City of Frederick Government Operations Committee Discusses Land Management Code Review Commission – February 9, 2026
City of Frederick Government Operations Committee Meeting – February 9, 2026
The Government Operations Committee met to continue drafting a resolution to establish the Land Management Code Review Commission (LMC). The committee refined the commission's name, composition, scope, and resource needs, and discussed how to proceed with potential charter amendments. No votes were taken; the resolution will be presented to the full council as a briefing.
Discussion Items
- Land Management Code Review Commission Name and Purpose: The committee agreed on the name "City of Frederick Land Management Code Review Commission." The purpose and scope were edited to include evaluating best practices from comparable jurisdictions and explicitly addressing affordable housing and housing diversity (including size, density, and price-appropriate housing). The scope also includes considering the comprehensive plan, climate action plan, active mobility plan, housing accelerator, Alice report, and other pertinent plans and studies.
- Commission Composition: The draft proposed 11 members, with discussion shifting to a range of 11–15 to allow flexibility. A clause limiting development and real estate representatives to a specific number was removed; the committee noted the need for expertise from developers, lawyers, architects, and urban planners. An aspirational goal of geographic diversity (one member per council district) was included. The committee decided not to be prescriptive about specific organizations for business, nonprofit, and civic representation.
- Council Liaison Role: The committee discussed having one or two council liaisons who would participate in meetings but not vote. The role would include asking questions and sharing opinions, with the liaisons appointed by the council (president or full council).
- Public Engagement: The committee emphasized creative approaches to gather public input, including facilitated sessions and online surveys, rather than relying solely on traditional hearings. Terms like “walkability,” “accessibility,” and “economic opportunity” need further definition.
- Moratorium Deliverable: The draft includes a request for planning and legal staff to provide options on a full or partial moratorium on permitting new development (not just residential) while the commission works. Some members raised concerns about housing supply impacts. The committee agreed to have the planning department produce a memo with options, but to consider the moratorium debate separately after the commission is established.
- Staff Support and Resources: The draft requests support from planning, legal, historic preservation, and other departments. The committee discussed the possibility of hiring a consultant to reduce the burden on city staff. This resource question will be part of the full council presentation.
- Charter Review Items: The committee reviewed a list of eight potential charter amendments (including redistricting, elections, surplus property). They agreed to handle these individually, starting with a public call for suggestions, and to keep a running list on the committee’s work plan. No immediate action was taken.
Key Outcomes
- The committee finalized the name and composition framework for the LMC review commission, with the number of members set at 11–15 and without a strict cap on development or real estate representatives.
- The committee decided to present the draft resolution to the full council as a briefing (not a vote) at a future meeting, with legal review still pending.
- The committee agreed to defer the moratorium discussion to a later date, but will request a memo from planning and legal outlining options and impacts.
- For charter review, the committee will compile suggestions and address them one at a time, with public input invited.
- The next committee meeting is scheduled for February 23, 2026.
Meeting Transcript
Good afternoon and welcome to the February second meeting of the Government Operations Committee. We'll begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. We will begin with our sort of continuation from last week. Last week, if you recall, Council members, we sort of began to answer some policy questions with respect to the land management code commission for lack of a better word. Again, that's just what we've been sort of calling it so we can proceed with our work. So as a reminder, just for from a process perspective, we're not going to make any decisions. To that end, I did include, although I don't see it in the backup. Is it the resolution just one document, Clara? Did we just append them? I don't think it made it just in the future. I don't think it made it to the backup. So let me is on your backup. Maybe I need to refresh. Oh, let me refresh too. So it's not on the I always use the online just because I like to see what the public this happens. I like to make sure the public sees what. So just online it's not connected. So let me. Okay. And for the public that's watching, we'll make sure this uh is added to the online backup on. Sorry for the programming delay. Joe, is your email the same if it was before? That would be really convenient. Okay. So essentially what we have is we have a, and I'm just gonna be very honest, a chat GPT edited version with respect to we took what I did was I took the notes from what uh what our discussion was last week, and we began with a draft and then I edit it accordingly. So there's a couple of things I would like to go through with the committee, and certainly, council members, you can send any additional feedback to my email and we can include that in the backup. Um we are all thrown off. I just did. So just check and okay, and we'll make sure that this gets my apologies that that wasn't posted. Okay. Okay, so just as a reminder, the whereas clauses sort of frame the discussion. So when you have a moment, we'll take a look. Um I expect that when we get to full council, we're gonna wordsmith these. So um I think if there's anything that you see that's glaringly omitted, uh that would be that would be good feedback to include for full council. It's always easier to edit down than it is to add on the fly. And I'm but imagine our fellow council members will have their own feedback as well. So of course the name is been something that we've been running with. Um does anybody have any sort of strong feeling about the name City of Frederick Land Management Code Review Commission. Looks looks good to me. Yep, I think it's good. So the purpose and scope has been edited. Um there was just making sure I'm gonna flag anything that I added that wasn't included in the original conversation. No. So this is the and just jump in, absolutely, Peter. Like, oh, okay, yeah, yeah. No, I appreciate your taking pieces of thread and weaving it in the whole cloth. So I think 11 as a discussion point, 11 commission members is a great start. Thanks. I just picked that from it was more than nine and less than there's no uh there's no uh brilliance here. It's just uh absolutely and and I imagine even the scope um one of the things that was heavily debated when the Charter Review Commission did their work was the scope and ensuring that the scope was tightly defined.
openpublica.com