There is a great hue and cry going up about negative campaigning in District 4. Ben Kramer sent out the flyer below featuring a protest by Alison Klumpp against Nancy Navarro’s mailers.
The irony here is delicious. After all, Mrs. Klumpp’s mother, Marilyn Praisner, won her first County Council election in part by criticizing her opponent.
Flash back to 1990. Michael Gudis was a man with problems. The three-term County Council Member had been pilloried by the media for employing his girlfriend in his council office. An impending reorganization of the council transforming it from a seven-member at-large body to a council with four at-large members and five district members herded him into a district race. He was a developer-supported candidate in a slow-growth year. (This was the year that anti-development Council Member Neal Potter defeated incumbent County Executive and businessman Sid Kramer.) But worst of all, Gudis had a formidable challenger: two-term Board of Education Member and former CIA analyst Marilyn Praisner.
Mrs. Praisner had very little money; Gudis outraised her by at least six to one. But she announced her challenge in the summer of 1989 and spent a year working the district. Some of the qualities that made her a legend were already manifest in her first council race: toughness, hard work and attention to detail. And she laid a clever trap for the incumbent.
One of our spies recounts what happened:At a candidate forum, Mrs. Praisner made a statement to the effect that campaign accounts should not be used for personal benefit.
Gudis later accused Mrs. Praisner of using “CIA tactics” in the pages of the Post but it made no difference. Mrs. Praisner won and so began the ascendancy of one of the county’s greatest public servants. Was her use of the JCC issue negative campaigning or merely seizure of opportunity? In any event, it was criticism of an opponent based on his record. And it worked.
Mr. Gudis responded that he agreed.
Mrs. Praisner then turned to Mr. Gudis and asked why, if he agreed, he had used $700 of campaign funds to pay dues to the Jewish Community Center.
Mr. Gudis turned redder than a ripe tomato and responded – jabbered, actually – that he is on the Board of the JCC and that it was therefore an appropriate use of campaign funds.
The Montgomery Journal ran an editorial – I think it was called “Mr. Gudis, Pay Back the Money” – saying that it wasn’t an appropriate use of campaign funds and he should pay it back. His response – a letter to the Editor defending the expenditure.
When letters started to appear in the Washington Jewish Week, I knew the election was over. Jewish voters were writing that “they work hard and struggle to pay their dues to the JCC,” and who does this guy think he is.
Mrs. Klumpp’s allegation that Marilyn Praisner supported Ben Kramer’s Delegate candidacy strikes us as odd. We cannot locate any verification for it. Furthermore, Sid Kramer, Ben Kramer’s father, endorsed Nancy Navarro in 2008 when she ran against Don Praisner. If the Kramers and Praisners were so close, why did the Kramer family patriarch oppose Don Praisner?
This is just one story in Montgomery County’s long history of contentious campaigns. We’ll recount that history in Part Two.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Negative Campaigning in Montgomery County, Part One
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
I Really Know Marilyn Praisner
By Alison Klumpp.
I was very disappointed when I read George Leventhal’s blog entry about my mother, Councilmember Marilyn Praisner. George may have worked with mother for some years but I am at a loss when he says he knew Marilyn Praisner best. Marilyn Praisner was my mother for thirty-eight years. I was there at the beginning of her political career. I was there at the end.
My mother's legacy is one of dedicated constituent service and fiscal prudence. She looked out for the taxpayers of this County, not just in difficult times, but every year. She was also known for “doing her homework.” Below I have included Marilyn Praisner’s biography that was on her Council website. You be the judge.
My mother and Nancy Navarro were both members of the Board of Education. That is where the comparison ends.
In my opinion, the only candidate that matches my parents’ legacies is Ben Kramer. He has already earned the reputation of working for his constituents and being there for them – a reputation that his opponents have not earned.
Ben Kramer has proven himself in Annapolis. He has the expertise on issues that affect us all, not just education. He knows how to advocate for our transportation, health care, public safety and quality of life needs that we have come to respect in Montgomery County.
I live in District 4, I am a voter in District 4 and the candidate who will do the best job for all of us is Ben Kramer. The only person who will continue the legacy of leadership, independence and integrity is Ben Kramer. Montgomery County deserves the best... District 4 deserves the best... the best is Ben Kramer.
Biography, County Council Member Marilyn Praisner
Marilyn Praisner is the longest serving woman ever on the Montgomery County Council. As the immediate past Council president, she is in her fifth term representing District 4. Praisner also served as Council president in 1993 and 1997 and as vice president in 1992, 1996 and 2006. Praisner chairs the Council’s Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee and serves on its Management and Fiscal Policy Committee.
As a Councilmember, Praisner has taken the lead on a variety of issues, including child care, technology the environment, private-public partnerships and fiscal policy. She sponsored the County’s Rainy Day fund, which has garnered high marks from the bond-rating agencies, co-sponsored the Economic Development Fund which has helped attract quality employers to the County, spearheaded special protection areas (SPA) to protect stream valleys in the County, including the Upper Paint Branch, and established the County’s Technology Innovation Fund to modernize County government technology to serve citizens better. As a member of the Board of Education (1982-90), Praisner lead efforts to reduce class size, expand counseling to elementary schools and add dedicated space in schools for day care and health services. She initiated the Baby Steps Program, which screens at-risk newborns and links families to County services.
A county official known for her national leadership on technology and telecommunications issues, Praisner has represented local government across this country at numerous technology conferences and public safety communications, cable television, the siting of cellular towers, and rights-of-way management. She has represented local government on public safety communications committees including the National Task Force on Interoperability (Vice Chair of Governance Subcommittee) and the Federal Government’s Public Safety Wireless Network (PSWN) program. She currently serves as chair of the Executive Committee for SAFECOM, a Department of Homeland Security high priority initiative established to help local, tribal, State and Federal public safety agencies improve public safety response through effective interoperable communications. She is a Maryland Vice Chair for CapWIN (Capital Wireless Integrated Network), a public safety communication system for the Washington Metropolitan Area. A member of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Counties (NACo), she served on NACO’s Homeland Security Task Force and was four times chair of its Telecommunications and Technology Steering Committee. Praisner is chair of TeleCommUnity, a national organization created to support local government telecommunication interests on Capitol Hill. For six years, she served as Vice Chair of the Federal Communications Commission’s Local and State Government Advisory Committee.
Praisner is a past president of the Maryland Association of Counties (MACo). She also represents Montgomery County on its Legislative Committee and chaired its Education Committee.
