July 9, 2025                                     Volume XXIII, Issue V

Dear GHCA Members and Friends:
Go-Kart Hearing Continued
July 10 at 6:30PM
3430 Courthouse Drive, Ellicott City

So far the Board has heard 12-hours of testimony over 2 days. To Begin the last session on June 26, the Board voted on the motion made by attorney Macy Nelson.  He filed a motion for reconsideration that in essence argued that the hearing strayed from a purely legal issue of whether the BOA had “jurisdiction” to hear the case to wander into hearing from irrelevant witnesses and viewing exhibits while the opposition was prevented from presenting exhibits and making its legal case.

After very brief discussion the Board voted to deny the motion. However, the motion is on the record and subject to appeal at the Circuit Court level.

The proponents called their engineer, Rob Vogel who testified that the use would not have adverse effects more than those inherently generated by a paved go-kart track generally in the RR-DEO Zone. Under cross examination he admitted to an “insignificant error” showing a small area of the proposed track to be removed without showing where the replacement would be situated. Attorney Nelson pointed out to the Board that they were bound to decide the case based on Exhibit #1 already accepted into evidence. They also virtually called a Florida sound consultant who had conducted a test in Florida based upon a SINGLE LAP  without any data regarding the speed or aggressiveness of the driver. At 105 ft., from the vehicle, the required maximum level of 65 decibels was less than 1 decibel under. The consultant admitted that at 100 ft. it would fail the test.

Most observers viewed the testimony as a whole to be unconvincing. The proponents have the burden of proof.

Adjacent residents testified to be disturbed by hearing loud noises generated by the sound of the tires cornering and maneuvering on the track on the one day it was used, September 10, 2024. They testified that their dogs barked almost continuously and the horses were visibly agitated and disturbed by the noises. A video was shown, but because the audio could not be directly inputted to the sound system, the noise could not be accurately heard. This might be remedied on July 10.

Dr. Tara Goldberg, a nearby resident with a doctorate in environmental science, presented expert technical information on the land, soil, the tracks effects on the environment and the wetlands. It was comprehensive, with charts and exhibits.  She believes that there is significantly more to say on the questions concerning erosion, water quality, the wetlands that she could not cover because of objections by attorney Sang Oh. She will continue her testimony under cross examination at the start of the hearing on Thursday, and the opponents’ will continue to press their case.

Link to the County Video and notes: https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/board-cases/ba-24-022c-0

Link to a fair summary by Dennis Valera, WJZ:
WJZ June 29, 2025

June 15, 2025                                    Volume XXIII, Issue IV

Dear GHCA Members and Friends:
In the interest of getting the news out as timely as possible, I am quoting, in part, an email by Stu Kohn, President of HCCA. Stu wrote:

“This past Thursday on 4 June the Board of Appeals (BoA) spent 6 HOURS concentrating on the Issue of “Jurisdiction.” That is, whether the Go Kart case should go forward and be heard by the BoA. The neighbors in the Highland area previously filed a complaint with the Department of Planning and Zoning (DPZ) of violations, especially since their quality of life had been disturbed. The Greater Highland Crossroads Association, GHCA, asked the Howard County Citizens Association (HCCA) to be involved with the concerns of the community and participate in the proceedings. 

Both the DPZ and the Hearing Examiner, H.E, ruled the Go-Kart facility on the property is not permitted for the reasons cited below. The owner, petitioner, filed an appeal of the H.E.’s Decision and Order dated March 3, 2025, in which the H.E. dismissed the Petition. 

The Petitioner constructed the facility without having permits or environmental approvals. He admitted this was a mistake. 

The hearing before the BoA centered on speculation as to why both the DPZ and the Hearing Examiner had taken the following positions and actions:

DPZ – in their written Technical Support Report stated, “Go-Kart racing is not listed as a permitted activity. We are unable to evaluate the petition for compliance with General Standards in Section 131.0.B and minimum criteria in Section 131.0.N.” You can view the various documents associated with this case at https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/board-cases/ba-24-022c-0. 

Hearing Examiner – stated in the Decision and Order: “the required findings and analysis have not been prepared by DPZ and because said findings and analysis are required before the Hearing Examiner may go forward with the hearing on a conditional use petition; the Hearing Examiner lacks jurisdiction to hear the petition.”

The video can be viewed at https://howardcounty.granicus.com/player/clip/6242?view_id=6&redirect=true…
.
The case has received media coverage see https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/howard-county-go-kart-race-track-zoning-maryland-appeal/?intcid=CNM-00-10abd1h from WJZ Television.” 

