[0:00] The pledge of allegiance
[0:06] to the flag of the United States of
[0:08] America
[0:29] Um
[0:31] Dan Dval are in pre are present.
[0:35] Um and we are going to head right into
[0:41] it. Informational discussion on the
[0:43] following budget discussions. Um three
[0:47] different funds are going to be
[0:48] discussed. Uh general fund, mitigation
[0:51] fund, water reclamation fund, and this
[0:54] is I'm assume going to be the treasurer.
[0:57] So, I guess you you're going to sit
[1:00] there and do it.
[1:00] >> Yeah.
[1:01] >> Okay. All right.
[1:03] >> Uh, take it away.
[1:05] >> Great. Well, I don't know if we're going
[1:07] to have it on the screen or possibly.
[1:10] >> I think so.
[1:11] >> Okay.
[1:12] Well, we can wait a second.
[1:19] We get it. That That's promising.
[1:25] Well, as we're getting as we're getting
[1:27] there, I'll just give a brief uh
[1:29] preview. So, tonight is the mic on.
[1:32] >> Yeah.
[1:39] » Oh,
[1:39] >> look at that. All right.
[1:41] >> You've got some power. [laughter]
[1:44] >> We'll see if I could uh manipulate it.
[1:46] Um so, tonight we'll be going over the
[1:49] uh general fund, the mitigation fund,
[1:52] and the treatment fund budgets. uh you
[1:54] were provided copies of all these slides
[1:58] as well as some additional information
[2:01] uh in your packets last week. I've
[2:04] gotten some questions from some council
[2:06] members and have responded uh to them uh
[2:09] with those individual questions, but uh
[2:12] any other questions we have as we go
[2:14] along tonight uh you know it is work
[2:16] session so you know please uh you know
[2:20] just speak up on those.
[2:22] So, the uh first part of the of the
[2:25] general fund, we'll go over the general
[2:27] fund budget first. Uh I've made some
[2:30] notes that I'm going to skip through
[2:32] right now. You probably looked over
[2:34] those and most of those will be uh
[2:37] referred to as we go through the budget
[2:39] itself. So as we look at the
[2:42] spreadsheets for the budget, uh what you
[2:45] have in the first three columns are the
[2:48] uh three actual uh revenues for fiscal
[2:53] year 23, 24, and 25. And then in the uh
[2:59] fourth and fifth columns you have the
[3:01] current fiscal year 26 budget and the
[3:05] actual fiscal year 26 figures through
[3:08] February of uh this year. So eight
[3:12] months of the current fiscal year and
[3:14] then the final column is the fiscal year
[3:17] 27 proposed budget which we will be uh
[3:21] referring to through most of the night.
[3:23] So as you start through the general
[3:25] fund, the first two pages are the
[3:28] revenues. Uh the first item being the
[3:30] real property tax revenue. Uh the rate
[3:33] is being uh proposed at 2977 cents which
[3:38] is the current rate. Uh this is actually
[3:42] slightly over the constant yield rate
[3:44] but uh historically that is the rate
[3:47] that's been set. uh by setting it at
[3:51] 0.2977
[3:54] uh it will generate an additional
[3:56] $82,000 in real property tax. That's
[3:59] because the assessed values of
[4:00] properties in Chesapeake Beach have
[4:03] increased about $27 million.
[4:06] So you know that because the increase
[4:09] assessment keeping the rate the same
[4:11] generates additional revenue. So, you
[4:13] see the real property tax revenue uh
[4:17] estimated $3.2 million
[4:20] uh for fiscal year 27
[4:24] under the admission amusement taxes. And
[4:26] I won't go through all the items, but
[4:28] I'll highlight, you know, some of the
[4:29] ones that have changed the most. Uh that
[4:32] is being projected at 2,18,000
[4:36] or $2.1 million in the budget. Uh the
[4:40] emission amusement taxes have increased
[4:42] about 400,000
[4:44] uh from fiscal year estimated for fiscal
[4:47] year 26.
[4:49] Um
[4:51] so I've increased that budget line item
[4:54] by uh 400,000.
[5:01] Uh going down to the operating property,
[5:04] uh that is uh tax on Verizon and BG&E.
[5:08] Uh you can see that is at $88,000.
[5:12] Uh we set that rate uh tax on those
[5:15] properties at a $139 per $100 of
[5:18] assessed value. Uh the property
[5:21] continues to go up each year and this is
[5:23] property held by Verizon and BGE on the
[5:26] public rightway.
[5:29] Uh going down to permits, fees, and
[5:32] penalties. Uh you see that at $20,000.
[5:36] We've actually broken that out uh from
[5:39] prior years. Included in there was the
[5:41] rental license fees and we've if you
[5:45] look at the line item under that uh
[5:48] we've taken $40,000 which is about what
[5:51] we've been collecting on the rental fees
[5:55] uh each year and put that in the
[5:57] separate category. That was at the
[5:59] request of a uh council member to show
[6:01] that separately and public has actually
[6:04] asked for that as well.
[6:07] Uh interest on savings you see a
[6:09] decrease there. Uh that is because we're
[6:12] using uh you know some of our surplus to
[6:15] fund the water park project. So uh the
[6:19] assumption there is that we are going to
[6:22] earn about three and a quarter percent
[6:24] on the reserves we have of about 15
[6:27] million. So that comes to 487,500.
[6:32] Uh cable TV uh cable franchise fees, you
[6:37] see a slight decrease, which is you know
[6:40] kind of been the uh trend that we see as
[6:44] people move from cable TV services into
[6:47] direct TV and some of the other uh
[6:50] providers. the franchise fee that we get
[6:53] from that uh decreases.
[6:57] Uh speed camera revenue, I'm projecting
[7:00] that to increase. Uh we're in the
[7:02] process of negotiating a new contract
[7:04] with a a camera company uh to do the
[7:08] administration of that which would
[7:10] provide additional revenues to the town
[7:12] over what uh we are currently getting
[7:15] which as you can see is you know about
[7:19] 12 thou about 20,000 anticipated for
[7:22] this year and has been about in that
[7:24] range in the prior years.
[7:28] Um, jumping down to state income taxes,
[7:31] we're seeing about a 6% increase in uh,
[7:35] state income taxes over a three-year
[7:38] average. Uh, it's actually been higher
[7:40] than that this year. So, I projected
[7:42] that at 1 million uh, 987,000.
[7:48] Uh, highway users revenue is at 579,000.
[7:53] Uh, which is current estimate from the
[7:55] state. uh they will be providing usually
[7:58] a updated one after the general
[8:00] session's complete but it should be in
[8:03] that range.
[8:05] um state aid for police protection uh at
[8:09] 50,360
[8:12] which is where we are now. Again, that's
[8:15] another uh source that I'll get updated
[8:18] figures before uh the budget's adopted,
[8:21] but it won't uh vary significantly from
[8:24] that amount.
[8:26] Um the other revenue sources uh you see
[8:31] transfers in from fund balance for the
[8:33] water park of 16.9 million. Uh these are
[8:38] revenues that you know were you know
[8:40] surplus funds as well as the sale of the
[8:43] bonds that we will not be using in
[8:45] fiscal year 26 that will roll over into
[8:48] 27
[8:50] as well as the uh general or I'm sorry
[8:54] the state bond bills for the water park
[8:56] and 1.1 million. We won't recognize that
[9:00] until fiscal year 27 either. Total those
[9:03] together is $18 million. And on the
[9:06] expenditure side of the uh general fund
[9:09] budget, you'll see that $18 million
[9:11] figure being used uh for the
[9:13] construction costs on the other side. Um
[9:18] the other transfer in a fund balance of
[9:21] 1,898,000
[9:23] is the amount of surplus funds that are
[9:26] being put into the general fund to
[9:28] balance the budget. Um and you know a
[9:32] large portion of that is you know for
[9:34] capital projects that uh we're
[9:36] anticipating doing u which I'll go
[9:39] through the capital projects as we get
[9:41] into the expenditure side of the budget
[9:43] as well. So when you take all those
[9:46] revenues into consideration and the fund
[9:48] balance carryover
[9:51] uh the total revenue or budget will be
[9:54] 29 million26,000.
[9:59] So, I'll stop there if you want and you
[10:02] know answer any questions on the revenue
[10:04] side if you have any.
[10:06] >> Any anybody have any questions on the
[10:08] revenue side?
[10:10] >> I have a question.
[10:12] >> Yep.
[10:13] >> Um the tripling of the amount of revenue
[10:19] for speed cameras, are we changing
[10:22] anything? Is that the plan or what what
[10:26] brought that? [sighs and gasps]
[10:28] Uh we're not changing anything as far as
[10:30] what we are charging per violation. Uh
[10:35] apparently when the town entered into
[10:37] the agreement with the current vendor
[10:40] for uh those speed cameras, we basically
[10:43] wrote on the uh Calvert County contract,
[10:47] >> which uh under that contract, the town
[10:50] pays a certain amount per month to that
[10:53] vendor, which is for each camera that
[10:55] the town has. And there's three cameras
[10:58] and they charge us $3,900 per camera. So
[11:03] that's roughly $12,000
[11:05] a month that we uh are charged for the
[11:11] vendor charges us for running the
[11:12] cameras. Uh we make about $10,000 a
[11:17] month in revenue
[11:19] uh from violations that we collect. So
[11:23] we don't make any money because we pay
[11:25] the vendor more than what we are
[11:27] collecting.
[11:29] Um that contract has expired
[11:32] and there's other uh vendors out there
[11:35] that have different uh cost structures
[11:38] for how they charge for the operation of
[11:40] the cameras. Uh and you know so instead
[11:44] of paying a fixed amount for the camera,
[11:47] you could pay them to process the
[11:49] violations and they will charge. So, if
[11:51] the cameras, it's a $40 ticket. Is it
[11:54] 40? Yeah, $40 ticket. Uh, you know, the
[11:58] fees for processing it, uh, in the
[12:02] contracts that I've seen I have have at
[12:04] other jurisdictions, you know, charge
[12:06] like $15 for a violation. So, the vendor
[12:10] gets 15, the town would get the
[12:12] difference about $25.
[12:15] So, it's not charging any of the
[12:18] violators anymore. It's just how we are
[12:20] sharing the monies that that are
[12:22] collected with the vendor. So that's how
[12:24] we generate the additional amount of
[12:26] revenue.
[12:27] >> Okay. So the speed is staying the same.
[12:30] >> Y
[12:30] >> and the price per violation is staying
[12:34] the same and the only thing anticipated
[12:38] for change is
[12:40] >> admin costs.
[12:41] >> Yep. when the when we were I believe
[12:44] under negotiation with uh we're looking
[12:47] at other companies that have or not
[12:49] other companies other towns that have
[12:51] actually bid out their speed camera
[12:54] services recently and are possibly going
[12:56] to ride on one of those contracts if it
[12:59] is comparable to our contracts.
[13:02] >> Okay. And
[13:02] >> which would generate the sharing as I
[13:05] just explained.
[13:07] >> Understood.
[13:09] >> Thank you.
[13:10] >> Yep. Good question.
[13:12] I have a couple questions. Yeah. Um
[13:17] line item for um [clears throat]
[13:21] our site rental. It says in the notes
[13:25] move to utility fund. Um doesn't seem to
[13:29] be any revenue for 24 25
[13:34] um 26. Was it uh moved be prior or do we
[13:41] not have any revenues coming into that?
[13:44] >> Because it was it was uh moved into the
[13:47] utility fund at the end of fiscal year
[13:50] 23. So when we get to utility fund
[13:53] budget at next month's meeting, you'll
[13:56] see terror site revenues in there for 24
[14:00] going forward.
[14:01] >> Okay. So, it's just it's still showing
[14:04] here because, you know, we're showing
[14:05] the actuals back to 23 and that's where
[14:08] it was in 23.
[14:09] >> Gotcha. Okay. Uh, one other question.
[14:12] Um, you mentioned a million something
[14:18] for um balancing the budget and other
[14:21] revenue sources.
[14:22] >> Yes.
[14:23] >> Um, what was that exact number and what
[14:27] number is that lumped into?
[14:30] Um it's actually by itself under uh
[14:32] under other revenue sources. The second
[14:35] item down account 430135
[14:39] >> and it's 1,898,
[14:41] Got it.
[14:42] >> 139.
[14:44] >> Okay. Thank you. Mhm.
[14:48] >> Is is that number coming out of the
[14:50] capital improvement budget that we did
[14:53] not expend or
[14:55] >> um it's just prior year surplus that uh
[14:59] you know the town has. We have over $15
[15:02] million in surplus uh and [snorts] uh
[15:06] that is being pulled from that in order
[15:08] to balance the budget. So it's being
[15:11] used to cover the expense side of the
[15:14] budget. And then the capital
[15:17] expenditures I look at as capital
[15:19] expenditures I think it's like $3.9
[15:21] million.
[15:23] So 1.2 million of that is being uh
[15:27] covered with current year's revenue or
[15:30] fiscal year 27 revenues and the other
[15:32] 1.8 is being covered from uh savings.
[15:37] It's a way to look at it.
[15:40] So in this budget, did you assume a
[15:43] reconciliation of our capital
[15:44] improvement budget?
[15:47] >> What do you mean by that?
[15:48] >> Like this fiscal year, fiscal year 2026,
[15:51] there's lots of money that went
[15:54] unexpended
[15:55] >> on capital improvements.
[15:57] >> Um that wasn't included in that
[16:00] estimated 15 million or so of reserves.
[16:03] that number will probably increase to
[16:08] 17 or 18 million because [clears throat]
[16:10] I would anticipate there's probably two
[16:12] to three million of unspent capital
[16:14] items uh this year that will roll over.
[16:18] So that will increase our uh surplus.
[16:22] >> Okay. So but as of today and this budget
[16:25] that revenue is still available and not
[16:30] accounted for here.
[16:32] >> Correct. Yeah. So if you want to expend
[16:34] it by the end of [snorts]
[16:36] 26, June of 30th, then it won't roll.
[16:40] >> Unlikely we will have time. But yes.
[16:43] That is
[16:44] >> why I'm asking.
[16:46] >> Yes.
[16:55] All right. So as we um go into the
[17:00] expenditure side um you know some of the
[17:04] I've reformatted some of the uh expenses
[17:08] within departments I've added in some uh
[17:11] new line items which I thought you know
[17:14] after looking over the budget over the
[17:15] last year would made more sense. So some
[17:19] of the account names might be a little
[17:21] different on a few of them and then lump
[17:25] you know I've carved out a separate
[17:27] department for recreation which some of
[17:29] their salaries and seasonal staff and
[17:31] costs are moved into there out of wreck
[17:35] ops or whatever other line items they
[17:37] were in. I've also added a new uh
[17:41] section for uh committees so that you
[17:44] know they would all be in one place
[17:46] instead of kind of spread out within the
[17:48] budget. So I'll point those out uh as we
[17:52] go through as well. Um so at the bottom
[17:56] of the first page uh it starts out with
[18:00] the salary and benefits and these are
[18:02] for the general government staff. uh
[18:05] there is a separate salary schedule
[18:07] which I believe we do that in a closed
[18:09] session uh last year uh to show the
[18:13] breakdown you know between each employee
[18:16] and what's included in there but in
[18:19] general uh throughout the uh departments
[18:24] uh there's about a 5.7%
[18:26] uh increase uh which uh the cost of
[18:29] living January over January of uh 25 to
[18:34] 26 six is currently 2.7%. So about 2.7%
[18:39] of that is factored in as a uh cost of
[18:42] living and then there's a average of
[18:45] about a 3% uh merit in there. So when
[18:49] you look at you know the different
[18:52] salaries department yeartoyear you know
[18:55] that's you know going to be part of the
[18:57] differences in there for for most
[18:59] departments. as we get into the
[19:01] treatment plant that will be a little
[19:03] different and we'll touch base on that
[19:06] and what's uh you know going on in their
[19:08] salaries uh when we get to the treatment
[19:11] plant budget.
[19:14] So at the top of the next page we start
[19:16] getting into uh operating costs.
[19:20] [snorts] Uh again I won't touch on all
[19:22] the items just you know some of the ones
[19:25] that have some changes. So the audit uh
[19:27] it was bid out three years ago. It does
[19:30] have a increase each year. Uh so that's
[19:33] increased to 34,000 and the cost of that
[19:36] spread out amongst the different funds.
[19:39] So you see the increase here to 8,500
[19:42] for the general fund.
[19:45] Uh legal counsel which includes costs
[19:48] for the town attorney. uh the board of
[19:51] appeals, the lobbyist,
[19:53] uh it's estimated 120,000
[19:57] uh planning and zoning uh increase in
[20:01] the uh hours for the planner. So you see
[20:05] an increase under the planning and
[20:07] zoning under engineering.
[20:11] uh that cost is actually uh decreased
[20:15] and the reason for that is uh we're
[20:18] costing the uh cost of the engineer to
[20:21] the projects he's working on. So if he's
[20:24] working on the water park, it's gone
[20:25] water park. If he's working on uh you
[20:29] know other projects uh goes there. So in
[20:32] doing analysis it looks like you know
[20:35] the cost for general works about 60,000
[20:38] projects that aren't underway. uh other
[20:40] general follow-up work
[20:44] um
[20:49] so under printing and publications
[20:52] uh had that as a two $12,000 decrease
[20:56] and you know it it looks more in line
[20:59] with the prior years and I was trying to
[21:01] figure out why we had $18,000 allocated
[21:04] this year and looks like we had put
[21:06] $8,000 in there for newsletter which I
[21:09] don't know if we're doing that or not.
[21:10] So, I don't know whether to leave that
[21:12] in there or not. Uh so, currently it's
[21:15] not included.
[21:17] Um
[21:19] under
[21:21] uh bank and credit card fees that was
[21:24] previously called professional fees,
[21:26] which I don't really consider bank and
[21:28] credit card fees professional fees, so I
[21:30] changed the name uh there. Um, and it
[21:35] was budgeted 67,000 this year, but we
[21:38] did have a public relations fee
[21:41] consultant included in there. Again, I
[21:44] don't know if that's something that's,
[21:45] you know, we didn't do this year.
[21:47] Haven't done it yet, and I don't know if
[21:48] that's going to be included, so I did
[21:50] not put it in.
[21:52] Um,
[21:54] the health department, uh, we are paying
[21:58] rent there. It hasn't been budgeted in
[22:01] the past in the past, but it has been
[22:03] incurred in the last two years. So, you
[22:06] know, figure that's something that we do
[22:09] need to budget for. Um, grants to local
[22:14] organizations.
[22:16] Um, currently, uh, it's budgeted 76,000.
[22:21] Uh, most of the items, uh, included in
[22:24] there. And let me see if we got it. Here
[22:31] there's the 76,000 in the in the right
[22:34] column. So most of the organizations
[22:37] are the same uh and funded at the same
[22:40] levels this current year with the
[22:42] exception of Chesapeake Beach Railway
[22:45] Museum. We've increased that from 1,500
[22:48] to 5,000.
[22:50] Uh and then we've added SmartCon in
[22:53] there, which is an organization we uh
[22:56] provided some funding for this year and
[22:59] then the Chesapeake Health for the
[23:01] birthing center at 50,000.
[23:04] Um
[23:05] the smaller amounts with the exception
[23:08] of the railway as it's highlighted
[23:10] there. I'm waiting on final allocation
[23:12] from the mayor. We are reaching out some
[23:15] of those organizations to um you know
[23:18] see what their needs are because we
[23:20] haven't gotten a lot of feedback from
[23:22] them or requests for this year. So they
[23:25] may change before um you know the next
[23:28] draft of the budget that you get.
[23:32] Um
[23:36] [gasps] I guess we'd go back to special
[23:38] events. So, special events budget um you
[23:42] see it's increased from 195,233.
[23:47] Uh some of the notes on the right here
[23:50] will let you know tell you where some of
[23:52] those figures come from. I believe about
[23:55] 12,000 or so uh events that we've done,
[23:59] but they've been costed to the
[24:01] recreation operation line item of the
[24:03] budget. and we're trying to uh there's a
[24:07] lot of things lumped into that account.
[24:09] So, we are trying to
[24:12] uh move them out into their own line
[24:15] items. So, you see the ones highlighted
[24:19] uh say move from rec ops and then there
[24:22] is some other uh um events that have
[24:27] been added in there as well. So, you
[24:30] know, it looks like a a larger increase
[24:33] uh from 195 233, but some of those were
[24:36] allocated elsewhere. Uh there are some
[24:39] newer ones and some additional funding
[24:42] for existing ones.
[24:45] Um
[24:47] go back to
[24:50] the
[24:53] deputy.
[24:55] Um so at top of uh page three uh you see
[24:59] the police deputy and residents line
[25:01] item uh the 1,454,000
[25:06] is the estimate we received from the
[25:08] sheriff's office. There is a detailed
[25:10] breakdown in your packet. I won't and
[25:12] also up on the screen but I won't refer
[25:15] back to that. um you know they reconcile
[25:19] that at the end of each year and then
[25:21] either give us a credit back or um you
[25:24] know charge us additional uh for fiscal
[25:27] year uh 25 we did get a credit back that
[25:32] was uh about I think it was about
[25:34] 100,000 less that got credited against
[25:37] our bills for the current year.
