Dear Neighbors:
Here’s a link to the agenda for the February 16, 2022 City Council meeting: https://takomaparkmd.gov/meeting_agendas/city-council-meeting-agenda-wednesday-february-16-2022/. The meeting will start with a Public Hearing on redistricting. Then, we’ll be voting on an extension of term of the Task Force on Sustainable Banking and Investments. In the work session, the Council will continue its discussions on redistricting and on the ARPA spending plan. For details on these agenda items see below.
Sign-up to speak in the public hearing or to comment on other matters by 5:00 PM on the day of the meeting: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_IMC3JnBgS2C-3I73VTNzCA. The meeting can be viewed on City TV (RCN -- 13, HD 1060; Comcast/xfinity -- 13, HD 997; Verizon Fios -- 28), on the City Council Video Page; on YouTube, or on Facebook.
COVID UPDATE
The Takoma Park COVID-19 Data Dashboard is updated through February 10: https://takomapark.shinyapps.io/covid_dashboard/. Key data points and information noted by City staff:
· Residents can order 4 free at-home COVID-19 tests kits from the US Postal Service via this link: https://special.usps.com/testkits. In February the City has arranged for free, walk-in COVID-19 PCR tests at the Takoma Park recreation center on Wednesdays from 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM: https://takomaparkmd.gov/news-alert/onsite-covid-19-testing-every-wednesday-in-february/. [I did this myself and received the results the next day.]
· There were 25 new cases of COVID-19 reported in the 20912 zip code between February 4 and 10, identical to the previous week. In Montgomery County, cases continued to fall and are down 71% over the last two weeks: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/montgomery-maryland-covid-cases.html. Hospitalizations in the same timeframe are down 39% in the County, and the test positivity rate is down to 7%. In Maryland, cases are down 69% in the same timeframe: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/maryland-covid-cases.html. And in nearby DC cases are down 52%: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/washington-district-of-columbia-covid-cases.html
· The at-least first dose vaccination rate in the 20912 zip code increased from 76.2% last week to 76.5% this week, and the fully vaccinated rate increased from 66.1% to 66.4%.
· The month of January finished with 960 cases of COVID-19 reported in the 20912 zip code, more than 2 times the next-highest month of December 2021 and 3 times the third-highest month of December 2020.
· There were no new deaths reported due to COVID-19 in the 20912 zip code.
Other Important COVID resources: Vaccines for children ages 5 - 11: https://takomaparkmd.gov/news-alert/covid-19-vaccines-are-now-available-for-children-aged-5-11/; vaccines for those who are 12 and older: https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/covid19/vaccine/ or State Vaccine Website; Testing: Montgomery County Testing Sites; Food aid: Submit an online request for help with food resources or call 240-777-0311. The City is also partnering with the Salvation Army to help residents with water, gas and electric bills. Send an email to: housing @takomaparkmd.gov or call 301-891-7119. In addition, the Takoma Park Library has COVID-19 test kits and N95 masks available for pickup during regular Library hours: https://takomaparkmd.gov/public-notices/covid-19-rapid-test-kits-and-kn95-masks-available-now/
REDISTRICTING PUBLIC HEARING
Redistricting Map Options Y & Z: https://documents.takomaparkmd.gov/government/city-council/agendas/2022/map-options-y-and-z.pdf
Options Y & Z Analysis: https://documents.takomaparkmd.gov/government/city-council/agendas/2022/options-y-and-z-analysis.pdf
Following extensive input from residents, requests from Councilmembers to view alternative mapping scenarios, and data analysis from our redistricting consultant, we now have two revised map options on the table. While they offer alternate ways to address many of the concerns and questions raised by the community -- particularly around keeping neighborhoods together in the same Wards -- the maps aren’t necessarily the absolute final choices. Modifications can still be made, and the Public Hearing is an important opportunity to let the Council know your views. Depending on how the Public Hearing and our Work Session discussion goes, I expect we’ll be voting on a final map first at our February 23 Council meeting and then again on March 2.
My preference would be to keep Ward 1’s boundaries as close to where they currently are as possible. That said, there will definitely be some changes, though in each of the two maps under consideration, Ward 1 is treated the same. A top priority for me has been ensuring that the 19 homes on Darwin Avenue and the northern side of Grant Avenue would be kept in Ward One with the rest of Hodges Heights, notwithstanding the fact that those homes are in a Census Block which otherwise includes homes in Ward 4 on the other side of the schools, parks and City facilities. I’m pleased that both maps would keep those 19 homes within Ward 1.
The biggest change in terms of an impact on residential parts of Ward 1 is the proposed shifting of the eastern part of Carroll Avenue into Ward 3. This includes Victory Tower and the smaller adjacent apartment building, plus the residences between Columbia Avenue and the Fire Station. Again, my preference would be to keep those areas within Ward 1. But at this point that seems unlikely, given that there are several hundred residents in those two Census Blocks and moving them back to Ward 1 would necessitate other changes that would make it harder to address some of the requests for neighborhoods to remain together elsewhere in the City. The two maps also propose adding residential areas near the Junction into Ward 1, including portions of Grant, Hancock, and Lee Avenues, and possibly part of Sherman Avenue as well.
