received a copy of the minutes. Does anyone have any additions or corrections on them after review? I have a correction on the third page 365. Mr. Baragley announced the next meeting will be May 12th, 2025. Should be June 16th,
2025. I get complacent by that pedal. It just a simple set of minutes. I didn't even get that far before. Oh, this is good. Any other corrections? Is there a motion to approve these with stated corrections?
There second. I'll second. All in favor? Any abstain? Motion carried. May second. That was me. Thank you. Yep. Are there any comments from the public? This is specifically for matters that are not on tonight's agenda.
Prior to asking your question, can you state your first and last name and spell your last name and state your address? Okay. My name is Lee Connor. That's C O N O R and it's to Tower Hill Road in Mars Plains.
Hi there. Hi. And I'm coming before you as a longtime resident of of Mars Plains and I wanted to officially bring to the planning board's attention a group of residents um has formed a group called
Plan Better Mars Planes. We first officially announced it at the May 15th Burough Council meeting and then a volunteer taken video of it is is up on our YouTube channel. So what is playing better Mars Plains?
It's grassroots. It's residentled. It's on our own time, our own dime. We're committed to a safe, sustainable, forwardlooking development and land use plan for the Burrow of Mars Plains. Over
recent years, there have been some truly painful controversies over land use and development in Mars Plains. the man fragrance factory proposed uh near residential neighborhoods in 2018, the storage warehouse on the old Acme
property in 2022 23, and most recently the approval by a 54 vote of a two-lane fast food restaurant from a major international chain on our overburdened two-lane main street.
We believe that Mars Plains can do better. By being proactive and open to new ideas, we can retain our town's wonderful character while planning wisely for the future. This is not a simple task, especially
not here in densely populated northern New Jersey in highly desirable Mars planes. Your job as a planning board is a difficult one, and we recognize that. Still, we believe there's a way for concerned and informed residents and
well-meaning and experienced elected officials to work together to create a vision for the future of Mars planes as we go into our second SE century very soon. To that end, we've been reaching out to numerous resources, including elected
and appointed officials here in town, similar local groups for sustainable development, the many smart planning resources available for New Jersey towns, and the New Jersey Highlands Coalition. We invite and strongly urge anyone who
is interested in constructive, feasible, workable ideas to join us in this effort. You can expect to hear more from plan better Mars planes soon. Goals, a timeline, measures of success. We will
present all of these in the near future. In the meantime, please visit plan bettermpp.com for more information. Thank you for your attention and we look forward to working with you. That was well presented. I like that. Thanks Lee.
[Applause] Lisa Schroeder. S C H R O E D E R 97 Naple Avenue. So, at a prior council meeting, I asked some questions about why Ron Kelly is no
longer on the planning board. I think a lot of people in the community are asking these questions and and continue to it was suggested that I continue asking those questions once everybody had had some time to into things and I'
I've had some time to look into things as well. Um I understand Mr. Brewer and Mayor Carr are not here so maybe we still continue this conversation but I did want to get these questions out there and and keep the conversation going because I think it's an issue that
a lot of people really really care about understanding better for context. These are questions that a lot of people are asking in the community. And just to be clear, I'm asking these questions because I believe in the town and its residents. And I have confidence that
this planning board can make good choices for our town. I want to have confidence that things are done in an above above board manner and in a fair manner. So when I see a situation that looks unfair or strange, I feel compelled to speak up and better
understand how the process works because that's what engaged citizenship is all about. So hopefully there is an explanation for all of this that makes sense, but we just haven't heard it yet. So I'm just keeping the the conversation going. So I tried to piece together the
timeline as as best I could based on publicly available information. What I see is that Mr. Kelly joined the planning board in January 2023 as a class 4 member, but then started working at the community center in September
2023, which is technically prohibited according to the description of class 4 membership. I also saw that Miss Steer joined the Shade Tree Commission in January 2023 and then joined the planning board as a class 4 member in
January 2024. If I understand correctly, this dual appointment would also be inconsistent with the description of a class four member. Neither of these mclassifications could have been remedied because Mr. Dutzler was already a class two member and there
can only be one of those if I understand correctly. So basically for the entirety of 2024, Mr. P and Miss Steckert were non-compliant for their assigned classes. Um, at the council meeting it was
suggested that the steer mclassification was a typo, but I don't think that is the case because uh she was class 4 up until at some point in uh January.
Actually, as of June 2024, she was still class 4. I have a snapshot from the way back machine. Um, and then as of May 2025, her classification was to class 2. I don't know exactly when that took place. That's one question that I have. It was that was done actually in believe was
that January, February at the council meeting. Okay. So I think if you look back at the reorg meeting, I think that's when it was reclassified as a class two. Got it. Okay. Thank you for that. Of this year. Of this year. Correct. Yeah. So oversightes and mistakes happen, right?
I think this was a good faith oversight. Um, and but what people are trying to understand really is is why a better solution couldn't have been reached that allowed Mr. Kelly to to stay on the planning board. So, I do have some
questions. I don't know if the people with answers are are here, but I'm just going to read them out so everybody understands the questions that we have in in the community. Um, and maybe we can keep things going that way. So, I was curious when the town became aware
of of these mclassifications. I don't know if we know that yet. Okay. Um, you answered my question, Bill, about when the website was updated to reflect the change. It sounds like it happened shortly after the the reorg
meeting. Once Mr. Dukesler left, there was the class 2 classification available. So, so she got that. One question I had is given that Mr. Kelly had sort of seniority on the planning board, how how was the decision made to
assign that class 2 membership to Steer versus Mr. Kelly? So, I don't I don't know that that's a question anybody up here currently could answer. Um because just just a reminder, right, the um the appointees to the the
planning board are mayoral appointees. Um the when the council reviews it, um the council basically just looks at it. Um but they are mayoral appointees. So who by the way is right behind
the graduation? I think everybody graduated. Good evening everybody. Good evening. We throw you a Nazi or we waiting for you to catch up. I'm always in the hot seat. I'm used to it. I'm following up on some of the questions I asked at the last
council meeting about Mr. Kelly. Um, so I you know I I understand that I I if I if if I'm understanding correctly and hearing correctly. Do you want to you want to step back a little
bit so Mr. or Mayor can I'm sure. Yeah. Um, so I mean really I guess the the question a lot of people are asking is why did Mr. Kelly have to leave the planning board, right? I understand I think the position is that he
effectively resigned upon accepting uh employment with the community center, right? That would mean that his seat is vacant. But why couldn't he just vacate his role at the community community center and then be reappointed? I think a lot of I think that's a question you
should ask Mr. I think that would be a question that you should ask Mr. Kelly. Mr. Kelly was given several options of what could be done. So I really think that that's a question that Mr. Kelly could answer. Okay. And why he made whatever decision that he Okay.
