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   

Mr. Young thanked staff, residents, and councilmembers who attended College Park Day on Saturday, October 15, which was well attended. He said he looks forward to doing it again next year. He shared this week is homecoming for University of Maryland (UMD) and there will be special events throughout the week, including fireworks early Friday Night. He also mentioned a concert is to be held at The Hall CP, and the home football game against the Northwestern Wildcats. He added that no Inter-Fraternal Council (IFC) tailgate would be held this weekend because of Homecoming. 

Councilmember Mackie asked if this weekend was also Cleanup Saturday at Davis Hall. Mr. Young confirmed October 22 is another Cleanup sponsored by the City held from 7:30am – noon. 

Councilmember Kabir mentioned that he attended the second budget hearing held by the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) held on October 18^th and learned that residents can send comments through November 1. He asked if the City would send comments. Mr. Gardiner, Assistant City Manager, said the City normally does send comments each year and will work with staff to get input for a letter. 

Councilmember Mitchell acknowledged that polling stations have changed and asked if the City could put information on the website. Ms. Miller, City Clerk, indicated that the county Board of Elections (BOE) is responsible for changing the polling places. As such, she indicated that the City would include a link on the website to refer residents to the County for detailed information. 

Amendments To And Approval Of The Agenda    

Councilmember Mitchell said the item related to GrillMarx needed to be added to the agenda as a Special Session item. Councilmember Adams made the motion and Councilmember Mackie seconded it. 

Follow up discussion on election matters – Board of Election Supervisors (45)  Janeen S. Miller,  City Clerk

Mr. Payne, Chair of the Board of Elections (BOE) indicated the BOE is seeking input from the Council to ensure the upcoming 2023 election is free, fair, and accessible. A survey is to be sent to all residents, and a link will be forwarded to students. Mr. Payne said the primary question is why there is not greater voter turnout. Is it that people do not have enough information, or are there barriers? There are factors that are beyond their purview like a contested election or if there are issues on the ballot that voters are passionate about. How do we conduct the election so there are not barriers and how is it that we can ensure that all are informed? 

 A comparison of data regarding City elections over the years shows there have been changes in how the elections are conducted and an increase in the budget for elections, but voter turnout has not changed. BOE has had discussions about what they would like to do for the elections, but they would like to get input from the City. The BOE would like to incorporate vote by mail for those residents who have signed up for the state vote-by-mail list. This would require education to encourage those who are interested to sign up for state vote by mail. In terms of in-person voting, we could utilize the traditional Tuesday, or we could have the election on a non-football Sunday. In terms of voting locations, he expressed his thought that it is easier to use the community center, but there is often an interest in having a polling place in North College Park. Going from three to two voting locations would result in a significant difference in the budget. The BOE is looking for input from Council and will be back in January to share the survey results. 

Mr. Payne noted there were two years where there was greater voter turnout, 2017 and 2019. He shared that in 2017 there was the issue of non-citizen voting and in 2019 there was the referendum on 4-year terms.

Councilmember Adams indicated that if voting was on a Tuesday, we should also include an early voting date. He thought we should incorporate mail-in voting list because it makes it easier to vote.

Councilmember Mackie asked why the City mailed the applications for mail-in ballots to everyone instead of simply directing resident to go online to request a mail-in ballot, saying mailing the applications to everyone was expensive. Ms. City Clerk Janeen Miller reminded Councilmember Mackie it was the Council’s direction to mail applications to everyone. Councilmember Mackie thanked the City Clerk for the efficiency of the city elections. 

Councilmember Whitney agreed that we still need to look at cost and acknowledged that the expenses did not make a difference. She liked Councilmember Adam’s suggestion of holding the election on Tuesday with early voting on Sunday. 

Councilmember Kennedy asked that the survey be translated into other languages. She thought it may be helpful for the Recreation Board to hold an event in conjunction with election day. She thought that debates should be more centralized instead of being hosted by civic associations, but was not sure what committee would do this. Ms. Miller informed the Council that it is a Council policy that the City not to be involved in the debates, which are normally done by the Civic Associations. She will circulate the policy, but the Council would need to discuss further if it wanted to change that. 

