This meeting is being recorded. Good morning and May 1st, 2025. And this is the scheduled meeting of the Howard County Board of Appeals on the Chairperson Gene Ryan. Today we're convening for the hearing on case BA 24-022C. Before we begin that hearing, we have an administrative matter we have to approve the meeting minutes. So board members, you've received the meeting minutes from April 10th, 2025. Are there any comments, suggestions? Seeing none, can I get a motion to approve the meeting minutes for April 10th? So moved. Move first by Miss Fierekab. I said. Okay, second by Miss Filves. Madam mystery Mayor, can you please call the roll? Chair Ryan. Approved. Mr. Chair, call. Approved, Ms. Harris. Approved, Ms. Phillips. Approved, Ms. Scho. Approved. And the motion carries in the meeting minutes for April 10th, 2025. I've been approved. Moving on to our principal matter today. BA 24-day, 022C. Mr. Sanders, which is called case. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. The Board. B824-022C, Mr. Sanders, which is called the case. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. The Board of Appeals is convening this morning. You hear the petition of Charles Cervico Edal for a conditionally used approval for an outdoor athletic facility under Harrow County zoning regulations. Section 131, 0B2, and Section 131, 0N6. The subject property, known as 6-7-17, main color road, is located and designated on tax map 34, as grid 21, parcel 287. The subject property comprises 11.01 acres. The property is in the RRDEO, rural residential, density exchange, option overlay zoning district. This hearing is being conducted in accordance with section 2.29 of the board's rules of procedure set forth in the Harakene code. This is a De Novo appeal from the March 3, 2025 order issued by the Harakene hearing examiner. For the record, would each board member please indicate if you've had an opportunity to visit subject properties required by the zoning regulations? I'll start with you, Miss Phillips. I have. Thank you. Miss Schoen. Yes, I'll start with you, Ms. Phillips. I have. Thank you. Ms. Schoo. Yes, I have. Thank you. Ms. Fierkeh. Yes. Thank you. Ms. Harris. Yes. Thank you. And Chairman Wright. Yes, sir, I have. Thank you all. The petitioners in this matter have filed requisite certificates of advertising as well as an affidavit of posting of the hearing as required by the Howard County Code. For purposes of this hearing, the following items are incorporated into the record by reference. The Howard County Code, the Howard County Charter, the Howard County zoning regulations, the February 12th, 2025, Department of Planning and Zoning Technical Staff Report, with attached agency comments. The general plan for Howard County, the general plan of highways, and the conditional use petition and plan and materials submitted with it. I know for the record that the petitioners in this matter are represented by Council saying, oh, I know also for the record that there are several individuals in opposition to the petition, name, Angel F. Bruce, Robert J. Bruce, Michael Joseph Mulcare, and Kelly Rudin, who are represented by council, G. Macy Nelson. I'm sure we might have some more individuals registered online, both in support and an opposition to the petition, Mr. Chair. That's all I have other than the primary matter that you want to discuss or that, okay. Great, thank you. So we've called the case. The board received a request for postponement for the hearing scheduled for today. The request was demonstrated good cause. There was no opposition from any opponents. So an order granting the post-aponement was issued and this hearing will be postponed until June 1st, 2025. That. Right, June 5th. June 5th, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. That's the right name. I'm sure. I apologize. June 5th, June 5th, 2025 at 9 AM, with the reserve hearing continuation date, if needed, of June 26th, 2025 at 9 AM. That order was issued, and therefore this meeting is adjourned, this hearing is adjourned and continue to that date. Thank you. I do have a question before we move on to our work session issue. So in reviewing this case, Mr. Sanders, I just had some questions about in terms of how it got to us and I understand that there might be some more DPC records in terms of why this property needs to conditionally use for this. I didn't see that in the record. Is there any way that we could get those before the hearing so I can kind of understand? I think that will have to be addressed at the first hearing. Okay, so they have to introduce that. I didn't know if that comes over as part of the record. You have just the, you have the, it's a dinner of appeal, which you have is the appeal, a teal petition, an original appeal petition, and whatever's presented to you, you have to address that the continued hearing date. Okay, I didn't know if the DPC was supposed to send over that it's kind of records ahead of time. No. That we do have the technical service report, that's all we have. Okay, but so they're not supposed to send over any kind of. No, okay. No, no. Fair enough. Okay. Okay. Okay, cool. I'd born a move to anything else on this before we move into our work session. Okay, so there's no objection. We'll move into our work session then. So we amended and adopted the rules of procedure, which are going to be prefiled with the council for their consideration. We were asked to take one last look for any kind of style or formatting or anything of that nature, make sure they're consistent with all of our decisions. And we've done that. I know I had some but I think some other members had some issues that they, or some concerns they want to raise. So no parent ordered. Does anybody who would like to go first? I'll have a copy. Sure. So I don't have a, well, I do have a copy right here. Yeah. All righty. So page eight, line five. Give me one second. All righty so page eight line five. Page eight line five. It's polar-bracad. Is this the one that I have to film? Or is this the polar-bracad? These are... present. Yeah, that's correct. Okay. So I'm just, I'm just, I would like to suggest a change in the wording. So an alpha approve a summary, alpha of. So it's the next sentence that I have, would like to change. During a hearing, a party may present the board with an oral summary of what the evidence, instead of a party may tell the board a summary. She went to change the word tell to present. Yes. Is either present or give one or the two but tell the board I don't think that that's. So which of recommendations just make a recommendation? Present. Present. So we'd like to change in what so page eight line five change the word tell to present may present the board with any objection to that and oral summary. Objection you got them. Okay Mr. Ron hurt you okay with that. So for the record the change is you would have to change tell to present and and then you have to add the words with an oral before summary correct. I believe that's correct. So the wording should at the end of party may present the board with an oral summary. Okay, got it. Thank you. Okay. All right. So then page 24, line 4. It's going to be there. I'm going to go on the floor. This page is okay. Page 24, excuse me, line 4. Prezyding needs to be capitalized. Oh yeah. OK. Any objection to that? No objection. Capitalize. Capitalize. Prezydingize, presenting. Present. All for the show. Presenting official. Page was that, Mr. Clerk? I'm sorry. Page 24. Thank you. Line 4. Thank you. Don't be part of the paper. I can't. I can't. I can't. Line 4. before official, the word presiding needs to be capitalized. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I to. I think everyone has a copy. Yeah, yeah, okay. Okay. Okay. All right, so can we get work over that one? Page 31 line 16. Give me a second. Let me just get to that. Yep. Page 31. page 31 line 16. Everybody got it? Okay. Okay. So this line is a phrase. It's not a sentence. So what I would suggest is that you make a comma at the end of rules, if that's the meaning of this, and then lowercase A, alternatively refer to as the unscheduled docket? Does that read it through first and see if that makes sense to you. Or you can make it alternatively, this may refer to as the unscheduled dock. I think that it correct me for a moment. I think that sentence is supposed to be moved up in front. So it's like inactive, alternatively referred to as the unscheduled docket. And then it goes on to describe what that is. So in other words, you should have a comma if it goes. Yeah, but I think that line 16 should be moved up to right after the word inactive on line 12. So it should be inactive and then it should be essentially otherwise known as unscheduled. Because- So should that be italicized as part of that heading? Is that what you're saying? I think that whole sentence alternatively referred to as unscheduled docket should be the after the online 12 after the word inactive. That sentence should be the first sentence. But it's not a sentence. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah,'m yeah, I should say yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, it would have to be either in parentheses next to inactive Okay, yeah, I'm trying to think how we did that before That's that that would be the way to fix that I think so in other words in after inactive directly after inactive parentheses alternatively refer to as the unscheduled docket and parentheses colon Any objection to that lower case being alternatively if you move it up there and prevent. Oh, you could lower case B.A. That's fine. Everybody okay with that? Yeah. Mr. Reinhart, you okay with that? So after inactive parentheses, alternatively referred to as the unscheduled docket, and that's all I tell us. Impressed is yeah, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Thank you. All right. All right. I'm going to have to pay 31. Page 32 line five. Everybody there? Something's missing in the sense what is what I wrote should and regular board member be here. So each name party in a documented case and regular board member, oh it's already in here, is expected to attend all meetings in here in person. Somebody must have put that in there while I wasn't looking. Okay, absent compelling circumstances. Okay. page 35 and regular 32. Be here. It's corrected. Okay. What page 35 is it? And regular. 32. Be here. It's corrected. Okay. So I've definitely corrected it. Okay. So let me take that out my list. All right. Page 32 line 14. Request an alternate memory. Okay. So the chairperson show immediately requests an alternate member. So what I would like to see here, it's changed to be called up or assigned either one of those from the pool of alternate members as defined by these rules. So I'll just and we can let the board side. So the reason we used to participate in that and I remember this was because we was consistent throughout. So we said that members of the public can observe and board members must participate. Participate means viewing exhibits and we define it in the rules elsewhere. So that's why we used to work there. That's why we said it was participate because it means that you will review exhibits, ask questions of what this is, we've discussed it elsewhere in the rules. So that's why. But if the board feels differently, but that's why it's where it was worded that way. How about be called up to participate? I'm okay with it the way you do it. You feel it's okay? that be called up to participate. I'm okay with it the way you feel it's okay. Because we'll be questioning some of you. She'll immediately request an old to remember participate. Yeah, because we talk about the camp participation list. Okay, I'll give one that one. Okay. Yeah, I'm gonna uncle with it. Okay, but you explained it so it makes it clear. Okay. All right. Page 39 Line 11 Okay, I have a question here for myself. Okay, line Page Page 39, line 11. Remove the colon after provided. That's what that, yeah. Remove the colon. There's a colon there. It doesn't need any. Semicolon, sorry, sorry, semicolon. Yeah, just remove that, so we call them after provided after provided any objection to that objection you go with that mispronter. Okay. No, after I didn't think so. Individuals may appear, but where was my right? Provided provided they are a party or a Dully or the rest of us now I don't see a call comma there mm-hmm individuals may appear before the board provided they are a party or a Dully authorized to represent a party to the proceedings before the board. I don't I don't see the need. Okay so where am I now? Okay page 43. Line 16 to 24. Okay so this was a question for me and maybe and maybe I'm not understanding. So this is the procedure of a denoulo hearing this whole section. So order a presentation. The county solicitor, which I know you're changing that, the county solicitor introduces reports an official documents pertaining to the case. Now does the county solicitor introduce all of these things? No, so it's kind of like what we just did. So the county solicitor called the case and then we would allow both sides to do it making statements. Then the petitioner would start with their side. Then they would be cross examination. Yeah, it's just yeah. I got that. But what this indicates to me is that this is the county solicitors stuff. It would seem to me that they want because the way it's for me. Correct. Okay. So ABC all these things are not the county solicitors. Perfect. I got you. That should be moved out to one two three four five to me. Yeah, you're right. They're not sub categories of the county So the recommendation then is to where the letters are to number it So it's sequential instead of a subcategory of one correct Everybody okay with that and it goes all the way through to the end And it wouldn't be intended. I'm sorry. Correct. Yeah, it would be intended. Right. Instead of being an A. Okay with that and it goes all the way through to the end I'm sorry, yeah would be indebted right yeah instead of being an ABCDE it would be a two three four five six and on and So that goes on through page 44 to through the through K through line six Actually go I'm sorry. I go through line 10 right because? Because they have to be re-numbered, too. Yes, correct. OK, yes, quick. Should we change the formatting of the number 1, 2, 4, change the format of all the A, 3, A, 3, and 4? A through. It's going to be A through K, and then the next page 2, 3, and 4. Yes. So the formatics are consistent. So with regard to the sentence, the first one, everything else is just not... Has nothing to do with... It's not sentences. So the first one is the sentence. So we want to change the format of that first sentence to flow with the rest of the number of the sentence. Doesn't have to because on the next page, it just says, petitioners rebuttal. It explains that petitioner summation opposition summation aren't it's only giving the order of how how the case runs I understand what you're saying the first one's like a formal but but then we be so wordy because they would say each side makes opening statements yeah it would be like all those should be number right yeah that's so yeah so yeah so two things here so one the recommendation is to number and I think we have a consensus on that right? We're gonna number okay and then Miss Harris is saying is the actual structure of the sentences. Do we want to change that of number one? Well, how would you change that? I would take out the yeah,. Yeah. Can you list or introduce his reports and official documents pertaining to the case and it's actually going to be legal advice or right? Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. I'll show your comment on that one. Are you okay with that, Mr. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay. Move it on. Okay. 47. H-47. Line 13. Okay. In that title there, decision and order. 47. Line 13. Okay. Should that be a colon after order in that title? Is that or is that us and why is that a semicolon there? I'm sorry. I'm a light. 