Saqib Ali has introduced a bill in the General Assembly to require special elections in the event of a U.S. Senate vacancy.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Friday, January 30, 2009
Don Praisner Recommends Appointment for Successor
Below are the final thoughts of County Council Member Don Praisner before entering surgery on Monday. Mr. Praisner asks the County Council to appoint a successor rather than scheduling another special election. At this time, we do not know of a legal opinion by county attorneys on whether the council can take this step.
Last May, when I took the oath of office, I had high hopes for serving the people of District 4 and looked forward to carrying on the legacy of leadership, independence and integrity that my wife, Marilyn Praisner, was known for and would have brought to the remainder of her term.
I am deeply saddened to think that this may not be. I am writing this before undergoing surgery on Monday, Jan. 26, 2009. I have no idea what the outcome of the surgery will be. If you are reading this letter, the outcome was not good. As you can imagine, the news has brought profound pain to my family. This means that the people of our great County and District 4 will have to endure yet more uncertainty.
One of my wife’s lasting legacies is her track record of fiscal responsibility. She had an unwavering commitment to assuring that taxpayer dollars were spent wisely, and I am also committed to that goal. With those thoughts in mind, I am asking my colleagues on the County Council to forego a special election and instead appoint a qualified and respected resident of District 4 to serve the remainder of my term if I do not make it through the surgery.
As we witness an unprecedented financial crisis unfold on Wall Street, and as we live with the consequences of that crisis right here in our own backyard, I am concerned that the County and District 4 residents face the prospect of a second special election in less than a year’s time. The cost of such an election could exceed $1.3 million at a time when our residents are struggling and County government is being forced to cut back on essential programs.
We also know from recent experience that few eligible voters cast ballots in these special elections. Turnout in the District 4 special election equaled less than six percent of the turnout in the recent presidential primary. In fairness to the voters of District 4 and the residents of the entire County, it would be better to appoint an individual who would serve out my term and who would agree not to run in the 2010 election. Such an arrangement would give potential candidates adequate time to share their vision for the county with the voters of District 4. We could then have a fair and open campaign with no candidate carrying the advantage of incumbency gained through a special election.
I am deeply proud of Montgomery County and its people. I consider myself extremely privileged to have had the opportunity to serve them. Nowhere are there such dedicated people who genuinely care about their community, their neighbors and their families.
To my Council colleagues, thank you for your tremendous dedication and spirit. I am grateful for the friendship and collegiality that you offered me. You inspired me with your commitment to the people of Montgomery County. To my good friend, Ike Leggett, our steadfast county executive in these uncertain times, I want to offer my deep appreciation. You have stood by my side through this past year. I will not forget any of you.
I wish you all well in the difficult days ahead, and I want to leave you with this one thought:
Norman Vincent Peale once said, “No matter how dark things seem to be or actually are, raise your sights and see possibilities—always see them, for they're always there.”
County Council Member Don Praiser Passes Away
The Gazette reports his passing at 1:45 PM today. This is an unbelievable tragedy for the Praisner family.
Big Daddy’s Revenge (Updated!)
Unfathomably, GOP Senators Alex Mooney (R-3), Janet Greenip (R-33) and Andy Harris (R-7) voted against Mike Miller’s inevitable re-election as Senate President again. All regular readers know how important defending the honor of Big Daddy is to the authors of this blog. And so we asked our informants this question: how should Miller go about punishing the renegades who so ill-advisedly resist his rule? One of our most devious spies offered this suggestion:Mooney, Greenip and Harris should spend 24 hours on death row, eating the food and sitting in the cell like other death row inmates. Ten minutes before midnight, they should be marched to the death chamber where the hooded executioner, Mike Miller, issues them a “get out of jail free” card. In a twist of irony, each learns a lesson: the three understand the inhumanity of the death penalty, and Miller enjoys a rare taste of benevolence.
Big Daddy – benevolent?! We’d pay rock-star money to see that!
Update: Another spy offers this:Obviously, the penalty should be for Miller to lock them in a room with Rob Garagiola, Mike Lenett, Roger Manno, and Saqib Ali, with instructions that the first one to eat an entire Republican gets to succeed Van Hollen in Congress.
WSSC Put To Shame By Others In Response To PCCP Crisis
By Wayne Goldstein.
Based on studies, news accounts, and water utility web sites, I have learned that two water utilities stand out in their response to the Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipes (PCCP) crisis - the Howard County Bureau of Utilities and the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) - as compared to WSSC. Howard County and WSSC simultaneously experienced PCCP breaks in the '80s and '90s, and even sued the same pipe manufacturer. But the similarity ends there. One of WSSC contractor Pure Technologies research papers, "Acoustic Monitoring of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe - A Case History" tells what happened:
"In 1995, Howard County’s Bureau of Engineering and Utilities developed a plan for inspection of its water mains constructed of PCCP… Beginning in April 2000, an acoustic monitoring program was implemented on approximately 6000’ feet of this pipeline… Howard County’s Long-Term Plan is to acoustically monitor all the PCCP water mains within the water distribution system. This will provide information regarding the overall condition of the pipes and enable Howard County to determine areas that should be externally inspected or replaced. Acoustic monitoring has allowed pipe evaluation without taking the pipeline out of service and provided data over an extended period of time. Acoustic monitoring has been proven successful in locating failures and Howard County will continue with this program. Acoustic monitoring of 5000 feet of 30-inch PCCP water main in US Route 40 from St. Johns Lane to Dogwood Drive is presently being conducted."
In its 1999 Annual Report, SDCWA stated: "In the early '80s, the Water Authority began experiencing failures in portions of its older, prestressed concrete pipeline. These pipes were constructed as far back as the late 1950s. How the Water Authority responded to these failures represented a significant change in the way the Water Authority inspects and maintains its aqueduct system. In January 1992, the board approved the Aqueduct Protection Program, an inspection, preventative maintenance and repair program that has won accolades from across the U.S. Since 1992, the Water Authority has spent more than $6 million for the inspection and repair work that prevents pipeline failures and unplanned service interruptions… The greatest testament of the Aqueduct Protection Program’s value is its track record: since the program’s inception, no section of inspected pipe has failed."
At a November 2000 meeting, SDCWA voted to "...Award a Professional Services Agreement to Pressure Pipe Inspection Company for $140,000 to Provide Remote Field Eddy Current/Transformer Coupling Inspection Services for Pre-stressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe for the Fiscal Year 2000/2001 Aqueduct Protection Program Shutdowns." In a 12/22/08 press release, Pure Technologies announced that it: "has been awarded a contract for up to [$3] million by …(SDCWA)… The SDCWA contract is for the supply and installation of Pure’s patented SoundPrint® AFO fibre-optic acoustic monitoring system as part of the Water Authority’s Aqueduct Protection Program, and monitoring services for the installation until September 2011. This is the third such contract awarded by the Water Authority to Pure since November 2005. Upon completion of the installation, which is scheduled for January and February 2009, Pure will be monitoring a total of 48 miles of the Authority’s aqueduct system."
Pure Technologies also reported in one of its papers: "Approximately 82 miles of [SDCWA] pipelines are pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipes (PCCP)… Made from a combination of steel and concrete, PCCP appeared highly resistant to corrosion and to provide unparalleled inner pipe strength. However, numerous catastrophic failures have occurred with these pipes worldwide. In response, the Water Authority in 1991 instituted a pro-active 30-year program to reinforce the pipes with steel liners. To date, the Water Authority has relined more than 24 miles of its pipelines. The remaining 58 miles of PCCP are targeted for rehabilitation by 2027, helping ensure a safe and reliable water supply to the region."
What these documents show is that these two water utilities developed a comprehensive approach to PCCP in the early to mid '90s and embraced monitoring technology in 2000 almost as soon as it became commercially available. These programs have never been shut down. Howard County inspects PCCP pipes down to 30 inches. In contrast, last November, there was this news account: "Although the fiber-optic system, which uses computers to monitor when wires inside pipes break, would not have applied to the [48-inch] Derwood pipe, the system would be beneficial for monitoring large pipes close to residential areas, WSSC officials said."
WSSC, in a briefing to the full County Council earlier this week, stated that it began inspections in 1981 when it: “first used Visual and Sounding to identify deteriorated areas and delaminations.” This detailed briefing bore little resemblance to the minimal information provided to a Council committee last year about the Derwood break. This week, I also learned that WSSC may have been more proactive in PCCP inspections and repairs and replacements than the public record appeared to show, making use of Sonic/Ultrasonic Pulse Echo to identify micro-cracking in the mid-1990s and using electromagnetic testing in 2001. WSSC may even have begun a comprehensive physical inspection program of its larger PCCP ahead of both Howard County and SDCWA. WSSC used steel in 1997-98 to line about four miles of its largest, 96-inch PCCP, similar to SDCWA’s chosen solution for all of its PCCP. Another four miles of PCCP in various large diameters was replaced in 1989 and in 1997.
Despite such responsible behavior, WSSC allowed long periods between visual inspections. According to the just-released records, there were eight years where little if any PCCP were inspected: 1982, 1983, 1992, 1993, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005. There were also seven years where more than 7 miles – 37,000 feet - of PCCP were inspected annually: 1988, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2007, 2008. There have been three cycles of years of little inspection followed by years of much inspection since 1981.
While various forms of “non-destructive testing” (NDT) first began with inspections in 1997, it does not appear to have been routinely used after that. This record also shows that WSSC still waited seven years longer than Howard County and SDCWA to make use of electronic inspection. While it did first use electronic inspection in 2001, it inspected less than two miles of PCCP that year and didn’t use it again until 2007. WSSC also failed to either inspect or monitor PCCP in diameters below 54 inches even though the smaller diameter PCCP is inspected and monitored by the other water utilities. To its credit, I found a few comments like this: "The sonic/ultrasonic nondestructive testing of the WSSC 96" pipe demonstrated much more good pipe exists than had been anticipated; this saved tens of millions of repair dollars." Pure Technologies also praises WSSC's approach to repairing PCCP where warranted, rather than doing indiscriminate relining or replacement regardless of remaining useful life.
In physically and electronically inspecting 4.7 miles - 24,816 feet - or 1551 sixteen-foot PCCP sections in the fall-winter of 2006-07, WSSC replaced 13 failure-prone sections, less than 1% of the total PCCP. In inspecting 5.8 miles - 30,624 feet - or 1914 sixteen-foot PCCP sections in the spring of 2007, WSSC replaced 2 and repaired 7 failure-prone sections, less than 1/2 of 1%. Internal acoustic fiber optic monitoring cable was also installed for all 10.5 miles. WSSC told the council this week that it costs $250,000 per mile to physically inspect PCCP and then set up the continuous electronic monitoring. It wants to do only twelve miles per year for just $3 million, claiming it doesn’t believe it could get more than that. WSSC also stated that it could do as much as 18 miles per year without disrupting water usage. Does anyone believe that either county would refuse to authorize an additional $1.5 million per year to inspect and install monitoring equipment in an additional six miles of PCCP to perhaps prevent the equivalent of another River Road break?
WSSC has been guilty of too little, too late over the last 28 years in doing regular inspections. It continues to rely on past assumptions about PCCP size and age, that have been shown to be incorrect, in order to save relatively small sums on inspection costs. It then is forced to waste money when PCCP fails. The $500,000 cost to WSSC for the 255 million gallons of water lost in the Derwood and River Road pipe breaks alone could have instead paid to inspect and to install continuous monitoring equipment in two miles of PCCP. Until this week, WSSC appears to have almost concealed what it has done right over the years, a far cry from agencies like MCPS that often take credit where little is due.
While WSSC is now far more straightforward than it was just a few months ago in the aftermath of the Derwood pipe break, I believe that the governments and ratepayers of both counties should exercise greater oversight of all of its operating and CIP budget requests to help WSSC maintain its newfound virtue. This means asking questions to get specific information about the sizes and ages of all broken water pipes, PCCP or not, and the ages and break history of all water pipes proposed for replacement. We need this factual information to decide for ourselves how much WSSC really needs for future infrastructure repair and replacement.
Whatever we decide, we can't punish lower income residents in both counties, in good times or bad, with flat fees for billing or infrastructure instead of instituting aggressively progressive rates that can also motivate greater water conservation efforts. We need to continuously monitor WSSC for potential catastrophic failure as much as we need to demand that WSSC continuously monitor all of its PCCP for potential catastrophic failure.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Elrich and Leventhal Debate Purple Line's Impact on the Trail and Traffic
While I think it is well-known that I favor an alternative version of the Purple Line, and I still hope that the State and the federal government will spur us to Rethink the Purple Line, I want to congratulate light rail on the trail supporters on their victory at the County Council the other day. Just Up the Pike has reproduced Purple Line Now's press release and has a number of Purple Line related posts, including debates over burying the segment along Wayne Avenue.
The most lively moment of the County Council meeting was an exchange between Councilmembers Marc Elrich (D-At Large) and George Leventhal (D-At Large) on the impact of the Purple Line on the trail and on traffic. I've done my best to transcribe the key sections of Marc Elrich's testimony and the resulting exchange below.
Councilmember Marc Elrich: How much of the trail for the construction of this are you going to have to clear? People have talked about a 50 or 60 foot swath being cleared for the trail. Is that accurate?
MTA Project Manager Mike Madden: Where the alignment is 66 feet, um, most of that would have to be cleared. I would say pretty much all of it.
Marc Elrich: And will that then have an impact on trees that are in people’s yards?
Mike Madden: That’s an effort we can do to look at, to make sure that the, uh, root systems are preserved. We have landscape architects on board that will look at that to develop a plan to make sure that we minimize the impact to trees outside that right of way.
Marc Elrich: I’m going to wind up voting for this today but I want to make a couple of comments that I think we need to be really clear on. This trail is not going to look anything like the pictures that Roger [Berliner] held up and I think Roger is rightly concerned about that.
If you’re cutting out a 66 foot swath, it’ll be a generation before the trees return to look anything like that and I think there is going to be a severe impact. I think what you’re going to have a trail and the trail will function as a trail because if I pave 12 feet between two points and I can ride on it or walk on it, we can call it a trail but the quality of that trail is going to be radically altered by what we do there.
And I happen to think that BRT is an option. However, I have to be honest, no matter what you do, it’s going to radically alter what happens there. It’s not like there is a good solution to this so I don’t hold that alternative path necessarily as a less destructive path. This is going to be pretty destructive when you do this. And so I’m very concerned about that. It helps my interest in looking at single tracking, not because anybody in Chevy Chase has said we’d be happy if you single tracked because the fact is that anybody whose talked me who doesn’t like this doesn’t like it period. And nobody’s said well, we’d be happy if you did this as a single track.
But I do think that there are opportunities here and I’ve been spending some time doing searches of literature on the web and there’s a lot of discussion about how the Transportation Research Board has a couple of paper that deal in fact with single tracking in small segments. And the conclusion is not that it can’t be done but that it’s possible. . . .
. . . .
I don’t think we should talk about this as a traffic reliever. I think Levin’s memo makes the point that no one’s talking about this as traffic relief anymore and it doesn’t have a significant impact on anything in terms of traffic. What it does do is make a significant difference between people who spend two hours on a mass-transit commute today and will knock it down significantly. And I think there is merit in doing transit projects to cut down on the time many people experience just as there is merit when we do road projects and widen an intersection or add a lane because we’re reducing the time people spend in delay . . .
The last point I’ll make is that I really appreciate the study you did because it is a far cry what was talked about when Mr. Flanagan was sitting in Annapolis or Baltimore or wherever it was that he actually sat [laughter from Mike Madden]. That you actually brought forward a real, genuine BRT alternative that was not what was proposed to the community back in the days of the Ehrlich Administration.
And I think what you showed in your BRT alternative is that given similar rights of way—running on identical settings—that the two things perform identically and that the only difference really is the issue of how much capacity you can add in the future. And what I would say to that is that this is my one disappointment in your report because I’m been mildly obsessed about what people are doing with transit. . . . There are vehicles that could have given the same expandability to a BRT system that you have in this system. . . . It’s not like you can’t do it in another mode.
. . .
Councilmember George Leventhal: I regret the necessity of having to do this but Mr. Elrich said that this would have no effect on traffic . And on p. 4 of the presentation, they say that it’ll be as many 20,000 cars off the road. And in addition, if you are able to reorient bus service because you have a better and faster alternative taking buses off the road if you’ve ever been stuck behind a bus in traffic does make a big difference. This will make traffic better from where it otherwise would be in 2030 and beyond. Is it going to reduce traffic from where it is today? Well, we know the population is likely to grow so it is likely that traffic will get worse. That’s why it is so urgent we provide alternatives to the automobile like this. This will make traffic better. It is not correct to say that it won’t.
And when we are in a public forum like this and when we’re being covered by the press and we’re being broadcast on television and someone who is going to vote for this says that this won’t do anything, it won’t make traffic any better and it’s going to devastate our communities, one has to wonder why would an elected official vote for something like this that was going to have such devastating pointless impacts.
I’m voting for this because I think it will enhance the trail, it will improve quality of life, it will make commutes easier and better for the communities along the trail and throughout the region and it will improve traffic. I just want to make it clear that [pause] perhaps there is disagreement on that point but I didn’t want to let that statement stand. I was very surprised by it.
Marc Elrich: I’d like to answer that. I didn’t say it would devastate communities. I said it would wreck the trail.
George Leventhal: (sarcastically) Thanks for that clarification, Mr. Elrich.
Marc Elrich: I think that we need to be honest about what’s going to happen to that trail. It’s going to be a long time before it is returned to what it is. And I’ve acknowledged that’s true whether it were done the way I might want to do it or whether it’s done this way. But we shouldn’t pretend that it’s not going to do what it’s going to do.
As for traffic, 20,000 cars off the road over an entire day spread out over the length of this entire system is not going to provide major traffic relief and no one has ever suggested it’s going to provide major traffic relief to the Beltway or to East-West Highway. That’s just not what this does. And we shouldn’t say these are reasons to do it. We don’t have to oversell what it does. It’s an important transit link; it serves a vital purpose. It is not the magic bullet.
David Lublin in the Gazette
The Gazette profiles MPW blogfather David Lublin this week. Mysteriously, his role as founder of this blog is not mentioned. Perhaps David is embarrassed at what has happened to MPW since his semi-retirement!
As for that picture, well... may I suggest sunglasses and a leather jacket for next time?
Can Anyone Believe What WSSC Says About Its PCCP?
By Wayne Goldstein.
In my New Year's Day column, I quoted from news accounts from the '90s that described WSSC's experiences with major breaks of its Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipes (PCCP) as early as 1975, a problem that became much more widespread in the '80s. What has WSSC done to deal with this problem in the decades since? WSSC apparently has been unable or unwilling to provide any detailed information to the government or to the rate-paying public about those efforts. However, in the September/October 2008 issue of Underground Infrastructure Management Magazine, WSSC was far more forthcoming, although not necessarily more accurate nor entirely truthful:
"Given its size and stature, [WSSC] cannot afford to take a reactive approach to maintaining its infrastructure. As a result of several …(PCCP) water transmission main breaks in the early and mid-1980s, WSSC began investigating inspection and testing techniques for PCCP that eventually led to an aggressive and innovative approach to assess the condition of its transmission mains with the intent of preventing future failures and optimizing the pipe-line service life. One area of particular concern was a portion of the Commission’s 400 miles of PCCP installed during the late 1960s and early 1970s."
"WSSC was an early adaptor of non-destructive testing, monitoring and inspection of PCCP. In the late 1980s, WSSC began its PCCP inspection program with internal visual and sounding methods. WSSC researched and worked closely with consultants during the development of the non-destructive testing and monitoring techniques widely used today for PCCP. WSSC’s PCCP program when first established included the inspection of all 60 miles of PCCP water transmission mains 54-inch and greater."
"WSSC is currently working with Pure Technologies and others, to embark on an expanded program to inspect all 140 miles of PCCP 48 inches or larger. According to WSSC, this proactive program is key to the management of these critical assets. By proactively maintaining an understanding of the condition of the transmission mains, WSSC is able to optimize the service life of the pipelines, identify short-term repairs, plan for long-term capital improvements and provide value to ratepayers."
"WSSC uses a combination of visual and sounding inspection, sonic/ultrasonic testing, and electromagnetic inspections to assess the condition of its large-diameter PCCP. The inspection identifies anomalies, areas in need of repair and establishes a baseline condition, which includes estimating the number of broken wires in each pipe section. WSSC uses acoustic monitoring methods to identify and track additional wire breaks. To date, WSSC has inspected all PCCP water transmission mains 54 inches and larger and installed acoustical monitoring equipment for 17 of its 60 miles of PCCP of this diameter."
"…Mike Higgins, regional manager for Pure Technologies, said that WSSC is one of the leaders in the area of large diameter PCCP inspection nationwide. 'A lot of agencies would have replaced or sliplined the pipelines, but WSSC was able to go in and find the problem areas and fixed them to operate the system in a safe manner,' he said. 'The WSSC experience has shown the ability to extend the service life of problematic pipelines.' "
Let's look at the facts to see how accurate this story is. In a response to questions from the Montgomery County Council about the June 2008 break of the 48-inch PCCP in Derwood, WSSC wrote: "It is known in the industry that large diameter PCCP pipelines manufactured in the period from 1960 through early 1970 similar to the one that broke have a proven track record of reliability and do not have high break history." The Derwood PCCP was installed in 1969.
A national study of PCCP breaks published in the spring of 2008 found "a significantly increased rate of failure for pipe installed between 1971 and 1979. Fully 50 percent of the catastrophic leaks and breaks recorded were manufactured or installed between those years." It appears that WSSC fudges the years of greatest concern by at least 2 to 3 years from "the late 1960s and early 1970s" to the 1970s when reporting to the government and to the public as compared to what it tells its water industry colleagues.
What this also means is that the other 50% of PCCP that failed in the national study were manufactured or installed in other years. The River Road PCCP was installed in 1964. It may even be that most or all of WSSC's PCCP was installed in the '60s and '70s, meaning that pipe failures might be from throughout this time period. As I indicated in my last column, the biggest problem with PCCP is the susceptibility of the prestressed wire to corrosion, regardless of its thickness or its year of installation. Once the protective cement coating is breached, it is only a matter of time before the wires start to break. Thicker wires just take longer to break than thinner wires. The result could be that the older PCCP from the '60s with thicker wires could fail in the same time period as the younger PCCP from the '70s with thinner wires.
As for WSSC being an early adaptor of PCCP inspection processes, the record is either scant or contrary. According to the 1996 news account referenced in my last column: "WSSC General Manager Cortez White said yesterday that the utility had developed special imaging equipment to test the integrity of the concrete pipe. White said the section of pipe that blew Tuesday was scheduled to be tested within a year. He said other sections of concrete pipe have been found to be at risk and were replaced without disruption in service to WSSC customers."
Another WSSC General Manager said this at a February 2007 meeting: "Lastly, Mr. Brunhart noted it is time for the six-mile inspection of the PCCP as it had not been done for five to six years." WSSC also noted in its July 2007 Utility-Wide Master Plan Phase 1A – Final Report: "The PCCP inspection program was said to have lagged in recent years, and was felt by the Delphi workshop group to have been beneficial in identifying issues before failure of the pipe. It is recommended that WSSC reinvest in this program, since the consequence of failure of large diameter transmission mains is very high."
There was also this response last month about the River Road PCCP break: "Among the possible causes, they said, was corrosion of metal support wires inside the concrete pipe, which passed its last inspection in 1998, or shifts in the ground beneath it. 'Something has happened in the last 10 years, and we hope to figure that out,' said Gary Gumm, chief engineer for the [WSSC]." Another account stated: "…the pipeline was last inspected in 1998 and was scheduled to be reinspected by 2011."
Apparently, WSSC had a program to inspect 66-inch PCCP like that along River Road as little as once every 13 years. It appears to have inspected some of its largest PCCP every 5-6 years, but then not to have ever inspected "smaller" 48-inch PCCP like the one in Derwood, even 39 years after installation. How does this compare to the development of inspection technologies and programs elsewhere?
