt property values, and almost all of them are next to residents. I went to high school with a girl next to North Carroll Plaza and Walmart, and I'm sure she didn't like it, but it worked, and their house didn't, didn't go down in value and and I just I get tired of hearing from people that I don't care about eldersburg I care about the whole county I love the whole county I was born here part of the school system and and I push for things I've and I don't blast it during open meetings but I've helped individuals in eldersburg in mount airy in tawny town in manchester and hampstead uh when somebody calls me i don't say what party are you i don't say where do you live until it's relevant to the conversation i try to help them and and uh i understand the frustration but the name calling the putting down the bullying is is just shouldn't be And like I say, Manchester and Hampstead have a road that's called Main Street. It's been called Main Street for at least 80 hundred years, and they have all of these businesses on it next to residents. And I understand your frustration, but don't tell me that Liberty Road is the only place that has commercial next to residents. There are a lot of places throughout this county. Thank you. That's it.

All right. Commissioner Guerin, is there anything you wanted to add before I ask questions of Chris? Or Commissioner Gordon, for that matter.

No, I'm good.

Thank you. So I'm going to start out by saying that I would appreciate two things out of my fellow commissioners. One, that we try to remain on topic as much as possible because this is an important issue. And secondly, I am really literally tired of being caught in the middle of a back and forth that is continuous. It is public official, public hearing 101 that we don't go after each other during a public meeting. We've all attended those ethics trainings classes. We know that. We know better. And I'm just literally sick and tired of being caught in the middle of it. I have better things to do than sit through that. So I'm just giving that warning to my colleagues. So we've got a deferral. And as I often do, I try to bring the conversation back to what we're here for. We have a deferral that is set to expire existing right now on October 9, 2026. There will be a day of reckoning on this storage facility, everybody. And you may not like the outcome. I don't know what the outcome is going to be. And I say that because I can say that. There was a comment here earlier that this whole situation stinks and it's awful. I agree with you. I actually agree with you. And some of you remember my involvement in this early on. And the review of the bulk requirements that was initiated, that was my doing. All four other commissioners agreed to it. In the end, They weren't as stringent as I liked. I didn't get what I wanted, but they were better, so I voted for them. But we are going to be faced with a decision here whether we're either removing this usage from that area altogether, or we're going to have to find a way, if there is a way, to continue to mitigate the footprint and what's there so it's the least intrusive building you can get. Those are the two options. I mean, that's just it. And are we going to get there by October 9? I'd like to get there sooner than that, and what I'm hearing is that it's October 9th if we're lucky. So this issue may get extended past October 9th. I would find that unfortunate, but my point being that I understand people are upset. I really do. And I think everybody who's involved in that situation knows my personal involvement in it. And I feel as though what's happened to you folks is wrong. And we keep talking about the history of what's happened there. And while I agree with that interpretation of that history, we can't change it. I mean, it is what it is. And sometimes... Things happen, you know, you've all heard the saying, sometimes bad things happen to good people. I don't know what's going to happen with this outcome, but I think it's important for everybody who's watching, and I know there's probably a lot of people in the Ellsberg area watching, and I used to live in Sykesville myself, that, I mean, those are really the two outcomes we're going to try to achieve. mitigate the footprint of this facility as much as we can, or we're just gonna completely remove it from the ordinance, I think that, I mean, I do happen to agree that that second, that latter outcome, that poses some significant legal problems and legal potential battles for the county. Are we willing to go down that road? I don't know, but I hate the fact that we're just kicking the can down the road also. So if we're going to leave the deferral as is until October 9th, I said this about the retirement age-restricted deferral a couple weeks ago. And is there a way to get to a resolution before then? I don't know. I completely understand, again, that the residents that live there, you just don't want it. And again, I understand that. I mean, I think it's wrong. I think what's happened, this whole history of that entire storage facility, absolutely wrong, 100%. But we're faced with what we're faced with now. And if we're going to defer this till October, but then have no real resolution until October 9, I think we're just setting ourselves up for a lot of these meetings to continue. So I can support the deferral as is, but I continue to just caution residents and I continue to just warn residents that Sometimes our hands do get tied. And I know that's not a good answer. So I can support the deferral as is, but I just feel as though this board, we are putting ourselves in some difficult positions. If we can't, as Commissioner Gordon mentioned, work together, try to get really focused on some technical, tangible solutions to these things, because they're not going away. And it's not going to get any easier.

Hope that made you make a motion or not?

No. Okay. Well, I don't think there is a motion needed if we leave it as is if I'm not mistaken. The question is whether we're going to go with two or three and and again, that's going to be I again, I got to stress we need to we do need to work together on these things. So let's say for instance, we leave it as is. I'd rather

many of us as possible have really a tangible good faith discussion about how we think we're gonna solve this going forward as opposed to just waiting till October 9th and then we're just gonna have another hearing let's figure it out and I agree with what everything you said and there are things that we could have done unfortunately we got a little kink in there because the state trying to take over everything we do and I'm not sure even how it affects this that's why we picked this October first date and

It doesn't affect this. That only affects us.

OK. One of the other things. But on this, that's right. It does not affect this. There's things we could do since there is not a deadline because this is commercial.

Yeah. And this October 9th is the date.

Of the extension?

Exactly.

So what we could do very quickly to just mitigate this, we still have to go on a larger scale on the whole corridor overlay. And we could have done this months ago, is take it back to what it was and take the word and put mini back. The word mini storage was always in our code. They struck that word. It changed the word mini to be big. Also, bulk requirements. I was looking at the bulk requirements last night, and I've got it with me. I don't want to go through it now. There's less of a requirement of a setback here than there is between other things of homes next to something else. It doesn't make sense. I have a 20-foot setback at my home, and there's other ones. It's not consistent. Why would there be a 10-foot setback, commercial versus residential, but over here it's something else? They're not consistent, these setbacks. I can't even understand some of it, how it's interpreted, but they're not consistent. So we can take many out, put many back in where it was before, before anyone knew it was struck. Nobody knew that word was struck and what it meant. We could change the bulk requirements so that you'd have to have more setbacks, and you'd have it back to the level it could have been. And I agree with you that Main Street, our Main Street is all businesses now. It used to be houses, and they're all businesses. But they're business local. And Main Street of Hampstead is business local. I grew up going up and down Hampstead, too. They're business local businesses. Now, there is ones off to the side that were put there years ago, some of the larger ones. They were always business local. And we have Walmart, too. We have that in the business general. Everybody knows we're business general. It was part of a planned community. It was put there before the houses were there. It was part of a PUD back then, planned unit development, which we talk about. And that's where the big shopping centers are. We have those, too. But that was business general. Nobody's complaining about that. But we changed all of this from business local, which is there now. There are stores all the way along there. I'm not saying it's beautiful, but they're small. And we changed it to make it all be business general, the highest use. They basically just took the whole corridor and did that without looking at what they're next to, does it belong, are the height requirements consistent. So if we want to do something quick, and we could have, but I thought the corridor improvement was going to sort of take care of it comprehensively, we could take the word mini out, put it out there, and we could change the bulk requirements, back to what they used to be when it was business neighborhood local and we could solve it for the for now and then go back and do the Carter study that would be a band-aid that would take this away and we could have done that and I thought if I didn't think the other thing was more comprehensive and being done the right it was being done the more comprehensive quicker longer way and we're investing money and doing that I appreciate that If I didn't know we weren't going to have this done in time and this was going to move forward or have a potential moving forward, I would suggest it having those quick fixes back in the fall to say, OK, this is the new rule. But we didn't decide to move in that direction. We decided to do it more comprehensively. So if that's what we want to do to take this off the table, I suggest that you could come back with some of those quick fixes that we could take to change it back to what it was, mini, and the bulk requirements back to business, neighborhood, local, what they were when it was known that. then that would fix it temporarily but then the more comprehensive look would do it more thoughtfully which it should have been done to begin with and then we we would have a more comprehensive look at it a plan for it so if we want a quick fix there they are right there that would take care of this and the other two that have been proposed that are early in the stages but it would give them guidance early on that hey this is the direction that we're heading in because we're going to have more of these

So Chris, if, uh, if I may, first and foremost, I want to be very clear about something else here, because again, this has been a heated discussion or passionate discussion where we are right now is not your fault. It's not the fault of staff. It's the fault of if necessary fault, but based on the previous decisions of previous boards of commissioners, where we are right now, as commissioner Guerin has alluded to, as we're trying to navigate a very difficult set of circumstances, right? I have a couple of questions, and if you can answer them, I'd certainly be grateful for it. So the mini storage deferral is in place until October 9th, correct? Yes. All right. We have a consultant who's currently looking at mini storages, correct?

yes all right do we have any anticipation for when that report might come back to us we are very close to having that complete they are they i would say about 95 percent complete with um if you recall um when we uh the the first use that was addressed was um age restricted and they we did what we're calling task one and task two related to those uses which is first of all to look at the consistency between the planning documents and the codes and then also looking at task two being looking at best practices and recommendations at a very high level and that culminates in a presentation to the board and we had that presentation just a couple weeks ago related to restricted We are very close to having those Task 1 and Task 2 products complete for self-storage. So in the next couple weeks, we could certainly be back to have the consultant present that information.

All right. So when it comes to the mini storage facility that is in question based on today's item on the agenda, Without the deferral in place, where would they be in the process right now? I mean, would they be ready to put shovels in there? Where would they be?

Yeah, so the way our process works is that our staff reviews for all technical code requirements, so to ensure that all stormwater management is addressed all landscaping is addressed all the zoning requirements are are addressed um because this is on a state roadway and they're proposing access state highway has to review and approve it the health department so on and so forth so we coordinate that review and when from a technical perspective every the final construction plans are all approvable from from the technical perspective we schedule them for the planning and zoning commission and then the Planning and Zoning Commission reviews and then issues a final approval. Once that final approval is done, we go through what we call legal documents phase because there are easements that need to be taken, public works agreements that need to be established, and so on. That can typically take about a month or two because we're dealing with a lot of lawyers, a lot of banks, and so on, need a lot of signatures on things. Our county attorney's office works through all of that. So that can take a month or two. Once those are in place, then they can get their grading permit, which is when they can put shovels in the ground. So if this were a normal process, we would have gone to Planning Commission in June, say two months after that, having everything in place, and then a grading permit, so July, August. So this fall, they could be under construction.

