Council minutes, May 2006
Minutes of the Council meeting held May 9, 2006
SECTION 5 OF THE VILLAGE OF CHEVY CHASE
MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING
Date: May 9, 2006
Place: 5906 Connecticut Avenue, Chevy Chase Village Hall
Present: Margy Abbott; Peter Gray; Frances L. Higgins; Farooq Hussain; Ira
Rosenbaum; Andrew Smith; 9 Section 5 residents
Andrew welcomed everyone. He moved that the April 4, 2006, Annual Meeting
Minutes be approved as presented; there was a second and the motion passed unanimously. Ira moved that the March 14, 2006, Council meeting minutes be approved as corrected by email, Farooq seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
- Citizens’ Concerns
Stuart Broad said that a Neighborhood Watch Committee meeting was held at the
Village Hall, 5906 Connecticut Avenue, May 5, 2006, at 7:00pm. The following people were present: Stuart Broad, Peter Gray, Alice Joseph, Dick Ireland, and Frances L. Higgins. There was some discussion about actions which Section 5 residents may take that will make the town a safer place to live. The manager will place a copy of these suggestions in the June newsletter.
- Additional Police Presence in Section 5
There was some discussion about Section 5 employing additional police
protection for Section 5. Montgomery Security Services charges $21 per hour for a security officer/vehicle and $60 per hour for an off-duty police officer. The minimum hrs. for security officer is 8 hours per day. Farooq said that according to the statistics published in the Somerset Safety Study municipalities which employ additional police protection are not safer than those which do not and thus Section 5 may not need to employ additional police protection. Margy and Ira agreed with Farooq; however, Margy said that she understands why some residents might feel safer if there were extra police patrols. Farooq will place a copy of the summary of the Somerset study on the town’s web site and the manager will include a copy with the June newsletter.
- Authority to Regulate Size of Houses
Peter said that the Madelino bill which will provide municipalities in southern
Montgomery County zoning authority has passed both the Senate and the House in
Annapolis and is waiting for the Governor’s signature. It will become effective in October, 2006. Peter presented some issues which Section 5 needs to address before it can put this bill into effect. Margy suggested that Peter, Andrew and she get together and make a list of issues which Section 5 needs to address before implementing this bill.
- Treasurer’s Report
Margy said that there are two CD’s which will mature before the next Council
meeting. The total for the two CD’s is $110,000; she suggested that these two CD’s be terminated and one CD for $100,000 be purchased at a bank with the highest rate for one year. The $10,000 left over from this purchase will be placed in MLGIP. During this year the town has received $50,000 more in income tax than this time last year. Margy suggested that the town rebate $1,000 per household for a total of $227,000 and pay the solid waste charge for each household for a total of $11,000. Iramoved that the town pay a $1,000 rebate for each household for a total of $227,000 and also the solid waste charge for each household for a total of approximately $11,000. Farooqseconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
- Oath of Office
Peter Gray and Farooq Hussain took the oath of office. There were elected to the
Council at the April 4, 2006, Annual Meeting.
- Open Space Funds
Andrew moved that Section 5 donate its Open Space Funds for 2007 of $16,750
to Chevy Chase Village as partial payment for the Wohlfarth property on Western Avenue. Margy seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
- Building Inspector’s Report
Peter said that the following permits were issued:
3801 Thornapple St. – back & side yard fence
3802 Leland St. – 1 story room and deck on rear of house; demolish garage
7 Leland Ct. – 2 story addition in rear
3518 Thornapple St. – fence on 3 sides of back yard
9. Resolution Adopting Montgomery Cty. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Council must adopt the Montgomery County Multi-hazard mitigation plan so that Section 5 may continue to receive pre-and post-disaster mitigation and disaster funds from FEMA. Andrew moved that the Council adopt the Montgomery County Multi-hazard Mitigation Plan; Farooq seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
- Resolution to Adopt Certain Flood Protection Measures to Join the National Flood Insurance Program
The Council must adopt a resolution to join the national flood insurance program for a non-flood prone community because insurance companies will not sell Section 5 residents flood insurance until Section 5 is listed on the national flood map. Andrew moved that the Council adopt certain flood protection measures to join the national flood insurance program for a non-floodprone community. Ira seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
- Manager’s Report
The Council agreed to engage Robert Gibbs, CPA, to perform the 2005-06 financial audit for the town. The Council agreed to pay to have raccoons trapped at 3700 Underwood St. at the town’s expense. The Council agreed to change the June Council meeting from June 12 to June 5. The Council agreed to have someone cut the maple tree roots from a public tree which have grown into the front yard at 3615 Underwood St. The fence at 6 Leland Ct. has been removed and when it is reinstalled, it will not come past the east front foundation line of the house. The Council has agreed to give Farooq a gift certificate for $150 to LaFerme Restaurant as a thank you to Farooq for all the work he has done on the web site.
Andrew moved that the meeting adjourn; Farooq seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Michael Shulman, Mr Hamiltion and Mr Eig having arrived late to the meeting requested that Mr Shulman be allowed to read a statement he had prepared for the meeting.
Mr. Shulman’s statement concerned the dispute between Mr and Mrs Duffy, the owners of the unfinished house at 3704 Thornapple Street and Mr Shulman, Ms Judd, Mr Hamilton, Ms Meyer, Mr and Mrs Eig, Kristin Gerlach and Robert Israel regarding the legitimacy of the unfinished structure. In his presentation Mr. Shulman made several points:
1. The building permits issued by the council were not viewed by an expert who would have prevented the demolition of the original structure, and as a consequence would have prevented considerable legal expenses.
2. The permits should have been viewed and appraised by a licensed contractor.
3. The Council should ask the County attorney to reject requests for a financial settlement since this would expose the Section 5 council to liability.
4. The definition of the existing building line (EBL) in the permit request was questionable.
5. There is likely to be a health issue associated with the unoccupied structure.
6. The grounds surrounding the unfinished structure are not being kept up as required by the Section regulations.
7. Those members of the council who have made public comments on the dispute as private citizens should leave the council.
It was pointed out to Mr. Schulman that traditionally the Section had accepted the zoning regulations of the county and had deferred decision making authority to the County. The purpose of requiring a Section permit was to keep informed about proposed construction. The fee is a nominal $5. In this capacity the Section granted 2 permits for modifying the building at 3704 Thornapple Street. One was to change the roof line and the other was to add a porch. Both of these changes conformed to County zoning regulations. The Section is not party to decisions about variances.