Monthly Archives: September 2009

On Friday, September 4, 2009, the Frederick City Board of Aldermen voted 4-11 to annex into the city 285 acres of the Crumland Farm. A few minutes later the Board of Aldermen voted 5-0 to annex into the city 151 acres of the Thatcher Farm. Despite some vocal opposition, including opposition from all five County Commissioners, a super majority of the Aldermen, with the full support of Mayor Holtzinger, agree that these annexations will be extremely valuable to the City and that they will provide needed help in improving our road infrastructure. Without these annexations needed improvements to important roads would be neglected and fall further behind. These annexations supply a critical component to help building the improvements that will both improve safety and alleviate the ever-increasing traffic congestion on U.S. 15 through the City and north towards Thurmont.

No sooner had the Board of Aldermen approved these annexations, than one of the County Commissioners announced his intent to begin a referendum drive for a special election to attempt to nullify these annexations. That drive is underway, and it is anticipated that proponents of this referendum will be soliciting support from those going to the primaries to vote on September 15th.

It is my intent in this publication to make available to all who may be interested, my statements of many of the reasons why I believe these annexations are good for the City. There are many facets to these annexations, and the Mayor and Aldermen thoroughly considered them before we voted. Prior to the annexation vote, I responded to a number of people with concerns about the annexations. Included here are some of the writings that I prepared in response to them. I encourage all of you to read these materials and to visit my web site (www.cpaulsmith.com) to get additional information and a better understanding of these issues.

It was not my purpose to annex these properties merely to bring additional tax dollars to the City. In my opinion, such a reason would be insufficient. I supported the annexation for several other important reasons, including improving serious road deficiencies, strengthening the City economy and bringing needed employers to the City. But these two annexations will bring substantial tax revenues and other benefits to the City—much more than they will cost current city taxpayers. Let me say that again a little differently: These annexations will not cost current taxpayers anything because they will bring more revenues and benefits to the city than they will cost the city. In addition, totally apart from this—these two annexations will contribute an estimated $8 – 10 million towards needed road improvements. All of these financial benefits will come ONLY because these two properties are paying to be annexed. Opponents of the annexation have no alternative plan to either make the needed road improvements nor to obtain other funds to help with such improvements.

For all the reasons stated herein, the annexation of these northern properties will be extremely valuable to the City and County. I encourage all to read these materials and to oppose any effort to get a referendum election vote on these annexations.

Additional comments re the Crumland and Thatcher proposed annexations—

The argument that building roads causes more traffic problems is a generalization that should never be used as a standard to determine when and where new roads are built. It is certainly not an absolute. We need extra lanes in Frederick; we are already inadequately served by sufficient lanes on our main arteries. Those who appreciate the tremendous growth that is projected for the Frederick area, recognize that in the next 20 years the County population is projected to increase by almost 100,000 (including 30,000 in the City). This will be about a 30-35% increase in population. This will make our already congested arteries much worse. And, again there are only two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes on US 15 running through the city. The rush hour congestion is already so bad that it stifles businesses and impacts lives. The commute from Montgomery County to Frederick during evening rush hour has doubled in time over the last 20 years, and the period of peak congestion in Frederick has expanded to be almost two hours in length.

Because Frederick is regarded nationally as an ideal place for many businesses, it is projected that there will be large increases in the number of residents and employers coming here—not only for the next twenty years, but for the next 30 years after that as well. This growth projection for Frederick is different from projections for other municipalities. Frederick’s close proximity to Washington, D.C. and to Baltimore combine to make Frederick one of the most desirable locations to live and work in the entire nation.

Thus, before the nation runs out of fossil fuel, there will be so much growth in population and businesses in this region, that our currently inadequate roads will become worse and worse. Battery-operated cars, bicycles, buses, scooters, trains and other modes of transportation should be developed—but this will not reduce the need that now exists for some new lanes.

I will work to bring about other modes of transportation to help meet our problems. But it will be at least 50 years before reliance on the automobile changes.

Currently, there is no feasible rail alternative (from Montg. Co. to Frederick) that would help Frederick County. A transit option would be feasible, and I am working to help bring it to pass. Extra lanes on I-270 would help the transit option.

There is no basis to project that a modern rail system in the city would be a viable mode of transportation. There is no basis to conclude that such a system would boost our economy. The current transit system that we do have (operated by the County) does not pay for itself; it is highly subsidized by the State; and there is no projection that it could become self-sustaining.

As I previously mentioned, bringing more jobs to the region would be a big help in taking cars off of the road.

I love farm land, too. But the highest and best use of the land immediately adjacent to the City of Frederick is for employment and housing. This is a prime principle of smart growth—to build homes and businesses where they can be best served by public utilities—rather than to sprawl all over the county. Some people argue that the development of the Crumland and Thatcher properties would be “sprawl,” but that is not an accurate description. Both of these properties constitute the northern most areas for development by the city in plans that were adopted at least twenty years ago.

If someone really believes that Frederick County is going to increase its population from 240,000 to 340,000 in twenty years, then he/she should begin now to plan for the basic improvements needed so that the growth will not cause any more problems than necessary. This is the basis for my support of the two northern annexations.

With regard to your comments on which businesses and which employers would be good for the region, and which would not—the City government is not going to be micromanaging which businesses establish themselves here and which do not. The City may have a small say in this, but it will be market forces that primarily dictate this.

Re: the proposedCrumland and Thatcher/COPT annexations

Dear Commissioners:

Thank you for attending the City’s news conferenceyesterday and for your comments. As Iexpressed yesterday, I am still prepared to listen to and address specificissues and problems with respect to the annexations on which the Board ofAldermen is scheduled to vote tomorrow. However, unless I am presented with a significant issue or problem forwhich I do not have a satisfactory response or explanation, it is my intent tovote on the annexation proposals tomorrow. I believe it is in the City’s best interest to do this. (I do not speak for the other Aldermen; I donot know how they will vote on this.)

I recognize that this is not the response youwanted. You asked that the City postponevoting on the annexations so that you can discuss with the City various concernsyou have about these annexations. But atthis point you have not identified any issue that, in my opinion, warrants ourdelaying a vote on the annexations. TheMayor, the Aldermen and the City staff have spent a lot of time and have thoroughlyanalyzed the proposed annexations. Thereis a substantial amount of time, resources and City expense to undertake thethorough evaluation that has been given to this. The public, including the County, has hadmany months to address these proposed annexations. During this time, many issues and problemshave been identified and addressed. Currently, the proposed annexation agreements are, in my opinion, verybeneficial to the City and its residents, and each of them will be very helpfulin meeting the future needs of the City and the entire region. Enclosed are some memos I have written thatstate some of the reasons why I believe the Crumland and Thatcher proposedannexations will be beneficial to the City.

Again, I am sending you this letter now to confirm that Iintend to vote on the annexations tomorrow, and to give you one lastopportunity to make specific comments or suggestions on these proposedannexations.

Thank you for your interest and your service.