Tag: Affordable Housing

Sign the Petition to Protect Our Rent Stabilization

What’s at stake…

Our city’s historic rent stabilization law, which helps keep rents affordable, is now being reviewed by City Council. Unfortunately, the review process opens the door to weakening the law for renters.

Please sign our PETITION to urge the Council to continue to prioritize tenant rights, and continue to limit allowable annual rent increases to no more than the rate of inflation.

  • Nearly half of Takoma Park households are renters. About half of these benefit from rent stabilization. (The other half live in units that are exempt from the law.)
  • Our law caps annual increases for rent-stabilized units at the rate of inflation (Consumer Price Index) – 2.4% this year. The County’s cap for the year is more than double at 5.7%.
  • Forty-seven percent of our renters are either “housing cost burdened”, spending over 30% of their income on housing, or “severely burdened”, spending 50% or more on housing.
  • Our law keeps rents affordable for many residents with low incomes. That creates stability and sustains the diversity and wellbeing of our whole community.
  • The Council’s review and possible revision of our law could either increase or reduce tenant rights and the availability of affordable rental housing for those with few options.
  • Weakening our rent stabilization law would be especially cruel while anti-immigrant violence and economic forces threaten Takoma Park renters, who are mainly people of color.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION HERE.

Haga clic aquí para leer en español.

ማመልከቻውን ለማንበብ እዚህ ጠቅ ያድርጉ

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 Park’s ordinance limits rent increases for half the City’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 wouldn’t be in our neighborhoods and schools if not for our progressive Rent Stabilization ordinance?
  • Isn’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 government’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 City’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 City’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 RFP’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 “already densely developed”, (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 City’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 City’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 “pillars” 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 “Key Findings”, p. 13: “Because Takoma Park is largely built out, there is little new residential construction.”

Protect Takoma Park Neighborhoods: Keep Rent Stabilization Strong

The Issue: The City of Takoma Park, at the Mayor and Council’s request, is reviewing our historic rent stabilization law. Unfortunately, the review process seems skewed towards weakening the law to appear more attractive to developers. That’s not housing justice!


The Law: Almost half of all households in our City rent their homes. Nearly half of all rental units are rent-stabilized, with annual rent increases now limited to the rate of inflation: 2.4% in 2025 compared to 5.7% in the County. Property owners can apply for “fair return” increases, above that level, and several exemptions exist, including for government-subsidized buildings and single-family houses.

Its Impact: Local data indicates our law has helped preserve our economic and racial diversity and provided stable housing. Many low-income families, including many immigrants, have been able to afford their homes for decades, planting roots and raising their children in a community with strong schools and good local services. We all benefit from the resulting community-wide sense of security and well-being.

What to Do? –  Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) invites you to work with us in the months ahead to urge the Council to make sure any changes in the law:

  • Strengthen tenant protections.
  • Preserve affordable housing, especially for residents with low incomes.
  • Help landlords better maintain and repair buildings.
  • Prevent higher rents or teardowns that would displace current residents.
  • Honor our community values: Diversity, inclusivity, protecting the most vulnerable.

If you’d like to receive CVT Alerts or join our working group on housing, email: tjcommunityvision@gmail.com.

Q&A: Rent Stabilization in Takoma Park

Q&A on Rent Stabilization in Takoma Park by Community Vision for Takoma (CVT)

(A working document, comments welcome).

Do you care about housing justice in Takoma Park? Then consider following the City Council’s new review of what may be the single most impactful law our small city has ever passed: Our Rent Stabilization ordinance. To help residents prepare to take part in this process, the 15 Questions & Answers below offer an overview of the current law – and what’s at stake in its review and potential revision.

Question 1: What is Takoma Park’s Rent Stabilization Law all about?

Answer: Takoma Park’s ordinance is apparently the oldest continuously in-effect law in the State of Maryland that stabilizes rent. The first version of our law was passed in 1980.1 (More than 200 other local governments as well as two states – Oregon and California – and the District of Columbia2 now have such a law as well.) Our law requires most landlords who rent out multifamily buildings or individual condominium units to limit their annual rent increases to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index from the year before. (For 2025, the maximum increase allowed is 2.4%.)

However, there are several landlord exemptions available even for those types of housing – including for units that are federally subsidized. Also, for entire buildings, if they operate under a contract with a government agency that requires at least half the units to be affordable for residents with low or moderate incomes. Owners of newly constructed multi-family rental facilities can also apply for a five year exemption. And the law does not apply to single-family rental housing or accessory dwelling units. In fact, just 1,636 of the 3,217 rental units in the City – about half — were rent-stabilized, as of 2023.3

For more details, you can read the law here.

Q2: How has Rent Stabilization impacted our community?

A: Rent stabilization has contributed significantly to the stability and resilience of our Takoma Park community. It has succeeded in preserving an unusually dense supply of affordable housing in high-priced Montgomery County. (Median rent was $1,318 in Takoma Park, compared to $1,957 in the County, as of 2022.)4

By preserving such reliable affordable housing, the law has played a major role in preserving our economic and racial diversity.5 (That’s not surprising, given the evidence that rent stabilization is a powerful tool for racial justice.) It has enabled Takoma Park to provide housing access to residents from near and far who can plant new roots and raise their children in a community with strong schools and good local services.

And there is evidence that rental communities in our City really are more stable: As of 2022, the median number of years Takoma Park renters have lived in their home is 7 years, compared to just 4 years in the County, which is just starting its own rent stabilization program.6 Rent stabilization has not only directly benefited many Takoma Park residents who rent, of whom a high proportion are residents of color. It has also promoted a broad sense of stability and community-wide security that contributes to the health of our whole city.7


Q3: Overall, what percentage of Takoma Park household are renters?

A: Takoma Park is a densely populated municipality of about 2.1 square miles with an ethnically and economically diverse population of about 17,500 people. About 48% of all households rent their homes. By comparison, about 35% of all households in Montgomery County rent their homes.8


Q4: What about the buildings that are fully exempted from our Rent Stabilization Law because the owners have signed a government contract to limit the rent for at least half of their units? How high are the rents for units that are not included in that protected proportion that must be affordable? And what’s the total number of units in each of those buildings that are not protected at all from hefty rent increases, either by our law or by those government contracts?

A: We urge the Council to ask staff to provide the data to fully answer this question – and to evaluate how total rents and the pattern of annual increases in rents in those uncovered units compare to buildings that are under our law. Note, though, that most renters in the City are either covered by the law or live in units subsidized or rent-regulated in some way by a government agency.


Q5: But is rent stabilization fair to landlords, who are trying to make a living, or does it force them to basically subsidize their own rentals?

A: The law specifically recognizes the value of allowing landlords to get a fair return on their investments. They are able to petition for special increases, beyond the year’s approved percentage increase. They can do so if they find themselves in any particular year in circumstances that require a higher rent to pay the costs of maintaining the safe, quality housing that residents deserve, while making a fair return for their own businesses. More details about such “Fair Return” rent increases are here. (Staff have stated that landlords have made limited use of Fair Return applications. A review to verify if that reflects satisfaction with increases allowed or some issue with the process – such as ease in navigating it or being informed about it – could be part of the rent-stabilization review.)


Q6: CVT alerted residents earlier this year about political pressures for a new Maryland State law to prohibit any local government from including something called “Vacancy Control” in its rent-stabilization law. What’s that all about, and how would it affect Takoma Park?

A: A major goal of rent stabilization is to protect stability and affordability for current and future tenants. After a tenant moves out can the landlord raise the amount of rent to market rate, or is the current rent for the year offered to new tenants? Keeping the rent level for the next tenant after the prior tenant vacates an apartment unit is called “vacancy control.” Allowing the rent to float up to market rates between tenants – often to levels which prospective new tenants can no longer afford – is called “vacancy decontrol.”

Affordable housing advocates stress the importance of vacancy control because it helps protect tenants from displacement and prevents a loss of reasonably priced rental housing. They fear that vacancy decontrol creates an incentive for landlords to displace long-term tenants and to select tenants who are more mobile and have higher incomes. The laws for both Takoma Park and the County include vacancy control. The effort to ban such provisions failed this year (2025) in the Maryland legislature, so our policies are still in effect. Locally, high-level support for vacancy control among both City and County elected officials was reaffirmed in March 2025. 9


Q7: Has rent stabilization stifled development of new multifamily rental buildings in the City?

A: Opponents of the City’s rent stabilization law often make this claim. However, they haven’t been able to offer persuasive evidence that a lack of new development is caused by rent stabilization. There’s good reason to doubt that assertion. A 2017 report to the City Council from a housing consultant, for example, concluded otherwise. One of its “key findings”: There has been little new development in Takoma Park for years because the City – which is just over 2 square miles in size – was already densely developed.10

More recently, a major new opportunity for considerable new housing has opened up at Hospital Hill, the site of the former Washington Adventist Hospital. And another site, owned by a church on New Hampshire Avenue, is already being planned for development, which will include 78 new affordable units for seniors.

