Tag Archives: Planning

Adam Pagnucco, County Executive, Nancy Floreen, planning

The County Executive’s Least Known Power

By Adam Pagnucco.

Montgomery County’s Charter lays out the County Executive’s powers and responsibilities.  The best known include nominating department heads, drafting recommended operating and capital budgets, vetoing legislation, representing the county in public and in Annapolis and directing the operations of county government.  It’s a powerful office.  But the least known, and one of the most interesting, powers of the Executive doesn’t appear in the charter and has not been used in more than thirty years.  If it is exercised by the next Executive, its use could have a significant impact on the county’s future direction.

Land use is a huge issue in county government.  It is largely the province of the County Council and the Planning Board.  The board makes many recommendations to the council on master plans, zoning, impact taxes, transportation projects, its own agency budget and numerous other matters.  In serving in its advisory capacity, the board’s recommendations are subject to final action by the council.  But the board has its own powers too, especially in deciding preliminary plans, site plans and other development applications.  Individual projects need to conform to applicable master plans, statutes and regulations but it is the board that decides how and whether they do.  That’s an enormous amount of authority resting with the board.

The five Planning Board Members are appointed to staggered terms by the County Council.  Because of the board’s power and influence, these appointments are taken very seriously by the council and everyone else with an interest in land use decisions.  But here is something that relatively few people have known about until now:

The County Executive can veto Planning Board appointments.

Maryland Land Use Code Ann. § 15-103, which we reprint below, lays out the process by which Planning Board appointments are made.

Note that SEVEN of the nine votes on the County Council are required to override an Executive’s veto of an appointment.  Under the county charter, six votes are required to override an Executive veto of a bill or budget item.

The last time we know of an Executive vetoing a Planning Board appointment occurred in 1986.  At that time, the council appointed Rosalie Silverberg, a civic activist from Bethesda, to the board.  County Executive Charles Gilchrist vetoed the appointment because the other four board members were also from Bethesda and the Executive desired geographic diversity on the board.  So the council appointed attorney Nancy Floreen, who then lived in Silver Spring, to the board instead.  (That turned out to be a momentous decision as Floreen would later go on to be a hugely influential four-term County Council Member and chair of the council’s Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee.)

The Executive is not commonly regarded as a major player in county land use decisions as the County Council and the Planning Board have direct authority over them.  But a determined Executive would only need three allies on the County Council to exert control over the Planning Board through his or her veto power.  Such control would not be absolute; the Executive can only veto whereas the council alone can nominate.  But it’s easy to see how Planning Board appointments could be high stakes, political confrontations in such a scenario.  And when politics gets involved, well… who knows what could happen?

The point here is that an Executive’s land use views matter and he or she has the power to make them stick.  Whatever your views on the subject, that is worth remembering in the voting booth.

Share
Montgomery County, planning

Montgomery County Land Use 101

Today, I am pleased to present a guest post by Del. Marc Korman about former Planning Board Chair Royce Hanson’s new book on the history of planning in Montgomery County.

Rumors abound that there could be more than 50 candidates running for the Montgomery County Council in the next election cycle (after attending the recent Montgomery County Democratic Party Spring ball, I think that could be an under-estimate).  I would recommend that each of them dive into Suburb: Planning Politics and the Public Interest, by Royce Hanson.

Royce Hanson is a legendary figure in Montgomery County.  He chaired the Planning Board from 1972 to 1980 and was brought back in as something of an elder statesman from 2006 to 2010 to clean-up improprieties fond related to development in Clarksburg.  His most lauded accomplishment is the establishment of the Agricultural Reserve which covers about one-third of Montgomery County although he oversaw numerous sector and master plans during his two tenures.  Mr. Hanson has had less success as a political candidate in the County.

Suburb is closely related to a series of speeches Mr. Hanson gave at the Planning Board Department in 2014 and 2015, which can be watched online and may be more accessible for some than the book.  Hanson’s book—like the lectures—tells the story of planning in Montgomery County essentially from the establishment of the bicounty agencies Washington Suburban Sanitation Commission and Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (the Planning Board) in the 1910s virtually up until the present.  Hanson sees County land use through three lenses.

First, land use decisions are usually the outcome of the back and forth between what he calls the “Miniature Republic”—homeowners, taxpayers–and the “Commercial Republic”—major land owners and developers.  At different times and in different locations, the power rests more heavily with one than the other.

Second, he traces land use decisions through several political regimes in the County’s history, which will be of particular interest to many local readers: The [Blair] Lee regime dominated by an insider political machine; the builders and the bar regime in which land use attorneys controlled the planning process; the progressive regime that emerged from the new Executive form of government in the 1970s, which he views himself as a product of; and the current “pure political” regime which Hanson views as lacking a cohesive vision for County land use.

Third, Hanson sees ultimate planning decisions as the place where the logic of consequentiality—the more technical and planning-based logic of bureaucrats–meets the logic of appropriateness—the politician’s changes to satisfy certain parties and make planning decisions more palatable.

