The Montgomery County Board of Education attempted to stop neighbors around the Brickyard Middle School site from appealing their decision to lease the 20 acre property to Montgomery County for use as "ball fields." The Board of Education had argued that these neighbors did not have the required standing to pursue appeals to the State Board.
Yesterday, the Maryland State Board of Education ruled in favor of the neighbors right to appeal the decision of the Board of Education.
The appeal will now go forward on the merits of the case.
Brickyard Middle School Appeal Decision August 30, 2011
Okay, I definitely understand public anger about the lack of transparency in the Brickyard case--violations of sunshine laws are serious, and the County violates them much too frequently. What I *don't* understand is why residents (and by extension, the Parents Coalition, although I admit I don't know that for sure) feel that keeping public land in private hands, for the sole benefit of a private farmer, is good, whereas a use that actually makes the public land *available to the public* is bad. I live in a part of the county with no easy access to ballfields, and I resent this attitude that these residents somehow deserve a bucolic existence at public expense. This complaint is the worst sort of NIMBYism; buried in the usual concerns about traffic and noise is the worry that the soccer field will attract the "wrong kind of people," and I really wish the PC wouldn't support this us-versus-them attitude so prevalent in the county.
ReplyDelete@11:47 Public lands? You have completely missed that this is public SCHOOL land - NOT land up for grabs by private companies to take for FREE!
ReplyDeleteThe farmers use of the land was restricted and his use was that of a place holder. He was allowed to use the land while it wasn't being used as a school. His use kept the land available for the public school use. The land was under the full control of the Board of Education. That's gone now.
You support robbing school children of school buildings in favor of the private use of land that was donated to public school children?
Private developers should be given public school land for their own profit because...why?
What do you call that?
Your complaint about no easy access to ballfields has no bearing on this matter. County Executive Ike Leggett is preparing to turn this 20 acres of public SCHOOL land over to a private club. YOU won't have access to this land either - unless you join the CLUB!
Public SCHOOL land is dedicated for the educational use of public SCHOOL children.
It's not for trading for political gain.
By the way, how much use have you had of the public football field at Richard Montgomery High School lately? Oh, none. That public football field is now fenced and locked. (Well, except where the hole has been cut in the fence.)
ReplyDeleteThat's the future of public SCHOOL land that is turned over to private clubs. FENCED AND LOCKED.
There's no need to "yell" at me. I've been very polite to you.
ReplyDeleteThat said, you seem so inflamed that you've completely missed *my* point.
I'm not sure how you read that I'm anti-school. If MCPS used the site for a school, that'd be great--the county certainly needs them. But the residents' appeal here mentions nothing at all about wanting the site to be used as originally intended--as a school--nor have I read anything to that effect in the press. In fact, based on the concerns expressed in this appeal--about traffic, noise, etc.--I would expect residents to be apoplectic about a school, which would have a far greater, nearly year-round impact on them. Unless, of course, the concern is not really about traffic and noise, but about people from outside the neighborhood making use of the property.
You write, "This is public SCHOOL land - NOT land up for grabs by private companies to take for FREE!" But you never answered my question: Why is it then okay to lease this land (at a rent so ridiculously low as to be practically free) to a PRIVATE farmer, who deprives the public of its use of the land just as surely as the locks on Richard Montgomery's football field do? The farmer keeps the land minimally developed, but so do soccer fields, ball fields, a park, or any of a number of potential uses that would actually have *some* benefit to the general public. There's nothing magic about the farm--a lease for soccer fields can also restrict development and reserve the right for future public school use (as this appeal clearly shows).
I don't know why MSI is managing the fields, and I suspect you don't either. But it's silly to make the company out to be some sort of exclusive soccer country club, either. They're a NONPROFIT, and, rather than restrict access, they're the only league in the county committed to allowing *all* children, regardless of disability, to play. They offer programs for children at high-poverty downcounty schools and scholarships to make the program accessible to all children. All other things in this case being equal (private renter vs. private renter), MSI is arguably a far, FAR better "school placeholder" to benefit the public than the farm could possibly be.
I just *hate* that we can't have an honest discussion about the county's economic and class divide--that we'd rather use contradictory arguments to defend certain private uses of public land but not others, rather than admit the elephant in this neighborhood's room.
@2:34 You want an honest discussion? Then start with the actual facts.
ReplyDelete1. In 2011 the public has NEVER been allowed to debate the use of the Brickyard Middle School site for school purposes because ALL of the negotiations on this land deal were conducted in SECRET, some of those discussions were even in violation of the Maryland Open Meetings Act.
