Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 2/26/11

This week we announced we would be moving Rockville Central 100% to Facebook. All the news outlets are always looking for the “story” while at Rockville Central we were always seeking to bring people into public life while fostering positive discussions concerning the issues. At least 74% of adults use Facebook so we decided to go where people are congregating. Even though the site is completely accessible without a Facebook account, we hope people will share news, photos, videos, and thoughts as we interact as a community. When I described this comic during an interview with Nieman Journalism Lab‘s Megan Garber, she quoted me as saying “There’s this big party. And we want to be in there.”

About ROCK’burb: Last year we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I decided to give it a try. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].

Reader Note By Cheryl Kagan: At Long Last… The ICC!

After roughly five decades of discussing options and drawing routes… purchasing parcels of land and dealing with politics… rising costs and controversy… the Intercounty Connector (ICC) finally opened yesterday. As readers likely know, this east/west road will ultimately connect I-270 to I-95 and Route 1. It will make trips to BWI airport a breeze, and will link jobs and friends from across the state.

On Monday, Governor Martin O’Malley led the ribbon-cutting for the first segment of this road. This long overdue event, held in the bitter cold (with rain for good measure), was well-attended by current and former elected officials, business leaders, and long-time community members who have consistently supported this transportation improvement.

The significance of this long-awaited (and for some, long-dreaded) day was reflected by the presence of U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who joined his Deputy, former MD Transportation Secretary John Porcari at the ceremony. Former Governor Bob Ehrlich, former County Executive Doug Duncan, and many former transportation, business, and legislative leaders were also in attendance. The Mayor, City Manager and entire City Council of Gaithersburg were there to celebrate; Rockville was represented by City Manager Scott Ullery. State Senate President Mike Miller asked local State Senator Jennie Forehand to represent him; Maryland House Speaker Mike Busch asked the same of Del. Kumar Barve.

What does the opening of the ICC- the new Route 200- mean to you? Check it out and see (best to do so before tolls kick in on March 7th). You’ll find it attractive, clean, and quick… and your taxes helped build it! I suspect we’ll all choose BWI as our airport more frequently now that it is so much easier and quicker to get there. Check out www.mtaiccbus.com for the details on the $5.00 trips that are scheduled hourly between the Shady Grove Metro station and the airport. Thanks to the ICC, it will be much easier to get to the airport without worrying about traffic or steep parking fees!

It will be interesting to see how many drivers choose the Intercounty Connector for their regular commute or for pleasure trips. The sticker shock of the tolls will certainly dissuade many of us, but transportation officials predict that the time savings will entice drivers onto the road. Remember that- just like Metro- the ICC uses time-sensitive pricing. Rush hour commuters (those using the road 6 -9am & 4-7pm on weekdays) will pay $1.45. It will be less expensive for off-peak hours ($1.15 from 5-6am, 9am-4pm and 7-11pm on weekdays, and 5am-11pm on weekends) and a bargain at 60 cents for the overnight hours of 11pm-5am.

I’ve heard from a number of people who hope their commutes will be quicker based on other people using the Intercounty Connector. It remains to be seen how many of us will become “those people” who will choose the ICC on a regular basis.

Cheryl Kagan served in the MD House of Delegates from 1995-2003 and supported the ICC throughout her tenure.

This is a Reader’s Note. We welcome submissions on all sorts of things — shopping, restaurants, performances, art, cultural events, meetings, and more. Get in touch with us at [email protected] if you would like to submit something!

Contributor Opinion by Art Stigile: Using FOIAs To Intimidate Opponents Of Subsidizing RedGate Is Unacceptable

On Monday morning I sent a press release to the Gazette announcing that I was soliciting signatures on a petition condemning Joe Jordan’s attempt to silence my criticism of using taxpayers’ money to bail out the RedGate golf course, I also announced that additional information is available on my website (www.rocktrash.org).

Here’s a summary of what led me to take this step.

At Citizens’ Forum last summer (and here on Rockville Central), I posed 10 questions to the golfing community about the future of the RedGate golf course. The RedGate Advisory Committee largely ignored these questions on their quest to convince taxpayers that somehow we benefit from the privilege of paying huge subsidies for other people to play golf. September gave way to autumn, and I slipped into my normal budget season schedule of working 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. From October through the end of January, I was totally uninvolved in City issues and had no time to follow Mayor and Council action on any issue. I confess that I didn’t even have time to read Rockville Central!

I was gone, but apparently not forgotten. In late January, I was astounded to hear that Joe Jordan, chair of the RedGate Advisory Committee, had filed a FOIA request for all emails between me and Rockville City email addresses. I asked the City for confirmation and received a copy of Mr. Jordan’s FOIA request for my email, and a second FOIA request that he filed asking for email between the City Manager, the City Finance Director, and the Director of Parks and Recreation.

