MINUTES
TRUSTEES
PRESENT:
Daniel Colhoun, Chairman
Vera Mae Schultz, Vice
Chairman
Howard
S. Freedlander, representing Treasurer Kopp
Jerry Klasmeier, representing Comptroller Schaefer
Pat Langenfelder
Judith C. Lynch
Dr. James Pelura
Shirley W. Pilchard
Secretary Scott,
Department of Planning
Joe Tassone,
representing Secretary Scott, Department of Planning
Christopher H. Wilson
Doug Wilson, representing
Secretary Riley, Department of Agriculture
TRUSTEES
ABSENT:
Robert F. Stahl, Jr.
OTHERS
PRESENT:
Bill Amoss,
Page and Wayne L. Armacost, Landowner,
Alan Brauer,
Sr. Landowner,
Tammy Buckle,
Yates Clagett,
James A. Conrad, MALPF
Executive Director
Carol Council, MALPF
Administrative Officer
Rama Dilip,
MALPF Secretary
Nancy Forrester,
Assistant Attorney General, Department of General Services
Joy Levy,
Wally Lippincott,
Ed Lippy, Landowner,
Carla Martin,
George Mayo, Executive
Director,
Harriet and Wayne
McGinnis, Landowner,
Charlotte and Malcolm
Morris, Landowner, St. Mary’s County
LeRoy Myers, State Delegate
and Landowner,
M. Richard Myers, Jr.,
Craig Nielsen, Assistant
Attorney General, Department of Agriculture
Bill Powel,
Charles Rice,
Ralph Robertson,
Daniel Rosen, Planner,
Maryland Department of Planning
Radhika Sakhamuri,
Queen Anne’s County, Program Administrator
Donna Sasscer, St. Mary’s County, Program Administrator
Donna Smith, Queen
Anne’s County, Program Administrator
Elizabeth Weaver, MALPF
Administrative Officer
John Zawitoski,
The
Board met in an open meeting at
James Conrad, MALPF Executive Director,
presented the proposal on Critical Farms Program and distributed the draft
recommendations. The draft is an extract
from the report MALPF is doing for the Governor’s Office and the General
Assembly. Mr. Conrad stated that he is
presenting the draft to the Board to give them an idea of what is being
proposed and also to include comments, if any, from the Board.
The draft proposal originates in the recommendations
in the Final Report of the Task Force for MALPF in December 2004 suggesting a
statewide Critical Farms Program to help achieve the Foundation’s goals and
objectives. In the 2005 Legislative
Session, Senate Bill 502 recommended that MALPF and the Department of Planning
look at options to secure critical farms easements and identify those most
likely to succeed.
The purpose of the Critical Farms Program
is to provide interim or emergency financing for the acquisition of
agricultural preservation easements on critical farms that would otherwise be
sold for non-agricultural purposes. This
has been defined as the primary goal in the legislation.
The specific recommendations of the
report are:
·
Approve the proposed legislative language for the 2006 Legislative
Session that authorizes the Foundation to develop a Critical Farms Program
based on using easement option contracts for emergency and interim or bridge
financing in the acquisition of
permanent agricultural preservation easements or their equivalents on
land critical to the objectives of individual counties’ and the State’s land
preservation objectives. The specific
eligibility requirements, easement option valuation, and processes will be
developed and implemented within the general guidelines of the proposed
legislative language and set out as appropriate in COMAR.
·
Delay for one year the approval of legislative language that will
authorize the Foundation, as part of the Critical Farms Program, to make
fee-simple purchases of Critical Farms and resell them with an easement
attached. The delay is needed because of
the legal and process complexities related to potential liability,
environmental review requirements, land disposition requirements, etc. This will allow the Foundation time to review
legal and other issues to identify problems or issues that need to be addressed
by legislation.
·
Adopt the recommendations made by the Agriculture Stewardship
Commission for $20 million commitment from general funds for MALPF. MALPF should have flexibility to use this
additional funding for its existing easement acquisition program, the Critical
Farms Program, a Priority Preservation Areas Program, and/or an Installment
Purchase Agreement Program. Any funding not
used in a given fiscal year shall carry over to the next fiscal year and shall
not revert.
