Friday, July 24, 2009
Burbanks Scheduled For Demolition Tomorrow
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Setting the Record Straight
July 16, 2009
Letter to the City of Rockville Mayor and Council:
I am writing to you today in response to questions raised at the Mayor and Council meeting on July 13, 2009 and subsequent email communications.
At the citizen’s forum, I spoke regarding the negotiations between the West End Citizen’s Association (WECA) and Montgomery Housing Partnership (MHP) regarding the development at Beall’s Grant II. I also sent a letter to the Mayor and Council on July 13th supporting the comments I made at the citizen’s forum.
Since there seems to be some confusion regarding the status of our negotiations, I thought I would provide additional information for clarity.
1. MHP does not have an agreement with WECA. WECA drafted a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that outlined the details that both parties agreed to on building parameters, residency requirements and community impact of the project. MHP agreed to each point in the MOU. WECA has signed this agreement, MHP has not. To date, MHP has not provided an answer as to why they refuse to sign the MOU, despite repeated requests.
2. The MOU was presented to the WECA general membership and approved. The
WECA general membership voted 62-1-2 to approve the MOU which specifies the parameters for WECA support for the project. This MOU clearly indicates the conditions under which WECA will support MHP and the Beall’s Grant II project. However as mentioned above, MHP has declined to sign this agreement. Without MHP’s signature, we have no agreement. Without an agreement, there is no support. In addition, the original motion to approve the MOU was amended to include a motion that the Mayor and Council be made aware that MHP not only modified our original document with “poison pill” amendments, but also that they were misrepresenting the status of our negotiations – that we had an agreement when in fact there is no signed agreement.
3. There is great concern in the West End over concentration of affordable housing. The issue of increased density both at Beall’s Grant I and II, as well as the development of future sites in and near the West End, was raised repeatedly during our negotiations. MHP agreed to cap the number of units at the Beall’s Grant site and not acquire any future sites for development in a specific geographic area. (An exception was made for the acquisition of individual MPDUs). Language that spells out their commitment is included in section VI of the MOU.
4. The impact of additional development in the West End is also a concern. Beall Elementary especially is faced with significant enrollment over their capacity. Additional portable classrooms will be added this year. Traffic along residential streets continues to increase and the city has even resorted to speed cameras to provide additional pedestrian safety. As such, the limits MHP agreed to regarding future development are crucial to minimizing the impact on the community.
I have included the last two points as the conversation subsequent to the June 30th meeting has centered mainly on the fact that MHP and WECA “agree” on the size of the Beall’s Grant II building. And while we all know size does in fact matter, in the context of this development, it’s not the only thing.
For MHP to claim we have an agreement is disingenuous at best and untrue in fact. Yet this is precisely what they have done; to residents within the West End, and to the Mayor and Council and to the City Staff. And is exactly the tactic that the general membership voted to communicate to the Mayor and Council.
If in fact, we have an agreement, as MHP claims, then I ask – why not sign the agreement?
Mayor Hoffman, you so rightly asked this very question at the Mayor and Council meeting this past Monday.
WECA has committed to provide their support of this project only upon MHP signing the MOU; not for an “agreement-in-fact.”
MHP cannot be allowed to choose which sections of the MOU they wish to uphold. Each section is important to the City and to the West End citizens – not just the details on the size of the building.
Our agreement contains concessions on both sides. WECA compromised on the size of the building and number of units and MHP compromised on limiting future expansion and resident requirements. Allowing MHP to proceed with a building that only reflects the compromises WECA agreed to without holding them to the concessions on their side is not the right and honorable thing to do.
Sincerely,
Susan Prince
Susan Prince
President
West End Citizen’s Association
Letter to the City of Rockville Mayor and Council:
I am writing to you today in response to questions raised at the Mayor and Council meeting on July 13, 2009 and subsequent email communications.
At the citizen’s forum, I spoke regarding the negotiations between the West End Citizen’s Association (WECA) and Montgomery Housing Partnership (MHP) regarding the development at Beall’s Grant II. I also sent a letter to the Mayor and Council on July 13th supporting the comments I made at the citizen’s forum.
Since there seems to be some confusion regarding the status of our negotiations, I thought I would provide additional information for clarity.
1. MHP does not have an agreement with WECA. WECA drafted a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that outlined the details that both parties agreed to on building parameters, residency requirements and community impact of the project. MHP agreed to each point in the MOU. WECA has signed this agreement, MHP has not. To date, MHP has not provided an answer as to why they refuse to sign the MOU, despite repeated requests.
