Wednesday, August 19, 2009
The Economic Engine of Maryland, Part One
Barry C. Watkins, CEO and president of Fidelity & Trust Bank, 6/10/05:
Montgomery County is a powerful economic engine.Former Governor Robert Ehrlich on Montgomery County, 5/18/02:
It's the economic engine of Maryland.Royce Hanson, Chairman, M-NCPPC, 12/22/08:
The I-270/MD 355 Corridor has become the economic engine of Maryland, helping position Montgomery County for leadership in America’s knowledge-based economy.Senate President Mike Miller on Montgomery County, 6/1/07:
It’s like Never Neverland for other legislators of the state.Senator Rona Kramer (D-14), 9/22/07:
The rest of the state needs to understand that if they make Montgomery County too expensive to live, there are very comfortable alternatives right across the river in Northern Virginia where they have excellent school systems and much lower taxes… We’ve never said we don't want to help the rest of the state, but you can’t hit us so hard that we can no longer function appropriately and think we’ll remain the economic engine for the rest of the state.The term “economic engine” has been used for Montgomery County so often that it has begun to lose its meaning. Many people say it. Few say it with any real purpose. Very few understand why the county has this role. And only a tiny handful are beginning to say in public what is really happening:
This engine is wearing down. And if it breaks, the state will stop moving.
In this series, we connect the dots for you, our readers, the current and future decision-makers of the Free State. How important is the county to the state’s economy? How does it match up against its competitors? How has it performed against them? What does it cost the state to support the county’s efforts to compete? And what happens to Maryland if Montgomery County fails?
We will begin our story in Part Two.
MACO Mushroom Cloud (Updated)
At present, about 75% of all traffic to this site consists of direct entries to "Pols Party While Budget Burns." The post has now been linked by WBAL, the Ron Smith Show, the Shari Elliker Show, the Washington Post's Maryland Moment, the Examiner, Inside Charm City, O'Malley Watch, Salisbury News and the Maryland Senate Republican Caucus. This post is on its way to being the most-viewed piece in the history of MPW.
The insiders have totally missed the boat on how huge this story really is for the O'Malley administration.
Update: Now it's on Explore Baltimore County, the Baltimore Sun Forums, Newszap Forums and the Examiner (again).
Update 2: The post peaked at 78% of our traffic and produced the most-visited day in the history of MPW on Wednesday, 8/19/09.
A Single Track to Disaster
In order to make the Red Line viable for federal funding, the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) chose to single-track a one-mile tunnel under Cooks Lane in western Baltimore. MTA itself has made the case for why single-track lines compromise service, passenger capacity, future growth and operational and maintenance flexibility. Here’s what they left out: single-track tunnels are not as safe as double-track tunnels. Not by a long shot.
The above picture shows what happened in Chatsworth, California, a Los Angeles suburb, about one year ago. According to the Associated Press, a freight train collided with a passenger train near a single-track tunnel. The passenger train was supposed to wait near a siding outside the tunnel but did not. The collision occurred close to the tunnel entrance.
Wikipedia provides the following account: The 2008 Chatsworth train collision occurred at 16:22 PDT (23:22 UTC) on Friday September 12, 2008, when a Union Pacific freight train and a Metrolink commuter train collided head-on in the Chatsworth district of Los Angeles, California, in the United States. The scene of the accident was a curved section of single track on the Metrolink Ventura County Line just east of Stoney Point.
USA Today reported that the collision was the deadliest in the United States since an Amtrak crash in 1993. The newspaper said this about the accident:
Before the collision, the Metrolink train may have run through a red signal before entering a section of single track where the opposing freight train had been given the right of way by the train dispatcher. The Metrolink train’s engineer was near the end of a work week of long split shifts, making fatigue a subject of the investigation, along with distraction from text messages he was sending while on duty. The accident remains under investigation; meanwhile the basic circumstances have been released to the public, but the official report determining probable cause is expected to take up to a year to complete.
This mass casualty event brought a massive emergency response by both the city and county of Los Angeles, but the nature and extent of physical trauma taxed the available resources. With 25 deaths, this became the deadliest accident in Metrolink’s history. Many survivors remained hospitalized for an extended period. Lawyers quickly began filing claims against Metrolink, and in total, they are expected to exceed a US$200 million liability limit set in 1997, portending the first legal challenges to that law. Issues surrounding this accident have also initiated and reinvigorated public debate on a range of topics including public relations, safety, and emergency management, which has also resulted in regulatory and legislative actions.The collision occurred on a bend in the track just before a tunnel along the Metrolink track in the Chatsworth section of Los Angeles' San Fernando Valley.
Chatsworth is far from the only single-track tunnel disaster in recent times. In January 2003, a French passenger train collided with an Italian passenger train in a single-track tunnel near the two countries’ border. Two Italians died. In June 2000, two trains collided at the entrance to a single-track tunnel in Zugspitze, Germany. Fifty-seven people were injured, including one man who “was flown to a hospital by helicopter after rescue workers freed his crushed legs from the wreckage.” In August 1993, twelve people were killed when a passenger train collided with a goods train in a tunnel near Vega de Anzo, Spain. Many more crashes have occurred on single-track lines not involving tunnels, including at Pecrot, Belgium (2001); Glasgow, Scotland (1989); Dahlerau, Germany (1971); Violet Town, Australia (1969); and countless others in decades before.
