By Adam Pagnucco.
Here is today’s question.
Do you support retaining or repealing the county’s rent stabilization law? If you support retaining it, what if any changes would you make to improve its functions?
Fatmata Barrie (D)
I support retaining rent stabilization as an important protection for tenants facing rising housing costs. It has provided real relief to residents at a time when many families are struggling to stay in their homes. At the same time, we have to address the root issue: we do not have enough housing to meet demand. The median home in Montgomery County costs $580,000 to $620,000, leaving a missing middle class unable to afford a starter home.
The only way to create long term housing stability is to build more homes, including affordable homes, more apartments that everyone can afford and change some of our zoning to allow for duplexes and multiplexes. This also means we need to improve transportation across the county so we can expand housing past the highway and Red Line corridors. Housing economics is supply and demand, we need to increase our supply to balance the demand so we can stabilize the market.
Josie Caballero (D)
I support keeping and strengthening our rent stabilization law and this has been core to my campaign from day one. I’ll fight for rent stabilization at 3% with no loopholes, including a ban on rent banking, and a reduction in the new-building exemption. It is a high cost to the county when a reckless landlord displaces families and residents for the sake of profit. Displacement does not happen in a vacuum; it affects our workers, making them commute longer, find new schools, or leave the county altogether. This is not sustainable for the functional, healthy economic growth of our county that has a workforce that can’t plan year to year on where they are going to live. This will protect affordable housing for the people in Montgomery County who need it the most, and ensure people can live where they work. It is our job as the county council to protect our residents.
Radwan Chowdhury (D)
I support retaining rent stabilization as a tool to protect tenants from extreme rent increases, particularly in a high-cost market like Montgomery County.
However, it must be balanced with policies that encourage housing production. I would support targeted adjustments to ensure predictability for landlords while maintaining strong tenant protections.
We must pair rent stabilization with increased housing supply, streamlined permitting, and incentives for new development. The goal is stability for current residents while expanding long-term affordability.
Marc Elrich (D)
I strongly support retaining the County’s rent stabilization law. I would shorten the wait period before property is covered by rent stabilization which is supposed to be used to allow a developer enough time in a new building to see what the operating costs are in order to establish a sound rent base and, and seven to 10 years is adequate for that. I would make sure that it was clear that capital improvements, for example, replacing an HVAC system after 15 years, qualified the project for an increase to reflect the costs for major improvements and I recognize those will likely be over the rent caps. I found from speaking to some landlords that they think major capital expenses won’t be covered by a larger rent increase. That is not the intent of the law. If that’s not clear, it should be.
Dana Gassaway (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Scott Goldberg (D)
Housing in this county must be high quality and affordable. Period. Full stop. Improving our county’s housing ecosystem will take much more than altering the rent stabilization law passed in 2023. Here is what I will do regarding policy and politics:
+ Before and after rent control, average rents only increased 2-3% annually, lower than the 5.7% cap this year. To prevent gouging, amend the 3% + CPI amount to a static, single-digit year over year rent cap. Typical of Montgomery County, our housing laws are overly complicated and designed to be enforced by housing providers, instead of being simple so tenants can advocate on their own behalf.
+ Repeal vacancy control. This is when a tenant moves out, the new rent increase more than 10%. This is causing larger rent increases than normal because it disincentivizes housing providers from imposing no or small increases year over year.
+ Install “shot clocks” in the Department of Permitting Services to improve efficiency and predictability.
+ Prohibit rent increases until code violations are resolved.
+ Increase the Housing Production and Housing Initiative Funds.
+ Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) instead of Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT)
Hamza Khan (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Matt Losak (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Jim McNulty (D)
The rent caps included in the Rent Stabilization law are actively preventing new housing from being built and must be repealed. However, the transparency requirements, code enforcement and mediation that is included in the bill are important tenant protections and I support maintaining them.
The data is clear: Montgomery County’s multifamily building permits collapsed by 96%. Lenders have effectively red-lined the county because they can’t underwrite projects under price controls with uncertain long-term returns. The law exacerbated a housing shortage and did nothing to actually reduce rents.
I wrote an op-ed in Montgomery Perspective back in February exploring the impact the rent control law has had since its implementation. In the cities of Gaithersburg and Rockville, which do not have rent control, rents actually went down slightly year-over-year. Meanwhile, the County’s average rent went up 2.2%, around its historical average.