I don’t mind having a vigorous debate about the substance of public policy. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy and respect Rockville Central so much. But going on a fishing expedition for the email of your political opponent, and using City staff as a political punching bag go well beyond anyone’s definition of acceptable political behavior.

So, at the Feb 7th Citizens’ Forum, I spoke out against Mr. Jordan’s tactics, saying “You don’t have to be a political genius to see that Mr. Jordan’s action is designed to intimidate and silence critics of using taxpayers’ dollars to bailout the Golf Course.” I went on to say that his actions are “a perfect example of why many, if not most, Americans view politics with disgust.”

For anyone doubting my characterization of the intent of Mr. Jordan’s FOIAs, I refer you to his statement in the Feb. 16th edition of the Gazette:

“[I asked for it] because of [Stigile's] outspokenness on the golf course,” he said. “I don’t know [how it will be useful].”

I don’t care how you parse his statement, it says he targeted me because I oppose the golf course bailout.

I thought the public exposure might cause Mr. Jordan to rethink his political tactics. However, late last week, I learned that Mr. Jordan has expanded his FOIA request to cover email through Feb 12th of this year.

As I said at Citizens’ Forum, I fully support Mr. Jordan’s request for copies of my email. He absolutely has a legal right to see public records. In fact, I asked the City on Feb. 7th and again on Monday morning to post all of my email on the City web site, so that everyone can enjoy them.

But just because it’s legal doesn’t make it right. Mr. Jordan represents the City. His political tactics send the wrong message to any resident who wants to participate in the political process and isn’t a life-long fan of the Broad Street Bullies’ brand of hockey. (Sorry Caps fans.) I concluded my remarks at Citizens’ Forum by saying that this kind of politics is not acceptable from someone who represents the City, and I asked the Mayor and Council to discharge Mr. Jordan from his position on the Advisory Committee.

If you are appalled by political intimidation like this, I invite you to go to my website at www.ROCKTRASH.org and sign my petition condemning Mr. Jordan’s behavior.

I hate this kind of politics. It’s cheap and tawdry, and it taints all of us, even when we are pursuing honorable means. But turning our heads only encourages more of the same.

Art Stigile

p.s. I don’t send many emails, and I rarely keep email, so I don’t have copies of all of them. But I’ve posted a few that I have on my website. Enjoy!

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to [email protected]. 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!

Contributor Opinion By John Britton: The Tag Line, The Logo, Our Process

By Councilmember John Britton:

Click for full size

Rather than address each comment individually (and at the risk of inciting a new round of criticism), I submit this in response to comments by Rockville Central, the Communications Task Force and others who have expressed concern and dismay with the selection of the tag line (“Get Into It”) and logo (R) and the process for that selection. I fully understand and appreciate the comments and concerns as to whether the tag line and logo may or may not be representative, creative, inclusive, resonant, poignant (insert your adjective here). Such characteristics are hugely subjective with varying levels and intensity of acceptance or rejection. In fact, dare I suggest, the tag line and logo, as happens often in similar situations, may actually over time become an acquired taste. I appreciate too the expressions of consternation over the decision process and I am sorry there is a feeling that public opinion was summarily dismissed. It was not. I respectfully disagree with the characterization that in this process, public opinion was totally disregarded and the decision capriciously made. Specific to this characterization, I set out below my understanding of and involvement in the process that led to my favoring the selected tag line and logo. At the outset, let me make clear that I speak only for myself. The other Council members who voted for the tag line and logo – Piotr Gajewski and Mark Pierzchala – surely have their own bases for their processes and votes. Having said that, it is my observation that both have been deliberate and thoughtful in their analyses of all issues throughout this term (regardless of outcomes that may differ from my own), so I may safely hazard a guess that they did not act in blatant disregard of public opinion in this instance.

Keep in mind, this has been an ongoing process for more than a year; it is not just the citizen input survey that underlies its analysis. The previous Mayor and Council initiated the RFP and selecting the consultant who would ultimately submit the three tag line and logo options. It was early in this session that the current Mayor and Council, by a vote of 4 to 1, authorized the contract to proceed, i.e., the expenditure of $75,000 for the development of tag line and logo options. By the time these options were presented, the consultant’s work was nearly done and importantly the funds were already expended. The process publicly set last year was for the collection of demographic information and other data including interviews with select representatives of different stakeholder groups, the analysis of such data, a mechanism for random public input on tag line and logo options and the presentation of all of this information to the Mayor and Council for final selection. I do not dispute the benefits of an enhanced process that would have taken us into prolonged post analysis of the submitted options, including multiple focus groups, and likely the unending consideration of a myriad of additional options. We were constrained, however, by a limited project budget that was itself the subject of intense criticism. At no time throughout the process was there discussion of expanding the budget to include controlled, more representative surveys or focus groups. In fact, the opposition to the expenditure of any additional funds on this process was vehement and any discussion by the Mayor and Council of such additional funds was stillborn. Despite this, the rationality of the process we did engage in is not necessarily diminished nor is the decision making and its result any less reasonable. Based on my conversations with others, particularly in our public and business sectors, and my observations and research with respect to branding in other locales, I see a tremendous benefit to a branding infrastructure. I was sufficiently satisfied with the collection and analysis of data by the consultants and their identification of the lack of consensus among us (read broadly) of what kind of place Rockville should mean to all of us. I accepted the consultants’ options and felt the time was organically right to make a decision.

