[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6611324,"mediaKeyId","2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f","parentId",2898364,"title","Resident alleges black mold at county jail; commissioners say they will investigate","audioSeconds",229,"startMs",4834000,"endMs",5063000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f&start=4834&end=5063","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f/thumbnail_4834000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6611324/Caroline-County/Maryland/Resident-alleges-black-mold-at-county-jail-commissioners-say-they-will-investigate","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611324-a4f58d5cbab9f097b61b119e42390e2c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440634&Signature=VYGD2haVCN5gDDgpfhrH7rBR-tLh~baIAz~xVrG7Ih~PlA5YmLikxmCekSI25fYvOgHDYJGTdZlfxTr6VvFk7n~~Kovlx4QoQikMNA4~ikjKCxbD0L4CZwX5QiBFD1KCBGMWnnZ7lxJ1JQIx~mI31eMun43dUcNrQhegW~HPojfIFDX9Z-sYt6~kTF4E3axxH6jZ7D9l7PkOOmUm65bLeMX6CgAu28yJrETMIwJbEH5-OtVE87J-9nDc3wSiX-ZxZr~neB3KisYz9fzmjHhLbvViwSfgm6eyfDOhwE3BU0jpztFQFkDoDQHcuuZ0CUJukV2UM72D1MFwLa5ivJjbMg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Caroline","date","2025-04-08T00:00:00Z","article","A Denton-area resident told the Caroline County commissioners Tuesday that she found black mold throughout the county jail’s shower areas during a recent stay and that her attempts to get a response from county staff were unsuccessful.

Ashley Pleasanton addressed the board during the meeting’s closing public comment period, saying she spent about a month and a half at the facility and observed black mold in showers and other areas. She said she saved a sample and asserted staff had not responded to calls and emails. The transcript records her saying, “There is black mold everywhere in there.”

Why it matters: Complaints about mold in a county detention facility raise potential public‑health and liability concerns for detainees and staff. The commissioners said they would investigate the allegation.

County response: Commissioners and staff told the speaker they would follow up, review the matter and noted that the state of Maryland performs facility inspections. A county official said the county had not been informed of mold at the facility and would perform due diligence to investigate the claim and respond. No formal county finding was reported during the meeting.

What’s next: Commissioners asked staff to look into the matter. The transcript does not record any formal motion, inspection result or remediation plan; county staff said they would investigate and follow up with the speaker.

Provenance: The comment and county response are recorded in the transcript at ~4834–5079.

Ending: The county committed to investigate the allegation; no inspection results or remediation timeline were provided at the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Caroline - Caroline County Commissioners Meeting - Apr 08, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","A resident told commissioners she experienced black mold in showers during a recent incarceration and said county staff and the jail failed to respond; commissioners said they would investigate and noted the state conducts inspections.","taxTitle","Caroline County, Maryland","taxId",61674,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611329,"Commissioners designate Maryland State Police as primary regulator for scrap‑metal and pawn enforcement",249,3775000,4024000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f&start=3775&end=4024","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f/thumbnail_3775000.jpg","/articles/6611329/Caroline-County/Maryland/Commissioners-designate-Maryland-State-Police-as-primary-regulator-for-scrapmetal-and-pawn-enforcement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611329-98a4364a0316a853c3a661e57681f9b5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440634&Signature=LVdRe91UwydN5Zuk4ElcKUJduZeQkfU0IulF4aiyum7SwuV5TazeltsoHaYqMvvwSo307J-CxAKvz5ioMXg2VPvNxIh4neAFdIRs3O6kn9zIGPLRVaOOZ7ELhusDxz6Ddg9F6XhGrOMC3U7AtcvOjW9RYTIo7QIEnPq37lcqH9l1AnTAhhSni-Lpv-f8qF8KBWCpYMgHzRCyEenFQdHDP7VM4GYcKRe0ic1iGEooH3fI2ONRSKORACakFtI7-nUMEXop6iZYUoAPMDz7SwmclAU4nKGcYTEkt21i4JmaBazD9RVPsQ09EfbgkPRFW9Qs5gbQakTjvK1apNcaKeHW~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Caroline County commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday to adopt Resolution 2025-011, designating the Maryland State Police as the primary law enforcement agency for state statutes governing junk and scrap metal dealers, secondhand precious metal dealers, pawn brokers and automated purchasing machines in the county.

