OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Montgomery County Council Meeting - July 21, 2026: Legislative Actions, Public Hearings, and Appointments

County Council & Committees — Tuesday, July 21, 2026
BodyMontgomery County, Maryland
SessionCounty Council & Committees
DateTuesday, July 21, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:02

Good morning, everyone.

0:03

Today is July 21st already.

0:06

And we're going to start with our county council session.

0:10

We will start with General Business.

0:13

Madam Clerk, I know that there are no announcements today.

0:17

So next, we're going to move on to the minutes.

0:20

I need approval for June 30th, 2026 Council session and June 30th, 2026 closed session.

0:27

They have been shared with the Council.

0:29

Are there any objections to approving this minutes?

0:32

Saying none, these minutes are approved.

0:37

We're going to move on with Agenda Item 1.

0:40

And it's a public hearing on expedite bill 30-26, bond authorization, and stormwater management.

0:47

This bill will authorize Montgomery County, Maryland to issue special limited obligation bonds for the purposes of financing the planning, design, acquisition, and construction and maintenance of a stormwater management facilities and other related projects, and for refunding all or part of the outstanding special limited obligations bonds issued for such purposes.

1:09

Action is scheduled for later in this meeting.

1:12

As a reminder of our public hearing testimony guidelines, your comments must be limited to issues relevant to the public hearing topic for which you are testifying in at appropriate for a public meeting.

1:22

Do you hear a tone when your time is up, and we appreciate everyone abiding by their loaded time.

1:32

Each person has three minutes.

1:34

So we have Mr.

1:35

Gordy Brandon, Kenneth Bauer, Marion Ebay, Danila Cheveco.

1:54

And we will start with uh Gordy Brennan.

2:03

It's not on.

2:05

No.

2:07

Good morning.

2:08

Gordy Bernie with the Taxpayers League.

2:11

It looks like the executive is uh playing the Council and Taxpayers for Chunps.

2:15

And I'll explain why.

2:17

Uh yeah, I say it looks like, because uh this huge expedited bond proposals just fell from the sky in April after the budget was presented, with a little disclosure for why it's being proposed.

2:29

I started my career as budget director for the Illinois EPA following years of consulting for government uh and commercial clients and served as internal audit director for Marriott and controller.

2:41

None of the financing proposals in over 50 years have raised as many fundamental questions as this one does, beginning with why do this in a period of high interest rates?

2:51

We do know watershed restoration is slow growth, a mature program, since development has slowed dramatically in our county and streams are to be restored are finite.

3:01

Also, the rain tax is a very tempting cash cow.

3:06

We have reviewed the fiscal plan published with the program budget before this bond proposal came up.

3:11

It shows strong cash flows in light of the 7 percent fee increase you approved, and a healthy debt service coverage ratio.

3:18

Planned restoration projects seem like more of the same over the years with no material financial surprises.

3:24

The county uses fee revenues to pay debt service on stormwater project bonds and to finance operating expenses.

3:30

But this 125 million dollar bond proposal is 11 times the current restoration debt service above the three-year standard by the Government Finance Officers Association and uh new debt service would eventually overwhelm rain tax fee revenues.

3:45

Maybe the reason for the new bond proposal started with this year's budget adjustment, transferring 30 DOT employees who were assigned to the Department of Environmental Protection, that's a whopping 28 percent of their operating budget staff to the DEP capital budget.

4:02

Why on earth would this happen?

4:04

Are borrowed DOT staff in restoration operations stream restoration, suddenly planning, design, and supervision specialists for water quality, or does this suggest there are plans afoot to use the capital budget next year to work around structural deficit problems instead of cutting staff?

4:20

This transfer could violate generally accepted accounting principles for capitalizing expenses and uses bonds to finance operations.

4:28

Lastly, we were reminded that historical restoration practices don't work.

4:33

PFAS showed up last month in public announcements, forever chemicals, and found in DEP holding ponds for stormwater runoff from a former county public safety training site.

4:46

A 2021 DEP Consultant Site report totally ignored PFAS.

