Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 6 | June 10, 2025

VOL. 4, NO. 6  |  June 10, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter. For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below: City: Affordable Housing City: Native Plants Tour! City: Cricket Stadium City: Candidates Meet-and-Greet County: CDI Overlay Ordinance CRG will send a separate email on this topic County: MPRP Updates Upcoming Meetings & Events ______________ City: Affordable Housing (Discussion continued from the April CRG newsletter) Our City faces a huge deficit in affordable housing, whether owned or rented. In response, over the past several months, the City Council Housing, Health and Education (HHE) Committee has focused a substantial portion of their public meeting time on the Housing Work Plan, with special emphasis on affordable housing. Additionally, the City has contracted with TPMA, an Indianapolis-based consulting firm, to update the City’s housing needs assessment (last updated in 2016), develop a strategic plan to close the gaps found, and present their findings in November 2025. TPMA has already presented startling data documenting the lack of affordable housing. Their goal is to adhere to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan policy objective “for the City to create more options for housing development that supports the needs of all current and future residents.”     Committee members have discussed and prioritized several specific housing options including a homeless services/emergency shelter; incentivizing private sector investment; tax credits; tenant protections; rent control/rent stabilization programs; tax incentives; funding mechanisms; community land trusts; realtor education efforts; etc. All good ideas, some more realistic than others. Subsequent meetings focused more specifically on Moderate Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs), Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and SROs (Single Room Occupancy units), documenting challenges they pose, including: Issues with MPDUs include the disinterest among many/most developers to include such dwellings in their properties and thus opt to pay a Fee-in-Lieu (FIL) to the City. These funds are to be used, theoretically, by the City to build affordable housing though several other uses of the funds are allowed (e.g., rehabilitation, repairs, rental assistance, etc.) and the current total in the fund would not cover the construction costs of many units. One possible solution is to eliminate the FIL and require developers to dedicate 12.5% (of their total residential sq. ft.) to MPDUs; another is to raise the FIL to a more robust figure that will actually be used for MPDU construction and not for any other housing support.   City staff have encountered barriers to ADUs including parking limitations, dwelling size in relation to the principal dwelling, and requirements for owner occupancy of the principal dwelling. There is a question about the nature of SROs (what they are precisely and the range of configurations they might take). Typically, SROs are a form of affordable housing in some cases for formerly or otherwise unhoused individuals and/or seniors with very limited income. The term SRO refers to the fact that the tenant rents a single room, as opposed to a full flat (apartment). Generally, the dwelling does not include bathing or cooking facilities; these are shared by other SRO tenants. The facility provides supportive services to help tenants move to greater independence. Another option (though not one endorsed by landlords and building owners) on HHE’s priority list is rent stabilization which, according to Housing Frederick, has been institutionalized by Montgomery County, MD, via their 2023 Rent Stabilization Bill 16-23. This legislation, which could be used as a model in Frederick County/City, is designed to maintain reasonable rents for residents earning less than $30-40K annually (e.g., service workers, administrative staff, seniors, and residents on fixed incomes). Click for more information about Bill 16–23.   One potential outcome discussed at the May 15 and June 5 HHE meetings is a consensus on zoning concepts to promote affordable housing throughout the City. These options, as stated by City planning staff, are to create an affordable housing floating zone or derive a regulatory framework for flexibility for affordable housing projects that would not require rezoning action to be taken by the Council (“Incentive Zoning”). The primary factor in determining which of these two options the Council would like to pursue is the degree to which the Council should be the deciding body on individual requests to implement the regulations. Click for the Housing Work Plan Executive Summary.   At the June 5 HHE meeting, committee members also discussed the proposed (by staff) award of $256K+ in Rental Licensing fees. They agreed to move forward immediately to allocate $150K to Habitat for Humanity to repair homes owned by low-income residents. Other proposed awards/allocations require more detail and discussion including $80K to house 12 individuals in a co-living community, rental assistance to individuals in jeopardy of eviction or seniors not allowed to age in place, with the remainder for City staff salaries. Additionally, various advocates pleaded for speeding the process for permitting and subsequent construction of affordable housing. They noted that the long list of City requirements for development often delays or prevents affordable housing construction as developers must cover loan costs, etc. Over time and long delays in moving forward, costs must be covered often beyond the resources of the developers.    CRG applauds the attention to affordable housing. We realize the complexity of synchronizing the various laws and regulations governing development in the City which, unintentionally, make it more difficult to do what really needs to be done. And we appreciate the intentionality of the housing discussions at the City Council level to address the problem. However, some questions arise: Is there a vision for a continuum of housing options that will be sufficiently robust to truly accommodate the gaps which, it would seem, will not be truly delineated until the TPMA report is completed? Further, HHE committee members questioned why a Frederick County AMI was not in place and asked that it be calculated and used rather than the D.C. 80% AMI to be sure the City is assisting those at the lowest income levels such as the ALICE (Asset Limited Income Constrained and Employed) community. And will whatever definition that finally emerges truly reach and meet the needs of the folks who really need such housing? Will the MPDU program no longer allow fees-in-lieu under new legislation? If not, how will the City ever achieve mixed income communities but instead rely on LIHTC (low-income housing tax credits) for affordable housing projects (which tend to be stand-alone, not necessarily integrated with the larger community). CRG anticipates being part of the HHE housing discussion as it moves forward. City: Native Plants Tour! Our friends at Wild Ones have planned a Native Plant  Garden Tour in the City of Frederick. Click the graphic to RSVP for this free event. City: Cricket Stadium A developer is requesting a zoning change and amendment to an annexation agreement to erect a cricket stadium and events complex on the property at 8400-A East Patrick Street (currently a golf driving range). The Planning Commission previously held two workshops on the request and, on June 9, the Commission will hold the first of two meetings to formally discuss and vote on the request to then forward to the City Council for action.  