[0:00] Okay, we're we're sitting at 6:03. We're a little bit late getting started

[0:04] tonight. I do apologize for that. Uh we have no business tonight for the uh

[0:09] planning I mean for the BZA. So, we'll move uh straight on in to the planning

[0:14] commission. I'll now call this meeting to order. If you all would please join

[0:19] me in prayer.

[0:23] Dear heavenly father, we come to you just thanking you again for another day

[0:27] of life, dear God, and for the health and the ability that you give each and

[0:31] every one of us to to get up and go and do. And I pray, Lord, that you're

[0:35] pleased with how we've went about things until now. And I ask, Lord, as we come

[0:39] together tonight to conduct the business of the planning commission, that you

[0:43] would be with us and and guide our thoughts, our minds, our words, dear

[0:46] God, our actions, and may each and everything that's done here tonight be

[0:50] pleasing to you, Lord. Dear God, I lift up our our country to you, our state,

[0:54] our our county, dear God, and the officials that uh that are in each one

[0:59] of those capacities. I just pray that you would guide them, dear God. There's

[1:02] a lot of folks hurting, a lot of folks needing help, and a lot of decisions

[1:06] that need to be made. We know you're aware of them, dear God. I just pray

[1:09] that you would guide in the process. Dear God, we we thank you for

[1:14] everything, but most of all, we thank you for your son, Jesus, and what he did

[1:18] upon the cross and the hope we have etern in eternity through him. And it's

[1:22] in his name we do pray. >> Amen.

[1:25] » Amen. >> We're join pledge attention, salute,

[1:30] pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to

[1:36] the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with

[1:43] liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you all very much.

[1:51] And we're on to the minutes. Uh, everyone should have a packet in front

[1:56] of them. I know emails went out. We had a little bit of a deal getting the

[2:00] package to you in physical copies earlier, but I I trust if you had a

[2:05] chance to to see those and look over, if anyone has not, I'll give you a moment

[2:10] now to to flip through it. Is everyone good on those? Had a chance to review.

[2:16] » So move, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. I have a proper motion to approve

[2:18] a mess. Had a second for Randy [snorts] Bales. Austin made the motion.

[2:23] Any discussion on that? Being none, all those in favor of approving the agenda,

[2:28] pardon me, approving the minutes from the April meeting, let me know by saying

[2:32] I. I. >> All those opposed. Motion passes.

[2:37] Citizens input. We've checked the basket and there is none. Did I see Stephanie?

[2:42] You didn't have anything turned into you. Okay. We'll move on down to new

[2:46] business. And the first item under new business tonight is item A, final plat

[2:51] approval for three lots off Ponderosa Drive in Dandridge, Ponderosa Ranch

[2:57] Farm, lot one by Jared and Alicia. Wait, do we have someone here to represent

[3:02] that?

[3:07] » I don't know. >> They are actually bought the SOS like

[3:12] early today. I think there's an issue with they're probably going to have to

[3:16] do two lots instead of three lots because of the topography or the slope.

[3:22] » Okay. >> So, he did not approve it today. So,

[3:25] » so he did not approve it. So, >> they're not coming tonight. Okay. U

[3:29] » So, do we want to table? >> I'd say we table till June or until

[3:33] instead of doing it to the June meeting, let's postpone it until they have their

[3:37] stuff together. If someone make that motion that way, put a time. move item A

[3:42] be postponed until they can produce the proper documentation to present to this

[3:49] body. >> Okay. Thank you, Austin. We have a

[3:51] proper motion made by Austin. Do we have a second?

[3:53] » We have a second. Chad Dixon second. Any discussion on that?

[3:58] Being none, all those in favor of proponing item A until they have their

[4:03] proper documents in line. Everything approved, let me know by saying I.

[4:07] » I. All those opposed passes.

[4:16] [clears throat] We're to item B, revised site plan for a

[4:20] new pole barn to be constructed at 329 Lfield Road in Jefferson City by Rody

[4:25] Ronnie and Karen Trent. We have someone here. If you would step to the podium

[4:30] and state your name and you. >> Ronnie Trent, 329 Landfield Road.

[4:35] » Okay. Ryan, talk to us a little bit about what you want to do.

[4:38] » Well, we got a shop that's already there. I just need more room to place

[4:41] some more toys, more implements. You know how it is.

[4:45] » Yes, sir. >> Next thing you got one, you can build

[4:47] one. You think you're big enough that you're not. So, anyway, we're just

[4:51] construct another uh building there. Um on the print, I mean, on the drawing it

[4:57] shows a 50 by I think what 108. Um I'd like to change that dimension if

[5:04] we could. It's going to be a big problem. It won't matter. I was want to

[5:07] go with maybe 60 by 100 instead of 50 by 108 because we found out it's a little

[5:12] bit odd size. Um so if that matters or it doesn't matter.

[5:19] » You want to go 60 by 100. Yeah. >> So we're moving 8 ft and adding two.

[5:25] » Yeah. [clears throat] And it's just going to set directly, you

[5:29] know, in facing from uh shops over there. It's just parks and dump trucks

[5:34] under and trailers under and tractors and mowers, you know, stuff like that.

[5:40] » Put in your packet a copy of his survey showing where his house is located

[5:44] because the only reason he's having to do this because it's on the commercial

[5:48] portion of his property, not the agriculture.

[5:58] » I think the house is on like 2.02. We cut that off a few years ago.

[6:03] » 2.13. >> Yeah. There you go. And that way we

[6:05] could have a residence on that commercial property. So we cut that off

[6:09] a few years ago.

[6:14] » And I actually I actually own the property used to be the old uh Bettis

[6:18] place, the old Bettis farm down there. The old barn and stuff. It's been

[6:21] renovated. >> Yeah.

[6:22] » Yeah. That's that's me. >> Yeah.

[6:24] » We bought that and so then kind of trying to fix that corner up. They made

[6:28] me mayor up there since I'm on the house. [laughter]

[6:30] for dogs. >> You have the dogs, of course. Yeah.

[6:34] [clears throat] >> Would we need an updated drawing the 60

[6:38] by 100? >> We would to get that, but Katherine, I

[6:43] think you've got a thought. >> Um, no. [laughter]

[6:47] » No thought. We would need the updated drawing. And

[6:51] yeah, and I know that wouldn't be an issue to get that

[6:55] » um on this drawing. And you were wanting to see the property

[7:00] line that differentiated from the agricultural to the industrial.

[7:05] » Yeah. I think one of the con the concerns I had

[7:11] um is that um um you just have site plan approval. You don't have site plans for

[7:17] additions to existing sites. That's one of the things that we can work on. uh

[7:21] that you really should if it if it's an addition to an existing site like this,

[7:26] the the requirement should be pulled back somewhat and you don't make it that

[7:31] distinction. So if you're just looking at it um from a black letter issue, it's

[7:38] a site plan should have engineer seal on it, etc., etc., etc. Um I don't think

[7:45] that that adds anything. He's obviously got a big site. It's not that big of a

[7:49] building. It's pole barn. It's not like you're digging footings or any of those

[7:53] kind of things. >> You don't have you're not extending

[7:57] utilities to it. I send electricity, but not like sewer, water, anything like

[8:01] that. >> Okay. Thank you. That's what I think

[8:05] too. >> Appreciate it.

[8:08] » Okay. Does anybody and >> just uh if they would if you get that

[8:13] drawing redone could could you throw that line in there somewhere where the

[8:17] where it is just to so we'll have it. >> Yeah. As long as it meets a setback off

[8:21] of that existing line between the A1 you see too.

[8:25] » He um >> the line actually is where you see that

[8:29] crook and the western lot line >> that's basically where it is and goes

[8:34] back along around the house. This is not uh encroaching at all.

[8:38] » Any more clicks? >> So,

[8:40] » okay. Only I got the old land there. >> Yeah.

[8:44] » Yeah, >> Mr. Chairman.

[8:46] » Okay. Yes, sir. >> I think I think we're good. So, with

[8:50] that said, I'll move to uh approve item B.

[8:53] » Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second?

[8:55] » Second. >> I want to amend this.

[8:57] » Second. >> Okay,

[8:58] » get a second. >> We have a second on it. So, I have to

[9:01] make a motion. Chad seconded. And now R >> just a minute to make sure he turns in

[9:06] the the updated picture. That's the only thing I agree with you. I don't see a

[9:09] problem with it. It's just the >> I'll accept the amendment if you're good

[9:12] with it. >> Okay. And then that's a little cleaner

[9:15] on the minutes. >> Yeah, that's fine.

[9:16] » That sounds good. Yes. We don't have to get a second and go through. So we're

[9:19] good. >> The amendment is stated. Second.

[9:23] » Second. >> Any further discussion on this?

[9:27] Being none, all those in favor of the pole barn, let me know by saying I. I.

[9:32] All those poke. Thank you. Thank you. I'm gonna get you that drawing. One one

[9:37] thing on that drawing one one guy that was pricing available for me was his

[9:41] best way was to come out at 108. Then the other guy that price and he said,

[9:45] "Well, no, it' be better to go >> 100."

[9:48] » So we'll get that decision. But if it don't change, if it changes, I'll get

[9:52] you drawn. >> Okay. Just drop it off.

[9:54] » How many copies you need? >> Just for her office.

[9:56] » Just the board. >> Just for you.

[9:58] » I don't think you even have to come back to this committee. Just take it to her

[10:00] office. You're you're good though which way you're done.

[10:03] » And do I need to get permits from you or is it since it's commercial? Is

[10:06] » it'll be in the building? Well, in the office, but the building partner will.

[10:10] » Gotcha. Thank you, folks. >> Thank you, Ronnie.

[10:12] » See you now.

[10:15] » [clears throat] >> Okay, we're to item C, resolution

[10:19] 2026-03, amending the zoning resolution of

[10:23] Jefferson County, Tennessee to reflect certain prohibited uses in all zoning

[10:28] districts and permitted uses in the I2 zoning district solar energy and wind

[10:33] systems Austin Brook. Austin, you have the floor. Uh yeah, I

[10:39] believe at our last meeting there was discussion

[10:43] um about potential Oh, it's okay.

[10:49] » I like to hear myself. >> About um what we already had in our

[10:55] zoning regulations? >> Yes.

[10:58] » Was there anything? >> There is no decommissioning in Jefferson

[11:03] County zoning regulations for a solar farm.

[11:06] » Uhhuh. Now there is at the state level state put that back in Katherine am I

[11:10] right in about 22 23 somewhere that's I did go on and and print a little bit off

[11:18] if you will uh humor me just a second on that

[11:25] » anybody here got an extra pen I have one left on the truck

[11:33] you got another one >> I'll steal one up here steal Yeah. And

[11:37] often if you'd like for me to, I'll read you what it says.

[11:40] » Here, take your good. >> Tennessee solar the farm decommissioning

[11:45] is governed by Tennessee state decommissioning law. It mandates that

[11:50] commercial solar facilities over 5 megawatts submit compre comprehensive

[11:54] decommissioning plans and provides financial assurance i.e.

[12:00] bonds and or letters of credit to land owners for equipment removal and land

[12:05] restoration. Local planning commissions in the

[12:08] regions enforce these rules and periodically update setback or

[12:13] permitting ordinances. Now, state requirements and there's a

[12:17] ton of stuff on the internet that you can go to look at and I'm sure Katherine

[12:20] can give some clarity if we have some questions about this. Uh but it requires

[12:25] that the solar power agreement to outline a safe removal plan for panels,

[12:30] wiring, post, ensuring the property is restored as close to its precondition,

[12:36] preconstruction condition as reasonably possible. It goes on about financial

[12:42] asurances, local authorities, recent updates is there.

[12:49] Washington County, Green County, Sullivan County have taken this and

[12:54] they've made it a little bit more stringent from what and I've not went in

[12:57] depth on each one of the each one of those, but they have added to the

[13:01] decommissioning of those and that's something that we can definitely do, but

[13:05] the state already has a decommissioning in place right now. It's just do we want

[13:09] to make it more stringent than what the state has or not? And we can look at

[13:13] each one of those. I'm sure that's something you could get information on

[13:16] for us, couldn't you? Mhm. >> And go ahead.

