by A. J. Campbell
1. Executive Summary & Forum Overview
On Monday evening, November 9, 2026, Takoma Park City Manager Rob DiSpirito, accompanied by senior department heads, convened a hybrid Community Budget Forum to begin public dialogue about the upcoming Fiscal Year 2028 budget, which runs from July 1, 2027, through June 30, 2028. City leadership framed the forum as an early opportunity to align municipal spending with community priorities. Residents used the meeting to examine the city’s fiscal choices, tax policy, staffing, and service costs.
Community members, civic advocates, and former elected officials questioned the city’s spending trajectory and the pressure that rising assessments and property taxes place on households. They called for a seven-year tax stabilization plan, a draft budget showing 10% program reductions, an independent analysis of police calls and staffing, a review of Public Works management and performance measures, and changes to some proposed infrastructure spending.
Speakers also questioned administrative growth and executive compensation. Their proposals ranged from a temporary hiring freeze and attrition management to tax deferrals for homeowners who are property-rich but cash-constrained. Several residents urged the city to set measurable performance goals and identify specific cost-saving measures before asking residents to accept further increases.
2. City Financial Baseline & Timeline Framework
City Manager Rob DiSpirito and Interim Finance Director Ron Kowali opened the forum with an overview of Takoma Park’s financial structure and annual budget calendar.
| Key date or window | Budget milestone |
|---|---|
| November 18, 2026 | Deadline for Community Budget Survey submissions |
| December 2, 9 and 16, 2026 | Council work sessions and vote on FY 2028 budget goals |
| Mid-February 2027 | Maryland provides Constant Yield Tax Rate data |
| March 17, 2027 | City Manager presents the proposed FY 2028 budget |
| March 17–24, 2027 | Departmental spending presentations to Council |
| April 2027 | Public hearings, Council work sessions and budget reconciliations |
| May 2027 | Council adopts the final FY 2028 budget and sets tax rates |
| July 1, 2027 | FY 2028 begins |
Revenue and Expenditure Breakdown
The city’s financial baseline relies heavily on real property taxes. In the FY 2027 adopted budget:
- General Fund revenue accounts for 86% of total city revenue and is driven primarily by real property taxes.
- Other revenue streams include red-light and stop-sign camera funds (9%), stormwater management (2%), special revenue funds (2%) and federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds (1%). The ARPA funds must be expended by December 31, 2026.
- Personnel costs account for 61% of city spending. Services and contractual charges comprise 17%, capital outlay 11%, miscellaneous expenses 6%, supplies 4% and debt service 1%.
- Departmental activity: Public Safety (Police) is the largest operational expense, followed by Public Works (19%), General Government (16%), Housing and Community Development (8%), Recreation (7%), Capital Projects and Infrastructure Outlay (5%) and Library Operations (5%).
| Activity or department | Share of General Fund budget |
|---|---|
| Public Safety (Police Operations) | Largest single expense category, approximately 28% |
| Public Works | 19% |
| General Government Administration | 16% |
| Housing & Community Development | 8% |
| Recreation Services | 7% |
| Capital Outlay & Infrastructure | 5% |
| Library Operations | 5% |
| Multi-Departmental & Communications | 7% |
| Debt Service | 2% |
County Tax Duplication Reimbursements
Takoma Park receives reimbursements from Montgomery County for municipal services the city provides in place of county operations. In FY 2027, county tax-duplication payments total nearly $6 million:
- Police services: more than $4 million
- Roads maintenance: $998,000
- School crossing guards: $275,000
- Parks maintenance: $107,500
- State Police Protection Grant: $583,464 in additional state funding
City officials noted that the Maryland Municipal League continues to seek expanded reimbursement categories, including municipal recreation services, and updates to formula caps.
Constant Yield Tax Rate and Fiscal Reserves
Staff discussed the effect of adopting a Constant Yield Tax Rate. For FY 2027, Takoma Park’s adopted property tax rate is $0.5422 per $100 of assessed value. The calculated constant-yield rate was $0.5342. That rate is designed to collect the same total property-tax revenue as the prior year as assessments change.
According to the presentation, setting the rate at constant yield would have reduced revenue by $257,272 compared with the adopted rate, or about $577,000 compared with FY 2026 revenue.
