Governor's Advisory Committee on Chip Mills

Governor's Advisory Committee on Chip Mills
Department of Natural Resources
Conference Center
Jefferson City, Missouri
March 6, 2000

Meeting Minutes

Committee Members Present
Jerry Conley, Director, Department of Conservation
Stephen Mahfood, Director, Department of Natural Resource
Senator Wayne Goode, St. Louis
David Bedan, citizen environmental conservation group, Columbia
Joe Driskill, Director, Department of Economic Development
Jay R. Law, Conservation Federation of Missouri, St. James
Mark Garnett, forest products representative, Brandsville
Emily Firebaugh, forest landowner, Farmington
Representative Bill Foster, Poplar Bluff
Senator Doyle Childers, Reeds Spring
Jon D. Smith, forest products representative, Mountain View
David Day, private property owner organization representative, Dixon

Interested Parties Present
Earl Cannon, Department of Economic Development, Jefferson City
Bill Bryan, Attorney General's Office, Jefferson City
Cory Ridenhour, Missouri Forest Products Association, Jefferson City
Dan Schuette, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Dr. Jerry Wade, Facilitator, University of Missouri, Columbia
John McCammon, The Nature Conservancy, St. Louis
Roy C. Hengerson, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, St. Louis
Scott Brundage, Missouri Consulting Foresters Association, Columbia
Ken Midkiff, Sierra Club, Columbia
Dr. Bernie Lewis, Dept. of Forestry, University of Missouri, Columbia
Tom Lange, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Llona Weiss, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Martha Buschjost, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Connie Patterson, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Lynn Barnickol, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Brian Brookshire, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Richard Duchrow, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Jane Epperson, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Shelby Jones, Consultant, Jefferson City
Bruce Palmer, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Russ Titus, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Tom Treiman, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
David Urich, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Hank Dorst, Mark Twain Forest Watchers, Elk Creek
Tom Kruzen, Missouri Heartwood, Mountain View
Becky Denney, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, Kirkwood
Mike Hoffmann, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Charles Hirt, Canal Wood, Jackson
George H. Baker, Osage Beach
Denise Vaughn, West Plains Quill
Eugene L. Brunk, Jefferson City
Bob Krepps, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Chuck Mathery, Westvaco, Wickliffe, KY
Steve Galliher, Willamette Industries, Piedmont
Frank Hershey, Society of American Foresters–Water Resources Working Group, Jefferson City
Dan Witter, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Sarah Tyree, Department of Agriculture, Jefferson City
Ron Kucera, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
John W. Smith, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Steve Shifley, USDA Forest Service, University of Missouri, Columbia
Randy Crawford, Department of Natural Resources, Jefferson City
Kevin Perry, REGFORM, Jefferson City
Katie Auman, Dogwood Alliance, Yellville, AR
Amy Struckhoff, St. Louis
John Wood, Westvaco, Wickliffe, KY
Charles Davidson, Conservation Federation, Jefferson City
Louise McKeel, Village Image News, St. Louis
Jane Smith, Department of Conservation, Jefferson City
Bill Moore, Canal Chip Corporation, Conway, SC
Denise Vaughn, West Plains Quill
Dan McKeel, Washington University-Village Image, St. Louis
Carol Pufalt, St. Louis
Jack Slusher, University of Missouri Extension, Columbia
Picheat Prommoon, University of Missouri, Columbia
Delwin Johnson, Sierra Club, St. Louis

Call to Order

Jerry Conley called the meeting to order at 10:20 a.m. Steve Mahfood announced to the committee that the packet of information received contains final input on the committee's draft report, an article, a discussion piece from Jay Law regarding the issues and comments, and recent information. This does not require immediate action, but it is important. He added that this meeting would last until 3:00 p.m. and that the public hearing was scheduled for 4:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. He requested that the audience fill out comment cards. A court reporter would be at the public hearing and the transcript available afterwards. Requests to speak would be on a first come, first serve basis. The committee may ask questions for verification. He requested that speakers please turn in copies of written materials.

