Notes from July 22 Worksession and July 22 commissioner's meeting

Posted for Commissioner Demmler

Notes from July 22 Worksession and July 22 commissioner's meeting
....including some from July 21 Planning Commission meeting.



PUBLIC HEARINGS:
============
Text Amendment...property owners to be notified when commercial and industrial site plans are filed so neighbors can know what is happening next to them. (Note: this came about as a result of my request which grew out of the Phillips Mushroom situation. In the past.,,(since business and industry does not go before PC), the public has had no venue to know what is in the works. It will still be handled administratively only it will be required that the neighbors know so that if they have questions they can ask them before the business starts rising beside them. The Planning Commission heard this on Monday and thought it a good idea and recommended for approval.
=============
Text Amendment...greenhouses with on-premises sales. This will allow greenhouse business to sell up to 100 cubic yards of topsoil mulch and gardening/landscaping aggregates on site. This was brought before the Planning Commission on Monday and they agreed it was a good change and voted for their recommendation of approval.
============
Text Amendment...Critical Bay. Nine months ago the Critical Areas Commission notified the county that there were deficiencies in our zoning ordinance as relates to Critical Areas. Because of this, they imposed a moratorium where we couldn't grant waivers in the critical areas. During the time since, there have been changes worked out through the Critical Areas "people" and staff from the County. The result is contained in the paperwork given us. But, then after this came out... and as a result of a final meeting with 'them' and 'us' some final tweaking was done. The P.C. on Monday (and at our meeting last night) we were given the final version. Along with this was a shorter 12 page synopsis of the changes. A lot of the changes have to do with minor things such as language used...that is making our 'terms' coincide with terms used within Critical areas wording. The changes and 'housekeeping have been gone over carefully between Critical Areas Comm. and County staff. Mr. DiGiacomo, Principal Planner indicated that he can see no detriment to the County in accepting the changes. With his input, the PC felt comfortable and recommended approval. This information was again given within the public hearing at the commissioners' meeting yesterday.
===============
Cecil county Rode code. We briefly discussed this at yesterday's worksession since Mr. Whittie from DPW had reviewed it with us in some detail the previous week. I asked about the change showing on pages 40-43 which moves the approval from the Director to the "Duly Authorized Agent." I questioned if this wording was too broad...maybe the "duly authorized agent should be defined more specifically...(WHICH position within DPW would be considered an "agent".) I asked....after the approval ...was this then ultimately signed off by the Director? I was told no ...that the director simply didn't have the time to review them and that in order to make sure the work progresses that this could be delegated to others. Through further discussion, I felt more comfortable with this change.

During the public hearing at our Tues. meeting, we heard from some within the development community. Will Whiteman commends that he attended some of the round-tables and commended the DPW for their good work However he specified that there should be some alteration to the sight distance regulations so that the individual home owner (or small development) would not have to adhere to the same regulations as what is required of a large development.. Bud Felty from McCrone Inc. commented that he agreed with what Mr. Whiteman had said and in addition asked to look more closely at the term "fee simple" as it relates to easements. He said that with easements we have the 'right' but not the 'title.' George Kaplan, asked that when variances have been granted that lists of these be sent to the commissioners. Mr. Carpenter (engineer) supports the codes as are. They do a good job of addressing the national standards and we should follow the 2004 standards.
==============
Program Open Space...Mentioned briefly at the worksession and in a bit more detail at the meeting. I had heard even more detail from Mr. Slicer when he gave his review at the PC meeting. In essence this is the latest outline of the programs within Open Space. By approving we maintain our eligibility to acquire Open Space money.
=============

P.O.S. Cecil applies to recover through POS 75% of the cost of fencing that has been installed on the McMillan property.
=====================

PUBLIC COMMENT....None
==============

INTRODUCTORY ITEMS: (To be voted on on August 5)
Dog License Fees increases... Imposing these fee changes is an authority that the county acquired through the legislature. We are now using them to adjust overdue fee increases. This has been reviewed by the Treasurer's office and they are okay with it.
=========
Resolution...code county. The process was reviewed by Mr. Wein, County Administrator. This was introduced as an action item at our May 6 meeting. We had two public hearings (June 5 and June 17.) The resolution was introduced at today's July 22 meeting. The commissioners will vote on this at the August 5 meeting. If four of the five commissioners agree, then the resolution will be submitted to the Board of elections on or before August 18. The question of Code Home Rule will be submitted to the voters in November for adoption or rejection. )
==========
Purchase of Develop. Rights for Harvey McNatt...this will remove 15 development rights from this land. At the worksession (and at the meeting) this was presented by Eric Shertz. This was within the MALPH but the money is not there...so requesting payment through the county. This money is available through the county PDR program via recordation tax collections.

ACTION ITEMS: (Voted on at the July 22 meeting)

Appointments to Boards and Committees
Susquehanna Workforce Network
Commission for Women
Planning Commission (Joe Janusz reappointed for three year term / Kennard Wiggins replacement for Joyce Bowlsbey...three year term .)

All appointments were approved.
==============
Nomination for Historic District (Thomas Scott's Place, 516 Colora Road, Colora ...owners William Mary Rowe. ) My personal take...if this does not qualify...I don't know what does. This is a genuine historical treasure. It passed.

===========
DPW items...all passed.
*construct Pine Hills AC pipe, Phase 2
*Seneca Point facilities repairs.
*Easements for Meadowview sewer and water upgrades.
*Utility easement for the town of North East
*Text amendments -- Septage hauling and Discharge. Starting August 1, 2008, all county septage must be discharged at the new septage receiving facility at the Cecil County Central Landfill. The charge will change from $30.00 per 1,000 gallons to $10 per ton.
*Closure of portions of Old Conowingo Road between Belle Manor Road and Conowingo Lake Road. This section has no access to home. many costs associated with maintaining and since it is not an essential portion of the public road system, permanent closure was granted.
==========
Budget amendments dealt with ADDITIONAL revenues. ..passed.

===============

2:00 meeting with Cecil County Partnership for Children Family and Youth

Cindy Smith, Director (along with Nick Ricciuti director of Social Services) gave an overview of the organization ... and why it is more than merely a "non-profit." They are one of 24 management board throughout Maryland. In 1991 they were made into a "non-profit" rather than part of the county since as such it is an easier way to disperse money. A Local Coordinating Council was established in 1980 for the placing in residential of those needing. The LCC itself has no money...it coordinates through other agencies....Nick involved in this. By law certain members within the community must be on the Local management Board and the Local Coordinating Board...(Schools, Social Service, hospital, government, etc). The Partnerships coordinate several programs within the county ...whose needs are determined with work of Program Committee and that are monitored making sure duplicate services are not given. At the back of the booklet that she gave us are listed the programs currently offered with outlines and who is the 'vendor'..(responsible for conducting the program) etc. Cindy explained the process for selecting the vendor...once need determined it is advertised and sent to those known to have worked with them before. A committee works through the submissions and determines who will be given the money (State) to conduct that program.

====================