By Jim Humphrey, Chair, Montgomery County Civic Federation Planning and Land Use Committee. Reprinted from the Montgomery Sentinel.
I was shocked and saddened this past Monday to learn that Wayne Goldstein, my friend and fellow civic activist, had died suddenly that morning. He had suffered a heart attack while walking in to the County Council Building in Rockville to participate in a hearing on expansion plans for Suburban Hospital. It is always a shock when someone so vibrant and lively is taken so suddenly. But how appropriate, I thought, that he had left us while engaged in the activity that he enjoyed so much and did so well--advocating, as an unpaid volunteer, on behalf of the residents of Montgomery County.
Marc Elrich and Wayne Goldstein.
After saying a silent prayer for his family and loved ones, my thoughts turned to the magnitude of the loss. Since the mid-1990s, Wayne had been a fixture in the civic community. The depth of his knowledge on issues ranging from land use and education, to the environment and historic preservation, and his experience in navigating the processes of local government were legendary.
Wayne would often call late in the evening to discuss some development project or zoning issue confronting one of the county's communities, usually after attending one or more public meetings earlier that evening. Who would I have those talks with now? If I was stumped as to what aspects of an issue should be focused on when drafting MCCF testimony for a hearing before the County Council or Planning Board, he always provided wise counsel, invariably suggesting an approach I had not considered. Who will provide that counsel now? And in those rare times of frustration, when the likelihood of a positive outcome on an issue made my involvement seem nearly pointless to me, Wayne was the person who had lifted my spirits and urged me to get back in the game. Who, I thought, will be my cheerleader now?
Over the past few days my phone line has been kept busy by community leaders from all over the county, calling to relate their shock and grief over the death of our friend and colleague. And in the sharing of stories with these callers, I came to realize that one of Wayne's most remarkable attributes was that each person I spoke with felt they had had a special relationship with Wayne...that their issues of importance had received particular attention from Wayne...that he had boosted their spirits at critical times by focusing solely on them. This quality was the more remarkable because he stayed so busy. As I would jokingly say to him, "wherever two or three county residents are gathered together to confront an issue that could negatively impact the quality of life in their neighborhood, you're there too--organizing, educating, and supporting their efforts."
And when Wayne was done for the day (attending all of the meetings or hearings he could cram into his schedule), and perhaps spent precious personal time visiting his mom or girlfriend, like many other civic activists I've known he would often stay up late into the night writing, researching, and responding to emails. I would sit amazed when receiving one of his research emails containing a list stretching yards in length of links to internet articles he'd found on a particular topic, with his personal notes tacked on each entry. A small example of the depth of his research was the 3-article series Wayne wrote as a Federation Corner columnist in January of this year on the problem of breaks in the pre-cast concrete water and sewer pipes used by WSSC. The knowledge he acquired helped educate both citizens and elected and appointed officials alike on a whole host of problems and their possible solutions.
For all his hard work and dedication, however, Mr. Goldstein was not a man without humor. He always wore a hat, indoors or out, and often one themed to the event which he was attending. I remember well one Planning Board session where Wayne strode into the hearing room wearing boots and a white cowboy hat and announced in his testimony that he'd heard a new sheriff was needed in town to clean up the particular mess the Board was confronting that day. The twinkle in his eye and his customary Cheshire cat grin always gave one the impression that he knew some juicy bit of news he couldn't wait to share with you, or that he suspected you knew something which he couldn't wait to hear.
Another remarkable aspect to Wayne was that his ego was never at issue. He volunteered his time and abilities on behalf of the residents of the county without a care for personal gain. But, thankfully, his efforts did receive richly deserved recognition.
Wayne was awarded the 2008 Educational Excellence Award from the Maryland Historical Trust Board of Trustees, for planning the COMSAT charrette as a means of showing the developer/owner that it was possible to profitably redevelop the site while retaining and reusing the historic building on the property, which was designed by world-renowned architect Cesar Pelli. (And, when Wayne felt the success of the effort might be enhanced by Mr. Pelli's attendance, he simply contacted the architect who willingly agreed to travel to the county and participate.) Wayne served as MCCF Vice President from 2004 to 2006 and President from 2006 to 2008, and was awarded the Star Cup last May in recognition of his outstanding service to the Federation and the people of the county. And in a survey conducted by a local political blogger in the fall of last year, respondents voted Wayne one of the "most influential non-elected people in Montgomery County."
Wayne Goldstein was a one-of-a-kind personality and a truly gentle man. And he will be sorely missed.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
On the Death of a Friend
Probable Case of Swine Flu Identified in MoCo
Following is the press release from the Montgomery County government.
Statement by Montgomery County Health Officer Dr. Ulder J. Tillman Regarding Probable Case of H1N1 (Swine) Flu
Statement by Montgomery County Health Officer Dr. Ulder J. Tillman
Regarding Probable Case of H1N1 (Swine) Flu
Thursday, April 30, 2009
As expected, Montgomery County has identified a probable case of H1N1 (Swine) flu that we are following closely. The County Executive and health officials are working closely on an hour-by-hour basis with the Governor’s office, as well as state and federal health officials. We expect confirmatory tests to be completed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the next several days. I want to assure everyone that we are doing everything we can at the present time and we will continue to respond as the situation unfolds.
The definition of a “probable” case is an individual with flu-like symptoms who has a recent history of travel to an area affected by swine flu or contact with a known case and has preliminary testing suggestive of a novel virus that needs further confirmation.
The probable case was an individual who traveled to Mexico on business. The individual is recovering from their illness and was not hospitalized. Due to confidentiality concerns, no further information about the individual will be released.
We are also working closely with the Montgomery County Public Schools on necessary precautions involving this particular case, as the individual is related to a school staff member.
The situation with the H1N1 virus is still fluid and the CDC is continually updating its guidance and we will respond accordingly.
To keep the flu from spreading, we continue to urge the public to help stop the spread of germs and illness:
· Always cover a cough or sneeze with a tissue—and throw the tissue away. Or cough or sneeze into the inside of the elbow.
· Wash hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze and before you eat. Alcohol hand sanitizer (minimum 60% alcohol) will do if soap and water are unavailable.
· Avoid touching the eyes, nose or mouth. These are places germs can enter the body easily.
· Try to keep at least six feet away from sick people. This is called social distancing. Swine flu, like all flu, is spread through the air so keeping some distance will give the virus space to drop to the ground if someone is coughing or sneezing.
· Monitor yourself and your family for symptoms of fever, chills, headache, sore throat, cough, body aches, and vomiting or diarrhea. If you are sick, stay home from work, school or other public places until you are feeling well. Persons who have difficulty breathing or believed to be severely ill should seek medical attention.
If you have questions or concerns, please call the Public Health Information Line at 240-777-4200 or go to the County’s website at www.montgomerycountymd.gov/swineflu.
Media Contact: Mary Anderson, 240-777-6534 (cell 301-529-7669)
Rob Garagiola on Bill Frick’s Credit Card Bill
Senator Rob Garagiola (D-15), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, sent us this statement on Delegate Bill Frick’s (D-16) credit card bill.
*****
First, the bill would have covered every conceivable contract beyond just credit cards. We heard from many industries who said that they would be affected under the bill as passed by the House and expressed concerns about unintended consequences. Delegate Frick said that was not his intent so he went back to the drawing board and had some suggested amendments drafted to his bill. He presented them before a work group (a handful of Senate Finance members), which included me. However, the amendments would have brought in all regulations of the Federal Trade Commission, Federal Reserve, and I am not sure which other federal agencies, since the beginning of time - and did it by reference to a federal statutory provision - rather than by saying specifically which federal regulations we wanted the State Attorney General’s office to enforce.
His bill as it came before us, and the suggested amendments that he presented, were both overly broad beyond what he was trying to accomplish. He essentially acknowledged that his original language was overly broad by trying to remedy it with an amendment. Unfortunately, his amendment was also overly broad and we were not presented answers to questions about what federal regulations we would actually bring under the enforcement of the State Attorney General if we passed the bill with his amendments. He could not answer what regulations he was essentially bringing under Maryland law via simple statutory reference.
Delegate Frick stated that he was aware that the Federal Reserve considered thousands of pages of comments on their proposed regulations on credit cards (the same issue Delegate Frick sought to address with his bill) prior to the Federal Reserve deciding to make such regulations final. The federal regulations on credit cards will be effective on July 1, 2010. Was there reasoning for such delay? Did the Federal Reserve consider all sides when deciding upon an effective date? One has to assume that the Federal Reserve saw a problem, studied it, promulgated proposed regulations, took in thousands of pages of comments, and issued final regulations because they wanted to do something to protect consumers. I am for protecting consumers. Was there some balancing of interests in having an effective date on July 1, 2010? Are there issues with timing to get national banks to comply in a shorter time period?
Finally, there were concerns about whether state law would be preempted under the notion that the state can’t impose its laws on federally chartered banks. It is my understanding that last year, Delegate Frick had an Attorney General letter that said such state law would be preempted. It is my understanding that his bill last year only focused on credit card interest rates and not broad contract law that this year’s bill was drafted to do. This year, he said he had an Attorney General letter saying that it was not preempted, perhaps because it was more broadly drafted to affect contract law in multiple other industries (not just credit cards). Nevertheless, there were still concerns by Committee members.
Delegate Frick’s legislation, even if it wasn’t so broadly drafted to affect industries he did not intend to impact, had an effective date of October 1, 2009. So Delegate Frick wanted us to pass a bill that sought to remedy problems with credit card interest rates being changed on consumers nine months earlier in Maryland. It’s not that the overwhelming majority of members of the Senate Finance Committee are anti-consumer - in fact, we crafted model mortgage lending legislation in 2008 that the federal government used for national legislation, and I could cite other multiple examples of consumer-friendly legislation worked on by the Senate Finance Committee - it was that Delegate Frick’s bill was too broad without knowing fully what the implications of it would be. Perhaps there would have been support for legislation that said “do just the federal regulations on credit card interest rates in Maryland 9 months earlier,” however, in isolation without a broader contract impact, it may have been preempted by federal law. The Committee was not willing to pass legislation that had a broader impact or unknown impact (with his amendments).
More on Credit Card Gouging
Unveiled: The Senators Who Blocked the Credit Card Bill
The Congress may finally be moving to prevent deceptive credit card practices, an effort supported by President Obama. As for Maryland, the House of Delegates passed a bill to crack down on abuses by a 136-1 vote, but the bill died in the Senate Finance Committee. Here's who voted to kill it.
Senators Rob Garagiola (D-15) and Delores Kelley (D-10) made the motion for an unfavorable committee report, which in almost all instances kills a bill. Every other Senator on the committee except Nathaniel Exum (D-24) and Catherine Pugh (D-40) voted with them.
If any of the Senators who voted against the bill would like to comment on their reasons for doing so, we will run those comments on this blog.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
A Letter to Wayne Goldstein
From Byron Bloch, former Chair, Montgomery County Civic Federation Transportation Committee.
Dear Wayne,
Please tell me, tell us all, that you are still with us. You are still fighting the battles for a better community. You are still railing against injustices in our communities. You are still advocating for historical preservation. You are still telling your funny anecdotal stories, each with a good moral lesson embedded within. You are figuring out which hat to wear for tomorrow's hearing, and polishing your notes about the key facts and the points you need to make. You are looking over the agenda for the forthcoming Civic Fed meeting, and deciding which actions to support.... and why it makes sense. Please, Wayne, we know you're up to something so very clever.... and we know we'll see you at the next civic event. We were so proud of you for being named a recipient of the 2008 Educational Excellence Award from the Maryland Historical Trust Board of Trustees.
And we all vividly remember and applauded you being honored with The Star Cup trophy award for outstanding public service to Montgomery County, presented at the 2008 Montgomery County Civic Federation's Annual Awards Banquet. Damn, you've done so much for all the rest of us. So, you know what, let's get together next week and rant about the many issues yet to be resolved. And, dear friend, please guide us through the maze... as you've always, always done with your hard work and brilliant insights. We love you, Wayne, with that friendly twinkle in your eye, that broad smile, compassion in your voice, and a dashing rake to your cap. Here's to you, Wayne Goldstein !
From Byron and Naomi Bloch, just two of your countless friends.
Funeral Arrangements for Wayne Goldstein
Following is information on events for Thursday and Friday.
Arrangements by:
Danzansky-Goldberg Memorial Chapel
(301) 340-1400
Gathering with family (visitation):
at Danzansky-Goldberg Chapel
1170 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852
Thursday, April 30
7 pm - 9 pm
Service:
Friday, May 1
1 pm
at Danzansky-Goldberg Chapel
1170 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852
Thursday, April 30
and moves to
Garden of Remembrance Memorial Park
14321 Comus Road, Clarksburg, MD 20871
(301) 428-3000
Can She Pull a Raskin?
By Marc Korman.
There are lots of rumors about races in 2010, but the first one to really get started is the State Senate race in District 17. There, former Delegate Cheryl Kagan is mounting a challenge against State Senator Jennie Forehand. The Gazette covered the story a few weeks ago.
Senator Forehand is in her fourth term in the State Senate, which was preceded by four terms in the House of Delegates. Forehand has indicated she is seeking a fresh term in 2010. She has never had a serious primary challenge for her senate seat. Her closest call came in 2002, when she won 82% of the vote.
Delegate Kagan served in the House of Delegates for two terms from 1995 to 2003. She declined to seek reelection in 2002 and Luiz Simmons took her seat. Now, Kagan is back to try and knock out the long time incumbent. She is native to the area and a political and non-profit consultant.
At the last campaign finance filing, Kagan had $44,224.76 in the bank. She raised over $19,000 during the past year. Since her campaign went public during the 90 day legislative session, she may have raised even more while Forehand was constrained by the fundraising ban. Forehand has a $71,044.34 balance, plus almost $6,000 in the D17 slate account. Forehand has not geared up for a race yet, having raised nothing in the period before the last filing.
Incumbents are generally heavily favored for reelection and as a result, there are very few primary challenges. Montgomery County’s notable exception is Jamie Raskin’s successful race against Ida Ruben in 2006. The question is whether a Kagan/Forehand race will shape up like that one on one race or be more like the District 19 senate race in 2006. In that case, long serving Senator Len Teitelbaum reversed his plans to seek reelection in the face of a spirited challenge. The race became a free for all that included two sitting delegates and a central committee member, Mike Lenett, who won the seat. If Forehand were to decline another campaign, it is unlikely Kagan would be left alone to claim the seat. Delegate Simmons is the most commonly cited potential candidate, but there could be others.
Part of Raskin’s strategy for victory was painting Ruben as out of touch, past her prime, and not in line with the district. For example, at one meeting Senator Raskin attended he contrasted his displeasure with the Iraq War with Senator Ruben’s alleged support, as demonstrated by a resolution she introduced regarding the US Armed Forces in Iraq.
It is not clear that Senator Forehand offers a similar record for Kagan to highlight or even if Kagan is interested in going that route. But without drawing some sharp contrasts, it is difficult to see how Kagan can take down a long serving incumbent who will likely be running on a slate and enjoying the support of leadership in Annapolis. But Kagan is no slouch. As a former delegate she knows the issues, understands the political process, and has a vast local network. For the first time in her career, Forehand may have a serious challenge.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
MCAD Activists Praise Wayne Goldstein
From Chris Ollo:
Wayne approached us and offered his insights and help in our efforts to make MCAD a park (at the County Council, where else!). He was a fund of knowledge and support, knew everyone, and had lots of advice. Beverly Sobel and I received a MCCF award just last month with him. He motivated us and made us activists, to not be shy about contacting our representatives and speaking at the County Council about our concerns. He did too, on our behalf. They knew him well, addressed him by name, and respected him. Yes, his legacy will last in all of us. He will be missed. Very sad.
Beverly Sobel, Wayne Goldstein and Chris Ollo.
Editor's Note: Chris Ollo is one of the McKenney Hills/Carroll Knolls/Plyers Mill neighbors who are fighting for a park at the Maryland College of Art and Design site on Georgia Avenue in Wheaton.
A Tribute to Wayne Goldstein
By Cary Lamari.
When I turned on my computer yesterday I was in shock. Wayne Goldstein, my dear friend and colleague, had passed away, suddenly and with no warning. He died en route to another round of testimony before the County’s Hearing Examiner. He was going to battle for the Huntington Terrace community, backing them in their fight to keep an important local road open to the public rather than allowing Suburban Hospital to have its way and swallow up both the road and more homes in an expansion move.
Jim Humphrey, Marc Elrich and Wayne Goldstein.
I first came to know Wayne during my time on the Mid-County Citizens Advisory Board. We remember him for his production during the 1990’s of an acerbic, superbly crafted, Michael Moore-ish video challenging the necessity of building the new jail in Clarksburg. Historic preservation became his passion and he fought against the potential loss of mature trees and open space adjacent to Montgomery College and the break up of the historic Falkland Apartments, both in Silver Spring. He proactively organized a charette to try to devise the best possible reuse of the Comsat Building designed by the famed architect, Cesar Pelli in the I-270 corridor.
Wayne recognized early on that County residents are almost always at a disadvantage when challenging well-financed development interests and their law firms in rezoning, special exception and land use cases. Years ago, he developed his own expertise at researching land use issues. His testimony in support of local communities was invariably complete, detailed, articulate and compelling. Last year there was a site plan being considered for the redevelopment of Bethesda Metro Center. The land use attorneys representing several different business interests spent some time squabbling and shouting at the Planning Board and behaving childishly. Wayne, in his own inimitable style, testified quietly giving the perspective of the Civic Federation’s Land Use Committee. The Planning Board paid him their highest tribute saying that at least Wayne and the Civic Federation always presented their testimony with dignity unlike the lawyers who had been embarrassing themselves and the legal profession all day. I spoke to Wayne later that day, and he had that wonderful, silly smile he always wore when recounting his experiences. Wayne was always good for a smile.
Wayne and I worked together on many initiatives including “Pay and Go” and the Montgomery County Civic Federation’s petition drive to put Question C on the ballot for which Wayne gathered thousands of signatures, always with a smile and a willingness to talk to people about the nature of the problem and the need for a solution.
Many might not appreciate this fact, but people like Wayne actually provided a sorely needed balance to County Government. During my time as President of the Montgomery County Civic Federation, Wayne asked me to host a forum on “Citi-stat”, the program developed and used by then-Mayor O’Malley to streamline the city government of Baltimore. The Civic Federation held the forum, and O’Malley made his presentation. We were sufficiently impressed that we pressed Ike Leggett to consider using the same approach to improve the County’s government if elected to serve as County Executive. Now that Ike Leggett is in charge, “County-stat” has been initiated and is said to have saved approximately 5 million dollars just in the last year. I hope Ike implements the remaining components of County-stat as a tribute to Wayne Goldstein.
One thing Wayne could not tolerate – hypocrisy. And he was good at uncovering hypocrisy! He proved over and over again that there is significant room for improvement in our County government. Wayne never sought election to public office, and most residents are probably unaware of how much he contributed to their quality of life. I will personally miss my friend Wayne, his infectious smile and quiet dignity, and his relentless quest for better government. Montgomery County has lost yet another major champion of the people when they lost Wayne Goldstein.
Thank You,
Cary Lamari
Ike Leggett on Wayne Goldstein
Following is the statement from the County Executive.
Statement by County Executive Isiah Leggett on the Passing of Wayne Goldstein
April 28, 2009
“I am deeply saddened by the untimely passing of Montgomery County civic activist Wayne Goldstein. Wayne was an earnest and perceptive watchdog on County government and County politics but he never let that earnestness get in the way of a delightful sense of humor and love of life. Wayne could disagree without being disagreeable. I will remember the ever-present fedora, the satiric testimony before County Council hearings, and the bundle of energy and idealism that was Wayne.
“Wayne was a strong and effective advocate on historic preservation, land use, and the environment, as well as an avid proponent of our CountyStat program to measure results and performance in County government.
“I have lost a friend. Montgomery County has lost an institution.”
Council District 4 Special Election by the Numbers
Just as we did last year, MPW presents our exclusive analysis of the precinct breakouts for the special election.
In terms of total margin, this election was closer than last year’s. In 2008, Don Praisner defeated Nancy Navarro in the precinct counts by 3,288-2,940 (44.2-39.5%). In 2009, Nancy Navarro defeated Ben Kramer in the precinct counts by 3,557-3,479 (44.5-43.6%). The 2009 total precinct margin of 78 votes, which is unlikely to be overcome by the remaining absentees, is smaller than the 2008 total precinct margin of 348 votes. But in many important ways, this election was not close at all.
Mr. Praisner’s victory was tight but broad. He carried 22 precincts to Navarro’s 21. He won Leisure World by 153 votes, but he also won the rest of District 4 by 195 votes. He won 4 of the 11 precincts that had a black population percentage of 30% or more in 2000, 8 of the 15 precincts other than Leisure World that had a white population percentage of 60% or more and carried his own precinct handily (176-62). That proves the value of the Praisner name, a name fortified by seventeen years of constituent service.
Ben Kramer outperformed Mr. Praisner on only two metrics. First, he racked up a MUCH bigger margin in Leisure World. Mr. Praisner’s 153 vote margin in Leisure World equaled a 47-32% edge over Navarro. Kramer outpolled Navarro by 798-280, a 518-vote margin and a whopping 67-24% lead. Navarro lost 43 votes compared to 2008, while Kramer won 322 votes more than Mr. Praisner received. Second, Mr. Praisner won the 15 non-Leisure World precincts with a white population percentage of 60% or more by 44-40% over Navarro. Kramer won the same precincts by 47-41%. Navarro received 8% more votes from these precincts in 2009 compared to her 2008 total, but Kramer received 14% more votes in these precincts than did Mr. Praisner.