Um, I guess, you know, I'm not a land use attorney, but I have been a lawyer close to 20 years. And my observation is that these good faith unintentional mistakes can typically be remedied in a pretty pragmatic way that
honors the intent of the parties. Um, so it it just feels strange to me and that's why I'm here asking questions. Um, and I think to the rest of the community as well, that there wasn't a more pragmatic way to address this. I'm sure it an artist mistake um in a way
that would allow him to to remain on on the planning board. I think there are statutes and case law that looked up and I'm sure can can speak to those it wasn't just something that we can do. Right. So So
briefly because I I'm not that familiar with the situation, but he did give me a memo that um there is a case if you'd like I can give you the citation that speaks to um the order of how it happened. So the fact that he was on the planning board and then took the
position with the community center by doing that he vacated the earlier position. He would have to be reappointed is my understanding that he would have to actually be reappointed to the position not just okay I'm going to give this up and go back onto the board. Okay. Um and the reverse was true for
Mr. Miss Stecker because she was on the sh commission first and then by taking the planning board position she vacated her position commission. Okay. But then I guess she's reappointed. She's still But she's no longer a class four member.
Correct. No, she's class two, right? So class four can't serve in in another. Right. Class 4 has to be general members of the public. So once she became a class two, then she is obligated to have a position of municipality. And Mr.
Kelly was offered to be reappointed. So again, this is that's why I don't like going over this stuff that is not my understanding about being so what would be best to wait for Mr.
Brewer Mr. laid out an email I don't have as to why was it out to myself like like I said I think everybody just wants transparency into the process right and we don't we don't have the
legal memos we don't know what the conversations were like and I think people just want to have confidence that things are being done in in the right way and in a fair way So, as far as Mr. Brew, I'm not going to speak for Mr.
I don't know what she's saying, but could you speak into the microphone? So he can state the statues and what kind he was looking at when he made his decision. So even even if he left his position at the community center, he would not be eligible to be reappointed.
My understanding is the minute that he accepted the position at the community center. He was not a member of not that he couldn't vote, but he was not a member of that board anymore and could not be reappointed even if he quit his job.
I'm not sure about memo. Yeah, his memo says that he's by resigning from his employment, he's not automatically reappointed. We can't just fix it that way, right? So, I think we have like the same idea. Now that you're saying that that's that is correct, right? He just he doesn't automatically
go back and obviously it's up to Mr. Kelly, but like I said, like we as the public, it's more about understanding the process. Um, so if he he truly didn't want back on, understandable, but I think some are under the impression that it was not his. You'd have to ask Mr. Kelly.
Um, and then also, while we're talking about wearing multiple hats, is there any conflict with Miss McCloskey being on the traffic committee as a class four member? It's not it's not a this is just committee. Yeah. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you. So I left uh but I did leave some pamphlets out here that we did for our affordable housing just the other
nightbody. Any further questions? Then I'll close that part of the meeting committee reports. Minor site plan committee. Any updates? We forgot those. Karen, what happened? You're still good. You're fine. You're
good. You're fine. I'm sorry. Minor set minor site master plan review committee. No. No. Okay. Then I'll close that portion. Correspondents and bills. We have three
in no particular order. Purchase order 20251067 from Maseretti Nerz. Thank you. Falcon LLP uh general services in the amount of
$1,97. Sorry. 1 million. Not that way. I'm sorry. Unit price versus total $1,00 $1,97.50. Try to read, kid. Uh, purchase order
202503 for affordable housing in the amount of $990. Sorry, for Phillips Price and Greg. Gra and last is purchase order 20251000. Uh Anderson and and Dendler
uh engineering services and that comes to $386.80. We need two votes for approval or objection. I'll approve. Look for a second. Second camera. Roll call. Mr. Brick. Yes. Mr. Wolf. Yes. Mr.
Bessel. Yes. Mr. Houston. Yes. May car. Yes. And Mrs. McCl. Yes. Okay. Then I will close that portion of the agenda. Karen, we have no new applications, correct? No. So, I'll close that portion
of the meeting. Do we have any old business? Yes. All right. Um, so the uh you'll you'll see as part of your your packet tonight um that's included there, there's uh there's two documents there. Um
um they are a more explain planning board uh application and zoning board of adjustment application the revised applications. Uh the checklist review committee which included myself as um Bill Ryden our engineer Dave Schultz
chair of the zoning board adjustment and Mikelia chair of the planning board uh had several meetings regarding our land development application. Uh the committee's goal was to simplify the document embiding all the necessary items needed between zoning requirements and planning board requirements as well
as provide a simpler and online accessible form for the applicant or resident submission. Our current land development doc uh document is 37 pages long and has many redundancies within the application. Uh the two documents in the package tonight contain all the same
requirements as our current applications. However, the information is better organized and are easy to understand from an overall applicant perspective. Um so in summary there uh we now have the following a Morris Plains planning board or zoning board of adjustment application for subdivisions
and site plan review and a checklist specific for each and a Morris plain zoning board of adjustment application for variance relief and a checklist uh specific for this. These two applications now separate zoning board requests from planning board requests and provide the applicant or resident
with an easy transition to the appropriate board for application review and approval. Uh the zoning board uh had already started reviewing in April and I believe they are gathering input from their board. Um and Mr. Gavagia had had sent these over to Mr. Brewer. He had
reviewed and had no legal comments. Uh so now it's uh before the planning board to review and I would like to ask for any um comments or questions by our next meeting. And that's all I have for all business.