4:51

Equally disturbing is why PFAS was reported by the State, not the county's inspection program.

5:00

I would suggest you either cut this proposal in half or move forward quickly with an OL study of funding needs for these projects and how they should be prioritized based on scientific evidence of actual local pollution reduction and flood control.

5:12

Please add a new public reporting requirement for individual public outcomes and expectations in the budget.

5:18

There's more in our written testimony.

5:19

Thank you.

5:20

Thank you so much.

5:21

Next, Kenneth Bauer.

5:24

Good morning.

5:25

My name is Kenneth Bauer with the Coalition to Stop Stream Destruction.

5:28

We are against this bill due to the misuse of water quality protection charge funds, which are meant to be used for projects which improve our streams' water quality.

5:36

Specifically, this bill would provide funding for destructive engineered stream restorations.

5:41

This would be a blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars for projects that we know have failed in the past and we know will fail in the future.

5:47

In my written testimony, you can see video examples of how stream restorations destroy our streams when they clear cut forests, bulldoze streams, and dump fill material into them.

5:57

And we have a link to photos of failed projects in the county.

6:00

The preponderance of scientific evidence, published papers that analyze over 700 engineered restorations shows that water quality and ecological functions, ecological function are not improved and are sometimes made worse.

6:13

But DEPN parks continue to deny the science.

6:16

They have bought into the greenwashing and disinformation from the $25 billion engineered stream restoration industry.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural█████████████████17%
Affordable Housing█████████████13%
Racial Equity█████████████13%
Economic Development████████████12%
Water And Wastewater Management██████████10%
Public Engagement█████████9%
Public Safety███████7%
Personnel Matters██████6%
Community Engagement██████6%
Summary of Proceedings

Montgomery County Council Meeting - July 21, 2026

The Montgomery County Council convened on July 21, 2026, starting at 9:30 a.m., for a full-day session that included a public hearing on stormwater bond authorization, legislative session (Day #18) with five bill introductions and five final readings, a district council session, a consent calendar, and afternoon public hearings on the Clarksburg Gateway Sector Plan and a rural village center zoning text amendment. The council also interviewed candidates for the Board of Investment Trustees and the Housing Opportunities Commission.

Consent Calendar

  • Approved minutes of June 30, 2026 (Council and Closed sessions) (8 yes, 3 absent/tardy).
  • Received and Released OLO Report 2026-13 on resident hiring preferences in other jurisdictions.
  • Introduced resolutions: franchise agreement with Shentel Asset Entity I, LLC; amendment to FY27-32 CIP for Olney Community Building and Police satellite station; WSSCWater June 2, 2026 debt refunding plan; Special Appropriation #27-5 (State grant $12M for Health and Human Services).
  • Adopted resolutions: OLO FY27 work program (20-1178); FY27 Schedule of Revenue Estimates and Appropriations (20-1179); appointments to East County Citizens Advisory Board, MCEDC Board, Montgomery Cares Program Advisory Board, and Sports Advisory Committee (20-1180 through 20-1183). All consent items passed 11-0.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Expedited Bill 30-26 (Stormwater Bonds): Four speakers opposed the bill. Gordy Bernie (Taxpayers League) argued the bond proposal was unnecessary, questioned the transfer of DOT staff to DEP capital budget, and suggested cutting the amount or requiring an OLO study. Kenneth Bauer (Coalition to Stop Stream Destruction) opposed due to misuse of funds for failed engineered stream restorations. Marion Ebay (Sierra Club) objected to delegating debt authority to the county executive and urged using the water quality protection charge instead. Danila Cheveco argued the bill transfers legislative power of the purse and lacks justification for emergency.
  • ZTA 26-09 (Rural Village Center Vehicle Repair): Two speakers and one written supporter testified in favor. Andrew Leit (resident and real estate agent) supported Will Neek Auto, noting the business is LGBT-friendly and minority/woman-owned, and that the property was previously a car shop. Casey Cerner (attorney for Will Neek) urged adoption with Planning Board recommended amendments to allow flexibility on setbacks and alternative shade structures. Denise Fredericks (longtime customer) testified in support, highlighting the business's eco-friendly practices and need to stay in the underserved upcounty area.

