 |
 |
| Wicomico County Council Minutes of Meeting |
|
|
| Wicomico County Council Minutes of Meeting |
October 1, 2002
The County Council of Wicomico County, Maryland met in Executive Session on Tuesday, October 1, 2002. The meeting was held in Council Chambers of the Government Office Building, Salisbury, Maryland. Members in attendance included Rebecca Taylor-White, Vice President, Philip L. Tilghman, Edward T. Taylor, Stevie Prettyman, Marvin R. Long and A. David Ennis. L. Russell Molnar, President, was absent.
Vice President Taylor-White presided over the meeting, which was called to order. Prior to the commencement of business, Council Member Long and Kathleen Reif, Library Administrator made presentations to the top three local elementary schools that participated in the Great Blue Heron Summer Reading Program, sponsored by the Library. Those recognized and congratulated were Willards Elementary School, Northwestern Elementary School, and Pittsville Elementary and Middle School.
Ms. Taylor-White then called for any additions or corrections to the Minutes.
Mr. Tilghman requested an amendment, which shall be reflected in the original minutes of September17, 2002. On motion of Mr. Long, the Minutes were then approved as amended.
ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
City of Salisbury: Theodore E. Shea, Administrative Director, introduced Deborah Stam, Grants-Special Projects Director for the City of Salisbury. Ms. Stam proceeded to hold a public hearing for an application of renewal and expansion of the Salisbury-Wicomico Enterprise Zone, as required by law. Ms. Stam reviewed those areas to be expanded, explaining that notifications have been sent to all businesses within the Enterprise Zone that have expressed an interest in the application process. Vice President Taylor-White called for public comments, however none were received. Calling for Council comments, Mr. Tilghman remarked that the program is an excellent example of both governmental entities working together to offer opportunities to businesses. Mr. Tilghman motioned to support the County’s participation in the program and renewal process; Mr. Long then seconded the motion. Mr. Tilghman amended the motion to include the adoption of a Resolution to approve the application for renewal and expansion of the Enterprise Zone. Mr. Long amended his second and the motion was unanimously carried with six votes.
Circuit Court Phone System: Judge Donald Davis came before Council to request authorization of a capital expenditure for replacement of the telephone system utilized by Circuit Court. An upgraded system would equip Circuit Court with the technology necessary to perform more efficiently. Upon request, Fred Harris, Purchasing Agent, assured that this is the same phone system as recently installed in the Government Office Building. Mr. Tilghman then motioned to authorize an expenditure of $27,722, seconded by Mr. Taylor. During discussion, Mrs. Prettyman asked if a maintenance agreement was included in the purchased price and if the company would purchase the Circuit Court phone sets, just as it had purchased those from the Government Office Building.
Mr. Harris responded that there is no maintenance agreement for the first year while under warranty and confirmed that the company would purchase the phone sets and those monies would be used to reduce the total cost of the system. Mr. Tilghman then amended the motion to state authorization of an expenditure not to exceed $27,722, if required.
Mr. Taylor amended his second and the motion was then unanimously approved.
General Obligation Bond Sales: During a recent teleconference, the County’s Bond Counsel, Sam Ketterman and Lindsey Rader, offered financial advice to accomplish the bond sale in November 2002. The sale would differ from previous years because the County would like to sell both series of bonds in calendar year 2002, although one series of bonds would not be issued until calendar year 2003. To accomplish this, it is recommended that both series be sold by private, negotiated sale rather than at public sale involving competitive bids. To meet the tight time frame, it is suggested that Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the Administrative Director, Bond Counsel and the Director of Finance to approve the interest rates to be borne by the Bonds, within specific limitations previously established in the Bond documents. Should Council choose not to use this option, a special Executive Session on November 14th must be called to receive the results of the bond sales and provide Council approval of the interest rates. A brief discussion ensued, with Mr. Tilghman motioning to accept the advice of Bond Counsel and approve the Resolution submitted by the firm. The motion received a second and was unanimously approved. Mr. Tilghman, remarking that the sale of bonds is such that an incoming Council is immediately required to act upon increasing County indebtedness and asked that during the orientation process, this is fully explained. Mrs. Prettyman asked that Council confirm the amounts of the separate bond sales. Mr. Tilghman motioned that an approximate principal amount of $2 million shall be sold during calendar year 2002 and an approximate principal amount of $5,980,000 shall be sold during calendar year 2003.
The motion was unanimously approved.
Planning Director Interviews: Mr. Shea advised that representatives for the City of Salisbury are requesting that said interviews be held on October 15, 2002. Council concurred.
