By Adam Pagnucco.
Here is today’s question.
The county’s more than $7 billion budget funds hundreds of programs. Name one program that you think should be reduced or eliminated and quantify the savings for taxpayers.
District 1
Drew Morrison (D)
As we look to address the County Executive’s budget increase and our larger fiscal challenges, we can move a few major levers to achieve savings and bend the cost curve.
To begin to address the current challenge, we can defer and phase new programs across County Government. Council staff estimates that non-mandatory “enhancements” represent $41 million this coming year.
This year and moving forward, we need MCPS to make more progress in identifying savings in its substantial existing central administration budget. And in County Government, we need to look at how we can avoid duplication of administrative services within core government. In the future, we should consider streamlining shared administrative activities across core government with partner tax-funded agencies like Park and Planning.
To drive further savings, our model should be the recent efforts of WMATA, the Metro system. In FY25, facing budget pressure, WMATA convened a cost efficiency task force that ultimately reduced $128 million in operating costs, including $50 million in ongoing structural costs. They focused on (a) reducing offices and unnecessary leases, (b) reducing consultants and contracted services in favor of in-house staff, and (c) better deploying technology to more efficiently conduct routine maintenance work.
Debbie Spielberg (D)
Rather than targeting a single program in isolation, I believe we need a better tax structure rather than what we have, which puts a disproportionate burden on residents. We also need a comprehensive review of duplicative and inefficient processes across county government, particularly in the duplication between permitting and planning. Streamlining these systems could reduce costs while improving service delivery.
I will use my experience to work with the next County Executive and the unions to determine how we can be more efficient in the provision of services. My focus will be on identifying inefficiencies and reinvesting those savings into priorities like education, housing, and infrastructure.
Reardon “Sully” Sullivan (R)
One area worth reviewing is the Office of Energy and Sustainability and related programs. While environmental stewardship is important, there may be opportunities to streamline these efforts by aligning more closely with established industry standards such as LEED, rather than maintaining overlapping layers of regulation.
Reducing redundancy could lower administrative costs, simplify permitting, and encourage more development activity. The potential savings extend beyond direct operating expenses to broader economic benefits, including reduced construction costs and increased investment.
The savings from reducing this program would be far beyond just its operating cost. Although there is no clear line-item budget associated with the County’s DEP/OES expenses, the ripple effects would be significant, including:
- Simplified permitting
- Lower construction cost
- Increased construction due to reduced bureaucracy
- No gas ban enforcement
Julie Yang (D)
Montgomery County employees are deeply dedicated public servants, and I have seen firsthand how hard they work to serve our residents. Any conversation about efficiency must start with respect for their contributions.
That said, the world has changed, and government should too. Technology has automated many routine clerical and administrative tasks, everything from data entry to basic processing, and we have not always adjusted our staffing structures to reflect that shift.
Rather than targeting a specific program arbitrarily, I would partner with our employee associations to conduct regular position audits across departments. The goal cannot be to make arbitrary cuts but to identify where roles may be duplicated, outdated, or better supported by technology, and where staff can be repurposed to frontline services that residents need most.
Even modest efficiencies matter. If we achieve just 1% savings in personnel costs through better alignment and reduced duplication, that could translate into tens of millions of dollars annually.
Regular position auditing is simply good governance. It ensures we align our workforce with today’s needs, use taxpayer dollars responsibly, and support employees by focusing their work where it has the greatest impact.
District 2
Marilyn Balcombe (D-Incumbent)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Arian Borghei (R-Write-in)
I would conduct a full performance audit of duplicative administrative programs across departments, particularly in areas where overlapping functions exist. By consolidating these functions, we can reduce administrative overhead by an estimated 5–10% in targeted departments, saving tens of millions of dollars over several years.
These savings can be redirected to essential services or returned to taxpayers.
District 3
Jud Ashman (D)
Even for someone who has been in elected office as long as I have, I suspect that I’m only aware of a fraction of the programs that the County is operating – and even fewer when it comes to understanding the actual value each is delivering for our residents.
What I can tell you is that we spend a lot of time on policy formation, but not a lot on measuring outcomes. The County’s Office of Legislative Oversight does some of this work – and very well – but the subjects of their reporting seem to be more ad hoc than comprehensive. This is a missed opportunity and an area in which I hope to move Montgomery County forward.
For example, last month the City of Austin, TX passed an ordinance requiring a systemic citywide performance and efficiency review and audit of city operations. I think our County is long overdue for something like that, and I’d bet we can find lots of efficiencies and ways to improve services for our residents.
