Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Economic Development Committee Work Session on EDF Policy and MCEDC Strategic Plan - October 12, 2026

County Council & Committees — Monday, October 12, 2026

BodyMontgomery County, Maryland

SessionCounty Council & Committees

DateMonday, October 12, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 2:15:51

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

Good morning, everyone.

0:02

This is the economic development committee work session.

0:05

We have two very important and very exciting items today.

0:09

We're gonna start with the economic development fund policy considerations.

0:14

This one we have emphasized pretty much since this committee started.

0:19

Um not just during the budget, but outside the budget, there are five ongoing annual programs that we're gonna dig into.

0:28

And before we even take off, I do want to recognize the work of Emma Jones, who was our fellow during the summer.

0:35

Uh, she's in school right now.

0:37

She's supposed to be in class, but if she's not in class and watching us, it's okay.

0:43

Um I think she did a remarkable job.

0:46

And many of the things that you're gonna be seeing as part of this support is really um due to her work during the summer.

0:53

And um it just emphasizes emphasizing um one more time that every time we have fellows in the county council, their work is noticeed and their work is completely um valued.

1:06

And this is just one example of such efforts.

1:10

Um we have one committee member, Councilmember Lori Incels was virtual.

1:15

Everybody else is here in person, and with that, I'm gonna turn it to Council Staff to please take us

Unassigned speaker

1:20

off.

Speaker 2

1:21

Thank you.

1:21

Good morning.

1:22

Um slides here

Unassigned speaker

1:25

and

Speaker 2

1:35

the fancy council template.

1:37

Okay, good morning.

1:38

So uh yes, Icon one today is about the EDF.

1:41

Um, and uh the you know, we for our agenda, we'll talk a little bit about how the MOVE program and the jobs initiative have run out of funding, which is sort of the motivation for being here.

1:50

Um this committee has discussed on several occasions some of the policy issues and structural issues that have led to this perennial issue.

1:58

Um, and so we'll talk about that.

2:00

Um, and then I have a few suggested next steps for you to consider to maybe suggest to the incoming council.

2:07

So um first things first, the move program and the jobs initiative have uh run out of funding.

2:11

Uh on the top of this table, you see the annual EDF programs and their annual appropriation.

2:16

It doesn't account for the uh staffing costs.

2:18

There's one FTE that the fund supports.

2:21

Um you can see for the two largest programs, uh the MOVE program, which had $1.65 million appropriated, some rollover for money that was supposed to go out the door uh that didn't for whatever reason, but is all committed.

2:33

Um and then based on what's dispersed and uh the applications that they have in the pipeline, they don't expect to have any funding remaining in that program.

2:41

Um and then for the EDF GLP, the grant and loan programs, it's a similar situation where uh you know um over two million is is committed um and will go out in FY27 um or as as estimated and some clawbacks and not a lot remaining for for more awards.

2:59

Um the job creation fund has been well known to be to have run out.

3:03

The job creation fund has enough applications in the pipeline, it's a buy right program.

3:07

Um, and so it's been expended.

3:09

Um the TI fund is well um on its way uh halfway through the first round.

3:14

Um, and once those projects are completed, they support these commercialization projects.

3:18

Those businesses will receive the second round of funding.

3:21

There won't be anything left in there either.

3:23

Um, for the founders fund, as you know, the first round um did not um commit as much funding because of some uh challenges with the applications and whatnot, but they do plan to stand up a second round in FY27, which will commit the rest of the funding.

3:37

Um so some of the big reasons for this, and again, this has been discussed on several occasions.

3:43

Um, the 2024 update to move, increase the maximum award size, increased eligibility to first-time expanding businesses, uh, drew attention to the program um and therefore significantly increased demand.

3:55

Um it's hard to know what demand is for move as currently designed because it just uh awards a new office lease.

4:01

Um and the whereas the jobs initiative uh is also run out because it also has a large maximum funding dollar amount, um, also has significant demand.

4:10

Um, and as we've discussed, uh technology innovation and founders have launched their first and hope uh soon to be second round for the founders fund, and those were one-time programs.