Review of January 24, 2000 meeting minutes

Mr. Mahfood noted several typos, but no serious policy problems. Jay Law made a motion that the minutes of the January 24, 2000 meeting be approved with clerical corrections. David Day seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Department of Conservation draft report on the chip mill issue

Jerry Conley explained the process of developing the MDC report. Jane Epperson chaired the MDC committee, and she provided a brief overview. The committee started their work in 1997. The committee included:

Lynn Barnickol, Forestry Division
Brian Brookshire, Forestry Division
Dick Duchrow, Fisheries Research
Jane Epperson, Administrative Services Division
Shelby Jones, Forestry Division
Bruce Palmer, Outreach and Education Division
Russ Titus, Wildlife Division
Tom Treiman, Forestry Division
David Urich, Natural History Section

The committee looked at the chip mill issue from every level. Each member drafted a section of the report based on their area of expertise, and the final draft was completed in December 1998. The report was submitted to MDC management at about the same time that the chip mill committee was formed, therefore MDC management and the Conservation Commission have not acted upon this report.

Since the report was completed 1 ½ years ago, Senator Wayne Goode asked if the MDC committee would change any of the recommended actions. Dick Duchrow responded that the aquatic principles used still apply. David Urich responded that the biodiversity recommendation and procedure is still valid. Senator Goode concluded from the report that the committee views chip mills as a possible threat to long term sustainable forests, water quality, and habitat. With increased clear cutting, are these still viewed as threatened areas? Jane Epperson explained that the committee did a rigorous review of all the issues, the committee believes in what it developed, and believes the recommendations stand. The committee's recommendations were based on the best science available.

Jay Law noted that one recommendation was the need for a study in Missouri. He would like to have additional information on the observations in Tennessee. Since the Ozarks are unique, a study is needed. Ms. Epperson pointed out that Recommendation 8 includes research in the Mill Spring and Scott City chip mill areas. Brian Brookshire confirmed that information specific to Missouri is needed. Mr. Law wondered if the southeast studies are applicable. Mr. Duchrow agreed that a Missouri study would provide valuable information.

Joe Driskill expressed interest in the forestry group land program. Many years ago landowners were more apt to participate. How can the forest group land program be made more attractive? Mr. Brookshire explained the program. For enrolled land, county property taxes are reduced and MDC reimburses the county. Since taxes have not risen at the same rate as property values, the program is now less attractive. Previously there were 500,000 acres in the program and now there are 154,000 acres in the program. There has been some interest in revising the forest law to include a tax credit, or some incentive-based program, rather than a personal property tax reduction. Enrolling land for 25-30 years is not attractive because of land turnover. There have been suggestions of a 10-year minimum, and then the landowner could re-enroll in the program. It is the landowner's responsibility to manage the land in the program. The landowner is to have a plan developed by a professional forester. This is basically a stewardship plan; a multi-faceted plan based on the landowner's objectives.

Dave Bedan questioned Recommendations 5 and 6. They will require law changes, and will they be effective? There is no data from other states on these issues. He also questioned the status of the MDC document as policy. It has been stated that MDC has no policy on chip mills. Mr. Bedan is very concerned about a 1995 MDC memo and news release regarding chip mills. He believes these documents set policy and were not addressed appropriately in the MDC report. He also believes these documents helped persuade chip mill companies to Missouri. Mr. Brookshire explained that MDC is the holder of wood products data and works with all companies considering locating to Missouri. Chip mills were initially considered a possible opportunity to market low quality timber. MDC is committed to best management practices. Jerry Conley stated that the committee was made aware of the October 1995 news release, but the committee was not given direction to work within a policy. MDC needed a good, fresh look at what was going on. Mr. Conley agreed with Mr. Bedan that a couple of recommendations will require law changes. Emily Firebaugh noted that the gentleman that authorized the news release now works for a chip mill company. The news release and memo may reflect his attitude, and not necessarily the attitude of MDC.

David Day questioned the reasons for Recommendation 6. Mr. Brookshire responded that the intent is to track what is happening across the state. This gives MDC no authority to enter property. An inspection would have to go through the landowner. The overall intent is to track timber harvest progression. Mr. Day is adamantly opposed to this recommendation.

