November 19, 2001

The Town Council of the Town of Easton met today at 7:00 P.M.

The meeting was called to order by the President of the Council, Mr. Willey.

The following Council members were present: Mr. Ford, Mr. Jensen, Mr. Reed, Ms. Jackson-Amis and President of the Council Mr. Willey. Also attending the meeting were Mayor C. Eugene Butler, Chief of Police George Harvey, Town Engineer Mr. Tim Glass, Assistant Town Engineer Mr. Joe Gruber, Town Attorney Christopher Kehoe and Town Clerk Mr. Karge.

Also attending the meeting was Mr. John Atwood, Planning and Zoning Commission.

Mr. Jensen opened the meeting with prayer. He led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Upon motion by Mr. Reed seconded by Ms. Jackson and carried, minutes of the November 5, 2001 meetings were unanimously approved as written.

Mr. John Yorkilous was present to address the Council regarding the Dickens of a Christmas Parade. Mr. Yorkilous stated that he is a member of the Dickens of a Christmas Old Tyme Holiday Committee. He stated that the parade this year is December 1 at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Yorkilous stated that the parade will start after the lighting of the Christmas parade by Annapolis Paint. He discussed the participants and awards for the evening. Mr. Yorkilous read invitations for the Mayor and Council. He invited everyone to come out and enjoy the evening.

Mr. John F. Ward was present to address the Council regarding information related to the proposed Easton Economic Development Coordinator position, which was presented at the November 5 Council meeting.

Mr. Ward referred to the guideline documents submitted to the Council November 13 for information purposes. He stated that he obtained these documents and information at an all day session in Annapolis November 7 entitled Organization for Downtown Revitalization which was sponsored by the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development and conducted the a member of the National Main Street Center in Washington, DC. Mr. Ward stated that tonight, he would like to reiterate two of the three points made in the written statement which were based on the points emphasized in the Annapolis meeting. Mr. Ward stated that a program manager should report and respond only to decisions of a controlling body. The second point is a firm commitment for adequate funds for the manager’s salary and benefits for a three-year period to avoid the manager having to solicit for funds and grants. Mr. Ward asked the Council to discuss these points in their deliberation to assure the creation lines and authority and accountability. He stated that this position should be funded under the General Operating Budget of the Town. Mr. Ward discussed the private sector’s position. Mr. Ward thanked the Mayor and Council for their attention.

Mr. Ford stated that in reference to Mr. Ward’s presentation, the Council will introduce an ordinance tonight to establish this position. Mr. Ford suggested to the Council, in conjunction with the first reading of this ordinance, the Council set a public hearing date regarding this position to make sure all public input has been received.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she would like to be heard before a motion is made. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she is understanding from the memo received from Mr. Kehoe, that if we have an ordinance, that this would change the position as it has been originally thought or discussed from an employee to an official which changes the relationship. Ms. Jackson-Amis asked if the Council should decide ahead of time to whom the person is going to respond. She stated that if the information Mr. Ward distributed is reviewed, it suggests one of two alternatives. For example, if the manager reports to the board, the board would be outside of the authority of the town to the extent that the town does not employ that group and that board would then be responsible, under the information received, for funding or finding funding for that position. She stated that on the other hand, if the employee or if the person is an employee of the town, then the apparent lines, the Mayor and Town Council, what is the relevant merit of doing that as opposed to hiring the person as a town employee first or at least clarifying some of the issues that clearly have been raised by discussion as suggested by Mr. Ward’s presentation.