Staff also cited financial modeling by consultant Raph Telus. The model warned that adopting a constant-yield rate without replacement revenue could create structural deficits. Under that scenario, the city’s unassigned General Fund reserves would fall below the required 17% policy threshold by FY 2029, decline further in FY 2030 and reach zero by FY 2031.
| Fiscal year | Projected unassigned General Fund reserve status under constant yield |
|---|---|
| FY 2027 | Compliant with the 17% policy threshold |
| FY 2029 | Falls below the 17% policy minimum |
| FY 2030 | Falls further below the operating safety margin |
| FY 2031 | Reaches zero |
Staffing Growth Patterns
DiSpirito presented an 11-year analysis of full-time equivalent (FTE) positions from FY 2017 through FY 2027:
- Total staffing grew by 11.77 FTEs, from approximately 171 to 183.
- An accounting adjustment in FY 2023 added 4.28 FTEs of pre-existing seasonal and part-time pooled hours, mainly in Recreation and Public Works, to the formal count.
- After accounting for that change, net citywide growth was approximately 7.5 FTEs over 11 years.
- The General Fund, which directly affects property tax rates, added 4.6 FTEs over the decade.
- The city added no net FTEs over the last three fiscal years, FY 2025–2027, and reduced overall headcount.
3. Forecasted Fiscal Headwinds and Budgetary Pressures
City leadership outlined several cost and revenue pressures affecting the FY 2028 budget:
- Inflation: Vehicles, maintenance supplies, street-repair materials and professional services continue to face rising costs.
- Labor and health care: The city is negotiating a multiyear AFSCME agreement, while health-insurance premiums remain volatile.
- Federal grant expiration: ARPA funding ends on December 31, 2026, removing funds that had supplemented municipal operations.
- Declining media-grant revenue: Cable television grant revenue continues to fall as residents cancel cable subscriptions.
- State and federal revenue risks: State Highway User Revenue could be affected by state budget cuts. Federal workforce and contracting reductions could also affect local income-tax receipts.
DiSpirito said the Council had established more than $3 million in assigned reserves to guard against potential delays or losses in income-tax revenue related to federal employment changes in the region.
4. Public Comments: Tax Stabilization, Affordability and Revenue
The public-comment period brought forward a range of proposals from residents, members of the Budget Working Group, civic advocates and former Council members. Speakers raised questions about tax growth, homeowner affordability, commercial contributions, development costs and the city’s budget assumptions.
Housing Burden and Tax Growth
Budget Working Group members Randy Gibson and David Reid presented figures on household housing costs and tax growth. They cited regional data showing that 19% of homeowners and 49% of renters in Takoma Park spend more than 30% of their gross income on housing.
Advertisement
They also compared average inflation with growth in city property-tax revenue over the 2006–2026 period. Their figures put average Consumer Price Index inflation at 2.55% annually, while Takoma Park’s real property-tax revenue grew at a compound annual rate of 4.15%—a gap of 1.60 percentage points a year.
| Measure, 2006–2026 | Average annual growth |
|---|---|
| CPI inflation | 2.55% |
| Takoma Park property-tax revenue | 4.15% |
| Difference | 1.60 percentage points |
Gibson proposed a seven-year tax stabilization plan to bring revenue growth closer to inflation. The proposal included cost caps and a requirement that the City Manager prepare an alternative FY 2028 budget showing a 10% program-spending reduction alongside the standard budget.
Reed urged Council to require that alternative budget so residents could see what a 10% reduction would mean in practice, rather than debating a general target without a detailed proposal.
Roger Schlegel’s Ward 5 Multifamily Assessment Remarks
Roger Schlegel, former council member from Ward 3, discussed the effect of property assessments on Ward 5’s multifamily properties, including apartment buildings along Flower Avenue. The figures presented at the forum showed average assessment increases of 21.85% for those properties.
His remarks addressed the pressures facing apartment owners as property taxes and maintenance costs rise under Takoma Park’s rent-stabilization rules. The question he raised was how those costs affect the financial condition of multifamily properties—and how the city should weigh those pressures when setting policy and evaluating revenue.
Schelegel also discussed assessment increases in other neighborhoods. The presentation cited 17 single-family properties on Cole Avenue in New Hampshire Gardens, Ward 6, with an average 37.3% increase in 2025 assessments. A typical home’s assessment rose by $180,600, which the presentation estimated would add $979 annually to the tax bill as the increase phases in.