Anything else for old business? Okay, close that portion. We'll move on to new business. The master plan amendment to the housing element and fair share plan. One of the roles of the planning board is the adoption re-examination of
amendment of the burough master plan. Tonight the board will be considering an amendment to the housing element and fair share plan portion of the burrow master plan. Karen, is everything in order related to noticing the state county surrounding
towns as required? Yes. I'll ask Miss Kelly to walk us through the planning methodology. And Miss Hover, can you please swear Miss? Please rise. The testimony you're about to give in this matter shall be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. For the record, can you state your full name spelling your last name? Sure. My name is Kate Keller. My last name is K E L L E R. Can you just provide the board with you with qualifications? Sure. Hi everybody. I have been here before. I believe I've met most of you. Um I'm a principal with
um Philips Price Ryol. LLC based in Hoboken. I am Liz's partner. Um I've worked with her over the years with a number of of tasks in Morris Plains. Most recently um you know we've all been involved in preparation of of fair share plans throughout the state and I'm here
tonight to present yours. Thank you. Thanks. So I will I will just go through this. Um so as this board is aware this um the state is currently in what is known as the fourth round of the affordable
housing. Um, this is based on the original Mount Laural decisions back in the 70s and 80s. And there's been a long process that at one point involved COA, the Council on Affordable Housing. And now, as of last year, 2024, there is a
new process in place that dictates how the fourth round is um is managed. So, I'm going to go through um you know, just really where we are, where the where the bureau stands with affordable housing, what their obligations are for the fourth round, and how we're going to
meet those. Um so, as um the vice chair stated in his opening, um this is a um public hearing for the adoption of the housing element and fair share plan, which is an element of the burough's master plan. So, you know, this is, you know, we think of it a little
differently because it's the the housing element, but this is really another element of the master plan and so all the procedures are similar for this board. Um, so the plan that you have seen in draft form was bas was was prepared in order to comply with the
fourth round of legislation. And in 2024, the governor signed into um law what was known as bill number A4S50, what we are calling in our report the amended fair housing act. And
essentially this eliminated COA. COA had been you know had been really pushed aside as of 2015 but this is really what abolished it. It set new standards for establishment of the municipal municipal fair share
obligations for the fourth round which is July 2025 through June 2035 and subsequent rounds and it created the affordable housing dispute resolution program to oversee um man basically manage this process for the municipalities.
So just to uh to see where we are today and how we got here is that the the DCA department of community affairs were tasked with and this is all per the state the statute. So when I say per the
amended FHA this is all part of that package of new laws or that new law that was that was adopted in 2024. So per that statute, the DCA, Department of Community Affairs, state agency was obligated to issue their calculations
for the municipalities present need and prospective need. This was for all municipalities in the state of New Jersey. This was issued in October 2024. Um the present need, that's what's sometimes known as the rehab obligation. That's a number of, you know, existing
deficient housing units in the municipality that are occupied by low moderate income households. Mars Plains did not have a present need obligation. That number was calculated as zero and that's a very complex calculation that involves you know a lot of census data and they do they do a lot of detail and
in Morris plans that number was considered zero. So that was the obligation for the present need. the prospective need. That's really the new construction or the new new provision of affordable housing obligation that we are addressing in this plan and that's a projection of the need for low and
moderate income housing and that's based on development in the community growth. It's based on um the amount of land that's available etc. And so it looks at that as the fair share of the regional standard for each municipality.
So as mentioned the um the October 2024 DCA released their numbers and the present need of Mars planes as stated was zero. The perspective need was 137. And the way that the um law was written is that these numbers were non-binding. This was DCA's first attempt at
calculating it. the municipalities were permitted to take a look at it and by January 31st 2025 had to adopt a binding resolution um either you know stating their participation in the affordable housing program in the process and if they thought the number was
miscalculated preparing a new number there. So that is what Morris Plains did. um January 30th, 2025, a resolution was adopted in which the burrow stated they would be participating in the program, which is how we are here today. And we and our firm um did some
recalculations that set the present need still at zero. We accepted that number, but sought sought to adjust the prospective need down from 137 to 106. And this was essentially based on our review of lands that they had stated were developable that we pushed back on
because they were really not developable for reasons that you know sometimes it was environmental constraints sometimes it was township owned property that was restricted from development etc. So this was the initial um calculation. Um as part of the dispute resolution process,
the build New Jersey builders association which is a trade group of builders pretend mostly home builders and residential developers filed a timely objection which had to be in in by February 28th of this year. So they request they requested that the bureau
find the perspective need to be 137 units aka the original number. Uh the bureau held a settlement conference with um uh Miss Laney, with the with the professionals, with the um and with those from the um builders association in March of this year. That was held
with the program judge, which is a special judge that um a judge that was appointed to the town by the affordable housing dispute resolution program and the special adjudicator for the burrow. um again a a professional planner who was also assigned by the state and that
they failed to reach a settlement but the program judge issued their recommendation on on April 3rd of this year in which they agreed with our calculation with the burough's calculation of 106 units and the Mount Laurel judge for the county subsequently
confirmed that on May 13th. So, took until May 13, 2025 to get this uh uh to get get it official, but the the um the state and all the judges of the affordable housing dispute resolution program agreed with the bureau's stated
uh number of 106. So, the numbers that we're working with here for the fourth round, present need rehab again, zero units, perspective need 106 units. So, that's that's where we started off at in preparing this housing element and fair share plan. So just to go through the
components of this plan um one of the things that we had to do we had to look back on the prior rounds which would be really the second round but which was um or 1987 to 1999 and then the third round which included the like what they call
the gap period when COA wasn't really functional and that was from 1999 to 2025. So um Mars Plains has addressed their obligation for those prior rounds. um everything has either been constructed or the township is um has every fully
believes that they will be constructed and still represent um a time an appropriate uh provision of affordable housing. So when we got that out of the way we were left with preparing our new plan and so we actually from the third round have a carryover of two credits.
So just to go through what we have prepared in this 2025 2020 2035 fourth round plan. Um again present need there's no obligation but the bureau will continue to participate in the Mars County housing rehabilitation program.
Um this is a county program that provides funds to income eligible households um to address major failures of systems, you know, heating, HVAC, um you know, plumbing in their home to get them up to um a better standard of living in their primary residence. So the burough will continue to participate
in that. And then um in order to address the prospective need, that's the 106 units, the first thing that we did was we prepared um what is known as a vacant land adjustment. And this is a method of looking at your vacant land in your
town. Um it's it's been part of the rules for affordable housing for about since I think about 1999. And so the um this was done in the last round and we did it again here. So um so the vacant land adjustment looks at the
fact that this is a small builtout community. There's limited land available for the development of low and moderate income housing at densities that um are what what the state looks at for inclusionary development. This is mostly due to environmental constraints. Um and then other land that's open space
is reserved for open space per the master plan per the open space plan. And so those are not considered to be developable lands per the vacant land adjustment. So, we did the vacant land adjustment and you can this is included in um the I'm not going to go through all the properties that were um
considered to be developable, but you can find those on page me um those are on page 31 of the of the housing element and fair share plan. And in total, that came out to be 8.26
developable acres. And that includes lands that we we subtracted the um environmental constraints, we subtracted deed restrictions etc. So we when you make your when you in order to uh use utilize a vacant land adjustment you have to then calculate a realistic
development potential and that is defined as um what how many units could be developed assuming that all of those 8.26 26 acres were reszoned for inclusionary development at the presumptive minimum density of six units
per acre with a set aside of 20%. So in real term, you know, simpler terms here, you have 8.26 acres. We use the presumptive density of six units per acre um which has been um established in a lot of the the case law and a lot of
the um the past um um uh rules regarding COA COA in the past. And now this fourth round and the total number of dwelling units that could be developed was about 49 and a half 49.57 6.8.26.
