Takoma Park 2026 Election Candidate Questionnaire

Responses to the 2026 Takoma Park City Election Candidate Questionnaire

Below are the responses of seven of the candidates in the 2026 City of Takoma Park elections.*


  1. Name and Office For Which You are Running. (Campaign websites linked to names).

Tom Gagliardo, Mayor

Doug Glynn, City Council Ward 1

Jim Della-Giacoma, City Council Ward 2

Suzy Stimler, City Council Ward 2

Tom Wallack, City Council Ward 3

Kurt Gilbert, City Council Ward 4

Ambroise Agosse, City Council Ward 6


2. Do you think Takoma Park’s rent stabilization law needs to be changed, and if so, what changes do you support and why?

Gagliardo, Mayor:
I would not change the provision allowing rent increases up to the rate of inflation. The Incumbent hasn’t demonstrated a need to change that provision or to extend the five-year exemption in order to align City law with County law. I would add a provision to prohibit a rent increase of any size when there are significant code violations.

Glynn, Ward 1: No. The rent stabilization law seems to be working well. Initiatives to align Takoma Park with County laws would not benefit our residents as it could potentially double the permissible annual rent increase. Landlords have the opportunity to file a petition in certain cases to increase rents. I believe maintaining our current law does not stifle construction or development.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: The law does not need to be changed but its implementation can be improved with better education for renters about their rights. The city can continue to help residents to organize and better represent their interests to owners. Landlords need more education about their responsibilities and options under the existing law and help to fund building maintenance and rehabilitation to ensure that renters not only have access to stable and affordable housing but it is of good quality.

Stimler, Ward 2: I support the preservation of Takoma Parkโ€™s rent stabilization law. It has served us effectively since 1981, and the vibrant, racially and socio-economically diverse community we love and cherish is its result. Depending on the RSG study results, I would consider changing the exemptions for deed-restricted buildings, as many have units that are not deed-restricted or subject to rent stabilization, and to capital improvement pathways, to help landlords keep buildings safe and energy efficient.

Wallack, Ward 3: I feel that Takoma Park should continue to lead on rent stabilization, rather than simply defer to the County to set a uniform policy. Takoma Park is special, and in all my conversations with residents on this topic, people want to ensure Takoma Park remains affordable for current and future renters. My belief is that the best way to do that is to keep our rent stabilization law as it is.

Gilbert, Ward 4: Takoma Park’s Rent Stabilization Law has been a saving grace for our residents for many years. I like that we are exploring ways to improve the law. Aging of some of our buildings has created opportunities for low income housing developers to opt out of our law and use the county guidelines. This allows for higher increases in some of those occasions due to the type of lending. I am not certain that our laws can be changed to restrict that opt out, but would welcome that idea.

Agosse, Ward 6: I support maintaining rent stabilization. It provides important protection for renters and helps prevent displacement. I am open to improvements, but any changes must include strong safeguards and should not weaken protections for residents with limited or fixed incomes.


3. What is your vision for the scale and type of development in our City in order to best serve our community?

Gagliardo, Mayor: Building affordable housing is the priority. The availability of land on Hospital Hill is an opportunity for the entire community to work with Adventist Health Care and Washington Adventist University to foster development of affordable, missing middle and market rate housing compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.

Glynn, Ward 1: I believe Takoma Park needs development that is commensurate with the size of the city given that space is very limited. Hospital Hill is the most eminent space to be developed, which I support as long as we contemplate the needs of a variety of people with different economic possibilities. Also, we should carefully consider what impacts this may have on surrounding neighborhoods, as well as critically evaluating the negative repercussions of higher population density.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: We should support quality partners to increase housing choice. This includes MHP plans to rebuild Edinburgh House and those by the Grace Methodist Church for senior housing. In the medium term, the Washington Adventist University has an ambitious vision for a mixed use development with significant affordable housing. This large site has great potential and Takoma Park residents should see this as an opportunity to achieve a net gain in affordable housing of good quality.

Stimler, Ward 2:
I support development that creates employment for local residents, diversifies the local economy, and is environmentally sustainable. I support the use of local and state resources to expand deeply affordable housing, catalyze โ€œmissing middleโ€ opportunities, and ensure stable, affordable housing for seniors. I am committed to protecting our rent stabilization law. I believe that creating new residential choices must be supported by new retail businesses within walking and biking distance.

Wallack, Ward 3: I think people move to Takoma Park because it is Takoma Park – a unique, progressive, livable community. To me, this means lots of green space, (relatively) affordable housing options, and a feeling of community in our neighborhoods. We need to preserve our affordable housing stock and work to ensure a range of housing options that can accommodate current and future residents at various income levels and housing needs (i.e., seniors, families, multi-generational households).

Gilbert, Ward 4:
I would love to see more affordable housing and economic development in our city. So long as our infastructure can adequately support such development and does not adversely impact our environment.

Agosse, Ward 6: My vision is development that creates opportunities while respecting our neighborhoods. The City should better promote existing resources, support local businesses, attract responsible investment, and partner with employers to create jobs. I also support local job fairs connecting residents directly with employers.


4. Increasing property taxes to pay for bigger City budgets is making it harder for some homeowners and renters to remain in our community. What changes will you support to address this issue?

Gagliardo, Mayor:
Spending needs to be focused on community needs. Property tax relief needs to be income-related allowing neighbors on fixed incomes to stay in their homes. I would eliminate the requirement to live in a residence for a lengthy period. This would allow older residents to downsize and remain eligible for tax relief. The Council needs to instruct the City Manager to start identifying cost savings now.

Glynn, Ward 1:
A first step would be to request that the City manager identify cost-saving possibilities and prioritize these as new initiatives. The City needs a more realistic vision for capital projects so they do not run grossly overbudget. I support property tax relief for our neighbors on fixed incomes.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: I have heard concerns about taxes. The city cut the tax rate in the last budget, and county increases and rising state assessments were a major factor in rising tax bills this year. The FY2028 budget will be challenging to manage with new multi-year union agreements, high inflation, rising costs, and record diesel prices. I will aim to keep the property tax rate level or less. Last year, the city expanded tax relief for homeowners on fixed incomes.

Stimler, Ward 2: I support a cost-benefit analysis of current City services and programs, especially those we duplicate. For example, Takoma Park is the only municipality in Montgomery County with a full-service police department; policing is 31% of our FY27 budget. Rockville and Gaithersburg serve as models of keeping operations while transferring investigative services to the County. If we fail to find areas of cost savings, the result will be a maintenance of effort budget that continues to outpace inflation.

Wallack, Ward 3: I believe we have to minimize future property tax increases and mitigate the impacts of past increases on residents. This requires a few different things. First and most importantly, we need to be willing to make hard choices on the budget. Second, we need to look to diversify our revenues sources. Third, we need to ensure eligible residents are taking advantage of the expanded tax rebate program the Council approved earlier this year.

Gilbert, Ward 4: I do not support increasing property taxes in order to pay for bigger city budgets.

Agosse, Ward 6: Property taxes support essential services, but continued increases can burden homeowners and renters. I support slowing tax increases by carefully reviewing City spending, eliminating unnecessary expenses, improving efficiency, and diversifying revenue through grants, partnerships, economic development, and other sources.


