patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

SPEAK OUT: Gaithersburg and Rockville Officials, Residents Weigh In On Annexation

A collection of the best comments following Gaithersburg's unanimous approval of the annexation of Shady Grove Road's approximately 28 acre Sears property.

 

City officials and residents from Gaithersburg and Rockville alike have offered strong opinions regarding Gaithersburg's unanimous vote to annex the 27.9 acre Sears property located along Shady Grove Road.

The decision follows a Montgomery County Council July 31 decision to approve a zone change for the property, shifting it from Research and Development (R&D), which prohibits retail, to Mixed Use District (MXD) zoning.

Prior to the vote,  Rockville City Council member Tom Moore said in a blog on Patch that Gaithersburg officials were "preparing to wreak serious, unnecessary and perhaps permanent damage upon the relationship between their city and the City of Rockville."

Gaithersburg City Council member Cathy Drzyzgula replied directly to Moore in a prepared statement at Monday evening's mayor and council meeting, and both, as well as Gaithersburg's Ryan Spiegel, expressed interest in maintaining a strong working relationship with each other.

Spiegel cited Gaithersburg's inclusion of the property in the city's proposed Maximum Expansion Limit (MEL) as part of the Municipal Growth Element (MGE) as far back as 2008 while Rockville did not express interest in the property for its own MGE until March of 2011.

Word traveled quickly to Rockville's own mayor and council meeting that Gaithersburg's annexation had passed.

"Let's forget the Gaithersburg event, as I would call it, and let's move on with what we'd like to do." Rockville Mayor Phyllis Marcuccio said a short time after Moore announced in the Rockville council chamber that Gaithersburg had approved the Sears site annexation.

In a comment on his own blog, Moore conceded Rockville needs to be more proactive in its future planning.

"If nothing else, this whole episode has demonstrated to me that Rockville does need to be proactive in where we want our city to go, and by 'we' I mean the Mayor and Council," Moore wrote. "Otherwise, over the long term, we're going to have our lunch eaten."

Others, including Rockville council member John Hall, agreed, but don't want this series of events to harm the cities' relationship.

“I don’t want us to be at war with Gaithersburg,” Hall said. “I’d like for us, after a time, to have as good communication, consultation. I’d like for us to get to work on a revised [memorandum of understanding].”

Patch users from Rockville and Gaithersburg also expressed their thoughts on the decision.

"I do not think there was anything amiss with this annexation, user Peter Mork, of Rockville, wrote. "Mr. Spiegel's explanation strikes me as well-reasoned and not an attempt to "cling to [a] narrow definition of what is legal ... and ethical behavior."

"Instead, I find it dismaying that Rockville is perceived as so hostile to mixed use that the property owners had no interest in approaching our city. Good luck, Gaithersburg, I hope the project is mutually beneficial."

Gaithersburg's Tom Rowse was highly critical of his city's actions.

"This type of arrogant and poorly thought out conduct is par for the course from Gburg's 'leadership' and is what I have come to expect," Rowse commented. "Rockville should move to annex the former Gaithersburg West area and call it Rockville North. I'm sure that would get [Gaithersburg's] attention."

Another hoped this would not mark the start of Gaithersburg expanding in the Shady Grove area.

"Please leave Derwood and Mill Creek Towne alone as you sprawl toward Shady Grove Road," Patch user Jim Burnetti commented. "If I wanted to live in Gaithersburg, I would have bought a home there."

 

SPEAK OUT: How do you feel about Gaithersburg's annexation of the Sears property along Shady Grove Road? Will the decision affect the relationship between the two cities? Tell us in the comments.

