Takoma Park 2026 Election Candidate Questionnaire

Responses to the 2026 Takoma Park City Election Candidate Questionnaire

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


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

Tom Gagliardo, Mayor

Doug Glynn, City Council Ward 1

Jim Della-Giacoma, City Council Ward 2

Suzy Stimler, City Council Ward 2

Tom Wallack, City Council Ward 3

Kurt Gilbert, City Council Ward 4

Ambroise Agosse, City Council Ward 6


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



*Both Mayoral candidates submitted responses by the original deadline. Candidate Cara Honzak, who had not seen the invitation in time, asked for an extension, and in the interest of fairness, that extension was also offered to the three other candidates (Shana Fulcher, Kurt Gilbert, Amy Wesolek) who had not submitted questionnaire responses. However, Mayoral candidate Talisha Searcy then withdrew her responses, citing the unfairness of the extension.



Protect Takoma Park Neighborhoods: Keep Rent Stabilization Strong

The Issue: The City of Takoma Park, at the Mayor and Councilโ€™s request, is reviewing ourย historic rent stabilization law. Unfortunately, the review process seems skewed towards weakening the law to appear more attractive to developers. Thatโ€™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 โ€œfair returnโ€ increases, above that level, and several exemptions exist, including for government-subsidized buildings and single-family houses.

Its Impact:ย 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.ย We all benefit from the resulting community-wide sense of security and well-being.

What to Do? โ€“ย  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 youโ€™d like to receive CVT Alerts or join our working group on housing, email: tjcommunityvision@gmail.com.

Without Full Council Debate,ย City Issues RFP for Major Policy Review of Rent Stabilization Law

On July 8, the City of Takoma Park issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a consultant to conduct a policy review of our vital Rent Stabilization Law.  

Before this staff-written RFP was released, Community Vision for Takoma sent the Council and staff a critique with recommendations [see a copy below] on an earlier draft staff wrote, proposing what the goals and scope of the review should be. The final version of the RFP was issued without a full Council deliberation or vote on those critical points, despite support from at least two Council members for such a public decision-making process.

This issue affects us all, whether renters, landlords, homeowners, or businesses. Please read the RFP, and CVT’s suggestions, and consider for yourself the importance of the issues that CVT raises. Have they been adequately addressed? 

We invite you to work with us in the coming months focusing on such critical issues as: 1) protecting current residents and small landlords from displacement, 2) preserving Takoma Park’s rare stock of affordable housing, and 3) the urgency of reviewing all past and proposed policies with a racial-equity lens.


Comments and Suggestions on Rent Stabilization RFP

Community Vision for Takoma

July 1, 2025


As presented at the June 11th Council meeting, the goals for the RFP do not accurately reflect the Cityโ€™s current Housing and Economic Development Strategic Plan, approved in 2019.

The Planโ€™s three main objectives were clearly articulated as:

  • PRESERVE existing businesses and affordable housing in Takoma Park, including in revitalizing areas.
  • PRODUCE more housing and opportunities for businesses to start and grow across the income spectrum and in neighborhoods across the City to meet the diverse housing and economic needs.
  • PROTECT renters, homeowners and local businesses from discrimination and displacement, and protect our environment from destruction.

The Strategic Planโ€™s only mention of a review of rent stabilization is to serve the first objective โ€“ to preserve existing affordable housing โ€“ not to question its impact on the pace of development in the City. The Plan also, under each of those three main objectives, includes this specific strategy: โ€œConsider all advocacy and action through a race equity lens.โ€ Given that 83% of householders who rent in our City are households of color, the third goal โ€“ protection from displacement โ€“ as well as the first goal, which is closely related (preserving existing affordable housing) should be at the core of any evaluation of both existing policy and potential changes to ensure that racial equity concerns are prioritized.


In contrast, the draft RFP calls for a consultant to recommend revisions to our rent stabilization law based on analyzing the impacts of the existing law and any proposed changes on housing โ€œaffordability, quality, and choice.โ€ By themselves, those three words are not clearly aligned with the three officially designated goals of the Cityโ€™s Strategic Plan, and are nowhere actually defined. None of the three terms specifically addresses protection from displacement or preserving the Cityโ€™s unusual stock of deeply affordable housing. Nor do those words, or anything else in the RFP, indicate to the potential consultants that their entire project should evaluate existing policy and make recommendations โ€œthrough a race equity lens.โ€

In fact, the Councilโ€™s June 11th Agenda Item suggested that the study should focus on โ€œbalancing tenant protection, incentivizing high-quality housing, addressing affordability, and creating housing choiceโ€ โ€“ as if those goals may be in conflict with each other, or that each is as important as the other. That does not seem to take Takoma Parkโ€™s community values into account. Is increasing โ€œchoiceโ€ in housing โ€“ which apparently means developing new housing for current or future residents who can afford more expensive options — really as much of a priority as protecting tenants, especially the Cityโ€™s many very low and extremely low-income residents?

