The Chevy Chase Town Council met last night. Mayor Linna Barnes called the meeting to order at 7pm. Here is a totally unofficial account of what happened.
Public Comments
Strongly opposed to the tearing down of the home next door at 44th and Willow, Deborah Vollmer called for a new moratorium on teardowns, asked that the Council figure out something to do about private sales to builders, and closed by raising the specter of rats.
Rose Miller spoke about the regulation of traffic at Chevy Chase Elementary and handed in extensive written comments. Diane Dorfman said she sighted a fox on Walsh Street. Willie Blacklow asked about the status of the left-turn arrow at the traffic light on Connecticut at Rosemary. (Thanks to everyone who congratulated Al and myself on our election during their comments.)
Swearing In, Election of Officers, and Committees
Town Clerk Andi Silverstone swore in myself and Al Lang as new councilmembers, and Kathy Strom for a second term. The Council then unanimously elected Kathy Strom as mayor, Rob Enelow as vice mayor, Linna Barnes as treasurer, myself as secretary, and Al Lang as community liaison. Each councilmember will also serve as a liaison to one Town committee: Kathy to Community Relations, Rob to Environment, Linna to Land Use, myself to Long-Range Planning, and Al to Public Services.
Recognition of Former Council Members
Members of the Council spoke about Mier Wolf and Lance Hoffman. Lance was lauded for his efforts on the water ordinance and other areas. Linna proposed that Mier's long service be recognized by naming a Town park after him in the near future. Rob said that Mier had gotten him to run for the Council and spoke about how much Mier has down for the Town. I mentioned that I hoped the civility and respect with which Mier treats everyone would continue on the new Council. Kathy said she had spoken with Mier and hoped that he would stay active in the Town. Al talked about how he had gotten to know both Lance and Mier during the recent election and respected both men.
Finances
The Council approved the new tax rate. The property tax rate for FY09 was set at a level to collect the same amount as money as FY08, a gentle decline in taxes if one takes into account inflation. The budget was also approved quickly with no changes. The Town Manager posted the budget narrative online, a practice I hope will continue. The Council discussed revisions to the permit fee and performance bond schedule and will hold a public hearing on them at the next Town Council meeting.
Sidewalks
After presentation of current sidewalk options for Thornapple and Oakridge, Town Manager Todd Hoffman agreed to see if 3.5 foot sidewalks met ADA and other legal requirements. He also will get the engineer to draft a plan for a new option for Oakridge which will take the space required for a sidewalk partially from the street and partly from the right-of-way.
The existing options take all the space from the street resulting in the elimination of parking on one side of the street, or from the right-of-way requiring the construction of retaining walls. Public Service Liaison Al Lang will hold meetings with residents on Thornapple and Oakridge on the various options for the proposed sidewalks. The Council agreed to move (or remove) trees in the path of the proposed sidewalk on Thornapple now since trees are more likely to survive replanting in spring than in summer.
Speed Humps
Like many other Councils before us, we foundered on the issue of speed humps. Public Services Chair Bill Pritchard presented the proposed new speed hump policy which suggests data-driven guidelines for the new speed humps. Al and Rob worried that the guidelines might exclude speed humps from areas where they were needed. Linna and I thought the guidelines were useful because the Council would have more data (e.g. how many cars are speeding and by how much) before choosing to install a speed hump, though their installation would ultimately remain a Council decision (read: political question) and the Council could override the guidelines. After much debate, it was discovered that Bill's version was slightly different than the version being examined by the Council, so it was thought wise to hold off on a final decision until we are all literally reading from the same page.
Time Limits on Variance Approvals
After discussion, four members of the Council agreed that variances should expire after a certain point unless the work was carried out. Al Lang opposed the change as unneeded since the problem had only occurred on a few homes. Homeowners will have one year to pull the permit and begin the work envisioned under the variance and then another year once the permit is issued to complete the work with the Town Manager and Mayor able to grant extensions administratively for good cause. The Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed code changes.
Jane Lawton Memorial
I was pleased that my first formal motion on the Council was to embody the unanimously expressed sentiment that the Town Hall should be named in honor of Jane Lawton--Kathy and Linna seconded the motion simultaneouly. Mier Wolf had first proposed this idea on the previous Council. The Town Hall is rented from the County, and County Councilwoman Nancy Floreen has promised to lead the effort at the County level to make the change.
The Council then adjourned (five minutes early!) into executive session.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
New Chevy Chase Town Council's First Meeting
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Council Votes 6-2 to Preserve Labor Agreements (Updated)
Last Friday, Council Members Duchy Trachtenberg and Phil Andrews voted in the council’s Management and Fiscal Policy (MFP) Committee to recommend $40 million in “labor savings” or “employee participation,” alternative terms for under-funding the county’s collective bargaining agreements with its employees. Today, they sought support for their proposal from the full County Council. They found none.
Labor contracts were not the only budget item considered by the Council. They also discussed the nature of the proposed property tax hike. The MFP Committee recommended that the County Executive’s proposed rate and his proposed credit be cut. The effect of that structural change would be to channel the tax burden onto homeowners and away from commercial properties, including apartment buildings occupied by renters. That proposal was approved by the Council by a 7-1 vote, with Council Member Marc Elrich dissenting. Council Members Trachtenberg and Andrews also recommended lowering the amount by which the property tax would exceed the charter limit from $138 million (which was the County Executive’s proposal) to $118 million. Ms. Trachtenberg and Mr. Andrews were joined by Mike Knapp and Roger Berliner, but Valerie Ervin, Marc Elrich, George Leventhal and Nancy Floreen voted against it. And so the property tax reduction failed on a 4-4 vote. Interestingly, Ms. Floreen commented that she voted against the reduction because she wanted to see a larger one.
But the main action of the day concerned “labor savings.” The 300+ people who mobbed the room were not there to lobby for a $20 million reduction in a tax hike. The vast majority were public employees present to defend their livelihoods. And at least from the perspective of political theater, the County Council did not disappoint.
Former union organizer Valerie Ervin hurled the first thunderbolt. “We could fund this budget right now and not go into the COLAs [cost of living adjustments],” she said. “A lot of this other stuff is just subterfuge.”
George Leventhal objected to any hint of “subterfuge,” defending the county government’s record of clean government. But he agreed with Ms. Ervin on the COLAs, saying, “I don’t really appreciate the term ‘employee participation.’ That’s a euphemism for busting contracts.”
Phil Andrews would not back down. He looked the 300+ public employees in the eye and told them, “Employees need to do their part… It would be unfair to expect taxpayers to pay a tax increase to fully fund employee contracts that would be 8% next year.” He praised MFP Chairwoman Trachtenberg, who had joined with him in recommending labor savings, for her “intelligence, diligence and guts.”
Duchy Trachtenberg also stuck to her guns. “I have stood with labor on a number of issues,” she said, citing her support for living wage legislation and the SEIU’s organizing campaign at Montgomery College. “I represent a million residents. Most of them don’t have an opportunity to join a union and benefit from collective bargaining agreements… I don’t disrespect you, but I respect the unrepresented, the seniors, the disabled and the homeless.” She told the crowd, “I have been the object of a lot of vilification. It doesn’t do any good to attack another person on a policy difference.”
But the other Council Members did not seem convinced that reducing the COLAs was the only alternative. Council Member Marc Elrich brought up possible savings from the county’s annual PAYGO expenditure. PAYGO is a cash contribution made by the county towards capital projects, which are mostly financed by bonds. Council staff told Mr. Elrich that next year’s capital budget would be paid for by $330 million in bond issuances and $30 million in a cash PAYGO contribution. If the county did not make its cash contribution this year, it would not necessarily delay any capital projects which would be mostly covered by bonds. In fact, the unions recommended reducing PAYGO by $10 million last week, just one part of their suggested $67 million package of cuts and alternate revenues. Mr. Elrich’s idea received support from several other Council Members, though Ms. Trachtenberg opposed it.
And then Mr. Leventhal pointed out the real role played by the council in labor contract decisions. For non-schools government employees, the council does indeed set funding levels for contracts. But with regard to the public school system, the council only approves its budget as a whole. Contract funding is decided by the school board. Mr. Leventhal called Board of Education President (and former County Council candidate) Nancy Navarro to the witness table. He asked her whether the school system, if handed a budget cut by the council, would respond by cutting employee raises. She replied, “The board feels very strongly that its strategic investment is in the compensation of our employees.” And then she said that while she could not speak for the rest of the board, she personally would not vote to underfund contracts. Mr. Leventhal concluded that if the council cuts contracts for non-school employees but the school board preserved its employees’ pay, significant inequities in pay scales would result.
