Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, everyone. It's September 17th, and we're starting our planning board meeting. Our first item is a closed session. According to the Maryland Annotated Code General Provisions Article 3-305B7 to consult and counsel to obtain legal advice, the topic is requests for reconsideration. Is there a motion to go into closed session? Move for closed session. Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it. Thank you. We will now go into closed session, and... We'll come back in the open session as soon as we finish. Thank you. Welcome back, everyone. We're on item number 2C of the preliminary matters. The first item is request for consideration, followed by Aaron E. Girard, Popular Grove Preliminary Plan Amendment Number 1, 2019-004C, regarding resolution dated August 5th, 2026, hearing date July 9th, 2026. So is there a motion for reconsideration of specifically only of I believe it was condition number 19 that addresses the traffic signal and of that reconsideration that we would ask for designing cost of the light and any other alternative traffic control methods to provide safety of pedestrian and vehicles.

Yeah. I'll move for the reconsideration specifically of the conditions related to traffic installation and request information on alternatives and costs.

I second.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it 5-0. We're going to go to the next item, which is a fair let in.

Very quickly, Mr. Chair, not to go on too much longer, but just in terms of Ali Myers with the Office of General Counsel. The next steps, now that the board has granted reconsideration for the resolution, is that it would be considered void. And we will schedule a follow-up public hearing only on the narrow issue that you have raised. And we will schedule the public hearing to give a reasonable time for DOT and planning staff and the applicant to provide the additional information that you've requested in the motion and for the staff report to be posted at least 10 days before the public hearing. And then the board would consider just the issue that you have raised and would consider re-deliberate at that time.

Thank you so much.

A notice will be provided to all the parties of the public hearing date.

Thank you for that information and clarification. So now we're on item number two, Fairland-Briggs-Cheney Implementation Advisory Committee member appointments, where staff is recommending that the Planning Board appoint selected candidates to fill vacancies on the Fairland-Briggs-Cheney Implementation Advisory Committee. And I see that the staff is recommending that they appoint three candidates candidates to fill three vacancies on that committee for three-year terms, as stated in the committee bylaws. Those are Charlene Brooks, Earl H. Brooks, and Kimuel Chavez, and that they also recommend that the planning board reappoint the following candidates to serve three-year terms, as stated in the committee bylaws, which are The two are Timothy Dugan and Dan Wilhelm. So there's a motion on, yes, is there a motion to appoint these five to the Fairland and Briggs Chain Implementation Advisory Committee? Oh, oh, I'm sorry. No, please, please, I'm sorry. We have staff here to present this item, thank you. Sorry to take your work from you.

For the record, Sophie Kotzker, East County Master Plan Team. Today we're asking the board appoint three new members and repoint two returning members to the Fairland and Briggs Cheney Implementation Advisory Committee, as outlined in the September 10 staff report. The new members requested for the three-year term are Charlene Brooks, Earl H. Brooks, and Camille Chavez. The two returning members, which we are requesting reappointment to three-year terms as well, are Timothy Dugan and Dan Wilhelm. I'm happy to share further detail about the Fairland and Briggs Cheney plan, the plan vision and recommendations for the establishment of the Implementation Advisory Committee. an update on the recent work of the committee and discuss the process for recruitment at the board's direction.

Maybe you could just mention the recent accomplishments or whatever so that the board loves to hear about accomplishments. If you don't, my fellow board members, you're open to that? We are open. OK.

um so the planning board appointed the first 11 members two years ago in the summer of 2024 and since then the committee has been meeting monthly and has had several new members some of the current priorities include supporting a healthy community food system advocating for a continuous network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and advocating for brt and transit connections Some of the activities they've done over the past two years include meeting with MCDOT staff to learn about the CIP process and the Cherry Hill Bikeway project that adjoins the plan area. They've also worked with Montgomery Parks and the County Office of Food System Reliance to learn about community gardens and food system issues. They recently coordinated with the Prince George's County Parks and Recreation Department team to provide input on the Fairland Regional Park Master Plan update. And they have also met with Adventist Healthcare to learn about hospital levels of service and their community outreach system.

So can I ask you that how long this implementation advisory committee continue to meet on a monthly basis? And does it include any planning staff also, or county staff?

JESSICA MCVERY- Good afternoon. For the record, my name's Jessica McVery, planning supervisor for our East County Master Plan team. That's actually on the committee's agenda in September, is discussing the frequency of their meetings. And they have been meeting monthly over the last couple of years, with breaks here and there around the summer or the holidays. But they've really been working to get their momentum going, and they've done a good job of doing that, building the momentum. So this month, when they meet in September, they will be talking about how often they meet. Does it continue to be in-person monthly? Does it continue online? or is there a virtual option? And Sophie is our point of contact for the committee. So Sophie staffs those meetings, and then we have other staff that will support as needed.

Are they indefinite meetings? Is it a Ending time, or is it just indefinite?

The plan, the Fairland and Briggs Cheney plan does not have a sunset date, and their rules of procedure don't have a sunset date as of this time. It's still relatively new, and so we haven't evaluated the conclusion or the end date of the committee. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments from the board? Hearing none, thank you for your presentation. And is there a motion to approve the members to the Fairland and Brooks Cheney Implementation Advisory Committee as presented?

Yeah. I'll move for the board to appoint the candidates here for the Fairland and Brooks Cheney Advisory Committee.

I second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it, 5-0. Thank you so much. And we'll go into the minutes, approval of minutes. We have two this afternoon, the minutes of July 30th, 2026, where all commissioners can vote. So why don't we all go on that one. There's a motion to approve the minutes of July 30th, 2026.

Move to approve the minutes from July 30th.

Second. Yes. Great. All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. And there is a motion to approve the minutes of August 18th, 2026, where Commissioner Linden can vote. I'll move to approve the minutes from August 18th.

I second.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it, 4-0-1. Thank you. And we're going to Record Platts.

Mr. Chair, before we move on, I think we may have skimmed over a corrected resolution under preliminary matters C for 7749 Old Georgetown Road.

Okay, so I'm sorry. Oh, yeah. Sorry about that. Yeah. So is there a motion to approve corrected resolution for 7749 Old Georgetown Road site plan number 820240090 MCPB number 25-015.

Sorry, I'll move to approve the corrected resolution.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. The ayes have it, 5-0. We're going to our two record plats. There's a subdivision plat for Willerbaum Acres, and there's a subdivision plat for Greenwich Forest, where staff is recommending approval of these two record plats. Do I have a motion to approve the record plats?

I'll move to approve the record plats.

Second. All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it, 5-0. We're going on to regulatory extension requests. We have one this afternoon, the Woodland Estates Preliminary Plan Amendment and Forest Conservation Plan, the fourth request, where staff is recommending approval of the extension request. There is a motion to approve this extension request. I'll move to approve the extension request.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. The ayes have it, 5-0. And we're now on to our director's report, around-the-table discussion with Director Mr. Jason Sartori. I'm sorry. Long day, Mr. Sartori.

