News on Courthouse Issue
Jan 15, 2008 21:56 - 8 Comments
The Town Center Action team got bad news on the fight over where to build the new courthouse. Rockville Central readers know the city and a growing group of residents oppose the State’s plans to build it on the former library site. >Tonight City Manager Scott Ullery and Mayor Susan Hoffmann explained where the matter stands after a recent summit meeting with everyone from the Governor on down.
In spite of Governor O’Malley’s strong support for building the courthouse at the Giant site and his pledge to go to great lengths to make that happen, State Senator Jennie Forehand remains the lone hold-out among our elected officials who is not willing to work to get the courthouse built at an appropriate location.
To make matters worse, Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett said it seems certain that the County would exercise its right of first refusal and take back ownership of the former library site if a courthouse is not built there. That takes the wind out of the proposed Giant site land-swap in which the City would buy the library site back from the State.
City officials and residents alike were vindicated, though, in their stand that the delegation was made aware of their opposition to the court being built on the former library site long ago. Former delegate Cheryl Kagan provided notes from her Palm PDA of a June 11, 2001 meeting at City Hall in which then-Mayor Giammo and concerned residents — several of them current TCAT members — presented reasons why the library site was not the place for a courthouse.
Yep, you guessed it, lack of parking, “dark after five”, need for transition between residential neighborhood and buildings in town center were cited. The “Giant site” was specifically mentioned as a preferable alternative. So that’s six and a half years of consistent, logical opposition. So much for the “too late in the game” argument.
The meeting ended with plans for mounting an 11th hour, grassroots campaign to sway Senator Forehand, and seeking a meeting on Saturday afternoon with her and the rest of the delegation to explain just how frustrated Rockville is with the stalemate and what it might lead to.
Some tough talk indeed. I felt the presence of those former Rockville citizens who in 1774 gathered at the Hungerford Tavern, a block or so away, and drew up “the Hungerford Resolves”, a statement of support for their fellow patriots in Boston and against British rule (don’t know what I am talking about? read the plaques out front of BB&T on the corner of Washington and Jefferson).
Don’t you just love Rockville? I know I do!
Stay tuned……..
This is such an interesting turn of events for me. I wrote Senator Forehand this afternoon with some of my reasons why the courthouse should be built on the Giant site. A big part of that is environmental, but also the parking, and that the infrastructure is not there to support the building. Senator Forehand is usually so level headed and smart on things. I wish she would explain her thinking on this. I know she reads her email, [email protected]. Let her know what you are thinking maybe? Jacquie
>Rockville Central friend Christina Ginsberg sent along the following helpful comments:
Just a few points to add to Frank’s excellent summary:
a) Last night we heard that it would be possible to add three more parking decks to the parking garage behind the COB. That would be in the range of adding 600 cars to the traffic alrady on Jefferson Street. When I asked Scott Ullery who would be paying for the construction, his answer was “not the State”.
b) Governor O’Malley DID commit to having the State cover the redesign costs for a new building at the Giant site, but NOT parking costs at the new site (no state support for parking at either site).
c) Question from Councilmember Marcuccio about the total costs of the entire deal. Good question, as we can see from a and b above, we really don’t know. My gut estimate of the traffic mitigation costs just jumped to $5 million, mostly coming from us, the Rockville taxpayers, for EITHER courthouse site.
d) FYI - Did you know the Court walks prisoners through downtown Rockville? I sure didn’t, but it was confirmed by Peerless Director Eileen McGuckian who watches the criminal parade from her office in the old Red Brick Courthouse.
in haste - Christina
…And >Rockville Central friend Brigitta Mullican passed along this opposing view:
There is a lot of misinformation on the relocation of State District Courthouse to be built in Rockville. The Department of General Services (DGS) analysis confirms the Judiciary’s concerns that any relocation to an alternate site would involve considerable time delays, additional costs and risks of litigations. Relocation of the planned District Courthouse to the Giant site would entail a costly process that would impede DGS’s ability to utilize construction funding until FY 2011 or 20112. For these reasons the construction of the district courthouse at the library site is the most prudent decision. Why the Giant site is now considered when years ago alternative sites were pursued should alert people that something is not right with this relocation deal. Who is benefiting from this new negotiation? Who are the losers of the project if it isn’t honored?
The library site is the most acceptable site that allows construction to begin in FY 2009. For years the site has been zoned for public use. The district courthouse project has already resulted in millions of dollars of unrecoverable costs. In addition to cost escalation of construction this project would cause delay of other projects in Baltimore County, Baltimore City and Hartford County. The citizens of Rockville need to understand that this is a STATE project and that it is our state funding that will move this project forward.
While I served on the Rockville Planning Commission, we were told about the District Courthouse plans; and we were also told that the State has the final authority over State projects. The City of Rockville receives its planning and zoning authority from the State of Maryland (Code 66B). . . .
At the tax payers’ expense Rockville officials recommend overturning an earlier legislative vote made by members of the District 17 delegation. I believe not honoring the legislative decision is wrong and believe that wasting tax dollars is wrong.
