agenda county council of anne arundel county, … · 5/18/2020 · for the purpose of designating...

AGENDA

COUNTY COUNCIL OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND

VIRTUAL COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING

Legislative Session 2020, Legislative Day No. 18

May 18, 2020 - 7:00 P.M.

A. Invocation (Haire)

B. Pledge of Allegiance

C. Open Meetings Statement

D. Ethics Statement E. Invitation to Audience F. Announcement of Items not Appearing on Agenda G. Preliminary Motion

H. Approval of Minutes

May 11, 2020 – Legislative Day No. 14




I. Introduction of Bills

BILL NO. 39-20 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE concerning: Current Expense Budget

– Fourth Quarter Fund Transfer and Supplementary Appropriations – FOR the purpose

of transferring appropriations of funds between certain offices, departments, institutions,

boards, commissions or other agencies in the general fund; making supplementary

appropriations from unanticipated revenues to certain offices, departments, institutions,

boards, commissions or other agencies in the general fund and to certain special funds of

the County government for the current fiscal year; making this ordinance an emergency

ordinance; and generally relating to transferring appropriations of funds and making

supplementary appropriations of funds to the current expense budget for the fiscal year

ending June 30, 2020.

by Ms. Pickard, Chair

(by request of the County Executive)

BILL NO. 40-20 – AN ORDINANCE concerning: Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan

FY 2021 – FY 2025 – FOR the purpose of adopting the “Anne Arundel County

Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 2025”.



Agenda

May 18, 2020 – 7:00 P.M.

BILL NO. 41-20 – AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE concerning: Proclamation of Civil

Emergency in Anne Arundel County – FOR the purpose of amending the termination

date established by Bill No. 24-20; and making this Ordinance an emergency measure.

by Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler, and Ms. Haire

J. Introduction of Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. 16-20 – RESOLUTION urging the County Executive to Reopen Anne

Arundel County

by Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler, and Ms. Haire

K. Public Hearings and Call of Bills for Final Reading and Vote

INTENT TO EXCEED CONSTANT YIELD

BILL NO. 13-20 – AN ORDINANCE concerning: Finance, Taxation, and Budget and

Zoning – Commercial Revitalization Area Program – Designation of a Commercial

Revitalization Area in Harundale in Glen Burnie, Maryland – FOR the purpose of

designating an area along Ritchie Highway and Aquahart Road in Glen Burnie to be a

Commercial Revitalization Area; and generally relating to finance, taxation, and budget

and zoning.

by Ms. Pickard

BILL NO. 14-20 (Amendment Proposed) – AN ORDINANCE concerning: Finance,

Taxation, and Budget and Zoning – Commercial Revitalization Area Program –

Designation of a Commercial Revitalization Area in Marley in Glen Burnie, Maryland –

FOR the purpose of designating an area along Ritchie Highway and Mountain Road in

Glen Burnie to be a Commercial Revitalization Area; and generally relating to finance,

taxation, and budget and zoning.

by Ms. Pickard

BILL NO. 16-20 – AN ORDINANCE concerning: Zoning – Residential Districts –

Community Based Assisted Living Facilities I and II, Group Homes I and II, Recovery

Residences I and II, and Rooming Houses – For the purpose of defining community based

assisting living facilities I and II, group homes I and II, and recovery residences I and II

based on numbers of residents; amending the parking space requirements for assisted

living facilities; adding parking space requirements for community based assisted living

facilities I and II, group homes I and II, recovery residences I and II, and rooming houses;

allowing assisted living facilities as special exception use in RA residential districts;

allowing community based assisting living facilities I, group homes I, and recovery

residences I as permitted uses in residential districts; allowing community based assisting

living facilities II, group homes II, and recovery residences II as conditional uses in

residential districts; allowing rooming houses as conditional uses in R10 and R15

residential districts; adding the conditional use requirements for community based

Agenda

May 18, 2020

assisting living facilities II, group homes II, recovery residences II, and rooming houses;

making technical corrections; and generally relating to zoning.

by Mr. Volke

L. Other Business

M. Adjourn


Minutes of

Virtual Legislative Session 2020, Legislative Day No. 11

May 11, 2020 – 7:00 P.M.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Allison Pickard at 7:00 P.M. Mr. Volke

asked those listening to pause to remember those lost and those still fighting during the pandemic

and thanked front line workers. He then led a prayer of blessings and positivity, followed by

Ms. Fiedler leading the Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting was held remotely via Zoom Webinar,

beginning with roll call of all present. The Auditor’s Office was represented by the County

Auditor Susan Smith. The following members of the County Council were present:

Sarah F. Lacey First District

Allison M. Pickard Second District

Nathan Volke Third District

Andrew C. Pruski Fourth District

Amanda Fiedler Fifth District

Lisa D.B. Rodvien Sixth District

Jessica Haire Seventh District

OPEN MEETINGS ACT

JoAnne Gray, Administrative Officer, read a Statement from the County Attorney

regarding the Open Meetings Act. She stated that the Md. Open Meetings Act, a state law, requires

public meetings to be open to the public and to be “held in places reasonably accessible to

individuals who would like to attend these meetings.” [Gen’l. Prov. Art., § 3-102(c)]. The virtual

format of this meeting of the County Council is due to the COVID-19 emergency and is necessary

in light of the serious health risks associated with public gatherings, as well as the Governor’s

various Executive Orders limiting public gatherings. While a virtual meeting of this type was not

envisioned by the Open Meetings Act, steps have been taken to ensure that this virtual meeting

includes alternate accessibility features that the Open Meetings Act Compliance Board and the

Courts have reviewed and approved, such as having a call-in phone number that allows anyone

with a telephone to call and listen to the meeting, broadcasting the meeting with video and audio

on cable TV and on the Web, and allowing written public comments to the legislation be filed with

the Clerk and considered by the Council. The County Office of Law has opined that the public

access provided by this technology makes this virtual meeting reasonably accessible to the public

and therefore complies with the Open Meetings Act.

