Montgomery County officials and unions back bill to let charter counties adopt supplemental property tax for public safety
Loading...
Summary
Testifiers told the Ways and Means Committee March 31 that SB 520 would give charter counties a narrowly tailored option to exceed local property tax caps for public safety funding; supporters framed it as an enabling tool, while members raised affordability and outreach concerns.
Montgomery County officials urged the Ways and Means Committee to support SB 520, legislation that would let charter counties adopt a supplemental property tax for public safety by a simple majority of their elected councils.
"We are here asking for flexibility when it comes to our public safety budgets," Rich Maddalino, chief administrative officer for Montgomery County, said as he described the bill as an enabling tool that would not mandate a tax increase. Maddalino said the measure mirrors earlier legislation that allowed counties to raise revenue for education and argued the same flexibility is needed for public safety.
Senator Ben Kramer, appearing with county supporters, called the bill a "pressure relief valve" for charter counties facing constrained fiscal options, saying it would be available "on very limited occasions" and only if local officials chose to use it.
Labor and law‑enforcement groups told the committee they support SB 520. Raymond Lee, special assistant to the president of UFCW Local 1994, said growing mental‑health and emergency calls require investments in staffing, training and coordination, noting that "more than 114,000 mental health related calls were made to county helplines and 911 in 2024" in Montgomery County. Lee added the bill offers a balanced approach that preserves local decision making.
Lee Holland, president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35 in Montgomery County, said his members were "exhausted" and described persistent recruitment and retention problems. "Local officials should have the ability to implement a tax increase for funds specifically allocated for public safety in times of need," Holland said, stressing the proposal does not mandate an increase.
Committee members pressed presenters on outreach to other jurisdictions and on affordability for residents. The chair noted the county executive has proposed a 6.3¢ supplemental property tax rate increase for education in the current recommended budget; Maddalino said SB 520 would not change current rates and is intended as a tool for future elected officials if needed.
There was no committee vote during the hearing. The chair adjourned the session and told members to expect votes the following day.
SB 520 remains a proposal to allow local flexibility; supporters characterized it as optional enabling legislation, while some committee members sought clarity about outreach and the potential fiscal impact on residents.
