Print this page

City Council Minutes

June 21, 1999

June 21, 1999

Cambridge, Md.

The City Council met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor David J. Wooten presiding.

Those Commissioners in attendance were: Commissioners Watkins, Rice (arrived at 7:40 p.m.), Saunders, Swafford and Vickers.

Mr. Kinnamon led in the Lord's Prayer.

Mr. Collison advised that there was a closed Executive Session prior to tonight's 6:00 p.m. meeting for the purpose of specific personnel issues.

He then requested a motion to meet in closed Executive Session following the order of business tonight to discuss a legal matter. Commissioner Saunders then made a motion, since she and Mr. Pritchett also have a legal and a finance matter, to meet in closed Executive Session after the meeting to discuss two legal matters and one finance matter. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Watkins and it carried unanimously.


Mr. Collison advised that this is a Public Hearing for a C.D.B.G. application. The notice ran in the Daily Banner on Wednesday, June 9th announcing tonight's hearing. It is regarding the Maryland Community Development Block Grant program and the City's intention to submit an application for some of the monies for Fiscal Year 2000. He then turned the meeting over to Ms. Kathy Foster, Grants Administrator.

Ms. Foster advised the City is planning to submit an application for a study grant to see if there is an underlying cause for deterioration of sidewalks on portions of Maryland Avenue, Henry Street, Aurora Street and Dorchester Avenue.

Ms. Lois Elliott, 402 Henry Street, came forward in favor of the grant because she lives in that neighborhood and "we need to beautify it." There are problems with the yards as well as the sidewalks. She is currently adding an addition to her house and after the door was lined up, the house settled more so now she can't even open her back door. She stated that she would do whatever she could to help with moving the grant along.

Mr. Collison confirmed with Ms. Foster that the application deadline is July lst for the block grant. She then stated that the City could go for a planning grant which could be submitted at any time.

Mr. William Jackson was next to speak as President of the Human Relations Committee. He feels this would definitely fall in line with Human Relations as far as the City is concerned because the citizens of this neighborhood need the City to step forward and give them a hand to help beautify their neighborhood. The sidewalks are certainly a safety issue and he and the Human Relations Committee would like to support the study of the sidewalk situation.

Commissioner Saunders stated that Ms. Foster has worked very hard trying to get a mail-out survey done. Many people have not taken the time to mail the survey back. If a favorable response is not received, Ms. Foster and a State Representative will have to go door-to-door to every house that did not respond. The survey is anonymous and citizens do not need to sign their names. Commissioner Saunders went on to say, "you're jeopardizing your own neighborhood in not getting the study done." She asked if neighbors could ask neighbors to get the survey back before next week.

Ms. Anna Pope was next to speak stating "I'm one of them that started all of this." She feels the survey should have gone to the owners of the property not to the people renting them. Some of the renters don't understand what this survey is about and would need it explained to them. Commissioner Saunders interjected that Ms. Foster went by State Guidelines which stated "the occupant of the dwelling."

Next to come to the podium was Ms. Portia Johnson of 700 Cornish Drive. She said she is speaking both for and against the study because of the hard work the City is doing to help these people. Although there are other streets within the City that have never had sidewalks that need them, she feels this study would be like a pilot to get it started. on the negative side, when residents come before Council trying to get something for their neighborhood and talk down about the people who reside there, as the previous speaker did, "I would say forget it."

Lois Elliott came to the podium again to say she is speaking for "me and my property." She stated that she would do whatever she can. Her house is fifty-four (54) years old and she is trying to add on to it and she plans on staying in it for a long time to come. "What happens across the street, next to me, that has nothing to do with me. I will do whatever I can to get my street beautified."

Commissioner Saunders commended Ms. Elliott on her positive attitude each time she has come before Council on this issue. There have been some "heated" times and as Ms. Elliott stated, she understands that there are processes to everything and although we may not like them all, we have to follow them.

For the record, Commissioner Saunders added that threatening her with contacting someone about the process doesn't scare her or move her because those people are going to come right back to this table and say this is our rules and you do it the way you see fit to go by the rules.