13. Oh, oh. Light's camera action. That's a grammar thing. I have no idea. Well, I can tell you. It probably should be probably should be a colon. A colon. Because the decision in order, this process and issuance is what it's referring to it. It's not another subject, which that would be. Oh, I understand what you're saying. So to colon, is that what, is that how that is, but is that title, does that what that title means? Decision in order and we're going to talk about the process and issue it? Yeah, okay. Okay. So then the colon should be there. Okay. All right page 48 Line 12 Need to spell out administrator there third word in number four Wow, you got eagle high. I'm dying. I was really, I was very intent on this. And then I have a comment when I'm all done. Okay. And then line 15. I'm sorry. 48. Line 12. Number four. Administrator needs to be spelled out there Okay, and then 15 15 and 17 should this be board legal advisor Is that this am I on the right place here? 15 and 17. Boreds, liquid, legal advisor. That's on 18. So here are not out of lines that have changed. I had that somewhere else. Bords, legal advisor has changed there. Okay, I don't know what that's about for me. I'll figure that one out as I go along. This is going to be codified. So I imagine on that end, right? This is just our imagination. I have to reformat all this to be if they pass it, when they pass it, how they pass it, to be, you know, to conform to code. So yeah, I guess they have an internal process, but I'm very sorry to speak about that. I'm doing it for you. Yeah, yeah. Okay. Now we're on page 51. Line 6. Shell. Call. Copy. Complete the volume. Within six months of appointment, each board member, including all the members, shall. OK, that's what I was meant to say. OK, at the end of shall, put a colon and drop the other complete the following. Oh, OK. Because you're giving the action in one and in two. So don't complete the following and then complete. Am I linguistics class? So just say that again. So at the end of line six, place a colon at the end of shale and then drop the remaining part of those. Strike complete the following. Strike it, right? Exactly. Everybody okay with that? Okay. Good. I had just another unrelated point on that previous page that we just discussed. I noticed that legal advisor was not capitalized as of the board's preference to please have a capitalized for the document. Thank you. Okay, please. Okay. Are there places? Yeah, so it's consistent throughout. Yeah. I'm hoping that you have something to add to Yeah. Hopes and dreams. OK, page 52. Line 5. Why is it not there now? There was something that I can't, oh here it is. Why is it 17 now? Line 17. Okay. Line 17. Period at the end of a sentence. Line 5. Okay. Yeah. Place a period at the end of Line 5. Any objection to that? Nope. Okay. Okay. And then on the same page, line 17, because it's not done anywhere else where we see BOA refer to here. I don't think in the document, I think it ought to be spelled out. Yeah. So do you want to have the full thing or just the board's website? Either one will be on. Well, you're recommendation. So you make the right. I am happy with either one of those. So make a specific one so he can make the change. So also through the document, I know that it's, that it says, that it's, I know it says, the board's all the time, the board, the board, the board. Do we actually make in the very beginning of the document? because I can't go back and remember that. That the Board of Appeals is referred to as the Board in this document. I will say definition. Can I add, if you go to page two, we do spell out Board of Appeals for the first time in the second paragraph online eight, and maybe we just add BOA there. So it's been referenced, although it's a far away from where you're referencing it again, I like using just the board. Where are you on page two, line five? Yes. First sentence and second paragraph. So what you should, are you suggesting that you put put parins and do BOA there? Because I'm not sure if it's used anywhere else throughout the document, board Appeals. I have to do a search. You could or you could say the some some place here too because we all were I saw in here that were. Well actually since it's in the line one two it's in line one two Board of Appeals shall regularly. Yeah, but that's right. Sometimes it's being called the board on Capitol. Yeah. I think we should in page two, page two line eight, we put the parenthesis there, the board, and the parenthesis. And then throughout the entire document, we just refer to the board instead of. We'll be okay with that. If we move it to line five when it first appears. Yeah, it first appears in line five. Yeah, so like we did on the first period. So we're gonna succinctly say that. So Mr. Bynor and that's clear direction. Yeah, Nick, because Mr. Bynor, you had a question, but he was- I was just gonna point out that there are other occurrences where it's referred to as the Board of Appeals website other than on the first page. But the board's suggestion from what I'm hearing is on the first page, but the board suggestion from what I'm hearing is on the first occurrence, put the board in parentheses and then make that consistent throughout. Yes. Yeah. Okay. So, we're changing it. It's already there, but if it's BLA, we'll put BLA as the board. Nothing we need to do now. Are these changes all? Yeah. We changed it to be consistent throughout the document. One at a time. So yes, Mr. Goh. OK. In order to be really consistent, where it's first mentioned, which is Board of Appeals, on line five, whatever we decide on, that's what we should stick with. So when we call it the board because that's the reference all the way through here is the board. Okay, so I think that the reference should be the board. So if you're going to go to that last page and I'm talking about then the Board's website. Right, right. But so I want to make sure we fit. So point one, we're changing in the first reference to the Board of Appeals as Mr. Reiner said, right? The recommendation. So are we all agreement with that? I agree. That we're going to friends the Board. Yes. OK, so that's resolved. Now, that brings us to your point, which is where it says And you like to change it to what? The boards website. Okay, so just the board. Okay. So we want the board. Now that brings us to your point, which is where it says B-O-A. Correct. And you'd like to change it to what? The board's website. Okay, so just the board, okay. So we want the board instead of like B-O-A. Yeah, I agree. All right. Everybody okay with that? Yes. Okay. Mr. Rienhart, you go with that. Okay. Okay. And a couple things that I did see. I'm sorry, but I said one. Oh, sorry. So the only place that that might be confusing is on page two when the term is used in that parents, but in italics. I mean, page two, what line is it? Cultations. Page two line 20. It says specified. Unless otherwise specified, the term board of appeals shall be deemed to include the board of appeals hearing an examiner So that will be the only place that wouldn't change it. Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah, okay. Yeah, okay Okay, okay We're not yeah, we're not we're gonna go through it. No, we're not we put the board of appeals We're gonna just put the board. It's just a search and replace for. Yeah, but we did. Yeah. But we're not even doing that. We're just saying if it says the board of appeals it also means the board. So if you say the board of appeals, say the board of appeals, if you say the board of appeals it also means board. OK, but we're not going to go back and change everything. Okay, I just wanted to only this one spot Do you understand throughout throughout the board of appeals is not gonna be mentioned anymore. It's just gonna be the board Accepting this Yeah. Do you understand? Throughout. Throughout. So the board of appeals is not going to be mentioned anymore, so it's just going to be the board. It'll be the board. Except in this one instance down here on page 2 at the bottom. I don't think we have to do it. I mean, the board, just like you could say, well, I don't think it needs to be changed through. I don't think we need to search throughout. Only if it's BOA, change it to the board. Which we did. Not to go back throughout the whole document and change wherever we put board of appeals. Because sometimes it's good to rethink. Actually, you don't have to do that. But what you do have to do is you have to make sure that when you read a document that way you're using the board as opposed to the board of appeals that you know that that references the board of appeals and not the board of something else. That's what putting that in the Perence means. You can use board of appeals later on in the document if you like. That's not a problem, but you have to make sure that you understand that if you're shortening board of appeals to the board, you won't understand that's what they understand. Yeah, so I'm with you because there's instances where the board of appeals refers to a specific document. You can't say the board, like it's a specific title document. So no, I agree. I think we're all on the same page there. The board, when we put it in parentheses now, it clarifies that that refers to the board. Correct. So yeah, you don't have to. All right. Okay. Except for us as BOA. Yeah, that shouldn't say that anywhere. Okay. And I had a couple of thoughts on one other thing. Page 16. want to make sure we want to get there. Yeah, hey 16 16 page 16 Line 17 Okay Okay Okay. Okay. So, I don't know why you said that. Okay, never mind. Okay. All right. Any other words? I'll hold on one second. Any words? 