The line consists of only a single track heading into the narrow tunnel in a residential area.
“Thank God it (the crash) wasn’t in the tunnel — there’d be a lot more killed,” said Lt. Cheryl MacWillie, watch commander for the coroner’s office.
In March 2003, Terje Andersen and Borre Paaske published a study comparing the safety records of single tunnels to double tunnels for international risk manager DNV Consulting. They were specifically interested in smoke levels from fires. Below is their finding for smoke levels in a double tunnel, with red marking the highest smoke levels and blue marking the lowest levels:
Below is their finding for smoke levels in a single tunnel, with red marking the highest smoke levels and blue marking the lowest levels:
When Andersen and Paaske compare the fatality risk of single and double tunnels, single tunnels FAR surpass double tunnels in all scenarios. For the longest tunnels (much longer than the one planned in Baltimore), single tunnels actually have a higher fatality risk than passenger cars.
All of the above information is easily available to transportation planners and railway engineers, not to mention the general public. The Maryland Transit Administration either knew or should have known of the dangers associated with single-track tunnels at the time they proposed one for the Red Line. If they actually construct a single-track tunnel in Baltimore, they risk a disaster that could surpass Chatsworth or WMATA and join the ranks of the deadliest rail accidents in American history.
Is it worth it?
The MACO Moment (Updated)
Blog traffic is burning up over the party-time photos from last week’s Maryland Association of Counties (MACO) meeting. This is turning into one hot August.
First of all, let’s make one thing clear: schmoozing and networking are legitimate parts of both the political and lobbying professions. That is how relationships are established, information is exchanged and compromises are worked out. MACO, and other events of its kind, serves to lubricate the gears of governance. The problem is that in this case there may have been a little too much lubrication.
The politicians in the early photos are guilty of doing little more than socializing with each other. None of them participated in the shot-splattered barbarity of the later photos. Through sheer bad luck, pictures of their harmless socializing wound up in the same Facebook album with the frathouse frolicking of the Governor’s staff. They have legitimate cause for grievance with the Governor’s failure to control his camera-happy, drunken underlings.
And that failure is spreading across the state like wildfire. Monday was the sixth-most-visited day in the history of MPW and Tuesday was the seventh-most visited day. That was primarily because every corner of the state piled into that booze-soaked blog post. That’s remarkable given that August is usually our worst month. It’s also noteworthy because not a single mainstream media source or conservative blog(!) has yet covered the story.
This presents two problems for the Governor and the Democratic Party.
Messaging
The Governor’s press people have worked hard to control how the mainstream media has covered the MACO conference and the next round of budget cuts. He persuaded both the Post and the Sun to write about his poring over thousands of residents’ suggestions for budget cuts. That deftly shifted the coverage away from devastating cuts and towards the Governor’s practice of grass-roots democracy. The Post also wrote articles describing MACO as “low key” and “sober.” The uniform message was that the Governor, his staff and his allies were serious-minded policy-makers undertaking the difficult work of government at the direction of the citizenry.
The MACO imagery shows otherwise. It depicts the leadership of the Democratic Party preening in full plumage right before announcing a half-billion dollars in cuts for services that go mostly towards working-class and poor people. It also shows that the Governor’s staff, far from being “frugal” while studiously viewing the people’s budget suggestions, were instead much more interested in viewing the bottoms of shot glasses and liquor bottles.
Budget cuts won’t kill the Democrats. Hypocrisy might.
Tax Money
Most of the events at MACO were sponsored and financed by lobbyists. But we hear that many county officials may have used public money to pay for registration and rooms. At least one local leader also brought a security detail.
Earlier this month, we reported that Montgomery County Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg used county money to pay part of the cost of a three-week training she attended at Harvard. Upon her return, she declared, “We’ll have to tighten our belts, and we cannot wait until next May to do so.” (A lot of public employees have seen that blog post.) Some politicians defend their right to use public money so they can attend “trainings.” But let’s be honest – no one ever voted for a candidate while thinking, “He might be a pretty good public servant if only he took a couple more classes.”
Appearances matter a lot in tough times like these. Politicians at all levels are telling the voters that every cent of public spending must be scrutinized, and they are right. But they must start with their own offices’ expenditures if they are to have any credibility in making that argument. The publicly-funded trainings, trips and junkets must end until the budget crisis is over. And in this atmosphere, anything resembling Delegate Jon Cardin's incredible blunder is especially crippling. Remember, hypocrisy kills.
The silver lining is that all of this could have been worse. We hear that one prominent state leader traveled to MACO with an entourage of leggy twenty-something females. If any photos had been released of what one source calls “the hoochie-mama harem,” well... you get the picture.
Update: That silver lining is looking tarnished. O'Malley Watch has linked to the story. We recommend that all politicians read the comments on their post.
MoCo Republican Chair Mark Uncapher on "Political Pulse" on Ch. 16 TV
Mark Uncapher, the Chairman of the Montgomery County Republican Party, will be on the "Political Pulse" TV Show on:
Thurs, August 20th at 9 p.m;
Fri, Sat. and Sunday (August 21st-23rd) at 6:00 p.m.; and
Tues., August 25th at 9:30 p.m.
Topics that will be discussed include the 2010 races and issues that the Republican Party will focus on and also the state of the Party in Montgomery County and Maryland.