Mr. Kehoe stated that the proposed ordinance makes it clear that the person that the Council appoints would be a town official as opposed to a town employee. He stated that this is not a change as the discussion as he understands it all along from the Mayor and Council, is that the person would be nominated by the Mayor and approved by the Council, a process normally associated with being an official of the town. He stated that the distinction is simply that an employee follows orders and an official is expected to exercise their judgement in the discharge of whatever duties they have. Mr. Kehoe discussed employee versus official positions. He stated that the distinction is to make it clear that this person is an official. Mr. Kehoe discussed litigation procedures under Maryland law concerning officials and employees. The Town Attorney stated that the next issue concerns ordinance versus just hiring and he stated that this part and parcel of the first issue. The Town Attorney stated that the third part is what does the ordinance say about the fact of whether or not the Economic Development Coordinator reports to the Mayor and through the Mayor to the Council, or should the Development Coordinator report to a separate commission. He stated that the Ordinance before the Council tonight, states that the Economic Development Coordinator is an official of the town who reports to the Mayor, the day to day Chief Executive of the Town and the Council is the policy makers of the town.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she wants to be real clear for her own purposes, that if the reporting is to the Mayor and to the Council versus reporting to the board as was recommended by the Task Force as she understands them, then it makes a difference to her in terms of who has the authority and as was suggested, there should not be two masters, there should be only one but the more pressing problem is if the person is going to report to an outside board over which the Council and Mayor have no official authority because they are now hired by the town or not appointed by the Mayor, that if that is the case, why would there be an ordinance because they are outside of the parameters.

The Town Attorney stated that if the intention of the Council is to have someone who would report to the Mayor then the ordinance or some variance should be passed. He stated that if the intention is to fund a person who is employed by an outside group, then their compensation should be partially funded by the town.

The President of the Council asked for the Council’s pleasure regarding a public hearing for the Economic Development Coordinator. It was the consensus of the Council to set a public hearing. The President of the Council set the public hearing for December 17 at 7:15 p.m.

Mr. John Murray, Esq., was present to discuss the request by Meadow Farm Joint Venture and Mr. and Mrs. Gannon to down zone portions of their property they own at the intersection of Airport Road and Old Centreville Road just north of the Easton Airport. Mr. Murray stated that presently the property is zoned Limited Industrial and is in the jurisdiction of Talbot County just beyond the Town of Easton boundary. He stated that the driving purpose of this request for down zoning is to provide a site for a new Lowe’s Home Improvement store. Mr. Murray stated that the property is approximately 23 ½ acres. Mr. Murray passed out aerial photographs of the proposed site outlined in yellow.

Mr. Murray stated that Lowe’s could not develop a new store within the town because of the 65,000 square foot cap on retail stores that was imposed a year or so ago. Mr. Murray stated that the Talbot County Council and the Talbot County Planning Commission considered and rejected a similar cap in the county.

Mr. Murray discussed for zoning purposes, the status and amount of commercial land in Talbot County. He stated that presently in Talbot County, there are 164,770 acres of which 955 acres are zoned General Commercial or Limited Industrial. In order to down zone this property, the county will need to be persuaded that such a down zoning is consistent with the county’s Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Murray discussed the points they will make to the county on that proposition. He stated that the property is suitable for commercial development because it is located immediately adjacent to the town, the airport, Route 50 and other existing commercial and industrial development. Mr. Murray stated that the development is consistent with current and future airport uses. He stated that there will be no residential impact on the rezoning. Mr. Murray discussed the purpose behind this request.

Mr. Murray discussed this project from the prospective of Lowe’s. He stated that Lowe’s has had a store in the county for over 24 years and their current store opened in 1993. He stated that Lowe’s has a significant commitment to the area but the current store size configuration are inefficient for stocking, for storage and inventory which causes problems for Lowe’s, its staff and customers. He stated that Lowe’s must find a place to build a modern store with a better layout, all under one roof, not outside storage somewhere in the mid-shore marketplace, which would increase shopping convenience and the number of local jobs. Mr. Murray stated that the stores similar to the one in Easton are being phased out and shut down. Mr. Murray discussed the history of Lowe’s trying to build a new store in the town of Easton for the previous three years. He stated that Lowe’s cannot expand one square foot under their current site, which makes this the subject of this down zoning request. Mr. Murray stated that the Home Depot issue is going on a parallel track with a court case pending which will decide whether a home improvement store like Lowe’s or Home Depot can be built in a Limited Industrial Zone in Talbot County. In addition, there is a bill before the voters of Talbot County in November of 2002 known as Bill 808, which will present to the voters the opportunity to decide whether or not a home improvement store should be permitted in the LI Zone. Mr. Murray stated that the point he wants to get across is that Lowe’s feels very much that they need to move forward. Mr. Murray stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Jensen stated that he realizes in Easton that there is a 65,000 square foot cap. He stated that the previous Council wanted to protect the character of Easton. Mr. Jensen asked if Lowe’s would be willing to talk to the new Council about trying to keep Lowe’s in town. Mr. Murray stated that the only solution Lowe’s sees is the one he is working on but their first choice was to be in town.