25, 20. He or she. Yeah, that's why I put it in there. Here, in the office, I'm just going to sketch the link cases that they will hear that's perfect. OK, never mind, I'm done. OK, any other board members have specific requests? I just have one to clarify what we're doing and I think you did a great job with that. But we've got a place down here where it says the board of appeal. Where's that here? Can you give us a list? Yes, let's see. On page 16 where we were just at, line 17. Give me one second just to get there. Okay, go ahead. We're using by the Board of Appeals and the hearing examiner. I think when we're using the Board of Appeals and the hearing examiner, we probably don't need to shorten it to the board. So just. I thought that's what we said. Yeah, so we agreed. Yeah, we're not going to go through the whole document. Oh, we're just needs to be deleted. Yeah, I think that's what I'm going to write. That's what I'm going to write. That's what I'm going to write. That's what I'm going to write. Okay. Got it. Miss you? More in the stopes. I don't have specific pages, but I have two points to make. One is the alternate member, the whole block of the alternate member and the related texts in this document that I agree with everyone here. We do need a member, but we need to do it in the right way. And I think the charter says very clearly that we only have five members. And ultimately members would be additional members to the board. And the second point is the absentees from the board members, we need to define excused absentees, distinguished absentee, excused and versus non-squeues absentees. And the good example is, it's a perfect example is for the positive work sessions, I absentee for those two work sessions. I notify the chair and our mystery office that will be on the travel on these days. But Mr. Chair, schedule two meetings on those two dates. That's really and I can do about it and that's already two absentees. So in theory, and I were before I notified the Chair and Miss Berb of my trial and plan in June and again, there are, there will be hearings in June. So if this go into law, I would have already had three absentee and that will be excluded from the board. I'm just using me as an example, but it could happen to any board members or future board members. Any thoughts, everybody? I think we've had to do more meetings to do the work session just because we have a deadline crunch if we were to wait for you know that we would miss you know this has to go before the county council but I think in the future it's not a law yet one and in the future you won't I mean unless they start doing a lot of we won't have these work sessions like we're having now, which is just an, you know, like a leap year, kind of thing that's happening. But we will just be, usually just having hearings, because once we package this up, ship it off, I mean, I don't know when we'll be scheduling another works. Well I mean maybe when it comes back or something but once we finish this process and if these rules get enacted which won't be tomorrow you won't have this kind of schedule scheduling issue and I think people should be able to make the hearings. And they'll have more ample time to schedule the hearing so that everyone can make them. I just had a comment also. I think there's a discretion that the chair can make on excused absences. So I wouldn't be concerned with that, because as long as it's something that makes sense to the chair and it's fair, I think that fairness is what we're definitely trying to pursue. And your previous absences wouldn't count against you until you had absences after it was adopted. That would be the fore discretion of the chair and that could create some problems. So I'll say this. So the rules have been first off off, the rules have been a minute adopted to change a substantive change. We'd have to have a motion to open the rules back up. We then have to amend them again. Then we'd have to have a motion to then adopt them again and send them to council. So this purpose of this was for stylistic changes that don't change the substance because the rules are better proper. So I'm not objectionable to that. I'm just saying. The other thing, if you recall, we've had, I can't even say maybe half a dozen meetings in which we specifically talked about considerations. And we've asked that the chair, since the laws that exist now, says that the chair schedules the hearings, that the chair be notified at least 30 days before an absence. So that scheduling could be accommodating that. The notice you're referencing was two weeks before the hearing. The hearing was scheduled. As you know, my mother died and I did not ask the board to stop moving forward because the business of the board is important. I think when we follow the rules and we give advance notice like it's been asked as a courtesy, then scheduling can be accommodated. But last minute change in scheduling obviously it becomes an issue. To that end, ultimately, I think if I'm not mistaken, the rules don't even require the removal of a board member. It requires the notification of the council will ultimately decide if a board member should be removed or not. So that's my two cents, but if the board so wishes to reopen these rules and to then that I'm happy to do that otherwise, the focus this was to make stylistic changes that won't change the substance of the rules. But whatever the board is so inclined to do, I'm happy to. I don't want this to go forward. I do not want to go backwards. I agree. Ford, we're going forward. I think the rules are fine. And they're not in place right now. And when they do get in place, board members should attend. You know, there's reasons that they don't attend. And they can, you know, something could come up. And, you know, it's not like, you know, and it's, I think, you know, I think it's, I like the rules as written. unless there's some grammar or something that might need to be changed, but I think it's good. So I feel- Do I have to motion that or what? No, no, no. It is as they stand. The motion would have to be to reverse what we've done. Otherwise what we've done stands, if there are anybody feel differently. Okay? Okay, anybody else? Okay, so I have a few style, let me pull them up real quick. So, and I know we said this at the board meeting, but I wanted to be clear that we all had the same expectation. So when I went back to review the tape, it was kind of mentioned in passing, and I want to make sure that we all run the same page. So it's my understanding that the board will not develop any related, what we're calling collateral material. So the rules reference, things like users, guides, petitions, affidavits, and it was my understanding and I wanted us to board if I had the right understanding that we will not develop those until the boards, rules are enacted by the council knowing and the thought behind that was that we're not going to spend the time developing all these things if the council doesn't pass it. Is that right, everybody? Have that's the understanding. That makes sense? Yes. Okay. Okay. So, I think