After Ms. Ervin recognized several exceptional county employees in the room – including one fire fighter who had heroically raced into a burning building to rescue victims inside – the County Council took its vote on the contracts. Ms. Trachtenberg and Mr. Andrews were the only Council Members on the short end of a 6-2 vote. While some of their colleagues defended their good faith, none were willing to break the county’s commitment to its employees.
But the issue is far from decided. In order to fund the contracts, the council must approve a property tax hike that exceeds the rate of inflation tomorrow. The county’s charter states that seven votes are necessary to do that. Both Mr. Andrews and Ms. Trachtenberg have publicly opposed breaking the limit, which would be sufficient to block it. One of them must budge. If they do not, there is no obvious alternative and catastrophe would result.
And so the lights will be on in the County Council building very, very late tonight.
Update: The Gazette and the Post have also covered the story.
Town of Chevy Chase Budget
Town Manager Todd Hoffman has posted a copy of the Town's budget narrative to the Town website at:
http://www.townofchevychase.org/assets/documents/pdfs/financials/09text.pdf
The document gives a line-by-line explanation for the budget. I found it very helpful. For each item, the narrative also states how much was budgeted and actually spent for FY08, and how much is proposed for FY09. One caution as you look through this and the actual budget is that the Town tends to take a conservative approach. Revenues are estimated on the low end and spending on the high end. Just because a budget item for FY09 is higher than spent for FY08 does not mean that spending will actually rise. It is quite common for the Town to spend less than budgeted.
The proposed FY09 budget itself can be found at:
http://www.townofchevychase.org/assets/documents/pdfs/financials/fy09budget.pdf
You'll see that budgeted (but not actual) revenues and expenditures balance. Town Clerk Andi Silverstone tells me that this is required by law. In reality, as you can see, we had healthy surpluses in FY07 and FY08. This money does not disappear but goes into the general fund and remains available to the Town.
WaPo writer complains about turnout; does not look in mirror
Boy this one rates as dumb. Today's Maryland Moment (WaPo blog on MD politics) has writer Ann Marimow with a headline of How Low Can They Go in MoCo that highlights the 8% turnout in yesterday's election.
Ms. Marimow mentions that the turnout was around 8%, true. But my question is how can a reporter for WaPo point a finger at the low turnout when her paper did next to nothing to promote the race. Too busy letting us know what is going on in Iraq and on the Presidential campaign trail but consistently fails to cover local events.
Another Round of Being Punked by the Post
I mentioned this during the primary race between Al Wynn and Donna Edwards. There they have the most important test of mainstream Democrats and left Democrats as any race in the country and we got third rate coverage.
This time the race to replace Marilyn Praisner was decidedly smaller than the Wynn-Edwards race and the coverage reflected that. But the real complaint is the WaPo did next to nothing to cover the special election (the time between the primary and yesterday) and much of anything. I never saw an editorial from them. The Gazette had an editorial and it was less than three column inches buried in the lower right hand corner of the editorial page.
The WaPo was even worse. Tuesday's paper had a mention of the race in the Metro section on page 2 in the upper right hand side. It was not the lead story. Total length was two paragraphs.
So for Ms. Marimow to put a headline on her blog about how low the turnout can go in MoCo when her paper did next to nothing in covering the race I have to laugh. Then I wrote a blog piece how stupid the Maryland Moment blog post she wrote is.
Next time look in the mirror WaPo. I think we have be in Iraq or someplace in Europe for the Post to care about us.
Mike Miller is Not Going Anywhere
Recently, there has been a lot of speculation as to whether Senate President Mike Miller would stick to his earlier pledge to retire. We are putting this conjecture to rest with one bold prediction: Mike Miller is not going anywhere.
Have you ever met the Senate President? We did, back in January. The white-maned, snorting old bull stomps into any room he enters and instantly dominates it. But he does not radiate pomp or arrogance like many politicians. He instead relies on good-old-boy, Free State charm, delivered with a bellowing laugh and a rough handshake. Miller would be equally at home entertaining foreign dignitaries at the statehouse or slamming boilermakers down at the shipyard.
The Senate President regaled our group with tales of his dealings with the media. He expressed hope that the blogs could provide a bit of balance to right-wing radio “even though I know some of you are with me and some of you are against me.” And then he cast a long, baleful look around the room. Now I have heard from multiple sources that Miller is a blog reader. “Hmmm,” I thought, “Is he trying to figure out who wrote this?” Miller seemed a wee bit hurt, perhaps let down, that he could be so misunderstood by any of us. And that’s when it hit me: this is part of his bag of tricks.
Better than anyone, Mike Miller understands the volatile and fragile mix of ego, fear, hope, insecurity and the needy desire to be loved that defines most politicians. He knows how to push every one of those buttons. He praises obedient Senators as courageous. He predicts dire consequences for the wayward. He shuffles subcomittee chairmanships and vice-chairmanships like cards in an ever-winning hand. He elevates junior Senators above senior ones when they stick with the boss. A longtime Annapolis player told me, “We call him Big Daddy. When people screw up, he doesn’t get mad at them. Instead, he tells them he's ‘disappointed.’ No one wants to let Dad down.”
Miller is resented by many Montgomery County liberals because he is rabidly pro-slots and lukewarm at best on gay rights. But Miller is actually to the left of most of the county’s allegedly liberal delegation on progressive taxation. He also expressed his opposition to Virginia’s harsh immigration measures in our interview. Many liberals tend to forget that Miller has to balance a diverse group ranging from anti-tax Baltimore County Senator (and former Miller aide) James Brochin to left-wingers like Senators Paul Pinsky, Jamie Raskin and Rich Madaleno. Brochin and Madaleno are both in Miller’s doghouse now for different reasons, but they will get out eventually if they stop making trouble for the boss. That is part of Miller’s way.
What would a Miller-less Senate look like? For a preview, look at the Montgomery County Council’s current deliberations on its budget. Only a few days out from the first vote on the next budget’s outline, there was still no public agreement on how to cut the county’s $297 million deficit. The late Marilyn Praisner, the most feared head-breaker in Rockville, would have had none of that. Would this sort of thing happen to Maryland’s Senate without its fearsome overlord?
Mike Miller is surrounded by a huge group of Senate allies, aides, former aides, lobbyists, former aides who are now lobbyists and many others who are commonly referred to as his “family.” They depend on him and cannot imagine Annapolis without him. They are undoubtedly urging him to stay on because, after all, no one can do the job of Senate President as well as their Dad (or Grand-dad) can. If you were in Miller’s position, how could you say no to your entire family?
The fact is that Big Daddy is the most powerful politician in Maryland's nearly 400-year history to never occupy the Governor's chair. And whatever you may think of him, Mike Miller is not going anywhere.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Trifecta for Chris and DCCC
Hillary's win in West Virginia has dominated press coverage tonight but the story that should have Republicans quaking is that Democrats won the special election runoff for Mississippi's First District. Chris Van Hollen's DCCC has now won three special elections in Republican territory:
Illinois 14. Former Speaker Denny Hastert's district went 55% for Bush in 2004 and is now held by Democrat Bill Foster.
Louisiana 6. Democrats didn't even field a candidate against the incumbent in 2002, 2004, or 2006, but Democrat Donald Cazayoux now holds this district where Bush scored 59% of the vote in 2004.
Mississippi 1. Republican Roger Wicker never won less than two-thirds of the vote since his first election in 1994. Bush won 62% of the vote in 2004 here but Democrat Travis Childers won the seat tonight with 52% of the vote.
Update: The Washington Post stole my, admittedly not that original, headline.
Council Election Update
Update 2: 10:00 PM The BOE has 43 of the 45 precincts reporting and the figures are holding at 66% to 33%.
The victory garden in the front yard of Alison Praisner Klumpp's house.
Alison Praisner Klumpp and her dad and new Council member, Don Praisner, outside of her home.
Update 9:32 PM: With 26 out of 45 precincts reporting and Praisner leading 66% to 33% over Fennel, Mark called to concede to Don. Picture is below. More information to follow as I get it.