Senator Doyle Childers asked about the habitat characteristic comparisons between private and public lands. Russ Titus summed up that they are similar. Senator Childers also asked about ways to market lower grade timber. Mr. Titus and Mr. Brookshire responded that there are really no markets for lower grades of timber. It is a challenge for land managers to properly manage to benefit forests and wildlife habitat. Bruce Palmer discussed landowner education efforts. One-on-one forester and landowner contact is best, but the number of foresters is limited. Ms. Firebaugh added that the mass removal of culls necessary for marketing would not be financially feasible. Mr. Day added that intensive education programs targeted at large organizations would be beneficial. MDC has a lot of good information, but it is a well-kept secret. Recognizing the fragmented approach in the past, Mr. Brookshire added that a major objective is to coordinate partnerships through MDC's new private lands program directed by George Seek.

Senator Goode asked if chip mills provide a market for low-quality timber other than a clear-cut situation. Are they active in the market under a normal marketing process in a way that does anything other than cutting and hauling? Bruce Palmer responded that he knows of one logger that has equipment for pre-commercial thinning or selective cuts. Senator Goode asked to what extent MDC monitors timber cutting. Mr. Brookshire responded that MDC does not monitor this. Senator Goode and Mr. Brookshire have heard from constituents via letter and e-mail that clear cutting has increased in the proximity of the chip mills. MDC does not monitor or sample. Senator Goode questioned why better monitoring of chip mills is not a higher priority. Mr. Brookshire responded that issue is up to MDC management, however, MDC cannot enter private land without permission. Since there is no baseline data, it will be hard to monitor the impact of chip mills and clear cutting. Senator Goode thinks this is a problem for the committee. He wondered if flyovers already conducted to monitor burning would help ascertain the amount of clear cutting.

Ms. Firebaugh complemented the MDC committee for producing an easy-to-read document, and wishes the chip mill committee could do the same.

Mr. Bedan believes there needs to be good research on the effectiveness of all the education programs. He wondered how quickly the education efforts work. Mr. Palmer responded that MDC will be conducting surveys soon. Mr. Day encouraged follow up in 5-10 years to target the more effective methods.

Ms. Firebaugh stated she educated herself on some of the issues; there was too much of a delay with MDC foresters. The new stewardship program may be more advantageous. With all of the changes occurring, foresters and landowners need to stay alert, educated and up-to-date. Mr. Day believes the MDC education efforts will help. Ms. Firebaugh added that the university extension master tree-farming program is good.

Mr. Mahfood expressed concern about water quality, habitat, and tourism issues. There are definite water quality concerns in the MDC report. Mr. Duchrow added that forestry harvest practices, not just chip mills, affect the environment. Environmental problems include stream corridor warming, silting and nutrient loss.

Mark Garnett asked for more information on the MDC continuous inventory. Mr. Brookshire responded that this was conducted on a 10-year rotation. Now, different parts of Missouri are inventoried continuously. Water quality is a totally separate effort.

Ms. Firebaugh added that there is very little that can be done about water quality without a baseline study. How do we get funding for a baseline study? Mr. Duchrow responded that another study would be localized, but still prove what is already known as far as degrees of damage. Ms. Firebaugh questioned how a citizen can prove a neighboring harvester is causing damage. Mr. Duchrow responded that this could be difficult depending on the situation. There could be damage from indirect sources such as road construction. Road construction is the main cause of sediment. Mr. Law believes this is an area that needs to be researched. Mr. Brookshire believes there has been research on this issue. Several committee members discussed the need for baseline information. Some members believe a moratorium is needed until information can be gathered, particularly in the 18 county area. Mr. Driskill stressed that there needs to be a way to get people to make wise decisions about land. Incentives work better than regulations. He requested that MDC produce a report for the committee on the amount of money spent, by category, and include what other states are doing to get people to participate in management programs. Mr. Brookshire responded that MDC can produce information on what MDC has spent on various incentive programs.

Mr. Garnett asked if best management practices are implemented, will water quality improve. Mr. Duchrow responded that it would, assuming those practices were put into place properly. There would be less sediment runoff. Mr. Garnett asked to what extent the bad cuts are resulting in permanent damage. Mr. Duchrow responded that even wide spread damage can heal in several years, depending on the degree of damage. Streams may be warmer in areas converted to pastureland.

