[0:00] Keep the other key though because that
[0:01] does open the doors down here. So don't
[0:05] >> that should get you into the
[0:10] Yeah. No.
[0:14] » And then we want to do it or you want
[0:18] » That's right. We needed to do that for
[0:20] tonight, didn't we?
[0:21] >> I was waiting for
[0:23] you.
[0:30] » Tell you what,
[0:48] so
[0:49] I feel I'm supportive of it.
[0:56] How many people say
[1:01] noticing
[1:20] staff really supports it because there's
[1:21] just still
[1:24] >> you support it if it was a
[1:26] Yes, just just that the problem is I
[1:29] guess just that the measurements don't
[1:32] really match up
[1:35] at the same time we take you know at
[1:36] their word they place 10 ft
[1:39] >> but we could also ask Neil to go look at
[1:41] it
[1:43] >> sending like verification or something
[1:45] >> you know
[1:46] >> sounds I should have I should I had Neil
[1:49] talk to them directly a while ago and it
[1:52] sounded like something else you However,
[1:55] we need to get
[1:57] start.
[1:57] >> This needs to be on the record. Whatever
[1:59] you're going to do about this.
[2:01] >> Okay.
[2:04] >> Thank you for the information. Bring it
[2:05] into the record.
[2:09] » Yeah.
[2:15] » May I be let in?
[2:18] >> Who needs to come in?
[2:20] >> Just me.
[2:20] >> Oh,
[2:23] hey.
[2:28] That was enough.
[2:31] » Oh my god.
[2:36] » Yeah.
[2:38] >> He just handed it to me.
[2:39] >> I feel like this is this was Matt's
[2:41] throwing away gift.
[2:43] >> Oh, that
[2:48] be
[2:50] August. This is definitely July. Sorry.
[2:56] This is not You don't have to read this.
[3:00] >> Okay.
[3:04] » Oh, you didn't. Okay. We did not. Oh, so
[3:06] it's a good idea to read the read. This
[3:08] is
[3:09] >> Yeah. Okay. I'll read the whole thing.
[3:10] It's fine.
[3:12] >> Whatever.
[3:14] That's fine. That's number one.
[3:23] It's going to be tough. Okay. Are we
[3:25] ready? Anybody in the waiting room?
[3:28] We'll go ahead and let them in. It's
[3:31] 7:05.
[3:55] Everybody ready? Susan, Alex.
[4:01] » Awesome.
[4:02] >> Okay.
[4:05] Going to call to order the Wednesday,
[4:08] September 16th town council meeting. Um,
[4:12] and I want to welcome those who are
[4:15] visiting us on Zoom.
[4:17] And the first item, oh, you know, we
[4:19] didn't put the pledge of allegiance
[4:21] since we are in person. We haven't had
[4:23] that on here for a while. So, could I
[4:25] make an amendment to the agenda uh to do
[4:30] the pledge of allegiance?
[4:32] >> Do we need a motion?
[4:32] >> Could I have a motion?
[4:33] >> I'll move to amend the agenda to add the
[4:36] pledge of allegiance to the American
[4:38] flag.
[4:39] >> Is there a second? I second.
[4:41] >> All those in favor?
[4:42] >> Okay. Well, let's do the pledge of
[4:44] allegiance.
[4:46] >> I pledge to the flag of the United
[4:49] States of America and to the republic
[4:52] for which it stands, one nation under
[4:55] God, indivisible, with liberty and
[4:57] justice for all.
[5:00] >> I think we haven't done that so long.
[5:02] Glad I still remember it. [laughter]
[5:05] Okay. All right. Um, if I would do a
[5:08] moment of silence, I I just want to read
[5:11] something that I received in the mail.
[5:15] Here I am again. The first anniversary
[5:18] of the tragic death of James Everett
[5:21] Anderson. February 1st, 2009.
[5:26] September 9th or excuse me, September
[5:29] 21st, 2025
[5:32] is approaching and bringing to mind the event of that evening. James would
[5:42] have been starting his senior year at
[5:45] Wheaton High School with a great future
[5:49] ahead of him. I hope and pray the safety
[5:53] for pedestrians project at University
[5:56] Boulevard West is still on your to-do
[5:59] list. Sincerely, Teresa Lip Pike. Lips
[6:04] her writing. It's Lipsky, the grieving
[6:08] great grandmother of James. So, as his
[6:12] one-year anniversary of his death
[6:14] approaches us, let's keep him in mind.
[6:18] Is there anything else that we would
[6:20] like to remember?
[6:26] Okay, we can just bow our heads for a
[6:28] moment.
[6:41] Okay, thank you very much. Was wondering
[6:44] if maybe we should send a note back to
[6:48] Miss uh Lipsky and letting her know
[6:51] where we are
[6:52] >> with the project.
[6:55] >> Yes, I can do that.
[6:57] >> Would you like to do that? Let me give
[6:58] you um the card and her address. Yep.
[7:01] >> And if you would follow up with that, would be great.
[7:03] >> Absolutely.
[7:04] >> Thank you, Stuart.
[7:06] >> Okay. All right. Uh we have the approval
[7:08] of minutes. Um everybody received um
[7:11] this long list of minutes. We will go
[7:14] one by one to approve them. I think you
[7:17] captured everything on the minutes. We
[7:20] had a few uh but not too many on all of
[7:23] them.
[7:24] >> One was to remove the zoom and one was
[7:26] to add the motions.
[7:28] >> Okay.
[7:29] >> All right. Uh could I get a motion to
[7:32] approve the confidential close session
[7:35] minutes for uh June 4th?
[7:38] >> Sure. I will move that we approve the
[7:42] confidential close session minutes from
[7:44] June 4th, 2026. Is there a second?
[7:47] >> Second.
[7:47] >> All those in favor?
[7:49] >> I.
[7:50] >> Okay. Organizational meeting on July
[7:52] 15th.
[7:53] >> I move that we approve the town
[7:55] organizational minute meetings from July
[7:57] 15th, 2026.
[7:59] >> Is there a second?
[8:01] >> Second.
[8:01] >> All those in favor?
[8:03] >> I.
[8:03] >> Okay. Town council meeting on July 15th.
[8:06] >> I move that we approve the town council
[8:09] meeting minutes of July 15th, 2026.
[8:12] >> Is there a second? I
[8:14] >> all those all those in favor?
[8:16] >> I
[8:18] uh special town meeting minutes for um
[8:21] excuse me for the public close session
[8:24] minutes for September 11th.
[8:25] >> I move that we approve the special town
[8:26] meeting minutes from September 11th,
[8:29] 2026.
[8:30] >> Is there a second?
[8:32] >> A second. All those in favor?
[8:34] >> Okay. Um the public close session
[8:37] meeting minutes for September 11th. move
[8:39] that we approve the public close session
[8:41] minute uh meeting minutes from September
[8:44] 11th, 2026.
[8:45] >> Is there a second?
[8:47] >> I second.
[8:47] >> All those in favor?
[8:49] >> I.
[8:49] >> Okay. And then the last one, the
[8:50] confidential closed session for
[8:52] September.
[8:53] >> Move that we approve the confidential
[8:55] closed session minutes of September 11,
[8:58] 2026.
[8:58] >> Is there a second?
[8:59] >> Second.
[9:00] >> All those in favor?
[9:02] >> Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. All
[9:04] right. The first item on the agenda is
[9:06] the announcement of a violation and oral
[9:09] summary of open meetings compliance
[9:11] board decision 20cb-265.
[9:16] All right. The announcement of violation
[9:18] of summary and of opinion 20 OCB-265
[9:22] 2026. This announcement and summary are
[9:24] provided as required in section 32-2-211
[9:30] of the general provisions anointed code
[9:34] of Maryland. Various complaints were
[9:36] filed by a resident against the town
[9:38] with the open meetings compliance board
[9:40] under the open meeting act related to
[9:43] closed sessions, notice minutes, closing
[9:45] statements, and the public's right to
[9:47] attend meetings. The board found the
[9:49] town council violated section 3-302 and
[9:53] section 3-303
[9:55] by failing in several meeting notices to
[9:58] make clear that the body would meet
[9:59] first in open session before convening
[10:02] in a closed session. Section 3-302
[10:07] A by A by failing to use the reasonable
[10:11] method of making an agenda available to
[10:13] the public before a meeting section
[10:15] 3-305D
[10:18] by omitting request details and by
[10:24] declining the resident request to
[10:26] inspect a written closing statement the
[10:28] morning after the meeting. section 3-305
[10:32] D6 by failing to post written closing
[10:35] statements online when it was practical
[10:37] to do so and section 3-306 by failing to
[10:41] post minutes online when it was
[10:44] practable to do so and by admitting
[10:46] required details from one set of
[10:48] minutes.
[10:50] The board suggested that the notices of
[10:52] open sessions convene only to go into a
[10:55] closed session more explicitly state
[10:57] that the council will meet in open
[10:58] session before closing a meeting, such
[11:01] as including the following. The council
[11:03] will meet in open session only for the
[11:05] purpose of voting to close its meeting
[11:07] to discuss matters that the open
[11:09] meetings act permits it to be it to
[11:12] discuss in close session. The town will
[11:14] adopt a suggestion. The board found the
[11:17] town did not violate the act in the
[11:19] manner in which it provided notice for
[11:21] the May 7th, 2025 meeting notice or the
[11:24] January 5th, 2026 meeting notice. That
[11:28] notice on June 4th, 2026 close session
[11:31] was compliant, that there was no
[11:33] violation based on the complaint that
[11:35] the June 4, 2026 meeting agenda lacked
[11:38] an item for approval of the minutes of
[11:41] the May 18th, 2026 open session. no
[11:45] violation that the May 7, 2025 agenda
[11:49] did not provide a reason for why the
[11:51] town council intended to convene in
[11:53] close session as this is not required
[11:56] and no finding with respect to whether
[11:58] the council prepared written closing
[12:01] statements before entering close
[12:03] sessions. I am required to make this
[12:05] statement by law but it is not an
[12:07] admission of a violation of the open
[12:09] meetings act by the town.
[12:12] Okay,
[12:14] any questions?
[12:16] >> Mayor, if you could pass the down both
[12:19] sides. Council member should sign on the
[12:21] back.
[12:28] » Not seeing any hands.
[12:34] » Joe.
[12:36] >> Yeah, thanks, Mayor. I wasn't sure if
[12:38] you were asking um the council if they
[12:40] had questions or if uh that was a uh
[12:44] invitation to the audience.
[12:46] >> It's invitation the audience. I'm sorry.
[12:47] to lose my
[12:48] >> Okay. Um I you know I've read the
[12:51] opinion of the board and uh um I find
[12:55] this to be a disappointing development
[12:57] that doesn't speak very well to the
[12:59] health of local democracy in Kensington.
[13:02] I also say that uh Alcar deserves a good
[13:04] deal of credit for bringing the
[13:05] complaints to the attention of the open
[13:07] meetings compliance board. This could
[13:10] not have been a very popular move, but
[13:12] I'm glad it was done because it did um
[13:17] it did uh [sighs]
[13:19] identify several violations and and
[13:22] repeat violations and it this whole
[13:24] opinion is is um is very thorough and
[13:27] it's worth reading closely. I have a
[13:30] couple of questions, mayor. Uh, simply,
[13:34] how did this happen?
[13:36] With whom does responsibility for these
[13:38] violations uh reside? Is it is it with
[13:41] the town attorney for not properly
[13:46] providing adequate legal counsel and
[13:47] guidance to the to the town council?
[13:50] Does it reside with the former town
[13:52] manager for failing in an oversight
[13:55] capacity to make sure the staff and
[13:56] council fulfill provisions of the open
[13:58] meetings act or or does it principally
[14:00] reside with the mayor for being
[14:02] unfamiliar with the requirements of the
[14:04] open meetings act? I ask these questions
[14:07] because you know at the local level town
[14:10] representatives
[14:11] are or ought to be very transparent and
[14:14] accountable to towns people whom they
[14:16] represent. Accountability of course is a
[14:18] key element of a healthy local democracy
[14:22] and this detailed ruling which deserves
[14:24] to be closely read by everybody on the
[14:26] council um describing multiple
[14:29] violations is is is a symptom I think of
[14:31] the unhealthy state of local democracy
[14:33] in Kensington.
[14:35] So um and it's not like open meetings
[14:37] act guidance or even coursework is is
[14:41] hard to track down. The Maryland
[14:43] Municipal League, as you know, offers
[14:45] courses and instruction and and guidance
[14:47] on this very frequently. So, I'm I'm
[14:50] curious as to how this happened. How did
[14:52] this happen?
[15:05] Joe, uh,
[15:08] your your questions are very valid and I
[15:10] appreciate I think everybody up here
[15:13] agrees that transparency and following
[15:17] all of the rules are what we are
[15:19] attempting to do every single day. I do
[15:22] encourage everybody to read it. It is,
[15:24] you know, the uh OMCB goes to great
[15:28] lengths to make people aware of how the
[15:32] Open Meetings Act is meant to function.
[15:36] And what we attempted to do, some of the
[15:40] alleged violations, which were
[15:41] unfounded, were simple oversightes. We
[15:44] did not post something on our website
[15:47] exactly in the time frame that we were
[15:48] supposed to. We, you know, we
[15:50] acknowledge that we are working to
[15:52] improve those processes. Um, we had
[15:55] agendas for a meeting
[15:58] inside of the agenda for another
[15:59] meeting. Again,
[16:02] you know, those are things that can get
[16:03] cleaned up. I don't think there's
[16:05] anything nefarious that was being done.
[16:07] There was nothing trying to be hidden.
[16:08] We were working quickly. Um, you know,
[16:11] errors happened. Uh, appreciate that it
[16:13] was brought to our attention so that we
[16:15] can improve. We're always looking to
[16:17] improve, Joe. And um I think your
[16:20] questions are extremely valid. We take
[16:22] it all very very seriously. I know
[16:24] everybody has read the OMCB opinion,
[16:28] right? We have inquired uh to the town
[16:32] attorney to make sure that our processes
[16:34] are improving. Um, I sat with the town
[16:37] attorney and the mayor to go over the
[16:39] checklist that we have to do for closing
[16:42] statements to make sure that it is fully
[16:44] up to date, that it is compliant, that
[16:46] it is got all of the information not
[16:49] just of OMCB but also the attorney
[16:51] general's recommendations and we are
[16:54] folding in areas that we were advised
[16:56] could be better um that are clearer that
[16:59] allow us to do things in the meeting in
[17:01] the moment so that our our clerk can
[17:04] capture
[17:06] all the activities
[17:08] as they are being discussed and we can
[17:10] have the documents ready. Um so to that
[17:13] I say you know we accept every of every
[17:16] one of the recommendations inside of the
[17:18] opinion
[17:20] and we are putting in the processes to
[17:21] improve it.
[17:27] Okay.
[17:28] All well and good but uh really doesn't
[17:30] answer the questions I had as to how
[17:32] this happened. Where does primary
[17:34] responsibility rest for these
[17:36] violations?
[17:38] I it's a simple question and and uh I
[17:41] think it's a straightforward uh
[17:44] straightforward question as well.
[17:48] » Yeah. I mean um
[17:51] as the elected body, the primary
[17:54] responsibility resides with us, Joe.
[17:56] That's why we are here to tell you we
[17:57] accept it. Uh the mayor read the opinion
[18:00] statement. Um, we're working to improve
[18:03] those processes. I mean, there's, you
[18:06] know, we, for lack of better
[18:09] terminology, we own it. We are the
[18:11] council. Uh, we have oversight of it. We
[18:13] have, you know, we are the governing
[18:15] body. It it resides with us.
[18:23] One last question. And isn't there a a
[18:25] member of the town council, perhaps it's
[18:27] the mayor, who is um has had training in
[18:31] the open meetings act and its
[18:33] requirements
[18:34] and is essentially the open meetings act
[18:37] point person for the council and um if
[18:41] there is no point person, will there be
[18:43] one designated to keep this kind of
[18:45] thing from happening again?
[18:48] >> So to your point, the Maryland Municipal
[18:50] League provides training. I think a
[18:52] number of us have been through it. Um I
[18:55] speaking for myself I've been through
[18:57] it. Um
[19:00] with regard to yes the the immediate sit
[19:03] down after receiving the opinion was how
[19:06] can we improve our processes right
[19:08] starting with the checklist starting
[19:10] with how an agenda is formated uh
[19:13] formulated starting with um adding
[19:16] additional information to the agenda to
[19:18] ensure that the public knows that when a
[19:21] meeting is being held solely for closed
[19:25] purposes that it will be open first,
[19:27] right? These are seemingly small things,
[19:30] but these are now things that we are
[19:32] building into our processes so that the
[19:34] agenda for those meetings reflect all of
[19:36] the necessary information and that the
[19:39] closing statement form and you know,
[19:42] checklist we go through. It has all of
[19:45] the required parts and updated our
[19:48] process so that we as a council with the
[19:51] mayor and the clerk will go through the
[19:53] closing statement as a matter of the
[19:56] agenda and we will have it completed so
[19:58] that it is prepared at the end of that
[20:01] closing meeting. So we are we're
[20:03] addressing all of those things and I do
[20:04] I appreciate you you know bringing it up
[20:07] uh and and asking your questions.
[20:10] >> Yeah, thank you. Uh, who though on the
[20:12] council is the point person on
[20:14] compliance matters with the open
[20:16] meetings act? Is there is somebody on
[20:18] the council been trained and is
[20:20] designated as the point person? Is it
[20:22] the mayor? Is it one of the council
[20:23] members?
[20:24] >> Yes.
[20:25] >> Yeah. I was just confirming um you know
[20:28] I've received training. I think many of
[20:29] us have received training from MML. Um
[20:32] it is offered routinely. We will, you
[20:35] know, I think as the MML meeting cycle
[20:37] comes back around, right, it's great to
[20:39] go back in and have a refresher. Um,
[20:41] there's no requirement to have an
[20:42] appointed person between the council who
[20:46] is responsible for the activities of
[20:48] this body. We are all making a
[20:51] commitment to seeing that the opinion is
[20:54] held up and we have a clerk who is going
[20:56] to be keeping that record for us.
[21:00] >> Okay, let me just try one more time. If
[21:02] council members have
[21:02] >> there's nobody directly appointed Joe if
[21:04] that is your question as a body entirely
[21:07] we are doing it
[21:08] >> is I if [laughter] if council members
[21:10] have received MML training on the open
[21:12] meetings act then why did this happen
[21:14] how did this happen was why were
[21:16] provisions
[21:17] >> not respected of the open meetings act
[21:20] >> Joe um
[21:21] >> I can't get an answer I mean I've asked
[21:22] this several times I can't get a
[21:24] straight
[21:24] >> you don't like the answer you're getting
[21:26] >> I don't get a straight answer to the
[21:27] question answer there were errors made
[21:31] errors were made.
[21:32] >> How were they made? Why were they made?
[21:34] There were meetings that were occurring
[21:35] on Zoom, right? Where
[21:38] >> because there is no place to meet, we
[21:40] were meeting electronically and we put
[21:42] that into the agenda. That wasn't
[21:44] actually a violation. We put a Zoom
[21:47] meeting out, people knew, but being able
[21:50] to post things when we are not in the
[21:52] same building, right? We we did not get
[21:55] things in the time that the OCNB
[21:57] guidelines, the open meetings act
[21:58] guidelines ask us to.
[22:01] Those are things that we are
[22:03] traditionally in person. Um but when we
[22:05] don't meet, those are new processes that
[22:07] we have to improve, right? That's how
[22:10] things happen. We are working in a way
[22:12] that is a little bit atypical from our traditional style of being here in
[22:18] person. Um we will work to improve that.
[22:31] Okay. I don't see any other hands.
[22:33] Council, do you have any questions?
[22:35] Good.
[22:36] >> No, it's it's fully signed with town
[22:39] attorney.
[22:42] >> Okay.
[22:44] Excellent. Thank you. All right. Uh a uh
[22:47] we want to uh recognize or acknowledge
[22:49] that um our uh facilities manager
[22:53] Shirley Watson has um had her 30y year
[22:57] anniversary of service to the town. And
[23:00] we want to thank Shirley for all of
[23:01] those years. Uh and on B, uh Susan
[23:06] Engel, our clerk treasurer. This is her
[23:08] 25th year of service to the town of
[23:10] Kensington, and we would like to
[23:11] acknowledge that as well. Sienna, way to
[23:15] go.
[23:19] » Thank you.
[23:21] >> Okay. Um, number C, uh, the mayor and
[23:24] council held a special town council
[23:25] meeting on the purpose of the closed
[23:27] session on Friday, September 11th,
[23:28] pursuant to the general, uh, provision
[23:31] article section 3-305B1
[23:37] uh, and seven close session code of
[23:39] Maryland discussion the following uh,
[23:43] appointment, employment, assignment,
[23:44] promotion, discipline, demotion,
[23:47] compensation, removal, resignation or
[23:50] performance evalu Valuation of employees
[23:53] of appointees, employees or officials
[23:56] over whom it was has jurisdiction or any
[23:59] other personal matter that affects one
[24:01] or more Pacific individual specifically
[24:04] to discuss the process to fill the town
[24:07] manager position. Number two, a separate
[24:10] employee issue involving a Pacific
[24:12] individual and to consult with council
[24:14] to obtain legal advice concerning same.
