The Wicomico County Council
met in a Legislative Session, July 3, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. in Council Chambers,
In attendance: Doris
Schonbrunner, Council Administrator; Edgar A. Baker, Jr.,
On
motion of Mrs. Bartkovich and second by Mr. Holloway the minutes of June19,
2007 were approved as amended.
Doris Schonbrunner,
Council Administrator:
Resolution 108-2007: A resolution to the FY2008 Intergovernmental Agreement with the Wicomico County Department of Social Services for Child Support Resources/Work Opportunities positions.
Mr. Cannon commented that Mrs. Sample-Hughes would not be in attendance at today’s meeting but as a member of the Social Services Board, she wished to send her support of this resolution.
Mrs. Bartkovich asked whether this initiative was an ongoing
request to which Mr. Baker replied that essentially the County only handles the
payroll for these employees. The actual
funding of three Child Support positions and one work opportunity position at
the One Stop Job Market are generated from the State of
Resolution
109-2007: A resolution making a supplemental appropriation from the
Board of Education FY2007 fund balance to the
Board of Education FY2008 operating budget for Capital Outlay $500,000 and GASB 45 Trust
$500,000; and a request to designate $500,000 of the FY 2007 fund balance for
Medicaid School Based Services Audit.
Board of Education Representatives, Bruce Ford, Robin Holloway, Tom Field and Charlie Bounds came before Council to explain that the $500,000 requested for Capital Outlay will be used to provide broadband internet access to outlying schools including Pittsville Elementary, Willards Elementary, Northwestern and Mardela. The funds will be used to construct or utilize existing towers in those municipalities to put up wireless devices in order to be able to provide broadband service.
An additional request for $500,000 will be utilized to fund the post employment benefit trust for health insurance.
Finally, $500,000 was requested to be designated for a pending
settlement between the Maryland State Department of Education and the Federal
Government. Every state has been or is being audited by the Office of the
Inspector General relative to Medicaid reimbursements.
At the time the State of
Mrs. Prettyman questioned Mr. Baker whether the
unanticipated 1.5 million fund balance from the FY2007 budget that had been
allocated to the Board of Education should be returned to the County. Mr. Baker
advised that
Mr. Bounds expressed that the overage in funds is a result of extreme turnover of teachers and lower utility bills based on a mild winter. The County has previously asked for the Board of Education to pay for as many Capital projects as it can through their operating budget. The School Construction Savings Program was initiated so that fund overages can be placed in that fund.
Mrs. Holloway explained to Council that the cost of teacher
turnover is significant. The Board of Education intends to set priorities over
the summer beginning with taking a look at those key positions. Mrs. Holloway
also stated that the Board has created a budget committee that is working with
the Superintendent to make sure budgeted items are aligned with priorities and with
the finance department to capture and control spending. Mrs. Holloway went on to inform Council that
for the first time the Board of Education was involved with the Budget
Committee to address critical key factors. Some of those factors include school
security and safety, continuation of academic pieces and efficiencies to
software systems for accounting and academic instruction.
Mrs. Prettyman reiterated that she is disturbed that 2.1 million is still available at the end of the fiscal year and wonders if the Board of Education can budget more tightly. Mr. Bounds replied that the budget is created with all factors in mind and that most of their budget is allocated to salaries. The Board attempts to anticipate their employment needs so that they will not have to come before Council to request additional funding if the expected turnover does not occur.
Mr. MacLeod asked the Board of Education whether they had
been caught unaware over the Medicaid penalty. Mr. Ford explained that the Federal
Government had initiated the ability for the school system to bill for health
services provided to special education students who qualify for medical
assistance. The purpose is to help defray costs associated with meeting the
requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The rates were set by the State of
Mr. Cannon asked if the Medicaid penalty case is dismissed what will happen to the $500,000. Mr. Ford replied that because the funds are designated the Board of Education would have to come back to Council to undesignate the funds.
On motion of Mr. McCain and second by Mr. Holloway, Resolution 109-2007 was unanimously approved.