Legislative Session - Bill Introductions

  • Expedited Bill 32-26: Survivor benefits for line-of-duty death – expanded eligibility to Groups E and J (sheriff’s deputies, corrections officers). Lead sponsors: Luedtke, Glass, Katz. All council members added as co-sponsors. Public hearing 9/15/26.
  • Bill 34-26: Health and sanitation – bodywork establishments amendments to combat human trafficking. Lead sponsor: Luedtke. Co-sponsors: Council President Fani-González, Stewart, Katz; others added. Public hearing 9/15/26.
  • Bill 35-26: Forest conservation – brush management clarification for agricultural community. Lead sponsors: Sayles, Balcombe; co-sponsor Luedtke; Katz and Evans added as co-sponsors. Public hearing 9/15/26.
  • Bill 36-26: Fire and Emergency Services Commission duties and responsibilities. Lead sponsor Luedtke. Public hearing 9/22/26.
  • Bill 37-26: Disruptive behavior in public facilities amendments. Lead sponsor Council President at request of County Executive. Public hearing 9/22/26.

Discussion Items

  • Legislative Session - Final Readings:

    • Bill 15-26 (Property Tax Credits for Habitat for Humanity): Enacted 11-0. Creates 100% tax credit for properties held by Habitat for Humanity for rehabilitation and conveyance. Lead sponsor Friedson highlighted partnership for affordable homeownership.
    • Bill 21-26 (Employee Retirement System Amendments): Enacted 11-0. Implements negotiated changes from collective bargaining agreements. Committee adopted a technical amendment.
    • Bill 22-26 (SBIR/STTR Matching Grant - Repeal of Sunset): Enacted 11-0 after a floor amendment by Councilmember Sales to require an annual survey (adding workforce and procurement questions) failed 4-7. The underlying bill removes sunset and codifies phase zero grants. Council Vice President Balcom noted the grant is a small sliver ($200K) of $25M in total grants.
    • Expedited Bill 23-26 (Ghost Guns/Firearms Restrictions): Enacted 10-1, with Councilmember Sales voting no. Brings county law into conformity with Maryland Supreme Court decision. Councilmember Sales expressed concerns about enforcement leading to over-policing.
    • Expedited Bill 30-26 (Stormwater Bond Authorization): Enacted 11-0. Authorizes up to $125M in bonds for stormwater management projects, including flood mitigation and structural repairs. Councilmember Glass noted the state's MS4 permit constraints and planned letter to MDE. Council President emphasized the projects are already in the CIP.

  • District Council Session:

    • ZTA 26-10 (Driveway Access and Shared Parking): Introduced; public hearing 9/15/26.
    • SRA 26-02 (Road Street Types - Design Standards): Introduced; public hearing 9/15/26.

  • Interviews (Board of Investment Trustees): Interviewed Joshua Burge (AARP) and Michael Sinoway (Penn State). Both expressed no conflicts and availability. Council will select one representative.

  • Interviews (Housing Opportunities Commission): Interviewed incumbents Jeffrey Merkowitz and Robert Salomon for reappointment. They discussed affordable housing supply, federal funding constraints, and improved collaboration with county. Councilmember Mink asked about transparency; both affirmed support for regular communication.

  • Public Hearings (Afternoon):

    • SMA H-162 (Clarksburg Gateway Sector Plan): No registered speakers; record open until July 24, 2026.
    • ZTA 26-09 (Rural Village Center Vehicle Repair): Hearing held; record open until July 30, 2026. Testimony in support from business owner's representatives and customers. PHP committee work session to be scheduled.

