Category Archives: Adam Pagnucco

Maryland Delegate Questions Criticism of Roy Moore

By Adam Pagnucco.

In a Facebook post in the wake of Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore’s defeat, a Maryland GOP Delegate is questioning those who have criticized Moore’s history with teenage girls and the actions of other sexual harassers.  That history was key to Moore’s loss.

Republican Delegate Jason Buckel (R-1B), who represents Allegany County, wrote on Facebook:

I’ve not said a word about the Alabama Senate election or the swirling world of accusations, admissions, rumors and varying degrees of bad behavior by men– from the clearly criminal to the truly appalling to the unambiguous acts of poor taste to the fairly innocuous and easily overblown. I think that trying to litigate in the court of public opinion what did or did not happen 20, 30, 40 or more years ago in momentary, fleeting encounters or relationships and then view those allegations through the light of modern prism, as opposed to the conventions and norms of the time in which they occurred, is fraught with danger, although clearly rape, physical sexual assault, and pervasive, consistent, degrading sexual harassment have never been and never could be acceptable under any circumstances at any time by anyone.

Buckel went on to praise the policies of the Trump administration while bashing Steve Bannon, Moore and other GOP candidates.

In a comment later on his post, Buckel said, “But who knows – While girls Roy Moore stopped by a mall to say hi to 40 years ago are national figures, 99.9% of Americans have no idea who Doug Jones is and chances are his senatorial career will be exceedingly brief.”

Let’s review the allegations against Moore.  His first accuser, Leigh Corfman, described how he sexually assaulted her when he was 32 and she was 14.  Another woman, Beverly Young Nelson, said Moore locked her in a car and tried to force her into oral sex when she was 16.  Six of the eight women who came forward were under the age of 18 at the time that Moore pursued them.  These incidents were not in keeping with the “conventions and norms of the time” as the girls and their families were disturbed by Moore’s actions and he was banned from stalking girls at the Gadsden Mall.

Right now, there is a national debate going on about differing degrees of sexual misconduct and what levels of punishment are appropriate.  That debate will be playing out for a while before it is settled – IF it’s settled.  But the allegations about Moore’s behavior with teenage girls are far outside the boundaries of any gray areas, past or present.  He was not “saying hi” as Buckel stated above.  Elected officials who appear to make excuses for the likes of Moore should beware the voters next November.

Share

Enviro Early Endorsements for General Assembly

By Adam Pagnucco.

Yesterday, the Maryland League of Conservation Voters (LCV) released its early endorsements for General Assembly.  We present them along with the early endorsements recently issued by the Maryland Sierra Club below.

First, let’s look at early endorsements for the Senate.

All early endorsees for Senate are Democratic incumbents with two exceptions: LCV-backed Delegates Ben Kramer (D-19) and Pam Beidle (D-32), who should have little problem winning their party nominations for open seats.  In general, the Sierra Club has endorsed fewer candidates so far.  Both organizations took passes on several contested Senate races.  They notably declined to support Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee Chair Joan Carter Conway (D-43), who is being challenged by Delegate Mary Washington.  However, both of them did support Senator Shirley Nathan-Pulliam (D-44), who is being challenged by SEIU leader Aletheia McCaskill.

Now let’s look at the House.

Again, all the early endorsees are Democratic incumbents and the Sierra Club supported fewer of them.  Many of the incumbents who have not yet been endorsed are appointees who have not served for three full sessions, like Montgomery County Delegates Pam Queen (D-14) and Jheanelle Wilkins (D-20) and Baltimore City Delegate Robbyn Lewis (D-46).

Let’s remember that both of these organizations will be issuing more endorsements in the future.  Several incumbents who don’t appear on these lists now could be endorsed in the next few months.  Open seat candidates will also earn support.  And the endorsement decisions in the contested Senate races, especially in the City of Baltimore, will be very interesting.  We will be watching!

Share

Is MoCo’s Budget in Trouble?

By Adam Pagnucco.

Montgomery County’s $120 million budget shortfall has set off political fireworks this election season, including attacks from Delegate Bill Frick (D-16), who is running for Executive, and Republicans who question how taxes could be going up while revenues are going down.  County Council incumbents pooh-pooh it, insisting that the budget decline is unremarkable and the economy is strong.  County Executive spokesman Patrick Lacefield, who once predicted that any loss of the county’s $30 million in liquor profits would cause a big property tax hike, now says that the $120 million shortfall is “pretty small” at just 2.2 percent of the county’s budget.