Long time no post. But I tried to get you some mid-day reports on turnout. This should hold you over until the results comes over at the MoCo BOE.
The 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM counts are listed below:
What this table points out is that the Others (Non-Affiliated) voters were not voting. And that the turnout by party is matching the turnout by party that is in the district.
In short, unless Mark Fennel can take 27% of the Democratic vote our next Council member will be Don Praisner.
More to follow....
The Limits of Labor
Ann Marimow is a good reporter and I respect her work. But in her Sunday Post article, “Union Influence Sways Montgomery Budget Talks,” I believe she overstates her case. Montgomery County labor has power, but that power has its limits.
This may seem a curious statement coming from me. After all, my now-notorious 2006 guest post in which I christened the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA) the county’s 800-pound gorilla has contributed to the image of labor power in Montgomery. The story behind that long-ago essay is that I was running a petition drive at my precinct and witnessed the extraordinary attention given by voters to MCEA’s Apple Ballot. I then calculated the 90% win percentage earned by Apple Ballot candidates in the Democratic primary and concluded that MCEA had played an important role in the election. That essay was originally intended only for my own union people and a few friends but found its way onto the Internet through third parties as a guest blog. And so began my descent into online infamy, an unhappy event lamented by many who have been spoofed here. While the point of that original post may be true, it presents only one side of the story.
Consider the following facts in assessing the limits of public union power:
1. Public employees in Montgomery County are not uniformly better paid than in other jurisdictions. I compared wages and benefits across jurisdictions in a post last month and found no systemic advantage for workers in Montgomery. In fact, firefighters and teachers lagged many other nearby counties, many Montgomery workers are not eligible for a defined benefit pension and even teachers with Masters degrees cannot afford to buy the average county townhouse. Is this a result you would expect from “Big Labor?”
2. In my 800-pound gorilla post, I wrote:With property tax growth slowing down, the next county council will face tough budgetary decisions. Public schools account for half of the county’s budget and would be an obvious location for cuts. But don’t expect any action there: the county’s politicians have learned that those who cross the Teachers Union once are unlikely to be given a second opportunity.
How wrong can a man be and still be allowed to blog? The fact is that County Executive Leggett has not recommended full funding for the public schools’ budget request in either of his first two years in office. Last year, the County Executive proposed $19.7 million less for the school budget than requested by the Superintendent. The County Council ultimately approved $6 million less than the school request. This year, the County Executive recommended $51 million less than the Superintendent’s request, of which $26 million has so far been restored by the County Council. The school unions have performed well in defending their budget but they are hardly untouchable.
3. SEIU Local 500 has so far been unsuccessful in persuading Montgomery College to terminate its “union avoidance” attorney. If the unions were truly all-powerful, the college’s actions would have been unthinkable.
4. Union-backed candidates do not automatically win. Many have noted the losses of school board candidate Alies Muskin and County Council candidate Nancy Navarro. But look back on 2006. Progressive Maryland President Elbridge James and teacher Melodye Berry were badly outraised and finished next-to-last in their delegate races despite being Apple-approved. MCEA could not save Ida Ruben from Jamie Raskin in the District 20 Senate race. And Apple Republican incumbents Howard Denis (County Council) and Jean Cryor (State Delegate) fell to Democratic challengers. Apparently George W. Bush had more sway with MoCo voters than did MCEA!
Pure union-only candidates struggle. Labor tends to do best when it backs candidates in concert with others. For example, a combination of union and civic support helped to elect County Council Members Duchy Trachtenberg and Marc Elrich and resulted in the eviction of Mike Subin. The real genius of the county’s labor strategists has been to pick candidates who are strong on their own merits and (hopefully) agree on union priorities. But even union-supported candidates sometimes stray, as has Council Member Trachtenberg – further evidence of the limits of labor power.
I will bet that most of our readers are not union members. “Why should I care about this?” you ask. Montgomery has always been a “you-get-what-you-pay-for” county. Our citizens have been willing to pay higher taxes than in other jurisdictions in a belief that higher service quality would result. Many Montgomery residents are employees or contractors of the federal government and easily see the relationship between funding and performance. Sometimes residents make common cause with unions in seeking county funding, as PTA members occasionally do with MCEA. By pressing for good compensation and adequate budgets, the unions help the county maintain its service level and recruit superior talent. Without strong unions, Montgomery’s politics might resemble those of infighting, school-challenged, crony-infested Prince George’s, or perhaps developer-, business- and tax-activist-dominated Northern Virginia.
Look into the eyes of this woman and read her sign. Labor is at its best when it presents her message to both the politicians and the public at large. Labor has power. Labor has limits. But labor, and the rest of the county, can only succeed if our citizens agree with the woman above.
Disclosure: The author is the Assistant to the General President of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, which does not represent government employees in Maryland.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
REVOLT!
In a moment that defined their political careers, Montgomery County Council Members Duchy Trachtenberg, Phil Andrews and Valerie Ervin put the fate of the public employees’ cost of living adjustments on the table last Friday. Present to greet them were over 300 chanting, stomping, clapping and occasionally yelling union members.
Council Members Trachtenberg, Andrews and Ervin are members of the council’s Management and Fiscal Policy (MFP) Committee. The committee’s charge on Friday was to discuss the extent to which savings on the county’s labor costs should be applied to fix its $297 million budget deficit. “Labor savings” ultimately means funding less for personnel costs than is called for in the county’s collective bargaining agreements: a practice derisively labeled by the unions as “contract busting.”
A word about the union members in the pictures. Assembled by pugnacious MCGEO President Gino Renne in the nearby County Executive Office Building, they were in no mood for “contract busting” and marched across a rain-soaked street to confront their council overseers. Their radioactive yellow battle color is not intended to please the eye and it certainly does not. It is designed to attract attention. They certainly received plenty of it on Friday.
Council Member Trachtenberg, chairwoman of the MFP Committee, opened the meeting with new transfer and recordation tax receipt numbers for April. Transfer and recordation taxes depend on property sales and they have been devastated by the recent collapse in the county’s real estate and construction market. According to Ms. Trachtenberg, the county received $13 million in transfer and recordation taxes in April 2008, down from $18 million in April 2007. For the year to date, transfer and recordation taxes totaled $138 million, down from $180 million the year prior. “Taxpayers are reaching a breaking point,” declared Ms. Trachtenberg and that justified a 2% reduction in the unions’ negotiated COLAs.
Council Member Andrews agreed. Citing the fact that personnel costs accounted for 80% of the county’s budget, he told the ornery union members, “What’s fair is to ask everyone to help.” As he has for months, he criticized the unions’ agreements as “unaffordable” and stated flatly, “I would not have negotiated the contracts that came over to us.” Supporting Ms. Trachtenberg, he said, “I believe that the 2% COLA reduction is a fair way to go.”
Pictures cannot do justice to the unholy din created by the roaring public employees. Hundreds of police officers, bus drivers, librarians, deputy sheriffs, correctional officers and park and planning workers rose to their feet to challenge Council Members Trachtenberg and Andrews. “What are you giving back?” one cried. “We are the taxpayers!” another yelled. “You’re hitting us twice!” pointed out one employee who was also a county resident. Worker after worker decried simultaneous increases in fuel and food costs, cuts in county services and proposed cuts in COLAs as a squeeze on their standard of living from multiple sides.
And then Ms. Ervin took the mike. She is a 25-year veteran organizer and trainer in the labor movement and everyone knew what she would say. “I was a proud member of the UFCW union,” she announced to the crowd. “We do not have to balance this budget on the backs of working people.” She recounted a bookful of statistics on poverty and income inequality to the groans of the audience (some of which we will examine on this blog) and concluded with, “Montgomery County is affluent for only some people.” “I believe that cutting salaries will hurt our local economy,” she said, “and I will not support a 2% COLA reduction.” We present the crowd’s reaction below.
In the end, the MFP Committee did not recommend a 2% COLA reduction. Instead, Ms. Trachtenberg introduced a motion calling for $40 million in “labor savings” with the exact mechanism to be decided later by the rest of the County Council. Mr. Andrews concurred and Ms. Ervin ferociously dissented. Neither the council members nor the staff justified this particular number against a lesser or greater amount. No mention was made by anyone of the unions’ identification of $67 million in additional revenues and savings as reported on this blog. The Post and the Gazette also omitted that fact from their coverage.