In every other respect, Nancy Navarro defeated Ben Kramer handily. She won 33 precincts compared to Kramer’s 12. She won the home precincts of Ben Kramer, Rona Kramer and Ike Leggett. In the non-Leisure World precincts, she beat Kramer 3,277-2,681 (48-39%). Navarro held onto 18 of the 21 precincts that voted for her in 2008. Kramer only held 8 of the 22 precincts that voted for Mr. Praisner. In 2008, Navarro lost the precincts in Congressional District 4 1,238-1,078 (45-39%). In 2009, she defeated Kramer in these precincts 1,310-1,128 (48-41%). Finally, in the 22 District 19 precincts other than Leisure World, Navarro defeated Kramer 1,434-1,372 (45-43%). Other than in his performance in Leisure World, Ben Kramer’s service as a District 19 Delegate did not help him against Navarro.
Navarro won all 7 precincts with a Latino population percentage of 20% or more and 10 of the 11 precincts with a black population percentage of 30% or more. In both instances, she increased her margins in these precincts by substantial amounts in 2009. The black precinct results are particularly telling. In 2008, Mr. Praisner won 4 of these 11 precincts, received 509 votes and trailed Navarro by a 47-41% margin. In 2009, Kramer won only 1 of these precincts, received 479 votes and trailed Navarro by a 54-36% margin.
One set of precincts performed differently in the two special elections: the 10 precincts along the alignment of the Intercounty Connector (ICC). Marilyn Praisner was a longtime ICC opponent. In 2008, 7 of these precincts voted for Mr. Praisner, who won the 10 precincts by 982-810 (47-39%). In 2009, 9 of these precincts voted for Navarro, who won the 10 precincts by 1,111-740 (51-34%). Kramer de-emphasized his prior support for the ICC during the campaign, but the people who lived near it were not fooled.
Kramer’s strategy of focusing on Leisure World made sense, especially in a special election. In the 2006 District 4 Democratic primary, only 9.7% of the County Council votes came from Leisure World. In the 2008 special election, 13.6% of the Democratic primary County Council votes came from Leisure World. In the 2009 special election, 14.9% of the Democratic primary County Council votes came from Leisure World. Because turnout in Leisure World held up better than the other precincts in the special elections, its impact was amplified. But Kramer could not hold onto the rest of Mr. Praisner’s vote and that is why he lost.
This election will have significant political consequences for the County Council, for Ben Kramer and for Nancy Navarro, as well as a few other figures of note associated with their campaigns. We’ll explore those consequences in the near future. In the meantime, here’s our complete datafile for the real addicts among you.
Wanted: Darth Vader
County Executive Ike Leggett is on the verge of losing control of the volatile disability issue. But that is just one symptom of his growing problem. While Leggett is still well-liked personally, his administration is increasingly plagued by rebellious County Council Members and a Rockville political environment that is drifting away from him. Most believe that Leggett’s hire of Steve Silverman as his Director of Economic Development was a good move, but Silverman is not the employee Leggett most needs. Who he really needs is Darth Vader.
The disability issue has become a broader window into the increasing willingness of Council Members to challenge Executive prerogative. Last September, the Inspector General identified “insufficient internal controls and management oversight” of the police disability program leading to higher rates of benefit approval than other jurisdictions. The Executive then entered negotiations with the Fraternal Order of Police to revise the program, but Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg introduced a bill three months later to restructure it. Andrews and Trachtenberg simply don’t believe the issue should be collectively bargained. Neither does Council Member Roger Berliner, who voted for it in committee. But that position erodes the right of the County Executive to negotiate working conditions with the county unions. The council may well vote on the bill today.
Four other Council Members (George Leventhal, Valerie Ervin, Nancy Floreen and Mike Knapp) obtained a proposal from the police for restructuring the program which we reprint below. They are adamant that they are not negotiating with the police. But Valerie Ervin said this to the Post: “We felt someone had to lead, and we decided it would be us.” Again, this is a direct challenge to the prerogatives of the Executive as well as an explicit criticism of his leadership.
The common factor uniting all of these Council Members is a frustration with the slow pace of the renegotiation and a willingness to intervene. Some are frustrated more broadly with the slow-moving tendencies of the administration, such as its failure to reach a new agreement with the Fire Fighters, its drawn-out resolution of the Live Nation issue and its (until now) neglect of economic development. This is not personal animosity directed at Ike Leggett himself, but it is a set of increasingly bold efforts by some Council Members to fill what they believe is a leadership void. They are acting in part because few, if any, are actually afraid of Leggett. That presents a growing challenge not to Leggett’s ability to win re-election (which most believe he will do) but rather to his ability to govern.
Ike Leggett is simply not built for conflict. He is warm and intelligent, has a long memory, knows how to listen (or, at least, how to appear to listen) and he leaves nearly every visitor with the impression that he is on their side. That’s a good recipe for getting elected and he has perfected that method better than anyone in this county over his 20+ year career. But a politician with that skill-set is not ideally suited to staring down enemies, making and carrying out threats and intimidating the opposition. He needs to hire someone to do that for him.
Former County Executive Doug Duncan had an operative who was cast by Hollywood for the role: his special assistant, Jerry Pasternak. Cunning, ruthless and alternately menacing and charming, Pasternak was given one instruction by the boss: if you find something that’s screwed up, go fix it. And that’s what Pasternak did. Acting as a roving investigator, hole-plugger and ball-breaker, Pasternak roamed through the government and the press clearing the way for Duncan to operate at a higher level. Duncan had no need to be plagued by petty problems when his special assistant was on the case. Pasternak was so good at this that our spies still refer to him as “Darth Vader” nearly three years after he left government.
The presence of Pasternak was far from the only difference in the governing styles of the Leggett and Duncan administrations. Duncan was a bolder leader by simple temperament. He organized a virtual County Council coup in 2002 and confronted opponents in ways that Leggett would never do. But Leggett may need a Pasternak even more than Duncan because of his low-key manner. Good-cop/bad-cop routines tend to work well if played convincingly, whether in collective bargaining, business negotiations or politics. And no one will ever accuse Leggett of being a bad cop.
Pasternak himself is now employed by Bethesda super-lawyer Jack Garson and would be an even unlikelier choice for hire by Leggett than Silverman. But Leggett desperately needs a Darth Vader of his own. Because if he does not find one, the Rebellion will rage on.
The Great Civic Grand-daddy
Yesterday, Montgomery County lost a great champion of the little guy: former Civic Federation President Wayne Goldstein. Today, I pay homage to one of my heroes.
The first time I met Wayne, he was running one of his Monday night Civic Federation meetings. There he was, wearing his trademark flat cap, a pony-tail running down his back and his amused, vaguely conspiratorial voice coming out of that super-sly smile. “What a weird guy,” I thought. But Wayne wasn’t weird. He was simply a man who derived immense joy from what he did.
And what Wayne did was cause trouble – endless trouble. Wayne was the best researcher in Montgomery County. There was nothing he couldn’t figure out. There was no information, no matter how ancient or obscure, that could elude him. If you don’t believe me, just check out the small sample of his work featured here on this blog. Wayne loved facts – especially embarrassing facts. He would use them to torment the powerful, whether in private industry or in government, and pressure them to come around to the interests of the county’s residents. He was a resource for all of us. If you couldn’t figure something out, you just called Wayne. He either knew what you needed to know or he knew someone who did. Hundreds – maybe thousands – of civic activists originally met through Wayne.
Wayne loved historic preservation. He lived for battles like Falkland Chase and Mike Knapp’s historic preservation law. He loved tutoring young activists. For a rookie like me, Wayne’s sly smile always said one of two things: “I know something juicy!” or “You look like you know something juicy, so tell me!” And Wayne really loved to hate MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast. He wrote hundreds of Civic Federation columns devoted to exposing Weast’s “ongoing subterfuge” of test data, his charging curricular fees to parents, his hiring of ethics-challenged subordinates like John Q. Porter and much, much more. Wayne had a strange symbiotic relationship with Weast. Weast’s misbehavior fed Wayne’s twin passions of research and taking down the big guys. And Wayne’s constant Machiavellian depictions of Weast fueled Weast’s image as an omnipotent overlord, something that is craved by every emperor.
The tribute to Wayne Goldstein does not end today. It goes on every time a neighborhood mobilizes against a proposed rezoning. It goes on every time an amateur historian opposes a building tear-down. It goes on every time a parent questions the school system. It goes on every time a citizen challenges bureaucracy in our eternal quest for a voice in government. Whether they know it or not, they are all Wayne’s kids.
And wherever Wayne is, he’ll be watching us and rooting for us with that super-sly smile.
Monday, April 27, 2009
On Political Pulse
Congressman Chris Van Hollen will be on "Political Pulse" on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County on Tuesday, April 28th at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, April 30th at 9:00 p.m.
Topics that will be discussed include whether Pakistan will be the next terrorism hotspot, the federal bailout and stimulus legislation and Congressman Van Hollen's position as (a) the Assistant to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and (b) the Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Kramer Picks Up 2 Votes on Provisionals
The Montgomery County Board of Elections reviewed 86 provisional ballots today. 36 Democratic votes were ruled valid. Of those votes, 16 went to Ben Kramer, 14 went to Nancy Navarro, 2 went to Cary Lamari, 2 went to Rob Goldman, 1 went to Michael Bigler and 1 went to Thomas Hardman. Navarro's lead over Kramer is now 73 votes. 108 more absentee votes - from both parties - await review on Friday. It is almost impossible for Kramer to win now.
How State Budget Cuts Hit MoCo
Here's the latest on how much Montgomery County will suffer because of state budget cuts.
Total state aid is up 3.1%. Education did well (up 9.9%) because of federal funds and repayment of aid not transmitted to the county last year, but transportation and Program Open Space were devastated.
State aid will be $42.2 million less than assumed by the county under state formulas. The biggest cutbacks will be in transportation and jail support.
On the capital budget side, Montgomery is scheduled to receive $26 million for school construction. Because not all construction money has been allocated, the county could eventually get $30 million or more. But that is far short of the $46 million goal set by Senator Rich Madaleno (D-18), the county's Senate Delegation chair.
On the bright side, Big Daddy's push to send teacher pensions down to the counties did not succeed. But there's always next year!
The Washington Post’s Boy King
Former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite was once called “the voice of God.” And for some people, that’s how the Washington Post editorial page appears. After all, there’s the elegant masthead and logo, the rich tradition of legends like Bob Woodward and Ben Bradlee, all the Pulitzers (8 in 2008 alone) and the often excellent national and international reporting. So the editorials should carry some weight, right?
Not the ones about Montgomery County. Because their until-now anonymous writer is a 23-year-old intern who has never lived in Maryland and is less than a year out of college.
Steven Stein is a Los Angeles native and current Virginia resident who graduated from Emory University in 2008. His first job out of school was an internship at the Washington Post. The Post had him write a handful of blog posts last fall, but it didn’t work out. One reader complained on his last post, “I continue to be mystified at the Post’s rationale for giving Mr. Stein a platform as he never has anything remotely insightful to contribute to any public debate,” and Stein was yanked. But the Post had another job for Stein because longtime Maryland issues writer Lee Hockstader was taking a break. And so Stein was given a task that was a low priority for the Post Company, something that wouldn’t matter even if it was screwed up by an intern: editorial writer for Montgomery County.
Now the Post has always had an anti-union lean to its editorials because it is an anti-union business. But with Stein at the writer’s desk, the propaganda reached new lows: clobbering the Fire Fighters, calling collective bargaining a “ruse,” ranting about “the sway that unions exert over county politicians” and congratulating Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) for supposedly being willing to criticize unions. The Post even ran an election-day smear alleging that the unions were “funneling contributions” to Nancy Navarro.
But Stein is no ordinary intern; he has an agenda. At the Emory Wheel (the campus newspaper), Stein wrote this about Barack Obama:For all his talk of unity, Obama has a platform only a far-left liberal could love. He’s Edmund Muskie with sex appeal, Walter Mondale with charisma. If you’re a diehard liberal, Obama is your man. If you actually believe in unity, you might want to look elsewhere.
And on the Post’s intern profile page, Stein wrote this about his career goals:The ultimatum came early my freshman year of college: “Get a job or forget about us paying tuition!” my mother frostily exclaimed. Having no discernible talent other than the ability to string sentences together semi-coherently, I sought refuge in the Emory Wheel, my university’s student newspaper. Three years and more than 150 articles later, I’m preparing to make journalism a career. I’ve interned as a reporter at the Garden Island (Kauai, Hawaii), where the governor of Hawaii publicly criticized one of my first articles. I’ve also interned as an editorial writer at the Austin American-Statesman, where a tongue-in-cheek blog post about San Antonio left the Alamo City up in arms. Needless to say, my goal at The Washington Post is to practice hard-hitting journalism — even if it means infuriating a high-ranking politician or the residents of a major city. Besides writing things that anger people, my interests include playing bad basketball, playing worse golf and raving to anyone who will listen about the genius of the film “Being There.”
How on Earth could the Post permit such a thing to appear on its website? Stein is in bad need of an adult in the company to approach him and say, “Look, kid. This is the Washington Post, not the Emory Wheel. The goal of our editorial page isn’t to infuriate politicians for its own sake. We have opinions, but they have to be fact-based and fair.” But no one is interested. Montgomery County just doesn’t matter to the Post leadership.
But the Post leadership does matter a lot to Montgomery County politicians, a few of whom still regard the editorial page as the Voice of God. Some in the County Council building have been working Stein for months, feeding him all the propaganda he can regurgitate. They gleefully cavort before the Boy King’s throne and Montgomery voters are none the wiser.
What does this say about the Post’s senior management? Their pick of an intern who has never lived in Maryland to write Montgomery County editorials reveals their true regard for us. Montgomery County politics is irrelevant in their world and, in any event, the editorials supply a pleasant way for a callow neophyte to hurl invective at government employees and move up in the ranks.
And what about the Post’s editorial integrity? It lies in shredded tatters, decaying at the feet of the Boy King.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Democrats to Celebrate at Spring Ball
Following is the press release from the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Press Release
April 25, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: Milt Minneman
Communications Director
301-299-2551
FAX: 301-299-4604
Cell: 301-910-4676
minnemmj@hotmail.com
Democrats to Celebrate at Spring Ball, Sunday, May 3, 2009
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee presents Democrats: A Party for all Seasons, Sunday, May 3, 2009, from 4:30-9:30 PM at the Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road. The event starts with a reception and silent auction at 4:30PM, dinner at 6:30PM, followed by the presentation of the Democratic Party 2009 awards and then dancing until 9:30PM.
Representatives Chris Van Hollen and Donna Edwards. Comptroller Peter Franchot, Attorney General Doug Gansler and County Executive Ike Leggett will individually present the following awards:
• David Hart, Helga Butler, Ronit Dancis, Maia Hunt, Donice Jeter, Jon Randall, Harriet Shugerman and Charles Washington, the Bethesda Obama Office Supervisory Team - jointly the Democrat of the Year Award,
• Sue Byrnes - the Precinct Official Award,
• W. Gregory Wims - the Community Service Award,
• Louise Armentrout - the Lifetime Service Award.
• Ralph and Betsy Stephens - jointly the Volunteer of the Year Award.
• Molly Ruhl - the Outstanding Services by a Former Elected Official Award,
Tickets are $100 each ($125 at the door) and up at sponsor levels.
Guests are asked to bring a can of food for a local food bank.
For more information, call the Committee at 301-946-1000.
-End-
McIntosh Joins TruBlu Politics
Following is the press release from TruBlu Politics.
For More Information Contact:
David Goodman
202-431-9940
For Immediate Release
April 23, 2009
McIntosh Joins TruBlu Politics to Form Powerhouse Political Consulting Firm
Baltimore, MD—Baltimore Delegate Maggie McIntosh joins TruBlu Politics as full partner, creating a powerhouse political consulting and direct mail firm in Maryland.
McIntosh, Chair of the House of Delegates Environmental Matters Committee, has served in the House of Delegates since 1992 and began her own direct mail firm, McIntosh Files, in 2004.
“I am extremely excited to join TruBlu Politics. This partnership will allow us to provide the very best client service and quality direct mail to Democratic candidates throughout the country,” says McIntosh.
McIntosh’s list of clients includes Maryland Lt. Governor Anthony Brown and Baltimore City Council President Stephanie Rawlings Blake. In 2008, she collaborated with TruBlu Politics on direct mail for Frank Kratovil’s successful campaign for Congress.
McIntosh brings over 20 years experience in Maryland politics to the partnership. In 2001, she became the first woman to serve as House Majority Leader and has been named one of Maryland’s Top 100 Women. Prior to her election in the House of Delegates, she served as State Director and Campaign Manager for U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski.
“Michael and I worked with Maggie last year and there was just a great synergy,” says David Goodman, a founding partner of TruBlu Politics. “We are looking forward to forging a great partnership.”
Tapper, with a combined 25 years of message development and political consulting experience established TruBlu Politics in 2006 with partner and co-founder David Goodman. Winning political strategist, Goodman, has been active in Democratic politics since 1994 and has been producing direct mail for the past 8 years.
In 2008, TruBlu managed successful direct mail campaigns on behalf of Rep. Donna Edwards (District 4) and Rep. Frank Kratovil (District 1). Previous successes include wins for Progressive Majority Colorado and numerous legislative campaigns in Maryland.
Tapper has received recognition by the American Association of Political Consultants and the NAACP for his message and design for the controversial NAACP National Voter Fund campaign that mobilized a million new African American voters in the 2000 election. Tapper and Goodman have collaborated on other notable campaigns including D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams’ historic write-in campaign in 2002 and Mayor Douglas Palmer’s victory in Trenton, NJ in 2006.
TruBlu Politics is a national direct mail and political consulting firm based in Ellicott City, Maryland.
###
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Read the Book on Chris Van Hollen
Come join Representative Chris Van Hollen, former White House press secretary Mike McCurry and author Sanford "Sandy" Gottlieb for a book signing and discussion of "Red to Blue: Congressman Chris Van Hollen and Grassroots Politics". Wednesday, April 29, 7:30 pm, Barnes & Noble-Rockville (Rockvillle Pike and Montrose Road)
This new book describes the emergence of the Democratic majority through the prism of Congressman Van Hollen's career.
(Hat tip to Sen. Rich Madaleno.)
Friday, April 24, 2009
District 4 Precinct Tidbits
The individual precinct totals are up. Next week, we’ll have a full analysis. But here’s a couple tidbits to hold you over.
Leisure World
In the two Leisure World precincts, turnout was 23.6% (much higher than the 10.45% turnout rate in the precinct total count). Kramer blew out Navarro in these two precincts by 798-280, a 67-24% advantage. Navarro lost Leisure World to Don Praisner last time by 153 votes (47-32%).
Endorsers
Precinct 8-04 is Ben Kramer’s home precinct. He lost to Navarro there by a 25-22 vote. Precinct 8-06 is Rona Kramer’s home precinct. Ben Kramer lost it to Navarro by a 114-71 vote. Precinct 5-18 is Ike Leggett’s home precinct. Kramer lost it to Navarro by a 45-33 vote. Precinct 5-12 is the Praisners’ home precinct. Kramer outpolled Navarro there, but only by 89-90. Navarro won her home precinct (5-05) by 142-138.
Other Precincts
Precinct 13-33 is the site of Kemp Mill Elementary School and has a substantially Jewish population. Kramer defeated Navarro there by 147-73. Precinct 5-21 (Eastern County Regional Center) had the highest African-American percentage in the district in 2000 (57%). Navarro defeated Kramer there by 54-19. Precinct 13-28 (Wheaton High School) had the highest Latino percentage in the district in 2000 (31%). Navarro beat Kramer there by 59-8. Precinct 13-02 was, along with 13-28, the closest precinct to Wheaton Library. Navarro led Kramer there 128-99.
Everybody Loves Main Street, Part Three
By Emily Adelman.
PART 3: Growing Pains
Now, as far as our policymakers are concerned, the local shift is going to be more substantial, and it might hurt a little. All across our fine nation, the paradigm for economic development for a long time has been based on a certain type of law of attraction. The assumption is that there are big job-creating, revenue-generating businesses out there to be seduced into settling down in our state, our county, or our city by tempting them with tax incentives, public investments, and other kinds of shiny things.
The problem is that the public investment (sacrifice?) is huge and the payoff is not always consistent. Economist Michael Shuman, author of The Small Mart Revolution and a Montgomery County resident, is a great resource who’s got his finger on the pulse of the plethora of studies that show that cultivating local businesses is a far more effective use of resources than the seduction method. Shuman has created a handy checklist for consumers, investors, entrepreneurs, policymakers, and community builders to foster a strong local economy.
In December of last year, the Montgomery County Department of Economic Development invited Shuman to present at a roundtable on local economies. This gives me hope.
At the same time, there’s much to be done while our local government is still just getting its toes wet. I believe that now is as good a time as ever to move beyond nostalgia for Main Street. We need to start putting our money where our mouth is. I’m not saying that we all have to go as far as one loyal customer went to save his local video store in Missoula, Montana (as heard on NPR), but we can start by thinking. Think about what you need to buy and where you’re going to get it. First, think about your local options. Second, think about everywhere else. All this thinking should take place, of course, before the actual buying.
If we all start thinking local first (get it?), the effects would be tremendous.
--
If you need some help finding locally-owned businesses near you, these websites may help:
www.buylocalsilverspring.com
www.localfirstwheaton.org
www.greattakomadeals.com
www.thinklocalfirstdc.com
www.buylocalbaltimore.com
Emily Adelman is currently working with Local First Wheaton, an alliance of independent businesses, to produce the Wheaton Shop Local Guide that will debut in May 2009 at The Taste of Wheaton. She also is working on the Buy Local Silver Spring campaign and helped produce a guide to over 200 locally-owned establishments in downtown Silver Spring.