The Seven-Year Tax Stabilization Proposal
The Budget Working Group’s proposal asked Council to direct city management to:
- Limit revenue growth: Over seven years, bring property-tax revenue growth closer to CPI or COLA benchmarks.
- Prepare an alternative budget: Require a supplemental FY 2028 draft with a 10% reduction in program expenditures.
- Set performance goals: Establish departmental outcome measures, review back-office consolidation and use attrition strategies to manage staffing costs without broad frontline cuts or layoffs.
Tax Deferral and Other Revenue Ideas
Carter Doherty, a Ward 1 resident, who is associated with a Affordable Maryland Super Pac with support from developers who spent heavily against County Executive Will Jawando’s election, proposed allowing some homeowners to defer a portion of property-tax increases. He described long-term homeowners who may have substantial equity in their homes—he cited values of roughly $800,000 to $1 million—but limited cash flow. Under the concept he raised, eligible seniors or low-income homeowners could postpone some tax payments until the property is sold. It should be noted that Montgomery County has a similar program.
Paul Huebner, a resident with a construction background, proposed impact taxes on residential “pop-up” projects, in which smaller homes are expanded into much more valuable properties. He argued that these projects can generate substantial profits for contractors while adding pressure to surrounding property values and assessments. Paul also suggested business-tax adjustments to ensure commercial enterprises contribute equitably to local infrastructure.
Elizabeth Wallace, a resident, raised questions about the balance between commercial and residential contributions to city revenue. She also asked whether executive salary reductions should be considered as part of the city’s response to budget pressure. Cued up below.
Adam Bodner, a resident since 1996, asked about negotiations with Montgomery County over tax-duplication reimbursements. He also raised the New Hampshire Avenue recreation center, asking about the city’s plans and the financial commitments associated with it.
Richard Simber, a Ward 1 resident, asked how the city calculates inflation in its budget assumptions and what an alternative budget based on the constant-yield rate would look like.
5. Public Comments: Police, Public Works and Infrastructure
Residents focused particular attention on the Police Department and Public Works, two large areas of city operations. Their comments included comparisons with other municipalities, questions about staffing and management, and proposals to shift some infrastructure spending.
| Topic | Figures or concerns raised by residents |
|---|---|
| Police spending | $553 per resident in Takoma Park, compared with $212 in Rockville and $186 in Gaithersburg |
| Police investigations and dispatch | A 12-person investigative unit with a $1.8 million budget; Takoma Park operates its own emergency call center |
| Police vehicles | $1.5 million over five years for 16 replacement vehicles |
| Public Works management | One manager for every 2.6 staff members, compared with an APWA benchmark of one for every 5 to 12 |
| Sidewalk spending | $1.5 million allocated for FY 2027 projects; speakers urged attention to stop signs and speed-bump maintenance |
Police Spending and Staffing
Grace Shiraldi, a Ward 3 resident, presented per-capita police spending figures: $553 per person in Takoma Park, compared with $212 in Rockville and $186 in Gaithersburg. She asked Council to commission an independent analysis of police calls and staffing so it could assess whether the department’s staffing and structure match current community needs.
Shiraldi and former Councilmember Ruben Snipper, a Ward 5 resident, also raised questions about investigative and dispatch operations. The presentation contrasted Takoma Park’s 12-person investigative unit, with an annual budget of $1.8 million, with Rockville’s four-person unit serving a population nearly four times larger. It also noted that Takoma Park operates its own emergency call center, while Gaithersburg uses Montgomery County’s centralized dispatch system.
Advertisement
The speakers raised capital spending as well, including a five-year plan for 16 police vehicles costing $1.5 million, among them two equipped vehicles priced at more than $150,000.
Snipper supported reviewing police staffing in light of crime trends. The presentation cited declines in serious crime since the late 1990s in nearby jurisdictions and argued that staffing expanded during high-crime years in the 2000s without a comparable reassessment as crime declined.
The residents asked Council to consider both an independent call-and-staffing analysis and a broader community-safety landscape analysis. That review could examine whether some calls might be handled by non-police crisis responders and whether police resources could be adjusted accordingly.
Public Works Management and Performance
Paul Huebner, a Ward 3 resident, presented concerns about Public Works’ management structure and its ability to measure results. His breakdown included a director, deputy director, administrative assistant, nine division heads, three managers, five supervisors and a city engineer. He said that structure amounted to roughly one manager for every 2.6 staff members, compared with American Public Works Association benchmarks of one manager for every five to 12 employees.