the recommendations I have fallen to a couple general categories. The first being, as I looked at the document, there was what you might call, I guess, like a formatting or a, and I'll pull the first one up to give you an example. So if you look at page three line seven, you could see there's kind of like, I don't know what you want to call it, like a track change or something. So I just recommend that that be corrected. Do you understand what I'm talking about, Mr. Reinhardt? I do, yes. So making sure that the final version is clear of any comments on the document. Yeah, so and I'm just gonna list those off in order if that's okay. They're all the same thing they just appear in different. So first one. Yeah, clear of any comments on the document. Yeah, so and I'm just gonna list those off in order if that's okay. They're all the same thing they just appear indifferent. So first ones page three, line seven, page 31, line 18, page 34, line one, Page 51 line 5. Page 35. What's the one I just said? Page 51, line 5. Did you say page 35? No. No. There's one on page 35. Oh, I didn't get a is there? According to what I see, unless it's 34. So I have 34 line one. I have 35 line one. Oh, I might have wrote the wrong page. No, I'm here. It is page 35 line one. Okay. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Page. That's correct. Page 51 line 5. Page 53 line 16. And that's it for that main change. Is there any objection to those updates? How about did you put page 53 in there? I'm sorry. So the first Ms. Berg, the last one was, you asked me with the last page I said, the last page I said was. 53, line 16, yeah. Is that what you're asking? Yes, I do. Okay. So is there any objection to those four mounting corrections? So I just have a question about that. Of course. I agree with it. And I want to make sure when the county reads this document, they know the areas that they need to consider, for example, on page 31, where it reference required a change in the charter. Just those things that, so they're aware. So that, if you recall, we're going to separate documents. Yeah, we're doing separate docking because they also love saying why they believe a charter or amendments required and we're delivering a second one that says why we don't and the council will be giving both options and they get to decide. Is that what you're talking about? Right so I just want to make sure when they're reading through they're not having to walk through you know just to a good reference maybe we have. The Excel spreadsheet says it remember. Okay. because we move to give them that. Okay, then I'm okay with that. Okay. Let's see. Okay, so that's the first set I would say. So now I'll go line by line as a few. And this one, I'm going to make a recommendation and whatever you guys think. So it's page 12, line 14. So my recommendation was that we add the word Board of Appeals before hearing examined and I'll explain why but whatever you guys want to do. At the time we did this or at the time it was originally written there was a hearing examiner, a sole hearing examiner if you remember, but then subsequently so whenever you said hearing examiner applied to the Board of Appeals, however, now the council has tests to hear examiner, there are two types of hearing examiner, ones at zoning, which we have nothing to do with the other Board of Appeals. So I make this recommendation, but I also think it could go either way because these are the Board of Appeals rules procedure, like why would you be talking about the zoning board hearing examiner? So I throw that out there that I'm recommending, but I think either way we're fine, but I'm just going to put that out there that I'm recommending, but I think either way we're fine, but I'm just going to put that out there that that would be my recommendation if the board has any thoughts that we had the word board of appeals before hearing examiner. So we're clear on which hearing examiner we're talking about, but I could go either way. This can be added. I mean, you know, always clarifying is always a good thing because I hate when we go, what does that mean? Should that be missing? Is that mean? Okay, should that be missing? Is that that I hate that, you know? Go ahead, what if we added Here an examiner to the definitions and put in their board of appeals here in examiner Just to have that clarity to have a definition for here in December I don't know but it's right here in F. What'd you say? The county council may appoint hearing examiners to conduct hearings and make decisions concerning matters with the jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals. Decisions of an examiner may be appealed to the Board of Appeals as provided by law. An examiner shall be a member in good standing of the Board of the Maryland Court of Appeals and at the time of appointment, shall have knowledge of administrative and zoning law, practice, and procedure. While holding the position of hearing examiner, the hearing examiner may not represent any client involving land use in Howard County. Right, I do remember that now. We took that from the existing, yeah. So should we clarify the definition in the beginning and say board of appeals or like we have the board here in Examiner, because that's also referencing board of appeals to make it shorter? So, okay, so, okay, so I hear what you're saying. So, but let me first back up to the point I made. So should we clarify the hearing examiner we're referencing in page 12, line 14 is the board of appeals hearing examiner. So that's the first question. I don't see any damage that we do to do that. I agree with Ms. Phillips. Okay, so we'll do that then. And then the second point you raised, Ms. Harris, if I heard you correctly, was that you'd like to add board of appeals before, Ms. Fierck, I've just read that, but you'd like to preface that board of appeals before that as well. So when it says just hearing's ever, you'd like to say board of appeals hearing's ever? Just because hearing examinations three out the document not just here. Well if you put it up there then I don't think you need to put it down there. Yeah. Okay. Because then... like it's a port of fields here in the summer. Just because here in the examiner's you three out the document, not just here. Well, if you put it up there, then I don't think you need to put it down there. Yeah. OK. Because then you're talking about this here in the examiner. Right. Right here. You don't need to put it down there. If you put it up there. OK. So am I right, Ms. Harris? I don't want to mistake what your recommendation is. Yes, but I have some reservation on what I just wrote. I'm thinking about it. So do you want to mistake your recommendation. Yes, but I have some reservation on what I just wrote. I'm thinking about it. So do you want to strike when you just said it or do you want to? No, what I really want to say is use the board like we shorten the board of appeals or BOA here in examiner to clarify somewhere in the beginning where we are the definition of hearing examiner. Well, why don't you just put board of appeals here, I remember. Well, we could. Yeah. But we've already shortened that. But it could be zoning board board. I'd like to just be explicit, right? Yeah, because there's two boards. Right. And that was the whole purpose we were trying to distinguish between the hearing examiner from zoning board because it's literally the same person. Can we just put like we did before with the... It's the same person. In Perent. In Perentices, the board of appeals here in Examiner. So make a recommendation, which is specifically, so Mr. Reinhardt is clear direction. Well, I'm talking through one. Okay. Now I'm just throwing things out. I'm not, you know. so so what if we did this what if we put Board of Appeals here in Examiner at the beginning of line nine Letter F put Board of Appeals in front of here in Examiner and then afterwards in Perrin's here in Examiner Just clarifies what we're using here and we're shortening here in the examiner, like we've done with Board of Appeals. So, there's the same process, it's consistency with our formatting. If we do it that way. So there's recommendation, and just reset it again, and