Comments are by Councilmembers Llatetra Brown Esters and Susan Whitney and are not approved or sanctioned by the City of College Park.

Announcements 

Councilmember Kabir mentioned the Community Clean up that will take place in Hollywood on April 16th.

Councilmember Kennedy wished everyone Happy Spring!

Councilmember Esters mentioned the upcoming meeting for the Greenbelt Corridor Plan on March 23^rd at 8pm. She also mentioned the upcoming District 2 Community Forum that will be held April 9th from 2pm – 3:30pm for residents to share input and ask questions of Councilmembers. (Click here to view the flyer. Click here at 2pm on April 9th to attend via zoom.)

Councilmember Whitney indicated that the District 2 Community Forum will be held virtually. She also invited those who missed College Park’s Age Friendly Action Plan Visioning meeting on March 14^th to share their ideas about creating age-friendly policies in the city on the Planning Department’s Vision Board. (Click here to access the Vision Board.)

Councilmember Adams offered thanks for drainage pipe repairs that took place in Calvert Hills.

Councilmember Riggs mentioned the upcoming Cleanup day in Calvert Hills on March 26th. He acknowledged that he would not be able to attend due to the Council’s all-day budget meeting. 

Councilmember Mackie announced the Hyattsville Library is slated to open on March 30th

Councilmember Mitchell announced the District 4- Community & Budget Meeting in April (more details to come) . She acknowledged Councilmember Kennedy’s presentation on the preservation trust for the recent National League of Cities Conference and recognized Dan Alpert, former SGA Liaison, for filing to join the Montgomery County Central Committee.

City Manager Report 

Kenny Young, City Manager, indicated starting March 25^th, the State Highway Administration will shift the lanes on Route 1 (Baltimore Ave) to start working on the median. 

The City Manager will be traveling to the Black City Administrators conference in Grand Rapids Michigan the week of March 28. 

Amendments to the Agenda

Councilmember Mitchell requested that we send a letter of support for HB 227, which would

establish Juneteenth National Independence Day as a legal State holiday and a State employee holiday in Maryland. Motion made and accepted to add to the consent agenda

Comments from the Audience on Consent or non-Consent agenda items

Mary King – Two presentations and the city is ready to commit $3 million. How will one hundred homes in this program help to provide housing stabilization? Not convinced the program will help to attract people to College Park. Are we helping the city or long-term renters?

Former College Park resident (Currently lives in Hyattsville) – Concerned about the health of Old Town and College Park generally. Concerned about the qualifications for those who commit to living in the house for 5 years. Industry categories seem arbitrary, why weren’t teachers and nurses included? If you want to benefit people, open it up to everybody. Others should have the opportunity to benefit from the grant. Suggested restrictions that reference renting to two others be clarified to indicate it is concurrent. Did not understand why the City is waiving the covenant. 

The State of the City Address- Mayor Wojahn – Mayor Patrick Wojahn gave his first State of the City Address 

Consent Agenda (See complete meeting agenda to see consent items listed)  

Action Items – None

Closed Session- Mayor and Council reviewed applications for the Restorative Justice Commission and discussed the City Manager’s performance evaluation. They did not return to open session after the closed session ended. 

Meeting Adjourned

Click here to see the meeting agenda for March 22, 2022

Click here to view the Mayor and Council Regular Meeting held on March 22, 2022

City of College Park Proposed Operation Budget and CIP (Fiscal Year 2023) held on Saturday, March 26, 2022 – Agenda

The next regular meeting of College Park City Council will be April 5, 2022. 

Comments are by Councilmembers Llatetra Brown Esters and Susan Whitney and are not approved or sanctioned by the City of College Park.

City Manager’s Report – There were no announcements from the City Manager this week. 

Amendments or approval of the agenda 

Special session added to the agenda to discuss draft proposal by the 21^st delegation to request $50 million from the state to make a one-time contribution to University of Maryland to subsidize the construction or acquisition of affordable graduate student housing and to discuss a request of $4 million from the state for the Community Preservation tTrust.

Proclamation in support of Ukraine added to the agenda.

Presentation from CPCUP on the neighborhood Preservation Development Committee

Councilmember Kennedy led the presentation on the Community Preservation Trust. First presented to Council on January 11, this initiative will help us to meet strategic goals related to affordable housing. Specifically, this initiative will focus on the preservation of affordable single-family homes and includes the establishment of a ground lease. The establishment of the program will be based a shared equity model. The cost for purchasing a home through this program will be based upon what the buyer can afford to pay, and the land grant will fill in the gap. The following work has been completed since the last meeting with Council:

• Meeting with expert at Enterprise Community Partners
• Review of Best Practices
• Retention of Legal Counsel
• Meetings with lending Companies
• Development of financial models and initial policies
• Continued search for third party financial support

Key policies for consideration are related to applicant eligibility and prioritization (Based upon Average Medium Income (AMI) and targeted neighborhoods. Targeted neighborhoods are based upon the percentage of rentals vs. owner-occupancy). The program will require a commitment to occupancy. 

Trust seeks to be self-sufficient as soon as possible. It is estimated that operating expenses will cost $350,000 annually. Homeowners will be charged monthly fees, which, depending on income level, will range from $75-$200, less than the typical private mortgage insurance (PMI) payment. It is anticipated that once 80-100 homes are in the program, the Trust will be self-sufficient, and it’s estimated it will take 10 years to reach that goal. 

Councilmember Riggs asked about safeguards against situations that the city would not approve of (e.g., a developer or investment group purchasing property). Edward Maginnis, Assistant Vice President for Real Estate, University of Maryland, indicated that transparency of the process and the strict rules should serve as safeguards. 

Kenny Young shared that the use of ARPA funds will require quarterly reports, and that those funds need to be expended by 12/2026. The City will need to determine at what point it will request unexpended funds back from the program. There are specific dates by which the City must provide reports related to the use of ARPA funds. So, check-ins with the Trust should be built in. 