Ms. Pope came back to the podium and said she is not putting anyone down. She was only trying to explain that she felt the reason some of the forms were not returned was because some people didn't understand them and she offered to help Ms. Foster by going door-to-door so that everyone responds.

With no further comments, Commissioner Saunders then made a motion to close the Public Hearing; seconded by Commissioner Watkins. Motion carried unanimously.


Mr. Kinnamon opened and advised of the following bids received:

1) Sidhu Engineering Inc.

   Clarksville, MD


$ 8,250.

Contract Docs.











2) ATCS, P.L.C.


   Annapolis, MD


$ 6,600.


Contract Docs.








3) George, Miles & Buhr


  Salisbury, MD


$ 3,500.


Contract Docs.






Commissioner Saunders made a motion to forward the bids to Mr. Pritchett and his people at Public Works in order for them to give Council their suggestion for the best and most comprehensive deal. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Watkins.

Commissioner Vickers asked Mr. Pritchett what it would actually cost to repair the sidewalks in the areas where people were cited for sidewalk repair. Mr. Pritchett advised that most of the homes have two sections of sidewalk (20 square feet). Based on the typical $5.00 per square foot, it would be between two to three hundred dollars for the average repair. This was mainly for Maryland Avenue where the tree roots played a large part of the cracking.

On Henry Street where some of the concrete was broken, it was due to the fact that the sidewalks were only one and one-half inches thick and in some cases, sewer laterals were aged, collapsed or abandoned.

Commissioner Vickers knows that the bid process has to go forward, but he asked, "would it not be financially feasible to consider some means of financing the sidewalk repairs? Put the sidewalk repairs in and wait twenty years to see if they crack and forget the study."

Commissioner Saunders stated that the City just paid a consultant to work with the City to get this study off the ground and to make documentation on how to do it. Secondly, the City would not be in very good favor with the State when they go back for other grant money.

Motion to refer the bids to DPW carried by a vote of 3 to 1 with Commissioner Vickers opposing.

Mr. Kinnamon then presented a Resolution to apply for CDBG funding which Ms. Foster stated needs to be included with the application. Commissioner Saunders stated that "it looks like you're putting the cart before the horse..." Ms. Foster said originally the City was going for the July lst deadline but since the surveys are not completed, the City could apply for the planning grant and wait with the Resolution until the next scheduled meeting.


Commissioner Swafford made a motion to follow the Department of Public Works' recommendation for the bid on the roof for Council Chambers; seconded by Commissioner Saunders. Motion carried unanimously.

It was recommended to award the contract to the low bidder, Simpkins Roofing and Siding of Easton, Maryland.


Mr. Pritchett requested that the contract be awarded to Davis Concrete of Fruitland, Maryland in the amount of $10,000.

Commissioner Swafford made a motion to follow DPW guidelines on this; seconded by Commissioner Watkins. Motion carried unanimously.


Mr. Collison advised that there was a Public Hearing several months ago with regards to the guidelines which have been adopted. These are the by-laws and procedures to be followed when someone is within the Historic District and is making a request for exterior change or addition.

These procedures were previously submitted (basically using the City of Annapolis' Historic Guidelines, Procedures and By-Laws) but were tabled at that time. Since that time, Mr. Collison has met with Mr. Hayward who has done a thorough job in going through the document and making suggestions to meet the Historic Preservation Commission's specific format which they created. At this time, a motion would be needed to formally adopt the by-laws, procedures and application which any property owner would be using in applying for a building permit.

Commissioner Saunders made a motion to approve the by-laws and procedures as they are written and submitted; seconded by Commissioner Vickers. Motion carried unanimously.


Mayor Wooten, with regards to last week's decision on Clarence Johnson's produce stand, stated that at that time he was not willing to vote on the issue (since it was a tie) until he had the opportunity to find supporting documentation for the vote, either for or against. He asked if this could be brought up again.

Mr. Collison advised that there were two issues. The first issue on which there was a tie was the acceptance of the recommendation of the Traffic and Safety Committee which the Mayor could vote on.

The second issue was the Special Use Permit which requires a four fifths vote. With the vote 2 to 2, even if the Mayor had voted, it would not have given the required four votes. Mr. Johnson was offered the opportunity by Council to change his location and resubmit his application, which would still require a four fifths vote.

