[2:22] I got simmer down, simmer down.

[2:25] So they heard me. They heard me. So they gave it away.

[2:28] Good afternoon. Good afternoon.

[2:29] Good afternoon.

[2:29] Thank you, brief. I appreciate your public works.

[2:32] We had a meeting this morning about this new event that's going to impact our county.

[2:36] And we wanted to keep you and the citizens briefs.

[2:39] The road department facilities and fleet management for a full prepared to fight the event, as we call it.

[2:45] You're brief this morning by dovebrown and he told you some of the centrals,

[2:49] I don't want to reiterate that the forecast is calling for approximately 18-24 inches, no, for our area and the winds are going to be what's really hurting us.

[2:58] It's going to be about 30 mile an hour winds sustained until about 40 mile an hour of gusts.

[3:03] The storms predicted at this time to hit us about five o'clock tomorrow afternoon.

[3:09] And when it hits and it's described, it's going to hit quick and it's going to be very heavy.

[3:13] It's going to be a 5.3 quarter of an inch to an inch an hour.

[3:18] We just like to remind all the citizens to stay in if they can.

[3:22] Now, this one is sure that the road crews can do their job effectively.

[3:25] In addition, please help us by parking, not parking on the streets if you have a driveway

[3:30] parking your driveway.

[3:32] And don't walk in a coffee sack.

[3:34] If you have a goal, please park in a driveway and remove any obstacles, like trash cans,

[3:39] any basketball hoops, anything that's in the road in the road so we can get in there

[3:43] door job properly. This door is going to last into Sunday and it's going to take a long

[3:50] time for us to clean it up, especially with the wind and the drifting. And we are committed

[3:55] to getting sure that everyone safety is involved here. And we just want to make sure that

[3:59] we achieve a high level of snow plow. And if we can get the citizens to help us help them.

[4:06] And right now we just want to make sure everybody stays safe. So we're going to be out there

[4:11] We're going to get to you, we have a lot of roads, we have over 900 miles of roads, and we will get to you.

[4:19] So, just want to make sure that you'll be in for a little bit, but we will get out sometime.

[4:24] If anyone has an emergency, it needs to get out like a medical emergency.

[4:29] What would you advise them to do, Dave?

[4:30] Okay, and Doug Brown was morning. I was talking about the EOCV in open and they're going to have DPW staff along with the emergency management there, and it was a 1-800 number believe they gave.

[4:42] Yeah. And of course, 911's the first availability of your phone number. If you can't catch, we get them or anything. You call that 1-8-8 number.

[4:50] And then they will make sure that the proper dispatch has been, you know, involved for the trucks to get out and assistant anything.

[4:58] I've got that number right here.

[5:01] The emergency operations center number is 888-543-8362 again 888-543-8362.

[5:14] Let's want to make sure by safe and stay in and let us let us do our job when we get

[5:18] out.

[5:20] All right.

[5:20] Any other questions for day?

[5:23] Would it come?

[5:25] So, thank you, Dave.

[5:25] We appreciate the update.

[5:26] very much. And plow to certainly appreciate all the efforts that's going on too. As we stated this

[5:35] morning, that's one of the things that the preparation for this thing goes on notice too. We've had

[5:39] folks working tirelessly for the last several days as a result. Okay, thank you very much. The governor

[5:47] has declared a state of emergency as of 0700 hours tomorrow morning, which really sounds worse than

[5:55] it is. Essentially, that just puts key people in the places that they need to be. But I wanted

[6:01] to pass that along. And as a result of the pending storm, we have made the decision to close

[6:07] the county office building at 3 p.m. tomorrow. It's critically important to get our folks,

[6:14] regardless of what time this storm is going to start. Everybody that we've talked to said it's

[6:18] to begin heavy and come down fast. So it's critically important that we get our folks home safely

[6:27] also. So as of 3pm tomorrow for those, and we'll get the word out for those, I know it

[6:34] affects permits and certainly tax collection and office and that kind of thing. But we'll get

[6:39] the word out there, everyone, but we'll be closing at 3pm tomorrow and I know that care

[6:44] public schools is already decided to close three hours early tomorrow. So, so we're going

[6:49] all that we can to make sure that, you know, our public is safe. I can't reiterate enough

[6:55] as a public safety guy for over 40 years now. If you don't have to go out, don't. I don't think

[7:05] there's any milk toilet paper or bread left in Carol. But if there is, get it today or first thing

[7:13] tomorrow. You know, it helps our folks immensely to just stay home. You know, I've been

[7:26] clowning so also for the last 30 years and I've had people in my way for the every year

[7:33] and all the 30 years. So, and you know, several of the gentlemen that I talked to or ladies

[7:39] or whoever, whenever I ask him what they're doing out here,

[7:42] they have no good reason that they've given me.

[7:47] So anyway, that's enough about that.

[7:50] OK, I'm going to try to stay on time, Saturday.

[7:54] You're not doing very well.

[7:56] I don't want that.

[8:01] So first, on the list, the afternoon is,

[8:06] request acceptance at the Courthouse Security Grant Award and Debbie Standford is coming up and

[8:14] who else do you have, Debbie?

[8:16] We have Susan Larry.

[8:17] I'm Susan Harry.

[8:21] I'm the new court administrator, and my deputy, Bobbiur, who you may recognize, is here with

[8:27] me.

[8:28] I'm very fortunate to have her.

[8:30] But we're here today.

[8:31] First of all, welcome.

[8:33] Thank you.

[8:33] We're glad to have you on board.

[8:36] So we hear today to get your permission to accept a grant award from the Administrative Office of the Court of 142,329D so that we can upgrade our security at the Court houses.

[8:52] So if you have any questions, I believe you were given this sheet that shows everything what we're going to be spending the money on.

[9:01] So, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

[9:03] Does it summarize that when the bullet list for the public or you're spending the money left?

[9:07] Sure.

[9:08] First, 67,626,23 for digital cameras, that's to replace our analog cameras, several, we're working it all.

[9:18] Now the server, 12,528, 13, that's for the cameras.

[9:24] So we have to have a new server for the new digital cameras.

[9:28] than 29,6708 for the new X-ray machine, that's to go over the historic courthouse.

[9:37] Then 14,300, it says ballistic resistant glass, but really what it is as you come into the ground level of the annex, that's at the rear of the courthouse.

[9:49] When you go through the first double doors, there's a window there that looks right into where the veil of understanding.

[9:55] So that window will be bulletproof glass and then the wall underneath will be reinforced with Kevlar.

[10:02] Okay, so it's not just the glass.

[10:05] Then there's an extended warranty for all three of the x-ray machines.

[10:09] One in the historic courthouse, two in the annex, that will go until March 2020.

[10:16] And that's 18,182,46.

[10:20] How many cameras are we talking about?

[10:29] I can get back with you about the amount of $200 a piece that I believe they are that much.

[10:39] There's that thing.

[10:42] It just seems exorbitant.

[10:58] This wiring in place should just keep mine up to be run.

[11:04] probably some in place but some you

[11:16] know I don't want to get into the

[11:17] weeds I just I would just expect it that's for the entire system too

[11:21] that's probably not just for cameras it's probably that you know the software

[11:25] and all of those associated things that go with that yeah actually render

[11:31] an opinion it's 41 cameras now it makes more sense to me okay now I feel a lot

[11:38] better now. Okay. All right. I put the system in half a dozen cameras for

[11:44] $5,000. $5,000. I charge $50,000. Mark up was still saving some money.

[11:51] Did the camera, I guess, bid, did that go out to bid for the cameras?

[11:57] At least Skyline already has a contract with the counties. So that's what they're the ones

[12:01] that we go to for cameras.

[12:05] I mean, I'm not, I'm guessing I'm missing something, is there contract is we don't bid it out or we just find it because there's another estimate.

[12:24] Right, okay, doesn't have to, but we don't know if this is competitive or not.

[12:31] No, we don't, we don't

[12:36] know. Debbie, what's the, based on that questioning, what's our time line here?

[12:42] We don't have a long time to spend this money.

[12:46] It has to be spent before the end of fiscal year 16.

[12:50] So by June 30th of this year,

[12:54] the grantor does allow to follow county procurement,

[12:58] which would allow us to use a current vendor that's already going through.

[13:03] I mean, skyline is a current vendor that's already been vetted through purchasing.

[13:07] So they do allow us to, we have to follow county procurement policies.

[13:12] So they have followed county procurement policy and talked to purchasing about this

[13:19] Purchase and I do think part of it was that they needed to expedite

[13:24] I mean, I don't want to hold this up in your way, but because I would like to get the money from the grant

[13:29] However, I would anything this large is

[13:32] $67,000 without my glasses

[13:34] So I think it's $57,000

[13:37] I think things are that

[13:38] Manchu should go out to bid so we can find out if we're getting the best

[13:42] you. And I have nothing in Scotland. I don't know them at all, except I don't know we have a contract with them.

[13:47] I just think anything just this large and always got a bit.

[13:52] I have a group.

[13:58] So what do you suggest?

[14:00] Okay, we just have to accept it. We just have to grant.

[14:04] And then you can look to see if this is a good price or not. Correct. Would that be possible to do?

[14:10] Yeah, they can be with purchasing and make sure that.

[14:13] Okay, so you'll infertics authorizing to accept the grant of the stipulation that they will

[14:18] suspend what they will then will check competitive.

[14:22] I'll tell you.

[14:23] I'll tell you.

[14:24] I'll tell you.

[14:25] Okay.

[14:28] So make emotions accept the grant, which stipulation of the camera price, I guess, is

[14:34] checking.