[25:40] Uh we added a new line item in for
[25:43] satellite uh for a satellite police
[25:46] office. Apparently they had a satellite
[25:48] office at Fishing Creek which no longer
[25:51] exists. Um and so they are looking for
[25:56] uh a new location. Uh so we've put money
[26:00] in there to possibly rent space uh for
[26:04] them, but you know there could be other
[26:06] options to do that as well. Uh but
[26:09] that's a a figure that was put in there
[26:12] based on you know renting a space at
[26:15] current rates. Uh for that
[26:19] uh North Beach Volunteer Fire Department
[26:22] uh allocated uh 50,000 donations same as
[26:26] it's been for you know at least the last
[26:28] five years.
[26:31] uh the uh salary and benefit line items.
[26:35] These are for public works and we also
[26:37] had some items here that were for
[26:39] recreation. So you could see the payroll
[26:42] taxes, recreation and recreation ops
[26:44] salary. I've noted that they've been
[26:46] moved to a separate budget uh item. So
[26:50] you can see I kept the prior years here
[26:53] so you could see where they were in
[26:56] prior years. And then when we get down
[26:57] to the wreck uh department line items,
[27:00] you'll see that we moved it down there.
[27:03] Uh salary and wages for public works uh
[27:07] you know 605,000.
[27:10] That one's a larger increase because
[27:11] there is a additional staff full-time uh staff
[27:18] want to say a uh
[27:21] labor beginning, you know, someone at
[27:23] the beginning of the the scale. uh going
[27:27] into that department or it's being
[27:29] proposed. And then you see the uh
[27:33] payroll related uh taxes and benefits
[27:37] for them. Uh when you get under public
[27:40] works supplies, first item is the
[27:42] gasoline and tolls.
[27:44] Um that has gone up uh you know
[27:47] currently because of uh different
[27:50] allocation. We're now allocating 80% of
[27:53] the gas uh charge. This is for the
[27:56] vehicles to uh public works and 20% to
[28:01] the utility fund. It was at 5050. Uh Jay
[28:05] has asked you know looked at that and uh
[28:08] thinks that the breakdown should be 8020
[28:11] instead of 5050. So that's where part of
[28:14] the increase is there. Uh with the price
[28:16] of gas going up now that may have to be
[28:19] increased uh you know if it stays up
[28:21] high. So we may need to put additional
[28:23] money there.
[28:26] under the public works contracted
[28:28] services and fees. Um the holiday lights
[28:32] [clears throat] is at 175,000. That
[28:34] includes the uh current contracts for
[28:38] the electrician and basically the
[28:41] installer for all of the lights and
[28:44] company that does the maintenance
[28:45] windmill farms of 130,000.
[28:48] Uh new displays for the coming year at
[28:51] 35,000 then additional 10 for
[28:54] miscellaneous costs.
[28:57] uh trash removal service uh possible 8%
[29:01] increase which built into their
[29:02] contract. Uh brings it up to 681,000.
[29:07] Uh trash removal uh cans at Kellum's
[29:10] Field is a new line item. Uh and if you
[29:13] need to, Jake could elaborate a little
[29:15] further on this if you have questions,
[29:17] but it's uh new service to pick up uh
[29:21] you know trash from the cans at Kellums
[29:23] and throughout the town. And I can't
[29:24] remember how many cans there are, but
[29:26] there are quite a few of those. And you
[29:28] know, this seemed to be an efficiency
[29:30] request uh uh to do this.
[29:35] Um
[29:38] so most of the other items to get down
[29:41] to snow and ice removal, you know, are
[29:43] pretty much in line with uh prior years.
[29:46] Under the snow and ice removal, you
[29:48] know, obviously 26 was an unusual year.
[29:51] you know, we're over budget there.
[29:53] Currently at 110,000 vers versus 50,000
[29:56] budget. Uh prior years were a lot less
[29:59] than that. Um so, you know, kind of
[30:02] split the difference and put it in at
[30:04] 70. Hopefully, we'll have a you know,
[30:07] another uh easy year in fiscal year 27,
[30:12] but you know, [clears throat]
[30:14] we definitely have to allocate just in
[30:16] case.
[30:18] At the uh top of the next page, we get
[30:20] into the recreation line items. And
[30:23] here's where, you know, we've uh
[30:25] generated uh you know, some accounts
[30:28] separately for the recck department. So,
[30:30] the wreck operation salary is the office
[30:33] staff uh that forms the recreation
[30:37] uh recreational uh duties.
[30:40] uh the seasonal wages for Kellums or for
[30:43] the seasonal staff that that works at
[30:46] the Kellums for the events that happen
[30:48] there. That was previously costed under
[30:50] wops. Uh which again, you know, I felt
[30:53] that we should break out and show it so
[30:55] you know, it'd be easier to see what
[30:57] we're spending uh on those costs. and
[31:00] similar to
[31:02] uh the seasonal Bayfront Park staff. So,
[31:05] that was under a different line item,
[31:07] but it was had had a different uh name
[31:11] to it, which I didn't really think uh
[31:14] told you what it was for. Uh so, we put
[31:18] that into a separate line item and then
[31:20] they have direct department has their
[31:22] own breakout for their taxes and
[31:25] benefits that you could see under there.
[31:28] Um it's blank for all the actuals in
[31:30] prior years because those were all shown
[31:32] under the public works figure and within
[31:35] the public works department
[31:39] uh for the subcommittees uh you know I
[31:42] mentioned before you know these were
[31:43] spread out throughout the budget in
[31:45] various places so I've uh went and
[31:49] combined them one place so that they're
[31:51] easy to see. Uh there was a new one
[31:54] added for the walkability committee of
[31:56] $10,000.
[31:58] Uh the other ones uh the opioid
[32:01] awareness uh committee the green team
[32:04] and seabbox were uh you know already
[32:07] existing
[32:09] uh accounts
[32:12] uh new line item under debt service uh
[32:15] which is 500,000 you know by the middle
[32:18] of May or you know we'll know what that
[32:21] actual figure will be uh but you know
[32:24] I'm estimating it to be about 500,000
[32:26] that's the annual ual debt service that
[32:28] will be on the water park. Uh debt
[32:31] service that will be going to market in
[32:35] May. Uh and that's based on a 15-year
[32:39] payback starting fiscal year 27 through
[32:42] fiscal year 42
[32:45] under capital expenditures for the water
[32:48] park. That's where you see the 18
[32:50] million which is the actual construction
[32:52] cost. The operating budget will be
[32:54] presented uh at the May work session. Uh
[32:59] we're working on that now. It'll be the
[33:01] first year it's operational again in I
[33:04] guess three years. So uh you know we're
[33:06] kind of starting from scratch again and
[33:09] you know generating that budget. So it's
[33:10] taking a little longer. Uh saddle
[33:13] replacement is something that was
[33:15] requested by the public works director
[33:18] and when I'm done I think he could
[33:20] probably add little or add more
[33:22] information
[33:24] uh regarding to what that request is
[33:26] for.
[33:28] And then last item is the capital
[33:30] expenditures
[33:33] which uh yeah is 3,867,000.
[33:37] So under the fiscal year 27 column you
[33:41] could see what those projects are and
[33:43] I'll go through them briefly. So um you
[33:47] know the asphalt overlay and road
[33:48] repairs these are the HU highway user
[33:52] funded projects. So it's the road work
[33:54] that we do within the town. Um we
[33:58] currently have about $1.4 million in
[34:02] reserve funds [clears throat] you know
[34:03] that we've accumulated over the years
[34:05] that we haven't used yet.
[34:07] So what I did is I took that 1.4 million
[34:12] allocated over the next five years and
[34:14] then added in the uh projected
[34:18] uh annual
[34:20] HQR benefit that we'll get which you
[34:23] know I had touched on
[34:25] uh on the revenue side. So for fiscal
[34:28] year 27
[34:32] that was 579,000.
[34:34] So, I just said, "Okay, for the next
[34:37] five years, we're going to get somewhere
[34:39] in that range. Plus, we have the 1.4
[34:42] million uh surplus
[34:45] uh of highway users revenue funds. I
[34:47] divide that equally, and that's how we
[34:49] get the 879,000
[34:51] a year for five years.
[34:54] Uh the 261 connectivity trail connection
[34:58] and design, uh that's the estimate that
[35:01] we have from Mexican Associates. uh you
[35:05] know to do the design work. You know,
[35:07] you all know the conversations that have
[35:09] been had with that. It could be more, it
[35:12] could be less. We could be getting state
[35:14] highway users money to help fund that.
[35:17] We might not be getting highway users
[35:19] revenue. So, I've just put it in to the
[35:22] budget for for discussion purposes that
[35:26] [clears throat]
[35:26] that the design is there if we want to
[35:29] pay 100% of it. Um, you know, we could
[35:34] decide where we go from there. Uh, the
[35:36] railway trail extension. Um, I had again
[35:40] gotten ballpark estimates from Mecan
[35:43] Associates of what it would cost to
[35:45] actually design uh the railway trail. He
[35:50] said 150,000.
[35:52] And then the estimated construction cost
[35:55] is 2 million. So, I've broken out the uh
[36:00] assumed that the design would take place
[36:02] in 27, probably take, you know, a while
[36:05] to do the design. Uh we may be able to
[36:08] start construction during 27. So, I put
[36:11] a half a million dollars in 27 to start
[36:15] construction and then that would go over
[36:18] two years. You know, as we get closer,
[36:20] maybe it would only be a year. So the
[36:22] two million construction cost is spread
[36:24] out over three years.
[36:27] Uh the sign and wfairing projects uh I
[36:31] believe that's for the trails as well uh
[36:34] kept at 25,000.
[36:36] The uh boardwalk sidewalk railway trail
[36:39] maintenance uh we budget that at 100,000
[36:42] a year. So that just continued that for
[36:45] the five years. uh coastal resiliency if
[36:48] it happens doesn't isn't projected until
[36:51] fiscal year 28. Uh storm drainage
[36:55] improvements again is uh an item that we
[36:58] budgeted 100,000 a year for. Uh there
[37:01] are uh improvements to the town hall for
[37:05] the chamber conference room and lobby at
[37:07] 85,000.
[37:09] uh town hall sidewalk flooring and
[37:12] carpet at 60 and property improvement
[37:16] behind the town hall which basically the
[37:18] house that we purchased I don't know it
[37:20] was a couple years ago uh if we want to
[37:23] do some improvements there uh that's at
[37:26] 50,000
[37:28] uh the truck replacement in the toolk
[37:31] are requests from the public works
[37:33] director uh at 70 and 90,000
[37:37] and
[37:40] the
[37:41] Veterans Park bricks. Can you help me
[37:44] with that one, Jay? Is that replacing
[37:46] the existing bricks or
[37:50] >> including that? Um, and maybe some
[37:52] different technologies and also some
[37:54] benches and some general maintenance.
[37:58] » And then we get into the Kellum's Park.
[38:01] Again, this this is, you know, we've got
[38:03] the concept planned for the park. We had
[38:07] about 10 or 12 line items in past
[38:09] budgets that we were like piece mealing
[38:12] together. So going forward, it looks
[38:15] like we're going to be dealing with the
[38:16] concept design, refining that uh putting
[38:20] those uh designing the full concept and
[38:24] putting the building plans together. So
[38:27] it's anticipated that that would uh
[38:30] start in 27 and then the construction
[38:34] cost is estimated at $5 million. So
[38:37] again allocating part of the
[38:39] construction is happen in uh 27 and then
[38:44] proceed forward through 28 and 29 and
[38:48] maybe it'll be sooner uh maybe it will
[38:51] need to be stretched out.
[38:54] Um
[38:56] the last two items are the veterans park
[39:00] upgrades uh of 50,000
[39:04] that includes late speakers and concrete
[39:07] repairs. And then there's the uh kayak
[39:11] launch at 50,000 which previously was
[39:15] thought to be done with POSOS funding
[39:17] but as we research POSOS funding there
[39:20] really isn't any POSOS monies available
[39:23] to do any projects at the county. Um so
[39:27] if we're going to do that it would need
[39:29] to be done oursel and therefore uh
[39:31] that's why it's being budgeted as the
[39:33] capital project.
[39:36] Um, so I think that's the main capital
[39:39] projects and I think that's the last
[39:43] item within the budget, right?
[39:46] >> Yep.
[39:50] » A lot. But if you have any questions,
[39:52] we'll answer those. A lot of questions.
[39:55] >> Any questions? Go ahead, Jamie.
[39:57] >> I have a few questions. Um,
[39:59] [clears throat] I'll I'm going to go
[40:00] through I'm gonna go page by page if you
[40:02] don't mind. Um,
[40:03] >> tell her where tell us where we're
[40:05] starting.
[40:05] >> Right. So, starting on at the top where
[40:08] it says legal counsel, the last six is
[40:10] 620600.
[40:12] It talks about Bank of America fees at
[40:15] 18,000 under legal fees. Is this just US
[40:19] >> actually board of appeals?
[40:20] >> Board of Appeals. Okay. Somebody told me
[40:22] it was Bank of America. That's what I
[40:23] was saying.
[40:24] >> That is Yeah,
[40:26] >> I was like, that's why I Why are we
[40:28] paying Bank of America there? Okay,
[40:30] perfect question. Thank you.
[40:32] Um um okay and then I just had a
[40:35] comment. Are we I I do see throughout
[40:37] Comcast coming up quite a bit. Are are
[40:40] we going to explore uh like think big as
[40:42] well as an opportunity to upgrade uh the
[40:45] town's infrastructure? I mean we're going all over the community. Uh
[40:49] there might be an opportunity to
[40:51] decrease our utility costs uh and go
[40:53] fiber uh at the same time. As I was
[40:55] looking throughout a couple uh a couple
[40:58] of these, um I did have a question. Uh
[41:01] if you go about halfway down the same
[41:03] page, uh 624800, it says health
[41:06] department rent. Um
[41:10] what is that? I don't I don't know where
[41:12] that's that's at.
[41:13] >> Could you help me on that?
[41:15] >> So, we have an agreement with the health
[41:19] department to share space. So we cost
[41:21] share the space that they have over
[41:23] where the old library was.
[41:25] >> So they're in a smaller space. They're
[41:27] currently renovating to move into to
[41:29] take over the space where the library
[41:31] was, but there are a lot of uh town
[41:33] residents who seek medical services
[41:35] there.
[41:36] >> Okay. Okay. I didn't know that. That's
[41:37] awesome. Okay. Thank you. Um
[41:42] [clears throat]
[41:44] do we have any clarity on the trash
[41:46] services for Kellums in the town, Jay?
[41:49] like what like what that frequency is
[41:50] going to look like.
[41:52] >> I plugged in some money and I'm working
[41:54] on some prices, but basically we used to
[41:56] have a trash person and the the biggest
[41:59] role was they were semi-retired. The
[42:01] town didn't pay them benefits. They were
[42:03] able to work weekends, which when the
[42:05] water park opens and everything, it's
[42:07] our biggest demand. So, I want to look
[42:08] at somehow going back to there if we can
[42:11] find the right person, the right thing,
[42:13] cuz we have 40 trash cans now that we
[42:15] empty throughout town. We do three
[42:17] trashs a week, which is great. and we
[42:18] have the staff, but I going to have to
[42:21] start bringing them in on weekends again
[42:23] to do up and down 260, do the rail
[42:25] trails, the parking lot. So, I'm just
[42:26] exploring. I think it's more cost
[42:28] beneficial in the town to get a better
[42:30] product if we can find the right
[42:31] individual to do it. We used to have one
[42:34] Allen Brown and if he's listening, I
[42:35] thank you for doing what you did for
[42:37] many years. But, um, he was a perfect
[42:39] fit for it. And
[42:40] >> so, I want to explore that. I think
[42:41] it'll be more cost effective
[42:43] >> to have a lower level person designated
[42:45] to do that.
[42:46] >> Okay. Thank you. Sure.
[42:48] >> Um and then I'll flip over to the
[42:50] [clears throat] capital uh capital
[42:52] budgets page.
[42:56] Um
[42:57] so I'll [clears throat] start from the
[42:59] bottom and work my way up, but um the
[43:02] Veterans Park has two $50,000
[43:05] uh uh pieces in here. Um, so there was a
[43:09] meeting uh a few weeks ago related to
[43:12] the revitalization of uh or whatever
[43:15] acronym or verb we want to put in front
[43:16] of that um of of Veterans Park because
[43:19] if you go over there I mean it's a
[43:20] beautiful park. It's stunning when you
[43:22] come down and see the bay. But if you
[43:24] actually get up close, there's a lot of
[43:25] wear and tear because it's, you know,
[43:27] next to the water and and it's showing
[43:30] its age and and there was some
[43:31] conversations about um how to um honor
[43:36] uh uh veterans more appropriately. Um so
[43:38] there was like a little group that met
[43:40] and there's some conversations that are
[43:41] ongoing. However, because of that, uh I
[43:45] think we wanted to pause. There's
[43:47] actually a question around restoring
[43:48] bricks and even finding out who's on the
[43:50] current bricks. So, I don't think we
[43:52] want to uh have any funding in there
[43:54] right now for uh specifically for
[43:56] bricks, but I would ask Jay like what do
[43:59] we what what would you need I know as we
[44:02] have to have that conversation maybe
[44:04] repurposing this for the design that we
[44:07] would like to do versus um
[44:11] putting it in here for Rex.
[44:15] >> Sure. So, I think the original 50,000
[44:17] where it says lights and when it's when
[44:20] the mayor first became mayor, we went
[44:21] back over there. It used to have lights
[44:23] in the fountain. They used to have a few
[44:25] things that we were going to try to
[44:26] restore. The second 50,000. I'm not 100%
[44:29] sure if that was allocated just to the
[44:31] bricks or something else.
[44:32] >> Just to the bricks.
[44:34] So, that may have
[44:35] been from the original plan to replace
[44:37] the bricks and now we may moving may be
[44:40] moving to something different.
[44:42] >> Okay. So, I'm wondering then if that's
[44:44] where we would maybe look to
[44:46] >> you want to remove it or just have it
[44:48] say veteran park revitalization instead
[44:51] of specifying bricks.
[44:53] >> I would probably swap it to that so we
[44:55] can use it for the design discussions.
[44:57] Uh and and that and it's not to I don't
[44:59] mean to catch the council or anybody
[45:01] offguard. It literally was a
[45:02] conversation we just had and there's a
[45:04] lot of things we had to it wasn't ready
[45:06] to be presented. So, um but obviously
[45:08] we're at budget time. So, um, yeah, I
[45:10] think just swapping it to that and we
[45:13] can partner use it for
[45:15] >> I think that makes a lot of sense.
[45:17] >> Yeah. Um, and then I'm I'm so sorry. I I
[45:20] went um I skipped one piece on the
[45:23] council member. What is it we want to
[45:24] do? Change the name or you lump it
[45:26] together with the other 50,000. You
[45:28] could just um I think you could probably
[45:31] just remove the bricks and lump it in
[45:34] with the
[45:36] veteran park upgrades and make that
[45:38] 100,000.
[45:38] >> Yeah. So you don't have two line items.
[45:42] I'm not an accountant, but that sounds
[45:44] simple. So um and I'm sorry, I I did
[45:48] make a mistake on um on the grants
[45:52] piece in there um to local
[45:54] organizations. Mayor, if you remember,
[45:56] uh I'm going to advocate for the Bucks a
[45:58] little bit here. There was discussions
[46:00] about a one-time increase, uh to 10,000
[46:03] versus 5,000. And the the purpose was
[46:06] they were going to uh purchase the
[46:10] concussion pads that go on all the
[46:12] helmets for all the teams uh moving
[46:15] forward. And I and I think they were
[46:16] going to cost all share a piece of that,
[46:18] but uh I would encourage us just for a
[46:21] one time. Uh, I know we I know it's
[46:23] pretty steady across the board.
[46:24] Everybody's around the 5,000 mark, but
[46:26] for a one time to to support youth
[46:29] safety, um, increasing that from 5,000
[46:32] to 10,000,
[46:34] >> I think that's fine.
[46:36] Get that down.
[46:37] >> I think they missed their 5,000 payment
[46:39] like two years ago anyway.
[46:42] >> Yeah. And there's some nuances to it
[46:43] where it was only allowed for like
[46:46] scholarships. Um, and I I think
[46:48] collectively as a town, you like safety
[46:50] equipment is a very important thing in a contact sport. So, allowing them to
[46:54] do that uh would be really nice. But,
[46:56] okay, thank you. Uh, that's all I have.
[46:58] Thanks.
[47:00] >> Anybody else? Eric, you got anything?
[47:05] » We probably should have something in
[47:06] here for uh goals over at Kellum. Soccer
[47:10] goals.
[47:11] >> We're going to hold you hostage. Maybe
[47:12] we can put uh maybe we can put a a
[47:14] singular line item in, you know, for
[47:17] like $5,000 for soccer goals at Kellum's
[47:21] Park.
[47:23] >> Where' that go?
[47:25] >> It goes when the capital
[47:29] Yeah.
[47:29] >> Yeah. When you vote for the capital, I
[47:32] got it included. think that I propose
[47:34] that we add a line item
[47:36] under the already two existing KMS Park
[47:40] items that says uh soccer goals $5,000
[47:46] bullet point
[47:48] >> or that line item
[47:52] » I don't think it needs its own line
[47:54] idle. Yeah, it should have its own line
[47:56] item, so it gets done. It's [laughter]
[47:58] >> like,
[47:59] >> well, it was already captured in the
[48:02] revitalization plan.