5. What is your position on two-year versus four-year terms for City Councilmembers, including whether that decision should be voted on by residents or be approved by a simple majority vote of the Council?

Gagliardo, Mayor: I oppose four-year terms. Any change of this magnitude should only be done by referendum. I have proposed to the current Mayor and City Council and District 20 delegation to amend state law to make referendums achievable. Current law makes it practically impossible.

Glynn, Ward 1: I support maintaining two-year terms since this has been the system our city government has used for decades. Allowing for fresh, innovative ideas to come forward via new candidates is a crucial element in our democracy. Another vital part of our democracy is for members of the community to have a voice in these decisions, and their vote serves as their voice.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: I would like more information on two- vs. four-year terms. The real question is whether we have the right balance between accountability and effective governing in a small city. Our Charter already strikes that balance: Council can act by majority vote, but residents can petition any change to referendum. That built-in check means voters, not just Council, always have the final say.

Stimler, Ward 2: I am a strong advocate of keeping two year terms for City Council to maintain accountability and to give all of our 16 and 17 year olds the opportunity to cast their Youth Vote. In addition, I believe significant changes to the City Charter and to how we practice participatory democracy in Takoma Park should be brought to the people in an advisory referendum, as we did in 2017 when moving elections from odd to even years.

Wallack, Ward 3:
I strongly believe terms should stay at two years. As to the process question, the City Charter lays out two options for amendments, which this would be. Those options are via a vote by the Council (with a required notice and input period) or resident petition (and then either Council adoption or a voter referendum). I am open to learning more from residents about why the amendment process should be changed for terms of office or any other particular measure.

Gilbert, Ward 4: I do not take strong exception to either method. Our ward representatives should be listening to their residents and making decisions based on what they feel is a general consensus, coupled with their individual beliefs. We could also add the question to a vote in the forthcoming election.

Agosse, Ward 6:
I support keeping two-year terms and believe residents should have a direct voice in any change. Two-year terms provide frequent opportunities for voters to evaluate their representatives and help keep elected officials accountable and connected to the community. Leadership requires continuous engagement with residents.


6. How would you promote the meaningful participation of a wide range of residents in Council decision-making? And, what is your position on the public being allowed to clap and hold signs at City Council meetings?

Gagliardo, Mayor: I encourage and embrace public input. Important issues should be explained in the City Newsletter and website, so people can think about proposed changes and decide what they want to say. I would hold interactive public hearings, akin to hearings in the Maryland General Assembly and Congress. Hearings would be held at times convenient to the public, not late on the agenda of Council meetings. And I believe the public should be able to clap and hold signs.

Glynn, Ward 1: Ways to promote meaningful participation include allowing residents more than three minutes, and to two-way discussions. I feel that if members of the public would like to clap in support of other speakers, this is perfectly acceptable and a normal part of public interactions, as is holding up signs during meetings, so long as they do not interfere with other individualโ€™s ability to see.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2:
I would engage residents via email lists, neighborhood meetings, social media, walk-and-talks, and use city committees to convene topical presentations, such as the Emergency Preparedness Committee’s webinar on Sligo Creek flooding. The Council has adopted Robertโ€™s Rules of Order as the recognized authority on meeting procedure, which says in Section 61:8 that โ€œall persons present at a meeting have an obligation to obey the legitimate orders of the president officer (i.e. the mayor).โ€

Stimler, Ward 2: The Council needs to make opportunities for resident engagement easy and convenient. This includes holding Council meetings in locations outside the Community Center and providing multi-language materials and translation services. I celebrate public participation in City Council meetings and have no problem with clapping or signs provided that clapping does not impede residentsโ€™ 3 minutes to speak and signs are small enough that they do not encroach on othersโ€™ physical space or sight lines.

Wallack, Ward 3:
We are a small town with many smart and passionate people. I think there could be greater community engagement in the discussion of issues before the Council and the Council should explore ways to facilitate this. I think people should be able to clap in support of comments and hold signs at Council meetings.

Gilbert, Ward 4: I encourage residents to come to meetings and speak on whatever topic concerns them. I feel that the 3 minute time frame is adequate and 5 minutes can be requested. I think that should be the only time for us to express our personal views during council meetings. There are certainly other city platforms of which to be heard. Clapping, booing and holding signs are unnecesary distractions.

Agosse, Ward 6:
I support clapping and signs at Council meetings as it makes the meeting active. I also support multilingual outreach, neighborhood meetings, and accessible online and in-person participation so immigrants, seniors, renters, and residents with limited incomes have meaningful voices in City decisions.


7. Does the City do enough to protect the nearly one-third of Takoma Park residents who are immigrants and, if not, what further steps should the City take to do so?

Gagliardo, Mayor: No. Where are the visible signs of resistance to ICE’s cruelty? Rather than fear the cost of speaking out, we need to realize the cost of remaining silent. I will work closely with Montgomery Count IRC, Community Safety Network, We Are Casa and Blair Unida.

Glynn, Ward 1: My wife is an immigrant from Mexico who was granted citizenship just over a year ago, so this is a topic I take very seriously. I believe the City has every intention to protect our immigrant residents, however, the City could also make its resistance to ICE more visible. This may be achieved by published statements on the Cityโ€™s website, articles in the Newsletter and by fostering peaceful protests within City limits that speak out against aggressions towards immigrants.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: We donโ€™t, and we should not, allow our police to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. We do this as a long-standing principle as a welcoming city, but also for very practical reasons, as this would undermine the very trust with people in our communities that our police need to help keep us all safe. The city is doing more than many realize to use our taxes for grants for community organizations supporting immigrants and the most vulnerable, and this should continue.

Stimler, Ward 2: FY27โ€™s $93,500 in Community Quality of Life grants to local groups supporting immigrant residents impacted by federal immigration enforcement is a step in the right direction, but it is not enough. The City must codify that ICE cannot use City property for civil immigration enforcement, cover immigration enforcement in the newsletter and online, offer know-your-rights and bystander training, and hold standby guardianship, second key, and passport clinics, waiving City passport fees for minors.

Wallack, Ward 3: We have to do more. The lives of our fellow residents are in danger. We should continue to work closely with the community groups on the frontlines of protecting immigrant communities to figure out what the city can do to help.

Agosse, Ward 6:
The City can do more to engage and support immigrant residents. I support stronger multilingual outreach and better access to information about jobs, housing, education, City services, and business opportunities. Partnerships with employers and community organizations can also expand job training and employment opportunities.


8. Do you think the Cityโ€™s commitment to racial equity is effective (please elaborate)?

Gagliardo, Mayor: Much of what the City considers a commitment to racial equity is performative. The refusal of the current Mayor to conduct or support a racial equity study before the Council voted on the Minor Master Plan Amendment was a betrayal of a commitment to racial equity.

Glynn, Ward 1: Although the City has taken some positive steps forward by committing to โ€œdecision-making through a racial equity lensโ€ and officially joining GARE, it is unclear as to how effective these initiatives have been. We need more concrete data and real-world examples of its effectiveness to claim it has been implemented successfully. Without these, it remains only symbolic and superficial.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: To know whether it is effective or not, we would need to evaluate each aspect of city equity efforts, such as each Racial Equity Impact Statement from council agendas. One case I know where it was effective was the decision to support the Habitat for Humanity house on Garland Ave. This allowed an immigrant family living in a rented apartment on Maple Ave to move into a โ€œmissing middleโ€ renovated duplex on our street, without the children moving schools or going far from grandparents and friends.

