Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Get off the politics

Expand Messages
  • bobrosebrough21045
    Get a grip on the politics you junkies!! As for morality, neither party (we have a two aparty system??), has a lock on it. End of message -GET IT. I have been
    Message 1 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Get a grip on the politics you junkies!! As for morality, neither
      party (we have a two aparty system??), has a lock on it. End of
      message -GET IT. I have been a member of any number of newsgroups
      that have been spoiled by incessant political name calling. Again,
      neither the right nor left have locks on boorish behavior.

      There is ample blame to pass around concerning development in HoCo
      and the failure to match schools to growth. My thought – why do
      schools need to be built in response to growth and not the opposite.
      Every heard of the tail wagging the dog??

      I want both of the current BOE candidates to address a couple of
      issues that affect my high school.
      1) Joe Rutter apparently thinks that it is OK for Giant to replace
      the old Palace Cinema with yet another grocery store, compounding the
      traffic on Rt. 108 in front of Howard High School. Could it be that
      Rutter lives in the west and could care less about school safety in
      the east?
      2) The BOE is breathing good air again. The latest from Pat Gordon
      (Melody, she was endorsed by the CDC) seems to think that it is
      wasteful to bring Howard up to programmatic standards because of the
      age of the building. Funny, she has no problem with Glenelg's
      addition although that school is only 6 yr. newer than Howard. Will
      the BOE figure in the cost of the new poo patch at Glenelg in costing
      out the cost of that school's addtion? Cost benefit the whole damn
      school system, then. Is it cost effective to pour money into those
      high schools built in the 70's with their architectural deficiencies
      and shoddy construction? The older high schools, Howard, Glenelg and
      Mount Hebron are fundamentally much sounder facilities, if they were
      properly maintained. In the case of Howard, this was certainly not
      the case – systemic renovations such as unplugging the toilets and
      fixing HVAC are not programmatic improvements and should not be
      considered as such.

      Courtney and Barry, where do you stand on a programmatic improvement
      of Howard versus more unplugging of the toilets (merely adding
      seating capacity).

      BobR
    • maureensmom@aol.com
      Bob, She might have been endorsed, but I didn t vote for her then and don t support her now. I am glad to get past the politics, but it is in my blood! I will
      Message 2 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Bob,

        She might have been endorsed, but I didn't vote for her then and don't support her now.

        I am glad to get past the politics, but it is in my blood! I will try to hold back and get back to education issues. Howard High School does not seem to be on anyone's radar screen at the BOE. I guess there are not enough rich folks backing the school to get anyone's attention. Virginia Charles is actually the BOE rep to our school and as of June had not stepped one toe in the school since she was elected.

        Melody
      • bobrosebrough21045
        You r neither right not wrong - just irrelevant. How s the Klan doing in the west? ... walking ... go to ... the ... replace ... that ... in ... Gordon ...
        Message 3 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          You'r neither right not wrong - just irrelevant. How's the Klan
          doing in the west?

