This fall, voters in Montgomery County are weighing in on four important measures that could have far-reaching implications for the way Maryland’s most populous county is run for years into the future.
The four ballot questions in Montgomery County offer up competing plans for two key issues: calculating property taxes and the structure of the county council.
“Folks are understandably focused at the national level, but we have a critical election here in Montgomery County that will determine what the next 30 years are going to look like,” said Montgomery County Council member Andrew Friedson, who has spearheaded one of the ballot measures that would change the method the county uses to collect property taxes.
Question A: Cap property tax rate, not overall revenue
Question A 鈥� the measure supported by Friedson, his colleagues on the Montgomery County Council and other county leaders 鈥� would overhaul the current system for limiting property tax increases in the county.
- Sign up for WTOP鈥檚 elections newsletter
- Maryland drop boxes: How safe is your vote?
- DC ballot drop boxes: What you need to know
- DC voter guide听
- Maryland voter guide
- Virginia voter guide
- Presidential Election 太子探花
- Congressional Election 太子探花
- Local Politics and Elections 太子探花
The current system doesn’t cap tax rates directly but does impose a cap on the overall amount of property tax revenue the county can take in. That cap is tied to inflation. Council members can exceed the cap but doing so also requires a unanimous vote by all nine council members.
Proponents of Question A say the current system holds the county back, since it limits the overall amount of tax revenue the county brings in even if property values rise or the county鈥檚 tax base expands.
Rather than a cap on overall revenue, under Question A, the actual property tax rate would be limited to the previous year’s rate unless all nine members of the county council voted to increase it.
“Question A is the answer to our county鈥檚 broken property tax system,鈥� said Friedson, who represents District 1 on the Montgomery County Council and also sits on the council鈥檚 economic development and fiscal policy committees. 鈥淚t sets a consistent rate each year that allows us to fund schools, libraries and parks. It鈥檚 really simple: Your property tax rate will remain the same unless nine members of the council unanimously vote to change it.鈥�
Under the current system, the council has to set the property tax rate each year to make sure that the county doesn鈥檛 exceed the overall revenue cap.
Over the years, the property tax rate in Montgomery County 鈥� calculated per $100 of a property鈥檚 assessed value 鈥� has fluctuated. For the current fiscal year, the rate was set just shy of 98 cents per $100 of assessed value 鈥� at $0.9785. In 2017 and 2018, the rate was just over a dollar 鈥� $1.0264 and $1.0012, respectively.
Friedson said the current system, where rates are set each year to comply with the revenue cap, is too complicated, likening it to a game of 鈥淛eopardy.鈥�
“Having a tax system that requires a Ph.D. in economic theory, that has a complicated formula that nobody really understands 鈥� isn鈥檛 a rational or reasonable way to do tax policy. We should be better than that in Montgomery County.”
The current system dates to 1990, when voters approved a ballot measure limiting overall revenues, but it鈥檚 now out-of-step with how most other jurisdictions operate, officials say.
Question A “gets us out of the shackle where we鈥檙e limited to the revenues we raised last year, which ironically doesn鈥檛 limit any individuals鈥� tax increases,” County Executive Marc Elrich said during an online news briefing in September.
Question B: Prevent all increases beyond inflation
Question B would stick with the current system for capping property tax revenue but would make it impossible for the county council to approve any increases above the rate of inflation.
Attorney Robin Ficker, who unsuccessfully ran for county executive on the Republican ticket in 2018, led the citizen’s initiative that resulted in the measure making it to the ballot.
“Question B limits property tax revenue increases to the rate of inflation,” Ficker told WTOP. “Question A allows the council and Mr. Elrich to increase property taxes as much as they want.”
Looming large in Ficker鈥檚 campaign to further limit property tax increases is the move four years ago by the county council to approve a county budget that included an 8.7% hike in property tax revenue, in part to provide more funding for schools.
Given the expected budget shortfall to county coffers because of the coronavirus pandemic, Ficker said he believes another tax increase is all but inevitable if voters don鈥檛 approve Question B.
鈥淭hey have a huge deficit, and they鈥檙e going to make it up by treating the voters as an ATM and giving us another very large tax increase next year,鈥� Ficker said, referring to the county council. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 their whole purpose in opposing B and supporting A.鈥�
Ficker said the requirement for a unanimous vote by the council 鈥� a requirement that was actually created via a 2008 ballot question, also championed by Ficker 鈥� isn鈥檛 much of a check on property tax revenue increases, because all nine members of the council are Democrats who he claims are all ideologically similar.