[14:36] Okay.

[14:36] Is there a second?

[14:39] Yes.

[14:40] Is there a second?

[14:41] So depending on what kind of you sometimes the servers are camera unique, so the servers might need to be

[14:49] I'm just a great developer.

[14:50] We're here.

[14:51] They have a deep competitive alternatives and we just make the situation more general.

[14:58] So the United States promotion commission.

[15:00] You can make a wish. I will draw a motion. I'll make a motion that the Board of Commissioners authorize reports to receive form with a provision that they are going to check alternative competitive measures.

[15:18] I

[15:22] ask for a second again.

[15:24] Second?

[15:25] Okay.

[15:25] Any additional comments or discussion?

[15:28] Have you looked like you're leaning?

[15:31] I don't know.

[15:31] Very good poker face.

[15:35] Is that for all of the items or for the...

[15:38] Please, Robert, thanks so.

[15:40] Hi.

[15:40] The combination of the camera and the person.

[15:42] And server, because those are tied together.

[15:45] Well, I'm assuming they're tied together.

[15:46] They might not be.

[15:47] I don't know, so some camera subsystems have their own unique service.

[15:50] I don't know, whether that server is a generic internet server, or land, or land, or

[15:57] land server.

[15:57] Whether it is vendor unique.

[16:03] I'm sorry, I don't know.

[16:04] But for the, I think the x-ray inspection, I think we procure those off of state contract,

[16:10] for the x-ray machine.

[16:11] So we're just talking about the server and the key camera.

[16:14] Yeah, for the x-ray.

[16:15] Of course.

[16:15] All right, so we'll clarify that the stipulation that's related to checking alternative competitive alternatives for the camera and service.

[16:23] Yes.

[16:24] So that's my motion.

[16:25] That's exactly what you're looking for.

[16:27] Okay.

[16:28] Okay.

[16:28] Any additional?

[16:30] No, nothing.

[16:31] All in favor.

[16:32] Hi.

[16:35] Any opposed?

[16:37] Okay.

[16:39] Thank you.

[16:39] Thank you very much.

[16:41] Regum on that.

[16:43] Yes.

[16:43] You're there.

[16:44] Yes.

[16:44] Thank you.

[16:45] Commissioner Weaver.

[16:48] Okay,

[16:52] item number two is a grant acceptance for pocket wet land to treat runoff at the existing

[17:02] Manchester skate park and I have a list of players here, but only one seems to want to come to the table.

[17:10] So, Gale, Engels R, Chief, your Chief of Resource Management.

[17:16] Good afternoon.

[17:17] Good afternoon.

[17:18] So I'm coming to you today to ask your approval to accept a grant from State Highway Administration Transportation Autoratives Program.

[17:30] We, Theresa and myself, who's no longer with the county, she resigned effective last Friday.

[17:37] When, before you on May 7th to be able to submit the application for the project known as the Manchester State Park Pocket Wetlands project, we were recently informed that we did receive the grant and the grant request was for $750,000 and $43,000, which is approximately 80% of the total construction cost of the pocket wetland.

[18:03] This is a facility that is located just outside of the town of Manchester along 27, where the

[18:10] skate park currently exists, or I should say existed.

[18:15] And we will be working very closely with State Highway Project of their worldwide mining

[18:20] in that area, along with our project, as well at the same time, hopefully saving some

[18:25] cost with mobilizing construction folks.

[18:28] This is a project that's located in the Double Pipe Creek Watershed and we will be treating 99 acres of untreated existing, I mean, she's the untreated drainage area.

[18:40] I do want to mention that Theresa obviously was very instrumental in us getting this grant.

[18:46] We are very much going to miss her in our office. She was able to acquire $3.7 million in her two years here at Carroll County Government.

[18:54] So we're waiting to hear regarding a couple of other grants that she was involved with making

[18:59] application for us, but she will be greatly missed, and I just want to throw that out there.

[19:05] I know we need this for NPDS and some of some other things.

[19:09] Tom, could you or Gail tell us, how many pounds of nitrogen phosphorus and sediment will

[19:15] just take out for you?

[19:17] I do have that number.

[19:18] We have 256 pounds of nitrogen, 16 pounds.

[19:23] Now this is per year, a phosphorus, and three tons per year of sediment.

[19:29] And that is a sediment, okay.

[19:31] Thank you very much.

[19:32] No problem.

[19:34] So a couple questions.

[19:37] The county town cash match.

[19:41] Is that what it says it is?

[19:43] We're matching and so is the town of Manchester or, and that leads to the second question of the town of Manchester is aware of the fact that we could get this grant.

[19:51] Yes.

[19:51] Yes. Actually, the grant approval was sent directly to the town because they are the property

[19:57] owners of the project, so they are working jointly with us. They've been involved in the

[20:01] project since we started discussing it. They will, they entered into our NPDS permit along

[20:06] with us in 2014, and this is one of the projects that was slated to be built under that NPDS

[20:13] agreement. We will be the total cost estimated engineers' cost estimate for construction

[20:19] is $950,000. The construction cost will be coming out of our CIP, which is where the towns

[20:26] contribute to the funding every year through the NPDS permit arrangement and the engineering

[20:33] cost is approximately $60,000, which will be also coming out of the CIP.

[20:41] The annual maintenance cost will be through the town. The town will be the

[20:49] There will not be a whole lot of maintenance other than milling for the first probably 25 or 30 years.

[20:54] That's what we're finding with our facilities and they average about what our rate is averaging is about $100 per milling and we do it 4 times a year.

[21:03] So I would say approximately $500 a year for milling.

[21:07] Unless they want to do it more often.

[21:12] Okay.

[21:14] Any additional questions?

[21:16] Comments.

[21:20] You need emotions of set fewer, isn't it?

[21:22] Yes, please.

[21:22] Yeah, make a motion, set except you order.

[21:24] A second.

[21:25] Okay, there's a motion in second.

[21:27] Anything additional?

[21:30] All in favor.

[21:32] Aye.

[21:32] First.

[21:34] Thank you.

[21:35] Thank you.

[21:36] Thanks, Gail.

[21:39] Just.

[21:41] I know that since it's probably under way, but I'm sure we're making some sort of strides in replacing

[21:47] Teresa, I would assume, is that correct?

[21:50] Both of you are nodding.

[21:51] Okay.

[21:52] She informed us that paperwork is downstairs, it is due to come on the board tomorrow.

[21:57] Okay.

[21:57] Find somebody exactly like her.

[21:59] I hope we do.

[22:01] Okay.

[22:02] Thank you.

[22:05] All right.

[22:06] Item number three this afternoon.

[22:12] Briefing discussion on the highest quarry water development agreement, and we're joined

[22:17] by Tom Delvis, our director of the Land and Resource Management.

[22:23] And I'm working, how are you?

[22:25] Good, how are you?

[22:25] I'm fine sir.

[22:27] He was also in that department, so that's correct.

[22:30] Shalom is our hydrogeologist, and he's been very integral in this project up to this point.

[22:35] Doing a lot of field work, a lot of coordination with the city of Western Australia.

[22:38] So, I'm going to see Shalom's face, because he's just a big part of where we're at, to this point.

[22:43] Just as a reminder, we've been working on the high-score project with the city of coordinate with the city of Western Australia.

[22:51] for about two years now as far as testing the facility, actually pumping and seeing how much water

[22:57] can actually be produced from that facility. And that facility was acquired by the County

[23:02] Commission in 2007. It's about 68, or property. It has an eight acre abandoned water fill

[23:08] cori on it. Again, it was tested in late 2014 by the city. We worked very closely with them.

[23:15] They actually incurred the costs of the testing.

[23:19] It involved, you know, actually putting a pump in the quarry and withdrawing water at a certain rate.

[23:24] And what we actually did is we pulled the water down to a certain level in the quarry and then just left the go and maintained it at that level.

[23:31] So it's what we call a constant level test for what we do for the worst supply and the government guys.

[23:36] Since that time, there's been work on analyzing the numbers, taking a look at crunching and figuring out exactly what we have there.

[23:43] Because this is a little bit of a different type of facility in that it's a water-filled surface

[23:50] water body, but it acts like a well if you go out there and you think about it, it's just a

[23:54] big well.

[23:56] So what we've done is we've had discussions with the Maryland Department of Environment about

[24:01] how actually that could be utilized and those discussions are actually still ongoing.

[24:05] The reason that we're here today is that originally the agreement that the county and the

[24:12] entered into back in 2008, was that if the licensee, who was the city at that time, finds

[24:20] suitable source of water that a further desire to develop, and the county and the licensee

[24:26] shall negotiate the perfect document for future water use. So the agreement we have with the

[24:30] city was specifically just for this part that we've done the last two years the testing phase

[24:34] of to evaluate it, and it's feasibility for water supply development. So we're here today

[24:42] to discuss with you and you for you all to give us direction as to the next step.

[24:48] The next step being, we would like to have your permission to enter into negotiations with the city for a new agreement which will allow us to move to the next step which would be actually planning for it to be used as a word of supply.

[25:01] And actually entering into those discussions ourselves and now environment to actually utilize that resource.

[25:07] Because at this point in time, we just done the testing.

[25:10] There's nothing firm in stone as to how much water supply you could derive from there.

[25:15] And that really is not in there until you enter some very serious discussions with the wrong partner environment

[25:20] and the permit process ultimately.

[25:22] Do we have any guest limits at this point in time as to water volumes, gallons per day?

[25:27] Yeah, we do have some preliminary estimates.

[25:31] It's basically a range somewhere between 560,000 gallons a day.