Let me explain then the how of my preferred choice. As a member of the previous Mayor and Council, I was privy to the extensive presentations by the RFP respondents on the benefits of branding, experiences with different municipalities and the approach each would take for branding in Rockville. I also reviewed the reports submitted by the consultant, discussed the results of the consultant’s research and analysis with others throughout the city and in different capacities in the city, participated in the presentations by the consultant before the Mayor and Council and conducted my own background research into the initiation and efficacy of branding processes and campaigns. This is all part of information gathering and analysis that I undertake for any issue before the Mayor and Council. Another component of information gathering for this was my review of the survey, in particular the comments submitted with many of the votes. I never understood our citizen input survey to have a mandated result. Rather, I used the survey and the comments therein to inform my decision but not be determinative of it. If we intended the latter, then we would have announced that the winner of the survey would be the absolute determining factor for selection of the tag line and logo, regardless of any other factor, and we would not have needed any further discussion of the survey. We made no such announcement. Nor could we. Nor do we operate in such manner in any other forum or for any other topic. As in other processes, I put the survey information in an analytical context and based my decision on a multiplicity of factors, including the survey and its comments.

Rightly or wrongly, the survey was a random sampling, hardly the appropriate mechanism on which to solely rely in making a decision. With this random survey, there is no geographic, racial, ethnic, age, gender, education or income break-down. I do not submit that all of these categories must be known in a survey, but it is impossible to know how representative of your population your respondents are if at least some of these categories are not present. The Rockville Central Opinion titled “I Feel Branded” stated that the “will of the people” should not necessarily be followed, but focused its criticism of the process for not doing just that – blithely making a decision based solely on a random numbers game. With this as a mantra, Rockville Central and others made the audacious assumption, without ever attempting to validate such assumption, that, in this process, the will of the power was “summarily” rejected by those of us who voted for the selected tag line and logo. So sure of the arbitrary dismissal of the “will of the people”, not one person contacted me or even undertook the slightest of inquiry to determine if there might be a countervailing rationale on my part.

Even apart from the randomness of the survey, the simply stated tally warrants stricter scrutiny and statistical parsing. The tag line and logos were rated 1,2 and 3 in a dancing-with-the-stars-like vote tally. But the reality of the preferences is murkier. For example, a number of the none of the above vote actually intended to reject the process altogether either because branding itself was an unacceptable activity or the expenditure of funds on this activity was wasteful. There were a number of “hybrid” selections, i.e., one of the tag lines mixed with another of the logos or modifications to the submitted option. For example, approximately 15 comments selected either tag line #1 or tag line #2 (thus, the “winner” for that vote), but with attachment to logo #3. I am not suggesting that further scrutiny in this way necessarily changes the finish line position of the options. But categorizing the votes in non-permeable categories was a disservice to the overall sentiment. Put differently, it was not as clear cut as the vote tally suggests. I also carefully reviewed the survey comments which I found more telling of sentiment. (I wonder how many of those who bemoan my vote as egregious actually read, as I did, the comments in the survey as well as all of the demographic and stakeholder interview reports and other pertinent and relevant materials.) Some of the comments rejected option number 3 because the tag line did not resonate with some easily identifiable component of Rockville. As one comment suggested, it is no good if it has to be explained. I considered this seriously, but in light of the varying concepts in all of the materials, including the survey, about what is the primary component of Rockville, I personally thought a more interpretative tag line would be appropriate. It has a breadth of interpretation and an elasticity in its application or, following other survey comments, it is both an invitation and a recommendation to find out more about Rockville.

The characteristics of my process and vote are as varied as our citizens’ concepts of Rockville. Are you colorblind? (No, I am not.) Any child could come up with a better tag line. (I am struck by the inordinate number of 5 and 7 year olds in Rockville who are purported to be proficient in marketing and graphic arts.) Midlife crisis? (Maybe, but I think I addressed that with my recent skydiving.) Result of beer drinking frat boys? (No quip here – this unfortunate comment does a disservice to intelligent, substantive public dialogue.) Also, the charge that we are the laughing stock of the entire region is hyperbolic. To prove the point of ubiquitous ridicule, Rockville Central refers us to the “dcist” blog. But, even a cursory review of the blog comments reveals that it’s not really this process that is being ridiculed; rather, it’s outdated stereotypes of Rockville being parodied, with an unflattering picture of Rockville Pike signage and faux tag lines such as “The World Class City That Nobody Cares About”; “Rockville: It Probably Isn’t Getting Any Better Than This”; “Rockville: We [heart] Strip Malls” “Rockville-Because I Didn’t Know Any Better”; “Rockville: Home of Hank Dietle’s Tavern!” (which it technically was not); “Rockville: On The Way To Somewhere Nice”; and on and on. And by the way, the blog author states that the selected tag line is the least ridiculous of the three options. (Well, not the endorsement one typically solicits but an endorsement nonetheless!) If you really want to read some ridicule of Rockville process and policy, try some of the local and national transportation blogs on our recent CCT decision.