Several issues about this request have been raised by residents of the surrounding community including: Access to and from the property: The only access is from Old National Pike through a state-owned Park-and-Ride and then onto US 40/East Patrick Street. There has been no traffic impact study for the area, an absolute ‘must’ considering the short ramp on to I-70 at the RV Center on E. Patrick and the large volume of traffic from the Lake Linganore community. Parking: The applicant is proposing a stadium for 7,000–10,000 with busses delivering most of the attendees from out of the area, parking at other locations like Nymeo Field, and shuttle busses to/from the event facility. There will be no parking at the park so local neighborhoods could be overrun with attendees in private vehicles. Lack of information about use of the venue: The developer provided no information beyond the 14 plus cricket events and a craft show, graduations, and lacrosse game use of fields. There is no mention of concert events that this venue could be used for under the zoning requested. There is also a request to modify the $500,000 road improvements request that was in the original annexation agreement that was never paid because the property development never occurred. Siting adjacent to a flood plain: Another issue is related to the 16 acres of land near the Monocacy River — that is mainly a 100-year flood plain. On June 10, the applicant will appear at the Parks and Recreation Commission to present their request. The original annexation agreement included the 16 acres. The applicant’s new request is to place a cricket stadium and a grass park, pavilion, asphalt walkway along the river, and public boat access to the river. To build the cricket stadium, the fissures in the flood plain will need to be filled. Approval by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is needed for the fill and other flood plain activities. CRG strongly encourages extensive review of this application as the traffic, neighborhood parking, floodplain damage, and general noise from the proposed events pose serious shifts in character and activities of the generally quiet adjacent neighborhood as well as severe vehicle congestion for the cricket complex and traffic from the Linganore community.  City: Candidates Meet-and-Greet On June 4, CRG hosted a Meet-and-Greet for all non-incumbent candidates for City Council and mayor in the Thomassens’ beautiful garden on E. 4th Street. Each candidate introduced themselves and their platform to the community. As Steve Jakubczyk, the moderator of the event, stated, the community is fortunate to have such a strong slate of candidates willing to work for the betterment of Frederick. Across the board, the candidates seemed to agree that low-to-moderate housing, a strong plan and vision for the future of our City, and representation of specific district needs are paramount for a better Frederick. In addition, particular attention was given to the everyday needs of the residents, from childcare concerns to improved transportation. Following individual speeches, attendees and candidates discussed details of proposed plans. Stay tuned for future CRG–organized individual candidate forums throughout the summer, leading up to the all–important September primary and subsequent November election.   County: CDI Overlay Ordinance Several organizations are mobilizing residents to attend the County Council meeting on Tuesday, June 17 at 5:30 PM, when the Council will be discussing the new Data Center Overlay. Please consider attending! Wear a white shirt if possible to show support for strong controls on data centers. More specifics to come in a separate email this week. A compromise siting ordinance employing a Data Center Overlay Zone has been agreed upon by the two County Council factions and the County Executive. However, several issues/questions remain. For example, in the Overlay legislation, if 1% of the County’s area is to be allocated for data center rezoning in the overlay zone, how does that expand the current acreage surrounding the 2200-acre Eastalco site? Will agricultural neighbors who are not in the ag preservation program adjacent to Eastalco be enticed to seek rezoning for data center development? Certainly, with the huge sums being offered for land by data center corporations, expansion is highly likely. The Council would have the final decision on whether rezoning would be granted.   Other issues NOT addressed in the compromise ordinance still include absence of any requirements for identifying power or water demand, center proximity to nearby residential areas (currently proposed at 200 feet), protection of neighbor wells and properties as well as riparian buffers and creeks through corporation-funded escrow accounts, and funding for any County services that may need to be upgraded for addressing data center operations, such as treatment of data center effluents.   CRG is deeply concerned that dialog with industry representatives is proving more important to 5 members of the Council than resident concerns on proximity, hazardous material use and storage, property values, and quality of life in a soon-to-be-noisy 24 hour/day in the overlay area. There are certainly ample fact-based reports re: deleterious center impacts from just across the river in Loudoun County, VA that the Loudoun representatives have warned Council members to address before moving forward but — so far — to no avail. CRG was hoping that ignoring facts was only common to our nation’s capital, but it seems “fact ignorance” has now leaked into our local governance. County: MPRP Updates Review the PSC pre-hearing conference from June 10 by using this link. StopMPRP will air a Webinar Update on Monday, June 16 at 6:30 PM. Join Stop MPRP, Inc. President and Board Chair Joanne Frederick for a timely PSC post-hearing debrief and update on the latest developments. They'll break down what happened at the June 10 hearing, share insights on the PSEG federal lawsuit, and provide clear next steps so you can continue making your voice heard. Click to register for the webinar. Upcoming Meetings & Events County Planning Commission Meeting, Winchester Hall, June 11, 9:30 AM: S. Frederick Corridor Form-Based Code; Livable Frederick 5 Year Report City Land Use, Public Safety, and Community Development Committee, City Hall, June 12, 1 PM: Brickworks Deferral Agreement City Native Plants Garden Tour, Sat. June 14: click to register and receive addresses StopMPRP Webinar — Update on status of the MPRP, Virtual, June 16, 6:30: click to register. County Council Hearing, Winchester Hall, June 17, 5:30 PM: County Executive's Data Center Infrastructure Overlay proposal. Wear a white shirt if possible to show support for strong controls on data centers.