[25:37] forward to around 720,000 gallons a day.

[25:42] So the range is a bit of a how much will be allowed to drill out of there?

[25:46] The Coingin Jim Allen Department of Environment.

[25:48] Because my guess is 720,000 gallons a day is actually what it can produce but we might not

[25:53] be able to pull that out.

[25:55] Would that be correct?

[25:56] Yes, I would say that that's correct.

[25:59] Nothing actually is until you acquired a permit really.

[26:02] Right.

[26:02] I understand.

[26:03] But the range is actually based on how they're going to let us utilize that resource.

[26:06] whether it's strictly pumping out of there, or whether it's taking some water from the stream,

[26:12] or both, or augmenting the water in the core.

[26:15] It was streamed more.

[26:15] There's a lot of different scenarios that can be developed here with this resource.

[26:19] Which makes it streamed more flexible than traditional resources I mean.

[26:23] Just purely a reservoir, just purely a well.

[26:26] And so how that actually will happen has to be worked out in real far from the environment.

[26:30] But the numbers that Sean gave you were that range that we feel, you know,

[26:34] that was treated like this would be at the lower end

[26:36] and if it was treated like this, it would be up on it.

[26:39] That's correct.

[26:40] So the agreement that we're looking to enter with the city

[26:43] of Westminster is how we're going to split the order

[26:46] that may be coming out of this for a nation's of it,

[26:51] or what we'd like to move forward with.

[26:54] And again, this would not be a final determination.

[26:57] We would be back before you or in discussions with you.

[27:00] And we'd like to begin those discussions

[27:02] to the assumptions that I'd like to move forward with from today would be, first that the county

[27:09] would be interested in an allocation reserve based on the amount of order that's produced.

[27:15] And again, until you know roughly what the appropriation may be or what we may be or to acquire,

[27:21] that number may not be able to set the stone and meet initially.

[27:25] So the first thing would be that the county would be interested in some type of allocation

[27:28] from the city's water system, and I may have jumped ahead a little bit too much, but if you

[27:33] look here at the quarry and it's the same to the city, really the only public water system that's

[27:40] available in close proximity and probably as far as actors economically would be the city of

[27:44] Westminster. And what's showing you here, you can see the outline and blue of the city of Westminster

[27:49] in red, you can see the hides quarry location, and then over on the far right, you can see the

[27:58] case for utilizationists were would be to get the water from the quarry location to that

[28:04] water line because treating it probably on site and then distributing it would not be

[28:09] an economical reasonable thing to do. So the idea would be most likely to get it to that existing

[28:14] water line that existing water line goes to the cranberry reservoir that the city has and then

[28:19] goes to their surface water treatment facility. So the most likely scenario is somehow getting it

[28:24] there in the city of Westminster wants to pursue that's correct at this time into yes.

[28:30] So again, by incorporating this into the city system, you know, what would the county look

[28:36] in return, I guess?

[28:37] And again, the first assumption would be that I would think that we would want to look at

[28:42] some type of allocation reservation.

[28:43] It might not be directly this water, but some type of allocation of water from their system

[28:49] because we would be adding water to their system from high.

[28:52] That's the first assumption.

[28:53] we would be reserving it for if there's no treatment but we would be reserving it for future

[28:58] use commissioner could be based on commercial industrial opportunities that the county may

[29:05] see or have if it was reserving an allocation the right to take future filter water out of

[29:11] their treated water out of their plant and move it somewhere else that's correct that's absolutely

[29:15] great the second assumption would be that the county would retain ownership of the quarry

[29:22] property that we would not you know relinquish that and again that's an assumption I'm

[29:27] making right now something that we would be looking at direction from you all on because

[29:32] I think those are the two overriding issues unless there's something else that you all

[29:35] see and there could be something else in our discussions but those are two initial assumptions

[29:39] that I think we would need to move forward who's going to build the pipeline from the

[29:44] to exist in order to lie.

[29:48] Our thoughts are, and then these would be in this

[29:50] cultural city, that that would be part of their system,

[29:53] that they would utilize that resource,

[29:55] so it would be their infrastructure that would withdraw

[29:58] the water and take it to their system.

[30:04] So, again, what we're here is to start those initial discussions, no final decisions, obviously, that you allow county staff, it would be most like yourselves in the county attorney, initially start discussions with the city as to moving forward with the new agreement. Obviously, you all would have to prove any agreement as final stage. But we really need that for both our states, for the city and the county's sake to move forward, we feel. Because there has to be an expectation moving from this point on, what we're going to do is

[30:34] But we all want that at the end product here.

[30:36] So, and I apologize, Tom.

[30:38] I just...

[30:39] You've ever had the question to be.

[30:41] You want us to...

[30:42] You want the candidate to retain control of the query itself.

[30:44] So that is my assumption, sir.

[30:45] All right. So we would do...

[30:47] We would retain it.

[30:47] So it's just to me that what we need to do is

[30:49] off the rise you

[30:54] analyze this.

[30:55] That meaning number one,

[30:57] estimating the total capital cost to the county.

[31:01] The total ongoing operating and maintenance cost of the county

[31:04] making this water available from the quarry if funny. Any county cross associated with transporting

[31:11] or pumping the water to Westminster if funny. And once you have those figures then getting

[31:20] feedback from Westminster to how much they can use. There's not going to worry about more than

[31:25] you can use.

[31:28] I'm reading.

[31:30] And then, and then calculate.

[31:31] And then, and then, and then, and then, for the figure out what a, what a reasonable

[31:34] amortization.

[31:36] And the reason why amortized costs would be on a per-1000 gallon basis or whatever, so that it's

[31:41] competitive with what Westminster would expect to pay.

[31:44] We want to be paid back as much as we can.

[31:47] We don't want to price it so high that it doesn't work for Westminster either, though.

[31:50] I mean, you know, we're not, we're not running a profit.

[31:52] But we have, but in the other hand if we could make, if the potentials that are

[31:57] make a small profit on it, that we could use to offset other development costs or future

[32:01] development costs, that might not be a bad thing, and then based on what Westminster

[32:08] needs we can begin to ask, you'll take a recommendation of staff as how much we should

[32:12] reserve.

[32:13] You have to measure a phrase or I'll tell you not to say so.

[32:15] I do.

[32:17] I can have to answer.

[32:18] Very perceptive today.

[32:20] From what you said earlier, if the city was mentioned, it's going to provide the pipeline

[32:24] to go from the quarry to there exists the existing water line and the infrastructure

[32:29] and the pumping to know that will be money that they're going to lay out, so as we won't put

[32:34] any money on offer that, correct?

[32:36] That is our assumption as of right now.

[32:38] That is what we would like to enter into discussions with them, is that we would not be the

[32:42] owner operator of the infrastructure to pump and deliver the water they would be.

[32:46] So right, there are resources to utilize, because then they're getting such a percentage

[32:52] whatever we determine out of this order for their use.

[32:56] That's kind of like their capital outlay into this so that they can use part of the order

[33:00] that's coming out of this.

[33:01] That's correct.

[33:03] And what we would get, we would get, we would be a utilization of a certain amount of water

[33:10] allocation based on that that's produced by the quarry.

[33:16] I also know that this particular body of water has been utilized in the past and maybe it is again

[33:24] With the undersea outfitter folks the scuba diving folks. That's crap. I want to assume that we would good

[33:30] Again, there's another assumption

[33:32] Sometimes that can get you in a little bit of

[33:35] jam but

[33:37] I assume that we would

[33:39] attempt to continue to have

[33:42] That utilization occur there, that facility, or why are we with that time?

[33:47] Has any, or have we even thought about it?

[33:49] Oh yes, believe me, we've thought about it.

[33:51] I'm sure you have.

[33:52] Believe me.

[33:54] There's several ways that could go.

[33:56] Obviously, if we wanted to make that part of the negotiations with the city,

[34:02] we could put something in there that they could continue to have use of it,

[34:06] although if that is to take place, there has to be certain modifications

[34:09] to the core that have to be made to accommodate that.

[34:12] In other words, there has to be some way of when you put the infrastructure into pump that

[34:16] isolate that area from any diver's and all, because you can't have diver's in or

[34:21] around that intake pump that's pumping hundreds of gallons, and that's probably not a good idea.

[34:25] In other words, I just keep them pumping.

[34:27] So that should have the other thing that I read here saying, you know.

[34:31] The other item, because I'm going to put this on a table that the scuba operations are not allowed

[34:37] to continue there because of the use of the water supply.

[34:41] I think those are items that we would want that to have a discussion with the city

[34:45] about.

[34:45] Specifically, we've had cursory discussions, and I don't really want to maybe go into it right

[34:52] now, but I think it could go either way with them.

[34:54] Just as long as it's still on the radar, that was my point, and yes, and bringing it up.

[35:03] I'd like to move that we allow the staff to start to begin discussions with the city of

[35:08] Minister about the hives, why water allocations?

[35:17] Can we just direct you to do that?

[35:18] Do we need a motion to refer to that?

[35:21] Well, you also know one of the notions that you've made here that we're agreeing with

[35:26] those assumptions that we want to maintain, use a hives quarry.

[35:30] Now, we want a percentage of our gallons, how we want to put it.

[35:34] Allocation for us.

[35:35] That's correct.

[35:36] That's set aside.

[35:37] And I, my opinion, I think we should retain the high-square property and I think we should

[35:47] look at some allocation set aside for the county use.

[35:52] Now what that happens to be is, I guess, to give a take between us in the city.

