I pledge allegiance.

And through the public for which we stand.

One nation under God.

Just wanted to say thank you, everyone, for being here.

We are going to begin our meeting with proclamations and recognitions, and then we'll start our normal meeting at 6 30.

So we appreciate everyone joining us for the celebration today.

I'm going to ask my colleagues to please join me at the podium as we do the recognitions and celebrations.

Good evening, everyone.

It is my honor to read the Maddie's topanic Peace Day proclamation.

And although, while I never had the opportunity to meet Maddie, his spirit in terms of the love and care for this community runs very deep.

Whereas Maddie JT Stepanic was an American poet, ambassador, and advocate for peace in our world.

And whereas at the age of three, Maddie started to write poetry, which he referenced to his heart songs, enabling him to cope with a rare and fatal form of muscular dystrophy.

A disease that also claimed the lives of his sister and two brothers.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim July 17th, 2026 as Maddie JT Stepanic Peace Day, and encourage all members of the community to recognize the many contributions of Maddie JT Stepanic by thinking gently, speaking gently, and living gently.

The motto by which his courageous young man lived his life.

And we have Dr.

Jenny Sepanic here.

Oh Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilman below eight seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hands and say aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

We have Dr.

Jenny Stepanic here to receive the proclamation.

I forgot my absolutely.

Do you want me to hold the mic for you?

I got it.

Thank you.

I feel like step forward people.

Step forward.

So thank you, everybody.

Thank you to the city, to the council for always supporting Maddie's foundation and celebrating Peace Day.

For people who are not familiar, Peace Day is a celebration of my son, Maddie Stepanic's life and legacy.

It's on his birthday every single year.

When Maddie passed away back in 2004, he left this legacy of hope and peace.

He taught us all about the important matters of not having to agree with our neighbors, but learning to be with our neighbors.

He taught us about having inner purpose and finding what that is so that we know that we matter, so that we're not afraid to get along with other people and find out how they matter also and build these mosaics of humanity.

And he reminded us about the important matters of play, of getting to know our neighbors around the block and around the world, and just connecting because when we know our neighbors, we care more about our neighbors.

And when we care about somebody, we fear them less.

So there's less violence.

We have materials, we have peace certification, we're developing a virtual museum, we have uh master class sessions, podcast sessions, blog things.

We have all kinds of things.

I have all these people here that I do a lot of my facilitation with, with some of my mama peace chats with the Main Street and um UCR communities.

Um but peace day.

Peace Day is a day that we pause all those programs.

We pause all the hard work year-round.

And we bring those programs in a playful way to the city of Rockville.

So when you come to Peace Day, there's peace stations with all kinds of Matty messages paired with arts and crafts to help you understand the message.

There's entertainment this year, we have Ocho de Bastos, the Blarney Bench, the Zam Dancers.

We have a cornhole tournament this year.

Please sign up.

We are looking for people and we're dropping the price a little bit.

It's our fundraiser that supports our foundation, but we really need people to come and play cornhole for peace.

But most of all, we're also having a toaster piece where we just we connect with purpose for peace.

We all know that peace matters.

We all know that peace matters, but I think in today's world, a lot of people say, Yeah, but what can I do?

Look at my world.

And what I'm saying, what this day says is there's a lot we could do.

Peace does not begin with the end of war.

Peace begins with our choices and how we connect with our neighbors around the block and around the world.

This year, Peace Day is going to be on July 11th.

World of Beer, they close the street.

It's inside, outside, big party with a purpose, bands, music, cornhole, everything from two to five Saturday, July 11th.

Um be there.

Okay.

Um and you can find out at more information at Mattie's Peace Foundation.org.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Can we take a picture of this?

Shorter people.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Also, please, my apologies.

Usually we stay for everybody else's, but I'm literally teaching a month peace chat even as we speak.

So we're leaving the role to it right now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a couple of proclamations that don't have recipients, but we wanted to make sure we uh spread awareness about the issues.

So uh June 15th through 21st is Men's Health Week.

I said that right, men's health week.

And uh it's an important time to ensure that people are getting their checkups and taking care of their health.

Whereas, despite advances in medical technology and research, men's life expectancy continues to average five years less than women, with men of Native American and African American ethnic backgrounds having the lowest life expectancy overall.

And educating the public about the importance of a healthy lifestyle and early detection of male health issues will assist in reducing the number of deaths caused by detectable and preventable diseases.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim June 15th through 21st, 2026 as Men's Health Week, and encourage the Rockville community to increase their efforts to understand the importance of a healthy lifestyle, regular exercise, and getting medical checkups from men and their families.

I'll read the next proclamation, and then I'll ask my colleagues to help me move these.

Whereas World Refugee Day is an annual commemoration adopted by the United Nations in 2000 to honor and raise awareness of refugees, and the more than 122.6 million displaced people have been forced from their homes worldwide, more than at any time in recorded history, including over 30 million refugees around the world.

And now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville proclaimed June 20, 2026 as World Refugee Day, and June 15th through 21st as World Refugee Week.

Can one of my colleagues please move these proclamations?

Councilman Valeri.

Do we have a second?

Councilman Fulton seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

It is unanimous.

I think it is apropos that we uh read this next proclamation and thinking about world refugees who are often uh have to move refugees who have to move from their homes due to violence, and we have peace day, we also recognize um gun violence awareness day.

I want to uh just note that uh in 2024, Maryland experienced 671 firearm fatalities, including homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings.

There are about 7 million children living in homes with unsecured guns.

That's not okay, and we can do better.

And I will read the proclamation.

Whereas while homicides and gun violence are down significantly in Maryland compared to nationwide, guns are still the leading cause of death among children and teens every year.

And we still need to work to eliminate gun violence and gun homicides across the country.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville declare June 5th, 2026 as gun violence awareness day, June 5th through 7th as gun violence awareness weekend, and June 2026 as National Gun Violence Awareness Month, and encourage all residents to support their local communities, efforts to prevent tragic effects of gun violence and to honor and value human lives.

I want to welcome Moms Demand Action to the podium.

I will say I had a chance to engage with them in Annapolis Day where state laws are being passed.

And I just want to thank you for your tireless advocacy.

I also want to thank Rockwell City Police Department because Rockville has been leading in the area to help get guns off of our streets.

We have removed about a thousand guns and melted them.

Thank you for your work.

I will, yeah, I will do that.

Thank you.

So I just wanted to honor and appreciate the work that they are doing.

Who can help?

You you did the move.

Do we have a second?

Uh Councilmember Miles seconds.

All right, so I want to welcome Maria Picala, who is from the Maryland chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and other chapters.

Do you want to share a few words?

Yes.

Okay.

So we gotta take a quick vote.

Sorry.

We're all unanimous, correct?

Thank you.

All right.

There we go.

Um, Mayor Ashton and members of the Rockville City Council, on behalf of the 4,000 plus Montgomery County Moms Demand Action volunteers, uh, I want to thank you for issuing this proclamation today to recognize the Wear Orange movement.

Moms Demand Action is nonpartisan, a volunteer-based organization.

And we, including my friend uh Leslie Katz and I, are part of a wider network called Every Town for Gun Safety, which includes students' demand action, mayors against illegal guns, and every town survivor network, which includes the survivors that your proclamation honors today.

We are the largest gun violence prevention organization in the country with over 11 million supporters.

And we work at the federal, state, and local level, engaging in advocacy, legislative action, support for community partners that work with many of the people who are most impacted by gun violence.

We engage in school safety and public education and electoral action.

We deeply appreciate your commitment to elevate the cause of gun violence prevention and to give voice to those who have been personally affected by this horrible problem we face every day in our communities.

This past year was another difficult year in Montgomery County, where we were confronted with unacceptable levels of gun violence.

And sadly, um with firearm-related incidents in our schools, uh, including at Wootton High School and Blake High School.

I know I share your concerns about this.

And I know we all worry about the future of our children, and also for the future of those young people who make the wrong choice and then have their lives destroyed by it.

So speaking out about gun violence as you have done today, issuing this uh Where Orange Proclamation is a first and important step that we can take.

As Montgomery County residents, parents, and students, we want to express our appreciation to you for your leadership in elevating the cause of reducing gun violence, and for this proclamation that recognizes and supports those among us who've been affected most directly.

So let's work together to make gun violence, especially in schools, in schools, sorry, a thing of the past in Montgomery County.

In schools, sorry, a thing of the past in Montgomery County.

And thank you again for recognizing We're Orange.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much.

Thanks for having me.

I'll just make one final point because we did have you spoke about gun violence in schools, and I mentioned the leading cause of death for young people.

Just noting that it's not just those who are directly impacted, but in the case of Wooten, over a thousand students and teachers were impacted.

And we just want to thank you for the work that you're doing, and we'll all strive to be better to make sure we're making sure that our schools are safe and our community is safe.

Thank you.

So at the beginning of every one of our meetings, we say pledge allegiance to the flag.

One meeting a year, we get to proclaim flag day.

And I have the honor of doing that today.

It's a hard act to follow after gun violence, but I'll get it together.

Whereas, by resolution of the second continental Congress, dated June 14th, 1777, the first official flag of the United States was adopted.

And by act of Congress dated August 3rd, 1949, June 14th of each year was designated as National Flag Day.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim June 14th, 2026 as flag day, and also celebrate the 250th anniversary of America.

And we urge the Rockville community to pause at 7 p.m.

on this date, June 14th, for the annual pause for the pledge and recite with all Americans the Pledge of Allegiance to our flag and to our nation.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

And I believe we have some members of the American Legion Post 86 Color Guard to come say a few words.

Tim Graeber, welcome.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council members.

I accept this proclamation on behalf of American Legion Post 86.

I'm an Army veteran and member of Post 86, and I'm also in the American Legion Color Guard.

We have another member over here as part of the Color Guard with me as well.

To me, flag is a symbol of freedom, sacrifice, and unity, as well as an expression of patriotism.

It stands for courage of those who fought for liberty from the revolutionary war through our current wars and conflicts.

And it also demonstrates the resolve Americans have demonstrated throughout history.

That courage and resolve was demonstrated by the flag still being raised in September of 1814 at Fort McHenry.

It was demonstrated during February 1945 when the flag was raised in the Ojima during World War II.

It was demonstrated in July 1969 when the flag was planted on the moon.

And it was fine, and it was also demonstrated in New York City when the flag was raised in the aftermath of the 2001 World Trade Center attack.

To me, the flag also reminds us of the cost of freedom and the service to our nation when it is draped over caskets and military funerals and funerals of veterans.

The flag represents unity and respect when it is honored through saluting and putting your hand over your heart during the President of Allegiance and during the national anthem.

So this is what flag day means to me and why it's important to continue to recognize Flag Day on June 14th.

Thank you.

You can, you can.

Thank you.

Good job.

Thank you.

Bless you.

Okay.

It is my privilege and my honor to present the proclamation in honor of Juneteenth, a holiday that is probably one of the newest federal holidays, and thank goodness is still a federal holiday as of last time I checked.

Whereas in August 1619, the first recorded enslaved Africans arrived in Jamestown, Virginia, after enduring the brutal journey known as the Middle Passage.

And whereas on June 19th, 1865, Major General Gordon Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas, and announced General Order Number Three, informing enslaved African Americans in Texas that they were free, marking a defining moment in American history.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim June 19th, 2026 as Juneteenth in the city of Rockville, and encourage all employees, residents, and visitors to commemorate this important day through reflection, learning, celebration, and renewed commitment to freedom, justice, dignity, and unity for all.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

And I believe we have Jean Booth, our wonderful uh Jedi coordinator, Justice Equity, Diversity Inclusion, to accept it.

So thank you, Ms.

Booth.

Thank you very much.

All right.

So thank you, Mayor Ashton and Council members for this proclamation recognizing Juneteenth.

As a community, we commemorate the end of enslavement in the United States.

We honor the resilience, contributions, and enduring legacy of African Americans.

May this day inspire us to continue building a community where freedom, opportunity, and belonging are available to all.

This isn't this is in fact our ongoing commitment.

And it's from one o'clock to 10 PM.

So there's lots of activities, and we hope to see you all there.

Thank you very much.

Whereas the commemoration of Caribbean American Heritage Month was initiated in 2004 by Ms.

Claire Nelson, PhD, and adopted by the U.S.

House of Representatives in 2005 to recognize the significance of Caribbean people and their descendants on the history and culture of the United States.

And whereas, since the declaration, the White House has issued an annual proclamation recognizing June as Caribbean American Heritage Month.

And now therefore, the Mayor and Council of the City of Rockville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim June 2026 as Caribbean American Heritage Month in the City of Rockville, and urge all the residents of our city to honor these cultural and historic bonds and be reminded that America's greatness lies in our diversity.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

And I believe we have several recipients of this proclamation.

Greetings, I'm Althea Gray Mackenzie, and it's a pleasure to be here today thanking Mayor Ashton and the city council members, the good people of the city of Rockville, and all of those who made it possible for this day to happen.

And if I've said your name incorrect, please correct me.

Thank you.

Um, and wanted to share that.

Um, it's a pleasure to be here for the third time, and we wanted to make sure that we had a representation representative from the community as well to receive this proclamation.

Um, just to share that I am um I wear many hats and I'm a chair for the library advisory committee of Aspen Hill Library, as well as being a board member with the library system.

This has enabled me and others to help to have I would say 21 expressions of Caribbean culture and heritage alongside summer reading for 11 years.

So even though we're about seven percent, six to seven percent of the foreign born in the community, we have done so much to bring extra life and love and energy to all of Montgomery County.

I'm a 35-year resident, as well as my families here.

Um, my daughter Ariana, my husband John, my grandson Zayer.

And I wanted to share that um there's so many cr incredible uh members of the community who have made their mark.

Um my daughter and I are uh awardees for the Maryland State Arts Council's Folk Life Apprenticeship, and that documentary is coming out soon, as well as being part of um uh I would say an invitation to support the Juneteenth events for the last three years for the city of Rockville at the square, and I believe the square this year will have in the summer series or summer concert series um on Juneteenth in the evening, our business community as far as um uh black uh business owners and um a wonderful concert, so I hope you come on out.

And I did reach out to the Caribbean Chamber of Commerce so they can share um who should also receive this wonderful um recognition, and I'd like to say that Gillian has been in um the Rockville area for 25 years as the owner and um founder of Caribbean Caterers and she's also a dear friend, so I would like her to come up and say a few words.

Thank you so much, Adher, and thank you, um Madam Mayor and the entire council members.

Um it has been my privilege ever since I migrated here to the United States in nineteen eighty-seven to be a Montgomery County resident, and I opened my business in 2004, 25 years ago this year in Rockville, Maryland.

So I am squarely Rockville, Montgomery County all for the last 40 years of my life.

My grandson is over here taking pictures as well, and um also a product of uh Montgomery County, just graduated from college.

Um it has a business here in Montgomery County has been um a great pleasure for me.

I have friends who have businesses all throughout the country, and yes, Montgomery County has some problems, but it has been a great journey for me as a business owner and to have lasted 25 years through 9-11 and the sniper and everything as it has happened in Montgomery County.

It has been a great journey, and I am proud to be a Rockville business owner.

So thank you very much, City of Rockville.

Um just want to say thank you so much, Jillian.

I want to say one more thing.

Um there are actually two other events that are happening, one tomorrow, which is the um Caribbean Advisory American Advisory Group.

Um they have their uh proclamation ceremony that will happen in the executive office building, which is their lunch room area, which is the bottom level.

Please go at um six o'clock.

I will be there, and I'm hoping that you all enjoy with me all the wonderful food and um Laureanne Sales, um council member for the uh Montgomery County will have her proclamation on June 9th.

So hope to see you.

Lots of good food, lots of entertainment, enjoyment, and thank you all.

Thank you.

I don't think everybody so much.

Thank you so much.

I think this is a second.

I'm gonna get this to you.

Good evening.

Thank you for your patience.

In tolerating running a few minutes behind, checking in on family in the hospital.

And I'm glad to be here this evening with you all.

Again, at some point we're gonna do this outside because the weather's too nice.

I have the privilege of reading that the uh Pride Month Proclamation, and it goes whereas the riots at the Stonewall Inn in Manhattan, New York in June 1969, are um are recognized as the beginning of the modern day LGBTQIA, also known as lesbian gay, bisexual, transgender, queer civil rights movement.

And now therefore the mayor and council of the city of Rockville proclaimed June 26th, June 20, June 2026 as LGBTQ Pride Month.

Um and I should have begun this.

I'll go ahead and move the proclamation and talk about our event this weekend.

Uh but with that, Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

All right.

It's my understanding, uh, city manager correct me if I'm wrong.

We have a pride event this Saturday.

Sunday, I apologize.

Time and date.

I'm sorry, the time.

Two to six.

Two to five in town square.

So um please join us if you're able.

And I'm unsure, do we have somebody to have oh I'm so sorry, I saw you walking in the back.

Yeah, yeah, from the Heavy Human Rights Commission.

Good evening.

Thanks for coming out.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Um cool.

Um, yeah, so the Human Rights Commission graciously accepts this proclamation in honor of Pride Month.

Um, while pride is celebrated for just one month, it should serve as a reminder to everyone here who identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning that the city of Rockville doesn't merely accept you for who you are.

We have been, are, and will continue to be a community that embraces and celebrates you.

This proclamation is a testament to the city's commitment that every individual, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, deserves to live freely, authentically, and without fear.

In this past month, we had a community member reach out to the commission after experiencing a hate crime outside of our city limits, just outside of our city limits in North Bethesda.

Um, and we were able to help her file a priest police report and connect her with further resources.

Um, the nonprofit organizations and government agencies we host along Gibbs Street during Rockville Pride, while the music is playing in the square and drag story time is happening in the library.

As we come together during this joyous celebration, let us reaffirm our dedication to creating a community where love triumphs over hate, where equality prevails over discrimination, and where every person feels safe and welcomed.

On behalf of the Human Rights Commission, we extend an invitation to join us.

You are correct, on Sunday, June 7th, 2 p.m.

to 5 p.m.

in Rockville Town Center.

Um, and if anyone wants to show up and help us put up decorations beforehand, we still welcome volunteers.

It's SSL hour eligible.

Um, and of course, we extend our heartfelt gratitude to the city of Rockville for this proclamation and for its steadfast support of the LGBTQ plus community.

And finally, we thank the mayor and council for celebrating with us here today.

Thank you so much.

Oh, yes.

Bring it on.

Wait, can you can you take a portion, please?

Yeah, okay.

Thank you.

Yay.

I see that and before I get to my next proclamation, I would be reminisced if I did not note that um the founding, uh, the kickoff of the LGBTQ movement, was begun at Stonewall by a black trans woman, Marsha P.

Johnson, um, and want to say her name and the importance of her contributions.

It is now my privilege um to present the proclamation, uh, recognizing and honoring the Americans with Disabilities Act, also known as the ADA.

Um at the time that the ADA uh was signed into law, our country was in a very different place.

It was shepherded through by a Democratic senator signed into law by a Republican president.

I hope that one day we can get back to that spirit of cooperation and collaboration.

Whereas individuals with disabilities have long faced mistreatment, discrimination, indignities, and exclusion.

And whereas the Americans with Disabilities Act, a landmark civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications, and state and local government programs, was signed into law by President George H.W.

Bush on July 26, 1990.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of the city of Rothville, Maryland, do hereby proclaim July 26, 2026 as a 36th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and encourage all residents to recognize the importance of this landmark legislation and the ongoing work to advance accessibility, equity, and inclusion for people with disabilities.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

And here with us this evening is someone I got to know through our equity work in the Rockville Pedestrian Advocacy Committee, and that is Vincent Sable.

I'm also I'll take this moment to also note that we will have an ADA accessible and uh everyone accessible podium shortly, I do hope.

Um thank you, Madam Mayor and Council.

I for allowing me to accept this proclamation.

Um let me assure you, uh my remarks will be short.

Not um okay, I don't know.

As I'm getting a little nervous now, um well, now I'm gonna have to lift the cat out of the bag for those of you who don't know me.

Um I am low vision, but as you can see, I'm quite quite well functioning.

Um what I'd like to point out is that many disabilities are unnoticeable.

And that is either by to take care of them, they're kept either kept unnoticeable by design or by choice.

Um, in the case of by design, it's primarily medical devices which address various disabilities.

Uh in my case, I know of very well about insulin pumps, and those things have progressed from being half the size of my forearm to something that's small enough to fit in the palm of your hand.

Uh now by choice is a little different because many disabled people.

That you don't make mention of your disability for fear of the stigma that will come up.

You are either broken or unable, and in the worst case scenarios, people think you're less of a human being.

Um of the intents of the ADA was to help level the playing field in society for disabled people.

Um in March 1990.

The Capitol Crawl illustrated this dramatically when dozens of disabled people, many movement impaired, and their supporters went to the Capitol, got out of their wheelchairs and assistive devices, and literally crawled up the Capitol steps to make the point.

That was March 12th, 1990.

July 26th, the ADA was signed.

Um, one quick little anecdote, and I'll just be just about done.

Um in 2018, my sister and my niece and her fiance came down for a visit, and we went downtown and did all the usual things, monuments, whatnot.

One of the places we went to was the National Archives.

Primarily one of the things her my niece's fiance wanted to see copy of the Constitution.

We and we were at the National Archives, we got online, and the attendant with due diligence allowed X number of people to go in at a time.

And unfortunately, at one point he stopped me and put them up across through up across and that group was there, ready to go.

And my sister and niece and her husband were concerned that I was going to be left behind.

So I but I just waved them on, knowing that full well I was going to eventually meet up with them.

Two or three minutes later, another, a different attendant came up to velvet rope, unhooked it, and said, I was walking with Kane then.