Pure Technologies, one of the companies now helping WSSC to inspect and monitor its PCCP, has written a series of research papers about PCCP over the years. According to one such paper: "Research done in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation investigated the use of continuous acoustic monitoring to track the deterioration of prestressed concrete pipelines. Results from work done at the Agua Fria pipeline in Arizona indicated that deliberate wire cuts generated large distinctive acoustic anomalies, which could be recorded by suitable equipment."
"In 1993, Pure Technologies Inc. began to use continuous acoustic monitoring to track the failure of unbonded post-tensioning strands in concrete buildings and parking structures. The size and complexity of these structures required the development of specialized equipment and software to collect, manage, and analyze the large amounts of data flowing from these sites. These programs, techniques and equipment designs have been applied to the monitoring of prestressed concrete pipe."
"In 1996, Pipeline Acoustic Systems (PAS) of Phoenix, Arizona was awarded a contract to supply a 6,200-ft. hydrophone array and data acquisition system to be deployed at different locations in the pipeline. PAS selected Pure Technologies to design and manufacture the system. A prototype system was developed and first tested in September, 1996. After several design modifications and software enhancements, a functional system was deployed in August, 1997."
A different company wrote this: "Immediately upon organization of Pipeline Technologies Inc. in June 1995, the firm answered a formidable challenge of the pipeline industry to develop a method of determining the structural condition of buried large diameter water pipelines while they remain in service. PTI, parent firm of Pipetech International, conducted a rigorous development program to meet this challenge, resulting in the introduction of acoustic emission technology to the PCCP industry in late 1996. In the decade since its introduction, acoustic emission technology has become the widely used technology of choice for determining the health of PCCP pipelines on every continent throughout the world."
Given that the technology to allow for the continuous monitoring for the sound of wire breaks, first through hydrophones and later through fiber-optics, has been available for at least 12 years, when did WSSC and other water utilities take advantage of it? Tomorrow, I will show the comprehensive approach of other water utilities to monitoring its PCCP, in stark contrast to WSSC.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
First Lesbian Prime Minister
In Iceland. Social Democrat Johanna takes the helm in the wake of the collapse of the Independence Party-led coalition.
Kratovil Votes Against the Stimulus Package
Democratic Rep. Frank Kratovil (MD 1) was one of eleven House Democrats to vote against the stimulus package. Not a single Republican supported it, including Roscoe Bartlett (MD 6). Meanwhile, it appears that state Sen. Andy Harris plans to run again.
More Chaos at WSSC
Volcanic WSSC Commissioner Juanita Miller is at it again. The following email from an anonymous WSSC employee to the Prince George's and Montgomery County Councils alleges that Miller is going around the Interim General Manager to meddle with personnel issues. We will be reporting a lot more on Juanita Miller in the near future!
Dear Respected Councilmembers,
I have seen the recent article via the WTOPNEWS website about WSSC and the comments made by you and could not agree more. At this time I would prefer to remain anonymous since I am a current WSSC employee BUT I am also a rate-payer in PG county. I would like to give some additional information about a part of the inner workings at WSSC. It seems at least one commissioner has decided to take it upon herself to interject into employee relations within the organization. While this is always helpful and appreciated when done in a positive manner, I feel she is creating a negative environment by her comments and with what some might consider an attack on our Human Resources Group Leader. With any organization, preserving the Chain of Command preserves order. The HR Group Leader is answerable to the Deputy General Manager and General Manager.
The Commissioner in question SHOULD have gone through the Acting General Manager if she has an issue with ANY employee since that is the responsiblity of the General Manager and senior management, NOT directly to the employee, in this case the HR Group Leader and not through a public broadcast.
Below is the latest email from her to ALL Commission employees, Commissioners and Acting Deputy Manager. She does not even include the Acting General Manager. If this Commissioner is having an issue this should be addressed through Senior Management only and not ALL Commission employees.
Latest EMAIL:
From: Miller, Juanita
Sent: Mon 1/26/2009 12:01 PM
To: McKinney, Yvonne; Chow, Rudolph Cc: #Commission Employees; #Commissioners
Subject: PMS
Ms. McKinney: This is to document and apprise you of your apparent disregard of and disrespect for providing a response to the inquiry made on January 5th and 11th. You have not even sent an acknowledgement to indicate that you received and would follow up on the concerns expressed in the correspondence on this issue. Let's be very clear, a direct request from a Commissioner supercedes the protocol of going thru a "chain of command" to provide "substantive" information to the leadership of this agency. There have been major concerns expressed relative to the PMS process. And I initially inquired about the procedure for which you have either ignored or refused to respond. This conduct is unacceptable. Employees have a right to question a process and procedures that impact their careers and they deserve responses and clarification!! Therefore a response to my inquiries is expected by the close of business on January 28, 2009. I prefer that it be transmitted via email.
Editor's Note: Yvonne McKinney is WSSC's Director of Human Resources. Rudolph Chow is the Interim General Manager. Teresa Daniell, the Interim General Manager, was not copied on the email.
Former WSSC Commissioner Responds to MPW
Former WSSC Commissioner Manuel R. Geraldo wrote the following comment on our post about the behavior of Prince George's County Executive Jack Johnson's WSSC appointees. Johnson appointed Joyce Starks to replace Geraldo and the Washington Post's account of what happened next is eye-opening. Our readers should be aware that our original post on the WSSC Commissioners has attracted several hundred visits in less than a week and is one of the most popular stories to ever appear on this blog.
I am a former Commissioner of WSSC. I was appointed by Wayne Curry and I served with Artis Hampshire Cowan and Gregory Wells for Prince George's County. My term expired two meetings before the firing of John Griffin and Mike Errico. During my tenure with Artis and Gregory, WSSC was true to its mission and the ratepayers and approved programs for capital improvements, improved infrastructure and enhanced security of WSSC's facilities. The governance of WSSC was guided by our mission. We were always conscious about rates but we put the health considerations of the rate payers first. I have kept abreast of WSSC after my term expired because I am a ratepayer and I was proud of WSSC's role in the water utility industry. WSSC was regarded as a leader in the industry. To be sure,WSSC has not been managed or governed effectively since John Griffin and Mike Errico were fired. Moreover their firing was politically motivated. Some of the Commissioners who voted to terminate John Griffin had given him excellent evaluations in December. I am aware because I was the Commissioner repsonsible for soliciting and reviewing the evaluations of the Commissioners. Since their firing, WSSC has lost several long tenured employees who truly believed in the mission of the WSSC. These were employees with long institutional history. These employees left because of interference by Commissioners and poor management. I must disagree with the post "this is what you get under one party rule". During my tenure, Wayne Curry did not interfere with the Prince George's County Commissioners. His charge to us was for the Commissioners to do what was best for the ratepayers of the county.
Manuel Geraldo
Flawed Transportation Policies Hit Home
By Marc Korman.
I have spent the past year and a half riding the DC Metro and MARC Train from Bethesda to Baltimore for school each day. I always knew the cost was slightly higher than driving, but there were other benefits to transit: riding helped me justify living so far from school, gave me time to read and nap, and made me think Al Gore would like me. Unfortunately, due to our state and nation’s flawed transportation policies I am now commuting in my car on a daily basis.
I have written before about the need to improve the MARC Train and the reasons we should increase the gas tax. Unfortunately, both MARC Train service and gas prices have moved in the opposite direction from what I have proposed. Instead of following through on a plan to expand and upgrade MARC service, the commuter rail has maintained inflexible policies, reduced service, and increased ridership costs. Instead of increasing the gas tax, or pegging it to inflation, or setting a flexible tax so that the price of gas is always above a certain level, prices have been allowed to drop and a major incentive for mass transit expansion and alternative energy development has faded.
In the case of Maryland’s commuter rail, the Maryland Transit Administration has just instituted cuts. Among them was the elimination of the ten trip pass. A one way trip to get from Union Station in DC to Camden Yards in Baltimore costs $7.00. With the ten trip pass, the cost broke down to $5.60. As a result of the cuts, my daily commute on MARC went up by $1.40 each way and $2.80 roundtrip.
Taking the MARC train also required a $2.90 metro ride in each direction, so my total cost to take transit last year was $17.00/day. Now, it would be $19.80/day.
The benefit to the ten trip pass, as opposed to other bulk passes MTA offers like the weekly and monthly pass, is flexibility of use. Weekly and monthly passes can only be used for a short period of time, so if for some reason a rider does not need to take MARC one day (for example, they have to stay at school or work later than any trains run or they have avoided Friday classes) they lose a use of the pass they cannot recover. There are far less limitations with a ten trip pass.
This is not the only inflexible MTA policy that increases my costs. For example, MTA offers a student discount, but only if you purchase a special benefits card. Even then, you must go to a MARC train ticket office to make the purchase and cannot use the much more convenient electronic kiosks.
Another cut MTA made is to service on some of the lines. This did not affect the Camden line that I would take, but it counters the long growth plan for MARC which is to make service more, not less, regular. In my case, my current schedule makes MARC’s limited schedule extremely inconvenient.
A slight increase in the cost and inconvenience of transit would not be enough to chase me off the train. But the plummet in gas prices combined with those factors has done the job. A year ago, the Energy Information Agency indicated that a regular gallon of gasoline in the mid-Atlantic costs $3.11. Now, it costs $1.81/gallon. My 2003 Acura RSX gets 24 miles per gallon. A year ago, it would cost me $10.10/day in gas costs to get to Baltimore. Now, that cost has plummeted to $5.88/day. I also have to pay a $4.00 daily parking fee, so driving a year ago cost $14.10/day total and now costs $9.88/day, though this excludes wear and tear costs on my car.
Given these facts, a year ago I was paying a not insignificant, but manageable, $2.90/day surcharge to reduce traffic and greenhouse gas emissions. Today, the surcharge would be $9.92/day. I cannot justify the increased costs and inconvenience, so I am back in my car, causing traffic, emitting greenhouse gases, and yelling at the radio. Sensible transportation policies would get me, and many others, on mass transit where we belong.
January 2008 Transit
Metro: $2.90/trip
MARC Train 10 Trip Ticket: $56.00, $5.60/trip
Total Daily Cost: $17.00
January 2009 Transit
Metro: $2.90 a trip
MARC Train: $7.00 a trip (10 trip ticket eliminated)
Total Daily Cost=$19.80
January 2008 Driving:
Length of Trip: 39 miles each way
Gas Mileage: 24 mpg
Gas Costs: $3.11/gallon
Parking Costs: $4.00
Total Daily Cost: $14.10/day (not including wear and tear)
January 2009 Driving
Length of Trip: 39 miles each way
Gas Mileage: 24 mpg
Gas Costs: $1.81/gallon
Parking: $4.00
Total Daily Costs: $9.88
January 2008 Transit/Driving Difference: $2.90
January 2009 Transit/Driving Difference: $9.92
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Can Big Daddy Pass Off the Teacher Pensions? (Updated)
State Senate President Mike Miller seems determined to pass off at least part of the burden of financing teacher pensions to the counties. In reacting to the Governor’s failure to include a pension handoff in his budget proposal, Miller told the Gazette, “That's one of the failures of this budgetary process.” Miller also poked fun at County Executive Ike Leggett’s effort to draw a “line in the sand” over the issue, saying:
My good friend Ike Leggett said that he's going to draw a line in the sand… You never want to draw a line in the sand. Believe me, because I've had to rub out many of them in my lifetime, and I'm going to help him rub that one out as well.So can Big Daddy force the counties to eat the teacher pensions?
Mike Miller is rightfully the most-feared man in Annapolis. But even his power has his limits. If Miller persists in going down this road, he will find plenty of obstacles. Here’s five of them.
The House of Delegates
House Speaker Mike Busch has not been as outspoken as Miller on teacher pensions. There is no sign at this point that House leadership will push the issue or that it will receive mass support on the floor. If the House reports a budget with no pension handoff, Miller will then have to override both the House and the Governor. That’s a tall order, even for Big Daddy.
The Computer Tax Debacle
The last time the Senate made significant changes to the Governor’s proposed budget was during the Special Session, when they added a sales tax on computer services. The computer tax quickly became the most-hated product of the Special Session and generated a mass movement to kill it. Ultimately, it was replaced in part by a three-year millionaire surcharge that was resisted by some legislators from Montgomery County. This illustrates a central challenge facing legislators who want to change the Governor’s budget. If an objectionable item is proposed by the Governor, he is blamed. But if an objectionable item originates in the legislature, they are blamed. Few legislators will gladly want to repeat a battle like the computer tax and a fight over teacher pensions would be MUCH bigger.
Federal Stimulus Aid
The Governor has included $350 million in anticipated federal stimulus aid in his budget. That cuts both ways. If the federal payment equals at least this amount, Miller’s case for the necessity of handing off the pensions is weakened. If the federal payment is less, Miller’s case is strengthened. Our hunch is that the Governor did not pull this figure out of thin air; he likely included it based on assurances from Maryland’s Congressional delegation and/or officials in the White House. If that is true, Big Daddy will see no help for his cause here.
Pensions Are Not Just a Montgomery Issue
Teacher pensions are sometimes cast as an issue primarily impacting Montgomery County. That is not entirely true. From our post last fall, here are the top five beneficiaries of the state’s covering teacher pensions:
Montgomery: $131 million
Prince George’s: $95 million
Baltimore County: $78 million
Baltimore City: $62 million
Anne Arundel: $54 million
Now here are the top beneficiaries on a per capita basis:
Howard: $159.52
Calvert: $142.99
Montgomery: $140.62
Charles: $131.78
Frederick: $122.94
The Montgomery delegation can find plenty of allies to block a handoff. Miller, a master at counting votes, must know this.
The Republicans
When asked about this issue by the Gazette last month, House Minority Leader Anthony O’Donnell (R-29C) said this:
Shifting pension costs “almost guarantees the locals are going to raise your taxes,” O’Donnell said. “The onus will be on the locals to cut spending and the states will continue spending on their merry way.”Delegate O’Donnell is absolutely correct. With some counties across the state already facing deficits, they may be unable to cope with a pension handoff without raising taxes. And the long-term stress of bearing those obligations almost guarantees future county tax hikes. A logical Republican position on the issue would be to cut spending at the state level rather than pass the buck and risk tax hikes elsewhere.
So if Montgomery’s strategists line up their pieces correctly, Miller could face an opposition consisting of the House, the Governor, many legislators from jurisdictions in Central Maryland and the Baltimore area, and several Republicans. The rational play for Miller would be to stand down and move on.
But if Mike Miller can triumph against all of the above, he really does deserve the title “Big Daddy!”
Update: The Gazette reports that the federal government may send $3.3 billion in aid to Maryland over the next two years, though not all of that is destined for the general fund. If that happens, the odds against Miller will grow even longer.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Counties Escape the Worst in O’Malley’s Budget
Governor Martin O’Malley, a former mayor of Baltimore, has expressed sympathy for the financial circumstances of local governments ever since taking the reins of the Free State. During the 2007 Special Session, his budget proposal largely protected county aid. His new budget does the same. The counties should be breathing a sigh of relief.
The Governor proposes appropriating $14.44 billion for the general fund in FY 2010, down 1.3% from FY 2009 ($15.011 billion). His budget assumes that the federal government will provide the state $350 million to support Medicaid spending. He also transfers $619 million from reserve funds to cover deficits in FY 2009 and FY 2010, including $366 million from the local income tax refund reserve.
The nearly one-billion-dollar total of increased federal aid and transfers has enabled the Governor to stave off the worst in terms of spending cuts. Here’s a comparison of FY 2009 and his proposed FY 2010 budget from the Department of Legislative Services:
The only area taking a double-digit cut is medical assistance, which reflects a partial rollback of a health care expansion passed in 2007. Higher education receives a 7.7% increase, buttressed by the Governor’s determination to hold the line against tuition hikes.
Here is further detail on the Governor’s planned state aid by category:
None of the aid categories are changing significantly. A $71 million cut to local schools’ operating budgets is compensated for by a $137 million increase in retirement funding, yielding a total school aid increase of 1.2%. Libraries are down 0.5%, community college aid is up 2.0% and county/municipal aid falls by 1.0%.
How did each of the counties fare? We illustrate their relative fates below.
Overall, aid is up by 1.0% (including increased retirement contributions). Montgomery County’s aid rises from $663 million to $715 million, an increase of 7.7%. But that is misleading since it includes extra money to make up for the state’s underpayment to the county’s schools last year. Accounting for that money likely brings Montgomery’s increase down to the low single digits. Three Eastern Shore counties – Wicomico (6.7%), Worcester (4.5%) and Talbot (3.6%) are among the biggest winners on aid. Prince George’s County (down 1.2%) is the biggest loser. But these shifts do not change the rankings of per capita aid. Baltimore City still leads the pack and Montgomery is still third from the bottom, just like last year.
Public school superintendents are already beginning to protest their operating budget reductions. It’s true that the Governor is proposing to cut their operating aid by $71 million. It’s also true that the Governor is proposing to reduce by half the Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI), which steers extra money to Prince George’s County, Montgomery County and Baltimore City. But in return, the Governor has protected local governments from the burden of financing teacher pensions.
That’s a deal the counties can live with.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Give War a Chance?
The recent conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza has revealed, yet again, the difficulty of achieving any lasting victory or peace in the Middle East. Israel has shown it can make Gazans pay a fierce price for Hamas's continued insistence on launching missiles aimed a civilian targets inside Israel. However, it appears unable to dislodge Hamas from Gaza or totally stop violence from the Palestinian side.
The approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the Israeli side will be determined by upcoming elections. A Likud victory will likely lead to a harder Israeli line, as during when Yitzhak Shamir was Prime Minister, though Menachem Begin negotiated the peace treaty with Egypt. Electoral success by Kadima and Labor make meaningful peace talks more likely, though as in any democracy they remain constrained by public opinion.
Kadima and Labor currently lead the government and were clearly trailing Likud until the recent war in Gaza--widely supportted by Jewish Israelis. However, the latest poll shows Kadima and Labor show a tight race. Kadima, Labor, Meretz, and the Arab parties would win 54 seats in the 120 member Knesset. Likud and three parties to its right would win 51 seats.
Two religious parties--Shas and United Torah Judaism--would gain he remaining 15 seats. Religious parties, often seen as more natural allies of the right but also often willing to work with the left--would hold the balance of power. Alternatively, Israel may see a Likud-Labor-Kadima government.
Meanwhile, signs on the Palestinian side aren't especially encouraging this week. Haaretz--the major left-leaning Israeli daily--reports that Hamas remains opposed to peace talks:A senior Hamas official on Sunday said that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement must end peace negotiations with Israel before any reconciliation talks can take place. . . .
Hamas appears determined to follow a strategy that has failed for 60 years. Palestinians can certainly bring violence to Israelis but only at a price that brings even greater violence down on their own people. Yet "Give War a Chance!" seems to be the continuing approach from Gaza's rulers.
He also demanded that the PA end security coordination with Israel, and maintained that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process had ended.
"Those who committed mistakes must correct their mistakes through a clear and frank declaration to stop security coordination with the [Israeli] occupation, release [Hamas] prisoners and later end negotiations [with Israel] because the peace process is irreversibly over," said Hamdan.
"It's time for us to talk about a reconciliation based on a resistance program to liberate the [occupied] territory and regain rights," he added.
P.S. Unsigned comments may be deleted in the name of pursuing civility instead of another blog flame war on this topic.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Will There Be Another Special Election in District 4? (Updated!)
County Council Member Don Praisner, who won a special election to replace his wife last spring, is now in the hospital. There is no indication from the media of the seriousness of his health problems. But if Mr. Praisner left the council prior to the expiration of his term in 2010, would that automatically trigger a special election?
The answer is that it depends on the date he leaves the council. In a December 2007 post on special elections in Montgomery County, I found the following:When a council vacancy occurs, a special election must be held if the vacancy “occurs before December 1 of the year before a year in which a quadrennial state election will be held.” (County code, Chapter 16, Sec. 16-17(a)(4)) So, if a county council member stepped down on 11/30/09, a special election would have to be held. But if a council member stepped down on 12/2/09, the rest of the council would appoint a replacement who would serve out the rest of the term (County charter, Sec. 106)...
The same Gazette article on Mr. Praisner's hospitalization indicates that his daughter, Alison Klumpp, is considering running for the District 4 seat. If she does, she will join a crowded field whenever the election is held.
The last time a county council vacancy occurred was when District 5 council member Derick Berlage stepped down in June 2002 to become the county’s Planning Chairman. As the date was too late to trigger the special election requirement, the county council appointed Donnell Peterman to serve out the remaining months of Berlage’s term. Peterman was appointed on the condition that he not leverage his appointed incumbency to seek office that year. Peterman honored that commitment in 2002, choosing instead to run (unsuccessfully) for an at-large seat in 2006.
Update: The Gazette's Janel Davis reports that Mr. Praisner will undergo surgery for colon cancer next week.
State to MoCo: Build Your Own Trail!
A recent Examiner article revealed that the state expects Montgomery County to pay for finishing the Capital Crescent Trail near the Purple Line. Are they right that MoCo should pay up?
First, let’s understand the relationship between the trail and the Purple Line. Back in August 2007, I wrote the following in a guest blog on Just Up the Pike: In 1986, CSX decided to file for abandonment of its tracks. The county then passed the Georgetown Branch Master Plan Amendment in 11/86 designating the tracks as “a public right-of-way intended to be used for public purposes such as conservation, recreation, transportation and utilities.” The amendment stated that “a transit facility could be an important element of the County's long-term transportation system.”
From the beginning, the trail was designated as an integral element of the transit project, not an optional one. Neither the county nor the state has ever completed the trail into Silver Spring, a fact chronicled by Wayne Phyillaier in his Finish the Trail blog. But the Purple Line offers the promise of finally providing a safe pedestrian link between Bethesda and Silver Spring if the trail is completed alongside the transit line.
In 1988, the county purchased the right-of-way from CSX for $10.5 million. Two years later, the county passed the Georgetown Branch Master Plan Amendment of 1990, which “designates the Silver Spring & Bethesda Trolley and the Capital Crescent Trail as suitable uses for the 4.4-mile portion of the Georgetown Branch right-of-way between Bethesda and Silver Spring.”
The Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan, also adopted in 1990, reinforces the intended right-of-way use for both trail and transit. It states, “Use of the route for transit would provide an alternative to driving on East-West Highway and Jones Bridge Road. It would assist those people who rely primarily on local public transit. The key to attractive, successful transit service is providing reliable, speedy service. The Georgetown Branch provides an existing travel corridor that could readily be adapted for transit use.”
See the sector plan for further details - pages 103 and 104.
Newspaper articles from that time show that the county government intended transit use at the time they bought the CSX land. Chevy Chase residents reacted by first opposing possible residential development on the land and later by opposing rail service.
In 1989 the County Council voted to accept state money to pay for most of the cost of what was then known as the trolley by a 6-1 vote. [Then-councilman] Ike Leggett was the sole dissenter. Two years later, the trolley line died because of rising cost estimates and state budget problems.
The Purple Line Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) estimates the project’s capital cost at $386 million to $1.6 billion. According to the Examiner, finishing the trail would cost just $14 million. So why shouldn’t MoCo shut up and pay up? Because we are now revealing a dirty little secret: the county has already committed more money for the Purple Line than has the state.
You don’t believe me? Consider the following:
1. The county is paying $32 million for its share of the Silver Spring Transit Center, which is designed to accommodate the Purple Line. This includes $18.6 million added by the County Council in July to “make the project an example of design excellence.” Former Montgomery County Executive Doug Duncan had to fight tooth-and-nail with the administration of former Governor Robert Ehrlich to get any state funding.
2. In June, the County Council voted to spend $60 million to build a new south entrance at the Bethesda Metro Station. This project is also intended to accommodate the Purple Line.
3. The Georgetown Branch right-of-way, explicitly purchased by the county twenty years ago for both transit and trail use, is now valued at more than $30 million.