[35:57] And we certainly, I think, would look at what our future need to be based on master planning and the amount of

[36:07] I mean, there's various ways that we could do that.

[36:10] And again, before anything would be finalized,

[36:13] we would be back before you just say,

[36:15] this is what's developed for your probably more direction.

[36:19] I'm not even saying, you know, the final approval.

[36:21] We might come back to you for a more direction.

[36:23] Other results in these conversations.

[36:25] But at least you begin discussion.

[36:27] That's correct.

[36:28] Start important.

[36:29] And if I could, Commissioner, could we,

[36:32] did you understand or did we answer your comment,

[36:37] related to the piping and all. I mean, my thoughts are that they would own an operate the system.

[36:43] We don't want to, I don't believe we want to be in a public order for a very spot here with this,

[36:47] you know, the loan system. So them, them being the city would be the owner and operator of that.

[36:55] And they would utilize that resource. The only role we would be playing in is landowner and a

[37:01] of an allocation at the very end of the day.

[37:04] Well, I agree, and let me explain why I agree, because we don't have all of the pieces

[37:09] of the pie. If we had the water treatment plan, then we might want to retain control of

[37:13] the pumping and transport and the planet itself, so that we have control of the complete

[37:17] supply chain. We're given that we are dependent on them. I've done many benefit to us

[37:22] of only only half the supply chain. So yes, it's all going to become part of the negotiation.

[37:27] If they're going to provide more in terms of a capital fit up, then they're costs for the winner will have to be lower.

[37:35] And vice versa if we go the other way.

[37:37] So I'm going with that time.

[37:38] Okay, thank you sir.

[37:40] What's your best guess, Tom?

[37:43] How long these negotiations would be?

[37:47] Oh, I would.

[37:49] I hope that we're back before you,

[37:52] with hopefully a final product not that we won't be before you with some

[37:55] intermediate or final product for the summer. I mean my thoughts are through

[37:59] the spring and we can get something worked out because we want to get with

[38:02] MBE and have some, you know, sprouts series discussions but until I think we

[38:07] have some agreement here with the State and Accounting, I don't want to go too far

[38:10] with MBE on those. Let me bring up one or two other issues, we have to, it's always

[38:17] This is stuff you don't think about between the problems.

[38:20] So let me talk about a few things that we should think about.

[38:25] We don't know what this is about.

[38:26] Number one, you know, look at the mess

[38:29] where in the liberty, the liberty reservoir.

[38:31] I mean, you know, the water's going about the most city.

[38:33] Maybe we should consider saying, look, if the Westminster's

[38:37] putting up a supply chain, we're going to lease this water supply

[38:40] them for 30 years or 40 years.

[38:43] I don't know, maybe a thousand, I don't know, but I think it should

[38:47] in the form of finite term agreement. So something changes 50 years from now that we don't anticipate

[38:52] or 40 years. And we have a way we have a way to change our mind. We all wish that we could

[38:56] recapture the order that's going to fall from the city. The liberty, right? So I would suggest

[39:02] we think about doing it as some kind of a lease, long-term lease, and then the two other questions

[39:09] come up. Suppose there's an environmental problem that develops 20 years from now, and the

[39:16] responsibility of dealing with it, whether it be environmental regulations, whether it be a

[39:22] pollution problem, who will be responsible for dealing with it, if it has to be fixed?

[39:29] I think we should try to anticipate what would happen in the scenario where we get a phone call

[39:33] from somebody who says, hey, it was polluted by underground storage tanks leaking somewhere.

[39:37] Who wants us or that? I think we should try to put some language in there with respect to that.

[39:43] And it might be as simple as it'll be paid for and proportion to the amount of water we

[39:48] draw or something like that, but I think we should try to address that.

[39:52] That's understood, sir.

[39:53] And I agree with you.

[39:54] A hundred percent.

[39:55] That will be considered in this agreement.

[39:57] And if we can keep Kitesquare for dive, precisely.

[39:59] I certainly would like to see it remain that way because I think it has actually become a

[40:05] another.

[40:05] We don't have any major doors.

[40:07] If actually we got lots of small ones.

[40:09] Could draw more businesses at the count.

[40:15] Very good.

[40:18] I guess that was my line of thinking with the divers too, I mean, that would be like a destination if you will, which I think we critically need here to bring people in.

[40:29] So that's got ramifications on all kinds of sides, the tourism side and the economic

[40:36] development side, and you keep on keeping on with that, right?

[40:41] But I think as you look at this, we really need to consider that as a factor too tonight.

[40:50] One issue with that is that concerns me the most is the whole issue that Commissioner

[40:59] of issue happening, which I'm not saying it will, but that's associated with an operation

[41:05] that we allowed that to take place there.

[41:08] And then how does that, you know, you know, the responsibility to go along with that, absolutely.

[41:13] So that, I think that really has to be considered, because we just keep in mind, a water supply,

[41:18] I mean, you've heard some of the things going on in the country now, if we're surprised

[41:21] and how vulnerable they can be, and the other issue is, I always look at a water supply

[41:26] to develop something like this, it's forever.

[41:28] You know, let's be finding another source or something, it's forever.

[41:31] So, you know, well, a reservoir or whatever.

[41:34] So, I think we're Jeff, to think about it, is okay.

[41:36] We'd like to do a lot of things, but we can't afford for this source to disappear,

[41:42] whether it be by contamination or lack of, you know, what are being it.

[41:46] So, there's just types of things I try to consider when we're concerned with things is,

[41:50] this is a forever type of thing, unless we find another source, right?

[41:53] You know, we have to kind of put everything in perspective here.

[41:55] I agree with that, but I'm going to be careful, we don't put on a model that's a glass.

[42:03] It's first off, you have a west of places like the White Mead Lake Powell.

[42:07] Those are the reservoirs.

[42:09] They have power boating and water skiing and boats in those, in number two, the presence

[42:15] of divers may serve a positive purpose, especially if divers, if somebody does throw something

[42:22] when they might see something, second, the fact that they're there,

[42:26] reduced the luck of a deserted quarry being a target for Mr.

[42:33] You know, if you want to see, I have to handle this.

[42:35] I've been thinking for five seconds.

[42:37] I've been thinking about the vandalized.

[42:38] Right.

[42:39] And I would entertain, basically, on the comments that you've heard about that,

[42:42] that it would probably be in the best interest to have someone

[42:47] to provide some additional information as we're talking about.

[42:52] that particular aspect, someone either in the industry or what have you to provide, not that I wanted

[43:00] to lay this anymore than what it is, but maybe it's important to get that person involved in some sort

[43:07] of dialogue as to get to maybe to the specific answers of the things that we have just brought up.

[43:14] Just for that particular aspect, and maybe that we're back before you within a meeting agreement,

[43:19] address is just this issue and the future that's very possible and I just follow

[43:23] a commission. I just wish for our jobs. I just want to indicate, I hear you're

[43:26] loud and clear about the lakes out west and I use the Merbat. But keep in mind this

[43:31] is an eight acre pool water. It's very small. The travel, the travel economy, between

[43:36] something being introduced in this water and the tonic, we'll hit that intake

[43:39] is very, very short. So, while, you know, a lot of big lakes, there is that

[43:44] situation, possibility, and all where things can be not only diluted, but take time to get.

[43:50] This would be very, very short time, as far as that happens.

[43:55] So that's the one reason I'm concerned, but that's not to say that something can't be

[43:58] worked out, and we will have those discussions with the city, and I think we'll be back

[44:02] before you with that.

[44:03] And what that will be one of the specific items we probably will be back to discussion with you.

[44:07] Okay.

[44:07] One of this one question, are we looking to, since we have the property and the city west

[44:14] ministry is going to build the infrastructure so it can be treated?

[44:18] Are we looking to charge the city west minister for water?

[44:20] Are we just looking to, this is our money we put up basically is money to pay for the property.

[44:26] The money they put up was the money to pay for the infrastructure, and then we just allocate

[44:30] the water.

[44:31] What are we looking at just like spending the water percentage wise or are we looking at charge him for a thousand gallons or something that sort?

[44:38] There was not our intent to do that to charge.

[44:41] I didn't think I learned that it was to basically say,

[44:44] We purchased the property.

[44:47] They paid for infrastructure to deliver water.

[44:50] What we get out of it is an allocation from their system to utilize.

[44:55] in either way, but you can also develop them in some manner.

[45:03] Okay. Okay. So I think you've got a clear direction and I didn't want to step on your toes, commissioner.

[45:10] But I don't think that we need a motion. I think you faith mainly at this point, yes, to get you direction and I think you've seen that and we've tried not to muddy the waters.

[45:28] Thank you, thank you. Thanks for your work to appreciate it. Thanks.

[45:36] Okay.

[45:40] I'm only five minutes behind. It's amazing. Amazing.

[45:46] The last item, well, the last agenda item this afternoon for us is the discussion and the

[45:53] sit.

[45:54] But the discussion only, there's no decision at this point.

[45:58] This is merely a discussion today.

[46:00] I want to make that clear about a request approval to proceed to public hearing.

[46:05] I propose amendments to chapter 34 of the Ethics, which is the Ethics, which is a

[46:13] on that Roberta.

[46:16] Mr. Ferrellan would like to make a public loan.

[46:20] So I'm going to tell you anybody who's told me.

[46:22] $10 a roll?

[46:27] Yes, but it's delivered.

[46:29] Okay, so is that one or two ply?

[46:32] Because we'll give you two more.

[46:39] Good afternoon, folks.

[46:43] What is being considered here?

[46:45] And this is part of the much larger issue.