__________________ See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, R. Huber, S. Jakubczyk, R. Robey, M. Rosenswieg, K. Sellner. Guest Contributor: Dr. W. Reid, Frederick Progressives CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue. We're on Instagram... follow us! Check out our Facebook page!

Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 5 | May 19, 2025

VOL. 4, NO. 5  |  May 19, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter. For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below: City: All Politics is Local (sort of) City: Historic Preservation Commission — 127 E. 6th Street, Frederick City/County: Affordable Housing County: Investing in Workers and Workplaces Workshop County: Critical Data Infrastructure (CDI) Legislation County: A New Player in the County — Amazon County: MPRP Update County: Recently Adopted State Laws Relevant to Frederick, Passed by the Legislature & Signed by the Governor County/City: Climate Planning Upcoming Meetings & Events ______________ City: All Politics is Local (sort of) While we all struggle with whether/how the many changes at the federal level will impact us, it is important to note that what happens locally will go a long way in determining the quality of our day-to-day lives. In that regard and since the last recap in our April newsletter there have been a few additions to the list of candidates, including some with * after their names, who have indicated that they are running but are not reflected on the City’s website candidate list: Mayor: Ron Beattie (D) has entered the race and will challenge incumbent Michael O’Connor (D) for the democratic nomination, assuring a stimulating discussion of the issues and concerns facing the City and its future. There is, currently, no Republican or Independent candidate. City Council: At Large: Three candidates, Libby Taylor (D), Katie Nash (D)* and Kelly Russell (D), both incumbent council members, are candidates for the at-large seats. No Republican or Independent candidates have entered the race. District 1: There is no candidate registered. District 2: Cesar Diaz (D) has entered the race. There are no Republican or Independent candidates. District 3: Two Democratic candidates have registered, Peter Brehm and David Schmidt. Derek Shackleford (D)* is an incumbent councilmember and expected candidate. There are no Republican or Independent candidates to date. District 4: Joe Adkins (R) has filed to represent this district. Two other individuals have expressed interest in running for the Democratic nomination but have not yet registered. District 5: Sara Hempel Irani (D) is registered for this district. There are no Republican or Independent candidates. This link displays all candidates who have officially registered as of May 19 (www.cityoffrederickmd.gov/1786/2025-Mayoral-and-City-Council-Candidates). Hopefully, it will be updated frequently to apprise residents of additional candidates. This link connects to the district maps (www.cityoffrederickmd.gov/1805/District-Maps), just in case you’re thinking of running or know someone who would be a great candidate! Click on each map; it will show up on your computer expanded sufficiently for you to see the exact boundaries of, and streets within, the district. Important dates: Last day to register as a candidate: July 1st Primary Election: Early Voting August 22 and 23; Primary Day September 9 General Election: Early Voting October 24 and 25; Election Day November 4 City: Historic Preservation Commission — 127 E. 6th Street, Frederick In a disappointing decision on April 24, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) voted to allow demolition of the Winchester House and its barn/stable largely due to concerns over public safety of tenants in the primary structure. CRG strongly applauds the 9-month effort by Jim Wagner and his neighbors in delving into all aspects of the history of the property and providing fact-based justifications for saving and then rehabilitating the structures. As contributing structures, CRG is concerned for the precedent now in place for future HPC decisions in which acknowledged history is overruled by new development opportunities in our historic City. Efforts now will have to concentrate on reviewing the proposed infill development’s compliance with Historic District Guidelines. City/County: Affordable Housing Ongoing consideration of ways to expand affordable housing options in Frederick City/County were featured at several discussions/events during April. These events included the City Council Housing, Health, and Education (HHE) committee's focus on the status of the City’s MPDU and ADU ordinances, and a home-buying assistance workshop sponsored by Housing Frederick (in partnership with the Frederick County Association of Realtors). Additionally, a luncheon on April 29th under the Enterprise Community Partners' Faith Based Development Initiative was held at the Trinity United Methodist Church. Pastor Joseph Williams from Washington, DC encouraged a collaborative religious institution effort to provide affordable housing in some portion of the 196 County religious properties where underused church, synagogue, or mosque properties can be renovated to provide the desperately needed housing for the area. The effort has been extremely successful in multiple communities and CRG hopes that similar success will follow here in the County. Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs) Extensive discussion at the April 17th meeting of the HHE committee revealed a lack of clarity among staff and council members about the purpose of the MPDU program. This followed presentation of data documenting a relatively small expenditure (approximately $350,000) of City Housing funds during FY25, with none allocated to construction of MPDUs ($4 million was spent on MPDU development in FY24) and the expectation of a similar amount in FY26. Council members noted that the purpose of the City Housing Fund (“fed” by developers’ Fees-in-Lieu [FIL] that provides 12.5% of the housing stock in the planned community) is to be used for the “development, preservation, and operation of affordable housing within the City.” Given that no FY25 MPDU funds were used for this purpose, council members opined that there appears to be no formal plan or outreach/solicitation process for this purpose. While there are low- and moderate-income developments in early stages, they are not mixed income communities, which the 12.5% MPDU construction assures. A review of the 74 projects (with 5,100+ units) in the development pipeline dashboard (i.e., a list of approved or planned [mostly residential] projects that have not yet received permits) shows very few developers plan to include MPDUs in their communities (https://cof.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/584b77d84aac4d8b8fd37b738a9e0f1d). We note that several proposed/planned developments are not subject to this ordinance due to size (i.e., fewer than 25 units), pre-2007 exemption, or other factors, and the MPDU-required status of several others is not provided in the pipeline documents. However, of the projects that do indicate an intention to utilize the FIL option, more than 650 MPDUs could — theoretically — be constructed. Accessible Dwelling Units When passed, the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance was intended to provide flexible and affordable living spaces for City residents. Since its passage, City Planning staff have found — and are brainstorming ways to address — several barriers to ADU development (particularly detached units). Staff also seek ways to promote the ADU concept. Among the key barriers are parking, limitations on square footage, and owner occupancy of one of the units on the property. Parking: Currently, the Ordinance requires that “If the parking serving the primary residence on the lot is less than or equal to the minimum required parking per Table 607-1 of this LMC, one additional parking space must be provided.” (Section 802 (c)(1)B) Council members and staff discussed several options to this provision, namely eliminating the parking requirement entirely and/or eliminating the requirement in transportation option areas, e.g., in proximity to a bus stop. Questions were asked about “proximity” and whether it is a specific distance or actual accessibility (e.g., continuous sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, etc.). The discussants expressed a preference for multiple, or a combination of, options.   Square footage: The ordinance specifies 800 sq. ft. as the maximum for a newly built (or existing/expanded building separate from the primary residence). The problem is where an existing building is already at the maximum square footage. Staff advised that the purpose of the limitation is to assure that the ADU remains subordinate (and proportional) to the existing principal residential structure. Options to address this problem include eliminating the limitation for an existing structure but retaining it for a new structure or increasing the size limitation. When asked why the 800 sq. ft. size was determined originally, staff explained that it was based on the County's school impact fee for structures over that size. Staff recommends that square footage use proportionality in size and that a greater than/less than calculation might be the standard. Owner Occupancy: The Ordinance requires that the homeowner reside in either the principal or accessory dwelling. Given the passage of the City’s rental license ordinance, it might be possible to eliminate this requirement as the City now has oversight control of rental properties. Council members asked that staff return with recommended options to address the barriers discussed. Home Buying Assistance On April 10, Housing Frederick (in partnership with the Frederick County Association of Realtors) held a home buying assistance workshop. The session was geared to new, moderate income home buyers in the City and County. Presenters included representatives from Frederick County, Frederick City, United Way, Habitat for Humanity, the State Employees Credit Union, and a private lender. The speakers informed prospective buyers about ways to buy their first home, including possibilities to obtain zero interest loans for closing costs and money for a down payment. Some of these funds might not have to be repaid if specified criteria are met. Additionally, there were some lenders who would accept housing authority vouchers in the buyer's income calculation. A note: For those of us who remember the 2008 housing bubble, when many families lost their homes due to the unrestrained lending programs that encouraged folks to obligate themselves to mortgages far beyond their ability to pay, CRG hopes Housing Frederick and its partners keep this cautionary tale in mind! County: Investing in Workers and Workplaces Workshop On April 16, the County Planning Department discussed with the Planning Commission a comprehensive outline of a plan to be produced from 2024–2025 meetings of the Investing in Workers and Workplaces Advisory Group (IW2). The plan’s focus is to identify possibilities to increase economic growth in the County with content largely driven by the Advisory Group’s business and developer members, ideally yielding specific geographic areas to be rezoned for businesses, industry, and innovative new technologies such as the life sciences (see www.frederickcountymd.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/15773). A primary goal for developing new commercial land uses is to reduce tax burdens on residential properties. Planning Commission members were generally supportive of the effort, but several comments from the public argued that the Livable Frederick Master Plan actually provides the visions and goals of the IW2 and that any report should serve to implement specific initiatives of the Master Plan. County: Critical Data Infrastructure (CDI) Legislation In a surprise agreement, the County Executive and County Council reached a compromise on data center siting in the County, largely limiting centers to the 2200 acre Eastalco site currently under development and another approximately 1800 acres in nearby areas (see www.frederickcountymd.