give me the page in the line, so I could look at it too. A page 12, line nine, letter F. Line, give me what say, I'm just pull a page 12. So I mean, because I got a flip screen. It sounds like a lot, but it does make it consistent. Page 12, line nine. Okay. I'm just pulling to H12. Just like I mean, because I got a flip screen. It sounds like a lot, but it does make it consistent. Page 12, line nine. OK. And would you want to say now? We could say board of appeals here in Examiner, instead of just here in Examiner. And then in Perrent to show that we're going to be referencing it as here in Examiner throughout the document. I would rather go the other way. If would rather, if anything, it would go here and examiner, in parentheses, the board of appeals hearing examiner. Just like defining what the hearing examiner is or who it's associated with, no? So I think this is getting over-complicated because the definition is very clear here. It says the county council may appoint hearing examiners to conduct hearings and make decisions concerning matters within the jurisdiction of the board of appeals. Right. I agree and this is what the definition's for. So, okay, and then it goes down to what the jurisdiction of, now if you put board of appeals here in examiner for that Yeah. So, okay. And then it goes down to what the jurisdiction of now if you put board of appeals here examiner before that last sentence, that makes sense. Where? Because the one you were suggesting. Oh, I'll give. Because what it's doing is it's eliminating the any other hearing examiner from that first statement of what that here,iner is. And it says while holding the position of Board of Appeals hearing examiner, the hearing examiner may not represent any client involving lay on the use in Howard County. And to be clear, if I understand what the chair said, this same hearing examiner currently sits as the zoning board here board of appeals examiner and a board of a hearing examiner hearing appeals that would come to us. Is that correct but on understanding? The hearing examiner serves yeah as it sits right now. So that's why I just want to clarify that these rules apply to the Board of Appeals hearing examiner, and that sentence as opposed to a hearing examiner. Because it's time there, because remember, we just copied these from the past rules, but the time hearing examiner only referred to the Board of Appeals, but then subsequent to that, the law has changed, and now they have two types of hearing examiners who is the same person with the same title. Here, an examiner is the same title for two different boards and with two different rules. So that's why I just try to make a distinction. These rules. same person with the same title. Here examiner is the same title for two different boards and with two different rules. So that's why I just try to make a distinction. These rules don't apply when the examiner is the zoning board here, examiner. But I'll be fine either way. I don't think, you know, I'm losing it. Because these are our rules to begin with, so why would we be talking about the zoning board? But I don't care. I think we should leave it as it is. We're defining it's the hearing exam, this is what it is. We're defining it's the hearing examiner. This is what it is. It doesn't need a little help. OK, so we have a rule not to, so we have a recommendation not to modify it. Not to modify it at all. Just leave it as it is. That's why I said it in my either way. Which do you think? Well, what I just did was did a search for hearing examiner in the document. The first time it shows up is on page two, line 20 and 21, where we say, Well, what I just did was did a search for here an examiner in the document. The first time it shows up is on page two, line 20 and 21, where we say, unless otherwise specified, the term board of appeals shall be deemed to include the board of appeals here an examiner. So is that given us the clarity there? I'm just, and I think when we change something like this, we need to make sure it's not altering anything else in the document Because we aren't in our minds. We're saying these changes, but we don't know how it's written anywhere else So this but I like I like it if I could I like to withdraw my recommendation I think that will help us move past this. Okay, that's good. I think we leave it as isn't. I think Miss Piroca bred the definition. I think after reading that, you know, it's pretty clear. So I'm sorry, Mr. Wright, heart for all that back up for it. I'm going to withdraw. Everybody okay? Okay, scratch it. Okay. I dug my own hole in that one. Okay. I'm sorry. So the next group of recommendations is generally speaking. We agreed that we were going to change the it said county solicitor unless it was explicitly required to be the county solicitor. We're going to alter the language to be the legal advisor. So the reason for that, if you remember, was that no matter who it is, it describes the function. There are legal advisor, whether it's kind of solicitor,'s a private attorney, whoever it is. So we don't have to be worried about conflicts in the rule. To that end, I would like to, on page 13, line 12, I'd like to strike the text from the county solicitor. 13, line 12. Mm-hmm. I'm not there. I don't see it. You don't see it? Did I write it back? Hold on. I'm going to pull up my document. It's okay. You take your time. You take your time. 13, line 12. Page 13. Oh yeah, I totally messed up that reference. Sorry, I believe you were a forensic page 14. Line 12. Thank you. Yeah, that definitely appears to be. Yeah, okay, so I, man, I hope all my pages aren't screwed up. I sorry So for yeah, so 14 so the sentence the new sentence would read read and disseminate traffic and hearing decisions in orders For board member review approval and public posting So we strike from the caddies. Let's do yeah, everybody okay with that Okay, or I should say any objection to that. Okay. And let me, I'll stick with all that. So I would like to change the word, I recommend changing the word county solicitor. Two boards, legal advisor. When it appears on the following pages and lines. Can you tell me where you are again? Yeah So rec the recommendations to change the text that says county solicitor change it to boards legal advisor in the following places page 36 line 21 I'll move on when everybody's If you want to because it appears about we just like to find a new time. Yeah, yeah, make sure I don't have the wrong reference Page 36 line 21 Yep page 43 line 16 Yep page 43 line 21 Yep, can I ask the question? Yeah. On page 43, the county solicitor introduces reports and official documents. Do you think it will be legal advisors? So it might be the county solicitor. It might not. It depends on how things play out. It doesn't have to be like. So for example, and Mr. Sanders correct me if I'm wrong, it's my understanding that I believe it's a charter somewhere. It says the county solicitor is the actual attorney that represents the board, must be the attorney that represents the board in circuit quarter or quarter appeals. So in that case, it must say the county solicitor, so I didn't change it there. But in other places in terms of who will be at our hearings and introducing cases, I don't know if it would be the county's leader or I don't know if it'd be it's all on whatever the council does. so I didn't change it there. But in other places in terms of who will be at our hearings and introducing cases, I don't know if it would be the county solicitor or I don't know if it would be, it's all on whatever the council does with who our attorney is going to be. So that's why I just changed it to the legal advisor. So might be the county solicitor or might be this private attorney, you know what I mean? Does that make sense? It makes sense. It doesn't make sense that during this county proceeding that they would, we would just have a legal advisor rather than the county solicitor. Well, that's yeah, that's a barbaric pay grade. But that's okay. Yeah. But okay. Am I correct, Mr. Sanders, is the requirement that the county solicitor must introduce a case? I don't know about that. not in the charter says the solicitor shall be counsel to