She was a member of the Board of Education (1982-90) and twice served as president (1984 and 1987). She was president of the Maryland Association of Boards of Education, Chair of the Northeast Region for the National School Boards Association, and president of the National Federation of Urban-Suburban School Districts.
Long known for her advocacy on children’s issues, Praisner has served as Second Vice President of the Montgomery County Council of PTAs, on the National Governors Association Intergovernmental Workgroup on Children’s Issues, the Board of Directors of the Maryland Congress of Parents and Teachers and the Executive Committee of Children’s International Summer Villages, Washington D.C. Chapter.
Before entering partisan political office, Praisner spent 16 years at the Central Intelligence Agency including service as an intelligence analyst, Branch Chief and staff member for the Deputy Director of Intelligence.
Known for her outstanding leadership on local as well as state issues, Praisner was named by Washingtonian Magazine as one of this area’s “Most Powerful Women,” and has been included in the Daily Record’s “Maryland’s Top 100 Women” three times. Montgomery County Business and Professional Women’s Club chose her as its 2000 “Woman of the Year.” She also received the Charles Willis Award for outstanding school board service from the Maryland Association of Boards of Education. The Montgomery County National Organization for Women awarded her its 2004 Leadership award.
A graduate of Douglass College, Rutgers University with a degree in journalism, Praisner also completed the paralegal program at the University of Maryland. A 38-year resident of Montgomery County, she is married to Donald Praisner. They have three children and four grandchildren.
COUNTY ELECTED OFFICE
Montgomery County Council - District 4 (Democrat) (1990-)
President (2007, 1993, 1997), Vice President (2006, 1992, 1996)
Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee, Chair
Management and Fiscal Policy Committee
Member of the Health and Human Services Committee (1990-2002)
Chair, Ad Hoc Committee on Outreach ( 1995 - )
Montgomery County Board Of Education (1982-90)
President (1984, 1987), Vice President (1983)
Maryland Association of Boards of Education, President (1988-89)
National School Boards Association, Northeast Region, Chair (1989-90)
Nominating Committee (1988, 1989)
National Federation of Urban-Suburban School Districts, President (1987-88),
Board of Directors (1982-88), Executive Committee (1984-89)
OTHER ELECTED AND APPOINTED POSITIONS
Member, Chesapeake Bay Executive Council Local Government Advisory Committee (2003-)
Council of Governments (COG)
Member, Metropolitan Development Policy Committee, Chair (2002)
Maryland Association of Counties (MACo)
President (2003)
First Vice President (2002)
Treasurer (1999); Secretary (2000); Second Vice President (2001)
Montgomery County Representative to Legislative Committee (1990-)
Maryland Public Safety Interoperability Governance Group (2003-)
Maryland Commission on Education Finance, Equity and Excellence (1999-2001)
MACo Education Committee, Chair (1992-98); Member (1999 -)
MACo Ad Hoc Committee on School Board/County Government Relations, Chair (1991-93)
Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) Review Panel (1997-99)
Maryland Business Roundtable Education-Professional Development Task Force (1995-97)
Maryland State Department of Education High School Assessment Task Force (1995-96)
Maryland State Department of Education Charter Schools Task Force (1996-97)
National Association of Counties (NACo)
Board of Directors (1997-)
Telecommunications and Technology Steering Committee, Chair (2000-01;2003-2007);Vice Chair (2002);Telecommunications Subcommittee, Chair (2001-2002);Public Safety Communications Subcomittee, Chair (2007-)
Executive Committee, SAFECOM (2003-)
Executive Committee, Public Safety Wireless Network, (PSWN) (2001-2003)
National Institute of Justice Task Force Interoperability, Vice Chair (2001-2002)
Human Services and Education Steering Committee, Chair (1999-00)
Sustainability Leadership Team (2003-04; 2006-)
Education, Children and Families Subcommittee, Chair (1993-99)
Governance Task Force (2003)
Homeland Security Task Force (2001-2006)
Telecommunications Task Force, Chair (1999)
Economic Development Task Force (1999-00; 05-)
Millennium Committee (1998-00)
Membership Committee (1997-00)
Children's Initiative Task Force (1993-94)
Intergenerational and Aging Task Force (1995-97)
Federal Communications Commission
Local and State Government Advisory Committee, Vice Chair (1997-2003)
National Governors Association
Intergovernmental Workgroup on Children's Issues (1994-95)
County Elected Women of Maryland
President (1994-99)
Treasurer (1999-2003)
Maryland Democratic County Elected Officials
President (1994-95)
Secretary (1996)
EMPLOYMENT
Central Intelligence Agency (1963-68, 1978-89)
Intelligence Analyst, Branch chief and staff member for the Deputy Director of Intelligence
AWARDS
Douglass Society inductee, Douglass College Alumnae Association for distinguished public service (2007)
"The Joan Mann Life Service Award," District 14 Democratic Club
"Woman of the Year" Award, Montgomery County Business & Professional Women's Club (2000)
Ida Mae Garrott for Local Government Leadership, Allied Civic Group (2001-2002)
Maryland's Top 100 Women, Daily Record (1999, 2001 and 2006)
Maryland's Top 100 Women Circle of Excellence, Daily Record, 2006
Washingtonian Magazine, "Most Powerful Women" (1993)
Charles Willis Award for outstanding school board service, Maryland Association of Boards of Education (1990)
Women in Education recognition award (1990)
PTA Life Membership, awarded by the Montgomery County Council of PTAs (1984)
COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP POSITIONS
Olney Theatre Center for the Arts, Board of Trustees (1998-2006)
Greater Laurel-Beltsville Hospital, Board of Directors (1977-82)
Banneker Junior High School PTSA, President (1981-82)
Suburban Maryland Fair Housing, Board of Directors, Education Chairperson (1981-82)
Montgomery County Council of PTAs, Second Vice President (1979-80), Area IV Vice President (1977-79)
Maryland Congress of Parents and Teachers, Board of Directors (1978-82)
District 14A Democratic Club, Board of Directors (1976-78)
Greater Laurel-Beltsville Hospital Citizens Advisory Committee, Board of Directors (1974-77; 1982), First Vice President (1974)
Calverton Citizens Association, Officer (1969-71)
Douglass College Alumnae Association, Washington, D.C. Chapter, President (1966-67)
COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
Leadership Maryland, Class of 1996
Women's Advisory Board, Girl Scout Council of the Nation's Capital (1988-)
Governor's School Construction Task Forces (1985; 1987)
State Superintendent's Commission on School-Based Administration (1985-86)
Montgomery County Drug Abuse Advisory Council (1981-82)
Galway Elementary School, Trustee (1972-78)
Greater Laurel-Beltsville Hospital Authority (gubernatorial appointment) (1976-77)
Montgomery County Public Schools Secondary Schools Task Force (1975-76);
Senior High Study (1977)
Executive Committee, Children's International Summer Villages, Washington, DC Chapter (1973-77)
League of Women Voters (1975-)
Girl Scout Leader (1967-69)
PERSONAL BACKGROUND
Resident of Montgomery County since 1967
B.A. degree (Journalism) Douglass College, Rutgers University
Completed paralegal program, University of Maryland
Married to Donald E. Praisner; three grown children, all of whom have graduated from Montgomery County Public Schools, and four grandchildren, two of whom live in Montgomery County and attend Montgomery County Public Schools
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
A Sorry Moment for the Slow Growth Movement
Dear readers: those of you who read this blog know that nothing ticks us off more than double-talk. We can deal with differences in policy or ideology. Indeed, we have had a few such debates here over the years. But dodging, ducking and dissembling can really get our juices flowing. And we already have seen the reek of some of it in this year’s District 4 special election.
