This meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. The meeting is being recorded. Good evening, Madam Hearing Examiner. Good evening, Madam Hearing Examiner. For the record, Christopher DeCarlo. Representing the appellant in this case. and I'm with Rosenberg, Martin, and Greenberg. Then proceed with an opening or? Right. So just briefly before calling my first witness, I would say an opening, just to shape a little bit the subject matter of this case. So this is an appeal of DPC's email determination that was issued on July 17th, 2024 in which they found or determined that the conditional use associated with this project and this property they said it was void. And to back up a little bit Madam Hearing's Amherstery, you may remember this petitioner and this project was before you actually back in 2022 for a conditional use for a ground mount commercial solar facility on Roxbury Road. The approval was an uncontested case, the approval was issued in March. I believe your decision order was March 31st, 2022. You're going to hear through testimony tonight that after receiving that approval, the petitioner, the appellant in this case, Community Power Group, began diligently pursuing the activation of that use and ultimately began processing plans with the Department of Planning and Zoning under the county code to subdivision regulations. There's two mechanisms, and as Madam Hearing's Ammoner knows, a conditional use per the statute, you have to pull building permits within two years. There are two exceptions to that, or extension abilities. One is the petitioner is able to, prior to the expiration, file a letter with the hearing authority, send it to the neighbors, and indicate that they've been diligently pursuing the use, and ask for an extension period of time to complete it. In that circumstance, as long as they've been diligently pursuing it, and there's been no change in circumstance, typically the extension is approved, anyone can petition for a work session to come in and argue otherwise. Now a lesser used regulation is 131-013E of the zoning regulations. And that is what we're here to talk about tonight. That regulation provides an exemption from that two-year time period and actually end all time periods associated with it under two scenarios. The first scenario is when the petitioner, the project, has plans that are being actively processed. So it's a present tense qualifier. Are being actively processed in compliance with the procedures of Title 16, Subtitles 111. There's then a disjunctive or that talks about the second qualifier, which is if plans were being actively processed in compliance with those subtitles at the time of the expiration of the applicable timeline. In that case, the applicable timeline would have been March 31, 2024. Now you're going to hear through testimony that it's undisputed that at the time that the two-year time period ended, my client, community power group, was actively processing an environmental concept plan. And it is my client's position and the position of the witnesses that are going to testify or tonight that under the statute and a correct interpretation of that statute, an environmental concept plan qualifies as a plan within the procedures of subtitles one and eleven. And because of that, they have the exemption from the two-year timeframe. Now, and I'll get more of that in my closing, but that's the first part. The second part, even regardless of that, there's no dispute as well that my client is currently processing now a site development plan. You're gonna hear through testimony that was submitted in, I believe early August of 2024. It has been accepted by the department. It is being processed by the department. Fee's were paid as part of that. They're reviewing it. They've issued some comments already. There is no doubt that a site development plan falls within the gamut of that regulation, 16 sub-title one and sub-title 11. And either under the second qualifier, which is the past tense, were processing plans, or under the first qualifier in which we are actively processing plans currently presently, either one would allow this project to move forward and not have the conditional use be void, and I'll talk more about that later, but the policy behind it and why such an interpretation that the department has taken in this case is really illogical and it doesn't really read the statute and harmony with each other in the purpose of this regulation. So with that, I'll go ahead and call. Can you just ask your one question? Sure. When was the site development plan filed? The site development plan filed was filed. I believe I want to say, I know it was formally accepted August 26th. I think it was filed August, it was early August. It was filed after they said the conditional use was void. Which is also very odd. But we'll get into that with the arbitraryness of decision, but they make a determination that our conditional uses void and they say you have to start all over again, and then they accept payment for the site development plan to begin processing it, which is certainly at odds with each other. So you've kind of arguing a stop-alair? Yes. Well, a stopper to some extent, but also just under the regulation itself, I think that the way that regulation is written, and I'm not trying to circumvent the hearing here, but the regulation is written is there's two qualifiers. There's the present tense, which says you are actively, if you