Good morning, Ward 3 neighbors,
After last week¡¯s canceled City Council meeting (due to a power outage), we will be starting budget reconciliation discussions tonight. It¡¯s mainly unchanged from last week except that presentations from our two City employees¡¯ unions will take place.?
This update is again focused strictly on budget matters, which are keeping all Council members pretty busy right now. If you¡¯ve written to me in the past few days and are awaiting a response, please know that I am reading emails carefully and keeping up as efficiently as my obligations will allow. You will get a response from me.
?????- . -
The reconciliation process involves City staff and City Council members offering potential changes to the proposed FY26 budget. These options are registered in a spreadsheet that calculates impacts on revenues, expenditures, tax rates, and potentially the stormwater fee. Fiscal Year 2026 runs from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.?
(Of interest for Pinecrest residents, City staff have gone back and identified a potential location for a speed hump on Orchard Avenue, so that project has now been added to their proposed traffic-calming projects for FY26.)
You have the option to comment on the proposed budget in person (no sign-up needed, starting around 7:45 pm) or (sign up by 5 pm). I think that your comments, and even just your presence at the meeting, can make a difference in the topics and tenor of the dialogue.?
The second of two official Public Hearings on the budget is scheduled for next week, April 16. Final reconciliation work is scheduled for the following Wednesday, April 23. The City Council will adopt property tax rates, the stormwater fee rate, and an FY26 budget in the first half of May.
Here¡¯s the published , which was prepared by the City Manager last month. It has seen some changes since last month, which will be reflected in the reconciliation process.?
Our City Charter embraces a Council-Manager form of governance. The City Council¡¯s primary responsibilities are to set the budget, make laws and policies, hire and provide oversight for the City Manager, and engage in long-term strategic planning. The City Manager proposes and executes the budget, hires and supervises all employees with the exception of the City Attorney, negotiates union contracts, and reports on outcomes to the City Council.
Thank you for all of your thoughts, questions, and research on the budget that you¡¯ve shared so far. I anticipate a lively set of Council discussions over the next three meetings. I will push for our group to be attentive to details, informed about staff thinking, and imaginative in thinking about how to tackle objectives. I will try to underscore broader questions about the choices we make as a community that affect our diversity, affordability, and sustainability in the long term.
Based on the principles that I ran on in the fall, knowledge gained as a Council member, close consideration of the budget, listening to colleagues and public commenters, tracking of County and State budget outlooks, and following unanticipated developments in the wake of the new federal administration, I am going to be advocating for significant budget changes in this reconciliation process. There will be more reconciliation items introduced and lots of moving parts, but as of this morning, I intend to support or introduce the following:
A significant scaleback in the proposed $1.685 million Atrium renovation project to expand space for the Police Department, to $500,000. The recommendation would be to focus work focus on relocating dispatcher space to an area with natural light, establishing a suitable room for interviewing members of the public, and making the current lobby restroom ADA-compliant. I will advocate for finding space elsewhere in the building for mental health counselors if and when that pilot project can move forward with County support. Savings: $1.185 million.
Delay the purchases of one patrol car ($76,000 and one leaf vacuum ($70,000), and reduce the contribution to the Equipment Replacement Reserve accordingly. Savings: $146,000.
Limit raises for non-unionized employees to the same 3% raise scheduled for unionized employees. Savings: $74,000.
Delay or cancel the ¡°Community Connectors¡± program in light of increased County support for social services outreach in our community and upgrades to our website, including translation capabilities. Savings: $150,000.
Freeze the hiring of a Deputy Director for Housing and Community Development in light of an anticipated economic downturn and a potential year spent reexamining City housing policies. Savings: $100,000 or more.
Do not proceed with a proposed hiring of a financial consultant, in recognition of the expertise of the City Manager and the two Deputy City Managers. Savings: uncertain, perhaps $65,000.
Modestly increase the taxes charged to utilities. New revenue: $10,000.
Modestly increase the per-square-foot rental fees for commercial use of City right-of-way, to more closely approach what other jurisdictions charge. New revenue: $10,000.
Delay a requested review of the City housing ordinance (with a proposed focus on rent stabilization policies), pending Council discussion and clarity on the objectives of such a study. Savings: $85,000.
Eliminate the uphill portion of the Maple Avenue Connectivity Project and reallocate grant funds to other portions of the project. Potential savings: up to $22,774.
Increase property tax relief for lower-income property owners by $135,000 (doubling the available funds).
Double available funds for food insecurity grants (by $60,000), quality of life grants (by $50,000), and rental assistance (by $136,000), for a total of $246,000 in increased expenditures if all funds are claimed/allocated.
I
f the Council were to adopt all of these reconciliation items, this would result in a total reduction of 4.76 cents in the property tax rate, from $0.5522 to $0.5046 per $100 of assessed value. A median-assessed property ($588,000) would see a property tax reduction of $280. A property assessed at $750,000 would see a property tax reduction of $357.
To me, these reductions and reallocations would not only provide a small amount of relief in a year that is likely to be a wild ride economically, and in light of federal government cut-backs that have hit so many Takoma Park households very hard. These reductions would also recognize the need to shift to a common-sense, living-within-our-means fiscal philosophy. Finally, they would acknowledge the need to slow down and think long-term about our needs, our programmatic priorities, our staffing, our approaches to getting the work done, and perhaps most importantly, our relationship with Montgomery County, which reimburses just a fraction of the costs we incur for services we provide ourselves in lieu of County services.?
All of that being said, I must ask these basic questions:?
1. Would you support the above reductions and reallocations in Fiscal Year 2026, either for reasons related to your household¡¯s well-being or in the interests of our community as a whole? If so, why? If not, why not??
2. Are there other expenditure reductions or increases you would support?
3. Are there other revenue reductions or increases you would support?
4. Is there anything you feel I may be missing overall, or any different perspective you¡¯d like me to keep in mind?
Please reply to this email if you have thoughts to share. Thank you!
Best regards,
Roger