All right, so, okay, so one to two months after all these reviews and the document phase and everything, which would put them, if they got the approval in June, would put them in potentially July, August, September. The deferral is until, is last until October 9th, right? One of the outstanding questions for me, and some of our citizens have raised it, and Commissioner Krebs has raised it as well, about the zoning for that particular parcel. Again, this board was not in office when that occurred, and that change occurred because of the decision-making of previous boards of commissioners, not because staff took the initiative on their own to change it. Something like that has to go through a process and has to be voted on by the commissioners. So the question of whether or not that was the correct zoning for that area. And I understand that, that, you know, we're also looking at this, this overlay zone, but we don't have eight months to wait. We just don't as commissioner Guerin alluded to. So as far as the zoning for that particular property, right? There's a couple of parcels, right? I understand that the one has the deed restriction on it. And that particular parcel is not being constructed upon because of that deed restriction. So with the deferrals going, deferral on those going to October 9th, the potential that this developer would not be beginning to build until September, and knowing that we are very close to having something back from the consultant, has the consultant, in the process of looking for consistency, have they also looked at whether or not those couple of properties were inconsistently zoned, inappropriately zoned?

So no, because that's not within their scope. Their scope was specific to looking at self-service storage facilities and looking at best practices from where they should be constructed, what zoning districts they should be constructed in, examples of design guidelines, those sorts of items. the question of the zoning of that property specifically is something that will be looked at in that corridor study that that small area amendment that we just got through the procurement process of bringing a consultant on board to look at the entire comprehensively look at that corridor so the when the freedom plan was put together and that would that took place over from about 2015 to 2018 so about a three-year process to put together the Freedom Plan. What we are trying to do is as quickly as possible amend that plan, but it needs to be a totally transparent process. There are a number of community meetings being proposed, a lot of work with the Planning Commission, and so on. that process to comprehensively potentially rezone any properties along that corridor or to put an overlay district that would put additional requirements on any properties in that area, that is a lengthy process that must be transparent and must work with the community and so on. So it's to try and compress that and get that done in a very short amount of time, I believe does a disservice to the community that we're trying to accurately

put in a correction as it were for that for that area right so I'm asking all these questions because a lot of this really does come down to timing and the question or the reason why I'm asking the question specifically about that particular piece of property where the storage facility is slated to go is and again please guide me or correct me if I'm wrong the consultant looking at all these things specifically about the storage facilities all right Is there any way we're going to have, through that consultant's report, some indication about the appropriateness of the zoning of that property as it is now, beyond whether it's consistent with the master plan? Because I know we've heard from a lot of citizens who have said, well, why don't you just wait until the consultant comes back with the report, right? And I'm inclined to, you know, think about that, but I want to understand what it is we're getting back from the consultant that might assist us in the decision-making process.

Yeah. So we discussed this in the work session that has been brought up, where we were looking at what are the appropriate ways to look at the corridor, look at the Freedom Corridor along 26th. And I think it was what we described and I think what was recognized is that the issue is not necessarily with self-storage on that property. As you said, it's more the zoning. And if we want to change, if there's a desire to change the zoning on that property, it has to be done as part of a comprehensive process. which is why we then went down the route of let's look at a small area amendment to look at the entire corridor. And is the zoning, are the land use designations and the zoning for that entire corridor appropriate? And do we comprehensively want to make any changes? We can't go in and just change the zoning on one property. That's not legal. That was going to be one of my later questions about spot zoning. yes so the so we're looking at two different paths here one is the cell storage which is what Michael Baker the one consultant is working on and they they are prepared to come and talk about what are what other communities have done related to bulk requirements design requirements zoning districts and so on in a general topic related to self-storage specifically The other consultant, Wallace Montgomery, who is working on, no, I'm sorry, I'm mixing up consultants, DRS, is going to be looking at is the entire corridor and what are the zoning districts that are appropriate. And that property, as well as any others that are in the scope of that, if there is a desire to change the zoning, that would have to be done comprehensively.

And obviously, the spot zoning of that place would be illegal.

Correct.

OK. So as Commissioner Guerin said, I'm asking these questions because I'm trying to get a better sense of what options we have, not specifically just for today, but going forward. And I think Commissioner Guerin is right. I think that we come down to a place where you know, something is gonna end up going there, right? And my heart goes out to the community because I'm a firm believer in community integrity, fittingness of something to go into a particular area. Yeah, I take the point very much to heart that, you know, the citizens in that area don't want it in that area, that they don't feel that it, you know, fits into the area. And I certainly get that. I take the point that the developer is satisfied that everything procedurally at this point, that he's adjusted his plans based on our discussion, feedback from the community. He's demonstrated a willingness to try to amend the project. But I also take the point that there are these kind of lingering questions about the zoning. And, you know, I went into this whole process supporting these deferrals with an open mind because I'm figuring, okay, well, maybe there are inconsistencies that we have to address. There are areas of the zoning code that we could certainly strengthen. And, you know, it certainly has been the case with the report we've received back so far that, you know, with those so far, there are no inconsistencies, but there are certainly areas where we can strengthen the code. And so for me, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, this really does come down to a question of time, right? You know, I was asking the questions about when this mini storage or the storage facility might go in as it, you know, related to the amount of time that we have as far as the deferral is concerned, but also when that consultant is going to come back to us. I really am conflicted about this because, again, there really is such a take to heart the community sense of integrity. I really do. I also have to consider the fact that, again, previous boards of commissioners made decisions that brought us to where we are today. And that's the reality that we have to deal with at present. Again, this wasn't staff who did this. This wasn't you who did this. This was previous boards of elected officials. And now we're trying to make the best that we can out of a very difficult situation, right? Because again, on the one hand, you have a perspective of community integrity. And as Commissioner Krebs had mentioned, right, we're especially up in Commissioner Kyler's district, in my district, and partially in Commissioner Guerin's district. We're fighting the MPRP. There's a company from out of state that's coming in to literally try to take people's land away from them, to build a transmission line that's not going to benefit them, and it's going to raise their utility rates. In a situation like this, again, you have the sense of community integrity, but then you have a developer who's satisfied everything procedurally as it exists. And even if we take this through to the date of this extension of the deferral on October 9th, I mean, I guess that's my other question here. If we take it through October 9th, and to Commissioner Guerin's point, we can't wait till October 9th, If we follow the pursuit of that deferral to October 9th, where does that potentially leave us? What is the next step at that point? Are we in a position where we have to extend the deferral again pending the results of the overlay study? Honestly, I don't know. I'm genuinely trying to parse these things out.

yeah so so there are there are two paths that that we're on so one is the question regarding um self-service storage right what are what are the best practices from a design requirements perspective from bulk requirements and and and and so on um so that that path may result in the board coming up with additional design requirements specific to uh self-storage um an easy example is that we recognize that there is a difference between the mini storage the the small shed type storage and these large uh warehouse size so would it make sense for the county to have either a separate use between those two uses or at least differentiate regulations between the two. And I've read the documentation. It hasn't been presented to the board, but I've read the report from the consultant, and that is a recommendation. And so the board could go down that path of coming up with different regulations specific to cell storage. If those get put in place before the deferral ends, then this project would have to conform to those new regulations. So if there are certain aspects of it that they don't already conform to, such as design requirements and so on, October 9, the deferral ends. Unless it's extended, they would have to conform. Assuming that the board were to pass those new regulations related to self-storage and not do any sort of grandfathering and so on, this project would have to conform to those. That's one path if I may so that's the one path the other path being looking at the corridor and the comprehensive rezoning and so on so if that if and again from a timing perspective that has to be a longer process so that will not be done by October 9th by the end of the deferrals right so if the deferrals were extended and and so on and the board through that comprehensive rezoning process rezoned any properties and potentially including that one that would then affect the ability of that use to go there that project would then be affected in that manner whatever that manner might be so those are the kind of the two paths that we're on But you're absolutely right, the timing is the issue here.

Chris, I have a question. Yes. Unfortunately, I've spent a lot of time learning this stuff. And I know Commissioner Gordon knows this, since he sits on the Planning Commission. We don't necessarily have to change any zoning, C1, C2, C3. I think it was not done right. But what is C1, C2, and 3? It was never defined for years after the plan was adopted. We assume we went from two designations of business, neighborhood, retail, and business general. We had two designations. And they said, we need to spread it out more. Let's have three. So you would figure that the lowest one would go in the lowest, but it didn't. It was all what went into the definitions years later. They were not adopted at the same time, which is not the way you do plans. I pointed that out. I probably had my testimony five years ago when this was being done. This is not the way you do a plan, and hopefully you know that. It wasn't you there. Our planning director just did whatever she wanted to do and did not put, when they adopted the plan, there were no definitions written for years later. It came in different dribs and drabs. Actually, Commissioner, if I may. Let me finish. So the definitions are the key. It's not the C1. It's what went in C1. What do we allow? What do we allow in C2? The devil's in the definitions. You can change the definitions. We changed them for billboards. We changed them during time. We changed them for lots of things. The definitions could easily be changed in C1, C2, and C3. to make it fixed. It's not hard. We've got to go through the processes. So there is, again, in the definitions, what is C1? What is C2? And if you look at the uses, they're dramatically different. C2 and 3 are almost the same. There's very little differences. There's not the three different tiers that you would have thought it would have expanded. It actually did the opposite. And you say the commissioners were involved back then. They weren't involved. They weren't in these meetings. It was staff driven. And if you would look at who is attending the meetings, they were not public in the meetings on many of these things. I think they're not notified about it. The bulk requirements are definitions. Some of this stuff is changing the definition of what it means. Taking the word mini out or putting the word mini back, that's a definition. zoning change so it is very different because we do it all the time make changes to the definitions that's what we're asking to do is to fix the definition changes and I don't I don't I would hope that the Board of Commissioners before wouldn't have anticipated what this did I don't think it was thoughtfully done and they were not at the table they just vote for the definitions as they're presented to them like we do you just assume they've been vetted and sometimes so understand it's not a zoning we're not gonna we don't necessary I think it was done incorrectly but if they had defined it right Maybe it would have been OK. But the definitions are what we can change, and we can change without going through a whole comprehensive rezoning.