Mrs. Prettyman presented a letter she received to the Board
of Education and asked to have an explanation.
Mrs. Holloway scanned the content of the letter and explained that it is
referencing an early notification to potential retirement age personnel. A
large number of key employees have been leaving the school system for
neighboring counties specifically because of their ability to acquire
significantly enhanced benefits. The Board of Education based on that trend
approved the measure as a retention tool. The hope is to provide three years
worth of an additional 10% salary for employees who advise the school system of
their plan to retire.
Mr. Cannon suggested that anyone who was concerned about the content of the letter could meet individually or Council could choose to hold a work session to discuss the matter.
Mrs. Bartkovich asked Mr. Baker about Resolution 106-2007 that was tabled from the last meeting. Mr. Baker stated that it was not presented to Council again because the transfer was to be made out of the Fiscal Year 2007 budget and transfers cannot be made from the prior fiscal year. Additionally, after reviewing the resolution he has some questions that he needs to discuss further with the Director of Recreation, Parks and Tourism.
Mr. Edgar A. Baker, Jr.,
Mr. Baker indicated that the
Introduction to Bill 2007-3 has been requested to be pulled from the agenda for
this meeting and is to be added to the agenda for the July 17, 2007 council
meeting. The County Executive wishes to meet with representatives of the
Sheriff’s Office to gain a consensus of unified support of the legislation.
Mrs. Bartkovich mentioned
that she would like for the Council to have a work session to discuss the
content of Bill 2007-3. Mr. Baker stated that the standard is to introduce the
Legislation and then hold a work session for discussion prior to the Public
Hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING:
The
County Council proposes to acquire from David J. Walston, Bonita L. Walston,
William Howard Walston, Jr., Martha Cardell Walston, James Carroll Walston and
Michael Dean Walston the following described parcel of land:
ALL that tract or parcel of land situate, lying and
being in Nutters Election District of Wicomico County, Maryland, located on the
Southerly side of and binding upon Mount Herman Road and the Easterly side of
Airport Road and being known as 31493 Mt. Herman Road, Tax Map 49, parcel 129,
containing 20.79 acres, more or less.
A
plat of the property to be acquired is on file at the office of the Wicomico
County Attorney and may be examined there by any interested party.
The
above described property is to be acquired by
Mr. Baker advised Council that the County is obligated to acquire this land by requirement of the Federal Aviation Administration to secure properties surrounding the ends of the Airport runway.
Citizen Comments:
John Groutt – Mr. Groutt commented that his interest was not to oppose or support the land acquisition but to offer information about the impact Airport projects have caused to the ecosystem in the past. He provided photographs which show soil being washed away. Additionally, he provided a letter from the initial runway extension project wherein citizens had requested and were granted a hearing with the Maryland Department of the Environment. At that time the Airport Commission was noted as suggesting that the situations occurred due to what Mr. Groutt defined as poor planning. Two years later when another runway extension project was to be undertaken, citizens reminded the Airport of the planning problems that had occurred previously. However, the same impact to the ecosystem occurred during that phase of construction. The land associated with the matter before Council is for another Airport project and he appeals to Council that they insist the project is planned during a time of the year that will alleviate issues of soil run off. His wish is for Schumaker Pond and all other streams to be protected.
Additionally, Mr. Groutt commented on the twenty five to
thirty acres of wetlands targeted for the forthcoming Airport project being located
in
Mrs. Bartkovich asked to be
advised how the land acquisition at $210,000 would be funded.
Mr. Bryant, Airport Manager,
gave this brief history of the property: The land was appraised at $180,000 in
May 2006 and an initial offer was made to the Walston family. They rejected the first offer. The Federal
Aviation Administration agreed on an Administrative Settlement of $195,000 and the
Walston family also rejected that offer. Through negotiations with Delta
Airport Consultants and the Walston family, the Airport Commission agreed on
the price of $210,000. The Federal
Aviation Administration and the Maryland Aviation Administration will pay
$195,000 of the total cost. The remaining $15,000 will come from a separate
dedicated line item in the Airport Capital Account for property acquisition.
