Baby Olson-Pagnucco could be out any day now. As you see, his blogging station is ready. The mobile is a present from BOP's uncle, MPW founder David Lublin. Don't worry, dear readers - there is plenty of content already programmed over the next couple weeks for your reading pleasure (or displeasure).
Sunday, May 31, 2009
BOP is Coming Out Soon
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Friday, May 29, 2009
Marc Fisher Leaves the Post (Updated)
Marc Fisher wrote a farewell column today. Like many of you, I am surprised and saddened that one of the D.C. area's greatest independent voices is leaving.
Fisher's entire essay is a must-read (just like many of his columns), but here's the money quote for me:On the first day I was given this space to play with, the great columnist Mary McGrory summoned me to her office with a note: "Come see me. I have three words for you."
Fisher truly excelled at this. He was always honest, occasionally tough but never petty. He told the truth as he saw it, regardless of the pushback he got. And he received attention at the highest levels because politicians knew he had credibility with the public.
I scurried over and presented myself. Mary looked up from her desk and said, "Three words: Cruelty is important." To do this job right, you must name and blame the bad guys. You must call it as it is. The minute you hold back, your credibility is shot. The second you stop reporting, you're just one more pontificating, pusillanimous pundit." (When my friend and colleague Marjorie Williams launched her column, she too received the gift of three words from Mary: "Subtlety is overrated.")
The beauty of a column is that you can dig up the story, then say it straight: You can expose the cynicism that leaves D.C. school kids worse off at the end of their education than they were at the start, then you can call that system a criminal enterprise. You can reveal the narrow-mindedness that threatens to put mentally retarded people out on the street, and then push until embarrassed officials do the right thing. You can keep hitting the same note until a school principal with a phony doctorate is removed.
From the perspective of Montgomery County politics, Fisher's greatest contribution was his reporting on the dispute over Hillmead Park in Bethesda. The county had purchased a neighboring parcel with a large home on it for addition to the adjacent Hillmead Park. Some wanted to use the home as transitional housing for the homeless. Others wanted to tear it down and use all of the land to expand the park. After a huge uproar pitting neighbors against housing advocates, the issue was resolved by a 5-4 County Council vote to demolish the house. Fisher's work inspired me to write a five-part series demonstrating that subsidized housing in Montgomery County is disproportionately concentrated in black and Latino neighborhoods and is mostly far from Metro stations. Hillmead's residual impact is influencing both incumbent County Council Members and challengers and will affect the competing messages in our 2010 election.
We do not have enough people in public life willing to tell the truth regardless of the consequences. With Fisher's departure, those spare ranks shrink by one.
Update: We hear that Fisher is staying with the Post in a different capacity but he will no longer write a column.
Two Easy Targets
Once Maryland’s newest liberal blogger, Judd Legum is now the state’s newest Delegate candidate. His hoped-for opponent, conservative District 30 Delegate Ron George, may be an easy target. But in the process of quickly morphing from a Hillary Clinton staffer to a blogger to a politician, Legum himself has become an easy target for the state’s right wing.
Legum, the former research director for Hillary Clinton, moved back to his native Annapolis and started a blog called Legum’s New Line in December 2008. Despite his former occupation, the blog contained little original research and was mostly populated by posts listing MSM articles. Occasionally, one of Legum’s friends in the legislature would leak him a tidbit (like this one about a bill by Delegate Saqib Ali) and Legum would sell it in repeated emails to bloggers and MSM reporters. That broke an informal gentleman’s rule in Maryland’s blogosphere: most of us do not engage in self-promotion by pestering each other for links. And for all his requests for links, Legum linked to another Maryland blog just once to rebut criticism from Red Maryland leader Brian Griffiths. He never linked to another liberal or local blog.
After just five months in the state’s blogosphere, Legum announced he was running for Delegate in District 30. Many bloggers run for office but most put in years of work covering their home territory first. MPW founder David Lublin, for example, wrote more than 800 posts over 2 years before running for the Town Council in Chevy Chase. Griffiths logged more than 1,800 posts over more than 3 years before running for Chairman of the Maryland Young Republicans. For many on both the right and the left, Legum’s New Line looked like little more than a quick attempt to build name recognition among Annapolis insiders for a Delegate run. The blog has only averaged about two posts a week since Legum’s campaign announcement.
Now Griffiths has caught Legum in an embarrassing misstep. Legum has promised not to accept any contributions from Maryland lobbyists.
But Griffiths jumped on a fundraiser Legum is holding in the District hosted by a group of former Clinton staffers.
What even Griffiths did not realize is that three of the fundraiser hosts are federal lobbyists. Patti Solis Doyle, Hillary Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, is a telecommunications lobbyist for Utrecht & Phillips, PLLC. Patrick Metz works for Delegate Heather Mizeur’s (D-20) lobbying firm, the Mizeur Group, and lobbies on climate change issues. And former Bill Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta once had his own lobbying firm (Podesta Group Inc.) and has represented at least five clients.
If a Republican candidate promised to not take money from Maryland lobbyists but then allowed federal lobbyists to fundraise for him, the Democrats would cry hypocrisy. But when Judd Legum does it, the Democrats are (at least publicly) silent. This is a shameful moment for our party.
Legum’s target is freshman Delegate Ron George, the only Republican in District 30 (which is also represented by House Speaker Mike Busch). He had a 20% score from Progressive Maryland in 2008, a 0% score from Equality Maryland in 2008 and a 42% lifetime score from the Maryland League of Conservation Voters. He won office in 2006 over Democrat Barbara Samorajczyk by just 53 votes and had only $15,416.84 in his campaign fund in January. George is both conservative and vulnerable. For the right candidate, he is an easy target.
But Legum is also an easy target. Griffiths, George and other Anne Arundel conservatives will paint him as a Washington D.C. insider who is financed by federal lobbyists. (Wait until they get hold of his contributor list.) If Legum is the Democrats’ nominee, they may very well lose an opportunity to get rid of Ron George.
Two easy targets. At least one of them will be bulls-eyed.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
MCDCC Seeking New District 18 Member
Following is the press release from MCDCC.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Press Release
May 28, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: Milt Minneman
Communications Director
301-299-2551
FAX: 301-299-4604
minnemmj@hotmail.com
County Democratic Central Committee to Vote on a Member from Legislative District 18
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee will meet and vote at 7:30PM, Tuesday, June 12, 2009, at its headquarters, Third floor, 3720 Farragut Ave., Kensington, MD 20895, for a member from Legislative District 18. The vacancy is the result of Member Oscar Ramirez moving out of the district. Candidates for the position must be registered Democrats residing in District 18. District 18 encompasses Kensington and parts of Chevy Chase and Silver Spring.
Candidates should send a letter of application and a resume by 5:00 pm, Monday, June 11 by mail or in person to the Committee, by email to MontgomeryDems@msn.com or by Fax to 301-946-1002. Candidates are expected to attend the Tuesday, June 12 meeting, address the Committee, to be followed by a question-and-answer period and the votes.
For further information, call 301-946-1000.
###
Leggett Sticks Up for Auto Dealers
County Executive Ike Leggett wrote the following two letters to Governor O'Malley and the U.S. Treasury Department on the impending closures of auto dealerships.
May 27, 2009
The Honorable Martin J. O’Malley
Governor of the State of Maryland
State House
100 State Circle
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Dear Governor O’Malley:
I am writing to express my concern over the recent decisions made by our country’s domestic automobile industry, and to make a recommendation that could potentially assist current car dealerships in the State of Maryland that are being impacted by these actions.
The approximately 425 automobile dealerships in the State generate many benefits for communities throughout Maryland. These companies provide jobs to our residents (approximately 25,000 in 2008), and valuable revenues to government coffers. Many of these businesses are long-standing family enterprises where the ownership of these businesses has been passed down from generation to generation. In addition to the positive economic impact these businesses provide, automobile dealerships have historically been the epitome of “good corporate citizens.” They are, in essence, a critical part of our community’s social and economic fabric.
As you may be aware, the State of Maryland – through its Motor Vehicle Administration – licenses new automobile dealerships. Many dealers in Montgomery County who have been notified of GM’s or Chrysler’s intention to terminate their franchise agreements believe that their existing dealership license will simply be given to a new dealership in the same market in the relatively new future. This seems unfair to local businesses which have historically contributed to our local economy, and unfair to consumers who rely on the continuity of these businesses to service their vehicles. In these trying economic times, it does not make sense for the State to support the concept of replacing terminated car dealership franchises with new ones.
Along these lines, I am recommending the State of Maryland announce that it will not issue any new automobile dealer licenses until General Motors and Chrysler complete the formal termination process with those dealers who are being affected. By doing so, our domestic automobile industry will hopefully come to recognize that our State is not interested in replacing terminated car dealership franchises with new ones, but rather, is interested in maintaining the viability of our existing local automobile businesses.
Thank you for considering this request and for your attention to what is an important issue relative to the State’s economy and economic climate.
Sincerely,
Isiah Leggett
County Executive
Cc: Senator Barbara Mikulski
Senator Ben Cardin
Congressman Chris Van Hollen
Congressman Roscoe Bartlett
Congresswoman Donna Edwards
Senator Rich Madeleno
Delegate Brian Feldman
John T. Kuo, Administrator, Maryland Motor Vehicles Administration
Christian S. Johansson, Secretary, MD Dept. of Business and Economic Development
May 22, 2009
The Honorable Steven Rattner
Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury
United States Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 1332
Washington, D.C. 20220
Dear Mr. Rattner:
On behalf of the citizens and businesses of Montgomery County, Maryland, I am writing to express our concern over the recent decisions made by our nation’s domestic automobile industry that will result in the elimination of local car dealerships, jobs and important tax revenues for communities like ours.
Automobile dealerships are an important component of Montgomery County’s and the nation’s economy. The approximately 60 dealerships in our community employ over 5,000 workers with many other workers indirectly serving the auto dealerships. Many of these businesses are long-standing family enterprises where the ownership of these businesses has been passed down from generation to generation. In addition to the positive economic impact these businesses provide, automobile dealerships have historically been the epitome of “good corporate citizens.” They are, in essence, a critical part of our community’s social and economic fabric.
I would first like to ask the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry to re-examine the aggressive timeline associated with notifying local automobile dealerships of franchise cancellation plans and implementing subsequent termination procedures. Closing a myriad of dealerships in Montgomery County in the months ahead will place undue pressure on the already fragile state of our community’s economy.
Additionally, many in our County are questioning the economic rationale behind the massive closure of these dealerships, which provide essential goods and services to our residents while also providing significant revenue to their parent corporation. I join my colleagues throughout the country in respectfully requesting that you release the documentation that highlights the presumed financial savings that will accrue to our domestic car manufacturers by closing local dealerships.
Finally, I would like to call to the Task Force’s attention the distinct possibility that the current actions being pursued by our domestic automobile industry will simply result in terminated franchises being replaced with new ones in the same market, six months to a year down the road. This seems unfair to local businesses which have historically contributed to our local economy, and unfair to consumers who rely on the continuity of these businesses to service their vehicles.
I recognize the massive and complicated job before the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, and hope that it will take these concerns into consideration.
Sincerely,
Isiah Leggett
County Executive
Cc: Senator Barbara Mikulski
Senator Ben Cardin
Congressman Chris Van Hollen
Congressman Roscoe Bartlett
Congresswoman Donna Edwards
Get Behind Universal Health Care NOW
By Sharon Dooley.
Soon Senator Max Baucus from Montana will re-open the long dialogue on health care in the United States. He is known to be averse to continued in-depth discussions on a single payer National Health Plan. He has claimed to be interested in providing a bipartisan solution to this problem of the uninsured and ever more expensive health care costs. However he had protesting physicians thrown out of recent hearings where current industry lobbyists were the featured presenters.
A Maryland physician and my friend – Margaret Flowers was among the protesters arrested at this hearing; she was jailed for several hours, as were many of those who were with her. The purpose of this protest was to request the inclusion of advocates for single payer in his schedule of hearings. As a long time advocate for healthcare and a member of the profession, I do not understand why these ideas cannot be discussed in the Senate. Is this not the place and time to have all ideas presented and examined to see whether or not they can stand on their own merits? Could the single payer idea be such a dangerous one that it should be quashed? Does not the fact that many national physicians and health care leaders are behind this movement give it credibility?
Are we, as a nation, going to allow this most important discussion to be controlled by industry lobbyists?
Have others not noticed the baby steps being taken by the insurance executives to undo some of their past excesses? In recent months there has been willingness voiced to cease the excess fees charged for women (as they might have pregnancies), to increase COBRA (but not forgoing the excessive fees that make it difficult for many to afford) and other possible roll backs for some fees. But does this not sound like a teenager wanting the car keys vowing to take out the trash and mow the lawn despite broken promises in the past? Have there been any lobbyist promises to reduce the excessive salaries paid to industry executives, even as they are denying claims in order to protect shareholders interests? Medicare works well and has no preexisting clauses, yet these greedy companies insist that this prohibition is necessary to their survival as an industry. Medicare has not taken away the local physician option, so why have these companies thrown out the threat that patients will be denied services and cannot see their choice of providers. The specter of “Harry and Louise” looms behind the scenes and according to recent news reports is being raised in small markets across the country already. The single payer advocates are apparently unaware of just how strident some of the voices will be against their plans. But perhaps the arguments are both more singular and sinister than they expected. The sight of 47 million uninsured Americans means little to these powerful groups; the loss of income and power is more real to them. And – as history has shown over the centuries – those in power (for example the Blue Shield lobby) do not surrender this power easily or gracefully.
Another group claiming fiscal conservatism is already mounting media campaigns against expanding the health care models available in this country and raising the ghost of socialism once again. The question of getting government out of the business of health care is again voiced, but with Medicare and Medicaid both serious and significant options for an ever growing number of residents here, it is obvious that Federal interest is strong and staying. President Obama was seen as a supporter of a single payer plan; many hope that those in his own party do not try to dissuade him of this idea. Many Americans do have good healthcare and as a country it spends a lot, but we need to look at all practices to determine if we are spending these dollars wisely. Medicare is already examining outcomes to determine which decisions produce the healthiest patients. However, debates are again lining up along political lines even though disease sees no such boundary – this should not be a discussion that ends up with the least palatable choices – but with one that looks at all suggestions and chooses the one that reaches the most people in America and truly provides healthcare for all.
MPW readers need to follow closely the votes of our elected representatives in these important arenas in the next few weeks. I urge that each of you share your most informed opinions with these officials during this process.
Sharon Dooley is a healthcare consultant and former nurse.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Twenty Stories the MSM Missed in the Special Election
The mainstream media (MSM) did a sparse job in covering the District 4 special election, a swing-vote race with implications for next year. Here are twenty stories they missed ranked in order of ascending importance.
20. Leventhal vs. Klumpp
When County Council Member George Leventhal invoked the memory of Marilyn Praisner in advocating for Nancy Navarro, Mrs. Praisner’s daughter, Alison Klumpp, struck back with an essay entitled, “I Really Know Marilyn Praisner.” Both blog posts were unsolicited submissions to MPW. Neither probably decided many votes, but they sure were entertaining!
19. Help Save Maryland’s Electoral Activity
Help Save Maryland, a group that opposes illegal immigration, did not yet exist during the 2006 elections. But they became active this time, distributing a questionnaire, passing out a flyer against Ben Kramer and mobilizing against Navarro. The MSM missed this, but MPW readers know to expect more from the group next year.
18. Marilyn Praisner’s Authorship of the Special Elections Law
After Don Praisner called for an appointment to replace him, MPW revealed that his wife was a driving force in creating special elections for County Council vacancies. The irony of Mr. Praisner’s recommendation against one of Mrs. Praisner’s greatest achievements was lost on the MSM, which did not report it.
17. State Board of Elections Problems
The Maryland State Board of Elections (SBE) was slow to release the first batch of campaign finance reports, taking 11 days to post one of Navarro’s. We organized a four-candidate letter to urge them to release the reports on a timely basis. You would think that the MSM would have been as interested in getting the financial information as we were but they did not cover the story.
16. Implications for Council President
Even the MSM knows that there is an informal 4-4 split on the County Council. If Kramer had won, Vice-President Roger Berliner would have been Council President in 2010 and Duchy Trachtenberg would have been President in 2011 (assuming she is re-elected). Now that Navarro has won, Council Members Nancy Floreen and Valerie Ervin may be President instead. We reported that on May 6 but the MSM has not talked about it.
15. More Illegal Robocalls Against Navarro
Navarro’s enemies seem to love illegal robocalls. They used them in 2008 and used them again in 2009. Last year, the Gazette ran with the story after we broke it but no MSM showed any interest this time around.
14. History Between Kramer and Lamari
Ben Kramer and Cary Lamari have been stepping on each other’s toes for a long time but you would never have known that from the MSM. We investigated the subject of one of their most contentious disputes – the Georgia-Norbeck intersection – but we could have written even more about these old enemies.
13. Navarro’s Micro-Targeting
Eric Luedtke wrote about Navarro’s micro-targeting, one of the most important tactics of the 2009 race and one sure to be copied next year. The Gazette hinted at this but did not grasp the full impact of it. The Post just ignored it.
12. Ficker’s Violation of the Law
In March, we broke the story about Robin Ficker’s illegal flyers, which were replicated on his website. His frequent handouts of the flyer was a repeated violation of Maryland election law and no one else caught it. The MSM also totally missed his suspect residency in the district. Weeks after we questioned Ficker’s eligibility, the Post is still pretending that he lives in District 4.
11. Board of Elections Plan to Close Precincts
Near the beginning of the campaign, the Montgomery County Board of Elections proposed closing half the precincts in District 4, a plan that would have had a disparate impact on Navarro. The plan did not pass even though the MSM was silent.
10. Lack of Coattails for Ike Leggett and Rona Kramer
We reported that even with Ike Leggett’s endorsement, Ben Kramer lost ten of the eleven precincts with a black population percentage of 30% or more. And even with his sister, Senator Rona Kramer (D-14), appearing on his mailers, Ben Kramer lost thirteen of the sixteen precincts in both Council District 4 and State Legislative District 14. He even lost his sister’s home precinct. Where is the MSM’s analysis?
9. Post Office Fumbles Absentee Ballot Applications
The Postal Service’s failure to deliver 314 absentee ballot applications by the Board of Elections deadline could have been an even bigger story than it was if Kramer had used it as grounds for a court challenge. Curiously, we learned about this from the Pew Center’s Election Line, which did excellent work on this story even though it was never spotted by the local MSM.
8. Kramer’s Record in Annapolis
Our research on Ben Kramer’s record as a state legislator found that he was the lowest-ranked Montgomery Delegate by Progressive Maryland and the Maryland League of Conservation Voters and tied for the lowest-ranked by Equality Maryland. That provided a nice foil for Navarro, who has always run from the left, and gave her a basis for her negative mailings. That tactic would not have worked against a more liberal primary opponent. No one in the MSM made that point.
7. Role of the ICC
District 4 is home to most of the Intercounty Connector’s alignment. The ICC was a subject of concern for Kramer, who lost the precincts along its route by 17 points despite trying to mitigate its traffic impact. Only one MSM source picked up on this: Baltimore Sun reporter Michael Dresser, who cited MPW. If the Sun identified the ICC’s role in the race, then why didn’t the Post or the Gazette?
6. Rise of the Blogs
We don’t have to tell you how heavily the blogs covered this election. Just Up the Pike set its record month in March while MPW set its record in April, more than doubling conservative blog Red Maryland’s visit total that month. In terms of Google searches, the blogs totally overwhelmed the MSM. But if you only read the MSM, you would have no idea that the blogs even existed. The Post ran an excellent article on blogs in the Virginia Governor’s race, but its Maryland reporters seem to not know what a blog is. For example, take Ann Marimow’s short reference to MCGEO’s “Boy King” flyer in which she does not bother to mention that its content is almost entirely derived from this blog. Or her reference to Drew Powell’s campaign finance statistics with no mention of where they were first published: MPW.
5. Disrespect of Cary Lamari
Lamari had lots of things going for him: decades of community service, a stint as President of the Montgomery County Civic Federation, prior experience running for County Council and strong support from the civic activist community. More than anyone, he was associated with the growth restraint message used by County Executive Ike Leggett and County Council Members Duchy Trachtenberg, Marc Elrich, Roger Berliner and Phil Andrews in 2006. And yet none of these politicians supported him. Throw in the Post’s omission of his candidacy from its coverage and the Boy King’s unrepentant spin on his views and you have to wonder what the poor guy has to do to catch a break. More importantly, civic activists everywhere have to wonder just how much the county’s establishment truly respects their work.
4. Duchy Trachtenberg’s Rupture with Progressives
In 2006, at-large County Council candidate Duchy Trachtenberg was supported by a wide range of progressive groups including the Sierra Club, Progressive Maryland, many unions and – as a President of Maryland NOW – the state’s women’s rights movement. In 2009, almost all of these groups backed Navarro while Trachtenberg sided with Montgomery County’s least-progressive Delegate. This is going to have a heavy impact on next year’s at-large County Council race.
3. Park and Planning Lobbies District 4 Candidates
Folks, this is a BIG scandal. Park and Planning is not supposed to get involved in political races at all. But it made an exception this time, lobbying the District 4 candidates for its North Four Corners soccer field. Where is the same MSM that investigated Park and Planning’s conduct in the Clarksburg debacle? More importantly, where are the state authorities?
2. Kramer’s Broken Pledge
While the Post originally reported Kramer’s pledge not to take developer money, they totally missed his failure to follow through. Our readers now know the excruciating details of Kramer’s taking money from Josh Rales, the Bernstein Companies and the Maryland Realtors PAC even while repeating his broken pledge at Leisure World. Where were the MSM’s watchdogs?
1. Sources of Campaign Finance
This was the biggest story of all. No matter which candidate you supported (or opposed), you could find some aspect of the money chase to get jacked up about. Whether it was Navarro’s heavy reliance on union money, Kramer’s heavy reliance on himself or even Lamari’s receipt of a check from a child sex offender (which he returned), this race had something for everybody. The Post reported none of this in its lone, skimpy article on the subject on March 25. Campaign finance is an eternal issue in politics – any kind of politics – and voters must have a press that can keep an eye on it.
Lord have mercy on us if the MSM coverage of this race is a preview of 2010!
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Maryland Blogosphere: Up, Up and Away
The 35 Maryland state and local blogs that release their site statistics set a combined record visit count in March. Then they set another record in April.
We track site visit statistics for 35 Maryland blogs that focus on state and local issues. Five of them are liberal blogs, 16 are conservative blogs and 14 profile local areas without emphasizing political ideology. The most-visited blogs in our data set are usually Maryland Politics Watch, Annapolis Capital Punishment, Inside Charm City, Just Up the Pike, Rockville Central, Red Maryland, Baltimore Reporter and PG Politics. Some of the most prominent blogs that do not release site statistics include O’Malley Watch, Legum’s New Line, Salisbury News and the Silver Spring Penguin.