And she said, come in, sir.

You can walk up the ramp.

But I said, well, wait a minute, I'm with those people over there.

And she's motioned them to join me.

And she said, all of you, just walk up the ramp and walk right in.

That is a good example of the ADA in action.

Um, finally, I'd like to thank the city of Rockville, and especially the RPAC committee, which I belong to, for the attention that they give to the needs of disabled people.

Thank you.

I'll come to you.

Thank you so much.

So here in the city of Rockville, we truly pride ourselves in our park system.

Um, not just for what we can provide from the recreation department and all the different events, but the many dozens and dozens of different areas throughout the city that you can partake and you can enjoy with your family as a walk, as a stroll, or participating in the many Rockville events, which is why it's my honor to present um the proclamation for recreation, a parks and recreation month.

Whereas the U.S.

House of Representatives has design designated July as parks and recreation month as parks and recreation are an integral part of communities throughout this country, including Rockville, Maryland.

Now, therefore, the mayor and council of Rockville do hereby proclaim July 2026.

Is it July or is it June?

What's July?

Okay, all right.

July of 2026 as park and recreations month, and urge everyone to take full advantage of our beautiful parks and recreation facilities and amenities now and throughout the year.

Madam Mayor, I move the proclamation.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember.

Seconds.

All those in favor, please use the attendance.

Sorry.

Um, and now I believe we have uh Jack Thereof from the Recreation Park Advisory Board to come here and say a few words.

Thanks.

Uh thank you, Mayor Ashton and Council members.

Um, and before addressing recreation and parks, just thank you for an amazingly beautiful and meaningful set of proclamations this afternoon that make me very feel very lucky to have grown up here and very glad that this is where we're raising our family to be part of this just incredible community.

So thank you for that.

Uh speaking of my children, they were supposed to come up with me to make this a more visibly appealing and interesting uh set of remarks.

Uh, but they said no because it's beautiful out and they're at the park and at the Rockville Swim Fitness Center, which I think is appropriate.

Um I also want to say an amazing thank you to the staff uh for the city of Rockville and the recreation and parks department.

There is an incredible amount that goes on in the month of May to run up to hometown holidays to get everything ready for all of the camps and the thousands of kids who'll be going through those camps, all the work at the swim fitness center.

Uh, I got a little bit too much sun yesterday, timing and swimming, hundreds of kids, some of the best swimmers in the area, all swimming, um, and also people who are just learning to swim, all at the Swim Fitness Center.

And then as walking home from that event, uh, I saw at Welsh Park, the basketball courts packed with people, the futsal courts packed, the tennis courts and the new pickleball court all being heavily used.

It's all to say that uh there are a lot of things that make Rockville special.

Our parks and recreation programs are one place where we can all come together and play, be healthy from the youngest uh to the oldest.

Um, and really appreciate this recognition and all the work that uh the city staff do and that our leadership does to make this such a strong system for the city.

Thank you.

Thank you to thank you to everyone who joined us today.

A lot of opportunities to celebrate inclusion, but also to address important issues that are facing our city and our country.

And we thank you for being with us in that.

And I hope you have felt seen, you've learned something new, and please join the events that we've shared.

We're gonna take a brief uh break and then we'll be back just around no changes to the agenda for this EP.

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to the city manager's report, Mr.

Mahalik.

Mayor Ash and members of City Council, ladies and gentlemen, good evening.

I just want to spend most of my time time just thanking city staff for all the hard work over the past couple of weeks dealing with a lot of events and a lot of really strange weather going back and forth.

We had the public works equipment show a couple weeks ago, Thursday.

If you remember, it was in the 90s.

But we had a really good turnout.

A lot of equipment out there, a lot of really happy employees showing off their equipment and even happier little children and all the equipment as well.

So that was wonderful.

Two days later, it was pouring down rain for the whole weekend long for hometown holidays.

But yeah, we had a really great turnout, and I appreciate the work of our Wreck and Parks department, our police department, and our public works department.

Um, for those folks who braved the weather on Saturday when it was dreary, we actually had a good time.

We really did.

So I hope people enjoy that.

And it really goes to show that it's rain or shine out there.

So we're happy with that.

Um it is going to get hot again, the other side of the pendulum at the end of this week.

And thank goodness we have the interactive fountain all set up and ready to go at Town Square.

And we also have the Maryville Park splash pad for people to enjoy and to cool off.

And as has been mentioned multiple times, I hope people will join us for our Pride event this Sunday, June 7th, again, 2 to 5 p.m.

in the square in town center.

That's all I have now.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

I just also want to thank staff uh for all the work they did from the nonprofit symposium to the public works event to uh hometown holidays and the Memorial Day uh parade and ceremony that we did.

Thank you to all of Rockville for joining us.

Uh I also want to note um we appreciate staff allowing the uh Rockville Rotary uh to place flags that were put for Memorial Day.

Uh, they did a virtual event due to the rain, but just wanted to honor and appreciate that.

Mr.

Mahilak, I also know that you talked about the heats coming up.

And so we have the summer kickoff event that's this Friday.

Uh and I believe folks have to register for that.

But we encourage you to come out on Friday, I believe it's around eight o'clock.

So it's an evening event, and members of the mayor and council will be jumping into the pool.

So please join us.

Thank you for mentioning the other important events that are coming up.

We'll now move on to community forum.

This is the time for us to listen and to hear the concerns and feedback as well as to share ideas.

We will be going through the list of those who have signed up in advance, and then if anyone else would like to speak, I will call on you.

All persons, please address the mayor and council.

Please speak in a civil and courteous manner, and be respectful of the members of the audience as well.

Each person will be allotted three minutes.

There is a time clock in front of you.

Please state your name and whether you live in the city of Rockville.

Our first participant is Ken Liu.

Welcome.

My name is Ken Liu, and I live in Rockville in Hungerford.

Good evening, and thank you for the opportunity to speak.

We're here tonight as residents of Hungerford in strong support of allowing deer mesh in Rockville.

We ask that any new rule not set limitations in your location or setbacks.

Both the urban planning staff and the city council have had multiple, multiple discussions about solving the deer problem in another way.

While we wait for the solution, residents are left to manage the situation the best way we can.

The deer problem is not an exaggeration.

Deer reproduce in twins.

So the population literally multiplies.

These animals are no longer wild in Hungerford due to severe overpopulation.

Deer walked up to our front door and ate all of our plants the first night we moved in.

This weekend, my sister's dog jumped into the road because a buck charged her right off of Fleece Street.

Deer right now, they give birth right next to our doors and patios, bringing the risk of tick porn and other diseases into our yards where our children play, children and pets play.

A dehydrated fawn was abandoned in my neighbor's yard, and it screamed for hours and hours before animal control shot it.

This is happening in backyards, side yards, and front yards.

The deer don't discriminate.

Our neighborhood is overrun, and we need deer fencing everywhere that the deer can access.

There's a beautiful, beautiful native plant garden at Dawson Farm Park, tended by many hunger furters who are Rockville weed warriors, who, as you all know, are champions of citywide restoration efforts.

That garden is protected by deer mesh because without it, it wouldn't exist.

Importantly, we know to the council that restricting deer fencing to backyards only and requiring 10 foot setback unfairly punishes neighborhoods like Hungerford.

Many of our homes have very little yard to begin with.

And we're if we're required to do a 10-foot setback, we might as well have no fencing at all.

A setback rule effectively bans fencing for the people who need it the most.

We are passionate about conservation and we plant in front and side yards out of necessity when backyards are unplantable.

Our city actively encourages this.

The Rockville Rainscapes program offers rebates of up to $5,000 to residents who installed rain gardens or place lawns with native plants to support our local ecosystems and pollinators.

But when we can't protect these plants from the deer, they get eaten to the ground in a single night.

This is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

We planted a native service berry tree that was given to us by the city right up front where we have very nice sun.

Every night, deer came and stripped the leaves bare until we put netting on it.

We're asking to protect our families' health, protect native plants and native habitats for all.

Support the mesh, support native plants and pollinators.

Skip the setback.

Keep our families healthy while we live alongside the deer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I also have one more if you guys want this for you.

Welcome.

Lee Larson Raven.

Good evening.

Thank you for having this opportunity for me to speak.

My name is Leah Larson Rabin.

I am a resident of Rockville.

I have lived here since 2014.

And I live at 214 Harrison Street.

The reason that that's important is because we share a backyard with the Rockville Presbyterian Church.

And one of the things that we have treasured about living in Rockville and being a part of this community is that Rockville takes very good care of its marginalized and vulnerable communities.

To have a women's shelter right there, to have a nursery school right there, a cooperative nursery school that provides care for children for families who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford other forms of care is so critical as part of Rockville's identity.

And it's something that we really sort of feel it speaks so loudly to who Rockville is.

And these two organizations have been in Rockville Presbyterian Church.

The shelter has been there since the 80s.

Recently, unfortunately, and due to economic pressures, we've both been forced out.

And I say we because I'm a board member of RPCNS, and my four-year-old goes there.

It has been a very, very difficult year for a lot of people.

We know that nonprofit organizations are particularly under stress.

But it is very disappointing that Rainbow Place and RPCNS are being forced out of this space of this town, really, because unless we find a new place for ourselves, there's no place for home and secure women to go.

Rainbow Place has not yet found that location.

And they are being forced out as we speak.

They are moving their stuff out with no options.

So I'd like to announce an initiative that our two organizations have joined together to create.

It's a little bit on the nose because it's technically in our backyard.

We need to move away from a lack of ownership of the community and the diversity that having this these types of organizations here require.

We are to that end um holding a fundraiser on June 20th, which is apparently a very popular date.

And we welcome the community to join us in supporting the two organizations.

But we will also be engaging in other efforts to raise awareness and to provide opportunities.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Welcome, Mark Pushela.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and members of the council.

It is still impossible for any neighborhood association to determine what differences there are between the current zoning and the proposed zoning ordinances.

This body did not provide its last zoning instructions at the May 18 meeting, so you continue today.

What then is the adoption schedule?

Still June 29 or now early July.

The staff materials state both dates.

The final zoning ordinance text will now be released June 15th.

This does not allow adequate time for review.

Both ZOR hearings were in April.

There have been many adjustments since then and asked for comparison materials have not been provided.

For MXCD zones in section 25.8.2.2b, there are some new text.

We appreciate limitations on vehicular access.

One in the MXCD zone.

Vehicular access to a secondary residential street is prohibited unless determined by the director of public works, chief of inspection service, or fire marshal to be necessary.

The CGCA still requests that one sentence be added.

Such determinations must be made based on a public standard and in consults consultation with impacted neighborhoods.

If access is needed for stormwater management, utilities or emergency services, then access can be limited for only those purpose as for Newmark Commons.

Better yet, pre-submission meeting should still be required for large projects.

This was very useful for Turnbrook Quarter, and for large projects, this can be a time saver.

For another request, it is still the CGCA opinion that a purpose statement for zones actually include a purpose.

This is found on page 151 of the red line version.

For the R90, R75, R60, and R40 zones, please add the purposes of these zones include one, provide appropriate located areas for residential development that are consistent with the plan of public health and safety, and two, stabilize and protect the essential characteristics of existing neighbor residential neighborhoods.

And that was taken directly from the current ordinance.

This will be reinforced policy two on page 23 of the 2021 master plan on land use and urban design.

Maintain large areas of residential detached land use while allowing one additional accessory apartment or accessory dwelling in it per residential lot.

That's pretty specific.

The CGECA requests that a comparison table of permitted uses be put together by city staff and the table explicitly state what differences are required by the state and which are at the direction of the mayor and council.

The proposed ordinance goes far beyond policy two on page 23.

And why is it so hard to determine who is responsible?

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Welcome, John Butler.

Do we have John Butler?

Okay.

Welcome, Anutia.

Thank you, Sarah.

Are you born?

Thank you for this opportunity to stand before you.

I'd like to do this once a month to come and say thank you.

Because you guys spend so much time listening and analyzing and studying all the needs in our city.

And you work hard to try to make it equitable for everyone.

So someone once said I have one life and one chance to make it count for something.

I'm free to choose that something.

My faith demands that I do whatever I can, whenever I can, whenever I can, as long as I can.

Does anybody know who said that?

Um I have taken this opportunity as a city visitant.

This is my fifth year starting living in the city of Rockville.

I used to live on Bava Drive, not quite city.

Um, and I've been enjoying all the opportunities I have gotten to volunteer to make a difference in the city to give back to this country that gave me what I have today, compared to a lot of people who are struggling to find work and pay their bills.

And I thank the city and especially Rockville Town Center Village for the opportunity to host the coffee club, which we have now moved to the Cambria Hotel, and I invite all of you to stop by and have a cup of coffee with us.

Um important things I really want to stress is how grateful I am that this uh city gives us a place to be ourselves.

And you, the mayor, I know you have worked hard to put the Sri Lankan community in focus.

Uh, the dancing at the Richard Montgomery College and the International Night, and we also got to dance on the square stage, which was a dream of mine that I have been working on for one year.

So when dreams come true for immigrants like myself, I think there's a lot of hope for people around us to understand that we are all trying to work towards some means of bringing community together to bring peace together to keep us schools safe, to keep our roads safe, to keep our condo safe, etc.

Thank you.

Welcome, Marty Rice.

Marty, Marty.

Sorry about that.

When I walked in, somebody handed me a note here.

I only wish it was my age.

My name is Martin Reese.

In August, I will have lived with my wife Anne at number nine, Don Mills Court for 54 years.

In December, I'm going to be 92 years old.

Neither Anne or I will be here when the first housing unit is built on the former poor farm 10-acre site.

But we do have concerns.

We've looked over that land for 50 or some odd years.

I have a question for you.

What do you think are the most important considerations in providing new housing?

I think there are two things you should consider when you as you enact zoning changes.

They are the number of housing units, obviously, the density, but also the environment in which the occupants and their children will live.

Four-story buildings should be the maximum.

Encourage the creation of an environment where all the trees are not cut prior to the construction.

Let the occupants' children grow up with their home units in harmony with nature.

Maximize green spaces, mature trees, include walking past mini totlots and playgrounds.

Thank you for your time and any consideration you can give to my plea.

Thank you.

Welcome, Julia.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

My name is Julia Binder.

I live in Newmark Commons.

I'm a member of the HOA board.

I want to thank you for your continuing invitations to communicate with you on the matter of rezoning Z O R I D 17.

I'm here to revisit the question of why the zoning team is proposing a height cap of 55 feet for the RMD 15 zoning designation, a definition that isn't in the Rockville City Code.

Why are the owner of the property and the zoning team proposing to alter the definition for this parcel with a height cap that's more than 37% higher than the 40-foot cap in the code?

The chart that you were shown a couple of weeks ago, comparing the number of dwelling units for RMD 10, 15, and 25 at 55 foot height is misleading with this altered height cap.

Please ask for a revised chart at 40 feet.

RMD 15 allows for townhouses, stacked duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and cottage courts to be built well within the 40-foot height cap.

These are the favored uh home types for the missing middle, which is what the city wishes to attract and provide options for in the 2040 Rockville Comprehensive Plan.

Myriad examples for uh the missing middle housing options can be found on MissingMiddlehousing.com, and they illustrate that the city code does not need a height cap exception to build such housing in an RMD 15 or RMD 10 zone.

But what the developer and the zoning team do need are some imaginative solutions.

Imagination is what Edmund Bennett, the developer of Newmark Commons, had.

Nearly 60 years ago, Bennett pursued the ideal of affordable contemporary modern architecture and preserved natural surroundings.

He visited communities in Europe, Canada, and the U.S.

that integrated respect for nature, embraced the existing terrain, preserved tree canopies and green space, and utilize modern architecture to let in light and create space.

This is what I challenge the city administrators, landowners, and developers to do.

Stick to the 40-foot height cap that is in the code, preserve the natural surroundings, adapt to the terrain, build on a human scale to integrate nature and architecture in a seamless blend, provide attractive affordable housing options that complement instead of clash with the surrounding R90, R60, and planned development zones.

Thank you very much for your continued support for reconsidering the high-density zoning designation of this parcel with its wetlands, wildlife, and special place in Rockville history.

I very much hope that you'll arrive at a decision that balances the needs and hopes of those of us who already live here with those who wish to.

Thank you again for your responsiveness on this matter.

Thank you.

Welcome, Pat Rever.

Good evening, and again, thank you for listening to us.

I have owned a home in Rockville since 1985 in Newmark Commons.

I'm returning this evening to City Hall to ask you to reconsider and discuss later this evening the height limit for the RMD 15 zone you have are on the way to adopt for parcel ZOR 17.

The height limit you have agreed upon is 55 feet.

We understand that this would increase the profitability of development on this property.

It seems, however, that the price would be paid by the detached homes adjacent to this property in Markwood and Newmark Commons neighborhoods.

Buildings at such a height would create a wall that would act as a multiplier of noise and pollution coming from I-270.

This woodland at present protects us from the ill effects of both vehicle emissions and the roar of traffic.

If you care to come and look again sometime, some warm evening in July, you will also see one of Rockville's most remarkable displays of lightning bugs who make use of the dark sky preserve over this woodland.

By replacing the woodland with buildings that are 55 feet high, the price would be paid by the health of the neighboring communities.

The resulting wall would be more than twice as high as the adjacent detached homes, which average about 25 feet.

We are asking you to consider a height limit of 40 feet.

This would be in keeping with Rockville's current regulation for the RMD 15 zone.

The proposal of 55 feet puts Mayor and Council in conflict with its own zoning code.

This is a problem easily solved by reducing the height to 40 feet.

That's logical, isn't it?

We have reviewed community input on this issue up to April 22, the last available.

We are puzzled to find only a handful of supporters for the original rezoning recommendation, perhaps three or four since September.

And only once or twice have we heard oral testimony supportive of dense development.

Yet we keep hearing from some of you that there is strong support for dense development on this plot.

Where can we find it?

And over the uh there has been overwhelming testimony from our two communities, including about 700 signatures on a petition.

You all know that.

Um thank you all for having listened to so many of us who have been testifying on the proposed zoning update for this property since last September.

We thank you for finding ways to reduce the density and for finding ways to prevent our two communities from becoming a cut through for traffic.

This is our final request that you reconsider the height limit of 55 feet, so that it is in accord with Rockville Code and would help prevent a multiplier effect of emissions and sound.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Welcome, Anna Astrid Molina.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

My name is Anna Street Molina, and I have lived in Markwood for over 30 years.

I thank you again for listening to our concerns regarding traffic, safety noise, and the historical burial site.

We're deeply grateful for your decision to make the access through Don Mills Court to emergency and pedestrian traffic only, and to totally reject the RMD 25 proposal for the Sora 870 plot.

To responsibly accommodate the city growth, I respectfully urge you again to consider an RMD 10 designation with a 15% MDPU bonus.

Kept at the straight 40-foot height limit.

My neighbors and I are deeply alarmed by the proposed RMD 15 designation carrying a 55-foot height exception.

A 55-foot structure will completely tower over our single family homes, which max out at 25 feet.

Councilmember Fulton mentioned that RMD 15 zones in college garden have worked beautifully.

However, those towns houses again are under 40 feet.

They consist of two floors and a basement.

What the city proposed for it are SOAR ID 17 is not the same.

It effectively doubles the height of the college garden townhomes, making it entirely incompatible with the R90 zones.

RMD 15 is 333% increase from the density for our R90 zone, current R90 zone.

Even if RMD 15 is chosen, the 40 foot 40 foot height can and must be maintained.

We do not need a 55-foot exception to build density in the housing.

For example, in the Petro Terrace neighborhood in Aldi, Virginia, there will be these looking like traditional town homes, but are exactly three stories high, and they have a multi-level lower, lower multifamily, a three-bedroom uh unit and a two-bedroom single unit on the top.

And they have each their own um garage.

Um I know this because I have friends living there.

Furthermore, from my own experience, when I first moved here in 1990, I live in a single lower unit.

And I think this could be actually done here.

You can have a lower multiple unit and a single unit here, of course, without the cars.

But if you really want to make it luxury, you can add a terrace.

And you know, I think that will accomplish what you're trying to do.

Um I think this lower single family home is good not only for young families, but also for people that have mobility issues that I don't think they are being addressed on the on the conversations that I've heard from you.

And um, there are also other solutions.

You have beautiful duplexes, multifamily homes.

So I really want to leave this here for you, and I really thank you for your attention.

Thank you very much.

Welcome, Ju JD Kumar.

And uh, if you want to leave some pictures there, perfect.

Thank you.

Okay, guess who's back?

Back again.

JD here, televoter, please.

Now Montgomery County, Maryland government, you figure out how many monsters you've created, good ones and not so good ones.

Thank you.

Uh now, City of Rockway, Maryland Government, um, CRNG, Council and Mayor Ashton.

Thank you for this opportunity.

This open democracy forum.

My name is James Druva Kumar, J.D.

Kumar, Democrat candidate for United States Congress, House of Representatives for this Maryland District 8.

My website is vote jdk.com.

I'm EIC, explainer in chief, not humble on this.

Now pledge allegiance to the flag of British Colonial America, to the flag of the Continental USA America, which was a British East India Company, EIC inspired USA India flag.

We never quit the Brits, reasons for our immense wealth and emerging as a lone superpower in 1991, which is not just another number.

I pledge allegiance to USA America everywhere.

I pledge allegiance to rule of law, rule of law.

Now, some issues, adult issues, which is perhaps everyday health issues also for some of you.

Some of you not so frigid ones, perhaps.

Recently at a drop-in uh meeting, I discussed about sex and relationship survey.

I requested you coordinate with Montgomery County, Maryland government for a budget for this survey.

Please feel uh CRMG, please don't waste your limited budget for this.

