Rockville Will Be The State Capital (for a day!)

>

Governor Martin O’Malley and Maryland’s Executive Cabinet will spend Thursday, July 30, 2009 in Rockville, declaring it Maryland’s “Capital for a Day.” The monthly program brings the State Capital to “every corner of Maryland”. Started in 2007, the program provides an opportunity for officials to share and discuss local concerns.

The City’s Press Release explains:

During the visit Thursday, the governor, cabinet secretaries, state and county elected officials, city staff, business and community leaders, and the Rockville Mayor and Council will participate in tours of the city, a business roundtable, briefings and meetings. The day will culminate with a cabinet meeting at 1:15 p.m. in Town Square. The cabinet meeting scheduled for Thursday afternoon is open to the public.

Last night at the Mayor and Council meeting, the staff suggested Mayor Susan Hoffmann could hand over some paperwork to the Governor, but it was decided it was probably best to use the regular procedure. Personally, I don’t think we want to take a chance on misplacing documents during the trip!

If you are available at 1:15 p.m., stop by Town Square for this special opportunity.

State Clean Energy Center To Be In Rockville

According to many sources, the state of Maryland has chosen Rockville, Our Fair City, to be the home of the new >Maryland Clean Energy Center.

The office, whose mission is to keep the Free State at the forefront of clean and renewable energy research, will be housed at the Universities at Shady Grove. (Well, that’s just outside our coverage area, but still.)

This from the Maryland Daily Record:

The Maryland Clean Energy Center will foster development of green technologies statewide, including at an industrial park near Annapolis, a demonstration site in Frederick and an incubator in Baltimore, President Kenneth M. Connolly said.

A five-member staff, assisted by student interns and volunteers, will be based at the Camille Kendall Academic Center at the University System of Maryland’s Shady Grove campus just outside Washington.

This is big news, as it further solidifies our reputation at the forefront of tech. All up and down the I-270 corridor, we’ve got tons of biotech, clean energy, engineering, and other foreward-looking startups. We’ve got the human genome covered and . . . we’ve even got a big-deal gaming company.

Contributor Opinion By Carl Henn: Slot Costs Outweigh Benefits

>The following contributor opinion is by Carl Henn:

Choosing our president won’t be our only task when we go to the polls on November 4. We also must decide if Maryland should bring slots back. Maryland had more slots than Nevada until 40 years ago, then banned them based on the observation that they left a trail of wrecked lives in their wake and left gambling interests in control of many counties. People would spend their kid’s lunch money on slots and some turned to crime to feed the machines as they become addicted to the one-armed bandits.

The slots plan for Maryland is supposed to raise $660 million for schools. This sounds like a lot, and indeed it is. But that is the gross increase in funds, not net. Money spent on slots isn’t spent at restaurants or clothing, so we’ll be short on other tax revenues. We will need to pay more for police and social services to deal with the harm that gambling addiction causes. Studies show that over time the cost of gambling exceeds its revenues. Further, $660 million is now conceded to be an overestimate. It’s now $500 million at best.

I am troubled by the ‘something for nothing’ attitude that pervades slots. We won’t need to make tough decisions because slots will save us. Likewise on a personal level slots undermine sound decision making. It’s hard to save money. It’s harder still when you think each quarter you plug in a machine may solve your financial problems. Worse, when you do get a payout, folks are likely to think of it as found money. Found money is likely to be spent frivolously rather than saved. Slots undercut sound decision making both for governments and individuals.

A focus on energy and transportation brings other insights to the slots issue. We are now at or very near the peak of global oil production. The current downturn in the price of oil is temporary. High prices will return shortly and go higher still than we have recently seen.

This undercuts the argument that we need slots because the money will otherwise leave the state. As the price of oil rises, we will have less discretionary income to gamble away and driving to West Virginia or Delaware will recede as an option for most Maryland residents.

As the price of oil went up, it took asphalt, steel and concrete with it, causing a $100 million over run in the first part of the first ICC construction contract. Governor O’Malley then cut all of the construction funds for the Purple Line and Corridor Cities Transitway in order to keep the ICC on schedule.