Political Pulse is on Channel 16 TV in Montgomery County.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Leggett Defies Council, Delegation on Helicopters (Updated)
In blatant defiance of both the County Council and the Montgomery Delegation, the Leggett administration has decided to proceed with its acquisition of police helicopters. A source with knowledge of this decision states, "It is confirmed that the county has acquired two helicopters and assigned an officer to an informal 'aviation' job. They are going to keep the helicopters at the M-NCPPC Norwood facility."
We await the blowback. No doubt, the Lords of Annapolis are celebrating as they plot to hand down teacher pensions. After all, if MoCo can afford helicopters, why not pensions too?
Update: The Examiner confirmed our story.
Senator Frosh Proposes Anti-I-270 Letter
Senator Brian Frosh (D-16) is circulating a proposed Montgomery Senate Delegation letter calling for alternatives to the I-270 project.
Senator Frosh is not a member of the Senate's Budget and Taxation Committee. If he was, he might understand that transit and highway projects are financed by different federal agencies and that money does not transfer dollar-for-dollar from one mode to the other. Furthermore, let's put aside the merits - or demerits - of the I-270 project for a moment. Why would we be daft enough to even hint to the state that we don't want a big transportation project?
Following is the text of the letter. We do not yet know who, if anyone, has agreed to sign it.
The Honorable Martin O’Malley
The State House
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Dear Gov. O'Malley:
Your administration identified an important priority for Maryland by setting the goal of a substantial increase in transit ridership. New transit lines will remove traffic from our congested highways, improving the environment while they give harried commuters more time with their families. Transit also opens the door for economic progress; existing stations are rare bright spots in the current collapse of construction activity, and in the future transit lines can help revitalize our older urban centers.
The Department of Transportation's current I-270 Corridor Study may offer a valuable opportunity for progress toward the objective of more effective transit. The I-270 corridor has been a center of both economic growth and traffic congestion, and MDOT is evaluating options for relieving the congestion. To date, all options evaluated in this study have devoted well over two-thirds of projected construction funding to road capacity expansion. The Action Committee for Transit has developed the attached alternative, comparable in cost, that consists entirely of transit improvements.
The large transportation investments proposed along I-270 will take years to implement, and they will shape the development of the corridor for decades. There is time to decide carefully and wisely. We request that you ask MDOT to add the all-transit alternative to this study. After a complete range of options is evaluated, policy-makers and the public will be able to choose the solutions that are best for our communities, our economy, and our environment.
Sincerely,
People with Developmental Disabilities at Risk of Losing Services
By Laura Howell, Executive Director, Maryland Association for Community Services.
Developmental disabilities, like Down Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy and Autism, begin in childhood and prevent people from living independently without substantial help. Over 22,000 adults and children with developmental disabilities receive community based services, including residential, employment and day programs. Over 19,000 people with developmental disabilities are on the State’s Waiting List for these same services, and thousands of people waiting are in crisis.
When state coffers were full, the State largely neglected these important services, both refusing to provide minimally adequate inflation rates, and limiting access to services for people, many of whom continue to be in crisis.
Because Maryland now faces serious fiscal challenges, policy-makers want everyone to “share the pain.” This would be a more equitable proposition if people with developmental disabilities had shared in the good times as well, but this did not happen.
One in three developmental disability providers already have a negative operating margin. If the state cuts funding for services that are already significantly under-funded, it will create a severe crisis. Likely repercussions will include discontinuation of services for some people, especially those with significant disabilities, discharging of people who require uncompensated care, and closing of programs that are no longer fiscally viable. In addition, the basic safety and health of some people with disabilities may be jeopardized.
Some argue that if state employees must feel the pain, so too should direct support staff in the community. However, the workers in the community continue to earn far less that their counterparts in state institutions. Whereas the state reimburses community providers $9.18 per hour for direct support workers, recent job postings showed starting wages of $12.42 per hour for state employees. Although efforts by the State and providers to raise the low wages of community-based staff have improved the situation, community staff still lag behind their state peers. Telling community workers to “share the pain” will only push the best employees to better-paying jobs in other community settings, such as nursing homes and assisted living providers, and people with disabilities will suffer.
Lastly, reducing access to essential care and supports will ultimately increase the costs to the State of Maryland by shifting costs to state institutions, hospitals, and Medicaid.
Marylanders with developmental disabilities can not afford any further reductions in funding. While state policy-makers face difficult choices to balance the budget, this is one area they cannot afford to cut.
For the independent fiscal analysis by the Community Services Reimbursement Rate Commission of developmental disability providers in the community, visit here.
For information on the thousands of people waiting for developmental disability services in Maryland, visit here.
And for briefing on funding for developmental disability services and direct support staff wages, see the following document.
Saqib Ali and Nancy King Discuss Progressive Issues, Part Two
Part Two: Civil Rights and Marriage Equality.
By Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39).
What are the biggest civil rights challenges of our time? Equal pay for equal work? Ending racial profiling? Demanding accountability for torture? These are all ugent issues. But as a state legislator, the one that seems most immediately fixable to me is giving same-sex couples equal marital rights. I am in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. Six other states have already legalized it. And that building wave will be coming to Maryland soon enough. Increasingly this is becoming a bi-partisan issue. Even former Vice President Dick Cheney -- certainly no liberal -- recently came out in favor of marriage equality.