Stimler, Ward 2:
The goal of the racial equity framework is to ensure that there is no racial disparity in policies, programs, or services provided by the City. Currently, the City Council focuses on whether existing policies, programs, or services discriminate. The focus needs to shift towards an examination of how policies and programs are devised and how services are provided. The City Council must ensure that programs and services are actually used by everyone, without de facto discrimination.

Wallack, Ward 3:
I need to learn more about exactly what all the city is doing to fulfill our commitment to racial equity. I support the goals of the Racial Equity Initiative and believe the Council and City should continue to work diligently to meet them.

Gilbert, Ward 4: We can make some improvements in this regard. Changes to the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Law (TOPL) could help with affordable housing loss and make for more housing opportunities for people of color and immigrants in the future.

Agosse, Ward 6: The City has taken steps toward racial equity, but there is more work to do. We should regularly measure whether our policies and programs are producing meaningful results, identify remaining disparities, listen to affected communities, and ensure all residents have fair access to services, opportunities, and City decision-making.


9. What should the City do to advance meaningful climate change adaptation and resilience, and address biodiversity loss?

Gagliardo, Mayor: The effort to electrify vehicles is praiseworthy, but more is needed. We must assess the possibility of returning storm water management to the County, which has more resources and a more robust response to climate change. Preserving what remains of our tree canopy is essential. I fully support resident environmental groups, Friends of Sligo Creek, Stormwater Solutions, Climate Action Coffee. Their achievements, perspective and proposals need to be incorporated into City programs.

Glynn, Ward 1: First, we must support active resident groups that are doing very important work. Next, place more emphasis on electrifying the fleet of City vehicles to reduce our carbon footprint. Investigate and reevaluate what services, such as storm water management, the County can more effectively provide than Takoma Park given certain robust systems already in place.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: Climate risks include flooding, stormwater management, extreme heat, storms, and drought. The cityโ€™s Sustainability and Climate Action plan aims to improve climate resilience. The Sustainability Manager works with the Sustainable Maryland Committee (Green Team), composed of knowledgeable residents. This partnership should be supported. Better infrastructure and planting trees can help with some risks, and improve biodiversity, while preparedness and assistance to residents are needed for others.

Stimler, Ward 2: The City has clear programs and metrics for reducing greenhouse gases emissions and preserving our tree canopy. We need to do more to address heat and biodiversity, developing programs to address urban heat island effects, such as promoting green and cool roofs, and programs to maintain and increase biodiversity, using the City Biodiversity Index (CBI) to evaluate and monitor our progress.

Wallack, Ward 3:
The city should be a central node in coordinating efforts to address the impacts of climate change. This includes conveying information to residents and businesses on what they can do, enhancing resilience through stormwater management, and protecting biodiversity, among other efforts.

Gilbert, Ward 4: Keeping climate change and biodiversity in mind when addressing development and holding develpers accountable in that regard is important. I have seen our staff and residents do just that during conversations about current and forthcoming development projects.

Agosse, Ward 6: I support continuing the Cityโ€™s environmental work while strengthening climate resilience, particularly stormwater management and flood prevention. We should improve drainage, protect streams and natural areas, maintain our tree canopy, support biodiversity, and prepare neighborhoods for increasingly severe weather.


10. How could the City improve transparency and accountability in the wake of the sexual harassment lawsuit against the City?

Gagliardo, Mayor: Important events and policies needs to be published in the City Newsletter and website. Many records need to be made publicly available without a formal request. I have long called for release of the sexual harassment audit. As with any lawsuit, the public needs to know the truth of what happened and who is responsible. Closed meetings should be the exception. Contrast the Mayor’s response in that case with the County Executive’s response to recent wrongdoing by the County Police Chief.

Glynn, Ward 1: The City should be more responsive to questions that have been asked about the incident. This would also entail releasing the audit. Citizens have a right to know what the Mayor knew and when, why the suit was settled for $1 million and the reason(s) behind not immediately dismissing the offending party from City employment. Publishing this information in the City Newsletter would help regain the trust of citizens and bolster transparency.

Della-Giacoma, Ward 2: Balancing confidentiality against transparency on administrative, legal, and personnel matters is challenging as state law states that for local governments in Maryland, specific matters can be heard in closed session as needed. Using this right judiciously and sparingly is the challenge of all councils. Improving residents’ knowledge of their rights under the Maryland Public Information Act and how to use it could be a practical step to boost transparency and accountability.

Stimler, Ward 2: Transparency starts with the City following all requirements under the Maryland Open Meetings Act not just to the letter of the law, but in the spirit of the law. Meetings should be closed and reports withheld only when absolutely necessary, and any information that can be released should be, even if it must be redacted. Accountability starts with having a clear set of expectations and following through when they are not met. Decisions should be principled, not just “legally justifiable.”

Wallack, Ward 3:
I believe we as residents still deserve more information about this whole situation and greater accountability is still needed. As a member of the Council, I will push for more answers and more information to be shared.

Gilbert, Ward 4:
The city council released a pretty elaborate explanation on the findings of that event after the independent audit of the investigation.

Agosse, Ward 6:
The City should strengthen workplace accountability through regular staff and management training, clear reporting procedures, fair and independent review of complaints, and periodic evaluation of personnel policies. While respecting privacy and due process, the City should communicate clearly about corrective actions and prevention efforts.



*Both Mayoral candidates submitted responses by the original deadline. Candidate Cara Honzak, who had not seen the invitation in time, inquired about whether questionnaire responses were still welcome after the deadline. In the interest of fairness, an extension was offered to her but also to the three other candidates (Shana Fulcher, Kurt Gilbert, Amy Wesolek) who had not submitted questionnaire answers. However, Mayoral candidate Talisha Searcy then withdrew her responses, citing the unfairness of the extension.



Rent Stabilization: Why We Care (Community Vision for Takoma)


A Rent Stabilization Policy Review: Why should we care?

(Public Comment Delivered to City Council on Nov 5 2025)

  • Do tenants know that Takoma Parkโ€™s ordinance limits rent increases for half the Cityโ€™s renters to the rate of inflation (2.4% this year)?
  • Do they know that allowable rent increases in most of the rest of Montgomery County this year is 5.7% and no caps in Rockville and Gaithersburg?
  • Do home-owners know that half our neighbors are renters and that they and many of their children wouldnโ€™t be in our neighborhoods and schools if not for our progressive Rent Stabilization ordinance?
  • Isnโ€™t this law what makes us the progressive and an inclusive community that we claim to be?

The City plans to pay a consultant at least $85,000 to help Council and Staff begin reviewing this important ordinance. Unfortunately, the timing is problematic and potentially dangerous for the participation by our immigrant population. 83% of renter households are non-white. The Federal governmentโ€™s proposed cutbacks to affordable housing make the timing even worse. Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) recommends delay, but we will continue to monitor the study whenever it proceeds. We care about and are proud of our Cityโ€™s leadership on progressive Rent Stabilization. Due in large part to this law our community is socio-economically and racially diverse. All of us are stakeholders in this review.

