Tag Archives: David Moon

House Delegation Kills Country Club Payments

Del. David Moon sponsored a bill to require country clubs to pay taxes. In an effort to compromise and move the bill forward, David agreed to a changes proposed by Del. Vaughn Stewart that would instead force only the four most valuable country clubs to pay $100,000 fee instead. Even that amount proved too much and the bill died on a vote of 11-13.

Here’s a breakdown by legislative district:

D15: 0-3.

D16: 0-3.

D17: 1-2.

D18: 3-0.

D19: 2-1.

D20: 3-0.

D39: 1-2.

Share

Del. David Moon Touches the Third Rail of Maryland Politics

Delegate David Moon (D-20) may have done his political career irreparable harm and further cemented Takoma Park’s reputation as a very strange corner of Maryland when he tweeted the following joke the day before Thanksgiving:

We joke about lots of things in Maryland. Crab cakes and Old Bay aren’t among them. I won’t even eat “Maryland” crab cakes outside of the Old Line State because they are just a sad, pale shadow and about as real as Trump’s skin color.

Reaction has been swift:

If we don’t have an official state seasoning, someone needs to get on this ASAP. When politicians attack our core values, we need to take action. Or is this one of the terrible consequence of same-sex marriage that have finally come home to roost?

Share

Delegate Moon Analyzes the Results and Moving Forward

Today I am pleased to present a guest post from Delegate David Moon (D-20). Del. Moon is a leading progressive voice in the House of Delegates and was a savvy campaigner manager and blogger before he took the plunge and entered the House:

GOVERNORS RACE – The big story is obviously that Larry Hogan won a second term as Governor. I like the guy and wish him well, but no offense, I just couldn’t support him when he’s been vetoing things like paid sick days, renewable energy, ex-felon voting rights and marijuana decriminalization. I will give him credit on criminal justice reform, because I think he’s better than some Democrats on that issue, and his administration actively worked with our side to craft the Justice Reinvestment Act (note: Maryland now leads America in its prison population decline).

DOWNBALLOT RACES – Maryland preserved the status quo in its Congressional Delegation yesterday (2 Democratic US Senators, 7 Democratic US House Members, and 1 GOP US House Member). In contrast, the downballot races witnessed some big shifts, and Hogan’s win did not come with coattails in the state’s numerous competitive County Executive races. Democrats already had the top offices in Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Frederick. Last night, we held onto all of those offices, despite the purple tone of Baltimore and Frederick counties. More importantly, Democrats defeated the incumbent County Executives in Howard and Anne Arundel. That means we swept the elections in all of the state’s major population centers, and last year we replaced incumbent Republican Mayors in Annapolis and Frederick with Democrats.

HOGAN’S FUTURE – But I’ve had so many questions about how a 2nd Term Larry Hogan would choose to govern. Believe it or not, I’m actually a fan of the idea of Hogan trying to go national in the Republican Party, because he’s far less crazy than the current leaders in the national GOP. The problem is, that Larry Hogan is now term-limited, so he may not have to face Maryland voters again. Additionally, the current national GOP base incentivizes views that would not be considered moderate to the Democratic electorate in Maryland. Consider, for example, John McCain’s Confederate flag pandering in the South Carolina GOP Presidential Primary (he later apologized). Does an ambitious Hogan need to similarly worry about the GOP base and rightwing donors if he wants a future in the national GOP, or will he govern like the “bipartisan” candidate that appeared in Maryland? I suppose we’ll soon find out, and I assume this relates to what Hogan plans to do next. The calculus might be very different if he decides to run for US Senate vs President.

BUT THOSE VETOS – Either way, Hogan’s pesky vetos have always weighed heavy on me. Even knowing he had to face Maryland voters again, First Term Larry Hogan still vetoed popular policies like increasing renewable energy and guaranteeing paid sick days. It was only because of the veto-proof Democratic majorities in the House & Senate that Hogan’s wishes never became policy in Maryland. Imagine the opposition he would’ve faced this election cycle if we didn’t override his vetos, and policies like renewable energy and sick days then failed because of him.

