Publisher’s Note: This article is being made available to the public free of charge as a public service leading into the Spring Village Board and Columbia Association elections.
Resident concerns and village property management took center stage at the Feb. 13 Columbia Association (CA) Board of Directors meeting. The meeting lasted just over three hours, with a significant amount of time spent hearing concerns from eight Columbia residents.
The meeting also featured discussion on the village property management negotiations — an issue of contention among Board members and residents alike.
Residents Speak out
Eight Columbia residents signed up to participate in the Resident Speak-Out portion of the meeting, sharing concerns on a variety of topics including the W.R. Grace & Co. proposed pilot plastic recycling plant and the village management contract discussion. Individuals were permitted three minutes to speak while people speaking as representatives of organizations were given five minutes.
Robert Dover commented on a 2024 CA presentation on stream restoration projects in the Longfellow neighborhood. “In that presentation the staff explained that there is one, and only one, objective of stream restoration projects in CA and that’s stream stabilization and reduction of erosion. And the staff claimed that this objective had been met at Longfellow.”
Dover argued that CA was in talks with contractors to make these repairs at the same time they were delivering the presentation stating the stream had already been stabilized. Dover paraphrased from the CA Watershed Management Plan, stating “don’t do large scale stream restorations unless you have first reduced the amount of runoff coming from upstream.”
Dover stated that, in Longfellow, there is proof that the stream restoration did not work and that “after just a few years, more than two thirds of the trees have died and more than one third of the engineered structures have eroded to the point where they now need to be reconstructed.” He said the repair plan is repeating the mistakes that allowed the repairs to fail in the first place.
“Don’t be fooled, this isn’t a minor project. It’s a major construction project that’s effectively re-restoring an area that was supposed to have already been restored. Please put a stop to this, hire a contractor, look at this independently. Don’t just dive into this without letting people comment on it,” he said.
Ginny Thomas shared two concerns with the board — the first involving the CA Points Program. “I think you may be violating your 501c4 non-profit status,” she said. “I believe you may be discriminating against children whose families are lien payers.” She presented a list of families she believes were being “discriminated against because they are not eligible to participate,” either because they go to a school that doesn’t participate, such as Swansfield students who were redistricted into attending Clarksville schools; children who are homeschooled; or children with teachers who do not sign up for the program. Thomas claimed that there are around 700 families on the program currently and 100 do not pay the annual charge because they are not Columbia residents, citing a 2023 CA budget book. She was not able to provide the list to the Board, stating it was their responsibility to compile those names. .
Lisa Krausz appeared via Zoom. As a River Hill resident, she spoke to the Board about the W.R. Grace & Co. project, a proposed pilot plastic recycling plant for research in Columbia. “They’re planning to initiate a research and development facility recycling plastics. This proposed project will have a very deleterious effect on the surrounding communities including Cedar Creek, River Hill, Hickory Ridge, Robinson Overlook and beyond,” said Krausz. She also expressed concerns of risks from leaks, fire from facility equipment, and the toxic emissions to the community.
Krausz mentioned CB 11 2025, a zoning amendment, reading the act description as “amending the Howard County zoning regulations to add the research and development laboratory use to the planned employment center zoning district and prohibiting such research and development uses that involve commercial plastic pellets or feed stock.” She asked the Board to pass a resolution in support of the zoning amendment (ZRA).
Eric Miller also spoke on W.R. Grace & Co. project, expressing strong opposition to the project, particularly due to its location near “a recently built neighborhood where many people have moved” without having prior knowledge of the potentially dangerous facility that might be built “in their backyards.”
Kevin Bruening, chairperson of the River Hill Community Association, appeared via Zoom to represent his village.
“I was deeply concerned to learn that Columbia Association has proposed to take control of our community buildings in the villages. I hope this is an idea and it just remains an idea,” said Bruening. “These buildings are currently managed by the villages and provide an important source of income. CA’s proposal would effectively drain all revenue from the village rental operations.”
Bruening provided an example in the case of River Hill, where he said the proposed change would “reduce funding by over $300k, dramatically cutting community services the village could provide.” He said the loss in funding would jeopardize “cherished programs,” including the annual Independence Day parade. River Hill’s total budget is around $650k, according to Bruening, meaning the potential lost revenue — if CA were to take over management of the village properties — would cut nearly half of the village’s budget.