·
Approve the $5 million funding request from MARBIDCO for the Next
Generation Farmland Acquisition Program to benefit young farmers seeking their
first farm purchase.
·
If the related funding proposal is not adopted, the proposed
Critical Farms Program legislation should still be adopted and funded based on
existing funding, but without the PPA element, unless voluntarily adopted by
individual participating Counties. The
Program will be implemented based on existing funding. Funding legislation will be resubmitted in
2007 with legislation required to adopt the fee-simple purchase and resale with
easement-in-place element of the Critical Farms Program.
·
Creation of a permanent senior staff position PIN in MALPF for the
increased workload requirements associated with the development,
implementation, and administration of the Critical Farms Program and the IPA
program. Consultation with the Office of
the Attorney General (OAG) concerning expected increased workload for these
programs, and development of a recommendation to address MALPF workload issues
affecting the OAG.
Responding to a question, Mr. Doug
Wilson, representing Secretary Riley, Department of Agriculture, commented that
Stewardship HB 2 and SB 5 for MALPF recommend $20 million, but at this point in
time there is no funding in this regard neither in general funds nor in
Governor’s budget.
Mr. Conrad clarified that the program
could be created without additional funding.
The Foundation is proposing that it could draw an existing allocation
given the fact that the Foundation does expect a substantial increase in
funding in FY 2007 and that counties could choose to draw an existing
allocation for Critical Farms. Mr.
Conrad further commented that the additional funding is not absolutely
necessary, and the Foundation can start the process based on existing
funding. The options will be coming to
the MALPF Board and the Board of Public Works for approval.
Mr. Bill Amoss,
Program Administrator,
Mr. Conrad clarified that MARBIDCO will
not be creating an easement program, but will be a funding source and the
easement would be given to the Foundation.
The Foundation would actually be creating a common committee between the
Critical Farms Program and the MARBIDCO Program so that both can look at
applications and discuss them. The
Foundation will be recommending to MARBIDCO that they only approve those
properties which are eligible in the MALPF Program.
Mr. Conrad had to leave early to attend
the legislative session, where he was supporting the testimony of Maryland
Department of Planning.
Daniel Colhoun,
Chairman, called the meeting to order at approximately
The Chair asked the guests to introduce
themselves.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES/ADDITION OR DELETION OF
AGENDA ITEMS:
A.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
Motion #1: To approve the minutes of
Motion: Doug Wilson Second: Howard
Freedlander
Status: Approved
B. ADDITION OR DELETION OF
AGENDA ITEMS
II.D.
1. 21-99-07e Myers, Jr., Leroy E. 148.08 acres
Re-Review of request
for the exclusion of up to 2.0 acres for an owner’s lot
The item will be discussed at the beginning of the meeting as Delegate
Myers needs to attend the legislative session.
IV.
PROGRAM POLICY
C. The presentation
of Committee on Districts by Ms. Carol Council is being added.
Mr. Doug Wilson circulated the highlights
of the Governor’s budget announcement on the Department of Agriculture,
including the subsection on the Environment.
The handout provides a summary of the Maryland Department of
Agriculture’s overall budget. The
Department’s general fund budget is increasing for FY 06 over FY 07 from $23
million to $29 million – a 25% increase in general funds. The overwhelming majority of those dollars
are in the environmental area, primarily for a major initiative of the Governor
for cover crops and similar programs, such as commodity cover crops, harvest
cover crops, the Governor’s tributary strategy programs, directed funds for the
Corsica Watershed, and a yet to be named additional watershed for directed
action; these are under the heading currently called Corsica II. The total funding for the Department of
Agriculture will be more than $5 or $6 million.
Thus, there are lots of dollars directly allocated towards cover crops
and similar types of programs to improve the water quality. The last two pages of the handout relates to
the MALPF budget. The operating budget
for MALPF is under $2 million. This
amount is about $400,000 higher than the previous year, and the increase in
dollars is due to the additional funding available for MALPF, as it is expected
that MALPF will be paying for more appraisals and settlements. The additional expenses also towards include
a consultant who would be helping the Foundation to move forward on the Installment
Purchase Agreement program. Mr. Conrad
is currently working on this with the State Treasurer’s Office to hire a
consultant.