[46:47] I'm going to read to you from an old-tired document that you all

[46:50] swore to uphold, it's called the US Constitutional.

[46:53] And it says, in amendment 1, Congress shall make no law respecting

[46:57] an establishment of religion, but prohibiting the free exercise

[47:01] thereof or bridging the freedom of speech or of the press,

[47:06] get this one, or of the right of the people,

[47:09] will piece a way to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[47:16] Now we go over to the Maryland Constitution, and I quote from the Declaration of Rights.

[47:23] This is article 40.

[47:24] It says that the liberty of the press ought to be invariably preserved that every citizen

[47:30] of the state ought to be allowed to speak, write, and publishes sentiments on all subjects.

[47:38] get that all subjects. Then we have an article of 44, so is that the provisions of the

[47:44] Constitution of the United States and the Vistate apply as well in time of war, as

[47:51] in time of peace, and in the departure of their firm or violation thereof. Under the

[47:58] plea of necessity, or any other plea, is a subversive of good government and tends to

[48:04] energy and despotism. Now I didn't make this stuff up. You folks all took an oath to

[48:12] uphold these documents and you can get these anywhere you like. But here is my my position.

[48:20] This board enacted a provision that does not allow us to speak of ethics. Well, ethics

[48:28] are there to control baser instincts, and sometimes we forget that just because we think

[48:37] a certain way that it's ethical.

[48:40] Well, that isn't always the case.

[48:44] And the citizens, I think, should be able to speak of such matters at all times in all places.

[48:51] And there's a couple of pieces of case law that have been to Supreme Court.

[48:55] We may have to visit that sooner or later, I hope not.

[48:59] But I think that the ethics hearings certainly cannot limit my right of free speech or

[49:05] any other citizen.

[49:07] More importantly, the more transparency we have the better.

[49:10] I think that these hearings with ethics commission should not be a came to root court.

[49:16] I think the public should have access to it.

[49:19] And I think the public needs to know exactly that which transpires and the idea that

[49:26] administrator being to throw out and he charged to somebody's spoke.

[49:32] This is reminiscent of Stalin or Hitler.

[49:35] This is crazy.

[49:37] Thank you.

[49:39] Thank you.

[49:43] I often don't give you a compliment, but impeccable timing on your part.

[49:48] You were right to, did you rehearse that or not?

[49:50] You were right to the three men.

[49:51] All the boys, they don't think it's got the whole time to go.

[49:55] Thank you.

[49:56] Thank you.

[49:56] Look at the records show that he was holding up a copy of the Constitution Ladies and gentlemen.

[50:02] Hi, Mr. Burke.

[50:03] Good afternoon, commissioners.

[50:07] I'm here today to introduce a possible amendment to our ethics ordinance.

[50:12] Your job today is to decide whether you wish to proceed to a public hearing,

[50:15] or wish to not proceed with it at all.

[50:21] you're deciding whether or not to send it to the public hearing.

[50:25] So you have your lawyer today talking to you about ethics.

[50:28] And I'm going to pause for a moment and allow you to make your jokes.

[50:31] And then we'll proceed.

[50:33] There are just a circle about how you can tell.

[50:34] I can tell on lawyers a lie.

[50:38] That's a good one.

[50:38] I only want new jokes.

[50:41] Yeah, but that one still applies.

[50:42] That's the problem.

[50:45] Commission of your ethics ordinance currently provides that all

[50:48] Ethics and Plane procedures are to be confidential.

[50:51] That's in your code, section 3, dash 4, 13.

[50:55] Ethics, Commission and staff, the complaint and the subject of the complaint may not disclose

[50:59] any information relating to the complaint, including the identity of the complaint and

[51:04] or the subject.

[51:06] Now, this is almost identical to the state ethics law, which is found in the state code

[51:13] 5407 that provides, again, for a confidentiality with the ethics process for state employees

[51:19] and state officials. It provides that those proceedings are to be confidential and that information

[51:25] relating to the complaint, including the identity of the complaint or the subject of the complaint,

[51:30] may not be disclosed by the complaint. By anybody, including the complaint.

[51:37] Again, that the process

[51:39] This is confidential until the very end. If there's a violation found, then everything

[51:43] is on the table. Everything is disclosed. The entire process becomes completely transparent

[51:49] at that point. Now, what has been proposed at the request of one of the commissioners,

[51:54] as to, I'm

[52:00] sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

[52:07] What's been proposed is to give the ethics administrator

[52:11] or the ethics commissions, the discretion to dismiss a complaint when a complaint violates the

[52:17] confidentiality process in the ethics ordinance, for example, by disclosing the contents

[52:23] of a complaint.

[52:25] Right now, unless you're an employee or an official of county government, frankly, the disclosure

[52:31] of confidential information during the ethics process has no consequences that we can't

[52:38] not we, the Ethics Commission can't go after private citizens in any way, shape or form.

[52:45] So what's being proposed is giving the Ethics Administrator or the Ethics Commission

[52:50] to discretion to dismiss a complaint, where there's a violation of the confidentiality

[52:55] provisions by the complaint.

[52:59] How do you say the state handles this?

[53:01] Yes, they have an ethics thing brought up before them, and then it's put out publicly.

[53:06] What do they do?

[53:06] They have the same provision that we have. It says that the process is confidential until the

[53:11] conclusion, and only if the conclusion is the, as a violation found.

[53:17] I would have, during the process, the, whatever complaint is brought out to the TV stations or something.

[53:24] There is, there's no provision, no remedy at that, and that either.

[53:30] Presently, if that confidentiality is broken by anyone there, can the ethics commission

[53:38] do anything with it or can you dismiss the case?

[53:41] Presently?

[53:41] There's no provision that allows them to do that, President Lee.

[53:46] Just for a jocularity, you would be suggest that the state would ever pass any law that is in constitute.

[53:57] That Mr. Colonel brings up some good points to how county government or the federal government

[54:03] are not allowed to punish people's first amendment rights.

[54:08] If there have been some ethics codes and some judicial ethics codes that have been struck

[54:12] down by the courts under the first amendment, because they provided for either civil penalties

[54:18] or criminal penalties against people who disclose confidential information. That's a violation

[54:23] of their free speech rights and a punishment to a fire restraint. What's being proposed does

[54:29] not do that? It doesn't impose any penalties on the complaint or the disclosure disclosure.

[54:36] Their free speech rights are not infringed upon. They're free to stand on the street court

[54:39] and call you crooks on a unethical or whatever. There's nothing the county can do to prevent

[54:44] that it does give the ethics commission the discretion if that occurs to dismiss to complain

[54:52] on those grounds. So they have good now. They don't really have it.

[54:57] They don't really have it. They don't really have it. They don't really have it.

[55:00] Let's go back to his issue of penalties. So right now the Supreme Court, you said, as I will

[55:05] instruct down, the officials are in a decision to impose penalties, civil or criminal

[55:09] penalties and someone to greek them for motion.

[55:11] Yeah, complaints, or even the press, for example.

[55:15] The next slide, this question would be if an ethics process were halted and thrown out

[55:27] because someone decided to go to the press because they think the Commissioner John

[55:31] Doe was keeping paper custody to come.

[55:34] Isn't that denying that citizen the right to avail himself of government processes to

[55:46] redress agreements in the event he exercises his first amendment rights is in that

[55:50] form of a civil of a penalty?

[55:54] I mean you can't have the privilege of driving your car unless you promise not to talk

[55:59] about you are

[56:05] you are hearing for live in the radical it's a privilege it's not a right

[56:10] the courts have room well you also have rights as citizens who are serving government not

[56:16] to not have this information disclosed until there's a final resolution but against you

[56:24] I think that's the difference between that and the prime now somebody chooses not to use the

[56:29] of the district court, and falls a complaint against the commissioner and says, I believe

[56:36] the John Doe is stealing paper clips.

[56:40] That's a public document.

[56:42] What the criminal charges are processed, there's absolutely no protections, right, and

[56:46] the defendant.

[56:47] But the defendant could still, if the charges were prevalence in some cases.

[56:55] It's up cases, yeah.

[56:56] But if you file a document over a district court or a circuit court, that's a public document.

[57:02] Now, another, we see another phone call from someone who has some concerns about

[57:08] the possibility of opening the process for Mr. So Commissioner Jondo gets charged with taking

[57:14] paper clips and he knows he's guilty. So he leads it to his brother-in-law, who leads

[57:23] it to his employee, who leads it to his sister-in-law, who leads it to his friend to work

[57:28] for the newspaper, and the next thing you know, which shows up in this paper, the Commissioner

[57:33] John Del, which stealing paper clips, and there was an ethics complaint, and he indirectly,

[57:43] manufactured a way to get himself out from under it.

[57:46] By linking it indirectly, indirectly, indirectly, indirectly, indirectly.

[57:51] And there's no way to tell him, how do you protect this process from having the defendant

[57:58] Is that the right word?

[57:59] You're not the defendant.

[58:00] What would you call the person who's accused?

[58:02] I complain.

[58:04] They call him respond.

[58:05] It's a surprise.

[58:06] So what's the stop?

[58:07] I responded from being very clever and manipulative and linking the stop indirect through a series of other people so eventually gets to the press.

[58:15] In order to have his own, the complaints thrown out against himself.

[58:19] Well, you'd have to show that the complaint did the leak, did the leaking, did the disclosure.

[58:25] So you'd have to find someone his brother-law to file an ethics of play and then wave the ethics

[58:30] of play around and say when what I just did when it comes up through five or six, a chain of

[58:35] five or six people and the next thing you know, the corporate history of how it got out there

[58:41] becomes invisible. So the ethics of commission can't determine exactly who they did, but it's clearly

[58:48] out there that John Doe was charged with taking paper clips. So does it get dismissed or does it

[58:53] I can't clearly trace it back to the respondent.

