SALE OF CITIZENS/MONTEVUE HIGHLIGHTS FREDERICK COUNTY POLITICAL FEUD

George Wenschhof

The election of Jan Gardner(D) as the first county executive of Frederick County, Maryland has perpetuated the decades long battle between two factions who primarily differ on how best to manage growth.

Gardner’s actions to date have been a reversal of actions taken by the previous board of county commissioners’ president Blaine Young(R) and Company.  Young and Company expanded the differences between the two factions from growth management to include the level of education funding and a desire to privatize government services which I described in a previous column entitled Blaine and Co. bad for Frederick County.

The latest move by Gardner is her threat to use eminent domain to void the contract of the business sale of the services being provided at Citizens and Montevue senior assisted care centers owned by the county government.

For Frederick County residents, it is a modern day real life portrayal of the movie “Groundhog Day”.

This perpetual back and forth battle has also caught the eye of many outsiders and political leaders in Annapolis.  The running joke “Is there something in their water?” never seems to get old as it applies no matter who wins.

Following Jan’s convincing of the council to reopen the Monrovia Town Center development approval, stacking committees with her appointees (a common practice by the winner), reversing the ill advised “English Only” ordinance and ethics committee decisions, she has now turned her sights on undoing the sale of the “business only” interest of the Citizen and Montevue senior assisted care centers.

She enjoys the support of a 4-3 vote from the council by ensuring Republican Bud Otis would become the president after the three Democrats on the council voted for him over Republican Billy Shreve.  Since then, Jan has received Otis’s vote with the 3 Democrats on every issue she presents to the council.

Republican council members Kirby Delauter and Billy Shreve, who were part of the previous board of county commissioners referred by me as Blaine and Company, enjoyed a board with a sure 4-1 vote on every issue presented by Blaine.  They are exasperated because they are now a minority on the council.

Crying foul at every move made by Gardner and complaining she is only focused on undoing everything their board did, Shreve and Delauter seem to forget they spent their 4 years in office undoing everything Gardner and her “Dream Team” had done in the previous administration. Jan coined the name “Dream Team” when she and fellow Democrat Kai Hagen ran with and won with Republicans David Gray and John “Lennie” Thompson in the 2006 election.

The sale of the Citizens/Montevue business interest was another of the actions by Blaine Young, while enjoying a 4-1 majority on the board that illustrates his arrogance and persistence in doing what he wanted during his administration, even if it was ill advised.

Blaine began his obsession of selling the county owned land, building and services by first disbanding their board of directors, firing the director and sending a threatening letter to city officials.  A letter I questioned at the time whether it had board approval in a column.  In order to sell the land, subdivision was required and needed city approval.

I also pointed out in another column, there was legal action underway pertaining to deed restrictions and the state had provided a $200,000 loan that meant the state board of public works needed to approve the sale.

I opined it would be best to let the legal issues be decided before approving any sale.  In a meeting, the board of public works agreed.

Stymied, a frustrated Young intent on selling the facilities, received legal advice he could sell the business only interest of the centers with the option on the sale of the land and buildings dependent upon court decisions.

This brings us to present day where Gardner, who made it known during her campaign for county executive she opposed the sale of the facilities.

She has withheld questionable payments negotiated by Young from the county to the Buyer and is undergoing mediation in an attempt to dissolve the contract.

The contract agreed to by Blaine and Company is a poor one for the county and should be voided.  Decisions by the court still have not been made and no action to sell any interest in the centers should have been done by the previous board.

Speculation on the future of the long serving county attorney is rampant because he has provided opinions on both sides of this and other issues over the years, depending upon who was in power.  His credibility questioned, some believe resignation is the best option.

Let’s hope legal rulings will be issued soon and mediation will result in the voiding of this ill advised agreement.  The use of eminent domain to recapture a “business interest” is a stretch and is also not advisable.  It is used to claim land such as property for an airport expansion.  But in this case, the land has not been transferred so there is no need to recapture by use of eminent domain.

Optimistically, the county will retain the business interest, land and buildings. Afterward, a committee should be appointed by Gardner and confirmed by the council to review management options to include the reappointment of a board of directors and to develop financial plans for the future of the Citizens/Montevue senior assisted living centers.

Stay tuned.

JURY STILL OUT ON FREDERICK COUNTY CHARTER

George Wenschhof

Not much has changed in Frederick County, Maryland politics since the much ballyhooed vote to implement charter government took place in the 2014 election.

The back and forth positions on growth that have dominated county politics for decades continues with the election of Jan Gardner(D) as county executive.

She moved quickly to establish her “Dream Team 2” when she convinced the three Democrats on the council to support Republican Bud Otis(R) for president.  This kept growth adversary councilmember Billy Shreve(R) from winning the president of the council, even though there are 4 Republicans on the 7 member council.

Since being elected president of the council, Otis has given Gardner the fourth vote whenever it was needed.