Moreover, the results of a number of studies across the nation show that, in general, rent stabilization does not appear to stifle new housing development. For example, a 2021 national review of research on rent stabilization, in a report from the University of Minnesota, concluded: “Little empirical evidence shows that rent control policies negatively impact new construction. [highlighting in original] Construction rates are highly dependent on localized economic cycles and credit markets. Additionally, most jurisdictions with rent stabilization specifically exclude new construction from controls, either in perpetuity or for a set period of time.”11

In fact, Michael Bodaken, Adjunct Professor at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy and former head of the National Housing Trust, testified to the Montgomery County Council in 2023 on just this point: “The evidence shows that overall market conditions, interest rates, costs of materials, and zoning have much more influence over new housing supply than rent regulations,” he wrote. “This is particularly the case in prosperous locations like Montgomery County.”

And nearly three dozen economists in 2023 published a letter making a strong case for expanding rent regulations – pointing to “substantial empirical evidence that rent regulation policies do not limit new construction, nor the overall supply of housing.”


Q8: Does rent stabilization make it hard for landlords to afford proper maintenance and so lead to the deterioration of the City’s rental housing stock?

A: We aren’t aware of any local study on this question, which we agree is an important one to evaluate. One goal of such an evaluation should be how to use and preserve our law while making sure the overall impact of local City and County regulations, code enforcement, and financial incentives support landlords’ efforts to keep their properties in good condition.

It is notable that the same 2021 national review of rent stabilization found: “There is little evidence that rent regulations cause a reduction in housing quality. Some evidence shows that major capital improvements keep pace with need but that more aesthetic upkeep may suffer. Most programs allow for the pass-through of capital improvement costs.”


Q9: In Takoma Park, given the age of many of our rent-stabilized buildings, wouldn’t it help if City policies strongly encouraged landlords to maintain the quality of our affordable housing stock so we don’t lose it?

A: Yes. In fact, a 2018 study12 funded by a national group representing multifamily apartment landlords concluded that even under actual rent control (vs. our more flexible form of rent stabilization): “There is no clear association documented in the empirical research between rent control and building quality, particularly if other ordinances, requirements, or incentives are present to have landlords maintain buildings.”

So, any City review of our Ordinance should carefully evaluate whether we and the County have the right mix of such requirements. For example, this could include a review of how thorough and timely inspections and enforcement of housing codes are, as well as evaluating incentives, such as sharing costs of improvements or extending tax breaks related to repairs when appropriate.

Also, the review should pay special attention to an emerging maintenance challenge: New County energy standards. The County Council recently passed mandatory new Building Energy Performance Standards. These may require a review of cost-sharing options to help the owners of multi-family rental buildings that are rent stabilized comply. Each building in the County that is 25,000 sq. ft. in size or more has its own “site energy use intensity” (site EUI) standard that it must reach by a certain deadline. (A list that includes all the multi-family buildings in our City that must meet such standards and their deadlines is available here.) Site EUI is a measure of the energy use per gross square foot of building area each year. Each building’s final performance standard is based on what the building is used for.

Q10: Does rent stabilization tend to promote a decline in the total amount of rental housing units? Does it create an incentive for owners to either convert their properties to condominiums or tear them down and totally rebuild, or to sell to other developers who will do so?

A: This question, to our knowledge, has not been carefully evaluated locally. We urge the City Housing staff to compile and share data on condo conversions of rent-stabilized units in Takoma Park. The 2021 nationwide review did find that research shows, in general, that rent regulation “is related to an overall reduction in units.” However, other research demonstrates that’s not always the case, and that carefully written laws can avoid loopholes that encourage condo conversions.13 Depending on what a local analysis would show, if necessary, the City could follow other cities’ lead and add focused regulations to encourage landlords to stay in the rental housing market and continue providing affordable housing.

And consider this: When affordable rental units are converted to affordable condominiums or affordable cooperatives – which has happened in Takoma Park with the aid of the City and County – the change can provide affordable options for home ownership to residents with modest incomes who otherwise would not be able to afford buying a home. Given the importance of home ownership to building generational wealth, the equity impact of such conversions is also of value.

Q11: Why is the City Council reviewing our Rent Stabilization Ordinance now?

A: One reason: During the review of the Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA), a re-zoning plan, the City was pressured by the County Planning Board and the County Council to review the City’s rent stabilization law.

Separately, the Mayor and some Councilmembers seem supportive of a major review as well. The new City Council has included a review of the City’s ordinance as part of its official “Council Priorities” over this Council’s two-year term (which runs through October 2026). To date, it seems fair to say that the Mayor, some Councilmembers, and staff have expressed more interest in identifying revisions that might increase developers’ incentives to build more housing units – whether affordable or not – than on changes that could strengthen tenant protections or overall housing resilience.

Q12: What role do our Rent Stabilization Law and other tenant protections play in meeting the City’s major housing goals and challenges?

A12: This is a good question, deserving a full evaluation in any major review of the law. But we can make some preliminary observations. The Council, in its 2019 Housing and Economic Development Strategic Plan, prioritized three main housing objectives: Preserve, Produce, and Protect. The objective to protect was defined as: “Protect renters, homeowners, and local businesses from discrimination and displacement; and protect our environment from destruction.”

Notice the inclusion of language about protecting residents from displacement. City staff later reframed those objectives in 2024 as “stability, choice, and quality,” in a way that arguably de-emphasizes protecting residents from displacement.

     Stability was defined by staff as “the ability of residents to remain in their community.” Stability for residents renting in multi-family buildings is significantly advanced by the City’s Rent Stabilization policies. And stability among residents – whether they rent or own – is arguably threatened by high property taxes and rents.

     Choice was defined as residents’ ability “to choose and find housing that fits their life situations.” Choice is limited among certain housing types, notably duplexes, triplexes and townhomes and, for homebuyers, within certain price brackets, especially low to moderately priced single-family homes. A factor that impacts all housing choices is the limited availability of developable land. We note again this key finding of the 2017 City-funded study: “Because Takoma Park is mostly built out, there is little new residential construction.”

     Quality was defined as “safe, healthy and contains all amenities for comfort.” While various enforcement mechanisms attempt to address quality, how well the City’s many aging multi-family rental buildings are being maintained is a particular concern. A full analysis, including building-by-building evaluations of the need for repairs, would be a good first step to begin prioritizing this major issue. 

Clearly, rent stabilization and other tenant protections play a key role in achieving the City’s overall housing goals – serving current residents but also new residents.  Any policy that might lead to displacement is directly at odds with the City’s goals.

Q13: What other City policies significantly impact our housing?

A: Takoma Park’s suite of housing policies and programs work across the Stability-Choice-Quality framework, some clearly prioritizing housing justice in terms of promoting safe, affordable, well-maintained, stable shelter.

These programs include, for example, grant assistance with down payments for first-time home buyers who are income eligible and the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Law, which since 1986 has given tenants a right of first refusal when a landlord decides to sell. Together, these policies have supported numerous residents, on their own or organizing with other tenants, to transition from renting to home ownership without moving. This can help residents of more modest means, who are disproportionately families of color, begin to build the kind of generational wealth and stability that has historically been disproportionately available to white families. (A success story that, on paper, is a “loss” of rental housing units, but is also a gain for the individuals involved and, at least in some ways, for our community.)

Another set of City policies offer other protection for renters, including Rental Assistance and Tenant Protection from Displacement programs.

There are also significant new City and County policies, whose impacts on housing it’s too soon to evaluate fully. The City’s new Housing Property Tax Credits passed in late 2024. But they will not be available until the Council has approved regulations to implement them. (As of mid-May, 2025, staff have not yet presented such regulations.) The credit for new, multifamily rental buildings would provide 10 years of full exemption from City property taxes, and five more years of partial exemption. Other, less generous tax credits would apply to  the rehabilitation of multi-family rental buildings (Council has instructed staff to flesh this idea out), and affordable housing preservation.

The Minor-Master Plan Amendment, approved in 2024 by the County Council, significantly changed zoning in the 132 acres along Maple Avenue and Flower Avenue, from Philadelphia Avenue to the west, and the Washington Adventist campus, to the east.14 The changes expand the allowable heights, floor-area-ratio (FAR) and commercial-development potential in the plan area, which includes the site of the former Adventist Hospital.

Both the new tax credit for newly constructed rental buildings and the MMPA zoning changes likely increase development potential – but also the potential for some resident displacement. 

Q14: How does the City’s Rent Stabilization Law compare with Montgomery County’s?

A: Broadly speaking, Takoma Park’s ordinance offers much stronger renter protections compared with the County’s new law. Three significant differences are:

• The exemption period from rent stabilization regulations for brand new multifamily rental buildings is 5 years in Takoma Park, vs. 23 years under the County’s law.

• After a building’s “substantial” renovation, the County allows a new, 23-year period of exemption from its law. The City has no similar provision.  (Renovations that cost at least 40% of the building’s assessed value are considered substantial, under the County law.)

