Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Preservation Directory topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews draft preservation trades directory; staff to post with disclaimer, bring resolution for adoption
Summary
Staff presented a draft preservation professionals directory intended as a public, informational resource; commissioners raised liability and vetting concerns, and staff said the directory would include a clear disclaimer and be returned to the commission as a resolution for adoption.
Get email alerts on the Preservation Directory topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff presented a draft preservation professionals list intended as a public, informational "professional trades directory" to help property owners locate contractors for historic or vintage building work. The presenter said the list is intended as a starting point, not as a vetted endorsement, and that it would be posted online with a disclaimer explaining the town does not verify or recommend listed vendors.
The presenter explained the list was compiled from agencies in Maryland, Virginia and Charles County and included contact names and websites where available. "The directory is not an endorsement by the town of La Plata, Maryland, or recognition of professional competency," staff read from the draft preamble and said the town cannot verify licensure or performance for every firm on the list.
Commissioners raised concerns that the list, even with a disclaimer, could create a public perception of endorsement or invite complaints if residents relied on it without further vetting. One commissioner recommended the town attorney review the draft preamble for any legal downside, and staff agreed to consult the town attorney and return with any suggested language changes.
Commission members suggested minor changes and asked whether a feedback or review mechanism should be included; staff said such feedback systems can introduce liabilities and that online review tools (Yelp, other third-party sites) remain available to the public. Staff recommended bringing a resolution for formal adoption of the list and said it would accept commissioner feedback up to two weeks before the next meeting.
The commission did not adopt the document at the meeting; staff said it would bring a finalized draft and a resolution for the commission to consider at the next meeting and would post the directory online once adopted.