The WJZ report is an accurate report that sticks to the facts.

The case is scheduled to resume on June 26  at 9:00AM. In the meantime, attorney Macy Nelson has filed a motion for reconsideration that in essence argues that the hearing strayed from a purely legal issue of whether the BOA had “jurisdiction” to hear the case to irrelevant witnesses and exhibits while the opposition was prevented from presenting its exhibits and making its legal case.

The BOA is not required to hold a hearing on the motion, but we hope they will. For anyone sincerely interested in the case and how the BOA is conducting it, the motion is required reading GO TO: https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06 Motion%20for%20Reconsideration%20with%20Exhibits%206.9.25.pdf

June 3, 2025                                 Volume XXIII, Issue II

Dear GHCA Members and Friends:

                    Important Zoning Hearing
June 5 at 9:00AM

Where: 3430 Court House Drive Ellicott City, Maryland 21043

I apologize for the last-minute notice, but this is an important case that has  been appealed to the Board of Appeals,(BOA)

As you may know Charles Siperco has applied for a conditional use for a Go-Kart track in the Rural Residential Zone on Mink Hollow Rd. The case was dismissed by the Hearing Examiner, Katherine Taylor. However the applicant has the right to appeal. It is possible that the case might be argued and settled on the legal question of the validity of the dismissal by Ms. Taylor.

It is therefore important that as many people in opposition attend at least the opening arguments. Your presence will make a difference. Please plan to arrive by 8:45AM at the latest.

Please note: if you wish to testify (in Opposition, in Support, or Undecided) there will be sign-in sheets at the entrance of the hearing room to provide your information. You must sign up if you wish to testify. But, you need not testify. Many people sign up, attend in solidarity and decline to testify if called.

Many of you came to the very well-attended pre-submission meetings. Now is the time for you to support the neighbors who oppose this illegal track that was constructed without a single permit or permission; thus causing significant environmental damage that remains un-remediated. GHCA has won a number of zoning cases through the years, partly because our members and supporters attended the hearings and testified. Your presence will have an effect!

For more information go to: https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/zoning-land-use/board-appeals
Page down to Charles Siperco and click on “View Event Details” There you will find all the documents filed in the case. You can also sign up to testify either in person or virtually

November 1, 2024                                 Volume XXII, Issue VI

The second pre-submission meeting was held Thursday October 24, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church. The owners of the property invited the community to a second meeting, which was not a required meeting. The application is for a Conditional Use of a go-cart track on land zoned Rural Residential. The stated purpose of the meeting was “to facilitate this follow-up meeting as a gesture of good will toward the community.”

 

The meeting was conducted by Sang Oh, attorney for the owner, Charles “Chris” Siperko who attended and answered questions. Rob Vogel, project engineer also attended.

Attending from GHCA board/zoning committee: Dan O’Leary, Paul Collison, Charlotte Williams, Hilda Mathieu, and Kelly Frazier. Other GHCA members were in attendance.

Following are notes made by Dan and Charlotte. We encourage comments on what we may have missed or misunderstood. There was a good bit of people talking over others.

