Sosinski Goals

Tim Sosinski List of 10 Goals – January 29, 2008.

Rather than start with aspersions and angst, we should start with a positive vision. Our land use change process should be:

Comprehensive – “We are dancing with the 10,000 things.” Economics, aesthetics, public facilities, sustainability and 9,996 other aspects need a reasonable level of timely evaluation.

Organized – Starting with early grass roots input, through final approval, the process should be a clear step by step path that is known to all stakeholders.

Inclusive – To quench the community thirst for input, the process should reach out to those who have something to say but are overwhelmed by an un facilitated process.

Democratic – To avoid the competing claims that “my view represents the majority,” from the earliest community input meetings to the final approval by elected officials, decisions should be guided by the clear open votes.

Fair – Those with limited resources should not be shut out by of the process by a lack of access to neutral legal and technical expertise.

Civil – Although emotions often run high when people perceive the smallest threat to their quality of life, the process should emphasize civil discourse and respect for the good intentions of all participants.

Revenue Neutral – The beneficiaries of land use change should pay the full cost of every aspect of the change that benefits them. Fees in advance of services should be paid so that the County can hire everything from facilitators for community input to experts that study transportation, economics, sustainability and ecological issues.

Limited – The process should avoid repetitive testimony, multiple hearings, unending appeals and endless evaluation. In the interest of economics and energy, there should be a level of focus that limits all aspects of the process.

Malleable – We live in an age of continuing advances and need to allow for continuing evolution of how we use our land. Our process needs to allow for continuous evolution in the face of new realities and opportunities.

Future Focused – We need to see beyond the current reality to a future that is far closer to perfection. We need to insure that all that we put in place aims for that higher reality.

The next question is what kind of process will enhance the probability of achieving these benchmarks?

1. Signs on all driveable sides of a project. Signage should be visible on all potential sides of property so that people driving by can see when driving by.

2. A long time ago, DPZ sent out letters whenever something happened with a project, but this is no longer seems to be the case

3. Public participation should be allowed at any time during a development process – and weight should be given to resident testimony – they know more about traffic issues than traffic engineers.

4. Presubmission public meetings are essential and should be required. A developer presented his project to the community and as residents, we were able to see what was planned, and also give some helpful ideas of what would be important to his future residents and a nice selling point.

5. Better follow up for residents who attend hearings, ie, if a project goes to the Board of Appeals, any resident who testified at the hearings should be given notice of any action on the project they testified at.

6. Website has been improved, but its still difficult navigating thru the years of projects. Could confuse people

7. Let people submit testimony via written or email.

8. I recently stumbled upon what happens when DPZ and development are not logically (parcel by parcel) tracked in the various phases of development. Now we have a miserable driving experience, its frustrating and now there’s nothing that can be done.

9. What happens when the general plan does NOT account for future projects? A developer said any raw land, he sees at potential development, does the County?

10. Would like to see friendlier zoning potential for small businesses, esp. along Rt. 1, Rt 40.

Howard's "List of Ten"

I see Bill has been posting ideas. For what it's worth, here's my "List of 10." My list should in no way influence anybody else's. The idea at this stage is to be as free-wheeling as you like.

1. Initial public contacts with land use and DPZ need to be more user-friendly!

Need clearer, bigger and less-cluttered notification signs, better notification and public info at all levels, easy-to-use website. Establish a single well-publicized DPZ Help-Line phone for any and all questions, and better train front-desk staff to lead possibly-clueless visitors by the hand to info they need.

2. Replace adversarial “faux-judicial” process with mediation-based process

Adversarial process is a huge turnoff to the public, which correctly perceives it to be unfair (citizens are the only ones who don’t profit from participation). Mediation-based compromise should be the “default,” with a goal of working out differences before a case ever comes before planning or zoning boards – and pre-submission meetings should be led by a DPZ staff facilitator, NOT by a rep of the developer/petitioner.

3. Results of development must be better

When too many developers build lowest-common-denominator development with legal-minimum regard for aesthetics or environmental impact, and citizens see the lousy results, they conclude: “Why bother?” Developers must be held to higher standards if we want more people to get involved.

4. Switch to neutral, unbiased technical (traffic, noise, environmental, etc.) studies

Replace obviously-biased petitioner/developer-commissioned reports with studies generated by DPZ staff (or contractors with NO ties to area developers). Petitioners/developers would pay the bills.

5. No more “short-cut” rezoning by text amendment

This option subverts the process. People who want to build something not allowed by existing zoning should have to apply for piecemeal rezoning with full due process.