It's OK. For the record, Jason Sartori, happy to be here. And I want to begin just by congratulating Vice Chair Bartley on his appointment by this board to serve as vice chair for the next year. We look forward to continuing to work with you, and we're glad you're here as part of the board and look forward to working with you in this new role, too. So with that, I'll jump right into my agenda for this presentation this morning. We'll start, as I typically do, with a look ahead of things that are on the horizon for us at the planning department and with the board. talk a little bit about what we're referring to as the power of bi-county planning, and then give some personnel updates. And then I'm going to turn the microphone over to Paul Mortenson from the director's office to talk about our design excellence photo contest and announce our award winners this year. Look ahead. Here you can see some of the things we've got going on in the next couple of months that we wanted to bring to your attention. First, on October 1st, we have the third part of our three-part climate speaker series that we've been doing with the Parks Department and the Board. This particular one, the title is Building with Nature, Regenerative Solutions for Climate Resilience Communities, and my understanding is that Chair Harris will be moderating that discussion. That's a Thursday. As the last two have been, we'll begin with a reception here and then followed by the speaker presentation. On October 12, we will be at the PHP committee at the council to discuss the TOD designations that we've talked to the board about previously. We've got the four areas in Montgomery County that we are asking the state to designate as TOD areas officially. And in order to have that accomplished, we need the council to adopt a resolution asking for that. And so this was the committee work session on that resolution. On October 27, I'll be presenting, along with Chair Harris and Director Figueredo, the fall 2026 semiannual presentation to the full council. And after we're done with the photo contest announcements, Director Figueredo and I will be presenting to you the outline for the semiannual presentation. And then on November 20th, we have the Affordable Housing Conference of Montgomery County that many of us participate in. And on November 30th, we will be hosting here for the third year in a row the Montgomery County's House Delegation public hearing on local and by county bills here in this auditorium. I wanted to talk a little bit about the power of bi-county planning. And Montgomery planning and Prince George's planning earlier this week held our annual joint leadership retreat. Each year, the two departments take turns hosting this event as an opportunity to strengthen relationships, discuss shared opportunities and challenges, and identify ways to better collaborate across the two counties as one bi-county agency. This year's retreat was hosted by Prince George's Planning at Bladensburg Waterfront Park. And it really reinforced the value of strong cross-county relationships and the benefits of learning from one another as we work to serve our communities and strengthen the commission as a whole. We took a pontoon boat ride. And I'll show you some photos next about just some beautiful photos of the environment there. So it was a pontoon boat ride on the mighty Anacostia River, toured a historic caboose from the C&O Railroad, and had a productive meeting about how we can collaborate across the Bi-County region. I'm really grateful to Acting Director, Planning Director James Hunt and Prince George's and his team for hosting a really, really great event. We left the retreat with a renewed commitment to collaboration and a deeper appreciation for the expertise that exists across both departments. We discussed a wide range of topics from public benefits and incentive density to state legislation, integration of AI into our workflow, research collaboration, expedited reviews, housing policy, and innovative planning tools and techniques. And as we continue to face increasingly complex planning challenges, maintaining these strong relationships helps ensure that we are learning from one another and that we are positioning each of our departments for long-term success. I want to share a little bit more about what we learned about Bladensburg Waterfront Park. It's really beautiful, if you haven't been there, and what we learned about the Anacostia. So we always talk about the history, the origins of the commission as being first formed in 1927 to protect the waterways around Washington, DC. And we got to see the head of the Anacostia River, and it was very powerful and moving. The Bladensburg Waterfront Park is a 32-acre waterfront park located along the upper reaches of the Anacostia River. The park is operated by the Prince George's County Department of Parks and Recreation. It serves as a major recreational, educational, and environmental gateway to the Anacostia watershed. The river is one of the most historic waterways in the Washington region. It flows approximately 8 and 1 half miles from the confluence of the Northeast and Northwest branches in Prince George's County through Washington DC before joining the Potomac River. Historically, Bladensburg was a thriving colonial port because large ships could navigate the river this far inland. Over time, though, sedimentation and urban runoff reduced the navigability of the river and making restoration of the river a major environmental priority. And so again, really, it was just a beautiful, ecologically and just environmentally, and just a beautiful day, as you can see. And we saw a lot of great wildlife while we were out there, but also continued conversations about how we could work together while we were doing this in this beautiful setting. It was great. So I do have a few personnel updates. It's been almost a couple of months since I was last here with a director's report. So I did want to announce some new changes we have. First, I want to ask you to join me in welcoming Alana Sanders to our up county planning division as a planner three. Alana has experience in long range planning, development review, and design in multiple jurisdictions, including Washington DC, Florida, California, and most recently as a planner two at Prince George's Planning. She brings a strong background across regulatory and master planning, land use analysis, collaborative project management, and the production of high-quality graphics, reports, and planning materials. Alana earned her bachelor's degree in landscape architecture from the University of Maryland and master's degree in urban design from the University of California, Berkeley. So welcome to the team, Alana. I don't believe she's here. She's not here today. She might be watching online. Next, Christiana Limniadis is the Historic Preservation Division's New Cultural Resources Planner 2. Originally from upstate New York, Christiana has more than 15 years of experience in historic preservation. She began her career at Historic Albany Foundation, was previously the director of preservation services at Preservation Buffalo Niagara, and worked as an independent consultant in Louisiana and Tennessee. For the last three years, she has been program and outreach manager at Preservation Maryland. She will be working on historic preservation outreach services, master plan amendments and designations, the Asian American Heritage Project, and our new capital grant program. She has a master's degree in historic preservation planning from Cornell University and a bachelor's degree in history and political science from the College of St. Rose. Welcome to the team, Christiana. And I believe Christiana is here. Saria Abusola has joined the communications and engagement division as its new planner one. Saria is passionate about urban planning, environmental justice, and community engagement, specifically building communities that are sustainable and inclusive. She's the newest member of our engagement and information services team here on the second floor. Saria is currently wrapping up a master's degree in sustainable urban planning from George Washington University, and prior to that, received degrees from the University of California, Irvine. Please join me in welcoming Saria. And we are pleased to welcome our fall interns to Montgomery Planning. Atefi Sharzad is a graduate assistant with the East County Planning Division. She is a dual degree master's student at the University of Maryland studying community planning and historic preservation. She holds a bachelor's degree in urban planning and design from the University of Tehran. Her academic and professional experience includes community-based research, placemaking, public space design, and transportation safety, with a particular focus on equitable planning for women and children. Baden Pusey is a graduate assistant from the Research and Strategic Projects Division. He has worked as a research assistant in landscape ecology. He brings research design and methodology development, high quality map production, and project support to our team. Baden earned his bachelor's degree in environmental science and geography from UMBC and is working towards a master's degree in community planning from the University of Maryland. Carrick Hayes is a graduate assistant with the transportation planning division. He's supporting several transportation efforts, including the Clarksburg to Montgomery Village transportation study, the Wheaton plan, the 2027 travel monitoring report, and maintaining and updating the multimodal hybrid network. Carrick attends the University of Maryland School of Architecture planning and preservation, where he is pursuing a master's degree in community planning with a concentration in transportation. And finally, Amelia Zalubis returns to the Communications and Engagement Division, where she was an intern with us this past summer. Amelia is studying journalism, philosophy, politics, and economics at the University of Maryland. She serves as the managing editor at the university's independent student newspaper, The Diamondback. So please join me in welcoming Atefi, Baden, Carrick, and Amelia to the planning department. And I will say, just in reading those short bios, it's just really impressive the caliber of interns that we have here all the time at the planning department. And you can see why we feel so confident in being able to throw them right into the fire and have them work directly on everything that we're doing here. So really appreciate having them here. So I'll pause here to see if any of the board members had any questions or comments, anything they wanted to share. If not, I will be passing the mic over to Paul.

Yeah. Director Sartori, I just wanted to thank you for reaching out with the Prince George's planning team and building on that collaboration. That's really important for the commission. And I love that you highlighted the new employees, the full-time, and also the interns. It's so amazing, as you said, to see the talent that we were able to attract. So thank you.

