BOCC 2/18/03

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" rowspan="2" width=210 BGCOLOR="#99CC99" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="0968dfc3.jpg"> <div> <A HREF="id3.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Meeting Notes 12/3/02 6/30/03"><U><B>BOCC Meeting Notes 12/3/02 - 6/30/03</B></U></A></div> </td> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=130 BGCOLOR="#CCCC99" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="0978dfe1esnpes.jpg"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#336666" FACE="Arial" ><B>Welcome to the Web Site of Clare Whitbeck</B></FONT><B>     </B><B>|</B><B>     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Welcome to the Web Site of Clare Whitbec"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id88.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 12/3/02"><U>BOCC 12/3/02</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id92.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Legislative Agenda 12/10/02"><U>Legislative Agenda 12/10/02</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id91.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 12/10/02"><U>BOCC 12/10/02</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id95.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC12/17/02"><U>BOCC12/17/02</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id96.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 1/7/03"><U>BOCC 1/7/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id98.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 1/14/03"><U>BOCC  1/14/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id99.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 1/21/03"><U>BOCC 1/21/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id101.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 1/27/03"><U>BOCC Budget 1/27/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id102.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 1/28/03"><U>BOCC 1/28/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id103.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 2/3/03"><U>BOCC Budget 2/3/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id104.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 2/4/03"><U>BOCC 2/4/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id105.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 2/11/03"><U>BOCC 2/11/03</U></A>   |   <B>BOCC 2/18/03</B>   |   <A HREF="id107.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 2/25/03"><U>BOCC 2/25/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id108.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 3/4/03"><U>BOCC 3/4/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id110.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 3/10/03"><U>BOCC Budget 3/10/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id111.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 3/11/03"><U>BOCC 3/11/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id112.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 3/17/03"><U>BOCC Budget 3/17/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id113.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 3/18/03"><U>BOCC 3/18/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id116.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="3/31/03"><U>3/31/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id117.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 4/1/03"><U>BOCC 4/1/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id120.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 4/15/03"><U>BOCC 4/15/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id119.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 4/8/03"><U>BOCC 4/8/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id122.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 5/6/03"><U>BOCC 5/6/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id121.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 4/29/03"><U>BOCC 4/29/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id123.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 5/12/03"><U>BOCC Budget 5/12/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id125.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 5/13/03"><U>BOCC 5/13/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id124.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 5/20/03"><U>BOCC 5/20/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id126.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC Budget 5/26/03"><U>BOCC Budget 5/26/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id127.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 6/3/02"><U>BOCC 6/3/02</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id128.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 6/10/03"><U>BOCC 6/10/03</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id129.