County Above Party PAC echoes the developers' tactic (and name) from 1962.

William Faulkner famously wrote that “[t] he past is never dead. It's not even past.”  That appears to be true in Montgomery County politics.  On September 13, Bethesda Beat reported  that a new political action committee has been started by wealthy developers in Montgomery County calling itself  “County Above Party.” The purpose of this PAC is to advance the County Executive candidacy of Nancy Floreen, who has abandoned her status as a Democrat in order to run as an independent.

I have lived in Montgomery County since 1955, the year my family moved to Silver Spring when I was seven years old.  So the term “County Above Party” rang a bell.  A minute on Google reminded me of where I heard it.  A few weeks before the election in 1962 (when we had a County Council, but no elected County Executive), a group of wealthy developers formed a group also called “County Above Party,” which poured money and campaign materials to oust the progressive majority on the Council, a majority which was trying to have orderly development in an era of fast-moving change.  The tactic worked, and the progressives were defeated.  Willy-nilly development policies ensued, leading to the ousting of the developers’ members in the 1966 election.  See Royce Hansen’s description of what occurred in his book Suburb: Planning Politics and the Public Interest. .  Another account of the 1962 "County Above Party" campaign may be found in a 2016 Louis Peck article in Bethesda Beat.  This account bears repeating:  

“One veteran political observer calls it the ‘great granddaddy’ of contentious campaigns in Montgomery County: the 1962 battle for the then-seven member County Council. It followed a nearly fourfold increase in county population—to 341,000 in 1960—and pitted older residents against newer arrivals on issues ranging from local growth to civil rights.

“Days before the election, a coalition of conservatives and business interests—billing itself as 'County Above Party' or CAP—mailed a political flier disguised as a newspaper to county homes. Targeting a tax increase approved by the Democratic-controlled council to address needs created by the county’s mushrooming growth, the flier also contained thinly veiled racial and ethnic references. This was in the wake of the council’s passage of the county’s first open accommodations law in early 1962, which resulted partly from public demonstrations against the racial segregation policies of the then-privately owned Glen Echo Amusement Park.

“The late Stanley Frosh of Bethesda, who supported the law, was among those targeted. ‘I remember there was a caricature of my father with a big hook nose. It was at least subtly anti-Semitic,’ recalls Frosh’s son, current Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh. The flier contributed to the ouster of five council Democrats who had supported the law—including Stanley Frosh. In came the ‘Diggs Council’—so dubbed for its chairwoman, Katherine Diggs— and a 5-2 Republican majority. That council considered repealing the law, but rejected the idea in September 1963, following a debate that drew national attention."

A 2017 article by John Kelly in The Washington Post described the end of the "County Above Party" thusly: 

“Most of the County Above Party candidates lost in the next off-year elections, in 1966. But before they left office, they spent two days and one night whipping through hundreds of zoning requests. . . .An editorial in The Washington Post was later to describe it as ‘last-minute scurrility.’” 

So now the lineal descendants of the 1962 "County Above Party" developer group is trying the same thing --  hopefully, this time, without the ethnic and racial tinge.  It is likely no accident that the current PAC uses the same name as the 1962 group.

The 1962 political ambush should not be allowed to succeed in 2018. 

Indeed, the stakes are far higher in 2018, since now, in a three-way race for County Executive, it is not inconceivable that the "County Above Party"-supported Floreen candidacy could result in the election of Republican candidate Robin Ficker.  As those who have lived in the County for the last twenty years or more know, Mr. Ficker is a perpetual losing political candidate and demagogic gadfly, whose personality is so corrosive that his constant, ugly abuse of the athletes during games led Abe Pollin to not allow him to have seats near the players’ benches when the Bullets (now Wizards) moved to the then-named MCI arena in D.C. in 1997.  See, here.  While a Floreen victory would be unfortunate, Ficker’s election would be a full-fledged disaster.

Ms. Floreen has said that it is inconceivable that her candidacy could lead to a Ficker victory. See here.  But an analysis of recent Montgomery County election results belies that view:   Past experience demonstrates that any Republican candidate for County Executive is likely to receive about 1/3 of the vote.  (In the last three Montgomery County Executive elections, Republicans have received 33%, 34%, and 35%).    

   

So the blithe assumption of the Floreen Camp (that is, the "Citizens Above Party" Camp) that having what would effectively be a re-do of the Democratic primary could not result in four years of Robin Ficker as County Executive is naive. If Floreen’s money – and now the “Citizens Above Party” money -  is able to make it a horse race between her and Marc Elrich, creating an even split, then it is very likely that Ficker could get the 34% he would need to win.

Marc Elrich, contrary to the whispering campaign of the developers, is not a wild-eyed radical, but is a principled and practical progressive.  He has shown this in his years on the County Council.  All one needs to do is to listen to the September 11, 2018, County Council discussion on the Hogan proposals to expand I-270 and I-495 to see that this is the case.  The video may be found here (Mr. Elrich's comments begin at 66:18).  

Mr. Elrich won the Democratic Party primary fair and square.  His principal opponent, David Blair (whose views closely align with Ms. Floreen’s), has endorsed him.  See here.   Voters should unite behind Mr. Elrich and not allow a fiasco far worse than the one of 1962 to occur.  “County Above Party” was, and still is, really “County for the Benefit of the Developers.”