This meeting is being recorded. Good evening. This is the Council's March legislative session in which we introduce new legislation and give final consideration to legislation previously introduced and heard. This legislative session is being conducted as a hybrid meeting which is available in person and virtual via WebEx. It is also available to the public through live stream on the Howard County Council website and broadcast on channels 44 of your Verizon and 99 of your Comcast. The Council will hold a hybrid public hearing on Monday, March 17, 2025 beginning at 7 pm on the legislation introduced this evening. Testimony can be given in person or virtually via Webx. Written comments on the new legislation can be sent in to Council Mail at HowardCountyMD.gov. Anyone wishing to testify at the public hearing will have several options available. You may sign up in advance through the Council's website or you may sign up in person in front of the Banner Corrumb via a laptop on Monday, March 17th before the start of the public hearing. When signing up to testify, you will be asked if you are a student in grades K through 12 so that you can be called to testify early in the meeting. And you'll be asked whether your testimony will be provided in person or virtual via WebEx. If you select virtual, you will be provided instructions for logging into the WebEx session. If needed, the council will hold a work session on new legislation on Monday, March 24th, at 930 in the SeaVarning Greyroom. Public participation for these meetings will be available virtually via WebEx and viewed live stream through the county council website. At this time, I'm going to do a roll call for the Council members, Dr. Jones. Good evening, everyone. Ms. Young. Here. Ms. Rigby. Here. And Mr. Youngman. Here. We will now recite the pledge of allegiance. before we proceed this evening we have an honorary resolution in memory of delegate Frank Turner he is a legend that we lost very recently and we have prepared this resolution in his honor. On behalf of the Howard County Council, an honorary resolution in remembrance of delegate Frank S. Turner. Whereas Frank S. Turner, who is the first African-American representative of Howard County in the general Assembly passed away on February 14th, 2025. And whereas Deligate Frank Turner was born in Mount Pleasant, New York and graduated from North Carolina College at Durham as an undergrad, and the University of North Carolina Central University School of Law in 1973. And whereas Deligate Turner taught at Morgan State University specifically the School of Business and Management from 1974 to 2015, including five years as the chair of the Department of Business Administration. During his tenure at Morgan State, Deligate Turner served as Congresswoman Barbara McCullochie's Deputy Campaign Manager, and eventually as her special assistant in the United States Senate from 1987 to 1993. And whereas in 1990, Delegate Turner was elected to judge to the Howard County Orphan's Court, becoming the first black judge in the county's history. In 1994, Delegate Turner was first elected to the Maryland House of Delegates where he served until 2019. As a delegate, he served as the vice chair of the Ways and Means Committee, as chair of the Joint Committee on Gaming Oversight, and twice as the chair of the Howard County Delegation. During his tenure in Annapolis, Delegate Turner secured funding for many county community facilities and parks, including the North Laurel Community Center and Blandeir. Delegate Turner was also instrumental in the reopening of the Harriet Tubman School and All Black School in Columbia as a cultural and educational center in 2023. And, whereas Delegate Turner left a lasting impression on all who met and worked with him, becoming a role model for elected officials and was always willing to do whatever was needed to support his community and help people. Whereas, throughout his time of public service, Deligate Frank Turner was a trailblazer who broke barriers becoming the first black judge in Howard County and the first black representative from Howard County in the General Assembly. His devotion to his community and the people he served will be remembered long long into the future. Now therefore be it resolved on this third day of March 2025 that the County Council of Howard County, Maryland joins delegate Turner's family, and the community he am measurably served in remembering his life and his legacy. If anyone has any words they'd also like to add to our resolution, we'd be happy to hear them. I'll just briefly say prayers and condolences to his family. I refer to him as Uncle Frank. He, along with Fred and Gray, I would often find consult in early in our careers, and it was just a pleasure to know him and his family. Thank you. We will now turn to our agenda, and we will begin today's session with approval of journals and minutes of meetings. I move to approve the journal of legislative session February 3, 2025. Second. Ms. Herod, would you please call the vote to approve that journal? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Ms. Young. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Ms. Rig Youngman. Yes. The motion to approve passes. I move to approve the minutes of joint meeting with Board of Education on February 10th, a special meeting to hold closed session on February 18th, a legislative public hearing on February 18th, a special meeting to hold closed session on February 19th, a legislative public hearing continued on February 19th, and a legislative work session on February 24th, 2025. Second. Ms. Herod, would you please call the vote to approve those minutes previously voted? Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Young? Yes. Ms. Rigby? Yes. Ms. Dr. Youngman? Yes. The motion to approve the minutes passes. I move to approve adding council resolution 63 2025 to the agenda for introduction as late filed legislation this will require four votes to pass. Second. Miss Haired would you please call the vote on the motion to approve adding council resolution 63 2025 to the agenda for introduction is late followed legislation. Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones, yes. Miss Young, yes. Miss Rigby, yes. Mr. Youngman, yes. The motion to add council resolution 63 2025 to the agenda for introduction is late followed legislation passes. I move to approve adding council resolution 63 2025 to the agenda for final consideration second Is there can we discuss on this point or we move right to vote? Mr. Long. You're amending your agenda so you would just to your vote. Okay. Mr. Howard, please call the vote on the motion to approve adding council resolution 63 2025 to the agenda for final consideration. Chair Walsh? No. Dr. Jones. Pass. Miss Young? Yes. Mr. Riepie? Yes. Mr. Youngman? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. The motion passes. I move to approve adding Council Resolution 64 2025 to the agenda for introduction as late filed legislation and to the agenda as final consideration and colleagues I think you have that bill before you resolution. Second. So do I, can I describe that or no? Still no. So the resolution 64 is a device by which we could defer voting on this until March 12th. My understanding from the administration is the contents of this budget amendment should be submitted to the state entities on March 13th. If we were to add this to our discussion as a monthly meeting, there would at least be some discussion of it in the public realm. If you went to look for the Board of Education's discussion of this, you would find none. It was passed as a consent agenda in a vote that took no more than five seconds. It does concern $9.2 million of our capital budget in the schools, which to many of us are dear. And so I would have preferred to have some public discussion somewhere before we vote to pass this Council bill 63 and so that's what this council resolution 64 does is give us the time to do that by calling us into special session to vote on it still before the March 13th identified deadline. So Mr. D you want to call the vote on the motion to approve adding council resolution 64 2025 to the agenda for introduction as late file legislation and to the agenda as final consideration. Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Young? No. Mr. Rd. Yes. Mr. Youngman. Yes. The motion passes. Will the Council administrator please read the legislation for introduction? The following legislation is introduced by the chairperson at the request of the County Executive unless otherwise noted. Council Resolution 49 2025. A resolution confirming the appointment of Linda Lines to the Howard County Animal Matters hearing board. Council resolution 50, 2025. A resolution confirming the appointment of Kyla Nicole Kools to the Cemetery Preservation Advisory Board. Council resolution 51, 2025. A resolution confirming the appointment of William Benjamin McIntyre the second to the Commission on Disabilities. Resolution 52 2025 a resolution confirming the appointment of William Benjamin McIntyre of the second to the Commission on Disabilities Council Resolution 52 2025 a resolution confirming the appointment of Chappellea Lewis to the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday Commission Council Resolution 53 2025 resolution confirming the appointment of Harry Burrell to the historic preservation commission Council resolution 54, 2025, resolution confirming the appointment of Eric L. Clark, DCJ, to the police accountability board. Reappointments, Council Resolution 55, 2025. Resolution confirming the reappointment of Jennifer Broderick to the board to promote soft sufficiency. Resolution 56, 2025, a resolution confirming the reappointment of Theresa. Forget. Jennifer Brodrick to the board to promote soft sufficiency. Council resolution 56, 2025, a resolution confirming the reappointment of Theresa Foget, SPHR, SHRM, SCP, to the board to promote soft sufficiency. Council resolution 57, 2025, a resolution confirming the reappointment of a Huma G. M. Nuga M. D. M. P. H. M. B. A. To the Commission for Transitioning Students with Disabilities. Council Resolution 58 2025, a resolution the appointment of Kelly Rodell Reset to the Commission for Transitioning Students with Disabilities. Council Resolution 60 2025, resolution confirming the appointment of Mirian Vessel to the Recreation and Parks Board. Financial Council Bill 12, 2025, an act pursuant to Section 612 with Howard County Charter approving a multi-year agreement between Howard County, Maryland and E-plus Technology Inc. For Cisco, telephone and WebEx services, authorizing the executive to make changes to the agreement under certain conditions, authorizing the county executive to execute the agreement and generally relating to the agreement. Council Bill 13, 2025. An ordinance authorizing the issuance, sale and delivery of up to $15 million in bonds pursuant to a bond enabling law. Providing that such bills, such bonds shall be general obligations to the county, authorizing the county executive to specify, prescribe, determine, provide for, or approve the final principal amounts, maturity schedules, interest rates, and redemption provisions of such bonds, and other matters, details, forms, documents, or procedures, and to determine the method of sale of such bonds, providing for the disbursement of the proceeds of such bonds, and for the lebbing of taxes to pay debt services on such bonds, and providing for and determining various matters and connection therewith. Council Resolution 61, 2025, a resolution approving of financial assurance plan for Howard County's National Polluting Discharge Elimination System, municipal separation storm sewer system permit programs, and accordance with section 4-202.1 of the Environmental Act of the Anatoid Code of Maryland, and requiring certain copies to be sent to the Maryland Department of Environment. Council Bill 14 2025 enact providing that certain federal employees and contractors who meet the minimum qualifications for position in the classified service may be placed on an eligibility list generally relating to filling positions in the classified service providing for the application of this act and declaring that this act is an emergency bill necessary to meet an emergency affecting the public health, safety or welfare. Council bill 15 2025, and act demanding the Harrow County Police and Fire Employees Retirement Plan in order to authorize police officers with Maryland Police Corps service to purchase an additional five months of eligibility service, incredible service, and adding provisions related to the impact of such service on drop two participation and generally relating to the Howard County Police and Fire employees retirement plan. Council resolution 62 2025 introduced by the chair person on the behalf of the county council and the county executive, a resolution appointing the members of the Inspector General Advisory Board, establishing the initial terms of service for the members, and generally relating to the Inspector General Advisory Board. Council bill 16, 2025, introduced by Liz Walsh. An act demanding the Howard County Code to establish a centralized web page for all annual reports, studies, publications, or other documents required to be submitted to the County Council and generally relating to reports to the County Council. Once again, we're going to introduce the Council Bill 17 2025, introduced by Chris Gianna Rigby, and act reestablishing the text credit exclusively for geothermal energy devices, allowing the Council Bill 17, 2025, introduced by Christiana Rigby, and act reestablishing the tax credit exclusively for geothermal energy devices, allowing the credit to be granted only for applications related to geothermal devices, filed on or before a certain date, and generally relating to the tax credit exclusively for geothermal energy devices. Council Bill 18, 2025, introduced by Christiana Rigby, in acting the definition of moderate income housing units, establishing and retaining the school surcharge rate at time of schedule of sketch plan, providing for a payment in lieu of taxes pilot for disability income housing units with a transit oriented development TOD, and accepting an exempting transit-oriented development TOD residential units from the adequate public facilities ordinance school capacity tests and generally relating to transit-oriented developments. Council Bill 19 2025 introduced by Liz Walsh and and demanding the Harrow County Code to prohibit an in-keeper or employee of a lodging establishment in Harrow County from providing or offering to provide certain rooms in a lodging establishment for less than a period of time and generally relating to lodging establishments. 2020-25 introduced by, introduced by Liz Walsh, and act to modify the restriction on the use of excess surplus revenue pursuant to section 615B of the Howard County Charter in order to use excess surplus revenue from prior years to fund deferred school capital projects. In the fiscal year, 2026 budget and generally relating to excess surplus revenue. Council Resolution 63, 2025, a resolution amending Howard County Board of Education's request for fiscal year 2026 and capital improvement program requests for fiscal year's 2027 through 2031. For the purpose of submission to the interagency commission on School Construction as adopted by Council Resolution 151-2024 to account for additional funding and generally relating to Board of Education's request for Interagency Commission on School Construction. Council Resolution 64 2025 introduced by the chairperson on behalf of the County Council A resolution calling the County Council of Howard County Maryland into legislative session on a specific date Thank you, Miss Herod that concludes our legislation for introduction Miss Herod would you please read the legislation for final consideration? Council members, unless there is an objection, Mr. Harris will read all of the appointment resolutions together, except Council resolutions 12, 13, 2021, 22, 27, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, and 42, and we will vote them together. Hearing no objection, Mr. Harris, please proceed. The following legislation is introduced by the Chairperson at the request of the County Executive unless otherwise noted. Council Resolution 8, 2025, appointment of James Earl Hollywood III to the Board to promote sufficiency. Council Resolution 9, 2025, appointment of Dr. Susan Hirsch to the Commission on Disabilities. Council Resolution 10, 2025, appointment of DNAM, a wed to the Commission for Women. Council Resolution 11, 2025, appointment of Sandra V. Barrett to the Commission for Women. Council Resolution 14, 2025, appointment of Rachel Lynn Wynnum to the Commission for Women. the resolutionolution 15, 2025, appointment of Donald Gregory Alt to the Design Advisory Panel, Council Resolution 16, 2025, appointment of Jennifer Claire Bourne to the Martin Luther King Junior Holiday Commission, Council Resolution 17, 2025, appointment of Karen Foxworth, LCCPC, to the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday Commission. Council Resolution 18-25, appointment of Carrie J. Johnson, to the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday Commission. Council Resolution 19-25, appointment of Margaret R. Stevens to the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday Commission. Council Resolution 23, 2025. A appointment of Stephen Michael County to the Human Traffic and Prevention Coordination Council. Council Resolution 24, 2025 appointment of Christine M. Horn to the Human Traffic and Prevention Coordination Council. Council Resolution 25, 2025. A appointment of Taharam Masat Hassan to the Human Traffic and Prevention Coordination Commission. Council Resolution 25, 2025. Appointment of Taharam, Mesaat Hassan, to the Human Traffic and Prevention Coordination Commission. Council Resolution 26, 2025. Appointment of Travis Smith, to the Human Traffic Prevention Coordination Council. Council Resolution 28, 2025. Appointment of Evelyn D'Rosio, MAJD, to the Law Alonziac, Latina Commission, Council Resolution 29, 2025, appointment of Laura Crowvo to the LGBTQIA plus commission. Council Resolution 30, 2025, appointment of Jordan Dorsey to the LGBTQIA plus commission. Council Resolution 31, 2025, appointment of Michael Jean Muller to the LGBTQIA plus commission. Council Resolution 32, 2025, appointment of Emily Hazel-Redic to the LGBTQIA plus commission. Council Resolution 33, 2025, appointment of Veronica. I'll write to the LGBTQIA plus commission. Resolution 34, 2025, appointment of Barbara L. Allen to the opioid restoration fund commission, Council Resolution 36, 2025, appointment of Mark D. Donovan, LCPC, LCADC to the opioid restitution fund commission, Council Resolution 38, 2025, appointment of Jessica Matthews to the U.S. Restitution Fund Commission, Council Resolution 43, 2025, appointment of Jimmy D. Patel, MPM, DBIA to the Public Works Board, Council Resolution 48, 2025, appointment of Lynn Parlett-Mor to the planning board. Sorry about that. I move to approve council resolutions 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, and 48, 20, 25. Second. The previously read Council resolutions have been moved and seconded is there any discussion? Mr. Herod, would you please call the vote on these Council resolutions? Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones, yes. Ms. Jones, yes. Ms. Rigby, yes. Mr. Gungman, yes. The previously read, council resolutions pass. Council members, unless there is an objection, Mr. Herod will read council resolutions 21 and 22 and we will vote them together. Hearing no objection, Mr. Hared please proceed. Council resolution 21, 2025 appointment of Reginald T. Avery to the Human Rights Commission. Council resolution 22, 2025 appointment of Jeffrey Rubin to the Human Rights Commission. I move to approve council resolutions 21 and 22, 2025. Second. The previously read council resolutions have been moved and seconded is there any discussion? I'm the one who asked for these two council resolutions to be separated there are the two new appointments to our Human Rights Commission. And I truly believe now more so than ever, this is a really important commission within our local community. I can say that myself have been disappointed in the work product put out by this commission in the past. This commission saw no problem with a for-profit contract with ICE during Trump's first term. This commission saw no problem with human rights violations at our own detention facility. Again, under a Trump presidency, where even a Trump Inspector General found human rights violations. And more recently, this is a human rights commission that saw no problem with stifling the voices of our students and their respective schools as they sought to protest. We need leaders on this commission and we need people familiar with human rights. This is to say nothing of the two nominees tonight. Those nominations, I am near certain we'll go forward. But I think it is time for us as a council to revisit the qualifications of this commission. Right now it is you are a community member, you live in Howard County and number two that the commission overall represents us as a community. I'm not sure what that latter part means, I'm not sure if we're in satisfaction of that now or by virtue of these two new appointees. But again I think this is a really important commission that deserves more attention and thought than it currently has in our current code. So I will likely be moving to add some things to that. But for that reason tonight, I'm going to ask Ms. Heratt to call the vote if no one else has any comments on these two resolutions. Chair Walsh, I'm gonna abstain on this one. Dr. Jones? Yes. Miss Jung? Yes. Miss Rigby? Yes. Mr. Youngman? Yes. The motion to approve council resolutions 21 and 22 pass. Council members, unless there's an objection, Ms. Herod will read council resolution 12, 20, 27, and 41, and we will vote them together. Hearing no objection, Ms. Herrod, please proceed. Council Resolution 12, 2025 appointment of Ashley Easley, PhD to the Commission for Women, Council Resolution 20, 25 appointment of Margaret, our goal to the Housing and Community Development Board, Council Resolution 27, 2025 appointment of Yemi Bennett to the housing and community development board council resolution 27 2025 appointment of yummy Bennett Benitez to the law of Launza by Tina commission council resolution 41 2025 appointment of Theresa Thomas to the opioid restitution fund commission I move to table council resolutions 12 20 27 and 41 second the previously read council resolutions have been moved and seconded. Ms. Heratt, please call the vote on these council resolutions. Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Ms. Young. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Ms. Trigangman. Yes. The motion to table the previously read council resolution passes. Council Council resolution 13 2025 appointment of Ritina El Serberhandly to the Commission for Women. I move to withdraw C.R. 13 2025. Second. The motion to withdraw C.R. 13 2025 has been moved and seconded. Ms. Herod please call the vote. Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Young? Yes. Ms. Rigby? Yes. Mr. Youngman? Yes. The motion to withdraw CR-13 passes. Council Resolution 35, 2025. Appointment of Corey E. Bryce, CPRS, to the opioid restitution fund commission. I move to approve CR 35. Second. I move to approve amendment one to CR 35 2025. Second. Sure, so amendment one to CR 35. There's five similar amendments. These are the initial appointments to the opioid restitution fund commission and the bill creating that commission required the first appointees terms be staggered. So they all should not be three years. And so this amendment and the next four create that staggering. Okay. We will not ask you to explain that for the next four line. 20 here four times. Mr. Hared would you please call the vote on amendment one to see our 35 2025 chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Zhang. Yes. Miss Rigby. Yes. Mr. Gangman. Yes. Amendment one to see our 35 passes. CR 35 2025 as amended has been moved and seconded is there any discussion. Ms. Herod, would you please call the vote? Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Scheng? Yes. Ms. Rigby? Yes. Ms. Reganmin? Yes. CR 35, 2025 as amended passes. Council Resolution 37, 2025 of resolution for Gen. G. Elder to the opioid restitution fund commission. I move to approve CR 37 2025. Second I move to approve amendment one to CR 37. Second amendment one to CR 37 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Howard, please call the vote on amendment one to CR 3725. Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss John. Yes. Miss Rigby. Yes. Mr. Gingman. Yes. A amendment one to CR37 passes. CR372025 is amended has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Howard please please call the vote on CR-37 as amended. Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Young? Yes. Ms. Rigby? Yes. Ms. D. Youngman? Yes. CR-37 2025 as amended passes. Council Resolution 39 2025 appointment of W.E. NS to the opioid restitution fund commission. I move to approve CR39. Second. I move to approve amendment 1 to CR39. Second. Amendment 1 to CR39 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Edward, would you please call the vote on amendment 1 to CR39 2025? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss John. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Mr. Gungman. Yes. Amendment one to CR 39 2025 passes. CR 39 2025 as amended has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herod, please call the vote on CR39 as amended. Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones, yes. Ms. Young, yes. Ms. Rigby, yes. Ms. Trigangman, yes. CR39 2025 as amended passes. Council resolution 40, 2025 resolution confirming the appointment of Joan Webb, square and ski to the opioid restitution commission. I move to approve CR40 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment one to CR40 2025. Second. Mr. Herod, or I'm sorry, amendment one to CR40 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Miss Herod would you please call the vote on amendment one to see our 40 2025 chair wash? Yes, Dr. Jones. Yes, Miss John. Yes Miss Rieckby. Yes, Mr Youngman. Yes, amendment one to see our 40 passes C. Art 40 2025 as amended has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Miss Herod, please call the vote on CR-40 2025 as amended. Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss John? Yes. Miss Rigby? Yes. Mr. Youngman? Yes. CR-40 2025 as amended passes. Council Resolution 42, 2025 2025 appointment of John F. Way to the opioid restoration restoration fund commission I move to approve CR 42 2025 Second I move to approve amendment one to CR 42 25 second Amendment one to CR 42 2025 has been moved and seconded. Mr. Hared would you please call the vote on amendment 1 to CR 42 2025. Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Rigby? Yes. Mr. Giamman? Yes. Amendment 1 to CR 42 2025 passes. CR 42 2025 as amended our last appointment resolution of the evening has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Erd, please call the vote on CR 42 2025 as amended. Chair Walsh. Yes, and thank you for all of the appointees for your willingness to serve and to listen to tonight's very long approval of your service. Dr. Jones. Yes. Ms. Young. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Mr. Gengman. Yes. CR-42. 2025 is amended passes. Council Bill 9 2025. Executive reorganization for the Department of General Services. I move to approve CB9 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment 1 to CB9 2025. Second. Sure. Amendment 1 to Council Bill 9 makes several changes. It clarifies that multiple departments may perform mowing and landscaping functions. Clarifies the Department of General Services is responsible for architectural services, for county government buildings, but engineering and surveying will remain within the Department of Public Works. And it clarifies the type of improvements that will remain within the purview of the Department of Public Works to include without limitation, wastewater treatment facilities, pumping stations, and road maintenance facilities. Thank you, Ms. Sager. A amendment one to CB9 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herrard, would you please call the vote on amendment one to CB9? Chair W, Dr. Jones yes Miss Young yes, mr. Rigby yes, mr. Gengman yes, amendment one to CB nine 20 25 passes CB nine 2025 is amended has been moved and seconded is there any discussion Miss aired please call the vote on CB9 2025 is amended. Chair wash. Yes Dr. Jones. Yes, Miss Jung. Yes, Mr. Rigby. Yes, Mr. Gungman. Yes CB9 2025 as amended passes Council resolution 44 2025 easement and amendment to easement for 1.074 acres, Baltimore Gas and Electric, County property, Rockburn Park. I move to approve CR 44, 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment one to CR 44, 2025. Second. I have two of these amendments. One for this bill and the second for the following easement. And it simply adds a reporting requirement for VGE upon completion of its construction of this middle mile communications infrastructure to report back to the council a year later and annually thereafter. First what contracts have been entered into and on what terms, secondly, with what costs to the county ratepayers and thirdly to what benefit to the county ratepayers. Amendment 1 to CR44 2025 has been moved and seconded is there any discussion? So I like the reporting of the cost. I didn't get a chance to talk about this beforehand. But was there any rationale with other two bullet points? I mean, BGE, as you may have seen, as we've seen, and as others have seen, the prices have been going up as has been with other gas companies around the country, but having the consumer know exactly what's going on is important. So I understand the cost, but what about the other two? Bullet points. So cost is number two in our bullet point. So the comparison of one to three would show how much of the benefit that's going to BGE, that's number one, trickles down to the county ratepayers who are by virtue of this easement, extending in the case of Rockburn Branch Park, an acre of unfettered use for basically 80% of that fiber optic line that's being installed. The not testimony, but the explanations that we heard in work session was that two out of the ten fiber optic cables to be laid would be in service to BG. And that is in large part, I think, to limit the extent of outages. I didn't know that before. But there's some way for them to reclose certain circuits and give power back on in homes. That, to me, is fantastic and is worthy of the project alone. But eight out of those 10, as installed, will be what they call dark and were available for sale. And I just wondered, for what benefit of the county taxpayers is that 80% of those optics. And so this would require that reporting back. Is it worthwhile at all? Is it a benefit that eners exclusively to be GE? Is that a gigantic benefit? Those kinds of questions weren't able to be answered in the work session because those contracts hadn't been entered into and it was a changing market. There are a number of explanations for that that made perfect sense. But certainly after the cable is put in place because the easement is granted by virtue of these votes and after those third party contracts are entered into, that's all information that would be readily available to BGE and so in my view, it should be readily available to our constituents. Would you envision that being calculated? I mean, let's say it's a million dollars of revenue that they bring in on the dark lines and they just basically say a million dollars is x% of total billings and a portion that down to how much of their revenue comes out of Howard County. I mean I don't think it's it just goes in the big pot of money. So I mean it's how you didn't vision. Yeah okay. Any more discussion? Mr. Howard would you please call the vote on a amendment one to see our or do I, did I say, is there any discussion? Yes. Mr. Howard, would you please call the vote on amendment 1 to see our 44 to 2025? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Young? Yes. Mr. Rigby? Yes. Mr. Youngman. Yes. Mr. Riggby? Yes. Mr.unman? Yes. Amendment 1 to CR44 2025 passes. CR44 2025 as amended has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herr, would you please call the vote on CR44 2025 as amended? Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Miss Young? Yes. Miss Rigby? Yes. Miss Tree Youngman? Yes. CR-44 2025 as amended passes. Council resolution 45 2025. Eastman on 0.0357 acres Baltimore Gas and Electric County property along church Avenue. I move to approve CR 45 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment one to CR 45 2025. Second. And this is the same amendment we just discussed, which adds those three reporting requirements a year after construction of the fiber optic lines. Amendment one to CR 45 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herd would you please call the vote on amendment 1 to CR 45 2025? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Ms. Sean. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Mr. Youngman. Yes. Amendment 1 to CR 45 2025 passes. CR 45 2025 is amended. Has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herod would you please call the vote on CR 45 2025 is amended. Chair Walsh, yes. Dr. Jones, yes. Ms. Young, yes. Ms. Rikby, yes. Ms. Rikyangman, Yes. CR 45 2025 is amended passes. Council resolution 46 2025 introduced by the chair on behalf of the council, additional legislative sessions specified dates. I moved to approve CR 46 2025. Second. CR 46 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herod, please call the vote on CR 46 2025. Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Ms. Rigby? Yes. Ms. Rigaan? Yes. CR 46 2025 passes. a build 10, 20, the wash to require mobile home parks and motels to offer a right a first refusal to Harvard County. I move to approve CB 10 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment 1 to CB 10 2025. Second. Amendment 1 should look very familiar. This is the same amendment that was sponsored by the Howard County Housing Commission. Back when this issue came up, I think at the end of last year, it establishes a solicitation process that includes qualified assignees. The commission itself is not always able to undertake these kinds of projects on its own or many of these kinds of projects on its own and so this expands housing commission's ability to add those affordable housing units into inventory here in the county. Amendment one to CB 1025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any other discussion? Is this anticipating the housing commission getting involved in these solicitations beyond what your original bill was looking at, which was Mobile Home Parks or Motels? Yes. It is. So this is a bill that was introduced a year ago and failed. Okay. I don't remember the terms on which it ended but yes it is exactly the same as the prior version and we confirm that. And I remember we had a lot of questions about that. So yeah. I have a question. On the motel side, I know the background of this is affordable housing, but how long are people living here? This is short term affordable housing, right? No. I mean, it hasn't been in my experience. Is the barrier to housing here is so great that one of the one of the easiest ways to get into a place and not have to fill out applications for an electric bill or furnish it is someplace like these motels and in some cases the mobile home parks but the motels in the bill that we're about to vote on this amendment doesn't get into the distinction between motels and other housing. We purposely deleted things that called it transient housing and we purposely deleted things that limited it to three months because I know of people who have lived