The above three items alone cost county taxpayers more than $120 million. And what has the state paid? The state’s new budget schedule, which we dissected in September, reveals that it has spent $26.5 million through the current fiscal year and plans to spend a total $106 million on design and engineering through FY 2014. That compares to total spending planned for Baltimore’s Red Line of $221 million through FY 2014.
If the residents of either Baltimore City or Prince George’s County were spending more on a state transit project than the state government, their politicians would be screaming bloody murder in Annapolis. But MDOT must have no such fear of us. Their nickel-and-diming over the trail reminds your author of the state’s unapologetic shorting of the county’s school construction money last spring.
County Executive Ike Leggett said yesterday that MDOT Secretary John Porcari told him that the county will be “credited” for its contributions. Interestingly, we know of no such commitment appearing under the Secretary's signature. Assuming the County Executive's understanding is correct, that does not mean the county will pay nothing more for the Purple Line. Further county payments will depend on the project’s ultimate cost. But if Porcari did make such a commitment, it is the job of the County Executive and our state delegation to hold him to it.
Leggett and Fire Fighters Strike Deal, but Questions Abound (Updated)
The Montgomery County Career Fire Fighters Association (MCCFFA) announced more than $7 million in concessions in a tentative deal with the Leggett administration yesterday. But the structure of the deal and its timing are sure to raise questions at the County Council.
The Fire Fighters’ press release (which we reproduce in whole below) describes their concessions this way:Under the agreement, MCCFFA members will forego negotiated holiday pay benefits and will defer a scheduled 4% pay increase for three months, from July 2009 to October 2009. These concessions will save the County more than $5 million in Fiscal Year 2010.
The structure of this deal is a bit different than the concessions given by the Teachers, SEIU and the Supervisors to the school system. We described them in December this way:
In addition, MCCFFA agreed to a 6-month deferral of a scheduled 3.5% pay increase, from July 2010 to January 2011. This concession will save the County nearly $2 million more in Fiscal Year 2011.1. The 5.3 point Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) has been eliminated for the next fiscal year.
The school unions gave up their entire COLA for one year. The Fire Fighters are deferring one increase for three months (from 7/09 to 10/09) and another increase for six months (from 7/10 to 1/11), as well as foregoing some vacation pay. The difference in terms is important because the school unions negotiated a “me-too” provision that says:
2. The step increases that apply for employees who gain seniority will remain. Those increases range from 1 to 2.5 points.
3. Health insurance benefits will remain at the same level for at least five years.
4. The school system and the unions will establish a task force to examine employee work loads.If the County Government negotiates higher compensation improvements for any of its employee organizations during FY10, FY11, or FY12; those higher increases will be matched for school system employees.
In other words, if another union gets a better deal, the school unions are entitled to get the same terms from the school system. It is far from clear whether the Fire Fighters negotiated better terms than the school unions. But if the school unions find that the Fire Fighters did indeed get better terms, they may very well seek to reclaim a portion of their pay. That would set off a chaotic chain reaction through the county’s still-embryonic budget process that neither the school system nor the County Council will want to deal with. And waiting in the wings are the police union and MCGEO, who have yet to conclude their negotiations with the County Executive.
Time is running out to get the remaining agreements done. The school unions’ concessions have been incorporated in the school system’s proposed budget, which has already been submitted to the County Council. The County Executive must submit his budget to the council in March. If he has not obtained concessions from the Fire Fighters, the police and MCGEO by then, his budget must fully fund their contracts under the law. It will then be the responsibility of the council to underfund the contracts, thereby denying funding for the COLAs. If the Executive does strike deals with the Fire Fighters, police and MCGEO, then he can include those reduced compensation levels in his budget, saving the council some dirty work. My informants question why it is taking so long to renegotiate these contracts since today’s budget problems were known almost a year ago.
The bottom line is this: the County Executive must be careful in dealing with the remaining collective bargaining agreements. Activation of the “me-too” provisions by the school unions would take the county into uncharted territory as the clock ticks down to budget Armageddon.
Update: The Washington Post obtained this amazing quote from Leggett spokesman Patrick Lacefield:Leggett spokesman Patrick Lacefield called Sparks's announcement "in error."
What is going on inside Ike Leggett's management team?
"We have not finalized an agreement with the firefighters. There are some outstanding legal issues that we need to resolve," Lacefield said. "I did not expect to get a release like that across my desk this morning. " He declined to be more specific.
Update 2: According to the Gazette, Council President (and union nemesis) Phil Andrews picked up on the difference between the unions' concessions.
Following is the press release from the Fire Fighters.
*****
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA CONTACT: John Sparks (240-876-1920)
Montgomery Career Fire Fighters Reach Tentative Budget Deal To Save County Over $7 Million
(Rockville, MD) In response to the projected Fiscal Year 2010 budget shortfall facing Montgomery County, the Montgomery County Career Fire Fighters Association (“MCCFFA”) announced today that it has agreed to a series of pay concessions that will save the County Government more than $7 million over the next two fiscal years. MCCFFA represents more than 1,000 fire fighter/paramedics employed by the Montgomery County Government. The agreement is subject to ratification by MCCFFA membership.
Under the agreement, MCCFFA members will forego negotiated holiday pay benefits and will defer a scheduled 4% pay increase for three months, from July 2009 to October 2009. These concessions will save the County more than $5 million in Fiscal Year 2010.
In addition, MCCFFA agreed to a 6-month deferral of a scheduled 3.5% pay increase, from July 2010 to January 2011. This concession will save the County nearly $2 million more in Fiscal Year 2011.
“In normal times, we expect our elected officials to fully honor our contracts,” said John Sparks, President of MCCFFA. “But these are not normal times. We understand that in these difficult times we must all be part of the solution, and MCCFFA is doing more than its share.”
Last month, the Montgomery County Teachers Association agreed to postpone the Fiscal Year 2010 Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for teachers to help the County close the looming budget gap. MCCFFA’s negotiated COLA for Fiscal Year 2010 is scheduled to be approximately $5 million. The unions representing other county employees and police are still in negotiations with the Leggett Administration.
“The unions met last fall and we agreed that we would each negotiate our own solution to help the County,” said Sparks. “The County asked the fire fighters to give back $5 million as our share of the solution, and we did more than asked. That’s what fire fighters do – we sacrifice every day.”
MCCFFA is currently in the first year of a three-year labor agreement. The contract, which was approved by the Leggett administration in April 2008 and by the County Council in May 2008, brought the starting salary for the County’s rookie firefighters to $40,797, compared with $44,302 in the District, $40,848 in Prince George's County, $47,472 in Fairfax County, $44,637 in Arlington and $43,618 in Alexandria. Among jurisdictions such as Montgomery with more than 500,000 people, the average salary nationally is $44,275 for starting firefighters.
Sparks thanked County officials who have negotiated with him for several months and praised their willingness to find creative solutions to the budget problem. He said that the agreement will be submitted for ratification by his members “as soon as the County gives its final sign-off.”
###
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Leggett Supports Light Rail for the Purple Line (Updated)
Following is the text of a memo from County Executive Ike Leggett to County Council President Phil Andrews. While Leggett is a signatory to Purple Line Now’s light rail pledge, he once voted against an earlier version of rail on the Purple Line and an Examiner article suggested that his staff was leaning towards BRT. It is also worth noting that anti-rail activist Pam Browning held a fundraiser for Leggett in 2006.
Update: Purple Line Now sent the following email to Leggett in reaction to this news:
Dear Mr. Leggett (Ike):
On behalf of Purple Line NOW! and the more than 100 unions, businesses and environmental, civic and trail advocacy groups on record in support of the light rail transit line, I thank you for today's affirmation of your position in support of the Light Rail Purple Line.
We look forward to working with you to make sure that this project is completed in a manner that maximizes its transit utility, is a source of pride to residents of both Montgomery and Prince George's counties and that enhances ALL neighborhoods through which the Purple Line will pass.
Sincerely,
Webb Smedley
Chair, PLN
Memorandum
January 22, 2009
To: Honorable Phil Andrews, Council President
From: Isiah Leggett, County Executive
Re: Proposed Purple Line
Prior to the Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee’s work session on the Purple Line, I would like to convey my position on the preferred option. We all recognize the need to address mobility and accessibility issues in the Bethesda and New Carrollton corridor. The corridor is experiencing unacceptable levels of roadway congestion, unreliable transit travel times, limited travel mode options and degraded transit accessibility to the larger metropolitan region due to inferior connections to radial Metrorail lines and to other rail and bus services.
Construction of the Purple Line would provide environmental benefits to an area classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a serious non-attainment region, while simultaneously providing a stimulus for community revitalization. It is also critical to another shared goal of promoting smart growth.
My position is based on the input I have received through a rigorous and open-minded process. I asked my technical staff for their critical analysis. They have worked with the technical staffs from the Maryland Transit Administration and Prince George’s County. I have taken into account hundreds of letters and emails from residents and from other elected and appointed officials. Prince George’s County Executive Jack Johnson and I established a Bi-County Task Force to have our staffs discuss a variety of issues critical to both counties. I have also benefited from many conversations and meetings with those in opposition to the project, or those advocating specific alignments or transportation modes for the project. I have received important recommendations from the Western Montgomery County Citizen Advisory Board and the Silver Spring Citizen Advisory Board and from many other business and neighborhood organizations.
I met recently with Secretary of Transportation John Porcari and County Executive Jack Johnson to ask important and critical questions dealing with the project scope, costs, environmental impacts, financing plans, schedule, and the role of Montgomery County in the expected financial obligations for the selected project. Secretary Porcari’s answers to these questions helped me to finalize my position. My position reflects what I believe is in the best long-term interest of the county.
Based on my meeting with Secretary Porcari, I have the following understanding about the Maryland Department of Transportation and Montgomery County commitments:
1. The State, to the extent feasible, will not require Montgomery County participation in the State’s local share of a federally approved project. Should the County be required to share in the local costs, the State will credit the County for its significant contributions to the project that includes the Georgetown Branch right-of-way purchased by the County in 1988 for the future light rail transit line, the design and construction of the Bethesda South Entrance to the Metrorail system, and to pay for the construction of the replacement and improvement of the existing Capital Crescent Trail (CCT);
2. Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) will credit Montgomery County for the above contributions either as part of the Purple Line project or via another approach in the Consolidated Transportation Plan (CTP);
3. Should project costs exceed the amount in the federal full-funding grant agreement, the State will cover all of those additional costs;
4. MDOT will strive to keep the Purple Line within the Medium Cost Effectiveness rating for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding consideration;
5. MDOT will own and operate the Purple Line and integrate it into the WMATA rail and bus system.
As the Council is aware, there have been a number of legitimate concerns and issues raised. However, these concerns both individually and collectively do not in my view outweigh the long-term benefits of a light rail alternative as the Locally Preferred Alternative. After considerable analysis and discussions, it is evident that light rail is the more viable long-term option given the consistency with the Master Plan, the high level of forecasted ridership, the better travel times between Bethesda and Silver Spring and the ability of light rail to better support transit-oriented development.
It is important to convey a number of factors and concerns that should be considered by MDOT and the Federal Transit Administration as the Purple Line project proceeds:
1. Build the trail under the Air Rights Building in a manner compatible with the High Investment Light Rail alternative;
2. Examine during preliminary engineering the benefits and cost, and the property and environmental effects, of widening the trail to 12 feet with 2-foot buffers on each side versus the 10-foot trail as proposed;
3. Pursue the feasibility and long-term benefits and cost of using grass between the tracks;
4. Investigate design and building techniques to maximize the retention of existing trees in the corridor;
5. Examine during preliminary engineering the feasibility of using hybrid light rail vehicles (or dual powered vehicles) that do not require wires, poles and electrical substations. This option would provide aesthetic benefits, as well as potential capital and operating cost savings by eliminating the infrastructure to support the vehicles. It would increase the chances of preserving the existing tree canopy and realize the associated environmental benefits;
6. Examine the extent of the tail tracks in the Woodmont East plaza to minimize their length beyond the tunnel, and establish an operating framework on how the tail tracks will be used;
7. Build the surface medium light rail alignment through Silver Spring following Bonifant and Wayne Avenue. Include a stop at the new Silver Spring Library site but eliminate the Dale Drive stop. Special attention should be given to the LRT vehicle crossing of Georgia Avenue and the intersection of Fenton and Wayne to ensure that the light rail, pedestrians and vehicle traffic will operate in a compatible manner.
My staff and I will continue to work with the State to ensure that as this important project proceeds through planning and construction, the needs and concerns of our residents are considered to the maximum extent possible, that the planning addresses the issues noted above and that environmental concerns continue to be addressed.
Anti-Spying Bill Introduced
Senators Jamie Raskin (D-20) and Brian Frosh (D-16) and Delegates Sheila Hixson (D-20), Sandy Rosenberg (D-41), Heather Mizeur (D-20) and Tom Hucker (D-20) introduced a comprehensive bill today to prevent improper spying by the state police. Following is a press release from their offices.
Legislative Leaders Introduce Comprehensive Bill to Ensure Police Spying on Peaceful Activists Never Happens Again
January 22, 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
On behalf of Senators Jamie Raskin; Brian Frosh, Delegates Sheila Hixson; Sandy Rosenberg; Tom Hucker, and Heather Mizeur
ANNAPOLIS – Calling for swift passage for a bill to ban police spying on political activists in Maryland, state legislative leaders today held a press conference to announce their introduction of The Freedom of Association and Assembly Protection Act of 2009. The leaders believe that the First Amendment protects the rights of all Marylanders to organize to advance their political and social views free of the chilling specter of government surveillance and dossiers. However, Maryland now has no law that protects these most basic of rights to organize, peacefully assemble, and petition our government. Lead bill sponsors are Senators Jamie Raskin and Brian Frosh; and Delegates Sheila Hixson, Sandy Rosenberg, Heather Mizeur and Tom Hucker.
The legislation seeks to codify the recommendations of the report issued in October by former Attorney General Stephen Sachs. Specifically, the bill will mandate that law enforcement use of covert techniques and compiling of criminal intelligence dossiers about Marylanders’ political views and activities be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
State Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20): “The State Police are not Maryland's thought police. Marylanders have a right to work for environmental protection, an end to the death penalty, marriage equality, peace, and bike lanes without being spied upon and called terrorists by law enforcement officials. Our bill will forbid covert tactics against our citizens unless there is specific reasonable suspicion that they are engaged in criminal activity. It will also forbid the Orwellian practice of keeping political dossiers on citizens that are not part of actual criminal investigations. At a time of staggering financial crisis, let's stop wasting our money spying on people nonviolently exercising their political freedom.”
State Senator Brian E. Frosh (D-16): "Obviously, we've got to make sure that this kind of surveillance doesn't happen again. Police need the tools to do their jobs in cases of criminal wrongdoing. But surveillance of law-abiding citizens shouldn't be an option."
Delegate Sheila Hixson (D-20): “My colleagues and I were shocked and appalled to learn of the covert police surveillance of our neighbors who were simply expressing their beliefs regarding the death penalty, the war in Iraq and environmental concerns. Still further and inconceivably, we learned that their names were entered on a ‘terrorist’ list. We ask: what has happened to our freedom to express ourselves? For that reason we have crafted legislation to prohibit inappropriate law enforcement that interferes with First Amendment rights.”
Delegate Tom Hucker (D-20): “At a time when the state is cutting health care, transportation, and environmental protection, it boggles the mind to learn our state police were using precious tax dollars to spy on our constituents. We wrote this bill to make sure state tax dollars are never again used for surveillance of peaceful activists. We have a constitutional right to assemble, and we will fight to protect it.”
Delegate Heather Mizeur (D-20): “Takoma Park residents share a proud history of civic engagement and issue advocacy. Sometimes we have to fight to be heard. At other times, we’re being listened to when we least expect it. State sponsored spying on peace activists and death penalty advocates is a mark of shame on Maryland. We are here today to reaffirm the most basic of our rights granted by the First Amendment – that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Here and now, we make our petition: Never again will this be allowed to happen in Maryland.”
Delegate Samuel I. (Sandy) Rosenberg (D-41): “People exercising their First Amendment rights should not be subjected to the chilling presence of undercover police officers.”
ACLU of Maryland Legislative Director Cynthia Boersma: “The ACLU of Maryland applauds the bill’s sponsors for answering the call of Mr. Sachs’ report, which condemned the police surveillance that has taken place as ‘inconsistent with an overarching value in our democratic society—the free and unfettered debate of important public questions.’” Mr. Sachs believes such police conducted ‘ought to be prohibited,’ and we believe that legislation is necessary to ensure that the protection of our most basic rights do not change with changing administrations. This bill establishes clear standards to protect both our First Amendment rights and our public safety by directing that criminal intelligence and counter-terrorism resources are used to respond to suspected criminal activity rather than spying on legitimate political activity.”
Since July 17, 2008, when the ACLU of Maryland uncovered that the MSP engaged in covert surveillance of local peace and anti-death penalty groups for over a year from 2005-2006, we have learned that the Maryland State Police has engaged in a far-reaching program of covert surveillance of political groups in Maryland. Dozens of individuals and organizations have been targeted by the Maryland State Police which maintained criminal intelligence files on their political beliefs and activities, labeling them as suspected terrorists and security threats. According to their own files, the MSP had no evidence or suspicion that any identified target was engaged in criminal activity of any kind.
Go online to learn more about MSP spying on political activists:
http://www.aclu-md.org/Index%20content/NoSpying/NoSpying.html
The Work of Our Congressional Delegation, Part Two
By Marc Korman.
My last entry examined the committee assignments of four of Maryland’s Congressmembers and what issues they might deal with in the coming year. Today we will take a look at the remaining four.
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
As Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer has no committee assignments. On the other hand, he is in every meeting of the Congressional leadership and helps to craft and pass all of the legislation that goes through the House of Representatives. He also helps to determine the schedule, so the timing of major Obama initiatives will be signed off on by Hoyer. Will new regulations for global warming pass in 2009? When will healthcare be dealt with? Hoyer will weigh in on these decisions.
Congressman Roscoe Bartlett
The lone Republican in Maryland’s Congressional delegation serves on the Armed Forces Committee, Science and Technology Committee, and the Small Business Committee.
On the Armed Forces Committee, where Barltett just lost a bid to become the top Republican, he is considered a naval expert. That is no small matter for a state that houses the Naval Academy.
Barlett also has a background in science that equips him for the Science and Technology Committee, where he will address the same issues as Congresswoman Edwards mentioned last week.
The Small Business Committee has jurisdiction over the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the various federal programs to support and develop small businesses. According to the SBA, Maryland is home to 511,805 small businesses, which has the amorphous definition of a business that is “independently owned and operated and which is not dominant in its field of operation.” The amount of small businesses in Maryland has probably shrunk during the current recession.
Congressman Elijah Cummings
Congressman Cummings sits on three House Committees: Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I), Armed Services, and Oversight and Government Reform.
Oversight and Government Reform has been extremely active over the last two years, since the Democrats became the majority in the House of Representatives, investigating the Bush Administration. It remains remains to be seen how active they will be in keeping watch over the Obama Administration.
On T&I, in addition to the major transportation bill, Congressman Cummings will likely continue his chairmanship of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee. That Subcommittee helps oversee port security, an important issue for Congressman Cummings’ Baltimore district.
Congressman Chris Van Hollen
Unlike Maryland’s other member of the House leadership, Van Hollen maintains his committee assignments. He serves on the Ways and Means Committee and Oversight and Government Reform.
As Obama pushes forward with tax reform, both in the stimulus and because the Bush tax policies expire in 2010, Congressman Van Hollen’s committee has a central role.
On Oversight and Government Reform, Congressman Van Hollen is in the unique position of being the Representatives for many of the government workers being overseen. As one staffer told me, this means that he needs to be at every hearing since it is his constituents testifying. It also increases the stakes for his participation in committee activities.
Committee work is just one part of a Congressmembers’ contribution. But it is the area where they have the potential to have the biggest impact. Regardless of which committee each Congressmember serves on, there is a full agenda for Congress in the coming year.
Johnson Appointees Run Amok at WSSC
The dysfunction of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) continues to be a big story, with pipe breaks sending a 75-foot wide river to engulf residents in Temple Hills and forcing guests at the Gaylord National Resort to avoid tap water. But our informants have tipped us off to one of the biggest reasons for WSSC’s collapse: the abysmal behavior of Prince George’s County Executive Jack Johnson’s appointed commissioners.
WSSC is overseen by six commissioners, three each appointed by the County Executives of Montgomery and Prince George’s. The three commissioners appointed by Johnson are Joyce Starks, Prem Agarwal and Juanita Miller. Starks is a budget manager at the National Institutes of Health and has no experience in utility management or construction. Prince George’s Delegate Barbara Frush (D-21) told the Gazette “she didn't have a clue what was going on,” during her tenure as WSSC Chair in 2004-2005. At the time, the Washington Post editorial page said she had “displayed consistent impulses for secrecy, backroom dealing and bad management.” Nevertheless, Starks is serving as Chair again.
Prem Agarwal owns G.E. Frisco Company, a building materials contractor, that has submitted bids on WSSC work despite being warned not to do so by the utility’s managers. The Washington Post found that Agarwal’s company was awarded $1.46 million of WSSC work during his first nine months as a commissioner after Agarwal and his family donated $12,000 to Jack Johnson’s campaign accounts.
But Juanita Miller is in a class by herself. A special education administrator in the Prince George’s public school system, she was elected to the House of Delegates in 1986 from District 25 for one term. Miller later ran unsuccessfully for the County Council and the State Senate. She was first appointed as a WSSC commissioner in 1996 by former Prince George’s County Executive Wayne Curry, serving through 2002.
It did not take long for Miller to leave her mark on the agency. One year into her first term, Miller intervened in a contract dispute. Recyc Systems Inc., a white-owned firm, won a sludge-hauling contract at WSSC’s Blue Plains site with a low bid of $11.5 million. But Miller pushed the WSSC board to reject Recyc’s bid in favor of MTI Construction, a minority-owned firm, which was the third-lowest bidder at $13.5 million. Miller never told the board that MTI had contributed to her political campaigns. A state court ordered WSSC to reconsider its rejection and an ethics investigation ensued.
After the WSSC board deadlocked on the Recyc-MTI dispute, Miller accused the agency of racism in contracting. Then-General Manager Cortez A. White, who is black, said this about her charges:The lowest of all polarizing techniques has been used – emotionally charged claims of racism and discrimination, similar to tactics used by Sen. Joseph McCarthy to hunt alleged communists during the early '50s… Unfortunately, the rhetoric on the sludge hauling contract has digressed to a point where political games are being played with professional lives. Personal attacks have been made because technical and professional assessments have not supported certain parochial, political goals. Such remarks are particularly disgraceful because they were uttered by a public official in a position of rank upon essentially defenseless staffers.
But Miller was not finished with hurling charges of racism. In 2002, Miller was in her last year on the commission and took on State Senate President Mike Miller (D-27) in a primary. Juanita Miller wrote the U.S. Justice Department complaining of “bid-rigging” at WSSC against minority contractors. She was joined in her request by then-commissioner Kevin P. Maloney of Montgomery County, who alleged bid-rigging against white contractors(!) Miller also alleged that WSSC was “targeting” African-Americans and women for harassment. Miller’s allegations followed the firing of an employee accused of committing $200,000 in fraud against the agency and a Montgomery County investigation finding multiple WSSC commissioners’ abuse of expense money. Nothing came of Juanita Miller’s bid-rigging accusations and Mike Miller defeated her by 62-33% in their Senate primary.
Just when WSSC thought it had seen the last of Miller, new County Executive Jack Johnson decided to reappoint her to the board in 2005. “It appears that I am ordained to be a public servant,” declared the triumphant Miller, who sits on the board to this day.