Mr. Ford stated that he has questions about the county’s zoning regulations. Mr. Ford stated that Mr. Murray referred to this as a down zoning. Mr. Ford stated that in the County’s Ordinance, if it is considered a down zoning, you do not have to prove a change or mistake. Mr. Murray stated that the county is a chartered county and the concept of change or mistake in zoning derives from Article 66B of the Maryland Code but it is not applicable in the County because it is a charter county so it has the freedom to modify that to some extent if it wishes to do so. Mr. Murray discussed the Talbot County’s Zoning Ordinance which specifically provides that unlike most rezoning, which are typically an up zoning, where change or mistake would be required to be proved, in between Comprehensive Re Zonings, that is not required. You simply need to be able to prove that it is more consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Murray discussed the term change or mistake where the applicant must establish a change in the neighborhood since the last zoning or a mistake with respect to the zoning applied.

Mr. Ford discussed his concerns with the property owner down zoning. He echoed Mr. Jensen’s concerns with the 65,000 square foot cap. Mr. Ford stated that he would be in favor of looking at expanding the store within the town limits. He discussed the effects of moving the anchor store out of that shopping center. Mr. Murray stated that Lowe’s owns the store that they are located in now and they have a great deal of confidence that within no time at all, that store would be re-configured with smaller stores in the location.

Mr. Jensen asked what could be done in terms of opening dialogue with Lowe’s regarding the site not being abandoned by them.

Mr. Murray stated that Lowe’s is being driven by time sensitivity. He stated that the only way to get back to where we were two or three years ago is to not have that cap and allow the site plan process.

Mr. Reed stated that he is not concerned with whether it is Lowe’s or Home Depot. He stated that the Town of Easton is not prepared with the road system to handle the amount of traffic that would be brought in by a large store. Mr. Reed stated that he was a little disappointed with the county when the county jumped over the line, across the street and tried to get an approval to put a Lowe’s store there.

Mr. Murray stated that he does not represent the county but it may be that the county was a little disappointed when the town did what it did. Mr. Murray, stated that secondly, that with respect to the roads, the county’s roads need to be improved near the Airport and whether or not there is a Lowe’s, all those properties out there are presently zoned for commercial and industrial use and something is going to happen unless you intend to stop all development everywhere in the county. He stated that the site plan process would determine if there is too much traffic that could not be managed, then it would not be approved.

The President of the Council addressed Mr. Atwood for any questions. He had none.

The President of the Council thanked Mr. Murray for his presentation.

The President of the Council brought a memo to the floor from the Assistant Town Engineer regarding the approval to proceed with a Letter of Intent to the Army Corps of Engineers to proceed with preliminary restoration plan for the RTC property. The President of the Council stated that he had asked the Engineering Department to brief the Council on the proposed project but he asked them to be aware that if a part of the RTC property was to be sold, it is understood what is intended for the property and make sure it all fits. Mr. Willey asked for a brief rundown of what the project is going to look like.

