JBG pursuing Gold LEED for Homes certification for The Terano in Rockville

The JBG Companies announced it is pursuing a Gold LEED for Homes certification for its Terano development at 5720 Fishers Lane in Rockville. A 214-unit apartment building near the Twinbrook Metro station, The Terano has several features designed to meet the indoor air quality and health standards required for the certification under the LEED for Homes program.

These include a no-smoking policy, a mechanically ventilated HVAC system that delivers a constant flow of fresh air, high-efficiency HVAC filters that reduce airborne dust and particles, energy-saving low-emittance windows, low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) paint, adhesives, and Green Label Plus-rated carpet.

Light-colored roofing cools the "heat island" effect of urban buildings, and Energy Star appliances and built-in Smart Meters add to energy efficiency.

This is the first project JBG has applied to the U.S. Green Building Council LEED for Homes pilot program for certification.

Photo courtesy The JBG Companies

Rockville Mayor and Council 2015 debates scheduled

With about 40 days until Rockville elects its next Mayor and Council, and the first time it will elect them to a 4-year term, the candidate debate schedule is starting to fill up.

Here are the forums scheduled so far:

October 7 (Televised on Channel 11)

Rockville Chamber of Commerce Debate - 7:00 PM
Thomas Farm Community Center, 700 Fallsgrove Drive.

October 14

Senior Citizens Commission Debate - 1:00 PM
Rockville Senior Center, 1150 Carnation Drive.

October 20

College Gardens and Woodley Gardens Civic Associations Debate - 7:30 PM
Rockville Senior Center, 1150 Carnation Drive.

October 22 (Televised)

League of Women Voters Debate - 7:00 PM
F. Scott Fitzgerald Theatre, 603 Edmonston Drive.

October 27 (Televised)

King Farm Citizen's Assembly Debate - 7:00 PM
King Farm Community Center, 300 Saddle Ridge Circle.

Mayoral candidates are incumbent Bridget Donnell Newton, and challenger Sima Osdoby.

Council candidates are Beryl Feinberg, Rich Gottfried, David Hill, Brigitta Mullican, Virginia D. Onley, Julie Palakovich Carr, Mark Pierzchala, Clark Reed, and Patrick Schoof.

There are 4 council seats.

Rockville Mayor and Council want more comprehensive proposal on outdoor smoking before voting

Banning smoking in outdoor areas in Rockville was discussed at last night's Mayor and Council meeting, but ultimately city leaders decided they want the final measure to be more uniform and comprehensive.

Councilmember Beryl Feinberg initiated the discussion by asking whether the measure should extend to off-leash dog parks, vaping or e-cigarettes, and asked for more detail on how much signage would cost for the city.

There was also a sense that the city should do more than just regulate smoking in and near parks and playgrounds, or just in Rockville Town Square.

When the topic of whether or not the ban could or would apply to RedGate Golf Course was raised, Assistant City Manager Jenny Kimball noted that Montgomery County has not banned smoking at its golf courses. Councilmember Tom Moore felt Rockville should take a bolder approach.

"Just the fact that Montgomery County hasn't banned smoking at golf courses does not speak to the health or safety of it," Moore argued. "This is a product that kills people." With a broader measure, Moore said, "Rockville could have a leadership role on this issue."

Councilmember Julie Palakovich Carr asked city staff if Rockville's contract with RedGate's management, Billy Casper Golf, would have to be renegotiated. Timothy Chesnutt, Director of Recreation and Parks, suggested such a negotiation would "have to wait until the next lease." Moore strongly disagreed with that, saying that municipal rules can and do change all the time, and that the city would be under no obligation to negotiate with Billy Casper before implementation of any smoking ban.

Mayor Bridget Donnell Newton said she also would favor a ban at RedGate, and a citywide ban on smoking in outdoor dining areas, rather than one just in part of the Town Center. Federal Realty, which developed and owns Rockville Town Square, objected to the proposed ban, saying that its restaurant and bar tenants would be at a disadvantage. Other restaurants a few blocks away would have been exempt, and there would be confusion over boundaries and enforcement, the developer argued.