Notably, Hogan was very publicly trying to defeat enough Democratic Senators yesterday to overrule the legislature on the issues I mentioned above (Google Larry Hogan “Drive for Five”). He was so upset about the Democratic veto overrides that he even opposed incumbent GOP Senator Steve Waugh in this year’s Republican Primary, because Waugh sometimes voted to override Hogan’s vetos. Waugh was then defeated in the primary by a Hogan-backed candidate, who we can now assume will tow the GOP party line on veto overrides (is that what moderate bipartisanship looks like?).

Clearly, Hogan cared about the Democratic policies he vetoed (I care too). But it remains troubling to me that these vetos were not a major focus of debate in yesterday’s election. It is not so mysterious though, when you consider how much of our attention has been drawn toward the Trump administration, and how Trump’s unique brand of crazy makes our governor look moderate, even when vetoing modest renewable energy increases. “Moderate” is obviously and inherently a relative concept.

MD HOUSE & SENATE – The good news is that Hogan didn’t succeed in breaking the Democratic supermajorities in the  State House and State Senate. Not even close. In the House of Delegates, not a single Democratic incumbent lost re-election yesterday, so all of our swing district Democrats are coming back. Moreover, we won 6 or 7 State House seats currently held by Republican Delegates, and we only lost 1 seat in the State Senate, where Hogan was targeting his efforts to destroy the Democratic veto-proof majority:

Democrats Gain 6 or 7 State House Seats
D3A (Frederick County) Ken Kerr defeats Bill Folden
D8 (Baltimore County) Harry Bhandari defeats Joe Cluster
D9B (Howard County)  Courtney Watson defeats Bob Flanagan D29B (St Mary’s County)  Brian Crosby defeats Deb Rey
D30A (Anne Arundel County)  Alice Cain wins open seat
D34A (Harford County) Steve Johnson with a 25-vote lead over Glen Glass
D42B (Baltimore County) Michelle Guyton wins open seat

Republicans Net 1 State Senate Seat
D9 (Howard) Democrat Katie Fry Hester defeats Sen. Gail Bates
D38 (Lower Eastern Shore) Republican Mary Beth Carozza defeats Sen. Jim Mathias

D42 (Baltimore Co) Republican Chris West wins open seat

8 FUTURE ISSUE BATTLES IN MARYLAND – It will be very interesting to see how yesterday’s election impacts the politics of the General Assembly. Here are a few issues I’m keeping an eye on:

1) IMMIGRATION – In the last four year term, the State House passed a few bills intended to provide protections to immigrants in Maryland. These bills generally died in the State Senate, perhaps with some concern about the seats Democrats had to defend in conservative territory this year. But House Democrats gained seats, even while passing policies like the “Trust Act,” which were labeled “sanctuary state” bills by the opposition. Hopefully this means immigration gets a fresh look in 2019.

2) MARIJUANA – Likewise marijuana legalization was at a potential fork in the road given Jealous’ support for the reform, and Hogan’s relative silence (but openness to a referendum). For what it’s worth, Michigan voters approved legalization yesterday, while Missouri and Utah of all places, approved medical marijuana.

3) JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS – There was some discussion during the election about the fact that due to Maryland’s mandatory retirement age for judges, 5 out of 7 members of our state’s highest court would be appointed by our next Governor (Hogan). Notably, during the last term there were serious pushes to increase the retirement age. Perhaps that issue returns once again.

4) TAX CUTS – Given that Hogan ran on cutting taxes (something he hasn’t really delivered on), I assume he’ll try again. We have a temporary budget surplus, but some Democrats will probably want to use it for something else like….

5) SCHOOL FUNDING – The Kirwan Commission recommendations for school funding and innovation will soon be made into policy proposals (eg: Pre-K). These will cost money. What will Hogan do?

6) HIGHWAY WIDENING – This was Hogan’s idea, so if he had lost re-election, these highway widening proposals would’ve been dead. Now they’re not. There will be a fight.

7) MINIMUM WAGE – There’s going to be a “Fight for $15” push in Maryland, and Montgomery County now has a minimum wage indexed to inflation. This debate is unavoidable.

8) REDISTRICTING – Duh.

How does all of this play out with a term-limited Republican Governor serving with an even deeper bench of Democratic lawmakers and County Executives? Hold on to your hats! The next four years are going to be very interesting.

Share

Unger Fires Campaign Manager for Stealing Lit

By Adam Pagnucco.