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="BOCC 6/24/02"><U>BOCC 6/24/02</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" height=350 colspan=2 BGCOLOR="#CCCC99" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="0978dfc3.jpg"> <div> <I>BOCC 2/18/03</I></div> <div> The meeting was called to order at 10:05.  Comm McKay congratulated the County crews who cleared the snow and said he hoped to find Comm Mattingly was not present.  After the invocation and pledge, the agenda was adjusted.  The bills were approved.  (McKay abstained.)  The minutes were approved.  </div> <div> Dr. Roach and Harry Kohler of the <B>St. Mary’s County Rescue Association</B> came to the table to report.  Roach apologized for not having a copy of the written report.  They would like a change in resolution 95-3 which specifies the funding formula.  It is now $30 per call and they want $45 per call.  He recited the history of the formula.  In 1996 they attempted to get a fire tax.  They get a per call amount plus mileage.  The rescue squads had a base allowance which increased $2,000 per year until parity with the fire companies was reached ($19,000).  The number of calls has more than doubled in the last 15 years.  In 2002 the squads answered 10,200 calls.  The demand for services has increased dramatically.  People used to have family doctors and that was how they entered the health system.  Today, the whole world has changed and few people have a family doctor, Roach said.  Most people think the rescue squads are funded by the government.  They have no idea how much money is raised by the volunteers themselves.  A new ambulance costs $105,000.  9/11 has increased costs by requiring individual protective gear.  There are no personnel costs because rescue squads are staffed by volunteers.  Roach continued that the squads think the funding formula is equitable and everyone understands it.  Comm McKay thanked the volunteers.  He noted the rescue association represents tremendous value for the County.  McKay noted that most people do feel that the fire tax pays for the rescue squads.  McKay said he thinks a rescue tax would allow the squad to receive revenues better.  He asked Roach if a dedicated tax were wrong.  Roach said we have a system which has worked, has promoted fiscal conservancy.  We have a system that will have unpredictable costs.  If you were to suggest a tax and go to all the trouble to have a tax and have a tax passed, it may not be sufficient down the road.  There are billing issues as far as mutual aid.  Squads have said that going from $30 - $45 will solve their problems.  He noted that two groups have satellite stations.  He thinks things are pretty stable.  If this change allows us to become solvent, but he doesn’t know if it’s right or wrong.  Raley noted that now there is a base of $19,000, plus $.30 a mile to Leonardtown, plus $30 per call.  Raley asked if more than one unit responds to a call. Roach said some companies had trouble getting a unit on the road during the day.  There were double dispatches.  Kohler noted that Lexington Park thinks this rate will last at least 5 years.  McKay thanked Roach and Kohler.  </div> <div> The next item on the agenda is the <B>proposed cable ordinance</B> and the proposed cable franchise agreement.  They have comments, responses from GMP, from the public hearing.  They had 16 written comments.  Late on Friday they received additional comments that are not included.  Norris said comments have been considered.   One comment is that the private schools have been excluded, but we have modified the franchise agreement to include some private schools in the I-Net.  Norris continued, if you accept staff responses, we have already drafted the franchise agreement.  They will present it to the Cable Company and if they agree bring it back to the table.  The term is a matter of comment.  The compromise is 15 years with a mid term review at the 8<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >th</FONT> year.  They are investing $10,000,000 to rebuild the system as a cutting edge 750 MHZ system.  They will have a minimum of 9 years to recoup that investment.  Fifteen years was not their preference, Norris said, but it ensures the investment should be recovered.  There are concerns about providing support to the public access channel.  There is language that requires the cable company to spend $20,000 a year for a part time person to train the public.  We will incorporate that letter by reference, then transition that training to part of the curriculum for the students.  Forrest said the students would become the users of the facility.  They would be trained.  Norris said  Comcast has not progressed to this point.  We would support a change to the ordinance that would require it when they have 2,000 clients.  (They now have 800.)  Norris said there were complaints about poor service, cables not properly buried.  Customer service provisions were one of their greatest concerns.  