So when you you take that 49.57 number and you you see how many affordable housing units you could get at a set aside 20%. And that number came out to 10 units. So the realistic development potential in Morris Plains as part of the fourth round plan has been
calculated at 10 units. Um and that means um what could be developed based on that vacant land. So the first part of addressing the fourth round compliance is how to compliance mechanisms that will address this 10
unit realistic development potential. And this was th this is really the the crux of the plan. These are the units that the burrow has to provide. And the way that this was calculated or excuse me the way that the way that that the bureau will be complying with this per
this plan is that there's a surplus. There's a carryover of two units from the third round. Basically two extra units got developed um that were not part of the third round plan. There is an existing arc group home which there um there's expansion. this the zoning
board approved an expansion for that in 20 uh 23 which uh recently received certificates of occupancy. So, that's two bedrooms there and then there's two bonus credits that the township, excuse me, that the bureau can take for that property. Um, which I'll I'll explain a
little bit more, but basically the new affordable housing law um re re kind of recalibrated the bonuses that were available to take. And so, supportive housing, uh, group homes, etc., special needs, each bedroom is worth two is worth gets an extra bonus credit. So for
the ARC home um for the new expansion, four new four credits were available there. Um and then there is a new um supportive special needs facility called RAM New Jersey um that that is actually a six-bedroom facility um which would
have been able to take um all of those six bonus credits except for the fact that there there are limitations in place. So the the this plan takes only one of the bedrooms from that facility towards the fourth round realistic development potential and only takes
half of a bonus credit. And there's two reasons for that. The first is that the amended fair housing act requires that 50% of the affordable units provided as part of round four have to be available for families with children. Um and so you know something like a supportive
housing bedroom does not meet that standard. And so the idea is that you're providing a variety of homes in your community. So of the fourth round um five five units have to be available to families with children. So I'll get we'll get to how we're going to meet
that. But so in this case involves a lot of math. Fortunately, we're working with single digits here, but um so so in this round the the family with children was two units from the third round. Those were considered for family units. Um,
and so in this case, so now we're up to 1.5 form, four per arc, and two from the carryover. So that is 7 and a half. And so we can only take one half of a bonus credit form because you also limited in
how many bonus credits you can take, which is 25% of your total RDP. So in uh Morris Plains, that is 2.5 out of the 10. So we're got we're up to there. Um so now and and I'll explain this because
you know obviously you can't provide half of a housing unit but this all it it all it all is almost like a holistic view of everything and it's better to take all the credits that you can versus leaving any on the table even if it's half of the credit. So then finally the
new um there's only one new um mechanism that's proposed in order to meet the RDP and that is a inclusionary reszoning of block 112 lot 2 which is otherwise known as 100 Candlewood Drive. This is a 1.7
acre parcel that's located next to the Sinesta Suites. Um it's owned by them now. Um but and it's currently in the OB office office building district. uh currently does not permit multifamily housing. Um it's undersized for the OB
district. It's 1.7 acres where two is required. So we did um we're required to do an analysis of this site per the regulations which shows that it's available. It's not encumbered by any deed restrictions or other hindrance. It's suitable. Um it's a it's a site that's nearby other residential
development. It's within walking distance of businesses, bus routes, and route 10. Um it can be accessed from various roadways. It's developable, which means it has adequate water and sewer service, and it's approvable in that it can be a development of the size
that's proposed, can be on this site consistent with state statutes such as the residential site improvement standards and JD regulations, etc. So, we included draft zoning for this site as part of the appendices of this report. Um, no, no act no zoning has to
be adopted at this time, but we've proposed the draft zoning and that shows a maximum of 17 dwelling units per acre on this site, which would have a 20% set aside. Um so the total development yield would be 30 units maximum including six
affordable units and those would be required to be family rental units in order to meet the three extra of that we need for the RDP. So then we have one last compliance mechanism and this is
that the um the new affordable housing law the amended um fair housing act requires that the municipality also put zoning in place to address another to address 25% of the RDP. So in addition
to the 10% that excuse me to the 10 unit RDP, you have to put zoning in place that that will um really identify properties that represent realistic opportunity to redevelop in the in the fourth round. I know this sounds similar. There is a distinction there
which is really that um you know the RDP is what you have to do and this is a new regulation that is meant to account for potential additional development. And in this case, um, the burrow has, uh, it actually worked out very well because
those three units are also going to be at 100 Candlewood Drive. So the six units that are proposed at 100, six affordable units at 100 Candlewood, three of those will go towards meeting the RDP and the other three will go towards addressing the uh, likely
redevelop likely development um, during the future during the next 10 years. So that's where that six comes into play. Um again, it's it's a little bit of um it's a little little there is a distinction there and typically and typically most most towns you'll see
those on different sites, but here because of the way that this that this site was available and because of how the numbers worked, both of those will be on this one site. Um so you know, the really the summary there is that 100 candle will will provide up to six affordable units. Three will use to be
addressed. the bureau's fourth round RDP obligation and three will be used as the identified 25% of the RDP for future development throughout the fourth round. Um and then you know just just to go through some of the other requirements
um 13% of all units will be very low income. This was also the case in round three. This will be two units out of 100 Candlewood will meet that requirement. 50% of all of the 10 units will be low income. 25% will be rental units. 50% available to families and then half of
units will also be available to families. That goes back to what I was talking about with why we have to kind of um why we can't count all those group of home and supportive housing numbers. Um there's also required bedroom distribution um which again will comply
with all UHAP requirements. Um so that is what that what that this what this plan includes and that will take the burrow um through the um fourth round which ends in 2035. Um the next steps here are that this um you know if the
planning board approves this tonight it will go to the governing body for um you know um not so much it it's approval for the for the process of the state um the state program for the governing body um to uh adopt another resolution support
in support of this and then it will be submitted to the state's um affordable housing dispute resolution program where it is then also every every um it's it's able to be um appeals can be can be filed throughout
the summer and then you know we'll get another look at it see who comes out if anyone has appeals for it um such as New Jersey Builders Association like they did in January um that will all come out over in in I believe August. So but this is this is what we are proposing to meet
that obligation. Happy to answer any questions. I know it's a it's a even though it's not it's not a large number that we're dealing with here, there's a lot of rules, a lot of regulations. So, happy to explain if anyone has any specific questions. So, just before you take any questions, I just want to show everybody the um Do you want me to Yeah,
the parcel of property that we're talking about. So, this is Foxwood up here. Okay. For everybody um and this is the piece, this little red piece here is there's the parcel that we're talking about. And this larger red piece here is uh that's Candlewood right there. So as
you come out Taber Road or Route 53 and you exit to go out to Route 10, uh that's where that piece of property is behind Harley-Davidson and and whatnot over there. Liberty Gas station has rough ideas. Thank you, Mayor.
