Montgomery County Council hears hours of public testimony on proposed 0.1% income tax increase to stabilize school funding

The Montgomery County Council held a lengthy public hearing on a proposed increase in the county income tax rate from 3.2% to 3.3%, with testimony from teachers, union leaders, business groups and community organizations about whether the small hike is the right long-term solution to fund Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS).

Chief Administrative Officer Rich Maddalino, speaking for County Executive Mark Elrich, told the council the executive supports the council’s short-term plan to use one-time funds for FY25–26 but still believes “making this change in the income tax is still important” for long-term fiscal stability. Maddalino also explained that income tax changes are commonly applied retroactively to a January 1 tax year and recommended the council consider a prospective rate change starting Jan. 1, 2026.

The public comment period featured consistent themes: educators and school leaders urged stable, predictable revenue; labor and community groups stressed equity and protection for vulnerable students and services; and business and taxpayer advocates warned that tax increases and rising assessments threaten affordability and competitiveness.

David Stein, president of the Montgomery County Education Association, called the morning announcement that used one-time funds "welcome news" but cautioned that the fix is temporary. "This solution is only for one year and will not address long standing challenges," Stein said, urging the council to find an enduring revenue plan.

Educators gave concrete examples of classroom impacts. Jeff Brown, principal of Roberto Clemente Middle School, described rotating paraeducators and increasing class sizes that he said undermine students with special needs. Teacher Dustin Jeter, a 19‑year veteran, told the council the marginal 0.1% increase would support services “needed to sustain MOCO’s exceptionalism and our public schools.”

Business groups delivered a counterpoint. Angela Franco, president and CEO of the Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber "strongly opposes increasing taxes," warning that residents and small businesses are already facing economic strain and that higher taxes could harm local competitiveness.

Fiscal critics pressed for alternatives. Gordy Berney of the Taxpayers League argued the council has increased spending and used reserves to balance budgets, saying the council had “robbed Peter to pay Paul” and urging spending cuts and property tax reform as alternatives.

Other testimony highlighted community services at risk if revenue declines: speakers urged preservation of the East County dental program, the Maryland Vietnamese Mutual Association (MVMA) contract with DHHS, Montgomery Cares and other health and social‑service programs that serve limited‑English‑proficiency and low‑income residents.

Several organizations and speakers endorsed the tax change as a modest, progressive step to fund essential services. SEIU Local 500 and multiple principals, administrators and medical providers described how cuts would affect staffing, mental‑health supports and special education services across the county.

The council set tentative action on the tax resolution for 05/14/2025 and requested any supplemental materials for consideration by 05/14/2025. The hearing record will be part of the council’s deliberations on whether to adopt the 0.1% increase, use one-time funds or pursue an alternative revenue package.

Next procedural step: council action on the income tax resolution is tentatively scheduled for 05/14/2025.