Yes. So you've asked that question before, and I put together a memo that laid out the time frame. So the zoning code changes that began at the end of 2017 While the freedom master plan was in process and through the through 2018 both the code changes were being discussed with both the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners at the same time that the freedom plan was being completed the The freedom plan was adopted in October of 2018 and then the zoning code changes for commercial industrial continued then through 2019 to be adopted in 2019 and So they were done in parallel, but the plan ended in 2018 and then the code continued in 2019. You are correct, absolutely, about a text amendment regarding uses and so on. That does not have to be done comprehensively. But the code was established through a lot of discussion from 2017 to the end of 2019, so over a two-year period, with a lot of discussion with work groups, county commissioners, planning and zoning commission, and so on. We can certainly, at your direction, make text amendments that would make those changes. But there is a process that needs to be gone through because any change that we make to the code affects the entire county. We would need to evaluate any text amendment and what are the implications, what are the legal implications and so on. That is a couple month process of working through

the legalities of those code amendments working with the planning uh Commission to then come back with a recommendation to the best best ability that we can we can meet what you're trying to achieve so if and the reason that we moved with the Carter study is because one of my colleagues said that they didn't want to change it in the rest of the county they wanted the large facilities they wanted the bulk they wanted people like that and that's why we went with the quarter study instead but temporarily we could go back too many like it was I don't think anybody's anticipated with this since we've never had it if we if we changed it back to many temporarily for the whole county until we figure it out and then if people really want it in the rest of the county they want the large ones then then the comprehensive overlay district would would then make sure it just stayed a certain thing in the district where we are on our main street and then that could be reversed back. It's never been anticipated before. Do you know what I'm saying? If that's the temporary fix that we need to fix this, it would be quicker, it would affect the whole county, and then maybe the whole county would pay attention and say, maybe they want it. Maybe there's an appropriate place for it. I think there are appropriate places for it. I've tried to find that place. We don't allow it in industrial. Almost every other county, that's where they put them in industrial. We don't allow it in industrial. We have bigger setbacks on industrial within industrial than we do residential next to commercial. Things don't make sense. So if we could find a more simple path, all these paths take time and steps. We had anticipated that we were going to try to do it in one certain way. Obviously, this has presented a more need for urgency, if that's what we want to call it. So I'm not sure what's doable, what's workable. And you mentioned about moving it to the Planning Commission. So right now, based on the law, you have to follow the law that is in place today. So based on what's in place today, if right now it got moved to the Planning Commission, what would the recommendation of the planning department be?

We would know.

So we do know.

On this particular thing? No, because you said the next. Just making sure. Yes.

On this particular site plan that's been proposed, we got the law in place, if we changed it. And it would move to the planning commission. Because what I've found on a lot of these properties that were problematic is the recommendation did come from the planning department. It wasn't your planning department. It was the past person that was there. And the recommendation was, yes, let's do this. Intersection is failing, but let's do it. So the Planning Commission would see a recommendation figuring that staff had figured that out, I assume. But the recommendation always had come yes, for the ones that even in controversy of these other ones. So on this one, because you interpret the law that way, would the recommendation be to move it forward?

So we typically do not make recommendations on approval or denial of a project. What we do is we indicate whether the project has met all of the requirements for the project. What we do make a recommendation for is if there are conditions related to the project, such as recording all of the easements before uh before issuing grading permit there there's a list typical list of of eight or nine and i can certainly get you that list of of conditions and so we would we recommend that if there is approval that the planning commission impose those conditions on their approval But as far as an overall up and down approval of the project, we typically do not do that. That is up to the planning commissions to decide.

I'll have to show you what I'm talking about because it was a recommendation for approval for another one that's in controversy from the past director. And it said right at the top, recommend it for approval. Happy to look at it. Yes.

All right, is there any other discussion from my?

I have just one quick question, and it'll be very brief. Mr. Hine, when you mentioned us looking back at the zoning in place in that quarter that's been changed over the last few years, hypothetically, if there were properties that for whatever reason the consultant deemed that they could be rezoned back to their previous designation, Would that happen without any involvement or approval of the property owners? Or would the property owners have the right to appeal that to keep the property at the current destination?

Absolutely. The property owners would absolutely be involved in any of that. Yes.

And let me ask you on this particular one for the record. When the property owners bought the three properties and consolidated them together, what was the zoning on the property? What was the land use? What was the zoning on the property?

I don't recall.

It was BNR. It started as residential. Well, they got conditional uses because they started using them. So the conditional use, they were never rezoned. They were conditional used into BNR because they used it as a plumbing company. I don't remember if all three were conditional use, but they became that from the residential because they opened something in there. And that's what the conditional use is. And then they come and say, well, now that we're using it as this, now it's commercial. But it really was a conditional use for that plumbing company that I think someone lived upstairs and the plumbing office was downstairs and other uses. It was, I believe, conditional use from residential, and the use was then business local, when they purchased the land. So they knew that, as Commissioner Rothschild used to say, it's when you buy the property, what the value is of the property, if it was done properly, and the value of the property when they bought it was BNR. It was not commercial to undefined. And I think

yeah so just to clarify um zoning is not conditional uses um as defined by the board of county commissioners and on an individual basis are defined whether they're by right or conditional and so i'm not familiar with back when it was bnr what was conditional versus principal permitted when the when the commercial industrial zoning codes were being reviewed and discussed with the board of county commissioners Staff actually recommended that self-storage be a conditional use, and as did the Planning Commission. However, the Board of County Commissioners decided to make it a principal permitted use.

And the other thing I just want to put on the table, when the Board of Zoning Appeals and these conditional uses, I think a lot of us have had concerns about what their decisions are based on. And I'm not sure that it's like that all these different places, but whether this will be worse off somewhere else than here. And some of the conditional uses that have been approved they don't even get presented with the information that, yes, this property is at a failing intersection. They're never even given that information. So is it worse off here than it would be over here where it's not a failing intersection? They just approve it anyway. And I'm not sure because of the way that they're looking at it. It's problematic to me what they've been told. And again, they're just lay people as well, of what they base their conditional use on. And they're not given the information. Because I'm like, why would you approve something that, yes, this is failing here. It's not failing over here. That's not something that they consider. There's a problem with how we're doing these conditional uses that we need to. sort of figure out while we're doing all these other things because if they are conditional use it's the the guidelines are not the same as if it would go through the regular channels of a failing intersection having to remediate it there's no there's no connection between the two so that that's not my experience my experience is that that information is conveyed to the board of senate as part of their decision okay well just going by what they're telling me but that's okay yeah

So again, I think where we are, and I certainly don't take it away from Commissioner Krebs, because I know she is firmly committed to the position that she is.

I'm missing my whole service. They're upsetting to me. I have to miss this.

Thank you, Mr. Kyler, for making me do this.

You do, guys, what you're going to do. I'm missing it right now.

Thank you for giving us your time. I think everybody can probably tell by the breadth and the length of this discussion, as well as the fact that it's been ongoing now for months, that this is not an easy thing for any of us to approach. All right.

See you later.

So again, the options we have are pretty limited. None of them are a completely positive or problem-less course that we can take. And Chris, maybe you can walk me through just a couple more questions. Because again, I'm trying to make sure I have as broad an understanding of this as I can. so if we choose to create a process for exemptions take it to public hearing you're looking at least what a couple of weeks until the public hearing would occur at least a couple weeks right yes typically the process is about three weeks from when the board requests the public hearing to actually being able to have the public hearing due to the public notification process okay and

after if we had a public hearing once we got beyond the public hearing there would still be at least a couple more weeks before it came back to us for an actual vote on the topic that is being discussed at the public hearing i will defer to to uh the county attorney but my understanding is that um it's uh it's up to the board as to whether you make a decision the day of the the public hearing or to extend it right okay

