OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Greenbelt, Maryland/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Greenbelt City Council Public Hearing and Regular Meeting - March 9, 2026

City Council — Monday, March 9, 2026
BodyGreenbelt, Maryland
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, March 9, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Original source
Transcript — Verbatim

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.

Speaker 1

0:14

You know what?

0:14

I don't have the agenda agenda that she sent.

0:22

I know, but normally we have the ones on the side with all the documents attached, and I don't have that.

Speaker 2

0:36

I think what's confusing is there's two events on the calendar.

0:41

Seven event is a seven o'clock event, and there's a seven thirty event on the counter.

Unassigned speaker

1:36

I

Speaker 3

1:36

don't know what because it's very

Speaker 2

1:38

big.

1:38

I have to I have to return

Unassigned speaker

1:40

it.

Speaker 2

1:42

Recording in progress.

2:03

Okay, that's what I spoke in for.

2:05

Thank you

Speaker 4

2:06

so much.

2:07

Good afternoon, good evening.

2:10

This is a uh Greenbelt City Council

Speaker 2

2:13

public hearing.

2:14

Uh, incorporation of these federal lands into the city's corporate over if you like.

Speaker 4

3:05

Rule,

Speaker 2

3:06

please.

Speaker 3

3:07

Councilmember Fritz.

3:08

Present.

3:09

Council Member Niesel.

Speaker 5

3:12

Okay.

Speaker 3

3:13

Right on top.

3:15

Council Member McKinney.

3:16

Here.

3:17

Council Member Poppy.

3:19

Councilmember Pope.

3:20

Here.

3:20

Mayor Port Sam Weaver.

3:22

Here.

3:22

Mayor George.

3:23

I'm here.

3:24

And let's

Speaker 2

3:32

try that.

Jack Patterson · Speaker 6Inferred

3:38

Yes, my name is Jack Patterson.

3:41

I live at one sixty-one research road in Greenbelt.

3:45

Thank you.

3:46

Thank you for the opportunity to talk about this matter.

3:52

Our property is adjacent to uh area two in your annexation map.

3:57

And we are in agreement that the city should annex the federal property as shown in those maps.

4:05

Uh because we need to protect the federal lands.

4:09

And I think your actions would do that to the best that you can.

4:14

Also feel that you haven't gone far enough.

4:18

There are there is a slice out of the area that we would like to see included in the annexation area, but I understand there are some technical issues of private property that um confound that.

4:36

But we like the idea of having a a unified annexation area uh from Kenilworth Avenue over to Research Road.

4:46

Uh realize that there are private property owners where that would be harder to do.

4:54

But I would urge you to try to consider that and and make that complete.

Unassigned speaker

4:58

I would hate to see this land get developed.

Jack Patterson · Speaker 6Inferred

5:02

And that's basically all I have to say.

5:04

Thank you very

Unassigned speaker

5:04

much.

Speaker 2

5:36

Thank you.

Speaker 7

5:38

I don't really have any strong opinion one way or the other as far as the proposed innexation parcels go.

5:47

I think legitimate arguments can exist as to why uh Greenbelt should attempt to protect itself from future development if that's going to be possible.

5:58

Uh but so much of the discussion leading up to tonight's public hearing has been conducted behind closed doors in council's closed sessions.

6:09

I don't think Green Builders, Greenbelt residents, other than council and staff have a clear idea of how these two parcels were chosen, what other parcels were considered, what other parcels were rejected, and why this these two proposed these two parcels are being proposed for annex action necessitating this public hearing.

6:32

For many years, there has been a piece of there's been a property that's surrounded by Greenbelt on three sides, and also on the fourth side by the beltway, uh relatively small apartment uh project, uh largely African American and Latino, but not entirely.

6:53

Uh it's was my understanding that many years ago the management, the ownership of that property, sought annexation in the Greenbelt and it was rejected.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural███████████████████████████████████35%
Public Engagement██████████████████████22%
Zoning And Land Use█████████████13%
Fiscal Sustainability█████████9%
Women's History██████6%
Public Safety████4%
Affordable Housing███3%
Parks and Recreation██2%
Technology and Innovation██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Greenbelt City Council Public Hearing and Regular Meeting - March 9, 2026

On March 9, 2026, the Greenbelt City Council convened at 7:30 p.m. (despite an agenda listing of 7:00 p.m.) for a public hearing on proposed annexation of three federal land parcels, followed immediately by a regular meeting. The hearing received resident input on environmental protection and jurisdictional oversight, and the regular meeting addressed petitions, a proclamation, administrative reports, annexation legislation, revenue modernization, and updates to council standing rules. Key actions included the adoption of an annexation resolution for BARC/NASA Area 3 and a resolution supporting state municipal revenue modernization.