The over run they have admitted to so far is just the beginning. The ICC will continue to over run and more money will be needed to keep the ICC going. That’s where slots come in. O’Malley has already said that slots will help us to avoid budget cuts. So here is the plan - Pass slots and provide the proceeds as promised to the gaming sites, horse racing industry and education. Then reduce state support to education and use that money to fund the ICC.

Most of the people supporting slots have said that we need it for the additional money it will raise. But we should be honest about what we are raising the money for and that there are better alternatives. It isn’t too late to cancel the ICC. O’Malley could cancel it tomorrow with one phone call. This would go a long way toward solving our temporary funding problem. In the long run, the costs of slots exceed its benefits.

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors as well as other guest columns. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. We encourage you to join the growing list of contributors! To submit your piece for consideration, contact us.

(Image from Baltimore City Paper)

Montgomery College To Get New Science Building

>The Washington Business Journal reports that Montgomery College’s flagship Rockville campus has received $29 million from the State to build a science center.

Lt. Governor Anthony Brown made an appearance today to deliver the check.

Per the Business Journal:

“Community colleges are the largest suppliers of workforce training in Maryland and Governor O’Malley and I are proud to support their efforts,” said Brown, in a statement. “With the addition of the Rockville Science Center, Montgomery College will provide the training and skills to even more Marylanders and will continue to promote Montgomery County’s vibrant I-270 biotech corridor.”

The building is expected to house chemistry, biology, physics, engineering, and geosciences. It’s also slated to be LEED gold-certified, placing it on the cutting edge of environmentally aware development.

State Board Approves New Court House On Old Library Site

>Rockville Central friend Roald Schrack attended an important Board of Public Works meeting yesterday and sent along the following report:

Yesterday, October 15, there was a meeting of the State Board of Public Works that I attended. The Board consists of Gov. Martin O’Malley, Treas. Nancy Kopp and Comptroller Peter Franchot. The Board must approve all public works in the state.

The board unanimously approved the construction of the planned courthouse in Rockville at its planned location on the old library site. The meeting was a public hearing with many items up for decision. Testimony in favor of the planned location was presented by former Mayor Rose Krasnow and [state senator] Jennie Forehand. Testimony against the courthouse construction was presented by Frank Anastasi. The members of the board spoke extensively about their decision and reviewed many points made by proponents and opponents. They consistently supported the construction of the courthouse in the library location. This hearing was the final step in approving the courthouse construction.

Thank you, Roald, for the update.

Barve Pleads Guilty

Maryland House of Delegates majority leader >Kumar Barve, who represents the district that includes Our Fair City, today pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol. This move stems from his arrest last November in Gaithersburg.

Barve was represented by his District 17 colleague, Rep. Luis Simmons.

According to the Associated Press, “Delegate Kumar Barve apologized today and promised that he will ‘never do this again.’ Barve received unsupervised probation before judgment in a plea agreement.”

Photos From Move-The-Courthouse Rally [UPDATED]

>

What started life billed as a “press conference” and later became a “rally” in support of not locating the new district court house on the site of the old Rockville Library building was a success. A nice knot of concerned citizens showed up in the middle of the day to pick up “Move The Courthouse” signs, and four [OOPS: THREE] of the five members of the Mayor and Council, and the former mayor, were all present to support the effort. [UPDATE: I guess you might want to know who. Mayor Susan Hoffmann and Councilmembers John Britton and Phyllis Marcuccio, and former mayor Larry Giammo were there. Sorry for the confusion.]

Town Center Action Team Plans News Conference on District Courthouse Location

The citizens’ group TCAT (Town Center Action Team) is holding a press conference on T>hursday, January 31 at 10:00am at the corner of Vincent and S. Washington Streets. The purpose of the press conference is to make public how many citizens of Rockville feel about the courthouse going in the location of the old library.

TCAT is encouraging all those who are concerned about the proposed location to come to the press conference.

My Opinion: In Search of the Elusive Courthouse Parking

This opinion piece is by >Cynthia Cotte Griffiths. It is in response to an article written by Mary Ellen Flynn.

After reading Mary Ellen Flynn’s Contributor’s Opinion yesterday, in which she stated “With public parking already located nearby (some even on the same side of the street as the old Library site)…”, I decided to try to find this existing parking that could be used for the District Courthouse.

