Carroll County, MD FY 24 Budget Process, 18 May 2023

Previous Meeting

Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: BoCC Work Session on Community Solar and FY24 Adopted Budget Work Session May 18, 2023

Description

https://www.carrollcountymd.gov
Agenda: https://www.carrollcountymd.gov/government/commissioners/board-of-carroll-county-commissioners-weekly-agenda/

A

It is uh 103 and as shared, we have two actions.

A

This afternoon, the first action is regarding our fy24 budget and then the second one's completed.

A

We will have a work session on community solar in agricultural zone properties, so with that said,.

A

The proposed budget is in front of us on our screens and also in hard copy and.

A

Are there any comments.

B

I'll just say that I uh I cannot tell you guys how grateful I am for your patience with us for.

B

Sticking through this with us or your suggestions for the advice and to my fellow commissioners for.

B

Your patience and for your integrity and your convictions, uh and and your compassion for for.

B

Doing this, so it's been, it's been a long, you know it's been a long couple of weeks, but it's been.

B

An enjoyable couple of weeks- and I can't think of anybody else- I I would have rather done this with.

B

And uh I'm looking forward to going into the next budgeting cycle in a couple months.

A

Okay, are there any other comments.

A

Any questions concerns.

A

A

So so everybody is convinced and content in moving forward with what we have up on the screen.

A

Okay say: I need a motion.

B

Motion to draft and ordinance to adopt the budget am I getting that right to directly.

A

Staff I apologize motion to direct the staff to draft an ordinance to adopt the budget. Second.

A

I have a motion. I have a second any discussion seen here, none all in favor, aye, okay, let's move.

A

On to solar and egg zone just want to say that was the most enjoyable session. I've ever had.

A

uh You don't have people willing to speak.

A

Up, that's what you're going to get. I do yeah! Yes, sir. Thank you.

C

D

It's dude: what's tuesday,.

E

So we gave them guidance to packages and then well it's a very quick adoption.

E

Whether we can do it thursday, possibly okay, I was going to bring that up, but I guess we can.

D

Talk about it later, we'll get on thursday think that'd be okay. That would be helpful for me guys.

C

If not, I understand now we'll do it.

D

F

I'm gonna join chris down here. Okay, chris, it's on you all right.

G

All right good afternoon, so, um while you all have been deep in the midst of of budget discussions, we.

G

Have been deep in the discussion of solar, and so this afternoon, we'd like to go through the uh the.

G

Staff report related to the work group findings and discussions that we've had over the past month.

G

uh Brenda is not here she's on vacation. She conveniently picked today to well.

G

She's actually on a two-week vacation, but so you have to deal primarily just with myself.

G

So um as a means of introduction, so we all know that.

G

The impetus for for the work group is that, a couple years ago, the board of commissioners.

G

Adopted a zoning text amendment to allow community solar on ag properties and uh after those uh after.

G

That tax demand was amendment was adopted. Several projects started coming through the.

G

Development queue and there was some concern from communities adjacent to that and um back in march.

G

uh You all adopted a six-month moratorium so that we could look a little bit deeper into.

G

The code and and come up with recommendations on potential changes, so we convened a work.

G

Group for your direction, and I wanted to just acknowledge the the members of the work group.

G

Several of whom are here today so uh cheryl, boss and annette fleshel, are are, in the background.

G

uh They are both property owners adjacent to proposed proposed facilities. We also have.

G

Patty toth, who is a property owner who wishes to develop a community solar project, charlie.

G

Indicated he was going to be here, but I don't see him yet so.

G

um He represents the community solar industry, he's not one of the developers, but he is a.

G

Representative of the industry, and then we have don herring who's back there and ralph robertson.

G

I do not see, but maybe he's on his way, who represent the ag community and specifically the.

G

Carroll county farm bureau- so I wanted to thank all of them for for the time that was spent on.

G

This we had four meetings. I think we met in total about 16 hours. All those meetings are have were.

G

Are recorded and are available on the website if you wanted to go back and review them so.

G

We also had a number of staff that participated. These are the professional engineers planners.

G

Scientists and so on that work for the county that have familiarity with the subject matter.

G

And with dealing with codes and some of us for decades, so we contributed our understanding.

G

Of of the subject matter and how codes work and so on, to help guide the discussions and.

G

uh We're here to provide any additional guidance and answer any questions that you may have so.

G

The various topics that we covered really can be broken into two categories. The first is the.

G

Applicability of the code so applicability talks to what can be developed and where can it be.

G

Developed, so it really determines if your project is is, is doable right. If the code applies to you.

G

The second group of requirements are the detailed requirements that once.

G

You determine that the code applies to you and that you can develop that project. What are the detailed requirements that you have to meet? What are the things.

G

That you have to do in order to have a successful project that can be permitted.

G

So uh the very first kind of fundamental question about applicability relates to.

G

Whether these projects are allowable in the agricultural zone, so there, if you.

G

Remember the current code speaks to projects that are only allowed on remaining portions.

G

When we met with the board previously, this direction was given to us that you wanted us.

G

To expand the scope of that to look at all agricultural projects, there are properties.

G

So the that first fundamental question that we have and that we asked the work group about was.

G

Should community solar, which again community solar, is a type of larger scale, solar, we're.

G

Not talking about an accessory use for one's personal use and so on, community solar can be.

G

Implemented on agricultural properties, and we really got, we got three opinions and knowing.

G

The uh the makeup of of the work group, it's understandable, that we had the the diverse.

G

Opinions that we had so one opinion was that these types of solar facilities, utility solar facilities,.

G

Which includes the community. Solar only belong on commercial and industrial zone properties and just.

G

Should not be allowed on agricultural property, so that's one fundamental opinion. Second opinion was.

G

That kind of contrary to what the existing code says, is that, yes, they could be on agricultural.

G

Properties, but they should not be on remaining portions kind of flipping. What the current code.

G

Is the current code is that they're allowed only on remaining portions? The recommendation.

G

Was to flip that to any agricultural properties, except for remaining portions, the reason being is.

G

That remaining portions came into existence through the residential development process.

G

And so that by their very nature they would be close to residential properties and then the.

G

Third opinion was that community solar facilities should be allowed on any agricultural zone parcel.

G

Including remaining portions, if the other defined applicability limitations are met.

G

So this is really kind of a base. Fundamental question for for the board is that if you decide.

G

That you do not want community, solar or utility solar on agricultural parcels. We can simply.

G

um Remove that section of the code and really we don't need to discuss the.

G

Remaining applicability and regulations, and so on, because we'll just eliminate it. However,.

G

If you do feel that it's appropriate that we consider community solar on agriculture,.

G

Agricultural parcels, then we'll continue through the rest of the of the document.

G

So I would post that that question for a discussion.

A

Okay, so that's open discussion that was the leading for us. What are thoughts, ideas.