Moore pointed to the experience of Bowie, where the municipality reported no negative impact on restaurants from a similar smoking ban. Palakovich Carr also said she would support a citywide smoking ban in outdoor dining areas.

While there is a clear majority and consensus among the Mayor and Council for taking a bolder approach, Newton suggested holding a public hearing on a final draft ordinance before taking a vote. "To be inclusive, we need to bring the public in," she said, as well as the businesses that would be affected by the change.

Staff was instructed to draft an ordinance that would ban smoking in outdoor dining areas citywide, in all city parks, and on the outdoor plaza at Rockville Town Square. Comments regarding enforcement should be solicited from the police chief, and the cost of signage should be tabulated, as well, before this is brought back for further discussion, the Mayor and Council agreed.

World of Beer posts Coming Soon signage in Rockville Town Center (Photos)

It's not news anymore that World of Beer is coming to The Upton luxury apartments in Rockville Town Center. But the restaurant has put up its first official Coming Soon signage on its future space across from the Regal Cinemas.

The sign is still promising 500 beers, and it will be very interesting to see if that is possible under Montgomery County's outdated liquor laws.

D.C. Council punks MoCo's Transit Task Force with 10 hour public hearing

Bus Rapid Transit - are you
ready to pay 5 new taxes for
...this?

Yesterday I reported on the Montgomery County Task Force shutting off sign-ups for its September 30 public hearing after only a few hours Wednesday. Apparently, some on the task force are incapable of sitting and listening to more than 50 speakers.

A supporter of the task force posted a comment on my article, saying the task force shouldn't be expected to listen to citizens until 3:00 AM. But Wednesday night, the D.C. Council did just that.

BRT will have its own lane,
and take a car lane away
from you on some of
MoCo's most-congested
roads, reducing automobile
capacity by 33% on those
routes

District of Columbia elected officials held a public hearing from 5:00 PM Wednesday until 3:00 AM Thursday morning, listening to 70 speakers and additional city officials beyond that number.

Now, of course, the sensible thing to do in either jurisdiction would be to hold a second hearing, to accommodate the number of residents who wish to comment.

But what a great contrast. On the same day the task force shut off the phone lines, and shut out citizens to ensure a short evening for themselves (and let's be realistic, to limit the number of negative citizen comments, and make the opposition to the Independent Transit Authority and Bus Rapid Transit appear to be smaller than it is), the D.C. Council put in an all-nighter.

Embarrassing.

Rockville Historic District Commission unanimously approves County request to move Confederate statue

The Rockville Historic District Commission voted unanimously last night to grant Montgomery County permission to relocate the Confederate soldier memorial statue from the grounds of the historic Red Brick Courthouse. Commissioner Jessica Reynolds made the motion, and it was seconded by Commissioner Anita Neal Powell.

As part of her motion, Reynolds included a request that the new site of the statue be within the City of Rockville, and on public property where it can remain accessible to residents or historical walking tours and other educational opportunities.

"We would be fine with that language," Greg Ossont, representing the County's Department of General Services said prior to the vote. The request is not legally binding on the County.

Each commissioner made a brief statement, with all supporting moving the statue.

Commissioner Craig Maloney noted the statue is "an important piece of our history." Rockville was indeed a city divided during the Civil War, with a number of prominent residents supporting or even fighting on behalf of the Confederacy. Several notable Confederate figures passed through Rockville during the war.

But, Maloney said, "150 years have given us a different perspective." He recalled how the statue had been "defaced with the words, 'Black lives matter.' I would go a step further, and say black values matter. The value of a Confederate statue does not make the [Confederate] cause right or just."