Norris said there was a landlord who was concerned about tenants being able to get cable even if the landlord didn’t want it.  Now GMP must consult with the landlord to ensure the installation meets with the approval of the landlord.  Comments about why we need a new ordinance, said Norris, can be answered by saying we need to keep up with changes in the law, to get better service for more people at a greater distance from the road.  We allow people who don’t meet the distance requirement to purchase installation if they desire.  Jarboe asked about page 59 and was told that typo had been changed.  Comm McKay said the County needs to make a decision and go forward.  The agreement is not perfect, but it’s not bad.  He doesn’t think it’s going to develop to the ultimate capabilities if we don’t have a watchdog on our side of the fence.  We have to look at ourselves as a public utilities commission, he continued.  He trusts that GMP will be a good company to work with.  Comm Raley said 5% is to come to the county.  Is there a $2,500 filing fee for a change of ownership.  What about Comcast’s comments on out of pocket expenses? Norris said we think that’s necessary.  Raley said we should designate a person to oversee the operation of the contract.  Past owners had a golden opportunity and they wasted it.  He believes that the current ownership is trying to do right.  The County needs to learn from its past mistakes.  Someone should look it over. 15 years is a long time.  Mr. Norris, you make the point that there is a review in 8 years.  You being up the point that the cable company is to install infrastructure.  Raley said he understands there is a performance bond.  Norris said yes.  One of our large expenses was providing a needs assessment.  The new ordinance requires the cable companies will provide a report so we can at least get started.  Forrest said other counties have a dedicated staff and or person who oversaw this operation.  Staff doesn’t have the expertise to supply the person.  Raley asked if Norris was comfortable with the side agreements and was told yes (There is a side agreement about cable modem, and with the Board of Education).  We do still own our rights of way.  They must use them.  The cable companies would like to have rights of way usage in the agreement.  Comm DeMent asked about the person who would enforce the agreement.  He said he knows where there is cable on the ground right now.  Someone will get a lot of calls.  Sometimes if you don’t do it prior to finding the person, it won’t get . . .   McKay noted providing access to the I-net by private schools is important.  He wished the north end of the County is part of this system.  He asked of anyone looked at the costs of facilitating the higher education system from St. Mary’s College.  Could we move to another site?  Kelly said any of the three higher education centers would have the ability to broadcast.  They selected St. Mary’s College because they were told St. Mary’s had a studio and broadcast equipment would be all that’s needed.  The public schools can broadcast live from any of the high schools or the Moakley Street office.  The cable company will provide wires.  McKay noted that there were lengthy, but good comments from Jack Witten.  His main concern was the development of the ordinance at the same time the franchise agreement was developed.  Norris said Witten recognizes that the County retained a highly qualified consultant.  The consultant recommended a revision to the cable ordinance as well as the franchise agreement.  The old ordinance, for example, left loopholes for routing revenues away from the County’s 5%.  McKay asked if there were violations of the old ordinance or changes that would injure the public’s interest.  Forrest said the cable companies would like to keep the old ordinance.  McKay said he is concerned that the public was generally kept out of this process.  Norris said the public was involved  in the needs assessment.  The negotiating team was formed of County staff.  The consultant worked with the negotiating team.  Norris said Mr. Witten submitted over 600 pages of comments but they didn’t allow him to review them all.  That’s how we got to the January document.  Forrest said they had two meetings and the hearing was the third.  The Cable Committee wanted public input, but couldn’t get enough public input.  Mr. Witten’s group met with Ms. Cardona and I met with his group.  There was a teleconference with Ms. Cardona and Rick Elrod.  This document strengthens what we have.  Norris he’s not criticizing Witten for his comments.  Witten was going directly to the consultant and we can’t manage the costs that way.  We used our time to summarize his comments.  McKay said the concern is the filtering of the comments.  A number of the comments deal with things that happened in the past.  McKay said we could entertain a motion to accept staff’s recommended changes.  Raley moved to approved the submitted cable ordinance.  The vote was 4 -0.  