MINUTES
TRUSTEES PRESENT:
Lloyd C. Jones, Jr., Chairman
Allen H. Cohey
Daniel W. Colhoun
Mildred H. Darcey
Lewis Logan, representing Treasurer
Kopp
Judith C. Lynch
Shirley W. Pilchard
Vera Mae Schultz
Joseph F. Tassone, representing the
Secretary, Maryland Department of Planning
Douglas H. Wilson, representing the Secretary,
Maryland Department of Agriculture
TRUSTEES
ABSENT:
Jerry Klasmeier,
representing Comptroller Schaefer
James Pelura,
D.V.M.
OTHERS PRESENT:
Bill Amoss,
Harford
Erik Balsley, Maryland Department of
Planning
Bill Beach, Department of General Services
Brenda Black,
Carroll
Dave Bourdon, Prince Georges County Program Administrator
Tammy Buckle,
Yates Claggett, Prince Georges County
Soil Conservation District
James A. Conrad, MALPF Executive Director
Nancy Forrester, Assistant Attorney General, Dept. of General Services
Iva L. Frantz, MALPF Administrative Officer
Jill Goyette,
David Kelleher, Department of General
Services
Joy Levy, Howard
Wally Lippincott,
John Luthy,
Carla
Craig Nielsen, Assistant Attorney
General
Jeanine Nutter,
MALPF Fiscal Clerk
Barbara Polito,
Bill Powel,
Carroll
Charles Rice, Charles
Radhika Sakhamuri, Queen Anne's
Donna Sasscer, St. Mary’s County Program Administrator
Gloria Smith, Wicomico
John R. G. Stanley,
Elizabeth Weaver, MALPF Administrative Officer
Lloyd C. Jones, Jr., Chairman, called the meeting to order at
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES/ADDITION OR
DELETION OF AGENDA ITEMS:
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES,
May 25, 2004.
Board members
received copies of the minutes just prior to the meeting.
Motion #1: To approve the minutes of
Motion: Vera Mae Schultz Second: Dan Colhoun
Status: Approved
B. APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE SESSION MINUTES,
Motion #2: To approve the Executive Session
minutes of
Motion: Vera Mae Schultz Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
C.
ADDITION OR DELETION OF AGENDA ITEMS:
Mr. James Conrad, Executive Director,
noted that there are no additions to the regular agenda. There is one deletion which is item II;E, a boundary line adjustment in St. Mary’s County. Mr. Conrad stated that there is not enough
information at this time to make an informed decision. Mr. Conrad also announced the FRPP amount
awarded to
II. DISTRICT/EASEMENT
AMENDMENTS
Mr. Conrad
presented the district and easement amendment agenda items.
A.
1. 06-02-80-12E
Request to
allow the exclusion of three (3) child’s lots from an easement property, the
original owner of which is deceased, based on the intent of the original owner
as expressed in affidavits of persons who knew the landowner during his
lifetime.
The original request for the exclusion of
three child’s lots from Mr. Everett E. Stanley’s property was presented at the
Board meeting on
Mr. Conrad stated that the staff
examined the statutory language in 1979 and 1985 and the language in the deed
of easement and that none suggests any leeway to consider the approval of this
request. Both the Foundation and
Craig Nielsen, Assistant Attorney
General, stated that the problem is that Mr. Stanley died without a written
application. Because the easement is a
personal covenant, unfortunately the right to make written application dies
with Mr. Stanley. There is no right to
grant a child’s lot without an owner’s request.
That’s the law. The Foundation
has never deviated from that. The
Foundation does not have the authority to grant such a lot under the law. If the Foundation grants this based on
affidavits, it will have to grant lots whenever affidavits come in to support
requests after the Grantor’s death.
Mr. John R. G. Stanley, the son of the
deceased landowner, was invited to speak to the Board. Mr. Stanley apologized for not being able to
get the will to the staff, and he explained the history of the easement sale to
the Foundation, the personal background of his family and its need for child’s
lots, and the position of the family on the intent of his father. He felt that his father was consistent and
clear in expressing to all of the people he knew his intent for the children to
have lots on the property, and that he was unaware that the Foundation required
written application to secure the lots.