Choice and more options for whom are key questions for Council to clarify, especially given limited developable land, tight City budgets and uncertain economic trends. Robust data is needed to prioritize and target housing efforts to serve the most vulnerable residents.

In light of the above, we advise the following changes to the draft document. These are needed to realign the entire RFP with Takoma Parkโ€™s unique identity, based on a set of core, shared values that do not yet shine through the RFP document:

  1. Clearly emphasize throughout the document that the promotion of racial equity and socio-economic and racial diversity are core community-wide values and are to be top priorities in reviewing the law and proposing revisions. It is important that there be a thorough review of the impact on equity and diversity of our rentstabilization policies over time. Any proposed change should also be carefully evaluated as to its potential for positive and/or negative impacts on improving measures of equity and diversity.

The City has not yet developed its own process for conducting a racial-equity analysis, to use in such an evaluation. However, the RFP could direct the consultant to commit to conducting its review through a racial equity lens, with an option to either adapt the OLO RESJ Project Methodology Tool, used by the Montgomery County Councilโ€™s Office of Legislative Oversight, or, if approved by staff after consultation with the Council, an alternative expert tool proposed by the consultant.

2. Revise the language of the RFP to specify that Protection from Displacement is to be a major focus of the review and a major goal of any recommendations for changes in the law or other City policies. That would include protecting tenants potentially priced out of affordable housing options or who could lose their homes if their buildings are torn down to make room for new construction, as well as protecting local businesses, especially small landlords in the City who are struggling financially to maintain older buildings.

The consultant should attempt to identify revisions that would increase such protection, as well as examining how potential changes might increase the threat of displacement. The study should include a close look at measures of housing stability through the years and how any potential changes could affect the likelihood of tenants being able to stay in their homes. Evaluating impacts on stability should include a fine-grained look at historic trends in tenant tenure, eviction rates, and how the law has impacted those, as well as analysis of how proposed changes might affect that important marker of community well-being.

Preserving the Cityโ€™s unique stock of deeply affordable housing should also be clearly addressed as key to protecting current residents from displacement. This would require a building-by-building inventory of code violations and needed repairs or upgrades. In that context, the RFP should call for the consultant to review not only this law but other City policies, to evaluate what changes would be helpful to encourage and support landlords whose older buildings are most urgently in need of repairs and renovation, including energy-efficiency upgrades.

It’s also essential for the consultant to clearly evaluate both historical and potential impacts on the supply of rental units affordable at particular income levels — not just to make general statements about “affordability,” without defining that term. For example, City staff report that, as of 2022, 93% of our rent-stabilized units are affordable for very low income households (with incomes of no more than 50% of area median income(AMI)), and about 14% are affordable for extremely low income households (no more than 30% AMI). The analysis must focus on this degree of detail, to capture what proposed changes might mean for our most affordable housing.

3. Strengthen Community-Wide Engagement requirements, to ensure the
results are authentic and really provide robust, meaningful opportunities for the consultant, City Staff, and the Council to interact deeply and effectively with the full range of stakeholders.

Strong representation of tenants is urgent, as are the voices of landlords, especially small landlords who are also residents. But representatives of the broader resident community โ€“ including homeowners โ€“ is also appropriate, given the impact that progress toward racial equity and socio-economic and racial diversity has on the stability and well-being of our entire community. Consider directing the consultant to work throughout its project with a Council-appointed taskforce that represents the full range of stakeholders.


On the City’s Proposed Housing Tax Credits

The City Council is on the verge of approving a package of housing tax credits.ย  Community Vision for Takoma welcomes new housing in our city that does not displace vulnerable residents and that is developed in ways that protect the environment, as the Councilโ€™s 2019 housing strategic plan wisely requires. We welcome new neighbors. We also strongly support incentives to preserve affordable housing and to renovate our deeply affordable–but aging–rental housing stock.

However, weโ€™re deeply concerned about the proposal to provide large, long-term tax subsidies for developers of market-rate multifamily rental housing. Given the major changes in Takoma Parkโ€™s real estate market due to both the enactment of the Minor Master Plan Amendment, which upzoned the center of the city to promote development, and the availability of a major, attractive site for development at the former Adventist hospital, we are not persuaded that tax subsidies are necessary to stimulate market-rate housing.