4:21

Um looking more deeply in this bar as a lot of Ms.

4:25

Jones' analysis and paper, um, which was very helpful uh to this uh work session.

4:30

You can see that the three big programs move, the EDF GLP and the job creation fund all focus on attraction and retention.

4:38

Um however, unlike uh the EDF GLP and the job creation fund move does not focus on jobs, um, it has this sort of secondary goal of reducing office vacancy, whereas the EDF GLP and the job creation fund are focused on businesses in the strategic industry.

4:52

So attraction retention plus strategic industry, whereas Move is just attraction retention.

Unassigned speaker

5:00

But importantly, if you look at the maximum dollar amount, whereas the EDF GLP does have no cap on its maximum funding amount, both MOVE and the job creation fund do provide large maximum dollar awards, 150 and 500,000.

Speaker 2

5:11

Currently, the threshold to uh for the council to have to review or just at least receive notice of an EDF GLP award is 100,000.

5:19

So you can see how these buy right thresholds are sort of imbalancing the incentive structure of the program and drawing businesses to some programs over the

Unassigned speaker

5:28

other.

Speaker 2

5:30

Um so move and jobs uh provide large buy-right awards.

5:34

Um they have no cap, and as I mentioned, there's this sort of imbalance in the thresholds.

5:38

Um importantly, and as Ms.

5:40

Jones paper emphasizes, it's difficult to measure the ROI for move in the job creation fund because they're buy-right programs.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Economic Development█████████████████████████████████████████████74%

Public Engagement███████11%

Workforce Development██4%

Procedural██4%

Budget Equity Analysis█2%

Racial Equity█2%

Personnel Matters█1%

Federal Grants█1%

Small Business Support█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Economic Development Committee Work Session on EDF Policy and MCEDC Strategic Plan - October 12, 2026

The Montgomery County Council's Economic Development (ECON) Committee met on October 12, 2026, from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, Rockville, Maryland. The work session focused on two major items: the Economic Development Fund (EDF) policy considerations and the first work session on the Montgomery 2030 Economic Development Strategic Plan. Chair Natali Fani-González presided, with Councilmembers Marilyn Balcombe, Evan Glass, and Laurie-Anne Sayles present; Councilmember Lorig Charkoudian participated virtually. The session featured presentations and discussion aimed at guiding the incoming county executive and council on program restructuring, funding sustainability, and strategic priorities.

Economic Development Fund Policy Considerations

Council staff, led by Bilal Ali, presented the status of EDF programs, noting that the MOVE program and Jobs Initiative have exhausted funding. Annual appropriations for the five ongoing EDF programs were reviewed: MOVE ($1.65M), EDF Grant and Loan Program ($2.9M), Job Creation Fund, Technology Innovation Fund, and Founders Fund. Staff noted that all programs are fully committed or nearly exhausted.
Key structural issues identified: MOVE and Job Creation Fund are both attraction/retention programs but focus on different outcomes (MOVE on office vacancy, Jobs on strategic industry jobs). MOVE is a by-right program with a $150K maximum award; Job Creation Fund has a $500K cap. Both lack ROI measurement due to by-right design. The EDF GLP is discretionary, has no award cap, and collects comprehensive data but is more administratively burdensome.
Staff suggested consolidating the three attraction/retention programs (MOVE, EDF GLP, Job Creation Fund) and repurposing MOVE to focus on non-strategic sector businesses or equity goals. Potential updates include lowering MOVE maximum award, implementing scoring criteria, and requiring robust data collection with demographic emphasis.
Teresa Vicela, Program Manager, provided detailed data on MOVE recipients: 92 applications in FY26 (up from 19/year previously); 42% female applicants; 18% Asian, 27% Black/African American, 10% Hispanic, 42% White; geographic distribution: Rockville 34%, Silver Spring and Bethesda 20% each; 19% attraction (relocation), 30% retention (expansion), 48% new businesses; 22% life science, 27% business services; 1,400 initial jobs reported, with 2,400+ projected over three years.
Executive branch (Dennis Hetman, Department of Finance) concurred with analysis, recommending a reframed MOVE program with smaller maximum awards, equity focus (e.g., minority- and women-owned businesses), and a scoring regime prioritizing strategic industries, job quality, and location in low-income census tracts.
Councilmembers raised concerns about public transparency of recipients (especially for Job Creation Fund), need for a consistent ROI matrix across all programs, and the ability to measure whether grants truly alter business decisions. Councilmember Glass stressed the public's right to know where taxpayer funds go, especially for awards up to $500K. Councilmember Balcombe noted the need to balance strategic targeting with community-level services (e.g., child care, veterinary). Councilmember Sayles called for a uniform ROI data collection requirement and better tracking of county revenue generated.
Discussion on Founders Fund: Challenges include restrictive eligibility criteria (MDOT certification or location in Community Equity Index area). Office of the County Executive (Judy Costello) is awaiting County Attorney opinion on expanding definitions to include socially and economically disadvantaged businesses as per federal SBA standards, but noted that would require additional staff resources.

