We'll call the meeting and the parties can be planning and zoning committee to order.
Committee members after leader for DM and mileage, everybody done that.
Presentations, water,
assistance for treatment and retirement, recovery, project summary.
All
right. Yeah. So I apologize if anyone heard this twice. I know we did this at the
land and water meeting too, but we thought it would be important for planning zoning too.
Just to catch you guys up on the culmination of the water project, the fine numbers and
everything like that. So pretty good results that we had. Good participation throughout
the county is. So just a little background, this project came from slur funds, federal money
to invest in water making necessary with the intent to invest in water making necessary investments
to improve access to clean drinking water. So in April 2022, Verge County set aside funds for
the American Rescue Act or American Rescue Plan Act, that's ARPA and then state and local
fiscal recovery funds for projects to improve access and to provide drinking water to forage
county residents. And this project was specifically for testing and identifying high nitrate concentrations
that I see in the health standards and providing funding for those wells and those treatment
systems. This project was broken up to two categories. I kind of was in charge of
the site of the county residents and private wells for drinking water, and Lindsay was in
charge of the transient non-community wells, and they were close drinking water sources.
So we'll start with the private residential well side of things, and then I'll look to
take over for her portion of it.
But there's approximately 15,000 active private residential wells in Portage County,
And roughly 21% of them exceed the drinking water standard of 10mg per liter for nitrates.
And that's based off our last county-wide groundwater study in 2022.
And that translates to about 3,000 wells that could require treatment or replacement.
14% are between 10 and 20mg per liter, and 6% are over 20mg per liter.
And just a note, there is also a state program for well compensation for new treatment systems
or doing new wells.
And it was a little bit more comprehensive at the state side of things where they can
receive more money.
If they needed a new well, we really pushed them to go through the state funding portion
because they can get up to $10,000 to drill a new well.
the county offered $1,500 to provide, we typically suggested reverse osmosis treatment systems,
but they had the option to either do a new well reverse osmosis ion exchange,
any kind of treatment they wanted as long as it would provide them clean water,
but it was just a cap of $1,500 for the reimbursement.
And that usually covered the cost of a reverse osmosis.
It wouldn't cover the complete cost for an exchange for a whole home system or a new
well, but if that's what they wanted, they'd still give them the $500.
So the process, the order of the process was residents would complete a non-land application
form.
They live in Forage County.
They had a private well.
They can receive a free test kit, either by sending them one or they're picking
it up here in the lab, the health department.
the county fair, town halls, a lot of different options.
We tried to reach as many people as we could.
Once they obtained that well test kit,
took their water test,
they would submit it to the lab at the university.
The results indicated eligibility for the program.
So if they were above the health standard,
then they were eligible.
There wasn't income cap or anything like that.
If you had high nitrates,
then you were eligible for the program.
Pellageable residents could receive a water treatment system.
As I said, they had their choice of installation.
So a new well, ion exchange, whole-home system, single-pointer versus osmosis.
And whatever they wanted, as long as they could show that it would treat the issue at hand,
typically those high nitrates.
But the future maintenance is on the fiscal homework responsibility.
And then one follow-up test was conducted one year after, just to confirm that the issue
was solved for them, hopefully, and if not, we can kind of work with them to resolve any
issues that might be, troubleshoot anything that would come up, but then test the efficacy
of the program.
So a number of tests, this included the test for the homeowner's package in bacteria
test and as you can see of all towns and the Village of Park
Bridge were all represented for giving a water test and you can see that there
was over 1,300 of these water tests given out and the different color
represents each year given or tested and you can see them typically the more
populist talents who had more water tests, which made sense, because there were more
private wells to test, but every single talent was represented.
Then there's water tests versus treatment systems for reimbursements.
And you can kind of see the tests are in the wider blue bars.
The reimbursement for treatment is in the orange bars.
And typically, if there's an over-representation of reimbursement systems, compared to water
tests, that's typically where we see just generally higher nitrates in the economy,
which makes sense because there's a more, fortunately, there's more eligible wells
if there's higher nitrates generally, whereas if there's higher tests relative to the
treatment reimbursements, then there's typically less nitrates, it's not as big of a problem
in that area of the county.
So places like Amherst, one of us, the stock and share in our all, typically you see higher
nitrate levels in the groundwater and places like Plain, Dewey, Carson, Hull, Glenwood.