In the Capital Budget, which is expected
to be released very soon, the significant changes expected are driven by the increased
revenues in the State Real Estate Transfer Tax.
For FY 2006, the State Transfer Tax dollars are just under $20
million. For FY 2007, the Governor’s
budget does not modify at all the current formula in the law for the
distribution of State Real Estate Transfer Tax – of which MALPF gets 17% of the
aggregate total of the tax after taking out a couple of things. This year, under this proposal, the State
dollars exceed $40 million. In addition
to that, the General Assembly last year in the budget reconciliation act
addressed the issue of "over attainment," which is from last year’s
money that was appropriated in the General Assembly. The actual revenues exceeded revenue
projections. Those extra dollars are
allowed to be budgeted in the Foundation’s budget for FY 2007. Those dollars are under $20 million. The Foundation’s budget from the State
Transfer Tax alone is $61 million. In
addition to that, the Foundation anticipates about $5 million from the federal
government. On the capital side, the Foundation
expects about $5 million from the Agricultural Transfer Tax and has budgeted
$13 million as local government contributions towards matching funds and 100%
county-funded easements. When all this
is added together, the expected capital funding amounts to about $82 million
available to purchase easements in FY 2007.
Mr. Doug Wilson concluded that there will
be a significantly greater amount of funding available for FY 2007 compared to
previous years. Mr. Conrad has written
to all program administrators about going on the road, county by county, with
tailored information about what have been the trends for MALPF easements. He emphasized the need to ensure that the
farmers are educated about the changes in the real estate market and the values
for their properties. The farmers need
to be informed about the availability of funds for MALPF easements. Also, he mentioned that the farmers need to
be informed about the new ranking system and its implications. The old ranking system of having to discount deeply
to be competitive to receive an offer is no longer valid. Mr. Doug Wilson remarked that the farmers
need to be encouraged to speak to their program administrators and to provide
realistic asking prices for their farms.
The program administrators can still recommend discounting if it helps
the landowner improve his or her likelihood of receiving an offer, but to keep in mind
that discounting no longer determines ranking.
When the Foundation makes an offer, this measure should help them to be
closer to their asking prices and reduce MALPF's
recent 30% rate of rejections.
Mr. Doug Wilson believed that if this is
done, the Foundation will have happier farmers selling lots of easements and a
significantly increased value compared to what the Foundation paid last
year. MALPF can expect over 24,000 acres
of additional easement property for FY 2007.
Mr. Doug Wilson summarized the situation by saying that there is lots of
support in the broad community for MALPF (as can be seen on the Agricultural
Stewardship Committee, in the General Assembly, in the dedication of General
Funds, and as heard in the statewide Agricultural Listening Sessions), and it
is essential to have synergy between the money the Foundation has and what the
farmers are expecting.
The first budget hearing is on
Mr. Colhoun remarked
that, as can be seen from Mr. Doug Wilson’s presentation, MALPF Board and MALPF
staff have a big project in front of them, and he felt it essential to ensure
that the information about the availability of funding for FY 2007 gets to all
the interested parties. He encouraged
all the program administrators to provide MALPF staff with any information on
any public meetings or any farmers’ clubs, dinners, Farm Bureau, local meetings
and so on. He hoped that a MALPF Board
member would be there for each of the County Agricultural Land Preservation
Advisory Board meetings or other appropriate venues to convey their personal
interest. There will also be a MALPF
staff member to explain the details of the Program and the funding. Mr. Chris Wilson had already made a beginning
by planning to attend the Anne Arundel County Advisory Board meeting. Mr. Colhoun also
shared with the Board members that, on the request of Mr. Ralph Robertson,
Program Administrator of Carroll County, he will be attending the meeting in
II. DISTRICT
/EASEMENT AMENDMENTS
D.
1. 21-99-07e MYERS,
Jr., Leroy E. 148.08
acres
Re-review of the request for the exclusion of up
to 2.0 acres for an owner’s lot
On
Carol Council, Foundation staff, spoke with Mr.