In my three years as a public official (and even before that), I have literally taken every opportunity (and created new opportunities!) to advocate in favor of full marriage equality:• In 2006 as a candidate challenging incumbents in a "conservative" district I said "I’m in favor of expanding civil rights for all citizens of Maryland. To that end, I support amending our constitution to allow same-sex marriages. I don’t see how allowing same-sex marriages will weaken the traditional institution of marriage for any other members of society."
Nancy has a starkly different opinion on this important civil rights issue. Although she has supported expanding certain rights for same-sex couples, she opposes full marriage equality. When asked in 2006 if the Constitution should be modified to allow same-sex marriages, she responded "It is already in Maryland State Law that marriage is between a man and a woman. There is no reason to change the Constitution when it is already in the law."
• In 2008 I co-sponsored the marriage-equality bill.
• In 2009 I co-sponsored the marriage-equality bill.
• On July 31st, I wrote a column in the Gazette emphasizing marriage-equality's importance saying “My stance on this issue isn't politically expedient. I am the first Muslim in the legislature. Homosexuality is strictly forbidden in Islam. As such I have evinced much grief from my most conservative supporters. But I recognize that I represent people of all faiths and no faith at all. If I tried to enforce religion by law - as in a theocracy - I would be doing a disservice to both my constituents and to my religion.”
• On August 11th, I gave an interview on NPR discussing my position on Marriage Equality.
I'm hopeful that Nancy will change her mind on this important civil-rights issue. Probably when she gives it some careful thought she'll come out on the side of fairness. I think most Montgomery County residents will agree that it's simply the right thing to do. :-)
It’s Not Just Maryland
Maryland cannot seem to escape its budget nightmare. But as the Governor and the General Assembly struggle through a deficit yet again, voters should keep in mind that we are not alone.
The National Governors Association’s latest Fiscal Survey of States lays out the cratered moonscape of state finances. Here are some of its findings:
On spending:So far, 42 states were forced to reduce enacted budgets in fiscal 2009 by $31.6 billion. This is in stark contrast to the thirteen states that had to reduce their enacted budgets in fiscal 2008 and the three states that reduced their enacted budgets during 2007. During the last fiscal downturn, the peak years of reductions to enacted budgets occurred in fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2003, when thirty-seven states were forced to make mid-year budget reductions totaling $14 billion and $12 billion, respectively. These years of peak cuts occurred after the national economic downturn ended in 2001.
The chart below shows that combined state budget increases are now in negative territory and are at their lowest level in at least 30 years. Maryland had nominal general fund changes of -0.9% in FY 2009 and -3.6% in FY 2010. The 50 states together had nominal general fund changes of -2.2% in FY 2009 and -2.5% in FY 2010.
Thirty-five states assume negative budget growth for fiscal 2010 governors’ recommended general fund budgets, while 30 states are estimating negative growth budgets for fiscal 2009.
On taxes:Recommended net tax and fee changes would result in $23.9 billion in additional revenue based on governors’ recommended fiscal 2010 budgets. For fiscal 2010, 29 states recommend net increases while five states recommend net decreases. This amount well exceeds fiscal 2009, when states recommended $726 million tax and fee increases, as sixteen states recommended net decreases while eleven state recommended net increases.
The chart below shows that combined state tax hikes in FY 2010 will reach a higher level that at any time since at least 1991. The Maryland General Assembly did not enact a net tax increase in FY 2010. The only revenue-raising measure it did enact was a cut in lottery sales agent commissions from 5.5% to 5.0% of ticket sales, which is projected to raise $8.6 million.
The number of states experiencing revenue shortfalls increased in fiscal 2009. Revenues from all sources which include sales, personal income, corporate income and all other taxes and fees exceed expectations in two states, are on target in ten states, and are below expectations in thirty-eight states. This is in contrast to fiscal 2008 when twenty-five states reported that revenue collections exceeded estimates.
On year-end balances:Total balances — ending balances and the amounts in budget stabilization “rainy day” funds — are a crucial tool that states heavily rely on during fiscal downturns and budget shortfalls. Balance levels are one of the indicators of overall state fiscal health.
The map below shows that many states’ rainy-day funds are in far worse condition than ours. Maryland’s year-end balance is projected to be 5.4% of expenditures in FY 2010, close to the 50-state combined balance of 5.3% and better than 29 states.
After reaching a peak in fiscal 2006 at $69 billion or 11.5 percent of expenditures, balances declined in fiscal 2008 to 9.1 percent of expenditures. However, balance levels have fallen significantly during fiscal 2009, as balance level estimates now represent 5.5 percent of expenditures. Balance levels are projected to decrease to 5.3 percent of expenditures based on governors’ recommended fiscal 2010 budgets. While balance levels have fallen from their 2006 highs, they are expected to nearly match their historical average of 5.8 percent of expenditures. Because states recognize that an economic downturn may last for more than one year they are reluctant to deplete balances. This is in part due to concerns that the poor fiscal situation may continue through fiscal 2011.
Here are the tax-hike and spending-cut strategies used by the 50 states in their FY 2010 budgets. We mark those strategies employed by Maryland with an asterisk (*).