As usual, the issue is developer contributions. It’s an ancient issue in Montgomery County politics; witness its use back in 1998. In last year’s special election, Don Praisner vowed not to accept developer money and his supporters demanded that Nancy Navarro adhere to the same standard. But there were two problems. First, 42% of Marilyn Praisner’s contributions from 2001 through 2008 came from business interests, including developers like Bryant Foulger and Aris Mardirossian. Second, Don Praisner himself accepted a contribution from a co-owner of the Privacy World complex, which is seeking redevelopment to higher density. And so Nancy Navarro was required to hold to an anti-developer-contribution pledge that Marilyn Praisner never made and Don Praisner made but did not keep.
But it does not end there. Now the Praisners’ daughter, Alison Klumpp, is supporting Ben Kramer – a commercial property owner and manager by trade. She informed Maryland Moment that part of her reason for backing Kramer was that he told her he had “no intention of taking developer money.” When I pointed out that Kramer had already taken money from two real estate PACs, Mrs. Klumpp replied, “Let's keep in mind that the reports Adam are quoting are from 2006 and 2007.” So now the prohibition on accepting developer contributions has a statute of limitations attached.
There are many legitimate reasons to support Ben Kramer. He is a very intelligent man, has served in three general sessions and one special session in the state legislature and has been active in county politics for a long time. He could easily assume the demands of county office immediately after winning an election. Labor people should respect the fact that he was supported by both MCEA and MCGEO in his prior council races. As a businessman, he brings a perspective that is not shared by many of his potential colleagues on the County Council. And pro-growth voters should be delighted with Kramer’s support of Pay and Go and his 2006 endorsements by the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce and the Greater Washington Board of Trade. My problem is not with Ben Kramer himself, a serious candidate and a plausible office holder.
But to support Kramer because of his sudden apparent willingness to turn away developer contributions is a bizarre mutation of logic. Mrs. Klumpp herself describes him as a “commercial developer” and says that he “builds and owns shopping centers.” So a candidate who accepts developer contributions (as our County Executive and many County Council Members do) is bad, but a self-financing candidate who happens to BE a “commercial developer” is just fine. Let’s remember that if Kramer is indeed a developer, every penny he contributes to his own campaign is a developer contribution.
Given the brain-bending mental gymnastics around this issue, people who care about this are now facing an unappetizing choice: either accept a definition of “developer contributions” that is so elastic that it vaporizes on contact or abandon the issue altogether. This is a sorry moment for the county’s slow-growth movement.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Special Elections and the Legacy of Marilyn Praisner
It is ironic that the final thoughts of Don Praisner included a recommendation to appoint his successor. That goes against one of the greatest achievements of his predecessor, the great former County Council Member Marilyn Praisner.
Section 106 of Montgomery County’s charter provides that the County Council will appoint new members to fill vacancies. In 1997, Republican County Council Member Betty Ann Krahnke (R-1) called for a charter amendment (Question C) to allow special elections for Council Members. Mrs. Praisner, then in her second term, supported the idea. The voters passed Question C in 1998 by a 190,283-21,615 (90%-10%) vote.
It now fell to the council to draft implementing legislation. The task became urgent as Krahnke was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig’s disease in 1998 and was having trouble performing her job by early 1999. Krahnke and Mrs. Praisner then began to draft the special election process. One item of contention was whether to have one election or two (a primary and a general). The Washington Post reported the following on 3/17/99:Krahnke has argued that primaries should be eliminated in a special election, saving the county as much as $400,000. But a council majority intends to keep the primary because that is the way Montgomery elections have always been staged.
Mrs. Praisner agreed with Leggett and her implementation bill called for two elections. It passed by a 7-2 vote, with Krahnke and Republican Nancy Dacek (R-2) voting against it. Leggett (who now wants an appointment), freshman Phil Andrews and Mrs. Praisner voted in favor.
Council President Isiah Leggett (D-At Large) yesterday called the single-ballot system the “David Duke ballot,” after the former Ku Klux Klan official who has done well in Louisiana elections run that way. When a council colleague noted that Duke is not planning to run in Montgomery, Leggett shot back:
“But we have Robin Ficker.”
In January 2000, Krahnke announced she was leaving the council. Republican Howard Denis then defeated Democratic primary winner Pat Baptiste in the special general election. One of Krahnke’s aides, Joy Nurmi, later became Chief of Staff to both Marilyn and Don Praisner. Montgomery would not go on to have another special election until the 2008 District 4 race.
Mrs. Praisner was the champion of special elections in Montgomery County. She designed the system that operates today. And the concept of special elections was approved by 90% of the county’s electorate. Any call for appointments goes against the legacy of Marilyn Praisner – and the will of the voters.
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Navarro, Praisner Campaign Contributions Provide Ammo for Both Sides
Last Friday was the deadline for the final campaign finance reports before the County Council District 4 special election primary. Both the Navarro and Praisner camps will find them useful.