In the 2008 election Gardner and fellow Democrat Kai Hagen would run for election with Republican “no-growth” candidates John “Lenny” Thompson and David Gray.  They would win 4 of the 5 slots on the board of commissioners and label themselves the “Dream Team”.

After, going through a comprehensive plan update, supported by their appointees on the Planning Commission, a number of properties were down zoned, leading to public outcry on protection of property rights.

This lead to the election of Blaine Young(R) and company (current council members Billy Shreve and Kirby Delauter were part of the “company”) who quickly went about appointing their people to board and commissions who would support their positions on growth.

Not surprisingly, a comprehensive plan and zoning update took place and zoning was restored to many of the properties that had been down zoned from the Gardner led board.

Guess what?  Gardner as county executive has appointed her people to boards and commissions and a comprehensive plan and zoning update will take place yet again.

But Gardner did not wait for all of this to play out before influencing the council action on the controversial approval under the former board of commissioners of the Monrovia Town Center.

The approval of this development has been at the center of this political pendulum swing over growth for the last decade.

A law suit filed against the Gardner board by the developer for their down zoning the property was set aside after the Young board reinstated their zoning and approval was granted.

Now the council has used a vague opinion letter issued by a local Judge on the inclusion in the record of a questionable letter presented by local Frederick Area Committee for Transportation (FACT) as justification to reopen the entire review of the development.

No effort was made by the council to ask the Judge to clarify what he intended in his opinion letter.

Instead, action was taken to decide whether to reopen development review.  The 4-3 decision to “start-over” a foregone conclusion with Gardner’s “Dream Team 2” in place in the council.

With recent appointments to the Planning Commission by Gardner, one can anticipate the recommendation on this development will be a “No”, followed by a 4-3 vote by the council to deny approval.

With the county roller coaster actions on growth continuing, legal action by the developer is likely to come.

Legal action is also pending on Gardner refusing to make the county payments under the questionable contract made by the Young board for the sale of the county owned senior citizen services.

Also undertaken during the first year of charter government was the reversal of the ill advised “English Only” ordinance passed by the Young led board.

Interestingly, the county attorney has argued the positions taken by the politicos on both sides of these issues over the years.  Not, an easy task and he is still there.

Speaking of staff, this is one of the biggest problems facing the county council as charter has been implemented.  The council is separate from the executive yet their staff is provided by the executive.

Gardner has settled into the executive role and has treated the council similar to how she worked with the board of county commissioners when she was president.

However the council already experiencing image issues, should move to establish their own entity and organizational structure, breaking away from the executive and the influence exerted by the executive and her staff.

In addition, for the same reason, the council needs an independent website.

In a conversation with vice chair of the council M.C. Keegan-Ayer, who is arguably the most qualified member of the council, she acknowledged this was an issue and expressed her frustration with the lack of funds provided to the council by the previous Young led board.

Already circulating in the rumor mill among progressive Democrats is Blaine Young and Company will work to have voters reject charter, bring back the board of county commissioner form of government and run for office.

Not a likely scenario, but it illustrates the dislike members of these two political factions surrounding growth have toward each other.

In addition to providing good government services, hopefully what is done during this first charter term will be to focus on the split of council staff from executive staff.  This will establish a true separation of powers called for by the charter.

A compilation of issues, such as council salary, council input on the budget and all council members elected by districts should also be discussed with voters over the next couple of years so constructive changes to the charter can be voted on.

Including, what may be the most important change, of having the county executive hired by the council instead of being elected.  This is known as the west coast charter model.

This would ensure the vision by the elected council is implemented by the executive.

Stay tuned.

WHY REDISTRICTING REFORM WILL FAIL IN MARYLAND

George Wenschhof

After a surprise 2014 victory in a state that enjoys a 2-1 Democratic voter registration advantage, Republican Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, has understandably moved forward to create a committee to recommend redistricting reform.

Democratic state senate president Thomas V. “Mike” Miller and Democratic House Speaker Michael E. Busch have reportedly vowed to make sure this reform does not pass in the state legislature.

While Governor Hogan is moving in a direction I support in general, redistricting reform will not be obtained across the country using a state by state approach.  Instead, a national and uniformed approach is needed.  In fact, a constitutional amendment may be necessary to accomplish this much needed change.

The reason this attempt by Hogan and any individual state will fail is simple.  The Republican and Democratic parties will not voluntarily give up the power they enjoy to configure districts to their advantage.

It was the gerrymandering that created the current congressional district 6 in Maryland prior to the 2012 election that led me to pen a column published in The Baltimore Sun.  In that column, I argued it was time for redistricting reform and called for the creation by states of a nonpartisan committee to recommend redistricting, if called for by population changes reported by the census every ten years.

What has happened across the country over the last few decades has been radical redistricting within the 36 states where state legislatures perform this action.  These gerrymandered districts have created “safe” districts for the political party in control of the state.  Seven states have only one representative and the rest use independent or bipartisan commissions, with the state legislature still retaining approval in some of these states.