Mr. Stanley expressed his family’s willingness to accept resale
restrictions on any lots granted by the Board.
There is no intent on the family’s part to do anything but make personal
use of the lots for their own dwellings.
He felt that the Board has the discretion and authority to grant his
request regardless of any recommendations of counsel concerning statutory
interpretation. His interpretation is
that the legislature is not concerned about who actually signs the written
request for child’s lots, but establishing the intent of the original Grantor
to exclude those lots from the easement.
Mr. Stanley considered the evolution of the statutory language
applicable to the granting of child’s lots over time, and concluded that there
is no requirement that the Grantor is the one to make the written
application. He was also concerned about
whether his father was properly informed as to the requirements for written
application to secure the lots he fully intended to acquire for his children.
Mr. Lewis Logan, representing Treasurer
Kopp, reminded Mr. Stanley that Craig Nielsen, Assistant Attorney General, had
stated earlier that the Board does not have the authority to grant such a
request under the law. Mr. Stanley, Mr.
Nielsen, Mr. Tassone, and Mr. Wilson discussed how much discretion the Board
has to interpret the applicable statutory language versus following the advice
of counsel. Mr. Stanley, Mr. Nielsen,
and Mr. Jones discussed whether or not accepting letters of intent or the language
of a Grantor’s will was a deviation from statutory language requiring written
application by the Grantor. Finally, Mr.
Stanley discussed how his request could be granted while limiting such requests
for other program participants. Mr. Wilson
moved to reject Mr. Stanley’s request.
Motion #3: To reject Mr. Stanley’s request based on advice from the Foundation’s
counsel that this request does not meet the legal requirements of the easement
or of the statutory language (Agriculture Article §2-513) in effect in 1985 for
“written application” based on a personal covenant of the Grantor.
Motion: Douglas Wilson Second: Dan Colhoun
Status: Approved
B.
1. 07-06-01-05
ALLRED, Floyd, Jr. 117.774
acres
Request to
exclude up to two acres for an owner’s lot for the personal use of the Grantor.
The current request is for the release of up to 2 acres for an
owner’s lot for Mr. Allred’s personal use. Mr. Allred owns no
other district or easement property. His
wife, Lorraine Allred, owns a 49.45 acre easement
property (file #07-06-01-15a) contiguous to this parcel. There have been no other lot requests on
either of these properties.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for an owner’s
lot based on the landowner’s rights contained in the deed of easement’s
covenants, conditions, limitations and restrictions, Section A. (1)(b) “...the Grantee, on written application from the
Grantor, shall release free of easement restrictions only for the Grantor who
originally sold this easement, 1 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a
dwelling house for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child...”
Motion #4: To approve the release of up to two
acres of Mr. Allred’s property for an owner’s lot for
his personal use.
Motion: Judy Lynch Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
C.
1. 11-07-85-04e GREEN, Howard & Kathleen 197.76 acres
Request to exchange 0.382 acres of
easement property with 0.382 acres of non-easement property from the adjacent
parcel owned by Mr. Neil Towne to eliminate an unintended encroachment when Mr.
Towne constructed his dwelling.
The current request is to exchange 0.382 acres of easement
property with a neighbor, Mr. Towne, who inadvertently constructed his dwelling
on Mr. and Mrs. Green’s easement property.
Mr. and Mrs. Green own no other district or easement property. They have requested and had approved a 1.0
acre owner’s lot exclusion and a 1.0 acre lot
exclusion for a pre-existing dwelling.
Mr. Towne, an adjacent landowner, recently constructed a new home
on his property and the foundation of the home was mistakenly built over the
boundary line between his building lot and the Green farm. The placement of the fencing between the
properties was assumed by Mr. Towne to form the boundary line, which it does
not. To resolve the dispute without
litigation or the expense of relocating the house, Mr. Green has agreed to
exchange a 0.382 acre portion of his property for an equivalent acreage from
Mr. Towne to eliminate the encroachment.