And the consultant's report we're expecting in a couple of weeks in probably June sometime, I would guess, right? Mm-hmm. So again, I, I, I certainly, uh, take nothing away from commissioner Krebs because I know that, that, you know, her heart is with the citizens that she lives among down there. And I don't take anything away from our citizens because my goodness, if I lived in that neighborhood, I'm sure my opinion would be the exact same. I wouldn't probably be a little more, more skeptical than, than they are. Maybe. I don't know. Um, but the position we find ourselves in again is, you know, whatever course we pursue is, is not going to make everybody happy. and and so i think that you know for us the best we can do is to try to pursue the best possible option that we might you know if we if we and i'm going to walk us through i'm going to try to walk these options through as best i can um uh you know not least of which because i don't want to put any of my colleagues on the spot and i certainly want to make sure that we understand these potential options as clearly as we can right so the first potential option is to do nothing right and that extends then obviously that leaves the deferral in place as it is until october 9th Now, if we do that, even if we leave the deferral in place, we're still going to have to make some kind of decision about the zoning and the mini storage and all of these associated questions. And even if we did leave the deferrals in place as they are, again, with everything that is pretending the future course of action here, we cannot – I don't think we have the time to wait another eight months. I think this is something that we're going to have to determine sooner rather than later. If we stay ourselves until October 9th, we still come up with that same question, a couple of the same questions. Do we exempt this particular project based on being so far along in the process, the changes that the developer has made to what's going in there, or do we choose not to? If we choose not to do that, if we choose not to exempt, I don't doubt for a second that we're going to open ourselves to a lawsuit. and we're gonna be in court over it. And it is gonna be what it's gonna be. Second option that we have is to consider the exemption, move to a public hearing, go through that entire process. Now, as that's happening, and even if we didn't move ahead to a public hearing, right, considering the exemption, we still have the consultant that is going to come back to us with a report at some point by June, sometime in June. So we go through the public hearing process, and maybe we decide not to do an exemption. If we decide not to do an exemption after we go through a public hearing process, there's a lawsuit. If we decide that we are going to do an exemption, we're going to disappoint a lot of citizens who live in that area. Now, if we decide the course of the consultants, right, even if we leave the deferral in place and we decide through our dealings with the consultant and the report that comes back to us that we're not going to make any changes to the zoning, the storage facility is going to go in and they're going to be disappointed citizens. if we do decide to make changes based on what report we receive from the consultants then on the one hand we're certainly going to open ourselves to a lawsuit but then on the other hand as commissioner gordon had pointed out any zoning changes we make are going to be appealed in court so i think that that those really are the the options that we have in front of us you know i When Commissioner Guerin mentioned earlier and Commissioner Gordon mentioned as well, it is not an easy, straightforward thing for us to determine. Not least of which because we know that there is such a passionate interest from the community in this particular area. But because, as Commissioner Kyler has pointed out numerous times, we represent certain areas, but we serve the entire county. And the decisions that we make will ultimately affect the entire county. The zoning may change for that particular area, but whatever ramifications occur because of that will affect the entire county, whether it's a lawsuit or changes in zoning in the grand scheme of things. There are going to be ramifications for this. And those are... the those are the options that we have to to contend with you know i don't want to have to break anybody's heart about what a facility goes in but i don't want to put i have concerns about putting the entire county on the line for a lawsuit or an appeal through court I say all these things not because at this particular moment I'm going to say let's do X or Y, but because I'm really trying to set the table here for the position in which we find ourselves. know that that again if i lived in that community the answer would be straightforward i get that right i don't take anything away whatsoever from from from you respect and appreciate your passion and again if i lived there i would be out there with you right i would be out in the audience with you you know so but we as a commissioner now again commissioners find ourselves in a position That is the creation of previous boards of commissioners and back in the fall and December when Commissioner Krebs came on board and she said, look, I think there are some issues here. You know, maybe there are some inconsistencies. Maybe we can strengthen the code. You know, we said, OK, let's look at this right and we are working through that process with the consultants. And, you know, as these reports come back to us, again, just because the consultant comes back to us with a report doesn't mean that changes will necessarily be made or won't necessarily be made. And so, again, it really is a complicated set of circumstances from the position in which we find ourselves. You know, I don't want to have to be in the position of breaking anybody's heart, and I wish that there was some kind of compromise position here where, you know, Again, maybe the developer says, okay, well, he has made changes, right? The developer has made changes to what he was originally proposing before the deferral process began. The developer came along and said, okay, well, if you want to go back to mini storage, I could change the plans to make it a mini storage. And then we could say as commissioners, okay, we'll put you to the head of the line with the priority review process. We'll waive some things. We'll move you through the process faster. But we don't have that kind of perspective with us today because we don't know what the developer would or would not decide. So I always try, and we always try to find a compromise. We try to find the best possible path forward with the circumstances. And having heard from our citizens and looking at what we have in front of us legally, legally, I cannot see a simple path for any of this. And again, I say that because I know this weighs on all of you as well. This is not a simple thing. I have been wrestling with this for, I know we all have been wrestling with this for quite a while. course the other option we have today is to not move ahead with it i know not least of which because commissioner krebs is not here not make a choice today the deferral remains in place we could bring up the potential for exemption further down the road maybe we we consider waiting a little bit on this until we hear back from the consultant and see what the report from the consultant has to say maybe that changes our perspective in one way or the other i don't know um But if anybody has any thoughts or suggestions or, you know, I really am trying to, again, it really is, what is the best set of circumstances that we can, it's a difficult set of circumstances, what is the best possible path that we can pursue to try to And even then, I'm not sure that we can take everybody into account. That's the that's a difficult part of this. You know, I, I take nothing away from any of my colleagues here. Because again, I know that this does will ultimately affect the entire county one way or the other. And so I'm certainly willing to hear any thoughts or considerations from my colleagues about where we are or if there's a security. I mean, again, maybe the path forward is to keep the deferral as is and to see what the consultant has to say in a couple of weeks. I'm just throwing out some ideas here. that would give us some time to to further consider where we are with the issue all the different components that we have to consider in lieu of that issue we would have more evidence to proceed on based on what the consultant gets back to us and i feel bad because you know that delays the developer but it delays the community from a decision being reached about whether or not we're going to proceed with this Even if it does bring us back more information, at that point, we may choose not to act on it or we may choose to act on it. And then even from there, there's a variety of paths that we pursue, and none of them are wholly satisfactory.

Do you think in three weeks we'll have heard from the consultant?

Yes.

the report is as i said about 95 percent complete um whatever date the board would like us to come in i will make sure that we are here because it if we take it to a public hearing and we have more facts by then we can always say yes or no then um what i guess my dilemma previous commissioners us on bulk requirements um everything we did and even compromising to the community this guy's done and if we don't make a decision today he won't be able to start it this year um if we if we put it to the public hearing and we have more information um maybe we can make it the real decision will be in three weeks or four weeks, depending on how we handle the public hearing. But yeah, I it it's, it's tough, because like, like I say, I look at and yes, I was in site work, and I was in development. But so maybe that makes me biased. But when somebody follows every rule you're given, and then you say never mind uh and and i i agree with you but i don't make decisions based on fear but we're going to be sued but but that's not you know i've been to court and uh you know that's that's not a fear so yeah it's it's you're right it's it's uh we we can't please everybody um and uh

it's it's it's hard so I mean I so let me throw out the idea then I mean what if we so if we don't make a decision today the storage facility could not go in until next year is that accurate couldn't begin until next year

so if nothing changes right and they are held up until the deferral ends so that would be mid-october we would then schedule them we could put them on the october planning and zoning commission meeting for approval and then you're looking at november and december probably for for all the legal documents so yes it would be the earliest they would potentially be under construction is next year

Now, out of curiosity, if this, and I'm just speaking in hypotheticals, I'm not suggesting I'm going to support this idea, but if we were to move it out several weeks and had additional information, if it went that way. I'm not suggesting it will. If it went that way, though, they would potentially be able to be in front of planning and zoning much sooner, correct?

Yes. So I know it's not good to do mental math in an open session. I believe that if a decision were made to go to a public hearing on this topic, that the earliest would be the June 11th open session. We could have the consultant here on the previous open session, which would be June 4th. June 11th, if a decision were made, and if it were to exempt them, if that were the decision, we could put them on the July Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

And I'll mention this since I know Commissioner Vigliotti very thoughtfully went through a wide variety of possibilities and scenarios. Regardless of people's opinions and passions, I'm not really sure I'm comfortable taking a vote on this level of magnitude without all five of us. That's just my feelings. We can all have different opinions. We can have heated and passionate conversation and even disagreements. But I think, you know, I would hope that we would all give each other that same professional courtesy. So I'm kind of and I hate bringing this up today because I know everybody was here having an expectation of some decision. But I'm personally a little reserved to make a decision without our fifth commissioner here because I feel that we all owe that level of courtesy and respect to each other personally and also the position.

so walk me through this commissioner gordon because i i don't disagree with having us here especially because i know for her it's it's you know certainly a matter of import importance um i mean it is for all of us but for her in particular because that is her her district and i do want to give her that that courtesy as well so if we so chris walk me through this again so we would if we delayed the decision about whether or not to exempt by a couple of weeks pending the consultant coming back to us. That would be first two weeks of June. So what, two, three weeks from now, give or take.

was saying yeah yeah we could definitely have the consultant here june 4th for open session yes and then uh and if the if the board were to make the decision that you wanted to have the public hearing to further this discussion and you made that decision today i believe the earliest that that public hearing could be would be june 11th so we could have the consultant here on the 4th to provide additional information than the public hearing on the 11th and And then you could make a decision and if that decision were to to do some sort of exemption that would free up this project That's in time for us to put them on the agenda for the July planning its own a commission meeting So that's that's one potential path forward if that's the direction you wanted to go hypothetically like and I'm not suggesting I'm supporting any of this I'm just asking questions for clarity if we were to do that on the 11th

Would that then Mr. Burke require a public hearing or would that be exempt?

Yes.

Okay, so we would then have they would still they could still potentially progress and planning and zoning at the same time we're going to a public hearing or we would have to leave them off off of the July meeting until after the public hearing decision.

deferrals as final approval and I guess Yeah, any commission couldn't go ahead Chris.

Yeah, so just so I understand your question if your question is is that if you delayed your decision on having the public hearing until the 11th, so on the 11th you you Decide we're gonna take this to public hearing that would the public hearing would be three weeks after the 11th Which would push us past the time that we could put them on the July Planning and Zoning Commission So we would then be looking at August

OK. Did I understand your question correctly? Yes. I appreciate that. I just was asking for additional information.

Can you put them on August? That'll be the first week of August that the public hearing would be.

It would be close. Yeah. Mentally, I'm not thinking out that far yet, so I'd have to look at all the dates. But it would be close.

I'm going to request that we take a five-minute recess. Do we have a motion for that? So moved. Do we have a second?

Let's wait and get this done and then take the five minutes. I thought you wanted to. I'm sorry. That's what I want to do afterwards. We'll be good. Just for a brief minute. Okay.

All right, gentlemen, so I guess, you know, what path do we pursue here? Do we put this out a couple of weeks until after we hear back from the consultants?

So that would be July 4th would be the consultants, so then we would not pick it up. I'm sorry, June, sorry. June 4th would be the consultants, so June 11th would be the actual conversation then to bring it back up.

Yes.

So then, just to make sure I have this correct, and it pains me to even consider this option, but I think we need to potentially do this for a variety of reasons. We could table it then until the 11th is what I, is that correct, Mr. Burke?

I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

Would we be able to table this conversation until the meeting of the 11th if we were to have the consultant in on the 4th?

Yeah. You could decide not to. You could take it off the agenda.

And we don't need to table it because we haven't made a motion. Right. Just table motions. And actually put it on.

If the consultant were to come in on June 4th and present their information, I don't see why you couldn't have this discussion then that same day. The purpose of the consultant coming in is to give kind of that higher level concepts of what kind of potential code changes and the desires of the board related to self-storage. and what we've always anticipated is that if there was a desire of the board to have us make those text amendments that you would make that motion to direct staff to then start working with Planning Commission on the details so that could all happen on the June on June 4th if you then wanted to have additional discussion about this particular site similar to what we've had today I don't see why you couldn't have that on the fourth as well okay

Yeah, because that's what you did with the retirement, with the age-restricted, right? I just was trying to figure out timeline-wise where we get places. Yeah, exactly. The board gave direction to start working with the planning commission on the recommended changes.

I'm going to make a recommendation that we move this and pick up the conversation on the 4th the same day as the consultant. I sincerely apologize to those of you that came in today. I understand that this has been a long process, to say the least. I also don't want to leave one of our colleagues out, given one just personal and professional courtesy, but also the fact that it is indeed her district. So that's my motion.