Miller rejoined a WSSC board that had just concluded a holy war against General Manager John R. Griffin. In March 2004, the board fired Griffin and his deputy on a 4-2 vote because they allegedly “recklessly spent the agency's money on raises, executive bonuses, excessive travel and consulting fees, mostly without the commissioners’ consent.” But WSSC’s legal counsel found the firing to be illegal because the board met behind closed doors and did not take a recorded public vote. The Post editorial board said Griffin was “competent” and the firing was “needless.” Griffin and his deputy later accepted a buyout. Montgomery County Executive Doug Duncan asked his county’s three commissioners to resign over the incident. Jack Johnson refused to replace his commissioners, saying he was “happy” with WSSC’s performance.
Much of the struggle inside WSSC’s board has been over its minority contracting program. Part of former General Manager Griffin’s undoing was his constant battles with Shaaron W. Phillips, the former head of the agency’s minority contracting office, who later sued the agency for discrimination. In 2004, the board tried to assume direct control of minority contracting at a closed-door meeting to which two commissioners were not invited. That action prompted threats of intervention from the Ehrlich administration. The General Assembly failed to reauthorize the program in 2006 but WSSC continues it on an interim basis. Unfortunately, the push for minority contractors has served in the past as a way to steer business to certain minority contractors, as Juanita Miller showed during the 1997 Recyc-MTI dispute.
State politicians have acknowledged WSSC’s problems for years. In 2004, then-Delegate Rich Madaleno (D-18) called the board’s closed-door attempt to take control of minority contracting “shocking.” In 2005, former Senator Leonard Teitelbaum (D-19), who had once been a WSSC commissioner, said, “If the last 12 months tell us anything, it's that the place is broken, and needs to be fixed.” Senate President Mike Miller described the conflict at WSSC as a “cancer,” saying “Public confidence in the ability of this board to govern is nonexistent.” Miller suggested allowing the Governor to appoint WSSC commissioners, but told the Gazette that “he does not want to give the power to a Republican.” Legislative proposals to bring the agency under state control failed in 2005, in part due to opposition from Doug Duncan and Jack Johnson.
My informants tell me that the Prince George’s commissioners are still focused on controlling contracting, while the Montgomery commissioners prefer to have that function under the control of the General Manager. That is one of the biggest obstacles to the hiring of a new General Manager to replace long-departed Andrew Brunhart, who famously warned that WSSC’s aging pipes could explode “like a missile.” It may also be an impediment to the approval of a capital program. After all, if the right contractors are not performing the work, why have any work at all?
And so Jack Johnson’s appointees continue to run amok throughout WSSC. When are Prince George’s County voters going to run amok against their entrenched political oligarchy?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Work of Our Congressional Delegation, Part One
By Marc Korman.
The new Congress convened earlier this month and they have their work cut out for them: the economy, healthcare costs, global warming, two wars, and the conflict in Gaza are just the tip of the iceberg. While Maryland is blessed with two Congressmen that are a part of the leadership in the House of Representatives and may deal with these issues at a high level, most of our House members will work in the trenches of Congress. Much of the substantial work is done in the House Committees each member is assigned to. What committees do our Maryland members serve on and what will they focus on this year?
The Committee assignments may still be modified in the opening days of the 111th Congress, but the information below reflects the most up to date assignments for each Maryland Congressmember.
Congressman Frank Kratovil
Maryland’s newest Congressman only has one committee assignment so far, the House Armed Services Committee. He will likely have one or two more assignments during the next few weeks.
Locally, the Armed Services Committee is important due to the changes that the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process is bringing to Maryland. Nationally, the Armed Services Committee has an oversight role for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and input into the funding decisions for the Department of Defense, which is the largest component of discretionary federal spending (as opposed to mandatory spending, such as Social Security or servicing debt).
Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger
Congressman Ruppersberger sits on two committees: Appropriations and Intelligence.
The Appropriations Committee is considered so powerful and important that Congressmembers cannot serve on another committee unless they get a special waiver. On Appropriations, Congressman Ruppersberger will have a role in crafting government spending, including the stimulus package.
The Intelligence Committee focuses primarily on oversight of the intelligence community, which includes the Director of National Intelligence and the sixteen US intelligence agencies. Some of these agencies, for example the National Security Agency (NSA), are based in Maryland.
Congressman John Sarbanes
Congressman Sarbanes sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which like the Appropriations Committee is considered so important that Congressmembers can only serve on additional committees with a waiver.
The Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction was built up over the years by Congressman John Dingell (D-MI), who has been the chair or ranking member of the committee since 1981. He recently lost his bid for two more years at the helm to California Congressman Henry Waxman.
The Committee’s agenda is vast, including a lead role on major Obama domestic priorities such as:
Global warming - will there be a cap and trade system or a carbon tax;
Energy independence - will there be a national requirement for renewable energy or increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) Standards;
Healthcare reform - will reform come through an expansion of existing federal programs such as Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) or a guarantee of insurance coverage for all.
Congresswoman Donna Edwards
Congresswoman Edwards sits on the Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee and the Science and Technology Committee. This year, the T&I Committee will have a major role in crafting the transportation section of the stimulus. T&I will also write a Transportation Authorization bill, legislation written every few years to authorize federal funding for highway and transit programs across the country. Locally, the changes made to federal funding for transit may effect potential federal funding for the Purple Line and the Corridor Cities Transitway.
The Science and Technology Committee has oversight over much of the nation’s science research and education programs. Relevant to Maryland, the Committee oversees NASA, which has a facility at Goddard and a number of partnerships with the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory. Congress endorsed President Bush’s plans to return to the Moon and go to Mars, but a shift by Obama’s NASA could effect Congressional support.
Next time, we will take a look at the other four Maryland Congressmembers’ committee assignments.
Will the County Council Destroy Collective Bargaining in MoCo? (Updated)
Imagine you are buying a house. You offer $500,000 and demand a $5,000 rebate towards closing costs and an inspection contingency. The seller wants $600,000 and offers no rebate or contingency. After a week of negotiation, you give up the rebate and contingency and agree to a price of $540,000. On settlement day, you sign the contract and hand it to the seller. The seller changes the price to $580,000, signs and expects you to abide by the new deal – his deal. Is that fair?
Of course not. But that is how some on the County Council want to deal with public employees. And that would mean the end of public collective bargaining – and indeed public sector unionism – as we know it.
The issue that brought the council to this point is the county’s disability system. Last summer, the county’s Inspector General found that 62% of the police officers who retired between July 2004 and March 2008 were approved for disability benefits. One officer was approved after pleading guilty to theft. Another finished in second place in a fitness contest a year after being approved. Two more were approved after being cleared to return to work on full-duty status in workers compensation proceedings. In testimony to the County Council’s Public Safety Committee, the Inspector General described the program as having “insufficient internal controls and management oversight” to prevent abuse.
That prompted Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg to propose a bill that would overhaul the disability program. Their consternation with the program is understandable. The problem is that retiree benefits – including disability benefits – are a mandatory subject of bargaining under the law. That means if either labor or management wants to bargain it, the two parties are obligated to do so. The current disability program is the product of negotiations between the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35 and the county government going back many years. (In fact, the police and the County Executive are currently negotiating changes to the program to prevent the conduct that concerns Council Members Andrews and Trachtenberg.) A revision by the council would effectively involve rewriting a portion of the police union’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
In the private sector, it is illegal for management to unilaterally rewrite CBAs outside of bankruptcy court. Even there, any changes must be approved by a judge. But the council’s staff attorneys conclude that the County Council does indeed have the legal right to rewrite CBAs negotiated directly with public employee unions. The staff’s reasoning is that Maryland’s Constitution and the county’s charter both grant the council wide authority to enact and amend county legislation, including bills that involve mandatory subjects of bargaining. The County Executive, who negotiates agreements with the police, the firefighters and the government employees (MCGEO) may be bound by the terms of CBAs but the County Council is not. (The staff does not address CBAs negotiated by the school system, which is a state-chartered entity.)
Suppose the staff is right and the County Council has the legal authority to rewrite, in whole or in part, CBAs. Should it?
For decades, Montgomery County has recognized the right of its employees to collective representation and no politician would dare state otherwise. Part of that representation involves collective bargaining – real bargaining with give and take. Think about the negotiations you have undertaken in your life: buying a house, buying a car, making a business deal, even settling a conflict with your spouse. Each side likes some things in the resulting deal and dislikes others. The only way the deal gets approved is as a package, with each side giving as well as getting. If either side has the unilateral right to change the deal after the fact, then there is no bargaining – only domination. And that applies every bit to CBAs as it does to every other agreement.
The County Council already has more power in labor negotiations than most employers. Maryland public employee unions, unlike private sector unions, are forbidden to strike. The council, unlike private employers, can choose to “underfund” agreements, thereby cutting compensation obligations. And the council can vote down CBAs applying to the police, the fire fighters and the government employees outright. Those sources of leverage alone have produced voluntary agreements by the school employees to give up their cost of living adjustments. Nothing is stopping the council from pressuring the County Executive and the police union to fix the program and, if they are dissatisfied with the result, rejecting it and sending the parties back to the table.
But that is not enough for Council Members Andrews and Trachtenberg. Their bill envisions their having first, final and unilateral say on any and all conditions of work – line by line – regardless of any negotiations by the County Executive and the employees. That is a sweeping over-reaction to the problems in the disability program that are, after all, now being bargained. And the precedent they intend to establish would eventually destroy the ability of public employees to exercise any real voice in their workplace.
County employees are already giving up their pay increases. Now must they give up their collective bargaining rights as well?
Update: Maryland Moment reports that the Leggett administration is asking the County Council to hold off on legislation until negotiations are concluded. Separately, I hear there is very little support from the rest of the council for the Andrews/Trachtenberg bill.
Disclosure: The author is the Assistant to the General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and has been employed in the labor movement since 1994.
Photos from the Equality Ball
I went to my first Inaugural Ball at the Mayflower Hotel. Jeffrey Slavin, the Mayor of Somerset, was the only local political luminary I ran into at the party. Like a true tourist, I brought my camera and here are the pictures.
Thelma Houston still has got it at 65. She choked up when she talked briefly about how she never thought she'd live to see the day when our country had an African-American President.
The crowd came for an Inaugural Ball and stuck around for a Cyndi Lauper concert. Remember when "Girls Just Want to Have Fun" was considered racy? Cyndi may think she belongs on the "Island of Misfit Toys" but the crowd just seemed glad she was there.
Sir Ian McKellen
One man spent much of the night waving his American flag in front of the stage. Because it's our country too.Let's Not Do Lunch
On suggestion for the 2012 Inauguration: cancel the congressional lunch.
While the lunch sounds like a nice opportunity for the new administration and Members of Congress to get off on the right foot, it just doesn't seem real friendly to the ordinary people who already spent hours and hours waiting in the cold for the parade from the Capitol to the White House.
This year, the parade started so late that it didn't finish until after dark. Most of the observers left long before those very cold and very patriotic high school band got a chance to walk down Pennsylvania Ave. I think even Michelle Obama had to leave so she could go get ready for the evening. Barack Obama and Joe Biden were almost the only ones left by the end.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Presidential Approval Ratings
For more detail on each President, see this Wall Street Journal article.
Where MoCo’s State School Aid Went
As we reported last month, a state property assessment mistake overestimated Montgomery County’s relative wealth level, thereby sending $24 million in state school aid that should have gone to Montgomery to other school districts instead. In a letter to Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) and Delegate Brian Feldman (D-15), the Department of Legislative Services reports where that funding went (plus an extra $6.7 million in school aid that Montgomery did not share). Here’s who was given MCPS’s money:
That’s not all. The mistake will generate overpayments to other counties in next year’s budget too unless it is corrected. Here’s who will benefit if nothing is done:
Governor O’Malley has promised to fix the errors. I sure am glad that I’m not the statistician who has to unravel this mess and figure out who’s getting what!
Monday, January 19, 2009
Good Vibrations from the Pre-Inaugural
I dipped my toe into the big Obamarama which began this weekend. Here are some random impressions:
Oddly in the middle of an economic crisis, everyone downtown seems optimistic about the future. Everyone apologizes even when you accidentally bump into them. Even most of the t-shirts and buttons are happy sporting messages like "Hope", "I Was There", and "One Love" (Is Bob Marley getting royalties?) with relatively few taking weak jabs at the Republicans like "I Love My Parents Even Though They're Republicans." I even saw a small pile of McCain magnets on sale. Yes, really.
My out-of-town visitors from Chicago didn't bite when I tried to introduce the new $1000 rates for use of the attic guest room. However, they did take us to the 9:30 Club to see Adele. She hails from England and mentioned that she was "really chuffed" about Obama's election to cheers. The crowd just laughed with amusement when she said "Yay England!" in response to someone in the crowd from London hurriedly followed by an "And America!" as an afterthought.
Washingtonians generally aren't as conversation-phobic on the Metro as Londoners are on the Underground. Nonetheless, it is striking that the spirit of good fellowship has gone so far that people who aren't drunk or students even talk to each other on the Metro. OK, it's mainly tourists swapping stories and looking eerily happy about the long ride back to Shady Grove. Even so, isn't it one of the harbingers of the Apocolypse?
A crowd dwarfing the size of the main event at most Inaugurations enjoyed the big concert (Obamapalooza?) on the Mall in front of the Lincoln Memorial. Obama and his family enjoyed it all--I loved watching Malia excitedly take pictures of the stars. The President-Elect seemed mildly annoyed for only one moment when one guest from way out of town insisted on injecting politics into it. (Earth to Bono: I think the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was already on his radar.) I could've done without most of the Oscar-like stilted speeches--except when Jamie Foxx demanded that they scroll back the teleprompter--but I guess they had to do something between acts. My favorite was the high school choir which was clearly having a blast just being there.
The film scenes from previous Inaugurals and of Marian Anderson were inspiring. And "Ask not what your country can do for you" seems newly relevant in light of the President-Elect's call for public service. (Now, if he'd just stop sending those emails asking for more money.) Apparently, the General Assembly dispensed with the usual MLK Day activities so everyone could participate in the celebration and volunteer activities promoted by Barack Obama.
Oh, and if you see any of our state legislators on the Mall, they're playing hooky. The General Assembly will be in session tomorrow as required by the Maryland Constitution. I can't say I'd blame them if they strayed from Annapolis, however, I suppose extra kudos are also due to those keep the lights on at the State Capitol so there is a quorum and others can be in DC on the big day.
Latest on the State Budget
In a fiscal update given to the General Assembly, the Department of Legislative Services (DLS) lays out the scope of the state’s budget problem and the options for dealing with it. Would anyone like any arsenic, hemlock, mercury, snake venom or chloroform before reading further?
Here are the main points made by DLS.
1. Maryland’s economy is in trouble.
The state’s unemployment rate has increased from 3.5% in January 2008 to 5.0% in October. Initial unemployment insurance claims were up 62.6% in September 2008 from a year earlier. Existing home sales were down in ten of the first eleven months of 2008, sometimes by 30% or more from a year ago. Median home prices were 10.7% lower in November 2008 than November 2007. Vehicle sales were down 27.8% in October 2008 from a year earlier. And sales tax collections fell in seven of last year’s first ten months. All of these factors are responsible for driving state tax revenue forecasts down.
2. Maryland’s budget is primarily comprised of education, health and public safety.
Of the state’s $14.5 billion budget in FY08, 36% was accounted for by education aid, 15% was accounted for by Medicaid, 8% was accounted for by higher education and 32% was allocated to state agencies. Of the state agency spending, 29% went to health services and 26% went to public safety. There is no way to cut the budget without cutting education, health and public safety.
3. Aid to localities has driven long-run spending increases.
Between FY02 and FY09, the total general budget has grown from $10.6 billion to $14.8 billion, an increase of 40.3% Local aid has risen from $3.3 billion to $6.0 billion over the same period, an increase of 81.2% driven primarily by the state’s Thornton education program. Perhaps this accounts for Big Daddy’s now-infamous remark that the counties are “fat, dumb and happy.” This fact will put pressure on the counties to defend their aid.
4. Revenue forecasts are deteriorating.
In September, the Board of Revenue Estimates forecast receiving $14.7 billion in revenues for the general fund in FY10. Three months later, the board revised its forecast down by $963 million to $13.7 billion. The reason: the tanking economy.
5. Deficits are a long-term problem.
Despite the legislature’s effort to close the “structural deficit” during the 2007 special session, deficits have returned. DLS calls baseline spending increases “unsustainable” given its new revenue forecasts. Currently, DLS estimates general fund deficits of $391 million in FY09, $1.874 billion in FY10, $2.237 billion in FY11 and $1.844 billion in FY12. Slots revenues only have a serious impact starting in FY12 when they add $494 million to the state budget.
6. Transportation will be hit too.
DLS says that a “dramatic decline” in vehicle sales will reduce titling tax revenues by more than $1 billion over the next six-year capital planning period. Gas tax declines and increased operating expenses will also have an impact. The overall reduction to the state’s transportation program could total $2.5 billion. By FY14, the state may not be able to meet its system preservation needs, much less fund ANY new projects.
7. The options involve “hard decisions.”
DLS throws out a number of options for the legislature to consider, including:Reduce and rebase formula grants including GCEI and highway user distributions (which are used by counties for transportation projects).
The above leads me to believe that if President Obama sends infrastructure stimulus money to Maryland, there may be little or no increase in real transportation spending. Why? Because then the General Assembly will be very tempted to transfer the state’s transportation revenues to the general fund by an equal amount. That may make the general fund problem easier to deal with, but it will mean no net stimulus impact to Maryland’s economy. And the state’s downturn will continue.
Restructure employee and retiree benefits by extending vesting and making them “more comparable” to the private sector.
Restrain “recent costly initiatives” including the 2007 health care expansion, the Chesapeake Bay Fund and the university tuition freeze. All of these were major priorities for the Governor early in his term.
Freeze pay and provider rates.
Maximize use of the capital budget to support the general fund. In other words, divert transportation revenues to other spending. This is exactly what Democrats accused former Governor Robert Ehrlich of doing when he was in office. It will also exacerbate the state’s Crisis in Transportation.
Setting the Spending Affordability Committee limit, policies for positions and using the rainy day fund.
Further revenue opportunities, in other words, taxes. No state politician I talk to believes that will happen.
Keep an eye on this one, folks.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Progressive Working Group Holds Successful Forums
By Sharon Dooley.
Last week the newly formed Progressive Working Group (PWG) held two forums where its Legislative agenda was presented to local legislators. The first of the two events was held at the Silver Spring co-housing site and included a partnership with Progressive Neighbors, while the second was held at the Wheaton Library. Takoma Park activist Mike Tabor served as the moderator of both events.
Progressive Working Group was formed last year as an umbrella organization. Its agenda was formulated after input from more than 30 groups from around the Prince George's and Montgomery County areas. By pooling resources and joining forces with smaller groups, some of whom are single issue, it was thought that the organization could streamline both message and marketing of the ideas and causes represented by its members. Meeting throughout the year, the members worked on multiple suggestions and agenda items after hearing presentations from associated advocates. This democratic process culminated in a large meeting where all topics were discussed, considered and voted upon. After this, member groups were solicited for support and again voiced suggestions. For these legislative discussions, turnout was heavy at both events which ended up being standing room only. All eight of the District 18 and District 20 elected officials were at the Silver Spring venue while the Wheaton event hosted 11 additional electeds from both counties. At both events, presentations were made by advocate members for the 14 selected agenda items. The elected officials were asked to support or indicate why they did not support, each particular agenda item at the Wheaton event and did so. All answers were tallied on a posted flip chart. In Silver Spring the format was a little different, but there was general support for the entire agenda by all of the elected officials with the main exception noted below.
One item that seemed more divisive was the effort to de-fund the ICC. Senator Madaleno reiterated his support for the continued expansion of this road that is despoiling upper portions of the county currently, while all of his down county colleagues indicated that they would take a stand against continuing the funding. This was also an area of disagreement in the Wheaton meeting with some of the PG legislators not being quite as familiar with the issue and others stating that there will not be a vote on the matter since it would never get out of committee and come to a floor vote; the majority, however did support de-funding.
Gender identity and open marriage bills were also problematic for some who wished to see a bill in final form before commitment. Some officials wanted to ignore the agenda and discuss their own particular education or local bills. However the rules of engagement prohibited that diversion; the moderator informed them that this was not the appropriate forum for that discussion. These sessions were set up to showcase the particular legislative agenda that all associated groups endorsed and this was what they wished to see answered. Members were also asked to address police spying, voting audits, combined reporting, high school student access by the military, limits on national guard deployment, single payer health care, real ID, in-state tuition for immigrant children, work-place fraud by contractor identity, public financing of state campaigns, and the Global Warming Solutions Act from last year. Many in the audience voiced hopes that there could be more types of these informative sessions in the future.
The particular measures, many of which already have promised sponsors for planned bills, are listed more specifically at the end of this article. Health care and Global Warming Solutions are both issues which came under great scrutiny last year and are back in improved format this year. Both promise to have passionate supporters and, perhaps detractors as well, since the lobbyists will again be out in force. The health care charge in particular hopes for added impetus from the expected Presidential push for better healthcare options. As all groups were aware of the necessary belt-tightening this year, many of these agenda items are revenue neutral or could even bring in more money to the state while others are considered more regulatory or civil rights oriented.
Is this the start of a trend toward more openness and transparency in our dialogue with those whom we elect? Can we now believe that everything that was said will be substantiated by an ultimate progressive outcome? Can a certain group of self-selected attendees push this agenda and ultimately the General Assembly toward a more liberal stance? Is there enough clout here to influence leadership support? Or as one skeptic asked – can we believe what we think we heard today? These questions will be answered in April after the session ends. The members of the Progressive Working Group have promised to keep watching and keep score and prepare a scorecard with results.
(Attention delegates and senators: If you were invited but could not attend for whatever reason – look in your inboxes for an email from the PWG – they have promised to give every local member a chance to answer the relevant issues mentioned above and be duly noted.)
Sharon Dooley is a member of the Progressive Working Group steering committee.
Attending the Silver Spring Co-Housing Site:
District 18 Senator Rich Madaleno, Delegates Ana Sol Guiterrez, Al Carr, Jeff Waldstreicher
District 20 Senator Jamie Raskin, Delegates Shelia Hixson, Heather Mizeur, Tom Hucker
Attending the Wheaton Library Site:
District 14 Delegate Karen Montgomery
District 17 Delegate Jim Gilchrist
District 19 Senator Mike Lennett, Delegates Ben Kramer, Roger Manno
District 39 Kirill Reznik
District 22 Senator Paul Pinsky,
District 24 Delegate Joanne Benson,
District 47 Senator David Harrington, Delegates Victor Ramirez, Jolene Ivy
Issues Presented –(non-ranked)
1. Health Security Act (single payer)
2. Global Warming Solutions Act
3. De-fund the ICC
4. In-state college tuition for non-citizen immigrant children
5. Opposition to Real ID in current form
6. ASVAB(Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery)-Protect Student Privacy
7. Bring MD National Guard Home from Iraq
8. Electoral Integrity - post-election audits; voting process transparency
9. Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act
10. Gender Identity and Expression Protections
11. No police spying on lawful activities
12. Public Financing of General Assembly Campaigns
13. Workforce Fraud Bill (Misclassification of workers as independent contractors)
14. Combined reporting
Friday, January 16, 2009
MCDCC Looking to Fill District 20, State Party Vacancies
If you want to join MCDCC or the State Democratic Central Committee, now is your chance. Following is a press release from MCDCC.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Press Release
January 16, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: Milt Minneman
Communications Director
301-299-2551
FAX: 301-299-4604
Cell: 301-910-4676 minnemmj@hotmail.com
County Democratic Central Committee to Vote on a Member from Legislative District 20 and a Member of the Maryland State Democratic Central Committee
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee will meet at its headquarters 3720 Farragut Ave., Kensington, MD and vote at 7:30PM, Tuesday, February 10, 2009, for a member of either gender from Legislative District 20 and for a female member of the Maryland State Democratic Central Committee. The District 20 vacancy is the result of the resignation from the County Central Committee of Karen Czapanskiy. The Maryland State Democratic Central Committee vacancy is the result of the resignation of Linda M. Plummer.