Captain Rodney Helmer of the Sheriff’s Office told commissioners that when the original county resolutions were adopted in 2010 and 2015 the Maryland State Police lacked dedicated personnel to oversee these statewide responsibilities in the region. The state police now maintain assigned investigators for the Eastern Shore region who regularly handle investigations and holds; county and state personnel often coordinate on cases that cross county lines.

Why it matters: The resolution transfers operational oversight for statutory reporting, seizure holds and licensing coordination to the state police, allowing county sheriff’s office resources to focus elsewhere while preserving law‑enforcement continuity in the region.

Key details: Captain Helmer said the state police routinely take investigative leads in the region and maintain dedicated staff for the unit; adopting the resolution formalizes that arrangement. The board approved the resolution on a motion and second; commissioners voted aye without recorded dissent.

Provenance: Presentation and adoption of Resolution 2025-011 appear in transcript timecodes ~3775–4024.

Ending: County staff will implement the resolution and coordinate with the Maryland State Police for ongoing oversight and licensing matters.","The board adopted Resolution 2025-011 to transfer primary local oversight for junk/scrap metal dealers, pawn brokers and automated purchasing machines to the Maryland State Police, citing dedicated state personnel in the enforcement unit.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611334,"Commissioners map state road priorities: MD 454, MD 404, MD 16 and 313 on list for May letter to Secretary of Transportation",253,3101000,3354000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f&start=3101&end=3354","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f/thumbnail_3101000.jpg","/articles/6611334/Caroline-County/Maryland/Commissioners-map-state-road-priorities-MD-454-MD-404-MD-16-and-313-on-list-for-May-letter-to-Secretary-of-Transportation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611334-2ee48d738127bc35709f5cc630c6f381/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440634&Signature=hojDRdAJj8R9zKUw8basqz~j7ch33GmMoztaRdD7rVRLUbrxBBrm7t0gzfNYyqwKjxKfvppZLm4mxwf0IeQqpxbpuNBdxNkiUJ3727J-5l6ZWpNibIdEmKvFC9u7tEpXvHjmLnpbOD7ZOzlQWJnRvOmy0bgFzGuqjKysL1CwGnbl5SaTHbPCJhn41U96DA6U70e6zOdgk49gTwm-IjM1gb0yKf0sEPX41U-r5nB0AazbqxAkhIo8J656ci1RaFtLFh-3hH3FSmFpdmEWeXjiZ--BE92yXghjhE~mEdNDXZBwyw9eyg4WMEnDYhC~axeO1MZ2zCEU~eFWmJ0t3YiKVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Caroline County commissioners instructed staff Tuesday to draft the county’s 2025 state transportation priority letter with a primary focus on maintaining and resurfacing existing state routes, and to include several locally prioritized corridors.

Among items discussed for the May submission were maintenance of Maryland Route 454 (Crownstone Road), completion of safety improvements and turn-lane work at the MD 404/Maryland 328 (River Road) intersection near the high school, final paving of MD 16 from Lake Drive to the MD 404 intersection, continuation of MD 404 wider improvements and traffic‑management signage, and resurfacing needs on MD 313 between Greensboro and Goldsboro and and on Fettlesburg Highway. Commissioners noted interim work already planned by the state but urged finishing pavement work and shoulder/turn‑lane treatments where needed.

Why it matters: The county’s annual priority letter informs the Maryland Department of Transportation’s regional planning and allocation of paving, turn‑lane and safety projects. Several items discussed affect school traffic and emergency‑service access.

Key details: Staff reported the state plans paving for segments of MD 306 this fiscal year and earlier intersection work on River Road is awaiting final paving — officials said completion is being timed to school schedules. Commissioners and public commenters urged inclusion of MD 454 and MD 313 safety and paving needs; a local resident also recommended a right‑turn lane conversion at the 313/317 intersection to reduce confusion and improve fire department access.

What’s next: Staff will prepare a draft priority letter for the commissioners’ review at a subsequent meeting before the May submission deadline.

Provenance: Discussion of priorities and route suggestions appears in transcript timecodes ~3101–3674, with public comments on 313/317 and MD 454 appearing later in the session (≈3313–3463).