Foundation staff recommends approval of this request for an
exchange of easement property for non-easement property as a common-sense
solution in lieu of litigation and the possible expense of relocating the
dwelling. Staff further recommends that
that approval be conditional on Mr. Towne and/or his title insurance company
assuming responsibility for the legal expenses incurred by the Foundation
related to this property exchange
Motion #5: To approve the swap of 0.382 acre of non-easement
property to eliminate the unintentional encroachment.
Motion: Lewis Logan Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
D.
1. 09-07-91-01 STEVENS, Donald R., Sr. 199.1
acres
Request to exclude up to two acres for
a child’s lot for the personal use of the Grantor’s son, David L. Stevens.
The current request is for the release of up to 2 acres for a
child’s lot for the personal use of Mr. Stevens’ son, David L. Stevens. This request was originally filed in February
1995 as part of his estate planning (see acknowledgement letter attached). Mr. Stevens is now ready to move forward with
the necessary approvals. Mr. Stevens
owns no other district or easement property.
There have been no other lot requests on this property. Mr. Stevens’ son is the designated heir of
the farm.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for a child’s
lot based on the landowner’s rights contained in the deed of easement’s
covenants, conditions, limitations and restrictions, Section A. (1)(b) “...the Grantee, on written application from the
Grantor, shall release free of easement restrictions only for the Grantor who
originally sold this easement, 1 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a
dwelling house for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child...”
Dan Colhoun, Board member questioned the
location of the proposed lot. Mr.
Conrad, Executive Director stated that the location of this lot had been
approved by
Motion #6: To table the motion until
Motion: Lewis Logan Second: Douglas Wilson
Status: Approved
2. 09-15-01-19A SCOTT, James C. & Linda M. 87.75
acres
Request to exclude up to 2 acres for an
owner’s lot for the personal use of the Grantors.
The current request is for the release of up to 2 acres for an
owner’s lot for the personal use of Mr. and Ms. Scott. The Scotts own no other district or easement
property. There have been no other
requests on this property. There is no
pre-existing dwelling on this property.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for an owner’s
lot based on the landowner’s rights contained in the deed of easement’s
covenants, conditions, limitations and restrictions, Section A. (1)(b) “...the Grantee, on written application from the
Grantor, shall release free of easement restrictions only for the Grantor who
originally sold this easement, 1 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a
dwelling house for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child...”
Motion #7: To approve the exclusion of up to 2.00
acres for an owner’s lot on Mr. and Ms. James Scott’s easement property.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Judy Lynch
Status: Approved
3. 09-01-90-08c LUTHY, John F. 89.6
acres
Request to exclude up to 2 acres for a
child’s lot for the personal use of the Grantors son, John F. Luthy IV.
The current request is for the release of up to 2 acres for a
child’s lot for the personal use of his son, John F. Luthy
IV. Mr. Luthy
owns no other district or easement property.
There have been no other lot requests on this property. A 1,000 square foot acreage swap was approved
on this property in 2003 to allow a septic mound system on a neighboring
property. There are no pre-existing
dwellings on this property.
Foundation staff recommends approval of the request for a child’s
lot based on the landowner’s rights contained in the deed of easement’s
covenants, conditions, limitations and restrictions, Section A. (1)(b) “...the Grantee, on written application from the
Grantor, shall release free of easement restrictions only for the Grantor who
originally sold this easement, 1 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a
dwelling house for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child...” Staff feels that this release for 1.35 acres
is acceptable given that the legal requirements of the program are met by the
letter from the Health Department, in lieu of having the entire 2 acre lot with
the dwelling located on easement property.
Motion #8: To approve the exclusion of up to 2.00
acres for a child’s lot on Mr. Luthy’s easement
property.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Shirley Pilchard
Status: Approved
III. AGRICULTURAL
PRESERVATION DISTRICT PETITIONS
Mr. Conrad
presented the district petitions.
A.
1. 21-20-04-01 BOWMAN FARMS, LLC 373.48 acres
This is a 373.48 acre parcel in
Downsville. It is contiguous with
district property and is divided between cropland and farmland. The property has two dwellings, and the primary
farm operation is grain. It has 68%
qualifying soils and 5.25 acres being withheld because it is in a historical
preservation district.