What is going on here?  Is MoCo’s budget in trouble?

First, the incumbents are right to point out that mid-year corrections, including budget savings plans, are not uncommon.  Between FY08 and FY11, the County Council approved five mid-year cut packages ranging from $30 million to $70 million each due to the Great Recession.  In FY16, the council approved a $54 million savings plan associated with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Wynne decision and disappointing income tax receipts in the prior year.  While mid-year cuts happen occasionally, it’s important to note that their history indicates that they are often – but not always – produced by looming economic problems.

So what’s causing this one?  No one is totally sure yet, but there seems to be two phenomena at work.

Declining Income Tax Payments from the Wealthy

In Maryland, the state collects income taxes on behalf of local governments and remits them in periodic distributions.  Part of MoCo’s problem originated in its November income tax distribution from the state, which includes extension filers who tend to be disproportionately very wealthy.  It’s difficult to forecast income tax payments from wealthy people because their dependence on capital gains and business income can be volatile.  The chart below from the state’s Bureau of Revenue Estimates contrasts the annual change in average federal adjusted gross income between all MoCo taxpayers (pink bars) and the top 100 MoCo taxpayers (blue line).  Income change for all taxpayers usually varies by single digits each year while income for the super-wealthy almost always varies by double digits.  This creates serious forecasting challenges for the county government since the super-wealthy have a material impact on its budget.

One relevant fact is that the November distribution may be down by 29% in MoCo but, according to the state, it is also down by 30% in Howard County and 26% in Baltimore County.  One thing these three jurisdictions have in common is that they all have substantial concentrations of very wealthy people.  That suggests that some of MoCo’s problem is not specific to the county but rather to variations in the incomes of the super rich.

Why is this happening?  One explanation lies in capital gains income.  Council analyst Jacob Sesker writes:

To a large degree, that volatility is the result of the year-to-year variations in the capital gains income of a small number of County residents. Illustrating this point, part of the projected FY18 decline in income tax revenue can be traced to a sharp drop in the capital gains of the County’s top 50 taxpayers, who realized gains in tax year 2016 that were 50% of the gains realized in tax year 2015, resulting in $21 million less in County income tax revenue (Revenue Administration Division of the Maryland Comptroller). Staff’s review of tax return data published by the Comptroller indicates that roughly 1.8% of Montgomery County returns report income of $500,000 or greater. On average, these returns explain more than half of any year-to-year increases in income tax revenue, and explain more than 100% of any year-to-year declines in income tax revenue.

Another factor could be the tax bills being considered by Congress, which contain numerous large cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations.  The super wealthy could be deferring capital gains and business pass-through income to next year when they would be subject to significantly lower rates.  If true, that would mean less income tax revenue this year but perhaps more next year when the deferred income is reported.  That’s just a theory but it can’t be ruled out.

Broader Economic Weakness

There are other facts that can’t be explained by the tax planning of the super wealthy.  First, FY17 (the year of the 9% property tax hike) closed out with $25 million less than expected.  Second, the county is writing down $206 million over the next six years in property taxes, energy taxes, transfer taxes, recordation taxes, telephone taxes and hotel taxes in addition to a $212 million income tax writedown.  The energy tax revision alone is $100 million over six years.  The reason for that is unclear, but it’s worth remembering that since commercial energy users pay roughly double the tax rates of residential users, some assumptions regarding employer energy use may be operative here.  It seems unlikely that a “strong economy” would produce such broad, multi-tax writedowns of the kind just put forth by the county.

What’s the bottom line?  Over the years, we have learned that under most circumstances, economic trends usually matter more than singular events.  One good year should not cause irrational exuberance and one bad tax distribution should not cause panic.  Whether the recent shortfall turns out to be meaningful or not, MoCo’s serious budgetary challenges are long term in nature.  They relate to decade-plus trends of lagging growth in employment and income, repeated funding of ongoing spending with one-time revenue sources and the county’s recent passage of large tax hikes and expensive employment laws at the same time, a unique combination among Washington-area jurisdictions.  That is on top of any targeting of Maryland and general economic insanity by Congress.  The big question is not about one tax distribution from the state but whether a combination of all these long-term factors will catch up with MoCo in a really bad way in the next couple years.

That’s a question for the next Executive and County Council.

Share

Moon Country Club Bill Could Generate $10 Million for MoCo

By Adam Pagnucco.

A local bill introduced by Delegate David Moon (D-20) that would end property tax breaks for country clubs would eventually generate $10 million a year for Montgomery County Government according to General Assembly analysts.  That’s welcome news for the county, especially considering its current budgetary difficulties.