The $15,000 is all Airport generated revenue.
In this particular case, the Federal Aviation Administration is allowing
the Airport Commission to use a portion of the appraised value donated from the
Chesapeake Airways site as its matching share.
Mrs. Bartkovich asked how
many more pieces of property the Airport plans to acquire. Mr. Bryant indicated
there are two additional small properties that the Airport Commission will be
asking Council to approve at a later date.
Mr. MacLeod asked if this land
acquisition is for present day security or for future aircrafts. Mr. Bryant replied that the Federal Aviation Administration
requires safety areas that run beyond the end of the runways and that the
approaches to the runways are to be considered as a component of overall runway
reconstruction and/or extension projects.
The property in question is listed under the runway protection zone. Mr. Bryant further explained that Federal
Aviation Administration design standards for airport runways encourages airport
sponsor ownership of land that is located directly beneath runway protection.
This acquisition is needed to maintain the existing 5500 feet of the primary runway.
It is an acquisition that’s been identified for quite some time.
Mr. Bryant further explained
that much of the property is located in the runway protection zone. It is
heavily impacted by Federal Aviation Administration regulations, the 1946
easements acquired by the Navy when they built the property and to some degree,
Wicomico County Zoning Codes. Mrs.
Bartkovich asked and Mr. Bryant replied that no trees will need to be cut down
and there is no need to construct a fence on the property, however there are a
few old structures that will be torn down.
The cost for the demolition will be incurred by the Airport at their 2
½% cost.
Mr. Cannon asked if a Public
Hearing will be held to outline the project to which Mr. Bryant replied
affirmatively. Council will be advised
when the Public Hearing date is determined.
On motion of Mr. McCain and
second by Mrs. Bartkovich, Council unanimously approved the acquisition of land
located at
Resolution 110-2007 –
Mike Hitchson, Walt Maizel
Mr. Pusey,
The Resource Conservation
Area allows only one unit per twenty acres.
The applicant is requesting to change 61.37 acres designated as a Restricted
Conservation Area land to another category which is called the Limited
Development Area. The purpose is to
increase density in some areas but significantly decrease density in
others. The property is located within
the Metro Core which is a designated growth area in the County’s comprehensive
plan. All property adjoining this proposed site is zoned a Limited Development
Area.
Mr. Pusey went on to explain
that since 1989 when the County adopted the Critical Area law almost nine
hundred acres were allowed for growth allocation. In the past eighteen years
there have only been eight projects approved consisting of one hundred ninety
acres and one map amendment for the
A number of reviews have
already occurred with this project. State law requires that a minimum of three
Public Hearings be held. These required Public Hearings before the Planning
Commission, the County Council and the Critical Areas Commission have been
held. Condominium site plans were
approved by the Planning Commission in 2004. The County Council held a Public Hearing and
approved the water and sewer amendment in December 2005. The Maryland Department of the Environment
approved the
The Wicomico County Planning
Staff recommends that the County Council approve the final reward of 61.37
acres and map amendment to change the Resource Conservation Area to a Limited
Development Area. That approval shall be
subject to four conditions:
Terra Firm Representative,
Mr. Hickson stated ships were kept and maintained on the project property that
was previously an industrial site. He
also mentioned that it was a former drudge site. Therefore, some water quality and wildlife
habitat improvements were requested to be added to the design. Terra Firm has
planned a very green development on what at one time was suspected as being a
hazardous waste site.
Mrs. Prettyman asked Mr.
Pusey if the County would be responsible to monitor that the stipulated conditions
meet compliance, to which he replied yes. Mr. Maizel stated they have to bond
and certify with both the County and the Critical Areas Commission. The
monitoring will be in effect for a period of five years.
Mr. Baker suggested that the
Resolution be amended subject to the four conditions to the Chesapeake Bay
Critical Areas recommended by the Planning Department.
Mrs. Bartkovich asked to be
shown where the wastewater treatment plant would be located. The plant will be
placed underground and she was shown its location, a small building, on the
map.