[48:04] >> There you go.
[48:07] >> Own line item. He wants to see
[48:10] >> No, he wants to see not vote for the
[48:13] other one.
[48:14] >> Um, we might actually also have funds
[48:16] this year to where we could explore
[48:18] that. But, um,
[48:19] >> I would appreciate it if there if it had
[48:21] its own line item.
[48:24] Oh, really?
[48:26] [laughter]
[48:28] I'll add a separate line item.
[48:31] >> Thank you, Mr. Treasure.
[48:32] >> The Are you done, Eric?
[48:36] [laughter]
[48:36] >> The uh
[48:37] >> John,
[48:38] >> I'm just thinking about that.
[48:39] >> Yeah.
[48:40] >> I'm just thinking about the satellite.
[48:43] Um, so they lost their satellite office
[48:46] over here, the sheriff's department. And
[48:49] I was wondering what the purpose of that
[48:51] property is that we purchased over here.
[48:54] Like what could that be a satellite
[48:56] office possibility once we refurbish
[48:59] that or
[49:00] >> I think there a lot of things that are
[49:01] possible but their need is more
[49:03] immediate than what we would be able to
[49:05] produce if we refurbished the place that
[49:08] we have behind us. And the idea is to
[49:11] bring um a satellite office that's more
[49:14] front-facing because when they were back
[49:16] in Fishing Creek, a lot of people didn't
[49:17] know that they were there.
[49:18] >> I didn't either.
[49:19] >> Um so the idea is to have space
[49:22] potentially where the health department
[49:24] is in that same complex
[49:27] >> that would have signage and then it
[49:30] would be a place where Chesapeake Beach
[49:31] residents would be able to go and
[49:33] interface with the police department
[49:35] instead of having to drive all the way
[49:37] down to Prince Frederick.
[49:38] >> Gotcha. Okay. So maybe more of a longer
[49:41] term idea could be to restore that
[49:44] building.
[49:45] >> Well,
[49:45] >> or do we have another purpose for that?
[49:48] >> I think at this point there has not been
[49:51] anything determined
[49:53] uh for the use of that building. The
[49:54] only thing I've heard is reports from
[49:56] staff that have actually been in it,
[49:57] which I have not, is that it's in very
[50:00] rough shape and uh it probably needs to
[50:03] be Okay, Wendy just gave me the high
[50:06] sign back here. She went like this. Um,
[50:08] >> we have 50,000 in there for that this
[50:11] year, right? Did we do anything?
[50:15] >> We talked about um engaging like an
[50:17] architect to figure out like what our
[50:19] options are and I'll [clears throat]
[50:20] defer to Jay about some of the
[50:22] conversations that happened in the past
[50:24] when they actually acquire the property.
[50:26] >> So, just just inform the council, it's
[50:29] an older house, has lead paint and
[50:31] asbestous and it may not be cost
[50:33] effective to
[50:35] rebuild. So, I think the 50,000 has been
[50:38] rolled over um year after year to
[50:40] actually demo it and just have open
[50:42] green space until we have a plan.
[50:44] >> Dog park.
[50:46] >> Just want to throw that out there.
[50:49] [laughter]
[50:50] >> Get a dog park.
[50:52] >> All right. Uh yeah, I think that's it
[50:54] for now. Thanks. [clears throat]
[50:55] >> Great. Councilman Laura,
[51:00] » you did a very good job answering most
[51:02] of my questions. I just
[51:04] >> Good.
[51:05] >> Yeah.
[51:06] I have all these notes and and none of
[51:09] them are needed for the most part. Um
[51:14] I'm going to do like Jamie and start
[51:18] just go page by page.
[51:22] >> He's just not close to it.
[51:30] » Take your times.
[51:35] I would like to see the newsletter come
[51:37] back if that's something possible. So,
[51:39] I'll just make that comment.
[51:50] » Printed newsletter. You mean printed
[51:52] newsletter?
[51:53] >> Yeah,
[51:53] >> I like that idea.
[51:55] >> Yeah, I think that would be great. Um
[51:57] especially we've been going through this
[51:58] history stuff for our project and it's
[52:01] very difficult to locate
[52:04] >> um recent history.
[52:06] >> Agreed.
[52:06] >> Because the newspaper went away.
[52:08] >> I like that idea.
[52:23] Unspent ARPA funds. Where where's that
[52:26] going from fiscal year 2026?
[52:30] >> So [clears throat] technically there are
[52:31] no unspent ARPA funds. Uh they've all
[52:34] been spent. So um I'm looking at that as
[52:39] surplus funds. It's okay.
[52:41] >> Unreserved surplus funds that could be
[52:43] used for whatever purpose you want. So
[52:46] >> we should probably start stop talking
[52:48] about ARPA funds because we don't want
[52:51] anyone to think that we have ARPA funds.
[52:53] [laughter]
[52:54] >> Right. Right. I I know the story behind
[52:56] that. They were spent on something else
[52:59] but but tracked as ARPA. So, okay. So,
[53:03] now we're just going to go back to
[53:04] tracking them as surplus.
[53:06] >> Yep.
[53:13] » Why is the trash increasing by 8%.
[53:17] >> Uh, it's built into their contract.
[53:20] >> An 8% increase each year.
[53:22] Um, I'm not exactly sure what that
[53:25] amount is, but there is a increase built
[53:28] in there. I'm not have to look at it
[53:31] again.
[53:33] >> Okay.
[53:34] >> See exactly what, you know, if it's
[53:36] spelled out, but that was what the
[53:37] increase was the prior year.
[53:40] >> I would guess based on the increase in
[53:42] cost of fuel that they're going to be
[53:44] losing money on that.
[53:46] >> They might have a fuel adjustment in
[53:47] there, too, because I've seen cont.
[53:49] >> Was there a fuel adjustment as well?
[53:50] >> There might be. I I don't know, but I
[53:52] do.
[53:53] >> Can you take a look at that? Take a look
[53:55] at those contracts.
[53:56] >> Y
[53:56] >> appreciate that.
[53:57] >> Yeah, that would make it more
[53:58] reasonable, but a 8% increase is a
[54:02] pretty huge increase. Um, generally
[54:05] speaking,
[54:09] um, and then a, uh, the $35,000,
[54:13] uh, trash pickup. I just can we get a
[54:18] picture whenever we do make that
[54:20] contract, which I agree with that
[54:22] contract. Um just to make sure that all
[54:25] areas are covered. Um that that would be
[54:29] great. And really
[54:33] um getting some community input on that
[54:35] would also be good because
[54:38] myself I'm not home anymore during the
[54:40] summer during the day but my neighbors
[54:42] are.
[54:45] Just an idea there.
[54:48] Um,
[54:55] we have the street [snorts] sweeping
[54:58] landscaping contract that we're
[55:00] reducing.
[55:02] And I guess I'm just wondering why.
[55:05] >> I don't think it was reducing it. I
[55:06] think that note that it is quarterly uh
[55:09] was from when we did go to
[55:13] quarterly. Apparently, we're only doing
[55:14] it quarterly. Um because I think the
[55:17] 8,100 on that goes back a ways. Um
[55:25] yeah, so
[55:27] apparently we added it on in fiscal year
[55:30] 24
[55:34] » and it's been 8,100 since then. So that
[55:37] note
[55:39] uh reduced accordly I think goes back to
[55:43] the fiscal year 24 when it went to 8100.
[55:47] >> Gotcha. So it's no change in the street
[55:50] sweeping right now.
[55:52] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[55:53] >> And I know you know when the summer's
[55:56] really getting rolling
[55:58] um there were comments about a need for
[56:02] street sweeping.
[56:04] Um,
[56:07] I guess mostly when it was windy a lot
[56:09] of times. So, I don't I don't know if we
[56:12] can find a way to accommodate
[56:14] some kind of clause or or some kind of
[56:17] way to make sure that we keep up with
[56:19] our street.
[56:25] » Maybe allocate for a change order if
[56:26] that's feasible.
[56:35] And then um
[56:38] the green team has been asking me if we
[56:40] could look at the landscaping contract
[56:44] so that they understand what um is
[56:48] covered and not covered with watering
[56:51] and evasive removal.
[56:54] And an area was caught up out at
[56:56] Brownies Beach that seems to be getting
[56:58] bad. And uh it really would be good to
[57:01] be proactive there. Hope it'll take over
[57:04] quick and their reports are that it was
[57:08] successfully treated previously. We want
[57:11] to treat the other areas
[57:13] >> if it's in that contract. There was
[57:15] actually uh items added into uh
[57:22] the
[57:24] landscaping numbers [snorts] that
[57:27] includes uh a request from the green
[57:30] team to do native garden at town hall
[57:33] areas on 17th street at boardwalk
[57:36] including trees trees at Chesapeake
[57:38] Village Water Tower and Buffer Garden at
[57:40] Kellumsfield parking area.
[57:44] Um I don't Invasives can can be a little
[57:47] bit pricey. So if they're in the
[57:49] contract, we would want to know that
[57:52] >> probably not to provide all labor
[57:55] equipment materials and supervision
[57:56] necessary to maintain those areas
[57:59] planted by the green team, which
[58:00] includes fertilizing once a year,
[58:03] removal of excess mulch, edging and
[58:05] mulching of all beds and trees, and any
[58:08] necessary pruning to native plants and
[58:10] trees.
[58:13] to those four areas that I touched base
[58:15] on.
[58:16] >> I think the general request is just to
[58:18] sit down with with Melanie who's a
[58:20] master gardener and so that
[58:24] >> um you know I see your note that it's
[58:25] coming back up too.
[58:27] >> Yes.
[58:27] >> So capturing all that would be
[58:29] >> chime in here just because it's not a
[58:31] Dan question that's a more
[58:33] administrative question. So, we've sat
[58:35] down with the green team as staff and
[58:38] we've sat down with Less, the
[58:40] contractor. And so, the next step is to
[58:42] bring us all together to make it all the
[58:44] same.
[58:45] >> Okay. So, that's already happening. Yes.
[58:48] >> Okay. So, pointless conversation, but
[58:50] thank you for the update.
[58:52] >> But just letting you know that we're
[58:53] it's on our radar.
[58:54] >> It's good to know. It's good to know.
[58:56] So, thanks for asking the question.
[59:01] » Um
[59:14] And then my last question is um I see
[59:19] saddle replacements in the general fund
[59:23] budget and
[59:25] I'm just wondering why it was placed in
[59:28] the general fund budget.
[59:30] There's a reason. um instead of the
[59:34] >> you you you could go ahead and start
[59:37] a little more history on it.
[59:39] >> Yeah, I told Dan I just need a half
[59:41] million dollars. Put it in there. No. Um
[59:45] >> and he did it.
[59:46] >> That is what I told him. But uh when we
[59:50] talk about I know it's not ARPA fun
[59:51] anymore and I wanted to
[59:54] bring back the last administration and
[59:56] what I will do is share with the council
[59:58] the
[59:59] meeting that was recorded is the best
[1:00:01] way to look at the project when it was
[1:00:03] started. I don't know if you probably
[1:00:05] have seen it.
[1:00:06] >> So it's a PowerPoint that shows the
[1:00:08] problem in Richfield. I had saddles in
[1:00:10] here and different things and I I will
[1:00:12] have uh forwarded to the council members
[1:00:14] the minute and the meeting date to
[1:00:16] watch. But at that time it was like a we
[1:00:19] had 5.8 million ARPA funds and we are I
[1:00:22] had asked for about 2 million and we
[1:00:24] only spent 1.1
[1:00:27] and we've done some research and some
[1:00:30] spot saddle checking in-house public
[1:00:32] works and kind of came up with what we
[1:00:35] need to replace as part of that first
[1:00:36] phase of that project. So, there's some
[1:00:38] areas left that I I have here and
[1:00:43] they're basically finishing up the areas
[1:00:44] in Richfield Station and the rest of Bay
[1:00:46] View Hills to proactively replace the
[1:00:49] saddles. And the reason I said do it out
[1:00:52] of the general fund because thinking of
[1:00:53] the ARPA funds and um the original scope
[1:00:57] of work that I thought I had from the
[1:01:00] get-go, but I understand now that the
[1:01:02] ARPA funds were spent and I understand
[1:01:05] um so I'm not going to call it ARPA
[1:01:07] funds, but that was the intent from the
[1:01:09] get-go. It's the council's pleasure
[1:01:13] where it's funded from, but I do think
[1:01:15] if you watch it, you'll see the need.
[1:01:17] And it does save if we do it proactive.
[1:01:20] It's going to cost us about 376,000. I
[1:01:23] budgeted 500. If we do it reactive, it's
[1:01:25] going to be 750,000 and sprout out over
[1:01:28] time. So,
[1:01:30] >> and these are explain briefly what
[1:01:35] happens when the saddles fail.
[1:01:38] >> Uh, the PowerPoint shows it in way more
[1:01:39] detail, but basically if we go in
[1:01:41] proactive and these saddles are failing,
[1:01:43] I brought some in. I called it showed
[1:01:45] and tell. It's it's electrolysis in the
[1:01:46] ground. There's a lot of different
[1:01:48] things that lead to it, but it's a cast
[1:01:50] iron saddle. It's a copper lateral,
[1:01:55] creates a battery, if you will, and it
[1:01:57] cannot follow a ductal iron pipe because
[1:02:00] it's plastic. So, the charge goes end to
[1:02:02] end. It ends up eating the saddle
[1:02:03] underground till they blow. Anyone that
[1:02:05] lives in Richfield's station has seen
[1:02:07] the Yeah.
[1:02:08] >> So, when they blow, first of all, it's
[1:02:10] in the middle of the night. It's not
[1:02:11] exactly safe and the ground is
[1:02:13] compromised. It costs twice as much
[1:02:14] because you got a bigger hole in the
[1:02:15] road.
[1:02:17] um you have to haul off the material,
[1:02:20] it's saturated, and then you have to put
[1:02:22] it back in the middle of the night. And
[1:02:23] it also gets people uh unscheduled out
[1:02:26] of service. The proactive approach is
[1:02:28] you pick the street, which we've test
[1:02:30] pitted and replaced one saddle in each
[1:02:33] one of these streets, so we know the
[1:02:34] condition and we know what's coming. Um
[1:02:37] and then you hire a contractor that
[1:02:39] proactively goes in and does one street.
[1:02:42] They do about two to three saddles a
[1:02:43] day. you know, it's a shut off at 9:00
[1:02:46] a.m. and we're back on by 2 PM. Uh the
[1:02:49] PowerPoint shows the process, but but
[1:02:52] that's it. So, basically in Richfield
[1:02:53] Station and Baby Hills, these saddles
[1:02:55] are failing and they're going to fail.
[1:02:58] It's a proactive approach of replacing
[1:03:00] them.
[1:03:02] >> That helps. Thank you. Any other
[1:03:04] questions?
[1:03:05] >> Um, not about that. As you know, I I
[1:03:08] believe it belongs in the utility fund.
[1:03:10] I
[1:03:11] >> I know. I know.
[1:03:15] Um
[1:03:22] so going to the capital programs, uh we
[1:03:26] have the highway user funds across the
[1:03:29] board and last year we had an asphalt
[1:03:33] overlay line [clears throat]
[1:03:36] and we were supposed to get a schedule
[1:03:38] of how that was spent and I don't
[1:03:40] believe that we got that but I think it
[1:03:42] was spent.
[1:03:44] Um, but I do think that knowing where
[1:03:48] [clears throat] large expenditures such
[1:03:50] as the ones in the highway user funds
[1:03:53] are spent is something that we have
[1:03:56] should be doing. Um, so I'd be
[1:04:00] interested to know where they were spent
[1:04:01] last year and um
[1:04:05] >> and and and honestly that's on me
[1:04:07] because we produced a scoring sheet in
[1:04:08] the road report so I can follow up with
[1:04:10] a with a map in the footages for the
[1:04:13] public and the council of where we did
[1:04:15] spend that money and what we plan to
[1:04:17] spend this year coming up.
[1:04:21] >> That [snorts] that would be good. Um
[1:04:23] because there's a there's a lot of need
[1:04:25] in for those highway user funds. Um, we
[1:04:28] all know that I have a a project that I
[1:04:30] would like to see done.
[1:04:31] >> Oh, really?
[1:04:32] >> Really? [laughter]
[1:04:34] >> A lot of people would like to see it
[1:04:35] done.
[1:04:36] >> Um,
[1:04:39] but those are big expenditures. Just not
[1:04:41] knowing where that money goes isn't
[1:04:44] really appropriate. So, um, look forward
[1:04:47] to seeing that.
[1:04:49] Um,
[1:04:51] I'm happy to see the $68,000
[1:04:55] in the
[1:04:57] connectivity trail design. I um,
[1:05:02] you know, if if it's
[1:05:05] my choice, which clearly isn't, I would
[1:05:08] say get the state grant, pay it back if
[1:05:11] you have to, and move the project
[1:05:13] forward. I think people have been
[1:05:14] waiting long enough. Um, but that's all
[1:05:17] I'll say. I hope we do move it forward.
[1:05:20] Um it's been a very long time with that
[1:05:23] project and um it's unsafe.
[1:05:27] So that's all I'll say there. Um signs
[1:05:31] and wfairing. I think we would like to
[1:05:33] use this year's um just a heads up.
[1:05:36] Don't roll that back in because I've
[1:05:38] already have been working with the green
[1:05:40] team a little bit and I think we're
[1:05:41] going to spend that money to refresh
[1:05:43] some of the signs that they already have
[1:05:46] information for.
[1:05:48] Um,
[1:05:56] I think that's it. I mean, the the
[1:05:58] Kellum's project isn't really broken
[1:06:00] down.
[1:06:04] I like that project. You won't see me
[1:06:06] not voting for that project. Um,
[1:06:10] >> Kellum's just just to help you out. it.
[1:06:12] So, it's just with Wayne's team right
[1:06:14] now to to give us the master plan back
[1:06:17] based off of the feedback from
[1:06:19] everybody. And then there was some
[1:06:21] additional Sumeilia's already found like
[1:06:23] potential grant money that could
[1:06:26] supplement some of the activities we
[1:06:28] were trying to do. Um, so what's in here
[1:06:31] is just the estimate if we were to pay
[1:06:34] 100% out of pocket with no support, but
[1:06:37] I don't that's not realistic at all.
[1:06:38] We're going to go for open spaces money.
[1:06:40] we're going to go for some additional
[1:06:41] grant funding and then the council will
[1:06:43] get a presentation soon of like here's
[1:06:46] the iteration two of the master plan
[1:06:49] that they're working on. So Jenny
[1:06:50] Jenny's still working on so you'll see a breakout of what all that entails but
[1:06:55] this is just Wayne giving a notional
[1:06:58] knows that we're going in the budgeting
[1:06:59] cycle putting something into the budget.
[1:07:02] >> So I appreciate that. Um, I would
[1:07:04] appreciate support for my neighborhood
[1:07:07] because currently nobody can get to
[1:07:09] Kellumfield.
[1:07:11] So, I I hope we can reopen those
[1:07:13] conversations. It looks like we have
[1:07:14] enough money for everything. Um, and
[1:07:18] I'll leave that there. And then I'll
[1:07:19] just ask the question.
[1:07:21] Um,
[1:07:23] does the plan include pilings?
[1:07:28] » Does it include? I mean I think it would
[1:07:31] if it require if something required
[1:07:33] pilings maybe but I don't think any I
[1:07:35] don't think there's anything I I don't I
[1:07:38] mean I'm not we'd have to ask Wayne that
[1:07:39] or Jay if you know
[1:07:40] >> so preliminarily before that discussion
[1:07:42] I did tell him any permanent structure
[1:07:44] would need piles there and he is
[1:07:45] understanding of that
[1:07:48] >> but um
[1:07:49] >> so if we're talking about pilings now
[1:07:52] we're talking about
[1:07:55] a lot of winds and a lot a lot of
[1:07:58] coordination which goes back
[1:08:01] to my original thought that we should be
[1:08:04] master planning the entire area. But as
[1:08:07] I said, if we're going to get something
[1:08:09] done in Kellum's Field um to beautify
[1:08:12] the area, I am all for it. you won't see
[1:08:14] me voting against it, but
[1:08:18] um
[1:08:19] [clears throat] I think there is a
[1:08:21] planning point in everything we're doing
[1:08:24] in the center of town
[1:08:27] that we need to be aware of.
[1:08:32] [snorts]
[1:08:33] >> Noted.
[1:08:34] >> Agreed.
[1:08:37] Anthony
[1:08:41] » Dan,
[1:08:42] >> sir,
[1:08:43] >> I have no general fund budget questions
[1:08:46] for you.
[1:08:48] >> Thank you.
[1:08:49] >> You're breaking the mold here.
[1:08:54] » Okay.
[1:08:54] >> Are you happy with the opioid awareness
[1:08:56] committee?
[1:08:57] >> Actually, yes, because a lot of things
[1:08:59] will end up going into events anyway, so
[1:09:01] it pretty much evens out now that I
[1:09:04] thought about it. But thank you. Okay.
[1:09:08] All right.
[1:09:10] >> Oh, your time. Can I have your time?
[1:09:12] Well, all right. I have a follow up.