Mr. Day asked how many landowners have gone through an education program since the chip mills came to Missouri. MDC has a database that tracks contacts by category. Ms. Firebaugh stated if payments are low, for standing timber, few landowners will cut. The timber industry puts false values on standing timber, keeping the market depressed. Most landowners want to know what to do with their land. There are different definitions to the terms clear cut and best management practices (BMPs).

Mr. Bedan asked Mr. Duchrow about permanent nutritional loss and soil erosion. Mr. Duchrow responded that all topsoil will not be lost. The natural healing process will include small grasses and annuals that will start the soil-building process, in relation to simple clear cuts.

Mr. Garnett asked how water quality is measured. Mr. Mahfood responded that this is a process DNR staff goes through, with information from other departments, to assess stream health, the impact of pesticides, habitat, and lost sediment. This information is included in a formula, with controversy on how this is done and to what extent. There is no mandated formula. Each state is on its own. DNR's approach is that every stream mile needs to be fishable and swimable. There are proposed rules on agricultural practices that will affect this process, focusing on point and non-point sources. Pre-notification is being considered as part of the best management practices. Mr. Garnett asked if there is a way to benchmark the water quality now. Mr. Mahfood responded that he can check with DNR staff, but he does not think there is without going back to the moratorium request. A report can be given to the committee at the next meeting.

Mr. Day asked if testing water quality at the points where streams enter and exit land would prove who is to blame for pollution. Mr. Mahfood responded that there have been situations like this.

Senator Childers gave an example of a school building and parking lot construction project. The small tract of harvested forest between the school and parking lot had an insignificant affect on the stream as compared to the construction of the school and parking lot.

Lunch 12:30 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.

Mr. Conley and Mike Hoffmann discussed the timber inventory. It takes five years to complete, and MDC is now in the second year. A fifth of the plots are completed statewide each year. The preliminary report will be available within two months. An additional 50 foresters will be needed if prenotification of sale becomes law. Ms. Firebaugh asked if MDC could work with county assessor's offices to determine which land is available for harvest, then send notice of prenotification obligation to landowners. This might solve the additional forester staffing problem, depending on the number of sells. The legislation discussed is strictly prenotification. There is nothing in the legislation to limit or stop the sells.

Mr. Bedan and Ms. Firebaugh discussed the responsibility of prenotification and if the landowner or logging company is responsible for prenotification.

Mr. Law and Mr. Titus discussed the species impacts from harvesting in the Ozarks. Ms. Firebaugh mentioned an article she read about a new chip mill coming to Missouri that is not mentioned in MDC's report. She will fax the article to Llona Weiss.

Discussion of approach to committee decision-making, summary of comments and additional information

Mr. Mahfood reviewed that at the last meeting the committee decided not to exclude any information in the decision-making process. The committee needs to decide how to proceed on decision-making. He requested the thoughts of the committee.

Mr. Day prefers a role call vote and documented pro and con discussion. Mr. Law is not pleased that there are 70 decision items at this stage. He expressed his concerns of the facilitation of the committee and discussed the need for a closed session to discuss procedures. Bill Bryan reminded the committee that in a closed session it is only legitimate to go over personnel issues, not procedures unless there are specific legal questions. A decision must be made in open session.

At 2:10 p.m., Mr. Law made a motion that the committee go into closed session. Mr. Garnett seconded the motion. After some discussion, a role call vote was taken, with a final vote of 6-4 for closed session.

Yes No
Rep. Bill Foster Steve Mahfood
Mark Garnett David Bedan
Jay Law Jon Smith
Emily Firebaugh Sen. Doyle Childers
Jerry Conley
David Day

At 2:25 p.m., Mr. Law made a motion that the committee go back into open session. Mr. Smith seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Mr. Mahfood explained that the closed session was brief since there was nothing to discuss in closed session. The committee continued a detailed discussion of voting process and procedure. Voting will take place at one of the next two meetings. The draft final report will be finalized. There was additional discussion of the list of 70 items and whether or not more items should be added or deleted, and if the list should be prioritized. There was concern from some members that discussing and voting on 70 items would take too much time. Others believed that there would be less than 70 items on which to vote when they got into the process. The original list of 70 items was put together when the committee was not planning to vote. Ms. Firebaugh expressed her concern that the committee needs to establish a dialogue and organize the information received from the public. Mr. Mahfood expressed a willingness to establish a subcommittee to create a working summary document for voting purposes. He asked that the committee e-mail ideas for inclusion to Llona Weiss.