Candidates for the District 20 position must be registered Democrats residing in District 20. District 20 encompasses Takoma Park and part of Silver Spring. Candidates for the female member of the Maryland State Democratic Central Committee must be registered Democrats residing in Montgomery County.
Candidates should send a letter of application and a resume by Monday, February 9 at 5:00 pm by mail or in person to the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee 3720 Farragut Ave., Third floor, Kensington, MD 20895, by email to MontgomeryDems@msn.com or by Fax to 301-946-1002. Candidates are expected to attend the Tuesday, February 10 meeting, address the Committee, to be followed by a question-and-answer period and the votes.
For further information, call 301-946-1000.
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part Five
MTA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) contains a set of facts that are extremely problematic for opponents of rail on the Capital Crescent Trail. But the bigger problem for rail opponents is the evolving political dynamic on the issue.
Purple Line rail foes have suffered a string of defeats. In November, the Washington Area Bicyclist Association endorsed rail. On November 16, the Post endorsed rail. In December, County Council Member Roger Berliner, who represents Chevy Chase, restated his support for rail. On December 10, the Gazette endorsed rail. On December 22, the Montgomery County planning staff endorsed rail. On December 28, Post columnist Marc Fisher endorsed rail. On January 4, the Post called for rail again. On January 8, County Executive Ike Leggett told the Post, "It's pretty clear there's overwhelming support for light rail," while saying he was undecided. Yesterday, the Montgomery County Planning Board endorsed medium-investment light rail by a 4-1 vote. The lone bright spot for rail opponents was the withdrawal of the Environmental Defense Fund from the pro-rail coalition.
But these recent events have reinforced, not changed, the basic political alignment on the Purple Line. Here is the order of battle.
The Combatants
Purple Line Now, the primary pro-rail organization, has assembled a giant coalition of civic, environmental, business and non-profit groups and has signed up dozens of state and county politicians. Rethinking the Purple Line, an anti-rail alliance, contains a number of civic groups and municipal governments located near the Capital Crescent Trail. The Chevy Chase opponents do not have close relations with opponents in East Silver Spring, who have different concerns and are themselves divided. The Jones Bridge BRT option has spawned new opposition to that proposal along Jones Bridge Road in North Chevy Chase. The Columbia Country Club, long opposed to transit through its grounds, is rumored to be in negotiations with MTA. Rail supporters are at least as well-organized, at least as well-financed and are much more numerous than opponents – a fact that is not lost on most politicians.
Prince George’s County
The Town of Chevy Chase’s push for buses sets up a dream scenario for Prince George’s politicians. The notion that opposition to rail from one of the state’s wealthiest neighborhoods might condemn Prince George’s residents to further rides on buses provides irresistible propaganda opportunities for many politicians. Senator Paul Pinsky (D-22), who said of the town and the country club, “They seem to live in Alice in Wonderland,” provides just one example. There is zero support for BRT in Prince George’s County (and Town consultant Sam Schwartz did not study it east of Silver Spring). That lack of support will factor into the state’s political decision-making.
Montgomery County
Only Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18) and Delegate Al Carr (D-18) are known to oppose rail for the Purple Line. County Executive Ike Leggett, every County Council Member and every other state legislator in Montgomery except Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (D-18) is a listed supporter of rail. The inability of rail opponents to break out of their home district exposes a major liability. The anti-ICC coalition was much, much larger and it still lost.
The Administration
The calculus of the administration looks fairly simple. From a policy perspective, if MDOT Secretary John Porcari believes MTA’s data, the only conceivable reason he would not recommend rail is pure cost. The numbers indicate rail superiority in almost every other area. But if he did choose BRT, the data argues for running buses directly on the trail. The on-trail bus options beat Jones Bridge BRT on travel time, speed, ridership, reduction in vehicle miles traveled, reduction in carbon dioxide and cost effectiveness. Medium-investment BRT, which runs buses on the trail, costs $14.01 per hour of user benefit compared to $18.24 for Jones Bridge.
From a political perspective, the Purple Line is a high-profile, high-cost project that could use up a significant percentage of the state's transportation budget. Any rational politician would embark on such an endeavor only if he or she was sure to receive substantial credit for it. (The unpopularity of the $2.4 billion ICC must be galling to the Governor.) If the administration chooses BRT, they would disappoint the entire Prince George’s establishment, most of the Montgomery establishment and the colossal number of groups in the pro-rail coalition. If the administration chooses rail, they would antagonize a few neighborhoods near the trail and receive praise from almost every power player in the Washington suburbs.
So what do you think the state will do?
Thursday, January 15, 2009
The Inside Story Behind Charles Barkley’s Ouster
The Gazette reported yesterday that Delegate Charles Barkley (D-39) was stripped of his Public Safety and Administration Subcommittee chair (a subcommittee of House Appropriations) because of his opposition to last year’s millionaire tax proposal. Barkley told the Gazette, “I thought it hit Montgomery County too hard, and we just increased taxes back in November. Another tax increase that quick wasn’t right.” County Executive Ike Leggett said he was “disappointed,” noting, “It comes at a crucial time when we are leaning very heavily on Annapolis that the county's interests are protected.” So is this a case of a Montgomery legislator being punished because he stood up for the economic interest of the county?
The vast majority of our spies say no. They claim the real reason for Barkley’s demotion, and his impending departure from House Appropriations altogether, is his repeated public battles with leadership. The protocol of Annapolis is to keep conflicts in the backroom. If you are a subcommittee chair and you lose an internal committee battle, you may vote against the resulting bill on the floor but you may not publicly attack the committee’s work product.
Barkley ran afoul of House Appropriations Committee Chairman Norman Conway (D-38B) twice, blindsiding him with amendments on the floor after losing in committee. The more recent of the two incidents involved the millionaire tax. Barkley was unable to stop the tax in committee, so he offered an amendment against it on the floor and criticized Chairman Conway (and the committee) for insufficiently restraining spending. Barkley’s open defiance was too much for leadership, who took away his subcommittee chair and arranged for him to move to the Economic Matters Committee.
One spy sighed, “When you’re in leadership, you work with leadership. But he won’t play with the team. He’s just very, very stubborn. He wouldn’t change his mind to save his soul. No one did this to him – he did it to himself.” Multiple informants pointed out that none of the other millionaire tax rebels were punished.
Will the loss of Barkley’s seat on Appropriations hurt Montgomery County? No. We hear that Delegate Bill Bronrott (D-16), already an Appropriations member, will be given a subcommittee chair. And Barkley's replacement on Appropriations will be Delegate Heather Mizeur (D-20). So Montgomery will neither lose its total number of seats on Appropriations nor its number of subcommittee chairs.
A minority of our informants takes a different view. They acknowledge Barkley’s “hacksaw” approach in defying the millionaire tax. But they praise him for standing up for the county’s interest and note that there is no comfortable way to challenge leadership. They worry that excessive reliance on protocol and deference to leadership will discourage Montgomery’s delegation from aggressively challenging budget cuts that disproportionately impact the county.
One informant comments:Here’s the deal in Annapolis. We get screwed if we don’t speak up, and we get screwed if we do. Why? Because we don’t stand up as a group. For every Charles Barkley there are five others who cower and fear losing their positions, so they go along to get along. At some point, those five need to stand with Charlie and tell leadership that they can’t keep screwing us, they can’t do it without us, and they need to play ball with us.
That view is typical of the way many county officials see the Montgomery delegation.
A pipedream, I know. Because it takes courage. And it seems many in our delegation would rather be the “deputy assistant to the senior advisor to the true insider with an ear to the ground” than an effective Montgomery County representative.
Regardless of Barkley’s fate, this episode should cause our delegation to think long and hard. With both GCEI and teacher pensions at risk of being cut, Montgomery’s head is inside the state’s guillotine. How can the delegation work together to protect Montgomery from bearing the lion’s share of the upcoming budget debacle? Our advice last summer was to devise a common strategy, stick together and punish defectors from the county's team.
The alternative will create a couple more Barkleys and a whole lot of lost money for Montgomery County.
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part Four (Updated)
More data from the Purple Line DEIS details the staggering scope of MTA’s rejection of a Jones Bridge BRT alignment for the Purple Line.
CO2 Emission Burden, Percent Change from No-Build Option
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 0.00%
Medium-Investment BRT: -0.02%
High-Investment BRT: -0.05%
Low-Investment LRT: 0.04%
Medium Investment LRT: 0.04%
High Investment LRT: 0.04%
Bottom Line: Light rail actually produces slight increases in carbon dioxide emissions because of the power necessary to operate the system. High-investment BRT, which runs buses down the trail, performs best on this measure. But none of the options would deliver any significant changes in carbon dioxide.
Noise
Jones Bridge BRT would have a “modest impact” on Leonard Drive, Wayne Avenue between Cedar Street and Cloverfield Road and Wayne Avenue between Mansfield Road and Sligo Creek Parkway. The other two BRT options would have “modest impact” on Leonard Drive, 16th Street between East-West Highway and Spring Street, Wayne Avenue between Cedar Street and Cloverfield Road, Wayne Avenue between Dartmouth Avenue and Dale Drive, Wayne Avenue between Mansfield Road and Sligo Creek Parkway and Arliss Street between Flower Avenue and Walden Road. All of the light rail options would have “no impact” on noise.
Bottom Line: Light rail is less noisy than buses because of vehicle "skirts" (panels covering the train wheels) and walls on some parts of the alignment.
Capital Cost, 2007 Dollars
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): $386,390,000
Medium-Investment BRT: $579,820,000
High-Investment BRT: $1,088,480,000
Low-Investment LRT: $1,206,150,000
Medium Investment LRT: $1,220,150
High Investment LRT: $1,634,840,000
Bottom Line: All bus options are cheaper than the rail options. Jones Bridge BRT would cost about one-third of the cheapest rail option and one-quarter of the most expensive rail option.
Annual Operating and Maintenance Subsidy, 2007 Dollars
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): $14.0 million
Medium-Investment BRT: $12.8 million
High-Investment BRT: $10.6 million
Low-Investment LRT: $21.1 million
Medium Investment LRT: $19.4 million
High Investment LRT: $16.0 million
Bottom Line: The least costly system to operate is high-investment BRT, which runs buses down the trail. The subsidy difference between Jones Bridge BRT (the most costly of the bus options) and high-investment rail is only $2 million per year.
Annual Cost per Hour of User Benefit, 2007 Dollars (FTA Cost Effectiveness)
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): $18.24
Medium-Investment BRT: $14.01
High-Investment BRT: $19.34
Low-Investment LRT: $26.51
Medium Investment LRT: $22.82
High Investment LRT: $23.71
Bottom Line: The BRT options are more cost effective than the rail options. But the most cost effective option is medium-investment BRT, which would run buses on the trail.
My Take on the DEIS
The DEIS is a sweeping rejection of the arguments for a Jones Bridge BRT alignment. Some of its conclusions are supportable but others are not. Its two most problematic components are:
1. Failure to account for more ridership with extra stops
According to the DEIS, the Jones Bridge alignment would have 40,000 daily boardings while high-investment BRT and all rail options would have 60,000 or more. Yet, the Jones Bridge alignment evaluated by the state has an extra station at the Medical Center. And the state never evaluated the impact of a second station at North Woodmont in Bethesda as suggested by the Town. The state's reasoning is that the greater speed of the other alignments drives up ridership compared to Jones Bridge BRT. But does that completely swamp the ridership increase of one (or two) extra stations to the extent alleged in the DEIS? That may not be likely, especially when one of the extra stops is at the exploding National Naval Medical Center.
2. Failure to study tree impacts
The loss of mature trees on the Capital Crescent Trail is a powerful argument made by the Town. The state's reaction was to ignore it and promise to count destroyed trees only after the alignment was chosen. This more than anything is evidence of bureaucratic warfare.
On the above two issues, MTA has not fairly evaluated the Town's arguments. Town residents have reason to feel aggrieved on those grounds.
But the state has one very powerful argument in its favor that rail opponents cannot effectively rebut: a trail-based, grade-separated alignment will inevitably be faster. The Connecticut-Jones Bridge intersection is one of the most congested intersections in the county. Park and Planning found that northbound evening rush-hour traffic moved at 6.1 miles per hour on Connecticut in the vicinity of the intersection. This horrendous intersection is effectively quicksand for buses.
Town consultant Sam Schwartz recommends prioritizing buses at traffic signals to move them through the intersection as a solution. But that will not help buses stuck in long queues on Jones Bridge Road and it may further congest north-south traffic (causing a disaster for Kensington commuters). The ultimate solution would be to grade-separate the intersection, but that would dramatically increase the Jones Bridge alignment's cost.
The speed advantage of lane-dedicated, grade-separated trains based on the trail alignment has a ripple effect on many other numbers, including ridership, reductions in traffic, user benefits and cost effectiveness. That alone makes a compelling case for MTA's evidently preferred options without engaging in bureaucratic games over the extra Jones Bridge stations and tree loss. The speed and performance superiority of rail make it the better option for the Purple Line provided that the politicians will pay for it. After all, while many politicians have signed a pledge to support light rail, few in the state delegation have publicly stated their willingness to raise taxes to fund it.
Rail opponents disagree with the facts contained in the DEIS (and have done so on this blog). But the DEIS has reinforced the most important set of facts concerning the Purple Line: the overarching political climate. More in Part Five.
Update: The Planning Board voted 4-1 today to endorse medium-investment light rail.
Major Fire in Chevy Chase
A house went up in flames on Oakridge Ave. around the corner from my home sometime around midnight. When I first looked, the entire home was on fire with flames shooting up to the sky. Thank G-d the house was under construction so no one lives there. At one point, there was a major explosion heard as far away as Lynn Dr. and Ridgewood Ave. At this time, it appears to be under control though there are still flames visible in the now completely destroyed structure. More, including bad photos, below the fold.
Update: The 7200 block of Oakridge is currently closed while the Fire Marshall investigates.
I called the Fire Department around the time of the explosion--maybe one minute after I first saw the flames--and they said they were already on the scene. The response by the Fire Department appears incredible and very aggressive from my layman's perspective. There are many, many firemen, trucks and ambulances as well as police here. The Department has concentrated water from many hoses, including one connected to a hydrant in front of my home. Fire trucks have come from as far away as Wheaton, Walter Reed, and Kensington. Thank you.
No photos of the fire itself as I was calling neighbors and didn't think of getting my camera until I saw a neighbor with his. By the time I got mine, the fire was fortunately not very photogenic in the dark though lots of smoke was still coming out and the firemen will still spraying several hoses on the remaining flames.
Fire Truck Ladder on Oakridge Ave.
Fire Truck on Maple Ave. at Thornapple St.
Fire Truck and Ambulance in front of my home
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Senators Write to Governor About Education Spending
Yesterday, sixteen Senators wrote the following letter to Governor O'Malley about education spending in next year's budget.
January 13, 2009
Governor Martin O'Malley
State House
100 State Circle
Annapolis, MD 21401
Dear Governor O'Malley:
We write to support your efforts to preserve progress for Maryland's families in the midst of America's worst economic crisis since the great depression of the 1930's.
In recent years, Maryland has improved our public schools and made college more affordable by investing in our young people. Since the state committed to the Thornton formula, student test scores are up by double digits. In response to a recent Education Week report moving Maryland up from number three to number one in student achievement, the Baltimore Sun noted "efforts to improve are beginning to pay off." The results are in -- investment in public education works. And, since 2006, your freeze on tuition increases at our public four year colleges has reduced Maryland tuition from the 6th highest in the nation down to 16th.
This progress is threatened by the national recession. Indeed, some have proposed slashing our successful investment in public education -- by cutting the Geographic Cost of Education and state payment of teachers' pensions, in particular -- in a misguided attempt to get the state through these difficult times. Such an approach certainly won't help Maryland families survive these tough times and would do long term damage to our state's economic competitiveness.
Raising college tuition and laying off public school teachers would make the recession worse by reducing consumer aggregate demand in the economy, thus hurting the private sector as well. Reducing our investment in public education now would make working families double victims -- first of Wall Street and then of their own government.
The alternative -- and the right answer -- is clear. As President-elect Barack Obama has said, the federal government needs to act on the lessons of the great depression. In a deep national economic downturn, it must promptly launch a major stimulus plan, including substantial investment in the core functions of state and local government -- education, health, public safety, and transportation.
To get America's economy moving again, now is the time to accelerate investment in Maryland's successful education efforts, not cut them. We must not roll back basic commitments we have made to students, teachers and communities in pursuit of educational excellence.
Thus, we urge you to identify the federal stimulus aid Maryland needs immediately to avoid cuts in education investment. Specifically, that means providing enough investment in Maryland's public schools and colleges to hold down tuition, block cuts in state aid to local schools, and accelerate expansion of successful improvements.
Federal capital investment should focus on public schools and colleges, as well as transportation, the environment, and technology. With Maryland's recently increased debt capacity, the state can be a strong partner in such job-creating efforts.
We look forward to working with you, our colleagues, local officials, and our congressional delegation to assure that the federal economic stimulus package puts the priority on our families' needs.
Best wishes,
Joan Carter Conway
George Della
Jennie Forehand
Brian Frosh
Rob Garagiola
Lisa Gladden
David Harrington
Nancy King
Rona Kramer
Mike Lenett
Rich Madaleno
Anthony Muse
Paul G. Pinsky
Jamie Raskin
Jim Robey
Jim Rosapepe
Chevy Chase Comments on the DEIS
In light of Adam's series, I thought I'd post the link to Chevy Chase's comments on the DEIS (warning, really big .pdf file).
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part Three
The Purple Line Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) contains a set of facts that is devastating to the Town of Chevy Chase’s case against use of the Capital Crescent Trail for transit. Of the arguments made by Town consultant Sam Schwartz for bus rapid transit on Jones Bridge Road, MTA agreed with almost none.
Following are statistics directly from the DEIS comparing the six options for the Purple Line.
Travel Time, End-to-End
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 96 Minutes
Medium-Investment BRT: 73 Minutes
High-Investment BRT: 59 Minutes
Low-Investment LRT: 62 Minutes
Medium Investment LRT: 59 Minutes
High Investment LRT: 50 Minutes
Bottom Line: Compared to the alternatives, the off-trail alignment is slower because it has to navigate the Connecticut-Jones Bridge and Wisconsin-Jones Bridge intersections, two of the most congested intersections in the county. The fastest options have grade-separated alignments over Connecticut Avenue. Town consultant Sam Schwartz believes some of the Jones Bridge alignment's longer travel times can be mitigated by prioritizing buses at traffic signals, but the gap with rail is a very large gap to make up.
Average Speed
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 10 MPH
Medium-Investment BRT: 13 MPH
High-Investment BRT: 16 MPH
Low-Investment LRT: 15 MPH
Medium Investment LRT: 16 MPH
High Investment LRT: 19 MPH
Bottom Line: For the sake of comparison, the Planning Department found evening rush hour speeds on Connecticut Avenue northbound of 6.1 miles per hour and Wisconsin Avenue northbound of 6.8 miles per hour. Since the Jones Bridge alignment is not grade-separated, it has to contend with that traffic. And remember - the DEIS is assessing projected traffic conditions in 2030, which will presumably be worse than the awful traffic we see today.
Daily Purple Line Ridership in 2030
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 40,000
Medium-Investment BRT: 51,800
High-Investment BRT: 58,800
Low-Investment LRT: 59,300
Medium Investment LRT: 62,600
High Investment LRT: 68,100
Bottom Line: According to the DEIS, high-investment BRT (which runs buses on the trail) can compete with light rail in ridership, but off-trail BRT can not. The state does not believe the Jones Bridge alignment picks up net ridership by going past the Medical Center - instead, it believes there will be fewer riders because of its slow speed. That is a major disagreement with the Town, which would like to have stations at both the Medical Center and North Woodmont in Bethesda. The state did not examine a Jones Bridge alignment with a North Woodmont station.
User Minutes Saved Per Day in 2030
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 623,700
Medium-Investment BRT: 851,200
High-Investment BRT: 994,200
Low-Investment LRT: 1,033,700
Medium Investment LRT: 1,098,200
High Investment LRT: 1,211,800
Bottom Line: Higher speeds for light rail translate into more time saved for users. Only high-investment BRT on the trail can compare.
Change in Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled, 2030
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): -0.02%
Medium-Investment BRT: -0.044%
High-Investment BRT: -0.067%
Low-Investment LRT: -0.064%
Medium Investment LRT: -0.07%
High Investment LRT: -0.071%
Bottom Line: Higher speeds and more time saved for high-investment BRT and the light-rail options lead to at least three times the reduction in trips of off-trail BRT.
Potential Impact on Public Park Lands
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 2.09 acres
Medium-Investment BRT: 3.02 acres
High-Investment BRT: 2.09 acres
Low-Investment LRT: 1.98 acres
Medium Investment LRT: 2.38 acres
High Investment LRT: 1.51 acres
Bottom Line: High-investment light rail has a lower impact on public park land than any of the BRT options.
Potential Impact on Open Space at Public Schools
Low-Investment BRT (Jones Bridge): 14.46 acres
Medium-Investment BRT: 10.98 acres
High-Investment BRT: 9.58 acres
Low-Investment LRT: 11.46 acres
Medium Investment LRT: 11.40 acres
High Investment LRT: 9.96 acres
Bottom Line: Most options have a similar impact on open space at public schools, except for Jones Bridge BRT, which is significantly greater. One reason for the Jones Bridge alignment's bigger impact on open space is its seizure of acreage near North Chevy Chase Elementary School - a sore point in the surrounding neighborhood.
Tree Destruction
The DEIS does not compare the number of trees removed under each option. Instead, it says this on page 168:Significant trees with a diameter breast height size of 30 inches or greater or with a diameter that is at least 75 percent of the state champion tree of a given species were not specifically identified within the corridor during this stage of the planning process. However, forested areas and neighborhoods with street trees that appeared to contain a number of significant trees were mapped for identification. The delineation and surveying of these significant trees will occur following the selection of a preferred alternative.
Bottom Line: Tree destruction is one of the Town's central arguments against using the trail for transit, but the DEIS does not deal with it. That is ironic for an analysis that is titled an environmental impact statement. This is classic bureaucratic warfare: dismissing an argument by refusing to acknowledge its existence.
We will continue examining the data in Part Four.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Inaugural Laugh for the Day
From the Onion: Vice Presidential Handlers Lure Cheney Into Traveling Crate
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part Two
To understand the scope of MTA’s conflict with the Town of Chevy Chase, we need to examine the alternative options for the Purple Line in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). One is favored by the Town and the other five are not.
Three options use bus-rapid-transit, a high-speed bus system that is often cheaper and more flexible than rail lines. The “Low Investment BRT” option would run buses on existing streets in lanes shared with other traffic. Use of dedicated (or bus-only) lanes would be minimal. This is the only option that would run buses on Jones Bridge Road to the Medical Center and would stay out of the Town limits, and is therefore closest to the alignment recommended by the Town’s consultant. The “Medium Investment BRT” option would run buses along the Capital Crescent Trail, inside the Town limits, and use a mix of shared lanes and dedicated lanes. The “High Investment BRT” option would also run along the Capital Crescent Trail inside the town limits. It would use dedicated lanes and grade-separated pathways (like tunnels and bridges) wherever possible.
Three options use light rail (LRT), all on the Capital Crescent Trail. “Low Investment LRT” would run trains at ground level, often sharing lanes with traffic. “Medium Investment LRT” would run trains in a mix of shared and dedicated lanes at ground level with a bridge across Connecticut Avenue. “High Investment LRT” would operate exclusively in dedicated lanes at ground level with frequent use of bridges and tunnels.
All trail-based options would preserve part of the right-of-way for pedestrian and bike usage with transit alongside, with the two uses separated by grade and a fence. But none of the proposals for transit co-existing with the trail are likely to satisfy those who believe that transit is an inherent threat to the trail and the nearby communities.