Nancy Navarro reported contributions from individuals of $12,196, the Hispanic Democratic club of $250 and Maryland PACs of $22,000 for total receipts of $34,446. Her campaign reported $28,380.81 on hand. Sixty-four percent of her contributions came from labor unions, including the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters ($6,000), the Montgomery County Career Fire Fighters ($6,000), UFCW Local 1994, also known as MCGEO or the government employees ($5,000), SEIU Maryland/DC State Council ($3,000), SEIU Local 500 ($1,000) and the Metropolitan Washington AFL-CIO ($1,000). The fact that Navarro received nearly two-thirds of her contributions from labor rebuts the allegation that she is “developer-controlled.”
However, one name on her individual contributor list truly stands out: Aris Mardirossian, who gave her the maximum contribution of $4,000. Mardirossian is the developer of Crown Farm in Gaithersburg. He is notorious for once suing Montgomery County Civic Federation President Wayne Goldstein when Goldstein wrote him a letter inquiring about tree removal on his property. The lawsuit, widely viewed as a frivolous slap suit in MoCo’s civic community, still causes many anti-growth activists to make the sign of the cross whenever Mardirossian’s name is uttered in their presence. Navarro’s campaign made a mistake by accepting this contribution. Her opponents are sure to jump all over it despite the fact that Mardirossian also once gave $3,000 to Marilyn Praisner.
Donald Praisner has also filed an interesting finance report. His campaign reported contributions from individuals of $16,280, Council Member Phil Andrews’ campaign account of $750, and a loan from Mr. Praisner himself of $5,000 for total receipts of $22,030. His campaign reported $17,551.67 on hand. Mr. Praisner’s biggest contributors are Council Member Marc Elrich’s chief of staff Dale Tibbitts ($2,000), County Executive spouse Catherine Leggett ($1,000), former Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg staffer Bobbie Walton ($1,000) and Nicholas Miller of Bethesda ($1,000). (Geez, Dale, how much is Marc paying you?) Tibbitts, Leggett, Walton, Andrews, County Executive spokesman Patrick Lacefield ($200) and former Marilyn Praisner staffers Claire Iseli ($150) and Sherry Kinikin ($100), along with Mr. Praisner, comprised a core group of contributors who together accounted for 46% of his campaign’s funding.
Mr. Praisner told the Gazette last week that Navarro was the only candidate taking money from developers. His supporters have lambasted Navarro on this blog for failing to abstain from development money despite Marilyn Praisner’s ready acceptance of it. But two of Mr. Praisner’s contributors are connected to the real estate industry.
Nicholas Miller of Bethesda, who gave $1,000 to Mr. Praisner on 3/26/08, is a telecommunications lawyer with Miller and Van Eaton PLLC. According to its website, the firm’s clients include the “Building Owners and Managers Association, International, the Institute of Real Estate Management, the International Council of Shopping Centers, the National Apartment Association, the National Multi-Housing Council, the National Realty Committee, and the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts.” Now this has nothing to do with development, right?
Gregory Eisenstadt of Brookeville gave $100 to Mr. Praisner on 3/24/08. Eisenstadt has been a steady supporter of Marilyn Praisner over the years, giving $314 to her campaigns between 2001 and 2005. Eisenstadt is the owner of Privacy World, a housing complex just north of the Glenmont Metro station due to be redeveloped by JBG Companies. The Privacy World redevelopment will be one of the bigger projects in District 4 if the County Council allows it to proceed. Eisenstadt’s relationship with the Praisners makes sense for him although his contribution runs afoul of Mr. Praisner’s pledge to avoid development money.
Let this be a lesson for all the aspiring politicians who read this blog: the worst thing about making a pledge is actually having to keep it!
Democrat Pat Ryan has raised a total of $10,825, of which $4,000 came from the Montgomery County Career Fire Fighters Association. (Yes, this is the same union that gave $6,000 to Navarro.) Ryan is his own biggest individual contributor and gave his campaign $2,000 in seed money on 3/10/08. Ryan had $9,632.52 on hand, slightly more than half Mr. Praisner’s total and over one-third of Navarro’s holdings. Republican Mark Fennel has raised $1,705 with all but $300 coming from the candidate. Republican Thomas Hardman gave himself $100, the sole contribution to his campaign. Financial reports for Democrat Steve Kanstoroom and Republican John McKinnis are not yet available.
Now that the finance reporting deadline has passed and the special primary is fast closing in, District 4 voters will be treated to their most intense week of politicking since Marilyn Praisner defeated Mike Gudis way back in 1990. Lock your doors and let the answering machine fend off those robocalls!
Disclosure: I am the Assistant to the General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. Our local affiliate, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters, endorsed Nancy Navarro.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
The Politics of Paranoia
One charge made with increasing ferocity against County Council District 4 candidate Nancy Navarro is that she is allegedly a “tool of the developers.”
Stuart Rochester, a District 4 resident supporting Don Praisner, told the Gazette: “I’m finding that although there is a good deal of respect for Navarro, there is a concern that she is identified, fairly or not, with the pro-business and pro-development forces in the county,” Rochester said. “For that reason she may not be relied on to carry on the positions that Marilyn had.”
Takoma Park activist Mike Tabor, who does not live in the district, wrote the following to the Gazette in endorsing Mr. Praisner: The problem that many have with this election is the quiet support of the fast, uncontrolled growth activists for Navarro. She openly accepts contributions from developers, PACs, special interests and land use attorneys. She is not willing to place limits on those contributions.
The issue erupted at the People’s Community Baptist Church forum last weekend. The Gazette reports:
My belief is that this could lead to a conflict of interest any elected politician making decisions regarding land use issues.
The fear of many of us is that if Navarro is elected, the faster, uncontrolled growth advocates will have a majority on the council once again. Furthermore, a Navarro victory might enable a more developer and business-friendly majority on the council to fill the two vacant positions on the Park and Planning Board.During the only negative exchange in the meeting, Praisner took issue with a Navarro comment in response to a moderator’s question about campaign financing and avoiding undue influence. Navarro had said she was financing her campaign as Marilyn Praisner had, with contributions from many sources, including business interests.
Neighborspac, a MoCo activist group that opposed overdevelopment, raised the issue of politicians and development contributions starting in the 2002 county races. Neighborspac began tabulating contributions from development-connected people or entities and reporting them as a percentage of the total receipts for each candidate. Neighborspac had a point: if a politician received an overwhelming percentage of his or her support from one industry, like real estate, voters had a right to know that. I certainly looked at Neighborspac’s data in 2006 before casting my votes.
“I resent how you represent Marilyn Praisner and her influence,” Donald Praisner said. “In her last year, she was disappointed with you because you were not an independent voice.”