Representative Foster mentioned the possibility of a signature vote instead of a role call vote in order to save time. Senator Childers noted there is much concern about private property rights. There was detailed discussion on whether the committee should vote on this specific issue or include this issue in the preamble. Mr. Mahfood requested that the committee review the list and return to the next meeting with any additions. He requested that if the committee wants additions, to e-mail their issues to Ms. Weiss before the next meeting. Mr. Mahfood is proposing use of the role call voting process except for the members that will be unable to attend the next meeting. Possibly, those members can signature vote. No decision was made.

Ms. Firebaugh made a motion that the committee use this document as a basis for voting, including any additions to the list before the next meeting, during the next one to two meetings. Mr. Law seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.

Public Comment

Mr. Mahfood requested that each speaker please limit comments to five minutes or less since time was running short before the public hearing.

Hank Dorst distributed information, attached, including classified advertisements for timberland. This is a good example of the pressure on the Missouri Ozarks in the years to come. One phone number called is in Arkansas with a recording that does not indicate a company, and the other number is in Alabama. Mr. Dorst recommended the committee try calling these numbers. The final draft says the Goodman chipper is just a residual chipper, but recently it seems they have round wood on their yard. It sounds like they are chipping trees, as opposed to just slabs. The railroad spur in Willow Springs just opened the new weighing and loading yard. They are taking mainly pine, but are experimenting with hardwood markets. Mr. Garnett was recently mentioned in a newspaper article about this opening. The article referenced Mr. Garnett's earlier-mentioned plans of moving his chipping operation and doubling production. Mr. Garnett clarified that it is all residual chips, and has not done anything for a year. At the beginning of the process Mr. Garnett wrote a note to the committee about his business affiliation. Mr. Dorst asked if Mr. Garnett was going to be able to make the stated production increase by sticking to residuals. Mr. Garnett responded that he is not going to do anything, right now the chip markets are terrible. Mr. Dorst added that the demand will continue to grow. With the demand projections going out all over the country, eyes are on the Missouri Ozarks. Mr. Dorst's second handout provided a brief overview of five other states' notification procedures. Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and Maine all have notification procedures as a tracking tool, which is desirable. Monitoring inspections are debatable, but notification could be done with a toll free number to the agency. Cory Ridenhour clarified that the round wood at the railroad spur in Goodman is a result of consolidating operations, they only use residual wood.

Tom Kruzen stated that there is constant repetition that forests are only here for wood products. Forests exist for other reasons such as plants, animals, erosion control, storage of water and slow release of water back into the atmosphere. He would like to see the committee discuss alternative forest products offering landowners the opportunity to make money in ways other than cutting down all the forests. Shelby Jones did a Conservationist article about this subject. Mr. Kruzen objects to the discussion of rough and rotten culls going to high capacity chip mills. While on the chip mill tour, the committee saw the pile of approximately 95 percent good, straight wood. As of January, that pile has grown, with the same proportions, with not much rough and rotten or slabs, but good, straight wood. Mr. Kruzen hopes the MDC works on the monitoring issue. A 15 percent success rate on education is pitiful compared to the 10 percent success rate of the professional logger training for the Missouri Forest Products Association. These are not successes, and are things that need to be reversed. Mr. Kruzen hopes the committee can complete their work in two meetings, realizing that the debate has to end at some point. He asked that the committee please consider some of the things he and others have mentioned.