The organizations which know housing policy best—The Greater Capital Area Association of REALTORS (GCAAR) and Greater Greater Washington—have both endorsed my campaign in part because they know that building more housing is the only lasting path to affordability. And that can only happen if we remove the self-inflicted obstacles that stand in our way.
Jeremiah Pope (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Laurie-Anne Sayles (D-Incumbent)
With homelessness increasing by 30%, I supported Montgomery County’s rent stabilization law because families need stability in an unpredictable housing market. But good governance requires more than passing a policy. It requires listening, learning, and adapting as real-world impacts become clear.
We are operating in a period of persistent inflation, shifting interest rates, and real pressures on both renters and housing providers. That makes it even more important to remain open-minded and prepared to pivot where needed. As we continue implementation, we must closely track outcomes. Are residents staying housed? Are small housing providers able to maintain their properties? Are we encouraging or discouraging the new housing our community needs? Those answers should guide our next steps.
I believe we can strengthen this law by improving transparency, simplifying compliance, and ensuring enforcement is fair and consistent. At the same time, we must address unintended consequences, particularly those affecting housing supply, workforce mobility, and neighborhood investment.
Our economy and housing market are deeply connected. If adjustments are needed to support job growth, small businesses, or new housing production, I am prepared to work with colleagues and stakeholders to make them.
My commitment is to balance stability with opportunity, protecting residents while ensuring Montgomery County remains a place where people can build, invest, and thrive.
Prabu Selvam (D)
There is significant debate on rent stabilization, with much thoughtful analysis presented here on Montgomery Perspective. I have reviewed data showing a significant downtrend in permitting for multi-family units corresponding with this policy. Nationally, the evidence on rent stabilization is mixed. In some places, housing supply decreased, worsening long-term availability. In many cases, housing stability improved, helping vulnerable families better plan their lives. The answer is not as black and white as often portrayed.
Our rent stabilization law is more flexible than many examples across the country. CPI + 3%, with a cap of 6%, averaged about 5.8% over the last three years. If that continued for 10 years, a property under rent stabilization could still raise rents by 75% over a decade. How many working families see their income increase by 75% in that time? Rent stabilization also does not apply until 23 years after a property is built.
My approach is to keep rent stabilization in place for now. Make it easier for landlords to receive credit for building upgrades so residents have safe living conditions. Proactively enforce the law to maximize housing stability. Work cooperatively with developers and create more opportunities to build homes for our residents.
Karla Silvestre (D)
My goal is to protect tenants from rent gouging while also making sure we build more housing, and I will adjust the law if needed to ensure we achieve both.
We need to be clear about what this policy can and cannot do. Rent stabilization does not create housing, and without more supply, affordability will remain out of reach for too many residents.
We should also make sure the law is easier to navigate. Many housing providers are not aware they can apply for exemptions to the vacancy control provision, and the process should be clearer and more efficient. The law is balanced, but if it is perceived as unpredictable or overly burdensome, it can discourage the investment we need.
We must send a clear signal that Montgomery County is open for business while maintaining strong tenant protections. That is how we protect residents and ensure enough housing is built for the future.
Steve Solomon (D)
I was a renter for 15 years. I’ve been active with the Renters Alliance supporting renter’s rights. But I don’t think that rent stabilization is good for the economy. This goes back to the previous answers about bringing in more business to the county. New multi family development applications plummeted when rent stabilization was enacted. This does not address our main problem of a housing shortage in Montgomery County. Also, landlords may lose the incentive to make improvements or upgrades, and may shift costs to other areas like parking or amenities. If you look at the landscape since rent stabilization was put in place, we have not reduced evictions, or built more housing.
Lelia True (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Vicki Vergagni (D)
While I support the County’s rent stabilization law, its outcomes must be monitored to assure both quality living conditions for renters and reasonable ROI for landlords. I also see over-regulation of rental housing that benefits no one except government agencies that are charging fees (e.g., lead paint inspections, mandatory reporting by condominiums on rental units, unreasonable service expectations of rental properties when vendors are in high demand and cost an arm and a leg, convoluted legal process for landlords to address abusive behavior and property destruction by a small fraction of the rental population).
Muhammad Arif Wali (D)
Did not answer the questionnaire.
Sherwin Wells (R)
As a Real Estate Broker I represent Landlords and Tenants. On one hand rent stabilization protects tenants but taxes and costs are increasing for Landlords in Montgomery County Maryland faster and higher than 6%. Landlords would be forced to subsidize tenants in some instances. These rentals would be converted to Condominiums and then this would be a burden on the system as taxpayers would be left to fund the tenants until they find other affordable housing options.