Yeah. And we, I think, collectively recognize the importance of us collaborating and working together. And while we can work closely with other jurisdictions, and just this morning I was at a meeting with people from throughout the Greater Washington Partnership, which covers everything from Baltimore down to Richmond. But, you know, there's something special about the relationship with Prince George's County and the role that we collectively play here in the state of Maryland with one-third of the state's population. We drive the economy for the state. There's a lot, and you look at the diversity of the state, a lot of that is driven by the diversity that we have in our two counties. And so anything that we can do collaboratively I think can be really powerful, not just for the residents of Montgomery and Prince George's County, but also for the future of the state as a whole. So I think it's important for us to have those conversations. OK, with that, I will turn it over to Paul Mortenson, who will share the winners of the 2026 Design Excellence Photo Contest. And let me just do a switch of.

Thank you. So another year. As you know, our design excellence program was initiated in the planning department over 12 years ago to promote better design throughout the county in an effort to help distinguish Montgomery County throughout the region. Through better design of our neighborhoods, towns, and cities, we hope to encourage more people and jobs to locate here so that our county can thrive. is promoted through the Thrive Montgomery 2050 general plan, through our master plans and policy reviews, and through our development reviews. The people who do the work at Montgomery Planning and Montgomery Parks are a very, very talented bunch. The photo contest, which is in its 11th year, is intended to show our organizations and community just how talented we are. This year's contest was focused on the theme of human-designed nature. How do we create and enhance environments that support our daily lives, improve our surroundings, and possibly make our communities more bucolic, resilient, and healthy? This year we had 94 staff participants who submitted 395 photos. It was a great turnout and the second most submission of photos in our 11-year history, so that was really good. From those submissions, we had a small group of photographers cut the photos down, that jury, down to 27 finalists, which ultimately were whittled down to five winners by myself and the design and director, Sartori. As you will see here, these photos are outstanding. And it was not easy selecting five winners. The photos were judged on how they met the theme and their artistic composition within the photo. We will announce the winners at the end. And when they hear their name, they can come up and get their certificate. And then at the end, we'll have a photo with all of you. to get to the finalists. First, I'm going to do the 27 finalists and then the winners. As you can see, all of the theme, again, was human-designed nature. All the photos have to do something with how humankind has developed different places in the world, actually, and throughout our region as well with man-made features that feature the environment overall. These photos were really great, some of them very architectural in nature, some of them very historic, some of them featuring some of the better places within the county and the better places within the country and world. You can see some of the juxtaposition of very strict architecture and nature, and how that was woven together, and how we used some of historic elements of our architecture in the nature that we create in our parks and museums. The composition of the photos, as you can see, the color, the composition were all pretty outstanding. And so again, it was very hard to get down to 27. It was even harder to get down to five. Some of the photos here. If any of you haven't been to Ronda in southern Spain, you should take a trip. That's a great photo of it right there. Photos in the greater region and of different topics. Yards to pathways to out in nature. Some of the examples were wonderful. So of these 27 finalists, we had to get down to five winners. And so again, come on up and get your certificate. The winners will each get eight hours of leave so they get a day off to enjoy their winnings and to go take some more photos. A lot of these photos, not only are winners, the winning photos we show up in panels up in our office But we often use a lot of the photos that are in the library here from the submissions in some of the work we do to really show off good examples of how we would like to see precedent photos and how we'd like to see a future in the county. So the first winner is Holly Dunn. Holly's from the Horticulture, Forestry, and Environmental Education group in the Parks Department. And it was a great photo. It was something that stuck out on how you take something as simple as just clay pots and flowers planted in those pots, hanging them on a wall to really create a wonderful setting. I believe this is in France, but just a wonderful photo. And then the color and the composition as well were outstanding. Congratulations, Holly. The next winner is Kimia Zolfagarian. She's in the West County planning group in the planning department. A great shot of a pathway through nature, but then also nature kind of coming back and overtaking the man-made element with the mosses and the greenery growing here. It looks like something completely woven into the overall nature, which was just really outstanding with the photo. So congratulations, Kimia. The next winner is Ben Barber in the planning, design, and placemaking and policy group in the planning department. This photo really struck the jury just by the calmness of the water, the reflection of the bridge, and how the composition of the bridge within the nature, the small town within the nature, and then the reflection of it just made it so interesting that right away the jury was struck on such a beautiful photograph. The next winner. Way to go, Ben. The next winner is Alex Rixey. He's in the Transportation and Planning Group in the Planning Department. This is a beautiful shot of a boulevard kind of in a misty morning, just a wonderful shot with the parterres, the plants, the trees, framing the beautiful pathway in the middle of the boulevard itself. It was really a great shot. And it's very striking and just a wonderful photo of the theme of the human nature. Way to go, Alex. And the fifth and final winner for the year is Andrew Sarcinello. I've actually been. about where this photo was taken before I grew up in Washington State. So this is Mount Rainier. And it's very subtle, the human-imposed element within the plant in the photo itself. But the mountain framed by the trees and the stream with a bridge, a trail bridge that goes over the stream in a very subtle way that clearly does not overpower the nature, but is actually in harmony with it. So a great photo. Great, five great winners. Probably the first time in 11 years that we've had all five winners here at the same time for the presentation of the awards. So let's give them all one more time a great hand and then get a photo.

We could get you up, get a quick photo and then we'll be done. And Paul, thank you for organizing this. This is wonderful. It just shows also the creativity of the staff not only at their jobs, but outside. So thank you. I know it took time to do it, but it's so appreciative. Thank you. And thank you to the winners. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome back. We're on item number six, the 2026 fall semiannual outline, where the directors Sartori and Figueredo will outline what they expect to provide to the council soon. So I'll have both directors present what they are suggesting. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Chair Harris. And I'll begin because this particular semiannual, it will be planning that goes first. We alternate each semiannual, whether it's planning or parks. And just to correct that statement, actually, we always begin with comments from you. So that's how we'll begin this semiannual this fall. And then for Montgomery planning, if we could put that up on the screen just so they can see it. Sorry. So we have five main topics that we're going to address in the semiannual for Montgomery planning this year. The first one is the FY26 master plan support funding allocation. So you'll recall that with the FY26 budget, This was the first year, thanks to your advocacy and support on this, we received master plan funding for master plan funding generally, not specifically to certain master plans, which means, in a good way, that that is now part of our base budget that we get every year. We do need more, and we'll talk about that in the coming weeks as we talk about budget. But one of the promises we made to the county council when we moved to this was that we would, in the fall semiannual, outline for them how we spent the prior fiscal year's money for that so that they had some knowledge of how we were actually spending our money. So that's what this will be.

How much is that? Could you refresh my memory?