District 20 House candidate Darian Unger has fired his campaign manager for stealing and destroying literature belonging to his opponents.  Unger terminated him immediately upon seeing video of the act.

Unger’s campaign began paying John Rodriguez as a campaign manager in November 2017.  Rodriguez was profiled by the Washington City Paper’s Loose Lips in 2016 for his work with a firm called District Political in D.C. political campaigns, including fundraising.  The article ends with these paragraphs.

Apparently, Rodriguez still has some money to splash out. While LL was reporting this column, Rodriguez called, unbeknownst to his partners, to ask the name of the City Paper employee in charge of ad sales. He went on to ask whether LL would be aware if City Paper suddenly received a lot of money, and pondered how much he would have to spend in ads to gain more “power” to kill stories like this one.

It’s one more offbeat scheme from an outfit that tried to make its name with unlikely candidates. Unluckily for District Political, though, the problem with underdogs is that they tend to lose.

Update, 10 a.m.: According to a District Political statement released shortly after this article was published, Rodriguez is no longer a partner at the firm.

Now to the matter at hand.  The video below is security footage from the Silver Spring Civic Center on June 17.  At the beginning of the video, Senator Will Smith, Delegate David Moon and House candidate Lorig Charkoudian can be seen delivering lit to a storage area.  Smith, Moon and Charkoudian are running as a team in District 20 along with Delegate Jheanelle Wilkins.  Unger is a House candidate in the same race.  Smith deposits a box of lit on top of other materials and the group departs.  Soon after, a man matching Rodriguez’s description enters the room, looks around, grabs the lit box and places it in a dumpster outside.

The District 20 team all went on the record and identified the man as Rodriguez.  The team said the lit was worth $600.  Your author sent the video to Unger and asked him for comment.  Unger replied, “I just saw your email and the video.  I spoke with the campaign consultant and fired him immediately.  I consider such behavior to be completely unacceptable.”

As of this writing, we are unaware of an apology by Unger to the District 20 team.

Share

District 20 Incumbents Team Up With Charkoudian

By Adam Pagnucco.

District 20 Senator Will Smith and Delegates David Moon and Jheanelle Wilkins have decided to team up with non-incumbent House candidate Lorig Charkoudian in the upcoming primary.  Moon explained his decision to endorse his team on his Facebook page, writing specifically about Charkoudian, “I’ve also worked these last few years with Lorig on criminal justice reform and know she shares my commitment to driving down mass incarceration in Maryland. She used to live on my block in Takoma Park, and I’ve gotten to see her passion for justice issues up close.”

The decision to include a non-incumbent on the slate is reminiscent of 2014, when Senator Jamie Raskin and Delegate Sheila Hixson teamed up with new House candidates Moon and Smith.  In that election, all four were on the Apple Ballot.  That’s not true this time around as MCEA has supported Smith, Moon, Wilkins and second-time House candidate Darian Unger.

In addition to the incumbents, Charkoudian is supported by Casa in Action, the Laborers Union, MCGEO and NOW.  Unger is supported by MCEA, SEIU Locals 500 and 32BJ and the Volunteer Fire Fighters.  (Unger is himself a volunteer.)  On May 22, Charkoudian reported a cash balance of $37,226 and Unger had $27,897.

Share

Non-Incumbents Embrace Moon Country Club Bill

By Adam Pagnucco.

Delegate David Moon’s local bill on country clubs, which would have phased out a $10 million special tax break received only by country clubs with golf courses, did not get much love from elected officials.  The County Council did not support it (despite recently passing $53 million in budget cuts), the County Executive outright opposed it and Moon’s colleagues in the MoCo House Delegation killed it on a 17-7 vote.  This story is not quite over though because Moon has a statewide bill that would not eliminate the tax break but would limit country clubs’ assessed land value to one percent of market value.

Elected officials may not have embraced Moon’s bill but there is another group of people who absolutely loved it: non-incumbent candidates for office.  In the wake of the bill’s death, MANY candidates made clear they would support it if elected.  Here’s a sample.

Bill Conway (Council At-Large) tweeted in support of the bill.

Danielle Meitiv (Council At-Large) wrote in support of the bill on Facebook and criticized those who voted against it.