This should be a county initiated because Montgomery County, Maryland has been cheating the city of Rockville, Maryland government for decades.

Now, you, not you, but exactly whoever you decide to appoint for this study, the sex survey, and this can be amalgamated with JEDI Jedi, as these are society and potential discrimination issues.

You should start with a political leadership with Montgomery County, Maryland government council and their executive, some kind of fetter staying at MCPS and funding MCPS so much.

High schools staying there for years working there.

You should ask them public questions, the public, and then do the survey with the public.

You should ask them questions like their first intimate relationships, their age when they did this.

Did they marry their first partner?

If not, why?

You all should answer these questions too.

Have they ever been physically or mentally abused in a relationship?

Do they support LGBTQ?

Because it is a popular thing to do.

Um you should also pose this question to my home country, little in India peoples.

I want to know their response here in my home nation, USA.

Dr.

Drew Pinski has very good advice on these issues for decades.

Again, now vote JDK.com policies.

Um ADA, um, you had had a commemoration today.

My mom has ADA issues.

I take her everywhere in a transport chair.

Um now you have to look into public accommodation in Montgomery County Board of Elections in terms of political chemisting.

Political canvassing is not the same as solicitation.

Thank you.

Um there are no signs anywhere.

Thank you.

No trespass.

Except sorry, uh, your time has expired.

We appreciate your commentary.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Welcome, Kathleen Kleinman.

Thank you.

My name is Kathleen Kleiman, and I am a Rockville resident.

Um I I just learned recently that uh the zoning is writing policy that indicates that uh food venues cannot have drive-throughs in Rockville.

Um, I had noticed early on that there was a shortage of them when I even before I moved here because I would visit frequently.

But to absolutely exclude them, um, I don't think you understand how they are utilized by people with disabilities heavily.

Um, back when I was a working person and time was always short because I was raising a family working 40 to 60 hours a week, and 40% of my time was travel.

I yeah, I I would have missed a lot of meals, not having access to drive-throughs.

Um, and I'm I'm not alone.

A lot of people with disabilities who drive tap into that to sustain themselves through the busy week.

Um it's it takes me about 10 minutes to get into the driver's seat and be ready to pull out of a parking spot.

Takes me about five to seven minutes to get out and hop over to get something to eat.

But that's you know, a big chunk of the time that I've allocated just to eat.

So drive-throughs become important.

If you're a person with a disability, trying to do what citizens do in this country, which is work and take care of a family, and you have a busy life, but the the drive-throughs are a lifesaver for us.

I just wanted to mention it that's who's gonna miss it the most.

The other thing I'd like to say, it relates to a uh my complaint about some of the driveway aprons in Rockville.

Not some of them, most of them, actually.

She thought she was ready for that because she's only been using a power chair for about a year, and she thought she was ready to go one block.

Um she went early, and I wasn't aware of it, but she told me later.

When she got to the driveway apron, getting close to the market, her chair toppled, of course, and she got dumped on the sidewalk.

And you wouldn't know this without me telling you.

And she's an 85-year-old woman.

It'll be really hard for me to convince her to come back out into the world with this wheelchair.

You know, you got the curb cuts, but the driveway aprons, completely neuter, you know, completely make effective the the curb cuts.

If you can't get through the block.

Now I'm working.

I mean, there's there's certain ones that are arteries getting you to Rockville important places.

I and I think the farmers market is one of those.

And I'm asking that if we really get into doing these driveways, and not I mean, on the on a priority basis, and not just wait till we do all the sidewalks in that neighborhood.

So thank you for your attention.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

Welcome.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

I'm Amanda Bosslin, the Markson and Communications Director at Rockville Economic Development Inc., better known as Ready.

I'm here to share an exciting program returning this June.

Explore Rockville Global Bites.

Global Bytes is a month-long celebration of food, culture, and community running from June 1st through 30th.

It's built around something that Rockville can be proud of.

We're one of the most diverse cities in the nation and home to over 50 global cuisines from Peruvian and Japanese to Jamaican, Korean, and more.

The concept is simple.

Dine at any Rockville restaurant, excluding National Gens, submit your receipt through the Global Bytes form, and for every receipt received, Rennie Ready will donate 25% of the value to local nonprofit chosen by the diner.

Visit two or more restaurants, and you're also answered into draw-ins for visa gift cards.

This year, nine local organizations will benefit from the campaign.

They are Friends of the Library, Montgomery County, HT Brigade Inc., the Matty Stepanic Peace Foundation, Pearless Rockville Historic Preservation, Rockville Housing Enterprises Foundation, Rockville Bike Hub, Rockville Concert Ban, Stepping Stone Shelter, and Twinbrook Elementary PTE.

Global Bytes also includes a culinary tour for families.

Pick up or print a global bite standing passport, one like this, and I've distributed some to you all as well.

Dina designated bite-site restaurants across Rockville's neighborhoods and collect global byte stickers.

Collect four stickers to complete the passport and upload a photo of it, and you're answered into a draw-in for additional prizes like cooking kits.

What makes this campaign special is that it asks nothing extra from anyone.

No special menus, no discounts, and no apps to download.

Diners simply enjoy the diverse cuisine that Rockville already offers.

And by doing so, they drive sales for our local businesses and direct real dollars to community organizations.

We'd love everyone, residents, employees, visitors alike to take part.

You can learn more and find participating restaurants at Explore Rockville.org.

Thank you and happy dining.

Thank you very much.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

Thank you for everyone who came to participate.

We appreciate your queries, your concerns, your ideas, and your events.

I know that if you would like to also send us an email for specific questions, please reach out to Mayor Counsel at Rockville MD.gov.

We'll now move on to our public presentation by the Board of Appeals.

We have Alan Frankel, thank you, Bory Deitman, Jimmy Howard, and I also want to recognize Nick Dumay, who serves as the Senior Assistant City Attorney.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council.

It's always a pleasure to appear before you.

And the first thing I always say is that my family and I love living in Rockville, and I can't see us ever living anywhere else.

I come before you this evening not to talk about zoning.

I had appeared before previous boards to deal with that tonight.

I'm here in my capacity as the chair of the Board of Appeals of the City of Rockville.

And our responsibilities are to review and act on applications for special exceptions and zoning variances.

Review and act on appeals from administrative decisions per the zoning ordinance, and act on all appeals from administrative decisions that are de novo and shall be considered by the board in accordance with state law.

2025 has been a pretty quiet year for us.

I think part of this has to do with previous amendments made to the zoning ordinance.

But we've had three applications for variances from setback requirements on residential properties.

These were reviewed and approved.

The board received regular updates and a briefing on the zoning ordinance review and comprehensive map amendment during the year.

And I think you've heard enough about the zoning ordinance tonight.

2026 goals and objectives.

The first one I'm going, it's not on here, but I'm gonna say maybe you can find us an alternate.

You know, there are three of us.

There's myself and my co uh board members, Roy Deutschmann, Jimmy Hauer, and I come every year and say we are the least diverse border commission in the city of Rockville.

We're three old white guys.

Okay.

Um we need an alternate, and um which makes our life easier, and it would be nice to have some diversity on the board of appeals.

Um, but in the meantime, our 2026 stated goals are consider all application requests objectively, fairly, and based on the information and evidence presented and/or available.

Allow applicants to present application requests fully and completely, provide maximum opportunities for the public to participate in and to testify at board um proceedings.

Ensure that all actions on applications are based on required findings and made in a timely manner, and learn about the revised zoning ordinance when adopted to ensure seamless consideration of applications.

Now we don't make the zoning ordinances, that's your job.

But our job is to apply them to the situations that appear before us fairly and properly.

I also want to thank Jim Waslick, our staff member, and his underlying staff, and our uh counsel, Nick Dumay, who is an invaluable asset to the Board of Appeals.

And I'll answer any questions if you have any.

Thank you.

This is a special presentation, and I appreciate all the work that you're doing.

Uh, members of the body will be sending any questions to Mr.

Mahalik.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Madam Mayor.

It's always a pleasure to see you and the members of the council.

Thank you very much.

We now have our consent agenda.

There are several items on the list.

Okay.

Consent agenda item 9A, approve and authorize the city manager to execute the fiscal year 2027 agreements that extend resident community performing arts organization status to Rockville Little Theater, Rockville Musical Theater, and the Victorian Lyric Opera Company to enable these organizations to provide performances at the F.

Scott Fitzgerald Theater and Social Hall and Youth Storage Units located at Rockville Civic Center Park.

B, authorize the city manager to execute the youth and teen swim support agreement with the RMSC Parents Club to formalize the city's longstanding arrangement to receive support for the city's competitive swim team program.

C approve and authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with the State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources requesting program open space funding in the amount of 153,000 to fund a portion of the renovation of the David Skull Park Improvements Project.

D, authorize the city manager to enter into a memorandum of agreement with the Montgomery County Police Department to assign a sworn member of the Rockville City Police Department to the Vice and Intelligence Units.

E approval of an authorization of the city manager to execute the Molly Price Dwelling Unit Homeownership Program Agreement and approval and authorization of the city manager to execute the declaration of restrictive covenants for Roxhire project between the mayor and council and EYA development.

Those are affordable housing units that will be coming for ownership.

F award and authorize the city manager to execute a contract with TY Lynn International for planning and engineering services for the Twinbrook Pedestrian and Bicycle Bridge Study Project responsive to RFP 526 and the amount to not to exceed roughly 381,000.

And G, the approval of minutes.

Colleagues, are there any that you want to pull for discussion?

Councilman Valeri.

Yes, Madam Mayor, I'd like to pull A and F.

Thank you.

Colleagues, do we have a mo any others?

Is there a motion to approve the others?

Councilmember Shaw.

Madam Mayor, I move B C agenda, consent agenda item B, C D E and G.

D and E, right.

Can you do that again?

Yes, please do.

Madam Mayor, I move to approve consent agenda items B, C D E, and G.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Larry seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

All right, let's move to questions.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, I had a question regarding um consent agenda item A.

Um, I have absolutely no problem about renewing the um, it's an annual renewal, no problem with that.

But was curious about and um was curious about why Rockville Civic Valley is not of resco, and if this is something that can be looked into and possibly come back.

We'll bring that back, Mayor.

Okay, I I appreciate that.

Thank you.

I also will just note that uh Young Artists of America has been trying to also become a RESCO, and I did pass it on to city manager.

I believe the staff is working on that and will come back to us with an update as well.

Okay.

Thank you.

You have another question?

Yes.

I do, thank you.

And and I I think our rescues are great.

So we just want everybody to have the opportunity.

Um, on item F.

Um, I am extremely excited to see that this is on consent.

I have no problem in supporting it.

What I want to note is that um my understanding is in the creation of the CIP by the previous mayor and council is that um this CIP, TC22 is approved for funding through 100% of design.

I know staff is working super hard on grants that are going to offset the costs of the CIP all along the way, that we got to do feasibility before we do design.

Absolutely makes sense.

I I believe that you know this body is committed to the CIP.

We're committed to 100% design because of the previous decision.

So I would note that the CIP page of the included in our packet does not reflect this language as of yet.

So I would I would definitely encourage that um slight change just to reflect the decision of the previous body.

Mr.

Mahalek.

We'll take a look at it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

With that said, uh, do we have a motion to approve A and F.

Councilmember Valeri.

Madam Mayor, I move that we approve consent agenda items A and F.

Do we have a second?

Councilman Shaw seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Excellent.

Thank you very much.

We'll now move on to uh the consideration of approval of the proposed 2027 Maryland Municipal League legislative action request.

I'd like to welcome Linda Moran.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council.

Thank you for this opportunity.

Tonight, this is the mayor and council will consider 2027 MML legislative action requests.

Each year, the Maryland Municipal League invites its membership to submit up to three topics with broad municipal impact to be considered for its priority program in the upcoming state legislative session.

Staff is recommending three legislative action requests that are based on mayor and council priorities and legislative issues that the mayor and council have advocated for in the past.

Approving the 2027 LARs is a first step in the mayor and council's discussion of 2027 state priorities.

In the early fall, the mayor and council will discuss its comprehensive 2027 state legislative priority programs.

Excuse me, program.

Staff recommends that the mayor and council discuss and approve the three recommended LARs and authorize staff to submit them to the Maryland Municipal League.

Staff will now provide a very brief overview of the three proposed 2027 MML LARs.

The first LAR has to do with municipal revenues, and it has two components.

The first component is supporting legislation that MML would advocate for based on the findings and recommendations of the task force to modernize county and municipal revenue sources.

The second aspect is protecting and preserving municipal highway user revenue and police protection aid from the state.

Given there are ongoing very significant state budget shortfalls projected over the next several fiscal years, and state law is set to change the highway user revenue distribution to municipalities.

It's going to be reduced from 3.0% to 2.4%, which MML says is going to be a 12 million dollar hit ongoing across all municipalities.

It's going to be really important to advocate for municipal highway use revenue as well as the state aid for police protection funding.

The second recommended MML legislative action request is exempting municipalities from the family program requirements.

Family stands for Family Leave and Medical Insurance Program.

This LAR would entail Rockville partnering with MML and member jurisdictions to get an exemption from the state requirements to be put on local governments.

While Rockville supports the overall concept of expanded family and medical leave, the program as it is structured currently places significant financial and operational burdens on local governments.

Municipalities statewide have expressed concern about the administrative complexity of implementing the family program alongside with existing local policies, the duplication of benefits for jurisdictions that are already offering comprehensive benefit programs, the compressed time frame, and the challenges of maintaining essential core public services when there are extended leave absences.

So this LAR would request exemption at least from the requirements or a more workable local solution that would better align with municipal budgets and operational capacity.

The third proposed MML LAR relates to aligning Board of Educational Facilities Master Planning with municipal growth and planning data.

So this is also a continuation of the mayor and council's advocacy from the 2026 session.

The mayor and council supported SB 31, which was sponsored by Senator Lamb.

It was entitled School Construction and Housing, School Zones and Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances.

Senator Kagan put forward an amendment to this legislation.

So while this legislation primarily impacted counties, the amendment would have required boards of education to consult with all municipalities in the county with planning and zoning authority to make sure that they include municipal planning data in their growth enrollment projections and their future facility planning.

During the mayor and council's advocacy and support of Keith being Wooton High School at the Wooton campus, the mayor and council expressed significant concern that it was established and confirmed by MCPS staff that they only include approved site plan data in their enrollment projections and don't include approved planning documents.

The City of Rockville requested that when it determining enrollment projections that the Board of Education incorporate growth reflected in all approved development and adopted planning documents to ensure that MCPS aligns its facility planning decisions with Rockville's long range planning efforts.

So continued advocacy for this MML LER is important to protect residents and communities from school facility planning decisions that could negatively impact communities.

And given that 108 municipalities across the state have planning and zoning authority, we believe that this MML LAR could garner significant attention, excuse me, attention from MML.

So in closing, staff just would like to reiterate that we're asking you to discuss and approve the three proposed MML LARs and to authorize staff to submit them to MML.

Staff and the city state lobbyist Christine Crohn are available to answer any questions that the mayor and council may have.

We are looking forward to your conversation.

And with that, I will turn it back over to you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I want to thank you for the excellent presentation and the background research that you've done.

Can you just also remind us the deadline to submit to Mal, I know that we are doing these activities now, and then you'll submit them to Maryland Municipal League, and then they review all the municipal submissions and determine what they're gonna uh advocate for statewide.

Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor.

So uh we have till July 1st to get mayor and council approval, and they actually ask that forms be forwarded by May 31st.

So staff forwarded um draft forms with these three proposed LARs, but giving MML staff a heads up that this was not scheduled until today.

Okay and that we would inform them based on the mayor and council's decision this evening.

That is excellent.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate that uh background uh information.

I I I do appreciate all the three.

I know that um there was something that got passed for municipal revenues, and I appreciate this will be follow-up so that um after the study is done that there'll be some actionable work to make sure that municipals are getting municipalities are getting their fair share.

HUR is something we've always discussed and have advocated for.

Uh and this entire body worked very hard to try to make sure that our data was represented, and I want to thank my colleagues collectively for that.

Um, we saw some challenges uh in that experience this past year, uh, and uh some concerns about uh understanding our growth and how that will have an impact on our schools.

So um thank you for that.

I did want to just want to clarify on the family piece.

Uh the city of Rockville is one of the few municipalities that actually has a parental uh leave program, and we're very proud of that because we support families.

Um, this is about uh giving municipalities also sort of credit for the ones for what we're doing.

I just want to make sure it's clear that we do support family leave.

Uh we have generous programs here compared to what is in other places.

Um, but it's not recognized at all in the state's current framework.

Uh, and where in the state's current framework, which I think is an excellent step to try to make sure that parental leave and uh time to care for for relatives and um you know giving people the opportunity to make sure they they have that.

Um it it doesn't it they didn't contemplate municipalities having such robust programs, and we don't require employees to pay into it.

It is a pure leave program.

So this is really about clarifying what Rockville does and saying that we are providing a better benefit in terms of giving someone leave and not making them to have to pay for it for it, and with the current legislation, um the employee has to pay generally and the municipality has to pay.

So I I think we're just trying to remind, you know, that there's not uniformity across the state, and how can we encourage and support municipalities to do things like give the employees the adequate leave versus making them pay for it?

So I just wanted to clarify that comment.

Dr.

Miles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Apologies for stepping away.

That was the only of the legislative action requests that I did have concern more about the optics of it, and I think you addressed it.

Um I don't know if there's a better way to phrase it because again, on the one at first glance, it looks as though we may be against the family program, but it you know how to make that threat that needle in a way that shows the work that we are doing while being mindful of the constraints that it could place.

That's all.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fulton.

No, I'll just add to that.

Um, when you were giving the presentation, you actually added language that I thought was helpful that I can't remember at this point in time.

It was like exempt municipalities or find an option that recognizes municipality distinctions.

I just feel like that that kind of terminology might be helpful.

You said it, but it's just not written there.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Councilman Valeri.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I agree uh with council member Fulton, and I can't recall exactly what that verbiage was, but I think it also referred to the uh EPIP alternative.

Um so I think giving that context, because I don't think we're trying to opt out of supporting people.

I do wanna um and put this forward to my colleagues um up here, uh maybe an additional step in the uh number three.

Um maybe we can if this is is viable, maybe we can rebrand it as something akin to municipal school alignment.

Um because I think this goes beyond planning data.

Um planning data absolutely is critical.

We do know that there's the you know, um for instance, Twimber Quarter, one part, the initial um uh phase is not actually zoned for high school in Rockville proper, but then subsequent are and are currently the boundary for Richard Montgomery.

So I think it makes sense to include those numbers.

But what I wanna I'd I'd really like to explore state legislation that would authorize municipalities to enter into agreements, MOUs with the counties to ensure that there is a guaranteed percentage of school impact taxes generated in a municipality are actually used within the municipality.

So if we're generating and we're doing the right things here, we are um you know, increasing our economic development activity and housing, and then some of us are um uh in a position where we are literally having to beg for the barest minimum, which occurred in this last um uh year.

It's getting extremely frustrating.

Um, and I can't imagine that we are the only municipality, I know that we aren't, um, dealing with maybe um uh a disconnect between uh housing generation in a municipality versus housing generation uh in uh the county.

So I'd like to see what is actually possible.

Um I believe, and uh Madam Mayor and I were kind of talking lightly on this, um, it would require um state legislation to be able to do that, but again, I I think I think there's being part of the community, and then there is having to to beg for what we are doing the right things here in the city.

So um that's kind of where I am coming at it from, and I'd I'd really um I'd love to hear from my colleagues on this and see if that's something that we can expand um and include in our LARP is that something that we can explore uh just and I think uh on that last piece.

I have heard when people say they pay impact taxes, but then the work doesn't happen anywhere near where the impact is.

And so it's just a a follow-up question on that to see if that can be.

Yeah, I mean, this is the first time we heard about it was just now.

So we'd want to research that a little bit.

I like the concept of it.

If we put in the money, the money should come back to the city, if you will, but we I'd I'd like to understand more of where exactly those dollars go and what are the rules in place right now before we put it into an LAR, but I like the concept.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Uh I did want to go back to um for the for the family.

I think um it's part of the first sentence could say Rockfall has a uh a leave program that is a bit more generous and actually provides leave without um requiring the employees to pay into the system.

Uh so and that's something we started last term, and I've heard a lot of people taking advantage of it.

Uh so I think start with the positive on what we're doing so that we can educate uh because they may not know what's happening in all the municipalities.

Uh, I think that would be very helpful in terms of reframing, and I appreciate the comments of my colleagues on this.

Okay.

Um I I am interested in the question that Councilman Valeri uh also mentioned, so I I did say that.

And then I do have a few other questions uh for LAR and topics.

Um I'd love to continue to support um the algorithmic pricing that this entire body has been trying to do at the local level uh on statewide.

I think there are some other bills that we've been you know gaining traction on and have been advocating on, but we haven't been able to see that cross houses in the same way and get the same support.

So I just I wanted to raise that issue.

Um I know that uh Julie Polakovich carr is also working on some legislation that would allow bicycles to to cross on pedestrian signals.

It sounds very simple, uh, but you know, could improve experiences.

Um something that I heard at our nonprofit symposium.

There is current state law that has some uh tax credit for nonprofits, but it's not working fully as intended.

According to several of the nonprofits who um reached out and shared their feedback, um they're seeing insurance rates for health insurance go up 27 percent, and we really need nonprofits uh at this time more than ever as we're expanding the network.

So I just wanted to flag, even if it doesn't make it to NL, but maybe that could be one of our priorities to G17 that we look at that.

I know we have limited MML uh opportunities, I think it's three or so.

So I just I wanted to raise that for for uh this ongoing legislative action request.