[24:17] Three, close session public m minutes
[24:20] are attached.
[24:24] Any questions from the council or the
[24:28] on TV?
[24:30] Okay. All right. Number three, 10311
[24:34] Summit a Avenue variance hearing. Uh,
[24:37] Alex, do you want to take that one?
[24:39] >> Sure. So, it looks like the homeowners,
[24:42] um, Kevin D and Christy Cavalado are on
[24:44] the call. They're requesting um a
[24:47] variance for the northeast corner of
[24:50] their property. There's been a rear
[24:52] edition u a screen in deck in the
[24:55] backyard and uh the variance is for an
[24:57] encroachment of about 6 in in that rear
[25:01] corner of the property
[25:04] and they're on the call uh if you have
[25:06] any questions.
[25:07] >> Okay,
[25:09] council, do you have any questions?
[25:11] There was some issues regarding the
[25:14] couple of inches. Is that correct?
[25:16] >> Um, yes. Let me ask of the homeowners
[25:19] first. So, Christy and Kevin, uh, hey,
[25:21] welcome back.
[25:22] >> Hi.
[25:23] >> Been a little while.
[25:24] >> Um,
[25:24] >> thanks for, uh, taking the time to
[25:26] consider our request.
[25:27] >> Yeah. Um,
[25:30] the I was looking at the aerial photo.
[25:32] Is So, the screen porch is just going
[25:34] over where you have some of the concrete
[25:36] padding now.
[25:37] >> Yes. It's it's uh basically in line with
[25:40] our pro with our our home just moving
[25:42] straight back. The only reason we have
[25:44] the encroachment is because like our our
[25:47] house is 90 degrees perpendicular to the
[25:49] road, but our lot is caned. So just the
[25:53] very back end of of of the screen in
[25:56] porch would encroach within the 10 the
[25:58] town's 10-ft uh limit
[26:01] >> by six inches.
[26:02] >> Yes.
[26:03] >> Yeah. How what how dare you build a
[26:05] house that is not perfectly
[26:07] perpendicular to your side lot? Um
[26:10] >> then everyone's houses would be crooked
[26:11] if the way the lots are growing up. So
[26:15] >> the the drawing that we saw from
[26:17] planning what is the I'm just curious
[26:19] the depth of the screen porch. What are
[26:20] the dimensions of the screen porch? Uh
[26:23] >> oh, I didn't print it out.
[26:26] >> Hold on.
[26:26] >> Alex, do you have the the thing? because
[26:29] I actually
[26:30] >> we're on my wife's computer and I don't
[26:32] have that in front of me, but it's uh I
[26:35] want to say
[26:36] >> it's tw it's the same width as the
[26:38] house. So I believe that's 22 feet and
[26:40] then the depth was
[26:43] >> closer to 14
[26:44] >> 14 or 16 feet. I can't remember offhand
[26:45] exactly should say there though.
[26:48] >> And so then ultimately as we understand
[26:50] it the encroachment that that you're
[26:52] asking for variance is in the very call
[26:55] it northeast corner.
[26:57] >> Yes. where you're going to, you know,
[26:59] put down a footer, build a screen deck.
[27:02] That corner of the house is going to go
[27:04] in and out. We feel fairly confident,
[27:07] uh, six inches from plan submitted and
[27:09] building inspector
[27:10] >> based on, you know,
[27:11] >> just towards the back there.
[27:12] >> Yeah. Right. You're north like the
[27:15] corner that's going up towards Nolles
[27:18] Avenue.
[27:19] >> Yes.
[27:20] >> Yeah. Okay.
[27:22] Those are my initial questions.
[27:24] >> Yeah. Nate, do you have any questions?
[27:25] >> I don't. Um I think the staff report was
[27:27] pretty pretty clear. Um no more
[27:31] question. I don't have any questions.
[27:32] Thanks.
[27:32] >> Okay.
[27:35] >> Um I am just curious about where you are
[27:38] in the process. So you've had um it
[27:41] looked like they were stamped plans from
[27:42] the county. So the countyy's already
[27:45] >> Yes.
[27:46] >> issued the permit. I know their setback
[27:48] requirements are different from ours.
[27:51] >> Um
[27:52] that's all I was curious about.
[27:54] >> Okay. Stuart,
[27:56] >> any objections from the neighbors?
[28:00] » Not that not that we're aware of. And
[28:03] we've had this sign up, I know, for
[28:05] >> for a bit. There's a big sign in our
[28:07] front yard with a number to call.
[28:10] that
[28:11] >> and I think our neighbors on the one
[28:12] side that it would actually and I I
[28:15] don't see it really impacting because it
[28:17] is like such a small amount on that back
[28:19] corner but uh I I believe that there's
[28:22] like renters there so we don't really
[28:24] even know
[28:25] >> we don't know them or or really see them
[28:28] so we haven't had a chance to but there
[28:30] has been no complaints even if they stop
[28:32] by.
[28:33] >> Okay. Nothing further from me there.
[28:35] >> Okay. Is it possible to when the
[28:38] foundation goes in just to have um Neil
[28:41] measure it just to make sure we're at
[28:43] that six inches?
[28:44] >> Sure.
[28:46] >> He's done that before.
[28:47] >> Okay. I just think that's a good idea.
[28:48] We don't want to have a problem later.
[28:51] >> Yeah. I would highly support that.
[28:54] >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you could
[28:55] >> We don't either. We don't want to take
[28:57] anything down.
[28:58] >> Okay.
[28:59] >> We're trying to check all the boxes
[29:00] here.
[29:01] >> Sure. Yeah. I just think that would be a
[29:02] good idea to have it measured before
[29:04] even I guess even before you pour the
[29:06] concrete you could just have the
[29:07] foundation measured make sure Okay.
[29:12] >> All right.
[29:12] >> Um is it worth mentioning why we would
[29:16] be granting the variance?
[29:17] >> You really should.
[29:18] >> So everyone Yeah.
[29:18] >> Well, I think we should probably be
[29:20] clear about that. So maybe I'll read it
[29:21] from the staff report if you have it up
[29:23] if someone else has. Okay.
[29:25] >> So there are um it's a three-part test
[29:27] when a variance is requested. Um, in
[29:30] this what we're looking at is are there
[29:33] specific situations or conditions that
[29:35] are peculiar to the property that makes
[29:37] it unique from neighboring properties,
[29:38] including but not limited to the shape,
[29:40] either narrowness or shallowess of a
[29:42] lot, topography, historic significance
[29:44] or environmental features um or other
[29:46] extraordinary conditions unique to that
[29:48] property. the con and the conditions
[29:50] must result from the application of
[29:52] building or zoning standards not from
[29:54] the action inaction or personal
[29:56] circumstances of the properties owner or
[29:58] the owner's predecessors. The second
[30:01] would be um is what you're asking for in
[30:04] your variance the minimum necessary to
[30:06] overcome the unique condition of the
[30:08] property and then the third would be uh
[30:11] is in what you are requesting is it not
[30:13] detrimental to neighboring properties or
[30:15] the community as a whole. So what the
[30:18] staff report looked at was um you know
[30:22] the staff is recommending granting the
[30:23] variance to allow the encroachment. Uh
[30:26] it is you know a minimum necessary
[30:28] amount it is 6 in um you know to council
[30:33] member Sparker's question it you know
[30:35] the sign has been up in your yard. Um
[30:37] neighbors have had the opportunity to
[30:39] weigh in on this. We have not received
[30:41] anything correct Alex. Um, so the town
[30:44] has not received anything that stating
[30:46] any, you know, detrimental impact to
[30:47] neighboring properties or the community
[30:49] as a whole. Um, but what we are looking
[30:51] at is I made a joke at the light of it
[30:54] to, you know, Mr. Jones, but the house
[30:57] and the lot while both rectangular are
[31:00] not align. And so the house is angle at
[31:04] the northeast corner is angled slightly
[31:06] toward the property line. That is not
[31:08] your fault. Um the house is trying to be
[31:12] oriented to the street but your lot was
[31:14] not. Um and so you are trying to enjoy a
[31:16] screen yard in with minimal impact and
[31:19] you're asking for a variance of uh into
[31:22] the sideyard setback of 6 in to which I
[31:25] individually and personally would be
[31:26] supportive of.
[31:27] >> Okay. I need to ask the uh people here
[31:30] or online if they have any questions
[31:33] before we take a vote.
[31:39] I'm not seeing any hands.
[31:42] Okay. Um, do we want to take a vote or
[31:45] was it council members want to make any
[31:47] other statements before we do that?
[31:48] >> We taking a vote to
[31:50] >> to support it or the
[31:52] >> but with uh town um with Neil verifying
[31:57] the distance.
[31:57] >> Yes, I think we should do that.
[31:59] >> The permit. Okay. Great.
[32:00] >> Yep. So um
[32:03] >> and you want a motion?
[32:04] >> I do. I would move that we approve the
[32:07] variance for
[32:10] 10311
[32:12] Summit Avenue
[32:14] um
[32:16] appending the permit approval from the
[32:19] uh from Neil Stab.
[32:20] >> Okay. Is there a second?
[32:22] >> Second.
[32:22] >> All those in favor?
[32:24] >> I.
[32:25] >> Okay. Thank you very much.
[32:26] >> Why does it say we would do something?
[32:28] >> Thank you very much.
[32:29] >> It has to come back.
[32:30] as a resolution as a
[32:33] resolution.
[32:34] Yeah. Right.
[32:35] >> Did they understand that?
[32:36] >> We'll tell you right now. Hey guys, we
[32:39] still a resolution has to be passed at
[32:41] the October meeting. Um
[32:43] >> we'd love it if you showed up, but uh in
[32:46] case there are any questions, I think it
[32:47] would be wise to be there, but a
[32:49] resolution will be drafted. Um so
[32:51] between now and then uh the permit uh
[32:54] will be satisfied and then we will be
[32:57] presented a resolution. We will vote on
[32:59] that and that is the approval of the
[33:01] variance.
[33:02] >> Okay.
[33:02] >> Fantastic. And when you say show up, is
[33:04] that in person or
[33:05] >> No, just just like you are now.
[33:07] >> Yeah.
[33:07] >> 10 p.m. 21 October.
[33:09] >> Yep.
[33:10] >> Okay. Great. Well, thank you so much
[33:12] everyone.
[33:13] >> Yeah. Thanks, everybody.
[33:14] >> Take care.
[33:14] >> Thank you.
[33:16] >> Okay. Um I know the parking uh analysis
[33:19] is up next, but I'd like to move the uh
[33:21] doorways to democracy and art exhibit.
[33:23] Since Carrie's here, I'd like to move
[33:25] that forward so she could It should be
[33:27] relatively short. You want to just give
[33:29] a brief?
[33:30] >> Yeah, you just go up there. You have to
[33:32] go up there and just give your name and
[33:33] just your street.
[33:40] » Yes. So, this is little art show that
[33:42] some of the neighbors have put together.
[33:45] I was working on a project
[33:48] and we found some old doors and anyways
[33:52] we created
[33:54] democracy and each day has the message
[33:57] of how we can do to support our
[34:00] democracy.
[34:02] So, there's 20 doors. There's um I'll
[34:04] hand this around. You guys can take a
[34:06] look at it.
[34:06] >> I think I think this is good enough. You pass this around. This is good
[34:10] enough.
[34:10] >> Can I just ask before you go further?
[34:12] Could you please state your name for the
[34:14] record so everyone knows?
[34:15] >> Wait.
[34:16] >> Okay.
[34:16] >> And I actually live in North Chubby
[34:18] Chase.
[34:18] >> Thank you.
[34:19] >> Thanks.
[34:20] >> So, um we had a lot of fun doing it and
[34:23] um it's an upbeat thing. It's fun and um
[34:27] we're closing the show down. We did it
[34:29] about over a year ago and we've had it.
[34:31] We showed at um the Chvy Chase Women's
[34:34] Club. They loved it for Fourth of July,
[34:35] but last year, not this year. And um
[34:38] elections are coming up and so I
[34:40] thought, well, we need to close it down
[34:42] because I have 20 doors and I need to
[34:44] get rid of them. So anyways, we're um
[34:47] going to sell the doors for $500 a piece
[34:49] from the League of Women Voters and um
[34:52] we're looking for a place to show show
[34:54] it. And we need one day only. We only
[34:56] need I tried to Tracy and we um we don't
[35:00] need as much as what we were asking for.
[35:02] So we were thinking it would be great if
[35:04] we can have it on October 24th and next
[35:07] to the farmers market at your um Mnt
[35:10] Bank property and then um we'll we'll
[35:14] remove it that night. So it would go
[35:17] over to Metro Vintage Market um the next
[35:20] day and they said that they disclose the
[35:22] doors Yeah. that we don't sell. So
[35:25] that's the plan. I did a draft
[35:27] invitation. I don't know.
[35:29] >> I I sent it out to the council so
[35:31] they've seen it. Yeah.
[35:32] >> Yeah.
[35:33] >> Okay. Great.
[35:34] >> Yeah. That's just
[35:34] >> So it would just be for the day.
[35:36] >> So and u I've talked to Alex and the
[35:39] building will still be there.
[35:40] Unfortunately, we're working on it, but
[35:43] it'll still be there and then they would
[35:45] just show it in that area. Uh I I knew
[35:48] you'd asked about closing the parking
[35:49] lot. I can't really do that because of
[35:51] the um
[35:52] >> because of the market, but I think we
[35:54] can just close the circle around the
[35:57] building itself.
[35:58] >> And maybe we could put a few um doors on
[36:00] the trees just laying among the campers.
[36:03] >> But yeah, you know, we'd set it up that
[36:04] morning. It would everything would be
[36:06] moved over the night before and then
[36:07] we'd set it up that morning.
[36:09] >> It should be a lot of fun.
[36:10] >> Okay. So, uh is there a weather thing if
[36:14] it's pouring rain that weekend? It's
[36:16] still
[36:16] >> We're just gonna do it rain or shine.
[36:18] It's okay.
[36:19] >> You know, one shot deal and no official
[36:23] art things.
[36:23] >> Okay. So, I just wanted to bring it
[36:25] forward to the council just to make sure
[36:27] you guys were okay with what they were
[36:29] showing and because it would be on town
[36:31] property.
[36:33] >> You guys have any questions? Yeah.
[36:34] >> No. Uh first of all, thank you for doing
[36:36] this. These are fabulous and I so much
[36:37] appreciate the the uh the approach. Um
[36:41] >> the town is doing a Walktober event on
[36:44] October 24th, which is the art walk.
[36:48] It just happens to work out really well
[36:49] if you did that.
[36:50] >> No, I did. Yes, you did.
[36:52] >> Yeah. Yes, you did. Um,
[36:54] >> so people will be out and about walking
[36:56] to hopefully already do this.
[36:57] >> Look at our
[36:58] >> Yeah, we were going to I was going to
[37:00] say we were going to start uh around
[37:02] Oldtown Market and we can make our way
[37:03] there. But it's I don't I didn't hear I
[37:06] don't recall you saying what time you
[37:07] would start.
[37:08] >> I'm thinking 10 to 5, but I think
[37:09] >> that's perfect. No, no, 10 to 5 is
[37:11] perfect because we start at 10:30. So
[37:12] we'll bring a whole hopefully a big
[37:15] group over and do that on the tour.
[37:17] >> So next weekend, you know, it's
[37:19] Halloween and I thought that would be
[37:20] distracting and then the elections are
[37:21] November 4th. So there you go.
[37:23] >> Perfect. And thanks for
[37:24] >> you know it was funny because Beth
[37:25] Pierce asked about um possibly doing the
[37:29] U building and you know having a paint
[37:31] since it was going to get torn down, but
[37:33] I think this is a better option. So
[37:35] there actually isn't that much to paint
[37:37] in that area. It's good. What I one
[37:39] thing I would really love is if they
[37:41] just mow the grass around it. So
[37:42] >> yeah, I think there was some uh uh
[37:45] misunderstanding that that we said
[37:47] public works over there, but they were
[37:48] doing around the build, you know, not
[37:51] the front the building itself. Yeah. So
[37:54] I think there was some misunderstanding.
[37:55] So if you can explain that to Pablo to actually do around the building, not
[38:00] the around the lot itself.
[38:04] >> Yeah.
[38:04] >> Well, we are absolutely thrilled. Can I
[38:06] say um town of Kensington and Metro
[38:09] Vintage Gallery present doorways to
[38:10] democracy? Can I use you guys? Can you
[38:13] be
[38:13] >> Do you have any objections to adding
[38:15] putting the
[38:16] >> I don't It's on our property.
[38:17] >> No.
[38:18] >> How many doors was it again? 20.
[38:20] >> We have like 24 artists.
[38:23] >> Are they going to be there?
[38:24] >> A lot of them.
[38:24] >> Okay, that's good.
[38:26] >> Yeah, it'll be fine.
[38:27] >> Is there any way you can I don't
[38:28] remember if the flyer had the artists
[38:30] names. Is it possible to add them?
[38:32] >> Yeah, I'd love to do that. And also, um,
[38:34] yeah, that sounds great. And, um, Okay,
[38:38] that sounds perfect.
[38:39] >> Could I also recommend um that when you
[38:42] set them up, have some not just behind
[38:45] the building, but in the front to
[38:47] >> drive? Definitely in the front.
[38:48] >> The whole
[38:49] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[38:51] >> Right. Okay.
[38:52] >> And just to just to be sure, you said
[38:54] you're going to set them up and take
[38:56] them down in our town crew.
[38:57] >> No, no, the crew is just going to do the
[38:59] gardening.
[39:00] >> The gardening. Okay. Yeah, we have
[39:02] products and stuff like that.
[39:05] >> Does any anybody else have any you guys
[39:07] any questions? You guys good?
[39:09] >> Uh, anybody online or here have a
[39:12] question?
[39:15] >> I'm not seeing any hands. Okay, Carrie,
[39:16] thank you very much.
[39:17] >> Thank you.
[39:18] >> Be a lot of fun.
[39:20] >> Thank you.
[39:23] >> Okay. All right. Now, let's get down to
[39:25] the Walker Consultants parking analysis
[39:27] update. Yeah,
[39:29] >> I'll start and Stuart, please um fill
[39:32] in. So, uh for those of you that follow,
[39:36] um town council closely, you know that
[39:38] we have a parking task force that is
[39:41] made up of residents um business
[39:44] representatives and others to examine
[39:46] the parking pressure that we've
[39:48] experienced, especially in the
[39:49] commercial core and the um adjacent uh
[39:53] residential streets. And one of the
[39:55] things that we've done this past uh year
[39:58] is engage Walker consultants to do an
[40:02] analysis. We had a presentation of their
[40:05] first um uh compilation of data and
[40:09] evidence from their you know multiple
[40:12] walking of the neighborhood uh digital
[40:15] recordkeeping around turnover
[40:17] um measuring where the compression and
[40:20] the hotspots are. And now we're into the
[40:23] next phase of the study, which is to
[40:25] present a set of recommendations. So,
[40:27] what was included in the town council
[40:29] packet that was sent out publicly was
[40:32] their draft plan uh I'm sorry, their
[40:34] draft um set of recommendations with a
[40:37] summary of those. We had a discussion
[40:40] with them um and are ready to um preview
[40:46] for you the recommendations. Uh
[40:49] hopefully you had a chance to look at
[40:50] it. I will highlight very briefly
[40:52] because it is a very dense report and it
[40:55] is just the draft report. They are
[40:57] making adjustments to it after uh
[41:00] talking with the task force but I want
[41:03] to highlight some of the top findings.
[41:04] So first would be to focus on improving
[41:09] wayinding and signage. This is both
[41:11] physical and digital. There's a lot of
[41:13] room for improvement and directing
[41:15] visitors, employees, and residents um to
[41:20] uh where they can park using available
[41:22] public lots first, but also updating all
[41:25] the digital maps online um with
[41:28] directions for parking. So, that's first
[41:30] step that they emphasized. Uh second
[41:33] would be to upgrade our technology. We
[41:36] are still chalking tires. We are still
[41:39] doing written tickets. Um, and there's
[41:43] tremendous, I think, efficiencies that
[41:45] we can gain if we move to digital
[41:47] handheld systems. So, we're examining
[41:50] that option. All of this, I understand,
[41:52] comes with costs. We haven't gotten to
[41:53] that point yet. We will. That's the next
[41:55] phase. Um, and also do some targeted
[41:59] curbside management where maybe we need
[42:01] to adjust the um, parking limits where
[42:05] we do have uh, pressure.