[13:19] » Uh, so I have a question. Um, whenever you hold the bond,

[13:25] make sure that you have the tools in place to administer that bond,

[13:31] » right? Um, if you're if let's say somebody just walks and leaves it there,

[13:36] it I'm not sure that you have like staff personnel that you want to ascribe that

[13:43] responsibility to and hold that bond for the life of uh um um solar

[13:52] » solar facility. Um monitoring bonds is it's one of the things that we've I

[13:59] think the only bonds that the planning commission holds that uh is a bond for

[14:04] outstanding infrastructure for roadway improvements

[14:08] uh and it's charged by the in Tennessee code that the planning commission is the

[14:12] only entity that has authority for that. you could just simply add to

[14:18] uh the solar draft

[14:22] uh an an additional item that says you shall meet that section of the law

[14:29] and make sure that the state of Tennessee has the bond

[14:34] » right and it's the Tennessee decommissioning law but it it goes on to

[14:38] say here about the asurances it tells us that these bonds assurities are

[14:43] scheduled to scale up typically requiring at least 50% of the total

[14:47] decommissioning cost to be secured by the 10th year of the commercial

[14:51] operation and 100% by the 15th year. >> Does it say that they are willing to

[15:00] administer those bonds? >> It did not say who would administer.

[15:02] » Did not say >> no.

[15:04] » Um >> but you know this was to to bring the

[15:07] topic kind of to the table and get the conversation started about it. But these

[15:11] are some things we can do and I'm I'm sure we can look at that moving forward

[15:15] with this. >> Mhm.

[15:16] » You know, and back to part of our original conversation,

[15:21] I I'm I'm pro- landowner being able to do

[15:26] things with this property. If there's somewhere on this solar thing that I

[15:31] want to be really strict about, it would be with the cleanup of it when

[15:36] somebody's done. And I think that's something we definitely need to give

[15:39] some time to. and look at and get something drafted and adopted that'll

[15:43] protect us as a county and the adjoined land owners to the property. That's just

[15:49] my thoughts on adoption. >> I've got a couple of qu you probably

[15:53] answer this one. Um how big does a solar field need to be to produce 5 megawws?

[16:02] decent size to do five megawws. And that's something else that I think we

[16:07] can look at is size limits inside our county when we address this and go to

[16:13] drafting this. U I know there's one in New Market and it's uh it's about six

[16:21] acres and it will not meet 5 megawatts. 5 megawatts is a lot of load.

[16:27] » Yes, ma'am. Who owns that solar fixate? >> Appalachin Electric owns one.

[16:33] » So it is a public entity. >> Yeah.

[16:35] » Your other alternative is to state that um this provision is only allowed for

[16:44] public utility companies.

[16:48] Public utilities. >> State that again.

[16:50] » That um >> I wish this dagum seat had a lock on the

[16:56] back of it. Mine's squeaky. [laughter]

[17:02] » You know, we and we just had this discussion this morning in the working

[17:06] group of the difference between public schools and private schools. Private

[17:11] schools are forprofit. I don't care what they are. If it's not, you know, uh

[17:16] Jefferson County. Uh so there are language we put in today that says it

[17:20] has to be a public entity. uh public utility uh public utility

[17:27] district or andor a TVA um and that if it's a private forprofit

[17:34] entity, they're not allowed

[17:38] because the scary thing is a public entity is is uh it's uh dependent on

[17:45] public input, public support, taxpayer money. you have a way of controlling

[17:51] that and they're held to they they hold [clears throat] themselves to a higher

[17:55] standard. Um if when you get a for-profit entity

[18:01] um those are the ones that I would think

[18:05] would have a higher tendency to walk away. It's not profitable. We're

[18:10] walking. >> Okay? And I'm speaking hypothetically

[18:15] and don't let me control the conversation. by all means jump in.

[18:19] [laughter] If I've got this fella and again

[18:23] hypothetically who has a couple hundred acres in the county, it's A1

[18:28] and he is had an accident. He's no longer able to farm. He's no longer able

[18:34] to do what he is that he's done for a living for so many years. Doesn't have a

[18:39] great retirement because most farmers don't other than the lands they hold.

[18:44] I don't want to limit the marketability of his piece of property to take that

[18:50] potential off the table if it's the best situation for him.

[18:56] » I want to protect his rights as a property owner cuz he's paid taxes. He's

[19:02] bought the land. It's been handed down through families. And for us to come in

[19:06] and say, "No, that private company can't come in work a deal out with you because

[19:11] we're not willing to do what we need to do on our end to see that it's

[19:14] decommissioned in the proper way." >> I'm I'm just saying.

[19:17] » I mean, it's a two sword, but those are the guys that are walking. [laughter]

[19:20] » Yeah. >> Sorry. They're the If we were further

[19:23] along in the technology and the knowledge of how these things will

[19:28] operate in the long term, I'd feel better about that.

[19:31] » Yeah. Um, >> I still that's just my stance. I don't

[19:35] want to hurt the property owner. >> Let's say TVA came in and leased this

[19:38] property. >> Absolutely. But, you know, we we've had

[19:44] there's been conversation for the last three or four years if you're in the

[19:47] county about outside firms coming in. There was actually one in place and it

[19:51] fell through. >> There's another one looked and stuff and

[19:54] it's fell through and we we may be >> That's a good indication right there

[19:59] though. That's that's kind of what [laughter]

[20:01] trends and >> but but we're we're talking about

[20:03] hypotheticals and we we can't we don't have a crystal ball and we can't read

[20:07] the future saying that this private company's going to walk or they're going

[20:09] to do the right thing. You know, that's like me looking at David and saying I

[20:13] know what he'll do in this situation. That's unfair to David. It's unfair to

[20:16] me. You know, we have the ability to put the regulations in place to

[20:22] govern that. Well, then it's our duty to do that to protect the community and the

[20:28] property owner. And the state has done that to a degree

[20:31] with what they've already got in place.

[20:35] » Um just administration of bonds uh and having a 10year

[20:42] 50% 15year 100%. That tells me the state's

[20:48] worried about it. >> Um [clears throat]

[20:52] that's the only reason you do bonds. >> Yeah. But there's no reason or nothing

[20:56] saying in what I've said that we can't be worried about it. We're just still

[20:59] protecting that property owner's rights to do one of those deals.

[21:02] » Yeah. They've collected 100% of the decommissioning cost

[21:06] » by the time >> in bonds by the time it runs out by the

[21:11] time solar panels run out the life of them.

[21:13] » Yeah. >> On a five megawatt

[21:16] » on a five mega. So, do we amend that? >> So, anything smaller does not have to do

[21:20] that. >> That's right. That's right.

[21:23] » And that's that's per state. But again, we can look at those neighboring

[21:27] counties who have took what the state had as a foundation and they build upon

[21:32] that. That's what we can do as a planning commission in Jefferson County

[21:36] and still protect the right of the property owner.

[21:40] » Yeah. It don't have to be a five five meg.

[21:42] » We can we can change those things and whoever handles the bond to say, "Well,

[21:49] I don't want to fool with it just because I don't want to."

[21:51] » No, I mean, I'm getting where you at. I'm just saying whoever needs to handle

[21:56] that, we just make sure it gets handled. >> So I administration bonds is a really I

[22:04] think I read somewhere that the the planner does that. [laughter]

[22:12] [laughter] >> Um I mean like right now I'll give you

[22:16] an example. Clever County has bonds coming due in August.

[22:20] » Uh it's it's a set amount. Um, it's for a top coat on a road. Uh, you know what

[22:27] just went up? The cost of asphalt. They're underwater. Uh, five months

[22:32] ahead of time of that bond expiration. They're going back to the developer and

[22:39] saying, "We will call this and ruin your credit unless you give us new uh

[22:46] estimates for the cost based on asphalt today."

[22:50] And that that's what I mean. You can't >> just the nature of that conversation

[22:56] doesn't settle well with me because you're threatening from the lead instead

[22:59] of having the conversation with them give their

[23:01] » No. All they're doing is saying come at August a month ahead of time which is in

[23:06] their subre that a month ahead of time we're going to go back and look at this

[23:10] bond and they have the authority to ask for an increase because they know

[23:16] they're underwater. And and the the thing of it is it it's you're talking

[23:21] about economics and fluctuations and 10 years uh 15 years. Uh Stephanie, you

[23:29] going to be here? [laughter] >> I mean, that's the kind of stuff. Or is

[23:33] the county mayor's office going to do that

[23:35] » and we put that in the regs if we craft this?

[23:39] And that's if if you want to belly up to that bar, that's an administrative issue

[23:44] that you need to make sure on the front end the administration of that section

[23:50] of that provision, you know, how it's going to happen. You

[23:55] know, and and the other thing is, okay, you put up solar panels and then uh five

[24:02] years from now you're looking for a place to take it. That's what

[24:06] decommissioning is. >> Absolutely. you got to pay for

[24:09] transportation disposal. I mean, I don't even know how you'd estimate that cost

[24:14] uh much less over the time of uh of the life of the bond. That's why I

[24:22] said if the state of Tennessee is doing that and then you ask for proof that

[24:27] they've complied with it and that way her office is monitoring a license that

[24:34] should be renewed you know every year 5 years or or 10 years 15 years on that. I

[24:41] don't know where when you're looking at Johnson City, are they administering it

[24:45] or are they saying that >> I don't know anything about Johnson

[24:49] » or Washington County? Washington County. >> Um I think before you would

[24:54] » and that's what thing is let's ask them how they are they looking for proof that

[25:02] those things have been met or >> I don't know if they've lowered the

[25:05] megawatt at the side. Have no idea. That was where I said we would ask you to get

[25:09] information about what each of those did >> and stuff. That way we can look at it.

[25:13] This was to start the conversation. >> At the end of the day, what I'm saying

[25:17] about this, we've got to protect the property owner. I'm not going to limit

[25:22] who he can sell or do a deal with on his land. I'm not going to be a part of

[25:26] that. >> Yes, sir.

[25:30] [clears throat]

[25:35] As long as let me let me add to that. As long as the people who are willing to

[25:40] purchase or lease or do whatever the land's willing to meet what's put in

[25:43] place to protect it. >> Yeah.

[25:46] » I want to follow up. Sorry. >> Does it stipulate who would determine

[25:51] the bond? So, my concern is when a deal like this is struck,

[25:56] uh, unlike building a roadway where it's like, I need this bond and within a year

[26:00] I'm going to have my road built and and I don't need this bond.

[26:04] » With this, you're saying I'm going to build this facility out and then in 20

[26:09] to 30 years, >> 10 to 15 is what he did. But,

[26:13] » okay. So, in 15 years, we're going to take it all down. Well, what's that cost

[26:19] in 15 years? So whatever it costs today, if we were to just go with simple

[26:24] inflation at 3%. It's 45% increase from now until then, right?

[26:29] » Assuming we don't have periods of rapid inflation, which

[26:34] recent history shows that uh that can happen. So um I I would want to know

[26:39] more information about who determines the bond amount because in my opinion,

[26:44] whatever you come up with, you've got to tack on another 50% for inflation.

[26:49] The other thing is I'd like to determine maybe instead of us dividing um by

[26:56] megawatt we can sorry

[27:00] we can um stipulate by acreage. >> I think that would be a better approach

[27:06] because the megawws that's being produced and I guess you would look at

[27:11] potential megawws for the site if everything was running full throttle.

[27:16] » You're not going to get that every day, >> right? you know, so I think a better way

[27:20] to approach it, and I agree 100% with you, often would to be looking at

[27:23] acreage that could be, you know, put to use for

[27:29] um another thing I understand, uh protecting,

[27:35] sorry, I understand protecting land. That's what I'm trying to do in this as

[27:39] well. I think the argument could be made when

[27:43] you're protecting somebody's right to put a solar uh facility on their

[27:47] property. >> The neighboring property could say,

[27:49] "Well, now you're affecting my property. You're affecting my property rights,

[27:54] affecting my property value." Whether you agree with it or not, I think that's

[27:57] certainly an argument that we would hear.

[27:59] » We see it every day here. >> Yeah.

[28:02] » That's a common argument. [clears throat]

[28:04] And we already stipulate a lot of different things uh that people can and

[28:08] cannot do on their property. Uh most often

[28:13] stipulating the zone that that that activity has to occur in.

[28:17] » Right. >> Yeah.

[28:17] » So unfortunately, as much as we want to be

[28:21] pro property rights, everything we do is infringing on that.

[28:25] » Yeah. >> Somebody's absolutely on somebody's.

[28:29] So my goal is to do the best job we can to protect everybody. And there's not a

[28:35] happy medium. I just don't want to overburden the citizens with

[28:40] restrictions. And and the more restrictions we add,

[28:45] it's only allowed to be sold to a public utility. You know, we're adding

[28:51] restrictions every time we do something like that. And I don't think that ought

[28:56] to be a goal. >> [clears throat]

[28:58] » So, not wanting to restrict property owners, definitely. Um, wanting to

[29:04] restrict these companies that pop up >> absolutely

[29:06] » every time the federal government decides to open the checkbook

[29:10] » and pour out a bunch of subsidies for these projects where they get their

[29:14] cash. Then administrations change out in 4 to 8 years.

