|
Chairman Watson and members of the County Council: The League of Women Voters of Howard County opposes Council Resolutions 39 and 40,2008 that declare approximately 26.2 acres of land owned by Howard County located along Martha Bush Drive in Ellicott City and 24.5 acres of land owned by Howard County located along Rogers Avenue as no longer needed by the County for public purposes, authorizing the County executive to sell the property, waiving advertising and bidding requirements of Section 4.201 of the Howard County Code and providing that the County Executive is not bound to sell the property if he finds that it may have a further public use.The League opposes both Resolutions based on the lack of a public comprehensive plan for County Government Office space and Court House space. In previous County Capital Budgets, the County made compelling statements of the need for a larger complex of government offices as well as the need for new courtrooms and offices for the Courts. These same parcels of land were purchased by the government to provide the opportunity in future years to build the new government complex and provide Courtroom space. In addition, knowing that the County would be utilizing the 50 plus acres during the last Comprehensive Zoning, the property on Rogers Avenue across from the 24.5 acres was rezoned from residential 2 lots per acre to Planned Office Research. The Route 40 Task Force suggested the connection of a road through the parcels to relieve congestion from the Rt. 29 and Rt. 40 interchange. Why would the County consider selling undeveloped land closely adjacent to the current County seat of Government? Certainly we are looking to consolidate the scattered sites of local government. There is a cost of doing everyday business when county offices are not co- located. Immediately adjacent to the 26.2 acres is the Department of Public Works facility purchased to provide maintenance and repair services to County vehicles on what was formerly a car dealership. Why is the County Council being asked to waive the advertising and bidding requirements normally required. to go instead to a marketing program initiated by a real estate consultant retained by the County? Who is the consultant? What are the terms? What benefits will be gained by the County? The League recognizes the major difficulties with the George Howard Building. Those difficulties were apparent more than 20 years ago. We support the County Executive's plan to reengineer the building and make it a green building. However, to accomplish that initiative, the County should not be declaring "no public purpose" for 50.7 acres of land. The League urges the County Council to table or vote unfavorably on County Council Resolutions 39 and 40.
Barbara Schnackenberg |
| Top | Action and Advocacy | Home |