boards. Right agencies. But there's no requirement like that the county solicitor must introduce a case. Right. Okay. Okay. I just want to make sure I didn't miss that. Okay. Then I'm good. Okay. Where last we left off page 44 believe line four page 49 line three 49 line three correct. Yeah, okay. I think that's the last reference that I have noted for it uh 15 uh what would page line 15 page is that supposed to be or not you see where am I 49 line 15 please look at them see I don't have it what it's 49 line fourty nine 15 right here the fully. The fully signed final party. Three days. Three days received from the county solicitor. So that note so that is so that has to stay that way and the reason is you might remember Mr. Cook said. It's the honest. So the they have to do a legal sufficiency before anything can be so the county solicitor is the final saying it. They have to give final approval. They have to give legal sufficient on all DNOs. So he, that's why it didn't change that. He referenced that in our last work session where that, I guess, I don't know the, I can't recall the citation, but they have to be the last one to have eyes on it before it can go to be published. It's referencing the office, not the particular. Yeah. Yeah. So before Dean Oak, we publish, they have to, yeah. Yeah. So that's why I didn't put that in there. OK. All right. That's all right. OK. So the office, the messenger, refers to the entire office, not a particular office. Correct. That's right. Yeah. And a legal life can be a county. It could be. We talk about the function. It's a function that's not a person or office. Okay. Okay. Let me see where it might work out. So I think we did this already. The remove the period after the work hearing. Page 16, line 17. I think, yeah, we got that right. Okay. So page 25, line 20, it talks about hearing's numbers, says, they, so that implies that it's plural and I would like to change that to he or she. Right. Right. In the event, it's a singular. You could say it speaks for itself, yeah. So I'd like to recommend James the word day to he or she. Yeah. Any objections? It's page 25, 920. Good. Okay. So what are we changing to H or C? He or she. Am I in the right page? I don't know. I just want to make sure we change. So are we changing to he or he slash she? He or she. Quit, the quote unquote he or she three words. I've got it. I've got a question. Yeah. What? I have a question. Yeah, go ahead. So, why wouldn't it be they? Because they refer us to plural. What if there's only one hearing that would. Okay. And the new, because I'm not getting gender. Oh, we're not getting gender. I know I'm no expert on this. Okay. But when they do, he, she, or it's he, she, or they. Right? When they do that? not referring to their pronouns, we're referring to the person but in this case it's unsafe they meaning it's their gender or sexual identity It's talking about they as in plural like they gathered meaning multiple people Where are they very he or she? Okay. Because they can be a single. For the individual, whatever. Yeah. I mean, if you want to be. She's not in your head over there. No, I think that individual can't they were a single. Yeah. Oh, does they refer to a single? It does. Yeah. Because it's another way they're not binary. The person, the people that they, that it's in there. But was the single person like would you be there? Yes, because that's a nine, but that's an unbinary term Who did that? Who's that me? The hearing exam is yeah, it's a body and it's it's there might be several different hearing examers It's a they they is a group But even though you only have one there. Probably change to the individual, practice S. So just to avoid that. What ever person they group up. Is there individual cases? Is that what you're saying, Jim? No, it says change the hearing. The hearing will hear to the individual, practice S. Yeah, For scheduling. So you don't have that program. The individual, it's just first, yeah. For scheduling their cases. Schedule the, yeah. I mean, once again, I don't know what I'm going to do. Well, the hearing exam will be responsible for scheduling their cases. I don't take care of it. Whatever you guys want to yeah So what's the recommendation? And there will be not they will hear the heron examiner will be responsible for scheduling their cases period Everybody okay with that. Yeah, that sounds that that that will take you to run her. Okay. I New to when I was typing that out. Like this we come up pronouns. Yeah it's tricky. Okay. Let's see. So that takes care of that. I take care of that. Oh so the next is page 52, line 17 through 18. So if you recall at one of our work sessions we we said, and it made good sense that we were gonna strike any reference to an appendix. And any where it says you could find this in the appendix or that in the appendix, we said we're just gonna put everything online. And that way we can keep it updated and it's a real living thing. So what I'd like to do is strike on page 52, 17-13-18, I'd like to strike the words, or in the appendix of these rules. Correct. So that the only place to find that is online. Right. Any objection? That sounds no. Okay. And then my last two, page 54, lines 10 and 11, on line 10, the text is incorrectly, it has to be lowercase, it's capital right now, it says county land use law, that's not a specific law, it's a general, so it should be lowercase, and then on line 11, local redevelopment housing law, once again, that's a general reference, not a specific law, so it has to be lowercase. Any objection to that? Yeah. Okay, and once again that's a general reference not a specific law so it has to be lower case Any objection to that no, okay, and I think that's it. Oh wait. Nope. I spoke to you soon. Okay, so are you okay with those two mr. Reiner? Okay Let's see show rules and proof list of Okay, so on page 55 line 10. I'd like to change the sentence up a little bit so it reads more clearly. What's, where are we? We are on page 55 line 10. So I'd like to strike the sentence. As it reads now, it says appendix C of these rules shows an approved list of filing codes. I'd like to replace that with a list of approved filing codes may be found online at and then put the hyperlink in for our Border Appeals website. That sounds good. Yeah, once again, taking out the whole reference suit of Pentix. That's fine. OK. No objection? OK. Page 55 lines 21 and 22, and that goes and continues on to page 56 line 1 and 2. I'd like to replace the following. So it exists now. It says to call and or to friends an electronic submission received without any attachment shall be rejected rejected and the administrator shall enter a no-dock it included notation in the online record. I'd like to strike that. That's not what it says, right? What's the, where's it? Yeah, I'm looking at my own writing. I don't think it makes sense. No, here here. So we're in page 56 line 2122. I'm trying to make sure we see without any test where it will qualify as rejected submission. Oh, OK. So my recommendation is to strike completely page 55 lines 2122 and page 56 line 1 and 2. I'd like to strike it completely and replace it with two perons. An electronic submission received without any attachment shall be rejected and the administrator shall enter a no document, include notation in the online record. It summarizes those sentences and it's much more clear. Okay, because that does sound clear because what I'm reading there. Yeah, it doesn't matter. So it's rewired to be more clear. So the new tax would say an electronic submission received without any attachment shall be rejected and the administrator shall enter a no document included notation in the online record. Hi. Everybody okay with that? Yes. Okay. And then there's a technical reference page 57 line 4. So we don't have our motion is for reconsideration not for procedural review. So I'd like to strike the word procedural review and replace it with reconsideration. So it's a motion for reconsideration, not a motion for any objection to that. That's all I have. Anybody else? This house? This mayor may not be fixable, but it's just a spacing after the numbers. When you hit nine, you go to 10 and then where are you? All