Mayor Pro Tem Mitchell suggested we might want to look to The League of Women Voters and similar outside entities for hositng forums.

Mr. Payne said that Stamp Student Union was added as a location based upon the strong interest to increase student voting. He said when the election was held, the Stamp location had by far the lowest turnout of any of the polling places, and  the people who voted there did not appear to be  students.

Councilmember Esters thanked the BOE for their work and mentioned their previous discussion with Council as they considered the 2021 elections and how things would be conducted in the midst of COVID. She mentioned that Sunday was chosen because it was felt that Sunday would allow many more people to vote. She agreed with Councilmember Adams suggestion for an early voting day if we go back to the traditional voting day of Tuesday. She also mentioned that those living in North College Park appreciate having a voting location nearby and she would like to advocate for such. Councilmember Esters asked the SGA liaisons to provide input about voting locations and if they make a difference of student participation. Ms. Graham, SGA Liaison, shared that voting locations were not a primary issue for students. She did say that the receipt of mail is often an issue for students. 

Councilmember Mitchell said there was one election for which the student liaison successfully pushed to get more students registered to vote, but those additional registrations didn’t result in higher voter turnout. She said she’d like to have the numbers on how many people have turned out for early voting. 

Councilmember Kabir asked about the mailing of the upcoming survey on City elections and how it would be sent. Ms. Miller explained postcards would be mailed with a QR Code. Councilmember Kabir expressed concern that our older residents may not be able to access a link or the QR Code. He asked if the survey could be mailed. Councilmember Whitney suggested there be a contact number on the card so those who would like a hard copy may request it. Ms. Miller indicated that would be her suggestion. 

Councilmember Kabir asked if the County had cleaned up the voter rolls. According to Ms. Miller, the first step in cleaning up the rolls is the return of ballots for those who no longer live at an address. She encouraged residents to return such ballots and indicate that the individual no longer lives at the address. She said that 1600 (10%) of the mail-in ballot applications the City mailed for the 2021 election were returned as undeliverable. She said over the years, the number of registered voters has been dropping, and she thinks that’s a good sign that the rolls are being cleaned up. She doesn’t think it’s possible for them to ever be totally clean, saying it is always in process. 

Councilmember Kabir expressed his thought that we should encourage more people to run; residents like to see more people run. He also said it is important to find more ways to get students to vote and suggested research of best practices from other college towns. He mentioned the inability to access apartments and the residence halls on campus. Ms. Miller said that we may need to work with our student liaisons to provide input. She also mentioned that we cannot forget the issue of campus safety as it relates to accessing buildings. 

Mayor Wojahn asked us to consider sending absentee ballots to every voter, saying it might increase voter participation.  He said it would be good to research how that’s gone in other municipalities that have tried it.

Councilmember Mackie indicated she is leaning toward fewer polling locations in combination with a mail-in vote.

Mr. Payne indicated there would be an opportunity for the BOE to put a drop box for students to vote. Councilmember Esters clarified that the concern was more about receipt of the ballots rather than mailing them out. 

Ms. Miller indicated that 80% of the voters went to Davis Hall to vote when there were three locations that included Ritchie Coliseum, College Park Community Center, and Davis Hall. 

Special Session – GrillMarx

Mr. Young introduced the special session item to support the liquor license application for GrillMarx. Linda Carter, attorney for the owner, Jacqueline Baker-Nees, was present. 

Ms. Carter mentioned that the organization does fine dining well in the area and that they are currently applying for their liquor license. All bartenders will be 21 and over and will be trained. She said that, although GrillMarx could have treated the space as a turnkey operation, the owners have chosen to spend $850,000 to $900,000 for renovations. 

Councilmember Whitney recused herself from the discussion due to her employment. 

Councilmember Adams expressed his excitement about the restaurant and thanked the owners for their investment in the City. The Council voted to approve the Property Use Agreement for GrillMarx with 7 yes votes and one abstention. 