And I would only ask that, OK, he made a motion.

All right. So this is a motion to- To move it to the fourth. Move this to the fourth. Both the consultant and- The consultant and the discussion, yes. All right, so we have a motion, do we have a second? I'll second it to move it to the fourth. If this motion passes, that we move to the fourth, I'm gonna request that we try to keep our agenda for that day as light as possible. Because I would imagine this is going to entail another long and involved discussion that day as well. Okay, so we have a motion, we have a second. Is there any discussion on the motion?

I would only ask... Yeah, that may not be possible.

Because our fiscal year ends. Good point, Chris, just reminded me. Our fiscal year ends and we need to have all of our procurements and all the business done basically on June 4th is what the comptroller's office, they're a bunch of meanies over there. um and uh except for pretty much emergency procurements that would need to be done between then so that they can wrap up the year-end stuff so we may have several it may be i i may not be able to guarantee a light agenda is where i'm going but we could still do it okay that's okay right i'll i can i'm more than okay

you were giving me a fight i was just worried you weren't going to say we could do it on the floor but you were gonna i wasn't sure where you were going with it it all made sense in the end and my only request would that be would when this comes back before us if the staff could uh make an effort to provide the site plan and elevations digitally for the public to see uh as well so sure if that's

Does that make sense? Do you want to add that to the commission?

No, I don't think so.

Just making sure. All right. So we have a motion. We have a second. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye.

All those opposed?

All right. Motion carries unanimously. A motion for a five-minute recess. We have a motion and a second for a five-minute recess. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? All right. We are in recess for five minutes. all right welcome back to the thursday may 21st 2026 open session for the board of carroll county commissioners i now need a motion to recess and go into effect as the board of health so moved we have a motion we have a second all right do we have any discussion all those in favor aye we're now sitting as the board of health and we'll invite all of our friends from the health department down to uh to talk to us i really feel like we should get you hats

Or lunch. Yeah.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Still morning. Got 17 minutes, 16 minutes?

Good to see you.

We won't need that much time now, I'm just kidding.

Well, thank you first for inviting us to come and speak with you as the Board of Health. We wanted to share with you a proposal that we are putting through to the state, which I think you will all appreciate, I hope. But we also needed your buy-in on this, and we have an ask towards the end. It's not a big ask, but it's an important ask. So the, you can go to the next slide. I'm trying.

Right down there at the bottom.

Start the slideshow. Trying to figure it out. There's several options, but they don't, let's see. It's not letting me click that.

I usually go down to the bottom right. The little podium down there.

Hey, good stuff. Okay, there we go. Thank you. Who's doing that? Yes, the man behind the curtain is running the slides. Okay.

All right, so... There was a $50 billion federal initiative for 2026 to 2030 under the one big beautiful bill, Act of 2025. It was to modernize healthcare, rural healthcare in particular, improve access and support to workforce development in rural communities. There was $10 billion set aside each year for five years to states to mitigate the estimated $137 billion in federal Medicaid cuts that were going to be towards rural areas over 10 years. So they sort of shifted it over to make sure that rural communities got support to bring more rural programs. So they created the Rural Health Transformation Program. The state applied for money under this grant, and they were awarded $168 million this year to strengthen and modernize the rural health care system. There's 18 counties in the state that are designated as rural counties, and Carroll County is, of course, one of those. And each year, this is a five year grant, but each year there's a new budget, there's a new request for funding. The focus of this that they proposed to the state, to the feds, was essentially around three pillars. Transforming the rural health workforce, creating a sustainable and improving access to care, comprehensive care, somatic or physical health, oral health, nutritional health, and to focus a lot of energy on chronic diseases and reducing the burden of chronic disease, as well as looking at innovative models, both technology-based and also how you create a sustainable model for the healthcare delivery system. So after five years, you still have something that continues to move forward. And then the third was around improving rural communities to have better access to healthier foods and eat healthier. So this came at us. Well, we knew this was coming. We didn't know when and how much and where and all that stuff. So it came out pretty fast and furious. We had a whole month to put together a very comprehensive grant worth a lot of money with multiple partners. to support the community. And we are moving ahead. We are on track to get it in by May 26, which is a few days from now. So while the funding is expected for five years, it's not guaranteed. So what we essentially did was, keep going, this is the map of where the rural areas are, but the whole county is covered, not just those rural areas. Once you're designated as a rural county, it's the whole county that you can work towards trying to bring services to. So we all got together with our partners, because you can have two different models, a solo application, or a transformational collaborative. And they're looking much more favorably on the transformational collaborative model. So we reached out to our friends and partners across the county, and we brought together eight key partners, including us, Carroll Hospital, Access Carroll, both county government, fire EMS and citizen services through the Bureau of Aging and Disabilities, Department of Social Services, Carroll County Youth Services Bureau and the Westminster Rescue Mission as principal key partners in trying to create a comprehensive strategy. And we have been working with them all together to put together this really, I think is pretty amazing transformational project that will create a network across the, essentially by the end of five years, we'll have a network of services across the county to help improve access to care, reduce chronic disease. This is also tied, will be tied to the what's called the AHEAD model, which is the total cost of care model in Maryland. That's the newest iteration of that. And there are metrics that we are going to be held to, that the hospital is being held to, that we're being held to, that primary care is being held to. And they're the same metrics. So we have to, it's encouraging us to work together to solve this. i think carroll county is unique in how people work together here because i've talked to lots of other health departments and and it's not the same and so everybody came together to say all right what part can i own what part can i own how do we put this together what is the best strategy here we really and we did this all in really three weeks which is pretty that's impressive yeah pretty impressive it was pretty furious and fast And I want to thank them all publicly here because they're here supporting us as well in this proposal. But also, it's just been a tremendous team effort. So under this proposal, we have three components, if you will. The first is called a tri-sector integrated health hub. The reason, it's not necessarily a brand new concept, but what it's highlighting is bringing the social service system, the healthcare system, and the public health system together into one location to provide access to services, both health services and also social services and public health services in one location. So we're removing and reducing barriers to care. We're increasing access to care. And everybody's bringing a little bit to the table. Some of it is in kind. Some of it is put into the grant. And the first, because we have to move fairly quickly, the first health hub is going to be Access Carol. And we're going to bring in more resources to Access Carol to increase primary care, oral health, behavioral health, chronic disease management, telehealth, to specialty care. So it's really a comprehensive strategy to get more services and do it quickly and test the model out. We have a lot of measurable things we also are going to be doing. And it's really this co-locating and then creating a bidirectional flow of referrals from the hospital to Access Carol, Access Carol Hospital, to the public health system, to the social service system. So really working together and trying to create a seamless transfer of information. And also make sure that patients are surrounded by almost like a blanket of care. So one of the things we have been looking at is space issues inside of the distillery building. And the first ask, the only ask we have of you besides your support is we may need to access and use some of the space inside the building for additional people. It's unlikely we're going to need a lot of space, but we might need a few rooms on the second floor. And then the idea is to clear up some of the rooms on the second floor and in the third floor and move some of that storage stuff up to the fourth floor. So because that's area that is not going to be used for the services we're providing. So we would need a little bit extra space on the second floor, and we're going to also work in Access Carroll and build more capacity there on the third floor as well. So that's the big ask, is your approval to be able to use some of that additional space inside of the second floor. We probably won't need a lot of it because most of the people are clinical people, so they're going to be in the clinic itself, in Access Carol itself. But we will have some social service. We're bringing a Medicaid assistance application, medical assistant to do the application process for Medicaid. and other insurances. So we're going to have somebody there. There'll be someone from the Department of Social Services, Citizen Services on site so that we can make sure that people have what they need and we can address most of their needs at the time of the visit. So that's the first ask. Let me give you the whole presentation, and I'll answer all your questions. So that's the first tri-sector integrated health hub. In subsequent years, we're actually going to try to put a second and possibly a third one around the county. Because we're moving fast in the first year, we want to get the model right. We're using a an existing platform but then the second and or third year of this we're going to want to place somewhere some some another type of the model in the western side of the county probably somewhere near tonytown so that there's additional resources there and we have the same sort of tri-sector integrated health hub so people can go and making it easier access to the services that they need in various different ways. So that's the next iteration in the future years, but we can't move fast enough with space and location and if we need to build out, all that stuff. So we have to spend some time thinking about it and how we put that in place. And then the third one, is yet to be determined. We were thinking of possibly about the Manchester-Hamstead area, but that remains to be determined. We're going to have to do a full assessment in the first year of what that's going to look like. So that's one component. So you can see how big this is. The second component is really a very exciting link to these services, which is a, we're calling it the Wayfinder program, which is a paramedicine care coordination program that is going to be led by Fire EMS. And we're going to, we're putting money in the grant to hire resources for the Fire EMS to be a community paramedic, if you will, and do more and focus on the high utilizers of of EMS services and ED use. So we're going to target those folks first to see if we can go upstream and see what they need, see if we can intervene early with lower cost services to make sure that we plug them in and get them attached to services they might need and or different resources they might need that they can do more closer to home. We're also going to be assessing, this is sort of a prelude to potentially a hospital at home program that will be due in partnership with the hospital as well. So it's building out infrastructure to try to remove again those barriers to care, try to reduce the cost of care overall, and make sure people have what they need to live healthy lives. So that's going to be a multidisciplinary team. It'll be Fire EMS taking the lead. It'll be the hospital, some people from the hospital, some people from the health department all working together, meeting on a regular basis to identify the patients who are most at risk and then try to intervene One of the things they're going to be working on is chronic disease and also fall risk for our elderly population as well, because they get a lot of calls for fall risk, people that have fallen. So we're going to try to look for ways to be able to reduce that risk for people. And then the third component of this, and it's really directly in line with the grant itself, is... There's a technology side of this and we're integrating that into what we do with virtual classes, with telehealth, and looking at ways to integrate technology into chronic disease management. But the third big component is around behavioral health services and linkages. So I already mentioned that we're putting some behavioral health services inside of Access Carol. That'll be in partnership with the Westminster Rescue Mission, as well as CCYSB. And then we are also going to look at, in the first year, how we embed primary care, how we embed behavioral health providers into primary care. So on site, there's a warm handoff if there's a behavioral mental health need. Inside of the clinic, you see somebody. And I've used this model before, and it's very effective in getting people linked to behavioral and mental health services quickly. We're also going to do some broader things which are around prevention and reduction of substance use in pregnancy and also identifying and helping the children that are at risk of that to get developmental and behavioral health assessments early between the ages of zero and eight. We're going to do more broader outreach around 988 and the Lock and Talk program, which have been very successful and very well received. And then the last one that I'm going to mention, I think I've got them all except for the last one, which is very exciting, is we're going to be creating a farm family wellness program to send and link up with the agricultural community to try to address and work with them around behavioral health needs, around isolation, around loneliness, around suicide risk. And we're going to partner with the third pillar of this, which has already been submitted, around connecting food farmers with those who need the food and trying to increase capacity in the community to feed people. But we're also going to connect those dots. So all these programs are going to be connected The pillar one, which is the workforce one, it hasn't been out yet. And once we do that, we'll look at workforce opportunities as well. So I think I covered all of them. I'll stop there just to let you know that the ask from the state is going to be somewhere between 3 and 1 half and 5 million. dollars for this program for the first year. We're great.