Targeted cuts: 30*
Raise revenue (any type): 22*
Reduce local aid: 20*
Layoffs: 17*
Across the board cuts: 16*
Cuts to state employee benefits: 16
Reorganize agencies: 16
Furloughs: 15
Rainy-day fund: 15*
Raise tobacco taxes: 13
Raise motor vehicle-related fees: 12
Raise user fees: 11
Salary reductions: 10*
Raise business-related fees: 9
Raise higher education fees: 7
Raise court-related fees: 6
Raise sales taxes: 6
Raise personal income taxes: 5
Early retirement: 4
Raise alcohol taxes: 4
Gaming/gambling expansion: 2
Privatization: 2
Raise corporate income taxes: 2
Lottery expansion: 1
Other: 24*
So how are our elected leaders doing? Their challenge is probably less severe than many other parts of the country, especially in California, New York and Michigan. Since the 2007 special session, they have for the most part avoided revenue increases. Their strategy in FY 2010 is weighted towards restraining state employee compensation costs and budget cuts. More of both, as well as mounting cuts to local aid, is likely to come.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sligo Creek Golf Association Proposes Plan to Save Course with No Taxpayer Subsidy
Following is the press release from the Sligo Creek Golf Association (SCGA).
Saqib Ali and Nancy King Discuss Progressive Issues, Part One
Part One: Let's Discuss the Issues!
By Delegate Saqib Ali (D-39).
It is no secret to political insiders that there has been speculation about my political future. Rumors about me running for the State Senate have been written up right here on the pages of MPW. Mostly, those rumors are based more in fantasy than in fact :) However, there will certainly be plenty of time next year for speculation and intrigue. So lets put aside those rumors for now and talk about issues of substance.
What the media and political watchers have missed are very clear distinctions on the issues between State Senator Nancy King and myself. We have very distinct records of public statements and legislative records. And that's OK :) We are simply two people of good conscience who often arrive at opposite conclusions on major public policy issues of the day.
For many residents of Montgomery County, these are issues of very great urgency. These residents may not understand our respective values, our decision making processes and why we arrive at the conclusions we do. Certainly large national media outlets can't devote the coverage to such niche stories. But I believe that we owe it to Montgomery County residents to air out these differences in a public forum. And the internet is the cheapest, most widely accessible means for us to do so.
So over the next few days and weeks, I would like to discuss and debate those differences right here on MPW. I will be contrasting my record with Nancy's on three key issues and would welcome her response. This will be a thoughtful, respectful, serious exchange of ideas and it will be something that is rather new to Montgomery County Politics. Hopefully we will be providing an important service to our mutual constituents by giving them unparalleled access to our decision making processes. And who knows? Maybe we will even start a cool new trend! :) :)
Undoubtedly there will be a certain amount of Sturm und Drang about the proposition of two elected representatives debating on the internet. But there is really no call for that. Nancy and I are friends. We visit each others' homes and know each others' children. And that will always be the case.
Pols Party While Budget Burns (Updated)
Governor Martin O'Malley made a big deal about wanting to have a "sober" Maryland Association of Counties conference last week. But one of his staffers proved otherwise by releasing a whopping 115 party-time photos to the public on Facebook. Who knew that hundreds of millions of dollars in budget cuts could be so much fun?
Update, 11 AM: The MACO partiers are covering their tracks. Eleven of the photos, including the three featuring the Governor and the Baltimore Mayor, have been deleted. But we still have them here.
Update, 3 PM: We can no longer see the content on Facebook. It has either been access-limited or deleted.
Governor O'Malley and indicted Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon.
Indicted Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon.
Baltimore City Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (left) and her Chief of Staff, Kim Washington (right).
The Governor's wife, Katie O'Malley, with Jeremy Rosendale. Rosendale is a former staffer for Baltimore City Council Member Mary Pat Clarke and is currently the Governor's Deputy Director of Correspondence and Constituent Services. He posted all of these photos on Facebook, where they can be seen by anyone, and helpfully identified most of the people in them. Thanks, Jeremy!
From left: Somerset Mayor Jeffrey Slavin, Jeremy Rosendale and Montgomery County Council Member Valerie Ervin. We hear plenty of other Council Members were there as well.
Colleen Martin-Lauer (left) and Colm O'Comartun (right). Martin-Lauer is a fundraiser for the Governor and former Prince George's political boss Al Wynn. O'Comartun is the Director of the Governor's Office.
Sophia Silbergeld, former staffer for Senator Ben Cardin and Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith, now a Democratic fundraiser. Observe her amazing dexterity as she hoists four drinks.
From left: Maryland Democratic Party Executive Director Travis Tazelaar, Baltimore City Council staffer Kim Washington, Laborers Union lobbyist Jayson Williams and Sophia Silbergeld.
Nick Stewart, a former spokesman and campaign staffer for the Governor (left) with Travis Tazelaar.
Jim Gillis, Executive Assistant to Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith (left) with Jeremy Rosendale.
A staffer in the Governor's press office (left), Stacy Landolt Mayer (second from left), the Governor's Deputy Legislative Officer, and Tom Hickey (right), the Governor's Board of Public Works liaison.
O'Malley staffer Colm O'Comartun (left), Democratic fundraiser Sophia Silbergeld (top) and Ashley Valis, a Special Assistant in the Governor's Office of Intergovernmental Affairs.
Board of Public Works liaison Tom Hickey must love those budget cuts!
Here's some assorted booze-fueled mayhem proudly posted by O'Malley staffer Jeremy Rosendale. Pay special attention to his captions. We hope Facebook's 250 million users enjoyed them as much as you will.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Saturday, August 15, 2009
SHA Announces ICC Meeting on Environmental Issues
Following is an email from the State Highway Administration announcing this meeting. Would anyone be willing to attend and write a guest blog?