ETHICS STATEMENT

JoAnne Gray, Administrative Officer, announced that under certain circumstances members

of the public may qualify as lobbyists when they testify before the Council. If so, the law requires

that certain information be filed with the Ethics Commission. The Chairman of the Ethics

Commission has asked that those present review the Ethics Commission information in the foyer

of these Chambers. If there are any questions about lobbying requirements, speakers should contact

the Ethics Commission in the Heritage Office Complex on Riva Road.

SUSPENSION OF RULES

On motion of Ms. Rodvien, seconded by Mr. Pruski, the Council voted to suspend Rules 3-

103 and 3-106 for this meeting by the following roll call vote:

Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Haire, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Volke, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Pickard

Nay – None

On motion of Ms. Rodvien, seconded by Mr. Pruski, the Council voted to suspend Rule 3-

105 for this meeting by the following roll call vote:


Nay – None

INVITATION TO AUDIENCE

There was no public testimony submitted, and the hearing was concluded.

PRELIMINARY MOTION

On motion of Mr. Pruski, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, the Council voted that the partial

reading of any bill, resolution, minutes, or amendment constitutes the reading of the whole.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

On motion of Mr. Pruski, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, the minutes of April 20, 2020, May

1, 2020, May 4, 2020, May 6, 2020 and May 7, 2020 were approved as presented.

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

BILL NO. 38-20 – An Emergency Ordinance concerning: Residential Rent Increases during

Catastrophic Health Emergencies – For the purpose of prohibiting certain residential rent

increases during catastrophic health emergencies; providing for the termination of this

Ordinance; and making this Ordinance an emergency ordinance.

by Mr. Pruski, Ms. Rodvien and Ms. Pickard

INTRODUCTION OF RESOLUTIONS

RESOLUTION NO. 13-20 – RESOLUTION appointing a member to the Anne Arundel

County Ethics Commission



RESOLUTION NO. 14-20 – RESOLUTION approving an appointment to the Board of

Trustees for the Anne Arundel County Retirement and Pension System



RESOLUTION NO. 15-20 – RESOLUTION proposing an amendment to the Charter of

Anne Arundel County to allow the use of an emergency ordinance to address a situation

that needs immediate action

by Mr. Volke

SUSPENSION OF RULES

On motion of Ms. Rodvien, seconded by Ms. Lacey, the Council voted to suspend the rules

to hear and vote on Resolution No. 13-20 and Resolution No. 14-20.

CALL OF RESOLUTIONS FOR READING AND VOTE

RESOLUTION NO. 13-20

The Chairman called Resolution No. 13-20, Resolution nominating a member to serve on the

Anne Arundel County Ethics Commission; and the Administrative Officer read the title.

Ms. Pickard stated this is an Administration resolution. Kaley Schultze, Boards and

Commissions, accompanied by Lori Blair Klasmeier, Legislative Deputy County Attorney, Office

of Law, stated this resolution approves Daniel J. Semick, a Democrat, to serve on the County

Ethics Commission. She stated Mr. Semick is the individual the County Council chose as a

representative on the Ethics Commission. He will serve his first term which will expire April 20,

2024.

Resolution No. 13-20 was adopted by the following roll call vote:


Nay – None

RESOLUTION NO. 14-20

The Chairman called Resolution No. 14-20, Resolution approving an appointment to the

Board of Trustees for the Anne Arundel County Retirement and Pension System; and the

Administrative Officer read the title.

Ms. Pickard stated this is an Administration resolution. Kaley Schultze, Boards and

Commissions, accompanied by Lori Blair Klasmeier, Legislative Deputy County Attorney, Office

of Law, stated this resolution reappoints Mary Lou Hughes to the Anne Arundel County

Retirement and Pension System. She will serve a term ending April 30, 2023. She noted that her

resume had been provided to the Council and she was happy to answer any questions.

Resolution No. 14-20 was adopted by the following roll call vote:


Nay – None

PUBLIC HEARING AND CALL OF BILLS FOR FINAL READING AND VOTE

BILL NO 10-20

The Chairman called for the public hearing on Bill No. 10-20, An Ordinance concerning:

An Ordinance concerning: Boards, Commissions, and Similar Bodies – Commission on Disability

Issues – For the purpose of amending the composition of the Commission on Disability Issues;

amending the terms for membership on the Commission; amending the powers and duties of the

Commission; making technical corrections; and generally relating to boards, commissions, and

similar bodies; and the Administrative Officer read the title.

Kaley Schultze, Board and Commissions, accompanied by Pam Jordon, Director, Aging and

Disabilities, Joelle Ridgeway, ADA Coordinator and Lori Blair Klasmeier, Legislative Deputy

County Attorney, Office of Law, stated that the Commission was established in 1995 as a result

of advocates from the community. Since that time they have provided valuable assistance to

various administrations to create awareness of disabilities issues. She explained the changes the

bill will enact. She stated she was happy to answer questions.

Ms. Haire stated she had received information that the Commission would no longer provide

any recommendations to the County Council and would only go to the County Executive. She

asked why this communication would be ended.

Ms. Jordan stated that the way the Code is written is if there is a member of the County

Council that is on the Commission, in this case it is Ms. Lacey, so there is room for communication

through that member. She stated this would be a smoother process.

The Chairman stated there were two submissions of public testimony opposed to Bill No.

10-20. The hearing was concluded.

The Chairman called Bill No. 10-20, as amended, An Ordinance concerning: An Ordinance

concerning: Boards, Commissions, and Similar Bodies – Commission on Disability Issues; and

the Administrative Officer read a portion of the title.

Mr. Volke stated that he appreciates the efficiency aspect this bill would provide, but he is

concerned about the direct contact between the Council and the Administration. He is also not in

favor of decreasing the number of members on the Commission. He appreciates the difficulty in

filling vacancies, but he does not think that problem is solved by decreasing the number of

positions on the Commission.