6. Zones have to be more specific to eliminate “bait-and-switch” options

No more 45-use zones, no residential uses under commercial zones – all of which undermines credibility and predictability. Developers should have to apply for the zone that allows what they actually intend to build.

7. Create incentives for developers to be more cooperative with community residents

We’re not trying to punish or chase away developers, so give them reasons to do a better job. They’ll change their behavior if it enhances their bottom line.

8. Schedule regular one-on-one DPZ leadership-staff interviews with local reporters

Nobody reads the legal announcements, we don’t have local TV coverage, and there aren’t enough media outlets for press conferences. Giving reporters regular access to DPZ leaders to talk about current and future land-use issues might generate more and bigger news stories in the Sun and Patuxent Publishing weekly papers – where citizens might actually read them!

9. Comprehensive zoning needs to be split up

In an increasingly crowded county, with more re-zonings likely to be contentious, the current “big boiling cauldron” model of comp zoning is too complex and rushed to allow for good decisions. Break it up into 3-5 logical regions at 1-2-year intervals, and maybe try a charrette-style process.

10. Consider creating an independent zoning board

Having legislators also be regulators is a credibility-killing combo. When developers give campaign contributions to council members who then rule on land use as the zoning board, that invites the appearance of impropriety even where there is none.

Constructive Comment #2

Many task force members have expressed frustration with the difficulty they experience when trying to become informed about the processes and procedures of various zoning matters within the county. To address this issue, I would like to suggest that DPZ endeavor to inform the public about the existence and role of the Howard County Zoning Counsel.

Title 10, Subtitle 16 of the Howard County Code permits the County Council to employ Zoning Counsel (currently, Eileen Powers, Esq.). I have set forth below the relevant sections of the law that describes the role of Zoning Counsel. One of the statutory functions of Zoning Counsel is to inform the public about the process and procedures of various zoning matters. Zoning Counsel cannot provide legal advice or represent a private party, but can inform the public about the procedures involved in zoning matters. The role and function of Zoning Counsel is not well known to the public. As you can see from the statutory excerpt below, Zoning Counsel can even attend certain pre-submission community meetings if directed by the County Council.

My Constructive Comment #2 is for DPZ to inform the public about the existence and role of the Howard County Zoning Counsel.


SUBTITLE 10. ZONING COUNSEL*
__________
*Editor's note: Section 1 of C.B. 77, 1995, repealed former subtitle 10, §§ 16.1000--16.1012, relating to growth management and derived from C.B. 43, 1989; C.B. 98, 1989; C.B. 104, 1989; C.B. 55, 1990; C.B. 61, 1990; C.B. 62, 1990; and C.B. 12, 1991. Subsequently, C.B. 37, 2000 added a new section 16.1000 pertaining to zoning counsel.

Sec. 16.1000. Zoning Counsel.
(a) The County Council may employ a Zoning Counsel on a part-time, contractual basis. The Zoning Counsel shall be a member in good standing of the Bar of the Maryland Court of Appeals and at the time of appointment shall have been actively engaged in the general practice of law for at least 5 years.
(b) A decision to enter into a contract with an individual to perform the duties of Zoning Counsel shall be made by an affirmative vote of at least 3 Council members. A decision to terminate a Zoning Counsel's contract shall be made by an affirmative vote of at least 4 Council members.
(c) The Zoning Counsel shall appear at all zoning board hearings on requests for piecemeal zoning map amendments for the purposes of producing evidence and testimony supporting comprehensive rezoning and facilitating the compilation of a complete record.
(d) In the performance of these duties the Zoning Counsel may:
(1) Present evidence and witnesses;
(2) Examine and cross-examine witnesses;
(3) Present argument; and
(4) Take any other action necessary to perform these duties.
(e) The budget for the Zoning Counsel shall be included in the County Council budget.
(f) The Zoning Counsel may retain expert witnesses and compensate them to the extent that the Council budget includes funds for such compensation.
(g) The Zoning Counsel shall be available:
(1) To any person interested in any zoning matter to advise as to procedures before a county agency or board, provided that when doing so the Zoning Counsel does not engage in the practice of law or render individual legal advice; and
(2) To any group to speak about zoning procedures in the county.
(h) The Zoning Counsel shall attend certain pre-submission community meetings, as necessary. The County Council shall determine whether or not the Zoning Counsel shall attend certain pre-submission community meetings to advise any person or group of procedural matters.
(i) The Zoning Counsel:
(1) Does not represent the county, any government agency or any private party;
(2) Is not a party and does not have a right of appeal in connection with any case before the Board of Appeals;
(3) May not represent any client involving land use in Howard County; and
(4) May not represent any client before the Zoning Board or Board of Appeals for 1 year after leaving the Office of Zoning Counsel.
(i) On or before July 1 of each year, the Zoning Counsel shall submit to the Council and the County Executive a report on the activities of the office in the past year.
(C.B. 37, 2000; C.B. 58, 2005; C.B. 8, 2006, § 1)
Secs. 16.1001--16.1012. Reserved.