The Town Engineer, Mr. Tim Glass, stated that discussions have been held regarding an environmental development plan for the lower portion of the RTC property, which is west of the railroad, north of Tanyard Branch and south of Chapel Farms. The Town Engineer stated that in March of 2000, the Engineering Department was before the Council in a similar situation requesting a letter of intent that would allow the Army Corps of Engineers to work with them to develop a scheme for what they thought would be a stormwater management facility and environmental enhancement through wetland developments with a little passive park environment to the area. He stated that since that time, the Army Corps of Engineers has been heavily involved in trying to see if this project will fit in some of their funding schemes. Mr. Glass stated that a preliminary restoration plan was formed some time ago. He stated that this project also did not look like it was being considered favorably for funding but the Army Corps of Engineers got involved and they would like to look at the project again. Mr. Glass stated that the reason he is present tonight, is that the Army Corps of Engineers is trying to see again if the project fits within their funding schemes. Mr. Glass stated that the initial intention of this project was to provide a place upstream of Washington Street near the Utilities Plant to put in a regional stormwater management facility to catch the rainfall that has been discharged the storm drain network throughout the center of town across from Route 50 as far away as Golton II and Mulberry Station in hopes that they can contain that water and allow the storm drain system to work more functionally.

The Town Engineer stated that where we are tonight is just to try this project again with the Army Corp of Engineers with a letter of intent. He stated that the Town is not obligated with any cost share. He stated that if we get through this next stage which usually last about twelve months from the time they receive the letter of intent, they will have an Environmental Restoration Report in draft form for review with an estimated cost as well as a scope of what the project would be. Mr. Glass stated that if the cost were too high, the Town could get out of the project with no obligation. He stated that the sketch shows shallow ponds, wetlands with a purpose of stormwater control and environmental enhancement to address the quality of water.

The Town Engineer stated that they are asking Council’s permission to formulate a draft letter of intent.

Mr. Jensen questioned if we have to do something like this at some point. The Town Engineer stated that this project would certainly help over the long haul once more sites are developed. Mr. Jensen discussed the stormwater process.

Mr. Ford made a motion to approve a letter of intent to the Army Corps of Engineers seconded by Mr. Jensen and carried unanimously.

The President of the Council asked the Town Clerk to discuss his memo regarding sworn police officer pension options. He stated that this would change the police department’s pension to the current rule of 80 to straight 25-year retirement. Mr. Karge discussed his previous memo where he over estimated the cost. The Town Clerk stated that he needed approval from the Council to proceed with the drafting of the documents. He asked for any questions.

Mr. Jensen asked Mr. Karge to briefly explain the change. Mr. Karge stated that the current police department pension requires the sworn officers to work under a pension plan that calculates their normal retirement date under the rule of 80, one point for each year of service plus one point for each year of your age. When the two combined, reaches 80, you can retire and collect full pension. He stated that for most officers, that runs about 26 to 29 years of service. He stated that the officers have universally disliked that plan and they would much prefer to have a straight 25-year for a straight pension. He stated that this change would not be as significant of an impact as the previous rule of 80 which took a normal town employee’s normal retirement date to age 60 and drop that down in a lot of cases to 48 years old. Mr. Karge stated that under the Chief’s proposal, mandatory contribution made by the sworn officers would increase from a normal 4% of salary to 5.7% which according to the actuary, will cover the cost from here forward so in effect, the officers will be funding their own retirement.

Mr. Ford asked if there is a list of other regional police department’s offers. Mr. Karge stated that he has obtained that but does not have that with him.

Chief Harvey discussed other department’s retirements.

Mr. Ford stated that this is another way to make employment with Easton Police Department more competitive and more attractive. He stated that it will help to retain officers.

Chief Harvey stated that it is a piece of it but it is not the whole pie.

Mr. Ford stated that during his time on the council, this has been the third alteration to the police pension and he wondered if it would ever be satisfactory. Mr. Ford asked if it was fair to compare the pension plans of the other Town of Easton departments to the police department’s pension. Chief Harvey stated that it is not fair due to the nature of the work and the continuous training involved as well as many other factors. Chief Harvey stated that the point that he would like to stress is that they are not asking for the Town to contribute any more money or funding as this is strictly on the officers for their own pension.

The Town Clerk stated that the entire Town of Easton population is on the same pension plan so the Chief Executive Officer of Easton Utilities is exactly the same as the Town Clerk’s or the Town Engineer’s. He stated that Utilities, Public Works and Town of Easton all have the same plan assuming the normal retirement plan of age 60. He stated that this also goes for the non-sworn members of the police department, as the only ones we are talking about are the sworn officers.

