Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Developmental Disabilities Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council signs letter asking state to reconsider proposed DDA rate cut affecting Montgomery County providers

2382312 · February 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Montgomery County joined a multi-county stakeholder letter asking the Maryland General Assembly to reconsider proposed cuts to the Developmental Disabilities Administration budget that would eliminate a geographic rate differential used to reimburse local providers.

Montgomery County agreed to sign a stakeholder letter urging state lawmakers to reconsider proposed cuts to the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) that county staff said would remove a geographic rate differential used to reimburse local providers.

Leslie Fry, legislative analyst with the county Department of Health and Human Services, told the council the governor’s initial FY25 budget had proposed $197 million in cuts to DDA that were later restored, but the FY26 proposed budget includes $450 million in cuts. “One of those cuts directly affects providers in Montgomery County,” Fry said, describing the geographic rate differential that allows DDA to reimburse providers at a higher rate because of Montgomery County’s higher cost of living.

Fry said county staff and representatives from four other affected counties had prepared a draft letter asking the General Assembly to reconsider eliminating the geographic differential. Councilmember Albanese moved that the council sign the draft letter and Councilmember Friedson seconded the motion. The council voted to sign on to the letter.

The transcript records staff describing the geographic rate differential as applying to Montgomery County and four other counties and that the FY26 proposal would eliminate it. The letter is intended to reflect county concerns about the fiscal impact on local providers if the differential is removed.