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=5555). CRG congratulates our officials on this compromise, alleviating extreme resident frustration over possible data center sprawl, as in northern Virginia. At the Council meeting that followed, however, deep divisions were evident, as protections for residents and the natural environment were sought by Councilmen McKay and Donald vs. the apparent ‘trust the industry’ approach of members Knapp, Young, Carter, Keegan-Ayer, and Duckett. The most notable rejected McKay amendments included taking noise and vibration assessments before data center buildout, followed by measurements with all equipment in place but prior to occupancy, with 6-month checks thereafter (the Knapp/Young bill includes only tests every 2 years);  measurements during emergency power outages when all backup generators would be operating (this would be deafening noise levels from perhaps >1000 diesel generators when the entire acreage is built out); and data center development adjacent to residential areas. A major concern is the need to require noise abatement for the low, continuous hum from routine operations of mechanical and electrical equipment in the centers, ignored by the Council majority but a vexing problem in northern Virginia for residents adjacent to data centers. Water use, a major need for data center cooling, and recommended for inclusion in the Knapp/Young Ordinance by the County Planning Commission on April 16, was not addressed, nor was requiring an escrow account by the data center corporations that would reimburse neighbors for loss of well water quality or volumes (or damages from data center stormwater runoff/flooding). CRG remains deeply concerned that with the lengthy time required for Council decisions to protect water availability for all users, or focus on enacting sustainability requirements for our new data center neighbors, new applicants may be accepted with inadequate regulations in place for these protections, thereby grandfathering in only limited protections for our current and future residents and other businesses. Whatever regulations are in place once a data center’s site plan is accepted, the County cannot apply new regulations that would negate what was in place at the time of site plan acceptance. The Council will vote on the proposed CDI Ordinance on Tuesday, May 20. Link to the Ordinance as amended: https://frederickcountymd.gov/DocumentCenter/View/356185/052025---AMENDED-Bill-No-25-05---Siting-Requirements-to-Apply-to-Critical-Digital-Infrastructure-Facilities County: A New Player in the County — Amazon As part of the Rowan data center campus at the 2100 acre Eastalco site near Adamstown, Amazon Web Services has submitted an application to the MD Department of the Environment (MDE) for a permit for 99 diesel generators for its new center’s backup power (https://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/environment/climate/amazon-seeks-permit-to-construct-99-diesel-generators-for-data-center-in-frederick-county/). MDE is evaluating the applications for emissions from the proposed diesel units. In a community meeting held at the Carroll Manor Elementary School on April 24, a Rowan and an MDE spokesperson provided background of the application. Enlightening but disappointing is the fact that each data center is reviewed independently for meeting emission limits rather than a review of cumulative emissions from all centers in the Eastalco site; the latter approach would certainly fail existing limits. Maybe CRG will push for this aggregated emissions impact review in next year’s state legislature! County: MPRP Update More than 100 Maryland landowners are being taken to federal court by energy giant PSEG. Their goal? To force access onto private land in Carroll, Frederick, and Washington Counties for a massive transmission line project (the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project, or MPRP) — not to benefit Marylanders, but to power data centers in our neighboring state, Virginia. PSEG is seeking access to properties to survey and conduct environmental impact studies required to obtain permission to build from the MD Public Service Commission. Residents and local governments alike have opposed the transmission line project, yet families were given just 7 business days to respond to this legal assault. In response, the Tri-County Coalition — a network of local organizations and small businesses — has rallied to fight back. They have secured attorney Susan Euteneuer of PK Law, a Maryland-based legal expert with a strong track record in corporate and environmental law and the current President of the Maryland Farm Bureau. Euteneuer understands what’s at stake for our farmers, our families, and our futures — and she’s ready to lead the charge. The PSEG effort may be the first in many legal maneuvers. Individuals who wish to do so can contribute to the legal fund at https://gofund.me/a0ad5176. 100% of donations will go toward legal fees to defend Frederick County land and rights in federal court. Any remaining funds will support continued efforts to Stop the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project. County: Recently Adopted State Laws Relevant to Frederick, Passed by the Legislature & Signed by the Governor There was a flurry of power- and data center-related bills in the General Assembly this year. The Maryland Office of People’s Council (OPC) identified and monitored 134 bills, including cross-filed bills. To find coverage of these bills go to https://opc.maryland.gov/Publications/Legislation. Data Center Study Bill – SB116/HB270 — Senator Karen Lewis Young- and Delegate Crosby-sponsored bill to study environmental, energy, and economic impacts of data centers as they may apply to Maryland. The committee will be headed by the Department of Legal Services and will include members from MDE, MEA, and the University of Maryland School of Business. Additional agencies will be