Second Round Listening Session: Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission -October 16, 2018

The comments below represent the statements or points of view of one or more individuals who participated in the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) “A Better Maryland” Development Plan Listening Sessions. These comments do not represent any official position or policy of MDP or any other State agency, nor do they represent any official position or policy of any local jurisdiction or local planning agency.

Environment

Selected Topic
Adapting and Becoming Resilient to Climate Change

Selected Strategy
Establish ongoing climate adaptation forum to share case studies, best practices, and informational resources

Comments:

• • Climate change data can be controversial
    • Planning data is not settled; and not universally accepted
  • Smaller jurisdictions may not have the expertise or the data to use climate change data to make decisions
  • Care needs to be taken in how the data is presented and how the information is used
  • Sharing of data may be the least impactful; no decisions or actions occur simply by sharing data
  • Need to recognize jurisdictions don’t have the technical skills to know how to interpret and process the data
  • Need to recognize climate change data is relative and is changing based on changes in population, land use, and changes in transportation usage
  • Agricultural resilience is an important strategy to include in A Better Maryland
  • We don’t know how the EPA will support any State effort to address climate change.

Economic Development

Selected Topic
Improving Economic Growth and Development in Existing Communities

Selected Strategy
Enhance interagency engagement with Maryland Economic Development Association (MEDA) in planning and implementation

Comments

• • MEDA provides an opportunity to share best practices on how other jurisdictions are promoting revitalization in their community and supporting affordable housing opportunities
  • Economic development in existing communities is important, but there is a concern that some economic activities, like the MagLev project, will cut through existing communities and disrupt them, yet will not address the local transportation needs and could negatively impact historic resources
  • Opportunity Zones are areas that need investment
    • We need to help make them work
  • Zoning at the local level will be the determinant of what type of economic development will happen
    • The State cannot do much about local zoning
    • Need to recognize that local zoning will impact the cost of development
  • The State could provide technical assistance to educate and inform elected officials regarding zoning alternatives and other options to promote economic development

Community Development

Selected Topic
Building Capacity in Communities

Selected Strategies
Enhance state’s resources for and support to non-profit community development corporations

Engage younger and more diverse people in education, training, and professional development opportunities related to community development

Comments

• • We should support non-profit organizations working across all parts of the community, including working with youth:
    • To improve communication and interactions among the community members
    • To encourage collaboration with the local government on Transforming Neighborhood Initiative (TNI)
  • The State should support more sub-county TNI efforts
  • Allow local community groups to use State and county vacant buildings for office and community activities
    • Develop volunteer programs
    • Volunteers can be an important resource to help create and strengthen neighborhood cohesiveness
    • Organizational infrastructure is needed to help promote volunteerism
    • We need to get more diversity in the volunteerism of our communities
    • Greater diversity in our volunteers will help strengthen our community

Collaboration / Coordination

Selected Topic
Respecting Regional Distinctions

Selected Strategies
Facilitate regional communication opportunities for jurisdictions to interact with each other and state agencies to address shared regional concerns

Evaluate state program criteria to reflect regional differences

Comments

• • Having the State play a proactive role in facilitating solutions can be very positive for everyone
    • Avoids having to wait for local governments to take the lead, which may not happen
    • Allows for more efficient use of state and local resources and improves the sharing of information
  • Support changing program criteria to be more responsive to regional concerns
    • Funding could be adjusted based on different criteria or scaled to recognize the regional challenges to address the issue
    • Need to be aware of the disadvantages that could be created by creating regional difference in programs. Still need to ensure fairness
  • To promote equitable distribution of funds throughout the state, program criteria could be modified to reflect regional differences
  • Need to be mindful of unfunded mandates that could arise by trying to force regional distinctions.
    • Consider the unintended consequences of highlighting regional differences
    • Too many regulations already being mandated and costing homeowners
    • Need to consider the cumulative impact of more and different regulations
    • Provide the public information and an opportunity to comment on such proposals before they are acted upon