Public Comments & Testimony

No separate public comment period was held; public input was gathered during the strategic plan development process (633 survey responses, 75 open comments).
George Smith, MCEDC President and CEO, provided an overview of the Montgomery 2030 plan, which includes five signature initiatives: Ready Montgomery (development-ready sites), Scale 25 (support 25 high-growth firms), MoCo Talent Exchange (connecting employers to talent), Brand Montgomery (unified marketing), and Focus Place-Based Economic Development (community-level growth).
Smith noted the county's growth from 2020-2025 was only 3.5%, lagging behind regional competitors (some growing 8%+). The plan aims to convert assets (federal labs, educated workforce) into private sector growth.
Implementation phases: Year 1 builds foundation with coordination, not necessarily new funding; Years 2-3 expand; Year 4 institutionalizes. Each year will have an action plan and performance report.
Smith stated MCEDC does not intend to lead all five initiatives: MCEDC raises hand for Brand Montgomery and Scale 25; the county is asked to lead Ready Montgomery and Place-Based; Worksource Montgomery to lead the Talent Exchange.

Discussion Items

Councilmembers reviewed the strategic plan's target industries (life sciences, technology, aerospace/defense, clean energy/environmental innovation, corporate headquarters) and intersectional industries. Bilal Ali raised concern about aligning definitions with incentive programs; agreed to seek County Attorney input for the November 5 work session.
On implementation leads, committee agreed to explicitly assign leads in the plan for accountability. County government (Office of the County Executive) would lead Ready Montgomery and Place-Based; Finance Department's Dennis Hetman confirmed they are prepared for that role.
Discussion on Scale 25: Bilal Ali presented scenarios for how it might interact with existing incubator programs; committee members (Balcombe, Glass, Sayles) agreed the initiatives should remain separate to avoid confusion, with incubators potentially feeding into Scale 25 later. Cost and resource implications were noted; no specific funding amounts have been attached yet.
On MoCo Talent Exchange, Councilmember Balcombe stressed the need for true partnership among MCPS, Montgomery College, University of Shady Grove, and employers. Councilmember Sayles asked for explicit inclusion of underserved communities and demographic targets in workforce opportunities.
Councilmembers noted the plan lacked Montgomery County-specific context and a strong racial equity and social justice (RESJ) lens. Chair Fani-González observed the plan felt generic; she asked staff to incorporate more local flavor and RESJ elements via data and explicit goals.
Implementation plan: The committee decided not to codify the implementation plan within the strategic plan but expects MCEDC to provide cost estimates and lead assignments before final approval. A companion implementation document with resource needs is anticipated by the time of full council action (by March 15, 2027).