On Fri Aug 14 14:59:18 CDT 2009, SHA ICC Project
The State Highway Administration (SHA) is holding an open house for the Intercounty Connector’s (ICC) Environmental Stewardship and Compensatory Mitigation (ES/CM) program. Information on the ICC’s mainline environmental features, such as the box turtle relocation, and erosion and sediment control efforts also will be presented at the open house.
The ES/CM program includes an unprecedented level of mitigation to offset environmental impacts associated with the ICC. Above and beyond that mitigation, the package also includes Environmental Stewardship projects that were developed to specifically address degraded environmental conditions in the project area that existed prior to, and not as a result of, the ICC construction. The Environmental Stewardship and Compensatory Mitigation projects include stream restoration, wetlands creation and enhancement, and Stormwater Management Best Management Practices (BMP). The majority of the BMP projects are proposed within the Upper Paint Branch watershed because it contains the most sensitive aquatic resources within the project area.
The details are: Saturday, August 29 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., The National Capital Trolley Museum 1313 Bonifant Road, Silver Spring MD.
This forum will provide an update for interested parties, including an overview of the ES/CM program and progress to date on the proposed stewardship and mitigation efforts throughout the project area. There will be no formal presentations, but members of the project team will be available to answer any questions on the material showcased. We will also post an announcement of this meeting on the project website, www.iccproject.com; SHA encourages you to share this information with your staff.
SHA hopes that you also will take advantage of the opportunity to learn more about the proposed environmental projects. In addition, please share this email with your staff members so that they may attend as well. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. John Sales, Community Liaison, Office of the ICC, toll-free at 866-462-0020 or via email at iccproject@sha.state.md.us.
Sincerely, Melinda B. Peters, Director, Office of the ICC
Friday, August 14, 2009
WMATA Bus Driver Spared from Discipline
The Baltimore Sun's Mike Dresser reports that the WMATA bus driver accused of violating the agency's cell phone policy has escaped discipline. WTOP confirmed our story on the driver's innocence, and now, so has WMATA.
The incident gained attention when the Washington Post reported anonymous allegations made on an anonymous blog without vetting them. The Post really should apologize to this driver. Instead, the Post has now been scooped by the Sun on the finding of innocence and, as far as we can tell, no apology is forthcoming.
Budget Cutting Myths, Part Two
By Marc Korman.
Last time we examined a couple of budget cutting myths, which elected officials at the local, state, and federal level should remember as they try to cut deficits. Today we will examine the last three myths.
Myth#3: We Can Solve the Problem if We Just Cut Enough
Filling a budget deficit involves two major tools: cutting and raising. Budget cutting is the popular one. Raising means finding new sources of revenue, whether they be changes in tax policy or more targeted user fees. With budget deficits as large as they are at all three levels of government, it simply does not make sense to fight the problem with one hand tied behind our backs. Any serious proposal to plug the deficit will require changes in tax policy, particularly at the state and federal level where policymakers need to consider combined reporting, gas taxes, alcohol taxes, income taxes, the inheritance tax, and how much of annual income payroll taxes apply to.
But just as cutting without raising makes little sense, so does raising without cutting. There are no doubt government programs that can be cut (I would start with the Maryland Stadium Authority) and those should be considered along with any tax changes.
Myth#4: If We Just Reel in Appropriations, We Can Solve the Problem
A large percentage of government spending is not based on the annual budget process in Washington, Annapolis, or Rockville, but is the result of other legislation setting their funding level. Federally, the distinction is between discretionary and mandatory spending. Discretionary spending accounts for approximately $1 trillion and is the annually set appropriations for many government programs such as defense spending, funding for enforcement of environmental laws, and NIH research. Mandatory spending is the remainder of the federal budget, which is required spending for entitlement and other required expenses such as Social Security, Medicare, and servicing the national debt.
At the state level, approximately 50% of state spending is Mandated or Entitlement spending. This is spending based on a statutory or constitutional requirement designating a specific amount to be appropriated or formula to be used to determine the payment or requiring benefit to anyone in a qualifying group. These mandates of over $12 billion primarily go to education and healthcare. Maryland also has another category of mandatory spending, mandated purposes, but these allow more discretion for their specific use.
To address large budget deficits, major legislative changes are needed in the drivers of these mandatory or mandated costs. There are thirteen formula mandates in Maryland that automatically adjust for inflation. Healthcare costs at the federal level are driven by an aging population with access to Medicare under a Fee-for-Service model that rewards volume of services over quality. Dealing with issues such as these is not just part of the budgetary process, but requires far more comprehensive legislative action.
Myth#5: Strong Funding=Strong Policy
There is an old adage that funding=policy. To a large extent, that is true. In the 1800s, a series of US Presidents began declaring National Parks and Monuments to conserve the west, but until military patrols were authorized and funded to prevent poaching and exploitation, that conservation policy was meaningless.
Most Maryland and Montgomery County politicians will answer the question “what would you cut?” with a long discussion of our strong education system. If you saw Political Pulse the week of August 3rd, you saw a variation of this when host Charles Duffy asked some Maryland legislators what should be cut. The answer primarily involved Education Week naming Maryland number one in education and that education was off the table. The O’Malley/Brown Administration has already said that K-12 education will not be cut.
