Contributor Opinion by Roald Schrack: Growing Old In Rockville [Updated]
Feb 8, 2010 6:10 - 9 Comments
Posted by: Cindy Cotte Griffiths
Department: Contributor Opinion, Opinion
Tags: by Roald Schrack, Opinion
Department: Contributor Opinion, Opinion
Tags: by Roald Schrack, Opinion
Rockville was incorporated on March 10, 1860. The city will celebrate its 150th birthday with appropriate pride. The residents have been getting older too. In the 1950’s the population of Rockville was about 5000 people. The development of affordable housing attracted young families from Washington D.C. and Rockville grew at a rate of about 2000 people a year. This baby boom generation that led to the rapid growth of the city is now reaching retirement age. The graph below shows the expected increase in population of Rockville residents age 65 and over. This graph is based on a Task Force Report prepared by Senior Services Long Range Plan Task Force in 2006. The task force called attention to the “coming Tsunami” with numerous suggestions for city action in anticipation.
Graph mistakenly omited from original post.
These seniors are retiring in a very bad time economically. Most have seen their savings greatly reduced because of the stock market crash and the crash in housing values.. Over half of the retirees in the city depend on Social Security, 1/3 are “highly dependent” on Social Security. The average Social Security is about $1000/ month. There are a few affluent seniors who can afford the luxurious retirement community recently built in King Farm but the vast majority cannot. The city desperately needs affordable senior housing. It is thus especially tragic that the proposed 68 86 unit facility, Victory Court, that was to supply affordable senior housing has withdrawn its request for support from the city that would have enabled it to obtain tax credit funding from the state. With tax credit funding it would have been possible to set a rent of $1000 making the units affordable by the 1/3 of city seniors “highly dependent” on Social Security. Further development of Victory Court depends on finding alternative financing and completing site review by the Planning Commission.
The growing number of seniors in the city should have a political effect. The graph above shows a projection of the senior fraction of the total vote. This projection is based of past patterns of behavior and represents a best guess. It shows that in the next Rockville election in 2011 seniors will contribute between 35 and 40 % of the total vote. By 2020 seniors will contribute the majority of the vote. It is probable when seniors command a majority of the vote that their needs will receive greater support than they do now.
Roald Schrack
[UPDATED 2/9/10: The original post did not include the "Projected Senior Population in Rockville" Graph provided by R. Schrack, which has been added above.]
[UPDATED 2/9/10: The digits in the number of units were transposed. The figure has been corrected.]
This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such opinions for consideration — the more voices the better. We ask that all such contributions be civil and we reserve the right to edit (in consultation with the author) or reject. Contributor opinions should not be seen as reflecting opinions held by Rockville Central editors, as they are just as frequently at odds with our own views. That’s the whole point!
9 Comments
Leave a Reply
Read our comment policy. Please be civil. Don't write something you would not say to someone's face. COMMENTS ARE MODERATED. We reject comments with vulgarities, obscenities, or that personally attack other commenters. We also reject comments that do not use full names. We MAY BAN ip addresses where we detect multiple aliases posting.
Follow on Twitter
I hope that the large population of Rockville seniors will vote in the next election for the candidates who genuinely support more affordable housing for seniors, and not for the ones who mouth platitudes but then actively work to prevent that type of housing from actually being built within the city.
As to the Mayor and Council’s treatment of Victory House’s application for a letter of approval so that tax credits could be applied for, “seems to me I’ve heard this song before, it’s from an old familiar score….” Although we cannot count on the dependable image we all had of Tiger Woods or Toyota, one thing we do seem to be able to count on is that our Rockville Mayor and Council will squelch anything with the word “affordable” in its title. This is another shining example of why the “Best Cities in America” should probably not include Rockville on their list! For shame!
Susan Kneller
I cannot think of more shameful behavior than that which has been demonstrated by this ruling body with regard to Beall’s Grant and now Victory Housing.
Let’s make something clear here; there was no “treatment of Victory Housing’s application for a letter of approval…” other than a delay. Mayor and Council decided 2/1 to delay giving Victory Housing the letter until some questions were answered by City Staff. There is nothing wrong with waiting to make a decision until you have your questions answered; on the other hand, there’s something very wrong with going ahead and granting a request when you still have serious questions. Mayor and Council do NOT just automatically approve requests without considering them. On 2/5, Victory Housing through its attorneys withdrew the request for a letter of support. Victory Housing’s attorneys were present at the 2/8 Mayor & Council meeting; they could have waited to see what action would be taken on the letter request and could have withdrawn its request then, but Victory Housing chose not to do so. I don’t see anyone squelching affordable housing; there are issues with size, not the project itself. How many times do people have to say that? Victory Housing itself said that when they opened their facility in Potomac, Md., they had to turn away 900 people—so should they build a 900 unit project in Rockville? How big does Victory Court have to get before its supporters say “It’s too big”? How come no one is asking Victory Housing how they’re going to finance the project without tax credits and still keep the project as affordable housing?