Bill No. 10-20 was passed by the following roll call vote:

Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Haire, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Pickard

Nay – Mr. Volke

BILL NO. 11-20

The Chairman called for the public hearing on Bill No. 11-20, An Ordinance concerning:

Public Safety – Speed Monitoring Systems – For the purpose of authorizing the use of speed

monitoring systems in the County; and generally relating to public safety; and the Administrative

Officer read the title.

Mr. Pruski, Sponsor, stated there was a discussion on this bill at a previous work session. He

noted that speed monitoring systems are a valuable tool for public safety as well as workers. They

have shown a drastic reduction in accidents, fatalities and property damage. He stated we recently

added red light cameras and he believes we should use all available tools. Mr. Pruski stated this

is not going to be included in this year’s budget because it is not approved yet. This is enabling

legislation which he will look forward to enacting in the future. Mr. Pruski thanked the Auditor

for her blue letter about how the program would be implemented and the numerous restrictions

implemented by the State of Maryland. He asked for the Council’s support.

Pete Baron, Director, Government Affairs, accompanied by Major Ross Passman, Anne

Arundel County Police, and Lori Blair Klasmeier, Legislative Deputy County Attorney, Office of

Law, stated this issue was discussed at a previous work session and the Administration is

comfortable with the bill. He reiterated that this is not included in the next budget.

Ms. Fiedler asked Major Passman if there is a significant difference after the cameras are

installed in the amount of speeding in those areas.

Major Passman stated that he has heard that there is a significant decrease. The cameras

have signage requirements, so there is a significant reduction in the amount of speeding with both

the signage and the cameras.

Ms. Fiedler asked if he had a number of officers that are monitoring speeds in school zones

Major Passman said he did not have a specific number but they are usually running radar

checks in those zones since that is where the complaints are.

Mr. Volke asked how many citations were handed out as a result of those radar checks.

Major Passman stated he did not know the specific numbers.

Mr. Volke asked what hours these will be enforced.

Major Passman stated the cameras are only allowed during certain times of the day. They

are operational Monday through Friday from 6 A.M. to 8 P.M. year round. School does not to be

in session.

Ms. Haire asked about the signage requirements. She asked if the requirements are such that

this will not be a surprise to anyone.

Major Passman stated the signs are required by State law.

Ms. Pickard stated she has worked with Traffic Control in her district because this has been

a problem in her school zones in several areas. She is grateful that the Police are willing to patrol

the areas, but she looks forward to voting for the bill.

Ms. Fiedler stated that generally she doesn’t like speed cameras, but there are some areas in

her district that have problems with speeding and she realizes that the County spends a lot of money

on traffic calming devices. She also stated that she doesn’t want our officers sitting doing speed

monitoring when they could be used in other areas.

Mr. Volke stated that he is concerned about the number of cameras being installed. His

concern is the lack of measurable data stating this is going to work. He stated the data is usually

anecdotal. He knows this is a concern, and especially for those who have school aged children.

He thinks that speeding is a problem no matter where it occurs. He stated he is unable to support

this bill until he sees data that supports objective data driven metrics to show that this bill will be

effective.

Ms. Rodvien stated that she understands Mr. Volke’s reservations, but because this is only

enabling legislation the Council will still have the opportunity to look at data for specific locations

before they are put in place. She shares some of his concerns, but she is going to support the

legislation.

Ms. Haire stated she agrees with all of the points, but is going to fall on the side of safety of

the children. She stated she is taking Major Passman’s comments that it does reduce speeds as

enough. She is also pleased with the fact that there will be warnings prior to the camera to let

people know they are there.

The Chairman stated there was one submission of public testimony in favor of Bill No. 11-

20. The hearing was concluded.

The Chairman called Bill No. 11-20, An Ordinance concerning: Public Safety – Speed

Monitoring Systems; and the Administrative Officer read a portion of the title.

Bill No. 11-20 was passed by the following roll call vote:

Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Haire, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Pickard

Nay – Mr. Volke

BILL NO. 12-20

The Chairman called for the public hearing on Bill No. 12-20, as amended, An Ordinance

concerning: Subdivision and Development – Adequate School Facilities – Workforce Housing –

For the purpose of exempting residential developments that meet the conditions for workforce

housing from the test for adequate school facilities under certain conditions; adding the conditions

for the exemption from the test for adequate school facilities; making certain technical changes;

and generally relating to subdivision and development; and the Administrative Officer read the

title.

Ms. Lacey, Sponsor, detailed the origins of the bill. She stated that originally it was for a

developer in her district who had contacted her after applying for low income housing tax credits

from the State of Maryland. The State does not look at the construction timeline when making the

grants in the county where it makes the award. When the developer applied all three schools where

the development was to occur were open under the school utilization chart. They received their

award and then the Council voted for Bill No. 84-19 which closed Meade Middle School for

purposes of development. She stated that a market rate housing developer may be able to wait out

the six year period to develop the property anyway, but a developer of low income housing is on

a three year clock to get to occupancy of the project. That is a shorter clock than is usually

necessary in our County to get through the development steps. If the developer does not meet the

three year guideline, they are barred from applying for tax credits for future projects.

Ms. Lacey stated she was made aware of this last fall and that Bill No. 84-19 had put this

project in jeopardy. She was approached to help them as she had done with the Meade Village

project bill she had previously introduced which made a limited exception to the adequate public

facility ordinance. She stated that she decided that rather than have her advocacy targeted at one

developer or project, she would include in this bill 50 or less units, but not all workforce housing.

She included only those which are for low income housing and which have received low income

housing credits. Ms. Lacey also stated there is a work group working on our adequate public

facility ordinance, particularly on schools. She stated her intent is to take one more step so all over

the County, a small number of units, in this case 50 or less, to ensure that at the time the developer

applied for the low income housing tax credit the schools were open. Under the utilization chart

or at the time in the development process if they have been closed but the population is such that

there is a 3 percent buffer for middle schools and a 5 percent buffer for high schools, they should

be allowed to go forward. She believes there is a measurable benefit.

