President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump pitched to undecided voters Thursday night during the first debate of the presidential campaign — trading insults over their policy differences, immigration and who represents a threat to democracy.

During the debate from CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta, the two men argued over who can do better for Americans during the next four years on a broad swath of issues, ranging from the economy to climate change to foreign policy. Each repeatedly accused the other of lying.

Biden early in the debate spoke softly at several points, coughed and gave several somewhat confusing answers. At one point, Biden appeared to lose his train of thought and ended an answer with the statement that “we finally beat Medicare.”

The two disagreed sharply over access to reproductive rights, including abortion, with Trump arguing Democrats’ position is “radical” and Biden saying that leaving decisions up to the states has been “terrible” for women.

Biden, 81, and Trump, 78, did not shake hands at the beginning, a break from past debates.

Near the end of the debate, Trump said political violence was “totally unacceptable,” though he went on to downplay the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, defending the conduct of his mob of supporters.

Trump initially did not directly answer a question about whether he would accept the results of the election if he lost. When pressed by moderator Dana Bash, Trump conditioned his answer.

Jabs over personal conduct

Even with rules meant to minimize crosstalk, the debate — moderated by Bash, anchor and chief political correspondent, and Jake Tapper, anchor and chief Washington correspondent — saw many moments of acrimony.

While Trump had harsh words about Biden’s border policy and Biden blasted his predecessor for appointing Supreme Court justices who overturned the constitutional right to an abortion, they saved their harshest criticism for the other’s personal conduct.

Referring to reports that, as president, Trump said veterans killed in action in France during World War II were “suckers and losers,” Biden, invoked his son, Beau, who was a National Guard veteran and later died of brain cancer.

“My son was not a loser and was not a sucker,” Biden told his predecessor, scowling. “You’re the sucker. You’re the loser.”

Trump denied he ever made the remark, first reported in The Atlantic and confirmed in other reports.

Biden at several times attacked Trump’s credibility and truthfulness, saying after one answer, “Every single thing he said is a lie.”

“I never heard so much malarkey in my whole life,” he said in response to another of Trump’s answers.

Trump brought up the conviction of Biden’s son, Hunter, on federal gun charges this year. And he said that Joe Biden could face prosecution for his performance on border security.

Trump and his legal team argued in front of the Supreme Court in April that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution.

Trump’s conviction

Thursday’s event was the first presidential debate where one participant was a convicted felon.

A New York state jury in May found Trump guilty of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels for an affair she testified they had that Trump didn’t want to harm his 2016 election prospects.

Trump has denied the affair and it hasn’t affected his support within the GOP, though his sentencing July 11 could affect his campaign strategy.

Trump rejected his criminal conviction during the debate and reiterated his stance that he didn’t have a sexual relationship with an adult film star.

“I didn’t have sex with a porn star,” Trump said, marking the first time such words, or anything near them, have been uttered during a presidential debate.

“I did nothing wrong, we have a system that was rigged and disgusting,” Trump said. “I did nothing wrong.”

Trump also responded to the question by referring to Hunter Biden.

“When he talks about a convicted felon, his son is a convicted felon,” Trump said.

Jan. 6 disagreement

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to release a ruling within days in another trial involving Trump, this time on whether presidents enjoy complete immunity from criminal prosecution for their actions while in office.

The justices’ decision will determine whether a federal trial against Trump for election interference stemming from his actions on Jan. 6, 2021 can proceed.

During the debate, Trump said that “on January 6 we were respected all over the world,” but that changed after Biden took office.

Trump seemed to imply that the people who stormed the Capitol building were “innocent” and “patriotic,” saying that “you ought to be ashamed of yourself” for those people being in prison.

Biden said that Trump encouraged the “folks” who attacked the U.S. Capitol building and U.S. Capitol Police officers.

“If they’re convicted, he says he wants to commute their sentences,” Biden said, criticizing Trump’s behavior that day. “These people should be in jail. They should be the ones held accountable.”

Biden rejected the idea that the people who attacked the police and disrupted the electoral certification were patriots.

Divide on abortion rights

Reproductive rights — including access to abortion — sharply divided Biden and Trump, who sparred over which political party’s stance is better.