• The maximum annual rent increase allowed under rent stabilization under Takoma Park’s law is the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index in our area (2.4% increase allowed for 2025). Under the County law, the maximum allowed annually is either 6% or the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index plus 3% — whichever is less. (5.7% allowed for 2025).

You can compare the two sets of regulations to see all the differences here. (Link here)

Q15: What can residents do to learn more and/or advocate for the City’s Rent Stabilization and Housing policies?

A: Residents can learn more about individual policies from the Housing pages on the City Website and from our document “Selected Rent Stabilization and Housing Policy Documents”.  You can  also attend a City Council Meeting – which are most Wednesday nights at the City Community Center – when housing issues are on the agenda. You can make a 3-minute public comment in person or over Zoom at the meetings. Please also share your questions and concerns with your City Councilmember, the Mayor and the entire City Council.  Lastly, talk with your friends and neighbors to help them stay informed and engaged too.

And a special invitation: If you would like to actively work on these issues with CVT’s Housing Working Group, send an email to:  Community Vision for Takoma at tjcommunityvision@gmail.com. Feel free to also email us, at the same address, any further questions, comments, or information you have about these issues.

  1. In the early 1970s, there were both federal price controls and a statewide rent-control law in effect. After those limits were lifted and rents began rising dramatically, Montgomery County declared a public emergency and passed first a rent freeze and then a rent-control law. That law was in effect from 1973 to 1977, followed by a transitional period during which another law temporarily gave the County the authority to disapprove rent increases of more than 10% if landlords could not provide “adequate justification.” That authority expired in 1981.  Takoma Park voted in their rent stabilization in 1980. Prince George’s and Howard Counties and Rockville also had rent-control programs from 1973 to 1976.  Read about this history here (pp. 6-10, 63-64, as numbered in the pdf). More recently, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties adopted new rent-stabilization laws that took effect in 2024. The City of Mount Ranier’s new law took effect In 2023. In addition, many jurisdictions in Maryland limited rent increases early on during the COVID-19 pandemic but later lifted those limits.
    ↩︎
  2. Minneapolis Rent Stabilization Study, published by the Center for Regional and Urban Affairs at the University of Minnesota, 2021, p. 1, 4. ↩︎
  3. Housing Annual Report, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, Oct. 18, 2023. ↩︎
  4. Housing in Takoma Park, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, July 1, 2024. ↩︎
  5. No racial group in Takoma Park is in the majority. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts for the City. ↩︎
  6. Housing in Takoma Park, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, July 1, 2024.p. 14. ↩︎
  7. Minnesota Rent Stabilization Study, p. 22, in terms of the national evidence that housing stability – which our rent stabilization supports – yield strong social benefits:  “. . .  housing research overwhelmingly stresses the importance of housing stability for economic well-being and physical, emotional, and mental health (Harkness and Newman, 2005; Smith et al., 2003; Welch and Lewis, 1998; Guzman et al., 2005; Bartlett, 1997). Housing stability has been associated with greater educational achievement among children (Scanlon and Devine, 2001; Kerbow, 1996; Brennan, 2011; Newman and Holupka, 2014).
    Also, for evidence of the relationship between housing instability and significant negative physical and mental health outcomes for both adults and children, see the summary and references in “Rent Regulations and the Montgomery County Rental Housing Market,” from the County Council’s Office of Legislative Oversight, OLO Report 2023-5, p. 14. ↩︎
  8. The population density of Takoma Park is about 8,382 people per square mile. That compares, for example to about 5,276 per square mile in Bethesda, 4,961 per square mile in Rockville, and 6,741 per square mile in Gaithersburg. (Source:  U.S. Census Reporter.) Sources for proportion of households who rent their homes in Takoma Park and Montgomery County: U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts for the County and the City. Source for number of residents (individuals) who live in rented homes Is: “Facts and Figures: Summary of Census Information Through 2022,” City of Takoma Park Website. ↩︎
  9. “Good Cause/Vacancy Control Local Legislators Sign-On Letter (updated 3/14/25).” County Councilmember Kristin Mink played a leading role in organizing this effort. In addition to Mayor Searcy, Takoma Park Councilmembers Jessica Landman, Cindy Dyballa, Roger Schlegel, and Cara Honzak signed the letter. County Executive Marc Elrich, Mink, and five other County Councilmembers signed it as well. ↩︎
  10. City of Takoma Park Housing and Economic Data Analysis, The Cloudburst Group, Oct., 2017. One of the “Key Findings”, p.  13: “Because Takoma Park is largely built out, there is little new residential construction.” ↩︎
  11. Minneapolis Rent Stabilization Study, published by the Center for Regional and Urban Affairs at the University of Minnesota, 2021, p. A1. ↩︎
  12. Lisa Sturtevant, Ph.D., “The Impacts of Rent Control: A Research Review and Synthesis,” published by the National Multifamily Housing Council Research Foundation, May, 2018. ↩︎
  13. Mark Paul (an economist himself), “Economists Hate Rent Control. Here’s Why They’re Wrong,” The American Prospect, May 16, 2023. ↩︎
  14. For extensive commentary on, and the history of, the Takoma Park Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA), click on the link to “Affordable Housing,” on CVT’s website. ↩︎

Democracy Dies in Darkness (in Takoma Park)

We are living through the collapse of local media, nationally.

And, this crisis is all too evident here in Takoma Park.

We have almost no independent local news anymore: no Gazette, no Takoma Voice, and the loss of local coverage by the Post and others. All we really have left is a publication put out by the City staff, the “Takoma Park News.”

But this month, we had a stark reminder that this paper newsletter is not an actual news outlet, but a public relations organ. 

Residents have a right to expect factual accuracy in the city newsletter.

Unfortunately, the article on page 4 in the May issue, on the Takoma Park Minor Master Plan Amendment (“the Plan”), is filled with spin and misinformation. (The Plan has now been approved by both City and County Councils).

The Plan upzones to increase land values, incentivizing building owners on Maple and Lee Avenues, and around the former hospital site, to tear down old affordable buildings and build new (larger) ones with higher rents. Someone who did not follow the process closely would be left with the reassuring impression that the Plan ensures that in this gentrification process there will be no net loss of affordable housing, and a right for current residents to return if their building is renovated or replaced.

And yet, the stark reality is that the plan does not ensure either of those outcomes in any way.

City spin: The article contains a quote stating that the plan “explicitly calls out the right to return.”

Reality: What does the ambiguous term “call out” mean here? Perhaps it simply means the right to return was discussed, or mentioned? Because the truth is that the plan does not ensure any such right to return. It says only that priority should be given to eligible residents to return. So, what happens if a building owner tears down a building and builds a new one? If they define “eligible residents” as those with ability to pay what we know will be a new higher market rate rent, then those residents will be displaced.

City spin: There’s a reference in the article to having “strengthened plan language around no-net loss of affordability.”

Reality: The plan calls only for preserving affordable housing “where practicable.” What if the developer does not deem it practicable? And the plan calls only for “striving for no net loss.” Striving is not ensuring.

City spin: The article casually mentions the idea that “tenant displacement laws appropriately meet the needs of our residents.”

Reality: The Plan only “recommends…strategies to minimize displacement.” A recommendation to develop strategies is not the same as a requirement to prevent displacement. And when the plan talks about minimizing displacement, it is acknowledging, as the Planning Board vice chair acknowledged, that there will be displacement.

ACTION ITEMS

  1. At least one large building filled with affordable housing in the Plan area is already up for sale. How is the City ensuring no residents are displaced with each sale or renovation? Stay alert. Ask questions.
  • The Planning Board, County Council, and City officials have all mentioned the possibility of reconsidering Takoma Park’s strong rent stabilization policy. This policy helped create our exceptionally affordable housing stock, and has kept Takoma Park an exceptionally diverse city. Now there is pressure to weaken that rent stabilization policy. Stay alert. Ask questions.
  • We have no more local independent press (most of the remaining local press is dependent on real estate and development advertising). To stay informed, we must demand complete and timely accuracy and transparency in the City’s newsletter. Anything short of this creates further erosion of trust. Stay alert. Ask questions.

The Struggle for Takoma Park’s Future 

Below, we post the Executive Summary of an analysis by Takoma Park resident David Reed, PhD, an author, policy analyst, and longtime organizer for tenants’ rights.

The Struggle for Takoma Park’s Future

Executive Summary

Takoma Park’s Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA) will determine the future of our City.  Either the plan will provide new housing opportunities for low- and middle-income families on the vacant hospital site and protect low-income families along Maple Avenue.  Or it will convert both the hospital site and Maple Avenue into a glistening corridor of 12- and 15-story high apartments as in Bethesda or downtown Silver Spring.

The controversy in Takoma Park began in 2019 when the Adventist Hospital, then the City’s largest employer, moved its operations to a new White Oak location.  In mid-2023, after 18 months of preparation, staff of the County Planning Department submitted the MMPA for the City Council’s first review. However, the plan did not offer the public an urban development program. It had no implementation stages, no discernible timeline, no identified lead agency, no budgetary allocation of public resources, and no infrastructure improvements. 