BOP Update
By Holly Olson.
*** WARNING: This post contains no political content whatsoever. Read on at your own risk. ***
I admit that when I found out I was pregnant with Baby Olson-Pagnucco (BOP), I became quite curious as to whether people would start to treat me differently. Would people hold the door open for me? Would they give up their seat on the metro for me? Would drivers at the Intersection of Death (IOD) let me cross the intersection without nudging their cars up my butt?
As I suspected, the answer came back a resounding NO. No passes for the pregnant lady, thank you very much. This is DC after all, where everyone has places to go, people to see, and little time to show any extra courtesy to a pregnant lady. I recently heard about a new show called ‘In the Motherhood’ on ABC, and in the premiere, the story line included a woman who faked a pregnancy to receive preferential treatment. Obviously, this story was written by a Man, because I don’t believe that this happens in real life - at least not where we live.
Even in my own home, I don’t get much of a break. The vision of me lounging around on the sofa while my husband fans me and feeds me grapes is only that - a vision in some alternate reality. Instead, I find myself still doing my usual chores, cooking dinner, and yelling at Adam to stop blogging as midnight rolls around. And those pesky D4 debates did not help my cause. [Note to the politicians: Could you please not hold any more special elections? I am tired of seeing my husband disappear three nights in a row during the work week because you all need to have campaign debates.]
And so rather than the universe stopping to revolve around me, I find that it continues on, just as it always did. Instead, what I find is that my life is now filled with A LOTS. I have to go the bathroom, A LOT. I eat, A LOT. I am tired, A LOT. My belly has grown, A LOT. You get the picture...
As the big day approaches, we are trying to get ready as countless parents have done before us. We ordered the crib, set up the baby registries, and are scheduled for lots of baby classes at Holy Cross Hospital. There is the ‘How the hell do I make it through labor class’, the ‘What do I do now that he is out class’, and the ‘How do I prevent him from electrocuting himself class’ (i.e. baby safety). Somehow I couldn’t convince Adam to attend the breast feeding class with me - he wanted to go to a D4 debate instead. Go figure. [Note to assorted politicians: Adam WILL be attending baby classes throughout April and May. Tuesday nights will no longer be free. Please adjust your schedules accordingly.]
There are also the usual worries: will there be any complications during delivery, will he have any health problems, will he terrorize us both with endless crying. Adam is particularly concerned about all the diapers that he will have to change. I am concerned about whether he will try to blog while changing the diapers. But such is life.
All in all, things are going pretty well (knock on wood). BOP continues to grow, and as far as we know, he is healthy. He moves around a lot, and I am sure that if he could take a mini-laptop into the womb with him, he would be typing out his daily updates on Facebook. So keep us in your thoughts. Only 2 more months, and out he comes - get ready world!
Spies React to Duchy Walkout
Just when you might think there’s nothing more to say about yesterday’s post, our spies stepped up. Here’s what they had to say about the incident and the County Council in general. Hide the children.
Spy #1:
Duchy is the perfect foil for George...he provokes her and gets an immediate, irrational response. Unfortunately, as entertaining as this might seem, it doesn’t improve the working environment at the Council and is particularly unhelpful while we’re trying to handle the budget.
Spy #2:
Trachtenberg’s behavior may be questionable when viewed in the larger context. However, on another level, I sympathize with her walking out. I could easily see myself having a tough morning, and then walking into the lion’s den only to be needled by one of the council’s most acerbic members. Everyone knows that the group dynamic on the council is horrible. Individually, I think most members are fairly sane and rationale - but once they enter a group setting, all bets are off. The council could use a facilitator but I for one would not want the job. I think I would end up throwing my hands in the air after 30 minutes and saying, “I give up – you’re all f*****d.”
Spy #3:
It is all about the “Malcontents” and the “Grown-ups.”
There are four members of this Council who are nothing but malcontents and political opportunists. They do nothing but play to the grandstands for their own benefit on issues that are politically safe (and play well to a very liberal Democratic primary voting universe). They don’t bother to solicit thoughts or ideas from anyone outside of the narrow little slice of constituencies they consider their base because, let’s face it, they know so much more than everyone else (just ask them). They rarely even talk with any of the other four members who are not perceived as “on their team,” and they spend way too much time talking with one another so they can wield their influence by voting as a bloc (open meeting laws notwithstanding). I wouldn’t mind this behavior as much if these four had the County’s best interests at heart, but they don’t. It’s all about them and their immediate, short-term, self-perceived, political self-interest. I don’t want to name names, but these four are Duchy Trachtenberg, Marc Elrich, Phil Andrews and Roger Berliner.
The other four members of the Council, whom I will call the “grown-ups” for this discussion (although all things are relative here), are the ones I see repeatedly coming in prepared for meetings, having done their homework, knowing what they are talking about most of the time, reaching out to various people for their opinions (whether they were with them in the last campaign or not), and doing the job they were elected to do (in some cultures, it is referred to as “leadership,” which I am told used to be practiced occasionally here as well). Unfortunately, these four (whose identities you may be able to deduce by now) had two distinct disadvantages: (1) there were only four of them, which meant they were often outvoted; and (2) they were reluctant to believe that the Council was split down the middle in this fashion, and stubbornly kept trying to work with some of the four in the other bloc, without much success. The fact that not all of the “grown-ups” get along all the time personally, and they don’t agree among themselves on everything, no doubt contributed to this as well.
The really dysfunctional thing here is how these two blocs interact with the Executive. The grown-ups are much more aligned with County Executive Leggett on all his major initiatives, but they are not his political allies. The malcontents are his allies and he repeatedly tries to rely on them to move his policies forward, despite the obvious fact (obvious to everyone except Ike I guess) that they despise virtually everything he is trying to do and have no intention of supporting any of it, ever. The fact that this obvious dynamic has not dawned on the Leggett team before now is one of life’s great mysteries.
Two things have now fundamentally changed (regardless of the final outcome in the primary, actually): (1) the “grown ups” will now have 5 votes on the Council and the “malcontents” will have 4 on most issues. (2) the “grown-ups” have put their differences behind them and are starting to realize that they can get us moving in the right direction again if they work together as a team. The question now is, will the Executive start working with them and tell the malcontents to take a hike?
What a concept! This special election is a huge step in the right direction.
Spy #4:
Believe it or not, Council Members really do look first to the County Executive for leadership. Whether they agree with the CE or not, a strong CE helps keep the Council from getting fractured and dysfunctional. A strong CE enables the Council to get things done because a majority will try to work with the CE and, if they can’t agree, they will find alternatives. What we have today, however, is a very weak Executive who leaves a leadership vacuum. No Council Member has been able to fill that void, either because they lack the skills or the personal relationships on which a leadership foundation is built. Let’s face it, these Council Members don’t just disagree philosophically, they also don’t like or trust each other.
Budget time is crazy time, when Council Members and the Executive typically get into some arguments. What we saw yesterday, however, is beyond the norm. The Council is like a volcano, showing periodic signs of unrest and periodically emitting hot air. Yesterday, it erupted. And while it’s hard to predict volcanic activity, it’s a safe bet that we will see more activity as we get deeper into the budget season. And we haven’t yet hit election season!
Spy #5:
It’s normal in a legislative, political environment for tensions to run high. However, this Council has taken dysfunction to a new low. Personal comportment, dignity, respect and honesty seem to be out the window with many on the Council. Combined together, the members of this Council seem to bring out the worst in each other. It’s very sad to see. Montgomery County prides itself on good government. That’s something we’re not seeing these days.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Kramer Picks up Three Votes in First Canvass (Updated)
Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) picked up a net total of 3 votes in today's first canvass. There are very few votes left to be counted. That means Nancy Navarro has likely won the District 4 race.
The first canvass counted 597 Democratic ballots. 272 went to Kramer, 269 went to Navarro, 35 went to Cary Lamari, 12 went to Rob Goldman, 5 went to Thomas Hardman and 4 went to Michael Bigler. That means Navarro's lead has decreased from 78 votes to 75 votes.
On Monday, 86 provisional ballots will be examined. Many will be thrown out because of undervotes or non-residency. So far, 45 overseas ballots have come in and will be counted at the second canvass on May 1. More could come in later. In last year's special election, only 11 absentee ballots were counted at the second canvass.
Unless hundreds of new votes come in from overseas and tilt overwhelmingly to Kramer, it is now almost mathematically impossible for him to win.
Update: Here are the polling place results from election night, the first canvass of absentee results and the total so far.
Everybody Loves Main Street, Part Two
By Emily Adelman.
PART 2: The Multiplier Effect
Maybe you’re thinking, “How is buying the same roll of dental floss at an independent pharmacy instead of a big-box chain store going to save the world?”
Well, I’m not promising it’s going to save the world, but the economic relevance of locally-owned businesses should not be underestimated. The Small Business Administration consistently reports, most recently in September 2008, that small businesses:
• Represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.
• Employ about half of all private sector employees.
• Pay nearly 45 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
• Have generated 60 to 80 percent of net new jobs annually over the last decade.
• Create more than half of nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP).
It gets better. Let’s say that it’s lunchtime and you have ten dollars in your wallet. If you spend those $10 at a locally-owned, independent establishment, $6.80 of your ten bucks will stay in your community. The owner of the café where you just ate lunch will pay those dollars forward by, let’s say, using a local print shop to print the menus, purchasing local produce and ingredients, donating food for the local elementary school’s fundraiser, and paying local property and state income taxes. This is called the “multiplier effect”. Each dollar you spend at a local, independent business will circulate several times within the local economy, and over 2/3 of it stays in the community. (See the Andersonville Study of Retail Economics, 2004.)
That’s not all. Of all the businesses located in a determined geographic area, those owned by local residents and operated independently of a non-local corporation are also the most likely (and sometimes by default) stewards of the local environment. Studies show that local businesses use other local firms as suppliers and vendors, reducing the environmental impact of long-distance transportation. We have some local business leaders in Montgomery County who are setting the example in many ways:
• Local businesses by their very nature have the autonomy to choose their own suppliers and are more likely to carry locally-produced agricultural and manufactured products. (For example: Jackie’s Restaurant; My Organic Market)
• Local businesses are making efforts to further green their enterprises by converting to renewable energy sources and eliminating “dirty” processes. (The Gazette recently published an article on Wheaton businesses taking advantage of wind power.)
It makes sense to support these home-grown companies that have a triple bottom line business model (people, planet and profit). When they do well, their profits stay contained within the local economy and achieve a ripple effect.
Is it sounding good yet?
...Stay tuned for Part 3: Growing Pains...
Emily Adelman is currently working with Local First Wheaton, an alliance of independent businesses, to produce the Wheaton Shop Local Guide that will debut in May 2009 at The Taste of Wheaton. She also is working on the Buy Local Silver Spring campaign and helped produce a guide to over 200 locally-owned establishments in downtown Silver Spring.
Credit Card Bill Fails; Banks Run Amok
Folks, you just can't make this up. Delegate Bill Frick's bill limiting credit card abuses dies in the Senate Finance Committee after passing the House 136-1 and now the banks are jacking up rates:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The next time your credit card statement shows a higher rate, ask these Senators how they voted on Frick's bill.
Duchy Trachtenberg Walks Out
In the most extreme symptom of a general unrest that has been permeating the County Council for months, Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg became so aggravated with a colleague that she did the unthinkable: walk out on a vote.
The event occurred on April 21, which perhaps not coincidentally was the District 4 special election primary day. During the morning session, the council was considering Bill 4-09, a component of the County Executive’s stimulus package that would delay impact taxes paid for development projects. Council staff expressed concerns that the bill would cause problems in financing the county’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
The bill fell under the jurisdiction of the council’s Management and Fiscal Policy (MFP) Committee, of which Trachtenberg is Chair. At 2:26:38 of the morning session video, Trachtenberg says, “The issue that’s been raised by some on the committee, although I haven’t polled the entire committee, is that this would have an impact on the CIP.” That raises a process question: the MFP Committee had not considered the staff’s newest memo in a work session. Furthermore, Maryland’s open meeting law requires committees with quorums to meet in public. Since the Montgomery County Council’s committees all have three members, two constitute a quorum and should therefore discuss committee matters in public. What exactly did Trachtenberg mean when she said she had not “polled the entire committee?”
Council Member George Leventhal pursues the issue at 2:42:17 of the video. Here is the exchange:Leventhal: I also wanted to understand, of course it’s the Council President’s prerogative to take something off the agenda at any time and I appreciate that but earlier the Chair of the MFP Committee had said that she had polled the committee and that... but, she hadn’t polled the committee? I just wasn’t clear. Had the committee been contacted, or... ?
The council chose to defer Bill 4-09. Six minutes after her exchange with Leventhal, Trachtenberg gathered up her papers and walked out of the room. She missed a vote taken on Bill 5-09 at 2:50:24 of the video. She missed the public hearings scheduled for later that day and was a half-hour late for the afternoon’s MFP meeting, for which she was the Chair.
Trachtenberg: I said that I had not been able to poll the entire committee. I have not spoken, obviously, directly to Councilmember Ervin [a member of the committee]. I’ll be very specific.
Leventhal: Uh-huh. You polled some of a three-member committee.
Trachtenberg: No, I didn’t poll them actually. I had colleagues come to me about the item and obviously one of them was the Council President. [Phil Andrews is a member of the MFP Committee.]
Leventhal: Poll was the Chair’s word.
Trachtenberg (clicks tongue disapprovingly): George, I actually think that your comments are not being made in the spirit of collaboration.
Leventhal: So, just for the record, the chair spoke with one member of a three-member committee.
Trachtenberg (clicks tongue disapprovingly): When I walked in this morning, I had several e-mails and voice mails from colleagues. I don’t need to name names. And obviously I walked up here to this dais with my pocketbook and my bundles, OK? I didn’t have a lengthy period of time in my office to go contact Councilmember Ervin. No one is looking to isolate a colleague from discussion. And I did not want to represent what I was saying as a committee recommendation because I did not have the opportunity, the benefit, of having a direct conversation with Councilmember Ervin. I think that should clarify what went on. Again, I do not appreciate the spirit in which your remarks are being made.
This was the second bout of erratic behavior from Trachtenberg in less than a week. On Thursday April 16, Trachtenberg attended a meeting of the Leisure World Democratic Club. She had been invited as a guest months earlier to discuss the budget. Instead, she talked for 45 minutes about herself, her family and her background in the women’s movement before complaining of “dissension” on the council and then plugging Ben Kramer’s District 4 candidacy. The meeting’s organizers stood by helpless to stop her. Multiple attendees who supported other candidates left the room and others were simply appalled.
The County Council building has been an increasingly tense place in the last few months with the awful budget situation, the special election and thoughts of 2010 mixing into a foul and bubbling stew. But this is the first time during this term that a Council Member has actually missed a vote due to aggravation with a colleague.
What’s next?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Everybody Loves Main Street, Part One
By Emily Adelman.
PART 1: There’s No Place Like Home
For those of you who have lived near downtown Wheaton for a long time, you probably associate this eclectic little district with some place that you’ve gone to for years – such as Marchones, Wheaton Studio of Dance, or Showcase Aquarium. There’s likely several other businesses that are no longer here but remain as placeholders for some of your personal memories, such as The Anchor Inn.
The chances are very slim that you take a walk down memory lane when you gaze upon what I like to call the Ghosts of Retail Past: the former locations of Circuit City and Office Depot.
There’s something intuitively attractive and nostalgic for most people about Main Street and the unique small businesses that inhabit it. Even before President Obama started to use “Main Street” as a personified character cast in contrast to “Wall Street”, we have long celebrated the iconic local business as an ideal in our culture. It’s where everybody knows your name. It’s the diner you go to with your buddies at least four times a week. It’s the barber shop where you only get your hair cut once a month but where you stop in once a day.
Now, not every local business is as cheery as a Boston pub and not every local business lends itself to being what Ray Oldenburg coined the “third place” – the living room away from your living room, if you will. However, locally-owned and independent businesses typically can offer many advantages that may not give you a warm and fuzzy feeling but are still reason enough to stay local. Apart from not having to travel far to get what you need, high on the list of advantages are that the staff is frequently knowledgeable and the customer service is intentional. Some good examples of this are your local hardware store (Strosniders) and the independent pharmacy in your neighborhood (Upscale Care Pharmacy in Silver Spring; Kensington Pharmacy).
There’s also one particular myth that needs to be dispelled, such as the one that assumes that prices are necessarily higher at local businesses than at chain stores. They’re not. Do the experiment yourself. I’ve done several price comparisons in my day and I can offer you the results of one having to do with dental floss. I checked out Kensington Pharmacy and the CVS located in the same shopping strip on University Boulevard. My dental floss of choice (and I’m very particular about my floss) was indeed available at the independent drugstore, and it cost ten cents less than the same product at the chain store.
Okay, great. Everybody loves Main Street. So, you ask, why is this relevant?
When I listen to news about the state of the economy, it seems like we’re facing a monster that is too complicated to deal with: it’s global, it’s sliced up into pieces and insured and sold, and it involves ethereal things called (somewhat ironically) “futures” and “securities”. The good news is that the bread and butter of it all starts at home and there are things that we, and our local policymakers, can do to help re-establish stability in the local economy.
For the consumers — that’s us — it means shifting some of our purchases to local, independent sources.
...Stay tuned for Part 2: The Multiplier Effect...
Emily Adelman is currently working with Local First Wheaton, an alliance of independent businesses, to produce the Wheaton Shop Local Guide that will debut in May 2009 at The Taste of Wheaton. She also is working on the Buy Local Silver Spring campaign and helped produce a guide to over 200 locally-owned establishments in downtown Silver Spring.
How the Absentee Ballot Process Will Work
We asked the Montgomery County Board of Elections how tomorrow’s absentee ballot count will work. Here’s what they said.
The board issued 1,195 absentee ballots in this special election. So far, 773 of them have been returned. The board will continue to receive more absentee ballots provided that they are postmarked by election day (April 21) and come in by 10 AM on May 1, the day of the second canvass.
The board’s staff is preparing for the first canvass today. They are sorting out the returned absentee ballots by precinct. Tomorrow, the first canvass will begin at 12:30 PM. A series of tables will be set up in a conference room, each having sets of manila envelopes containing the ballots from each precinct. A Democrat and a Republican volunteer, both of whom have been trained for ballot review, will examine each ballot at each table.
The first step in the ballot examination involves examining each envelope prior to its being opened. The volunteers will check on whether each envelope is (a) postmarked by April 21, and (b) has a signed oath on the exterior. If any unopened ballot fails either test, it will be put into a “reject” pile.” The second step is to open any ballots that pass the first test. The volunteers will check to see that each ballot has one filled-in oval that can be read by the board’s optical scanner. If the ballot has a rip, tear or illegal marks (like check marks), the volunteers will prepare a duplicate scan-able ballot that reflects the intent of the voter.
Once these steps are completed, the three sets of ballots face different fates. All of the ones that make it past the volunteers and are properly completed will be tabulated by the optical scanner. The ones that required duplicate ballots will be examined by the Board of Elections itself, who will look at both the original and the duplicate to make sure that the duplicate truly does reflect the will of the voter. Those duplicates that do will be fed into the optical scanner. (The originals will not.) The reject pile must be considered by the Board of Elections on advice of its legal counsel. It is probably unlikely that the board will vote to accept any unopened ballots that lack either a timely postmark or a signed oath.
The campaigns have little role in this stage of the process. They can observe but they cannot approach the tables where the ballots are examined. They cannot challenge or handle the ballots themselves.
The first canvass should be completed by the close of business tomorrow. There are also 86 provisional ballots that will be processed on Monday. The second canvass will take place on May 1. Election-day vote counts by precinct may be available by Friday. The County Board of Elections will certify the results on May 1 and the State Board of Elections will certify them on May 4.
In last year’s special election, 7,434 Democratic primary votes were cast at the precincts, 183 absentee ballots were received by the first canvass, 30 provisional votes were recorded and 11 absentee ballots were received by the second canvass. This year, 7,987 Democratic primary votes were cast at the precincts, so the number of absentee ballots has gone way up relative to election night. That is probably because both the Kramer and Navarro campaigns distributed pre-printed absentee ballot applications.
So we may know the winner by tomorrow afternoon. Unless we don’t.
Washington Post Gets Out the Vote for Kramer (Updated)
Lost in the aftermath of yesterday's intense finish was an amazing event: the Washington Post actually re-endorsed Ben Kramer on the day of the election.
Here's the money statement from an editorial that reads almost like a public service announcement in other paragraphs:Ms. Navarro has been effective on the school board, but on tough fiscal calls she might offer little resistance to the labor leaders who have funneled contributions to her campaign. Mr. Kramer, whom we have endorsed, displayed an independent streak in Annapolis that would infuse the County Council with needed pragmatism.
"Funneled contributions?" Labor unions legally contributed to Navarro's campaign just as millionaire developer Josh Rales legally contributed to Kramer. When the Post uses a term like "funneled contributions," they are implying that labor is somehow behaving unethically, or even breaking the law, merely by contributing to a candidate.
We have examined the Post's anti-union editorials before. But the real truth behind their editorials will shock all of you regardless of whom you supported in the special election. And we will be exposing it soon enough.
Update: In last year's special election, the Post endorsed Navarro on Friday, April 11. The language of that endorsement contained no disparagement of Don Praisner and there was no "re-endorsement" prior to the April 15 election. This year, the Post endorsed Ben Kramer on Sunday, April 12, its biggest circulation day of the week and repeated it the day of the April 21 election. Both of the pro-Kramer editorials criticized Navarro and her labor support. Why did the Post treat Kramer and Navarro so differently between the two cycles?