Both options also call for changes to the commercial districts, moving the businesses on the east side of Carroll starting at Westmoreland (including Ace Hardware and Republic) from Ward 1 to Ward 3, and making a similar move to Ward 3 for the businesses on Laurel Avenue (the Girl and the Vine would also be in Ward 3). However, the businesses on the other side of Carroll (from Takoma Old Town Auto through Mark’s Kitchen and around the corner to the old Bank of America Building and beyond) would stay in Ward 1. Similarly, the businesses on that side of Carroll in Takoma Junction would also end up in Ward 1. This includes the block with Kinetic Artistry and Doley’s car service, plus the block of stores across from the Co-op. However, the Co-op itself, the Junction parking lot, and the other two car repair shops would stay in Ward 3. I have mixed feelings about these changes, but I do think shared representation of the commercial districts can have a positive impact since there will be two advocates for these areas. It may also help in resolving disputes that arise around commercial-residential boundaries.
While Ward 1 is treated the same in both options, they do vary in other ways, particularly in Wards 2 and 3. I prefer Option Y over Option Z, primarily because, in addition to addressing a number of the neighborhood requests to stay together, Y wouldn’t remove the residences of two current Councilmembers from the Wards they are now representing, which Z would do. Although Z is more compact and compactness is emphasized in the Council resolution laying out our redistricting criteria, Y is more compact than the current map. And another criterion is not gerrymandering to ensure the election or defeat of any incumbent. In balancing compactness against preventing large numbers of residents from being able to vote for their current Councilmember if they wish to, I come down in support of Y. Or at least something close to it -- changes can still be made to either map. I encourage residents to participate in the hearing or let me know separately what you think about the options.
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
Folk Festival Volunteers: https://www.tpff.org/. The organizers of this year’s festival (which will take place in September) are seeking volunteers to help plan various aspects of the event.
Youth Council Winter Clothing Drive: https://takomaparkmd.gov/public-notices/takoma-park-youth-council-winter-clothes-drive/. In partnership with Adventist Community Services, the City’s Youth Council is sponsoring a Winter Clothing Drive. Donations can be dropped off at the Rec Center, Police Department, or Community Center lobbies through March 6.
Free Tax Preparation Assistance Starting February 16: https://takomaparkmd.gov/public-notices/rsvp-aarp-free-tax-aide-program/. In partnership with AmeriCorps Seniors and AARP, the County is offering free tax preparation help for low and moderate income residents.
Spring Plant-A-Tree Orders Accepted Through February 21: https://takomaparkmd.gov/government/public-works/tree-care-and-resources/. The City offers discounted tree plantings for private property for the spring and fall planting seasons.
Invasive Species Forum, March 1: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/252041842937. To coincide with National Invasive Species Awareness Week, Climate Action Coffee and the City are hosting a panel discussion and Q & A on invasive plant species from 12:00 - 1:30 PM. Speakers will provide an overview on invasive plant species, including how to identify and remove them.
Applications for Community Quality of Life Grants, March 16 Deadline: https://takomaparkmd.gov/public-notices/city-of-takoma-park-community-quality-of-life-grant-program-now-accepting-applications/. These grants -- up to $10,000 -- are for projects providing access to arts and sciences. The City encourages applications for programs that promote workforce development and entrepreneurial skills for low and moderate income residents.
Essentials Drive for Montgomery County Animal Shelters: https://takomaparkmd.gov/public-notices/now-collecting-items-for-the-essentials-drive-for-montgomery-county-animal-shelters/. The Takoma Park Police Department will be collecting sheets, towels, and bath rugs to help the Montgomery County Animal Shelter through March 31.
VOTING SESSION
Resolution Extending Term of the Task Force on Sustainable Banking and Investments: This Task Force is studying how to shift the City’s banking and investments away from institutions and companies with ties to the fossil fuel and nuclear weapons industries. The Task Force will also be making recommendations on the future of the Nuclear Free Committee. It was originally scheduled to complete its work at the end of February, but the members have requested some additional time. While the resolution wasn’t yet available at blog-post time, I anticipate it will call for a roughly one-month extension. I plan to vote in favor of it.
WORK SESSION
Redistricting Options: The Council will continue discussing redistricting, taking into account residents’ comments in the Public Hearing, with an eye toward voting on a final plan in our next two meetings. See “Redistricting Public Hearing” above for details.