A

On what's been shared.

B

Well, first, before getting into the the subject matter, I want to say thank you to you, chris and.

B

To everybody who participated in this, I know it was a uh yeah. I was explaining to you know a.

B

Couple different people that when I was running for office, this wasn't even something that came.

B

Up during the course of my campaign, but it was an issue that the community uh you know brought.

B

To our attention, and- and you know, we certainly were convinced of the rightness of bringing it up.

B

For discussion, um you know the the whole concept of allowing solar development of agriculturally.

B

Zone land uh is really a fundamental kind of transformation for our county and I think.

B

That chris is right that this is you know the fundamental question that faces us with this.

B

um You know so I mean I I part of me wants to to express where I stand on this, but part of me also.

B

Feels like we almost owe it to to the amount of time that was spent on this to at least go through.

B

What was what was suggested? um Okay, I don't know where everybody else stands on that, but you know.

B

Six, you said 16 plus hours of meetings, and then you know this time out of people's daily lives.

B

Out of their work, you know to to be a part of this, and- and I would at least like to to hear.

B

What they've, what they have to say about it before coming to a decision? Okay, so yeah! Please agree. I'm.

C

I'm hard-pressed to be convinced that solar belongs on ag any place, um but I'm also.

C

Worried even looking through this there's inadequate landscaping to.

C

To shield it there's still some things that I that I wouldn't be happy with any place.

C

And- uh and so I agree, I think until we see the other conditions and discuss them it's hard to to.

C

Say yes or no, but I'll be straight up, it's going to be very hard to convince me that solar belongs.

C

On ag, and particularly when I heard our secretary of agriculture, say that exact same sentence.

A

Okay, any other comments. No, I would have to agree with both my colleagues on that.

H

um Specifically the last comment about our secretary of ag. I think the challenge is.

H

If we're looking at ag, are we using it for ag? Are we utilizing it for other things? I'm not really.

H

Comfortable with the idea of it being utilized for other things, when realistically.

H

You know if we're actually investing in carol to be ag related to take away from that to me seems.

H

Totally counter-intuitive, but I do agree I'd like to at least listen to the rest of the presentation.

D

Well, I I will remain hard-pressed too.

D

Be convinced that these types of projects belong in that zone land as well. However, it.

D

Doesn't mean if that's a decision we decide to come to that this document wouldn't be helpful.

D

Because I know it sounds like a bit of a oxymoron, but I'm not I'm not opposed to community solar in.

D

The sense of that either, but on agland I become increasingly concerned about the directions, we're.

D

Going in on that particular zoning, you know if you look at the documentation that we are supposed to.

D

Be adhering to it's it's very clear about the ag zoning for farming activities, conservation.

D

And reaffirming agricultural use activities and operations, I I feel like we're a straying.

D

From that and it's going to take some course correction to bring us back and and I'll probably.

D

Talk about that a little bit later, but those are my concerns and that's sort of the forms. The basis.

D

For for where I sit at this time and place in terms of these particular projects on ag and for.

A

Me it's um it's the opposite. I believe solar is a passive use on property and if it's.

A

You know available to be on agricultural property or property that can be masked or.

A

um Whatever that word is screamed screened, um you know appropriately, uh then it's it's a it's a good.

A

News story for use of property that is not being used elsewhere. um Not all ag property is being.

A

Used for farming and ag purposes, we know that we're very proud of our agricultural community.

A

um I'm and I'm the first one to say that I mean from the first day I came in this office. I was a.

A

Huge proponent and continue for preserving and putting you know, agricultural property.

A

And perpetuity uh in preservation, so I'm 100 for that and I have been and that has never changed.

A

The other uses on ag properties, whether it be churches or schools or other activities that are.

A

Not passive that are much more active. I would be more concerned about those than something that is.

A

You know using property and in the future, and it may not be today, but in the future.

A

The agrovoltaics and all the the new ideas of raising solar above a certain level, so crops.

A

Can be used so the farming properties can be used that that may occur. I don't.

A

Want to be so short-sighted and again, the reason we did what we did was looking at.

A

Property, just as I mentioned, but also the concerns of potential um state, you know.

A

Not restrictions, what's that mandates and uh you know so it's kind of I always believe we.

A

Should tell our own story and that's what we're trying to do, and I was very proud.

A

Of my colleagues in stepping up telling that story, um I agreed with the six-month moratorium.

A

To further define it and refine it, um but uh it doesn't mean we have to make such a a change. You.

A

Know one way or the other and uh we're not talking about a lot of properties um and it's not suitable.

A

For everybody, but uh if we don't allow one, I I hate saying be careful what we ask for, because.

A

We said that with the storage facility and uh but you gotta, we gotta be careful. What we ask for and.

A

um We're either gonna take all abilities away growth on ag and say nope, nothing, no, schools, no, no.

A

Churches know all of those other uses we're not going to allow any of it.

A

And or we're going to say, okay, we're going to allow that and this potential.

A

So I'm for moving forward to- and I appreciate everybody's intent to not stop but listen to uh to.

A

Moving forward, but I'm kind of on the flip side of as far as hard-pressed, to get to a hard. No, um my.

A

My was, I was hard-pressed to get to a quick yes early on, in the sense that I wanted to.

A

Get a six month because that was, I think, it's smart. I think you know we should.

A

Have the community engagement um but uh yeah, everybody who says well we're a farming.

A

Community and we're this and we're that I said I agree and we're really proud of it.

A

But not every property is equal, and is this not even necessarily ego is the same.

A

So um that's that's my two cents and I think there's setbacks and all that kind.

A

Of stuff that you're going to talk about that, may modifier or minimize or mitigate.

A

Circumstances to allow for this, but we'll get into that and I'd just like to make one more.

C

Comment because commissioner garen, um I think, made it well, I am not opposed to community solar and.

C

The argument that I am doesn't help anybody's case. I want to see it on industrial and commercial. I.

C

Want to see them going as quickly as possible. I think along the hampstead bypass along some of.

C

The state roads, there's there's ideal places for it on other zoned property, but but again.

C

I do want to see the setbacks. Like I say me me, reading it they're still inadequate trees.

C

And I'll be honest, I just don't understand that it's it's uh um I I wouldn't want a structure. Next.

C

To me that needed to be screened and say: well, don't worry in five or ten years it will be. It.

C

Needs to be before it's built, and that's that's not what's in here, but okay, well, very good. So.

G

um I'll progress through the through the report, um it was all provided to you in advance, so you'll.

G

See that the general format of it is that we tried to capture all of the various opinions of the work.

G

Group and then we boiled that down into a summary of those of opinions and then we added in a staff.

G

Recommendation because really at the end of the day, we have to get past all of the opinions and.

G

We have to put something down and to make a decision, and so staff used our experience and.

G

Technical understanding, experience with code and so on to try and reach a good compromise.