[42:08] um that needs to be combined with
[42:11] enforcement. This was a big point of
[42:13] emphasis throughout the analysis and
[42:15] throughout their initial findings. Um as
[42:18] we've discussed before, it's great to
[42:20] have signage, but unless you are
[42:22] enforcing it, you do not change
[42:24] behavior. And so we've had conversations
[42:27] at the task force level with the
[42:29] consultants about whether we need to
[42:30] make adjustments to when we have um
[42:33] staff. Our code enforcement officer um
[42:36] who is enforcing you know all of our
[42:38] code, not just our parking um is not
[42:41] typically here on weekends or evenings,
[42:43] which is often when we have the most
[42:44] parking uh challenges. And so that's
[42:48] something that we would like to examine
[42:50] with staff and the council is shifts
[42:52] that could be made on the personnel
[42:54] side.
[42:55] Finally, the recommendations include
[42:58] examining public private partnerships
[43:01] for parking. Um, doing employer and
[43:04] business outreach so that as their
[43:06] employees come in for work, we're
[43:08] helping them uh perhaps broker
[43:11] agreements uh to use lots nearby for
[43:15] longer stay parking. Um and ultimately
[43:19] uh these set of recommendations in their
[43:22] estimation at this point they think
[43:24] would have a measurable impact on the
[43:27] turnover and the overall management.
[43:30] They did not come out with a finding
[43:33] saying we needed to move to paid
[43:34] parking. In their view they thought um
[43:38] that we have pretty considerable
[43:40] capacity. It's just poorly managed and
[43:42] poorly signed. And so their
[43:45] recommendation was to start with the
[43:46] improvements that they've outlined here
[43:49] and see um how it goes. So I want to ask
[43:53] Stuart to add anything to that and then
[43:54] we want to talk about next steps because
[43:56] we would like them to come forward with
[43:58] the final report and there's more
[44:00] analysis and deliberation that needs to
[44:01] happen.
[44:02] >> Yeah. Yeah. The only thing I would add
[44:04] and and I think kind of echoes to a lot
[44:06] of the things we've heard from the task
[44:07] force is um the enforcement really will
[44:11] start to hopefully even out some of the
[44:13] areas we've seen um higher demand for
[44:17] parking. um some kind some have
[44:19] characterized it as hot spots, but I
[44:21] think through enforcement and through
[44:23] better signage, they hope to have better
[44:26] way finding and folks can identify
[44:27] easier places to park that are still
[44:29] close to the business core while
[44:30] alleviating a lot of the um demand for
[44:33] parking in residential areas. So, I just
[44:35] want to make sure we address that
[44:36] specifically as well.
[44:39] So, in terms of next steps, well, one,
[44:42] we'd love to hear any questions you have
[44:44] that should be considered now while
[44:46] they're revising the report. But in
[44:49] terms of next steps, we've talked about
[44:51] having them present publicly the
[44:54] recommendations in October. We could do
[44:56] it maybe as an add-on to the October
[44:59] 21st meeting. It's hard to know how full
[45:01] that agenda is, but I think you need at
[45:03] least an hour for this conversation. the
[45:05] community forum that we did went a
[45:07] little bit over an hour and then even
[45:10] then after public discussion around the
[45:13] recommendations I think there needs to
[45:15] be further analysis with the task force
[45:18] uh and town staff to price out and think
[45:23] about like budgeting and management
[45:25] implementation wise uh what we would
[45:28] recommend to the council um based on
[45:31] this analysis and these recommendations.
[45:33] Obviously, some of them are easier to do
[45:35] and lower cost to do and some of them
[45:37] will take a little more um study and
[45:40] planning to do.
[45:43] >> Do you think having a meeting a public
[45:47] meeting before the town council meeting
[45:50] in October is a good idea? I mean
[45:53] >> to do it at
[45:54] >> start before
[45:57] I mean we'd probably need to start at
[45:59] least by 530 at the latest but you know
[46:02] maybe five would be better.
[46:04] >> Yeah. I mean it might mean
[46:06] I I would want the town council to be
[46:09] there right to so I don't know if it
[46:12] means extending the town council
[46:14] meeting.
[46:15] >> Yeah. We had we had talked about um
[46:19] having W come in basically give like the
[46:21] oral representation of their report to
[46:23] the town publicly. I mean, you have our
[46:24] you have Anthony and our
[46:26] characterization of the task force
[46:27] characterization of it, but I think
[46:29] having Nigel and Megan who are true
[46:30] subject matter experts come in, be able
[46:32] to ask questions, answer questions, be
[46:35] really compelling. And then from there,
[46:36] we in task force can come back and do
[46:39] the analysis that we need to do to come
[46:41] back to the town and say, right,
[46:42] >> okay, they presented a lot of stuff.
[46:45] We've actually sat back, we've mapped
[46:46] with town staff, we've done the
[46:48] analysis, and we can come back with
[46:50] these four are reasonable. Now, these
[46:52] three are, you know, a little further
[46:53] out. We need to do something like that.
[46:55] I don't know if that's It might give us
[46:56] a little bit more breathing room. Is
[46:58] this is dense and it is It is very
[47:00] thorough.
[47:01] >> Okay. I'm I'm kind of thinking a sec a
[47:04] different night be better, but that it's
[47:06] just me.
[47:06] >> Yeah. But they I mean, they presented
[47:09] already the analysis,
[47:11] >> but not the recommendations.
[47:13] So,
[47:15] is it necessary to go through all the
[47:17] background again other than making it
[47:19] available um all of the technical
[47:21] details and all of the GIS analysis they
[47:24] did and the walking study or just the
[47:27] recommendations?
[47:28] >> This is just a walk through the
[47:30] recommendations
[47:30] >> an hour.
[47:31] >> You think so? With the
[47:33] >> residents questions and everything. My
[47:35] thinking it would be like questions from
[47:36] the town council, questions from the
[47:38] residents, public, whoever attends would
[47:41] then give the task force some direction
[47:44] >> to then hone in on the recommendations.
[47:48] >> But maybe we could just move the town
[47:50] meeting to 7:30 instead of 7.
[47:52] >> Start at 6.
[47:53] >> Yeah.
[47:53] >> Do you like 6 and start at 7:30?
[47:56] >> Yeah,
[47:56] >> I'd be okay with that.
[47:57] >> I just Yeah, I think we need that extra
[47:59] time.
[48:00] >> Yeah. I don't know what's on the agenda
[48:02] for October, but I
[48:03] >> Well, I don't think Well, it's hard to
[48:05] tell right now, but Well, we will be
[48:07] approving a variance, but we've already
[48:08] done the hard part.
[48:10] >> Uh doing a re resolution. Um
[48:13] >> yeah, let's let's do let's just have the
[48:15] town meeting start at 7:30.
[48:17] >> Okay,
[48:18] >> sure.
[48:19] >> Yeah.
[48:19] >> So, you want to wait on question hold on
[48:21] questions until then?
[48:22] >> You can ask questions now. I This was a
[48:25] preview of like what's to come.
[48:26] >> I'll get all my questions out now. Yeah,
[48:28] please let us know because we're in
[48:30] discussion. Yeah. Yeah.
[48:32] >> Okay.
[48:34] >> Go ahead. Go ahead.
[48:36] >> First of all, my pen ready.
[48:37] >> First of all, I know that Connor will
[48:38] have twice as many as I do, so I'm gonna
[48:40] go first.
[48:41] >> Um
[48:43] I know that uh others on the council
[48:45] have praised you guys for what you've
[48:47] done in leading this. And I just want to
[48:49] add my my um kudos to you because it is
[48:52] a really remarkable set of data that
[48:56] have been collected, analyzed, digested
[48:59] and then put into I think very clear
[49:02] terms even though it is a bit long for
[49:05] what can be recommended. And I think
[49:06] each one seems to have been carefully
[49:08] weighed and and and um and and and just
[49:12] it's very evidence-based and data driven
[49:14] which I think is fantastic. So, um,
[49:17] great leadership and thanks to everybody
[49:18] who's been on the parking task force.
[49:21] Um, I my questions actually are more
[49:23] about, um, just clarifications from what
[49:25] I what I see in here. The first was just
[49:27] around the first this point about
[49:29] enforcement. To me, it's not it made me
[49:31] ask myself, I actually don't know when
[49:33] Annie goes out and tickets someone, how
[49:35] do we actually how do we enforce that in
[49:37] the first place? I know the mechanism
[49:39] for it, but how do we actually ensure
[49:40] that someone is paying on that ticket?
[49:43] >> It goes to Montgomery County. So that's not clear.
[49:46] >> They're not paying us. We don't make
[49:47] >> I didn't see it clear that they're not paying it. And the second
[49:50] was um if we move to this CMS system,
[49:53] which I think it's citation management
[49:56] system or the virtual permit management
[49:58] system,
[50:00] is it still the going somehow back to
[50:03] the county um to then enforce that was
[50:07] it wasn't really clear. Does it make our
[50:09] lives and the onus on our staff that
[50:11] much more difficult or does it actually
[50:12] make it a little easier?
[50:14] >> I mean, we talked a little bit about
[50:15] this um when they were sharing these
[50:18] recommendations. One, there are there
[50:20] are handheld systems that already
[50:23] integrate with the county system. Okay.
[50:25] >> So, in that sense, it would be an
[50:27] efficiency and a time saving. And we
[50:30] talked about checking with Rockville and
[50:32] other jurisdictions to see exactly which
[50:34] of these handheld
[50:36] >> systems they're using. in the thing.
[50:38] Yeah.
[50:38] >> Um uh so that's one aspect. Obviously,
[50:41] it doesn't change the overall
[50:43] enforcement. We still they still collect
[50:46] the money and we get I think it's a 30%
[50:50] um
[50:51] >> oh from share of that.
[50:54] >> And why is it
[50:54] >> funding?
[50:56] >> It has to be
[50:58] >> above the
[50:58] >> I don't think it's I do not think that
[51:00] it's something that we have the con the
[51:02] power to change. I think that is set at
[51:04] the um
[51:06] >> even on our town
[51:07] >> county level
[51:07] >> that's we can we can run that down
[51:09] because I think that's
[51:10] >> yeah I believe it has to do with the
[51:11] court adjudication cost they they have
[51:13] to cover all the costs at the county
[51:15] level and then
[51:16] >> it trickles down to us so that that so
[51:18] the I know it's not no one's comfortable
[51:22] talking about these terms but the
[51:23] revenue that that is projected to
[51:26] generate with our new system have they
[51:28] run any analysis on how much we might
[51:31] generate from that in order to pay for
[51:33] an additional staff member or for the
[51:36] program to get the the software and so
[51:38] on. So, is it self financing? And if
[51:41] it's not,
[51:42] >> did the decision to not recommend paid
[51:46] parking factor into that? Um, but the
[51:50] fact that it was already going to be
[51:52] covered by the revenue it would generate
[51:54] because because I don't I didn't quite
[51:56] >> understand if that if it was just
[51:58] because it wasn't needed because of the
[51:59] demand and the hotspots wasn't necessary
[52:01] or
[52:02] >> might we want to think about adding it
[52:04] if if we can just cover the cost of
[52:05] implementing the program.
[52:07] >> Yeah. Um, great questions.
[52:08] >> Great questions.
[52:10] >> So, we had some initial discussion and
[52:12] we were literally googling during the
[52:14] meeting to get um cost estimates for
[52:17] these parking systems. the do
[52:19] >> and of course there are different um
[52:22] models but I if I recall correctly it
[52:24] was somewhere between 7 and 12,000 it
[52:27] was not a huge cost
[52:28] >> and then some maintenance costs.
[52:30] >> Yes, I'm sure there's a service
[52:31] agreement ongoing licensing and um so
[52:35] that was one of that's an example of
[52:36] like one of the follow-up items that
[52:38] came out of our discussion with them was
[52:40] to get better intel on the pricing. In
[52:43] terms of your second question about the
[52:46] recommendation that we didn't need to do
[52:49] paid,
[52:49] >> yes, their recommendation not to do paid
[52:51] at this point. I think it had more to do
[52:54] with the the latter point you made,
[52:56] which is that they felt we could manage
[52:58] the hotspots through these other methods
[53:00] first. Okay.
[53:01] >> What they did say was if you upgrade to
[53:04] a digital system that is integrated with
[53:06] the county system, that lays the
[53:08] foundation for you to later move into to
[53:11] paid parking and you'll have like the
[53:15] technology foundation to do that.
[53:17] >> Okay. Because I think if some of if
[53:19] these recommendations, it would be great
[53:20] to see what the cost estimates are, but
[53:22] having doing like theus and the
[53:25] partnerships, we'll we will likely have
[53:27] to make some budget allocation or
[53:29] payment. So, it' be great if it could be
[53:31] self financing. Yeah, exactly.
[53:33] >> So, right now our signs only they go
[53:35] till like 4, I think, Monday through
[53:38] Friday. Well, some are four, some I
[53:40] don't know of any five.
[53:42] >> Okay. But they're they're weekday
[53:45] >> and of course Annie leaves at 4.
[53:47] >> So um
[53:50] there's an hour not captured.
[53:52] >> Are we looking to maybe have extending
[53:56] an hourly parking
[53:59] >> or or no parking or for in the
[54:03] residential areas? One of the well and a
[54:07] couple things that they mentioned to
[54:08] that point was uh potentially amending
[54:11] Annie's time that she's on the ground
[54:13] moving her to the right a little bit so
[54:15] she starts a little later and that's
[54:17] based on when they've seen the hot spots
[54:18] start to pull.
[54:19] >> Sure. Yeah. I mean nothing happening at
[54:21] 9:00 or she comes in at 8 in the morning
[54:24] people are there 10 to you know 10 to 6
[54:25] or whatever and that would then cover
[54:27] some of the evening parking rush that we
[54:28] have with baby cat etc businesses. Um so
[54:31] that's one way they were talking about
[54:32] fixing it. the other way they were
[54:34] talking about uh and they did talk a
[54:35] little bit about maybe amending some of
[54:37] the times that were there. Um it
[54:39] definitely came up as part of the um the
[54:41] recommendation to change some of the
[54:42] times when things would be available.
[54:44] You could park in places. So it's not a
[54:46] single answer to my question. It's like
[54:48] multiple approaches to answer.
[54:50] >> Yeah. Because I mean I feel like
[54:51] especially after 4:00 the the uh train
[54:55] station starts to empty
[54:57] >> and then we'll have our lot you know up
[54:59] and going.
[55:00] >> Yep. And we haven't given those two a
[55:03] chance yet to really show because a lot
[55:05] of people don't know they're available.
[55:07] >> Yeah, absolutely.
[55:08] >> They don't they don't know they exist.
[55:10] So, okay. Okay.
[55:13] >> Um, so thank you. Is so just two more
[55:16] quick ones. Um,
[55:18] >> I had trouble understanding the uh the
[55:22] two options for the partnership
[55:23] agreements. Is there like a way you can
[55:25] simply convey to the the residents and
[55:30] the public what what the two options are
[55:33] or should we let that to Walker to
[55:34] explain?
[55:35] >> We actually asked if they could get us
[55:37] template agreements and examples of how
[55:40] other jurisdictions have done this
[55:42] because uh
[55:45] it was there's not as much detail there.
[55:47] >> Okay. Yeah.
[55:48] >> Yeah. It was like I read it like each
[55:49] one at least three times.
[55:50] >> Can you clarify for people who haven't
[55:52] read the report? Yes. So, for those who
[55:54] have not read the report, there um we're
[55:56] considering or we're recommended to
[55:59] consider doing um partnership agreements
[56:02] with some of the private businesses that
[56:05] have um parking lots that are vacant,
[56:08] otherwise not during business hours. and
[56:10] the suggestion is to go into one of two
[56:12] options of some sort ofou and
[56:14] partnership that would involve um
[56:17] potentially paying them to allow us to
[56:20] have that as a public lot and going
[56:22] through all the insurance and and and so
[56:24] on and so forth. But there's two options
[56:26] that um that are presented in the report
[56:29] that I think one is called a traditional
[56:31] approach and the other one's an after
[56:32] hours secondary parking use of
[56:34] classification. Um, and it's just not
[56:37] clear what that really means. At least
[56:40] when I was reading it to be it wasn't
[56:42] very
[56:43] >> Do Alan, do you have some experience
[56:44] here?
[56:45] >> Some Yes. Um, a number of privately
[56:50] owned parking lots in College Park were
[56:53] leased to the city for um use as parking
[56:58] and then they could also enforce it. And
[57:00] the main issue is insuring it.
[57:03] >> Mhm.
[57:04] >> And you can't insure something you don't
[57:05] have a property interest in.
[57:08] >> Oh, so that's why you need a lease
[57:09] agreement.
[57:10] >> That's why they did it that way. Yes.
[57:11] >> And that's the traditional approach.
[57:13] >> Uh that's what they did for many years.
[57:15] Uh it's it allows control. You have the
[57:19] control is very clear, the liability is
[57:22] very clear and you can ensure it.
[57:25] >> So that would be option one. Negotiate
[57:27] partnership. I unfortunately haven't
[57:29] seen this but um yeah it would that's
[57:32] >> canly
[57:33] >> so to your point of the biggest issue
[57:36] with regard to the example of college
[57:37] park has been which we've heard here too
[57:39] is liability insurance so you have to
[57:42] have an interest you have a lease does
[57:45] the duration of the lease matter could
[57:47] we go into a shortterm
[57:50] a specific event we want to have have a
[57:53] lease for that weekend or at least for
[57:56] the summer season or is Does the length
[57:58] and duration of the lease matter?
[58:00] >> You'd have to talk to Legit about that
[58:02] about because they have day of insurance
[58:05] also,
[58:06] >> which makes things easier sometimes.
[58:08] >> That's like a uh like a if you're having
[58:10] a party in the street, block party. And where I'm going with the question is
[58:14] simply there are sometimes where we know
[58:17] a specific event um or one of our
[58:19] specific businesses may be the driving
[58:21] factor behind parking and could they
[58:25] work out a you know event specific time
[58:28] frame lease with a with nearby lots if
[58:32] there's some mechanism to get them uh
[58:35] you know short-term the one day coverage
[58:38] >> if yes there there are ways to do that
[58:40] you And you can write a lease to make
[58:43] provision for almost anything about the
[58:45] use of property that where you get a
[58:46] property right and then you can ensure
[58:48] that property right.
[58:50] >> So you know the the thing that's covered
[58:52] by that property right. Um and they'll
[58:54] add that on for you how they think it's
[58:56] best to do that.
[58:58] >> I'm not sure the the leases I dealt with
[59:01] were long-term not periodic but they're
[59:05] going to want you to ensure your
[59:07] liability. You're going to want to do
[59:09] that. So, and that allows if you're
[59:12] enforcing
[59:14] parking there, that allows your folks to
[59:16] be there to do their enforcement and
[59:19] everything's covered so that they're
[59:21] familiar with that activity. That's a
[59:22] government activity.
[59:26] » Okay.
[59:28] So, the template agreements would be
[59:30] good to see. Thank you. Last question
[59:32] was um still no bike inventory analysis.
[59:36] They're not going to collect any data on
[59:38] that. So unfortunately it was not part
[59:39] of our original scope of tasking with
[59:42] them. However, that doesn't mean that as
[59:45] part of some
[59:48] analysis um we couldn't include it. I
[59:51] think what that last discussion surfaced
[59:53] for us was oh for Mnt lot in particular
[59:57] as we are redesigning it we need to make
[59:59] sure that we've thought about bike
[1:00:01] locations and then um you know I think
[1:00:05] this is a good opportunity to work
[1:00:07] jointly with the mobility and traffic
[1:00:09] committee to see where else would be
[1:00:11] priority. It also doesn't mention that
[1:00:13] there's no ADA analysis in here either,
[1:00:15] which is an entirely separate
[1:00:16] >> ADA compliance is entire.
[1:00:18] >> Yeah, I know that was another issue
[1:00:19] there.
[1:00:19] >> There's an inventory, not an
[1:00:22] it's not the same.
[1:00:24] >> Yes.
[1:00:24] >> Um, sorry, one last thing I forgot. The
[1:00:26] implementation plan, is that in Walker's
[1:00:28] contract to also do or is that just like
[1:00:31] you should do this as a town? It wasn't
[1:00:33] clear that they're doing it.
[1:00:34] >> There is a task related to
[1:00:37] implementation, but it's pretty high
[1:00:38] level. But these these dots here the
[1:00:41] bullets recom they have to do
[1:00:43] >> um or they're organizing the
[1:00:45] recommendations by time frame cost
[1:00:47] feasibility rating they'll do that. Yes.
[1:00:49] Okay.
[1:00:49] >> Yes.
[1:00:49] >> They'll build that out
[1:00:50] >> but not like the detailed
[1:00:52] >> feasibility studies.
[1:00:53] >> Yes. Not detailed feasibility. So easier
[1:00:55] for us to like scope out.
[1:00:57] >> Sure.
[1:00:57] >> The overall the exact cost and how to
[1:01:00] when and how to work it into a budget
[1:01:02] process.
[1:01:02] >> If they were um open to it. Is it
[1:01:05] something we could retain them to do?
[1:01:08] I'm sure that that's the best thing they
[1:01:10] could do. Like it already came up that
[1:01:12] for example if we wanted to move forward
[1:01:15] with wayfinding um changes or
[1:01:17] improvements and we needed assistance
[1:01:19] with a firm they offer those services
[1:01:22] for example.
[1:01:23] >> Okay, great. Thank you.