Typically we see lower nitrates generally in the groundwater in those areas.
Okay, so then private well treatment.
There was over a total of 105 reimbursements that we, that were accepted and reimbursements
given to county residents and again there was slightly over 1,400 total
well-tested that includes homeowners package, the nitrate retests,
so this is
about $88,000 worth of water testing for the cost of water testing and
almost $136,000 for treatment reimbursement costs. And as you can see
that there's the highest amount in 2023 for both water tests and treatment
reimbursements. And then it kind of tapers down as the people that were really that
knew that they kind of knew that their water was bad and they wanted to apply
for this they got involved right away and then it kind of tapered out as we
were still trying to educate the public about it but there's less
people that ended up going through the program.
But was it a success? Well
So there was a 98%, sorry, a 78% average nitrate reduction.
The average free treatment nitrate concentrations for eligible participants
was 17.3 milligrams
per liter.
But after treatment, the average went down to 3.9 milligrams per liter.
And as you can see in the chart, the green is free treatment nitrates, the black is
the most treatment nitrates.
and there was five instances where there was high or nitrate levels above the
health standard after treatment and for each of those people we reached out to
them, try to see what's going on, solve the issue, give them that and send another
test that they needed to change the filter. So we were currently working with
those five participants to try to give those nitrates.
This is where I take over.
So, again, my name is Lucie with the Health Department and I'm one of the sanitarians.
So, the Health Department has a contract with all of the TN systems in Portage County,
and we're contracted by the DNR.
So, there are 128 total TN systems, excuse me, in Portage County.
When we first started this project, we identified 35 of them that had nitrate levels that exceeded 10,
or were trending to exceed 10 milligrams per liter over the next few years.
10 of those systems already had a nature removal system that they had installed
but had ongoing maintenance costs for those. The TN systems can't just put a
reverse osmosis system underneath their kitchen sink or they have to install a
point-of-entry system entry all of the water and that's for TNR and PSPS. So
those are much more costly than a narrow system. So they have a lot of
ongoing maintenance. There was no state funding available for TN systems when
we started this project.
So we set aside $10,000 per system.
So they could work cost-assorted with their existing
treatment system to drill a new well,
install a treatment system, or connect to a municipal system.
And then we worked with a DNR to determine if a new well
was the right answer or treatment system,
which was the best choice.
Here's kind of a quick overview.
So the number of new wells installed
installed or we installed nine new wells or had nine installed. Six new treatment systems
were installed and then there was 10 previously installed treatment systems that were reimbursed.
We did have one new well for a bacteria issue was drilled recently and then there's four
new wells right now that are being drilled or will be reimbursed here yet in 2026.
So I just had a new well put in a place and a treatment system that was just installed
but we are waiting for reimbursement yet for those.
Here's kind of the type of TN system.
So, churches, campgrounds, hotels, rec-ed camps, retail food facilities, serving meals, not serving meals.
And then, like you said, the number of systems to be reimbursed yet in 2006.
So, so far we've reversed 25 systems.
And then we have four more to go out of the 35 that we had initially.
And like Tyler and I put together the average nitrate reduction, the pre-treatment on average
was 16.9 and post-treatment was 1.6.
So definitely made a great impact for those systems.
I kind of indicated some of these were new wells and some were treatment systems, so
that's where you see the W and the T. I added this slide, so it's not in your
presentation.
So I apologize.
I just added it to me to show your average nitrate reduction.
So,
the total that we reverse for the TN systems was 232,000, and we anticipate additional 40,000 yet.
In talking with these TN systems, overwhelming gratitude for this money that the county set aside for them.
I have had over and over and over, they were just extremely pleased, and thankful that they got this money for a new well or treatment system or they're going to redeem this cost.
So I think this program was a great success.
There were a few systems that decided not to,
or their nitrate level did decrease, you know,
over time, so we needed to take action at this point.
Any questions?
Yeah.
How many people from the village of Nelsonville?
At least one within the village was,
went through the entire process
and was reimbursed for treatment.
One person.
So, tell me how many of the transients are connected to a municipal system?
So, did I hear you say they had that option?
They had the option.
So, we had one system that had the option to connect to municipal.
So, that one was previous time floor.
And so, they're the only one that had the option that was close enough.
Everywhere else is not anywhere close to connecting.
So they initially had treatments as to put in and when we just go water came through the
And the reimbursements, how long are they available?
