[00:00:01]
FROM VIRGINIA RESOURCES[Wetlands Board on March 26, 2026.]
COMMISSION.WE ALSO HAVE MS. EMILY HILE THAT'LL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CEDAR ISLAND PROJECT.
I ASSUME THE BOARD IS AWARE OF AND COMP AS AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE TO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE MARINE RESOURCES COMMISSION OF NO NET LOSS.
ALL APPROVED PERMITS ARE GRANTED FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD FROM THE DATE OF THIS HEARING, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED ALL PERSONS SPEAKING BEFORE THIS BOARD WILL BE SWORN IN.
FIRST OF ALL, IF EVERYONE HAS LOOKED OVER THE AGENDA, UH, IT'S HAD TIME TO LOOK EVERYTHING OVER.
ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? IF NOT, I CALL FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT MARCH'S AGENDA.
UH, I I MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA.
WE HAD NO FEBRUARY MEETING, THEREFORE, I ASSUME THAT EVERYONE HAS LOOKED OVER THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY'S MEETING.
SOME CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE AS EVERYONE HAD TIME TO LOOK THAT OVER.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? THERE'S NOT A CALL FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES.
SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU A SECOND, PLEASE.
I, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA START WITH, UM, OLD BUSINESS IF WE MAY.
FIRST, UH, MR. WATSON, ARE YOU PREPARED? UH, DO YOU NEED SOME TIME, SIR? UM, WE GOT IT RIGHT HERE.
DO YOU FIRMLY SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD? I DO.
I ASSUME YOU'LL CARRY ON WITH CAPTAINS COVE.
WE, UM, HAVE RECEIVED THE JPA AND, UM, I PROVIDED THAT TO YOU BY MAIL OR DELIVERY A FEW WEEKS AGO.
UH, MR. GETTIG POINTED OUT THAT ONE OF THE OWNERS HAD NOT SIGNED.
SO WE GOT THAT SIGNATURE AND I PUT THAT PAGE, UH, BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING.
AND, UH, ONCE THAT JPA IS, UH, PROCESSED AND HOPEFULLY APPROVED, THAT WOULD RESOLVE THAT VIOLATION.
UM, TODAY AFTER THE MEETING, WE'RE GONNA GO LOOK AT THE PROJECT.
I ANTICIPATE THERE ARE GONNA BE CHANGES TO IT SUCH THAT IT WILL NOT BE READY TO BE HEARD AT THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE HEARD AT THE MEETING AFTER THAT.
UM, BUT I DO NOT THINK, UH, THE PLAN AS PROPOSED IS GOING TO BE WHAT'S ULTIMATELY BEFORE THE BOARD BECAUSE OF SOME, UH, WELL, VARIOUS REASONS.
WOULD, WOULD YOU REPEAT THAT, PLEASE? YOU DO NOT THINK BECAUSE, UM, I'M NOT SURE FOR ALL THE REASONS, BUT I THINK, UH, THERE NEEDS TO BE GAPS IN, UH, THE REVETMENT.
AND, AND, AND SO THEY'LL, I ANTICIPATE COMMENTS FROM VIMS OR OTHER AGENCIES, UM, THAT, THAT THE PLANS WILL BE REVISED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE COMMENTS.
EVERYONE UNDERSTAND? NO QUESTIONS.
JUST QUICK, QUICK, UH, VIMS AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE AND DMRC, THEY HAVE THE, THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT AS WELL.
WE ARE LEAVING, UH, ONCE WE LEAVE THE MEETING TODAY, WE ARE GONNA DRIVE UP THERE AND LOOK AT IT.
UM, EMILY, HE IS HERE FROM VIMS, UM, CONVENIENTLY SO WE CAN ALL GO LOOK AT IT TOGETHER TODAY.
UM, WE WILL TAKE, UH, ANY COMMENTS NOW FROM ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR JPA, NOT, WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE FLOOR, OPEN THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
ANYONE ELSE CLOSE THE FLOOR BOARD DISCUSSION? YOU'VE ALREADY ASKED QUESTIONS OR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE, MR. WATSON? I'LL JUST REITERATE, I GUESS WE HAVE ALL THE OWNERS THAT NEED TO BE THE OWNERS SIGNED ON TO THIS PARTICULAR, NOW THERE'S NO OTHER EXTRANEOUS PEOPLE.
WE NEED TO, I DOUBLE CHECKED ALL THE PARCELS AND IT'S ALL EITHER CAPTAIN'S COVE OR CCG NOTE, UM, OWNERS ON ALL THE PARCELS.
YES, WE, WE'VE GOT THE SIGNATURES FROM EVERYONE.
ALRIGHT, WE'RE ALL SET WITH THAT.
WOULD, WOULD YOU PLEASE CONTINUE ON VIOLATION?
[00:05:01]
THE ONLY OTHER OLD BUSINESS WE HAVE IS THE, THE BIG ISSUE, BUT WE HAVE A, AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR OLD JPA THAT I HAVE AFTER THE CEDAR ISLAND, UH, PLANTING PLAN.UM, 'CAUSE I ANTICIPATE THE BIG ISSUE TO TAKE A LITTLE LONGER.
SO I PUT FOR NEW BUSINESS THE CEDAR ISLAND PROJECT FIRST.
SO OF COURSE WE WERE HERE TWO MEETINGS, WELL, NOT TWO MEETINGS AGO, BUT TWO MONTHS AGO.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A MEETING LAST MONTH ABOUT CEDAR ISLAND.
AND THE BOARD AT THAT POINT, UH, APPROVED THE PLAN CONTINGENT ON GETTING A PLANTING PLAN THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE.
AND, UH, I JUST NOTED THAT IN THE SUMMARY HERE.
UM, AND JUST AS A REMINDER OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, I JUST INCLUDED A FEW OF THE VISUALS, UM, FROM THEIR INITIAL PROPOSAL.
THIS IS THE NORTH END OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS, UH, THE SOUTH END.
AND THEN, UH, AN OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED HABITATS THAT WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT IF THE BOARD WANTS TO POINT OUT ANY PARTICULAR AREA.
AND THEN I HAVE THE LETTER, NOT FOR EVERYONE TO READ RIGHT HERE, UM, BUT JUST IN CASE WE HAD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR LANGUAGE, UM, I HAVE THE LETTER HERE, UM, IN ITS ENTIRETY ALONG WITH THE PLAN.
IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO READ, BUT, UH, UM, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY DIRECT TO THE REPRESENTATIVES HERE TODAY.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME, UH, MR. WATSON, I'D LIKE TO, UM, OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANYONE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK, COME FORWARD, EVEN IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS.
SIR, WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? MY NAME IS CHUCK LEY WITH STANTEC.
DO YOU AFFIRM OR SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTER BEFORE THIS BOARD? I DO.
YOU, UH, ALL YOU REMEMBER HIM SIR, UH, FROM LAST MEETING.
SO ANYTHING YOU WISH TO SPEAK BEFORE TAKING QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION, SO I'LL OPEN IT FOR QUESTIONS, UH, FROM THE BOARD.
WELL, I THINK, UH, YOU MAY HAVE GOTTEN SOME COMMUNICATION.
I WAS SORT OF CONCERNED HOW YOU GONNA EVALUATE, SAY, NATURAL CAUSES OF DECAY VERSUS SOMETHING MIGHT BE AN OVERFILL FROM A WAVE ACTION.
AND I SEE YOU DID THESE LIKE, UH, IT'S INTERESTING, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE LIKE THESE LITTLE ONE BY ONE METER SITUATIONS AND YOU'RE GONNA, THAT'S GONNA BE YOUR COMPARATIVE IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING ON EITHER POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY IN REGARDS TO WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE ISLAND, CORRECT? IS THAT ESSENTIALLY CORRECT? WE'LL DO, UH, AERIAL, DO SURVEYS, GROUND SURVEYS AS WELL, TRANSECTS.
BUT WE'LL ALSO BE EVALUATING USING, UH, EITHER DRONE TECHNOLOGY OR AERIAL IMAGERY TO, UH, EVALUATE THE LANDSCAPE OKAY.
TO HELP EVALUATE PERCENT COVER IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS OF GROWTH.
AND SO THIS IS GOING UP TO FIVE YEARS THEN? IS THAT WHAT THE FINAL CORRECT.
AND WE'LL BE DOING THIS COMPARATIVE FOR FIVE YEARS.
YOU AT LEAST HAVE ONE YEAR ALREADY LOCKED IN FOR REPLANNING AND THEN THIS IS GONNA BE THE FOUR YEARS SEEN WHAT'S GOING ON AND SEEING IF SOMETHING ELSE IS NEEDED.
SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A DECISION POINT AFTER YEAR ONE, A DECISION POINT AFTER YEAR THREE AND A DECISION POINT AFTER YEAR FIVE.
AND ONE LAST SORT OF, I'M NOT UP TO ACRONYMS. UH, TOYR TIME OF YEAR RESTRICTIONS.
I DID
YOU WANNA TELL US WHAT YOU THOUGHT IT MEANT? OH, I THOUGHT IT WAS SOME SORT OF TOYOTA SOMETHING DRIVE CAR OVER IT.
I THOUGHT HE WAS THE CAR OR SOMETHING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, I'M GONNA, I THINK THAT'S ALL FOR NOW, BUT I MIGHT, UH, COME BACK IN A SECOND.
MR. WARD? NO, MR. TAYLOR, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, BEING TALK, WE'LL TALK TO GUNS HERE TOO WHEN WE DO THESE, UH, UH, PLANNINGS AND, AND CHECKING ON 'EM.
AND LIKE YOU SAID, I, I UNDERSTAND ABOUT NATURE TAKING OVER, BUT I MEAN, ARE WE GOING TO, UM, AND IT DOES
UM, BUT LIKE YOU SAID, BUT I THINK AS A, AS A BOARD, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT'S SAYING THIS, THAT WE'VE GOTTA LOOK AT NATURE DESTROYING SOMEBODY'S PLANNINGS TOO.
AND I HAVE BEEN IN MY NOTES, BUT I'D JUST ASSUME YOU CARRY ON FROM THERE.
WHAT WE'RE SPEAKING OF IS, UH, NATURE, UH, S NURTURE.
LIKE WE HAD ONE, WE GOT GENTLEMAN UP
[00:10:01]
HERE AND LIKE I SAID, THAT WAS COMING UP LATER.UH, WE DIDN'T, I PERSONALLY DIDN'T EVEN DO THE PLANS BECAUSE YOU JUST KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE, THE, THE PROGRESSION OF THE THE NATURE EAT THE MARSH IN THE AREA.
WHY, WHY SHOULD I ASK HIM TO DO A THREE YEAR PLANNING WHEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT, IT'S GOING TO, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I SEE THE, THE NATURAL EATING UP OF THE MARSH.
SO WHY DID, WHY WOULD I TELL HIM THAT? WHY? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? AND THAT'S THE THING I'M SAYING.
SO WE GOT, WE GOTTA TAKE THAT AS A BOARD TOO.
UH, WHEN SOMEBODY PLANTS IT AND THEY'VE DONE THEIR DUE DUE DILIGENCE AND THEIR BEST THING AND WE CHECKED IT.
THAT'S THE BIG THING TOO, TALKING ABOUT A PRE-CONSTRUCTION.
WE NEED TO DO AN AFTER CONSTRUCTION CHECK.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? YEP.
WHEN IT'S DONE TO THE NINES AND NATURE COMES UP AND DESTROYS IT, THAT PERSON WHO DID THAT DUE DILIGENCE IN DOING THEIR PLANNINGS, THEY COULDN'T HELP IT.
AND I, AND THAT'S JUST WHAT I'M SAYING.
THIS IS A, IF, YOU KNOW, WE, IF THIS IS THEM SAYING THAT WE GOTTA DO THE SAME THING WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING HERE AND THEY'VE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, WE'VE CHECKED IT, THEY'VE DONE IT, AND THEN NATURE COMES BACK AND CAN BE TWO MONTHS TO SOURCE IT.
AND, AND THE PLAN DOES TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE AN OVER WASH EVENT THAT RAISES THE ELEVATION TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S ACTUALLY NOT IN THE WETLAND, YOU KNOW, IN THE ONE AND A HALF THE MEAN TIDE RANGE.
WELL, THERE'S GONNA BE A POINT THAT HAVE, WE KNOW THAT
THAT'S NOT A, IF THAT'S A WIN, UM, I THINK WE'RE BOTH ON THE SAME, ALL OF US ARE ON THE SAME PAGE.
UH, WE EXPECT IT TO BE PUT BACK THE WAY YOU FOUND IT UNLESS IT IS THE GOOD LORD.
AND THEN IT IS, UH, SOMETHING WE HAVE TO REVIEW.
I JUST WANNA SAY, I, I ASSUME THAT THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GATHER AND THE MEASUREMENTS YOU GATHER ARE GONNA BE OPEN ACCESS.
OTHER PEOPLE CAN REVIEW IT IF NEEDED.
THEY, WE END UP SUBMITTING MONITORING REPORTS FOR THE AGENCIES TO REVIEW SO THAT IT CONTAINS ALL OF THE DATA THAT'S CAPTURED IN THE FIELD AND CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
YOU HAVE, YOU WEREN'T HERE LAST MONTH.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS? UH, I BELIEVE THE TERM IN LEGAL CONTRACTS HAS FORCED ME OR, BUT, UH, ACT OF GOD.
UH, SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REVIEW.
UH, IF, IF THERE IS NO NORMAL OVER WASH IN OTHER PLACES OR UH, ADJOINING AREA, THEN WE EXPECTED YOU TO DO JUST WHAT YOU GOT HERE.
UH, IF THERE IS, THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP AND REVIEW IT AND YOU MAY HAVE TO COME FORWARD AND EXPLAIN THAT.
BUT WE'LL ALL KNOW, BELIEVE ME, BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE ON THIS LITTLE SEVEN MILE WIDE STRIP.
ALRIGHT, UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, UM, THANK YOU SIR.
UM, MA'AM, MAY I, WOULD YOU, UM, GIVE US YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YES.
DO YOU AFFIRM OR SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD? YES SIR.
UH, MAYBE SOME OF THE SAME QUESTIONS.
UH, ANYTHING NEW? ANYTHING TO ADD YOU, I ASSUME YOU AGREE AND UNDERSTOOD EVERYTHING WE'VE SPOKEN OF? YES.
AND AS, AS FAR AS THE, UM, OVER WASH GOES, YOU KNOW, WE INCLUDED IT IN THE PLAN SPECIFICALLY.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TO HAPPEN.
WASH OVERS ARE TYPICALLY VERY EASY TO DELINEATE IN THE FIELDS.
YOU KNOW, THEY ARE, UM, IN THIS LOCATION THEY, YOU KNOW, IT BUILDS UP SAND AND IT'S USUALLY A VERY CLEAR CUT LINE OF WHERE THEY END.
UM, AND SO WE PROPOSED TO SAY, OKAY, IF THAT HAPPENS AND IT ENCROACHES INTO OUR PLANTED AREA, THEN THAT AREA OF WASHOVER WILL BE THEN EXCLUDED FROM THE PROJECT AREA.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT WANTING TO MESS WITH THAT PROCESS.
UH, I THINK EVERYONE'S ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS, UH, WHAT WE EXPECT IN THE MONITORING PLAN.
UH, WE WILL CERTAINLY BE WATCHING IT AND IF, UM, IF SOMETHING ELSE HAPPENS THAT IS OUT OF OUR HANDS, OUT OF THEIR HANDS, THEN WE CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST.
EVERYONE AGREE WITH THAT? ALRIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU MA'AM.
UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO NOW IS ASK IF ANYONE FROM THE FLOOR THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS
[00:15:01]
JPA AMENDMENT ONLY, PLEASE COME FORWARD.WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? UH, PHILLIP VALIANT.
UM, I WANNA THANK YEAH, YOU FIRMLY SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD.
TELL US WHY YOU'RE HERE JUST LIKE LAST MONTH AND GO FROM THERE.
UH, I CAN KEEP IT A LOT QUICKER THAN LAST TIME.
I WANNA THANK THE BOARD FOR THEIR TIME.
YOU KNOW, GOT EVERYTHING OUT THERE.
UH, THEY'RE SUBMITTED A REPLANTING PLAN FOR THE CEDAR ISLAND PROJECT.
UM, I THINK LAST TIME I WAS HERE I HADN'T QUITE READ THE COASTAL PRIMARY SAND DUNE BEACHES GUIDELINES.
THERE'S SOME PRETTY EXPLICIT BARRIER ISLAND POLICY.
AND I JUST ASKED WITH THESE SORT OF PROJECTS, UM, I'M KIND OF HOPING FOR CLARITY ON A COUPLE OF THE LANGUAGES HERE.
BUT BASICALLY THE GIST OF THE BARRIER ISLAND ACT, YOU KNOW, STATES THAT THESE ISLANDS ARE MOVING WEST, THEY NEED TO BE SUSTAINED THROUGH OVER WASH, AND THEY MOVE AT A A REASONABLY PREDICTABLE RATE.
AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF WORDINGS, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, ACTIVITIES WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THIS INTERACTION CAN HAVE EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON THE ISLAND AS WELL AS THE STRUCTURES.
UM, THE EXPLICIT GOAL OF THIS PROJECT IS TO SLOW THE MIGRATION OF THE ISLAND.
UH, THERE'S PLENTY OF WORDING AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
THAT'S THE GOAL, IS A NOVEL EXPERIMENT TO SLOW THE ISLAND.
THE BARRIER ISLAND POLICY EXPLICITLY STATES THAT THAT'S AGAINST THE SURVIVAL OF THE ISLAND.
SO THERE'S A REAL TENSION HERE BETWEEN WHAT I'M READING.
I DON'T KNOW IF VMRC COULD CLARIFY SOME OF IT, BUT, UM, THIS, THEY ASKED FOR IMMUNITY FROM OVER WASHING IN THIS.
BUT THE BARRIER ISLAND POLICY STATES THAT, UH, COASTAL PRIMARY SAND DUNES OR AMOUNT OF UNCONSOLIDATED SAND USE SOIL CONTIGUOUS TO HIGH WATER.
UM, THERE'S A CHANGE OF GRADE AND GROWING CERTAIN DESIGNATED PLANTS, INCLUDING SPARTINA, PEYTON'S, UH, THE FOUR OR FIVE ACRES OF THE HIGH MARSH ARE LOADED WITH THIS SPECIES.
SO WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT THE WORDING IN THIS POLICY COVERS EVERYTHING IN THIS PROJECT EXCEPT FOR MAYBE PART OF THE LOW MARSH.
UM, SO FIRST POINT, SLOWING THE BARRIER ISLANDS MIGRATION, IN MY OPINION, IS DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH OF THE ISLAND.