[58:56] Well, it was a third of the questions that I did to determine that if they can't

[58:59] close, I'll find out who put it out through the press.

[59:04] My guess is they would dismiss it, just to guess.

[59:08] But the other side is when someone makes an ethics complaint and then runs to the care

[59:14] of any times or runs to the radio station or a new station and says, I did this, it's

[59:19] what I did.

[59:20] There's a doubt about what happened.

[59:22] So one of the things that I'm wondering about, and again, this is a sort of phone call, so

[59:26] so many of the things that lead to affix complaints are not issues which develop in the sphere

[59:33] of a sphere of a single person, these are things that develop in the sphere of public opinion.

[59:40] Half a dozen people are having dinner one night talking about Commissioner John Doe, and whether

[59:45] or not John Doe misuse the power of his office, and then one of them says, well, I'll file.

[59:51] The other five know about it at that point.

[59:55] One of them who didn't file weeks is the revelation.

[1:00:01] Is the ethics complain, public document? No. No. What's the matter? Until the process is completed and there's a finding against a responded or a subject, it's confidential. Nothing should ever be disclosed on this.

[1:00:19] The way your code is written and the way the state law is written and the way the most codes are written, they have a confidentiality provision in there.

[1:00:27] So, Compton and Gelty is the population both parties at this point, right?

[1:00:33] Yes.

[1:00:34] Yes, right.

[1:00:34] I'm sorry.

[1:00:35] The third of the do-so on one point has no consequences.

[1:00:40] On other point, actually, it actually has no consequences, correct?

[1:00:42] It depends on who you are.

[1:00:43] If you're a county employee, and you do something that you do something that then,

[1:00:47] yeah, the Athens Commission can't, at least,

[1:00:51] bring you with front of the, for questioning or, or if you're a county official,

[1:00:56] I'll do that. This would do more of the ethics commissions called correct or necessary.

[1:01:03] It's all the ethics commissions called. It's a wish and hearing from them.

[1:01:07] Yeah, you may want to hear from them.

[1:01:11] Two is there another outside the realm of ethics. Is there anything else like this where confidentiality is supposed to be something that's provided as part of a legal process?

[1:01:23] And so then we can look to you to say, OK, well, here's a different kind of legal pursuit.

[1:01:29] But if it was disclosed, this is how it would be handled.

[1:01:32] You know, you know, you know, asking these things come up in the, like,

[1:01:37] judicial disciplinary proceedings, the judicial ethics proceedings.

[1:01:41] There's a complaint against judges, things like that.

[1:01:45] That would be one example.

[1:01:46] So how do they handle it?

[1:01:47] I mean, what are the, if someone discloses, what do they do?

[1:01:52] That would be good to look at.

[1:01:54] I mean, I mean, I mean, I'm trying to be on the spot,

[1:01:56] but I'm just thinking, you know, this can't be the only

[1:01:58] time when confidentiality's been at issue in terms

[1:02:03] of a protective aspect, but confidentiality, you know,

[1:02:08] I can sign a confidentiality to, you know,

[1:02:12] I'm going to buy Commissioner Rothschild's business,

[1:02:14] and he has to be signed a non-disclosure,

[1:02:16] But I might be having Commissioner Frazier participated in that and you know, I mean like at least not everything is one person's a one person sometimes things form collaboratively

[1:02:27] And something gets out, but there needs to be some I'm thinking there's other examples of maybe where

[1:02:35] This type of issues, but it drives not not on the merits of ethics itself, but from the standpoint of just process

[1:02:43] Well, yes, that's exactly right.

[1:02:47] And I going back inside of the sphere,

[1:02:49] but sometimes when complaints are filed,

[1:02:50] they develop collectively by groups of people

[1:02:55] and one or two might actually fire.

[1:02:57] I mean, let's say, three of us were charged

[1:02:59] with some kind of open meetings violation.

[1:03:02] That's where we all met with a business.

[1:03:05] And for whatever kind of accountability

[1:03:06] somebody thinks we, and they trace the pursuit

[1:03:09] as an ethics violation.

[1:03:12] And people were talking about it in the public, and there were 20 people talking about it,

[1:03:17] but only 25.

[1:03:19] And one of the other 18 leaks up.

[1:03:22] You see, there's two different issues here.

[1:03:24] There's two or three different issues.

[1:03:26] One issue, of course, is this reconstitutionality.

[1:03:29] Can't send or to a citizen if possible.

[1:03:31] I wouldn't dismiss your complaint that gets out to the press,

[1:03:33] because that essentially deprived them of their first amendment rights.

[1:03:37] The second question that comes up here is,

[1:03:39] is opening up the system for mission. My favorite, my favorite elected official is John

[1:03:44] Doe. And I find out that John Doe is under whatever means I find out that he's a subject

[1:03:51] of an ethics investigation. So a bunch of my friends somehow link it to the press. They're

[1:03:57] by trying to get the charges dismissed. I've just tried to anticipate that law will

[1:04:04] the consequences of this.

[1:04:06] Well, how would you find out if you follow the rules of the Ethics Commission, you wouldn't

[1:04:12] find out that your favorite politician is under has a complaint?

[1:04:16] I can give you an example of how can five people are sitting on a dinner table and you say

[1:04:20] what they have to give you.

[1:04:21] Now, I understand what you're saying.

[1:04:22] Well, some of them are like mine, but one of them is, one of them is actually a friend

[1:04:25] of John to the other 400 ponies, so the four of them are ponies, one of them files,

[1:04:34] and

[1:04:34] one because it's on the, it's any, the charter, the rules of the ethics commission, they

[1:04:40] won't say anything. So while they're all sitting around at dinner talking about it, and it

[1:04:44] may go, I'd say, you know, we talked about this at dinner, but the only person that knows that they

[1:04:47] filed the complaint is a person that actually filed the complaint. And that person is supposedly

[1:04:52] held to confidentiality. Therefore, no one would know that. So we get leaked. You got leaked by the

[1:04:58] person that filed it, or the person who was filed against. You can't be leaked in another way.

[1:05:02] to be discussing it and wanted to say how filed.

[1:05:05] Now, if it wasn't at one of the four, it was a friend.

[1:05:07] The other four was a friend of the officials.

[1:05:09] So, the one who was a friend, the liberalist,

[1:05:11] who tried to disembowl their complaint.

[1:05:15] So, if I sit there with Kushe Roach up and say,

[1:05:19] which, so until I think was a violation,

[1:05:22] I'll follow the paper and you, you call the care academy types.

[1:05:28] If I, if I haven't followed the yet, if I violated the ordinance,

[1:05:33] You, yes, let's get it.

[1:05:36] Currently, it reads the Ethics Commission, it's staff, the Complaintant Complaintant,

[1:05:40] and the Respondent, who's a subject may not disclose any information relating to

[1:05:44] Complaint, including the identity of the Complaintant and the Respondents.

[1:05:48] Would that include the intention to file?

[1:05:51] No, but, by Commission Rush else's scenario, we're all having dinner, and I say, well,

[1:05:58] you know what?

[1:05:59] You're right.

[1:06:00] And so many to do some about that, I'm going to file.

[1:06:03] And I mean, because the Commissioner Frazier's point, the real act is the filing itself.

[1:06:08] Right. Now, if someone comes back and says, well, five people are having dinner and rich

[1:06:12] just to, you know, to me, we're done to you ever file it.

[1:06:17] At the point at which I say yes or no, that's the point where actually I am then devolving.

[1:06:22] Because what you're saying is truly, you can't go for sure.

[1:06:25] Unless the person finally devolves it.

[1:06:28] And you can maybe know what their intent was.

[1:06:30] You can know that it's likely you can know they talked about it doing it, but you can't know for sure they did it

[1:06:36] Don't ask I can't tell you

[1:06:37] So here's a question. Yeah, if the Kail County times

[1:06:45] Then is sort of made aware that this is happening right happen or did happen and they call the ethics commission to say has there been a complaint file against XYZ

[1:06:56] Do they what is the response to that?

[1:06:58] I think they can't respond.

[1:07:01] No, but I don't want to catch off.

[1:07:02] But most likely what happens is that they will call the person, and they believe,

[1:07:07] thought you could play and say, did you thought it was complete?

[1:07:10] And that's what happens.

[1:07:11] It's amazing.

[1:07:11] Oh, you sure I thought it could play and respond.

[1:07:14] It's not a paper.

[1:07:15] And they already thought it was complete.

[1:07:16] That is.

[1:07:18] So it's the confirmation of the file, which is really the point where we're over a clear one.

[1:07:25] Yeah.

[1:07:26] I think so.

[1:07:27] And they say, I can't tell you if I followed them,

[1:07:29] kill again times as a story here.

[1:07:33] But I couldn't say, you know, for sure,

[1:07:35] how is it?

[1:07:35] You couldn't tell me if you followed them.

[1:07:37] But the other thing's mission could throw this out

[1:07:41] because the non-public document

[1:07:43] when public correct.

[1:07:45] No, no, they can't do that.

[1:07:47] Okay, it's not now.

[1:07:48] Not now.

[1:07:49] That's the purpose of it at the end.

[1:07:51] To give them, if this pass, they could do that.

[1:07:55] They would have to describe this question.

[1:07:56] It's not made at all.

[1:07:59] Right.

[1:08:00] Right.