are actively processing plans within the meaning or with compliance with the procedures of Title 16, Subtitles 111, you are not subjected to the two-year requirement. So that's a present tense. Separately from that, there is the past tense if you were. My argument here tonight is that we qualified under both. If it was to be determined that the environmental concept plan did not count, because that SDP has been accepted to the extent that they said the conditional use was void previously, that decision would be erroneous, because there's no doubt that the plan is being actively processed. And the department does not disagree that a site development plan is not a plan within the meaning of that title. And that regulation itself is also a mandatory. I mean, it says, Shell, it's not May, there's no discretion there. Shell in the regulation is defined as a mandatory, when it's used as a mandatory requirement. Here, it's clear cut. SDP is being processed. It shall not be subjected to the two-year requirements, pulled building permits. And, you know, really the reason for that is because you're not going to reach a logical result in which a petitioner has been processing a plan in good faith, or paying fees, they're responding to comments. No one's brought up this expiration period because you're processing the plans. And then, as you'll hear in this case, the only reason this came up was because the petitioner was being proactive and saw this and was like, well, we want to reach out and make sure that we're on the same page about us not having a boy conditional use. So, you know, let's get some clarity on that, to make sure before they went to pool building permits and, you know, maybe had to deal with it then. And, you know, unfortunately then then they got bit a little bit and got put into situation. But the reg itself is clear on the actively processing plans part. Now, our first position is wholeheartedly that the ECP counts as a plan within that requirement. So that it should have been exempt from the very star because the ECP is certainly a plan. I mean, if you look at sub-title 16, which is the subdivision regulation, sub-title one is the general provisions. To say an environmental concept plan is not contemplated in those procedures, is just an erroneous interpretation and a short-sighted one. Because as anybody knows, and as our witnesses will testify to, in DPC's own documents indicate, it's a sequential development process, and the environmental concept plan is required to be submitted and approved prior to being able to submit an SDP. It is baked into those procedures. Not only that, but if you look at section 16-127 of the code, and I'll be it that does talk about residential infill development. So I'm not saying that would specifically apply here. But that section, which is, that's section 16 sub title one, talks about the requirement of approval of environmental concept plan. It's in the, that suble. But moreover and further to our point is that subtitle 11 of title 16, that's the subtitle that deals with adequate public facility ordinances. And that's really what STPs are important. 16-1-1-1 deals with adequate public facility ordinances dealing with stormwater management. And when you read that section and we have quotes of it to pull up, it discusses how an SDP must comply with the requirements of subtitle, of Title 18, subtitle 9. And that puts you over to the Department of Public Works. And it is in that paragraph, the Department of Public Works paragraph, in which it lays out the process of defining the environmental concept plan as the first plan that needs to be approved as the first stage. The next stage in that is an its site development plan that needs to be approved. And then the final plan is the grading plan. So it's a three-step process. That's how you comply with your stormwater management obligations. Again, it's, you know, I would say that the department's interpretation is clearly erroneous and arbitrary for the reason that they've looked at this reg at least in this instance and determined that, you know, we don't think an ECP qualifies. No real reason why it doesn't qualify despite it being an actual plan in the regulations themselves and reference, but we don't say it qualifies, sorry you got to start over. And that interpretation is logical, it's not looking at the reg as a whole or the intent of what the legislature, the council was doing with this, which was in situations like this, you have an uncontested case, there's really no, there'd be no logical point for starting over here, especially when you have an, there's an approved VCP now. And the plant, the plants are being processed. And the letter portion, the other section that we're used to seeing, that talks about diligently pursuing, I think when you're reading those together in harmony, you'd say that that portion is for a person that hasn't submitted any plans yet. For whatever reason, they've come, they've been trying to secure funding, maybe they have to go through other pilot programs, things of that nature, they've been diligently pursuing it, but they haven't followed plans with the department. So I've really jumped ahead, matter of example, kind of profit a lot, but that's the universe of what we'll be discussing this evening. So with that I'll go ahead and call my first witness who is Peter Melitz. Unless you have any other questions before that? No, no, I'm good. If you sit up there. Yeah. Thank you, sir. Okay. Okay. Mr. Melitz, I need to swear you in, please, sir. Okay. Do you solemnly swear or affirm in the manner of penance, tell the truth, the whole truth and everything but the truth? I do. Please state your name and business address for the record. My name is Pierre O. Piede-Mellitz, professional engineer with Century Engineering, 16901 Melford Boulevard, suite 130 in Billy, Maryland, 20715. Thank you. Sorry for my voice. Hello. Matt proceed. Thank you, Madam Hearing, Senator. Mr. Mellitz, how are you employed? I'm a registered civil engineer in land department. And how long have you been a professional engineer? 