[1:09:14] >> Just this time.
[1:09:14] >> All right. Real quick. Um, and just uh
[1:09:19] so I don't have to do ask for a budget
[1:09:21] amendment. Um, I think maybe if we could
[1:09:25] make that soccer goal uh line item
[1:09:30] um
[1:09:31] 15,000 because um
[1:09:36] for the for permanent goals that are
[1:09:38] sturdy that won't be uh ruined by kids
[1:09:41] hanging on them or anything like that.
[1:09:43] You know, high quality goals. talking
[1:09:46] about two large goals on the side and
[1:09:49] another four for short field. That's six
[1:09:52] goals. So, that's kind of I think that's
[1:09:55] a more realistic budget line item. Um
[1:09:59] I'd like to see that if there's any if
[1:10:02] there's enough agreement. No.
[1:10:03] >> Do they have something to light up at
[1:10:05] night?
[1:10:05] >> I don't know.
[1:10:06] >> You should look into that. I mean, look,
[1:10:08] if it doesn't cost that much, we pay
[1:10:09] what, you know, whatever whatever the
[1:10:11] least amount is, but I think maybe 5,000
[1:10:13] probably won't be enough to get it done.
[1:10:16] Um,
[1:10:18] so, uh, I'll say that. And then I do
[1:10:20] want to comment on, um, Lor's, uh,
[1:10:25] intent or desire to, uh, have the saddle
[1:10:30] replacements, uh, move to utility fund.
[1:10:33] I actually, I concur with that. I think
[1:10:35] that's probably where it belongs. Um,
[1:10:38] and in the same vein, I think that um
[1:10:44] the the capital expenditures for the
[1:10:46] water park and the debt service for the
[1:10:48] water park probably deserves to be in
[1:10:50] the water park fund.
[1:10:53] Um, along that same line of reasoning.
[1:10:56] And I mean, those are my comments.
[1:11:00] >> Thank you. All right. Anybody else have
[1:11:03] anything before we move on? C
[1:11:05] >> can I just ask Jay one question on
[1:11:07] capital projects? I know uh you had
[1:11:12] mentioned a storage facility that you
[1:11:16] wanted for public works, which as I look
[1:11:19] through the capital project and think
[1:11:21] about the budget and all the
[1:11:22] conversations I've had with various
[1:11:24] people, I noticed that is not there. Is
[1:11:27] that something you want to advocate for
[1:11:29] or is that something that could be done
[1:11:32] in subsequent years?
[1:11:34] >> I actually and I'm glad you mentioned
[1:11:36] that and I did I know we discussed it.
[1:11:38] So up at Chesig Village which is uh the
[1:11:40] water tower property that the town
[1:11:42] acquired for free thankfully um working
[1:11:45] with the developers. So we have the land
[1:11:47] and we have built already a lean to
[1:11:49] there where we currently store our vac,
[1:11:51] the little town boat, the seabbox oyster
[1:11:54] projects and a few other things.
[1:11:57] It is basically twothirds of it has been
[1:12:00] taken over by Christmas displays. And
[1:12:03] now moving forward with the new stuff
[1:12:05] we're getting, we have actually closed
[1:12:07] it in, created wall. So I lost my
[1:12:09] storage. And what I would like to do is
[1:12:11] build another public works building.
[1:12:13] It'll be a multi-purpose. Uh it's not a
[1:12:15] building. It's not a Yeah, it's not a
[1:12:18] heated or electrical structure. It's what exists there today, but now I
[1:12:22] want to build one on the side. The only
[1:12:23] addition will be there will be one
[1:12:25] closed in bay. One thing we suffered
[1:12:27] from this year uh with the snow events
[1:12:30] is we had 17 days in a row where it
[1:12:32] never got above freezing and it's very
[1:12:34] hard to wash your truck outside
[1:12:36] literally without it freezing. So we
[1:12:38] made like a make two shelter. We could
[1:12:40] at least get ice and salt off. When I
[1:12:42] build this new thing up there, it'll be
[1:12:44] one bay closed in that we could heat and
[1:12:47] have a place where we could if we have a
[1:12:49] similar situation. We have a wash down
[1:12:51] that's heated. Um, and it's $75,000.
[1:12:58] » So that's not in the budget at this
[1:13:00] time.
[1:13:01] >> That's not in the budget at this time.
[1:13:02] >> He had asked for it and I didn't want to
[1:13:04] talk.
[1:13:06] >> What? I'm sorry. What did you say?
[1:13:08] >> I had not included in the budget.
[1:13:10] Something he had talked about a couple
[1:13:11] different times when I discussed his
[1:13:14] budgets with him. But reflecting on it,
[1:13:17] I noticed that it's not there. So I left
[1:13:19] it out. So, we could put soccer goals on
[1:13:23] each end.
[1:13:24] >> Mhm. [laughter]
[1:13:26] >> They can be heated.
[1:13:29] >> We add it.
[1:13:30] >> Add it. I think we should add it. Why
[1:13:32] wouldn't we add it?
[1:13:33] >> Yes.
[1:13:34] >> So, if you'd make a note to add that,
[1:13:36] please.
[1:13:36] >> Thank you, council and mayor. Yeah. And
[1:13:38] Dan,
[1:13:42] » anything else on the general fund before
[1:13:43] we move on?
[1:13:45] >> All right. Time for the mitigation fund.
[1:13:49] Here's
[1:13:55] the mitigation fund.
[1:13:58] Um,
[1:14:00] again, doesn't have, you know, a lot of
[1:14:02] activity. Apparently, in the past, it
[1:14:04] was used for, uh, larger projects. Uh so
[1:14:09] the only thing we have here on the
[1:14:11] revenue side is interest on uh some uh
[1:14:16] savings that we have included in that
[1:14:18] account of about $3,000.
[1:14:22] A critical area grant that we uh seem to
[1:14:26] get each year. and then some uh tree
[1:14:29] planting and maintenance expense
[1:14:31] associated with uh
[1:14:35] work done that's needed in order to get
[1:14:37] that $2,000 grant.
[1:14:42] » I don't know anything more about it. Now
[1:14:44] >> I have one comment about that. Um
[1:14:50] the green team has just been awarded a
[1:14:52] tree city um I guess for the second
[1:14:56] round in a row and part of the
[1:14:57] requirements is to have a certain amount
[1:14:59] of money based on residential population
[1:15:04] designated for trees and we found it in
[1:15:08] the mitigation fund last year. I just
[1:15:10] want to make sure that we have the right
[1:15:13] amount in there for them to maintain
[1:15:16] their effort.
[1:15:17] >> What's the actual amount that they have
[1:15:18] to have?
[1:15:19] >> I don't know because we need to base it
[1:15:21] on the number of residents we have.
[1:15:26] >> Is it for new trees or is it what's it
[1:15:28] need to be for?
[1:15:29] >> It's just part of the the tree city
[1:15:31] program. you have to have a certain
[1:15:34] amount of money per resident
[1:15:38] dedicated for the maintenance of your
[1:15:40] tree of your trees,
[1:15:42] >> right? So, we have the you know the
[1:15:44] landscape landscaping budget and things
[1:15:46] like that. It's not a mitigation fund,
[1:15:48] but we spend you know monies for
[1:15:51] maintenance of the trees and trimmings
[1:15:53] and things. So,
[1:15:56] I guess we need to figure out what that
[1:15:57] dollar value is and see if what we're
[1:16:00] doing within the uh tree maintenance
[1:16:02] budget would be enough.
[1:16:04] And if not, then you know, we
[1:16:06] [clears throat]
[1:16:07] allocate more to the tree maintenance
[1:16:09] budget versus mitigation fund.
[1:16:12] >> Yeah. And it could even be a zone line
[1:16:14] item set out in the general fund. It can
[1:16:16] be anywhere in the budget. just I'm just
[1:16:19] asking staff to um be aware of that
[1:16:23] program and make sure that the wording
[1:16:26] is
[1:16:27] accurate in the budget so that they can
[1:16:30] maintain there.
[1:16:31] >> Joe, are you familiar with that? I work
[1:16:34] with you on that. Okay.
[1:16:36] >> Thank you. Dan, I have a might be a
[1:16:39] silly question, but why are these like
[1:16:42] five line items not just rolled into the general fund?
[1:16:47] >> Like why is it certain thing?
[1:16:49] >> My knowledge uh of past is not great
[1:16:52] enough to answer that question.
[1:16:54] >> It's just so small.
[1:16:55] >> I get the idea.
[1:16:56] >> It's such a small fund. Why don't we
[1:16:58] just
[1:16:59] >> add five line items? I I can try to
[1:17:03] research it a little better and see if
[1:17:06] >> what the history is of it and why it's
[1:17:08] there. I mean,
[1:17:09] >> yeah,
[1:17:09] >> Sarah might have an answer.
[1:17:11] >> There's one less fund we would have to
[1:17:13] deal with.
[1:17:14] >> Why is it a separate fund
[1:17:18] instead of putting those five line items
[1:17:20] into the general fund?
[1:17:31] It just feels better after spending an
[1:17:33] hour on the last one.
[1:17:34] >> Yeah.
[1:17:35] >> I mean, let's just be It just feels
[1:17:36] better like we got something else done
[1:17:38] and then we can go on to the next one,
[1:17:40] right? Some good reprieve
[1:17:42] >> for the beans.
[1:17:47] » Maybe we'll make up for it in the next
[1:17:49] one. [laughter]
[1:17:54] Let's move on to the wastewater
[1:17:56] treatment plant fund. Oh, I'm sorry. I
[1:17:58] got that name wrong again. I always
[1:18:00] will.
[1:18:05] Right. So, um, most of the information
[1:18:08] within the treatment plant fund I got
[1:18:11] from Josh. So, um, I'm going to turn it
[1:18:14] over to Josh because he knows a whole
[1:18:16] lot more about what individual costs are
[1:18:19] in there. I did share with each of you
[1:18:22] the uh detailed spreadsheets that Josh
[1:18:27] used to come up with these numbers. Uh
[1:18:29] they got sent over like late this
[1:18:32] afternoon. Uh so you will have those as
[1:18:35] well, but I'll let Josh uh take over
[1:18:38] from here.
[1:18:41] >> Good evening. Um so going down I'll kind
[1:18:45] of go off of uh Dan's uh presentation he
[1:18:48] has here. uh going into the engineering
[1:18:50] professional fees. Um that's basically
[1:18:53] includes known contract services. And
[1:18:57] then we have the um an average for
[1:19:01] project engineering fees. And what I did
[1:19:03] was I looked at what our expenditures
[1:19:04] were for the last three fiscal years.
[1:19:07] Averaged that out and put that amount in
[1:19:09] there. That came out to about $45,000.
[1:19:12] Uh all the rest of it, like I say, is
[1:19:14] for our SCADA systems. uh Pacina doing
[1:19:17] network backups for our computers um
[1:19:22] flow meter calibrations and scale
[1:19:24] calibrations which were required to do
[1:19:26] but for MD um
[1:19:38] interjurisdictional agreements.
[1:19:43] » Sure. So the other thing that you might
[1:19:46] not see now but you will see potentially
[1:19:48] if our partners are aligned is that the
[1:19:50] inclusion of the um reworking the
[1:19:54] interjurisdictional agreements which are
[1:19:56] currently um probably over 40 years old
[1:20:00] um and need to be revisited
[1:20:03] but we need to get partner alignment on
[1:20:05] that first.
[1:20:11] » So
[1:20:13] Anybody have any questions regarding the
[1:20:16] uh engineering professional fees line
[1:20:18] item? We'll just go by line item by line
[1:20:20] item if we want to.
[1:20:21] >> Just I had a question on what Sam just
[1:20:24] said. Is that something we need to add
[1:20:26] to this professional line item now or
[1:20:29] wait until we have
[1:20:31] >> we have ourations?
[1:20:33] >> We have our partner meeting next week
[1:20:36] and so I think it would be most prudent
[1:20:38] to wait till we hear back from them to
[1:20:39] make sure they're aligned and then add
[1:20:41] it.
[1:20:41] >> Okay.
[1:20:44] budget at all right now.
[1:20:48] >> I think there's value in going over it
[1:20:50] now.
[1:20:51] >> Yeah. And this budget was actually as
[1:20:53] shown here was given to the partners a
[1:20:56] month ago. So they're going over it as
[1:20:57] well. And you know, they may have some
[1:21:00] questions next week. So there could be
[1:21:03] changes from them as well. But this is
[1:21:05] the actual budget that they were looking
[1:21:07] at. Um so
[1:21:14] » so next item it would be our safety line
[1:21:16] item. Uh we have no major changes on
[1:21:18] there. Uh generally that's just going
[1:21:20] through our annual hearing testing. Um
[1:21:24] replacements for reagents for our
[1:21:25] portable eyewash stations. We have a
[1:21:27] number of those in the plant. Uh
[1:21:30] personal PPE.
[1:21:32] Uh spill response materials and then
[1:21:34] OSHA training during the year. And that
[1:21:36] line item hasn't changed since last
[1:21:38] year.
[1:21:40] Uh for lab analysis and supplies,
[1:21:44] we did have a significant reduction uh
[1:21:47] as a result of the lab services RFP that
[1:21:50] we did recently. Uh we've cut that by
[1:21:52] about $66,000
[1:21:54] uh year-over-year. Uh we did have an
[1:21:57] increase in cost for our um lab
[1:22:01] equipment. uh some of the uh materials
[1:22:04] that we need for our testing. Costs are
[1:22:06] going up on that. Uh we're making a
[1:22:08] change to our u daily uh testing for our
[1:22:12] nutrients. Uh we had been using two
[1:22:15] different types of tests. One of the
[1:22:16] tests has been being very inconsistent
[1:22:19] over a period of time and didn't see any
[1:22:21] reason to continue with that to do the
[1:22:24] other test more frequently. had a little
[1:22:26] bit of cost increase um but it really
[1:22:29] didn't make a huge change on the budget
[1:22:31] year-over-year and we had a lot of
[1:22:33] savings with the uh lab services.
[1:22:41] So, equipment repairs and maintenance.
[1:22:43] Uh as our equipment gets older, we're
[1:22:46] finding that we of course need to do
[1:22:48] more maintenance. We're having equipment
[1:22:50] that's um needing to go out for
[1:22:53] rebuilds, uh stuff like that. We have
[1:22:55] our generator service contract
[1:22:58] uh for two annual checks on that along
[1:23:01] with a load bank test annually. Uh we
[1:23:04] have a project for replacement of a
[1:23:07] block heater on the generator. It's
[1:23:08] going to be about $5,600 to do that
[1:23:10] work. Um that's already been quoted from
[1:23:13] Kelly Generator who handles our uh
[1:23:15] generator service. Uh chem service
[1:23:18] contract that's our chemical analyzer
[1:23:20] for our denitrification filters. that
[1:23:23] controls the chemical application. Um,
[1:23:26] HVA service contract, uh, annual RPZ
[1:23:29] inspections which are required by
[1:23:30] plumbing code, uh, and a service
[1:23:33] agreement with Zyllem for our dry prime
[1:23:35] pump and also annual, um, service
[1:23:39] contract for our, uh, lab desktop
[1:23:42] equipment.
[1:23:46] And since, again, since the equipment's
[1:23:48] getting older, we did increase that line
[1:23:50] item to try and compensate for that.
[1:23:52] Right now, we have about $10,000 left in
[1:23:55] that budget for the fiscal year. Started
[1:23:57] at 90,000.
[1:24:01] Any questions?
[1:24:05] Anybody got any questions or comments?
[1:24:08] >> You had a comment.
[1:24:10] >> This beard is looking good, man.
[1:24:11] >> Second.
[1:24:12] >> The beard is looking good, man.
[1:24:14] [laughter]
[1:24:15] >> I I tend to agree.
[1:24:17] >> I'm proud I'm proud of him. I'm proud of
[1:24:18] him.
[1:24:19] >> I think Jamie does, too. and John
[1:24:24] is the uniform. Jay, get with it.
[1:24:27] [laughter]
[1:24:30] » All right. So, for TP office expense, um
[1:24:34] doesn't look like Dan had in the
[1:24:35] presentation. That's just generally our
[1:24:37] annual training. Um uh janitorial
[1:24:41] supplies, office supplies, break room
[1:24:42] supplies, uniforms. Uh that line item is
[1:24:46] hasn't had an increase year-over-year.
[1:24:50] We are trying to get our operators out
[1:24:53] as frequently as possible for their um
[1:24:57] certification exams to try and get that
[1:24:59] knocked out and see if we can get more
[1:25:01] license operators.
[1:25:03] And that makes me
[1:25:05] uh realize I did not go over to
[1:25:07] salaries, which was one of the topline
[1:25:08] items. Um I'll go ahead and backtrack on
[1:25:12] to that. Uh for salaries, we did have an
[1:25:14] increase this year. um that primarily is
[1:25:18] for the three trainees that we have in
[1:25:21] the uh apprentichip program. As part of
[1:25:24] the Maryland rural water apprentichip
[1:25:26] program, we're required to initially pay
[1:25:29] them at 65%
[1:25:31] of full operator pay and then after
[1:25:34] their completion of their first year,
[1:25:36] which would be an F FY27, they are to be
[1:25:39] paid at 85% of operator pay. So, that's
[1:25:42] a significant pay increase over where
[1:25:44] they were as a trainee.
[1:25:46] >> Um, and it's all dependent on them
[1:25:48] completing their required 2,000 hours of
[1:25:50] OJT and I believe it was about 150 200
[1:25:54] hours of relevant relevant training
[1:25:56] hours uh classes.
[1:25:59] So, more than likely they're going to
[1:26:01] meet that. They had uh quite a few hours
[1:26:04] uh for previous experience, previous
[1:26:06] classes they had taken that they got
[1:26:08] credit for. Um, but that is something
[1:26:10] that's going to occur this fiscal year
[1:26:11] as required by the apprentichip program.
[1:26:13] And ideally once they complete this next
[1:26:16] year, they'll pass the license pass test
[1:26:18] and we'll have three new operators. So
[1:26:21] that's one thing we're shooting for. I
[1:26:23] also figure into the budget
[1:26:26] um for possible increases for um one
[1:26:30] more oper or trainee to become an
[1:26:32] operator. Uh we have one uh trainee
[1:26:35] who's taken the exam the last two times.
[1:26:36] you need a 70 to pass and he's gotten a
[1:26:38] 69 the last two times. So, he's very
[1:26:42] frustrated and as soon as he comes back
[1:26:43] and doesn't pass, he's filling out an
[1:26:45] application to retake that exam and it
[1:26:46] takes about a month for MDE to process
[1:26:49] it and get him lined up and then he goes
[1:26:50] back out and takes the exam again.
[1:26:52] >> So, um anybody have any questions
[1:26:55] regarding the salary since that was
[1:26:59] >> questions? Yeah. Um
[1:27:02] so, I don't know. So you got salaries
[1:27:05] here and then uh under the notes it's um
[1:27:07] personal schedule and then notes
[1:27:10] continue on under that is are those are
[1:27:13] those notes of 50% of salaries the notes
[1:27:17] on Zach treasurer and um town
[1:27:20] administrator percentages are those
[1:27:23] associated with the salary line or the
[1:27:26] plant benefits and taxes line
[1:27:29] >> they're associated with the
[1:27:31] administration
[1:27:32] down at chest to speak beach line.
[1:27:34] >> Okay.
[1:27:36] >> The 50 Well, take that back. The 50% of
[1:27:39] salaries is 50% of the treatment plant
[1:27:43] line. The administration TCB is the Zach
[1:27:48] 28% treasur 20%.
[1:27:56] » Um
[1:28:01] yeah. Okay. And um just for purposes of
[1:28:04] expressing an opinion um and been
[1:28:07] expressed before, I'm not uh for
[1:28:10] breaking these salaries out um and
[1:28:13] adding expenses
[1:28:15] um that way into the um treatment plant
[1:28:20] and utility fund. Um but uh thanks for
[1:28:25] clearing that up.
[1:28:27] >> Julie noted. Thank you. Anybody else got
[1:28:30] any questions or comments? Anything
[1:28:32] else, Josh?
[1:28:34] >> Uh, we do have two other line items.
[1:28:36] The, uh, chemicals and then the, uh,
[1:28:38] landfill tipping fees. And then getting
[1:28:40] into the capital projects. Uh, for
[1:28:43] chemicals, I was able to reduce the
[1:28:45] budget by about $90,000 this year on
[1:28:47] that. We were just over the past couple
[1:28:50] years looking at how many deliveries we
[1:28:52] needed of chemicals. I was able to
[1:28:53] reduce the estimated number of
[1:28:55] deliveries for each year. Our usage just
[1:28:58] has not been at that level. Uh we've
[1:29:01] also had a change with one of our
[1:29:03] chemicals which reduced the cost um by
[1:29:07] close to 10 cents per pound. Um and each
[1:29:11] delivery would get 32,000
[1:29:13] and that's when we get almost 10
[1:29:15] deliveries a year. So that was a
[1:29:17] significant reduction in cost. Um
[1:29:21] yeah, that was basically the biggest
[1:29:22] part of the cost change was for our
[1:29:24] aluminum chloride uh in that process.