2. 21-23-04-02 CARBAUGH, Harold L. & Sharon
D. 144.18 acres
This is a 144.18 acre parcel in Clear
Spring. It is contiguous to other
preserved land. The property has one
dwelling and is primarily cropland. The
primary farm operation is dairy. It has 66% qualifying soils, and no acres are
being withheld.
3. 21-09-04-03 SHANK,
This is a 77.38 acre parcel located in Leitersburg. It is within 50’ of another district. The property has one dwelling and is cropland
and pasture. The primary farm operation
is dairy. It
has 76% qualifying soils with no withheld acreage.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #9: To approve the requests of Bowman
Farms, LLC, Harold and Sharon Carbaugh, and David and
Linda Shank to establish an agricultural district on their properties.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
B.
1. 12-01-04-02 SMITH, James C., Jr., & Alice
Y 146.696 acres
This is a 146.696 acre composed of two
parcels located in the community of Creswell.
It has two dwellings and is primarily cropland. The primary farming operation is hay and
grain. It has 62.8% qualifying
soils. Three acres are being withheld
because of commercial zoning.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #10: To approve the request of James and Alice
Smith to establish an agricultural district on their property.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Lewis Logan
Status: Approved
C.
1. 09-14-04-01 NABB, Georgia J., et al. 334.96 acres
This is a
334.96 acre parcel located southeast of
Staff
recommends approval.
Motion #11 To approve the
request of Georgia Nabb, et al to establish an
agricultural district on her property.
Motion: Lewis Logan Second: Judy Lynch
Status: Approved
2. 09-12-04-02 SCHULTZ, Mary Ann, et al. 74.09 acres
This is a 74.09
acres parcel located in Hurlock. It is
contiguous to over 100 acres of preserved land.
It has one dwelling on the property, and it’s a mixture of cropland and
woodland. The primary farming operation
is grain. It has 90% qualifying
soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
3. 09-03-04-03 APPLE, Annette H. 137
acres
This is a 137
acre parcel located in the community of Reid’s Grove. It has one dwelling on the property and is a
mixture of cropland and woodland. The
primary farming operation is grain. It
has 99% of qualifying soils. There is no
acreage being withheld.
4. 09-01-04-04 DONALD G. JOHNSON & SON, INC. 113.40 acres
This is a
113.40 acre parcel located in the community of Finchville. It is contiguous to almost 400 acres of
preserved land. There are no dwellings
on the property, and its use is primarily cropland. The primary farming operation is grain. It has 100% of qualifying soils. There is no
acreage being withheld.
Staff
recommends approval.
Motion #12 To approve the
requests of Mary Ann Schultz, Annette Apple, and Donald G. Johnson & Son,
Inc., to establish a land preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Doug Wilson
Status: Approved
D.
1. 23-08-04-04 RICHARDSON, Willard Scott 47.84
acres
These 47.84 acres are contained in two
parcels located in Girdletree. It is contiguous to over 200 acres of
preserved land. There are two dwellings,
and the property is cropland and woodland.
The primary farming operation is hay.
It has 81% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #13: To approve the request of Willard
Richardson to establish a land preservation district on his property.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Shirley Pilchard
Status: Approved
E.
1. 02-33-04-01 FRANKLIN, Johnnie A. & Gary D. 103.00 acres
This 103-acre parcel is located in
Lothian. It is contiguous to over 700
acres of preserved land. There is one
dwelling, and the property is primarily pasture. The principal farming operation is cattle and
hay. It has 92% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #14: To approve the request of Johnnie and
Gary Franklin to establish a land preservation district on their property.
Motion: Shirley Pilchard Second: Lewis Logan
Status: Approved
F.
1. 06-01-04-01 BASSLER, Charles P. & Janai R. 21.10
acres
This 21.10-acre parcel is located near
Taneytown. It is contiguous to over 950
acres of preserved land. There is one
dwelling, and the property is cropland.
