gaithersblog.net

From the County’s website:

For Immediate Release: 8/25/2008

Leggett to Host Town Hall Meeting in Gaithersburg

On Wednesday, September 17, Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett will host a Town Hall Meeting at 7:30 p.m. at Gaithersburg Middle School, 2 Teachers Way. Previous town meetings have drawn thousands of residents who have taken advantage of the opportunity to voice their concerns to the County Executive.

“Town meetings present an excellent opportunity for me to find out what’s on the mind of our residents,” said Leggett. “A cornerstone of my administration has been to make sure ‘everyone has a seat at the table’ and these public meetings provide a forum for our residents to share their ideas and concerns.”

The town meeting is free and open to all and will be videotaped by County Cable 6, the County government channel, for future airing.

Sign language interpreter services will be provided only upon request with notice as far in advance as possible, but no less than 72 hours prior to the event. If these or other services or aids are needed to participate in this activity, please call 240-777-6530 or TTY 240-777-6505 or email a request to karen.falcon@montgomerycountymd.gov.

For more information about the town meeting or the cable television program schedule, call 240-777-6530.

# # #

Release ID: 08-331
Media Contact: Sue Tucker 240-777-6530

The County has put up a series of web pages describing what they call their “Property Use Initiative”. These pages contain extensive information about their plans to relocate several County functions to a number of mostly further-up-county sites, with detailed analysis of each site. There is a 30-minute video giving an overview of the plan, as well as a flowchart showing how the uses are likely to be redistributed; a small copy of the flowchart is pasted in below, click on the image to load the PDF from the County’s website.

There is also a page on the GE Tech Park, containing many of the statements that we have heard from them many times before. On the most sensitive of topics, they remain as vague as ever:

• The property is I-3 zoning which permits the County to uses including office, warehousing and manufacturing.
• An additional 700,000 square feet of I-3 development and uses are permitted on the site “by right” under the Annexation agreement. However, the County does not plan to construct additional buildings on the site.
• The tenant, GXS, is willing to vacate the building and the size of this building allows the County to immediately consolidate in one location certain uses that are currently dispersed throughout the County.
• The GE Tech Park is surrounded by natural and man made buffers that separate the areas of the site where new development is likely to occur from existing adjacent residential development and the County is considering enhancing these buffers.

But in the FAQ they state:

• Can you put deed restrictions on the property to ensure that there will be no other uses? No, we cannot bind the future government in this manner.

Which I read as saying that they feel that at this point in the process they can tell any story they think will lower the community’s resistance, but on the other side of the next County election — which if you think about it will be held before any major expansion would be likely to begin — any promises they make now are null and void. They do not, I note, answer the question I’ve heard asked many times: How is it fiscally responsible to buy and hold valuable land that you have no intention of using?

• Will you control the employee traffic through the residential streets? We want 100 percent of the traffic to enter from route 28.

Well, you know, you can’t always get what you want. Note that they do not say they will do anything to control this. They do have a link on that page to a recent traffic study (PDF format).

The FAQ contains many statements along these lines:

• Will you reduce the parking lot to create a larger buffer between the property and the residential? We can look into that. Will also relocate the warehouse loading bays if necessary.

Well, yes, they can look into that. I’m sure they look into all maner of things, but how many of these things get done?

• Can the lakefront property be deeded to the city? The County plans to preserve and improve that portion of the parcel by adding benches to make it usable for residents.

Note that they don’t even answer the questions in their own FAQ. And they are silent on the obvious follow-up question of why they would hold on to property that would be that expensive to maintain if they don’t plan on using it for anything beyond seating. Note that they have not proposed to make this a formal County park. They do mention on another FAQ page that they plan on putting a public safety memorial near the lake, but I don’t think that this is intended as part of a park so much as a monument in an office building complex.

• What is the impact to city tax revenues? Will the county reimburse the city? That has not been determined, but the County has plans to discuss this with the city.

Another thing to look into.

• Will this affect the construction of the aquatic center? This will have no effect on the construction.

Why does the limiting of this question to the construction of the aquatic center leave me feeling that there’s more to this story?

• What has been the City of Gaithersburg’s reaction to the general proposal for a substantial public safety presence at the GE Tech Park site? The City of Gaithersburg has not opposed our proposed uses. Some officials voiced support, other cautious support and others were non-committal.

Again, I’m not sure this tells the whole story. From what I’ve seen in public meetings on this topic, City officials have had a large number of questions which the County staff have not been willing or able to answer. But in the end the tone of this FAQ entry seems to suggest that it doesn’t really matter to the county how the City reacts.