[1:01:26] >> Um just a few things the some of them
[1:01:28] are more comments than questions. Um,
[1:01:31] looking at the communication, marketing
[1:01:33] and wayfinding and signage. Um, one, I
[1:01:36] think the examples you have in here are
[1:01:37] really illustrative and helpful. We have
[1:01:40] kind of a current green sign way. You
[1:01:43] have an example of it right here. Um,
[1:01:46] have they looked at other jurisdictions
[1:01:47] including Montgomery County and what
[1:01:50] standard wayfinding color and lettering?
[1:01:53] >> It's all blue. And and that's where I'm
[1:01:55] going is there's a blue, but I'm seeing
[1:01:56] examples of the blue then being applied
[1:01:59] to the town's wayfinding brand. Um, and
[1:02:04] so recommendations of blue seems to be
[1:02:07] somewhat the universal understood color,
[1:02:10] but you know, uh, how we might do that,
[1:02:13] layering the two in into each other.
[1:02:15] >> That did come up. Um, they said, you
[1:02:17] know, the big uh, capital P is really helpful. The blue, most people
[1:02:22] have noticed the blue. There was one
[1:02:24] representative example that they put in
[1:02:25] here with the red P, but ours is just
[1:02:27] it's not consistent. I think they were
[1:02:29] fine with us going with town branding. I
[1:02:31] think there were no issues there. They
[1:02:33] just said make the P more prominent and
[1:02:35] put them in places where it's not
[1:02:36] against the green background. Like
[1:02:38] there's ways to make it more consistent
[1:02:40] and broad and and obvious.
[1:02:41] >> Yeah, we we did talk about blue as the
[1:02:44] standard way. And theam the thing that
[1:02:47] they pointed out, one of the things they
[1:02:48] pointed out to us is because our town
[1:02:50] color is green.
[1:02:52] >> Mhm.
[1:02:52] >> We have these green signs that are, you
[1:02:56] know, in the background there's green
[1:02:58] grass and trees and and you don't see
[1:03:00] them.
[1:03:01] >> Yeah. I would highly recommend blue.
[1:03:03] >> Yep. Yeah.
[1:03:05] >> One coming into this. I think it's
[1:03:07] green, too.
[1:03:07] >> Yes, they're all Yeah,
[1:03:09] >> they're all green.
[1:03:10] >> Okay.
[1:03:11] >> So, um under a little later on it it
[1:03:15] talks about conducting the inventory of
[1:03:17] our existing signage. Is that complete?
[1:03:20] And then I my next question where I'm
[1:03:22] going is um looking at the regulatory
[1:03:25] sign review to the mayor's point of how
[1:03:28] are we shifting staff potentially? How
[1:03:30] are we looking at hotspots, weekends,
[1:03:33] evenings? Um will they be making
[1:03:36] recommendations to
[1:03:39] where to adjust the signage?
[1:03:41] >> Yes.
[1:03:42] >> Okay, perfect. um including
[1:03:46] are the RPP signs we have still logical
[1:03:49] where they're posted where they're not
[1:03:53] RP signs that that would make sense
[1:03:55] because I think that analysis would be
[1:03:57] helpful as well. I think
[1:04:00] we have a collection of different time
[1:04:02] frames on signs and different spots as
[1:04:04] we've tried to peacemeal our
[1:04:07] understanding of hotspots. um now that
[1:04:10] we have a data-driven approach from the
[1:04:11] top down that we can
[1:04:14] bring an analytical eye to why the hours
[1:04:17] are what they are where they are.
[1:04:19] >> So um I think that'd be great. Um
[1:04:23] as we talk about technology, one thing
[1:04:25] that'd be interesting uh for you all and
[1:04:28] Alex um do we have a sense of the number
[1:04:31] of citations that Annie writes?
[1:04:34] Is there any way to do a breakdown of
[1:04:36] that to under and because it's that and
[1:04:39] her other code enforcement activities
[1:04:42] to get a sense of
[1:04:45] how much time is able to be done toward
[1:04:47] enforcement. So that's just some data to
[1:04:50] back up how many citations are we
[1:04:52] writing.
[1:04:53] >> I can tell.
[1:04:53] >> Yeah, that would be great.
[1:04:55] >> We we talked a little bit about that and
[1:04:57] I think that data has at some point
[1:04:59] earlier was surfaced. I think we said
[1:05:01] 8020 law enforcement versus parking.
[1:05:04] Yes, 8020 was the split generally.
[1:05:06] >> And then and then of in that 20% of
[1:05:09] time,
[1:05:10] >> how many are we writing which we to your
[1:05:12] point, it's a manual process, right?
[1:05:15] We're chalking, we're going down, then
[1:05:17] you got to come back. It's a two, in
[1:05:18] fact, it's a two-step process.
[1:05:20] >> Um,
[1:05:22] I love the fact that as you think about
[1:05:23] technology, you're already thinking
[1:05:24] about integration with where these
[1:05:27] things ultimately need to go. And I
[1:05:29] think you all already know this, right?
[1:05:31] like let's only support those systems
[1:05:33] that would integrate with Montgomery
[1:05:34] County since that's where they need to
[1:05:35] go. One question I had uh Nate's
[1:05:38] question prompted this
[1:05:40] is there any potential for partnering
[1:05:42] with Montgomery County if we use the
[1:05:43] same handhelds if we choose to do that
[1:05:45] and our tickets are going flowing into
[1:05:47] their system. Is there any partnership
[1:05:49] that can be done with whoever is the
[1:05:52] parking authority at the county to
[1:05:53] either receive handhelds from them,
[1:05:56] lease handhelds from them, get
[1:05:57] purchasing power with them, something to
[1:06:00] that extent. Yeah, that's
[1:06:02] >> good point.
[1:06:02] >> Or even partner with them on the
[1:06:04] enforcement. Could we do that?
[1:06:06] >> We could explore that. Well, but that
[1:06:09] led me to my third point, which I know,
[1:06:11] you teed it up perfectly, which is if if
[1:06:14] we're using the same technology and if
[1:06:16] we are in partnership with them, is
[1:06:18] there a way when we want additional
[1:06:20] enforcement and it doesn't it's not our
[1:06:23] town enforcement, can we either contract
[1:06:25] out with a third party vendor that is
[1:06:28] certified on that equipment somehow or
[1:06:30] with Montgomery County traffic division,
[1:06:32] >> like the crossing guards, you know, rent
[1:06:34] some because if they are, they know how
[1:06:36] to use the ran a of crossing. I mean,
[1:06:39] uh,
[1:06:40] >> yeah, there was a little bit of
[1:06:41] discussion around third party vendors
[1:06:44] for enforcement and our former town
[1:06:47] manager Matt has talked with other
[1:06:49] nearby jurisdictions have done that and
[1:06:51] they have had poor results.
[1:06:53] >> Okay, that's good data points to have.
[1:06:55] >> So, however, um, the the direction
[1:06:59] you're going with your questioning
[1:07:00] around like could you pay back on
[1:07:03] leasing or procurement vehicles? Are
[1:07:05] there shared staffing arrangements that
[1:07:08] could be done with other
[1:07:10] >> We do shared staffing with Montgomery
[1:07:11] County Police for policing. Um, not to
[1:07:14] say that, but like there is the whole
[1:07:16] parking division of Montgomery County.
[1:07:18] Is there the schedule where we pay an
[1:07:20] hourly fee because we're on the same
[1:07:22] equipment and their vehicles, their
[1:07:24] technology, their people are helping us
[1:07:27] when needed.
[1:07:29] >> So,
[1:07:31] >> great. Thank you.
[1:07:33] >> Anything else?
[1:07:35] Um it say
[1:07:39] >> no I the only other thing I would ask
[1:07:42] and I think so from Nigel did a
[1:07:44] fantastic job is is Walker Consulting
[1:07:48] fully aware of kind of the uses of
[1:07:51] building like Brookwood school and its
[1:07:53] unique traffic um um you know Springual
[1:07:58] its unique traffic church you know
[1:08:00] Sundays are different than Saturdays are
[1:08:01] different than you know all of those
[1:08:03] building use kind of activities.
[1:08:05] >> We did our best both with the sampling
[1:08:08] for when Nigel, who was one of the key
[1:08:11] consultants on the project, was in
[1:08:12] Kensington, but also when we did our
[1:08:15] stakeholder meetings, we purposfully
[1:08:17] invited um schools, uh churches,
[1:08:22] congregations to be a part of that as
[1:08:24] well as businesses. So, we had
[1:08:27] >> uh representation from
[1:08:29] >> I think R.J. was there from Brookwood.
[1:08:31] >> Yeah, R.J. was there from Brookwood. I'm
[1:08:33] trying to remember if spring bilingual
[1:08:34] was part of the conversation. I feel
[1:08:36] like you were okay.
[1:08:38] >> Um we also um talked with some of the
[1:08:42] congregations
[1:08:44] um and some of those uh variances and
[1:08:49] >> and uh parking demand I think are
[1:08:51] documented in the in the study.
[1:08:53] >> When I walked with Nigel, I gave him
[1:08:55] that information as well as we walked.
[1:08:57] The other thing that that they added in
[1:09:00] um you may have noticed um new
[1:09:02] developments like the Kinsing Crossings,
[1:09:05] Warner Circle,
[1:09:06] >> um the new proposed townhouse
[1:09:09] development. Um that of course just
[1:09:12] recently popped up. So they asked for
[1:09:15] information about that, whatever was
[1:09:16] publicly available. So that's being
[1:09:18] provided to them.
[1:09:19] >> Future programming for noise because it
[1:09:21] will have an expansion program.
[1:09:24] >> Yeah. the HOC building, the Dietrich
[1:09:27] building as mentioned as well. So, they
[1:09:30] tried, but we didn't ask them to focus
[1:09:32] too much on that. It was just we wanted
[1:09:34] them to be aware that that was going to
[1:09:36] have spillover impacts
[1:09:38] um on the surrounding streets.
[1:09:42] » That is my questions for now. Appreciate
[1:09:44] this. You guys have done great work on
[1:09:46] this.
[1:09:48] >> Does anybody in the audience or online
[1:09:50] have a question for Ann and Stuart? Joe?
[1:09:54] Yeah, not so much a question, mayor, as just to emphasize or add to a couple
[1:09:58] of points that they uh presented so
[1:10:01] admirably tonight. Um there was some
[1:10:03] data
[1:10:05] shared at the May 4th parking
[1:10:08] consultants meeting. Um and my notes say
[1:10:10] that uh there was $4,000 a year in
[1:10:13] parking fines collected in in the town.
[1:10:16] I don't know if that's um from the town
[1:10:18] or from the parking consultants
[1:10:20] themselves, but it's in my notes. So
[1:10:22] that's that's a a data point that that might be investigated a little bit.
[1:10:27] U just a couple of emphases. U one of
[1:10:29] the Walker consultants um actually
[1:10:32] Nigel's boss Megan u who joined our call
[1:10:36] last week u emphasized the the real
[1:10:39] importance of enforcement as an
[1:10:41] essential building block to uh to any
[1:10:45] solid traffic plan. And this this echoes
[1:10:48] something we've heard ever since the
[1:10:49] task force got going back in
[1:10:52] 2024. And uh the the the critical
[1:10:56] importance of of enforcement is um is
[1:10:59] not lost on the task force, I hope. And
[1:11:01] also there was some discussion at last
[1:11:03] week's meeting about u what the task
[1:11:06] force has identified as intermittent hot
[1:11:08] spots in town. Now, these are short-term
[1:11:12] parking violations at clearly marked no
[1:11:15] parking places in town that that
[1:11:18] nonetheless um uh are those those no
[1:11:21] parking signs are violated. And they
[1:11:23] cause they can cause short-term traffic
[1:11:25] disruptions. And there's a whole list of
[1:11:27] them about 10 such hotspots ranging from
[1:11:30] 10400 Connecticut Avenue to uh um to uh
[1:11:35] the new um Kensington Crossing parking
[1:11:39] situation and so forth. And and those u
[1:11:42] uh were uh discussed toward the end of
[1:11:45] the meeting last week with with Nigel.
[1:11:47] And I think that's really important not
[1:11:48] to lose sight of that because parking
[1:11:50] problems in town are not of one
[1:11:53] dimension. there there's multiple kinds
[1:11:55] and multiple parts of town. It's not all
[1:11:57] business core. It's not all commercial
[1:11:59] core. It also extends into the
[1:12:01] residential areas. So, um it's an
[1:12:03] important point that um uh we've we've
[1:12:06] mentioned to to Nigel in the past.
[1:12:10] >> Okay. Thank you.
[1:12:12] >> Thank you, Joe, for offering that data
[1:12:14] point. It um makes me think back to your
[1:12:17] question, Nate, about like would we
[1:12:19] collect enough in enforcement to cover
[1:12:21] the costs. I think part of what you've
[1:12:24] heard in this discussion is that we
[1:12:26] don't have our enforcement at the hours
[1:12:27] when we are actually seeing violations
[1:12:29] and our code enforcement officers only
[1:12:31] 20% of the time.
[1:12:33] >> I think there's room for improvement
[1:12:36] even if we're only recovering 30% of the
[1:12:38] overall fine.
[1:12:39] >> Yeah.
[1:12:40] >> Could I get clarity on that, Alex? We It
[1:12:43] is my understanding we don't receive any
[1:12:45] money from Montgomery County for the
[1:12:46] parking tickets. No, we do receive
[1:12:48] >> We do receive $15 for every 60 in
[1:12:51] tickets.
[1:12:51] >> $15 for every 60 tickets.
[1:12:54] >> No, we
[1:12:56] >> get more than that.
[1:12:57] >> 5%.
[1:12:59] >> We will get Yeah. tickets.
[1:13:02] >> Okay.
[1:13:03] >> Because maybe we weren't giving enough
[1:13:05] out to make money.
[1:13:06] >> Come to the
[1:13:07] >> Oh, come up.
[1:13:09] >> Yeah, you have to come to the
[1:13:11] >> Just for the Yeah.
[1:13:12] >> Yeah. Just for the record, give your
[1:13:13] name and your um
[1:13:14] >> I don't want to get hit for as possible.
[1:13:16] >> David Shaw, my SPMA board member. Um
[1:13:21] we're we're just trying to figure out
[1:13:24] how how to expand the school, which
[1:13:27] isn't the topic of specific topic of my
[1:13:30] question, but relate to it.
[1:13:32] >> Obviously, parking traffic concerns are
[1:13:34] a big part of it. So we're we're this is
[1:13:37] a really important meeting because it's
[1:13:39] we're understanding how much you're
[1:13:41] struggling with both and that it's still
[1:13:45] materializing your strategy. But uh
[1:13:47] specifically, is there any part of the
[1:13:49] Walker study that's available to us to
[1:13:53] read?
[1:13:54] >> Yes. Yes. Um it was included in the um
[1:13:58] agenda and materials that went out with
[1:14:00] the meeting notice.
[1:14:01] >> He sent it to you guys.
[1:14:02] >> Oh, okay. It was not translated. We will
[1:14:05] make it available.
[1:14:07] >> Okay.
[1:14:08] >> Yes.
[1:14:08] >> Okay. So, you'll just put it on the
[1:14:10] website.
[1:14:10] >> Oh, I can I can email it to you, Diane.
[1:14:12] Okay.
[1:14:13] >> Yes, we can make it available, I think,
[1:14:14] as part of the
[1:14:16] >> the minutes the meeting as the
[1:14:18] >> We want you to read it.
[1:14:20] >> We want Yeah. And in fact,
[1:14:22] >> we want to read it.
[1:14:23] >> Yeah.
[1:14:24] >> Yes. Absolutely.
[1:14:25] >> Okay. I'm sorry. No, I I know they're
[1:14:27] making revisions, too. B, so we'll we
[1:14:30] can make
[1:14:31] >> maybe more than one copy available.
[1:14:34] >> Okay. Thank you.
[1:14:35] >> Um,
[1:14:38] Alex, is you're going to talk
[1:14:40] um pull the information for Ann on
[1:14:43] Montgomery Countyy's infraction cost and
[1:14:45] our percentage of it because it's in
[1:14:47] here as well. Um,
[1:14:51] do we do any sort of graduated
[1:14:52] ticketing? Does Montgomery County do any
[1:14:54] graduating? So, first offense, second
[1:14:56] offense, third offense. Um,
[1:14:58] >> we do not.
[1:14:59] >> Okay. And if we did, that's just part of
[1:15:01] the analysis. It was in the one of the
[1:15:02] options. If if we were to discuss some
[1:15:06] sort of graduated ticketing for multiple
[1:15:08] offenses,
[1:15:10] is it is our portion of that a flat
[1:15:14] dollar amount or is it always a
[1:15:16] percentage of the value of the ticket?
[1:15:18] That would be the information I wanted
[1:15:20] to see from Montgomery County. Yeah.
[1:15:25] Okay. Any other questions?
[1:15:29] » Anything else?
[1:15:32] >> Thank you.
[1:15:32] >> Okay. So,
[1:15:33] >> so we're going to do the meeting on the
[1:15:35] 21st, 6 o'clock, and then the town
[1:15:38] meeting will be at 7:30.
[1:15:40] >> Okay.
[1:15:41] >> So, can uh Alex, you or Brooke put the
[1:15:44] meeting onto the town calendar?
[1:15:46] >> Yes. Okay, great.
[1:15:50] >> And we'll confirm with Walker.
[1:15:52] >> Yeah.
[1:15:53] They knew we were going to discuss
[1:15:55] timing tonight.
[1:15:58] >> Okay, good.
[1:15:59] >> Thank you for your input.
[1:16:01] >> Nice. Thank you for your questions.
[1:16:02] Fantastic.
[1:16:03] >> Okay. All right. Let's uh move down to
[1:16:05] the 3420 Pliers Mill Road um update and
[1:16:09] I think it we got another uh an updated
[1:16:14] >> um appraisal.
[1:16:15] >> Appraisal. Thank you.
[1:16:21] » Do you need
[1:16:22] Bye Matt.
[1:16:26] A
[1:16:26] >> you don't want to stay for the whole
[1:16:27] meeting.
[1:16:29] >> Matt, could you please come to the uh
[1:16:30] and announce yourself? For an honor, you
[1:16:33] know where these are. They were on my
[1:16:35] desk.
[1:16:36] >> I will forever. Thank you for that.
[1:16:38] >> Yeah.
[1:16:38] >> Oh, I will explain it later.
[1:16:40] >> Okay.
[1:16:41] >> Signing off. And um
[1:16:43] >> Do we need to do a picture with you? Can
[1:16:44] we do a picture with Matt?
[1:16:46] >> Can we?
[1:16:46] >> Sure.
[1:16:47] >> All right. Yeah,
[1:16:47] >> let's do a picture.
[1:16:49] >> Do we need to make a motion?
[1:16:50] >> Yeah. Second approve.
[1:16:53] >> Wait, where are we? Yeah, we're doing
[1:16:55] it.
[1:16:57] >> Center.
[1:16:59] >> Should we all stand right here?
[1:17:00] >> Come on. Let's act like we we're friends
[1:17:02] with it.
[1:17:06] » Come on,
[1:17:07] get in there. Come on.
[1:17:10] >> Come on. Get in there.
[1:17:16] » Yeah. [laughter]
[1:17:18] Shoulder to shoulder.
[1:17:22] » [laughter]
[1:17:24] » Pull some chairs back, too. Look at a
[1:17:26] nice one of you guys.
[1:17:30] » There we go.
[1:17:34] » No, don't say that. Don't say that.
[1:17:37] >> All right, we go. One, two, and three.
[1:17:41] We'll take a couple more. Hang on.
[1:17:44] One, two, three smiles. One, two, break, break. One, two, three. Okay, I
[1:17:49] think I got one. Thank you.
[1:17:56] » All right,
[1:18:02] » sorry. Did you get your dresser?
[1:18:04] >> Matt, did you get your dresser?
[1:18:07] >> Okay,
[1:18:10] we're live. Sorry, but
[1:18:13] this way. Thank you again.
[1:18:15] >> Thank you, Matt. Um, watch that. You
[1:18:18] guys have my number
[1:18:20] >> and
[1:18:20] >> Dr. Alex will be reaching out to you
[1:18:22] occasionally for sure.
[1:18:23] >> Did you turn in your keys?
[1:18:25] >> Yes, he did.
[1:18:26] >> And you know, if you miss us, we're live streaming our meetings. So,
[1:18:31] >> if you're really bored
[1:18:34] updates periodically from
[1:18:38] you've been here as long as I have, you
[1:18:40] can't even explain how much of a help
[1:18:42] you've been. So, really,
[1:18:44] >> thank you very much. It's been a
[1:18:46] pleasure.
[1:18:47] >> Alex,
[1:18:51] » thank you, Matt.
[1:18:52] >> Bye, Matt.
[1:18:53] >> Bye.
[1:18:53] Matt.
[1:18:56] >> A so sad.
[1:18:58] >> Okay.
[1:18:59] >> All right. We were talking about uh the
[1:19:01] uh number five updated appraisal.
[1:19:05] So, you hand or Alex, do you want to
[1:19:07] take that?