The purpose of the DEIS is to evaluate the impact of each of these six options on a variety of criteria, including travel time, speed, ridership, vehicle miles traveled, impact on open space, noise, carbon dioxide emissions and cost. The Town contends that BRT outside of its limits, as represented by a Jones Bridge alignment, is a superior alternative on multiple counts. We will examine the contents of the DEIS in Part Three.
But before we do, readers need to be aware of two elements of context.
1. The long-term momentum behind rail.
The Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan of 1990 refers to a "transit" use for the Georgetown Branch, but Washington Post articles from the late 1980s and early 1990s often refer to a "trolley" line. So in the earliest days of this debate - long before the project was referred to as the Purple Line - rail was the most discussed use. Bus proposals for Jones Bridge Road began receiving serious consideration only in 2003, when then-District 18 Delegate John Hurson received a favorable hearing from the Ehrlich administration. Several politicians alleged that Hurson won the support of Governor Ehrlich for buses by agreeing to support slots, an allegation Hurson denied. The Columbia Country Club also lined up behind buses since the trail cuts through its grounds (and the club encroaches on the right-of-way with fences). The association of buses on Jones Bridge Road with Governor Ehrlich, the country club and a possible connection to slots has negatively affected perceptions about the proposal for years.
The above history illustrates a long-term momentum in favor of rail, with buses viewed by some as a concession to the country club and a distraction rather than as a serious proposal. Has this affected MTA's analysis of the project?
2. Bureaucratic warfare
Many people will question my use of the term "war." Have you ever been in a long-term conflict with a bureaucracy? I have. Bureaucracies do not wage war with weapons or polemics. They do so by controlling information. They emphasize the arguments in their favor, de-emphasize other arguments and sometimes even refuse to acknowledge some data opposing their view. These tactics may not make the bureaucracy's positions wrong, but they do affect its dealings with opposition. There are a few signs of this in the DEIS that warrant examination.
We will begin in Part Three.
Monday, January 12, 2009
MCEA Sets its Annapolis Agenda
Following are the remarks of MCEA President Bonnie Cullison at the union's legislative breakfast this past Saturday. In attendance was the vast majority of Montgomery's statehouse delegation. Note the union's positions on the state school aid miscalculation, GCEI and teacher pensions.
Montgomery County Education Association, msta/nea
Annual Legislative Breakfast
Saturday January 10, 2009
MCEA Conference Center
Remarks of
Bonnie Cullison, MCEA President
Good morning, and welcome to MCEA’s Annual Legislative Breakfast. This is the time for frontline educators to talk with our elected representatives about the needs in our classrooms and our schools. We can share our collective priorities for education in the upcoming legislative session. It is the time for us to reflect together on the state of public education here in Montgomery County and on what we must do to provide the best possible education for our more than 139,000 students.
Looking Back
As the outgoing president of MCEA, this is the last year I will be giving these remarks. With your indulgence I will take a moment of personal privilege to reflect on our accomplishments together.
We have achieved a great deal both for MCEA members and for our students. On the bread and butter issues, we have increased salaries, won major improvements in our pension plans, both at the state and county levels and we have protected our health insurance premium cost-sharing formulas.
But equally important we have made significant strides towards empowering educators and building effective relationships to transform policies and programs for our schools in order to meet the needs of our students in the 21st century. We have designed leadership opportunities for our members so they can engage with their principals and program managers to shape program planning and implementation. At the system level, the leaders of the three unions (MCEA, SEIU and MCAASP) are full participating members on the MCPS Executive Leadership Team and sit at the table in the Budget Review Process to prepare a recommended budget for the Superintendent every year. I do not believe there is another school district in the nation where educators and their union have this level of shared leadership for strong schools. I want to thank the members of the Board of Education and the administration for their continued support for this collaboration. We have all learned that collectively our students benefit most when we sit down together, listen effectively to one another, problem-solve, and ultimately come out with decisions that are jointly owned. But most importantly, I want to thank the hundreds of MCEA members who put in untold hours beyond their regular duties to take on responsibility for joint problem-solving and leadership. They are the real power behind MCEA.
With these improvements over the past six years we have also seen tremendous progress in terms of student achievement. The demographics of our student body have continued to shift. MCPS is a “majority-minority” district, and the number (and percentage) of our students who are English language learners and/or come from disadvantaged homes continues to grow. But our investments in early childhood education, class sizes, especially in high needs schools and professional development are paying off. At the secondary level, we have seen a significant increase in the number of students taking Advanced Placement classes--and we have seen that increase in the numbers scoring three or higher on their AP tests--especially among African-American and Hispanic students. All students are achieving at higher levels and the achievement gap is shrinking.
Just this past week, two national studies ranked Maryland schools as the best in the nation. Is there anyone here who does not recognize that it is the success of Montgomery County Public Schools which makes that possible?
The Problem with High Stakes Testing
When talking about the state of public education one has to say something about testing. At the state level, MCEA worked hard with several members of the State Board of Education to change the implementation of the High School Assessments. I want to publicly thank both Blair Ewing and Rosa Garcia for their efforts as members of the State Board to make the HSAs less punitive and more equitable for students. Unfortunately, we have not yet convinced a majority of the State Board. We still face a state system where thousands of primarily minority students will either be denied a diploma this spring, or they will have jumped through enough hoops to qualify for the State’s “alternative” HSA routes to graduation. Neither does those students or our schools any good. The proposal we had crafted with Blair and Rosa and others would have simply shifted the HSA test results inside of the relevant course to be part of the final grade. Most research across the country argues strongly against having ‘high stakes,” like graduation, dependent on a single standardized test. Yet that continues to be the policy in Maryland. Under the option we proposed, the HSAs would still count towards students’ academic success, and could still be used as a measure of overall school accountability, but they would no longer be stand-alone hurdles blocking large numbers of students from graduation.
The Budget Crisis
It is clear to everyone that the biggest issue facing our public schools today is the unfolding economic recession and its impact on funding. In Montgomery County, virtually everyone professes to be a friend of public education. Such promises are easy to make in good times. However, the true measure of one’s support for public education comes in the tough times, not in the easy times. The teachers and students in classrooms in every school and in every neighborhood in Montgomery County are counting on our elected officials to be vociferous and passionate advocates for protecting funding for public education.
This past week, the MGT Study cited Maryland as having the most effective public schools in the nation. They found a direct link between the improvements in student achievement and the increased education funding from the Thornton Plan. For every $1,000 of additional funds invested in education, student proficiency rates increased by 4% (elementary) to 8% (middle). The Thornton money has gone a very long way to recruit and retain high quality teachers and to reduce class size. The evidence is now clear: if we cut back on our investment in education, our students will suffer.
We are sensitive to the fiscal bind that lawmakers are in. But we are asking the state to do all it can to protect the progress we have made with our students.
The State’s Error in School Aid for FY09
It is critical to begin the funding conversation with an understanding of what our schools are entitled to under existing state aid formulas. Late last month, we all learned that the state government made a serious error in calculating state aid for education, shortchanging MCPS by an estimated $24 million this year. The state has admitted the error; however there are several serious questions and issues remaining and we are counting on our delegation to get the answers.
First, there must be full disclosure of the calculations and the true amount owed to MCPS. We applaud those members of our delegation who have already called for an independent audit to determine the correct amount.
Second, the effort to determine the exact amount of the errors in the FY09 payments must also include an examination of prior years to determine the full extent of the mistake.
Third, whatever the exact sum, these funds are owed to the Montgomery County Public Schools. When the state makes good on the debt – as the Governor has promised – those funds by right should go to our schools. It has been suggested by some that the county government should get the money instead. To do so would amount to supplanting local funding with state funding – a practice that the state government has always strongly opposed. The county government determined its contribution of local tax dollars to the MCPS FY09 budget last spring. Giving this money to the county could mean that its allocation of funds to this year’s budget was decreased by that amount. That is neither fair, appropriate, nor in keeping with the long past practice of state aid.
Fourth, we cannot allow repayment of this legitimate debt owed to MCPS to be wiped away through some shell game. The state cannot and should not be able to “repay” the estimated $24 million while taking away $24 million in other state aid to education.
State Education Aid for FY10
According to the preliminary estimates provided by the Maryland State Department of Education, MCPS is projected to receive $71 million in additional state aid for education in FY10 (over the amount funded for FY09). This amount includes $59 million due to us under the existing, enrollment-based state funding formulas, as well as an additional $12 million due to MCPS under the legislature’s action to phase in GCEI (the Geographic Cost of Education Index) over two years (FY09 and FY10).
It is important to remember the history of GCEI. Recognizing that most of the increase in funding called for under Thornton was going to go to poorer districts in the state, our delegation successfully argued that it was important to “raise all boats” and not draw resources away from Montgomery County in order to provide increases to other school districts. Now, almost ten years later, GCEI has not been fully funded by state. However the original rationale still applies.
Consider this proposal: combine the estimated $63 million due for full statewide funding of GCEI in FY10 to the estimated $91 million in statewide increases in other state education funding formulas for a total of $154 million. Begin with that number before taking whatever reduction is necessary due to budget restraints and apply the cuts proportionately.
Whatever the ultimate calculations, we are counting on our delegation to ensure that Montgomery County does not bear a disproportionate share of whatever budget cuts are ultimately necessary. The principle must be one of shared sacrifice.
We have worked intensively in shaping the recommended budget which the Superintendent has presented to the Board of Education. Not only have we sacrificed our cost-of-living increases, but the recommended budget also includes more than $35 million in cuts to the base budget, including the elimination of 280 positions. If MCPS does not receive enough state aid, the only thing left to do is increase class size. We do not want to see that happen.
The Issue of Teacher Pension Plan Funding
The single most important issue for us in the upcoming legislative session is funding for the statewide teacher pension plan. There are some in the legislature who want to shift future increases in the cost of teacher pensions away from the state government onto the backs of local governments. For them, this is the answer regardless of what the question is. It’s like a broken record.
This is completely unacceptable. We fully concur with the bold statement made by our county executive, Ike Leggett, that this is a “line in the sand” that should not be crossed. In fact, we would consider it a “line in cement” and one that cannot be rubbed out or washed away.
If you are asked to consider this shifting, we would give you six things to think about:
First, state funding of teacher pensions is one of the only state aid formulas that favors Montgomery County. So our delegation has a special interest in protecting this program.
Second, state funding of teacher pensions is a long-standing part of the complex balance between the state and local jurisdictions on both revenue and expenditures. It is simply unfair to pass these expenses back to the counties without also passing back revenue sources as well.
Third, this isn’t a strategy for balancing the budget; it’s a strategy for passing the buck. Every single county in the state would suffer. When there is a budget deficit, you have to either increase revenues, decrease expenditures, or both. Shifting the costs to somebody else doesn’t solve the problem.
Fourth, some may draw an analogy to the shift in responsibility for Social Security payments in the early nineties. However when that happened, the state also gave the counties greater taxing authority. Now the proposal would shift responsibility for funding with no increase in taxing authority and at a time when local counties cannot increase taxes.
Fifth, this is a long-term change in response to a short-term problem. We all recognize that our state – and our nation – face a serious recession. But like all recessions, we will get through it and the economy will recover. It is disingenuous to advocate for a long-term change in the relationship between the state and the counties as a solution to a short-term budget shortfall.
Finally, it is simply unfair to force the counties to pay for a pension system that is controlled by the state. The state legislature determines the benefit formulas. The state pension board oversees both the administration of the plan and the investment of its assets. How can anyone argue that the counties should be expected to pay for a state-run program over which the counties have no control? The next thing you know, the president of the state senate will be telling the counties they have to pay for the state police as well; after all – the crime occurs in the counties.
For the legislators here today, here is the bottom line for us-- preventing a shift in funding for the state teacher pension plan is MCEA’s single most important priority in the upcoming legislative session. Nothing will be more important in our assessment of the success of the session – and the success of our delegation – than this. United, our delegation has the size, strength, and sophistication to block any budget that that deeply harms our county. Now you have the opportunity to show your true mettle. I would encourage each and every member of the delegation to go on record stating that they will not vote for any budget that includes any shift in funding for teacher pensions. Only then will the leadership understand that this cannot be a part of the package.
While the budget issues are foremost on everyone’s mind, there are three other, non-economic issues before the legislature this year that I would like to mention.
Labor Bill
For several years, we and the Maryland State Teachers Association have advocated for reform of the collective bargaining law that was first created 40 years ago for school employees. It is antiquated and needs to be updated to meet the challenges of today’s environment. The proposal being drafted this year is different from before. The bill simply establishes a neutral third party to resolve differences between the public school employer and the employee representative within an established timeline with the arbitrator’s decision binding on both parties.
We urge all the members of our delegation to support this fair and balanced reform to our state collective bargaining law.
BOAST Bill
The so-called Building Opportunities for All Students and Teachers (BOAST) Maryland Tax Credit bill is nothing more than a tax credit scheme that is a backdoor approach to providing vouchers to parents of students in nonpublic schools.
The research in Arizona, Illinois, and Pennsylvania shows that the greatest beneficiaries of tax credit programs are wealthier tax payers and schools in middle and upper income neighborhoods. A study by the non-partisan RAND Corporation concluded that tuition tax subsidies rarely benefit poor children. It is families already attending private or religious schools that benefit the most. And as with vouchers, tuition tax credits provide funds to nonpublic schools without regard to the schools’ entrance policies. Some private schools do and would continue to deny entrance to certain students.
When facing a budget shortfall the state cannot afford to lose revenue through a tuition tax credit that subsidizes private school tuition.
Montgomery County Split Rate Property Tax Bill
I want to thank Delegate Al Carr for his work on local bill 906-09. The proposal gives the County Council the flexibility to delink residential and commercial property tax rates. There is no reason these two different kinds of property should be treated identically.
This bill does not raise anybody’s taxes. Every spring, the County Council sets property tax rates, and this bill doesn’t change that. The County Council is the forum where the needs of competing constituencies are balanced and decisions are made.
By providing the County Council with the flexibility to set different tax rates for commercial and residential property, the Council will have the ability to raise more revenue for education and other public services, without increasing residential property tax rates as much.
Conclusion
As I wrap up my final term as president of MCEA, I can only say how proud I am both of our members and of the incredible support our community and our elected officials provide for our schools. Every day, our members work miracles with children and change lives. There is no more honorable calling. But we are also grateful to work in a community that places such a high value on public education and which has shown repeatedly over time the willingness to pay more to provide the best possible education for our students. It is this collaborative approach that has been essential to our continuing success.
We are counting on our state delegation to do their part to protect the funding our schools need. We know the tight budget times will require shared sacrifice. But your charge is to ensure that the cuts do not fall disproportionately on Montgomery County. Our students deserve their fair share of support from the state government.
And finally, let me reiterate our fundamental issue this year: nothing will be more important in our assessment of the success of the session – and the success of our delegation – than protecting the current teacher pension funding system. MCEA has always been known for standing by those elected officials who stand by teachers during tough times. Our decisions in 2010 about who to recommend for support will be driven by the critical votes this year on the teacher pension funding system.
Thank you all for coming out this morning, and for everything you do on behalf of our schools and our students.
MTA Declares War on Chevy Chase, Part One
Late last year, the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) released its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the Purple Line. The DEIS is many things. It is a description of multiple alignments and modes proposed for the Purple Line. It is an analysis of costs and benefits for the project. And it is also a Declaration of War on rail opponents in the Town of Chevy Chase.
But first, a bit of background on the project. The Purple Line is a transit project intended to connect Bethesda and New Carrollton. It has gone through various iterations over the years. One of the earliest versions of the line was envisioned as a trolley between Bethesda and Silver Spring. In 1988, the county purchased a rail right-of-way that had been abandoned by CSX for $10.5 million for the purpose of building both a transit line and a hiker-biker trail. The Bethesda-Chevy Chase Master Plan of 1990 stated:Use of the route for transit would provide an alternative to driving on East-West Highway and Jones Bridge Road. It would assist those people who rely primarily on local public transit. The key to attractive, successful transit service is providing reliable, speedy service. The Georgetown Branch provides an existing travel corridor that could readily be adapted for transit use.
Over time, part of the right-of-way evolved into the very popular Capital Crescent Trail. The trail functions as a continuous pedestrian and bike corridor from the Jones Mill Road/Jones Bridge Road intersection through the grounds of the Columbia Country Club, the boundaries of the Town of Chevy Chase, west into Bethesda and beyond. The portion of the right-of-way east of Jones Mill Road has never been finished as a trail and winds through neighborhood streets in Silver Spring. But the finished part of the trail is a treasured community amenity in the areas around Chevy Chase and has created a large, active constituency to protect it.
What does the trail need protecting from? Some see any rail alignment on the trail as a threat to the trail’s viability. As proposals have surfaced over the years to use the right-of-way for both of its original purposes – a rail line with a trail alongside it – some of the trail’s defenders have mobilized in opposition. The Columbia Country Club sees any rail through its grounds as a threat to its golf course and has cooperated with the Ehrlich administration to promote a bus-rapid-transit (BRT) route along Jones Bridge Road as an alternative. Under the O’Malley administration, light rail and bus alignments on the trail and a bus alignment along Jones Bridge Road are being evaluated for the Purple Line.
As the state advanced its planning for the Purple Line, the Town of Chevy Chase financed a study by transportation consultant Sam Schwartz calling for a BRT route on Jones Bridge Road. Many residents of the Town believe a Jones Bridge Road alignment is superior to a trail alignment for the following reasons:
1. In a few places, they believe the right-of-way would be too narrow to safely house both a light rail line and a hiker/biker trail.
2. Construction of a rail line on the trail would involve substantial loss of mature trees and have other negative environmental consequences.
3. Bus lines are cheaper than rail lines.
4. A Jones Bridge Road alignment would connect directly to the Medical Center on Wisconsin Avenue, a facility about to undergo a significant expansion due to the federal government’s BRAC plans.
But as vigorous as Town residents have been in their advocacy, MTA’s DEIS has rejected almost every one of their arguments. While the DEIS does not make an alignment recommendation, MTA’s data stacks up so overwhelmingly against a Jones Bridge BRT alignment that it is difficult to imagine that they will pick the Town’s favored alternative. To illustrate our point, MPW has summoned its crack bureaucratese translation team to reveal the extent to which MTA has shot down the Town’s proposal.
Translation begins in Part Two.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
An Election Deserving More Attention
Newly Elected Ghanaian President John Atta Mills Takes the Oath of OfficeGhana held its regularly scheduled presidential and parliamentary elections around one month after our own elections at the end of last year. Ghana experienced an incredibly tight contest between the two candidates complete with its own version of our snafus in the 2000 election. Yet Ghana's young democracy came through, resulting in the second peaceful transfer of power to the opposition since the restoration of democracy in 1992.
The First Round
Many African democracies have one dominant party--usually associated with the president. Like the United States, Ghana has two vibrant parties, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) of newly elected President John Atta Mills and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) of outgoing President John Kufuor. Kufuor could not run for reelection as he had served the maximum two terms allowed under the Ghanaian Constitution, and the NPP banner was carried by Nana Akuffo-Addo.
The first round was very close. Akuffo-Addo led Mills by 49.13% to 47.92%. Turnout was down from 2004 but that was widely viewed as the product of a successful clampdown on fraudulent registrations, especially by people not yet of voting age. As no candidate won a majority, a second round was held a few weeks later.
The Second Round
If the first round was close, the second round on December 28 was even closer. Mills of the NDC very narrowly led Akuffo-Addo of the governing NPP. However, there were problems with a shortage of ballots in one parliamentary constituency, Tain, so the independent Electoral Commission decided to hold a revote there on January 2 as the difference between the two presidential candidates was so small that the results in Tain could at least theoretically change the outcome.
Tensions grew as both parties accused the other of tampering with the vote in their regional strongholds. The NPP claimed that the NDC had acted improperly in the Volta Region, infamously called the NDC "World Bank" for votes by former NDC President Jerry Rawlings. The NDC made similar accusations regarding NPP behavior in Ashanti, the NPP regional stronghold.
When I visited Ghana in late September, I had been impressed that supporters of both parties widely perceived the vote as free and fair. The ballots are placed in transparent boxes, making them hard to stuff, and they are counted at the polling place in the presence of observers from both major parties with the results posted immediately at the polling place, so all can see.
These operations seemed to help give confidence in the count as it made it harder for fraudsters to mysteriously change the result on the way to some central counting headquarters. Complaints about the electoral process centered overwhelmingly on the voter registration list. Nonetheless, several constituencies in Kumasi, the capital of Ashanti and Ghana's second largest city, reported updated results in 2008 with the second report being stronger for the NPP.
The Second Round, Take Two in Tain
Both candidates travelled to Tain where the election would finally be settled. The preliminary results from the second round without Tain had Mills just ahead. In the first round in Tain, Mills had narrowly beat Akuffo-Addo by just 51% to 47%. However, he won in a landslide in the second round, solidifying Mills' lead and claim to the presidency.
Obviously, I wasn't there so I can only speculate why voters in Tain plumped so heavily for Mills in the second round. One reason might be the tendency to go with the winner to join the winning side, possibly in the hope of patronage. Akuffo-Addo would have had to win Tain by a landslide to overcome Mills' national lead even though it was a small one.
Perhaps the voters of Tain wanted to help Ghana avoid potential post-election violence--the violence in Kenya and several other African countries had been given much press attention in advance of the election as a negative example. Regardless of who they preferred, many Ghanaians wanted a peaceful outcome above all. Including Tain, Mills won by 50.23% to 49.77%.
Accepting the Results
President Kufuor played a positive role, encouraging all the accept the results of the Electoral Commission in advance of the poll and quietly pressing Akuffo-Addo to concede after he had lost this extremely tight contest. Mills also promised to hold no grudges and represent all Ghanaians. Akuffo-Addo conceded and wished Mills well even as he cited the need to correct irregularities in the future.
Ghanaian Exceptionalism
Perhaps surprisingly, Ghana uses the same first-past-the-post system to elect its parliament that we use in the U.S. to elect the House of Representatives and is often viewed in Africa as a recipe for ethnic conflict as it allows each party to capture their home region and potentially sweep all the seats in it.
Somehow, Ghana has avoided this problem and presents a real challenge to the current wisdom among scholars of electoral systems. In Ghana, each party has an ethnic base--the NDC does very well among the Ewe of the Volta and the NPP does best among the Asante in Ashanti. However, neither group is big enough to dominate the country. Ethnic voting is not totally homogenous even in the bases, particularly in Ashanti.
Even more interestingly, the Asante are part of a larger group of closely related ethnic groups called the Akan which speak very similar languages. However, the Akan--the largest ethnic group in Ghana--have notably not consolidated within a single party. Divisions among the Akan and resentment of past Asante dominance may explain this outcome.
Whatever the reason, it appears healthy for Ghanaian democracy as both parties have to build coalitions well beyond their own bases in order to win nationally. While the parties undoubtedly have ethnic bases and a certain ethnic appeal, they are not ethnic parties. Perhaps Ghana's success owes something to success in creating a national identity that goes beyond ethnicity, a genuine problem in countries which were originally colonial creations and cobbled together many ethnic groups. I saw Ghanaian flags and colors everywhere during my visit.
Even more interestingly, Ghana has also avoided the pattern of the presidential party becoming incredibly dominant in the wake of an electoral victory. Even after losing power in 2000, the NDC survived and came back to win in 2008. The NPP did not fade after losing in 1992 and 1996, and came to power in 2000.
The second successful transfer of power should solidify Ghana's status as one of the most successful democracies in Africa. Interestingly, the results also reflect the view of Ghanaians who thought an Obama victory in the US would benefit the NDC in Ghana.
Coverage in the Washington Post
While the Post commendably ran an editorial lauding Ghana's democracy, it's a pity that it never merited more than a postage stamp blip of news coverage. It reminds me of why I tell Canadians they shouldn't be offended by the lack of news coverage of Canada in the U.S. Just look at what is going on in countries, like Zimbabwe, which make the papers.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Blair Lee on MPW
Long-time Gazette columnist Blair Lee (voted by our readers as one of MoCo's most influential people) picked MPW as one of his "Rising Stars" of 2008. Here's what he had to say about this blog:
Rising StarsLet's put aside the fact that this is not "my" blog since it was founded by David Lublin in July 2006. But... gee everybody, do you think I have a slant?