G

If, if the opinions did not have a consensus and to make a recommendation, that recommendation is.

G

Just for your consideration, obviously, whatever you come up with that's what how we'll move.

G

Forward and that's what we will then enforce when it's in place, so as we go through this.

G

As I mentioned, the work group is is all here so if, at any point, you'd like further clarification.

G

From them they can certainly speak up and and talk to those various things, those items so.

G

To start with, just to wrap up this, the question about applicability related to on the ag district.

G

Or not a couple of key points, one was that, obviously from the ag community and the farm.

G

Bureau, I'm very concerned about ag preservation, and so there was some discussion about preserved.

G

Farms and so on, and everybody was in complete agreement that preserved farms, farms that are.

G

Currently preserved, we are not talking about those they're, the easements that are on them do.

G

Not allow for commercial uses and so on, so those are, those properties are preserved, and this would.

G

Not be consideration for the community, solar would not be something that would be considered.

G

On those farms, so everybody was in agreement on that related to this first. um This first.

G

Topic, the staff recommendation was to go with option number three. The reason being is that.

G

Option two, which talked about um precluding from remaining portions remaining portions.

G

Are a description they're, not a zoning code onto a zoning use unto itself. It's really.

G

Just a description of that property that remains after residential development has.

G

Occurred so, for instance, the part of the the difficulty we could get into this is.

G

That, if someone has a 100 acre farm and they take one lot off of that hundred acre farm.

G

By the definition of what a remaining portion is the rest of that farm is a remaining portion.

G

But it really has no legal connotation to it and so on, and that hundred acre farm may be.

G

Perfectly suitable for community solar, so staff recommendation was that we simply continue with.

G

All the applicability discussion and that will determine what properties could have community.

G

Solar on them and not to make a wide range decision that remaining portions be excluded.

G

So that was recommendation, so is that, moving towards from a to well towards a conditional use.

G

That's actually the next very next item, okay, so yeah! I did it on purpose, for you.

A

Thank you, yep, okay, so the the the next topic is related to um principal, permitted use and.

G

So everybody hopefully, is aware that there are basically three categories of of uses.

G

um In the code you have principal conditional or it's not applicable, so any use in any zoning.

G

District is defined as one of those three right principle means that, um yes, it can be there.

G

No issues conditional means that it needs to go before the board of zoning appeals for discussion.

G

um With that board and that's a public meeting and the board of zoning appeals goes through by code.

G

They have a number of items that they're supposed to look at every project that comes before them.

G

For that conditional use- and these are the items one through eleven- that buy code- they are supposed.

G

To review those projects for, but essentially what they're doing is they're looking at.

G

The proposed project and where it's being proposed is there, is it any different there than any other.

G

Location in the county does it create more of an issue at that location than some other location.

G

And then the board of zoning appeals can also apply additional conditions to that development. So.

G

um A good example, I guess, would be like a contract equipment, storage yard. They could.

G

Impose restrictions on the time of day that the contractor can be out there and working.

G

To limit the noise and, and so on, so those types of conditions, the board of zoning appeals can add.

G

To it and that that is again a public meeting, so the public can contribute to the discussion and.

G

Then the board's owning appeals makes a decision whether it will be allowed or not allowed at that.

G

Location, so the work group was was split on the the discussion. Some felt that the having.

G

That extra level of discussion and approval was beneficial to the community. Others felt.

G

That there was enough in the process already that, because of the process that we go through.

G

From a site development plan, perspective planning and zoning commission weighing in and so on, that.

G

There was enough process in place to capture all requirements, so staff recommendation was.

G

That we felt that additional step was worthwhile to get the community involved and have that extra.

G

Discussion and extra look at the project to see if it's appropriate for the neighborhood, where.

G

It's it's proposed so, as we went through a lot of zoning definitions over the last few years,.

A

um I was not a advocate of conditional use. I was like let's make this stuff black or white, and.

A

um It was frustrating because we had so much conditional use in in the perming process.

A

Is it gives people like? Well? Maybe I can't maybe I can't, and then there was this attitude well, it was.

A

Conditional, the bza is just gonna rubber stamp something and which I definitely don't agree.

A

With or that the board of commissioners were just going to rubber stamp, what the planning and zoning.

A

Says, and it just created to me more chaos in the community of um understanding and acceptability.

A

However, with all that said, um this could be a very good use of.

A

Conditional usage with the appropriate restraints already in place and then like.

A

You said get in the community engaged both from the property owner and the community.

A

um We we just dealt with that this morning, dealing with a grant. You know how the community's.

A

Engagement changed the minds of somebody moving forward and we've done it with other things. So.

A

um So yeah this that definitely changed my mind from principle to conditional, and this may be.

A

A good example of where conditional makes more sense, so I appreciate that. Oh no, I mean I don't.

A

Want to be the only one talking back. Is there thoughts and comments on any of this so far,.

E

I don't know okay, so um it's entirely up to you how.

G

um How we we go through this? What would be helpful um is an indication whether we do it in.

G

um Item by item, or maybe when we get to the end of applicability, we can have a discussion but.

G

um At some point, we'll uh we'll need staff we'll need direction to on how we're going.

G

To take this forward to planning its owning commission so with uh with going through this.

B

My thought would be you don't have to, because I've spent the last couple of days going through this.

B

um If you just want to go through it briefly and just touch on things, and as we have questions and.

B

We can get into deeper discussions about them if needed, but beyond that, I think just the cursory.

B

Run derivative giving error to the opinions expressed would be suitable. Okay, very good.

G

Yes, yes, we got to be cognizant that some of the community, some of the public that may or may not.

C

Be watching and didn't have the opportunity it was online. Yes, it's been posted, yes, so.

C

They had the opportunity, but may not have right. So I you know yeah for going too fast.

F

Yeah and then yeah I mean, and you know the the concern that.

A

We are going to agree or disagree on each recommendation and we're going to end up.

A

Building a camel with you know, seven humps, you know, is a concern. You know, um as opposed to going.

A

Through it, like you, said joe cursory and then at the end, okay, let's get the principal decisions.

A

um There's definitely two ways to doing it, but uh even at the end, whatever the decisions are.

A

If we can come to an understanding on, you know the principles of permitted and conditional, I think.

A

Is important, I think this is a a very important topic on zoning and how we make decisions. I mean.

A

You know mike you, you were on the commission, you know years ago, but you had to deal with.

A

This and we talked about coming, you driveways, so I mean get me started on those I mean I.

D

Think, what's interesting is, is you and I we we probably we seem to be maybe on opposite.

D

Ends of this particular issue, but I think it is highlighting this whole issue of particularly.

D

The agricultural zones and the approved accessory and conditional uses and where we are with those.

D

Everything from the definitions to the uses and intended uses, so it sounds like again I I would.