For those still awake at this point, I do not pretend that any of this will convert you to disciples of “Get Into It”. You may still consider the tag line and logo “astonishingly unimaginative”. Just know that I based my decision on an analysis of all the data and information presented, including the survey and its comments, my own research and observations of branding campaigns and my own emotive response, the latter obviously to the chagrin of the opponents of the tag line and logo. Anyone has the right to criticize my analytical process on a substantive basis and my artistic pretensions on even a WTF basis. I believe, however, the sweeping generalization of my summary disregard of the public will is misplaced and unwarranted. The roll-out of the tag line and logo is not immediate but gradual, an approach determined wholly by fiscal considerations. Only time will tell if this works to the city’s advantage or is inherently destructive of the branding attempt. A small irony of this public dialogue is that a number of people are using the tag line, albeit not necessarily in the preferred way, either in the context of this process issue or related to another concern or issue. What’s the usage count before we can say it is now in common parlance?! In the meantime, I encourage you to “get into it” with respect to any aspect of the good life in Rockville!

John Britton

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to [email protected]. 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!

Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 2/12/11

The 2010 Census results for Maryland were released this week. Rockville Central has been a Media Partner throughout the process so we’re excited to see the results.

About ROCK’burb: Last year we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I decided to give it a try. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].

Reader Note From Rotraut Bockstahler: Upbeat Report From Pinneberg, Germany

Rockville Central friend Rotraut Bockstahler, of the Rockville Sister City Corporation, passed along this nice note from our friends in Pinneberg, Germany. Pinneberg and Rockville are sister cities, and this report appeared in the Pinnebrg local newspaper from the German-American Association Rockville Pinneberg (DAGRP) in German. Rotraut helpfully translated for us!

German-American Association Rockville Pinneberg (DAGRP): Birgit Drechsler, Angelika Schulze, Margrit Ziegler, Herbert Hoffmann, Hans-Dietmar Bethke Inge Heinrich, Bernd Hinrichs, Michael Patt

“It lives, it fits, and we are moving forward. We are carried by an expanding wave of self sustaining power.” Bernd Hinrichs, President of the German-American Association Rockville Pinneberg (DAGRP) reported right at the beginning of the annual membership meeting (taking place at the VfL-Building) the very positive development of affairs for the association.

Lots of activities and exchanges straight across the ocean, a growing number of personal friendships between members of the association and its US counter part, the Rockville Sister City Corporation (RSCC): The President of the 166 member association is satisfied.

Besides the sponsorship of traditional activities, such as the Thanksgiving Dinner, the German American Day, bicycle tours, and the Fast Food Breakfast, the board members are busy initiating new projects. For the first time, a hiking tour through the Harz mountains (June 30th - July 3rd) is being organized. From August 18th - August 25th as a test balloon “Bike Ride Baltic Riviera”, a bicycle tour through the eastern regions along the Baltic Sea, Usedom-Rügen-Hiddensee, is on the program. For the Spring of 2012, very engaged members of the association are planning a USA group trip by taking advantage of the seasonally lower airfares.

One major event: The Pinneberg artist Detlef Allenberg will show his works at the Glenview Mansion in Rockville. The full exhibit will open in September 2011 with a reception of the artist on September 9.

Our activities this year will have to stay within a tight budget. Our reserves are down to 443 Euros, warned Treasurer Hans-Dietmar Bethke. The welcome activities left their traces on our balance sheet. Last Fall, DAGRP supported the visits to Maryland by a group of Theodor-Heuss High School students and the Pinneberg Music School Clarinett Ensemble. The DAGRP visitors program and Pinneberg hosts generously treated the Rockville Chorus members during their visit in June.

Our Board of Directors has two new faces: Members of the annual meeting elected Birgit Drechsler and Michael Patt unanimously. Jürgen Kleinhans and Erika Wupperman did not run again. Vice President Margrit Ziegler and Treasurer Hans-Dietmar Bethke were re-elected and remain in their current positions. The remaining board members have not completed their terms and will be up for re-election in 2012.

At the beginning of the evening and before the business meeting, Robert Lucke, history teacher at the Theodor-Heuss-High School and two of the 12th-graders, Isabell Priebe (18) and Kirstie Alcock (17) described their impressions of their visit to Rockville in the Fall of 2010. The visit to New York City and the warm welcome by host families in Rockville impressed them most. “The concept of hospitality received new definiton”, said Lucke.