[1:08:00] Which also kind of then sort of speaks to Commissioner Rachal scenario, which is, if I said,

[1:08:07] well, it was devolves, but then it turned out to be devolves by someone that was sympathetic

[1:08:11] for the person being accused.

[1:08:13] It's still in the discretion of the ethics commissioner to say, well, that doesn't get you out of trouble.

[1:08:19] Just because your body knew about it and devolves it, right?

[1:08:23] I mean, they have discretion.

[1:08:24] they would have to discretion regardless of who even if the complain makes it and then they

[1:08:29] will find it to be an egregious violation and they could continue to proceed with it.

[1:08:36] So on to what, so if we're going to give someone discretionary authority it presumes that

[1:08:41] there's some guidance over which discretionary actions would possible line in which wouldn't.

[1:08:48] Right?

[1:08:48] And I think it has to be their best judgment as to whether or not they could claim it.

[1:08:55] should that information, right, devolves that information, and they'd have to make a

[1:09:01] judge and so on.

[1:09:03] So let me hear the ethics, I mean the ethics person right now actually can dismiss

[1:09:07] something just by looking at it and saying, I don't think there's enough substance if it does

[1:09:11] not lay out a complaint under the end of the ethics.

[1:09:14] And I understand these guidelines there, but I mean there's already some discretion, I mean

[1:09:19] I mean, it's not like this is a completely black and white,

[1:09:22] everything that's filed finds its way through the entire process.

[1:09:26] And so we're asking someone then at that point to say,

[1:09:29] OK, well,

[1:09:33] you're confident enough to dismiss this,

[1:09:36] based on the fact that the information,

[1:09:40] if you're OK times calls that person and they say,

[1:09:44] oh, yeah, I filed it.

[1:09:45] Well, they're on YouTube, Sam.

[1:09:46] I filed it, whether they're in a political club,

[1:09:49] I mean, you know, someone's going to have to have a certain degree of confidence to be able to use this authority that they're being given, right?

[1:10:00] I mean, that's part of the deal. Otherwise, we'd be saying, well, it's not even discretionary, just kicks it out on the back of you, which says that's not what we're saying, right?

[1:10:10] So, three people come to the hearing room and start yelling at one of us because they think

[1:10:15] we own the company that's going to be fixing a stormwater management plan to have a conflict

[1:10:20] of the ventures.

[1:10:21] And they all three stand up and accuse us of that expolation, scoring an open meeting.

[1:10:26] Nothing's been filed yet, okay?

[1:10:30] And that night, one of them follows.

[1:10:33] And then the next day, five more people come to the hearing room and say, we heard about it yesterday,

[1:10:37] And we think you did come at an ethics fund.

[1:10:39] They start arguing with the economics violation.

[1:10:43] So, it's public.

[1:10:45] It's on TV.

[1:10:46] There's been something filed.

[1:10:48] It's not public that it was filed.

[1:10:50] It's not public that it was filed.

[1:10:53] It wasn't public that it was filed.

[1:10:57] I'm just asking.

[1:10:58] It wasn't public that.

[1:11:00] But I also think Commissioner Weaver's point.

[1:11:03] Maybe we should have someone from the ethics commission come in.

[1:11:06] Well, this is just to see whether you want to, this is what you did all public hearing.

[1:11:11] It needs to be a public hearing.

[1:11:12] You need to hear from everybody.

[1:11:14] Certainly the ethics commission would be invited.

[1:11:16] I didn't want to bring them all in.

[1:11:17] Right.

[1:11:18] I'm proceeding at this point.

[1:11:19] I think we'll send door to public hearing.

[1:11:21] If we proceed to public hearing.

[1:11:22] Right.

[1:11:22] It's one of them or however many wanted to come in and speak to this.

[1:11:26] But people who think it's a bad idea will come in and speak to it.

[1:11:29] Right.

[1:11:29] But I go.

[1:11:30] But I kind of get the sense that you're almost asking it.

[1:11:33] like to hear from them before you decide whether or not it should go to the point where they can speak then.

[1:11:38] Okay, I would be fine with that.

[1:11:44] Is there any point at which we need them to speak as a body?

[1:11:48] No, you would draft the ordinances for the county if they don't.

[1:11:52] But I mean, we would want them to speak as...

[1:11:54] I mean, sometimes people ask our opinion on things and sometimes they prefer to hear from us after reaching some consensus.

[1:12:02] I mean, so I mean, would we, I mean, I think that's the question we've brought more for

[1:12:07] us, but I'm getting back to what Commissioner Weaver is saying, you know, do you want

[1:12:11] to hear from the, you know, is this, you can certainly refer it to the ethics commission.

[1:12:15] For them to say, you know, as a, you know, because, I don't know if that's the right

[1:12:20] course of not, but at that point, if they said, well, no, we, we really, this is, because I mean,

[1:12:26] there's no question that it definitely all through the process, there's also no question

[1:12:32] Well, they're already supposed to be confidential, right?

[1:12:36] I mean, I don't know that at all there's the process at all.

[1:12:39] Well, I guess what I'm saying is misuse ulcers the process.

[1:12:42] So in that, you know, I mean, people that can't achieve a success

[1:12:47] at the ballot box can find ways to misuse other things.

[1:12:51] And that's part of what that disclosure is accomplished.

[1:12:57] So, you know, that's not the intention of ethics.

[1:12:59] And the intention of ethics is to, you know, monitor our activities and keep them ethical.

[1:13:08] And to actually do not.

[1:13:10] Let me remember scenario by.

[1:13:13] So, this thing is really angry because he thinks that his representative is a Fisher Representative committed

[1:13:19] and agreed just ethics act.

[1:13:21] So, he follows a complaint.

[1:13:24] And then as he follows a complaint, but the next day, he meets with all his neighbors and says,

[1:13:28] I think the Commissioner of John Doe committed a religious act and I want to protest him

[1:13:33] if I can.

[1:13:34] The next day, a 50-navish shop in front of the county office building, protesting, saying

[1:13:39] that Commissioner of John Doe is committed, it should resign because he did this

[1:13:46] and agreed just a large violation of ethics.

[1:13:51] He doesn't actually say that the file doesn't tell there's actually a file that's

[1:13:55] Plank pretty scored it as a protest with 50 people related to the exact same mission.

[1:13:59] Now.

[1:14:00] Here's the right to do that.

[1:14:01] He didn't say five complaints.

[1:14:02] He has broken confidentiality at all.

[1:14:05] But there's no way that.

[1:14:06] But there's no way those 50 people know.

[1:14:09] Or any of them know where the paper knows that something's been filed.

[1:14:13] Unless he demotes.

[1:14:14] If that's out there, then he had to demotes.

[1:14:17] So he can run around until 1,000 people.

[1:14:19] I think the John Deau violated the ethics was not he doesn't say he filed a complaint. He hasn't brought he hasn't crossed the line

[1:14:27] Right, because whatever process then the ethics commission goes through they go through they come up three months later and say no

[1:14:35] It completely had been filed. This is what our findings were yay name whatever, but it's not

[1:14:42] And the paper interviews and wise protesting and says so Mr. Smith your protest and commission John

[1:14:49] did you did you file an afters complaint he says no comment

[1:14:54] okay then you can have well

[1:14:57] I'm just not that it would have happened here you could have

[1:15:00] People standing out there with signs accusing people of all kinds.

[1:15:03] I don't remember that.

[1:15:05] That's not true. That's not true.

[1:15:06] That's not true. That's not true.

[1:15:08] Citizen is still free to protest.

[1:15:09] He's still free to light accusations. He's still free to run ads, right?

[1:15:13] Letters, carry signs.

[1:15:15] Turn, he just can't say the words. I follow the complaint, though.

[1:15:19] That's true.

[1:15:21] I'm just asking.

[1:15:22] Is it matters?

[1:15:23] It's a big difference.

[1:15:25] Yeah, there is a big difference.

[1:15:26] Because the problem with the, the following of the complaint is that

[1:15:30] It goes to another level in terms of, you know, well, first of all, the whole process is

[1:15:36] compromised.

[1:15:37] I think of that one.

[1:15:37] But secondly, you know, the idea is also some measure of protection for the innocent.

[1:15:46] And so, you know, at that point, you have to say, well, the fact that 100 people do, I mean,

[1:15:51] you know, I mean, I expect over five years, I can't imagine how many people have protested

[1:15:56] me across the street, that's fine. I welcome that to me again. So many of them. And that's fine.

[1:16:03] But if someone says, oh, he was brought up with ethical charges for blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

[1:16:08] That's a different level of accusation. And, you know, the only way someone would know that is if they had actually filed it or demolished

[1:16:18] it.

[1:16:19] In my case, they did it on the same day, which was, you know, really nice. So, you know.

[1:16:24] One of the reasons why I think we're having discussions because we know that statistically

[1:16:29] I'm just going to make up a number

[1:16:31] Well, that was on the numbers. Almost every ethics and playing filed is basically in the term that I have no merit

[1:16:44] But so in the interest of thought coming up with a hundred more scenarios

[1:16:51] Which we could do that all afternoon. I mean, I you know, I think we're getting the same place with any of those right

[1:16:57] I think we've answered that question

[1:16:59] what's the appetite for

[1:17:01] seeing this go through

[1:17:03] to the public hearing?

[1:17:06] I think some of the forms of public hearing.

[1:17:13] I like to assure we reside here.

[1:17:15] I'm hearing from the Commission,

[1:17:17] but I think it would be an attempt to make sure that what we put out for public hearing

[1:17:21] is what we should put out.

[1:17:23] But my intent would be to put out for public hearing.