Discussion of parking enforcement and permit parking zones (30)  Kenneth A Young,  City Manager

Mr. Young introduced this item and shared his thought that we should review our existing processes as it relates to parking enforcement practices, policies, and permit parking zone. 

Mr. Bob Ryan, Director of Public Services, said that a couple of years ago, the Council did away with paid parking permits, which are now free. Registration is now available online. 

Councilmember Esters asked why the enforcement times vary for each area. Mr. Ryan said enforcement hours are different depending upon information that may have been brought by Councilmembers and neighborhood residents. He mentioned the major areas where permitted parking exists, including Downtown, Old Town, Hollywood, and Lakeland. Councilmember Kennedy talked about her concern about parking on her street and asked about the maximum number of five parking permits and asked if that is too many. According to Jim Miller, Parking Enforcement Manager, most people who have permits do not receive the maximum number of passes. Councilmember Kennedy asked to receive information that provides a breakdown of the number of passes by household. 

Mr. Ryan stressed that individuals who live in areas where there are no restrictions on the number of vehicles have challenges with parking since you cannot restrict parking on a public street. Councilmember Kennedy asked to verify that individuals can indeed block their own driveway. 

Councilmember Adams agreed that issuing five passes is excessive and added that often complaints about the number of vehicles parked in an area is related to rentals. He mentioned that DC has tiered parking fees in some areas and believes it is something we should consider. He asked about visitor parking and the amount of time a car can remain parked. Mr. Miller said if a car is licensed in Maryland, it is possible for the City to track and added that the City is working to fill the gaps. Councilmember Adams expressed his belief that parking is also a component of affordable housing. In DC, if you are near American University or Georgetown University you cannot get a parking permit. We are more generous than DC.  He asked how we can encourage students not to use cars. He asked for the City to consider moving the two-thirds majority for approving a parking permit petition to simple majority. Mr. Ryan says that such changes are Council’s prerogative. 

Councilmember Kabir agreed with Councilmember Adams and thought it was a good idea to move to a simple majority. He mentioned also changing the two-thirds majority for speed hump petitions. Councilmember Kabir mentioned concerns about the Aims System, which is the online system used to register vehicles, and made a suggestion for those seeking permits. He asked for there to be an option for mailing a reminder rather than sending an email.   Mr. Miller said that there are a few complaints about reminders going to spam mail. He said the online fix is on the users end. 

Councilmember Mackie asked about the policy for expanding one’s driveway. Mr Ryan replied that there are limits, and the owner would have to apply for a permit. She asked if the city ever had included a question about restricted parking on the annual resident survey. Mr. Young did not believe such a question has been included on the survey. Councilmember Mackie also asked if there is any information available about the number of business vehicles that can be parked on a street and how close someone can park near a driveway. Mr. Miller said City Code regulates both items, but the council recently amended limitations on work vehicles. He added that if the vehicle has lettering above a certain size on the side of vehicle, there are code limitations. Mr. Ryan said residents who bring home work trucks are allowed to do. Councilmember Mitchell shared that Mr. Halpern, City Engineer, could help with information about expanding a driveway.

Mr. Andriessens, SGA Liaison, expressed concern that a tiered fee system may financially hurt students trying to live in a city that is already costly. 

Follow up discussion on Redistricting (30) Bill Gardiner, Assistant City Manager 

Mr. Gardiner outlined the redistricting process, to date. During the last Council meeting, updates to commission’s maps were requested. He reminded Council that a decision must be made by the end of the year. Prior to making a decision, the issue will need to go to a public hearing. 

Mr. Gardiner spoke of how these updated maps (October Plan 1 Map, October Plan 2 Map, and October Plan 3 Map) differ from current districts: 

October Plan 1 Map – the map divides the UMD residence halls by moving the north side halls to District 2 and the south side halls to District 4 but minimizes current district boundary changes. 

October Plan 2 Map – the map keeps Autoville and Cherry Hill in District 4. There is a very narrow strip behind the Enclave/The Nines that is connected to District 4. Residents in Berwyn remain in District 2, but some commercial buildings do not. The part of District 2 that is now north of Greenbelt Road is moved to District 1. 