Our data series starts in June 2007. In that month, these blogs (some of which were not yet active) recorded a combined 63,847 visits. The combined count increased to a peak of 108,477 visits in February 2008 and then fell below 100,000 for seven months. Since then, the combined count has exceeded 100,000 visits in six of the last seven months. March’s record of 112,027 visits was broken by April’s record of 129,286. Thirteen of the 35 blogs had their record month in either March or April of 2009.
The general trend of Maryland blog site visits is up – WAY up. But that does not apply equally to all blogs.
1. Local blogs that do not focus on political ideology now account for almost half of all Maryland site visits. Their combined visit count has leaped from 34,649 in December 2008 to 64,240 in April 2009. The leaders in 2009 site visits through April are Inside Charm City (80,984), Just Up the Pike (30,701), Rockville Central (27,697), Tales of Two Cities (19,547) and Oceanshaman (14,396).
2. Maryland Politics Watch has been the most-visited political blog in the state for six months in a row. Among political blogs, the leaders in 2009 site visits through April are MPW (59,290), Red Maryland (39,497), PG Politics (22,355), Baltimore Reporter (21,342) and Annapolis Capital Punishment (21,279).
3. The conservative blogosphere has stopped growing. Conservative blogs accounted for 49% of all site visits in October and November 2007. In April 2009, they accounted for just 29% of all visits – the lowest percentage they have ever had in our records. Their April 2009 visit count of 37,918 is 16% lower than their peak month of October 2008. Red Maryland’s April count of 8,535 visits is its lowest total since October 2007, its fourth month of existence. And of the 16 conservative blogs in our dataset, eight of them received less than 1,000 site visits in April – meaning that they have virtually no audience.
4. Inside Charm City has become perhaps the premier news aggregator in Baltimore. It rarely runs any original content and primarily reprints or links to mainstream media (MSM) articles. But posts like this are extremely popular. (Just click on it and you’ll see why!) Inside Charm City has been the most visited blog in the state in three out of the last four months.
Political blogs of both the right and left normally experience a lull in the summer as the state, county and federal governments go into recess. But many local blogs will hold their audience and the political blogs will pick up again in the fall. What will these numbers look like in the 2010 election year?
Montgomery County's Desperate Budget Gamble
Montgomery County’s budget crisis, exacerbated by a State Board of Education decision at the very end, is over for the moment. Or is it?
The County Council approved a new budget last week containing a 1.1% decrease in spending from FY 2009, the first drop since FY 1992. The last hurdle to that budget involved a state requirement for “Maintenance of Effort” (MOE) on school spending, which holds that counties must at least maintain their per-pupil spending on education to be eligible for increases in state aid. Montgomery County applied for a $79.5 million waiver from the State Board of Education, saying that the county’s poor economy and its anti-tax Ficker Amendment prevented it from meeting MOE. Moreover, the county argued that since federal stimulus money earmarked for schools would enable the county to meet Superintendent Jerry Weast’s budget request, its limited county funds would be better directed to other parts of the government.
The State Board of Education denied Montgomery’s waiver request on two grounds: first, it was not persuaded that the county’s economic problems were worse than the state’s other jurisdictions (of which only two others were asking for MOE waivers), and second, it said that the county’s Ficker Amendment was no excuse to avoid MOE. That provoked an angry response from County Executive Ike Leggett and County Council President Phil Andrews and created a thorny last-minute problem: the county would now have to figure out how to direct $79.5 million to the schools from the rest of the government. How could they do that in a matter of days, especially in the context of a $587 million deficit?
Based on a recommendation from the County Executive, the council adopted this budget resolution language to get around the MOE decision:10. This resolution appropriates $79,537,322 for the payment of debt service due in FY10 for the construction of Montgomery County Public Schools facilities.
In plain English, the county gave the money to the schools as required by the Board of Education decision. And then they took it back as a special “debt service” charge on school construction. So the county’s position is that we are meeting the state’s MOE requirement. Even though in terms of net real dollars we clearly are not.
a) Montgomery County Public Schools must make payment for the debt service through the Montgomery County Government as provided in subparagraph 1O(c). These funds must not be spent for any other purpose.
b) The inclusion of this amount for debt service will be part ofthe County's Local Appropriation and part of the calculation of the FY11 Local Appropriation required to comply with the State maintenance of effort requirement.
c) Reimbursement must occur no less than five days before each applicable debt service payment.
So why is this a desperate gamble? The State Board of Education’s decision affirmed that local government financing of schools was a “cornerstone” of state education policy. It was a rigid statement of principle. Will they now sit back, ignore the county’s action and allow Montgomery to collect its state aid? The consequences of pushback from the Board are potentially immense. No one yet knows if they will take on that fight with the county government. Montgomery’s leaders are praying they do not.
There was another approach available, but it would have generated its own problems. The County Executive’s proposed budget added $119.6 million to the revenue stabilization fund, defined as “a special revenue fund that accounts for the accumulation of resources during periods of economic growth and prosperity when revenue collections exceed estimates. These funds may then be drawn upon during periods of economic slowdown when collections fall short of revenue estimates.” It’s true that drawing on this fund would have required some explaining to the county’s credit rating agencies. But it would not involve risking the wrath of a clearly hostile state agency that has already demonstrated its indifference to the county’s financial plight and controls hundreds of millions of dollars of aid.
The county rolled the dice and gambled that the State Board of Education would be less likely to twist a dagger into its back than Wall Street. For all our sakes, we hope they are right.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Gas Taxes by State
From MSN Money and the Tax Foundation, here's how Maryland's gas tax stacks up against other states.
Maryland is tied with Massachusetts for the 26th-highest gas tax rate among U.S. states.
A 2007 study by the Texas Transportation Institute found that traffic congestion in the Washington-Baltimore corridor cost Maryland $3 billion per year, up 1200% since 1982. Maryland's gas tax rate has been unchanged since 1992.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Adam Pagnucco on "Political Pulse" on 5/26 & 5/28 on Ch. 16 TV
Adam Pagnucco, a blogger on the Maryland Politics Watch Blog, which covers Maryland State and Montgomery County politics will be on the "Political Pulse" TV Show on Tuesday, May 26th at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, May 28th at 9 p.m. Many topics will be discussed including the County budget, blogs versus newspapers, and some of the 2010 races that will be interesting to watch.
Political Pulse is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part Five
In Part Four, we discussed how the Democrats have made major gains in voter registrations throughout the state over the last two years. Today, we look at five counties where they have done especially well.
Charles County
October 2006: 50.0% Democrat, 33.5% Republican, 16.6% Other
October 2008: 55.1% Democrat, 29.4% Republican, 15.5% Other
Over the last eight years, Charles County’s total voter registration has increased by 47%, the top growth rate in the state. And the fastest-growing Maryland county is now the fastest-growing county for the Democratic Party. All of Charles County’s state legislators are Democrats and population-adjusted redistricting may add more Democratic seats there in the next round.
Prince George’s County
October 2006: 74.5% Democrat, 11.1% Republican, 14.5% Other
October 2008: 77.6% Democrat, 9.5% Republican, 12.9% Other
Prince George’s County has the greatest number of registered Democrats in the state (383,541) and the third-highest total registered voters (494,275). One of every five Maryland Democrats lives in Prince George’s County. That guarantees a marquee role for the county in every statewide Democratic primary. Attorney General Doug Gansler and Comptroller Peter Franchot defeated Baltimore-area candidates in 2006 in part by rolling up substantial margins in Prince George’s County. If the next County Executive after Jack Johnson builds a credible record, that person will be a serious contender for the Governor’s chair.
Montgomery County
October 2006: 54.2% Democrat, 24.7% Republican, 21.2% Other
October 2008: 56.6% Democrat, 22.4% Republican, 21.0% Other
Montgomery County has the highest number of total registered voters in the state (553,366), about ten percent more than Baltimore County (500,711). The GOP’s utter collapse in Montgomery (see Part Three) is a major reason for its statewide troubles.
Frederick County
October 2006: 36.5% Democrat, 45.3% Republican, 18.3% Other
October 2008: 38.5% Democrat, 42.4% Republican, 19.1% Other
State Senator Alex Mooney (R-3) is one of the most conservative legislators in the General Assembly. His district includes the City of Frederick, the most Democratic area in Frederick County. In 2006, Mooney defeated Democrat Candy Greenway by a tight vote of 21,844 to 20,111. The fact that the Democrats have now almost caught up to Republicans in registrations puts Mooney in danger. District 3B, which borders Montgomery County, is currently represented by Delegate Richard Weldon. Weldon recently changed his registration from Republican to unaffiliated and announced his intention to retire in 2010. His seat could easily be picked up by the Democrats.
Howard County
October 2006: 46.7% Democrat, 33.8% Republican, 19.5% Other
October 2008: 48.4% Democrat, 31.6% Republican, 19.9% Other
District 9A in Northern Howard County is represented by two Republicans: Delegates Gail Bates and Warren Miller. In 2006, Bates (22,862 votes) and Miller (18,533) defeated Democrat David Osmundson (16,162) in the general election. Next time around, the Democrats should be able to field two Delegate candidates and will have a chance to knock off one or both of the GOP incumbents. They are already making preparations. Districts 12A, 12B and 13 are already represented by Democrats who were elected with healthy margins in 2006. Senate Minority Leader Allan Kittleman (R-9) is probably protected by the fact that his district is partially located in more conservative Carroll County.
Numbers can be relentless. And in Maryland, they point to the utter collapse of the Republican Party at every level. Has the GOP bottomed out? Can it ever be revived? We’ll have some answers in 2010.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
The Infamous "PIA" Video
This discussion by Board of Education members about parents who are "PIAs" (pain-in-the-a$$es) has led to a most entertaining feud with the Parents Coalition. Enjoy!
County Council Approves Operating Budget
Following is the press release from the County Council.
Release ID: 09-077
Release Date: 5/21/2009
Contact: Neil H. Greenberger 240-777-7939 or Jean Arthur 240-777-7934
From: Council Office
Montgomery County Council Approves $3.73 Billion Operating Budget for FY 2010
County’s 1.1 Percent Decrease in Tax-Supported, All-Agencies Budget Is First Decrease Since Fiscal Year 1992
County Government Budget Decreases 2.2 Percent
Public Safety, Schools, ‘Safety Net’ Are Priorities; Property Tax Stays
Within Charter Limit; $690 Tax Credit for Homeowners
ROCKVILLE, Md., May 21, 2009—The Montgomery County Council today approved a $3.73 billion tax-supported, all-agencies operating budget for Fiscal Year 2010, which begins July 1. The budget is 1.1 percent less than the approved budget for FY09, marking the first decrease in a Montgomery budget since FY 1992.
The approved budget for County government, which includes the Police Department, the Fire and Rescue Service, and Health and Human Services, but does not include Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), is $1.25 billion—a decrease of $28 million (2.2 percent) from FY09.
In a budget year complicated by the national and regional economic downturn, the Council’s budget protects core services and “safety net” programs, but does not exceed the County’s Charter Limit on property tax revenue. The budget includes a $690 property tax credit for owner-occupants of principal residences and does not fund cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for 33,000 employees of County government, Montgomery County Public Schools, Montgomery College and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, saving $125 million. Employees agreed to forgo COLAs in FY10, recognizing that the County could not afford the increases.
The $3.73 tax-supported operating budget, as defined in the County Charter, excludes self-supported enterprise funds and specific grants from the Federal and State governments, but includes current revenue funding for capital projects. For comparative purposes, this figure does not include $79.5 in debt service for MCPS school construction that will be appropriated to the MCPS budget.
The approved total operating budget for FY10, without the MCPS-related debt service, is $4.394 billion, an increase of 1.2 percent from FY09. The total operating budget includes self-supported enterprise funds and specific grants from the Federal and State governments.
In March, County Executive Isiah Leggett submitted his recommended budget to the Council. In reviewing the budget over the past two months, the Council reduced funding in several areas—including technology, cable funds, utilities and leases—and redirected it to reflect the Council’s priorities in health and human services and public safety.
The Council adopted resolutions for the FY 2009-14 Capital Improvements Program that will keep all school construction projects on their current timetables, move ahead with funding for a new Silver Spring Library and continue plans for a North County Bus Maintenance Depot.
The Council also approved a down payment of $12.9 million for purchase of the GE Tech Building on Route 28. That property is a key element in the Executive’s Property Use/Smart Growth Initiative that would move numerous County operations from scattered locations, and some from rented space, into County-owned consolidated facilities. The new complex, whose overall cost is approximately $107 million, would include the Montgomery County Police Department’s headquarters, the 1st District Police Station, the Fire and Rescue Service, the Office of Emergency Management and various County offices. A new public safety memorial also would be located on the site.
Under the approved budget, property tax revenue will stay within the County’s Charter limit. The County exceeded the Charter limit—which requires that revenue from taxes on existing property not exceed the rate of inflation for the previous year—only four times since voters approved the provision in November 1990. In November 2008, County voters amended the Charter to require support of all nine Councilmembers to exceed the limit.
In addition, the County “circuit breaker” tax credit will provide more targeted property tax relief for households with incomes of $64,000 or less. And under a law the Council passed three years ago, eligible homeowners who are at least 70 years old will benefit from an added 25 percent circuit breaker credit.
The County entered the budget season facing a gap estimated at nearly $587 million. The budget adopted by the Council restored core services including police and fire and rescue services, addressed the health needs of the poor and disadvantaged and maintained facilities and programs that continue the quality of life expected by residents.
The budget emphasizes the Council’s priority focus on education, public safety and health and transportation programs that help the less fortunate during these difficult economic times.
The Council did not approve the Emergency Medical Services Transport (EMST) fee—generally known as an ambulance fee—recommended by the Executive. The fee would produce an estimated net of $12.5 million in revenue, which the Executive asserts would be paid primarily by insurance companies.
The Council’s budget preserved 18 bus routes that the Executive recommended be reduced or eliminated. The Council heard numerous concerns during budget public hearings about the impact of such cuts. The Council’s action helps many residents for whom transit is the only way to get to work or get around. The Council also provided for $1.8 million in community grants to non-profits in addition to about $2.5 million in grants recommended by the Executive and approved by the Council. Those grants will strengthen the safety net for the most vulnerable residents.
The budget continues the Council’s commitment to affordable housing. The Council approved $57.8 million for the Housing Initiative Fund (HIF) as recommended by the Executive. The Council allocated $8.9 million from the HIF for costs associated with Housing First, including rental assistance subsidy payments. Housing First seeks to find permanent homes for homeless individuals and families rather than keep them in a series of transitional housing.
The budget avoids layoffs through agreements with organizations that represent County employees that will have all employees forgo Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs).
“We had a framework in approaching this most difficult budget year and we stuck to it,” said Council President Phil Andrews. “These are difficult times for our residents and for our County. We cut spending and produced the first Montgomery County budget in 18 years that is less than the previous year’s budget. We protected our residents by not exceeding the Charter limit, but we still preserved essential services and provided for our most vulnerable residents by making sure they will have access to health services and transportation.
“We did not approve an ambulance fee, which was recommended by the County Executive but is opposed by many residents. We restored funding to keep all police stations open all night to the public, and we will buy 14 new ambulances to keep our services state-of-the-art. And we have provided a $690 property tax credit for homeowners, which will be a significant help in this challenging year. The pain of a budget year like this is real for employees who won’t receive COLAs, for example, and for youth in recreational programs, some of which were eliminated. However, we have taken the steps that were necessary to balance the budget wisely in these very tough economic times.”
The FY10 approved total budget for Montgomery County Public Schools is $2.2 billion, fully funding the Board of Education’s request. Funding for Montgomery College will be $265.6 million, 99.5 percent of the College’s request. The budget provides for enrollment growth, the opening of the new Performing Arts Center at the Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus, and additional scholarship funds.
The $246.6 million for the Police Department includes $316,160 to restore 24-hour public access to the 2nd District (Bethesda area) and 6th District (Gaithersburg/Montgomery Village) police stations. The Executive proposed closing these stations to the public from 1-6 a.m. Police funding also includes $75,000 to keep the Piney Branch Satellite Station open and in its current location and $216,220 to add five recruits to the January 2010 police academy class. In addition, the Council approved funding to administer a program that will install video cameras in police cars. The cameras will be purchased with grant funds.
The budget includes $660,000 to add 12 recruits for the County Fire and Rescue Service that were not included in the Executive’s recommended budget. The additional employees will help keep up with increased staffing needs.
“The Council’s budget action this morning maintains property taxes at the Charter limit, spreads the property tax burden equitably among residents, preserves essential services for residents and eliminates planned cost of living increases for employees,” said Councilmember Valerie Ervin, who chairs the Council’s Education Committee and represents District 5, which includes Kensington, Silver Spring, Takoma Park and Wheaton. “The Council kept its commitment to fund core services that residents rely on each day. Education, public safety and safety net services were at the top of my list of priorities because these are issues that I hear about most in District 5.”
Councilmember Nancy Floreen, chair of the Council’s Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee, said: “Fortunately, we were able to retain 18 Ride On bus routes that had been targeted for elimination or reduced service. Transit has a lot of benefits, like reducing congestion and mitigating climate change. But my most important consideration right now is that that Ride On is the only transportation option for many of our residents. I’m glad that during these difficult times we’ve been able to make sure the most vulnerable of our residents continue to have the tools they need for their health and safety.”
Councilmember George Leventhal, chair of the Council’s Health and Human Services Committee said: “This was the most challenging budget of my seven years on the Council. As chair of the Council’s Health and Human Services Committee, I am gratified that the Councilmembers worked together to protect the ‘safety net’ - the array of County services that support our most vulnerable residents. The economic recession has forced an unprecedented number of residents to seek relief from County government in the form of rental assistance, utility payments, advice and counseling on preventing home foreclosure, assistance finding employment, primary health care, mental health counseling and shelter from homelessness. The County Council is committed to helping our residents through these difficult financial times, and is working toward our economic recovery and a prosperous future for everyone who chooses to call Montgomery County home.”
Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg, who chairs the Council’s Management and Fiscal Policy Committee, praised her colleagues for today’s vote.
“During this season of unparalleled budget pressure, I am particularly pleased that funding was preserved for vital preventive health and behavioral health care delivery programs,” said Councilmember Trachtenberg. “We prioritized funds for screening, assessment and wraparound services for youth. The Council made a commitment to the integration of primary care and behavioral health by supporting the Montgomery Cares Behavioral Health pilot program. We also increased our funding for the County’s STD/HIV core programming after I presented information to my colleagues on the current unmet reproductive health needs of women qualifying for publicly funded services.”
# # #
Highlights of the Fiscal Year 2010 Montgomery County Operating Budget:
Property Taxes
• The average tax rate will remain unchanged from FY09, resulting in an average tax rate of 90.3 cents per $100 of taxable value (there are 21 property tax rates in the County).
• Every owner-occupied principal residence will receive a $690 property tax credit.
• The County “circuit breaker” homeowners’ tax credit will provide significant property tax relief for homeowners of all ages with household incomes of $64,000 or less.
• Under a law the Council passed three years ago, eligible homeowners who are at least 70 years old will receive an added 25 percent circuit breaker credit.
Education
• $2.2 billion total budget for Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), fully funding the request of the Board of Education.
• MCPS Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
- Supports all of MCPS-requested CIP amendments for capacity projects and infrastructure maintenance.
- Includes funding requested by MCPS for work required to meet general discharge permit requirements, as well as planning requirements, associated with the new National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
• $265.6 million for Montgomery College, 99.5 percent of the College’s request. The budget provides for enrollment growth, the opening of the new Performing Arts Center at the Takoma Park/Silver Spring campus, and additional scholarship funds.
• $745,000, plus a transfer of $43,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services, for the Montgomery Coalition for Adult English Literacy (MCAEL). The Coalition administers County grants for programs to improve adult literacy.
• Approved construction funds for the Bioscience Education Center at Montgomery College’s Germantown campus, including a new access road to serve the entire campus. Center is scheduled to open in January 2013.
• Created Workforce Investment Scholarship program to provide tuition funding assistance for undergraduate students at Montgomery College and the Universities at Shady Grove who are pursuing degrees in fields of significant occupational need in Montgomery County. It is estimated that in its first year, the program will provide 25 scholarships of $3,000 each.
Public Safety
- Police
• $246.6 million for the Police Department.
• $316,160 to restore 24 hour public access to the 2nd District (Bethesda area) and 6th District (Gaithersburg/Montgomery Village) police stations. The Executive had proposed closing these stations to the public from 1-6 a.m.
• $75,000 to keep the Piney Branch satellite station open and in its current location.
• $216,220 to add five recruits to the January 2010 police academy class.
• Approved funding to administer a program that will install video cameras in police cars. The cameras will be purchased with grant funds.
- Fire and Rescue
• $193,587,120 for the Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Service.
• Budget does not assume $12.5 million in net revenues from Emergency Medical Services Transport (EMST) fee that was proposed in County Executive’s recommended budget.
• Save $1.18 million by lease purchasing 14 new ambulances instead of County Executive’s recommended purchase of 30. The Council supported a staggered approach to purchasing vehicles rather than a lump sum approach.
• Lease purchase two engine body pump modules and one tanker, but save about $200,000 by not purchasing four all-wheel-drive engines and two light duty brush trucks also recommended by Executive.
• $439,330 in Consolidated Fire Tax funds and $100,000 in grant funds to open the new Milestone (East Germantown) Station in March 2010.
• Add matching funds for 12 new field positions to be partially funded through a Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant. Five positions will be assigned to the new Milestone Station. The others will be used to increase four-person staffing on fire engines around the County.
• Maintain funding for the new Kingsview (West Germantown) station that opened in March 2009 with one fire engine and one ambulance.
• Save $676,590 by delaying implementation of a second ambulance for the Kingsview (West Germantown) Station until FY11.
• $264,150 for a transition in the Emergency Communications Center that would return 10 uniformed firefighter/rescuer positions to the field and replace them with 10 civilian positions. After the first transitional year, this civilianization initiative is expected to produce cost savings.
• $157,500 for a transition in Fire Code Enforcement that would return six uniformed positions to the field and replace them with six civilian positions. After the first transitional year, this civilianization initiative is expected to produce cost savings.
• $660,000 to add 12 recruits to recruit class in February FY10.
• Save $216,000 by eliminating some daywork overtime for career positions at Bethesda-Chevy Chase Rescue Squad, Kensington Volunteer Fire Department, and Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad. The reduction will either be covered by volunteers, or by units from other nearby stations.
• $134,000 to restore a day position at Burtonsville Fire Station (funding was not included in Executive’s recommended budget).
- Correction and Rehabilitation
• $65.6 million to fund the Department of Correction and Rehabilitation.
• $72,140 to restore a laboratory assistant position in Pre-Trial Services that had been initially cut under the Executive’s recommended budget.
- Sheriff’s Office
• $21.2 million to fund operations of the Sheriff’s Office.
• $108,650 to restore a recruit class that had been eliminated under the Executive’s recommended budget. This will add three new officers over the next fiscal year. While attrition is currently low, the Maryland General Assembly recently created a new judgeship for Montgomery County Circuit Court. In the past, each new judgeship has warranted the addition of two officers to handle the resulting increased caseload.