[1:19:10] >> Don't fight over it.
[1:19:12] Uh so we I sent we received an updated
[1:19:15] appraisal for 3420 Pers Mill Road. Uh
[1:19:18] the first one was for $450,000. The
[1:19:21] updated appraisal is for $560,000.
[1:19:24] >> Okay.
[1:19:26] >> And uh let's can you just go over
[1:19:28] quickly how we we're putting it up for
[1:19:30] sale and how we're planning on doing
[1:19:33] that?
[1:19:33] >> Yes. So, we're listing on Bright MLS and
[1:19:38] uh our appraiser is going to create a
[1:19:41] description for us about the property
[1:19:43] for us to post.
[1:19:44] >> Okay.
[1:19:44] >> And so once you guys give us the okay,
[1:19:46] we will list it.
[1:19:47] >> Okay.
[1:19:48] >> Good. Right. Well, I mean, you kind of
[1:19:51] have the okay, so it's just we're just
[1:19:53] waiting for the So, when you get the
[1:19:55] description
[1:19:57] Yeah. Okay. Any questions from the
[1:20:00] council?
[1:20:02] >> Whoa.
[1:20:04] Go ahead.
[1:20:04] >> Go ahead. You open your mouth first.
[1:20:07] Happy to defer. You're probably asking
[1:20:09] question. We had talked about
[1:20:11] >> potentially adding some conditions to
[1:20:12] the sale potentially.
[1:20:14] >> I think there was no variance.
[1:20:15] >> No variance.
[1:20:16] >> We're not going to entertain a variance.
[1:20:18] >> Is that is that part of this plan?
[1:20:20] >> Yes, it will need to be. Any description
[1:20:22] of the for sale of the property will
[1:20:24] have to have these conditions on it so
[1:20:26] that you're straightforward from the
[1:20:27] beginning as to what the the
[1:20:29] requirements are. You know what the
[1:20:31] restrictions are going to be. Yes.
[1:20:32] >> Okay. So to Sue's point though, is the
[1:20:34] plan to have a draft description for
[1:20:37] review at the October council meeting?
[1:20:39] >> I can do that. Yeah. Yeah. Yep.
[1:20:42] >> Okay. So my question was um in terms of
[1:20:46] the description that will be added to
[1:20:51] the listing, what is the price that is
[1:20:54] going to be listed? We have two
[1:20:56] different appraisal numbers.
[1:20:58] >> I think that's up to you guys, right?
[1:21:00] So, do we need to make a decision on
[1:21:02] that or
[1:21:03] >> the appraisal was brought forward to
[1:21:06] inform you of what the actual value of
[1:21:08] this property is seen to be.
[1:21:10] >> Um, and so that is a good point for you
[1:21:15] to consider in terms of your asking
[1:21:17] price for this property. You can justify
[1:21:21] it to the public, to yourselves. So
[1:21:24] unless you have other considerations you
[1:21:28] want to place on that right now, that
[1:21:30] would be I I don't know that the
[1:21:32] appraisal considered any type of
[1:21:35] restrictions.
[1:21:37] >> It would not normally.
[1:21:39] So uh but it's it's a good basis for
[1:21:42] setting your sale price. But yes, you
[1:21:46] should.
[1:21:46] >> So between 450 and 560 are the two data
[1:21:50] points we have based on the appraisal.
[1:21:53] Uh really the data point you have is
[1:21:57] yeah the latest one. That's really it.
[1:22:02] » So do you want because he's writing it
[1:22:03] up and if we're going to look at it, do
[1:22:05] you want to
[1:22:06] >> just state 560?
[1:22:07] >> I don't see any reason to state anything
[1:22:08] else unless we're like going to throw on
[1:22:10] a suggested bunch of conditions which
[1:22:13] was advised we advised against doing too
[1:22:15] many.
[1:22:16] >> Um I would be fine with listing it for
[1:22:19] the appraised price.
[1:22:20] >> Okay. Did the resolution require us to
[1:22:22] say maximum, you know, seek the maximum
[1:22:24] diet or something like that? Do you
[1:22:26] remember when we sold Joseph's Park or
[1:22:28] No, sorry. Not the not the sale of
[1:22:30] Joseph, but you when we the when the the
[1:22:33] vote came through, did you remember? And
[1:22:35] >> I don't think we had anything on the
[1:22:37] referendum about that. I was just
[1:22:38] selling it in
[1:22:39] >> general. Okay.
[1:22:40] >> Yeah. So we can double check, but
[1:22:43] >> what you should do is what's reasonable
[1:22:45] >> and and you have a pretty good idea of
[1:22:47] what's reasonable based on a very
[1:22:49] current appraisal
[1:22:51] >> is based on you know property values and
[1:22:53] how things what things have sold for in
[1:22:56] nearby sites that type of thing. So
[1:22:59] >> for that for that purpose
[1:23:02] >> I mean personally I would support
[1:23:05] listing it at the appraised price. I
[1:23:07] think that that is the data point that
[1:23:08] we have. It demonstrate we did we paid
[1:23:10] to have the analysis of the lot done.
[1:23:13] The market will also they can choose to
[1:23:17] uh submit a bid at they could choose to
[1:23:19] submit a bid below. They could choose to
[1:23:21] submit a bid above. Um and we will
[1:23:24] evaluate each as they come in based on
[1:23:27] whatever conditions they may put on
[1:23:30] their bid and the price that comes with
[1:23:32] it.
[1:23:35] Have we defined do we have that process
[1:23:38] laid out before like for evaluating?
[1:23:41] >> Yeah. Who's going to evaluate like among
[1:23:42] the councils like when we get those bids
[1:23:44] in is there contingent of us or all of
[1:23:46] us that have to review that and approve
[1:23:48] and like by what is it a majority in
[1:23:50] vote?
[1:23:52] >> Yes. You'll have to approve the sale
[1:23:54] >> by majority.
[1:23:55] >> Yes. The contract of sale for one thing.
[1:23:56] There'll be a contract of sale. You'll
[1:23:58] need to approve that.
[1:24:01] So, are you asking that maybe we have
[1:24:04] like two council members look at the I
[1:24:06] mean, we're acting like, you know, we'll
[1:24:07] get a whole bunch of maybe we will um
[1:24:11] contracts to look sit and look at them,
[1:24:12] you know, with Alex and Suellan and then
[1:24:15] come back to the council, you know, with
[1:24:17] the they'll obviously see the other
[1:24:19] ones, but with the recommendation after
[1:24:21] going through one by one,
[1:24:24] >> I'd be fine with the staff doing it to
[1:24:26] be honest. Um, I don't think I I
[1:24:29] personally don't know more about real
[1:24:30] estate and it seems like a pretty
[1:24:31] straightforward process for buying a
[1:24:33] piece of land
[1:24:34] >> and it's about the price. So, I don't
[1:24:36] personally see the need for us to be
[1:24:38] involved. But, if no one wants to, then
[1:24:40] >> I would also say I have no problem with
[1:24:43] Nate's suggestion and or
[1:24:45] >> that I not be on it since it backs up to
[1:24:48] my property and I don't want a perceived
[1:24:50] conflict. Yeah. Perception of interest.
[1:24:52] >> Yeah. So whether it's two others I trust
[1:24:55] you all or the staff I would be
[1:24:57] supported either.
[1:24:59] >> Well why don't we start with staff to to
[1:25:01] review and then
[1:25:02] >> that's just my opinion.
[1:25:03] >> No but I mean if we start with staff to
[1:25:05] review and then they can if there's any
[1:25:07] questions um they can if something is
[1:25:09] just too odd then we can call in a
[1:25:11] couple of council members other than
[1:25:13] Connor to come in and to review. How's
[1:25:16] that sound?
[1:25:17] >> That's fine. Yeah.
[1:25:18] >> Okay. But I mean they will be available.
[1:25:20] I mean, obviously, if you get like 10 uh
[1:25:22] people, you don't want to be sitting
[1:25:23] there hashing that out, you know, in a
[1:25:25] town meeting. It should be narrowed down
[1:25:27] to maybe one or two at that point. But I
[1:25:31] think we'll be able to put everybody's
[1:25:32] eyes on there at some point. So,
[1:25:34] >> uh just a question on the record for
[1:25:36] town attorney Suen. I mean, I have no
[1:25:39] problem and I've asked to just be
[1:25:40] stepping away from the analysis of it if
[1:25:41] but is there any conflict with the fact
[1:25:45] that my property line touches that
[1:25:46] property line in when it comes before
[1:25:49] voting on the contract on me voting on
[1:25:52] it andor would it be more appropriate
[1:25:54] for me to be recuse myself from that
[1:25:57] process?
[1:25:58] >> It's a good question.
[1:26:00] Conflict
[1:26:01] of interest generally
[1:26:04] is
[1:26:06] defined as involving a pecuniary
[1:26:08] interest of you or your family. Okay.
[1:26:12] >> Um and so there has to be something
[1:26:14] that's related to money or
[1:26:19] um
[1:26:21] that that's generally what it is.
[1:26:24] Uh it's hard to see
[1:26:26] how it relates to the relates to any
[1:26:31] >> nearby proximity to the property.
[1:26:34] >> Yeah. I you know you could do you could
[1:26:36] also ask the ethics commission.
[1:26:39] >> You can do that too. It's a little
[1:26:41] >> if you want. I'm talking generally.
[1:26:43] >> Yeah.
[1:26:44] >> I generally don't like to give specific
[1:26:47] legal opinions in open meeting.
[1:26:49] >> Mhm. Uh, and you can't ask for an
[1:26:52] opinion from the ethics commission.
[1:26:53] >> Okay. I welcome both approaches and
[1:26:55] that, you know, I hope and that every
[1:26:58] time we've discussed this, I've tried to
[1:26:59] be very open that this property touches
[1:27:01] the back of my property. Um, but I just
[1:27:04] don't want there to be any perception.
[1:27:05] So, I appreciate the direction.
[1:27:09] >> You lose your view of Flyers Mill Road.
[1:27:13] >> You know, you're going to game
[1:27:14] potentially. That's how I know whether
[1:27:16] my kid made it to the Mland Center.
[1:27:21] » Okay. So, sounds like we have a plan.
[1:27:23] Uh, anyone in the audience or on the
[1:27:26] screen have a question?
[1:27:31] » Okay. All right. Let's move on.
[1:27:34] Um, let's see. Uh, number six, the 10400
[1:27:38] Dietrich Avenue.
[1:27:40] Um
[1:27:42] Nate, Connor and I and Alex sat in uh on
[1:27:47] a discussion with some of the MCPS real
[1:27:49] estate people to discuss the property.
[1:27:52] Um
[1:27:54] Connor, do you want to go ahead and give
[1:27:55] a little report on it?
[1:27:56] >> Sure. Um MCPS reached out to the town to
[1:28:00] discuss the former HORC property at
[1:28:02] 10400 Dietrich which they have now taken
[1:28:06] back over control of um since HROC has
[1:28:09] relocated.
[1:28:11] They are operating it in as for
[1:28:14] educational purposes. They do have
[1:28:15] students that are in the building but
[1:28:17] its primary use is as offices. when they
[1:28:20] were evaluating the site for taking it
[1:28:23] back over, we made them aware that, you
[1:28:25] know, there were things we wanted out of
[1:28:28] whoever took over the building to be
[1:28:29] good partners. One was returning the gym
[1:28:31] to the community use of public
[1:28:34] facilities. Um, returning the grass
[1:28:37] field to active Montgomery so that it
[1:28:38] could be signed out for practices and
[1:28:41] soccer and things like that. I think
[1:28:43] everybody understood uh what that needed
[1:28:45] to be, but the realities of the uh daily
[1:28:49] and weekly maintenance and upkeep uh as
[1:28:51] well as some of the equipment that's
[1:28:53] there, the skate park, um some of the
[1:28:56] playground equipment and the current
[1:28:58] state of um wear and tear on that
[1:29:02] equipment. uh MCPS came to ask whether
[1:29:04] or not the town would entertain working
[1:29:07] with them in some capacity on keeping
[1:29:10] the public amenities
[1:29:13] upkept so that they can be made
[1:29:15] available to the public. MCPS's concern
[1:29:19] with the skate park is that it's not
[1:29:22] something that they operate. Um they
[1:29:24] don't have skate parks, you know, county
[1:29:27] has skateparks, but the school system
[1:29:29] does not. they don't have necessary
[1:29:31] liability coverage to cover it.
[1:29:33] Expertise in maintaining it. Uh staff to
[1:29:36] be able to be checking on it for we know
[1:29:38] the things that have happened there.
[1:29:39] Furniture's been dumped. You know,
[1:29:42] graffiti has happened, garbage has been
[1:29:44] strewn, so can we kind of keep a
[1:29:46] watchful eye on it and and have control
[1:29:48] over it? the playground. While that is
[1:29:50] something well within MCPS's purview, um
[1:29:54] their problem is they don't have the
[1:29:56] budget and capital monies really to keep
[1:29:59] it up.
[1:29:59] >> The schools are going to get I mean,
[1:30:01] >> right, so there's a prioritization that
[1:30:03] they have
[1:30:03] >> priority
[1:30:04] >> for how they will fund improvements
[1:30:07] andor upgrades to
[1:30:10] a a playground site. And because this is
[1:30:13] not a primary school, meaning it's first
[1:30:16] and foremost a a school,
[1:30:18] >> an office,
[1:30:19] >> it's first and foremost is as an office,
[1:30:21] it is not going to get weighted high
[1:30:25] enough to get the very limited funding
[1:30:28] available for playground improvements.
[1:30:30] They were being honestly very forthright
[1:30:33] and transparent that without help their
[1:30:37] solution will probably be that they
[1:30:38] would have to shutter that playground
[1:30:41] which serves not only our west side and
[1:30:43] the skate park and not just our west
[1:30:45] side but our neighboring communities.
[1:30:47] Kensington Estates, this is their
[1:30:49] primary uh playground. Um they have the
[1:30:53] capability to
[1:30:55] do mowing. Uh there's some landscape
[1:30:58] improvements. We pointed out that yes,
[1:31:00] there's some mowing, but there's some
[1:31:01] other they're missing some spots, let's
[1:31:03] say. Um, so they asked for our help. Um,
[1:31:06] we discussed with them the potential to
[1:31:09] look at swapping lots, right? Taking on
[1:31:12] that lot in exchange for the lot that
[1:31:14] the town owns underneath the gymnasium.
[1:31:16] I think that's out for discussion, but
[1:31:19] that's a bigger conversation. what's on
[1:31:21] the
[1:31:21] >> for the purpose of if and when um that
[1:31:26] site has been identified as a a very
[1:31:29] good site to implement early childhood
[1:31:31] ed under the blue ribbon commission and
[1:31:34] should they do that they would have to
[1:31:36] make some operational improvements and
[1:31:38] changes to the building how you access
[1:31:40] it how it's laid out um if they needed
[1:31:42] to change any of the physical plant of
[1:31:44] the building some of that building sits
[1:31:47] on our lot and we are as as we told them
[1:31:49] we want to be a stakeholder in how this
[1:31:52] site uh long term gets addressed. But if
[1:31:57] we were to look at the possibility of a
[1:31:59] land swap and sharing that land, you
[1:32:01] know, transferring that land to MCPS and
[1:32:03] DGS in exchange, we took the green space
[1:32:07] inclusive of the playground and the
[1:32:09] skate park because we're very good at
[1:32:11] parks. We know how to do these things.
[1:32:13] Um, we can partner with and work with
[1:32:16] MCPS on, you know, access and things
[1:32:18] like that during school hours, but we
[1:32:21] have the ability to make sure it safe,
[1:32:24] it's up to-date, it's, um, being
[1:32:27] monitored, uh, it's clean, and that
[1:32:30] benefits not just our residents, but the
[1:32:33] greater community. Um, so what they were
[1:32:34] looking for was would the town be
[1:32:36] willing to enter into a short-term uh
[1:32:39] memorandum of understanding anou that
[1:32:41] would outline
[1:32:43] what we would be willing to take on with
[1:32:45] the idea that this short term would be
[1:32:48] >> sometime less than a year or up to a
[1:32:50] year
[1:32:50] >> where we can evaluate for our sake
[1:32:54] what is the cost of doing these things
[1:32:56] right what is the impact on our staffing
[1:32:59] um adding in these additional areas
[1:33:02] there are some upkeep things that they
[1:33:04] are very capable of, new trash cans,
[1:33:06] things that are deteriorating, but they
[1:33:08] can handle that, but trash and cleanup
[1:33:10] and and grass and maintenance. Would we
[1:33:12] be willing to take those things on? And
[1:33:14] >> this would just be in the back, not in
[1:33:16] the front. They would
[1:33:17] >> correct. Correct.
[1:33:19] >> Um, one last is
[1:33:22] they are still not sure what to do with
[1:33:23] the playground because they they're just
[1:33:26] like, are we know how the budgeting
[1:33:28] works.
[1:33:30] Is there any way to partner on
[1:33:31] improvements to the playground? Um, so
[1:33:33] the mayor asked me and I reached out to
[1:33:36] um, Emily Shetty, one of our delegates
[1:33:37] from district 18 about can the state's
[1:33:41] bond program
[1:33:44] allow for us to be a sponsor to the bond
[1:33:47] that would ultimately be for a
[1:33:48] playground at MCPS's site? And she
[1:33:51] believes absolutely uh, and she is more
[1:33:53] than willing to engage with the town,
[1:33:55] work with us on uh, determining that.
[1:33:59] The good news or I guess an easy thing
[1:34:01] is the same playground vendor that we've
[1:34:05] used uh playscapes is the same one that
[1:34:07] the county uses. We're all familiar with
[1:34:08] the same um types of apparatus processes
[1:34:12] uh even right down to the specific
[1:34:14] people. So um that is you know
[1:34:18] potentially something to come under
[1:34:19] theou could be potentially carved out
[1:34:21] separate but obviously once we involve
[1:34:25] state bond money and an improvement is
[1:34:27] made and where we put this we have to be
[1:34:29] very mindful of where are we locating it
[1:34:32] what are we improving then it needs to
[1:34:35] you know stay in good condition
[1:34:37] >> is uh going for another bond for
[1:34:40] playground equipment going to hurt us if
[1:34:42] we need to go back
[1:34:43] >> as I understand it it would be MCPS that
[1:34:46] potentially could go for the bond and we
[1:34:48] would look at partnering with them. Um
[1:34:52] but that is one of the questions that is
[1:34:54] to be asked of our delegation is is it
[1:34:57] the town it's called being the sponsor.
[1:34:59] Is it the town that would be the sponsor
[1:35:01] of it extend and these are typically
[1:35:04] reimburseable. So are we spending the
[1:35:06] funds and we are managing the
[1:35:08] reimbursement process or would it be
[1:35:10] MCPS? Yeah, I got the feeling it would
[1:35:12] have be us because it would be too
[1:35:14] difficult for them to be taking money
[1:35:16] for the state for playground equipment
[1:35:17] and it's going there has to go through
[1:35:19] DGS.
[1:35:22] >> So, um those are all things that you
[1:35:25] know are
[1:35:26] >> part of our consideration is
[1:35:29] we've done some uh bonds recently that
[1:35:33] we are just clearing out. Um you know
[1:35:35] there may be future bonds, public works
[1:35:37] and other things that we are potentially
[1:35:38] thinking about. Um we've had a great
[1:35:42] delegation who works hard on our behalf
[1:35:44] but being cognizant that state's budget
[1:35:49] right we are all aware the state is got
[1:35:51] significant budget challenges ahead that
[1:35:54] go to the county level as well so there
[1:35:57] may be more pl more jurisdictions and sponsors looking for money in the
[1:36:02] future bond cycles. Yeah, I'm wondering
[1:36:04] if we can get Kensington Estate Civic
[1:36:06] Association to I don't know if they
[1:36:09] could be a partner in that.
[1:36:10] >> I think they could. The question
[1:36:12] ultimately is as these bonds are
[1:36:13] typically
[1:36:15] um released after as a reimburse you
[1:36:18] >> saying we would have to be the general.
[1:36:20] I'm just saying I think the civic
[1:36:22] association though should be um ask them
[1:36:25] to support it.
[1:36:26] >> Yes.
[1:36:27] >> Because it really is their park.
[1:36:30] >> I agree. Um I you know I also just want
[1:36:33] we have worked very hard you know
[1:36:35] council member licter in many other
[1:36:36] capacities has has worked on the you
[1:36:39] know our building of bridges to our
[1:36:41] neighboring communities
[1:36:43] it Kensington estates from some of the
[1:36:46] feedback we have received they didn't
[1:36:48] get as much information about
[1:36:51] >> MCPS they didn't get any giving it to
[1:36:54] them
[1:36:55] >> so we want to bring them to the table
[1:36:57] >> and make sure that they are aware they
[1:36:58] can ask questions Um, you know, we've
[1:37:01] talked about with MCPS during this
[1:37:03] meeting just how to facilitate that
[1:37:06] exchange that is getting, you know,
[1:37:09] facilitating actual uh community
[1:37:11] engagement. But I I think their
[1:37:14] partnership,
[1:37:15] especially because it demonstrates this
[1:37:18] is a a part of the county that has no
[1:37:21] parks within their their association
[1:37:23] area. They rely on this park. they rely
[1:37:27] on it for their kids, you know, soccer
[1:37:30] practices and games and as their
[1:37:32] playground and whether they're using the
[1:37:34] skatepark just, you know, sitting under
[1:37:35] the tree. This is some of the only
[1:37:38] nearby walkable um with to the emphasis
[1:37:41] of that Hawk
[1:37:44] um uh crosswalk was put in specifically
[1:37:47] to make a safe connection point from
[1:37:49] this park, right,
[1:37:50] >> to their community.