Does that consume the whole eight acres that we had available for Excuse me. Did uh my bad does that consume the whole 8 acres that we had available for building? No, that that property is 1.7
acres. Um the realistic development potential of 10 acres um that is based on that whole 8.25 acres, but because of the fact that the township excuse me that the burrow is using other mechanisms like the supportive housing like the carrier over
units from round three means that that n that not all of those eight acres have to be reszoned or used for inclusionary housing. And is there a simpler way to express that my my question is going to sound weird. You start out with 106
units being approved by the court. I think you came up with 10. We went through that lake. I was going to bring this up vacant land adjustment. Yes. So, we had 36 acres that the state gave us that recognized say, oh, you can
build on these. Oh, gotcha. Gotcha. And we're like, no, that's not true. Yeah. We we brought that down to eight. Gotcha. Yes. From there, hundred or more parcels of pieces of property lot by lot we went through to to get it down like
she said some were evenings some had environmental constraints some were open space or parks right so this is what we came down that's that's where you're drastic right lowering number thank you mayor the only thing I would
just add to that is the one another way to look at this is that getting the the initial um calculation of the prospective need that was done that was the first part of this process and that was done in response to the Department of Community Affairs coming out with
their number. And so that that was you know looking at ways at the calculation that DCA had provided and what whether we thought there was issues with that which we thought there were issues and the courts agreed with us. So then then we were assigned this number of 106
prospective and so then as part of the preparation of the plan and it actually is really a compliance mechanism for meeting that 106 that's where the vacant land adjustment comes in. So there's some similarities in that process but they
are really two different processes. They look at two slightly different things, but the the difference is also that with the the number that is between the 106 and the 10, really the 106 and the 13, that's going to that's known as the unmet need. Um that's not something you
have to you don't have to to to have uh proactive um um you don't you don't have to to identify pro you know uh sites in your plan like we are with 100 candlewood but that and the way that we are meeting that technically is is the way the way that we're complying with
that is through the vacant land adjustment. So that 106 number is still the official obligation. And so the vacant land adjustment is used as a as a compliance mechanism. And not every town, you know, I I work in many towns where we didn't do a vacant land adjustment because there just is
there not this kind of tightly built built out suburb. Um you know, where there is a street grid, there's there's highway patterns, stuff like that. So it is well I I mean Yeah. Yeah. And then you know not even to talk about rural more rural areas but so you know it really is the way and this has been in the law for a while and the way it's
it's to it's because they understand that especially in more you know it's train station suburb places like that there there really is not that much land to go around. So two square acres two square miles it's not much to play with. So so my question would be and maybe you
don't have the answer and thank you for what you just did that was a lot of information. Um, I hope it was helpful. So, the property is owned by the hotel? Yes. So, then the hotel is the one that has to build this. No. No, they don't have
to. Um, and I I don't know. I I actually do not know if what the what whether there's been discussions or anything with that, but that property just they can is is what is where what has to do. It's not saying that there's no there's no agreement in place with them. As far
as I'm aware, we're just zoning it. We're just zoning it. We're just The burrow just zones it. Whatever happens, a builder may buy it may put it up. A private person. Zone. All we're required to do is zone.
Provide the opportunity. Exact opportunity. And if the opportunity never happens, it doesn't matter. So, we have a 10ear obligation. Right. So, that's what I'm saying. So, within 10 years, somebody will take care of it. You're
confident and and what will happen is that build is already complaining we don't have enough for them. What will happen in 10 years is that either those units will be provided or the the burrow in the fifth round go even think about that um will you know you have to you have to either demonstrate why it's
still presents a realistic opportunity or you have to make up the unit somewhere. Um, so we're not there yet, but the obligation on the burrow at this time is to reszone it, not just put an overlay on it to actually, you know, fully reszone the property to allow for
um this type of multif family development at the prescribed acreage at this prescribed density to build it. So I do have one question. Thank you, by the way, very much. Very very very good. Appreciate that. So the the last the
last part of this is reading through that you have page 33. Um there's something in there about the the spending plan. Yes. Can you just explain a little bit about what that is and why we do or do not have to Sure. Absolutely. Um so a spending plan is
typically a requirement of the affordable of of the fourth round um housing elements and fair share plans. And a spending plan is where a municipality details um really what they expect to go into their affordable housing trust fund, how they're going to spend it, etc.
Um Morris claims at some point made a policy decision that the bureau would not have their own affordable housing trust fund. They would not manage the trust fund and so the bureau does not have one. The bureau collects development fees as appropriate in
accordance with the law and is in full compliance with the collection of development fees. However, um there w there is an option in the law for towns to opt out in this way and in that case the monies go to the state and the state manages and spends the money. So because
of there is no affordable housing trust fund in Morris Plains there is no requirement for a spending plan as part of this um this master plan. Thank you. Sure. Anybody else on the board?
I just I just want to say before we do this, we started this uh we started the affordable housing or I started the affordable housing committee put it together back in 2024 and we met for the first time I believe
was in March or April of 2024 and um that's just from learning in the last round right and being prepared for this and getting to this kind of number. I also want to reiterate that um the the burrow and I say the burrow as
the as the mayor and the council are certainly not against the affordable housing. It's the density of the housing because these builders are able to buy build five units for every affordable. So at the beginning of this you heard me saying 137 units times 5 is 600 and
something. That was a real possibility and and it still could be a possibility but um through the meetings and going literally lot by lot uh to see what these lots were, whether they were open space, whether they were parked, whether they part of somebody else's property,
whatever the case may have been. Uh to get it down to the eight acres from the 37, 36 acres rather, was you know, that was that was a pretty hard task. And um I think the pro is in very good position. I think having this piece of
property here, I think, is very good. Like the You said we had a short period of time to come up with this once we did get our number from May 13th to June 16. Yeah. Right.