鈥淭hey have it, nine seats locked in, and every one of them goes along to get along,鈥� he said.
Disagreements over A and B
Ficker鈥檚 proposal has sparked fierce opposition from county leaders.
Friedson, who鈥檚 leading the push for Question A, said the rival measure proposed by Ficker, 鈥渨ould be a disaster” for the county.
He said Ficker鈥檚 plan 鈥渢urns a bad property tax policy into a potentially catastrophic one, which would eliminate many aspects of our ability to fund school and transportation needs, respond to a crisis like the one we鈥檙e in with COVID-19 鈥� and it鈥檚 just not a thoughtful, reasonable and rational way to do tax policy. It鈥檚 fiscal insanity; it鈥檚 not fiscal responsibility.鈥�
A broad coalition of groups going under the name 鈥溾�� have lined up in opposition to Ficker鈥檚 proposal, arguing Question B鈥檚 inflexible cap on property tax revenue would 鈥渟trangle essential services, from firehouses to public health.鈥�
Ficker鈥檚 response: 鈥淨uestion B doesn鈥檛 cut anything 鈥� it limits increases to the rate of inflation. So these folks who are opposing Question B are not telling the truth. Nothing鈥檚 being strangled. Nothing鈥檚 being cut. We鈥檙e just limiting increases, and they need to get that straight instead of telling falsehoods.鈥�
The Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce, which is known for its support of business-friendly policies, , saying Ficker鈥檚 proposal would compromise the county鈥檚 Triple-A bond rating, which would increase borrowing costs.
Ficker called that contention 鈥済arbage,鈥� adding, 鈥淲hat is threatening the county鈥檚 Triple-A bond rating is (the council鈥檚) overspending.鈥�
Ficker鈥檚 proposal has garnered fewer endorsements than the county-backed Question A, but it does have the support of the Montgomery County Republican Party, which called on voters to reject Question A and support Question B to 鈥渟top unnecessary new property tax increases.鈥�
Democrats far outnumber Republicans in the county, but despite its reputation as a liberal enclave, Ficker said 60% of the more than 15,000 county voters who signed the petition to get Question B on the ballot this fall were Democrats. 鈥淎nd we checked every single name,鈥� he said.
Ficker also has a winning track record when it comes to ballot questions. In addition to 2008鈥檚 so-called 鈥淔icker Rule,鈥� which required a unanimous council vote to raise property tax revenue above the rate of inflation, he also successfully shepherded the 2016 effort on term limits in which county voters overwhelmingly approved.
Ficker said he is similarly optimistic this go-round.
Question C: Add 2 seats to the county council
The two remaining ballot questions facing Montgomery County voters are competing proposals to shake up the structure of the county council.
Under Question C, the number of district seats on the council would grow from five to seven, and the number of at-large seats would remain unchanged at four. That would expand the overall size of the council from nine members to 11 members.
Montgomery County, which is Maryland鈥檚 largest county by population, has had its current structure 鈥� five members representing geographic districts and four at-large seats 鈥� since 1990.
Evan Glass, one of the council鈥檚 four current at-large members who has spearheaded the measure, said Question C is necessary because of how much the county has grown over the past few decades.
鈥淢ontgomery County has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 30 years, and our population has actually increased 50% in the time that we鈥檝e had the current council 鈥� I think now is the time for us to increase our representation, increase our democracy and increase the size of the council,鈥� Glass said.
At nine members, the Montgomery County Council has fewer members than the D.C. Council, which has 13 members, and the Prince George鈥檚 County Council, which has 11 鈥� even though Montgomery County鈥檚 population is larger than those jurisdictions.
Question D: Get rid of at-large seats
Competing Question D, which is supported by a citizens initiative, proposes even more dramatic changes to the council. Question D would do away with all of the council鈥檚 at-large seats in favor of nine single-member districts.
Kimblyn Persaud, the chair of the group 鈥�,鈥� said the current council structure privileges the voices and the votes of residents who live 鈥渄own county鈥� 鈥� south of Rockville to the D.C. line.
Getting rid of the at-large seats would lead to districts that are smaller and 鈥渕ore cohesive,鈥� Persaud said, 鈥渨ith the ability for regular Joe Blows to be able to speak and have their voices heard in Rockville,鈥� where the county council sits.
Residents who live in the northern parts of Montgomery County have long complained that “up-county” residents are not adequately represented on the council.