Um and then the last two uh the senior tax credit that we've been advocating for, as well as uh initiatives that will help to reduce utility costs for our residents and small businesses.

Um one of those is balcony solar, it's been trying, it's been tried.

Um in other states it's succeeding in some and not yet in others, but I just wanted to re-raise those issues as potential legislative action requests, and I know that this builds on things that we've done previously and the others that you would probably pull in, but I wanted to at least say some of those new ones.

Thank you.

Uh yes, uh staff can bring those forward for the mayor and council's comprehensive state legislative priorities discussion in the fall.

I think that would be a great time for the body.

I do have a question about that timing, and I really appreciate you sharing the fall.

Um, what we've been hearing from D17 is that they're actually working on LARs over the summer.

Um, whatever reason, they're having to like introduce bills like day one uh and have pre-filing.

So I just wanted to potentially raise that for getting some of our homework done so that um we can get those circulated among D17 and maybe get some bills moving forward.

Thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

So I think basically everybody has said um things that I'm in agreement with.

Um I do want to uh pull on the thread though of um uh the additional things uh that you're discussing.

Um I was there when uh the uh person for the nonprofit was talking about uh health insurance uh going up.

And I thought it was really interesting.

Um it's directly related or at least partially related to the uh layoffs in the uh federal government because obviously uh if they have a spouse or um uh children uh then they they need to get coverage uh and they're working for a nonprofit, um then they get coverage there, and then they have uh uh costs uh of the of the uh of the program for the nonprofit go goes up.

So I mean it's a it's a double whammy and it's uh it's unfortunate because obviously nonprofits don't run uh big um uh big operation.

Um so I think that's that is something that should be uh explored.

Um I'm really uh I don't really have a problem with with any of it um that's discussed.

Um I'm in agreement a little bit with the city manager um on item number three.

Um it seems like uh a topic that you know came out um uh uh it was discussed uh ton tonight and so I would want to know uh more uh about um that additional um language um but yes I'm I'm uh I'm I'm comfortable with what's proposed.

Thank you, Councilmember Shaw.

I also uh um I strongly agree with all of the requests proposed.

Um thing to explore, perhaps um, is that recognizing that Rockville does have uh collective bargain and rights, and uh a number of municipalities don't.

Um, and I know that uh a bill passed in Virginia um and some other places, and so it could be um and an understanding how important it uh it is to have employees to have a voice.

Um I think it's incredibly important for us to explore collective bargaining rights on the state level.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Van Crack.

Thank you.

Yeah, um I think it's a uh list is excellent.

Um, but um kind of following up uh similar to what to what uh Councilmember Valeria was talking about in that third area where we're talking about in municipal data.

It's no surprise that every one of the mayor and council had signed letters with regard to what we saw happen in Wooton.

And I think the issue is not just about what we have here and um the amendment to SB31 is important because we talked about data, but there's also the issue of you know what is being considered, the money that's out there, because this is council member Valerie said there's issues of money.

There was also a bill that actually did get through with regard to the state providing money to charter schools, charter schools that essentially that money that could be going to public school assistance is essentially now has a priority lane to charter schools.

So there's a lot of different things that are happening at the state level that are affecting what's happening with our county schools, not the least of which is, and I agree fully here, this issue of municipal data being excluded.

Um the amount of times that members of this body kind of went before the school school board and said, where's the missing data?

And they said, well, it's kind of within our purview.

Um so I uh this is definitely a great focus, but I think there's also a broader issue of what's actually happening to our schools from a state level and how we can uh usher usher towards it, but I really appreciate the list that you provided.

Excellent job.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I'll just put a uh uh explanation point underscore support on the comments about school data.

Uh the city of Rockville uh noticed uh that in the planning considerations for Richard Montgomery High School as well as for uh Wooton that it was and and there are residents who also go to Gaith's Brook High School.

Those sections did not mention our comprehensive plan and uh Rockville Town Center Master Plan.

I know I raised it multiple times, my colleagues did.

We wrote a joint letter more than one.

Uh and I haven't seen it updated in the in the cluster considerations.

And that's really hard because other sections throughout the county recognize those planning documents that show what is the intent of a community and how do we plan for you know growth and considering our schools, and then that's missing.

So I do know that they were very extensive conversations at the Board of Education.

I'm not uh discounting any of those, but that was those those two were simple things that could have been added at the very least uh that were missed.

Uh so I just wanted to provide some background on that.

Um, and then just to I know uh my colleague, Councilmember Jackson mentioned also the uh health tax credit for nonprofits.

I wanted to clarify so that there's some direction here, or not direction, but uh background.

Uh the current tax credit only qualifies it's you're only eligible if you have a nonprofit with less than 25 full-time employees.

And so nonprofits like Interfaith Works or MANA or community, many that are providing integrated like basic needs for our community are not able to qualify.

And it's causing a challenge uh while people they need they need to be providing support for our community even more given federal layoffs and a number of funding challenges that are happening to core programs that locally they're picking helping us, local government, county government to provide uh social safety net.

Councilmember Leary.

Maybe a possible friendly amendment um and what in theory should be a relatively easy ask is um having worked at nonprofits my entire career, um often it's not the number of employees, but it's the actual budget of the given nonprofit that's the consideration so that um it actually has and especially for health insurance costs, right?

Like that makes to me that makes much more sense than you know counting the number of employees.

Um I think you should go based on the the budget um for a given nonprofit.

So maybe that's another like clear-cut angle that in theory could be easier to address it.

So I would like to just pause and see.

Thank you.

I would like to pause and see uh what what else do you need from us in terms of feedback for this as well as for the future LAR for our D17?

Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council members.

Um I thank you very much.

I think the council and the mayor gave excellent direction.

It sounds like the three requests are approved.

We can staff will tweak the family item to show all that the city is doing already, and that we, you know, we do support what the state wants to do.

We're just looking for a little bit of flexibility.

And then the mayor and council gave um some great ideas, I think, in clear direction on additional items.

And if we can't muscle these all into the LAR, then we'll absolutely consider if we're recommending your legislative priorities later on this year.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

Thank you, Ms.

Moran.

We appreciate it.

Thank you.

We'll now move on to agenda item 12A, which is work session number four.

And I'll say work session number four for this mayor and council.

It has appeared before the planning commission uh several times as well.

We're talking about zoning text amendment application TXT 2026 00271 for the zoning ordinance rewrite and map amendment application map 2026 00126 for the comprehensive map amendment, mayor and council of Rockville applicants, articles 9-13, nonconformities, signs, historic preservation, and platz and subdivision.

Welcome.

Holly Simmons, Deputy Zoning Manager for Community Planning and Development Services, as well as Jim Wasilek, Chief of Zoning.

And I understand that you have backup support with Evan Johnson, uh, who leads the department, and Nick Dumay, who is supporting as senior assistant city attorney.

Thank you so much.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council for the record.

I am Holly Simmons, Deputy Zoning Manager in Community Planning and Development Services.

And as noted, we are here before you this evening for our fourth and final uh scheduled work session of the mayor and council's portion of the adoption process for the zoning ordinance rewrite and comprehensive map amendment.

During this work session, we are planning to provide a couple of follow-ups on items that the mayor and council has discussed previously.

One is the continued conversation of a planning commission recommendation, and the second is additional information requested by the body at their last work session.

We also, as noted, will be going over the key changes from the old ordinance to the new staff draft for Articles 9 through 13.

As you'll recall, any of the red text are items that the mayor and council have provided direction to staff on previously.

Black text are things that you've potentially seen previously, but no specific direction was provided.

And then we will also go over next steps.

So you've seen this many times before our adoption timeline.

High level again, we are here at our last planned work session on June 1st.

We are headed toward adoption on June 29th.

And diving just briefly into a little bit more specific level of detail.

We also are intending to release our final staff draft of the zoning ordinance and map on the 15th following this work session prior to the adoption date on the 29th.

So first we are going to address follow-up from the mayor and council discussion.

These items we are going to pause after both slides and seek direction from the body.

You'll recall from prior work sessions that with the um the slides that pertain to the key changes.

We'll go through those and then at the end have time for questions.

So first up, we have electronic message centers.

You'll recall that we try we addressed these back on April 13th when you heard the planning commission's recommendations.

At that time, the body asked for regulations that would allow these electronic message centers, these digital display signs within the city, balancing support for small business, and quality of life.

So we did go ahead and review best practices here and are proposing a number of standards that would allow electronic message centers within the city of Rockville.

So first off, we are proposing that they be limited to freestanding signs in our industrial and mixed-use zones, except for the least intense mixed-use zones, the MXC and the MXT.

This is consistent with our other changeable copy signs, which we do permit kind of marquee signs within the city of Rockville, and those are requirements that apply.

We are also proposing that the images change every 30 seconds maximum.

It be an entire sign change, it wouldn't pixelate in and out.

And if the sign is malfunctioning, it would be required to go dark or to freeze.

And when it comes to brightness, we are proposing that they be set to a maximum 0.3 foot candles above ambient light.

And in order to understand what ambient light is, they must have light sensing devices.

And these are this is based on best practices and recommendations of the International Sign Association.

So with that, I will turn it back to you all for discussion and direction.

Thank you, Dr.

Miles.

I have nothing at on this particular topic.

Councilman Sultan.

I don't have anything on this either.

Thanks.

Councilman Valeri.

It just struck me as I was sitting here that we have some already existing in residential areas, and those are MCPS electronic message centers.

So it hit me because one is malfunctioning that I just went by.

Um and it was not not dark or freezing.

And so there I think there will be a challenge there.

Um I don't know what the brightness is, because I don't have one of those cool machines, but um I I guess this would be clearly we're not going to grandfather in, but if we ever get to the point where a school has uh a new electronic message center go in, would it be would it fall under the existing rules?

Because again, that a lot of those are in residential, so I'm I'm a little gadget.

Um thank you.

Um I was just trying to figure that out because I know that we were all thinking, you know, like snow crab legs and stuff like that, but I was thinking more like you know, field days and stuff like that.

That would be my only concern.

Just one thing to keep in mind about the the schools and Montgomery College that have these types of electronic message centers, that they're not subject to our zoning code.

And so um, we can certainly work with them uh if there would be some issue with their signs and let them uh be aware of that, but uh otherwise we can't really regulate them through zoning.

No, and and that makes sense.

Thank you so much.

I knew that you know we all work together.

We're we collaborate.

Um, but thank you, and thank you for the the changes and the research on this as well.

Thank you.

Uh I appreciate that you put the some some level of timing because I have seen some signs that are blinking quickly and have disturbed residents who it causes a health challenge for.

Uh, so I think I I think you guys were very thoughtful and how do we allow something but also think about not causing challenges for other people.

Um and then just also to clarify uh these are in industrial and mixed-use zones.

So this is not necessarily appearing like flashing in someone's home window.

Or could it be so the flashing is something that we would would not be permitted with these regulations.

I think if we had an instance where something were malfunctioning, it's on private property, then potentially we're looking at a zoning violation or just coordination with the property owner.

When it comes to flashing or being visible from individual residences, it's going to depend on you know what's adjacent to or confronting those mixed use or industrial zones.

And this that you feel like the parameters are um helpful enough to allow businesses to do the advertisement, but also won't turn 35 into Times Square.

That's the goal.

Okay, thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you.

Uh I really appreciate the thoughtfulness uh that you put into this, and I think it looks great.

No questions.

Thank you, Councilmember Shaw.

I uh agree with my colleagues.

Um, no questions.

Councilman Van Greg.

This is exactly what we asked for.

Um this is perfect because we specifically said we want to go a little bit more.

We don't want disturbed neighborhoods.

We want to have something that actually addresses the flashing, addresses the light ambient.

And I think, you know, when I was going through it, it's almost exactly, and and I looked at some other jurisdictions, they have almost these exact parameters in some of the similar-sized cities.

So just kudos to staff for kind of listening and putting something together that was on point.

Thank you.

And I know that we're gonna get into signs later, correct?

Uh, I know that is uh when we'll get to the article six.

Yes, I do want to cover some of the the broader issues first.

Thank you.

Next up, and this is the second and final item of uh follow-up from prior mayor and council discussion.

We did want to provide additional information on ADA parking where no minimums apply.

As you will recall, our draft does include provisions that would eliminate minimum parking requirements within a half mile of metro and a quarter mile of bus rapid transit.

This is consistent with the policy recommendations in the town center master plan and also with the policy in Montgomery County.

So we did receive some questions regarding ADA parking in these instances at our last work session.

And staff is recommending that there simply be no parking requirements in these areas.

This is consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Maryland Accessibility Code requirements.

Those requirements are based on the number of parking spaces required.

So because of that, it is structured to provide flexibility in cases where no parking is provided.

We also understand that eliminating curb cuts, this would elimin or reduce the need for curb cuts, which also can increase the ability for on-street parking to be provided.

And finally, it increases accessibility by reducing the land dedicated to vehicular parking.

So if you have less parking spaces, it's easier for folks who walk, roll, use transit to access the entrances to buildings as well.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fulton.

I was continue to be in, I am good with this uh no parking requirements for all of the reasons previously discussed and the ones you just gave us.

So thanks.

Thank you, Councilmember Valeri.

Thank you.

Um and thank you for all this additional information.

Um I'm always still a little um not perplexed.

I'm challenged uh by the inclusion of bus rapid transit, only because I think a lot of it'll shift on 355.

Like we'll know, you know, we know what the beers will for the most part right now, right?

Like we'll know where the stops are there.

Um, and I guess, you know, um, I guess as long as we stay on top of how that evolves over time, um, because I think that this part of you know the parking requirements as a whole may shift.

So I just always like to put a pin in that that we know bus rapid transit's coming.

The stations may adjust, you know, over time, and as long as we kind of keep up with that, then um I'm I'm absolutely I'm great with this.

So thank you.

Thank you.

We have a BRT update coming, but I'm assuming that staff also has checked and cross-checked to see what has moved proactively, and because I know we're approving the zoning ordinary right in advance, so you will adjust as the BRT adjusts.

Is that correct?

Yes, absolutely.

And the way that the language is structured is the same as what the county has, and it does it does um account for flexibility there.

Okay, thank you.

Um, I was curious about so I I think this is not a discussion broadly about parking minimums at all.

I think it's really about the ADA piece.

And so I was just curious.

I've lived in cities where the market demands it, but they don't get it.

So I was just curious for people who are in um walkers, etc., how do we how do we deal with this?

Will the city will the city be reevaluating its, you know, maybe increasing ADA parking if there's a demand or a need for it.

Um I I think that we have to think about people.

We have seen more people in our community aging in place and walkers and people with disabilities and being able to have things closer to where they live, it's it's harder for them to navigate people with.

I was talking to another resident with a disability who has vision impairment and at night is hard to come from a farther location to get to the building.

So I just was curious as to what we might do as a city to contemplate needs and make adjustments.

I think those are excellent points and really get to kind of a broader conversation about how the ordinance itself functions.

We are headed toward adoption, but this is a living document.

So if there are changes that need to be made, if there are fixes, which we do anticipate, I know you all have seen this in the staff reports for probably every single one of these work sessions.

That our intention is to adjust as we go to be tracking any issues that come up with the ordinance.

So if there are things that need to be adjusted, considerations that happen in the first you know six months to a year, we are certainly anticipating being able to address those through future zoning tax amendments.

And uh would the city have a protocol of analyzing on-street parking uh to think about placing the ADA parking closer to the residents if they don't have parking.

That is not something that we have previously discussed, but I think it's a point well taken, and we certainly can't take it into consideration.

Okay.

I the I remain concerned about how we're thinking about people with disabilities and people who are aging and pregnant and expecting mothers.

They're just I've I've had high-risk pregnancies and had limitations with bed rests and things.

So I just I think about all the needs of our most vulnerable residents, and this is one that still gives me pause in terms of are we thinking around creatively, even what the city can do.

Um so I I remain concerned.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I I really like this discussion, and uh the mayor uh and my colleagues have raised some excellent points.

And you've been really thoughtful in uh answering the question.

Um I would just encourage um city staff to think back proactively um when it comes to you know uh disabilities, aging in place.

I mean, uh I think you've heard loud and clear from this body that this is uh an area that we're really we're focused on and we want staff to really kind of get ahead of the the issue.

So thank you.

I really don't have any questions.

Uh I think this has been a good discussion, but I just encourage you to like think about down the road, you know, what is needed and and and when don't just uh say uh yeah, we'll we're gonna uh monitor the situation and you know we'll take it into account ADA when it when um it comes up because it's gonna come up.

So just work at it in your plans uh ahead of time.

Councilman Bushaw, I also want to thank staff um for proposing this.

I um I mean I I I agree with uh reviewing this as and monitoring this.

Um I just want to keep in mind that uh particularly around the area of town center, um, there is a higher number of people with disabilities um in town center and some other places closer to the metro.

Um, and just to keep in mind some of those equity concerns while you're monitoring this, um, and I would um uh and just to bring up issues as they come along.

Thank you.

Councilmember Van Greg.

I want to thank you for this, because when we were doing the town center um master plan, we specifically were saying, let's do we were doing this at town center with the idea of pushing this everywhere kind of around the city, because it should be mirroring what we're doing, and I really appreciate you adding to that and ensuring that we're gonna have that same consistency um around uh the bus rapid transit in the um centers um that we're doing.

Again, we want to be encouraging the development and the use around these transit centers.

So uh really appreciate staff going to and listening to what we were talking about with regard to um how we're gonna be developing around the centers.

So thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Miles.

I have no additions to what's been discussed.

Thank you for bringing this.

Thank you.

Councilman Fulton, in addition?

I do.

So given my colleagues' conversation, I feel compelled to say I also am concerned about people with disabilities.

Feels like I had to say that.

Um but I listened to you and the research and weighed all of our disparate goals and heard that the impact here, we don't expect to be good based on the research that's been done every to be bad, based on the research we've done everywhere else.

And I think you have been proactive in looking through all of this, and of course, we will monitor.

But I have a lot of concerns about a lot of things.

We have to make decisions.

So that's where I landed on this one.

I remain concerned about people with disabilities.

Thank you.

But um, I think what you've heard from some of us is that uh we appreciate the work on this, but perhaps we can look at our policies if we see that there is not parking being developed for people with disabilities.

Um, and there's a challenge that we would even just as simple as we look at where we're placing those uh parking spots on right-of-way, just to consider how we evolve with this potential policy change.

Mayor, we heard council loud and clear.

I think it is evolving.

Um we'll try to stay ahead of it, and if we think there needs to be a correction, we won't hesitate to bring it back to council.

Thank you, Councilman Valerie.

I had a thought, um, and it kind of struck me sitting here.

So we're having this discussion, but we also know that the amount of housing that is actually truly accessible is very limited, and we know that those not those kind of buildings um accessible wider um doorways, et cetera, are are again minimal, and that's really the the individuals that are looking for those kind of parking spaces, are also going to be looking for that that kind of housing as well.

So I think it's a little it it's a tough situation.

I don't think any of this is really easy to kind of figure through.

I will also note as well that um we are talking about specifically um ADA parking.

I I will note, and I hope this changes at some point, but for individuals, and I know uh Ms.

Kaiman was here.

I have her and I have talked about this a lot.

Um there's actually less and less people with um adapted vehicles, especially if you are a power uh chair user um because it's extremely expensive.

It is prohibitively expensive.

Um so these things may shift over time.

And again, I am really just talking about individuals, power chair users almost exclusively.

But I I agree, I think everybody up here is extremely concerned and wants to go even, you know, do better than the ADA, which is as I've always said, the the starting point, not the ending point.

But um again, I think over time culturally, um, we're we're gonna see shifting patterns, especially with automobile use.

Um, and all of this that we're talking about is the future.

And I I'm I'm probably gonna say that like five times tonight.

Um, but these things are not going to happen overnight.

We're not gonna see development in a certain zone overnight, and and some of us may never see it, even if we change a zone.

Um I think we have to think about, you know, the original plan was the Rackville 2040 plan.

Um, and I think that we have to still keep that in mind that we're we're building on assumptions that are current as of right now, and we don't know necessarily how things will shift over time.

So it's it's tough.

Um, but I just wanted to to note that uh particular fact.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Back to you.

Thank you so much.

With that, I will turn it over to my colleague, Mr.

Wazlock, to go over articles nine and 10.

Thank you, Ms.

Simmons.

And just to remind the mayor and council, we are going to uh present uh articles nine through 13 uh in total, and then come back uh for questions at the end of the uh presentation.

So Article 9 deals with nonconformities, and there are two types of nonconformities.

Uh one is non-conforming uses, and those are uses that may have been legal at some point in time.

And uh with adoption of subsequent zoning ordinances became not legal or became not permitted, I would say, uh, in that particular zone.

Uh the other type of nonconformity is development standards, nonconformities, which uh similar concept, although it relates to uh the development standards associated with property, such as parking requirements or setbacks, things like that, uh, which affect uh the site design.

So those things can also become nonconformity, non-conforming uh as uh new zoning ordinances are adopted.

As you can see, the mayor and council uh you gave us uh significant amount of direction on nonconforming uses.

Um we'll say that uh the provisions in the ZOR uh are more flexible specifically for nonconforming uses.

Uh it allows for up to and nine 20% expansion of nonconforming uses, which the current code does not permit.

And uh is still subject to a non-conforming use expansion approval um which is stipulated in the code.

Uh it allows certain site improvements to be approved through the standard process rather than going through a separate uh nonconforming approval process, uh, and allows uh sites to bring the nonconforming use into greater conformity with the code.

Uh it allows for um site improvements for maintenance, safety, and ADA compliance, and also to improve facades, increase stormwater management, and provide for pedestrian and bike facilities.

So there's a significant amount of uh flexibility built into upgrading nonconforming uses.

