Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses decoupling Salisbury and Wicomico planning commissions and creating a county-only commission
Summary
County planning director and legal counsel presented a draft bill to dissolve the joint Planning and Zoning Commission and form a separate Wicomico County Planning Commission; topics included membership size, representation, appointment process and city/county administrative burdens.
Wicomico County officials proposed dissolving the existing joint Planning and Zoning Commission shared with the City of Salisbury and creating a separate Wicomico County Planning Commission, saying administrative burdens and heavy city agendas have strained county staff time.
Tracy Taylor, director of the county Department of Planning and Zoning, told the council the city’s agenda increasingly contains the majority of items and the county has continued to perform staff work — agendas, notices, reports and minutes — without reimbursement since 2018. Taylor said that work has created a risk that county items receive less attention and that serving as secretary to a joint commission places the county director in a difficult advisory role on city matters.
County legal counsel Andrew Luminotti explained the proposal would align Wicomico with the common practice across Maryland’s charter counties. The draft calls for a county commission of either five or seven members (state law permits 3–7), residency requirements, mandatory state training for members and removal procedures. The plan also contemplates keeping existing members through a transitional period to preserve institutional knowledge and coordinating timing with Salisbury, which intends to adopt mirror legislation for its own commission.
Council discussion covered representation (district-based appointments vs. at-large selections), quorum and alternate-member options, concerns about special-interest dominance noted by a council member who described repeated lobbying by a single local economic group, and the city’s unpaid contribution (historically about $160,000/year before 2018) toward county administrative costs.
The council asked staff to return with refined language and options (five-member with alternates versus seven-member commission, appointment and removal conditions) and to engage the planning commission for comment before forwarding a legislative bill. No final vote was taken; staff said the city’s comprehensive plan timeline favors a fall transition if both jurisdictions proceed.