Powell concurred. "I cannot support keeping the statue where it is," she said. "When I think of history, I think of that place across from the statue. I can tell you that until the murders took place in South Carolina, many people did not know the statue was there. It just doesn't fit into the history that I know," Powell concluded.

Reynolds said that in her personal view, "I would find it hard to support leaving the statue where it is, based on the information we have. However, the statue does have a lot of value in its own right." One positive result of moving the statue, she said, is that it would be better protected from vandalism.

Chair Rob Actmeyer said, "Our historic resource is the Red Brick Courthouse" itself. "I don't see how the statue contributes to the Red Brick Courthouse. I agree with Jessica in the sense that the statue has been in Rockville for over a hundred years, [yet] it has not been declared historic."

Achtmeyer's assessment did bring a disagreement among several commissioners on whether or not the statue itself was indeed a contributing resource to the site, and whether it therefore deserved historic protection.

Maloney, while being quite clear that he did not favor keeping the statue there, said it nevertheless did have some standing within the context of its current location. [As an editorial note, I will also add that it is one of the few remaining vestiges of Rockville's historic downtown, most of which was demolished in the "urban renewal" of the 1960s and 70s.]

"It is not directly related to the Courthouse per se," Maloney conceded. But "it is typical of the statues" erected during that time period by Confederate heritage groups. "It is part of that legacy. We have one. It's in the context of the Courthouse, whether we like it or not. Does it deserve some protection as part of that historic site? I don't know. Maybe it does."

Perhaps sensing a potential legal argument that could be made, supporters of keeping the statue where it is attempted to share more information with commissioners, but were told they were out of order, as the public comment portion of the meeting had closed. One person made a motion from the floor to reopen it. Achtmeyer could find no support on the dais for doing so, and rejected the motion.

With the vote in its favor, the County now has one year to move the statue, and two six-month extensions. If it does not move it before that time, it will have to return to the commission again for permission.

Reynolds told statue supporters that this vote wasn't the final word. She urged them to contact the County Executive and County Council and make their opinions known to those who do have the final say on the statue's ultimate fate.

Public shut out of MoCo Transit Task Force "public" hearing

Task Force

report suggests

5 new taxes on

County residents

to pay for BRT

The Montgomery County Transit Task Force is at it again, attempting to shut an angry public out of a so-called "public hearing" September 30 at 6:00 PM. To be held once again in the 3rd floor hearing room at the County Council Building at 100 Maryland Avenue in Rockville, the hearing is ostensibly for the public to comment on a Public Draft of the "Report of the Task Force".

This document was supposed to be posted on the Transit Task Force website "on or about" September 16, 2015. Then the public was supposed to have a chance to sign up to comment on it. A set of arbitrary rules were imposed prior to the sign-up "window" opening.

To quote the Task Force hearing announcement (which I have not seen in either of the two newspapers widely-circulated in the County so far):

Members of the public wishing to speak at the forum must sign up between Wednesday, September 16 at 9 a.m. and Wednesday, September 30 at 10 a.m. To register to speak, call 240-777-7165, Monday through Friday, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.; TTY users call Maryland Relay. People signing up must provide their name, address and contact information. Those registered to speak may not substitute or cede time to others.

A maximum of 50 people will be able to present their views during the public forum. Speakers will have three minutes to make their comments and are encouraged to submit written remarks – which may include additional information and materials. If 50 people sign up before September 30, no additional names will be accepted and there will not be a waiting list.

These ground rules were unacceptable and unorthodox in themselves, as is the 6 PM start time, when most citizens are stuck in traffic trying to commute home.

Seriously - 50 people can speak, in a county of 1,000,000, on a ton of new taxes that will be paid by residents countywide?

Then things went from bad to ridiculous on Wednesday.

When I called only a few hours after the phone lines opened, I was told all 50 speaking slots had already been filled. And that my name was being put on a contingency list.

A county public hearing filled and closed to the public after just a few hours on the first day of signups? Outrageous.