And uh and and we did it. So I want to thank everybody that was on the affordable housing committee that spent their time and volunteering, you know, hours and hours to to get us to where we are today. Monumental feat.
something very good about I mean kudos for doing it as well. If you think of the impact of that number of housing on traffic on just everything fire department fire department services
and one one thing I would add Mr. Mayor is that the 137 initial was reduced to 106 by the courts and that with barring some major major change to the whole law which we don't anticipate that can't go
back up to 137. So you know you're really the part of that first process is really like looking at how it was calculated and recalibrating that baseline in order to make it fair to to really reflect what the town what the bureau had available. So, I think that, you know, just want to just want to note
that because I know here we're looking at getting it down back down to 10, but we those that is set in stone by the judge that 106. Why would that make a difference? What if they said 500? It we we simply don't have the land for them to have done
anything is unrealistic. Well, they didn't say much. What do you mean? Um, well, I'm saying it would matter if it's at 136 or 106 is six of another. At that point, it doesn't matter because we didn't have the base based on the ratio of 5 to1. It is to have done any more
more than what we're saying. No, absolutely. And that and that and that's what that's what we're putting forward. I just want to make sure, you know, I just wanted to to clarify that um you know that that that because there's going to be there's there's these organizations who look at these plans. They objected to the first time and we were successful the first time. So, you
know, I have no reason to doubt that we won't be again. But, you know, that's just the way where you're you know, get that obligation down and then you have the compliance mechanisms in place. So that's you know that that that's that's where we were careful in the first the first earlier this year.
Mayor, I'd also like to thank you for two things. One for the transparency tonight, but also for the education meeting that I wasn't able to come to, but I really appreciate that as well. I do think it's helpful to understand the huge long process that this has been and
everything that that the bureau has done to actually get to the right answer. I think it's important that people understand Thanks, Andrew. It takes everybody. That's really true. And that is very true for everybody, too. He's got hours and hours and days
and weeks preparing all this. The love going over the um And Frank and I sat down and we went over every single lot and block. Every easement, every piece of property that has
wetlands on it. It was hours and months. Months. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And we could not have done it without Frank because my god, he knows every inch of this thoroughly. But that was with Liz's help. I mean, it was huge. And and
that's one of the That was why, you know, in that in the when the law was written, it said the DCA's numbers are non-binding and that was that was their way of saying you know more about your towns than we do. And so they were like they they listened they really they
listened and the judges listened when in the first and then then the vacant land adjustment and that you know when you are this thorough as we you know our firm takes pride in how we do these plans and especially in Morris plans where they help with the where you can help with the committee um you know we have every right to that they will see
it this way. So, and the other thing is you have to make sure that that these um so all of open space this is is this actually it's called a Rossi. It's your recreation and open space inventory that all of the open space is actually on
that inventory or you can't count it. So, anytime you have property that you've acquired through grants or uh open space trust funds, you have to make sure that that is on that plan. Otherwise, you won't be able to count it
as uh you know already developed or not available or it's or that it's used for a legitimate public purpose, right? Because not every piece of public land can go on the Rasi because there's you know you're using it for municipal purposes, but that's also considered are
valid. You know, it's not developable if you have some kind of utility on it or you have some kind of, you know, public really something that serves the public purpose. Yep. Absolutely. Do you have anything to add? No, I think she did a great I'm not trying to deck
my job here, but I couldn't explain it any better than she did. She's intimately involved and she did a great presentation. Thank you. So before you open it up for a public, I just want to read the introduction of this uh the fair share plan.
Uh this housing ele this was prepared by Liz Laney and your office. This housing element and fair share plan has been prepared on behalf of the burrow of Morris plain Morris County, New Jersey in accordance with the New Jersey municipal land use law, the New Jersey
Fair Housing Act as amended applicable rules established by the council on affordable housing and the administrative office of the court's directive. This document addresses the bureau's plan to address its 2025 2035 2035 obligation to provide its fair
share of the regional need for affordable housing. This fourth round housing element and fair share plan will be submitted to the affordable housing dispute resolution program and subsequently to Superior Court for a determination as to its compliance with the requirements. The municipal land use
law requires that the municipal master plan include a housing element in order for the mun municipality to exercise the power to zone and regulate land use. The H housing element and fair share plan is adopted by the burough planning board and endorsed by the governing body. It's intended to achieve the goal of meeting
the burough's obligation to plan and regulate land use to provide for fair share for the for a fair share of the regional need of affordable housing. Morris plans remains committed to meeting its constitutional obligation to provide through its land use regulation
a realistic opportunity for a fair share of the region's present and prospective needs for housing for low and moderate income families. This housing element and fair share plan document outlines how the bureau will address. Thank you.
One one thing I'd like to add, mayor, is is that when when this is accepted and approved, that will give us immunity for any organization, for any builder to come in and say, "You haven't met your obligation. Now, we're going to force
this on you like they did with the Eminem development and the JMF development." Yes, Mr. Ky, that's a very good point. Just the actions that are taken tonight and by the governing body, doing that before June 30th gives the bureau immunity. So, you know, as long
as because we are, you know, you're we're participating in this process. We're going through this process. There will be opportunities, you know, for these for people to challenge it potentially, but none nothing is the the the the the burrow in this process is keeping their
immunity. And uh just a point of clarification. So this entire document when we adopt it will become an amendment to the master plan. Correct. So then it'll be it'll be part of that public document that will have access.