Ken Midkiff discussed the EPA proposed rule changes regarding the 303(d) list. This proposed rule will require NPDES permits of logging operations that are near impaired streams. In Missouri, there are no streams documented as impaired by logging operations. There are 202 impaired streams caused by thermal pollution, CAFOs, and lead mining. This is not to say there aren't some streams impaired by logging operations. Many impaired streams are on the 303(d) list because citizens downstream complained, causing water quality monitoring. If the quality of water entering and exiting property is good, there is no problem. The new proposed 303(d) rule will not help or hinder the work of the committee, because no Missouri streams are currently on the list. It may be a number of years before any are on the list due to logging. Mr. Midkiff recently flew over an area in Oregon where the very same company coming to this area has impaired streams, so this could happen here. He thinks the committee needs to focus on how these areas are logged, not the landowners, since the landowners are not doing the logging. There are no major problems with small logging operations. The industrial forestry coming to Missouri will create problems that have never been seen before. The committee needs to stay focused on why they were called together, to address high capacity chip mills, not to address small logging operations. If the committee does this, they will avoid getting into arguments about landowners' private property rights, and address the real problem of how big companies are proposing to remove logs from properties.

Roy Hengerson is glad the committee reviewed the MDC report since it is good material. The discussions on potential harvest impacts are good since they lay out the concerns of the environmental community. The MDC report also contains good recommended actions that Brian Brookshire indicated that MDC is implementing, which leads to questions about the exact status of the draft report. Studies from other states could be valid indicators of what could happen in Missouri. He reiterated Mr. Midkiff's point about the focus of the committee and the need to get back to the problem of high capacity chip mills and how Missouri can deal with the goal of protecting forests.

John McCammon thinks the MDC report brought up a wide range of important issues. He addressed two of the issues, best management practices and prenotification. The report assumed that best management practices are good. The report indicated that best management practices cannot be mandatory. How will we protect forest assets? Prenotification seems to be the least intrusive. Prenotification should take place, especially if best management practices are not mandatory. This raises questions about who is responsible for prenotification, the logger or the landowner? How many acres should require prenotification? This also raises questions about commercial cuts and clear cuts. He hopes the committee will make these issues a top priority.

Scott Brundage expressed concern that the committee's end result will not be what the Governor intended. He is also concern that two members have been removed from the committee since their department directors have started attending. Mr. Brundage discussed best management practices in detail. Not all best management practices are good. Some best management practices are not good forestry. Many problems discussed can be solved with the involvement of a forester. In theory, the potential of a chip mill is super. Chip mills are great from the standpoint of marketing low value timber and general species. This can get rid of thinnings or materials that cannot normally be marketed. Logging is the true concern. Mr. Brundage does not think the chip mills have taken a single tree out of Missouri. Independent loggers are bringing the chip mill companies the product. Unlike previous speakers, Mr. Brundage believes forestry is the problem, not chip mills. More education is needed through speaking to large groups. The MDC private lands division will generate interest. Managed clear cuts are good. Forest management plans need to be included in government incentive plans.

Becky Denney commended the committee for continuing with this program. The draft report released in December was rushed and hard to read. The schedule now is much better and she is hoping the next report will be more readable. She wants the citizens of Missouri to be interested in this issue. She is also glad that the MDC studied this issue and wants the MDC report included in the chip mill committee report.

Shelby Jones stated that he has information available that will answer some of the committee's questions regarding quantity, quality and forest management. He discussed these issues in detail with the committee. Mr. Conley asked him to explain the details surrounding the 1995 memo and press release previously discussed. Mr. Jones responded that he fielded requests from other agencies, private companies, and domestic industry for timber inventory information. Many of these requests came from throughout the country, many through the Department of Economic Development. Many times Mr. Jones did not know who had originally requested the information since the request came through another agency. In 1995 several of the contacts were interested in wood fiber in Missouri, but Mr. Jones did not know whether or not they were interested in putting chip mills in Missouri. Mr. Bedan expressed concern that in 1995 Mr. Jones went beyond simply transmitting data, and said this is good for the environment. Mr. Bedan cannot see a basis for this, especially when there is not enough management and the need for more research. Mr. Jones added that his position of utilization marketing forester included finding and developing markets for small diameter hard, round wood. Mr. Jones' information will be sent to the committee before the next meeting.

Mr. Mahfood confirmed that the next meeting will be Sunday, April 9 and Monday, April 10. The May 22 date has been moved to Wednesday, May 17. The June meeting date is undecided. The July meeting is the final meeting, and the date will need to be determined. Another public hearing may be held after June 10. Mr. Mahfood requested that the committee members send Ms. Weiss their available dates for July.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.