Sure. In FY26, it was $270. $203,000 that we had that we allocated across numerous master plans. And when we get into the budget discussion in the coming weeks, we will show you how much we spend on master plans and why we're asking for more on a regular basis for that. The next thing we'll talk about is give an update on our strategic plan. This is also something that we plan to do with the board. Before we go to the council, we've been taking time every month over the last year with our leadership to do a check-in internally on where we are with the 149 actions that we have in our five-year strategic plan. And this will be an opportunity for us to, at a high level, we don't want to go into too much detail with the council, let them know the progress we're making on that. The next thing will be a preview of upcoming master plans and other projects. We have a number of things that are in our work program, just to give them an update on the status of those, when they're going to be coming to the county council, and when we anticipate starting on some of the newer projects. The fourth item that we're going to talk about is a kind of overview of accomplishments of this county council. This county council, it's the 20th county council of Montgomery County. And we'd like to highlight, as you know, they'll be transitioning in December to the 21st county council. And so we want to take some time highlighting the accomplishments that they've had hand-in-hand with us in the planning department, the master plans that we've completed, the other projects that we've completed and work that we've done with them. We'll also take a little bit of time to highlight for our interactions and work closely with the five county council members who are rolling off the county council this year. And then lastly, this is new, we are going to take some time to recognize winners of the first annual Planning Directors Awards. So talking about our collaboration with Prince George's County and where we get to learn things from them, this is something they've done over there for a number of years and is going to be new here. So we just announced this yesterday to our staff that we have nominations open currently for staff to nominate other staff members or themselves or a team of staff for a planning director's award that we will announce at our next full staff meeting later in October. But then immediately after that, we'll ask them to join us at the county council so that they can get recognition of the work that they do and for the council and the public to learn a little bit more about the specific work. And just to give you a highlight, there are five categories for these awards. The first is our Employee Excellence and Growth Award, and that will recognize those who help their colleagues thrive, strengthen our workplace culture, and support professional development. The second is the Community and Partner Impact Award, honoring efforts that build trust, expand meaningful community engagement, and foster productive partnerships. The third award is the Efficient Performance Award, celebrating improvements that streamline processes, enhance collaboration, and make the department more effective and responsive. The fourth is the Innovation and Creative Solutions Award, recognizing creative thinking, new approaches, and the advancement of technology and best practices. And finally, the Leadership and Transformative Impact Award, honoring exceptional leadership and lasting contributions that advance our mission and thrive in Montgomery 2050. So kind of tying this last bullet here, the planning director's award to the second one, you may note that these five awards correspond directly to the five priorities we've identified in our strategic plan of our employees, the community and partners we serve, our efficiency, innovation, and leadership.

Thank you. So for Montgomery Parks during this fall semiannual, we're going to start out with highlighting some of the programs that we have in Montgomery Parks that bring people together. that reinforce social connection and, of course, intersect with and support the work of county government overall. Because while we think that people have an intuitive understanding of our work on the environment and in providing opportunities for people to get outdoor physical exercise, sometimes the social connectivity part I think needs a little bit more of an emphasis and a highlight. And again, in particular, in how it relates to the county's goals and work of its departments and how we can support that. So you can see that at the top there, some of the examples of the programs we'll be talking about. and then as always we are going to do an overview of our initiatives including projects new programs new new or updated policies because this is our you know the park the parks department is not in front of the council as frequently as the planning department is so for us apart from the budget or the you know specific projects that might come to the attention of the council where we need to be present to talk about them. Generally, the semiannual is the opportunity we have to update the council on all the work that we do. So some of the projects or initiatives that I'll – and I won't read them all, but I'll just pull out a couple of notes. We're going to talk about our Tacoma Urban Park facelift because that facelift, I think, is emblematic of what we're trying to do with the facelift program. We are, of course, always going to talk about our attempts to secure – outside funding. We'll do some policy updates like our athletic field donation policy and our updated e-bike policy, which, as you all recall, now allows Class 1 e-bikes on natural surface and hard surface trails, and some other project updates like, of course, Wheaton Regional Action Sports Park and a couple of others as well. So that's a brief outline of our outline.

Any questions or comments from the board? Please.

I totally agree with Midi that especially for the Parks Department, this is or time to be able to highlight our parks. So I totally agree with the goal and items that you have put in here. I think it would be good also if there are any kind of, and I don't know if it has been there, any kind of achievement, big achievement that we have had this past year to include that or anything that has had a lot of public, you know, questions or controversial among the public that our council people have heard from their constituents. That's our chance that we can clearly provide our side of of what we are doing and what is the purpose of it. In regard to the planning, I have a couple of just input in regard. I saw that you have the accomplishment for this 20th Council. I think you have to put the accomplishment for the planning department also attached to that because their accomplishment, you know, they do a lot more and we do a lot more that is different than it's not intertwined. So I know that when it comes to CDA master plans and things like that, we go to them. But we do a lot of other things in here that we don't go to the county council. So you may want to put some of the highlights on those accomplishments. In regarding of the Director's Award I think is a great idea. I think also it would be very helpful that each award that you talk about to make sure that you show the connection that how that impact the residents of the county and why we are doing what we are doing. Of course we cannot do that without having really good staff to do it but having the staff and getting the award the final impact is not really the staff, but is the residents of the county. So those five different areas are areas that impact our community and what they do and when they, you know, They are providing efficiencies or they're doing the community service or bringing the community together. That's how our residents are going to see the fruit of their work.

That's really helpful, and I will say I think you'll notice that I just, I don't know, I must like giving myself difficult decisions because as difficult as it was to decide which was going to win those photo contests, the photo contest, it'll be equally difficult, if not more difficult, because our staff is so outstanding to be able to call the list of nominations that we'll get down to five winners. But yes, we'll make that connection so that people can see how this impacts their community.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? I have just, thank you both for presenting. I think they always, you always give great presentations to council, and I think the topics you highlight will be great for them. And the piece about honoring the council members, I think they would, especially the outgoing one, I think that would be great for them. One of the things that, maybe alluding to what Commissioner Petum said, I think a key accomplishment that your team did during this year, especially in order to maybe pushing economic development, was this, you know, and it's also honoring the council members that pushed that ZTA, was this office to residential, and what has come out of it. And so you probably are going to do it in one way, but it would be just nice to, like, okay, you did, and then over even the past six months, what, you know, look at the explosion of deals that hopefully will create And then your work with the EDC around economic development and what the planning staff did around the TIFs to help jumpstart this. Well, we did our part, jumped on it for the, what's it called, the Viva White Oak pieces. And the council eventually, they approved the TIF. So I don't know if you can work. There's so much to work in, but just how your work also is impacted. a lot of the things going on in the county. But all good.

Can I just add, while we are at it, the expedited review, I will shine on that. Because a lot of them have come in front of us. And I know that that's not easy. I think that we just may want to just push some information inside.

We appreciate you bringing this to us. I look forward to this happening soon. Thank you. We're going to just take a couple minute break and then go with our next item, which is the fiscal year 28 operating budget overview. And Ms. Charles will be here to do that. OK, thank you. We'll be right back. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome back. We're on item number seven, fiscal year 28 operating budget overview. And we have presenting our executive director, Mr. Bill Spencer, and Terry Charles, our budget director. Welcome.