There is a plan to establish a subcommittee of the trust that would then become the Board of the trust.  The board will initially report to the CPCUP but will eventually spin off into a separate 501c3. Councilmember Kennedy explained that a commitment of $3 Million from the city may help to encourage others to give, and said there were plans to seek funding from both the University of Maryland and the state. 

The goal is for the program to start in early fall. There are additional details about structure and operation that have be determined (application process, structure of prioritization…) and an Executive Director will be able to make such determinations. Suellen Ferguson, City Attorney, informed Council the MOU would apply to the current entity and its successors.

Mr. Maginnis indicated the Trust will allow for flexibility. He went on to describe it as a tool that should be used opportunistically and indicated that Council can determine how the funds provided are used. Councilmember Kennedy shared that through the program, appreciation of home values would be tied to the labor market rather than the real estate market. 

Discussion on draft proposal by the 21^st District Delegation on Graduate Housing 

Discussion was introduced by Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager. Edward Maginnis was asked to share input on the topic. Although Mr. Maginnis was not in attendance to talk about this matter, he explained that the University has been trying to work on graduate housing for a while, but the challenge has been trying to find the right price point. 

Councilmember Stuart Adams commented that $700 and below was a reasonable price point to look at and said he figured funds would largely go toward rental, but he asked if cooperative housing had been considered as part of the solution. Mr. Maginnis wasn’t sure if that had been discussed, but he thought it a creative approach to the problem.

Councilmember Esters said that $50 million sounds like an excellent seed to grow affordable housing for the city’s graduate students, and she wondered if additional funds might be available in the future. Mr. Maginnis said it was most likely a one-time offer., saying the state probably won’t be amenable to another ask. He said even if $50 million doesn’t solve the problem, the University will continue seeking solutions.

Councilmember John Rigg noted that the demand for housing for undergrads of modest means is almost as urgent as that for grad students. He said they often have to get more loans than they should be getting. 

SGA Liaison Megha Sevalia mentioned that on-campus housing occurs on priority, but those living off campus, collaborative housing is the most affordable housing. Renting single family homes off campus is the cheapest option. She indicated that affordable undergraduate options should not be left to chance, and added that it seemed contradictory to focus on students housing needs yet develop programs to encourage owner occupancy. 

Motion made and approved for Council to go into Special Session

Special Session 

Motion made and accepted to send a letter to the state in support of the $4 million request for the Community Land Trust.

Motion made and accepted to send a letter to the state in support the 21st Delegation request for $50 million to address affordable graduate student housing.

Motion made and approved to exit Special Session

Develop rules and regulations for City Park, playground, and recreational areas to ensure the safety of facility users

Director of Public Services Bob Ryan approached Council to ask for approval to rewrite Chapter 148 to update some of parks and recreation facility guidelines. He said Public Works had been polled about the rules that are needed. He continued that Chapter 148 had not been rewritten for a few decades, saying that some language was clearly outdated. The inclusion of enforcement provisions in the form of $50 fines was requested, although he noted that code enforcement typically issues warnings first. 

Mayor Wojahn asked if it benefitted us to include prohibitions on behavior that’s already illegal. Mr. Ryan explained that Contract police officers cannot write municipal infractions, but code officers can. 

The Mayor was concerned about rules against camping or using parks at night, saying it broaches on criminalization of homelessness, saying in such situations we look to utilize 211 and homeless outreach programs to give people access to services, rather than using enforcement.

City Attorney Suellen Ferguson explained that code officers do not deal with criminal matters. It’s more of a “move that (activity) out of here” approach.  She said the city would not be criminalizing any activity – no infraction would create a criminal record – code enforcement routinely tries to get compliance without fines. This is just regularizing the rules so signs can be posted.

Mayor Wojahn pointed out that even fines can build up for people.

Councilmember Esters asked if there’s any objective to ensure that the rules are reviewed on a consistent basis to ensure they don’t become outdated.

Ryan said his department would draft a rewrite and come back to Council in about a month.

Amendments to New Neighbor Homeownership Grant Program Guidelines

City Director of Planning and Community Development Terry Schum started the discussion by revisiting where the Council left off at its February 8^th meeting, with a motion on the table to support staff’s recommendations, which were:

1.removing the restrictions on the status of the house that can be acquired (a non-owner occupied property rented for a period of two or more years, an owner-occupied property rented by two or more persons for a period of two or more years, newly constructed, in foreclosure, or a short sale); and

2. increasing the grant amount from $5,000 to $10,000 if the house was a non-owner occupied property rented for two or more years or an owner-occupied property rented by two or more persons for two or more years. 

Schum continued that the competing motion kept language as currently existed but would add a lot of different employees – anyone employed or living in the city of College Park or anyone employed in the Discovery District.

Schum explained that the program was created to encourage home ownership, but the annual $50 thousand budget is never fully spent. Staff’s goal, she said, is to simplify the program and maximize use of the funding to get as many new homeowners in the city as possible. She sees the competing amendment as more of a live-where-you work program that’s more related to transportation goals than homeownership. Current grant requirements allow it to be used either by certain public safety personnel or for the purchase of a property that had been rented in the previous 2 years. She said she sees the lack of availability of former rental properties as what is limiting the utility of the program, hence staff’s suggestion to lift all restrictions other than the requirement that the buyers live in the property for 5 years.  

Councilmember Stuart Adams, who’d put forward the alternate amendment, was in agreement on increasing the grant to $10 thousand for formal rentals, but thinks we could quickly go through the budget because staff recommendations open the door too wide by removing restrictions on the $5 thousand grant. He stated that he couldn’t find another grant program in the country that placed so few limitations on recipients. 

Ms. Schum stated that grants would be given on a first come, first serve basis and reallocated annually, saying that that was not unusual. 