Because like the rescue dollars, I don't know, I thought they needed to be expected by 5%
So I had to push back until the end of this year.
Yes.
So most of those are, these are all reimbursed.
There's just a few more.
I'm going to hand it back to you.
We've got a few more weeks.
And the ones that were decreasing and decided not to, what area of the county close in?
Um, so I would say there's two out near Amherst.
So when we initially put the 35 systems out there, if some were increasing and they might have had like 6, 7, 8, but we're not yet at the 10 pilgrims were later.
You're delaying the DNR.
They have to take action, sign the consent order and take action. So those systems might
have been increasing. So there's a few out here in Amherst. One of them is still above 10 milligrams
per liter and decided that he was selling his facility and didn't take action at all. And
so he will have to take action, but he decided not to use our funding.
what
the cost of a replacement filter is.
Exactly, but I think it's like $80 to $100.
I think it's typically, sometimes it needs to be changed more frequently depending on the use.
So a family of six is probably going to have to change the filter more often than a family
of six.
I suppose we don't know when these won't work.
There's some people that have taken money from the system and will not replace their filter.
Yeah, that's correct.
We try to encourage them, like with the one-year post-treatment test, you know, if the results
come back higher,
see if they have changed the filter or not, suggest that they do it.
But, yeah, going forward, there's no way that we can continue to regulate that or anything
like that.
Yeah, I just need for the results that you get good results if you use this.
So I wanted to, for the new wells that were installed in some of those cases,
those are nine new wells installed, sometimes you said you were getting kind of feedback from the DNR,
whether that approach makes sense.
You're always successful in finding a place to place a well that meets better water standards.
All of the nine that we reimbursed on here were successful. However, I had two in the
last three years that were not successful. And then one was actually a county system and
they ended up putting in a treatment system after a new well. But the old well had more
issues than just my treatment. So it was definitely well. And now we have treatment systems
besides. So the ones that the new wells that were on
them. So I just had one
drilled and it started out at like it's been testing about 12 the last couple
years and the new wells at a level. They went deeper with that one. I don't know
the I know they're testing it more. There's definitely some. So do we allow
them to go to need papers for the treatment system and as well if they're unsuccessful with it.
So we gave them $10,000. We didn't give them, but we will reimburse them $10,000. So now they
will have to go on and do a treatment system for DNR requirements. We will give them $10,000 for
that treatment system. Yeah, we will give them $10,000. But not.
There
was only one person who could
ask me. We went through all the address, the mailing
address
but then there was also one person directly adjacent to the village that's
was basically you know just outside the the village boundaries but yeah one within the village
basically two basically two but one technically something
like a good use of those
meeting attendants
before anybody made anywhere planning this only breakfast before logic because
Mr. Chair
We're going to be walking through just some highlights of the proposed
preliminary George 2027 budget.
This is the first time I'm going through this process, but I try to keep it fairly high
level and fairly brief, but I wanted to kind of call it a couple of
things.
We have submitted the draft, I should note as well.
We have a number of the resident experts here in the audience,
under different section of the
specific questions about certain components of the budget as it
relates to what they may do on behalf of the county.
So, can we submit a draft two weeks ago?
I had some preliminary discussions with my department that seemed to be for
all planes
only in section three, but I should make this preface by saying there are 15 staff
members plus two seasonal in the department. We have one vacancy currently and 14 of those 15
are actually housed in Fort Housigan. There are several different sections in the budget. So as
you go through this, I'll kind of wait. This is kind of a summary of each of those sections
or divisions, but there are eight different components that roll up and make these totals
for each of these different line items. So we have administration, planning, zoning,
and water conservation, groundwater, GIS, Central Scotts Windsched Partnership,
and land record spawnerization components that go into the overall
budget. The county surveyor just went through the process to be moved over to
Highway Department so you can see that in the
so the budget hearing as it's called
with finance department and county executive is actually tomorrow so
So we're just hours away from actually having some more formality to this presentation.
So in previous years, it typically goes before that budget hearing and gets kind of fine-tuned
a little bit,
emphasizing the words, preliminary draft at this point.
It certainly is that way until we get further into the coming board computations and hearings.
So, what is, again, lined up for the future process in terms of milestones, as scheduled
for early each month, next three months.
So, we have final changes from the department staff side of things until the end of next
week.