Consistent with the Cityโ€™s 2019-30 Housing and Economic Development Strategic Plan, CVT supports a rent stabilization review that focuses on protecting the most vulnerable from displacement. CVT will consult and advocate with tenants to protect them from displacement as a result of possible rent increases or other proposed changes. We will also support changes that help small landlords address any unnecessary administrative burden to receiving Fair Return. We will also support ways to enhance both the quality and number of low to moderate income housing. Building on the RFPโ€™s scope, I include with this testimony specific review recommendations for consideration by the consultant, Council and Staff. We care.

Frankly, we are concerned that some City leaders may ascribe to a one-dimensional development agenda at the expense of robust tenant protections. The suggestion that Rent Stabilization is preventing development in Takoma Park has not been backed up by actual evidence. It also ignores other factors, including the fact that the City is โ€œalready densely developedโ€, (per a City authorized assessment)1, and has the highest property tax rate in the County. To adequately analyze any barriers to additional multi-family housing, a much broader and deeper study would be required of relevant policies, economic trends and landuse research and involving a wider set of stakeholders.

It is clear nationally that moneyed interests have successfully lobbied to reduce the role of government in truly affordable housing. We are asking our City to buck this trend, protect our social contract and maintain the Cityโ€™s robust and progressive role in preserving our economic, racial and social diversity.

As noted, I have included separately a list of study recommendations. It includes:
1) Clarify that the Cityโ€™s 2019-2030 Housing and Economic Development Strategic Plan and its three main objectives (Preserving, Producing, and Protecting) will provide the foundational definitions for the three โ€œpillarsโ€ of our housing policy.
2) Review contextual changes in the overall policy landscape and their bearing on the program at least since 2010.
3) Research and report back on the following data sets: a) Racial equity impacts of policies tracked over time, b) Rent-stabilized units converted to ownership by tenants, c) Quality and safety of units in rent-stabilized buildings, and
4) Plan secure meetings with tenants on the premises of stabilized housing buildings.

As Takoma Park residents and advocates for good government, CVT welcomes the opportunity ahead to share input and discuss this important review with the Council, Staff and consultant. Thank you for your openness to broad community engagement. In that spirit, we urge the Council to define and clarify
“effectiveness,” the stated goal in the proposed ordinance. Lastly, I trust that the Council and staff will consider and forward our recommendations to the consultant selected. Thank you.


Randy Gibson, on behalf of Community Vision for Takoma

  1. City of Takoma Park Housing and Economic Data Analysis, The Cloudburst Group, Oct., 2017. One of the โ€œKey Findingsโ€, p. 13: โ€œBecause Takoma Park is largely built out, there is little new residential construction.โ€

Equity Review of the MMPA

UPDATE: Despite the fact that the City Council was on spring break and held no public meetings on the Equity Review, the Mayor wrote a letter to the County Council supporting the MMPA. The County Council then voted to approve the MMPA on April 2nd.

Our City is being ignored and disrespected by theย County Council, which isย rushing to approve a plan that could displace vulnerable city residents, gentrify Maple Avenue, and reduce the socioeconomic and racial diversity of our City.ย 

  • On Monday, County Executive Marc Elrich released the long-awaited independent Racial Equity and Social Justice Review (attached below) of the proposed Takoma Park Minor Master Plan (MMPA). It found the Plan “could lead to real harm” to vulnerable City residents. 
  • The next day, the County Council went ahead with a unanimous “straw vote” that set up approval of the Plan. 
  • The County Council gave themselves, their staff, our Mayor, our City Council, and residents less than 24 hours to absorb or weigh in on the new equity review before that vote. 
  • The County Council has now scheduled a final vote on the Plan at their next meeting, immediately after spring break, on April 2nd. 
  • The City’s last chance to try to improve the Plan and prevent displacement of residents is in this two-week window, unless the County Council postpones the vote. 
  • The City must write a very clear and specific resolution to prevent displacement, now. 

ACTION STEP: Write the Mayor and City Council, to urge them to demand a delay of the final County Council vote, to give the City Council time to write a stronger resolution to prevent displacement, in response to the critiques by the County Executive, the County Housing, Transportation and Environment departments, and the equity review. 

ACTION STEP: Write the County Council, especially our rep, Council Vice President Kate Stewart (Councilmember.Stewart@montgomerycountymd.gov), to demand that they make changes to the Plan in response to the equity review, and await the City’s review and input before voting on it.

Racial Equity and Social Justice Review findings:

  • “It does not appear there is a clear rationale provided for why a large swath of multi-family properties are included in a Minor Master Plan aimed at addressing the redevelopment of a hospital campus.”
  • Residents on Maple “were not informed or asked about zoning changes impacting their place of residence.”
  • The Review warns that “when you upzone it increases land value and speculation, which can trigger market reactions that lead to displacement of vulnerable residents.”
  • The Plan lacks the “teeth” to protect our deeply affordable housing.
  • “No net loss does not go far enough” when newly-built Moderately Priced Dwelling Units (MPDUs) are more expensive than the units they replace. 
  • We should be “looking to increase the affordable housing inventory, not just replace the existing inventory.”
  • We should ensure that “as the area changes, residents are able to remain, even during the construction phases.”
  • “Declaring peopleโ€™s fear of displacement as a ‘perception’ while directly stating that the biggest issue is ‘concentrations of poverty’ that need to be โ€˜dilutedโ€™ with new development is exactly the type of rhetoric that justifiably stokes the fear of displacement.” 

The Review points out that “If done well, this could be a successful case study of how to do development without displacement, which would be celebrated as a best-practice and earn the municipality and County positive recognition.” 

As a reminder, the County Executive had to order a racial equity review because a racial equity study repeatedly promised by Planning staff turned out to never exist, and the County Council failed to order one. For the County Executive’s critique of the Plan, read his analysis, or watch the video of our Affordable Housing Town Hall.

Candidates for City Office in 2020 Respond to CVT Questions

Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) asked each of the candidates for City Council and Mayor in the November 3rd 2020 election to send us a 200-word response to each of three questions, with a deadline of September 16th. Three seats in this election are contested (Ward 3, Ward 5, and Mayor). Our intention here is to provide information for voters to directly compare responses from the candidates. We will also consider these responses in determining CVT endorsements.

We include one response that came in too late for endorsement consideration. We are no longer accepting responses at this time.

1. Is the City Council addressing racial justice effectively? What specific actions would you seek to take on the Council to achieve more racial justice in Takoma Park?

Peter Kovar (Ward 1):

The Council has taken steps to address inequities in our community connected to systemic racism through actions such as making advances on affordable housing; focusing more on community policing; exploring renovation of the New Hampshire Avenue Recreation Center; seeking to address the Purple Lineโ€™s economic impacts; expanding translation of City documents; making the resident survey more inclusive; targeting grants and programs to marginalized communities; and adopting our Racial Equity policy.

We need to do much more in order to fully live up to our ethos of inclusiveness, and to treat our Black and Brown neighbors with respect and dignity. The Reimagining Public Safety task force weโ€™re establishing sets the stage for further improvements by helping ensure weโ€™ll hear from residents most affected by policing and budgetary decisions. Iโ€™ll be pushing to further demilitarize the police, develop alternative first responder ideas that emphasize mental health and economic support, and widen participation in municipal affairs. But as a white male living in a wealthier neighborhood, itโ€™s also important for me to listen to residents who live elsewhere. So Iโ€™m approaching these issues as someone with plenty to learn, and who needs to pay more attention to voices from other parts of town.