So I dropped the kids at school and went to park by the old library site to take some pictures. I couldn’t find a parking spot. Now, I’m not saying this to be sarcastic or even funny, but I couldn’t. So I drove home, parked, and walked over. It’s cold out there today.

The only public parking on the same side of the street is the Council Office Building parking which is Permit Only.

I was thinking that if they have space in this parking garage, perhaps they would share with the District Courthouse, but it was full except for a few spots on the top level:

There is also the Jury Parking lot on Rt. 28, but it is almost always full:

My only conclusion is that there is no existing public parking on the same side of the street as the old library site. People need to understand that there is no parking anywhere for this Courthouse proposal. The use of false statements to sway an argument always disturbs me, probably because I was a Philosophy major. People might be persuaded by the rosy picture painted, so the facts need to be proven. It would be unfortunate if the courthouse supporters turn around in the future and state that they thought there was parking available because someone wrote that there was parking. There is no parking existing or planned for the current District Courthouse proposal.

If this plan goes forward, the City of Rockville should not fund a single penny of the millions of dollars that will be required to not only build parking for the Courthouse but also mitigate the traffic and neighborhood problems created by the Courthouse. The residents of Rockville should not have to bear the cost of the State’s terrible urban planning which is being forced upon us.

Contributor Opinion by Mary Ellen Flynn: Time for the New District Courthouse to be Built at the Old Library Site

This >contributor opinion is by Mary Ellen Flynn, president of the Bar Association of Montgomery County. It is in response to an article by Frank Anastasi:

I respect that you, your friends and colleagues have a different viewpoint from the one shared by me, the entire Montgomery County Delegation of Legislators, the County Executive, all of the Courthouse Elected officials, and many public officials and County residents on the subject of the location of the new Rockville District Courthouse at the old Library site. We who support the construction at the old Library site remain steadfast in our position, as it is firmly based on facts relating to location, cost, and positive benefits to be gained for the entire County and State.

The old Library site is directly across the street from the current District Courthouse building, so infrastructure already exists for the placement of the Courthouse at that location. The site’s proximity to the Circuit Court, State’s Attorney’s Office, Public Defender’s Office and other County agencies associated with the everyday legal business conducted in our County Seat would facilitate efficiency, not only for lawyers, judges and other public officials, but for the County’s citizens who conduct business in this judicial quadrant on a daily basis. With public parking already located nearby (some even on the same side of the street as the old Library site) and easy access to both Circuit Court and many court-related agencies within a convenient two-block area, efficiency would result. It is anticipated that shorter, less confusing travel among the courthouses and other judicial agencies would occur if the Circuit and District Courts were located within a centralized area rather than being separated and on opposite sides of the expansive Town Center.

As is well-documented, a great deal of taxpayer money has been authorized and already spent on purchasing and designating the old Library site as the location for the new District Courthouse. Additionally, architectural designs specific to that site have been ordered, prepared and paid for. These plans are now only waiting for State funding. At a time when fiscal prudence is on the minds of all County and State taxpayers and no overabundance of funds exists in any of the governmental coffers, the scrapping of completed architectural plans on which significant money has already been spent, the incurring of millions of dollars solely due to construction delays, and the risk of diverting $71 Million of State funding away from this much-needed courthouse are unacceptable to most County residents.

Although it is understood that at the outset any new construction will not be without concerns and opinions on both sides, the concerns and opinions on construction at the old Library site have been voiced and addressed as completely as is practicable. Now, with the positive benefits of the old Library site far outweighing the few negatives, it is time for the new District Courthouse to be built at the old Library site, so that the judicial, commercial and residential sectors of our County Seat can once-again operate as effectively and efficiently as possible and thrive.

Mary Ellen Flynn, President
Bar Association of Montgomery County, MD

Rockville Central runs occasional, edited opinion pieces by contributors. Their views are not necessarily those of Rockville Central. To submit your opinion for consideration, contact us.

Lawyered Up

The ongoing >public debate over the location of a possible new District Courthouse appears to be generating much heat, but less light.