• The study proposes moving the District 1 Station from its current location on Seven Locks Road to the GE Tech Park. Chief Manger told the Committee that the move will not only provide upgraded facility but will allow Headquarters to become a 24-hour facility. However, the GE Tech Park is just barely in District 1 and would be quite distance from many residences and businesses in the District. What are the service impacts from this relocation? Should consideration be given to establishing a centrally located satellite or sub station? Has the City of Rockville been asked for their reaction to the relocation of the District 1 station? If so, what were there comments? The District 1 Station will be located on the extreme edge of the district that it serves. This will have no impact on the officers’ effectiveness or the speed of responses because to a large degree, calls are dispatched to officers in their roving vehicles, not from the station. It will be less convenient for residents on the other side of the district to get to the station and in the future we may consider a substation more centrally located. Preliminary conversations have been held with the City of Rockville. Additionally, of course the City of Rockville’s police services supplement those of the County and the impacts of the proposed 1st District should not be significant.

In other words, they don’t really have a good answer to this.

According to the County Council agenda for next Tuesday, January 22:

10:45 BRIEFING - County Property Use Initiative, a proposal to relocate services from Public Safety Training Academy (PSTA) and County Service Park to GE/Edison Tech Park in Gaithersburg

This meeting will be televised live on CCM Channels Comcast 6, RCN 6, and Verizon 30; repeated on 1/25/08 at 8 pm.

This page has information on additional ways to hear and see this session.

Gaithersblog readers may recall my earlier posts on this topic. Additionally, a Gaithersblog reader has pointed out to me that one of the primary uses the County has in mind for this property — County Liquor and School Cafeteria distribution warehouses — may in fact not be allowed under the current zoning (I-3) for this property. According to the City Code, Part II, Chapter 24, Article III, Division 15, I-3 Zone, Section 24-143 (emphasis mine):

(2)	Public buildings and uses subject to the following requirements:
	(a)	The minimum lot or parcel area shall be at least twenty (20) acres in size.
	(b)	No on-site parking or storage of trucks, either within a building or on the exterior, or motor vehicles other than automobiles for employees and customers of the facility are allowed.
	(c)	All parking areas shall be set back at least fifty (50) feet from any common property line or public right-of-way and shall be screened by fencing or planting at least four (4) feet in height.
	(d)	No distribution uses are allowed. For the purpose of this section “distribution uses” is defined as the primary use of the property for the collection and transfer or dispensing of personal property or equipment to public or private recipients.

Note this restriction on distribution uses only applies to public buildings and uses, and therefore the current Peapod grocery distribution warehouse is not excluded under this rule.

The County is currently asserting that they are not subject to City zoning — Ike Leggett said so in response to a question in his call-in show last month, and County Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Diane Schwartz Jones said as much in her presentation at the January 7 City Council Meeting. But for them to come in and blatantly violate not just the spirit but the letter of the City’s ordinances right from the get-go, is pretty offensive in my opinion.

In my mind, this raises the question of whether there will be any sort of controls whatsoever on that property once it is taken over by the County. If the County believes that the City’s zoning doesn’t apply, and the County doesn’t have any zoning for that property because it is outside the jurisdiction of M-NCPPC, would this not mean that the County can do just whatever it likes there? All the assurances that the County might be making about the compatibility of their activities on that property have to be taken with an enormous grain of salt.

Folks, I think that the City of Gaithersburg is about to get 100 acres smaller.

Update: The video of this call-in show can be found here.

From the County’s website:

Residents can view Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett and County Council President Mike Knapp during a live, televised call-in show on Tuesday, December 18 from 7:30 to 8:30 p.m. on County Cable Montgomery — Channel 6 on Comcast and RCN, and Channel 30 on Verizon. Leggett and Knapp will answer residents’ questions on any topic of local concern. Residents can call 240-777-6540 with their questions anytime before or during the show.

It will be interesting if they actually will answer any question of local concern. One thing I’m particularly interested in at this point is what the County’s plans are for the GE Tech Park. Will the County, by purchasing a good-sized chunk of land in the City, cut off the City’s tax revenue stream for that property, and in net effect — as it is arguable whether the City has any zoning authority over the County — de-annex a property that was annexed into the City about eighteen years ago? The GE Tech Park property is currently assessed at $19,201,800, on which the City’s portion of the property taxes is $40,707.82. If the County buys that land, the City would not be able to collect these taxes, which would likely be much higher if that property is redeveloped by a commercial entity. If this deal goes through, will the the City receive any compensation for this loss? And beyond these financial issues are questions of the long-term use of this property if the County has no one to answer to but themselves with regard to what they do there. According to the Gazette,

The county police department headquarters would move to the building, along with Public Service Training Academy classrooms and the 1st District police station. The county Board of Elections would also be moved there.