[29:20] all the money dries up and then this company based out of who cares Delaware

[29:25] uh closes because they've gotten their money on the front end. I just wonder

[29:29] like at what point is Jefferson County stuck with an absolute disaster.

[29:34] Uh because you're talking [clears throat] with no stipulation and

[29:37] I understand you seem to be in favor of some decommissioning stipulations.

[29:41] » I think I've stated that several times. >> Yeah. And I I appreciate that. uh we

[29:46] could end up sitting on a several hundred acre disaster uh in our county.

[29:52] So, I'm just not really in favor of the solar fields

[29:58] mainly because there's not a positive ROI. They seem to be subsidized by the

[30:02] federal government. That seems to be the only way that they

[30:04] » there are situations where there is part positive return on investment

[30:07] » in this area. >> Yes.

[30:09] » Okay. Uh I don't see that. um all the numbers I've ran on it, there is not a

[30:15] positive ROI. I don't think it's a good use of our land, which is certainly we

[30:20] just we have as much as we have and we're not getting anymore.

[30:22] » Okay. >> So, um

[30:27] I I I think that the fact that the state has put uh what they've put in place

[30:33] shows that there's concern at the state level. I think there certainly needs to

[30:36] be concern at our county level. And I I think I'm hearing that we're all in

[30:39] [clears throat] >> some agreement. Maybe not 100%, but

[30:44] » I'm in a 100% agreement of us having protection in place.

[30:49] I'm also for protecting the property owner. And

[30:54] it may be that we craft this in a way that's a deterrent from anybody ever

[31:00] wanting to, but yet we still leave that possibility for that property owner to

[31:06] market or to lease his property in that way. And if that company's willing to do

[31:11] every house stringent regulations we put in place and there's

[31:16] somebody somewhere that can do what needs to be done with the bonds and the

[31:20] assurity, let them do it. >> So you would prefer

[31:28] stringent stipulations >> on cleanup

[31:31] » on decommissioning. >> Mhm. as well as like I said the bond to

[31:36] me the only way that this bond is worth anything is if you account for the

[31:40] inflation >> uh because typically all the bonding

[31:42] that we deal with. >> So when we write this be sure and put

[31:44] that in there what you come up with. [clears throat]

[31:46] » Well I mean yeah 15 years I would put 50% for inflation.

[31:50] » Absolutely. >> Um

[31:55] I'm still hung up a little bit on the zone. So you'd be okay with it in any

[31:59] zone? I mean is there any zones? So basically the document that we have are

[32:03] there any >> I would be okay with it and I with A1

[32:07] » okay >> and and that's those property owners go

[32:10] ahead Randy sorry >> I would be too but the thing is we need

[32:14] to put a percentage and up to a maximum amount if if you or me want to we got a

[32:19] 100 acre farm and we want to take five acres that's that should be the limit

[32:24] » the utilities down there have uh what' you say five to six acres

[32:29] » I think it's six acres don't for an individual to do that,

[32:34] » then they need to they need to keep the whole thing as one section, not not

[32:38] divided off. And in the event that they want to cut it out, I think, hell, if we

[32:42] go over five acres on anything, we're doing as much as the utility company is.

[32:46] So, if we're going to leave it in A1, let's do a percentage of the property up

[32:51] to 5 acres, no more. 5% or 5 acres at the most.

[32:56] » No more than that. So, if you got >> So, 50 acres, 2 and a half.

[32:59] » Yeah. and make it smaller. So, and and then we need to look at

[33:03] » where it's located on the property as opposed to be right here on the property

[33:06] line right against Mr. Nelson's place. >> Let's let's make it be more centrally

[33:10] located on their farm so that everybody right there on the road and everybody

[33:14] their neighbors aren't affected by it as much as they are.

[33:17] » Yeah. With setbacks and buffers in place. Absolutely. I love the idea of

[33:20] the decommissioning stuff because if we don't have that in place, I mean, just

[33:25] like you said, they can walk away and then what is it the county's

[33:28] responsibility to get rid of it? I don't think so. I like what you're saying. I

[33:31] agree 100% with that. >> Um, one of the other things, we

[33:35] [clears throat] keep talking about the property owner, but but realistically,

[33:39] no property owner is going to go into this endeavor. They're simply going to

[33:43] lease to a company. And these companies usually pop up, like I said, whenever

[33:47] the federal money starts flowing. And that could happen, uh, that could happen

[33:52] maybe sooner than we wanted to. Um, whenever those dollars start flowing,

[33:57] all of these little companies pop up, they get involved in all this stuff.

[34:00] Quite frankly, I feel that's what was going on with the best. Uh, if you all

[34:03] recall, the best that was trying to go into Pedmont,

[34:06] » it was some company that was located over here that dealt that was owned by a

[34:10] company located over here. Like the whole thing was very, very fishy. And

[34:13] and to me, they already had their exit lined up and they come in, do all the

[34:17] dirty work, and then they turn it over to a more reputable company. Um, that

[34:23] right there just stands a hair up on the back of my neck. Um,

[34:27] » like some of the housing developments we've seen go in the last little bit.

[34:30] » Yeah, >> same scheme.

[34:31] » Um, same scheme, but uh to me these are these are more

[34:38] frightening uh than that because of the mess that it could leave behind. So, um,

[34:45] are we in agreement on any others? Like, I mean, R1, R2, RR, C1, C2.

[34:55] Most of those are not even going to have a parcel size large enough to um,

[35:00] » which eliminates them all together in that area,

[35:03] » right? Because nobody's going to take a twoacre lot and say, "Oh, I want to put

[35:08] » No, it's it's not lucrative enough acres. I don't even know what it would

[35:12] be that much as a solar farm cuz then it' have one solar panel."

[35:16] [clears throat] Yeah. I mean, >> that that would be my thing is to

[35:20] protect the most land around it if we're going to do it. Um the five acres, like

[35:26] I said, on 100 acre farm, well, if they sell it off, they've got to decommission

[35:30] half of it. >> Mhm. and and most people's not going to

[35:33] do it. But what it does allow is it's just like a cell phone tower. I was

[35:37] talking to somebody earlier today. It allows them to have a source of income

[35:43] bar, like you said, it's going to be a pain in the butt for any individual to

[35:47] do this. >> Uh it's it's a phenomenal expense. I

[35:51] don't see the return on investment, but I think in the future it may be easier

[35:56] with the technology. >> Yeah.

[35:58] » To to do that and it may be more return on investment.

[36:02] » Yeah, >> I'm not going to be it probably won't be

[36:04] in our lifetime. I want to leave that option open for future.

[36:09] » So the recommendation So I think we could take this document

[36:14] that we have and then the recommendation would be allow it in A1

[36:21] uh which we're working on our working group

[36:24] but it would be limited to 5% of the parcel size.

[36:28] 5% of the parcel size up to five acres >> up to five acres. So if you have

[36:33] » I don't think if you have 200 acres I still don't think

[36:35] » you're limited to five or you max out of five

[36:38] » and if they divide the property in half and they want to do it on the other half

[36:42] but no more than five acres at one spot. >> Okay.

[36:44] » Does that I mean does that make sense? Cuz then I look at our 100 acres that uh

[36:50] we the 40 acres of hay we rent and my mom's property.

[36:54] It would still be hard with a road running right through the middle. still

[36:57] be hard to find a good place on that property. So, you're going to restrict

[37:00] the properties to a certain extent, but you're still leaving it out there as a

[37:04] an option. >> Yeah. Well, it'll be the biggest

[37:07] stipulating factor. You got to have those lines running through your

[37:10] property. >> Yeah.

[37:12] » That's that's going to be one of the biggest determining factor.

[37:15] » If you put it on the edge, it's going to affect your neighbors a lot more [cough]

[37:17] than it's going to affect you. But if it's if it's going [clears throat] if

[37:19] you're going to have more skin in the game and you will with the investment

[37:23] and where it's located at buffer zones and I don't know what those buffer zones

[37:27] need to be off the property lines, but I think we ought to be considerate of our

[37:30] neighbors in anything that we do. >> Mhm.

[37:34] » I could go along with that. >> Yeah.

[37:36] » So, we could keep this document and really just adjust the A1

[37:41] and it would be an allowable use or I guess it'd be a conditional use,

[37:46] wouldn't it, Katherine? Uh if you could make it conditional um

[37:52] with um the requirements like um they have to do a engineered site

[37:59] plan um

[38:04] » we need to make sure it's done correct and whatever.

[38:06] » Yeah. I mean it's it I would suggest it to the group they would have to do a

[38:11] site plan. And he have I mean even right now I think yes and we have to send it

[38:15] back and we all those things are in place

[38:17] » in section one of the draft that you have right now uh uh we had uh

[38:23] eliminated it as a principal use. Yeah >> we it was an accessory use. So your

[38:29] first item one is you want to make it a principal use not accessory.

[38:34] » Right. >> Well it is now isn't it? It could

[38:37] » it is currently this draft of the document took it from

[38:42] principal to accept. So it's an accessory use in every single

[38:46] » uh zone which I think we all agree. >> Well with the exception of your IND IND2

[38:52] it was to be a principal use. Yes. Um, so I think the proposition from Randy is

[39:01] it would be I guess you would that would be a principal or conditional use or the

[39:06] condition would be 5% or 5 acres maximum.

[39:10] » I don't see any for an individual. I don't see any reason in world we need

[39:14] one over five acres >> and then it's really not a principal use

[39:16] at that point is it? >> Yeah. [laughter] And I don't know if we

[39:19] need to restrict it to that. I'm not sure.

[39:21] » That's that's me. I'm thinking >> I'm throwing ideas out. Yeah, I I know

[39:25] you just conversation I I'm thinking and this is just me and let me state this.

[39:30] I'm not a solar fan. >> I I don't think I but I can take you to

[39:35] places who have had a positive return on investment about three years ahead of

[39:39] time for what they've done. Businesses that have put the stuff in. Citizens

[39:44] Bank Trucks Citizens Bank and Trust in Granger County come out about four year

[39:48] ahead >> as a Yeah, as an accessory.

[39:50] » As accessory use. >> I could see that. There are places where

[39:55] it does return on investment >> that would still be allowed and

[39:58] » and if we would I know but I'm just saying it is profitable in some

[40:03] situations. If we look at the Joe James based property you know I would have

[40:08] hated been the one to step up and say Joe you can't do what you're getting

[40:10] ready to do if he'd have chose went through with him and that's exactly what

[40:14] we'd be doing by doing what we're doing right now and

[40:17] » it fell through. It took care of itself, >> but it was coming.

[40:23] » That was a shady deal. >> I don't know the inner workings of it. I

[40:27] I just I don't want to be the man said, "David, no, you can't do that."

[40:32] And >> so, but I do believe we need to have

[40:34] restrictions. I do believe we have need to have a a stringent decommissioning

[40:40] » on 100 acres. I'd look at at least 20%. And I would say, you know,

[40:46] » A1 is the only% of the piece property. 100 acre be 20 acres.

[40:50] » Yeah. I say A1 is the only thing we're talking about.

[40:54] » Absolutely. >> R1, R2, RR, C1, C2, ain't going to

[40:58] happen. >> I mean, if the mines ever wanted to,

[41:01] » but it'd be an accessory. I mean, >> no. I mean, if they ever wanted to

[41:05] generate power. >> Yeah. And I mean, we couldn't stop them

[41:08] from doing that for theirel anyway. >> True.

[41:14] And the percentage I threw out there is negotiable just like everything is.

[41:18] » No, I think you were the to hardline that one, Randy. [laughter]

[41:21] » I just I don't want to take it off the table for agricultural

[41:25] » for a farmer [clears throat] that's that's got an opportunity to do it and

[41:28] help supplement his farm. >> Absolutely.

[41:31] And just like we talked about in the places where we've we've seen

[41:34] agriculture and solar work hand in hand for one another

[41:37] » where they've done the elevated solar panels and they've actually farmed with

[41:40] livestock underneath with vegetables and fruit production underneath. You know,

[41:45] let's say you wanted to do 60 acres of his farm

[41:49] and and mar marry those two together. Well, we've just killed that.

[41:55] » Mhm. I just I I want to protect as many

[42:00] people as we can protect, but I also don't want to infringe.

[42:03] » Yeah. >> And and we're just talking. That's

[42:08] discussion. We're just kicking. >> I'm not saying

[42:10] » it cuts both ways. >> It does. That's right. It does. It cuts

[42:12] both ways. >> Um [snorts]

[42:16] » Well, I don't know. I just uh Randy with that 5% I think was uh See, I'm at zero.