• $88,460 to help support new Family Justice Center in Rockville. The center provides a coordinated team of professionals that provide a variety of services for victims of domestic abuse.
Transportation
• $189 million to fund the Department of Transportation.
• Retained the current service for 18 Ride On bus routes that were targeted for elimination or reduced service in the County Executive’s recommended budget. To offset the costs of retaining the bus routes, parking rates were increased in the Bethesda/North Bethesda area. Also restored weekday midday service (from 10 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) on the Route 6 Ride On line that serves the Garrett Park area. That service was eliminated during a round of mid-year budget cuts in April. It is expected that service would be returned in September.
• Parking payment by cell phone will be piloted in Bethesda in the fall.
• Increased by 25 cents per hour all short-term spaces for public parking in the Bethesda Parking Lot District. Also increased long-term hourly rate, for a monthly Parking Convenience Sticker and for other associated fees. The parking fee changes include the following:
- Raised price of all short-term spaces from 75 cents to $1 per hour
- Raised price of long-term spaces from 50 cents to 65 cents per hour
- Raised the price of the Parking Convenience Sticker from $95 to $120 per month
- Raised price of a two-person carpool permit from $70 to $90 per month
- Raised price of a three-to-four-person carpool permit from $40 to $50 per month
- Raised price of a five-plus-person carpool permit from $10 to $13 per month
- Raised the price of the Daily Parking Permit and for the Daily Maximum and a Lost Ticket in Garage 49 from $8.25 to $10.50 per day
• Increased parking fees in the North Bethesda area, including:
- Short-term rate increased from 60 cents to 75 cents per hour
- Long-term rate increased from 45 cents to 50 cents per hour
- Monthly Parking Convenience Sticker increased from $85 to $95
• Increased the subsidy for the Call-’N-Ride program that supplies taxi coupons for economically disadvantaged seniors (age 67 or over) and disabled persons. The impact of those changes would be:
- An eligible person earning $14,001 to $17,000 who now pays $17.50 per coupon book per month will pay $10 in FY10. An individual can buy up to two coupon books each month. This measure could save an individual $15 per month.
- An individual earning $17,001 to $20,000 who now pays $26.25 per coupon book per month would pay $20 in FY10. This measure could save this person $12.50 per month.
Economic Development
• $10.3 million to fund the Department of Economic Development.
• $852,440 for the Economic Development Fund that loans funds to businesses and including funding for the impact assistance program which provides grants to small businesses impacted by County revitalization projects.
• $700,490 for the Conference and Visitor’s Bureau that promotes the County as a tourist destination.
• $1,339,860 will be added to the FY09 budget in federal economic stimulus aid for workforce development to focus on youth and on adult dislocated workers.
• $617,395 to fund the Montgomery County Conference Center.
Housing
• $57.8 million for the Housing Initiative Fund (HIF).
• $8.9 million from the HIF to be allocated for costs associated with Housing First, including rental assistance subsidy payments. Housing First seeks to find permanent homes for homeless individuals and families, rather than keep them in a series of transitional housing.
• The Department of Housing and Community Affairs has already made commitments to use a portion of the HIF for 13 identified projects to acquire, preserve and/or renovate affordable housing.
• $50,000 to enhance the County’s Clean and Lien program and outreach effort regarding code enforcement. The Clean and Lien program will address problems at vacant properties (such as uncut grass and weeds) and then require the property owner to repay the County.
• $4 million in Community Development Block Grant Funds, including $1.26 million for housing rehabilitation and $605,000 in grants to non-profit organizations.
• $226,875 in Federal Emergency Shelter Grants and $2.76 million in HOME Investment Partnership funding.
Health and Human Services
• $269.5 million in funding for the Department of Health and Human Services.
• $249,530 to fund a 1 percent inflationary adjustment for contracts with eligible health and human services providers.
• Restore $136,830 (funding was eliminating in County Executive’s recommended budget) for six Conservation Corps member slots and a Human Service Specialist who provides counseling, employment skills training and support services to out-of-school, at-risk youth ages 17-24.
• $10,000 for ESOL Silver Spring team
• $90,790 for a human services specialist for the Conservation Corps program
• $46,040 for six member slots for Conservation Corps program
- Public Health Services
• $10.16 million for the Montgomery Cares program, plus $117,000 to restore the Executive’s recommended funding reduction to the Montgomery Cares Behavioral Health Pilot program and to fund specialty care services as recommended by the Montgomery Cares Advisory Board. Montgomery Cares provides primary health care to low-income uninsured adults. More than 22,000 patients will be seen by the Montgomery Cares clinics in the current fiscal year and the Montgomery Cares Advisory Board projects that up to 28,000 may need services in FY10.
• $45,000 for smoking prevention programs for at-risk youth and young mothers. These programs were proposed to be eliminated because of the State’s reduction in Cigarette Restitution Funds for education and outreach.
• $100,000 to expand screening and treatment capacity for STDs and HIV to reduce the number of people who are turned away from the County’s STD/HIV clinic.
• $182,330 to restore funding for primary care for low income uninsured patients through Mobile Medical Care and Proyecto Salud.
• $100,000 for a nurse practitioner for the Mobile Medical Care service.
• $130,000 for special care and a volunteer coordinator for Mobile Medical Care.
• $50,000 to support clinic expansion through Mercy Health Clinic
- Behavioral Health and Crisis Services
• $70,000 to restore Level 1 Outpatient Treatment services to minimize acceptance time into treatment.
• $83,810 to restore Child Mental Health Care Coordination services. Funds were not included in the Executive’s recommended budget.
• $162,420 to expand the Public Inebriation Intervention Team to the Wheaton Central Business District.
• $4.2 million for 24-hour crisis services including telephone, walk-in, mobile crisis outreach and crisis residential services.
- Aging and Disability Services
• $4 million for services that help seniors remain independent in the community including an increase of $154,010 for senior transportation services.
• $4.62 million for in-home aide services.
• $2.3 million to support the senior food program, an increase of $600,000 over the previous year.
- Children, Youth and Family Services
• $291,210 for the Neighborhood Network initiative to provide emergency food and housing stabilization services to neighborhoods most impacted by the recession. These funds will be combined with grants to non-profits and funding from the Community Foundation.
• Restore $50,000 (funding was eliminating in County Executive’s recommended budget) for intensive individualized, coordinated, and multi-agency support services for children and youth who are gang-involved or at risk of becoming gang involved.
• $22.1 million for Child Welfare Services.
• $10.7 million for Child Care Subsidies.
• $20.3 million for School Health services, an increase of $500,000 from the FY09 approved budget).
• $2.4 million to fund an initiative that addresses high risk youth behaviors including gang involvement, violent behavior, substance abuse, and teen pregnancy. Services are delivered through the Youth Opportunity Center in Langley Park, the Wellness Center at Northwood High School and the Street Outreach Network, a cadre of outreach workers, who connect with and provide support to gang involved youth.
• $2.85 million for services focused on increasing the quality early care and education programs available to young children, including restoration of $17,000 for training incentives for new child care providers.
• $3.5 million for evaluation, assessment, and early intervention services to families with children under age three when there is a concern about development, including a $1.3 million increase in federal and state funding.
• $5.2 million for Linkages to Learning, an increase of $26,850.
• $340,000 to support community-based pre-kindergarten services for 40 children provided by Centro Nia.
• $17,000 for incentives for new child care program.
Libraries
• $37.9 million for the Department of Public Libraries.
• Maintains current hours at all libraries.
• A decrease of 53 positions (most were already vacant).
• 10 percent reduction in purchase of new materials.
Technology
• $31.8 million to fund the Department of Technology Services to continue support a multitude of resident and County services on the web, as well as provide an infrastructure for County business applications, data storage, and information sharing in a secure and reliable manner for all county departments.
• $14.9 million to continue technology modernization initiatives that are expected to streamline County processes and make it easier for residents to reach the County and receive services.
• Many aging Finance, Procurement and Human Resource systems are being replaced and the many call taking operations in multiple departments will be consolidated into a single MC311 call center ensuring prompt and coordinated response. In addition, this effort will result in long term operational savings of $7.5 million annually, with the first such savings being realized in the last quarter of FY10 equaling an estimated $1.875 million.
• $6.8 million for desktop computer modernization, a program that refreshes a schedule of outdated desktops / laptops and provides a responsive Help Desk function for all County departments.
• $15.5 million of Cable Fund revenues to a variety of programs including the Office of Cable and Communications Services that assists residents with cable and broadband service complaints, enforces cable and other telecommunication franchises, and reviews all telecommunications tower and antenna siting requests.
• Funding provided to support cable programming produced by community, government and educational organizations and to support of expansion of the FiberNet system that permits cost-effective, fast, secure broadband communications between public safety agencies, educational facilities, government service centers and much more.
Arts and Humanities
• $5,069,380 for Arts and Humanities.
• $3,963,130 for Arts and Humanities Council includes:
- $3 million for operating support for large organizations.
- $492,930 for grants to small and mid-size organizations, program and arts education grants, and individual artist/scholar grants (a 5 percent reduction from FY09)
- $375,000 for administration and related functions (about the same as FY09)
- For operating support, the Council requested that the Arts and Humanities Council adjust the formula for allocation of grants to avoid large percentage increases or decreases for organizations between FY09 and FY10. The Arts and Humanities Council revised the formula so that an organization’s FY10 grant would not increase or decrease by more than 11 percent of the organization’s FY09 grant award.
• Assistance to individual organizations
- $506,250 for American Film Institute (Silver Theatre operating support)
- $75,000 for Heritage Tourism Alliance (operating support – match for State funds)
- $400,000 for Imagination Stage (facility debt service and/or debt retirement)
- $50,000 for Pyramid Atlantic (facility debt payment)
- $75,000 for Round House Theatre (Bethesda facility maintenance and utilities)
Environment
• Initiated a plan to reduce energy consumption in County government facilities by four percent in FY10. Meeting the goal would save an estimated $1.1 million in the next fiscal year.
- WSSC
• Reached agreement with the Prince George’s County Council for a 9 percent rate increase that will provide additional funding for large diameter pipe inspections, fiber optic monitoring, and repairs as well as an increased pace of small diameter water main replacement.
- Department of Environmental Protection
• $11.7 million to fund the Department of Environmental Protection including $8.9 million for the Water Quality Protection Fund.
• Added $270,000 for the staffing of the State of Maryland’s new Clean Energy Center, which is to be located at the Universities of Shady Grove.
• Added $90,000 for a storm drain inventory of Montgomery County Public Schools facilities as required under the County’s new National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
• Approved four additional positions in DEP for planning and capital work associated with the new National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
• Supported an additional $192,000 for the maintenance of 70 stormwater management facilities (new or recently transferred to DEP for maintenance). DEP inspects all stormwater management facilities in the County (more than 4,000) and currently maintains more than 1,400 stormwater facilities.
- Department of Environmental Protection-Solid Waste
• $102.5 million for Solid Waste Collection and Solid Waste Disposal, fully funding the Executive’s recommended budget.
• Approved modest increases in Solid Waste charges. Single-family residences will see increases of 3.5 percent or less depending on the subdistrict (A or B) in which they reside. Multi-family residences will see virtually no increase (increase of .1 percent)
• Maintains tipping fee at Shady Grove Transfer Station at $56 per ton for non-residential and multi-family transfers.
• Supports the Executive’s recommendation to close the Damascus “Beauty Spot” because of environmental compliance issues at the site.
- Climate Change Implementation
• $30,000 to the Office of Consumer Protection to continue advocacy at the State and Federal levels on energy issues affecting Montgomery County residents.
• $518,000 to continue the Clean Energy Rewards program.
Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission
• $135 million for M-NCPPC budget.
• $83 million to maintain current level of staffing for parks.
• $19 million to fund planning initiatives including master plans, environmental and transportation analyses, and the development review process.
• A summer study to examine the efficiency of administrative services within the Commission and consider restructuring options.
• New funding for a parking management study to be conducted jointly with County government.
Recreation
• $30.96 million to fund the Montgomery County Recreation Department.
• Restored three out of the 13 RecExtra after-school program sites recommended for elimination, providing for the continued operation of a total 28 program sites for FY10.
• $80,000 for youth programming to be disbursed to the four recreation regions.
• Increase financial assistance by $100,000 for low-income families to take part in fee-based Recreation Department activities.
• Provide funding to continue the operation of the Piney Branch Elementary School pool.
• $417,000 for operating the Wisconsin Place Community Recreation Center, scheduled to open in July 2009.
• $551,170 for operating the Mid-County Community Recreation Center, scheduled to open in November 2009.
• $24,000 to operate the Randolph Road Theater.
• $5.6 million for aquatics programs, including recreational, fitness, instructional, competitive, therapeutic and rehabilitative water activities.
• $2.6 million for camps, classes, and sports programs.
• $11 million for services provided by the Department’s Recreation Regions and Centers.
• $1.7 million for senior adult programs, which include senior centers, neighborhood programs, classes, sports and fitness, trips, and special programs for frail and isolated seniors.
• $534,000 to support land acquisition costs for the Wheaton Community Recreation Center – Rafferty.
Liquor Control
• $44.4 million to fund the Department of Liquor Control (an increase of 13.4 percent over FY09).
• $5.3 million in debt service from the Liquor fund for state transportation projects
• Approval for the liquor warehouse to move to the Finnmark property in Gaithersburg to meet industry storage and other safety standards.
Fleet Management Services
• Reduced the County CarShare fleet from 28 vehicles to 18. MC CarShare is a pilot program (began Jan. 1, 2009) where County employees rent hybrid vehicles by the hour instead of using administrative fleet vehicles or traditional rentals. While the Council actively supports the use of this program, it is currently being underutilized. The Council therefore decided that 18 was a more appropriate and cost-effective fleet size while the program is in its infancy.
• Reduced the number of administrative fleet vehicles, saving approximately $1.5 million. In order to achieve this reduction, fleet users will be shifted from administrative fleet vehicles to the MC CarShare program.
• Reduced Enterprise rental expenditures by $100,000. FY09 rentals are projected to cost more than $300,000.
Regional Services Centers
• $4.2 million to fund the East County, Mid-County, Bethesda-Chevy Chase, Upcounty and Silver Spring regional centers.
• $125,000 for Emerging Communities Initiative for small community development projects in commercial areas that are not in Urban Districts.
Other Notable Items
• $1.8 million for a total of 47 grants to nonprofit organizations to support a variety of programs and services, including food, eviction prevention, utility assistance and other safety net services to help low income families facing severe economic hardships.
• Funded several youth development proposals from community nonprofit organizations working to provide needed after school programs for County youth.
• $48.6 million for the Division of Risk Management, the self-insurance component of the Department of Finance.
• $8.6 million to fund the Office of Human Resources.
• $2.4 million to fund the Office of Consumer Protection.
• $9.2 million for Community Use of Public Facilities.
• $27.1 million for the Department of Permitting Services.
• $2.2 million to fund the Office of Human Rights, including an increase of $3,000 in administrative expenses for the Human Right Commission.
• $1.2 million to fund the Commission for Women.
• $64,500 for the Montgomery County Historical Society.
Programs Eliminated or Significantly Reduced
• The Teen Club program was totally eliminated from the Recreation Department budget for savings of $595,240 (net savings $184,240 because of lost revenues of $461,000). The program included activities and trips for middle and high school students.
• RecExtra programs offered by the Recreation Department are reduced from 38 to 28 schools for savings of $158,350. Program funding overall was reduced by 57 percent of FY09 levels.
• SHARP Street Suspension Program budget was cut by $342,980, a 75 percent reduction from FY09 approved levels, due to restructuring of the program. Four of the seven existing sites will receive some level of funding to support operations. The other three sites will continue only if the churches and volunteers can sustain programming.
• Implementation of a second ambulance for the recently opened Kingsview (West Germantown) Fire Station will be delayed until FY11, saving $676,590.
• Police staffing reduced by six non-sworn positions in the administration, personnel and crime analysis sections and five vacant positions were eliminated in the Security Services section.
• Only one police recruit class will be held in the upcoming fiscal year. Because there will be only one class in January 2010, four background investigator, two recruiter and a field training coordinator positions were eliminated.
• Save $724,000 by eliminating 10 positions at Montgomery College.
• The Office of Zoning and Administrative Hearings was reduced 58 percent (total reduction of $21,510 from the FY09 appropriation of $36,500) in the area of legal and attorney services. This area is for contract attorneys that assist in hearings to maintain a hearing schedule that does not have significant delays. The hearing examiner believes this reduction could delay hearings in some cases.
• Save $150,000 in funding for Chore Services, which provided assistance to elderly or disabled persons who need assistance with heavy housework and trash removal. The program was eliminated because of budget constraints, but had assisted 30 people before it ended. At the time the program ended there were 71 people on the waiting list for these services.
• Saved $135,000 by reducing maximum hours of Respite Care, which provides family caregivers of disabled persons with up to 164 hours of respite services per year. In order to reduce expenditures, the maximum hours will be reduced to 140 per year. While this is the average number of hours used, many families will experience a reduction in this very important service.
• The State reduced the Hepatitis B grant to the County by $161,000 and the County has eliminated a Community Health Nurse in the immunization program. This will impact the County’s ability to provide outreach, education and immunization clinics.
• The State has reduced Cigarette Restitution Funds for prevention, outreach and education by $734,900. This will result in the elimination of three positions in the Department of Health and Human Services and more than $400,000 of contractual services.
• Redistribute/increase the workload for existing analysts in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and abolish a vacant budget specialist position to save $135,000.
• Fill several analyst positions at OMB with interns to save $104,000 (assuming that some of the analyst positions become vacant during the year).
• Save $27,000 by reducing the number of County budget books printed (they are available online).
• Save $122,000 in the Department of General Services (DGS) for the cost of various supplies, reflecting lower prices and reduced use.
• Save $235,000 by reducing miscellaneous maintenance operating expenses in DGS.
• Save $442,000 by assuming efficiencies in administration in DGS from digitizing the work processes. Savings will come in form of paper, toner, copier use, paper storage, filing space (cabinets and floor space for them) and general administrative costs
• Save $1.4 million by assuming that the cost of the various service contracts for maintaining County facilities can be reduced 11.2 percent without reducing the level of service. This seems reasonable due to the fact that the economic recession has reduced the demand for such services and the contractors must reduce their prices to attract customers.
• Eliminated three positions in the Department of Finance: one in Treasury, one in Payroll and one in IT. Total savings of $273,340.
• Phase out mailing of tax bills to homeowners whose mortgage company pays the property tax bill to save $42,950. Savings will come from printing, postage, and handling. Finance explained that the service impact would occur in FY11, not FY10, because it will still mail the FY10 bills, but on or before the end of FY09, using appropriation in the FY09 budget. The savings in FY10 would result from not mailing the FY11 bills in FY10. Instead, Finance would mail a postcard informing residents that they can view and print their bill from Finance’s web site. The FY12 bills (July 2011) will be available only online.
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part Four
The Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun and Gazette columnist Blair Lee have all looked at Democratic gains in voter registrations since 2004. But all of them are missing the point. Since 1992, Maryland has voted Democratic in Presidential elections by double digits and probably will continue to do so. The real impact of Democratic registration increases may be felt on state and local elections. And since the last round of those elections in 2006, Democratic gains have been eye-opening.
Below are two charts illustrating voter registrations by party and county at the end of October in 2006 and 2008.
In just two years, Democratic registrations have soared by double digits in 8 of Maryland’s 24 jurisdictions for a total gain of 11.7%. Democratic registrations have dropped in only two counties: Allegany and Talbot. Republicans did not achieve a double-digit increase in any county and shrank in seven counties, including Montgomery and Prince George’s. Their total registration increase was a tiny 1.7%. Overall, the Democrats added 202,122 voters while the GOP gained 15,752. New registrations not affiliated with either major party went up by 50,480.
These new registrations are producing small but noticeable shifts in the voter balance in some counties.
The Democratic percentage of registered voters increased in 16 of Maryland’s 24 jurisdictions over the last two years. At the same time, the Republican percentage of registered voters has declined in every single jurisdiction. The biggest shifts in favor of the Democrats have been in Charles County (plus 5.1 points), Prince George’s County (3.1 points), Montgomery County (2.4 points), Frederick County (2.0 points) and Howard County (1.7 points).
We will examine these counties more closely in Part Five.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Reflections and Advice for 2010
Eric Luedtke’s analysis of the impact of the District 4 campaign on future Montgomery races was truly excellent. So naturally, I’d like to spoil it with my own two cents.
First, many politicians I talk to seem to have learned the wrong lesson from this race. They assume Nancy Navarro won in part because of the negative mail and anticipate more of that in 2010. They may be right that negative campaigning will increase, but it is fundamentally unknowable whether the anti-Kramer mailers put Navarro over the top. Ben Kramer was able to use those mailers to depict Navarro as a nasty opponent and himself as a victim, and that may very well have helped him to increase turnout among his base in Leisure World. Politicians emphasize this tactic in part because of its mass visibility. In contrast, the micro-targeting that Navarro’s campaign used was never matched by Kramer and had no downside. Since it was largely invisible, it does not receive sufficient credit for helping Navarro win the primary.
Eric also said this:I think we saw a profound difference between the way the Navarro campaign treated bloggers – as real media targets in the same way they pursue reporters – versus how the Kramer campaign treated bloggers – as, well, bloggers.
And how! I have two pieces of advice for politicians on how to deal with bloggers in 2010.
1. Send us every bit of positive information about your own campaign.
The Navarro and Lamari campaigns fed us a steady diet of positive news about themselves. Navarro’s staff sent us lots of endorsements, pictures, videos, mailers and everything else short of a new sauna. Lamari did the same thing and even contributed an op-ed column. (We encourage all politicians to steal Cary Lamari’s community land trust idea as long as they give him credit!) But the Kramer campaign sent us very little positive info about him. We had to go out and obtain his endorsements from those organizations themselves. We also had to ask Duchy Trachtenberg’s staff for her endorsement of Kramer. We only received two unsolicited pro-Kramer statements – one from Kevin Gillogly and another from Alison Klumpp – and neither of them were paid Kramer staffers. If we did not affirmatively seek out positive information on Kramer, very little of it would have appeared here because his campaign did not volunteer it.
Kramer’s people did respond to requests for information. One item they sent me – a set of notes from the State Highway Administration about the Georgia-Norbeck intersection – directly contradicted a statement made by Lamari in a debate. Why didn’t they offer this to me right after the debate and not wait for me to ask for it? If I had not gone out of my way to pursue this information, Kramer’s side of the Georgia-Norbeck issue would not have been told.
2. Don’t lie.
At the very beginning of the campaign, I asked Ben Kramer this question:Delegate, the last time you ran for County Council, you finished seventh out of eight candidates in the 1998 at-large race. If you finished that badly last time, why do you think you will win this time?
Kramer replied the reason he ran poorly in 1998 was that he dropped out of the race but missed the withdrawal deadline. He told me that his name was still on the ballot, but since he did not campaign, he attracted few votes.