30 years. And do you have experience working in Howard County and land use zoning and development matters? Yes. Have you ever testified before the Howard County hearing examiner or the hearing authority before? Yes, on both items. Okay. And can you explain how you connect it with the commercial solar facility project conditional use on Roxbury Road? We are the site civil engineers for the project. We picked the project up just after the conditional use plan. And then you are you familiar with the reason for this appeal? Yes. And you understand you've seen the decision that the Department of Planning and Zoning is made regarding the conditional use being void. Yes. Before we jump into it, what is your professional opinion just regarding that decision right off the bat? As previously stated by others, we don't believe it's correct. We believe that the introduction and approval of the environmental concept plan to ECP, its processing is part of the site development plan process and we believe that we've fulfilled the requirements. Okay. And now, backing up a little bit, I'd like to go through the timeline. So the conditional use for this project was approved on March 31st, 2022. That's when the decision order came out. Is that correct? Yes. And that was BA 21, 0, 31, C, is that right? Oh, yield to you, yes. You're hearing me. Kelmash, your on my screen. is that right? I'm yield to you. Yes. I'm here. I'm here. Yes. Can I share my screen? I'm sorry. All right. Mr. Melton sharing a document on the screen. Or looks that was. Okay. I'm sharing a document on the screen that was previously submitted and pre-marked as petitioners exhibit one. Have you seen this document before? Yes, I have. And can you identify this for Madam Hearing Examiner? That is the decision in order as noted for this particular site. And then if you're understanding this was, there was no one in opposition to this conditional uses that correct? Not to my knowledge. Madam here in the seminar, I admit this as petitioners exhibit one. All right, I'll exclude it one. So accept it. Now when was the so the conditional use was approved in March 31st, 2022, when did your Can you ballpark when it was perhaps a minute? The environmental concept plan. I'm sorry about that. Let me refresh your memory. I'm sharing a document on the screen that was submitted and pre-marked as petitioners exhibit number two. I believe this is your email address. Is that correct? At the top of this document? Look at the screen, you can stop looking at your phone. Go ahead. Well, I had just my note. Yeah, yeah, that's fine. OK, so the date on here is December 7, 2023, is that right? Correct. And if we go down, and this is an email to you from the Department of Planning and Zoning, is that correct? Correct. And it's Project Dox. What is Project Dox? That's the Howard County electronic document support. What do you submit through? When we make submissions, we submit plans through those through docs. What plans do you submit through project docs? The environmental concept plan, site development plans, et cetera. And then yes, that was the, that's the email of the risk of the, of when we made the submission. And ECP 24026 is that the environmental concept plan for this project? Yes, it is. And down here on the second page of this, what is this indicate? It's an attention to you. Right. What it stating is that the plan was submitted and it was accepted. And the intake as noted was everything was found acceptable to begin the processing for its review. So based on this you'd say on December 7, 2023 the environmental concept plan was submitted and being processed. Yes. Okay. Madam here in the examiner I move to submit exhibit two in the evidence. I exhibit two so accepted. Thank you. I want to move to, what was the intake fee for that, Mr. Mousen? 2000, I guess the totals. Plus, yeah, plus the additional fees for soil conservation and the administrative fee of $50 there. So $25.90. And are you aware, you know, do you know either way if community power group paid that fee? Yeah, we did receive a, it was paid through the community power, correct. Okay. Now, I'm sharing a document on the screen that was pre-marked as petitioners or a balance exhibit number three. Have you seen this document before? Are you familiar with it? Yes. Okay. Can you identify this document for Madam Hearing Examiner? These are, this was the initial memo received as noted, it identifies timelines in the road frontage requirements. It refers to that. It also evaluates what the project is going to be subject to and it basically outlines the review process. Well, this isn't specific to this project, correct? This is an internal memo regarding commercial solar projects in general. It can be for everything, yes. Okay. Now, would this set out the policy of procedures for