Update 2: In 2006, the Post endorsed Ike Leggett for County Executive on 8/13/06. It never "re-endorsed" him. But on election day, 9/12/06, the Post issued a simple list of its endorsed candidates with no elaboration and no disparagement of opponents. Given that fact, the Post's re-endorsement of Kramer is not totally unprecedented. But that does not explain its disparate treatment of Kramer and Navarro in the 2008 and 2009 special elections.
Absentee Ballot Update (Updated!)
Here's the latest on how the math is trending.
The following email was sent from the county Board of Elections to the County Council this morning:From: Mihill, Amanda
If 660 absentee ballots are really outstanding, then Kramer would need to outpoll Navarro by about 14 percentage points to win. But we hear that perhaps as few as 360 absentee ballots actually came back.
Sent: Wed 4/22/2009 7:15 AM
To: Andrews, Phil; Berliner, Roger; Elrich, Marc; Ervin, Valerie; Floreen, Nancy; Knapp, Mike; Leventhal, George; Trachtenberg, Duchy
Cc: #CCL.Confidential Aides; Greenberger, Neil; Farber, Steve; Orlin, Glenn; Faden, Michael; Drummer, Bob
Subject: FW: Election Day results are posted
Councilmembers, here is a bit of follow-up from yesterday's Special Election. Board staff report that the Absenteee Canvass will be held on Thursday, April 23. From the Board's website: The Montgomery County Board of Elections, sitting as the Board of Canvassers, will convene at 10:00 a.m. for the Absentee Canvass. The Board of Canvassers will then recess immediately until 12:30 p.m. The Board of Elections will hold its monthly meeting beginning at 11:00a.m. The Board of Canvassers will begin canvassing absentee ballots at 12:30 p.m.
According to Margaret, the Board expects to canvass about 660 ballots (see her message below).
Amanda
-----Original Message-----
From: Jurgensen, Margaret
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 10:32 PM
To: Street, Thomas; Mihill, AmandaCc: 'KevinKarpinski@aol.com'; Roher, Margie
Subject: Election Day results are posted
The Absentee Canvass will be held Thursday April 23 2009, please see website regarding time. The Board expects to canvass approximately 660 absentee Ballots.
Thank you.
So let's do some more math. If 360 absentee ballots come back and 36 (10%) go for other candidates, that means Kramer must beat Navarro by a 202-122 margin (56%-34%) to win the election. Can that happen?
The Navarro campaign has said, "Our campaign can confirm a large number of absentee ballot requests were submitted by our supporters." That could be election night woofing, though the Kramer campaign is silent for the moment. But consider this: who are more likely to need absentee ballots: retirees or people who work two or three jobs?
Advantage: Navarro.
Update: Now we hear the 660 number is the actual number of returned absentee ballots. That's probably a good thing for Kramer. The more additional votes are out there, the more opportunity he has to win.
Fire Fighter Decision Threatens Nationwide Public Labor Movement (Updated)
We published our post “A Heavy Blow to Public Collective Bargaining” on Wednesday, April 8. But exactly a week later, it received an avalanche of direct visits from all over the country. And the visitor roster is an ominous development for public employee unions all across the United States.
Our post concerned a decision by the county’s Labor Relations Administrator (LRA) on the issue of whether the County Executive was required to propose a budget that included the Fire Fighters’ cost of living increases. The union cited sections of the county code requiring the Executive to respect the results of collective bargaining agreements he negotiated. The County Executive’s position was that the code did not bind him in his role of proposing a budget since that was a “legislative” function. The LRA agreed with the County Executive and the Fire Fighters are mulling an appeal.
The matter remained local until yesterday. Suddenly, the post began to be emailed all across the country. At one point, direct visits to that post accounted for more than a quarter of our traffic, an unusual event for this blog. Here are just a few of the entities who accessed it:
State of Arkansas
State of Maryland
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Miami-Dade County, Florida
City of Milwaukee
State of Minnesota
New York State Office of Comptroller
Oakland County, Michigan
Prince George’s County, Maryland
Public Employees Retirement Systems of Ohio
Stanislaus County, California
City of Tallahassee
Vermont Public Schools
Wayne County, Michigan
Wisconsin Public Schools
Many state and county governments around the country are experiencing financial problems similar to Montgomery County. More than a few of them are looking for a mechanism to escape their collectively bargained obligations. The LRA’s decision gives them a possible model for doing that.
But it could be worse. The Fire Fighters are considering an appeal to the court system. If they appeal and lose, the resulting court decision will be even more dangerous. Governments all over the U.S. could mimic the court’s reasoning to bust contracts everywhere.
We hear that there may be a way to step back from the brink. Our informants tell us that the Leggett administration is ready to join the Fire Fighters in asking that the LRA’s decision be vacated. That would rob the decision of its value as a precedent and render court action moot. In return, the administration would ask the Fire Fighters to stop pursuit of their cost of living increases. The Fire Fighters do not have much to lose by doing so since the County Council will certainly refuse to fund their increases even if the Executive proposes them. Everyone gets something out of the deal: the Fire Fighters can erase a bad labor decision, Leggett can resolve the last union contract issue and the rest of the nation’s labor movement will have one less problem to confront.
The deal makes sense. Will it happen?
Update: The Gazette has more.
Navarro Declares Victory
Following is the press release from the campaign.
##FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE##
Tuesday, April 22, 2009
Contact: David Moon, Campaign Manager
Email: david@navarroforcouncil.com
Nancy Navarro Declares Victory for County Council
SILVER SPRING, MD – Tonight, Nancy Navarro declared victory in her second run for Montgomery County Council, District 4. In two consecutive special elections, Nancy Navarro has thrown her hat into the ring. In 2008, Navarro came roughly 350 votes short of victory, but only a year later pulled off a tough-fought victory by 78 votes, winning most precincts carried previously by the late Councilmember Don Praisner.
Mobilizing an aggressive get-out-the-vote operation from populations traditionally ignored by politicians, Navarro united environmentalists, women, Latinos, Asians, Africans, African Americans, youths, seniors and progressive activists. Despite the unfavorable demography of the special election population, Navarro pulled off a stunning victory in only eight weeks.
Navarro commented, “I am so proud that my broad coalition of supporters has created a powerful new electoral vehicle to stand up for seniors and working families. In these tough times, I am ready to roll up my sleeves and pick up where the Praisner family left off. I can only hope to live up to their high standards of dedication to their constituents.”
Our campaign can confirm a large number of absentee ballot requests were submitted by our supporters. Elections experts consulted by the campaign point out that often a exceedingly small percentage of requested absentee ballots are actually returned. Considering Delegate Kramer lost the vast majority of precincts on Tuesday night, and Board of Elections records show that the distribution of absentee ballot requests was far more even than Tuesday’s turnout rates, Delegate Kramer’s path to victory is insurmountably narrow.
###
D4 Election Results 3
We believe the two Leisure World precincts came in at the end. That's why Navarro's 652 vote lead with 37 precincts counted shrank to 78 votes with all 45 precincts reporting. Now the contest goes to absentee ballots.
Our spies are whispering that there may be up to 600 absentee and provisional votes outstanding at the maximum. So let's do a little math. If there are 600 more votes to be counted and if candidates other than Navarro and Kramer claim 10% of those votes, then Kramer could beat Navarro by outpolling her 310-230. That would mean he would need a 52%-38% edge over her among absentees and provisionals. If there were only 400 more votes to be counted and 10% went to other candidates, then Kramer would need to beat Navarro by a 20-point margin (55%-35%). The smaller the number of votes to be counted, the greater the percentage lead Kramer will need to defeat Navarro.
We know that both the Kramer and Navarro campaigns sent out preprinted absentee ballot applications. Kramer sent them far and wide while Navarro concentrated on supporters. Which strategy will prove more successful? We'll find out in a few days.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
D4 Election Results 2
The contest between Nancy Navarro and Ben Kramer certainly tightened as the night progressed. Navarro now leads with 3557 votes to 3479 for Kramer. Just 78 votes separate the candidates. I don't know how many, if any, ballots are still outstanding including absentee or provisional ballots. The Washington Post reports that absentees will be counted starting on Thursday.
Cary Lamari received 690 votes with 104 for Robert Goldman, 99 for Thomas Hardman, and 58 for Michael Bigler. On the Republican side, new D4 resident Robin Ficker got 1187 to 571 for Louis August and 292 for Andrew Padula.
Around four times as many people voted in the Democratic as Republican primary in the obviously light special election turnout which attracted 10 percent of registered votes, though that number is depressed somewhat by the inclusion of ineligible unaffiliated voters among registered voters.
D4 Election Results
With 37 of the district's 45 precincts counted, Navarro is up 2,689-2,037 over Kramer. That's a margin of 49.58%-37.56%. So far, 5,424 Democratic primary votes have been cast compared to 7,658 cast last year. If another 2,000 votes were cast and 10% of those votes went to candidates other than Kramer and Navarro, Kramer would need 61% of the remaining 1,800 votes to catch Navarro. That seems extremely unlikely.
Robin Ficker is blowing away the other two Republicans with 61% of the vote at the moment. He is a sure winner of the Republican nomination.
Negative Campaigning in Montgomery County, Part Two
Conventional wisdom holds that negative campaigning hardly ever happens in Montgomery County. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the county has a long and rancid history of political smackdowns. Consider the following contests.
1. In the 1998 District 5 County Council race, challenger Marc Elrich called incumbent Derick Berlage a “total hypocrite” for accepting developer contributions. Berlage responded that Elrich was using business as a “bogeyman” and was “the candidate of shrill rhetoric.” Berlage won.
2. In the 1998 District 3 County Council race, challenger Phil Andrews accused incumbent Bill Hanna of being “beholden to developers” because of the volume of developer contributions he received. Andrews won.
3. In the 1998 at-large County Council race, William O’Neil called incumbent County Council Member Mike Subin “an abusive, obnoxious, horrible politician.” Lawrence Rosenblum, a close friend of both Ike Leggett and Ben Kramer, said, “It’s a destructive way to campaign… and it’s usually a sign that you’re desperate to win.” O’Neil finished last out of eight candidates. Kramer, who took more developer money than any other candidate (40% of his contributions), finished seventh.
4. In 2000, Board of Education incumbent Mona Signer blamed a “vicious smear campaign” by MCEA for her defeat. MCEA President Mark Simon replied, “I don't think you can build a career on the board of education by attacking teachers.”
5. In 2002, District 20 Delegate Dana Dembrow, who had long feuded with the other members of his delegation, was arrested for hitting his wife. Two anti-Dembrow attack mailers went out right before the election, one of them financed by the other District 20 incumbents. Dembrow called the mailers “absolute garbage, absolute deceitful lies,” but he still lost.
6. Also in 2002, the Gazette described “extensive use of attack ads” and “a barrage of vicious mailings” in the County Council races, much of which was aimed at incumbents Blair Ewing and Phil Andrews.
7. In 2004, Board of Education candidates Valerie Ervin and Sheldon Fishman held a number of “bitter exchanges” over the school system’s gifted and talented program. Ervin told the Gazette, “Sheldon's philosophy – it’s old and I think it’s elitist.” Ervin won.
8. In 2006, Montgomery’s negative campaigning spread to the Internet. Neighborspac ran a cartoon on its website showing five County Council Members singing and dancing on strings pulled by developers. Two short-lived anonymous attack blogs, Quid Pro MoCo and MoCorruption, sprang up to spread dirt on Council Members Steve Silverman, Nancy Floreen and Mike Subin. But good old mail-and-bash negative campaigning was alive and well in District 20, as MPW founder David Lublin related in his two posts about the Ida Ruben-Jamie Raskin mudfest.
9. The 2008 Congress District 4 rematch between incumbent Al Wynn and challenger Donna Edwards was even meaner than the original. The low point came when Wynn robocalls alerted voters about Edwards’ long-since-paid tax liens. Edwards called the messages “a really desperate attack… for the Congressman to attack me personally like this, shame on him.” Edwards won.
10. In the 2008 District 4 special election, Nancy Navarro was slimed by illegal attack robocalls. The perpetrators have never been discovered. Navarro lost.
11. In the summer of 2008, another anonymous attack blog was spawned targeting County Council Member Mike Knapp in the belief that he might challenge Ike Leggett for County Executive. After Eric Luedtke, Dan Reed and I condemned it, it shut down.
There you go, folks. Every election cycle in this county over the last decade has seen at least one negative campaign. Let’s see what next year brings!
Blogs Dominate Online D4 Coverage
Imagine casual voters in District 4 investigating the candidates the new-fangled way: Googling their names. What would they find? You would think they would see a bunch of Washington Post and Gazette articles, right?
No way. They are seeing posts from Maryland Politics Watch and Just Up the Pike.
Check out these screen shots of Google searches from yesterday:
Yesterday, MPW had its fourth-most visited day in the blog's history. Six of our top ten most-visited days ever have occurred this month. (The other four occurred around the November 2008 general election.) Last month, MPW and Just Up the Pike set internal visit records. This month, MPW is on track to set another record.
Many voters still get their news from paper. But the online generation is increasingly adding blogs to their daily news diet. That's something to remember for 2010.
Battle of the Endorsers
Check out the last mailers from the Kramer and Navarro campaigns. Which supporter would you rather have: Ike Leggett or Donna Edwards?
Negative Campaigning in Montgomery County, Part One
There is a great hue and cry going up about negative campaigning in District 4. Ben Kramer sent out the flyer below featuring a protest by Alison Klumpp against Nancy Navarro’s mailers.
The irony here is delicious. After all, Mrs. Klumpp’s mother, Marilyn Praisner, won her first County Council election in part by criticizing her opponent.
Flash back to 1990. Michael Gudis was a man with problems. The three-term County Council Member had been pilloried by the media for employing his girlfriend in his council office. An impending reorganization of the council transforming it from a seven-member at-large body to a council with four at-large members and five district members herded him into a district race. He was a developer-supported candidate in a slow-growth year. (This was the year that anti-development Council Member Neal Potter defeated incumbent County Executive and businessman Sid Kramer.) But worst of all, Gudis had a formidable challenger: two-term Board of Education Member and former CIA analyst Marilyn Praisner.
Mrs. Praisner had very little money; Gudis outraised her by at least six to one. But she announced her challenge in the summer of 1989 and spent a year working the district. Some of the qualities that made her a legend were already manifest in her first council race: toughness, hard work and attention to detail. And she laid a clever trap for the incumbent.
One of our spies recounts what happened:At a candidate forum, Mrs. Praisner made a statement to the effect that campaign accounts should not be used for personal benefit.
Gudis later accused Mrs. Praisner of using “CIA tactics” in the pages of the Post but it made no difference. Mrs. Praisner won and so began the ascendancy of one of the county’s greatest public servants. Was her use of the JCC issue negative campaigning or merely seizure of opportunity? In any event, it was criticism of an opponent based on his record. And it worked.
Mr. Gudis responded that he agreed.
Mrs. Praisner then turned to Mr. Gudis and asked why, if he agreed, he had used $700 of campaign funds to pay dues to the Jewish Community Center.
Mr. Gudis turned redder than a ripe tomato and responded – jabbered, actually – that he is on the Board of the JCC and that it was therefore an appropriate use of campaign funds.
The Montgomery Journal ran an editorial – I think it was called “Mr. Gudis, Pay Back the Money” – saying that it wasn’t an appropriate use of campaign funds and he should pay it back. His response – a letter to the Editor defending the expenditure.
When letters started to appear in the Washington Jewish Week, I knew the election was over. Jewish voters were writing that “they work hard and struggle to pay their dues to the JCC,” and who does this guy think he is.
Mrs. Klumpp’s allegation that Marilyn Praisner supported Ben Kramer’s Delegate candidacy strikes us as odd. We cannot locate any verification for it. Furthermore, Sid Kramer, Ben Kramer’s father, endorsed Nancy Navarro in 2008 when she ran against Don Praisner. If the Kramers and Praisners were so close, why did the Kramer family patriarch oppose Don Praisner?
This is just one story in Montgomery County’s long history of contentious campaigns. We’ll recount that history in Part Two.
Five Ways to Ensure Your Voting Rights
From the Montgomery County Board of Elections.
Contact: Marjorie Roher, 240-777-8525
For Immediate Release: April 9, 2009
Five Ways to Ensure Your Voting Rights
Montgomery County Election Director, Margaret Jurgensen, encourages registered voters to vote and offers assurances that voters’ rights will be protected. To help make the voting process smoother on April 21, 2009, Jurgensen suggests that voters follow instructions and allow enough time to cast a ballot, especially during the peak voting hours immediately before and after the workday.
Jurgensen offers these Election Day reminders:
1. BE ON TIME – Polling hours for all precincts are 7 a.m. until 8 p.m.
2. VOTE IN THE CORRECT PRECINCT – It is important for voters to go to the polling site for the precinct in which they are registered to vote. The correct polling location is listed above the mailing address on the sample ballot or you may contact the Montgomery County Board of Elections office at 240-777-VOTE or visit www.777vote.org or www.montgomerycountymd.gov/elections (select Polling Place Locator on our home page).
3. ID MAY BE REQUIRED – First-time voters in Montgomery County may be required to show proper identification. A driver’s license or official document including the voter’s name and address are acceptable. It is also helpful to bring voter registration cards, however, it is not required to vote.
4. FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE VOTING DEVICE - Citizens are encouraged to visit http://www.mdvotes.org/demo.php for a live demonstration of the Touchscreen Voting machine. Becoming familiar with the voting machine prior to arriving at the polling place will help make the voting experience as seamless as possible.
5. FILL OUT SAMPLE BALLOT AND TAKE TO THE POLLING PLACE – Sample ballots contain important information on which candidates will appear on a ballot, how to operate the voting machines, and where voters are assigned to vote. Voters should read it carefully, make selections, and take it to the polling place to use as a guide – the voting process will be easier as a result.
Voters should not hesitate to ask for assistance. Election officials are trained to assist voters with physical disabilities and answer questions about the voting process. The ballot is available in both English and Spanish. Voters for whom English is a second language are encouraged to bring an interpreter to the polling place to help them with the voting process. In addition, if a mistake is made on a ballot, the voter should notify the election official immediately and corrective measures will be taken.
For clarification of these, or other voting questions, contact the Montgomery County Board of Elections at 240-777-VOTE.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Special Interest Contributions in the District 4 Election: Update
By Drew Powell.
Posting today around 11:00 AM, finally in is Nancy Navarro’s April 10th filing with the Maryland State Board of Elections. The BOE confirmed that the Navarro campaign accrued $100.00 in fines for this late filing. It is true that the BOE makes lots of mistakes (like Kramer’s loans), but one has to wonder, in which category does this most recent late filing fall? The possibilities are: 1.) the BOE messed up, 2.) the Navarro campaign filed late.
Consider the first possibility: The BOE makes lots of mistakes; it’s no secret that they are understaffed and asked to do a lot with a little bit of funding. They are reliant on the campaigns to do their jobs right and to preferably file using the ELECTrack system, which makes things much easier on BOE officials. It’s a big job, with lots of room for error. During the past week, I spoke with at least three different staffers in the BOE’s campaign finance division. They assured me that the problem with the late Navarro filing was not on their end. If indeed, there was some kind of ELECTrack issue, why then did the Navarro campaign not express mail or hand deliver the data on a disc? All other District 4 candidates filed on time.
Possibility two, it was the fault of the Navarro campaign: First, let’s look at history; has Navarro ever filed late? Yes. Since her first filing with the BOE in August 2006, Navarro has filed late 17 times out of 31 (inclusive of reports and audits). She has received a total of $3,120.00 of fines and penalties. On five occasions the Navarro campaign requested a BOE waiver and was denied all five times. Additionally, the BOE has requested amendments for 19 of her reports… all of this in fewer than three years.
One might ask that if Navarro can’t manage a $100K campaign, is she capable of handling a $4B county budget? One thing is for certain, when you file your campaign finance report (late) on the Friday before the primary, it can’t possibly post on the BOE/UMD web site any sooner then the Monday before the election. This means it can’t be seen by concerned voters or receive the scrutiny of the press. This looks like it was taken out of the City of Rockville’s play book, where the mayor and council recently voted to obfuscate most campaign finance data until after the City Election.
Using the data in the just-filed report, an update has been performed for the “Nancy Navarro Campaign Finance Analysis 2009 Special Election” spread sheet. In the 2008 District 4 Special Election Navarro accepted $75,000.00 (67% of her total contributions) from development related sources. During this same period last year, she garnered 15% of those development related dollars and went on to declare the remaining 85% after the primary. Between TWO groups, development related interests and unions, Navarro received 84% of all her 2008 funding. This year Navarro’s development related take is 28% thus far. I look forward to her “Pre-General and “Post-General” campaign finance reports.
What you can do? As I have mentioned, it costs a lot of money to run a successful campaign. Don’t complain if candidates take too much money from special interests, if you’re not willing to give some yourself. If only a tiny percentage of the electorate gave $10, $20 or $50 to the candidates of their choice, those candidates would not have to turn to special interests to fund their campaigns. As an over simplified estimate, every mailing piece costs about $1. If you give $50, that’s about 50 more people, who will hear that candidate’s message. What difference can that make? The 2006 District 15 race for Maryland State House was won by 152 votes. If you can’t give money, give your time. Help with phone banks, stuffing envelopes, leafleting, working the polls, etc. Remember, Democracy is a participatory sport for all citizens.
Absentee and Provisional Ballots Counted Following Election
Following is the press release from the Montgomery County Board of Elections.
Contact: Marjorie Roher, 240-777-8525
For Immediate Release: April 20, 2009
Absentee and Provisional Ballots Counted Following Election
Voters who are unable to vote in person on Election Day and have requested an absentee ballot, as well as those voters who vote a provisional ballot on Election Day, will have their votes counted in the days following the election. The unofficial results released on election night contain only those votes cast on voting machines in the polling place.
