Friday, November 22, 2019

Marc Elrich is right on Montgomery County housing targets

Montgomery County Executive Marc Elrich is yet again the target of another hit piece in The Washington Post, which makes no secret of its disdain for Elrich, labor unions, and the men and women of our police department. Incredibly, the article, "Executive won't back housing targets" (Metro section, November 21, 2019), presents no defenders of Elrich's position. It instead attempts to paint him as a man entirely alone. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Elrich is the most popular elected official in Montgomery County, in both die-hard following and in actual votes cast. One of the key reasons is his willingness to put citizens over the interests of developers in situations exactly like this. As I reported earlier this month, the developer-controlled Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has put forward an "affordable housing" scheme designed to profit - surprise! - developers.  It has asked local jurisdictions to build a specific number of new, low-income housing units by 2030. Of Montgomery, it has asked for us to allow 23,100 additional low-income housing units to be constructed by 2030, in addition to those already approved or proposed.

Needless to say, agreeing to such a target would bankrupt the County for multiple reasons. MoCo has a structural budget deficit as far out as the future projections go. Our economy is so moribund, Montgomery ranks rock bottom in the region by every relevant federal economic development statistic from job creation to new business starts to new business growth this decade. We haven't attracted a single major new corporate headquarters to the county in over two decades.

The County's debt is so large, if it were a department, it would be the 3rd-largest department in the County government. Despite record-high taxes, County revenue is actually declining. Many of the ultra-rich have fled to lower-tax jurisdictions in our region, taking their money with them. And most significantly, because the in-the-red-every-year budget has proven definitively that residential housing growth costs more in new services than it generates in revenue (even as places like Clarksburg have grown 800% in population in recent years). Imagine adding 60573 more taxpayers who will not make any significant contribution to revenue, while requiring education, medical care, food, police and fire service, social services, and more.

Adding 60753 low-income residents beyond those already on their way by 2030, while simultaneously subsidizing developers to generate those units, would be a financial disaster. And it must be noted that MWCOG is not counting or restricting the number of existing affordable units that may be demolished - a phenomenon that has led to a net-loss of affordable housing in Montgomery County over this decade. Just this week, I reviewed plans for a major redevelopment on Battery Lane that will result in a net-loss of affordable units. Will the same County Council that attacks Elrich, and supports the housing targets scheme, block the net-loss Battery development? Of course not.

But take a look at this article.

Reporter Rebecca Tan tells us that the "unprecedented push to address the region's affordable housing crisis has hit its first major snag." That is biased language in favor of the scheme in the very first sentence. She then describes Elrich as "stubborn." This is wild - I've never seen another Democratic executive in the region referred to in pejorative language like that by a Post reporter. He is "a serious roadblock to addressing the housing shortage," and his "position is particularly concerning given that Montgomery, a wealthy suburb of 1 million, has been asked to create more affordable units over the next decade than any other locality."

I recognize Tan is new to covering the County, but her report appears to lack the context of the County's disastrous budget picture and moribund economy. It doesn't matter how "wealthy" a jurisdiction or any enterprise is, if it annually spends more than it takes in.

Tan notes that the County Council, as I reported, voted unanimously to adopt the MWCOG housing targets. What she doesn't note, is that each of them accepted thousands or more in dollars of developer campaign contributions. And that Elrich, by contrast, does not accept developer money.

This is a key point of context - why is it missing from the article?

Tan allows delusional 2022 Elrich challenger Councilmember Hans Riemer to say, "Marc Elrich stands alone," the theme she bashes readers over the head with throughout the piece. She goes on to quote five people critical of Elrich's position - all of whom are funded by development interests - without acknowledging their conflict of interest.

There are many activists, neighborhood leaders, and residents who agree with Marc Elrich whom Tan could have quoted. Contrary to journalistic standards, she did not. She even allowed Riemer to lie about the infamous fake-news claim that Elrich would prefer jobs go to Frederick County, which was pushed by the developer-funded Greater Greater Washington blog last year.