So, it's following those budget hearings that are going on this week with the kind
Executive's Office. The County Executive will present the budget to the County Board in
October. October 6th is currently scheduled for that. And then you have your County Board
annual meeting along with the public hearing budget adoption in November, November 2nd,
preliminary scheduled for that. So, again, the current budget that's presented at these
next coming meetings are performance specialists and accomplishments. A couple of things of
particular interest, for example, so we kind of outline what you see in your kind of budget
manual or documentation coming forward here the next couple of months. Some of these tables
or if you see it's a little more specifically,
but we'll kind of lay out 234 actual numbers
compared to 205 actual numbers,
and then essentially the first half, 206.
One, or two items that we're gonna call out in particular,
rezoning applications for 2024 or 12.
In total, we have nine last year
and already through June we have 10.
So quite a few of those rezonings happening.
Moving forward, on site waste treatment system permits, we have 147 and 204, 187, a
couple
of things to call up there.
As you just heard, again, water tests and water treatment systems being provided or reimbursed
in the process of that water program as Heather and Lindsay just talked through, so those are
some of the habits that they'll be sharing in more formal documents coming up. Of course,
one of the big projects underway is the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance rewrites
for the middle of workshops and western towns that had good stays and actually had a pretty
good turnout. All things considered in terms of just coordinating all those things, especially
in the summer months here.
Eastern towns go through the same workshop process here this
Thursday.
A couple of things to highlight, again, working on such things as economic
development, groundwater planning, well-protection ordinance, other things
that are kind of just on the list moving forward into next year. So these are kind
of issues and initiatives and then also looking at that farmland preservation plan
too. So again looking at a lot of different types of topics, processes,
different conditions in planning and zoning,
those numbers, and he made an
issue.
That's a lot of the information that's not necessarily in your packet, but just kind of
appropriate kind of introductory to the materials here I want to highlight. So looking at that,
budget analysis spreadsheets here in the agenda packet, I'll walk through these questions
along with my guide. But some more additional materials here I can reference for staff here
So to start,
looking here, one thing I want to call out in particular here you see right at the top is $29
,700 for a federal grant.
This is an NRCS grant that already works for processing that for a source water protection plan.
So that's what you see here. So you see negative numbers. Those are essentially the revenue
side of things. So that's what that federal grant call out is. So just wanted to call attention
to that. Under state grants, put further down the list, you can see a 40% proposed increase.
He has some 9.1 enhancement grants coming forward for our GIS and the GIS and land records are just GIS.
Yeah, that's coming out of the land records.
Okay, thank you.
So again, we have just somewhere in eight different components that go to that.
We're trying to keep it kind of high level, but you can just see the totals here.
So that's in part what has seen an increase in this number for next year.
We are projecting here in revenue side a possible decrease from what we budgeted for revenue
for the building permit side of things. It says building permits, but that really is
coming through on the onsite research reading system permit side.
So just be a little bit more, I guess, under promise and hopefully be over-delivered.
On the revenue side is for projecting 2026 and then looking to next year.
So you see a little decrease there on the revenue side, but again, that's plausible that could be higher.
And again, especially as we're tracking the last few years of those permits still being
on the fairly high side.
So that's page one.
So page,
I should also note too, some of the decrease in the revenue here is there was
some rerouting of
the fees that are associated with violations over to the general fund.
So some of this is more of a keeping decrease, I'm saying that right, but that's kind
components to some of these things as well as just some.
So we'll be able to, we'll pass page two.
A lot of information you can see here are
salaries and such things.
That, you know, are sorting out through finance staff and such things that we don't really have
any input into any particular way. At least that is the stage of this level. So moving on
to page three, contractual services here. This is where we always hesitate providing
percentage change numbers because you take a little number, make a big number, you get
at a percentage of 430% increase.
So it's a strange number to be looking at,
but essentially that's related to the,
every five-year groundwater testing
that is coming up for 2027.
So those are less than 2017, 2022.
Five years later, we're into 2027.
So there are funds come from a $10,000 annual set aside, and I believe there's some funds from the solar donation fund in that.
I don't know if it's there, but there is some funds.
Yeah, we're asking
from the solar field down over, they gave us a donation to do annual groundwater testing.
So that's accounted for.
Yes, that's on the benchmark.
Okay.
So that, I think the 53 is just for the,
just for, okay.
So that's the, let me see, there's the
53,000 is for that.
Page four,
if I should know it is also
page 18 of your,
oh, sorry, page 19.