          --- In howardpubliced@y..., steve&jen swanhart <sjswanhart@j...>
          wrote:
          > Bob,
          > Wouldn't adding a Giant, reduce traffic ? The new store would be
          walking
          > distanse to so many people. We all know how the Columbia crowd will
          go to
          > great lenghts to not drive. More food stores should be located near
          > communities so the evil internal combustion engine can be dumped on
          the
          > junk heap of history. Or are you just being a NIMBY?
          > Steve
          > Now if CA will only let you put a sign up so you can find it!!!!
          >
          > > 1) Joe Rutter apparently thinks that it is OK for Giant to
          replace
          > > the old Palace Cinema with yet another grocery store, compounding
          > > the
          > > traffic on Rt. 108 in front of Howard High School. Could it be
          that
          > >
          > > Rutter lives in the west and could care less about school safety
          in
          > >
          > > the east?
          > > 2) The BOE is breathing good air again. The latest from Pat
          Gordon
          > >
          > > (Melody, she was endorsed by the CDC) seems to think that it is
          > > wasteful to bring Howard up to programmatic standards because of
          the
          > >
          > > age of the building. Funny, she has no problem with Glenelg's
          > > addition although that school is only 6 yr. newer than Howard.
          Will
          > >
          > > the BOE figure in the cost of the new poo patch at Glenelg in
          > > costing
          > > out the cost of that school's addtion? Cost benefit the whole
          damn
          > >
          > > school system, then. Is it cost effective to pour money into
          those
          > >
          > > high schools built in the 70's with their architectural
          deficiencies
          > >
          > > and shoddy construction? The older high schools, Howard, Glenelg
          > > and
          > > Mount Hebron are fundamentally much sounder facilities, if they
          were
          > >
          > > properly maintained. In the case of Howard, this was certainly
          not
          > > the case – systemic renovations such as unplugging the toilets
          and
          > > fixing HVAC are not programmatic improvements and should not be
          > > considered as such.
          > >
          > > Courtney and Barry, where do you stand on a programmatic
          improvement
          > >
          > > of Howard versus more unplugging of the toilets (merely adding
          > > seating capacity).
          > >
          > > BobR
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          > >
          > > This is the Howard Public Education Mailing List.
          > > To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to:
          > > howardpubliced-unsubscribe@e...
          > > To send a message to the mailing list owner, send
          > > an e-mail to:
          > > howardpubliced-owner@e...
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          > >
          > >
          > >
        • steve&jen swanhart
          Bob, Wouldn t adding a Giant, reduce traffic ? The new store would be walking distanse to so many people. We all know how the Columbia crowd will go to great
          Message 4 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Bob,
            Wouldn't adding a Giant, reduce traffic ? The new store would be walking
            distanse to so many people. We all know how the Columbia crowd will go to
            great lenghts to not drive. More food stores should be located near
            communities so the evil internal combustion engine can be dumped on the
            junk heap of history. Or are you just being a NIMBY?
            Steve
            Now if CA will only let you put a sign up so you can find it!!!!

            > 1) Joe Rutter apparently thinks that it is OK for Giant to replace
            > the old Palace Cinema with yet another grocery store, compounding
            > the
            > traffic on Rt. 108 in front of Howard High School. Could it be that
            >
            > Rutter lives in the west and could care less about school safety in
            >
            > the east?
            > 2) The BOE is breathing good air again. The latest from Pat Gordon
            >
            > (Melody, she was endorsed by the CDC) seems to think that it is
            > wasteful to bring Howard up to programmatic standards because of the
            >
            > age of the building. Funny, she has no problem with Glenelg's
            > addition although that school is only 6 yr. newer than Howard. Will
            >
            > the BOE figure in the cost of the new poo patch at Glenelg in
            > costing
            > out the cost of that school's addtion? Cost benefit the whole damn
            >
            > school system, then. Is it cost effective to pour money into those
            >
            > high schools built in the 70's with their architectural deficiencies
            >
            > and shoddy construction? The older high schools, Howard, Glenelg
            > and
            > Mount Hebron are fundamentally much sounder facilities, if they were
            >
            > properly maintained. In the case of Howard, this was certainly not
            > the case – systemic renovations such as unplugging the toilets and
            > fixing HVAC are not programmatic improvements and should not be
            > considered as such.
            >
            > Courtney and Barry, where do you stand on a programmatic improvement
            >
            > of Howard versus more unplugging of the toilets (merely adding
            > seating capacity).
            >
            > BobR
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            >
            > This is the Howard Public Education Mailing List.
            > To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to:
            > howardpubliced-unsubscribe@egroups.com
            > To send a message to the mailing list owner, send
            > an e-mail to:
            > howardpubliced-owner@egroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >
          • steve&jen swanhart
            Howard High ... Melody Melody, One human citizen one vote. The BOE counts votes not $$$$. I don t think Howard H.S. has the numbers of supporters that say
            Message 5 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Howard High
              > School does not seem to be on anyone's radar screen at the BOE. I
              > guess there are not enough rich folks backing the school to get
              > anyone's attention.
              Melody