[42:23] [laughter] Yeah, I'm a five and he's a

[42:25] » So, I'm at 75. No, >> I think you're going to have a problem

[42:30] with the percentage like saying you've got 20 acres so you get 5% but you got

[42:38] 100 acres so you get 5%. And those two numbers are different and but the zone

[42:45] district's the same. Uh so you have there's a test called uniformity of zone

[42:50] district and it's if you got two people on property same zone uh you have to

[42:56] allow them the same option. You can't say you get 20 and you get five.

[43:02] » Um that that that doesn't pass muster. So, but now putting a a maximum on it uh

[43:10] and doing making it a conditional use in you can make it an allowable use in the

[43:18] I2 and you can make it a conditional use in

[43:21] A1 and we looked at conditional uses this morning for the you don't currently

[43:27] have conditional uses but they're very it's a very common tool in other

[43:31] jurisdictions. Um, so you could do uh conditional use, you have to meet

[43:37] setbacks, you have to do buffers, >> uh, etc., etc. You would want to do um

[43:43] the bonding process whether it's industrial or

[43:47] » Yes, >> absolutely.

[43:48] » Um, so we could we could set up the conditions and that way they would come

[43:53] before the BZA and the BCA would basically check boxes.

[43:58] » Yeah. >> Yes. You got a buffer. Yeah. if you your

[44:00] setbacks are, you know, your your um you know, you could set up whatever

[44:06] conditions you wanted to and then the BCA would determine compliance with

[44:11] those conditions. Whereas, if you have an I2, which they have the authority to

[44:16] come in and say, I want my properties to I2.

[44:19] » Mhm. >> Uh and and at that point, that that is a

[44:22] discretionary thing that's ultimately approved by the county commission. Um,

[44:28] and I too would automatically you would be looking at areas that there are other

[44:33] industrial uses. I don't know if you even have I do you have any I2?

[44:38] » I just want to I'm going to circle this back around real quick.

[44:41] » Okay. >> We've got three neighboring counties who

[44:45] have sit at the table having the same discussion we've had or having and

[44:49] probably already have have a lot of these things worked out. Let's get that

[44:53] information, see what's there. I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel.

[44:57] » Let's Let's just see what see what kind of cars are running and see if that'll

[45:01] work for us. >> It [clears throat] sounds like we're

[45:03] close to some agreement or at least all of us but you. So,

[45:07] [laughter] >> we're we're down here at 5%. I think

[45:09] you're >> I'm not at five.

[45:10] » I think you and Chad are I think Randy changed his mind. So, no, [laughter]

[45:15] » you at two and a half. >> I'm I'm open to discussing it, but I

[45:19] don't want to take it off the table for a private land owner. So on this

[45:24] document we we do agree uh I I don't think there's much we go ahead and take

[45:28] it out of R1 R2 RRC1 C2 >> as a principal use

[45:33] » as principal use >> and could I1

[45:37] I just don't think that's a good use of our industrial space personally

[45:41] » pay the money and get our industrial space

[45:44] » well if they cut it on top of their building and use

[45:46] » it would be an accessory use >> you know the other which was allowed in

[45:50] all the zones >> um one thing to consider is what type of

[45:55] infrastructure is necessary to carry carry the electricity generated to a um

[46:04] you know transformer or however to get it into the grid. What types of

[46:09] infrastructure >> that's got to be something that's worked

[46:10] out with utilities? >> Well, that will be a very much a

[46:13] limiting factor. Absolutely. You know, you

[46:16] » there are so many things that this thing is going to have to conform to.

[46:20] » Yeah, it can only be a go. It'll only go where those What do you What do you main

[46:24] transmission lines? >> It just need No, it just needs

[46:26] distributions and stuff. Distribution lines. I mean, you can We've got one in

[46:30] White Pine hitting distribution lines. >> That's yours.

[46:34] » It's not ours. It's somebody who It's a private own. It

[46:37] » is a private owner. >> Talking about Jod's.

[46:39] » Well, it's 5% each way instead of Appalachin and US both.

[46:43] » Oh, okay. >> Proper from it.

[46:45] » So, there's But it's a private company. >> Yeah.

[46:48] » That's doing it. So, and it comes out at distribution voltage. [clears throat]

[46:53] » Are there some that would be at transmission voltage? Absolutely.

[46:57] » Oh, okay. Distribution voltage. Okay. I'm

[46:59] » that feeds straight into the grid. >> Yeah.

[47:01] » The one in New Market is distribution voltage.

[47:03] » Meaning you could put one of those anywhere that has

[47:06] » Right. Power supply. >> That's right.

[47:08] » Yeah. I've heard this. >> Now, you got me upset again. [laughter]

[47:14] » So, >> well, I agree with you. Let Let's do

[47:17] some homework. >> Yeah, absolutely. I wouldn't go that

[47:19] far. >> And um [laughter]

[47:21] so uh and at this point A1 we could look at a conditional use at

[47:28] » with appropriate development standards. >> Absolutely. Right. Right. And they they

[47:32] need to be we can develop those and then it would be allowed in I2

[47:39] um as stated and and then we can do a [clears throat] separate

[47:45] uh section that's just for performance criteria for solar uh principal use

[47:51] solar. So we'll define [clears throat] you have to define something then you

[47:55] have to regulate it. So we'll have to define a solar

[48:00] um installation as uh get a definition for it and then uh uh add it as an

[48:08] allowable use in I2 and add it as a conditional use in A1 and the A1 will

[48:14] have conditions with it.

[48:19] So just to clarify, so we're going to look at as far as developmental. So

[48:24] you advised against a percentage because if if I've got five acres and Randy has

[48:29] a hundred, he gets to put in his full 5% but then 5% of

[48:34] » I mean if he's got Yeah, >> that's it.

[48:38] » That's a um >> I mean are you advising against using a

[48:43] percentage? >> Absolutely.

[48:45] » Okay. So, >> but we could do a maximum.

[48:49] » You could do a maximum. >> Okay.

[48:50] » Maximum absolute amount or maximum percentage.

[48:53] » Um, not percentage. Maximum >> maximum just maximum amount

[48:58] or or >> there's also probably a minimum that it

[49:03] it [clears throat] um as a principal use. It just doesn't

[49:06] make sense. >> Yeah.

[49:10] [clears throat] >> There is.

[49:11] » I mean, [laughter] absolutely there is. I mean, you got to have an economies of

[49:16] scale of these things. The one out at the Ford plant in West Texas, I mean,

[49:20] West Tennessee is >> I mean, that's that thing's massive.

[49:24] » Absolutely. >> Um, there's a couple in Oakidge and

[49:28] they're huge. >> Um, so again, I I think there we have

[49:33] more questions than we do answers. So, uh, let's do some homework and come back

[49:38] with >> the the one in New Market is Appalachian

[49:41] Homes. Uh it supplies our lightest loaded circuit on the system we have but

[49:49] it supplies that circuit. You know there's several houses on that thing

[49:54] » and we as the county couldn't have stopped that anyway because that through

[49:56] the state >> the state TVA appalach if it's a public

[50:00] utility. >> Well and I'm I'm not concerned with what

[50:04] » did you buy any blocks of it? >> No.

[50:07] » I think there's still a few for sale if you were interested.

[50:09] » Okay. I'm joking. [laughter] >> I was a wee.

[50:14] » I was a wee little man when that went in.

[50:16] » Me, too. I >> um so we'll look at maximums, setbacks,

[50:27] buffer zones, >> buffering. Yeah.

[50:31] » Assurity bonds. Yeah.

[50:41] » [clears throat]

[50:43] » buffer material also. >> I don't think you want trays around

[50:47] solid farm. >> What's that?

[50:49] » You don't want a high canopy around you. >> Wouldn't bother me.

[50:55] » It wouldn't bother you to try >> if you invested in Yeah. [clears throat]

[50:59] » It would bother you if you were the investor or the property owner.

[51:02] [laughter] >> Invest in a while, right?

[51:08] All right. Well, with that, Mr. Chairman, I will move

[51:13] to postpone item C to our June meeting.

[51:19] » Okay, we have a proper motion. Had good

[51:23] discussion. I I appreciate it very much. Uh, do we have a second?

[51:28] » I'll second. >> Have a second. Is there any further

[51:30] discussion on this? Being none, all those in favor of

[51:35] postponing item C until the June meeting, let it be

[51:41] known by saying I. I. >> All those opposes.

[51:47] » I've got papers.

[51:55] » Okay, we're to item D. Megaw want to produce

[52:02] » development standards for mining and mineral extraction. Mr. David Nelson

[52:07] David I'll turn the floor to you sir. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman.

[52:10] » Uh I'd like to first start with just sort of the genesis of this what

[52:14] prompted me to want to put this together and then I'll walk you through kind of

[52:18] the process that I've been through so far. And it's kind of going back to

[52:23] things we've bandied about several times already in this meeting about property

[52:27] rights for everyone. And my concern that I've seen happen over the years is we

[52:34] have commercial industrial uses that take precedent over the property rights

[52:38] of some of our small farmers and our residents. So, what I'm I'm after is

[52:44] trying to marry those two together and put together some standards that protect

[52:49] existing property owners but also allow uh commercial and industrial operations

[52:56] to take place. And when I started this process, my my first effort was to kind

[53:02] of look at some other counties around us and see what they do. Uh, I looked at

[53:06] Washington County, Sullivan County, Knox County, uh, were the three that that I

[53:12] looked at quite a bit. In my initial draft on this, you may think this is a

[53:16] little lengthy. My initial draft on this is about 15 pages long after I took all

[53:21] the material from three different counties and tried to pull it all

[53:24] together. And I said, "Well, this obviously is way too much." So, I went

[53:29] back to the drawing board immediately and and cut out a lot of that

[53:34] information. I consulted with the county's attorney uh about it and he

[53:40] said, "Yeah." And he said, "You have to be aware we have a state surface mining

[53:46] act which really governs a lot of what's being addressed in here." And so his

[53:52] initial suggestion when I started the process was to to leave alone things

[53:57] that were covered by the surface mining act in the state and really just focus

[54:04] more on the things that um are basic like getting proper uh buffers setbacks

[54:11] screening uh just to make sure that the operation is not going to destroy

[54:17] somebody's enjoyment of their property that's lived there for 30 or 40 years.

[54:22] And and so that was my my main goal. Uh after putting this together first pass

[54:30] uh and whittling it down to my second pass, then I consulted our planning

[54:35] consultant, Miss Baldwin, and said, "Would you look at this, please, and

[54:39] offer suggestions, which she did." And so the draft that

[54:44] was sent out to all the commissioners last Friday

[54:48] uh was a combination of Miss Baldwin's input as well as my input.

[54:55] Unfortunately, since that went out, uh we got a little surprise. I didn't get

[55:01] it till Monday. I don't know when you saw it, but [laughter] I didn't check my

[55:05] email till Monday. uh uh our county attorney sent an email and said, "Oh, by

[55:10] the way, I do have a few concerns on this latest draft." It's like, "Oh, I

[55:14] wasn't expecting you to have some concerns." So, so he has some concerns.

[55:18] I will share with you what those concerns are. A lot of it's

[55:21] definitional. Uh it a lot of it relates to use of the term mineral. Uh we talked

[55:28] about bonds a minute ago. Katherine advised me about this when she looked at

[55:32] an earlier draft. uh I had provision for bonds in the earlier draft when she

[55:37] looked at it and after we discussed it and she explained to me how difficult it

[55:41] is to administer bonds I decided well it's just don't require bonds. Uh if we

[55:46] want to do that later we certainly can. So the draft you have does not have any

[55:52] reference to to bonding requirements. So that's not in there. Uh the one that Mr.

[55:58] Drenan reviewed did have it. So, he was a little bit concerned about

[56:01] administration of those bonds as she was.

[56:04] » Well, now what one thing and I said, ask your county attorney if it's legal

[56:10] to administer bonds for such things. >> Yeah. And it's it's legal. You just have

[56:14] to set it up, of course, like you said, and and have it all worked out. So, so

[56:19] we have some things in the air on this resolution right now. What I wanted to

[56:24] do was go ahead and introduce you to it and explain to you my my reasons and my

[56:31] background on doing it and walk through just the highlights a little bit. But I

[56:36] don't really want to get into the weeds today because I really need to consult

[56:41] with the county attorney again to make some possible changes.