• About 62 attendees according to an attendee who counted.
• A documentary film maker from Baltimore, Scott Evans, was at the meeting, he said he was freelance and saw the notice and decided to film it. He said he was not paid or invited to film.
•  Siperko said he is not using the track till approved. County asked them to stop using track after video was made and posted on Face book. Siperko said the audio on video was enhanced. {Other authorities we consulted said audio on video is not enhanced by zooming in.}
• Dan asked if they would provide the linear distance of the track within the 100-ft setback, and the total area occupied by the track. Sang Oh declined, saying it was not required.
•  Dan offered that he had scaled 95 linear ft of track in the buffer, and that the track comprised about 3 acres of the 11-acre parcel. {Fish Bowl article said it is 1/2 Mile}
•  It was revealed by Rob Vogel, engineer, to Dan that they would moving the track back from the 100-ft. buffer to the east side of the property. This would be as a result of urging by DPZ and would comprise the second revision of the site plan to include additional landscape buffering.
•  Oh estimated that the first hearing would be maybe Feb/Mar.
•  MD Dept, of Environment, (MDE) is on hold until the CU application is decided.
•  OH admitted that there was some kind of court or hearing action where Siperko had been found guilty of some violation and fine had been paid. He said he did not remember how much.
•  Microplastics contaminating ground water shed from tires was brought up.
•  Siperko has a helicopter which he apparently landed in the area. Says he has no intention using it at the property. He has a hanger elsewhere.
•  GO Cart, LLC is for son’s racing – financial protection – not for track
•  When questioned about the complete lack of approvals, zoning, environmental and otherwise, Siperko said he did an Internet search and could find no requirements for go-cart tracks, and his paving contractor told him no permits were required.
•  If track is not paved – no rules broken, it would be permitted according to Sang Oh. {GHCA doesn’t think so}
• Conditions of approval – Siperko considering limiting CU to his ownership. Normally CU conveys with the property to subsequent owners Siperko did not commit to this, but will:
  • limit hours & users (2 kids & coach, son and friends)
  • No lighting.
  • Permit will be for EV only
•  DPZ Technical Staff Report (TSR) – Will be published 7 days before hearing according to the Regs.
•  No copyright on track design
•  Joel Hurewitz – Columbia – Asked why the 500-ft setback in M-2 should not be applied here. OH: no answer.
•  Question: are we establishing a precedent for paved track in the RR zone? Sang Oh: “probably.”
•  Cistern/spring fresh water system not operating- pipes have collapsed.
•  What bio- retention – too early to say – state & county regs prevail.
•  No fencing required.
•  If use changes or wanted, CU process must be repeated.
•  Maintenance is Siperko’s responsibility – like a driveway.
•  He will not heat track.
•  Lithium battery fire difficult to control.
•  Violations must be policed by neighbors. HOCO is complaint-driven.
•  Docs available in ProjectDox.

GHCA will continue to monitor developments. The GHCA board has voted to support the immediate neighbors and strongly oppose approval of this inappropriate, illegal use in our Rural Residential Zone, and to insure that all environmental violations are uncovered and remediated.

Note: The Baltimore Fish Bowl published an article with a good photo of the track on Oct. 25:

https://baltimorefishbowl.com/stories/go-kart-track-county-weighs-fate/

The Patch/Sun also published an article on Oct. 30.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/2024/10/30/howard-county-go-kart-track-controversy/

GHCA board activity:

The board discussed filling a vacant seat on the board. Several candidates were identified and discussed. These seats will be voted on in the next membership meetings.

The future and the revitalization of GHCA activities following a slowdown in membership activities resulting from COVID was discussed. The discussion centered on answering the following questions:

1. Do we have leadership with the energy and drive to commit to minimal goals for success and sustainability? Yes, having identified several potential board members, we would have the necessary leadership.
2. Maintaining membership of at least 60 dues-paying members. Yes, this is achievable by the end of the year. Members paying this year would be paid up through 2025.

3. Can we stage successful membership meetings: Quarterly meetings at least. plus an annual picnic at Hi-Land Farm? Yes, the meetings would be held in Feb, May, August, and November with the May meeting a picnic BBQ at Hi-Land Farm. A number of good meeting themes emerged. Details to follow.
4. Can we publish a regular newsletter, quarterly, at least, preceding the membership meetings (We need Contributors?) Yes, Dan will continue as editor, but he needs others to send in items for publication.

Conclusion: We can do all these things and revitalize the association with the continued efforts of the leadership.

Membership Drive: During 2023-24 we had 63 due-paying members. We have had a flurry of membership renewals, and we are appreciative, but we need all those from 2023 to renew. The board voted to extend any renewal in 2024 through 2025. So, please go to the website and renew through PayPal or send your check and info to:

GHCA

PO Box 412

Highland MD 20777. 

FIND US ON FACEBOOK!!
We’ve created the Greater Highland Crossroads Association Facebook group.  Please join up to see the latest news on events, happenings, meetings, your neighbors and everything else Highland.   Its free, useful, entertaining. You don’t have to be a member of GHCA to join the Facebook group.  Go to: https://www.facebook.com/groups/GHCACommunity/about/

August 6, 2024                                                           Volume XXII, Issue IV
Dear GHCA Members and Friends:

Most who attended the July 30 meeting seemed to be pessimistic about preventing the proposed Go-Cart Track, and doubtful about enforcement of zoning violations. Our experience at GHCA concludes that although the Condition Use process heavily favors the applicant, some proposals can be defeated or altered to an acceptable resolution. This flagrant violation and disregard for environmental concerns could and should be successfully opposed and remediated. Also, we have been successful in filing numerous violation complaints with good results.

This posting is an attempt to inform people about what will likely happen next in the “Go-Cart Case.” The summaries posted on the Facebook site are a fairly accurate account of what happened at the meeting. I would add that my estimate of attendees was above 80, one of the larger meetings at St. Marks, and emotions were high. Based on over 20-years experience with the conditional use process, here is a projected timeline of events.

