Redgate, Rockville Pike Feature In First Mayor And Council Meeting Of The Year
Jan 11, 2011 6:30 - 11 Comments
After a winter hiatus, Our Fair City’s Mayor and Council is back on schedule for Monday night meetings, and Rockville Central was (as always) virtually on hand to give you the important details. Here is a recap of highlights from last night’s meeting.
City Manager’s Report
Instead of City Manager Scott Ullery, Craig Simoneau gave an update on a new program for marking fire hydrants. Large red and white stalks are already attached to about 125 hydrants and 150 more are on tap. There are 1,370 hydrants in City, and it is likely that they will be deployed throughout the city.
Mayor Phyllis Marcuccio took this time to ask a few questions. First, she reported that she asked the City Clerk to verify that Rockville is still #2 in the state of Maryland in terms of population. Second, she asked for an update on a Montgomery County Public Schools meeting between Scott Ullery and City Planner Susan Swift relating to the portables issue. He reported that they made good progress toward an agreement.
She also asked Mr. Ullery to give a quick synopsis of a tax issue related to Woodmont Country Club. Mr. Ullery reported that Woodmont has been paying a lower tax rate based on an annexation agreement that ends in 2014. The City also found some parcels in King Farm that had not been placed into the correct tax category and “as a result for four or five years in a significant way have been in the wrong tax rate, a much lower tax rate.” That has been corrected moving forward but the City Attorney has advised that there is no way to collect the back taxes.
Chamber of Commerce Update
Andrea Jolly, director of the Rockville Chamber of Commerce gave an update on Rockville Rewards. 61 businesses have signed up for this effort, which is signing new businesses every day, and nonprofits are raising significant amounts of money. She also reported that the Chamber has established a committee to look at the City’s sign regulation, in conjunction with City staff. Councilwoman Bridget Newton asked that the task force make sure to coordinate with the City’s signage commission.
Appointments and Reappointments
This week’s appointments:
Cultural Arts Commission
- Abe Brown, III (Appointment as member until January 1, 2013)
- LiLiane Blom (Appointment as member until January 1, 2013)
Recreation and Parks Advisory Board
- Vincent “Chip” Boylan (Reappointment as member until January 1, 2013)
Traffic and Transportation Commission
- Mallory Duquesne (Appointment as member until January 1, 2013)
Citizen’s Forum
Anyone may speak at Citizen’s Forum. The best way to do this is to call ahead to the City Clerk’s Office at 240-314-8280 by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. However, even if you don’t call the Mayor typically allows all who wish to speak and who are present to do so. You can speak on anything you wish, for up to three minutes. (In the notes below, I may have spoelled some names wrong.)
- Maynard Moore: Spoke about concern about an “imbalance” at playgrounds when it comes to accessibility for people in wheelchairs and other disabilities.
- Charles Segerman: CEO of Clean Currents, the Mid-Atlantic’s leading clean energy company, located in downtown Rockville. Spoke in favor of a proposed green building tax incentive plan.
- Joe Jordan: Spoke as chairman of the RedGate Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee had suggested that the City improve its public information execution. A first draft of the NGF report was received on December 19, but Advisory Committee members were not allowed to see the report. Later, the report was released to the press three days before it was released to the public.
- Anne Goodman: Also spoke on RedGate. She supports maintaining RedGate as a golf course, and expressed concern over the environmental effects of other possible uses.
- Mike Rabkin: Spoke on ways he had thought of that would save the City money. For example, Rockville Reports costs approximately $84,000 per year — he suggested setting the default delivery mechanism as email (while still preserving the ability for residents to choose to receive a copy in the mail).
- Susan Prince: Spoke on the NGF RedGate study. A supporter of the golf course, and expressed dismay that the report was released to the press before it was provided to the public. Also expressed concern over staff receiving a first draft. As to substance of the report: Pointed out that the report exposes serious problems in how the course has been managed at a senior management level. When it comes to suggesting what to do about this situation, she feels the report falls far short, providing only two options that do not address the underlying problems.
- Alice Von Saunder: Expressed desire for a similar study to the RedGate one to be applied across all recreation facilities in Rockville, especially the Swim Center and the Senior Center.
National Golf Foundation Report
The new report by nonprofit golf consultants the National Golf Foundation that was kicked off at a Mayor and Council meeting last September was formally presented to the Mayor and Council (see the report here).
Recreation and Parks Director Burt Hall introduced Richard Singer of the National Golf Foundation, who gave a presentation on the report.
Go here to see a full recap of that presentation — it was an extensive discussion.
Here is the key finding according to Singer: “I have to say that this is one of the highest overall expense structures I have ever seen in 20 years,” he said. “That in and of itself is the issue with RedGate. That is especially true in terms of personnel costs, but we did not see those direct costs to be out of line.”
Singer said that, even if every idea were implemented and successful, the course would still be short in terms of its ability to meet expenses. “Even if you get a couple of good years,” he said, “you might be back where you started in three to five years.”
The NGF’s best recommendation, he said, is to privatize the course so as to both control expenses and grow revenue. He recognizes this could be problematic when it comes to staff and good will.