[56:45] So, so just walking through it in section one, the first part of it is

[56:51] really definitional. A lot of times we talk about things and people say, "What

[56:55] does that mean?" So, I've tried to make an effort to define some of the terms

[56:59] that are used in the body of it as much as possible. Uh, Mr. Dren has no

[57:04] problems with that except mineral and that's one of the key issues. Um, we've

[57:08] got to figure out how to deal with the term mineral properly. Uh section two is

[57:14] really a housekeeping matter that is not there's any direct import as far as what

[57:20] happens in the mining and mineral extraction operations. There's a

[57:24] provision in our zoning resolutions that basically says that mineral there's a

[57:30] mineral exception to where you can't really regulate minerals, but that

[57:33] really applies to underground mining. So, this was just some language to try

[57:38] to tie that uh together and distinguish between surface mining and underground

[57:44] mining. Section three basically is to just to say we're going to move I'm

[57:51] proposing we move mining from an I1 permitted use to an I2 permitted use.

[57:57] That's section three and four. It's like, okay, uh, if we're going to have

[58:00] mining, let's let's put it in our I2 zone, which is our heaviest industrial

[58:05] zone. Then section five deals with development standards. And this is what

[58:12] we were talking about in relation to the solar. uh if you're going to do things,

[58:16] if we have the proper development standards, then hopefully we can have

[58:21] solar farms, we can have surface mining, we can have things that are industrial

[58:26] functions and people can generate revenue doing that, but not destroy the

[58:32] neighbors use of their property. And so that's again is the the main gist of

[58:37] this. Uh Katherine helped write the buffer strip in section five. I had an

[58:43] amateur's effort at writing buffer strips and she fixed that for me. So

[58:47] this is um things she provided. Um if you look

[58:54] after the buffer strip definition, if you go to page three, item B, there are

[59:00] some standards, brief standards for underground mining. The main gist of

[59:04] this is not underground mining. It's really surface mining or mineral

[59:09] extraction. The two things that show there uh are minimum setbacks of 500 ft.

[59:16] Unless there's a property line that is for property zone residential or there

[59:22] is an adjacent residence then the setback is 1,00 ft. That may seem

[59:27] horrendous but I will tell you Knox County, Washington County uh they are

[59:33] even higher. Knox County is not higher. Washington County even has a higher

[59:37] setback if it's along a property line that's residential. Theirs is 1500 feet.

[59:43] And so when I looked at this, uh, I I've looked at what other people are doing to

[59:48] say, "Okay, what's what's within the realm of reason?" And again, what we're

[59:52] trying to do is make sure operations are far enough away from somebody's front

[59:59] porch that they can sit on their front porch and not be disturbed by mining

[1:00:04] operations. Then we dropped on down to the surface

[1:00:08] mounting standards in item C. Uh again, it's a basic 500 foot setback anywhere.

[1:00:14] Knox County has that, Washington County has it, Sullivan County, they all have a

[1:00:18] basic minimum of 500 ft um for anything. And then again, it has the 1000 foot

[1:00:23] setback if it's a property line that's um zoned residential or contains a

[1:00:29] residence regardless of how it's zoned. Um, I missed this in the um underground

[1:00:38] mining. I've got a minimum lot size of 100 acres there and also a minimum lot

[1:00:43] size of 100 acres for surface mining. And then the rest of those few

[1:00:48] paragraphs there are mainly dealing again with buffering strips which is how

[1:00:53] we protect the neighbors and make sure that what happens

[1:00:58] on the mining operation is not going to cost them the enjoyment of their own

[1:01:03] property that they've had for 20 or 30 years. And that's the the main

[1:01:07] objective. So what I would like to do is we've had

[1:01:12] this to look at. I don't know if you had a chance to read it before tonight. Uh,

[1:01:16] but now now for sure we've walked through it a little bit.

[1:01:20] I know we're gonna have to tweak this a little once I can get some more input

[1:01:24] from the county attorney to clarify a few things. So, I would just like to

[1:01:30] keep this in your hands. Uh, make a motion tonight to table this until the

[1:01:35] June meeting at which time I would expect to have a new draft that

[1:01:39] addresses the attorney's concerns.

[1:01:44] » Okay. A motion proper proper motion. I'll ask for a second. Do we have a

[1:01:49] second? >> Second.

[1:01:50] » We have a second. Is there any further discussion on this?

[1:01:55] » And I'll be happy to answer questions now if anybody wants to ask anything.

[1:01:59] » David, thank you for your work very much. Being no discussion, all those in

[1:02:05] favor of postponing this until the June meeting. Let me know by saying I. I.

[1:02:11] » All those opposed. Motion passes.

[1:02:22] Moving on down the agenda. I just covered the agenda

[1:02:26] uplaw.

[1:02:35] Yes, it's the uh second page and that's discussion of proposed

[1:02:40] procedural rules and bylaws for the Jefferson County Regional Planning

[1:02:44] Commission. And I open that up to the board.

[1:03:13] » [snorts]

[1:03:16] » Mr. Nelson, since nobody's jumping, if you want to speak to the rules that you

[1:03:21] brought forward, and I know we've had those for a little while, and we kind of

[1:03:25] kicked things down the road. U wanted you to be here when we discussed them.

[1:03:30] » Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> You're very, very welcome. I'll I'll let

[1:03:33] you go ahead and speak to that. >> Okay. All right. So, I guess two months

[1:03:37] ago now when when we talked about this first, um we had a draft that of of

[1:03:43] bylaws that Miss Bowwin had done and then um I was hoping to try to work with

[1:03:48] her on that. We couldn't connect and since I couldn't connect with her, I

[1:03:51] thought, well, I'm just going to do my own. Sorry, Mrs. B, but I just decided

[1:03:55] to do mine. I took everything she had in hers and and put it in the draft I put

[1:04:00] together. Uh there were a few additional things and I'll I'll we'll re review the

[1:04:06] additional items that I added from her draft. Um there was a little bit of

[1:04:13] wording change and in my section five. We've got two documents here. So I don't

[1:04:18] know. I'm I'm going to speak from my draft.

[1:04:20] » Are we on Jefferson County Regional? >> We're on Jefferson bylaws of the

[1:04:25] Jefferson County Regional Planning Commission. on page two, section five,

[1:04:30] compensation. I suggested a little bit of a wording change there, um, of no

[1:04:35] major significance other than maybe it's just my preference for my words versus

[1:04:40] hers. Uh I suggested we say uh reim in sentence number two of section five

[1:04:48] reimbursement for travel and continuing education expenses of the members shall

[1:04:53] be in accordance with the prevailing policy of Jefferson County, Tennessee.

[1:04:57] She had worded that differently and I thought well things may change. So I was

[1:05:02] just suggesting the wording that uh it just follows their policy whatever it

[1:05:07] might be from time to time.

[1:05:11] In article three, the next article down section one under officers, I added

[1:05:17] something that she did not have. The last of that sentence, I just added and

[1:05:22] any additional officers it deems appropriate from time to time. That's in

[1:05:26] your draft. I'm just pointing out to you the things that I put in the draft idea

[1:05:31] that she did not have. >> Go over that with me, Dave. Okay.

[1:05:35] Please. >> Section one, officers. Uh, can we just

[1:05:38] make sure we're on the >> Yeah, I'm We have had several copies of

[1:05:42] these come out. There should have been a copy of the bylaws

[1:05:46] » and a section of the meeting rules in there.

[1:05:49] » That's not That's not Yeah. Okay. Okay. >> We've actually got two bylaws look like

[1:05:53] this. >> Okay.

[1:05:54] » Here's rules. >> Here's what I'm looking at.

[1:05:59] » I've got the bylaws and meeting rules.

[1:06:04] We don't have that. You don't have that. No.

[1:06:07] » Is that the original copy? David, you >> I've got I've got a few copies of the

[1:06:12] original. Yes. Okay. I only have one copy.

[1:06:14] » I got that that that and that. >> And I'll be more than willing to hand

[1:06:17] those out. >> Okay. Well, I don't need one. I have

[1:06:20] one.

[1:06:23] » So, what you got? We don't You can share mine,

[1:06:26] » David. >> Okay. So, what

[1:06:30] » article one the commission is that? >> That's the bylaw. Pardon me. Meeting

[1:06:35] rules. No. Yeah. We're not talking about meeting rules. We're talking about

[1:06:38] » So, the first one is that one. >> Yeah.

[1:06:41] » Okay. >> Yeah. I can't see. You got it. No,

[1:06:44] that's not it. >> I'll let you.

[1:06:45] » Okay.

[1:06:49] » That's not That's not what we're talking about.

[1:06:52] » I'll just read. >> This is what we're talking about though,

[1:06:54] right? >> Yes.

[1:06:56] » Okay. [laughter] >> Sorry.

[1:06:57] » Is it me? >> Sir,

[1:06:58] » pass that one off. >> Okay.

[1:07:00] » Yeah. >> All right.

[1:07:01] » Okay. Now

[1:07:04] » have one. >> Now we all get one.

[1:07:08] » Okay. We all have the same thing now. Okay.

[1:07:11] » We're all frantically meeting rules. That's the

[1:07:17] » Everybody has the right one as well. >> That's the meeting. No, I've got four

[1:07:20] different ones.

[1:07:23] » I can go make copies of this one.

[1:07:26] » I think you can tell the difference by the font.

[1:07:28] » The font is different on the two. >> Show that. This is the new font font.

[1:07:33] » This is what we're working on. >> By laws

[1:07:38] » of the Jefferson County Regional Planning Commission had

[1:07:42] » Is that what we are? >> Yes. Gotcha. Okay.

[1:07:46] » Yep. >> Yeah. I know. The last two I had. Okay.

[1:07:56] » So, it's this one. That's the No. Okay. Yeah, that's much different.

[1:08:04] » What did you say? >> Yeah, this is was in the back of the

[1:08:07] deck. >> Oh, okay. Okay. All right. I think that

[1:08:09] was that was Catherine's. >> Somebody got my copy. It's got notes on

[1:08:14] it. >> Uhoh.

[1:08:16] » Look at the second page and see which one got a little bit of ink on it.

[1:08:19] » Sue is really mean. I think this is [laughter]

[1:08:24] » Tell that's [laughter]

[1:08:27] Catherine. Okay. >> Oh, no. No. I got some ink here.

[1:08:30] » That's what I need. Let me swap out with you.

[1:08:33] » Hold on. Let's see what O'Brien. Thank you.

[1:08:37] » He said happy birthday to me. My birthday

[1:08:42] » 38 reverse. >> Okay. All right. So,

[1:08:48] page two of this document, which is what I was reading from.

[1:08:52] » Page two at the top, section five, compensation. I just changed wording

[1:08:56] there a little bit from what Katherine had to where it reads in the second

[1:09:00] sentence, reimbursement for travel and continuing education expenses of members

[1:09:06] shall be in accordance with the prevailing policy of Jefferson County,

[1:09:09] Tennessee. U she had referenced a specific document, I think, and I

[1:09:13] thought, well, that could change from year to year, so maybe we just leave it

[1:09:16] open-ended. And so that's why I wanted to make that change.

[1:09:21] Next article down, article three, officers and their duties, section one.

[1:09:26] The last part of that sentence in the document you have, I added to

[1:09:30] Katherine's document that just says any additional officers it deems appropriate

[1:09:35] from time to time. So, we're just saying we'll have a

[1:09:40] chairperson, vice chair person, secretary, and any additional officers

[1:09:44] we deem necessary and appropriate >> if we needed to form a committee and do

[1:09:49] some of those things. Absolutely. Right. >> Subcommittee I guess would be

[1:09:55] » or or or a parliamentarian. We have a parliamentarian.

[1:09:58] » We have parliamentary. Yeah. >> Um page three uh article four election

[1:10:04] of officers. There is one change here that's not a change between or

[1:10:07] difference between my document and Catherine's. It's a change in when we do

[1:10:11] officers. Um it says that officers shall be elected at an annual organization

[1:10:16] meeting in the month of January. Historically, we've been doing that in

[1:10:20] October. Um, and

[1:10:26] I think Katherine put that in her draft, so I picked it up and I was fine with

[1:10:29] it. But it may be something that we need to think about [clears throat] and and

[1:10:33] make sure we're okay with that.

[1:10:39] » Commissioners will change on this committee in September. Is that right?

[1:10:43] » Correct. I would think move it back to September meeting instead of October

[1:10:47] because you won't know who's going to be on here and that. Right.

[1:10:50] » That's the only thing I >> that's what we do on commission is

[1:10:53] » right. >> September meeting you have all your

[1:10:55] election of officers and that type of stuff. That's that's my only hesitation

[1:10:58] on October. >> Right.

[1:10:59] » So, do we just want to omit January and put September?

[1:11:03] » Yeah, I would be better.

