Changes on the Horizon for BARC?

I attended a recent Greenbelt County Council meeting, where they discussed annexing parts of BARC (Beltsville Agriculture Research Center). I was the only representative (to my knowledge, all the speakers before and after me were from Greenbelt) from Beltsville who spoke. I expressed surprise and frustration that our community wasn’t included more in this conversation as Beltsville is literally the first word in BARC (a name-to be clear-has changed over the years from when it was first developed and land gathered in the 1910’s) and a sister city of Greenbelt. I was informed by the Mayor (who seemed very genuine in wanting to protect BARC lands when he came up to speak to me) that Council Member Dernoga and Senator Rosapepe were informed of this change.

(I was updated from Council Member Dernoga’s office a day after the meeting that he and Representative Ben Barnes were working on this matter with updates to come in the very near future. And as of this writing, I have this additional update to share: 

Delegate Mary Lehman authored House Bill 1267, Patuxent Research Refuge and Beltsville Agricultural Research Center - Zoning Classification (Protecting Patuxent Research Refuge Act) (https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/HB1267?ys=2026RS). CM Dernoga helped rewrite the amendments to make the bill more comprehensive. 

• Bill Synopsis: Requiring a certain local zoning authority to designate and maintain certain property in a zoning classification that restricts the uses in a certain manner under certain circumstances; and requiring the appropriate authority to maintain certain property in a certain zoning classification that restricts the uses in a certain manner under certain circumstances.

We were told that the maps for the Greenbelt annexation would be modified to keep the annexation from extending to Beaver Dam Road (Beltsville/District 21), but we have not seen any indication of this taking place officially. We have reached out to Greenbelt Mayor Emmett Jordan and hope to hear from him for confirmation.)

A bigger question, at least for me and I’m sure for many others, is why now? It’s federal land that can’t be developed or modified without an act of Congress. I can see both sides, having reviewed the materials handed out and listened to folks speak about this issue. They care about having BARC land protected, since the current administration has already threatened it with closure, downsizing, etc. They don’t want it developed at the whim of an administration that cares little for science or for laws. It also makes sense (to me) to enclose the area of NASA into Greenbelt since the entrance to NASA Goddard is within Greenbelt boundaries. But on the flip side, the lack of cooperation, transparency, and reaching across the city lines makes little sense. To be sure, this agenda for the meeting with the annexation was discussed and shared widely in Greenbelt; surely it couldn’t have been too hard to share the same information with Beltsville residents, even as our elected officials were also informed? I will also say that this is a good reminder too, as best as anyone can these days with everything going on at the federal level, to keep as informed as possible on local levels.

I did have one local resident state if Beltsville were incorporated, we’d likely be able to throw more weight around in such conversations. I’ve heard arguments on both sides of that conversation for a few years, and I honestly think it’s a worthwhile conversation to have, especially now, given how many changes our community has faced in recent years.

While I was at the meeting, many folks who spoke felt that the three parcels currently under review weren’t enough, that more land should be annexed. The current parcel up for review is #3 in the picture. It would bring the whole area into Greenbelt. The other two parcels are also up for annexation, but at a later date, after more county council meetings open to the public. The mayor also raised the idea of developing a museum to showcase the history of BARC and the New Deal on the land, if annexed. I do love the idea of showcasing history, but I do wish that the spot would be better located if a museum were to be built.

Once all of the comments were entered into the minutes, the council clarified that "they were changing the municipal boundaries...not acquisition, but annexation" i.e. they were not purchasing the land, because again, it's federal. They also stated they were following state annexation guidelines (an FYI for anyone wishing to read up: https://planning.maryland.gov/Documents/OurWork/MML-Annexation-Handbook.pdf). The motion did carry unanimously so the next steps are the open comment period and after which, provided there are no objections/appeals/etc, the boundaries for Greenbelt would be redrawn to include Parcel 3.

I plan to attend the follow-up meetings for the other two parcels and will have updates as soon as they are available!