[1:29:27] [gasps]
[1:29:27] Uh for landfill tipping fees, uh that's
[1:29:30] going to increase by about 30,000. And
[1:29:32] that has to do with just the contract
[1:29:34] cost increases and predicted sludge
[1:29:37] production through the plant. Um as we
[1:29:39] get more flows, we're going to have more
[1:29:41] sludge production.
[1:29:43] Any
[1:29:45] questions regarding the last part of the
[1:29:46] operational budget
[1:29:52] going into capital projects? Uh didn't
[1:29:55] have as many projects this fiscal year.
[1:29:57] Uh just
[1:29:59] some of these other projects needed a
[1:30:01] little bit more time to be able to get
[1:30:02] processed into. Uh the headworks
[1:30:05] project, we're still working on funding
[1:30:06] for that one. So that's been pushed out
[1:30:08] to FY28.
[1:30:10] Uh for this year, we've got 80,000 for
[1:30:12] equipment purchases. That's just been a
[1:30:13] recurring line item over the past couple
[1:30:15] of years. That's for purchases of pumps,
[1:30:18] uh, any other major equipment we need.
[1:30:20] Um, building our spare parts inventory.
[1:30:24] Uh, every year we're having to buy spare
[1:30:26] parts, replacements, re restocking
[1:30:28] inventories. Uh, the majority of that
[1:30:30] we're finding is our UV components.
[1:30:32] Those are fairly expensive when we do
[1:30:34] have to get those, but we do need to
[1:30:36] retain stock on the shelf for those uh,
[1:30:38] during the fiscal year.
[1:30:41] Uh we have two projects for um repairing
[1:30:45] our basin mixers and our um SPT mixers,
[1:30:51] shellfish protection tank mixers. Um
[1:30:54] those
[1:30:55] are going the plan is to take them, get
[1:30:58] them pulled out, send them over to the
[1:30:59] motor shop, have them fully rebuilt, and
[1:31:01] that will get us extended life on those
[1:31:04] uh pieces of equipment. Uh the plan for
[1:31:06] the basins is to replace pull six of
[1:31:08] them, have them rebuilt, put back in.
[1:31:11] That will uh redo half of the mixers we
[1:31:13] have, and then [clears throat] probably
[1:31:15] next fiscal year, we may try and do the
[1:31:16] same thing. Uh depending on what the
[1:31:18] rest of them are looking like, uh the
[1:31:20] shellfish protection tank mixers is
[1:31:22] going to be a larger project. Uh due to
[1:31:25] the height of the tank, tank is about 25
[1:31:27] ft high. Uh we're going to need to have
[1:31:29] a crane set up in uh Jay's lot back
[1:31:32] there to be able to get those out of
[1:31:34] that tank. have them hauled off to the
[1:31:36] uh motor shop, rebuilt, rewound, put
[1:31:41] back in there, and we should be able to
[1:31:43] get another number of years out of
[1:31:45] those.
[1:31:46] And then we have a $5,000 for a clean
[1:31:49] out aluminum chloride tank. We had a
[1:31:52] issue with the last chemical that was
[1:31:53] causing a lot of precipitation in the
[1:31:55] tanks. Uh one of the reasons what
[1:31:57] besides the cost of the chemical, that
[1:31:59] was one of the other reasons why we
[1:32:00] moved away from that chemical. Um,
[1:32:02] that's going to be a onetime project to
[1:32:04] get that precipitate out of the bottom
[1:32:06] of the tank. Uh, we're going to use a
[1:32:08] known uh, septic hauler and should be
[1:32:11] able to get that pumped out pretty
[1:32:12] easily and then we'll just feed that
[1:32:14] back in through the plant.
[1:32:19] » Questions?
[1:32:20] >> Any questions?
[1:32:21] >> I just have a comment. Can we just where
[1:32:23] [clears throat] it says build inventory
[1:32:24] spare parts, can we just say spare parts
[1:32:26] inventory and remove excuse me remove
[1:32:28] the build because you've been building
[1:32:30] for a while. I think you're just
[1:32:31] replenishing now.
[1:32:32] >> Yes.
[1:32:32] >> Uh so yeah, just for uh naming
[1:32:35] convention integrity.
[1:32:40] » I have a question that might be more for
[1:32:42] um Dan. Like I know we did the enhanced
[1:32:45] nutrient removal a while back and I
[1:32:47] think we're about to stop paying the
[1:32:49] debt service on that in a year or two. I
[1:32:52] was wondering why that wasn't in this
[1:32:55] budget and why it was in the I think
[1:32:57] it's in the um utility fund budget and
[1:33:00] not in this budget. I don't know. Maybe
[1:33:02] you can get back to me on that one, but
[1:33:05] [clears throat] you don't have the
[1:33:05] answer.
[1:33:07] >> That's where it's always been is all I
[1:33:09] know.
[1:33:10] >> Yeah, seems like it's a treatment plant
[1:33:12] expense, but it's in the utility fund
[1:33:14] and not the treatment. I think within
[1:33:16] the treatment plant those are called
[1:33:17] share with the partners and I think
[1:33:19] everyone paid for their own share
[1:33:21] separately. So instead of showing it
[1:33:23] within the um treatment plant and
[1:33:29] >> the cost not being shared whereas
[1:33:31] everything within the treatment plant
[1:33:32] now is either a fixed or variable cost
[1:33:34] that's shared by the partners and it
[1:33:38] looks when I did look at it before it
[1:33:39] looked like we paid for our share of
[1:33:43] those upgrades with the bonds. So
[1:33:46] therefore I think that's why it's a
[1:33:47] utility fund.
[1:33:50] I think there was another one that was
[1:33:51] dropping off in a year or two besides
[1:33:53] the nutrient removal. Can't remember
[1:33:55] what it was though.
[1:33:56] >> Yep. There's three bonds and two of them
[1:33:58] come off the next three years, I
[1:34:00] believe.
[1:34:00] >> So, is that why we're targeting the
[1:34:02] headworks for around that time when
[1:34:04] those drop off we're going to take on
[1:34:06] the headworks probably that service?
[1:34:08] >> I don't know if that was considered. I
[1:34:10] think that's just when they need to be
[1:34:11] done [clears throat]
[1:34:12] based on need.
[1:34:13] >> So, it's good timing then.
[1:34:14] >> Yeah.
[1:34:15] I never quite understood that
[1:34:16] either. If there are improvements to the
[1:34:20] treatment plant, why aren't the costs
[1:34:23] shared with the partners?
[1:34:25] >> I mean, we only have one or two more
[1:34:27] years to pay on those, but that's
[1:34:29] something that should have been a long
[1:34:31] time ago.
[1:34:32] >> I'm sure it was agreed to 15 years ago,
[1:34:35] whatever the breakdown was. And I I
[1:34:38] think everyone was paying their own
[1:34:39] chair directly.
[1:34:41] All right. That would be a sub that's a substantial
[1:34:48] amount.
[1:34:49] >> All right. Any other questions?
[1:34:55] » All right.
[1:35:01] Think we're done with the the budget
[1:35:03] discussions. And I think this was very
[1:35:06] productive and I thank all of you that
[1:35:08] prepared material and I thank the
[1:35:09] council for their thoughtful and
[1:35:12] uh questions and comments.
[1:35:16] It is time to move on to item two uh on
[1:35:20] theformational discussion and that is
[1:35:22] the election board uh briefing and Randy
[1:35:25] Gman um is here to uh bring us up to
[1:35:30] date on what's happening with the
[1:35:32] election board which is actually quite a
[1:35:34] lot.
[1:35:37] >> Thank you Randy. Okay. So, you got you
[1:35:40] got your read ahead, but I'm going to
[1:35:42] start out with uh introducing the uh the
[1:35:46] election uh committee. So, so I have uh
[1:35:50] Aacia Flores
[1:35:54] and and and I have uh Gordon Mat.
[1:36:01] And and Chris Martinez.
[1:36:03] >> Thank you.
[1:36:06] these have worked very hard
[1:36:09] >> and Anthony
[1:36:11] >> say the other two I'm waiting for my
[1:36:14] table there you know so [laughter]
[1:36:18] >> so so al also there there are actually
[1:36:22] three more people to talk about so but uh Eric Reinhardt Councilman
[1:36:26] Reinhardt and and uh Councilman Anthony
[1:36:30] Green that was the committee addition to
[1:36:33] that we now have a new member uh
[1:36:36] Jennifer Bennett which uh you
[1:36:39] back here. Okay. So which you appointed
[1:36:43] as board of elections uh at your last
[1:36:46] meeting. Okay. So I needed a little bit
[1:36:48] of space here for all those people. Um
[1:36:52] in in case needed if you guys want to
[1:36:56] move up a little closer in case you need
[1:36:57] to come to the uh microphone.
[1:37:03] So, I tried to do this as a as a re read
[1:37:07] ahead like you do a lot of your other
[1:37:08] things so that you could uh prepare. I'm
[1:37:12] not really planning on going through it
[1:37:14] as a as a uh a brief. Um let's see if I
[1:37:19] figure out how to use this thing. Do I
[1:37:21] point it any particular direction? Okay.
[1:37:24] So, so uh wanted to you've read it, you
[1:37:30] thought about it. I'd kind of like to to
[1:37:33] uh you know hear your questions if
[1:37:36] there's a particular slide or something
[1:37:38] you want me to go into more detail in uh
[1:37:41] or a answer more questions. This this
[1:37:44] was my attempt to put a whole lot of
[1:37:48] information [laughter]
[1:37:50] into your heads and and and I I I
[1:37:54] probably rewrote this thing about what
[1:37:56] 15 times Chris or something [laughter]
[1:37:58] like that and try to figure out the best
[1:38:01] way to present it or to give it to you.
[1:38:04] >> Yeah.
[1:38:04] >> Uh I I can start. So I [clears throat]
[1:38:08] Well, first Randy, thank you very much
[1:38:09] for putting this together. We talked
[1:38:10] earlier. This is absolutely fantastic.
[1:38:12] Um, I will just say that, uh, I concur
[1:38:16] with the committee's recommendation. Uh,
[1:38:19] I appreciate the the work tied to this.
[1:38:22] Um, where we would have a townrun
[1:38:24] election with contractor support. Uh, I
[1:38:27] know that's what North Beach is doing as
[1:38:28] well. I concur with that. I appreciate
[1:38:31] that it's on uh, election day, so it
[1:38:33] ties when most people are going to be
[1:38:35] voting anyways. Um, I am sad.
[1:38:38] >> [clears throat]
[1:38:38] >> I told you and I I will say this is a
[1:38:40] precursor so I'll say it in public uh
[1:38:42] where it says Randy May stepback is
[1:38:44] listed multiple times throughout this
[1:38:46] document. You didn't you did not sneak
[1:38:48] that one past me. Um
[1:38:51] uh but you did have an ask in here
[1:38:53] regarding uh multi-day elections. Uh and
[1:38:59] one of the re and and I'm I went back
[1:39:01] and forth on this. I googled a whole
[1:39:02] bunch like you know and and I think you
[1:39:04] could I think there's easily an argument
[1:39:06] for both of them. However, this uh
[1:39:09] option targets national election day uh
[1:39:13] and sticking with that. So, I think
[1:39:15] that's what led me into saying and I
[1:39:17] would lean into a single election day
[1:39:19] because that ties to the ex actual plan
[1:39:22] that the committee uh put forward. Uh
[1:39:24] and then I will just call out I do
[1:39:26] appreciate you answering my question
[1:39:27] regarding paper ballots because uh North
[1:39:30] Beach is not going to do paper ballots.
[1:39:33] However, we have a code requirement to
[1:39:35] do both. uh and and Randy just kind of
[1:39:38] explained uh maybe some integrity type
[1:39:40] things uh and and it just makes logical
[1:39:43] sense uh in current state. So I
[1:39:45] appreciate it.
[1:39:46] >> Thank you.
[1:39:52] » That was good.
[1:39:53] >> Um since I was on the committee, I'll
[1:39:56] pass and then loop back around at the
[1:39:59] end um if need be.
[1:40:01] Yeah, I just want to echo Jamie and say
[1:40:03] that this is very well put together and
[1:40:06] you'd already kind of answered my
[1:40:07] question about what happens if you step
[1:40:09] back and maybe you can just brief
[1:40:11] everybody real quick on what does happen
[1:40:13] if if we lose our certified um
[1:40:16] >> so so when we finish our little thing
[1:40:18] here the second part of this is you're
[1:40:20] going to appoint Aacia [laughter]
[1:40:24] >> as the other board members so we'll have
[1:40:26] Jennifer and Aacia who I who over the
[1:40:30] next two years, I will train to be able
[1:40:33] to run the 2028 election.
[1:40:36] >> Okay. Hopefully the machines work out
[1:40:38] this next time and we don't get the last
[1:40:41] minute uh hiccup.
[1:40:43] >> Well, the the the uh the whole thing
[1:40:45] about going over this and look looking
[1:40:47] at whether we go on their ballot on on
[1:40:50] the county's ballot or whether we do it
[1:40:52] ourselves. And one of the things that
[1:40:54] really went wrong the last time was poll
[1:40:56] book availability. Well, part of the
[1:40:59] thing the committee did, we looked at,
[1:41:02] we looked for what contractors were out
[1:41:04] there that provided and what other
[1:41:06] municipalities were doing. And we found
[1:41:08] out that Alche uh was through through
[1:41:12] the Maryland Municipal League. We we got
[1:41:15] in contact and we found out that Elect
[1:41:17] has actually been supporting 28
[1:41:20] different municipalities with election
[1:41:22] support. We had a we had a uh Zoom
[1:41:25] meeting with them where they went over
[1:41:27] and talked about what they could provide
[1:41:29] in poll books and stuff. So, there's
[1:41:32] actually three companies that I believe
[1:41:35] could could support our 2028 election.
[1:41:38] Um the the uh ESNS is who we've been
[1:41:42] using in the past to get ballots and
[1:41:44] stuff. Uh heck, I I can't remember the
[1:41:47] other name, but I've got it somewhere in
[1:41:49] there. they won the poll book contract
[1:41:52] for the uh county and and then elect is
[1:41:55] another one and and uh the key thing was
[1:41:58] getting poll books that could beworked
[1:42:02] that could have the Maryland municipal
[1:42:06] uh registry on I'm sorry the the the the
[1:42:10] uh the Maryland registry the statewide
[1:42:13] registry which is what we're part of. So
[1:42:15] the Chesapeake version of that on the
[1:42:18] poll book so that we can easily look
[1:42:20] them up and that the the the poll books
[1:42:22] were all networkked so when you enter
[1:42:24] one name in here it automatically go so
[1:42:27] nobody could vote twice so you can track
[1:42:30] and count them and and also so you could
[1:42:33] print a voter authority card. The voter
[1:42:36] authority card is very important in that
[1:42:38] it's that's what we use to take to the
[1:42:42] scanner so that only one ballot, one
[1:42:45] voter authority card so we know and
[1:42:47] those numbers have to match at the end
[1:42:49] of the night. So, so that's kind of
[1:42:52] keeping with the integrity and making
[1:42:54] sure we are u voters only vote once and
[1:42:59] only registered voters vote.
[1:43:01] >> Great goal. Um, you guys, it's just
[1:43:04] amazing how many people actually were
[1:43:06] able to vote despite all the hiccups you
[1:43:08] guys had last time. It was a huge
[1:43:10] turnout and hopefully we can get even
[1:43:12] more at the next election. So, thank
[1:43:15] you.
[1:43:17] >> Um, great job. Uh, I like um what you've
[1:43:21] done here, your ask multiple days. I'm a
[1:43:25] no multiple day person. I like election
[1:43:28] day and I also think it's a heavy lift
[1:43:30] for the town. So, uh, that's my comment
[1:43:33] >> and and you know, multiple election
[1:43:36] days, we were 5050 split on that. We we
[1:43:41] uh we couldn't decide that one ourselves
[1:43:43] and and uh we we were not looking to
[1:43:46] extend the the November election date.
[1:43:50] We were looking at the potential of of
[1:43:53] adding maybe a weekn night or a or or a weekend
[1:43:58] kind of like the you know uh um the
[1:44:01] county does eight days of early voting
[1:44:06] and and and uh um the and those are full
[1:44:10] 13-hour days [laughter]
[1:44:12] and I was I I looked at or proposed as
[1:44:15] an option of doing a six-hour
[1:44:20] week weekday night and a six-h hour
[1:44:23] Saturday. Um but but uh I also found
[1:44:28] that when I got a a cost estimate from
[1:44:30] Altech that it was another $4,200 for
[1:44:33] each day that you added. Uh so I I don't
[1:44:37] know that it's really important to do
[1:44:39] that. We did get 41% the last time. Um,
[1:44:44] you know, one of the reasons I I added
[1:44:46] it was because if if you look looked at
[1:44:48] the uh um
[1:44:51] our our election that that multi-day
[1:44:55] um
[1:44:58] one
[1:45:05] So if you if you looked at
[1:45:09] the voters the our Chesapeake beach
[1:45:12] voters,
[1:45:14] 70.1%
[1:45:15] of them actually voted in the 2024
[1:45:19] election for the for the general for the
[1:45:21] president for the general election. We
[1:45:24] had 41% of those same voters vote in our
[1:45:27] election.
[1:45:29] But if you look at the election day
[1:45:31] absentee ballot, provisional and early
[1:45:34] and and early voting breakouts, the
[1:45:37] reason they had such a high percentage
[1:45:38] is not that they all showed up on
[1:45:40] election day. You can see we actually
[1:45:42] had more show up on election day to
[1:45:44] ours, but it's because they had an early
[1:45:46] voting opportunity and a mail-in ballot
[1:45:49] opportunity and that's that's how they
[1:45:50] got up to 70%.
[1:45:53] Do we really need to do that? Like we've
[1:45:55] we split 5050 as to whether we we did or
[1:45:58] not and and and uh I was one of the vote
[1:46:01] one of the ones that voted for it and
[1:46:02] I'm kind of leaning against it. So I
[1:46:04] don't [laughter] you know it it it's not something that we have to do.
[1:46:09] The real decision I I I need from you
[1:46:12] going forward is is uh do we hold our
[1:46:15] own election and get contractor support
[1:46:19] or do we or do we go onto the uh county
[1:46:22] ballot? And and uh one of the things I
[1:46:25] have I I I recently asked a question to
[1:46:27] the uh through the county to the state
[1:46:31] uh as as to which which municipalities
[1:46:34] are going to go on the county ballot in
[1:46:38] their county for the November 2026
[1:46:41] election. Zero. [laughter] No. Nobody.
[1:46:45] Uh the only ones the only the only
[1:46:49] municipality I know that that I'm aware
[1:46:51] of that has gone on
[1:46:55] the ballot is Baltimore County and they
[1:46:58] I guess they've always done that. Uh but
[1:47:01] no other municipality does that to my
[1:47:03] knowledge.
[1:47:05] Uh, one of the things we were able to do
[1:47:07] is is in 2023 this the state put out a
[1:47:11] requirement pass legislator legislation
[1:47:14] so that we so that municipalities had to
[1:47:16] submit their election results to to the
[1:47:20] uh state and then the state puts them on
[1:47:23] a website. Well, all this information
[1:47:25] about the other places that voted and uh
[1:47:29] you know, so I got you percentage of of
[1:47:32] when elections were held that came from
[1:47:34] that state site. I can actually go on. I
[1:47:36] can't look at 22 because the law wasn't
[1:47:39] in effect there. But but you look at 23,
[1:47:42] 24, 25. And I gave you some examples of
[1:47:44] 2025
[1:47:46] of when they uh one of the other options
[1:47:49] we had looked at is we could have rented
[1:47:52] equipment from the state and done anou,
[1:47:54] but they would have made us change our
[1:47:56] election date. So I gave you information
[1:47:58] about why we shouldn't do that because
[1:48:02] the the five that I looked at, the five
[1:48:04] different municipalities, they were
[1:48:06] under 12% voter
[1:48:08] >> Yeah.
[1:48:09] uh on a non on a non-election non county
[1:48:14] election day.
[1:48:15] >> And I recall you and I talked about this
[1:48:17] at some length and and I think that
[1:48:19] makes all the sense in the world to
[1:48:21] leave it on the same day as the the
[1:48:24] general election just to improve the
[1:48:27] turnout and and and the percentage of
[1:48:30] our voters that actually vote.
[1:48:33] >> And I think 41% is really good. you
[1:48:35] know, we're we're we're basing that on
[1:48:38] active active voters.
[1:48:41] >> Uh the county uh the state county, they
[1:48:44] clear up and they they they have a uh um
[1:48:49] they have different categories of
[1:48:51] active, inactive, they'll if someone
[1:48:53] doesn't vote or they don't respond to
[1:48:55] them when they send correspondents, when
[1:48:57] the state sends them correspondents,
[1:48:59] they'll move them to the inactive list
[1:49:01] and they'll stay there for a while. that
[1:49:03] if they don't answer anything for uh a
[1:49:07] period of time, they'll take them off
[1:49:08] the list. Uh but but uh updating that
[1:49:12] Maryland Universal Registration, that's
[1:49:14] the term I was looking for earlier, uh
[1:49:17] is is uh takes time. Uh we can't do it.
[1:49:22] Only the only the state and county can
[1:49:25] change that.