So what will become of the committee’s proposal for “labor savings,” a euphemism for underfunding the contracts? There do not appear to be any other votes on the council for the MFP Committee’s proposal, especially considering the fact that the union contracts are affordable in the next fiscal year. Instead, a rough consensus is forming in favor of a slightly lower property tax increase than that proposed by the County Executive along with a carbon tax proposed by Council Member Nancy Floreen. 
But even that plan involves breaking the county’s charter limit on property tax increases, which generally holds tax receipt gains to a level equaling the increase in the consumer price index. Seven of the eight County Council Members must vote to exceed that limit. Both Council Members Trachtenberg and Andrews oppose breaking the charter limit, enough to kill any property tax hike. Will either of them budge on that position, thus enabling the union contracts to be preserved? That is the big question. We will have an answer by Thursday.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Labor Between the Hammer and the Anvil
As Montgomery County's budget battle draws to a clamorous climax, a new bomb has been dropped.
Yesterday, Council Member Trachtenberg sent the following letter calling for a 2 percent cost of living reduction to each of the county's public sector unions:
The unions countered in two ways.
1. In a letter to Ms. Trachtenberg sent today, MCEA, SEIU Local 500 and the school supervisors listed $67 million in new revenues available to the council next year. Those revenues include:
$14 Million
Adjustments in OPEB [contributions to future retiree healthcare liabilities]; would allow for 8 year payout, but does not assume the same level of increase; $11 million in savings from MCPS and $3 million from other agencies.
$9 Million
Net gain from increases in energy tax [as proposed by Council Member Floreen].
$10 Million
Could be taken from PAYGO.
$19 Million
Reduction of .5% into the reserve [maintained by the county to protect its AAA credit rating].
$15 Million
Potential carry-over carry over funds that were set aside in the FY 08 budget for emergencies, such as snow removal that were not needed.
2. In their letter to Ms. Trachtenberg, the unions state, "An additional source of revenue is to take into account any revenues in excess of projections in the current budget. We have no knowledge of what that figure is since it has not been shared by the County Executive’s office." Indeed, rumors are flying that the county's income tax receipts may be higher than first thought. The unions have sent a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request to the County Executive's office seeking a monthly tabulation of new income tax revenues received from the state. They hope to discover evidence that income tax receipts are higher than projected, thus relieving the pressure on their contracts.
One of the sad aspects of this showdown is that it may not be necessary. A week ago, we demonstrated to our readers that the County Executive's budget projects $301 million in new revenues for FY09 against $154 million in added union labor costs. At least for next year, labor's cost of living adjustment is easily affordable. Nevertheless, the hammer is falling.
In the private sector, an employer could not do what the county is considering. If a private company attempted to unilaterally change a labor agreement, the union could strike, file unfair labor practice charges, get enforcement orders from the National Labor Relations Board and the courts and file suit to collect benefit contributions. Only employers under bankruptcy protection could unilaterally alter wage levels. Montgomery County may be in a recession, but it is not under the supervision of a bankruptcy judge!
The fate of the unions' COLAs is far from certain. Council Members Trachtenberg and Phil Andrews can block the County Executive's proposed property tax increase, which requires seven of the eight sitting council members to pass. But altering the union contracts would require five votes. It may be difficult for Ms. Trachtenberg and Mr. Andrews to find three more council members willing to cut the COLAs when there are less electorally-threatening alternatives available.
And if the council simultaneously rejects the property tax hike and rejects COLA reductions, what then? No one knows. But the choice must be made in less than a week.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
MCDCC to the Rescue
Folks, this is why we need a strong Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee. In addition to mailing out a sample ballot for Don Praisner in the County Council District 4 special election, MCDCC is putting out this call for volunteers on poll coverage.May 8, 2008
If you want to prevent Robin Ficker from joining the County Council staff, call MCDCC at 301-946-1000.
MCDCC Members:
We are approaching the Special General Election on Tuesday, May 13, 2008. It is vital that we have coverage for all precincts in this election.
I am asking the MCDCC members to support this effort by volunteering their time to help with poll coverage.
Please let us know the duration of time that you will be available. I understand that we all have a busy schedule, but we can give a portion of our time when the stakes are so high and the Republicans are running a very aggressive Get-Out-the-Vote operation.
The staff at the MCDCC office will be maintaining a precinct coverage spreadsheet that will have information regarding which precincts require coverage and the time frame for coverage needed.
By responding quickly, we can effectively make timely decisions to fill those precincts that are pending coverage.
You can help make this election run smoothly and demonstrate your support for the Council District 4 Democratic candidate, Don Praisner.
Please forward this email to your local Democratic District Clubs and ask them to send it to their databases.
Your continued commitment to supporting our Democratic Candidates is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Vivian
Governor, It’s Up to You
In a comment on my previous post calling for Maryland’s uncommitted super delegates to jointly announce their support for Senator Barack Obama, District 39 Delegate Saqib Ali said the following:Adam, Why do you only put the responsibility on the 9 unpledged Super-Delegates?
Delegate Ali makes a fair point. Maryland’s pro-Clinton super delegates are:
I agree that all the uncommitted Super Delegates should immediately endorse Senator Obama.
However the 11 Super Delegates who have previously pledged to Senator Clinton should also SWITCH to Senator Obama post-haste. It is their responsibility to heal the party every bit as much as the uncommitted SuperDs.
In fact if "The Clinton 11" switch, it would have a net effect of +22 for Obama. It would be a crushing blow. It would have a huge mathematical and psychological effect. It might end the nomination battle today.
So yes, the 9 uncommitted should join the Obama train. But even more important, The Clinton 11 should join too!
Governor Martin O’Malley
Senator Barbara Mikulski
Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger
State Treasurer Nancy Kopp
Former Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend
Alvaro Cifuentes, Former Chair, DNC Hispanic Caucus
Maria Cordone, Director of Community Services, International Association of Machinists
Richard Michalski, Vice President, International Association of Machinists
Glenard Middleton, President, AFSCME Council 67
Carol Pensky, Founder, DNC Women’s Forum
Michael Steed, Managing Director, Paladin Capital Group
We should note that both AFSCME and the Machinists have endorsed Senator Clinton. Since the Clinton Administration fought hard to pass NAFTA, which has devastated the Machinists, many of the rest of us in labor have been scratching our heads over their endorsement for many months.
The key figure in the above list is Governor O’Malley. He alone has the power to deliver most if not all of Maryland’s super delegates as a group, as Delegate Ali suggests. Some believe that the Governor has national ambitions. What better way to enter the national stage as a bold deliverer of the party from a continuing bloody primary fight?
There are more parochial reasons for the Governor to intervene. Maryland badly needs federal funding for its BRAC transportation projects, its three proposed transit projects (Baltimore’s Red Line and the Washington suburbs’ Purple Line and Corridor Cities Transitway) and further cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay. How would the Governor be better positioned in pursuing those funds? By sticking with a furious, increasingly ugly Clinton campaign to the bitter, losing end? Or by delivering victory in the primary to future President Obama?
Governor, it’s up to you. We are watching.
On Political Pulse
Washington Post writer Ann Marimow, who has written a series of articles on Montgomery County budget issues such as the $300 million deficit, will be on the 'Political Pulse' TV Show on Thursday, May 8th at 9 p.m. and Tuesday, May 13th at 9:30 p.m. Among other things, Ann will discuss the important votes that the County Council will take on the budget in the next 2 weeks.
Political Pulse is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.
Death Sciences versus Life Sciences
From Marc Korman: A few weeks ago, I heard District 18 Senator Rich Madaleno refer to the difference between Maryland’s and Virginia’s reliance on federal government spending as the difference between life sciences and death sciences. Maryland benefits when the government is investing in healthcare and scientific research, while Virginia benefits when the government invests in war and defense.
I thought it was an astute, and somewhat humorous observation. The question is, is it true?
Broadly speaking, it’s easy to look around and say yes. After all, Virginia has the Pentagon and we have the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, and the National Institute of Science and Technology. Looking at non-defense science more broadly, Maryland is also home to the Goddard Space Center. But how about if we take a closer look at some other measures of Maryland versus Virginia. Below are three categories to help us examine the issue.
First, we look at the value of government procurement contracts for the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, and NASA.