After the meeting, Navarro said she only meant to show she was financing her campaign in the same spirit as Marilyn Praisner had. “I’m not sure why he took my comment negatively,” she said. “I was only referring to public campaign information. If we’re going to talk about financing campaigns, this is what the record shows.”
On Monday, Donald Praisner said that only Navarro is taking money from developers and that Navarro may “undo some of the work my wife did,” referring to provisions supported by Marilyn Praisner and passed by the County Council designed to slow the pace of growth.
But since then, the issue has mutated. Now the standard is not whether a politician accepts an overwhelming majority of his or her contributions from business, but whether a politician accepts any contributions from business at all. Because Navarro has refused to rule out any business contributions, she is accused of being controlled by them. This is a difficult test for any politician to pass, including a very prominent one who is relevant to this race: the late Marilyn J. Praisner.
According to state board of elections data, Mrs. Praisner raised a total $78,056 between 2001 and 2008. Of that total, $32,769 – a full 42% – came from businesses, business owners or corporate lawyers. See the graphic below for the specific contributions.
Among Mrs. Praisner’s contributors was Bryant Foulger, head of construction and real estate giant Foulger Pratt, who gave her $200. That firm is a partner in Downtown Silver Spring developer PFA, against whom a First Amendment demonstration was launched last summer. Companies and relatives of Aris Mardirossian contributed $3,000 to Mrs. Praisner. Mardirossian, developer of Crown Farm in Gaithersburg, is infamous in MoCo for suing civic grand-daddy Wayne Goldstein for the mere act of writing him a letter. Three Linowes and Blocher lawyers contributed a total of $975. And four limited liability companies from Colorado gave Mrs. Praisner a combined total of $2,000 in 2006.
Does any of the above make Marilyn Praisner a “tool of the developers?” Hell no. As I wrote in my tribute to her, “She was a woman of incredible intelligence, great fairness, and most of all, unquestioned honor. Nobody was smarter, tougher, harder-working or more honest.” Mrs. Praisner was a fearless crusader for her constituents and nobody was stupid enough to accuse her of being anything different. She could have taken a million dollars from Mardirossian and she would still have told him “NO.”
So what has Nancy Navarro done to justify treating her differently? Why is she the only candidate to be attacked by illegal, anonymous robo-calls? Why is she the only one accused of being controlled by “special interests?” Why are her critics making an issue of this before she has filed a single campaign finance report?
What we have here is the Politics of Paranoia. Taking a single dollar from a business buys off your integrity and makes you their slave. Or at least that’s what Navarro’s enemies would have you believe.
My advice is to vote the old-fashioned way. Grab the politicians by the lapels. Determine whether they agree with you on the majority of things that you care about, whether they are capable enough to deliver on those priorities and whether you think they are people of good values. If they pass those tests, vote for them. If they don’t, find someone else to vote for. No political jihads. No illegal robo-calls. Just you, your brain, your heart and your vote.
Disclosure: I am the Assistant to the General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters. Our local affiliate, the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters, endorsed Nancy Navarro.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Special Election for Marilyn's Seat is Set
Looks like things are going to move very fast. Date has been set by the MoCo Council for tax day (April 15) for the primary and May 13 for the general election. Deadline to file will be March 24 at 5:00 pm.
Steve Kanstoroon, who was listed as a candidate last week in the Gazette, is in. Almost immediately after the date was set, School Board President Nancy Navarro, announced her intention to run.
Fellow blogger Adam Pagnucco has a series of posts at the ready on the background of district and the people of Council District 4.
This will be a quick fast ride to the finish. Keep a window (or tab) open to MPW on your browser for the latest in the Council District 4 Race.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Council Special Election Date Set?
Looks like the MoCo Council will meet on Tuesday February 19 at 1:30 pm to set the date for the special primary election and the special general election for Marilyn's Praisner's seat.
The County Council sets the dates for both. The staff recommendation is for the special primary election April 15 (tax day) and the special general election of Tuesday May 13, 2008.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
More on the Politburos
Today's Post contains a few tidbits about the Montgomery and Prince George's County Politburos... err, excuse me, Democratic Central Committees.
First, the Post reports that PGCDCC used an open roll call vote in selecting District 47 Senator Gwendolyn Britt's replacement. Hmmm, very interesting. Does anyone know how long PGCDCC has been using open votes for appointments? Delegate Saqib Ali had to threaten MCDCC with state legislation before they agreed to open voting.
Second, the same article supplies even more details about County Executive Jack Johnson's maneuvers to thwart his enemy, former Delegate Rushern Baker, from getting the appointment. Apparently, Johnson employed an eyeball-to-eyeball staredown (probably in addition to other tactics) to reverse a vote that was previously pledged to Baker. Now do you think Johnson could have personally stared down the thousands of voters who would have participated in a special election to fill the vacancy? I think not.
Third, in an article chronicling County Council Member Marilyn Praisner's long and distinguished career, the Post notes her support for special elections:In an ironic twist, Praisner and former council member Betty Ann Krahnke, who died in 2002, were the driving forces behind a measure that in 1999 created the mandatory special election for replacing council members. They didn't want to leave those decisions to the political activists on the Democratic and Republican committees.
Actually, I believe the County Council appointed its own replacements prior to 1999 and MCDCC had no role. But Mrs. Praisner favored special elections for vacancies and worked to pass them at the county level. And unlike MCDCC spokesman Milton Minneman, Mrs. Praisner believed in the capacity of voters to choose their own leaders. Remember Minneman's infamous quote in the Examiner?...The county’s Democratic Central Committee spokesman Milton Minneman believes his team is best equipped to make the selections. Because the group’s purpose is to get Democrats in office, and because it spends time interviewing potential replacements and hosting public forums, it is far more knowledgeable than average voters of each candidate’s suitability.
That's right, I thought you remembered that.
“Special elections are often held rapidly, and voters don’t have time to get to know the candidates,” Minneman said. “We think we’re more representative.”
Monday, February 04, 2008
Memorial for Marilyn Praisner
Information on the Viewing, Memorial Mass, and Contributions in Memory of Councilmember Marilyn Praisner.
Viewing on Monday, Feb. 4, and Tuesday, Feb. 5: From 2-4 p.m. and 6-8 p.m. at Hines Rinaldi Funeral Home, 11800 New Hampshire, Silver Spring. A prayer service will be held on Tuesday evening at 7:30 pm.
Interment: Will be private.
Memorial Mass on Saturday, Feb. 9: At 11 a.m. at St. John the Baptist Church, 12319 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring.