This is understandable. The prospect of having such a large building, with no parking, filled with people interacting with the legal system (a time when people are typically not at their most restrained or reasonable), hard by an historic district, church, and school for children as young as three is enough to unnerve anyone. (Note, too, that the three-year-olds are often moved outside from school building to school building.)

I believe the old library site is a poor choice for a new courthouse building. It’s just a silly spot for it, notwithstanding the convenience it would pose for lawyers and judges.

However, along with Mark Pierzchala, I get the sense that the debate so far has not given full due to the political facts of the issue. (He also makes a good point about whether we are giving a fair hearing to the other side too.)

A number of recent comments in this post appear to have embedded in them the notion that the City is facing a decision about where we want a new court house, or whether we should have one.

I may be very wrong, but my understanding is that it’s not in the City’s power to decide whether the state courts need a new building or not. Since the City unfortunately, and inadvertently, let pass (long ago) the deadline to officially object to the plans, there isn’t an official planning process to influence. (The state could, I believe, overrule such a process anyway.) The Montgomery County Council would essentially have to approve any move of the court house to the Giant site by giving up its right to take the old library site back in the event a court house is not built there — something they have all but promised they would do (notwithstanding Exec. Leggett’s agreement to “look into” the matter).

It is not just the local, District 17 state delegation that must be convinced — it is all state legislators from Montgomery County. Even if it were possible to convince all four District 17 legislators of the value of moving the court house site to the old Giant, there are 28 more legislators to go.

Finally, there are funding issues. In order for a move to the Giant site to happen, not only would the City of Rockville need to absorb a significant expenditure hit (possibly up to $5M but at least $1M or $2M to redesign the building) but, in addition, Governor O’Malley would have to expend a significant amount of political capital to ensure the funds for a moved court house remain available over multiple fiscal years (while, presumably, other jurisdictions throughout the state lobby to get a piece of that money for their own projects). That’s a lot to ask of a Governor who has already spent out a lot of chits on a special session and is now trying to get a budget passed.

I’m just little old me, but my read on this is that a move to the Giant, while far preferable to placing the new court house on the old library site, remains a very difficult sell. So much has to fall into place, with so many forces arrayed in opposition, in order for it to happen. Jupiter will have to align with Mars, to quote my favorite Broadway musical.

Given all this, Mayor Susan Hoffmann and the Council are really rolling a rock up a hill and I am proud of their efforts. In the dim, dark, past, I was a lobbyist (only for the forces of good) and know a little about how hard it is to make things happen. I will be stunned — in a good way — if they can pull it off.

Meanwhile, the Montgomery County Bar Association and other attorneys and judges are addressing their arguments where they will do a lot of good: to the full Montgomery County state delegation and to the Montgomery County council — both of which have the power to say “no” to the Giant site and “yes” to a court house. Rockville Central friend Brigitta Mullican has passed along some of their communications along to me (and to others, I am not airing any laundry here). Those interested in having a full understanding of what we are up against ought to read:

• A recent email from the Mary Ellen Flynn, Montgomery County Bar Association’s president, to the Montgomery County Council; and
• Chief Judge Ben Clyburn’s December letter to the Montgomery County delegation to Annapolis, along with a state report on the proposed Giant land swap.

My interpretation of things is that, given the state of play, one option the City faces is to try in various ways to stop any court house from being built by delaying (ironically, through the courts) for so long that the state money essentially disappears, claimed by other projects. Even this tactic is not guaranteed of success and I have doubts about its ethics. There is a lot of momentum behind a court house, and it is hard to argue with a straight face that a new court house is not needed.

I hope this is helpful. I don’t mean to be a downer, but it seemed worthwhile to spell out just what obstacles are standing in the way. I would love to hear comment from people who see other ways through this.

A Tax You'll Feel Right Away

>Most tax increases aren’t felt until it comes time to settle up in April, or (for those of us self-employed) quarterly. So, for many of Rockville Central’s readers, the tax increases put into place during the recent special session won’t come home to roost for a while.