[1:37:52] >> So,
[1:37:52] >> well, it's funny. the skate park is now
[1:37:54] being used more by smaller children. I
[1:37:56] don't know if you've noticed that that,
[1:37:58] you know, they bring their little
[1:37:59] scooters or their bikes and they they're
[1:38:02] playing on that, you know, uh I think
[1:38:04] maybe skateboarders are doing the ebike
[1:38:06] thing now more than they are, you know,
[1:38:08] >> still a fair amount of
[1:38:09] >> Oh, yeah. No, they're still there. But
[1:38:10] it is it's just funny to see younger
[1:38:12] kids.
[1:38:12] >> It's evolved.
[1:38:13] >> Yeah. Yeah. That are enjoying it. And
[1:38:15] those, you know, some of our concerns
[1:38:17] back to them were if we don't own it, we
[1:38:20] don't control it,
[1:38:22] do we want to take liability, right?
[1:38:24] down to legit and ensuring and how
[1:38:27] when things may happen on this site. um
[1:38:29] that's something to be discussed in the
[1:38:30] short-term
[1:38:32] but also the the bigger discussion that
[1:38:34] we wanted to have with them is you know
[1:38:38] us being able to control that property
[1:38:41] as a park and work with them as a
[1:38:43] partner which I think we have a
[1:38:44] demonstrated
[1:38:46] um track record of with the schools that
[1:38:48] are within our jurisdiction using our
[1:38:50] parks that uh you know that may be the
[1:38:54] pentimate
[1:38:56] uh option that needs to be discussed.
[1:38:59] >> So, Sue Ellen, is it possible to do anou
[1:39:03] maybe 9 months to that so we can have
[1:39:07] insurance on that property or when if
[1:39:10] we're doing the uh landscaping just for
[1:39:12] the back? How would that work?
[1:39:17] » What you would be insuring is property
[1:39:19] that you own and activity by your
[1:39:21] employees,
[1:39:22] >> but it's not property property we don't
[1:39:24] own
[1:39:26] >> that we lease.
[1:39:27] >> Yeah.
[1:39:27] >> Right. that you lease. That's a property
[1:39:29] interest.
[1:39:30] >> Okay. Yeah.
[1:39:30] >> Uh or you have some kind of ownership.
[1:39:33] So, um you can ensure the activities of
[1:39:36] your employees and your contractors.
[1:39:40] >> Okay.
[1:39:40] >> So, uh an MOU is always a good idea. So,
[1:39:44] you lay out all the rights and
[1:39:46] obligations and who has to carry what
[1:39:47] insurance and who's doing what. It's
[1:39:50] much better to do that way.
[1:39:52] >> Okay.
[1:39:52] >> And in fact, I would imagine that would
[1:39:54] be required
[1:39:56] in some way. You know, in the event of a child falls off the playground or a
[1:40:00] child's using the skatepark and they get
[1:40:02] injured and they are looking for an
[1:40:04] outlet, is it and we have a lease on it, would be our liability, our coverage
[1:40:10] or MCPS DGS,
[1:40:12] >> they would want if they they still own
[1:40:15] it, they would want you to identify
[1:40:17] them.
[1:40:18] >> That's what would happen. And so that's
[1:40:20] what and they would look to you for
[1:40:21] that.
[1:40:21] >> Y okay. I mean, if I were representing
[1:40:25] them, that's what I want you to do
[1:40:27] because whoever has control of the
[1:40:30] property should be the one that's
[1:40:32] insuring it.
[1:40:34] They don't have control once you you're
[1:40:36] taking over maintenance or and or
[1:40:39] operation.
[1:40:40] >> Well, that was this is the question I
[1:40:43] wanted to ask. And so I think
[1:40:44] >> we're here
[1:40:45] >> would be good to know like how expensive
[1:40:48] is that to ensure for skate park
[1:40:51] liability versus other types of
[1:40:53] playground equipment. I don't think we
[1:40:55] know that yet, right?
[1:40:56] >> No, but this was very recent and these
[1:40:59] are kind of data points questions we
[1:41:01] want to go back and get. So then and
[1:41:03] then also whether you all in your
[1:41:05] conversation
[1:41:07] um
[1:41:09] identified which would be the likely
[1:41:12] tasks that we would take on versus them.
[1:41:14] You mentioned mowing
[1:41:16] >> most likely they mow about every two
[1:41:18] weeks
[1:41:20] >> like
[1:41:20] >> give or take and then it's
[1:41:23] been cancelled because
[1:41:26] >> what is it that they're
[1:41:29] >> taking on? But I gathered from the end
[1:41:30] of that conversation to be um maybe it's
[1:41:34] not consistent with how we interpreted
[1:41:36] it, but I thought they said they would
[1:41:37] continue to mow and they'd be okay with
[1:41:38] it and we whacking and they wanted us to
[1:41:41] help with the playground most
[1:41:42] >> playground and they would do it sounds
[1:41:44] like trash. I think part of the question
[1:41:46] if I'm interpreting it correctly is is
[1:41:50] the standard by which they're going to
[1:41:52] do it and the standard by which we
[1:41:53] typically do it
[1:41:55] >> if we're which do we prefer? if they are
[1:41:59] if their mowing schedule is such that
[1:42:02] they're doing it every twoish weeks and
[1:42:05] heavy and then the park isn't usable
[1:42:07] because it grass is too long.
[1:42:09] Who's benefiting from that? Um and so
[1:42:12] ultimately I think these are the points
[1:42:14] of hey
[1:42:17] do you just want us to take it and kind
[1:42:19] of run it for 9 months
[1:42:20] >> and see what it would take for us and
[1:42:22] collect thinking like what are all the
[1:42:24] tasks that need to be specified in anou
[1:42:27] in terms of responsibility. I think
[1:42:30] that's what the the mayor is, you know,
[1:42:33] what are all those points that we want
[1:42:34] to get clarified and is MCPS. Yep. You
[1:42:37] guys can do this that we'll take trash.
[1:42:40] We understand their standard for how
[1:42:42] often will that occur? What happens? You
[1:42:44] know, their trash is overflowing right
[1:42:47] now. And so
[1:42:48] >> they have one daytime custodian that's
[1:42:52] in the building.
[1:42:53] >> So he's the one that goes out and does,
[1:42:55] you know, the lawn cutting now.
[1:42:57] >> Mhm. So, I don't know. I saw him today.
[1:43:01] I don't know if he was doing the back,
[1:43:02] but he was doing the front. It's a
[1:43:04] different guy that had been there
[1:43:06] previously.
[1:43:07] Um, so, um, you know, do we want people
[1:43:12] to be able to use the field knowing that
[1:43:14] we cut it every week, but if it can't be
[1:43:17] used because the grass is too high, you
[1:43:20] know, I don't um, or they take away the
[1:43:23] skate park or they take away the
[1:43:24] playground equipment because it's not up
[1:43:26] to their standards, you know, so they
[1:43:28] don't want the liability.
[1:43:30] >> So, I think we just have to decide, do
[1:43:32] we want to have a park on the west side
[1:43:33] or not? I mean also just tell you just
[1:43:36] to keep the conversation moving where I
[1:43:37] am like I fully support exploring
[1:43:40] entering into anou so that we can try to
[1:43:42] have this
[1:43:44] >> park and green space maintained on the
[1:43:45] west side. So if you want to proceed
[1:43:48] with conversations with them to figure
[1:43:49] out some of these details and then come
[1:43:51] back with a recommendation after you
[1:43:53] look at the staffing impacts and the
[1:43:54] cost impacts on what you think we should
[1:43:57] be willing to take on for a 9-month
[1:43:59] period.
[1:44:00] >> Yeah. Yeah. And I think part of that,
[1:44:01] Alice, you know, to the mayor is talking
[1:44:03] to our town crew of
[1:44:06] >> how much time would it take?
[1:44:07] >> Yeah. What are we adding here? And is
[1:44:08] it, you know, when we get into leafing
[1:44:11] season, are we leafing them? You know,
[1:44:12] and getting their perspective on it.
[1:44:14] >> So,
[1:44:16] >> okay. So, you want us to just come back
[1:44:18] in October and hopefully have more
[1:44:20] information on what the cost would be,
[1:44:22] >> what the impacts would be, and what
[1:44:24] >> when we would take on versus them,
[1:44:26] >> right? I mean, at this point, grass
[1:44:28] season's almost over anyway, so you're
[1:44:30] really talking about season.
[1:44:32] >> No, I know. I know.
[1:44:33] >> But, uh,
[1:44:35] >> Yep.
[1:44:35] >> Yeah. Okay. All right. We will do that.
[1:44:37] And maybe on the next call, do you want
[1:44:39] to include uh Kensington Estates?
[1:44:42] >> Yeah.
[1:44:43] I'd be happy to reach out. I'm on
[1:44:45] an exchange with them from the county
[1:44:47] development.
[1:44:47] >> I think it's Leslie Freed, I think.
[1:44:49] Correct. Yeah. Okay. Good. All right.
[1:44:52] Sounds good. All right. Thank you. Does
[1:44:54] anybody have any questions? Sorry. Ow.
[1:44:58] >> Um, hey, good evening everybody. Can you
[1:45:00] hear me?
[1:45:00] >> Yes.
[1:45:02] >> Um,
[1:45:04] so, um, this property, it's owned by the
[1:45:07] county and, uh, MCPS is the tenant. So,
[1:45:12] uh, I guess my first question is, is
[1:45:14] there a lease orou
[1:45:17] or agreement that defines the MCPS's use
[1:45:22] of this property that they don't own
[1:45:23] that is owned by the county?
[1:45:27] Um cuz I remember in uh when HOC
[1:45:31] occupied the property there that was
[1:45:34] governed by a a lease and lease was very
[1:45:38] specific that they had to um you know
[1:45:41] keep the grounds in a good state of
[1:45:43] repair and make sure they were available
[1:45:44] to the public. Um and they had to make
[1:45:47] the gym available which you know at for
[1:45:50] a while they weren't doing but um then they were after some some public
[1:45:55] pressure. So, um, that's a key question
[1:45:58] for me is, you know, what does the lease
[1:45:59] say between the county and MCPS? If the
[1:46:04] lease says that, you know, they have to
[1:46:06] do these things, then, um, you know,
[1:46:09] maybe there's some other avenues. Um,
[1:46:12] you know, it would be a shame if MCPS is
[1:46:14] sort of eyeing up the town as, you know,
[1:46:17] deep pockets. Let's dump some
[1:46:20] responsibility on on someone else. Uh,
[1:46:24] and I know that some of the
[1:46:28] functions that are currently at this
[1:46:31] property were formerly at the the
[1:46:34] Lindbrook property in East Bethesda. Uh,
[1:46:38] Lindbrook. Um, that's a little different
[1:46:40] because Lindbrook is actually owned by
[1:46:42] MCPS, not by um the county. But, uh,
[1:46:47] Lindbrook has has a playground. It's
[1:46:50] wellmaintained. So, um, been that way
[1:46:54] for many years. Um, so I don't know
[1:46:58] about this claim that, um, you know,
[1:47:00] nice playground you got there. Be a
[1:47:02] shame if something happened to it. Uh,
[1:47:05] when they're managing to maintain, um,
[1:47:08] playgrounds and other similar properties
[1:47:10] just fine.
[1:47:11] >> Um, so, couple of comments. Um, I think
[1:47:16] the bond bill is a smart approach. Um,
[1:47:19] there was actually a bond bill that was
[1:47:23] specifically designated for a skate park
[1:47:26] in Kensington that arose out of a
[1:47:28] conversation with Gabe Albernos about
[1:47:32] uh this property. And what happened was
[1:47:35] uh parks
[1:47:37] said um sure we'll we'll take the money,
[1:47:40] we'll take a bond bill, but we want to
[1:47:43] put a uh skate park over at Newport Mill
[1:47:46] Park. Um and then uh recently they re
[1:47:50] relocated that to a whole different
[1:47:51] park, but um that's a bond bill that's
[1:47:54] been sitting around for
[1:47:56] uh a number of years uh back from from
[1:47:58] my tenure that if if Parks is not using
[1:48:01] it could potentially be repurposed to
[1:48:03] for uh purposes in Kensington.
[1:48:08] I
[1:48:08] >> think the problem for this particular
[1:48:10] skate park is it doesn't fit quite what
[1:48:13] even the county likes to use. They
[1:48:16] didn't construct it,
[1:48:17] >> right? It was
[1:48:20] >> self constructed. And I think
[1:48:22] >> there's no oversight of the skate park
[1:48:26] by the county. Never has been. So, it's kind of a oddity for um for the
[1:48:33] county and not quite sure what to do
[1:48:36] with it because HOC basically promised
[1:48:40] that they would keep it tidy and oversee
[1:48:44] it. So, you know, it was up to them.
[1:48:47] >> I am a little confused though that
[1:48:49] you're say is this uh
[1:48:52] >> it's always been it was Greg Osat from
[1:48:55] the Department of Government Services
[1:48:58] >> when HOC left the building and land went
[1:49:02] back to MCPS
[1:49:04] because it's really was theirs. Are you
[1:49:06] saying that?
[1:49:07] >> Well, the the county is the owner. The
[1:49:09] county has been the owner of that
[1:49:11] property for many many years. is still
[1:49:13] the owner
[1:49:14] >> and MCPS is the tenant.
[1:49:16] >> So MCPS does not own the property, but
[1:49:19] they are
[1:49:21] um using the property. I don't I don't
[1:49:23] know exactly how that works.
[1:49:24] >> Well, they had the right of first
[1:49:26] refusal. So I guess
[1:49:28] >> I mean I imagine there's some sort of
[1:49:29] agreement that spells out exactly what
[1:49:32] >> uh MCPS is responsible for, what the
[1:49:35] county is responsible for since it is
[1:49:37] not MCPS's property.
[1:49:39] >> Right. We will look into it. I and I
[1:49:41] only say that um I think we will
[1:49:44] investigate the leasing. I think
[1:49:46] obviously that's very sound.
[1:49:49] Uh county's website MC Atlas lists the
[1:49:52] board of education as the owner which is
[1:49:55] commiserate with how I just looked up
[1:49:56] Kensington Parkwood Elementary School
[1:49:58] and a couple of others whereas other
[1:50:00] county facilities which I looked up
[1:50:02] indicate Montgomery County as the owner.
[1:50:05] So takeaway is let's uh just finish that
[1:50:09] investigation. Determine what other
[1:50:12] encumbrances are on it, what otherus are
[1:50:15] on it, what other leases and terms,
[1:50:16] right? Like what are the things that that are
[1:50:22] driving why the county feels they cannot
[1:50:25] maintain the green space, the skate park
[1:50:28] or the playground that leaves them to
[1:50:33] believe that their only option is to
[1:50:36] potentially shut those facilities down,
[1:50:38] which is what I think we're trying to
[1:50:40] avoid, regardless of who may be the
[1:50:42] owner of it.
[1:50:43] >> Well, I I stand corrected. I just looked
[1:50:45] up on the EST state land records and it
[1:50:49] did change hands
[1:50:50] >> from the county. So it is owned by MCPS
[1:50:53] as of May 21st.
[1:50:57] >> Yeah, that that was my understanding.
[1:50:59] So, um,
[1:51:00] >> just to just to add to your point,
[1:51:01] Conor, when they
[1:51:03] >> what they reflected in the meeting, uh,
[1:51:04] was that they were, um, they were short
[1:51:08] resourced, um, and that they would not
[1:51:11] be able to likely get more resources to
[1:51:15] keep a park and a playground that wasn't
[1:51:18] actively serving the population that's
[1:51:20] housed in the building that they're
[1:51:21] using it for for that use. other active
[1:51:24] schools would get priority in the and
[1:51:26] given the current budget situation
[1:51:28] >> because the kids that they are having at
[1:51:30] that school are older and would not be a
[1:51:33] playground.
[1:51:34] >> Yeah. Yeah. They're not
[1:51:35] >> Yeah. Secondarily to Nate's point is
[1:51:38] >> they've got a backlog of playground CIP
[1:51:42] either upgrades replacement um and they
[1:51:45] it exceeds the budget and they just
[1:51:47] they're being realistic
[1:51:48] >> and they even said that they have work
[1:51:49] orders in. And I don't know, Al, if
[1:51:51] you've been over there recently to see
[1:51:52] the swings and the holes in the in the
[1:51:55] >> in the rubber
[1:51:56] >> rubber,
[1:51:57] >> but they have a work order in for a
[1:51:59] while now to fix some of the stuff, but
[1:52:01] it's just the backlog is
[1:52:03] >> and it's going to be lower priority
[1:52:05] active than an active school.
[1:52:07] >> So, we don't want to see it really go
[1:52:08] totally downhill.
[1:52:10] >> Yeah. I mean, our goal is to keep the
[1:52:12] open space and to keep it in good
[1:52:14] repair. That's our goal. That's our
[1:52:16] want.
[1:52:17] >> Safe and accessible.
[1:52:18] >> Yeah.
[1:52:19] Another question is um
[1:52:23] >> is the gym currently available for
[1:52:26] public?
[1:52:27] >> They said that it should be back on
[1:52:29] track now that they've moved in now that
[1:52:31] they have a custodian for the night uh
[1:52:36] lined up the evening
[1:52:37] >> because I just went online tonight. I
[1:52:39] wasn't able to do it. This might be my
[1:52:41] own inability to navigate active
[1:52:44] Montgomery.
[1:52:45] >> Yeah.
[1:52:46] >> But I wasn't able to make it work. Um,
[1:52:49] so that's that's another question is is
[1:52:51] have they come through on that promise
[1:52:54] that they would make
[1:52:55] >> on our call which was what two weeks ago
[1:52:57] and they plan to have it up and up. She
[1:53:01] didn't give me an exact
[1:53:02] >> because it's it's been you know stay
[1:53:05] tuned it's coming for
[1:53:07] >> well they did not want to open it when
[1:53:09] they did not have the people in the
[1:53:11] building. uh those people are now the
[1:53:14] workers are in the building and now they
[1:53:16] have do have the custodian like today
[1:53:18] was the first time I've seen him and he
[1:53:21] was mowing the front lawn
[1:53:24] so they uh they were pretty clear about
[1:53:27] the the hires are now in place.
[1:53:31] >> Got it.
[1:53:33] >> But she did not give me an exact date.
[1:53:40] Well, once we have that info and once we
[1:53:43] assuming all proceeds and we get to a
[1:53:45] point with anou, I think it would be
[1:53:46] good to update the community, not just
[1:53:50] town of Kensington, but as you said,
[1:53:52] >> yeah, I think Kensington estates
[1:53:53] particularly need to
[1:53:55] >> Yeah. Okay. Any other questions?
[1:54:01] » Okay.
[1:54:03] All right. Thank you very much.
[1:54:04] >> Thank you.
[1:54:11] Uh, Connor, do you want me to meet uh I
[1:54:12] can reach out to Peggy and tell her
[1:54:14] we're Yeah. ready for another meeting,
[1:54:15] >> please. What you mean? Okay.
[1:54:20] » And I'll um
[1:54:21] >> work with Kensington State.
[1:54:22] >> Do you want to reach out to
[1:54:23] >> I will because I've got that for Kika.
[1:54:25] Uh once we have a
[1:54:27] >> is it Leslie? I have the president of
[1:54:30] >> Joan.
[1:54:31] Yeah.
[1:54:32] >> We also have someone from Emily Shetty's
[1:54:34] office.
[1:54:35] >> Yeah.
[1:54:35] We had hoped to have her on there
[1:54:37] and she Yeah, she didn't come.
[1:54:38] >> Maybe join.
[1:54:40] >> Yeah.
[1:54:40] So, we'll keep them in the loop as
[1:54:42] well. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh
[1:54:45] let's see. We doorways. Um let's go be I
[1:54:48] know the resolutions are quick, but
[1:54:49] let's do public appearances. Um this is
[1:54:52] the opportunity to bring anything up
[1:54:53] that's not already on the agenda. So, if
[1:54:56] you're online or here in person and want
[1:54:59] to bring something up that's not on the
[1:55:00] agenda, this is your opportunity.
[1:55:05] Uh Joe.
[1:55:08] >> Yeah. Thank you, Mayor. Um I I recommend
[1:55:11] or suggest in a spirit of transparency
[1:55:13] that excerpts from the uh Open Meetings
[1:55:15] Act compliance board findings be
[1:55:17] published in an upcoming edition of the
[1:55:19] Roundtown Journal, the official town
[1:55:21] record for for Kensington.