[1:11:11] Now, right below that, there are two short paragraphs that I added that docu

[1:11:16] Katherine didn't have in her document. Uh, it's just about the election

[1:11:19] process, and it just says the current presiding chairperson or chairperson

[1:11:23] selected by majority vote will serve as chairperson for the election. Um and

[1:11:29] then the second added little paragraph there says whoever is nominated and gets

[1:11:35] the new office basically uh will take office upon adjournment of the annual

[1:11:41] organization meeting. In other words, their term starts once that meeting

[1:11:44] adjourns.

[1:11:50] Now go to page four uh section seven attendance.

[1:11:57] Um, I had a little bit of a concern about dealing how we deal with that. I

[1:12:01] think it's a good good provision that Katherine had 11 of it. Um, but I'm not

[1:12:06] sure that there's any authority to kick somebody off the commission other than

[1:12:11] by the county mayor. >> Um,

[1:12:15] » is it legal? >> Yeah, the same thing I come up with.

[1:12:18] » Well, we we t we did talk about that last time.

[1:12:21] » Um, and so it's like, well, uh, I don't know if it is or isn't. Uh we could do

[1:12:27] two or three things about this little wording I guess is we could ask the

[1:12:31] county attorney uh or uh just leave it and if we try to do that

[1:12:38] and it's not legal obviously it's not legal. The the county mayor does appoint

[1:12:42] the positions. We know that. Um and I'm not really sure if once the county

[1:12:48] mayor's made an appointment if he can undo it. I don't know. You do you know

[1:12:52] have any idea? >> I think there's a process to that. I'm

[1:12:54] not sure. I haven't looked into that. Okay. I know county commission can

[1:12:58] remove one of us. >> Yeah,

[1:13:00] » county commission can >> for cops.

[1:13:03] » We can't I don't think we have the authority to kick anybody off this

[1:13:06] commission ourselves. Uh because it is a mayoral appointment. Um but nonetheless,

[1:13:12] I think it is a good idea that if we have people that are taking the seat and

[1:13:16] not showing up and doing the job, we would like to replace them.

[1:13:20] » You know, I want people to come [laughter] and participate. Um, so I I I

[1:13:25] would like to have that provision and I don't know um what how how how

[1:13:31] would be the best way to deal with wording on that at this point.

[1:13:33] » Could we refer to county commission in the event that somebody misses three

[1:13:36] meetings? That's a good idea. >> I think it needs to be addressed if

[1:13:39] » instead instead of bypassing the mayor though,

[1:13:43] » I don't think we need to go straight to county commission. We should go to the

[1:13:46] mayor. If we just struck the last part of the last sentence,

[1:13:52] u the chairperson shall notify the county mayor and request and reward that

[1:13:57] last part, the appointment of replacement that and however you want to

[1:14:02] craft the wording and I enjoy listening to you speak. You have a a good way with

[1:14:06] words and I I appreciate that to address the situation somehow,

[1:14:12] however he sees fit. Or or maybe we just stop with notify the county mayor.

[1:14:17] » Yeah. >> Yeah. And that's we could strike that.

[1:14:20] » I'm at peace with that. I think Yeah. >> Yeah. Why don't we just do that? That's

[1:14:25] simple. >> So it doesn't have to be brought before

[1:14:27] the county commissioners. >> Do county commissioners have to Okay.

[1:14:32] When somebody's put on this >> the mayor, don't the mayor would

[1:14:37] probably have to present that to county commission upon time he makes a

[1:14:40] decision. >> Mayor appoints commission confirms.

[1:14:43] Right. So >> there you go.

[1:14:45] » So yeah, it's a >> Okay. All right. Okay. Um I added down

[1:14:50] at the bottom of page four, section 10 for two lot subdivisions because we have

[1:14:56] delegated that responsibility. And I know it became an issue about a year or

[1:15:00] two ago. I forgot when exactly. And we spent a lot of time trying to figure out

[1:15:04] were we doing the right thing or [laughter] not and do we have the

[1:15:06] authority to do it. So I thought well let's just put it in our bylaws and that

[1:15:09] way it's covered. Uh, so I I did add that in and that's basically just

[1:15:14] covering that delegation of authority and that goes on over page five. You can

[1:15:20] take >> I was No, I was just seeing what how it

[1:15:22] how it ends.

[1:15:27] » Also on page five, I added section 11 minutes, which we do anyway. Um,

[1:15:35] I think the document I was working with had that, so I left it in there. Um, and

[1:15:40] then section 12 likewise was something I took out. I I used Haywood counties um

[1:15:45] eyelaws as sort of my straw man to start this and they had those two things in

[1:15:50] there. So I just threw them in too.

[1:15:55] And otherwise everything that I have not talked about in this document is exactly

[1:16:01] the same as it was in Kathy's document.

[1:16:46] David, go back over the very first one you went over because I think you had a

[1:16:51] lot of confusion going on about what you were reading from the top of you. We got

[1:16:55] those other copies handed out, >> right? Uh [snorts] the fir the first

[1:16:59] thing was on page two, section five. >> Okay.

[1:17:02] » I just changed wording a little bit on how the travel reimbursement is handled.

[1:17:08] » Five. Page two, section five. Top of the top of the page.

[1:17:11] » Yeah. Section five, compensation. I just rewarded that a little bit about how the

[1:17:18] reimbursement for expenses takes place. I just put in that it's based on the

[1:17:21] prevailing policy of Jefferson County. >> That way if the policy changes, it's

[1:17:27] still governed by their policy. >> We changed and the next thing we changed

[1:17:34] after section five, >> it was right below it. Section one

[1:17:38] officers. I added the phrase and any additional officers

[1:17:43] that deems appropriate from time to time. That was added.

[1:17:46] » Okay. >> Last.

[1:18:01] And then the next thing we change would be just the wording in article 4 section

[1:18:07] one striking January inputting September.

[1:18:10] » Right. >> Okay.

[1:18:12] » Now that is a change to this draft. The others are already in there that we

[1:18:17] talked about. Right. So we do I think we have two changes to this document that

[1:18:21] have been discussed. One is to change January to September.

[1:18:24] » Yes. And the other is to to truncate the sentence about notifying the county

[1:18:30] mayor. Just to stop right there and don't put the rest of that sentence in.

[1:18:39] » Yes, ma'am. >> I have one correction.

[1:18:42] Um, you're assigning the Can I say good um

[1:18:48] the two lot subdivisions? Mhm. Um,

[1:18:56] uh, Stephanie cannot disapprove a plaque.

[1:19:02] » Okay. >> She can either approve or send the

[1:19:05] » she either approves or sends to us or the planning commissioner.

[1:19:08] » Uh, she she um >> Okay.

[1:19:11] » There's no disapproval. Um,

[1:19:16] and you should have usually there's a statement in there that

[1:19:24] uh if she deems a issue, she is uncomfortable at any time

[1:19:31] with a plat, she can refer it. Like that I don't I have authority to do that in

[1:19:38] other counties. >> And there are [clears throat] some I

[1:19:40] look at and I'm like, >> I'm not touching it. It's it's it's

[1:19:44] either a political issue like the I had to admit the one about the sheds. I

[1:19:50] would not have touched that one. Uh and I think I even said you got my note

[1:19:55] afterward like don't approve that or uh it should have been referred here.

[1:20:00] Anything that has any kind of political or

[1:20:04] » e even if it meets >> even if it meets No, I would

[1:20:08] » that's heavily contentious. I guess >> if it's a contious

[1:20:12] » Yeah. >> because it could be challenged based on

[1:20:14] the contious aspect of it. >> Yeah. But I go back if it meets all

[1:20:20] requirements. >> Well, she's using her to scratch. I

[1:20:22] » I know. I I know. But it that's pretty much cut and dry check boxes if it meets

[1:20:28] the requirements or not. I mean, there's not a lot of gray area there.

[1:20:35] » On two lot subdivision. >> On two lot subdivision there. I mean,

[1:20:38] he's he's it's he's pretty much cut and dry. It's laid out.

[1:20:40] » I think it's still a good mechanism for whoever's in the staff position to kick

[1:20:45] that to a body because in the scenario you're describing, it would still get

[1:20:48] approved legally. It would have no reason to be disapproved, right?

[1:20:51] » But at least it's like, look, everybody has looked at this. It does meet the

[1:20:56] requirements whether you like it or not. >> So, uh, and and she can use her or

[1:21:01] whoever can use their discretion. >> Yeah.

[1:21:06] I just if you got if you got the checklist and it meets it irregardless

[1:21:12] how you feel, I feel, or he feels, >> it meets it.

[1:21:15] » I've had to sit here and vote for some. I didn't

[1:21:18] » Absolutely. [laughter] >> I didn't agree with them. U

[1:21:21] but um >> and and what you're doing in that if

[1:21:24] they come in week one of the month, you're holding whoever's doing what

[1:21:28] they're doing up in another month's time for something that's already in black

[1:21:31] and white.

[1:21:35] And and that's where you got to lay political bias aside and do what's in

[1:21:38] black and white. If it meets the requirements, it meets them whether

[1:21:42] Austin's spirit and Brian's against it or not.

[1:21:44] » Yeah. >> Right.

[1:21:45] » Uh usually the other way around, but [snorts]

[1:21:50] » um >> well, you're not going to be building

[1:21:52] those, >> right?

[1:21:53] » I mean, it's going to be somebody got a form or cutting off section for their

[1:21:57] kid for a house. And and again, you're making it harder on a land owner, harder

[1:22:01] on a man that's trying to get something or woman who's trying to get something

[1:22:04] done. >> Like in this scenario, we're talking

[1:22:06] about one instance and in that instance, the staff did approve it. So,

[1:22:09] » right. I'm just come up about hypothetical future situations.

[1:22:13] » Yeah. >> If it's in black and white, we don't

[1:22:16] need to see it. Well, and I think maybe this is

[1:22:19] something that the staff may look at that go

[1:22:23] » and it's I don't feel that it actually means, but maybe you look at it and go,

[1:22:28] "Actually, I think it does." >> Right.

[1:22:30] » And if she she or whoever in the future is in that position is at that point,

[1:22:34] then by all means bring it to us. >> Yeah. And that's all this says, my

[1:22:37] understanding of it. >> Yeah. It's just an out.

[1:22:40] » Yeah. >> Um and again, she can't disprove one.

[1:22:44] » Yeah. Right. And now the deal is and the the state law

[1:22:50] she [laughter] >> I mean really

[1:22:53] » sorry. >> So

[1:22:56] » there's just instances where uh a staff person may not feel comfortable

[1:23:00] approving. >> Absolutely.

[1:23:02] » And uh the the way this is written it's like someone could you know just because

[1:23:09] she doesn't feel comfortable approving stuff and something

[1:23:12] » and I were to have that out. Absolutely. then it needs to be there. I'm I'm just

[1:23:16] saying though if >> and if it's if it's cut and dry,

[1:23:19] » you you brought in the whole political aspect and who it's going to offend this

[1:23:22] that and the other and stuff and that's that's off the table. If it's cut and

[1:23:26] dry, it's cut and dry. >> Yeah.

[1:23:28] » No matter who's for it or who's against it if it meets what the requirements set

[1:23:32] in place. >> If it if we don't go with them, what's

[1:23:35] the use in having them? >> And there in lies the reason that the

[1:23:39] planning commission has authority for subra. You're not it's not a political

[1:23:42] decision. That would be a county commissioner.

[1:23:45] » Absolutely. >> So, it rests with the planning

[1:23:46] commission. But, um, >> sorry, I didn't I'm not trying to be

[1:23:51] argumentative, but I think we're spinning we're spinning our wheels on

[1:23:55] stuff that we don't need to spend it on. >> Yeah.

[1:23:56] » Well, I'm opposed to this. >> I do have a problem like you were.

[1:24:00] » No, I'm I'm opposed to having it before us if it's cut and dry.

[1:24:06] » She said she she said if it had political connotation to it,

[1:24:11] » it should come here. it should come here if she's unsure and

[1:24:16] politics ain't got nothing to do >> and that's that is not in here. So

[1:24:19] ultimately it's the discretion of whoever holds [laughter]

[1:24:21] » that was great on paper. >> Thank you. Yeah.

[1:24:24] » So basically we need to remove the disapprove and

[1:24:27] » what happens if it doesn't meet the requirements when they turn it in.

[1:24:32] » Um >> isn't that a disapproval? Well,

[1:24:35] » she's she's going to disapprove it to the person presenting it because it

[1:24:39] doesn't meet our requirements and they've got to fix it.

[1:24:41] » She's going to say, "Yeah, go fix it." >> She's saying it's just like I do. I'll

[1:24:46] make a list of things that they omitted and you guys approve it on on these

[1:24:51] conditions that these conditions are met >> and then it's approved.

