Haga clic aquí para leer esta publicacion en español.
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
October 9 -15 is National Fire Prevention Week. This year, the city will focus on fire prevention and what to do if fire occurs. The theme is “Fire Won’t Wait, Plan your Escape.” The October Community Safety Meeting will feature Ms. Teresa Crisman, Director of Public Affairs of the Maryland State Fire Marshall’s Office and she will discuss safety measure to take in case of fire. The community meeting will take place on Monday, October 10 at 7pm.
Councilmember Mackie asked for confirmation about the upcoming shredding event. Mr. Young confirmed the Saturday Cleanup/Shredding event would be held on October 8 from 7:30am – noon.
Councilmember Kabir acknowledged the Rabies and Microchip Clinic originally scheduled for October 2 was cancelled. He asked when it would be rescheduled. Bob Ryan, Director of Public Services, informed him the city is working on rescheduling the event.
Amendments To And Approval Of The Agenda
Councilmember Whitney asked to add to amend the agenda to add consideration of a letter from the City to support a recent notice of proposed rulemaking from the Federal Highway Administration that would establish performance measure requirements regarding greenhouse gas emissions from the National Highway System.
Proclamations
The Mayor wished our Jewish neighbors a happy new year and a good fast in recognition of Yom Kippur.
Presentation on the business plan for the Community Preservation Trust and review of the MOU between the City and the Community Preservation Trust regarding City funding from ARPA (30) Councilmember Kennedy and Kenneth A Young, City Manager
Councilmember Kennedy introduced Valerie Woodall, Interim Director of the Community Preservation Trust; Ed Maginnis, legal advisor; and Richard Wagner, Chair for the Community Preservation Trust. They provided an overview of the Community Preservation Trust initiative – to create more single-family home ownership by making home ownership more affordable and accessible and the MOU between the City and the Trust.
Councilmember Kennedy began by mentioning the progress made by the Trust since they last met with City Council. Trust now has almost $14 million in funds and recently received a grant from the Council of Governments (COG). She also shared that an Executive Director has been hired and will start in November; his name is Daniel Cunningham. The Trust worked with the City’s consultants on how to manage the ARPA funding. According to Councilmember Kennedy, progress has been made on the legal work and the Trust has developed a business plan. In addition, the Trust Advisory Committee has been established, and it will eventually become the board of the Trust.
Councilmember Kennedy mentioned the provision of Graduate Housing will become part of the focus for the Trust. She explained there are currently houses in the community that are already set up for rental. The Trust would like to buy and manage housing with less than 10 units and use it as a source of revenue from the beginning. Councilmember Adams asked if single family houses would be converted into rentals or if the Trust would be purchasing rentals and having graduate students move in. Councilmember Kennedy confirmed the latter. Councilmember Adams asked if graduate students with families would be given preference. Mayor Wojahn asked if students who received subsidized student loans would be given preference. Richard Wagner explained that units would be charge $800 per bed which is considered affordable. Councilmember Mitchell asked if similar programs exist in other communities. Richard Wagner indicated that similar programs did indeed exist in other university communities, mentioning Charlottesville, NC, UC Berkeley and Michigan.
Councilmember Kennedy indicated that since the last meeting with Council, City housing stock is tightening, and interest rates are on the rise. Councilmember Adams mentioned that the City has little housing stock located in the flood plain but urged the Trust to be mindful not to purchase any of those homes.
Councilmember Kennedy reviewed the neighborhood priority listing and indicated that Lakeland is the first priority, although they appear lower on the list because the numbers do not adequately reflect the loss of homes due to urban renewal.
Councilmember Kabir asked that consideration be given to North College Park since many of the homes are affordable in that area. Ed Maginnis acknowledged that fact but emphasized that purchases would be based upon inventory.
Councilmember Kennedy outlined the five-year plan for the Trust, which includes:
- Establishment and Startup
- Testing Strategies
- Establishing Separate Organization
- Refinement and Expansion
Councilmember Whitney asked if the $14 million included the $5 million in state funds set aside for affordable UMD graduate student housing. Councilmember Kennedy said it did not.
Councilmember Kennedy outlined the operating budget including revenue and operating expenses:
Revenue:
- Sale of properties
- Monthly Fees
- Graduate Housing Rental Income
- Fundraising
Operating Expenses (estimated at $450,00 Annually):
- Staffing
- Executive Director
- Administration Coordinator
- Accounting Services
- Legal Services
- Marketing
- Education
Councilmember Rigg asked a procedural question about how matches for homes will be made. He specifically asked if the Lakeland descendants would only be able to live in Lakeland, or if they would be able to live anywhere in the City. Councilmember Kennedy said the director will play a key role in the matching process. She added that Lakeland descendants, like everyone else on the priority list, would be able to live anywhere in the City.