 

• Within 2 weeks or so, an application will be filed with the Dept. of Planning and Zoning, (DPZ). It will be checked for completeness, and the applicant will have an opportunity to correct any deficiencies. It will be assigned to a staff member for review and he or she will draft a Technical Staff Report, (TSR) for the Director of DPZ to sign, and transmit to the Hearing Examiner (HA) assigned to the case. At present, there are two HAs. I am not sure how it is decided who will get the case. This report is to be delivered to the HA at least 7 days prior to the hearing date, and posted on the DPZ website. Here is a link to Section 131.0 Conditional Uses. You might have to copy and paste this link. https://library.municode.com/md/howard_county/codes/zoning?nodeId=HOCOZORE_S131.0COUS
• According to the Zoning Regulations, (ZRs): ” Citizens may request a meeting with a staff member of the Department of Planning and Zoning to review the development proposal after the petition has been formally submitted to the Department”

• The property must be posted and advertised at least 30 days prior to the hearing date. Adjacent property owners must be informed by mail. Owners of property across Mink Hollow may not be informed depending on the latest definition of “adjacent.”
• The hearing itself is a quasi-judicial hearing. Proponents present their witnesses and exhibits. Opponents may cross-examine witnesses. Opponents may present a case and speak. There will be a sign-in sheet for proponents and one for opponents. Usually, the opposition is a coordinated effort — more on this later.

Attached is a link to an actual TSR on a case to be heard Aug. 7. Previously, the last paragraph contained a recommendation of approval or denial. GHCA and others were able to have this removed, The report does state whether the applicant meets the conditions required. As such, the TSR is the most important factor in deciding the case. Read this one, and you will be able to see how the applicant must prove she has met the “Conditions” and how this case is likely to be decided:

https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2024-07/BA-24-002C TSR with Agency Comments.pdf.

A link to the Hearing Examiner site:

https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/zoning-land-use/hearing-examiner

A link to the Rules of Procedure: https://cc.howardcountymd.gov/sites/default/files/2023-05/Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedures.pdf

Anyone who missed the meeting may email Gina Pagini (Sang Oh’s office) to request the minutes and subsequent correspondence at: gpagani@talkin-oh.com

FIND US ON FACEBOOK!!
We’ve created the Greater Highland Crossroads Association Facebook group.  Please join up to see the latest news on events, happenings, meetings, your neighbors and everything else Highland.   Its free, useful, entertaining. You don’t have to be a member of GHCA to join the Facebook group.  Go to: https://www.facebook.com/groups/GHCACommunity/about/

Newsletter                           

Volume XXI, Issue II

Dear GHCA Members and Friends:

Although we have posted a few brief updates regarding what has been transpiring with the Tuerk House facility in Highland, we have not issued a complete update on this matter until now.

Community Meeting

On February 23 a standing-room-only Community Meeting was conducted with representatives of Tuerk House at St. Marks. Also in attendance were staff from our County Council persons’ offices. At the close of the meeting, Tuerk House Executive Director, Bernard Foster, agreed to provide an executive summary letter in which they would address the community’s concerns.

Meeting Follow-up

Within less than a week, GHCA officers wrote Mr. Foster, requesting agreement on 17 specific points of concern strongly voiced during the February 23 meeting. The objective of this communication was to elicit a positive response from Tuerk House, addressing these points to the community’s satisfaction.

Tuerk House Response

Over a month passed before we received the Tuerk response. It was nothing more than a marked-up copy of GHCA’s letter, agreeing to some points and neglecting to address others. It was not on their letter head, nor did it carry a signature. It was certainly not the binding agreement we sought. GHCA quickly responded, stating our disappointment in the less than satisfactory response and advising Tuerk House we were prepared to take further steps with Howard County Department of Planning and Zoning (DPZ).

Shortly Thereafter

In early May, County Executive Calvin Ball held a press conference in which he announced $2.5 million to expand Behavioral Health Services, including $500,000.00 for the Tuerk House Facility in Highland.

At around the same time an important decision, against DPZ, was handed down by a Howard County Board of Appeals Hearing Examiner in the case of the Manor Hill Brewery on a dead end, residential street off Route 108 in Clarksville. The Examiner found that DPZ had been “arbitrary and capricious” in making only the most cursory investigation of the neighbors’ legitimate zoning complaint. In order to take their case to the level of the Hearing Examiner, this necessitated the expenditure of many thousands of dollars in legal expenses. The decision is likely to be appealed by the County, which will incur further legal expense from the aggrieved residents of Manor Lane.