Ms. Jackson-Amis questioned the benefit of the rule of 80. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she has heard the concern that the officers have stressed and their rational but the Town went to the rule of 80 for some reason and it had to have been a benefit so if there was, does that still pertain?

The Town Clerk stated that there are two things you deal with on a pension plan, one the length of service and the other is the benefit when you leave. The Town Clerk stated that the benefit would be the same under the current rule of 80 and the proposed 25 years and out and that benefit would be 50% of the final average earnings. He stated that the only thing being talked about changing is when you are eligible to retire, whether it is 28 years of service or straight 25 years of service.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she would be worried about so many officers leaving at the same time. The Town Clerk stated that there would only be one Captain eligible to retire today if the Council does approve the change in the sworn police officer’s pension option. He stated that the next officer would be eligible in approximately eight or nine months, the next about three years and nine months and then another two years before another is eligible. Mr. Karge stated that the department will not have a mass exodus at this current level.

Chief Harvey stated that if a higher rank retires, you are replacing the position with a lower rank so it is considerable savings across the board.

Mr. Jensen made a motion to approve the changes for the sworn police officers to the straight 25 consecutive years, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried following a roll call vote with Ms. Jackson-Amis voting no.

The President of the Council brought a letter from Ms. Alice W. Anderson, Register of wills for Talbot County, requesting two reserved parking spaces on the north/east side of West Street in the vicinity of the State’s Attorney’s Office.

The Town Engineer stated that he had spoken with Ms. Anderson. He stated that there are currently five spaces on West Street that are reserved as well as one on Dover Street and three additional signs. Mr. Glass stated that Ms. Anderson is requesting two spaces, one for the Registrar of Wills Office and the other for the Clerk of the Circuit Court. He stated that he believes these positions are elected or appointed positions with the county. Mr. Glass discussed parking in the downtown and stated that there is still an on-going problem with the 2-hour parking time limit. Mr. Glass stated that if the two spaces are not reserved, they will be available for downtown parking patrons. The Town Engineer stated that the parking spaces are being utilized by those other than patrons visiting the downtown businesses. Mr. Glass stated that the Parking and Traffic Commission had been looking at this issue.

The President of the Council asked if the Parking and Traffic Commission is still in effect. Mr. Glass stated that it may be on paper but in actuality, there has not been anything specific or reviewed. The President of the Council stated that if the group is still in effect, he would like to have a recommendation from them. The Town Engineer stated that he would like to contact the past members. He suggested studying this request.

The President of the Council introduced Ordinance No. 435, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF EASTON AMENDING THE EASTON TOWN CODE TO ESTABLISH THE POSITION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR FOR THE TOWN OF EASTON AND SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND DUTIES FOR THE POSITION" into the record.

The President of the Council brought Resolution No. 5753 to the floor authorizing a match to the Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan.

Mr. Jensen asked the Town Clerk to explain the Resolution.

The Town Clerk, Mr. Karge, discussed the request from the employees approximately five years ago to set up a deferred compensation plan, IRS Code Section 457, which lets the employees defer a part of their salary currently and shield it from taxation and then use that money when you retire and pay tax on the money at that time. Mr. Karge stated that during that time, the staff was encouraged to invest in their retirement. He stated that the plan was set up so that if there is a surplus and the Utilities has a profit, and if the employees which helped to make that profit are still employed, then a match can be contributed. He stated two goals are trying to be accomplished. Mr. Karge stated that the money does not go to the employees but goes directly to the Plan on behalf of the employee so they maintain the tax advantage.

Mr. Ford made a motion to approve Resolution No. 5753, seconded by Mr. Jensen and carried unanimously following a roll call vote.

The President of the Council, Mr. Willey stated that there was a Draft Noise Ordinance in the packet prepared by the Assistant Town Attorney, Ms. Sharon Van Emburgh at the request of Councilmember Jensen.