What the Planning Department staff submitted was a one-dimensional rezoning proposal.  In essence, the plan incentivizes private investors to build more than 3,500 new residential units for as many as 8,400 new residents in Takoma Park, whose population in 2021 was approximately 17,500 residents. The plan envisions building 12- to 15-story high-rise apartments on the old hospital site, identified as “Site 23”.  The staff’s proposal also called for the “up-zoning” of the entire length of the Maple Avenue District with its 14 garden-, mid-, and high-rise apartment buildings.  

“Planning is never just a bureaucratic or technical exercise: in its essence, it is an exercise of political power.”  

“Up-zoning” is urban planners’ preferred tool for increasing the value of land.  Through increased land values, planners incentivize builders to tear down old residential buildings and replace them with luxury apartments that will boost owners’ rental profits and increase tax revenues.  Up-zoning, unless accompanied by robust government protections and incentives, has driven thousands of Black and Brown families over past decades from their apartments into untold social instability in urban areas across the country.  

The Struggle for Takoma Park’s Future contends that, with the recent approval of the MMPA, our City Council, County Council, and Planning Board have abandoned our City’s basic values, vision, and goals. Those goals were first established when it created the Maple Avenue corridor in the 1970s and 80s.  During that period, local developers, the Montgomery Housing Partnership, and government agencies drew on federal, state and local financing to create the County’s densest concentration of low-income families.  Today, Maple Avenue remains among the County’s most affordable and culturally diverse communities.  

Now, the MMPA promises to replace existing, deeply affordable housing with higher-priced apartments that would lead to the displacement of current low-income (primarily Black and Brown) families who would struggle to find housing elsewhere in the County.  County planners have also recommended weakening Takoma Park’s rent stabilization law.  Throughout the two-year process, County planners repeatedly promised, but never delivered, a comprehensive social equity analysis.  In the final measure, an independent equity analysis issued from the County Executive’s office states: The Plan “could do real harm” to vulnerable residents, incentivizes “displacement” along Maple Avenue, and fails to provide resources that will allow “residents to remain” in their place of residence.  Moreover, planners have failed to provide a local transportation infrastructure study and an impact analysis on public schools.  

As the struggle over the future of Takoma unfolded, City and County Councils embraced the allegedly neutral technical proposals of the County’s urban planners pointing our City towards unregulated, for-profit solutions to our housing crisis.  City elected officials abandoned community-driven solutions and priorities built on equity and sustainability, and expressed support for the approved blueprint for a racially inequitable, unjustifiably dense enclave along Maple Avenue.

Expert witnesses, housing professionals, and hundreds of neighbors steadily rallied to modify the MMPA.  Under the current County Council, we can expect that what is happening in Takoma Park will be repeated across Montgomery County.  To halt that trend, our challenge as a community is to build partnerships with community organizations, tenants, religious groups, unions, elected officials, and socially committed entrepreneurs to promote the following actions:

·      Protect Takoma Park’s rent stabilization law  

·      Promote similar strong statutes in Rockville and Gaithersburg

·      Protect tenant-landlord regulations and courts

·      Ensure the Montgomery Housing Partnership remains focused on preserving and expanding low-income housing – without displacement

·      Encourage moderately priced housing development by non-profits

·      Promote public acquisition of land and housing stock

Read the full article at this link:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1w26crs59ncTB6V28mKtUSOs2LhMzRgvX

Affordable Housing Town Hall

CVT’s Takoma Park Affordable Housing Town Hall, March 10 2024

Over 85 people came out on a Sunday for our Takoma Park Affordable Housing Town Hall at 7510 Maple Ave (Piney Branch Elementary). The panelists were CVT’s Jessica Landman, CVT’s Denise Jones, and special guest, County Executive Marc Elrich. Takoma Park’s Mayor and two Councilmembers attended. It was the first chance in the entire Plan process for people to ask questions and get immediate answers.

Takoma Park has an unusual density of affordable housing, especially on Maple Avenue. But the County Executive just issued a warning that the proposed Takoma Park Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA) will reduce, rather than increase, our stock of affordable housing, and displace residents. The Planning Board and County Council failed to demand an equity study. And planning staff repeatedly promised an equity study that never materialized. So the County Executive finally ordered one. It should be completed very soon. (UPDATE: Find the equity review HERE).

Nevertheless, the County Council housing committee pushed the MMPA through last Monday (March 4) without waiting for the equity study. And the full Council will begin considering it this Tuesday (March 12), apparently without the equity study, and over the objections of residents.

We ask, what is the rush to push ahead without an equity study?

County Executive Slams Takoma Park Minor Master Plan

County Executive Marc Elrich just delivered a blistering critique of the Takoma Park Minor Master Plan Amendment to the County Council. (For what happens next, see our Q&A). His comments were based on reports from County Housing, Transportation, and Environment staff. Below are just some of the findings:

Overview

  • The Plan “exceeds the definition and scope” of minor master plan amendments.
  • “The proposed zoning would equate to 205% more development than currently allowed, or 3X as many housing units as currently permitted.”
  • Proposed upzoning on Maple “would adversely affect what is one of the densest neighborhoods of affordable housing in the County.”
  • The County Executive quotes Takoma Park resident Jessica Landman: “Recognize a unicorn when you see it. Takoma Park has a unique pocket of  dense, deeply affordable rent-stabilized housing, which is already consistent with the principles of Thrive and needs to be preserved, not undermined.”

Displacement and Loss of Affordable Housing

  • The Plan is “based on the mistaken assumption that upzoning is essential” to meet housing targets.
  • Proposed upzoning would reduce rather than increase affordable housing, and thus be “counter to Thrive stated goals.”
  • The Plan will lead to “the displacement of current residents who cannot afford to live elsewhere in the County.”
  • No equity study was done. “To rezone an area with one of the largest concentrations of minority populations in the county, and to do so without a racial equity analysis is a major disconnect.”
  • “The focus on high-rise construction, which is very expensive, on Maple Avenue and on the Washington Adventist property, essentially guarantees that most of the new units will be unaffordable to the County’s low-income population, who are disproportionately minority.”
  • “Rent restrictions for nine rent-stabilized properties (485 units) would be lost if those sites redevelop.”
  • The required small percentage of MPDUs (moderately-priced units) “would serve residents with significantly  higher income levels than current residents.”
  • “The language recommending no net loss lacks sufficient clarity to allow enforcement when properties redevelop.”
  • “The Plan states that there is a need for reinvestment in older buildings to ensure quality, safe, affordable housing, but there is no recommendation in the Plan for reinvestment.”
  • By emphasizing “redevelopment over reinvestment,” the Plan “will inevitably lead to displacement of tenants who are predominantly of color and low income.”
  • “Reduce heights along Lee Avenue to 50’ to maintain a garden apartment character and lower MPDU rents.”
  • The hospital site is not in any major transit walkshed, and upzoning on the site should be reduced from 120′ height to 70′ height.
  • The Maplewood and Erie neighborhood has “exactly the diversity of housing stock that Thrive says it wants” and should not be upzoned.

Increased Traffic

  • There is no planning for an anticipated 65% increase in traffic.
  • Plan area is “not conveniently walkable by most, to surrounding transit hubs.”
  • “Existing transportation infrastructure will not support the additional growth.”
  • The Plan would permit increasing traffic “from about 6,400 vehicles per day per road to 10,800 vehicles per day per road” on Maple and Flower Avenues.
  • “Reduce densities as needed to fit within existing and currently proposed  infrastructure.”

Environmental Risk

  • Consideration of the Sligo Creek watershed was “brief” and “relegated to an appendix.”
  • In terms of environmental goals, there are no “details on how to accomplish them or who is responsible for ensuring they are achieved” and “there will likely be no effort to address them.”
  • “Although one of the plan’s goals is to reduce imperviousness, its zoning  recommendations will likely increase impervious cover.“
  • “There is no discussion on the condition and replacement of aging sewer  infrastructure.”
  • It is possible that “tree canopy cover may decrease rather than increase.”
  • On the former hospital site, only “about  ½-acre of central open space is recommended for retention and would require the  removal of large native canopy trees.”
County-Executive-Comments-on-the-Takoma-Park-Minor-Master-Plan-Amendments-CE-Signed-1Download

Vote for Change

We Have a Choice to Make Right Now.

The City of Takoma Park is in trouble.

  • We are spending more than we are taking in,
  • City staff and manager salaries keep growing while the population is flat,
  • The relationship between the Council and unions is so bad they’re considering an outside mediator,
  • Climate change is bringing bigger storms and the City’s stormwater response is inadequate,
  • And the NDC lease, and threat of litigation, still hangs over the Junction.

Right now, you can vote for candidates who want to “continue the work” of the current Council, are endorsed by the current Council, and/or want to continue to try to work with NDC.

Or, you can vote for change–for candidates who are unafraid to confront the way things have been going in the City and work to correct our course.

