Citizens slam Montgomery County independent transit authority (ITA) proposal (Photo)

The same proposal for a Montgomery County Independent Transit Authority was put on the table again last night, and residents didn't like it any more than they did last January. About 50 people turned out to argue for or against the ITA legislation, which - if passed by the Maryland General Assembly - would empower the county to create its own transit agency. That unelected, 5-member ITA, as described in the bill, would have unlimited power of taxation and eminent domain, as well as the authority to issue bonds and carry unlimited debt.

While many Bus Rapid Transit advocates feel the ITA would be the best hope of paying for a BRT plan that would not qualify for federal funding, taxpayers are not so enthusiastic about the idea.

Then again, some on the Transit Task Force, which hosted the public hearing, weren't so enthusiastic about hearing from taxpayers, either. When task force member Jim Zepp tried to ask a follow-up question of a speaker early on, Chair Mark Winston objected. "We can't ask questions?" Zepp asked. "Questions are not in order," Winston replied. "I'm not going to argue with you about it." Eventually, task force members Richard Parsons and Casey Anderson intervened to offer a compromise on the number of questions that could be asked, which Winston found acceptable. However, Anderson grew testy when Zepp later attempted to ask a second question of a panel, shutting that inquiry down abruptly.

Speaking of compromises, there haven't been any by the county yet, despite the overwhelming community opposition. One wonders why they are going forward in the face of some of the loudest resident rage in recent history (Or why the ITA hearings always start at 6:00, rather than the standard 7:30 PM start for most county public hearings).

That controversy isn't based on the misfired rollout of the legislation last winter, South Four Corners Citzens Association Vice President Larry Dickter testified. "Rather, it was and remains the very concept of an unelected, unaccountable entity, with powers of eminent domain and the authority to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, without being required to submit its capital or operating budget to the County for approval that makes the proposed [ITA] a non-starter.

Dickter and other speakers also criticized the tone ITA proponents have taken in responding to citizen and organized labor objections, and their the use of pejorative terms like anti-transit, NIMBY, and "howling unionists". He also noted that under a recent National Labor Relations Board decision, "the ITA could well qualify as a private employer subject to the jurisdiction of the NLRB, and bound by federal labor law, not County statute." Dickter argued that a much less expensive alternative to the ITA would be to create a division within MCDOT similar to the Maryland Transit Administration.

Union representatives sought to ensure there would be no privatization of transit services in the county, and that projects overseen by the ITA would require Project Labor Agreements. UFCW Local 1994 MCGEO President Gino Renne said he also had oversight and transparency concerns, and thought homeowners should not pay more taxes to the ITA than developers. Echoing Dickter's question of the need for an authority independent of MCDOT, Renne asked, "is another bureaucracy truly necessary?"

"We agree the transportation infrastructure needs new sources of revenue," Metropolitan Washington Council, AFL-CIO President Joslyn Williams said. "What we don't agree on, is that to get a more reliable system, we need to privatize." Williams slammed elected officials' recent praise of Public-Private-Partnerships (often called "P3s" for short). "P3 is a branding of privatization," Williams declared. He asked the task force to examine "the failures of P3 across the world," from London to Los Angeles.

Residents and taxpayers were no more enthusiastic.

"We don't want the ITA, and we don't want the sham, scam bus rapid transit," Silver Spring resident Michael Williamson said. He said the sole purpose of the ITA was to enable BRT, which he predicted would be "a Silver Spring Transit Center on wheels", which elicited raucous laughter and applause from the audience. Williamson argued the few supporters of the ITA are "developers, professional transit lobbyists, or those looking for a job from one or the other." "If you think an ITA is such a great idea, put it on the ballot," he challenged the task force.

Howard Greif, representing the Greater Olney Civic Assocation, said the association continues to oppose the ITA, and the current BRT proposal. He said the association could only support a plan that funds BRT with existing local, state and federal funds, permits "documented citizen input," and which requires voter approval through a ballot referendum.