The sum total of these two incidents made it clear to the GHCA Board that:

• City Hall is firmly in favor of the Tuerk House expansion in Highland; and
• A complaint to DPZ will likely necessitate taking it through several appeals at a projected cost of over $100,000.00.

The GHCA Board is in agreement we should not expend your dues money in a battle which has virtually no chance for success. Further, in order to mount this effort, the community will need to raise the considerable funds to cover the legal fees.

By Way Of Background

In 2016 a study was completed on behalf of the Maryland Behavioral Health Administration to determine, on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, the need for Opioid Treatment Centers in Maryland. The study showed Howard County needs 1700 more placements than are currently available! This study only addressed Opioid Treatment. If other addictions were included, the County’s resource shortfall would be even greater. Hence County Executive Ball’s commitment of $2.5 million to expand the County’s current placement inventory.

Next Steps

In June, GHCA officers met with our County Council Representative, Deb Jung, and Carl DeLorenzo, Director of Policy and Programs for the County Executive. Mr. DeLorenzo specializes on Healthcare issues. We shared our previous correspondence with Tuerk House and the disappointing response received. It was agreed that Councilperson Jung and Mr. DeLorenzo would communicate directly with Bernard Foster of Tuerk House to develop a binding agreement which will meet the needs of the greater Highland community. At this writing those discussions are on-going.

Current Status of Tuerk House in Highland

At this time the project is still awaiting its license from the State Department of Health’s Office of Healthcare Quality. Until the license is received, the project cannot be opened and operational.

A Further Option

Citizens of Highland, who are directly and negatively affected, may lodge a complaint with DPZ on the basis that the terms of the Caswell Conditional Use are not being adhered to in the Tuerk House case. The Caswell Conditional Use specifically limits the site to the care of elderly people. Pregnant women and women with young children do not fit this definition. This would be a long shot. However, it would put the objection on record as one more instance of DPZ’s flexible interpretation of rulings.

GHCA cannot file this complaint because in legal terms the organization lacks standing. We have learned from a similar, previous situation the complaint must be lodged by a person, or persons, who can show damages or losses.

In The Final Analysis

GHCA plans to continue to work with Council Person Jung, Mr. DeLorenzo, and their associates to achieve the binding agreement representatives of Tuerk House agreed to at the meeting on February 23. We believe this is the most effective means of achieving a working relationship which will foster and protect the interests of the greater Highland community. During this process there will be an opportunity for review and input by the immediate neighbors who will be most directly affected by the facility.

Greater Highland Crossroads Association (GHCA)

Meeting Minutes

2/23/2023

7:00PM-8:15PM EDT

Prepared By: GHCA Secretary

Attendees:

GHCA Officers and Board:

Dan O’Leary
Kathy O’Leary

Charlotte Williams
Alan Schneider
Geoff Jackson
Adam Collison

Paul Collison
Majeedah Johnson-Collison

Hilda Matthieu
Scott Shearer

Residents of Howard County

Tuerk House Staff:

Bernard Foster, Executive Director
Albert Arrington, Residential House Manager
Brian Zimmerman, Facilities Director

Mayra Diaz, Director of Operations

 

Discussion

Welcome (Charlotte Williams, President)

• • Charlotte Williams welcomed attendees and provided an overview of the history of GHCA.
  • Alan Schneider provided an overview of the rebuild project for St. Mark’s Episcopal Church.

Old Business

1. 1. Nomination of Directors (Dan O’Leary, Chairman)
      • The following leadership was confirmed by the Board: Paul Collison, Adam Collison, Geoff Jackson, Stu Kohn, Dan O’Leary, Director and Chairman, Alan Schneider, Scott Shearer, and Charlotte Williams, Director and President, Hilda Mathieu, Vice President
      • 8 out of 9 positions are filled.
      • Nominations for the remaining position were encouraged.
      • Board will be elected at next membership meeting
   2. Zoning Committee Update (Dan O’ Leary, Chairman)
      1. Successful opposition to crippling commercial solar farms (CSFs) on Agricultural Preserved Land. CSFs are now limited to the lesser of 20% or 16 acres and 2 Megawatts.
      2. Zoning Violations Cured (Dan O’Leary, Chairman): Highland Crossing: Landscaping, restored, handicap parking restored, shed removed.
         • An official zoning violation was filed when landscaping was denuded. Result: Landscaping and buffers were restored to original plan.
      3. Hall Shop Road: Junk vehicles removed, and paving operations  ceased.
         • An asphalt paving contractor sought, and was granted a BR zoning (business Rural). He was permitted to run an operation with improvements to be made to the property. GHCA investigated lack of improvements. Apparently, the operation moved to another location.
         • Complaint of Junk vehicles at 2 other locations resulted in vehicles being removed.
      4. Rte 108 First House North of Grey Pony Site: Contractor operations ceased.
         • A violation was filed. against a contractor asphalt operation. Apparently, the operation has moved to another location with equipment and staging area.