Thank you. Again, Terry Charles, Corporate Budget Director. I'm before you this afternoon to share some information regarding the early outlook for the FY28 budget. Today's presentation will follow last year's framework, as shown here on the slide. I will quickly go over the annual timeline and review some key trends. Then I'll share the FY28 estimates for both property tax revenue and the major expenditure categories. And then after that, I'll touch on the county's forecast and conclude with a summary of the preliminary financial condition of each fund. So with that, as you know, staff is already preparing the FY28 budget proposals, today's session. begins your clock and work as the board that reviews and approves the proposed budgets. That is then sent as required. to the county executive and council by January 15th. This year's budget work sessions are scheduled as follows. First presentation on October 22nd, and if needed, a follow-up session November 5th. And then your approval sessions are calendared for November 12th and November 19th. And that, of course, will bring us to the point where the commission as a whole will approve by December 16th. And then as the norm, We will, with the new year, then await the county executive's budget submission in mid-March and participate in the council's review process that, of course, ends by June 1st and, once again, culminates in the commission adopting the FY28 budget as scheduled right now for June 16th. Now moving to key trends. Let's start with our primary revenue source, which is, of course, property taxes. As you know, the budgeted tax receipts are based on two major factors, the value of the accessible base and the approved tax rate. As shown here, the annual growth in the accessible base has been steady with acceleration. Since FY20, the real property accessible base value has grown on average annually by 3.9%. with the more recent annual growth falling even higher, between 4% and 5.5%. And that is between FY23 and FY26. However, as noted here, the FY28 expectations will continue what appears to be a new trend of decelerating growth, slowdown in the rise of the property values, with the expectation being for FY28 just 3.3%. This is likely prompted by the current regional macroeconomic shifts, including, of course, the cooling of the demand for real estate and our possible regional economic recession. The next slide gives you a visual of the approved property tax rates since FY19. Both funds experienced a tax rate increase for FY27, our current year. The admin fund was granted an increase of 11.6%, putting it at 2.112 cents, the highest rate shown. In contrast, the parks fund rate was increased by 5.9%, which returned it to a previous high mark of 6.50 cents. Visually, you can see that the park rate has experienced a bit more volatility than the admin fund. Let's briefly look at the expenditure trends since FY20. Between FY20 and FY26, the admin fund has on average increased its annual spending rate by about 5.7%. And as noted on the slide, the growth rate has begun to accelerate. And partially contributing to the growth rate acceleration is the increase in the transfer for the development review. And then for the park fund, they too have a similar average increase in annual spending. Theirs comes in at 5.9%. And again, as noted on the side, that growth rate more recently is now edging up to 6.5% per year. The FY28 estimate for property tax revenues. Assuming no change in the tax rate and the base value growing, At 3.3%, the admin fund can anticipate an additional $1.26 million, which would basically take it to $49.3 million. The PARP fund can anticipate an additional $3.88 million, which would land it at about $151.1 million. Again, this assumes no tax rate increase. will turn our attention to how those new monies will likely be used. Presented here is a list of some of the major cost pressures that we face. Going one by one, wrong way, Terry. One, beginning with the estimated cost for the benefit package, our current benefit package. The annual change is estimated at 5%. which is nearly two points lower than this time last year, which was at 6.7%, and has previously been shared by our HR director, Director Allen. This is a favorable result due to the newly bidded package. The admin fund will go from nearly $5.2 million in supportive benefits to $5.4 million. And the park funds contribution will go from $17.2 million to $18.1 million. The next category is our OPEB outlook. We do not yet have the completed Bolton study. We will likely receive that at the end of next month. However, we have assumed the need to increase the budget over last year. And as you may recall, this actually was our bright spot last year, where we were able to actually capture some savings and have it reduce the contribution by $500,000. But again, that's not anticipated to occur moving forward in FY28. So what you have before you right now is us assuming a 5.5% increase in the claims cost and basically a flat pre-funding requirement. And as a result of using that assumption, the admin fund will contribute $1.87 million. up from the current $1.79 million that is budgeted. And the park funds similarly will need to contribute $6.63 million up from $6.36. And again, we will be able to finalize these numbers when we receive the final report from Bolton.

Is this increase, or is it just that OPEB is defined every year? There is no baseline budget for OPEB. I forgot.

This is the increase on the base budget. So every year, we will be increasing because, as you understand, OPEB is reflective of us trying to pay a portion for pre-funding to get ahead of the liability. But more importantly, and what typically actually drives the increase we see annually, is the claims. the actual experience of the retirees on the health program. And so that has been running anywhere between 5% to 7% per year.

So OPEB usually funds the retirees' health and also compensation. The compensation doesn't come from OPEB, correct?

Correct, no.

So that's just the health requirement.

Yeah, OPEB is the retiree health program. And then, of course, the pension. aspect of it is in our retirement line item. So moving on to retirement, as shared by the consultant yesterday, this is the year where we experienced the greatest impact from the new experience study that was just completed. As noted here, we are preliminarily anticipating an increase of 14.2%, which for Montgomery County as a whole represents an increase of 2.27 million. Just as a reference point, last year at this time, we were looking at an 8% increase. And hopefully, this 14.2 will actually decline a bit when we get the final in late October. We did experience that last year. In terms of a slight reduction over the original 8%, it did drop down a bit. So hopefully, the 14.2 will be something less when we actually finalize the numbers. What's driving it again is the fact that, The retirement board approved a new funding policy that they discussed a little bit yesterday. They moved from an amortization of an open rolling 15 years to a layered 15 years. Also, as they indicated yesterday, that is combined with the fact that they updated the demographic assumptions, like the mortality table. They also had to increase. the actuarial liability resulting from what the experience revealed, which is greater than expected retirements, additional COLA costs, and salary rates. As well as they acknowledged yesterday too, administrative expenses was increased just a bit as well. And so as a result, the admin fund will contribute $4.5 million up from the current year's budget of $3.9 million And it's anticipated that the Park Fund will need to contribute $13.8 million up from the $12.1 million that is currently budgeted. Next, cost pressure is new to our slide deck. And the family program, of course, will be newly budgeted in FY28, as you, again, have previously heard the HR director, Alan, speak to. This mandated program goes in effect in 2027 with benefits becoming available in January of 2028. As the details for shared funding and implementation are still currently being worked on, we have simply assumed the highest cost scenario, which currently for Montgomery County is estimated at $1 million and split, as you see, between the admin and park fund. The next slide speaks to our employee compensation outlook for FY28. As is the norm, the numbers provided here before you reflect full annualization of the just approved wage adjustments for FY27 and the provisioning for a salary marker for FY28. And so we are anticipating from Montgomery County taking care of that will result in an additional $2.6 million needing to be budgeted. The slide speaks to the operating budget impact and debt service requirements, which, of course, impact the park fund. And right now, the estimate reflects a total of $1.1 million, with $420,000 associated with bringing new facilities and programs online. and $693,300 associated with debt service. And again, that debt service number is dependent upon putting to market both in the current year $9 million, but also issuing another $9 million during FY28. Here puts it all together in terms of, of what the outlook adds up to. And as shown here, the major base changes add up to. And as shown here, the nearly $1.9 million in the admin fund, again, we will refer to these as base changes, amounts to a 3.8% increase over the current year's budget. Again, that means minimally we are saying that the admin fund, with just covering base adjustments, will need to be minimally $51.7 million. Using that same framework on the park fund, our major base changes at this point, we would estimate at $8.8 million. That is a 5.7% increase. So again, the base, required base, is growing at 5.7%. over the current year's budget, which is $155 million. So again, minimally, we would be needing to request $164 million prior to any discussion of enhancements or otherwise. Now let's just briefly look at the published county outlook. Montgomery County's outlook has indicated that Again, it acknowledges the fact that the current budget increased by 4.3% or by $264.4 million. The projected rate of growth from FY27 to 28 is actually negative, as published. They're anticipating a decline of 2.1% or needing to reduce expenses by $134.4 million. This forecast includes the fact of the recognition that they are experiencing growth in revenues at 2.3%, which should provide them new monies of $155 million. But they realize that what has already been committed to in terms of the CIP PAYGO support, as well as a statement to not use one-time reserves at the same level that they have been budgeting, that would create what? again, is in their published outlook at this point. They will be releasing another outlook, of course, as we get closer to the end of the calendar year. What all does this mean? I will conclude by just sharing the financial condition as it appears right now in the administration fund. The fund's preliminary ending balance, and again, we are still making our way through year-end closeout activity, but the fund's preliminary ending balance was higher than anticipated due to lower expenditures. We've already talked about the fact that the county did increase the admin tax rate by 11.6%. And in FY27, they used less than $1 million to balance the budget. So as a result, the remaining current balance in the admin fund is estimated at $4 million. Now, we just went through the major costs, which for the admin fund, the base added to 3.8% or $1.9 million. That's growing faster than the revenues projected at 2.5% or $1.3 million. Again, assuming no property tax rate increase, the good news is that this fund has sufficient reserves available to close the variance and meet the projected reserve requirement of $1.5 million for FY28. So this fund is better positioned to weather meeting the base changes. In contrast, the Park Fund, again, this fund Ending preliminary ending balance is higher than anticipated, again, due to lower expenditures. Same concept, a tax rate was granted, not nearly as high as what was given to the admin fund, 5.9%. And as you can see, also, there was greater reliance on the use of fund balance for the current year's budget than what was experienced in the admin fund. So as a result, the remaining current balance for the park fund is estimated at $3.9 million. Again, the major costs, as added up right now, we say base equals 5.7%, or at least $8.8 million. And the revenues are expected, again, to grow at just 2.5%, giving us 3.8%, leaving quite a variance, assuming no property tax increase. The issue here for the Park Fund is that their current projected reserves are insufficient to close the variance and, in fact, are less than what the projected reserve requirement is for FY28, which, again, we're estimating would minimally be $4.7 million. So to cover the estimated FY28 major cost changes, the tax rate would need to increase by minimally $0.15 or $2.3, rising it from the $6.50 tax rate that currently exists to $6.65. And again, that would just be covering the base adjustments and being able to meet the FY28 required reserve amount, no incentives or otherwise.