The City can ill afford to give away future tax revenues to for-profit developers.  We face a serious structural deficit in our City budget that may require painful choices about cutting City services or raising our already-high taxes.  CVT believes that it would be fiscally irresponsible to provide tax credits for market-rate rental housing that seems likely to be built anyway, given how popular Takoma Park has become as a housing destination. Trying to compete for developersโ€™ attention by being among the first jurisdictions to offer a big tax break for market-rate housing is not a policy experiment worth putting the Cityโ€™s shaky finances at further risk.

For these reasons, CVT opposes adoption of the market-rate housing tax credit.  We do strongly support tax credits to preserve affordable housing, which is so valuable to our community, and to rehabilitate the Cityโ€™s aging apartment buildings to ensure quality housing for residents. We urge the City Council to strengthen those two proposals.

New City Council Endorsements from Union and Environmental Leaders

Two new sign-on statements for City Council endorsements were released this week:

1. From City residents in the union movement:

Having devoted our careers to the union movement and having acquainted ourselves with the candidates we are happy to endorse Jessica Landman in Ward 1 and Roger Schlegel in Ward 3 for Takoma Park City Council. 

We know Jessica and Roger share our view that strong, effective unions are needed to improve the lives of all working people.  We believe they are the best candidates to represent these interests on our city’s Council.

Karen Ackerman, former AFL-CIO political director

Sally Davies, former President AFSCME University of Maryland College Park

Dennis Desmond, former Business Manager, LIUNA Local 11

Fred Feinstein, former NLRB General Counsel

Tom Gagliardo, civil rights, labor and employment attorney

Beth Grupp, union consultant

Paul Huebner, rank & file activist in Laborers Local # 74 & Fin. Secretary-Treasurer in Carpenters Local #1110.

Jennifer Martin, former President, Montgomery County Education Association

Bob Muehlenkamp, former Teamster Organizing Director

Steve Rosenthal, former political director of the AFL-CIO

Saul Schniderman- Former President AFSCME Library of Congress Guild

Miriam Szapiro, former chief NLRB Regional Advice Branch and union-side labor lawyer 

Joe Uehlein, former Secretary-Treasurer of Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO and labor musician.


2. From City residents who are environmental and climate activists:

We, the undersigned, endorse the following candidates for Takoma Park City Council in 2024 because of their deep longstanding knowledge of, and commitment to,  climate and environmental issues.

Bob DreherEnvironmental lawyer and conservationist; worked for EPA, DOJ, FWS, Earthjustice, Defenders of Wildlife and Potomac Riverkeeper Network
Brenda PlattEnvironmental program director, national nonprofit organization, 30+ years
Byrne H. KellyLandscape Architect/Environmental Planner, Takoma Stormwater Solutions, DC Solar Coalition (plankholder) Installed Solar on the White House circa.1978
Catherine TunisEnvironmental Policy Analyst, retired; former Takoma Park Committee on the Environment
Charlotte SchoenmannArchitect, lighting activist
Colleen CordesFormer Psychology & Environment Fellow at Friends of the Earth, former TP Tree Commission chair
David HunterInternational environmental and human rights professor and advocate
David ReedEnvironmental economist, author of 7 books on international environment and security
De HermanJewish Earth Alliance, Takoma Park Drawdown, Climate Action Coffee
Diana YountsTPEM Environmental Working Group
Diane CurranEnvironmental and nuclear safety attorney
Diane MacEachernFormer Director of Communications, Sierra Club; Founder & Publisher, Big Green Purse. Resident of Takoma Park since 1984.
Dr. David BlocksteinCo-Director, Worldwide Climate and Justice Education Week
Dr. Robin BroadResearch Professor of Environment & Development, American University
Esther SiegelSustainable farmer, community activist
Ferd HoefnerSenior policy director, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
Gillian CaldwellFormer CEO Global Witness and former Campaign Director 1Sky (now 350.org)
Gina GaspinFounding member of TPSS Food Coop
Jimmy DaukasSenior manager at national farmland protection non-profit organization
John CavanaghInstitute for Policy Studies, the outfit co-founded by Jamie Raskinโ€™s dad Marc
Joseph KlocknerLEED AP BD+C, Klockner & Company โ€“ Sustainable Builders since 1982
Karen ElrichCo-founder TPSS food co-op, member Climate Action Coffee
Karen LangeJournalist on wildlife, sustainability and the environment
Kirsten StadeConservation Biologist, sustainability + environmental overshoot author
Kopal JhaTPSS co-op board, native ecosystem rejuvenation
Linda Pentz GunterJournalist, founder of TP-based anti-nuclear/environmental advocacy group, Beyond Nuclear
Lorraine PearsallEnvironmental scientist and ardent conservationist
Marc ElrichExecutive Montgomery County and former Takoma Park Councilmember
Margaret BowmanWater policy and climate resilience advocate in nonprofits and foundations
Michael BlauAerospace software engineer
Mike TaborSustainable farmer, community activist
Nadine BlochFormer NOAA Office of Education & Sustainability, 35+ yr Environmental Activist + educator
Paul ChrostowskiEnvironmental consultant and author of over 100 scientific papers
Philip BogdonoffBoard member: Biodiversity for a Livable Climate, EcoRestoration Alliance, +Community Food Forest Collective; Consultant, World Bank Environment Dept
Randy GibsonOutgoing TP City Councilmember; Climate Action Coffee, Takoma Stormwater Solutions, Food Forest group
Robert EngelmanFormer president, Worldwatch Institute
Robert GooNational expert on stormwater and Federal agency employee
Robin SchoenScience policy, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Shari FriedmanWorking in climate and sustainability for 30 years, focus on policy and finance.
Stephen WhitneyClimate Action Coffee, Takoma Stormwater Solutions and Friends of Sligo Creek
Steve ShapiroPast president American Federation of Government Employees Local 3331,ย  EPA HQ