The absentee and provisional ballots are counted during special canvass sessions held during the weeks following the election. The results of the canvasses are then included with the Election Day totals and released as the official election results. The canvasses, which are open to the public, begin at 10 a.m. and are held at the Montgomery County Board of Elections, 751 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville. Canvasses for the 2009 Special Primary Election begin on: Domestic Absentee Canvass, April 23; Provisional Canvass, April 27; and Absentee 2 Canvass, May 1.
###
Fact Check: Kramer’s Challenge to Navarro on Guns
Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) has shown his displeasure with Nancy Navarro’s negative mailers in recent debates. But one reference to a gun vote has attracted special ire and caused Kramer to issue a dramatic challenge. At stake is Kramer’s entire candidacy – and that’s according to Kramer himself.
Kramer disputes this statement from one of Navarro’s mailers:NRA & the Gun Lobby: Ben Kramer sponsored pro-gun legislation, making it easier to buy handguns in Maryland, that was touted by a Republican blog as a “step in the right direction.” The Washington Post noted “adding guns to an already combustible situation is likely to lead to more violence.”
By the Riderwood forum last Thursday, Kramer began pushing back against this allegation. One of his volunteers quoted him as making the following challenge:If Nancy Navarro can find one bill that I sponsored or voted for that weakens gun control protections, I will resign from this race. But if she can’t, I want her to stand up on Election Day with a sign that says, “I apologize to Ben Kramer.”
I heard Kramer state the challenge in a slightly different way at Friday’s Leisure World debate:If Nancy Navarro can point to a single vote by me to make handguns easier to buy in Maryland, I’ll withdraw from the race. Otherwise, she should apologize with a sign on the street on Election Day saying that “I was wrong about Ben Kramer.”
So did Ben Kramer support weakening gun control protections or making it easier to buy handguns? What are we going to see on Election Day: a big withdrawal or a big sign?
The focus of the dispute is HB 359, a bill that was lead-sponsored by Republican Delegate Tony McConkey (R-33A) and co-sponsored by Kramer and three others. The bill’s fiscal and policy note summarizes its purpose this way:This bill requires the Secretary of State Police to issue a handgun permit to a victim of domestic violence who has been issued a temporary or final protective order, assuming the individual meets other statutory handgun permit requirements. Specifically, the bill adds an individual who has been issued a temporary or final protective order to those individuals who, after meeting other statutory handgun permit requirements, are deemed to have a “good and substantial reason” to wear, carry, or transport a handgun.
The bill was extremely controversial. Advocates claimed it would help abuse victims defend themselves. Opponents claimed it would have unintended consequences. Consider these statements from one Baltimore City Delegate:Del. Cheryl D. Glenn (D-Baltimore), who last week rose on the floor to passionately recount her own experiences as the victim of violent beatings by an ex-husband in the 1970s, urged the bill’s defeat.
The Washington Post had these reservations about a similar Senate amendment:
“I can tell you as a victim, if I had had access to a gun at my most serious instances of domestic violence, I would have used it,” Glenn said. “Killing someone would have changed who I am today.”Victims’ advocates and law enforcement officers have serious concerns about the amendment. They worry that an abuser could discover a firearm hidden by a victim or wrestle away a gun during a dispute. It takes considerable training, police officials note, to be able to effectively wield a gun in self-defense. There’s another wrinkle: An abuser could misleadingly claim to be a victim of domestic violence and file for a protective order. This would rush a gun into the hands of someone capable of violence. And police officers called to domestic disputes could find themselves in greater danger.
In the end, the House bill was defeated 86-51. Kramer and Luiz Simmons (D-17) were the only Montgomery Delegates who voted for it.
Let’s evaluate Kramer’s challenge.
1. Does the bill make it easier to buy guns?
The bill never uses the term “buy.” It does require the Secretary of State Police to issue a permit to “carry, wear or transport a handgun” to applicants who have received a protective order from a judge. (An amendment changed the language to allow the Secretary to “consider” those protective orders as criteria for the permits.)
The bill’s fiscal and policy note states that 17,427 temporary protective orders and 9,104 final protective orders were granted by Maryland judges in fiscal year 2007. The note assumes that 10% of eligible individuals would apply for permits if the bill was passed, resulting in 1,700 to 1,800 additional applications per year. The bill estimates that the state would earn $130,500 more per year in permit application fees but would pay out an extra $240,600-$306,800 annually for the hire of two additional state troopers to process the applications.
Guns can only be obtained in one of two ways: by purchase or by theft. Most abuse victims are incapable of conjuring guns out of thin air. (If they could do that, there would be a lot less abuse!) Furthermore, individuals who steal guns rarely apply for permits for them. It defies common sense that a bill allowing thousands of people to more easily obtain permits would not result in more gun purchases.
Kramer is splitting hairs. Plain and simple, this bill would have allowed more people to legally buy guns – 1,700-1,800 in all per year. Whether those guns would have served a good purpose is a legitimate subject of debate.
2. Does the bill weaken gun control regulations?
Buried in the fiscal and policy note is this statement:DSP [Department of State Police] has questioned whether, after an order has expired, a handgun permit properly issued under the bill would still be valid. If not, the permit and the weapon might have to be forfeited. Because it takes about 120 days for the actual issuance of a printed permit, and because temporary protective orders can only be issued for 30 days, it would seem likely that those persons not issued a subsequent final order will have had the basis for issuance expire.
This is an important point that received no attention during the debate over the bill. A temporary protective order only lasts 30 days, but a gun permit takes 120 days to process. What happens if a temporary protective order expires but the gun permit is issued anyway? The individual who receives the permit would no longer have a legal basis for possessing it. The prospect of hundreds, maybe thousands of individuals obtaining gun permits without a current legal basis for having them is definitely a weakening of gun control regulations.
Kramer’s challenge fails. Will he withdraw?
Update: Ann Marimow really fell down on the job this time. Her rushed Washington Post article makes no reference to the above facts. She did not bother to read the bill or its fiscal and policy note, a serious disservice to her readers.
Navarro Opposes Wheaton Library Move
Nancy Navarro's campaign has been sending this postcard into precincts near Wheaton.
The Strange Case of Kramer’s Mystery Money Loans… Solved
By Drew Powell.
In the April 17th post, “Special Interest Contributions in the District 4 Election” I reported that I was unable to find $42,000 in loans Ben Kramer made to himself during the 2009 District 4 Special Election.
The Maryland State Board of Elections (BOE) shows Kramer receiving $23,000.00 in loans as reported in his “Montgomery Special 2009 Pre-Primary 1 Filing” (03/24/2009) and $27,000.00 as noted in his “Montgomery Special 2009 Pre-Primary 2 Filing” (04/10/2009). The BOE also shows Kramer going from $130,450.00 in “Total Outstanding Obligations” to $180,450.00 during that same period. If you click on the “23,000.00” or “27,000.00” loan figures on either “Montgomery Special 2009 Pre-Primary Report” page it takes you to the same loan summery page 1 of 2. So far so good. This page shows loans made by Kramer to himself since March 2006 and shows ONE loan in the amount of $8,000.00 on February 11, 2009 (part of the 2009 District 4 Special Election cycle).
Now it gets interesting, at the bottom of the loan summary page, you then click on the “page 2” link. What you get is another summary page for Mr. Kramer’s contributions, NOT page 2 of the loan summary page. Try as you may, when it comes to page 2, ‘you can’t get there from here.” The link simply does not exist on the State Board of Elections web site. This leaves a difference of $42,000.00. Where are those loans? When did Kramer receive them? How many separate loans were there and in what amounts? In the April 17th post, I referred to the missing loan data as “mystery money loans.” I was told by a few folks in the know (including the BOE), that since Kramer ran for delegate, the loans could be in “other accounts.” However, there is only ONE “Friends of Ben Kramer” account and if Kramer loaned himself money, that’s where it would appear.
Finally, I started to think; what if this was a BOE database or University of Maryland web error. Don’t ask me why, but the State Board of elections commissioned the University of Maryland to provide all its web services starting in August 2006. It may have reduced the BOE’s costs and/or liability, but it certainly has increased the time it takes to get data posted by at least one to two business days (take Navarro’s late filing for example, which just posted late this morning, even though it was received by the BOE around noon Friday) and has increased the time it takes to correct errors.
After examining the link structures, I tried a manually correct link to try and pull up the missing page 2… and it worked! You can’t get to page two on the BOE/UMD campaign finance web site, but you CAN on “Maryland Politics Watch.” Click on MPW Page 2 to view. Up pops the missing $42,000.00.
The loans reported are as follows:
It looks like Mr. Kramer has a very handy checkbook. How did he make all his money again?
Final Campaign Forum Draws a Crowd
By Sharon Dooley.
It was standing room only at the Marilyn J. Praisner Library in the Fairland area Saturday as the District 4 candidates squared off in the final event of the primary campaign. Co-sponsored by the African American Democratic club and the District 14 Democratic cubs, the event allowed the candidates to hone their messages before the partisan crowd. In alpha order, those attending were Robert Goldman, Ben Kramer, Cary Lamari and Nancy Navarro; Tom Hardman arrived more than one hour late, apologized without explanation and sat down.
All candidates stuck to the themes and messages that they have brandished throughout the campaign and there were few news items or jabs across the table.
Lamari kept to his populist message and was clearly the most animated and demonstrably passionate of the group. His speaking about the 14th amendment in an attempt to tie it to the ambulance fees and equal protection seemed to be off base. His anti- ICC message was an audience favorite. He also mentioned that he was mostly self-funding his campaign, although with significantly fewer dollars than his two main opponents.
Goldman talked about his neighborhood and his wife and children who were present and still seems to be running to govern Burtonsville. (Too bad it isn’t a municipality.) He did speak also about volunteerism, minorities and juvenile justice – where he volunteers.
Hardman had short, somewhat rambling responses and when given a chance to ask his audience a question, tried to determine which topics ranked highest on their list of concerns. He seemed surprised that taxes were not picked as a primary issue and that jobs, healthcare and housing were ranked higher.
School Board member Navarro was better and more confident in her answers, which seemed less tentative than they had been at the first forum; she smiled more and seemed to relate well to the audience, many of whom were persons of color. She spoke frequently of the majority minority designation of District 4. Several of her answers were brought back to her strong point – matters before the board of education, although this was not always relevant. Oddly, she did not forcefully ask the audience for their vote.
Delegate Kramer had an up and down day. Knowledgeable and succinct, his answers were generally to the direction of the questions asked, but at times, he did not seem to reach out well to the audience, smiling infrequently. Discussions of race were minimal in his answers in a room that called out for such a dialogue. Despite this, he was clearly informed and informative in his responses, speaking well about the foreclosure issue, for example.
All candidates had partisans in the audience: Lamari stickers were noted across the room, Eric Bernard of the Volunteer Firefighters was called out by Lamari for not supporting him when they had in the past – this group endorsed Kramer this time. Council member Valerie Ervin was in attendance – her support for Navarro is well known. (I am unsure if Council member Leventhal – a Navarro supporter - was in the crowd; someone said they saw him, but I did not.) Senator Rona Kramer was there in support of her brother, as was Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg who also supports him.
So it is about all over now except for the shouting. Several friends who live in District 4 have mentioned that the mailings, phone calls and voice mails have been pretty heavy. Negative campaigning is said to be getting worse, with many, in my informal survey, indicating that Navarro’s mailings were the most misleading. I have not seen them apart from the postings done by MPW, but it has been seen that negative ads work, even while being decried by the voters. Turnout is likely to be the key and a repeat of the low approximately 8% or so seen last year is not unlikely. So – it seems that the voters will speak on Tuesday – I expect a close race between Navarro and Kramer and would not venture a guess as to the winner, but I believe that the winner will take Leisure World, where turnout is expected to be larger than elsewhere. Leisure World might then control the deciding precincts.
My message to District 4 voters is – get out and vote on Tuesday. Make a difference in this county by casting a ballot for the candidate that can best represent you and will work hard for Montgomery County’s future.
Sharon Dooley
District 18 End of Session Letter
Following is the letter sent by Senator Rich Madaleno and Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher and Al Carr.
April 14, 2009
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
This week marked the end of the 426th legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly. In prior years, we have each prepared individual end-of-session letters. This year, we decided to conserve resources by forgoing our four letters and instead prepared this single, joint letter.
It is an honor and privilege to represent the people of District 18 in the State House. The four of us work hard as a team to advance your interests. During the past 90 days, we have benefited from your advice and counsel during our deliberations on a wide range of issues. We appreciate the thousands of e-mails, postcards, letters, phone calls, and office visits we received.
With state revenues suffering from the effects of the global economic downturn, the state budget was a focal point of discussion this session. In the face of a billion dollar budget deficit, we passed a $13.8 billion balanced 2010 budget, 3.3% smaller than 2009. In doing so, we worked hard to protect Maryland’s critical support of public education and its commitment to our most vulnerable citizens. Two of us -- Sen. Rich Madaleno and Del. Ana Sol Gutiérrez -- serve on the budget committees in our respective chambers. We reined in future spending, cutting more than $825 million from the budget overall while leaving an ample Rainy Day Fund. We were also able to secure a record level of state investment for the Montgomery County Public Schools ($624.4 million). In addition, we blocked attempts to transfer responsibility of the state-controlled teacher retirement system to the county.
We successfully fought to defend Gov. O’Malley’s tuition freeze at our state universities and increase funding for community colleges. Maryland is one of only a few states nationally that balanced its budget without significant tuition increases. We also worked to protect our investment in community services for Marylanders with physical and developmental disabilities.
Your District 18 Team also championed a number of issues related to energy and the environment. Del. Al Carr serves as a strong voice for our community on these issues on the Environmental Matters Committee. The District 18 Team championed bills to strengthen forest conservation laws, increase community participation in environmental decisions, and accelerate Chesapeake Bay cleanup efforts. These new laws will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the discharge of harmful phosphorus into the Bay. We passed a bill to improve septic systems located near our vulnerable tidal wetlands.
We also successfully advocated for and passed all of the Governor's Smart, Green, & Growing initiative, an effort to curb sprawl by directing growth toward priority areas that have existing infrastructure. In addition, we passed legislation that improves the counties’ ability to invest in revitalization and transit-oriented development. After much debate, we were unfortunately unable to pass legislation to re-regulate the electric utility market.
We also worked hard this year to ensure the safety of our community and preserve our civil rights and liberties. A member of the Judiciary Committee, Del. Jeff Waldstreicher championed these issues. As you may know, in a widespread scandal, the Maryland State Police were found spying on peaceful activists such as antiwar protesters. The District 18 Team worked extensively to pass legislation to end this unconstitutional practice. He also led the effort to ban texting while driving, an extremely dangerous and distracting practice. In the area of child protection, the General Assembly passed two bills, authored by Del. Waldstreicher, making possession of child pornography a felony and allowing social service agencies to share crucial information to protect our most vulnerable children. These bills will be signed into law by Gov. O’Malley.
Driver’s licenses for undocumented residents and federal Real ID compliance became the dominant, controversial issue at the end of session. The final compromise, reached minutes before adjournment, changes the law to require proof of lawful presence for all new licenses issued after June 1, 2009. Current foreign-born license holders who cannot prove lawful status are permitted to keep their licenses until July 1, 2015. All license renewals will require proof of legal status and full compliance with Real ID after that date. We worked with our Montgomery County colleagues to reject more extreme measures that would have negatively impacted public safety and led to a significant increase in unlicensed and uninsured drivers on our roads.
Working together, we passed several bills aimed at improving local services, including one authored by Del. Carr to increase the transparency of procurement decisions made by the county school system. The delegation also secured $675,000 to renovate the MacDonald Knolls Center, a service center for the developmentally disabled in Silver Spring, and $175,000 to help complete the LEDC’s small business center in Wheaton.
Over the next few weeks, we will be preparing individual responses to many of the letters and e-mails we received during the session. We will also be posting items to our blog, Generally Assembled (Maryland18.blogspot.com). In addition, the General Assembly’s website (mlis.state.md.us) contains a great deal of information about our work, including the soon-to-be-released 90 Day Report. We hope you will continue to share your thoughts and concerns with us. Our individual contact information is listed below if you are interested in our individual positions on specific issues.
Thank you again for your comments and support this year.
Senator Rich Madaleno
richard.madaleno@senate.state.md.us
301.858.3137
Delegate Ana Sol Gutiérrez
ana.gutierrez@house.state.md.us
301.858.3181
Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher
jeff.waldstreicher@house.state.md.us
301.858.3130
Delegate Al Carr
alfred.carr@house.state.md.us
301.858.3110
Ben Kramer Repeats Broken Pledge at Leisure World
In Friday’s District 4 debate at Leisure World, Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) said, “I have not taken and agreed that I would not take money from developers in this campaign.”
That’s a nice line. But it’s not true.
Kramer originally pledged not to take developer contributions to Alison Klumpp according to Maryland Moment. Let’s put aside the issue of whether Kramer is himself a developer (although he admitted to building two commercial projects to Just Up the Pike’s Dan Reed). In a post on April 7, we identified a former part-owner of Home Properties Inc. and a commercial leasing lawyer as Kramer contributors. In yesterday’s post, we identified another contributor who was an officer of a medical office building owner. Whether they are “development interests” as Drew Powell might refer to them can be argued. But there can be no dispute about another Kramer contributor: Josh Rales, who gave him $1,000 on 2/25/09.
Josh Rales is a Republican-turned-Democrat from Potomac who ran for U.S. Senate in 2006. The corporate stub for his company, RFI Associates, classifies it is an “apartment operator,” one of many in Bethesda. Yellowbot says the company is in “real estate investments.”
On his YouTube site, Rales said, “In 1984, I founded RFI Associates, and over the last 21 years, I have built RFI into one of the leading investment companies in the area, specializing in acquiring, renovating, and overseeing real estate projects.” A Maryland Moment article from 7/26/06 refers to him as “a Montgomery County real estate developer and philanthropist” who poured over $1.4 million into his own campaign. An 8/11/06 Washington Post article says this:For more than a decade, Rales made millions of dollars in real estate development and investments in the Maryland suburbs. In the past few years, he said, he has sold all of his investments in preparation for a run for public office.
But a 4/20/07 Gazette article refers to him as a “real estate investor.” And in his federal contribution filings, he repeatedly refers to himself as a “real estate investor” as recently as 9/2/08. By his own filings, Rales himself states that he is still in the industry that made him a fortune – ownership and development of property.
Furthermore, Kramer says nothing about independent expenditures made on his behalf by the Maryland Realtors PAC. Check the authority line at the bottom of these two mailers.
When Kramer tells a large group of seniors that he rejects developer money while the real estate industry is sending independent mailings promoting his candidacy all over the district, he may not be violating the letter of his pledge. But he is being deliberately duplicitous.
We are not naïve about statements made by politicians. Navarro’s negative mailers have become an issue during the campaign. Some believe they state unfair characterizations of Kramer’s voting record in the General Assembly. They are a legitimate subject of debate.
But unlike Navarro, Kramer made a pledge and still makes it even though he broke it weeks ago. Ever since we exposed Kramer’s reliance on the real estate industry (a contention backed up by neutral former Neighborspac Executive Director Drew Powell, who estimated Kramer’s development-related contribution percentage at 97%), his campaign has gone silent on the issue. And Kramer still repeats his broken pledge, even standing 20 feet away from me and looking into my camera at the Leisure World debate. Development contributions are an issue for some in the county but basic integrity is an issue for us all. And now I am calling out Ben Kramer’s campaign.
Return Josh Rales’ money and repudiate the mailings of the Maryland Realtors PAC.
Or retract your pledge.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Phil Andrews Meets Bernadette Peters
Montgomery County's Council President met the world-famous Bernadette Peters at the Strathmore last night. In an MPW exclusive, Phil Andrews confesses all!
Adam,
I was the luckiest guy at Strathmore last night. I was sitting with my wife, Staci, watching the effervescent Bernadette Peters sing, "There is Nothing Like a Dame" from the musical South Pacific, when she approached the steps to the stage and started down. Since I was sitting in the seat closest to the steps, Ms. Peters would have had to consciously pass me by to serenade someone else. Demonstrating great kindness, she stopped in front of me, leaned over and sung to me from inches away for at least a couple of stanzas -- at which point she turned to Staci, asked "Is he with you?" and then said something very kind about me.
Although, as far as I know, there are no photographs, video or sound recordings of the event, none could match the experience of the moment.
Phil
Nancy King's End of Session Letter
Following is the letter from District 39's Senator.
April 18, 2009
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
The 2009 Legislative Session has come to a close and I would like to share with you news about the issues and initiatives in which I have been involved. I would also like to thank you for contacting my office with your thoughts and concerns about the budget and bills that were introduced. I am pleased that over one thousand residents of District 39 contacted me, as it is your thoughts on legislative issues that guide my decisions.
The Budget
As a member of the Budget & Taxation Committee, this 2009 Session presented us with very difficult decisions as we worked through the process of passing a balanced budget in this economic downturn. The process was further challenged this year as revenue estimates continued to tumble during the 90 days we were in session. It was my position throughout that we not raise any taxes which would place a further burden on our citizens who were already feeling the pinch of a global economic crisis. We were successful in accomplishing that goal. And while we cut over $850 million from the budget, we were able to protect core priorities like K-12 education.