鈥淎ll of the money, all of the advocating, goes towards the down-county area, and up-county is getting the shaft,鈥� Persaud said. 鈥淲ith nine districts, all the other regions would have someone who would represent them, so everybody in Montgomery County will have a voice.鈥�
Persaud, who lives in Wheaton and calls herself a 鈥渞eluctant community activist,鈥� said the at-large seats nature of the council contributes to the unequal representation.
Most of the council鈥檚 current nine members live down-county, including all of the council鈥檚 at-large members, whose residences are clustered in the Silver Spring-Takoma Park area.
She said up-county residents need members on the council who understand the issues that matter to them. 鈥淚 know when I needed help for anything, when I鈥檝e gone to an at-large member, I have received nothing 鈥� I don鈥檛 ever receive a call back,鈥� Persaud said.
For his part, Glass defended the at-large seats, saying a mixed structure of district and at-large seats provides citizens with additional council members to turn to for help besides only the council member who represents their district.
鈥淎s an at-large member myself, I put a lot of miles on my car and spend a lot of time on public transportation as well, getting to every part of the county to see the communities, walk the neighborhoods and talk with people 鈥�. as do my at-large colleagues as well,” Glass said.
Would Question D limit residents’ voting power?
Opponents of Question D say doing away with the at-large seats would diminish the voting power of Montgomery County residents.
With at-large seats, each voter in the county has the opportunity to weigh in on their choice for five seats on the council: their individual district as well as the four at-large seats.
鈥淚f we went to an all-district system, residents would be left with only having one council member whom they could call for filling a pothole, fixing a streetlight or lobbying support against legislation,鈥� Glass said.
He called his proposal, Question C, 鈥渢he best of both worlds,鈥� because it would still allow voters to weigh in on multiple seats as well as increasing the size of the council.
Persaud and other advocates of the all-district option disagree that the at-large system amplifies residents鈥� voting power.
鈥淭he reality is we don鈥檛 have five people sitting at the table,鈥� Persaud said. In part because of higher voter turnout down-county, 鈥淲e have a small group of voters dictating to the whole county who our at-large members will be,鈥� she said.
Glass鈥� Question C is supported by a broad swath of progressive and Democratic groups, including Jews United for Justice, the Association of Black Democrats, the Latino Democratic Club of Montgomery County, as well as the county鈥檚 chapter of the Democratic Party.
Persaud鈥檚 group 鈥�9 Districts for MoCo,” has received contributions from the labor union MCGEO and big developers, according to an analysis of campaign contributions . In addition to Persaud鈥檚 group, Question D has also been endorsed by the Montgomery County GOP, which said nine single-member districts would provide 鈥渇air representation鈥� to all areas of the county.
Persaud, who identifies herself as a Democrat, said she blames the 鈥淒emocratic machine鈥� for opposition to Question D.
Former County Executive Isiah 鈥淚ke鈥� Leggett, who was also a longtime council member, has come out of retirement to oppose the proposed changes to the council (along with Question B).
He has suggested a council made up of nine single members would be beset by parochialism.
鈥淚n single-member districts, the politics and parochialism becomes so, so adverse to a good local governance that it’s difficult to have the kind of effectiveness that you want,鈥� Leggett .
Costs of Question C under scrutiny
For their part, Persaud and other opponents of Question C also question the costs of adding two more council seats. Their proposal wouldn鈥檛 cost anything since it wouldn鈥檛 add districts, only take the at-large seats and convert them into district seats.
Overall, the cost of adding two more seats to the council would be at least $1.08 million. Each council office budget runs $540,000, which includes a $140,000 salary for council members, according to council spokeswoman Sonya Healy.
鈥淭he last thing we need to be doing is adding to our budget,鈥� Persaud said, arguing that before the council adds to its own budget, it should increase funding for schools.
Glass said the additional costs of adding seats under Question C is an additional investment in Montgomery County鈥檚 democracy.
Voters have the option of voting “no” on both Questions C and D, and the council structure would remain as it is now.
In 2004, when a measure nearly identical to Question D seeking to do away with at-large districts was on the ballot, voters handily rejected it.
The Charter Review Commission, a nine-member body tasked with studying proposed changes to the county鈥檚 charter, has studied the issue several times over the years, most recently earlier this year. The commission held a series of public meetings on the matters and voted narrowly, 5-4, against recommending any changes, concluding voters were best served by the current structure.