the review of commercial solar projects in Howard County? In general, yes. And it's an expedited process, is that correct? It is stated to be such. Okay, and I know here there's highlighted what is the first plan that is referenced in this internal Department of Planning and Zoning document? The Environmental Concept Plan ECP. And there's an indication of a timeline of when it's supposed to be reviewed and I guess comments approved or comments provided to you, is that right? Correct. What is that timeline? Well, it has noted it's supposed to be completed in three weeks. Three weeks. When did you, and you said you submitted and exhibit two showed you submitted the environmental concept plan on December 7th, is that correct? Correct. When did you receive, if at all, comments on the environmental concept plan from the Department of Planning and Zoning. Those comments were well passed the first three weeks. Do you have any idea when passed, how far passed, months? It was probably about two, I'd say probably about six weeks. Six weeks? It's almost doubled the timeline. Yeah, I have to take a look back to confirm that date. Could you please do that? Yeah. The December 7th. Yeah, we didn't get our first comment until until February 6th, which would be essentially two months past February 6th, 2024. 2024, correct? Okay. essentially two months past February 6, 2024. 2024 correct. Okay. So that was when we get when the first set of comments came in. Okay. And then I want to go back to this internal memo briefly. When the internal memo would also indicate the site development plan is also listed on here. Is that right? That's correct. And there's a note underneath of the site development plan review timeline. What is that note indicate it's highlighted on the screen? Well, as noted, it states that we cannot start the SDP processing until we have approval of the ECP. As noted there, the STP can be submitted upon approval of the ECP and can begin processing according to the three-week timeline while the ECP myelars are being routed and signed. So when the plans are approved and when it reaches its approval, we do get confirmation from the county that the plan's approved and they say, okay, go ahead and submit my large for signature. That approval allows us to move forward with the SDP. But not until that time that we received notification that the ECP has been approved. And that usually comes out in an email with a letter attachment. When, and then there were comments that were provided by the Department of Planning and Zoning. You said February 6th of 2024, is that right? Correct. Did you address those comments? We did. When did you submit a revised, when, if at all, did you submit a revised ECP to address that? The revised ECP, we resubmitted that April 23rd, 2024. We had some items that we were addressing that caused us to interact with the client and also with the land owner that took a little bit of time for us to address. And when, if at all, did you receive approval or comments back from the Department of Planning and Zoning one that provides the environmental concept plan? That approval, additional comments came back on May 8th, 2024. Did you address those comments as well? We did. Did you submit another revision? Yes, we did. And we resubmitted on June 13th, 2024 with approval soon thereafter on June 21st, 2024. Madam here, in the exam, I asked if I exhibit three could be moving evidence. I'm showing now on the screen Mr. Miller's, or a Pellance exhibit number four. Can you identify this document for the hearing Xamarin? Yeah, this is the notice of approval of the environmental plan. And that's June 21st, 2024, is that right? Correct. Okay. And then you can see in the second, exhibit number four. And then you can see in the second paragraph where they request that we go ahead and submit the original drawings, the myelars for signature approval. So from the period of December 6th of 2024, I'm sorry, December 6th of 2023, to June 21st, 2024, going back and forth to the Department of Planning and Zoning processing the ECP. In general, yes. Yeah. Now, when, if at all, we talked about this in my opening, but when, if at all, did you submit the site development plan for this project? That was submitted. Excuse me, August 1st. August 1st. And was it accepted by the Department of Planning and Zoning? Yes, it was. Okay, and I'm showing you a dot, and Madam here is having our ask for exhibit four to be admitted. Thank you. I'm showing a document on the screen that's been pre-marked as a Pellance exhibit number five. Are you familiar with this document? Yes that's an email from one of my colleagues. And you're on this email is like correct. Correct. If I scroll to the second page of the email, it's from I believe again the part the P dox is that right? The part of the planning and zoning. Yes. And what is it intake? What is this notification? What are they providing you in this notification? Similar to the other, they pre-screened the plans for review and approval review, excuse me. And they also requested the fees. The fees associated with initiating plan review. And that date on this was August 26, 2024? Yes. So the SDP was formally accepted for process. Well, formally accepted on August 26, 2024, is that right? Yes. So the SDP was formally accepted for process. Well, formally accepted on August 26, 2024. Is that right? Yes. Yes. And if we go to, if I move to the second page of this PDF, there's some