And that's coming from the state or what we would have to know.

OK, I want to make sure. OK, there's no there's no monetary ask from the from the county. It's all state money. And it's state money through federal money. It's really federal money that's passed through the state. And we're going to be asking. There's $73 million total that was identified for this particular pillar, Pillar 2, for the 18 counties. So that's about $4.5 million per county-ish. And we are taking a strategy that's a comprehensive strategy for the county rather than one group doing it or another group doing it. We said, let's get together. Let's figure out what works for the community. And then how do we bring those services there? And then what's next after we do this successfully? So I'll stop there and see if you have any questions, anything you want to add.

No. Just want to introduce myself. I'm Melissa Zahn. I'm the executive director and CEO of Access Carol.

I should have done that at the beginning, and my apologies. Nice to meet you. It's all right. Nice to meet you. Welcome. You, of course, know Maggie. Yes. I see you again.

Everyone knows Maggie.

I've got a couple questions to start off. So you're saying it's $3.5 to $5 million from the state that they would be using to fund this? Is there a period of time that they would guarantee this? Is this to be a three-year project, a five-year project? Will it be ongoing potentially after that?

It's a great question. I know it sounds like a big project, but we're starting off relatively small. We don't know if there's funding in year two to five, although there's funding that has been designated. But each year you have to reapply, and each year the funding has to be approved by Congress and et cetera, et cetera. They can't guarantee us the money for the next five years. What we're trying to do with this project is create some sustainability to it so that a lot of the services we're providing are going to be billable. So we'll bill those services out where we can. And then we hope that because we have enough partners and everybody has a little piece of this, If there's only one year of funding, we're hoping that at least we can absorb a good percentage of the folks that we put in place, both because of the billing and also because the burden on each organization is going to be a lot less than if it were just one of us doing it.

And I mean, I love collaboration, so anytime we can get good people working together is great. Now, if hypothetically this funding were to go for 12 months and that's it, and there might be some billables, but that may not cover it, what's the expectation of how you're going to cover the other half or portion? Is that going to be something you're going to come to the county and request, or how would that work?

There's no plan to come to the county for that money at this time.

Okay, I was just curious because obviously the funding's got to come from someplace.

The hope is that because some of it's in kind, like we're taking someone's position and moving it over. Sure. We're not supplanting, because you're not allowed to do that, but we're actually designating their time for a new project. So some of that time is being given to the project by all the organizations. Some of it's the money that we're spending. And then what I'm hoping is that if we're going to bill for as much as we possibly can, and then because the funding for this is going to all the organizations, we're hoping that if it comes down to that, then those organizations can help support that person moving forward.

obviously today you're just presenting this for informational purposes you're not expecting any sort of decision on any any part of this um just the uh just the support on using some of the space in the distillery building okay well let me ask you a question have you all spoken to the city of westminster since the property is in the city even though it's owned by the county we wanted to speak with you first okay that's fair um i like the concept i appreciate partnership and collaboration when possible um It's not personal to you or anybody in this room, but I'm starting to feel like I'm having deja vu again, and some of my colleagues know what I'm speaking about. I'd like to have a little more information personally on this project. I'd like to know more about the square footage, the usage. I'd like to know if we do decide to give you this availability of space, is this a space that you're gonna then maintain, or is this a space that, in theory, you know two years out could this be moved someplace else in the area we've been down this path before when it came to this building and I didn't really like how it was handled this has nothing to do with you but we had some staff issues and some other things last time and I think Given that the five of us are the people that are the decision makers, I think we need to take some time and get some additional information. I'm not against it. I'm by no means negative towards it. I just would like to have some additional information before we agree to anything at this point.

I can try to give you the information now, or I can send you whatever you need. Most of the people that we're hiring will be actually inside of Access Carol itself, and there are spaces in there for that are being used currently for storage. So we move a lot of those a lot of those resources up into the fourth floor. We'll actually be opening up quite a lot of space there. So I don't anticipate we're going to need more than two or three rooms on the second floor. But and we were putting in the grants some money to do minor renovations, painting carpets, maybe some partitions. But other than that, we can't put a major renovation in there. It's not allowed.

I just, and again, it's not directed at any of you all. I just know that when the five of us are given decision making, I think we need to give a little extra time than just saying yes. Like I said, it's not against it. It's not saying I'm gonna not support this or suggest we don't. just think that you know in all transparency it's something we owe the taxpayers and we owe the community I think it's a great concept I think it's an interesting idea I support that I just would like to be able to digest this a little bit I don't know if my colleagues would as well I don't want to speak for them but you know at the very least take a couple days breathe through it mull it over and then reach back out to you all just from further information

One of my asks of you is the grant is due Tuesday. Okay. So we can stop it, but I don't think that's a good idea.

No, I'm not suggesting that. I just would like to have a little more time. Sure. So what can I get you to do? Well, I'd like to read through this a little and just kind of process it a bit. I mean, you know, it's sort of like and I'm not saying this to be flippant, but it's sort of like, you know, me trying to say, hey, let me give you a home right now. And it sounds good. Then I'm not saying this isn't a great idea, but I'd like to just have a little more time. You were not in the position you are here the other year when we had a situation that kind of caught the majority of us off guard. off guard a bit and I'm a little leery not against this but just you know we have to do our due diligence when would you need this decided by dependent upon what what we all discuss here today I mean would Monday be too late when is holiday oh that's a good point I appreciate that as soon as you can we can we can

We can load the grant and just wait to hit the button. But is it possible by tomorrow?

I would say maybe end of business. We could kind of have some discussions maybe. I don't want to speak for the rest of you.

Let me try to. So first of all, thanks, Doctor. You did mention, you did answer one of my questions. You can use some of this money for some light renovations and things like that. And I know that With Selene being here, you already are going to be aware of what the space allocation is within that building. So you've probably already got a good idea of that. So it sounds like you're just, you're literally going through the grant process right now and it's gotta be in, in a couple days. Okay. I mean, that's basically, that's my understanding. The grant.

That is true, yes. Okay.

The grant works and grant works hard.

It's due two o'clock on the 26th.

Okay. And grant works hard and it's tedious and we know how involved it is and it seems like it never ends until it's too late and you get it in. I will, this is intriguing. I probably have the same concerns that we always do about, you know, certain initiatives being funded. And then if the funding, you know, dries out, dries up, you know, you've got to just think ahead to what might happen. And of course, if there's, you know, opportunities to maybe save money along the way, which there seems like there could be some opportunity cost savings and things like that, and that this That's certainly intriguing, and that's beneficial. And then I find the Paris Medicine Program interesting. If anybody knows where to go in the county where the emergencies are, it's going to be the Department of Fire and MS. We've got really good data. They're going to know. They're going to know who the same people who are calling in all the time are. I mean, it happens. It's just, you know, we have a finite amount of resources. So that program I find particularly intriguing. And would it also extend to, I'm assuming, like assisted living homes and nursing homes and things of that nature? Because that seems to me where these centers of activity really are in terms of people who are, you know, always having to call 911.

I think that's a great question. I don't have an answer for you regarding the homes. I think we will look at the list of the high utilizers, and I'm sure some of those folks are in there as well. That's the list they're going to start with. It doesn't mean that they're going to end with. And to your question earlier, or your point earlier, which is a good one, this will save money. This will save a lot of money. Not in theory, it'll actually save a lot of money because we're moving the cost away from constantly calling 911 and also the ED. So the hospital is very supportive of this program. This is one of their programs that they've wanted for years to put in place because it will save, it'll reduce costs overall. And I... We're trying also to sort of link this to a new model that's coming through the state around shared savings. I don't know if you're familiar with shared savings models, but there's one called the HOPE model that they're pushing through, HSCRC now, which will allow us to potentially, it can either be a hospital system that takes the lead or kind of a region, but the idea is we work together to reduce costs around ED and inpatient use. this is a is sort of starting that process before they've even made the made a decision whether they're going to have that so we're going to be we're well ahead of the game regarding the ahead measures which are many of the counties are not even going to start with at all until the it's all approved and updated So we're well ahead of the game around looking at how we save money, both Fire EMS, ED, but also chronic disease management, keeping people healthy, reducing the burden of disease around diabetes, hypertension. That's also part of the proposal.

I just want to point to your question with long-term care and assisted living facilities so up until now we haven't had the opportunity to formally work with EMS and fire on on this thing but we actually have people assisted livings yes I think this would be appropriate for assisted livings long-term care facilities you know it's more of a capabilities of the staff and those kind of training things to make sure that they're not calling ems all the time and we actually employ part of our in-kind is we employ people who do that so being in close contact knowing who those high utilizers are and being able to point to those facilities that need us most i think would be is going to be an enhancement with this program so i just wanted to yeah no no thank you i think that's that would be an excellent

collaboration and one that probably wouldn't be that difficult to do because we've got we've got great data we've even got a data analyst sitting within fire and ems we've got great people in there who are paying attention all those things so thanks fire ems is very they're very excited about this

Maybe more importantly, how long have you been official?

Do you need to add staff or is everything pretty stable and have you fixed everything possible?