This is a Reader’s Note. We welcome submissions on all sorts of things — shopping, restaurants, performances, art, cultural events, meetings, and more. Get in touch with us using our contact form if you would like to submit something!

Contributor Opinion by Martha Klasing: Will Our Mayor And Council Take Time To Evaluate The Best Course Of Action For Redgate?

What will RedGate’s future be? Our Mayor and Council may decide this on Monday night, as RedGate is once again on the agenda. City staff recommends following the National Golf Foundation’s (NGF) suggestion to outsource the management of the course. This would certainly bring in the needed expertise that has been lacking thus far. RedGate has suffered over the past several years under City management due to lack of marketing and lack of care. The negative rhetoric about its poor financial performance, cost to taxpayers, and possible closing of the course has kept golfers away and resulted in lost rounds of golf and revenue.

For anyone who had the patience to read my lengthy posting back in September, I attempted to explain exactly what the City (and others) were calling “RedGate’s Deficit”. For those who did have the patience to slog through the numbers, hopefully you understood that the majority of any accumulated deficit attributed to RedGate did not stem from RedGate’s operations, but rather from the City’s allocation of administrative and overhead charges. Costs that weren’t a result of operating RedGate and costs that the City would have to pay whether RedGate existed or not. If anyone is still laboring under the idea that RedGate is costing taxpayers a large sum each and every year, here is a figure for you. Over the past decade, the accumulated deficit in the RedGate fund – which includes over $1.3 million of City overhead not directly attributable to RedGate’s operations– amounts to just $6.97 per household annually.

This past week, an article in the Gazette states that the City could save more than $200,000 a year by outsourcing the management of the course. This is the management option that NGF recommends. I’ve studied NGF’s financial projections and I tend to disagree that outsourcing would save the City up to $200,000 per year. This is what it boils down to: The City would terminate its employees that work at the golf course. In turn, the City would hire an outside company to manage the course. So, rather than pay our current City employees, the City would pay a comparable amount (slightly more, based on their projections), to a 3rd party management company. The numbers are as follows: over the projected 4 year period FY 2012-2015, the City would save $1.452M on salary and benefits by terminating the city employees. They would then spend $1.488M on additional line item expenses related to the management company – NO NET SAVINGS! So, where do any projected savings come from? Here’s the answer, and please think about this carefully - if RedGate is outsourced to an outside management company, the City anticipates reducing the allocation of CITY admin/overhead charged to RedGate from a total of $1.359M to a mere $240,000 over the same 4 year period. There’s your savings. But, it isn’t really savings to the City, because those amounts of City admin/overhead represent City costs for running the City government and still have to be paid. They will just tuck it away in some other fund. So, as a city resident and taxpayer – and I am not a golfer so I’m not floating these ideas to preserve my hobby – I ask, how does this make sense? I can’t see that outsourcing is really saving any money at all –it’s just moving numbers around on a piece of paper. And, people will lose their jobs.

What outsourcing would do for RedGate is to bring in professionals who operate in and know the golf business. This would be a plus, and it is needed. Per the NGF study, the market favors golf operators in this area. RedGate is well situated to capitalize on an improving economy, increasing population, and a shake down in the industry, as some courses close. It highlights what RedGate has going for it – attractive venue, dedicated staff, and a core group of loyal customers. It provides the basic steps to take in order to get the course back on track. The study points out that RedGate needs to be able to operate competitively without decisions being made by those who don’t know the golf business (like City Hall). Outsourcing is one way to do that. If you read the RedGate Advisory Committee’s response to the NGF study, there is another way to do this, which could be a lower-cost alternative. Hire a golf director that has the experience and golf business acumen to run a golf business. Sure, this would require the city to create a new position, but it may be a more frugal approach to full outsourcing. Herndon has taken this approach with their course (a comparable facility to RedGate) and has been quite successful. Herndon’s golf course expenses track similarly to RedGate’s, but they enjoy nearly half a million more dollars of revenue than RedGate. This is something RedGate could do with the right direction and control. Do we really need to lay off City workers and take their livelihoods away? And then take those savings and pay an outside 3rd party to do something the City could easily do with the right expertise? I hope not – a very sad statement indeed when the entire nation is talking about job creation and job preservation.

If it is all about saving money, then outsource the care for all our passive parks - that costs a significant amount more than the golf course. The City could lay off even more workers and just hire a 3rd party landscaping company to do the same job for a lot less money. I hope our Mayor and Council have more of a vision than this.

By Martha Klasing

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to [email protected]. 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!

Contributor Opinion By Sean P. Carr: Brand On The Run

Click for full size

By Sean P. Carr:

A brand should be something that ties a community together, that unifies its diversity, that identifies something special or unique about the community.