In addition to the six-story building, there is also a 240,000-square-foot warehouse on the property owned by Finmarc Management Inc., which is leased to Giant Food Inc. for its Peapod delivery service. That building would be adapted to hold an expanded, climate-controlled primary warehouse for the Department of Liquor Control. The MCPS food warehouse would be built nearby.

But these are, of course, just tentative plans for the short term. As we saw with the Crabbs Branch Day Laborer Center, if the County decides they want to do something, they just go ahead and do it, so no one should look at these tentative, public plans as representing any sort of limits on what the County will actually do there.

Brad Botwin, Director of Help Save Maryland, sent me the following email:

This past summer Chuck Floyd and Help Save Maryland filed Maryland Public Information Act requests with Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett and Montgomery County Council President Marilyn Praisner concerning information and financial records relating to CASA of Maryland and the Montgomery County Government. Our intent was to uncover the vast taxpayer funded financial and organizational relationship between the pro-illegal alien group CASA and our elected officials.

Help Save Maryland opposes any taxpayer dollars being spent on CASA managed Day Laborer Centers which provides employment opportunities for illegal aliens or any other related CASA managed efforts. Included in the correspondence was a request for the names and addresses of the businesses that utilize the workers from the Day Laborer Centers. Again our intent was to notify the citizens of Montgomery County regarding the businesses that are utilizing the taxpayer-funded Centers in possible violation of Federal and State law.

After receiving little if any information or data from Leggett and Praisner, Help Save Maryland submitted a second set of letters in the hope that our elected officials and career Montgomery County employees would obey the law and release the information. Did not happen.

I am pleased to announce that Judicial Watch Inc (www.JudicialWatch.org), a DC based, conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law, has taken up our cause! Please see the attached letter to County Executive Leggett. A similar letter was sent to the Montgomery County Council. For further information please contact JW President Tom Fitton at 202-646-5172 x306

Brad Botwin, Director
Help Save Maryland

Attached to this email was a PDF file containing the letter sent by Judicial Watch. Below is a transcription of this PDF, which I produced via OCR, cleaning it up and formatting it by hand, so please consult the original for an authoritative copy. I must say that this does seem — to my untrained eye — like a massive request, covering a great deal of territory. But I do hope that this effort will ultimately result in some light being shed upon the County’s unmistakably cozy — but heretofore opaque — relationship with Casa de Maryland.

December 11, 2007

VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL AND FAX

Ike Leggett Montgomery County Executive 101 Monroe Street, 2nd Floor Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 240-777-2517	Mary Anderson Department of Health and Human Services 11 N. Washington Street, Suite 450 Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 240-777-1342
Jennifer E. Barrett Department of Finance 101 Monroe St. Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: (240) 777-8857

Re: Maryland Public Information Act Request

Dear Sir/Madam:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Maryland Public Information Act (PIA), SG §§10-611 - 10-630, Judicial Watch, Inc. requests from Montgomery County access to and a copy of any and all public record(s) within thirty (30) days concerning or relating to the following:

1. Any and all records relating to CASA of (de) Maryland’s budget and accounting information, opening and operation of day labor site(s) in Montgomery County, procedures/requirements for determining work authorization at day labor site(s), and any agreements and/or applications made by CASA of (de) Maryland to Montgomery County.
2. Any and all records relating to the use of public funds to fund (including, but not limited to, grants, income, subsidies, loans, and debt forgiveness), house, or provide goods and services for any day labor site(s) located in Montgomery County.
3. Any and all records relating to the use of public funds provided to CASA of (de) Maryland by Montgomery County to fund, in any way, education, training, publications, outreach, health care, English language training, recreation, gang prevention, etc.