[1:24:55] » Most people would come in, Stephanie would go, "Hey, you didn't check this or

[1:25:00] that." And they're going to go, "Oh, let me go fix that." Come back. Most people

[1:25:03] are going to do that. If someone were to be forceful, she can't say, "No, I'm not

[1:25:06] approving this." At that point, she go, "Okay, go before the planning

[1:25:09] commission." And at that point, you're going to get told the same thing.

[1:25:12] » Absolutely. >> There also is a proviso in the zoning

[1:25:17] ordinance where I mean in the subreg, and this is in state law, that if a plat

[1:25:21] is presented that meets the requirements and it's not approved or disapproved

[1:25:27] within 60 days, >> I definitely remember that.

[1:25:29] » It's automatically approved. >> Yes. So, and that that is to ensure that

[1:25:35] um nobody just gets one and sits on it. >> It goes through the process.

[1:25:39] » Um but um and it you know if let's say that there

[1:25:46] was ever a challenge about something that challenges to if she's

[1:25:51] uncomfortable with something that challenges of this board

[1:25:56] not a staff person. That's that's where um that's the [clears throat] reason I

[1:26:03] think if anything is >> if you have never said the word

[1:26:06] politics, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Did that trigger you,

[1:26:09] Brian? [laughter] >> You're not a politician.

[1:26:12] » I am not sure at all.

[1:26:16] » But she also should not be she should not be taking grief over something

[1:26:21] that's a hot issue. >> Absolutely. And we tried to have her

[1:26:23] back for the most part. >> Right. Right. That's why if there's an

[1:26:27] issue that's uh um um anything that's a hot issue or combative or etc etc etc

[1:26:36] that decision then should be made by this board and not that set first.

[1:26:40] » I agree. >> Can can I suggest a wording change then

[1:26:42] on this? >> Absolutely.

[1:26:43] » Can we put political in there? No, >> you [laughter] pushing me

[1:26:49] again. >> Catherine, see see how you you feel

[1:26:53] about this. If we where there's a semicolon at the top of that page, it

[1:26:57] says county subdivision regulations are met. Semicolon. How about if we change

[1:27:01] that semicolon to a period and strike and approve or disapprove the plants.

[1:27:08] » The next sentence then says, if approved, this is what she does. Will

[1:27:11] that work? >> Did that save you? If approved, it's sh.

[1:27:16] Yes. >> Okay. Okay.

[1:27:20] » Cook period. >> Strike.

[1:27:29] » That was simple enough. Less is more.

[1:27:39] » I'm down. >> Yeah.

[1:27:42] » Yeah. I mean that that sounds great. It does. We've addressed this. So last

[1:27:49] address this

[1:27:55] point a a point. Somebody comes in brings a plaque. It is woefully

[1:28:02] inadequate. >> She gives them a list. They they she

[1:28:06] gives them a list with six things. They fix three

[1:28:10] at that point. bring it to this body to have them deny it.

[1:28:16] » Yeah. >> Um that you know no there's you reach a

[1:28:20] point where just back and forth and back and forth with some of these surveyors.

[1:28:25] You know how that works. Oh yeah. So if she does not take an action to approve

[1:28:29] or disapprove in 60 days then you run a foul of the state law that it's

[1:28:35] » all right >> automatically approved. So if she takes

[1:28:38] it, it's you work with it for one month. After one month, the next month, put it

[1:28:44] on their agenda. >> Okay.

[1:28:46] » If she gives them something to correct and they don't correct it though, then

[1:28:49] is that not >> Yeah.

[1:28:52] » Do we still Does the time start from the time she tells them instructions?

[1:28:55] » Submitt. >> Okay.

[1:28:56] » It's submitt and I'll tell you this, >> that's

[1:29:01] » there are people who say it's submitt. There are people who say it's the action

[1:29:06] of uh planning commission. >> Uh that is a hotly debated.

[1:29:11] » There's actually not >> submitt would be when they write a

[1:29:15] check. >> Um

[1:29:17] » they got to pay 100 bucks to submit it. >> It's like when they hand it in, she

[1:29:21] says, "Well, you can't I can't take this cuz you got to do this, this, this, and

[1:29:23] this, and this." Now, when you get that fixed, bring it back. I take your check.

[1:29:26] » I mean, be my thoughts. And most of the surveyors here that I see are are doing

[1:29:32] a good job. >> Yeah.

[1:29:34] » Uh there are surveyors that >> you won't put anything on. And I tell

[1:29:39] you 90% of the time they're they're elderly and they're still doing work and

[1:29:44] they they they they can't do a digital copy is uh you know there just times

[1:29:50] that they they'll >> it goes back and forth and back and

[1:29:55] forth and back and forth. If it goes back one more time, I give it to the

[1:30:00] planning commission to say deny it without prejudice and then they can say

[1:30:04] when you correct this, we'll approve it. But we'll approve it.

[1:30:08] » Yeah. >> Okay. Uh we've got I'm going to kind of

[1:30:14] rain this in since we've talked a little bit about it. We've got the copies.

[1:30:18] We've seen some stricken language. Uh we've seen some change language. Does

[1:30:24] everybody have theirs marked where the changes have been made?

[1:30:27] » Well, I've got two golf cers one of them, right?

[1:30:29] » Okay. [laughter] >> Different, but they're not the one we're

[1:30:33] dealing with. >> No, they're not.

[1:30:35] » They're not. >> Right. But we can get a copy made I'll

[1:30:41] take with me. >> Yeah, that's this one. And this has the

[1:30:44] stricken. >> Yeah.

[1:30:46] » And the changes made. David, I think it's good piece of work.

[1:30:51] I like what I'm seeing. Would you be willing to let us get these copies made,

[1:30:55] have them, and then >> go to next

[1:30:58] » table to next meeting? >> Absolutely. Uh, in fact, I'll make the

[1:31:01] changes in the original draft that we talked about tonight and give them to

[1:31:05] Stephanie to to redistribute. >> Okay. Everybody peace with that?

[1:31:09] » Yep. >> I am as long as like everybody's got all

[1:31:12] their >> It's all on the table now, right? Any

[1:31:16] concerns or anything with this? Like we just need a clean document to present

[1:31:19] and approve. Yeah, I think I think this is a good piece of work.

[1:31:23] » Yeah, if something comes up, I'll let you know in June.

[1:31:25] » You're a good piece of work. [laughter] >> Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion

[1:31:30] that we postpone uh final approval on the bylaws of Jefferson County Regional

[1:31:36] Planning Commission until next month, in which time I will present [snorts]

[1:31:41] a new draft of the document with the three changes we discussed

[1:31:47] today. >> Okay. Second or you're going to ask for

[1:31:51] a second? >> Yeah, I'll ask for a second.

[1:31:53] » You're learning often. Stick with it. We have a proper motion on the forward. Do

[1:31:58] we have a second? >> Second.

[1:32:00] » Is there any further discussion? >> I hope not.

[1:32:04] » Baleith. One more outburst. [laughter] >> One more item.

[1:32:08] » One more outburst. >> Thank you. on the way out. [laughter]

[1:32:13] » Being none, all those in favor of postponement till June, let it be known

[1:32:17] by saying I. >> I.

[1:32:20] » Down to item V five. Any other business? >> Is today really Miss Sue's birthday?

[1:32:30] » Happy birthday. >> We don't have a cake for you.

[1:32:33] » Thank you. I know. You could say

[1:32:37] » you want a cake. So that's a bad suggestion. [laughter]

[1:32:42] » Yeah. Yeah. Leave the big the big main one.

[1:32:46] » We we we know we do have one thing to show the group. So if you would allow

[1:32:49] Stephanie a moment to go retrieve that just to

[1:32:52] » hold you seat. Sue, happy birthday. >> Thank you.

[1:32:55] » This isn't the case. >> I love to get it was but

[1:33:00] dread getting them. I love it. >> I know this is a little bit out of

[1:33:03] order, but I'd like to ask a quick question. Uh item A being the final PL

[1:33:09] approval for Ponderosa. It was postponed last month, postponed

[1:33:13] it again this month. >> It's if it's postponed, it's till they

[1:33:16] get their stuff together. It's not tabled. So it's it's we wait until they

[1:33:20] get everything together. >> But you were talking about 60 days from

[1:33:24] the day they submitted if no action is taken. It becomes uh it's passed without

[1:33:29] action. >> No,

[1:33:32] » but they have taken action. Postponement is an action. Yeah,

[1:33:35] » it's it's we're we're good and they'll come back in June if they're ready.

[1:33:39] » Okay. >> Yeah,

[1:33:40] » I appreciate it. You're very welcome. >> Uh so the document she's bringing

[1:33:47] » um we've um we've struggled with um

[1:33:55] a couple here. Um

[1:34:03] other weird one that's just that one the one from

[1:34:12] » that's

[1:34:20] um

[1:34:24] » okay let me I'll bring up the one from here.

[1:34:28] » Sorry.

[1:34:33] » I just can't read it if I print it because of the size.

[1:34:40] » Um, so these have been quote unquote

[1:34:45] submitted. Um they are obviously are deficient

[1:34:52] in a number of that one was the one

[1:34:57] » they've been submitted and will be on the agenda for the June meeting.

[1:35:00] Correct. >> Um

[1:35:01] » well well is we've not determined that yet because they're unbuildable lots

[1:35:07] under the water of the lake. >> [laughter]

[1:35:12] » So what happened is a property owner bought the whole

[1:35:17] » whole acreage under the water. >> Yeah.

[1:35:20] » This was a survey that was done in 2009 that was never recorded.

[1:35:26] So when the when he purchased it, he purchased it from somebody that it was

[1:35:30] only done in a deed. it wasn't recorded and now he's buying it and want to

[1:35:36] subdivide it to all these unbuildable lots and the hopes I guess of so selling

[1:35:42] it to the other property owners because TVA won't give them a dock if they don't

[1:35:47] underneath don't own underneath the water now

[1:35:52] this is I've got two of them >> this is the

[1:35:57] » actually had a buddy that went through some you know Todd Lacy he had to do the

[1:36:01] same Yeah, >> this is

[1:36:04] um >> that's the other one and I can't you can

[1:36:08] » everything outside of the purple line is underwater.

[1:36:11] Uh and so I talked to >> normally

[1:36:16] » I talked to >> maybe not right now. [laughter]

[1:36:19] » I talked to an attorney with TVA >> and I talked to another surveyor who was

[1:36:25] worked with some of these issues. Um [clears throat] there actually are is

[1:36:30] property totally underwater that there were people who owned to the

[1:36:37] center line of the river and their deeds went out there even

[1:36:42] though TVA when they inundated it they didn't totally go away.

[1:36:47] » Mhm. [clears throat] Um, so if you don't have technically

[1:36:53] uh meet certain criteria, you can't get a dock. So the intent, at least what the

[1:36:59] in two individuals I spoke with, [snorts] their opinion was that this was

[1:37:04] being done in an effort to subdivide off lots totally underwater and then sell

[1:37:10] them to adjacent property owners so they could get a dock.

[1:37:14] It's as far as does it meet your subdivision regulations. There's no road

[1:37:19] frontage, there's no access, [laughter] there's no sewer, there's no water.

[1:37:23] » Our role is to build buildable lots. So Steph and I have discussed this on

[1:37:28] numerous occasions. I've made lots of phone calls

[1:37:31] » and like I said, the last two with for this property were done on a

[1:37:38] deed referencing this old survey that was never recorded. So they went through

[1:37:43] a title company and the title company did the deed the

[1:37:47] last one. >> Oh yeah.

[1:37:50] » And it's never been recorded. >> So the original hasn't but has this

[1:37:54] » These have been recorded. This is where he bought it

[1:37:58] and this is where they bought it >> and it was referencing this survey

[1:38:04] with all the writing saying that's being particularly described.

[1:38:08] » We just wanted you guys to be aware of it. Obviously if It's not recorded

[1:38:12] though. It's not legal. >> Well, that's I mean,

[1:38:17] » no, the most recent one is >> surveyors,

[1:38:20] » right? >> Or two different attorneys right here.

[1:38:22] But this one isn't. This is from recording.

[1:38:26] » Been recorded. They're referencing this old survey that wasn't recorded.

[1:38:30] » That was not recorded. >> That wasn't recorded.

[1:38:32] » Doesn't Cherokee just go to the high water.

[1:38:34] » It does. And so does watch bar. >> You know, when I talked to

[1:38:37] » that would take care of so much of it. When I talked to the attorney that works

[1:38:41] with TVA, >> he said that all of this was

[1:38:47] moot because when TVA inundated there were uh federal legislation that it was

[1:38:55] condemned >> for water purposes for and so none of it

[1:39:00] was applicable, but he was going to look around TVA and talk to some people. So

[1:39:05] TVA is is giving permits for docks based on this.