Second, we look at the location of the corporate headquarters for the top government contractors for those same government agencies.
Third, we examine how many military installations there are in Maryland and Virginia.
2006 Government Procurement Contract Dollars
Agency Maryland Virginia
Department of Defense 21,803,858 41,915,022
Homeland Security 1,000,833 3,002,026
Department of Health and
Human Services 3,634,797 556,061
NASA 1,314,526 79,506
Government Contractors
Of the top five defense contractors in 2007, one was based in Maryland and two were based in Virginia.
Defense Contractor Corporate Headquarters
Lockheed Martin Maryland
Boeing Illinois
Northrop Grumman California
General Dynamics Virginia
Raytheon Massachusetts
Of the top five homeland security contractors in 2007, one is located in Virginia and none are located in Maryland.
Homeland Security Contractor Corporate Headquarters
Integrated Coast Guard Systems Virginia (Note, this is a Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman Partnership)
IBM New York
L-3 Communications Holdings New York
Unisys Pennsylvania
SAIC California
Of the top five Department of Health and Human Services contractors in 2007, none were based in Maryland or Virginia.
Health and Human Services Contractor Corporate Headquarters
Merck New Jersey
Sanofi Pasteur Pennsylvania
GlaxoSmithKline Pennsylvania (US HQ)
Wyeth Pennsylvania
Bavarian Nordic No US HQ Listed
Of the top five NASA contractors in 2007, one is in Maryland and none are in Virginia.
NASA Contractor Corporate Headquarters
California Institute of Technology California
United Space Alliance Texas (Note, this is a Lockheed Martin and Boeing Partnership)
Lockheed Martin Maryland
Boeing Illinois
Jacobs Engineering Group California
Military Installations
There are seven active military bases in Maryland:
Bethesda Naval Center
Naval Station Annapolis
Naval Air Station Patuxent River
US Naval Academy
Andrews Air Force Base
Fort Meade
Fort Detrick
Aberdeen Proving Ground
There are fifteen active military bases in Virginia (does not include the Pentgon):
Little Creek Naval Amphibious Base
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
Norfolk Naval Station
Oceana Naval Air Station
Portsmouth Naval Medical Center
Yorktown Naval Weapons Station
Langley Air Force Base
Fort A.P. Hill
Fort Belvoir
Fort Eustis
Fort Lee
Fort Monroe
Fort Myer
Fort Story
Quantico Marine Base
Coast Guard Atlantic Area – Portsmouth
Cost Guard Integrated Support Center – Portsmouth
Coast Guard Reserve Training Center Yorktown
Cape Henry Inn and Beach Club
So what do these categories demonstrate? That the facts back up Senator Madaleno’s observation. Virginia receives far more in defense contract dollars than Maryland, and that category far outweighs other federal spending. Virginia also has more military installations, beginning with the Pentagon. However, Maryland does receive some benefit from increased security dollars, including the contribution from Lockheed Martin, one of the state’s largest employers with almost 10,000 people.
Overall, Maryland would benefit much more from increased investment in science, which will hopefully come with a Democratic Administration, while Virginia benefits far more from the military-industrial complex.
Robin Ficker Joins the County Council Staff
Of course this has not happened, but it might. Here’s how the Stella Werner building’s worst nightmare could come true.
Let’s put aside the ideological differences between County District 4 special election candidates Don Praisner and his Ficker-backed opponent, Mark Fennel. All elections boil down to mathematics in the end. And it is mathematically possible for Fennel to beat Mr. Praisner.
Consider the following statistics. In the District 4 special primary, 7,658 Democrats voted, of whom 3,391 voted for Mr. Praisner. The Republicans attracted 1,919 primary voters, of whom 926 voted for Fennel. That means Fennel has a chance if three things happen:
1. Democrats who voted for one of Mr. Praisner’s opponents do not show up for the general election.
Nancy Navarro’s supporters are still fuming about the negative attacks against their candidate. Steve Kanstoroom and Pat Ryan were both asked to leave early in the race by Mr. Praisner’s allies. None of these three has much incentive to encourage their people to vote for Mr. Praisner unless they hope to earn his endorsement in 2010 (and that will not happen for Navarro).
2. Only half of Mr. Praisner’s primary voters show up for the general election.
One of the things that stood out from both the phone banking and door knocking was that the vast majority of District 4 Democrats did not know there was a special primary. Who is reminding them that there is a special general on May 13th? MCDCC is stepping up with a mailing on behalf of Mr. Praisner. But we see less activity from his organization now than we did a month ago aside from a recent ice cream fundraiser. One anonymous but influential Praisner supporter told me, “Dem complacency now is very dangerous.”
3. Every Republican shows up again to vote for Fennel.
This possibility cannot be dismissed. Fennel’s de facto campaign manager, Robin Ficker, is the all-time MoCo champion of sign-planting and petition-gathering. Love him or hate him, no one has more energy than the maniacal Ficker. And the Republicans were never as divided as the Democrats in this race. Anti-tax Republicans would love to grab any elected office in the county regardless of whether the candidate is Fennel or someone else. A low-turnout special election may be their best opportunity.
If every one of the above events occurred, Fennel would defeat Mr. Praisner by a 1,919 to 1,696 vote, or a 53-47% spread. It would be the ultimate royal flush in MoCo political history.
So could it actually happen? The chances are extremely low, but they are greater than zero. It’s time for the Democrats to get back to work.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
The Mayor of Chevy Chase
Mier Wolf will not be returning to the Chevy Chase Town Council after an twelve terms of service to the Town. Mier and his wife, Cathy, always encouraged me and made me feel like a friend even when we were both running for the Council. I've always appreciated how his calm demeanor could deftly turn down the temperature in the most heated debates. His experience, knowledge, and warmth will be sorely missed on the Council.
Mier has had many, many accomplishments on the Council--too many to detail here--including serving as mayor of Chevy Chase for nine years. I know Mier is particularly proud of tenacious effort to protect the Capital Crescent Trail on the north side of Town. The Town Hall was constructed while he served on the Council. Although his children have graduated (and he just became a proud grandfather for the first time), Mier is still an active and engaged supporter of Rosemary Hills, Chevy Chase Elementary, and B-CC High School.
A class act and a role model even after a very tough election night when around twenty votes kept him from reelection, I received an extremely gracious call from Mier and Cathy this morning. Both congratulated me on my election to the Council, expressed their confidence in me, and wished me nothing but the best.
I hope the Town will continue to benefit from Mier's experience and knowledge in the years ahead. Even more, I hope the Council forges ahead in the same spirit of neighborliness, even temper, and love of the Town that characterized Mier's long service. I'm glad that Mier will remain active in the County.
And I'm sure the residents of the Town of Chevy Chase will continue to refer to him affectionately as "the Mayor of Chevy Chase" just as they have since he relinquished that title in 2004.
Enough is Enough
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is tough, smart and a hell of a campaigner. But after her crushing loss in North Carolina and narrow win in Indiana yesterday, it is clear that she will not be the Democratic nominee for President. To maximize the chances of beating Senator John McCain, it is time for the Democratic race to end. And the following nine Maryland residents can make that happen.
Now that 93% of the pledged delegates have been selected in the state primaries, the winner will be decided by the party’s super delegates. For the most part, they are sitting or former Senators, Congressmen, state and local elected leaders and state and national Democratic National Committee members. As of this writing, there are 795 super-delegates, of whom 271 are pledged to Hillary Clinton and 257 are pledged to Barack Obama. If the super delegates decide to support Senator Clinton, they will be overturning their own party’s popular vote. That is incomprehensible for a party that calls itself “Democratic.” Out of respect for their own voters and in the interest of taking the fight to the formidable Senator McCain, the party’s super delegates must state their support for Senator Obama. And they must do it now, before another Democrat-on-Democrat attack ad is broadcast or another self-inflicted wound to the party appears in the papers, the cable channels or YouTube.