UH, I THINK A CLOSE READING OF THE BARRIER ISLAND POLICY KIND OF SUPPORTS THAT.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST OF IT IS, WELL, THERE'S A COUPLE OF 'EM.
ALL BIRD NESTING, YOU KNOW, AREAS POSTED SHALL BE OFF LIMITS TO ALL VEHICLES.
I BELIEVE THE PLAN IS TO HAVE AN EXCAVATOR IN THE WETLANDS HERE.
UM, AND THEN RATHER SPECIFICALLY, NO ARTIFICIAL RELOCATION OF SAND WILL BE PERMITTED.
UM, THIS IS SEEKING TO MOVE ABOUT FOUR OR 5,000,005 GALLON BUCKETS WORTH OF SAND.
THAT'S THE ROUGH NUMBER OF 89,000 CUBIC YARDS.
UM, AND THEN IF IT, IF THIS PROJECT IS SEEKING TO SLOW THE BARRIER ISLAND MIGRATION, IT'S NATURALLY GOING TO IMPACT THE DUNE MIGRATION.
UM, AND THERE'S A, A BOND REQUIREMENT, UH, FOR LETTER OF CREDIT PRIOR TO GRANTING ANY PERMIT TO ASSURE RESTORATION, UM, OR TEMPORARY ALTERATION OF COASTAL PRIMARY SAND DUNE, INCLUDING RE REESE RIGGING WITH APPROPRIATE VEGETATION, THE REPLANTING PLANTS AS THEY WANNA SCATTER SEEDS.
I DON'T THINK THAT COUNTS AS RE SPRINGING.
UM, SO YEAH, UH, SO THAT, THAT'S KIND OF, I THINK FOR THESE PROJECTS WE'RE GONNA SEE KIND OF A NUMBER OF 'EM COMING FORWARD.
MAYBE NOT IN THIS STATE, BUT WITH ARMY CORPS TRYING TO FIND A BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGE MATERIAL, PEOPLE ARE SAYING, OKAY, WE DO THIS FOR COASTAL RESILIENCE, X, Y, Z.
UM, ASK THAT THE EXISTING POLICIES BE CLOSELY.
UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IN THESE SITUATIONS WHERE BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE MIGHT BE PROVIDED, I KIND OF ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, EMILY HEIN IS MARRIED TO CHRISTOPHER HEIN, WHO DURING OUR VISIT IS BEING PAID BY THIS PROJECT.
SO ARE WE REALLY GETTING BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE IF SOMEBODY IS MARRIED TO SOMEONE BEING PAID BY THE PROJECT'S PASSING? UM, OBVIOUSLY WHEN I GOT MY OYSTER FARM PERMIT, I WANTED MY OYSTER FARM, UM, TO MAKE MONEY.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, REGARDING VMRC, I ASKED FOR SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS LANGUAGE AND MAYBE IN FUTURE SCENARIOS WE ASK FOR SOME INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT FROM PEOPLE THAT AREN'T GETTING FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FROM A PROJECT'S PASSING.
SO, UM, HERE'S THE BARRIER ISLAND POLICY, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO KIND OF LOOK AT THE EXACT LANGUAGE.
BUT ARTIFICIAL RELOCATION OF SAND AND THE ABILITY OF THE ISLAND TO MIGRATE NATURALLY ARE PRETTY EXPLICITLY WRITTEN IN HERE.
UH, THE EXACT GOALS OF THIS PROJECT ARE TO SLOW THE ISLANDS MIGRATION AND TO ARTIFICIALLY RELOCATE, UH, 89,000 CUBIC YARDS OF SAND.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I MIGHT HAVE MISSED THIS.
UM, WE HAVE ONE OF OUR ALTERNATES HERE.
TELL US WHY YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THIS PARTICULAR, WHAT DO YOU DO FOR A LIVING? THAT'S WHAT, UH, I'M AN OYSTER FARMER.
I LIVE RIGHT BEHIND THE TOMPKIN ISLAND.
UH, HEAR THE WAVES HITTING IT, MY FARM'S RIGHT BEHIND AN OVER WASH, UH, BREACH THAT WAS ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME AS THE ONE THEY'RE TARGETING HERE.
UM, I THINK THE CLAIMS THAT THIS THREATENS W CREEK THE ISLAND IS ERODING, ARE CATEGORICALLY FALSE.
UM, I APPRECIATE MR. ROD'S COMMITMENT TO SHARED DATA.
[00:20:01]
I'D LIKE THEY HAVEN'T SHARED ANY DATA ON VEGETATION SINCE 2019.I GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE SCIENTIST THAT DID IT.
SHE REFUSED TO SHARE IT WITH ME AFTER TALKING TO THE PROJECT LEADS.
SO THERE'S NO PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATA ON THE BIOLOGICAL SURVEY.
UH, I HAVE A LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE VIMS WPR LAB SAYING THAT IT DOWNPLAYS THE SITE'S CONDITION TO JUSTIFY ITS DESTRUCTION AND THAT THE CURRENT EXISTING MARSH WILL BETTER RESIST STORM SURGE AND EROSION THAN THIS PROJECT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE KILLING ALL OF THE EXISTING GRASS UNDER, AT MINIMUM OF A FOOT OF COVERAGE FOR UP TO A YEAR.
SO YOU GET AN OVER WASH EVENT WHEN THEY'RE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, PLAYING SANDBOX WITH AN EXCAVATOR AND ALL THAT EXISTING STUFF IS DEAD.
THAT ISLAND'S GONNA BREACH EASIER THAN THE EXISTING VEGETATION, WHICH ISN'T ACCURATELY COVERED IN ANY OF THEIR SURVEYS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF WHY IT'S, IT'S BAD SCIENCE.
UH, IT'S NOT, IT DOESN'T ACCURATELY DESCRIBE WHAT'S OUT THERE.
SO TO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE PRO ONE OF THE GOALS HERE IS A CERTIFIED SURVEY.
THIS SURVEY IS SEVEN YEARS OLD AT THIS POINT.
UM, CLAIMS OF EROSION ARE NOT QUANTIFIED IN ANY REAL WAY FOR THIS SECTION OF THE ISLAND.
UM, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD GAVE ME MY FAIR SHAKE LAST TIME, PASSED IT.
I WAS HAPPY ABOUT THE REPLANTING PLAN.
BUT IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR IMMUNITY FROM OVER WASH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT DOING A PROJECT THAT THEY FEEL IS GONNA EXIST IN THE NATURAL DYNAMICS OF THE BARRIER ISLANDS, WHICH THE LANGUAGE IS PRETTY EXPLICIT.
AND THIS MIGHT BE GUIDING POLICY AND NOT LEGAL LAW.
SO THE REPLANTING PLAN DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, IF THAT SAND REACHES IT AND THE PLANTS DIE, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE IS NO ACTIVE ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN PUT OUT YET.
YOU KNOW, THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS BEEN ASKING FOR ONE.
THAT'S KIND OF WHY IT HASN'T PASSED YET.
'CAUSE THE CORPS BELIEVES THERE'S GONNA BE A TEMPORAL LOSS OF FUNCTION, YOU KNOW, UP TO A YEAR OR SO.
UM, THE, THE REPLANTING PLAN WITHOUT A BOND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS GRANT DRIVEN.
SO, YOU KNOW, THEY GET THE MONEY AND THEN, OH, ALL THE PLANTS DIE BECAUSE THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T WATER 'EM CORRECTLY.
YOU KNOW, ARE, ARE THEY REALLY GONNA GO GET MORE GRANT MONEY IN 3, 4, 5 YEARS? SO THE THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO JUST LEAVE IT ALONE, WHICH I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE HIGHEST RANKING VIM SCIENTIST LOCALLY AGREES IS THE BETTER OPTION.
SO THAT'S GONNA THE BEST I HAVE FOR IT.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE MONITORING PLAN? WE'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE REST.
WELL, WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THIS, THIS WHOLE MEETING, WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THIS WHOLE MEETING IS IT'S, THEY'RE UP FRONT IS EXPERIMENT.
AND TALK ABOUT CHRISSY'S NOT HERE, BUT THE ONE THING HE SAID IN 20 YEARS IS THIS WHOLE THING'S WASHED OVER ANYWAY.
SO, UH, UH, THINGS ARE OPEN MM-HMM
AND, AND I'M GONNA TELL YOU ONE THING WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE OVER BUSHES.
GOD WANTS A BREACH THERE TOMORROW.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT'S THE, ALL THE FIELD THAT'S GONNA BE DONE, ONE STORM.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ANOTHER BREACH.
I'M NOT TRYING TO PREACH HERE, I PROMISE YOU.
NO, I, BUT I'M SAYING IS IT WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF IN A, IN A THING, YOU KNOW ME, BUT THIS, THEY'RE ALL OPEN ABOUT IT.
AND THEY ALREADY KNOW, THEY SAID IN 20 YEARS IT'S GONNA BE, LIKE I SAID, 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT BEACHES DO.
THEY ROTATE, THEY MOVE, ROTATE WARD, THEY A HUNDRED, A HUNDRED PERCENT AGREE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S GOD'S COUNTRY OUT THERE.
I THINK THE ONE COMMENT I WOULD HAVE IS THAT THERE IS THICK VEGETATION THERE.
NOW, IF DURING THE ENTIRE YEAR THAT, THAT VEGETATION'S COVERED IT SCIENTIFICALLY WILL BE MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO EROSION WITHOUT THE EXISTING VEGETATION THERE.
SO THAT, THAT, I DUNNO HOW THAT FITS IN THE BOARD OR ANYTHING, BUT THAT, THAT THAT'S MY OPPOSITION TO IT.
YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT ROLLING OUT SOD MATS, THEY'RE KILLING AND THEN THEY'RE COMING BACK AND THEY ASK FOR UP TO A YEAR OF, YOU KNOW, TEMPORAL LOSS OF COMPLETE ECOSYSTEM, LOSS OF FUNCTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE ALL KNOW A LIVING SHORELINE IS MORE RESISTANT TO EROSION THAN A DEAD SHORELINE.
SO THIS CREATES A YEAR OF DEAD SHORELINES, THAT'S WHERE I'M GET MY HEART RATE ON.
SO LET ME SUMMARIZE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
I THINK AT THE JANUARY MEETING, WE BASICALLY APPROVED THIS PERMIT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AND THAT WE NEEDED TO GET A PLANNING, A PLANNING PLAN.
SO RIGHT NOW WHAT'S ON THE TABLE IS REVIEWING THE PLANTING PLAN.
[00:25:01]
REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THAT'S WHERE WE AT RIGHT NOW.SO IS THERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THE PLANTING PLAN THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALTERED OR CHANGED? UH, OR SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE AN IDEA ABOUT? UH, YEAH, SO FROM MY OYSTER FARM, I THINK I HAVE A BOND FOR MAYBE $200,000 THAT IF I MESS IT UP, THE STATE GETS THE MONEY TO CLEAN IT UP.
ONE OF THE POLICIES IN A YEAR IS A BOND OF CREDIT FOR IT, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THEY SAY THE REPLANTING PLANS ARE THREE, $4 MILLION, UH, YOU KNOW, THREE YEARS NOT GROWING.
THEY THROW THEIR HANDS UP AND SAY, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO REPLANT IT.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE IT THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE AN I.
ANYTHING ELSE? NO, THAT'S ALL.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS? JPA? WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME MA'AM FOR THE RECORD? YES.
YOU FIRM OR SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD.
LET'S START BY YOUR RELATIONSHIP PLEASE.
UM, SO PHILLIP HAS A OYSTER FARM ON THE TOMPKIN ISLAND, AND WE SPEND A GOOD BIT OF TIME BACK THERE.
AND I OWN A SAILING SCHOOL DOWN IN CAPE CHARLES.
AND SO I HAVE, UH, A GOAL OR DREAM TO SPREAD SAILING UP AND DOWN THE EASTERN SHORE.
I BELIEVE IT USED TO BE AROUND THE AREA, BUT NOT SO MUCH ANYMORE.
AND SO A A GOAL OR A PURPOSE THAT I HAVE IN THIS IS THAT WE START MOVING SAND, WE START MOVING WATER, AND THAT IMPACTS THE AREA AND ACCESS TO THE ISLANDS AND, AND THE VEGETATION THAT'S THERE.
AND, UM, AND THE OYSTER FARMERS AND EVERYONE THAT'S AROUND THE ISLAND.
I KNOW THAT THE DREDGING AREA HAS MOVED, SO IT'S AWAY FROM THE APPLICATION THAT'S THERE, BUT STILL IT WILL IMPACT THE AREA REGARDLESS OF HOW MUCH OR HOW LITTLE THEY SAY IT WILL THE RESEARCH.
UM, MY COMMENTS ON THE REPLANTING PLAN ARE THAT ONE THE BOND, RIGHT? SO THIS IS A GRANT FUNDED PROJECT.
I THINK THAT IT'S COME DOWN TO ABOUT 18 MILLION AND THERE'S $5 MILLION THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, SECURED FOR THIS PROJECT TO START.
UM, BUT WHERE DOES THAT MONEY EXTEND OR HOW MUCH DOES THAT MONEY GET PUT ASIDE FOR THE THREE AND THE FIVE YEAR? AND THAT COULD BE AN ANSWER THAT CAN BE ANSWERED.
UM, AND THEN ALSO A LOT OF WHAT THE REPLANTING PLAN LEANS ON IS MONITORING IT WITH OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE ALREADY GOING ON IN THE AREA.
SO, UM, A LOT OF THE BIRD HABITATS IN THE AREA THAT GET WATCHED, THAT LEANS ON, WHO WILL MONITOR IT FROM THAT, AND ALSO STUDENTS AND DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT ARE ALREADY GOING ON IN THE VIMS LAB.
AND SO MY QUESTION, WITH THIS REPLANTING PLAN AND WHO'S GONNA BE MONITORING IT? IS THAT FALLING UNDER OTHER PROJECTS? OR IS THIS GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN, UH, FOCUSED EITHER RESEARCH TEAM OR RESEARCH GROUP? ARE THEY COMING ACROSS FROM GLOUCESTER OR HOW WILL IT BE MONITORED? 'CAUSE IT SEEMS THAT WHILE THIS REPLANTING PLANT IS DETAILED AND THE 80% COVERAGE, IT SEEMS TO FALL UNDER SOME OTHER PROJECTS.
AND I QUESTION HOW MUCH TIME THIS WILL GET, UH, IF THERE'S AN OVER WASH.
I UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYONE WILL WALK AWAY AND WILL MOVE AND THE PROJECT WILL GET MOVED, BUT WHERE DOES THAT MONEY FALL IN, IN THREE YEARS AND WHERE DOES THAT MONEY FALL IN IN FIVE YEARS? I DO A LOT OF WORK IN GRANTS.
I UNDERSTAND IT, I UNDERSTAND THAT MONEY GETS ALLOCATED AND EITHER IT'S IN THE BANK OR IT DOESN'T.
IT ALSO GETS MOVED AROUND AND USUALLY IT'S SECURED, RIGHT? ONCE YOU GET THE GRANT, EVEN IF IT HAS TO MOVE BACK A YEAR, IT IS SECURED.
BUT DOES THE BOND OR DOES THE MONEY THAT IS ALLOCATED TO THIS PROJECT, IS THAT GOING TO BE AN ADDITIONAL GRANT APPLICATION WITH NW OR WITH THE STATE OR WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT'S GONNA COME IN AND OR IS THAT GONNA COME FROM THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS THE COUNTY, BUT WHERE DOES THAT MONEY COME IN THAT'S GONNA SECURE THIS THREE AND FIVE YEAR MONITORING PLAN? BECAUSE THAT IT WILL TAKE MONEY TO FOLLOW UP WITH.
UH, LET'S GET, SEE IF WE CAN GET THE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS FIRST.
UM, MA'AM, UH, YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN.
WHY DON'T YOU BRING US UP TO DATE ON THAT PARTICULARLY? UM, SO YES, THIS IS A GRANT FUNDED PROJECT.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, DONE SOME REALLOCATING OF THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY.
SO THE MONITORING WAS ALREADY PLANNED FOR THIS PROJECT, SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT.
UM, NOT WITH OTHER, YOU KNOW, ONGOING RESEARCH PROJECTS THAT ARE HAPPENING, UM, ASIDE FROM THE BIRD MONITORING, WHICH THE STATE IS DOING.
AND THIS IS JUST SORT OF ADDITION THE BIRD QUARTERS AND ALL WE'RE AT DONE AT A REQUEST FROM, UM, THE STATE SCIENTISTS WHO ALREADY DO THAT BIRD MONITORING.
UM, BUT THE REST OF IT, YEAH, THAT IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS
[00:30:01]
PROJECT.THERE'S A PROJECT TEAM FOR THIS PROJECT DOING THAT MONITORING.
UM, AND IF WE NEED TO REPLANT, WE WILL REPLANT.
UM, WE ARE REALLOCATING SOME OF THE FUNDS WE ALREADY HAVE AND WE ALSO HAVE SOME OTHER PARTNERS WHO, UM, ARE WILLING TO HELP US SHOULD THAT BE NECESSARY.
AND IS THIS MONEY ALREADY ALLOCATED AND IS, I THINK THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
IS THIS MONEY ALREADY, UH, IN THE BANK, IF YOU WILL, FOR THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT OF IT, REPLANTING MONITORING, ET CETERA? SO YES, WE'VE HAD, WE HAVE OUR AWARD FROM NW FOR THE INITIAL PHASE OF THE PROJECT, AND WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REALLOCATE SOME OF THOSE FUNDS TO REPLANTING SHOULD IT BE NECESSARY.
DOES THAT THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MA'AM? ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE? YES.
I WOULD JUST ASK THAT IF THERE ARE RESEARCHERS AND THERE IS A TEAM SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT THAT THEY IDENTIFIED IN THE REPLANTING PLAN, IS THAT POSSIBLE? LIKE THE NAMES OF WHO IS ON THE RESEARCH TEAM? I THINK WHAT SHE'S ASKING IS, UH, IF THE MONEY IS ALLOCATED, IS IT THERE, WHERE IS IT GOING TO BE? IS IT GONNA BE AVAILABLE UNDER ANY ISSUE EXCEPT FOR OF ACT OF GOD? UM, I MEAN, YES, WE'VE, WE'VE RECEIVED THE MONEY FROM NW OR WE'VE RECEIVED THE GRANT AWARD FROM NWF, AND SO IT'S ALL PART OF OUR GRANTS AND CONTRACTS, UM, YOU KNOW, OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS DEALS WITH ALL OF THAT, UH, ALL THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING IS, IS OVERSEEN VERY CLOSELY, BOTH INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY.
I THINK, IF I MAY INTERJECT, I THINK WHAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT HERE IS THAT THERE'S INDICATORS, OTHER AGENCIES THAT WOULD ASSIST IF YOU NEEDED ADDITIONAL REPLANNING THINGS GO WRONG.