Public Hearing Date: Mr. Shea requested Council to set a date for a public hearing regarding the proposed sale of the former Sharptown School property. Council scheduled the hearing for November 5, 2002.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
Patricia B. Petersen, Director of Finance, submitted the Financial Report, reflecting a total general fund balance of $1,486,466; total major non-designated funds of $52,614,240 and total reserve funds of $4,772,709.
On behalf of the Health Department, Mrs. Petersen requested Council approval to transfer $108.79 to offset a deficit in the Department’s collection account. On motion of Mr. Tilghman, Council unanimously approved the supplemental transfer.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
Director P. Rai Sharma submitted the following items for Council’s consideration:
Subdivision: for Evans
Location: Quantico Road
Applicant: Davis, Bowen & Friedel
Owner: Brian and Cynthia Evans
The applicant proposes to subdivide a two acre lot from a 32.2 acre parcel. A dwelling exists on this proposed lot while the remnant is currently being farmed. Both the lot and remnant have access on Quantico Road. The farm is located within an agricultural easement and State approval to release the lot from the easement is required. As proposed, Lot 1 is a pipestem lot, which will be necessary due to the two acre limitation by the State Agricultural Board. If approved as such, a front setback must be established.
Public Works recommends approval of the subdivision by the Planning Commission, subject to the following conditions: 1) the final plat shall comply with subdivision regulations and Forest Conservation regulations; 2) Health Department approval is required; 3) the front building setback line on Lot 1 shall be established by the Planning Commission; 4) an entrance permit must be obtained from the State Highway Administration to allow access to both the proposed lot and remnant; 5) approval from the State is required for exclusion of Lot 1 from the agricultural easement. Council concurred with all conditions and recommendation.
Future Street Extensions: Mr. Sharma referred to a memorandum from the County Attorney, addressing the issue of closing future street extension within subdivisions by public petition. There has been a long-standing policy requiring the creation of future streets, which was implemented to accommodate any future expansions in areas immediately adjacent to the proposed subdivision; this would insure alternative access points, permit adequate emergency responses, protect the County’s major collector roads and permit alternative routes during the construction process. The Dept. of Public Works proposes modifying the County Code, prohibiting closure of future street extensions by petition. In certain instances, where a future street extension has been rendered useless, the Department could still recommend closure. On motion of
Mr. Long, Council unanimously supported the required Code modification, prohibiting closure of future street extensions by petition.
Request for Employee Reclassifications: Mr. Sharma reported that the Roads Division has experienced a significant increase in the need for specialized heavy equipment use in the construction and maintenance of County Roads. Two employees, currently classified as Mechanical Equipment Operator II, have been fulfilling that need by operating heavy equipment on a regular basis. Mr. Sharma requests that each be reclassified to MEO III positions. On motion of Mr. Taylor, Council unanimously approved the request as submitted.
SHERIFF FOR WICOMICO COUNTY
R. Hunter Nelms, Sheriff, provided Council with an update on enforcement of drought restrictions imposed by the State. Sheriff Nelms explained that the process of investigation and enforcement is very time consuming. Therefore, he is proposing to hire a temporary, part-time employee (20 hours per week) at a rate of $220 per week, to investigate and issue violations. This would include time spent in Court, as required.
This would be for a period of eight weeks, or when the restrictions are lifted, whichever is less. The Sheriff’s Office can fund the position from its Salary Account at this time, but may be required to request reimbursement at a later time during the fiscal year.
There was discussion regarding the entity that benefits from fines collected, with the County Attorney stated that he will research the question. Mr. Taylor motioned to approve the request, up to $5,000, with Mrs. Prettyman providing a second.
Mr. Tilghman asked to amend the motion to approval up to $1,760. Mr. Taylor and Mrs. Prettyman concurred with the amendment. Council then unanimously approved the amended motion.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
The County Attorney reminded Council of Legislative Session scheduled for this evening at 7:00 p.m. in Flanders Rooms of the Wicomico Youth & Civic Center.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Dr. Judith Sensenbrenner presented a request to replace two vehicles utilized by the Health Department staff. The 1989 Jeep, used as an emergency response vehicle, has more than 105,000 miles, has recurring brake problems. Replacement cost is estimated at $21,500. The 1991 Ford pickup has been driven in excess of 92,000 miles and has become unreliable. Estimated replacement cost is $12,000. In addition, the Department has sufficient funds in its operating budget to purchase replacement vehicles. On motion of Mr. Taylor, Council unanimously approved the request as submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Vice President Taylor-White wished to recognize Messrs. Ken Holland, Wayne Witzke and Joe Cacchioli, as well as Rev. John Kennedy, who were in attendance.
Mr. Holland remarked that the County should challenge the Governor regarding drought restrictions. Ms. Taylor-White stated that in the interest of all, the mandate needs to be honored.
COUNCIL COMMENTS None
On motion of Mr. Long, Council unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting. Executive Session will reconvene today at 1:00 p.m.
