The agenda for a Special Meeting scheduled on September 21 with the purpose of picking up the pace for discussing matters related to the proposed superconducting magnetic levitation railway system (SCMaglev) was itself delayed and came to an ending of sorts at the regular meeting of October 5.
The original September 21 meeting had been requested by Mayor Colin Byrd and Councilmember Rodney Roberts for the purpose of accelerating the city’s planning and response to a sudden resurgence of activity and change of schedule for releasing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the maglev project.
The resolution for establishing a city task force to work with others to oppose building maglev and a discussion about identifying an environmental engineer or consultant to advise the city on the findings of the DEIS were to be on the agenda for the next regular meeting on September 28, but that meeting was unexpectedly postponed to October 5.
Roberts was particularly eager to get the anti-maglev show on the road. He said both the resolution for the task force and the discussion about the
environmental consultant or engineer were on the agenda for the following week, but he requested the Special Meeting to initiate action earlier than that.
Timeline
Councilmember Judith Davis asked Planning Director Terri Hruby to explain the timeline as it now exists for responding to the DEIS.
Hruby explained that the DEIS will be released on January 22. Public hearings will be held February 21, and the comment period will be January 22 until March 8. Davis commented that it would then be the late January to early March period that should be the city’s target for having its documents and testimony prepared, to which Hruby agreed.
According to Hruby, Greenbelt is a participating agency but not a cooperating agency in the review process. An administrative DEIS is scheduled to be sent to cooperating federal agencies next week, with their review comments due in mid-November. These comments will be used to revise the DEIS before its release to the public in January. Davis asked why Greenbelt could not directly contact the federal agencies that make up the cooperating agencies and ask for copies of their statements. City Solicitor Todd Pounds replied that they could indeed do that. Councilmember Edward Putens said it might be the case that the agencies were not free to provide copies of those opinions, and he also recommended that the requests include materials not only from the main agency but from offices within it. Pounds indicated that if the agencies would not supply the statements, he would file Public Information Act (PIA) requests as needed.
Task Force
The resolution to establish the Greenbelt SCMaglev Opposition Task Force was unanimously
adopted, and for several weeks the city ad in this paper has featured information about the task force and about applying to participate. The task force will include representatives of the city’s advisory boards and committees and homeowner associations, and it also seeks residents with experience in the following areas: environmental engineering, major transportation projects, environmental law, social justice and community advocacy. Councilmembers hope to have representation from all parts of the city.
Environmental Engineer
Roberts said that, as with the task force, he wanted to pass an ordinance that night to proceed with the hiring of an environmental consultant or firm. He envisioned authorizing staff to undertake the search and hiring, and he made a motion to that effect. Pounds ran through a list of possibilities he had explored for consultants, but the number of interested companies was not large.
Davis disagreed with Roberts, saying there needed to be more information and that council needs to have a list of viable possibilities. She said they could move on it quickly. Staff can investigate, she said, but council needs to make the decision. Councilmember Leta Mach agreed with Davis, as did Councilmember Emmett Jordan, saying more time should be taken.
Davis asked to have the matter continued on the agenda of the September 28 meeting (which eventually became the October 5 meeting). She said council needed information on candidates’ qualifications, backgrounds and project experience, as well as pricing.
The mayor had seconded Roberts’ motion for the purpose of discussion but said he thought Davis’ points were well taken and that all that council was really doing tonight was receiving a briefing from the attorney.
Roberts argued that council had previously authorized the prior city manager to hire in the situation, but councilmembers disagreed with him, and he eventually withdrew the motion.
Because of the relatively limited responses to Pounds’ queries, councilmembers asked staff to prepare materials to serve as a Request for Proposals (RFP).