When members of the Montgomery County Council air their differences, the debate often is intense but seldom lacks civility or collegiality.
Tensions over the 2006 budget are starting to unravel that tradition, producing an uncharacteristic level of sniping, factionalism and hardball politicking. Some members who ran together in 2002 now barely speak to one another. Spats usually played out in private have gone public. Dueling memos fly between members' offices.
With a deadline of the end of the month and 2006 elections drawing closer, the council is deeply divided over how and where to cut County Executive Douglas M. Duncan's proposed $3.6 billion budget. The key question is how much property tax relief to offer residents while upholding the county's reputation for generous spending. Duncan's budget includes a 2-cent cut in the property tax rate, but if approved, property tax revenue still would exceed a charter limit by a record $67 million.
Many members believe Duncan's tax cut isn't deep enough. Beyond that, there is little agreement.
"Our nerves are frayed. There is tension, absolutely," said council member George L. Leventhal (D-At Large). "We could have done this in a collegial way. We could have worked together and provided real tax relief and spending restraint, but instead we got council members eking out headlines at the expense of other council members."
At the end of Tuesday's hearing on the capital budget -- which does not affect the operating budget or the charter limit on taxes -- council President Tom Perez (D-Silver Spring) warned the audience that their elementary schools may not get all-day kindergarten programs if $70 million is cut from Duncan's budget.
Council member Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg) responded that Perez wasn't telling the truth. Leventhal then shouted at Andrews to produce his plan for bringing spending in line with the charter amendment.
Other years have brought contentious budget debates. The severe recession of the early 1990s forced massive spending cuts and produced rowdy protests.
What makes this year unusual is that there is no fiscal crisis.
Booming real estate values have left the county flush with property tax revenue. Even if the council triples Duncan's proposed tax rate reduction to adhere to the charter cap -- which limits tax revenue collection to the previous year's total plus inflation and the value of new construction -- the 2006 budget will be at least $170 million larger than the current year's spending plan.
"There is more sniping than usual because the problem this year is a political one, not a financial one," said council member Michael Subin (D-At Large), who now jokingly refers to the council building as the "loony bin" because of all the political anxiety.
To exceed the charter limit, seven of the nine members must agree on a budget. Right now, there is no consensus.