Mr. Jensen discussed why he felt it necessary to draft this noise ordinance. Mr. Jensen stated that the town is growing fairly rapidly and from the discussions to develop the new Comprehensive Plan, it has become clear that there is going to have to be more people on less land. He stated that in old Easton, the Town Center, there are already these kinds of densities. Mr. Jensen stated that with more people, there is more noise and noise erodes the quality of life that is enjoyed in town. Mr. Jensen stated that we need to start thinking about the future. Mr. Jensen discussed being a good neighbor and stated that this ordinance would help us in our endeavor to be good neighbors with each other. Mr. Jensen stated that people have had concerns that an ordinance like this would hurt contractors. He stated that he does not think this will happen as this ordinance would control noise before 7:00 a.m. and most contractors have not started before that time. He stated that this ordinance would allow exemptions, which could be considered.

Mr. Reed asked for Chief Harvey’s comments. Chief Harvey stated that he has two small problems on page three. He discussed warnings and stated that verbal or written needs to be clarified as well as a time the warnings are issued in. Chief Harvey discussed contractors being able to apply for a waiver before 7:00 a.m.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she has a couple questions. Ms. Jackson-Amis noted on page two, the weekend 11:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., she knows for example that Habitat has been working at 7:00 a.m. on weekends and she would like someone to consult with the people that are building to find out if these are reasonable times and why they need to start as early as they do. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she would not like to hamper, particularly those who give volunteer services, for being able to work when it is convenient. She stated that she would like to see some type of leeway given there. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that on page three, lawn care equipment in normal daytime usage, whatever that means, needs to be more specific and with the Warning Section, she hopes that written warnings will be included to avoid controversy as to whether a warning or not was issued. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she believes the fines are rather steep.

Mr. Jensen asked what fines she would find more appropriate. She asked what would happen if there were no funds to pay. She questioned how to get the message across with an effective solution without having to incarcerate people.

The Town Attorney stated that this ordinance is for discussion and drawn from other ordinances around the state. He stated that a flat $100 fine is preferable and simplifies the police department and the District Court’s paperwork. He stated that a written warning would be sufficient.

The President of the Council questioned the Variance Section. He stated that he does not believe a contractor should have to come to the Council to get authority for a variance. The Town Attorney stated this was drawn from another ordinance but he thinks the proper procedure would be to have a municipal official, the Town Planner or Building Inspector’s office look at these variances.

The Town Planner stated that the builders have a practice of starting at first light and sometimes during the year, that may be before this time. He stated that in most instances, contractors work at a site temporarily and inconvenience residents for a short period. Mr. Hamilton stated that the building community should have an opportunity to come in and explain when they like to work. The Town Planner stated that occasionally, there is a complaint about noise generated from compressors on refrigerator trucks left parked in residential neighborhoods or commercial neighborhoods adjacent to residential neighborhoods and he is not sure this is addressed in this ordinance.

Mr. Jensen questioned why in Section 3, would motors and mechanical noises caused by motor vehicles on public roads be excluded. Chief Harvey stated that State Law covers this. Mr. Jensen stated that he knows that there is a state noise ordinance. He asked what the relationship between this ordinance and the State’s Noise Ordinance is.

The Town Attorney stated that there are actually two state noise laws. He stated that there is one that has to do with bad mufflers and things like that and then MOSHA or MDE has come up with regulations regarding the noise levels at property lines. Mr. Kehoe stated that he does not believe there is a conflict between the MDE and these regulations but the MDE regulations all involve decibel readings from a noise meter and the purpose of this ordinance which does not use that approach is to make it easier for enforcement purposes.

The President of the Council asked if Ms. Van Emburgh could revise this ordinance and incorporate the changes. The Town Attorney stated it could be done.

The President of the Council brought invoices to the floor totaling $867,599.34 to the floor for payment.

Mr. Ford made a motion to approve payment of the invoices, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried unanimously.

The President of the Council reviewed the Council’s upcoming schedule.

There was no report from the Fire Department at this time.

Mayor Butler wished everyone a joyful, healthy Thanksgiving.

Chief Harvey stated that Willow Construction has requested two parking spaces to work on demolition for Rowen’s Stationery. Chief Harvey stated that the dates were not included in the letter so he will obtain this information and report to the Town Clerk for a telephone poll from the Council.

