By Adam Pagnucco.
The U.S. Postal Service sent out this postcard last week recommending that mail voters request ballots at least 15 days before election day and mail them in at least 7 days before election day. The State Board of Elections has further information on voting.
By Adam Pagnucco.
MoCo voters will see two charter amendments on property taxes on their ballots this fall. One of them was submitted by long-time anti-tax activist Robin Ficker, who delivered his petition signatures in February. The other was authored by Council Member Andrew Friedson and placed on the ballot by the county council. The Washington Post editorial board dislikes both, but for progressives, the choice is clear: the Friedson amendment is superior in providing adequate funding for government.
The first reason why progressives should support the Friedson amendment over the Ficker amendment is due to the nature of how they allow revenue increases. The Ficker amendment uses the methodology of the current charter limit on property taxes, which dates back to 1990. Currently, MoCo’s charter allows the volume of real property tax collections to rise at the rate of inflation with a few relatively minor exceptions. Friedson’s charter amendment would cap the weighted average tax rate on real property and allow collections to rise with assessments. So to compare their revenue generation over time, we need to compare the growth in price inflation (which is relied upon by the Ficker amendment) to the growth in assessments (which is relied upon by the Friedson amendment).
The chart below compares the growth in the county’s assessed value of real property to the growth in the Washington-Baltimore Consumer Price Index (CPI) from 2003 through 2017.
This period contained three distinct economic phases. The 2003-2010 period saw robust economic growth throughout the Washington region, causing assessment growth (115%) to far outpace price inflation (26%). Then came the Great Recession years of 2010 to 2013, during which assessments fell (5% over three years) while prices rose modestly (7%). In the slow recovery through 2017, assessments went up by 12% while prices rose by 4%. For the entire period, assessments increased by 129% while price inflation was 41%, suggesting that Friedson’s approach would have yielded MUCH more property tax revenue growth than Ficker’s. (The exact difference would have depended on other factors such as the application of tax credits, especially the homestead tax credit.)
That said, in four of these sixteen years – the period of the Great Recession – Ficker’s approach would have raised more than Friedson’s because real estate values tend to decline during prolonged economic downturns. That leads us to the second major difference between the Friedson and Ficker amendments. Friedson’s amendment allows a unanimous council vote to break the charter limit on property taxes, which continues current practice. Ficker’s amendment eliminates the ability of the council to break the limit, thereby instituting a hard cap on property tax collections. (There is an important exception to this in state law which will be the subject of a future post.) If property tax collections collapse during a recession, Friedson would allow the council to intervene in case of an emergency while Ficker would not. That’s another big reason why progressives should support the Friedson amendment.
Some progressives were disappointed because they wanted the council to adopt County Executive Marc Elrich’s proposed charter amendment, which would have made property tax hikes easier. Good luck getting MoCo voters whose wallets are getting slammed by COVID-19 to support anything opening the door to tax hikes. The Friedson and Ficker amendments both limit property tax increases, but since the Friedson amendment raises more money over time, it deserves the support of the left.
Update: An earlier version of this post was based on changes in the national CPI. This version is based on the Washington-Baltimore CPI. The two measures change at similar rates so the conclusions here are unaffected.
By Adam Pagnucco.
Circuit court judge candidate Marylin Pierre, who is backed by a number of progressive groups, has responded to an article by former county GOP chairman Alexander A. Bush describing her efforts to court Republicans. Pierre’s response appears below.
*****
Thank you, Mr. Pagnucco, for the opportunity to comment on this article. I am proud to be a candidate for judge in the Montgomery County Circuit Court in the 2020 Presidential election. As you know, the election for Judge of the Circuit Court is non-partisan, and I have and will, continue to seek the support of all voters — Democrats, Republicans, third-party voters, and independents.
My conversations with the MCGOP members were about me appearing on the Republican primary ballot. I was reaching out to voters in both parties because I am running for a position where I would appear on both the Republican and the Democratic ballot in the primary. I paid to attend some events that were sponsored by the Republican party. I also paid to attend some events that were sponsored by the Democratic party.
As a United States Army veteran with more than 28 years of legal experience practicing civil and criminal law in Montgomery County, past President of the J. Franklyn Bourne Bar Association, and former Chair of the Montgomery County Criminal Justice Coordinating Commission, I have been recognized for my work by the Montgomery County Bar Association, the Montgomery County Bar Foundation, the Daily Record, and the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee. Let me be clear, I am committed to excellence, dignity, and justice for members of all parties who would come before me as a judge.
Marylin
By Adam Pagnucco.
