The Planning, Housing and Development Committee voted 5–0 on Oct. 16 to move CB 75, a sponsor-led bill creating a voluntary moderately priced dwelling unit (MPDU) program, out of committee with non-substantive amendments and technical fixes suggested by the planning department.

CB 75 would establish an optional MPDU program administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). The bill, as drafted, would allow eligible developments of 10 or more single-family dwelling units in a single location to participate in return for incentives like density bonuses, fee reductions and expedited permitting. The draft bill sets a 10% minimum delivery requirement for participating developments; committee staff compared that to Montgomery County's mandatory program, which applies to projects of 20 or more units and generally requires 12.5% to 15% MPDUs.

"CB 75 will have an adverse fiscal impact as it would add a significant administrative responsibility to DHCD to create the program," Shaylyn Miller Y, budget and policy analyst, told the committee. DHCD Director Jonathan Butler also testified that operating an MPDU program requires staffing, income-certification procedures, long-term resale monitoring and interagency coordination with Planning, Office of Law and DPIE.

The Planning Department submitted a memo noting that several provisions reference planning and subdivision processes and that subtitle 24 (subdivision regulations) and subtitle 27 (zoning ordinance) will need amendment for enforcement and to align plan-review and approval steps. Planning officials suggested technical amendments and said some items may require companion legislation to revise subtitles 24 and 27.

Sponsor remarks said the measure is intended to encourage affordable homeownership options — particularly in townhouse and single-family developments — through incentives rather than mandatory inclusionary zoning. "What would make this... a great program is... applying the same model to single-family home ownership," the sponsor said. The sponsor also agreed to accept technical, non-substantive changes identified by the planning department prior to introduction.

Committee action: A motion to move CB 75 favorably with the planning department's non-substantive amendments carried 5–0 (ayes recorded for Chair DeNogue, Councilmember Adam Stafford, Councilmember Hawkins, Councilmember Olson and Vice Chair Oriada). Committee members asked staff to bring a clean draft that incorporates technical edits before formal introduction, and DHCD agreed to provide follow-up on a prior study of inclusionary zoning economics.

Why it matters: If adopted and implemented, the program could create a voluntary pathway for developers to set aside for-sale moderately priced units in new single-family/townhome development, but county staff and DHCD noted the program would require significant ongoing administrative commitment to verify buyers, record resale restrictions and track unit compliance over time.

What remains: Sponsor and staff to reconcile technical edits to align the bill with subtitles 24 and 27; DHCD to report on a related inclusionary zoning feasibility study; staff and sponsor to finalize implementing regulations that will set the specifics of incentives and fee reductions.

Sources: Committee presentation and roll-call vote recorded Oct. 16; remarks by Shaylyn Miller Y (Budget and Policy Analysis) and Jonathan R. Butler (DHCD).