The increased income tax, for example, won’t be felt by most folks until next year at filing time. Wondering about that one? Here are the details from the Washington Post:

Under the previous structure, residents paid a flat rate of 4.75 percent on all taxable income above $3,000. Under the new structure, single filers reporting more than $150,000 in taxable income and joint filers reporting more than $200,000 in taxable income will be taxed at gradually higher rates. The top rate of 5.5 percent will be applied to single and joint filers with taxable income of more than $500,000.

Meanwhile, the personal exemption will increase from $2,400 to $3,200 for individuals reporting taxable income below $100,000 and joint filers reporting taxable income below $150,000. The exemption will gradually decrease to a minimum of $600 for the highest earners.

There is one tax that is being felt right away, across the board. That’s the state’s sales tax hike from 5 cents on the dollar to 6 cents:

That will make Maryland’s rate equal to those of West Virginia and Pennsylvania but higher than those of the District and Virginia, which have sales tax rates of 5.75 percent and 5 percent, respectively, and of Delaware, which does not have a sales tax.

If you are counting your change before going to the store, your math is going to be a little more complicated.

Me, I already miss the 5% rate because it was easy to figure, and easy to explain to my son.

(Image from QuickJump.)

BRAC Attacks Bethesda

> WTOP brings word that Montgomery County Executive Isaiah “Ike” Leggett has sent a letter to Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley complaining about the state’s draft plans (released Nov. 19) for dealing with the latest BRAC round.

Sorry, my old defense industry background is showing. BRAC is the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. (In true military form, the initials are really a truncated anagram.) The most recent BRAC has set in place a significant shift: Over the next few years, Walter Reed Army Medical Center is set to be moved to the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda.

Among Montgomery County’s requests is a dedicated offramp from the beltway right to the Bethesda hospital on Wisconsin.

Makes sense to me. Have you been on Wisconsin in that gauntlet between the Naval hospital on one side and the National Institutes of Health on the other? When a shift is changing? Yikes!

What amazes me is the magnitude of the change that is set to be occurring:

The federal government’s plan to move Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Washington to Bethesda will add 2,500 workers to the hospital’s campus. The number of visitors is expected to double to 1 million a year.

The cabinet is to submit a final plan to the governor on December 17.

(Photo from the blog of Sgt. Samuel Nichols, USMC. Sgt. Nichols is an injured hero of the war in Iraq. Read about his progress here. He is not the only one. Read about his fallen comrades in Kilo Battery 3/12 here. Learn more about all the fallen here.)

Barve Arrested For Drunk Driving

According to the >Washington Post and the Gazette, late on Friday night MD Delegate Kumar Barve was arrested for driving while intoxicated and other violations. (I was traveling Saturday and missed it until today.)

The arrest occurred in the 200 block of East Diamond Avenue in Gaithersburg, but there is a Rockville connection: Barve is part of the District 17 delegation, which represents Rockville.

Says the Post:

Barve, who was first elected to the House of Delegates in 1990 and has been majority leader since 2003, is among the most powerful delegates in the House. He sits on the influential Ways and Means Committee and is chairman of its subcommittee on revenue. He supported a 2003 change in state law that made it illegal for people to drive within 12 hours of getting arrested on an alcohol or drug charge.

And the Gazette quotes Gaithersburg police chief John A. King:

‘‘He exited from an entrance to a parking lot and drifted across the road; he crossed over a yellow line,” King said. ‘‘The officer noted signs of intoxication, gave him some field sobriety tests and he was arrested.”

Barve is playing a key role in the City’s effort to get the state to choose some site other than the old library for a new district court building.

District Court Meeting Update

As those who have been following this issue know, >there was a meeting last night at City Hall called by the Town Center Action Committee to discuss the siting of the new District Court building.

The background in a nutshell is this: The state is poised to begin work placing a new — and needed — District Court building on the site of the old public library. The City is on record as having asked the state repeatedly not to place the District Court there, due to its proximity to an historic district and to a school, and due to a lack of adequate parking for the proposed structure. The state has ignored the City’s requests and continued to move forward with the property. The site is insufficient to support the Court’s needs and the proposed structure even as envisioned is a scaled-back version of what was hoped for by the state. In January, Mayor Larry Giammo sent a letter to the newly-inaugurated Governor Martin O’Malley (and County Executive Ike Leggett) asking that he look again at the issue. Governor O’Malley has made it known in a letter to the legislative delegation that, if they and local leaders can find an alternate site, he would support it. In recent weeks, a new site has become available: the old Giant building (next to the Bank of America). The City is proposing that it purchase the Giant building, and swap it with the state for the old library site, which the state owns. The state could then build a larger District Court building on the old Giant site, and there would still be room left over for some green space.