[1:49:28] Did your committee talk at all about
[1:49:30] putting the question to referendum about
[1:49:33] how we would vote? Like obviously we
[1:49:37] can't do that right now, but um like on
[1:49:40] the ballot, a question on the ballot for
[1:49:42] how we would do our elections. Did you
[1:49:44] all haveation about that at all?
[1:49:46] >> I know you said North Beach maybe did.
[1:49:48] >> They they they voted to do that. The
[1:49:51] town council voted to put that on their
[1:49:53] November 2026 ballot. We didn't really
[1:49:56] talk about that because our next ballot
[1:49:58] is in 2028. So, you would be talking
[1:50:00] about a special election,
[1:50:02] >> right?
[1:50:04] >> Or just a newsletter or something that
[1:50:08] goes out and asks for input, you know,
[1:50:10] or
[1:50:13] » I would be interested because I am for,
[1:50:15] you know, the one day of voting. Also,
[1:50:17] from a campaign perspective, it's hard
[1:50:19] to campaign for multiple days um when
[1:50:22] you drag out the election too far
[1:50:24] >> and things change.
[1:50:26] >> So, so, so I was not I don't think that
[1:50:31] we should go to what the county does,
[1:50:33] which is
[1:50:34] >> prior to election day, they do eight not
[1:50:38] eight days of of uh that's a lot,
[1:50:41] >> but nothing after the normal election
[1:50:43] day. So, that ends it. that that
[1:50:45] election day ends it. Okay. What takes
[1:50:47] place after that is just the counting of
[1:50:49] the absentee ballots, the the the
[1:50:52] canvasing of the provisional ballots,
[1:50:54] just stuff that takes place. That takes
[1:50:56] time to get that done. It takes the
[1:50:58] county several a week for absentee, a
[1:51:00] week for provisional to to get their
[1:51:04] actual numbers.
[1:51:08] I was only proposing prior to election
[1:51:10] day like the a Saturday before or the or
[1:51:15] a Wednesday or something before. Uh
[1:51:17] that's what I was thinking about in
[1:51:19] multiple elections. And again, I don't
[1:51:21] think we have to have that 41% is a
[1:51:23] pretty good turnout. I would say if you
[1:51:25] wanted to accommodate more people and
[1:51:27] you got that feedback from people, if
[1:51:29] you kept it close together so that the
[1:51:32] people that voted on this day have the
[1:51:34] same information as the people that
[1:51:36] voted on the other day. I think that's
[1:51:39] the problem when they're spread out.
[1:51:41] >> If you spread it out too far and and
[1:51:44] also the the other thing you don't want
[1:51:46] to do is that you would not do is you
[1:51:48] wouldn't put out results until after
[1:51:51] election day. So, so you wouldn't you
[1:51:54] wouldn't be saying how many votes each
[1:51:56] candidate got.
[1:51:58] I probably wouldn't be able to do that
[1:51:59] with the machines anyways.
[1:52:02] >> You have a tough job.
[1:52:04] >> He's been doing it for a long time, too.
[1:52:06] And we appreciate that.
[1:52:07] >> I do have a couple uh things now.
[1:52:09] >> I was going to call on you before you
[1:52:11] interrupted me.
[1:52:12] >> Sorry.
[1:52:14] >> Get left out. You are you good, Anthony?
[1:52:17] >> Okay.
[1:52:19] I'm sorry to interrupt.
[1:52:21] >> Go ahead. you have something. Go ahead.
[1:52:23] >> Okay.
[1:52:24] >> Uh, I just wanted to highlight a couple
[1:52:26] of things that the committee u looked at
[1:52:28] that are I think are important that it
[1:52:30] really hadn't been said yet. And one
[1:52:32] that's super important I think it was to
[1:52:35] our committee was that if we went with a
[1:52:39] county or state ballot that uh there's
[1:52:44] no there's a law that says that it
[1:52:46] cannot be a nonpartisan election. So,
[1:52:50] uh, we would have had to had partisan
[1:52:53] elections or have a fill out a petition
[1:52:57] and get 200 signatures or whatever to
[1:52:59] get on a ballot um as a nonpartisan
[1:53:02] candidate,
[1:53:03] >> 250
[1:53:04] >> or 250. So that that was kind of a a a
[1:53:08] really big deal to the committee um and
[1:53:12] one of the reasons that we made the
[1:53:14] decision to uh that we to recommend um
[1:53:18] that we go with the town run elections
[1:53:21] and I just wanted to make sure everyone
[1:53:22] was aware of that point. Um
[1:53:27] the committee split 50/50. I am
[1:53:30] definitely for a single day election for
[1:53:33] multiple reasons that we've already gone
[1:53:35] over. Manpower, cost,
[1:53:38] different information. Uh, all good
[1:53:40] points. Um
[1:53:43] I wanted to say that uh
[1:53:48] oh regarding the Zoom call um that we
[1:53:51] had with Elect was a great call and they
[1:53:55] did demos of the equipment and the
[1:53:58] process and the pull books and the
[1:54:02] machines and everything. And I believe
[1:54:05] that that call was recorded. So if
[1:54:08] anyone is interested in that information
[1:54:10] that type of you know richer information
[1:54:14] on machines and and programs and process
[1:54:18] and stuff it's it's there and available.
[1:54:21] >> Yeah. Do you have an estimate on how
[1:54:22] much that might speed up the like
[1:54:24] process from last time having those
[1:54:27] machines
[1:54:28] >> having the pole books?
[1:54:30] >> Yeah. Or the upgraded computers that
[1:54:32] areworked and all that. Well,
[1:54:35] >> like the whole thing, how how much do
[1:54:37] you think it'll improve? Cuz I know we
[1:54:39] had long lines and people were leaving
[1:54:40] and stuff. So, that's what that should
[1:54:42] be that's one of your goals, I'm
[1:54:44] guessing, is to improve the
[1:54:45] >> If I can add it to it took a a minute
[1:54:48] and 45 seconds per person to check them
[1:54:53] in the the poll book or reg the laptop
[1:54:56] that we were using. We had four laptops.
[1:54:59] The maximum number that we could get in
[1:55:01] a 13-hour day was about 1755.
[1:55:05] I think we had like 1693 that we
[1:55:09] processed
[1:55:10] >> plus about another 100 provisional
[1:55:12] people that came through that we had to
[1:55:14] rule out for provisional about another
[1:55:16] 80 I guess.
[1:55:17] >> Uh so
[1:55:19] >> it doesn't take that long on the poll
[1:55:21] book and it and we had to handw write
[1:55:24] the the voter authority card. We had to
[1:55:27] print that for each voter and and that
[1:55:30] that's what took a minute and 45
[1:55:32] seconds. The machine will do this. The the reason I wanted to go to
[1:55:38] townun
[1:55:40] contractor supported is that I could I
[1:55:43] found out I could get machines from
[1:55:45] probably any one of these three
[1:55:46] contractors and there may be more out
[1:55:48] there too that we'll you know
[1:55:50] investigate in 2020 you know as we get
[1:55:52] closer to 2028. Uh but but it's because
[1:55:55] that could be done and it'll be fast. Uh
[1:55:58] the the county uh uses uh I think six
[1:56:02] machines and and um um
[1:56:07] they don't they never have lines or you
[1:56:10] know you'll always have some lines but
[1:56:12] it it won't we can get we can probably
[1:56:15] just do four. We could do four or six
[1:56:17] and and we'll be fine. It it'll it takes
[1:56:21] less than a minute to do that. It's
[1:56:23] almost half half the time.
[1:56:25] >> Oh, and and I'm probably exaggerating in
[1:56:28] the minute.
[1:56:29] >> Wow.
[1:56:30] >> It probably doesn't take that long.
[1:56:31] >> A significant improvement.
[1:56:33] >> Dramatic improvement if I'm not mistaken
[1:56:36] >> because it the the
[1:56:38] I don't remember if I remembered if I
[1:56:40] mentioned the printer. Each pole book
[1:56:42] has its own printer and and and so
[1:56:47] what's your name? What's your what's
[1:56:49] your uh date of birth? What's your address? here it is. I got
[1:56:53] that person. Print,
[1:56:56] get them to look at it, verify their
[1:56:58] address, and sign it and and give them a
[1:57:01] ballot, and they move on. They go vote.
[1:57:03] >> I think the voters will be happy about
[1:57:04] that.
[1:57:05] >> Yeah. The way we were in 2020.
[1:57:08] >> Yeah.
[1:57:08] >> And and and similar in 2016, the state
[1:57:13] 60 days out for 2024. They they they
[1:57:16] were supposed to be given to us 60 days
[1:57:18] out. They took them away and we didn't
[1:57:21] have time to find I didn't find other
[1:57:24] ways. I didn't know Elect was out there.
[1:57:27] I didn't know other things were out
[1:57:28] there at that time.
[1:57:29] >> You guys did you guys did great.
[1:57:30] >> So, the the committee did that.
[1:57:33] >> Other questions or comments?
[1:57:34] >> Well, yeah. And also just wanted to say
[1:57:36] uh of note that um you know the $16,000
[1:57:41] for to run to have this this election
[1:57:43] with this equipment and run this way I
[1:57:46] think is well worth it. But it's also of
[1:57:48] note that they provide a technician on
[1:57:52] site,
[1:57:55] >> you know, on election day here. So
[1:57:57] that's an extra person to make sure
[1:57:59] everything's running, make sure the
[1:58:01] equipment's, you know, go running
[1:58:03] smoothly, an extra person cuz we're, you
[1:58:05] know, we we are struggling to uh field
[1:58:08] an entire uh board of elections and
[1:58:11] everything. So it's nice to have an
[1:58:13] extra person there and especially one
[1:58:15] who is uh an
[1:58:17] >> how the equipment runs.
[1:58:18] >> Yeah. Yeah. So I just wanted to make
[1:58:19] sure that everyone knew that also.
[1:58:21] >> Right. I'm glad you brought that up. I
[1:58:23] would I would like be before I move
[1:58:26] forward, I I would like to see if there
[1:58:28] if any of my uh committee members want
[1:58:32] to come up and add something.
[1:58:34] >> Actually, I I would appreciate it if
[1:58:36] they would.
[1:58:38] >> There's your answer.
[1:58:41] >> And by by the way, one of your next
[1:58:43] items is agenda items is is she's going
[1:58:46] to be appointed. So,
[1:58:48] >> yes. [laughter]
[1:58:51] » Good evening. My name is Aaca Flores. I
[1:58:53] am on the election committee and um
[1:58:57] hopefully after your vote tonight, we'll
[1:58:58] be on the board of elections for the
[1:59:00] town of Chesapeake Beach. Um I have had
[1:59:04] the pleasure of uh serving with Randy
[1:59:07] for about since probably January,
[1:59:09] correct? When we started this or maybe a
[1:59:11] little bit before that, November.
[1:59:13] >> Actually, it was in November.
[1:59:14] >> November. Okay. So, uh so yeah, I've learned a lot in the past five
[1:59:19] months. Um I um have also been
[1:59:25] learning a lot about different processes
[1:59:28] for voting in elections and things like
[1:59:29] that. And it's been kind of something
[1:59:31] that I've been interested in learning
[1:59:33] more about election integrity and what
[1:59:36] kinds of things we can do to make sure
[1:59:37] that we don't have outside interference
[1:59:39] in in our processes and things of that
[1:59:42] sort. So, I'm hoping that I can learn a
[1:59:46] lot more from Randy and be able to serve
[1:59:48] on the board to be able to um help with
[1:59:51] our
[1:59:53] uh keeping our our town uh voting
[1:59:56] integrity intact.
[1:59:59] >> Appreciate that.
[1:59:59] >> Okay. Any questions for me?
[2:00:02] >> Yes.
[2:00:02] >> And and uh I think that you'll be
[2:00:04] introduced at the council meeting at the
[2:00:06] next council meeting and then we vote
[2:00:08] the following council meeting. Is that
[2:00:10] right? Am I wrong? So you guys have the
[2:00:12] opportunity to ask questions
[2:00:13] >> ask questions at that time
[2:00:14] >> so that she can be if you all decide to
[2:00:18] appoint her it would be at the upcoming
[2:00:20] council meeting on Thursday next week
[2:00:23] >> but she's here now if you want to ask
[2:00:25] >> I'm here now
[2:00:26] >> be a good opportunity and we had some
[2:00:28] good conversations so
[2:00:29] >> I I don't I don't we talked a lot when I
[2:00:31] was campaigning so I'm more than
[2:00:34] appreciative of what you're
[2:00:35] >> here [laughter]
[2:00:36] >> no I I support you 100% more more than
[2:00:39] appreciative you stepping up to this I
[2:00:41] appreciate a lot.
[2:00:42] >> I echoed that sentiment. Uh I do want to
[2:00:45] say that um for the council's purposes
[2:00:49] and everything understanding we did talk
[2:00:51] about during in the committee we talked
[2:00:53] about because there are going to be some
[2:00:55] changes that need to happen in the in
[2:00:57] the code and I don't know if it's
[2:01:00] charter and code or or or just one or
[2:01:02] the other but um we decided as a count
[2:01:05] as a as a committee that we thought the
[2:01:07] proper place for that discussion and
[2:01:10] fleshing out those types of issues was
[2:01:13] in the board of elections, not the
[2:01:15] committee. So, this is going to be
[2:01:18] something that um any new comm any new
[2:01:23] uh um board members will be tackling
[2:01:27] >> uh in the near immediately.
[2:01:29] >> Yeah.
[2:01:31] >> So, I appreciate your
[2:01:37] as do I.
[2:01:39] >> All right. Thank you.
[2:01:41] >> Anyone else?
[2:01:47] » [laughter]
[2:01:49] >> All right,
[2:01:50] >> we good.
[2:01:51] >> Anybody else got any questions? Are you
[2:01:53] done?
[2:01:53] >> I just want to say I know Aaca and her
[2:01:55] husband and they're they're good people
[2:01:57] and now you got to get Joe to come on a
[2:02:00] committee.
[2:02:03] » I know.
[2:02:05] I'll talk to them.
[2:02:14] I'm glad you I'm glad you stepped up.
[2:02:16] I'm sure you'll you'll be great on that.
[2:02:18] Um
[2:02:18] >> yeah, we we all appreciate that.
[2:02:20] >> Thank you.
[2:02:21] >> It's critically important to our
[2:02:23] municipality to have a great board of
[2:02:26] elections and everything way above
[2:02:28] board, you know. So, uh thank you so
[2:02:30] much for stepping up everybody. You too,
[2:02:33] my friend.
[2:02:35] Oh, I'm I'm uh I'm hearing that we want
[2:02:39] to go town run election contractor
[2:02:41] support. Was there any
[2:02:46] » Okay. And and I and I'm also hearing no
[2:02:49] multiple election.
[2:02:51] >> I I think that
[2:02:52] >> that's necessary.
[2:02:53] >> Okay. And and that's something that
[2:02:57] could be changed by code at a later
[2:02:58] date, but it's not something I will be
[2:03:01] that we will be looking at. and the fact
[2:03:04] that we're going
[2:03:05] >> town run election contractor support.
[2:03:08] There are not that many changes to the
[2:03:10] code that have to take place.
[2:03:12] >> U there there's only a few tweaks that
[2:03:15] have to be done. There would have been a
[2:03:17] lot more if we went with the uh going on
[2:03:20] the county ballot there. We would have
[2:03:22] to pretty much rewrite our election
[2:03:24] code.
[2:03:25] [laughter]
[2:03:27] >> I do have one question. Is was there a
[2:03:29] law last year that we had to accept
[2:03:32] mail-in ballots?
[2:03:35] Some reason I remember something around
[2:03:38] >> there is there is there is nothing that
[2:03:41] I'm aware of that that dictates
[2:03:45] the municipalities have to do that.
[2:03:48] >> But we did do it, right? Didn't did we
[2:03:50] do
[2:03:51] >> we have absentee ballots in our code. We don't really call them mailin. They changed the term from absentee to
[2:03:57] mailin for for the uh county and state.
[2:04:01] >> Okay.
[2:04:01] >> Ours is absentee ballots. However,
[2:04:04] there's not a big distinction. U the we you don't have to have an excuse for
[2:04:11] doing an absentee ballot. You don't have
[2:04:13] to be going away or something. Ours
[2:04:16] basically allows any registered voter
[2:04:18] for Chesapeake Beach to decide to do an
[2:04:20] absentee ballot if they want. which is
[2:04:23] another reason why having a multiple
[2:04:25] election days is not really necessary.
[2:04:28] If they want to vote and they can't make
[2:04:30] election day, they can still vote by
[2:04:33] absentee ballot.
[2:04:34] >> Okay, that's that's what I thought. And
[2:04:36] the confusion that I had wasn't around
[2:04:37] any communication by you, but there were
[2:04:41] confusing conversations there
[2:04:43] >> that happened. There have been I I think
[2:04:46] there there's been talk in legislation
[2:04:48] and stuff for the county, state,
[2:04:50] federal, but
[2:04:52] that doesn't apply to us.
[2:04:54] >> Gotcha.
[2:04:55] >> Our code applies to us.
[2:04:58] >> Understood. Thank you.
[2:05:02] >> All right. Well, then if there's no more
[2:05:05] questions.
[2:05:06] >> So, I'm thinking I have my answer, which
[2:05:08] is downrun election and and no multiple
[2:05:12] days. I believe that that is what I'm
[2:05:16] seeing a bunch of thumbs up here. Thumbs
[2:05:18] up. Thumbs up.
[2:05:19] >> Yes.
[2:05:19] >> Appreciate your time.
[2:05:21] >> Well,
[2:05:22] >> and I and I I will take one more. I it
[2:05:26] was very helpful to to have uh um
[2:05:29] Anthony and Eric on on the committee
[2:05:32] because it it really when we start
[2:05:35] looking at whether we want to go on the
[2:05:36] county ballot, the thing I was most
[2:05:38] worried about is is uh what happens to
[2:05:41] the candidates that we're going to get
[2:05:42] because it would most affect them.
[2:05:45] >> It it would most affect somebody that
[2:05:47] wanted to run and and so it was very
[2:05:50] helpful to have their insight.
[2:05:52] >> Thank you. and and I do appreciate every
[2:05:54] member of the uh committee. They did a
[2:05:57] we did a lot of work together
[2:06:05] » and I especially appreciate you. I know
[2:06:08] how much effort you put into this. So,
[2:06:11] thank you.
[2:06:14] » You're not moving, are you? You'll still
[2:06:16] be around, right? You know, you know the
[2:06:17] re the reason I I had to put my name in the uh brief is is because Eric kept
[2:06:23] pushing me to do that.
[2:06:25] >> Well, yeah, because it is important to
[2:06:28] know that he plans to step down and you
[2:06:31] know that is a factor in our
[2:06:34] decision-making process.
[2:06:35] >> It is.
[2:06:37] >> You'll still be available for advice,
[2:06:39] right?
[2:06:44] » There you go.
[2:06:44] >> Town council.
[2:06:45] >> There you go. Sounds good. Town council,
[2:06:49] mayor, town council, mayor, mayor.
[2:06:55] So much experience.
[2:06:58] All right. Well, thank you. Thank you so
[2:07:01] much. Um,
[2:07:08] all right. We're moving on to the next
[2:07:11] item on the agenda, which is state
[2:07:13] highway updates. and uh Dr. Oak Padu is
[2:07:16] going to brief us on that.
[2:07:20] >> Thank you. Um it's a pretty brief brief.
[2:07:23] Um it's we in order for us to officially
[2:07:27] um withdraw from the grant that we
[2:07:29] currently have. I have to submit a
[2:07:31] letter. So this is really letting you
[2:07:33] all know that that is what the next step
[2:07:35] is for um for the grant that we
[2:07:38] currently have. Um the the grant process
[2:07:42] is open now for transportation
[2:07:44] alternatives. It's open through the end
[2:07:46] of April. And so uh the town engineer
[2:07:49] and I have a meeting scheduled um for
[2:07:52] later this week when he returns um to
[2:07:54] work through the application and move
[2:07:57] forward and submit.
[2:08:01] » Um do we need to know like which
[2:08:04] alternative we're thinking about for the
[2:08:06] to submit for the grant or
[2:08:08] >> Yes. So my understanding from the last
[2:08:10] time that we had the large larger
[2:08:12] conversation was that everyone seemed to
[2:08:14] be largely on board with alternative one
[2:08:17] and so that is what we would be moving
[2:08:19] forward with. Um the transportation
[2:08:22] alternative grant is slightly different
[2:08:24] now than it used to be. So before you
[2:08:26] would have to apply once for a 30% grant
[2:08:29] and then again for 100% grant. They
[2:08:32] don't do that now. It's just one 100%
[2:08:34] grant which will streamline the process.
[2:08:36] Yeah. Um and so they've shared that's
[2:08:39] the federal grant. Um and they've also
[2:08:43] shared that there may be opportunities
[2:08:44] to apply for some state fundings as
[2:08:46] well. So um we are looking into that.
[2:08:52] >> But we are going to get out of the grant
[2:08:56] pipeline and hope that we have a grant.
[2:08:59] Is that what we're talking about doing?
[2:09:01] we are going to withdraw the from the
[2:09:04] grant that we currently have because
[2:09:05] that was my understanding of the the
[2:09:07] council's will and we will apply for
[2:09:11] another grant.