Does that mean you've included the time to care funds that's loaded with that and the pension increase? Yes.

But no enhancement?

No, yes. We're talking base changes, no enhancements for the park fund. There was a desire to to lower the vacancy rate and put, for lack of a better way of describing it, more butts in the seats to do much needed work. So none of that is included in what we're calling the base changes right now. That would be on top of.

OK, great. Great. Thank you for sharing great news. No, but I would rather have the news than no news. So a couple of questions I have.

Sure.

The county's numbers, they're also budgeting for their own portion of the Time to Care Act, right?

Now, it's interesting. They sent out a template to basically look for major changes, and one thing that I found was interesting was that was not added to it, so I added it. on our submission back because, again, everybody in the state of Maryland is going to be experiencing that increase. So it was kind of interesting that it wasn't on the template. But they're going to need to factor it in.

Are we factoring in a half year or a whole year?

Whole year.

But even though our budget is a fiscal year You're starting, so we have to start paying in January of 2028, right?

It is unclear when we will actually have to turn over a payment because we're in the process of needing to figure out who our vendor is that's going to administer the program on our behalf. But we are anticipating and know that we're liable, if you will, to provide some payment during FY28. We also understand that there is a desire to pre-fund this, which is why they're asking all of the participants, if you will, to begin making contributions in FY27 to build up the fund. Because I mean, this is going to be similar to OPEB or the retirement fund. You're going to be kind of chasing an uphill, because we don't know what the experience is actually going to be. So it's going to take a moment. So again, everybody is trying to encourage the practice of if you have the money, put it away. it's going to sit in the space that it's going to sit, and it will be drawn available. So if you front load here, you'll have less of a payment maybe the following fiscal year. So right now, again, this is just for assumption purposes. We took the take a full year and the full funding to just make sure we build our budget in a framework that we can accommodate what the actual bill that will be handed to us during FY28 will be from our new vendor once they're determined.

OK. We have to do what we have to do. What we had heard during the MAKO is that you have to start paying. If you form your own club, you don't need to start paying until 2028. So to save a half a year, I don't know. But you'll keep going. Also, we learned about the pension increase yesterday. I had also heard that even though this is because they're doing this experience study and you're going to big hit the first year, do you think that, and I heard it may go down the second, third? I mean, is there a way to, what do you call it, even that out? So we aren't taking such a big hit the first year. Does that make sense? Maybe I'm wrong when I heard someone said maybe the second year isn't as So if that is true in this time, because dollars are so important, can that be evened out in some place? But I'm just throwing out the question. Right, no.

I mean, I don't think it would be wrong to anticipate something less than 14% moving forward, because again, it's one of those enclosing the 15-year period, you're doing a one-year adjustment up to that new number. So the new number will be baked in there. If investments continue to do well enough and all, then we should be able, the pre-funding amount should stay kind of where it is with moderate increases. So I think that The 14% is likely to come back down to kind of what our experience has been in that 5% to 7% range, because again, that's being driven by the actual benefit payments. The pill that we're swallowing is the fact that in closing the amortization, we decided to put more towards pre-funding. But that pre-funding base now, once we swallow that pill, it's supposed to even out. It's still the same principle that the pre-funding should be kind of one of those more moderate. That's the whole principle of the 15 and moderating the expense. This should be something. We should be looking at something less than this, far less than this next year.

The consultant, when I spoke with the consultant, was unwilling to say how much less. I was trying to pin him down a little bit to get a better idea. an estimate, but they were saying there's so many variables that typically there is a, no matter what, whenever you change assumptions, there is a hit at the first year. It's less in the succeeding years, how much less they will not give me a definite because of changes in your own experiences and mortality rates and everything else. The retirements may go up as they did this past year. All I can say with some type of clarity and definitively is that, yeah, as Terry has said, there will be a trend downward, but how much we can't say at this moment. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments from the board? And thank you.

I just have a question about the family. And it's just lingering. Employees contribute to VODAT, correct?

So as the mandated program was approved, it does provide for for shared funding, meaning employer and employee. There's some discussion that some folks are considering the employer taking 100%. And so again, and I'll let Mr. Spencer continue, the funding split has not been determined for us.

So right now, the cost is all on employees. Because my understanding that the first time employer, that The idea for the state was that they start deducting a share from employee ahead of time to create funding. This is what I remember when they told us. I don't know. Maybe I don't remember it right. To create some pre-funding or buffer that they'd be able to pay the funding. But even if they're not going to do that, I think that it should be some kind of share of funding. I do not know who has the final approval on that, that it comes. It's something that comes to the planning board because that impacts the budget, and I do not know how the budget impact would be that everybody has to pay for that, and it just comes from the employer because most of the benefit we share. the employees and the employer they share.

I think we are looking at possibly a 50-50 share. Of course, there's going to be interest groups, unions, that will be looking to alter that because everything is negotiable when it impacts employee benefits and salary. It'll be up to us to see what's reasonable and what's going to be the practice in there.

And when are we going to make that decision? Because that impacts how much you have shown that, correct? How much it would be available.

And again, that was more the reason why we leaned into using the highest case scenario, which would be 100% employer. And then hopefully as implementation discussions continue, we will be able to. reduce, but we're preparing ourselves for that.

So right now is the worst case? Correct. OK, thanks.

But you will have an answer before we submit the budget, the final budget, about who's the split.

We should.

OK. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? Thank you for presenting, and if we have any other questions, we'll get back to you. I appreciate you for coming this way. Thank you. All right, so we're going to take a two-minute break, and we'll end with our item number eight, Special Event Assistance Program, where staff is recommending approval of this Special Event Assistance Program. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. We're on our last item of the planning board meeting. It's item eight, special event assistance program, where the park staff is recommending approval of the special event assistance program. And we have Christy Williams leading this presentation. Welcome.

Thank you. Can you hear me OK? Yeah. OK. Good afternoon. I'm Christy Williams, division chief for public affairs and community partnerships. Joining me is Javis Adiojo, Park Permit Section Manager, and Robin Hulvey, Special Event Permit Coordinator, and Susan Stafford, to my left, our Communications Director. Thanks for the time today to tell you about this important program. Today we're seeking your approval of the program that, when passed, would establish a consistent, transparent framework for considering financial assistance requests for special events held in Montgomery Parks. The program's goal is to continue supporting community events that advance our mission while ensuring we manage limited public resources. So why start with a definition? This definition for special event is the key to the entire program. If an activity doesn't meet these criteria, it isn't a special event. And none of the assistance framework we'll be discussing today applies to it. So two things are worth emphasizing here. First, the host is always a third party, never Montgomery Parks. Our own programming is budgeted separately, so nothing here changes how we fund department-run events. Second, these criteria matter because they signal real cost. An event that draws a crowd, sells goods, and needs extra cleanup or police coverage creates staffing and service demands beyond routine park operations. That is the cost we've been absorbing. So special events are an important way for residents to connect with parks, recreation, culture, health, and community life. So let me take you through some of our current challenges. Today we face four primary challenges. First, we have no formal guidance governing fee waiver decisions. We have recommendations following an audit of the waiver process. That audit informed the program before you. Second, applicants may receive different outcomes depending on their timing with their request, circumstances around the request, and the decision makers. So third, we lack a structured way to evaluate the public benefit generated by the events receiving that assistance. And finally, the operational costs associated with large events, including staffing, overtime, public safety, all continue to increase. So together, these factors create inconsistency and make it difficult to demonstrate accountability. I'm going to turn this presentation over to Robin Hulvey to bring you through the special event financials for 2025. That's the last full year that we studied.