Raley said he was concerned about the length of the agreement.  We paid Elrod $200,000.  But he thinks the 9 year mid term review will work.  If the Board will designate someone to take care of monitoring the agreement, it will work.  Norris said he’s not asking for approval.  Raley modified his motion to have staff insert changes and obtain a signature from the franchisee.  The vote was 4 - 0.  </div> <div> <B>The County Administrator</B> brought <B>draft agendas</B> to the table.  A budget amendment for $22,292 for the Emergency Management <B>Agency was approved.  The Housing Authority (Tonja Frazier-Jenkins) brought 3 grants to the table.</B>  The first was $43,858 of a special loan program.  The second was for $60,000, the third was for a $200,000 grant to pay for voluntary relocation of up to 30 households.  Frazier-Jenkins said they had applied for $400,000 and got $200,000.  The State has asked them to focus on home ownership and Lexington Manor.  Raley said we have $100,000 to offset the purchase price.  He asked and was told that the County fronts the money to purchase a home and then got reimbursed.  Frazier-Jenkins said the management has been extremely supportive and they indicated they are not planning to backfill.  Housing assistance for new tenants is not permitted in Lexington Manor.  They hope to hire someone to assist them in finding them a place to live.  McKay asked about a written agreement and was told the informal agreement is working.  Lacer said there has been an agreement not to backfill though the property owner has not fully executed and returned the agreement.  There needs to be coordination and cooperation.  The grants seem, he said, to be the next step.  Not accepting these monies would further complicate the situation.  McKay said he recognizes the good work of Tanja.  There is another issue - what alternatives do these people have?  Housing is so unaffordable, this seems like a small pieces.  How do you decide who gets these funds and in what amount.  Frazier-Jenkins said they are trying to get the tenants motivated.  If they want help, they’ll get it.  The Authority has begun home ownership classes.   People have to put themselves in that position.  They get apartment listings, moving expenses.  The relocation person will try to identify people to be buyers.  They have been told to ask for more.  McKay asked if the residents think the livability code won’t be enforced if they don’t do this.  She replied no.  She continued there are 5 people from Lexington Manor in the home ownership classes.  Savich said this makes sense for the County - not to have a perpetual motion machine at Lexington Manor.  The important thing right now is to get these funds into the hands of County government.  McKay commented that he would hate to see any funds lost to salaries.  Savich said there is an allowable amount and we stay under that level.  McKay said we need to take up discussion of what to do about the offer made to Club Properties if we pass this grant.  The vote was 3 - 1.  <B>The Board of Appeals brought its Rules of Procedure to the table for approval.  </B>Raley questioned them about closed sessions.  Grimm commented that discussion of litigation could take place in closed session.  Howard Thompson (chair of the Board of Appeals) said he doesn’t like closed sessions. In response to questions about posting, Thompson sometimes the property is on a County road and is hard to find. Grimm said posting is not a requirement of State Law.  McKay noted we are not the only County that posts and Grimm agreed.  Raley asked if they hold to the three minute limits.  Thompson said if there’s a large meeting, he will hold it to the limit.  He noted he doesn’t cut people off, he just gives a motion.  Raley moved approval.  The vote was 4 - 0.  </div> <div> <B>Phil. Rollins (Director Recs and Parks) brought two items to the table.  </B>  The first was a SMECO easement for Nicolet Park.  The vote was 4 - 0.  The second was the annual renewal of the alcoholic beverage permit renewal.  Dement asked if this had any relation to the changes in the building at Wicomico Shores and was told the design for the new building will be approved by the Liquor Board.  There was some banter about Dement not knowing where Wicomico shores is located.   Jarboe said he sees this as the ideal opportunity for privatization.  He thinks the county should not be selling liquor.  Raley said if it were to be privatized, it would be easier to transfer a license than to obtain a new one.  The vote was 3 - 1.</div> <div> <B>Randy Schultz (Director of Human Resources) presented the Sheriff’s request for positions.</B> The Sheriff’s Department has said that these clerk openings have resulted in patrol officers being pulled in to do station clerk work (3 positions) and court security work (1 position).  These positions are expected to relieve overtime.  The vote was 4 - 0.  </div> <div> <B>Next came Commissioner Time.  </B>Raley thinks the snow removal crews.  