Myers by telephone and was informed that his intention was to place a 2.0 acre
lot for his daughter between Ryan’s lot and his proposed owner’s lot. Mr. Myers stated that at this time he is not requesting
approval of the lot for his daughter as she is not yet in a position to
construct a home. He asked that the
Board be polled in an effort to secure preliminary approval of the revised
owner’s lot location, with the understanding that the item would be brought to
the full Board at its January meeting.
Ms. Council sent an e-mail to the Board members, but received only three
responses giving preliminary approval and one response, from Ms. Vera Mae
Schultz, voicing concern about the need to have a 2.0 acre lot for the future
child’s lot. This was not enough
response to provide a quorum. Mr. Myers
is attending the January meeting to address the Board and answer any questions.
In response to Ms. Schultz’s concern, Ms.
Council researched the previous approval for Ryan’s 2.0 acre lot. This lot was required by the Washington
County Health Department to be 2.0 acres as “the presence of rock some what
limits our ability to manage the on site sewage disposal system in a
conventional manner.” Mr. Myers has
received a letter from the Health Department that gives the same justification
for his lot requiring 2.0 acres. It is
likely that a future lot located between these two, and in an area of rocky
soils, will also be required to be 2.0 acres in size.
Attached with the review was Mr. Myers request
letter, the Health Department letter, the survey, the original agenda memo, and
the original location map. Given receipt
of a letter from the Health Department requiring a 2.0 acre lot, Foundation
staff revised its recommendation to be one of approval of the release of 2.0
acres, based on the provisions of the deed of easement and in accordance with
Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b), Annotated Code of Maryland, which
grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of up to 2 acres if required by
regulations adopted by the Department of the Environment or the county.
Ms. Shirley Pilchard and Ms. Pat Langenfelder, Board members, stated that they did not
receive the e-mail sent by Ms. Council.
Mr. Myers said that he and his wife are the
owners, and they sold the easement to the Foundation. They thought it better to build a house on
their farm. The present request is for
the owner’s lot. The lot was required by
the Washington County Health Department to be 2.0 acres due to the presence of
rocky soils.
Motion #2: To approve
the request for the exclusion of up to 2.0 acres for an owner’s lot.
Motion: Chris
Wilson Second: Pat Langenfelder
Status: Approved
A.
QUEEN ANNE’S COUNTY
1. 17-91-04 PROUD, Donald W. and Catherine M. 106.60 acres
Request to exclude a child’s lot from easement
property
Mr. and Mrs. Proud are the original grantors of
the easement. The current request is for
the release of up to two acres for a child’s lot for the personal use of their
son, Donald. There have not been any
other lot requests for the property. The
Prouds do not own any other district or easement
properties. There are two pre-existing
dwellings on the property. The Prouds have requested a release of one of the pre-existing
dwellings.
The proposed location and access follow the
Foundation’s proposed lot location guidelines.
According to Queen Anne’s County, the proposed lot is to be located
along the road. The lot is clustered
with existing dwellings. Right-of-way
access to the proposed lot will be through an existing farm lane that serves as
access to two pre-existing dwellings.
The request was approved by the local advisory
board. The request conforms to local
zoning regulations. If approved, there
will be a required payback of $950.00 per acre to the Foundation. The exact payback amount will be determined
when the Foundation receives a letter from the Health Department stating how
much acreage is required.
Staff recommends approval of the release of one
acre plus such minimum additional acreage if required by the County Health
Department, not to exceed 2 acres total based on the provisions of the deed of
easement and in accordance with Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b),
Annotated Code of Maryland, which grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of
up to 2 acres if required by regulations adopted by the Department of the
Environment or the county.
Ms. Donna Smith, the new Queen Anne's County
Program Administrator, and Ms. Rad Sakhamuri, current Program Administrator, were available to
answer any questions from the Board. Mr.
and Mrs. Proud were not available. Ms.
Smith has been a long time resident of Queen Anne’s County and, also, a
neighbor of Mr. and Mrs. Proud. Ms.
Smith felt confident of answering the questions from the Board, if any.
Since there were many requests for lot
exclusion, Mr. Joe Tassone, representing Secretary
Scott, Department of Planning wanted to know if the lot location policy
guidelines have been finalized. Ms.