Councilmember Adams asked if a future homeowner were expected to have a down payment or if the Trust would make the down payment. Richard Wagner indicated the lender would expect the homeowner to make a down payment, but the down payment will be lower than it would be if the buyer were financing 100% of the cost of the home. Councilmember Adams asked if the Trust considered how long an owner should be in the house in order for the purchase to make sense given the fee structures. Mr. Wagner indicated homeowners will need to determine how long they stay. He indicated fees, structures, and appreciation percentage will need to be reviewed each year. Councilmember Adams asked if the maintenance of the roof is maintained by the homeowner or the Trust. Richard Wagner explained the trust will fix the house before selling, but maintenance will be the homeowner ‘s responsibility. Ed Maginnis said the backbreaking expenses Councilmember Adams hinted at might be something the Trust would handle, but the fee would be adjusted for that. The goal would be to preserve the asset for the Trust.
Councilmember Adams asked what would happen when a home is resold quickly or loses value. Richard Wagner explained that is a risk of the housing market but that the Trust has first dibs at purchasing the home so would have the benefit of not competing on the open market.
Councilmember Kabir asked, on behalf of a resident, how we are addressing equity issues through this program. Ed Maginnis said, “comfortably when you consider affordability.” Councilmember Kabir asked about other forms of equity like race. Mr. Maginnis said there are federal laws that ensure non-discrimination in housing. Councilmember Esters added that marketing of the program will be the major tool used to ensure equity, saying the promotion of the program will need to be broad and wide to ensure awareness and opportunity to apply.
Councilmember Whitney asked if residents would be eligible to use down payment assistance offered through the City and CPCUP to purchase a Trust home. CPCUP Interim Executive Director Valerie Woodall said they’d discussed that with their consultants when designing the Trust and were told that you typically don’t want to have an additional subsidy on top of the Trust.
During the brief discussion of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), City Attorney Suellen Ferguson stated that the City is known as the recipient of the ARPA funds and the Trust will be sub-recipient. As such, the Trust will need to provide reports to the City. Mayor Wojahn asked if the MOU is going to be considered for approval next week. Ms. Ferguson said it would be on the next week’s Council meeting agenda. She said the focus on graduate housing will need to be added to the MOU.
Councilmember Kabir asked what happens if a house does not sell. Councilmember Kennedy indicated it is a risk. Ed Maginnis explained that with the focus on affordability, they anticipate houses will sell. He emphasized houses will sell at the right price.
Mayor Wojahn asked when we will buy our first home through the Trust. Councilmember Kennedy said the goal is to do so by the end of the year.
Discussion of a Special Tax District to fund public safety projects in a designated area (45) Kenneth Young, Bob Ryan, Suellen Ferguson, Gary Fields, and Michael Williams 2
Mr. Ryan, Director of Public Safety, thanked city staff for their help and gave a review of the proposal for the special tax district proposed. Suellen Ferguson indicated that there are two ways to create tax districts. One doesn’t require the approval of a certain percentage of those in the tax district, and one that does require consent. Public safety falls under the category of those that don’t require consent.
This was initially reviewed about 10 years ago. The enabling legislation was approved, but nothing has occurred since that time. Generally, a special tax district is funded by a bond, then the bond is paid off by the taxes that are collected.
Mr. Ryan spoke of the recommendations made by the Public Safety Task force of the College Park City- University Partnership District 2020 Vision Project and how many of the recommendations were achieved without establishing a special tax district.
Councilmember Rigg provided some context by saying he asked that this be brought back to the Council as a way to ensure the long-term sustainability of off-campus live camera monitoring. He said funding the program has historically received tepid support by Council, as there has been varied impressions about its effectiveness and a sense that the benefits of the monitoring do not accrue to the City at large, but rather to a small area. He emphasized that the City has heard from SGA, Business Owners and UMD about the importance of this matter. He also made the point that this commercial core provides 80-90% of City revenue and that one could argue that this should be considered part of what they’re paying for.
Councilmember Mitchell thanked Mr. Rigg for bringing this forth and indicated her interested in live camera monitoring in the Crystal Springs neighborhood.
Councilmember Esters thanks Mr. Rigg for bringing up this discussion. She mentioned the need to consider additional safety measure as the City continues to grow. She expressed her interest in seeing more camera surveillance along the Trolley Trail.
Mayor Wojahn clarified that what was before the Council was a discussion about a special tax district within the commercial core of the City, which would require those within the area to pay a special tax. Any measures undertaken would need to directly benefit those within the special district. The City can have a distinct discussion about any additional safety measure it would like to undertake and fund. Ms. Ferguson confirmed the Mayor’s comments.