Takoma Park City Council Endorsements 2024

Community Vision for Takoma 2024 City Council Endorsements

Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) is endorsing the following 2024 candidates for Takoma Park City Council, based in part on the responses toย our questionnaire. We encourage you to go to their websites:



Don’t forget to vote in BOTH elections!

On Nov 5th, there are two separate elections, with two separate ballots, and two separate polling places.

  • City ballots should be arriving this week.
  • You can mail your ballot if it is postmarked by Nov 5th (and it arrives by Nov 12th).
  • Or, put it in the yellow drop-boxes in front of police station (7500 Maple Ave) or NH Rec Center, by 8pm on Nov 5th.
  • Or, vote in person at 7500 Maple Ave on Nov 5th, 7am to 8pm. No ballot? Bring Photo ID and proof of residency.
  • You can vote in the City election if you are 16 or older, even if you are not a U.S. citizen, or have a felony conviction.
  • You may register to vote in the City of Takoma Park at any time, up to and including the day of the election.
  • Questions? Contact City Clerk Jessie Carpenter, 301-891-7267 or clerk@takomaparkmd.gov.


What About Ranked Choice Voting?

If you live in Ward 3 or Ward 6, there are three candidates in your ward. So, Ranked Choice Voting will come into play if no candidate gets a majority of votes in the first ballot count. In that case, the 2nd choice votes only from the 3rd place candidate ballots will be counted. Here’s what to remember:

  1. You cannot hurt your 1st choice by listing a 2nd choice. Your 2nd choice will only be counted if your 1st choice comes in 3rd place.
  2. If you have friends & neighbors committed to another candidate, ask them to list your candidate as their 2nd choice.


And…A Word About CVT 
  • Who Are We? CVT is an independent, informal network of residents with no formal organizational structure, no membership roll, and no budget. We advocate for Takoma Parkโ€™s progressive political values, and to ensure City transparency and accountability. We are the lone progressive community group attending most City Council meetings and reporting out to the community on a regular basis. Our base โ€“ those on our email listโ€“ is almost 1,000 residents strong.
  • What Does CVT Stand For? We seek to advance these critical public interests: Racial equity, social justice, and ecological sustainability; transparency and accountability in our local government; financially sustainable City budgets that prioritize our communityโ€™s values; and a public empowered with the information they need to more actively participate in City policymaking.
  • Our Record.  In the wake of the collapse of local independent media, CVT has been your source, widely distributing information about City politics. And we’ve mobilized residents to work together to protect public land for the public good, preserve our Cityโ€™s rare stock of deeply affordable housing, prevent the displacement of residents, protect rent stabilization, make our streets safer for everyone including pedestrians and bikers, improve stormwater management, protect our tree canopy, treat our climate emergency with the urgency it demands, save our community grocery (the Co-op) and the jobs it provides to a diverse, unionized workforce, support other locally-owned businesses, and strive for a balanced City budget. 
  • CVT is Pro-Housing. We recently testified, for example, in favor of new housing on the old hospital site. We are, however, anti-displacement, whether the residents at risk of being priced out of our community are home renters or owners. We support development that supports tenant rights, ecological sustainability, and racial and economic equity. We advocate for preserving, renovating, and expanding affordable housing โ€“ and protecting our rent stabilization โ€“ because the unusually affordable housing in Takoma Park has made possible our rich racial and economic diversity, which is the heart and soul of our community. 
  • We Work by Consensus. At our core is a varying group of about 20 residents โ€“ including journalists, legal experts, renters and homeowners, and people with decades of experience organizing for social and environmental justice. We meet regularly, organize Town Halls, speak at City Council meetings, build coalitions with other local organizations, and encourage robust resident participation in the Cityโ€™s democratic process. 