Related Coverage of Sears Property Annexation:

Beaten by Gaithersburg on Shady Grove Annexation, Rockville Council Folds, Ponders Next Step (Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2012)

Gaithersburg's Spiegel, Drzyzgula Defend Shady Grove Annexation (Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2012)

Gaithersburg Unanimously Approves Sears Property Annexation (Monday, Aug. 6, 2012)

Gaithersburg's Destructive Drive Toward Annexing Sears (Monday, Aug. 6, 2012) [Blog post by Rockville city council member Tom Moore]

It's Gaithersburg vs. Rockville: Which Will Win? (Wednesday, Aug. 1, 2012)

County Council Approves Rezoning, Gaithersburg Leads In Border Battle (July 31, 2012)

 Border Wars: Gaithersburg, Rockville Fight Over Shady Grove Site (July 26, 2012)

Rockville Letters Oppose Great Indoors Site Annexation (June 7, 2012)

Council Considers Adding 28 Acres To City (March 5, 2012)

Related Topics: Annexation, City Government, Gaithersburg, Great Indoors, Rockville, Rockville City Council, Shady Grove Road, Small Business, comments, and speak out

Marian Hull

1:38 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

First, Montgomery County Council on 31 July 2012, acted in haste to approve the zoning change proposal to incorporate the property of Sears Great Indoors requested by Gaithersburg Council. I cannot believe that no one on the MCC was aware of the (recently expired) Memorandum of Understanding between Rockville & Gaithersburg, or of some general interest of Rockville’s citizens in our boundary lines.
Secondly, even though MCC members might have been uninformed of the details of
the relationships between the only two incorporated (as cities) jurisdictions in our county, I cannot believe that noone on MCC did not see that Shady Grove Road marks a clearly rational limit at Gaithersburg's southeast boundary.
Thirdly, Does anyone officially representing Rockville’s citizens (Mayor or Council members) attend County Council session?

Fourthly, Rockville Mayor & Council in 2010-11 lacked foresight to permit this MOU to expire. This is not the first time our representatives have dropped a ball.

Lastly, is there no official means by which Montgomery County Council decisions may be reexamined, challenged and reversed?

Reply

Cathy Drzyzgula

2:43 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Here is the full text from the 1992 MOU regarding the establishment of boundaries:

The City Councils, the County Council, and the Executive agree to work cooperatively to determine logical urban growth areas and to establish
boundaries which will serve as guidelines for a twenty-year planning horizon regarding:

1) Land use and required community facilities,
2) Capital investment responsibilities, and
3) Logical and efficient operating service areas.

The full MOU can be found beginning on page 147 of this document:
http://www.gaithersburgmd.gov/Documents/mc_bkd_12/080612/policy_a_x-184.pdf

Cathy Drzyzgula

Reply

Piotr Gajewski

5:51 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

The property owner wanted to be annexed into Gaithersburg. Rockville leadership’s failure is not that they were not able to prevent the property owner, through force of law, from being annexed into Gaithersburg, but rather that the owner preferred Gaithersburg over Rockville in the first place.

The present Council majority has taken numerous anti-business postures: just check out the plight of the Pumphrey Funeral Home (that was told by the current Mayor to “move”) or the Silverwood property developer (who survived the annexation of his property [just a block away from the Sears property] into Rockville by just one vote and was subsequently threatened with a law suit from a former Mayor).

So long as Rockville elects a majority of members on the Council who show such attitude (and presently I count Mayor Marcuccio and Councilmembers Hall and Newton among those), we can expect business leaders, whenever possible, to look for more favorable solutions than locating in Rockville.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jim Goheen

8:04 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Pitor:I agree with everything you said. J.Hall talks about consensus & working together, but his actions belie his words! Reversing the Pumphrey zoning,pay raises instead of a bonus for the city employees,not supporting Perschalla & Moore on the financial advisory board & many other issues. Hall should be renamed Councilman NO!

Comment_arrow

Theresa Defino

8:38 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Folks may also want to follow the discussions on the signs that FRIT and the business in Town Square need, part of the plan from the beginning, which the Planning Commission rejected. The owner of incoming Dawson's--supposedly the pride of some on the council--was literally begging for approval.

It's not just some on the council acting this way--but, perhaps more dangerously, their appointees on the lower boards as well. The signal--message--is loud and clear.

Comment_arrow

Peter Mork

9:12 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Piotr, you have accurately described the situation. Thanks.

Leave a comment