Huber also cited the city’s 2022 Matrix organizational assessment, saying Public Works lacked formal outcome measures for evaluating efficiency. The department tracked operational outputs, such as the number of vehicles serviced or sites mowed, but he argued that residents also need measures showing what those activities achieve and how much they cost.
Sidewalks, Traffic Safety and Design Costs
Katherine, a longtime resident and former federal manager, challenged the FY 2027 allocation of $1.5 million for sidewalk construction, citing estimates of up to $2 million per block. She argued that the city should weigh those projects against more immediate traffic-safety maintenance, including installing missing stop signs and repainting deteriorated speed bumps. She also questioned whether side-street sidewalks deliver enough safety benefit to justify their cost and environmental impact.
Paul, who has construction experience, separately questioned the budget’s $410,000 for sidewalk engineering design. He argued that city Public Works staff could perform basic curb, gutter and sidewalk layout work instead of relying on outside engineering contractors.
6. Public Comments: Management, Compensation and Staffing
Executive Compensation
Elizabeth Wallace raised questions about executive compensation as part of the broader discussion of commercial-residential tax equity and budget restraint. Another resident, whose name was not identified in the material provided, recommended a 10% salary cut for city management. (Video)
The meeting notes also describe Wallace questioning salaries for senior city administrators, which were cited as ranging from $127,000 to $210,000. E.W. challenged City Manager Rob DiSpirito and Police Chief Tony DeVaul to consider voluntary salary reductions of $50,000 to $75,000. After DiSpirito replied, “I’ll check with my wife on that,” Wallace criticized the response as sidestepping the compensation question.
Growth of Deputy Positions
Ferd Hoefner, a 43-year resident, questioned the growth of senior deputy positions over the preceding decade. He said the city’s senior executive tier had grown from one deputy position to five, including two Deputy City Managers and deputy roles in Public Works, Housing and Police. He asked whether that expansion was sustainable for a small municipality.
DiSpirito responded that these positions did not represent net additions to the city’s workforce. He said existing vacant line-item positions had been converted into deputy roles to provide executive coverage, support complex projects and maintain continuity when department directors were absent.
Hiring Freeze and Attrition
Toya Pujol-Gentry, a Ward 6 resident and Budget Working Group member, proposed two approaches to managing personnel costs, which account for 61% of city spending:
- Manage vacancies through attrition: When non-frontline employees leave, review whether their positions need to be filled before recruiting replacements.
- Consider a three-to-six-month administrative hiring freeze: Use a temporary pause to identify bottlenecks, assess back-office workloads and determine whether functions could be consolidated before positions are refilled.
Tom Gagliardo, a Ward 1 resident, asked staff to identify the cost-saving measures they had already considered. His question pressed the city to name specific actions and explain their likely savings.
7. Public Comments: Climate Action and Community Priorities
Kathleen Gundry, a Ward 2 resident and Green Team member, urged the city to incorporate climate goals across departments rather than treating them as the responsibility of a single sustainability office. She called for the city to maintain sustainability funding and update its 2019 Climate Action Plan.
Gundry pointed to the practical budget implications of that approach: climate mitigation and resilience can affect police fleet decisions, Public Works facilities and stormwater infrastructure. Her proposal was to make climate goals part of departmental planning and spending.
Andrew Mawn, a Ward 1 resident and Sustainable Maryland Committee member, supported maintaining funding for climate action. His comments reinforced the case for keeping sustainability work in the city budget as departments plan for future operations.
8. Conclusion & Outlook for the FY 2028 Budget Process
The November 9 Community Budget Forum placed competing fiscal concerns before the Council: the city’s warning about reserves and rising costs, and residents’ demands for a clearer account of tax growth, spending priorities and measurable results.
Residents put several specific proposals on the table: Randy Gibson’s seven-year tax stabilization plan; a 10% alternative budget; review of police calls and staffing; scrutiny of Public Works management and performance measures; tax deferrals for homeowners with limited cash flow; and closer examination of executive and administrative costs.
Council is scheduled to set FY 2028 budget goals and priorities in December 2026. Residents were asked to submit the Community Budget Survey by November 18, 2026. The City Manager is scheduled to present the proposed FY 2028 budget on March 17, 2027, followed by department presentations, public hearings and Council work sessions through April. The Council is expected to adopt the final budget and set tax rates in May 2027.