[1:55:24] And uh allow me to say I was just more
[1:55:27] than a little disappointed not to get a
[1:55:28] straight answer, a clear-cut answer to
[1:55:30] my straightforward questions about with
[1:55:32] whom specifically responsibility resides
[1:55:35] for these violations.
[1:55:37] I I don't think we are all ex
[1:55:39] responsible is is a sufficient or um
[1:55:43] very telling response.
[1:55:46] >> Okay. Well, this was already on the
[1:55:47] agenda, so bringing up something. I just
[1:55:50] wanted but the town around town journal
[1:55:53] suggestion wasn't so I wanted to be sure
[1:55:55] to get that uh raised. Uh also um
[1:56:00] I I know that council member Crims is to
[1:56:03] be the point person for the search for
[1:56:05] the new town manager. Um, I encourage
[1:56:08] the council to consider an expanded
[1:56:11] approach maybe in paneling a search
[1:56:13] committee that includes two council
[1:56:14] members, perhaps the mayor as well, as two count towns people, a fivep
[1:56:20] person search committee, in other words,
[1:56:22] for the new town manager.
[1:56:24] >> Um, we're actually all on that committee
[1:56:27] as uh we understand from our town
[1:56:30] manager. So, Connor is just taking the
[1:56:32] lead.
[1:56:32] >> Yeah. on getting in touch with the
[1:56:35] search, but the entire council and
[1:56:37] myself will actually
[1:56:39] >> uh be on that committee.
[1:56:41] >> Is there is there going to be a role for
[1:56:42] town's people to be serving on the
[1:56:44] search committee?
[1:56:45] >> Uh we have not made that decision, but
[1:56:49] >> we are we are
[1:56:50] >> I hope so. I think it would be a good
[1:56:52] idea to have some uh
[1:56:53] >> Yep. I appreciate the input, Joe. And I
[1:56:56] will as I'm working forward in this I
[1:56:58] will
[1:56:59] >> and and finally and finally I want to
[1:57:01] extend best wish best wishes to Alex
[1:57:05] Marini and her acting town manager
[1:57:07] position. I know Alex to be a very
[1:57:09] friendly hardworking person who's
[1:57:12] respectful of towns people and those are
[1:57:14] all very important qualities and uh
[1:57:17] they're they're qualities that promise
[1:57:18] to serve her well in her acting town
[1:57:21] manager role. So congratulations Alex.
[1:57:24] >> Thanks Joe. Anything
[1:57:26] else? [clears throat]
[1:57:28] And I don't see any other hands. Anybody
[1:57:30] in the audience want to say anything?
[1:57:32] You guys are good. Okay. All right.
[1:57:34] Great. Okay. All right. We will move on
[1:57:37] to the resolutions.
[1:57:39] Um, we have two resolutions on here. One
[1:57:42] is for the DRB
[1:57:44] and one is to uh re uh engage uh Shorb
[1:57:49] uh contract to a landscape from Kennedy.
[1:57:52] What am I doing? Oh, sorry you guys. You
[1:57:55] guys want to talk too?
[1:57:56] >> Ready to move on.
[1:57:58] >> Gosh. Yeah, we've talked a lot.
[1:58:01] >> I felt like everybody's had their
[1:58:03] moment. Let's start with Stuart. Stuart,
[1:58:04] do you have anything you want to add?
[1:58:06] >> Uh, briefly, just a plug on uh
[1:58:08] Walktober. Uh, we are doing Walktober
[1:58:10] again this year. We are doing it a
[1:58:12] little differently than we have in the
[1:58:13] past or perhaps a return to the way we
[1:58:16] did in the past, I should say. Uh, every
[1:58:18] weekend in October, we will be leading
[1:58:20] town walks. Um, starting on October 3rd,
[1:58:23] we will do a food and restaurant walk
[1:58:25] starting at Java Nation at 10:30. By the
[1:58:27] way, all these walks start at 10:30. So,
[1:58:29] we'd love to have participation if folks
[1:58:30] are interested. Uh, food and restaurant
[1:58:32] walk, we'll start at Java Nation. We'll
[1:58:33] go from 10:30 to 12. On October 10th,
[1:58:36] we'll have a transportation walk leaving
[1:58:38] out at Warner Mansion at 10:30. Um, on
[1:58:41] October 17th, we'll do an infrastructure
[1:58:43] improvement walk leaving out at Ernest
[1:58:45] Memorial Park um at 10:30. And then
[1:58:48] obviously we talked about the um the
[1:58:49] wonderful defending democracy and art
[1:58:51] walk that we're going to be doing on
[1:58:52] October 24th sitting at Oldtown Market
[1:58:55] 10:30. And then I will be leading a
[1:58:57] youth focus walk at Kensington Heights
[1:58:59] Park on the north side October 31st. So
[1:59:02] we have been putting out uh
[1:59:03] communications with uh the town through
[1:59:05] various outlets and so
[1:59:06] >> well the journal went to press yesterday
[1:59:09] so for the October issue and it's right
[1:59:12] there on the second page. So did you
[1:59:14] open it and
[1:59:15] >> the website? So, we got a lot of things
[1:59:16] going on the front.
[1:59:17] >> I know, but
[1:59:19] got to hype it up a little. Um, so
[1:59:22] there's that. Uh, next thing I'd like to
[1:59:24] flag for folks is that we did have a uh
[1:59:27] state highway town council quarterly
[1:59:29] coordination meeting on September 2nd.
[1:59:32] Um, this is is a part of our quarterly
[1:59:34] meetings that we do with uh state
[1:59:35] highway. Um, they provided a pretty
[1:59:37] comprehensive report on all the things
[1:59:39] that we had asked them to provide. Five
[1:59:41] topics. The note that I will flag for
[1:59:43] the town and I'm happy to share the
[1:59:44] minutes from that meeting u they may be
[1:59:47] already posted on the u town website is
[1:59:50] that the light at the intersection that
[1:59:52] mayor referenced uh top of our meeting
[1:59:55] uh which is at St. Hall Park University.
[1:59:57] We had we had met with the community in
[2:00:00] December of 25 post um uh the incident
[2:00:04] there uh and and SHA committed to doing
[2:00:08] a uh a study that would take about nine
[2:00:11] months to design a traffic light at that
[2:00:12] intersection. So I'm talking about
[2:00:14] University at St. Paul Park. Um, so we
[2:00:16] of course we got onto the phone on
[2:00:18] September 2nd asked for an update on
[2:00:19] that and they said that that
[2:00:20] intersection has actually been folded
[2:00:22] into a much larger project which would
[2:00:24] involve basically tearing up one lane in
[2:00:27] each direction along University
[2:00:29] Boulevard from the Kensington
[2:00:32] Connecticut Avenue University split at
[2:00:33] the north side of our town boundary all
[2:00:35] the way out to Georgia Avenue. Um, and
[2:00:37] so they said that uh progress on that
[2:00:40] has started. They have funding which is
[2:00:41] important to note. Um but that that
[2:00:44] build would probably start uh
[2:00:45] significantly in 2028, summer of 2028.
[2:00:49] So it's a bit of a downer. We were
[2:00:50] hoping to have a much more um speedy
[2:00:54] implementation of a traffic light at
[2:00:56] that intersection and it looks like
[2:00:57] we're going to have to wait a little
[2:00:58] bit. So um just want to flag that for
[2:01:00] the town that that is something we are
[2:01:01] keeping our eye on and we are actively
[2:01:03] engaged with SHA, but uh unfortunately
[2:01:06] we had some um news to report there. Can
[2:01:09] I ask I'm so glad you brought this up
[2:01:10] because I was actually going to ask in
[2:01:12] light of the letter from James'
[2:01:14] grandmother. So it when you say tearing
[2:01:16] up the lane, is this like a road diet
[2:01:18] where they're removing a lane to try to
[2:01:20] slow and then we'll also
[2:01:23] >> maybe make changes to slow traffic with
[2:01:25] a light? Did they talk about
[2:01:27] >> We've asked for the study. They have not
[2:01:28] provided us with a study. Uh we asked to
[2:01:31] get the study so we could socialize with
[2:01:32] the community. Actually, council member
[2:01:34] Angel rightfully pointed that out. Um
[2:01:36] and we have not received that yet. Um,
[2:01:38] so I don't know what the scope of work
[2:01:39] entails. It's significant. They did
[2:01:41] debut some um information at the at the
[2:01:45] community meeting in December and then
[2:01:47] they while we were actually on with the
[2:01:49] task force uh I'm sorry with the
[2:01:51] committee somebody identified a slide
[2:01:54] deck that they had published that had
[2:01:56] some like okay we're going to put a
[2:01:57] light in here and we're going to you
[2:01:58] know we're going to note an improvement
[2:02:00] here. But we had talked about as part of
[2:02:01] our plans like, you know, eliminating
[2:02:04] about a lane in each direction, maybe
[2:02:06] adding a little bit of a buffer and a
[2:02:08] bike lane kind of like they did on Old
[2:02:09] Georgetown. But we haven't seen plans
[2:02:11] yet.
[2:02:12] >> Um, if I may, it's Yeah, it's so this
[2:02:14] has been in discussion for a while. I
[2:02:16] mean, even the letter we sent to SHA,
[2:02:18] >> um, we kind of documented every
[2:02:19] iteration of this potential road diet
[2:02:21] that was recommended.
[2:02:22] >> The BIPA, was in the Connecticut Avenue,
[2:02:26] it was in the priority plan that we did
[2:02:27] back in 2020
[2:02:29] >> and 2021. So they're they've they've
[2:02:31] actually now hired someone to do the
[2:02:34] study and they have the funding secured
[2:02:36] to actually do the project they said.
[2:02:38] >> Um so in 20 January 2027 they will get
[2:02:42] to the 30% design and then we implored
[2:02:44] them to share with the community so we
[2:02:46] don't get into a situation where the
[2:02:48] public just doesn't like what they're
[2:02:50] proposing so that there's at least an
[2:02:52] opportunity for feedback and we can we
[2:02:54] offered to host a forum for what the
[2:02:56] design looks like.
[2:02:58] What it boils down to is at the fork of
[2:03:00] University of Connecticut, it would go
[2:03:02] to two lanes to calm traffic because the
[2:03:05] lanes are not technically really needed.
[2:03:07] So, the road diet, which would then
[2:03:09] provide a um protected bike lane and
[2:03:13] possibly sidewalk enhancements and
[2:03:15] improvements, including better buffers
[2:03:18] and so on. Um, and that would go all the
[2:03:20] way um I
[2:03:22] >> going all the way to Georgia,
[2:03:23] >> past Georgia, I thought was even. So
[2:03:25] that's um that's the plan at least as
[2:03:28] they described it and that's how it's
[2:03:30] been articulated at least one other time
[2:03:32] um if not several times to us.
[2:03:35] >> Well, they did have a death of that way
[2:03:37] too.
[2:03:37] >> Yeah.
[2:03:37] >> So the good the good news is that it's
[2:03:41] proceeding and we should have something
[2:03:42] to react to um if not sooner because
[2:03:45] there has to be have been a preliminary
[2:03:47] kind of sketch and design but at least
[2:03:50] by January to see what the actual 30%
[2:03:53] looks like. Yeah,
[2:03:55] >> but um the point they made about why
[2:03:57] they tied this into the traffic light
[2:04:00] improvement into it is that they know
[2:04:01] that they have a dedicated source of
[2:04:02] funding for it, but we push back um all
[2:04:06] of us that they said, "Look, this is
[2:04:08] something that was promised that you
[2:04:10] committed to it, do it sooner." And and
[2:04:13] um the district engineer um
[2:04:16] >> Jonathan,
[2:04:17] >> no, Derek. Derek got it. Um he he uh he
[2:04:22] >> he committed to looking for for ways to
[2:04:24] do it sooner as they had previously
[2:04:26] committed. So we keep we'll keep pushing
[2:04:28] them.
[2:04:28] >> Okay. If there's anything we can do to
[2:04:31] like inform the community and bring
[2:04:34] additional
[2:04:36] >> pressure. I don't know what's helpful.
[2:04:38] >> One thing that we haven't done yet that
[2:04:39] um I thought we can and should do is at
[2:04:42] least hear what delegate Solomon's
[2:04:45] position is on this. mentioned that
[2:04:47] right at Matt's thing. I said, "Hey,
[2:04:49] maybe we should we should reach out."
[2:04:50] >> Because he had been he had been leading
[2:04:51] a lot of the engagement with SHA for
[2:04:53] that event.
[2:04:54] >> Yeah.
[2:04:54] >> And follow up.
[2:04:55] >> He also was engaged with the outer parts
[2:04:58] of University Avenue and improvements
[2:05:00] that they were trying to do for bike
[2:05:01] pedestrian safety that ultimately
[2:05:03] >> SHA
[2:05:05] >> chose not to move forward with after
[2:05:06] their pilot. And I think,
[2:05:08] >> you know, he was frustrated. And I think
[2:05:10] his point is he's trying to
[2:05:13] >> make these kind of sound improvements.
[2:05:15] And so I think it would be great to get
[2:05:17] his take on it.
[2:05:18] >> Yeah. And that's my final comment and we
[2:05:20] should probably move on. I know there's
[2:05:21] a lot but um just like did any
[2:05:24] discussion come up about piloting like
[2:05:27] before you like they could put up
[2:05:30] barriers and test out a road diet and
[2:05:32] start doing some of these things.
[2:05:33] >> We asked them previously and this is
[2:05:35] where things shift all the time. There's
[2:05:37] like seven different parts of SHA
[2:05:39] represented. we had suggested and
[2:05:41] requested even at that meeting in
[2:05:42] December
[2:05:44] >> um with uh administrator Pines
[2:05:46] >> to do a quick build just a quick build
[2:05:48] which would be like a temporary
[2:05:49] >> and they say okay we'll look into it and
[2:05:51] then they told us at the meeting
[2:05:52] >> that we had in when was that February
[2:05:55] >> February that they would they would
[2:05:57] consider it for for a quick build but
[2:05:58] now all of a sudden it's actually going
[2:06:00] to happen as a permanent installation.
[2:06:02] So we, you know, we've emphasized, you
[2:06:06] know, we tried it out and then they, you
[2:06:08] know, they go off and do their thing and
[2:06:11] come back to us with
[2:06:13] >> maybe they felt the numbers were low
[2:06:14] enough in that area. They did a traffic
[2:06:17] study the numbers.
[2:06:19] >> Well, I don't think I've seen like the
[2:06:21] spot, you know, the where the rubber
[2:06:23] hoses across the road or what what they
[2:06:25] would have done. I don't think I've seen
[2:06:26] anything about traffic studies out
[2:06:28] there, but maybe I missed that.
[2:06:30] >> Okay. Thank you.
[2:06:32] a point on that when you how in a quick
[2:06:34] build they what the pylon off the curb
[2:06:37] lanes how would the buses operate in
[2:06:41] >> this was
[2:06:42] >> and and to that point I'm sure you guys
[2:06:43] have talked about this but it's your
[2:06:44] committee of like maybe another part of
[2:06:47] this quick builder or immediacy that
[2:06:49] could be taken is because we all saw
[2:06:52] Wada and the county were very capable of
[2:06:55] putting bus lanes in on Rockfell Pike
[2:06:56] overnight
[2:06:58] >> without a whole lot of public notice but
[2:07:00] like could they be converted to bus only
[2:07:02] lanes,
[2:07:03] >> right?
[2:07:03] >> They just showed up.
[2:07:04] >> So, but could they be converted to bus
[2:07:06] only lanes as an interim to trying to
[2:07:09] calm that corridor? Granted that as
[2:07:12] we've heard in other things,
[2:07:12] enforcement, they only work if they're
[2:07:14] enforced.
[2:07:15] >> Yeah. No, I just to your point like
[2:07:19] >> you can do things quickly and test.
[2:07:21] >> Yeah. They did say they engaged with
[2:07:25] Wada and Rhyon and that they were they
[2:07:29] were concerned. um those entities were
[2:07:31] concerned with what was being proposed
[2:07:33] and what the buses would do. At one
[2:07:35] point we were told um by a previous
[2:07:40] one of the previous lead um partners at
[2:07:43] SHA who's since moved to a different
[2:07:44] role uh that they were going to do the
[2:07:47] designated bus lane as part of it um and
[2:07:50] that was going to be the plan and maybe
[2:07:51] they'd be able to get some bike lanes
[2:07:53] but now it's shifted. So the point is we
[2:07:55] just kept saying just let us see let us
[2:07:57] see what's being proposed and let's
[2:07:58] discuss it before it's
[2:07:59] >> finalized. Yeah.
[2:08:00] >> Thank you.
[2:08:00] >> Yeah.
[2:08:02] >> Um keep you guys updated on that for
[2:08:04] sure. Um one other thing coming out of
[2:08:06] that the PBS uh MTC is you know we're
[2:08:08] going to continue to focus on SHA and our and our high-speed hightra uh
[2:08:14] routes. But what I think I'm starting to
[2:08:16] focus on is things that we can do in
[2:08:17] town that are in our uh custody and
[2:08:20] control. And so to that effect, I've
[2:08:23] started um essentially putting together
[2:08:24] a study for sidewalks and crosswalks
[2:08:27] methodology. And so I've spent a
[2:08:28] considerable amount of time uh walking
[2:08:30] the town documenting current conditions
[2:08:32] as we've leveraged some of the previous
[2:08:33] work that council member Angel and Allen
[2:08:36] has put together for walk audit. So um I
[2:08:39] hope to have something in front of that
[2:08:40] committee soon. We'll bring it to the
[2:08:42] town once we get the committee's input,
[2:08:44] but I just want to keep it on
[2:08:45] everybody's radar. This will be
[2:08:46] something coming out of the committee
[2:08:48] there shortly. So
[2:08:49] >> yeah, sidewalks we can do pretty easily.
[2:08:51] >> Yeah, absolutely.
[2:08:52] >> But yeah,
[2:08:53] >> thank you for the support. Uh that's all
[2:08:54] I have.
[2:08:55] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[2:08:57] >> Um briefly on Greenscape,
[2:09:01] those of you who are paying attention,
[2:09:03] Ernest Memorial Park has had some
[2:09:05] improvements put in place.
[2:09:07] >> Improvements.
[2:09:08] >> We have lighting, we have benches, we
[2:09:10] have new flag poles. Um the planting
[2:09:14] installation is coming. And I did want
[2:09:17] to acknowledge that unfortunately we had
[2:09:19] to take down that very large beautiful
[2:09:21] willow tree because there was decay.
[2:09:24] Limbs large limbs were falling. But at
[2:09:27] our next greenscape committee meeting we
[2:09:29] will consider how we can add trees back.
[2:09:32] >> I think if it had been sitting in a big
[2:09:33] field somewhere it would have been okay
[2:09:35] but it was right sidewalk but sidewalk
[2:09:38] electrical wires it was. Yeah cuz that
[2:09:41] last limb that came down went right on
[2:09:43] the sidewalk. We're very lucky that it
[2:09:45] nobody was there. It was huge.
[2:09:48] >> And it wasn't a windy day. It just was
[2:09:52] >> That looks great.
[2:09:53] >> It does look great.
[2:09:54] >> Thank you for the work. Your ribbon
[2:09:56] cutting.
[2:09:56] >> We're going to re uh we've t I've talked
[2:09:58] to Jim and uh about um doing something
[2:10:02] next Memorial Day. So, um Yeah.
[2:10:07] So, I think that'll be great. So,
[2:10:09] he's he's all excited and already
[2:10:11] working on on things. So, we're the
[2:10:13] greenscape's meeting on Sunday for um
[2:10:15] from 3:00 to 4:00 in the park just to
[2:10:18] kind of get re familiar with the
[2:10:20] plantings. Um things have changed a
[2:10:23] little bit. They always do. and to make
[2:10:25] sure everything is is going through. And
[2:10:28] um going to look at possibly adding a
[2:10:30] sound barrier type of fencing just along
[2:10:33] a small section to as you're up there at
[2:10:36] the memorial, you're not quite inundated
[2:10:39] with the sound, but um if you're coming
[2:10:42] down Connecticut Avenue going north,
[2:10:45] it's it's lit up at night. I'm not I
[2:10:47] know some people have been there and it
[2:10:48] wasn't lit up, so I'm not not sure what
[2:10:51] the um timer is on that. supposed to go
[2:10:54] until midnight.
[2:10:55] >> I know, but I don't know what time it
[2:10:56] comes on.
[2:10:57] >> Oh, uh
[2:11:00] I want to say 5, but I'll have to stop
[2:11:03] >> just check. But anyway, um I was able to
[2:11:06] see it coming up the down going north on
[2:11:09] Connecticut. It was really bright.
[2:11:13] So, yeah. So, we're doing good.
[2:11:18] >> Back to school event or anything.
[2:11:19] >> I feel like did we talk about that? I
[2:11:21] can't remember what month
[2:11:22] >> pictures.
[2:11:27] We did have a wonderful turnout. I felt
[2:11:29] like I had talked about it. Maybe I'm
[2:11:32] >> We did have a great back to school block
[2:11:34] party. Thank you to the town support.