It also the ZOR also allows nonconforming uses and structures to be replaced or repaired in kind uh in the event of a fire flood or other natural disaster or emergency.

In other words, uh some calamity that is not caused by the property owner uh taking an action that he had no control, he or she had no control over.

Um that allows uh those types of facilities to be uh reconstructed as they existed prior to the destruction.

I will move on to uh Article 10, and that deals with signs.

And uh the man council probably has seen most of these uh regulations regarding signs.

Can I just ask a question?

Do you want us to weigh in on the non-conforming uses now?

We were intending to move all the way through nine through 13, and then we can come back to whatever we need to do.

Thank you.

I will note that the sign ordinance actually was uh rewritten significantly uh in 2019.

Um this uh kind of iteration uh really uh focuses more on reorganizing the article for ease of use beyond what was done previously.

Uh it exempts uh certain signs, including directional signs and those regulated by Chapter 21, uh, which is the city's road code.

It further ensures that regulations are content neutral.

Uh, that was one of the driving forces between uh for the prior uh rewriting of the zone of the uh sign ordinance, and so we have again pushed for that given uh subsequent decisions.

And uh for example, we have uh collapsed real estate, temporary non-commercial signs, and yard sale signs, not as separate categories, but uh collapse them all into temporary freestanding sign category.

We've also introduced new sign types uh and associated regulations.

Uh so A-frames are now legal in the city uh for commercial businesses.

Uh window signs will also be regulated, uh, something that we have not done in the past.

And uh we are also permitting building mounted banner signs uh to exist longer than just say a grand opening sign that we have.

So it allows for more flexibility for businesses uh to get their message uh out uh in a variety of ways.

And we also allow for up to three temporary freestanding signs uh per residential lot uh without a permit, probably seeing a number of those uh at the current time.

We did provide some clarification on what signs are prohibited, uh specifically signs that move or give the illusion of movement, again, uh similar to the electronic message signs.

We don't want signs uh that are roadside signs uh to be distraction to drivers and walkers and others that may be utilizing the public right-of-way signs such as feather flags uh that draw attention uh or are illegal under the ZOR.

We've also increased the permitted sign area of signs specifically for the industrial zone and also the mixed-use zone.

Uh, what we found is across the MX zones, they really weren't consistent in terms of the amount of sign area that was permitted.

And so we have done that uh through the more intense uh MX zones.

We still have a couple of zones like MXC and MXT that they're within residential neighborhoods, and those are have limited sign area, but the areas where we're seeing a significant significant amount of non-residential development, uh we've provided for additional and consistent sign area across our zones.

We've allowed for an expansion on the scope of repairs for non-conforming signs.

Uh I will say we don't have many of those, uh, even though we've written our signed code a number of times.

Uh signs seem to be something that uh uh our businesses like to keep updated, and there actually are very few uh in the city that we found when we wrote the code in 2019.

Uh we've eliminated the requirement for sign plans and optional sign packages in the code.

Um this was something that the city had had in place uh for um sites that have multiple businesses and that the signage is across uh consistent across those businesses.

Uh you will may notice in shopping centers that all the text is the same color and the same font and all of that, um, which I think addressed maybe an issue the city had in the past, uh, but we have uh opted for more flexibility uh to allow for additional colors, for logos uh that may have a certain color or certain design, and so uh those are not specified necessarily by the city.

Certainly landlords are uh have the ability to enforce their sign regulations as part of their leasing, uh, but the city would uh really look at the sign area and where signs can be located as opposed to regulating the color and uh font and et cetera of signs.

Optional sign packages.

We've only had one, and that was for the Twinburg quarter development.

Uh they put together the package prior to or just after the uh project plan approval.

Uh it's been amended a number of times because sign demands just keep evolving.

Uh so we didn't see the utility in keeping the optional sign package necessarily in place.

I will say um all of this has been replaced with a requirement for uh sign plans for properties that uh from this point forward would require more than one sign.

So um subsequent to site plan, an applicant would just be able to tell us uh where they intend to place the signs on their building and on their site, uh, but not get into specifying again the color and the font and and all of the types of signs uh that they might propose.

And uh lastly, uh these the ZOR does revise and update the required approval findings for assigned variants.

Um variants uh has been fairly rare since we wrote the code.

Uh those are granted by the chief of zoning.

And uh as the current holder of that position, I can tell you that I'm very appreciative of the uh simplified findings.

Uh the findings that we have uh now are not um particularly relevant, and I think we've really done a good job in uh addressing that.

And with that, I am going to show you some examples of signs uh as what I've been talking about as it might be implemented uh on buildings and on sites.

So we've got a freestanding sign in the upper left uh on a residential property, and that is a say a temporary freestanding sign.

We have building signs on the right uh graphic that shows you where those building signs uh can be located, and then uh in the lower left, we have freestanding signs uh on mixed-use properties essentially.

Those are some call them monument signs, but those are the signs that are um uh anchored on the ground as opposed to being uh mounted on a building.

And with that, I'm gonna pass it over to Ms.

Simmons to discuss historic preservation.

Thank you, Mr.

Wazilex.

So next up is historic preservation.

This is one that I imagine you all are quite familiar with.

You'll recall that the changes to the historic preservation article were largely informed by the city's 2023 to 2033 historic preservation work program, which laid out a series of recommendations for the zoning ordinance to be updated to modernize the historic preservation programs and practices of the city.

The work program includes six specific updates to the zoning ordinance, and as you may recall, it was endorsed by the mayor and council in May of 2023.

So since that time, the Historic District Commission discussed these proposed changes specifically in July of 2025.

This body discussed and provided direction on the recommendations in October of 2025.

The planning commission provided further input and recommendations in February of 2026, and then you all provided additional direction on a selection of these items prior to the publication of the revised staff draft.

So no surprise, many things in bold read here.

First key change is that the historic preservation article codifies Rockville's nine designation criteria.

Currently, these designation criteria are outlined, but they are located in guidance documents and they're not in our ordinance itself.

It also modifies who can submit an application to nominate a property for historic designation, specifically allowing that the property owner, the historic district commission, or the mayor and council can perform that action.

It expands the work in the historic district overlay zone that can be approved administratively by staff as opposed to requiring a full HDC review.

This includes things, minor work such as installing mailboxes or house numbers, storm windows and doors, utility meters, all of this currently requires HDC review.

It also prohibits demolition by neglect of historic properties.

Currently, demolition by neglect is defined in our ordinance as failure to maintain property or any component of property located within the historic district zone so as to jeopardize the historic integrity of the property, but it does not prohibit demolition by neg neglect.

So there's no enforcement mechanism to really give that definition any teeth.

And finally, it outlines a process to remove historic designation from properties in rare circumstances.

After historic preservation in Article 12, we have subdivisions and plates.

So this is quite a quirk of our existing ordinance that along with all of our regulations governing development, we also address subdivision.

So subdivision is any time that a lot is proposed to be created or lot lines moved or changed, kind of general rule of thumb.

This is an article that really was not touched with our 2009 update to the zoning ordinance.

So we were very excited for lots of opportunities for improvement, enhancing organization, increasing clarity and accessibility in this article specifically.

So high level, we did create two new processes for subdividing property, minor subdivision and major subdivision.

As with demolition by neglect, our ordinance defines minor subdivision, but then it doesn't have any processes associated with it.

It doesn't delineate what happens if you have a minor subdivision versus a major subdivision.

It just says here's what it is.

So now we clarify specifically what types of subdivision qualify as a minor subdivision, what types of subdivisions qualify as a major subdivision, and the process differs a little bit.

The minor subdivisions are able to go through a quicker process.

And we did review a number of different subdivision ordinances in nearby jurisdictions in the region to get a better sense of what should fall into that category of minor subdivision.

And then you've seen this one before, but it allows record plats for minor subdivisions to be approved by the chief of zoning.

This currently the planning commission is the approving authority for all subdivisions, but delegation to an administrator is something that the state allows.

So we're writing it into the ordinance.

The planning commission is intending by resolution to actually enact that delegation immediately after the adoption of the ordinance.

Currently, we have that on their agenda planned for July 8th, assuming that the ordinance is adopted at the end of June.

We've also revised and updated the required approval findings for preliminary plans of subdivisions.

You've seen these before, they are exactly the same.

Sorry.

That was exciting.

They are exactly the same as what you saw for project plans and site plans previously.

So we did look for consistency there.

It also allows the creation of lots for multiplexes where only one unit fronts the street.

Currently, all units would be required to front a street, but this is something that we looked at particularly in terms of middle housing types that we're wanting to promote.

We modeled these regulations on the county's attainable housing solutions proposal and coordinated closely with the Department of Public Works.

It also allows for the creation of pipe stem lots.

This is something that the body discussed and provided direction on back on October 6th, understanding.

There we go.

Understanding that this would increase out options for housing diversity.

The article also updates requirements for streets, pedestrian and bicycle connections, public utilities, floodplains, and sediment control.

A lot of this was cleanup.

Many of these items refer out to other entire chapters in city code where we deal comprehensively with sediment control.

And in our subdivision regulations, we say you need to conform to those regulations that are contained elsewhere in city code.

We've also proposed that it would give Mayor and Council authority to accept land dedications.

Currently, this is something that lies with the planning commission.

You all saw this before when we were doing our analysis, we really did not think that the ability to accept land for dedication in the city aligned with the planning commission's roles and responsibilities.

It's more aligned with Mayor and Council's policy and budgetary responsibilities.

We've also added a requirement for access to burial sites, which is required by law and dam inundation areas, clarifying that if property is located within an area downstream of a dam that is if the dam were to break, this area would be inundated.

You cannot create a lot within those areas.

And we've also clarified the provision allowing for waivers of certain subdivision regulations.

Currently, the language says in our subdivision article, it says you can get a waiver from any provision in the entire chapter, the whole zoning ordinance.

We have the ability to waive them through the subdivision article, which we thought that doesn't make sense.

That might be a typo, we're not quite sure.

But what we did was go through and figure out specifically which of the subdivision standards themselves should be ones that are waverable.

So there are exceptions to that.

We didn't think everything should be able to be waived, but we really homed in on what should be able to be waived.

And finally, we've eliminated the creation of new cluster developments.

So this will not impact existing cluster developments.

Those actually will be memorialized even maybe more effectively than they currently are through the cluster development overlay zone that we discussed a few weeks back.

But in the future, no no additional cluster developments would be considered.

And I will note that we did not go over Article 13.

That is enforcement.

The main reason being there are no key changes to that article.

We did clean up the language a lot.

We streamlined it, but substantively, it is effectively the same.

And with that, we are happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Can we we're gonna go section by section just so that we're clear?

Let's go back to non-conformities, please.

Oh, there was something before that.

Let me just double check.

I think it was non-conformities.

Yeah, we're good, nonconformities.

Councilmember Valeri.

No.

Yes, thank you.

Um a lot of my questions on nonconformities were answered ably um previously, and thank you both.

Um thank you both for many things, but um, especially in non-conformities.

Um, I think I mentioned a couple of examples, both very personally, you know, um, as well as around neighborhoods when I've been walking around that I've seen.

Um, and this to me makes a lot of sense.

So I appreciate you know, any any opportunity to do do the least harm while allowing for um flexibility.

I appreciate that.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Do we do you think that in this new rewrite if we have a clear appeals process for this?

Is it I know that you mentioned that the language was so broad that it could anything could be appealed, but do you feel like we have a strong appeals process now with this new code?

Are you talking about in general?

Yeah, yes.

Okay.

All right.

Um, I I did want to re-raise something I've raised in the past and the spirit of uh supporting people with disabilities.

Um there was some language discussed earlier about making uh drive-throughs for food and banking as non-conforming.

I would respectfully ask my colleagues to reconsider that given that our discussions on ADA.

Um, I will say that it has been beneficial for people who are you know have high risk pregnancies, who are aging in place, people and walkers.

Um I it's my understanding that uh it's only allowable for pharmacy and for cannabis, but you can't get food a banking or bank.

Is that correct?

That is not not quite accurate.

Currently, in the staff draft, we are proposing that drive-throughs be um permitted in some zones, they would be a special exception, specifically the mixed-use neighborhood commercial.

Um those are the zones I'm talking about.

Yeah, and that is that is really the only zone I believe that is it is proposed to be a special exception, but the uses that it could be associated with are eating and drinking establishments, cannabis dispensaries, banks, and pharmacies.

And in many instances, we actually we currently have within our existing zoning ordinance when it comes to restaurants with drive-throughs, there are actually more zones in which it's considered a special exception than in the staff draft.

So just to clarify this new draft reduces the reduces the ability to have drive-throughs for food and banking or not.

It depends on the zone.

In the mixed-use transit district zone, we have said that drive-throughs would be not permitted.

That's exactly what I was focused on.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Yes, currently they are permitted within that zone, but only within a structure or is that it?

There's another or a garage.

That's part, yeah.

So I mean, mixed use is where we have a lot of our traffic happening, right?

Uh and so, like parts of 355.

I just I I re-raise this from my colleagues.

I just want to flag it.

I'm very concerned.

So and I'd love to see where people's heads are at on this.

I don't think it's necessary to remove.

Um, but I still think we're doing a lot of great things in this, but I this is one area that I have concern about.

Um I wanted to go to Section 25912 expansion of non-conforming uses.

Um it says can be expanded by no more than 20% of the total square footage.

Can you give us examples of like when people have asked for this?

Is how did you come up with a 20%?

Is it based on the history and experience of what people are asking for?

To be honest, we really haven't had specific requests uh for this, it's because heretofore the answer has just been they can't be expanded except for very limited circumstances.

Um we thought, because we know there are some non-conforming uses out there, the city's rewritten its code a number of times, that uh perhaps some flexibility is is needed.

I think since uh 2009, we've only had one uh non-conforming alteration that actually came forward and required approval.

Um so there haven't been a lot of requests uh to be honest, but we felt that uh flexibility was in order.

Excellent, thank you.

Um and then the termination of non-conforming uses, the right to continue a non-conforming use terminates if, and it talks about us, I think there's a section here that talks about if you advertise it.

I was curious about that because um if someone has a property and they set sell said property, they're advertising what the current use is.

I understand they can't now change said property more than X percent and maintain it, but why would they lose the ability to have and maybe that's not the case, but if you could help clarify that statement.

Well, that's another aspect of nonconforming uses.

Um the uses become nonconforming because those are deemed to be uses that the city does not want to see in a particular zone going forward.

Um so at some point, if a use ceases, it uh a use that's non conforming can continue on uh operating as it has been uh in perpetuity if if it's so desires.

But if it does uh cease uses for an example, an establishment goes out of business and there's not another establishment to replace that nonconforming use, then if the um the use is vacant for up to 100 for 90 days, then the uh use could not be replaced.

When we were at the code then last time, we wanted to make sure that there was an out kind of for uh property owners who may be having difficulty recruiting a similar use, and uh so we put wrote in this ability to be actively act uh marketing uh that space for a particular use.

So uh, but if it gets to the end of that point, then the use could not be replaced with that non-conforming use.

This one is I guess given the vacancies and what we've seen in the economy through COVID and with what's going on with our federal workforce and work and changes that this one just gives me pause because people may have to sell their property.

Uh and then we're saying, even if you're not making structural changes that you can't have what you currently have.

But maybe there's some there's a nuance there that if you could clarify that part, because I I are we limiting people's ability to sell the same use if it's I mean, 90 days is not a lot of time.

And I think what really happens is when we're doing what we are now, which we are rezoning certain properties and rewriting our code, uh that can potentially create non-conforming uses and and will, but um and again the the thought was that those non-conforming uses are not you know the uses that the city would like to see in a particular zone.

Um as you stated, maybe there is some additional flexibility that we'd build into uh the nonconforming use provision in particular, uh if you'd like to see even more flexibility in terms of whether the use um ceases I if I might add there is a provision um just below the part where it says that the use has not ceased if the site is being actively marketed for tenants to continue the use.

There is also the ability of the property owner to request a six-month extension of the termination date from the planning commission, and they can submit up to two of those requests.

So there is actually quite a bit of flexibility there as well for conditions that you are um outlining things with the market, things with pandemics, unforeseen circumstances.

Yeah, I just I think we've seen how long it takes to fill vacant spaces.

I don't have to name sites.

So this one just gives me pause.

I'll I'll note that given where the economic activity has just changed.

Um for me, if they're not expanding and they're not tearing down and redeveloping, I don't see them necessarily the need to take away a right, a property right there.

But that's there may be examples where we would want that to happen.

I I don't know.

Maybe you've had experience there that we should know about that might help to shape our thinking on this, but I I do have concerns about removing that property right at this time.

Thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, I'll be brief.

I really don't have any problems with the uh nonconformities uh section.

Uh I just want to uh uh reiter reiterate uh what the mayor was talking about about uh people with disabilities, aging in place, um, and access to uh you know drive-throughs for food, banking, and pharmacies and the like.

Uh I think that's something that's really important and needs to be taken uh look at.

So I associate myself with uh the mayor's comments.

Thank you, Councilman Bouchaw.

I also uh support the recommendations and um also uh support the statements of the community member that shared the issues with um uh taking away the drive-throughs and how uh this can provide more accessibility for the city.

Councilman Van Greg.

Um so a lot of the issues here we've got about non-conforming usage, and it's not an automatic exemption, it's essentially what are we going to allow with non nonconformity?

So, with regard to the drive-throughs, I know uh the mayor and I talked about this last time this came up.

We really want to be able to provide that.

We've seen um more and more businesses utilizing this option, and this is happening especially along the 355 corridor, and happening in some neighborhoods too.

And that drive-through access is providing not only convenience, but is encouraging businesses to take advantage of that and allowing a wider variety, even in some of those um mixed use zoning areas is extremely beneficial.

I mean, even just looking at the neighborhood um and um while that isn't currently zoned for that, but looking in the neighborhood of Rockshire, there's gonna be a little commercial shopping center.

There is an area behind there that someone might want to put a non-conforming use.

That happens.

That could extremely be a convenience to the neighborhood, to the community, to allow that.

So uh I would certainly encourage that type of access.

Um similar to what the mayor was talking about with regard to non-conforming uses and expansion.

Uh again, I understand throwing out a 20% um number.

I would actually argue for a little bit larger.

Again, because this isn't an automatic grant, but something like a third or 33% could be something to be considered if there is a possibility from someone who wants the non-conforming use.

Again, being able to utilize what's there if a particular site it makes sense for that.

We'd want to be able to allow the land to be used or the property be used if needed through a potential appeal.

Um, I also have some questions.

Um, now I know that there was some discussion and that we've had before with regard to non-conforming use, and um my colleagues were talking about it before with the grandfathering.

And when you have uh a project that might be in the middle of something, is that the process?

Because I didn't see it in this section where we were talking about a certain time limit of a grandfathering if someone is in the process prior, but I didn't see that in this section, or is that what we're applying in that first section?

Are we talking about pending applications for site plans, project plans, et cetera?

That is something that we addressed back on May 4th, I believe.

If you'll remember all the way back in Article One, you'll find it on page three of the revised staff draft with our transitional provisions.

Um that does deal comprehensively with pending applications.

We are proposing a couple of updates there as well, um, specifically to address special exception approvals and maybe one or two other things, just clarifications and refinements.

Okay, so then with regard to when we were talking here about the uh the prior use going to that, not necessarily for pending applications, that's where we're talking about the non-conforming to be approved through the the the standard process, right?

Um in those particular situations, similar to, and I think the mayor was talking about it.

I think there's a uh an ability, and I like that I think we've got a little bit of a wider use here than we did in the prior code, and that's I think what we want to encourage.

So I really like what staff's doing here.

And I think those two additional comments about increasing the potential expansion as well as allowing a significantly wider use of drive-through, I think goes through the spirit of what staff's doing here, which is saying, listen, we want to encourage use depending on the circumstance.

And I think those two changes accomplish that.

So great job.

Thank you, Dr.

Miles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I have no additional comments on this particular portion, in addition to what's already been mentioned by my colleagues.

Thank you.

Councilman Fulton.

I have only one maybe two questions.

And under in the expansion, the findings that the planning commission must uh find to approve includes the proposed non-conforming use expansion is compatible with the general character of the surrounding neighborhood or zone.

We've had difficulty with that in the past.

Uh, and it prompts me to ask first of all, do we have those required?

I should I should know this, but is that throughout where we talk about conforming to the character, or is this a unique requirement?

I would say this is fairly unique.

General as a rule of principle or um going through this rewrite, we really did try to remove neighborhood character needing to be consistent with or compatible with neighborhood character.

I know you've had discussions on this quite recently.

We did retain it in this one area, and perhaps uh my colleagues, Mr.

Wazlack or Mr.

Dumay have additional things to add there, but generally no, it is it is not sprinkled throughout the ordinance.

Particularly in light of that, because I wouldn't want to suggest like a wholesale rewrite.

I'm wondering if we can get at the actual purpose there in a more specific way, like compatible with the purpose of the zoning.

Sure.

Uh, but I struggle with that particular language, and not just me, like we collectively as a city have struggled with that language.

So I would I don't have specific language to suggest suggest there, but either removing that criteria or making it more specific.

That's my only question.

Thanks.

Councilman Valeri.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um I had misplaced my notes.

I have now found my notes.

Um, but it's I it's very short and sweet.

Um, one, I I co-signed the the drive-through um issue that's been raised.

I did um forget this issue, even though we had talked about it.

Um, and I I do agree.

I think that you know, we that might shift over time as well, and that'll be you know, probably a market forced uh situation.

But I did want to raise on nonconformities and the the use table.

We did hear from um of a very interesting business sector.

Um the green funeral spaces, um, I I would want to put this to this body.

We um do pride ourselves on being very intentional around EV charging and solar and other things.