language here discussing active processing of the plan. Is that right? Yes. And what is it note regarding active processing? Well, as noted, it says that the plan will not begin processing until we submit three paper prints associated with the project and pay all the required fees. The fees identified above that 98 to total fee of 983135. And then as noted, we print three copies, three sets, and then deliver them to the department. Okay, and Mr. Melitz, is it your understanding that that fee has been paid? Yes. And have those plans, I guess the paper plans been submitted? Yes. So what is your opinion about whether or not the plans are being the SDP is being actively processed right now? I have no no reason to believe it's not. And the Madam here is Emma asked for a exhibit, a balance exhibit number five It is two-page email. I do have hard copies as well. I can provide. Mr. Mallett's moving on to what's been pre-marked as a Pellance exhibit number six. Another email, are you familiar with this email? That email Yes, again, you're on this email is that correct? That's correct again referencing P project docs. Is that right correct? If we go to the body of it, it's a notification again from project docs What is that notification indicating regarding the SDP notification that all the full payment has been received by the department. And that's on what date August 29th, 2024. And the payment amount was, I think from the previous ones, you know approximately how much that was? It was 98, 31. Have you received any responses on this site development plan? Yes, we have. And what are you currently doing right now with those responses? We have a review cycle that we have to submit by and that is later in this month that we have to be back if I'm not mistaken. It's October 2021 if I'm not mistaken. We have to have resubmitted the SDP, a revised copy addressing all the comments that were offered by the department Are you on track to meet that timeline for august or October 21st 2024? Yes And I want to get back now to mr. Melis just you're understanding of a one environmental concept plan as a professional engineer that has practiced in Howard County I'm familiar with the development regulations, what is an environmental concept plan in your mind? The environment, what we do is we lay out the site, we show what's proposed to be in, what's proposed to be developed on the site. We also identify all the natural resources, tree lines, streams. We identify wells, septic systems, anything that's there, that's environmentally sensitive. We identify roadway, subsequent to that, we then show what we're proposing to build, and then we provide also our layout of stormwater management, how we're anticipating to address stormwater management. Are you required to receive approval of an environmental concept plan? Yes. Prior to constructing a project? Yes. Prior to building permits? Yes. Prior to submitting an SDP? Yes. Is there any requirement, if you know about whether or not the site development plan has to be consistent or comply with the environmental concept plan? It has to follow. Essentially, it's the first step of the planning process. What's the first step of the planning process? Excuse me. The first step is the vision of what are we looking to do? What plan would be, what if any plan is the first step of the? The environmental concept plan is the initial step that is the initial plan that anyone else sees of what's proposed. And then Mr. Mellitz, I'm now sharing on my screen some code excerpts from Howard County zoning regulations. Let me back up. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, let me back up. That would be subsequent to the conditional use. Subsequent to the conditional use. Yeah, we subsequent. When I say it's the first plan in the development process, the first step would be the conditional use plan. Certainly. So I guess there are cases where, if you have a by-right project of permitted use, you would not need a conditional use, is that correct? Correct. And in that case, you would go to the environmental concept. But if first you need to have some type of zoning approval, what would that, that would be either by-right, or either it would be by-right, or we would have to go through this, the conditional use. the the the the the the the the the the the the the zoning and the regulations of Howard County and the Howard County Code. This was pre-marked as appellants exhibit number seven. Are you familiar with these regulations that are being shared? Yes. Okay. The first one is the exemption I referred to in my opening is that correct? 131-013E? Yes. This exemption, what do you understand it to mean? Well, depending on based on what we are proposing, there are certain portions of, there are certain requirements that are listed further down that are not required because we're not, we're not providing or proposing a use that is in this case like I have a structure. So we don't our solar site does not require water and sewer. As noted there we are required for stormwater management we do not have solid waste. So you are required to meet the standards under Title 16 subtitles 11 adequate public facility ordinances for stormwater management solid waste. So you are required to meet the standards under Title 16, Subtitles 11, adequate public facility ordinances for stormwater management. Is that correct? Right. As applicable. As applicable. And then if we go to the co-provision which talks about