It'll be an element. It'll be an element of the master. It will it will really it will really replace the third round housing element, right? Because it includes the third round in this. Yes. Exactly. Exactly. Um the only other thing just just one thing just um administratively is that we did catch
you know caught a few typos. We're going to fix those and Liz will be providing Karen with a clean copy for adoption um for endorsement by the governing body. just a few nothing nothing substantive at all but you know big document few little typos so Liz will be providing
that yes yep absolutely so um and I don't they're not even you know they're really just little things here and there nothing that changes the contents of the plan before you hear from the public just let me say the affordable housing committee was it was uh Dave Schultz was the chair
myself Art Broom was on it Mike Presler Mike Garaglia Bill Houston Sumakus Ed Bill Ryden is our engineer and Liz Ly was our and again that was hours and hours and hours of their time and that document
that Jason reading from was 176 pages. Does any of the board members have any other questions? Any of the public have questions? I'm just going to make sure I I'm understanding. Joanne, do it again. 31
Campfield plays. Okay. So, the way I understand it is the burrow has to supply or have a space for six lowinccome housing units. And we have this lot that we don't own. So if this
person who owns these this lot doesn't want to sell it or develop it, how are we complying with that six unit? The municipal can only reszone it. We don't have the ability to develop it. So
we the zoning creates an ability to develop it and comply. Okay. But if we don't supply those six units in the next 10 years, then what happens? Then we have to then you'll have to address them in the fifth round. So, so I would just just to clarify the the the the language
the the municipal's the municipality's obligation is to provide a realistic opportunity for the development of those units. And that does not mean that the municipalities to build them themselves. It means that it means that the and that's why this the re the municipality
has to reszone the property because right now it doesn't permit this. So reszoning the property going in there permitting the uh level of density that I described with the six affordable units set aside that is the municipal obligation at this time. Um and that by
doing that if this you know when this plan is is finalized and adopted that is how the municipality provides that realistic opportunity. Okay. But if for some reason in 10 years that doesn't happen then is there some kind of
mechanism? Yeah. Like I said then if has not developed by the fifth round which again long time from now but 20 2035 and if the rules stay the same um what would happen then is that municipality has to either demonstrate that there is still a
realistic opportunity for development and I don't know you know and who knows you know there's a million things that could happen between now and then that why it didn't develop but um you have to either demonstrate it's a realistic opportunity for development still which um you know it may very well be or
provide a different site But but there's it's not that that's the only obligation. Okay. Just you said there were eight acres total that were deemed you know wouldn't it be prudent to approve
reszoning for all eight acres so that there's more likely to be somebody some of those acres are already. Okay. So why do we have to resone this time? We're still going to have future rounds coming up. So you still need Oh
gosh. So those are already zone. And some of them are residential. I mean, you might not want that in, you know. Well, I didn't want McDonald's and I got that. So, but that was zoned for um you know, no. Um yeah that because the the
answer is that that's that's not what the law requires providing this realistic opportunity and with all the analysis that was just you know that was done by the affordable housing committee by the professionals you know this was determined to be the realistic site because for example some of those 8
acres they they they are part of the vacant land adjustment because they are not able to be excluded through by what the law says but how you can exclude property for example there's there's There's three properties that are all adjacent on a residential block that Do
you know where that is? It's in it's it's in this um but they're not they're not considered that's part of this um they're part of the the overall uh vacant land adjustment but that was you know and then there's also burrow owned
land that was also not determined to be u considered the most suitable site. So I mean and and it's also just this having this site here and again all it has to be done it has to be reszoned. Okay. Seems like a lot of work to have
nothing happen for maybe 10 years and then have to start all over again. A lot of money and time and people's lives. That's what the law requires. Yeah. I mean it is you can you can reach out to your legislator. Tell them thankful voting. Thank you very much to all the
state legislators that signed this in the law and the governor too. Thank you. Thank you. Carolyn Bennett 19. Hi. Um I'm piggybacking off of what Joanne was just saying because I don't think I'm fully understanding. So maybe
this is for you. I don't know who the eight acres that are currently deemed developable, if that's the right word. Um, you're saying some of them are already zoned to be able to fit these six
housing units. So, can you just reward why we need to reszone this other piece of land because I'm not I don't know if that's is it's so I so some of it's a recycle center, right? Right. That was deemed
developable. That's already on our there are portion. So the so the lands that are deemed developable are thus speak because there's a section in the state statute that says what type of lands can be excluded from your vacant land
adjustment and those are a number you know your vacant land adjustment is supposed to examine lands that are owned by that are owned by the municipality lands that are vacant which is class one on property tax records a few other things um I don't think in Mars planes but it's like farm farms that are in
planning area one, metropolitan planning area, etc. And then you look at each of those and there's reasons that a property can be excluded. And those reasons include if it has environmental constraints on it, if it has a deed restriction on it, if it's used for a legitimate public purpose, but if a
property, you know, for example, the recycling center property, um, it's it there's still a portion of it that's not developed and not deed restricted, that's that's that's big enough that the state requires it to be counted. So that's where that comes in. Um, so yeah,
any of this brown ash more? Yeah, up here. Yeah, that's like the recycle center. Um, across here, this is 260 Taber that's already affordable there. And we have a piece that's right next to this piece that we're looking to
develop. So all the all the developing properties right basically in that area. Um there are some steep slopes there. There's some also some construction. So I would also notice that is that an overlay zone is that or is that AF1
AF21? Okay. So then the answer is that it's part of prior rounds and that could be double counted. So anything in red is no commercial. Okay. And that's what we're saying we want to
read this little portion right here. Okay. I don't know if I'm just not understanding because I keep hearing the 8 acres. So, I'm like, "Oh, 8 acres." Then I'm hearing that some of it's already zoned for this and if the requirement is just to reszone
something, it just I'm not understanding and I don't know if I'm asking it in an intelligent way. I don't think I care as long as we're not told we need to put down 106 units. So, so here the answer is that you have to provide for the realistic opportunity
for 10 new units. So, seven of those units are through the supportive housing through the prior round. So, three new units have to be provided. And if something is already zoned for inclusionary housing, it's part of a
prior round or something like that, it's not considered a new unit. So, Even though something even it's considered developable land but it has to we need to create new opportunities based on the amount of developable land and that's why a new property has to be included.
But but even then right so you went through this whole process of elimination. You essentially got down to 11 lots in town that make up the eight. Right. Some of those are like big enough you can put stuff together and some of them are not big enough you can do it much with but that makes up the eight.