Adams said he thinks we need to keep some eligibility requirement to make sure we have funds remaining throughout the year and do not run out of funds for buyers seeking prioritized homes like prior rentals, short sales, etc. 

Counsel Ferguson suggested a way to avoid the issue about money running out would be to divide funds up for different parts of the year.

Councilmember Fazlul Kabir said he likes that staff’s suggestion is easy to communicate. But he also recognizes concerns about funds running out too soon, and some homebuyers getting money whether they need it or not. Still he thinks the alternative language is too lengthy and has too many conditions. Make it simple. He suggested restricting it to living or working in College Park, saying that language would cover the firefighters and EMTs. 

Councilmember Esters stated her concerns that not maintaining some level of eligibility might open it up to those who don’t need the money.

Councilmember Whitney disagreed with the notion that opening eligibility somewhat by offering the grant to people who live or work in College Park changes the grant from a homeownership program to a live-where-you-work program. She argued that under the amended proposal, the grant was still being issued to people on the condition that they live in their homes for five years after purchasing them. She said it should always be the goal to solve as many problems as possible when we spend money, saying that decreasing traffic and its negative effects in addition to increasing homeownership was a better approach.

Councilmember Rigg wanted to second Kabir’s call for simplicity. He said the program is not a lot of money, and he doesn’t think we increase uptake by making it more complicated. He expressed concerns both about staff workload and about prioritizing certain emergency personnel, saying it opens up a can of worms. He thinks it’s better to make it simple and broad and narrow it down later if needed. 

Councilmember Kennedy agreed that staff burden on something like this is deciding factor. 

Ms. Schum stated that the goal when the program was started was to reach 50% owner occupancy, and now we only have two neighborhoods that don’t meet that goal. She thinks opening up the program will hasten that progress. 

The conversation then turned to additional ways to qualify for the $10 thousand grant, with Councilmember Adams asking if homes purchased in neighborhoods that are registered historic districts could also quality.

Mayor Wojahn asked if we could instead focus on neighborhoods where a certain percentage of the properties are registered as rentals.

Ms. Schum said they could monitor the owner/renter status quarterly.

It was initially suggested that homes in neighborhoods exceeding 55% rental registration would qualify. As two neighborhoods in District 2, Lakeland and Berwyn, are currently at 49% rental, Councilmember Whitney countered with 50%. 

Councilmember Adams brought forward for a vote the amended motion 

1. limiting the $5 thousand grant to certain emergency personnel, University of Maryland College Park students, and people who live or work in College Park, and 
2. increasing to $10 thousand the grant amount for homes that were non-owner occupied for two+ years, in foreclosure or short sale, or were located in neighborhoods in which 50% or more of the homes are registered as rentals.

The motion carried with a vote of 5-2. Councilmember Mitchell was not present. It will appear on the March 22nd consent agenda. 

Legislative review  

Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager, informed Council there were no major changes to legislation beyond was what outlined in the legislative review. No new legislation will be introduced after the crossover date of Monday, March 21^st. 

Councilmember Adams asked about HB1259, which would require municipalities to authorize the addition of ADUs on property. 

Gardiner said it had had a hearing. 

Mayor Wojahn said we do occasionally take positions counter to the MML.

Adams said he would like the Council to consider supporting the legislation, especially considering the recent Maryland Matters article on ADUs.

Adams moved that we enter Special Session to consider sending a letter in support of HB1259.

Adams said the law required municipalities to allow ADUs “with certain restrictions”, so they could limit by lot size, number of pp, home ownership in primary dwelling, etc.

Ferguson said the District Council didn’t take up the issue because there are different views on it, but they do intend to take it up again. 

The mayor explained that MML opposes it because it forces municipalities to make a certain choice. MML would oppose any state law that would restrict local control. He said we should take a week to understand it a little better. He’d spoken with District 3 County Council Representative Dannielle Glaros about it, and she said a recommendation was for the Housing Opportunities for All Work Group to look at the issue. 

Councilmember Rigg said he’s nervous about voting tonight or at all, especially with MML against it. He wants to maximize the ability of our city to make this right for College Park and thinks we need to consider it carefully with a lot of community involvement.  

Adams moved Council exit Special Session

Requests for/Status of Future Agenda Items Mayor and Council

Adams put asked that we consider joining the National Association of City Transportation Officials at a future worksession.

Meeting Adjourned

Click here to see the meeting agenda for March 15, 2022

Click here to view the Mayor and Council Regular Meeting held on March 15 2022

Click here to see the Mayor and Council Work session scheduled for March 22, 2022

Comments are by Councilmembers Llatetra Brown Esters and Susan Whitney and are not approved or sanctioned by the City of College Park.

Announcements /Comments

Hayden Renaghan, SGA Liaison, shared with Council the success of the recent IFC/PHA clean up.  Four chapters conducted the cleanup that reached Norwich Street, College Ave, Hartwick Street, and Rhode Island Ave.  A form will be sent out to City Councilmembers to share with residents to complete to request cleanups in their neighborhoods.  Once completed, the information will be shared with IFC and PHA to schedule and coordinate cleanups. 

Councilmember Kabir shared information about the upcoming North College Park Community Association meeting to be held on Thursday, March 10 at 7pm.  He acknowledged that new Councilmembers Adams and Whitney will be in attendance.  

City Manager’s Report 

Kenneth Young, City Manager shared information about the City’s Summer Youth Camp Scholarship Program and indicated that application information is posted on the City webpage. He also shared information about the virtual meeting to be held by M-NCPPC on Thursday, March 10 at 7pm to discuss plans for a new playground at Paint Branch Elementary School, the upcoming visioning workshop to be held on March 14 regarding the College Park Age-Friendly Action Plan, and the upcoming Greenbelt Corridor Plan visioning meeting to be held on March 23.   