in motels now for seven years. Okay, so we're going to eliminate the three-month cap. Just for purposes of defining motels in this bill, I did. What the housing commission does, or whatever entity ends up owning these properties, if they exercise this right, I do not get into what those conditions would be. I'm just trying to keep those most affordable units available to the county for its acquisition if it so desire when the time comes. Because what I'm concerned about is, the reason why Motel has a 90 day cap is because it doesn't pass through out faux. It doesn't pay a school surcharge. You're basically creating residences, no different than an apartment. They don't have to, they again aren't controlled through app foe, aren't paying us those fees. And, you know, if it's on a super limited limited basis I don't think it moves the needle much but what if the commission starts assigning this right to the third party who says okay well you know I'm going to throw a kitchenette in these things. I'm going to really turn them into efficiency apartments on B2 under the guys of it's just a motel but we're sort of creating these many apartments that don't have any growth controls on them. That was the only thing that concerned me about, well I mean it concerns me that we're violating zoning now, but I don't want to encourage more of it going forward if that makes sense. Okay. I'm trying to encourage it obviously by the spell. Go ahead, yeah. I think part of the issue is that that three month cap is not enforced and there's no, there's no real enforcement mechanism that's happening. And I think when we're looking at this, it's more of an opportunity for cold weather shelters to have them in a much more functional way when you look at some of those places. Like how we shifted, the county shifted their approach during COVID, I think that would be the preferred route. And with capital being as limited as it is, deploying capitals, one of the biggest challenges right now in terms of housing creation, I don't see it being used that frequently for that purpose, but I also think that the third piece that we haven't discussed much tonight is the mobile home communities. And I think that's a real way for other people and other communities across the country have been able to come together and work to purchase their parks. So this would also provide that mechanism and it could have the county be a partner in that. Yeah, I don't have any concern with the mobile home parks. I just, you know, I mean, if somebody wants to create two residential lots, they get locked in to APFO, but somebody could come in and build a motel and bypass all of that and say, well, this is to help our most vulnerable, our lowest income, and all of a sudden they have seven-year tenants where they didn't go through any of the other things that we require for residential development. Plus I plunked residential on a commercial property. So I mean, just, again, the housing commission, I think it's going to be fairly limited. But once this gets out, I see developers lining up to say, sure, I'll buy those motel properties all day long and just turn them into basically apartments. Go ahead, I'm sure of you. But the housing commission would have to assign that right. And so it couldn't happen. It couldn't just happen without that sort of backing. And then the other piece is that they have gone through some of the growth controls in terms of water and sewer capacity. Because those are necessary whether you are staying there one month or 70 or consecutively. So I think those elements certainly apply. Well, I have to put, there was one. There was one exchange that this council has had with Jennifer Broderick's of Bridges to Housing. And I feel like I was sitting next to you, Miss Young, when we had it. And it was exactly this issue of when the county was able to fund through COVID relief housing for our homeless in hotels. It basically eliminated homelessness in our county. Like I thought it was the silver bullet. And why we weren't pursuing that after COVID times made no sense to me if we had actually found the solution. But the second thing is no one ever in this room ever will hear me say I want to preserve the status quo except for in this very circumstance is what you're concerned about Mr. Youngman is already happening in motels. People already are living there. They don't need a kitchenette. They have like a crock pot and a toaster oven and they plug it in. I mean it's already happening and due to the limitation of the size as far as I know there are not so many families with school with school, it's children in that position, but they certainly exist. I mean, it's really hard to cram in, you know, four or six members of a family in a single room motel with, you know, one bed and one bath and little floor space, it is done, I have seen it. But I think this is just one of many programs that hopefully would work, and certainly, you know, to the extent we see abuse, I would think we'd act. But I am hopeful that this is a good first step and I'm very excited to see its result. One last point and that is that the fiscal analysis for this, which is available to the public due to this council's legislation, really paints an amazing picture just in the last one, two, three, four years through 2024. 451 of these units have been up for sale. The total cost average of them per unit is probably around $70,000. For $70,000, this county could have preserved up to 451 very small, very frugal, but entry level housing in this county had something like this been enacted before. And I didn't even know that when we put this concept together, but the data behind it, I really think speaks to what an amazing even pilot this could be. So, as its sponsor, I'm obviously a big fan. All right, is there any other discussion of amendment one, which is the housing commission amendment on this thing? Sorry, we got way up track. Okay, Ms. Howard, would you please call the vote on amendment one to CB 10? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Ms. Young. Yes. Ms. Rigby. Yes. Ms. Tree Youngman. Yes. Amendment 1 to CB 10 passes. CB 10 2025 is amended, has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Erad, please call the vote on CB 10 2025 is amended. Chair Walsh. Yes, and I'd like to thank one of our new LAs. Jim wrote this. This is one of my favorite bills of six years in office, and I did not write it. Mr. Alman wrote it. And I am as indicated by some of that prior doubt, a very optimistic about what it can do for some of our constituents here in the very, very near term. Nothing has to be built. So thank you all. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss. Yes. Ms. Rikby. I am an enthusiastic yes. I was really disappointed when this failed last time. So I'm glad we're making it happen. Yes. Mr. Youngman. Yes. CB10 as amended passes. Council Bill 11, 2025, CRA to 11, introduced by Deb Young at the request of Onver Hassan, the CRA to 11, addition to certain research and development laboratories as a permitted use in the planned employment center PEC zoning district. I move to approve CB 11 2025. Second. I move to approve amendment one. Oh, I'm sorry. Well that's you may go ahead. Okay. I move to approve amendment one to CB 11 2025. I second that. Am I allowed to second my element? You can second your own. There are two amendments to this CRA. The first is mine. The second is Miss Young's. This amendment takes goes back I guess to the the original concept of the CRA and goes back to the issue of what is and isn't a non-conforming use. Already in the concept of non-conforming use and what isn't, isn't allowed in a largement, in expansion, in alteration, is a use expanding on a certain footprint. But what wasn't reached by our current code, and which I think was at its you you here is when the footprint actually contracts around to use and so that use becomes that much closer to its neighbors and then causes that conflict. So by this amendment we tried to address that by amending the non-conforming use section as a regard specifically enlargement. Amendment 1 to CB- of what? Yeah, just CB 11, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20 CB- What? Yeah, just. CB 11, 25, I was moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Oh, sorry. I thought you were moving to the vote. No. Yeah, so how would you envision the hearing authority considering it? I think it gives more guidance. I mean, right now it says an enlargement can be a diminution of the size of buffering zones around it property by a certain percentage and we thought a diminution of roughly half was probably, you know, we didn't have any guidance there but it gives the hearing examiner explicit clarification about where the line is in terms of what kind of contraction around a use will constitute a code defined in large men. If there's no more discussion, would you please look if there's no more discussion. Ms. Herd would you please call the vote on a amendment one to CB 11 2025 chair wash yes