Voters heading to the polls will decide whether the county executive should be limited to serving two terms after a referendum that would change the county charter made it onto the ballot despite criticism from the county’s Charter Review Commission.
The initiative resulting in the referendum is sponsored by the Committee For Better Government, which is led by Reardon Sullivan, a former Montgomery County Republican party chair and unsuccessful 2022 GOP county executive nominee. The committee gathered enough valid signatures earlier this fall to have the referendum placed on the ballot.
If successful, the referendum would amend the county charter to limit a county executive to serving two consecutive terms. Currently, a county executive can serve a total of three terms. That limit, which also applies to County Councilmembers, was approved by voters in 2018.
With just one week until Election Day, a movement opposing the referendum is gaining momentum, with U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Dist. 8), former County Executive Ike Leggett, four state senators and 14 state delegates who represent the county encouraging constituents to “vote no” when they cast their ballots, according to the “Against Question A” political action committee website.
Meanwhile, those supporting the referendum, including a political action committee backed by real estate developers and businesses, have raised 30 times as much money, collecting more than $66,000 compared to the $2,300 received by the opposition, according to state campaign finance data.
Nine of the 11 members of the entirely Democratic Montgomery County Council are among the opposition, urging voters to select “no,” according to the Against Question A committee’s website. Council President Andrew Friedson (D-Dist. 1) and Councilmember Dawn Luedtke (D-Dist. 7) have not publicly taken a position.
Friedson told MoCo360 in an email Thursday that he has “not made any formal endorsements on local office or local ballot initiatives for this election cycle.” Luedtke also said in an email Thursday that she is not making an endorsement for or against the referendum.
According to state campaign finance documents, Against Question A: Make Your Vote Count filed paperwork to become a committee on Sept. 5 and is chaired by Ronald Wright, a Silver Spring-based lawyer who has served on multiple county committees. Wright did not respond to MoCo360’s request for comment.
The committee’s website encourages voters to check “no” on the referendum, citing existing term limits and that it is supported by special and corporate interests.
“This initiative is funded by those who lost in 2022 (Republicans) and special interests. They didn’t win during the election so they are trying a back door attempt,” the website says. “Don’t let special interests take away our right to re-elect good leaders.”
Several unions are also recommending a “no” vote, including the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 689, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 26, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 500, the Municipal & County Government Employees Organization (MCGEO) Local 1994, and the Montgomery County Education Association, the local teachers union.
Sullivan, the leader of the term-limit referendum movement, called the opposition committee’s efforts a “last-minute ploy” in a phone call to MoCo360 on Friday.
“No one thought we would get enough signatures. People were laughing and thought it would never work,” Sullivan said.
Sullivan’s committee submitted a petition to the Montgomery County Board of Elections to request that the referendum be placed on the ballot. The petition needed to meet a threshold of 10,000 valid signatures from registered county voters. The county elections board validated 15,956 petition signatures in support of putting the referendum on the ballot.
If the referendum is successful, it will affect County Executive Marc Elrich (D), who would no longer be able to run for re-election. He is serving the second year of his second four-year term and has said he plans to run for a third term.
Elrich has been critical of the initiative, calling it a ploy to remove him from office while Sullivan has argued it is not directed at Elrich, who defeated him at the polls in 2022. Sullivan has said it would align term limits with those that apply to the Maryland governor and president.
“A NO (against) on Question A is to fend off a Republican initiative, funded by developers who cannot win at the ballot and are trying to circumvent the voting process,” Elrich wrote in an Oct. 7 email from his campaign. “Many organizations, including the Democratic Party, the teachers, Congressman Jamie Raskin and former County Executive Ike Leggett all are AGAINST A and say Vote NO on Question A.”
Who’s behind the funding?
While signs bearing the slogan “vote no on question A” have appeared on county roads and outside early voting sites over the past week, the Against Question A committee has garnered more endorsements than funds. According to the most recent state campaign finance data, the committee reported receiving $2,300 in contributions in this cycle and just $90 in expenditures paid to ActBlue, a political fundraising site used by Democratic campaigns.
The Committee For Better Government reported it had received $66,460 in contributions in its latest campaign finance report, which was filed Oct. 24.