New Business

1. Presentation by Tuerk House Staff, followed by Q & A- Charlotte Williams
   • Bernard Foster, Executive Director, provided an overview of Tuerk House which has been in operation for over 50 years and has worked in Howard County for 20 years. Tuerk House works with the Howard County Health Department to provide services to Howard County residents. Foster provided a background regarding Tuerk House’s alcohol and drug abuse treatment care facility developing in Highland.
   • Foster noted that there are not many long-term treatment programs available for women who are working toward living in sobriety. Thus, Tuerk House aims to provide a means for pregnant women who are residents of Howard County to receive treatment in Howard County. The property where the treatment facility is planned for is located on Route 12752 Scaggsville Rd. (MD 216). The estimated timeline to launch the program is July 1, 2023.
   • The facility is residential and at a 3.1 level of care. Therefore, residents housed are one step away from living independently. The program is designed for pregnant women. Tuerk House has security measures and staff to monitor residents.

Question/Answers (from Howard County Residents to Tuerk House Staff)

• Highland is a remote location and therefore does not have public transportation nor many sidewalks for pedestrians. Describe how transportation will be managed for patients.
• A: The facility will have a van for patients.
• How many staff will be on site at all times?
• A: The maximum number of patients in the program is 15. There are two staff on site at all times.
• Can Tuerk House confirm that the facility will only be utilized by pregnant women and not become instead a men’s facility? Is there any binding documentation?
• A: The program is designed for pregnant women, either in their first or second trimester, who have been sober for at least 30 days.
• Describe activities that the residents will do while at the facility.
• A: There is a daily schedule for re-assimilating into the community. Objectives for patients include receiving therapy, transitional housing, employment, education and/or trade school.
• There are concerns regarding improvement for right-of-way in cooperation with nearby property owners. Confirm that street signage to be added for new traffic navigating to the facility.
• A: This information will be included in the executive summary provided by Tuerk House.
• How are needs assessed for pregnant women who are assigned to the program?
• A: Each individual is assigned based on medical necessity, often by Medicaid. The number of days, between 30-60 days are also assigned.
• What kind of signage will be posted?
• A: No signage is planned to be posted at the facility.
• Are visitors permitted to visit residents in the program?
• A: Only staff who work at the program are permitted at the facility. Visitors are not allowed. Any patients who violate the no visitors rule are removed from the program. Patients who are removed from the program are referred and transitioned to another program. Cell phones are not permitted by residents.
• There was discussion and concern about the facility being solely a men’s drug rehab program. Can the community be provided with a 1-page description including objectives, safeguards, clientele?
• A: Tuerk House will provide a summary including the information requested by March 16, 2023.
• What was the cost of the property purchase?
• A:1. 4 million                                                                                                                                            

Adjourn

• The public meeting adjourned and GHCA leadership concluded the question/answer session.

Post-Meeting Discussion between GHCA & Howard County Residents

• O’Leary and Williams discussed that upon receipt of the executive summary, the document will be reviewed for revisions and next steps.

Next Meeting Date/Time: TBD

Action Items

Task	Owner	Due Date	Status
Send letter to Bernard Foster summarizing community requests to be included in executive summary	Charlotte Williams	March 1, 2023	Completed
Provide summary/objective for intentions of Intermediate Care Facilities planned for Highland location to GHCA for review and revision	Tuerk House	March 16, 2023	In Process, GHCA letter sent to Tuerk House
GHCA to review and revise summary/objective provided by Tuerk House	GHCA	TBD
Draft and provide MOU for Intermediate Care Facilities planned for Highland to GHCA for review	Tuerk House	TBD
Schedule and hold follow-up meeting(s) with community members/neighbors to discuss documents provided by Tuerk House	GHCA	TBD
Schedule next due date(s) for revised summary/objective for intentions of Intermediate Care Facilities planned for Highland	GHCA	TBD
Review revised draft summary/objective Intermediate Care Facilities	GHCA, Community Members	TBD