CVT has endorsed Jarrett Smith for Mayor, Mark Sherman (Ward 1), Randy Gibson (Ward 3), and A.J. Campbell (Ward 5) as candidates best equipped to navigate us out of our current troubles, and return Takoma Park to its historic position as a progressive leader.

Why the Junction is Still Important

Some candidates would prefer to forget the failure of the development plan at Takoma Junction. They urge voters to move on. But the Junction is still essential for these reasons:

1)    NDC still has a 99-year lease at the Junction, preventing anyone else from making improvements there. Many of us would love to improve the esthetics, the stormwater system, and the infrastructure for both public use and low-impact pop-up retail use. But none of that is possible while NDC holds the lease.

2)    The Junction is very much an active topic on the City Council right now, but that conversation is going on behind closed doors. City Council has been holding closed meetings with the City Attorney about the Junction for over a year now, with the next one scheduled for this Wednesday.

3)    The vibrant new and old businesses at the Junction, including the planned arrival of an exciting new restaurant, the new bridal and nail salons, the bakery and butcher, and the Co-op, all rely on our City lot. The Junction has revitalized–the lot is full. We do not need new traffic, new cars trying to park, or new safety challenges for pedestrians, cyclists, buses, delivery trucks, and drivers.

4)   Several candidates have indicated they are still open to a new plan from NDC, despite this developer attempting to kick the Co-op and public off our public land.

For the Record

In the key 2018 vote on the Junction plan by the City Council, sending the plan to the County for approval, Jarrett Smith voted against the plan. Talisha Searcy voted for it (listen to her defend the project on the Kojo Nnamdi Show here).

In 2020, Jarrett Smith was the only Council member to sign a letter with 100 local residents to the County Planning Board, expressing grave concerns about the racial equity and gentrification effects of the Junction plan.

In 2021, Seth Grimes was still advocating for NDC’s Junction plan, urging the County’s Planning Board to approve the plan despite multiple findings that it was unsafe, and despite unanimous disapproval at that point from the City Council.

On his campaign website, Seth Grimes writes that he is “open to a new junction proposal” from NDC.

False Binaries

It has been suggested that we should all focus on the New Hampshire Recreation Center renovation and the Purple Line, rather than the Junction. This is a false binary.

CVT supports equity and investment in all wards, and is strongly in favor of a vibrant community-driven renovation of the Recreation Center, including exploration of affordable housing and satellite library services there.

It has been falsely stated that CVT is anti-housing, or anti-development, because we opposed NDC’s Junction plan. CVT is strongly in favor of exploring new affordable housing options throughout the City, including at the Rec Center and other locations on New Hampshire, at the old hospital campus, and at the old McLaughlin School campus. CVT also urges new efforts to prevent Purple Line displacement of low-income residents and small local businesses, through expanding residential and commercial rent stabilization, and increasing and improving affordable housing at the Crossroads.

This is the moment. Vote for change, and vote for a return to our progressive ideals.

City Council Candidate Questionnaire Responses

In preparation for the City of Takoma Park’s election on November 8th 2022, Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) sent questions to each of the 15 candidates for City Council. All but two candidates returned the questionnaires, below. (A few responses were edited to fit the limit on length.)

Topics included the climate emergency, the City budget, racial equity, the future of Takoma Junction, and affordable housing. We appreciate the time the candidates put into replying to these questionnaires.

The questionnaire responses below should help residents to make decisions on voting in the Council races. Not all candidates have websites (yet), but we encourage you to visit those websites linked to the names in the questionnaire responses, and to seek out the candidates at local events including the Takoma Park Street Festival on October 8th. You can also listen to speeches made about the candidates at the Nominating Caucus.

Also, tune in to the upcoming City Candidate Forums moderated by Eric Bond of Talk of Takoma (WOWD), streaming on Takoma Park City TV:

  • Oct 6, Candidates for Mayor 6pm
  • Oct 10, Ward 1 (6pm) and Ward 5 (7:30pm)
  • Oct 17, Ward 3 (6pm) and Ward 6 (7:30pm)

City ballots (separate from State/County ballots) should arrive by mail in October. Residents age 16 and up can register to vote in the City election, and do not need to be US citizens. City residents can vote:

  • by mail,
  • by drop-box,
  • or in person on November 8th.

WHO WE ARE: CVT is an informal network of neighbors who first came together around the use of public land at Takoma Junction, and continue to work on community issues. We do not have a formal organization. We work by consensus. At our center is a varying group of about 20 residents who meet regularly to discuss what’s happening in Takoma Park and to plan communications and advocacy. Our work includes attending City Council meetings, alerting residents to issues before the City, and encouraging participation in the City’s democratic processes.

CVT does not collect or donate funds to support candidates, and is not a Political Action Committee. 

City Council Candidate Questionnaire Responses

Ward 1

Shana Fulcher (Ward 1)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

Pedestrian safety, bicyclist safety, and traffic safety should be improved at the Junction before moving forward with the development. The intersection causes unease to everyone who passes through it. The parking lots on either side of the Co-op are awkward. The parking lot under consideration for development can be impossible to exit in order to get back into traffic.

I’m concerned about the legal and financial obligations the City might have with ending the current agreement with NDC as well as the City’s reputation. I would not want the City to lose money to NDC as a result of terminating the agreement. I worry about how other developers would feel about entering into an agreement with the City after ending its contract with NDC. NDC should present a plan that fits the City’s parameters including more greenspace and significantly reduced development. 

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

I would like to see a plan with more public use space that has protection from the elements with either a green roof or solar paneling. The Junction is at a major throughway for Takoma Park, so I want it to include architecture that is unique. I support finding a way to change the angle of the intersection at the Junction to increase visibility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers. Our city should reflect that pedestrians not only have the right-of-way but also the priority. The second that someone parks their car at the lot to the right of the Co-op, they become a pedestrian. If we want them to frequent the businesses across East-West Highway, we have to ensure that they feel comfortable crossing at that intersection.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Yes. The services that the Takoma Park community values have likely changed since the inception of those services. We should reevaluate which services we want to spend our city taxes on. With Takoma Park incorporating in 1997, we don’t necessarily need to provide the same services we have historically provided. At the same time, the City has historically experienced difficulty negotiating with the County for reimbursement of duplicated taxes for services. At some point we have to accept that it makes more sense to get more services from the County.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

I do think that the City is doing a good job with some actions. I appreciate our efforts to protect the tree canopy and to create programs to plant more trees, even on private property. It is hard to address climate change locally when so many regulations are weakened nationally. I’ve seen many rain gardens going in on city property in the last few years and we should continue to address runoff. In order to support green construction of city buildings, we may need to slow down and put city goals further into the future. Developing in our city is a privilege and we should expect developers to treat it as such. We can expect developers to meet our higher expectations for environmental practices in order to build here. 

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

The City begins the budget process in November and does not solicit public input until April. I don’t think the current process places enough value on public input. The City Clerk and Employees should be more transparent earlier in the process. Stopping the growth in staff numbers will be hinged on reevaluating services that we want to provide.  My experience with the City staff is that they are working hard all the time so we would have to adjust our expectations of what our City staff’s output would be in order to reduce numbers. My family’s property taxes nearly doubled between 2018 to 2019. We had to seriously consider moving out of Takoma Park.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I’m not sure that I would agree that the process has been ineffectual because there are currently no metrics to measure success or failure. I would like to see metrics associated with our “racial equity considerations” process so that we are better able to recognize accomplishments and areas for growth. The City’s committees and task forces are meant to make recommendations to the City Council, but I would also like for them to be involved in advising the City Manager. In order to have a more inclusive process, I would like to see some committees and task forces assigned through invitation that is randomized and for us to publicize the honorarium that members receive.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

We should ensure that developers invest in greener measures now so that vulnerable families have protection against rising utility prices. These developments do need a variety of types of housing. We must be careful not to segregate our low income families from the rest of the community any more than they already are. We should not solely depend on new construction to make affordable housing for people.  The percentage of affordable housing should be heavily weighted when reviewing developer’s proposals. 

Mark Sherman (Ward 1)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

The city should never have leased the lot to NDC in the first place — the entire idea was wrong. The lease should be canceled immediately, and the council should quit being intimidated. In addition, the city attorney should stop trying to gag city council members on this issue — council members are not staff — they answer to us, not the city manager

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

The highest and best use of that land is for a parking lot that doubles as a delivery space for the adjacent grocery store. However, that doesn’t mean it has to look bad — it should be treated as green space with parking, and the corner at the back, near the fire station, should not be given away to a private business.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

No, I don’t — somehow, these surveys never amount to much, they’re just giveaways to the survey company, and every bad thing that has happened seems to have been preceded by a survey, so I place little faith in them.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

The tree ordinance was weakened by the current council — I would seek to strengthen it, creating a right to shade, especially for renters. We should also be trying to get people out of their cars — I propose giving free bus passes to all residents and taking additional action on transit.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

Staff should revert to the number of FTEs 20 or 30 years ago — we have become an overstaffed, over-consultanted, overengineered city — witness the library project. I am not well enough versed in the budget process to comment on that in particular. What’s really missing is a local press, to highlight what’s going on in the budget.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

Those questions don’t belong together — racial equity is not the same as making city governance more inclusive. My biggest recommendation is to make the city manager an elected position — i.e., the actual mayor. The person we call mayor now is actually the council chairperson.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

The rent stabilization allowance should be based on a wage index, not a price index. Just-cause legislation should be enacted by the state legislature to prevent landlords from arbitrarily terminating tenant leases. I am also concerned about the loss of rent-stabilized units under various conversion scenarios. And the buildings themselves should be protected under historic preservation rules whenever feasible.