Rockville Pike Plan
Rockville's Pike: Envision a Great Place
David Levy, Chief of Long Range Planning, introduced the Draft Plan For The Rockville Pike Corridor. This draft is the official draft for the Planning Commission, which will consider it at their meeting on March 9 at 7pm. The purpose of this presentation is to provide key information, provide an understanding of how the public can comment, and to provide an overview of the document.
This part of the meeting was a joint meeting between the Mayor and Council and the Planning Commission.
The document was released on December 29. Tonight (1/10) is the presentation. On Tuesday night (1/11) there is a presentation. (See this article for more on the schedule and for links to the plan.)
Editor Cindy Cotte Griffiths has been following the Pike Plan very closely, and all her Rockville central coverage is collected here.
ACP Visioning and Planning was the consulting company that implemented and drove the public visioning process. Gianni Longo from ACP presented the plan itself.
“The time we have taken has been time well spent,” he said, “as we have been able to develop a vision from the community about what they want the Pike to become.”
More from Mr. Longo:
The group wanted a plan that reflects the vision of the community, and tried to determine what is the full potential of the Pike?
This is a timely plan, and extension of the 1989 plan. But there are a number of considerations. Traffic congestion along the Pike is likely to get worse. Second, city traffic standards for development are going to inhibit further development. Third, the Pike needs redevelopment to stay economically competitive in the region.
But, traffic conditions along the Pike impede redevelopment. We are at the intersection of Rock Drive and Hard Place.
The biggest difference is to create a shift from private automobiles to transit, walking, and use of the bicycle.
The key element is the creation of a “multi-way boulevard.” This is a time-tested way to address transportation and creating a great place, in use in many of the world’s major cities as well as places throughout the U.S. (K Street in DC is an example.)
The basic idea keeps the same size of the existing Pike. It adds access lanes to either side, with two traffic lanes, ample sidewalks, and a lane that is shared by bike and transit. So the middle section has vehicles only, for through traffic, and the access lanes are mixed. This also brings sidewalk businesses closer to the traffic that is actually liable to stop.
Two key issues we focused on was safety (especially pedestrian safety) and transit service.
The main land use recommendation is to make the Pike walkable by moving the buildings closer to the road. A second recommendation is to create a situation where there is a variety of heights.
There is a problem with moving forward however. Given only already-approved development, the City’s existing development requirements will not allow redevelopment without taking remedial actions to increase capacity of the Pike.
Overall, the key recommendations are:
- Adopt the Plan
- Create a tool to support quality development over time
- Implement congestion management strategies
- Partner with property owners
Mr. Longo’s presentation started late and ran into the wee hours. The questions back and forth caused him to miss the last train! That got a few chuckles, and the City’s chief of planning David Levy promised to get him home.
The next meeting of the Mayor and Council is TUESDAY, January 18.
did anyone respond to the accusations that the report was somehow withheld from the public?
my understanding is it was released to the city manager, who released to the mayor and all members of the city council, and to mr. jordan, who was expected to, but did not, provide the report to the other commitee members.
i believe it was released to a reporter after mr. jordan and the mayor and council already had received copies.
folks need to understand: the mayor and council ARE the public. if they get it, the public has it. and the press also represents the people.
i don’t believe anyone who asked for a copy would have been denied one. in this information age folks are used to getting things instantaneously and simultaneously, and . that can’t always happen. when it doesn’t they see a conspiracy and want to create controversy.
the report isn’t up for action yet. when it is scheduled, i trust that ms. prince and anyone else will have time to make comments.
Nothing about a grocery store in RTS? The grocery store post from December said, “Assistant City Manager Jenny Kimball, informed the Mayor and Council that they will be asked to endorse the license request at their next meeting on January 10, 2011. Federal Realty will be providing additional information before that date,” so I was hoping to get some news!
Theresa…first of all let me say that I spoke up about the fact the Gazette received a copy of the NGF report on Monday, the same day the M&C got their copies and I got one to distribute to the committee. I’ll return to this last point in a minute.
This is the second time in the last several weeks the Gazette got a “scoop” before information was made publicly available. The last was when they were given the names of people on the APFO task force. Here is an excerpt from my CF statement:
“Second issue… giving the press “scoops” on reports and information before they are posted on the City website for public view. A reporter for the Gazette was given a copy of the NGF three days before it was made available on the city website. This gave the reporter an opportunity to write a story that appeared online on Tuesday and in print on Wednesday, and gave him the opportunity to filter or slant the story to his liking. In an email exchange between the City Manager and a member of the advisory committee, the CM saw nothing wrong with this approach, and in fact thought the reporter was doing us all a service by ‘giving effective notice to the public of the report and its appearance on the upcoming agenda’. Come on Mr. Ullery. Isn’t that the job of the PIO, which is under your management?
He went on to explain the report wasn’t posted Wednesday, but on Thursday, because of a software glitch. I was informed by the City Clerk’s office the agenda was not sent to IT until Thursday at 8 AM, and the glitch Mr. Ullery referred to was in fact brought to the City’s attention by me. Regardless, we should get to see what the press can see, worst cast, at the same time.”