Mr. Jensen asked how quickly the renovations would be started. Chief Harvey thought that the last proposal was for six months but the work was to be started yesterday but nothing has been set up as of today. Mr. Jensen asked that the period be looked at because this could be a real time sensitive issue.

Chief Harvey stated that the second request he has is for a Peace Prayer Walk from Easton Church of the Brethern for a Peace Prayer Walk on December 16 at 1:45 p.m. at the Peace Pole at Idlewild Park proceeding to Thompson park across from the Talbot County Court House. Chief Harvey discussed the agreed upon route. Chief Harvey stated that the only question the Department had was if the Parks and Recreation Director had given permission.

Mr. Ford made a motion to approve the Prayer Walk, seconded by Ms. Jackson-Amis and carried unanimously.

The President of the Council stated that one comment that came up at the last meeting was to have the Chief provide the Council with the events before the meeting.

Chief Harvey stated that would be acceptable except in the case where there may be questions or concerns.

The Town Engineer stated that Thursday is a holiday and garbage pickup will be accomplished throughout the entire town on Friday. Mr. Glass stated that he expects to get a draft traffic report for the east/west analysis. He stated that he will look at that and get back to the Council with any results.

The Town Engineer discussed the request from Ms. Jackson-Amis for a reduction of the 25 M.P.H. speed limit on Lynnbrook Court. He stated that he has spent time looking at engineering documents and design manuals and just reducing the posted speed limit does not effectively control or reduce speed. The Town Engineer suggests that the Chief and officers look at the area to determine what the speeding problem is and possibly take those results and proceed with an engineering study. His recommendation is first enforcement, investigation, and if needed, look at the area more closely.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she wanted to read a letter with Mr. Ford’s permission as it is in his area.

The letter was from Dray Cooper, a 14-year old resident who expressed her concerns with the speed limit on Lynnbrook Court. Ms. Cooper requested the speed limit be reduced to 15 M.P.H. Ms. Jackson-Amis read Ms. Cooper’s letter into the record.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she has another suggestion for the Town Engineer and the Chief since the Town Engineer will be doing some type of study. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that the Visioning Meeting held last week, there were several other streets that seem to be impacted by speed that was really one of the main concerns generated from that meeting. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that from the bypass onto Port Street, she knows it is a state road then it becomes a town street and the speed limit changes, and there was some concern that there isn’t large enough or a visible sign that suggests that the speed limit changes. Therefore, there is speeding on that street. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she is talking about the transition from one speed to the next and it was recommended if it was all possible that there be one uniformed speed limit. She asked him to talk to the state authority to see if this is reasonable.

Ms. Jackson-Amis discussed connecting the east or studying connecting the east to the west to the town or traffic studies because Mr. William Kirby forwarded a document during their Visioning meeting that she will share with the Council. She stated Mr. Kirby also gave it to the Planning Commission that would set forth what he considers to be or suggests to be a desirable traffic pattern from St. Michaels Road to Denton Road as well as the recommendation from Mr. Dills. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that there was a concern specifically about Safeway trucks coming down that street and whether or not this is an appropriate route and whether there is an alternative and if there isn’t an alternative route for these trucks, is it possible for signage that would indicate the speed.

Chief Harvey stated that they have been working with truckers since Mr. Jensen’s complaints about trucks on Goldsborough Street and they have been asked to utilize the bypass. Chief Harvey stated that the trucks Ms. Jackson-Amis is referring to go directly onto West Street then they back up to the supermarket which is the quickest way.

Mr. Ford stated that hopefully with the studies, determination can be made regarding the speeding on Lynnbrook Court.

Mr. Ford stated that a week from tonight, November 26 at 7:15 p.m. at the Presbyterian Church on Washington Street, Ward I will be having their Visioning Road Show which is an opportunity for the residents of Ward I and anyone who would like to attend to find out what the Visioning Committee for Easton’s Comprehensive Plan update has in mind for the town. He stated that it is a very important process and he encouraged members of Ward I to get involved and come to that meeting.