Walking through the timeline of the village contract negotiation, Bruening reminded those present that “the villages are in a one-year extension of a five-year contract” with CA, with the negotiations having begun in March 2024.
He said the decision to extend the existing contract had been made “so that the incoming CEO could negotiate the contracts.”
In the summer of 2024, he said that two proposed contracts, similar to the previous five-year contract, were disseminated to the villages. The village managers revised the contract and submitted their mark-up to CA in October 2024.
“In the draft budget, CA proposed village funding of $3.725 million … the silence since October, to me, is concerning,” he said. “I reiterate, the most important point of what all 10 villages have asked for and agreed upon are 1. that the village contracts should allow for multi-year funding and 2. fiscal year 2026 should be based on 2019 funding levels on a percentage basis.”
Bruening asked the Board to instruct staff, through a motion, to update the budget to reflect the requested numbers.
“Let’s ensure our villages have the necessary resources to continue providing valuable services to our community. I ask that you bring the 2026 funding levels back to the 2019 levels,” he said. “That would mean a total budget line of $4.143 million.”
Sharon Boies appeared remotely via Zoom and spoke on local stream restoration concerns. She opened by describing the forest in Longfellow as “magical places.”
“The four-year-old, two million dollar stream restoration has left us with a pathetic, engineered stormwater conveyance system that is unraveling,” said Boies. She called the restoration project “fraud” and “an abuse of our natural resources,” citing a “dismal reforestation success rate.” Boies stated that the project had an exception that allowed them to “cut down over 1,000 mature trees in our open space.” She asked the CA Board of Directors to advocate “for our community and our environment.”
Jake Burdett, co-chair of Our Revolution Howard County, shared concerns with the Board about what he described as “the undue influence of private corporate money and actors in Howard County and Columbia. He cited the W.R. Grace & Co. plant proposal as an example and reiterated the request that the CA Board support the zoning amendment (ZRA).
Joel Hurewitz, a Harper’s Choice resident and member of that village’s board, also expressed concern about the W.R. Grace & Co. project. He also shared concern about the proposal for CA to take over village spaces, saying it has “so many flaws and operational issues that haven’t been explained.”
Videos Highlight CA Community Engagements
Columbia Association President/CEO Shawn MacInnes shared four videos with the board, recognizing recent events within the Columbia community. The first video recognized the Red Shirt club, featuring long-time CA member Brad Stearns, who has been a CA member for 29 years. “What started with a trip to the gym on laundry day has turned into an entire community of people who not only push each other in their physical wellness journey but understand the true benefits of social wellness as well,” said MacInnes. The video follows up with the group at one of their Friday morning gatherings on “red shirt Friday” at Supreme Sports Club. Members recognize the inclusion and “multi-generational friendships” the club has cultivated.
MacInnes also presented a piece highlighting the CA greenhouse. The video features Jackson Sides, a CA horticulturist. “This is an important part of our efforts to maintain our open space,” said MacInnes.
Two additional videos were presented to the Board. One of the videos featured a CA Communications team visit with young participants during the KidSpace Adventure Day, while the other recapped CA’s recent Afrobeats Bash & Blend event held at Supreme Sports Club. The event was planned as one of many upcoming experiences to “bring opportunities to learn about and celebrate different cultures to our community, said MacInnes. Approximately 100 people attended the event.
Inner Arbor Trust 2025
Nina Basu, president and CEO of the Inner Arbor Trust, presented a concept plan of the reimagined Symphony Woods in Columbia, including updates to areas like the Ridgeline, referred to as the Colonnade.
“This is one of the pieces that is funded and that is on a high priority for the Trust,” said Basu. The Trust intends to include new fencing and new, usable features, as well as repaving the path and incorporating an opportunity for public art.
The Inner Arbor Trust was created by CA to fulfill the 2010 General Plan vision of an arts and culture park in the heart of Downtown Columbia. The perpetual easement covers the originally 36 (now 51) acres of Merriweather Park at Symphony Woods and is empowered to design and build the Inner Arbor Plan. The Trust managed the Park with CA until 2024 and now manages the Park independently.