Under current state law, the State Department of Assessments and Taxation (SDAT) is allowed to strike agreements with country clubs having golf courses to cap the assessed value of their land.  To be eligible for such agreements, the clubs must have at least 100 members who pay dues averaging $50 or more annually for each member; restrict use of their facilities primarily to members, families, and guests; have at least 50 acres of land; and have a golf course with at least 9 holes and a clubhouse.  In practice, the agreements limit assessed land values to $1,000 an acre.  In return for the assessed rate, a club with an SDAT agreement must agree not to sell its land for subdivision and to not discriminate on race, color, creed, sex or national origin.  If a club with an agreement does sell its land for subdivision, it must pay back taxes equivalent to what it would have been paying without an agreement.

Not long ago, your author asked SDAT for all of its agreements with country clubs in Montgomery County.  SDAT sent us ten of them but we later learned that there are actually fifteen of them in the county.  One of them was signed in 1980 and three more were signed in 1981; all four of these are fifty year agreements.  Two more were transferred from prior owners.  One agreement, for the Lakewood Country Club in Rockville, was signed in 2017.  In tax year 2016, when the agreement was not effective, the club’s 175 acres had an assessed land value of $1.94 million.  Once the agreement takes effect, the club’s assessed land value will be $175,000 – a 91% reduction.

Moon’s local bill would abolish such agreements with country clubs in Montgomery County as of their expiration or June 30, 2029, whichever date is earlier.  Because Maryland’s state constitution requires uniform rules for the assessment of land, Moon’s bill takes the form of a constitutional amendment carving out MoCo country clubs and golf courses from that requirement.  The amendment would have to be approved by voters.  We understand that Moon may also introduce a statewide bill to deal with SDAT agreements everywhere.

The fiscal note on Moon’s bill indicates that MoCo country clubs with SDAT agreements have a combined 3,000 acres currently assessed at $3 million.  In the absence of the agreements, the fiscal note estimates that the club’s assessed land value would be $983.3 million.  So once the agreements are all gone by Fiscal Year 2030, the fiscal note estimates that the state would collect an additional $1 million a year in property taxes from the clubs and the county would get an additional $10 million annually.

That’s right, folks – if the country clubs simply pay property taxes at the same rate the rest of us do, the Montgomery County Government would get an extra $10 million a year.

Delegate Moon’s country club bill is the biggest no-brainer of all time.  There is no justification for the richest of the very rich to get a property tax break that no one else does.  And if they are required to pay the same as everybody else, the county government would get a nice revenue bump to help it deal with our significant and increasing needs.

We hope every single MoCo Senator and Delegate will join David Moon and support his bill.

Share

GOP Tax Bills Discriminate Against Maryland

By Adam Pagnucco.

Much has been written about the tax bills passed by the U.S. House and Senate in recent weeks.  Overall, both bills offer small tax cuts to the poor, modest ones to the middle class and large cuts to the wealthy and corporations.  But in order to partially offset the massive tax cuts going to those at the top, the bills do something else.

They discriminate against taxpayers in Maryland.

Why do they do that?  One key feature of both bills is that they abolish the ability of individuals to deduct state and local income taxes from their federal incomes.  (Property tax deductions would still be allowed up to $10,000.)  According to IRS data for Tax Year 2015, U.S. federal taxpayers deducted a total of $334 billion of state and local income taxes from their incomes, more than the amounts they deducted for mortgage interest ($278 billion), charitable contributions ($222 billion), real estate taxes ($187 billion) and state and local sales taxes ($17 billion).  Abolishing the state and local income tax deduction hits people who itemize their deductions and pay significant amounts of state and local income taxes.  Marylanders are targeted on both those measures.

Itemizing Deductions

According to the above IRS data, 46% of Marylanders itemized their deductions on their federal tax returns in 2015.  That’s the highest rate in the country, far surpassing the national rate of 30% and red states like Arkansas (22%), Mississippi (23%), Louisiana (23%), Texas (24%), Alabama (26%), South Carolina (27%) and Georgia (33%).

State and Local Income Tax Deductions

In terms of state and local income tax deductions per return (including non-itemized returns), Marylanders ranked fifth in the nation at $4,217 per return.  Maryland trailed New York, D.C., Connecticut and California.  Virginia ranked tenth, indicating that the abolition of this deduction will hit the Washington, D.C. metro area particularly hard.  The states least impacted are mostly red states and those with little or no income taxes.