The book marches through a number of “case studies” beginning with the 1964 General Plan, known as Wedges and Corridors; reimagining Bethesda and Friendship Heights for Metro; the resurgence of Silver Spring; updating White Flint for the 21st century; development of corridor cities such as Gaithersburg, Rockville, Montgomery Village, and Germantown; the huge and scandalous errors with Clarksburg development; the creation of the Agricultural Reserve; and the growth policy regularly updated by the Planning Board and County Council and now called the Subdivision Staging Policy.  Each of these chapters is rich with detail, but at times it feels as though you are just reading a series of facts and events as opposed to any type of analysis.  There are insights about what political and planning compromises worked (and sometimes didn’t work) in specific locations in Montgomery County at particular times, but broader conclusions about planning and process are hard to discern.

Indeed, Hanson even recognizes this late in the book when he concedes that it “is hazardous to overgeneralize from the experience of Montgomery County”, although he goes on to say that examples, analogies, insights, and more can be drawn and applied elsewhere, which is true in the broad sense that another place could redevelop a suburban strip mall near transit, come up with transferable development rights, or target specific neighborhoods through sector plans.  As someone more interested in the Montgomery County story, this approach helped focused on facts and events suited me fine but may be seen as a shortcoming to others.  Indeed, while as I said I think this book is important to read for County Council candidates, I’m not sure who else besides them, other local elected officials, and committed local activists would really appreciate this book.  I certainly did, but I’m in one of those relatively narrow buckets.

Hanson may have been torn between writing a history of Montgomery County planning politics and case studies that could potentially be used to teach planners anywhere and sometimes he did not find the balance he was looking for.  Those interested in the history will want to know who the unnamed councilmembers were who voted against appointing Norman Christellar Planning Board Chair and planning students will probably want to know why the failed plan to build another Mall of America in Silver Spring is relevant to their studies.  I, of course, understand why a pure Montgomery County history book was not written, as it would clearly have a small audience.  It has also been pointed out to me that the history of the County’s actions over race are almost entirely omitted.  I am sure others who lived through some of these planning efforts will note their own omissions.

Still, for you local history buffs there are plenty of interesting facts.  For example, County Executives used to control some appointments to the Planning Board and, for a time under County Executive Kramer, they could revise plans before they went to the Council.  Neil Potter devolved these powers back to the Council after defeating Kramer.  Hanson is also open with his criticism of some local County players and even relies on Adam Pagnucco research in making his attacks.  Former Councilwoman Idamae Garrott comes off as particularly responsive to the current mood of the best organized voters.

If you sit in lots of meetings about sector plans, dream about being on the County Council, or read blogs like this one, then this book is for you.  It covers interesting history and can be a good reference regarding particular parts of the County.   But for those not fitting that description, this book and its detailed history of Montgomery County land use may be more of a slog.  For the right audience, this book can provide a useful baseline of how Montgomery County developed over the last century and why.

Share
Economy, Montgomery County

Contemplating Life Inside An Economic Engine

1 Comment

Political and business leaders often refer to Montgomery County as the “economic engine” of Maryland. Interesting words, “economic engine.”

In the 1950s and 1960s, Montgomery County was transforming from farmland to suburbia. I doubt that any of my neighbors in those years imagined that the county would ever be called an economic engine.

In 1950, the county population was 164,000. By 1970, population more than tripled, to 525,000. People were moving to Montgomery County by the thousands because it was a good, safe place to live, with excellent schools. And they could have a yard for the kids and the dog.

The fast pace of growth continued through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s–not only residential development, but construction of shopping malls and industrial parks. The county became a place to work, as well as a place to live. Looking back on those decades, Montgomery County was an engine of constant real estate development.

By the turn of the century, Bethesda was on its way to becoming an “edge city,” with tall office and residential buildings. Cutting-edge industry emerged along the I-270 corridor in Rockville and Gaithersburg, and residential development extended to Germantown.

2014 And The Future

Now, in the year 2014, with a  population of one million, and more jobs than any other jurisdiction in Maryland, we’re not sure if Montgomery County is destined to be a city, a suburb, or something in between. Jobs are a critical concern, but housing is also essential, especially a range of affordable housing for everyone from retail and service workers, to teachers and police officers, to the very affluent.

Taking stock as we approach the 2014 election, and looking to the future, residents might ask the following question:

Do Montgomery County voters want to live inside a constantly growing economic engine?

My own instinctive answer is, “No, Montgomery residents want to preserve, as much as possible, a more bucolic, suburban sense of place.”

At the same time, I wonder, “Maybe we’re too far down the road to urbanization to turn back. We have more jobs than any other place in Maryland. Our population is diverse and multilingual. Wouldn’t it be cool to become a 21st century, cosmopolitan city.”

Imagine a prosperous urban center, combining the best of Montreal and Silicon Valley.