Key Outcomes

  • Enacted 5 bills: 15-26, 21-26, 22-26, Exp. 23-26 (10-1), Exp. 30-26 (all 11-0 except 23-26).
  • Introduced 5 bills and 2 zoning/subdivision amendments with scheduled public hearings in September.
  • Approved consent calendar including OLO work program, revenue estimates, and multiple appointments.
  • Held public hearings on stormwater bonds (record closed), Clarksburg sector plan (open to 7/24), and ZTA 26-09 (open to 7/30).
  • Completed interviews for investment trustee and HOC commissioner positions; confirmation votes pending.
  • Councilmember Glass announced a letter to MDE requesting MS4 permit updates to allow more flexible stormwater projects.

Meeting Transcript

Good morning, everyone. Today is July 21st already. And we're going to start with our county council session. We will start with General Business. Madam Clerk, I know that there are no announcements today. So next, we're going to move on to the minutes. I need approval for June 30th, 2026 Council session and June 30th, 2026 closed session. They have been shared with the Council. Are there any objections to approving this minutes? Saying none, these minutes are approved. We're going to move on with Agenda Item 1. And it's a public hearing on expedite bill 30-26, bond authorization, and stormwater management. This bill will authorize Montgomery County, Maryland to issue special limited obligation bonds for the purposes of financing the planning, design, acquisition, and construction and maintenance of a stormwater management facilities and other related projects, and for refunding all or part of the outstanding special limited obligations bonds issued for such purposes. Action is scheduled for later in this meeting. As a reminder of our public hearing testimony guidelines, your comments must be limited to issues relevant to the public hearing topic for which you are testifying in at appropriate for a public meeting. Do you hear a tone when your time is up, and we appreciate everyone abiding by their loaded time. Each person has three minutes. So we have Mr. Gordy Brandon, Kenneth Bauer, Marion Ebay, Danila Cheveco. And we will start with uh Gordy Brennan. It's not on. No. Good morning. Gordy Bernie with the Taxpayers League. It looks like the executive is uh playing the Council and Taxpayers for Chunps. And I'll explain why. Uh yeah, I say it looks like, because uh this huge expedited bond proposals just fell from the sky in April after the budget was presented, with a little disclosure for why it's being proposed. I started my career as budget director for the Illinois EPA following years of consulting for government uh and commercial clients and served as internal audit director for Marriott and controller. None of the financing proposals in over 50 years have raised as many fundamental questions as this one does, beginning with why do this in a period of high interest rates? We do know watershed restoration is slow growth, a mature program, since development has slowed dramatically in our county and streams are to be restored are finite. Also, the rain tax is a very tempting cash cow. We have reviewed the fiscal plan published with the program budget before this bond proposal came up. It shows strong cash flows in light of the 7 percent fee increase you approved, and a healthy debt service coverage ratio. Planned restoration projects seem like more of the same over the years with no material financial surprises. The county uses fee revenues to pay debt service on stormwater project bonds and to finance operating expenses. But this 125 million dollar bond proposal is 11 times the current restoration debt service above the three-year standard by the Government Finance Officers Association and uh new debt service would eventually overwhelm rain tax fee revenues. Maybe the reason for the new bond proposal started with this year's budget adjustment, transferring 30 DOT employees who were assigned to the Department of Environmental Protection, that's a whopping 28 percent of their operating budget staff to the DEP capital budget. Why on earth would this happen? Are borrowed DOT staff in restoration operations stream restoration, suddenly planning, design, and supervision specialists for water quality, or does this suggest there are plans afoot to use the capital budget next year to work around structural deficit problems instead of cutting staff? This transfer could violate generally accepted accounting principles for capitalizing expenses and uses bonds to finance operations. Lastly, we were reminded that historical restoration practices don't work. PFAS showed up last month in public announcements, forever chemicals, and found in DEP holding ponds for stormwater runoff from a former county public safety training site. A 2021 DEP Consultant Site report totally ignored PFAS. Equally disturbing is why PFAS was reported by the State, not the county's inspection program. I would suggest you either cut this proposal in half or move forward quickly with an OL study of funding needs for these projects and how they should be prioritized based on scientific evidence of actual local pollution reduction and flood control. Please add a new public reporting requirement for individual public outcomes and expectations in the budget. There's more in our written testimony. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next, Kenneth Bauer.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com