Why does Montgomery County Subsidize Taxes for Country Clubs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Hey Judge Smales! Bushwood’s days are numbered!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why am I not surprised by this so typical for DCUM thread.

I don't think I've ever set foot inside a country or golf club in my life but even I can tell the angry posters (maybe it's the same one poster) are more upset at the concept of country clubs than that they're not paying what he/she considers to be fair taxes. What they're really pissed off is the clubs, not the lower taxes.

Why are country clubs - in some of the densest parts of Bethesda - given a sweetheart deal at $1K an acre? Homes just across the street from CC Country Club are easily paying $10K for a small 1/8 of an acre lot.

Bethesda Country Club is at 7601 Bradley. There are no houses directly across the street, but one that is within eyesight is 7714 Bradley.

The land size is 20,169 sqft = 0.463 acres. The land is assessed at $468k = $1.01m per acre. 2018 county tax rates (including state) are 1.1047 for tax class 42, which is valid for that property, so it's about $11k per acre land tax for residential land in that area.

The Chevy Chase Club occupies 190 acres. At $1/acre, their tax bill is roughly $190K per year. Let's assume they also have a Water Quality protection charge, that brings them up to an even $200K. The acreage tax also ignores the value of improvements and buildings.

Let's look at 4015 Bradley Lane, which directly faces the country club grounds. This home is currently assessed by the county at $1.9m. This home is currently paying a property tax of nearly $22K/year on a 0.41 acre lot with a 5800 square foot house. Therefore, nearby residential property - land plus improvements - is taxed at roughly $53K per acre.

Why is the Chevy Chase Club getting a $52K per acre discount on its taxes?

If it were taxed at a similar rate, it would owe over $10m per year in property taxes.

Again, this is a massive subsidy to the small group of members of that club.

The purpose of taxation is not to put people or institutions out of business. I don't go to country clubs but I'm not bothered by them the way you are. We don't live in a class warfare environment, thankfully. At least the clubs aren't factories polluting the skies. They offer green canopies that is beneficial, even if they're private lands, but the animals sure like it better than more cul-de-sacs. As others have pointed out, many small farms benefit from lower taxes despite being no more a benefit to local communities than country clubs. Nor is the area so chock full of country clubs that we need the land for other purposes.

But the tax rates for residents bankrupts them. Do residents not count? Only businesses count?

A bit of redistribution would not be a terrible thing.

[Anonymous]

I’m not the alleged TP poster. I live in Bethesda and I think country clubs are generally irritating and I’m irritated at subsidizing them. I have often wondered why there are so many clubs around and I guess this explains it.
I don’t think I agree with PP that the country clubs are essential to attact business. That seems like very old school Trump-think to me. The younger educated professionals are not spending weekends at the golf club like this is the caddy shack of the 1970s. They are off rock climbing or jetting to Aspen or the Caymans. I think these clubs are mostly outdated remnants of a time gone past and in my experience seem to be mostly frequented by the people with inherited money who are trying to work their parents’ connections.

Also, all that manicured grass is super bad for the environment with the fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Also, all that manicured grass is super bad for the environment with the fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

So is your lawn, and most of your neighbors' lawns. And all the roads. And all farms, too. Think of all the pesticide and fertilizers used on farmlands. It's not the clubs that's affecting the runoff in the Chesapeake but farms and everyone with a green lawn and a car. Just about everything built is bad for the environment one way or another.

Country clubs and golf clubs are closing down all over the country. Let the market take care of what happens to the DC area clubs. And any club that closes down in the DC area will be redeveloped into expensive housing, which means even more people crowded on the same roads and schools with more runoff into the Chesapeake.

I don't know why people get a twist into their panties over being judgemental about clubs. It's pretty clear it's the concept of country clubs that's the problem, not the taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also, all that manicured grass is super bad for the environment with the fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

So is your lawn, and most of your neighbors' lawns. And all the roads. And all farms, too. Think of all the pesticide and fertilizers used on farmlands. It's not the clubs that's affecting the runoff in the Chesapeake but farms and everyone with a green lawn and a car. Just about everything built is bad for the environment one way or another.