By a 3-2 vote, the City Council brought the community together — but against the brand. In news stories and online comments, people in Rockville have agreed on one thing: they just can’t “get into” the council’s choice. Sure, “Get into it” is simply awful. Uninspiring. Too begging of the question “Get into what, exactly?” As Brad Rourke wrote at Rockville Central, “I assumed that it was just the third option the consultants presented because they had to present three.”

But the choice’s dubious quality is not the real problem.The real problem is that the council asked the people of Rockville for their opinion — and more that four in five picked something else. Yet, three members inexplicably selected the least popular option. One can argue that the poll was not scientific. One can argue that there weren’t a lot of votes. But the council did ask the question. If you’re going to ignore the answer, don’t ask the question.

Actually, the council did worse than ignore the results — it voted in direct opposition. Out of four choices, it picked the least popular, one preferred by just 17% of respondents. This sets a bad example. Seventeen percent may be a higher percentage of the vote than any of them won in the last election, but it also means 83% preferred another option — such as the near-winner, “No choice made.”

Last year, a group of volunteer city residents served on a Communications Task Force created by the council. After months of meetings, interviews and reviews of city practices, we generated proposals to help city government speak with and listen to the people of Rockville. Two recommended principles were to clearly communicate how the the city is hearing feedback and addressing concerns and to solicit ideas “to encourage citizens to help improve the city and its operations.”

In Rockville Reports, Councilmember John Britton wrote about a “disconnect” between city government, residents and businesses and called for “increased communication and information sharing.” After all, he said, too often “we fail to address such issues and concerns through a long-term and community-inclusive approach.”

We couldn’t agree more. That’s why we call on the council to reverse its vote. If a branding initiative is to be continued, the process must be respectful of the perspectives of residents.

Noreen Bryan
Sean Carr
Sam L. Elowitch
Shashi Koduru
Steve Maroon
Waleed Ovase
Russ Rubin

Members of the Rockville Communications Task Force, 2010

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to [email protected]. 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!

Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 2/5/11

Hats are flying. In Gajewski Explores Run For Mayor, Councilmember Piotr Gajewski announced the formation of a committee to determine if he will run for mayor this year. He’s fundraising and gathering support but says the decision won’t be final until May. Mayor Phyllis Marcuccio has been quoted as saying she will run again.

About ROCK’burb: Last year we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I decided to give it a try. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].

Contributor Opinion By Joseph Jordan: Pros And Cons Of NGF RedGate Report

Contributor Opinion by Joseph Jordan:

Photo courtesy Redgate Golf Course

On Monday, February 7th, RedGate Golf Course will once again be on the Mayor and Council agenda. This will be an opportunity for the Council to discuss their reactions to the National Golf Foundation study (presented on January 10th), to determine next steps and give some direction to the staff. The RedGate Advisory Committee was invited to submit its response to the NGF Report, and will be given time on the agenda to speak. You can read the Committee’s report here at this link.

The NGF report contains a great deal of information on the history of the golf course, including the controllable and uncontrollable factors that contributed to RedGate’s current situation. It also lays out several options the City might consider going forward. We highly recommend that people read the report to get a better understanding of the issues and the advantages and disadvantages of each option.

The Advisory Committee’s report, though brief, highlights what we think are the pros and cons of the NGF recommendations. Bringing in an outside company to manage the course means current RedGate employees will likely lose their jobs. While on the surface, outsourcing may seem to produce better financial results, there are costs associated with such an arrangement. There would be, of course, the fee paid to the management company. There would also be other additional line item costs the City would have to cover that would be passed through from the management company. Based on the projections provided by NGF, these additional line item costs exceed the savings from terminating the city employees. These and other considerations are covered in our report, so please take a look.

We trust our elected officials will do the hard work required of them and do whatever necessary to keep RedGate a City owned and operated golf course. Given the jobs at stake and the future of our green space, we need them to approach this thoughtfully and carefully, and not make a quick decision that has long term repercussions that will stretch way beyond their terms.

Joseph Jordan, Chairman
RedGate Advisory Committee

This is a Contributor Opinion. Rockville Central encourages readers to submit such pieces for consideration — the more voices the better. Simply send them to [email protected]. 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!

Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 1-29-11

The consultants, ROI/CRC did not work to improve their lackluster, wordy, and unoriginal logo & tagline ideas for the City’s branding effort after the survey results were tabulated. As a matter of fact, as Brad Rourke pointed out in his opinion piece this week, when they first came up the their ideas, they “simply pointed out that there was little consensus among people and that they had seemingly false impressions of where they live.” We paid them $75,000 to ignore us. We don’t know where we live? Anyway, at the Mayor and Council meeting a majority voted for the least favorite choice from the survey results. The rest of the DC area is having a good time ridiculing the options and our choice.

About ROCK’burb: Last year we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I decided to give it a try. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].