Trump said that he agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision earlier this month to leave access to mifepristone, one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortion, in place. And he said he wouldn’t seek to limit access if elected president in November.

“I agree with their decision to have done that, and I will not block it,” Trump said, adding that the Supreme Court’s earlier decision to overturn the constitutional right to an abortion was a good thing.

“We brought it back to the states and the country is now coming together on this issue,” Trump said. “It’s been a great thing.”

Trump said he supports exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the woman.

Biden rejected Trump’s classification that Democrats are “radical” on abortion policy and said he supports reinstating the protections that existed under Roe v. Wade.

“It’s been a terrible thing,” Biden said of leaving decisions about abortion access up to state lawmakers, comparing it to leaving civil rights decisions up to the states.

Trump said during an interview with Time magazine released in April that his campaign was on the brink of releasing a policy regarding mifepristone, one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortion. The campaign has yet to release that policy.

Trump suggested that he would be okay with states limiting or barring access to contraception during a May interview with a Pittsburgh TV news station. But he quickly walked back those comments in a social media post.

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank, has suggested that another Trump administration could block the mailing of mifepristone by enforcing the Comstock Act.

The group included the proposal along with dozens of others in Project 2025, its 920-page blueprint for a second Trump administration.

The 1873 anti-obscenity law hasn’t been enforced in decades and is referred to as a “zombie law” by reproductive rights organizations, but it is still technically a law.

A future Republican attorney general seeking to enforce the law to block the mailing of mifepristone would likely see the law challenged in court, likely working its way up to the Supreme Court.

Mifepristone is one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortions, which are approved for up to 10 weeks gestation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The two-drug regimen accounts for about 63% of all abortions within the United States, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

First of two debates

The two presidential debates this year are a departure from past years, with both candidates ditching the proposed schedule from the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates.

Biden and Trump later agreed to two debates, the one held Thursday by CNN and another one on Sept. 10 that will be hosted by ABC News.

CNN opted to hold its debate at its studios in Atlanta, Georgia, without an audience. Thursday night’s debate was also earlier than any other presidential debates, which have traditionally begun in September or October.

The television news network created frustration ahead of the debate with the White House Correspondents Association when it decided to keep the pool, the group of journalists that travel everywhere with the president, out of the room.

Kelly O’Donnell, president of the WHCA, released a statement Thursday afternoon that the organization was “deeply concerned that CNN has rejected our repeated requests to include the White House travel pool inside the studio”

“The pool is there for the ‘what ifs?’ in a world where the unexpected does happen,” wrote O’Donnell, who is also the senior White House correspondent for NBC News. “A pool reporter is present to provide context and insight by direct observation and not through the lens of the television production.”

CNN’s rules also said that neither Biden nor Trump was allowed to bring props or pre-written notes into the debate area.

Each stood behind “a uniform podium” and was not allowed to interact with campaign staff during the two commercial breaks.

Biden was scheduled to travel with first lady Jill Biden to Raleigh, North Carolina, immediately after the debate wrapped. They’re set to participate in campaign events on Friday morning before traveling to New York later in the day.

The Bidens are then expected to travel to Red Bank, New Jersey, on Saturday for more campaigning before heading back to Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland.

Trump will attend a campaign rally Friday afternoon in Chesapeake, Virginia. In a release announcing the event, Trump criticized Biden on inflation, crime and drug addiction, and immigration.

This is a developing story that will be updated.

by Jennifer Shutt, Virginia Mercury

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com. Follow Virginia Mercury on Facebook and X.

In this last segment of the Warren County School Board meeting of June 26, 2024, the board discussed several key 2024-2025 school year issues, including approving salary scales, insurance rates, and the substitute plan. The board also addressed concerns raised by board members regarding these agenda items.

Salary Scales Approval

The board reviewed and discussed the proposed salary scales for the 2024-2025 school year, which reflect the increases previously approved for teachers, instructional assistants, and the rest of the staff.

Board member Melanie Salins raised concerns about the trade worker category, noting that it lists increased pay for degrees, but not all trades require a bachelor’s degree. Salins suggested changing the phrasing to reflect certification requirements relevant to those trades.