Yes, yes. April 15th was my official start date. I guess I jumped into the pool before looking into whether there was water in it. Join the club. Join the club, doctor. But, you know, it's been wonderful so far, and people have been very supportive. And the fact that we could get this grant together as a Carroll County team and really try to move it towards the finish line, I think speaks volumes to the trust that has already been there. And I'm following on the backs of folks that already did a lot of work to build trust with partners in the community. The fact that we can pull people together It was like the first week. And build out a plan that would serve the community I think has been tremendous. So yeah. And I have good people. We have good people in the health department. Really phenomenal people. So thank you for asking.

I'm very glad to have you on board.

Absolutely.

Been hearing a lot of good things.

I guess the idea then is to give this a little consideration and get back to Dr. Levy by tomorrow at the latest.

End of business? Is that fair?

That's two o'clock.

That's normal end of business because we don't work normal hours.

Has staff talked to staff at all about these rooms are good, these rooms are bad, or no discussion so far?

Well, Salim can speak to this.

You know, I love to give tours of our building.

As Celine told you no, and now you're trying to appeal.

I wouldn't have invited her.

Smart man. Thank you for that. Now I know why I'm here. And I've been involving conversations with facilities, building construction, looking at the old family shelter and potential storage up there, also looking at our floor on second floor. and some other potential options for space on that floor because we have a committee throughout the county which includes the commissioner's office with Deb Effingham, our deputy administrator, as well as building construction facilities team to really look at across the board in the county where there's space and where there's a space need. So we've been in dialogue. I've been in communication about this particular grant. some other space considerations on our floor but then how that would interface with the need that we may have here which is not a large need on the second floor but just some type of designation for expansion if we need some overflow and also looking at a potential storage area that we have that we've utilized on that floor that we could clear out to then utilize for potential maybe programming space so that's another consideration but that could maybe be phase two of this but just to make sure that there is some ability to to put this this designation in place to allow for that but yes and I can get you the floor plan to look at where the space is available that's open on our floor at citizen services and just some of the areas that could be under consideration for this okay could you also speaking of floor plans could you give us an overall floor plan of the entire building I'd like to see what what's allocated space wise for everything else I will get that for you from facilities and building construction. I don't have all of that at my fingertips, but I can get that, I'm sure.

What other information would you like from us?

think right now me personally i'm just trying to digest this a little bit it's a lot it is it's a lot for us i love the fact that i mean this sincerely i love the fact that it's collaborative because i i say this all the time it's what we do best in carroll county is work together yeah so i love that and i can't say enough good things about you i might be slightly biased because we did get involved in the process but it's great to have you here it really is i know i've heard a lot of things from a variety of different individuals in the community i just want to thank you for uh considering and taking the job.

Yeah, thank you for dealing with us.

Maybe a better way of putting it. I'll leave that to you.

All right, is there any other comments or questions for Dr. Levy and the health department? Anything else from you? No, I think we're good for the moment. Okay. All right.

I was going to say, I'll send you a more detailed project narrative so you can read that.

Thank you very much. Absolutely. So now we need a motion to adjourn as the Board of Health and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. So moved. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. We have a motion. We have a second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. We are adjourned as the Board of Health and reconvene as Board of County Commissioners. Thank you very much. Thank you all.

Thanks for coming by.

So I would like to ask of my colleagues, because our time is running very, very short here, I'd like to ask for consent from my colleagues to postpone the discussion about water resources element planning.

Push that off to a future meeting.

So moved. All right. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. Any further discussion? All right. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? All right. Water resource elements have been moved. And we'll see you in a little while anyways, I'm sure. He can't get rid of us. It's not like we don't have him doing enough. Right. Okay, so up next, Spending Authority for Fire Department Equipment Testing.

Good afternoon, gentlemen. Good afternoon. I was going to say good morning, but I've been here a while.

The Office of Procurement and Cooperation with the Department of Fire and EMS requests your approval to spend up to but not exceed $80,576.35 for fire department equipment testing to IIA fire department testing. This purchase will be made via a Frederick County, Virginia contract that was competitively bid. The amount is approved in the FY26 budget.

OK, so to ensure compliance with the National Fire Protection Association standards and maintain the safety and operational readiness of critical fire department equipment and resources, annual testing is required for fire hose pumps and ladders across the county's 14 fire companies. Carroll County currently has approximately 138,000 feet of fire hose that must be tested annually in accordance with what's known as NFPA 1962. 40 fire apparatus pumpers that require annual pump performance testing. under another NFPA standard and 135 ground ladders and then our six aerial ladder trucks with the truck mounted 100 foot ladders. All of these have to be tested and we currently use a company known as Industrial Inspection and Analysis, or 2A, and we've used them in past years very successfully, and it's a whole comprehensive process that we actually have begun and will be doing over the next two months.

Any discussion motions from the board? Move the board of commissioners approve the contract for fire department equipment testing at 2A fire department testing in the amount of $80,576.35. Second. We have a motion, we have a second.

Is there any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Up next, approval to purchase counseling services from Small Business Development Center.

Yep.

And if we need to, we can hop ahead.

Yeah. Want to do that? She's not.

Yeah, we can skip ahead one and come back to this. Yeah, let's do that. I know Denise is on the way up or whoever. We'll find out where she is. Sorry about that. Are we prepared to discuss a contract award for construction administrative services for the liberty art? Come on up, gentlemen. All right, so we're gonna skip ahead to item number seven, which is a contract award for the construction administrative services for the liberty water storage tank booster pump station project. That is a title. Certainly is. Good afternoon, gentlemen.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. The Office of Procurement and Cooperation with the Division of Utilities request your approval to award a contract for construction administrative services for the Liberty Water Storage Tank Booster Pump Station project. commissioner district 5 to Whitman rec work and associates LLP of Baltimore Maryland in the amount of seventy one thousand eight hundred and sixty two dollars proposal mount is within the adopted budget gentlemen

Whitman Record is the engineering firm of record for the Liberty Water Storage Tank booster pump station. Given that, and with a project of this size, engineering services are needed during construction for the review of shop drawings, the material submittals, requests for information, and other related construction administration tasks. Engineering services are also needed to develop the final punch list and to prepare record drawings for the project. Bids for the construction contract itself were received yesterday, and we are currently reviewing those submissions. I anticipate returning to the board sometime in late June, early July for consideration of that award of contract. The anticipated construction duration of this work is 150 working days following the issuance of notice to proceed, and the engineering services contract amount is a not to exceed value. Any questions for me?

Any questions of direction from the board with the Board of Commissioners award a contract for construction administrative services for the Liberty water storage tank booster pump station project to Whitman record and Associates LLP in the amount of seventy one thousand eight hundred and sixty two dollars We have a motion to we have a second second.

We have a motion. We have a second. Is there any further discussion?

So will staff be day-to-day? Inspectors or whatever or is these guys a hundred percent? I

So I will be coming before the board in a week or so for the actual inspection services. My staff will be out there on a virtual daily basis, but the official inspection will be handled by a third party. Okay. Thanks.

All right. Any further discussion? All right. We have a motion. We have a second. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Now we have approval to purchase counseling services from Small Business Development Center. Good afternoon, everybody.

Good afternoon. Thank you.

Thank you for your patience with us.

Yes, thank you. I apologize that we're a little late. But anyways, the Department of Economic Development.

Oh, I'm good to go? All right. Behind you.

The Office of Procurement and Cooperation with the Carroll County Department of Economic Development requests your approval to purchase counseling services from the Small Business Development Center in the total amount of $75,000. This amount covers the period of January 1, 2026 through December 31, 2026. This is a sole source purchase. The Maryland Small Business Development Center offers small business counseling services in every Maryland jurisdiction. Carroll County is part of the northern region. Maryland SBDC is part of the US Small Business Administration, and it established for this very purpose, to provide free counseling and training to entrepreneurs and expanding businesses. SBDC will provide Carroll County Office of Economic Development quarterly reports of outcomes, SBDC training and counseling service, or counseling outcomes. Funding has been approved in the FY26 budget.

Anything you want to add?

Denise Beaver, Director of Economic Development. I have Amy Wallace-Yingling here with me, who is the Northern Region Director, as well as the Assistant Director, Darren Payton, who offers the counseling services in our office and throughout the county. So again, this is a budgeted item, and we have been partners with the Small Business Development Center for really decades, for as long as probably my career here. I think it's a wonderful partnership and actually one that is replicated throughout the country and is very important to helping our businesses to establish and to grow. So we appreciate your support for that. And Amy and Darren are here if you have any questions on their work in the county. But it's been a great partnership and they've been very active with us.

Any questions or direction from the board? Move the Board of Commissioners approve the purchase for counseling services from the Small Business Development Center in the total 75,000.

Second.

We have a motion to be the second. Is there any discussion? No, but I will say that they do great work. I've heard that from a variety of individuals and businesses.

Very well said. Thank you very much. Any other discussion? Hearing none, we have a motion to be the second. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you all.

Thank you very much.

All right. So now we are going to move into priority, Carol. And I believe Commissioner Gordon has a proclamation for the Davis Library. Okay. Well, if anyone wants to come up front, by all means.

Thank you all for coming in today.

Thank you.

Afternoon, everybody. Good afternoon.

Good to see you.

Good to see you, too. Wasn't sure if you all wanted to start and then I'll read the proclamation or?

Sure, that'd be great. It'd be fantastic. Well, thank you very much. You know, we're celebrating here the Walter and Elizabeth Davis starting the first library as two churches merged in Carroll County and Westminster. The one church was left over, and the Davises purchased it and created the first Carroll County Library. And so we're celebrating that fact in conjunction with the Arts Council, the Historical Society, and the library celebrating the Davis Day. And so we appreciate that. Do you want to?

That was basically summed up perfectly. Well, we did want to give a plug for next Thursday, May 28 at the Art Center, an evening with Walter and Elizabeth Davis should be a fun, great family friendly event. Some of you know about our Shellman performance last year, which went off with a bang. So please attend and thank you very much.

Just one more thing to add. Another wonderful collaboration across the county between the Historical Society, Carroll Arts, and the Public Library. So thank you.