We supported 218 special events. Of those, 51 received either full or partial fee waivers. representing approximately 23% of all special events. Of those events, 46% of special event fees were ultimately waived. These figures demonstrate that fee assistance is a meaningful component of our special event program and warrants clear policies and oversight. Already occurring, and in some cases represents a significant investment, The events listed here all received waivers for at least $1,000, with some receiving substantially higher levels of support. not whether assistance occurs, it already does. The question is how we make those decisions consistently and transparently moving forward. Looking more closely at the financial impact, over $150,000 in fees were waived during 2025. The largest category was park police overtime costs, followed by grounds fees and operations overtime. Our analysis supports focusing the future assistance program on application, facility, and grounds fees while recovering unbudgeted direct costs like overtime. down the waived fees from 2025. These are real costs and lost revenue. Park Police overtime is by far the largest expense, followed closely by grounds fees and staff overtime. With the help of this program, we intend to create consistency in decision making, align financial assistance with organizational priorities, recover unbudgeted costs like overtime, and reduce ambiguity for both applicants and staff. Ultimately, the objective is to create a process that is fair and sustainable.

So the remainder of the presentation outlines who qualifies, what events qualify, how requests are evaluated, and how funding decisions would be made. We want to provide clear expectations to applicants while giving staff an objective framework for decision making. to be transparent, equitable, and mission driven. It should steer our limited financial assistance towards events that deliver the greatest public benefit and advance Montgomery Park's priorities. In return, that assistance should create a shared value for the entire community. One of the important aspects of the program is defining what constitutes a direct public benefit. For purposes of our evaluation, benefits may include improving social connection, expanding access to recreation, encouraging physical activity, and or incorporating conservation, outdoor education, and stewardship elements. These criteria help us distinguish between events that primarily serve a private audience and those that advance broader community goals. Eligibility. is intentionally focused on organizations whose activities primarily benefit the public. Eligible applicants include local governments, municipalities, civic organizations, and nonprofit organizations in good standing with the state. are used appropriately. Private events, ticketed events, political events, religious events, and for-profit events and activities would not qualify for assistance. Policy also establishes clear fiscal boundaries. Assistance would only apply to grounds and facilities fees. Application fees, vendor-related costs over time, and the other direct operational expenses would remain the responsibility of the event organizers. Funding would be subject to annual budget availability, and approval in one year would not guarantee any future assistance.

Now I'd like to show you what our process will look like. Under the administration, applicants would submit both their permit and their request for assistance through a single streamlined process. Applications would be reviewed twice annually by an internal committee representing multiple operational perspectives. The committee would score applications and provide recommendations, while final approval authority would remain with the director or her designee. Rubric is critical because it replaces subjective decision-making with objective evaluation. Applications are reviewed using consistent criteria, ranked according to merit, and funded until the budget allocation is exhausted. This creates decisions that are explainable and equitable. Proposed rubric includes seven categories totaling 100 points. The greatest weight is assigned to direct benefit to the park system, physical accessibility planning, collaboration on potential marketing opportunities, and equity considerations. The structure ensures that assistance is directed toward events that most strongly align with parks priorities. Rate on two application cycles annually. Organizations planning spring and summer events would apply in December and receive notification by February. Organizations planning fall and winter events would apply in May and receive notification in July. This approach gives applicants predictability while allowing staff to evaluate requests collectively and allocate resources strategically. Late or incomplete applications will not be considered.

Thank you, Robin. If you all support the program, our next steps would be to finalize the scoring rubric, establish the review committee, develop public-facing guidance and communication materials, and set up tracking and reporting mechanisms. We begin with special events occurring after January 1, 2027. This timeline allows adequate opportunity for outreach to event planners, employee training, and for marketing and training of both our staff and the public on how to use the program. By setting clear criteria and funding limits, Montgomery Parks can continue supporting community events while ensuring accountability for these resources. Again, we ask you to support the program, and we thank you for your time and attention. And do you have any questions?

Well, thank you. Thank you for thinking ahead and creating a plan so that it's more transparent and it's easier to deal when you set aside a certain amount that you're going to allow when you do this. So thank you for thinking through that and bringing it to the board. Are there any questions or comments from the board members?

Yes.

Could you please? Let's go to the previous slide. Okay, so the fee waiver is just for the ground fees, facility fees, or use of the amenities. You had a slide that showed the component of cost. Could you take it to that one? Are you talking about slides? The graph bar. Yeah. That you had the component. Okay, yeah, yeah. Go back here. So basically, if I want to circle here that what fees could be waived, it's the second one that is the ground fee. That's the total. So that's like about, for total, would be like $17,000. And it's the shelter, that is another 1027. Field court is another six. an application fee that is another $1,500. So people can request for waiver on these. Yes. And are these going to be full waiver? Because you have this rubric, you have this chart. So you may decide that you're going to give a full... waiver maybe on the ground fees, but we're going to charge on the other ones, or altogether, we're going to just do 20% discount or 30%. Using your matrix, how do you decide that you're going to do the percentage that is fairly decided. That's one question I have. The second question is that are people have, because I would see that people come and they say, well, even though with your 50% discount, Our biggest part is paying staff and overtime or other ones that you are not going to cover. Is there an appeal process that you have? And I could see that, especially that we have doing those for free for some time. I saw that it was zero. That was very expensive. I could foresee that there's some people going to start complain and bring it probably take it to the upper level. So how can we support it? First of all, I totally support you.

Thank you.

I think that is a fair and right thing to do. So that's put aside. Now I'm just thinking that I think this is going to be probably some people that are not going to be happy about it. And they're going to complain. What is the appeal process? And if someone says that, okay, I'm going to bring my own staff, I'm going to bring my own volunteer, I'm going to bring my own thing to do it, let me do it, because this could stop some of the people not to do the special event anymore. And, you know, I understand we don't want it, but I understand. So, What are the issues and how are we going to take care of those? Because I could see some people go straight to the politicians and complain to that.

So I will let Kristi and her team handle your first question. As to the second, there is no appeal. The reason we're bringing this policy to the board is we want it to be a board approved policy. That some fees do not get waived at all because they represent a direct cost to the department. and that in order to qualify for any kind of fee waiver, and we still want to offer fee waivers because it's in our interest under certain circumstances to have outside events in parks when they meet the criteria that were outlined at the beginning. But we want it to be, again, a predictable process with clear standards so that there's more clarity for the applicant and also for staff as we're reviewing these fee waivers as well. So the idea is that the policy is what sets the expectation.

Yeah. I could see that the policy, if we approve that, there are certain things that clear cut. Staff cannot be included. So that's a clear cut for that. But then the part that you're going to decide is 20%, 30%, 40% or whatever.