Richard Parsons said "I don't believe this is the only way, or even the best way" to fund transit projects. He suggested limiting any plan to the Corridor Cities Transitway BRT line initially, with a special taxing district along I-270 or countywide to fund it. Parsons also advocated a regional approach, that would connect with BRT systems in Frederick and Prince George's Counties.

Members of the Montgomery County Civic Federation had a different approach, discussing alternatives to both the ITA and the BRT which they felt could be more effective and less costly.

Jerry Garson suggested offering free Ride On service in the county, which he estimated would cost taxpayers $22 million more per year.

MCCF President Paula Bienenfeld, while expressing the Federation's "absolute opposition" to the ITA, also endorsed the free Ride On concept. She also referred to the successful approach in Houston TX, where - without increasing taxes or creating an ITA - the city boosted transit ridership by using data to analyze existing routes and make changes. They came up with a new route system that placed more of their existing buses "where people use and need them" the most. "No one wants the BRT, and certainly no one wants the ITA," she said in her testimony. "Stick a fork in it."

Nancy Abeles of Bethesda argued that the new tax burden the ITA would place on residents and businesses would "further weaken our ability to compete in the region."

Route 29 resident Harold McDougall said he feels the ITA and tax proposals reflect a growing gap "between the citizens and the people who make decisions that affect their lives."

County Executive Ike Leggett testified and accused ITA detractors of making false statements. Leggett said he never proposed a $1.8 billion BRT plan. Silver Spring resident Harriet Quinn begged to differ, saying Leggett's plan was actually $3 billion.

Strathmore-Bel Pre Civic Association representative Max Bronstein criticized the "vague and elastic language" of the ITA legislation, and argued that self-driving cars would make public transit obsolete.

Steven Poor was more blunt, saying there was "only one way to repair this proposal - throw it away." He noted that using state legislation would, in effect, give other counties a hand in our taxation policies. Poor predicted the ITA would prove as effective and efficient as the WSSC and WMATA, to knowing chuckles from the crowd.

I thought Geri Rosenberg of Communities for Transit (which supports BRT) had a good suggestion - requiring ITA appointees to be transit riders. When the task force was asked by Bienenfeld who among them took transit to the meeting last night, only Del. Marc Korman (D-District 16) raised his hand.

Bonnie Bell of the Greater Goshen Civic Association, and also representing the Clarksburg Civic Association, said the County Council actually does have the power now to exceed the cap on property taxes if it wants. But that requires a politically-risky unanimous, 9-member vote, and "We all know that isn't going to happen," she said. "We do not support taxation without representation," Bell said, holding up a mockup of a license plate similar to the District's "Taxation without Representation" model.

Carole Ann Barth exhorted developers to finance the system if they want it. If they're not willing to do that, "you can't expect the rest of us to get on board."

"If MCDOT can't do their job," resident Cary Lamari said, "put someone in there who can do the job," not an ITA. "Give Gino the job," Lamari advised, pointing to union leader Renne. "I bet you it gets done."

Rockville construction update: Renaissance Street (Photos)

Renaissance Street has been in the news recently for having a name that neighbor Choice Hotels would very much like to change. That's because the new street's name is similar to a competing hotel brand.

But today, we're taking a look at the street itself, which is coming together nicely even as the Rockville Planning Commission considers what it may eventually end up being called.

Beyond the barricades 

Looking back toward
E. Middle Lane

Backyard chickens to be legal in Rockville July 1

Which comes first, the backyard chickens or the election? It turns out, the backyard chickens, after the Rockville City Council passed an animal ordinance last night that would permit up to 5 hens in a backyard with several restrictions.

The update of the animal ordinance, which was spearheaded by Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr, had a number of elements that the Mayor and Council could agree upon. Those included registration of cats, and trap-neuter-release guidelines for feral cats. Councilman Tom Moore said he was "deeply impressed" by Palakovich Carr's work on the legislation.

But only one of their colleagues, Councilmember Virginia Onley, joined them to approve the new ordinance in a 3-2 vote that surprised few by the end of the discussion. Mayor Bridget Donnell Newton and Councilmember Beryl Feinberg both voted against the measure.