Randy Gibson, City Council, Ward 3: Endorsement

Community Vision for Takoma is endorsing Randy Gibson for Ward 3, City Council. Theย City electionย will be Tuesday, November 8th.

After considering questionnaire responses, experience, and previous involvement in the life of the City, we believe Randy is the candidate who best aligns with the CVT mission of public land for public good.

Randy is a natural facilitator and mediator, who seeks to dedicate himself full-time to Ward 3 constituents and to the City. He has led a life of service around the country and the world, starting with Peace Corps service in Iran. Randy has a Masters in Political Science, spent a semester in Colombia, and has worked in economic development, and on fair trade issues. In recent years, he has been deeply engaged with environmental issues in the City through Takoma Park Mobilizationโ€™s Climate Action Coffee, and the Takoma Stormwater Solutions group.

Randy has the skills to address the issues and opportunities of Ward 3, a ward including hilly terrain and woods, bounded by Takoma Junction and New Hampshire Avenue.

You can learn more about Randy Gibson and how to support his campaign at FriendsOfRandy.org.ย 

Not sure if you’re in Ward 3? The boundaries have changed! See the new Ward 3 mapย HERE.

In this election cycle, CVT has only endorsed Jarrett Smith for Mayor, and Randy Gibson for City Council Ward 3, the ward including the public land at Takoma Junction. To research all the City candidates, we encourage you to read the CVT questionnaire responses.


WHO WE ARE:ย 

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 whatโ€™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 Cityโ€™s democratic processes.

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


Council Moves to Reject Junction Plan

Takoma Park City Council moves to reject the NDC plan for a development at Takoma Junction.

UPDATE: September 15 2021 The County’s Planning Board votes to give the developer a 90-day extension (their fifth extension), to try to get approval from the SHA for the layby and the egress.

UPDATE: September 3 2021  The County’s Planning Board has scheduled a vote on the Takoma Junction plan for Wednesday September 15th (tune in online starting at 11:15am). The County staff has posted a report recommending that the Board vote to deny approval for the project.

UPDATE: August 19 2021  SHA โ€œReturns for Revisionโ€ the latest NDC proposal. And, apparently, the tentative date for the Planning Board public hearing and vote has been delayed until later in September.

UPDATE: July 14 2021 NDC submits yet another revision of their plan for the loading zone, in response to SHAโ€™s rejections. SHA is due to respond by August 19th.

UPDATE: July 2021 The County’s Planning Board has tentatively scheduled their Public Hearing and vote on the NDC plan for September 9th. This is one day after the City Council returns from their six-week summer break. Ten days prior to the hearing, the Planning Board staff will release their report and recommendation to the Board on the vote. NDC’s fourth extension to get approval from the Planning Board will expire on September 16th.

UPDATE: On June 23 2021 The Takoma Park City Council voted unanimously (7-0) for a resolution to disapprove the proposed Neighborhood Development Company (NDC) plan for a development at Takoma Junction. View NDC’s final statement before the vote at minute 18:00, and the City Council discussion before the vote starting at minute 53:45 HERE. See links to new statements from the City and NDC in our Junction timeline.

At the City Council work session on Wednesday June 16th 2021, the Council agreed unanimously (7-0) to craft a resolution to disapprove the Neighborhood Development Company (NDC) plan for a development at Takoma Junction. The move to reject the plan was based primarily on the fact that no approved loading zone was submitted by NDC.

You can watch the City Council’s decision on the video at time 3:28:30.

The formal vote will follow a week later, on June 23rd. The draft resolution should be posted on the agenda by this Friday, ahead of the vote.

What Changed?

Just minutes before the Council meeting started, the City posted a letter  from the State Highway Administration (SHA) to NDC. In that letter, the SHA rejected the longer layby for a third time, and rejected the shorter layby as even less safe.

(That shorter layby also broke all agreements to accommodate the Co-op, as described in this June 11th letter from the Co-op to the City).

With no approved way to create a loading zone for the development, the City Manager announced in the City Council work session on the Junction resolution that City staff were recommending crafting the resolution for disapproval of the plan. Each Councilmember then agreed to choose the disapproval option for the resolution. All of them cited the fact that there was no approved loading zone. Some also mentioned flaws in the plan related to inadequate public space, and other issues.

Many questions remain about what will happen next. For all the latest news, see our facebook and twitter feed.