Carol Council, MALPF staff responded that the Committee is meeting after the
Board meeting to finalize the guidelines and hoped to present the Committee’s
final recommendations at the next month’s Board meeting.
Mr. Colhoun commented
that a number of applications for lot requests have already started following
the guidelines, though they still have not been formally adopted.
Motion #3: To approve
the request for the exclusion of up to 2 acres for a child’s lot on easement
property.
Motion: Doug
Wilson Second: Shirley Pilchard
Status: Approved
B.
1. 14-87-03 MYERS, M. Richard 173.80
acres
Request for the relocation and release of a
pre-existing dwelling
Mr. Myers is the son of the original grantor of
the easement, Elma M. Myers. The current
request is for the relocation and release of an existing dwelling on the
easement property.
According to
The area being proposed for the relocation,
which accommodates a suitable septic reserve area, is located between two lots
as could be seen from the attached map distributed with the agenda. One of the lots is a child’s lot which was
excluded from the easement for Mr. Myers, Sr.
The second lot, which is adjacent to the proposed relocation lot, is
occupied by M. Richard Myers, Jr., another son of Mr. Myers, Sr. The lot was excluded prior to district
establishment. The area between Mr.
Myers, Sr.’s lot and the proposed relocation lot site will serve as a septic
reserve area for the remainder of the farm.
The soils map indicates that the soils on both sites are comparable. The
area of the proposed relocation site is currently used as cropland.
The farm consists of 82 acres of cropland, 47
acres of forest, and 19 acres planted with trees and warm season grasses. Additionally, a 24-acre area surrounding the
farmstead is mowed for hay.
A 41.125-acre agricultural subdivision of the
property was approved by the Foundation on
According to Carla Martin, Program
Administrator, the new location will not have a detrimental impact on the
agricultural operation of the farm as it is located along the road. The proposed relocation site will be accessed
directly off the road. The request was
approved by the local advisory board and complies with local zoning regulations. Additional information attached to the
request included photos of the existing dwelling and the proposed site, along
with a copy of the Foundation’s lot relocation regulations.
Foundation staff recommends approval based on
the condition that the existing dwelling will be demolished and the area where
the current dwelling exists will be returned to agriculture within 60 days of
the issuance of a use and occupancy permit for the replacement dwelling, or
sooner, if required under county law. If
the Foundation approves the request, Mr. Myers must enter into a written
agreement with the Foundation, to be recorded among the county land records,
describing the terms and conditions of the Foundation's approval.
Mr. Richard Myers, Jr.,
representing his brother and father, was present at the meeting. Ms. Carla Martin, Program Administrator, was
also available to answer any questions from the Board.
Mr. Doug Wilson wanted
to know about the property between parcel 105 and the excluded lot. Ms. Martin clarified that the County Health
Department is requiring that there will be a septic reserve area in that area
of the property.
Ms. Vera Mae Schultz,
Vice Chairman, wanted to know if the Board can assume that the trailer was not
a designated tenant lot location. Ms.
Martin confirmed that it was not.
Motion #4: To approve
the request for the relocation and release of a pre-existing dwelling.
Motion: Shirley
Pilchard Second: Howard Freedlander
Status: Approved
C.
1. 10-87-10 HALLEIN, Ned E. and Carolyn E. 156.00 acres
Request to place a stockade, formerly used in a
documentary film, on easement property
Mr. and Mrs. Hallein
are the original grantors of the easement. The current request is to allow the
placement of a log stockade, formerly used in a documentary film, on easement
property. The stockade was constructed
in
The Halleins own and
manage a beef cattle operation on their farm.
They propose to use the stockade as a corral for herd checks. The gates and fences currently used on the
farm for this purpose are in poor condition.
The stockade would be placed on an area of the farm currently kept in
pasture.
The Halleins intend to
make the stockade available to Media Magic for use in future documentary
films. The activity was approved by
Foundation staff has requested that the County
provide photographs and dimensions of the stockade to the Foundation. The County expects to make them available
during the Board meeting.