[2:09:12] >> No guarantee on another
[2:09:14] >> there's there is never a guarantee when
[2:09:16] you're applying for grants. So that it's
[2:09:19] not like they're saying yes we're going
[2:09:20] to earmark these funds for you. Right.
[2:09:22] So, so this basically could cost us the
[2:09:26] same $68,000
[2:09:29] that is currently budgeted,
[2:09:34] but we could move forward with the grant
[2:09:37] that we have, stay in the grant
[2:09:39] pipeline, which might line us up for
[2:09:45] the construction grant as well.
[2:09:48] And the only risk to that situation is
[2:09:51] that we pay exactly what we're saying
[2:09:54] we're going to pay anyways. It's it's
[2:09:57] just
[2:09:59] to me it's really poor decision- making.
[2:10:02] It's going to set us back in time.
[2:10:06] I think that we do have a 30% design
[2:10:11] that is um viable according to the state
[2:10:16] um viable according to rightways and
[2:10:18] easements
[2:10:20] and um takes everybody on a safer route
[2:10:23] and eliminates an a situation of
[2:10:28] unsafety that will not be eliminated
[2:10:32] by going through Woodshshire Avenue. Um,
[2:10:36] I would argue that going through
[2:10:37] Woodshshire Avenue introduces a whole
[2:10:40] lot of foot traffic to a neighborhood
[2:10:42] that may not want it. Um, it also takes
[2:10:46] people on a path that is not visible by
[2:10:50] road or by common traffic. Um, I believe that
[2:10:59] there's a reason why SHA rightways along
[2:11:01] a roadway exist and why they will build
[2:11:05] those connections along those areas. And
[2:11:10] I can see where this the whole step
[2:11:13] situation by the marsh is um
[2:11:17] [clears throat] maybe not ideal, but it
[2:11:20] also will be
[2:11:22] it's we have a guaranteed
[2:11:25] route there and there's no reason why we
[2:11:27] couldn't get the same open space grants
[2:11:31] that we are unsure whether we can get or
[2:11:34] not and add them to the burden in hand
[2:11:38] that we have that we just dismissed.
[2:11:41] Um, this project has been going on and on and on and what I see is this
[2:11:47] council, even though we are funded and
[2:11:49] we have the ability to do this project,
[2:11:52] sending it back around in a circle and
[2:11:54] it really it it's hugely frustrating to
[2:11:58] me and it's hugely frustrating to
[2:12:02] everybody. Um,
[2:12:05] I know you hate being called new, but
[2:12:07] you are new. Um, many many people
[2:12:09] >> Well, I I don't hate being called new. I
[2:12:11] just This is This has already been
[2:12:12] litigated like 80 times in this this
[2:12:14] like the question is just an update.
[2:12:16] This isn't us re redisputing this.
[2:12:18] You're you're literally bringing back
[2:12:20] the previous work session and the
[2:12:21] previous council session. So, I would
[2:12:23] ask that we move uh to strike this
[2:12:25] conversation and move forward because
[2:12:26] this is not a we're not revoting. This
[2:12:28] has already been discussed. It's already
[2:12:30] been set in stone. You agreed that we
[2:12:32] were going to look us.
[2:12:33] >> You said we were going to look at
[2:12:34] alternatives. You supported
[2:12:35] alternatives. Alternatives go. So like
[2:12:38] this is ridiculous.
[2:12:38] >> One one one person at a time, please.
[2:12:41] And um I think that
[2:12:46] it's not valuable to spend time to re
[2:12:51] reitigate this. This is where we're
[2:12:54] headed. Um is there anything else,
[2:12:57] Amelia, that you want to add to this?
[2:12:59] >> Not for SHA at this time.
[2:13:01] >> Okay. You never got approved for the
[2:13:02] 100% design grant, right? Cuz it was two
[2:13:05] separate grants. We got approved for 30%
[2:13:07] but not 100%.
[2:13:08] >> We we had the approval. So we completed
[2:13:10] the 30% which was the feasibility and we
[2:13:13] have the the 100% design funds. That's
[2:13:16] what was
[2:13:17] >> right. But they went over budget and all
[2:13:19] that. Okay. Yeah.
[2:13:20] >> No, they didn't go over budget.
[2:13:22] >> All right. Again,
[2:13:24] >> again, we're we are
[2:13:26] >> Okay.
[2:13:26] >> giving away a grant. We're going to
[2:13:29] reapply for the new grant
[2:13:31] >> and we will wait for it.
[2:13:34] >> That's the plan. Thank you very much.
[2:13:36] Let's move on. Um,
[2:13:39] next is the um rail trail expansion and
[2:13:44] the concept plans and you have do you
[2:13:47] have a
[2:13:47] >> it's not for the slide is
[2:13:49] >> so you you have this
[2:13:52] um and
[2:13:55] had recent discussions with Similia and
[2:13:57] other staff uh regarding this. Um and so
[2:14:02] after uh this is really a little hard to
[2:14:05] see, but after uh discussing this
[2:14:10] um as as you all know, I was I advocated
[2:14:14] for the the current rail trail for
[2:14:16] decades and finally got done what has
[2:14:19] been done to date, which is now over I
[2:14:23] don't even remember how long ago it was.
[2:14:26] And [clears throat] and I I know I'm
[2:14:28] repeating myself, but I'm old, so I'm
[2:14:30] allowed to do that. The piece that's
[2:14:33] shown in red down here, and I can barely
[2:14:35] read it, but it it it's the rest of the
[2:14:38] right of way. That was the that was the
[2:14:42] big cut in the hill coming down from
[2:14:44] Richfield Station. We had approval from
[2:14:48] all of the agencies except one to build
[2:14:50] that. I think uh that agency recognized
[2:14:54] that they made a mistake as soon as I
[2:14:57] took them out and showed them the trail,
[2:14:59] but those pe that that goes back I think
[2:15:02] 22 years or something like that. So
[2:15:04] they're those same people are no longer
[2:15:06] there. So my thought was in discussing
[2:15:09] this with uh the engineer and with
[2:15:12] Sumeriia
[2:15:14] uh it was to
[2:15:16] re-energize that bottom part of
[2:15:19] Richfield Station and build it around.
[2:15:21] Another concept that was presented there
[2:15:24] was this additional trail that goes uh
[2:15:27] back to the northwest and then loops
[2:15:29] around and goes back up into Richfield
[2:15:31] Station. So you could actually make a
[2:15:34] circle all the way around through
[2:15:35] Richfield Station. I'm not opposed to
[2:15:38] that, although I think that it's got a
[2:15:39] lot of challenges, but I'm not opposed
[2:15:41] to doing it. And as far as con
[2:15:44] continuing it on the right of way, uh
[2:15:47] the once you get to the town limits,
[2:15:51] that's not a town issue, but I will be
[2:15:55] happy to advocate uh to the county um
[2:15:59] and and try to gain support from our
[2:16:02] county commissioners to consider uh
[2:16:05] conducting or you know, building the
[2:16:08] trail further on out. Um, and as you
[2:16:12] know, Route 260 where it goes from two
[2:16:14] lanes to four lanes is once you're on
[2:16:16] the two-lane part, that is the railroad
[2:16:18] right away. And there are still several
[2:16:21] existing buildings along Route 260 that
[2:16:25] were there in the heyday of the railroad
[2:16:28] uh back which went out of business in
[2:16:30] 1935.
[2:16:32] So anyway, that's where we stand with
[2:16:34] that. And uh Similia, do you want to add
[2:16:36] anything to that? Uh the only thing that
[2:16:39] else that I would add to it is that
[2:16:41] we're in the process I'm expecting to
[2:16:42] receive the RFP um by the end of this
[2:16:45] week for the rail trail expansion um so
[2:16:49] that we can move forward with bidding
[2:16:51] it.
[2:16:54] >> Council,
[2:16:55] >> I have a question.
[2:16:56] >> Yes, sir.
[2:16:57] >> Um I love this project. Um the glad to
[2:17:01] hear it.
[2:17:01] >> The uh so I just have one question. the
[2:17:05] um in the phase one proposed phase one
[2:17:07] here in the diagram.
[2:17:08] >> Mhm.
[2:17:09] >> It looks as though the um proposed phase
[2:17:14] one does stop short of the town limits.
[2:17:17] Is there a reason it doesn't go all the
[2:17:19] way to the town limit?
[2:17:20] >> Yeah. And the reason is because it's
[2:17:22] overwater. We're not building a bridge
[2:17:24] there. Mhm.
[2:17:25] >> And so that would there's be no point in
[2:17:28] building a bridge to take you to the
[2:17:30] town limits because all you would do
[2:17:31] would be to get across the bridge and
[2:17:33] you would be at the town limits.
[2:17:35] >> Makes sense.
[2:17:35] >> And so if we can ever encourage the
[2:17:38] county to build it all the way on
[2:17:40] further, that's when to build that
[2:17:42] bridge.
[2:17:42] >> Okay. Makes sense.
[2:17:44] >> Other questions, Eric? Um
[2:17:53] and so yeah um and so we looked at this
[2:17:57] in the budget on uh capital budget
[2:17:59] general fund uh line item rail trail
[2:18:02] extension construction. We have in there
[2:18:04] budgeted
[2:18:07] um it looks like a a budget of 2 million
[2:18:11] for the entire project over three years.
[2:18:14] Is that something we got from Wayne?
[2:18:21] And that's
[2:18:26] » like a throw up kind of number.
[2:18:28] >> I think once we once he's done um with
[2:18:33] the design portion, then we'll have a
[2:18:34] little bit more
[2:18:39] to build. There's some existing tieins
[2:18:41] there. Anybody
[2:18:49] else? Yes. Question.
[2:18:52] >> Um, so just um for the record,
[2:18:58] I have no desire to pursue pursue this
[2:19:01] project before
[2:19:04] um a connection from Chesapeake Village
[2:19:09] to town is underway.
[2:19:13] Secondly,
[2:19:15] there is a 200 acre parcel that is still
[2:19:18] in possession of Mr. Repky
[2:19:22] um
[2:19:25] that he owes to either Richfield Station
[2:19:28] or a public entity
[2:19:30] or a covenant.
[2:19:33] I'm not a huge fan of phase two of this
[2:19:37] proposal,
[2:19:39] but I additionally have concerns about
[2:19:44] um
[2:19:47] legalities associated with building on
[2:19:49] Mr. Repy's property before he acquiesces
[2:19:54] the 200 acre parcel that he
[2:19:58] should not be allowed to keep.
[2:20:00] So, I would just urge the town to
[2:20:04] cross their tees and dot their eyes.
[2:20:06] This this really isn't my project
[2:20:09] anymore.
[2:20:10] Um, of course, I do support a railway
[2:20:14] trail expansion, but there are several
[2:20:18] things that concern me. And um
[2:20:24] again, I I I thank you for the railway
[2:20:26] trail that you did build and you have a
[2:20:29] vision, but I have very deep concerns
[2:20:31] about the 200 acre parcel and the safety
[2:20:33] of my neighborhood that supersede my
[2:20:36] desire to
[2:20:39] » Thank you for your comments. Anybody
[2:20:41] else?
[2:20:42] >> Yeah, I just wanted to say that I would
[2:20:44] like to see the connection from like
[2:20:47] right where the blue and the red line
[2:20:48] meet. um like the end of the existing
[2:20:52] trail uh to connect to Beach Elementary
[2:20:56] as part of one of the projects. I think
[2:20:58] that was already thought of before. I
[2:21:01] just want to voice my support for that
[2:21:04] connection.
[2:21:07] >> Okay. Anybody else?
[2:21:09] >> Not sure. I What can you explain that?
[2:21:11] >> Well, maybe not where the you know like
[2:21:13] where the trail te's off and you can
[2:21:16] either go right or left.
[2:21:17] >> It's right where you go left. right
[2:21:19] where the sidewalk starts, there's a
[2:21:20] clear path to Beach Elementary. I think
[2:21:23] there's already a there's already some
[2:21:25] kind of concept plan for that
[2:21:26] connection.
[2:21:27] >> We just have to request property from
[2:21:29] the uh the county and they've already
[2:21:31] agreed to do that once we're ready for
[2:21:33] it.
[2:21:34] >> It's just a a boardwalk connection to
[2:21:36] the school,
[2:21:38] >> but they can do their field trips.
[2:21:40] >> Are you speaking about down where the
[2:21:43] water well is or are you thinking about
[2:21:44] up over the big hill once you go across
[2:21:47] the bridge? No, no. Right when you hit
[2:21:50] the tea, you can go right to Richfield
[2:21:52] Station or left takes you on the trail.
[2:21:55] You go left and then right where the
[2:21:56] sidewalk starts, there's like a clear
[2:21:59] straight path to the school.
[2:22:02] >> I'm We would just need to build a
[2:22:03] boardwalk
[2:22:06] >> real fast. We did a feasibility study
[2:22:08] with the walkable communities and then
[2:22:09] we actually took out there. So yeah,
[2:22:11] line of sight it is, but elevation wise
[2:22:13] it's like 70 ft cuz you're at sea level
[2:22:16] 6t above it at the trail and you're like
[2:22:18] plus 75 at the school. So we walked that
[2:22:21] actually for feasibility and they didn't
[2:22:23] know how to figure that out cuz that
[2:22:24] wasn't one of the initial phases. I'm
[2:22:26] not saying to exclude it, but the hurdle
[2:22:28] was the height difference uh cuz it's
[2:22:30] pretty level until you get to the school
[2:22:32] and it's
[2:22:32] >> it's steep
[2:22:33] >> and they abandoned the two trails that
[2:22:35] they did have because of they failed on
[2:22:38] the hillside. I was going to say I
[2:22:39] thought there were some switchbacks in
[2:22:40] there or something.
[2:22:41] >> They were, but they've been abandoned
[2:22:43] for a few years. They used to come down
[2:22:44] to the old well site and come through,
[2:22:46] but they failed. The slope failed. So,
[2:22:49] not saying not pursue it, but that was
[2:22:51] the hurdle when we did the initial
[2:22:52] feasibility study with a third party and
[2:22:55] they just thought it was not possible at
[2:22:58] that time. And I think it's safe to say
[2:23:00] there's I I I would be willing to bet
[2:23:02] you that there's not a single person on
[2:23:04] this council that wants to not have as
[2:23:07] much walkability as possible within our town. I mean, everybody wants
[2:23:12] to do that. It's it's not a matter of
[2:23:14] what we want to do. It's a matter of
[2:23:16] what we can do and how we get it done
[2:23:18] and what's feasible and what's not
[2:23:20] feasible. And so this is this piece
[2:23:24] that's being proposed here is an easy
[2:23:26] win because it was already approved by
[2:23:29] 21 agencies of the state.
[2:23:32] >> And uh I think Wendy's been pulling all
[2:23:34] the documentation from the original
[2:23:38] uh all of the stuff that we put together
[2:23:40] for the state and the joint evaluation
[2:23:42] committee that I testified in front of
[2:23:44] and all that. So we're gathering all the
[2:23:47] information. we'll represent it and and
[2:23:49] I I believe that that's doable. Uh not
[2:23:52] that we don't want to do anything else.
[2:23:54] It's just that this one is probably
[2:23:58] doable and gets us to the town limits
[2:24:00] and that, you know, hopefully that sets
[2:24:03] a pattern for a whole lot more
[2:24:05] walkability in the town.
[2:24:08] Does anybody else have anything they
[2:24:09] want to say about this or questions
[2:24:11] about this?
[2:24:12] >> I'm just going to push a little bit. Are
[2:24:14] you arguing that this is more feasible
[2:24:18] >> than a state verified
[2:24:22] grant
[2:24:24] to connect a neighborhood to town where
[2:24:26] it's unsafe?
[2:24:28] >> I'm I'm not saying that at all. I'm
[2:24:30] saying that this is something that was
[2:24:32] approved over 20 years ago and I want to
[2:24:35] see it move forward. It has nothing to
[2:24:38] do with the other project that we're
[2:24:39] talking about
[2:24:42] and it's not an eitheror situation as
[2:24:45] far as I'm concerned. We we pursue both
[2:24:47] of them at the same time. This one I
[2:24:49] think we can get done
[2:24:52] >> as opposed to the other one.
[2:24:53] >> I'm sorry.
[2:24:54] >> As opposed to the other one
[2:24:56] >> I didn't say. Did you hear me say that?
[2:24:58] Those words never left my lips. I said
[2:25:01] this one can be done. It was already
[2:25:03] approved. That's all I said. I didn't
[2:25:06] say anything else. Thank you.
[2:25:11] Can we move on to the home occupations
[2:25:13] discussion?
[2:25:15] >> Sharon.
[2:25:23] » Hi.
[2:25:23] >> Good evening, sir. Um, so you all have
[2:25:27] in front of you and you've introduced
[2:25:29] for um approval the um updates to the
[2:25:34] home occupations that you requested. Um,
[2:25:37] just a reminder, these are a quick fix,
[2:25:39] a 90-day fix. They are not how the
[2:25:43] planning commission is looking at for a
[2:25:46] long-term solution in the the six-month
[2:25:48] process of the land use classifications
[2:25:50] being updated. Um and so uh if you have
[2:25:54] any other questions or concerns, I'm
[2:25:57] here to answer them.
[2:25:59] >> One, um only one thing for me um one a
[2:26:03] where it says and has minimal negative
[2:26:05] impact
[2:26:06] >> on the neighborhood where the business
[2:26:07] is located. I think that is very
[2:26:10] subjective. When you say the words
[2:26:12] minimal and negative, those are not
[2:26:14] definitive things that you can define or
[2:26:16] explain and it opens it up to a gray
[2:26:18] area to be a person's opinion on what is
[2:26:21] minimal and negative. Um, when you go to
[2:26:25] J, you have it here where it says uh
[2:26:28] establishment of or operation of a home
[2:26:30] occupation is harmonious with the
[2:26:32] character of neighboring residential
[2:26:33] uses and does not create traffic, etc., I think that kind of covers that.
[2:26:38] >> So for me to make sure that we have
[2:26:41] codes that you can actually enforce and
[2:26:44] is not opinionated, I would ask to
[2:26:47] remove that verbiage.
[2:26:50] But that would be my only um from going
[2:26:52] through this. That's the only thing that
[2:26:53] I had concern about. I would like for
[2:26:56] our codes to be as succinct as possible
[2:26:59] so that there's not a lot of questions
[2:27:01] or opinions or or push back from people
[2:27:04] saying well I didn't have minimal imp
[2:27:08] you know it wasn't negative it was
[2:27:09] positive impact so that was be my only
[2:27:12] thing that I would want to bring up
[2:27:15] >> okay
[2:27:16] >> good call
[2:27:19] >> council anything else
[2:27:21] >> agree with
[2:27:24] Just [clears throat] just want to make
[2:27:25] it as easy as possible. If it's wrong, If it's right, it's right.
[2:27:29] >> No opinions, no favoritism, you know.
[2:27:32] Just make it simple.
[2:27:36] >> And I I'm just
[2:27:43] » up here so you get recorded, please.
[2:27:51] Nothing in this code is going to
[2:27:53] supersede a homeowner association
[2:27:56] governing documents that will limit what
[2:27:59] kind of businesses or what kind of
[2:28:02] occupancy can be in their home. Correct.
[2:28:05] >> That's correct.
[2:28:06] >> That's my question. Thank you.
[2:28:08] >> I'm glad you asked that question.
[2:28:10] >> I just wanted to ask a procedural
[2:28:12] question. Is is this something that
[2:28:15] would need to be brought up for a vote
[2:28:18] at the next meeting? Is this something
[2:28:20] that can be voted on now?
[2:28:23] >> Can can be voted on comments.
[2:28:25] >> Yeah, it has to be brought up in the
[2:28:27] next meeting.
[2:28:29] >> I think we're all in alignment with
[2:28:31] >> So, yeah, I think that what's presented
[2:28:34] at the meeting
[2:28:36] um doesn't have to be this document. It
[2:28:39] can be something different. And if we
[2:28:41] all agree that we would like a c to see
[2:28:43] a certain change, that change can be
[2:28:45] made
[2:28:46] before before
[2:28:48] >> before a regular session.
[2:28:50] >> That was my question.
[2:28:51] >> So I have a couple questions about this.
[2:28:58] [clears throat]
[2:28:58] >> Um so this contains two sections and one
[2:29:02] of the sections contains home
[2:29:04] occupations that are not permitted. And
[2:29:06] I did a little research
[2:29:09] and I did not find
[2:29:13] home occupations that were not permitted
[2:29:16] in common code. So I'm I'm curious about
[2:29:22] um the section of this code that does
[2:29:26] not require a permit.
[2:29:28] >> Can you be specific about where a permit
[2:29:30] is not required? where it says there's
[2:29:33] >> so in the first um
[2:29:38] customary home occupation um it has a
[2:29:42] long list of things and pay is a zoning
[2:29:45] permit is obtained then it has
[2:29:48] conditional use in the RV1 RLD RMD R HD
[2:29:53] and RPC
[2:29:55] um and I don't see that same language in
[2:29:58] that um if I were reading the zoning
[2:30:01] code. Uh I would assume that I do not
[2:30:04] need a permit. So if you are planning on
[2:30:08] requiring a permit for
[2:30:11] um section two,
[2:30:14] >> I would say that we would want to
[2:30:16] include that same language that it
[2:30:19] requires a permit and requiring a permit
[2:30:21] for a home occupation is the common
[2:30:23] practice from what I can tell.