Adam Pagnucco's blog: "Maryland Politics Watch" is a good read once you get past the leftist/labor slant.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Show Us the Money! Part Two
Has anyone else noticed that waiting on the Lord, or at least His new envoy in the form of Barack Obama, increasingly seems to be the preferred strategy to deal with transportation funding and the budget crisis in general? For developers and future passengers, light rail is commonly seen as "more snazzy," while bus rapid transit is often viewed as "a second-class system," said Montgomery County Council member Nancy Floreen (D-At Large), who chairs the council's transportation committee. Although Floreen said she believes both systems can offer quality rides, "I do think for long-term permanence and reliability, light rail sends a different message to everybody. It's just a step below Metro. . . . I think we all agree on light rail. The question is: Can we get it done? She'll be joined by Marc Elrich who is openly skeptical about the necessity or cost of light rail even though he staunchly favors an east-west link: Montgomery council member Marc Elrich (D-At Large) said he thinks the debate has given short shrift to a state analysis that shows that buses in their own lanes and with priority at intersections "perform virtually identically to light rail." "If you look at the difference in ridership and the amount of money, you have to ask yourself, 'Is [light rail] worth it?' " Elrich said. Elrich said he would join his fellow council members in voting for light rail to show unanimous support for a Purple Line. He said the rest of the Montgomery council appears to favor light rail, which the Prince George's council has endorsed.
And the budget crisis isn’t a small one. The Washington Post reported yesterday that Maryland now faces a budget gap of $1.9 billion in a budget of $14 billion. Today's paper reports that Comptroller Peter Franchot has proposed tapping $367 million from a reserve fund, jeopardizing the State's AAA bond rating. Montgomery County is deep in the hole too, facing a gap of $450 million.
No wonder our political leaders feel the need to pray.
Still, an air of unreality pervades transportation discussions. Nowhere is this more true than the Purple Line. I've advocated for bus-rapid transit on the grounds that it provides the most bang for the buck among many other reasons. However, leaving aside the heated debates over modes and routes, I am still wondering how the State and the County intend to pay for any version of the Purple Line let alone other transportation needs.
I'm not alone in my curiosity. At the Planning Board hearing on the Purple Line, Commissioner Jean Cryor, a former member of the House of Delegates, asked Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-18) if he thought Montgomery could get funding for the Corridor Cities project as well as this one. The Senator pointed out that the Baltimore region would like to see its proposal for light rail funded and that it would take a gas tax increase of such a size that the room burst out in laughter at the absurdity of it.
And no, as much I think Barack Obama is marvelous and going to be an outstanding president--I supported him strongly in the primary and the general--I don't assume that the federal budget is endless and he can bail out everything. Even if the federal government largess somehow became so great as to fund not just one or two but three new light-rail systems in Maryland, we'd still have to pay a bundle.
Don't believe me? Just ask the nice folks across the river. The new Silver Line through Tysons is projected--note that word carefully--to cost $5.2 billion. The federal government is paying $900 million of the cost.
The good news is that members of the Montgomery County Council are not unaware of the problem. In an earlier post with the same title, Adam Pagnucco reported that County Councilmember and Transportation Committee Chair Nancy Floreen pressed State Transportation Secretary John Porcari on how large the County's share of the new transportation projects would be--a number that depends heavily on how much the State is willing to shell out.
Secretary Porcari couldn't answer Councilmember Floreen's excellent question because he has no more idea where the money will come from than the rest of us. Meanwhile, Montgomery has already committed to spend at least roughly $100 million for the elevator connection at Bethesda Metro, to rebuild what is left of the Georgetown Branch Trail, and for transit stations. And we don't even know if that will be all Montgomery has to pay for the project.
The bad news is that the County Council isn't too worried about its share of the cost despite the budget crisis. Apparently, they plan to vote unanimously to support the more expensive light rail option. Councilwoman Floreen will join them despite continuing concerns about the cost:
Again, however, the real question is how we can afford to pay for any new system--BRT, LRT, or even a token to get Charlie off the MTA--in the current fiscal climate. Even if President Obama (still fun to write that!) comes through with major help, we're still going to face serious cuts and the county will need to concentrate its resources on its core missions of public safety and education--Maryland does extremely well at the latter according to a recent report which suggests recent investments in education have paid off.
No agency better illustrates the disjuncture between the castles we are building in the air and fiscal reality than MTA itself. Yesterday, MTA Administrator Paul J. Wiedefeld released an letter detailing reductions in MARC and Commuter Bus services because of the fiscal crisis. Yet, MTA presses onward with its proposals for three new transit systems even as it cannot maintain funding on our current infrastructure.
Meanwhile, Metro also faces a shortfall of $176 million in its budget of $1.3 billion for the upcoming year. Service cuts are expected here too:"To close this $176 million gap, we propose to cut our projected expenses by $103 million," [Metro General Manager John] Catoe said. "Then, as a last resort we are proposing $73 million in service cuts."
Transportation undoubtedly remains a major issue and problem in Montgomery County. However, no one has explained how we can build more of it even as we cannot maintain existing services--a problem not limited to just transit as the recent water main break on aptly named River Road highlighted. Additionally, these major projects will almost certainly tie up all of the County's transportation funds for years (decades?) to come, forcing the County to forego other transportation improvements. Show us the money!
Changes Are Coming
By Holly Olson.
Over a year ago I made a suggestion that would change my life forever. I told my husband that he should start blogging. So, for better or for worse, I am in great part responsible for the beast that I have unleashed on Montgomery County, and to a lesser extent, the state of Maryland.
It started off harmlessly enough. I frankly was tired of coming home every night and having to listen to my husband rant for hours on end about assorted local political drivel. Why should I be the only one to be enlightened (suffer) by (from) this endless source of wit and wisdom? So, I did what any good wife would do — I tried to push it on someone else. My husband was a frequent reader of Just up the Pike, so it seemed natural for him to provide the occasional guest post. Soon, he began guest posting on MPW — and from there it steamrolled. Now he is the main contributor, typically posting at least once a day. He even has a Facebook page, where MPW readers can become ‘fans’. As if his ego isn’t big enough already...
My husband still shows no signs of slowing down. However, there is something that may just put a kink in his plans for mass domination of the Maryland liberal blogosphere — a baby. Yes, Adam and I have a bun in the oven — a little baby Olson-Pagnucco (BOP) due in the first week of June.
So to prepare you all for what is to come, I feel that I must lay down some rules (for my own personal sanity) — for if Adam had his way, he would probably continue to call up his ‘spies’ and post from a wireless laptop while we are in the delivery room. So come June, here are Holly’s NEW RULES:
1. No more ‘calls’ to/from local politicians after 7pm. It always amazes me how he can yap for an hour or more to one of the pols — I swear he is like a teenage girl in high school, but instead of gossiping about who is going out with who or what so-and-so wore, he talks about who is running for x seat or who is on the outs with Mike Miller. Pleasseeee...
2. No more week night ‘dinners’ with local politicians (or weekend dinners for that matter). OK, I have to give Adam some credit here. He has improved. He went through a spell this past summer where he was going out to dinner with some local muckity muck at least three times a week. Um — hello, you do have a wife! After about a month of that behavior I threatened to remove certain body parts essential to the male anatomy, and he straightened up quick. But just so he doesn’t start fantasizing about getting out of diaper duty so he can drink beer with a new ‘informant’, I figured it would be good to reinforce this rule.
3. The final and most important rule is a biggie. It will take the most self-discipline, and probably require a bit of help from you all. Adam must blog less. The daily postings, the staying up till all hours of the night, the weekend afternoons dedicated to blogging, MUST be minimized. Yes, Adam will still be up all hours of the night — but it will be for taking care of BOP and not MPW. I realize that this will probably take great will power on Adam’s part, for in many ways, blogging has become a bit of an addiction. It may even require an intervention. So I am asking all of the readers, females in particular, that if you see Adam posting too much, you must remind him of his parental responsibilities. Tell him that instead of dishing the latest local political dirt, he should instead be removing the last round of poop.
So there you have it folks. Get ready for BOP! I expect BOP to be quite feisty. When I had an ultrasound several weeks ago, the technician commented on how active it was and difficult to pin down (sound familiar?)! But have no fear, I am not banning Adam completely from blogging. I will still allow him to post on occasion. And I might add that this would be a great time for all of you wanna-be bloggers to step up to the plate and start providing guest posts. There are plenty of insightful, witty, and thoughtful readers out there who could offer a post or two a month. So let’s keep MPW alive and active — but let’s do so as a community endeavor. After all, I know that you all will continue to need your political fix — baby or no baby.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Obama Elected President Today
See Dick Cheney announce the electoral vote totals at 24:30. The expression on his face at 26:50 when he announces Barack Obama is classic Dick.
WSSC Endangers Us By Failing To Confront The PCCP Problem
By Wayne Goldstein.
Two days before Christmas, River Road became a river, endangering the lives of nine people when a 66-inch, 5-½ foot wide, water main burst, sending 2500 gallons per second racing down the hilly, tree-lined section where it is a two-lane road. Someone must have been watching over these people that day as it happened so close to the only fire station in the county staffed by fire and rescue personnel trained in swift water rescue. They performed in the same professional manner on River Road that day, as they routinely do on the Potomac River, assisted by a Maryland State police helicopter also doing what it sometimes does over the same river.
It is fortunate that these well-trained government employees did their job as well as they did, preventing harm in spite of the decades-long failure of WSSC to do its job the right way, which might have prevented this life-threatening event from ever happening in the first place. During several days of world-wide coverage, WSSC failed to reveal how much it had been doing wrong as well as what little it had been doing right.
In researching news coverage of big pipe breaks - present and past - and researching documents from WSSC and other sources, what I have learned both alarms and comforts me. I want readers of this column to become familiar enough with the historical and technological details so that if they decide they want WSSC to do its job right and prevent a future River Road river, they won’t be tricked or confused by WSSC technical doubletalk. Readers will learn what WSSC knew, when WSSC knew it, and what WSSC has done or failed to do about it.
The water main on River Road, as well as many other large-diameter water mains in the county, is made of Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP). PCCP was introduced in 1943 as a way to deal with wartime steel shortages and still be able to build large pipes. PCCP was so successful that it was widely installed until the early 1980s, because it makes effective use of the compressive strength of concrete and the efficient use of very high strength reinforcing steel, usually referred to as prestressing steel, giving it the ability to carry water at pressures up to 300 psi (pounds per square inch) or higher. The water in the pipe coming into your house is probably about 50 psi.
However, these large pipes first began to fail in 1955. The failure rate of PCCP became much more noticeable in the early ‘80s across the nation and close to home. In fact, a 6/23/90 news account noted: “Yesterday's water main break was the fourth in Howard [County] since 1983. The 15-year-old pipeline system has been troublesome since 1984 and is being replaced at a cost of $7 million. The manufacturer, GHA Lock Joint Inc., has been sued by several jurisdictions, including the [WSSC]… The WSSC has had particular trouble with the company's pipes under Georgia Avenue - a 48-inch main has created serious floods there and near Andrews Air Force Base.” With some local PCCP beginning to fail in Howard County as early as 1983, just 8 years after installation, WSSC knew that PCCP had problems 25 years ago.
There were far more details about this problem in a 3/14/96 news account: “[WSSC] worked to restore water pressure and customer confidence yesterday, a day after one of the area's largest water mains broke and left nearly a half-million people in Montgomery County with little or no water. But with much of the 9,500-mile system of water and sewage lines reaching a critical age, utility officials could offer no guarantees that ruptures like the one Tuesday in an 8-foot-wide main in Potomac [on Glen Road] won't happen again soon… Although officials could not say what caused the break in the pre-stressed, wire-reinforced pipe, they said premature aging was a likely culprit. The pipe was made in 1970 by Interpace Corp., of New Jersey, a now-defunct company that WSSC and other utilities successfully sued for providing inferior materials… WSSC has an estimated 200 miles of pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe, most of which was manufactured by Interpace. WSSC statistics show more than two dozen major breaks of Interpace pipes since 1975, including the 60-inch main that failed last April in College Park and triggered a water emergency in Prince George's County.”
Recent news accounts stated: “The WSSC said the pipe under River Road was manufactured by Interpace, a defunct company that became notorious for a series of water main breaks in the 1970s and 1980s. The high-strength wire in prestressed concrete pipes acts as a backbone. In the 1970s, Interpace began using a new type of wire, which it called Class IV, according to its own standards. The wire had more tensile strength than other types, but it was prone to corrosion that caused it to become brittle and break. If enough wire breaks, a rupture is much more likely. The River Road water main, however, was placed before Interpace began using Class IV wire. It used an earlier type of wire that has proved very resistant to becoming brittle, according to the utility. Interpace claimed that its pipes would last 100 years before requiring replacement.”
In fact, a 2000 presentation included similar observations about the wire. “The so-called Interpace Class IV wire issue has been a nightmare for the PCCP industry. The issue was the result of wire manufacture's efforts to get a little more efficiency from the prestressing wire in the late 1970's and early 1980's. There were some indicators that the high strengths achieved were accompanied by poor performance. It was a more common position that wire could no more be too strong than a person can be too rich. If only it could have been limited to Interpace, but unfortunately it was not.”
Decades of studies have determined that the prestressing wires in PCCP, the source of its great strength, is also the source of its greatest weakness, through a process known as hydrogen embrittlement. “Elemental hydrogen (H) readily diffuses into steel. Hydrogen can cause steel to become brittle and fail at a tensile stress less than the yield stress of the steel. This phenomenon is especially pronounced in high-strength steels… and when the steel is under stress. The existing prestressed concrete pipe is made of high-strength wire that has a high residual stress.”
What happens is that the cement that coats the wires may begin to break down, perhaps because of acidic ground water. This then allows the water and the accompanying hydrogen to come in contact with the wires. Over time, the wires weaken and break. “As a rough estimate, a high-pressure (200 psi or greater) pipe may tolerate fewer than 25 broken wires; pipes carrying ~50 psi can lose several hundred wires before catastrophic failure occurs.”
One study notes: “…A strand of ¼-inch Class III wire will possess a gross wrapping stress of 180,000 psi for ¼-in wire. A relatively small amount of corrosion will cause a wire to break...” In fact, the thicker Class III is as vulnerable to breaking as the thinner Class IV; it just may take a few more years for the process to begin. This is important to know because it appears that Interpace and its Class IV has become the scapegoat and perhaps a diversion for all problems with PCCP.
Just as the strength of the wire is also its Achilles heel, so the spectacular way in which each wire fails is also the best way to prevent the even more spectacular failure of the entire pipe. The same study notes: “A relatively small amount of corrosion will cause a wire to break, resulting in a sudden release of energy. The energy is dissipated along the pipe (through the pipe wall and through the water column) and the associated acoustic response can be detected…” A history of PCCP further states: “The concept of monitoring pipelines for acoustic signals, based on technology used by the U.S. Naval Submarine operations, was born when workmen noticed loud popping noises made by prestressing wires as they broke. These wires can be under as much as 8000 lb. of tension and when they break, some of this potential energy is converted to sound waves that propagate though the water in the pipe.
“The initial wire break is only the first in a series of acoustic events associated with that wire. The broken wire immediately reanchors itself in the adjacent mortar… The wire remains inactive and silent until the surrounding mortar becomes weakened by progressive deterioration. Then, the wire contracts several additional inches until it is reanchored in strong mortar. Each of the hundreds of subsequent energy releases will send a distinct sound through the pipe. This process of deterioration may take years to progress to the point of ultimate pipe rupture.
“The system used to detect these acoustic events consists of hydrophones, a signal processor, and communication links. A series of hydrophones is inserted through the wall of the PCCP and into the water stream. When a prestressing wire breaks, the hydrophones detect the sound as it propagates through the water and the signal processor identifies the event. AET (Acoustic Emission Theory) can also discover the event's point of origin. Both the speed of sound through water and the spacing between any two hydrophones are known. By comparing the arrival time at two adjacent hydrophones, the signal processor can locate a wire break to within ±5 ft.”
Readers now should understand the PCCP problem and the best way to diagnose it before it is too late. This PCCP history, published in February 1997, concluded with this:
“AET benefits pipe owners by reducing operating expenses, including monetary losses from disruption of service and liability for flooded structures. By monitoring the condition of PCCP pipelines, problem areas can be identified before a failure occurs. The inspection process itself costs as little as $2/linear foot, and proper maintenance with AET can extend a pipe's useful life by years or even decades. The overall cost of AET maintenance can safely be estimated as 10% - 50% less than that of replacing an entire pipeline. AET can be of assistance to municipalities making long-range capital improvement plans. A decision to completely replace a pipeline is often based on the frequency of repairs to the existing pipeline. While certain pipe sections may require rehabilitation, the greater part of the pipeline may be in perfect condition. A thorough AET analysis allows a municipality to save money by repairing only the discrete sections that need work, rather than replacing the entire line.”
The next column on this subject will focus on what WSSC has done in the 25 years since it first learned of the PCCP problem.
What To Watch for in 2009
By Marc Korman.
With many end of the year articles and blogs focusing on the best of, most influential, and so on of 2008, I thought it might be more interesting to discuss a few things to watch for in 2009 in local politics.
1. Who Is Raising Money?
The primary is not until September of 2010, but retiring lawmakers will likely have made their intentions clear before then by having failed to raise the money needed to run for reelection. Some early potential retirements in Montgomery County include Senator Jennie Forehand (D-17), Delegate Sheila Hixson (D-20), and Delegate Hank Heller (D-19). On the County Council, Don Praisner has said he will not run for reelection and rumor is that Valerie Ervin will run for an at-large seat, leaving her district seat open.
Serious contenders for open seats or challenges may also start raising money and attending more community events. Some non-incumbents who are in the rumor mill for a run include Ryan Spiegel (D-17), Dana Beyer (D-18), Reggie Oldak (D-16), Hugh Bailey (D-39), and many more.
Expect both these lists to grow longer during 2009.
2. What Are The Republicans Doing?
Democrats wiped out all local elected Republicans in 2006, but that does not mean the GOP will not be a serious force in 2010. How serious a partisan fight we have in Montgomery County in 2010 depends on a lot of factors, including the Democrats’ national performance. But another factor to watch for is the quality of Republican candidates running. 2009 is when the groundwork will be laid.
Rumor is that Robin Ficker might run for the state legislature in District 15 or challenge Mike Knapp for the County Council. Former Councilman Howie Denis could seek his old seat against Roger Berliner. These Republicans start with a local following and name identification. If these two are leading the Republican charge and positioning themselves in 2009, even if they are not closely aligned on many issues, expect a real Republican effort in 2010. What these potential candidates do in the next year, and what other Republicans emerge as contenders, will do a lot to determine if the 2010 cycle in Montgomery County is defined by an intra-party battle among Democrats, or a partisan standoff with Republicans.
3. Is the County Council Doing Anything?
There seems to be a growing concern that the County Council is spending too much time on issues of limited, but progressive, appeal and not enough time on the core issues facing the county such as the economy, the budget, and transportation. A lack of institutional knowledge and leadership is one cause. With Marilyn Praisner’s passing, only one Councilmember was elected prior to 2002. Major disagreements on fundamental issues is another reason. The current council is still divided on growth issues, transportation projects, and union contracts.
New Council President Phil Andrews will have the opportunity in 2009 to set an agenda and try to make strides on major issues. Whether those strides can be made without breaching the charter limit or raising other taxes, which no one seems to have an appetite for, will also define the Council’s political fortunes and reputations.
4. How Testy Are Those Board of Public Works Meetings?
Any discussion of Maryland politics makes reference to the strained relationship between Governor O’Malley and Comptroller Franchot. There has been speculation, here at MPW and elsewhere, that the Governor could find a primary challenger for the Comptroller or that the Comptroller could jump into the Gubernatorial primary. With the slots issue settled and serious challenges facing the state, perhaps the Governor and Comptroller will enter détente. Whether the Comptroller continues criticizing the legislature and Governor during the 2009 session, as he did during the Special Session and slots campaign, will help set the tone. How the Governor reacts to the Comptroller’s behavior will also indicate whether the two have found peace, or at least a political truce.
5. Is There Any Progress on Transportation?
The state has made massive cuts to transportation and the county’s problems have been well documented here at MPW. The next year may show if we are making any progress at all. Does the state begin moving forward with a preferred Purple Line alternative without lawsuits challenging its decision? Do our federal legislators provide more funding for BRAC in Bethesda? Do ICC opponents succeed in altering or even stopping the project? How does Maryland do in a public works stimulus? With traffic getting worse and our infrastructure decaying, these are important issues to watch in 2009.
I am sure my list is not complete, so if you think of more political issues to watch for in 2009 please say so in the comments.
And thanks for reading my posts and those of my fellow MPW contributors all year.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Coultergeist vs Single Mothers, B. Hussein Obama and the Liberal Media
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
OK, so this is not directly related to Maryland politics, but it's still amazing!
Bill Frick and Eric Luedtke: The Smartest Pundits in MoCo
Assuming that Al Franken's apparent victory in Minnesota holds up, we are ready to declare the winners of MPW's Election Contest. And they are...
Delegate Bill Frick (D-16)
Eric Luedtke, Board Member, MCEA
Here are the win-loss records for all of our participants:
Delegate Bill Frick (D-16): 27-2
Eric Luedtke: 27-2
Sharon Dooley: 26-3
Alan Banov, MCDCC: 25-4
Delegate Brian Feldman (D-15): 25-4
Marc Korman, MCDCC: 25-4
County Council Member George Leventhal: 25-4
Kim Propeack: 25-4
David Lublin: 24-5
David Moon: 24-5
Adam Pagnucco: 24-5
Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20): 24-5
Jerry Pasternak: 23-6
Delegate Bill Bronrott (D-16): 22-5-2 (declared two races toss-ups)
Pete Fosselman, Mayor of Kensington: 18-11
Delegate Frick deserves extra credit for making this remark about the Franken-Coleman race in our November post:I think this comes down to the wire. Al is good enough, smart enough, and gosh darnit, people like him. But most of those people live in New York.
MPW readers, if you see Bill Frick or Eric Luedtke today, we request that you refer to them as "The Smartest Pundits in MoCo." Congratulations to the winners!
The Good Sport Awards, 2008
Over the last year, we have poked and prodded our fair share of politicians. And we have encountered a variety of reactions. It is not easy for politicians to see their names on the Internet in sometimes unflattering terms, though that is part of the price they pay for the privilege of power. But the way politicians react to teasing and (sometimes) constructive criticism provides valuable insight into their character. Today, we pay homage to the good sports: those who have reacted with humor and class to an occasional poke from this blog.
Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39)
Any discussion of good sports must start with Delegate Ali, the undisputed King of Facebook. When we posted his hilarious (and borderline unhinged) Facebook Wall declarations, we did not know what to expect. A lesser politician would have reacted with anger or defensiveness. But Delegate Ali turned the tables on us, directing his Facebook legions to swarm this blog and even teasing us in return.
A few weeks ago, another politician was complaining about my coverage of him when Delegate Ali walked by. I told this individual, “Don’t get worked up over what I said about you. Look at what I said about Saqib!” And Delegate Ali chirped in, “Hey, Adam made my Facebook page famous!” And deservedly so, Delegate. Thanks for the good cheer.
Delegate Al Carr (D-18)
Delegate Carr must feel I have it in for him. After all, I zapped him twice in two days: once over the Purple Line and again over the CARR bill. This prompted a friend of mine to ask, “Are you trying to get rid of him?”
Nothing is further from the truth. Al Carr is a decent person who handles disagreements, including the two above, with class and civility. He has not had one cross word for me about his treatment on this blog. Al’s graciousness is a quality I wish more politicians had. (Disclosure: it may not be obvious from my recent comments on the CARR bill, but I am the Treasurer of the District 18 Democratic Team and have contributed to Delegate Carr’s campaign fund.)