He closed his comments by mentioning that the City and the University of Maryland were chosen by the Washington Business Journal as a finalist for the 2022 Best Real Estate Deals in the Best Redevelopment category for the new City Hall. The overall winner in each category will be announced at the awards celebration on Thursday, April 28^th. He recognized the outstanding work of Ed McGinnis, Suellen Ferguson and Tracey Skinner.

Proclamations and Awards

Mayor Wojahn read a Women’s History Month proclamation.

Consent Agenda

Councilmember Riggs requested adding the action item related to the North College Park Community Center (22-G-42) to the Consent Agenda

Councilmember Whitney requested that we add sending a letter in support of HB1333, a bill that would stiffen the penalties formodified mufflers, to the Consent Agenda so the Council could show its support prior to the March 10^th hearing,  provided such a letter had not yet been sent. City Clerk Janeen Miller confirmed that it had not, and the matter was added to the Consent Agenda.

In addition to the above-mentioned items, the Consent Agenda included:

22-R-05 Resolution Of The Mayor And Council Of The City Of College Park Adopting The Recommendation Of The Advisory Planning Commission Regarding Variance Application Number CPV-202202, 6909 Rhode Island Avenue, College Park, Maryland, Recommending Approval Of A 10.0% Lot Coverage Variance From Section 27-442(C) Table II Of The Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance, For An Addition.  

22-G-37 Award renewal contracts for employees’ health, dental and worker’s compensation insurance coverages, and the City’s general liability insurances, for FY 2023 for a total budgeted cost of $1,874,182 –Teresa Way-Pezzuti, Director of Human Resources  

 22-G-38 Approval of a contract amendment in substantially the form attached to the Consultant Agreement with Mead and Hunt, Inc. for additional services in the amount of $33,394.36 to complete design of the Hollywood Road sidewalk project – Terry Schum, Director of Planning    

22-G-43 Authorize staff to contract with Cable Video Specialists, Inc. in the amount of $63,310.58 to purchase the Cablecast hardware, software, warranties, and installation services as described in the attached quote.  Council waives its regular procurement process to authorize this purchase – Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager   

 22-G-50 Approval of minutes from the February 1, 2022 Work session; February 1, 2022 Special Session

The Consent Agenda approved by Council

Public Hearings 

Petition Request for Traffic Calming in the 4600 Block of Guilford Road 

The overview of the traffic study was conducted by Steve Halpern, City Engineer.  The volume of traffic met the criteria for traffic calming measures while the speeding criterion was not met.  According to Mr. Halpern, there were no accidents that have been reported from the study area. 

Keann Bhatt was the initiator of the traffic calming petition and provided anecdotal input regarding speed that occurs during the week despite the traffic report.  Mr. Bhatt mentioned enthusiastic support from neighbors for traffic calming measures.

Ms. Gee does not mind a traffic calmer but does not want it in front of her house.  She indicated that there was an accident in front of her home 6 years ago and said she didn’t understand why it was not included in the report that was shared.  Renewal of Participation in the Greater College Park RISE Zone Program

Michael Williams, Director of Economic Development, led the discussion on this matter.  He indicated that the Stone Straw property was not part of the original application and will not be included.  The tax credit offered through this program will be 50% rather than 75%.  The State also offers a 10% tax credit to participants.  

According to Mr. Williams, RISE zones are used to attract economic entities and activity.  There is only one Enterprise Zone in Prince George’s County while there are are over 100 opportunity zones. 

In 2016, the Mayor and Council voted to participate in the Greater College Park RISE Zone for five years.  The program will offer incentives to tech companies, and this particular program will offer rental assistance to companies as greater incentive. State legislation passed last year created the rental assistance portion of the program and funding to support it. Subject to availability, the state will offer $3 for every $1 of assistance a RISE Zone entity elects to offer. The program will be a key component to the economic development of the City.   

Ms. King testified about the large impact of the Greater College Park RISE Zone. 

Ms. Cook testified that we should stopped giving huge tax credits and use the money for our residents. 

Ordinance to amend the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget

Gary Fields, Director of Finance, gave an overview of the ordinance intended to allow the City to accept a set amount of recovery funds in the amount of $10 million.  Whatever funds are not used can be transferred to Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funds.  

Councilmember Kabir asked about the procedures to allocate the $10 million.  Gary Fields mentioned that some will be in the current fiscal year and the remainder will be in FY2023.  He mentioned another $3.5 million that City Council will need to take action on spending.  Mr. Young mentioned that later in the week Council will receive the proposed FY23 budget and will need to determine how funds will be spent.  

Ordinance for Revitalization Tax Credit

City Attorney Suellen Ferguson led the discussion for this proposed ordinance to allow for a change in the level 2 Revitalization tax credit. The ordinance would allow the City to offer a larger credit for a longer period of time.  Can be utilized if the County grants a PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) for a development. Ferguson explained that passage would allow Council to consider providing further incentives for government-supported projects, such as affordable housing developments.

Mr. King expressed concern about the lack of a public session/discussion of this matter.  

Mrs. King said the proposed tax break would be a whopping tax credit.  She asked for the city to consider a financial consultant to understand a developer’s financial practices before granting such a tax credit.  

Ordinance regarding the acquisition of 4704 Calvert Rhode/7307 Rhode Ave

Kenneth Young, City Manager, provided an overview of the property and details regarding the potential acquisition. Specifically, he addressed how we got to 1.7 million dollars. He said the county’s assessed value for 470 Calvert Rd is $700 thousand. He noted that assessed value tends to be much less than market value and added that the existing rental brings in $48 thousand in annual revenue. Based on comparable lots that sold nearby, the five lots on the remainder of property would market at $200 thousand each, bringing the total value to $1.7 million. The Phase 1 Environmental review found no issues, and a title report and appraisal are underway.  