---

Custodian of Records
Public Information Act Request
December 11, 2007
Page 2 of 3

4. Any and all research, studies, analyses, statistics, data, surveys, reports, legal opinions, and any other information related to:
   1. Illegal immigrants immigrating to, living and/or working in Montgomery County;
   2. Day labor site(s), day laborers (including information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of day laborers) and employers of day laborers in Montgomery County; and
   3. CASA of (de) Maryland’s day labor site and day laborers and employers of such day laborers, including the citizenship or immigration status of day laborers.
5. Any and all communications and/or correspondence between Montgomery County and any federal government agency regarding CASA of (de) Maryland and/or any day labor site(s) located within the county.
6. Policies and procedures for Montgomery County employees concerning or relating to illegal aliens or suspected illegal aliens, including but not limited to approval or denial of services with respect to a person’s citizenship or immigration status.
7. Policies and procedures concerning or relating to contacts or communications with between Montgomery County employees and federal immigration officials, including but not limited to officials of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the U.S. Border Patrol, regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status.
8. Any third party communications, including, but not limited to members of the media and/or activists, regarding Montgomery County day labor site(s).

The time-frame for this request is January 1, 2005 to present.

Public records are any records that are made by, or received by, a covered public agency in connection with the transaction of public business. SG §10-611(g)(1)(i). All "public records" are covered by the PIA. The term "public record" includes not only written material but also computerized records (including, but not limited to emai1s and digital files), correspondence, photographs, photostats, films, microfilms, recordings, tapes, maps, drawings, and any copy of a public record. SG §10-611(g)(1)(ii).

Within thirty (30) days of receipt of this request, you are required to determine whether the request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable public records in your possession and to notify us promptly of your determination and the reasons therefore. SG §10-614(b)(2). If this request is denied you are required to provide a written statement of the reasons for the denial, the legal authority for the denial, and notice of the remedies for review of the denial within 10 working days. SG §10-614(b)(3)(ii).

---

Custodian of Records
Public Information Act Request
December 11, 2007
Page 3 of 3

Any reasonably segregable portion of a record otherwise exempt from disclosure is required to be made available after deletion of the portions that are exempted by law. SG §10-618(a).

Finally, Judicial Watch requests a waiver of any direct costs of duplication or statutory fees pursuant to SG §10-618(c) as the request is for noncommercial purposes that serve the public interest. Judicial Watch is a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) educational organization dedicated to increasing public understanding of the operations of government as well as the importance of ethics and the rule of law. Judicial Watch regularly requests information from public agencies about their operations and activities and disseminates this information to the public in furtherance of its educational mission. However, if any fee is to be charged for copying the requested records, please notify us in advance if the expected cost is likely to exceed $150.00.

If you do not understand this request or any portion thereof, or if you feel you require clarification of this request or any portion thereof, please contact us immediately at 202-646-5172 or dgrothe@judicialwatch.org.

Sincerely,

(signed)

Deronda Grothe
Program Manager

Ike Leggett, in his State of the County speech, said:

We start by creating a Public Safety Headquarters on a new single campus. This new campus will also have room for other County agency needs. This will free up both the current Public Safety Training Academy site and half of the County Service Park for alternate uses.

In today’s paper, an article by Ann E. Marimow contains the statement:

County officials have identified nearly 100 acres for a public safety headquarters site at the old National Geographic building on Darnestown Road and an adjacent property that is a warehouse for an online shopping company.

The county would sell the 52 acres where the training academy is located, freeing valuable land at the Shady Grove Life Sciences Center.

The plan would depend on finding locations for pieces of the government services park near the Shady Grove Metro, such as the school bus yard, and must be approved by council members.

The GE Tech Park Special Study Area — which contains the old National Geographic building — comprises a total of 97 acres. Thus, with the 100-acre figure in the post, I’m guessing that the County is proposing to use the entire parcel for this purpose.

At a minimum, I expect that this could have a significant impact on City revenues; should that parcel be used for private development, the City could expect a property tax revenue stream in the future. Should the County develop the property instead, I expect that these revenues would not materialize. Instead, the County would be seeing such a revenue stream from development of the old training facility site near Shady Grove Hospital.

WTOP reports: Md. Burglar and Assault Suspect Picture Released:

A composite sketch has been released for Gaithersburg residents to help police track down a man who is charged for burglary and sexual assault.

The full press release from the County states:

Detectives from the Montgomery County Police Major Crimes Division - Homicide/Sex Section are continuing to investigate a burglary and sexual assault that occurred on Saturday, August 11, in Gaithersburg. They now have a composite to release to the public.
At approximately 1:00 a.m. on August 11, 6th District officers responded to the 18200 block of Lost Knife Circle in Gaithersburg, for the report of a burglary and sexual assault that had just occurred.

Through the course of the investigation it was learned that the 25-year-old female victim was asleep in bed when a lone male suspect forced the sliding glass door open and entered the victim’s apartment. The suspect walked into the bedroom and made demands for sexual actions from the victim. After a brief struggle with the suspect, he fled the apartment and was seen running towards the rear of the apartment complex.