Mayor Wooten then requested that Mr. Kinnamon notify Mr. Johnson about tonight's discussion.


Commissioner Swafford made a motion to approve the Budget Amendments for Financial Administration and the Department of Public Works; seconded by Commissioner Vickers. Motion carried unanimously.

A slight recess was taken prior to the 7:00 p.m. scheduled Public Hearing.


This Public Hearing is with regards to a request by Linda Holliday for a Special Use Permit to operate a day care center in her home at 410 Talbot Avenue.

Mr. Collison advised that under Section 20-16 of the City Code, day care centers are permitted only by a Special Use Permit and in the Code under Section 20-2, day care centers are defined as those types of centers caring for 5 or more children. Therefore, day care would be permitted for 4 or less children. He added that Ms. Holliday has already been licensed by the State for up to 8 children.

Mr. Pritchett stated that the request to operate a day care center was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 11, 1999 and recommended approval of the Special Use Permit. The property was posted on June 4, 1999 and the notice for a special use request was published in the Daily Banner on June 4th and June llth. The area property owners were notified by mailing on June 4th. He also noted for the record that he has a petition against the Special Use Permit which was signed and submitted by the West End Citizens Association.

Mr. Collison added that he also has a mapping of the surrounding property owners who were notified by the June 4th mailing.

Ms. Linda Holliday, 410 Talbot Avenue was first to come to the podium. She stated that she has been licensed in Cambridge for about eight and one-half years and this is her third residence. Prior to her current address she lived at 512 Glenburn Avenue and she has a letter from a neighbor that lived across the street from her explaining that she had no problems with Ms. Holliday doing day care at that address.

Currently she is licensed for four children first shift, four children second shift and three children third shift. She is the only day care provider in Dorchester County that is licensed for 24 hour care. If a child is taken in before 6:00 a.m., the provider needs to be licensed for 24 hour care. Additionally she added that if she gets licensed for eight children, she could watch eight children first shift, eight children second shift and three third shift (after midnight and before 6:00 a.m.). She then provided a copy of her current license.

At this point she discussed some concerns that were addressed at the Zoning Board hearing. one was traffic ... she has a driveway and enough room in front of her house for two cars to park. The parents don't usually arrive at the same time, so she doesn't feel she would need more than four or five parking spaces at any one time.

The neighbors were also concerned about their property values decreasing because she is a family day care provider.

If she is not approved for a Special Use Permit, she has two choices. One is that she could only accept the day children which would decrease her income by half, and as a single parent, she cannot afford to do that. Her other choice would be to watch children again 24 hours a day.

Her concern, if she is not approved, is not for herself because she will survive and keep her home. Concern is for future providers as well as illegal day care because it is easier to be unlicensed.

The last thing she wanted to say was "thank you" to the parents who came to tonight's meeting to stand by her.

Mr. Collison stated that in addition to a letter of support from Dellie Webster, 513 Glenburn Avenue, there was also a letter of support from Ken and Wendy Gordon, 2204 Jenkins Creek Road. He then asked if she would be having any employees and she stated that she is the only employee. She does have substitutes in case of emergency... her boyfriend John and her mother. They would be there in case she needed to take her daughter to the doctor.

He then asked her what the hours of each shift were. Ms. Holliday said the first shift would be 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; second shift 4:00 p.m. to 12:00 p.m. and the third would be 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.

Regarding off-street parking, she stated that she could fit two cars in her driveway.

Commissioner Saunders verified with Ms. Holliday that even if she didn't get the Special Use Permit from the City, she could still care for four children on the first shift, four children on the second and three on the third.

Ms. Holliday further stated that she has not done three shifts in the past and she doesn't want to do three shifts now but because some parents work until 11:30 p.m. in Easton, it is after midnight when they would pick their child up and in one case, a child was dropped off prior to 6:00 a.m. thereby requiring a 24 hour license.

Commissioner Saunders then asked if the adults who relieve her and come in contact with the children would be required to have background and fingerprint checks? Ms. Holliday said only if they are paid ... both of her substitutes are not paid although her boyfriend has been fingerprinted and his background has been checked with the State and through the FBI. Her Mom has been checked with the Department of Social Services.