Dr. Ballenger agreed with that suggestion, acknowledging that trade certification requirements should be more clearly defined. He mentioned that the board had discussed this in cabinet meetings and planned to work with Mr. Helmick to establish these certification requirements for the next year.

A motion was made to approve the 2024-2025 salary scales. The motion was seconded, and the board voted favorably, with all members approving.

Insurance Rates Approval

The board considered three options for the insurance rates for the 2024-2025 plan year. Dr. Ballenger recommended option three, which involves a 7.9% increase in employee premiums.

Board member Salins expressed frustration with the timing and legibility of the uploaded documents, noting that teachers had called her to express their concerns about being unable to review the information.

A motion was made to approve option three for the insurance rate proposals. The motion was seconded, and the board voted favorably, with all members approving, except Salins, who abstained.

Substitute Plan Approval

Board Chair Kristen Pence emphasized the importance of addressing underlying issues with staff absences and exploring ways to reduce the reliance on substitutes.

The board discussed the substitute plan for the 2024-2025 school year, which involved renewing the contract with ESS, the current substitute management company. Several board members expressed concerns about the performance and costs associated with ESS.

Board member Tom McFadden highlighted the need to include specific metrics and an on-site presence in the contract. Board Chair Kristen Pence emphasized the importance of addressing underlying issues with staff absences and exploring ways to reduce the reliance on substitutes.

Dr. Ballenger and Mr. Jody Lee, Director of Personnel, agreed that the contract should be revised to include:

• Specific performance metrics.
• A clause for an on-site ESS representative.
• Clear guidelines on how substitutes are hired and managed to ensure accountability and efficiency.

The board decided to postpone the approval of the ESS contract until revisions can be made. The revised agreement will be presented at the next meeting for final approval.

The board moved to enter a closed meeting to discuss personnel matters, including the personnel report, the superintendent’s evaluation, and an employee grievance. The board seconded and approved the motion to enter a closed meeting.

Watch the Warren County School Board Meeting of June 26, 2024, in the exclusive Royal Examiner video by Mark Williams.

(Part 4 is covered in the video from 2hr25 to the end.)

The Warren County School Board held an in-depth discussion on the non-labor fiscal year 2023-2024 budget, providing a detailed comparison of appropriations, expenditures, and current balances across various cost centers. This review aimed to identify potential savings and necessary adjustments to balance the budget effectively.

Key Budget Considerations

Non-Labor Budget Overview

The board reviewed the non-labor budget, including all expenses outside salaries and benefits. The report compared the appropriations and expenditures for the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2023, with the current fiscal year’s appropriations, expenditures, encumbrances, and pending payments. As of the meeting date, the available balance for non-labor expenses stood at $469,230, though this amount is expected to decrease once all costs are audited and accrued.

Utilities and Pending Payments

Board members noted that utility bills for June had not yet been received, which could significantly impact the final available balance. Other pending payments, such as the food service bill from Sodexo, will also be accrued back to the fiscal year that ended.

Carryover Funds

The board discussed the lack of a formal agreement with the County Board of Supervisors regarding the return of unspent funds for capital improvements. Although past years have seen requests for carryover funds to be used for transportation and equipment, the current financial climate and the county’s need to maintain a balanced budget make such returns uncertain.

Superintendent Dr Chris Ballenger discussed budget adjustments with the school board.

Proposed Budget Adjustments

Insurance Costs

Three options were considered for handling the increase in insurance costs:

1. The division covers the entire increase.
2. The cost is split between the division and employees.
3. Employees cover a 7.9% increase in premiums, with the division covering the remainder.

Dr. Ballenger recommended the third option to minimize employees’ financial burden while addressing the increased costs.

Staff Positions

Several staff positions were recommended for hold or removal to help balance the budget:

• An agriculture teacher position.
• An additional kindergarten teacher due to lower enrollment numbers.
• An additional reading specialist position.
• A dean position at Skyline High School.
• A fourth-grade teacher position at E. Wilson Morrison Elementary School.
• Three special education teacher positions, with plans to repurpose these roles for registered behavior technicians (RBTs) and a board-certified behavior analyst (BCBA).