The suspect, who closely resembles the computer-created composite, is described as a black male, 18 to 21 years of age, 5’6” to 5’7” tall, weighing 160 pounds. He had a close shaved head with no facial hair. He was carrying a white t-shirt and wearing blue jeans.

Anyone who has information about this incident and/or suspect is asked to call the Homicide/Sex Section at 240-773-5070. Callers may remain anonymous.

Ernesto Londoño and Karin Brulliard write in the Washington Post, Liberal Suburbs Don’t Avoid Heated Debates On Immigration:

Uncharacteristically, Leggett lost his cool.

“Shut up and listen for a moment!” he cried, silencing the crowd. “We are not in the business of enforcing immigration issues.”

Kathleen Miller writes in the Examiner, Area pro-immigrant groups say Va. proposals not all bad:

The leaders of Washington-area immigrant rights groups say Virginia communities that are considering denying services to illegal immigrants are actually helping immigrant advocacy organizations to get organized and coordinate tactics.

As posted on the City’s website:

Report On The Operation Of The Crabbs Branch Temporary Workers Center

Posted 7/11/2007

The following report was prepared by the Montgomery County Government:

REPORT ON THE OPERATION OF
THE CRABBS BRANCH TEMPORARY WORKERS CENTER (CBTWC)
(Operated by CASA of Maryland, Inc.)

June 22, 2007

APRIL 2007

PROGRAM BEGINNING: The CBTWC officially opened on Monday, April 16, 2007 at 16642 Crabbs Branch Way. Employment related activities began on the same day, with the registration of 34 workers and three (3) job placements. It was also the start of a comprehensive WORKER REGISTRATION AND ORIENTATION process whereby the rules of conduct and a general explanation of operational guidelines and expectations from participants, overview of services provided by the center, and information on community services are provided.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH: Two weeks prior to the opening of the center, CASA and Upcounty Regional Services staff visited businesses, agencies and churches in the CBTWC area and neighborhood to talk about the program and services. Some of the places reached included the MCPS Food Services, Montgomery County Department of Park and Planning, MCPS school bus association, F.O. Day Construction Company, Maya can Inc, Home Depot, and Shady Grove Shopping Center. Informational flyers about the program and who and how to contact the center and its representatives were provided to businesses and agencies in the area. Many locations where workers were likely to congregate were visited.

TRANSPORTATION: CASA provided transportation for the first two weeks of the opening, running a shuttle between various pickup points (mainly in Gaithersburg) and the center every hour. Workers encountered were given information about the program and services offered at the center.

APRIL PROGRAM STATISTICS

Number of Day Job Placements – 130
Permanent Job Placements – 2
Temporary Job Placements (placements more than a day/not permanent) - 2

New Employers (newly registered) - 52
Existing Employers (previously registered/repeat) – 6

MAY 2007

The center experienced an increase in activities in registration of both workers and employers and job placements. The program expanded services offered to workers to include photo identification cards and a menu of educational programs such as financial /money management, legal rights, personal health and workplace safety. More referral services were added.

PROGRAM STATISTICS

Number of Daily Job Placements – 596

Number of Permanent Jobs – 2
Number of Temporary Jobs – 37
Number of New Employers – 208
Number of Existing Employers – 86
Informational Referrals – 16
Number of ID Cards Issued – 17

Number of Presentations/Session – 2
Number Attending Presentations – 55

CENTER TRAFFIC: Traffic in and out of the CBTWC and the immediate area presented no problems or registered reports. The monitoring report indicated the following traffic count (vehicles entering the center) during normal operating hours (6:00 A.M.-2:00 P.M.):

April – 187
May – 561
Daily Average – 21

The traffic peaks between 7 – 9 A.M. Traffic is routinely monitored at the center.

LAW ENFORCEMENT: During its first two months of operation, local Police reported no incidents of any kind relating to participating workers, or complaint calls from nearby businesses and agencies. However, there was an attempted arson on May 4, which is still under investigation by the County Fire Marshall’s Office. Enhanced security measures are in place which we continue to closely monitor.

MONTHLY PROGRESS MEETINGS AND REPORTS: The Upcounty Regional Services Center and CASA staff meet monthly to discuss program/operational issues, review reports, safety and security, outreach and program enhancement and continuous improvement strategies, etc. CASA provides monthly written reports to the URSC, the designated administrative monitor of the CBTWC contract. The Shady Grove Implementation Advisory Committee received an update on the program on June 26, 2007 and the URSC Director and staff will continue to work with and keep the City of Gaithersburg officials informed as necessary.