Andy Hoverman (House D-39) took out a Facebook ad supporting the bill.  Among the District 39 Delegates, Shane Robinson voted for the bill while Kirill Reznik and Charles Barkley (who is running for Council At-Large) voted against it.

Three non-incumbent candidates for Delegate in District 18 spoke out in favor of the bill on Seventh State’s Facebook page.

Emily Shetty said, “We have a budget deficit and are struggling to fully fund schools and other high priority services. I support David’s bill, and appreciate and would have supported the amendments he made to further tailor it as well. I don’t think it’s fair for private clubs to benefit from tax breaks otherwise unavailable to families and other employers in the state.”

Mila Johns said, “I 100% support David Moon’s bill. I have previously stated that on this page and I’m extremely grateful to Jeff Waldstreicher and Ana Sol Gutierrez for their principled vote. I read Al Carr’s reasoning and while I understand how he came to his decision, I disagree with it. It’s simply hard to believe so many in our county discarded a very reasonable way to raise revenue in a time of such painful budget shortfalls.”

Leslie Milano said, “Here’s where I stand: We cannot continue to subsidize a luxury restricted to the wealthy when taxpayers do not have access to the very thing they are subsidizing. The fact that only the very wealthy can access this subsidized luxury is extremely distasteful, especially when there is a great deal of poverty in our county as well as a budget shortfall of $120M affecting a variety of areas for every taxpayer. I would sponsor or co-sponsor a revised bill come January to ensure that clubs are paying their fair share. I agree with Ike Leggett that MoCo clubs shouldn’t be taxed differently than clubs in other counties, but I think we need to course correct MoCo clubs first with a local bill – as a sign of good faith – and in a second bill address remaining clubs in the state, which is David’s proposal. It will be easier to pass in two stages and moves us in the right direction.”

Among the District 18 Delegates, Al Carr voted against the bill while Ana Sol Gutierrez (who is running for Council District 1) and Jeff Waldstreicher (who is running for Senate) voted for it.

Several other candidates sent us statements in support of the bill.  They include:

Brandy Brooks (Council At-Large)

Our budget and tax policies should be built around the mutual concept of the common and each contributing their fair share. The common good should guide us in our decisions as well as our interactions with one another. It’s clear the special tax breaks for country clubs benefit only a few.  When wealthy special interests have a major influence over the policy discussions — even around common sense bills to create tax equity — our communities suffer. The county faces a huge budget shortfall, a severe housing crisis, income inequality, and education and opportunity gaps in our schools, to name a few of the pressing issues. Yet, the arguments made by those opposing the bill fail to address these needs. Instead, the country club lobbyist gave lawmakers an ultimatum: kill this bill or workers lose their jobs. All too often, hourly and low wage workers are the first to suffer when management says they need to tighten their belt.   Our policymaking should be focused on the common good. Lawmakers need to hear the voices of everyday people over corporate and big money interests. Our voices — the voices of everyday people — must be central in our policymaking, otherwise we further divide the county into the haves and have nots.

Hoan Dang (Council At-Large)

I strongly backed Delegate Moon’s bill to phase out the special property tax break for Montgomery County country clubs. I was disappointed that this bill was killed by special interests in this County.   This action is another example of why we need more efforts to take money out of politics, such as the public financing of all candidates in Montgomery County from School Board to the General Assembly.

Seth Grimes (Council At-Large)

I support ending special tax treatment for country clubs. Thanks to David Moon for taking a shot. We’ll try again in 2019.

Ben Shnider (Council District 3)

It’s common sense that clubs with annual dues in the tens of thousands of dollars should pay their fair share in taxes when we’re struggling to keep up with vital investments in transportation, school facilities, and other critical infrastructure. It’s not sustainable to keep raising taxes on working families in the County to meet our budgetary needs.

Vaughn Stewart (House D-19)

It’s a shame that this proposal to bring the taxes paid by country clubs in line with the far higher taxes paid by working families and seniors failed to generate wide support. The extra $10 million of revenue per year would be especially beneficial at a time when the county is cutting school funding to address a $120 million budget shortfall caused in part by wealthy residents strategically withholding capital gains. If we can’t afford to pay teachers and staff what they deserve, we can’t afford tax breaks for Montgomery County’s Mar-a-Lagos. I’ve spoken to thousands of District 19 residents since starting this campaign, and they want to know how I’m going to reduce their healthcare costs, create alternatives to traffic congestion, and fully fund their kids’ schools. Not one of them has asked me to continue subsidizing the golf games of our county’s wealthiest few. I look forward to helping Delegate Moon revive this bill next session.