I quickly discovered this was untrue. Kramer earned County Executive Doug Duncan’s endorsement prior to June 1998. He participated in a candidate debate in August. The Gazette mentioned Kramer’s candidacy on August 26 and discussed his mailers on September 2. Also on September 2, the Gazette reported that 40% of Kramer’s contributions came from developers. The Gazette reported the results from a poll on the at-large race, including Kramer, on September 9. And on election night, Kramer went to a vote count at Richard Montgomery High School before learning of his loss. The Gazette carried this quote:“I don’t have an answer [about what happened],” said a key Kramer supporter, Gino Renne, president of the Municipal and County Government Employees Organization.
I did not report this at the time because I was hoping that Kramer had made a mistake. What candidate would deliberately make such a claim when it could be so easily checked? But the more I thought about it, the more my skepticism of his campaign’s statements grew. One problem was Kramer’s position on ICC traffic mitigation. His sister, Senator Rona Kramer (D-14), defended a plan by SHA to build a bypass around Georgia Avenue and Norbeck Road at a community meeting attended by Ben Kramer. But shortly afterwards, both Kramers slammed it in writing as “convoluted.” The honesty issue boiled over when Kramer told Leisure World that he was not accepting contributions from developers while looking me in the eye, a statement that I had previously found to be untrue and exposed again the day before the election. Thousands of visitors saw that post. The Kramer campaign never responded and I caught them taking a developer contribution again after the primary. The issue of truthfulness will now dog Ben Kramer throughout the rest of his political career.
We are not naïve. We understand that some issues can be interpreted in multiple ways. We know the differences between honest disagreements, spin, parsing words, using context and outright falsehood. Remember that this blog is based in part on research. If you lie, we will find out. So just tell the truth. It’s easier that way for you and for us.
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part Three
Baltimore City and Prince George’s County have long been dominated by the Democrats. Baltimore County has been regarded as a swing county. Once upon a time, Montgomery County was not so different from Baltimore County. That time is now long gone.
Since 1990, between one-quarter and one-third of Baltimore County’s state legislators and the eight county officials (seven Council Members and the County Executive) have been Republicans. The last Republican County Executive, Roger Hayden, served between 1990 and 1994.
Additionally, much of Baltimore County was represented in Congress by Republicans Helen Delich Bentley (1984-1994) and Bob Ehrlich (1994-2002). While the GOP did not dominate Baltimore County, they were competitive enough to challenge the Democrats most of the time.
Montgomery County also once had a competitive Republican party.
Republicans held seats in Districts 14 (which was once split with Howard County), 15 (Potomac and western Montgomery) and 39 (which once extended to the Frederick County border). Most of the county was also represented by Congresswoman Connie Morella (1986-2002). But Montgomery’s Republicans have waned steadily from holding one-quarter of the county’s elected offices in 1994 to zero today.
The GOP’s fadeout in Montgomery County and its minority position in Baltimore County has greatly damaged its ability to compete on a statewide basis. At the end of October 2008, 56% of the state’s registered voters lived in the Big Four jurisdictions – Baltimore City and Baltimore, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties. And of the 158 state legislative, County Executive/Mayor and County/City Council positions in those jurisdictions, Democrats now hold 149 seats (94%), with the only 9 Republican seats located in Baltimore County.
The GOP’s virtual annihilation in these jurisdictions prevents it from developing young talent. After all, Governors, Senators and Members of Congress often start as County Council Members and Delegates. And one of the reasons why Republican gubernatorial candidates like Ellen Sauerbrey and Bob Ehrlich were able to compete on a statewide basis is that they could tap into a large enough base of surrogates, activists and fundraisers who could create a geographically diversified electoral push. Now that the Republicans are almost extinct in the state’s most populated areas, that may no longer be possible.
All of the above trends have been developing over the past five state election cycles. But now one recent development has pushed the GOP to the edge: big Democratic registration gains during the last Presidential primary. More on that in Part Four.
Nancy Navarro Declares “New Day” in Montgomery County
Following is the press release from her campaign.
##FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE##
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Contact: David Moon, Campaign Manager
Email: david@navarroforcouncil.com
Nancy Navarro Declares “New Day” in Montgomery County
SILVER SPRING, MD – Today, Nancy Navarro declared victory in the Montgomery County Council, District 4 Special Election. After the now annual voting ritual that District 4 voters are becoming accustomed to, Navarro looks forward to reaching out to all members of the community and providing the steady, responsive representation that the late Councilmember Marilyn Praisner was so well-known for.
Navarro commented, “I am humbled to be able to give back to the community that has been so wonderful to my family for the past two decades. I am ready to get right to work and pick up where the Praisners left off.”
Navarro will host a series of town hall meetings in the coming months to meet residents throughout the many unique neighborhoods of District 4 and hear their concerns. During the campaign, in addition to reaching out to likely Democratic voters, Nancy began extensive outreach to communities traditionally taken for granted by politicians -- a strategy modeled partly after President Obama’s successful campaign.
As a result, this election is likely to have repercussions beyond simply filling a council vacancy. Many experts had been speculating about whether the droves of “unlikely” voters that Obama brought into the electorate would participate in off-year, down-ticket races. The answer in Montgomery County seems to be a resounding “yes.” Navarro’s campaign notes that 3,500 Democrats participated in the April 21st primary that did not participate in the 2008 Special Primary. The campaign plans to release a more thorough analysis of the 2009 Special Election in the coming weeks – but it is already clear that with the larger, and typically more diverse electorate expected to participate in the 2010 election cycle, Navarro’s margins can only improve.
###
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
District 4 General Election Precinct Final
At 10:35 PM with all 45 precincts in, Nancy Navarro has 6,637 votes (63.36%), Robin Ficker has 3,423 votes (32.68%), George Gluck has 372 votes (3.55%) and write-ins accounted for 43 votes. 10,475 votes were cast and turnout was 8.78%.
Robin Ficker is perhaps the most famous Republican in Montgomery County still trying to run for office. Yet, his voting percentage was actually below little-known Mark Fennel's in the 2008 special general (33.44%). In November 2008, 35,270 District 4 residents voted for the Ficker Amendment (51.3%). But less than one-tenth of them voted for Ficker in this election. Apparently, the popularity of the anti-tax issue did not translate into personal popularity for Ficker.
Ficker's name recognition, while significant, is offset by his baggage. Check out the results of a simple Google search on his name.
Other than the heckling articles and his website, the first page of search results contained his Just Up the Pike profile and two MPW posts: our questioning his residency and our description of his history in politics. Both of those posts have received several dozen direct visits every day over the last several days. Special election voters tend to be exceptionally well informed about candidates and they may very well have considered that information in the voting booth.
District 4 General Election Results (Updated)
At 9:07 PM with 31 of 45 precincts reporting, Nancy Navarro has 4,152 votes (62.01%), Robin Ficker has 2,276 (33.99%) and George Gluck has 243 votes (3.63%). There are 25 write-in votes and 6,696 total votes. Turnout so far is 5.62%.
Last year, Don Praisner defeated Mark Fennel by 6,123-3,092 (66.22-33.44%). Turnout was 8.90%.
Update: At 9:32 PM with 37 precincts in, it's Navarro 4,885 (62.58%), Ficker 2,617 (33.53%), Gluck 277 (3.55%) and write-ins 27. Total votes are 7,806 and turnout is 6.55%. It's interesting that Robin Ficker's percentage is virtually identical to Fennel's last year. Who could think that Ficker would draw the same level of support as an unknown like Fennel?
Update 2: At 9:53 PM with 42 precincts in, it's Navarro 5,768 (62.60%), Ficker 3,078 (33.41%), Gluck 327 (3.55%) and write-ins 41. Total votes are 9,214 and turnout is 7.73%. There are only 3 precincts left to be counted.
County Proclamation for Wayne Goldstein
County Council President Phil Andrews delivered this proclamation at Friday night's Montgomery County Civic Federation Awards Dinner.
WHEREAS, it takes a special person to dedicate much of their life to making sure government works the way the general public expects and to have vision when it comes toward actions that are based on what is best for the long-term future rather what seems convenient for the immediate moment; and
WHEREAS, for many years throughout Montgomery County, officials of all kinds—elected and otherwise—knew they were in for quite a day when they saw the man with a pony tail tucked under the quite evident hat approaching or read the name ‘Wayne Goldstein’ on the speaker’s list for an impending public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Wayne Goldstein unleashed his quiet fury from many positions, whether it was with Kensington Heights Citizens Association, Montgomery Preservation Inc., representing the Montgomery County Civic Federation, in his weekly newspaper columns or just in any random conversation where he could zing a point with the combined sharpness of an arrow and the soft touch of a feather pillow; and
WHEREAS, adjectives often can characterize a person, and the words that friends, admirers and even occasional philosophical opponents have used to describe Wayne Goldstein over the past few weeks include ‘tirelessly selfless community advocate,’ ‘pillar of the civic community,’ ‘fierce defender of the environment and historic preservation,’ ‘researcher beyond compare,’ tenacious and passionate,’ and ‘fearless,’; and
WHEREAS, since few were better with words than Wayne himself, it is likely best to allow Wayne to best sum up his life’s public work, as he once did in talking to The Washington Post about attempts to preserve a historic building, saying: "There's a tremendous amount of principle involved here. We're doing this to say, 'This was an important, historic building and this still is an important site, and we had a right to be heard and not be pushed aside.' ";
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland, hereby salutes the work, dedication and passion for life of
WAYNE GOLDSTEIN
and wants all to know that few individuals will have a left a mark on this County as he did, and most importantly, we all know that the real beneficiaries of Wayne’s life will be those who get to experience and enjoy many of the things Wayne fought to preserve for our later generations.
Presented on this 15th day of May in the year 2009.
Phil Andrews
Council President
Maryland Public Television Snows Leisure World
By Rocky Lopes.
On April 14, 2009, without notice to customers, Maryland Public Television (MPT) converted to digital-only service. People who view MPT via basic Comcast service suddenly found snow on Channel 22. This was very upsetting to residents of Leisure World, in particular, since they view Channel 22 using the master cable infrastructure provided by Leisure World to its residents and funded through monthly assessments charged by the mutuals.
This incensed me when I found out about it. I have family and friends who live in Leisure World who described with angst (and some anger) that they thought can't get MPT any more. I wrote to MPT, and eventually received a "fact sheet" (reproduced below) describing the options. Essentially what they are saying if I read it correctly is that Comcast is required to provide ONE public television station in the basic, non-digital tier, and that MPT is not the one. They don't say it, but we know that the one public broadcast channel that Comcast must provide in Montgomery County is WETA (Channel 26).
Thus, the only way to get MPT in Leisure World any more is to do one of three things, according to their fact sheet:
1. Install an antenna. Yeah, right: outdoor antennas are against the covenants of Leisure World.
2. Get a digital converter box for Channel 22 from Comcast which will be provided free for one year (after that, there will be a monthly fee.)
3. Convert to the digital tier, requiring installation of a digital box and payment of a monthly digital service fee (on top of the fees included for Comcast by the fees assessed to residents by the mutuals).
The problem is, at least for my loved-ones who live there, they are not interested in using one type of set-up to watch one channel, and then switch to another set-up to watch others. Switching inputs is a technological challenge to many.
My perception in reading between the lines of what MPT provided in their "fact sheet" is that there is sniping going on between MPT and Comcast, each blaming the other for this problem.
Meanwhile, Channel 22 is dark for those unable or unwilling to install yet another technologically challenging system to get it back.
It's such a shame this has to happen. It has nothing to do with DTV transition that will occur nationwide on June 12, yet similar issues arise. If MPT does this, what's next? It just plain ain't fair.
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part Two
The Maryland Republican Party is in deep trouble. Barack Obama’s 25-point win is just one sign. Far more worrisome are changes in voter registrations.
Between October 2000 and October 2008, the GOP’s voter registrations grew by 14.8%. That’s the good news. The bad news is that Democratic registrations grew by 25.1% and other registrations grew by 52.0% over the same period.
The Democratic share of registered voters has held steady near 57%. Registrations not affiliated with either of the two major parties have climbed from 13% to 16%. The GOP’s share has fallen from 30% to 27%. For whatever reason, voters who do not want to join the Democrats are increasingly choosing alternatives other than the Republicans.
The regional composition of the two parties has been changing in very different ways. Below is the regional distribution of the state’s Democrats in October 2000 and October 2008.
The Democrats are slowly, steadily orienting themselves away from Baltimore and towards the Washington suburbs. In 2000, the share of Democrats in Baltimore City and Baltimore County (32.8%) roughly equaled the share of Democrats in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties (32.3%). Eight years later, the share of Democrats in the two Baltimore jurisdictions (30.4%) trailed the two Washington suburban counties (36.0%). Using an expanded definition of the Baltimore area (Baltimore City and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford and Howard Counties), Baltimore’s percentage of state Democrats has fallen from 50.7% to 47.5%. Perhaps for the first time in Maryland’s history, a Democratic statewide candidate can win a party primary while losing in Baltimore and its suburbs.
The Republicans are going in a different direction.
The GOP is actually becoming more Baltimore-oriented. The share of its registrations in Anne Arundel and Baltimore Counties has increased from 26.6% to 27.3%. Using the broader definition of the Baltimore area, the percentage of Maryland Republicans living there has grown from 47.7% to 49.4%. This has been driven not by fast growth of the GOP in Baltimore but by absolute reductions of Republicans in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties. The share of Maryland Republicans living in those two counties has fallen from 22.3% to 18.5%.
The Democrats have kept up with the historic shift of Maryland’s population towards the Washington suburbs. The Republicans have not. And the Democrats have grown much more rapidly in the state’s fastest-growing region, Southern Maryland (by 41.8%), than have the Republicans (25.4%).
We will look at the consequences of the GOP’s failure to keep pace in Part Three.
Monday, May 18, 2009
What is at Stake on Tuesday
It is only one County Council seat in a low turnout special election, right? How much does that really mean? A lot, actually. What is at stake is the future of the Montgomery County Republican Party and the broader direction of the county as a whole.
Historically, Montgomery’s GOP has been comprised of three factions who have barely coexisted, much less worked together effectively.
1. Moderates
Montgomery has a long tradition of socially liberal and (relatively) fiscally conservative Republicans. Prominent examples include James P. Gleason, the county’s first Executive; former eight-term Congresswoman Connie Morella; former Delegate Jean Cryor (D-15); and former County Council Members Howie Denis (R-1), Betty Ann Krahnke (R-1) and Nancy Dacek (R-2).
This branch of the GOP established a niche in county politics by advocating a similar, but more modest, agenda of liberal government than the Democrats. But since Montgomery’s voters are so attuned to national politics, moderate rank-and-file Republicans were mostly driven out of the party by Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Some Republicans, like Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17) and former Senator P.J. Hogan (D-39), joined the Democratic Party. Denis and Cryor stayed in office as long as they could until they were defeated by Democrats in a very bad year for the GOP (2006).
Another factor in this branch’s decline is that (relative) fiscal conservatism has found a home in part of the Democratic Party. It’s worth noting that in 2006, Denis and Cryor appeared on the Apple Ballot while Democratic County Council Members Nancy Floreen, Phil Andrews and Marilyn Praisner did not.
2. Social Conservatives
This wing of the party has been around for awhile but has never achieved the prominence of the moderates. The two foremost social conservative organizations in the county are the anti-GLBT group Citizens for a Responsible Government and the anti-illegal-immigration group Help Save Maryland. Both groups are tiny but very loud. Neither of them will ever win a majority of county voters over to their agenda. But both have received some attention from the GOP. Witness Republican Central Committee Member Adol Owen-Williams’ cry of “Heil Hitler” after the County Council’s passage of the transgender protection law and the appearance of several elected GOP leaders at a Help Save Maryland rally.
3. Anti-Tax Activists
Say what you will about Robin Ficker, but he is no ordinary politician. He is a sincere and highly-motivated advocate of one of the core principles of modern conservatism: tax restraint. His theatrics and repeated runs for office have caused many to underestimate him but the victory of his tax-limiting charter amendment should be a wake-up call to the Democrats.
Consider the following facts:
1. In the 2008 general election, 440,774 Montgomery voters cast cards. That is the highest number of votes cast in the history of the county. The turnout rate was 79%. This was the electorate that approved the Ficker Amendment.
2. The Ficker Amendment carried the county’s precincts located in Congressional Districts 4 and 6, State Districts 14, 15, 17, 19 and 39 and Council Districts 2, 3, and 4.
3. The Ficker Amendment passed by double digits in precincts located in Darnestown, Laytonsville, Clarksburg, Damascus, Sandy Spring, Dickerson, Poolesville and Germantown. It also passed in Derwood, North Potomac, Potomac, Gaithersburg, Olney, Burtonsville, Montgomery Village and (by 58 votes) Rockville.
Nothing in Montgomery associated with the Republican Party or right-of-center politics has approached the success of the Ficker Amendment since Connie Morella was last elected in 2000.
Anti-tax activism has a chance in Montgomery County in part because of our disadvantaged fiscal relationship with the state. The county’s relatively high nominal household incomes guarantee that it will be hit disproportionately hard by the state’s income tax. But the county’s high housing costs lead to high mortgage costs and a calculation by the state’s wealth formula, which is based partly on property values, that we are “too wealthy” to receive much state aid. As a result, we are third from the bottom in state aid per capita among Maryland’s counties even though we are first in mortgage costs and gasoline prices and second in foreclosures. All of this makes it harder for the county to maintain the quality of its schools and public services, without which Montgomery is merely a high-cost place to live and create jobs.
Robin Ficker’s answer is to limit local tax increases. He would follow the example of Prince George’s County, which passed its TRIM amendment over thirty years ago and has seen a relentless decline in its schools and police service ever since. Montgomery County is not as far away from going down that road as many Democrats may think. This represents perhaps the only viable return to relevance for the Montgomery GOP.
Beating Ficker on Tuesday will be one step off that path. But making the case that good government is worth paying for is essential to preventing a rebirth of the Montgomery County GOP, a surge in single-issue anti-tax activism and a resulting decline in the county’s fortunes.
Free State GOP Fades to Black, Part One
Maryland’s Republican Party is in a downward spiral. The problem goes far beyond the ideological disputes between the party’s leaders. It also goes beyond the recent overwhelming victory in the state by President Barack Obama. And the party’s poor position in the state legislature is merely a reflection of the GOP’s difficulties, not the cause. By every measure, the party is in serious trouble and the end is not yet in sight.
First, let’s begin by comparing the last two presidential elections in the state. Here are the numbers by county from 2004:
And here are the numbers by county from 2008:
The obvious fact is that Obama’s total margin (25.4 points) nearly doubled Kerry’s margin (13.0 points). But that understates the extent of Obama’s domination. As depicted by the chart below, Obama surpassed Kerry’s performance in every Maryland county.
Maryland has voted for the Democratic nominee for President in every election since 1992. But the Democratic nominee’s margins have been far less than Obama’s, ranging from 13 points (Kerry) to 17 points (Al Gore). Was Barack Obama’s gigantic margin due to George W. Bush’s epic unpopularity, the state’s large black population, or something else?
Whatever the answer may be, this is just the start of the GOP’s problems. We will begin looking at voter registrations in Part Two.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Cardin and Leggett Support Navarro in Leisure World
This mailing went out from the Navarro campaign into Leisure World.
It’s All Over But the Voting
By Sharon Dooley.
Wednesday evening the final debate of the Council District 4 campaign was held at Sherwood High School in Sandy Spring. This evening was sponsored by two local groups - Sandy Spring-Ashton Rural Preservation Consortium (SSARPC) & Greater Sandy Spring Green Space.
It was obvious that fatigue has crept in like those fogs mentioned in Carl Sandburg’s poetry …on little cat feet. None of the candidates were spouting fiery rhetoric, although Robin Ficker at times returned to his favorite lines about the voters being the ATM for the council. But, he even forgot his handwritten prop about taxes, which had to be retrieved by one of his sons who were in attendance with their mother. Ah yes, when all else fails – bring in the family to show what a man of the people the candidate might be.
Taking note of MPW recent posts, Ficker did claim to be among the residents of Council District 4 and introduced one of his sons as the actual farmer on the family farm in Boyds, (the one where the candidate no longer lives, if he is to be believed). He also benefited from a rude and noisy cheering section, which made frequent and often inappropriate outbursts; all were discouraged by the moderator.
The two other candidates in this upcoming Tuesday election were also there. George Gluck - the Green candidate - is a serious man, an engineer and grandfather who cares about such things as global warming and free trade and other progressive issues and his sincerity shone through his remarks. He also spoke of living in the Brookeville area previously and noted he had a real appreciation for the quaint town and other rural areas nearby where the residents are trying to preserve historic areas and open spaces.
Nancy Navarro, recently returned from her native country of Venezuela and the funeral of her mother, who died suddenly, seemed subdued, but did not cave under the attacks of Ficker, or the accusatory questions his supporters submitted. Living in the most diverse district council district was a theme she returned to, as she mentioned ensuring services for all residents of the county. She stuck to the issues she had identified early on in the race as the core components of her campaign – reaching out to the minority members of District 4, promoting her successes on the Board of Education and speaking of the need to bring jobs and affordable housing to the eastern portion of the county. She also mentioned the needs for safety and security for our elder residents. She spoke of painful education budget cuts and sacrifices of the union members who turned back raises that they were expecting. She plowed no new ground, nor was she expected to at this late date. Each candidate was more in safe mode – not willing to make a mistake that might provide any opening for an opponent to exploit in a last minute mailing or robo-call.
Growth was a concern on the minds of the sparse audience as questions concerning zoning and the ICC were asked as well as future development. Navarro – who touted her Sierra Club endorsement – spoke against the ICC and the fact that Council District 4 would suffer disproportionately from the devastating effects of this highway, which has been questioned by many over the years. Gluck mentioned the deforestation that has already occurred. Ficker claimed the negative environmental effects will be worsened by the shopping malls and high rises that will appear at each ICC interchange and mentioned the need to replace devastated parklands. He claimed that development dollars, which fuel politics, will be in play in this area.
None of the candidates voiced support for the plan to move the Wheaton Library to the urban center as is planned. Each mentioned the need for the new planning board member to be smart and independent; Navarro spoke also in favor of a new member who could support Smart Growth concepts.
In closing statements, Navarro repeated her themes, mentioned the schools, which are the jewel of Montgomery County and the need to protect the quality of education for our community. She spoke of the need for a council member to speak up for the neighborhoods as a voice for those locals who might not be heard on the council.
Gluck was philosophical in a benediction to his campaign, speaking of lessons learned while sometimes speaking truths before their time. He mentioned his hope for progressive issues such as verifiable voting, campaign finance reform and an instant run-off system. He quoted Mark Twain in mentioning that “Irreverence is a Champion of Liberty and its’ only sure defense.”
Ficker was rambling in his closing and mentioned that all of his campaign funds had come from District 4 residents – a statement not verified by this writer! He claimed that the council was spendthrift and irresponsible with taxpayer dollars. He repeated his frequent ATM remark and noted that his multiple petitions over the years had garnered over 2 million votes (not mentioning the costs to the taxpayers of dealing with all of the defeated petition drives during this time.) He repeated that he was a man of the people who had lived in the county his entire life and he would do a good job and not be aloof; in proof he gave out his cell phone number if any in the audience had questions.