Sebastian Montes writes:

The more immediate concern for County Councilman Michael J. Knapp — who had been involved in the creation of the center as far back as 2004 — is what brought the issue to a head in the first place: dozens of workers gathering unsupervised in parking lots along Route 355 in Gaithersburg.

Though not nearly in the numbers seen before the center opened, at least one of those lots — the 7-Eleven in the Duvall shopping center — continues to be a hiring hot spot.

That’s because some workers and employers would rather circumvent the paperwork and formality of an organized center, said day laborer Ricardo Maravilla Tuesday morning. Maravilla stood alone on the deck outside the day-laborer center while inside, some 20 workers listened to a presentation from Casa staff on the legal measures available to them when employers don’t pay.

Originally from El Salvador, the 21-year-old began going to the lots in Gaithersburg more than two years ago and now prefers going to the day-laborer center: there’s more work, he said, though he concedes that more workers also means more competition for the first-come-first-serve jobs.

Still, several of his friends insist on using the 7-Eleven parking lot, even though Gaithersburg police have been ticketing many of them for trespassing.

‘‘They feel freer over there,” he said in Spanish. ‘‘Here we have American [employers], who like having the paperwork, and over there it’s the Hispanics.”

• Chris Robinson writes, City looks to tap out early alcohol sales:

  An ongoing concern about early morning alcohol sales has Gaithersburg looking at putting a lid on the practice.

  Residents have long claimed a slew of indecent behavior such as public urination and littering in the Olde Towne area is the result of beer sales that begin as early as 6 a.m. at one convenience store.

  In lieu of pursuing state legislation, the city has discussed with the county board of license commissioners limiting sales hours through liquor licenses issued in specific areas, Assistant City Manager Fred Felton said.

  My understanding is that the 7-11 in question, in the Duvall Center, is the only beer and wine outlet in a fairly wide area that begins alcohol sales that early in the morning. This has the effect of bringing many people to that location who otherwise have no reason to be there; in many cases they will buy single beers, drink them in the nearby neighborhood, and toss the empties into front yards, sometimes even stashing an extra for later in the bushes of a private home. Sometimes they proceed on to their jobs — or homes if they are coming off the night shift — and sometimes they find a place in the area to hang out or take a nap. If opening times for beer outlets were more uniform, many of these people would likely patronize stores closer to their homes or jobs. It is also fairly obvious why the 7-11 would be reluctant to help with voluntary restrictions, as these early sales are drawing customers from a much wider area than would be typical for a neighborhood convenience store.

---

• Sebastian Montes writes, Labor center gets initial nod from planners:

  The county’s planned day-laborer center off Shady Grove Road is set for a public hearing before the Planning Board Thursday, and has been recommended for approval by planning staff.

  The plan is to set up two 60-foot trailers side-by-side on a half-acre lot in a county-owned cluster of industrial operations along Crabbs Branch Way, more than half a mile from the nearest home.

  While the task force recommended that a center is better than doing nothing, it also set strict criteria for where a center is suitable — which Cathy Drzyzgula, a task force member and neighbor to the current informal gathering spot in Olde Towne — says the proposed site meets.

  She is also hopeful that Leggett’s plan can draw broad support from people looking for practical solutions — a sentiment she feels has gotten lost in the fray of emotion and controversy.

  ‘‘[T]his choice represents a middle path, since it pleases neither extreme, but instead the larger share of people who hold moderate views on the issue,” she wrote in an e-mail to The Gazette. ‘‘It will help the workers, without putting an undue burden on a particular residential area. … It is easy when looking at an issue to try and define ‘the two sides,’ but in this case the middle is just as important as the extremes.”

---

• Chris Robinson writes, Gaithersburg teen stabbed by group:

  The Gaithersburg teenager was attacked at about 7:30 p.m. Jan. 29 by a group of unknown people wearing masks, county police spokeswoman Officer Melanie Hadley said Tuesday. She did not know where on his body or how many times he was stabbed.

  The time and place of this incident would appear to make this the same incident as the first one in my earlier report here.

---

• Chris Robinson writes, Residents want bilingual police chief:

  Residents at a forum last week said it is important to have a bilingual, technology-savvy city police chief take control of the city’s force when long-time chief Mary Ann Viverette retires in May.

  Though most said the new chief should have prior leadership experience and a knack for communication, there was no clear majority on whether the candidate should be selected from the city’s current ranks or from outside the department.