[1:17:25] But I want to do that first.

[1:17:27] I think we should hear from each other.

[1:17:28] I think we should hear from each other.

[1:17:30] I think we should hear from each other.

[1:17:30] First of all, we will refer the the proposal to the ethics commission for their comment and then come back to you with the results

[1:17:38] Okay, we're having a stack. I think the discussion appears is if we're all kind of getting to that same place. So that's I think that's where we

[1:17:47] Anything's where we're going right. Okay. Good idea

[1:17:50] One need to check on ethical actions

[1:17:53] Tim, I got to ask one other question

[1:17:55] In this family at the state level. I know as a general rule

[1:17:58] rule, we can't pass things that impact us or things that seem things to get passed during

[1:18:05] a term, don't go into effect until the next election or the next body of folks.

[1:18:11] Is this different from that because I know the presence of the, well, it was when we

[1:18:15] did the termlets.

[1:18:16] The state could impose that, but they couldn't impose it until the next round of elections.

[1:18:20] And this is something that, no, this would be effective now, so this is not subject to

[1:18:25] that kind of battle.

[1:18:27] Okay.

[1:18:28] Okay.

[1:18:29] This would not be a threat.

[1:18:30] If you adopted it would be a threat.

[1:18:31] If this would not rise to the threshold of a retrospective outcome of the Constitution,

[1:18:35] the minutes it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a stereo change.

[1:18:40] Doesn't really change any requirements on us.

[1:18:44] Now we just impose as an additional requirement or complaining.

[1:18:47] Well actually, doesn't even do that.

[1:18:49] It just has a great to consequence for what is already imposed upon.

[1:18:53] They're already bound by confidence.

[1:18:55] You just create the cards correct.

[1:18:57] That's exactly right.

[1:18:58] It's exactly the same.

[1:18:58] I was a consequence for what I need existing rule.

[1:19:01] It doesn't rise in the threshold of changing your requirement.

[1:19:03] Let's go back and see where the official.

[1:19:06] Look at it.

[1:19:08] Okay.

[1:19:08] Thank you very much.

[1:19:09] Thank you.

[1:19:11] Yes.

[1:19:11] It's the best observation we've had in the long.

[1:19:15] Okay.

[1:19:17] Approval an adoption of minutes.

[1:19:20] Do we have any?

[1:19:21] Yeah, we do.

[1:19:22] I guess that's what it is.

[1:19:24] There's the January the 14th at 9 a.m.

[1:19:32] It's the only set that we have.

[1:19:39] Motion through fruit.

[1:19:44] Got a second.

[1:19:46] I'll second.

[1:19:50] All in favor.

[1:19:53] All right.

[1:19:53] I'm going to abstain just because I have to go.

[1:19:55] Thank you.

[1:19:56] Okay, that's it for the minutes, right?

[1:19:59] All right.

[1:19:59] Agendas.

[1:20:02] And we welcome the ace to the front table, which is always so exciting.

[1:20:06] But she's wearing the colors one of the cheap ones in with the chair.

[1:20:12] I was going to make a million.

[1:20:14] I was going to make that comment but I'm in no way doing that.

[1:20:16] All right.

[1:20:17] I didn't go.

[1:20:18] I actually prefer today as the chairwoman.

[1:20:23] I'm a gender chairwoman.

[1:20:24] So you should be quite happy at this point.

[1:20:27] She's thrilled for her.

[1:20:29] I see that expression for a number of reasons.

[1:20:32] Not certainly not including tomorrow's schedule.

[1:20:35] Okay.

[1:20:35] Next week, January the 25th, nothing on Monday. Tuesday is our Board of County Commissioners

[1:20:43] Cabinet retreat, that's scheduled for EDM that day. Wednesday finds myself in Commissioner

[1:20:51] Rochow in anapolis again. I will be at the Maryland Association of County's legislative

[1:20:59] reception at 5 p.m. in anapolis and Commissioner Rochow has the Board of Education budget

[1:21:05] meeting at 6 p.m. in the West Coast.

[1:21:08] That's not right.

[1:21:09] Did somebody not eat lunch?

[1:21:11] I'm not sure what that is.

[1:21:14] So we're...

[1:21:15] So I must hurry and not do everything.

[1:21:17] Uh, Thursday to 28th we have closed admin at 9 and then open session at 10, which includes

[1:21:23] Water and Silver Master Plan Discussions, Jones and Excitation.

[1:21:28] Stable Families Program, Grant Award.

[1:21:30] We're going to discuss landfill rates, and site-filled freedom relief sewer discussion, and also care of county detention center off site housing.

[1:21:44] 130 that afternoon, renewal of the radio system service, discussion on the cable franchise agreement, and that's it for that day.

[1:21:53] We're going to close for boards and commissions on Thursday at 28th. If we're dug out by that.

[1:22:00] Friday this twenty-nine. Commissioner Howard will be at the EMC meeting. And that's set it in

[1:22:07] that.

[1:22:08] Both.

[1:22:10] Yes.

[1:22:11] It's involved more.

[1:22:11] I don't think that- oh, actually this one is an animal threat.

[1:22:15] It's okay.

[1:22:16] It's just like a threat.

[1:22:17] Well, you're just like I said, it's a threat.

[1:22:19] Didn't you get- did not want to steer Mr. Howard in the wrong direction by the way?

[1:22:23] I had to think about that one myself.

[1:22:25] And then Saturday, that Saturday in Mr. Rochob will be at wing

[1:22:29] field and we'll fire department banquet and commissioner Howard has the commissioner's dress.

[1:22:37] That throws us right in the February already.

[1:22:42] There we are at the first.

[1:22:43] Mister's leader of Howard at planning zoning commission.

[1:22:47] Tuesday the second.

[1:22:48] We have closed admin and then our joint Board of County Commissioners and Board of Education meeting.

[1:22:54] Which should be.

[1:22:56] see the seat of the chair activity excitement to the max. That's that afternoon at three.

[1:23:04] I'll take some value in the flow on the way. Wednesday the third.

[1:23:09] I heard they required that if your participation of that board, is that not sure?

[1:23:13] I don't want to move it.

[1:23:15] Would you like to go to the store around this place?

[1:23:18] I'm still trying to hold up the young red flashcards.

[1:23:21] I never, I never did it.

[1:23:23] I think that's a 1961.

[1:23:25] I never go through the field.

[1:23:27] I never go through the field.

[1:23:28] I do want to raise your hand at that.

[1:23:30] Just stand.

[1:23:31] On Wednesday the third of February.

[1:23:36] Uh...

[1:23:36] Commissioner Howard, I guess you should go have in warfield

[1:23:38] Development Corporation meetings.

[1:23:40] Just for a whole time saying that.

[1:23:43] Commissioner Rodchano myself, or inapolis, again, that Wednesday

[1:23:46] and Commissioner Rodchaub,

[1:23:49] is that the Board of Education budget hearing at 7 p.m. that night.

[1:23:55] 30 a.m. is the Ag Business Breakfast right now, I have Commissioner Weaver on that.

[1:24:04] Okay, 10 a.m. we're going to open with a Proclamation, B.G. and E.

[1:24:11] Briefing. That ought to be interesting after this weekend.

[1:24:17] What are some master plan discussions and economic development refunding revenue bonds with Mr.

[1:24:22] Burke and that's it for that day. Friday the fifth is our joint Board of County

[1:24:29] Commissioners and delegation meeting and that's in anapolis at 9 a.m. Yes, Ms.

[1:24:35] Hoover. I will be adding the address or the room address and the street address

[1:24:40] for that. Okay, that's in the Western Maryland room. We'll be okay. We got it. Saturday

[1:24:48] February 6, Commissioner Weaver and Lance, we'll be at the care of

[1:24:55] any services bureau of chocolate ball.

[1:25:00] If I survive that night, I'll do the

[1:25:02] commissioners report on Sunday morning.

[1:25:07] Any additions, corrections, stuff we want

[1:25:11] to go to.

[1:25:14] All right.

[1:25:19] We're going to entertain a motion to move into clothes,

[1:25:25] right for boards and commissions. So we'll do that. I'm sorry, person now. Is it

[1:25:31] the boss person now? Okay, hold on. So just to remind you, I think we've covered

[1:25:36] the storm enough today, but just to remind her again, everybody stay tuned, certainly

[1:25:42] we're making all efforts a weekend to make sure everybody's safe and remind her again

[1:25:49] that the county office building will be closing at 3 p.m. tomorrow and care of county

[1:25:54] public schools are after three hours early tomorrow. So three hours of

[1:25:59] that tonight. Schools are after three hours early tomorrow. Yes. And

[1:26:03] and the office building is being shut down at 3 p.m. Okay, Mr.

[1:26:09] Reminder. All right. I'll entertain a motion to go into closed for

[1:26:14] personnel. The motion to go into closed for personnel. Second.

[1:26:18] That's all in favour.

[1:26:22] Didn't I look any more good?

[1:26:23] Don't-it's a nice time.

[1:26:23] Thank you.

[1:26:24] Then I'll entertain a motion to adjourn after that.

[1:26:27] No mood.

[1:26:29] All in favour.

[1:26:31] All right.

[1:26:32] How good do I do?

[1:26:36] You did.

[1:26:37] You got the-can you got the-can I'm gonna go like this?

[1:26:41] I-can me.

[1:26:43] You'll get

[1:27:08] the final report.

[1:27:10] I'm gonna go like this.

[1:27:10] Go to Carol County MD that IQM2.com

Board of Carroll County Commissioners Open Session

Agenda

Transcript