D

Prepare to talk a little further about that later, but um I I agree with you on that point.

G

Okay, so we'll continue through.

G

And I guess to speak them to the seven humped camel concept.

G

um I think each of these topics is discreet enough, that they don't have a lot of impact on other. So I.

G

Think a decision could be made on each individual without creating a frankenstein of yeah conflict.

A

No ideas so, okay, and also again, it's lessons learned for other hot issues that you know we have.

A

Also brought attention to whether it's storage facilities or bulk requirement, you know, we've.

A

Gone back to, I don't say the drawing board, but have taken steps back.

A

To allow us to move forward um and permitting conditional use is a key one. So yeah, okay.

G

So the next topic was minimum parcel size, so the existing code requires that parcels be at least.

G

Five acres- and I think most of the work group agreed that that was on the small side, especially.

G

I think from the farm bureau perspective, and so on is that the the farm bureau um is not in.

G

Favor of the idea of community solar, but I think there was some recognition that if it advanced.

G

The preservation of more property that it may be inconsidered a payment, they're they're in of.

G

um Of getting more property preserved in agriculture for a conservation preservation, so.

G

um But it needs to be enough compensation, it um and five acres. Just it didn't um the juice.

G

Wasn't worth the squeeze from that perspective, so um there was a range of discussions um there.

G

Were concepts of minimum acreage of 50 acres or 100 acres? There were some that.

G

um That thought it should be based on a percentage of the property right, so.

G

But there was a difference of opinion on what percentage, so some suggested 25 of.

G

The property, while others suggested 60. so as an example, if using 20 acres, a 20.

G

Acre solar facility, if you were using the 60 guidance, isn't that a solar facility cannot.

G

Take up more than 60 percent of the parcel that you're talking about you would need a.

G

34 acre parcel would be the minimum size right if the recommendation is 25 percent.

G

Then you would need an 80 acre parcel in order to get 20 acres of solar.

G

So a little bit more confusing to to determine, but um but there are maybe some merits to that.

G

Kind of limitation, rather than a strict minimum parcel size. Why can't you do two and five together.

G

Minimum parcel size, okay and then my so, if you do two and five together, I guess then also my.

A

Question is why 50 acres? Is it arbitrary? Yes, okay, good answer, I'm here at least yeah. I wasn't quite.

D

Expecting that but okay, um so it went yeah five acres too small minimum 100 acres, 50 acres, you're.

A

Cutting in half I mean you say it's arbitrary but well. There's got to be conditions associated with.

A

This and part of those conditions can be number five. You know.

A

um As well or number so, four, regardless so yeah, so I have some numbers for you just to put it.

G

In context, so we did an analysis of properties that are remaining in the agricultural zone, that.

G

Are not preserved that could potentially have community solar on them and we broke those into.

G

A range so we ignored everything smaller than 50 acres, so between 50 and 100 acres. There are.

G

302 parcels properties that could potentially be developed between 100 and 200 acres, they're 144.

G

Between 200 and 300 acres, they're, nine and over 300 acres, there are three. So while the number 50.

G

And the number 100 who are just nice, even numbers to to look at that was part of the reason why the.

G

Staff recommendation was to go with 50, because if we set that as the minimum parcel size, we.

G

Still have 458 in total parcels out there that potentially could be developed for community solar.

G

If you increase that to 100 acres you're down to only 156, so it almost regulates the the um the use.

G

Out of existence in that there's, so many other criteria that need to be considered. Proximity.

G

To three-phase line, and and so on, that it would greatly reduce the amount of of properties that.

G

Could be developed so that's why staff came down on the the 50 acres minimum size and then.

G

While there is some merit to the 60 of of the property being covered or the 25 percent,.

G

Those types of of con confusing calculations make it difficult to implement um and explain.

G

To people but 60 of parcel being covered of a 300 acre property- that's 180, acres of solar.

A

That's a lot of silver well, except for we have another requirement that the maximum solar.

G

Site is 20 acres, so no matter regardless of what yes, the maximum is 20 acres. Yes,.

F

Yeah, but if, if you use the 60 number, what it's saying is you would need.

F

180 acres, if that, if I remembered your math um to put a 20 acre solar on it,.

G

G

This is why we recommend just the base 50. yeah, so okay, so if it's okay, you use 60 percent.

G

And the 20 acre solar facility. If we consider that the standard we keep that variable set.

G

Right 20 acre facility: if it's 60, you would need a 34 acre parcel to be able to construct.

G

That 20 acres, because 20 acres is 60 of 34 is 20. right. If we went with the 25 percent.

G

Then you would need 80 acres to construct the 20-acre solar facility. If you had 150.

G

Acres or 180, I forget the example you gave you could there would be the the percentage would.

G

Not be the restricting variable right, the 20 acres would be the maximum that you could do.

A

That's why I like number two and number five packaged together.

C

And to your point: if you did two and five, it would just mean the 50 acre parcel. Could.

C

Only have 12 and a half acres and there are some being designed: 12, 13, 14 acres and that's what I.

E

Was saying no it, wouldn't it wouldn't cut it out, yep? No, it would just that's right. So you know.

F

A little bigger you'd need a bigger site. In order to do all 20 acres, I need a bigger boat, um no.

F

No 40 acres yeah, I mean it yeah. It number five goes along with minimizing the amount of solar.

A

In a property number, two 50 acres is splitting the baby, I'm sure from the lowest end to the 100.

A

um But it also makes it almost as substantial, but you know, of value in the county, but.

A

Most of the properties you're really going to limit a probably 12 to.

A

25 acres of solar, because there's 302 parcels between 50 and 100 acres. So it's actually.

A

Relatively small, keep in mind, it still can only be 20 acres and it could only be 20 acres. Yes, okay,.

A

So it would be so it'll be 12 to 20 acres on those which is relatively small and then everything else.

A

That 160, whatever properties, it's you're, really not going to have.

A

The ability well, it depends on where it is on the property of course, but if it's.

A

Fenced shielded whatever that word was again um that maybe you know.

A

We go okay, um any thoughts on this I mean I'm kind of just brainstorming.

A

In my head out loud, but I I guess and and maybe I could have been a little clearer earlier and.

B

I apologize, commissioner. The way that I was at least that I'm looking at this is is to.

B

Get a you know like a, I guess, like a summary presentation of everything in here and then.

B

Based on going through that, if I had questions about anything along the way, I would ask them.

B

um With the ultimate goal, coming back down to that fundamental question, do we allow agri or.

B

Solar development of agriculturally zone land period- okay, so, by going through the.

B

Presentation we come back to that fundamental, uh the foundational question and then, if the answer.

B

Is no then you know we gave the presentation the time that it deserved that it earned and we move.

B

On and if the consensus among this body is yes, then we're able to go back in uh to to you know.

B

Look at these things, I guess in a more uh detailed and discussion-oriented way: okay, at least at least.