throughout the document, the spacing is different. But one page, I think it's 16, is where it stand out more to me. I'm sorry, page 14. It looks like there's no space at all between the perenn from the number 10 on line 6 through the end of 15. Yeah, do you know what happens? Because there's two numbers versus one. Yeah, and then what would happen is that all the whole alignment, they'd have to move that. So my question. Yeah. Well, my question is, can the double digit numbers be moved over to the left one so they align with the 8, 9, and 10, or with the 7, 8, and 9 throughout the document. Yes, again. Okay. Okay. Anybody checked? Okay. Okay. Okay. Did you? Yes, and we don't get that high in numbers. Yeah. Anybody else? Okay. So you know for the business, we're going to join this meeting and we'll reconvene for our hearing on June 5th at 9 a.m. So we're going to vote on the, the document, or we don't have a final vote. Well, we already did that. That was the other day. Is that what you mean? Yeah? The, you mean the final amendment adoption? Right. So we're not going to vote on the change the modified version again. again, and just the vote as a whole the other day. I'm sorry, sorry, sorry, so let me back it up so we're not adjourned. So let me back it up, I'm sorry, I don't want to get understand. So we made some changes today, and you voted the other day as the entire document. and amendment made it today doesn't have to unfold or it's. No, these were just style changes. We adopted the rules and substance that we had already. We amended and adopted the rules and these are style changes to the new rules but there's no new substance. So we wouldn't have to amend and adopt the rules again. Okay, that's fine with me. And what's the next step for the document? So the next, let me give you the calendar. So it goes, and this is just, let me see, I got from Miss Harrod, the clerk, I got the general schedule. So essentially, let me see if I can find a email, essentially what happens next is it goes pre-filed, goes to the council, there's a work session, if I'm not mistaken, a public hearing, and then the council could take a table, they could do whatever, they could continue it, they could approve it, they take whatever action, they deem fit. I think it was, yeah, so let me pull that But the dates already on the... No so it's all tied to the pre-file so the budget is going on right now and that's why we had to get into them so that the let me see tentatively and I could be mispeaking Miss Herd is I'm just going to share what she shared with me because I'm not very well versed in how that procedural thing works. Is that shared with the board? Or it's just shared with you? No, I think she said it to me. She, I'm just, yeah, yeah. So I wrote it down when she said it, and I put it into our calendar. I don't know., what was it? So May 15th must be approved to allow time to draft. May 22nd is prefiled at 2 p.m. June 7th is introduction of the legislation. June 16th is the public hearing. I'm nervous requested that someone from Board of Appeals should come before the council to testify for about five minutes June 23rd is a passable work session July 7th would be the vote and July 30th would be wrap up legislation Wrap up legislative session before August recess Okay, and I can send this to you. Yeah, please Yeah, and what's the procedure to write a minority opinion on the document? I don't know, about the third. I think you could testify if you want to. I won't be available on that day. I will be in China and the WebEx is not available. or youith something to the council once this is in the process that's been formally introduced to that? I can. Is it an individual boardman? You could submit anything. I can email to the council, right? And there's no formal procedure as a appendix to the document saying there's a minority opinion. Not in something like this. This isn't like a decision in order. You could do a minority. But this is, I think the record speaks for who voted for the adoption of these rules and things like that. Because I know other committees at task force they can have a minority opinion officially attached to the document whatever they submit or recommendations they submit. I don't think I think you could submit whatever you deemed appropriate if you want. Okay. Thank you. There's no restraints on you submitting something. Thank you sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Right? We did. These dates are. These are just rough to see. Yeah. It's in the council. Our job was to get into council from there on. Nothing's definitive, right? Right? That these dates are just... These are just rough to see. Yeah, we... It's in the council. Our job was to get into council from there on. They could not even call it up. Like, who knows? They could say they don't want to hear it at all. But public hearing started 7 p.m. typically. Oh, in the evening. Correct. that's why our job was to get it to the council. What they do with it, if anything, is completely on them. So Ms. Howard just gave us a brief outline if it follows the council. What they do with it, if anything, is completely on them. So, Ms. Howard just gave us a brief outline. If it follows the normal trajectory, this is how it would look, but who knows? If I may, those dates that Ms. Herod provided were the earliest, I think, time possible that the council would be able to consider it. May 22nd, pre-file date was the earliest pre-file date. Were the rules to be completed by the 15th? Yeah and we were trying to get it done before summer break so that we don't have to carry it over to you know an election year where everything becomes hot but. So they in other words they don't have to schedule public hearing or or work session or legislative vote at all. No they do. They do. They would need to hold a public hearing, introduce the legislation, considering adoption of the rules of procedure, hold a public hearing and then vote to make a decision on adopting or not adopting or amending what you all provided to them. But they don't have to follow. As far as the work session, they it's up to the council's discretion. That's my understanding. But they don't have to follow the schedule. This is just the early debates. They can schedule. But they can postpone that. It's their it's their calling. Correct. So if depending, it all depends on, you know, the amount of legislation that is before the council any given month. You know, this is definitely one of the higher, I would say, I can't speak for a priority level with the council, but it's definitely, they know it's going on, they know it's an important thing to get done so You know this could be prefiled later this month. There could be until next month it could be further up than that so So the time frame from our submission to the profile is set or it's up to them I believe ideally and this bird can correct me, but ideally it would be like we'd have the complete document, at least a week before any pre-file date. Their meeting dates are preset. It just depends on when they pre-file this legislation. Bet it would be heard before the council. I heard before the council, I mean the public hearing or so it would be pre-filed first. So depending on when that gets pre-filed, that's when it would go before legislative session and all the necessary steps. So who decides what date to profile? Is it a county council that they decide? Or there's certain rules that they have to profile after certain days of submission? Like us? I can't do a pre-file. Do you know when it makes that to set? So the pre-file dates are set. It's usually the one set. I'm going to put it on the, one second. The pre-file for introduction of legislation, the following month is the fourth Thursday of every month. Okay, got it. So May 22nd would be the pre-file date to introduce legislation in June. I see. The first meeting of the council every month is to introduce new legislation and vote on legislation from the prior month. So that's the first meeting. The second meeting of the council should be the third Monday would be the public hearing date. Got it. Thank you for your clarification. Thank you. Any else? All right. We're adjourned. Thank you.