David Lublin, Town of Chevy Chase Council Member
Once upon a time, David Lublin generously invited me to join this blog. So what did I do? I promptly spoofed him, mocking his appearance at a fictional press conference about the dreaded blogger tax and assigning him a mythical hairless Chihuahua named Muffitt. Worst of all, David was about to run for Town Council at the time and was directing voters to the blog! But David tolerated my misbehavior and allowed me to continue my diatribes before the rest of you. I suspect he is grateful that I am not one of his constituents.
County Council Member Marc Elrich
Council Member Elrich has taken his lumps here. On one post, I speculated whether the police would catch him skinny-dipping in Sligo Creek. On another, I put him on my “Bad List” because “Marc is not happy unless someone is mad at him, so here he is. I’ll come up with a reason for his inclusion later.” And I even spread a satirical rumor that Federal Realty was raising money for him, an obvious fallacy given that Marc does not accept developer contributions. Nevertheless, Marc gave me an exclusive on his BRT plan, a big story that was followed up by the Post and the Gazette. As a former teacher, Marc should know not to set a dangerous precedent for someone like me: the more I act out, the more stories I get!
Marc Korman and Alan Banov, MCDCC Members
In the good old days, this blog was a hotbed of anti-MCDCC propaganda, including possibly the most infamous post in our history: our District 18 appointment satire Long Ago and Far Away. MCDCC Members Marc Korman and Alan Banov would have been well within their rights to never visit this blog again! But Korman has become a reliable once-a-week contributor and Banov gave us the scoop on the illegal District 4 robocalls. Of course, I wonder if they’re just setting me up to feel guilty prior to my writing any more anti-MCDCC rants!
And the grand prize winner is...
Senate President Mike Miller
Whether it was our rollicking interview, our criticizing him for pressuring teachers on slots, our christening him as “Big Daddy” or our demented fable about his encounter with Uncle Ike, no one has been tormented by this blog more than Mike Miller. Now we have heard from multiple sources that the Senate President knows almost everything that is said about him. But that did not stop him from having his picture taken with your author.
If Mike Miller is truly aware of our blog’s coverage of him, then this picture is proof that he is the ultimate good sport!
So to those of our readers who are politicians, we know you are going to get mad at us in 2009. We know you will pull out your hair and say, “How could he write that?!” We know you will find our home address and strongly consider calling your Uncle Bruno in New York to take care of us. But bear in mind that if you can laugh it off, in a year’s time you too will be recognized for your class, your good humor and your indulgence of trouble-making bloggers!
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Chesapeake Climate Action Network Announces Possible Deal on Global Warming Bill
In an email sent to supporters this morning, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network announced a potential deal on this year's version of the Global Warming Solutions Act.
The email states:A hard-won consensus appears to be near between environmentalists, manufacturers, and union leaders concerning Maryland's historic Global Warming Solutions Act. With the state General Assembly set to begin in mid January, leaders within the Maryland climate movement spent several days in December participating in facilitated talks to work out an effective, fair agreement with union and business leaders. A final consensus agreement is expected on January 7th. The bill would mandate a 25 percent reduction in statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.
The organization is holding a conference call on Thursday night to announce the details of the new bill.
Update: The Baltimore Sun has more.
The Top Stories of 2008, Maryland
Today, we reveal the top statewide political stories picked by our panel of thirty-nine readers. Brace yourselves for their unfettered commentary!
1 (tie). State Budget and Economic Crisis
27 votes
Reader: “Just like with MoCo, the state budget crisis will persist. Cuts beyond expectations will have to be made, and made big. They already raised taxes enormously in the special session, so the option of raising more taxes is not really there. The economic crisis will continue, and what worries me is that it will spill over to the county (especially with the GCEI) and teacher's pension payments. MoCo can’t afford to put more money into things the state is (or should be) covering, yet I see this as a looming reality.”
Reader: “This was pretty easy to see coming. Maybe not so the global scope of the economic crisis, but clearly the tea leaves were there to indicate that the economy would take a step backwards. Which made it all the more irresponsible for O’Malley and Annapolis Democrats to then proceed to raise taxes on the middle and working classes and simultaneously increase discretionary spending. It was a prescription for disaster from the get go, and it led directly to the current economic situation the state finds itself in. Even more infuriating in that O’Malley seems to want to take no responsibility whatsoever for causing this problem...”
Adam: “This is the story that affects all other stories. Martin O’Malley may be the unluckiest Maryland Governor since the Civil War. Nevertheless, the record the state Democrats will be defending in 2010 will be primarily characterized by big tax hikes, big program cuts and passage of slots. The Governor and his party need to find other things to run on.”
1 (tie). Slots Campaign
27 votes
Reader: “Like ‘em or hate ‘em, this truly is a major issue in our state. Okay, the referendum passed. Now the fight truly begins, on actual location and operation of gaming in Maryland. West Virginia and Pennsylvania are competing even more strongly now, and will always be way ahead of Maryland to go after the gambling dollars.”
Reader: “Without the state being in a current financial crisis, I don’t believe slots would have passed.”
Reader: “A result that will haunt Maryland for decades.”
Adam: “This will not have the political impact of the state budget actions in 2010. But if Delaware allows sports betting, does anyone believe that Maryland slot machines will generate anything close to their forecasted revenues?”
3. Frank Kratovil Defeats Andy Harris
23 votes
Reader: “Interesting how politics is changing in a Congressional District drawn to try to ensure a Republican will hold that seat.”
Reader: “There were a lot of conservatives who shed no tears for Andy Harris losing. Harris might be the least popular Republican in Annapolis... among Republicans. The guy has a bad reputation for being an arrogant blowhard, and that seems to be the message that voters took away before casting their vote for Harris. It’ll be interesting to see how the CD-1 GOP Primary plays out for 2010, becuase Kratovil is likely a one-term Congressman if they nominate virtually anybody not named Andy Harris.”
Adam: “The above comment illustrates the reason why Harris lost a seat explicitly designed for Republicans: GOP disunity. If Free State Republicans do not come together, they are looking into the abyss for a long time to come.”
4. Donna Edwards Defeats Al Wynn
22 votes
Reader: “Wynn’s arrogance finally catches up with him.”
Reader: “She has grit and will be one to watch on the regional scene for years to come.”
Adam: “Rushern Baker came close to defeating Jack Johnson in 2006. Donna Edwards blew out a long-standing incumbent two years later. Does this mean that Prince George’s voters are finally fed up with their politicians? Is Edwards willing and able to spread change inside the county’s political establishment? Or are these events blips before an impending return to business as usual?”
5. Franchot vs. the World
21 votes
Reader: “If I only knew what a nut-case Franchot is before I voted for Franchot, I would have crossed party lines and voted for Janet Owens.”
Reader: “Franchot fancies himself as the wizard and the state of Maryland his Oz. But what will we actually see when the curtain gets pulled back?”
Adam: “The more difficult this year gets for the state Democrats, the more harsh Franchot’s criticism is likely to be. This is the year that the Governor and Big Daddy have to decide whether they can tolerate Franchot or whether they will try to get rid of him.”
6. State Police Spying Scandal
20 votes
Reader: “Glad the State Police had their priorities straight. After all, who isn't more concerned with free-range-chicken-egg-loving, poetry reading, bean-curd-chewing peaceniks from Takoma Park than the rapists, drug dealers, murderers and thieves roaming through East Baltimore?”
Reader: “If the police are spying on kumbaya peace-loving activists, what are they doing to rabble-rousing, trouble-making bloggers?”
7. Ulysses Currie Investigation
18 votes
Reader: “It’s a shame; Uly is a nice man who has done many good things for Prince George’s.”
Reader: “The three most visible investigations in Maryland politics [Currie, Senator Nathaniel Exum and Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon] all share common themes, mainly the fact that these are elected Democrats in high positions of governmental authority, continuing a long tradition of Democratic corruption in Maryland. What’s probably more irritating than anything else is the fact that Maryland Democratic leaders refuse to acknowledge, discuss, or deal with the ongoing culture of corruption they have helped to create.”
Adam: “It’s amazing that Mike Miller is apparently going to let Currie continue to head the Senate’s Budget and Taxation panel despite his admission that Currie did not adhere to the state’s ethics laws. It’s even more amazing that this has gone unchallenged by every single member of the Democratic establishment.”
8. Millionaire Tax Replaces Computer Tax
15 votes
Reader: “It is always a good day when the geeks prevail over the rich and famous.”
Adam: “This issue will resurface in 2010 when the General Assembly debates whether to make this three-year surcharge permanent.”
9 (tie). Mike Miller Announces His Return
12 votes
Reader: “Anything related to Big Daddy is big news.”
Adam: “Imagine what the Senate would be like if it was cutting $2 billion in spending at a time when Mike Miller is a lame duck. That’s how huge his return is.”
9 (tie). Transportation Cuts
12 votes
Reader: “The first fallout of the state budget battle, with more to come. It’s easiest to cut the big-bucks initiatives such as transportation over heart-tugging issues like schools, seniors, and health care.”
Adam: “These cuts are just beginning. The legislature could very well divert transportation money to the general fund in the next session. If it does, how on Earth will the state be able to afford contributions to the Red Line, Purple Line or Corridor Cities Transitway?”
11 (tie). Business Climate Rank Falls from 24th to 45th
11 votes
Reader: “Why Maryland hates business revenue, I’ll never know.”
Reader: “This is the one thing that Conservatives saw coming from the get-go. It is amazing that the Governor and his team thought that raising taxes and discretionary spending would do anything but provide a chilling effect on the business climate. I’m actually amazed that the business climate only fell to 45th, and didn't fall lower than this.”
Reader: “Maryland is walking a fine line. Anyone who thinks that these rankings don't matter is wrong. The fact of the matter is that without businesses, there is no job creation. And without jobs, there is no money to fund schools, health care, transportation, or any other type of project essential for a well-functioning state.”
11 (tie). Foreclosures Soar
11 votes
Reader: “A long-term problem that will continue.”
Adam: “The General Assembly spent a lot of time grappling with this issue last year. It may be that their reforms delayed foreclosures without truly stopping them.”
Most Underrated Story: Democratic Party Voter Registration Gains
Adam: “Only five of our readers voted for this story but it’s potentially huge. Maryland Democrats far outstripped Republicans in voter registrations last year. That could have significant implications for 2010 provided that the Democrats can retain these new voters and get them to vote in state and county elections. We will be examining this further in an upcoming series.”
Those are the big stories of 2008. Tomorrow we will offer one last glance at the year that was and then we will look to 2009.
Monday, January 05, 2009
The Top Stories of 2008, Montgomery County
A couple weeks ago, Rockville Central blogger Brad Rourke asked me to name the top political stories of 2008. I did not know the answer to that question, but I knew who did: you, the readers of Maryland Politics Watch. And here is what you said.
I contacted many regular readers of MPW and asked them to name the top political stories in both Montgomery County and in the rest of the state. Thirty-nine readers answered my call. Today, we reveal the Montgomery County stories that received the most votes. Tomorrow, we will cover the rest of the state. In addition, our readers supplied a number of saucy quotes that we will share with you – on an anonymous basis of course!
And the top stories in Montgomery County are:
1. County Budget and Economic Crisis
31 votes
Reader: “With the passing of the ‘Ficker Amendment,’ (which I include as an issue related to the county budget), the budget this coming year will be incredibly difficult and complex. Cuts beyond ‘bare minimum’ will have to be imposed, and those who have come to expect a level of services as a birthright will have to accept that we just can’t have it all here in MoCo, as much as we would like.”
Reader: “By far the most important story of 2008 because of its longer term implications. County residents will need to brace for real pain – there’s no way to close a $500 million gap (and that’s before state cuts kick in) without seeing real cuts in service. Residents are not used to service cuts, and it won’t be pretty. It’s the type of scenario that should concern not only every resident but also every incumbent elected official.”
Reader: “The budget and economic crisis is a very important story at the county level but I would say the other stories were more important in 2008, while the budget and economic crisis will likely dominate 2009. The FY 2009 budget that passed in May, 2008 was very difficult but the FY 2010 budget that will come before the council in spring, 2009 will require far deeper cuts and more painful choices. Those choices will be even more difficult if the 5-4 polarization continues. The Elrich/Trachtenberg/Andrews/Berliner/Praisner majority may not want to be held solely responsible for the sources of voter frustration that will result from this budget.”
Adam: “Impending state aid cuts could push the county budget deficit well north of a half-billion dollars. That will exacerbate tensions between the county politicians and the state delegation, as well as between both of the above and the Governor.”
2. Ficker Amendment Passes
28 votes
Reader: “Tax revolt? Political failure? Whatever, it is the early rumblings of a conservative resurgence if the county leaders do not get their act together.”
Reader: “A rare rebuke from voters to County politicians to stop raising taxes and spending so much at a time when residents are losing jobs, homes, retirement accounts, and confidence in their elected officials.”
Reader: “Leadership void on Monroe Street and Maryland Avenue is so bad the public turned to Robin Ficker.”
Reader: “With Ficker and his ‘amendments,’ it always seemed like pigs would fly before he actually passed one of the darn things. Well, pigs might not be flying, but we did have the equivalent of Mount Vesuvius erupting (River Road water main break). Is this a signal that the end of the world is near?”
3. Purple Line Battle
25 votes
Reader: “This is an example of a complex issue that can’t be decided on one set of facts and figures, and also that so much is still unknown about future predictions regarding ridership. Further, the unspoken tension between the East and the West is yet to be fully seen, and I predict those issues will become more apparent, and unfortunately, ‘more ugly.’”
Adam: “This is not just an argument about alignment and mode. This issue has metamorphosed into an all-out cultural and economic conflict with class-based and racial undercurrents.”
Reader: “Ride, ride, ride your bike, gently by the train, merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily tears at the country club will rain.”
4. Passing of Marilyn Praisner
24 votes
Reader: “Marilyn Praisner was one-of-a-kind. She listened to all sides, and made decisions based on informed input. She never let personal feelings get in the way of a decision based on facts and figures. Council Member Praisner was the only one who knew where ever dollar in MoCo was, and was making difficult budget decisions and recommending cuts even when dollars were flush. She wasn't afraid to make tough decisions, even if the decisions were not something that her loyal supporters or other interests wanted. Those who knew her admired her unchallengeable integrity, talents and intellect.”
Reader: “This left the council rudderless.”
Reader: “Like her or not, she was a force to be reckoned with. Intelligent, opinionated and dominating – and her untimely passing left a fractured dysfunctional County Council even more so.”
Adam: “Please see our tribute to this titan of Montgomery County from last year.”
5. WSSC Pipe Breaks
19 votes
Reader: “Just as you have been writing on MPW, the WSSC is a huge mess, and requires major political ‘repairs.’ The replacement of ALL commissioners as well as the appointment of a General Manager has to be done, yesterday. Both Montgomery and Prince George's Counties should impose a governance model on WSSC following the M-NCPPC.”
Reader: “People need to wake up and realize that the infrastructure is aged and needs to be repaired/replaced. Elected officials need to stop sticking their fingers in leaky pipes and take steps to raise the money for a system overhaul. If not, River Road is just the beginning.”
Reader: “MoCo was jealous of DC’s exploding man-hole covers, so we topped it with our exploding water mains.”
Adam: “A critical leadership test for Ike Leggett and Jack Johnson. This problem can no longer be overlooked.”
6 (tie). Transgender Law Fight
15 votes
Reader: “Many jurisdictions around the country have had such a non-discrimination civil rights law on the books for a long time, such as Baltimore. The only reason why this matter became such a fight is that narrow-minded bigots from outside the county invested a lot of money for this matter to become a ‘test case’ in a jurisdiction so close to Washington, DC. They lost the sex education situation with the Board of Education, so this was next on their political agenda. This is why being on the border with the Nation’s Capitol is a detriment to our location, not a help. I betcha this battle would not have happened if we were in Podunk.”
Reader: “This was a very, very visible story; it’s questionable how influential it really was, but it got a lot of people riled up.”
6 (tie). County Council District 4 Special Election
15 votes
Reader: “The huge amount of money poured into Nancy Navarro’s special election campaign - most of it after the pre-election reporting deadline - is abominable, and a clear indication that development and union interests once again tried to buy the seat.”
Reader: “Jerry Weast’s attempt at engineering the election speaks to his influence; ditto for Valerie Ervin, who stood up against the entire council in supporting Nancy Navarro. Your suggestion that Fennel could’ve won the election through Robin Ficker's grooming was foreshadowing for Ficker's successful amendment.”
Reader: “During the special election, Council Members Elrich, Trachtenberg, Andrews and Berliner endorsed Don Praisner and clearly conveyed the message that without Don, those four would lose the majority on the Council that favored stringent restrictions on economic growth. The campaign by the four Council Members to retain ‘their majority’ hardened the polarization on the Council and made it difficult to achieve coalitions larger than four votes prior to Don's being seated, or five votes after he was seated.”
8 (tie). Live Nation Project
14 votes
Reader: “One of the few times common sense prevailed on the Council.”
Adam: “Ike Leggett’s legacy project and possibly the greatest achievement of his first term. He dug in, fought hard for it and won.”
8 (tie). Public Employee Contract Fights
14 votes
Reader: “Jimmy Hoffa has nothing on the very effective Gino Renne; except, of course, a better seat at Giants games.”
Reader: “Discussion of public employee contracts is closely intertwined with the budget and economic crisis in both 2008 and 2009. Council Members Andrews and Trachtenberg called for abrogating negotiated agreements early in 2008, when the argument could be made that the agreements were affordable. That damages employee organizations’ ability to trust those Council Members as the real hard negotiations get underway in 2009, when the county clearly cannot afford to honor the agreements and must renegotiate them. Labor unions were critical to Trachtenberg's election in 2006, and their withdrawal of support for her will be one of the most important political stories of 2010.”
Adam: “The unions are never going to forget who was there when they needed them – and who was not.”
10. Ambulance Fee Dispute
13 votes
Reader: “Many other county governments in the United States who operate EMS programs charge these fees, and waive fees for those who can not afford to pay. Insurance companies do not charge us lower premium rates just because we live in a county that currently does not charge these fees. While I don’t like it, I do not agree that having a fee structure in place with waivers granted liberally for those who are uninsured will cause fewer people who need service to request an ambulance for a true emergency -- and there are some who take advantage of ‘free transportation’ which is a disservice to all others who would only call for an ambulance if we truly require medical transport.”
Reader: “Let me get this straight, Montgomery is in a horrible budget mess and it turns down free money we could take from health insurance companies? And we wonder why the rest of Maryland doesn't respect us?”
Adam: “The county leaders have used up an enormous amount of time and energy fighting over a $14 million proposal. Given that fact, what does a battle over a half-billion dollar deficit look like?”
11. ICC Battle
12 votes
Reader: “I ranked this one as part of my Top 10 because this issue is like an old horse that won’t die. The SHA can teach any political ‘spinmeister’ the tricks of spinning a story like no other, and manages to remain arrogant simultaneously. It really ticks me off that the SHA tells one elected official one thing, community leaders something else, and leaves us to fight among ourselves, struggling with their divisive tactics.”
Reader: “The ICC battle increasingly indicates a pile of broken promises and cost overruns, both of which will burden us for decades.”
Adam: “What happens if the tolls generated by the road are not enough to pay off the toll-backed bonds issued for the project?”
12. Marc Elrich’s BRT Plan
11 votes
Reader: “Council Member Elrich has studied the Purple Line and various options like no other. He knows his stuff, and has made a serious recommendation based on facts and figures. I admire how hard he has worked in his first term on such an important issue.”
Reader: “Elrich’s BRT plan is one of the most important since it really presents a viable way to cure some of our transportation ills at reasonable cost.”
Reader: “The first broad transportation vision to surface in many years. Whether it’s new or recycled doesn’t matter – what does matter is that a conversation is starting.”
13. County Council Infighting
10 votes
Reader: “This County Council is proof positive that ‘War of the Worlds’ was no joke; the Martians have landed!”
Reader: “Can’t we all just get along?!”
Reader: “The state of the County Council reminds me of the teen soap opera Beverly Hills 90210. You’ve got the requisite cliques, infighting, backstabbing, and even their very own hangout a la the Peach Pit (Gordon Biersch). The only thing missing is the steamy love scenes which I think I’ll pass on. EEK!”
Most Underrated Story: Ike Leggett’s $65,000 Bathroom
Adam: “Only nine of our readers voted for this story, possibly because the amount budgeted for the bathroom is such a tiny part of the county’s $4+ billion budget. But Ann Marimow’s gigantic scoop turned into a national story and became a symbol for many residents of government waste and arrogance. It is impossible to measure the number of voters who know almost nothing about their county except that it constructs $65,000 bathrooms for its leaders. But those voters almost certainly contributed to the passage of the Ficker Amendment and the incumbents should worry about them in 2010.”
Come back tomorrow for Part Two, in which we will review the top political stories in 2008 for the rest of the state!
Friday, January 02, 2009
MPW on the Radio
I was on Rockville Central Radio today talking about the state school aid story, budget problems and the top stories of 2008. Listen in here at the 13:30 mark.
Something Maryland Gets Right
By Marc Korman.
The Maryland political calendar in December and early January is filled with fundraisers, as lawmakers rush to raise money before the 2009 legislative session begins on January 14th. Although a drain on schedules and wallets of political activists around the state, the rush to raise money is a good thing. It is a byproduct of what is arguably Maryland’s best good government law, the ban on fundraising during the legislative session.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Maryland is one of sixteen states with a prohibition or restriction on any campaign contributions during its legislative session. Thirteen other states prohibit or restrict lobbyist donations. What that means in Maryland is that during the 90 day legislative session the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Comptroller, or any General Assembly member cannot receive a contribution, conduct a fundraiser, solicit or sell a ticket to a fundraiser, or even deposit any campaign funds. If an elected official violates the law, they are subject to a $1,000 fine and forfeiture of the donation.
The explanation I usually hear for the law is that it limits the ability of lobbyists to sway (some would say bribe) elected officials on issues during the session. For example, if there is a bill to raise the tobacco tax before the State Senate, the ban prevents the tobacco company’s lobbyist from buying a few votes with some well timed campaign donations.
Although there may be some truth to that reasoning, I believe lobbyists think a bit more long term than that. They can identify potential swing votes on issues they expect to come before the General Assembly before the session and make donations accordingly. Lobbyists understand that they are establishing long term relationships with their regularly occurring donations, not paying by the vote.
But the ban on fundraising fulfills another important purpose. It creates time for legislators to do the work they are in Annapolis for. On Capitol Hill, where there is no similar restriction on fundraising, Members of Congress and Senators are regularly stepping away from their offices and committee hearings to dial for dollars. According to one source, Congress members need to raise $11,000 a week and Senators need to raise $30,000 a week for their reelection battles.
Thankfully, state races are much cheaper. But fundraising still comes with the job. The law preventing lawmakers from focusing on fundraising during the 90 days they are in Annapolis makes for a better government. It also raises the question of whether public financing should be enacted, but that is a topic for another day.
There is a loophole in the current law however. It does not apply to Special Sessions. Delegate Saqib Ali first proposed plugging the loophole during the 2007 Special Session and introduced legislation in the 2008 session. Legislative leaders have also expressed an interest in plugging the hole. A Special Session fundraising ban would be a bit more difficult for lawmakers than the regular session ban, since they could have previously scheduled events planned when a Special Session is called. But that inconvenience is a small price to pay for the benefits of fundraising bans during session.
So if your email and mailbox are being inundated with fundraising requests, remember there is a good government reason for it. Elected officials may spend the next two weeks raising money, but that will ensure they then spend 90 days doing their jobs.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
MPW on Political Pulse
Political Pulse from Crossing Georgia on Vimeo.
The first 30 minutes of this video are my interview by Charles Duffy, host of Political Pulse, taped in November 2008. We discuss slots, taxes, whether blogs are competitors to the mainstream media and more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