B

That's how I'm I'm approaching this I'll keep moving uh and for reference uh we um added into.

G

The report there are seven projects that were in the queue that were subject to the moratorium and.

G

These were: are there parcel sizes, so you can see what ever whatever kind of guidance that you come.

G

Up with, as far as a minimum parcel size, how that would affect the existing projects in the queue.

G

So we've already talked about this: the maximum project size. I think there was.

G

Consensus by the the work group that 20 acres maximum was was a good number.

G

We talked a bit about maximum energy production, so when we developed the initial code we set.

G

That at two megawatts to match state law. However, state law has since changed that community, solar.

G

Can now be up to five megawatts? But here in the county, because we have the limitation on.

G

Two that would still be appropriate because we can be stricter than state law. We talked about.

G

It, though, and a very good point was brought up in the discussion, and that is that I don't.

G

Believe anybody is really concerned about the amount of power that are generated, that's being.

G

Generated from the solar facilities, it's the impact right! It's how many acres, whether it's.

G

20 acres or how much space it takes up and over time technology may change. So if you establish.

G

A project right now and you take up 20 acres and you're, producing two megawatts, but 10 years from.

G

Now, solar panels become more efficient and on the same space you can swap out those panels and now.

G

Get five megawatts! Why wouldn't we allow that? um It's it's not any at increased impact, and so on.

G

So to allow for that change in technology and to follow the state law, I think the majority of the.

G

Work group thought that removing the requirement of a limitation of two megawatts made sense.

G

Because we have the other restrictions regarding the size and the impact to the the property.

G

Productive soils was a was a hot topic, a lot of discussion related to that so.

G

The nrcs maps, the soils around the county and the quality of the soil for production.

G

Ranges from a gradation from one to eight, with one and two being highly productive, and there.

G

Was a lot of discussion about restricting the development of community solar away from highly.

G

Productive farmland and I believe there are other jurisdictions where um that's that's a requirement.

G

um From a staff perspective, though, we looked at it that there really are no other developments, that.

G

Are limited by productive soils? We don't have a requirement of the code that says if you have a.

G

Highly productive farm you can't subdivide and put residential use on it. You can't develop a a.

G

Church on it and so on, and when you do that development you're losing that productive.

G

Land forever, whereas community, solar and we'll talk about agrovoltaics and so on in a minute.

G

The intent is that it's really a temporary use. Now it's a temporary 20-year some use, but it's still.

G

A temporary use- and the idea is at the end of that it would go back to agricultural production.

G

And when we start talking about agrovoltaics and the idea of having agriculture underneath those.

G

Solar panels um pushing those solar panels to non-productive soils may make the agrovoltaics.

G

Difficult to achieve so, for those reasons, the staff recommendation was that that this not be.

G

A criteria, but again that's in the opinion and and again the work group was, was very split on this.

G

Discussion, I can understand why that may be your recommendation because of other uses.

A

On those properties, however, this is a new topic that is getting a lot of concern and.

A

You know, there's I mean I almost say you bend one way to get somewhere else, but.

A

If a major concern is to ensure we have the most productive agricultural properties,.

A

Available in carroll, county and use, then we want soils one and two there's no doubt.

A

So um you know I'd be on the other side of this one I'd be like hey, you know, the only place is and.

A

It would be like a 90 percent on soils, four, five, four and up you know, and ten percent of it may.

A

Be soils you know three and down, but you know you don't want to use the prime property on a farm to.

A

Do this, if you know there's other available spaces and that's again part of that conditional usage.

A

um You know what I don't want to make it so difficult that it can't be used properly.

A

But I do want to restrict it to do what's best, for you know our county and and our county is.

A

Based on culture and culture is very important, and the farming culture and our agricultural culture.

A

Is very important and we shouldn't minimize that, so that's why to me you know I'm going to.

A

Be outspoken on every one of these, because this is important. Our culture, you know, needs to see.

A

That we are valuing class one and two and strong farming opportunities. There's also guys that folks.

A

That have properties and they call themselves farmers and they have property, and I don't know if.

A

They've ever formed and I'm not one to say because I'm not, but uh you know I want people to take.

A

Advantage of their properties, but I also don't want to lose that culture, so I understand I don't.

A

Know I mean ken you're, the closest I know here to a farmer. What are your thoughts on that I mean I.

C

Like I say, this is going to be a hard sell for me, but.

C

um All I hear from people as well, this guy has 20 acres and it's rocky and on a hill when it's not.

C

Really farmable, but we don't care, you know, and it's it's nice to say you know. Well what about.

C

This? What about that? But it's it's! What about what the rules are so yeah yeah. I would think.

C

If we care about agricultural land in carroll county, then the soil type gets more important. Yeah.

G

I said: okay, all right. The next two topics um relate to zoning and use and just take a second.

G

To make sure that everybody's clear on on the difference, so zoning that's described here, a legal.

G

Mechanism that just identifies the types of uses that it can occur on properties and in certain.

G

Areas so zoning would be like agricultural or residential or commercial or industrial.

G

Doesn't speak to the uh and then within those districts there are a list of uses that are.

G

Allowable in those zoning areas use is how it's exactly where it said how it's used, so you can.

G

Have a residential use on agricultural zoning and for the most part, what we're talking about.

G

Here with the remaining portions are properties that were developed for residential and left.

G

A remaining portion so those those properties that have houses on them. They are a residential.

G

Use but they they are zoned agricultural, so one of the discussions was proximity to other.

G

Zoning districts, so proximity of agricultural property to say residential zoned property or.

G

Commercially zoned property and I believe that really the work group came to the consensus that.

G

Establishing a restriction on proximity to a zone did not make sense that it was not needed.

G

Because they were were more focused on the usage and the separation of the community.

G

Solar infrastructure from houses and so on. So if we go to to residential uses again.

G

There were two of them. There were two basic opinions: one was no community solar facilities.

G

Allowed on parcels contiguous to residentially used properties or not having that restriction.

G

And the staff recommendation was not to to prohibit based on adjacent to residentially.

G

Used properties because there are so many residentially used properties around the county.

G

That would essentially prohibit community solar from being developed, so that would be an undue.

G

Restriction and what we would rather do is rely on the other applicability requirements and then the.

G

The requirements that of screening and separation and setbacks, and so on, to address the the issue.

A

There's only two opinions, one one, four one against there wasn't any consensus anywhere in there. No.

A

No okay, proximity to environmental features. There was consensus with the group understanding that.

G

There are other local state and federal codes and so on related to development.

G

And environmental features, so it wasn't felt that additional environmental restrictions for.

G

This specific use were needed, so when you say additional restrictions, you mean restrictions.

B

In addition to what's already there, or do you mean as in needing to prescribe those.

B

In any kind of legislation pertaining to solar and agriculturally developed land, yes,.