Mr. Jensen announced that the meeting for Ward II’s Visioning Meeting is tomorrow evening at the Town Hall at 7:00 P.M. Mr. Jensen stated that he wanted to stress how important it is that people come to these meetings. Mr. Jensen stated that the Comprehensive Plan is what is looked at when development proposals are submitted to the Town and they need as much input as possible so the town can grow like the community wants it to grow.

Mr. Jensen wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.

Mr. Reed stated that the Visioning meeting for Ward III will be November 29 at 7:00 p.m. at the Town Hall. He stated that it is very important. He stated that it is an opportunity for everyone to give their thoughts on how they want the Town of Easton to grow in the next six years. Mr. Reed asked Ward III residents to come out and make the right decisions.

Mr. Reed asked the Town Planner if he had any more information on the Cherrywood Development, LLC for the property near South Beechwood. He asked if the Town Planner knew about the developer and what their plans are for that area.

The Town Planner stated that he has made a few telephone calls and Cherrywood Development, LLC is a relatively new company out of Charles County. He stated that they have done a couple projects in Ann Arundel County. Mr. Hamilton stated that he had spoken with a planner from that county and she had indicated that his recent developments in that area were upscale single-family houses and were pleasant people to work with. The Town Planner stated that he does not know what they are planning in that area although he has seen a rough sketch. He stated that the site plan will be before the Planning Commission and the Council. The Town Planner spoke with the applicant’s attorney and suggested that the Development company introduce themselves and give a brief history on their previous projects during the Planning Commission’s hearing and the Council’s meeting.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she is very pleased to report that Ward IV has had its Visioning Meeting as well as a town meeting where she was able to make some presentation and the community was able to ask questions. Ms. Jackson-Amis thanked the Town Planner and the Assistant Town Planner for the wonderful presentation. She thanked Ms. Stacie Sauca, the Planning Secretary for help with the flyers and Ms. Wanda Green, Ms. Pat Hawkins, Ms. Sharelle Turner, a high school student, Ms. Stacy Mill and Mr. Eddie Shepherd who got the flyers out in the community which she felt was a major reason for the great turnout.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that one of the other things that came from this meeting is complaints about the police speeding on Glenwood Avenue and Washington Street. She stated that residents stated that the speeding has been excessive.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that there is a concern that crossing guards are needed at Glenwood and West Street. She stated that she is not sure if this is the County’s responsibility or the Town’s but it has to do with school children. Residents have reported that they have seen children almost hit by automobiles. She stated that they would like to have this concern addressed.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that there is a homeowner who is near Christ Church and is asking for additional police monitoring saying there has been some shootings at that site.

Chief Harvey asked that the person making the request for crossing guards give him a telephone call. Chief Harvey stated that the people that discharged weapons in that area were arrested and charged with 15 crimes they had been involved with. He stated that the police department will continue to monitor that area. He thanked Ms. Jackson-Amis for her input.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that she had spoken with the Talbot County Emergency Planning after the last meeting regarding the Easton Police Department’s participation. She stated that they had gone back and looked and it is correct that the Department had not been invited and a letter had been sent clarifying the misunderstanding. Chief Harvey thanked Ms. Jackson-Amis for her efforts.

Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that there was a concern that we remember that the RTC property is the last large tract available for park and recreation. She stated that citizens did bring this discussion up for an important issue to remember. She stated that she had received a very sensitive letter from Ms. Christine Burke who has been a resident of South Street for 30 years concerning the re-opening of Kelly Gibson Street, which she advocates. Ms. Jackson-Amis stated that Mr. Bibb was also present at the Visioning Meeting and gave his input why he would like this matter considered very carefully. She stated that she was happy both sides of the issue were presented as it was a good open discussion. Ms. Jackson-Amis thanked all those that participated.

The President of the Council reminded the Council to review the calendar.

There being no further business, Ms. Jackson-Amis made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried.

At 8:55 p.m., the President of the Council adjourned the regularly scheduled Council meeting.

___________________________________

Town Clerk