Dement attended an employee wedding.  Jarboe asked how we will pay for snow removal.  He asked Lacer to come up with a proposal.  McKay said he highly recommends careful use of funds for all those who depend on the County for funding.  He is planning a walk through Lexington Manor in early April.   </div> <div> <B>After lunch, the BOCC presented commendations for the Correctional Officers of the Quarter.  </B>David Zylak presented the Correctional Officers of the Quarter.  Officers Malletto, Payne, and Carter were given awards.  </div> <div> <B>When the awards had been presented, the BOCC took up the Zoning Ordinance.</B>  Jon Grimm (lame duck Director of Planning) came to the table to present opportunities for changes to the Zoning Ordinance.  He told the BOCC they could take items singly, and he would need an effective date.  Comments have been organized by chapter.  They began with Mr. Hanks’ comments on Chapter 26, Chapter 27 includes presentations from applicants who were processing applications which are now subject to the new ordinances.  Citizens want consideration for proceeding under the old ordinance. Grimm noted that James Dale Blackwell’s letter did not get included in the summary.  Comm Raley asked about Lee Hines who got caught up in the changeover.  Hines had to get a waiver for a two lot subdivision.  Then he needed a perk test and the dry weather held up the perks.  He asked to give grandfathering status to those projects that had been hear by TEC.  Raley said Hines has burnt up his telephone.  Mattingly joined us at about 2:00 PM.  When asked by McKay, Blackwell and Hines, Grimm said, have     been through TEC.  Mattingly said a two lot subdivision would end his development rights.  There were 50 properties awaiting perk tests.  Raley asked if they wanted to let properties who went through TEC, or widening the scope of the changes.  McKay asked about Cheryl Dart, who wanted to put a trailer on her property.  By the time she was ready to received her permit approval, one could no longer put a trailer on that property.  Glen Wood has problems with buffering.  The lot won’t accommodate the buffers.  McKay asked about Emerson.  Grimm said Emerson was ready for a permit, but State Highway and Health Department approval came after May 13.  Grimm suggested giving them six months from, say, March 1 to complete the ordinance.  </div> <div> The next section is in chapter 32.  The Planning Commission has recommended changing the allowable footprint for a commercial building in the town center to 60,000 sq ft maximum.  Jarboe noted that RCL is preventing leases.  Mattingly said any use that’s anywhere in the RCL is permitted at any RCL location.  Griffin Carpet is building in a place he didn’t really want to build because he couldn’t get the size he wants.  McKay said we are discussing TMX and RCL together.  Mattingly said the PUD is a complicated process.  Jarboe said there are problems in the RCL and he is amenable to addressing that before we address the guys that got everything.  Raley said it’s better now than it was when the process started.  Raley suggested tackling the TMX first.  McKay said he is staying out of the discussion Mattingly said he will stay out of the TMX discussion because of a conflict.  You have to have an anchor and you have to get above 45,000 to create the anchor.  Raley asked about a strip center with a large structure with smaller attached structures, are they all counted as one footprint.  Grimm said the ordinance is not clear, but the Planning Commission has recommended that the in line stores not be counted.  Raley said 50,000 is the maximum for everything.  Mattingly suggested allowing them to go above 30,000 with one TDR per 2,000 sq ft.  He said he didn’t agree with RCL when it was adopted.  Jarboe said we have empty stores and we should fix the RCL first.  McKay asked what should be done in RCL.  Jarboe suggested TMX uses with up to 90% of FAR for RCL.  Then Jarboe suggested perhaps 80%.  Mattingly asked if there should be TDR’s.  Jarboe said just put a cap on it.  Raley said there could be a domino effect.  He doesn’t think there should be a larger footprint than 15,000 sq ft in the VMX.  Raley noted that the reason for TDR’s was to address the big box store.  He thinks the cost of building something in a VMX where there is no water is prohibitive.  The agreed that 30,000 sq ft is not appropriate for a village center.  McKay said we need to chart out a course.  Mattingly suggested making RCL the same as VMX.  McKay suggested commissioners submit recommendations for next week.  They moved on to Chapter 50. I left the room.   The proposal would allow 107% of capacity in the development district, counting planning money as current funding, and borrowing capacity from an adjacent district..  Raley suggested using the Chamber of Commerce’s 104%, while the committee does its work.  McKay said the 104 affects the middle of the County more than anywhere else.  