Cindy Dyballa (Ward 2), submitted Sept 20th:

The long-overdue need for racial justice to address systemic inequities requires long-term action at many levels.ย  At the local level, City council can continue to build on the clear intention of the cityโ€™s 2017 equity initiative and recent city efforts, to focus more consciously on building equity into our policies, programs, and budget decisions.ย  That would look like, to share some recent examples, funding youth recreation programs that serve youth of color and lower income; centering people of color in the effort to reimagine our public safety policies; expanding tree planting efforts in underserved areas; and targeting outreach for New Hampshire Ave. Recreation Center redevelopment to nearby neighborhoods most affected. Identifying and removing barriers to greater civic engagement by residents of color is another critical step. As a city council member, I actively seek out and listen to black and brown voices about what they see and what they need to address inequities.

Kacy Kostiuk (Ward 3):

The City of Takoma Park took the groundbreaking step in 2017 of adopting a Racial Equity Initiative, and racial equity considerations have become part of decision-making and planning-processes.

But this is only the beginning. There is much more to do. Racial equity needs to be a part of every decision and discussion, and we need to make systemic changes to build a truly racially equitable community.

We need to:

โ€ขImprove the Racial Equity Initiative through active consultation that gives power to Black and Brown residents

โ€ขDevelop a comprehensive system for analyzing racial equity impacts in budget decision processes, since many inequities are tied to funds distribution

โ€ขRemove barriers and ensure Black and Brown residents are part of decision-making processes by changing the committee structure and providing new supports to run for office

โ€ขSystematize and provide more tools to City staff to create racial equity statements on agenda items

โ€ขMake difficult decisions and have open and honest conversations about needed changes

As we move forward, a key focus area must be making policing reforms. This process needs to be driven by collaborative, change-making, action-oriented discussions with Black and Brown residents that lead to adoption of concrete policy, procedure, and funding changes.

Olly Swyers (Ward 3):

The city has not done enough to address racial equity. It was exciting in 2017 when the city made a move to adopt a racial equity impact statement for major city actions. That is an incredibly bold and absolutely necessary step to beginning to unpack injustices and correct our path forward. The city was unable to establish a rubric and subsequently shifted the impact statement to “equity considerations”. If we are committed to seeing an equitable Takoma Park we need to do the work to build that rubric and then apply it to all major actions. We also need to address our budget, especially that for policing and salaries, and decide if it reflects our equity commitments. One thing that seems obvious, when you look at salary allocation for municipal staff, is an astounding wage gap between people who are doing physical labor at 40 hours a week, like our mostly Black and brown sanitation workers, and people who are working as managers and administrators a majority of whom are white . We need to take a hard look at who is being paid for what, and how and why we value some labor at such higher margins than others.

Sawa Kamara (Ward 5):

The city has to examine racial biases embedded in city department services such as the police department, affordable housing/ homeownership and businesses. Survey how well weโ€™ve tackled these issues annually by creating an equity goal and a five year plan. To measure progress we should have a community report card or organizational assessment holding Takoma Park City Staff accountable. Hold culturally competent classes( racism training)  and also have a committee that implements racial and diversity decision making. Build our communityโ€™s capacity to judiciously address racism by providing opportunities to build relationships and work together on issues. When making decisions that directly affect residents, engage the censorious mass of diverse residents to not only participate but to lead the initiatives. Rather than focusing on racial equities, focus on racial inequities especially institutionalized incongruity in power, policies and practices.  Most people will point out rent control as addressing the issue but that is merely scratching the surface. 

Jarrett Smith (Ward 5):

Our City Council is a not fully immersed in what it means to truly address racial equity. When looking at the racial equity landscape, data is the true indicator of progress and we havenโ€™t progressed when:

โ€ขEvictions are taking place that are affecting mostly Black and brown residents; this is unacceptable to me;

โ€ขCOVID-19 cases are affecting more Black and brown people than anyone else; this is unacceptable to me;

โ€ขIn a city that is predominantly Black and brown people, the average household income for black and brown people is dramatically less than everyone else; this is unacceptable to me;

โ€ขCollege entrance for Black and brown people in this city is dramatically less than it is for everyone else; this is unacceptable to me;

โ€ขVoting/Civic Participation is very limited among Black and brown people because, there is a feeling of hopelessness; what has the government done for me latelyโ€ฆ This is Unacceptable to Me;

Takoma Park is a majority ethnic city, and these indicators show us that there is no racial equity.

I was the sponsor of our cityโ€™s Racial Equity policy that was unanimously adopted by this City Council. Measurable implementation hasnโ€™t happened.

An economic plan that should accompany Racial Equity needs to be put in place immediately and measured constantly until we see marked improvements in these indicators.

There are members of the community and senior City leadership that have no interest in truly addressing racial equity beyond simply having an intellectual conversation about racial justice or reciting a poem by a nationally acclaimed black poet. These actions do not feed someone who is hungry, educate the unknowing, offer hope to the impoverished, put a roof over someoneโ€™s head, provide transportation to that struggling mother who is pregnant with no way to get to her sonogram appointment across town.

Racial equity is supposed to mean something and currently Takoma Park is missing the mark.

Roger Schlegel (Mayor):

The Councilโ€™s racial justice initiative is moving slowly and superficially. I would seek to:

  1. Catalogue our history of systemic racism.
  2. Incorporate anti-racist training in City meetings.
  3. Address racialized income disparities among staff.
  4. Use metrics to ensure equitable service allocation, including wifi.
  5. Activate groups to address transit, childcare, social services, building safety, and police relations.
  6. Overcome linguistic, temporal, geographic, and technological barriers to participation.
  7. Ensure pandemic assistance information is delivered to every resident in need.
  8. In near-term climate strategies, Do NOT burden residents of color; DO generate economic opportunities for residents of color; DO prioritize better transportation.
  9. Insist that new development do no harm to businesses that are crucial in building wealth or quality of life for people of color.
  10. Implement an affordable retail stabilization program.
  11. Leverage the establishment of an โ€œEquitable Takomaโ€ credit union to spur racially equitable economic opportunities.
  12. Develop a northern Ward 6 playground, and improve the Eastridge Avenue playground.
  13. Activate more public space to welcome residents of color.
  14. Ensure residents of color play major roles in Library and Rec Center projects.
  15. Ensure Junction redevelopment advances racial equity in use of that site.

Kate Stewart (Mayor):

The work to dismantle over 400 years of institutionalized racism is and must be an ongoing process. In 2017, the City intentionally took on this work which has been highlighted by National League of Cities.

In the last three years, we have trained city staff, Council, committees, and residents; put in place pilot engagement programs; and started to collect data โ€“ e.g. resident survey included questions on racial equity and focus groups with African immigrants and Spanish speaking residents.

This work is changing how we do business; guiding where new bus shelters go, how we conduct meetings, determining which local organizations receive City grants, informing the cultural plan, funding oral histories of Black residents, and guiding how we reimagine public safety. And, many other efforts.