I am very concerned how much extra money the project will cost the taxpayers if a deal is given for a nonpublic site, especially in light of the State budget shortfall.
The county should promise to exercise its rights to allow the Courthouse to be built on the old Rockville Library Site so that taxpayers do not waste the millions of dollar already invested in the planning design and its changes. I have faith that our elected officials will make the right decision on the State Courthouse project.
Thanks Brigitta!
I think the summary is unfair to the State Senator. I wonder if we’re allowing the delegation to say what we need to hear instead of what we want to hear. I was also initially irritated when I heard of Jennie’s stance, but then I concluded that she is doing what we say we want politicians to do, that is to tell it like it is.>
I was at the first 40 minutes of the TCAT meeting the other night (I had to leave to pick up kids) but before I left I heard the summaries from both Cheryl Kagan and Scott Ullery. I was also at all of the previous meeting that Barve attended.
Both Barve and Forehand are saying the same thing to a great extent. They are very concerned about the the procedures and practice of the state legislature’s budget process and the very real possibility that all funding for this project will be lost. Last meeting, Barve ended up supporting the switch in sites, but only with a few key conditions that haven’t seemed to pan out. (He went to great lengths to explain the perils of not spending when the money is there.) Also, Ullery’s summary of the recent meeting with the Gov had Barve expressing once again concern about losing all funding.
One other thing that Ullery said; there would almost certainly be more than a year’s delay if sites were switched and that process could involve recompetes of contracts, and other similar obstacles.
According to Ullery as summarized in the Tuesday meeting and again in the Gazette, City Staff made a mistake and Rockville’s official chance to review the plans expired about 2 years ago.
I also note that much of the rest of the county’s delegation is very skeptical (to put it mildly) of switching sites at this late hour and we need to be looking beyond our 4 local reps.
It appears to me that the switch in sites is dead. That begs the obvious question. Are people so against the new court house at this site that they’re willing to try to flat out stop it no matter the outcome?
Yes, the old library site is stupid for reasons already well enumerated. But would it be better to not have it at all? Or is it time for a plan B?
Mark Pierzchala
Mark et, al. >
Tell me, what do you invision Plan B to be?
My concern is that this site is obviously such a bad idea — do we as citizens and taxpayers benefit from a bad building? My inclination at this time is to say no, we do not benefit from a bad building and the detriment to the quality of life, our life, is steep.
And, I must ask. Why do we even have to have the Court House in our backyard. If they don’t want to play ball with us, and create a building that will be an asset to Rockville and fit into the needs of this citizenship, let them build it somewhere else.
Does a district courthouse bring in enough revenue to the City of Rockville to make it an appropriate burden for the citizens of Rockville.
What is the fall out if the Courthouse isn’t built in Rockville? Let them build it somewhere else… what do we lose? And I am honestly asking this question, not being sarcastic. What do we lose if they go elsewhere. Illuminate me. I want to know.
I have only heard about what it is going to cost citizens of Rockville, not about what it brings to the table.
Maybe we are fighting for something we don’t really, really need to have afterall. At one time, being the “seat” of government gave us an industry, but is that still the case? Particularly as we invite the 5,000,000 new residents being predicted to come to this area.
Will having the District Courth House here make that much of a difference?
Jacquie
>Rockville Central friend Bill Burchett has sent along the following:
OK, so redesign costs will be covered if the Courthouse site is moved. That is good.
It sounds like we either wont lose our funding or it may be delayed a year or so. That is good.
It seems there is much agreement (not total agreement) among many of our elected officials and what I will call “prominent citizens” that an alternative site would be better. Agreement is good.
There is some concern about wasting the money already put into the project. Look at that as an economic stimulus package of the type Congress wants to pass at the Federal level. Is this the first poor use of money on behalf of government? Isn’t “wasting” a little money worth it if we get it right in the end?
I only skimmed this part but it seems that Rockville had a chance to review and oppose the site years ago but missed that opportunity? So, as a penalty, we get a giant courthouse that most (I am guessing here) don’t want? We are building a huge office building that will be there 50+ years and be a focal point of most of the traffic traveling North on Rt. 28. Will this courthouse be the most welcoming site in Rockville? We are finally getting over being a government center that rolls up the sidewalks at night.
As Mark alluded to at the end of his above post, “would it be better not to have it?’. I have read a lot about the arguments on both sides but I have missed why we need the courthouse to begin with and what happens if we don’t build one for 5 years.
Thanks, Bill!
The question of whether the Courthouse is a necessity is being raised by more than one (me) — so can anyone tell me, and others…>
Why do we need the courthouse? Why can’t we say, Thanks, but no Thanks?
This is our city, our tax dollars, our infrastructure… can they just demand the right to put this building up regardless of what we want for our city?
What if they wanted to put up a small jail/prision because it would be easer to move the bad guys from there into the courts…. could they do that?
I am really curious.
Jacquie
Doesn’t anyone want to know more about Hungerford Tavern and the Rockville Reolves? I hear they had “penny pint” nights!