I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO, I THINK WHAT THE YOUNG LADY WANTED, WHAT'S THE LIST OF THE AGENCIES THAT ARE INVOLVED THAT WOULD SAY THEY WOULD DO IT? NOT NECESSARILY THEY HAVE THE MONEY YET THAT, THAT, THAT, BUT YEAH.
WHO HAVE SAID THAT THEY WOULD ASSIST IN THIS, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO THOSE ARE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS, NOT WITH OTHER AGENCIES NECESSARILY.
UM, BUT WITH, UH, NONPROFITS, I, I THINK MAYBE SO LIKE TNC YEAH.
YOU MAYBE WOULD LIST THOSE AND JUST SORT OF LIST WHERE THEY'RE AT.
MAYBE THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, SO YEAH, WE IF BE CAREFUL WITH THAT BECAUSE IT IS, YOU KNOW, LEGALLY OF WHAT THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO OR NOT OR WHATNOT.
BUT YES, IF WE HAVE TO REPLANT, WE WILL REPLANT AND WE WILL WILL FIND THAT MONEY.
WHAT'S THE SOURCE OF THE GRANT MONEY? SO CURRENTLY IT'S THE, IT'S NW, THE NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M NOT PLEASE, I PROMISE YOU I'M NOT TRYING TO BE OBNOXIOUS WHEN I'M READY, SAY, I PROMISE YOU NOT.
I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE MONITORING ON THIS.
I MEAN, BIMS, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE FUNNY WHEN I SAY THIS, BUT BIMS OWNS HALF OF WATCH BREAK, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I, UP THERE CAN, CAN SAY, Y'ALL HAVE A BIG, BIG, BIG, UM, MARKINGS AND, AND SO YOU'RE THERE AND YOU'RE ON THE WARD THERE.
I MEAN, SO THE, THE MONITORING THAT PART OF IT DOESN'T CONCERN ME BECAUSE YOU ARE THERE AND MS YOU CAN'T HELP BUT MONITOR IT.
YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? FIX.
PLEASE DON'T THINK I'M SAYING, I MEAN, I'M GLAD YOU HAVE A PRESENCE THERE.
IT'S, IT'S HELPFUL TO, TO THE COMMUNITY TO WATCH IT PRETTY, BUT I'M SAYING, BUT YOUR PRESENCE IS VERY LARGE.
YOU CAN WATCH IT PRETTY AND YOU CAN'T HELP BUT MONITOR IT.
YOU HAVE TO, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO TURN YOUR HE HAD NOT TO MONITOR.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS FOR THIS YOUNG LADY? I GUESS WE HIT THIS IS AND IN REALITY A COUNTY PROJECT OR IT'S NOT, I THOUGHT THE COUNTY COUNTY SIGNED YEAH.
WHERE THE, WE'RE THE
AND WE HAVE AN AN MOU BIMS HAS AN MOU WITH THE COUNTY ABOUT THIS PROJECT, BUT I'M MONEY, I MONEY AS NOT.
SO GETTING BACK TO THIS BONDING ISSUE, IS THERE ANYTHING, OR I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE POTENTIAL OTHER AGENCIES COMING IN IF NEEDED, BUT MAYBE TO GIVE EVERYBODY A COMFORT LEVEL, IS THERE ANY POTENTIAL? I REALIZE MONEY IS TIGHT.
IS THERE ANYTHING FOR BONDING? AND I, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE COUNTY HAS SIGNED ON IN SOME WAY AND WE HAVE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, UH, IN HERE ADMINISTRATOR, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EVEN A FEASIBLE DISCUSSION TO EVEN HAVE, IS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY CAN DO.
IN THIS CASE, IF YOU WERE TO REQUIRE A BOND, I'M NOT SURE WE COULD GO FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.
AND THE, THE LEG, THE, THE LEGALESE THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER WAS THE BERRY ISLANDS ACT THAT I BROUGHT UP, UM, AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
AND THAT THOSE BONDS WERE REFERRED TO, UH, THAT, UH, BUILDING HOUSES AND THOSE SORTS OF STRUCTURES.
AND FOR, UH, CLARITY, WE ARE NOT IMPACTING THE DUNAN BEACH, THE LEGAL DUNAN BEACH.
[00:35:01]
LANDLORD OF THAT.SO I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS YOU CONTINUE THESE NEGOTIATIONS WITH OTHER AGENCIES, LIKE MAYBE TNC AS YOU GET SOME FINALITY IN TERMS OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND WHATNOT, THOSE CAN BE MADE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE SO THEY CAN VIEW IT SOMEHOW.
I THINK THAT WOULD GIVE EVERYBODY'S COMFORT LEVEL OR MAKE SOME SORT TELL US ABOUT IT MAYBE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, MR. WATSON, THAT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE BACKGROUND TO HELP THIS PLANNING SITUATION.
I, I DON'T KNOW THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COMMUNICATE THIS, BUT I DON KNOW.
I'M TRYING TO, I DUNNO WHAT I CAN COMMIT TO ON OTHER ENTITIES.
THEN AGAIN, BEING A LEGAL DOCUMENT, MAYBE, I MEAN, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT BE INVOLVED, YOU KNOW, HAVE IT BE OUT THERE.
WHO KNOWS, RIGHT? I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW.
I CAN'T CAN SPEAK FOR, FOR OTHER ENTITIES, BUT WHAT I CAN SPEAK FOR IS IF SOMETHING IS REQUIRED IN THE PERMIT, WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO THAT.
BUT I, I THINK, I MEAN, GONNA DO THE EXPERIMENT, THIS IS THE PLACE TO DO THE EXPERIMENT BECAUSE OF THEM BEING THERE AND, AND BEING, AND BEING MONITORED 24 7, THEY'RE ALL GONNA BE ALL OVER.
SO IF THAT SPRINT NEED TO BE DONE, THIS IS THE LOCATION.
IF THEY THINK THIS IS A VIABLE FOR, UH, BREACHES AND, AND, AND BEACHES AND SLOWING DOWN PROGRESS, AND LIKE I SAY, IN THE REAL WORLD, WE KNOW IT'S GONNA BE ROLLED OVER ON IN 20 YEARS.
I MEAN, THAT'S MAY, WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING.
IT MIGHT BE ROLLED OVER 20
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? BUT I THINK WE ALL REALIZE THAT AND, AND, AND SO WHAT I'M SAYING, BUT IT SAID DID EXPERIMENT.
BUT I, I DO, IF YOU'RE GONNA DO THE EXPERIMENT, I DO THINK THIS IS THE PLACE TO DO IT BECAUSE OF THEIR PRESENCE AND THEY BEING ABLE TO MODERATE 20, REALLY 24 7.
THAT'S, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.
THE, THE, THE MONITORING PLAN IS THE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, THE LEGAL MONITORING PLAN, THE MINIMUM IN REALITY, YES, WE WILL BE OUT THERE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE OFTEN THAN IS REQUIRED.
CAN I JUST GET, MAYBE IF C IF VMRC HAS ANY OPINION ON THIS, CAN WE ABSOLUTELY.
DO YOU FIRMLY SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD? I DO.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHY HE WANTS TO ASK ALL THE COMMENTS YOU'VE HEARD THIS MORNING? MM-HMM
I MEAN, I REALIZE YOU DON'T, MAYBE DON'T ANY COMMENTS OR ANY CORRECTIONS OR ANY, UH, ENHANCEMENTS TO EVERYTHING, ANYTHING BEEN MADE OR ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE UNHAPPY WITH IN REGARDS TO THIS DISCUSSION THIS MORNING? SO, UM, REALLY ALL I CAN SPEAK TO IS OUR JURISDICTION.
WE DID APPROVE THE COMMISSION APPROVED THIS PROJECT OR THE CIVIC RISK COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT, UM, IN FEBRUARY.
AND I HAVE NO ISSUES OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE REPLANTING PLAN, BUT THAT IS Y'ALL'S, UM, PURVIEW.
UM, I WILL SAY THE DISCUSSION OF FINANCES AND SPECIFIC STAFF IS WELL BEYOND THE SCOPE OF ANY TYPICAL REPLANTING PLAN.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT IN ANY OTHER REPLANTING PLAN.
AND, UM, AS FAR AS BONDING GOES, I'VE NEVER COME ACROSS A PROJECT IN WETLANDS, BEACHES, SEBA WASTE THAT REQUIRE BONDING.
THAT'S PRETTY, UM, STANDARD FOR SHELLFISH LEASES.
BUT I'VE NEVER COME ACROSS A PROJECT WHERE BONDING WAS REQUIRED.
UM, AND THOSE ARE, THAT'S REALLY ALL I I GUESS THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE, GENTLEMAN BACK THERE MENTIONED THE BARRY ISLAND COASTAL MM-HMM
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE VMRC IN PARTICULAR HAS? UH, SO ALL OF THE, THE BARRY ISLAND POLICY, THE DUNES AND BEACHES, WETLANDS, ALL OF THAT WAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE REVIEWED THE PROJECT.
THAT IS A PART OF OUR REVIEW PROCESS.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC, UNLESS THERE'S A SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT IT.
WE, I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON IT BASED ON THE, AND GO AHEAD.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY TO EMILY'S POINT, UM, THEIR WORK IS ON THE LAGOON SIDE OF THE ISLAND.
IT DOES NOT IMPACT DUNES AND BEACHES, UM, AND THE, THE SEBA WAYS COMPONENTS, OBVIOUSLY BELOW LOW WATER, WHICH IS THE COMMISSION'S PURVIEW.
ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE BOARD FOR THIS LADY? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YOU KNOW, THE COMMENTS WELL, I JUST WANT TO SORT OF FOLLOW, I'M SORRY.
WELL, I KNOW YOU, UH, PROBABLY CANNOT GET DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS TO COMMIT TO EXPENDITURES, BUT IT WOULD, UH, I THINK BE HELPFUL IF WE, WE COULD GET LETTERS THAT THEY WOULD BE MONITORING, UM, OR INTEREST INTERESTED IN THE, UM, PROJECT AS IT GOES ALONG, UM, OTHER CONSERVATION
[00:40:01]
GROUPS.BUT, UH, I'M JUST TRYING TO RESPOND TO WHAT SHE ASKED FOR.
YEAH, I MEAN, THERE'S CERTAINLY A LOT OF INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT AND I EXPECT OUR MONITORING REPORTS TO BE, UH, MUCH MORE WIDELY DISTRIBUTED THAN IS TYPICAL
UM, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST TO THE REGULATORS, BUT TO OUR, OUR OTHER PARTNERS WHO ARE INVOLVED OR JUST INTERESTED IN THE PROJECT.
AND JUST BRING UP ONE MORE LAST POINT.
IT'S SORT OF GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A CONFUSION HERE.
WHEN YOU EVALUATE WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, IT'S ALL GONNA BE IN SITU.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE YOUR ONE METER AREAS AND YOU'RE GONNA EVALUATE OVER WASH AND GROWTH BY THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SOME OTHER SITE OR COMPARATIVE, THERE'S SOME SORT OF DISCUSSION.
EVALUATE WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.
ANYTHING ELSE, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? THANK YOU, MA'AM.
UM, ONE FINAL COMMENT, PLEASE.
AND I THANK YOU BOTH IN THE BACK FOR COMING AND RESTATING, UH, YOUR ISSUES, EVEN THOUGH, UH, IT IS MERELY MONITORING.
NOW WE BOTH KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENT QUESTIONED, PLEASE APPROACH.
UM, I THINK ON, ON THE INTEREST OF BONDING, UH, I, I MEAN IT SAYS HERE THAT IT WILL BE REQUIRED, UH, I GUESS, UM, BUT WITH, IN CONVERSATION WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE KIND OF ASSESSING THE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, AS THE APPLICANT AND WHATNOT.
UH, AUTUMN CRAWFORD, THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BIOLOGISTS THAT, YOU KNOW, HAS REMOVED THIS PROJECT FROM REVIEW.
UM, I GOT, KINDA GOT TO THE GIST OF IT WITH HER.
I WAS LIKE, OKAY, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO PASS? AND IT WAS A SIMILAR, YOU KNOW, REPLANTING PLAN X, Y, Z.
AND I ASKED HER, OKAY, SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, APPROVES GETS EVERYTHING.
THEY DO IT YEAR THREE, THEY DON'T REPLANT WHO'S ON THE HOOK FOR THE FINES, SHE SAID THE APPLICANT.
AND IN THIS CASE, THAT'S THE COUNTY.
UM, SO, UM, AND THEN ON THE NOTE OF, I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS COULD NAME A SCIENTIST AT THE VIMS
SO THE COUNTY'S ON THE HOOK FOR ANY FINES AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S LOCAL LABORATORY INTEREST IN ENGAGING THIS PROJECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS GENTLEMAN OR ANYONE ELSE? WELL, I GUESS WITH THAT COMMENT, SHOULD WE CALL MR. PBIT UP BRIEFLY OR I, I, I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW MORE THAN WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE COUNTY THAT'S ON THE HOOK.
MR. PBIT, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? WOULD YOU PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM? WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? LEE PAM, THE DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
DO YOU FIRMLY SWEAR YOU TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN ALL MATTERS BEFORE THIS BOARD? I DO.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE AND THE REASON FOR US ASKING YOU TO COME FORWARD? GENERALLY, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UH, GIVE US A GEN GENERAL ANSWER? SO IF I, UNDER, IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION CORRECTLY, IT'S ABOUT FINANCIAL ASSURANCE IN CASE SOMETHING GOES WRONG.
PART TWO IS ALSO ABOUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE FINES.
IF, IF THERE ARE FINES, LEVY, TECHNICALLY, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE THE, UH, THAT WE ARE THE APPLICANT, BUT THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
UM, WITH REGARDS TO FINANCIAL ASSURANCE FROM A CODE STANDPOINT, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THE COUNTY CODE THAT WOULD COVER A PROJECT LIKE THIS BECAUSE THIS IS NOT DEVELOPMENT IN CHAPTER 38 OF THE ENVIRONMENT OF, OF, UH, OF THE COUNTY CODE.
THAT'S THE ENVIRONMENT SECTION THAT COVERS NOISE.
IT COVERS, UH, IT COVERS STORM WATER AND A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS, BUT PRIMARILY NOISE, STORM WATER.
I THINK ENS IS ALSO IN THERE BECAUSE THIS IS NOT DEVELOPMENT.
THE TYPICAL BONDS THAT ARE CALLED FOR SAY IN, UM, IN, UH, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE OR ZONING ORDINANCE, OR IN THIS CASE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CODE.
THE ONLY FINANCIAL ASSURANCES THAT ARE SPECIFIED IN CHAPTER 38 ARE FOR STORM WATER AND EMS. THIS IS NOT A STORMWATER OR ENS ACTIVITY THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND IT.
AND CHAPTER 38 AGAIN, DEALS SPECIFICALLY WITH DEVELOPMENT, WHICH THIS IS NOT, WE'RE NOT BUILDING ROADS.
WE'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, A BOND IN CASE A QUOTE UNQUOTE DEVELOPER WALKS.
AND WE HAVE TO CALL THAT BOND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS BUILT.
AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A, AN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT OR A PROJECT THAT REQUIRES THAT WITH REGARDS TO THE FINES.
OH, AND ONE MORE, UH, ONE MORE THING ON BONDS.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING IN THE, IN THE AGREEMENTS FOR THIS, THEN
[00:45:01]
THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA HAVE TO, UH, THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA HAVE TO PREVAIL HERE.NOW SWITCHING TO, UM, UH, SWITCHING TO THE FINES, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'D HAVE TO DIG INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS, I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN EXPERIMENTAL TYPE, UH, APPROACH, WHAT COULD GO WRONG AND WHAT, UM, AND UH, UH, WHAT WE WOULD BE FINE FOR.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I NEED TO DIG INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE.
WELL, I THINK I COULD MAYBE SPEAK FOR, BUT I'M A LITTLE BIT CAUTIOUS HERE ABOUT APPROVING A PLAN THAT MIGHT PUT THE COUNTY IN A SITUATION THAT THEY MAY, YOU KNOW, FISCALLY.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT.
I MEAN, I, I, I'D RATHER HAVE SOME BACKUP IN TERMS OF DISCUSSION MAYBE WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OR, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BEST PATHWAY HERE, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IF WE VOTE AND APPROVE THIS PLANNING PERMIT, A PLANNING PLAN THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PUTTING THE COUNTY INTO A SITUATION HERE THAT, UH, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO PUT THE COUNTY IN.
SO THIS IS, THIS IS A NEW CONSIDERATION AND I'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS, UM, JUST VERY GENERALLY WELL THAT, UH, MY, MY SUGGESTED PATH FORWARD WOULD NOT BE TO, UH, UH, APPROACH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS YET.
WE'D HAVE TO RUN THIS THROUGH LEGAL FIRST.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE OUR FIRST BEST.
DID, DID YOU SAY LEGAL, SIR? LEGAL, YES.
SO TALK WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, JAN PROCTOR.
UH, MY, AND I GOT ONE QUESTION, AND I APOLOGIZE THAT I HAVEN'T BEEN HERE FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS, BUT HAS THIS QUESTION OF FINES BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE TODAY? THE, THE, UH, NO, NOTHING WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT FINES.
WE WERE WAITING, UH, TO FIND OUT ABOUT THEIR FIVE YEAR MONITORING PLAN ORIGINALLY.
IT, IT, UH, REQUIRED VIRTUALLY NOTHING AS FAR AS REPLANTING OR MONITORING.
THAT'S WHEN WE STEPPED FORWARD AND SAID, WE WANT TO HEAR THAT.
THAT'S WHY IT'S BEEN TWO MONTHS.
UH, SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, I BELIEVE IS NO, CERTAINLY YOU CAN, UH, GINGER CAN SUPPLY YOU WITH ANYTHING.
MS. CLAIRE, I NEED YOU TO, LIKE I SAID, CLARIFY.
SO YOU ONLY GOT LIKE FIVE OR THREE OR FOUR AGENCIES OF, YOU WOULD BE ONE OF 'EM, BMRC, UH, PROBABLY, UH, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UH, THAT WOULD BE FINE.
SO WHAT IS THE POLICY IN THIS, IN THIS AREA? YOU, YOU CAN DEFINITELY ANSWER ONE OF THEM.
SO, UM, LIKE EMILY MENTIONED EARLIER, THE COUNTY AND VIMS DO HAVE AN MOU.
SO THE COUNTY, MY UNDERSTANDING, WOULD NOT BE ON THE HOOK FOR ANY SORT OF FINES WHEN IT COMES TO A VIOLATION.
AND THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY.
IT DID, DID COME UP DURING OUR REVIEW.
THE OTHER THING THAT I, UM, WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SPECIFICALLY SUBMITTED A LETTER TO VMRC IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.
SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
SO DO WE, DO YOU THINK WE NEED SOMETHING FROM THE CORPS? IF THE STATE IS SAYING THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE OFF THE HOOK, DO WE NEED ANYTHING FROM THE COURT SAYING THE SAME THING? IS THERE, I DO NOT THINK YOU ALL NEED ANYTHING FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
THEY DO THEIR OWN REVIEW CONCURRENTLY WITH US.
TYPICALLY, UM, THE WAY THINGS, AND YOU KNOW THIS, BUT TYPICALLY THE WAY WE DO THINGS IS THAT IT'S APPROVED AT THE LOCAL, YOU KNOW, REVIEWED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, REVIEWED AT THE STATE LEVEL.
AND THEN THE CORE IS KIND OF THEIR OWN SEPARATE REVIEW.
WHETHER OR NOT THE CORPS WANTS TO ISSUE A PROJECT OR A PERMIT FOR THIS IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM VRCS.
AND THE COUNTY'S REVIEW, I THINK CORRECT PROCEDURE IS MR. PAMED THROUGH LEGAL, MR. PAMED, THEN THROUGH MR. WATSON.
AND THEN WE TAKE IT FROM THERE TO THE NEXT STEP.
I'VE GOT A LIST OF THINGS TO TALK WITH HER ABOUT.
SO I'LL ADD THIS ONE TO THAT LIST.
AND YOU'LL BE THE LAST PERSON TO APPROACH.
ALRIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE RELATING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE, CAN WE APPROVE IT WITH MAKING SURE WITH ALL THE AGENCIES, CORPS ENGINEER AND B-Q-V-M-R-C AND EVERYBODY, THAT THE COUNTY WILL BE OFF THE HOOK FOR ANY, UH, VEGETATION REPLANTING, UH, OR, OR ANY, ANY, UH, BILITIES FROM, FROM THIS, FROM THIS PROJECT? IS THERE AN APPROVAL, UH, NECESSARY FOR THIS MONITORING, MR. WATSON? UM, SO MY UNDERSTANDING AT THE LAST MEETING IS THAT THIS WAS PUT BE, OR THIS ISSUE WAS TO BE PUT BEFORE THE BOARD, UH, FOR APPROVAL.
AND, AND THAT WAS WHAT THE BOARD DECIDED LAST TIME.
AND I DO THINK THE BOARD CAN, UH, DETERMINE OR, OR GIVE ITS APPROVAL TODAY CONTINGENT ON THAT ISSUE.
SUCH THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN.
IF EVERYTHING IS RESOLVED AND AND OF FAVOR AND THE WAY THAT I EXPECTED TO BE, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT.
[00:50:01]
THE MOTION WILL INCLUDE THOSE THINGS AND THEN WE WILL WAIT TO SEE, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD IF EVERYTHING IS APPROVED.AND OUR, UH, UH, WITHIN OUR MOTION.
SO THIS IS, UM, I'M GONNA CALL FOR A MOTION FOR THE FIVE YEAR MONITORING PLAN, REPLANTING, ET CETERA.
WHO'S IN CHARGE? WHO HOLDS PURSE STRINGS? AND I'M GONNA ASK FOR A MOTION.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I, I, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE JPA 20 24, 23 60 AS PRESENTED WITH THE NEW, UH, PLANNING PLAN AND ALSO CONTINGENT ON ACK COUNTY, MAKING SURE ACK COUNTY'S CONSENT FROM ANY FINES THAT OCCUR THAT WOULD OCCUR ON THIS PROJECT FROM ALL THE AGENCIES, D-E-Q-V-M-R-C, ARMY STATE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
DOES THAT COVER EVERYTHING? I WOULD MAYBE ADD SOMETHING AFTER REVIEW BY, UH, AFTER REVIEW BY, BY OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY? YES.
ALSO, AND THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF IT TO ME.
ANY OTHER THING TO BE ADDED? WE HAVE A MOTION TO CALL FOR A SECOND, PLEASE.
WE HAVE A SECOND TO CALL FOR A VOTE, PLEASE.
JPA PASSES AND WE WILL WAIT TO HEAR FROM OUR ATTORNEY, ET CETERA.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ONE THING.
AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT MR. WATSON.
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE PROCEDURAL POINT, BUT SINCE MR. GICK ADDED SOMETHING TO THE MOTION, I DON'T KNOW IF HE COULD SECOND THE MOTION.
DO YOU WANT TO DO THE WHOLE THING ALL OVER? ALRIGHT.
WE APPROVE THE, I MEAN JPA 20 24, 23 60 AS PRESENTED WITH A NEW, UH, REPLANNING PLAN AND ALSO CONTINGENT ON TALKING TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY THAT THE COUNTY WON'T BE ON ANY, UH, ON THE HOOK FOR ANY FINES THAT ARE OCCURRED IN THIS PROJECT FROM D-E-Q-V-M-R-C, UNITED STATES COURT OF ENGINEER OR ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO FONDEST FOR THIS PROJECT.
UH, BEFORE WE PROCEED, I'D LIKE TO SAY ONE THING.
UM, MR. MRS. VALIANT, UM, I'VE THOUGHT OF LITTLE LESS FOR THE LAST TWO MONTHS AND, UM, WE KNEW IT WAS INEVITABLE, UH, EXCLUDING THE REPLANTING AND MONITORING.
UM, I'M SURE YOU HAVE RESEARCHED THIS, UH, LONG ENOUGH THAT YOU KNOW WHO OWNS WHAT.
I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE PERSON THAT OWNS THE TWO OF THREE PRIVATE LOTS THAT ARE THERE.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT DEVELOPED IT, PUT THE HOUSING UP THAT ARE NOW QUARTER MILE OUT IN THE OCEAN
UH, AND AS CONCERNED AS SHE IS, UH, FRANKLY, I THINK HER COMMENT TO ME WAS, I'M SURPRISED IT'S NOT GONE ALREADY.
SO I JUST NEEDED TO BRING THAT UP AND, AND SAY THAT TO YOU.
I UNDERSTAND, UH, THAT YOU THINK THAT IT IS TAKING CARE OF ITSELF, UH, UNTIL THE NEXT STORM COMES, BUT, UM, THERE'VE BEEN A WHOLE LOT OF STORMS, WHOLE LOT OF ISSUES.
UH, I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT, BUT I I WANTED TO BRING IT UP.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON IF YOU'LL ALLOW US.
UH, NEXT IS THE AMENDED JPA 2 0 2 5 DASH 1263 B, UH, AT, ON MAIN STREET IN HIN.
MR. WATSON, WILL YOU BRING US UP TO DATE? YES, SIR.
UM, OF COURSE, THIS IS A VIOLATION ALSO ALONG WITH THE AMENDED JPA.
UM, SO BASICALLY AFTER, UH, THE FIRST VIOLATION, WHICH WAS THE BULKHEAD, UH, WAS BUILT IMPROPERLY AND THEN PULLED BACK.
AND THEN THE SECOND VIOLATION WAS THAT THE BULKHEAD WAS STILL BUILT IMPROPERLY.
UM, BUT IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE SOURCE OF THAT PROBLEM WAS, UH, INSUFFICIENT DRAWINGS, NOT I GUESS ANY INTENTION TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD DIDN'T INTEND.
SO THAT ACTUALLY DID NOT END UP BEING A VIOLATION.
AND NOW THIS IS THE, THE THIRD TIME WE'VE BEEN BACK AND IT IS FOR, UH, WHAT I CALL DECKING OVER WHERE THE BULKHEAD WAS PULLED BACK.
[00:55:01]
WAS SUBMITTED OF THE DOCK HERE, HERE, HERE IS ACTUALLY RIGHT HERE.UM, THIS IS WHAT WAS SUBMITTED AT THE LAST HEARING, UH, WHICH WAS THE SECOND TIME, UH, BICK WAS BROUGHT BACK FOR BUILDING IT IMPROPERLY.
UM, BUT IT WAS DETERMINED THAT, UM, LOOKING AT THE VARIOUS LINKS THAT WHAT WAS BUILT WAS WITHIN WHAT THE BOARD INTENDED.
SO WHILE IT DIDN'T EXACTLY MATCH THIS PLAN, UM, IT WAS NOT A VIOLATION AND IT WAS ALLOWED TO REMAIN.
SO THE AREA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS THIS, UH, AREA RIGHT HERE THAT'S BEEN DECKED OVER.
SO WHEN THE BULKHEAD WAS PULLED BACK FROM HERE TO HERE, THE PIER NO LONGER MET WITH THE BULKHEAD AND WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF 45 DEGREE ANGLE BACK ALONG HERE.
SO THIS IS WHAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WITH THE AMENDED JPA.
THAT'S NOW BEFORE THE BOARD AGAIN SHOWING THIS AREA HERE THAT'S BEEN FILLED IN WITH DECKING.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PIER DID NOT END UP MATCHING UP WITH THE BULKHEAD BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT IMPROPERLY.
AND THIS IS WHERE IT WAS PULLED BACK FROM HERE TO HERE.
AND OF COURSE, THIS DECKING WAS DONE WITHOUT ANY PERMITS AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED BY THE WETLANDS BOARD OR BMRC.
SO THIS IS WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE AFTER THE BULKHEAD HAD BEEN PULLED BACK FROM HERE TO HERE.
AND AT THAT POINT, THESE WERE JUST PLANKS, UH, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, BECAUSE I WALKED ACROSS THEM A FEW TIMES CONNECTING THE BULKHEAD TO THE PIER.
AND NOW YOU CAN SEE THE DECKING THAT WAS PLACED OVER THE AREA THAT WAS PULLED BACK ROUGHLY.
THIS RECTANGLE IS THE NEW AREA OF DECKING.
HERE ARE A COUPLE OTHER VIEWS OF IT.
SO BASICALLY INSTEAD OF A BULKHEAD FOR THIS AREA, NOW WE HAVE DECKING OVER THE AREA.
OF COURSE, WHEN I FIRST REPORTED THIS TO THE BOARD, THIS WAS A, UH, PROJECT THAT WAS NOT BILLED ACCORDING TO THE PLANS.
AND NOW WE HAVE AMENDED PLANS AND, UH, APPEARS ARE OF COURSE EXEMPT FROM WETLANDS BOARD REVIEW.
I DO NOT CONSIDER THIS TO REALLY BE A PEER HERE, IT'S JUST DECKING OVER OPEN WATER THAT WAS NOT PERMITTED IN THE FIRST PLACE.
AND THERE IS AREAS UNDER HERE THAT ARE WETLANDS.
UM, I KNOW BIG DID HAVE TO PAY FOR THOSE WETLANDS WHEN THEY DESTROYED THE WETLANDS IN THE FIRST PLACE WHEN THEY PUT THE BULKHEAD THERE BEFORE THEY PULLED IT BACK.
BUT THAT DOES NOT GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO THEN COVER IT WITH A DECK, WELL, OBVIOUSLY WITHOUT ANY PERMITS.
UM, SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
THIS IS THE DISPUTED AREA RIGHT HERE, UM, THAT, UH, WE HAVE CITED THEM FOR VIOLATION.
I GUESS NOW WITH THE AMENDED JPA, BECAUSE ASKING THE BOARD'S PERMISSION TO PUT THERE, UM, I DO NOT VIEW THAT AS EXEMPT AS A PEER BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR P AND THIS IS, UH, APPEARS TO BE JUST A DECK OVER WATER.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. WATSON? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF, IF THIS IS A PRIVATE DOCK, IS THIS CONSIDERED BY RIGHT? WELL, UH, THAT, UH, THAT'S THE OTHER ISSUE.
THIS IS ACTUALLY A, UH, WELL, IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED.
UM, VMRC DOES NOT CONSIDER IT, I GUESS PRIVATE BECAUSE THEIR TERMINOLOGY IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
UM, I KNOW THERE'S A, UH, THEY'RE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT.
UM, BMRC CONSIDERS THIS, I THINK A COMMERCIAL DOCK.
UM, AND OUR LOCAL WETLANDS ORDINANCE USES DIFFERENT TERMINOLOGY.
I DO CONSIDER THIS A PRIVATE DOCK.
I DO CONSIDER EVEN IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE USER, IT'S PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL IS ACTUALLY A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT.
I UNDERSTAND SOME OTHER WETLANDS BOARDS VIEW THAT DIFFERENTLY, BUT I'VE TALKED TO VMRC ABOUT THAT AND THEY SAY WE'RE WELL WITHIN UM, IT, IT'S WELL WITHIN THEIR PARAMETERS FOR US TO CONSIDER IT PRIVATE, EVEN THOUGH IT IS ACCESSED BY MORE THAN ONE PRIVATE PARTY.
AND THERE ARE THREE HOUSES, OR WILL BE THREE HOUSES ON THIS LOT, UM, EXTENDING BACK FROM THE WATERFRONT THAT WILL ALL HAVE RIGHTS TO THIS DOCK.
BUT LIKE I SAID, IF I, IF YOU DON'T MIND ME READING THIS, THIS IS IN VIRGINIA PRIVATE DOCK, UH, PEER OVER STATE OWNED, UH, NON-COMMERCIAL PEER OVER STATE OWNED SUBMERGED LANDS FOR NON-COMMERCIAL, UH, PERSONNEL NOT OWNED BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
PUBLIC DOCK IS A STRUCTURE OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT IN A
[01:00:01]
DAY TOWN, STATE, OR PUBLIC AGENCY THAT PROVIDES PUBLIC ACCESS TO WATERWAYS.UM, LIKE I SAID, I'LL TALK ABOUT THIS LATER, BUT LIKE YOU SAY, IT IS, WE, ONLY THING WE'RE DEALING WITH IS PUB, PRIVATE AND PUBLIC.
SO BACK TO MY QUESTION, IF IT'S A PRIVATE DOCK, ISN'T IT? UH, I KNOW HE'S GOTTA HAVE THE RIGHT PERMITS.
AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, AND, AND I'LL ADDRESS THAT LATER TOO.
BUT LIKE YOU SAY, UH, HE DOES DEFINITELY HAS TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR IT.
AND THE PERMITS BEEN APPLIED FOR, BUT ISN'T IT BY, RIGHT.
I WOULD SAY THAT THE AREA THAT HE HAS BUILT HERE, I AM NOT COMFORTABLE AS THE WETLANDS BOARD AGENT CALLING IT A PEER.
UM, BUT I DO, BUT I DO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, THAT THAT IS AN ISSUE BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY.
AND I JUST DON'T THINK, AS A WETLANDS BOARD AGENT, I SHOULD BE THE ONE MAKING THAT DETERMINATION.
I THINK THAT'S A WETLANDS BOARD ISSUE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS ACTUALLY A PEER RATHER THAN SOMETHING ELSE.
I GUESS ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS, IT'S HARD TO SEE FROM THIS, BUT UNDER THE DECK, IN TERMS OF LOW MEAN WATER AND HIGH MEAN WATER, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY JURISDICTION UNDER THAT? THERE'S AN AREA RIGHT HERE.
UM, IT, AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT'S BEEN EXTENDED BACK.
UM, UM, IT CERTAINLY, THE MAJORITY, VAST MAJORITY OF THAT AREA IS, IS SUB AQUEOUS.
SO IT'S NOT IN OUR JURISDICTION, BASICALLY UNDER AL ALMOST, I, I MEAN, IT DOES APPEAR TO HAVE SOME DEPTH TO IT.
I, I'VE LOOKED UNDER IT AND, AND IT DOES APPEAR AS YOU GET ALL THE WAY BACK.
IT'S, UM, THAT THE, WE, THE WETLANDS BOARD HAS, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS NEAREST CORNER THERE.
ALRIGHT, SIR, IF YOU'LL ALLOW US ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, FOR MR. WATSON AT THIS MOMENT, HE'LL BE HERE.
I THINK PROPER PROCEDURE IS, UH, SOMEONE REPRESENTING BIC, WHICH IS MR. RAYMOND BRITTON, JR.
AND, UH, SIR, AT YOUR GO AHEAD.
CAN YOU HAVE A MICROPHONE OR ANYTHING? I'LL SPEAK LOUD.
YOU, YEAH, YOU ARE USED TO THAT.
DO YOU AFFIRM OR SWEAR YOU'LL TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO.
UH, JUNIOR, THEY CALL THIS JAGGING OVER THE WHOLE WHOLE AREA.
WELL, IF I EXTENDED MY PIER BACK TO WHERE IT'S AT NOW, IT WOULD BE AN EXTENSION OF THE PIER ITSELF.
THE PIER WAS PERMITTED BY 350 FEET WITH AN L HEAD, 400 SQUARE FOOT.
WE, WE ARE RIGHT NOW 290 FEET WITH THE PIECE BE VALUE BACK.
SO THE IMPACTS ARE WAY LESS THAN WHAT WE WERE PERMITTED FOR THE AREA COMING BACK.
THE FIVE FOOT PIER COMING IN RIGHT NOW WAS JUST AN EXTENSION OF THE FIVE FOOT PIER.
WE DECKED OVER AN AREA THAT'S ABOUT SIX FOOT WIDE, ABOUT 28 FOOT LONG, UH, OVER SOME LAKE WAS MODEL.
NOW, WITH ALL THAT GETTING DONE, WE'RE STILL UNDER THE IMPACTS OF WHAT IS PIER WERE ORIGINALLY PERMITTED FOR.
AND THE REASON WE CAME BACK THIS FAR IS BECAUSE THE PIER WOULDN'T MATCH WHAT WE HAD TO MOVE THE BULKHEAD FOR.
SO THE PIER EXTENSION SHOULD BE A, A NON MU THING.
THE AREA QUESTION SHOULD BE THE LITTLE SIX FOOT BY MAYBE 28 FEET OR 48 7 FEET, WHATEVER IT IS DOWN UNDERNEATH OF IT.
IT WOULD BE A HOLE LEFT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DECKING THERE.
IF THE BOARD MOVES THAT HOLE PUT BACK, WE'LL PUT THE HOLE BACK FOR EM.
BUT AS FAR AS THE FIVE FOOT EXTENSION ON HERE, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THAT.
SO IF WE HAD SIX FOOT COMING INSHORE TIED TO THE DOCK, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? IT'S OVER SOME BAKER'S BOTTOM.
ALL OF IT DEPENDS ON IF YOU GO AT THE RIGHT TIDE, YOU MAY HAVE SOME NON VEGETATED AT THE RIGHT TIDE, A NORMAL HOT LOW TIDE.
WE WERE DOWN THIS MORNING, TOOK PICTURES OF IT.
EVERYTHING UNDER THAT PIER WAS MAYBE A HALF INCH INCH OF WATER OVER ALL OF IT AT EIGHT 30 THIS MORNING.
BUT YOU GO DOWN TO THE WIND SOUTHWEST, NO MOON, IT'D, IT'D BE DRY HALFWAY OUT THE PIER.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BRITTON? OKAY.