The Washington Post’s editorial board has weighed in on MoCo’s competing charter amendments and recommends voting against all of them. The Post wrote that both citizens’ initiatives – Robin Ficker’s amendment on taxes and the nine council district proposal – were bad ideas. But the Post also said, “Yet neither of the council’s competing proposals is preferable to the status quo.” The Post’s verdict is to vote against all of the amendments and stick with the county’s current property tax system and council structure.
You can read the Post’s editorial here.
By Adam Pagnucco.
Marylin Pierre, whose insurgent campaign for circuit court judge is backed by some progressive groups, has courted the county Republican Party for support. At least that’s what the former chairman of the MoCo GOP is claiming. And he has a picture and campaign finance records to prove it.
Maryland judicial elections are strange birds. In most elections, candidates run in partisan primaries to get their party nominations. The party nominees then face off against each other along with any write-in or unaffiliated petition candidates in a general election. In elections for circuit court or orphan’s court judges, candidates may run in any party primaries, including more than one party at a time, and whoever wins those primaries appears on the ballot in a non-partisan general election. For the most part, judicial candidates are those who emerge from a rigorous vetting process by judicial nominating commissions and receive temporary appointments to the bench pending election. However, other candidates who are age 30 or older, have been a state resident for 5 years and are a member of the Maryland bar may also run for judge.
Pierre has tried but failed to make it through the state’s vetting process before. Nevertheless, she has run for circuit court judge as is her right under state law. This year, four seats are on the ballot, each occupied by a vetted appointee (a sitting judge) seeking election. In the Republican primary, all four slots were won by the four sitting judges. In the Democratic primary, Pierre won one of the slots with three of the four sitting judges taking the others. Pierre is now facing the four sitting judges in a contentious general election. The top four vote-getters will win.
This is not the first time Pierre has run for judge. She ran in both the Democratic and Republican primaries in 2018 too, losing both and failing to advance to the general election. In evaluating Pierre’s current campaign, former MoCo GOP chairman and current central committee member Alexander A. Bush wrote an article on the party’s website recalling Pierre’s 2018 campaign. Bush wrote:
For a judicial candidate to get their name on the November General Election ballot, they must win in either the Republican or Democratic Primary election. Historically, insurgent candidates have focused on trying to win in the Republican Primary, because our primary has only about 15% as many voters as the Democratic Primary. It’s simple math: the campaigning necessary to win among 12,000 Republicans is a lot easier than the campaigning necessary to convince 75,000 Democrats.
And in 2018, that is exactly what Marylin Pierre attempted to do.
In January that year, Mrs. Pierre and her treasurer came to our candidate training event and assured those running the event that she would be a strongly conservative judge and asked for the party’s support in the 2018 Primary. Mrs. Pierre came to one of our fundraising dinners in early February to ask for our votes again, as campaign finance records will show. And later that month she came to our yearly convention, and proudly posed for a photo with the current county chairwoman for the Trump for President Campaign.
Bush ran this photo as proof.
State Board of Elections records also support Bush’s account, showing Pierre making two $70 contributions to the county Republican Party. One of those contributions (on 2/14/18) was made during the 2018 cycle. The other (on 2/5/19) was made after the 2018 election and occurred during this cycle.
Bush’s reaction to all this is scathing. He wrote:
Mrs. Pierre lost in both parties’ primaries in 2018. In fact, she did worse in the Republican Primary. Obviously, she has decided to change her strategy, and has remade herself into whatever she thinks will help her win.
If this doesn’t convince you, regardless of your political views, not to vote for Marylin Pierre, then nothing will.
After writing his article, Bush later told me directly, “At the candidate training, she asked for MCGOP’s support, claiming she would be a ‘law and order’ judge who would be tough on bail.”
This time around, Pierre is running as anything but a Republican. She has participated in Progressive Maryland’s candidate training program and has been endorsed by Progressive Neighbors, Our Revolution and Town of Somerset Mayor Jeffrey Slavin, one of the most progressive elected officials on Planet Earth. What would they have thought if they knew that she had been courting and donating to Republicans?
There is more. In a video on Facebook, Pierre criticized her opponents because a Trump supporter sat on one of their nominating commissions. Showing the person at a pro-Trump rally, Pierre said, “This woman was on the commission that recommended almost half of the Montgomery County judges to the governor. Does she share your values? Will the judges she recommended take Montgomery County in the direction you want to go?”
And so Pierre goes after her opponents because a Trump supporter sat on one of their nominating commissions after she herself gave money to the county GOP – twice.
I have asked Pierre for comment on Bush’s story and I will print it when I receive it.
By Adam Pagnucco.
A new group formed by former County Executive Ike Leggett, former Congresswoman Connie Morella, businessman and former county executive candidate David Blair and business owner Carmen Ortiz Larsen is holding a press event on Monday to discuss their plans to oppose charter amendments by Robin Ficker and Nine Districts for MoCo. Maryland Matters discussed the group in broad terms today but did not name its leaders. The group’s news advisory (listing Leggett’s former public information officer Patrick Lacefield as contact) appears below.