Pete Baron, Director, Government Affairs, accompanied by Alex Szachnowicz, Chief

Operating Officer, Anne Arundel County Public Schools, Lori Rhodes, Assistant Planning and

Zoning Officer, Kathy Koch, Arundel Community Development Services, Clif Martin, Housing

Commission, and Lori Blair Klasmeier, Legislative Assistant County Attorney, Office of Law,

stated he thanked the Sponsor and that the Administration is supportive of the bill with the

amendments they are bringing forward. He stated that the Administration and this Council have

worked hard on housing in the County. He explained the process for these projects. He stated that

there were only two of these projects undertaken in 2018 and only one in 2019, which was a project

for elderly of moderate means which would not be affected by this bill.

Mr. Pruski stated that there have been many emails regarding this bill. After reading them

all and researching himself, he has found that it is very difficult to build these kinds of projects

and be profitable. He stated that some of the emails had stated that workforce housing had caused

Covid-19, which is not true. He stated this is a policy decision. If districts are overcrowded

projects will not occur anyway. He wanted to be sure that when the Council discussed the bill

they discussed that, and not other topics.

Ms. Fiedler asked if for free or reduced lunch programs in the schools, if it was true that it is

more difficult to assist those students for teachers and staff.

Mr. Szachnowicz stated it is fair that those students require more support.

Ms. Fiedler stated that Meade Middle School was 68 percent free and reduced meals in the

2018-2019 report. She asked if that was still an accurate number.

Mr. Szachnowicz state he did not have that number available to him. He stated that the most

current information is available for October 2019.

Ms. Haire stated she is concerned that we are trying to fix the project from the wrong side.

She thinks is might be better for these projects to vest seats at the time of application as opposed

to when then receive the tax credits. If they don’t get the tax credits the seats can be released. She

stated that we should try to mitigate the problem on the front end rather than fix it on the back end.

Ms. Rhodes stated that there is a work group looking at APF. Timing does not always

coincide with when Planning and Zoning processes take place. They will have to look at it in the

work group.

Ms. Haire asked if this is on the list currently for the work group.

Ms. Rhodes stated that she believes it is on the work group’s list, but she will look at it

comprehensively looking at it from both sides to give an answer to the concern.

Mr. Volke stated that there were many emails about this bill. The Council all have reviewed

the emails. He wanted to address the concern about sneaking bills through during the Covid-19

crisis. He stated he had been contacted specifically about Oak Hill Elementary School in Severna

Park, but was trying to protect all of the schools throughout the County. Mr. Volke stated many

of the emails the Council had received had indicated that constituents were watching how

individual members of the Council voted on this particular issue, and that he had not seen this

many responses to a single issue during his time on the Council. He encouraged people to continue

monitoring the Council and watching what was happening.

Mr. Volke stated when reviewing this bill he noted that a closed school in his district, which

is Solley Elementary, would add 10 students with this bill. He noted that may not seem like many,

but the aggregate would be over 200 countywide. He voted against the school utilization chart

because he believes that the way the data was utilized was incorrect.

Mr. Volke stated the schools have capacity issues and he is strongly opposed to adding more

students to schools where there are capacity issues. He stated he is very concerned about the

community comments and concerns and is strongly opposed to the bill as currently written.

Ms. Rodvien stated she is a teacher for the public schools. She stated she has taught many

students over the years who are housing insecure, meaning they didn’t necessarily have a regular

home to go to due to the lack of affordable housing in the County. She also has taught homeless

students. She stated that given the choice of teaching a class with one or two more students or

prefer that students who are housing insecure stay that way, there is not a question for her that she

would rather see her families get regular housing. She believes this problem is hidden from public

view. There are 18,845 families on the public housing waiting list, made up of 53,877 people.

They are in our County already and are already going to the public schools. There are 10,755 on

the voucher waiting list. The waiting list for families to get into public housing is three to five

years. The wait time for a voucher is seven to ten years. Vouchers do not necessarily cover the

entire amount of that family’s rent.

Ms. Rodvien also stated that she has received emails saying that anyone who supports this

legislation is supported by developers. She clarified that she has not taken any money from any

developers. Her district has the most public housing anywhere in the County, and there still is a

shortage.

Ms. Lacey addressed Mr. Volke’s comments regarding Solley Elementary and that school’s

capacity.

Ms. Pickard stated that Oak Hill Elementary is already closed also. She stated that the

County has not been friendly to affordable housing. Since 1963 this County has only built 1,662

family units with LITEC funds. That is 57 years’ worth of affordable housing that has been built

in Anne Arundel County. She went on to discuss housing insecurity and the data for the County.

Ms. Fiedler asked regarding Oak Hill Elementary and if it was open or closed under this bill.

It is closed as long as it stays at or over 98% capacity. This does open Severna Park Middle School

and any elementary school that feeds into Severna Park Middle School that is open.

Mr. Szachnowicz stated that Oak Hill would be closed. Every school in the Severna Park

district, with the exception of Oak Hill, would become open for this unique subset of housing

types.

Ms. Fiedler stated that a majority of the emails she saw were in regards to District 5. Her

children go to a school that is over capacity. She stated that this Council passed legislation to

create a buffer. She thinks it is hypocritical of her to protect the constituents in her district and not

those in other districts. She stated she does not think that they should be prioritizing housing over

education and schools that are at capacity.

Ms. Pickard commented on school capacity issues.

The Chairman stated that there were 387 submissions of written testimony on Bill No. 12-

20, all of which have been reviewed by the Council and will be posted on the County website for

public viewing. There were 377 in opposition Bill No. 12-20 and 10 were in support of Bill No.

12-20. The public hearing was then closed.

The Chairman called Bill No. 12-20, An Ordinance concerning: Subdivision and

Development – Adequate School Facilities – Workforce Housing; and the Administrative Officer

read a portion of the title.