asked to provide input as needed. The final report is due to the General Assembly and the Governor by Sept. 1, 2026. Next Generation Energy Act — SB 937/HB1035 — Legislative Leadership Bill — The bill includes a fast-track process to build gas generation plants next to data centers (co-location) but also requires utilities to set unique rates for large energy users (100 megawatts or greater). In addition, the bill requires a large load customer to cover the just and reasonable costs associated with any electric transmission distribution system buildout and protects ratepayers by making data centers commit to long-term agreements. County/City: Climate Planning The City and County have launched an effort called the Climate & Energy Action Plan (CEAP). The CEAP will map out where our community is at risk, document what we are doing that contributes to the problems, and identify actions we can take to tackle these issues. It will provide a guide for how we can work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and prepare for the impacts a changing climate may have on our people, natural resources, businesses, and infrastructure. The CEAP is a data-driven project built in partnership with stakeholders, based on scientific research, and responsive to feedback from our residents.  Learn more at this link: https://www.frederickcountymd.gov/8888/Climate-Energy-Action-Plan-for-the-Commu Upcoming Meetings & Events County Council, May 20, Winchester Hall, 5:30 PM – vote by the Council on the County’s revised CDI Ordinance County/City Community Meetings re: Climate & Energy Action Plan — see meetings calendar for meetings around the county here: https://www.frederickcountymd.gov/calendar.aspx?CID=91

__________________ See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, S. Jakubczyk, E. Law, M. Rosensweig, K. Sellner, J. Wagner CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue. We're on Instagram... follow us! Check out our Facebook page!

Frederick City and County News of Interest VOL. 4, NO. 4 | APRIL 7, 2025

VOL. 4, NO. 4  |  APRIL 7, 2025 Frederick City and County News of Interest Please join our monthly email list by clicking here. Learn more about CRG at the bottom of this newsletter. For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below: Commentary: It's Getting Late Early City: City Council Committees City: Cricket Anyone? City: Street Grid County: 'Frederick Futures' Public Outreach Meetings County: Data Center Update City & County: The City Nature Challenge, April 25–28, 2025 Upcoming Meetings & Events ______________ Commentary IT'S GETTING LATE EARLY Although the opportunity to register as a candidate for the 2025 Mayoral and City Council election has been open for several weeks, with less than 90 days remaining before the filing deadline, the number of individuals seeking office is disturbingly low.   As of Friday April 4, current Mayor Michael O'Connor is the only option for Mayor and although CRG is confident O’Connor does not mind running unopposed, this is not the best way to maintain a democratic system.   The City Council situation is equally troubling. Of the 5 districts, two have no candidates, one has one, and the 2 at large seats have just 2 candidates. Currently, there are 3 candidates in District 3 and one each in Districts 4 and 5. This unanticipated lack of interest could cause severe issues for the fall primaries and general election, as the City does not have a procedure in the event that no one is on the ballot in a particular district.   On a positive note, several civically involved residents are part of an all-out effort to recruit viable candidates who represent the values and concerns of each district. Sadly, success has been limited.   CRG challenges anyone who wants to make a difference in how the City grows and prospers to make themselves available to serve. The newly created legislative branch has been given more authority and ability to make things happen and at a higher pay scale! The time is now to represent your community.   All interested parties can reach out to CRG directly or to Phyliss Hane with the City of Frederick at phane@cityoffrederickmd.gov for additional direction.   City: City Council Committees Housing, Health, and Education (HHE) Committee The HHE Committee continued its discussion of the Housing Workplan at meetings on March 20 and April 3, with presentations describing the housing Continuum of Care (CoC), a community plan to organize/deliver housing services to persons experiencing homelessness and move them to subsidized (and other) housing. Presentations/discussions on Accessible Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Single Room Occupancy (SRO) facilities were also part of the meeting’s focus. Any provider receiving US Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) funds must be part of the CoC, a group of 24 organizations that meets monthly to discuss best practices and identify community needs, grants, etc. Frederick County government is the lead organization and the main conduit for two state grant processes. During the discussion, committee members requested development of a funding matrix for the City Council to identify the funds available, the source of the funds, and the destination (i.e., the specific program that will receive allocated funds). Two other items of interest and concern were shared: The committee also confirmed the distribution of funds derived from the Rental License Ordinance: 50% will be reserved for affordable housing (or, as one member characterized it “price affordable” housing) and 50% for rental/tenant assistance. As well, the committee chair noted that the City Council had voted unanimously to release the covenant on properties designated as “perpetual affordable housing”, thereby permitting sale of specific properties that were initially purchased from the City by Habitat for Humanity to individual homeowners. This vote made possible the sale of one of the homes at market rate. During the meeting focusing on ADUs and SROs, committee members agreed affordable