Raley thought that density would be controlled at least partially by the APF (Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance).  Parlett’s proposal would allow the development district to borrow up to 10% from adjacent schools.  Raley said a committee to fine tune this should be ready within 3 years.  We walk a fine line.  We want development to continue, especially in the development district.  People have a right to expect their children to go to decent schools.  Raley thinks they should follow Parlett’s proposal, but change it to 104%.   Raley noted this only applies to major subdivisions.  Jarboe said Parlett has been a school board member as well as a developer.  He thinks Parlett has the solution.  McKay wonders why the Chamber recommended 104%.  Mattingly said Parlett’s proposal was for 102% until the new enrollment figures came forward.  Mattingly said he doesn’t have a problem with 107%.  They will maintain 3 school districts.  Raley asked for total County funding to allow a project to go forward.  Who make the decision that John Doe can go forward.  If you don’t allow the borrowing, said McKay, maybe you want two districts - one around Leonardtown-Lexington Park.  If you’re going to keep the school areas, you have to allow the borrowing.  The redistricting is going to come into effect, said Dement.  McKay noted that our ability to grow is in the northern end of the County, but that’s not our growth area.  You will have more growth in Leonardtown and Lexington Park than in the northern end of the County.  McKay said we are going through redistricting, but 105% without redistricting will not allow any more development.  Mattingly said only the high schools are being redistricted.  We will allow borrowing.  McKay asked about allowing mitigation.  Raley said we know what it costs per student.  Different people make different numbers.  McKay said you could exceed 105% if mitigation is paid.   If you have a 25 lot subdivision and that developer want to pay that much money up front to mitigate, that’s a long way from having a school.  What does mitigation get you.  It lets the developer to build the houses, but it doesn’t provide uncrowded schools.  Norris noted that when a developer proposed to provide facilities, the planning commission could not make a finding that the facilities existed.  So we have to not allow mitigation. McKay named Leonardtown government, County Government, the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Education, a member of the opposition.  </div> <div> <B>Next came the return of the cable franchise agreement.  </B>Norris reported the changes have been incorporated.  They have prepared a resolution.  Raley asked if Norris was comfortable that the changes are in the new document and it’s ready for prime time.  Norris said he appreciated the public’s input.  He caught even a few more typos than the public caught.  Raley made the motion to approved the agreement with changes.  The vote was 5 - 0.  </div> <div> <B>The next item is the proposed changes to allow a property tax credit to the surviving spouse of a fallen rescue worker.  </B>Mattingly said that families of rescue workers make a huge commitment to the successful service of the rescue workers.  This has been enabled by State legislation for the primary residence of workers.  The vote was 5 - 0.  Mattingly left.</div> <div> <B>Next came a budget work session</B>.  Elaine Kramer summarized the instructions to move some capital projects from FY ‘03 to FY ‘04.  That means that there would be $29,000,000 to carry over.  The current draft capital plan has $980,690 in public facilities, $335,000 for land preservation, $295,400 for highways, $3,900,000 for solid waste, $1,075,000 for parks acquisition, $9,955,000 for public schools.  Kramer said she would like to move to the operating budget.  We will be within the debt capacity in all years.  Today they received a copy of the Board of Education’s new capital budget.  Kramer said she has shifted the entire capital program over one year.  They looked at FY ‘05 to ‘09, but did only some analysis.  They have added $50,000 to renovate the second floor of the Leonardtown Library.  The Governmental Center addition/renovation is included at $3,610,020.  Kramer said the $335,00 could be all the land preservation money we get.  Roads get $200,000 for slurry seal and $50,000 for the transportation plan.  Solid Waste still has its $3,900,000 for capping St. Andrews.  Recreation and Parks gets $200,000 for Nicolet Park and Phase I of the Chaptico Park. $9.2 million for the schools has remained, but the Board of Education expects a total of $90,306,000 in the next 6 years.  McKay said he wants Erichsen to address the highway program and how the delay will affect roads.  Erichsen said they had a road evaluation study done last year and found that 70% of our highways are good, only 2% are poor.  About 78% of our roads require routine maintenance.  