2. The MOU was presented to the WECA general membership and approved. The
WECA general membership voted 62-1-2 to approve the MOU which specifies the parameters for WECA support for the project. This MOU clearly indicates the conditions under which WECA will support MHP and the Beall’s Grant II project. However as mentioned above, MHP has declined to sign this agreement. Without MHP’s signature, we have no agreement. Without an agreement, there is no support. In addition, the original motion to approve the MOU was amended to include a motion that the Mayor and Council be made aware that MHP not only modified our original document with “poison pill” amendments, but also that they were misrepresenting the status of our negotiations – that we had an agreement when in fact there is no signed agreement.
3. There is great concern in the West End over concentration of affordable housing. The issue of increased density both at Beall’s Grant I and II, as well as the development of future sites in and near the West End, was raised repeatedly during our negotiations. MHP agreed to cap the number of units at the Beall’s Grant site and not acquire any future sites for development in a specific geographic area. (An exception was made for the acquisition of individual MPDUs). Language that spells out their commitment is included in section VI of the MOU.
4. The impact of additional development in the West End is also a concern. Beall Elementary especially is faced with significant enrollment over their capacity. Additional portable classrooms will be added this year. Traffic along residential streets continues to increase and the city has even resorted to speed cameras to provide additional pedestrian safety. As such, the limits MHP agreed to regarding future development are crucial to minimizing the impact on the community.
I have included the last two points as the conversation subsequent to the June 30th meeting has centered mainly on the fact that MHP and WECA “agree” on the size of the Beall’s Grant II building. And while we all know size does in fact matter, in the context of this development, it’s not the only thing.
For MHP to claim we have an agreement is disingenuous at best and untrue in fact. Yet this is precisely what they have done; to residents within the West End, and to the Mayor and Council and to the City Staff. And is exactly the tactic that the general membership voted to communicate to the Mayor and Council.
If in fact, we have an agreement, as MHP claims, then I ask – why not sign the agreement?
Mayor Hoffman, you so rightly asked this very question at the Mayor and Council meeting this past Monday.
WECA has committed to provide their support of this project only upon MHP signing the MOU; not for an “agreement-in-fact.”
MHP cannot be allowed to choose which sections of the MOU they wish to uphold. Each section is important to the City and to the West End citizens – not just the details on the size of the building.
Our agreement contains concessions on both sides. WECA compromised on the size of the building and number of units and MHP compromised on limiting future expansion and resident requirements. Allowing MHP to proceed with a building that only reflects the compromises WECA agreed to without holding them to the concessions on their side is not the right and honorable thing to do.
Sincerely,
Susan Prince
Susan Prince
President
West End Citizen’s Association
WECA President's letter to Mayor and Council
To: City of Rockville Mayor and Council
I am writing to you on behalf of the West End Citizen’s Association (WECA) regarding the recent negotiations with Montgomery Housing Partnership (MHP).
As you know, a WECA committee made up of diverse group of residents of the West End met with representatives of MHP beginning in December 2008 and continuing through June of 2009.
Our goal and intent was to negotiate an acceptable design and development for the Beall’s Grant II housing project.
Our efforts culminated in a joint meeting between the WECA committee and MHP on June 17, 2009. At that meeting representatives of MHP reviewed and verbally agreed to details of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that covered the design, resident requirements and community impact of the project. Dennis Cain, Chairman of the committee then signed the MOU and presented it to MHP for signature. MHP chose not to sign the MOU at that time. A copy of that agreement was also provided to the Mayor and Council. (An additional copy is attached for your reference.)
This document not only covers mass and size of the proposed building, but also the community-impacting design details of the building (setbacks, townhouse fronts, no access on Beall Avenue, mansard roof, etc.), the demographics of future residents (i.e., income levels, preference for teachers, firefighters, etc.), commitment not to further expand or develop this site in the future, and safeguards against MHP further concentrating affordable housing within the immediate vicinity. These details go directly to the issues of affordable housing concentration in the West End and overcrowding in our schools – ongoing issues of concern that sparked the outcry over the original proposal approved by the Planning Commission in July 2008. Issues that you are likely to hear more of in the coming months.
The details in the MOU represent concessions on both sides and must be viewed as a whole. MHP and the City cannot leave the door open for expansion and concentration at will or pick and choose which concessions to honor – the committee agreed to a certain number of rental units based on the understanding that MHP would agreed to requirements for prospective residents and future development within the West End.
Subsequent to the meeting on June 17th, MHP modified the signed copy of the MOU by inserting language into the MOU that the committee had rejected as beyond its purview and authority. MHP then signed this version of the document and circulated it as a final agreement. I believe the Mayor and Council have also received a copy of this “cut and paste” document.
At no time did the committee approve these modifications to the MOU and these amendments remain unacceptable to the committee.