Mrs. Laura Weldon, 116 Mill Street, came forward stating the she is a licensed day care provider in the City of Cambridge and has been licensed in the State of Maryland since November, 1991. According to a list she received on May 17, 1999, there are 69 registered in-home day care providers in Dorchester County. Of these, 24 have Cambridge addresses. Mr. Collison noted that the hand-out that was given to Council by Mrs. Weldon will become part of the record so there was no need for her to go into further detail.

Mrs. Weldon said she has known Ms. Holliday for over three years and "there are exactly three day care providers in Dorchester County that I would trust my children with and one of them is Linda Holliday." Also, Ms. Holliday has been doing day care in the same neighborhood for the past four years, "so it is my pleasure to inform you that your property values have not decreased, traffic has not increased significantly and Linda Holliday is probably the highest, most competent day care provider, along with myself, in Dorchester County." If we are going to bring more business and industry into the area, we need to make sure that this day care industry is supported.

Ms. Amanda Holliday, 410 Talbot Avenue, came forward to say that her Mom has been doing day care since she was about six years old and throughout all the years they have not had many complaints.

Ms. Portia Johnson, 700 Cornish Drive, was next to speak stating that she has made phone calls on the Federal level, State level and she has met with Ms. Holliday. She was informed that there has not been a blemish on Ms. Holliday's record as a day care provider. With new businesses coming to town, if there aren't proper day care providers available, people will move to Wicomico or Talbot Counties.

Mr. Price Schuler, Regional Manager for Child Care Administration was next to speak. He stated "I am the licensing department for Linda Holliday." His office is located at 301 Bay Street, Suite 305, Easton, Maryland. He has done child care licensing for twenty-one years and has known Ms. Holliday for all of the eight and one-half years that she has been registered in Dorchester County. As a state official, he said their is no problem with Linda Holliday. He then provided Council with the State of Maryland Regulations regarding Family Day Care. He then mentioned that they have been losing providers in Dorchester County and have been for the last three years.

Commissioner Vickers stated that this evening two licensed providers made the statement that there are illegal operations for day care, "wouldn't you like them to report those people to you?" Mr. Schuler said certainly and if they would call his office, it would be investigated. There was a situation recently in Cambridge where a woman has been watching "lots and lots of children" in a house that was quite small. His office verified that it was all relatives and he only has control of what is in the manual, which is non-relative care.

Commissioner Saunders expressed her concern to Mr. Schuler about background checks not being done if a person is not paid while helping out a day care provider. Mr. Schuler stated that they do clearances on any substitute for child abuse. However, there is a clearance for criminal background but that is only done if the substitute is paid.

Commissioner Saunders stated her discomfort and used the example that a convicted drug dealer, who sold to children and spent time in jail, could substitute for a day care provider so long as that person was not paid. Unfortunately, Mr. Schuler stated this was true.

Mr. Schuler wanted to point out to everyone that Ms. Holliday is the Vice-President of the Family Day Care Association which is a network of providers that care about the job that they do and the average provider doesn't volunteer to be an officer. In addition to her record in day care, she cares about this community. He added, "I hope that people trust and make a good decision."

Mr. Lee Weldon, 116 Mill Street stated that as long as his wife Laura has been providing day care in their home, "it has been one of the most rewarding things that she could do." In addition to being able to stay at home to raise their children (which there aren't many people out there that can state that claim), she has also been able to touch the lives of over thirty other children in this community and in the community they had moved here from. What his wife and Ms. Holliday do, contributes to this community. "She does it eleven hours a day and she does it for about six bucks an hour. Now, if any of you are willing to make that kind of sacrifice for your community, I'd like you to stand up here and tell me about it."

Ms. Patsy Bennett Martinek, Linda's mother and primary substitute, was next to speak in favor. When her daughter sold her home on Glenburn Avenue, she got more for it than she paid for it. She feels if you keep your property up, neighbors property values would increase not decrease. As a substitute for her daughter, she wanted everyone to know that she has lived in this community for 50 years and has cared for children as well as the elderly at Mallard Bay Nursing Home. She has also been trusted enough to do cleaning in people's homes when they were not present.