Public Hearing: Proposed Annexation of Federal Lands

The council heard comments on Annexation Resolutions 2125, 2126, and 2127 concerning the incorporation of federal properties (totaling approximately 2,200 acres of BARC and NASA land) into the city’s corporate limits.

  • Jack Patterson (resident at 161 Research Road, adjacent to Area 2) expressed strong support for annexation, stating the action would help "protect the federal lands." He urged the council to consider including the Beaver Dam Creek Watershed and a unified annexation area from Kenilworth Avenue to Research Road, acknowledging technical issues with private residential properties. He said, "I would hate to see this land get developed."

  • A second speaker stated he had no strong opinion on the proposed parcels but criticized the lack of transparency in council’s closed-session discussions on parcel selection. He noted there is a property surrounded by Greenbelt on three sides and the Beltway that had sought annexation in the past but was rejected, and its residents would benefit from services.

  • Uri Okal (resident of Old Greenbelt) asked why parcels 1, 2, and 3 were chosen and why other sections, including a gap between parcels 1 and 2, were not included. The City Manager answered that the gap contains residential property, which was excluded to avoid imposing municipal service obligations.

  • Jillian Schweitzer (Beltsville resident) inquired whether Beltsville would have "a seat at the table" if the land is annexed, given the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC) is involved. The Mayor replied that county council representatives, delegates, and senators represent the views of Beltsville and other affected areas.

  • Another resident asked what covenants would exist on the annexed property, specifically concerned that it could be used for data centers or solar farms.

  • A further speaker sought to confirm that the primary purpose of annexation is environmental protection and ensuring the city has a voice in any future changes to the land. Council clarified that federal ownership would not change; annexation only gives the city a seat at the table if the federal government proposes changes.

  • City Manager Salmerón noted that the state’s Maryland Department of Planning had provided written comments with no concerns, and that annexation plans were available for public review.

Consent Calendar

The council voted unanimously to approve the consent agenda as presented. (The consent agenda typically includes routine approvals and contracts. City staff noted that a detailed packet was provided.)

Public Comments & Testimony (Regular Meeting)

Petitions and Requests

  • Christine Wilkin (Greenbelt Resistance Network) delivered a petition on behalf of the network expressing concerns about Verquita security cameras in the city, which record 24/7 and upload data to a cloud owned by the company. She submitted a letter with 11 questions regarding data access, warrant requirements, potential sharing with federal agencies, and plans for additional cameras. She requested discussion and transparency.

  • Laura Rosenthal (Court Gardenway) supported the petition and asked for detailed written responses to the 11 questions, noting the group includes over 100 members.

  • (Another speaker, Mr. Orleans, also commented on the petition and requested information on council closed sessions regarding annexation parcel selection and on an RTA contract approval item on the consent agenda.)

Response from City Manager

City Manager Salmerón stated that the council had previously discussed license plate reader (LPR) technology in detail, including data storage and access. He said the police department found savings that allow addition of more cameras, and a proposal would be brought to council. He encouraged residents to review the earlier presentation recording.

Discussion on Eviction Ordinance

Councilmember Niesel inquired about compliance with the 2021 Greenbelt eviction notification ordinance, noting she heard 11 families were in court for evictions that day. City Manager Salmerón responded that the city had received notification from two property owners with several names, which were forwarded to CARES. Enforcement is complaint-based, and they are educating new property managers about the ordinance.

Communications

Mayor Jordan presented a proclamation designating March 2026 as Women’s History Month in Greenbelt, honoring the contributions of women. Councilmembers noted historic milestones, including Ruth Taylor (first woman on council, 1938-1941) and Elizabeth Harrington (first woman mayor, likely first in Maryland). They also highlighted that women currently hold a supermajority on the council.

Administrative Reports

City Manager Salmerón provided updates:

  • The city received a check for $1,804,969 from the federal directed grants program. Funds are allocated: $250,000 for Springhill Lake Recreation Center expansion and $1,500,000 for youth center roof replacement. The next year’s capital projects have been submitted.
  • The proposed budget is on schedule to be delivered as balanced on March 23. A March 4 meet-and-greet had 25 participants.
  • EV charging station construction began; the target is to have them operational by June 30 to capture a 6% tax credit on the $238,000 project.
  • The city completed its single audit for federal grants.
  • GIS roadmap planning with ESRI started; a full-day design session is set for March 17.
  • A pet resource fair was held on March 7 with Senator Washington, resulting in a large donation of dog food.
  • Upcoming events: Ace Educator Awards (March 18) and Egg Hunt (April 5).