A policy or program is successful when it leads to positive impacts on many peoples’ lives; when it falls short of that standard, we should move on from it.
Allison Eriksen (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Ricky Fai Mui (R)
We have approximately 6000 non-profit organizations that solicit county funding. Although a competitive environment is favorable for capitalism, we see many layers of overlap by the non-profits. Of course, as the county’s demographics are not homogenous, we do need some specialization, however, it is not possible to subsidize our way out of our county’s over-spending, lower income population, and insufficient housing options. I would like to see a better coordination and deconfliction amongst the non-profit organizations; and that we expect clear and transparent transaction tracking of taxpayer’s investments.
One area that reduces how fair our county operates are the 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) that takes in county funding and in return provides endorsements or campaign contributions. This cycle of funding and contributions using taxpayer funding does not promote community trust that our candidates are not swayed by special interests.
I would like to help future election cycles become free of conflicts of interest.
Izola Shaw (D)
Montgomery County’s budget is complex, funding many vital programs, so naming just one to cut is not straightforward. That said, the county’s travel and conference budget is an area worth a closer look. The Montgomery County Office of Inspector General has highlighted 18 million dollars in questionable costs. Strengthening audits and enforcing accountability, especially around discretionary spending, can recover or prevent unnecessary expenditures.
Rather than a blunt cut to a single program, I support continuous efficiency improvements, rigorous oversight, and data-driven budgeting. This method has already helped save millions in recent years and ensures that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely without sacrificing critical services. Thoughtful stewardship balances fiscal responsibility with the needs of our community, making sure Montgomery County remains both efficient and vibrant.
District 4
Paula Bienenfeld (D)
First, there are thousands of non-profits in the county. A transparent fiscal audit of county funded non-profits would discover how efficacious they are and if there is redundancy. Second, almost half of the $7 billion budget goes to MCPS; there is almost no oversight of that budget. For 13 years I have worked to organize the MCPS Budgetpalooza where we volunteers look at the proposed operating budget chapter by chapter. Each year we publicly identify places where funds could be saved. While I understand as a councilmember I will have little purview over curriculum costs, it is worth stepping up and having this conversation with the Board of Education. One specific recent item are costs for a second warehouse, estimated at $245,614 per month, while previous superintendent Dr. McKnight in 2023 leased a new warehouse for $65,567 per month. Dr. Taylor’s second warehouse will also require approximately $13 million in capital budget funds to build out the space. At a time when maintenance of our schools has fallen behind to the point where children are in schools with mold and getting ill with asthma as a result, it is worth really looking at the MCPS budgets.
Kate Stewart (D-Incumbent)
I have worked on municipal budgets for over a decade and I have found the best way to find savings is working in collaboration with departments and residents to identify how best to prioritize our spending. We are in that process now for the budget.
Peter “Rocky” Whitesell (D)
One place I would start is spending on economic development incentives such as Montgomery County’s MOVE grants. I do not believe direct subsidies to specific private businesses are an appropriate long-term strategy, regardless of whether those businesses are viewed as strategic.
Realistically, this is not going to solve our budget challenges on its own. These programs are on the order of tens of millions of dollars, not hundreds, and there are not many large discretionary items available for cuts.
That is why we have to focus on broader structural issues, particularly reducing regulatory burden and better aligning county growth with long-term spending.
District 5
Charles Kirchman (D)
The entire county government needs to be examined, department by department to look for opportunities to improve efficiency and reduce expenditures until the county can get expenditures under control and hopefully increase revenues. With the uncertainty in the economy and financial pressures on many residents along with the uncertainty of future federal and state budgets the county needs to be fiscally responsible and control spending.
Kristin Mink (D-Incumbent)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Josephine Salazar (R)
As a Council Member, I want to ensure that all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations receiving tax dollars are not allowed to work hand in hand with their 501(c)(4) or Political Action Committee campaign arm, such as Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), We Are CASA, anti-Christian or anti-Jewish groups like CAIR. The current situation I am describing undermines the residents’ trust in the county government. It is hard to quantify, due to lack of transparency and budget information which is scattered to avoid detection.
The results of these programs are not evident, unmeasurable metrics, no transparency or accountability. Much of the hard-earned taxpayer funds ultimately go indirectly to financing political campaigns of the non-profits. Out-of-state contributions made by non-profit organizations.