Maryland has 29 super delegates, of whom 11 are pledged to Senator Clinton, 8 are pledged to Senator Obama and 10 are undecided. The 10 undecided super delegates are:
Senator Ben Cardin
Congressman John Sarbanes
Congressman Steny Hoyer
Congressman Chris Van Hollen
Susan Turnbull, Vice Chairwoman of the National DNC, Bethesda
John Gage, President, American Federation of Government Employees
Belkis Leong-Hong, President, Knowledge Advantage Inc., Gaithersburg
Heather Mizeur, State Delegate from District 20, Takoma Park
Gregory Pecoraro, City Council Member in Westminster
John Sweeney, President, AFL-CIO
Ms. Turnbull is unable to commit to a candidate because she is an officer of the national DNC, but the other nine are free to vote their conscience. It should not be a difficult choice. Maryland Democrats voted for Senator Obama by 60-36.5%. Senator Obama won 55% of the vote in both Congressman Sarbanes’ and Congressman Van Hollen’s districts and claimed a whopping 66% in Congressman Hoyer’s district. Delegate Mizeur’s State District 20 voted for Senator Obama by 64-35%.
Senator Clinton cannot win unless she convinces the party establishment to ignore its own rank and file – an unthinkable prospect that reminds us of George W. Bush’s “victory” in 2000. How many more attack ads, pot shots, innuendos and whisperings must we endure before marching into the real battle against the Republicans?
If the nine uncommitted Maryland super delegates above declare for Senator Obama on the same day, that could strike the final blow in the Democratic contest. Ladies and gentlemen, please do it – NOW. And then onward to victory in November.
Chevy Chase Election Results
The Town of Chevy Chase held its annual elections for the Town Council yesterday. It was a hotly contested election with record turnout in which the Town's new land-use ordinance was a major focus. Six candidates, including all three incumbents, ran for the three seats up for election.
I'm afraid I can't report on this one in a particularly unbiased way, since I was one of the candidates. The results came in after all of the (one) precincts were counted. I was pleased and honored to be one of the three people elected to the Council along with incumbent Kathy Strom and newcomer Al Lang.
This isn't really the place but I am thankful not just to all the many people in Town who supported and worked so hard for my election but to all of the people in Chevy Chase who took time to say hello and even invited me into their homes when I knocked unannounced, often in the middle of dinner or taking care of the kids.
I should give a special thanks to Jane Lawton, who is still enormously missed in the Town since her untimely death not long ago, and to Rich Madaleno. I learned a lot about running for office--mainly the importance of listening and treating people with respect even as you stand up for your beliefs--from both of them while working on their campaigns in 2006.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Who Really Opposes Slots? (Updated)
Marylanders United to Stop Slots recently released a list of 102 state leaders serving on its steering committee. Of the 15 State Senators and 52 Delegates who voted against last year’s slots referendum, only 12 have signed on for the anti-slots campaign.
The elected leaders on the steering committee are:
Congressman Wayne Gilchrest (R MD-1)
Comptroller Peter Franchot
Senator C. Anthony Muse (D-26, Prince George’s)
Senator Paul Pinsky (D-22, Prince George’s)
Delegate Curt Anderson (D-43, Baltimore City)
Delegate Joanne Benson (D-24, Prince George’s)
Delegate Elizabeth Bobo (D-12B, Howard)
Delegate Aisha Braveboy (D-25, Prince George’s)
Delegate Bill Bronrott (D-16, Montgomery)
Delegate Jill Carter (D-41, Baltimore City)
Delegate Marvin Holmes (D-23B, Prince George’s)
Delegate James Hubbard (D-23A, Prince George’s)
Delegate Tom Hucker (D-20, Montgomery)
Delegate Jolene Ivey (D-47, Prince George’s)
Delegate Gerron Levi (D-23A, Prince George’s)
Delegate Anthony McConkey (R-33A, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Karen Montgomery (D-14, Montgomery)
Delegate Victor Ramirez (D-47, Prince George’s)
Delegate Luiz Simmons (D-17, Montgomery)
Delegate Herman Taylor (D-14, Montgomery)
Delegate Michael Vaughn (D-24, Prince George’s)
G. James Benoit, Anne Arundel County Council Member
Will Campos, Prince George’s County Council Member
Joshua Cohen, Anne Arundel County Council Member
Nancy Howard, Ocean City Councilwoman
Glenn Ivey, State’s Attorney, Prince George’s County
George Leventhal, Montgomery County Council Member
Eric Olson, Prince George’s County Council Member
Ryan Spiegel, Gaithersburg City Councilmember
Bruce Williams, Takoma Park Mayor
Of the above state legislators, Delegates Bronrott, Hubbard, Hucker, Ivey, Ramirez and Vaughn voted in favor of the referendum and Delegate Montgomery was excused from the vote. That means that only 12 of 67 legislators who voted against the referendum, or 18% of the no-votes, have joined the anti-slots coalition.
Also notable is the fact that 13 of the 30 elected steering committee members are from Prince George’s County. Montgomery County, which is often described as a stronghold of slots opposition, only has nine members (counting the Comptroller). Absent from the list are all of the state’s County Executives.
The following state legislators voted against the slots referendum but have not joined the anti-slots campaign:
Senator David Brinkley (R-4, Frederick/Carroll)
Senator George Della (D-46, Baltimore City)
Senator Brian Frosh (D-16, Montgomery)
Senator Barry Glassman (R-35, Harford – a delegate at the time of the vote)
Senator Janet Greenip (R-33, Anne Arundel)
Senator Larry Haines (R-5, Baltimore County/Carroll)
Senator Andrew Harris (R-Baltimore County/Harford)
Senator Nancy Jacobs (R-34, Cecil/Harford)
Senator Allan Kittleman (R-9, Carroll/Howard)
Senator Alex Mooney (R-3, Frederick/Washington)
Senator E.J. Pipkin (R-36, Eastern Shore)
Senator Jamie Raskin (D-20, Montgomery)
Senator Bryan Simonaire (R-31, Anne Arundel)
Senator J. Lowell Stoltzfus (R-38, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39, Montgomery)
Delegate Susan Aumann (R-42, Baltimore County)
Delegate Charles Barkley (D-39, Montgomery)
Delegate Joseph Bartlett (R-4A, Frederick)
Delegate Gail Bates (R-9A, Howard)
Delegate Wendell Beitzel (R-1A, Garrett/Allegany)
Delegate Joseph Boteler III (R-8, Baltimore County)
Delegate Emmett Burns Jr. (D-10, Baltimore County)
Delegate Rudolph Cane (D-37A, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Robert Costa (R-33B, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Don Dwyer (R-31, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Adelaide Eckardt (R-37B, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Donald Elliott (R-4B, Carroll/Frederick)
Delegate William Frank (R-42, Baltimore County)
Delegate Ron George (R-30, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Jeannie Haddaway (R-37B, Eastern Shore)
Delegate J.B. Jennings (R-7, Baltimore/Harford)
Delegate Kevin Kelly (D-1B, Allegany)
Delegate Nicholas Kipke (R-31, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Ben Kramer (D-19, Montgomery)
Delegate Susan Krebs (R-9B, Carroll)
Delegate James Mathias Jr. (D-38B, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Susan McComas (R-35B, Harford)
Delegate Patrick McDonough (R-7, Baltimore/Harford)
Delegate Robert McKee (R-2A, Washington, since resigned)
Delegate Warren Miller (R-9A, Howard)
Delegate Heather Mizeur (D-20, Montgomery)
Delegate Peter Murphy (D-28, Charles)
Delegate LeRoy Myers Jr. (R-1C, Allegany/Washington)
Delegate Anthony O’Donnell (R-29C, Calvert/St. Mary’s)
Delegate Joseline Pena-Melnyk (D-21, Anne Arundel/Prince George’s)
Delegate Steve Schuh (R-31, Anne Arundel)
Delegate Christopher Shank (R-2B, Washington)
Delegate Tanya Thornton Shewell (R-5A, Carroll)
Delegate Michael Smigiel Sr. (R-36, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Richard Sossi (R-36, Eastern Shore)
Delegate Donna Stifler (R-35A, Harford)
Delegate Nancy Stocksdale (R-5A, Carroll)
Delegate Jeff Waldstreicher (D-18, Montgomery)
Delegate Mary Roe Walkup (R-36, Eastern Shore)
Delegate John Wood (D-29A, Charles/St. Mary’s)
Update:
In an interview on a Cumberland radio station, the Governor renewed his push for slots. According to the Sun:Gov. Martin O'Malley said today that if a referendum on slot machine gambling fails in November, "it'll be back to the drawing board with a lot of unpopular choices, and I don't think any of us wants to go there."