First, I'd like to see the list of these 50 people, and find out how many of them are from the MoCo political machine, developers and organizations overtly or covertly funded by development interests.

But secondly, this arbitrary decision should not be permitted to stand.

The taxpayers should demand to be heard at this "public" hearing.

If any member of the Transit Task Force is incapable or unwilling to sit and listen to public testimony for as long as it takes, he or she should resign immediately. They are clearly not up to the task the County Executive has charged them with, if that's the case.

Even if some on the task force are too lazy to sit in a chair for a few hours to listen to the public, they should at least be scheduling a second hearing, so that those of us citizens who have more energy than they do can testify.

Now, about that report.

The TTF writes that it considered alternative ideas to replace the proposed ITA, and like Bill Clinton's famous "I've worked harder on this than anything I've ever done in my life," reached the shocking, surprising conclusion that what it (and the developers behind the curtain) want - the ITA - remains the only solution.

Page 12 contains a laughable argument for Bus Rapid Transit (one of the major reasons the County needs the ITA, as BRT won't qualify for federal funds, and the $5 billion BRT system couldn't be funded without exceeding the Ficker amendment cap on property taxes), claiming it is needed to keep all of the jobs that supposedly will be coming to MoCo from going to other jurisdictions.

This argument is preposterous on two fronts. First, the County has failed to attract a single major corporate headquarters in over decade. So, under the current moribund business climate, there aren't any jobs coming. But BRT will allow urban redevelopment of suburban areas like Rock Spring, Wildwood, Georgetown Square, Aspen Hill, etc. Those mixed-use developments will only create jobs for baristas and jeans-folding boutique salespeople. Only a moron would spend $5 billion to attract low-wage retail/restaurant jobs.

Finally, the TTF has proposed changes to the ITA bill that will again go to the state legislature in Annapolis in the coming months.

It has recommended staggered, 4 year terms for a 7-member governing board for the ITA. Interestingly, it suggests the possibility of term limits, which the County's political machine has fought against for decades for other offices. Is this an acknowledgement that term limits work? Interesting.

The ITA would be required to submit its Capital Improvements Program (CIP) budget to the Council for review and approval, as well as the operating budget for the ITA itself, and the transit projects it oversees and operates.

Amending the ITA budgets would follow the same process as amending those of County agencies, the report states.

Eminent domain seizures would have to be reviewed and approved by the Council, as well.

The report also suggests "that any tax rate set by the authority shall be subject to disapproval by the Council."

It should be noted, however, that this current language does not impose the same political disincentive to the Council as the Ficker Amendment cap does for property taxes. Therefore, it would be far less likely that a majority of members would vote to disapprove of the ITA tax rate. The Ficker cap requires all 9 members of the Council to vote for a tax increase over the charter limit.

There is also a provision for an "excise tax" "not to exceed 30 cents per gross rentable square foot of leased commercial space, subject to disapproval by the Council."

Speaking of the Ficker charter limit cap on property taxes, the TTF says that provision is now outdated, since the state legislature passed the Maintenance of Effort law which requires education funding to be maintained at an equal or higher level each year. It therefore says it favors allowing taxes to exceed the charter limit, but with some restrictions on the amount. It also suggests other sources of revenue that could be substituted for property taxes.

Those proposed revenue sources include the aforementioned excise tax, a local-option sales tax, an employment withholding tax, and a congestion tax. Heard enough yet?

The report veers back into laughable territory in discussing the serious issue of the higher interest rates the ITA would have to pay for revenue bonds, compared to the lower rate the County could get. Dismissing these concerns, the report says, "if there is such a premium it is likely to be insignificant."

Say what?

Several funding scenarios laid out seem to overestimate federal and state contributions, and lowball construction and operating costs.

And all of the taxes suggested are regressive, flat taxes, that would hit lower-income residents the hardest.

They want you to pay; they just don't want to hear your response.