So District 4: The horses are in the starting gates – you can stay home and let the wrong winner be selected, you can vote your party and if turnout is along registration lines, elect a Democrat, or you can confound the experts and vote for a 50 to one third party candidate. The choice is up to you. But if the Preakness were any harbinger, I’d say keep your eyes on the filly in the race – she may well gallop to the finish!
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Nancy Navarro-Robin Ficker Debate on Political Pulse
The Navarro-Ficker debate will air on "Political Pulse" on Channel 16 TV on Saturday, May 16th at 6 p.m., Sunday May 17th at 6 p.m. and Monday May 18th at 7:30 p.m.
Nancy Navarro and Robin Ficker are running for Montgomery County Council in District 4.
Navarro's Enemies and the Company They Keep
Help Save Maryland has released its latest challenge to Nancy Navarro to answer its questionnaire. But the challenge appeared on the "American Jingoist" blog, a national right-wing site with some eye-popping content. Check out some of the company Help Save Maryland keeps.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Leggett and Andrews Slam State Board of Education
You better hide the kids and shield your eyes before reading this press release, folks!
Statement by County Executive Isiah Leggett and County Council President Phil Andrews on the Decision of the State Board of Education on the County’s Maintenance of Effort Waiver
“The last-minute decision by the Maryland State Board of Education to deny Montgomery County a one-time waiver of the Maintenance of Effort funding requirement is totally unjustified.
“This is a classic example of state bureaucrats second-guessing an agreement reached on the local level by Montgomery County and the Montgomery County Public Schools to fully fund County school programs.
“This waiver request was fully supported by the Montgomery County Board of Education – those in closest touch with the needs of County schoolchildren and their families.
“Given the County’s long history of unparalleled local funding for our public schools and the strong case Montgomery County has made for the existing fiscal difficulties, it is difficult to understand how any waiver for any jurisdiction at any time could ever be approved by this State Board of Education.
“This decision actually harms school kids and the Montgomery community as a whole. It potentially forces even further cuts in critical services such as public safety, positive youth programs, libraries, and help to the most vulnerable County residents – or reductions in public school spending.
“During the past decade, MCPS enrollment has risen by 5.4 percent while our local contribution to the schools increased 75 percent. Montgomery County has gone far above and beyond what is required by the State of Maryland in funding our schools with local dollars from local taxpayers. For the past two years, even with fiscal challenges, we have significantly reduced both the overall capital and operating budgets to ensure that our schools had the resources necessary. For example, last year, the County raised property taxes by $130 million, again, in part to help fund our public schools.
“Only the severity of the economic downturn and the dire consequences for the County’s overall budget caused us to request a waiver this year. Despite these challenging conditions, we still funded 99 percent of our school system’s request.
“Montgomery County requested this waiver in order to continue to support our world-class school system while, at the same time, sustain critical programs in public safety, help for the most vulnerable County residents, and other important initiatives in the County budget that support our children and youth.
“As a result of this unwarranted decision by the State Board of Education, we will work together on a plan to resolve this unacceptable denial in a manner which we believe will be in the best interests of the County and its taxpayers.”
# # #
Contact: Patrick Lacefield 301-919-9372, 240-777-6528
State Board of Education: Local Tax Caps Are No Grounds for Waivers
The State Board of Education denied the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) waivers for school funding for all three counties (Montgomery, Prince George’s and Wicomico) that applied. And contrary to what we were hearing, former Montgomery County Council Member Blair Ewing supported Montgomery’s request and dissented from the State Board’s decision.
In its decision for Montgomery County, the State Board cites state law holding that a county may obtain a waiver if the board determines “that the county’s fiscal condition significantly impedes the county’s ability to fund the maintenance of effort requirement.” The Board’s regulations list four factors it would consider in deciding on a waiver:
(a). External environmental factors such as a loss of major industry or business;
(b). Tax bases;
(c). Rate of inflation to growth of student population;
(d). The maintenance of effort requirement relative to the county’s statutory ability to raise revenues.
Moreover, a county asking for a waiver bears a burden of proof that the above factors prevent it from maintaining its current level of per-pupil school spending, thus requiring a waiver. Should a county not receive a waiver and fail to meet its MOE requirement, its increase of state aid would be at risk.
On Montgomery, the Board found the following:
(a). While the county is suffering an economic downturn, it has not lost a major industry or business. The Board noted that 21 of the other 24 counties also suffered from the recession and did not request waivers.
(b). The Board found that while Montgomery had revenue reductions, it did not have an erosion of its tax base. It cited the county’s relatively low unemployment rate and the presence of the federal government as protecting its tax base relative to the rest of the state.
(c). The Board stated that Montgomery’s student population had grown by just 1,424 in the year ending September 30, 2008 so inflation or student growth was not an issue.
(d). The Board differentiated between two limitations on the county’s ability to raise revenues: the income tax cap and the Ficker Amendment. Both were cited by the county as reasons it could not raise more money and was thus compelled to seek an MOE waiver.
State law limits income tax rates charged by the counties to 3.2%. Montgomery is already at that limit. The Board said, “We give great weight to the fact that the county is prohibited by State law from increasing the income tax rate.”
The Ficker Amendment, passed by Montgomery voters last November, requires a unanimous vote by nine County Council Members to raise property taxes by an amount exceeding the rate of inflation. The Board dismissed that as a reason for the MOE waiver, saying, “We give little weight to the need for a unanimous vote to raise property taxes.”
Why?
The Board said this about local tax caps:In some counties in Maryland there are locally imposed caps on taxes and/or other significant locally imposed impediments to increasing taxes. We do not opine on the propriety of those locally imposed prohibitions or impediments. We do opine, however, that based on our understanding of the State/local share requirements contained in Maryland’s education funding formula, when we consider a county’s ability to raise revenue we will give locally imposed prohibitions little weight in the balance.
Translation: you may pass the Ficker Amendment or any other tax caps, but you may not escape your responsibility to educate your kids. Prince George’s and Wicomico Counties were also denied waivers because the Board gave “little weight” to their own local tax caps.
We adopt this position because each county and its voters are free to restrict tax increases, but in our view, each is not free to abdicate its responsibility to fund its minimum local share of education costs. If we gave locally imposed prohibitions great weight in our analysis, we envision legal and public policy consequences that could destroy the cornerstone of the education funding formula because any county in Maryland can, by referendum or otherwise, cap its property or other tax bases at a level that would ultimately preclude the county from raising sufficient taxes to fund MOE in full. That is not an outcome this Board could sanction by interpretation of our regulation.
Our spies were dead wrong about Blair Ewing. He offered this dissent from the Montgomery decision:The Montgomery County case is a unique one. The initial problem was that there was adequate money to fund the schools, but not adequate money to fund both the schools and the county government operations. The local school board, the county executive and the county council have now all agreed on adequate funding for both the schools and the county government operations, but need the waiver they have requested to make the agreement effective. This is an example of good government at work. It ought to be encouraged and supported. The waiver should be granted.
State Board Member Donna Hill Staton also dissented.
So now Montgomery is obligated to divert $79 million of county money from non-school programs to the schools to maintain its per-pupil education spending. That is money the schools do not need because they are receiving federal stimulus funding. Police service, fire service, health and human services programs, transportation – all are at risk because of the Ficker Amendment.
And this is just the beginning.
Does Robin Ficker Live in District 4?
Republican District 4 nominee Robin Ficker has been making a big deal about his new East County residency, referring to “our district” in debates and criticizing Democrat Nancy Navarro for out-of-district contributions. But it turns out that Ficker himself may not actually live in District 4.
Section 102 of the Montgomery County Charter states:The Council shall be composed of nine members, each of whom shall be a qualified voter of Montgomery County. Four Councilmembers shall be nominated and elected by the qualified voters of the entire County. Each of the five other members of the Council shall, at the time of election, reside in a different Council district, and shall be nominated and elected by the qualified voters of that district.
A County Attorney Opinion from 1990 further clarifies that:Charter Section 102 requires those candidates running for election to the County Council from a councilmanic district to reside in the district they are seeking to represent. Residency must be established by the date of the primary election and maintained throughout the Council member’s term of office.
On February 23, the Gazette’s Janel Davis broke the story that Robin Ficker was moving from Boyds to “a house in the Fairland Estates area of the district on the perhaps ironically named Peaceful Lane.” We looked up the tax assessments for every house on that street and post them below:
Ficker is not listed as an owner of any of these houses. Furthermore, all but two of them are claimed as principal residences by their owners, who receive homestead credits towards their property taxes. The other two houses have the following listed phone numbers:
The phone number for 1303 Peaceful Lane is disconnected. The phone number for 1411 Peaceful Lane is answered by a message from “the Beanes.” None of this rules out the possibility that Ficker lives in a basement or accessory apartment in one of the homes on the street.
But there is more. On his property tax bill, Ficker still claims his house in Boyds as his principal residence. He is saving $2,250.81 in homestead and property tax credits this year.
Ficker “changed his residency” once before to run for office, challenging Senator P.J. Hogan in District 39 in 2002. But Ficker continued to claim his Boyds home as his principal residence back then too.
Finally, Ficker has just one listed home phone number in Maryland: the one at his home in Boyds.
If Robin Ficker truly is a resident of District 4, why does he own no property and have no phone number inside the district while he continues to have a listed phone number and a homestead credit for his “principal residence” in Boyds?
Thursday, May 14, 2009
New Members Elected to MCDCC
Following is the press release from MCDCC.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Press Release
May 14, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: Milt Minneman
Communications Director
301-299-2551
FAX: 301-299-4604
minnemmj@hotmail.com
New Members Elected to Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee, at its May 12, 2009 meeting, elected Shirley C. Rivadeneira of Germantown as an At-Large-Member, filling a vacancy through the end of the 2006-10 term and Chloe Miller of Darnestown and Jordan Johnson of Silver Spring as Student Members for one year.
Shirley Rivadeneira is an attorney with the U.S. Department of Labor and has been active in the Nancy Navarro for District 4 Councilmember and Obama-Biden campaigns. Rivadeneira received the degrees of Juris Doctor and Master of International Affairs from American University and the degree of Bachelor of Arts from Emory University. She may be reached at 404-717-9861 or srivade@hotmail.com.
Chloe Miller, a sophomore at Northwest High School, is a member of the High School Democrats and was supportive of the Central Committee at its 2009 Spring Ball, the 2008 Young Democrats kickoff, 2007 Holiday Party and the 2006 and 2008 Election Day activities. Miller may be reached at 301-963-9474 or konznme@yahoo.com.
Jordan Johnson, a Junior at John F. Kennedy High School, was Vice President of the school's Young Democrat Club and is Junior Class President, volunteered in the Obama campaign. He may be reached at 301-871-6225 or 301-367-3926.
Biographies and photos are available on request.
-End-
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee is the official voice for the Democratic Party in Montgomery County on all questions of public policy and promotes democratic government, social justice, and economic opportunity for all.
3720 Farragut Avenue • Kensington, Maryland 20895 • 301-946-1000 • FAX 301-946-1002 • www.mcdcc.org
By authority, MCDCC; Karen Britto, Chair; Simon Atlas, Treasurer.
A Tale of Five Sessions, Part Two
By Marc Korman.
Last time, we reviewed each D16 legislator’s view on the 2009 legislative session. Today we will see what their constituents had to say during the event’s Q&A.
Before diving into the questions asked, it is worth noting what was not asked. Unlike the last two years, no one asked about the Purple Line or the effect of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process on Bethesda.
The D16 team took thirteen questions. I will divide them into the categories of civil rights and liberties, environment, taxes, and miscellaneous.
Civil Rights and Liberties
Two questions were asked of Senator Frosh on these issues. The first was whether the General Assembly had determined the genesis of the police spying. Senator Frosh said it was not entirely clear, but the Police Superintendent took responsibility, saying it was a decision made by him.
The second question was much more rigorous. Scott Davenport, a D16 constituent and president of Equality Maryland’s Board, asked Senator Frosh why he would not let SB 566 out of committee. The legislation would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity, explicitly adding transgendered individuals to the state civil rights law.
Senator Frosh gave a vigorous defense of his actions regarding the bill and went on the offense against Equality Maryland. According to Senator Frosh, he has now brought the transgender bill to a vote three times. The first time was two years ago, when it failed. The other two times were this year, when both times the committee voted to table the bill. Equality Maryland’s position is that this year’s votes were procedural and not substantive votes on the bill. If Senator Frosh would force that vote, Equality Maryland says the bill would move out of committee and to the full Senate. The House of Delegates will not consider the bill until the Senate does.
Senator Frosh also questioned Equality Maryland’s singular focus on the transgender bill, at the expense of other issues like civil unions. Although he said he supports marriage equality and has told Senator Rich Madaleno he would cosponsor a constitutional amendment to that effect next session, he felt that civil unions were more achievable and would make a real difference.
A recent court decision, Schroer v. Billington, may have also changed the equation on transgender issues. That case found that the prohibition on gender discrimination in the federal Civil Rights Act included transgendered individuals. Senator Frosh indicated his belief that state civil rights law may do the same and thought Equality Maryland should work to test the law in court. Of course, the federal case is likely to work its way through the appeals process and could still be reversed.
Environment
Most of the questions asked were about the environment.
One D16 constituent asked how the new Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act would actually be executed. Senator Frosh conceded that no one quite knew how the full 25% cut by 2020, but that there would be a combination of efficiency improvements and other incremental steps to eventually reach the goal.
Another constituent raised the idea of connecting the growing green economy to workers with special needs, who often have good vocational education skills.
The next environmental questions were about the Chesapeake Bay and whether anything could be done to really improve the situation and if there were ways to increase education on the issue. Senator Frosh said that the lack of progress was not for lack of trying. Throughout his entire legislative career he had been working on the issue, and there had been no measurable improvement. What there has been is an increase in the Bay’s basin population of 1.5 million people, bringing with them new impervious surfaces and run-off that add to the damaging nutrients in the bay. But there is new hope on the horizon with the appointment of Chuck Fox to head the EPA’s national effort to save the bay.
Another set of environmental questions concerned improved efficiencies. One constituent asked about gas furnace efficiency, which Delegate Bronrott said he hoped to see improved in future years. The other question asked why the legislature had chosen to apply the International Building Code to schools and government buildings and not the well known LEED (Leadership in Environment and Energy Design) Code. Senator Frosh said Republicans in Annapolis had an extreme distaste for LEED and wanted to advance the Green Globe standard, but the legislature adopted the more efficient International Building Code standard as a compromise.
The final environmental question was on Maryland’s air and water pollution. The legislators said much progress had been made, but there were limits to what Maryland could do alone due to federal regulatory constraints.
Taxes
The two tax questions involved income tax skimming and home buyer tax credits. On income tax skimming, there was concern by one constituent that the same proposal could come again in the future. Delegate Frick acknowledged that was true, but felt the County delegation’s unity on the issue would endure in the future and be able to fight off future attempts.
The second question was posed by Matt Herrmann, president of the District 16 Democratic Club. Mr. Herrmann asked if the state had considered adding a first time home buyer tax credit, similar to recent federal legislation which allows a $8,000 tax credit for first time home buyers. Delegate Frick explained that Maryland already had a recordation tax credit and stressed that tax credits were hard hitting to the budget.
Miscellaneous
There were three other questions that were not as easily categorized.
The first question was about what strings might be attached to stimulus funds the state receives. Delegates Bronrott and Frick discussed the various programs funding was going towards. While the funds do not need to be repaid, each individual program has certain requirements. For example, if a state accepts funds for unemployment payments, they must provide benefits to part time workers. Maryland now does this, but several states refused to make the change because of concerns about the long term cost after the two years of stimulus funding ended.
The second question was about the 2010 Census and the changes it might bring to District 16. It was too early for any definitive answers, but Senator Frosh doubted D16 was growing as fast as other parts of the state.
The third question was about what limits were placed on nanobiology funding, specifically whether there could be weapons funded through the state. Delegate Lee said she had not thought of the issue and would look at it further.
WSSC Wild Child Takes on the Boy King
OK, it’s not King Kong vs. Godzilla. Or Darth Vader vs. Doctor Doom. Or even Moe vs. Larry vs. Curly. But in a throwdown that just had to happen, two of MPW’s favorite targets are going at it: Washington Suburban Sanitary Commissioner Juanita “Wild Child” Miller and Washington Post editorial intern Steven “Boy King” Stein. Let’s get ready to RUUUMMBLE!!
The Boy King fired the first shot with a tartly-worded Sunday editorial blasting WSSC. The Post’s Katherine Shaver has been doing some excellent reporting on the woes of the Maryland suburbs’ most dysfunctional agency and Stein followed by criticizing its “corrosive politics.” Stein’s critique of WSSC echoes ours – so closely, in fact, that we wonder if he used our blog post for his research. After all, everyone knows how attentive the Boy King is to MPW.
Well, leave it to the Wild Child to come blasting back! We know that Juanita Miller is a talented email writer and she did not disappoint. Here’s what she sent out to all of WSSC on Monday night. Can you imagine what she would have written if she knew Stein was an intern?
From: Miller, Juanita [mailto:jMiller@wsscwater.com]
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 6:17 PM
To: Hawes, Jennifer; #Commissioners; #Change Leadership Team; #Commission Employees
Subject: RE: Clips: 5/11/09
It is quite apparent that the Washington Post's editor is on a "witch" hunt in its continued attempts to denigrate Prince George's County and its Commissioners. The article "Water Fight" (05/10/2009, editorial) contains little substance with lots of fabricated and manipulated the verbiage contrary to the two "balanced " articles on WSSC written last week by reporter Katherine Shaver.
The truth is in the facts and detail which the editor has clearly and apparently purposefully omitted! The editor demeans the "process" (labeled "dubious" in the editorial) which six commissioners developed, approved and initiated. The editor omitted that Rudy Chow was the highest ranking candidate from a national search. Equally as important, he is a 30-year Montgomery County resident and has worked at WSSC for more than 25 years. Mr. Chow was selected by the former GM to run the largest department in the agency-- Customer Care, and he has demonstrated leadership and management skills based on his performance for the GM to make that selection. Mr. Chow has earned the right to be WSSC’s GM. He is hardly a pawn of Prince George’s County since his lifelong ties have been and are to Montgomery County. The characterization of Mr. Chow made by the Post editor undermines Mr. Chow and the integrity of the process.
Montgomery County commissioners have blatantly "refused" to adhere to an established process (approved and sanctioned by them) only after Mr. Chow was identified as the winner of that process--that is the FACT!! They have clearly shown on two other occasions preference for "less qualified" persons to lead the agency, i.e., they supported an employee who had only two months working at the agency, with no engineering experience, rather than the more senior, experienced and qualified employee to serve as the interim GM. They supported a candidate (recommended by the two County Executives) with a checkered past over its own "home grown" employee. Their conduct has made a mockery of "succession" planning and been an insult to the committed employees who seek to grow with this agency.
Yet it is apparent that the Washington Post editors have little concern for truth when expediency and continued desire to denigrate and demean all that is Prince George’s County, simply because they can do so in anonymity. The editors who wrote this editorial have little to no knowledge of WSSC's MBE program and process and have continued to rehash the same misinformation as if or because it is the singular most important crutch the Post has to lean on when it seeks to cast aspersions on the minority commissioners and the MBE program. The editor dug deep once again to a 1997 reference in an attempt to "impugn" this Commissioner’s leadership in carrying out fiduciary responsibilities. The FACT is the staff member who was the project manager at that time for the sludge contracts and was responsible for investigating firms prior to award of the sludge contract, had not done due diligence and was reprimanded for that shortsightedness at the public hearing. It should also be noted that the State Ethics Board cleared and exonerated Commissioner Miller from the unfounded allegations made 12 years ago. This case is a matter of State record and can be easily checked by Post researchers; yet the Post editors have continuously and purposely mischaracterized that matter.
Another fact relative to Commissioners’ expenses is the three year cumulative amount of $10,000+ paid by the GM for this Commissioner to attend the national AWWA conferences. It is to be noted that each year the cost for attending this conference comes out of the GM's budget for each Commissioner from both counties who chooses to attend the conference. It also should be noted that Commissioner Counihan's expenses of $9000-plus for 14 months far exceeded that of Commissioner Agarwal's expenses of $5000-plus for the five years he has served. I surmise that it wasn't newsworthy since it didn't involve a Prince George's Commissioner exceeding expenses.
I am "adamant" about adhering to established policies and procedures and have documented many accounts of irregularities that the Post is apparently not interested in publishing. I am also adamant about supporting a process that identifies a person who happens to be the most qualified for GM and who happens to be Asian. The Post should be questioning Montgomery County representatives who have manipulated and engaged in underhanded tactics to circumvent a process that identified one of its own longtime residents as the winner of the GM process.
It's apparent that news must be slow at the Post for the editor to continue to misrepresent certain facts relative to Prince George's Commissioners and their position on issues.
The only "pet" in this matter is the "peeve" as well as the "unspeakable and capricious" journalism exercised by the Washington Post editor who obviously has a penchant for attempting to denigrate Prince George's County's Commissioners, especially this one. This explains why the Washington Post readership appears to be suffering, especially in Prince George’s County. It’s apparent the Post editors are determined to print disparaging articles about Prince George’s County.
As has been stated previously in the public forum and is reiterated in this missive, the Washington Post does not guide the actions or operations of this agency nor the functions of its Board.
It appears that the Post is on a mission to fabricate and manipulate information in an effort to cover up the corrupt activities occurring at this agency and provide a distraction of the facts. It's ironic that these articles began to appear shortly after an audit/investigation of certain activities at the Commission was requested by Commissioner Miller.
The Post did not find it "newsworthy" to further research/investigate Commissioner Miller's assertion to its reporter about the corruption at the agency, i.e. an employee being arrested for stealing $10,000 plus of ratepayers money and other risks that leave the agency exposed which need to be mitigated . And did I mention that Commissioners allocated funds to hire an Ethics Officer, conducted interviews and then the process got halted (and not by the Prince Georges' Commissioners)? Also the agency spent well over $100K for the original GM search only to have the Montgomery County Commissioners balk at the results and continue an exclusive search outside of Commission authority and then had the agency billed for the Montgomery County process. This means that the ratepayers paid for a duplicate yet exclusive process conducted by Montgomery County.
Let the truth be told, the Post editors’ determination to impugn the integrity and character of Commissioner Miller and Prince George’s County have blinded them to the FACTS.
Commissioner Juanita Miller
Will Montgomery Get its School Funding Waiver?
A major part of Montgomery County’s $587 million budget crisis is not under the control of the County Executive, the County Council or anyone else in Rockville. In fact, a decision affecting $79 million of county money will actually be made in Baltimore – the home of Maryland’s State Board of Education.
Maryland state law contains a “Maintenance of Effort” (MOE) requirement for counties stating that they must at least maintain their per-pupil county spending on education before receiving state school aid increases. The goal of the law is to prevent counties from diverting their own school spending while accepting state school money.