which is subtitle or title 16, Subtitle 11, which I have shared here, 16, 11, 11, talks about adequate water sewer, stormwater, is that correct correct and the first line here It says no developments shall be approved until plans are reviewed plans in plural Are reviewed by the Department of Planning and zoning and the development of public works is that right yes If we go to be which talks about storm water There's a specific reference to title 18 which is public works is that correct? Yes, and then subtit 18, which is public works, is that correct? Yes. And then Subtitle V, which is storm drainage systems, is that right? Correct. Now, are you familiar with Title 18 as well? Yes. Title 18, which I have copied here in 1901, that is where an environmental concept plan is provided, is that correct? Correct. And here, it defines it as an actual plan. Is that right? Correct. It is not just, I guess, reading DPC's email determination, it appears that they do not consider an environmental concept plan an actual plan. Is that right? That's what they're stating, but everything else does not lead you to that conclusion and that would be your Professional opinion based on your review of the regulations and your experience practicing here in Howard County Yes, okay, and the environmental concept plan was it being processed actively in March 2024 of this past year. Yes, okay. That's all the questions I have for mr. Melis Madam hearing senator my next witness would be Jim Whitmer I have in part that one. Okay. Yeah. Good. We're on the same page. Yes. Do you want the hard copies now? If you have one copy given to Miss Berg, if you have two copies, give me one. I have two. All right. So, Mr. Millett, as I'm sorry, Mr. Whitmer, I need to sway ring please. Do you solemnly swear or affirm under the penalty's accurgeary that in the matter now pending, you shall tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank you, please state your name and business address for the record. My name is Jim McMurray and my business address is one part of the avenue. Thank you. Thank you. Great. All right, sorry about that. Yeah, my name is Jim Whitmer and my business address is one park avenue, Mount Erie, Maryland 21771. Thank you. You're welcome. I'm Bruce Lee. I'm here. Thank you. Mr. Whitmer, how are you currently employed? I'm self-employed owner of JNM Engineering. What is JNM Engineering? It's a civil engineering firm. We do all types of land development design, surveying, environmental. Do you hold any degrees or professional certifications in the field of engineering or civil engineering? I do. Yeah. Licensed professional engineering registered professional survey. How long have you been a licensed professional engineer? Roughly six years now. And how long have you been a licensed surveyor? Roughly four years. What did you do prior to being self-employed with J&M engineering? I actually worked for Howard County in New Zealand. In planning in zoning? I did. What a division a development engineering division? Okay, and what were some of your duties as part of your employment with Tower County Department of Engineering? I would review, I'd be responsible for reviewing subdivision plans, development plans. This includes ECPs, all the way up SDPs, Plats. We'd review road designs, environmental, you know, all the gamut that they would be involved with. How long were you, did you hold that position with the Department of Planning and Zoning? Right around 15 years. Okay. And I'm sorry, could you repeat your position? Yeah, I worked for development engineering division. Thank you. What was your actual title? Engineering Specialist Three. I'd assume as part of your position and even your position now that you're familiar with the Howard County zoning subdivision and land development regulations. Is that is that correct presumption? Yes, sir. Okay. Are you familiar? Re-share my screen going back to what was submitted as petitioners exhibit seven. Are you familiar with specifically Title 16, subtitle 111 of the subdivision and land development regulations? Yes, I am. I apologize, I'm Courts. I have a little problem sharing. There we go. Okay. Mr. Whitmer, are you familiar with zoning regulation 131-013E? Yes, I am. And that regulation is the first one shared on the screen. Is that correct? Yes, sir. And this regulation speaks to projects which are exempt from the conditional use projects which are exempt from the two-year requirement is that right to pull building permits? Yes. And it refers to procedures. Projects that have been actively processing plans within the procedures of Title 16, Subtitles 1 and 11 is that right? Yes. What is your opinion regarding whether or not environmental concept plans fall within the procedures of Title 16, Subtitles 111? I think they definitely would fall under those subsections. Go. Can you elaborate why? Yeah more specifically because environmental concept plan is this start like we talked about already It's the beginning point of any of the plans. It's required under most circumstances prior to an SDP. And there's a lot of, there's a lot of portions and reports and tasks that are required with the ECP that are also intertwined with the site development plan more specifically if there's a wetland elimination, a forest and a lineation, a preliminary forest study, any anything and also stone mortar management. So prior to an SDP being submitted, all those have to be identified and