Mrs. Laura Magill, 319 E. Central Avenue, Federalsburg, Maryland, came forward and stated that Ms. Holliday watches two of her children. If it were her choice, she would stay home and watch her own children, "but it's not my choice." Sending your children to a day care provider is a very scary thing and I know I can trust Linda and I know that she takes care of my children the way I would. If people care more about their property than children in this community, that doesn't say much for the community.

Mr. Brian Magill, husband of Laura Magill who just spoke, added that if people didn't know that kids were going there, you would not know that it was a day care provider. There has never been any trash out front, the bushes might not be cut, "but my bushes aren't cut." With all due respect, Linda has teenage children and neighbors would see their friends on the street more than they would see day care children.

Ms.Lorine Grant, 1110 Locust Street, said Linda has been watching her children on and off for four or five years. Mr. Collison asked Ms. Grant how Ms. Holliday maintains her house and she responded, "her house is better than my house." The children are always clean and they pick up as soon as they're finished playing with the toys.

Mr. Gordon McWilliams, 408 Talbot Avenue, was next to speak. It was said by the Department of Public Works that this was approved by Planning and Zoning but the gentleman did not state that it was a 3 to 2 vote which Mr. McWilliams feels is important. He has no problem with Ms. Holliday and her family moving into the neighborhood. The problem is having a "business" moving in there. This is not a vote against day care or children. He and his neighbors selected to live at a dead end street in the 400 block of Talbot Avenue with a most restricted zoning and now they seem to be the bad guys. They are objecting to a business coming in. He hopes in this day and time, people still have a right to protect their neighborhood and preserve an area where they have selected. I hope our elected officials will listen to the people who have spent most of their lives living on this block.

Mr. Wade Roche, 417 Talbot Avenue, said residents on the block are like a family. When someone is ill, everyone is, there to help. During the snow storms, neighbors help neighbors in clearing the snow. Ms. Holliday and her family are welcome to join the block "family". He is not concerned about his property value because he plans on living out his days on Talbot Avenue.. He does not like the idea of a business coming in..."where does it stop."

Mr. Sarge Johnson, 411 Talbot Avenue, said that he treasures his neighborhood as a "residential neighborhood". If this is granted, where will we be five years from now. "Are we going to be an entirely business neighborhood or are we going to be a residential neighborhood?"

Ms. Judy Moody came forward to state she has the concerns of the children to address. State officials are here and she hopes they follow up on what she has to say because she feels it needs to be investigated if it has not already been. She stated that she had been looking for a new property in February and had the "unpleasure" of visiting the current house that is being addressed this evening. Her concern is the fact that when the previous owner passed away, the house was left empty. The elderly lady had animals and when Ms. Moody entered the house the odor "reeked", "you couldn't even stand walking in the door." The garage that Ms. Holliday is using as the day care portion was loaded with animal droppings. She would like to know what kind of fumigation was done to this house to prove it worthy of putting children in. The small fenced-in area to the right of the house was the animal pen where Ms. Holliday now has the children's play things.

Her other concern is when kindergarten children get off the school bus on Glasgow Street, unsupervised, walking down Talbot Avenue which doesn't have sidewalks all the way. She thinks anyone with children who need child day care, needs to look at these issues.

Mr. Luke Messick, 406 Talbot Avenue, said he is not concerned about his property (he's been there for forty years or so). The 400 block of Talbot Avenue is nothing but individual "home" properties. Ms. Holliday came from the 500 block of Glenburn which is surrounded by apartment houses, nursing homes and a church. Mr. Messick stated, "I'm against a day care business coming in a residential section there of our 400 block, unique section of Cambridge." Keep in mind that the residents of this block are not against children, property values or the family that has just moved in. Not only that, this family knew the residents were in opposition before they settled for the property they have. They could have easily gone somewhere else.

Commissioner Saunders asked Mr. Messick to help her understand how this would change the neighborhood. His response was, "once you put a variance in and accept it into a center block of R-1 traffic only, then those property owners have no recourse except to have, at your mercy, to give a variance to any business that comes in there."