Country clubs and golf clubs are closing down all over the country. Let the market take care of what happens to the DC area clubs. And any club that closes down in the DC area will be redeveloped into expensive housing, which means even more people crowded on the same roads and schools with more runoff into the Chesapeake.

I don't know why people get a twist into their panties over being judgemental about clubs. It's pretty clear it's the concept of country clubs that's the problem, not the taxes.

Exactly. So funny. Witness the jealous poster who wants to “bleed them dry.” LOL!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Hey Judge Smales! Bushwood’s days are numbered!!!!!

OMG, I can't stop laughing at the mental image this generates for me!

I'm hearing PP as Rodney Dangerfield, and the "pro-country club" poster is Ted Knight, both circa 1984, and Ted is glaring silently at Rodney, and Rodney is driving a Prius with a Bernie sticker on the back, lolz!!!


Yeah... Bushwoods days are indeed numbered, hahahaha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also, all that manicured grass is super bad for the environment with the fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

So is your lawn, and most of your neighbors' lawns. And all the roads. And all farms, too. Think of all the pesticide and fertilizers used on farmlands. It's not the clubs that's affecting the runoff in the Chesapeake but farms and everyone with a green lawn and a car. Just about everything built is bad for the environment one way or another.

Country clubs and golf clubs are closing down all over the country. Let the market take care of what happens to the DC area clubs. And any club that closes down in the DC area will be redeveloped into expensive housing, which means even more people crowded on the same roads and schools with more runoff into the Chesapeake.

I don't know why people get a twist into their panties over being judgemental about clubs. It's pretty clear it's the concept of country clubs that's the problem, not the taxes.

Exactly. So funny. Witness the jealous poster who wants to “bleed them dry.” LOL!

m'eh, I'm not a member, never will be, and don't care. But I'm fine with bleeding them dry, simply because they're obnoxious and grotesque. In fact, I'd bet if you had this as a ballot referendum, it would get 95% of the vote. And given how almost impossible it is to get 95% of people to agree on *anything*, that would truly be something.

Not many people are going to be sympathetic to a private CC full of rich members that pays wayyyy less taxes per acre than they do on their own tiny middle class house. Very few things will unite virtually everyone, but THIS is one that will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also, all that manicured grass is super bad for the environment with the fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

So is your lawn, and most of your neighbors' lawns. And all the roads. And all farms, too. Think of all the pesticide and fertilizers used on farmlands. It's not the clubs that's affecting the runoff in the Chesapeake but farms and everyone with a green lawn and a car. Just about everything built is bad for the environment one way or another.

Country clubs and golf clubs are closing down all over the country. Let the market take care of what happens to the DC area clubs. And any club that closes down in the DC area will be redeveloped into expensive housing, which means even more people crowded on the same roads and schools with more runoff into the Chesapeake.

I don't know why people get a twist into their panties over being judgemental about clubs. It's pretty clear it's the concept of country clubs that's the problem, not the taxes.

Exactly. So funny. Witness the jealous poster who wants to “bleed them dry.” LOL!

m'eh, I'm not a member, never will be, and don't care. But I'm fine with bleeding them dry, simply because they're obnoxious and grotesque. In fact, I'd bet if you had this as a ballot referendum, it would get 95% of the vote. And given how almost impossible it is to get 95% of people to agree on *anything*, that would truly be something.

Not many people are going to be sympathetic to a private CC full of rich members that pays wayyyy less taxes per acre than they do on their own tiny middle class house. Very few things will unite virtually everyone, but THIS is one that will.

