Montgomery Forgoes Building Ban in Favor of Warning

"I've never seen so many interest groups mobilize and get so energized so fast," said Gus Bauman, a former Planning Board chairman who worked on behalf of the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce to fight the moratorium.

Council members said they took further notice when Planning Board Chairman Royce Hanson -- a land-use expert brought in last year to help restore confidence in the agency -- skewered the idea of a moratorium as ineffective, largely symbolic and a severe measure that should be reserved for emergencies.

On the day Praisner announced the moratorium, she could count on two other votes on the nine-member council: Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg-Rockville) and Marc Elrich (D-At Large). A third, Duchy Trachtenberg (D-At Large), would ask to be added as a co-sponsor after the council's four-hour public hearing.

Roger Berliner (D-Potomac-Bethesda), who campaigned on tightening the growth policy, emerged as one of the swing votes. Berliner met with Hanson one-on-one and was persuaded by the argument that the moratorium would not be worth the effort once the council had made exceptions for worthy projects already in the queue. His position was reinforced when he bumped into Leggett at a recent awards dinner.

Leggett had been generally supportive of Praisner's proposal but pressed for flexibility for certain projects and eventually concluded that a warning was "a better way."

The compromise reached yesterday left neither developers nor civic activists completely satisfied. Timothy Dugan, a land-use lawyer, called the measure "less onerous" than what was initially considered but said, "I can't say I favor the bill."

Drew Powell, executive director of Neighbors for a Better Montgomery, said that his preference was for a "stronger policy" but that the alternative still prevented a rush of applications for new projects.

Three of the moratorium's supporters -- Andrews, Elrich and Trachtenberg -- said they remain convinced that a timeout was the most efficient approach and that they were not swayed by Hanson's assessment. But the compromise acknowledged the reality of needing five votes.

To Elrich, "blowing this thing up wasn't worth it." The real test of the new council's philosophy, he said, will come down to the debate over the next six months.