October Plan 3 Map – the map keeps northside residence halls in District 4 and southside residence halls in District 2. However, it splits University View; the rear building is in District 4 and the front of the building in in District 2. 

Councilmember Mitchell thanked the Redistricting Commission for their work and said that we will listen to those residents who have voiced their opinions and do what is necessary to educate residents on changes. 

Councilmember Adams asked if the labels were the centroid of the area. Valerie Graham, who attended the commission meeting, did not know.

Councilmember Rigg said this process is a challenge. He explained that we have heard from residents who have concerns about changes and being moved to other districts. He acknowledged the work from the Redistricting Commission and would like to consider one of the original maps completed by the Commission. 

Councilmember Adams said that he agreed with Councilmember Rigg, and he was leaning toward the new maps. 

Councilmember Mitchell asked about the new maps developed by the Commission being put online   and if we can reconsider redistricting prior to the next ten years. Ms. Ferguson said we can reconsider redistricting prior to the next ten years. 

Councilmember Kennedy summarized her thoughts on the benefits and drawbacks of the October Plan Maps. The advantage is that they keep districts more similar to what they are now and do not overload District 2. The disadvantages of these maps are that when there are 3 times as many voters in a district, each vote is more diluted. It will be harder for some folks to get onto committees in D1, and, most importantly, it favors incumbents because a newcomer has less name recognition but needs to earn a lot more votes to win. She noted that this discrepancy was the smallest in October Plan 3

Councilmember Esters thanked the commission for their work and acknowledged the process thus far which has included hearing from residents, the consideration of maps, and the update of maps. She indicated that she is leaning toward the October Plan 1 map and the Commission’s 3A map for keeping the neighborhoods together as much as possible. 

Councilmember Whitney thanked the commission for their work. Of all of the plans, she said she was leaning toward October Plan Map 1. She expressed concerns about map 3A because it adds more civic associations to District 2, and she has concerns about being able to serve everyone in the best way but will do all that she can to learn about the neighborhoods. 

Councilmember Kabir expressed his interest in October Plan Map 1. He wanted to share thoughts and concerns about decreasing voters in District 1 because they have not always voted in such numbers. He shared his belief that the people who have run for office have created an interest in voting. He said the City should consider changing the Charter after redistricting has concluded to remove the consideration of actual voters, saying he could not find other college towns that did so. 

Councilmember Mackie asked Suellen Ferguson, City Attorney, to share why it is that we have to include students. Ms. Ferguson shared that we are required to consider population during the redistricting process, but the charter includes other means that can be considered. Many years ago, the city tried to consider only voters, and that was not allowed. 

Valerie Graham, SGA Liaison, said her personal preference would be not to choose any of the October maps. She said for herself and the other students on the Commission, October Plan 1 was their least favorite, October Plan 3 was their second least favorite. They preferred October Plan 2 out of the lot. She said neither October Plan 1 or 3 would increase student turnout.

Mayor Wojahn, who attended the work session virtually, was having technical difficulties so shared through the Zoom chat his thoughts that the October Maps are a good compromise of the various interests. He said we’ve heard residents want us to retain existing districts as much as possible. He summarized that he heard a lot during the meeting about October Plans 1 and 3 and would be comfortable with either. Mr. Andriessens asked that Council make efforts to keep student populations together. 

A straw poll was conducted, and the results revealed that Council chose to move forward October Plan Map 1 and Redistricting Commission Map 3A.

Discussion of the dollar limit of expenditures (contracts) that require a full bid process, and that the City Manager is authorized to award instead of the Mayor and Council (15)  Kenneth A Young,  City Manager  and Gary Fields, Finance Director 

Mr. Young said he is requesting the changes to increase the efficiency of the purchasing process.

Councilmember Rigg expressed his choice to view this request from a risk factor perspective and asked what efficiencies would be gained. Mr. Young responded by saying many things come to a work session for approval and there would be efficiency in staff and attorney time since they have to review every item that comes through. He assured staff that high dollar amount items would come to council. City Attorney Suellen Ferguson said there were two things to consider:1) increasing the dollar amount that requires the City Manager to get bids on a contract from $30,000 to $150,000 and 2) increasing the dollar amount of a contract that must be approved by Council before being awarded by the City Manager from $30,000 to $150,000.