Yes. The 8.26. Okay, I think I might just need to I have nothing against affordable housing. I mean, I probably qualify for it. So, it's nothing of that at all. It's just I don't want this is all very new to me. So, if you're interested, the
the full document, which I do not have in front of me, um the full document has a methodology explanation for the how the vacant adjustment was conducted. It's great sleeping reading. Um I also I was not understanding. So
let's say we move forward, we reszone it the red that's by candle. Yes, I'm tracking it gets resone and then I wasn't following the conversation that you guys were having. If the hotel doesn't want to give it up, but I think
the quote was that if it's reszoned, the builders will come. What does that mean? So there's an opportunity there for forest suites to develop it themselves. Could you speak into the microphone, please? They may develop it themselves. There's
an opportunity for them to sell it to a developer and have a developer develop on that. Also, there's a 10ear time period that we have a builder or somebody has to satisfy this obligation, right? If that does not happen, it gets rolled
into our next obligation from 2035 to 204. So what role do do that does that property owner play in any of this? So they just get told after this is passed, hey, we reszone property that
you're owning. That's going to be this. And then it's up to a builder to come and say, hey, I want to buy this because it's reszone. for it or they may want to build themselves and make the money or they may want to sell the property because now it may become more valuable
and sell the property to a building. I'll say maybe towards a million now toward three million whatever. So just because it has this reasoning just because because the builder has the opportunity of not putting three units on there of putting 30 units on there
and not and not only just putting something like an office on there where there isn't a big market. Yeah. So so you know and and those other units that are not affordable, he can charge exorbitant rents like they do everywhere else. So this is a win-win for a builder
to come in. Again, it's five to one. Yeah. And I would again, you know, to go back to what I was saying to the last member of the public is that the burough's obligation is to provide a realistic opportunity for the development of the affordable housing. And by fully reszoning this property to
explicitly permit that, they are providing that realistic opportunity because the law does recognize to a certain extent that you can't control the free market. So you know that's what this realistic opportunity is about. Okay. And so once this is reszoned and
builder who is not we don't know who that is. It is this mysterious builder would come buy the land or they would build it themselves. They just need to check the box that is the six units of affordable housing and then how many others can they build there? It is being
reszoned for a maximum yield of 30 residential units of which 20% have to be affordable set aside. They cannot build more than 30 units on the property under the proposed zoning that is part of this plan. And it's the town that would hold them accountable for not
building 31. Correct. Yeah. They have to come to they have to come to the board and everything. I know it all sounds very This is you know this all goes through the courts. It's these settlement agreements with the courts and And then they would have to come to the planning board and show this is what we're planning to build. Yeah. How many
square feet, how many parking spaces? And there's the And if they do get to that point, you know, all of the affordable units have to be deed restricted for a certain amount of time. They have to provide the correct amount of bedrooms. They have to say what level of um affordability they're going to be, moderate, low, very low. So, you know,
there is a lot of oversight in this process from the town's perspective. This is the bottom of the ladder. Yes. And this is this is looked at every single year. Every one of our affordable developments, they have to submit records and show that they are still
maintaining that these people still are eligible. It's a huge huge administrative process. Did I say something that made it seem like I didn't think that? No, I want you
to understand that it's not just you build them. There is constant constant oversight on whether or not they are maintaining their obligation. Okay. Okay. Yeah. And I'd like to have full confidence in that 100%. Like I wish I
could say that I am 100% confident in that and maybe this is a much bigger scale than recent conversations I've done. It it's just there's a lot of things top of mind. So I appreciate that and that is Carol. I'll just say that as one of the newer members of the playing
board, right, it it is a lot to take in and it took me a while to I don't even want to say understand it because there there's a lot of information, but um it it you're not alone in hearing this information for the first time and
trying to um evaluate it all. So, um but you know, I I've looked through it a lot as as the other members of the planning board have. Um and I I do think it it does make sense. um what we're trying to do um and we are doing and the numbers
um you know they spent a lot of time working working this stuff out so I think it is the the best option that again as the mayor said right it is a state obligation that that we are required to meet yeah no I I don't argue any of that I I don't I don't have any
intent in arguing anything right now it's really me just learning so I appreciate it and I don't discredit any of the hours hours hours hours hours hours hours hours that have been put into Um, I appreciate all of that. So, thank you. Thank you.
Any other questions? Okay. So, the next order of business then is to adopt resolution 25-12. Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. Okay. We're going to close that session.
Okay. Next order of business then is to adopt resolution 25-12. Each board member has received the copy by email and hard copy. Can you please read the resolution for us? Resolution adopting housing element fair
plan amending the master plan for the burough of Mars Plains. Whereas NJSA 405D-28 authorizes the planning board to and after public hearing, adopt or amend a master plan or components thereof to guide the use of land within the municipality in a manner that protects
public health and safety and promotes the public welfare. And whereas the Burrow of Morris Plains Planning Board conducted a public hearing on June 16, 2025 to consider the adoption of the housing element fair share plan of June 2025 entitled Burrow of Morris Plains,
New Jersey housing element and fair share plan fourth round 2025 to 2020 to 2035 and prepared by Elizabeth C. Leah professional planner known as the housing element. And whereas a notice of said public hearing was published duly
published in the official newspaper and written notices were served as required by the provisions of NJSA4 55D-13. And whereas said at said public hearing, the enforce document was presented to the public and members of the public were given an opportunity to be heard.
And whereas the board finds the housing elements consistent with the physical, economic, and social development of the Laura Morris Plains and the purposes of municipal land use law as stated in NJSA 405D-2. Now therefore, be it resolved by the land use board of bur of Morris claims
in the county of Morris, the state of New Jersey on the 16th day of June 2025 as follows. The board hereby amends the burrow of master plan Burrow of Morris Pain master plan and adopts a housing element in the form considered by the board and attached here two and the
planning board secretary is directed to record this date June 16th 2025 as the date of its adoption. Two, the planning board secretary is authorized and directed to provide notice of this action in accordance with NJSA 405DS3. Planning Brook Secretary is hereby
directed to forward a copy of the housing element of June 2025 together with a copy of the resolution of the PL of the resolution to the office of the planning advocacy and to the Morris County Planning Board as required by law. This resolution shall take effect
as provided by law. Thank you. Can I have a motion to approve the resolution adopting the amendment to the borrow of Mars Plains housing element and fair share plan element of the master plan? So moved. I have a second
please. Second. Aaron, roll call, please. Mr. Blick. Yes. Mr. Wolf. Yes. Mr. Bezel. Yes. Mr. Houston. Yes. Mayor Carr. Yes. And Mrs. McCluskey. Yes. I just want to make sure it was Mrs.
McCluskey and Mayor Car. Am I right? Yes, you're right. Correct. Okay, then I'd like to close this portion of the agenda. Our next schedule planning board meeting is July 21st, 2025. Have a motion to adjourn tonight's
meeting. So move. Second. Second. All in favor? Opposed. Thank you everybody. Everybody has a green mind.