Ending: Commissioners offered additional road suggestions and asked staff to include resurfacing, turn‑lane and signage improvements in the draft and to return the draft for final approval before the May deadline.","County commissioners discussed priorities for the annual county transportation request letter to the state, instructing staff to draft a May submission focused on maintenance and resurfacing of existing infrastructure and specific corridors including MD 454 (Crownstone Road), MD 404 intersections, MD 16 paving, and MD 313 (Greensboro–Goldsboro).",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611338,"Caroline County to study fee for pre‑CPCN solar site-plan reviews amid FY26 fee schedule workshop",293,740000,1033000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f&start=740&end=1033","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f/thumbnail_740000.jpg","/articles/6611338/Caroline-County/Maryland/Caroline-County-to-study-fee-for-preCPCN-solar-site-plan-reviews-amid-FY26-fee-schedule-workshop","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611338-682f280a1f2956a1cc8d68642ff01819/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440634&Signature=YyaCs7yZEw5p8CzXfQwrxQoEK2YvjVDQcVTDwLrOmPyZoBM0rq2hwwAGTJtLA6Ig5WVqrEsMCjJDaFuzbt7LzX4HlQWEjitHIsqx36Dj0Ax3GtVLDVsftf6Pvc0~BdvDjHoek4QGbtmVvrWCUlSOeJLMwsi4F63AqBtGqNEnrMiv7ggSlYS7BCfxUylTDk4S5UhP0UdcHPK3r-u5ukK-zygllDnPqMZIXz3fiuFj6Gd46YKE32Hk0UlaoDOosW7MPwMZTr0LH1ZVfMcav5A798aRIesQDV5CvY-wR5nu0-Wc8831qtjkY5w6bjpIseBegPvWoW1YESQIaNGs175HYg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During Tuesday’s FY26 fee schedule workshop, county planning staff and commissioners discussed adding explicit fees for commercial solar energy site‑plan reviews and a proposed fee for a pre‑Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (pre‑CPCN) site‑plan review.

The county’s draft FY26 fee schedule circulated in the meeting packet highlights proposed additional fees for major site-plan reviews and specifically calls out commercial solar systems. Planning staff asked whether the county should charge for a pre‑CPCN review — an early, informal review of incomplete filings submitted to the county before developers file with the Public Service Commission (PSC).

Why it matters: Planning staff said developers frequently submit grossly inadequate pre‑application materials that require significant staff time to review and return with deficiency notices. Commissioners and the county attorney said fees are intended to cover the cost of services rather than generate revenue, and they saw no statutory prohibition to charging a fee if the charge is proportionate to staff time.

Key details: County counsel and planning staff agreed to quantify staff hours spent on typical pre‑CPCN reviews so they can propose a commensurate fee. Commissioners asked staff to investigate the PSC filing fee (noted in the meeting as $10,000 but not confirmed) and to follow up by email with more precise figures. Staff committed to return with a recommended fee amount and the hours the recommendation is based on.

What’s next: Planning and codes staff will calculate the average hours spent reviewing pre‑application filings and present a recommended fee schedule at a future budget workshop. The fee recommendation will be weighed against state rules and the county’s ordinance on fees.

Provenance: Workshop discussion and requests for follow-up appear in the transcript from ~740–1033.

Ending: Commissioners signaled support for a staff recommendation rather than immediate adoption; no fee was adopted at Tuesday’s workshop.","During a FY26 fee-schedule workshop commissioners discussed adding fees for solar commercial site-plan review and a proposed pre‑CPCN review fee; staff will return with a recommendation tied to staff hours and statutory constraints.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6611344,"Caroline County enacts two zoning changes, holds hearings on BZA term limits and wastewater rules",769,1523000,2292000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f&start=1523&end=2292","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2898364-2c1ee7960abcde66add5ad85118f129f/thumbnail_1523000.jpg","/articles/6611344/Caroline-County/Maryland/Caroline-County-enacts-two-zoning-changes-holds-hearings-on-BZA-term-limits-and-wastewater-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611344-ab2548de8deef90d559e707e3d71b5ea/orig.mp4?Expires=1770440634&Signature=Y8lJ0-326WeqMXLGaxNgwbCQejHLOay7ZE9U7s6zwTdRfvl3HFTGXKEOMQcfOTZD-eN8d6aDcT~lT7nIsbEqzDNHE0xfIrXwkILZze6Gxc5BpMdOAmSzad1uUJ4BOMRpfZK-WvzAyiy0JMvVqnRVQt7UW0N9RYQ6D9174CrKp~iSRBfVG5baT~reXSiIyP7Sbu52VyB2pz37gyA2yqaxgRqmCquqtfnzGbH~EENCP6JMmzwbJgFYzDqzL3QuBSKeXcKR6iK3XatnMw2znYsXMVicx2ap5t57PPeCF2dOZF1Kv8s8PEzcF5zPYBPO2zgNcUPXlcQCSKQh9LN6i12upQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Caroline County commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday to enact two amendments to the county zoning code and held public hearings on two additional zoning measures.