In lieu of flowers: The family of Mrs. Praisner said that contributions can be made to the following:
Ida Raitano Scholarship Fund
c/o Associate Alumnae of Douglass College
181 Ryder Lane
New Brunswick, NJ 08901
Sunday, February 03, 2008
A Chicken In Every Pot
It's that time of the year. T minus 10 days to primary day where attacks pick up their intensity. Last night's Debate at People's Community Baptist Church for the candidates for the Fourth District was the most charged of the three I attended. Fortunately for the incumbent most of the charges were focused on his principal rival.
The blogosphere has not been kind to Incumbent Al Wynn. So this may be the first words to highlight his positives. 
This was his night. His skills as a debater came through in spades. The former coach of the Howard University Debate team was on. He had position all night (being the first one to speak in opening and the last one to speak during closing) using both to great effect. The questions favored him. Others made charges against his principle rival, Donna Edwards, sparing him the trouble. No one except her called on him to explain some of his votes. It was the perfect storm of a debate for the incumbent. Edwards had to feel as if it was four against one, with the genial George McDermott refraining from the testosterone festival.
Wynn's Perfect Storm
In his opening statement Wynn took time to honor Marilyn Praisner's work getting all to stop what they were doing to give her a moment of silence. Classy move. He had held his own during the Q&A. None of the questions highlighted his vulnerabilities. He also got a major assist from Dr. Michael Babula, who laid into his principle challenger Donna Edwards early. Jason Jennings and George Mitchell (note link is broken) bunched Wynn and Edwards together on multiple occasions blurring the lines. Al Wynn completed the night by having the final word in closing statement. Harking back "to the old days where politicians promised a chicken in every pot" to voters, Wynn compared what he has done in office to the lack of accomplishments by his opponents.
"She disgusts me"
The first question was on campaign finance and special interest money. Babula, pictured to the lower left, speaking after Edwards and before Wynn went after the former with a vengeance. 
Sounding as if he was reading from the recently filed Wynn complaint against Edwards centered on soft money and 527s, Babula, a former Republican candidate in his native New Jersey, highlighted perceived connections between 527s and her campaign ending with the subhead quote above.
Other Observations
Mitchell, pictured to the right, sounding as if he was the Pastor of this powerful
Baptist church, charged you can't continue to elect the same people and expect different results. He called Wynn and Edwards "two peas in a pod". Babula piggybacked on Mitchell and called Edwards "a wolf in sheep's clothing" and Wynn "a wolf dressed up as a grandmother".
Why the Increase in Charges?
These increases in charges are common and expected. The further down you are in the race the greater the intensity. The closer to the election the greater intensity. This is a race where no one knows who is ahead. We have a crowded six person race. No public polls to digest. No leaked candidates polls. So this is moving time. You either move up or you move out. The uncertainty of the race has all but the main players fighting for their place in the sun.
This is the second debate inside a week where Edwards served as the pinata 
for her male opponents. There were numerous times a finger was pointed and charges directed at her as if she was the eight term incumbent. When people talked of change it was as if she was the one blocking change. Her attempts at connecting with the voters was lost in a sea of "they are both the same".
Debates, or forums as we like to call these things in the 21st century, are just a small part of an overall campaign. More people will read these words than were in attendance. So hopefully, my recollections match others. All sides will spin to highlight their candidate. It will be tough for Edwards to "win" another debate if the attacks continue. Wynn used his oratory skills to great effect. He defended his positions without being defensive. It was the best I had seen him in several debates over two election cycles.
What's Next
The candidates have another debate at PG Community College on Monday evening. I would expect more of the same. Also expect to see and hear more interviews on cable and radio in the coming week.
General Observations After Three Debates
Having sat through three debates and interviews with all candidates but Wynn (still waiting Congressman) here is a thumbnail sketch of the candidates, so far.
George McDermott (pictured to the left), the longest of long shots, continues to bark at a corrupt judicial system and wants you "to throw the bums out of office". He may not win but he is a decent and honest man who is determined to speak out against the faults of our judicial system as he sees it.
Jason Jennings (pictured to the right), who has not mastered the sound bite, has a theme of 'us, working folks vs. them, the rich'. He is the only candidate who was educated in local schools from kindergarten to graduate school. Jennings wants to be a different legislator than you have seen previously. He wants to not just change the representation in this district but he wants to change the way Congress operates completely.
George Mitchell wants you to know that he will speak out for the children. Not that others won't but he will be the first and the most vocal. His facts sometimes are off (e.g., when he mentions the district is 85% PG and almost 20% MoCo meaning the district equals 105% or he cites campaign contribution percentages for his opponents that don't match the public record) but Mitchell gives a good speech. You can tell he has not missed too many Sunday sermons. His cadence is good.
Mike Babula, the newest of the newcomers, wants you to know that without a serious change in our fiscal & monetary policy we face an economic future that rivals Independence Day. He may be right; but it is not the type of message that inspires. He also has some of the more libertarian views on drug control, education, health care, gun control, and foreign policy, though he will reject the use of that label. Somewhere the far right meets the far left and that seems to be where he resides.
Donna Edwards wants you to know that she has been where many have been -- a single parent, without health insurance, trying to raise a son -- all while serving as a public interest advocate. Outside of the Congressman, she is only person who can point to several accomplishments for the public good.
Al Wynn wants you know that he is not about promises but about results. His results speak for themselves though others may disagree. He claims "transparency" on campaign finance. He wants both universal education and universal health care. He sounds as if he got the message in 2006 and is willing to become a more vocal advocate for the district.
All candidates claim to be the latest agent of change in the year of change.
We are in a for wild 10 days sprint to the election. It is All in The Family now.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Marilyn Praisner: Passing of a Titan
Perhaps you have heard about the recent passing of Montgomery County Council Member Marilyn Praisner. I write this post in praise of a legend of county politics, a true titan of public service who will never be forgotten.
Mrs. Praisner has represented District 4 (East County) since 1990. She is the longest-serving woman in the history of the County Council. But she was far, far more than that. She was a former member of the school board, a long-time chair of the council’s Management & Fiscal Policy Committee and a long-time member (and recent chair) of the critical Planning, Housing & Economic Development Committee. Those positions and her long tenure made her one of the county’s most influential voices on budget issues, cable policy, technology, education and land use.