[2:11:37] Kensington and K um was tremendous. They
[2:11:39] made sure that every single kid that
[2:11:41] attended got a backpack and school
[2:11:43] supplies. I will say we welcomed a lot
[2:11:47] of new families, many of whom who had
[2:11:49] just moved to Kensington and they're
[2:11:50] like, "Wow, this is awesome." I was
[2:11:52] like, "Wait, do you see Labor Day?"
[2:11:55] >> um,
[2:11:56] >> so we're finding that it's now trending
[2:11:59] younger, like a lot of more of like the
[2:12:01] kindergarten, first to third grade
[2:12:03] families are coming.
[2:12:05] >> Um, but, uh, I think it was it was much
[2:12:08] appreciated.
[2:12:09] >> Yeah. Yeah, that was good.
[2:12:13] Okay. Um I'll be very quick. So um Tracy
[2:12:16] brought to my attention there's a
[2:12:18] Maryland municipal league um achievement
[2:12:22] awards for uh categories
[2:12:26] for things that have been implemented by
[2:12:28] towns and municipal other by
[2:12:30] municipalities around the state for
[2:12:32] community engagement, sustainability,
[2:12:34] and a couple of other topics. Um, and
[2:12:37] she suggested that we put in a an award
[2:12:40] application for the town's food waste
[2:12:43] collection program because it's very
[2:12:45] unique in in not only in this in the
[2:12:48] county, but also just the way that it's
[2:12:50] done and then partnered with the um
[2:12:53] ecology and then it where it goes and what happens to it in the
[2:12:56] processing. So,
[2:12:58] >> I will put together an application
[2:13:00] unless anyone disagrees or opposes.
[2:13:03] this. No, I think
[2:13:04] >> I think it'd be really nice and and the
[2:13:05] idea is to share lessons with other
[2:13:06] municipalities so you can learn from one
[2:13:08] another. A lot of the spirit of what we
[2:13:10] do with sustainable Kensington anyway
[2:13:11] because we like to share those those
[2:13:13] lessons and examples and we learned a
[2:13:15] lot from other municipalities. So,
[2:13:16] >> and I would I would you know mention too
[2:13:18] that we have the composting here too for
[2:13:20] people that you know don't have their
[2:13:22] pickup.
[2:13:23] >> Yeah.
[2:13:24] >> Um so, you know, a lot of people can and
[2:13:26] it's open. You know, if a restaurant
[2:13:28] wanted to do it, they could do it. So,
[2:13:29] you just have to bring it over here. But
[2:13:31] we do have a point.
[2:13:31] >> Yeah. I'll mention that in anything, but
[2:13:33] I will um
[2:13:36] >> I'll just submit it. Maybe Ann and I can
[2:13:38] take a look look at it together.
[2:13:39] >> I think it was that package sent I think
[2:13:41] to
[2:13:41] >> you had a lot of material prepared
[2:13:43] already first application.
[2:13:45] >> Yeah.
[2:13:46] >> Um and the only other thing was just to
[2:13:47] say it was a really nice um 911
[2:13:51] commemoration ceremony um for the for
[2:13:54] the you know last Friday with the
[2:13:56] Kensington Volunteer Fire Department.
[2:13:58] >> Um
[2:13:58] >> and a good turnout.
[2:13:59] >> Good turnout. Yeah. I don't know if you
[2:14:00] were going to say anything about it, but
[2:14:01] it was really touching and very um I
[2:14:04] think a very good ceremony and they had
[2:14:06] a a museum that they kind of did a
[2:14:08] pop-up museum inside the the fire hall u
[2:14:11] and it was just very good event and I
[2:14:14] encourage other towns members to go in
[2:14:17] future events because I uh for me it was
[2:14:19] my first one actually. So
[2:14:20] >> yeah, I haven't missed any and it's just
[2:14:22] been um last year's was a little bit
[2:14:24] more laidback. It wasn't nearly as big
[2:14:26] as this year's but it was it was nice.
[2:14:28] I'm really we're very fortunate that the
[2:14:30] fire department took this on and um that
[2:14:33] they um they remember it every year.
[2:14:35] >> Yeah. Great job.
[2:14:35] >> Every year.
[2:14:36] >> To accompany that, there's also
[2:14:40] news around the uh 9/11 memorial that's
[2:14:45] at station 5 here in Kensington and kind
[2:14:49] of station 5's uh activities on that
[2:14:52] day.
[2:14:53] >> Yeah. to show how even though we are
[2:14:55] miles from the Pentagon, how the whole,
[2:14:58] you know, firefighting and emergency
[2:15:00] personnel all work together to, you
[2:15:05] know, support what happened on 911, but
[2:15:07] also to backfill for other departments
[2:15:10] and just, you know, take care of each
[2:15:12] other as a first responder community.
[2:15:14] >> Yeah. Uh, Brookside Gardens has a nice
[2:15:16] memorial, too, there for 911. It's
[2:15:18] really so but yeah was
[2:15:23] yeah very moving.
[2:15:25] So actually the one of the speakers he
[2:15:27] actually was at the Pentagon and was
[2:15:30] burned
[2:15:31] >> and so he got
[2:15:32] >> he's an acting secretary.
[2:15:36] >> Wow.
[2:15:36] >> I said defense [laughter]
[2:15:40] » anyway. But no, he he was a very good
[2:15:41] speaker though about his experience
[2:15:43] having been at the Pentagon and and
[2:15:45] taken to the you know burned over quite
[2:15:48] >> the fire and the fire chief who was
[2:15:50] acting fire chief recounted a lot of
[2:15:52] what you were talking about how how they
[2:15:54] all went down and
[2:15:56] >> everyone jumped in and just yeah
[2:15:59] >> Connor
[2:16:00] >> uh two items um I think clearly on
[2:16:03] behalf of the whole council Labor Day
[2:16:06] Alex if you will carry it to the town
[2:16:08] staff and crew I Everybody was here. It
[2:16:11] was a true all hands event and it was
[2:16:13] spectacular. Um, as always, but I mean
[2:16:16] it the parade was unbelievably
[2:16:19] efficient. It was moving the little
[2:16:21] adjustments you made of kind of putting
[2:16:24] people mid parade volunteers to help you
[2:16:26] know shorten any gaps. Um, it really
[2:16:30] worked well. My just two little stories
[2:16:32] about it were one the neighbors up on
[2:16:33] the north side who again just they love
[2:16:36] listening to the band set up and prep
[2:16:38] and kind of starts their day cup of
[2:16:40] coffee on the porch and then you know
[2:16:43] they know that once it starts they just
[2:16:45] cut across the tracks and they get their
[2:16:46] prime spot and they get to see the whole
[2:16:48] thing. Um the other one at the festival,
[2:16:52] um you know, it helps cuz we had our
[2:16:54] shirts on and everything, but somebody
[2:16:56] came up to just say like, you know, they
[2:16:58] were asking directions to things. Um
[2:17:00] they were not residents. In fact, they
[2:17:01] were from way out in Howard County. They
[2:17:05] were coming down here because they had
[2:17:06] read about a record shop and some other
[2:17:08] antique shops and the cumin shop. No
[2:17:11] idea that there was a parade. Wow.
[2:17:13] That's
[2:17:14] >> everything's closed on Monday. So they
[2:17:16] were happy to kind of come in off of
[2:17:17] Georgia and they parked. Um but they
[2:17:21] were just like this is amazing. They're
[2:17:23] like this is small town Americana. They
[2:17:25] they're like this is
[2:17:26] >> oh that's the company they saw at Warner
[2:17:28] when we
[2:17:29] >> like this is even better than what we
[2:17:31] came here to do. Right. You know they
[2:17:34] came in they were getting food and drink
[2:17:36] and they were taking a look at the art
[2:17:37] show and they were and they were just
[2:17:39] like this is amazing. Uh and it's we get
[2:17:42] to live here
[2:17:43] >> and they were like
[2:17:44] >> right. So, just kudos kudos to the staff
[2:17:46] and crew and volunteers uh and the the
[2:17:50] uh parade coordinators, everybody who
[2:17:53] was out there just making it go off
[2:17:55] without a hitch. I think we uh
[2:17:58] [clears throat]
[2:17:59] 100 pounds of candy were distributed
[2:18:03] >> that we're not supposed to throw.
[2:18:04] >> Uh did you go to eat?
[2:18:05] >> It was distributed as instructed. Um so
[2:18:10] >> I cannot speak for the mayor. Um, so
[2:18:13] that was
[2:18:14] >> way
[2:18:15] >> that was number one. Uh, number two,
[2:18:19] there was a community meeting um for 104
[2:18:24] 10 Kensington Parkway put on by the
[2:18:27] contract purchasers. Um, this is not yet
[2:18:30] even a development review board, but
[2:18:32] they are pre-application right now with
[2:18:35] the county to look at conver converting
[2:18:39] the office building that is there,
[2:18:41] bringing it down and then putting in up
[2:18:45] to 19 town houses. They are very
[2:18:48] preliminary in this, but they held a
[2:18:50] community meeting on September 2nd where
[2:18:52] they went through some of their initial
[2:18:54] thoughts, answered questions from the
[2:18:56] community. They have not um there are
[2:18:59] some prepending files like a site plan
[2:19:02] and a preliminary plan that they are in
[2:19:04] due course will file with the county and
[2:19:06] at that time we've made them very aware
[2:19:08] of how our development review board
[2:19:10] process works. Um and as soon as we see
[2:19:14] an application we will reach out to
[2:19:16] coordinate a development review board
[2:19:18] meeting with those plans so that we can
[2:19:22] assess it in its application against our
[2:19:24] sector plan. um how it kind of
[2:19:27] integrates into uh that part of the
[2:19:30] community, you know, look at things like
[2:19:32] circulation and traffic and access um
[2:19:35] you know, trees and lighting, all that
[2:19:37] the kind of things the DRB looks at. So,
[2:19:39] just be on the lookout. We will uh
[2:19:42] publish the DRB meetings when we know
[2:19:45] them um on the town calendar and we will
[2:19:48] send out eblasts. Um, I work to you make
[2:19:52] sure to try and get those out to the
[2:19:53] Kensington listerve. Um, as a reminder,
[2:19:55] the DRB meetings are always open to the
[2:19:58] public, but they are intended for the
[2:20:00] DRB to ask questions of the applicant
[2:20:04] and get that uh information back to the
[2:20:07] DRB members. Um, where and always when
[2:20:11] we have additional time, um, we, you
[2:20:15] know, may turn the open the meeting for
[2:20:17] questions from the public. Um and as
[2:20:19] well we will work to do in person where
[2:20:21] it makes sense but leverage our
[2:20:23] technology where it also makes sense to
[2:20:24] make sure that we can get as much access
[2:20:26] as possible.
[2:20:28] >> A quick I don't think I think this
[2:20:31] happened after our July meeting that
[2:20:33] about the sector refresh where that
[2:20:35] stands.
[2:20:35] >> Yeah.
[2:20:36] >> So the um there was always a plan to
[2:20:40] begin this year a refresh of the
[2:20:42] Kensington sector plan which was last
[2:20:44] adopted in 2012. what we are operating
[2:20:46] under currently. Um, unfortunately due
[2:20:50] to budget constraints with Montgomery
[2:20:51] County planning, they've had to push
[2:20:55] that one year. Everything's kind of done
[2:20:58] one year at a time um until they can
[2:21:00] receive funding from the county. So
[2:21:02] assuming that that funding uh comes to
[2:21:07] fruition in this upcoming budget cycle,
[2:21:09] we would start kind of this, you know,
[2:21:12] July of next year in a refresh, a minor
[2:21:16] master look at our sector plan, which
[2:21:19] will be a, you know, potentially
[2:21:22] multi-year process. It will certainly be
[2:21:24] a solid year of work working with all of
[2:21:26] the stakeholders and experts and getting
[2:21:28] that information and then, you know, the
[2:21:30] publication and updating of that plan.
[2:21:33] You know, we've been informed that that
[2:21:34] could be upwards of of a two-year
[2:21:36] process.
[2:21:38] So,
[2:21:39] >> okay. Right. Thank you.
[2:21:41] >> I just have a couple of things. cuz I I don't think people realize how uh
[2:21:44] difficult
[2:21:46] uh the end towards the end of August
[2:21:48] through the end of um well this year o
[2:21:52] the first weekend in October because we
[2:21:54] have the back to school then we have the
[2:21:57] Labor Day parade and then we have this
[2:21:59] train show and then we have the 8k ra
[2:22:03] >> we get a week off weekend off and then
[2:22:06] we have the car show. So, it is a really
[2:22:08] busy time. And then we threw in the fact
[2:22:10] that the staff was down here and we're
[2:22:13] moving back upstairs
[2:22:15] uh the week before the Labor Day parade
[2:22:18] and then we had Matt dive.
[2:22:21] >> So, you know, he gave a 30-day notice.
[2:22:24] So, it has been very busy down here. So,
[2:22:27] I really want to thank the staff for all
[2:22:29] their efforts. I want to thank public
[2:22:32] works for it was like a bunch of
[2:22:35] squatters had been down here for the
[2:22:36] last six months.
[2:22:39] >> Getting this room ready.
[2:22:41] >> Oh my gosh, [laughter] it was a mess.
[2:22:43] And so I want to thank public works who
[2:22:46] came down here and got, you know, the
[2:22:47] carpet cleaned and they got the chairs
[2:22:49] down and, you know, and kind of and I
[2:22:51] want to thank the cable. I asked Albert,
[2:22:54] could you just check everything and make
[2:22:55] sure everything's working and he found a
[2:22:57] bad cable for the Zoom. So you guys are
[2:22:59] lucky. who's online. We found that out
[2:23:02] earlier. So, I just want to thank
[2:23:04] everybody who was involved, but um the
[2:23:06] upstairs offices look great. We still
[2:23:08] aren't haven't received all the uh uh
[2:23:10] furnishings that have been ordered, so
[2:23:13] they should be in hopefully soon. So,
[2:23:15] Alex is working off of a six-ft plastic
[2:23:18] table and so she's ready to get her her
[2:23:21] desk soon. But, um it was it was a tough uh month of of work. And I I want
[2:23:29] to thank you guys. U you guys really
[2:23:31] pulled it together and um so thank you
[2:23:34] Brooke and you know it was uh it was
[2:23:36] tough but uh we've got uh two more
[2:23:39] events and then everybody can just kind
[2:23:42] of take a catch your breath.
[2:23:44] >> I understand why municipal works month
[2:23:47] >> comes in November should be in
[2:23:49] September. It really should be. So, um,
[2:23:53] and that, you know, and that includes
[2:23:54] making sure that the, um, residents, you
[2:23:58] know, are being taken care of of what
[2:23:59] their needs are and, you know, and
[2:24:01] everything else. So, um, and getting
[2:24:04] journals out, everything else. So,
[2:24:06] anyway, just want to add, oh, and and I
[2:24:08] do want to recognize Q and Rita.
[2:24:11] >> They were our new MC's at the Labor Day
[2:24:13] parade.
[2:24:14] >> How'd that go?
[2:24:15] >> It was Yeah, Romy's had some health
[2:24:18] issues, so not able to do it. So, it was
[2:24:21] a great opportunity to bring in a new
[2:24:23] generation and um they did a fabulous
[2:24:26] job. So, they really really did.
[2:24:28] >> And so, um
[2:24:30] >> anyway, and I want to thank um your
[2:24:32] sister Haley and and you Alex stepped in
[2:24:36] to be the festival chair. Um Lisa had a
[2:24:40] health issue and wasn't able to do it
[2:24:42] this year, so Alex stepped in. So, we
[2:24:44] had the Marini women running the
[2:24:47] festival and the parade. this year. So, that was another task that was put on
[2:24:52] their shoulders and so thank you very
[2:24:54] much for doing that as well. Okay. So,
[2:24:57] uh if we've all spoken anything from the
[2:24:59] staff, you guys good?
[2:25:01] >> No. Okay. All right. Well, it's Let's
[2:25:04] get the resolutions and regulations done
[2:25:07] then.
[2:25:08] >> Yes.
[2:25:09] Mayor and Council, before you is
[2:25:11] resolution R-11-2026,
[2:25:14] a resolution of the town council of
[2:25:15] Kensington for confirming the
[2:25:17] appointment of Anne Marie Turner and the
[2:25:19] reappoints of Mike Henahan and Michael
[2:25:21] Gordon to the development or review.
[2:25:23] >> Okay. Uh, any questions?
[2:25:26] >> Nope.
[2:25:26] >> Okay. Could I get a motion to approve?
[2:25:28] >> Yeah, I'll move to approve resolution
[2:25:30] R-11-2026.
[2:25:34] » Okay. Is there a second?
[2:25:36] >> Second.
[2:25:36] >> All those in favor?
[2:25:38] >> I. Okay. And we are actually going to
[2:25:41] pull resolution uh R-12-2026
[2:25:45] pending further review of the contract
[2:25:47] by the town attorney.
[2:25:48] >> Okay.
[2:25:49] >> It's not the contract's not until it's
[2:25:51] for March to December of next year.
[2:25:53] >> Oh, so we have plenty of time. Okay.
[2:25:54] >> Okay. Good.
[2:25:55] >> Okay.
[2:25:56] >> Thanks. Oh,
[2:25:57] >> is this going to come back before the
[2:25:58] time?
[2:25:59] >> Oh, yeah. It will. Oh, yeah. Yeah. No,
[2:26:01] it will.
[2:26:01] >> Ask your questions then.
[2:26:02] >> Well, I do have a question. Uh, I know
[2:26:04] it's late, but I I just I just would
[2:26:06] like to know how many times we've
[2:26:08] sleourced this contract to Shorb. I
[2:26:11] understand they're local. That's great.
[2:26:12] I just would like to know if this is our
[2:26:14] fourth year consecutively or fifth year
[2:26:16] consecutively.
[2:26:16] >> And since we
[2:26:18] had the had clump because they they did
[2:26:20] all the plantings at Clum Kennedy when
[2:26:22] it was redesigned.
[2:26:23] >> No, when it was redesigned.
[2:26:25] >> 2020.
[2:26:26] >> Oh gosh.
[2:26:27] >> Before my time.
[2:26:28] >> 2016.
[2:26:29] >> Yeah, it's been a while. Yeah. No, it's
[2:26:32] not 2016, but um maybe 18.
[2:26:37] We can look that up. Yeah, that's
[2:26:39] >> Yeah, just interesting how many times.
[2:26:41] >> Yeah,
[2:26:41] >> they've given that they've got that
[2:26:43] contract directly.
[2:26:44] >> Yeah,
[2:26:44] >> thank you.
[2:26:45] >> Okay, good. Um All right. Uh let's see.
[2:26:49] So, we've done public appearances.
[2:26:52] So uh we are going to
[2:26:56] close the uh the meeting and but we are
[2:27:00] going to have a close session.
[2:27:03] So Suwellen to make sure all my
[2:27:06] dots are dotted and my tees are crossed.
[2:27:09] Um
[2:27:11] mayor we have a you have some paperwork
[2:27:14] for me. Thank you. your form
[2:27:17] >> ready have statement for closing a
[2:27:19] meeting. And this meeting is to be
[2:27:22] closed under 3305B
[2:27:26] 7 to consult with council to obtain
[2:27:29] legal advice. And the purpose is
[2:27:32] uh the town is seek the council is
[2:27:35] seeking advice from me on legal matters
[2:27:38] with respect to acquisition of the
[2:27:41] property located uh that is parcel A of
[2:27:44] the Kensington Crossing Homeowners
[2:27:46] Association.
[2:27:48] Um and the uh council does not wish to
[2:27:52] wave its attorney client privilege or
[2:27:54] make public our legal strategy.
[2:27:57] >> Okay.
[2:27:57] >> What's the reason therefore?
[2:28:00] >> Do you have the closing statement?
[2:28:02] >> Yes, you have it.
[2:28:05] >> You should have it.
[2:28:08] >> Well, I have it. But which
[2:28:12] >> Oh, if you want to send it back down
[2:28:13] here, we can pull it out. Yeah.
[2:28:17] >> Yeah. Oh, you just need me to sign it.
[2:28:19] Oh, I can sign that. Let me just fill
[2:28:21] out who's
[2:28:24] the motion. Do all that. Okay.
[2:28:30] » Ready for a motion?
[2:28:31] >> Yes.
[2:28:31] Second.
[2:28:33] >> I move that we go into close session so
[2:28:36] that we can consult with our legal
[2:28:38] counsel concerning the matters already
[2:28:41] described.
[2:28:42] >> Yes.
[2:28:43] >> Is there a second?
[2:28:44] >> Second.
[2:28:45] >> All those in favor? Hi.
[2:28:46] >> Hi.
[2:28:47] >> Okay. Thank you very much.
[2:28:51] » Thanks for being here.
[2:28:52] >> Thank you for all your hard work.
[2:28:54] >> This was such a nice
[2:28:56] >> You forgot to mention the black market
[2:28:58] lemonade. So
[2:29:02] >> I can email you. I got your email.
[2:29:03] >> You're good.
[2:29:04] >> Yeah. Yes. You going