Foundation staff recommends approval because the
stockade will be used for agricultural purposes. However, the Board may want to consider
placing conditions on the approval, such as a condition that any
non-agricultural use of the stockade, beyond future use by Media Magic for documentary
films on other farms, must first be approved by the Foundation.
Ms. Elizabeth Weaver, Foundation staff informed
the Board members that there was no one from
Motion #5: To table
the request to place a stockade, formerly used in a documentary film, on
easement property until the Board receives more information.
Motion: Vera
Mae Schultz Second: Chris Wilson
Status: Approved
2. 10-87-07 BRAUER, Alan L. Sr. 144.00
acres
Request to exclude a child’s lot from easement
property
Mr. Brauer is one of
the original grantors of the easement.
The current request is for the release of up to two acres for a child’s
lot for the personal use of his daughter, Kelly. Mr. Brauer was a
co-owner with his father when the property entered the Program. His father is deceased. Mr. Brauer is
currently the sole owner of the property.
There have not been any other lot requests for the property. Mr. Brauer does not
own any other district or easement property.
The proposed location and access follow the
Foundation’s proposed lot location guidelines.
According to
The request was approved by the local advisory
board and conforms to local zoning regulations.
If approved, there will be a required payback of $1,000.00 per acre to
the Foundation. The exact payback amount
will be determined when the Foundation receives a letter from the Health
Department stating how much acreage is required.
Staff recommends approval of the release of one
acre plus such minimum additional acreage if required by the County Health
Department, not to exceed 2 acres total based on the provisions of the deed of
easement and in accordance with Agricultural Article, Section 2-513(b),
Annotated Code of Maryland, which grants an allowance of a maximum lot size of
up to 2 acres if required by regulations adopted by the Department of the
Environment or the county.
Mr. Brauer
was present at the meeting to answer any questions from the Board.
Motion #6: To
approve the request for the exclusion of up to 2 acres for a child’s lot on
easement property.
Motion: Doug
Wilson Second: Howard Freedlander
Status: Approved
Mr. Brauer
took the opportunity to express his appreciation for the additional funding
available for Agriculture.
E.
ST. MARY’S COUNTY
1. 18-02-18e Morrris,
Malcolm & Charlotte 163.50
acres
Request to exclude a 1.0
acre child’s lot from easement property
Mr. and Mrs. Morris are the original owners of
this easement property. Their current
request is to exclude a 1.0 acre child’s lot from easement property for their
daughter, Patricia Ann Prosey. The Morris’ own one other easement property
but they have not made any previous requests for lot exclusions. There are no
pre-existing dwellings on this property.
According to St. Mary’s County, the proposed lot
is to be located in cropland. The lot
will be accessed through a right-of-way over an existing gravel road.
The request was approved by the local advisory
board. The request conforms to local
zoning regulations. If approved, there
will be a required payback of $5,000.00 per acre to the Foundation.
Staff recommends approval of the 1.0 acre
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 restrictions only for the Grantor who originally
sold this easement, 1.0 acre or less for the purpose of constructing a dwelling
for the use only of that Grantor or the Grantor’s child...”
Mr. and Mrs. Morris and
Ms. Donna Sasscer, Program Administrator, were
available at the Board meeting to answer any questions from the Board. Mr. Morris briefed the Board about his
farming operations and also informed the Board about the perc
test planned for
Mr. Doug Wilson wanted
to know if Mr. Morris owns another easement property. Mr. Morris confirmed that they own another
easement property consisting of 36 acres.
Mr. Doug Wilson asked if Mr. and Mrs. Morris were aware that if the
current request is approved they cannot ask for a child’s lot on the other
parcel. Mr. Morris confirmed that they
were aware.
Mr. Doug Wilson also
wanted to know about the RPD (Rural Preservation District) mentioned in the
letter from St. Mary’s County to the Foundation. Ms. Sasscer
clarified that the County requires one or two acre lots as open space preserved
parcels. These are identified and cannot
be built on.
Ms. Shultz pointed out
that the staff report indicated that there are no pre-existing dwellings, but,
from the aerial map, it looked as if the property had dwellings. Ms. Sasscer
clarified that they are excluded envelopes.