Councilmember Robbins commented on the following:

• Thanked Mr. Powell for his comments about the City Attorney, saying that the Mayor and Council were moving forward
• Said that she was glad that the Mayor moved Citizens’ Forum forward so there could be input about the appointments this evening

Councilmember Britton commented on the following:

• Said that the Mayor and Council were looking into all of the details surrounding any possible change to legal services, including the scope of services
• Expressed his personal disapproval of the ICC
• Said that Steve Johnson, whose reappointment to the planning Commission was later on the agenda not longer worked with his, but had just been appointed by the State’s Attorney to work with the Maryland Department of the Environment

Re: Appointments

Historic District Commission

Upon motion by Councilmember Robbins, duly seconded by Councilmember Britton, and unanimously passed, Jeremy Tucker was appointed as a member of the Historic District Commission to fill an unexpired term until May 1, 2010.

Planning Commission

Councilmember Britton made a motion to approve the reappointment of Steven Johnson to the Planning Commission until May 1, 2013, which was seconded by Councilmember Gajewski.

In discussion on the appointment, Councilmember Marcuccio said that she opposed the appointment because 1) it represented another lost opportunity to provide some diversity to the Planning Commission and 2) based on a meeting that she had with him, it was clear that he was an advocate of “Smartgrowth, “which she did not endorsed. She also felt that his demeanor with some people who had appeared before the Planning Commission and at the Stonestreet Avenue Implementation group caused her some concern. 

Councilmember Robbins said she shared Councilmember Marcuccio’s concern with diversity.  However, she appreciated the right of the Mayor to appoint people to Boards and Commissions.  Councilmember Robbins added that she hoped that the negativity that had surrounded this appointment could be resolved soon.

Councilmember Britton said he echoed Councilmember Robbins’ comments in that things like the email campaign designed to smear Mr. Johnson’s reputation was despicable.  Councilmember Britton said that Mr. Johnson’s new appointment with the Maryland Department of the Environment, which will commence next week, was indicative of Mr. Johnson’s reputation as an advocate for the environment.  He noted that he worked with Mr. Johnson on a number of City projects as a member of the Planning Commission himself.  Regarding the comments about Stonestreet, he noted that he had received messages of support from some of the merchants there regarding Mr. Johnson.

Councilmember Gajewski said he agreed about the need for diversity in membership, but that he would defer to Mayor Hoffmann regarding appointments.  In this case, he said he felt Mr. Johnson was superbly qualified.

The vote was taken, and with Mayor Hoffmann, Councilmembers Britton, Gajewski, and Robbins voting, “aye,” and Councilmember Marcuccio voting, “nay,” Steven Johnson was reappointed to the Planning Commission until May 1, 2103.

Rockville Housing Enterprises

Upon motion by Councilmember Britton, duly seconded by Councilmember Robbins, and unanimously passed, Virginia Onley was appointed as a member until May 1, 2011 and Henry Battle was reappointed as a member until May 1, 2011.
Rockville Seniors, Inc. (RSI)

Upon motion by Councilmember Marcuccio, duly seconded by Councilmember Robbins, and unanimously passed, the following appointments were made to the Board of Rockville Seniors, Inc.:

• Edith (Rusty) Embrey (Appointment as a member of the Board and Treasurer until July 1, 2010)
• Elizabeth (Betty) Ball (Appointment as a member of the Board until July 1, 2010)
• Betty Briscoe (Appointment as a member of the Board until July 1, 2010)

Re: Consent Agenda

Mr. Ullery said that the Mayor and Council had received a corrected version of Item C in which the numbers in the recommendation and the discussion sections of the agenda item were consistent.

Upon motion by Councilmember Robbins, duly seconded by Councilmember Britton, and unanimously passed, the following Items, A through C on the Consent Agenda were approved:

A) Approval of minutes of the following meetings: March 24, March 31, April 14, and April 21

B) Award of Bid #57-08 to Elliot & Frantz, Inc. for one highway wheeled excavator

C) Approval to extend Montgomery County Contract #4507000129 for the purchase of fuel for City vehicles and equipment for one additional year from March 1, 2008 through February 28, 2009

Re: Introduction of an ordinance to amend Section 1-8 of the Rockville City Code entitled, "Application of county law," so as to update the reference to the current edition of the Montgomery County Code, and to allow Chapter 48, entitled "Solid Waste," Article V entitled "Recycling" of the Montgomery County Code to apply in the City with respect to businesses and certain multi-family residences; and to allow the Montgomery County Code of Regulations, Section 48.00.03 entitled Residential and Commercial Recycling" to apply in the City, except for Section 48.00.03(a) pertaining to single family residential recycling, and certain small multi-family residences

Chief of Environmental Services Mark Charles introduced Eileen Kao, Chief of Recycling for Montgomery County, who was present to respond to any questions about the recycling services that provided to businesses in the County.  Ms. Kao said the County was in support of Rockville adopting the proposed ordinance, which would allow the County’s law to apply in Rockville. 