So I can answer that part for you. The way that we used to do it, you know, we'd sometimes give a 25%, a 50%, or a full fee waiver. That's gone with this program. But you have the matrix now. Right. So everyone, every event organizer would be paying, you know, the application fee and over time, if you were looking at this slide in front of us, this park police over time and staff over time. Those are real costs. They would be paying for those. And they still also have to put down security deposits for damage and all of this. So really, what's going to happen here is if you were to go back to the slide with the 18 events on it. I think it's slide eight. here is you're gonna see this list no no no slide eight it's like the one with the yeah there you go okay so this is as she told us you know we had 218 events and this is just 18 events and this is the majority of the funding that we had last year so when we stop waiving the overtime fees and everybody pays the same entry, the application fee, and they're considered it the same way with constant criteria, what's going to happen is this money is going to be distributed to many more events. So it becomes more of a community benefit rather than a small group of people benefiting from it.

I totally agree with you. That's what I said, that I support you 100%. But I'm expecting that some of the, you know, they're going to be, you know, appealing. I do not know if we are, well, I guess that we have to be ready for that, that So the idea is that this is it, and this decision is done and approved by the planning board, and this is how we proceed. And we may lose some of these, but hopefully we gain some more. We don't know.

So we have had conversations with some of these groups that have had a full waiver in the past. And they're aware of our budget constraints. They understand it. And they also understand that overtime is a real cost that we do pay. And so I think they understand the aim to be more equitable and to level the field. So it's not an easy change for anybody. But it's understandable.

I think it's going to the right way. I think that it's time to do that. And that would be helpful. I just could see that some people say that we're going to bring our own volunteers and let us do it. Just be ready.

I do not know what is the process. I don't think we'd have a problem necessarily. People bring volunteers to staff their events. There are certain, like park police overtime and staff, our own staff overtime for helping support the events. That can't be waived, but we absolutely expect and hope you can't bring your own police. But we expect and hope that people will ramp up the number of volunteers who can support their events.

Yeah, that's to reduce the number of our staff. That's a good thing. That would be something that maybe we could look into that they could bring volunteers that do some of the work that I know that we cannot not have our staff there. They have to be there, totally supported. But maybe we could make it a little bit less that the cost can come down.

Thank you. A couple questions. One is that this now you'll see if people plan ahead because you have two and maybe after a year or two you can figure out do you need a third one or a fourth but it'll give you some feedback on will people plan ahead like you want. And the other is do you have a Because you're going to do this twice a year, like you say, okay, I'm going to give $50,000 in fees a year. I don't know. Is there a cutoff where you're going to divide it between two? How is that going to work? Have you thought through your budget?

So the scoring has to meet a minimum threshold to even be considered. And then what we would do is once it's ranked, the scores are ranked and delivered to Mitty, we would be giving her a recommendation of the ones to fund that would deplete the budget that we're given. We are now working with a capped budget rather than just revenue loss.

Right. Right.

And I think the number that we had been discussing internally was maybe, like you said, around $50,000 a season. But again, that's foregone revenue. Right. I understand. So we can be, you know, We can be a little bit flexible as we evaluate how the program is working.

Great. I'm very supportive of the program. Let's get it going and see how it is. And any other? Commissioner Linden.

Yeah. I actually had kind of a similar question or building off of that. I was curious, considering we're splitting it into two different times of year now. In the past, have applicants for these waivers, has it roughly been equal? for these different times of year? And historically, have the waivers requested and or given also been relative? I'm just sort of wondering if it makes sense to have an even pot of money, or if there's any reason why, like I'm looking at the schedule again, April to August, for example, is that any busier than September through March, and therefore worthy of perhaps a relatively higher share of the pot?

Yeah, hi. This is Robin again. Yeah, I would say they're about equal. We have as many events in the spring as the fall. So really it's May and June that are busy and September and October. So it really evens out.

Okay, yeah, that makes sense. My only other question is kind of in the spirit of I do agree that this seems fundamentally more equitable and, in a broad sense, more community-oriented. Everyone gets a little bit instead of a few get a lot. Even so, I imagine that, of course, there will be some organizations that are either late to the game or aren't aware of the program. I'm wondering, what are we doing to maybe reach out to people about this new program and because the deadline, I'm looking again at the schedule, the deadline for applications for the spring, for example, is December 15th. Plenty of organizations are going to hit that no problem because they're very good at organizing. They're very organized. I imagine there might be some, less so, who are still worthy applicants, but they can't get their stuff together in time. So is there any process for maybe either holding back like a little bit kind of waiting for like late Kermit to come in, you know, or I guess I'm just trying to get at the idea of like smaller organizations that are not quite as organized as the big fish and therefore, you know, don't really get in the queue on time. Or maybe that's, maybe that's not an issue to solve for now. Maybe we kind of see how it goes for the first few years and, and come back to it.

Yeah, I think that that is what we'll be challenged with. Susan's going to tell you about the communication strategy for all of this, but one of the messages that we are going to drive home is that the awards really don't start until 2028, right? We start making adjustments in 2027 and do a lot of public education. So, you know, the... Part of the messaging that's going to be the most challenging is making them understand that we are serious about that deadline. It's important because if you want equal access to funding and equal criteria and equal evaluation and you want everything to be community-based and not given to just one person, right, you got to hold the line on the date for the deadline.

And I would just add that grant deadlines are normal.

So we're going to have to do a lot of messaging around it, though. So I'm going to let Susan tell you.

I think that was the real driver behind the other question around how are we getting the word out in the community.

Hi. Susan Stafford, Assistant Division Chief for Public Affairs. and community partnerships. So we have a marketing plan to support this initiative. Obviously, the first thing we're going to be doing is communicating with existing permit holders and folks that have done these special events, making sure that they understand this new process, doing the outreach with them. We'll also be rolling this into our marketing tools that we're already using, building a web page for this, using our social media channels, our e-newsletter. So we have a lot of different ways to communicate with the public in doing that community outreach.

So if someone misses, so they still can't have the event. They're not just going to get the waiver. So it's on them to be late. All the waivers, they have application. Nobody's going to stop them to come to the park and have it, but everybody can go as long as there is a space available and they pay the fee. They're all welcome to do it.

And just to clarify, I had a similar question, but I just wanted to clarify. So for things like just basic park rental applications and things like that, for something that's not a full-fledged large-scale event, most of these are sort of the... I like the Al one, too. I didn't know the Al one before. That one's neat. But just lease of space without fee waivers and stuff, I think, to Commissioner Petter-Williams is still acceptable without that. It's about three and a half months of lead time for each deadline. And I do share some of Commissioner Linden's concerns about smaller organizations, but I think there's still accessibility for smaller events that aren't these full-fledged, large-scale, tent-style. I mean, you're talking about marathons, walks, the recreations, big picnic, things of that nature, rather than smaller reservations of park facilities and things like that. Okay.

I have more of a practical comment and compliment. First, you all did an outstanding job in your research in presenting it today, and I understand what you're trying to accomplish, and I think you're going to accomplish it. Mitty Figueredo pointed out that one of the themes of the parks is bringing people together, and the use of this public space for private events that bring people together outside of what our great park staff does is an excellent opportunity to create other events with people of expertise and interest that the parks might not otherwise support and i think it's a great opportunity to bring people together and i think this is going to be an outstanding program thanks

Well, you heard a lot of thank yous. So hearing no other questions or comments, is there a motion to approve of Montgomery Park's special events assistance program, proposed special assistance program?

I'll move to approve the special events assistance program policy.

And I second it because I used to be looking over that project.

All in favor? Aye. Aye. The ayes have it. 5-0. Thank you so much. We appreciate you coming. And it's been a great day. And this ends our planning board meeting. And we'll see you next Thursday. Thank you. And welcome Chief Robinson.