Dr. Jones yes Miss Young Yes, Miss Rigby no Mr. Youngman no a Amendment one to CB 11 2025 passes I move to approve amendment two to CB 11 2025. Second. All right. Amendment two to CB 2025 adds a number of where as clauses that actually set forth what it is that this county council has the right to do. It explains the rationale for the bill. And these where as clauses specifically were recommended by our office of law. And just to give you an idea of what these whereas clauses state, it makes sure that people understand that the council has the right to regulate the type of activities in different zoning areas to protect and promote public safety and health. And it also states that catalytic conversion at a certain scale is not compatible with research and development. Amendment 2 also adds federally funded research centers and university affiliated centers to bring Howard County regulations into compliance with federal designations in other jurisdictions. And it clarifies technical language in the research and development use to prohibit catalytic conversion of plastics. Instead of the term that used when the CRA was first filed, which was commercial pellets and feedstock, which produced flu gas. This was simply to ensure that the technical language in this bill is accurate. Are there any questions? Amendment 2 to CB 11 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Ms. Herred, please call the vote on amendment 2 to CB 11 2025. Chair Walsh? Yes. Dr. Jones? No. Miss Shung. Yes. Miss Rigby. My issue with this amendment is that the final clause makes it extremely clear that this applies exclusively to WR grace and not other research and development entities on PEC's own property. And because of that my vote is no. Mr. Youngman. No. Amendment two to CB 11, 2025, our fails. CB 11, 2025 as amended has been moved and seconded, is there any discussion? Well, I think that it's clear there's a whole community There's a whole community sitting out here in front of the five of us that feel very strongly about this bill. And you missed it, Mr. Rigby. And Mr. Young Menon and Dr. Jones, you weren't here for the entire time that we had people here testifying, but we had well over 100 people testifying on this bill. Adults, children, older people, entire families, and the one thing that they made very clear is that they are very fearful about their health and safety. Living next to this plant, a pilot plant that runs huge equipment for 16 hours a day to convert plastics into oil and gas, which is a manufacturing activity that does not qualify as a non-conforming news and should be a prohibited activity in planned employment zones. I have more to say when I make my statement, my voting statement, but I do think that all of you, each one of us, all five of us here in this council, should be thinking first and foremost about the people in this room instead of the profits that companies can you. Okay. Thanks. Let's let all of our councilmembers please make comments as they wish. Are you done, Miss Young? Yeah. Yeah. We haven't really started voting yet. We're still discussing. Yeah. Dr. Jones? Yes. I just want to clarify that all of our public hearings, and this is for anyone who is wondering, By code, our legislative hearings must be in person to vote. Since COVID, our public hearings are in a hybrid session. So whether you're here in the building or your president virtually, you are still present. I believe the council member knows that, so I believe it's inappropriate to state that any of us was or was not here being present for any of the testimonies. Personally speaking, I listen to every single testimony on both nights, read all the testimony that we got an email and I'm very grateful for all the testimony that we got all the data, everyone's concerns. So I just wanted to clarify that yes, I was present for the entirety of public hearing. Thank you. I was just going to say the same thing. Just like people on both sides of this issue, we're permitted to listen, observe, participate, and testify virtually the fact that we might, one of us might have been watching it Virtually and participating virtually It it really was not fair to say that I apologize I meant you weren't here in the room Makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. It makes no difference at all. and you see the children here in person. We saw the children, we saw everybody Tuesday night for five hours and saw it again for how many people were on the screen. It's not like they're just on the telephone. If anything you know that I can't stand when people, I can't stand when people... You are if anybody wondered whether this was a special law, just review the signs and review this. But yeah, I mean, we permit people to testify by telephone without a camera on, which I think is a problem. And a lot of the folks. And a lot of the folks. Guys, please let Mr. Youngman finish. So I just think going down this rabbit hole of, we live in we live in a hybrid world now and council members that want an extended night that we needed to create because of the over 100 testimonies we got. Just I don't think we really needed to go there. So. All right. If there's no further considerate or. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I was really interested in hearing what you had to say. Sure, I'll vote first. First, let me say this. I want to thank, as I said earlier, the hundreds and hundreds of emails we received. Everyone who testified in person and virtually, the testimonies that we received even after public testimony was closed. The emails we received over the weekend. I stated to a colleague of mine, I'm not sure how my cell phone was made somewhat public, but I started receiving testimony on my personal cell phone. Which I appreciate, because I got to read it on my phone. So thank you for that. A lot of it was filled with data, and it was a lot of data. And I thank you for that as well. I was able to pour into that, understand it, do somewhat of my own research. I am not a subject matter expert on all the things that were discussed, but I thank you for that. My concerns are several about what's going on. First off, the distance that this research would be conducted, I feel, is entirely close to the communities. I think that the process of the research was a concern of mine, so I wanted to do some further understanding on what that entailed. I also had a concern with the lack of communication that some of the residents expressed that the company, in this case, even though I really shouldn't mention it, but everyone's going to talk about it. WR Grace, that the lack of communication that they had with the surrounding community. I thought that there was a problem there. But I also had concerns with the bill. I felt like the first version that we saw of the ZRA in addition to the second version, and even some of the amendment tonight, was that it felt like spot zoning. And that's not something that the county council should be involved in. I also was concerned about the difference of data and the varying stories I heard from the community, as well as those that were against the bill. Even members of the company, WR Grace, that testified stated the exact opposite of what hundreds and hundreds of residents stated. Therefore, I was able to, thankfully, not only did I meet with the community, and I believe it was Owen Brown and a church in the Owen Brown district but I was also able to meet with Grace and confront them and say hey listen we have hundreds of testimonies we have people saying they're going to be breathing toxic air you're burning plastic you're doing this you're doing that what is going on is this what you're doing that. What is going on? Is this what you're doing? And we were able to have a conversation about that. Some of you seen, they have written testimony and they were quoted in the newspaper as saying, well, some of that is false. It's like this, it's like that. The percentage is this, the numbers of that. I said, okay, though, these conversations would have been great to have happened months ago, but here we are. Another concern I had was that the original ZRA and once it was amended and came forth in the current form of the bill did not go back to the planning board. Not that it should have gone back to the planning board but I heard several testimonies which said that the planning board approved it or the planning board said this. Well, the version that we have wasn't the version that the planning board looked at had changed. And so the question is should it have gone back to the planning board before the bill came before this body? So got out all those concerns. I was grateful to have met with the community, met some wonderful people, so a really nice presentation, several presentations that night. And like I said, I did my due diligence to meet with Grace as well. And again, I just wanna say thank you all so much for your testimony and your time and all the data. My vote is contingent upon a couple of things. One, I would have