As the committee had gone as far as it could in its negotiations with MHP, Dennis Cain and Vice Chair Bridget Newton made a presentation to the general membership of the West End Citizen’s Association on June 30, 2009. As you recall, emotions ran very high at the WECA general membership meeting in October, and a high level of interest in our negotiations has continued in the ensuing months. We had a large turnout to hear the committee’s report.
After presenting the details of the MOU, a motion was made and approved (62 for, 1 against and 2 abstentions) to support the MOU in its entirety. Not parts. Not a modified version. The WECA general membership approved the document that is attached.
MHP continues to decline to sign the MOU – despite repeated attempts and even as recently as today when I spoke with their representative, Artie Harris.
As such, WECA is unable to offer any support to MHP in the development of the Beall’s Grant II project.
Furthermore, we request that the Mayor and Council support the citizen’s of the West End and reject any forthcoming request for a letter of support by MHP until such time as this agreement is signed.
Given all the time and effort your citizens have put into this process and our efforts to negotiate in good faith, we are confident you will support our position.
Sincerely,
Susan Prince
President
West End Citizen's Association
I am writing to you on behalf of the West End Citizen’s Association (WECA) regarding the recent negotiations with Montgomery Housing Partnership (MHP).
As you know, a WECA committee made up of diverse group of residents of the West End met with representatives of MHP beginning in December 2008 and continuing through June of 2009.
Our goal and intent was to negotiate an acceptable design and development for the Beall’s Grant II housing project.
Our efforts culminated in a joint meeting between the WECA committee and MHP on June 17, 2009. At that meeting representatives of MHP reviewed and verbally agreed to details of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that covered the design, resident requirements and community impact of the project. Dennis Cain, Chairman of the committee then signed the MOU and presented it to MHP for signature. MHP chose not to sign the MOU at that time. A copy of that agreement was also provided to the Mayor and Council. (An additional copy is attached for your reference.)
This document not only covers mass and size of the proposed building, but also the community-impacting design details of the building (setbacks, townhouse fronts, no access on Beall Avenue, mansard roof, etc.), the demographics of future residents (i.e., income levels, preference for teachers, firefighters, etc.), commitment not to further expand or develop this site in the future, and safeguards against MHP further concentrating affordable housing within the immediate vicinity. These details go directly to the issues of affordable housing concentration in the West End and overcrowding in our schools – ongoing issues of concern that sparked the outcry over the original proposal approved by the Planning Commission in July 2008. Issues that you are likely to hear more of in the coming months.
The details in the MOU represent concessions on both sides and must be viewed as a whole. MHP and the City cannot leave the door open for expansion and concentration at will or pick and choose which concessions to honor – the committee agreed to a certain number of rental units based on the understanding that MHP would agreed to requirements for prospective residents and future development within the West End.
Subsequent to the meeting on June 17th, MHP modified the signed copy of the MOU by inserting language into the MOU that the committee had rejected as beyond its purview and authority. MHP then signed this version of the document and circulated it as a final agreement. I believe the Mayor and Council have also received a copy of this “cut and paste” document.
At no time did the committee approve these modifications to the MOU and these amendments remain unacceptable to the committee.
As the committee had gone as far as it could in its negotiations with MHP, Dennis Cain and Vice Chair Bridget Newton made a presentation to the general membership of the West End Citizen’s Association on June 30, 2009. As you recall, emotions ran very high at the WECA general membership meeting in October, and a high level of interest in our negotiations has continued in the ensuing months. We had a large turnout to hear the committee’s report.
After presenting the details of the MOU, a motion was made and approved (62 for, 1 against and 2 abstentions) to support the MOU in its entirety. Not parts. Not a modified version. The WECA general membership approved the document that is attached.
MHP continues to decline to sign the MOU – despite repeated attempts and even as recently as today when I spoke with their representative, Artie Harris.
As such, WECA is unable to offer any support to MHP in the development of the Beall’s Grant II project.
Furthermore, we request that the Mayor and Council support the citizen’s of the West End and reject any forthcoming request for a letter of support by MHP until such time as this agreement is signed.
Given all the time and effort your citizens have put into this process and our efforts to negotiate in good faith, we are confident you will support our position.
Sincerely,
Susan Prince
President
West End Citizen's Association
Saturday, July 4, 2009
WECA Endorses Beall's Grant II MOU
The Beall’s Grant II Committee presented the Beall's Grant II Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (see article below) at the WECA General Membership Meeting on June 30. After the presentation, the approximately sixty residents in attendance voted, nearly unanimously, to accept the terms of the MOU. Committee members explained that there are apparently two versions of the MOU at this point, the one developed by the WECA committee in conjunction with MHP and a second, later version written by MHP. This later version has been modified with the addition of a "kickout" clause. There was much confusion and discussion about this "kickout" clause added in the MHP version and this modification was rejected by the WECA membership.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)