And I really was compelled around the the green cremation, non-ineration cremation.

Um, and as it stands right now, our code would not allow that to be present in the city anywhere.

And actually, odd enough, um funeral home, which is a little bit more expansive than just funeral home, is not permitted at all in industrial zones.

Is that correct?

Because that's what I had on my my old my older draft, and I don't think I saw it changed or edited.

I think it's page 84 of the draft.

Yes, that is correct.

Okay.

So I think that again, the compelling part of it is yes, incineration-based cremation.

That is a whole separate, not trying to get into any of that.

But as individuals are becoming more green and aware of, you know, those sort of um, you know, uh things that we do after we are no longer of this mortal coil.

Um, I think it I think it would benefit us.

We do have a history of of funeral homes in the city.

Um I I think it I don't see a downside to making the code more amenable, changing the um the definition of crematorium definition to include incineration only and expanding the funeral home definition.

Um to include these sort of of green funeral uh green cremation alternative.

Um I guess I would put that to my colleagues as well to see if that would be something that we could add to and if it would be possible to include this in the upcoming draft.

And if others support this.

Staff is conferring.

Let's just give them a second.

Oh, Chris.

Our take on it was that it actually would be permitted under our current definition.

Yeah.

Um, even though we're not specifying incineration about crematorium, et cetera, but as kind of an accessory use uh to the broader definition of freeer home, we thought that it would.

It would fall under that because it's non-incineration.

Okay.

So then I guess it would just be a slight adjustment in the language then, because if there was any sort of confusion from uh a business community that is interested in doing that, then maybe it just means it's a clarification point.

Um I'm sorry.

Yeah, Mr.

Mahalik has been.

I was gonna say, Mayor, we agree with councilmember as long as the body doesn't object.

We'll make some clarifying uh adjustments to the language to make it explicit that that type of um disposal is is allowed.

Okay, thank you.

Go ahead.

Yep.

No, no, that's it's no problem.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, because I was like looking down.

Um then I guess my my point then is if we tweak that language, would we then allow that as a permissible use in industrial?

Because I could almost see that being an option that that industry may want to utilize and we're not recommending that um in the in the Zoor, but if the mayor and council would like to see that, that's certainly a change that we could make.

I I just wanted to throw that out there as another possibility, and maybe Mr.

City Manager has thoughts on it too.

Um I just I just noted like it it just seemed to stick out at me that we're we're a-okay with funeral homes and like all the mixed use zones and and not industrial seemed seemed odd to me.

I'm I'm not willing to uh no pun intended die on that hill, but I would like to adjust the definition um for sure, if if everyone is on the on the dais is cool with that.

Thank you.

I appreciate that you'll you are going to clarify that um that kind of green cremation is allowed.

Um I did have a question.

Are there some places funeral homes can be, but cremation is not?

Cremation is not allowable anywhere in the city.

Not cremation, but um incineration, sorry.

Yeah, no.

It's it's prohibited within the city, period, like in all zones, the incineration.

Okay.

Um, because I did see in the definition it said you can have a funeral home, but cremate crematorium is not included in this section.

So what just to clarify, why is that a thing?

I think it's because of the emissions.

Okay.

That's associated with it.

Okay.

All right.

But this green process would be okay.

Understood.

Okay.

I I appreciate and support that.

Thank you.

Councilman Van Grack.

Um, in addition to supporting uh making sure that the green um the green cremation can work.

I also want to follow up with something council member Fulton said, because uh we've we have a body have talked about subjective criteria with regard to zoning.

It's been used in the history of the United States, sometimes negatively, and it's also something that different, you know, bodies in making determinations have used.

So I want to echo what my colleague said that subjective determinations of how we're gonna be doing non-conforming uses is something that to the extent we can redraft that, I think it'd be beneficial for the city.

Uh councilmember Van Grack, I'm I apologize, just for clarity for the rewrite.

Um, another option would be to remove it altogether, which is fairly consistent with what we've done in the past.

And I did want to note that the the finding below that one uh does require that the use expansion will not have negative impacts on the public health safety and welfare of nearby properties, which probably covers what we're looking for anyway.

Beautifully said, um, and that's why you're sitting in the chair.

Thanks.

I have a question for you.

Is there a reason why staff kept that one in and uh pulled it from other places?

I'm just curious because like have you had experience or concerns or especially because it's non-conforming.

I just want to understand your rationale, because maybe there's very good reason.

I know I understand everywhere else you did it, but maybe you said in non-conformity, we need to be more careful based on your experience.

Can you just share that with us?

Yeah, candidly, uh, Mayor Ashin.

I I think this was probably just a holdover from when we had this finding in some of the other series of findings.

Um I don't recall that there was an affirmative decision after we had removed that finding from other approvals to keep it here, but I did you know I do think that when we drafted this provision, there was a sense that we did want to make you know applicants uh make a fairly robust demonstration of need in order to get the use expansion.

Um I I don't from my perspective, and certainly staff can weigh in as well.

I don't see any negative effects if we were to remove the finding.

Excellent.

And what about planning team?

We agree.

Okay, thank you.

Just want to make sure, like maybe there's something that you guys have encountered that we're not aware of.

So I appreciate you clarifying that.

No.

Okay.

No, thank you.

Great.

Thank you very much.

Um I had one question.

Something came up with it at the nonprofit symposium again.

It was a lot of discussion at this symposium.

Uh, there was uh uh a nonprofit organization that said, I want to buy a building and do some work in the city.

I immediately referred them to ready um to say they can help you and then they'll bring in planning staff.

Uh but I have been told that like there's a lot of strictness around an old bank can't be turned into a cultural center, and I'm just questioning why.

So is that would that be considered non-conforming?

So we don't just to be clear on that one, we're not sure sure it's a zoning issue, it more be um building code at such issues.

So give us some more time.

Look at that, but we're pretty sure it's not a zoning issue.

Okay, just if there is if that if you dig deeper and it is, if you could please let us know before we make approvals that we are trying to fill spaces with positive things.

Uh so I just want to make sure we're not doing anything inadvertently.

Okay, so I'm seeing no more questions on non-conforming.

Let's move to the next section.

Signs.

Okay.

Signs.

How exciting.

I know these are important to people, and it's critical to the advertisement of businesses and organizations, et cetera.

Um, but I do want to note that um to ask the question in terms of what you all have.

I always want to know like what is sitting in your issues, what have you seen uh in terms of the projects that are coming forward that businesses are asking us for and signs?

Is there anything that we haven't done that you've encountered that we should be considering I don't think so.

One of the biggest things that we have seen is you know, every property, every non-residential property has a sign plan associated with it.

And more often than not, that has to either be amended because ex-tenant does not use that color, that's not their corporate color.

And um, they really I think landlords end up being hamstrung to a degree by those sign plans.

And so that was what that was our recommendation uh to eliminate those so there'd be more flexibility for property owners and the landlords.

Last term uh there was something that came up with um you mentioned Twinbrook Quarter.

They like one, I don't know the full discussion, but like they wanted more flexibility on signage because some of the businesses are on the side or the back of the street, and they you know they need a visibility.

Is there any lesson learned there that we need to address?

Well, I think there's still the ability um for sign plans moving forward.

They got a comprehensive sign package that had variances built into it.

Um but if they're moving forward, if a similar project came in, they could still address it in that in those same ways.

Okay, and are we having to say no a lot on sign issues?

Not really.

Okay, so there's no other missing problem to be fixed.

No, I mean, one thing we'd always heard several years ago that there wasn't enough sign area.

We have not heard that once we rewrote the sign ordinance in 2019.

So apparently there's enough sign area that businesses have uh for their signs.

Again, it was always just the sign plans and and kind of the restrictions that those placed uh on property owners.

Thank you.

You mentioned um that we have a lot of signs around the city right now.

Um you've noted up to three signs on residential in the past.

Has it been four signs?

I can't recall there was four or five.

It seemed like it was more than a few.

Well, I just noted that our council has expanded, right?

And so reducing the signs uh gives less civic engagement.

So I just I was curious about like why four, why three why they went down to three?

Because I remember there was a four number in the past.

So it might be something to just confirm and look at to make sure we're not reducing.

If I if I might add, so I don't believe we have anything currently that would preclude someone from having more than those three, but you are allowed to have up to three with no permit required, which currently that is not the case.

Well, there was a number of four with no permit required.

At least it was conveyed to in previous elections.

So I know this is not election code, but I just wanted to make sure we're not reducing when there's a larger council, so or requiring uh triggering a permit.

Um we'll confirm it, make sure.

Thank you.

Um, and then also uh there's been a lot of signs placed in different places and rights of way.

That has that's not legal, right?

It's not allowed.

Um we've also heard some complaints from residents saying signs are placed in their property without permission.

Yeah.

Um can you confirm that's not legal, correct?

Is in this code?

That is correct, yes.

Okay.

And is there a fine for that?

So um the city does spend resources and um I will note like sometimes there's a uh commercial proper commercial owners come and litter the city and put 30 signs in the rights of way, 50 signs in the rights away.

You guys could clean it one day and then they come back the next day.

Um why why wouldn't we consider and maybe that comes back to enforcement?

I would like to hear your thoughts on that.

Certainly we could uh elevate it to a notice of violation and then get into um the violation that would kick in the fine.

Because essentially we're working for them when we keep cleaning up their signs, and they know there's no teeth to it, so they just keep doing it.

Yeah, we we kind of um we're out of step a bit with the county because the county allows for, say, real estate signs to be posted uh in the rights of way uh for the weekend, uh, and we don't.

So I've noticed that some of the sign installers uh place those in the right of way in the city, even though we don't permit those.

Yeah, and I get the real estate signs.

Um, and maybe it's it's just a there's a balance.

Um I I just we have seen like the littering of 40 and 50 signs by the similar companies.

Um, and I don't even know if we call them to say that's not allowable, but they maybe and and I know up some of them don't even know it's not allowable.

So um I just I wanted to flag that.

I'm not necessarily trying to limit real estate.

I get that.

It's it's the littering part of it that gets out of hand.

Yeah, it's been a while since we've had one of those massive uh sign uh installations.

Yeah, we had one recently.

If you know one, please tell me.

Uh the city manager took care of it.

Okay.

But yeah, we can certainly reach out to the providers and remind them that our our code is is different than the county or whatever it might be.

And I think this the county does allow real estate, but they have to be removed by X time.

Yes.

So it's like reasonable.

But anyway, I I think it's something to explore further.

Councilmember Jackson.

Thank you, uh, Mayor.

Um the signs, uh, I really have um no problem.

I think you guys have done uh a really uh good job.

Uh I would uh associate myself with the mayor's comment.

Um, three signs uh does seem uh a little bit limiting, uh especially as the mayor has said when we expanded the the council um by a couple of seats.

But um I think you know four signs is is good.

Um but I do I I'm really proud that Rockville does not have any restrictions on um uh signs uh and political signs because I think it's a free speech um uh uh thing, and I really uh uh am proud that we don't try to restrict uh free speech.

Um unfortunately my age o' is uh going in their other direction, uh, but that's another uh topic for another time.

But uh the the city um, you know, three signs is a good, maybe four uh would be better, as the mayor said.

And just one clarity.

Um I align with your comments, but if anyone's listening, you cannot put political signs in the public right away.

Um right, council member Shaw.

Thank you.

I do agree with staff's recommendation.

Um is there just could you provide some clarification for um if there's any different regulations with political signs that are temporary versus real estate or in the revised stop draft, there is no distinction, they would both be treated as temporary freestanding signs.

Okay.

So I know that there's um there's like yeah, okay, thank you.

Councilman Van Greg.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, hasn't the US Supreme Court said you can't limit the number of political signs on a property?

I don't think that they didn't.

I thought there was a limit that you can't limit the number of political signs on a property.

Is that not true?

Council Member Crack, we we might need to get back to you on that one.

Okay, I I'm also not aware of that.

Okay.

All right.

There are general, you know, safety and and and you know, welfare limits to that are allowable in in limiting free speech rights.

Um, but you may be right.

So I'll I'll take a look at that and get back to you.

All right, it then to the extent that isn't limited, even four, I would say is potentially uh too small.

Um it does make sense uh whether it's you know on a county council level, whether it's a city council level to allow people to be able to have that without a permit, certainly makes sense.

Um talking generally, um I know we could go into idiosyncrasies of like the little areas, but I think for the most part, what is being done through these revisions is an expansion on the use of signs and an understanding of some of the concerns that property owners, that residents and people, whether it's real estate, whether it's um using signs on multi-use buildings, that from what I can tell, staff is trying to be more accommodating.

And I think it's exactly what you've heard from staff, or sorry, staff has heard from the community, we've heard from the community.

So while there might be little nits and gnats that might be better, it's something we can always amend if we realize there's a problem.

But for the most part, I think this code is moving in the direction of exactly the way we want it to.

So thank you very much.

Dr.

Miles.

Good afternoon.

Or thanks.

I have no additional initial uh comments on this one.

Councilman Fulton.

So like forget the political signs.

If I have like a kid graduating from middle school, a kid graduating from high school, a kid graduating from elementary school, and I want to say where they're going to college, and I want to say congratulations to my kids, I want to be able to put six signs in my yard.

If I'm bringing home baby and I want to say welcome home, baby, I want to be able to put that sign in my yard.

So setting aside the political signs on an individual single family residence private property.

I'm probably alone in this, but I'd say have as many signs as you want.

I would remove that prohibition entirely.

That's my only comment on this one.

I am gonna strongly co-sign the the right honorable council member Fulton on that point.

Um and and truly, as I think as as some of us do have a congrats for graduate graduating, and I'm blah, blah, blah bound.

Um and you know, it's some other folks that maybe or may not be running for election.

Um yes, I I just remove it completely.

If you want to have in temporary, we all get the temporary non-commercial, totally get it.

Um yeah, I mean, as long as it's not a permanent fixture, put as many as you want.

Like there's so many issues in the world that I I don't want us to veer toward the design guidelines slash HOA requirements when there are many of us that do not um live in HOA controlled um or historic district controlled neighborhoods.

Um I so yeah, totally take that out.

I have seen um to to kind of put a pin in it.

I think enforcement, I know it's not here, but is I think uh our next biggest challenge.

Um there have been uh political signs placed without consent of the owner.

Um there are political signs in the public right away, like whoa.

Um I think at a certain point, same with the business ones.

You're right, there haven't been a ton of the like you know, green doctor sort of like signs that pop up all the time, but if there's no enforcement, then there's no mechanism to uh correct behavior.

Um and I would really want there to be an actual um something a fine, something substanti something significant enough that it will be a behavior modifier.

Um, because otherwise you will have people placing political signs willy-nilly wherever they want to put them.

Um and and frankly, I don't know that residents know even who to contact.

Um, you know, and it it's a challenge because you want to get along uh with your neighbors and so forth, but um everybody has that that right to say no, no, thank you, and things should not show up anyway.

So um yeah, I just wanted to to note that, and I think in general, things like character, things like you know, that last uh bullet point that's doing a uh a lot of work there.

Um I I'm not gonna be a big fan of that just because you know again, sometimes people make the choice to not live in an HOA community, and that is in itself a choice.

I do also to that extent on I I am not personally a fan of of feather flags, but of all the things for us to be like picking on prohibition on signs that move.

Like I I've had some signs fall over, but like I I don't see all the you know overnight that we're gonna see a bunch of feather flags and you know all these other issues when we do have other uh more significant um issues that we have to face, like a bunch of mattresses appearing in the public right away on certain roads.

Like let's let's let's look at those things before we start uh beating up on the feather flags.

So um I think the rest of it looks great.

I know that this is not easy.

I remember when the original sign ordinance was going through its stuff, and I uh I appreciate all the work that you did on that.

So thank you.

Councilmember Jackson.

Yeah.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'll be brief.

Uh I council member Fulton, you convinced me.

So I uh I I actually uh would uh co-sign uh you know removing the uh three temporary uh free standing signs for the residential um lots.

Uh I think uh you're right.

Uh we can do away with that.

Councilman Bashall.

I also agree with Councilmember Fulton's comment.

Um I I do think it's related to freedom of speech.

Um, as well as not just political signs, but also like issues um like support for our schools and things.

So I do think that's it's important to remove that.

That's a majority, we'll remove it.

Thank you.

And just can you also just check to make sure that we're not violating any laws because I I'm just remembering um one of our district 17 commenters had this issue in Gaithersburg and they went through some sign issues um when he was on council um and and there was some free speech concern.

So I just wanted to he has advocated on there's some Supreme Court rules about it.

So I just think that we need to take another look.

Certainly.

Um Madam Mayor, I do do want to emphasize to the body we we did um we did do a pretty thorough review of our sign ordinance to ensure compliance with uh recent Supreme Court case law.

Okay.

Um so I don't want you to think that that wasn't part of our analysis, and we we actually put a lot of effort into ensuring in particular that our regulations are content neutral.

Um and but there's certainly no no legal issue with removing limits on residential properties.

In fact, you know, to the extent there might be a pain point for the city that would that would probably be one of them.

So yeah, I mean I do know that like especially graduation, like there are like individual little sticks.

I have done it because my you know when your child graduates, it's like the letters, right?

Um and uh I I see residents do that all the time.

But you do you can't I I have seen that cities can do the time and you know to find what is temporary, uh, and then we also can still maintain our X foot requirements from polling places.

I mean, that all makes sense still.

Next issue.

Apparently, signs were exciting.

I'm excited.

Councilmember Jackson.

I didn't plan this.

If you want to pass and come back, it's okay.

No, no.

No, um so this is the historic preservation.

And I think staff has uh done a really thoughtful job uh on this.

Uh just I have some hesitation on uh being unanimous, um, frankly.

And uh I I want to hear more discussion, but um, you know, the a unanimous vote is hard to to to come by.

Um I would be more comfortable with a super major majority um uh vote of the uh various uh uh bodies, whether it's mayor and council or um uh the historic uh district.

Um that's well, I'm sure we're discuss it, but that's kind of uh where I'm leaning right now.

Um the rest of it is is good.

I wonder here's more discussion of um other people's ideas um, you know, before I I I uh give it a thumbs up, but I really do appreciate all the work the staff has put put uh into it, and by and large, um uh I I agree with most of it.

Councilman Mashaw.

I want to thank the staff and no questions.

Councilman Van Grad.

Uh uh I also want to thank the staff.

I think you've looked at a lot of the problems that we've talked about.

Um, and I know one of the problems that we've talked about is whether you've got an objective uh objecting uh property owner, and it's being taken by a third party.

And so having that pretty high bar for that type of situation is reasonable.

Um we have to make sure that there is reasonable grounds and it's gotta reach a high standard.

So I think what you've got in this code um meets that standard.

If there becomes a problem that for whatever reason, something that we've got in here that we might have gone too far, it is something that we can amend.

But I think what you've got in here really seems reasonable, and I appreciate your hard work in getting it done.

Thank you, Dr.

Miles.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I am and I am in support of and associate myself with call the comments of my colleague, Councilmember Jackson, with regard to going towards a supermajority as opposed to um uh unanimous vote.

Uh the rest of it have no major concerns at this point.

Councilmember Fulton.

I have one question on the removal of the historic designation.

Uh 251113A2.

Uh the it one criteria for removal is the site or structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program that will be of substantial benefit to the city.

I could have missed it, but like that term's not defined anywhere.

Major improvement program.

What does that mean?

Like I feel like getting back to the being really specific.

I think I know what it's getting at, and I think that's important to be there.

I just don't know what a major improvement program is.

Is there a way we can be I think this is one of those things you you know it when you see it.

And I will I will say that we developed this language um based on the feedback I believe it was of this body, or it might have been the planning committee.

It would have been this body because it's in the revised staff draft to eliminate the other good cause, which is very broad.

So we did go and coordinate with our historic preservation staff to come up with like okay, what do we actually mean?

Yeah.

Um, and this is language that was borrowed from state law, not specific to removal of historic designation.

Um it was directly related to something that will come to me, but not in this moment.

Um, but it is something that this language is used elsewhere.

I think we could go into state law and see if that is something that is further defined.

Um, but in my mind, it is it is one of those things, you know, it's maybe not as specific as it could be, but it's significantly more specific than other good cause.

It still provides um counsel with the leeway to remove within kind of these two bounds of these two criteria.

I mean, Councilmember Fulton, if if I can add a little bit to that as well, just a reminder to the body.

Most of the series of findings that you're seeing in the ordinance have to do with really with quasi-judicial decisions where you're deciding property rights.

Um this is not one of those cases.

And one of the things that's a little bit unusual, although it does obviously all of your decisions in the land use context affect property rights.

This is effectively a legislative decision by the body whether to zone or not zone a particular property.

So it's a long way of saying these restrictions are restrictions that you're putting on yourself that really aren't legally required.

And so when you choose to remove a property, you could do it really for any reason.

And I say all of this because you know, if you're choosing to remove a property from the historic district overlay zone, you know, one of the reasons you may not need a definition in item number two is because it really is your decision as the legislative body as to whether or not there is a major improvement program.

In other words, somebody can't appeal this decision in the same way that they could appeal, for example, the denial of a site plan.

Um I'm not saying any of that to suggest that you need to change this language, but you have a lot of options here, and these are restrictions you are putting on yourself.

Um that's helpful.

Maybe I'll just make one like super.

I'm bringing my day job into this.

The word program is what's sticking for me.

Like if we could just change program to initiative, like program implies something.

Uh like so, yeah, just a major improvement initiative might might help.

Uh so that was just or major sure.

Yeah, yeah, major improvement.

Major improvement.

Uh or initiative or whatever it is, just program.

If everyone's okay with that.

Uh my only other um.