loved to have seen the actual report from the subject matter experts at the Maryland Department of the Environment. None of us up here are subject matter experts. Actually, some of you may be subject matter experts given the testimony that you gave, but none of us up here are subject matter experts as the Maryland Department of Education, excuse me, not Maryland Department of Education. The Maryland Department of the Environment would have to be able to bring forth. And I would have loved to have seen that before, as I understand, they have not given their final report of whether they're going to give a permit or not. But all of those things I weighed, poured through it over the weekend, including today, reviewed some things. I just don't think that the county council should be in the business of coming forth with such a bill that has a feel of spot zoning that targets one entity. I believe it's problematic and it sends our body down a rabbit hole that we shouldn't go down. Let me go back to what I said in the beginning. I am concerned about the air that people are breathing. I am concerned about everything everyone said. The question is, the question is what is the truth, right? I heard testimony that if you're running your car and you're stuck in traffic on 32 or 29, there's more emissions there than what I don't know. I'm not a subject of any expert, but it would be great to see that again, it would be great to see what the Maryland Department of Environment has to offer in this regard. But I don't believe that the county council should be handling this bill in this form. Some of our voters know. Miss, Miss Zhang, Miss Young, please. Well, actually, I was also going to pass. This was my bill and this is my community. So I was hoping that I would get the last word. Is that okay with you? All right, okay, so I'm passing. Miss Rigby, pass. Mr. Youngman. Lord. I don't know what everybody is. I say. I usually I vote less and I can usually say I don't want to repeat everything everybody said. So you might have to repeat what I say. Look, there are some really smart people that testified on this bill, really intelligent folks. The tough thing is we're not scientists. The tough thing is, we're not scientists. We're just not. And you all need to stop interrupting. You really do need to stop interrupting. My job or one of my jobs is to maintain decorum in this room. And if we can't maintain Decorum, then I have to clear the room. And obviously I don't want to do that. So if you would please let Mr. Younglin continue. You know, these things are set up to be agency driven. If we don't like the decision that DPC made, then we have the hearing examiner. We have the Board of Appeals. We have the circuit court. We have a whole process in place. People disagree with DPCs, these decisions all the time and they avail themselves of those processes. MDE hasn't ruled yet. They are the experts in this. If they rule a way that one side or the other doesn't like, there are appeal processes built into that. But instead of availing through those processes, this became a zoning bill in front of five non-scientists that were getting emails, the gamut of, this is perfectly safe to breathe for 100 years, it's going to kill me in two minutes and everything in between. And that is why this isn't the body that regulates these things. From a zoning standpoint, we've heard a lot about special law and spot zoning. Folks, it is illegal to use the zoning code to target one project of one owner of one property. And as much as we kind of people tried to dance around this one, I was really not targeted, it's really not targeted. Look at the signs. Look at read all the testimonies we got. This was changed the zoning code to stop this one property owner from doing this one thing, regardless of what DPC. And that And that process court process says and regardless of what the expert agency M. D. E. says. It never should have been before our body. I vote no. Chair Walsh. I'm going to vote this time. The County Council is the zoning authority in Howard County by desire. And land use and on which properties and where you can do that is a zoning matter, is a land use matter, is a council matter. It is not for MDE. This council, this zoning authority has many times in the past approved spot zoning. It was just not for your benefit. I have to say, I still do not know how the ultimate vote is gonna go tonight. But I will tell you that seeing this, many new faces, night after night, filling our inboxes, answering the statements that are issued with legal citations and scientific fact is amazing. And whatever the is tonight I implore you to please stay involved not just for Cedar Creek but for your greater community. Every time we have a hearing I am blown away by the expertise, by the thoughtfulness, by the intelligence of the people that make Howard County and I don't want you to take tonight as a failure in any way. I am very optimistic that there are still solutions if it's not tonight's legislative one. But if it does end up being a 32 vote like so many of the environmental bills that we have voted on in my last six years. I invite you to look back on six years of this same kind of thing. Democratic versus Republican doesn't have a whole lot of meeting. Issued statements don't have a lot of meeting. What matters is your vote. And tonight my vote is yes. I just have a question. I heard you say earlier that you would defer. Normally, when we go back around, we would go back to Miss Young and then Miss Ridby. But I thought I heard you say that Miss Young as sponsor could go. No. I mean, I can't do that yet. Miss Young. Yes, I would like to pass again. I would like to go last. I think you can only pass once. We had this conversation pre-ordering. I would like to go last. I think you can only pass once. We had this, we actually had this conversation previously, right, Mr. Cook? Miss Young, you're going to have to go. And then, Miss Rigby, that's the state of the order. Thank you. The council has applied its rules in the past where someone has actually passed more than once. Given that history, I think at least the majority of you ought to decide how the next two Boads are cast. So you want us to take a vote on whether Deb can pass the Senate on the Senate? Or just a consensus. That's ridiculous. That's ridiculous. I can't believe that, Mr. Rigby, that. Okay, wait, Tim. Okay, all right. The only problem with it though is if people keep passing, passing, passing, and never like- We had this last time and we said, let's never do that again because we look like clowns. Yeah, so the point was to not look like clowns again. We're passing until Thursday. It's, um, I can be an adult, I'll go. Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. President. So I do, I wanna express my appreciation for everyone who has testified, emailed, called. I agree with Ms. Walsh that your passion and engagement on this are deeply appreciated. I have viewed the testimony, I have read the emails, and I have responded to as many as possible. I understand the concerns we have heard from residents around health and safety, and I have regret whoever has told you that this would be an effective solution. I must express my concern about the nature of CB11 as a special law. It will not ultimately stop WR Grace from developing their pilot project for research and development. The likelihood that CB11 would be considered a special law is extremely high. And so if this bill passes in a few months, it would be challenged, overturned, and undone. Undone. This process will waste time and money for everyone. It is unfair to everyone here who is expecting a resolution from this process, and it would be irresponsible to allocate county resources to defend a law that we know cannot ultimately stand to legal scrutiny. Next month we'll begin conversations about the county's budget and I don't want to spend the same money we would spend on education for lawsuits I know we can't defend. The Maryland State Constitution in Article 3, paragraph 33 prohibits special laws. This goes above and beyond the U.S. Constitution. Special laws relate to particular persons or things of a class, whereas general laws apply to all. This council approved legislation Ms. Walsh mentioned it a few years ago that ended up being deemed a special law, which is why it is important to me that we are this cautious about a repeat situation. CB 11 is clearly a special law, and unfortunately, a significant amount of evidence can be pulled together to make the case for this. The original ZRA lists only graces properties as impacted locations. In the press, it's been described as a zoning change to block grace. It was set again at a February Columbia Association meeting that the bill was designed to only impact grace. The council has received a lot of testimony, and all of it speaks about grace. Even the amendments on CB-11 doubled down on the sole target, WR Grace. All of these are publicly available, and that's what would make it an