Real ID and Driver's Licenses
The House of Delegates voted out a bill which would allow those without documentation of legal presence to be able to renew their license but that license could not be used for identification purposes to board a plane or enter a federal building. The Senate amended that bill and passed a version which would end the issuance of licenses to undocumented immigrants and removed the proposed "two-tiered" system of licensure. Members of the Senate and House met to work out a compromise bill. I voted in favor of that compromise which does the following: prohibits the issuance of a driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants after June 1, 2009; allows a window for undocumented immigrants who hold current licenses to prove legal presence; voids all licenses issued to undocumented immigrants by July 1, 2015. While I preferred the bill that was originally amended and passed by the Senate, I feel the worst alternative would have been no bill at all.
Speed Cameras
The experience of speed cameras in Montgomery County has been varied. Since there are areas in our community where the cameras have caused traffic problems and have not increased safety, I voted against the speed cameras bill. The Senate reconsidered the issue and limited speed cameras to work zones and school zones. Based on assurances that the county would re-visit those cameras which are not in work and school zones, I agreed to vote for the bill.
The Death Penalty
I have been contacted by District 39 residents on this issue more than any other this session and the overwhelming majority are in favor of repeal. I have struggled with this difficult issue for many years; but after hearing enough evidence of the chance of executing an innocent person, I supported the repeal efforts this year. While a full repeal did not pass in the Senate, we did require more stringent evidentiary standards which will make the imposition of the death penalty more difficult and this version of the bill did pass. While disappointing to those in favor of repeal, these limitations are a step forward.
Re-regulation
I have heard from so many people about the increases in their energy bills and I have experienced the same at my home. The Senate passed a bill which would re-instate energy regulation in the state, but I voted against it and here is why: first, I felt the bill was hastily drafted and came to us late in the session. There were many questions about the bill that could not be answered and many concerns about what re-regulation would do to emerging energy production sources like solar, geothermal and wind power. Even the proponents of the bill were quick to point out that this would not save consumers any money in the short term and in fact the bill required the imposition of new fees to all state consumers. The House of Delegates voted unfavorably on this bill so it did not pass this session. Re-regulation may be the best way for the state to proceed, but I think an issue as important and complex as this one should be studied over the interim for the best possible outcome for Maryland's citizens.
Bills that I sponsored in this 2009 Session which have been passed by the Legislature and are headed to Governor O'Malley for his signature:
SB550 - Child Online Safety Act of 2009 will require Internet access providers to make available to their subscribers a product or service which enables the subscriber to restrict, monitor or completely block their child's use of the Internet. The United States courts have continued to uphold the right to free speech on the Internet but have been vocal in their support of tools such as filtering and blocking technologies. Senate Bill 550 will empower parents to allow their children to benefit from all the Internet has to offer while protecting them from those sites that may cause them harm.
SB800 - Biotechnology Investment Incentive Tax Credit Program - In 2005, the Biotechnology Investment Incentive Tax Credit Program was established to encourage investment in the growing biotechnology industry. Senate Bill 800 simply clarifies two aspects of the program by defining language and timeframes for credits. The biotech industry is critical to the economic growth of the state and the I-270 corridor in particular. These clarifications will allow the Biotechnology Investment Incentive Tax Credit program to move forward and help build an industry which has the capacity for significant job growth in Maryland.
SB 413 - Committee on Children, Youth, and Families - Repeal of Sunset - In 1999, the Joint Committee on Children, Youth and Families was created to focus on issues related to the education, health, safety and economic well-being of children in Maryland. This Committee, of which I am the current Chair, continues to provide a forum for collaboration and coordination among all agencies and groups concerned with child welfare. In these times of economic crisis, it is as important as ever for state agencies, legislators and children's advocates to have a forum to explore new and cost effective ways to meet the needs of our children. The authorization for the Committee is set to expire on June 20, 2009; this bill will remove the sunset clause and allow the Joint Committee on Children, Youth and Families to continue its work.
SB234 - Education - Maryland's Preschool for All Business Plan - Final Report Requirements - Studies clearly show several educational benefits for children who attend high-quality preschool programs including greater academic achievement, lower rates of grade retention and higher rates of high school graduation. A 2007 Task Force on Universal Preschool Education report to the Governor recommended a program called Preschool for All. The Task Force charged Maryland State Department of Education to develop a business plan, including cost estimates for expanding the program. Senate Bill 234 requires MSDE to finalize that report with input from county school superintendents and local governing bodies. The report would include, among other things, a cost projection for the staged implementation of the finalized business plan, allowing us to look at the feasibility of implementing such a plan in Maryland.
SB305 - Mortality and Quality Review Committee - Sunset Extension and Membership - In 2006, legislation was enacted which required that incidents of injury or fatality that occur in a facility or program licensed or operated by the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) must be reported to the Mortality and Quality Review Committee. This committee takes that information and makes recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) and the Secretary of Disabilities to prevent future avoidable injuries and deaths and improve quality care. The requirement to report certain data to that committee is set to expire in 2009. The new legislation will extend the reporting requirements for three more years and provide a continued commitment to the safety of a very vulnerable segment of our citizens.
SB621 - Sales and Use and Property Tax - Exemptions - Solar Energy Equipment and Property - During the 2008 Session, the Legislature passed a bill that exempted the purchase of specified solar energy and geothermal equipment from sales and use tax and exempted specific solar energy equipment from property tax. The Maryland Energy Administration determined that the language in that legislation could impose an unintended limitation. Electricity generated by a solar panel, along with use in a structure, can also be used to send electricity back to the power grid through net-metering. Senate Bill 621 makes a technical change to the current legislation which will accomplish the original intent of the legislation by including in the exemption equipment which supplies energy to the grid. The legislation passed last year with bipartisan support will encourage the use of renewable energy sources and help to create "green collar" jobs. The technical changes in Senate Bill 621 will allow Maryland to continue moving forward with its commitment to renewable energy.
Bond Bills
Along with passing state-wide legislation, I was successful in securing funding for three important District 39 projects. The first provides $40,000 for the addition and upgrading of lighting in the Northgate Homes Corp. Upgrading and adding equipment will improve the lighting levels in the community to ensure the residents' nighttime safety, security and productivity, and provide for safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians. The second provides $80,000 for repairs which will bring areas of the Lake Whetstone facility up to current code as well as extending the building and adding new windows. Lighting will be added for improved safety. The Lake Whetstone Facilities are enjoyed year round by the residents of Montgomery Village. These improvements will allow the residents to safely enjoy the facility for years to come. The final bond bill will provide $30,000 to upgrade group homes dedicated to adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Funding will provide for the necessary repairs in these homes and allow their tenants to continue living independent lives.
Bills I sponsored that did not get passed this session:
SB354 - Correctional Services - Crimes of Violence - Diminution Credits - Under current law, offenders convicted of crimes of violence (as defined in Title 14-101(a)), are eligible for parole upon completion of 50% of their sentence. If the parole board refuses parole for the offender, then the offender may use diminution (good behavior) credits to reduce their sentence. Senate Bill 354 would require those offenders convicted of crimes of violence, who have been denied parole, to continue to serve at least 85% of their sentence, no matter how many diminution credits they have earned. Unfortunately, this bill, which was heard in the Judicial Proceedings Committee, did not come out for a vote. I believe very strongly in the importance of this legislation and will work over the interim with public safety officials, Maryland prison system officials and the Judicial Proceedings Committee members to see how we can move this legislation forward.
SB799 - Health Care Facilities - Certificates of Need - Hospitals - Under current law, the Maryland Health Care Commission may only consider one application at a time for a new health care facility. Montgomery County has found itself in a unique position where two health care providers are looking to build new facilities in the upcounty. The legislation I proposed would have allowed the Health Care Commission to review the two applications simultaneously thus ensuring a more efficient process with the best outcome for the county. While the legislation did not pass, it did bring this issue to light and we have received assurances from the health care commission that they will do their best to review both applications before making any decisions. Go to the following link to read an op-ed which I wrote with Delegate Barkley on this issue: http://www.gazette.net/stories/02182009/montcol174835_32471.shtml
During the interim
I can be reached during the interim at my Annapolis office number - 301-858-3686 as well as by e-mail at nancy.king@senate.state.md.us. As always, I am honored to serve you here in Annapolis and I look forward to hearing from you on any issues or concerns you may have.
Sincerely,
Senator Nancy J. King
Paid for by Friends of Nancy King; Joli McCathran, Treasurer
District 4 Campaign Finance Reports, Part Two (Updated)
The second and last pre-primary reports due on April 10 are now mostly online. Nancy Navarro’s filing is not online but we obtained it directly from her campaign. Following are the cumulative receipts and spending totals for the candidates for both reports, as well as items of interest.
Ben Kramer
Beginning Balance: $316.44
Contributions: $2,875
Loans: $50,000
Expenditures: $50,118.54
End Balance: $3,072.90
Kramer has consistently led all candidates in receipts by loaning himself 95% of his campaign’s funding. His spending total is close to Nancy Navarro’s, but lags because she started with more than $40,000 left over from last year.
Kramer had five individual contributors since March 24 who gave him a combined $675, three of whom are newsworthy. Hilde Alter of Rockville gave him $100. Alter is the Chief Accounting Officer of Medical Office Properties Inc., a real estate manager based in Chevy Chase that once owned a portfolio of medical office buildings. Board of Education Member Laura Berthiaume defeated incumbent Steve Abrams in large part because of help from MCEA. That did not stop her from giving $100 to Kramer, who is running against MCEA-endorsed Nancy Navarro. And Kensington Mayor Pete Fosselman, who endorsed Navarro in 2008, gave $200 to Kramer. That’s an interesting decision because the Town of Kensington is dependent on the District 5 County Council Member for constituent services. Unfortunately for Kensington residents, that Council Member is Valerie Ervin – Navarro’s strongest ally.
Kramer paid staffer Tom Smith (who used to work for Martin O’Malley and Marylanders United to Stop Slots) $4,000 this period. That makes Smith’s total take $8,000, more than what Kramer has paid former Praisner campaign manager Eric Hensal ($6,000). Kramer spent $21,030.52 this period on mailings and postage and $1,568.80 on printing and campaign materials. His biggest ad buy was a $675 purchase in Washington Jewish Week.
Cary Lamari
Beginning Balance: $0
Contributions: $4,432.24
Loans: $10,000
Expenditures: $4,260.54
End Balance: $10,171.70
Lamari led all candidates in contributions with $3,592.24 last time but only collected $840 in this period. Three contributors stand out. DiSalvatore Realty gave him $100. John DiSalvatore owns the shopping center property on the northwest corner of Georgia and Norbeck, right next to one of Ben Kramer’s properties. Dale Tibbitts, Council Member Marc Elrich’s Chief of Staff, gave him $100. And George Leventhal, one of four County Council Members who endorsed Navarro, contributed $100 to Lamari. When I asked Leventhal about that, he wrote me, “Cary Lamari asked me for a contribution and I was happy to respond. He is a dedicated and sincere advocate for Montgomery County neighborhoods.”
Lamari spent $2,361.46 on postage and $166.21 on printing and campaign materials in the most recent period. Lamari is known by many in Leisure World because of his activism on Georgia at Norbeck and on the ICC, but his total spending is likely not enough to build his name recognition in other parts of the district.
Nancy Navarro
Beginning Balance: $43,220.69
Contributions: $28,645
Loans: $0
Expenditures: $66,573.63
End Balance: $5,576.95
Navarro has received more in contributions (not including loans) than the rest of the candidates combined. Nineteen individuals and entities have given her $500 or more during this election so far. Collectively, they account for 76% of her receipts. They are:
SEIU MD/DC State Council: $3,000
BUILD-PAC of Maryland: $3,000
Mid-Atlantic Laborers Political Education Fund: $2,500
Friends of George Leventhal: $2,000
Democratic Women’s PAC of Maryland: $2,000
United Food & Commercial Workers Union: $1,000
Sheet Metal Workers Local 100: $1,000
MCGEO Local 1994: $1,000
James Soltesz, Potomac, MD: $1,000
Artery Development LLC: $750
Amalgamated Transit Union COPE Account: $500
Milagros McGuire, Bethesda, MD: $500
Hispanic Democratic Club: $500
Jeffrey Zane Slavin, Chevy Chase, MD: $500
David Weiss, Chevy Chase, MD: $500
Bethesda Center LLC, Washington, DC: $500
David D. Flanagan, McLean, VA: $500
R. William Hard, Potomac, MD: $500
Shirley Brandman, Bethesda, MD: $500
Soltesz is the CEO of Loiederman Soltesz Associates, a land development firm. Milagros McGuire and her husband, Dennis McGuire, are retirees who frequently contribute to Democratic candidates. Slavin is the President of C.J. O'Shaughnessy, Inc., a real estate firm, and is the Mayor of the Town of Somerset. Weiss is a member of the Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Chamber of Commerce. His company, Monty LLC, is a Montgomery County developer. Bethesda Center LLC’s address (3299 K St. NW Ste. 700) matches The Bernstein Companies, a major metropolitan development firm. Flanagan is President of Elm Street Development, a residential developer that built Clarksburg Village. Hard is the Executive Vice-President of LCOR, a development firm. Brandman is the current President of the Board of Education.
Other contributors of interest include Board of Education Member Chris Barclay ($175), District 20 Delegate Heather Mizeur ($150), former District 5 County Council candidate Hans Riemer ($150), Verizon Communications ($125) and Board of Education Member Judith Docca ($100).
During the 2009 special election, we estimate that labor unions supplied 31% of Navarro’s funding. In the first pre-primary report, SEIU Local 500 reported a $2,500 in-kind contribution for the services of Jackie Lichter, their political director who is now working as Navarro’s deputy campaign manager. No in-kind contribution appeared on the second report. We do not know of any union contributions to any other candidate besides Navarro.
Navarro spent $23,430 on media this period, an amount that far exceeded Kramer ($965.44) and every other candidate. Almost all of it went to TruPolitics LLC, a consulting firm based in Ellicott City. She paid salaries to three staffers: campaign manager David Moon ($3,500), Ken Silverman ($1,015) and Alexis Reed ($1,000). She has advertised on both CBS Radio ($900) and Radio America ($450). She is the only candidate to rent a campaign office.
Incidentally, while the State Board of Elections (SBE) does not have Navarro’s report, it was compiled one day before the April 10 deadline. That fits with her campaign’s claims that a transmission error prevented it from getting to SBE. As a campaign treasurer myself, I can attest to the problems with its atrocious ELECTrack software. See the date report on her submission below.
During the latest period, Republican Andrew Padula received $475, Green Party candidate George Gluck collected $230 and Democrat Thomas Hardman received $80. The other candidates do not have reports listed on the State Board of Elections website. These totals are simply not enough to mount a competitive campaign. In last year’s special election, Steve Kanstoroom loaned himself $47,573.96 and finished third in the Democratic primary with 10.76% of the vote. A candidate with no money and no name recognition has no chance.
Disclosure: I am the Assistant to the General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. Our Mid-Atlantic Regional Council gave Navarro $6,000 last year, the maximum amount allowed by the state. I have not donated any money to any District 4 candidate and am not volunteering for any of them.
Update: An informant points out that Elm Street and LCOR, two of Navarro’s contributors, specialize in projects near Metro stations. That fits with Navarro’s views on transit-oriented development.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
The Most Paranoid Message of the Special Election
Following is a post by Volunteer Fire Fighters Executive Director Eric Bernard on the volunteers' listserv at 11:15 on Friday night. The Volunteer Fire Fighters have endorsed Ben Kramer. You have to read this to believe it, folks.From: ebernard@rvfd.org
Back to reality. I attended the Leisure World debate on Friday. MCGEO Executive Director Bob Stewart asked Ben Kramer a question about his vote on progressive taxation and Kramer answered it. There was no brawl. There was no threat of a brawl. There was no hijacking by anyone at all. Nothing happened.
To: mcvfra@mailman.mcvfra.org
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:15:06 -0400
Subject: [MCVFRA] HELP Needed Tomorrow at Candidate's Forum
Good evening, we have received several phone calls tonight for help tomorrow at the last candidate's forum for district 4. There was almost a full out brawl at tonight’s forum at of all places Leisure World according to several people who were there. There were supposedly Navarro supporters or at least anti-Kramer people there, who we were told, tried to hi-jack the forum. The descriptions we have heard are bad but that Ben did very well. They are asking for supporters to attend tomorrow's forum at the Praisner Library from 11a-12:30p. If you can PLEASE help - please attend to hold signs and help Ben win!! ****Candidate Forum District 4: African American Democratic Club of Montgomery County.
TOMORROW: Saturday, April 18, 2009, 11:00 AM--12:30 PM Marilyn Praisner Library 14910 Old Columbia Pike Burtonsville, MD 20866
The election is just 4 days away and EVERY vote counts. Last primary was won by Mr. Praisner by only 317 votes!!!
Thanks, Marcine and Eric
Eric N. Bernard
Executive Director
Montgomery County Volunteer
Fire & Rescue Association
P.O. Box 1374
Rockville, MD 20849
301-424-1297
301-455-6648
ebernard@rvfd.org
This listserv message gives real insight into the current state of mind of the Kramer campaign.
Lamari Responds to Washington Post
From Cary Lamari's website:
“Mr. Lamari would be a compelling candidate if he were not so opposed to growth.” – The Washington Post
That quote says it all. I am not the “Developer’s Candidate”, nor am I the “Union Candidate”, which is why I’m not being endorsed by The Washington Post.
I wish to set the record straight. It isn’t about being opposed to growth, and growth is not something that I am opposed to. However, I *am* supportive of measurable growth policies that make developers pay their fair share, rather than leaving that burden to the taxpayer.
We are in the grip of a major fiscal crisis. Yes, it was brought upon us by a national downturn of the economy. However, we would have been in a better situation had we not allowed Montgomery County to grow beyond its ability to sustain that growth. We allowed this to go on throughout the Duncan years without receiving the necessary funds from developers to pay for the needed infrastructure, county employees, and other county services.
Let’s analyze the situation: Looking at Rockville Pike, there has been unprecedented new development all along the corridor. Rockville has built a lovely town-center and tens of thousands of units were built going down to King Farms. Also, the Shady Grove transit station has another 6,000 residential units proposed. Mr. Royce Hanson, Chairman of the Park and Planning Commission, is propos ing that the White Flint Mater Plan increase development several times over, going from 2,200 existing residential units to well over 17,400. His plan also involves increasing commercial development from 2 million square feet to well over 5 million. I feel that this is course of action is excessive for an area which is already experiencing severe congestion.
Mr. Hanson doesn’t stop there, either. He believes that White Flint should be the model of future growth in Montgomery County, and has proposed bringing Germantown’s density up to 15,000 residential development units. Additionally, the Gaithersburg West Master Plan that he proposes would increase residential units an additional 5,000 and add 9 million square feet of commercial area, bringing that master plan to 20 million square feet of commercial space. Mr. Hanson also proposes the White Flint Model for White Oak, which would increase density many times over.
I want to reiterate that my position isn’t a matter of opposing growth, but a matter of scale. It’s a matter of paying the bill for this new growth, and catching up with the existing demands on infrastructure and demands, which includes our workforce. As I have repeatedly said throughout this election, every new unit built has a cost of over $36,000 for associated infrastructure and services, and we collect less than $8,000 of this at our transit centers. This is why we have a shortage of teachers, policeman, firefighters and apparatus, D.O.T. workers, and the infrastructure to support all of our existing growth.
We also lack a stable funding source for our county employees, as we cannot rely on property taxes alone to pay for basic services. We currently rely on nuisance taxes, as well. These include measures like increasing transfer taxes and recordation fees, capitol gain revenues, and other taxes on businesses, which for the most part have dried up. This has led to the loss of over 400 county employees and the reduction of much-needed county services.
We can’t get out of the crisis that we find ourselves in by digging a deeper hole. It will take courage not to yield to special interests while we catch up on our infrastructural demands. We can only grow responsibly by requiring developers to pay their fair share. The problem is that this isn’t a popular idea in the business community. Perhaps this is why the Chamber of Commerce did not endorse me?
I believe that District 4 has some incredible natural resources, and a valuable quality of life that we should strive to protect. If elected, I will protect the suburban and semi-rural lifestyle that we currently enjoy, increase jobs in order to provide options to the residential community, and to complete the work of Marilyn Praisner by building a low-density Town Center in the heart of Burtonsville. I believe that the Voters, and not the Special Interest Groups, should have the final
say in how we live life in Montgomery County. It’s time for change, but let’s not allow Special Interests to change Montgomery County into something that we’re not.
Cary Lamari
BOP Gets First General Assembly Letter
Baby Olson-Pagnucco (BOP) has just received his first letter from the General Assembly:
Soon enough, BOP will be debating Judiciary bills with the Waldstreicher twins.
Friday, April 17, 2009
District 4 Candidates Respond to Help Save Maryland
Four candidates have responded to the questionnaire issued by nativist/extremist group Help Save Maryland: Democrat Thomas Hardman, Republicans Robin Ficker, Lou August and Andrew Padula and Green Party member George Gluck. Here are the candidates' statements from their completed forms.
Thomas Hardman, Democrat
I’m sick of special interest groups promoting the invasion of our sovereign nation and subversion of the rule of law. I’m sick of pandering politicians that will cave at the slightest whisper from the lawyers and Unregistered Agents of Foreign Powers that work endlessly to undermine the legacy of our Founding Fathers. I welcome and will assist every decent person who waits patiently for their turn to legally and reasonably come to the USA to become American. But for lawbreakers, I give NOTHING but endless opposition and my most vituperative expressions of OUTRAGE.
Lou August, Republican
Many of our schools have large populations of children from families of illegal immigrants. My wife is a substitute teacher in MCPS and she frequently recounts the significant behavioral issues of children she works with, many from children she suspects are illegal immigrants. Almost by definition, many of these families come from turbulent distressed backgrounds, which often has a negative impact on their children’s behavior. The result of this is a damaged learning environment for all students, even those here legally whose parents’ tax dollars support the entire system – all during a time when education is more important than ever. If we address illegal immigration issues earlier, these very significant consequential impacts will be reduced or eliminated.