Constructive Comment #1

A recent amendment to the Howard County Code requires that notice of Pre-submission Community Meetings be mailed to any community association that represents the area of the subject property or any adjacent properties. I have found it very difficult and very time consuming (i.e. expensive) to properly identify these community associations.

To my knowledge, DPZ does not maintain a current list of community associations operating within the county. There used to be such a list, but it is not kept current with respect to the name and proper mailing address of the president of the various community associations. Even with a current and accurate list of the community associations, there is not a convenient or accurate way of determining what specific area each association represents.

I would like to see DPZ afford all community associations the opportunity to register with the department in order to facilitate the notification process. Once registered, it should be incumbent on the association to notify DPZ of a change in the name of its president, or a change in the mailing address of its president. It would also be very helpful if the specific areas represented by each association could be determined from a map maintained by DPZ. Alternatively, each community association could submit a list of parcel/lot numbers that they represent. This way we could be sure that all interested community associations respresenting a given area are given timely notice of land use proceedings.

I'm so frustrated.

I'm a Howard County resident. I have a job, my husband has a job, we both work ridiculous hours to be able to afford a house and continue to live in Howard County. We have a little girl, who took her own sweet time coming into our lives. For over 10 years, I contributed to the Howard County Schools tax base and one day I hope my daughter will benefit from the wonderful Ho. Co. School system. For the most part, I am proud to live in Howard County, and have spent countless hours, weeks, months and years trying to make my neighborhood a better place to live by being active in my HOA, attending hearings, doing research at DPZ, just being a an active part of the community. I want, like everyone else, to live in a nice community. I'm just more outspoken than most about what I want that community to look like.

This task force is supposed to be about public engagement. There is nothing about the meeting times that are at all engaging the the general public of Howard County. Most people work - at a job where output is required. Most general, everday, regular citizens of Howard County work during the day and then have a commute. So why isn't the whole PELU task force and all its lofty goals of public engagement more regular Howard County citizen friendly?

I don't get to bill my hours to a client, I don't get to add this taskforce to my CV, it won't add to my client list and it won't decrease my tax bill and the experience will not add any income to my household. By the time this taskforce is done, I will have spent several hundred dollars for childcare and for what? After attending 4 task force meetings, it is quite clear that the public really isn't welcome to talk about land use. Except for those dog and pony shows before a general plan every 10 years.

The meeting times are not citizen friendly and I feel it is very important for me to speak out publicly and state this.

"Homework" List: Your 10 Pet Peeves

Hi, Everyone!

Let's see if I can master this new-fangled technology...

At our Jan 24 meeting, we decided to set you all loose on the assignment to compile your personal lists of the "Top Ten Things I Hate" about the current land use processes.

We realize you may have considerably MORE than 10 things you hate and believe need to be changed. But for purposes of shaping our group's direction, and keeping things from getting too unwieldy, please limit your list to what you consider to be your 10 most important (there may be opportunities to bring up other items later).

So what sort of things are we looking for?

Based on the task force's overall assignment to focus on ways to boost public participation in the land use process, your list can include anything you think impedes, limits or discourages public involvement. These can come from anywhere and everywhere in the land use process -- general plan, comprehensive zoning, piecemeal map amendments, text amendments, zoning board, planning board, etc.

You can examine public info and education efforts, the DPZ website, how easy or tough it is to find info at the "front desk" or on the phone. Note any points in or characteristics of the various land use proceedings which make people want to run screaming into the night (I've got a bunch of those :o).

If you think of specific laws and regulations needing to be changed, mention that.

For now, please keep it short! How short? No more than a sentence or two for each of your 10 points. If you can include both what's wrong and how you'd fix it in your 2 sentences, that's great. If not, don't worry about the complexities yet. We'll expand on these things later.

At this point in the process, we're looking for broad strokes which will help us define specific directions for us to explore in the next few months.

Once you have your list, what should you do with it? If you can figure out how to post it to the blog, do that. If you can't, then you can simply e-mail it to everyone on the task force mailing list (which you should have if you saved any of the group e-mails which have gone out already).

Now that we're heading toward things we actually think need to be changed in order to enhance public participation in land use matters, I'm looking forward to seeing what y'all come up with!

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or Bill.

Thanks very much!

Howard W