Executive Session was reconvened at approximately 1:05 p.m with six Council members in attendance.
INTERNAL AUDITOR’S REPORT
Robin King, Internal Auditor, Pat Petersen, Finance Director and Douglas Devenyns, Director, Dept. of Corrections, reviewed an audit recently conducted by the Internal Auditor. The Director of the Department of Corrections requested an audit of the Inmate Account following two incidents involving counterfeit and forged checks. Investigations by appropriate law enforcement agencies are underway. Mrs. King and Mrs. Petersen emphasized that Corrections has implemented audit recommendations very quickly in an effort to improve security and approved accounting practices. As is customary, another audit will be performed in approximately six months. Mr. Devenyns expressed the department’s appreciation for Mrs. King’s efforts and the subsequent support of the Finance Department.
On another note, Mrs. King announced her departure in the near future. She and her family will be relocating to another state. Council shared best wishes and assurances that Mrs. King will be missed as part of the Finance Department.
WATER & SEWER SERVICES: Perdue Stadium and Wor-Wic Community College
Mr. Newell "Chip" Messick, City Public Works, and Messrs Jim Azirett and Mr. Joe Sowinski, Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP, Consultants, presented three options for water and sewer services. Alternative I is designed exclusively to serve only Wor-Wic Community College and Arthur W. Perdue Stadium, as originally agreed upon by the County and the City of Salisbury by Joint Resolutions on July 27, 2001. Anticipated cost is approximately $2.6 million. Alternative 2 offers an expanded wastewater system as compared to Alternative 1. Alternative 3 is comprised of an expanded project that would serve the two facilities plus a "backbone" system to provide water and sewer services to the surrounding areas within the County. Following the presentation, there was considerable discussion on issues of additional costs involved in Alternatives 2 and 3, the County’s ability, if any, to recoup costs through future hookups in outlying service areas and Council’s focus on the provisions of the joint agreement already executed by the County and City. Vice President Taylor-White recognized Dr. Hoy, Wor-Wic Community College. Dr. Hoy acknowledged that while the College would have adequate funds for its share of either Alternative, he would like to offer the option of modifying Alternative 1 to incorporate the water tower proposed in Alternative 2. Inclusion of the water tower in the project would eliminate the need to maintain a fire suppression system on campus. Dr. Hoy remarked that this would a benefit to all parties involved.
Mr. Tilghman remarked that Council should follow its plan to fund Alternative 1; then encourage the City of Salisbury to consider funding the difference between either Alternatives 2 or 3, whichever is financially suitable. In this fashion, the City would clearly have the option to recoup its investment through the collection of fees.
Mr. Tilghman also suggested that the parties involved should share proportionate costs of the water tower as a supplement to Alternative 1. Council members concurred. Dr. Hoy then asked to clarify an earlier statement regarding Wor-Wic’s ability to fund either alternative; Dr. Hoy asked Council to keep in mind that while the college has $2.6 million in its budget, the college can only use the amount of money that serves Wor-Wic directly. Mr. Ennis reiterated Council’s commitment to providing water & sewer services within the County, however, due to existing constraints, meeting the needs of Perdue Stadium and Wor-Wic Community College must be its primary focus at this point in time. Ms. Taylor-White asked for Counsel’s guidance on the next step in the amendment process. Mr. Baker agreed that Council should express in writing its agreement to amend Alternative 1 to include the water tower at the College and obtain the related cost from the Consultant. Mr. Tilghman motioned to accept the County Attorney’s recommendation; the motion was then unanimously approved. Ms. Taylor-White asked
Mr. Azirett when Council might expect to receive the cost estimate; Mr. Azirett responded that the estimate is $900,000; however, any cost sharing estimates need to be determined, based on parties who would benefit from the water tower. Mr. Mackes suggested that Comcast Spectacor, the owner of the Shorebirds franchise, should share in the cost of the water tower. Ms. Taylor-White and Council members thanked Mr. Messick and WR&A representatives for the comprehensive presentation.
PLANNING & ZONING
Discussion of Development Impact Fees: Lori Carter and Frank McKenzie provided additional information on the topics of impact fees and transferable development rights, as requested by Council. Mr. McKenzie shared the following points contained in the analysis:
Transferable Development Rights:
When legislation was first introduced, its purpose was to send TDRs from A-1 districts to growth areas (Metro Core, town growth centers and villages). Upon determining development capacities, it was discovered that when the current code was drafted, accommodations were made in the event water and sewer services were made available in the future. This would allow apartment, townhouses, etc. development, which would exceed those densities and transfer of development rights would not be required.