Councilmember Riggs asked how it is looking to close prior to 3/17.  Mr. Young indicated that things were moving in that direction. 

Councilmember Mackie asked for an explanation of R-55 and R-18 zoning.  Terry Schum, Director of Planning, explained that R-55 pertained to single-family units and R-18 pertained to multi-family units.  

Councilmember Adams asked about the funding that would be used to make the purchase.  Mr. Young indicated that CIP funds would be used, not ARPA funds.  

Dr. Kabir asked about how residents would be engaged to give input into the use of the property.  Mr. Young shared that he did not want to move beyond the Council on determining how that would happen. He indicated that Council would meet to discuss engagement on this topic.

David Dortsch questioned the emergency of the ordinance.  

A resident asked how the contract has been signed if the council has not approved and said the city should not go into property development business. 

GW Rowlings –Hopes the city will buy the property because it has been maintained as affordable housing for those who currently occupy the property.  Believes it would help the city to begin an affordable housing program.

Mrs. King – Does not believe that the council should pay 1.7 million for open space.  If there is an emergency, she said, the council created it.  

Alaina Pitt said she’s still not pleased with the process, but after speaking with Councilmembers, she is for the purchase as long as housing is what it is used for.  Housing is what is needed, especially dense housing.  She spoke of the importance of housing near Metro and employment.  

Mary Cook expressed concern about the process, saying staff should have brought this to the Council much sooner since they knew about it a year ago.  She thought it unwise to make this purchase outside of the budget process, some would say irresponsible.  

Action Items

22-G-39 Council consideration of the petition request for traffic calming in the 4600 block of Guilford Road – Steve Halpern, City Engineer – Motion made and seconded with a unanimous vote in favor by Council. 

22-R-06 Adoption of a Resolution confirming the City’s participation in the renewal of the Greater College Park RISE Zone application – Michael Williams, Economic Development Manager – Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor by Council.  Comments – Councilmember Mackie will support even though she is conservative when it comes to tax credits.  Councilmember Kabir thanked the residents who came out to testify.  Councilmember Mitchell indicated her appreciation for the work on the application and understands the potential for such a program to help the economic development of the City. Councilmember Whitney pointed out that bringing more tech businesses to College Park with these incentives could help make College Park the place to be for such businesses, saying that creating that critical mass also leads to better amenities for everyone in the city. She compared it to walking down the street and seeing a half empty restaurant next to a bustling one and asked, “Which one are you going into?”

22-G-41 Approval of additional FY 22 public school education grants to Cherokee Lane Elementary School and Hollywood Elementary School – Carolyn Bernache, Chair, Education Advisory Committee and Kiaisha Barber, Director, YFSS   22-O-02 Adoption of Ordinance.  Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor by Council.  Comments – Councilmember Mackie thanks Dr. Bernache and the EAC for their work and mentioned that she in fact attended Cherokee Elementary School.  Councilmember Esters acknowledge that the grants offered are not big-ticket items, but impact big outcomes related to student development.  She thanked everyone involved in the work. 

22-O-02, An Ordinance to amend the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget (FY 2022 Budget Amendment #2) to transfer the recovery of lost revenue of $10M from the ARPA allocation – Gary Fields, Finance Director.  Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor by Council.  

22-O-03 Adoption of Ordinance 22-O-03, an Ordinance Of The Mayor And Council Of The City Of College Park, Amending Chapter 175 “Taxation”, Article IV, “Revitalization Tax Credit”, §175-10 “Eligibility Criteria” To Authorize The Mayor And Council To Approve A Level Two Tax Credit For A Property That Has Received Authority From Prince George’s County For A Payment In Lieu Of Taxes Under §7-506.1 Of The Taxation-Property Article, Annotated Code Of Maryland – Suellen Ferguson, City Attorney. Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor by Council. Comments – Councilmember Rigg said the opportunity to provide incentives for affordable housing is another tool we can use to meet our goals. Councilmember Kabir pointed out that the Council is not approving a tax break for a specific development. He said that it is considering an ordinance that would give it the option to offer tax credits. He said we’d have to look at what a development would offer in terms of affordable housing, location, and what kind of impact the development would have on the community as far as traffic and schools, etc. Offering the credit will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

22-O-04 Adoption of 22-O-04, An Emergency Amended Ordinance Of The Mayor And Council Of The City Of College Park Authorizing The Acquisition Of Certain Property Located At 4704 Calvert Road and 7307 Rhode Island Avenue, College Park, Maryland, For A Public Purpose.  Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor by Council.  Comments – Councilmember Riggs said that if the City did not purchase swiftly, we would lose this opportunity, especially since others are interested.  He also commented that, contrary to testimony, this purchase would be part of our strategic plan, specifically as it relates to affordable housing and green space.  He shared a previous conversation he’d had with the owner where he asked if they ever wanted to sell, to consider the City; he was glad to see that the City was considered.  He went on to share his support of staff and their work related to this acquisition. Councilmember Mitchell indicated that she would support this purchase and seek input from residents. Councilmember Kabir indicated his support but discussed his concerns about the process.  He made a visit to the site and understood concerns that residents expressed for maintaining the character of the community.  He thought there should have been an appraisal of the property before the signing of the contract.  He asked about a financial analysis of what is proposed for the property.  Councilmember Adams expressed his hope that regardless of location, the Council would move expeditiously in the future to take advantage of such opportunities.  Ms. Sevalia, SGA Liaison, asked if there were any specifics about when the public discussion surrounding the use of the property would occur . Mayor Wojahn responded that any discussion or decisions will be a fully public process. (Note that no timeline for considering use of the property had yet been established since the purchase had not been finalized and due diligence had not yet been completed.)