Montgomery County residents and leaders haven’t had much time to catch their breath and fully consider the choices. Growing from 165,000 to one million in six decades, it’s been a constant challenge just for basic infrastructure to keep up with population and job growth.

Past economic growth has been truly impressive, but we have no reason to project that kind of growth into the future. We can’t predict whether future development will overwhelm us, or go elsewhere.

For one thing, the federal government remains the most important economic influence in the Washington, D.C., region. If the federal government did not exist, Montgomery County would still be farmland.

The federal government remains the largest single employer in Montgomery County. But consider that federal job growth has probably peaked. Many workers in both public and private sectors will be replaced by computers and robots. We may well lose jobs faster than we can create them.

No matter what politicians say at election time, it’s not within the power of any one local leader, or even all local leaders acting together, to create private sector jobs.

If economic and job growth is Plan A, we should also have a Plan B. Plan A only works if the American economy returns to the status quo ante 2006. If not, if there’s been an economic paradigm shift, we’ll need a Plan B. What that plan would involve is beyond the scope of this article.

21st Century Infrastructure

Based on geography and infrastructure in the Maryland-D.C.-Virginia region, it looks to me like the economic engine of the future might be the I-95 corridor.

It’s shaped like a barbell, anchored in the south by the federal government and major universities in Washington. In the north it’s anchored by major universities and medical centers in Baltimore, and the Port of Baltimore. In between, along the highway and railroad infrastructure linking the two cities, there’s the University of Maryland at College Park, the National Security Agency at Fort Meade, and importantly, BWI Airport.

Now look west, to Montgomery County. The county is not far from the I-95 corridor, but it’s not exactly at the center of the action. You might almost say — in fact, I will say it — Montgomery County looks perfectly located to be a major bedroom community for the Baltimore-Washington corridor, particularly at the southern end.

Historically, major cities developed around transportation by water, railroad or airport. In the 21st century, can Montgomery County expect to be a major economic player without an airport? The county also does not have a professional sports team, or a major research university, a medical school, law school, or even a four-year college.

We’ve had our hands full in Montgomery County building a basic suburban infrastructure of schools, highways, and mass transit.

If we aspire to be a cosmopolitan center with population density and economic growth, we need to commit ourselves to building other kinds of infrastructure, such as a major airport and a university.

The growing Baltimore-Washington region is going to need another modern airport eventually, I’m thinking. Dulles is far to the southwest and BWI is to the north. Reagan National is reduced to boutique-VIP  airport status for obvious security reasons.

But finding a site for a major airport in Montgomery County is a problem that boggles the mind. It would be an epic battle. Possibly Frederick County would like an airport to support the economic growth of both counties. Or possibly not. All in all, an airport to serve the western part of the metro area seems like an unlikely dream.

Besides an airport, it’s hard to imagine a city of  one million, a center of innovation and scientific development, without a university. Lack of affordable, local higher education is a problem for both middle-class families and business development.

Montgomery College and the Universities at Shady Grove fill part of the need, but they’re less than a shadow of the excellent higher education available in Baltimore and Washington.

So what does Montgomery County have to attract businesses? A great public school system, relatively high costs of land, and inconvenient airport access. Seems to me the I-95 corridor might be a better choice for many companies.

Housing, Business and Jobs

It doesn’t make sense for jurisdictions within the region to compete for all types of development. No one can predict the future, but we’ll probably have more than enough growth to go around over the next 50 years. Might Montgomery add another half-million people? Another million? It’s impossible to say.

Since the pressures for growth are mostly beyond our control, wouldn’t it be best to allow the region to grow organically, rather than trying to rush growth, or block it?

Maybe the I-95 corridor has an advantage when it comes to development of business and commerce. Maybe Montgomery County has an advantage as an excellent place to live.

When good companies want to locate in Montgomery County, we should welcome them. But it doesn’t make sense to encourage growth on steroids, or to get into a bidding war with other counties.

Jobs are a critical need, but so is housing. The exact location of jobs is not critical, as long as they’re within commuting distance. Montgomery residents moved here because they want a good place to live and excellent schools. They knew from the start that they’d be commuting. They don’t necessarily need their jobs to be in the county.

Fortunately, the Intercounty Connector and the Purple Line will connect Montgomery County with the I-95 corridor in both north and south. The improved transportation network will make it easier for people who live in Montgomery to get to jobs in Prince George’s, Anne Arundel, and Baltimore, and vice versa. No need to treat our neighbors as rivals. A cooperative approach would enable the region to grow organically, with a balance of businesses for people to work in, and houses for people to live in. It’s a win-win.

Election year 2014 is an opportunity for decision-making. We only get this opportunity once every four years. But I’m afraid most residents are disengaged from politics.

Assuming that continued growth is virtually inevitable, the question is:  What kind of growth and development do the people who live and vote in Montgomery County prefer, and how much? And what do the candidates think?

Is Montgomery County home sweet home, or an economic engine. Perhaps it can be both. What do you think.

Contact: BJohnHayden@icloud.com

Share