G

So essentially um we were talking about.

G

Restricting the the concept was restricting solar facilities near say, streams or near.

G

Wetlands or other types of uh in watersheds uh for drinking water reservoirs, those sorts of things.

G

um There are other codes related to environmental requirements for development that address those.

G

Types of concerns so adding in additional restrictions specifically to solar facilities.

G

Was not felt to be necessary? Okay, so so, basically you know if something like this.

B

Goes through the the suggestion would be that what exists already does not have I mean, do we.

B

Would it have to be noted that everything has to all requirements have to be met? No because all.

G

um All development needs to conform to all codes, so, for instance, stormwater management, storm water.

G

Management applies to all development in the county, which would include community solar, so.

G

If there's a concern with runoff and erosion and things like that, the stormwater management code.

G

Already addresses that, from a grading perspective with what, during construction, that you don't want.

G

um Erosion and and sediment running into a wetland, for instance gotcha. There is.

G

Already a grading code that all developments must conf all construction activities must.

G

Conform to so it wasn't felt that something additional was needed. Thank you very much sure.

G

The next topic was potentially limiting the total amount of solar facilities. County-Wide.

G

So this would be like setting an upper limit that we don't want any more than a thousand.

G

Acres of community solar in the whole county- and there were different ways of that. We could come.

G

Up with that kind of metric, uh one percent of all available agricultural property or or.

G

um uh uh There are a number of ways that it could be calculated and and because they're.

G

All those different ways that could be calculated, that's why staff came down on the on the concept.

G

Of not implementing something at this point right because we don't know right now how pervasive this.

G

Is going to be, and we feel that putting in the other limitations as in if 50, acres and larger are.

G

Required and then you look at all of the other criteria, that for citing of community solar, I.

G

Think we think that it's going to be self-limiting, um so a total limit is not needed because we.

G

Couldn't come up with a recommendation, what that limit would be it uh is it 500 acres is a thousand.

G

Acres, it would be kind of an arbitrary number, and- and what does that number really mean now? We did.

G

Put a caveat on the staff recommendation know that you, as the board can change this at any time. So.

G

If you wanted to put in a a cap of I'll just use a thousand acres, we could put that into code and.

G

Then if that became an issue, we could revisit the code and change that cap or vice versa. We.

G

Don't put anything in but there's a proliferation of of solar projects and you decide that you want.

G

To open the code to put a cap into to throttle that back, it's entirely up to to the board.

G

um Yeah we, I would say, staff recommendation was more neutral on this. Just we didn't have.

G

A basis for what a good number might be, and there were a variety of suggestions.

A

Taking a deeper look at this may be warranted. I mean there's, there's caps on activities in the.

A

County, you know liquor stores, you can only have so many licensed liquor stores in certain areas.

A

I just happen to know that one, uh but uh you know, um and it's to I keep the integrity of.

A

The community, you know, so we don't have a liquor store on every corner. You know.

A

We don't have the same with nail, salons or car washes, but we do with liquor stores. um So this.

A

May be something to take a deeper look at and say: hey what should we? What should make sense for the.

A

County-Wide or forest or anything I I don't know, um but that's the first thing that came into my.

A

Mind is how to how to limit things you know or not, but control control, the growth that we want.

G

So so, to help the discussion a little bit, we did run a few numbers again looking at that minimum.

G

Parcel size of 50 acres, if that is, if that's the metric, that we want to use and, as I indicated.

G

There are 458 parcels in the county that we feel could potentially be developed with community.

G

Solar, if that 50 acre threshold is, is what's set and those 458 parcels equate to 42 743 acres.

G

However, you, if you have the limit of 20 acres per site, you're, basically looking at 20 times.

G

The 458 with so we're looking at 9 160 acres of community solar, would be kind of the upper end.

G

But then all of those other restrictions based on proximity to three-phase line and.

G

So on and so forth, I think would greatly pull that back. So if there, if there's a.

G

Desire to set a number- I think the number is somewhere between zero and nine thousand.

G

um That's entirely up to you all as to where you would want to set that number to to just.

G

Keep the proliferation of of community solar projects yeah, that's kind of where I was going so.

G

So let's see I'll move on here, um another concern was proximity of solar facilities to each other.

G

Our current code is silent on that, because state law prohibited community solar projects.

G

From being on adjacent parcels, so we did not have it in in the county code. State law has.

G

Now changed, however, and it does allow them for on adjacent parcels. However, the combined power.

G

Outage power generation from those needs to be less than five megawatts, so um so there's.

G

Still, a state restriction on the amount of adjacent parcels that can can be developed.

G

The work group generally agreed that the state law would be sufficient and to just.

G

Keep our code in line with um with what the state law stated. um It was one opinion that.

G

No two community solar facilities be located within 10 miles of each other, so that's kind.

G

Of at the far farther extreme, so I mean the first issue was because howard county.

A

Took advantage of a loophole that wasn't there and they put two solar fields contingent to each.

A

Other which were larger than a certain amount and then states it, howard, yeah, yeah off of.

D

um Corn down the northern part of the county, I think- maybe I don't know, I'm not sure, I'm.

A

I can't remember, but uh yeah they put them adjacent to each other and the state's like.

A

Well, wait a second, you know you're, taking advantage of what is in place. So then they.

A

You know a close loophole, that's what you know. Okay,.

G

And so that's the end of the applicability section. So um those are those are the topics.

G

That were discussed as to whether community solar should be allowed or not allowed in the egg and.

G

And what the additional restrictions would be based on size and and so on.

E

Yeah, so what are some thoughts.

D

Is anybody here ever heard of stanley county north carolina before.

D

No stanley county north carolina is not too far outside of mecklenburg county outside.

D

Of charlotte near the area, well, I went to college in charlotte and they've been grappling with this.

D

Issue for quite a while, they call it solar power generation, but it's the same concept as community.

D

They've got a 10 page ordinance and they are just struggling with this issue. It.

D

Is not going away, it's go online. You don't have to take my word for it. It.

D

Has not gone well for stanley county and they have a 10 page ordinance and it is.

D

Pretty detailed- and I think I've shared it with some of you sure chris as well.

D

We've got: we've got a real challenge here in that, where some of us feel that this particular.

D

Projects might be more warranted, we're going to find out that it's just not feasible for the.

D

Companies themselves to put things there, it's just too far from something or too close to something.

D

County code 158.153 needs to go away today and that's how I'm voting community solar doesn't.

D

Have to- and I think this document serves as a great basis for where we might want to go.

D

In the future, but 158.153 needs to disappear and that's all I'm voting, I'm ready to do it.

F

G

So and actually I'd like to clarify.

G

158 153 section e is, is specific to community solar on ag. Yes, so I think the motion would be.

F

Because it would still need to go to the planning commission, yes, we was telling.