I struggle with when I read in concert the we can place real meaningful restrictions on what a property owner can do with their property after they bought it, and pair that with not only are restricting what they do with their property, but under the demolition by neglect, we're actually telling them what they have to do with it.

And the this body talked a lot about in the conforming uses about property rights, and that like the double whammy of that, like you can't do what you want to do, even though you didn't know that when you bought it, but you do have to do all these other things.

So I know we're gonna get there.

Uh, I know that's gonna happen, but I I say that to be maybe that's why I'm still good with the unanimous if there is written owner objection.

That's the only case we would need it.

That's it.

Thanks.

Thank you, Councilman Valeri.

What are my favorite topics?

I am extremely excited about this one.

I was excited about science though, too.

So, you know, um, so there are so many things.

I I want to get it, I want to get to a more foundational starting point and then kind of get more into some of these details.

Right now, a property must meet just one of nine criteria to be eligible, including quote, represents an established visual feature of the neighborhood, which really has no meaningful limiting principle.

There is no minimum age requirement.

Um, the national registry journal generally requires 50 years.

Draft language does not.

Um I think is most distressing to me is that the owner of a property's interests are really not relevant at all during this process.

I think we're talking about two different things too, right?

Um we're talking about housing, residential, and then we're talking about retail, business, um, historic.

So I kind of want to focus on residential because I think that the rules are the same regardless, right?

Which is I think it's part of the problem.

I think that maybe at a minimum, there is a higher bar for residential historic designation.

Um for office or other sort of retail buildings that are being designated.

Um, but even before we get to that point, I appreciate the changes about who can nominate, but right now there is no provision that a confirmation that an owner has received the notice.

Um and correct me if I'm wrong.

Um, how actually I'll turn this around.

How do owners get notified that their property has been nominated?

Uh we send written notice by by mail.

Okay.

Um and the written notice is English only.

I would say in most cases, yes.

Okay.

So in writing, no um return receipt or signature required on receipt.

Like confirmation of receipt, basically, not just I don't think so.

But easy enough to so there's really no guardrails.

Is there?

Clarification is certified mail.

It is certified mail um with a signature.

In the notice, does it um share with the individual that as of the receipt of that letter, there is a 210-day exterior change freeze.

So even if they had like work coming up, they would have to stop whatever project was in place until it was sorted out.

Yes, and that's that is actually happened.

So it's basically a property, a residential.

I'm gonna stick with residential because I think we'll get to it adaptive reuse shortly.

Um we need to put ourselves in the shoes of individuals who may or may not be comfortable in in reading or writing the English language, not understanding the full implications of what's occurring, um, and frankly, could just be nominated because they represent an established visual feature of the neighborhood.

I think that oh, and they just have to meet one of nine criteria.

So we have a very very low bar for something that's so significant in terms of the effect on uh a property owner, a residential property owner.

Um I appreciate that um there are homeowner historic tax credits.

Um they exist, um they do require pre-approval and documentation from MHT.

Uh owner-occupied homes are not eligible for the federal historic tax credit, so that is a no-go for folks.

And we're doing all this and not giving the person, we're not giving the person the capability of saying, hey, wait, no, I don't want this nominated because somebody could say no, I don't want it nominated, it could still go forward, correct?

Okay.

That's my that's my struggle.

I do not like that at all.

Um, it could be something insignificant, not say insignificant, it could be something like an architectural style to like, and and Madam Mayor knows I use this example, to like the the something like the the home that Thurgood Marshall once slept in.

I'm trying to think of an example.

Um that's a wide scope, right?

Like I'm not a big fan of issuing blank checks.

I'm not a fan of not working to explain more about the process to a homeowner.

Um I'm I'm I'm not a fan of not getting the affirmative response.

Silence is not consent, it just is not.

And um people get in trouble when they take silence for consent, and I I think we can do better than that.

So um to that extent, I think it should be um an affirmative.

Uh I'm I'm laughing because the example I have is the notes that you would send each other in high school that's like, do you like me?

Yes, no, maybe, and I need to check one of these.

Um I can't just send it back empty in my note, right?

So definitely getting um something either way.

Um, yes, no, I don't care.

If it's a no, that should be a different decision branch, right?

You can educate on what um available options there are, and maybe there's a higher threshold, but we're essentially in this section of the zoning code, we're determining and defining property rights of a homeowner.

And like we're not having a bigger and more in-depth conversation than this is a little it's it's concerning to me.

So um Article 11, if I'm not uh wrong, does not distinguish between owner-occupied residential properties and income producing or commercial properties in terms of consent requirements, right?

It's all the same.

So at a bare minimum, could we not look at those two as as separate?

Um to me that does make sense.

Staff said it's a process available in quote rare circumstances.

Are we gonna further define that as far as like specific grounds, procedure, anything like that, or are we just gonna leave it open-ended?

I would say that the text on the screen is basically uh subjective synopsis, or it's something that we developed that is not language that is in the ordinance, the rare circumstances specifically that that term does not show up.

That's just that's just in the um the slides because that was what I was working from.

I didn't um do like a one-to-one on that.

So I think I want us to get to a much better place than this.

I think that um whether it's unanimous, supermajority, it doesn't really matter if we don't kind of address some of these bigger concerns, and um the outreach component of it is just one piece.

And um, yeah, I I think I'll leave it there.

Oh super quickly, Mr.

City Manager.

The historic catalog, did you ever get um any sort of uh it has not been updated since I think 2011?

I sent you guys a response.

Let me look it up.

I'll circle back.

Okay, yeah, no, it's okay.

I didn't see it, but I've been having uh email issues uh not shockingly so.

Um yeah, I just I I hope that we have uh a little bit of a more thoughtful conversation on this.

And I I really I also want to say I support the planning commission's recommendation for adaptive reuse now.

Um I think it's you know it it's directly supported by it, and I think that's something that we can do um is a positive thing.

So I really look forward to hearing from my colleagues on some of these tougher questions.

Thanks.

Thank you very much.

I'm just gonna do a time check to say it's 9 37.

We have another agenda item and about two more sections to go through.

I will try to speed and I apologize for fast talk.

But um, I support the comments of Councilmember Jackson and uh Dr.

Miles on moving from unanimous to supermajority.

I think we have done significant work to change who can nominate, and so it would be the HDC or the mayor and council.

So some of those concerns about um, you know, the issues of the past, you know, if people can still come to the mayor and council or HDC, but it's ultimately one of those two bodies who would who would move the process.

So I I think that is a big change, and for that I support the supermajority.

Um and also um I know we talked about like the work of the HDC doesn't inhibit mayor and council, so it's not required, correct?

That both are now unanimous.

We had a discussion on that last session.

That is that is correct.

We did revise that in the draft.

Excellent, thank you.

Um I will just share um some history that I have seen in Rockville and something that informs my decision.

I have seen um particularly some of the African American properties or people who have been, you know, there's been issues with those with properties who have been people have businesses here or people who have been longtime residents, and there have been a number of scenarios where um those properties are just demolished.

So you can call it urban renewal, you can call it, you know, this that has also happened in other areas.

So I I do have concerns um about what has happened in the past and how uh black properties, black cemeteries have been less valued than others, and that is an issue, not just has happened in Rockville, but in across this entire country, and so some of that gives me pause and why I think we should be looking at this more seriously.

Um, to the comment of my colleague, I think Councilman Fulton and Councilman Larry raised it.

I do have some concerns about people buying something and not knowing what they're getting into.

Um, and so the catalog needs to be updated, and people need to know.

Um, that's a concern that I have, and I believe the work plan was supposed to be up in it had that to be updated, and we just need to know where where they are, and I appreciate that you're looking into that, Mr.

City Manager.

I've raised this last term, but 210 days is a long time.

Is it state law?

Can that timeline be adjusted just so that we are you know digging in on the facts and can get back to people?

I think it was established in the prior code as a timeline that the map amendment, which the historic designation process is, uh could be accomplished and sometimes it's controversial, and those things take you know take some time.

I mean some of the issues why things took time was not necessarily controvers, not just controversial controversy, but like things happen that could have been prevented.

I'll just leave it there.

Mr.

City Manager, were you gonna say something?

Yeah, the last historic preservation inventory was 2011.

Yes, we could update it, but we'd I'd want to put together a budget estimate for that.

It's a pretty expensive process.

Okay.

I will note that there it was a work plan that was approved that said it would happen.

So yes, mayor council.

We just need to re-raise the issue and prior, you know, come up with the prioritization plan among everything else that's going on.

But I do have concern with the surprises.

Um so if we I do think that we need to have an accurate catalog.

Um the um 2511 uh one dot two.

I wanted to ask the question about um that section when the uh well, actually, I think I already addressed that one.

It's divided division 11 2 certificates of approval demolition by neglect.

Um for that one, the HDC may on condition of its approval, find it necessary to make those findings.

Is that is that how you've written it?

Can you just speak to the role of the HDC in that process?

Um just to clarify, Madam Mayor, the you're talking about the HDC's role in the demolition by neglect process.

So as we've written that section, um there are kind of the HDC would generally not have a role in that process, at least as far as the enforcement goes.

So if you look at 2511 to uh 2.2, um, you know, that's really just envisioning a process where we city staff have identified that there's a property that's been listed that is deteriorating, and we can take proactive steps to notify the property owner and request uh correction of that action.

Um the only way the HDC would get involved is that because we do equate demolition by neglect with demolition.

So if you actually want, and I I can't imagine anybody would actually do this, but if you wanted permission to allow your property to deteriorate, you could go to the HDC and request a demolition permit to do that.

But generally speaking, demolition by neglect is it's the it's really an enforcement mechanism, it's not a it's not a process that the HDC would typically be involved in.

Um so you're saying that um it you're trying to take this in the perspective of it allow staff to ask act faster to identify those properties.

That's correct.

So, you know, currently, you know, there are there are property maintenance code requirements, so you you you cannot you cannot allow a property to deteriorate to the point where it is no longer habitable.

Um the idea with a demolition by neglect um provision is that we can step in earlier than that, because obviously his the historic characteristics of a property could deteriorate long uh long before the property becomes truly uninhabitable.

And so, you know, if we identify a property where those historical characteristics are deteriorating, the as this is currently written, the chief of zoning would have the ability to issue a notice of violation.

And no, just be clear that's different than the citation process.

Notice of violation would just identify the violation, give the property owner a reasonable period of time to cure whatever the problem happens to be.

Okay.

So staff would be able to act faster on issues, but in terms of delisting a property, the HDC still has that authority.

Yes.

So um actually, so I I apologize.

So to be clear, the uh yeah, the ability to uh file an application to remove the historic designation from our property can only come as this code is currently written from the mayor and council or the property owner.

However, the HDC upon that application being filed would then have the ability to review that and determine whether the, for example, the site or structure is no longer no longer has those historical characteristics.

So the HTC can't initiate that process, but it would have a review uh responsibility.

Can you share what authority we're removing from the HDC in this in this code?

Uh if there is any.

Well, we're not just to be clear, and I'll I because I'm I'm gonna hopefully give my my colleagues some time to respond as well.

We're not removing any authority from the HDC in the removal of the historic designation process because that currently does not exist in our code.

Um as far as the other processes go, I'm I'm I might be missing something, but I'm not aware of any a responsibility or or uh authority that we're taking away from the HDC.

Okay.

We've received some commentary about that, so I wanted to confirm whether that is a thing or not.

It's an issue or not.

Was this from Peerless Rock, Phil, before our last meeting?

Yes.

So there are a number of instances throughout these processes where it refers to the chief of zoning review, and I believe there might have been some confusion about the effect of the chief of zoning's review.

This is something that we currently do, we'll have the chief of zoning, or as um that individual is defined in our ordinance, their designee, which very frequently is a staff member, in this case our historic preservation staff member who will do a review.

And as we are doing with so many things, make a recommendation to the body that they present to.

So that chief of zoning review would not take any authority away from the historic um from the HDC.

It's just outlining that before something gets to the HDC, staff will review it.

But then the HDC still has their authority.

Okay.

Um and then thank you for that clarification.

Uh section 2511 2-2, democl demolition might by neglect.

Um, it says it's prohibited.

However, if the neglect is caused by financial inability to maintain and repair the structure, how do you how do you determine that?

So I'll I'll weigh in on this as well, because there was there were some legal elements to this addition.

Um and I'll point out this was uh helpfully helpfully uh identified by one of our planning commissioners.

Um state law and and they don't do it in exactly this way, but state law effectively effectively allows for demolition by neglect in the event that a property owner does not have the financial ability to maintain the structure.

And in in the land use article, they do that by adding that provision into the definition of demolition.

So, you know, uh and and I agreed with the planning commissioner.

I don't think we have the ability to not include that provision.

So we have to create a carve out.

The problem is state law also does not identify what financial inability to support the structure would mean.

And so what we tried to do was to create a process, and I think this is largely in subsection C where we allow the property owner to the opportunity to make a demonstration.

But it's a great question, um, Madam Mayor, and honestly, that's a that's something we're gonna have to work out in the event that it actually happens.

We'll just have to make sure that there is some because ultimately this would be this would be you know reviewed under the substantial evidence test that's used for all of our administrative decisions.

So the question would be is there substantial evidence that the property owner has provided that there was a financial inability to maintain the structure?

It seems like a gaping window.

Um it sounds like you guys have grappled with it as well, and it's because the state law is just not clear.

Okay.

Um I've seen some people um there's a a resident who wanted to put an EV charger at their historic property and they had to develop all kinds of covers and do we have limitations on solar and EV going on historic properties and that they have to do things to hide it.

I I just was curious about that.

Yeah, that's not historically accurate.

I mean, people have had electricity come in.

I'm just saying, th those installations would require a certificate of approval by the HDC.

Yeah, but there's not specific criteria for for either, I don't think.

I think that's a problem.

I think that for those two pieces, uh the process must be clear and fast.

Um especially with rising utility costs, I just that concerns me.

So I will note that um as as outlined in this slide, we are proposing that a number of improvements be eligible for an administrative approval, which currently they are not, and that does include the installation of utility meters, vents, cables or telephone boxes, exterior wiring, antennas, satellite dishes, HVAC system components, electric vehicle charging stations, and exterior security devices.

How about solar?

I didn't hear solar.

I do appreciate EV, but I do know that that was an issue for a resident.

You don't have to, I know it's getting late, so if you could just look into that and get back to us.

At some point, we went to old properties and put heat and we put lights.

So I just want to make sure we can evolve with times while still supporting the historic property.

Absolutely.

I know that other counties do have some provisions for solar and historic properties.

I think we can look into some precedents there.

Okay.

Uh the other comment we received from peer lists.

I just wanted to flag um is 25113A1.

The chart, the change does not adequately describe the condition justifying delisting.

It should include integrity.

Has that come up with staff?

What was the section again?

25113A1.

Yes, so we did look at that as well, and we did think that the it outlines the criteria for removal.

The first one is the cider structure on the site has lost the characteristics that justified replacement or justified placement in the site.

That language we view to be roughly equivalent to integrity.

Also, a way of saying integrity with different words.

Okay.

Um I appreciate that.

I am done with my comments on this section.

Councilman Valeri.

I know.

I know it's late, but I'm gonna explain why this is important to me.

Um and and thank you for the um thank you for uh the inspiration.

So this is very personal to me for a variety of reasons, but I I think I need to share this.

So Twinbrook has a very special place in the heart of the city.

Although we're the farthest south, right?

We have a very special place in in the heart of the city.

We also are the heart of those living at or below the poverty level.

Uh those who um rely on food assistance and uh Medicare and Medicaid, and I live in a community where on either side of me, right?

I could um be entering into this uh 210-day exterior change freeze, which actually begins at nomination filing date before the owner could even receive the notice.

So it is very possible by the time I get that notice, I've already been under a freeze.

I don't know it.

Um I'm struggling with the rising cost of utilities and materials, and now I have a process that is unfolded.

Um, because I have one of the nine criteria, only need one.

Really want to mention that.

I think we need to raise that bar um to at least three, if not four, if we're going to remove the ability for people to control um their property.

I also think to to Madame Mayor's point, in my neighborhood, you will probably see a lot more demolition by neglect if there is not more fail-safes to protect folks who are already struggling to keep their head above water, who now have to go through more hoops to change, you know, repair a shingle to do any sort of thing that other homeowners have to do.

It's really inequitable.

This is an absolute equity issue.

And the flip side of it is the fact that we're talking about economic equity right now.

Um, and it just makes me honestly, it makes me sad that um it makes me sad the example that Madam Mayor raised for sure.

Um, and especially like cemeteries and so forth, I think they need to be treated with the utmost respect.

Conversely, I'm don't think that turning any neighborhood into a landmine field of demolition by neglect, does anything to a solve our housing crisis, or B maintain that we are an equitable city?

And it's just very it's disheartening to me to not see more concern about some of these things.

So I just wanted to add that and add more context as to why I am a little fired up about this one.

Thank you.

Uh any other comments.

I had a question.

Uh there were three of us who said supermajority versus unanimous.

I'm just wanted us just to clarify.

Is everyone else on this day is supporting unanimous?

Correct.

Yes.

Councilman McGregor, you support unanimous.

Um Councilman Shaw.

Okay.

All right.

I just want to claim there any other clarifications that you have for us.

That was the one.

Thank you.

Okay.

I was seeing your facial expressions.

All right.

I have concerns about that, but we are a democracy.

I have a lot of concerns about Article 12, subdivisions and plats.

Councilman Bushaw.

Madam Mayor, I don't have any questions for this section.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Van Grak.

No, similarly, I saw I like what staff's doing again.

I think this is going in a little different direction of understanding how things are put to um put to play.

It will remain to see if there if this works, but as of right now, it looks like how you've laid it out about what can happen seems to make sense.

And I haven't heard from any comment, at least with regard to developers or anything that there's a problem in it.

Um, but we're expanding and understanding how uses come about.

So thanks.

Good evening, Madam Mayor.

Just a question for staff.

Is this the section that deals with pipe stem lots?

It is.

Yeah, I mean that's the only thing I am against.

Only from a um just makes it difficult in in some contexts for neighbors, but I do understand the need to expand and utilize land for for housing purposes.

I won't stand in the way of this one.

I just personally just have a thing for it, but that's that's neither here nor there.

That's all I'll say.

That's all.

Thank you.

I've seen you're good.

I'm good on Valeria's good on this one.

Um I just had a question.

The pipe stem lots must be a minimum of 20 feet wide.

Uh, that's for fire truck safety.

That's correct.

Okay.

I know we've debated this topic, so we've gone through it already.

Okay.

Uh there was an issue that you raised early about dams.

Do we have dams?

In fact, we do.

Okay.

Okay, where that is not something that I have personal knowledge on.

I have seen the map, but I think it is an issue that we have to address.

Okay.

Well, it's a confirmed.

That's really funny.

Are you good?

I'm good.

Okay.

All right.

Enforcement.

You didn't have anything here.

Um, but I did raise the issue of signs and public rights away, so if you can get back to us on that.

I think we heard loud and clear, and I will note two things on that.

You'll be very pleased to hear, I believe, that we have refilled our senior zoning enforcement um position, and they are starting on Monday of next week.

So we're very excited about that.

Um, we'll definitely get them out there taking signs out of the right of way.

Um, and the other is that we are taking a look at um fines currently.

So we'll be able to address that as well.

And I know this came up in previous elections, but just clarity on if someone wants to report an issue with a sign, where should they go?

If a sign is placed in their yard without permission, what should they do?

Um those are just recent things that I've heard, so I just wanted to flag that.

It's not clear.

The property owner has every right to just remove it.

So that's probably the easiest thing.

If there's someone that they want to tell us that that's happening, we can contact you know that campaign or whatever it is, but just remove the sign.

And there's no enforce this, it's just uh sorry it happened.

Well, it could go either way.

It is a zoning violation, technically, if they want to pursue that aspect of it, we're certainly have the ability to do that.

But if it was my property, I would just remove the sign.

Right, thank you.

Just to add to that, we do take complaints.

Um, so if someone had a had a strong objection to it, they certainly could uh contact us and we would investigate that as well.

Thank you.

Councilman Valerie, go ahead.

Sorry.

Sorry, um, it's getting later.

Uh so they basically they they contact your department directly.

I I'm trying to figure out because we have already heard gotten a bunch of reports of especially in the right-of-way.

Okay.

I just didn't want them to send them directly to you, Holly.

You seem very nice.

So okay.

They could also use a report of concern, I would imagine.

I I think that I think the concern, sorry, Madam Mayor.

Um the the concern that was expressed with reporter concern, a lot of concerns, is that there's a lag sometimes in the reporter concern versus being able to talk to a human being on the phone.

At least that's what I've heard.

I can neither confirm nor deny.

Thank you.

All right.

I'm sorry.

Uh so there's you asking us about any other questions.

Okay.

I have I do have a couple questions.

One was um college gardens asked us some questions.

I know that I sent something to the city manager and he got a response out.

Did that get to the college gardens community?

Yes, we did send that to the College Garden Civic Association.

And can you uh just clarify the response in terms of adjustment that you made in response to their concerns?

The adjustment that we made um in response to their concerns was reflected in the revised staff draft.

So we did hear loud and clear um concerns about access to, I believe it's the secondary residential streets from MXCD properties.

That is something that in the original staff draft had been removed.

We added that back in, but we did coordinate with our inspection services division in CPDS and also the Department of Public Works to ensure that they would have the necessary flexibility to allow for roadway safety and function.

Um so that revision is currently in the draft.

When it comes to the purpose statement for the R90 zone, we did evaluate the comment, we discussed it, but ultimately did not um did not make a revision there.

We do think that many of the concerns or or one of the two points is covered by the purpose statement included in Article One.