Elrich inherited a moribund county economy, and neither he nor the Council have made any significant moves to change our business climate and regional competitiveness since taking office last December. But Elrich has an impeccable record of standing up for the vulnerable, looking out for the interests of residential neighborhoods, and providing better protections for renters. As Tan's article notes, Elrich is pushing for a "no net loss" housing rule. That is exactly the type of policy that will actually ensure affordable units are available for decades to come. To paint a longtime advocate for the less-fortunate as a "NIMBY," as Tan does, is absurd. She states "some critics" call him that, but failed to produce any for her report.

The fact is, as Elrich has noted in years past, Montgomery already has in the planning pipeline sufficient units to meet the expected population demand by 2030. And the reality is, Montgomery County decides how much our population grows - if we don't build, they can't come. So our fate really is in the hands of our elected officials, not those of fate itself.

Council President Nancy Navarro and others chastise Elrich for "denying" and "pretending" that there isn't a "housing shortage" or "need for affordable housing."

But there is growing evidence that we don't have a housing "crisis." Recently, the County Housing Opportunities Commission moved hundreds of residents out of the Ambassador apartments in Wheaton, and is demolishing the building. They moved them into vacant units in their other buildings across the County. Not far away, the owners of affordable and spacious apartments at Halpine View told attendees at a public meeting that they have many vacant units, with little public demand for them.

Wait a minute...we have a "crisis," but we could give up an entire apartment building, have enough vacant units idling elsewhere in the County to take all of those folks in, and have vacancies at Halpine View? This doesn't sound like a crisis to anyone with common sense.

What is this all really about?

As Tan expertly manages to note in yet another Montgomery County cartel talking point, people like Elrich may be "seek[ing] to shield single-family neighborhoods from bigger or denser development." That is exactly what voters in those neighborhoods elected him to do - protect them from the plans of the Council and their developer sugar daddies to impose urban mixed-use zoning on all established SFH-zoned neighborhoods across the County.

What this is really about is adopting Wild West zoning, and the MWCOG-County Council plan to have you the taxpayer fund developers, who will profit from overbuilding while bankrupting the County and destroying the successful suburban and rural neighborhoods those taxpayers live in. All under the guise of "helping the poor." It's quite obvious who's really being helped by this scheme, and it's not the poor.

We don't even have adequate infrastructure to handle our current population. Until we do, or until developers agree to provide more roads, schools, etc., pulling up the ladders to the extent we can - while protecting the existing housing of current residents of all income levels - is the only responsible way forward in housing policy.

Marc Elrich is right - and he is anything but "alone" on this issue.

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

tl;dr

Anonymous said...

This made my head explode. Accusing a reporting (or as you like to call yourself, journalist) of leading with a biased opening sentence is certainly the pot calling the kettle black. I guess if she would have only interned with you, she would have learned how to properly conduct journalistic inquiries.

But I also found your rantings informative. I now understand what it is you don't like about the direction Montgomery County is going. Too many poor people and more on the way!!! I bet a lot of them aren't even white!

Anonymous said...

So does this make you an Elrich supporter? I think you would understand if he would prefer that you not knock on doors for him.

Anonymous said...

"I recognize Tan is new to covering the County"

How come you didn't call her a "Carpetbagger" like you usually do?

Anonymous said...

Is this an editorial blog now?

Howard Lerner said...

OMG! Major difficulty comprehending the weird situation we are in. I am agreeing with Robert Dyer. This is amazing! Not his 'editorializing', anti-liberalizing, or his usual propaganda, but with his basic argument - that Mark Elrich is correct. This is shocking. But the most shocking thing is that Robert Dyer is agreeing with Marc Elrich at all. OMG. What's the temperature in hell right now?

Tom Andrews said...

Powerful piece.

Anonymous said...

5:55 AM - Every new "editorial" is really just the same article, getting longer and longer with each iteration.

Anonymous said...

Is this an April Fool's joke?

I like this quote from Dyer: "The Washington Post, which makes no secret of its disdain for Elrich, labor unions, and the men and women of our police department."