Amendment No. 1

On page 2 of the proposed bill, after line 18, insert:

“**** But subject to the conditions listed in § 17-5-207[[(c)]] (B).

***** But subject to the conditions listed in § 17-5-207[[(d)]] (C).”;

and in line 19, strike “(E)” and substitute “(D)”.

Mr. Baron stated that this was a technical amendment citing to the correct sections of the

Code.

On motion of Ms. Lacey, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, Amendment No. 1 was adopted by the

following roll call vote:

Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Volke, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Pickard

Nay – Ms. Haire, Ms. Fiedler

Amendment No. 2

On page 1 of the proposed bill, in line 2, strike “Workforce Housing” and substitute “Low

Income Tax Credits”; in line 4, strike “developments” and substitute “development”; and in lines

4 through 5, strike “meets the conditions for workforce housing” and substitute “is funded in part

by low income tax credits”.

On page 2, after line 16, in the chart, strike “MEETS THE CONDITIONS FOR WORKFORCE

HOUSING UNDER § 18-10-158 OF THIS CODE” and substitute “IS FUNDED IN PART BY LOW INCOME

TAX CREDITS”.

On page 3, strike in their entirety lines 19 through 22, inclusive, and substitute:

“(D) Exemptions for residential development funded in part by low income tax credits. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS FUNDED IN PART BY LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS AWARDED

FROM THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPT

FROM THE ADEQUATE SCHOOL FACILITIES TEST IF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET:”;

in lines 26 through 28, strike “THE PROJECT INCLUDES FUNDING FROM LOW INCOME HOUSING

TAX CREDITS AWARDED FROM THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT AND,”; and in line 28, after “AWARD” insert “OF THE LOW INCOME TAX CREDITS”.

Mr. Baron stated this amendment clarifies that only the projects that receive the LITEC

credits would be eligible under this bill.



Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Pickard

Nay – Ms. Haire, Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler

Amendment No. 3

On page 3 of the proposed bill, in line 37, strike “AND”; after line 37, insert:

“(3) THE PROPERTY IS ENCUMBERED BY RECORDED DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT THE UNITS

BE RESTRICTED TO OCCUPANCY BY ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLDS UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH FOR AT

LEAST 30 YEARS AND THAT AT LEAST 60% OF RENTAL UNITS BE OCCUPIED BY A HOUSEHOLD WITH

AN INCOME THAT DOES NOT EXCEED 60% OF THE MEDIAN INCOME ADJUSTED FOR HOUSEHOLD

SIZE FOR THE BALTIMORE PRIMARY METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA, AS DEFINED AND

PUBLISHED ANNUALLY BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT; AND”;

and in line 39, strike “(3)” and substitute “(4)”.

Mr. Baron stated that this amendment is a protection to prevent a switch. It must be used for

the projects as stated and a developer wouldn’t be able to transition these into market rate units

Mr. Volke stated he thought this requirement already existed when the credits were granted.

Ms. Koch stated that these projects are covenant restricted on the property and are

requirements of the funding. This would reinsure that in exchange for the zoning flexibility that

the County is granting the requirements are there and are met in case there are changes with the

funding for the project or a change of ownership.

Linda Schuett, Legislative Counsel, stated this is a requirement of the process of the tax credit

and this is a recorded instrument that comes afterwards. This deed restriction is reiterated here.

Mr. Pruski stated this also protects the Council and others since if there are changes at the

State level, this would still be in the Code so it could be updated or deleted. It becomes the

standard.



Aye – Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Pickard

Nay – Ms. Haire, Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler

The Chairman stated that Bill No 12-20, as amended, would be heard on May 26, 2020.

ADJORNMENT

There being no further business, on motion of Mr. Pruski, seconded by Mr. Volke, the

meeting adjourned at 8:27 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

by Susan F. Cline

for JoAnne Gray

Administrative Officer


Minutes of


May 12, 2020 – 1:00 P.M.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Allison Pickard at 1:00 P.M. Mr. Pruski

offered a prayer, followed by Ms. Fiedler leading the Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting was

held remotely via Zoom Webinar, beginning with roll call of all present. The Auditor’s Office

was represented by the County Auditor Susan Smith. The following members of the County Council were present:

Sarah Lacey First District

Allison Pickard Second District




Lisa Rodvien Sixth District


OPEN MEETINGS ACT
















SUSPENSION OF RULES

On motion of Ms. Rodvein, seconded by Ms. Lacey, the Council voted to suspend Rules 3-

103, 3-105, and 3-106 for this meeting by the following roll call:

Aye – Ms. Haire, Ms. Lacey, Mr. Volke, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Pickard

Nay – None

CAPITAL BUDGET REVIEW

General County

Roads and Bridges & Traffic Control

SWM & WPRF

Waste Management

Water and Wastewater

Dredging

RECESS

On motion by Ms. Rodvien, seconded by Mr. Volke, the Council voted to take a recess at

2:47 P.M.

RECONVENE

The Council reconvened at 2:55 P.M.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, on motion of Mr. Volke, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, the

meeting was adjourned at 4:00 P.M.


by Anna Macaulay

for JoAnne Gray



Minutes of


May 13, 2020 – 9:00 A.M.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Allison Pickard at 9:00 A.M. Ms. Fiedler

acknowledged the loss of moments in life due to the virus, followed by Ms. Fiedler leading the

Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting was held remotely via Zoom Webinar, beginning with roll

call of all present. The Auditor’s Office was represented by the County Auditor Susan Smith. The following members of the County Council were present:








Ms. Haire left at 12:30 P.M.

Mr. Pruski left at 12:30 P.M.

Ms. Fiedler lost connection at 12:50 P.M.

OPEN MEETINGS ACT
















SUSPENSION OF RULES

On motion of Ms. Rodvein, seconded by Ms. Lacey, the Council voted to suspend Rules

3-103, 3-105, and 3-106 for this meeting by the following roll call:

Aye –Ms. Lacey, Mr. Volke, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Haire, Ms. Pickard

Nay – None

The County Council sat as the Board of Health.