She then asked what he meant by an "exclusive neighborhood"? Another resident from the audience stated that there is nothing on that block or behind that block other than residential homes.

With no further opposition, Mr. Collison stated that the applicant, Ms. Holliday, would be allowed to have a very brief rebuttal because she has the burden of proof.

Ms. Holliday did say that when she looked at the house there was a terrible smell and she really had to consider if she wanted the house. She chose it because it was only one block' away from her previous location, she could keep the same families in her day care and she liked the neighborhood. She further felt that her two daughters, ages 12 and 14, would be safe there and she wanted to raise them in a good neighborhood and she didn't want to stray too far from where she was. The carpeting in her new home has been replaced, "and my house is clean."

In her opinion, what has happened here is things have gotten confused about a "day care center" and a "family day care provider". They are very different and although she has tried to explain this she feels she apparently has not explained it well enough. Mr. Schuler is here to testify that she is not a day care center.

The maximum number of children that she would be allowed is not what she is planning to have. She does not go to school and have someone watching these children. When her last second shift child left her care, she went back to school.

Mr. Lee Weldon spoke again to apologize "for getting a little passionate when he was up here before but it is something that I've lived with for a long time and it is something that I am passionate about just as I would be if it were my own occupation." He also wanted to clarify that the petition was presented for information by the West End Citizens Association... it was not circulated by the Association.

At this point, Commissioner Swafford verified the City Code with Mr. Collison regarding day care center. Mr. Collison explained that the Code defines a day care center is anyone who watches five or more children. If there are five or more children it requires a Special Use Permit. A day care provider could set up anywhere with four children. Commissioner Swafford then stated, as an example, if there were fifteen properties on Talbot Avenue and each one of these people decided that they wanted to care for four children, the Zoning Code would allow it. The reason Ms. Holliday is here is because she wants to go from four to eight children.

Commissioner Saunders proceeded to read the June 7th letter addressed to Mr. Kinnamon from the West End Citizens Association. Mr. Weldon confirmed that WECA did not circulate the petition and solicit the signatures. The petition was received from the neighbors, WECA considered it and then issued their opinion as submitted in the June 7th letter. Mr. Weldon stated that WECA feels that the concerns of the immediate neighbors are valid and should be weighed in consideration of this decision.

For the record, Mr. Collison advised that the Council will review the minutes of tonight's hearing and make their decision at their next regularly scheduled Council meeting which is July 12th.

Commissioner Saunders then moved to close the Public Hearing; seconded by Commissioner Watkins. Motion carried unanimously.


Mr. Pritchett advised that Jeff Sturdevant, P.E., from Stearns & Wheler, LLC, Environmental Engineers and scientists, was present this evening to give an update on the treatment plant project and the odor control.

On the design of the upgrade for the biological nutrient removal (BNR) at the treatment plant, the design is now 75% complete and they are moving on from the 1996 study when they started the project. Some of the goals are to upgrade other non BNR related portions to bring the plant up-to-date and also to design an odor control system to reduce odors.

In the 1996 study there was an estimated cost on the project of 8.29 million dollars.In November, 1998 when he waslast before Council, the design was 30% complete and there was an estimated total cost of 8 million dollars for the project. Now in June, 1999 the project is 75% complete with an estimated cost of 8.18 million dollars with a 15% contingency still in the total cost.

The odor control project was added in March and the estimated cost from the study was 1.9 million for the equipment for that project. There is a total project cost of $10,181,000.

The project schedule is to complete the design in October, advertise in November, open bids in January, start construction in March and complete construction by March, 2002. They are still on schedule.

In furthering the design, they have run into a couple of items that needed to be brought to the City's attention. The' existing plant has two emergency generators, which are thirty (30) years old, that come on when power is lost at the plant. (This is a requirement of the State law.) There is a program with the local power company whereby the generators are used during high demand periods to run the plant and actually save $20,000. per year on the electrical cost by shaving the peak demands. Current conditions would require replacement of the emergency generators within approximately five (5) years. Also, both units are under capacity for the equipment that is at the plant now. As part of this project, if both generators were replaced, the cost would be approximately $750,000. for both of them. If they are replaced now, the City could get grant funding from the State of up to $300,000. If the City were to wait five (5) years and not do it under the DNR program, then the City would have to put out that money themselves.