The largest portion of that money – $50,000 – is coming from the Progressives for Progress super PAC, a real estate developer-backed committee that backed entrepreneur David Blair, a Democrat, in his bid to unseat Elrich in 2022.
Other contributions include:
– $5,000 from BCH Hotel, owner and operator of the Marriott Bethesda Downtown hotel;
– $5,000 from DSC Partners, a Washington, D.C.-based real estate development firm; and
– $1,000 from Brian Danhauser, a vice president at the Polinger Co., a real estate developer in Chevy Chase;
The committee has spent most of its money on advertising, reporting a total of $20,000 spent on online ads and nearly $40,000 spent on television ads in the latest reporting cycle.
Taking sides
While the initiative was initially posed by Sullivan as a nonpartisan despite his prominent Republican connections, the race has grown increasingly politicized in the days leading up to the general election.
The Montgomery County Republican Central Committee voted to endorse the referendum, while the Montgomery County Democratic Central Committee has lent its name to the movement against the proposed charter change. Several signs placed at early voting centers that are urging residents to vote against the initiative bear the name of the Democratic party.
The Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), the union representing Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) teachers, put the initiative on their popular Apple Ballot listing endorsed candidates, encouraging voters to choose “no.”
When asked about the decision, MCEA spokesperson Michael Schoettle pointed MoCo360 to the union’s Sept. 5 press release on the union’s decision.
“Setting partisan politics aside, the Montgomery County Executive is already a term-limited position; no county executive is empowered to serve for life,” MCEA President David Stein said in the release. “Rather than changing the rules of the game by further reducing the terms the officer can hold through a ballot initiative, let’s allow the electorate to decide at the ballot box in 2026. MCEA urges voters to vote against Question A.”
The release specified the union supported the ballot initiative petition process and did not seek to challenge that, but opposed the referendum.
“The main backers of this ballot initiative aren’t motivated by good policy,” the release said. “Instead, they are weaponizing the ballot initiative process into a referendum on an already term-limited incumbent – whom voters will get to decide to reelect or not in 2026.”
MCEA did not respond to a question from MoCo360 about whether the union was putting money behind its stance on the referendum.
Trying to change the process
Although not all County Councilmembers are taking a position on the referendum, all 11 cosigned a letter written by Councilmember Evan Glass (D-At-large) and submitted to the Maryland General Assembly in July asking the legislature to consider changing the requirements for future citizen-led ballot initiatives to qualify to appear on the ballot.
Their main criticism is that 10,000 signatures is too low of a threshold in a county with a population of 1 million residents and more than 600,000 registered voters.
According to the letter, Article XI-A of the state constitution requires potential charter amendments to receive the signatures of 20% of the jurisdiction’s registered voters or a minimum of 10,000 signatures.
“At the time this constitutional provision was ratified in 1978, Montgomery County had a population of 584,000,” the letter says. “Today, Montgomery County has a population of over one million residents. Given the population growth within Montgomery County and across the state, we are requesting that the General Assembly amend the Maryland Constitution to replace the existing requirements with more proportional metrics.”
Accusations against the opposition
On Monday, Sullivan told MoCo360 that he believes 60% of the Committee For Better Government’s political signs urging passage of the referendum have been removed by unknown people, sometimes being replaced by signs advocating against the initiative.
“We have deployed cameras, sign-tracking devices, and other deterrents to stop this activity,” Sullivan said in an email Monday afternoon. “We will be posting videos of these actions and offering a reward for information on the identity of the vandal(s).”
Sullivan shared security camera video footage with MoCo360 of a person removing a pro-Question A sign and throwing it across the street at 4:58 a.m. on Monday. Sullivan said he placed the security camera at the intersection of Falls Road and MacArthur Boulevard near the entrance of Great Falls Park in Potomac.
In a public right-of-way, such as where the sign was placed, political signs are not allowed and can be legally removed. Sullivan said he believes that other political signs in that area were not removed.
MoCo360 could not corroborate the identity of the person in the video or the location where it was taken. “It is obvious that the political elite in Montgomery County will resort to just about anything to stop term limits. It is unfortunate that their machine has stooped to stealing our yard signs,” Sullivan said. “The anti-term limits group, County Executive and County Council must immediately condemn these actions. We are better than this.