These are meaningful, concrete steps forward, but not enough. We need expertise to analyze data, keep our Road Map updated, and all of us accountable. Thatโ€™s why I am calling for the hire of a Chief Equity Officer. As co-chair of National League of Citiesโ€™ Racial Equity And Leadership Council, I have learned a great deal about how to sustain this ongoing work and look forward to doing so.

2. Do you support the current Takoma Junction plan? Why or why not? What is your vision of a successful Junction development — and what process would help the City attain a shared vision?  

Peter Kovar (Ward 1):

I support developing the Junction, primarily because a well-designed project can contribute to creating a more vibrant, walkable community. I donโ€™t support the current site plan, and I voted against it in 2018, mainly because it had inadequate public space and excessive height. While some changes have been made, those concerns remain.

My biggest worry isnโ€™t that Iโ€™ll dislike the development that may ultimately be approved, but rather that divisiveness around the project could have a long-term harmful impact. With passion on all sides, I think itโ€™s healthier to seek a compromise. As review of the plan continues, Iโ€™d like to pursue a version of the project with a somewhat smaller footprint, meaning most of us — me included — wouldnโ€™t get all we want. But a smaller structure could make it easier to address some concerns about public space, transportation, pedestrian safety, stormwater, and the projectโ€™s overall neighborhood impact.

I donโ€™t want more lengthy delays — we should make a decision and move forward, one way or the other. So after the election, in coordination with the County review process, Iโ€™d like to work toward a smaller structure, ideally with a timetable for when weโ€™d have a final vote.

Cindy Dyballa (Ward 2), submitted Sept 20th:

In line with the vision of the Takoma Junction Task Force, existing agreements, and the resolutions of other Councils, I support development that contributes to a vibrant and commercially viable Junction.ย  In 2018 I voted to move the proposed plan for the city lot to county agencies development review. I worked to address concerns about the proposal (such as the Coopโ€™s operational concerns), and I pushed for specific requirements such as green construction, less height, and stormwater management. ย When the county agencies process concludes and before any county planning board vote, the City Council must review the revised proposal in an open manner, to check that it conforms with our previous requirements and agreements, particularly sustainability, traffic, public space and the Coop/NDC agreement. As I did in 2018, I will hold several neighborhood meetings to hear thoughts of a variety of ward 2 residents on the revised plan.ย  I am troubled that some residents feel great mistrust as a result of their experience of the process to date.

Kacy Kostiuk (Ward 3):

Takoma Junction is an important cultural and social hub. In 2018, I voted to advance the project concept plan to the County Review Process because I believe in-fill development at this location has the potential to benefit residents and local businesses, reduce car use, and bring additional revenue for the Cityโ€™s social and environmental initiatives.

A revised and more detailed plan will come to the City Council before it can move to a County Planning Board vote. The Council must thoroughly review that plan with the community. This must involve careful analysis, questioning, and advocating for change where needed.

I will not support a plan that makes stormwater worse, creates unsafe traffic conditions, negatively impacts racial equity, or creates environmental hazards for the neighborhood.

I will support a plan that benefits residents and local businesses; provides walkable, transit-oriented opportunities; enables the Co-op to serve the community, and offers small businesses and/or nonprofits and social-service providers space to serve our communityโ€™s needs.

Recently, I wrote to the developer twice, reminding them of the requirements in the 2018 Resolution, requesting rear illustrations, and asking a long list of community-generated questions. I look forward to receiving answers and having community discussions.

Olly Swyers (Ward 3):

I do not support the current junction plans. NDCโ€™s current plans donโ€™t even address the bare minimum standards set forth by the city council two years ago. It also doesnโ€™t meet any of our climate goals and they have only proposed a bare minimum amount of useful, accessible public space without a paywall, one of many equity concerns. An ideal junction development and development process would welcome, seek, and incorporate community input from the beginning of the process to the final stages through town halls, forums and active feedback sessions. That is what a community partner looks like to me and that has not been the process I have witnessed thus far.  

This project should have been, and could still be, an opportunity for creative and collective decision making. As it is publicly owned land, this is one of the few times where we can actually have a huge impact on the final project. Our city is filled with passion and love for community, and working together on this development could be a chance to foster and grow connections, and find a solution that isn’t just merely a compromise.

Sawa Kamara (Ward 5):

I support the continued but careful progress towards the revitalization of the Takoma Junction area. I support every effort to ensure that the continued input of residents and business owners are taken into consideration. The Cityโ€™s goals to minimize detrimental impact to neighboring properties, optimize the provision of retail services, and provide for both public and community spaces must be carefully executed to ensure the sustainability and viability of our diverse community for generations to come.

As a resident seeking to represent our community as a City Council member, I will ensure that residents, particularly those in Ward 5, are regularly informed of the status of this important project. I will continue to ensure that a good-faith effort is made to address our concerns appropriately and expeditiously. I will continue to work in direct collaboration and consultation with residents from all walks of life to ensure that the final design respects and meets our goals of ensuring accessibility, inclusivity, diversity, safety, environmental sustainability, and smart economic growth that supports local businesses.

Jarrett Smith (Ward 5):

I do not support the current Takoma Junction plan. Here is the email I wrote to residents prior to my re-election in 2018:

 โ€œNeighbors,

 It has taken five years for us to get to this point on the Takoma Junction development project. Over the years, the cityโ€™s development partner has shared with the community various iterations of the project. They have shown us ideas for urban farming on the new structures roof, a CoOp in a newly built store, and an improved failing intersection.

 Council is tentatively scheduled on May 23rd, 2018 to vote on the current NDC site plan, and it is my intention to vote against it. I feel the current proposal doesnโ€™t build on Takoma Parkโ€™s tradition of green space, the assurance that the CoOpโ€™s long-term home is in Takoma Park, and there is still uncertainty surrounding improving traffic conditions around the Junction location.  This is unacceptable.  Iโ€™ve worked for and supported small business for years; therefore, I think this is the time to once again support the backbone of American business, which is neighborhood businesses.”

The project has torn the community apart. The decision making and discussion on the future of Takoma Junction needs to hit the โ€œresetโ€ button. We as a city and city leadership need to push up our sleeves get to work and starting this entire process over again. Council should ensure this redevelopment is what the residents of Takoma Park want.

Roger Schlegel (Mayor):

I do not support the current plan. In many substantive and egregious ways, it fails to meet community interests, the design constraints of the site, the challenges of the complex chain of intersections, and the needs or nearby businesses. This is clear evidence that NDC has not been serious about tailoring the project in response to the values and requirements expressed in the development agreement.

The silver lining of the controversies that have accompanied the process over the past several years is that we are now quite clear as a community on the types of amenities and design features that could be combined in a consensus vision for the siteโ€™s development. My vision of a successful Junction development activates that stretch of Carroll Avenue in a delightful way that provides flexible community space as well as some new dining and commerce while protecting the operations of the community owned-grocery store, maintaining adequate parking for the district, protecting pedestrians and cyclists, and preserving the forest. I think that with good leadership, the community can come together around a shared vision and find the partners and the resources to make it happen expeditiously, and in a way that advances the Cityโ€™s values.