YEAH, I GUESS, I GUESS TO JUNIOR THE, UM, UH, FAR AS YOUR SURVEY OF THAT PROPERTY, UH, I KNOW, I KNOW THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT LAND STUFF IN THAT THAT YOU PAID FOR? THAT'S, THAT'S A NEW POINT.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER, UH, LAST, UH, JPA, BUT IT, IT, IT'S ACTUALLY WHEN YOU, LIKE YOU SAID,
[01:05:01]
WHEN IT EBBS OUT LOW WATER, YOU OWN THAT UNDERNEATH OF IT.THAT'S, THAT, THAT AREA POSSESSION IS NOT, IT'S NOT EVEN, IT'S IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S WASN'T, AND IT'S IN JURISDICTION, IT'S JURISDICTIONAL, BUT IT'S STILL PRIVATE PROPERTY.
AM I CORRECT IN SAYING THAT? RIGHT.
BUT THE, THE FIVE FOOT THAT WE CAME IN SHORE, WE DID ADD SIX FOOT DECKING IN THE MIDDLE.
ALL WE DID IS EXTEND THE PIER BACK THIS WAY TOWARDS LAND.
WELL, INSTEAD OF GOING OUT FURTHER WITH IT, AND IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE I SAID THING, BUT WE DO KNOW THIS ONE'S EASY AND IT'S NOT, DON'T SOUND LIKE I'M FUSSING AT YOU.
BUT, BUT, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU HAD ANOTHER JPA THAT WAS ON THIS PROPERTY, YOU KNEW IT WAS GONNA BE SOLVED.
YOU TAKE DO NEXT TIME, DO IT UPFRONT.
YOU KNOW THAT SOMEBODY'S GONNA SAY SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THAT JUST, WELL, I DID.
GET THAT NOW, JPA REVISE THE JPA, TELL 'EM WHAT'S GOING ON, EXPLAIN TO 'EM AND DO IT SO THAT THIS ISN'T THE ISSUE.
BUT THIS, THIS PEER EXTENSIONS, I, I DON'T SEE WHERE IT MATTERS IF I CAME IN 15 FEET, BUT MATTER MATTERING AND DRAWINGS IS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
IT IS WHAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, PROBATED FOR THREE OTHER FEET NOW, BUT, BUT WHEN YOU CHANGE THE DRAWINGS, HAVE THE DRAWING HERE AND APPROVED BECAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE HERE DUE TO CHANGE.
IF YOU SAID, LOOK, I'VE HAD A CHANGE OF PLAN, DRINK CHANGE, CHANGE, JPA, IT'S STILL LASTING WHAT IT ORIGINALLY WAS, BUT HAVE APPROVED DRAWINGS BEFORE, BEFORE DOING IT, BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S GONNA BE RIGHT HERE.
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU GOT ANOTHER JPA ALREADY, A PRETTY PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE THERE, RIGHT.
BUT THE ONLY AREA THAT RIGHT NOW FOR I'M PERMITTED FOR THE 350 FOOT PIER THAT WOULD BE IN QUESTION WOULD BE A PIECE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DECKING RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S SIX FOOT WIDE, ABOUT 27 FOOT LONG.
I I'M BACK TO MY ORIGINAL PLAN THEN.
WE'RE SAYING IS HAD THE PLANS, WHATEVER YOU'RE BUILDING, HAD THE PLANS APPROVED BEFORE BUILDING, I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S WELL, I HAVE PLAN APPROVED HUNDRED 50 FOOT PERIOD.
YEAH, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT HAD THE DRAWING EXACTLY WHERE YOU'D WANNA BUILD.
THAT'S, THAT'S, I CAN'T YOUR HERE WAS ORIGINALLY, BUT THEN, BUT DID THEY CHANGE? THAT CHANGED.
BUT I'M SAYING BY HAVE WHATEVER YOU'RE BUILDING AS A, AS A, YOU KNOW, APPROVED ANYTHING.
BECAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WITH ALL THE, WITH ALL THE, UH, APPLICATIONS THAT YOU APPLIED FOR, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA COME BY.
THIS AIN'T ME GRILLING OR ANYTHING.
IT'S JUST LIKE YOU SAID, HAVE IT, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU'VE DONE LESS THAN WHAT YOU APPLIED FOR, BUT HAVE THE PLAN PLANS THAT YOU'RE GONNA ACTUALLY BUILD BY, HAVE THOSE PLANS APPROVED.
THAT'S, THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL THING.
BECAUSE LIKE I SAY, WHAT, WHAT I'M NOT SAYING YOU'VE DONE WRONG, YOU'VE DONE WRONG, YOU'VE BEEN WRONG, BUT THE PLANS THAT YOU BUILT BY WEREN'T APPROVED.
YOU ARE, THEY, YOU'RE DOING 'EM NOW THE WAY WAY IT'S BUILT, BUT I'M SAYING IS MY, MY THING TO YOU SAY IS BUILT, HAD THE PLANS APPROVAL BUILT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GUESS IT IS, IT'S GONNA COME RIGHT BACK HERE.
AGAIN, WE ONLY GOT A AREA THERE TO SIX FOOT BY ABOUT 27 FOOT AND IT WAS DECKED OVER FOR THE BULKHEAD TO THE PIER IF I EXTENDED THE PIER BACK IN WHERE I HAD TO TIE IT IN AT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE AREA IN QUESTION IN MY BOOK.
'CAUSE I WAS PERMITTED FOR 350 FOOT.
MY IMPACTS WITH THE WHOLE THING ARE A WHOLE LOT LESS THAN WHAT IT WOULD'VE BEEN IF WE BUILT THE WHOLE 350 FOOT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS MOMENT? I SORT OF LIKE MAYBE GET THE VMRC UP HERE AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES.
JUST YOU GOT ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BRITTON? NO.
UH, MS. GORMAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE APPROACH, UH, YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN, UH, MS. GORMAN, YOU, I HAVE TWO DOCUMENTS HERE.
ONE IS A STAFF MEMORANDUM, UH, VIOLATION, AND, UH, THEN, UH, HABITAT MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF, WOULD YOU JUST COVER BOTH OF THEM FIRST FOR US? UM, SO SINCE, SO THIS IS AN ONGOING VIOLATION FOR VMRC.
SO I CAN'T SPEAK TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS ON THE RECORD.
UM, BUT PAUL AND I DID INSPECT THE SITE.
IT IS A VI IT IS IN VIOLATION.
ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A, UM, A PEER SUBMITTED, AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR A PRIVATE PEER, THEN A NEW APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED TO CHANGE THAT PEER TO COMMERCIAL, WHICH HAD NOT BEEN APPROVED.
AND THEN THIS DECKING WAS CONSTRUCTED.
SO THIS IS LIKE A MULTI-LAYERED, KIND OF COMPLICATED VIOLATION THAT SPANS MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY ALL THAT I CAN SPEAK TO AT THE, SO FROM WHERE YOU STAND MA'AM, WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NEXT? AS FAR AS THIS BOARD'S CONCERNED? I CANNOT TELL YOU ALL HOW TO PROCEED.
[01:10:01]
UM, BUT WE ARE PURSUING IT AS A VIOL.BMRC IS PURSUING IT AS A, AS A VIOLATION.
HOWEVER, TYPICALLY WE, I PREFER TO SEE TO LET THE BOARD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL PROCEED HOW THEY, HOW THEY SEE FIT.
CAN, CAN I HAVE A QUESTION? ABSOLUTELY.
UM, I KNOW HE APPLIED IF, IF YOU'RE TELLING ME HE APPLIED FOR COMMERCIAL MM-HMM
UM, I GUESS I DON'T KNOW WHAT MAKES IT EVEN THAT'S WHAT HE APPLIED FOR.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S GONNA BE RUNNING, UH, UH, PAMS AND OYSTERS OR ANY KIND OF SEAFOOD BUSINESS OUT THERE.
I I, MY UNDERSTANDING IT, IT'S THREE, UH, INDIVIDUAL HOUSES.
UM, I DON'T, 'CAUSE THAT'S THE, WE APPLIED FOR, SO I CAN'T DO NOTHING ABOUT THAT.
BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHY THAT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL BECAUSE LIKE I SAY, UH, JUST GIVE, GIVE YOU A HEADS UP.
LIKE I SAID, GETTING READY TO BUY THE TWO ACRE SIDE OF IT, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO PUT A SIGN OUT THERE THAT SAYS A PRIVATE DOCK.
AM I RIGHT OR WRONG? I MEAN, THE WAY, SO I'M SAYING, SO I MEAN TO ME, I MEAN WITH THREE PEOPLE OWNERSHIP TO ME JUST BECAUSE IT'S MORE THAN THREE, I MEAN IT'S MORE THAN ONE PERSON OWNING IT.
THREE PEOPLE COULD OWN ONE HOUSE.
DOES THAT MAKE IT COMMERCIAL? NO.
SO TYPICALLY PRIVATE IS DEFINED AS A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL USER OF A PEER COMMERCIAL.
AND MULTI-USER PEERS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE THE SAME THING.
SO LIKE IF YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY PEER, IT'S, IT'S CALLED A COMM, A COMMERCIAL PEER.
SO WE DESIGNATE IT IN A BINARY MANNER.
PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL MULTI-USER.
SO SINCE THIS IS PLATTED, SINCE THIS PLOT WAS DIVIDED INTO THREE SEPARATE RESIDENCES AND THIS PIER WILL BE USED BY THREE SEPARATE HOUSEHOLDS, IT IS CONSIDERED A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, A MULTI-USER STRUCTURE, WHICH REQUIRES A PERMIT FROM BMRC, UNLIKE THE ORIGINAL PIER THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UM, FOR A SINGLE PRIVATE PARCEL.
BUT MOST TIME THE DIFFERENCE IN THAT IS THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR SHADING.
AM I RIGHT OR WRONG IN THAT SHADING? YEAH.
FOR ONE OVER, UH, PAY FOR SHADING OVER, OVER UH OH COMMERCIAL P YEAH.
SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH FOR THE SHADING, BUT YOU'RE CORRECT.
WE REQUIRE, UH, ROYALTIES FOR COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES.
WHEN WE APPLIED THIS PIER ORIGINALLY, YOU TALKING ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL, I HAD A GENTLE IN NEW JERSEY WAS GONNA BUY THE WHOLE PROPERTY WITH THE PIER.
AND IN THE DEAL WAS WE HAD TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR THE PIER.
AND IN THE MEANTIME HE COULDN'T GET FUNDING OR FINANCING FOR THE WHOLE PROJECT.
HE WANTED TO BUY THE WHOLE PROPERTY AND HAVE ONE HOUSE ON.
AND IN THE MEANTIME, UH, WHEN IT CHANGED THE, HE, WE JUST TOLD HIM WE WEREN'T GONNA DEAL WITH YOU ANYMORE.
SHE HADN'T BROUGHT OTHER YOUR LITTLE DEPOSIT, YOU KNOW, BUT SHE, YOU'VE NOT GOT ANY FINANCING.
SO HE KIND OF BACKED OUT OF IT.
THEN WE TALKING TO CLAIRE, MR. GOMAN, UH, IT NEEDED TO CHANGE IF WE'RE GONNA USE THREE LOTS TO A COMMERCIAL PIER.
SO WE APPLIED FOR THE COMMERCIAL PIER.
NOW I CAN GO THERE RIGHT NOW, CUT OUT A SIX FOOT SECTION IN THAT DECK AND I'M NOT IN VIOLATION 'CAUSE I WAS PERMITTED FOR A 350 FOOT PIER AND I'M NOT THERE.
I'LL CUT THAT SECTION OUT, MAKE EVERYBODY HAD AND BE DONE WITH IT.
JUST BE A WHOLE MIDDLE THAT DECK.
IF IT MAKES EVERYBODY HAPPY, THE VIOLATIONS SHOULD GO AWAY, I WOULD THINK.
NEXT, FIRST THING, WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. GORMAN? UH, WELL I GUESS I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT IN TERMS OF OUR JURISDICTION, AS BEST AS YOU CAN TELL, THERE'S NOTHING OUR JURISDICTION UNDERNEATH THAT PLATFORM, AS BEST AS I CAN TELL, THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT HERE AT THIS FRONT THAT APPARENTLY THAT MR. WATSON MENTIONED.
IS THIS ESSENTIALLY CORRECT OR AM I IN THIS PHOTO? IT LOOKS LIKE THAT WHEN I WENT OUT THERE FOR A SITE INSPECTION, MY IMPRESSION WAS THE, THAT THE MAJORITY OF IT WAS OVER NON VEGETATED.
IT WAS OVER NON VEGETATED WETLANDS AND THAT A PORTION OF IT IS OVER SEBAS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT IT AT A REGULAR LOW TIDE, BUT WHEN I WAS OUT THERE, THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL NON VEGETATED, AND I SHOULDN'T SAY SUBSTANTIAL, BUT THERE WAS MORE VEGETATED WETLANDS THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE THAT WE SHOULD BE.
UH, BASED ON THAT, UH, GENTLEMEN, DO WE NEED TO UM, GO AHEAD MR. WATSON AND I, I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY TOO.
I, WHEN I SAID IT WAS I, THERE WAS JURISDICTIONAL AREAS.
I DID MEAN WHEN I SAID IN THE CORNER, I MEAN THE CORNER OF THE PLATFORM SPECIFICALLY.
WHEN YOU SAY CORNER OF THE PLATFORM, NOT THIS LITTLE BIT HERE IN FRONT, IT'S IN THE BACK.
[01:15:01]
RIGHT, RIGHT THERE.AND I, I MEAN WE WERE OUT THERE AT THE SAME TIME UNDERNEATH, SWITCH THIS DIRECTLY LOW TIDE, GIVE THAT TO, AND THE AREA RIGHT HERE IS THE AREA THAT I THINK WILL BE IN VIOLATION OF THIS PLATFORM.
AND THAT ALL WE DID IS EXTENDED P BACK FIVE FEET.
SO DIFFERENT LOCATION SHORELINE AND THE INSTALL WITH, I PUT NON VEGETATIVE.
WE SO BOTTLE IT DEPENDS ON WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING.
MY QUESTIONS ABOUT MS. CLAIRE RIGHT NOW, MS. CLAIRE, UM, LIKE YOU SAY, WHEN HE ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR THIS, HE APPLIED FOR AS, AS A PROJECT.
SO WHAT WHAT DOES HE HAVE TO DO TO CHANGE THIS TO TO, UH, YOU'RE CALLING, YOU'RE CALLING IT COMMERCIAL.
SO HE HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR IT TO BE, UM, CHANGED TO A COMMERCIAL PEER, BUT THE REST OF THIS WORK WAS COMPLETED BEFORE THAT THAT PERMIT WAS ISSUED, WHICH IS PART OF THE NO, I KNOW, LIKE I SAY, IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS PRIVATE, IT WOULD BE BARBARA WRIGHT.
WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? IF IT WAS A PRIVATE SINGLE RESIDENTIAL, YES.
SO EVEN THOUGH HE, IT WOULD, WOULD BE EXEMPT PERMIT, BUT IF IT WAS PRIVATE IT WOULD BE BARB WRIGHT SINGLE.
WELL, SO NOW THAT THE, THE PARCEL HAS BEEN SPLIT INTO THREE.
I'M SAYING IF IT WAS LIKE I SAID, JUST SO SAY I RIGHT NOW AND GO BUY, HE'S GOT BE BUILDING A HOUSE THERE AND IT'S JUST ONE HOUSE THERE AND I GO BUY A WHOLE THING.
I'M SAYING A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE'S PRIVATE.
HE HAS TO CHECK WHAT I'M SAYING.
BUT HE HAS TO CHANGE IT TO COMMERCIAL.
SO TO AND AND YOU SAY IT WAS PRIVATE HERE? I HAVE APPLIED FOR THAT.
AND WHAT I'M SAYING THAT'S APPLIED FOR, SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, SO, UM, WHAT WOULD BE ON THE APPLICATION HE HAS APPLIED FOR THE, THE ASBUILT.
WELL HE SO SUBSEQUENTLY HAS APPLIED FOR THE ADDITIONAL DECKING AND WE'LL CALL IT AN ASBUILT.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? SURE.
UM, THEY, UM, WE NOT THERE WITH DIFFERENT CASES THAT DO THAT, BUT I'M SAYING IS, UM, SO WHAT WOULD THE VM C'S, UM, LOOK ON THAT ON, ON HIS AS-BUILT APPLICATION? UM, IT'S A VIOLATION AND JUST BECAUSE, SO IF YOU CONSTRUCT SOMETHING WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION AND APPLY TO RETAIN IT AFTER THE FACT, WE'LL REVIEW IT AND CONSIDER IT.
BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT IS NOW IN COMPLIANCE AND WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH THAT VIOLATION PROCESS FOR KIND OF THIS TWO-PRONGED ISSUE.
AND I GUESS WHAT WE GOT, LIKE I SAID, WE CONSIDER IT IF YOU'RE SAYING IT'S PRIVATE.
SO WE HAVE A DIFFERENT THAN WHAT BN MARC C HAS.
AS YOU KNOW, THE BOARD HAS FIRES IS WRITTEN UP, IS PRIVATE AND PUBLIC.
THE MAJORITY OF WETLANDS BOARDS FOLLOW VM C'S APPROACH ON PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL AND MULTI-USER DOCS.
SO IN THE REAL WORLD, UH, HIS, HIS BIGGEST HURDLE HAS TO OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE AS-BUILT, UH, HIS, HIS VMRC.
NO RIGHT OR WRONG IN THAT, HIS BIGGEST HURDLE MM-HMM
UM, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.
I'M SAYING THE QUESTION IS LIKE YOU SAY HE'S APPLIED FOR AN AS-BUILT PERMIT MM-HMM
AND LIKE YOU SAID, I'M ASKING YOU WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON THE AS-BUILT PERMIT? THAT IT'S A VIOLATION AND PORTION OF IT IS NOT JURISDICTIONAL TO US.
I KNOW SINCE YOU HAVEN'T MADE A DECISION, YOU CAN'T STATE ANYTHING POSITIVELY, BUT COULD YOU OFFER A RANGE OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS WHICH WOULD BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE? YEAH, AND WE, WE DISCUSSED THIS WITH, UM, MR. BRITON ON SITE.
IF THE UNAUTHORIZED DECKING IS REMOVED, THEN WE'LL PROCEED WITH CONSIDERING TO CONVERT THIS TO A COMMERCIAL PIER AND CONSIDER HIS EXTENSION OF THE DECKING IF THE VIOLATION IS REMOVED.
WE CAN'T ISSUE A PERMIT OR AUTHORIZATION FOR SOMETHING WHEN THERE'S AN ONGOING VIOLATION, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A VIOLATION AT THE COUNTY LEVEL AS WELL.
WE CAN'T STEP ON TOES IN THAT WAY.
