2026-03-09 - Minutes DRAFT 1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Corporation Counsel had found that the original threshold at the start of the program had been 80 percent, that it later changed to 70 percent, and that in 2015 it was reduced to 50 percent, where it had remained for about 10 years. Cmr. Rosam also stated that she did not believe a blanket resolution was the proper approach and felt that maintaining checks and balances was helpful. She added, however, that future political circumstances could change depending on the County Council and the Mayor, and she believed the higher threshold could reduce internal or political influence in PONC acquisitions. She stated that a 70 percent threshold, which she characterized as a solid C grade, was reasonable. Chr. Chang stated that the Commission had no control over what the County Council or the Mayor ultimately chose to do. She said that the Commission’s control was limited to receiving suggestions, rating them, and prioritizing them, after which the matter moved to the County Council and the Mayor. Cmr. Markoff stated that he believed the scoring system made the process more democratic. He further commented that, if some of the ideas discussed during the PONC summit were implemented, including removing the Mayor’s involvement from the process, the acquisition process would become more streamlined and more democratic in how parcels are selected. V. Chr. Britt then asked how the Commission should treat agricultural conservation easements under the scoring system, specifically whether those properties would need to be informally boosted in order to qualify or whether anything scoring below 70 percent would simply not be considered. Chr. Chang clarified that 70 percent would be the minimum threshold. V. Chr. Britt acknowledged that anything below 70 percent would effectively not proceed. Chr. Chang responded that a property would not receive a score allowing it to gain priority status if it fell below the threshold. She also noted that this would not prevent resubmittal of a property in a later year, although that could result in the Commission seeing the same properties again. V. Chr. Britt stated that she had initially agreed with the 70 percent threshold, but after reviewing the properties under consideration, she found it more difficult to support. She added that the Commission could still try the change. Cmr. Lawson stated that, in her view, a 70 percent threshold would better reflect Commission consensus that a property belongs on the priority list than a 50 percent threshold. Cmr. Rosam responded that, even with conservation easements in mind, the scoring criteria still allowed meaningful points in areas such as acquisition feasibility and availability, which together account for 30 points, as well as support, maintenance, and management, which account for 20 points. She added that protection of agricultural lands could also receive points and stated that she did not think conservation easements would be negatively impacted by the higher threshold. After asking if there was any further discussion and hearing none, Chr. Chang called for the roll call vote. VOTE: DRAFT v.1 BS - Minutes of March 9, 2026 Page 5