              Melody,
              One human citizen one vote. The BOE counts votes not $$$$. I don't think
              Howard H.S. has the numbers of supporters that say River Hill has. Bob
              does a great job as a one man band but its votes. How safe do the elected
              officials feel ? Will the council rep always win in that district? In a
              State so dominated by one party I find it incredible that the minority
              party is blamed for everything. Class envy won't fix a thing it just gets
              the same ineffective people elected!
              Steve

              ps. Why would you want to increase the student/teacher ratio at
              struggling schools?
            • steve&jen swanhart
              On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 12:52:22 -0000 bobrosebrough21045 ... The Klan is on the run the compassionate conservatives are giving them no quarter. My clan is
              Message 6 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 12:52:22 -0000 "bobrosebrough21045"
                <bobrosebrough21045@...> writes:
                > You're neither right not wrong - just irrelevant. How's the Klan
                > doing in the west?
                The "Klan" is on the run the compassionate conservatives are giving them
                no quarter. My clan is doing well thank you :)
                Steve
              • steve&jen swanhart
                Invitation only town meetings where have I hears that before?? Will the participants get pre selected questions to ask also? Steve On Thu, 1 Aug 2002
                Message 7 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Invitation only "town meetings" where have I hears that before?? Will the "participants get pre selected questions to ask also?
                  Steve
                   
                  On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:56:28 EDT RGoodri973@... writes:
                  Below is a News Release from Mr. Robey's Public Information Office on the new govt complex.   Now I don't know the complete history on this project, but from what I've seen online (www.co.ho.md.us) there's NO MENTION of public hearings on this complex.  The "closest" thing to tapping public opinion on this project is Focus Groups!  And it appears that some citizen participants were INVITED to participate in the groups (and some were randomly picked from a pool of interested citizens).  This "participation by invitation" thing really rubs me the wrong way.  (And will there be public hearings on this in the future if there haven't been already?  Why shouldn't new county govt facilities be subjected to the same process as new school facilities?)

                  Also, note from below that the "workplace study ... is examining priorities of local citizens and taxpayers, including accessibility and government image." 

                  WOW!  If THAT is part of the reason for building new govt offices, then what a colossal waste of money!!  What relevance or value is "government image"?! And to add insult to injury, taxpayers had to foot the bill for focus groups to discuss "government image" -- your tax dollars at work!

                  I'm still waiting to see an analysis on this govt complex and will share what I find out. I hope it includes some relevant information (like a cost/benefit analysis) -- and not focus group verbatims on government image and accessibility. 

                  -Diane
                  ----------------------------------
                  http://www.co.ho.md.us/prfocus.html
                  NEWS RELEASE
                  November 21, 2000
                  Media Contact:
                  Victoria Goodman, Public Information Administrator, 410-313-2022
                  Citizens Sought for
                  Workplace Focus Groups
                  ...

                  Focus group members will be randomly picked from the pool or participate by invitation. Feedback
                  from the three groups will provide valuable assistance to the Department of Public Works both in the
                  planning and design of the new government campus and in contributing to a workplace study which is
                  examining priorities of local citizens and taxpayers, including accessibility and government image.
                  County Executive Robey directed that the study, by workplace specialists Griswold, Heckel and Kelly
                  Associates, should be undertaken concurrently with the planning of the new government campus.
                   