Mr. Charles explained that, currently, the City does not require recycling by businesses.  The City also does not pick up refuse from businesses either.  Since 1994, Montgomery County has implemented a mandatory recycling program for businesses and multi-family dwellings, including condominiums and apartment buildings with seven or more units.  Called Smart Organizations Reduce and RecycleTons (SORRT), the County program includes regulatory requirements and the following technical assistance and incentives:

• Site-specific technical assistance and consultations
• Recycling "how-to" handbooks, videos and a website
• Seminars and workshops
• Information on buying recycled products, collectors, and recycling facilities
• Newsletters, displays and demonstrations

City staff is proposing to require businesses and multi-family residential entities to recycle by enabling Montgomery County to implement its existing program within the City of Rockville.

Using a powerpoint presentation, Mr. Charles summarized the County's program as follows:

• Multi-family entities and businesses are required to recycle mixed paper, commingled materials (cans, bottles, plastics), yard trim, Christmas trees and scrap metal.
• The County does not directly collect recyclables for its commercial entities, but rather oversees and enforces the recycling requirement.  Businesses and multi-family dwellings either self-haul these materials or contract with a private vendor for this service. 
• All multi-family dwellings and businesses are required to reuse or recycle fifty (50) percent of their solid wastes by volume or weight.
• The County can grant a temporary waiver of the recycling requirements if there is no market for a particular type of recycled material.

Mr. Charles said that the advantages of allowing the County to implement its program in Rockville are:

• The City and County programs will be consistently implemented. 
• The City avoids the time and cost to develop and staff a new program.
• The City obtains the benefits of a mature, well-considered program with appropriate staffing.
• Rockville businesses will be placed on a level playing field with other county businesses.

The main disadvantages of this arrangement are:

• The City would not direct or prioritize implementation.  This would be deferred to the County
• Similarly, the City would defer enforcement to the discretion of the County.
• The City may not have access to some data concerning the amount and type of recycled material or the level of compliance for Rockville specific entities.

Mayor Hoffmann said she was in agreement with moving forward with this, adding that she felt it would fill a significant gap in recycling in Rockville.  She asked if it would be possible to get some data from the County regarding the volume of recycling so that the effects of this change could be appreciated.  Ms.. Kao said she thought that the County did have the resources that such data could be provided.

There was also some discussion about the removal of hazardous waste, but it was explained that hazardous waste would not be covered by this ordinance.

At this point, Councilmember Britton introduced the ordinance.

Re: Zoning Text Amendment TXT2008-00220, to allow porches to extend into the front or rear setback areas.

Planner III Deane Mellander said that there had been minimal comment, although the Planning Commission had made one amendment to limit the encroachment to the front yard.

Councilmember Britton said he was amenable to the suggestion of the Planning Commission.  The Mayor and Council directed the staff to bring back the item for approval.

Re: Town Hall Meeting Format

There was discussion about some of the meetings that had taken place in this format, which had generated an interest between the Mayor and Council about possible creating some parameters for this type of meeting.  Some concerns had been expressed about the role of the Mayor and Council at these meetings at which staff was also in attendance to either present information or respond to questions.  Assistant to the City Manager Jenny Kimball had drafted a memo to the Mayor and Council outlining some options.

Mayor Hoffmann asked what the problem seemed to be with being somewhat flexible with the format depending on the desires of the citizens involved.  She said that she had spoken with the people involved in planning the meeting with Burgundy Estates scheduled for May 14 and that a number of issues would be natural for staff to address, but that the presence of the Mayor and Council was also requested.

Councilmember Robbins said she was not happy that things seemed to be the subject of a need for “codification.”  She said that she agreed that there should be an allowance for flexibility.  Councilmember Marcuccio said she shared the sentiments of both Mayor Hoffmann and Councilmember Robbins on this topic. 

Mayor Hoffmann said that it seemed that the Mayor and Council preferred to continue to leave the format up to the citizens’ organization that was extending the invitation.

Re: Future Agendas

Mr. Ullery said that the meeting on May 19 would include the adoption of the budget.  A preview of the Zoning Ordinance is tentatively scheduled for June 9

Re: FYI/Correspondence

Councilmember Gajewski reminded everyone that he was holding a meeting at 8:00 p.m. in City Hall on May 15.

Re: Old/New Business

Upon motion by Councilmember Gajewski, duly seconded by Councilmember Britton, and unanimously passed, the Mayor and Council voted to have a Public Hearing on the matter of an in-house city attorney after following the normal advertising procedures.  It was mentioned that there should be a draft of the job description available prior to the hearing.

Re: Adjournment to Executive Session

Upon motion by Councilmember Britton, duly seconded by Councilmember Gajewski, and unanimously passed, the Mayor and Council adjourned to Executive Session at 9:15 p.m. pursuant to Section 10-508 (a) (7) to consult with counsel to seek legal advice regarding the Town Center pavers.  Present at the Executive Session were the Mayor and Council, the City Manager, Deputy City Manager Catherine Tuck Parrish, Assistant City Attorney Sondra Harans Block, and the City Clerk.  The Mayor and Council discussed matters related to possible litigation about the pavers in Town Center.  There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:53 p.m.