mapped. So it is your opinion that the environmental concept plan is contemplated within Title 16, Subtitle 11, Subtitle 1. Yes, I believe so. Yes. And then Mr. Whitmer moving to what has been premarked as a balance exhibit number eight uh... are you familiar with what i'm sharing on the screen here yes and what is this this is basically it's that dpc website it basically it's it tries to give uh... the general public engineers who ever is looking at it an idea of the plan submission processes depending on your project, what is required through DPC and DPW regarding start to finish for any given project in the county. And right here, I guess, right here is the list of planned submissions, is that correct? Yes, sir. And this indicates plans that are part of the processes, that right? Absolutely. The development process Yes, what is the first plan listed? It's the environmental concept plan and this is department planning zoning own document is that correct correct? And is that consistent again with your Historical work experience within the department absolutely. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Whitmer. That's all the questions I have. Madam here, examiner. Thank you, Mr. Whitmer. I appreciate it. Madam here, examiner, one last witness, which we'll be brief with. It is Miss Rachel Boots. All right. I need to swear you in. Do you feel when we swear or affirm our depends on the surgery. You know, I'm not planning to shut down the truth. I will truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Please state your name and business address for the record. Rachel Boots. It's 444-45 Willard Avenue, Chubby Chase, Maryland. Thank you. Hey, proceed. Miss Boots, how are you connected with the Pellan in this case community power group? I am an employee at Community Power Group. I'm a senior development engineer there. I'm are you familiar with this, the project on Roxbury Road, the commercial solar facility? Yes. And what's your connection with that commercial solar facility? I am developing it in the project manager for that project. Over seeing the processing of it. You heard Mr. Melod said test fighter earlier that the conditional use of prove overs received in March of 2022. March 31st, is that right? Yes. You were actually at that hearing, is that right? Yes. You were actually at that hearing, is that correct? Yes. No, the, as Mr. Mel, it's also indicated, the environmental concept plan was not submitted until December 6th of 2023, is that right? Yes. So there was a bit of a lag in between. What, if anything, was community power group doing during that time to pursue the establishment of the conditional use? Yes, I can definitely assure you I was diligently working on the project behind the scenes. There's a lot that goes into, once we have a conditional use approval, to getting all the consultant scared up for the submission of the Environmental Concept Plan as Mr. Whitmer stated and Mr. Millett stated there are several studies that go into the preparation of the environmental concept plan. So while we are gathering those I was also working on the PSC approval for doing the community solar in the just to back up a PSC what is PSC approval. Public service commission. Is that through, so is that a, that's through the state. So it's a separate approval that needs to be completed prior to the county zoning approvals. That right? Yes, that's correct. That's for operating in a solar facility in the state of Maryland, a community solar facility. And that comes after the conditional use, you have the conditional use approval in hand? Yes. Okay. And when did you receive, I guess when did you begin that process and when did you receive approval? So we had everything ready to get submitted for that in September of 2022. And then we got the approval from the Public Service Commission in April of 2023. Also during that time I was also working on the county's pilot program, the payment in lieu of taxes, which was required for us to process to make sure the project was financially feasible and that's a program that the City Council passed or a specific resolution related to our project that was passed in March of 2023. So those two items are kind of outside the division of engineering and land development, but we're required for us to process to continue the project. And you had to wait until the conditional use was approved to begin both those processes? Yes, okay Were there any other approvals that you required? Yes, we also had to Once we had the PSC approval we then applied with BG and E the electric utility provider And so we were doing that in the spring of 2023. And so then once we are confirmed capacity on the line in spring of 2023, we immediately started working with Pete to then get everything teed up and designed for the ECP submission. Do you know when about you retain Mr. Melitz for the ECP and the SDP? Yeah, we were speaking in the summer and I believe we signed the contract in August of 2023 and then it took, I guess, five months to get everything ready for this emission. And then Mr. Melitz was the one processing the environmental concept plan. Is that correct as you're and engineer? Were you involved with that process or ever're overseeing it though as well. Yes at any time during that Processing and the comments going back and forth with the Department of Planning and Zoning Did anyone ever raise an issue regarding the two-year period to poll building permits? No during the