                  This is the Howard Public Education Mailing List.
                  To unsubscribe from this list, send an e-mail to:
                  howardpubliced-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                  To send a message to the mailing list owner, send
                  an e-mail to:
                  howardpubliced-owner@egroups.com


                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                   
                • perlpubl
                  OK Bob - here is my stance - 1) Once again, a lack of communication between the school system and other entities. Do you think safety at Howard High was even
                  Message 8 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    OK Bob - here is my stance -

                    1) Once again, a lack of communication between the school system and
                    other entities. Do you think safety at Howard High was even
                    considered? I continue to stress partnerships. This means at all
                    levels - business, community, and other government departments.
                    Should I be elected, I intend to utilize my open and good
                    relationships with the county executive's office, the county
                    council's office, Jim Irvin / Director of Public Works, Chief Livesay
                    and others. With schools taking $400 million out of the $800 million
                    operating budget every government decision should be weighed with its
                    impact on our schools and children.

                    I choose not to make any comments on Joe Rutter personally.

                    2) Of course, I support the "programmatic improvements" at Howard.

                    However, a third very important point -

                    As with other issues - increasing teacher salaries... closing the
                    achievement gap... improvements at Howard require more than just
                    saying - "I support this."

                    I think it is the responsibility of every candidate - county
                    executive, county council to take the time and spell out in detail --
                    HOW they will achieve what they support.

                    Every year we hear teacher salaries need to increase... the
                    achievement gap needs to close...we need to improve the
                    disproportionate minority suspension rates.... and every year the
                    results are the same (or worse). I've spelled out HOW I would solve
                    these issues in detail.

                    For day to day operations - If more money is needed this requires
                    either an increased tax base or finding other revenue sources (bonds,
                    grants, state/federal funds, or reallocate the current budget). You
                    may not like or agree with my proposals for finding the money
                    (primarily central office cuts), but I've given the details. Without
                    the details we will be in the exact same place next year.

                    For capital improvements - this is something we as a community should
                    discuss - "creative solutions" or bonds/ taxes/ state assistance.
                    The bottom line is it should have been done years ago and we are
                    still spinning our wheels because of a lack of vision and
                    leadership. It needs to be addressed today.

                    Barry Tevelow
                    Board of Education candidate



                    --- In howardpubliced@y..., "bobrosebrough21045"
                    <bobrosebrough21045@y...> wrote:

                    > 1) Joe Rutter apparently thinks that it is OK for Giant to replace
                    > the old Palace Cinema with yet another grocery store, compounding
                    the
                    > traffic on Rt. 108 in front of Howard High School. Could it be
                    that
                    > Rutter lives in the west and could care less about school safety in
                    > the east?
                    > 2) The BOE is breathing good air again. The latest from Pat Gordon
                    > (Melody, she was endorsed by the CDC) seems to think that it is
                    > wasteful to bring Howard up to programmatic standards because of
                    the
                    > age of the building. Funny, she has no problem with Glenelg's
                    > addition although that school is only 6 yr. newer than Howard.
                    Will
                    > the BOE figure in the cost of the new poo patch at Glenelg in
                    costing
                    > out the cost of that school's addtion? Cost benefit the whole damn
                    > school system, then. Is it cost effective to pour money into those
                    > high schools built in the 70's with their architectural
                    deficiencies
                    > and shoddy construction? The older high schools, Howard, Glenelg
                    and
                    > Mount Hebron are fundamentally much sounder facilities, if they
                    were
                    > properly maintained. In the case of Howard, this was certainly not
                    > the case – systemic renovations such as unplugging the toilets
                    and
                    > fixing HVAC are not programmatic improvements and should not be
                    > considered as such.
                    >
                    > Courtney and Barry, where do you stand on a programmatic
                    improvement
                    > of Howard versus more unplugging of the toilets (merely adding
                    > seating capacity).
                    >
                    > BobR
                  • maureensmom@aol.com
                    I don t believe that he is treating the employees better. This is an unfavorable position, but I liked it the year my daughter was in a portable. Not believing
                    Message 9 of 22 , Aug 1, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I don't believe that he is treating the employees better. This is an unfavorable position, but I liked it the year my daughter was in a portable. Not believing in the open classroom approach to education, it was great having her in one room; no other classes making noise and creating distractions was great.