Agricultural areas within the targeted growth areas could benefit from a TDR program; if such a program is in place, the 50% set-aside could be applied to the sending parcel, therefore, one could realistically develop the entire receiving parcel.
Council discussed the intent in establishing a TDR program in the County to benefit the farming community and the various options available. Mr. Tilghman reiterated the importance of forming a focus committee to research the multiple aspects of a viable TDR program and how to best accomplish Council’s intent. Mr. Brent Kenney, Wicomico County Farm Bureau and Mr. Carl DiMatteo, State Farm Bureau, shared information regarding TDR programs in other areas of the state. Mr. DiMatteo remarked that Calvert County’s TDR program is comprehensive and successful and suggested that
Council consider this program as a guide for Wicomico County. Both Mr. Kenney and Mr. DiMatteo stated that the current proposed legislation does not address key issues such as establishment of agricultural districts and acreage requirements, clear identification of receiving areas, TDRs inclusion in estate planning, amount of tax credit, to name a few.
Following Council discussion, Mrs. Prettyman stated that she would like to see the proposed legislation amended to require a study committee. Ms. Taylor-White added that such a committee should provide periodic reports to Council during the study. Mrs. Prettyman asked Mr. Baker if it would be appropriate to make such an amendment.
Mr. Baker responded that Council should exercise caution, since it would be impossible to re-draft legislation scheduled to be acted upon this evening. Likewise,
Mr. Baker questions the authority upon which the County could authorize a 100% tax credit. Mr. Tilghman remarked that he could support the proposed legislation if the A1 toA1 transfers remain exempt and a study committee is established. Mr. DiMatteo added that Calvert County has repeatedly amended its TDR program, as needed; that Wicomico County could enact its current legislation and then modify its contents. Mr. Baker stated that this would be a departure from normal action.
Council members thanked Messrs. Kenney and DiMatteo and the Planning staff for their input.
Development Impact Fees:
Lori Carter, Planning staff, reported on Council’s request to contact other municipalities to obtain information on impact fees structures for water and sewer services. Staff also determined that in other jurisdictions, impact fees are confined to a specific development area, rather than applied county-wide. It should be noted that the County has no data base on which to determine a rate structure for the cost of developing water/sewer infrastructure. This prompted Ms. Taylor-White to refer to the review of a specific municipality whereby impact fees are directly applied to districts. Ms. Taylor-White then asked what constitutes a district; Wicomico County does not have separate school districts on which to base separate fee structures. In addition, the local redistricting process plays a key role. Mr. Baker responded by pointing out that every county that has imposed an impact fee has based it upon an economic study of the level of service needs and funding necessary to meet those needs. Mr. Baker stated that the County has no data to justify the fees contained in the proposed legislation, which could create an insufficient fee structure or be legally challenged; additionally, the County’s proposed legislation is based upon school enrollment only. He noted that in a certain instance, the Courts allowed use of impact fees in adjacent districts when one district was over capacity and the adjacent district was under capacity in school enrollment. The only other alternative is to have the school system redistrict more often.
Ms. Taylor-White asked Ms. Carter if there were other areas to be addressed; Ms. Carter responded that the Planning staff’s major concerns had been addressed during this discussion. Ms. Carter and Mr. Baker then responded to Ms. Taylor-White’s questions regarding possible reduction of impact fees, if justified.
Mr. Baker then made the following points for Council’s consideration:
a. the need to clarify that the proposed impact fees would be imposed when a building permit is issued and should not be confused with the subdivision process;
b. the need to determine whether impact fees would be imposed during a land acquisition, since there is a conflict in wording in the Bill;
c. Council needs to determine how refunds of impact fees are to be handled;
d. Suggested that the County needs an economic survey to justify any final impact fee structure.
Mr. Tilghman suggested that in light of today’s discussion, Council consider withdrawing the Bill; being assured by the County Attorney that public input could be received and that the bill could be withdrawn before formal vote, Ms. Taylor-White and Council members concurred.
Additional Discussion on TDRs:
At this point, Council agreed to let Mr. Kenney and Mr. DiMatteo share final observations regarding TDRs. Mr. Kenney stated that the proposed legislation does not address how to control the number of TDRs on the market, which affects the value of TDRs and the related success of the program; to amend the legislation to permit only existing agricultural districts to apply for TDRs, then address the expansion of agricultural preservation districts; and to more fully define sending and receiving areas.
Following this discussion, Mr. Baker stated that amending the legislation for tonight’s public hearing that would allow only existing State or County agricultural preservation districts to apply for TDRs would be possible. Council agreed with the amendment.
With discussion concluded, Mr. Tilghman motioned to adjourn Executive Session and enter closed session, under Section 10 (508)a of the Annotated Code, for the purpose of entering into contract negotiations. The motion was seconded by Mr. Long and unanimously carried.