MY THING, HOW MUCH OF THIS DO YOU CALL A VIOLATION? IF FIVE SIX FOOT PURR STANDS IN, IT DIDN'T GO OUT, IT JUST CAME BACK SHORE, UH, 21 FEET, 31 FEET INSTEAD OF GOING OUT.
THE ONLY THING QUESTION IS A LITTLE SQUARE.
I JUST GREW OVER THAT RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT DECK.
I MEAN, IF I GOT TO, I'LL TAKE THAT LITTLE SQUARE OUT IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S THE VIOLATION, BUT THE EXTEND THE APPEAR BACK, I DIDN'T GO OUT AS FAR THE SAME EFFECT THAT APPEARS BACK.
AND WE, WE CAN DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS OF IT, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THE HEARING.
YOU KNOW, IF THAT MAKES EVERYBODY HAPPY.
I WHOLE DECK GET THIS GO AWAY IS JUST, IT DON'T MAKE SENSE, BUT I'LL DO IT.
[01:20:01]
BUT IT'S BEING CALLED A VIOLATION.WELL MY IMPACTS ARE A WHOLE LOT LESS THAN WHAT I APPLIED FOR IS APPROVED FOR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. BRITTON REGARDING, UH, OR FOR MS. GORMAN HOW THIS BOARD SHOULD PROCEED? WELL, UH, YEAH, I GUESS HE'S SAYING IT, HE'S GOING TO CUT OUT WHAT THE VM RC IS SAYING IS THE VIOLATION.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THE VM MR. CITY ACTUALLY WILLING TO GO OUT THERE AND MARK OUT WHERE THE VIOLATION WOULD BE FOR THAT'S TO HAPPEN? UM, I AM GLAD TO WORK WITH YOUR STAFF TO DO THAT, BUT THAT IS CERTAINLY OUTSIDE OF THE PUR OF PURVIEW OF MY, UM, MY POSITION.
I CANNOT GO OUT AND TELL YOU ALL WHAT YOU NEED TO, WHAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED.
BUT I CAN WORK WITH PAUL TO DO THAT.
AND WE DID, WE WENT OUT THERE AND MEASURED, UM, I'M NOT EXACTLY CLEAR ON WHAT THAT SIX FOOT SQUARE IS THAT'S BEING REFERRED TO ON THE DRAWING.
WHAT IS, WHAT IS YOUR, WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF THE VIOLATION? I MEAN, WHAT IF YOU GO INTO THAT ON THAT DECK, HOW BIG IS THE, WHERE THE VIOLATION? SO I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE MEASUREMENTS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THE PORTION OF THE DECKING THAT EXTENDS CHANNEL WORD OF THE BULKHEAD THAT'S UNDERNEATH IS A VIOLATION.
THE PORTION OF THE DECKING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OVER CIVIC WAY'S BOTTOM IS ALSO A VIOLATION.
NOW THERE'S, I DON'T HAVE THOSE SPECIFIC DIMENSIONS AND I CAN, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH PAUL TO GET THOSE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S ALL OF THAT DECKING WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION.
BIG SQUARE APART THE CHANNEL, THE PORTION, SO YOU CAN'T SEE THE BULKHEAD HERE, THE BULKHEAD KIND OF IS DIAGONAL UNDERNEATH THE DECKING, BUT ALL OF THAT NEW DECKING WAS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION FROM THE WETLANDS BOARD WITHOUT AUTHOR AUTHORIZATION FROM BMRC.
OH, I, I DEFINITELY, I STILL DON'T BELIEVE, I STILL CAN'T BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE CALLING THE PIER EXTENDING THE PIER BY A VIOLATION.
YOU HAD S WE CAN DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS OF YOUR VMRC SUBMISSION SEPARATELY, BUT SINCE IT IS NOW DEEMED A COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, IT CHANGES WHAT IS AUTHORIZED BY STATUTE.
WHILE THIS IS STILL UNDER THE DISCUSSION, THE VMRC, CAN WE VOTE ON IT? YEAH.
'CAUSE THEY'RE GOING, THEY'RE GONNA OVER, THEY'RE GOING TO, IF WE APPROVED IT, THEY WOULD JUST ALLY OVERTURN IT BECAUSE SHE'S WHAT I TOLD HER, IT'S, IT'S A VIOLATION.
WELL, I JUST, SHOULD WE WAIT, POSTPONE IT UNTIL VMRC AND JUNIOR HAS AN AGREEMENT? WELL, SO THE, WE NEED TO, WE TYPICALLY DO NOT ACT BEFORE THE WETLANDS BOARD ACT.
SO ANYTIME THERE'S A PROJECT AND IT INVOLVES WETLANDS AND SEBE WASTE BOTTOM, EVEN WITH VIOLATIONS, THE LOCALITIES MAKE THEIR DECISIONS BEFORE WE DO BECAUSE WE DO NOT WANT TO SUPERSEDE WHAT'S DECIDED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
SO I THAT'S PROCEDURALLY THAT'S TYPICALLY HOW WE MM-HMM
MY CONCERN IS OBVIOUSLY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A HANDLE ON THIS UNVEGETATED WETLANDS THAT MIGHT BE IMPACTED.
SO I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN DO ANYTHING AT THIS MOMENT.
I, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME MORE INFORMATION EXACTLY WHAT'S WHERE.
'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A DISCUSSION.
YOU'RE, YOU SAY THERE'S BASICALLY NO IMPACT AND WE'RE HAVING, THERE IS IMPACT.
SO I NEED TO HAVE PEOPLE GET TOGETHER AND SAY, AGREE TO WHAT LEVEL OF IMPACT IT IS BEFORE I CAN MAKE A DECISION.
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF YOU PULL BACK THAT, THAT PIER AND IT GOES OVER UNVEGETATED WEAPONS AND THAT IS IN OUR JURISDICTION AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER MR. WATSON, PLEASE.
UM, WELL THERE'S, IF THE BOARD CONSIDERS THIS A PEER, IT'S AN OPEN FILE PEER, WHICH CAN BE OVER WETLANDS OF COURSE.
UM, I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU SHOULD DO THAT, BUT I AM SUGGESTING THERE ARE DECISIONS THAT CAN BE MADE AS TO HOW TO TREAT THIS GOING FORWARD.
UM, SO I MEAN MR. BRITTON'S HAS, HAS SUBMITTED REVISED PLANS THAT ARE BEFORE THE BOARD AND, UH, AND, AND NOW AT LEAST, I GUESS THE FIRST ISSUE IS, IS THIS A PEER OR, OR, OR NOT? IF IT IS A PEER, THEN IT IS A PERMITTED ACTIVITY UNDER THE WETLAND ORDINANCE.
IF IT'S NOT APPEAR, THEN WE GET TO THE WETLANDS ISSUE AND WHAT IT HAS TO DO.
SO MAYBE EXCUSE MY, SO IF IT'S A PEER THAT'S GOING OVER UNVEGETATED WETLANDS, IS THAT SOMETHING WE NEED TO COMPENSATE FOR OR? UM, AND, AND I GUESS I HADN'T REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT FROM THIS ANGLE BECAUSE THE BOARD DOESN'T SEE THESE, BUT, UM, I BE,
[01:25:01]
BE, BE BECAUSE PEERS ARE PERMITTED UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE AND YOU DO NOT NEED A HEARING IF YOU JUST WANT TO PUT UP A P.AND, AND I GET THOSE, I DON'T KNOW, A DOZEN A MONTH THAT I JUST CHECK OFF NO HEARING NEEDED BECAUSE IT'S A PERMITTED ACTIVITY UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE.
UM, SO I HADN'T REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT, BUT FOR THAT REASON, YOU NEVER HEAR THOSE AND ARE NOT EXPOSED TO 'EM.
SO IF THIS IS IN FACT A PIER, IT'S A OPEN PILE PIER, UM, AND IT'S A PERMANENT ACTIVITY UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A HEARING.
BUT I, WELL I WAS NOT COMFORTABLE SAYING THIS IS A PIER AND YOU ALREADY HAD A PIER THAT WAS PERMITTED AND BUILT.
AND NOW WE HAVE, I GUESS WHAT I'D CALL, BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA LABEL IT, APPEAR, UM, FOR THE BOARD I WOULD CALL DECKING OVER SUB AQUEOUS AND VEGETATIVE WETLANDS THAT'S, UH, BEFORE THE BOARD TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT IT'S, AND DO WE KNOW WHAT THE AREA IS FOR THE VEGETATED UNVEGETATED WETLANDS? WE HAVE A SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THAT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER
UM, I DO NOT HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER FOR THAT.
UM, I, I, I, WHAT WHAT DO YOU THINK SIR? WHY, WHY? IT JUST GETS REALLY, REALLY WEIRD.
'CAUSE LIKE I SAID, IT WAS ORIGINALLY BE SOLD AS PRIVATE BUILT.
UM, AND LIKE I SAID, I CAN'T STRESS ENOUGH ABOUT BUILD ACCORDING TO APPROVED PLANS.
I PROMISE YOU, I PROMISE YOU, WHEN YOU BUILD SOMETHING, BUILD IT TO THREE ACCORDING TO PRE PLANS BECAUSE YOU EYEBALLS WERE ON YOU.
THEM IN, THEY WASN'T BUILT TO PRE PLANS, BUT AGAIN, IF IT WAS PRIVATE IT WOULD BE BY RATE.
BUT BECAUSE IT'S COMMERCIAL AND THEY GOTTA GIVE A COMMERCIAL PERMIT, UH, IT'S UH, THAT'S PART OF THE STATE.
THE COUNTY IS, IS STILL CONSIDER IT PRIVATE.
WE AND, AND AND THE ISSUE THERE IS VMRC CONSIDERS MULTI-USER TO BE PUBLIC, COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIAL, JUST NOT PUBLIC COMMERCIAL.
UM, BUT OUR WETLANDS ORDINANCE TALKS ABOUT PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE.
SO IT'S DIFFERENT TERMINOLOGY.
THEY'RE CONFLICTING AND, AND YOU ARE FREE TO DETERMINE THAT EVEN THOUGH MORE THAN ONE RESIDENCE HAS ACCESS TO IT, THAT'S STILL PRIVATE.
AND, AND I'VE TALKED TO BMRC ABOUT THAT.
THEY SAID THAT IS A A, A QUIRK IN, IN THE LAW THAT THAT WETLANDS BOARDS CAN GO EITHER WAY WITH THAT, RIGHT? YEAH.
BUT, BUT OURS IS WRITTEN SO THAT IT'S WHAT I, I THINK, WELL I THINK THAT'S A MODEL THAT COMES FROM A MODEL ORDINANCE.
I THINK OTHER BOARDS HAVE INTERPRETED DIFFERENTLY.
OTHER, BUT THIS WOULD NOT BE THE ONLY ONE THAT SAYS MULTI-USER IS STILL PRIVATE AS LONG AS THEY'RE ALL PRIVATE RESIDE, LIKE I SAID, IT BE A TWO PARK BESIDE OF THEM.
DON'T BE A SIGN ON THAT DOT AND MATTER WHAT IT ENDS UP BEING THAT IT'S A PRIVATE.TO STAY OFF OF IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO ALL PEOPLE.
THE PARK USING THE DOT THINKING THAT IT'S THE TOWN OWNED BY THE TOWN OFFISH.
SO THAT'S JUST LIKE I SAID, BUT THOSE TWO ARE CONFLICTING.
LIKE I SAID, THIS IS REALLY WHY WHERE IT'S REALLY, REALLY WEIRD ARE CONFLICTING.
AND I, AND IF I COULD JUST SAY ONE OTHER THING AS FAR AS THE WETLANDS GO, I, YOU KNOW, I HAD TO LAY ON MY STOMACH AND LOOK UNDERNEATH THERE.
IT'S, IT IS, YOU KNOW, I CAN JUST GIVE A ROUGH ESTIMATE.
I, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I MEAN YOU WOULD HAVE TO WALK THROUGH THE SUB, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT IS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF WETLANDS WITH THIS PARTICULAR CONFIGURATION.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE'S THE OTHER THING.
HE'S ALREADY PAID MITIGATION FOR THOSE WETLANDS, NOT THOSE ONES.
WHERE DID HE PAY? HUH? I PAID FOR IT.
I, I WAS NOT INVOLVED AT THAT POINT.
UM, BUT I, DO YOU REMEMBER, I WAS JUST GONNA CLARIFY.
HE PAID MITIGATION FOR A VIOLATION FOR A BULKHEAD.
HE DID NOT PAY ANY SORT OF MITIGATION OR COMPENSATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS DECKING OVER NON-VITAL WEAPONS.
BUT YOU SURE HAD PAID THE MITIGATION.
HE PAID MITIGATION FOR THE BULKHEAD AND MOVED IT AND HE MOVED IT BECAUSE IT WAS A VIOLATION.
RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S THE REASON AFTER I MOVED THE BOOK, IT WAS STILL VALID.
BUT THAT DOESN'T JUSTIFY CONSTRUCTING A NEW TRUCTURE.
I'M SAYING, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY.
BUT THAT LAND UNDERNEATH OF IT WAS MITIGATED PAID, PAID MITIGATION FOR IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS A REGULAR, IT WAS NOT MITIGATED FOR, IT WAS A VIOLATION AND HE PAID A FINE, WHICH WAS EQUAL TO WHAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN, WHAT MITIGATION WOULD'VE BEEN.
AND I, I REALIZE THAT IT'S SEMANTICS, BUT HE DID NOT PAY MITIGATION.
HE, THERE WAS A VIOLATION AND HE PAID THE EQUIVALENT OF WHAT THE MITIGATION WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD IT BEEN APPROVED ORIGINALLY.
SO WE NEED TO CHECK HOW THAT WAS IN THE MINUTES NOW BECAUSE I MEAN, I CHARGED HIM BECAUSE I'M THE PERSON THAT DID IT.
'CAUSE THEY WANTED TO RE TO RE PUT IT BACK.
THERE WAS NO TO PUT IT BACK THEN IT'S GONNA BE TAKEN AWAY.
AND I MEAN, HAVING UP THE PLANT PLAN, MATTER OF FACT SIT IN THE LAST MEETING.
SO THERE'S NO NEED TO HAVE A PLANTING PLAN AND EVERYTHING BACK WHEN THAT MARSH WENT AWAY.
LIKE THERE'S THE MORE, IT'S JUST AMAZING WHEN I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS DOC, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND
[01:30:01]
LIKE I SAID, YOU SEE THE DOC, THE, THAT THE, UH, THE MARSH BESIDE JUST RECEDING.YOU KNOW? I MEAN JUST THAT TIME I'VE BEEN FOOLING CHECKING THIS DOCK, HOW FAR BACK THAT THAT, UM, THAT, UH, MARSH.
IT'S JUST CRAZY AMAZING HOW HOW MUCH THE MARSH IS GONNA WASTE.
SO THE REASON I'M GONNA TELL YOU UP FRONT, THE REASON I DIDN'T MAKE HIM PAY OR MAKE IT PLANT BACK IS ALL PLANT BACK.
BUT IT WOULD BE MOVED TO PLANT IT BACK WHEN YOU KNOW THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO NATURE NATURE'S GOING LIKE SEND IN THE LAST JPA NATURE'S GONNA TAKE ITS COURSE AND THERE'S NO ME TO MAKE A MAN AND HAVE A THREE YEAR PLAN ON IT, BUT IT'S DON'T STAND A CHANCE AND THE BAD LAND STILL LIVE.
MY MY POINT WAS JUST, I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IT IS NOT MITIGATION IF IT'S BEING PAID FOR AFTER A VIOLATION HAS BEEN COMMITTED.
I GUESS MY QUESTION, THAT MONEY GO THAT COUNTY, WAS IT COUNTY THAT WAS TAKING THE MONEY THEN? MM-HMM
DID THAT MONEY GO INTO COUNTY, COUNTY? UH, CERS I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THAT IN PARTICULAR, BUT I DO REMEMBER THIS CAME UP AT THE LAST MEETING.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT IT WAS IN THE THING THAT WAS MITIGATION PAID OR IT PAID FOR AND, AND WHERE DID THE MONEY GO IF IT WENT TO THE MATT COUNTY MITIGATION PLAN? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT TO THE IN LIEV FUND.
UM, THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING TOO.
SO WE'RE MYSELF AND, AND B MORE CITIZEN CONFIDENT ON THIS ONE BECAUSE I THINK BECAUSE I WAS THE ONE THAT I KNOW THE REASON I DID IT BECAUSE I JUST COULDN'T SEE PLANTING BACK AND THAT I, AND I, I WAS THE ONE MAKING TO PAY THE PAY THE MITIGATION FOR MITIGATION WENT BACK AT THE MITIGATION BANK, WHICH WOULD BE FOR US TO REPLANT SOMETHING ELSE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
THE BOTTOM LINE LOOKS TO BE LIKE IF LITTLE SIX FOOT PIECE BUDGET IN THE MIDDLE, IT'S A NON PERMITTING THING FOR YOU ALL.
ADAM P COMING ENSURE I EXTEND FURTHER, I EXTEND NO WAY MORE WET MAN THAN WHAT I WAS PERMITTED FOR THAT LITTLE SQUARE PIECE IN THE MIDDLE.
IT'S, HE'S CALLED AND SHE'S CALLED A VIOLATION.
IF IT'S A VIOLATION, I'LL TAKE IT OUT, CUT IT OUT, WHATEVER I GOTTA DO WITH IT TO MAKE SOME MENT, UH, APPLY FOR AN AFTER FACT PERMIT FROM EM.
THEY HAVEN'T ISSUED THAT DONE ANYTHING WITH IT YET.
UH, I WAIT TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO CUT IT OUT, BUT IMPACTS A WHOLE LOT LESS THAN WHAT I APPLY FOR ALLY.
IS THAT YOUR WISH? THAT YOU WOULDN'T? BUT THIS IS NOT A PERMITTING.
WELL, JUST TO BE CLEAR, AFTER THE FACT PERMIT IS BEFORE THE BOARD TODAY.
THAT'S BECAUSE I WAS ASKED TO DO IT.
IT'S AN AFTER THE FACT PERMIT.
SO WE NEED TO DETERMINE IF WE CAN EVEN, UH, DECIDE WHAT WE WANT DONE.
IF WE DO, IS IT THE SIX FOOT PIECE CUT OUT AND, AND UH, OFFER THAT IN THE MOTION? OR DO WE WANT, UH, MORE ADVICE WE WANT, UH, UH, MR. WATSON AND SOMEONE FROM VMRC TO LOOK AT IT AND GIVE US FURTHER GUIDANCE? THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DECIDE.
AND NOW MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE AF IF THE, IF THE BOARD GRANTED THE AFTER THE FACT PERMIT THAT WOULD ALLOW THIS, UM, OTHER THAN THIS DISPUTED SECTION, UM, I MEAN THE OTHER DECKING IS ALL ON LAND.