Editor’s Note: All three District 19 Delegates – Bonnie Cullison, Ben Kramer and Marice Morales – voted against the bill.

Chris Wilhelm (Council At-Large)

I’m disappointed that our County and State representatives weren’t willing to stare down the country club lobbyists on this bill, especially when the County is getting ready to balance the budget by cutting from education and other important services. I see this issue through a racial equity lens: how can we claim to “resist” and stand up for our diverse community when so many of our officials were unwilling in this instance to help shift the tax burden from lower and moderate income residents to the ultra wealthy? This is why Montgomery County needs to stop patting itself on the back for being the most progressive place in the world; we aren’t.

*****

Additionally, institutional supporters of Moon’s bill include SEIU Local 500, MCGEO, National Nurses United, Montgomery County Young Democrats and the Sligo Creek Golf Association (which advocates for a public golf course).

Moon’s statewide bill, which limits but does not abolish the country club tax break, is headed to a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee tomorrow (February 27).  The Chair of the Committee, Delegate Anne Kaiser (D-14), voted against the local version of the bill.

Share

Moon Explains Failure of Country Club Tax Break Bill

By Adam Pagnucco.

In the wake of the failure of his bill that would have phased out a special property tax break for MoCo country clubs, the Facebook page of Delegate David Moon (D-20) saw an eruption of commenters expressing outrage, disbelief and mockery.  (Some raised the prospect of starting country clubs in their back yards to get similar tax breaks.)  In response to repeated requests, Moon analyzed the arguments against his bill and told the story of how it died.  Moon’s account contains references to a well-intended amendment by Delegate Eric Luedtke (D-14), who tried to narrow the bill to allow it to pass.  But he also describes the tactics used by a lobbyist hired by the clubs to kill the bill which demonstrate just how far some special interests will go to protect what they have been granted by government.  We intend to find out what that lobbyist was paid when reports come due.

We reprint Moon’s breakdown of the arguments against his bill below.

*****

Let me finally try and add some detail to this bill.

Argument 1 – Treating MoCo Differently Than Other Counties: The bill as originally introduced repealed these tax breaks for all of Montgomery County’s golf courses. State law doesn’t allow counties to asses property differently from one another, so the bill needed a constitutional amendment (subject to approval by voters), to give MoCo permission to repeal the Country Club tax breaks. Some people (including Ike Leggett) argued that MoCo shouldn’t be taxing country clubs differently from other counties. I found that argument unpersuasive, as MoCo has a majority of the state’s country clubs receiving this tax break. Additionally, MoCo loses far more money from this tax break than other counties. This is because in 2002, state law created a flat fee for country club assessments at $1,000 an acre. The problem with that is that in MoCo, many of our country clubs are sitting on land worth between $300,000 and $1 million per acre. You will not find that scenario in any other county, as their land is worth far less. So the flat fee seriously harms counties with valuable land. I offered one amendment to change the bill to simply say the county should decide the country club tax assessments, since they are the ones losing money from this. That amendment failed narrowly. But even still, some people simply had a problem with amending the state constitution to fix this problem. I honestly don’t care what the mechanism is to address the issue (we inserted slot machines into our state constitution, for example). I also have a statewide bill (HB 1340) that addresses this issue by changing the $1,000/acre assessment to 1% of market value, to account for the different land values in Maryland. A few of my colleagues suggested this issue should be taken up as a statewide measure and didn’t think it made sense as a local bill. But to be honest, one of the reasons I did both a local bill and a statewide bill is that it will likely be far more difficult to persuade lawmakers from around the state to fix this broken system. It now remains to be seen whether lawmakers who opposed my MoCo bill on the grounds of treating all the counties the same will now support the statewide bill. I will forward the state bill to the County Executive to see if it now addresses his stated concerns.