Monday, May 05, 2008
Nancy Floreen Calls for Across-the-Board Spending Cuts
Montgomery County Council Member Nancy Floreen challenged all county agencies to present a plan to cut their budgets by 2% below the County Executive's proposal on her blog today.
Floreen contends that a 2% across-the-board cut would enable the council to chop the County Executive's property tax increase in half. However, because she would still break the charter limit, her proposal would require seven votes to pass. Floreen argues:As far as I am concerned, the proposed tax burden is untenable, particularly for the average homeowner facing increased fuel, food and health care costs. I am afraid that this budget is way out of line. In today’s economy, it is unaffordable... I know my colleagues have put their hearts into trying to limit spending. But I don’t believe we have gone far enough. Our neighbors in Fairfax County, the District of Columbia, and Prince George’s County are looking at budget increases of no more than 1.3%. We in Montgomery County need to join the rest of the region in looking toward a more sustainable budget.
It is impossible to overstate the turmoil going on in Rockville right now over the budget. Two council members - Duchy Trachtenberg and Phil Andrews - oppose a property tax increase, enough votes to kill it. Council Member Trachtenberg is eyeing the county's labor contracts for savings. The County Council's Education Committee voted to restore $26 million for public schools and $9.1 million for Montgomery College last week. How can resistance to the property tax hike, increases for education, adherence to union contracts and Floreen's call for across-the-board cuts be reconciled?
We'll find out soon enough. Zero hour for the budget is next week.
Gays vs. the Governor
The Sun reported yesterday on growing dissatisfaction among gays against Governor O’Malley. But in fact, resentment towards the Governor has been building inside the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community for at least eight months.
Last September, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that state law forbids same-sex marriage. While the Governor did not have a hand in the ruling itself, he released this statement to the Washington Blade: I look forward to reading the Court's full opinion, but as we move forward, those of us with the responsibility of passing and enforcing laws have an obligation to protect the rights of all individuals equally, without telling any faith how to define its sacraments… I respect the Court's decision.
Gays across the state immediately took this as a betrayal. What did the court’s decision on civil marriage have to do with any religion’s sacraments? And why did the Governor fail to include a right to marriage as one of the rights that should be protected for “all individuals equally?” The plaintiffs in the marriage lawsuit immediately unveiled emails sent to them by the Governor expressing his support for marriage rights as recently as August 2005. Blade editor and blogger Kevin Naff fumed: As gay Marylanders were reeling from the high court decision upholding the state’s marriage ban – shedding tears and canceling wedding plans – the governor released a statement that didn’t offer sympathy or condolences. Instead, he said he respected the court’s decision – an opinion unparalleled in its gratuitously offensive language – and that lawmakers shouldn’t tell religions how to define the sacraments.
Neither marriage nor civil unions passed in the 2008 general session, but bills providing gay partners the right to visit each other in the hospital and limited exemptions from some property taxes did pass. One sticking point was on partnership benefits for state employees. The Governor says the state cannot afford them despite the fact that their cost – about $3 million per year – equals approximately 0.02% of the state’s general fund. That helped to prompt this comment from one of the state’s most prominent gay rights leaders:
With that statement, O’Malley kicked us all at a time when we were down and we should not forget it. No more gay money. No more gay votes. No more door-to-door gay support or green bumper stickers or yard signs. After distinguishing himself as a brash young politician of a new generation, he has revealed himself to be a typical climber, so blinded by national ambition that he would break any promise to pad his resume and preserve his power.“There's just not a lot to be enthusiastic about, because the governor hasn't done much to help us move forward,” said Dan Furmansky, director of Equality Maryland, a leading gay rights group. “Why did the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community work so hard to elect this person? What do we have to show for it at this point?”
Make no mistake: marriage equality is inevitable, regardless of O’Malley’s calculations and vacillations. Perhaps it will come to pass under Governor Doug Gansler.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Wanted: Democrat for Board of Elections
MCDCC Vice Chairman Alan Banov sent us this announcement. Time is of the essence on this one!
Vacancy on the County Board of Elections
The Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee requests applications to fill a vacancy in the Montgomery County Board of Elections, which was created by the resignation of Mary Carter-Williams as a member of that Board on April 24.
The County Board of Elections consists of five regular members (3 Democrats and 2 Republicans) and two substitute members (1 Democrat and 1 Republican). The Chair is Sam Statland, and the other Democrats are John Sullivan and Jerry Garson. Mr. Garson was the substitute member and has become a voting member of the board by virtue of Ms. Carter-Williams's resignation.
At its regular meeting on May 13, 2008, the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee will vote to nominate a candidate to be the new Democratic substitute member. The Members of the Board of Elections serve for a four-year term and oversee the operations of the Board. Their work requires attendance at regular monthly meetings and considerable work, day and night, in the periods before, during, and after primaries and general elections.
MCDCC is soliciting applications from registered Democrats who wish to serve as substitute Election Board member.
To Apply: Please send a letter of interest and a resume or biographical sketch to the MCDCC at 3720 Farragut Avenue, Suite 303, Kensington, MD 20895-2195, or e-mail or fax them to MontgomeryDems@msn.com or 301-946-1002. The deadline to apply is 12:00 noon, Friday, May 9. Applicants will be interviewed by a committee of the MCDCC, starting at 7:30 p.m., May 12, in the order in which applications are received. Applicants will be notified on the afternoon of May 9 about the times of the interviews. Minorities, as well as women, are encouraged to apply.
Alan Banov (Legalrun@aol.com) and Karen Czapanskiy (KarenSyma@yahoo.com), are the chair and co-chair, respectively, of MCDCC Board of Elections Review Committee. Also serving on the committee are MCDCC Secretary Elliot Chabot and MCDCC Member Milt Minneman. The committee will make its recommendations at the May 13 MCDCC meeting. Applicants will be invited to appear at that meeting, but will not be expected to say anything more than to introduce themselves. The MCDCC will recommend that Governor Martin O'Malley appoint its selected candidate to the vacancy.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Maryland AFL-CIO Backs Slots
In a development that surprised no one, both the Maryland/District of Columbia AFL-CIO and the Metropolitan Baltimore AFL-CIO announced their backing of slots today.
The Sun carried this classic quote:"The main reason we're doing this is because of jobs, and that's what the hell we're supposed to do," said Ernie Grecco, president of the Metropolitan Baltimore Council AFL-CIO. He noted that racetracks such as Pimlico are "wall to wall" union facilities. "We're going to be contacting our members and asking them in November to get out there and vote for slot machines."
Jobs, jobs, jobs! Now that's a union guy talking!
The pro-slots side has been picking up momentum in the last couple months by earning support from the Maryland State Teachers Association, the Maryland Association of Counties and the Maryland Chamber of Commerce. But the AFL-CIO's endorsement does not mean that labor is monolithically pro-slots. MCEA resisted the state teachers board's pro-slots vote and one of the leaders of the anti-slots campaign is Chuck Graham, business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 26.
As a fellow building trades guy, I cannot resist asking this question. If the IBEW is opposed to the casinos, do the other trades get to perform the electrical work if the casinos go up?
Challenge to the Unions, Part Two
In Part One, we reported on County Council Member and Management and Fiscal Policy Chairwoman Duchy Trachtenberg’s letter to public employee union MCGEO offering a choice between layoffs and COLA reductions. Today we examine whether those measures are justified by the county’s dire budget situation.
Concerned over the county’s long-run finances, Council Member Trachtenberg asked council staff for an estimate of the future obligations to the county imposed by its public employee union contracts. Two weeks later, the County Council’s merit staff director responded with a 129-page memo outlining those costs. Page 2 of the memo contained this statement:Councilmember Trachtenberg has requested information on agency compensation costs over time. One measure of these costs is the cumulative fiscal impact of the current or pending three-year negotiated agreements with the six County and MCPS unions, starting with the base year. See the fiscal impact statements on pages 37-39 and 111-113. The cumulative fiscal impacts are $117.9 million for MCGEO [government employees], $45.4 million for the FOP [police], $37.2 million for the IAFF [fire fighters], $61.9 million for non-represented employees in County Government, and $577.7 million for MCPS.
Are these marginal costs really accurate? We looked up the supporting data on pages 37-39 and 111-113, which correspond to pages 53-55 and 127-129 in the pdf document. Following is our tabulation of all marginal costs reported.