Elizabeth Wallace (Ward 1)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

I encourage the City to find a way to end the current rent agreement of the lot to NDC. I agree that public land should be for the public good and the community should decide how the property would best serve the needs of the city at large. Having familiarized myself with the history of the Takoma Junction project, it seems several breaches of trust have ruined the foundation of what we hoped would be a positive relationship, and anyone in construction knows, you can’t build on that especially if it’s to last 99 years.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

Any new plan for the Junction should complement the other upcoming projects and amenities in Takoma. First focus on traffic flow, pedestrian safety, parking for existing businesses and food security. Perhaps move the Junction bldg to the Coop parking lot; design a circle to facilitate traffic; create a different parking pattern on Carroll; add city owned, refrigerated and dry storage for food security and a covered packing/picnic area; permeable parking; tiny house cafes/shops until we see what generates engagement before brick and mortar. 

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Yes, a survey would be helpful, but one that is not based on opinion alone. It’s important that those answering the questionnaire know which services the city and the county already handle, if they’ve had experience with them and their satisfaction level, the reason why they’d like the city or county to handle it, and whether or not they see using those services themselves in the next 5, 10, 15, 20 years. 

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

Right about the time the climate resolution was passed, climactic change was already a driver for the emergence of COVID. It was the city’s first test. In all climate issued, we need transparency projects management metrics. However, everyone was affected by COVID, suppliers and their workforces were undergoing massive change. It’s time not to point fingers, can’t redo, but pledge forward march! Since many construction projects are envisioned, green building and green space are first priority. 

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

The budget process seems to be a dreaded event by all. That must change in order that it be one that stimulates good and creative thought, not drudgery. Both the city 1 council and the residents need to see numbers on a quarterly, if not monthly basis so that patterns, trends, anomalies and other data are seen sooner rather than later. Also, it’s important to track whether or not project goals were accomplished on time and the man hours spent, including the TPPD. It’s impossible for me to say if we need to curb staff growth without those metrics. 

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I’d like transparency on the rubric/s used, but need to add the climate change lens as well, as CC already majorly effects all marginalized people. 2/ There are a few equity projects on the city website (bus shelters, park quality) but they are all ongoing. The reports don’t reflect how close they are to achieving their goals, if time was lost due to COVID or change of personnel etc. Again project management timelines! 3/ Perhaps use Targeted Universalism approach. 4 / Start with honoring them for their successes, naturalizations, etc. at council meetings. 5/ no room left. 

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Rent stabilization stays in place! I’d encourage the county to create other areas as well. TP can be a long commute to some jobs. 2/ As an Airbnb host, I have insisted on having my home inspected so safe housing is a core value. 3/ I would advocate for affordable housing but suggest also mini city hall office, police substation?, community center, and shops. 1st renters could be TP residents from homes that were sub par. Landlords who get property tax allowances must be inspected regularly or may have to forfeit the subsidy.

Ward 2

Cindy Dyballa (Ward 2)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

The city’s 2016 development agreement with NDC and the previous council includes the lease. The city has been in discussions about this agreement, and it’s not appropriate for a current council member to publicly address topics such as status of confidential contract negotiations. I think a mutual resolution is important; a unilateral decision could bring costly and time-consuming legal action. As a 30-plus year Coop member I believe I’ve been taking into account their needs.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

The city’s original project goals still seem relevant: be a stimulus to the commercial district and its local independent businesses; improve its aesthetic appeal; and be environmentally sustainable and sensitive to context. The bigger question is how we arrive at an updated shared vision for the site’s use. I would look for options that generate city revenue (not impose large city costs) if possible, as well as support healthy local businesses and respect safety and site constraints.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

This, along with past city resident surveys, is a useful tool to help us balance city services, budget and revenues. I’m open to shifting some services. There’s challenges: targeting outreach to draw in new or infrequent participants; addressing city unions since services are delivered by staff; and working with the county on service transition, code changes needed, and likely costs. Example: we now pay a lower county waste fee than others, since the city provides most residential pickup.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

As sponsor of the city climate emergency and action framework, and a strong promoter of city and county climate, tree canopy, and stormwater action, of course I want the City to do more—in a way that supports our equity and other goals. Let’s build on current efforts such as our GHG targets, building energy efficiency programs, tree canopy goal and expanded planting effort, city EV policy, and green features in the library renovation, as well as expand public-private stormwater management

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

Our budget process has more public detail each year, because we asked for it. I still want more focus and clarity on the key information, decisions and necessary choices. City services need staff to deliver and manage them; wage increases for staff facing the same economy we do, and increases for their tools and equipment, means more spending. I’ve voted to keep a level residential tax rate, and I’m very cautious about adding staff; and we must also expand other city revenue sources.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

More tools and training can help city staff and council better use this tool. I’ve worked hard to recruit and appoint a more diverse group of residents to city committees, with stipends to cover their costs. To be more inclusive and address structural issues, let’s take practical steps like our recent ones, such as more targeted and varied outreach, neighborhood workshops with translators, assistance programs for our most vulnerable, and community navigators to connect residents with services.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Half our residents are renters, so I’ve been focused on these issues, and strongly support rent stabilization; our housing strategic plan and housing fund; and affordable housing with needed zoning changes as part of the WAH and McLaughlin sites. I’ve stressed that we need stronger county rental housing inspections. I want solutions that serve more than one goal, such as bundling multifamily rehabilitation and energy efficiency improvements.

Ward 3

Mimi Diez (Ward 3)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

As there are no current discussions with this, and all the information I currently have is from the https://takomaparkmd.gov/initiatives/takoma-junction-redevelopment/ website, I don’t have enough information to answer. If and when any discussions do come up about the Takoma Junction and NDC, I plan to address these topics objectively and with the best interests of Ward 3 and the city in mind.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

My vision for a thriving junction is not an above ground parking lot that polarizes a city.I envision a place that is safe for people of all ages to gather, shop, & celebrate. A place where our home-grown entrepreneurs have ample space & where infrastructure can support their deliveries. There is more to Takoma Park than the Junction & we need to support safe transportation infrastructure, recruit/retain businesses & create safe & beautiful places in all Wards, not just the Junction.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

A survey conducted by the city is a great idea, however communication is already a challenge point in our community. Not everyone follows city announcements, has social media, or adequate access to wifi; flyers are lost or ignored. Surveys can assist this city in many ways, however we need to ensure that all voices are heard and not just the loudest.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

The city’s sustainability strategic action plan has recommendations to create a more resilient, equitable and sustainable community.I support the city’s plan to mitigate & adapt to climate related extreme weather events; in setting a realistic canopy goal; in replacing city fleet with electric at the end of its life-cycle; & I support LEED Certified buildings.All this comes with a cost, & I would dedicate my time in finding innovative ways to meet our sustainability goals.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

I don’t have enough information about this question to answer. However there are opportunities for improvement with how information flows in our community and if elected, I will work on improving city service delivery and finding innovative and sustainable program funding and budget management.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I don’t have enough information about this question, but one area where the Ward 3 can address structural racism is electing a Spanish speaking Latina candidate. Just as sustainability is “baked” into how the city does business, so to should we embed equity into city projects, initiatives and governance.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Yes

Randy Gibson (Ward 3)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not? 

 I am not privy to the legal case between NDC and the City, so I don’t know what the City’s options are. However, it is my belief that NDC has acted in bad faith on the principles agreed to with the City. They have also demonstrated reprehensible corporate bullying with regard to the Co-op. These actions should render NDC unacceptable and ineligible for continuance of a lease contract with the City.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses? 

I start with 4 non-negotiables. 1) Business viability of the Co-op, and other local businesses, should not be compromised. 2) Environmental services, e.g. stormwater mitigation, provided by the woods must not be compromised. 3) Adequate public gathering space must be provided, and 4) Safe traffic conditions must be maintained. Beyond these, there are several good options for some sort of enhancement or development. And the City must do a much better job to study and compare different visions in a transparent way before contracts are signed.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not? 

Yes, we should ask our residents about their priorities as regards programs and services. Our City taxes are high and some wonder if we are getting our money’s worth. Tough choices may need to be made to prioritize city services and determine if the County could do better. One example is the County’s Rainscapes program which is much more generous in terms of incentivizing conservation efforts on private property. Policing, a very large part of our budget, is an area that deserves careful review.