Discussion Items

1. Second Reading and Adoption of Annexation Resolution for Area 3 (BARC/NASA, ~1,196 acres)

  • Councilmember Weaver moved adoption of a charter amendment resolution enlarging boundaries to include approximately 1,196 acres of federally owned land (BARC/NASA), bordered by MD 193, Soil Conservation Road, Baltimore-Washington Parkway, and Beaver Dam.
  • Senior Planner Terry Ruby detailed the boundaries and noted that the Maryland Department of Planning had no objections. State law requires a 45-day waiting period before the resolution takes effect.
  • Councilmembers emphasized that annexation does not change ownership or services; it provides the city a voice in future land-use changes.
  • The resolution passed unanimously (7-0). Councilmembers noted it was a historic expansion of city boundaries.

2. Revenue Modernization Resolution

  • Councilmember Pompey moved first reading and suspension of rules for a resolution supporting House Bill 1142, which would establish a task force to modernize county and municipal revenue sources.
  • The bill is a Maryland Municipal League priority; it has passed the House and is in the Senate.
  • Councilmember Fritz expressed support and called for the task force to consider progressive taxation.
  • The resolution was adopted after suspension of rules with a unanimous vote (7-0).

3. Standing Rules Modifications

The council reviewed several proposed changes to its standing rules to streamline meetings and clarify procedures.

  • Sign-in/comment card requirement: The original proposal required a sign-in sheet at regular meetings. After debate, the wording was changed from "shall sign in" to "may sign in" to provide flexibility. The amendment passed, with one councilmember opposed.
  • Resolution on council member behavior outside meetings: The sponsor withdrew this item, stating it needed more definition.
  • Adoption of resolutions on first reading: A proposal to allow some resolutions (except charter and code changes) to be adopted on the first reading without a second reading failed by a vote of 3-4.
  • The overall package of standing rules will be brought back as a resolution for formal adoption at the next meeting.

Key Outcomes

  • Annexation: Adopted Resolution to annex the BARC/NASA Area 3 (1,196 acres) into the city limits (7-0). The 45-day waiting period begins.
  • Revenue Modernization: Adopted a resolution in support of HB 1142 to establish a task force on municipal revenue sources (7-0).
  • Standing Rules: Agreed to modify the sign-in requirement to voluntary; other proposed changes were withdrawn or failed. The complete revised rules will be formalized at a future meeting.
  • Consent Agenda: Approved as presented.
  • Petitions: The petition regarding security cameras and the request for information on annexation closed sessions were referred to the City Manager for follow-up.
  • Items 9 and 10: Removed from the agenda at the request of Councilmember Pompey without specific discussion.

Note on time discrepancies: The agenda listed the meeting at 7:00 p.m., but the minutes indicate the public hearing was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The minutes also state the meeting ended at 7:16 p.m., which appears to be a typographical error given the length of proceedings.

Meeting Transcript

You know what? I don't have the agenda agenda that she sent. I know, but normally we have the ones on the side with all the documents attached, and I don't have that. I think what's confusing is there's two events on the calendar. Seven event is a seven o'clock event, and there's a seven thirty event on the counter. I don't know what because it's very big. I have to I have to return it. Recording in progress. Okay, that's what I spoke in for. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, good evening. This is a uh Greenbelt City Council public hearing. Uh, incorporation of these federal lands into the city's corporate over if you like. Rule, please. Councilmember Fritz. Present. Council Member Niesel. Okay. Right on top. Council Member McKinney. Here. Council Member Poppy. Councilmember Pope. Here. Mayor Port Sam Weaver. Here. Mayor George. I'm here. And let's try that. Yes, my name is Jack Patterson. I live at one sixty-one research road in Greenbelt. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to talk about this matter. Our property is adjacent to uh area two in your annexation map. And we are in agreement that the city should annex the federal property as shown in those maps. Uh because we need to protect the federal lands. And I think your actions would do that to the best that you can. Also feel that you haven't gone far enough. There are there is a slice out of the area that we would like to see included in the annexation area, but I understand there are some technical issues of private property that um confound that. But we like the idea of having a a unified annexation area uh from Kenilworth Avenue over to Research Road. Uh realize that there are private property owners where that would be harder to do. But I would urge you to try to consider that and and make that complete. I would hate to see this land get developed.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com