Commissioner Rice asked if they were recommending diesel (as they currently are), propane or natural gas (which the government would give credits for). Stearns & Wheler feel that the cost for the natural gas generator exceeded the money that would be saved if going with natural gas vs. diesel.

In response to Commissioner Swafford's question about size, he was advised that they would plan to put in a 750 kW unit and a 500 kW unit. The larger unit would be used to run the odor control system and the $20,000. electrical cost saving should go up because the monthly bill would be higher since there would be more equipment at the plant with more power.

Commissioner Rice then asked about the noise levels because currently the people he represents say that the generators sound like "a freight train coming through your front yard." The new diesel generators have 82 decibels. A normal conversation is about 75 decibels. The existing generators currently run around 90 or 92 decibels.

Commissioner Vickers asked if the design calls for compositor matching to reduce electrical requirements and he was advised that it will.

Mr. Sturdyvant said he would try to find out if there would be a difference in noise based on the fuel that powers the generators in response to Commissioner Vickers question.

Regarding the shellfish protection pond, when the study was done in 1996, the pond was dredged by the City and all sludge was not removed. Sludge was noticed near the water surface in a recent site visit for odor control. The pond was surveyed for Stearns & Wheler by William C. Craig & Company and rough estimates indicate that there is 8 million gallons of sludge in the pond.

Pond dredging will minimize odors caused by sludge in the pond (required for implementation of the Phase I Odor Control Plan). It is required to allow the pond to be opened up to the river which was recommended in the 1996 BNR Study. He is aware that the City has spent a lot of money in the shellfish protection pond but the solution that they prepared is to open it up to the river. If it is emptied one more time, and pipe it straight across, "we will not have this problem again with sludge in the pond."

Mr. Sturdevant then gave the costs of "out of scope items" for the emergency generators, estimated total cost of $771,000 (MDE has tentatively agreed to fund $294,000 of this cost, and pond dredging, estimated total cost of $1,104,000.

The total estimated project costs would be $12,056,00 0. if the "out of scope items" are done at this time. Commissioner Rice asked when Stearns & Wheler would need an answer on this and he was advised they would like an answer by the July 12th meeting. After much discussion, Commissioner Swafford made a motion for Council to have their answer by the July 19th work session; seconded by Commissioner Saunders. Motion carried unanimously.


Commissioner Saunders mentioned that she spent a nice day with Commissioner Swafford on "June Teenth Day" at Cornish Park. Mr. Pritchett and his department deserve many applauds ... "the place was really nice, the best I've seen it in a long, long time." Everyone had a good time and our Police Department did an excellent job. There were approximately 500 to 600 people.


Mayor Wooten said he was unable to attend but he heard that it was a good affair and he apologized for not being able to make it.


Commissioner Swafford wanted to make the Mayor and Council aware of the fact that money has been requested for the Y2K State program. They have acknowledged that they have received all the information and that a decision should be made by June 25th.


Mr. Kinnamon presented a Building Permit Application for Phillip and Marlene Feldman, ISG, International, 204 Cedar Street, addition and renovations to existing structure in the amount of $650,000. The permit fee is $5,495. Commissioner Swafford made a motion to approve the application; seconded by Commissioner Watkins. Motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Kinnamon then announced that Council will be in Ocean City next week at the Maryland Municipal League Convention. The following week there will be no Council meeting due to the July 4th holiday.


Mr. Pritchett asked if Council had any direction or further thoughts on the DNR Grant requests form that he had submitted for this week's Council books. He stated that the requests were the same as last year but were not funded. The only one that would be different is the $100,000. matching grant request for bulkhead replacement at the Municipal Basin. A decision was not needed tonight and Commissioner Saunders suggested that it be put on the July 19th agenda.

With no further comments, meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m.

I herby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate account of the Council meeting of Monday, June 21, 1999 insofar as I personally am aware.

Edwin C. Kinnamon, Clerk-Treasurer