Montgomery County is suffering its worst budget problems since at least the early 1990s. The crisis could have been a lot worse if the state did not receive federal stimulus money. Much of the stimulus money was earmarked for schools, and the Governor used part of it to fully fund the state’s Geographic Cost of Education Index (GCEI) program. That meant Montgomery could fund almost its entire education budget request but still faced problems in the rest of its county government. And so the county applied for an MOE waiver from the State Board of Education, claiming that it had more than met its responsibility for education but had needs elsewhere. Specifically, the county asked to use $95 million (later revised down to $79 million) required for school funding to finance other parts of the government, arguing that federal aid would keep the schools whole. Both the Montgomery County Board of Education and MCPS Superintendent Jerry Weast supported the request.
The State Board of Education, however, may not go along. It is taking its sweet time in making its decision, waiting to release its position until May 15. (The County Council’s first vote on the budget, originally scheduled for May 14, has been postponed until next Tuesday.) If the State Board does not grant the county’s request, all or part of the $79 million will have to be transferred from the police, fire service, public works, transportation, health and human services or other government functions to MCPS. Policy makers worry that would damage non-school services and create significant inequities between non-school employees and MCPS personnel.
Rumors are careening all over Rockville even as we write this. Everyone is speculating about what the State Board will do, but very few people claim to know the outcome. (Those who do are probably lying!) Here are a few factors.
1. Precedent
The State Board is full of business people and school activists who are deeply invested in the state’s educational system. They do not want to make it easy for the counties to evade their MOE obligations. In FY 1992, the state gave a blanket waiver to the counties allowing non-compliance with MOE but that idea did not go anywhere this year. It is likely that the State Board will want to keep waivers available only for genuine emergencies.
2. Nancy Grasmick
The state’s Superintendent of Schools is the ultimate survivor of Maryland politics. Even the Governor had to make his peace with her. Part of Grasmick’s power derives from the state’s strong educational performance. What happens if the State Board approves MOE waivers and test scores go down? One more thing: Grasmick and Weast are not the best of friends.
3. Prince George’s County
Two other counties are applying for MOE waivers: Wicomico and Prince George’s. While Montgomery’s leaders are cooperating, Prince George’s County Executive Jack Johnson and his Board of Education are in open conflict over their waiver request. Would the State Board approve Montgomery’s request but deny Prince George’s? How would that be perceived? What would the blowback be from Prince George’s politicians against the O’Malley administration? All of the above may be an issue, but why should one county’s request have anything to do with the other’s?
One of our best-connected spies is convinced Montgomery will not get the waiver. Two spies report that State Board member Blair Ewing - a former Montgomery County Council Member and county Board of Education Member - is working against the request. Our other informants make no predictions and are on the edge of their seats. The State Board will likely show its hand tomorrow and Montgomery officials – and the rest of us – will learn our fate.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Jane E. Lawton Center Dedication
Please save Sunday, June 14th, from 2pm to 4pm, to celebrate the renaming of the Leland Community Recreation Center in memory of former Delegate Jane E. Lawton. The ceremony will take place at the Leland Center, 4301 Willow Lane, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Former Chevy Chase Mayor Mier Wolf will serve as Master of Ceremonies at the event, and I know Stephanie Lawton, one of Jane's two daughters, plans to speak. If you have any questions, please call (240) 777-6800.
Navarro General Election Mailer
Here is some proof that Navarro is taking Ficker seriously. So should the rest of the Democrats.
A Tale of Five Sessions, Part One
By Marc Korman.
The recent District 16 town hall reminded me of the old Kurosawa film, Rashomon. The Japanese classic shows the same series of events from four different perspectives. Others may think of this as the Quentin Tarantino method. In Part One, we will look at what all four District 16 legislators had to say about the 2009 legislative session. In Part Two, we will examine the fifth perspective on the legislative session, that of the District 16 constituents who asked questions at the May 11th town hall.
Delegate Susan Lee
Delegate Lee’s primary focus was on education and her own legislative accomplishments and initiatives. Despite the financial crisis, Delegate Lee was proud that Maryland had maintained its education commitment, including funding for the Geographic Cost of Education Index for the first time. Delegate Lee linked the legislature’s commitment to education to Maryland’s recent ranking by Education Week as the top state for education. She also heralded the legislature for not shifting the cost of teacher’s pensions to the counties and keeping public university tuition frozen for a fourth straight year.
Shifting to her own agenda, Delegate Lee departed this year from her signature identity theft issue and focused on biotechnology and nanotechnology. She was happy to have helped champion the biotech investment tax credit, preserving it at a $6 million value. Governor O’Malley also signed Delegate Lee’s legislation, HB 1124. The legislation adds to the mission of the already existing nanobiotechnology program within the Maryland Technology Development Corporation, pushing investment in public private partnerships for nanobiotech. Nanobiotechnology is the specialized field of nanotechnology focused on the human body, essentially seeking improved medical treatments.
Delegate Lee also heavily pushed HB 1117 during the session. The legislation would expand the liability shield for the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs), protecting users from civil suits. There is already immunity for the use of the devices, but the legislation would have eliminated the requirement that assistance or aid be provided in a reasonable manner for immunity to apply. That vast expansion of immunity brought concerns from trial lawyers and the bill died in the Senate.
Delegate Bill Frick
Delegate Frick discussed the session from the angle of existing and potential conflicts among the counties. Maryland has twenty-three counties and the City of Baltimore, and each one is different. But they can also be divided into a few broad categories. For example, ten Maryland counties operate under a Charter form of government, meaning they have home rule and do not general require General Assembly approval of their local legislation. Some counties are also more reliant than others on the local income tax. Montgomery and Howard Counties have the highest tax rate, 3.2%. The lowest is Worchester County, with 1.25%. As Adam Pagnucco has explored on this blog, there are also differences in the size of the teacher pension obligation in each county.
Both teacher pensions and skimming the local income tax were considered by the General Assembly to balance the state budget, as required by the state Constitution. But Montgomery County’s legislators stayed united against both of those efforts and neither were used. The budget did rely on a one time use of a reserve fund available for local income tax refunds if the collected taxes are not sufficient to cover the refund needs. The now exhausted fund will need to be repaid in the future.
Delegate Frick also discussed the Senate Finance Committee’s defeat of his credit card legislation, chronicled on this blog. However, there may soon be federal action to address the issue, as discussed at a recent press event with Congressman Van Hollen and Delegate Frick.
Delegate Bill Bronrott
Delegate Bronrott reviewed the session primarily through the scope of transportation. Some type of cut was necessary in order to balance the budget and maintain the state’s AAA bond rating, which Delegate Bronrott said sounded like “pocket protector talk” but was extremely important. Local governments took a transportation funding hit, but according to Delegate Bronrott the county government told the legislature this was their performed form of pain compared to the pension shifting or income tax skimming discussed by Delegate Frick. But stimulus funding is helping to pay for some local transportation programs, such as new hybrid buses and road and bridge maintenance.
Delegate Bronrott also highlighted his work on highway safety, which is something he labors on each session. One of the new laws going into effect on the road safety issue is SB 265, raising the driving age by six months.
Senator Brian Frosh
Given his chairmanship of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, it is not surprising that Senator Frosh viewed the session from the perspective of that committee. After hearing his colleagues complain about legislation that died in the Senate, he started off with an old joke about a young member of the US House of Representatives who told his senior Democratic colleague ‘I can’t wait to debate the enemy, those darn Republicans.’ To which the senior Democrat responded ‘The Republicans are not the enemy, they are the loyal opposition. The Senate is the enemy.’
The highlight of the Senator’s session appears to have been overturning the Supreme Court. In 2007, the Supreme Court reversed years of precedent and decided that manufacturer imposed minimum prices on retailers no longer violated federal anti-trust law. State law in this regard usually mirrors federal law, but SB 239 divorces the two on this specific issue and makes minimum price requirements by manufacturers a violation of anti-trust. This will allow retailers to, if they choose, set lower prices which is good for consumers.
Senator Frosh was also happy to see the two domestic violence bills involving guns pass, as well as the legislature’s step in the right direction on the death penalty. All of these initiatives flowed through the Judicial Proceedings Committee.
Conclusion
Each legislator discussed the legislative session in a different light. Next time, we will look at what their constituents had to say.
Navarro and Ficker Debate on Political Pulse
Political Pulse host Charles Duffy sent us this notice:
The Nancy Navarro - Robin Ficker District 4, Montgomery County Council debate will air on "Political Pulse" on Thursday, May 14th at 9:00 p.m. on Channel 16 TV. (The debate will also air this weekend; dates/times forthcoming).
The debate between State Delegates Brian Feldman (D. Montgomery County) and Chris Shank (R. Washington County) will air on Tuesday, May 19th at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, May 21st at 9:00 p.m. on "Political Pulse."
Boy King Sends Minion to Troll MPW, Part Two (Updated)
The Washington Post’s Boy King - editorial intern Steven Stein - has been seething over our exposure of his presence at the newspaper. So when we blogged about MCGEO's handing out a flyer outing him, we were not surprised to see a counter-attack in the comment section. We originally thought it was Stein himself, but we were wrong. Today we reveal the identity of Stein’s minion and heap even more embarrassment on the Washington Post.
The key to unraveling the mystery is the email address used by “Xavier Shepherd”: serpico1127@gmail.com. Here is what a Google search on serpico1127 yields.
Clicking on the first entry produces this Twitter record identifying the address with one Andrew Carlin.
Carlin happens to be a former colleague of Stein’s at the Emory Wheel campus newspaper.
Stein himself mentions “my friend Andrew Carlin, a Chicago resident,” in the very last post on his now-defunct blog.
On Facebook, Stein calls himself “Hamlet Hamlet."
No one should be surprised that Andrew Carlin is one of his Facebook friends.
Carlin has never worked at the Washington Post, so how would he be able to make this statement in his comment?In point of fact, every editorial that goes to print is reported out and that includes talking to the unions. Moreover, four of the people on the Post's editorial board live in Montgomery County. Many of them reported on local politics; one of whom was even the Metro editor.
Of course, his source is Steven Stein himself. That also explains why “Xavier” was ignorant of the work produced by longtime editorial writers Lee Hockstader and Bob Asher, both of whom preceded Stein.
As for Stein, he is busy covering his tracks. He deleted his LinkedIn profile listing his position as “intern.”
Luckily, it is still available in Google cache and we saved the original as a screenshot.
So the Washington Post has never commented on our story but its intern sends a juvenile lackey to troll this blog under a false name. These actions disgrace the august institution of Graham, Bradlee, Woodward and Bernstein. Where are Steven Stein’s supervisors?
The Post now faces three choices:
1. Justify to its Maryland readers why an intern who is less than one year out of school, has never before lived in our metro area and behaves like a bratty child is qualified to write our editorials.
2. Remove the intern and install an experienced veteran like Hockstader or Asher at the editorial desk.
3. Become even more of a laughingstock among our political class than they are now.
Update: Just like Stein, Andrew Carlin has tried to cover his tracks by deleting his Twitter page. It is truly shocking that such infantile behavior is tolerated by the management of the Washington Post. See the screenshot of the deleted page below.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Bill Frick's End of Session Letter
Following is the end of session letter from Delegate Bill Frick (D-16).
Dear Friends,
With the stroke of midnight on Tuesday morning, the House of Delegates concluded its 2009 session. While Governor O'Malley sifts through the bills for final decisions, I wanted to provide you with this brief update on how the legislature handled some of the key questions before us this session.
Many observers think that the 2009 session was the most challenging session in decades. Certainly, we had to confront bleak revenue forecasts and to resolve contentious social issues. In my view, however, the General Assembly can be particularly proud of this year's session, because we succeeded in addressing the serious challenges facing the state. When necessary, we were able to reach compromises without compromising our values.
A Balanced, Responsible Budget
As the economy has deteriorated, Maryland policymakers have had to confront a paradox: our resources have declined, but the needs of our citizens have increased. The Governor and General Assembly managed to carefully navigate this challenging environment using a balance of cuts, transfers, and – of course – a little help from the federal government.
The final budget:
* enacted $825 million in spending cuts;
* did not increase taxes, fees, or tuition;
* did not require layoffs of state employees; and
* employed federal stimulus funds to address critical needs, including healthcare and education.
The more austere budget reflected the our citizens' spending priorities. Maryland will invest $260 million into school construction, and has increased aid to community colleges. We fully funded the Geographic Cost of Education Index ("GCEI"), which will provide critical funds for Montgomery County Public Schools. The House and Senate even restored $3 million of funding that was proposed to be cut from the State Arts Council.
Perhaps most important, we defeated attempts to shift liability for teacher retirement costs from the state to the county. That would have devastated the Montgomery County budget. Defeating a cost shift in retirement was County Executive Leggett's top priority this session, and our success will avoid severe cuts to social services in Montgomery.
Cool Heads Prevail on Hot Button Social Issues
In addition to resolving a difficult budget puzzle, the General Assembly addressed some contentious social issues, and largely found common-sense, progressive solutions. We passed two bills to protect women, by taking guns out of the hands of respondents in domestic violence restraining order cases. We created new rules and restrictions to protect civil liberties, responding to evidence that Maryland law enforcement engaged in undercover spying on activist groups. We paved the way for early voting in future elections, and found money for optical scan voting machines that will ensure the integrity of the elections process.
As you probably have read, the State Senate voted not to repeal the death penalty. As a proponent of repeal, I was disappointed by that outcome, particularly after a state study commission recommended repeal. The evidentiary rules that the General Assembly voted to impose on capital cases are nevertheless a step in the right direction, and will substantially reduce the possibility of executing an innocent person.
Progress on the Environment
The 2009 session saw significant progress on environmental and global warming issues. The General Assembly passed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act of 2009 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 25% by 2020. We enacted Governor O'Malley's Smart, Green and Growing legislation to limit sprawl and create green jobs, and strengthened Bay cleanup efforts by requiring septic systems in the critical area to include new nitrogen removal systems.
Success for District 16
The District 16 delegation was particularly busy and particularly successful this year. Senator Brian Frosh, Delegate Bill Bronrott, Delegate Susan Lee and I succeeded in obtaining state support for Imagination Stage in Bethesda. Just as important, we obtained state matching funds for Bethesda's National Center for Children and Families, which is investing in facility upgrades that will benefit their needy residents and the entire neighborhood.
I was particularly proud that an issue I have championed, protecting consumers from arbitrary rate increases by credit card companies, won overwhelming approval from the House of Delegates and earned attention in the Washington Post and other media outlets. The State Senate failed to pass the legislation this year, but we have sent a message that abuse of Maryland consumers will not be tolerated. I was encouraged to learn that President Obama intends to take action on abusive credit card practices, perhaps as early as this week.
Thank you for the honor and privilege to represent you. I hope you will stay in touch during the interim and as we prepare for next year's session.
Sincere regards,
Delegate Bill Frick
bill@billfrick.com
(301) 858-3454 office
(301) 858-3457 fax
Come visit me in Annapolis
Office of Delegate Bill Frick
Room 217
House Office Building
6 Bladen Street
Annapolis, MD 21401
Politics, Money and Lies
The latest batch of District 4 campaign finance data is in and there’s something for everybody: a little bit of politics, a whole lot of money and a big fat lie! Following are cumulative totals for the 2009 election and details on contributors.
Nancy Navarro
Beginning Balance: $43,220.69
Contributions: $46,653.06
Loans: $5,000
Expenditures: $92,002.27
End Balance: $3,156.37
Navarro has received almost three times the contributions (excluding loans) as Ben Kramer and Cary Lamari combined. In our last post, we reported a list of everyone who had contributed at least $500 to her campaign. Since then, additional contributors who have exceeded that level include SEIU Local 500 PAC ($4,000), UFCW Local 400 ($4,000), County Council Member Valerie Ervin ($2,000), IBEW Local 26 ($1,000), Metro Washington Food & Allied Service Trades ($1,000), CWA COPE of Virginia ($500) and Silver Spring lawyer and developer Robert Hillerson ($500). Labor pulled out all the stops to help Navarro get elected, providing invaluable volunteer support and at least 44% of her contributions.
A few of Navarro’s other contributors in this filing include IMPACT Silver Spring Executive Director Frankie Blackburn ($100), fellow School Board Member Patricia O’Neill ($62.50), MCDCC Member Oscar Ramirez ($50), former County Council candidate Hans Riemer ($50) and, most interestingly, District 20 Delegate Sheila Hixson ($250). Hixson joins Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez (D-18) and Heather Mizeur (D-20) as the only state legislators to back Navarro in the primary.
Lastly, Navarro accepted a $5,000 loan. The state’s database is crawling with bugs at the moment but her campaign tells us the loan came from Navarro’s husband. Even with abundant financial support from both business and labor, the nearly six-digit primary cost compelled Navarro to sink family money into the election.
Cary Lamari
Beginning Balance: $0
Contributions: $5,512.24
Loans: $10,000
Expenditures: $10,182.18
End Balance: $5,330.06
Lamari received just $1,080 in new contributions in the last days of the race. His new contributors included County Council Member Valerie Ervin ($200), a strong Navarro supporter, and former District 4 candidate Pat Ryan ($200).
Lamari earned just 730 votes, or 8.4% of Democratic primary voters. Despite being a decades-long civic activist and a former President of the Montgomery County Civic Federation, Lamari could not keep up with Navarro and Kramer because both of them outspent him by about nine to one. Aspiring County Council candidates should heed this lesson: for a non-incumbent, even a district race now costs nearly $100,000 to compete.
Cary Lamari’s message of restraining overdevelopment and his emphasis on constituent service was closer to Marilyn Praisner’s philosophy than any other 2009 candidate. (Just ask Council Member Marc Elrich.) Yet, none of the politicians who endorsed Don Praisner supported Lamari and two of them (County Executive Ike Leggett and County Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg) sided with developer Ben Kramer. Lamari’s supporters have just cause to wonder whether these politicians truly believe in the growth-restraining message on which they campaigned three years ago.
Ben Kramer
Beginning Balance: $316.44
Contributions: $11,761
Loans: $90,000
Expenditures: $93,262.71
End Balance: $8,814.73
Kramer’s contributors in the last days of the primary included philanthropist Carol Trawick ($500), land use attorney William Kominers ($100), lobbyist Ashlie Bagwell ($100), real estate lawyer Lawrence Shulman ($50) and Senator Brian Frosh’s (D-16) law firm, Karp, Frosh, Lapidus, Wigodsky & Norwind PA ($250). Kramer also received a loan for $40,000, which given his past history, probably came from him. (The state database is not being cooperative today!) But the following contribution is particularly troublesome.
Alison Klumpp famously told Maryland Moment that Kramer had “no intention of taking developer money” on March 9. Kramer himself went further, declaring at Leisure World, “I have not taken and agreed that I would not take money from developers in this campaign.” We then exposed Kramer’s acceptance of a $1,000 contribution from developer Josh Rales as well as the independent mailings on his behalf by the Maryland Realtors PAC. The Kramer campaign has ignored our research for over a month. Now we have caught him breaking his pledge again.
Below is a partial contributor list to Kramer from his latest report. Note the $500 contribution from Bethesda Center LLC, an entity based at 3299 K Street, NW, Suite #700, Washington, DC, 20007.
Here is Bethesda Center LLC’s Maryland corporate registration. Note its intention to “develop certain property in Montgomery County, Maryland” and the signature of Marc N. Duber, Executive Vice President.
Bethesda Center LLC’s address matches the Bernstein Companies.
The Bernstein Companies describes itself as “one of Washington D.C.’s oldest real estate development, investment, and management organizations.”
Here is their management team. Note the presence of Marc N. Duber, who signed Bethesda Center LLC’s registration.
Here is more on their development activities. 
If that is not enough for you, Kramer also accepted a $6,000 contribution from the Maryland Realtors PAC on 4/29/09, a check that was reported eight days after the primary.
Some believe developer contributions matter and others do not. Nancy Navarro and Cary Lamari both accepted them but neither pledged not to do it. Whether developer contributions are inherently corrupting is a matter for the voters to decide but we are more concerned with basic honesty. And it’s time we called Kramer’s pledge not to take developer money exactly what it is:
A lie.
Boy King Sends Minion to Troll MPW, Part One
The Washington Post may be ignoring our exposing its use of out-of-state intern Steve Stein to write its Maryland editorials, but Stein is not. The Boy King launched an undercover operation against Maryland Politics Watch that we are now exposing, starting today.
Our post on MCGEO’s handout of anti-Stein flyers at the Montgomery Democrats ball prompted this comment exchange, which we reprint below:Xavier said...
Well, we jumped the gun. The troll is not Stein, but he is Stein’s minion. We’ll reveal his identity tomorrow.
Dear Mr. Pagnucco,
At first I wondered why your blog posts have so few comments attached to them. Admittedly, the average number of reactions to your postings hovers somewhere just above zero. Now I understand-- as a moderator, you simply don't approve any comments that disagree with you.
As an individual who is not a journalist, but merely plays one on the internet, I would be happy to give you a little insight regarding the Washington Post. In a May 4 post, you said: "That means turning over the editorial duties to long-time Maryland residents who know our county and state. As for the interns... is it too much to ask that they start at the bottom of the organization and not the top?"
In point of fact, every editorial that goes to print is reported out and that includes talking to the unions. Moreover, four of the people on the Post's editorial board live in Montgomery County. Many of them reported on local politics; one of whom was even the Metro editor.
To your other point, shocking as it may seem to someone who has no newspaper experience, writing staff editorials, is in fact the bottom of the organization. These editorials include no bylines, the author does not receive credit for them, and because they're typically written by someone new to the paper, each one is edited and re-edited to make sure it accurately represents the views of the Post.
Your ignorance on these fundamental issues would be less disconcerting if it weren't so incendiary.
Added to this, for someone who readily engages his right to free speech, it's ironic that your readers are gagged from expressing theirs. Don't your readers deserve the right to voice the same dissent that yourself place such a high premium on? Your said: "If the Post wants us to take them seriously, they must take us seriously."
This is why they don't take you seriously.
All the best,
Xavier Shepherd
serpico1127@gmail.com
12:40 PM
Adam Pagnucco said...
Mr. Shepherd:
Our comment policy asks readers to submit their full names when commenting. As you have signed your name, we have run your comment even though you disagree with our blog post.
Disagreement has a long history on this blog. MPW founder David Lublin and I have a long-standing disagreement on the Purple Line. He favors bus-rapid transit and I favor rail. Supporters of both approaches can find material here to back up their points of view.
More recently, we have allowed comments from people like Robin Ficker and representatives from Help Save Maryland. Some of them have named me personally, but we are happy to let them in.
The Post does not share our philosophy of dissent and disclosure. Steven Stein's editorials are unsigned. The fact that they are authored by an intern is something that the Post would never have admitted on its own. That's why we exposed the truth. The Post also feels no duty to portray candidates' positions accurately and allow them to respond for themselves, as Cary Lamari has said.
But thanks for pointing out that the editorials come from "the bottom of the organization." If that is really true of the Post, it explains a lot. Maryland readers deserve better.
1:04 PM
Xavier said...