Councilmember Kennedy asked that any contracts awarded be noted during quarterly financial reporting. 

Councilmember Kabir asked about resident input and wanted to find a middle ground. 

Councilmember Adams asked at what point a competitive bid is taken. Ms. Ferguson explained that costs over $30,000 go out for bid or you ride someone else’s contract. There are times when we are asked to override a process. She went on to say that if Council approved a contract in the first place, they come back to Council with proposed cost increases. They are not required to get approval from Council for increases or amendments to a contract Council was not involved with approving

Councilmember Adams suggested there was value in the competitive bidding process, saying, given the pressures of inflations, etc., he’d be willing to increase the contract value that requires a bidding process to $60,000-$75,000, but would suggest requiring a sole source justification to allow the City Manager to extend up to $150,000, saying that would put paperwork in place and keep us in line with other cities.

Councilmember Whitney, who had asked for the comparison of what limits were in place in other cities such as Bowie, Laurel, Rockville and Gaithersburg, expressed her agreement with having a sole source process in place. 

Councilmember Esters indicated that residents would have the opportunity to give input during the budgeting process. And with reporting on a monthly basis, Council and residents will still have opportunity to inquire and give input. 

Councilmember Kennedy wondered if sole source paperwork was needed every time the choice was made not to go out for bids for contracts within a certain dollar range. She said she’d prefer that the City Manager detail his process for determining whether or not to take bids on a project or purchase. Mr. Young said if Council were to move forward with the change, there would still be multiple checks and balances and he would continue with his practice of signing off on staff purchases of $3,000 or more. 

Approval of amendments to “City Recreational Facilities Rules and Regulations” and “Rules and Regulations for Parks and Recreation Areas” to conform to Ordinance 22-O-07, which was effective on October 4 (10)   Bob Ryan, Director of Public Services and Suellen Ferguson, City Attorney

Mr. Adams asked if there is detailed policy that applies to the trolley trail and if it were appropriate to include the Trolley Trail in these rules. Mr. Ryan said they were not focused on the Trolley Trail for these rules and asked if the City Attorney thought that appropriate. Ms. Ferguson said the rules reference “recreation areas”, which would apply to the Trolley Trail. She said it would be appropriate to include in the regulations. 

Councilmember Adams also requested that smoking, and any manner, be prohibited, and Ms. Ferguson said that change could be made.

Councilmember Mitchell asked it were helpful to add any other trails within the City, like those in the College Park Woods. Ms. Ferguson explained that we would then be talking about trails outside of the oversight of the city. 

Requests for/Status of Future Agenda Items AND Agenda Items for October 27 Four Cities Meeting (New Carrollton) Mayor and Council 

There were no requests for future agenda items. 

Ms. Miller mentioned the upcoming Four Cities Meeting in New Carrolton which will be in-person. Councilmembers did not share any agenda items. Councilmember/Mayor Pro Tem Mitchell said if agenda items should arise, they should be shared with Ms. Miller 

Mayor and Councilmember Comments Mayor and Council 

No comments

City Manager’s Comments Kenneth A Young   

The city manager did not have any comments. 

Meeting Adjourned

CLOSED SESSION AFTER THE MEETING Pursuant to the statutory authority of the Maryland Annotated Code, General Provisions Art. § 3-305(b), the Mayor and Council of the City of College Park are providing notice that they will meet in a Closed Session after the meeting on Tuesday, October 18 to discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation, or performance evaluation of appointees, employees, or officials over whom this public body has jurisdiction; any other personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals. The Mayor and Council will also consult the City Attorney to obtain legal advice. The Mayor and Council will discuss applications for advisory board vacancies and the enforcement of a City law.

Click here to see the work session agenda for October 18.

Click here to view the Mayor and Council Work Session held on October 18.

Click here to access the Mayor and Council Meeting agenda scheduled for October 25.