Notwithstanding the City’s protestations that date back at least to 2001, the Rockville legislative delegation (Sen. Jennie Forehand, and Dels. Kumar Barve, Luiz Simmons, and Jim Gilchrist) say that the recent objections to the “old library” site are the first they have heard of any problem with the District Court. That doesn’t mean they haven’t been listening; it may mean the state apparatus just didn’t bother to tell them.

In any event, they say, moving the building would be difficult because: a) there would be costs (estimated approximately $2 million) associated with redesigning the building to sit on a different site; b) the current “old library” plan is ready to go and at the top of the list funding list for capital funding projects and delay would (it is feared) cause it to lose its place in line and have to wait some number of years to get back to the top of the heap; c) there would be delays associated with re-working the plans (on the order of between 6 and 14 months, depending on various factors, according to the state); and d) Chief Judge Ben Clyburn evidently finds the Giant site unsuitable operationally.

The 90-minute meeting last night was meant to figure out where we were, and what needed to happen in order to achieve the City’s goal of getting the District Court to rest at the old Giant site.

There was firepower aplenty in the room. Of more than 20 attendees (people kept filtering in to the Red Maple Room so it was hard to keep count), five were current elected officials with a direct stake in this issue: Mayor Susan Hoffmann, Council Members John Britton and Phyllis Marcuccio, Delegates Simmons and Barve. City Manager Scott Ullery was also part of the official weight, giving background on the current state of play and answering key questions when needed. The two absent council members were Piotr Gajewski (who is in Poland) and Anne Robbins (who had a long-scheduled engagement but who let it be known ahead of time that she is complete agreement with the City’s desire to have the building at the Giant site).

In addition to the official folks, there were other notables: both losing candidates for mayor (Mark Pierzchala and, later, Drew Powell); and city council candidate Brigitta Mullican. Numerous other active citizens were present including a number of Rockville Central contributors and friends. Bridget Newton, former president of the West End Civic Association and current chair of the Town Center Action Committee, convened and opened the meeting.

Once the necessary pleasantries were out of the way, the meeting became a discussion between Mayor Hoffmann and Delegate Barve. Delegate Barve was asked a few times what citizens can do to help make this happen in the way they would like it to, and he repeated that it is really a negotiation between the City and the State. Here is where that negotiation, at the end of the evening, appeared to stand:

If the City can get a guarantee from the Governor that the District Court project will not lose its place in the funding queue, and that additional design costs would not have to be borne by the State, Barve and Simmons will not stand in the way of moving the Court building to the Giant site — and Barve would ask the Governor to do that.

It is up to the City, though, to make sure that the delegation is in a position to be able to make changes that won’t rile the rest of the Montgomery County legislators — after all, the District Court building is to be for the benefit of all Montgomery County residents.

Key question marks at the end of the evening were:

• Where does Senator Jennie Forehand, who did not attend the meeting, stand on this?
• Ditto Delegate Jim Gilchrist, who also could not attend (though some in the room had talked to him and he was described as “open” to the idea)
• Will the City really need to pay all of the (estimated) $2m redesign fees, when part of that redesing involves the State actually getting out of the building what it originally wanted but could not have?
• Where does Chief Judge Clyburn come down on this? (There’s a meeting scheduled between him and Mayor Hoffmann on the 29th, and presumably we will know more then).

Stay tuned for more on this issue as it moves forward. At the moment, if you are in support of this, there is one chief thing you can do: write a letter to the Governor explaining that you are in favor of the Giant site and are delighted that your legislative delegation is working toward a reasonable solution to this issue. While this is a negotiation going on in the “official” world, word from the “unofficial” world on where people stand is helpful — because, in the end, this will be a political decision and not a bureaucratic decision.

Other meeting attendees, if I got something wrong, please go ahead and make corrections in the comments section of this article.