By Adam Pagnucco.
In this year’s budget fracas, there are many numbers. Some are in the millions. Others are in tens of millions. Quite a few are in the thousands. But one number looms above them all.
Eight.
That’s how many council members must vote in favor of the FY27 operating budget for it to pass. Bear in mind that there are eleven council members.
Why is a supermajority necessary? Consider Sec. 305 of the county’s charter, which states in part:
The Council shall annually adopt spending affordability guidelines for the capital and operating budgets, including guidelines for the aggregate capital and aggregate operating budgets. The Council shall by law establish the process and criteria for adopting spending affordability guidelines. Any aggregate capital budget or aggregate operating budget that exceeds the guidelines then in effect requires the affirmative vote of eight Councilmembers for approval.
This year, the council set the aggregate operating budget affordability guideline at $6.728 billion, a 1.09% increase from last year. That’s far below the county executive’s tax-supported increase of 5.7% and any other options likely to emerge from the council. So eight votes it is.
This could be a challenge.
First, the council’s tax increase on homeowners passed on a 6-5 vote. That means two council members who voted against that increase would have to vote yes on the budget. It’s doable, sure. Such gymnastics have occurred in the past.
Second, the five no votes included all three council members running for executive (Andrew Friedson, Evan Glass and Will Jawando). Given the various nasty critters likely to inhabit this budget, it’s easy to imagine all three of them voting no. Who wants to run for executive after voting for a tax increase plus an MCPS budget that will be condemned by the teachers, SEIU and advocates?
Third, let’s consider MCPS. Now that many budget options are off the table, the county government’s collective bargaining agreements have been approved and the executive has already used $181 million of county reserves to finance ongoing spending, there are not a ton of places to go get money. The council staff has raised a few places to grab more cash and they’re a list the council will hate: slashing the county’s earned income tax credit, reducing funding for municipalities, eliminating funding for the KID Museum, raiding retiree healthcare money again… need I go on? MCPS with its $180 million ask looms as a big target.
But Superintendent Thomas Taylor has hardened MCPS’s defenses, releasing a blistering list of position reductions in response to proposals to go below his request. The political toxicity of going after MCPS could kill a herd of woolly mammoths.
So if all three executive candidates are no votes, any single council member could hold up passage of the budget. Suppose one or more of them takes a hard line on MCPS funding, arguing for another $18 million tranche or two (or three). That probably means a bigger tax increase to pay for it. Here is one sign of this possibility: yesterday, Council Member Kate Stewart suggested the possibility of raising property taxes by two cents on top of the recent homeowner tax increase proposal. Council Members Shebra Evans and Kristin Mink spoke favorably about that option.
And it’s not just MCPS. What if the priority of said council member is something else? Or a bunch of something elses? Or a bunch of council members?
Finally, here is a wild card. Of the six council members who voted for the tax increase, two (Sidney Katz and Shebra Evans) are not running for reelection and the other four (Marilyn Balcombe, Natali Fani-González, Dawn Luedtke and Kate Stewart) face competitors who lack their resources and endorsements. That frees them up to make unpopular choices if they want to. Kristin Mink is in the same territory. Only Laurie-Anne Sayles (who has been out of the council chambers for more than a week) faces real opposition. Political competition matters either through its presence or its absence. The direction in which this plays is up to conjecture, but it’s relevant.
When I asked how hard it might be to get to eight, one of my council building sources offered this nugget of wisdom: “Each budget seems too challenging to pass until we pass it. Every year.”
Fair enough. The council will pass a budget. They’re not Congress, after all.
But the challenge of getting to eight will have a big impact on the contents of that budget. We shall find out what that budget will contain soon enough.