Q4  Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set? 

Climate proclamations have not been matched with visible actions. There is an urgent need for a strategic analysis of stormwater risks and resiliency planning. Educating residents about how to help mitigate climate impacts is nearly absent.  Demonstration gardens to model green infrastructure best practices are needed.  An assessment of parks and green spaces is needed to account for the ecosystem services. Partnering with community groups could help educate the public. Home & habitat certification could incentivize energy and environmental best practices.

Q5  What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not? 

The current budget process is not clear nor transparent. I understand that even the Council has difficulty interpreting it.  Our growing budget is also not sustainable given the fact that population growth is not taking place. So, we must face some hard questions about what should be prioritized. Project based budgeting should be considered as a way to make the budget clearer and more transparent to residents and better account for expenditures.

Q6  Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism? 

The degree that racial equity considerations are meaningful is not clear to me and many other residents. To be effective the process must be forceful and sustained and may involve a change of culture for City staff.  Community, business and tenant organizations may offer viable partnerships for more effective outreach. Making those partnerships a business norm is one of my goals.

Q7  Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not? 

Yes, I would fully support our rent stabilization programs and the need to ensure that housing is completely safe and up to code.  I believe our economic and ethnic/racial diversity is a strength that is worth protecting. I seek to learn more about our housing programs and any threats facing them. I would support in concept the suggestion of converting the two sites mentioned for affordable housing but need to learn more the viability of such a proposal.

Alex Hadden (Ward 3)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

After years of consultation and planning, the failure to advance community benefit with the Takoma Junction Redevelopment has left Ward 3 voters dispirited. Ending the agreement with NDC would necessitate a financial, contractual, legal and commercial analysis that ensures the City preserves its reputation as a credible stakeholder able to attract future partners to stimulate our small business community, improve our City’s charm and livability, and advance our environmental and social values.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

After so many years of work and community feedback, there is a wealth of understanding of the exciting potential opportunities for the site. However, it’s likely to require reimagination or resolution of the City’s commitment with NDC to advance a new era at the site. In the near-term, the City should refocus and prepare for the reality of near-sourced growth in its planning and capital investment: nearly 1,000 condo units are being built within walking distance of every Ward 3 resident.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Broad consultation should be a primary focus when the City Council considers planning and use issues of material municipal resources. A survey is one tool in soliciting feedback and engaging the community. However, a truly consultative process requires multiple strategies to equitably and holistically solicit community input. As Councilmember, I will provide multiple channels through which Ward 3 residents can communicate their concerns, starting during my campaign at http://www.alexforward3.com.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

Takoma Park has been a national leader on sustainability issues for generations. However, with limited resources and budget–and a desire to minimize residents’ tax burdens–the City should leverage existing and actionable household-friendly practices, incentives and investments that support residents’ ability to make clean energy transitions, become pedestrian-first, and combat direct environmental risks. We will not be a sustainable City until there is a sidewalk on both sides of every street.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

Most Ward 3 residents express concern of ‘value for money’ for their rising tax burden. Ward 3 faces unique challenges compared to other wards, due to historic underinvestment in communities along Eastern Ave and New Hampshire Ave. Important quality of life issues feel overlooked. Near-term improvements to the City’s information collection and response should be paired with long-term focus on service excellence, factoring in data- and risk-weighted resource allocation to affected areas.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I think Mayor Stewart and the City Council have made a concerted effort to improve racial equity considerations in City governance. I will wholly support the advancement of the racial equity framework on the City Council. In my community outreach, I hear underrepresented groups expressing fundamental concerns about livability: rising cost of living, underinvestment in Ward 3, City responsives, etc. Long-term, we need to increase voter participation among disaffected groups to amplify voices.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Living in Takoma Park is aspirational for many and meeting a portion of that need will have to come from new housing stock. Rent stabilization measures should remain, so long as they do not create an environment that is unconducive to attracting more housing opportunities. Every City resident deserves a safe and code compliant home. Future uses of WHU and W-MS will require a rigorous evaluative and consultative process, drawing on lessons of the Takoma Junction Redevelopment process.

Ward 4

Terry Seamens (Ward 4)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

The Council and NDC are still in ongoing discussions about the project, its status and next steps. Although I would like to go into more detail, I cannot as a sitting Councilmember act unilaterally. The Council will have to decide when it is best to provide more information to the community. I believe that we (the Council) are currently acting in a manner that is in the best interests of Takoma Park taxpayers.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

I want the Co-op to be a healthy, viable and thriving business. The Co-op is an important part of TP’s character. I also believe that more storefronts in TJ would be good for the community. We learned much during the current process that should benefit the new council as they continue on this issue. I hope to continue to hear from community members about their desires, thoughts and opinions regarding this project so that we end up with the property fulfilling its best potential for a better TP.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Surveys are a valuable tool in gathering opinions, but surveys can be a poor way to make community decisions. They may be unintentionally written or distributed in a biased manner or not provide sufficient background information to get informed answers. We operate in a representative democracy rather than a direct democracy. Community opinions are vital for knowing the direction residents want to take TP. Surveys, community meetings, & direct conversations are some of the tools I find helpful.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

Yes, I think we have been aggressive in addressing the climate emergency. It would certainly be nice to do more, but we are constrained by costs and staff time.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

Since joining the council over 20 years ago I have advocated for more transparency in the budget process and with few exceptions I’ve been pleased with the continued progress we made. I’ve been surprised there is little community push-back on budget increases. The council hears more advocacy for adding projects than cutting taxes. We get many complaints when we talk about cutting projects. Staff costs are a significant part of the budget and directly relate to what we can accomplish.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I think the current racial equity considerations we added to the agenda items are good in the sense it was a first step. Obviously, much more needs to be done. A more participatory process would be good, but would not in and of itself ensure that it is not racially or economically biased.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Rent stabilization is why TP has much of the affordable housing in MoCo, therefore it should continue until there’s a better alternative. Unfortunately, maintenance is often inadequate to keep housing in good repair. Efforts to improve inspections have not kept many properties from degrading. Residents’ economic diversity is part of our community character that must be safeguarded. Remaining open-minded I can say the WAU and W-M sites present opportunities that could include affordable housing.

Ward 5

A.J. Campbell (Ward 5)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

For many years, the city has paid an obsessive level of attention to the Junction while ignoring other viable development projects. It is unclear if NDC will relinquish its lease without some considerations or even a lawsuit. I don’t think we would get another developer to take on the site. We are in a holding pattern for now.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

I would like to offer the Coop a chance to expand into the grassy area to the right and move its storefront to the property line in front. I would like to see a new seating space with a cafe or kitchen for cooking classes or demonstrations. For the parking lot surface, I would prefer to leave it open and add solar panels overhead. I would like to include a stage or bandstand in the back center for community use.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

The city surveys residents for each new plan and project, but do they listen? I am not sure the consultants we hire do a great job when they conduct surveys. Regardless, we don’t seem to listen to feedback when we get feedback. I think the city should invest in a real-time collection system and not keep paying the consultants.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

The city has a mixed record; there have been many infrastructure improvements like EV charging stations at select locations. The new tree giveaway is wonderful. The City wanted to buy an EV trash truck, but it was considered too expensive. Most of our vehicle fleet is still gas-powered. I don’t see any long-term movement towards an all-electric fleet.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

I recently held a budget zoom call with the community, and not one resident could tell me how much of our budget comes from property taxes vs. intergovernmental transfers. I could not tell you for sure because the city doesn’t seem to provide information on the net costs of each city service. The city does publish a budget breakdown but does not seem to go out of its way to educate the residents. We should change that.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I could not summarize the city’s racial equity agenda except for a vague notion of talking and examining. I get the lofty goals, but I rarely see anything that translates to direct tactical goals. We need to expand access to city and county services through a massive expansion of library services into every ward. While on the council, I will push to transform our library into a center of information and connection.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Yes, I would protect rent stabilization. My first push would be offering tenants a one, two, or three-year lease. Creating stability in housing over three years allows for long-term planning with a stable rent. My second is to limit our annual rent increases. Our current system of rental increases is tied to the CPI. We have seen with high inflation how much that can impact rent costs under stabilization. I would like to see the city limit the increases to a maximum yearly amount.

Cara Honzak (Ward 5) Submitted late, on October 15 2022

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

As I consider the idea of severing the NDC agreement, it is a high priority for me that we give strong consideration to our City’s financial situation and potential liability, and the degree to which severing the agreement may discourage any new developers to engage with the City on the Junction. Yet, there is also a clear loss of trust in NDC and the process used by our City government and City Council on Takoma Junction development efforts. My focus will be to identify a middle pathway.