Argument 2 – Some Country Clubs Are In Poor Financial Shape: A common argument made against my bill is that of the 15 or 16 MoCo golf courses receiving this tax break, not all had wealthy members. Some argued that they were teetering on the brink of closure and would shut down if this bill passed. The country club lobbyist got all the janitors and service staff from the clubs to come to Annapolis and tell lawmakers they would all be fired if the bill passed. It was a true spectacle. I tried to counter this argument with amendments to make the bill more need-based. I proposed that we cap the tax discount at the first $400,000 per acre of market value, so that almost all of the clubs would be unaffected except for the super wealthy ones that charge huge initiation fees ($40,000 to $70,000 just to join). The country club lobbyist opposed this and other amendments. Basically, they were saying this would put courses out of business, but when we proposed amendments to make that not the case, the lobbyist opposed those fixes, too. Nice move! To be fair to my House colleagues, they never had an opportunity to vote for this version of the bill, because we didn’t adopt the narrowing amendments in subcommittee.

Argument 3 – Country Clubs Provide Jobs & Do Charitable Work: Another routine argument during this debate was that the country clubs employ people and let charities use their facilities. My response here is that plenty of entities employ people and do charitable work AND pay their taxes. But what this argument really turns on, is the idea that passing this bill would put the clubs out of business. As I noted above, I had an amendment to address that issue, but the country club lobbyist (who was formerly a State Senator who sponsored the bill for country club tax cuts) opposed the amendment. Come on now.

Argument 4 – Open Space & Those Evil Developers!: Yet another frequently cited argument against my bill was that the country clubs would close and lead to rampant development. The Sierra Club ought to go do a membership drive at country clubs, because apparently there are hundreds of open space conservation activists at country clubs, and we didn’t know it! Kidding aside, there are a number of reasons why this is a flawed argument. First, it assumes that country clubs will close BECAUSE OF this bill. As I noted above, I offered to amend the bill to exclude clubs that are not wealthy. Second, you would have to believe that a wealthy club with hundreds of acres of land worth $1 million/acre and waiting list to join would shut the entire club over a tax bill increase in the thousands. As some have noted, the wealthy clubs could simply add some members or sell a tiny piece of their land IF this was really an issue (and I doubt it is, with the amendments I offered). Moreover, the teetering country clubs are in trouble because there is a generational shift away from golf being a popular hobby. We didn’t throw money at Blockbuster or Tower Records to keep those businesses open when the market shifted on them, but then again, their customers were not wealthy and politically influential people. Additionally, nothing would stop the county from exercising its zoning and staging authority over a failed country club, and I would be willing to bet that’s exactly what would happen if one of these clubs failed. Let’s also be clear that even if you don’t like development, only ONE of these clubs was in the Ag Reserve, and Eric Luedtke offered an amendment which I supported to exclude that club (it was rejected). Many of the clubs inside the beltway are in areas of the county that are zoned for development (not open space), per the master plans that guide county development. If people have a problem with that, they should argue for extending the Ag Reserve to the DC border, near highway exits and transit (an absurd policy proposition). Given that many of these inside-the-beltway clubs are located in highly desirable school districts, this amounts to an argument for residents who are privileged enough to live in the W cluster keeping out others who also want the privilege to live there. The tax implications of this de facto development moratorium are far greater than $10 million a year for the county. Moreover, a supermajority of MoCo lawmakers also cosponsored the bill to drop 50,000 Amazon workers onto the county without worrying about the development implications. But remember once again, that there were amendments offered to take this development issue off the table.

When I first embarked on this effort to rein in country club tax breaks, I thought this would be a simple bill. Boy was I wrong! I now know more than I could’ve imagined about this issue, and the more I learn the more I’m convinced that this situation is seriously messed up. I’ll be back with more legislation on this issue next year, including looking at how we enforce the anti-discrimination provisions regarding country clubs and pesticide restrictions for clubs receiving these tax breaks (since the environmental, open space argument is being made!).

In the meantime, I encourage everyone to listen to Malcolm Gladwell’s fascinating podcast on this topic.

Share

MoCo Delegates Kill Moon Country Club Bill

By Adam Pagnucco.

Montgomery County’s Delegates have killed a local bill proposed by Delegate David Moon (D-20) that would have eliminated a special tax break for country clubs contained in state law.  Seventeen Delegates voted to kill the bill while seven voted in its favor.