Kate Stewart (Mayor):

Over six years we have had many discussions and I have written extensively about, spoken, and voted on this project. On the last vote in July, 2018, I supported submitting the draft site plan to County Planning for technical review. The Resolution, along with Development Agreement, requires among other things:

  1. Storm-water treatment significantly exceeding City requirements;
  2. Parking for area businesses; 
  3. Dedicated public space; 
  4. No formula stores; 
  5. LEED Gold certification or higher;
  6. Minimization of impacts to neighboring properties;
  7. Accommodation of Co-op needs;
  8. Creation of an energy neutral building.

I have been and continue to be a strong supporter of the Co-op and believe we can have a project where it continues to thrive.

We have an opportunity to enhance walkability and vitality of the area, improve stormwater treatment (at no City cost), eliminate an unsightly parking lot, and provide the City hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue.

I support continuing County review process and having the project come back to the city for discussion and vote before going before Planning Board. We do not yet know if the next iteration will meet our requirements, but I believe we should continue the process and see.


3. How would you improve the budget process, and what changes would you seek to make in City spending and revenue generation?

Peter Kovar (Ward 1):

The budget is a large, dense document. And while weโ€™ve moved toward more transparency, our budget process is still too opaque, for residents and Councilmembers. Decisions on funding often occur in isolation, rather than through comprehensive review of spending and tax options. We frequently make modest spending changes around the edges without stepping back to consider broader priorities and alternatives.

Major changes may be difficult given the uncertainty around COVID-19. But for future budgets Iโ€™d like us to debate several alternatives, for example Constant Yield (same overall property tax receipts as the previous year), flat tax rate (same as the previous year), staff recommendations (a possible tax increase), and a spending freeze or a two percent cut. The Council and residents could then better understand tradeoffs and how community priorities are aligned with taxes and other funding sources within a clearer overall fiscal context. We wouldnโ€™t just be making spending changes around the edges.

Iโ€™d also like to see us further emphasize our lobbying for State legislation enabling municipalities to enact revenue measures, and appoint a resident task force to review County functions the City has absorbed so we can explore whether it would make sense to reconsider those decisions.

Cindy Dyballa (Ward 2), submitted Sept 20th:

There are no easy answers on budget, and the uncertain program and revenue impacts of the pandemic make future city budgeting an even greater challenge.  Iโ€™d like to continue and expand strategies adopted for this budget year–greater caution in spending, especially on personnel; shifting resources to an unexpected budget priority, COVID response; and significant funds on hold, pending quarterly reviews of spending and revenues.  Building a more diverse set of revenue sources is in order, such as attracting and strengthening local businesses, continued focus on increasing county โ€œtax duplicationโ€ payments, close attention to projections for current sources of revenue, and actively pursuing sustainability and other grants.  And I am actively working for a targeted new city property tax credit and deferral program to help some low-moderate income homeowners.

The city budget process provides a great deal of information in a very short time. Actions such as more readable materials, summary graphics, and budget open houses for residents will help make the process even more accessible to a range of residents. Iโ€™d like council to consider budget options at the concept levelโ€”what it takes to maintain current programs, to target high priority areas, to keep within the current budget levelโ€”and focus more on budget strategy and less on smaller line items.

Kacy Kostiuk (Ward 3):

As residents face worsened economic hardships and the City faces possible revenue reductions due to COVID, we will need to make increasingly difficult budget decisions.

We need to improve budget materials and processes to ensure robust, representative resident input:

โ€ขCreate more accessible budget materials, incorporating infographics and analytical tools such as percentage changes to expenditures

โ€ขConduct targeted outreach to underrepresented groups — especially Black and Brown residents, renters, and residents with limited English

โ€ขDevelop a comprehensive process for analyzing racial equity in budget decisions

We also must be innovative and look for opportunities to save and meet our goals:

โ€ขSet a manageable tax rate for all residents, while developing targeted tax assistance programs that create a more progressive property taxing system — so those who can afford it pay more, and those with greater need pay less

โ€ขReassess and revise the Payment-In-Lieu-Of-Taxes program to meet and create incentives to achieve affordable housing goals

โ€ขCreate a separate tax category for vacant developed properties

โ€ขCollaborate with institutions of higher learning, nonprofits, and volunteers

โ€ขSeek opportunities to pilot new programs or technologies, especially in sustainability and community outreach

โ€ขMake difficult cuts and changes when needed, prioritizing racial equity and the most critical needs of residents.

Olly Swyers (Ward 3):

Just some first steps to addressing our budget. We need to assess community needs first, as they pertain to our racial and economic equity goals, climate goals and also basic municipal functions. Our budget needs to reflect those priorities first and work within constraints that donโ€™t deplete our emergency reserves. Fiscal responsibility at the city level is an equity issue, as we increase spending year after year and raise taxes at double the rate of inflation, we are already losing longtime community members who have low or fixed incomes. City salaries are incredibly inequitable for some, and growing at unsustainable rates for others. Our city manager and police chief both make well over 200k with benefits. We also have to address tax duplication, in some cases like stormwater management, deferring some services to the county and addressing accurate reimbursement amounts for ones that the city continues to provide. Iโ€™m only scraping the  surface here but the first and main thing we need to do is shift our budgeting process to one that is transparent, and asks for active input from the community.

Sawa Kamara (Ward 5):

Budget decisions have a profound impact on our daily lives from the police department (safety) to garbage collection ( sanitation). Our neighborhoods budget is integral for community development. We need transparency in the budget process by analyzing several aspects: connect budget spending with key performance targets, If the budget calls for cut or increase, share when and how it happen, explain reasons for budget cut or increase, share the entire information with the organization through meetings, department program managers, mayor,council, and individuals. Approve the budget in stages not in one action to accurately aim at our goal. Practice revenue forecasting which is an ongoing process six months prior that revises the budget execution phase of the cycle. When proposing a budget or developing that initial assumption the city should solicit inputs not only from the city manager but city council, key stakeholders, policy leaders and residents. Our highest priority should be economic development and affordable housing. We need a better budget for a better city. Our annual budget should identify and address health & social inequalities. 

Jarrett Smith (Ward 5):

Here is how I would re-imagine our cityโ€™s budget process. Our budget process could be improved using Zero Based Budgeting. It is efficient and the major advantages are flexible budgets, focused operations, lower costs, and more disciplined execution. Department heads should have to explain in detail their budget request before the budget is presented to Council by the city manager. This gives council the opportunity to ask questions and weigh-in on decisions before the budget is almost final. In our current process, there is a very small window of time for changes once City Council receives the annual proposed budget and has the ability to analyze line items, and suggest any additions or deletions, or request even further explanation.

Iโ€™d like to see our budget process adopt some of the rigor of the U.S. Governmentโ€™s Accountability Office (also known as GAO). GAO is tasked to review programs and initiatives proposed by Congress or that are already on the books. According to their mission statement, they are tasked to, โ€œexamine(s) how taxpayer dollars are spent and advise(s) lawmakers and agency heads on ways to make government work better.โ€ For me that is Takoma Parkโ€™s budgeting process โ€œre-imagined.”

Roger Schlegel (Mayor):

In collaboration with the Council, I would direct the Manager to develop an outcomes-based budget that is closely linked to a fully fleshed-out and annually updated strategic plan. With this approach, I would insist that the Manager institute protocols and metrics whereby employees track their time on various programs and the outcomes achieved. I would lead the City Council to explore options for returning some services, such as stormwater and criminal investigations, to the County, and for merging and consolidating staff work teams within ecosystem services, human services, and planning/direction/evaluation.