Councilmember Mitchell thanks the Mayor and Ms. Ferguson for their clarification and indicated that her request and that of Councilmember Esters could be withdrawn for now and discussed at a different time.
Councilmember Adams thanked Councilmember Rigg for bringing this conversation forward. He said he sees special tax districts as a tool and a way to position ourselves for next year’s budget conversation. He said if we’re hearing from residents that this is a critical issue but we don’t think City funds will cover it, this is a tool we could use. He said we do not currently have live camera monitoring at The Hotel, which is in the proposed taxing district, but we do have live camera monitoring along the Trolley Trail in areas that aren’t in the proposed area. He asked if it might be more practical to have one special tax district just where the live monitored cameras are and a separate tax district for more foot patrols.
City Attorney Suellen Ferguson said you would have to ensure that each district would provide the funding to cover the extra services the tax is intended to pay for.
Councilmember Whitney asked that staff provide confirmation that all cameras in District 2 for which live monitoring is currently provided fall within the proposed taxing district. She asked Ms. Ferguson to confirm her understanding that, were this special tax district to be established for the purpose of paying for live camera monitoring, the City would no longer be permitted to pay for live camera monitoring in areas that fell outside of that district. Ms. Ferguson confirmed that that was the case. Councilmember Whitney asked that a map be provided that overlays the special taxing district and the current live camera monitoring. Mr. Ryan said that could be done.
SGA liaison Valerie Graham thanked Mr. Rigg for bringing this idea forward, given the cameras make students feel safer. She also mentioned previous discussions about University of Maryland perhaps contributing to the cost for live camera surveillance through increased student fees.
Councilmember Rigg indicated that the Downtown College Park Management Authority (DCPMA) contributes funds for foot patrols along Baltimore Ave in the downtown area. Mayor Wojahn asked if the DCPMA see live camera surveillance as beneficial as opposed to foot patrols. Councilmember Rigg said that DCPMA previously sent a letter expressing their enthusiasm for including funds for live camera monitoring in the budget.
Councilmember Rigg asked Mr. Ryan what would happen in the case of an incident occurring outside of the tax district. Mr. Ryan said that contract officers have to abide by County regulations, and the closest officers, regardless of whether their beat was the special tax district, would need to respond.
Councilmember Whitney asked about the Police Ambassador program and why that was discontinued. Mr. Ryan shared that Senator Rosapepe brought this idea from Philadelphia. After the pilot, CPCUP and the City no longer wanted to fund the program. Councilmember Rigg said there were Councilmembers who did not want to contribute to the program because they thought it provided a disproportionate benefit to the downtown area.
Councilmember Whitney asked if an analysis of the success of the pilot had occurred, and Mr. Ryan said it had not.
Councilmember Mitchell asked Mr. Gary Fields, Director of Finance, if he had been able to consider how this special tax district would be managed if it moved forward. Mr. Field explained he had not considered it as of yet and said it would need to be reviewed further.
Mayor Wojahn added that the City would need to consider the impact of imposing more taxes on the small businesses that exist in the area proposed for the special tax district. Follow up discussion of the Report from the Redistricting Commission (30) Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager 9:10 4
Mr. Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager, brought the discussion forward and said that concerns were expressed the previous week about Districts 1, 3, and 4. He said that during the Commission’s meeting on Monday, October 3, they indicated they wanted to respond to Council’s concerns but needed Council to provide guidance on what they would like to see. The Commission also voted to finalize the report to the Mayor and the Council, saying they stood behind their analysis and proposed maps. Mr. Gardiner said a hard copy would be provided as soon as possible.
Mayor Wojahn clarified that tonight’s purpose is to give additional clarification to the Commission, not to make a decision tonight. Mr. Gardiner confirmed that was the case.
Councilmember Kabir said the number of residents who sent emails about redistricting reflects how many are truly concerned about the issue. He asked that the Redistricting Commission keep together the neighborhoods currently in District 1.
Councilmember Adams stressed the need to keep the neighborhoods together as much as possible. Suellen discussed the two factors that are elevated, population and actual voters.
Councilmember Esters acknowledged the concerns of those who have lived in the city for many years and recognized that change is difficult. She indicated we are not the same city we were twenty years ago, nor are we the same city we were ten years ago, as evidenced by the recent census data. She said that we need to be careful in making decisions about this process based upon the desires expressed by residents. Rather, we need to focus on the data. She went on to say we asked the Commission to do a job and they focused on the data. Per our previous meeting, we were to consider the variance associated with actual voters, so let’s do that. She also added that a shift of district boundaries should not be seen as punishment.