I see under computer services
increase there as well,
26 and a half percent.
That is due in part two
who have some GIS number mapping software payments increases that are in a counterboard there.
Again, that's a number that, you know, readily participated and it's coming from the IT staff
and kind of rolled up into that overall number.
And then, again, trying to highlight some of the decreases where we can in terms of
of coffee supplies dropping 6%, just trying to be a little more
fruitful where we can.
And that's certainly one thing that's
a little bit more of a subloaning fruit.
Not a big number, but take
on.
And then a little bit kind of trading back and forth
here between publication subscriptions
and memberships and associations.
So kind of a little offset here
to increase and want to increase the other.
Again, we have a new information officer started early this year placing somebody had 30 years
of experience.
So we're adding some additional, you'll see a little bit later on too, some lots
of lodging
just the additional training sort of patients for that new staff person.
So that's why you see some increases and decreases in those, but then also conferences,
courses, conferences, training, deals, and such. Again, not huge numbers, but the percentages
look a little bit more opposing as a result. It's related to some initial training.
Lodging at the top of 6 is an increase in part for things as simple as our code enforcement
or code, county code, administrators, is that right?
I'll give these one of these, so Wisconsin County Code
Administrators Conference, for example, is in a different location
that was this year, and also that's going to be more costly
to send folks to that just because of the logic.
So annual training, education that folks go to
and have been going through for a while.
You just see some of these things change
It's just based out where they're moving.
I see that you've got $900 for airfare.
Yes, good to catch.
That is part of that GIS training
with the foreign and information officer.
And again, that's one of those things
where the county executive has to approve that.
So if we were to have this meeting in two days,
rather than the day after the budget hearing
versus the day before,
that number may be different
based on the conversation we have tomorrow.
So there is a national, international training for GIS software that is held every year in its outstanding.
So that's all of our outstanding.
It is several states outstanding.
So it's a calculate.
I'm not sure where the 900 came from.
Is that for one or for two people?
That's just for one.
Just for one.
It's
something else.
I just had to send a child back to Florida at $750 a month.
So that's a placeholder for that anticipated training
for next year.
It's one that you have been participating in many years ago,
but now with a new staff person in that role,
it seemed appropriate to put that forward
part of the draft conversation.
And then finally,
age seven,
didn't want to call out this, again,
another weird percentage. You see 380%. Well, that's just, again, a little bit of
kind of that how trading and bookkeeping works. This is part of the watershed
groups, incentive payments. Am I seeing that right? Tracy, watershed groups, incentive
payments. Producer led. Producer led incentive payments. Thank you. And that's
offset by page one, the state grants revenue. So here's the expenditure side
of that revenue component. So that's why, and I just want to call attention to some of these
bigger percentage numbers that you may see, but that's what that land is referring to.
And then just to quickly summarize this, bottom line, the proposed 207 budget as you see
here is a 4.3% increase over the 2026 original budget. So if you look at those columns,
You see the original budget is kind of the first one after the column that says actual.
So when you take those two numbers, the 1.235 over the 1.284, that's where you get 4.3.
And again, that's also a
personnel increase that's proposed.
So, while you may see the 14.5%, that's really the proposed 20.7 budget as it relates to the 20.6 projection.
So, again, that projection could be a different number as we get to the center of 31st.
But that's where you get that number of 14.5%.
But one day I identified the fact that original budget, proposed budget.
So, the reason why you may see some changes too when you see the revised budget and that
rejection as well means that we lower them with that original budget performance.
Is there, that does include those salary savings.
A little bit earlier in the year,
as well as that my information officer position,
taking time to get that filled, and now we have another reserve associates position
Again, it's worth it, so there's some salary savings, which is why that percentage change
number is going to look a little bit wonky as well, because the actual budget for the
series is going to be a lot less than originally planned.
So with that, I will stop and see if there are any questions.
So
one now, seeing that increase in basically the computer services fees, licensing, I just
thought I'd ask it that prompted any kind of review of just checking to see if like all
the licenses that we're paying for are being used for
extra licenses that aren't being used.
Anything like that?
Sure.
If they've been increasing the rates, that's always a problem for me to think about.
I'm not sure we're actually getting from it.
Obviously, we need it.
Sure.
I don't know if others can speak to that.