[2:30:27] Um, so that there's that in general. Um,
[2:30:32] additionally,
[2:30:33] >> can I add on to that real quick because
[2:30:34] it's that is a good call. Is there a
[2:30:37] difference because it's a zoning permit
[2:30:39] versus home occupation? Is there a
[2:30:40] difference between the two? Are they
[2:30:42] representing the same phrasing?
[2:30:44] >> We kind of weren't sure why that was in
[2:30:46] there because everything needs a permit.
[2:30:48] Um, we did leave it in there. I will
[2:30:50] tell you that the planning commission is
[2:30:52] discussing
[2:30:54] not requiring a permit for a minor home
[2:30:56] occupation which is what is
[2:31:00] um comparable to two. And while it isn't
[2:31:03] sort of established practice to do that,
[2:31:06] it is the more sort of modern new pro
[2:31:09] approach to allow these home occupations
[2:31:12] you can't even tell are happening to
[2:31:14] happen without a permit. And so that's
[2:31:16] why that is. So I think that it's worth
[2:31:18] a discussion here. might make sense
[2:31:20] since this is the shorter term fix to
[2:31:22] just add an I that says a zoning permit
[2:31:25] is obtained to two and put a pin in that
[2:31:28] discussion for when you get the bigger
[2:31:30] >> I would I think that's what Lor's
[2:31:31] getting I would concur with that too
[2:31:33] just for continuity uh as well and then
[2:31:36] addressing when when they do the full
[2:31:38] table uh review. Thank you.
[2:31:41] >> I have three more things.
[2:31:43] >> Can I just say one more thing to this
[2:31:45] one? Right. So the zoning permit and the
[2:31:47] home occupation permit are two
[2:31:49] completely different things. So I think
[2:31:51] making sure that that's defined and
[2:31:54] understood
[2:31:55] before moving forward with that verbage
[2:31:57] is really really important because you
[2:31:59] don't want to get caught out there with
[2:32:01] a person having a zone impairment when
[2:32:02] they're supposed to have a home
[2:32:03] occupation because they are two
[2:32:05] different things.
[2:32:10] » What's what's the difference then? I
[2:32:12] mean, I get it, but like what would be
[2:32:13] the difference in the language? Why we
[2:32:15] would put one the word zoning versus
[2:32:17] home occupation in a home occupation
[2:32:19] ordinance?
[2:32:20] >> So, again, we were we we did this in one
[2:32:24] sitting and the planning commission if
[2:32:26] that that's helpful for perspective. Um,
[2:32:29] and so it typically a home occupation is
[2:32:34] going to want a use permit, which is
[2:32:36] still a zoning type of zoning permit,
[2:32:38] but it's not the same as the larger
[2:32:41] permit.
[2:32:42] >> So, I think it might want to just say a
[2:32:45] permit is obtained so that the
[2:32:48] administration of what the permits look
[2:32:50] like has some flexibility to make things
[2:32:54] more simple. um
[2:32:58] as needed.
[2:33:02] » What's the difference between uh 2 E and
[2:33:05] 2G?
[2:33:07] >> 2 and 2 G.
[2:33:11] » So
[2:33:13] 2 E is that you can't sell anything,
[2:33:17] right? And to F is that you can't
[2:33:21] display anything.
[2:33:22] >> Uh G
[2:33:23] >> or sorry G. Okay. Oh,
[2:33:31] I guess there's really not a difference.
[2:33:33] >> Well, if you if you have a hair care
[2:33:35] place, you can't sell radios out of it.
[2:33:37] So, it's like no commodity, no if you if
[2:33:39] you're doing hair in your home, you
[2:33:41] can't also sell remote controls. You
[2:33:44] know what I mean? So when they're saying
[2:33:45] no um article or commodity is offered on
[2:33:48] sale on the premises, if you have a a
[2:33:50] business, a home business that's
[2:33:51] specifically for a specific thing, you
[2:33:53] can't also sell other things out of your
[2:33:55] home.
[2:33:56] >> Wouldn't that be covered under G though?
[2:33:58] >> Well, not necessarily because you still
[2:34:01] you you still have to say you can't sell
[2:34:04] other things except the service that
[2:34:05] you're supposed to give. And then when
[2:34:08] you get to G, that's like you can't have
[2:34:11] a shop set up where you just in there
[2:34:13] just selling goods instead of having an
[2:34:15] actual service. So it's kind of the
[2:34:17] same, but then again, specificity.
[2:34:19] Somebody could take one thing and put it
[2:34:21] under something different.
[2:34:23] >> So it covers all bases.
[2:34:24] >> So this says no article or commodity,
[2:34:28] >> right?
[2:34:29] >> Which does bring me to my second
[2:34:31] question.
[2:34:33] Um,
[2:34:35] do we have a cottage industry law that
[2:34:38] would allow somebody to sell their baked
[2:34:41] bread, their I mean we're we're
[2:34:46] [laughter]
[2:34:46] those are the kinds of things
[2:34:48] >> needle work in my wife's case
[2:34:51] >> different things. Um, so trying to
[2:34:54] conflate the two, a home occupation that
[2:34:57] should require a permit and business
[2:34:58] license and all this other stuff and a
[2:35:01] cottage industry
[2:35:04] is is a little bit um confusing. So I I
[2:35:09] would very be I would be interested to
[2:35:11] see the modern code that you're talking
[2:35:14] about because I couldn't find any.
[2:35:17] So
[2:35:19] you're you're talking about what my
[2:35:22] reasoning for advising the planning
[2:35:24] commission on the permitting is is it's
[2:35:27] not based on current a current a
[2:35:29] specific current code. It's based on
[2:35:32] discussions in the planning practice
[2:35:34] about making home occupations more
[2:35:36] accessible and best practices for that.
[2:35:39] So,
[2:35:40] >> I would just be interested to to read
[2:35:42] about it to educate myself if you have
[2:35:44] something on that from somewhere. Um,
[2:35:48] because
[2:35:50] to me, we should be permanent in these
[2:35:53] home occupations. Um, which brings me to
[2:35:55] my third point. Um, permits do a couple
[2:35:58] things. They they make sure that you
[2:36:02] know what's going into the neighborhoods
[2:36:04] where home occupations are allowed.
[2:36:06] um they make sure that those uses are
[2:36:09] compatible. When you have those things
[2:36:11] not permitted, you don't know. Um I know
[2:36:15] you had somebody visit the planning
[2:36:16] commission that wants to do bun repair.
[2:36:20] >> Um
[2:36:22] and then we have this definition for an
[2:36:24] adult bookstore in our code that we need
[2:36:27] to approve as well.
[2:36:30] Um,
[2:36:31] I think that having
[2:36:34] controlled items and substances
[2:36:38] be
[2:36:42] serviced in commercial zones rather than
[2:36:44] residential zones is something that I'm
[2:36:46] for and I did bring that up when you
[2:36:49] first brought this to us. Um,
[2:36:54] I I don't know. I'll just I'll just say
[2:36:56] I don't know that I can approve this
[2:37:00] based on no permitting or no regulations
[2:37:05] related to controlled items and
[2:37:07] substances. So,
[2:37:11] um
[2:37:12] but I would like to know why because
[2:37:14] people are going to ask me and if you
[2:37:15] get somebody
[2:37:18] um that is unhappy with the home
[2:37:21] occupation that they're forced to live
[2:37:24] by Mhm.
[2:37:26] >> I want to be able to answer that
[2:37:27] question.
[2:37:30] >> So,
[2:37:30] >> can I just add real quickly though? So,
[2:37:33] like the adult bookstore,
[2:37:35] it's already existing in the current
[2:37:37] code as written. Um, the real push here
[2:37:41] was I guess you a handful of years ago,
[2:37:45] it removed the RV1,
[2:37:49] RMD, all the people who could have true
[2:37:52] traditional to include cottage, right?
[2:37:54] cottage still requires permits with home
[2:37:56] occupation. Usually the county actually
[2:37:58] doesn't require it but the town the town
[2:37:59] does. Uh so it there was this change
[2:38:02] where it removed it and the quick fix
[2:38:04] was why would we not why not just unreal
[2:38:08] and nobody can Sarah correct me if I'm
[2:38:10] wrong nobody can nobody can explain
[2:38:13] why the code was adjusted to remove the
[2:38:17] areas where true home occupation would
[2:38:20] be. So, we had all this code and then
[2:38:22] somebody where you see in section two
[2:38:25] where it says conditional use in RV1
[2:38:27] that was eliminated and went um it was
[2:38:31] converted to NP versus conditional and
[2:38:34] the conditional drives that you have to
[2:38:36] have a permit uh to do that. So, for
[2:38:39] example, because I know you had brought
[2:38:40] up like uh like marijuana like sales or
[2:38:43] something like that, somebody would
[2:38:44] still have to come here and request a
[2:38:47] permit and if it doesn't live in the
[2:38:51] zoning uh rules that we have, they
[2:38:53] wouldn't get permitted for it. Now, if
[2:38:54] they go and sell on their own, then then
[2:38:58] they have a business that doesn't comply
[2:39:00] with with the town code, but but that's
[2:39:02] a whole different discussion uh on on
[2:39:05] enforcement. Um, but this here is really
[2:39:09] just actually enabling the community to
[2:39:12] have those home businesses and those
[2:39:14] cottage laws. Uh, and then there was
[2:39:16] even Dan had even brought up a
[2:39:17] discussion. You know, there's a
[2:39:19] gentleman, John, right next to you sells
[2:39:21] uh his shoes, his Nike shoes and Pokemon
[2:39:24] cards and basketball cards all the time.
[2:39:26] You know, what about that? It's like a
[2:39:28] popup that he does as he see fits. He
[2:39:30] puts a table out, puts some cards out
[2:39:33] there, people will will stop by. uh that
[2:39:36] actually conflicts with the home
[2:39:38] occupation, but that's not a home
[2:39:40] occupation. That's kind of like a
[2:39:41] temporary when you do when your son does
[2:39:43] paw paws, you know.
[2:39:44] >> Yeah. So, there's there's I I think
[2:39:46] there's other aspects of this that would
[2:39:47] be addressed through that we were
[2:39:49] working with Sarah on addressing through
[2:39:51] uh the the land use table and some other
[2:39:53] codes in there, but this specific
[2:39:56] ordinance is just to add back in the the
[2:39:59] zoning areas that were removed. I don't
[2:40:02] know. They just magically disappeared a
[2:40:04] couple years ago.
[2:40:06] >> I don't know how.
[2:40:07] >> So, how would
[2:40:07] >> And I don't know how either. But this
[2:40:09] isn't addressing any of those things
[2:40:11] that you just said. [laughter]
[2:40:13] >> No, it does. It adds it in section two.
[2:40:14] It puts it puts it back in,
[2:40:18] >> right? But it removed I remember it was
[2:40:20] removed an item 10 that had uh and I
[2:40:24] don't have item 10 in front of me.
[2:40:26] >> Um Oh my.
[2:40:28] >> And the the situation has come up. I
[2:40:30] mean you we Chesby Village can't even
[2:40:34] ride a bike to town now because of
[2:40:36] >> what's item 10 that you're trying to
[2:40:38] >> Well, what I'm saying is we are
[2:40:40] addressing this code now, right? Um we
[2:40:44] were very picky about some other code
[2:40:47] that really had no impact. But this code
[2:40:50] does have an impact. It is going to put
[2:40:53] certain occupations in residential areas
[2:40:56] where residential use and the people who
[2:40:58] move there for residential use rely on
[2:41:02] that zoning. And so um
[2:41:09] for me
[2:41:10] >> like what though like can give me give
[2:41:11] me
[2:41:12] >> I would say that that a a person who
[2:41:14] repairs firearms right
[2:41:18] there are a lot of reasons to repair
[2:41:20] firearms firearms and of themselves are
[2:41:23] not a bad thing. Um I would prefer that particular type of business though
[2:41:29] is in a commercial zone. I might be a
[2:41:31] person that lives next to that business
[2:41:34] that
[2:41:36] um doesn't feel comfortable around guns.
[2:41:41] Additionally, you might be there's all
[2:41:44] kinds of people who are
[2:41:47] associated with guns.
[2:41:49] That person that is repairing the guns
[2:41:52] might not have control over who is
[2:41:54] coming to his business in the
[2:41:56] residential area to get their firearm
[2:41:58] repaired. I think that
[2:42:04] removing
[2:42:07] the ability to have controlled items and
[2:42:10] substances sold in residential a
[2:42:13] neighborhoods or or be associated with a
[2:42:15] business in a residential neighborhood
[2:42:18] would eliminate most of my concerns
[2:42:22] with this
[2:42:24] in addition to requiring a permit for a
[2:42:27] home occupation.
[2:42:29] Um,
[2:42:30] >> well, this policy does require a permit.
[2:42:32] We can put the language in there
[2:42:35] basis for denying
[2:42:38] certain things.
[2:42:39] >> Well, if it's not allowed in the code if
[2:42:40] it's not allowed in the town code, then
[2:42:42] you wouldn't be allowed to have a there
[2:42:43] is or do we need to adjust? But you
[2:42:45] can't you can't have pharmaceuticals in
[2:42:47] your like I can't just start making
[2:42:48] aspirin in my house and sell it like
[2:42:50] that. like it's got to follow state code
[2:42:51] for like pharmaceuticals and like the
[2:42:54] mar like Maryland's uh like like for
[2:42:56] marijuana dispensaries is a very very
[2:42:59] strict code. So it's not like you could
[2:43:01] just stand up a dispensary in your home
[2:43:03] or anything. The gun one is an
[2:43:04] interesting one. I I don't know the
[2:43:06] answer to that. But like the medical
[2:43:07] stuff, marijuana,
[2:43:08] >> but we need to know the answer to that.
[2:43:10] Well, that but that that
[2:43:12] >> the problem is is that if there's a list
[2:43:15] somewhere that's already been made with
[2:43:17] things that are not allowed, then find a
[2:43:19] list. If the list is not there, then
[2:43:22] make the list instead of going back and
[2:43:24] forth over conjecture with our opinions.
[2:43:26] Exactly. So, that's the thing. So, if we
[2:43:29] don't already have a list, then let's
[2:43:31] stop talking about it and make a list.
[2:43:33] >> But doesn't the land use table
[2:43:34] >> because we're wasting the time right
[2:43:35] now. We have something in front of us
[2:43:38] that opens us up to get something done
[2:43:40] that was taken away without any purpose.
[2:43:42] Now we want to move on to say, "Okay,
[2:43:44] well, we got this straight. Let's make a
[2:43:47] list of the things that we don't want in
[2:43:48] the neighborhoods because we deem them
[2:43:50] unsafe." Then make that list and let's
[2:43:52] vote on that because right now this is
[2:43:54] just the conversation.
[2:43:55] >> It does say needs to be harmonious with
[2:43:58] the character, but that's open to
[2:44:01] >> I might go to the guy that that fixed
[2:44:03] guns,
[2:44:04] >> I think. So what's the character?
[2:44:06] >> I think we just need to be
[2:44:07] >> it's subjective and specific.
[2:44:09] >> If we deal with subjectivity and
[2:44:11] opinion, then what are we going to
[2:44:13] actually get to? Because we all can feel
[2:44:15] a certain way about something.
[2:44:16] >> They tried to accomplish it with two H,
[2:44:18] but it just needs to be more specific.
[2:44:20] Well, I would say that there is a list
[2:44:22] of controlled items and if we said
[2:44:27] controlled items
[2:44:29] that would
[2:44:32] account for most of PE most people's
[2:44:35] concerns,
[2:44:36] >> we just need to listen. If there's a
[2:44:37] list already in place from the smarter
[2:44:39] people that was here before us, then
[2:44:41] let's go to that list. If that list does
[2:44:43] not exist, then let's go ahead and move
[2:44:45] forward and then we can get that list in
[2:44:47] front of us and we can vote on that when
[2:44:49] we're ready.
[2:44:50] >> There's code on e-code library that
[2:44:53] looks great to me
[2:44:55] and it's
[2:44:56] >> but is the code on chess. You have an
[2:44:58] alternate proposal that is our code.
[2:45:01] >> I just wonder why why we are being
[2:45:06] so creative. You don't need to be and I'm always going to defer to
[2:45:12] protecting
[2:45:14] residential use in a residential area.
[2:45:18] >> Are you about to say something, Eric?
[2:45:19] >> I Yeah, I guess I'm um
[2:45:23] so my question is same back to number
[2:45:27] two, right? Um, and going back to uh,
[2:45:33] Councilman Evans comments about um, E
[2:45:36] and G.
[2:45:38] >> Mhm.
[2:45:39] >> And, um, how they seem to be the same?
[2:45:42] They do seem to be the same to me. But
[2:45:44] my question really is
[2:45:49] uh so are we saying that only services
[2:45:54] and not the sale of any physical item
[2:46:00] is allowable.
[2:46:03] >> So you can't conduct sales on premises.
[2:46:07] And this may be those two may just be
[2:46:10] sometimes when we do stuff at the
[2:46:12] planning commission we'll add stuff in
[2:46:14] and then the next time we'll realize
[2:46:16] they match up. Um but we like we did
[2:46:19] this pretty quickly. Um so we could
[2:46:21] probably remove one of those but you can
[2:46:23] still sell items just not on premises.
[2:46:26] So only via the mail.
[2:46:28] >> Okay. So just a really simple question.
[2:46:32] Is this
[2:46:34] require a permit to have a lemonade
[2:46:36] stand?
[2:46:39] [laughter]
[2:46:39] >> A lemonade stand is not a home
[2:46:41] occupation. Um, it's a temporary use.
[2:46:44] It's not permitted or not permitted in
[2:46:46] your code.
[2:46:49] Um, a lemonade stand is technically the
[2:46:52] sale of food and beverages, which the
[2:46:54] county regulates. Um, so it's a little
[2:46:57] more of a complicated question. Uh, and
[2:46:59] I don't think that a zoning permit would
[2:47:02] be required. There's no zoning authority
[2:47:04] over lemonade. So,
[2:47:05] >> don't call the county on my
[2:47:07] >> No, that this expl this ex exact
[2:47:09] question was emailed to Sarah and the
[2:47:12] attorney and [clears throat] that is
[2:47:14] where we would add in something in
[2:47:16] because what we do not want to do I
[2:47:17] don't think I don't think anybody in
[2:47:18] here wants to be on the news as the town
[2:47:21] who shuts down a nine-year-old kid's
[2:47:23] lemonade stand like it happened a
[2:47:25] handful of years ago. Uh, and so there
[2:47:29] was discussions about adding some
[2:47:30] language into the zoning ordinance that
[2:47:33] addresses that. And that's why I brought
[2:47:35] up the example of the gentleman next to
[2:47:36] John who sells Pokemon cards,
[2:47:39] >> right? And so it, you know, we can't
[2:47:42] just say, oh, except for lemonade stand.
[2:47:44] It has to be a broader
[2:47:46] >> [snorts]
[2:47:47] >> uh clause so that because there are
[2:47:49] other absurdities that you can come up
[2:47:51] with, I'm sure.
[2:47:53] >> Well, and the planning commission is
[2:47:55] working on that language. We worked on
[2:47:57] it a bit. I'm working on it to present
[2:47:59] to them again um for April's meeting.
[2:48:02] So, they do want to make sure people
[2:48:05] kids can sell lemonade or Pokemon cards
[2:48:07] or whatever.
[2:48:09] >> And I just want to comment that I I
[2:48:11] concur with uh um Councilman Green's um
[2:48:15] opposition to a a broad controlled
[2:48:18] substance clause. I it I'd like to see a
[2:48:21] specific list um because and it's the
[2:48:25] same thing. I can go to the to the uh to
[2:48:27] the situation that we talked about the
[2:48:29] last time at the meeting or whatever it
[2:48:31] was. I I brought up the idea of someone
[2:48:34] who does some uh small batch micro
[2:48:37] brewery and sells it to you know a local
[2:48:42] establishment
[2:48:44] um
[2:48:45] through and they can sell it there to
[2:48:47] individuals.
[2:48:49] um something like that I don't think
[2:48:51] should be um banned with some type of
[2:48:55] broad controlled substance uh clause
[2:48:59] >> you have a micro brewery standing in
[2:49:01] front of the house right next to the
[2:49:02] lemonade
[2:49:05] >> let's progress a big part
[2:49:08] >> another county
[2:49:11] » all right all right I think that we I
[2:49:14] think we talked this out pretty
[2:49:15] thoroughly I mean is does anybody else
[2:49:17] have any final comments before we
[2:49:19] adjourn. Thank you. I don't hear any.
[2:49:21] Uh, all right. This your last chance,
[2:49:24] Laura. Your last chance. Okay,
[2:49:26] everybody. Good. All right. Is there a
[2:49:30] Let's see. We're not going to do item
[2:49:32] six because Dan's not here.
[2:49:34] >> Not here.
[2:49:34] >> So, uh, the next item on the agenda is a
[2:49:37] motion for adjournment.
[2:49:39] >> What took you so long? All in favor say
[2:49:41] I. I. I.
[2:49:43] >> Thank you very much. Very good meeting.
[2:49:45] Uh, I appreciate everybody's input.
[2:49:48] We covered a lot of territory and we got
[2:49:50] a lot done. Thank you.