Thank you for clarifying your comment policy, Mr. Pagnucco. I will retract my earlier statement with my apologies, of course. I suppose there must be another reason for the conspicuous absense of comments on your site. Perhaps a lack of a traffic?
You said: "The Post does not share our philosophy of dissent and disclosure. Steven Stein's editorials are unsigned."
It's disingenous to imply that these editorials have gone unsigned because the Post is trying to hide something. Hopefully your readers are aware that staff editorials do not have bylines, even if you are not.
You said: "But thanks for pointing out that the editorials come from 'the bottom of the organization.'"
Quoting me out of context like that serves only to undermine your argument. It's irrelevant whether staff editorials are written by the editor-in-chief or the night watchman. If they are printed, then they reflect the opinion of the staff and of the paper as a whole.
I also noticed you neglected to respond to my other points entirely. I suppose I'm not surprised.
You said: "That's why we exposed the truth."
Oh, if only there were readers out there who cared to listen.
All the best,
Xavier Shepherd
3:54 PM
Adam Pagnucco said...
Mr. Shepherd, our online traffic is not a problem. We are the most-visited political blog in Maryland, have experienced a 595% increase in traffic since the fall of 2007 and our coverage (along with Just Up the Pike) dominated online reporting of the District 4 special election.
I believe all editorials should be signed. We sign every single blog post here. News articles carry bylines and yet undergo editing. Furthermore, your contention that Post editorials have always been written "at the bottom of the organization" is factually incorrect. Former Maryland editorial writers Lee Hockstader and Bob Asher were experienced professionals who were MANY levels above intern status and were not "new to the paper."
I give you credit for defending Stein by saying it does not matter if the night watchman writes the editorials instead. You get points for creativity on that one!
Finally, our readers should know that we have been unable to locate any voter registration, property ownership, telephone number or consumer bureau information for anyone named Xavier Shepherd in Maryland, Virginia or the District. The only data on individuals by that name applies to residents of Georgia, California, Michigan, Missouri and New York.
So perhaps that is not your real name, Mr. Stein.
6:31 PM
Monday, May 11, 2009
Democrats Unite Against Ficker... Except the Kramers
An all-star cast of Democrats came together today to support District 4 County Council Democratic nominee Nancy Navarro against Republican Robin Ficker. All of Maryland's statewide elected leaders added their support to County Executive Ike Leggett and a unanimous County Council to put the party over the top. Notably absent were Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19) and Senator Rona Kramer (D-14), who were asked to endorse Navarro but did not answer. Following is the press release from the Navarro campaign.
##FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE##
Monday, May 11, 2009
Contact: David Moon, Campaign Manager
Email: david@navarroforcouncil.com
Maryland Democrats Unite Behind Nancy Navarro
Press Conference Highlights Broad Support for County Council Bid
ROCKVILLE, MD – Today, Maryland Democrats united to endorse Nancy Navarro for Montgomery County Council, District 4. Convening outside the County Council building, Maryland Democratic Party Chair Susan Turnbull announced endorsements for Navarro from Governor Martin O’Malley, Lt. Governor Anthony Brown, U.S. Senators Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin, Attorney General Doug Gansler, Comptroller Peter Franchot, as well as Rep. Donna Edwards and Rep. Chris Van Hollen. Turnbull cited the importance of Democratic unity in the May 19th Special Election and noted the steps the Navarro campaign had taken to try and expand the Democratic base.
Navarro was also joined by numerous members of the General Assembly, including Delegation Chairs Senator Rich Madaleno and Delegate Brian Feldman, who announced the near-unanimous support from the Montgomery County Delegation. Also in attendance were County Executive Ike Leggett, Council President Phil Andrews, and Councilmembers Roger Berliner, Valerie Ervin, Nancy Floreen, Mike Knapp, George Leventhal, and Duchy Trachtenberg. A representative from Councilmember Marc Elrich’s office also joined the proceedings. Leggett noted that though County Democrats may have supported different candidates in the recent special primary election, it was now time for all Democrats to rally behind their nominee, Nancy Navarro.
The numerous Democratic state and county officials were joined by a broad coalition of endorsers, including representatives from diverse constituency groups, the Sierra Club of Montgomery County, local labor unions, and the Montgomery County Business PAC.
Massive Interest in Police Disability Post (Updated)
Right now, 44% of the traffic to this site is comprised of direct visits to our article, "What the Post Does Not Want You to Know About Disability."
That's fairly uncommon for this blog, on which the vast majority of visits usually come from regular readers clicking on our home page. The last time an individual post attracted this much interest was on April 8, when the District 4 Mail Scandal went national. A LOT of people are now seeing the other side of the story on the police disability program.
Updated: Now it's 49%. The word is definitely getting out.
Brian Feldman and Chris Shank Battle it out on Political Pulse
Delegate Brian Feldman (Democrat from Montgomery County) debates Chris Shank (Republican House of Delegates Minority Whip from Washington County) on Political Pulse concerning issues from the recently-ended Legislative Session. Issues that will be debated are:
MD car licenses for non-U.S. citizens;
the state budget;
the death penalty;
speed cameras;
who will run for Governor on the Republican side; and
whether Delegate Feldman will take on Peter Franchot in the Dem primary for Comptroller.
The Show will air on Tuesday, May 12th at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, May 14th at 9 p.m. "Political Pulse" is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.
Does the Department of Economic Development Actually Create Jobs?
The recent loss of Hilton Hotel’s headquarters to Fairfax and the resignation of Department of Economic Development (DED) Director Pradeep Ganguly have created significant debate about DED’s performance and mission. Four County Council Members wrote County Executive Ike Leggett urging him to select a new DED Director rapidly and Leggett picked former County Council Member Steve Silverman. But debates about DED’s leadership do not answer more basic questions, such as whether DED actually creates jobs and deserves taxpayer support.
A mammoth report from the Office of Legislative Oversight lays out DED’s functions. DED encourages private sector job creation by overseeing qualifying capital projects (valued at $5.7 million in FY09), offering tax credits (valued at $3.4 million in FY09), running the county’s business incubator program, doing marketing and outreach activities and providing career services to adults, dislocated workers and youth (mostly through contractors). The two largest DED programs are the incubators (based in Shady Grove, Silver Spring, Wheaton, Rockville and Germantown, with a sixth one coming in Fairland/White Oak) and the Economic Development Fund, which makes loans to businesses. The report describes the work of DED in exhaustive detail, but it offers no opinion as to whether DED actually creates jobs. Instead, it says:The research literature contains few examples of rigorous outcome evaluations of state and local government economic development programs. Measuring an economic development program’s effectiveness requires establishing a cause and effect relationship between the program and outcomes. Few groups undertake this type of evaluation because it is both analytically difficult to design and because the evaluation cost is often perceived as outweighing its benefits. Further, in some situations, political interests further discourage a review that might reveal negative results.
Below are financial data on the program from Montgomery County’s operating budgets. Note that “Grant Fund MCG expenditures” refer to federal Workforce Investment Act money. Also note that FY08 was the first budget during the Leggett administration.
Total funding for DED’s operating budget grew by 3.4% and 3.7% in Doug Duncan’s last two years and then changed by 7.8%, -1.8% and 10.9% during the first three years of the Leggett administration. But that is deceptive because it includes federal grants. In terms of county funding alone, DED’s operating budget grew by 25.0% and 11.3% in Duncan’s last two years and then changed by 10.8%, -3.4% and -2.4% under Leggett. Total workyears initially rose under Leggett but have fallen by double digits in the last two years. Economic Development Fund expenditures have fallen from $3.7 million in Duncan’s last year to a recommended level of $852,440 this year. On a strictly monetary basis, Leggett has reduced the county’s commitment to DED.
What does this funding buy? Under the Leggett administration’s Countystat program, DED has attempted to quantify the impact of its work in its latest recommended operating budget: 
DED claims job creation by new and existing businesses through “DED involvement” ranges from 1,200-1,800 per year. Capital investment through “DED involvement” totals $35-110 million per year and leased space ranges from 414,200 square feet to 896,318 square feet.
In comparison to the size of the county’s economy, DED’s impacts are strikingly small. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated Montgomery County’s private sector employment at 380,492 in 2007, meaning DED’s job creation accounts for just 0.3-0.5% of the county’s private workforce. The county has 42.1 million square feet of office space, so businesses with which DED is “involved” only occupy 1-2% of the office market. And business capital investments in the tens of millions of dollars are minuscule compared to the county’s $59 billion in personal income as estimated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in 2006.
Another question arising from the data is the meaning of “DED involvement.” Does that constitute making a phone call, holding a seminar and mailing a brochure or does it only include more substantive activities like grants of tax credits and loans? Are DED’s performance claims really based on services that were vital to creating private sector jobs or would those jobs have been created anyway? Current Countystat data does not say.
The new DED Director and the County Council must start asking these kinds of questions to get at the central issue: does DED actually create jobs? If it does, its budget should be dramatically increased because few things are more important during a recession than creating jobs. But if it does not, then DED should be eliminated. Its funds could be better used by other agencies or returned to the taxpayers.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Barney Frank on Pragmatism v. Idealism
American University gave Rep. Barney Frank an honorary degree for which he gave the commencement address for the School of Public Affairs--you can view his address here and read his address here. As one acerbic colleague put it, "It was worth the other twenty commencement addresses I've had to sit through to hear this one."
Normally, I would not link to commencement address--bywords for bordom--at the risk of driving readers away in droves. However, Rep. Frank is a funny guy and his strong defense of pragmatism struck me as apposite in light of a variety of recent political debates. Money quote:I would also make it felony to say “Oh, you can do that because you are pragmatic but I am idealistic.” Understand that the more deeply you hold your ideals, the more you are morally obligated to be pragmatic. Because ideals that are not implemented do nothing but make you feel morally superior. They never fed a hungry kid, they never cleaned up a polluted river, they never built a road that got people anywhere. So yeah, you should be pragmatic after you are idealistic. Pragmatism in the service of idealism is what you need. Idealism without pragmatism is just a way to flatter your ego.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Friday, May 08, 2009
Walking the Walk with Al Carr
By Marc Korman.
At a recent meeting of the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Breakfast Club, four legislators summarized the recent legislative session. Speaking were Senator Brian Frosh, Delegate Susan Lee, and Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher. But the stand out was Delegate Al Carr. Carr takes shared credit for six pieces of legislation heading to the Governor’s desk, an impressive success rate even if passed legislation is not the only barometer of a legislator’s success. But perhaps Carr’s most interesting bill, and where he is really walking the walk, is a bill that did not even come to a vote, the Chesapeake Bay Restoration Consumer Retail Choice Act of 2009.
Delegate Carr’s legislation would place a five cent fee on all plastic and paper bags at grocery and other retail stores. The store would retain one to two cents of the fee, depending on their particular program, and the rest would go towards the Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund. The purpose of the legislation is to improve the environment by decreasing the use of these bags, which often end up blowing into and polluting waterways like the Anacostia. It also has the side benefit of raising funds for the Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund to help with clean-up.
Similar proposals in other jurisdictions, none of which have passed, were limited to charging a fee on plastic bags, thus encouraging the use of reusable or paper bags. Paper bags are easier to recycle and, unlike plastic bags, do not require any petroleum inputs. But the larger size and increased weight of paper bags can also increase their total lifecycle costs when you factor in shipping. That’s why broader use of reusable bags is the best approach.
Delegate Carr has distinguished his effort from many other proposals in two additional ways.
First, he has teamed up with a DC Councilmember so that the legislation is passed in both jurisdictions. The proposal in DC has overwhelming Council support, although the bill has not yet passed and there have been some complaints that is disproportionately harms the poor. Opposition has been organized by the American Chemical Council, a trade group which includes bag manufacturers. By teaming up across jurisdiction, Carr is building political momentum for a bill.
Second, Delegate Carr has been giving his supporters reusable bags to try and encourage people to start using reusable bags regardless of whether a tax is passed. I already had reusable bags that I kept in my house, but now I am keeping a Delegate Carr bag in my car for those random stops at the store on my drive home to pick up milk.
The Chesapeake Bay Restoration Consumer Retail Choice Act will be back again next legislative session. It is a common sense bill, but it has run into stiff resistance in communities as diverse as Annapolis, Virginia, and San Francisco. The Maryland General Assembly should push past the American Chemical Council’s lobbying and pass it.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Minority Community Fights Back Against Budget Cuts
A diverse coalition of minority groups rallied at the County Council building today against cuts to health programs. We reprint their press release below. Maryland Moment has coverage of the event.
For immediate release. Contact: Anna Maria Izquierdo consejo.salud@gmail.com; 443-655-0101
Grace Rivera Oven grace.rivera@comcast.com; 301-367-2158
Montgomery County Proposes Severe Funding Cuts Disproportionately Impacting Minority Communities
Leaders join to oppose budget cuts to Health Programs
What: Press Conference to Demand that County Council Maintain the County Executive’s Support of his Minority Health Initiatives
When: Thursday, May 7, 2009 2:00 PM
Where: County Office Building-101 Maryland Avenue, Rockville MD (front steps)
Who: African American Health Advisory Committee, Asian Health Steering Committee of Montgomery County, Care for Your Health, Inc., CASA de Maryland, Inc, County Executive’s Latin-American Advisory Group, EVS Communications, Identity Inc., Latino Health Steering Committee of Montgomery County, Montgomery County Latino Lions Club, Proyecto Salud.
Rockville, MD – Diverse community leaders will hold a press conference this Thursday calling on the County Council to deal with minority communities equitably during this period of budget cutbacks. This action is being taken in response to a recommendation by the Health and Human Services Subcommittee of the County Council that proposes an additional 10% cut to the minority health initiative programs of the County. This significant cut from the County Executive’s 2010 County Budget would further increase the adverse impact of budget cuts experienced by the minority health initiative programs when the County Executive 2010 budget called for a 2% across-the board reductions. All of these budget cuts are particularly damaging to minority communities given the overwhelming evidence of pre-existing racial disparities in health care provision and outcomes.
“In a time when the economic situation has made the direct services provided by these Minority Initiatives more crucial than ever, the recommendation from the Health and Human Services Subcommittee to further cut these programs in a significant manner is unacceptable to us.” states Dr. Anna Maria Izquierdo, Co-chair of the Latino Health Steering Committee of Montgomery County.
Altogether the County Council’s recommendation will adversely impact 16,000 members of the minority communities in Montgomery County if adopted. The services impacted are varied and cut across cultural groups and their needs. They include: Hypertension Education and Awareness Link (African American Health Program – 3,600 individuals will not be served), HIV outreach and education (African American Health Program – 500 individuals will not be served), Diabetic programs (African American Health Program – 105 individuals will not be served), SMILE breast pump loan program (African American Health Program – 86 individuals will not be served including both mother and child), Mini-grant for supporting education and outreach done through community based organizations (African American Health Program – 400 individuals will not be served), Bilingual Health Services Line/Interpreter Program (Latino Health Initiative – 3,043 individuals will not be served), Latino Youth Wellness Program at Einstein High, Wheaton High and Gaithersburg Middle Schools (Latino Health Initiative – 160 high risk youth and their families will not be served), Ama tu Vida Health and Screening Program (Latino Health Initiative – 3,000 individuals will not be served), Latino Health Initiative Health Promoter Program (Latino Health Initiative – 2,500 individuals will not be served mainly in Upper County), Outreach and Health education services (Asian American Health Initiative – 900 individuals will not be served), Screening Services (Asian American Health Initiative – 300 individuals will not be served), and the AAHI Navigator Program (Asian American Health Initiative – 900 individuals will not be served).
“The loss of these dollars will set back the work of those hoping to highlight the value of preventive health care, especially for those populations where treatment is sought in emergency rooms-and is often too little too late,” states Arva Jackson, Chair of the African American Health Program. “We hope it is neither too late to restore the funding, nor to the slow the loss of faith in the County Council’s judgment by the adoption of this 10% solution. I encourage them to restore the funding before the budget release slated for May 15th”.
Health and Human Services subcommittee members that approved the cuts are George Leventhal, Chair, Duchy Trachtenberg, and Roger Berliner. The Montgomery County Council will be meeting in the next few days to vote on the proposed cuts.
What Does the Special Election Mean for Campaigning in Montgomery County?
By Eric Luedtke.
Innovation in political campaigning has a tendency to trickle down. Changes appear first at the national level, where the money and talent is most concentrated in politics, and then slowly make their way down to the state and local level. Sometimes it takes a while. The era of TV attack advertising in national politics began way back in 1964 with Johnson's Daisy Ad, which implied that Barry Goldwater was an absolute nut bent on world destruction. But the first intense use of TV attack ads in Montgomery County politics was only three years ago, when Steve Silverman's campaign called Ike Leggett a 'good guy with bad ideas', trying to avoid attacking the integrity of a widely respected man while questioning his positions. In that case, of course, the attack ad didn't stick.
The biggest lesson I draw from the Democratic primary for the 4th Council District special election is that this trickle down process is accelerating. Only a year ago, the Obama campaign managed to perfect a number of new political techniques which had emerged over the past decade. And many of these same techniques, used of course on a smaller scale, helped propel Nancy Navarro to a close victory over a formidable opponent. The irony is that the technology that helps underlie many of these innovations may be the same reason they are trickling down more quickly. Information of all kinds has become more democratized, and the insider secrets of the Obama campaign weren’t so much kept secret as advertised and taught to thousands of people.
Attentive observers of politics will realize that these changes are going to have profound effects on the local political scene. Many of my friends who have been active in Montgomery County politics for a long time believed that Ben Kramer was a lock in the recent special election. Why? The traditional reasons. Name recognition, especially given Kramer's family name. Money. The demographic makeup of the district. Strong support for Kramer in Leisure World. More than one of them denigrated the Navarro campaign as "a bunch of people sitting in a room crunching numbers."
But Navarro pulled out a victory. Based on the special election, these are some of the things I'll be thinking about as the 2010 election approaches:
1. Microtargeting is Cheap and Effective
Everyone knows that the best way to get a vote is to address a specific person’s interests in detail. This is why good canvassing is always a better investment than mail – it allows the canvasser to immediately adapt their pitch to the needs of the voter. But limited resources have meant that at the local level, few campaigns are able to keep track of the detailed voter files that allow for microtargeting to occur. This has changed. With the advent of the Maryland Democratic Party VAN database, which has some (far too) limited utility in tracking voter information, and some similar private databases, campaigns have a lot more information than the basic name, address, and voting history that the election board provides. Special election case in point – there are no more than a couple dozen French-speaking households of West African descent with registered Democrats in District 4. Each of them got a postcard, in French, from the Navarro campaign. In a world where every vote counts, those postcards pound for pound are a lot more effective for a campaign than a piece that tries to tailor its messaging to an entire diverse district of voters.
2. The Internet is the Local Campaign's Friend
The era of local political blogging in Montgomery County began just before the 2006 cycle, and there was some use by candidates of technology to reach out to voters. But the former were underdeveloped and the latter were limited to things like e-mail lists that provided another forum to pursue the same tactics. Just a few years later, Facebook and Twitter have taken off, e-mail targeting has become more efficient, and there are millions more people like me who get more information from blogs (I regularly read at least 7) than newspapers (I regularly read 2). I have yet to see a local campaign make really good use of social networking sites, but I think we saw a profound difference between the way the Navarro campaign treated bloggers – as real media targets in the same way they pursue reporters – versus how the Kramer campaign treated bloggers – as, well, bloggers. There are plenty even in politics who still think of blogging with contempt but I’ll just say this – although Adam may not have as much circulation as the Washington Post, he’s able to cover politics in a hell of a lot more depth than Ann Marimow or more traditional reporters. At least until the baby’s born, when all of us go into withdrawal. Serious point, though: local politicians now ignore the importance of blogs and other electronic media as messaging outlets at their own peril.
3. County Demographics Are Changing
I grew up on a Montgomery County street where there were four non-white families. I live now on a Montgomery County street where there are no more than two families of any single ethnicity. White, south Asian, east and west African, African-American, Hispanic, east Asian. Montgomery County is becoming increasingly diverse despite the nativist histrionics of some right wingers. This will profoundly change our politics. The lagging indicator will be the diversity of the elected politicians in the county, but in the meantime local politicians are having to quickly learn to reach out to multiple groups at once. I asked a friend of mine who thought Kramer was going to win a few days before the election what he based that on, and the answer was simple – Jewish voters and the elderly. He said all Kramer had to do to win was come out on top in Leisure World and Kemp Mill. A day or two later, I walked into a Navarro campaign office and there were volunteers in their 60’s and volunteers who were 6. There were volunteers of every imaginable nationality or ethnicity. And each of them has pull with a different subset of the voting public. In an increasingly pluralistic electorate, getting elected will mean reaching out to increasing numbers of smaller and smaller groups.
4. Montgomery County Will Tolerate Negative Campaigning
I’ve had more than one person from another part of the state comment on how they think people from Montgomery County are stuck up, and I’ve always fought them on it. But there are some ways in which it’s true, where Montgomery residents think of themselves as special. The idea that voters in Montgomery County don’t respond to negative campaigning is one of those ways. Like elsewhere, our voters don’t like negative campaigning in the abstract but it can still be effective in undermining the other side. Notice I said can be. Like any other form of campaigning, negative campaigning can backfire or simply fail. The "attack" ads that went after Ike Leggett a few years ago were one such example – they just didn’t resonate with voters because their message was too nuanced. The mailing from the Navarro campaign was a little more effective. But it was bolstered by the Kramer campaign and Ben Kramer himself, who actually drew more attention to the negative attacks by being defensive about them. Word to the wise – prolonging the story about criticisms of your candidate by talking and sending out mailers about them for the remainder of the campaign is probably not the best way to deal with negative attacks. In any case, given the perceptions about this race, I expect slightly more negative campaigning in 2010, and some entertainingly flubbed attempts at it from some of the less well run campaigns.
What the Post Does Not Want You to Know About Disability
We will give anti-government employee Post intern Steven Stein credit for one thing: he’s a persistent young man. His latest editorial attacks a County Council compromise on the disability issue as “an unacceptable outcome that would speak to the undue influence that union leaders exert over some council members.” But Stein has been sitting on a significant number of facts that, if known to Washington Post readers, would paint the issue in a far different light.
Last fall, Stein contacted the Fraternal Order of Police about the disability program, which was then the subject of a report by Montgomery County’s Inspector General Thomas Dagley. The police provided him the research below which showed that the number of officers retiring on disability has averaged 11 per year since 1985. Those officers include managers who are not in the bargaining unit.
The police updated this data and provided it again to the Post. Through 2008, disability retirements only accounted for 1.2% of the county’s actual sworn officers. The percentage in 2008 (1.0%) is the lowest since 2004. It’s difficult to portray the system as “absurd” or “outrageous” when it is so seldom used. Neither Stein nor Washington Post reporter Ann Marimow have ever revealed this data to their readers.
Another point that Stein refuses to discuss is that the Inspector General’s report primarily relates to management oversight. Dagley states in his enclosure letter:The findings relate to the need for the Office of Human Resources (OHR) to improve internal controls and management oversight to ensure SCDR [service-connected disability retirement] benefits are protected against abuse, and for the Department of Police to ensure compliance with medical examination program requirements and related standards regarding the health status and functional capabilities of police officers.