Non-Labor Budget Cuts

To address the budget shortfall, the following non-labor budget cuts were proposed:

• A $100,000 reduction in the overall non-labor budget.
• Specific cuts to the substitute budget ($148,000) and technology budget ($20,000).
• Limiting the increase in the substitute budget to $300,000, focusing on efficient use and monitoring of leave.

Board Discussion and Concerns

Board members expressed concerns about the impact of budget cuts on classroom resources and educational quality. They highlighted the need for careful monitoring of spending, especially in areas like substitute teaching costs. The high markup from the external substitute management company (ESS) was a particular point of contention, with suggestions to explore ways to reduce reliance on such services and keep more funds within the community.

The board acknowledged the difficult decisions required to balance the budget and emphasized the importance of proactive planning for the next fiscal year. They agreed to focus on efficiency and cost-saving measures that do not adversely affect students’ educational experiences.

The proposed fiscal year 2025 school operating budget was approved, amounting to $76,193,989, with a capital improvement facilities budget of $1,307,500. Despite some members abstaining due to concerns about the budget process and final allocations, the majority voted in favor of the proposed budget.

Watch the Warren County School Board Meeting of June 26, 2024, in the exclusive Royal Examiner video by Mark Williams.

(Part 3 is covered in the video between 1hr20 to 2hr20.)

During the Warren County School Board meeting, several student conduct and discipline policies were reviewed, highlighting the board’s commitment to ensuring a safe and orderly educational environment. The policies under review included:

1. JFC – School Conduct
2. JFCD – Weapons in School
3. JGD/JGE – Student Suspensions and Expulsions
4. JGDA – Discipline of Students with Disabilities
5. JGDB – Discipline of Students with Disabilities for Infliction of Serious Bodily Injury

Key Discussion Points

Inconsistencies in Expulsion Language

One of the primary issues discussed was the inconsistency in the language used across different policies regarding student expulsions for certain offenses. Specifically:

• Policy JGD/JGE mandates that the school board “shall expel” students for firearms and drug offenses.
• Policy JFCD and Policy JFCF use the term “may expel,” which implies discretion.

Board member Tom McFadden pointed out that this inconsistency could create confusion and legal challenges, as “shall” implies a mandatory action, while “may” suggests optional action. It was noted that the discrepancy might stem from varying interpretations of state statutes. The board decided to consult legal counsel to ensure consistency and compliance with state laws.

Board Member Tom McFadden questions the inconsistency in the policies.

Discipline of Students with Disabilities

Policies JGDA and JGDB address the discipline of students with disabilities. The board discussed the importance of aligning these policies with federal laws, such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), to ensure fair treatment and appropriate disciplinary actions for students with disabilities, particularly those involved in serious incidents.

Firearms and Drug Offenses

The discussion also covered specific firearms, destructive devices, and drug offense statutes. The board considered the nuances of these laws, including exemptions for educational purposes and scenarios where immediate expulsion might not be appropriate.

Board members and the public expressed the need for clarity and consistency in these policies. Suggestions included:

• Ensuring all related policies use the same terminology to avoid confusion.
• Clearly defining exceptions and special cases in the policies.
• Regularly updating policies to reflect changes in state and federal laws.

The board recognized the urgency of updating these policies to maintain a safe and supportive learning environment while ensuring compliance with legal requirements.

Next Steps

The board decided to revisit these policies for a second reading in an upcoming meeting, incorporating feedback from legal counsel to address the inconsistencies. They emphasized the importance of having comprehensive and clear policies that protect students’ rights and ensure a safe school environment.

The meeting concluded with a motion to approve the policy audit agreement with the School Board Member Alliance (SBMA), aiming to review and update policies to ensure compliance and best practices. The motion passed, and the board members were tasked with collaborating with SBMA to identify and rectify any policy discrepancies.

Watch the Warren County School Board Meeting of June 26, 2024, in the exclusive Royal Examiner video by Mark Williams.

(Part 2 is covered in the video between 48 to 80 minutes.)

The Warren County School Board held a work session this evening, starting with the approval of the agenda and the consent agenda. Both were accepted without modifications after being moved, seconded and approved unanimously.

