First of all, an update on some legislation that passed at our previous meeting.

Passed legislation

O-31-24 – Mobile Food Service Vendors’ Signage (my legislation)

O-35-24 - Fair Cannabis Employment Practices (my legislation)

R-3-25 - City Dock Resiliency Project (I co-sponsored)

Monday’s meeting

As far as Monday’s meeting, there is no legislation up for a public hearing. Though we are introducing some legislation that would authorize the installation on speed cameras, and a demonstration project to install green roofs on some of our bus stops. We are also having final votes on legislation including O-28-24 that would require that APD donate confiscated bikes to non-profits to serve local residents in need.

Fence updates

I know this is of special interest to some of you. O-29-24, which is part 1 of my two-part legislative package updating our fence code (in response to an issue that popped up in my neck of the Ward), is up for a final vote. There are a number of amendments that I detail below. Also, its sister legislation O-30-24 has made it through the planning Commission with a favorable recommendation and will be coming back to the Council in February and March.

Stay healthy and stay safe,

Rob

Next Council meeting – 2/10/25 (agenda)

This meeting starts at 7pm and will be televised on local cable, YouTube, Facebook, and the City website.  You can submit public testimony at http://www.annapolis.gov/testimony. This will be an in-person meeting.

Public Hearings

• **There is no legislation up for a public hearing tonight**

Legislation being introduced on first reader

• O-5-25 - Speed Monitoring Cameras - For the purpose of authorizing speed monitoring systems in the City of Annapolis to comply with changes in the State law changes; and generally related to traffic monitoring systems in the City. This is legislation I am co-sponsoring. The State legislature has authorized local jurisdictions to install speed cameras outside of just school zones. So what this legislation does is enact State legislation and adopts our own City process to allow us to start to do this. I support the installation of additional speed cameras, as it does help to slow down traffic, which is important because it helps to save lives. However, it needs to be stated that cameras only provide a very localized benefit. The more sustainable, longer term solution we need to do is install more traffic calming and “road diets” to narrow lane widths and separate pedestrians and cyclists from traffic. To that end, I’ll be introducing an amendment to ensure that all of the money raised through this effort will go into a Sustainable Mobility Services Fund that is dedicated to improving and providing safe pedestrian transportation alternatives.
• O-7-25 - City Docking for Dinghies and Other Small Vessels For the purpose of updating City Code regarding the docking of dinghies and other small vessels at public facilities on the City's waterfront by moving the rules and restrictions for docking dinghies and other small vessels. This legislation just moves this section of code to another, more appropriate Chapter, and takes the opportunity to reformat things. This does not change the content of the Code. However, I am working on some minor amendments that may adjust this code to make it easier to launch and dock non-motorized lite craft without fees or approval, as long as it isn’t overnight.
• R-2-25 - Demonstration Program to Build Green Roofs on City Bus Shelters. This is estimated to cost us around $5,000. I support this initiative but have inquired as to whether or not we should do this via budget amendment instead.
• R-6-25 - Non-Profit Vendors During Fall 2025 Boat Shows For the purpose of authorizing sales by certain vendors in the City Dock area of the Historic District during the Fall 2025 U.S. Sailboat and Powerboat Shows. We typically pass something like this every year.
• R-7-25 - Itinerant Merchant Sales in the Historic District During Calendar Year 2025 For the purpose of authorizing hawker, peddler, and itinerant merchant sales in the Historic District in conjunction with certain special events during calendar year 2025. We typically pass something like this every year.

Legislation on second reader (i.e. final vote)

• O-28-24 - Police Department -- Property and Contraband Disposal - For the purpose of clarifying that Annapolis will follow state rules on the disposal of abandoned vehicles and generally dealing with property and contraband disposal. This adopts State standards governing how APD can dispose of abandoned vehicles and unclaimed bicycles, with the exception that I’m seeking to amend it to require that unclaimed bikes be donated to local non-profits for distribution to local residents in need.
• O-29-24 - Fence Permit Requirements Related to Buildings and Construction Standards in Title 17. In light of some recent issues that were brought to my attention with fence permitting and approvals, I have introduced two pieces of legislation. This one clarifies our code to correct issues that frankly shouldn’t need correcting, to address the following: States that no fence over 400’ long should be removed or demolished without a permit, and 2. That existing trees over 5” dbh need to be shown on the permit application (to be amended to only those within 3’ of a proposed fence), and 3. That applications that do not meet these requirements shall not be considered or approved by the Department, (Yes, I’m even now surprised that I have to even type out #3 as it really shouldn’t’ need to be stated...), and 4. applicants shall be notified by staff of any appeals filed to their fence permit application so they don’t waste money building a fence that a judge may overturn, and 5. That the Board of Appeals should handle any appeals on a case-by-case basis and the plainly written meaning and intention of the code shall be adhered to, and that if they need clarifications they should contact the Council, the actual policy-makers, instead of simply ignoring our code. There are a few amendments offered. One would clarify that the Building Board of Appeals SHALL issue a correction or reversal of an order that is found to be in error. Currently it’s listed as a MAY, and they are clinging to that to say they aren’t compelled to do anything even if problems are found. That seems ridiculous in my mind. Why even bother having an appeal board if they can just find a problem then do nothing about it? A second amendment would restore language that was mistakenly stricken during drafting. A third amendment would remove the limitation I was proposing where only fences over 500’ would need a permit to remove, to have this apply to all fences. Ultimately this shouldn’t be much of an issue since most people don’t remove their fence until the new one is ready to be installed. But as we have seen, that isn’t always the case. A fourth amendment would clarify that only trees within 3’ of a proposed fence would need to be shown on an application. A fifth amendment seeks to reduce the burden on applicants by having staff review City GIS mapping to determine utility, right-of-way, and easements rather than the applicant.

Community & Political updates

Save the date – AACO Safe Routes to Transit Study – Public meetings

Annapolis (Annapolis, Parole, and nearby): Wednesday, April 15, 2025, 6-7pm -- American Legion Post #141 (1707 Forest Drive, Annapolis, MD)

https://www.aacounty.org/public-works/engineering/capital-projects?projectNumber=H590601