But funding alone does not determine good policy, it just goes a long way towards supporting it. For example, the Washington Post recently recognized Montgomery County’s peer review program for teachers as a national model. Although strong funding for teacher pay helps the program, it is not a strictly budget driven enterprise. Similarly, no progressive would want to cut healthcare, the environment, or other cherished programs. But using a scalpel instead of a hatchet, smart legislators may be able to find savings in these important categories of government spending while still maintaining good policies.
As elected officials at every level of government figure out how to address budget deficits, they should keep these five myths in mind.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Potomac Almanac Profiles Roger Berliner
Few County Council Members get an in-depth article like this one devoted solely to profiling them. It's good reading on a freshman who has frequently acted as a swing vote.
Budget Cutting Myths, Part One
By Marc Korman.
A few weeks ago, Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown told a blogger roundtable that the O’Malley/Brown Administration has been driven by the budget, which has required extensive cuts and cost containment. At the County level, the spiral of budget deficits appears set to continue with an estimated $370 million shortfall next year. Nationally, after years of inattentiveness to President Bush’s freewheeling spending, politicians suddenly seem interested in the federal deficit. Given all the attention, here are five myths of budget cutting that should be kept in mind as budget deficits are tackled.
Myth#1: A Cut is Too Small
When I worked on Capitol Hill, identifying a budget cut or increase as too small to matter was a popular tactic of advocates for specific programs. If a program was expected to receive a $4 million cut, advocates for the program would point out that $4 million out of a $3 trillion federal budget or $454 billion budget deficit, the federal deficit in 2008, was not going to make much difference.
They were right of course, the $4 million reduction would not plug the budget deficit. But there is no single cut that would fill a deficit of any meaningful size. $454 billion is larger than the budget of most Cabinet agencies and accounts for almost the entirety of non-defense discretionary spending, meaning spending appropriated by Congress annually and not subject to formula funding (see Myth#4 below). When deficits are the proportional size they are at each level of government, only a combination of many small cuts will equal a meaningful reduction. Dismissing a cut as too small is just an excuse to do nothing.
Myth#2: Across the Board Cuts Are a Good Idea
Essentially, this is where a politician says they are calling for a 1% or 2% cut across every agency of the government, at any level. Calling for an across the board budget cut is an easy way to give the appearance of being concerned about the budget while dismissing serious policy considerations. On Capitol Hill, House Republicans in particular have used proposed across the board cuts to fund bill proposals that would cost money, arguing for example that a massive tax cut would not increase the deficit because it is paid for by an across the board budget cut. What exactly would be cut is left to the imagination. Unfortunately, at least one local Democrat proposed this as well. An across the board budget cut is not the same as asking each agency in the government to find savings that equal 2% of their budget and then picking and choosing from those options.
The problem, as many elected officials have said, is that an across the board cut uses a hatchet where a scalpel is needed. A government-wide cut of equal size assumes programs have equal merit, which they do not. In Maryland and Montgomery County, education is a major priority that I suspect most politicians would choose to protect while cutting more deeply from other programs.
We will take a look at three more budget cutting myths next time.
WTOP Confirms MPW WMATA Story
WTOP is now confirming what our source told us about the WMATA bus driver cell-phone incident: she was not making a personal call, but was trying to contact management about a problem with the bus. This is a far different story than originally reported on UnsuckDCMetro and the Washington Post. Will either of them be sending an apology to the bus driver, who appears to be guilty of doing little more than trying to do her job?
The Wayback Machine
Have you ever visited the Wayback Machine? It's a site that archives snapshots of home pages back into the mid-1990s. Let's have a bit of fun looking at a few websites way back when, shall we? (Click on the images for full-screen views.)
Gazette.net, 12/27/96
The more things change, the more they stay the same...
MCDCC.org, 5/30/00
It was not that long ago that MoCo only had 5 Democratic Senators and 16 Democratic Delegates. The Dems have come a long way since then.
Drudgereport.com, 12/28/98
Remember the good old days when we impeached Presidents for lying? And we mocked the people who proposed doing that to George W. Bush.
RealClearPolitics.com, 8/16/00
Remember when Joe Lieberman was a Democrat? I mean, not just a guy with a "D" or an "I-D" next to his name?
CNN.com, 11/9/00
Ah yes, this is when we were showing the rest of the world what true democracy looks like...
GeorgeWBush.com, 11/26/00
Did you send in your contribution?
NationalEnquirer.com, 4/17/99
I just love that Monica headline! The vampire writer selling her underwear probably deserves her own blog post...
SarahPalin.com, 4/12/06
That's right, people, four months before her gubernatorial primary against Frank Murkowski, Sarah Palin had no website! Who could have predicted that?
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Top Blog Posts, July 2009
Here are the most-viewed blog posts on MPW in July 2009.
1. More Warnings of State Budget Apocalypse
2. How to Save Money on Your Electric Bill
3. Democrats for Pelura
4. Eli El’s Domestic Abuse Record
5. Funniest Facebook Status of the Day
6. Why CCT Supporters Should Give BRT a Chance
7. Print MSM to MoCo: Adios!
8. Dereck Davis vs. Jim Rosapepe on Electricity Reregulation
9. Winners and Losers in the Maryland Blogosphere
10 (tie). The Gaithersburg West Master Plan and the Magic Carpet
10 (tie). Maryland Transit Administration Wants to Record Our Conversations
10 (tie). Saqib Ali Uses Help Save Maryland to Raise Money
The most-downloaded graphics were easily the three pages of the state budget apocalypse letter. As we have said before, that post attracted massive attention from all around the state.