In 2003 the County Executive (Duncan) tried to take this exact same piece of school land and transfer it to developers. Over 300 people (parents/PTAs/Civic) showed up at a public hearing to protest removing this land from the public school inventory!
At that time the Board of Education voted to not surplus the Brickyard Middle School site, as County Executive Doug Duncan was demanding, and instead do an analysis of the building needs of public school children. That analysis was never done.
So this time Leggett was smart. He didn't let the public or the PTAs know what was being planned. Hence, absolutely NO opportunity for PTAs or parents to speak out about the hundreds and hundreds of portable classrooms in use and the overcrowded school conditions all over the county. That's what happened last time, but this time Leggett wasn't going to let those voices be heard.
2. The Brickyard Middle School site has already been transferred to Montgomery County. Inks dry, deal is done. The public was given exactly 2 business days to find out that County Executive Leggett had been working on this deal for 2 years. The Opinion you are reading is only the first part of the Appeal to the State Board. You are only reading their decision on standing. You apparently haven't read their actual appeals. If you had you would know that the requirement that this land be used for educational purposes for public school children is paramount to their Appeals.
continued...
3. Your question was totally answered with regard to the farmer. The farmer was leasing the land from the BOARD OF EDUCATION. The Board of Education now no longer controls the land. The land has been turned over to Montgomery County for hand off to a private club. The farmer's lease was very restrictive. He could not do anything else with the land. No buildings, no parking, no structures, no bathrooms etc... All of that is gone now. This land can be developed any way County Executive Leggett sees fit.
ReplyDeleteAny permanent structures built on this land will have to be paid for by taxpayers if the land is needed for a school. As in all of these super cool deals with private developers/clubs, MCPS has to buy back the land by paying for the improvements on it if the land is needed for a school. None of these costs exist when the land is simply leased by the Board of Ed to a farmer who does nothing more than move the dirt around. The cost to reclaim land from a farmer is zero.
The same thing has already happened with Montgomery Hills Junior High. The building was leased to a private school and $9 million in improvements were put into the building. A very special nifty lease (not standard County lease) was written for that deal and the cost to reclaim the building for public school children would be high. Hence, MCPS isn't going to reclaim the building for the BCC Cluster - even though a new middle school is desperately needed. (By the way, the fields at that school are public. Does the public ever use them?)
4. MSI is not "managing" the fields. The deal is for a private soccer club to lease the fields for their OWN use. They will NOT be public fields. They can fence off the field and keep out the public.
5. For a non-profit MSI has a whole heck of a lot of cash stashed and was able to hire a lobbyist to work on getting land from the County. Check our their 990 filings.
6. Want an honest discussion about what is going on? Then let's discuss the 178+ acres of public school land that has been moved away from the use of public school children since 1994.
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2011/04/17866-acres-of-school-land-declared.html
Land has been taken from public school children all over the county at the request of the County Executives. What is going on here is just the next in a series of transactions to take "free" land and hand it off to private interests.
Why do our County Executives do this when our public school enrollment has been GROWING that entire time? That's the elephant in the room. Why don't you ask County Executive Leggett what his motivation is for depriving public school children of dedicated land.
Hello Janis
ReplyDeleteI have the greatest respect for the Parents Coalition and what you have accomplished. I also am a supporter of organic farming, small business and the capitalist system that Nick is a part of, and have been a very satisfied customer of Nicks Organic Farm.(Great Thanksgiving Turkeys)
I also agree that the process could have been a lot better.
On the other hand, I have enjoyed this discussion and I think “anonymous” makes some great points.
There are 20 acres of Montgomery County owned land on Brickyard Rd. in Potomac being held for an eventual public middle school. There are two options as to the use of this land until a middle school is built:
Option 1) Lease to an individual who runs his commercial farm business on this publically owned land.
Option 2) Lease to one or more of the nonprofit kids sports organizations that serve the tens of thousands of boys and girls in Montgomery County.
An attempt has been made to portray MSI and the other sports leagues as some sort of exclusive, snobbish clubs where only a few lucky kids can play. I don’t think this is deliberate misinformation so it must be simple lack of knowledge. It’s been years since I coached at MSI but I doubt their policy has changed. MSI welcomes ALL kids regardless of their athletic ability, skill, or their ability to pay. MSI and the other sports leagues charge a reduced rate or even nothing at all for any family that can’t afford it.