I would press the Manager to propose achievable cost reductions and to identify the most efficient ways to accomplish the objectives of major projects such as the Library as well as ongoing expenses such as equipment replacement and the hiring of consultants. I would advocate strongly for allowing real property tax increases no higher than the rate of increase in the Employee Cost Index (ECI), and I would use budget and management improvements to lead a strong and forceful effort to advocate for an end to double taxation from the County. In select priority areas, I would support new spending, particularly for key racial equity and affordability initiatives.

Kate Stewart (Mayor):

  1. Budget Process: I have made improvements in the budget process the last five years by applying my experience as a small businessowner and executive of a non-profit which received private and government funding. I strengthened Council priority setting process to provide greater transparency and direction to staff on where to focus budgets. And, there is more to do. One change is โ€œParticipatory Budgeting,โ€ which empowers residents to help decide how to expend City funds.
  2. Revenue Generation: Given the limitations under state law, I have focused on (1) sustaining and increasing our commercial tax base, especially during COVID-19; (2) getting County Executiveโ€™s budget to start addressing tax duplication (although the pandemic delayed Council action) and securing the County Councilโ€™s commitment to set aside COVID relief funds for municipalities; and (3) Grants (e.g. $100,000 state grant for New Hampshire Ave faรงade improvements and $457,000 grant for bikeways on New Hampshire Ave).
  3. Spending: I have advocated for City staff to present Council a โ€œmaintenance of effortโ€ budget tied to the cost of providing services.  Through this lens, we can decide how to shift, cut, or increases services (e.g., shifting funds to address COVID-19 relief efforts).

What Takoma Junction Means to One Family

How does one family love the Co-op? And why are they weighing in on the proposed Junction development? Our City has repeatedly refused to hold a work session on racial equity at the Junction. We recently posted a letter signed by over 100 people urging the County to undertake a racial equity review of the Junction plan. But here, one voice, one story in all its rich detail, makes the point. With her permission, we are posting the letter Gimbiya Lim wrote to the County planning department this week.

The (seemingly endless) review process should come to an end one way or another this year, in 2020. So please weigh in now, this month, while the County staff is still reviewing the plan, with your own letter to Mr elza.hisel-mccoy@montgomeryplanning.org, and to City officials, to ask for a better Junction plan.

Racial Equity at the Junction

 A large group of neighbors and activists, Junction shoppers and business owners, along with City Councilmember Jarrett Smith,  sent this letter on racial equity this week to the County staff who are currently evaluating the proposed development at Takoma Junction. Community Vision for Takoma stands with this group of over 100 people who are urging the County to analyze the effect of the proposed development on racial equity at the Junction.

If you want to add your voice to these concerns, please send an email to Elza Hisel-McCoy, Montgomery Planning Board, at <elza.hisel-mccoy@montgomeryplanning.org> and simply say you join with others in the community of Takoma Park who are concerned about the racial equity and social justice impacts of the proposed development.

“Set a Brave and Bold Example”

Community Vision for Takoma Junction (CVTJ) is not the only group organizing for a more inclusive and public use for the lot at Takoma Junction. Here, we print a letter from Badia AlBanna, Dara Orenstein, Michele Bollinger, Ron Resetarits, Kerry Danner-McDonald, Jennifer Satlin-Fernandez, Adriana Kuehnel, and Dave Zirin, who have been organizing meetings on Takoma Junction. To join them, emailย michele.bollinger@gmail.com.

An open letter to Takoma Park residents and elected officials:

We call upon you to live up to the values that Takoma Park symbolizes and to reject the current plan for Takoma Junction. Our goals are twofold: to promote racial equity and to provide a higher quality of life for all residents, especially those who are the least-resourced and most marginalized.

  • The City has pledged that it is committed to analyzing racial equity in each of its decisionsโ€”yet its attempt at a โ€œracial equity statementโ€ about the Junction has been woefully inadequate.
  • Only a plan that designs a space to be accessed and used by all will be truly equitable. The space at the Junction is the last piece of open public land in Takoma Park. To lease it to a private, commercial developer violates the spirit of democracy. Even if that developer recruits small businesses, and even if all parties are minority-owned, still, private individuals are profiting off of public resources. A few individuals are exploiting the Cityโ€™s land, location, and cultural capital to enrich themselves, and in return the 17,000 citizens of the City are receiving, what exactly, a modest stream of property taxes that the omnipotent City Manager will allow to trickle down to the masses? The City should not be subsidizing an individualโ€™s path to greater wealth. It should devote public resources to the common good. No trickle-down economics.
  • There are many ways to create opportunities for minority-owned businesses in Takoma Park, beyond the public land at the Junction. Letโ€™s set standards and guidelines for economic development that center on racial equityโ€”and letโ€™s not allow the elite of Takoma Park to co-opt the language of racial equity as a hedge against those who want to preserve public resources for the public good.
  • Moreover, letโ€™s set standards and guidelines for economic development that contemplate what it means to work in Takoma Park, not merely what it means to profit (as a business owner) or to shop. The Junction should model this principle. Low-wage, low-skill service jobs with minimal or zero benefits or workplace rights are not the answer for the Junction.
  • Speaking of shopping, our community is facing an affordability crisis. Property values have skyrocketed. A single cookie can sell for $3.00. Most businesses that have opened lately cater to the affluent customer. The current plan for development will bring in upper-end retail accessible primarily to upper-middle class households and will contribute to rising rents and prices. It is disingenuous to call such a scenario a โ€œJunction for All.โ€ It is selfish to prioritize enhanced consumer options for upper-middle class peopleโ€”not to mention that it is the opposite of โ€œracial equity.โ€
  • A better solution is to create a space that everyone can enjoy, free of charge. The Junction lies at the heart of Takoma Park: it should unite residents across all six wards. Only a commons-style plan can support this role. A youth center, a technology center, a basketball court, a community theater, a community kitchenโ€”these are just some of the ideas in the air. Never would we challenge the current plan were it for a homeless shelter, a refugee shelter, a daycare center. We are not NIMBYersโ€”we are YIMBYers! Yes to the Peopleโ€™s Junction!
  • Focus on our youth, especially our teens. There are many parks for our very youngest residents to frequent. But, at the Takoma Park Community Center, older kids are confined to a game room and a basketball court. As one veteran of Takoma Park civic life put it to us, โ€œThe Community Center is mainly for white adults.โ€ Takoma Park does not support young adults by providing numerous facilities where they can mingle and playโ€”and as a result we fear some children are getting the message (yard signs aside) that their lives do not matter. They deserve better.

We will not give up on our fight to do what is right for Takoma Park. We are eager to help the City launch a transformative planning process, starting, maybe, with a community advisory board. Our elected leaders are in a position to set a brave and bold example of how to shore up against the tidal wave of gentrification that has wrecked urban communities, if they abandon the current plan. We understand that to do so would mean to give up on years of effort (for now, at least). It may take us a long time to reach a healthy decision for the Junction, but, then, as the saying goes, there is more than one path to the top of the mountain.

Signed on June 5, 2018

Badia AlBanna, Dara Orenstein, Michele Bollinger, Ron Resetarits, Kerry Danner-McDonald, Jennifer Satlin-Fernandez, Adriana Kuehnel, Dave Zirin