Inside Maryland, the impact will be felt differently across the state.  That’s because residents of some jurisdictions pay much more in state and local income taxes than others.  According to 2015 income tax data from the Comptroller, MoCo and Howard County residents pay by far the most state and local income taxes in Maryland.  Residents of many parts of Western Maryland and the Eastern Shore pay the least.

Consider this.  If you itemize your deductions, are paying $5,000 in state and local income taxes – roughly the average in Maryland – and your effective federal income tax rate is 15%, you will owe $750 more to Uncle Sam because of the abolition of the state and local income tax deduction.

Does that mean you will owe more federal taxes overall?  That depends.  If you are wealthy, you could get huge offsetting cuts because of changes to the top income tax brackets and tax cuts on pass-through income from your businesses.  If you are poor or middle class, you could benefit from an increase in the standard deduction and an increase in the child credit, but that could be offset by an elimination of the personal exemption.  An analysis of the Senate bill two weeks ago by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found almost all of the tax benefits from that bill going to the top quintile of Maryland taxpayers.  Changes prior to the Senate floor vote and in conference committee may tweak the details but not the overall impact.  And it could get worse: wealthy Republican donors are already complaining that their tax cuts are not big enough.

There are many evils in the GOP’s tax bills: redistribution to the one percent, big tax breaks for multi-nationals who ship jobs overseas, losses of insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act and more.  But for Marylanders, the additional slap in the face is that the bills shift the federal tax burden away from states like Texas, South Dakota, Alaska and Mississippi and onto residents of the Free State.  All Marylanders, including Republicans, should oppose that.

Share

Ron George: “Leftist Democrats” Believe Businesses are “Slave Plantations”

By Adam Pagnucco.

Former GOP Delegate and gubernatorial candidate Ron George, who is running for State Senate in District 30, said on Facebook that “leftist Democrats” think businesses are “running sweat kitchens or slave plantations.”  When challenged on his language by a reporter, he did not back down.

The Facebook exchange occurred on Daily Record reporter Bryan P. Sears’s page.  When Sears posted a video of Delegate Luke Clippinger weighing in on Governor Larry Hogan’s newest sick leave proposal, George wrote:

This helps no one. Employees will take it. Why not? Currently, I do not question my employees when they call in sick. It is their decision if they are too sick to work or have a personal need. But the small business owners I know in other states that have this say it is felt it is owed to them (the employees) and suddenly the business owners are simply paying for people not working. Why are the leftist democrats always thinking business owners are running sweat kitchens or slave plantations. Most treat their employees like family. I am responsible for my employees providing for their families and I feel responsible to do well for them and they feel the responsibility to do well for the business. Most owners put in many extra hours because of our responsibility to our employees and work extra hours for them. It ain’t easy.

George owns a jewelry store on Main Street in Annapolis.

When Sears raised the possibility that George’s reference to “slave plantations” might be viewed by some as “racially charged,” George replied, “In office I heard many comments speaking of business owners in disgust as if they are cold, heartless, inhumane.”  The full exchange appears below.

We get that as a business owner, George may not particularly enjoy the government setting his workplace practices.  But multiple polls find that huge majorities of Marylanders support paid sick leave.  Even Governor Hogan has introduced not one but two sick leave bills.  Are they all “leftist Democrats” who believe that business owners treat employees like slaves?  Or is Ron George as out of touch with Marylanders as he is inclined to the use of racially charged rhetoric?

Share

Should There Be Rent Control Near the Purple Line?

By Adam Pagnucco.

Council Member Marc Elrich, who recently equated potential gentrification near the Purple Line with “ethnic cleansing,” is taking flak for his remarks and is not backing down.  We will leave it to others to judge his choice of words.  But what interests us is the policy proposal he has made: specifically, Elrich would like to see rent control imposed near Purple Line stations.  That’s worth discussing.

Economists tend to disagree on many issues but a huge majority of them oppose rent control.  Liberal New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has written, “Almost every freshman-level textbook contains a case study on rent control, using its known adverse side effects to illustrate the principles of supply and demand.”  A massive review of economic research on rent control found evidence that it encourages conversions of rental units into condos and leads to higher rents in non-controlled units.  Rent control repeal in Cambridge, Massachusetts led to a surge in property values in both controlled and non-controlled units and a 20% increase in housing investment.  Even Communists denounce rent control.  In 1989, Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach told a news conference that rent control did more damage to his capital city than American bombs.  “The Americans couldn’t destroy Hanoi, but we have destroyed our city by very low rents. We realized it was stupid and that we must change policy.”