The report went on to recommend improving “internal controls and management oversight” and ensuring periodic medical examination procedures. The first issue is under the direct control of department management. The second issue has actually earned the agreement of the police union, who presented a proposal calling for mandatory medical reexaminations overseen by a Disability Review Board of 4 impartial doctors. Their proposal, which has been ignored by Stein but printed on this blog entry, appears below.
Several months ago, County Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg proposed a bill calling for a two-tier disability system, a measure that was not suggested by the Inspector General’s report. The Post promptly endorsed the bill. But in bashing the police union and the “spinelessness” of the bill’s critics, Stein ignored the Post’s own reporting identifying two Assistant Police Chiefs who benefited from the system. Those Assistant Chiefs are not members of the union bargaining unit and were directly supervised by MCPD Chief Tom Manger. Where are the anti-Manger editorials?
As the bill advanced, the County Council’s staff produced two memos on its legality and effects. The staff estimated that the savings from a move towards a two-tier system would amount to “more than $1.5 million” based on the experience of the career Fire Fighters’ move to such a system in 2002. First, that amount equals just 0.26% of the county’s $587 million budget deficit and 0.03% of the $4.3 billion operating budget. Second, the Fire Fighters’ experience should be considered in light of the fact that they negotiated a new deferred retirement option plan at the same time they went to a two-tier disability system.
Here’s another fact that Stein has never told his readers: the police union itself offered a three-tier system starting with 2009 hires to the County Executive, as we show in their proposal above. That would establish a similar system for the police as currently prevails for the career Fire Fighters. Stein also never gives credit to the union for giving back its 4.25% general wage adjustment, a move that saved the county $4.9 million. If the union is as greedy and obstructionist as Stein would have us believe, what can explain these concessions?
Stein’s views are rooted in his characterization of collective bargaining as a “ruse.” He prefers that the County Council unilaterally set working conditions for employees, which is the same position as all employers who oppose workplace democracy. If Steven Stein knew anything about Montgomery County, he would remember that county employee collective bargaining was approved by multiple charter amendments that attracted overwhelming support from voters. Most of our residents do not believe that employees should get everything they want, but they do believe employees should have a voice at work. As an intern who is one year out of college and has no acquaintance with our history and politics, Stein does not appreciate that basic fact.
Finally, let’s go back to the Inspector General’s report, which started this entire debate. It identified the disability issue as a management oversight issue requiring corrective action by management. Chief Manger is free to tighten oversight of the system and the police union – by its own written proposal – agrees with that goal. But because of the overlapping anti-government employee agendas of intern Steven Stein, the Washington Post Company and multiple members of the Montgomery County Council, the issue has mutated into an attack on labor. The County Council is on the verge of settling the matter through an amendment proposed by Council Member George Leventhal codifying some items agreed to by both management and labor and sending the rest back to bargaining. A reasonable compromise may therefore be in reach.
That would be good for the county. Too bad that it’s not good for the Boy King’s crusade against the men and women in our government service.
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Saving Money on EZ-Pass
By Rocky Lopes.
This is a reminder that effective July 1, 2009, holders of Maryland E-ZPass toll transponders will be assessed $1.50 per month "cost recovery fee" per account, regardless of usage. For an explanation about this poor decision by the Maryland Transportation Authority, see the earlier post on this blog.
Casual users may find that paying $18/year for the privilege of having transponders from Maryland not to be worth the cost, when you can get transponders from other EZPass participating entities for free or lower cost. A list of providing entities and a cost comparison is here.
I just got mine from another provider, for free. There is no account maintenance charge, either. I am sending back my Maryland transponders to the state with a letter of explanation (the address is: PO Box 17600, Baltimore, MD 21297.) I have asked that they close my Maryland account and refund the remaining balance to me.
If you haven't ordered yours from another provider yet, it's time to do so because it takes several weeks to get them. Do it now, and return your Maryland transponder(s) to the address above. Tell 'em by doing so that they can extract their "E-Z Tax" from people who don't read this blog.
Consequences from the Special Election, Part Three
Ben Kramer and Nancy Navarro were not the only two people affected by the special election. The rest of the county’s politicians will see the consequences too.
County Executive Ike Leggett
In 2008, Leggett-endorsed Don Praisner won District 4 by just 370 votes. This time, Leggett-endorsed Ben Kramer lost by just 62 votes. What a difference a few hundred votes can make.
The smart move for Leggett would have been to stay out of the special election. He already had four County Council Members – George Leventhal, Nancy Floreen, Valerie Ervin and Mike Knapp – growing increasingly restive. Now he has a fifth Council Member assuming office after running against his sponsored candidates twice. Furthermore, Leggett’s weakness inside the district with his oldest constituency – African Americans – is hard to miss. Eleven District 4 precincts had a black population percentage of 30% or more in 2000. Kramer won only 1 of these precincts and was blown out by Navarro by a 54-36% margin despite the fact that Leggett’s image with Kramer on a mailer was sent everywhere. In the black community, the trio of Navarro, County Council Member Valerie Ervin and Congresswoman Donna Edwards trumped Ike Leggett.
We still believe that Leggett himself will face no real challenge in 2010 in large part because no credible opponent has emerged. But unless he forms some new alliances on the County Council, his influence over the government will fade.
County Council
Ben Kramer’s candidacy was part of an informal design affecting the rest of the council. Council Vice-President Roger Berliner is scheduled by custom to be Council President next year. Duchy Trachtenberg is lined up to be next. Kramer’s vote would have cemented this procession. If Kramer had won, rumor had it that Trachtenberg would have sought to push aside her mortal enemy, George Leventhal, for the chair of the Health and Human Services Committee. Kramer may very well have taken over the Management and Fiscal Policy Committee, Marilyn Praisner’s old domain that Trachtenberg currently chairs. And if Kramer ran to succeed Ike Leggett in 2014, the District 4 seat would have been freed up for Alison Klumpp, the Praisners’ daughter who strongly backed Kramer and previously expressed interest in the office.
Now none of that will happen. Trachtenberg will not be Council President as long as the opposing coalition of five holds. Berliner too may not get his chance. Nancy Floreen and Valerie Ervin will both want the President’s place at the dais. Ben Kramer will face a tough race to retain his Delegate seat or run again for County Council, so thoughts of the County Executive’s chair will be remote at best. And everyone in Rockville will have to adjust to the new realities, at least until 2010.
Duchy Trachtenberg
No county politician supported Ben Kramer more than Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg. She was the only county incumbent other than Ike Leggett to endorse him, calling him “a critical voice for fiscal responsibility, tax fairness and prevention of government waste, fraud and abuse.” She stated in his mailers, “Ben is a talented, energetic lawmaker who has made advancing women’s rights, protecting seniors and caring for the most vulnerable touchstones for his career in Annapolis.” She stood in for him in at least two debates. His victory would have been her victory. And now his loss is her loss.
Trachtenberg never had a strong presence in District 4. She won just 4 of its precincts in 2006. In 2008, Don Praisner won 3 of these precincts over Navarro and outpolled her 138-133 (42-40%). In 2009, Navarro won all four precincts and outpolled Kramer 162-128 (45-36%). Trachtenberg’s hard work for Kramer did not stop Navarro from expanding her vote in Trachtenberg’s old stomping grounds.
Now Trachtenberg must explain her decision to endorse Kramer to her former progressive base. Trachtenberg lauded him for “tax fairness” despite his vote against the millionaire tax and against Governor O’Malley’s progressive income tax reform. Trachtenberg hailed him for his “bold and courageous leadership” on women’s issues even though he voted for the abuser expungement bill. And Trachtenberg chose to support him over a qualified female candidate who was endorsed by Donna Edwards, the Sierra Club, Progressive Maryland, NARAL and the Maryland Democratic Women’s PAC. All of that is fair game for at-large challengers next year.
Elections have consequences, as all of the above parties will find out. On to 2010.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Town of Chevy Chase Election Results 2009
Linna Barnes was reelected to the Town Council and will be joined by Pat Burda, who currently serves as chair of the Town's Long-Range Planning Committee. They defeated David Eason and Deborah Vollmer. Vote totals and analysis below the fold.
Each voter could vote for two candidates. A total of 615 votes were cast in the Town, down from last year's record turnout.
Pat Burda, 363 (59%)
Linna Barnes, 357 (58%)
David Eason, 267 (43%)
Deborah Vollmer, 44 (7%)
The vote totals add up to less than the possible 1230 votes because many voters probably bullet voted. Some of David Eason's supporters urged a bullet vote in order to maximize his chances of election. However, it is clear that at least one-quarter of his voters must have also cast ballots for one of the other candidates even assuming the unlikely scenario that all bullet votes were cast for him. Of course, some voters may have also cast blank ballots, spoiled their ballots, or bullet voted for one of the other candidates.
As explained in a previous post, one can roughly divide the candidates into three very rough groups from divisions stemming from past debates over land-use controls as well as partisanship. Of course, a number of other issues came up in the election and individual voting decisions are often far more complex.
Pat Burda and Linna Barnes had many of the same supporters as myself and Kathy Strom--two of last year's winners. However, Pat and Linna received a substantially greater share of the vote. Indeed, their margin of victory was greater even in absolute terms despite a noticeable drop in turnout. This occurred despite the perceived potential for Deborah Vollmer to play a Ralph Nader-like spoiler role this year.
David Eason had many of the same supporters as Al Lang did in 2008. However, Dave managed a only slight improvement over Al who came in third and won the final seat in last year's more crowded and complicated race featuring three incumbents as well as three newcomers.
MCDCC Seeks New At-Large Member
Following is the announcement from the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee (MCDCC).
MCDCC to Fill a District At-Large Central Committee Position at the May 12 Meeting
At-Large MCDCC Member Vilma White is now serving as a member Emeritus of the Central Committee. That creates an at-large vacancy that will be filled at the May 12 meeting. It is the tradition of the Central Committee, when filling at-large vacancies, to give preference to candidates residing in legislative districts that do not currently have at large members. Districts 17, 19, and 39 currently do not have at large voting members on the Central Committee.
To Apply: Please send a letter of interest and a resume or biographical sketch to the MCDCC at MCDCC, 3720 Farragut Avenue, #303, Kensington, MD 20895-2195. You should also email the information to montgomerydems@msn.com or fax it to 301/946-1002. The deadline for applying is Monday, May 11 at 5:00 pm. For information about the role of the MCDCC, please go to our website at www.mcdcc.org. For questions, please email Alan Banov, Vice Chair of the MCDCC, at LegalRun@aol.com.
MCGEO Takes On the Post (Updated)
The Municipal and County Government Employees Organization (MCGEO) has launched a vigorous counter-attack against labor’s nemesis, the Washington Post. Its weapon of choice: Maryland Politics Watch.
Back in January, a Post editorial entitled, “And the Oscar Goes to...,” slammed MCGEO President Gino Renne for opposing the disability bill sponsored by Council Members Phil Andrews and Duchy Trachtenberg. In hindsight, we now believe that that editorial was written by union-bashing Post intern Steven Stein, who has no knowledge of Montgomery County politics but brags about “writing things that anger people.” After we revealed Stein’s presence beyond the Post’s curtain, MCGEO returned fire.
Sunday’s Montgomery County Democratic Party ball saw an attendance of over 500 party loyalists including Governor Martin O’Malley, Attorney General Doug Gansler, Comptroller Peter Franchot, several members of Congress and nearly every politician in the county. Greeting the attendees were several MCGEO representatives handing out the flyer below:
Attached were our posts on the Boy King and the newspaper’s most recent anti-union campaign. The vast majority of Montgomery’s party activists, officials and politicians received a copy.
The Washington Post has been an anti-union business for decades. No one expects the Post to treat labor fairly. But when the Post employs an intern who is new to our area and has no grasp of our community to write its propaganda, the newspaper destroys its own credibility.
If the Post wants us to take them seriously, they must take us seriously. That means turning over the editorial duties to long-time Maryland residents who know our county and state. As for the interns... is it too much to ask that they start at the bottom of the organization and not the top?
Update: Washington Post reporter Ann Marimow noted the distribution of this flyer but failed to mention one of its central contentions: that the Post’s editorial writer is an intern. Why is the Post afraid to discuss that fact? Her article also does not credit Maryland Politics Watch for the flyer’s source material. Finally, her sole quote comes from Council Member Trachtenberg, one of the flyer’s targets. She never asked MCGEO for its point of view.
Chevy Chase Election 2009
Today, the Town of Chevy Chase is voting to elect two councilmembers. At least one of the two will be new as incumbent Rob Enelow is stepping down. The four candidates are Linna Barnes, Pat Burda, David Eason, and Deborah Vollmer.
Linna Barnes has served three two-year terms on the Council, including two years as mayor. She is currently serving as Treasurer and will be most senior member of the Council if reelected.
Pat Burda is currently chair of the Town's Long Range Planning Committee and a leader in the Town's efforts on the Purple Line. She has a part-time business in interior design and formerly worked as a strategic planning consultant for museums.
David Eason is the Town's representative on the Police Advisory Board and works in commercial construction, though is perhaps best known in the Town through his activity in the Washington Ireland Program.
Deborah Vollmer is a non-practicing attorney perhaps best known around the County as a frequent challenger to incumbent Rep. Chris Van Hollen in Democratic primaries and the general election.
The election roughly breaks down into three groups. David Eason, a registered Republican, is running with the support of opponents of the FAR (floor-to-area ratio) ordinance passed by the Town just prior to the 2008 election as part of his general opposition to regulations. Linna Barnes and Pat Burda, both Democrats, are running with the support of proponents of the FAR law (as did I, last year) and argue that the Town needs to move on to other issues. Spurred on by the planned new home adjacent to her own, Deborah Vollmer has campaigned for much stronger controls on development in Town and historic preservation.
However, many other issues have been discussed during the campaign including police and security, the Town's protections for trees and environmental initiatives, spending on the Purple Line, playgrounds and dog parks, term limits, and the Town's government and citizen committees.
Save Local First Wheaton
It was August 2007, and there we sat at a table in Downtown Wheaton: a Venezuelan baker, a Salvadoran restaurant manager, a Scottish tavern owner, a Cuban-American non-profit director, an Asian tea shop owner, a pretty economist from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and her husband, a redneck union guy from upstate New York. The rag-tag band had just won a big victory in getting the County Council to repeal its parking meter hour extension. Now we looked at each other and asked, “What’s next?”
For the Wheaton business community, the 2007 parking meter fight was a formative moment. The Central Business District (CBD) benefits from its vibrancy and cultural diversity, but it has been difficult to coordinate its many businesses across ethnic and language-based lines. That changed with the parking meter battle. Economic interest brought the businesses together to fight the county’s plan to extend parking meter hours. And in its aftermath, they decided to formalize their alliance in a new group: Local First Wheaton.
From the beginning, Local First Wheaton was not going to be a knockoff of the Chamber of Commerce. (The Wheaton-Kensington Chamber of Commerce in fact participated in creating the new alliance.) The new group would bring together businesses, non-profits and residents in order to promote locally-owned small businesses. The Latino Economic Development Corporation (LEDC) took the lead in coordinating Local First Wheaton but the businesses themselves made the decisions. The group’s first tasks were to recruit members (including associations and individuals), design a website and logo, engage in joint marketing through a business guide and help its members join together to sell grease for biodiesel fuel and buy wind energy.
As the economy worsened, Local First Wheaton’s joint marketing efforts became even more important. MANY businesses have left the Wheaton CBD in the last couple years, including Sabang, Bonifant Books, the Wheaton Bike Shop, Kefi Taverna, China Chef, Casa Furniture, La Despensa Mercado Latino and Barnaby’s. Several more are teetering on the edge. Now the group’s efforts to improve links between customers and the CBD became a matter of survival. As Local First Wheaton coordinator Emily Adelman has stated on this blog, 68% of money spent on a locally-owned independent establishment stays in the community. Every cent of that money can now make a difference between a local business’s success or failure. Business creation in Wheaton takes on even more meaning because many firms are owned by female or minority entrepreneurs. Finally, there may even be environmental benefits since residents who shop in their own backyard are less likely to take Beltway trips to Virginia.
The county has supported Local First Wheaton with a one-year $68,000 grant – enough to pay Emily Adelman’s salary. (Since Emily is a very capable Cornell graduate who could easily command twice that pay in the private sector, this is a great deal for the county.) But County Executive Ike Leggett has chosen to exclude the grant from his budget.
We understand that a tight budget demands cuts. Even more, it demands weeding out great programs from good ones, mediocre ones and poor ones. There are not very many $68,000 expenditures that simultaneously promote job creation, female and minority business ownership, community building, cultural diversity and CBD revitalization near a Metro station. Local First Wheaton does all of the above.
And that’s why it deserves to be saved.
Fire Fighters and Leggett Strike Deal
County Executive Ike Leggett and the Montgomery County Career Fire Fighters Association have reached a Memorandum of Agreement amending the union’s contract. Here are the key provisions.
1. The union’s 4 percent wage increase is “postponed” and will not be effective in Fiscal Year 2010. Salary-based benefits, like pensions, will not be affected by the postponement and will be calculated as if the postponement had not taken place. (This provision will require legislation to be submitted by the Executive.) The agreement does not specify when the postponed wage increase will take effect.
2. The contract will include new provisions laying out personal leave and compensatory leave credits.
3. Members will be permitted to wear union logos on their uniforms and helmets.
4. The County Executive and the union will jointly seek to vacate the Labor Relations Administrator’s decision that the Executive need not include salary increases for the Fire Fighters in his proposed budget. We suggested this deal could be made weeks ago. The memorandum says:The Union has filed an appeal of LRA Strongin’s March 28, 2009 Decision and Award. The parties shall file a joint motion and proposed Order (attached as Exhibit A) with LRA Strongin asking him to vacate the March, 28 2009 Decision and Award. If he signs the Order vacating the Decision and Award, the Union will voluntarily dismiss its appeal. The parties agree that they will neither cite nor attempt to rely on the vacated decision in any way. In the event that LRA Strongin does not issue an Order vacating the March 28, 2009 Decision and Award, the parties shall file a joint motion and proposed Order (attached as Exhibit B) with the Circuit Court requesting the Court to vacate the LRA Decision and Award and to dismiss the appeal. In the event that the Circuit Court does not enter the Order, the Union will pursue the appeal.
5. The memorandum contains this statement on County Council and senior management pay:The parties recognize the economic situation facing the County, particularly the shortfall in projected revenues for FY10. The County is calling on all of its employees to come together to deal with this grave situation. The Union and the County Executive, on his own behalf and on behalf of the non-represented employees in County leadership positions, are willing to make financial sacrifices in FY10, and the parties call on each member of the County Council to make similar sacrifices. Postponement of the general wage increase described in Paragraph 1 above shall be rescinded and the County Executive agrees to promptly seek funding from the County Council to retroactively pay such general wage increase unless (a) the County Executive returns to the County the net mandated pay increase required to go into effect in December 2009 under Section Sec. 1A-106 of the Code and (b) no general wage adjustment is given in FY10 to any appointed member of the Senior Management Team. The Parties recognize and agree that this provision does not impact salary schedule step increases.
Politicians’ pay raises are an increasingly dicey subject. According to the Post, D.C. Council Members and Fairfax Supervisors decided not to take raises in Fiscal 2010, but Calvert County Commissioners and Prince William Supervisors will get them. Raises for Prince George’s County politicians are up in the air. Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon and City Council Members received a 2.5 percent raise last December, but the Mayor donated her increase to charity. Many state legislators chose to give part of their salaries back to the state to match state employee furloughs. If Montgomery County Council Members are required to accept their pay by law (as are state legislators), will they follow the example of the state legislators or Mayor Dixon?
Following are the memorandums of agreement between the County Executive and the Fire Fighters, the Fraternal Order of Police and MCGEO.
Consequences from the Special Election, Part Two
Board of Education Member Nancy Navarro is about to take her seat on the County Council after winning the tightest of victories in the primary. What will become of her?
Navarro arrives in office facing several problems. First, she lost the single largest location of votes in her district, Leisure World, by a 67-24% margin to Ben Kramer. The near-unanimous consensus of our sources in and near Leisure World is that her negative mailers soured her reputation there. Navarro also lost precinct 5-04, which contains the Riderwood Village retirement community, to Kramer by 104-73 (53-37%). Navarro must reach out to seniors or leave open a huge base for an opponent.
Second, after two races in two years that have cost nearly $150,000, Navarro will have significant challenges in raising money. Some of her union allies have maxed out (including my union, the Carpenters). Some of her business friends may be preoccupied by other races. Navarro herself is not wealthy and does not have access to national fundraising networks.
Finally, Navarro must rid herself of the label slapped on her by both Don Praisner and Ben Kramer: a servant of “special interests.” That was particularly ironic coming from developer Kramer, who enjoyed widespread support from the business community. And never mind the fact that Navarro presided over $89 million in concessions from the school unions last year. Images tend to stick in politics when they are not challenged. Regardless of the invaluable aid given to Navarro by the unions, she cannot be seen to be going along with everything they want. As for the developers, while they did support Navarro against Don Praisner in 2008, Kramer was clearly their candidate this year. Kramer received endorsements from the Montgomery County Business PAC, the Apartment and Office Building Owners Association and the Bethesda-Chevy Chase Chamber of Commerce and benefitted from two independent mailings by the Maryland Realtors PAC. The development community should not be surprised if Navarro remembers their fairweather friendship with a jaded eye.
Navarro can really help herself by doing one thing: focusing relentlessly on constituent service. That is the primary job of any district Council Member. Potholes must be filled. Trees must be trimmed. Parks must be maintained. Police service must be abundant and visible. The Department of Permitting Services and the county’s Department of Transportation must be monitored. State agencies must be harassed – especially the State Highway Administration – by writing if possible. Navarro should hold a town hall meeting at least once a quarter. If residents feel that their Council Member is attentive to their needs, they will soon forget the ups and downs of the last two special elections. The power of incumbency is important, but its greatest source is service.
Assuming that all goes well and money can be raised, there is little reason to believe that Navarro will be easy to dislodge in 2010. She won 33 of the district’s 45 precincts this year. General turnout next year will be higher than in the special elections and the role of Leisure World will be reduced. Navarro’s coalition of labor, environmentalists, progressives, immigrants and non-whites could be more effective with higher turnout. Her base will be encouraged to vote if Help Save Maryland’s harassment continues. The Apple Ballot had little role in the special elections because most voters had their minds made up by the time they arrived at the precincts. But in 2006, the Apple Ballot played a huge part in down-ticket races, picking the winner in 90% of the contested Democratic primaries. And if Ben Kramer does not run against her again, Navarro may not face a name opponent next year. No Praisners will be in the race and no other potential candidates can match Navarro’s name recognition and alliances.
Tomorrow, we’ll examine the impact of the special election on the rest of the county government.
Monday, May 04, 2009
On Political Pulse
Maryland Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown will be on the "Political Pulse" TV Show on Tuesday, May 5th at 9:30 p.m. and Thursday, May 7th at 9:00 p.m.
"Political Pulse" is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.