Yeah, I'm not familiar, I'm not aware of any licenses being
underused, that's good questions in terms of,
I mean, to be overpaid perhaps for certain components,
but I do know the Esri licensing,
which is our backing software, the GS software,
has gone through changes, or has gone through changes?
And I'm sorry, I don't know a lot of details
about the increase, I know that the license,
and they stay in the place
because they're funneled through.
I see what you mean by the ones that are in the dark,
but the structures of those licensing.
But yeah, certainly, in some places,
we're actually looking to expand some of these.
Any more questions?
If you just need to
move into our 26
-year-old
flout of the Pesper, David and Charlie Nelsky,
excuse me,
future land use map,
this is a nation of parcel zero one zero two two
0.918,
0.9.01, totaling 41.63 acres from L1 enterprise agriculture to L2 intermittent
agriculture and rezone the same area from A1 exclusive agriculture to A3 low density
agriculture.
Yes, if I may, just kind of introduce this one, and then I'll look at the question.
The owners of this property in the town of Bonamista, they're looking to split a five-acre
parcel so they could build a new house on it.
So they originally actually stopped in our office.
They had been contemplating two parcels of five acres.
They were thinking their daughter would be interested in that turned out to not be the case.
so they are looking just for the one time of the time,
but rezoning the entire parcel allows them that flexibility
if she decides who wants to sub-demise down the road,
she could also do that just by getting a certified survey map.
So looking to go from A1 to A3
and then a comprehensive plan on their mid-future land use
map is all the
same questions.
Questions from the committee?
Anyone?
Anybody?
Anybody from the public that would like to say anything?
Questions?
I'll make a motion to close the hearing.
The minister has been made in the second.
All in favor?
Second by the way.
Aye.
Opposed?
If the record showed that it passed unanimously.
I'll move a second one.
request 20.2601.13 requests from Alan Pabelsky, agent for Orr, Orr's Joseph, and Nancy Pabelsky
to amend the time of plover, comprehensive plan, future land use path, designation,
4 acres of 29.27 acres included in parcel 030230813-01 of LZ Limited agricultural mix
used to commercial and to re-solve 4 acres of E1.
Exclusive agriculture to see for highly commercial and 25.27 acres from A1, exclusive
agriculture to A2, agriculture transition. Yeah, so for this request, Alan Pagelski is
looking to subdivide a four acre lot so he can have or basically move his
commercial business here. It's actually a contractor's storage yard where specifically they sell garage doors.
So they want to have a space where they can allow for office and then also being able to like stockpile their supplies kind of like home base.
It is home base. And as you can see, thank you for putting the map up.
The four acres is on the corner of the intersection, and this is in the town of Clover.
So that being commercial, they would have to resume the four acres to commercial.
The rest of the land, it actually is reduced below the minimum lot site allowed to stay in A1,
so that would have to change also.
So A2 would be the next logical voting district that they would be asking for.
And then we'll also be looking for a comprehensive plan amendment.
It's partially consistent at the time.
At this time, the agricultural zoning change will be consistent, but it's the commercial.
That would have to change also on the future land use map.
I think that's all I had.
But the Pavelskis are here.
If you had any questions for them about their business plan.
Do
you have any money from the committee?
Do you have any questions?
Any money new folks like to say anything?
Or
those who may
remain the second, all in favor,
signify by aye.
Okay.
The agenda items must register the request,
and this time with such comments,
subject to the public comments,
ordinance, and a reasonable control of the
committee chair has sent forth
the Robert's Rule in support.
Number six, approval of the July 28,
28, 20, 26, 20, 26 minutes.
This
has been made in the second of,
anybody have any discussion, corrections or additions?
All in favor signify with aye.
The
record should be passed unanimously.
Number seven, discussion possible action request,
20, 20, 6, 0, 12, David and Charlene Dalsky
for future land use map amendment,
and rezoning Tom Aviva-Vista.
Question two, proof is presented.
Hope she's been made in second and all in favor with a nine.
Aye. Aye.
Opposed?
I bet you'll pass your hands.
Number eight, Discussion Possible Action Request,
2026-015 on Povellacy to the Future Land Use Map Amendment
rezoning Tom Aplover.
He's
been made in seconded.
Any discussion?
session. Hearing none, all those in favor signify with aye.
Right to show that pass event. Our next meeting today will be Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026
at IPM.
We have exhausted our agenda. All those in favor, we'll be closing up the
committee. Thank
you, everybody.