Thank you. Absolutely. So I have a proclamation. Davis Library's 75th anniversary. Whereas, Walter H. Davis was born in Middletown, Maryland in 1873 and at the age of 12 was compelled to leave school and enter the workforce, beginning a life defined by determination, enterprise, and service. And after early employment in dry goods retail in Frederick, Mr. Davis obtained an apprenticeship with Ramsburg Carriage Works, later moving to Westminster in 1889 to work as a journeyman trimmer for Hare Brother carriage makers. And through hard work and vision, Mr. Davis went on to purchase a grocery business on West Main Street in 1898. and in 1910 opened one of the nation's earliest automobile dealerships, initially selling Steven Dreyer and EMF Automotives, and later becoming a Buick dealer in the 1920s. Mr. Davis was deeply committed to the civic life of Westminster, serving on the Common Council for several years, briefly serving as mayor in 1938, participating in the Westminster Rotary, and serving for nearly a decade on the Board of Trustees of Western Maryland College, now McDaniel College. and his generosity to education and community development included the donation of property on Sullivan Road for housing for returning World War II veterans and their families, thereby enabling them to pursue education under the GI Bill and a historic gift of $256,000 to the Western Maryland College in 1950, the largest such gift the institution had received at that time. And in recognition for his outstanding civic leadership, Mr. Davis was honored as Citizen of the Year by the Westminster Chamber of Commerce in 1945. And on January 7th of 1949, Mr. Davis and his wife Elizabeth announced their intention to donate a building and endowment to establish a free public library for the people of Westminster in Carroll County. Purchasing and renovating the former Methodist Protestant Church on East Main Street, expressly for that purpose, and this generous act transformed the longstanding subscription-based Westminster Library Association into a truly free public library. Opening access to knowledge and learning. He's only about half done. Yes, I am. And learning for all.

He's got a good one.

I do. And residents, regardless of means. Mr. Davis further ensued the sustainability of the library through substantial financial contributions including funds for renovation and the gift of income producing property to support ongoing operations although mr davis passed away shortly before the library's dedication the davis library opened on may twenty fifth nineteen fifty one what would have been his seventy eighth birthday fulfilling his vision of a public institution devoted to education civic engagement and the advancement of knowledge And Mr. Davis envisioned a library that would provide books and other resources, guidance in their use, and lifelong learning opportunities that promote informed citizenship, creative growth, personal happiness, and social well-being. Carroll County Public Library proudly continues this vision today, preserving Mr. Davis's enduring legacy of generosity, access, and belief in the power of knowledge and the Carroll Arts Center, Carroll County Public Library, and the Historical Society of Carroll County are marking the 75th anniversary of the gift of the Davis Library to the community through a performance paying tribute to the Davises' lives on Thursday, May 28th at 7 p.m. at the Carroll Arts Center. now therefore we the Board of Carroll County Commissioners to hereby proclaim Thursday May 28th 2026 as Davis Day and call upon all residents to recognize the celebration and extraordinary life civic leadership and philanthropic spirits of Mr. and Mrs. Davis and the lasting impacts of the Davis Library upon our community adopted this 21st day of May 2026 signed the Board of Carroll County Commissioners I think you get a proclamation after that

Did AI write that?

I don't know. I did not write this, so it's a great question. Shall we do a picture? We definitely should do a photo. Let's do a picture.

It's as long as his historical document. It suits you.

I think the Declaration of Independence was shorter. Yeah, yeah.

Certainly. Yeah, that was.

Good to see you. That's good. How are you doing? You're welcome. How many days?

We haven't seen you in a while.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you. Rearranging your your day. Oh no, because we usually, you know.

Alright, so do any of my colleagues have anything for priority? Carol, I'm going to save my remarks for next week as we're so short on time, but.

Anybody else anything for me? Alright, I'm going to forgive that as well.

OK, alright, so we'll move into public comment. Chris, I'm sorry, Roberta. We have anybody here for public comment. Chris, do you have anybody on the line for public comment? Chris, unfortunately, we cannot hear you. Still cannot hear you, sir. Still can't hear you. Well, it says he's talking.

The little button says he's...

He's got nothing. Seems to be a technical problem.

There is a caller. We can't hear the caller either.

Looks like they're going back and forth right now trying to settle some issues. all right so well if we can't do it we can't do it yeah so all right so while they're always we had so all right so well i guess while they're working that out um while they're trying to work that out we can go ahead to a uh admin open does anybody have anything for admin caller to email you i'm sorry oh yeah that's that's might be an idea commissioner is that carrollcountymd.gov Thank you very much, Roberto. Yeah, to our caller, I'm sorry we cannot hear you. There's some kind of technical difficulty. So we apologize for that. And if you could, please do email us your comments so that we can read those. Again, I do apologize for the technical difficulties. So unfortunately, we still can't hear Chris. So something else is going on, and it's certainly nobody's fault, but I know Chris will take care of that as soon as he can. So we'll move into admin open. Does anybody have anything for admin open? All right, hearing nothing, we'll move into agenda review. And I'll do my best to be as quick as possible with this, because I know, again, we've got quite a bit still ahead of us this afternoon. Wanda, how are you?

Good, thank you.

All right, so our first week, the week of Monday, May 25th, and this is also very important. County offices are closed in observance Memorial Day. Commissioner Kyler will be at the Hempstead Memorial Day event at 9 o'clock AM. Commissioner Gordon will be at the 159th Annual Westminster Memorial Day Parade. I will be at the Tawny Town Memorial Day Ceremony and Parade at 10 o'clock, and then in the evening I'll be over at Union Bridge for their Memorial Day Ceremony. Tuesday, May 26th, we have the Never Done Farm 25-Year Celebration, the Manchester Valley FFA Banquet with Commissioner Kyler, Wednesday, May 27th, we have the 33rd Carroll County Community College reception and commencement at McDaniel with Commissioners Gordon, Kyler, and Krebs. And then that evening, the Carroll County Public Library Board of Trustees meeting with Commissioner Krebs. Thursday, May 28th, we have our closed admin at 8, followed by open session at 9 o'clock, beginning with Priority Carroll. Item number two, prohibition on residential uses in planned commercial centers. And that is a public hearing. Item number three, briefing discussion on cluster subdivisions. If we could try to get a little more specificity about that before next week so we know exactly what it is we're talking about. Item number four, approval to transfer FY 2026 annual housing bond allocation. Item number five, grant approval to submit application and acceptance of the award for the FY 2027 Senior Center Operating Fund Competitive Grant. Item number six, request approval to schedule a public hearing for a community development block grant for family shelter construction. Item, what? Oh, sorry, just. Oh, no, okay. I thought you were trying to get our attention to say there's something wrong, okay?

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

No worries at all. Item number seven, state and local fiscal recovery fund update. Item number eight, contract award for community reinvestment and repair fund 45F12526. Item number nine, Summit Food FY26. I'm guessing that's some kind of... Food service. Food service, okay. Item number 10, same thing, Summit Food, FY27 for the Sheriff's Office. And I think the previous one was for the Sheriff's Office. Item number 11, Prime Care, FY26 for the Sheriff's Office. Item number 12, Prime Care for FY27 for the Sheriff's Office. Item number 13, public, I'm sorry, summit clearing FY26 for the sheriff's office. Item number 14, summit clearing for FY27 for the sheriff's office. Item number 15, briefing discussion decision for transportation development plan presentation. Item number 16, contract award for construction inspection services for the Liberty Water Storage Tank Booster Pump Station project. Followed by public comments, admin, open agenda review and then 7 o'clock PM and evening with Walter and Elizabeth Davis at the Arts Center with Commissioner Kyler. Friday, May 29th Emergency Services Training Program graduation with Commissioners Gordon and Kyler. Saturday, May 30th shows nothing on the formal calendar and Sunday, May 31st Commissioner Kyler has the podcast. And at 1 o'clock p.m., the Liburn Family Pavilion dedication at the Farm Museum. Commissioners Gordon, Kyler, Krebs, and myself are slated to attend. Are there any changes or alterations for our first week? All right, hearing none, we'll move into week number two, which is the week of Monday, June 1st. We are already in June. Time is moving fast this spring. Monday, June 1st, 9 o'clock AM, Winters Mill High School graduation with Commissioners Gordon and Kyler. 12 o'clock PM, graduation ceremony for high school best at the Westminster High School Auditorium. 3 o'clock PM, Manchester Valley High School graduation with Commissioner Kyler. Tuesday, June 2nd, Commissioner Gordon has his chamber breakfast at the Exploration Commons in Westminster, and Commissioners Gordon and Kyler are slated to attend. uh nine o'clock a.m century high school graduation uh commissioner krebs is slated to attend and at three o'clock p.m the fsk high school graduation and i am slated to attend wednesday june 3rd south carroll high school graduation at nine o'clock a.m with commissioner garen and at three o'clock p.m the liberty high school graduation with commissioner krebs Thursday, June 4th, 8 o'clock AM, closed admin with commissioners, followed by open session of the Board of County Commissioners. Item number one, Priority Carol. Item number two, approval to purchase PFAS Phase II Groundwater Remedial Investigation. Item number three, approval to purchase Team Dynamics IT Service Management System. item number four change order for modern landfill item number five contract approval for medical director for the department of fire and ems followed by public comment admin open agenda review and then at one o'clock pm westminster high school graduation with commissioner gordon friday june 5th shows nothing on the formal calendar saturday june 6th shows nothing on the formal calendar Sunday, June 7th, Commissioner Gordon has the podcast. And at 1 o'clock p.m., the Historical Society of Carroll County Remembrance and Reconciliation Historical Marker Dedication at Church of the Ascension in Westminster with Commissioner Gordon. Do we have any corrections or alterations to our second week?

I forgot and I wanted to. to not do anything at Admin Open. I don't know how many of you have seen this. Maryland 26 Liberty Road bridges over Liberty. There is a public meeting Wednesday, June 17th, 530 to 730 at Liberty High School. And I just, I wanted to say that. Thank you for sharing. To the world.

Thank you for sharing that indeed. All right, so without any further business for the morning session, we need a motion to recess until 1 o'clock p.m. for our work session on road design and traffic impact studies.

Do you want to make it 1.15? Let's make it 1.15.

1.15, all right. So we need a motion to recess until 1.15 for our work session on road design and traffic impact studies. So moved. We have a motion, we have a second.

Second.

We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. We're in recess until 1.15. Thank you, everybody.