22-G-40 Presentation and possible action on the request to amend Detailed Site Plan 09028-2 for MSquare/Discovery District – Terry Schum, Director of Planning. Ms. Schum explained that the request did not include a detailed staff report or recommendation.  She went on to explain that the applicant is asking to go through the limited minor amendment process.  The County’s Director of Planning is leaving the decision to College Park and Riverdale Park to determine and identify whether the requested changes should be considered minor, which would allow development to proceed without a revised site plan, or  major, which would require the developer to present a revised detailed site plan to the Planning Board.  

Gibbs and Haller’s Thomas H. Haller, the attorney representing the developer, indicated that it was the first time he had come before the College Park City Council to talk about building in  College Park rather than Riverdale Park.  Dean Lopez of MSquare/Discovery District developer Corporate Office Properties Trust  explained that this is a 15-year-old joint venture.  He said, to date, there has been an investment of $22 million.  They have watched the community become a more thriving area and discussed other advantages such as the proximity of WMATA and the connection to Riverdale Park.  He went on to explain that they were coming to Council because the difference between a minor change and major change could mean an additional 5-6 months; he said there’s a great need for space now.  

Councilmember Mackie asked if there had been a recent traffic study.  It was explained that an initial traffic study was conducted about 20 years ago.  The change in the configuration of the buildings would not call for a traffic study, but their goal of adding another building in the future would require one.  Councilmember Whitney asked Mr. Williams for his input regarding the project.  He explained that he did not want to step on Ms. Schum’s toes but likes the project and encouraged Council to listen to the developer. Councilmember Esters asked how quickly the developer would like to move forward with construction. Mr. Lopez replied that construction is seasonal. They want to break ground later this year, before winter, and to have site prep done before the worst of winter. He said that having to present a revised site plan would miss those seasonal deadlines, pushing the project farther back into next year.

Motion made and seconded with unanimous vote in favor. 

Closed Session

Mayor and Council met in closed session to review applications for the Restorative Justice Commission.  They did not return to open session.  

Click here to see the meeting agenda for March 8, 2022

Click here to see the Mayor and Council Work session scheduled for March 15, 2022

Monday, March 14, 2022, 7:00pm-9:00pm
Register at https://agefriendlycollegepark.eventbrite.com.

Check out the flyer to learn more:

Comments are by Councilmember Susan Whitney and are not approved or sanctioned by the City of College Park.

City Manager’s Report

The ARPA hospitality grant application will be released early in the week of March 7th. This portion of ARPA funding will focus on hotel, travel and tourism businesses, and we expect strong interest. For more information, contact City of College Park Economic Development Manager Michael Williams.

Amendments To And Approval Of The Agenda 

Mayor Patrick Wojahn requested to add a proclamation of Covid-19 Memorial Day to honor those lives lost to Covid-19. All were in favor, so Wojahn read the proclamation naming the 1^st Monday in March as Covid-19 Memorial Day.

Discussion about a potential M-NCPPC community center in north College Park
Guests: County Council Member Tom Dernoga; County Councilmember Tom Dernoga Chief of Staff Michelle García; Claire Worshtil, Lead Strategic Park Planner, PG Parks; Sonja Ewing, Assistant Division Chief, PG Parks, and Tanya Hedgepeth, Planning Supervisor 

County Councilmember Tom Dernoga introduced the presentation by saying that, after having been advocated for by the community for a number of years, the County is funding a feasibility study for  establishing a M-NCPPC community center in north College Park. He recognized Mary Cook for her assistance with community outreach.

PG Parks Lead Strategic Park Planner Claire Worshtil explained what would be involved in the feasibility study and actually bringing the center to fruition. She said many considerations are taken into account during the planning process, including a recent City of College Park needs analysis, a more focused look at north College Park, and the coming multigenerational Prince George’s Plaza. The smaller community center, she said, should complement, not duplicate, services at the larger multigenerational center.

Worshtil said at this initial stage, they are thinking the center will probably be a minimum of  12 thousand square feet and that, once they know how big the site is, they’ll zero in on locations. She said  bus and major road access are important, but they also need to avoid floodplains and damage to trees and wetlands. Once that’s been considered, they’ll narrow it down to two sites, look at ingress, egress, site development cost and neighborhood feedback. The three main categories of costs are acquisition, site development, and construction, which they should know by end of August 2022. The County’s budget process kicks off around September 2022, which is good timing. 

Dernoga said he understood that many residents are frustrated that this hasn’t moved more quickly but says such delays aren’t unusual, especially with covid. He continued that the 21^st Delegation has been an excellent partner, saying that Del. Ben Barnes thinks he can secure $500,000 – $1 million in this year’s budget. Dernoga thinks M-NCPPC can get more funding for it next year but says it would be helpful if the City were to partner financially with M-NCPPC to get the ball rolling. 

Mayor Wojahn asked what we need to do as city to move things forward, saying if we commit resources, we want a seat at the table.

Dernoga said exactly how much would be required is a hard question but said M-NCPPC wants the City to be a full partner regardless of its financial contribution. He said it’s difficult to speak to exact dollar amounts until the feasibility study has been completed and until we draw closer to the time to begin construction. He estimated that the project might fall somewhere in the $8 – $14 million range, but cautioned that the cost for everything has been rising. He asked if the City might be willing to commit as much as 10%, saying that the State was likely to contribute about 20% of the total cost over 2 years. 

Worshtil said the proposed locations are not set in stone, M-NCPPC is “still open to anything under sun.” 

PG Parks Assistant Division Chief Sonja Ewing said they sometimes have to be creative in urban areas, saying they might even have to enter into long-term lease agreement.

Councilmember Fazlul Kabir said the center would benefit all City residents, not just those in north College Park, saying that the College Park Recreation Center in Lakeland is one of top 10 busiest centers in region and that the City’s survey listed a community center in north College Park as a top ask from residents. He said north College Park is known as a densely populated residential neighborhood with lots of families, and he thinks the center could offer services for entire family. He added that he was open to all locations but would like to hear from residents. 