*****
COUNTY LEADERS LEGGETT, MORELLA, BLAIR, LARSEN TO ANNOUNCE LAUNCH OF “NO ON QUESTIONS B & D COMMITTEE”
Former County Executive Isiah Leggett, former Congresswoman Connie Morella, non-profit leader David Blair, and Latina tech business owner Carmen Ortiz Larsen will speak out against November Montgomery County ballot questions B and D and urge a “NO” vote on both. Question B would put an inflexible cap on County property taxes, on top of already existing limitations on increases, severely hampering the County from responding to crises such as COVID-19 and sustaining critical services such as education and public safety. Question D would eliminate the County’s four at-large Council seats and replace it with nine individual districts. The impact would reduce the number of Councilmembers each voter can vote for from five to one.
WHEN: Monday, September 14 at 10:15 AM
WHERE: Outside of the Dennis Avenue Health Center, 2000 Dennis Avenue in Silver Spring
CONTACT: Patrick Lacefield
By Adam Pagnucco.
MoCo Inspector General (IG) Megan Davey Limarzi has released her office’s annual report for Fiscal Year 2020 and it’s a doozy. The prior year was a very busy one for her and her staff!
The headline from her report is an obvious one – the phenomenal rise in complaints in FY20, the first full year of the new administration. The IG wrote, “We received 165 complaints in FY2020. This represents a 92% increase from FY2019.” The IG noted that her office’s authority was extended to the Housing Opportunities Commission and Montgomery College in October 2019 but she does not credit that for the rise in complaints. Instead, she said, “We attribute the increase in complaints to expanded outreach efforts and the perceived effectiveness of our reviews and investigations.”
This chart in the IG’s report shows skyrocketing complaints in the most recent fiscal year.
The report summarizes numerous IG reports, including some that have already attracted press coverage: the overtime “scam” in the fire department, the report on former Chief Administrative Officer Andrew Kleine’s ethics violations and the report about MCPS’s bus camera contract.
Two additional reports stand out. The first concerns the county’s Office of Human Resources (OHR). The IG wrote:
We initiated a review based on numerous complaints alleging improper practices within the Office of Human Resources (OHR), including internal hiring processes, assignment of employee salaries and use of contractors.
We found that OHR did not follow normal competitive procurement processes when they awarded four contracts to one individual in an apparent attempt at splitting purchases to avoid contracting thresholds. In total, OHR made $184,900 in payments to the individual or a company they controlled. To facilitate some of the payments, OHR inappropriately used the “exempt” commodity code associated with collective bargaining, falsely indicating that County procurement requirements did not apply.
The second concerns the Department of Health and Human Services. The IG wrote:
The OIG conducted an investigation based on a complaint alleging a Montgomery County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) manager misused Recovery Oriented Systems of Care (ROSC) grant funds resulting in a referral to the State’s Attorney’s Office. Through our investigation, we found evidence that the County DHHS manager engaged in a clear pattern of mismanagement and violations of County procurement regulations regarding the management of ROSC funds.
Was anyone disciplined for these violations?
The IG’s office, part of the legacy of former Council Member and former County Executive Ike Leggett, is one of the most valuable offices in MoCo government. With ten thousand people working for the county, there is bound to be some mischief going on and taxpayers deserve to know about it. That said, since the office has been around for more than 20 years and is therefore known to many county employees, it’s an open question as to whether expanded outreach alone is responsible for the astounding eruption in complaints last year. The county council should ask the executive branch why complaints to the IG have exploded under its watch.
By Adam Pagnucco.
Montgomery County’s COVID-19 dashboard is a great resource for judging the county’s progress in its efforts to control the coronavirus. Unfortunately, it’s not so great at enabling comparison with other jurisdictions, most of whom don’t release data at that level of detail. Inter-jurisdictional comparison is relevant because both public health and economic competitiveness cross state and county lines. Also, if local leaders facing similar circumstances make different decisions, that’s important for voters to know.
Johns Hopkins University hosts data on COVID cases and deaths relative to population by county on its website. On those two measures, here is how MoCo compares to other large jurisdictions in the region as of 9/6/20.
MoCo is about average for the region in terms of cases per capita. It is above average on deaths per capita. Prince George’s County has been hardest hit in terms of cases and, along with D.C., on deaths.
The data above illustrates the historical impact of COVID-19 but it’s less helpful in understanding recent trends. The table below shows cases in the two most-recent 7 day periods (8/24-8/30 and 8/31-9/6) relative to population.
During the 8/24-8/30 period, MoCo had the lowest cases per capita of any large jurisdiction in the region. During the following week (8/31-9/6), MoCo was below the regional average and about equal to Baltimore City, Howard, Fairfax and Loudoun. It’s worth noting that MoCo’s cases per capita increased over the two weeks.