ECP process we were in constant contact with the reviewers. As Mr. Melitz mentioned, there was a couple comments that required coordination with the reviewer and no mention of the upcoming expiration date was provided. And have you paid all fees associated with those plans? Yes. You heard me talk about this a little bit in my opening, but what was the circumstances then of how we came about to get this determination in July or you came about to get the determination in July of 2024 regarding the conditional use being void? Yes, so while we were getting our ECP and we are reaching what we saw as a foreseeable approval, we are talking to financial partners on line up construction, because those things do need to take part happen in advance. And we started talking to financial partners, and they wanted the assurance, and we wanted the assurance that our conditional use permit was still valid. We were operating under good faith. We got our ECP approval after the expiration. We were actively processing plans. We had spoken to you about a potential interpretation. Are we actively processing plans? Well, hold on. Don't let just for our own purposes, attorney-client privilege don't go into conversations with the record. But understandably, you've been, you were seeking reassurances that your conditional use was not voiced, that correct? Yes. When the in March of 2023, I'm sorry, March of 2024, were you under the understanding that you were you aware of section 131, 013, I'm sorry, 131, 013E, the exemption? Yes, we were aware of that exception that if you're actively processing plants, the two-year requirement to pull billion permits is your exempt from that. And is there any reason why you didn't submit an extension letter with the hearing examiner at that time? I think we were under the assumption that we were operating in good faith and had been working on the ECP during that exact time period. Okay, thank you. That's all the questions I have. Madam Hearing Center. Thank you very much. Thank you. And Madam Hearing Center, unless you had any, oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. An important point for you. Okay. So, go ahead. Thank you. Unless you have any other questions for any of the witnesses, Madam Hearing Examiner, I'd be... Oh, I'd ask to move that into having it says petitioners exhibit number eight. Appellants exhibit number eight. And let's you have any other questions for any of the witnesses Madame Hearing Examiner I'd be. Oh, I'd ask to move that into having it says petitioners exhibit number eight. Appellance exhibit number eight. Nine. Believe there should only be eight. Eight was the, this. Eight was the notice from DPC about how process plans. I might have them. I only have 8 that I've shown or introduced. I have my decision. Your decision would be one. OK, two would be evidence that the ECP was paid and filed. Yes. Three would be the policy for reviewed commercial solar facilities. Correct. Four would be. Four is up to look at it. Four should be on the ECP approval letter from June 21st. Yes, it is. Yes. Five is the STP's fees page and STP was accepted. Six is the project docs. Seven is the code requirements we keep coming back to. And eight was the code. Was the... The DPC. Web page. Web DPC web page. And that's all I have. Is there another document that you have that? You can see it. I mean, I see it. So I'm not sure. I don't know if it was attached to something. May it be part of? Right. I thought we visited part of the SEP. Thank you. That's six. I'll look to the five. Dr. Melis. No, no, no. What's the first page? What's it attached to? What's the yellow thing attached to? Okay. Okay. All right. Yes, sir. And with that matter here in New Zemmer, we would conclude our case unless you had any questions for the witnesses themselves. No, I think I'm good. You were very clear on the process, the dates, Mr. Whitman, this boots behind the scene. I think I'm good. Is there anything for the you wish to address? I think I addressed much of it in my opening Madam Hearing's amnors, so I would just have adopted that for my closing argument. I think the evidence clearly established here that one, the department's decision, as you know, is not supported by anything. Have they ever made a decision like that previously that you're aware of? Not that I'm aware of. And you know, so I think that alone makes it arbitrary, arbitrary, but even digging further into it for the reasons that were presented through the evidence and everything I talked about in the opening. For one, my client here qualifies as an ECP should certainly qualify as a plan contemplated within that regulation. And then again, even if the ECP wasn't for whatever reason, there's no doubt the site development plan is being actively processed. Which again puts the department in the normature, I think, in a precinct position where they've accepted payment and are processing a site development plan against the decision where they're saying the project itself is void and they're saying the start all over again. So, you know, for those reasons we'd ask that the decision be reversed and it'd be determined that the conditional use is not void and they'd be able to move forward with their project. So, thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you all for participating. Everybody do the great job. And, again, it's not do you to have been concluded and a decision in order will be put on. Thank you very much.