Division Literacy Plan for 2024-2025

The first significant item discussed was the Division Literacy Plan for the 2024-2025 school year. This plan is crucial as it aligns with the new Virginia Literacy Act requirements. Ms. Heather Bragg and Eileen Knesh, the Dyslexia and English Coordinator, presented the plan. The plan focuses on K-5 implementation, including resources, required teacher training, and communication strategies with stakeholders and families.

Ms. Heather Bragg and Eileen Knesh presents the Division Literacy Plan to the board.

Ms. Bragg emphasized that this is the first year of the new requirements, and the plan is a one-year roadmap. One board member raised concerns about the lack of clear metrics for success. Ms. Bragg responded that the Division Plan, which will be shared next week, includes more detailed metrics and continuous improvement strategies.

The discussion shifted to the instructional materials listed in the literacy plan. It was clarified that most materials were already in use, such as the core instructional material, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt’s “Into Reading” for K-5. The plan will expand as more state-approved materials become available.

Teacher training is a significant component of the plan, focusing on professional development and implementing high-quality instructional materials. The new K-3 assessment, VALS (Virginia Assessment for Literacy Skills), will be a critical metric for measuring effectiveness. The state does not yet have assessments for grades 4 and 5, so the division plans to pilot different programs to find the best fit for future use.

Board members raised additional questions about the specific details of the training and the materials. Ms. Bragg and Ms. Knesch explained that the state is still rolling out guidelines and approved programs, so some decisions are pending. They also highlighted the significant changes coming next year, including new English and math standards and the challenge of balancing these with the VLA implementation.

After a detailed discussion, the board approved the Division Literacy Plan for the 2024-2025 school year. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

Donations and Budget Adjustments

The board accepted a generous donation of $10,961.52 from Giant/Martins to assist with after-school snacks for programs not qualifying for the CACFP program. The motion to accept the donation was moved, seconded, and approved with gratitude.

Additionally, the board discussed and approved an additional appropriation of $1,227,437.73 to the school food services budget. This adjustment is due to increased meals served, corresponding reimbursements, and capital improvement projects in various schools.

School Resource Officer (SRO) MOU Update

The board reviewed updates to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Warren County Sheriff’s Office regarding School Resource Officers (SROs). The revised MOU aligns with the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services model, clarifying roles and responsibilities and differentiating between SROs and School Security Officers (SSOs). The new MOU also includes clear definitions of disciplinary misconduct and criminal offenses.

Custodial Services Contract Renewal

The board discussed the renewal of the custodial services contract with Sodexo. The contract renewal, effective from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025, includes an increase to $2,343,583. This amount covers salary increases for custodial staff and ensures competitive entry-level wages. The renewal was approved unanimously.

Facilities Use MOU with the County of Warren

An updated MOU for facility use with the County of Warren was presented. The board added a clause regarding Bing Crosby Stadium, ensuring that it remains the home field for both high schools due to the initial funding secured by Warren County Public Schools. The MOU was approved with the new amendments.

Next Steps and Future Meetings

The board will continue to work on implementing the new literacy plan and other significant changes for the next school year. The next board meeting will include more detailed discussions on the Division Plan metrics and additional calendar adjustments for teacher training.

The Warren County School Board is committed to ensuring a smooth transition into the new school year with significant updates to the literacy plan, teacher training, and instructional materials. The collaborative efforts with the Sheriff’s Office and the County of Warren demonstrate a solid commitment to providing all students with a safe and supportive educational environment.

(This story covers the first 48 minutes of the Warren County School Board Meeting of June 26, 2024)

The ayes had it in a 3-1 vote on a motion to approve the rezoning of 1321 Happy Creek Road from R-S Suburban Residential District to R-1 Residential District; the application from the owner, Rappahannock HC, LLC, was forwarded by the Front Royal Planning Commission to the Town Council with a recommendation for approval. The nay came from Commissioner Megan Marrazzo, balancing her desire to see intelligent growth with some of the concerns she hears from residents in that area. All of this transpired at a regular planning commission meeting on Wednesday, June 26, starting at 7 p.m. in the Warren County Government Center at 220 North Commerce Avenue. 

The town planning commission meets for a regular meeting on Wednesday, June 26, at 7 p.m. in the Warren County Government Center. Royal Examiner Photo Credits: Brenden McHugh.