Isn’t this the same as our very own Montgomery County Department of Recreation sports programs?
Have you had a look at the Montgomery Soccer (MSI) website which discusses their side of this story in very measured tone? MSI, being the largest and most inclusive kids sports league in the county, appears to be one of the contenders for the use of this site. However, I would be just as happy if we used this site for youth lacrosse, baseball, field hockey, or football, whether it is another nonprofit league or the Montgomery County Rec Department.
I am not as familiar with this Richard Montgomery situation as you are . It seems like you are saying that youth teams and others cannot practice or play there. To my knowledge, all high school fields are unavailable for anything other than high school sports games. Even Quince Orchard HS soccer team practices at Dufief local park, not at the high school property. As far as “general public” use, youth sports team ARE the general public these days. Whether we like it or not, suburban kids just don’t go up to the local park and play pick up sports like they did when I was young.
Lastly, I am not only surprised but disappointed in the opposition from the neighborhood. Does this mean it is OK for their kids to play at the other parks and schools but not OK for the other kids to play near their home? When I coached kids sports in Potomac, I was limited to a single one hour practice per week because there was such a huge demand for fields. Don’t you think most Potomac families in the coming years will be absolutely delighted that their practice or game is on nearby Brickyard Rd rather than the back of a middle school down in Silver Spring or way up in Germantown?
Thank You for your comments . I have read a lot on this and make it a point to look carefully at “the other side” but I am still convinced that this land should be used for kids sports rather than a commercial enterprise.
Bernie Mihm
Full disclosure I have been a volunteer coach in the following boys and girls programs
Montgomery County Public Schools
Montgomery County Recreation Department Basketball
Montgomery Soccer, Inc.
Seneca Soccer Association
@ Mr. Mihm,
ReplyDeleteWhy only 2 options? The school system has a lot of land needs, why have you eliminated the discussion of any school uses?
That was the discussion that should have been held by the Board of Education, in open session, before the land was handed over to the County for non-school uses.
How about starting with a discussion of the use the school land for school purposes? Use of the land by a farmer is actually a school use as it preserves the land - without construction - for future school use. It allows the Board of Education to have a caretaker for the land without any permanent modifications to the land.
That means the Board of Education could reclaim the land for free! That's not going to happen when buildings are constructed or other structures. If there are buildings on the land the Board of Education will have to reimburse the tenant for the cost of those improvements. The Board of Education won't be able to get this land back for free.
Public school land is deeded to the Board of Education in trust for the benefit of public school children. That legal trust has been broken. Let's start the discussion from the beginning instead of skipping ahead.
Ms. Sartucci
ReplyDeleteYou deserve a tremendous amount of credit for your dedication and hard work in watching over our schools.
You make some excellent points.
• If the site is needed for a school in the near future, that’s exactly what it should be used for. Maybe the site can used for that holding middle school that you were looking for in the Gazette article last week?
• The county (i.e. us!) should not be financially on the hook if a leaseholder decides to construct a building on the site.
On the other hand, I doubt that the sports leagues are planning buildings as the other sports fields in Montgomery County do not have buildings on site. Avenel, Falls Rd, Dufief and Darnestown are a few that come to mind.
Where I don’t think many people would agree with you is that running a commercial business on the site can be construed as a school use. I also think that an overwhelming majority of Montgomery County residents believe that kids sports leagues are a far better interim use than this commercial enterprise, especially since the eventual use as a middle school will have 2 or 3 sports fields.
Although the need for public meetings is important, it is more important to recognize that this is land owned by all of the taxpayers in Montgomery County and should be used for the benefit of all of us. Simply residing near the land does not mean that a resident should have veto power over the best use by the all of us in the county.
In the coming years, many a Potomac resident will be absolutely delighted to bring little Johnny or Susie to the field on nearby Brickyard rather than out to Silver Spring or Germantown.
Thank you again
Bernie
Bernie,
ReplyDelete-At least one building has been discussed in the plans for this site. That's a building that the taxpayers will have to pay for to reclaim the land.
-How exactly do you plan to know what the public wants to do with public land if you don't give the public notice and an opportunity to be heard?
-Take a drive over to the Richard Montgomery High School football field and take a walk around the field. Oh, you can't. It's fenced in and not available for the use of the public because it has been turned over to a private soccer club.
That's what happens to public land that is turned over to private entities - fenced and locked.
Your fantasy that somehow the public will have use of public land that has been turned over to a private club doesn't pan out. Although, there are those who have cut a hole in the RM fence to create their own "public" access!