                      I do not advocate portables, but the issue comes down to the unregulated growth of the 90's coming back to haunt the rest of us now. Robey did not cause this problem and should not be blamed for it. It is so easy to lay blame at the feet of those currently in office instead of looking at the historical facts.

                      Children and government employees should have the adequate space to learn and work. When this county government complex was proposed did you oppose it? Did you go testify before the county council? If not, then it is a bit late to start worrying about it now.

                      I don't believe in sacrificing one group to benefit another.

                      Melody
                    • RGoodri973@aol.com
                      ... learn and work. When this county government complex was proposed did you oppose it? Did you go testify before the county council? If not, then it is a bit
                      Message 10 of 22 , Aug 2, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In howardpubliced@y..., maureensmom@a... wrote:

                        > ... Children and government employees should have the adequate space to learn and work. When this county government complex was proposed did you oppose it? Did you go testify before the county council? If not, then it is a bit late to start worrying about it now. ...
                        >
                        > Melody

                        Melody,

                        Herman Charity from the county exec's office tells me that the only hearing thus far on this project was to purchase the land itself (and sell off other land) for this complex -- as part of a public hearing on the Budget.

                        $2.5 million has been budgeted so far for "preliminary" work (including the site plan and design).  All other monies to fund this facility have NOT been budgeted (did Charity say it's projected to be $24 million?) -- but will be part of a future hearing/budget process (in 2004, I believe).

                        He told me that all other "public hearings" for this project were less formal and not sworn testimony (like "official" hearings), and included formats such as "community meetings" and "focus groups."  (And some of the focus groups had "participation by invitation" only -- how "public" is that?).

                        This is not a done deal.  It will only be a "given" when the construction monies for the actual facility are budgeted.   I guess that's why Adler's position is what it is.

                        - Diane
                      • RGoodri973@aol.com
                        Regarding the subject above, I said I d follow up with what I heard back from the County Executive s office on the justification for the new government
                        Message 11 of 22 , Aug 16, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Regarding the subject above, I said I'd follow up with what I heard back from the County Executive's office on the justification for the new government complex.  So here it is: a response from Mr. Robey (see below). 

                          I've also included my initial request (also below)  for a cost/benefit analysis, and/or any reports on the project.  Just my opinion, but I feel that I did not receive what I asked for. 

                          I received nothing remotely related to costs: no projected costs of building construction, no projected costs of furnishings, not even the projected "costs" (to our government and taxpayers) associated with maintaining status quo of NOT building this facility (i.e., the economic burden of maintaining county offices scattered geographically -- but in quantifiable terms) for justification.  

                          I did, however, receive commentary on the benefits of such a project -- but not in quantifiable terms.

                          In this new age of corporate accountability -- which, hopefully, will carry over into public sector -- I wonder why the absence of factual data and projections surrounding this very large capital project? 

                          It was a simple request -- or so I thought -- for a cost-benefit analysis.  Certainly an analysis determining if the benefits outweigh the costs should be an initial step -- yet I did not receive such an analysis.

                          Seems something very basic is missing.  The quantitative -- not qualitative -- justification. 

                          Just my opinion again, but without the quantitative justification, the process of public involvement (which included one public informational meeting and several "focus groups" -- some including "invited" participants, see my previous posts on this topic) is meaningless.  The hearing process, thus far, has involved just the land acquisition/sales and the preliminary site work.  The public hearing(s) for the remainder of the project will occur at a future date.  It's not a done deal yet.  Mr. Adler has made several public statements that he will not support such a project, if elected.

                          Below is my request, followed by Mr. Robey's response [re-keyed] and his attachments [re-keyed or sources cited].
                          -Diane
                          ------------------------------------------
                          Subj: New county government complex
                          Date: 7/29/2002 6:03:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time
                          From: RGoodri973
                          To: jnrobey@...