Approximately forty-three acres in size and located approximately one thousand two hundred feet from the intersection of Leach Run Parkway with Happy Creek Road, the Marshall’s Glen project, formerly known as Ashton Green, sits on the south side of Happy Creek Road, and if it comes to fruition, it will be accessed chiefly by means of Oden Street, although there will be a “right-in and right-out” on Happy Creek Road as well. One of the owners of Marshall’s Glen, Chris Hornung, chief development officer of the Rappahannock Development Group, was present at the meeting and was accompanied by his attorney, Ty Lawson. Both gave presentations to the commission as well as follow-up responses after the public hearing in which several citizens voiced concerns about safety, logistics, and financial impact. 

Deputy Zoning Administrator John Ware is prepared for an evening of presenting applications.

The evening’s events were designed by the planning and zoning department to address every possible concern. Out of an agenda packet exceeding four hundred pages, which the commissioners were asked to read before attending the meeting, Deputy Zoning Administrator John Ware made a concise bullet point presentation that streamlined the contents of the packet. During that presentation, everyone watching learned the significance of rezoning from R-S to R-1. The latter allows the developer to build at higher density, creating as many as one hundred four single-family detached dwelling units, as opposed to the sixty-one he could build by right in an R-S zone. The higher R-1 figure is still by right, but it is a higher number by virtue of being in the higher-density R-1 zone. This type of development is in keeping with the 2013 iteration of Warren County’s comprehensive plan, and it is in keeping with the state of Virginia’s requirement that localities incorporate Urban Development Areas (UDA) into their comprehensive plans. 

Ty Lawson, the attorney serving Rappahannock HC, LLC, addresses the commission regarding an application for rezoning at 1321 Happy Creek Road.

Everyone who is even loosely following this development will ask: what is the impact on the school system? Within a two-mile radius of Marshall’s Glen are three schools, Leslie Fox Keyser Elementary, Warren County Middle School, and Warren County High School. None of them are currently exceeding their capacity. In the exigency that Rappahannock HC, LLC builds one hundred four single-family detached dwelling units at the 1321 Happy Creek Road location, those schools taken together will exceed capacity by seven students. This may mean the Warren County Public Schools must consider building a new elementary school. While there are no plans for that cemented yet, the owner has taken into consideration that potential need as he crafted his proffers. The total cost of building a new elementary school would be $29,874,000. The source for that figure is the Warren County Public Schools. To support the school system as they use the money to handle excess capacity, an effort which could be expressed in a new elementary school, Hornung and company are proffering $348,530. This comes in addition to the $320,840 they are proffering for other expenses like roadway improvements and the expenses they will incur from building in the subdivision a playground, a privacy fence, and an entry monument sign. Total contributions come to $859,370. 

Chris Hornung, Chief Development Officer of Rappahannock Development Group and an owner of the Marshall’s Glen project at 1321 Happy Creek Road addresses the commission regarding the rezoning application for that location.

In a fiscal impact analysis conducted by S. Patz & Associates, Inc., it was determined that one hundred forty dwelling units would result in an annual fiscal surplus of $407,620 for the Town of Front Royal. A VDOT study found that if certain roadway improvements are made, namely the widening of Happy Creek Road, the impact on traffic will be “minimal.” The owner has agreed to dedicate the necessary right-of-way to the Town at the time that the Town makes roadway improvements, assuming that none of the dwelling units are negatively affected. Also, the Town expects the owner to construct the necessary stormwater management facilities within the subdivision; the future homeowner’s association will be responsible for the maintenance of the retention ponds. The HOA will also be responsible for maintaining the percentage of open space that is preserved on the property. Water and septic capacity already exist at the site, and it will be the owner’s obligation to install it at his own cost and dedicate it to the Town. 

 With a density of 2.42 units per acre, the proposed Marshall’s Glen scheme compares to neighboring subdivisions as actually being less dense since the average between Oden Ridge and Happy Creek Knolls is a density of 2.77. Studies report no environmental hazards, and the wetland delineation report indicated no suspect wet areas. Coming after an application for a short-term rental on East Main Street, which was also presented by Ware and unanimously favored by the commission, the Marshall’s Glen rezoning was approved, and after commission member reports and a report from Planning Director Lauren Kopishke, the meeting was adjourned.