G

You to go planning commission, so I think the motion would be to direct staff to take that to.

F

Planning, commission that that they would work on removing 158 153e. It's not the numbers right now,.

F

From the zoning ordinance and then it would they'd work on and then bring it back to you.

F

Just might be uh yes, however: legally we have to take any land use, change to planning commission.

G

They'll come up with a recommendation. We would bring that recommendation back to you all and then.

G

And so on through the process, but that was a smart alec comment that will take a hit from that. This.

F

Is carroll county we're still still using? uh What is it word perfect? So I'm sorry we can't use it.

D

I've noticed that, but that's okay, though, because I'm still trying to figure out word perfect.

D

um Okay, I will make a motion at carroll, county.

D

Ordinance 158 .153e.

D

Is removed from the code and that we forward that recommendation of planning his own and commission.

B

A

Okay, any further discussion. Yes, I I'd like to just say a few things. We don't need to.

C

Probably go through the rest of this, um but but.

C

um Like I say, I was concerned, why why we didn't properly screen it and couldn't live with it.

C

With that, um the separations and and a lot of that was good, um they the decommissioning. It was good.

C

um But some of the concerns I had um when we first discussed this. There were only five or.

C

Six submitted, then till we got the vote on that on maury term. I think two more were, which is fine.

C

But there was a lot of confusion. I heard from one property owner.

C

um Well, what about the farmer? I told him not the farm this year and I said well.

C

Your plan hasn't even been submitted. He could probably farmed for a couple.

C

Years, I think I think there was little understanding on the process and.

C

There was, I think, you just said there were seven submitted. Yes did any of those have any.

C

Approvals yet no, and so they still had multiple steps to go through it's possible. You just said.

C

Now this doesn't meet the setbacks or no, you need to do stormwater management, or you know there was.

C

A lot of process- I I think, there's there was a lot of confusion over that. I don't know whether.

C

People just assumed it or people were telling each other, like. Oh, oh yeah, you're, going to.

C

Do this this summer, I'm getting a plan in in march and you'll. Do it this summer and.

C

um Unfortunately, no conduct development works that quickly um and- and I understand.

C

um Again, I've said it before my daughter-in-law's done uh more solar than what would be the total in.

C

Carroll county someday with big big projects and and goes back and forth with zoning and whatever.

C

She's very passionate about it. I I do think we need solar. I do think we're ignorant if we think.

C

We're gonna stop fossil fuels next week we need to transition, but that's a whole nother subject.

C

And, like I say I do want solar, I do want to see it on the other things, but I just think some of this.

C

um There were, there was a lot of confusion on and- and I hope everybody understands that it wasn't.

C

That one of these wasn't going to happen next month. No, but hopefully there's some commercial.

C

And industrial that are very close, if not maybe even happening, there's there's some that's.

C

Already been constructed, yeah yeah, so so that's great so yeah I just wanted. Like I say I don't.

C

And you're doing a great presentation and everybody here did a lot of hard work to get to.

C

Here I don't want to diminish that in any way, but um I think that's some of my concerns and I said.

C

Two months ago and I'll say again, I was hard-pressed to think that solar belongs.

C

On ag in carroll, county and obviously in other jurisdictions too, but that's not our problem.

A

Okay, any other comments, a quick question actually not a comment, but chris do you.

H

Know how many acres we have currently in solar in industrial by chance roughly? Is there any.

G

I do not off the top of my head, I'm looking at kirsten and she's, avoiding my eyes. Kirsten has.

G

The best information on it, but probably not off the top of her head I'll, tell us a number.

H

Not a problem, thank you. We can certainly get you that number, though, if you could, when you.

H

Have a chance absolutely appreciate it in my own comments, I'm not sure why we spent 45 minutes.

A

Doing this um I feel like it was just going through emotion. I mean a lot of good content.

A

A lot of discussion and work, and I think, if we allow for conditional use in solar and ag it would.

A

Weed its way out into appropriate usage, whether it be a 50-acre parcel as a minimum 20 acre as.

A

Maximum to use for solar, the appropriate setbacks, the appropriate everything for conditional use of.

A

Solar to me makes sense, but we are you know I mean it was, I think, already determined walking.

A

In this door, you know sitting down what it was going to happen, so I'm not sure why we just did.

A

This and used and provide a fact sheet, but um I mean there was very little dialogue and I was.

A

Wanting to see more because again, it's about maintaining carroll, county's culture.

A

While we move forward in capabilities like solar, because we're directed and mandated to look at.

A

This hard, I do believe it belongs in industrial and commercial and other opportunities, just like.

A

On that building up in hampstead the random house, I mean that's phenomenal, um but opportunities for.

A

Appropriate properties- I'm like I, I don't know, I'm it's unfortunate. You know uh not sure why.

A

Like I said, I sat through this and it was just okay got it, we're done no well. So I'm sorry, no.

A

That's I mean so unless there's more discussion on it, we can vote well. I did make a motion, but.

D

Since we're still in the discussion phase, I I've been talking about this issue for over a year.

D

And every time I met with concerned citizens in my district, they weren't asking me how to.

D

Stop it, they were trying to find ways to have it happen and not have it impact in a negative way.

D

Their house, their residential home, the place where they want to retire or have grandkids over that's.

D

What I've been doing for the past year? I think 45 minutes to discuss the report, which I think we all.

D

Went over prior to meeting here was in a complete waste of time, because I think it illustrates that.

D

It's a hard thing to try to to try to make work. It's a very hard thing to try to make work, and I I.

D

Hope that this document serves as a basis or maybe we can move in the future but um yeah I don't. I.

D

Don't feel as though we haven't spent enough time talking about this, I feel like we've spent a lot.

D

Of time talking about this okay and yeah they're, okay- oh I'm sorry, please! I'm I'm glad! We spent.

C

The time I I uh like I say I was leaning one way very heavily. I spoke out against this when it was.

C

Decided and whatever it was two three years ago, um but it it happened. What concerns me with this.

C

I saw plans right at the minimum setback right at the minimum everything today earlier today,.

C

We heard a group come in with a great idea, a need as passionate as solar.

C

um And because a couple neighbors didn't like it, they withdrew it. I didn't see.

C

Anybody in this group willing to do that or even compromise I mean like, like I say,.

C

When, when you submit the minimum fencing the minimum screening, the minimum distance back.

C

I gotta choose my words um and I've. I've done developments uh a lot.

C

um I it tells me they don't care, that's better than the phrase I was thinking of who it tells.

C

Me they don't care about the surrounding areas. Now I understand that people are so passionate about.

C

This, maybe they don't care, and they just think all of us ought to see the need and take whatever.

C

It takes, but I I wanted to hear this and I did read it and I'm glad we've had the discussion.

C

um But yeah, I think I can see what the outcome is going to be, but that didn't mean that they wasted.