OPERATING BUDGET REVIEW

Health Department

Aging

Social Services

Central Services

Law

Personnel

Information Technology

Budget

Finance

RECESS

On motion by Ms. Lacey, seconded by Mr. Volke, the Council voted to take a recess at

12:22 P.M.

RECONVENE

The Council reconvened at 12:30 P.M.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, on motion of Ms. Lacey, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, the

meeting was adjourned at 1:05 P.M.


/s/ Anna Macaulay

by Anna Macaulay

/s/ JoAnne Gray

for JoAnne Gray


Minutes of


May 14, 2020 – 9:00 A.M.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Allison Pickard at 9:00 A.M. Ms. Rodvien

shared words of wisdom, followed by Ms. Fiedler leading the Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting

was held remotely via Zoom Webinar, beginning with roll call of all present. The Auditor’s

Office was represented by the County Auditor Susan Smith. The following members of the County Council were present:








OPEN MEETINGS ACT
















SUSPENSION OF RULES

On motion of Mr. Pruski, seconded by Ms. Rodvien, the Council voted to suspend Rules

3-103, 3-105, and 3-106 for this meeting by the following roll call:

Aye –Mr. Volke, Mr. Pruski, Ms. Fiedler, Ms. Rodvien, Ms. Haire, Ms. Lacey, Ms. Pickard

Nay – None

OPERATION BUDGET RIEVIEW

Circuit Court

State’s Attorney

Orphans Court

Board of Elections

Liquor Board

County Executive

Chief Administrative Office

Community Development

Workforce Development

Emergency Management

Economic Development

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, on motion of Mr. Volke, seconded by Mr. Pruski, the

meeting was adjourned at 11:12 A.M.


/s/ Anna Macaulay

by Anna Macaulay

/s/ JoAnne Gray

for JoAnne Gray




Bill No. 39-20

Introduced by Ms. Pickard, Chair


By the County Council, May 18, 2020

________________________________________________________________________

Introduced and first read on May 18, 2020

Public Hearing set for June 15, 2020

Bill Expires August 21, 2020

By Order: JoAnne Gray, Administrative Officer

________________________________________________________________________

A BILL ENTITLED

AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE concerning: Current Expense Budget – Fourth Quarter 1

Fund Transfer and Supplementary Appropriations 2

3

FOR the purpose of transferring appropriations of funds between certain offices, 4

departments, institutions, boards, commissions or other agencies in the general fund; 5

making supplementary appropriations from unanticipated revenues to certain offices, 6

departments, institutions, boards, commissions or other agencies in the general fund 7

and to certain special funds of the County government for the current fiscal year; 8

making this ordinance an emergency ordinance; and generally relating to transferring 9

appropriations of funds and making supplementary appropriations of funds to the 10

current expense budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020. 11

12

BY amending: Current Expense Budget 13

14

WHEREAS, under Section 711(a) of the Charter, the County Executive may 15

authorize transfers of funds within the same department and within the same fund; 16

and 17

18

WHEREAS, under Section 711(a) of the Charter, upon recommendation of the 19

County Executive, the County Council may transfer funds between offices, 20

departments, institutions, boards, commissions or other agencies of the County 21

government and within the same fund of the Current Expense Budget; and 22

23

24

WHEREAS, under Section 712 of the Charter, upon the recommendation of the 25

County Executive, the County Council may make supplementary appropriations 26

from revenues received from anticipated sources but in excess of budget estimates 27

and from revenues received from sources not anticipated in the budget for the 28

PROPOSED

Bill No. 39-20

Page No. 2

current fiscal year, provided that the Controller shall first certify in writing that such 1

funds are available for appropriation; and 2

3

WHEREAS, the County Executive has recommended emergency and 4

supplementary appropriation and transfer of certain funds, and the Controller has 5

certified in writing that such funds are available for appropriation; now, therefore, 6

7

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the County Council of Anne Arundel County, Maryland, 8

That the Current Expense Budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2020, be and it is 9

hereby amended by making an emergency and supplementary appropriation and transfer 10

of funds in the amount set forth from: 11

12

(1) Health Department – General Fund Appropriation 13

Disease Prevention & Management 14

Supplies & Materials $ 5,180,200 15

16

and by transferring and making a supplementary appropriation of such funds to the below-17

listed department in the amounts set forth: 18

19

(1) Chief Administrative Office – General Fund Appropriation 20

Management & Control 21

Grants, Contributions & Other $ 52,000 22

23

(2) Office of Personnel – General Fund Appropriation 24

Office of Personnel 25

Personal Services $ 151,500 26

Contractual Services $ 349,500 27

28

(3) Office of Finance (Non-Departmental) – General Fund Appropriation 29

Debt Service 30

Debt Service $ 1,143,000 31

Contribution to Other Fund 32


34

(4) Police Department – General Fund Appropriation 35

Admin Services 36



Patrol Services 39

Personal Services $ 2,250,000 40


42

(5) Office of Administrative Hearings – General Fund Appropriations 43

Office of Admin Hearings 44


46

(6) Office of Information Technology – General Fund Appropriations 47

Office of Info Technology 48


Bill No. 39-20

Page No. 3

SECTION 2. And be it further enacted, That the Current Expense Budget for the fiscal 1

year ending June 30, 2020, be and it is hereby amended by making supplementary 2

appropriations from revenues received from sources not anticipated in the budget and 3

revenues received from anticipated sources but in excess of budget estimates as follows: 4

5

(1) Unappropriated fund balance of the West Cnty Dev Dist Tax 6

Increment Fund $ 59,000 7

8

(2) Unappropriated fund balance of the National Business Park 9

North Tax Increment Fund $ 1,112,000 10

11

(3) Unappropriated fund balance of the Route 100 Tax 12

Increment Fund $ 22,000 13

14

(4) Unappropriated fund balance of the Village South at Waugh 15

Chapel Tax Increment Fund $ 99,000 16

17

(5) State & Federal Grants in the Grants Special Revenue Fund $ 202,000 18

19

(6) Unappropriated fund balance of the Health Insurance Fund $ 10,000,000 20

21

and by adding such funds to the below-listed fund, in the respective amounts set forth: 22