In your mind, perhaps. In reality, no. Courts would strike it down because you can’t single out private clubs without affecting private schools and private institutions including colleges and religious institutions, and private farmlands and all the so called “farms” that are really just private lands. Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Sigh. If it's "not much tax revenue," can I please pay the same rate as a country club? Giving the same tax break to a few hardworking residents shouldn't be a big deal then, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Sigh. If it's "not much tax revenue," can I please pay the same rate as a country club? Giving the same tax break to a few hardworking residents shouldn't be a big deal then, right?

Probably not. Adjusting for the scale a household poses more burden on county services than a club. Replace the club with the equivalent in housing units the latter demands more and cost the county more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Sigh. If it's "not much tax revenue," can I please pay the same rate as a country club? Giving the same tax break to a few hardworking residents shouldn't be a big deal then, right?

Probably not. Adjusting for the scale a household poses more burden on county services than a club. Replace the club with the equivalent in housing units the latter demands more and cost the county more.

Or just leave the country club to pay the same tax rate as other businesses rather than subsidizing them. What a novel thought, rather than playing favorites with certain profit making entities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the feeling that there is one TP fool who thinks this is her issue and hill to die on. I guess the sit in over parking spaces is over.

Sigh -this is the dumbest issue. First, this is not much tax revenue. Second, it would even go into effect into 2030. Third, it will just lead to more development without infrastructure and schools as the clubs shut down and the owners get a windfall from being rezoned into residential land use.

I get that the local fool has a passionate hate for country clubs and wants to destroy them. OK everyone needs a little hobby so have it at but the rest of the adults need to focus on substantive issues to turn the county around not distractions.

Sigh. If it's "not much tax revenue," can I please pay the same rate as a country club? Giving the same tax break to a few hardworking residents shouldn't be a big deal then, right?

Probably not. Adjusting for the scale a household poses more burden on county services than a club. Replace the club with the equivalent in housing units the latter demands more and cost the county more.

Or just leave the country club to pay the same tax rate as other businesses rather than subsidizing them. What a novel thought, rather than playing favorites with certain profit making entities.

I hardly think the county is playing favorites. Country clubs are non-profits and are classified with other non-profits. The law cannot allow them to be singled out. They'd have to be declassified and considered for-profit, which would require the operating model of clubs to change substantially.

Farms also qualify as businesses but we don't tax them at the same rate as a corporate office park.

You really need to let go of your anger at country clubs.

[Anonymous]

Those country clubs have *already* been singled out for special treatment.

That’s why they’re paying a fraction of the taxes homeowners pay now.

Country clubs also aren’t farms. Stop comparing apples to golf balls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those country clubs have *already* been singled out for special treatment.

That’s why they’re paying a fraction of the taxes homeowners pay now.

Country clubs also aren’t farms. Stop comparing apples to golf balls.

As a PP pointed out, there are plenty of "farms" in upper MoCo that are just private lands with no discernible benefit to the greater public. Is a horse farm that different from a country club?

At the end of the day, country clubs are non-profits and governed under laws for non-profits. At least they pay something, which is more than can be said for schools or colleges or religious institutions. You have an argument with it? Take it up with the MoCo government and listen to them carefully explain why they won't be changing laws to single out country clubs just because you have a vendetta against them. The people up in Rockville are polite enough. And, no, just because you feel all morally superior doesn't mean you're in the right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those country clubs have *already* been singled out for special treatment.

That’s why they’re paying a fraction of the taxes homeowners pay now.

Country clubs also aren’t farms. Stop comparing apples to golf balls.

As a PP pointed out, there are plenty of "farms" in upper MoCo that are just private lands with no discernible benefit to the greater public. Is a horse farm that different from a country club?

At the end of the day, country clubs are non-profits and governed under laws for non-profits. At least they pay something, which is more than can be said for schools or colleges or religious institutions. You have an argument with it? Take it up with the MoCo government and listen to them carefully explain why they won't be changing laws to single out country clubs just because you have a vendetta against them. The people up in Rockville are polite enough. And, no, just because you feel all morally superior doesn't mean you're in the right.

Horse farms produce horses.

Horse farms are for training and boarding horses.


Nice try.