ARPA Spending Plan: This week’s expected vote on the ARPA plan has been put off at least another week, pending further review and analysis. Last week, the City staff presented some updated cost projections for the Library project, which are substantially higher than previous estimates due to the high rates of inflation and supply chain issues we’re seeing because of COVID. As a result, staff recommended cutting some of the proposed spending levels for other components of the ARPA plan, and setting aside additional funds for the Library, while we take more time time to drill down on the costs. To see the new staff recommendations, scroll down to “ARPA Reconciliation Sheet” in last week’s Council meeting agenda: https://takomaparkmd.gov/meeting_agendas/city-council-meeting-agenda-wednesday-february-9-2022/
As you can see in that document, the staff has recommended cutting the proposed amounts for the following initiatives: Recreation Department Scholarships & Tutoring; Municipal Broadband Assistance; Energy Efficiency Upgrades; Multi-family Apartment Rehabilitation; Social Service Partnerships; and Recreation Center Design. Together the proposed cuts would total over $2 million, and in turn the staff has suggested putting on hold an additional $2 million for the Library, pending further review of the costs.
As I continue to review these and other proposals, my current thinking would be to accept only some of these proposed cuts. To be specific, I would be willing to go along with the proposed cuts in the Recreation Department, Municipal Broadband and the Rec Center, though I’d like more information on the potential impact of the changes. I disagree with the proposed reductions for Multi-Family Rehab, Energy Efficiency and Social Service Partnerships. For the Partnerships I’d prefer to keep the funding at $3 million, with as much as $2.3 million for direct assistance to lower income residents and the remainder for NGO grants and the navigators initiative. In addition, I’d prefer to not go forward for now with the Community Center Atrium upgrade. It’s a meritorious project, but I think it would make sense to hold off for now and ultimately seek other sources of funds separate from ARPA. That set of changes would make it possible to put approximately $1.5 million on hold while we get more clarity on the Library costs. And I’d be open to considering additional cuts in the spending plan as we get more information.
So what about the Library? To me, it’s an important community resource which provides benefits to a wide range of residents, including students at the local schools and low and moderate income residents, many of whom can’t easily get to the County libraries. Overall I think it’s worth investing in an upgrade, particularly with the current structure near the end of its useful life, lacking sufficient space for programs and staff, and not being up to ADA standards. While the key questions relate to the potential cost, there are also some points concerning stormwater on which I’d like more clarity.
When I joined the Council, the Library expansion looked like it was going to cost in the range of $3 - 4 million. I was one of the Councilmembers who felt that plan was inadequate, in particular because -- due to ADA requirements for lower stacks with more space between them -- there would have been room for fewer books. I and others on the Council recommended a larger redesign and the Council agreed to do that, borrowing $7 million for design and construction through the State bonding system. Those funds are due to be paid back over 30 years with interest (a bit under $400,000 a year in payments; the earlier smaller version would have cost a little more than half that annually over the same period if we went through the State bond system).
Subsequently, when the plan was submitted to the County they required additional changes to comply with flood plain standards, which meant physically raising the entire structure. While that led to increases in the projected costs, with the $7 million we had borrowed plus State grants and surplus cable television funds, we had up to a total of $9.8 million available for the project pre-COVID, which looked more than sufficient at the time. Neither of those two other sources comes from the regular City budget, meaning the impact on property taxes would be unchanged. To the extent we could stay there -- that is, avoiding any further direct impact on the City budget and property taxes -- it’s been my view that we should continue moving forward with the project.
Now, while facing the COVID inflation cost increases, we have another potential source of funds in ARPA. Again, there won’t be a direct impact on our budget or property taxes if we use ARPA funds for the Library. But we have to make sure we have a better handle on how the cost estimates are being driven by inflation and what steps we could take to lower the costs. We also have to consider what other purposes ARPA could be used for. I don’t object in principle to some ARPA funds being used for longer term infrastructure investments provided they have a benefit for lower income residents. But it’s important to have the right mix of projects.
Looking back, had we gone with the smaller design, we still would have had to undertake the raising of the building, and seen increased design and construction costs as a result. If we had been able to get the project started before COVID inflation took hold, perhaps we could have avoided some of the additional costs we’re facing now. But, given where we are now, as I see it, waiting for prices to come down or starting up a new design process will most likely mean the end of the project or substantial additional costs going forward. And of course we have to continue paying the annual bond debt service, and the funds we’ve borrowed can’t, practically speaking, be shifted to some other project. Conceivably that could happen some years down the road, but I’m concerned that putting off the project at this point or seeking alternate uses for the funds will mean ending up with no Library at all in the relatively near future.
On the other hand, we can’t have an open-ended financial commitment for the project. So I think the best approach is to work with the construction management firm we’ve hired (something we didn’t have, as I understand it, when the Community Center renovation was done some years ago) to get a clearer idea of the cost estimates and whether there may be less expensive ways of moving forward within the bounds of the current design. Once we have a better idea for those details we can make a decision on how to proceed. For now, I’d like to see us approve at least those elements of the ARPA plan for which there’s a Council consensus, with the rest of the funds kept on hold while we do the necessary analysis on the Library and other initiatives.
As always, please be in touch with questions or comments about any of the topics in this blog.
Peter Kovar, Takoma Park City Council Ward One
240-319-6281; www.councilmemberkovar.com
(He, Him, His)
Important Privacy Notice: All correspondence, including emails, to or from City of Takoma Park agencies, officials, and employees is subject to the Maryland Public Information Act and may be disclosed to the public.