Capital Phase I of the project is complete and used a CA initial investment of $300K, as well as additional investments from the county to complete major pathways and begin environmental improvements. The Trust leveraged the CA investment and Trust corporate and private fundraising to obtain $3.95M in Capital Phase II — the amount that they currently have to spend.
Basu said the $3.95M “should get us through the [building of the] Bend in the Creek playground” and will also “get us those immediate connectivity pieces and the pathway pieces that will go to the Bend in the Creek playground.”
The Trust hopes to begin work on the first piece of the Ridgeline before the end of Fiscal Year 2025. Phase II, including the playground, is anticipated to be completed within three years.
Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Draft Operating and Capital Budgets
There was discussion regarding updating the draft budget prior to a vote at the next upcoming meeting. However, several members pushed back that it was too late in the process to make changes.
Board member Eric Greenberg made a motion to request that CA staff come back with one to three alternate scenarios regarding where funds could be found to offset freezing resident membership rates at the FY 2025 levels, to be presented at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by member Karin Emery.
“The funding is in here for a full membership rate and structure study to be done next year which I think would be the smarter approach,” said Senior Vice President/CFO Susan Krabbe, “and I don’t see how we could get one to three scenarios developed in a week. It’s significantly late in the process.”
The motion was called to question and did not pass, with a 3-6-1 vote. The Board will vote on the budget during the Feb. 27 meeting.
Updates on Village Management Contract
Under old business, the Board was briefed on updates regarding the village management contract.
Board Chair Bill Santos confirmed that the item will be held in a closed meeting because the discussion covers contract negotiations.
As described in the CA Board of Directors meeting minutes from July 2024, CA President/CEO Shawn MacInnes proposed seven goals for CA, with three of them being short-term (ideally completed in around one year). Goal 2 related to the management of village properties, reading “Goal 2: Evaluate CA assuming management of the buildings currently managed by the village community associations, evaluate opportunities and challenges for both CA and the villages, and develop a plan for Board consideration.”
Several board members spoke out in opposition of the closed meeting, arguing that the negotiations should be held in an open meeting for transparency with the community.
Board member Michael Golibersuch stated, “I think the nature of what we’re discussing is really the nature of the relationships between CA and the villages, and that is something that’s of public community interest and should be debated and discussed in an open session.”
Member Karin Emery agreed with Golibersuch’s assessment. “Not only do I think it should be debated in an open session with the CA Board of Directors but I think that the villages, the community, needs to be included in the discussion . . . I would like to know, what are our plans to inform the community of what CA is proposing and let them weigh in as well,” she said.
Member Eric Greenberg made a motion to have a discussion of the village management contract be placed on the agenda, under old business, for the open Feb. 27 meeting.
The motion failed with a vote of 5-5-0. Board members Reg Avery, Karin Emery, Michael Golibersuch, Eric Greenberg and Chris Fuchs voted in favor of the motion.
CA President/CEO Shawn MacInnes reminded members that the final proposed agreement would still go to the Board for review in a public session, even though negotiations would be held in closed session.
“It just presents the finalized details between the two entities,” he said. “This is not being done in secret . . . the CA staff has met with the villages, village managers. That shouldn’t be the policy of CA to have open negotiations on things,” he said.
Greenberg reiterated the need for transparency with the community.
“It’s about transparency of how we allocate our neighbors’ annual charge dollars,” he said. “When our neighbors and us will pay into the annual charge, that annual charge goes to CA and from there goes to support the villages. At the board level, we certainly have a fiduciary responsibility to oversee how that’s allocated and I think we also have a responsibility to our neighbors to provide certain transparency on how those decisions are made.”
Upcoming Meeting
The next CA Board meeting will be held on February 27 at 7 p.m. All CA Board meeting recordings can be viewed on the CA Livestream YouTube account.
This article was written by freelance reporter Sarah Sabatke.
Publisher’s Note: Maryland Newspapers LLC looks forward to providing regular coverage of news and events in Howard County, Maryland. Please support that effort by visiting HowardCourier.com daily, uploading our mobile app, and subscribing, if finances permit.
and then