By Yuchabel Sanon
Baltimore Watchdog Staff Writer
The Baltimore County Council Monday rejected a bill that was designed to meet the concerns of East Towson residents by limiting the scope of a controversial 56-unit affordable housing complex planned near their neighborhood.
The legislation – which was proposed by Councilman David Marks, R-5th District, and vehemently opposed by the nonprofit trying to complete the housing complex – would have placed a 30-foot height limit on apartment buildings in the Red Maple Place project planned on 2.5 acres between East Pennsylvania Avenue and Joppa Road.
The vote came after County Attorney James R. Benjamin Jr. said the bill could put the county in violation of the Fair Housing Act and lead to protracted litigation that would cost taxpayers millions of dollars.
Benjamin said he was also concerned that the legislation would make it difficult for the county to meet its affordable housing obligations under a voluntary consent agreement it signed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in 2016.
He said passage of the bill could appear to federal authorities and fair housing advocates that the county was showing a pattern of practices designed to discriminate against those from lower income brackets. He added that the bill could leave the county exposed to court orders that would force it to build affordable housing on its own.
“If a court were to determine that the county had violated the Fair Housing Act, we could be liable for compensatory, consequential and punitive damages,” Benjamin told council members in response to questions.
Homes for America, an Annapolis-based organization that builds and preserves affordable housing units, said Marks’ bill would make it impossible for it to complete the project because it would jeopardize the funding it had received from the state to build the rental homes. The developer has also threatened to sue the county if the measure was approved.
The council appeared torn between the traditional practice of supporting legislation proposed by council members for their own districts and advancing forward a project that has seen several delays over the years.
Council Chairwoman Cathy Bevins, D-6th District, pointed out that the council has supported Marks on at least two occasions since last March, including passing a measure that forced the developer to set the complex back further from the street than originally planned.
Councilman Israel C. “Izzy” Patoka, D-2nd District, said he was conflicted over the bill. He said he had received numerous letters from constituents who supported Marks’ bill, but he said he was also committed toward meeting the county’s affordable housing goals.
When it came time for him to vote, Councilman Wade Kach, R-3rd District, hesitated for several seconds before ultimately voting no.
Marks, who estimated that his proposal would reduce the number of units at Red Maple from 56 to somewhere in the 40s, argued that the county could still advance its goal of building more affordable housing even if it forced Homes for America to scale back the project. He said it would be better to build the complex in a way that did not hurt existing residents.
Marks acknowledged that the bill would cause an “inconvenience” for the developer, but he said that was better than building an intrusive structure that would stand for decades.
“We can still advance toward meeting our goals in the affordable housing settlement with a smaller building,” Marks said. “There is nothing wrong with asking the developer to modify a project instead of that building standing for 60 or 70 years. This is the point that we should act on behalf of people who have asked for our help.”
Marks also said the council should weigh the concerns of the residents over the lawsuit threat made by the developers.
In response to complaints of discriminatory practices, the county entered a voluntary consent agreement with HUD in 2016 and promised to see that 1,000 units of affordable housing would be built by 2027.
Benjamin said during the meeting that the agreement required the county to have built 570 units by the end of 2020. The county is currently 67 units shy on that benchmark.
Marks introduced the legislation in response to residents of the area who opposed the project because they thought it would change the face of the neighborhood, add traffic to local roads and add students to already crowded schools.
The bill failed on a 3-1-3 vote, with Marks, Patoka, and Councilman Todd K. Crandell, R-7th District, voting in favor, Kach voting no, and Council members Thomas E. Quirk, D-1st District, Julian E. Jones Jr., D-4th District, and Bevins abstaining. A bill needs four affirmative votes to become law. An amendment to the bill that would have prevented developers from receiving a variance to build higher than the 30-foot limit was also defeated.
The vote created confusion among the council, which at first did not know if the bill was approved or rejected. Legislative Council Thomas H. Bostwick consulted the council’s rules before he determined that the legislation had, in fact, been defeated.
The Red Maple Place project has been controversial since it was first proposed by Homes for America in 2018. Residents of the area expressed concern that the history of the area would disappear if the land continued to be used for development.
The residents repeatedly said they did not oppose affordable housing units but were concerned that the Red Maple project would bring in transient residents who were not committed to the neighborhood.