[1:39:09] » No. No. >> So,

[1:39:11] » but they also deny people docks. >> They're denying these some of these

[1:39:15] people docks because they don't own under the water

[1:39:18] » cuz they don't >> because they don't Well,

[1:39:21] » hold on now. >> That's what

[1:39:23] » they can't do that. There are certain No, that's wrong. No, they don't own

[1:39:27] down to the line. >> That's what they property doesn't

[1:39:31] necessarily touch the lake. Yes, that's that's the deal.

[1:39:37] » Stop short of the water. >> Yeah. Well, according to this, the 102.

[1:39:42] » Yeah. >> Which is the high water mark,

[1:39:44] » right?

[1:39:48] » Again, we just wanted you to be aware of it. We don't want you to do anything.

[1:39:52] Yeah. uh you know from the standpoint of a plat they don't meet any kind of your

[1:39:57] criteria based on zoning or based on zoning criteria and subre criteria

[1:40:04] to approve them. They can't be approved. >> It sound political to me. [laughter]

[1:40:09] » Somebody's trying to charge somebody that's done about water property.

[1:40:14] » So So here would be my thoughts on this, you know. So, if this guy paid

[1:40:18] [clears throat] $1,000 for all this underwater property and he's divided in

[1:40:21] lots, he can only take that $1,000 and divide it out by every how many lots and

[1:40:24] that's all he can charge. >> He paid $100,000 for it

[1:40:28] » for that. >> Yeah.

[1:40:29] » And how many lots he got. >> But

[1:40:31] » but he bought more than just this. >> No, he just bought what was under the

[1:40:34] water. >> But how far out does it go

[1:40:37] » to write? All that shows it's just a stone parcel.

[1:40:41] » I don't think we can stipulate what he sells it for. We

[1:40:44] » could. And I don't think we could approve it either. cuz it fell under

[1:40:48] water. >> Yeah. I don't know why you

[1:40:52] » you uh and this one is the one that really scared me.

[1:40:56] » Um >> I have no idea

[1:40:58] » what what your DA is, do all these other lakes, [clears throat] right?

[1:41:01] » Also, you cannot represent somebody else's property and record it

[1:41:07] without their signature. >> Yeah.

[1:41:09] » So, from a number of different standpoints, these do not meet the

[1:41:13] criteria for submittal. So, they're not um

[1:41:19] that's what we're basing that on, but we wanted to make you guys aware of it.

[1:41:24] See, if you had ever seen anything like this or been aware of anything like this

[1:41:29] has occurred, I've never seen this. >> I actually have a friend of mine bought

[1:41:34] a piece of property and then found out he could not have a dock there. He had

[1:41:39] to buy a piece of property that was underwater so he could have a dock.

[1:41:44] What was he? Where was Todd at? >> Muddy Creek.

[1:41:46] » It was over near the sheds. >> This is Muddy Creek.

[1:41:49] » Yeah, Muddy Creek. Todd's place, pretty sure.

[1:41:54] » And at least one surveyor that I spoke to said this was that was the reason for

[1:41:59] doing this. >> Um

[1:42:02] that there would there would be an attempt to go to these property owners

[1:42:06] and sell it to them and combine it with their lots. and and uh the surveyor I

[1:42:13] spoke to said they had done it before one lot at a time.

[1:42:19] » One lot at a time because and and then you had the person's signature, etc.

[1:42:24] That one's got Jeez. >> So that's a cove on two sides, right?

[1:42:30] Right. >> Yeah. This one.

[1:42:31] » This one is big one is. >> That's right.

[1:42:33] » Who checks the pins on them? [laughter]

[1:42:39] » That's stupid. But it's being done and there's money

[1:42:43] changing hands. >> How much do they pay usually for a lot

[1:42:48] for or a lot underwater? >> Eddie, [laughter]

[1:42:53] which it it would be I would feel better about

[1:42:59] » Thank you for sharing. Could we [laughter]

[1:43:02] could we even approve it though if it violates all of our

[1:43:05] » right that >> if it was being combined with adjacent

[1:43:09] property but that's not what these are doing it shows

[1:43:13] » he wants it or whoever it is wants it divvied up and then they're going to go

[1:43:17] » he wants to contact all the property owners to buy one of the joints

[1:43:20] » and really do it the other way around >> if someone who didn't own property

[1:43:25] bought one of these tracks somebody didn't own adjacent property and they

[1:43:28] bought one of these tracks and they wanted to anchor a house boat on top of

[1:43:32] their property. Lake City, there's house boats all over that thing and they've

[1:43:37] got property. They run electrical lines to them.

[1:43:40] Underwater cable. >> Oh, been there. Seen it.

[1:43:44] » And they're not like in a marina where what is that? A boat. That's a boat.

[1:43:48] That's a house. >> It's It's a house boat.

[1:43:51] » House boat or boat house. house. >> They've got docks on the on the house

[1:43:55] for the boat to pull into, for the jet ski to pull into, and they run an

[1:43:59] electrical cable from the utility. You can pick a 100 or 200 amp. And 200 amp's

[1:44:04] $20,000 to get a drop to your house,

[1:44:09] boat house. >> And so you own the land on the lake and

[1:44:11] you're looking out at somebody else using the water.

[1:44:16] » Well, this doable in different places, I'm sure.

[1:44:19] Washington State, Columbia River, Georgia. I'm sitting out there in front

[1:44:22] of the river. Got houses. I mean, houses built on poles. River goes up and down.

[1:44:26] Houses go up and down. >> Mhm.

[1:44:28] » Garage doors. Pull our boats right in. Just hit the remote. Drive your boat

[1:44:31] right in the garage.

[1:44:34] » Sure do. Wonder if I can buy a bunch of that lake bottom property.

[1:44:39] Start selling. >> What was it? Somebody said you they gave

[1:44:42] you a price for how much they paid for it.

[1:44:45] » And they got the deed. He paid $100,000 for that property.

[1:44:48] » He paid a hundred for all this. >> For all that. That's under the water.

[1:44:51] » And the deed you've got is this recorded the whole thing

[1:44:55] » written out. >> Okay. It's not one lot.

[1:44:58] » No, it's two tracks. >> Two tracks.

[1:45:01] » Maybe the only way we can afford to buy land now.

[1:45:03] » I think [laughter] >> I think we need to need to get Katherine

[1:45:07] to draw up where she disagrees with it and just give that to [laughter]

[1:45:13] » Yeah. >> Um

[1:45:15] » I thought we had a good meeting today. You know that's uh uh

[1:45:19] » if you believe that I've got a piece of property on Norris Lake [laughter]

[1:45:24] property. >> Thank you all for showing this to us.

[1:45:28] And I don't know how we move forward with something like this. Uh I mean if

[1:45:32] they've submitted >> you get to deny it because it wouldn't

[1:45:36] meet the regulations and then it puts them back in their ballpark to figure

[1:45:38] out how to do it >> to figure that out. But we've got to

[1:45:40] give them guidance on how to meet whatever they need to meet.

[1:45:43] » One lot at a time. >> One lot at a time. That's not even Yeah,

[1:45:47] that's not even a original. >> I wouldn't want to prevent I wouldn't

[1:45:51] want to prevent anyone that bordered it. I mean, if I live there and I wanted to

[1:45:54] buy it, >> Yeah.

[1:45:56] » I don't want to prevent that, but I also don't want to violate our

[1:45:59] » Yeah. rules. rules. >> You know, again, if they if they came in

[1:46:04] like brought lot 25 and 25 L and combined them, then the determination

[1:46:12] would be Yes. You It's a It's a two lot subdivision. Here's a great example.

[1:46:17] » Right. >> Stephanie [laughter] can approve it.

[1:46:20] » Yeah. You can

[1:46:22] » That could be That might be too political.

[1:46:24] » Yeah, it sounds like it. [laughter] Um that but that is the okay way to do

[1:46:32] it. Um >> so that would be the guidance though

[1:46:36] » and and why do they have to have that in order to be able to have a dock?

[1:46:41] » Cuz the government got involved. >> Oh that's why it doesn't make sense.

[1:46:46] » Yeah. Money. >> It's political. Brian

[1:46:49] [laughter] they go hand in hand. Some of those houses have dogs.

[1:46:54] » Some of those houses have dogs. Well, nobody has a dog without channel.

[1:46:58] » There's nothing black and white on this one to make a decision.

[1:47:00] » No, no, no, no, [laughter] no. And and I don't even I I mean, Has anyone asked

[1:47:05] you to approve it or >> Oh, he just he wants it approved. That's

[1:47:09] what he wanted me that's what he wanted me to find out cuz I told him I couldn't

[1:47:13] sign it. It was under the water. >> Yeah.

[1:47:15] » And that's where we need your guidance, Madam Planner.

[1:47:18] » Um I lost a whole field of wheat right there.

[1:47:21] » Third back to >> you know, we actually toss back

[1:47:23] [clears throat] and forth. Should we put them all on your agenda and have them

[1:47:26] all denied? >> Just tell if I get flood insurance.

[1:47:30] » How many? [laughter] All of them. How many are there?

[1:47:33] » 31. 34. There's individual one. >> 24 30 31.

[1:47:38] » And why they all came in? >> The month of May.

[1:47:42] » Yeah. >> The same few weeks.

[1:47:44] » There's 32 on this one. >> I guess the water started off somewhere.

[1:47:48] » He figured out what he had. I mean, maybe he serve they surveyed it

[1:47:53] while the water was low pool or >> Well, they did. And this was 2009.

[1:47:58] » Oh, well, >> well, the water leaves there every year.

[1:48:02] » They can survive. >> Half of it out on dry land now.

[1:48:06] » This one here's got 42 lots. >> Yeah.

[1:48:10] [snorts] >> But they can do it one lot at a time.

[1:48:14] » They can do it one lot at a time. >> As long as the property owner above the

[1:48:19] water is willing to buy it. Well, that's what they would be doing is combining.

[1:48:23] Yeah, you would it would be a two lot subdivision. You would be eliminate the

[1:48:26] lot eliminating lot. >> Why do they have lots under the water

[1:48:31] anyway? >> Well, the water wasn't there first.

[1:48:34] » Well, there they deeds went to the center line of the

[1:48:39] river. >> Oh, I got you.

[1:48:40] » So, that is the Gotcha. >> So, they condemned up to the 1002.

[1:48:47] [clears throat] Then the usable land was above the 102.

[1:48:51] So people bought those >> and now

[1:48:53] » it sit dormant for years. I mean in the 80s you couldn't give away like

[1:48:57] property. >> I know.

[1:49:00] » No you can't afford >> you can't afford to buy it. Yeah. You

[1:49:03] ain't just kidding. >> Okay. That's a good uh thing to close

[1:49:08] on. >> So Katherine, you're going to work with

[1:49:11] Stephanie on this >> and stuff. get things ready for her on

[1:49:15] what's the best way to move forward >> with [laughter] the two block

[1:49:20] » with this whole deal >> again. I've been asking a lot of

[1:49:23] questions. I've called I've called everybody I know

[1:49:26] » and you talked to Brandon had you talked to Brandon Jared, didn't he?

[1:49:30] » I called him. He never called me back. >> Here's the deal. It's only going to be

[1:49:36] on Douglas. >> Yeah. I mean, that's the only lake it's

[1:49:39] on because they bought the property to the high water mark everywhere else.

[1:49:43] Yeah. >> All the TVA changes.

[1:49:44] » Yes, sir. >> You mean you don't have this trouble

[1:49:48] that way >> and in in some like Waga Lake, there is

[1:49:51] no private property on the lake. >> There are no houses on Lake. There's

[1:49:56] » Dale Hall. Same way. >> Yeah. Yeah. So they I guess they just

[1:50:00] treated everyone different. >> But Douglas is the only one that they

[1:50:06] » didn't buy the property. All the rest of the lakes you only own down to the high

[1:50:10] water mark. Cherokee North watch bar Loud and

[1:50:14] Teleico yada yada all the TVA chain lakes right on down. [snorts]

[1:50:19] » Okay. >> Okay. So,

[1:50:21] » okay. >> Katherine and Stephanie's working on

[1:50:23] this and they're going to come back to us what they come up with. Anything else

[1:50:27] y'all like to present? >> Any other fun topics?

[1:50:32] » Being no other business, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Have a motion. Do

[1:50:37] we have a second? >> Second. All those of favor can

May 26, 2026 - Jefferson County, TN - Board of Zoning Appeals & Regional Planning Commission

Transcript