open and shut case. I value my integrity too much to vote yes on CB 11, knowing that it would be undone in a matter of months rendered moot and at a great cost to our residents. I don't think that's right for anybody. Least of all the residents of Howard County and of Cedar Creek, this legislation will not achieve the goals of the residents here tonight, and my vote is no. Chair Young, I mean, sorry, Miss Young, please. All right. The community of Cedar Creek has been on an emotional roller coaster ride since the announcement that a pilot manufacturing plant will be taking up residence right next to them. Through the two nights of testimony, we heard the families are afraid for their safety, feel lied to by the real estate agents, and distrust the officials. That includes us, by the way, task with protecting their health and safety. Pilot plants dealing with chemical conversions, plastics are manufacturing and should occur in manufacturing zones. Live work and play is our county's unofficial motto, but a small scale manufacturing plant is not live or play friendly. Siting a petrochemical pilot plant next to a neighborhood goes beyond anything I would have ever imagined would be logically possible. This CRA is not a special law since it applies to an entire class of research and development laboratories. In fact, in Annapolis last week, there were three chemical companies who came in and said they would love to come to Maryland and set up their chemical facilities here. We know this doesn't just apply to Grace, it can apply to any company that comes to Maryland or that moves to Howard County to do this same type of activity. It is within the Council's authority as the legislative and zoning body to define compatibility of uses. That's what we do. There's nothing compatible about what is going on here right now. The Maryland Court of Appeals, now known as the Maryland Supreme Court, has ruled in favor of other legal protections for the public from bad actors seeking profits. The Court wrote in one case involving a landfill next to a waterway that even some special laws do not fall within the constitutional prohibition, provided that the legislation addresses special evils with which existing general laws are incompetent to cope. a pilot plant converting plastics into oil and gas next to residences is simply a special evil that requires legislative action. But this chemical testing facility predates the houses. So what's the big deal you might think? Apparently, three of my colleagues think there is no problem with toxic air pollution next door to homes and aren't voting in favor of CB 11. This land used to be owned by the same chemical testing facility and the land provided an important safety buffer between its activities and the nearest homes. That buffer was sold at a significant profit, $13 million, and rezone and redeveloped into houses for an even more significant profit, $30 million. Leaving a meager 200 foot setback between polluting activities and people trying to raise young children. What do we call that? Profits over people. CB 11 supports jobs by reinstating research and development, which have done on a small scale. Produces no regulated, and supports the work of many local employers. But when R&D is used as an excuse to conduct manufacturing activities, they create toxic emissions near homes, then the Council must act to limit this activity. The health and safety of our community must come first in our land use decisions. CB11 puts people over profits. It's the least we can do, and I vote yes. The CB 11 2025 as amended fails The council resolution 63, 2025 amendment to the Howard County Board of Education request interagency commission on school construction. I move to approve CR 63, 2025. Second. CR63-2020- 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? I wanted to raise again the issue that I made. Who? You took a lot of courage about now. Issue that. To a lot of courage because of them. I raised at the beginning of the hearing, which is that this particular subject matter has not gotten any public hearing. The administration indicated to us that no later than March 13th, they would like to make whatever is approved if it is approved, and I think it should be actually, submitted to the IAC at the state level. But we looked at the calendar and if we were to actually add it to our monthly meeting agenda and called into a special legislative session on the 12th the night before, then we would be able to still meet that deadline but also have a public hearing. So I guess that would be my request is that we hold, I don't even know what, do you ask me this? Do we table the vote if we don't vote on it tonight? Or if I'd looked at this before, I would ask you to put 64 in front of 63 so that we could have decided whether we're going to move forward or not tonight. We could table or you could retract your, I mean, it's a- It was voted to add to final consideration, which is why I read it. Right. Both of the late filed resolutions were approved to be added at the end. So you've now got competing approaches. You've got vote on 63 tonight or vote on a resolution that would set in a legislative session on March 12th and then you kick it off. It's one of the other. So right now you have 63 pending. It's up for a vote, it's right for a vote unless somebody wants to table it. And then you'd move, take a vote on that. If it gets a table, then it's a table, and we move on to 64. OK. OK. If we table it, can we untable it tonight? Or is it have to be tabled for a period of time? I'll have to look. But I mean, if you're going to take it off the table right away, there's really enough point in putting it on the table. We could take it off the table before we vote on it on the 12th. Which is the- Right. OK. If you go for CR64, yes, you would take it off the table on the 12th at your, especially set legislation,'s session. Okay. The night and I can make that motion now. I move to table CR 63 2025. Second. Ms. Chair, would you please call the vote on tabling CR 63 2025? Chair Walsh. Yes, please. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Young. No. Mr. Rigby. Yes. Mr. Youngman. Yes. The motion to tables CR 63 2025 passes. Council resolution 64 2025 introduced by the chairperson on behalf of the County Council. Additional legislative session for specified date. I move to approve CR64 2025. Second. CR64 2025 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Edward, would you please call the vote on CR64 2025? Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Young? Yes. Miss Redby? Yes. Miss Dr. Youngman? Yes. CR 64 2025 passes. So what happened? Did I just in the wrong? No, I did. I did. Fine. It's just a thing, yeah, well. It's only 830. So the plan will be that it will be put on the monthly meeting. So hopefully someone from the board, Mr. Raoul and I see you and thank you for coming tonight. But we'd like to see you at the monthly meeting to talk about this and perhaps people from the administration can tell us about the circumstances that lead us to make this request. This mucyley is also on line from the Board of Ed. Okay. One by thin as well. Okay, perfect. All right, then I must proceed to some items of other business. Before we conclude, and that is other business I would like to address, according to Rule 1, 007-B1, may budget amendment prefile would be Monday, May 19, 2025. I believe that's before the Memorial Day holiday, right? To provide an opportunity for staff to draft for office of law to review and to provide public access to these often complicated amendments, I'm proposing to set May budget amendment prefiled to Thursday, May 15, 2025 at 12 p.m. Therefore, I moved to suspend Rule 1, zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero, May 15th at 12 p.m. Second. Ms. Hared, would you please call many, many amendments usually technical or otherwise. Yeah, the 15th is fine. Okay, yes. Mr. Dunham. Jen doesn't need to have a life in May so it's okay Thank you Yes The motion to suspend rule 1 0 0 7 be 1 to change the May budget amendment prefile from Monday May 19th at 2 p.m To Thursday May 15th at 12 p.m. Passes we have one other business matter I'd like to address according to rule Rule 1-002-C1. January legislative prefile would be Wednesday, December 24th, 2025, which is the day before a county holiday. To provide an opportunity for staff to spend time with family and friends over the holiday, I'm proposing to set January legislative prefile to Tuesday, December 23rd, 2025, at.m. I therefore move to suspend rule 1, 0, 0, 2, C1 to change the January Legislative Pre-File from Wednesday, December 24th at 2 to Tuesday, December 23rd at 2. Second. Ms. Herr, would you please call the vote on that motion to suspend the rule. Chair Walsh. Yes. Dr. Jones. Yes. Miss Zhang? Yes. Mr. Rigby? Yes. Mr. Youngman? Yes. The motion to suspend rule 1-002-C1 passes. This concludes our March legislative session. We are adjourned. Thank you and have a good night. This meeting is no longer being recorded.