                          Dear Mr. Robey:

                          I was wondering if you could tell me the specific reason(s) and/or benefit(s) -- other than consolidation -- for building the county's new government campus.  I'm trying to understand the rationale for such an expenditure, and trying to see if the benefits outweigh the costs.

                          Any reports you have on this project, particularly ones that contain a cost/benefit analysis, would be greatly appreciated. 

                          Thank you in advance for your attention to my question.

                          Sincerely,
                          Diane Goodridge
                          ----------------------------------------

                          Howard County Office Of The County Executive
                          3430 Courthouse Drive
                          Ellicott City, Maryland 21043

                          August 9, 2002

                          Dear Ms. Goodridge:

                          Thank you for your email dated July 29, 2002 regarding the County's new government campus.  I understand you have already spoken briefly with Kathy Sloan-Beard of the Public Information Office and Karen Becker of the Department of Public Works.

                          As you may know, the Department of Public Works contracted Griswold, Heckel and Kelly Associates, Inc. (GHK) to develop a comprehensive programming and space planning study.  Their findings indicated the County's need for an additional 158,611 usable square feet of space than was currently available.  The option of utilizing existing buildings was a short term solution with considerable renovation costs, and the County would be revisiting the same space crisis in three years.  In contrast, incorporating a long-range facility plan to include the purchase of additional property for the creation of a consolidated government campus provides the County with an eight year plan with options and built-in flexibility.  The campus would provide both the County and its citizens the best value for their money, both in the short and long term.

                          The Howard County Planning Board held a public hearing on February 3, 2000 to include the request for a new capital project #C-0282 FY2001 Government Service Campus, to develop the land for the creation of a government campus.  The hearing also addressed an increased scope to capital project #C-0271 FY2000 Office Space Improvement/Planning, to increase the scope to include the design and planning of the new government campus.  On February 15, 2001, the Planning Board held a public hearing to include the request for additional funding for both of these projects.  By law, all public hearings are advertised in the local newspapers.  In addition, on January 4, 2001, a press release (enclosed) invited citizens to volunteer for public focus groups held on January 30, 2001.

                          The County moved ahead with the purchase of a 24.8 acre tract of land for the creation of a consolidated government campus site.  The design of the Campus has begun with construction to be completed over a period of approximately five years.  In order to offset the costs, the Department of Public Works acquired the services of Manekin LLC to assist the County in developing a marketplace to dispose of a variety of real estate assets, as well as assist in marketing and selling the properties.

                          On March 25, 2002, an informational overview meeting for the community was held. ([L]etter and news article enclosed).  In addition, a web site is being developed for downloading the latest information on the status of the government campus.  For your reference, I have enclosed several draft pages providing additional information on the needs assessment and site selection for the new campus.  We hope to have the web site operational in the near future.

                          In closing, thank you again for your inquiry.  I appreciate the thoughts and concerns of the citizens as the County continues to develop its plans.  The County strives to be forward thinking about its growth, considering the services it currently provides to the citizens, and improving how we provide those services in the future.

                          Sincerely,
                          James N. Robey
                          County Executive

                          JNR/khb

                          Enclosures

                          cc:  James M. Irvin
                                 Kathy Sloan-Beard
                                 Karen H. Becker
                          -------------------------------
                          Enclosure 1: 
                          http://www.co.ho.md.us/prfocus01.html
                          -------------------------------
                          Enclosure 2: [Announcement/Invitation to Residents]

                          Howard County Government invites you to attend an
                          Informational Overview Meeting for the Community
                          To learn more about plans to re-consolidate offices at the
                          ELLICOTT CITY GOVERNMENT CAMPUS
                          Monday, March 25th [2002] at 7:30pm
                          Banneker Room, George Howard Building, 3430 Courthouse Drive, Ellicott City

                          Dear Resident,
                          ....
                          --------------------------------
                          Enclosure 3:
                          News article from The View from Ellicott City
                          March 28, 2002
                          "Community Hears County's Plans for Ellicott City Government Complex"
                          by Jacqueline E. Burrell
                          --------------------------------
                          Enclosure 4:
                          http://dev.trammellcrow.com/HowardCounty/default.asp
                          [Not operational as of 8-16-02; will be operational shortly]