I think 900 affordable units for seniors would be great. Many of these people fought for our country in World War ll and are the reason we live in the free country we do! Has Rockville forgotten?
Victory Housing very eloquently described the reasons it withdrew the letter. You can find it here and on the site Website.
http://www.weca.us/
Below is my email in support of the letter to the Mayor and Council.
Dear Mayor & Council:
I was not in attendance at the Feb. 1 Mayor and Council meeting but watched from home. I agreed that there should have been more notice about the letter, so I chose not to speak in support of it at that meeting.
But I must comment on the proceedings, as this is an issue that is continued to Monday’s meeting–at which time I do plan to speak in support of the letter.
There are several points I would like to make. I speak from having been involved in this project for many months. I have spoken in favor of it both before the Planning Commission and the Board of Appeals.
1. Your staff are undeserving of the criticisms that have been leveled against them, and I did not see anyone but Piotr defend them, perhaps only in reference the agenda item placement. One one citizen called for Mr. Ullery’s ouster and another said “the tyranny must stop.” Surely you saw how hysterical and over-blown these comments were, although I don’t believe anyone on the dias countered them. Leaving this accusations unchallenged implies you agree with them. It is demoralizing to the city’s public servants and reflects badly on you. To say that a letter coming in without notice makes one “physically ill” is pandering and shameful.
The Board of Appeals took an unprecedented FOUR day-long meetings to rule on this project. The Planning and Zoning Board took its time to vote in support of BOA approval, and was given a full update of the BOA’s actions at a subsequent meeting. It is prepared to do its job. These are volunteers who are well-qualified, thoughtful and deliberate in their actions. You wouldn’t know this from the comments citizens have made, with no rebuttal.
2. The law is the law is the law is the law…I need to repeat this because some members of the Mayor and Council believe the law is optional, or flexible, or simply doesn’t apply when they have a position that is contrary to it. I see this attitude creeping into more issues that come before you and it must stop. Projects are approved based on current zoning and applicants and the city staff following the rules as the exist today. The project will go before the Planning Commission at which time the number of units and size will be under review.
3. If the applicant says the letter is the first step and that a resolution must follow, there is no reason to believe otherwise. There is no approved site plan yet, so how could this first step lock one in?
4. Finally, I am appalled that some of you refuse to see the nature of the project before you. This is a project for poor, older people. Not a sewage treatment plan, biodefense lab, steel mill, or any development of the sort that would truly impact the surrounding homes. I continue to chuckle at the constant references to the fate of the “historic” homes on Fleet Street. They already have no front or back yards! The accusations of crime from possible grandchildren of the residents is another slam that has been made which is despicable and should be discredited on its face.
Do NOT allow this project to be held hostage by a group that does NOT speak for “the community” and as I have said before, is only in support of affordable housing as long as it isn’t anywhere near them and has “zero” units. I ask that as you debate this letter, you tell the TRUTH and stick to the facts. That’s the lesson of Beall’s Grant II. I hope the Mayor and Council have learned it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Theresa Defino
Let’s also make it clear that every time there is a delay or setback regarding Victory Housing or Beall’s Grant II, e-mails are sent out and websites are updated proudly proclaiming that this is a “victory” for the opponents. The nasty truth is that the core opponent group of both projects will accept nothing less than total capitulation on these projects. They have publicly admitted that their ultimate goal is to COMPLETELY stop them, and that they will not accept compromises: they will fight to the bitter end regarding the most minor of points, since they know that it is as effective to squelch the entire issue on the basis of a single parking lot or one foot of roof height as it is to terminate it on a much larger issue.
The fact that statements made during Citizens’ Forum, and e-mails to Mayor and Council, almost always follow a very defined format of specific talking points is proof to me that this is much less of a “citizen uprising” and more the result of a very sophisticated and regulated campaign by a small group of activists.
Well….as long as “We” want to make things clear…who is this “they” that have publicly admitted their ultimate goal is to completely stop and won’t accept compromise and will fight to the bitter end? I have not heard any one say this; so who are they????
1. Go to channel 11’s website
2. Watch a rerun of any 2008/2009/2010 Mayor/Council or Planning Commission/ Board of Appeals meeting
3. Watch specifically the statements against VH and BGII
4. Strip out the generic “I support affordable/senior housing, BUT….”
5. Voila!!
or
1. Attend a WECA meeting
2. Listen to the constant refrain of “how can we insert ourselves earlier into the process so that we can STOP these developers?”
Rinse and repeat
http://www.gazette.net/stories/10012008/rocknew204944_32470.shtml
Please read to the end of the article.