housing should be built anywhere in the City and not in specific designated areas; however, the lack of buildable land is an impediment. To address this problem, the City must have a regulatory framework sufficiently flexible to accommodate future affordable housing construction. The City’s experience with its ADU ordinance has exposed several barriers to development of these properties including parking requirements (e.g., how much flexibility is best?); maximum limit on ADU square footage within the larger property; and owner/occupancy issues (e.g., Does the Rental Licensing Ordinance affect this? Are we opposed to having two rental units on one property?). Committee members asked for real-life examples of the barriers, and a list of the issues that must be addressed. As for SROs, committee members noted that the definition of this type of housing differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and one funding source to another. All agreed that a Frederick City definition is an important first step. The discussion highlighted the need for new processes to inform and guide the City’s new legislative structure. One example is the Land Management Code text amendment process, including new procedures for bringing new text amendments forward. City: Cricket Anyone? The City of Frederick is in the process of developing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with an entity from Montgomery County to develop a Cricket Field in Frederick County. The field is envisioned to support regional events and will be located on the site of the former driving range on Route 144 just south of Patrick Street Bridge crossing I–70. City: Street Grid Frederick planning staff will be conducting an analysis of the street grid in the City and create a Master Plan to be incorporated within the small area plans as they are developed. This is a major opportunity to participate in the vision of how our community will respond to the challenges of growth. The City plans to complete the Master Plan by the end of the calendar year and your participation is important for ownership of the future City street network and its traffic. County: 'Frederick Futures' Public Outreach Meetings The County’s Livable Frederick Planning and Design office hosted three open houses in Thurmont (March 13), Middletown (March 26), and Urbana (April 7). These open houses are intended to provide members of the public with information about three newly initiated plans: the Housing Element, the Historic Preservation Plan, and the Green Infrastructure Plan. The Housing Element includes goals to reduce residential segregation, increase housing choice, and increase access to job and educational opportunities  (https://frederickcountymd.gov/8783/Housing-Element). In addition to Shelter (vision, strengths and challenges; housing strategy mapping, and lived experiences re. shelter), participants could weigh in on Culture (historic preservation) and Nature (Green Infrastructure). Attendees participated in several activities designed to elicit written responses on these elements at tables staffed by County planners. It is expected that community feedback will contribute substantially to considerations by Planning Commission members as they workshop the draft Recommended Plan, and by the County Council during the legislative process. Of note (and possible concern?) is that there does not seem to be (at least in the minds of some attendees) any coordination/collaboration with the City's planning vision and process. Wouldn’t a comprehensive planning approach to city/county housing be preferable? Learn more: frederickcountymd.gov/Calendar.aspx?EID=13079 County: Data Center Update On March 25, the County Council held the second reading of the Knapp/Young Critical Data Infrastructure (CDI) ordinance, with the meeting solely dedicated to public comment from more than 70 presenters. This version of the ordinance leaves decisions on data center placement/siting in the hands of the Planning Commission which has limited purview over issues it is allowed to explore. An alternative CDI ordinance has been offered by Council members McKay and Donald. Their version ensures that any future data center siting in the County must be investigated, reviewed, and accepted/rejected by the County Council (as elected officials who are accountable to the County electorate, unlike appointed Planning Commission members). Planning Commission discussion on April 9 The Planning Commission will discuss the ordinance on April 9 with a final decision for the Knapp/Young ordinance scheduled for May 6. CRG is optimistic that the weak Knapp/Young ordinance will fail with the much stronger McKay/Donald version adopted soon thereafter; alternatively McKay and Donald could offer stronger amendments for the Knapp/Young ordinance. Your input to the County Planning Commission (planningcommission@frederickcountymd.gov) and County Council on both ordinances will be critical! The proposed MPRP construction of transmission lines from southern Pennsylvania through Baltimore, Carroll, and Frederick counties for powering northern Virginia data centers has been temporarily slowed as the State has found the application inadequate on several issues. This is a promising development, indicating substantial governmental concerns for the proposed invasive transmission line project. Let’s hope a final State decision will ensure rejection of the proposed power project. Such an action will protect private and multiple preserved lands that would be sacrificed for construction of this grid that solely supports data centers of our neighboring state. Remember, MD residents would pay for construction of the transmission line, estimated at $425M. Adoption of the project is not fair, is it? Data Center Siting Frederick County should be applauded for addressing the issue of data center location in the above-discussed CDI ordinance options and for wanting to improve siting constraints. However, whichever option is chosen (by right, or floating zone), two primary concerns remain: 1. How do officials intend to control growth of the data center industry in the County? If the industry decides it wants to grow in Frederick County at the rate and magnitude of our Loudoun County neighbors across the river, do Frederick officials and staff believe there are existing tools to control growth? The County is currently focused on siting with little discussion of controlling data center numbers or operations.   