MoCo is one of just four jurisdictions in Maryland (along with Baltimore City and Anne Arundel and Prince George’s counties) that is not reopening in line with the state’s phase 3. MoCo’s cases per capita in the most recent week are roughly equal to or lower than Howard, which is proceeding to stage 3, and most of Northern Virginia, which has been operating under Virginia’s phase 3 (which is less restrictive than Maryland’s) since July 1.
Here’s the bottom line, folks: if reopening is a data driven decision, then the facts do not point exclusively in one direction. As seen here and in Part One, supporters and opponents of reopening can each point to data that reinforces their respective points of view. Anyone who says that the data is completely with them is mistaken.
That said, each side bears a burden in making their argument.
County Executive Marc Elrich must explain why he continues to resist reopening despite improvement in the majority of the county’s tracked measures. He must also explain why some jurisdictions with similar or higher recent COVID case rates have proceeded to greater economic liberalization than MoCo, especially in Virginia.
The critics have a different problem. Elrich has been very consistent in saying that public health is his top priority. In making that judgment, he is far from alone among MoCo residents. Critics have to acknowledge that further reopening creates greater risk. They must also explain why public health should not be considered the county’s sole top priority, or at the very least why concessions on that issue are justified by economic recovery.
By Adam Pagnucco.
Last week, Governor Larry Hogan announced that Maryland would enter phase 3 of its reopening, which included a partial lifting of restrictions on indoor theaters, outdoor venues, retail stores and religious institutions. County Executive Marc Elrich said he was a “bit disappointed” with the decision and said the governor “has again taken us by surprise.” Declaring “this is not party time,” Elrich declined to follow the state’s reopening plan, which he is allowed to do under the governor’s executive orders.
Jurisdictions around the state are split. Anne Arundel, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties are not proceeding to phase 3. Baltimore City is not either, although it is relaxing some restrictions. Most of the rest of the state, including large jurisdictions like Baltimore County, Frederick and Howard, are moving into phase 3 with a handful of small counties not making announcements yet.
Elrich has said time and again that his reopening decisions are made based on data and science. Elrich’s critics say he is not balancing economic needs with public health and that county restrictions are driving MoCo residents to spend money in neighboring jurisdictions.
Who is right?
First, let’s look at MoCo’s COVID-19 dashboard, which tabulates 10 quantitative data points and 7 qualitative data points identified by the county as relevant to its progress. At this writing (Sunday, September 6), 4 data points (intensive care unit bed utilization, percentage of ventilators in use, test positivity and hospitalizations) have been rated adequate on at least 80% of the days since the county went into phase 2. No data points have been rated inadequate on a majority of those days, although one (acute care bed utilization rate) was close. This is not a perfect record, but it’s a decent one.
The record looks stronger when these numbers are compared to the worst days in May. Let’s look at the county’s weakest measure: acute care bed utilization rate. This measure has averaged just above 70% in the last couple weeks. It topped out at 82% in early May. Bear in mind that this is the county’s weakest measure and it has shown improvement.
Now here is one of the county’s strongest measures: the percentage of the county’s ventilators in use. In the second week of May, this measure peaked at just over 60%. It has now been under 30% since mid-August.
The qualitative criteria are even better. As of September 6, 4 criteria were judged to be met and 3 were making progress.
Elrich and his critics can each find support for their arguments in this data. Elrich can say that not every measure is where it should be and that the trend of improvement is not as robust as it was in June or July. Those who disagree can say that most measures have been improving, and if that is not enough to justify further reopening, then what is?
All of the above is just one dimension of the issue. In Part Two, we shall see how MoCo compares to its neighbors.
By Adam Pagnucco.
These were the top stories on Seventh State in August ranked by page views.
1. The Squeaky Wheel and Inequities Hiding in Plain Sight
2. Is Talbot County Killing its Golden Goose?
3. Revealed! Funders of Nine Districts
4. Hogan Overturns MoCo Closure of Private Schools
5. MoCo Shuts Down Private Schools – Again
6. Volcano in Rockville
7. Two Districts vs Nine Districts
8. Council Drops Poison Pill on Nine Districts
9. Is the Council Violating the Open Meetings Act?
10. Friedson Asks for Answers on Private School Shutdown
Congratulations to MoCo PTA Vice-President Laura Stewart on writing our top post of the month! Laura’s excellent analysis of school construction geography was widely seen and provoked questions about county capital project decision making. Our Talbot County post saw lots of circulation and commentary on the Eastern Shore. The two major stories of Nine Districts and private school reopenings accounted for most of the rest of our top August posts. Keep reading and we’ll keep writing!