                          HOWARD COUNTY OFFICE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT SITE  [re-keyed; graphics omitted]

                          Welcome to the Howard County, Maryland
                          Office Campus Development Site

                          In an effort to modernize and improve the services provided to the residents of Howard County, Maryland and provide for future expansion of those services, the Howard County Department of Public Works is investigating the development of approximately 16 acres at the intersection of Route 40 and Rogers Avenue.  The project currently consists of two buildings totalling 285,000 SF supported by a 600-vehicle garage.

                          Howard County Office Campus - Project Goals
                          * Improve customer service through consolidation
                          * Increase efficiency of the operations of the Government and its many agencies
                          * Promote flexibility to accommodate future change

                          Needs Assessment [screen 1 of 3]
                          In 1998 the Department of Public Works contracted GHK to conduct a "Needs Assessment" and accumulate basic departmental programming data so that a long term solution tot he County's real estate needs could be formulated.  As part of this contract, GHK issued a Space Needs Questionnaire to key departmental heads and conducted 25 formal interviews to assess work patterns and confirm adjacencies.

                          The results of this Needs Assessment were issued by GHK in February 1999 and the final report presented in March.

                          Needs Assessment [screen 2 of 3]
                          The conclusions GHK and the County reached by the Needs Assessment Process were startling.  These conslusions [sic] are as follows:
                          Conclusions From Needs Assessment Process
                          * Multiple County locations frustrate customers
                          * County lacked adjacencies which would provide more efficient government
                          * Fragmented facility location increase operating expenses & budget requirement
                          * Significant space shortfall
                          * In Conclusion County services should Consolidate on a site which is located close to the existing Campus.

                          Needs Assessment [screen 3 of 3]
                          The decision to consolidate government in the Ellicott City area was very apparent but the question became how do you do it?  Again GHK was selected to provide further insights as to what was needed for this consolidation.  GHK convened a "Work Place Study Task Group" in September of 2000, which explored space utilization, expected expansion of service and the necessity for interdepartmental relationships.

                          GHK also utilized the county intra-net to request a response from County employees on an Innovative Work Place Questionnaire. These along with public and employee focus groups explored criteria that would be used in the design of the new project.  These included ease of way finding for the public, security, technology and its impact on space needs and environmental considerations for the new project.

                          The conclusions reached determined that a complex of buildings located near the present seat of government was the preferred solution.  This complex should be sized at approximately 285,000 SF which allows fro some expansion of county services.  The County's overall real estate plan would provide for the consolidation of services currently provided at the Gateway and Dorsey buildings.

                          Steps In Determining Need [screen 1 of 1]

                          Site Selection - March '99
                          Two Options:
                          Option 1 - New and Existing in Centralized Location
                          Option 2 - Renovate Existing and Add More Locations

                          Workplace Task Group - Sept '00
                          *Ellicott City, Seat of Government
                          *New Buildings near Existing Complex
                          *Minimal Community Impact
                          *Campus Setting
                          *Future Expansion Opportunities

                          Innovative Workplace Questionnaire & Study - Jan '01
                          Public Focus Groups
                          Employee Focus Groups

                          Conceptual Solution - July '01

                          Site Selection [screen 1 of 1]
                          The findings of the "Needs Assessment" clearly indicated that the new campus must accommodate 285,000 SF, have parking for approximately 6000 employees, provide 150 parking spaces for visitors, and be located close to the present seat of government.

                          Consequently, the only piece of land available to the County was the parcel located at the intersection of Rogers Avenue and Route 40 depicted below.

                          As you can see this parcel of land allows for a more consolidated seat of government making travel times for both county employees and the public customers of county services much more accommodating to efficient government.



                                

                                  






                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.