Note: The agenda and transcript indicate the meeting occurred on September 11, 2025, but the provided date is September 12, 2025. This summary uses the requested date.
The Facility Standards Manual Public Review Committee (FSM PRC) met to approve prior meeting minutes, discuss floodplain amendments to FSM Chapter 8, and receive an update on the 10-year Private Road Reserve Fund. The meeting included detailed deliberation on application requirements and a recognition that the private road fund issue requires higher-level policy input.
Called order the September 11th, 2025 facility standards manual public review committee meeting. No members are participating for regulation. Any members disclose that they are members of one or more affected groups and their prospective declaration of interest are kept on filed minutes of the facility standards manual public review committee. Hopefully you all got an email from Laura with our agenda and the minutes from our last meeting, which was only a week ago. You said there were some suggestions for some edits to the clearance. Where um basically Jason talked about some of the confusion and said that a special exception is required for active liberation with a proposed rise or boundary change. But it was confident that there were also additional criteria that you must exceed. Or must meet, maybe is the way you say it. That meet um so I think the challenge is do we capture what people say, or do we add like what the standard actually says every time? And I don't normally do that, but if the group feels it's important here, we can add that in reds because that wasn't like an emphasis point made, but it's a true fact that there's additional criteria pertaining to the percent impervious. Like slipped in that, because that is the development criteria. Yeah, like the design correct. I don't know if it was like a point of competition. That's the thing. I didn't want I think Jason's point was that any time you have a rise or a boundary change, you need specs, but this is also true. So I I kind of need guidance about how you how you all want your minutes. I think if there's factual information that helps provide clearity, what's the problem with that? Do you note it as yeah, a fact change, and here's what was said, and the correction. I mean, I think the parents hoping that was sort of a note that it's like maybe could you just say like note or correction or something? Yeah. Well, we have a wire, I think note. Is there anything wrong with saying note? And that's described it. Yeah. Sorry, it's not let me think it quicker. I'm sorry. Your screen behind you is not working long. I know it is. It was the line. I asked for the women using this room, so they don't want to fix it right now. And yeah, and I still have the room. Um percent impervious development criteria. I don't know, we've not had this before, so I guess it's uncharted territory. I mean, would be I'm not sure what it really adds to the minutes. I wouldn't put it in there, but I heard the I'm not looking to the minutes for technical criteria, right? So we could wind up have all kinds of notes and clauses for appropriate references to the codes and standards and that's I don't have sure really. Check yourself up for more work for it. I'm just aiming to please. However you want it, that's how it shall be. Um I wasn't inclined to put it in just because we don't normally do that, but then I thought, well, I'd ask. So if we don't want this change, I can just reject it. And then we're just back to the regular minutes, unless there are other changes. I don't know how critical it is to note when we started the meeting, but we didn't start on that. I think it's funny. So I typically give myself like within five minutes. Okay, we're good. If you think we started with the before 305, I have no idea. I just need but if we're after 305, I usually say it. Same with like the ending of the meeting. Okay, it's joking.