Elrich hates MCPD more than WashPo. He ordered the blue line flag taken down, and chose the existing acting chief to be the new police chief after first saying he wanted someone outside the county and failing to find a qualified person. So he didn't have faith in Jones at the outset, and now he does? He just hates MCPD.

Elrich is the most anti-MCPD CoExec we've had as far back as I can remember. The only worse MCPD-hater is Councilmember Jawando.

Maloney Concrete said...

6:38am not really...Dyer is dealing with a specific issue here.

Anonymous said...

Anyone else suspect that "Joe Soap" or "RealEcon" just might be our Robbie, commenting over at the other site not-so-incognito?

Robert Dyer said...

7:59: Nope - I've never commented over there. Ever. And I don't use aliases or hide as Anonymous like you.

Anonymous said...

@8:14 He's not commenting as those two people. They have a different writing style and bring up different points than Dyer usually does here.

Anonymous said...

Dyer is active, under his own name, on multiple platforms.

There is zero evidence that he posts here, or anywhere else, under other names. Why would he?

Anonymous said...

This powerful article calls for specific rebuttals by those who disagree. Puerile “Little Helper” snark suggests you have no argument to make.
MoCo politics are developers vs unions. I don’t know which is more costly, kowtowing to developers or to the unions. But on this issue it’s clear: we would be bankrupted.
I reviewed the report that puts forward this proposal. There are no cost estimates. Nor have the MoCo supporters made any. Committing to the proposal with no idea of the cost, as Riemer and others have done, is irresponsible. It demonstrates bad faith on their part. Dyer is right: they are doing the bidding of their developer sugar daddies. We are lucky that Elrich is fighting it.

Anonymous said...

"MoCo"

"it's clear:" (see "let's be clear:")

"Riemer" (as opposed to Albornoz, Friedson, Glass, Hucker, Jawando, Katz, Navarro, Rice)

"Dyer is right"

"Developer sugar daddies"

Terp Grad said...

Robert has a large audience here. No need to go to other sites to comment.

The other blogs should focus on doing what they do (keep it positive); not fantasizing about Robert commenting there.

When I see another blog not showing collegiality, it makes me wonder!

Anonymous said...

You forgot to include "safe, well-lit environment".

Terp Grad said...

9:54 AM Keep it positive!

Anonymous said...

Why is Dyer defending socialist Marc Elrich. Maybe you should look into his stance on the highway lanes instead of parroting his nonsense on housing.

Anonymous said...

10:21am open your mind.

Anonymous said...

Elrich is the most liked politician in the County????? Are you kidding me???? Elrich is almost universally disliked by both sensible Republicans and Democrats. He was only elected because he cobbled together enough pro-union and anti-development nuts to beat Blair by less than 100 in an over crowded field. Then got to face the only candidate worse than himself in Ficker.

Elrich is a sure fire one term County Executive if Blair, Reimer, or someone else with a brain runs against him in the primary.

Why are people surprised Dyer likes Elrich? He's the closest thing MoCo has to Trump both populist extremists one on the left and one on the right but both closer to each other than to moderate wings of either party.

Anonymous said...

12:10 PM Elrich won easily- wasn't even close. Despite all the puff pieces about his opponent.

Anonymous said...

1:45 PM - Elrich won easily over Ficker but my dog would have won easily over Ficker.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:45 PM said: "Elrich won easily- wasn't even close. Despite all the puff pieces about his opponent."

@ 2:50 PM said: "Elrich won easily over Ficker but my dog would have won easily over Ficker."

Yeah, kind of funny how you have to omit mentioning that Ficker was Elrich's opponent, in order to make Elrich look good.

Anonymous said...

The county is going broke. It’s bond ratings are down and the council only knows how to take and tax, not create and prosper.lots of people leaving the county.

Anonymous said...

Ficker had scant coverage. The Post called him a "heckler" and moved on to spend time boosting floreen.

Say what you want about ficker, but he has other recent accomplishments.

Anonymous said...

The bond rating is unchanged and our County's population is increasing.