Councilmember Kate Kennedy wanted to ensure that the County would staff and handle programming for the facility once it is built. She also commented that locating the center close to the City’s Youth and Family Services building in north College Park would yield beneficial synergies between the two services. Finally, she wondered if a commercial kitchen could be integrated into the space, and, when asked if she was talking about space for Meals on Wheels, she said that she was. She asked about taking an intermediary step of renting space in the Hollywood commercial district.

Ewing said that financing structures often don’t support being a tenant but that M-NCPPC is open to exploring ideas. She said their focus is on what the community’s needs are now, while taking into account how the building can serve and evolve over 40-year period, saying that flexibility and usability, as well as maintenance and repair costs are all taken into account. She said Meals on Wheels could be considered from the beginning if that’s an integral need. Worshtil said the needs would be determined from what they hear from the community. 

Councilmember Rigg asked what had been holding up plans for the center. Ewing responded that M–NCPPC had to temporarily shift its focus to services for the rapid development in the south of the county and maintaining the aging facilities they already had. 

Rigg said he was concerned about the precedent set by the 10% ask, saying that residents already pay about as much in property taxes to M-NCPPC as to the City and that he was concerned both that this might represent double dipping and that we might be asked to contribute to other projects in the future to move them along quickly.  

Dernoga replied by saying that he’d never thought of financing this project with anything but Parks & Planning dollars but that Kabir asked what might be done to move things along, and he thinks partnering would accomplish that, especially given the ARPA funds that the City has. He also noted that, even without the center, City residents get their $20 million value out of Parks & Planning. 

Rigg asked if it would it make sense to expand College Park Community Center. Ewing replied that the existing center in Lakeland isn’t walkable for north College Park residents. She said there was also a significant amount of floodplain next to College Park Community Center and the fields are highly used. She said the goal is to deliver on the recommendation of M-NCPPC’s Formula 2040 Plan. 

Councilmember Stuart Adams asked if the City was being asked to contribute money for construction or acquisition. He was concerned that the City could get nothing for its contribution if it gave money for acquisition then the build never happened. He said he’d rather City money go toward construction. 

Dernoga said he could not imagine a scenario in which the feasibility study is favorable, so M-NCPPC buys land and designs a center, but then doesn’t build it. 

Councilmember Maria Mackie said a small community center is great amenity for people of all ages, saying they’re a great asset for home schoolers, a community she asked Parks & Planning to keep in mind. 

Councilmember Susan Whitney suggested that choosing one of the possible sites, the Stone Straw property, could allow the City to use $800 thousand in accumulated Project Open Space funds as part of its partnership with M-NCPPC, retaining $800 thousand in ARPA funds for other goals the City has set for those funds. Doing so might make the ask of the City more palatable to other Councilmembers while protecting the 6.5 acres of trees on the site and ensuring that the purchase of Stone Straw would result in a development that residents would not oppose, since it would not generate industrial traffic and is in a location that would, once Rhode Island Avenue improvements have been completed, be easily accessed by bike, car or on foot. She acknowledged that the location is on the southern end of north College Park.

Ewing said M-NCPPC could explore POS funds as a funding source.

Councilmember Denise Mitchell said that she thinks the Council should commit to partnering with M-NCPPC on the center but doesn’t think we should commit to a particular level of funding at this time. 

The Mayor closed the discussion by stating that transit accessibility for the center should be strongly considered since College Park Community Center isn’t transit accessible. He also said we should look at amenities we often see at libraries, like a computer lab. Finally, he thinks looking at renting space in Hollywood business park should be thoroughly explored. 

Discussion of a commemorative bench program
Robert Marsili, Director of Public Works

Director of Public Works Robert Marsili introduced the commemorative bench program as an opportunity to purchase a bench for $2,500 to memorialize a family or friend and beautify the city. He said all requests would be made by application and that the City has a process in place to review them. The City would work with the requestor to identify a suitable place for the bench. Initially, orders would be placed as they came in, but by season two, the thought is that benches would be ordered semiannually. He recommended the Victor Stanley bench & plaque, which he called a high-quality bench by a Maryland company. The bench is available in a version that could be custom-painted with artwork which would have to be approved by the City. The benches would be City property once installed, and the City will make every effort to maintain them, although they might be removed were they damaged or vandalized.

Whitney wondered if there would be a process in place were a person memorialized who was later found to be problematic. Marsili said the City reserves the right to remove or move a bench for whatever reason and has studied dozens of communities that do this.

Kabir said the idea came from a resident who lost her husband and wanted to contribute something to the City in his memory. He asked if the $2,500 included purchase and installation, and Marsili said that it did. As far as maintenance, Marsili said the City will perform maintenance up to the point of severe aging or vandalization. At that point, they would ask the requestor if they want to have the bench or pay to have it repaired or replaced.

Mitchell is very excited about the program. She wondered if family of former public officials would now have to pay for their loved ones to be memorialized. Marsili said there’s already a policy in place whereby the City memorializes former councilmembers, mayors, or non-elected community servants. This program would amend that existing program to allow others to buy a bench in memory of their loved one. 

This will return as a resolution in a coming Council Meeting.

Consideration of Purchase of Cablecast Server for broadcast (suspend procurement procedures)
Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager 

The current CableCast server has been in place for more than ten years and is not compatible with the AV technology at the new City Hall. The vendor for the new equipment is Contracting Video Specialists (CVS) which the City has hired for several projects; most recently CVS designed and implemented the audio/video signal from the new City Hall to the Cablecast system at Davis Hall. CVS is the only CableCast-certified contractor in Maryland. Because the project’s total cost (hardware, software, and labor) exceeds $30,000, the City Council must waive its normal procurement processes in order to approve the purchase. 

Kennedy said she wants close-captioning included, and Assistant City Manager Bill Gardiner said he would come back with a quote that included that. 