The later in the “consequence chain” we address illegal immigration, the greater the humanitarian impact on the immigrant and community when enforcement is finally enacted. Our first steps need to be reducing the attractiveness of Montgomery County to illegal immigrants through methods such as enforcing E-Verify, requiring proof of legal residency to get a drivers license, and a timeline for ratcheted-down customs enforcement by county police.
Robin Ficker, Republican
We need to enforce the single-family zoning laws to protect homeowners.
Andrew Padula, Republican
There are hundreds of millions of people living in abject poverty in this hemisphere. Unfortunately we cannot offer refuge to all or even a significant part of this population without risking the very fabric of our nation. We are robbing developing nations of the core of their workforce this leaving in their void nations populated by women, children, the elderly, and infirm, who are ill equipped to fend for themselves.
There is a direct inverse proportional relationship to the rise in Mexican and Central American cartel violence and our acceptance of an ever increasing population of illegal immigrants. In itself, our misplaced intentions of kindness are in fact supporting the tragedy of human rights abuses on a mass scale. When the concept of slavery is re-introduced into our free nation through indentured servitude and sex slavery, there is a big problem afoot.
The acceptance of “illegal immigrants” also sets up a two-tiered societal structure that opposes the even handed rule of law. More importantly however is the fact that the utilization of this underground workforce inhibits the natural flow of economic development by unduly influencing the marketplace for both wages and the prices of goods. I believe that it would be a far better course of action to encourage these individuals to return to their home countries and to rebuild them from within rather than to risk a societal upheaval in the United States that may very well preclude us from ever being able to genuinely assist any more developing nations in the future.
George Gluck, Green Party
I believe that we do not so much have an “illegal immigrant” problem as much as we do an “illegal employer” problem. Enforcing existing laws which hold employers culpable for hiring illegal immigrants will result in a much lower demand for illegal workers. From a recent NPR broadcast about the present dearth of day labor openings: The other day I told my wife on the phone, “If I can just get a plane ticket – however I can find the money for that – I’m coming back to El Salvador.”
Spies Cry Foul on Navarro Mailers
Nancy Navarro’s negative mailers are creating a buzz throughout Montgomery County’s political community. So we consulted the best-connected people we know – our patented spy network – to ask their opinion. And their reaction to the negative mailers was… well, negative.
“I think Navarro’s piece is ridiculous. Kramer voted for the administration bills about removing firearms in 2009 - how do you just ignore that??” ranted one informant. “That poor kid behind the fence - it's like she's saying ‘Help me! I'm locked in here with a load of Navarro’s [fecal reference deleted]!’”
Now bear in mind that everyone we asked was a neutral current or former elected office holder. None of these remarks reflect an anti-Kramer or anti-Navarro agenda. So back to the spies:
Spy #1:I consider ads like that unfair - in that the people who are receiving them really don't know these people. The mailers, if not untrue, are very close to the line of untrue and I think it is deceiving to the voters. Besides, I don’t know a voter who enjoys receiving a negative piece of election material… Ben is being painted as a person who doesn't like children or women, which is not true.
Spy #2:I find this side of American-style politics to be embarrassing insofar as it is far too easy to pull out any one of the hundreds of votes taken on tough issues and demagogue the issue. Irrespective of how one feels about Kramer’s politics, to suggest that a guy who self-finances all his campaigns and takes no money from PACs is somehow in the pocket of the “special interests” is ridiculous.
Spy #3:As a person who ran a clean campaign against an incumbent, I feel as though negative campaigns are very disingenuous to the political process. It is very interesting that Navarro feels the need to bash Kramer while he just talks about himself and his values. Kudos to Kramer and shame on Navarro. I really didn’t have a favorite until now… If you want to get elected, it should be on your merits and what you bring to the table, not bashing others to make yourself look better.
Spy #4:
And you will ALWAYS be able to poll a voting record and make it seem as though a person voted against children or for guns or whatever...that nonsense is normally done in partisan politics and not by members of the same party. Again I can’t say how disappointed I am in Nancy for stooping this low.Sure, it’s negative - typical attack ad stuff. She’s definitely not praising him - and I think she needs to do something different in order to win at this point. I figure she’s either got to prove that she has a better track record than he has (which is tough because she has no legislative record), or she’s got to convince people to fire him because he's sort of running as an incumbent. It’s a risky but necessary strategy from where she’s sitting. It’s probably the only race that she can run, although I don’t think it will work.
Spy #5 had this to say to Kramer:If I were advising Ben, which I am not, Ben should hit her hard as smearing his record with support from a child advocate standing by his side and saying that she’ll doing anything to win! He can also talk about how he wants to focus on the issues instead of smear tactics and at the same time highlight aspects of her record. Unfortunately, he’ll have to sling a little mud now, too. However, if done carefully, he can have the benefit of characterizing her as the smear candidate, while he rises above it, but notes some of the problems with her record.
Spy #6 was the only one to offer a (partial) defense of the mailers:Seems hard hitting, maybe even mean, but not unfair on first impression.
Our Take:
The mailers refer to Kramer’s voting record. If you can’t criticize a politician on his or her record, what can you look at? But the imagery of two of the flyers (the child behind the fence and the worried woman) overloads the information and may cause some voters to reject the mailers’ facts for their tone. The mailers are also risky. This is a very competitive race and these flyers could make the difference one way or the other. The result will only be visible on Election Day.
Bear in mind one more thing. The above comments come from politicians. This class of people loathes negative mailers because they fear being victimized by them. Some of their objections are legitimate. One politician asked me, “Suppose I vote against a bill that gives child molesters 25 years in prison, but then I vote for a bill that gives them 50 years. Does the first vote make me pro-molester?” That’s fair because context matters. That’s why we included both the good and the bad when we examined Ben Kramer’s record.
But resolving these sorts of questions is one of the basic functions of political campaigns. Office holders should expect their records to be scrutinized. They should not expect that scrutiny to occur solely on their own approved terms.
Special Interest Contributions in the District 4 Election
By Drew Powell.
It always good to know where candidates stand on the issues and what may drive their decision making processes regarding their future voting records, should they be elected. Concerned voters may cast their ballots based on a candidate’s existing voting record (if any), what that candidate says about the issues (debates, mailers, other media, etc.), completed questionnaires, who endorses them, with whom they are politically allied, their sources of funds for running their campaigns (also an indication of allegiances) and the candidate’s charisma.
I believe that many would agree that most of the above are highly subjective and left up to one’s own political leanings and conscience. One of the items on the above list is a bit less subjective, “sources of funds” (i.e. campaign finance).
Campaign finance, the basics
For the most part, the Maryland legislature feels strongly about transparency in campaign finance (with exceptions like the “LLC Loophole…” maybe a future post). For many decades they have supported and funded (with your tax dollars) the State Board of Elections (BOE) in its efforts to report on candidate, slate, PAC and other campaign committee donations and expenditures. Since January 1998, these reports have been made available online. Any citizen, who wants to see this information for themselves, can sit in the comfort of their home and view candidates’ financial reports. At first this may this may seem rather boring, however, these contributions can sometimes tell their own, very interesting story. I urge everyone I speak with about this issue NOT to take it from me or anyone else… but to go online and see for themselves. If more voters did this, the outcome of many elections, and subsequent life-impacting legislation that those elected officials enact, might be very different. Visit the Maryland State Board of Elections and see for yourself.
What can you expect when you go to the State Board of Elections’ web site? Once you navigate to the “Search for Contributions” area, you will be asked to input some data to search on, such as a candidate’s name. Once this is done, assuming that the candidate has taken any contributions from 1998 forward, you will see a list, with column headings as follows: Candidates Account, Contributor Name (Address), Amount, Date Received and Contribution Type. Yes, if you donate to any state or county campaign committee (not federal or municipal), your name and FULL address appears in this public domain, online database. You might see contributions from people and/or businesses you know (Verizon, PEPCO, etc.). Even if you don’t know them, sometimes it can be obvious as to what business they’re in (XYZ Construction Company, ABC Auto Repair, etc.) However, there are usually many more that you don’t know who they are or what special interest they might represent. Many of these individuals and companies have given thousands of dollars.
That’s where “campaign finance research” comes in. There are many national and regional organizations that devote huge resources to this issue. Some of the more famous include: Opensecrets.org, Campaignmoney.org and Fundrace.org. From 2003 through 2008, Neighbors for a Better Montgomery (NeighborsPAC) served that function in Montgomery County’s 2002 and 2006 elections. I was honored for a time to be the executive director of NeighborsPAC.
Of the many services NeighborsPAC provided, one was campaign finance research, which we made available online, very much in the same way some of the above-listed national organizations do. It can be very tedious evaluating tens of thousands of contributions, which is why NeighborsPAC decided to prioritize by what was then (and still is) the largest amount contributed to local politicians by a special interest group, the development industry.
Why pick on the development industry?
Let’s start by setting the record straight. Many developers and development related individuals (and businesses) are, in many cases, Montgomery County citizens, who have just as much a right to vote and give money to the candidates of their choice as any other citizen. Developers serve a much needed purpose in our county, as they build the homes we live in and the stores and offices we frequent. But keep in mind that development is a FOR-profit business and as such, like any good business much is done to try to maximize profits. If they don’t do this, they go out of business. The question then becomes, in the area of our legislative system and the possible influence the development industry may have; just what is legal or not, ethical or not, in or out of balance or simply is transparent or opaque?
According to NeighborsPAC research, in the 2002 Montgomery County Election, more than $2.5M was donated by the development industry (about 70% of all monies given during that election cycle). In 2006, development related contributions totaled more than $4M (again, about 70%). According to NeighborsPAC research, one 2006 candidate received more than 71% (more than $1M) from development related interests. I’ll make a prediction now, that for the 2010 County Election, about $6M (again, about 2 out of every 3 dollars) will come from the development industry.
Why would developers care about elections?
If the County Council (with its mandate to make law and establish county code) and the County Executive (with his/her mandate to set the county’s agenda) voted on pharmaceutical drug regulation, believe me, the pharmaceutical drug industry would be a big player in county politics, making big contributions. As far as an industry is concerned, the one that is impacted the most by our County Council and Executive is the development industry. This comes in the form of county legislation regarding: zoning, master plans, impact taxes, transportation infrastructure (and who pays for it), schools (and again, who pays for it), etc. Arguably, it’s the biggest role the Council and Executive play. Keep in mind; we’re talking about BIG bucks. The development industry in Montgomery County alone is worth many tens of billions of dollars. What the County Council does can be a great benefit or hindrance to the development industry and its bottom line.
So what’s a developer to do? If you’ve been a developer for long, you know how the game is played. Even so, you hire $500 Land use/zoning attorneys and turn to the services of companies such as Rodgers Consulting. These “investments” will, for a lot of money, help you increase your chances of getting that zoning change or ZTA (zoning text amendment) or better yet, help you and your industry “Control Elections and Influence Legislation [and] Regulation.” Those aren’t my words, but guidance from Rodgers Consulting Inc. in a 2004 International Builders Show presentation, “Where's the Land?”
So, just what is a development related interest? A 'development-related interest' is defined as an individual, company or organization that benefits financially (directly or indirectly) from business activities related to land development in Montgomery County. Examples of those who may benefit directly are: developers, builders, construction companies, realtors, etc. Examples of those who may benefit indirectly are: Land use/zoning attorneys, developer consultants, development supply companies, development related unions/PACs/advocacy groups, etc.
Using neutral methodologies (applying the same rules to all), in an unflinching manor (i.e. report whenever and whoever meets the above definition for every candidate), NeighborsPAC identified thousands of development related campaign contributions made to county council and executive candidates. This was done by using other online databases and search engines. The same methods were employed in identifying development related contributions and funding sources in the 2009 District 4 special election.
District 4 summary
Here’s a summary of the District 4 Special Election campaign finance picture so far:
Lou August: $0 in reported contributions as of the 4/10/2009 filing (filed affidavit stating that his campaign received less than $1000)
Michael Bigler: One contribution from himself in the amount of $500.00 on 03/13/2009
Robin Ficker: $0 in reported contributions as of 4/10/2009 filing (filed affidavit stating that his campaign received less than $1000)
George Gluck: Four contributions totaling $230.00 as of 4/10/2009 filing
Rob Goldman: $0 in reported contributions as of 4/10/2009 filing (filed affidavit stating that his campaign received less than $1000)
Thomas Hardman: Four contributions totaling $226.07 as of 4/10/2009 filing
Ben Kramer: 15 contributions totaling $2,875.00 total as of 4/10/2009 filing, however as much as $50,000.00 was received in loans from himself (see below and spread sheet)
Cary Lamari: 43 contributions totaling $4,432.00 and $10,000.00 loan to self as of 4/10/2009 filing (see spread sheet)
Nancy Navarro: In violation of Maryland State law, has not filed with the State Board of Elections as of 4/16/09 and has accrued $80.00 of fines thus far (candidates pay fines of $20/day for the first six business days late, $10/business day thereafter). Navarro has filed through March 24, 2009 and also has completed all filing for the 2008 special election. (see spread sheets)
District 4 specifics
It costs money to run a campaign. It’s hard for me to see how a serious candidate can get out their message with little or no funds. Based on the State Board of Elections database, it appears that there are only three candidates on which to perform campaign finance analysis. Those are (in alphabetical order) Kramer, Lamari and Navarro. From the standpoint of campaign funding, each candidate falls into very different categories.
KRAMER: Kramer has raised very little from contributors. Counting from before the 2008 special election, the BOE shows him receiving a total of $5,440.00 in the form of 27 contributions, however we will only consider contributions commensurate with the 2009 special election. For the 2009 special election, that figure is $2,875.00 from 15 contributors. Kramer loaned himself $9,000 ($1K in 12/08 and $8K in 2/09). So how has Kramer spent $50,118.54 in his campaign thus far? I must admit, I’ve been researching campaign contributions and expenditures for seven years and I don’t get it. According to the State Board of Elections, Kramer has a current outstanding debt of exacting $180,450.00, most of it, appears to be moneys loaned to himself during the past three years. His debt or “Total Outstanding Obligations” increased from $130,450.00 in Kramer’s January 21, 2009 Annual Report to $180,450.00 in Kramer’s April 10, 2009 “Montgomery Special 2009 Pre-Primary 2 Report, a difference of exactly $50,000.00. HOWEVER, the BOE shows Kramer receiving only $8,000.00 in loans from himself during that same period. It’s difficult to know whether this is Kramer’s error, the BOE’s error or just plain pilot error on my part. In any case, I plan to have a long discussion with the BOE tomorrow. Back to the candidate: It’s well known that Ben Kramer hails from a family with strong ties to local politics as well as the development industry. A quick land records search shows that Kramer has interests in significant commercial landholdings near and along the ICC. So, is the money that Mr. Kramer has loaned himself “development related?” I believe it is. This puts Kramer’s development related take at 97%. Further, I’m not saying that this will happen, but it always remains possible that Kramer could accept tens of thousands in development related contributions after the April 10th filing. Those contributions would not be in public view until after the primary. Or he could simply wait until after the general election and report receiving development related contributions in the post general election report. Whatever the case, before the primary, Kramer needs to publicly avow that he will not repay any of his personal loans with yet-unseen developer contributions. Further, before the primary, Mr. Kramer must publicly state that, if elected, he will recuse himself on votes in all matters relating to his landholdings or the landholdings of his family, which fall inside Montgomery County. I end this section with a question; Why would someone spend $50,000 of their own money (and probably much more by the time Kramer files his post general election report) to win a seat that pays $94,040.00 a year? I guess it’s nice to be rich.
LAMARI: As of the April 10th filing, Lamari’s campaign has been funded by 43 contributions totaling $4,432.00. Most contributions are in small dollar amounts and are generally from individuals. Lamari has received $100 (2%) in development related contributions. Lamari has also loaned himself $10,000. Like any candidate loaning themselves money, Mr. Lamari should state publicly that he will not use developer contributions to repay campaign loans.
NAVARRO: In the 2009 special election, Navarro’s campaign has received $16,000.00 in the form of 42 contributions. However, Navarro has NOT filed her April 10th Campaign Finance Report as of midnight April 15th and is now four days late in filing. As confirmed at 3:00 PM 4/16/09 by the State Board of Elections, Navarro’s campaign committee has accrued $80.00 of fines thus far. Hopefully, Ms. Navarro will file the overdue report in time for Tuesday’s Primary. But, wait… we are fortunate in that this is Navarro’s second run for this seat in as many years. We have a full accounting of Navarro’s 2008 campaign financials and they do tell an interesting story. In the 2008 special election Navarro took $111,761.00 in the form of 185 contributions. Of that, $75,000.00 (67%) came from development related sources… that’s 2 out of every 3rd dollar. This level of development related campaign funding is very similar to what we saw with “End Gridlock” candidates in the 2002 county election. Of the $75,000.00 in development related contributions received, $31,950.00 (42.6%) came from just 7 development interests. Of that, $12,000.00 came from one developer, IDI. The $75K in development contributions is further compounded by Navarro’s apparent “sandbagging” of most of these funds. $63,750.00 (85%) was recorded after the 2008 Pre-primary Report filing, making the receipt of those developer dollars invisible to primary voters. From Navarro’s first 2009 filing (second late filing not available, yet), it’s hard to say whether she will repeat her 2008 sandbagging scheme. Perhaps she could make a public statement that she will limit her development related contributions in future filings.
As a postscript, it needs to be mentioned that Mr. Ficker is a realtor and thereby qualifies as a development related interest. However, the BOE shows no money received into the “Homeowners for Robin Ficker Committee,” in the form of loans or contributions. Also, Rob Goldman is a partner of the Bethesda-based law firm, Finkelstein & Horvitz, P.C., which, amongst other disciplines, practices real estate law, thus qualifying Goldman as a development related interest. However, the BOE shows no contributions or loans received by Goldman’s campaign committee.
Conclusion
So what does all this mean? Is it significant that a candidate takes more than half of their contributions from the development industry? Does it matter that a candidate is part of the development industry? Do developers get a good return on their investment? Will developer-candidates represent you, a citizen of District 4 or development interests? Do developer funded candidates do the developers’ bidding?
Based on NeighborsPAC analysis of developer funded campaigns in the 2002 election and subsequent county councilmember voting records, it certainly appeared that developer funded elected officials marched to the developers’ drumbeat. Will this happen in District 4? That’s for you to decide. ■
☼ As part of full disclosure, it needs to be mentioned that Neighbors for a Better Montgomery, of which I was the executive director, endorsed ten candidates in the 2006 county election (executive and nine council candidates). Those endorsements included: Valerie Ervin (current Montgomery County Councilmember and Nancy Navarro endorser), Cary Lamari (a District 4 candidate), Ike Leggett (current Montgomery County Executive and Ben Kramer endorser) and Duchy Trachtenberg (current Montgomery County Councilmember and Ben Kramer endorser).
* Last minute note: After reading the campaign finance analysis spread sheets, an informed individual stated that the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters PAC is not development related, but rather a union funded PAC, interested only in good working conditions and fair pay for their constituents. Even so, Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters’ constituents benefit from development in Montgomery County, which is why their $6,000.00 contribution was counted as development related. If this contribution were to be withheld from Navarro’s 2008 take, her developer total would have been $69,000.00 (62%).
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Help Save Maryland Attacks Ben Kramer
At a recent District 4 debate, a volunteer from Help Save Maryland distributed the following anti-Kramer flyer. The flyer is illegal because it contains no authority line. But perhaps even worse, it plagiarizes MPW, blatantly stealing from our posts on Kramer’s record. Come on now guys, shouldn’t we get credit for our work with our nativist/extremist readership?
Action Committee for Transit Issues District 4 Scorecard
Action Committee for Transit (ACT) has issued their scorecard for the District 4 candidates. ACT co-sponsored a debate along with the Sierra Club in Wheaton and collected questionnaires from the candidates, all of which we have posted on this blog.
We asked ACT President Ben Ross two questions about the scorecard.
Q: Why does Lamari get a No for Metro Communities while Navarro and Kramer get a Yes?
A: Lamari has been an opponent of transit-oriented development around Glenmont and offered no examples of controversial projects he supported elsewhere. (Downtown Silver Spring does not qualify as controversial.) In the questionnaire, Navarro was supportive of more transit-oriented development in general and specifically at Glenmont. Kramer was less specific in his questionnaire and did not specifically address Glenmont, but based on his overall record we anticipate that he will support new development around Metro stations.
Q: Why does Navarro get a Yes, Kramer get a No and Lamari get an Uncommitted on Green Growth?
A: This was based primarily on the answer to Question 5B of the questionnaire. What concerns us is the county’s past history of using vaporware transitways that never get built to justify what turns out to be auto-oriented sprawl development. This letter lays out our position - see especially the table on page 3.
Kramer's answer was, “If federal criteria for funding the CCT will allow for the construction of the CCT in advance of the proposed development included in the aforementioned master plan areas, then I would support such efforts.” Well - everyone would like to get federal money and build the CCT right away, the question is what to do if the money isn’t available. We interpreted this answer as meaning that if funding is not in place for the CCT, he would not support delaying the development.
Navarro’s answer was that while she would not wait until the rail line is actually built before development begins, she would insist on having the funding lined up and a clear timeline. This is essentially ACT’s position as stated in the letter I linked. It is what the county does with staging requirements for roads and - leaving aside the merits of the roads in question - it has worked in the sense that either the development is blocked or the roads actually get built. Lamari’s answer is explicitly undecided.