Mr. Holloway asked what type
of system will be used and was told there will be a sequencing batch reactor
used for treating the wastewater.
Mr. MacLeod asked about how
this development will impact traffic. Mr. Maizel responded that the development
will be small and done over a period of years thereby negating a traffic
situation.
On motion of Mr. McCain and
second by Mr. MacLeod, Resolution 110-2007 was unanimously approved as amended.
Citizen Comments:
Augustine DiGiovanna – Mr. DiGiovanna stated that at the
June 19, 2007 Council meeting he made significant requests of the Council. He acknowledged
that after returning home he received a
letter sent from Mr. Baker which was a very kind and generous review. Mr.
DiGiovanna commented that he has misinterpreted many
Mr. DiGiovanna is concerned with land use. He leaves a letter with Council asking for a modified request that they as a body review developments at The Meadows at Barren Creek and Deer Creek Estates. He states that we do have a Chapter 225 for land use and wants to know who is supposed to follow the Code.
There are still many questions on Mr. Di Giovanna’s mind, one of which is who oversees the Planning Commission and to what authority do they answer. He continues to be concerned about the lack of checks and balances on the Planning Commission. He has submitted letters to various persons. He asks that he be advised whom he should address the letters he has written. Additionally, he asks that the letters be reviewed and requests responses. His webpage houses all the newspaper articles he can find regarding growth. He further stated that he finds them very interesting and informative. The newspaper articles contain information collected over the past year on growth, AFPO, schools, roads, parks, and the costs of developments. Mr. DiGiovanna asks Council to take a look at them and states that members of the Council are often quoted in the articles. He thanked the Council.
John Groutt – Mr. Groutt spoke about wastewater package
treatment plants. In spite of the
presentations provided in previous meetings by Public Works Director, Rai
Sharma, he wishes to share his concerns about Engineering. Mr. Groutt expressed
that the traditional historical weakness of wastewater treatment plants is monitoring
and upkeep. On the planning side of things, he feels it is extremely important that
wastewater treatment plants are considered sprawl magnets. The facilities can
make almost any land highly developable. He asks Council to think very
considerably about that factor. There are three hundred twenty acres on
Walt Maizel – Mr. Maizel stated that Mr.Groutt’s comments
are well founded. He specified that technically wastewater treatment plants
cannot just be plopped. The Maryland Department of the Environment is extremely
stringent about the soils into which they have to be discharged. The area that is needed for drip irrigation
has to match the same number of square footage required as a septic field
discharge. A treatment plant requires twelve months of monitoring wherein data
is reviewed as well as the elevations of ground waters and the buffers between
ground waters and the quality of
Dorothy Truitt – Mrs. Truitt stated that the State doesn’t check on anything, citing the Salisbury Wastewater Treatment Plant as evidence. The Salisbury Plant collected solid waste the size of six football fields, she said. Her concern is where the plants will be located and how the waste will be stored. She is very concerned about sludge mixing with fertilizer on our poultry farms. Mrs. Truitt questioned if the solid waste will go to the dump.
Rai Sharma – Mr. Sharma commented of his displeasure of the
word dump in
Council Comments:
Mr. McCain wished to all in attendance an enjoyable 4th of July Holiday and hoped all would reflect on the meaning of the celebration.
Mrs. Bartkovich added that she hoped all would remain safe during the holiday.
President Comments:
Mr. Cannon mentioned the District One meeting hosted by Mrs.
Sample-Hughes was located at the Town of
On motion of Mrs. Bartkovich and second by Mr. Holloway and unanimously carried, Council voted to adjourn.
The County Council reserves the
right to close a portion of this meeting as authorized by Section
10-(508)a of the State Government Articles of the Annotated Code of Maryland.
Legislative Session
July 3, 2007
___________________________
John T. Cannon, President
____________________________
____________________________
William R. McCain, At-Large
____________________________
Sheree Sample-Hughes, District 1
____________________________
Gail M. Bartkovich, District 3
____________________________
David A. MacLeod, District 4
____________________________
______________________
Doris Schonbrunner
Council Administrator