A Baltimore City Circuit Court judge ruled against a proposed ballot question that would have slashed the city’s property tax rate in half.
Late Friday, Judge Althea Handy ruled that the proposed charter amendment, which through a series of staggered cuts would lower the property tax rate from 2.25% down to 1.2% over the course of seven years, was in violation of the state’s constitution.
“Such a requirement would take all power and discretion from the City Council and their ability to legislate and determine the tax rate,” wrote Handy in a six-page opinion. Handy’s opinion lines up with a challenge from Board of Elections Director Armstead Jones, who also found the measure violates state law.
The proposed charter amendment comes from a group that calls itself Renew Baltimore, whose most public figures include former city elected officials, economists, and real estate developers. They argue that lowering Baltimore City’s property tax rate, which is the highest in the state of Maryland, will attract residents and businesses in numbers high enough to offset money lost through a lower rate.
“Renew Baltimore is disappointed but not surprised by today’s ruling by the Baltimore Circuit Court to disregard the will of over 23,000 Baltimore City residents who are demanding real change to Baltimore City’s unfair and exorbitant property tax rate,” said Ben Frederick, a leading member of Renew Baltimore. “We take confidence that the Board of Elections has determined that we have secured well in excess of the 10,000 verified signatures to our petition.”
In a statement, Frederick said the group plans to “promptly” appeal to the Supreme Court of Maryland.
Lawyers for both sides of the argument clashed during a Thursday hearing.
At the center of the conflict is a 1990 appellate decision. In court and in documents. Lawyers for Renew Baltimore argue that that decision marks a difference between setting a tax cap for a legislature versus rolling back the tax rate. According to court filings, in that case judges determined that a charter amendment could set a cap but a rate roll back. Renew Baltimore points out that under their wording, the Baltimore City Council could theoretically set the tax rate even lower.
But city and elections officials argue that essentially the charter amendment would essentially set the city’s tax rate.
A report from Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott’s Finance Department speculates that under Renew’s measure, the city would face an annual structural deficit of nearly $900 million within one decade.
The Supreme Court of Maryland will likely take up the appeal from Renew Baltimore within weeks; the State Board of Elections begins printing ballots for November’s election on September 6th.