Ask yourselves the following questions: Can Municipalities annex adjacent land at will? Can Municipalities readily rezone land within their jurisdiction at will? Can Municipalities create municipality-specific tax structures within their jurisdiction at will (similar to Frederick City property tax, or could taxation have two components, with a property tax for the land and building as well as personal property tax for equipment and infrastructure within the center, as Loudoun County has done)? If the answers to any of these questions is ‘yes,’ the County may not have adequate control of data center expansion. CRG notes that a member of the County Council said the answer to these questions was indeed affirmative. 2. How does Frederick County protect access to water? Frederick County has limited access to water. As a result of a regional drought in 2003, the County was allowed to build an 8-inch water pipeline from the Potomac River to address County water needs. A significant portion of the water (20%) from this source was negotiated to be available to Quantum Loophole to serve their data center campus. The first two campus sites in development will require the entire allocation of water available for data centers from this source. What will be the source of water for the remaining sites on the campus? Has the data center corporation been promised ‘gray water’ infrastructure to be built, which would provide recycled water from the Ballenger-McKinney WWTP to meet additional demand? And what of river flow concerns? Are the Potomac River and its tributaries the projected sources of water for the 300 data center sites in Loudoun County? If it is from creeks and streams feeding the Potomac River, then Potomac River water levels will be impacted. If it is from the Potomac River directly, it could have a direct impact on water supply remaining available for drawdown by Maryland and other downstream users. Water is an asset under local control and CRG encourages the County to take measures to protect access to additional water from the Potomac, perhaps using aspects of MD and VA Riparian Rights. There should be caps understood by both states on maximum drawdown rates during normal river flow, as well as low flow conditions already addressed in the Potomac River Low Flow Allocation Agreement. During periods of constrained supply there should be a predefined priority regarding who has access to how much water, perhaps through the Interstate Commission of the Potomac River Basin or the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government. City & County: The City Nature Challenge, April 25–28, 2025 For the first time, Frederick County residents are preparing to join a global community science event with a very local focus: the wildlife in our environment. The City Nature Challenge (CNC) will take place April 25–28. The mission: to observe and identify as many species of wild animals, plants, and fungi as citizens can during the Challenge period — in local parks, neighborhoods, front stoops, back yards… anywhere. The Challenge is a fun event that offers a great opportunity to get outdoors. It also has a serious intent; the data collected will provide valuable information to scientists on urban wildlife and global biodiversity.   As our City grows, CRG believes we must allow and promote spaces for wildlife to survive, including pollinators, birds, etc. CNC volunteers collect data that help us understand effects on wildlife and biodiversity, as we increasingly expand and develop the City. More info on the City Nature Challenge in Frederick is here: www.mobilizefrederick.org/city-nature-challenge. Frederick County participants (as part of the Washington DC Metro Area) will use their cell phone cameras or digital cameras, and the free iNaturalist app to make observations. Mobilize Frederick, a local non-profit, is coordinating Frederick County’s participation. They are joined by more than 60 regional organizations. Special events will be hosted across Frederick County during the Challenge. Find the details at mobilizefrederick.org/cnc-events. Upcoming Meetings & Events County Planning Commission, Winchester Hall, April 9, 9:30 AM: Knapp/Young CDI Siting Ordinance Maryland Department of Environment meeting, Carroll Manor Elementary School, April 24, 6:45 PM: Amazon Data Center diesel generators on the Rowan Data Center Campus. 5624 Adamstown Road, Adamstown, MD City Nature Challenge, April 25–28: Throughout the County and City. Info on events: mobilizefrederick.org/cnc-events

__________________ See the CRG blog at: responsiblegrowthfrederick.com Contributors: P. Gallagher, S. Jakubczyk, E. Law, R. Robey, M. Rosensweig, K. Sellner CRG is a grassroots coalition of Frederick residents who prioritize responsible growth, expanding infrastructure, and a functional natural environment. We advocate for development that accommodates projected population increases while fostering a strong and diverse community fabric and increasing economic opportunities. Our comprehensive approach emphasizes public safety, traffic mitigation, increasing school capacity, and housing for all members of our community. Many Frederick residents want to know — but cannot find — information about how to participate in discussions of important local issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3–10 p.m., making it impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest. Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail.com), Marge Rosensweig (marjorierosensweig@gmail.com), or Steve Jakubczyk (jakubczyksteven@gmail.com) for consideration of your issue. We're on Instagram... follow us! Check out our Facebook page!