Councilmember Mitchell asked that Council colleagues understand that maintaining two districts directly impacts Districts 2 and 4. She has concerns about the shift in district 4, but she will be a team player and do what needs to be done in order to move things forward.
Councilmember Kennedy pointed out that in the proposed maps, District 2 would include up to six civic associations, unlike any other district. She believes this needs to be considered as we determine districts.
Councilmember Mackie said, like her colleague Councilmember Mitchell, she would be a team player and do her best to serve the residents of the city.
Councilmember Rigg said we need to be careful of looking like we are picking our voters. He reminded Council of the letter written to the county to speak out against them choosing their own voters. We need to avoid doing what we spoke against.
Councilmember Whitney talked about her confusion about why residents with common goals would see it as detrimental to their interests to have representation across districts, as that would only increase the number of councilmembers expressly charged with working toward said goals.
Councilmember Esters said she agreed with the use of 2023 data for calculating population, saying it just made sense. She expressed her feeling that there is something fundamentally wrong with going through this process and asking that only two districts remain the same and acknowledged Councilmember Mitchell’s comment that maintenance of Districts 1 and 3 directly impacts Districts 2 and 4. Despite that, she, too, will be a team player and will do what needs to be done to move this process forward. She thanked Councilmember Kennedy for pointing out that based upon current maps, District 2 could have up to six civic associations to serve. She joked that her colleague should not worry, as she and Councilmember Whitney will coordinate everyone’s schedules so they might assist and will request personalized scooters to cover their district. She concluded by saying that the city’s growth, as evidenced through this process, suggests that we may need to reconsider the structure of the City Council. She believes the current structure may have run its course and may not be feasible moving forward.
Councilmember Mitchel agreed about the use of 2023 data considering that we have other developments in progress. She said if we come to meetings and say we’re going to work together to do what’s right for the City, then we go into our district and say something different, it causes confusion and division. She said we’ve come a long way as a body and need to keep moving forward, not backwards. She said whatever personal feelings councilmembers have about the plan, she urged them to contain them when considering how to educate their residents. She then asked how the timeline would be affected should we not come to an agreement on 10/18. Ms. Miller said it would depend on how quickly decisions were made after that. She said if Council were only asking the Commission to tweak an existing map, that would only take a couple of extra weeks and would not cause issues.
Councilmember Whitney said after we finish this process it would be helpful to have information that shows us what the maps would look like if we did not include actual voters in the criteria.
SGA Liaison Graham attended the Commission meeting on October 3 and explained the Commission said they would be willing to create new maps if given the parameters from the Council.
Mayor Wojahn said that the consultant’s Plan B maps met the criterion and could be tweaked a bit.
Councilmember Rigg asked that we consider at least one map from the Commission.
Mr. Gardiner said he would try to summarize the discussion and give the Commission guidance. Mr. Gardiner asked if we wanted to consider adding flexibility to the criterion right now. The Mayor said Council wanted to direct the Commission to consider a 7.5% variance for voters, rather than the 5% initially considered.
Consideration of a sponsorship request from Holy Redeemer School’s Home and School Association for the Monster Dash 5k and 1K Trick or Trot in the amount of $2,500
Mr. Fields presented a grant request from Holy Redeemer School. The organization has received a previous grant from the City. The only concern was that funding not be used for religious purposes.
Ms. Tuttle, representative for Holy Redeemer School, thanked Council for their consideration of the grant. The Council voted to move into Special Session. The motion to approve the grant was made by Councilmember Mackie and seconded by Councilmember Kabir. Council unanimously approved the grant, then unanimously voted to exit Special Session.
Requests for/Status of Future Agenda Items Mayor and Council
Councilmember Kabir asked for a review of the charter for redistricting. He apologized to Mr. Young for not discussing it with him prior to submitting request, as required. Councilmember Kennedy asked that it be taken up after the current redistricting process is completed.
Councilmember Mitchell agreed that we should complete the current redistricting process before this is discussed.
Councilmember Whitney asked for the agenda item to be broader in scope given Council’s discussion.
Mayor Wojahn asked for discussion to be had among Council member to broaden the scope of the agenda item and then have the request brought back to Council.
Mayor and Councilmember Comments Mayor and Council
Mayor Wojahn mentioned that the mayor of Bloomington, Illinois reached out for support as they put in their bid to host the next World Expo.
City Manager’s Comments
No comments.
MEETING ADJOURNED
Click here to see the Work Session agenda for October 5 , 2022
Click here to view the Mayor and Council Work Session held on October 5, 2002
Click here to access the Mayor and Council Meeting agenda scheduled for October 11, 2022
The College Park District 2 Digest 