Council agreed to put the matter on the Consent Agenda for the March 8^th City Council Meeting.

Review of legislation (Possible Special Session to consider time sensitive matters)
Mayor and Council

HB1187/SB726 – Transportation – Highway User Revenues – Revenue and Distribution 

Gardiner says it will make it easier for MML to advocate for the bill if we send a letter of support. He said the hearings are coming up on 3/10 and 3/9, respectively. He explained that Highway User Revenues are funding that municipalities receive from the state, both at the city and county level. It’s calculated based on a combination of lane miles and number of vehicles in the municipality. The $575 thousand College Park currently receives doesn’t cover the cost of maintaining our roads. These funds were cut when state money got tight in the wake of the 2008 recession, a fact which has been a huge issue for MML since. MML is asking the State to return funding to pre-recession levels. The increase for College Park would be significant. 

HB1027, SB921 – Food Supplement Benefits – Students – Eligibility (SNAP for Students)
Kennedy says the hearing is on 3/10 and asks Council to consider sending a letter in support of the SNAP benefits for college students in Special Session.

HB1259, SB871 – Accessory Dwelling Unit Authorization and Promotion Act
Adams said the ADU bill has a hearing on March 8^th  and asked if Council could consider sending a letter of support. 

Wojahn explained that MML is opposing the bill because it mandates that municipalities allow ADUs, saying that typically bills that force zoning decisions on municipalities are opposed by MML. He said there is a movement to look at ADUs in Prince George’s County and that the Housing Opportunities For All  Work Group may be planning to look at the issue more in depth. 

Adams said it’s good to know that MML is opposing it. He said we have lots of single-family homes next to mass transit so we have a unique situation in the city. Regardless, he said that since one of the City’s partners is opposing it, now might not be the time to support it.

SB528 – Climate Solutions Now Act of 2022

Gardiner says the hearing has already been held but that the Council should send a letter soon if it wishes to show its support.

HB596, Constitutional Amendment – Environmental Rights
FOR the purpose of establishing that every person has the fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful and sustainable environment; and requiring the State to serve as the trustee of the State’s natural resources, including the air, land, water, wildlife, and ecosystems of the State, and to conserve, protect, and enhance the State’s natural resources for the benefit of every person, including present and future  generations.

Gardiner says he will check with our lobbyists and report back on whether this amendment will advance.

HB18 / SB143 – The Maryland Paint Stewardship Act

According to a letter sent by the Committee for a Better Environment (CBE) asking that the Council support the bill, it would make it more convenient for residents to recycle, reuse, and donate paint they no longer need and would shift the responsibility for managing the end-of-life of paint products to the manufacturers, shifting the costs away from local government. It is my read that the costs for managing the program would be covered by a “paint stewardship assessment” that would be added to the purchase price of any architectural paint sold in the state.

Gardiner says he will check with our lobbyists and report back on whether this amendment will advance.

The Council moved into Special session

The Council unanimously supported sending a letter in support of the Highway User Revenues bills HB 1187/SB726.

The Council unanimously supported sending a letter in support of SB528, the Climate Solutions Now Act of 2022. 

Kennedy moved that the Council send a letter in support of HB1027, SB921 – Food Supplement Benefits – Students – Eligibility (SNAP for Students). She said it’s been proven that, in addition to benefitting recipients, SNAP benefits improve the economy of the community. She asks that if we support it, we copy Delegate Jared Solomon on the letter.

SGA student representative Megha Sevalia said the SGA worked with Del. Solomon on the bill and will be supporting it, as well.

The motion to support carried unanimously.

The Council left Special Session.

Future agenda items

Kabir asked to have a worksession with the animal welfare committee to discuss the projects they need our support on. City Manager Young said he’s aware of the issues and that they’d be best handled by staff. Kabir said ok and asked that the Council get an update once one was available.

Adams wants to invite the County, included the Department of the Environment (DoE), to present to City Council on the Calvert Hills drainage project. He also asked to push back reconsideration of the New Neighbors Homeownership Grant Program from the March 8^th City Council meeting to the worksession on March 15^th.  He thinks there’s still a lot to discuss for it. The Council voted unanimously to do so.

City Manager’s Comments
Kenneth Young, City Manager

Young announced that the City is showing its support for Ukraine by placing yellow and blue lights at Duvall Field and in front of Youth and Family Services. Staff is working on doing something at City Hall.

Click here to see the worksession agenda for March 1, 2022.

Click here to view the Mayor and Council Worksession held on March 1, 2022.

Click here to see the Mayor and Council Regular Meeting scheduled for March 8, 2022.

Click Here to Apply before the March 29th deadline.

The City of College Park is offering its annual summer camp scholarships for the 2022 summer season. 

Youth (rising K-12 students) who reside in the City of College Park are eligible to apply. Scholarships are granted up to a maximum of $400 per student. Students are eligible to receive a scholarship for one camp session only. Priority is given to youth who did not receive a City of College Park scholarship in previous years. 

Last summer (2021), the City extended use of the scholarship to include camps hosted by Prince George’s County Department of Parks & Recreation and Prince George’s Community College. This same option is available for 2022 camp scholarships. For updated information and details on camps offered by each organization, please visit their individual websites listed below. Please note that updated summer camp information may not be available currently. Several camps (including Prince George’s Parks and Recreation and Prince George’s Community College) are still finalizing camp plans for the summer. Please check the websites frequently for updates.

Camp Website Information:

• University of Maryland
  search.umd.edu (Go to search, type in “2022 Summer Camps”)
•  Prince George’s County Department of Parks & Recreation
  http://www.pgparks.com
•  Prince George’s Community College
  https://www.pgcc.edu/programs-courses/academic-divisions/professional-studies-and-community-education/youth-programs/summer-youth-program/

Click here for more information.