The commissioners enacted Legislative Bill 2025-001, which amends Chapter 175 of the Caroline County Code to permit certain cannabis facilities under regulated conditions, and Legislative Bill 2025-002, which adds a code provision allowing the zoning administrator to deny a permit if the subject property has an unremedied state or county law violation, except where the permit application would remedy that violation.

Those two bills were read on their third reading and passed after floor motions. No individual roll-call votes were recorded in the meeting transcript; county staff stated the measures passed unanimously.

Why it matters: The cannabis bill implements state cannabis law by adding specific use categories and setbacks into the local zoning table; the permit‑denial bill codifies an existing planning-and-codes practice into ordinance, formalizing the county’s ability to require code compliance before issuing new permits.

Key details: The cannabis ordinance adds a new Section 175-8b to Article 5 and new use categories for small- and large-scale dispensaries, growers and processors to the County’s Table of Use Regulations (1-75 Attachment 3-4). Planning staff reported they checked municipal setback rules and found Denton already maintains a 500‑foot school setback that would apply inside town limits; county C-2 zoning parcels potentially near Lockerman Middle School and Denton Elementary were found to be outside the 500‑foot buffer. The permit‑denial ordinance clarifies that permits may be denied when existing violations on the subject property remain, but that applications intended to correct a violation will be permitted.

Public hearing items: Commissioners opened a public hearing on Legislative Bill 2025-003, a proposal to repeal limits on consecutive terms for Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) members. Multiple speakers, including Sabrina Barger Turner of Federalsburg and Gerald Franz of Greensboro, urged the board not to remove term limits, citing concerns about entrenched power and reduced community input. Planning staff and county officials responded that vacancies on the BZA are difficult to fill, that members must reapply at the end of each term, and that municipal boards are separate from county boards. The hearing was closed; no final vote on bill 2025-003 occurred at Tuesday’s meeting.

Commissioners also held and closed a public hearing on Legislative Bill 2025-004, which would change how wastewater treatment facilities are classified in the Table of Use Regulations (distinguishing accessory and non‑accessory facilities and moving some uses to special-use exceptions in industrial and mobile-home districts). No members of the public spoke on that bill at the hearing.

What’s next: County staff said third‑reading scheduling will continue, with follow-up sessions planned on the legislative calendar and possible continued work on items that require additional review.

Provenance: Discussion of third readings and enactments begins at transcript timecode ~1115–1202 (reading of bill 2025-001) and continues through ~1473 (passage of bill 2025-002); public hearings for bills 2025-003 and 2025-004 occur at ~1523–2072 and ~2100–2292 respectively.

Ending: The board’s actions complete two code changes now in effect and leave two other zoning matters—BZA term limits and wastewater facility classification—pending further action or later readings.","Commissioners unanimously enacted two zoning bills to allow regulated cannabis facilities and to codify permit-denial authority for properties with outstanding violations, and held public hearings on board‑of‑zoning‑appeals term limits and wastewater treatment facility classifications.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Resident alleges black mold at county jail; commissioners say they will investigate

Commissioners designate Maryland State Police as primary regulator for scrap‑metal and pawn enforcement

Commissioners map state road priorities: MD 454, MD 404, MD 16 and 313 on list for May letter to Secretary of Transportation

Caroline County to study fee for pre‑CPCN solar site-plan reviews amid FY26 fee schedule workshop

Caroline County enacts two zoning changes, holds hearings on BZA term limits and wastewater rules