THAT'S AN ISSUE WITH SHTE, WHICH I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD'VE AN ISSUE WITH IT.
THEY DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY RULES AGAINST JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST DECKING OVER DIRT.
UM, SO THE ISSUE IS IF THE BOARD GRANTS THE AFTER THE FACT PERMIT, THIS WOULD ALLOW TO REMAIN.
UM, IF THE BOARD DID NOT GRANT IT, THIS, THAT SECTION, THIS DECKING SECTION THAT I'VE CALLED IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED.
UM, THAT WOULD LEAVE A DOCK, A PIER THAT IS NOT CONNECTED TO LAND, BUT THAT WOULD BE UP TO MR. BRITTEN TO SUBMIT PLANS SHOWING HOW HE'S GONNA CONNECT THE DOCK BACK TO LAND.
UM, IF YOU'VE GOT THAT, GOT GOT AT LEAST WHAT YOUR LAST, SO WE NEED SOME GUIDANCE.
UH, WE CAN BEAT THIS TO DEATH OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
BUT THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.
ALLOW HIM TO TAKE A PORTION OUT.
UH, AND UH, THAT'S PROBABLY SAFETY HAZARD.
WELL SIR
COAST GUARD OR SOMEBODY ANOTHER YES SIR.
JUNE, HAVE YOU ALREADY BUSTED LOTS? SOMETHING FREE? LOTS.
THE WATER ON THAT ONE NOW
[01:35:01]
BUT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU'VE DONE THE THREE LIGHTS AND OFF, I FEEL YOUR PAIN, BUT I FEEL YOUR PAIN.BUT IT'S, AS FAR AS WE ARE CONCERNED, I'M SAYING PROBLEM Y'ALL, LET'S LET'S DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
UH, AND I THINK WE'VE BEAT IT AND BEAT IT AND THERE'S NOT MUCH MORE TO TALK ABOUT.
WELL, I JUST WANTED TO BE CERTAIN THAT WE'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING.
ESPECIALLY WHEN MR. BRITTON TALKS ABOUT A SIX FOOT PORTION.
IS HE SUGGESTING THAT HE TAKE OFF THE ENTIRE PORTION THAT'S BUILT OVER THE WATER THAT'S IN DISPUTE HERE, OR A SMALLER PORTION OF THAT? BECAUSE IT'S VERY UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT EXACTLY HE IS.
WELL, IF YOU BROUGHT THE FIVE FOOT PIER ALL THE WAY INTO WHEREVER HIT LAND, WHEREVER HIT LAND, IT HITS LAND RIGHT THERE AT THAT CORRIDOR CORNER RIGHT THERE.
I, OKAY, I IS IT LAYING RIGHT THERE? I UNDERSTAND.
I'M NOT SURE THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS, WOULD, WOULD'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO COME TO SHORE.
SO WHAT IF FIVE FOOT WOULD'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO COME TO SHORE IF I PERMITTED THAT WAY.
SO WHAT MR. SHORTER THAN THE OVERALL LENGTH RIGHT? NOW I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT.
SO THIS, SO THIS IS THE CORNER OF THE BULKHEAD RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS THE AREA THAT'S BUILT OVER THE WATER.
I THINK WHAT MR. BRIT IS SUGGESTING IS THAT THE, IS THAT THE PIER BE ALLOWED TO COME STRAIGHT ALL THE WAY BACK AS OPPOSED TO ANGLE BACK TO DRY LAND HERE.
UM, AND IF THE BOARD ALLOWED HIM TO GO STRAIGHT BACK WITH THE PIER, THERE WOULD BE A SECTION IN HERE THAT WOULD BE REMOVED.
UM, WHICH I GUESS I WOULD CALL DECKING AS OPPOSED TO A PIER.
'CAUSE ALL OF THIS IS ON DRY LAND.
ON DIRT BECAUSE THE BULKHEAD RUNS SOMEWHERE DIAGONAL THROUGH HERE.
UM, JUST TO BE CLEAR WHAT HE IS SUGGESTING AND WHAT THIS CIRCUMSTANCES ARE, DO WE AT LEAST UNDERSTAND THAT PART? IT'S ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED INTO THREE LOTS, THEREFORE THAT'S THAT IT'S COMMERCIAL.
UH, IF HE TAKES THAT SIX FOOT PIECE OUT, THEN WE'RE OVER DRY JUST DIRT.
SO, UH, THAT WOULD REMEDY THAT PROBLEM.
UH, AND THE THIRD IS TO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES LOOK AT IT AND DECIDE WHAT ELSE CAN BE DONE.
SO THAT'S THE THREE THINGS WE NEED TO DECIDE AND WE NEED TO DECIDE IT NOW.
AND IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, FOR THEM TO, TO UH, STAFF TO GO THERE? AND, AND I'D LIKE Y'ALL TO RULE ON WHAT, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK PERMIT Y'ALL FOR THAT.
IT'S, IT'S RESIDENTIAL IN YOUR, IN YOUR MANUAL AND THEIR MANUAL IS COMMERCIAL AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
IT'S, IT'S NOT YOUR JURISDICTION.
UM, MR. WATSON FOR AS FAR AS THIS BOARD IS CONCERNED RIGHT NOW, IF WE REMOVE THAT SECTION, THE REST IS OVER DIRT, ET CETERA.
SO IF THAT'S, IF THE, SORRY, IF THE ENTIRE SECTION THAT WAS NOT BILLED ACCORDING TO PLAN IS REMOVED, UH, THIS PIER WHICH WOULD END RIGHT HERE WOULD NOT BE CONNECTED TO LAND BECAUSE ACCORDING TO THE PLANS, UH, WELL WE'VE NEVER RECEIVED PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED SHOWING HOW THIS PIER WOULD CONNECT TO LAND.
UH, DID YOU PROCEED THE PLANS? I
AS AS BELTS AND HAVE BEEN SET TO DEAL C WE, WE, I GUESS YOU HAVE DO, WE DO HAVE THE AS BELTS THAT ROUGHLY REFLECT WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE.
BUT, UH, THEY ARE OF COURSE NOT APPROVED BY THIS BOARD OR BY VMRC.
WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ARE PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE BOARDS BEFORE AND EITHER APPROVED OR EXEMPTED.
UM, BECAUSE THIS PEER WAS INITIALLY EXEMPT FROM REVIEW AS AN, UH, OPEN PILE PEER.
SO, UM, WHATEVER THE, FOR THE, THE BOARD NEVER APPROVED THE PEER BEGIN WITH.
THE WHOLE PERIOD DIDN'T, IT DIDN'T HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU.
SO, UH, SO NOW WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE, UH, I MEAN WE JUST HAVE THIS UNPERMITTED AREA THAT IS NOW, UH, THE BOARD HAS THE PLANS WITH AN AMENDED JPA, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY IT IS A VIOLATION 'CAUSE IT WAS BUILT NOT ACCORDING TO PLANS AND UM, THE BOARD COULD TREAT IT AS AN OPEN PILE PIER.
I'M SUGGESTING THAT IT'S MUCH MORE THAN AN OPEN PILE PIER BECAUSE IT'S A LOT BIGGER THAN IT NEEDS TO BE.
AND IT'S COVERING UP WHAT WAS INITIALLY A VIOLATION WHERE THE BULK WAS BUILT.
UM, BUT I DO RECOGNIZE IT BECOMES VERY CONFUSING AFTER THAT EXACTLY HOW THIS IS GONNA BE RESOLVED.
UH, MAY I PLEASE, UH, REMIND THE BOARD THAT NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, IT'S GONNA BE REMOVED.
IT'S GONNA BE REVIEWED, UH, BY VMRC AND THEY WILL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION BECAUSE WE HAD TWO FIRST MAIN THING BECAUSE WE HAD TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS.
WE'RE WE'RE SAYING EVEN THOUGH IT'S THREE HOUSES THERE, IT'S STILL PRIVATE BECAUSE IT'S NOT PUBLICLY OWNED OR IT'S TOWN OWNED OR STATE OWNED.
[01:40:01]
JEAN WAYNE, LISTEN TO ME.IT IS, BUT WE HAVE TO START IT BECAUSE, UH, VMRC WILL NOT.
SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA TAKE THE BALL AND GO FROM THERE AND THEY WILL DECIDE ULTIMATELY WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT? SO LET ME PLAY THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.
WE CAN BRING IT LIKE, LIKE JUNIOR WAS SAYING, WE CAN BRING IT BEFORE THE THING BECAUSE OUR DEFINITION IS DIFFERENT THAN THE STATES AND THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE GET THAT, THAT DEFINITION WILL BE CLARIFIED IF WE DO ACT ON IT.
THAT THAT IS CORRECT IN OUR MOTION.
IT'LL BE OUR INTERPRETATION OF IT.
AND IF WE'RE WRONG, WE'RE WRONG.
I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT A QUESTION TOO.
ARE WE, ARE WE VOTING ON 2025 SIR? 20 25, 12 63.
THE, THE, THE, UM, REVISION, UH, THE, UH, YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE UH, THE NUMBER IS? YEAH.
UH, I NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE NEW, WHAT THIS NEW, UH, PERMIT IS.
HERE'S AN ILT DRAWING THE ONE, IT WAS EXACTLY WHERE IT STARTED.
NOW THE NEW EDGE THAT I SAVED WOULD BE IN VIOLATION IF WE CALLED OUT VIOLATION.
WHAT IS YOUR NEW, WHAT IS YOUR NEW APPLICATION? NO, DO YOU HAVE, HAVE, WHERE'S YOUR NEW APPLICATION NUMBER? JPA NUMBER ON THAT? THIS IS THE ONE THAT I SUBMITTED.
IS THAT 1263? UH, PAUL, WHAT? I BELIEVE SO, YES.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT IT, THAT DEFENSE IS VIOLATION.
I BELIEVE IT'S 2 0 2 5 DASH 1263.
CAN YOU PULL THAT UP AND MAKE SURE THAT'S THE, UH, REVISED APPLICATION? JPA NUMBER HERE IT IS RIGHT HERE.
I, UH, YES I DO HAVE AN EMAIL FROM BMRC.
SO, SO DOES EVERYONE HAVE IT? EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE? THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
ALRIGHT, SO DO, DO DOES IT EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT WE ARE CALLING THIS RIGHT OR WRONG AND OUR MOTION WILL INCLUDE IT AND THEN IT GOES TO VMRC AND THEY CAN CALL IT WHATEVER THEY WANT.
EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE AS FAR AS THAT IS CONCERNED.
OKAY, BUT I GOT THIS CLAIM OF THE DRAWING RIGHT HERE.
SO WHERE IS GOT IT RIGHT HERE.
OKAY, SO WHERE IS THE DECK? THE DECK IS HERE AND THAT'S WHY I'M HAVING A PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING.
YEAH, UH, HE CAN PULL IT BACK OUT FOR YOU PLEASE.
PAUL, PULL IT, PULL IT BACK UP.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? OKAY, ON THIS, THIS THING IS OVER HERE OR IS THAT, THAT'S THE PIER RIGHT NOW AS WE SEE THERE.
AND HE PUT DECKING HERE? THAT IS CORRECT.
THIS, SIR, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT STARTING, I'LL HOLD THAT UP.
JUST WHERE YOU'RE SITTING, YOU CAN BE CLEARED UP FOR YOU.
UH, IS, I BELIEVE THAT IS THIS RIGHT HERE? I THINK THAT WAS CLEAR IT UP MORE.
THAT'S WHAT YOU GOT IT LIKE THAT? YEAH, LIKE THAT.
UH, SO ARE WE ON THE SAME PAGE WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE, THE MOVE PART BE PART THAT'S IN VIOLATION OF GENE WAYNE OR DO YOU UNDERSTAND GEORGE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND? I THINK SO, YES.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT LEAST? ALRIGHT.
UH, WHERE ARE WE, UH, IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR JPA? ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE FLOOR.
I'M GONNA OPEN IT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS? JPA? I'M GONNA CLOSE THE FLOOR.
I'M GONNA OPEN IT TO COMMENT FROM THE BOARD ONE MORE TIME.
ANYBODY GOT ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY COMMENTS?
[01:45:02]
YES, SIR.I DON'T THINK, FROM WHAT I CAN SEE, THERE'S CLEARLY AN AREA IN OUR JURISDICTION WHICH IS FULLY SHADED BECAUSE OF THE DECKING.
UH, IT'S UNFORTUNATE, BUT I, AND HE DIDN'T PAY MITIGATION FOR THAT AREA, WHICH IS COVERED.
I THINK THE BEST SOLUTION IS FOR MR. WATSON.
MR. BRITTON AND WHOEVER FROM THE MRC GET TOGETHER AND CUT A SECTION OUT.
IT DOES NOT, THE, THE HOLE DOESN'T NECESSARILY, IN MY OPINION, HAVE TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO THE WATER.
IT CAN JUST BE A HOLE WITH A RAILING AROUND IT.
AND BECAUSE OF THAT HOLE, THAT WETLAND'S GONNA RECEIVE SUNLIGHT AND BE PRESERVED.
NO VEGETATED WETLANDS UNDER IT.
I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT THERE WAS NO, NO, NO NON VEGETATED.
'CAUSE IT'S A VALID POINT, BUT THERE IS NOTHING THERE.
ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT HE, UH, TURN IT INTO EDGE? THAT
SO I THOUGHT THAT, OKAY, HERE'S SOME UNDERNEATH THAT DECK THAT THE TIDE FALL AND RISE ON THAT BULKHEAD? YES.
OR IS THERE ANY AREA THAT IS DRY? I IT THINK IT RISE FALLS ON THE BULKHEAD.
IS THAT AN AGREEMENT? WE ALL AGREE THAT, THAT IT DOES PAUL, CLEAR THAT UP FOR US.
MS. GOMAN AND I WERE OUT THERE.
THERE, THERE WAS, THERE WERE WETLANDS.
UM, AS MR. BRITTON SAYS, OBVIOUSLY THE TIDES ARE DIFFERENT.
I GUESS THIS MORNING'S LOW TIDE.
IT WHAT HE SAYS IT WAS ON THE BULKHEAD.
WE SAW IT WHEN IT WAS BELOW THE BULKHEAD.
IT RIDES AND IT IT RISES AND FALLS ON THE BULKHEAD.
YEAH, WHEN WE SAW IT, IT WAS BELOW THE BULKHEAD.
YOU GO DOWN, IT'S THE SAME THING.
THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
EITHER EBBS OUT PAST THE BULKHEAD OR IT RISES OR IT, UH, RISES ON THE BULKHEAD.
JUST TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, WE SAW WETLANDS.
WE SAW WETLANDS WHEN WE WERE OUT THERE.
THE, THE LARGEST PART OF THE DECKING.
NOT TO THE, NOT THE DOCK TO THE LEFT, BUT DECKING TO THE RIGHT.
IS THAT ON DIRT OR IS THAT OVER? WELL IN, WELL, THIS AREA.
WHAT, WHAT WAS BULKHEAD? UM, AND WITH DECKING OVER TOP OF IT, IT'S ONLY THIS AREA WHERE THE BULKHEAD WAS PULLED BACK ORIGINALLY BECAUSE IT WASN'T BUILT TO PLAN.
AND NOW, NOW, AND NOW IT'S BEEN COVERED WITH IT WITH YOUR PEN.
PLEASE, UH, SHOW US WHERE IT WAS WHEN YOU WENT OUT THERE ON UPTIGHT.
UM, SEE, I WAS LOOKING UNDER HERE AND HERE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S ALONG, YOU KNOW, JUST RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE FACE ALONG HERE.
SO, MR. CHAIR, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE, I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN CHAIR THIS MORNING AT LOW TIDE.
WE WAITED TO COME DOWN HERE FOR LOW TIDE.
I GO THERE EVERY, HE BUILT IT.
I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN PROCEED UNLESS, UH, UH, EVERYTHING IS INCLUDED AND WE, UH, LOOK AT IT.
DID YOU EVER HAVE JURISDICTION OR IF THEY HERE THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THE THE OTHER THING IS TOO, UM, I MEAN I'M AT ODDS.
I SAY, UH, DO Y'ALL REMEMBER WHEN I MADE THAT, UH, ABOUT THE JUNIOR PAN? THE, UH, MITIGATION, IT WAS FOR THE BOTTOM AND IF IT WAS, IF IT'S WRITTEN CORRECTLY IN THE MINUTES AND THE MONEY SHOULD HAVE GONE TO ACK COUNTY'S THING, IT WASN'T FOR A FINE.
AND I, I KNOW WE'RE DIRECTLY, IT'S GONE.
BUT, BUT THAT, THAT'LL BE, THAT'LL BE IN MINUTES.
I'VE GOTTA SAY MY WORD AGAINST YOUR, THAT'LL BE IN MINUTES RIGHT THERE.
SO I I WOULDN'T HAVE THOSE CHECKED.
THE OTHER THING IS, IS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, LIKE YOU SAID RIGHT NOW, IF I WENT AND BOUGHT THAT THING, I DROPPED TWO LOT LINES.
AM I RIGHT? IF I WENT AND BOUGHT JUNIOR'S THAT PROPERTY RIGHT TODAY AND I DROPPED TWO LOT LINES, IT WOULD BE PRIVATE PROPERTY AGAIN AND THOSE THAT THIS WHOLE OPERATION WOULD BE BY.
[01:50:01]
SAYING THAT IF THIS WAS A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL PARCEL? YEAH.SO I'M SAYING IS, SO WE'RE, WE'RE, SO WE'RE, WE'RE FIGHTING OVER SOMETHING.
LIKE I SAID, IT'S NOT, IT'S THE, WHICH MEANS CHANGES.
THIS WHOLE THING IS OUR TWO DEFINITIONS IS THE NON-COMMERCIAL.
WE DON'T CONSIDER IT COMMERCIAL BECAUSE WE GOT PROBABLY BECAUSE IT'S JUST THREE PEOPLE AND YOU CONSIDER IT COMMERCIAL.
UM, BUT THAT'S OUR TWO, THAT'S OUR AS A WELL WELL WE CAN VOTE ON TODAY.
AND BECAUSE OF THE TWO DEFINITIONS, YOU CAN OVERTURN IT BECAUSE YOUR DEFINITION, WE CAN APPROVE IT BECAUSE OF OUR DEFINITION.
HE HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION CALLING THIS A COMMERCIAL PEER HIMSELF.
YOU HAVE GOOGLE WRITTEN YOU'ALL HAVE THE DECISION ALREADY? NO, BECAUSE BECAUSE UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES NOW HMM.
OVER THIS FORM, WE HAVE NOT TAKEN ANY ACTION YET.
YOU AND I HAD A DISCUSSION ON SITE.
AND THAT'S THE EXTENT MADE YET WE HAVE NOT ISSUED ANYTHING FORMALLY.