The principal farming operation is crops and hay. It has 100% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
2. 06-02-04-02 DRABIC, Wayne M. & Mary K. 59.93 acres
This 59.93 acre parcel is located in Taneytown. It is contiguous to over 550 acres of
preserved land. There is one dwelling,
and the property is primarily cropland.
The principal farming operation is cattle and hay. It has 58% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
3. 06-01-04-03 NELSON, Michael S. & Donna 122.61 acres
This 122.61 acre parcel is located in Taneytown. It is contiguous to over 1,000 acres of
preserved land. There is one dwelling
and the property is a mixture of cropland and woodland. The principal farming operation is grain and
hay. It has 93% qualifying soils. There are two acres being withheld for an
agricultural business.
4. 06-10-04-04 STARNER, C. Dean & Ruth L. 49.78 acres
This 49.78 acre parcel is located in
Taneytown. It is contiguous to over 700
acres of preserved land. There is one
dwelling, and the property is a mixture of cropland and pasture. The primary farming operation is dairy. It has 65%
qualifying soils. There are no acres
being withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #15 To approve the
requests of Charles and Janai Bassler,
Wayne and Mary Drabic, Michael and Donna Nelson, and
Dean and Ruth Starner to establish a land
preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
G.
1. 16-09-04-01 RICHARDSON, Charles F. et al 312.58 acres
This 312.58 acre parcel is located in
2. 16-05-04-02
This 132.06 acre parcel is located in
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #16: To approve the requests of Charles Richardson,
et al., and John and Donna Denison to establish a land
preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Mildred Darcey Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
H
1. 14-02-04-05 SUTTON, John, III, & Beverley Philipp 197.28
acres
This 197.28 acre parcel is located in Kennedyville. It is
contiguous to over 2,400 acres of preserved land. There are three dwellings, and the property
is mostly cropland. The principal
farming operation is growing crops. It
has 90% qualifying soils. There is no
acreage being withheld.
2. 14-02-04-06 HILL, Allan J., et al. 159.24 acres
This 159.24 acre parcel is located in Kennedyville. It is
contiguous to over 1,300 acres of preserved land. There are no dwellings, and the property is mostly
cropland. The primary operation is growing
crops. It has 98% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
3. 14-02-04-07 LANGENFELDER, Conrad J. & Patricia A. 56.58
acres
This 56.58 acre parcel is located near Kennedyville. It is
contiguous to approximately 1,400 acres of preserved land. There are no dwellings, and the property is all
cropland, The
principal farming operation is grain. It
has 100% qualifying soils. There is no
acreage being withheld.
4. 14-02-04-08 LANGENFELDER, Conrad J. & Patricia A. 210.77 acres
This 210.77 acre parcel is located near
Kennedyville. It
is within 2000’ of 1,400 acres of preserved land. There is one dwelling, and the property is primarily
cropland. The primary farming operation
is grain. It has 96% qualifying
soils. There is no acreage being
withheld.
5. 14-02-04-09 LANGENFELDER Family Limited Partnership 491 acres
This 491 acre parcel is located near Kennedyville. It is
contiguous to and near 1,600 acres of preserved land. There is one dwelling, and the property is mostly
cropland, with 75 acres of woodland and 20 acres of wetland. The principal farming operation is
grain. It has 86% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
6. 14-05-04-10 CLAGGETT, Herschell B. 144.06 acres
This 144.06 acre parcel is located in
Rock Hall. It is within 3000’ of 174
acres of preserved land. It has one
dwelling, and the property is a mixture of cropland, wetland, and woodland. The primary farming operation is grain, corn
and soybeans. It has 90% qualifying
soils. There is no acreage being
withheld.
7. 14-03-04-11 FRY, Edwin R. & Marian M. 164 acres
This 164 acre parcel is located in the
community of Worton.
It is contiguous to almost 1,000 acres of preserved land. There are no dwellings, and the property is primarily
in cropland. The principal farming
operation is crops and hay. It has 99%
qualifying soils. There is no acreage
being withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #17: To approve the requests of John Sutton
III and Beverly Philipp, Allan Hill et al., Conrad
and Patricia Langenfelder, Langenfelder
Family Limited Partnership, Herschell Claggett, and Edwin and Marian Fry to establish a land preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Allen Cohey Second: Lewis Logan
Status: Approved
I.