And the other one includes some of the language I believe that you all were discussing earlier this evening, neighborhood character, a little bit more subjective language, and we did not recommend reintroducing that language.

Okay.

Is that the entirety of the main issues?

To our knowledge, I would say yes.

Okay.

Um I do so and you've sent the response to them.

Correct.

Okay.

I just want to make sure that we are listening and addressing concerns or providing a rationale.

Um and I would just, Mr.

Uh Councilman, former councilman for Shela, uh, uh, if you would like to talk to staff, I just we're not taking questions from the floor, but if perhaps someone can be available in the back so he can raise the concerns that he has, that would be very helpful.

So someone will meet you in the back if you would like to talk.

Okay.

The other piece um that I wanted to flag is um for bonus heights, uh, we have previously modeled bonus heights when people provide additional affordable.

So are we gonna are we doing that for the new Mark Commons piece, or are you just giving the bonus height away?

I believe that the only way that that particular property in planning area 12 would qualify for bonus height is if it is a qualifying project under the housing expansion and affordability act, which I know we've discussed many times before.

I won't go into the details of that, um, but there are certain ways, certain criteria that you would need to meet.

Um, or if it came into the ownership of a religious institution.

So I'm just noting since we're giving 55, could they could they be asked to do more affordable units because technically 40 feet's allowed to so I I think I'm understanding correct me if I'm wrong, that there may be a desire among some members of the body to keep the RMD 15 RMD 15 height at 40 feet maximum with an additional MC and I with an additional uh increase for affordable housing above the minimum.

I'm just trying to find ways to get more affordable units.

I'm just we've we've done that in town center, and I'm just curious, is that could we apply a similar formula of sorts to get more affordable units?

If they want to go up in height and we want more affordable, could we have a lot of different things?

I would say technically, technically it is possible, but we do have direction from the body as of two two or three weeks ago regarding the recommendation for that site.

So it would be kind of reopening the issue for still allowing to go up to 55, but we're asking them to do more affordable for that to get to that to get to that point.

That is something that technically we could write into the ordinance.

It would it would be something, you know, we would write the provision.

Okay, Councilman Valeri.

Sorry about that.

Um I would be in support of that.

I think again, I think something that this body has said repeatedly from the dais is that if we're gonna do have one policy in one area of the city, we want to make it uh equitable across all parts of the city.

So why wouldn't we do that here?

Um or anywhere in the city, like if folks want to, you know, go up and beyond what I think um you're hearing is hey, more MPDU units is a really good thing.

Um, but there does need to be a give and take.

Um, and I think that that's how we are able to prevent market rate only or with very little MPDU units from kind of taking over and and not and allowing us to not meet our our affordable housing goal.

So I would be supportive of that same standard um across the city.

Uh thank you.

I just I've I've sat on a many uh a COG meetings, and they're saying yes, we need more housing and we need 70% of it should be affordable, and there's nowhere we're getting close to that quite yet.

So I just wanted to find other ways to get more affordable, and I thought I would ask a creative solution.

Otherwise, maybe all market.

We hear what you're saying.

We we do believe that's a major change uh to apply it either across the city or even to the RMD 15 zone.

There currently there's no bonus height in the RMD zone.

So currently in RMD 15, it's 40 feet, but we're allowing 55.

So we're just saying if we're allowing it, since it's unique to that site, they could do more affordable.

I'm just asking.

Yeah, we as Ms.

Simmons stated, we could do that for the RMD 15 zone in particular.

Okay, thank you.

Is anyone else interested in this besides Councilman Valeria and I councilman Bashaw?

I'm just stating I'm also interested in exploring it.

Okay, and Dr.

Miles as well.

Councilman Valeri.

Oh, yes, thank you.

Um, on I think this is kind of a similar issue on um on Rockville Pike as well.

And I know that we have the pike plan coming, you know, shortly, and I think that that'll be helpful, but I think it's and again, maybe folks need more information on what this would look like, but it was the idea of of you know, the the champion project status is is constrained only to the pike.

I understand that you know, uh physically there's not that many places for uh a project that large, but again, um I think we need to think through some of these zoning changes more uh broadly and not be so um focused.

We are focused on transit-oriented development.

I get that transit may look different in the future.

Um, and I think we're gonna have to wrestle, or others will have to wrestle with that maybe, but um all these sort of uh exceptions, like allowing for more height, if you have more MPDUs, I think would be a great benefit along Rockville Pike 355 because we have untapped potential in that corridor, um, not only for access to transit, but um just in the ability to go up to a certain height and have that large enough footprint.

So I think that I think it's I think it bears that I think we need to have that conversation and and thank you, Mr.

Waslitt for I think it's significant, but what is the point of having a zoning ordinance rewrite if we're not going to think more holistically and broadly about where we want to go as a city?

This makes sense to me.

And I having this piecemeal like town center can do it, and some of these areas can do it.

I think ultimately it can it constrains our ability to really attract people that are gonna do this sort of investment in the city.

Thank you.

I know this has been raised before, and I know we are gonna have a Rockville Pike plan.

Um I do know that that plan would get to like really having a deep discussion about base heights.

However, I would be comfortable with applying the same bonus formula that we've done right at you know in front of the uh 355 corridor.

Um I would support that.

Currently, we are applying bonus heights in areas where those are specifically recommended in the comprehensive plan or in a master plan updating the comprehensive plan, the town center master plan specifically calls for bonus heights.

We're also applying them in areas where state law calls for it.

We're really not applying them in other instances currently.

So that is not to say that technically we can technically we could write this into the ordinance, but I do think adding it to the RMD 15 or considering other zones at this point would be a departure from the structure that we've been operating inside of.

I would also note that the comprehensive plan for that property in the Tower Oaks planning area calls for the RMD 25, which allows for a base height of 75 feet.

So currently applying the RMD 15 with a 55-foot base height, even though that is an increase over what the RMD 15 zone allows for that property, it is a 25% decrease, actually, slightly over a 25% decrease from what is currently implicitly recommended in the comprehensive plan.

So I think those are just points that I would raise for consideration.

I appreciate that.

I think there was four who said we'd like to see what it looks like.

Um we don't apply that increase height for other RMD 15, but we've as a body determined that we would go in that direction to support it there.

But I we are trying to find creative ways to get more affordability.

So I just would appreciate that follow up.

Mayor Ash and can I just clarify so RMD 15 with us with a 55 vote requirement plus additional um affordable units, but only in that section 12, not throughout the city.

Correct.

Okay, I got it.

Thank you.

Just want to make sure everybody heard it.

I don't understand the page that okay.

Okay.

Okay, all right.

Okay.

Thank you all very much.

We are now moving on to our next agenda item and work session.

The Jedi Strategic Plan.

Thank you to staff for the hard work on that.

Um, Mr.

Mahallik, I'll just note as we wrap up that we're gonna see the rewrite for the first time.

So if there's as soon as we can get it would be greatly appreciated, so that the public has enough time and we have enough time to dig in on the details and that we do another round of notifications to community associations to on our broad city blast, etc.

We're looking at the 15th, but if we can put it out sooner, we'll certainly do that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

So we now welcome uh Jean Booth, who is the director of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion.

And we also welcome Dr.

Patricia Morgan, who is the consultant supporting this effort.

Welcome to you both, and we're excited to hear about this Jedi Strategic Plan update.

Thank you very much, and good evening, uh, Mayor Ashton and Council.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight and your patience.

Um, and as you mentioned, I'm Jean Booth, this is Dr.

Patricia Morgan, and who's been leading this strategic planning.

Tonight we're gonna bring you preliminary findings update, and we're here to share what we've learned, but also to get some feedback as we move forward.

So this is an outline that shows what we hope to talk about tonight.

Um, we'll start with a very brief background to set some context, then pause to share uh two specific questions that we'd like your input on before we go into the data.

We'll then walk you through the preliminary results from our internal and external engagement efforts, and we'll close with uh proposed new next steps and timeline and return to those same questions so that you can give us your feedback with the full picture of the data results in front of you.

So at its core, this work is about understanding where we are and charting a clear path forward, not just internally but from every angle, so that we have all of the voices represented.

We're assessing the current Jedi landscape across city operations and the community.

We're identifying strengths and gaps and using what we find to develop this actionable five-year strategic roadmap with very measurable outcomes.

Uh we hope to have a stronger organizational culture, deeper community trust, equitable service delivery across all populations, and a Jedi framework that is sustainable because it is integrated into how the city operates, that it's not treated as a separate initiative, but it's really woven into the fabric of how services are developed and provided to the communities.

That it's not treated as a separate initiative, but it's really woven into the fabric of how services are developed and provided to the communities.

This is not a report that's going to sit on a shelf, it's a living plan that is designed to guide decisions and to hold us accountable for real system real change.

All right, this slide briefly shows the work that we've done, which has been a lot.

It moved quickly and deliberately.

Um, following the mayor and council work session that we had, we um launched the organizational-wide staff survey and completed employee focused groups.

In April, we conducted the external community listening sessions, and tonight in very early June, we're back before you with what we found.

So four plus months from start to find uh to where we are today, uh, just reflects the urgency that we feel and that we know that you feel around this work.

So our engagement strategy was built around five pillars.

I'm gonna go through them really briefly, but they are very important.

We um informed the public about what our goals were.

We then consulted, gathering feedback through all of the different mechanisms internally and externally.

We involved the internal and external stakeholders in deepening our understanding of what that feedback truly means so that we had some clarity.

We're now moving into the collaboration phase where we're going to be using the data that are and to co-develop priorities, recommendations, and accountability measures, and ultimately our goal is to empower.

So using this strategic plan to give staff and residents a genuine, genuine role in shaping policies and practices that will affect their lives.

So tonight's conversation is a part of that collaborative phase, and what you share with us tonight will be incorporated into the plan.

So before we go into the data, we want to put out our first our two questions to you so that you they can anchor everything that you hear from us tonight.

First, we're asking if you support conducting additional community outreach before we finalize the strategic plan, and the data will uh reveal why that we believe that that's necessary.

And second, um, if you do agree, are there specific groups or communities that you would like us to prioritize in this next round of engagement?

So we'll come back to those questions after we reviewed the data.

So now I'm gonna turn it to Dr.

Morgan who's going to walk us through the framework and preliminary findings.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Thank you for having me.

Um, as you can see from this framework, we presented this framework when we met in May, and we were guided by some of the feedback, um, all of the feedback that you all provided to us, especially with trying to target those groups that were underserve and usually underrepresented.

Um, and so we conducted multiple rounds of engagement efforts, which we'll present tonight, and then um we also had inclusive practices as well as uh if anyone wanted to make ADA our accommodations requests, we also did that as well.

And so we'll be presenting some of the findings for tonight.

So let's go to the next slide.

All right.

So right now you'll have what's completed on the left-hand column.

So far, we've completed um internal staff surveys.

We had over 200 participants completed.

We had more that started on the back end, we can see the number of um participants that start, but we had 200 over 200 that were completed.

We also completed seven internal um staff focused groups across 13 departments representing over 76, 705 participants, and we completed the data analysis in the cross-tab breakdown, which we'll share when we dig a little bit deeper into the quantitative data.

In progress, we have um we're gonna continue with your approval with mayor and council interviews as well as extending the external community focused groups, and I'll share some of the numbers of the sample size that we have right now.

All right.

Now we're gonna go into the internal engagement efforts.

I'm going to first draw your attention to the staff survey, and then we'll go into some of the focus groups and listening sessions.

All right, with the staff survey, we had 210 responses.

We had um an average response rate across all divisions of 38.3%.

Every department exceeded a 30% participation rate, which is meaningful and signals our engagement and the community, the staff's engagement in this process.

By role, we had 43% mid-level employees completed, 22% supervisors and lead, 15% from the city's manager office and directors, 14% frontline, and 6% for the leadership team.

We also heard from every organ, every um level of the organization.

All right, so we're gonna first go into some of our areas of strength.

These four numbers represent real organizational strength.

So I want you all to be very proud of these numbers, and then we'll dig a little bit where we have to do some of the work.

And I also want to name what some of this means before going on.

Um 82% of staff said that they feel valued and respected by their colleagues.

69% said that they could be their authentic self at work.

Though I do want to flag right now that we'll also go into the CRAST tabulation that we conducted across role, race, and gender, which was something that deliberately came from this from the council.

And so I want to flag that for you.

So we'll come back to that.

Um 71% feel that their voice is heard in the decision making process, and 75% say their department is actively working to retain diverse staff.

Beyond the four metrics, we all also had some open-ended responses and had a lot of great qualitative feedback from that.

Um, three additional strengths worth highlighting from that is um they noted that Miss Jean Booth, the existing and accessibility of the Jedi director is to be compet commended.

Um, and they cited her frequently throughout the survey as well as in the focus group, and they see that her presence as a signal that the JET that the Jedi work that we're doing is a genuine priority and not just a policy policy statement.

The staff also recognize the equity impact statement process that is embedded into the budget process and policy review as concrete structural achievements.

And among leaders specifically, 98% feel confident in creating inclusive team environments.

But we're gonna get into what the staff say as well.

So I just want to flag that for you.

Um 82% feel supported by CD leadership and advancing Jedi priorities.

So that is a strong, um, some strong values to and foundation to build on.

So we have meaningful positives, and this is going to help us set the baseline against some of the gaps that I'll discuss.

So let's go to the next slide.

All right, so um, this was something that came um after the March 2nd meeting.

We went back to the Jedi Equity team and we wanted to make sure that we added those questions in that were specific to the in respect to intersectionality that the board brought up.

The mayor and council brought up at the last meeting.

And so um the citywide numbers that we saw on the last slide tell one story, but this story tells a a little different story.

Um, as requested by you all, when we disaggregate the data, we have significant disparities that are emerging.

And these five are some of the major ones.

Frontline staff scored significantly lower than managers on seven out of the eight program areas that we measured, and that was internal Jedi communication, external Jedi communication, hiring and retention, language services, disability accommodation, engagement with diverse communities, using data to identify disparities and training.

So out of those eight topics, the frontline staff scored significantly lower on seven out of the eight program, meaning that the employees that are closest to the residents and service delivery are the least connected to Jedi efforts and most likely to report experiencing discrimination.

Women reported microaggressions at nearly twice the rate of men, 48 versus 27%, and feel less valued and less heard than their male colleagues.

Black and African American employees reported low rate lower ratings on authenticity and voice and higher rates of both discrimination and microaggression, and Hispanic and Latino employees reported the highest discrimination and microaggression rates of any group and the largest gap on equal access to advancement opportunities.

And employees in their first year reported significantly lower scores on hiring practice, language access accommodations, and community engagement, um, as this may be, they may not understand what services are available right now.

So now let's go into some of the um our survey findings and some of the gaps that we that we feel that we need to address, and we've brought this to the equity um champions.

Training gap is by far one of the most significant findings.

Only 34% of staff reported that their departments offered any type of Jedi training.

Um, and we'll also talk about what the leader said in this one.

And so we did uh we we dug a little bit deeper inside of our uh listening session and focus groups to find out what they're looking for, and they say they want in in-person interactive training, sort of shorter sessions that fit into their work schedules, scenario, and role-based content.

So one of our recommendations is to move training from awareness to application.

They want to know what happens when I experience or I witness someone experiencing a microaggression, not tell me what a microaggression is, the technical definition.

And then they also want specific training topics such as um bias, respectful communication, microaggressions, conflict resolution, and general team dynamics.

And let's talk about some inclusion opportunities.

The survey um results also focus on um accessibility, and we show moderate performance here.

61% agree that their departments provide accommodations for both visible and invisible disability.

I do want to note that only 5% of the respondents reported having either a visible and invisible disability, um, and 11% selected the button that they preferred not to answer.

So we wanted to dig into that a little bit deeper to see, and we we did during the focus group what was going on with that question, and I'll I'll explain a little bit more over there.

Um, 61% says language services are provided when needed.

However, all of the group says that their accommodation requests starts with their supervisor and not HR.

So it's inconsistent across the board.

So your level of inclusion, accommodation, um, and those things are dependent on the supervisor that you have, the manager that you have.

Um, for example, staff reported delays in receiving some aeronautic equipment or even with medical documentation because that's a process that doesn't go through HR at this moment.

Um, language access emerges as a critical gap in every focus group that we interacted with with the public.

Um, the current internal language bank system, they say is slow.

It places burden on the bilingual staff.

They are provided a stipend, but um there's not a centralized bank of who the um trained uh translators are, and so most people go to their favorite person, and that person ends up translating everything and you know, having to do a lot of work.

Um, language line exists also, we found out, but it's difficult to use and it's not well publicized.

So staff default to using their personal phones, Google Translate to assist residents in crisis situations, such as eviction proceedings, which can be very timely, um, and they they want better um support there.

Um there's also no centralized directory, I believe I said that uh with of multilingual staff, and they noted that one rec registration system has no language preference prompt.

Um, so staff can't proactively identify residents who need translation services.

All right, now we're getting ready to go into some of the top barriers that um leaders uh felt.

Leaders said that 49% of leaders said that they had unclear expectations from senior leadership.

Um, time constraint was 49%, unclear expectation, 51%, insufficient data, 40%, limited resources, 35%.

But they noted that it wasn't just money, staffing was a huge concern.

Um so they wanted to wanted that to be addressed as well.

So leaders want to do this work, but they don't have clarity on what's expected or the tools to implement it.

Next.

Now we'll go into um one of the the major themes that came up with um shared organizational definition of Jedi.

So during our focus groups that we conducted in early April, we had over 70 participants across all levels in department.

Overall attendance was strong in six out of the seven groups.

We are recommending in today's recommendation at the end to open up two more staff sessions for those that were unable to fall into the seven that we conducted earlier.

And so here are some of the themes.

Um there's no shared definition of Jedi.

Most frontline staff have never heard of the acronym before, and there's no common language or role-specific model that tells, for example, park workers, police officers, administrative assistance, what Jedi looks like in their work.

So they did have this in our research of past um programs.

They all uh some were aware of it, but most frontline staff had not had never seen this.

Um so this, of course, is a foundational gap without shared not shared understanding and no consistent training program.

We can't have a way to actually implement a strategic plan.

Next, um, the next theme was focused on staff experience in the workplace.

As I stated earlier, it's entirely dependent and determined by their immediate supervisor, not by the organization.

Where supervisors model inclusive practices, staff feel valued, they feel that they have psychological safety.

Where they don't, staff hesitate to even raise concerns and feel that issues go undressed.

Process also we had these microcultures that were being produced because of this, um, because we don't have a Jedi identity.

And Jedi is something that cannot happen in teams on some teams and not happen in others.

All right, the third theme, um, and most consistent across all findings, as I stated, that training exists, but they didn't find it useful.

And then the fourth.

Yeah.

Yeah, we did this one already.

Yeah.

Oh, no more.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

And leaders genuinely believe that Jedi efforts are underway and moving forward.

However, staff experience those same efforts as unclear, not connected to their daily work.

Um, so this isn't about the leaders are not being um honest about their their feelings that they're able to implement Jedi and create these safe spaces.

Um, but what we notice when we look at the roles is that as you start at the top, the leaders feel that they can do it.

But as you get to frontline staff, when they start questioning about Jedi, its implementation, what does it look like in practice?

It's the number goes down drastically.

So it's not that anyone's being dishonest.

I think the leaders think that they can do it.

They just want um accountability and want to know how to do it and the tools to do it.

And then we also had additional internal focus group findings.

Um, one of the big ones was psychological safety.

This varies across group, um, psychological safety, as you all know, is that shared belief for people to feel that it is safe for them to speak up, that speak up culture to raise concerns, um, to be honest without fear of retaliation or judgment.

Um, and we saw meaningful variation in the sense of that across the focus groups.

Um, some groups were forthcoming, and um other groups said that it depended on their managers.

They were really afraid of retaliation.

Um, even some noting that they appreciated having the focus group and they did not participate in the survey because they did not know if the survey would get back to anyone.

And so that was a huge concern and something that we wanted to ensure that we we kept those results confidential, even when we share with our equity champions the breakdown.

We don't show like departments, small departments and such, we bulk them together so that it's um not easy to identify what's being said by departments.

Um second, Jedi is seen or why the experience is compliance rather than culture.

Staff described it in terms of training, initiative, and external mandates, not as a value.

Um, and so how the city hires, how it supervised, how it evaluates performance.

So until it lives in those core functions, then we're gonna have um Jedi seen as more compliance than culture.

And lastly, um, one that came up in almost every group is the federal climate is creating real and practical uncertainty.

Um, for example, grant applications are navigating DEI terminology.

So there's some efforts that we have here to have inclusive practices with grants, but they are being um limited because of the um current federal mandate.

So they want to know how does the work that how is the work that we're doing right now aligned with the current federal mandates.

All right, now we're going to go to our external efforts, and this is where we are looking for your feedback on how to continue supporting our engaging some of the groups that we mentioned earlier.

All right.

So on this slide, you can see our target number for each of our groups were 10 to 12.

Um, and you can see how many we have on the external side for um seniors and targeted groups.

I think that's the only one that we had enough to have sufficient um summaries from because we had enough people in that group.

Um, but there were others where we only had one participant show up.

Um, but we also accommodated members of the community if they were unable to join one of the sessions or they fit across multiple sessions.

We held private interviews with them as well so that we could hear their voice.

And some participants didn't want to share their voice in a group, and so we were able to accommodate them that way.

Um, we also conducted individual um mayor and council interviews, and we were asking to continue with that as well.

Um, but we are also asking to continue with the um the additional focus groups, for example, the education groups, housing, faith, business, and small, and maybe another round of um participants with disabilities as well.

All right, so first I'm gonna give Hugh the summary from the mayor and council interviews.

Um, there's five themes that came from here across all the participants that were um that held individual interviews with us.