The total of these amounts, $840.1 million, does not include higher ongoing costs for health benefits for active and retired employees, nor does it include the $1.2 billion cost of the proposed eight-year pre-funding schedule for future retiree health benefits.
The marginal costs for each of the employee categories amount to $134 million in FY08, $176 million in FY09, $225 million in FY10 and $21 million in FY11 for a total of $557 million over the four years. (The estimate is low for FY11 because only the fire fighters’ agreements cover that year.) This total is much lower than the $840 million reported on the second page of the staff report, even though that summary refers to the pages tabulated above. There is simply no data in those pages to justify the $840 million estimate.
Furthermore, marginal cost data for FY08 should not be construed as a future obligation faced by the county. FY08, the current fiscal year, expires on 6/30/08. Those costs have mostly been paid already.
Finally, the analysis includes marginal costs due to fire and rescue management and non-represented employees. Why should the unions be held responsible for additional spending on employees they do not represent?
Subtracting out costs for the almost-expired FY08, the fire and rescue management and the non-represented employees, the remaining future obligations faced by the county total $154 million in FY09, $193 million in FY10 and $20 million in FY11, or a combined $368 million. This is a far cry from the $840 million cited at the beginning of the staff report.
Are added salary costs of $150-200 million per year sustainable? The answer depends on the county’s economic performance and the county government’s revenue collections. According to revenue statistics released by the County Executive, revenues collected by the county are projected to rise by $109 million in the current fiscal year (between 7/1/07 and 6/30/08). That overall rise in receipts occurred despite the facts that a) county receipts from the real property transfer tax dropped from $107 million to $80 million (down 25%), b) receipts from the recordation tax dropped from $73 million to $53 million (down 27%) and c) the county may have entered a recession. The above means that even in a really bad year, the county’s revenues continued to rise.
The County Executive’s proposal projects a further rise in receipts in FY09 of $301 million, partially due to his property tax increase. This would be more than enough to pay the $154 million in extra costs associated with the union contracts. At least for next year, the county should be able to meet its labor obligations if it adopts a budget similar to the County Executive’s recommendation.
As for the future, the most volatile components of the county’s revenues are the two tied to real estate sales: the real property transfer tax and the recordation tax. According to the county’s Department of Finance, residential real estate sales volume averaged over $500 million per month from 2006 through the first eight months of 2007. Since then, residential real estate sales volume has averaged between $200 and $300 million per month. It is this collapse in residential real estate transactions that has caused many of the county’s current budget problems. All policymakers – both inside the government and inside the unions – should watch this figure in the Finance Department’s monthly economic updates. If it rises back up to $400 million per month or more, the county’s real property transfer and recordation taxes will begin to recover. If it falls further, tougher times are ahead.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Challenge to the Unions, Part One
In a story first reported by the Washington Post’s Ann Marimow, Montgomery County Council Member and Management and Fiscal Policy Committee Chairwoman Duchy Trachtenberg has written to UFCW Local 1994 (MCGEO), one of the county’s public employee unions, offering a choice between layoffs or smaller pay increases. We reproduce the letter and discuss its importance below.April 29, 2008
The letter is a dramatic development in the county’s budget crisis for several reasons.
Gino Renne, President
UFCW Local 1994 MCGEO
600 S. Frederick Ave., Ste. 200
Gaithersburg, MD 20877
Dear Mr. Renne:
In light of the difficult decisions County Council faces for the upcoming budget, I am turning to elected union leadership for counsel during this process.
The strong advantage of having union represented county employees is that the union structure, through its elected leadership, is an excellent conduit to reach out to the rank and file. It is important to each councilmember to hear and respect what options county and school employees would prefer as the Council balances the interests of residents across Montgomery County while making our final budget decisions. Without unions in place, this process would be much more difficult.
With the uncertainty of the County Council’s willingness to break the charter limits and concerns over jeopardizing our AAA credit rating, we may well not have the revenue needed to execute the current CBAs [collective bargaining agreements] without invoking their provisions for Reductions in Force. In an abundance of caution, I want to begin a conversation about all available options that might come forward to avoid force reductions as we face the budget deficit.
I am reaching out for an honest and open discussion of options to address our budget deficit. This invitation is extended to MCGEO, SEIU 500, FOP [police], IAFF [fire fighters] and MCEA [teachers]. To facilitate our discussion, below is a list of ideas that have come to my attention that warrant a response from organized labor. You are all invited to submit a memo outlining your concerns and options you feel will be acceptable to the county and school system employees you all represent.
1. If your members were given a choice between a reduction in COLA [cost of living adjustment] or involuntary layoffs through each contract’s provisions for Reduction in Force, which option do you think your rank and file would find most acceptable?
2. The County Executive projects only 58 employees will take an early retirement buyout option. Do you concur with this position, or do you believe there is more demand for this option? What are the best ways to structure these offers to make them more appealing to your members?
3. Would you have members interested and able to participate in a voluntary layoff program that would protect their seniority and health insurance while they drew unemployment for six months? Would there be more interest if this option could be used as a way to bridge a member to retirement?
4. During the District 4 Special Democratic Primary, Don Praisner proposed an extensive labor management cooperation program to help identify savings, much in the same manner as MCGEO’s letter to council. Would your members be interested in such a program?
These questions by no means limit our conversation. For further clarification of this request and any other questions you may have, please contact Eric Hensal through my office. Eric is a former union organizer with a depth of experience in labor issues and a Masters of Public Administration earned through the National Labor College. I am sure you will find Eric an excellent resource as we all chart a course through the current budget crisis.
Cordially,
Duchy Trachtenberg
Chair, Management and Fiscal Policy Committee
cc: Honorable Ike Leggett, County Executive
Honorable Mike Knapp, Council President
Honorable Phil Andrews, Council Vice-President
Steve Farber, Council Staff Director
1. There are only about two weeks to go before the County Council begins voting on the FY09 budget. This letter to the unions comes late in the game. As recently as April 9, the Gazette reported that Council Member Trachtenberg “said the contracts with county employees should be honored.”
2. When Ms. Trachtenberg refers to “the uncertainty of the County Council’s willingness to break the [property tax] charter limits,” she is referring to a situation over which she has some control. After all, Ms. Trachtenberg told the Gazette, “I do not support going over the charter limit.” Added to Council Member Phil Andrews’ opposition to the property tax increase, the tax hike is in real danger of not passing because it requires seven of the current eight council votes. Ms. Trachtenberg’s opposition to the property tax hike may in fact be creating a need for the sort of choices she is now offering the unions.
3. The reference to Eric Hensal is noteworthy. Hensal lost a special election in Takoma Park to fill Marc Elrich’s vacant city council seat and went on to manage Don Praisner’s District 4 County Council campaign. During the District 4 campaign, the Post reported that Hensal was seen entering the County Council building for lunch appointments with staffers for Marilyn Praisner and Ms. Trachtenberg. Has he now been hired as council staff or as a consultant by Ms. Trachtenberg? If he is a consultant, a reference to him in the letter is very unusual. Why would a sitting council member allow a third-party consultant to speak for her on such a vital matter as employee layoffs or COLA reductions?
But there is more. The public sector unions have not forgotten Don Praisner’s frequent criticism of their contracts during the special election. Nor have they forgotten how the Praisner campaign branded union-backed Nancy Navarro as a “special interest” candidate. Are any of the unions likely to view Mr. Praisner’s campaign manager as a desirable interlocutor for labor relations issues?
4. Ms. Trachtenberg gained a famous fan through her letter: none other than Robin Ficker. On Maryland Moment, Ficker squealed with delight:Trachtenberg is just the kind of person I like---one tough cookie when she wants to be. Continue asking the tough questions Duchy. Social security recipients get a 2.3% increase in 2008 with NO step increases. I loved Charles Barkley. I would ask him, “Charles I know you want to run for Governor of Alabama, but before I vote for you I want to know your views on the economy, NAFTA and healthcare.” He would reply, “Well, I do have a view on the death penalty----they should use it on you!” Trachtenberg reminds me of Barkley.
All of the above is subject to one awful truth: the county is facing a $297 million budget deficit and the County Council has two weeks to go before the tough votes come. Ms. Trachtenberg did not create this deficit and the problems are real. In Part Two, we will examine whether the county can meet its contractual obligations to the unions in the current budget environment.