Key Outcomes

The committee directed Council staff (Bilal Ali) to draft a letter to the incoming county executive summarizing the committee's views on EDF restructuring and strategic plan priorities. The letter will be reviewed at the November 5 work session and will accompany the council's comments on the strategic plan.
The letter will not demand specific actions or timelines but will inform the new executive of the program status and need for coordinated updates before the FY28 budget.
The committee scheduled a second work session for November 5, 2026, to continue discussion on the strategic plan, incorporating feedback from today: clarifying incentive alignment with target industry definitions, adding RESJ language and data, specifying leads for each initiative, and including Montgomery County-specific context.
Councilmember Glass requested public disclosure of all EDF recipients once funds are dispersed, including Job Creation Fund recipients. Council staff will provide recipients list for all programs to the committee.
The quarterly economic indicators update at ECON committee will be synchronized with EDF program updates to ensure ongoing oversight.
No formal votes were taken; the committee provided guidance for further staff work and preparation for the next work session.

Meeting Transcript

Good morning, everyone. This is the economic development committee work session. We have two very important and very exciting items today. We're gonna start with the economic development fund policy considerations. This one we have emphasized pretty much since this committee started. Um not just during the budget, but outside the budget, there are five ongoing annual programs that we're gonna dig into. And before we even take off, I do want to recognize the work of Emma Jones, who was our fellow during the summer. Uh, she's in school right now. She's supposed to be in class, but if she's not in class and watching us, it's okay. Um I think she did a remarkable job. And many of the things that you're gonna be seeing as part of this support is really um due to her work during the summer. And um it just emphasizes emphasizing um one more time that every time we have fellows in the county council, their work is noticeed and their work is completely um valued. And this is just one example of such efforts. Um we have one committee member, Councilmember Lori Incels was virtual. Everybody else is here in person, and with that, I'm gonna turn it to Council Staff to please take us off. Thank you. Good morning. Um slides here and the fancy council template. Okay, good morning. So uh yes, Icon one today is about the EDF. Um, and uh the you know, we for our agenda, we'll talk a little bit about how the MOVE program and the jobs initiative have run out of funding, which is sort of the motivation for being here. Um this committee has discussed on several occasions some of the policy issues and structural issues that have led to this perennial issue. Um, and so we'll talk about that. Um, and then I have a few suggested next steps for you to consider to maybe suggest to the incoming council. So um first things first, the move program and the jobs initiative have uh run out of funding. Uh on the top of this table, you see the annual EDF programs and their annual appropriation. It doesn't account for the uh staffing costs. There's one FTE that the fund supports. Um you can see for the two largest programs, uh the MOVE program, which had $1.65 million appropriated, some rollover for money that was supposed to go out the door uh that didn't for whatever reason, but is all committed. Um and then based on what's dispersed and uh the applications that they have in the pipeline, they don't expect to have any funding remaining in that program. Um and then for the EDF GLP, the grant and loan programs, it's a similar situation where uh you know um over two million is is committed um and will go out in FY27 um or as as estimated and some clawbacks and not a lot remaining for for more awards. Um the job creation fund has been well known to be to have run out. The job creation fund has enough applications in the pipeline, it's a buy right program. Um, and so it's been expended. Um the TI fund is well um on its way uh halfway through the first round. Um, and once those projects are completed, they support these commercialization projects. Those businesses will receive the second round of funding. There won't be anything left in there either. Um, for the founders fund, as you know, the first round um did not um commit as much funding because of some uh challenges with the applications and whatnot, but they do plan to stand up a second round in FY27, which will commit the rest of the funding. Um so some of the big reasons for this, and again, this has been discussed on several occasions. Um, the 2024 update to move, increase the maximum award size, increased eligibility to first-time expanding businesses, uh, drew attention to the program um and therefore significantly increased demand. Um it's hard to know what demand is for move as currently designed because it just uh awards a new office lease. Um and the whereas the jobs initiative uh is also run out because it also has a large maximum funding dollar amount, um, also has significant demand. Um, and as we've discussed, uh technology innovation and founders have launched their first and hope uh soon to be second round for the founders fund, and those were one-time programs. Um looking more deeply in this bar as a lot of Ms. Jones' analysis and paper, um, which was very helpful uh to this uh work session. You can see that the three big programs move, the EDF GLP and the job creation fund all focus on attraction and retention.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com