Newton said the backyard chicken provision in the ordinance "pits neighbor against neighbor," and ignores the evolution of once-rural Rockville into a denser, suburban residential area. She argued there must have been good reason for a previous Mayor and Council to ban backyard chickens in 2006. "What kind of city do we want to be," Newton asked, but said that given the positives of the resolution she was "disappointed to vote against this."

Feinberg was the most vocally-opposed to the chicken provision, citing a long list of unanswered questions, health and safety risks, loopholes in the proposal, and not least, resident opposition.

She argued that the costs alone were troubling, saying she was skeptical that a $25 fee could cover all of the costs to the city. "I don't think we can make any assumptions" of how many residents would seek to raise chickens, she said. Feinberg said there were many potential loopholes and problems in the resolution, which she said would be compounded by the fact that the city does not have a regulatory body to shape regulations to implement legislation.

"Votes should not be cast...without some notion on how they will be implemented, Feinberg said.

Among unanswered questions for Feinberg were:

• a lack of guidance on maximum coop sizes, potentially leading to "Taj Mahal coops" popping up in Rockville backyards
• 
  
• the potential for a resident opposed to chickens being surrounded by 15-20 of them on adjacent home lots
• 
  
• noise - Feinberg said comparisons of chicken noises to dog barks were "disingenuous"
• 
  
• not enough documentation provided to the Mayor and Council on complaints filed about chickens in other jurisdictions that allow them
• 
  
• feather pecking and cannibalism
• 
  
• avian flu virus
• 
  
• chicken waste contaminating ground water
• 
  
• salmonella risk to humans
• 
  
• frostbite and coop fires from non-compliant heating rigs for coops in winter
• 
  
• no specificity on breeds

Overall, Feinberg deemed the resolution a "far-reaching change" with lacking controls for implementation. She also said many residents were vehemently opposed to the chicken measure.

Palakovich Carr said emails to the city on the chicken issue were running 87 in favor and 88 opposed. How many of those writing were actually citizens of Rockville, Feinberg countered. Palakovich Carr said they all were residents.

"It's about the liberty of our citizens," Moore said. All of the surrounding jurisdictions allow chickens, he noted. To Feinberg's request for more data, Moore said, "We're never going to have a all the information we could possibly have." He noted the restrictions included in the ordinance would likely disqualify a majority of backyards in the city from having chickens anyway.

"We're not turning Rockville into farmland," Onley said.

Feinberg made a last ditch effort to delay implementation of the chicken provision until January 1, 2016. That would allow time for community outreach and education about how to raise chickens safely, and smooth the transition, she argued. "If you want this, let's do it right," she concluded.

Palakovich Carr suspected the amendment was simply a stalling tactic, to allow the next Mayor and Council to undo the ordinance before it could take effect. She asked Rockville Police Chief Terry Treschuk if the city would be ready to enforce the new ordinance on July 1. Treschuk noted that all such major changes require a grace period, and a "velvet glove on an iron fist." But he expressed confidence that the city would be ready. "We're ready when you are," Treschuk told Palakovich Carr.

Feinberg's amendment failed on a 2-3 vote. Newton cast the other vote in favor of the delay.

Along with the Council's recent loosening of the city's school capacity standards, the chicken issue drew strong responses from residents on both sides. Both votes will likely resonate in the city elections this November.

One of the few declared 2015 council candidates, Brigitta Mullican, attended the meeting and spoke in opposition to the backyard chicken measure.

Photo courtesy City of Rockville

Mellow Mushroom coming to Rockville Town Square (Photos)

Mellow Mushroom, a pizza chain that proudly declares its roots in the hippy culture of the 1970s, is coming to Rockville Town Square. Touting a unique, "Classic Southern pizza," Mellow Mushroom is also promising to bring a craft beer list customized to the Rockville location. One has to wonder if that would include Rockville's own Baying Hound Aleworks...

Mellow Mushroom will have a Beer Club for you to join, and your membership card will earn you points and rewards.