1. 08-08-04-04 PTACK,
Kenneth R. and Jo Ann 143.17
acres
This 143.17 acre parcel is located in Bryantown. It is near
400 acres of preserved land and is located in a watershed area. There are no dwellings, and the property is
mostly in woodland. The principal farming
operation is grain and forestry. It has 79%
qualifying soils. There is no acreage
being withheld.
2. 08-03-04-05
This 72.9725 acre parcel is located in Nanjemoy. It is near
a state forest that has over 1,400 acres of land. There are no dwellings, and the property is woodland. The primary use is forestry. It has 77% qualifying soils. There is one acre being withheld.
3. 08-02-04-06 MARYLAND SELECT HARDWOODS, LLC 51.134 acres
This 51.134 acre parcel is located in
Ironsides. It is contiguous over 300
acres of preserved land. There are no
dwellings, and the property is woodland. The principal use is forestry. It has 100% qualifying soils. There are 7 acres being withheld for a saw mill.
4. 08-04-04-07 GLADWELL, Charlotte E. & Kimberly 65.21 acres
This 65.21 acre parcel is located in Bel Alton. It is contiguous
to 120 acres of preserved land. There are
no dwellings, and the property is a mixture or cropland and woodland. The primary farming operation is grain, hay
and livestock. It has 100% qualifying
soils. There are two acres being
withheld around an existing perc site.
5. 08-06-04-08 MORGAN, Mary A. & Darryl Duckworth 61.237 acres
This 61.237 acre parcel is located in Pomfret. It is near
a 1,480 acre state forest. There are no
dwellings, and the property is a mixture of cropland with 15 acres of
woodland. The principal farming
operation is grain. It has 63%
qualifying soils. There is no acreage
being withheld.
6. 08-02-04-09 DYSON, George C. & Ruby W. 53.30 acres
This 53.30 acre parcel is located in Ironsides. It is contiguous to over 400 acres of
preserved land. It has no dwellings, and
the property is a mixture of cropland and pasture. The primary farming operation is grain. It has 60% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
7. 08-10-04-10 DYSON, George C. & Ruby 23.539 acres
This 25.539 acre parcel is located in Nanjemoy. It is
contiguous to state forestland and 200 acres of preserved land. There are no dwellings, and the property is woodland. The principal use is forestry. It has 52% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
8. 08-05-04-11 CHARLESTON PARTNERSHIP 36.10 acres
This 36.10 acre parcel is located in Newburg. It is contiguous to 300 acres of preserved
land. There are no dwellings, and the
property is mostly woodland. The principal use is forestry. It has 100% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
9. 08-02-04-12 GRAY, Malinda
B. et al. 102.28 acres
This 102.28 acre parcel is located in Port
Tobacco. There are no dwellings, and the
property is mostly woodland with 20 acres of cropland. The primary operation is grain. It has 100% qualifying soils. There is no acreage being withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #18: To approve the requests of Kenneth and JoAnn Ptack; Windsor, LLC;
Maryland Select Hardwoods, LLC; Charlotte and Kimberly Gladwell;
Mary Morgan and Darryl Duckworth; George and Ruby Dyson; Charleston Partnership;
and Malinda Gray et al., to establish a land
preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Mildred Darcey
Status: Approved
10. 08-03-04-13 KLAAS, Brian G. & Gregory A. et al. 261.1518 acres
This 261.1518 acre parcel is Nanjemoy. It is
contiguous 1,300 acres of preserved land.
There are no dwellings, and the property is all woodland. The principal use is forestry. It has 99% qualifying soils. There are 29.85 acres being withheld.
Staff does not recommend approval of
the district as currently configured because it conflicts with the Foundation’s
policy regarding withheld acreage.
Motion #19: To approve the request of Brian and
Gregory Klaas et al to establish a land preservation district
on their property subject to waiving all lot rights on the districted property
as well as restricting the withheld acreage to allow no more than three lots.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Dan Colhoun
Status: Approved
J.
