Five Issues to Watch as the Montgomery County Council Returns to Action

A proposal to ban some pesticide use will be a major focus when the council returns Tuesday from summer recess

By Aaron Kraut and Andrew Metcalf

The Montgomery County Council’s last session before its August recess was July 28, when the nine-member body approved $54.2 million in budget cuts to meet reductions requested by County Executive Ike Leggett.

Those cuts were the result of two weeks of furious negotiations and likely won’t be the last time a contentious issue hits the Council Office Building in Rockville this year.

Here are five issues to watch when the council returns Tuesday:

Close Vote, Extensive Debate Expected on Pesticide Bill

A bill proposed last year by council President George Leventhal is expected to generate heated debate as the council heads back to work next week. Leventhal’s version of the bill calls for a general ban of potentially carcinogenic pesticides on private lawns and county property, including athletic fields.

While Leventhal’s bill exempts certain uses of pesticides, such as for agricultural purposes and on golf courses, it’s drawn opposition from residents who see it as an infringement on the suburban ideal of a lush, green lawn; at least one fellow council member who says the bill is too big of a step too soon; and lawn care companies who say the federal government has already approved pesticide products for safe use, if applied properly.

?Council President George Leventhal's pesticide bill, food trucks and the county's Department of Liquor Control will be big topics this fall. Credit: Aaron Kraut and Andrew Metcalf

Council member Roger Berliner, who chairs the council’s Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee, put forth a detailed proposal this week to limit the scope of Leventhal’s bill. He says the current bill would likely face a court challenge.

Berliner’s proposed amendments would ban pesticide use on county lawns, but not on athletic fields, and remove the general ban for private lawns. The amendments would also ask the county to start an education campaign to advise homeowners about the risk of pesticides and begin testing organic care methods for possible future use on playing fields.

On Tuesday, Berliner said he believes that a close council vote will determine whether his proposed changes will be accepted, while Leventhal said he believes he has the votes to pass legislation that’s nearly the same as the bill he introduced last year, possibly with a compromise on athletic fields.

The environment committee is scheduled to work on the bill when it meets Sept. 17 and the bill is expected to be reviewed Oct. 6 by the council.

Liquor Control Committee to Guide Partial DLC Privatization, Work on Other Alcohol-Related Issues

Council member Hans Riemer, who chairs the three-member Ad Hoc Committee on Liquor Control, said Thursday the committee will continue to meet this fall to help guide a resolution to privatize the distribution of specific craft beers and wines through the General Assembly.

He also said the committee will focus on making sure the county’s Department of Liquor Control works on the accountability and performance measures created earlier this year to improve its service. Those include improving ordering accuracy, streamlining warehouse logistics and renovating the retail stores.

A third issue Riemer plans to work on with the committee, which also includes council members Marc Elrich and Leventhal, is improving the regulatory climate for local breweries, wineries and distilleries. Riemer said several improvements have already been made to make the county attractive to craft breweries, but he hopes to improve local laws and regulations for wineries and distilleries and possibly determine how farmers in the county’s agricultural reserve can participate in the production of locally made alcoholic products.

“There’s a lot of interest at the Council in making sure we have the best conditions for supporting local production of beverages,” Riemer said.

Elrich Battles Developers on Impact Tax Exemptions

Citing the county’s overcrowded schools and clogged roads, Elrich introduced a bill this summer with co-sponsor Craig Rice that would get rid of an impact tax exemption for developers building projects in downtown Silver Spring and downtown Bethesda.

Elrich argues that there’s no longer any need for the county to incentivize development in those transit-oriented areas, because the areas are in high demand.

But plenty of developers disagree, and say the exemption that can save them millions of dollars is still needed to make projects work financially, especially in downtown Silver Spring.

The bill has not been scheduled for a committee hearing.

Food Trucks in the Spotlight

A relatively straightforward bill that would expand the hours that food trucks in the county are allowed to operate faced sudden pushback during a July public hearing from the Silver Spring Chamber of Commerce and Restaurant Association of Maryland.

Those organizations, which represent brick-and-mortar restaurants, want the council to take a broader look at all county food truck regulations and also look into setting up designated food truck zones away from restaurants.

Riemer, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, said Thursday the county executive branch has requested time for a deeper examination of the county’s food truck laws. He said the council will likely wait for those recommendations “so we can address this issue in a full way.”

More Budget Fights on the Horizon?

As the council finalized $54.2 million in budget cuts in July, council analysts warned more cuts might be needed in the near future.

The county is projecting a budget shortfall of about $175 million over the next few years, thanks in large part to $21 million in lower-than-expected income tax revenue from the state for the last fiscal year and the outcome of the Wynne case.

The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision on the constitutionality of part of Maryland’s income tax law will mean about $15 million in lost tax revenue for Montgomery County this fiscal year and a total loss of about $150 million from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2017.

Depending on future tax revenue estimates, it could mean another round of mid-fiscal year budget cuts will be necessary.

Hanging over the budget discussion is Leggett’s continued insistence that a property tax increase is needed for the next fiscal year’s budget. That could require a unanimous vote of approval from council members.

Leventhal said this week the council is not considering a second savings plan at this time and that he’s trying to structure an “in-depth conversation” on the cost of government by looking at what top-level county employees make.

“I think we’re top-heavy and we pay a lot at the top end of the scale,” Leventhal said, repeating a concern he voiced this summer.

He’d like to also look at retirement plans for county employees and hopes to organize three panel discussions in October and November to talk about the issue.