Under current state law, the State Department of Assessments and Taxation (SDAT) is permitted to enter into agreements with country clubs possessing golf courses that would set the assessed value of their land at $1,000 per acre.  Moon’s bill would have phased out these agreements in Montgomery County subject to approval by voters.  The fiscal note on the bill indicated that the state government would have received an extra $1 million a year in tax revenue and the county government would have received an extra $10 million a year once the agreements were ended.  Despite the fact that the county just reported a $120 million shortfall, neither the County Executive nor the County Council supported the bill.

Since it was a local bill, the bill needed to clear Montgomery County’s House delegation before advancing to further votes by the county’s Senators and the full General Assembly.  That vote took place this morning.  After two unsuccessful attempts were made to amend the bill, Delegate Kathleen Dumais (D-15) made an unfavorable motion on it, which is tantamount to a no vote.  Delegate Sheila Hixson (D-20) seconded the motion.  Seventeen Delegates voted in favor of that motion and seven voted against.  The seven Delegates who voted in support of Moon’s bill were Moon, Ana Sol Gutierrez (D-18), Aruna Miller (D-15), Andrew Platt (D-17), Jeff Waldstreicher (D-18), Shane Robinson (D-39) and Jheanelle Wilkins (D-20).  We reprint the vote tally below.  In reading it, remember that a “Yea” vote is a vote to kill the bill.

Share

Campaign Finance Reports: Districts 20 and 39, January 2018

By Adam Pagnucco.

District 20

Everybody in this district is broke, including the incumbents.  Gone are the days when Jamie Raskin, Sheila Hixson, Heather Mizeur and Tom Hucker were raising money hand over fist and Jonathan Shurberg was writing himself six-digit checks!

If money is not a differentiator, the landscape will favor the three incumbents: Senator Will Smith and Delegates David Moon and Jheanelle Wilkins.  We anticipate that the three will team up, combine resources, get most if not all of the institutional endorsements and be reelected.  That leaves a contest for the open seat being vacated by the Queen of District 20, long-time Delegate Sheila Hixson.  Lorig Charkoudian, who runs a community mediation non-profit, has deep roots in Takoma Park and has been an advocate on progressive legislation at the state level (including abolishing the death penalty).  She finished second for last year’s Delegate appointment to Wilkins.  Howard University professor and volunteer fire fighter Darian Unger ran for the House in 2014 and finished fifth.  In that race, Unger was endorsed by the Washington Post, the Gazette, the Volunteer Fire Fighters, the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters.

The Big Question: will there be a mixed slate featuring the incumbents and either Charkoudian or Unger?  Such an event would be a repeat of 2014, when incumbents Raskin and Hixson teamed up with newcomers Moon and Smith to sweep the primary.

District 39

We should run a poll of Seventh State readers on whether this district is messier than District 17.  Last time, the four incumbents – Senator Nancy King and Delegates Charles Barkley, Kirill Reznik and Shane Robinson – had no primary opponents and cruised to reelection.  This year, Barkley’s decision to run for County Council At-Large has opened a seat.  MCGEO President Gino Renne threatened to defeat Reznik last May a month after Renne’s employee, Gabe Acevero, began his campaign for the House.  Shortly thereafter, the incumbents chose to slate with newcomer Lesley Lopez and it was Game On.  Just last week, County Executive Ike Leggett piled on, endorsing Acevero and accusing the incumbents of slating with Lopez in a “smoke-filled room.”  That’s an ironic comment from Leggett considering that he was first elected in 1986 as a new candidate invited by incumbents onto a mixed slate.

Putting aside the admittedly fun political food fight, the data above shows one salient fact: no one has any money except the incumbents.  That’s a big deal for Lopez as she can benefit from pooled resources with the rest of her slate.  Acevero’s path to victory necessitates rolling up lots of labor support – and not just from MCGEO and its affiliates – and raising enough money to break through.  That’s not easy to do in this district, which lacks the legions of liberal activists of District 20 and the wealthy neighborhoods of Districts 15, 16 and 18.

The Big Question: will the tumult over the incumbents’ mixed slate filter down to the voters or is it just something that the chattering class (and obsessive bloggers) will yap about?  If it’s the latter, the slate strategy could pay off.

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