Both of these were based largely on the questionnaires, using the debate and other public statements for clarification where necessary. For example, Goldman didn’t really get at what we wanted to learn in his questionnaire answer about development near Metro, but in the debate he was explicit that he thought new development should be directed away from Metro stations like Silver Spring and Bethesda and toward areas far from Metro like Burtonsville and Sandy Spring.
Editor’s Note: We present Table 3 from ACT’s letter below. Check out how many worthy transit projects are stalled.
Kramer Poll Described by Voter
Around the end of March, the Kramer campaign conducted a phone poll of a sample of District 4 voters. Here are the questions that were asked according to one voter who was interviewed.
1 - How would you rate the candidates (from 100-0)?
2 - Who do you support? Who is your second choice?
3 - Do you find it persuasive that Ben Kramer is a life long Montgomery County resident?
4 - Do you find it persuasive that Ben Kramer was a law enforcement major?
5 - Do you find it persuasive that Ben Kramer is a strong supporter of the environment and senior citizens?
The poll also asked the race of the voter and gave options of black, white and different Latin American nationalities. Asian was not an option.
Dueling Mailers Hit on Same Day
Check out these three mailers, all of which arrived in mailboxes yesterday.
NARAL Endorses Navarro
Following is their press release.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 15, 2009
NARAL PRO-CHOICE MARYLAND PAC ENDORSES NANCY NAVARRO FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
Today, the Political Action Committee of NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland endorsed Nancy Navarro for the Montgomery County Council District 4 seat. NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC is dedicated to electing the strongest prochoice candidates in Maryland.
“NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC is proud to endorse Nancy Navarro for Montgomery County Council. It is wonderful to have so many candidates running in District 4 who support reproductive freedom. However, we believe that Nancy Navarro will be a leader for reproductive health care issues on the County Council,” said NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland PAC Chair Tracy Terrell. “Her tenure on the Board of Education and leadership around the issue of sex education in our community demonstrates a strong commitment to pro-choice values. We know Nancy Navarro will continue to champion reproductive health in her service on the County Council.
“The Montgomery County Council has a role to play in expanding education about and access to reproductive health services for teens and families, preventing unintended pregnancy, and stopping the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Many women in Montgomery County encounter barriers to health care services, including family planning and pregnancy care. It is more important than ever that families have access to needed health care services. Nancy recognizes these issues and will work to improve access.
“Teen pregnancy rates in Montgomery County have risen recently, particularly in the Latino community. Nancy’s work on the School Board will enable her to recognize and address health issues of unique importance to teens and to combat teen pregnancy. Having a strong pro-choice voice from a historically underrepresented community will be an asset to the County and its residents. Nancy Navarro understands the needs of the diverse District 4 community and will work towards improving reproductive health care access for individuals and families.”
“I am very honored to have received the endorsement of an organization that has a long history of standing up for women's issues,” stated Nancy Navarro. "I strongly believe that women have the right to make their own choices and I look forward to working with NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland and its members to continue to protect these important rights."
Contact: Erin Schurmann, 301-565-4154
Ben Kramer and the Issue of Domestic Violence
By Eric Luedtke.
In politics there are issues on which it is OK to be on either side and issues in which it is not. Domestic violence is not an issue on which it is OK to be on the fence. It is a profound social ill that tears apart families, damages its victims both physically and mentally, and can result in horrific acts of violence. So any politician worth their salt will be on only one side of the issue: do everything possible to stop it. That’s something I appreciate as a husband, a father, and as a teacher who has seen firsthand the effects of domestic violence on students I’ve taught.
Which is why I remain baffled by Ben Kramer’s support for a bill in the General Assembly that would have made it possible for accused perpetrators of domestic violence to have their records expunged if there was not enough evidence to warrant a protective order. Baffled because, quite frankly, Kramer’s entire family tends to be very much politically astute. And I’ve waited to see how Kramer would deal with it in the County Council election. That last question has now been answered, as the mailing Adam posted from the Kramer campaign shows him with a number of prominent women in the county, including former chair of Maryland NOW Duchy Trachtenberg (although I think it’s probably another political misstep that the people in the mailing are, for lack of a better word, monochromatic, given the diversity of the population of District 4).
Now to be up front about it, I’m not a supporter of Kramer’s. I’ve endorsed Nancy Navarro because I believe she’ll be the best person to help protect the public services that underlay the wealth and success of Montgomery County , including our public schools. That said, my vote has always been for Navarro, rather than against Kramer. But Kramer’s position on this issue raises some questions for me, both about his political common sense and his position on domestic violence itself.
I suppose one could argue that it’s a complex issue, that there is the possibility that a person could be wrongly accused of domestic violence, but I think that argument’s a red herring. The consequences of protecting perpetrators who may actually have committed such a crime are far more severe than that of a court record of an accusation lying in a back room somewhere. And I suppose it could be excused if this were part of the normal backroom Annapolis deal-making, as in, “My colleague on such and such committee asked me to co-sponsor.” But, well, there’s video, sent to me by a friend in the women's movement:
I showed this to some friends over the weekend, and their responses were interesting. One called him prosecutorial, another said he simply seemed aggressive. A third pointed out that he was being pretty hostile to people testifying who deserved at least a modicum of respect because they were, in the end, only doing what they thought necessary to end domestic violence.
All that aside, there’s a fairly simple question which Delegate Kramer has yet to answer during the course of the campaign: Why does he think it necessary that the law should lean towards protecting those accused of committing domestic violence instead of the victims of it? I think his constituents in District 19, his potential constituents in Council District 4, and victims of domestic violence across Maryland deserve an answer.
Editor’s Note: Eric Luedtke is a board member of MCEA, a former blogger on Free State Politics and a resident of District 4.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Greater Silver Spring Democratic Club Hosts General Assembly Review
Following is their press release.
The Greater Silver Spring Democratic Club
Please join us for the next monthly meeting of the Greater Silver Spring Democratic Club
Date: Wednesday April 29, 2009
Time: 7:30 pm
Place: White Oak Middle School, 12201 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
Topic: Review of the Maryland General Assembly’s 2009 Session
Guest Speakers Invited:
State Delegates and State Senators for Legislative Districts 18, 19 & 20
For more information, please contact either Mark Woodard at (301) 592-1811, Donna Graham at (301) 585-4759, or Paul Mitchell at (301) 588-7126.
You can also e-mail us at silverspringdems@yahoo.com.
Navarro Blasts Kramer's Record on Children
This mailer is now showing up in District 4 mailboxes. Navarro's authority line appears on the first page along the left side.
We Certainly Should Not Be Making a Phone Call
By Marc Korman.
A recent Gazette article highlighted Councilman Knapp’s efforts to resurrect the DC United stadium in Montgomery County. Councilman Knapp said “we certainly ought to be making a phone call,” meaning to DC United. I hope that the rest of the Council disagrees.
Councilman Knapp’s goal to bring DC United to Montgomery County marries two poor ideas I have written about before, the soccer stadium and a Montgomery County arena.
All of the negatives of putting the stadium in Prince George’s, including the costs and infrastructure needs, exist in Montgomery County too. The stadium would not pay for itself and would require borrowing, through the issuance of bonds, by the county and the state. Neither level of government can afford to increase its debt load for an amenity.
An arena in Montgomery County has also been studied by the overzealous Maryland Stadium Authority. As I wrote last year, that study failed to take into account two important factors. First, it did not account for the costs of construction or infrastructure, which was the same problem as the soccer stadium in Prince George’s. Second, the study did not fully account for competing venues in the region.
Councilman Knapp is one of the few elected officials championing the idea of an arena in Montgomery County. He is using the Prince George’s County Council’s wise decision to reject a soccer stadium as an opportunity to advance his pet project. He is advancing his goal by trying to minimize the infrastructure problem by putting a DC United stadium closer to the Shady Grove metro than the arena study’s presumed Germantown location. But even with Metro access, further infrastructure improvements would be needed. A DC United stadium would also need about double the capacity of the 8,000 to 10,000 person arena studied for Montgomery County.
Adam Pagnucco has done a terrific job documenting the state and county’s budget problems and the massive transportation needs and I need not repeat them here. But I hope it is as obvious to Councilman Knapp’s colleagues as it is to me that when the Council is facing a deficit, debating furloughs, and discussing shutting down nighttime access to police stations, a soccer stadium is not a serious option.
Sierra Club Endorses Navarro
Following is the press release from the Sierra Club.
For Immediate Release
Contacts: David Hauck (301) 270-5826/ David Sears (301) 233-6690
Sierra Club Endorses Nancy Navarro
(ROCKVILLE, MD)- April 15, 2009 – The Sierra Club of Montgomery County is pleased to endorse Nancy Navarro in the District 4 County Council special election. She is smart, articulate, and will be a strong advocate for expanding public transit, directing future growth to areas well-served by transit, and promoting energy efficiency and other actions that will help Montgomery County address climate change.
Nancy Navarro, although not an environmental expert, demonstrates a good intuitive understanding of the key environmental issues facing the county. With many Master Plans coming before the County Council in the coming months, it is important to have someone like Ms. Navarro as a strong advocate for walkable communities, sensible growth, and environmental protection.
Ms. Navarro “gets it” that “going green” needs to serve all groups in the County. That means training workers for jobs in the green economy. It also means locating more employment opportunities in eastern Montgomery County to reduce the need for long commutes from the eastern portions of the county, where there is more housing than jobs, to the west where jobs outnumber homes. She understands that a renewed emphasis upon affordable and convenient public transit is vital for all, especially in places like District 4, which is population dense but transit poor, and particularly for low income commuters and others with few transportation options.
Ms. Navarro’s statements supporting transit-oriented, walkable communities are very strong, reflecting a good understanding of what is needed to move Montgomery County toward a more viable future: “As a councilmember, I will be a strong advocate for environmentally sound land-use decisions that promote transit over road construction and transit-oriented development over sprawl. This will be the first step toward pulling people out of cars and into mass transit, while channeling residents into walkable, transit-accessible communities and away from our auto-dependent lifestyles.”
District 4 is relatively poorly served by public transit. Nancy Navarro is outspoken in her support of expanded and improved transit. “If we are going to relieve some of the congestion on our roads and reduce our carbon footprint, we need to have a forward-thinking approach toward transportation policies that gets people out of cars and into mass transit as much as possible. That’s why, as a member of the County Council, I will prioritize transit projects over new road construction.” Her actions indicate that these are not just words. In December 2008, Ms. Navarro testified before the Maryland Transit Administration in support of the light rail option for the Purple Line. She also has publicly supported the Corridor Cities Transitway between Shady Grove and Clarksburg.
Ms. Navarro’s record on local action to address climate change is strong. While President of the Board of Education, she promoted energy efficient new schools that far exceed building code requirements. County schools are now installing solar panels on any properly-sited school at the time it is re-roofed and the school system is entering into long-term contracts to sell unused renewable energy into the grid.
We believe that Ms. Navarro will draw upon her expertise in the education arena to help others understand the importance of facing our environmental challenges. For instance, she told the Sierra Club that investing in energy efficiency is very much like investing in early childhood education: what you spend today pays for itself in future benefits and savings.
Her record as leader on the Board of Education shows she will be a coalition builder on difficult issues.
The Sierra Club encourages all District 4 voters who support smart growth, expanded public transit and strong local action to reduce the effects of climate change to vote for Ms. Navarro on April 21 in the Democratic primary election.
Sierra Club of Montgomery County •
103 North Adams Street • Rockville, MD 20850
ICC Battle Impacts District 4 Race
The battle over whether the Intercounty Connector (ICC) should be built has been decided. But a battle over how to rout traffic along Georgia Avenue has been raging for more than a year and it just might impact the District 4 race - and perhaps more contests beyond.
The $2.6 billion ICC is being built in five phases. Phase A, which began construction in November 2007, connects I-370 to Georgia Avenue. Phase C, which began construction in April 2008, connects US-29 to I-95. Phase B, which will connect Phases A and C, started construction in January. At the moment, Phase A is 40% complete, Phase C is 30% complete and Phase B is 5% complete.
Phase A is due to be completed in the fall of 2010, at least a full year before Phase B’s completion. During that period of time, ICC traffic would empty onto Georgia Avenue just north of its congested intersection with Norbeck Road, a fact that was revealed in 2007. According to the Gazette, Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) and his sister, Senator Rona Kramer (D-14) presented a plan by SHA to mitigate the interim impact on the Georgia-Norbeck intersection by constructing a bypass spur around its northeast corner to the Greater Olney Civic Association (GOCA) in September 2007. The SHA plan would allow ICC-related traffic to get onto Norbeck Road without going through the Georgia-Norbeck intersection. But the spur would have dumped the ICC traffic very close to the northern entrance of Leisure World. That prompted both GOCA and the Leisure World Board of Directors to oppose SHA’s plan, with many in both communities arguing that the ICC should not be opened until it was entirely complete.
The interim traffic routing posed a difficult problem for the Kramers, both of whom were longtime ICC supporters. Senator Rona Kramer initially defended SHA’s bypass plan to GOCA according to the Gazette:“The new road doesn’t affect any homes or businesses, as the majority of the area is SHA-controlled property,” Kramer said. ‘‘This will allow traffic to avoid the Georgia Avenue⁄Norbeck Road intersection and doesn’t impact Georgia Avenue traffic, which was our goal.”
But after intense pressure from the community, the Kramers wrote the letter below to MDOT Secretary John Porcari calling SHA’s bypass proposal “convoluted” and requesting that the ICC not open until it was completed in its entirety.
A portion of Norbeck Road will be widened from the access point of the new road to as far east as SHA owns the property.
“This should all be completed by the time that the ICC opens,” Kramer said. “I’ve asked SHA to see if it could be done sooner, because we could use it now. They said they would try, but it involves moving a lot of utilities, which takes time.”
Kramer said she presented the plan to GOCA members for their feedback, saying this is not the end of the discussion, but the beginning.
“This affects both my and Ben’s districts, him on the west and me on the east of Georgia Avenue,” she said. “We are very concerned about traffic, especially if there is any gap at all between phases one and two. We don’t want this to impact our community, and it’s our job to see that it doesn’t.”
She added that SHA has been “very responsive.”
“I was impressed that we didn’t have to fight with them,” she said.
SHA ultimately ditched its bypass proposal in favor of a plan to open temporary ramps from the ICC onto Norbeck Road about a half-mile east of the Leisure World entrance. GOCA President Sharon Dooley said:“It appears we got half a loaf,” Greater Olney Civic Association President Sharon Dooley said. “We wanted them to keep the road closed until it was all completed, but we did get these improvements, which should help Georgia Avenue, and that was our intent.”
But others were displeased.
“I think our voices were heard, and we appreciate all the work of our elected officials on this issue,” she added.Harry Cohen, a Leisure World resident and vice president of INFORCE, a group that was formed by six Leisure World residents concerned about the ICC’s proximity to their homes, called the decision “the lesser of two evils.”
Some of Ben Kramer’s opponents argue that he and County Executive Ike Leggett were the “joint architects” of SHA’s now-rejected bypass plan. I find that hard to believe. As a civic activist near the awful Georgia Avenue-Forest Glen Road intersection, I have found SHA to be resistant to control by any politician. SHA’s planners and engineers do as they will at the pace they prefer. While state and county politicians have supported a new Metro entrance at the Intersection of Death, SHA still has not implemented ANY interim improvements there from a plan they proposed in late 2007. The Kramers can complain endlessly about ICC traffic mitigation but no one should have any illusions that SHA serves at their beck and call.
“We’re very disappointed,” he said. “While this plan is better than the spur road because the traffic enters Norbeck Road east of the Leisure World gate, it’s not going to be good. Norbeck Road can’t handle the 12,000 cars a day. It is already clogged.”
Cohen said INFORCE’s preference was to keep the first segment of the ICC closed until the other segments were completed.
“We don’t like this at all,” he said. “The governor and the SHA have heard our pleas, but have not responded in any way.”
But there is a larger question at issue here. While the Kramers cannot dictate to SHA, both of them have supported the ICC throughout their political careers. If SHA is now running amok during its construction, they are doing so because of the approval of a project the Kramers both desired.
In this life, sometimes you get what you want – and then you regret it!
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Pat Ryan Endorses Cary Lamari
Former District 4 candidate Pat Ryan has endorsed Cary Lamari. Following is his statement from Lamari's website.
To my fellow residents of Council District IV
I am writing to remind you to vote in the upcoming April 21 County Council primary election. Many of you have expressed disappointment that I wasn’t running again and asked me who I am voting for. After examining the qualifications of many of the candidates, I plan to vote for Cary Lamari and hope that you will consider doing the same.
Cary is a life-long county resident who will bring honesty, a vision for the future, independence, and a true citizen’s perspective to the County Council. Cary understands the need to provide for the housing needs of future citizens, the importance of a careful approach to future growth, and the need to preserve the vital natural resources with which Montgomery County has been endowed. Cary also understands the need for fiscal responsibility, and will make choices based on what is best for the citizens of Montgomery County. He is strong enough to stand up to unions, developers, or others who would put their interests ahead of his fellow citizens.
The council seat formerly held by Don Praisner is of vital interest to the future of Montgomery County. Please be sure to vote on April 21. If you supported me or Don last year, please cast your vote for Cary Lamari this year.
Sincerely,
Pat Ryan
Kramer Mailer Makes Case to Women
Here's a new mailer that showed up in District 4 last weekend:
Just one little question... would any of the ladies in the mailer care to comment on how the abuser expungement bill is good for women?
Navarro Goes After Ficker
Is this smart because she is slamming the candidate most hated by liberal Democrats and solidifying her progressive credentials? Or is it silly because she is not running against Ficker in the April 21 primary? We don't know, but it's entertaining. Read the press release below.
Stop Robin Ficker & the Republican Party in Montgomery County
Vote for Democrat Nancy Navarro on Tuesday, April 21
Montgomery County Democrats,
The right wing of Maryland's Republican Party is making a serious play for the District 4 County Council seat. Their perennial candidate, Robin Ficker, has recently carpetbagged into our community to try and turn District 4 red.
Nancy Navarro is the Democrat who is best able to defeat Robin Ficker and his plan to slash critical county services for working families and seniors.
The threat of Robin Ficker in public office is so dangerous, that in one of his previous runs for office, the Washington Post issued an endorsement entitled, "Anyone but Robin Ficker." They called Ficker the "hands-down winner of all awards for worst member of the Maryland General Assembly," citing his "inability to produce the slightest constructive legislative result."
Last November, Democrats underestimated the looming threat, handing Robin Ficker "his first victory in a 34-year quest." One political commentator told the Washington Post, "The political leadership of Montgomery County should be embarrassed. They took him for granted."
County Executive Ike Leggett even admitted, "The effort was not as vigorous as it should have been.... Some people did not think this was that big a deal, maybe because this was Ficker and because he had been defeated in the past."
With an energized and broad coalition of working families, progressive activists, youths, seniors, women, communities of color, business and labor -- Nancy Navarro is the Democrat who will stand up for all of us and ensure the extremists in the Republican Party do not gain a toe-hold in Montgomery County.
Park and Planning Lobbies District 4 Candidates
In an unprecedented move, officials inside the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) have begun lobbying District 4 candidates on behalf of their priorities. One of those priorities concerns one of the district’s most controversial issues: the plan to add a soccer field at North Four Corners Local Park.
Multiple campaigns confirm being contacted by Joyce P. Coleman, a special assistant to the Planning Board. Coleman has attempted to arrange “briefings” with some candidates and has sent them budgetary information on several projects including the East Norbeck Local Park Expansion, the Rock Creek Trail Pedestrian Bridge, the Woodlawn Barn Visitors Center, the soccer field at North Four Corners and Ballfield Initiatives around the county. We hear that at least one candidate received a personal briefing on these issues from Planning Board Chairman Royce Hanson. By far the most contentious of these projects involves North Four Corners, the site of a raging dispute between M-NCPPC and the Northwood-Four Corners Civic Association.
In 2003, Park and Planning began advocating for the installation of a soccer field at the tree-filled North Four Corners Local Park, a 14-acre bit of green space just north of the horrendous University Boulevard-US 29 intersection. The community mobilized against the project and gathered 26 letters and 650 petition signatures against it by February 2008. That same month, bulldozers showed up at the park to take down trees, provoking an uprising in the neighborhood. Park and Planning said the work was intended to remove “invasive species.” The civic association held a District 4 debate in April and made their case to all the candidates who came. Steve Kanstoroom, a long-time anti-M-NCPPC activist, won the precinct but Don Praisner, the winner, did not attend the debate and made no promises on the issue.
By May 2008, the County Council had agreed to add the soccer project to the county’s capital plan. But spending for planning is scheduled to start in FY 12 and actual construction is scheduled for FY 14, so the community still has a hypothetical chance of getting it deleted. In any case, the issue still radiates in the neighborhood like a leaky tank of plutonium. And the civic association scheduled a debate for April 8, 2009 at which the park would surely be raised.
That caused Park and Planning to spring into action and start calling District 4 candidates. Here are the two documents they sent the candidates about North Four Corners Local Park:
Note how the first document, a “background memo” prepared for the candidates, says this:Contrary to wishes of the local community, but based on long-term unmet needs for athletic fields in the “down-county” area, park staff included one additional full-sized rectangular athletic field in the approved facility plan.
The timing of the information delivery and the language of the memo lay bare the intent of M-NCPPC. Park and Planning was lobbying the candidates to agree with its position on the park prior to their hearing from the neighbors. Clearly, Park and Planning did not want the candidates to make promises to the residents about stopping the soccer field that they would feel compelled to honor later on. M-NCPPC is certainly entitled to communicate its positions to the County Executive and the County Council, but this is its first attempt that we can recall to influence the positions of candidates even before they are elected.
This episode will surely feed the cynicism held by civic activists of Park and Planning and county government in general. M-NCPPC owes the residents an immediate apology and a promise to never do this again.