But one of the things I always remembered when dealing with her was her long service in the Central Intelligence Agency, starting as an analyst and moving into the senior ranks. That gave her an unusual skill set for a politician. Mrs. Praisner was the one policymaker who read every page of every report and grasped every single detail. Nothing got past her. She could not be fooled or bluffed. If you were going to see her about an issue, you had better do your homework! Because chances are, she would know your subject better than you did.
Time and again, I saw her use that encyclopedic mind and relentless style to grill the unprepared. I’ll never forget her interrogating State Highway officials at the annual Road Show meetings. The purpose of those meetings was to allow the state officials to brag about all of the road construction work they were doing in the county. But Mrs. Praisner would have none of that. She stood up, armed with a bookful of documents, and flayed the bureaucrats about every project in her district. She wanted to know about every lane design, every curb, every paint line and every traffic cone and exactly when each step was going to be completed. And woe to the hapless bureaucrat who didn’t know the answers to those questions!
But there was another side to Mrs. Praisner. She was a civil and courteous public servant who enjoyed intelligent debate. She insisted on decorum but she liked ideas. She responded diligently to communications and requests. I did not live in Mrs. Praisner’s district but that did not stop her from answering my emails and considering my proposals. If you treated her with respect, knew your facts, did your best to answer her questions and told the truth, Mrs. Praisner was your friend.
She was a woman of incredible intelligence, great fairness, and most of all, unquestioned honor. Nobody was smarter, tougher, harder-working or more honest. She was a towering figure in our county. There will be other people who follow in her position as the District 4 County Council member. But no one – no one – will do a better job than Marilyn Praisner.
One Name; One Memory
What can I say that hasn't already been said about Marilyn Praisner. Here is the announcement on the MoCo Council website.
She had reached that level of awareness that she was came with only one name: Marilyn. If I say "Michael" or "Magic" you knew I was talking about basketball. If I say "Hillary" you knew I was talking about perhaps the next President of the US. And if I say "Marilyn" I was talking about all things MoCo. There were few people that could match her on knowledge of the county.
In looking over the web for more news about Marilyn I came across this video from the Gazette that was done on October first of last year. You will have to scroll down to find it. It was pre-special session in Annapolis. But if you click on it you will get an excellent feel for the person who has left us.
Our paths crossed many times but my most vivid memory was from the campaign trail. I remember seeing her walk in a wet and cold Burtonsville Day Parade in 2006. Two hours later, she was at a Fall Festival in downtown Silver Spring and then yet another event I had long since forgotten after that. I may not remember the final event but I do remember who had the still had a wide same smile on her face, who was eager to connect you, and who still looked marvelous. It was Marilyn. I was dragging but she fed off of the energy of the people she met. So hearing that she put in a full day of work before she went in for heart value replacement surgery does not surprise me.
I recently moved into her district. I had not yet had the chance to vote for her. I don't claim to know her as well as several of our readers but it does strike a chord with me. My father passed away of the same complications several years ago. In some ways that feeling of emptiness never leaves you. Today's news begins back old memories of longing. Sadness can overcome you. I prefer to remember the good times. For me, it will be that cold and rainy day in the Fall of 2006 and the one with the widest smile and unbounded energy was Marilyn.
It is cold and raining outside as I write. I think of them as tears.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Council Acrimony Over Growth Policy Moves to the Papers
While I doubt they will ever beat out The Biggest Loser or Survivor, ratings for television broadcasts of County Council meetings could rise above zero to measurable levels if the tension in the Council on display in the papers moves to their public meetings. Market forces have now achieved what 20 years of arbitrary regulations could not — the reduction of growth to a crawl. And the new growth policy will only worsen our fiscal situation. By establishing impossible-to-meet growth controls, it will discourage private sector investment and the creation of new jobs, new housing and tax revenue. Unless government picks up the check, at most we will only see more of the luxury housing, chain retail and huge corporations that can pay the price. So much for the economic and social diversity that Montgomery County has cherished. County Executive Isiah Leggett is on record as stating that the ‘‘charges imposed on residential development are ultimately reflected, in whole or in part, in the pricing of homes and care must be taken so that homes are not priced even further out of the reach of residents of moderate income.” I agree. Limiting new development makes our county a more exclusive and expensive place to live. Once housing prices get out of reach for most average people, individuals who work in the county will be forced to look for housing in other jurisdictions. I have serious concerns about limiting growth in areas where the county has a history of encouraging development, such as near Metro stations. This is not my idea of smart growth. Some claim that theses areas are where robust development is taking place, but data show that 80 percent of commercial rentals are occurring outside these areas. First, the effect of the growth policy won’t be felt immediately. Development already approved will continue to move forward. That approved development includes 31,616 housing units (projected timeline for build-out: six years), and 32,210,095 square feet of commercial space (projected timeline for build-out: 11 years). If the county experiences a slowdown in the coming months or year, it will be due to economic forces, not the newly adopted growth policy. A national recession that affected this entire country caused the funding shortfall the county experienced in the early 1990s, not a restrictive growth policy. Second, Ms. Floreen’s contention that the growth policy will amplify the recent weakness in the housing market is also off base. Growth in housing and commercial development always ebbs and flows due to national economic forces. It is not something the county controls. What we can affect through the growth policy is the obligations on new growth, and who pays for it. Many of the county’s current budget problems have been caused by trying to catch up with infrastructure needs caused by past growth. Thirdly, growth does not always pay for itself. New housing requires new roads, schools, recreation centers, parks, libraries and other infrastructure. Providing this new infrastructure costs money. With that in mind, the new growth policy included impact taxes to assure that new growth helps pay for itself, so that the burden of new growth does not fall solely on our current residents.
After a tough debate, the Montgomery County Council adopted changes to the County's growth policy. However, the Council has not been able to move on from the issue. Indeed, Councilmembers are now taking their debate out of the Council and attacking each other in the Gazette.
Last week, Councilmember Nancy Floreen argued that the new controls are going to undermine the County's currently fragile economy and thus County revenues:
Councilmember Valerie Ervin largely agrees:
This week, Councilmembers Phil Andrews, Marc Elrich, Marilyn Praisner, and Duchy Trachtenberg fired back, arguing that their colleague got it wrong:
The Council quad is certainly right that many projects are already approved. Many projects already in the planning pipeline are on hold or going more slowly due to the economic slowdown rather than to the changes in the county growth policy.
My impression in the southern part of the County is that residents will welcome a bit of a breather. In Bethesda and Silver Spring, the slower pace merely means that growth will proceed at a steady, albeit slower, pace instead if the pell-mell fever which has gripped the area in recent years with white development signs sprouting like daisies in urban centers.