23

(1) West Cnty Dev Dist Tax Increment Fund 24

Office of Finance (Non-Departmental) 25

Tax Increment Districts 26

Grant, Contributions & Other $ 59,000 27

28

(2) National Business Park North Tax Increment Fund 29



Grant, Contributions & Other $ 1,112,000 32

33

(3) Route 100 Tax Increment Fund 34




38

(4) Village South at Waugh Chapel Tax Increment Fund 39




43

(5) Grants Special Revenue Fund 44

Office of the Sheriff 45

Office of the Sheriff 46


Bill No. 39-20

Page No. 4

Health Department 1

Behavioral Health 2



Supplies and Materials $ 7,100 5

Business and Travel $ 1,800 6


8

(6) Health Insurance Fund 9

Health Costs 10

Grant, Contributions & Other $ 10,000,000 11

12

SECTION 3. And be it further enacted, That this Ordinance is hereby declared to be an 13

emergency ordinance and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, 14

health, safety, welfare, and property, and being passed by the affirmative vote of five 15

members of the County Council, the same shall take effect from the date that it becomes 16

law. 17



Bill No. 40-20

Introduced by Ms. Pickard, Chair



________________________________________________________________________

Introduced and first read on May 18, 2020

Public Hearing set for June 15, 2020

Bill Expires August 21, 2020

By Order: JoAnne Gray, Administrative Officer

________________________________________________________________________

A BILL ENTITLED

AN ORDINANCE concerning: Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 1

2025 2

3

FOR the purpose of adopting the “Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 4

2025”. 5

6

WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) 7

requires that local governments develop Consolidated Plans that identify local 8

housing and community development needs and that further establish goals and 9

strategies to address those needs; and 10

11

WHEREAS, an approved Consolidated Plan serves as the framework to identify 12

housing and community development programs that may benefit from HUD grant 13

programs; and 14

15

WHEREAS, under 24 CFR Part 91, local governments are required to submit to 16

HUD for final approval a Consolidated Plan that describes “its plan to pursue these 17

goals for all the community planning and development programs, as well as for 18

housing programs”; and 19

20

WHEREAS, the “Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 2025” 21

has been drafted to fulfill the requirements of the provisions of 24 CFR Part 91; 22

now, therefore, 23

24

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the County Council of Anne Arundel County, 25

Maryland, That the “Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 2025” 26

is hereby approved and adopted. 27

PROPOSED

Bill No. 40-20

Page No. 2

SECTION 2. And be it further enacted, That the “Anne Arundel County Consolidated 1

Plan FY 2021 – FY 2025” is incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, and a 2

certified copy of the “Anne Arundel County Consolidated Plan FY 2021 – FY 2025” 3

shall be permanently kept on file at the Office of the Administrative Officer to the County 4

Council and in the principal office of Arundel Community Development Services, Inc. 5

6

SECTION 3. And be it further enacted, That this Ordinance shall take effect 45 days 7

from the date it becomes law. 8

_____________________________________________________________________________________ EXPLANATION: CAPITALS indicate new matter added to existing law.

[[Brackets]] indicate matter deleted from existing law. Captions and taglines in bold in this bill are catchwords and are not law.



Bill No. 41-20

Introduced by Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler, and Ms. Haire

By the County Council, May 18, 2020 ________________________________________________________________________

Introduced and first read on May 18, 2020 Public Hearing set for May 22, 2020 Bill Expires August 21, 2020

By Order: JoAnne Gray, Administrative Officer ________________________________________________________________________

A BILL ENTITLED

AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE concerning: Proclamation of Civil Emergency in Anne 1 Arundel County 2

3 FOR the purpose of amending the termination date established by Bill No. 24-20; and 4

making this Ordinance an emergency measure. 5 6

BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments: Bill No. 24-20, Section 1, Laws of Anne 7 Arundel County, 2020 8

9 WHEREAS, on March 5, 2020, Maryland Governor Lawrence J. Hogan, Jr. 10 proclaimed a state of emergency and a catastrophic health emergency for the entire 11 State of Maryland pursuant to Title 14 of the Public Safety Article of the State 12 Code, due to the impending threat and continuing impact of the contagious disease 13 known as COVID-19; and 14

15 WHEREAS, the Governor’s proclamation was renewed on March 17, 2020, April 16 10, 2020, and May 6, 2020, and the state of emergency and catastrophic health 17 emergency still exists; and 18

19 WHEREAS, by Executive Order Number 16 dated March 13, 2020, the Anne 20 Arundel County Executive proclaimed a civil emergency in Anne Arundel County, 21 pursuant to Article I, Title 6 of the Anne Arundel County Code (2005, as amended); 22 and 23

24 WHEREAS, pursuant to § 1-6-104 of the County Code, a proclamation of a civil 25 emergency or an executive order issued pursuant to a civil emergency proclamation 26

PROPOSED

Bill No. 41-20 Page No. 2

may not be effective for more than seven days unless authorized by ordinance 1 enacted by the County Council; and 2 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Bill No. 24-20, the County Council extended the 4 Proclamation of Civil Emergency by the County Executive through April 4, 2020, 5 or to the date the civil emergency proclamation for the State of Maryland is 6 approved to be renewed, extended or terminated by the Governor of Maryland or 7 the Maryland General Assembly; and 8 9 WHEREAS, on May 13, 2020 the Governor issued Executive Order 20-05-13-01, 10 which provided that political subdivisions have more autonomy in determining 11 restrictions that may be imposed to prevent the spread of COVID-19; now, 12 therefore 13