They will overlay 15 miles with asphalt and 69 with other surfaces. They are doing 84% of our roads.   All roads are on a cycle.  McKay asked and was told there will be no slurry seal, just modified seal.  Surface treatment generates complaint, but we can do more miles.  McKay said he would like to go back and talk about each category.  He asked if there’s a possibility of revisiting the library and cutting some money out.  Rohrbaugh said he thinks they have cut it as close to the bone as they can.  McKay noted it was a 6,000 sq ft building.  Jarboe said they converted a building in Charlotte Hall with dividers.  Couldn’t we do that?  The fire marshall is requiring it.  T separating the agencies.  McKay commented that $100 per sq ft is healthy remodeling.  He asked and was told the HVAC system is not being replaced nor is the roof.  Raley said the renovation of the library is something we need to consider.  It has a domino effect.  We are concerned about that area of Lexington Park, and this is a necessary renovation.  He thinks not putting $250,000 in the revolving loan fund is a mistake. Raley wants the governmental center, but he thinks it can’t be done until ‘06.  Rohrbaugh said the facility is 10,000 sq ft.  McKay asked if there is room for Catholic Charities.  They would like to have a small place for a food pantry.  Lacer said United Way and Big Brothers and Sisters, but we could take another look.  The key is building the space.</div> <div> They went on to highways.  Raley said there will be no asphalt overlay.  The surface overlay doesn’t have the same life span as asphalt.  A long discussion followed over surface treatments for the roads.  The reiterated that .4% of our roads are in poor condition.  McKay said that in ‘05 and ‘06 they will speed up road programs at the expense of other budgets.  They went on to Recs and Parks.  Comm Raley asked about the public landing past St. Inigoes.  Rollins said it’s current funding.  McKay said he hopes we can speed up the Patuxent River public landing.  The public schools were not commented on.  McKay went on to discuss the College of Southern Maryland additional equipment.  Sol they want an additional $225,000?  Kramer said the money is being moved from the operating budget to the capital budget.  McKay said he was trying to get surface treatment back in the budget.  McKay said let’s give some direction.  He asked what they can do with $50,000 for the Three Notch Trail.  Hoyer’s office is looking for projects.  Rollins said he would like to get funds for the Lexington Park to Wildewood project.  McKay said he would like a public private partnership.  Rollins said they plan to explore that.  Kramer said they might be able to look at the Public School letter.  The schools have budget amendments to use for front funding for relocatables.  That solves the problem, said McKay.  We can reach out the rest of the way.  McKay suggested that we might be able to do school complex on the 800 acres that was taken off the tax rolls.  They will drop the school budget to $9,000,000.  Dement asked what $250,000 will do and was told another 30 miles could be paved, plus the modified. seal.  Raley asked about extending Pegg Road.  Erichsen said the first phase is looking at environmental issues.  He recommended we wait until the transportation plan is completed.  Raley noted that he got the Lexington Park Library and more road treatments.  Kramer said she wants to revisit the outyears of the capital budget in the early fall.  McKay said we are paying $4.4 million in interest this year and it would be.  McKay said the Sheriff needs a special taxing district in reply to Raley’s comment that he was disappointed with the Sheriff’s request for a 30% increase in his budget. </div> <div> Kramer said we are looking at requests about 19% over last year.  There are significant grants including $1.2 million to Community Services alone.  We have our work cut out for us in the next 5 or 6 weeks.  They expect to have every budget submission and the folder will be complete by the end of this week.  Next week’s work session will focus on a summarized version of the operating requests.  McKay asked if staff would make the adjustments and Kramer said it will be a combinations.  Lacer said put us in the ball park, and we will give you proposals to put you there.  McKay said perhaps department heads should be allowed to appeal your decision.  Lacer suggested a memo from departments and you select which agencies you want to hear from.  Kramer said you make the decisions and we worked it.  The departments will make appeals detailed to an account and the impact.  They discussed the process at length.  There will be a written impact statement from every department.  If you want impact statements before the march budget, we need to get back quickly, said McKay.   McKay asked when there will be a better revenue projection and Kramer said in about two weeks.   </div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>