More on the inner workings of Charles County government…. In Hughesville, there is a business called Everything Amish. It sells excellent tables, knick knacks and also sheds and gazebos; a very welcome business in Hughesville. The store itself sets on one lot zoned CN (neighborhood commercial) and has two adjoining lots to the north both zoned AC (Agricultural Conservation.) They wanted to rezone the two AC lots. To rezone a property one has to prove one of two things, (1.) A substantial change in the character of the neighborhood where the property is located; or (2.) A mistake in the existing zoning classification. The owners filed an application to change the two AC zoned properties to CN based on the fact of a mistake in the original zoning. Now as much of an asset that this business is to Hughesville, the members of Preserve Hughesville opposed this rezoning because they felt it would precipitate a mass rezoning outside of the Village of Hughesville and the Village itself would fall further in decay because of lack the of the commercial infill recommended by the Revitalization Plan, which is usually more expensive than a virgin site.

The application went to the Planning Commission. A public meeting was held on October 16, 2006. On December 16, 2006 the Planning Commission had a work-session meeting. Not only did the Commission forward to the County Commissioners a favorable ruling on the application on the basis of a “mistake” but they interjected into the ruling, THAT THERE WAS ALSO A CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. Now I have all the respect in the world for the Planning Commission, but I do not think that it is their place to do the applicant’s work for them. Everything Amish could have added “Change” to their application but chose not to.

On March 7, 2007 the County Commissioners held a public hearing on the application. The applicant presented the Commissioners their Statement of Justification on the basis of mistake. All those testifying opposed to the application did so on the basis of “mistake.” It is my personal opinion that in fact no mistake occurred. We even had testimony from a former Planning Commission member present at the time of the original zoning who emphatically stated that there was no mistake. But I digress.

On April 4, 2007 the County Commissioners held a work-session. Please note a portion of the meeting minutes from that work-session: In response to questions by the Commissioners, Mr. Fink clarified that the petitioner could re-file a petition based upon a substantial change in the neighborhood and that a stay (short-term delay in proceedings) had been issued with respect to the zoning violation issued to Everything Amish and will continue until the Commissioners make their decision. They did in fact postpone the decision until their next regularly scheduled session to allow time for them to review the public record and sort out issues of zoning mistake and substantial change of neighborhood.

On April 18, 2007 a follow-up work-session was held by the County Commissioners. They decided to remand the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission for clarification of their recommendation.

On January 8, 2008 the Planning Commission discussed the reconsideration. A portion of the meeting minutes read: Mr. Grasso stated the Commission felt it would be beneficial if the opinion was based on both, given the information during testimony. Mr. Grasso will write a letter for the County Commissioners, under the signature of the Planning Commission Chairman, informing them of the reasoning behind the decision.

On April 16, 2008 the applicant submitted an addendum to include A CHANGE IN NEIGHBORHOOD as a rationale for the rezoning. This went through the county attorney on April 18, 2008 to the County Commissioners. It was also included on the website under Boar