Other troubling details:
A May 23 memo from County Attorney Marc Hansen leaves gigantic loopholes you could drive a (rapid) bus through.
It claims, for example, that the unlimited eminent domain authority the ITA would wield is limited by Bill MC 24-15.
Not true.
Hansen states that the legislation "places an indirect limitation on the Transit Authority’s power to condemn, because it requires that the Authority submit a 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to the County for approval."
Whoops. Check out the actual legislation posted on the TTF website. On Page 5, Item 6 of the proposed legislation, it only says that the County "may include a requirement" for submission of a 6-year CIP. "May" does not equal "requires".
It also does not require the ITA to submit any budget for review by anybody. On Page 6, section II, it clearly states this: "MAY NOT REQUIRE THE TRANSIT AUTHORITY TO SUBMIT ITS CAPITAL OR ITS OPERATING BUDGET TO THE COUNTY FOR APPROVAL" (italicized emphasis mine).
To that broader lack of accountability, later in the memo Hansen clearly admits "The legislation specifically prohibits, however, the County from requiring the Transit Authority to submit its capital and operating budgets to the County for approval."
One other controversial provision Hansen does acknowledge is the proposed power of the ITA to create unlimited debt. This provision will, in Hansen's words, "prevent debt incurred by the Transit Authority from being considered as County debt by bond rating agencies."
Do the math - unlimited debt, with no fear from County Council members of losing their AAA bond rating. Unlimited power by the ITA to raise taxes on you to pay back their unlimited debts. What could possibly go wrong, right?
Well, conversely, how about if the ITA somehow went bankrupt? Who would be left holding the bag for an unlimited amount of debt? It seems that the taxpayer loses under any outcome.
The document notes that state legislation may be written to create the taxing authority as soon as early September. It states that a second public hearing will be held in September, as well.
Written statements are being encouraged by the document, which civic activists recognize are utterly useless, as the general public and media rarely examine written statements submitted at these hearings. If it isn't heard live, or reported in the media afterward, it essentially is the proverbial tree falling in the forest.
That's what makes the attempt to limit the number of speakers so troubling. And let's not forget how those driving this agenda stacked the speaking list last time with government/elected officials and others who stand to financially profit from BRT. They could entirely squelch the public at this one, if they simply took up as many of those 40 slots as possible.
Important to note if you plan to (try to) speak at this forum - you must sign up online by noon on June 17, by calling 240-777-7165. The hearing will begin at 6:00 PM on Wednesday, June 17 in the 3rd Floor Council Hearing Room at the County Council office building, located at 100 Maryland Avenue in Rockville.
In an interesting footnote, the White Flint 2 Sector Plan launch meeting has been postponed to June 22 now, as citizens realized it was scheduled for the same time as the ITA hearing:
23 comments:
Thanks for following this. We don't understand why Mr. Leggett and the council is pushing this again when it crashed and burned last time.
5:24: $$$
(And you know some anonymous will later comment here that there weren't a ton of vocal dissenters, and that you can't "prove" that those present who were silent were necessarily against.)
I don't see a problem in limiting the number of speakers, as long as there is no effort to keep one faction from speaking. There are only so many hours in a day. Everyone else is free to submit their comments in writing. Or, multiple people can designate a single speaker to represent them.
Dyer has obviously never run any kind of community meeting.
What happened with Mr. Leggett's push for liquor bonds? And, how would that work to borrow money for his pet projects?
@Anonymous 6:08, there is a huge problem with limiting the number of speakers. The "process" the council has set up is this: unlimited time with the developers in their offices while the rest of us have to be at work; and then, the 'public' gets 2 or 3 minutes to speak and then we are shut up by the council. Of course, the council is always happy to meet with you, provided you take unpaid leave from work to talk to them. The developers and council members pushing the BRT borrowing are being PAID to show up at all these meetings. So yes, there is a problem with limiting our speech.
6:37AM Exactly. The developers and their attorneys are on the clock being paid to speak at these things. Citizens have the right to speak. If 100 citizens show up, that means they care. If I was an elected official, I'd want to hear what they have to say.
We all know why they're doing this, it's a classic tactic to blunt the massive criticism.
40 speakers x 2 minutes per speaker = 80 minutes
40 speakers x 3 minutes per speaker = 120 minutes.
100 speakers x 2 minutes per speaker = 200 minutes
100 speakers x 3 minutes per speaker = 300 minutes (5 hours).
Have more than one hearing if there's a lot of people who want to speak. Other governments, like Rockville, will have several hearings about a major issue.
Hold more than one hearing. how hard is that? the council and Mr. Leggett have endless amounts of time to meet with the developers, their attorneys, their planners. aznd we get 2-3 minutes on an issue like an independent transit authority, which will have unlimited taxing and spending powers over us, the citizens? No one wants this. It is being rammed down our throats.
Limiting this to 40 speakers = we don't care what you think. we don't want to waste any time with the taxpayers because we have already decided to do this. So go back to wherever you crawled out from because we have to have dinner with our wealthy patrons, the developers.
Legislation would also give ITA authority over Ride-on, making that service less accountable to riders. ITA would even have authority over ports. Good to know who has control of MOCO's non-existent assets.
6:08: You don't see a problem in only allowing 40 people to speak in a county of 1 million residents? In fact, I have run community meetings and served as an elected official for 4 years.
You do realize the previous ITA hearing lasted more than 120 minutes, as do public hearings before the County Council and Rockville Mayor & Council on a regular basis?
In fact, the last ITA hearing did try to limit the opposed, by jamming the speaker list with County officials and developer-friendly funded "nonprofit" organizations. Were the list limited to 40, those of us opposed could easily be shut out.
Can you explain why it's about money to the uninitiated? Thanks!
Are 40 people gonna have different things to say? If not, then group the opinions and save everyone's time. We don't need to hear the same thing over and over again from different people in a public forum if we understand there are numbers behind a specific opinion.
Very simple, Wrol - the elected officials and proxy organizations who are funded by developers are speaking on behalf of the developers who will profit from the development BRT will allow.
They should let everyone have their say. If more then 40 people want to speak, that means it's a contentious issue and they should be heard.
What I don't understand is this -- wasn't the ITA proposed a few months ago and struck down? Why is this coming up again?
Anonymous, this is coming up again because Ike Leggett and Marc Elrich have to jam it through. They have to have more money -- billions and billions -- to build the fixed-route bus infrastructure, stations, purchase property along the routes to widen the roads, move the utilities, change the roads, I could go on. There is not enough money in our current taxes. They know they have to bust the Charter limit that was put in place in an election. so, they can do that with the ITA - an independent authority that can raise property taxes beyond the Charter limit.
They are talking about 'differential taxes,' so that some neighborhoods would pay more in property taxes than others.
But what if they are saying the fact same thing? Isn't that waste of time
And what's so special about speaking out loud that an email doesn't accomplish?
So how many would you allow? 100? 500? 1000? It's never enough.
Anonymous 9:15, a public hearing is a legal event and the comments go into the public record. That's the difference. Many times the hearing is televised too. So, the council sees how many people oppose a specific proposed piece of legislation. Spend some time reading the council's agenda and you can begin to see everything they're up to. For the rest, there's the MD version of FOIA, MPIA.
Hm I get that. They should have a legal and public record for submitted letters too.
But if everyone says the same thing it'll be a waste. Hopefully the speakers coordinate and plan sole solid fact based content with sources.
Post a Comment