One need not go to a Communist nation to observe the effects of rent control.  MoCo has a good example of that policy right here at home: the City of Takoma Park, which passed a rent control law in 1981.  We examined U.S. Census data to analyze how the city’s housing stock compares to the county’s.  Below we show that just 10% of the city’s housing was built in 1980 or later, much lower than the county’s percentage of 47%.  That’s not a fair comparison since the city is much older than the vast majority of areas in the county.  However, other older areas inside the Beltway like Downtown Bethesda (27%), Chevy Chase (20%) and Downtown Silver Spring (26%) have much higher percentages of their housing built in 1980 or later than Takoma Park.

It gets worse.  Takoma Park has been losing rental housing units for years.  Below we show the city’s total, owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing units in 2000, 2010 and the five year period of 2011-2015.  During that time, the city’s total housing units fell by 4% and its renter-occupied units fell by 18%.  Owner-occupied units increased by 10% and vacancies rose by 30%.  No housing policy that produces double-digit losses in rental units can be described as good for renters.

Takoma Park’s housing decline is not going to turn around soon.  According to the site plans, preliminary plans and sketch plans listed on the MoCo Planning Department’s development tracking map, only two housing projects with a combined seven units are pending in Takoma Park.  Those units are all single family, which are exempt from the city’s rent control law.

This extract from the Planning Department’s site plan map shows the huge contrast in development plans between Takoma Park and Downtown Silver Spring.

The implication of all this is clear: housing developers are steering clear of Takoma Park’s rent control law.  These folks are not going to be any more enthusiastic about rent control near Purple Line stations.  Why does that matter?  When it comes to building new housing, there are basically three options.  First, you can build it near transit.  Second, you can build it away from transit, thereby incurring the associated congestion and environmental costs.  Or third, you can try to block it from being built, and that’s one probable effect of rent control.  But that won’t stop population growth – instead, it will result in overcrowded housing, unsafe living conditions and code violations.  (Such phenomena are not unknown in some areas of the county.)  Rent control near the Purple Line just encourages options two and three.

Finally, the Purple Line is a huge investment, costing at least $2.65 billion to construct.  Only an insane society would pour billions of dollars into a transit project and then stop new housing from being built next to it.  Even Vietnamese Communists would agree.

Disclosure: Your author is a long-time supporter of the Purple Line and is a publicly listed supporter of Council Member Roger Berliner for Executive.

Share

Giving Thanks

By Adam Pagnucco.

Today is Thanksgiving, an occasion for celebrating with friends and family and giving thanks.  And we here at Seventh State have many thanks to give.

We are thankful for the reporters, bloggers, troublemakers, rascals, rogues and scalawags who keep our government honest.  And we are thankful to this nation’s founders who created the First Amendment to protect them.

We are thankful for Facebook, which gives us online tirades by politicians available for screen shots.

We are thankful for the liquor monopoly, which gives us a rare county service to complain about.  (Snow plowing season hasn’t started yet.)

We are thankful for public campaign financing, which has helped give us more candidates than can fit in RFK Stadium.

A recent day at the County Board of Elections’ candidate counter.

We are thankful to all the County Council candidates who will shortly be filling out our 72-question questionnaire.  (We are kidding – or so they hope.)

We are thankful to our guest bloggers.  After all, someone has to come up with good content for this site!

We are thankful to David Trone, who has promised to give Total Wine coupons to everyone who votes for him.  (OK, this hasn’t happened, but we are entitled to our fantasies!)

We are thankful to Comptroller Peter Franchot, who is doing everything in his power to help Maryland craft beer connoisseurs.  (His occasional entertaining spats with Senate President Mike Miller are a bonus.)

We are thankful to Council Member Hans Riemer for having the best pair of pants in county politics.  (Not to mention one of the best-looking families of all time!)

We are thankful to everyone who signed the petition to deport Justin Bieber and we hope there is another one.  Perhaps the current President will take action!

We are thankful for Roger Goodell, who might be the only person in pro football worse than Dan Snyder.

We are thankful for Baltimore City State Senator Nathaniel Oaks, who brought back fond memories of Senator Clay Davis.

We are thankful to our many off-the-record sources without whom it would be impossible to understand what the government is doing.  Keep it coming, folks!

We are thankful to the government employees who educate our kids, protect us from crime and provide us with professional, top-notch services every day.  And we are thankful to the private sector employees and business owners who pay for them.

We are thankful for our families and friends, who knock us down when we deserve it and pick us up when we need it.