In Maryland, a strong Democratic state, 7 of the 8 Congressional districts are “safe” districts where Democratic candidates will enjoy a voter registration advantage.  The same protective carving out of districts also takes place in the other 35 states by their state legislatures.  Texas, a strong Republican state, does the same for the Republican Party.

With no need to campaign in a moderate manner to win election in these “safe” seats, candidates are often more progressive or more conservative. The result has been arguably a dysfunctional Congress made up of representatives mostly from the extremes of their political party.

These more extreme candidates from the two major political parties are currently elected by using deep rooted hyperbolic rhetoric and exhibit no intention of compromising on any issue that comes before them.

Sadly, the majority of voters across the country fall within the center left, the center, or the center right in the political spectrum and are now longing for representation in Congress.

Certainly, the establishment of nonpartisan commissions to handle redistricting not answering to state legislature approval is needed in all states.

However, this will not happen with a state by state process.  Why would either major political party voluntarily agree to alter their advantage in a state that would also alter their party’s representation in Congress?

The answer is they won’t. Maryland’s state legislature leaders Mike Miller and Michael Busch are replicated in Democratic and Republican controlled states across the country.

Voters eagerly want this change where they once again are able to vote for who their politician will be as opposed to politicians choosing who will be their voters.

So, the effort should continue, but the approach should change and if necessary, begin the process of a constitutional amendment.

This would be a major step in preserving democracy in the United States.  Getting the money out of politics is another..

LITIGATION LIKELY AFTER MONROVIA TOWN CENTER VOTE

George Wenschhof

The lengthy testimony at the last Frederick County Council meeting went as I expected. After all, the approval of the development of the Monrovia Town Center has been a battle during the previous two Frederick County administrations.

Two political factions that have been labeled pro-growth and anti-growth have made this development a focal point.

A little over eight years ago when Jan Gardner became president of the board of county commissioners, she and her four member bipartisan dream team would down zone properties across the county.

The property known as the Monrovia Town Center was one of them.  This action not only led to litigation against the county being instigated by developer Mr. Stanley, it also led to the election of a pro growth board of county commissioners led by Blaine Young four years later.

During the Blaine and Company administration, they would go about rezoning the properties down zoned by the Gardner administration.

During this time, the attorney for the developer set aside their lawsuit against the county

Among those properties rezoned was the Monrovia Town Center.  After a lengthy process that included many public hearings and countless hours of testimony, the development was approved to move forward.

Those who opposed the approval led by Steve McKay seized upon a letter submitted into the record at the end of the last public meeting preceding the approval vote to claim foul.

The letter was submitted into the record by Commissioner Paul Smith and was from the Frederick Area Committee for Transportation and stated their support for this development.

What was discovered was the letter never received a vote from the board of directors of FACT and after a legal appeal; a local Judge threw the hot potato back to the county and said the new county council should decide if this letter impacted the approval vote.

County attorney Michael Chomel would advise the council they would first need to choose to have a public meeting to decide if the letter had an impact n the prior approval and if they decided it did, they had several options.  One of which would be to choose to reopen the development approval process.  This would require the developer to start over from the beginning.

With Jan Gardner back in office, now as county executive with a county council so far voting 4-3 for what Gardner wants, the opponents of this development turned out to testify at the public meeting last week.

The testimony went as expected with opponents questioning the approval process and the developer saying he had met all of the approval criteria.

Following the conclusion of the public testimony, attorney Chomel explained to the council they have the option to close the record or they would have to disclose and make part of the record all emails received prior to their vote the next week on this matter.  He also pointed out the developer would also have the opportunity to respond to what had been received.

This was advice on procedure, but in the emotion of the two sides in this issue, a lot of confusion by several members of the council would ensue.

The vote would end up being a 4-3 vote to leave the record open with Republican council president Bud Otis once again voting with the Democratic council members.  Shortly after the recent election, Otis became president over fellow council member Billy Shreve when the three Democrats voted for him.

Lost in all the brouhaha, was a focus on whether the letter had an impact on the approval of the development by the former board of commissioners.

In fact, the testimony by the many who opposed the development, would testify the development was going to be approved by the previous board of commissioners, no matter what.

If the vote by the county council focuses on the testimony pertaining to the impact of the letter, the vote would have to be No.

However, those who oppose this development feel strongly the fix was in during the previous administration and want a reopening of the approval process.

Not so surprisingly, two council members, Billy Shreve and Kirby Delauter who also served as commissioners who voted for approval, stated their vote was not influenced by the letter.  Former board president Blaine Young also provided an affidavit that the letter did not influence his vote.  I thought I heard former commissioner David Gray, who was the only vote against the approval, also stated he was not influenced by the letter.

It will certainly be a curiosity to see how county attorney Chomel advises the council prior to their vote and what their decision will be.

Either way the vote turns out, litigation is sure to follow.

Stay tuned.