We are CASA receives State and County level funding (training, education, legal) yet their website endorses candidates, promotes the hiring of unvetted illegal immigrants. No mention if individual donations are tax deductible. The MCEA collects union dues, donations and receives taxpayer funding, yet through their PAC arm they promote candidates via the misleading “Apple Ballot” advertised as “Teacher Endorsed.” Both CASA and MCEA should be fully investigated to ensure there is separation in their various activities from State and Local Government funding.
Note from Pagnucco: I don’t normally comment on candidate responses but this one makes inaccurate claims. First, I know of no taxpayer funding that goes directly to MCEA and I have never heard of the union operating a 501(c)(4). Second, CASA Inc. – a 501(c)(3) nonprofit receiving county funds – does not endorse candidates. However, the CASA in Action 501(c)(4) and the CASA in Action Super PAC do endorse candidates and spend on elections. Finally, this candidate’s characterization of CAIR as “anti-Christian” or “anti-Jewish” represents her opinion and not mine.
District 6
Natali Fani-González (D-Incumbent)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Sonia Garcia (D)
To be clear, a $7 billion budget warrants a comprehensive review across many programs and contracts — this is just one example of where accountability is needed.
I would target the county’s developer tax abatement and PILOT program for immediate audit and reform. Expedited Bill 2-25, passed by the current County Council, contains a loophole allowing property owners to demolish and rebuild as luxury apartments and receive 20 years of property tax abatements. On a single large development, forgone property tax revenue over 20 years can easily reach tens of millions of dollars.
Multiplied across multiple active agreements, the cumulative cost to taxpayers is substantial.
A full audit of all active abatement and PILOT agreements would quantify exactly how much revenue the county has forgone, what public benefits were promised, and whether those benefits were actually delivered. Where agreements have not delivered the public benefits they promised, the county should pursue renegotiation or recovery of forgone revenue to ensure taxpayer investments are producing real outcomes for residents.
Closing this loophole and reforming how these agreements are structured going forward would generate real, recurring savings — not a one-time adjustment, but a permanent correction. Public money must produce public benefit.
Louella Tham (R)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
District 7
Van Free (D)
One area I would target is underutilized or duplicative consulting and administrative contracts across departments. These contracts can add up significantly without always delivering measurable value.
By conducting a comprehensive audit and reducing reliance on outside consultants where in-house expertise exists, I believe the county could conservatively save $10–15 million annually.
This is not about eliminating necessary expertise, but about ensuring we are using taxpayer dollars wisely and building internal capacity where possible. Every dollar saved here is a dollar that can be redirected to core priorities like public safety, education, or tax relief.
Sharif Hidayat (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Dawn Luedtke (D-Incumbent)
I have proposed and supported reducing funding for a number of departments, agencies, and programs during my first term on the Council for affordability reasons. It is difficult work and the number of programs even in our large budget that do not carry important functions and a passionate constituency could probably be counted on two hands.
My approach is not to eliminate a single program – it’s about setting firm boundaries for agency contracts in terms of scope of what the government can fund and afford, and then monitoring contracts for performance, efficiency and compliance in a stronger way. We have to work with our labor partners to rightsize compensation so we can sustain attractive salaries and benefits into future years and limit new spending to inflationary, negotiated salary, and legally mandated increases to stay within our means. We must prioritize proven, deeper, and longer lasting solutions to many of the social safety net needs that were initially addressed with emergency federal COVID funding. And it is time that we join other jurisdictions around the region and institute a hiring freeze as we deal with lower income tax revenues as a result of Trump’s reckless reduction of the federal government.
Harold Maldonado (R)
Montgomery County can reject all proposed tax and fee increases, protect police, fire, roads, and trash, and still structurally balance the budget if it cuts roughly $446.3 million, led by above-MOE school spending, administrative overhead, new initiatives, and unsustainable compensation growth. A credible path to closing Montgomery County’s structural budget gap does not require tax increases — it requires disciplined prioritization of spending. By reducing $203.7 million in County Government overhead, compensation growth, and non-core expansion; aligning MCPS funding by reducing $222.4 million above the Maintenance of Effort level; trimming $6.3 million in excess support for Montgomery College; and scaling back $13.9 million in non-core growth within M-NCPPC.
Taken together, these adjustments would refocus government on core services, eliminate inefficiencies, and replace the need for proposed tax increases with a more sustainable and accountable fiscal structure that protects taxpayers while maintaining essential public services. Non-core outside spending should also be reviewed aggressively. This includes nonprofit inflationary adjustments and grant-style funding for advocacy-oriented organizations and initiatives such as CASA and the Renters Alliance, where County resources are being used to support policy advocacy rather than essential government functions like police, fire, transportation infrastructure, waste management, or other legally required core services.