And most of all, we are thankful to Seventh State readers, who tolerate our dreck and inexplicably come back for more.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Share

Raising Money in Public Financing Takes a Long Time

By Adam Pagnucco.

Former Council Member Phil Andrews’s public financing system is in use for the first time during this election cycle.  It has already changed MoCo’s political landscape, with 33 county candidates – a majority of those running – so far enrolled.  It’s a bit early to say exactly how it will impact specific races, but two facts about the system are starting to become clear.

It’s cumbersome to use.  And candidates who use it need a long time to raise money.

We have already written about the burdensome administrative aspects of the system, especially in demonstrating residency of contributors.  (The system only provides matching public funds for in-county individual contributions of up to $150 each.)  An additional difficulty is meeting the thresholds for triggering eligibility for matching funds.  In order to collect matching funds, Executive candidates must receive contributions from 500 in-county residents totaling at least $40,000; at-large council candidates must receive contributions from 250 in-county residents totaling at least $20,000; and district council candidates must receive contributions from 125 in-county residents totaling at least $10,000.

So far, just seven of 33 participating candidates have reached the thresholds for public matching funds.  Council District 1 candidate Reggie Oldak was the fastest to qualify, hitting the threshold in 112 days.  But Oldak is a district candidate, meaning that her threshold is the lowest, and her district is the county’s wealthiest with the greatest concentration of political contributors.  At-large council candidate Hoan Dang hit his threshold in 148 days, barely beating out Bill Conway (155 days).  Council Members Marc Elrich and George Leventhal, who are running for Executive, needed more than 200 days each to qualify despite having large donor bases going back many years.

Then there are the other 26 candidates who have not yet qualified.  Six of them have been running for more than 200 days.  (District 4 incumbent Nancy Navarro will only be eligible to receive matching public funds if she gets an opponent.)  Eleven more have been running for at least 100 days.  Many of the non-qualifiers have been working hard for months.  It’s just tough to meet the thresholds.

Why is it taking so long to get matching funds?  One reason is that Andrews, the system’s architect, did not design the system to be easy.  He explicitly intended that public dollars only go to candidates who were viable in the sense that they had actual grass-roots support.  Another reason is the nature of fundraising itself.  Candidates who raise money turn to families and close friends first; past contributors next (if they have run before); then extended networks of professional connections, acquaintances and supporters’ networks; and finally complete strangers.  As each network gets further away from the candidate, the marginal difficulty of raising dollars increases.  In a public financing context, the first fifty contributions are easier than the next fifty, which in turn are easier than the fifty after that.  The last few contributions to reach the threshold are the hardest to get.

At-large candidate Danielle Meitiv has been working to hit the threshold with a video on Facebook.

Similar observations can be made about traditional fundraising with this exception: the private system has no single trigger that activates a stream of cash all at once.  The candidates in public financing will be weeded into two groups: the ones who get matching funds and the ones who don’t.  The latter group will be doomed to failure.

There’s one more lesson here for candidates: don’t get into a race late and expect to raise lots of money quickly through public financing.  Even if you have a history of donors going back more than a decade like Elrich and Leventhal, the public system is not built for speed.  If you are a late starter, chances are you will need either traditional fundraising or self-financing to close the gap and have a chance to win.

Share

Elrich: Without Rent Control, Purple Line Will Cause “Ethnic Cleansing”

By Adam Pagnucco.

In response to a question about just cause eviction and rent control at the Progressive Neighbors County Executive forum, Council Member Marc Elrich stated that the Purple Line would cause “ethnic cleansing” without a rent control law.  Elrich said:

I support rent stabilization and I think we need to be honest with ourselves about this.  If we throw up our hands about this and say the market will determine the price of housing and the market alone will determine that, then we are going to wipe out neighborhood after neighborhood in Montgomery County.  If you did that, then if you did not put rent stabilization around the Purple Line stops, for example, then the neighborhoods around the Purple Line will not continue to exist.  They will be bought, they will be repurposed and they will go to other people.

When we did the Long Branch plan, and Park and Planning came in and said we want to rezone all the existing housing in Long Branch, I accused the Planning Board of ethnic cleansing.  And I said some people do it with the gun, you guys are doing it with the pen but the truth is those folks would be gone and they would be gone forever…

Elrich’s remarks begin at the 2:29 mark of this video taken by Ryan Miner.

Disclosure: Your author is a long-time supporter of the Purple Line and is a publicly listed supporter of Council Member Roger Berliner for Executive.

Share