Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wssc Transparency Bill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council holds on WSSC transparency bill after extended review; commission and sponsor still negotiating
Summary
Montgomery County deferred taking a position on a Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) transparency and governance bill after detailed staff briefings and remaining questions about Avenel, ad valorem tax language and inspector general authority.
Get email alerts on the Wssc Transparency Bill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Montgomery County Council declined to take final action on a local bill affecting the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, instead leaving the item on the list while staff and WSSC continue negotiations over remaining provisions.
Kathleen Boucher of the county’s Office of Intergovernmental Relations summarized significant amendments the legislative delegation adopted, including adding the county Department of Environmental Protection director as a commission member, requiring WSSC to prepare and post a long-range comprehensive financial plan, enhancing inspector general independence and reporting, and mandating periodic external peer reviews. “It requires that a lot of information be posted on WSSC’s searchable website relating to that long range comprehensive planning undertaking,” Boucher said.
Monica Martina, WSSC’s government affairs director, told the council the commission had worked closely with the bill sponsor and that two main remaining issues were the Avenel Coordinating Committee provision and language about ad valorem tax assessment. Martina said the commission appreciated clarifying language that reiterates there is no intent to impose an ad valorem tax but seeks to ensure customers, rating agencies and other stakeholders understand that the commission does not intend to use the tax as a revenue mechanism. She also said WSSC is reviewing a sponsor proposal to address Avenel concerns outside of a legislative remedy.
Councilmember Pritsen moved that the council support the bill to give the sponsor room to negotiate; the motion received no second and the council did not adopt a formal position. The council instead continued to hold the bill for additional information and ongoing negotiations between WSSC staff and the sponsor.
Key elements highlighted in staff materials include changing inspector general budget submittal procedures to report through the audit committee to the commission (bypassing the general manager stage), a requirement for external independent peer review every three years, retention of WSSC representation on the Avenel Coordinating Committee, and a requirement that WSSC study scenarios under which ad valorem taxing authority could be used and report findings to delegations and county councils. WSSC staff told the council the commission had not taken a formal position but was engaged in discussions with the sponsor.
The council will revisit the bill after receiving additional information from WSSC and the bill sponsor.