14 SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the County Council of Anne Arundel County, Maryland, 15 That Bill No. 24-20, Section 1, Laws of Anne Arundel County, 2020 is hereby amended to 16 read as follows: 17 18

Bill No. 24-20 19 20

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the County Council of Anne Arundel County, 21 Maryland, That the March 13, 2020, civil emergency proclamation of the County 22 Executive, and all executive action taken pursuant thereto, is hereby extended 23 through [[the later of April 4, 2020, or the date the Governor’s civil emergency 24 proclamation for the State of Maryland is renewed, extended, or terminated by the 25 Governor of Maryland or the Maryland General Assembly]] MAY 23, 2020 AT 12:00 26 P.M., AFTER WHICH IT SHALL TERMINATE AND BE OF NO FURTHER FORCE AND 27 EFFECT. 28 29

SECTION 2. And be it further enacted, That this Ordinance is hereby declared to be an 30 emergency ordinance and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, 31 health, safety, welfare, and property, and being passed by the affirmative vote of five 32 members of the County Council, the same shall take effect from the date it becomes law. 33



Resolution No. 16-20

Introduced by Mr. Volke, Ms. Fiedler and Ms. Haire


RESOLUTION urging the County Executive to Reopen Anne Arundel County 1

2

WHEREAS, on March 5, 2020, Maryland Governor Lawrence J. Hogan, Jr. 3

proclaimed a state of emergency and a catastrophic health emergency for the entire 4

State of Maryland pursuant to Title 14 of the Public Safety Article of the State 5

Code, due to the impending threat and continuing impact of the contagious disease 6

known as COVID-19; and 7

8

WHEREAS, COVID-19, a respiratory disease that spreads easily from person to 9

person and may result in serious illness or death; and 10

11

WHEREAS, Anne Arundel County’s hospitalization rates for COVID-19-related 12

illnesses have remained steady for the last thirty days, since mid-April 2020; and 13

14

WHEREAS, Anne Arundel County is a state and national leader in Contact Tracing 15

and Case Management programs to trace and isolate every positive case of COVID-16

19; and 17

18

WHEREAS, Anne Arundel County has been working since March 13, 2020 to 19

purchase and stockpile sufficient Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to supply 20

hospitals and other healthcare facilities and providers to meet the demand for the 21

number of anticipated COVID-19-related illnesses; and 22

23

WHEREAS, Anne Arundel County has sufficient testing capabilities to test for the 24

anticipated COVID-19-related illnesses; and 25

26

WHEREAS, the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has been staggering 27

and the full impacts of the pandemic have yet to be calculated; and 28

29

WHEREAS, over 50,000 Anne Arundel County residents have filed for 30

unemployment benefits as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; and 31

32

WHEREAS, food insecurity and housing insecurity of Anne Arundel County 33

residents have increased exponentially as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; and 34

35

WHEREAS, the mental health of Anne Arundel County residents has been 36

suffering as many residents have been exposed to prolonged periods of isolation, 37

and loss of employment; and 38

Resolution No. 16-20

Page No. 2

WHEREAS, projected budget revenues for Anne Arundel County dropped by over 1

$63 million, or more, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; and 2

3

WHEREAS, continued delay and closures of Anne Arundel County businesses will 4

serve to magnify the economic and social harms to Anne Arundel County residents, 5

and erode further the social safety net of services provided to Anne Arundel County 6

residents; now, therefore, be it 7

8

Resolved by the County Council of Anne Arundel County, Maryland, that it hereby 9

urges the County Executive to immediately advance to Phase One of Governor Hogan’s 10

“Roadmap to Recovery” by reopening all businesses and houses of worship in Anne 11

Arundel County, subject to observance of proper safety protocols for social distancing, and 12

as permitted by the Governor’s Executive Order; and be it further 13

14

Resolved, That a copy of this Resolution be sent to County Executive Steuart Pittman 15

and to Nilesh Kalyanaraman, M.D., Health Officer. 16

AMENDMENT TO BILL NO. 14-20 (Finance, Taxation, and Budget and Zoning – Commercial Revitalization Area Program –

Designation of a Commercial Revitalization Area in Marley in Glen Burnie, Maryland)

May 18, 2020 Introduced by Ms. Pickard Amendment No. 1 On page 1 of the proposed bill, in line 26, strike “Exhibit A” and substitute “Exhibit A-1”. Strike Exhibit A and replace with attached Exhibit A-1. (This amendment adds a parcel to the proposed commercial revitalization area and replaces Exhibit A with Exhibit A-1 to reflect the addition.)

r

r

r

r

RT10

RITCHIE HWY

RT100

RT100

RT100

BALTIMORE ANNAPOLIS BLVD

JUMP

ERS H

OLE R

D

MARLEY STATION RD

NORF

OLK R

D

HOSPITAL DR

OVERHILL RDFO

XWEL

L BEN

D RD

PHELPS AVE

RITCHIE HWY

AMERICANA CIR

LONG HILL RD

MOUNTAIN RD

Marley Station Mall

Marley Elementary School

Southdale Shopping CenterFreetown Elementary School

Commercial Revitalization Area

Area 11 - Glen Burnie/Marley - Ritchie Highway & Mountain Road

/ 0.2 0 0.20.1 Miles

Bill No. 14-20 Exhibit A-1

Amendment No. 1

AMENDMENT TO BILL NO. 16-20 (Zoning – Residential Districts – Community Based Assisted Living Facilities I and II,

Group Homes I and II, Recovery Residences I and II, and Rooming Houses)

May 18, 2020 Introduced by Mr. Volke Amendment No. 1 On page 1 of the proposed bill, in lines 9 through 10, strike “allowing assisted living facilities as special exception use in RA residential districts;”. On page 4, after line 13, in the chart, in the row beginning with “Assisted living facilities, and under the column labeled “RA”, strike “SE”. (This amendment strikes proposed language allowing assisted living facilities as special exception uses in RA residential districts.)

agenda county council of anne arundel county, … · 5/18/2020 · for the purpose of designating...

Documents