While the general structure of the menu is similar to the typical neighborhood pizza parlor, you'll find whimsical pizza names from the 70s (and earlier) like Magical Mystery Tour and Kosmic Karma. Maybe the Magic Mushroom soup is what you prefer? Or perhaps the decidedly un-Southern menu items like hummus or cheesesteaks?

Mellow Mushroom will be located at 33-A Maryland Avenue, formerly home to Oro Pomodoro.

For Eyes opening on Rockville Pike (Photos)

For Eyes has leased a space by Roy Rogers, in the new retail center on the former location of Rockville Ford/Century Ford at 718 Rockville Pike. They are just beginning the construction process, however, as you can see from these photos. They got totally photobombed by the classic Lincoln Town Car in the background of the above photo, too.

Chevrolet Spark EV arrives in Rockville (Photos)

The new Chevrolet Spark electric vehicle has arrived at Ourisman Chevrolet in Rockville. Available for only around $13,000 after tax breaks, it is revolutionary for that reason - making an electric car affordable to almost any consumer.

Maryland is one of only 3 states where the car is sold, and the first on the East Coast.

Rockville Mayor & Council change rules on their compensation for travel, events

Much ado about nothing, or greater transparency? A discussion of how compensation for the travel and event registration for Rockville's Mayor and Council would be dispensed appeared to come out of nowhere at Monday night's meeting, but was actually in response to a past request by Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr.

Mayor Bridget Donnell Newton asked Acting City Clerk Sara Taylor Ferrell if the discussion was initiated by any abuse by an elected official. "There has never been any abuse by the Mayor and Council on travel in my time here," Ferrell answered.

Palakovich Carr said she wanted to have "more transparency, more guidance about how those funds get spent." Currently budgeted at $20,000 per year, and within one fund to cover the Mayor and Council's travel and event attendance, Palakovich Carr suggested it would be "more fair to have individual allocations for each of us," rather than the bulk sum.

"I understand the spirit of that," Councilmember Beryl Feinberg said. "On the other hand, I think elected officials get the trust of people that they are going to act judiciously."

Councilmember Tom Moore had a different take. "It starts to look like a slush fund," he said, adding that he would like unspent travel funds to be returned to the taxpayer. A fundraiser for the Stepping Stones Shelter, for example, was not "educational", he said, and shouldn't be covered by the fund.

Moore made a motion that staff divide the budget.

Onley said, "I think giving everybody a bucket of money is a mistake. We're spending wisely. It has not been abused by any Mayor and Council."

"Do you want to vote transparency or not," Moore asked.

"It's unfortunate that the term 'transparency' is being mixed in," Newton replied, arguing that the Mayor and Council are ambassadors for the city not only in the county, but also at the state level.

Moore's motion failed 3-2, with Newton, Onley and Feinberg dissenting.

Palakovich Carr then made a motion to prohibit using the fund to cover the travel and event expenses of spouses.

Onley said she thought covering spouses' attendance at events was "the right thing to do."

"It's indefensible," countered Moore. "I strongly support" Palakovich Carr's motion, he said. "It's the right thing to do. Most other jurisdictions do not allow this." Feinberg said she would like to see actual data on that point.

Palakovich Carr said attendance by spouses was merely social, not educational.

Newton said her marriage "is a partnership. Sometimes Fred [Newton] is a better ambassador than I." It's "inaccurate to say that spouses attending events are not helping the city." Onley noted that no spouse has ever been compensated for travel in Rockville. "We've managed that money very well," she said.

Moore said he thought the Mayor and Council's stipends were a more appropriate source to pay for travel and registration fees.

Ultimately, Palakovich Carr's motion passed 4-0, with Feinberg abstaining.

A second motion by Palakovich Carr also passed, unanimously, to prohibit incumbent elected officials from spending on events or travel after Election Day, when they might no longer be in office.

"I don't think anyone sitting here would do that," Onley said.

"I am actually stunned that it even needs to be brought up as a motion," Newton said. "I'll vote for it, but I'm disappointed. I think we should have more respect for each other."

Puzzled by what was driving the flurry of motions on the travel issue, Feinberg theorized that "this is symptomatic of other things, I believe," without elaborating on that point.