Two older series drew steady traffic in July: Crisis at the Gazette and the Washington Post’s Boy King. Predictably, both received visits from Post IP addresses. The Post may never be able to escape the radiation of those scandals.
We’ll have results for August in a couple weeks!
Kramer and Ficker, Together Again
Former District 4 County Council candidates Ben Kramer and Robin Ficker are re-united at a new venue: Sligo Creek Golf Course. But the course is outside District 4 and Kramer’s state legislative district. That has people talking.
In our history of the Battle of Sligo Creek Golf Course, the names Ben Kramer and Robin Ficker do not appear. That’s because neither of them were involved until very recently. Kramer is a Derwood resident who represents state legislative District 19 as a Delegate. Ficker is an East County resident (if you believe him) or a Boyds resident (if you believe his property tax records). Sligo lies in state legislative District 18 (represented by Senator Rich Madaleno and Delegates Ana Sol Gutierrez, Jeff Waldstreicher and Al Carr) and County Council District 5 (represented by Valerie Ervin). Kramer was defeated by Nancy Navarro in the Council District 4 special election primary and Ficker lost to her in the general. Both men are rumored to be running for council again. Kramer’s refusal to endorse Navarro against Republican Ficker has still not been forgotten by Democratic Party loyalists. The fact that the two of them are surfacing at Sligo fuels talk of their future ambitions.
Kramer has attended two recent meetings of the Sligo golfers to much praise. One Sligo supporter wrote on Facebook, “For a second week in a row, proponents of golf at Sligo owe great thanks to Delegate Ben Kramer. Having just written a letter to Valerie Ervin offering his support and assistance in protecting the golf course, Del. Kramer again showed up in person at the golf course snack bar for our regular Tuesday meeting (BTW, no meeting Tuesday the 11th). He spoke extemporaneously and passionately on the details of his argument against the MCRA’s rationale for closing the course.” Kramer claimed to have met with Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg, who according to the golfer “may well be sympathetic to our cause if you are persuasive.”
That would be an improvement. Your author made an appointment to meet with Council Member Trachtenberg to discuss the golf course on February 13, 2008. She canceled it due to bad weather and we were never able to get her office to set another appointment. In July 2009, Trachtenberg’s office wrote the email below containing numerous factual inaccuracies (such as the supposed takeover of the course by the Revenue Authority on October 1, which is the date the Revenue Authority is due to give it up). That email made Trachtenberg look really ill-informed in the community and the staffer who wrote it should be disciplined. If Kramer can educate Trachtenberg – who was the only Council Member to endorse his District 4 candidacy – on the basic facts of the issue, perhaps he can be of service.
Just an aside: do Kramer’s District 19 constituents know about all the time he has spent working on an issue inside District 18? What would they think if they did know?
Before the Sligo golfers get too excited over Kramer’s aid, they need to contemplate a few facts. Any politician can write a letter and show up at a meeting. If Kramer really wanted to be helpful, he could try to get a bond bill passed through the General Assembly paying for part of Sligo’s capital costs. Last year, Kramer was the lead sponsor on a bond bill securing $150,000 for the Olney Theatre Center for the Arts. If Kramer is such a passionate defender of Sligo, what is stopping him from getting a commitment from the House leadership for a bond bill of similar size for Sligo? The Olney bond bill matches the amount of public funding requested by County Executive Ike Leggett to keep Sligo open.
Of course, no such thing is going to happen. The state budget is a fenced-off disaster zone with little to no money available for any kind of bond bills, much less any financing golf courses. And Kramer, who ticked off the Governor and the General Assembly leadership by voting against the slots amendment, the slots authorization bill and the millionaire tax would not be first in line for money if any was available. In any event, Kramer’s deficient record on telling the truth creates ample grounds for skepticism of anything he says.
Why is Kramer suddenly active outside his council and legislative districts? Our sources see this as preparation for a coming at-large County Council run. The fact that the course is in the district of Council Member Valerie Ervin, the most active backer of victorious former Kramer opponent Nancy Navarro, makes his cross-border advocacy all the more interesting. This has nothing to do with golf and everything to do with politics.
Robin Ficker has also suddenly become active on Sligo. We admire his energy. Who else splits time between running for office, passing anti-tax amendments, crusading against Bethesda road stands and campaigning for public golf courses? Ficker is urging the Sligo golfers to hold a protest march down Forest Glen Road and is offering road signs (one of his specialties). When a course supporter warned his colleagues not to “get in bed with Robin Ficker,” Ficker replied, “Your heart holds hate for me.” If the golfers do take Ficker’s advice and hold a march, we hope they will avoid the Intersection of Death for their own safety.
All of the above distracts from one key fact: Valerie Ervin is doing a lot of work behind the scenes on Sligo. Her office is trying to arrange a partnership involving the Maryland Department of Veterans Affairs to save the course. Ervin is one of five freshman Council Members (the others being Trachtenberg, Navarro, Marc Elrich and Roger Berliner) who never voted to transfer Sligo to the Revenue Authority, an action that led to the current dispute. The freshmen had no role in causing Sligo’s problems, but together they can certainly fix them.
So Ben Kramer can write a letter a week and Robin Ficker can march to his heart’s content. In the tiny cubicles of the County Council building, the real work of preserving the course goes on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