BECAUSE WHAT YOU JUST SAID, WE CAN'T, BECAUSE OF THE APPLICATION BEING SUBMITTED AS COMMERCIAL, WE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY ADMITTED THAT IT'S COMMERCIAL.
EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT OUR DEFINITION COMMERCIAL, IT'S B-M-R-C-C, SUBMIT IT TO BM RC FOR THAT REASON.
SO WE CAN'T ACT ON IT KNOWING THAT, LIKE I SAID, 'CAUSE IT'S COMMERCIAL.
IF IT, IF YOU SUBMITTED AS PRIVATE, THEN WE COULD HAVE A THING.
BUT LIKE I SAID, BECAUSE YOU SUBMITTED AS COMMERCIAL, UM, YOU'VE ALREADY ADMITTED AS COMMERCIAL.
I I KNOW, BUT YOU GET WHAT? YOU GET WHAT WE'RE SAYING, UH, US YOU CAN'T HAVE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? I MEAN, I THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THAT DOES THE WHOLE THING.
I CAN'T SAY IN, IN A, IN A MOTION THAT WE CONSIDER IT A PRIVATE DOC WHEN IT'S BEEN ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AS A COMMERCIAL DOC BY THE APPLICANT.
YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING? YES.
I CAN'T DO, I CAN'T DO THAT AS, AS THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR CLARIFI CASE.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFI CASE.
I KNOW WE LOOK LIKE WE'RE AT OZ, BUT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE ON THE SAME THING.
LIKE I SAID, WE WANT IT BE FAIR TO EVERYBODY, BUT WE CAN'T APPROVE IT AS A, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE SAYING OUR DEFINITION, IT'S PROBABLY NOT BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED AS COMMERCIAL.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, WE CAN'T, WE, OUR HANDS ARE, SO DOES OUR, CAN WE USE AN APP? UH, CAN WE VOTE ON THIS AS COMMERCIAL, YES OR NO? UM, IF THE BOARD CONSIDERS THIS COMMERCIAL, THAT JUST MEANS IT'S NOT A PERMITTED ACTIVITY.
MEANING THE BOARD DOES HAVE ABSOLUTE JURISDICTION OVER IT.
AND AND THEREFORE A BOARD VOTE IS REQUIRED.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EXEMPT FROM BOARD REVIEW.
PRIVATE IS EXEMPT PUBLIC UNDER OUR ORDINANCE IS NOT EXEMPT.
UM, AND IF SO, SO IF WE, UH, VOTE ON THIS, UH, JPA AS COMMERCIAL AND IT INCLUDES, UH, VARIOUS THINGS TAKING IT OUT, UH, HAS TO BE LOOKED AT, AT LEAST WE'LL MAKE SOME HEADWAY AND VMRC CAN TAKE IT FROM THERE.
DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT? IT, HE'S ALREADY SAID IT'S COMMERCIAL.
SO I THINK, UH, I DISAGREE WITH THAT, SIR.
I DISAGREE THAT IT'S COMMERCIAL.
WELL, SIR, YOU BUT YOU, I CALLED IT COMMERCIAL.
WELL YOU APPLIED COMMERCIAL BECAUSE I WAS TOLD TO BY THEM.
I DIDN'T HAVE THE CHOICE TO DO IT.
WELL, I DIDN'T HAVE A CHOICE TO DO A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY'RE READING, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT GOING LOOK CHEAP OR ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
UH, UH, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY SUGGEST A ALTERNATE HALFWAY THOUGHT HERE, THAT WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND, AND NOT NECESSARILY PROVE, BUT BASICALLY SAY THAT THIS IS OUT OF OUR JURISDICTION.
THAT THERE'S NO, WITH THE CONTINGENCY, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE BELIEVE THAT THERE'S NO WETLANDS IMPACTED AND WE PROCEED AS SUCH.
CAN I MAKE THAT OFFER AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THIS? THAT WE BASICALLY, IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION AND IF WE FIND OUT OTHERWISE WE CAN REVISIT IT.
WELL, WE'LL SEE WHERE YOU USE AS A CLEARING HOUSE.
WE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE OVERLOOKED.
YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING WE DO IS, BUT WE, AS WE'RE THE CLEARING HOUSE, I THAT'S, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A JURISDICTION DOCS AND STUFF THAT WE APPROVE, THAT'S A PART OF OUR, OUR CLEARINGHOUSE IS, IS REALLY WHAT WE ARE AND WE HAVE TO START THE BALL ROLLING.
I MEAN, I MEAN NOT, I MEAN, I CAN PUT DEVILS ADVOCATE AND PROVE IT AS A, AS A, A COMMERCIAL.
BASICALLY THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO IMPACT TO ANY WETLANDS, THAT THIS IS OUTSIDE OUR JURISDICTION.
AND THEN IF WE FIND OUT OTHERWISE ON SUBSTANTIAL VISITS THAT IT IS, WE REVISIT THIS.
SO THE MOTION WOULD INCLUDE NO VEG IMPACT, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO, NO VEG OR NO UNVEGETATED WETLANDS IMPACT.
BUT THAT'S NOT THE STATUS SAYING THOUGH ARE WELL THAT, AND THAT'S THE POINT I'M GETTING AT.
IF WE FIND OUT OTHER, IF WE GET NUMBERS AND WE FIND OUT OTHERWISE THAT WE REVISIT
[01:55:01]
THIS PERMIT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT STAFF IS SAYING.I'M, I'M NOT SURE IF WE, I MEAN THAT'S NOT A PATHWAY.
MAYBE YOU HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT, BUT I THINK ONCE THE BOARD MAKES A DECISION, IT, IT BECOMES, YOU KNOW, FINAL.
UM, AND, AND THE BOARD IS PRETTY LIMITED IN BEING ABLE TO GO BACK AND, AND RECONSIDER, UM, I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE RULES TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT THE, OKAY, SO WE'RE BACK TO THE POINT WHERE I DISCUSSED, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF VEGETATIVE WEST.
SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE A CONTINUANCE ON THIS UNTIL WE GET SOME EXACT NUMBERS ON THIS.
OR THERE IS A MOTION AND YOU DON'T HAVE UH, UH, THREE A VOTE.
HOW HARD IS IT AND IT DOESN'T PASS, PULL UP THAT MITIGATION.
UM, WELL IT, I HAVE TO KNOW THAT HEARING IS, IT WAS BEFORE I WAS HERE.
THE ONLY, WELL THE ONLY RECOLLECTION I HAVE IS DURING THE LAST VIOLATION HEARING, IT WAS WOULD'VE BEEN AT 20 23 0 6, 5 7.
IT WAS THAT, YEAH, IT, IT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST VIOLATION HEARING AND I THOUGHT AGREED THAT IT WAS NOT THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE WERE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS.
IT WAS A VI YOU KNOW, THAT VIC OR MR. BRITTON PAID THAT FOR A VIOLATION AND NOT, MY THING WAS THAT I COULDN'T GET HIM TO LET ME PLANT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT GOING TO LIVE AND THEREFORE YOU HAVE TO PAY THE MITIGATION FOR IT.
I DON'T THINK HE HAD ANYTHING IF REMEMBERS ANY OF THIS, BUT AS I SAID, I DON'T REMEMBER IT BEING A PART OF A VIOLATION.
DO YOU READ IN A MINUTE? YEAH, I'M SAYING WE NEED TO READ THE MINUTES THAT WAY.
NOT CAN BE, I CAN CERTAINLY DO WRONG, BUT I JUST SAY I THINK THAT JUST, UM, JUST SEE WHAT IT WAS IN A MINUTES.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT.
THAT WAY WE'RE NOT ABOUT IS WELL IF WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A LIST OF THINGS TO DO THAT WOULD CERTAIN BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
IF, IF, IF WE HAVE TO COME BACK ON THIS, I CERTAINLY CAN, CAN FIND THAT PRETTY EASILY.
I THINK THE WAY TO GO IS, UH, CONTINUANCE, UH, BASED ON REVIEW OF THE MINUTES AS WELL AS OTHER THINGS, UH, AND, AND PUT THIS IN NEXT MONTHS AFTER.
UH, 'CAUSE THAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT, LIKE I SAID, OVER LAND ALREADY MITIGATED FOR OVER LAND MITIGATED BECAUSE OF THE FINE FARM.
I MEAN THAT TO ME THAT'S A TOTAL, TOTAL DIF TWO TOTAL DIFFERENT, UM, YOU WERE AWARE IF THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT PLANTING THAT AGAIN, I IF YOU DECIDED THAT PLANTS WOULDN'T STAY THERE, BECAUSE I COULD BE WRONG.
I PROMISE YOU, I'M 65 YEAR OLDS AND I PROMISE YOU I COULD BE WRONG.
I PROMISE YOU I CAN BE WRONG, BUT LIKE I SAID, MINUTES ARE MINUTES.
AND WHERE THE MONEY WENT IS WHERE THE MONEY WENT.
IT WENT TO A FINE, IT WENT TO THE STATE OF VIRGINIA.
IF IT WAS, IT DON'T TAKE FINES, I DON'T THINK ON THE WETLANDS BOARD COUNTY.
LIKE I SAID, THAT WENT TO THE WETLANDS BOARD.
IT WAS FOR RE MAKING OTHER, UH, MARSH PROPERTY SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO LIKE I SAID, AND I PROMISE YOU I CAN'T BE WRONG.
WE'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE AND I, AND I'LL APOLOGIZE AS LONG AS Y'ALL GO TO BA BEHIND I HERE, I WANTED, I CAN'T GET THE SIZE TENS, TENS AND TWENTIES.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO, UH, MAKE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE BASED ON VARIOUS THINGS, AND I THINK IT'S YOUR JOB.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UH, HAVE SPEAK UP ONE MONTH CONTINUANCE ON THE 2025 DASH 1263, UM, NUMBER AND THE MRC AND LIKE I SAY, AND WE DO WANT TO GET THE, UH, HOW THE MITIGATION THAT OVER THIS, OVER THIS AREA THAT'S IN QUESTION WAS PAID FOR.
WAS IT PAID FOR BY A FUND OR WAS IT PAID FOR, FOR ACTUAL MITIGATION TO, UH, MAKE A WETLAND SOMEWHERE ELSE? AND MAY I, AND ALSO, IF THERE ARE WETLANDS IMPACTED TO WET, WE NUMBER SPECIFICALLY YEAH, YOU GET THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF WETLANDS, UH, THAT ARE ACTUALLY THERE THAT MAY OR MAY HAVE NOT BEEN MITIGATED FOR IN, IN THE PAST.
DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THE MOTION YOU STAY OUT OF? UH, SECOND.
WE'RE UNANIMOUS BASED ON THE, UH, CHANGES AND SO FORTH.
SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE THIS UNTIL NEXT MONTH.
EVERYONE ON THE SAME PAGE? EVERYONE UNDERSTAND MR. WATSON, DO YOU UNDERSTAND? I DO.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF, UH, ANY VIOLATION, NEW BUSINESS, OLD BUSINESS.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT, MR. WATSON? I DO.
MR. LEE PAMED, WOULD YOU APPROACH, PLEASE? UH, YOU'VE BEEN SWORN IN IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
UM, MR. PAMED HAS SOME, UH, THOUGHTS AND SOME THINGS WE NEED TO KNOW, SIR.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UM, LEAD HIM WITH DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
I JUST WANTED TO COVER THREE REALLY,
[02:00:02]
UH, UH, GENERAL THINGS.UH, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT RECRUITING.
I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT A SCAM THAT WE'VE BEEN MADE, UH, RECENTLY AWARE OF.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.
WE HAD REPORTED THAT AN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER WAS HIRED, BUT THAT, UH, BUT THAT, UM, UH, THAT NEW HIRE HAS SINCE LEFT AFTER FIVE WEEKS AND NOW WORKS FOR NORTH HAMPTON HAMPTON.
SO WE ARE GONNA BE REOPENING THE RECRUITMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER AND OR ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT SPECIALIST.
SO, AS I AM, UH, AS I BRIEF YOU ON THIS RECRUITMENT OCCASIONALLY, UM, I USUALLY ASK YOU ALL TO BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR NEW GRADUATES OR FOR ANYBODY THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD HAVE THE REQUISITE SKILLS AND, UH, EXPERIENCE IN THE EDUCATION OR CREDENTIALS TO, UH, TO DISCHARGE THOSE DUTIES.
SO, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO BE OPENING UP THAT RECRUITMENT PROBABLY HERE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
WHAT IS THAT JOB TITLE, SIR? UM, THERE, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER SLASH INSPECTOR.
RIGHT? AND THEN THERE'S ALSO AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT SPECIALIST POSITION THAT'S ALSO, UH, THAT'S ALSO VACANT.
THE SECOND POINT IS A SCAM THAT, UM, THAT WE HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE OF OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS.
UH, IT FIRST STARTED IN HANOVER COUNTY, WHERE WE HAVE, UH, UH, BAD ACTORS WHO ARE DOING A VERY GOOD AND CONVINCING JOB OF COMING UP WITH THESE INVOICES.
IT'S GOT COUNTY SEALS, IT'S GOT LOCALITY, SEALS, UH, PERSON'S NAME, WHAT THEIR, UH, WHAT THEIR CASE NUMBER IS.
AND THEY SAY THAT IF YOU DON'T PAY THIS, UH, THIS FEE, YOU KNOW THAT, THAT THEIR FEES MAY BE OUTSTANDING AND YOU HAVE TO GO WIRE SOME MONEY OR PAY WITH, UH, WITH, UH, UH, WITH GIFT CARDS.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT ON THE FACE, IT'S A VERY CONVINCING, UH, IT'S A VERY CONVINCING DOCUMENT THAT MAY CAUSE SOMEBODY TO, UH, TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, AND PAY THAT.
BUT OUR SUGGESTION IS FOR, AND WE HAVE SEVERAL, UH, APPLICANTS HERE IN THE, IN THE ROOM THAT, UM, IF YOU SEE SOMETHING AND IT DOESN'T QUITE LOOK RIGHT, UH, TALK TO THE STAFF MEMBER THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH TO JUST VERIFY THAT, UM, THAT THAT IS THE, UH, THAT'S THE FEE THAT NEEDS TO BE PAID, OR THAT IT IS INDEED A, UM, UH, A FABRICATED, UH, UH, DOCUMENT.
SO I GET, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM AWARE OF THAT.
IF, UM, UH, AND WE ACTUALLY POSTED SOMETHING ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND, AND ON THE, UH, UH, ON THE COUNTY WEBSITE, THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IS AWARE.
AND IF, UH, AND THE ADVICE THERE IS IF SOMEONE HAS PAID, THEN TALK TO THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
YOU CAN CALL THEIR NON-EMERGENCY NUMBER.
UM, THE THIRD ITEM IS OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO WE HAVE KICKED OFF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWRITE.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS REQUIRED BY STATE CODE TO BE REVIEWED EVERY FIVE YEARS.
WE'RE A LITTLE BIT LATE ON THAT, AS THE LAST TIME WE DID THAT WAS 2018, BUT THAT'S OKAY FOR NOT SETTING THE STATE POLICE AFTER ANYBODY FOR BEING LATE ON THAT.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE, UH, WE HAVE, UM, UH, UH, CONTRACTED WITH THE BERKELEY GROUP AND THEY WERE HERE ON THE SHORE MONDAY AND TUESDAY TO, UH, TO TAKE A TOUR TO TALK TO STAFF, AND, UM, EVEN, UH, MOST IMPORTANTLY TO, UH, UH, TO GO THROUGH A JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS WAS DONE AT THE LIBRARY IN PARSLEY AT, UH, FIVE 30 THIS PAST TUESDAY.
AND, UH, YOU CAN EXPECT TO HEAR A LOT MORE IN TERMS OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OR CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT OVER THE NEXT, UH, OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.
THE BULK OF THAT IS GONNA BE DONE AT THE END OF APRIL AND THE BEGINNING OF MAY, BUT PART OF THIS, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REWRITE IS ALSO A DIAGNOSTIC OF HOW WE'RE DOING IN TERMS OF, UM, UH, COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW.
AND OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, STATE CODE HAS CHANGED, OR STATE LAW HAS CHANGED TO, UH, TO REALLY RATCHET UP THE AMOUNT OF ATTENTION THAT LOCALITIES ARE PAYING FROM A COASTAL RESILIENCE STANDPOINT, COASTAL PROTECTION STANDPOINT.
SO I EXPECT, UM, THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE MAY BE REACHING OUT TO YOU ALL INDIVIDUALLY TO, UH, GET YOUR, UH, TO GET YOUR OPINIONS ON THAT ASPECT.
BUT, UH, IN TERMS OF CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE FOUR POPUPS, WHICH IS NOTHING MORE THAN STAFF GOING TO SOME, UH, HIGH TRAFFIC, HIGH FOOT TRAFFIC AREAS, AND JUST GETTING SOME, UM, JUST GETTING SOME COMMENT THAT WAY.
THERE ARE GONNA BE A COUPLE OF WORKSHOPS, UM, AND THERE ARE GONNA BE FOUR MORE JOINT WORK SESSIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
SO EXPECT TO SEE A LOT OF ACTIVITY OVER THE NEXT, UH,
[02:05:01]
REALLY YEAR AND A HALF.WE HOPE TO WRAP THIS PROCESS UP IN, UH, AUGUST OF 2027 NEXT YEAR.
BUT THIS IS A REALLY, UH, IMPORTANT DOCUMENT IN TERMS OF SETTING THE GOALS, SETTING THE VISION FOR THE NEXT 20 TO 30 YEARS.
I'M GONNA PAUSE THERE AND ASK IF ANYONE'S GOT ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, SOME OPENINGS, LIKE WE, WE PREFER AN IN-HOUSE HIRING
A WHAT? AN IN-HOUSE HIRING FOR ADVANCEMENT.
AND, AND WE, SO LIKE I SAID, THIS COME FROM ME.
NO, COMES FROM A COUPLE OF US.
UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING AT
UM, WHEN THAT RECRUITMENT OPENS UP, IT WILL BE OPEN TO, UH, BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL APPLICANTS.
AND OF COURSE, THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE BASED OFF OF WHO IS THE MOST, UH, QUALIFIED.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. DEN? THANK YOU, SIR.
UH, IF YOU'LL ALLOW, I WILL CLOSE THE FLOOR AND OPEN THE FLOOR TO TOTAL PUBLIC COMMENT, NO PUBLIC COMMENT OR CLOSE THE FLOOR.
ANY, UH, FINAL DIS THOUGHTS FROM THE BOARD? ANY QUESTIONS? ANY THOUGHTS, ANY COMMENTS? CLOSE THE FLOOR.
OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE APRIL THE 23RD, 10 O'CLOCK, RIGHT HERE IN LOVELY MACK.
UH, CALL FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
PASS THAT PAPER DOWN SO I CAN.