Reader Note From Cheryl Moss Herman: Update On The Julius West And New Elementary School Feasibility Studies

Photo from the MCPS website

Thanks to Cheryl Moss Herman, Richard Montgomery Cluster Co-coordinator to Montgomery County Council of PTAs (MCCPTA), for agreeing to post this important information on Rockville Central.

Projects are moving forward as part of the plan to manage the overcapacity situation at elementary schools in the Richard Montgomery (RM) Cluster and the future wave of enrollment expected at Julius West Middle School (JWMS).

The Feasibility Studies for an addition at Julius West and for new construction (RM Elementary #5) on the site of the former Hungerford Park site have begun. Architect selection and approval for each is complete and dates have been set for the Feasibility Advisory Committee public meetings. (See below for details.) The committees will work with the architects to provide a series of options that will meet the program needs of the schools. The committees will also select a preferred option at the end of the process. These committees will NOT be discussing potential boundary changes for the Richard Montgomery Cluster.

While MCPS’ usual plan is to work with existing PTAs/PTSAs at schools where an addition or construction is contemplated, this is not possible for RM Elementary #5 as it is a new school. Moreover, since the composition of the school population will not be known until a boundary study process is completed in the 2013 timeframe, representatives from all four elementary schools and their communities are being invited to participate. MCPS sends letters only to those homeowners whose properties are adjacent to the school(s). The rest is up to the schools and their PTAs.

Similarly, while MCPS is working primarily through the JWMS PTSA, the reality is that the prospect of an addition at JW will affect most of us. This is because a majority of our current elementary students could be at JW during construction, or for those in the lower grades, would benefit by an addition at the school. The Feasibility Advisory Committee meetings and/or the final Community Presentation are an excellent way to stay informed and participate in the process.

These two new feasibility studies join an already completed Feasibility Study for an addition at Ritchie Park Elementary School and on-going studies for additions at Beall and Twinbrook Elementary Schools. You will recall that this summer MCPS intends to take all of these studies and its new enrollment projections and make a “comprehensive RM Cluster” recommendation for new classroom capacity next fall. Watch your e-mail for more info on participation as this process goes forward.

Also, mark your calendars for testimony to the County Council on the Capital Budget on the evening of February 8, 2011. Strong community support is essential.

RM CLUSTER ELEMENTARY #5 Feasibility Study (all meetings at Children’s Resource Center/Hungerford Park site at 322 W. Edmonston Drive)
Work Session Meeting #1 Monday, February 28, 2011 7:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #2 Monday, March 21, 2011 7:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #3 Thursday, April 7, 2011 4:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #4 Thursday, April 28, 2011 7:00 pm
Community Presentation Meeting Thursday, May 12, 2011 7:00 pm

JULIUS WEST MIDDLE SCHOOL Feasibility Study (all meetings at JWMS)
Work Session Meeting #1 Wednesday, February 2, 2011 3:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #2 Thursday, February 24, 2011 7:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #3 Wednesday, March 9, 2011 3:00 pm
Work Session Meeting #4 Wednesday, March 23, 2011 7:00 pm
Community Presentation Meeting Tuesday, April 12, 2011 7:30 pm

Cheryl Moss Herman

This is a Reader’s Note. We welcome submissions on all sorts of things — shopping, restaurants, performances, art, cultural events, meetings, and more. Get in touch with us using our contact form if you would like to submit something!

Editorial Opinion By Brad Rourke: I Feel Branded

Now that a decision has been made on whether Our Fair City will move forward with a branding effort (it will) and what that brand and tagline will be (“Get Into It“), it is time to look forward and try to create a positive and compelling image for Rockville.

However, before doing so, I feel it is important to shine a light on an aspect of how the branding effort unfolded that is unfortunate.

Click for full size

Those who read my earlier discussion of the branding effort, and how underwhelmed I was with the offerings, may think I am simply miffed because I don’t like the result. It is true that I hate the wimpy and stilted “get into it” tagline and find the logo’s “R” too clip-arty and the squiggle under it too generic — and find the combination of all of these elements to be a potential embarrassment when we begin to implement it.

(To prove how little influence I have, in my earlier article I wrote, “If any decision makers are reading this, I beg of you, please do not go with [this] tagline.”)

However, now that I have made my unequivocal statement I’ll set it aside.

Instead, what I feel it is worthwhile to focus on at this juncture is the process, because I hope we can take steps not to repeat it.

An Opportunity Squandered

The development of a new brand for a community — indeed, for any institution or organization — is an opportunity to boost morale, re-establish loyalty, and enthuse people with hope for the future. It’s also an opportunity to build resentment, foster derision, and drive people away. The way this process unfolded tended to make the latter true.

I was proud and pleased to be a part of the small committee that made initial recommendations for a consultant on this project to the Mayor and Council. ROI knows what it is doing when it comes to developing branding messages. But I don’t think they have exhibited great knowledge of what it takes to engage a community, at least not in our case.