1. 10-15-04-10 RILL, Bradley D. & Tracey L. 92.57 acres
This 92.57 acre parcel is located near
Thurmont. There are no dwellings, and
the property is a mixture of cropland, pasture, and woodland, with 33 acres
under a CREP contract. The principal
farming operation is hay. It has 58%
qualifying soils. There is no acreage
being withheld.
2. 10-17-04-11 McCULLER, James
V. Jr. & Nancy L 260
acres
This 260 acre parcel is located on
3. 10-05-04-12 WILLIAMS, Franklin M. & Judith 249.76 acres
This 249.76 acre parcel is located near
Emmitsburg.
There are four dwellings, and the property is mostly cropland and
pasture. The primary farming operation
is beef. It has 88% qualifying
soils. There are no acres being
withheld.
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #20: To approve the requests of Bradley &
Tracey Rill, James & Nancey McCuller
and Franklin & Judith Williams to establish a land
preservation district on their properties.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
K.
1. 22-02-04-01 WILLIAMS, Gregory H. et al. 21.00 acres
This 21.00 acre parcel is located near
Staff recommends approval.
Motion #21: To approve the request of Gregory
Williams to establish a land preservation district on their property subject to
waiving all lot rights on the districted property as well as restricting the
withheld acreage to allow no more than one lot.
Motion: Joe Tassone Second: Dan Colhoun
Status: Approved
IV.
PROGRAM POLICY
A.
Vera Mae Schultz, Board Member, presented information to support a
recommended change in MALPF’s current Forest Management Policy. She stated that the current policy requires a
forest management plan if at least 50% of the property is forest. The ad
hoc group on forestry policy recommends that, if an easement property has
at least 25 contiguous acres in forested land, a forest stewardship plan should
be required. Forest Stewardship Plans
cost $200-$300 if prepared by a Department of Natural Resources forester and
usually more if prepared by a private forester. There are no cost-sharing funds currently
available. It was the opinion of the ad hoc group on forestry management
policies that the cost is insignificant in relationship to the compensation
that would be received from the sale of the easement.
Mr. Conrad stated that the suggested change will only be required to be
completed right before settlement. Ms.
Schultz stated that the landowners need to be informed as soon as possible
after receiving an offer to allow time to provide a Forest Stewardship Plan
prior to settlement.
Mr. Wilson raised concern regarding the time frame between the Board of Public
Works approval date and the settlement date and the amount of time needed to acquire
a Forest Stewardship Plan. He stated that
currently the Foundation is settling easements on an average of 40 days. Rad Sakhamuri, Program
Administrator for Queen Anne’s County stated that the Department of Natural Resources
takes approximately six months to complete a Stewardship Plan.
Mr. Wilson stated there are two issues for the Board to consider. The first issue is the imposition of a burden
placed upon the landowner to meet this requirement before settlement, and the
second issue is the Foundation’s ability to enforce the requirement after
settlement.
Mr. Conrad pointed out that with this policy change it will allow twice
the amount of forested acres to be managed.
Doug Wilson asked the Program Administrators if they were to prepared to vote on these proposed policy changes. The consensus was that they are not now
prepared to have a vote.
Discussion ensued.
Motion #22: To table the proposed Forest Management
Policy changes until the next Board meeting to allow additional information and
input from Foundation Staff and County Program Administrators.
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Allen Cohey
Status: Approved
V. INFORMATION AND
DISCUSSION
A.
Recertification of Agricultural Land Preservation Program –
Joe Tassone,
Maryland Department of Planning, presented
Motion #23: To approve
Motion: Lewis Logan Second: Shirley Pilchard
Status: Approved
B.
Recertification of Agricultural Land Preservation Program –
Joe Tassone, Maryland Department of
Planning, presented
Motion #24: To
approve
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Lewis Logan
Status: Approved
Motion #25: To
adjourn regular session and go to executive session.
Motion: Allen Cohey Second: Joe Tassone
Status: Approved
The regular session Board meeting was
adjourned at approximately
Respectfully
Submitted:
_____________________________________
James A.
Conrad, Executive Director
_____________________________________
Jeanine Nutter,
Fiscal Clerk