Q4 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

Although the public land belongs to the City, I think it is reasonable to view the Coop, the adjoining business, and the public land as being interdependent, and the Coop as a legacy business that is vital to sustain. Yet the public land belongs to all of Takoma’s residents, and sits at a major City junction. We must give voice to how the space can be optimized for maximum public good for the whole City, while doing our best to meet local needs in the immediate vicinity and sustain the Coop.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Yes, I think this is important. If the City cuts some services altogether or in any significant form, then the City must have a mandate from its residents and an understanding of shared values across the City. However any survey would need to be done carefully so as to maximize participation, and ensure that our collective preferences are indeed accurately measured.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

I think the City has not yet responded adequately to the climate emergency. While I am pleased that we already have an ambitious 2035 target for mitigation, I believe resilience efforts should be a higher priority. I would begin with win-win goals for resilience, equity and mitigation, that are best buys, such as native tree plantings near pedestrian areas, green recreational space near high density housing, and emergency cooling and heating plans for residents.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

I would like to see the budget process become more transparent. At the same time, I am keenly aware that this will require substantial resources from the City, including significant additional staff time. I feel certain that if the City Council is collaborative with staff in exploring how this can be achieved, there are modifications that can be made to help residents feel more informed yet remain cognizant of this essential consideration.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I think that having a “racial equity consideration” process on Council agenda items is not entirely without merit. It has been my experience in institutions and government agencies that are seeking to address structural racism that taking the first steps towards compulsory reflection is absolutely essential, as is collating basic data. But to achieve greater participation and inclusion, and address structural racism will require us to engage in in depth, extensive dialogue on how to proceed.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

I believe strongly in rent stabilization in Takoma Park. It is vital for nourishing the greater equity that the City and surrounding areas need. As the Purple Line is finalized, it is essential to reap equity benefits. But Takoma Park needs to do better at ensuring that the County helps us keep buildings up to code and livable. I would also advocate for more mixed housing that motivates developers to modernize and provides middle income spaces that bring everyone up, including on the WAH site.

Yared Tebabu (Ward 5)

Did not submit responses.

Ward 6

Ambroise Agosse (Ward 6)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

Yes, I agree that the city promptly ends the agreement to let Neighborhood Development Company (NDC ) rent the lot because: first, the city density sounds already too high to handle that NDC project. Second, the  NDC project Transferable Development Rights (TDR) sounds not clear and also the environment impacts study. To rapidly end this, the city must take strong action to communicate and explain to residents the negative actions of that project on residents especially on traffic. We should have residents file petitions, multiply the protests, and if needed get expects to present to Montgomery county how this project could negatively affect residents of Takoma Park.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

At this moment, I do not have a clear vision. I will prefer to support the existing for future local business or open space.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Definitely yes. The city should conduct semi-annual survey to determine residents’ needs for government services because everyone or most residents do not have access to the right information. Nowadays, information is the key of life. The city should conduct regular surveys to find out at least each household residents’ needs as they pay extra taxes. Montgomery county versus other counties, I think Montgomery county does its part and only our city Takoma Park needs to do something additional as they collect extra housing taxes.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

For the city that collect extra taxes on housing, I do not think they have responded adequately to the climate emergency.  Stronger action is needed.  For instance, the city can offer free or reduced price permeable driveways to residents as well as to build or renew existing sidewalks with the water retention best management practices.  There are so many best management practices that we can develop–protect existing trees, then plant new trees everywhere.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

The current budget process needs to be more transparent. Compared to other cities’ budgets, our city budget is not transparent.  To me, the city council should do more or have the office staff do more to offer extra services to residents as they collect extra housing taxes.  They are so many small things that we can do to significantly impact our residents making people happy to come live in our city.  We cannot continuously collect extra taxes from residents while we are not offering significant services that impact their life. The police services, library, and … are not enough to justify the extra housing taxes that we pay. 

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

At this point and to me, information is the key. We need to have stronger action on communication.  Website and newspaper letter are not enough to have people informed. We need to reinforce communication on target group. Information is the key.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Yes, I will do as our population is not growing.  We need to work to make sure everyone has place to live in our city even low-income since everyone is needed for sustainable development.  Only rich people can not develop the  city. Everyone is needed so, rent stabilization program protection is important.  We need to offer more service to residents than try to displace low-income.

Raju Charles (Ward 6)

Did not submit responses

Mike Moore (Ward 6)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

I’m not opposed to modest commercial development at the Junction, possibly incorporating a residential component. However, the divisive debate surrounding the NDC project has so poisoned the well that I suspect nothing less than going back to square one has any chance of achieving a measure of consensus. As one of the mayoral candidates has persuasively argued, the city should strongly consider putting the entire situation on the back burner while we focus on a new rec center on NH Ave.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

I don’t personally have a vision as to the ultimate fate of the Junction, but I have an open mind with regard to creative solutions that achieve significant consensus.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

Absolutely. I’ve long felt that such a survey would be invaluable. Unless we find some way to substantially raise city revenues via creative development, sooner or later were going to be compelled to engage in a wholesale reevaluation of what we can continue to provide residents as opposed to turning to the county.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

Climate change is the overarching existential threat to the future of humanity, so we–and every other governmental and business entity–should be doing everything possible reduce our carbon footprint. I’m no expert, so I won’t presume to make macro suggestions without becoming much more familiar with the city’s current measures. I will say, however, that on a small scale I plan to push for vastly improved bicycle infrastructure, with a particular focus on the NH Ave. corridor.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

Yes, I definitely believe the municipal budget process needs to be far more transparent to residents. And as some residents have suggested, any new program that calls for increases in staffing and/or funding should trigger a hard look at cost-cutting—and potentially cuts in existing services—in other areas. We cannot continue to be what we consider ourselves—a paragon of economic and ethnic diversity—if we cannot sufficiently discipline ourselves to remain affordable for residents.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I don’t feel qualified at this time to comment on the specific equity considerations that are presumably baked into council initiatives. However, we certainly need to do everything feasible to ensure equity and inclusion of marginalized groups. Furthermore, as the parent of an autistic adult who has experienced the many challenges that face the neuroatypical population among us, I know we need to ensure that this extends to everyone who too often faces barriers to self-advocacy.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

I fully support rent stabilization and strongly support the city’s efforts to avert displacement of low-income residents and to ensure safe and healthful living for renters. I admit I’m not yet up to speed on the particular push for affordable housing on the hospital and school sites, but I’m open to the prospect of pushing for such projects.

Jason Small (Ward 6)

Q1 What is your position on how the City should proceed to end the impasse at Takoma Junction? Do you agree that the City must promptly end the current agreement to let NDC rent the lot? Why or why not?

If there are no contracts in breach it will require a court action to stay a legitmate process.

Q2 What is your vision for the equitable and inclusive use of the public land at Takoma Junction now, given what we have learned about the constraints of that space in terms of traffic, open space needs, safety, and support of existing and planned local businesses?

If there is an open RFP (Request for Proposals) process that includes the public and private interests then my Professional opinion is that this can be done. I have successfully worked on these issues.

Q3 Do you agree that the City should survey residents to determine our needs for government services, and which services should be provided by the City, versus which services could be best provided by the County? Why or why not?

I think community surveys are a active part of good government. The home rule statute and its adjudication make so many of them crystal clear. I think duplication of services does not occur in practice, and that makes for bad government. This should be a regular normalized process. It is not the same thing to live in a municipality as it is the county. Home rule should mean cooperation.

Q4 Do you think that the City has responded adequately to the climate emergency, or do you think we should take stronger action on issues including stormwater, city vehicles, preservation and expansion of the tree canopy and green space, and green construction of city buildings? What changes would you propose and what targets would you set?

I think that resilience and sustainability go hand in hand, and that best practivces should be encouraged. The increasing rate of weather instability increases the need for real consistent priorization of these issues.

Q5 What is your view of the current budget process? Do you agree that the budget process needs to become more transparent? Do you feel that the City Council should do more to curb the continuous growth of staff and spending, given that the City population is not growing? Why or why not?

I think we should do everthing to adehere to the constant yield rate during a recession. If you want a a level of engagement on issue based policy then you havew to have staff. I do think the lack of real communication with town staff makes unreasonable tension on both sides. I have seen the opposite of this in Price George’s county. I would rather have an engaged staff rather than a large one.

Q6 Do you agree that the current “racial equity considerations” process on Council agenda items is ineffectual? What would you propose to create a more participatory and inclusive process to involve residents in City governance? What new steps should the City take to address structural racism?

I think that most of the activities of this town are alienating on the basis of race and economics. I apppreciate the articulated need for it. I think there is not enough room to answer why. I think there are voices that do not particpate, and there is an obliviousness to the lives of pluralistic communities.

Q7 Takoma Park has the greatest density of truly affordable housing in the county, and the only rent stabilization program. Would you work to do everything you can to protect this rent stabilization, prevent the displacement of low-income communities, and ensure that housing for home renters is safe and up to code? Would you advocate for creating more truly affordable housing at the Washington Adventist Hospital site, and the Washington-McLaughlin School site? Why or why not?

Yes. Its classist and racist to do otherwise. I believe in the unarticulated values that non partisan public policy shows to the world. I do not think these values should be a distant memory. Best practices are discoverable about anything.