And let's not forget BRACasaurus. The expansion of the Naval Medical Center--not to mention the growth of NIH across the street--promises to place incredible new stresses on the already burdened Wisconsin Ave./Rockville Pike corridor and the Beltway. Neither the County, the State, or the Feds are willing (or able?) to contribute the significant sums needed to address this serious issue as Adam Pagnucco has pointed out.
Still, it will be interesting to see if attitudes in the County shift if the economy slips into recession and growth grinds to a complete halt. Many years ago, voters in Fairfax County elected a team of Democrats on anti-growth Democrats and tossed them out in favor of pro-growth Republicans when the County went into recession.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Gillogly on Council Town Meeting
Kevin Gillogly, a local activist who campaigned tirelessly for newly elected Councilman Marc Elrich, kindly shared this report on the County Council Town Meeting:
Wednesday, February 28 at Francis Scott Key MS in the White Oak/Hillandale section of Silver Spring, the Montgomery County Council had its first Town Meeting since the November elections brought four new members to the nine person Council.Kevin, thanks for the update! Keep 'em coming!
Chaired by Council President, Marilyn Praisner (District 4 -- East County) and hosted by the local Council member, Valerie Ervin (District 5 -- Takoma Park, Silver Spring and Wheaton), there were a total seven of the nine members in attendance: Praisner, Ervin, Phil Andrews (District 4 -- Rockville / Gaithersburg), Duchy Trachtenberg (At Large), George Leventhal (At Large), Nancy Floreen (At Large) and Marc Elrich (At Large).
It was an hour long question and answer with local residents. It was taped by County Cable Channel 6 and it will be edited next week and shown for a month afterwords. To see the complete schedule go here.
The crowd of 90-100 was pumped full of sugar -- if one came to the reception a half hour before the meeting. I made full use of the cookies and soda.
Moderator Susan Kennedy asked prior to the taping how folks heard of the meeting: it was a split between local listservs and the postcard to local residents. The crowd was significantly older than the Van Hollen Town Meeting on Monday and clearly more interested in local issues.
The anti-ICC folks were present and handing out a flyer. No other issue groups were there.
After introductions by President Praisner and an acknowledgment of former State Senator Ida Ruben and her husband Judge Ruben, the bulk of the questions were on transportation, public safety and yes the ICC.
Key points that came out of the meeting:
Budget Deadlines
County Executive Ike Leggett has to submit his budget on March 15 and the County has to be completed by June 1 for the start of the County Fiscal Year (July 1);
Increase in Police Officers
Public Safety question on robberies in the area elicited from Public Safety Chair Phil Andrews that the County funded for 90 new police officers in the past few years at a cost of around $30-35 million and that these officers are to be deployed on robberies and the like. Police Chief Tom Manger is to bring up his Five Year Plan to the Council in the coming months;
Council Saves the Children of Forest GlenCrossing Georgia Advcoate Adam Pagnucco humorously said regarding his group's effort to solve the dangerous crossing at Georgia Ave.: "We've been asking the government to build a new Metro entrance for quite awhile. We pleaded with them to build it. We complained. And finally, we revolted. Old ladies raised their canes to the sky in fury. And little kids refused to sit in their strollers to be wheeled across the street. The whole neighborhood went on strike!""This council heard us. They listened to us and understood our problems. And for the first time, they asked the state government to start development and evaluation on our project. That's the first step among many steps to build the new Metro entrance. And we are grateful for it."
Valerie Ervin and Marilyn Praisner both made comments supportive of the proposed tunnel;
Golden Shoveling It
The lack of snow removal around the Glenmont Metro elicited an apology from Nancy Floreen who agreed that public areas need to shoveled too. She also made her pitch for the Golden Shovel Award and for folks to nominate citizens who has really pitched in (my pun);
Birchmere
The status Birchmere in downtown Silver Spring seems to be "on track" according to Ervin and Praisner. State budget has $2 million for the project; County proposal comes out on March 14 and plans by the developer for the rest of the site are still to be determined;
The Never Ending Discussion
The interesting exchange started with a question on ... you guessed it ... the ICC. Where Praisner mentioned her opposition to the state road but that most of the plans are coming from the state where pro-ICC Gov O'Malley sits. Praisner favors four lanes at some places -- in lieu of the norm of six lanes. Floreen favors the road.
Marc Elrich is his only time speaking mentioned that only 4% of the traffic would go the full length of the road and they would only save 4 minutes (this according to the County and the State's own study). Marc mentioned the greatest use would be in the area between Shady Grove and Georgia Avenue and is this the best use of the money? Floreen believes if we don't use the money another part of the state will get the money instead of us.
Council Punts on Sending Their Transportation Priorities to the State
In light of the limited funds all elected officials mention, Marc pointed out that he asked his colleagues to sign a letter outlining the County's Transportation Policies with the Purple Line and the Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT) at the top of the list and the ICC not on it. Needing five signatories, Marc got four: his, Duchy's, Andrews and Praisner. So it died.
Leventhal and Elrich Exchange on Growth Policy
George Leventhal questioned Marc on what about the out of county residents. Marc fired back that the previous Council approved 110,000 in jobs and only 29,000 housing units and if you use the 1.5 workers per unit that there is a serious housing shortage that the previous Council did not address. This would have continued but Praisner interrupted them and got the questions back to the audience.
Future Events
Go to the County Web site for upcoming events, Executive Leggett will be at Ritchie ES in Rockville on March 23 (was originally in Feb but canceled due to snow) and at Holiday Park in Wheaton on March 29.
Hixson Moves to Eliminate Tax Cap
House of Delegates Ways and Means Committee Chair Sheila Hixson (D-Takoma Park) has proposed legislation which would allow the Montgomery County Council to override the county charter's limit on raising taxes by a majority of six instead of a supermajority of seven as currently required. County officials, either expressing a keen sense of the political winds or just annoyance at state interference in a county matter, did not immediately warm to the proposal:
No doubt Robin Ficker will soon be riding to the rescue on this one!Hixson's bill doesn't appear to have much support in other corners of the county she represents. Council President Marilyn Praisner (D-Eastern County) said the state shouldn't be tinkering with what is essentially the county's constitution. "I'm always troubled when the legislature involves itself in something where the voters have spoken," Praisner said.
At a hearing on the bill last week, the administration of County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) also submitted a formal opposition paper, saying the measure "would upset the responsible and workable approach enacted by our voters."