C

Their time for two months or we waste, like you, said, we've spent hours and hours on this, probably.

C

But that's okay, who are you saying that doesn't care, though, who who are you saying who doesn't.

A

Care the developers, the ones that did the plan and the thing is, I'm not even that's the thing.

A

I I'm not even looking at developers, I'm not I'm not concerned about a developer. I'm not you know.

A

What I'm looking at is the property owner, the community in carroll county, not developers and.

A

What I listened to was how consensuses were made to allow us to move forward, and that was.

A

From the community saying hey, the setback should be this and not this. It should be this much of a.

A

Acreage and not you know, should be minimum of 50, so there's there was definite conditional uses.

A

Or conditional, you know, concerns in allowing this so, and I thought there was a lot that.

A

Actually was yeah, I don't know honestly, I don't know any of the developers. I don't even know the.

A

Names of these developers- oh I don't know the names either looked at a set of plans yeah. I I.

A

I couldn't tell you which one was, but it's not to me it's it's just. How do we provide.

A

Solar, which is an important resource in carroll county, while maintaining carroll, county's culture.

A

And I think that's where you're going with this and that's why again, I believe the five of us.

A

Need to work hard on developing a mission and goals and objectives and a vision for carroll.

A

County and I'm looking forward to doing that, you know early to summer, as we discussed earlier.

A

And this may be addressed there, but no my concern about going 45 minutes because.

A

It just felt like okay, I got it. Of course. I appreciate the work you do, but I mean I read.

A

It you gave it to me, um so this is a presentation. um Well I don't know, I don't want to belabor the.

A

Issue from my perspective, but- and I don't want to diminish what you guys did a few years back but.

C

Sometimes hindsight's wonderful and these 25 pages tell me um that was a little bit too loose and.

C

And again so I agree, that's why we tended no, I I that's the thing I I agree 100 with what you said.

A

Go ahead, joe, I'm sorry. I know that no worries at all no worries at all, so I'm I'm certainly.

B

Glad that we spent time with this, because if nothing else out of respect for the process.

B

That we that we set in motion, uh but also because you know coming in here, commissioner rossi and I.

B

Genuinely did not know, for example, where you were going to fall on this issue. um You know.

B

For the for all, I knew you know, commissioner collar may have been convinced otherwise or.

B

Commissioner, gern may have been convinced convinced. Otherwise there was a commissioner.

B

Gordon may have been convinced otherwise through this, um so I don't think at all that that you.

B

Know was a waste of time or that that it wasn't. You know time that I you know was spend valuably.

B

um You know that there are, you know to your point, commissioner rossi, and you know we talk.

B

About being an agriculturally minded and centered uh county and community, uh you know, commissioner,.

B

Garen myself, I know others have brought up issues that other places have endured with with solar.

B

You know the public hearing was certainly critical in in developing an opinion about all of this.

B

um And as commissioner garen also said, you know, maybe this is a framework for some point in the.

B

Future when, when the the circumstances are, are better aligned and more amenable to to doing.

B

Something like this, but where we find ourselves at the present, I'm not you know, I don't believe.

B

That this is this is right. Moving forward and- and you know it's been brought up in a couple of.

B

Previous uh meetings that we've been in a couple of previous sessions that that you know a lot of.

B

These things- and I mentioned earlier uh that you know solar was not even you know something.

B

I was talking about during my campaign, but it became a community concern after we'd gotten.

B

Into office, the storage facility down in uh the southeastern part of the county was something.

B

That that I had not heard of until getting into office, um and so I think what we're finding.

B

um You know, and with this, if you, if you even if you include the public hearing the vast majority.

B

Of of uh comments that I've received emails, calls texts, uh commentary on social media even.

B

Has been against allowing solar and agriculture in agriculturally zoned land and, and I think that.

B

What people are discovering with our board? The present board of commissioners? Is that, even though.

B

We may not end up agreeing with them at the end of the day, we are receptive to at least hearing out.

B

Their concerns, you know the fact that we have had the kind of public response that we've had over.

B

The last six months to a variety of issues, again, some of which we none of us had even figured that.

B

We would be you know contending with, I think, is a credit to the the work that we're doing.

B

um You know in a situation like this, I think I mean again I'm not going to to predict how the.

B

Coming vote may go but but you know there are, there have been a number of issues where we've.

B

Come down squarely on the side of the majority of the county, um you know the positions that.

B

We've been put into uh you know that we've been entrusted with uh you know in my mind, anyways you.

B

Know taking into account at least the the public opinion and making a decision is as necessary.

B

um So so again I don't you know, certainly back to the beginning. I really don't think that it was.

B

A time that we, you know didn't, spend well today because again, if for nothing else, we have a better.

B

Understanding of what we ask the work group to do so, what one more question, um if I own a piece of.

C

Property and I get denied certain zoning there's a time frame before I can try again if this goes.

C

Away today- and let's say commissioner rothstein wants to propose community solar with whole.

C

Different set of rules, is there a time frame or is there anything restricting that from happening.

G

There's a time frame: okay, you have to wait for certain things on an ordinance like this there's.

C

No restriction right so the board of county commissioners on you know if this, let's say this.

F

Goes through the planning process and comes back to the board with a recommendation to white out.

F

um This section and the board does that um then um then that is the decision of the board of the.

F

County commissioners, if it's a 5-0 vote, any of the five of you just to keep it simple can bring.

F

That up again and say you know, gentlemen, I'd like to re-evaluate our you know: community, solar and.

F

The ag zone- um you know so that's sort of the mechanics how the board operates. I think what.

F

You're referring to and I'm looking at marion and hannah and other zoning people with regard.

F

Our planning people with regard to, if you, if you go through a a spot, rezoning and you're denied.

F

Did I use the wrong word piecemeal, yep, male resounding we're, not spot rezoning, [laughter].

F

Marilyn's watching don't um the if you go through the proper process to rezone.

F

Your property and it's denied, then. Yes, there is a time frame and I think it's two years.

F

Two or five five yeah some number of years, but it's a it's a time frame, but this I think it's.

C

Five there's no time for this could be brought up two months from now. If, if the board decides.

F

After again, the planning commission process, the board- decides to make a change here and.

F

Then a week later decided to open it all up again and make a different change as long as.

F

The person the person suggesting it was on the right side of the vote, uh the winning side of the.

F

Vote then, yes, you could do it, okay, yeah and that's why I wasn't sure if you were asking.

A

About the board or a property owner, I think it's five years, but I may be mistaken.

E

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking? Okay, yes, this this okay! I didn't want to assume this.

C

Had nothing and be wrong? No, I always better to ask yeah. Okay! Okay, I'm done still have the.

F

Motion in the second right did, I have a second. We have a second any further discussion on this.

A

All in favor aye and I'm against, okay, I need a motion to adjourn so moved. Second, all in favor, aye.

G