The process used is well-described in the agenda notice for the most recent Mayor and Council meeting. There were really two points where the effort reached out to the public — at a “Day One Meeting” with a handful of community leaders, and then during a “public outreach” phase after the three options were presented to the Mayor and Council.

While on paper this might look workable, in practice it seemed to become engagement in name only.

In the first place, it was clear from the presentation of the three options that the overriding factor in brand development was the demographic research that the consulting company had done. Such research is important — hugely — but it is not the only thing that matters. There was no sense that anything that was heard in the Day One meeting (or a subsequent meeting with REDI) was a strong part of the thinking going into the options presented. In presenting initial concepts to the Mayor and Council, the consultant simply pointed out that there was little consensus among people and that they had seemingly false impressions of where they live.

So far, I guess, OK. I would have liked to see a more authentic sense of inclusion, but I supposed the consulting company is comprised of experts and certainly we must rely on that expertise.

Where the process really fell down was in this most recent “public input” phase. One thing I have learned in my professional life is that, if you test something with the public, you had better be willing to listen to feedback and make changes or corrections. As I write this, I am on the plane returning from a public test of a discussion guide that is planned for wide release. We thought it was complete. Yet, based on what we heard in tests, we are going to alter it to improve it. This is standard practice. I have gone back to the drawing board many times, as a result of public input.

In the case of our Rockville brand, the public input phase — which should have included multiple public meetings where people could actually discuss the “brand” but which instead consisted almost entirely of an online survey and invitations for people to give written comments — resulted in an overwhelming “meh.” The winning option won out by only one vote in the online survey, ahead of None Of The Above.

Don’t Ask Me If You Don’t Care

And yet, when it came time to present the results of public input to the Mayor and Council, the same three options were presented, with no changes whatsoever. When Councilmember Bridget Donnell Newton pressed the consultant on this, he replied that the public input phase was for input, not for responding to that input. (What?)

So, in essence, the public input was ignored and the consultant simply restated the original three options.

In fact, the consultant mentioned that one thing that was suggested, turning “The” into “A” in the first option, might be workable, but that instead of even making that change he would go with the original.

In response to this, the Mayor and Council, after very brief discussion, chose the least favored option to move forward with, on a vote of 3-2.

In other words, in the very apt words of a Rockville Central commenter: “Let’s see if I have this right. After the citizen survey, the council 1) carefully evaluated the results of the survey, then 2) one councilmember moved we adopt the THIRD (last) choice, so 3) you have an up/down vote on adopting the third choice. As a citizen, next time don’t ask me if you don’t care.”

The result of this, is to create mistrust. The next time citizens are asked for their “input,” it would be reasonable for them to worry that it was just window dressing and would be perfunctorily invited and ultimately strongly ignored.

I am not arguing that the “will of the people” must be followed — just that it must be considered and not summarily rejected.

A Change For The Better

I hate to leave this on a negative note, so let me suggest a change for the way we handle such efforts in the future.

The next time a consultant is engaged on an issue where public input is seen as useful, I suggest we build these things into the process and the contract:

• Research phase:
  • The public input should involve at least three public meetings to which all are welcome and invited
  • The input should include at least two focus groups of 8-12 residents that are recruited randomly
  • The consultant should explain in initial concept presentation how this input relates to the product presented
• Development and testing phase:
  • Again, public input should include at least two public meetings (not just a survey)
  • The consultant should be directed to take public input into account and edit or alter the initial work, explaining the linkage between input and changes, or justifying why no changes are needed

This will add time and some cost to efforts such as the one we just completed. But it will save money in the longer run — and potentially save the public trust that is all too easily squandered when people are asked for their opinion and then ignored.

(Want an example? Take a look at the development process for the Rockville Pike Plan, that Cindy Cotte Griffiths has been following. This is a process that has had robust public involvement and has resulted in a plan that has energy behind.)

Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 1/22/11

The Mayor and Council reversed themselves regarding their support of the Corridor City Transitway (CCT) route through King Farm, even though the right-of-way was established before King Farm was built and the Maryland Transit Authority offered solutions to the connectivity and noise concerns.

About ROCK’burb: Last year we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I decided to give it a try. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].

Comic Strip: ROCK’burb 1/15/10

This week’s comic is based on the National Golf Foundation presentation of their report on the Redgate Golf Course to the Mayor and Council on Monday.

About ROCK’burb: A few months ago we were tossing around ideas for new features on Rockville Central. We thought Saturday morning comics would be fun. Since I’ve always wanted to draw a comic strip, I’ve been imagining them in my head each week. Sometimes an idea pops up in my head and sometimes my whole family thinks up a panel about our lives here in Rockville.

Do you like to draw? We’re hoping we have other cartoonists who would be interested in submitting comic strips. If you have one about life in Rockville, please send it along! We’d love to see it and may even publish it. Remember, be nice! Email us: [email protected].