In typical fashion, a citizen speaks out but no action is taken, not even a discussion. It is frustrating that something like this, which might fall in the gray zone between policy and administration, can be spoken of at a council meeting and everyone sits mute, including the CM.
No one is looking for a conspiracy or to create controversy. The Rockville Pike Plan was posted prominently on the City website…the NGF report, which deals with the single most controversal issue with respect to the 2012 budget, should have been as well.
Mr. Ullery said the Pike Plan carried more weight because there was a meeting being held on Tuesday, a day after the NGF report was being presented.
Now, in your comment you write the following:
“mr. jordan, who was expected to, but did not, provide the report to the other commitee members.”
First of all, that is not true. The report was sent to the committee members within hours of my getting it. But what I want to know is, how did you get the idea it wasn’t? Did someone share city emails with you? If someone did, you obviously didn’t see them all. You made the same mistake that the City Manager made, only your audience is larger than his…his misstatement went to M&C and 10 or more senior staff members, city clerk and city attorney staff, etc. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, anything from Mr. Ullery.
After a while the cheap shots directed at me get tiring. I would appreciate you retracting the “understanding” you have and next time, check with me.
i still maintain, joe, that you fail to understand my basic point and the way the press works. the report was not withheld from the public. also, a “scoop” is when one reporter gets information before another reporter. i saw not slanting in the gazette story whatsoever.
it is not a “scoop” when a reporter asks for a public report, and gets it.
as far as seeing city emails, all correspondence to and from city employees to the public, and the press are public record.
you yourself earlier expressed this point regarding potential members on the the APFO commitee who may not have wanted their applications made public.
I am not going to debate the press issue with you. There re plenty of people who think differently, and that’s just fine.
As to the topic of city emails, two things seem to be evident. Either whoever sent you the email exchange between the city manager and a citizen gave you half the story, intentionally keeping to himself the second exchange where it was revealed the city manager got it wrong, or you chose to ignore the second exchange and wrote something you knew to be false.
You both should be ashamed.
ashamed? of what? my point was that the people who were most interested in seeing the report, and the people who should have seen it DID see it before it went to the reporter. you don’t even seem the challenging that point.
there’s nothing to debate about the release of the report to the press. when something hits a city govt, it’s public. period. that means a reporter and anyone else can get it. if you want to be a full-time reporter and demand access to documents, that’s your right. but if you got it before the gazette, where’s the beef?
if there was a delay in posting to the city website, that’s an issue for the city administration to address.
if the way i described your role in the dissemination of the report, is in correct, i apologize. i did qualify my comments. i have not found that you have shown me the same courtesy and as you have frequently taken my comments out of context and attached your own meaning to them and then challenged elected officials to respond to your mischaracterizations of what i have said.
Theresa, I conceded the point on the press…we agree to disagree. At least I do, and I said that.
As for the matter of my disseminating the report to the committee, it isn’t a question of “if” your description is incorrect, it’s a matter of fact it is incorrect, and I told you that in my first comment.
I think we carried on in this public forum long enough, and before RC cuts it off, I’ll end my postings with this one. I offer you the last word, and if you want to discuss it further in private, please le t me know.
From a legal perspective, the City is obligated to make available public documents when requested by any member of the public and especially the press. To turn down such a request would open the City to a legal challenge in which it would not prevail. This is not an area where there is room to “agree to disagree.”
The press plays many very important roles in our democracy; indeed, the press and its many roles are so important that it is uniquely mentioned by name in the U.S. Constitution.
One of the press’ many roles is to disseminate to the widest possible audience the workings of the government. In this role, the press is in no way a partner to the government; just the opposite, the press is the adversary that is a check on the government.
It is this adversarial relationship that sometimes leads to accusations that information is not released to the press fast enough and that sometimes special interests are unfairly given advance notice of information.
In a democracy, the accusation that public information is released to the press too quickly is baffling.
here is a link to Maryland’s Open Government law
http://www.rcfp.org/ogg/index.php?op=browse&t=full&state=MD
You don’t get it…of course the press is entitled to public information, and so is the public. My point is that there is no reason why, in this case, the NGF report could not have been posted on the city website the same time it was sent to the reporter. As for agreeing to disagree, no matter how you slice it, the Gazette got the report 3 days before the public, and just because the M&C got it doesn’t mean the public got it. That is my objection, and no one spoke to it in response to citizen forum.
joe…i am not sure who you are speaking to or what you think isn’t understood. but i do not agree, and will repeat: the press IS the public. the mayor and council IS the public.
for the people who don’t have internet access and read the gazette when it comes to their house-aren’t they part of the public, too? they have to wait to read the newspaper.
you can’t expect the city to post everything it gives a reporter at that same time. it is up to the city administration to determine what is “posted,” how and when. that doesn’t mean it is somehow withheld from the public because it isn’t posted.
i first covered city government as a cub reporter in 1982, and i sure didn’t wait for anyone to post something for me make a story about it.