But proponents of the plan aren't giving up. Already, there has been word of a closed caucus on the bill being held by the Montgomery County Delegation in Annapolis today. Activists and the Montgomery County Civic Federation were critical of that yesterday via Twitter.
More solid indications of what might lie ahead come from this memo by County Council Administrator Glenn Orlin, which asserts that the Council already has the authority to do everything an Independent Transity Authority could, except for the ability to exceed the Ficker Amendment property tax cap. Orlin finds several weaknesses in going forward with an ITA, including taxpayers having to pay higher interest rates (as the ITA would not be backed by the full faith and credit of MoCo Government), and having little accountability to transit users as an unelected body.
He proposes the following alternatives to the ITA, which would also mean higher taxes for residents:
Adjust both the property tax rate, and the size of the Homeowners Property Tax Credit.
Impose a new Excise Tax, based on "use and occupancy" of all property in the county.
Establish not one new special taxing district, but two - with the one in proximity to the Bus Rapid Transit routes charging a higher rate.
Orlin also recommends canning provisions in the bill that would have allowed the ITA to not get approval for its budget from the County Council, and regarding the relationship between labor and the ITA. The latter would not likely go over well with county union leaders.
Ultimately, Orlin suggests tabling the bill for six months to work out the issues.
Clearly, meeting or no meeting in Annapolis today, the bill and the new taxing powers are still alive in various forms, just back behind the curtain where they'd been hiding previous to January 23.
15 comments:
"unlimited taxing power, the ability to take on unlimited debt, unrestrained authority to seize private property"
I believe that this is what Leventhal was referring to when he said "colorful analysis".
4:46: On the contrary, I don't believe Mr. Leventhal is foolish enough to participate in the campaign of deception this bill's proponents engaged in over the last 10 days. Read the bill. Read the bill.
Yet you believe that he's foolish enough to "call for Montgomery County to secede from the state of Maryland".
Yes. Read the bill Robert. Any tax hike past the Charter Limit would require unanimous consent from the Council, just as it does for a tax hike of any kind past the Charter Limit.
Read the bill Robert. Read the bill.
6:00: Who do you think you're fooling? It not only doesn't say that in the bill, but it DOES say that the ITA is explicitly NOT limited by that charter limit, or any other limit added to the charter in the future. Read the bill. Read the bill.
Sir, with all due respect, you are showing a blatant lack of understanding of the Charter limit. The County Council could raise any tax it wanted to past the Charter limit TODAY if it got a unanimous vote.
And based on recent reports, it appears that could happen with the property tax (unrelated to this transit authority) as soon as this spring.
You might be able to fool your fellow consiracy theorists with your lack of knowledge of county law, but not me.
The year is 2045. 30 years ago MoCo passed the ITA bill. With unlimited taxing power they raised property taxes 99,900,000.9999% and with the ability to take on unlimited debt they went entered into 20.5 quadrillion dollars worth of debt. With all the money in the world they threw a potato salad party and built a Death Star.
Council staff report on the ITA by Glenn Orlin specifically states that the proposal permits simple majority Council vote for tax hikes:
"If out from under the Charter limit the Council could raise the tax rate significantly by a majority vote; under the Charter provision all nine Councilmembers would be required to approve such an increase."
7:35: Now you're off topic. We're talking about the bill that lets them raise taxes without the unanimous vote, by having the ITA do it. That's the whole point of creating it.
You're correct that Mr. Leggett wants to hike property taxes beyond the charter limit. But which 2018 County Executive candidate on the Council is going to cast the 9th vote to allow it? Not likely.
@6am: the bill does not say what you are saying. It says the ITA is exempt from charter provisions. Even council members and replies to comments on Ike's paperless airplane blog by county staff acknowledge that the purpose of this was to have a revenue stream unencumbered by charter limits.
6AM: It's there in the Council's own report on the ITA bill, prepared by Glenn Orlin -- read the Council memo -- only a simple majority to approve ITA tax hikes. Here is the quote:
"If out from under the Charter limit the Council could raise the tax rate significantly by a majority vote; under the Charter provision all nine Councilmembers would be required to approve such an increase."
Great work following this story. Ike has made plain he wants to make it easier for him to get higher taxes to fund this. People can nit pick and squabble about the details if they wish but that is the fundamental truth of this. And since Ike has made plain what he wants this is sure to come back until he gets his way.
Also, make no mistake, the Councilmembers and George Leventhal as President, were all briefed on this in private well before it was introduced, and by not advising Leggett to pull it back, gave their go ahead to introduce it and bypass the will of the voters. Now they are distancing themselves from it.
How does "introducing a bill" "bypass the will of the voters"?
Do you understand how our legislative process works?
If you are proud of your sweeping tax-and-spend bill, you introduce it with a big PR rollout, starting with a press conference weeks before introduction. You explain it at length to constituents in public meetings and events, not in closed-door briefings -- because you want to talk about it. If you are not proud of your bill, you sneak around plotting for months behind constituents' backs, hold onto the plan for a year or more until your re-election is over, then in the weeks following you plan behind closed doors to file it with the Assembly 7 weeks late on a fast-track basis, then issue a non-announcement announcement Friday afternoon/evening so nobody, you think, will notice.
Post a Comment