Why does Montgomery County Subsidize Taxes for Country Clubs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except by not being an old racist white man, I'm certainly not as bad.

You though....

You should look into the mirror so you can see there is an intolerant, hatred filled person you know very well. My advice, let and live. If it's that important to you country clubs not receive the lower tax benefits, then do something about it such as starting a petition drive and talk to your county representatives. Coming on here and whining and trying to take a superior moral tone and judging people who disagree with you isn't going to change anything.

Actually, it’s making people aware of the problem.

I was completely unaware of it before reading it here. Hundreds of people have now seen this thread (and the lame, absurd excuses people like you make for keeping the subsidy) and eventually there will be a popular groundswell of support for making private clubs pay the same taxes.

Whether the clubs can survive that or not is frankly something I care little about.

But you people are capitalists, right? Let’s let the market decide if your club should survive or not.

Exactly! This is all about raising awareness! You gotta walk before you can run

In time, people will realize what a stupid waste of space these clubs are. The land they occupy will be developed once the tax rules change.

Instead of refuges for the rich, they will become the sites of schools, playgrounds, transit right of ways and affordable housing for immigrants

Every word of this

+100

The wants of many outweigh the wants of a privileged few

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except by not being an old racist white man, I'm certainly not as bad.

You though....

You should look into the mirror so you can see there is an intolerant, hatred filled person you know very well. My advice, let and live. If it's that important to you country clubs not receive the lower tax benefits, then do something about it such as starting a petition drive and talk to your county representatives. Coming on here and whining and trying to take a superior moral tone and judging people who disagree with you isn't going to change anything.

Actually, it’s making people aware of the problem.

I was completely unaware of it before reading it here. Hundreds of people have now seen this thread (and the lame, absurd excuses people like you make for keeping the subsidy) and eventually there will be a popular groundswell of support for making private clubs pay the same taxes.

Whether the clubs can survive that or not is frankly something I care little about.

But you people are capitalists, right? Let’s let the market decide if your club should survive or not.

Exactly! This is all about raising awareness! You gotta walk before you can run

In time, people will realize what a stupid waste of space these clubs are. The land they occupy will be developed once the tax rules change.

Instead of refuges for the rich, they will become the sites of schools, playgrounds, transit right of ways and affordable housing for immigrants

Every word of this

+100

The wants of many outweigh the wants of a privileged few

You sound like a pro-development flack from Hogwash, we GreaterGreaterWash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except by not being an old racist white man, I'm certainly not as bad.

You though....

You should look into the mirror so you can see there is an intolerant, hatred filled person you know very well. My advice, let and live. If it's that important to you country clubs not receive the lower tax benefits, then do something about it such as starting a petition drive and talk to your county representatives. Coming on here and whining and trying to take a superior moral tone and judging people who disagree with you isn't going to change anything.

Actually, it’s making people aware of the problem.

I was completely unaware of it before reading it here. Hundreds of people have now seen this thread (and the lame, absurd excuses people like you make for keeping the subsidy) and eventually there will be a popular groundswell of support for making private clubs pay the same taxes.

Whether the clubs can survive that or not is frankly something I care little about.

But you people are capitalists, right? Let’s let the market decide if your club should survive or not.

Exactly! This is all about raising awareness! You gotta walk before you can run

In time, people will realize what a stupid waste of space these clubs are. The land they occupy will be developed once the tax rules change.

Instead of refuges for the rich, they will become the sites of schools, playgrounds, transit right of ways and affordable housing for immigrants

Every word of this

+100

The wants of many outweigh the wants of a privileged few

You sound like a pro-development flack from Hogwash, we GreaterGreaterWash.

If wanting affordable homes for undocumented immigrants is “pro-development,” then I am a pro-development fat cat!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hope this legislation goes through. These country clubs aren't public green spaces, and they can just raise the rates on their ultra rich members to pay their fair share of taxes so that they're not paying lower rates than Montgomery County residents.

Offer them a choice: they can pay their fair share of tax rates PLUS open up to the public, OR, they can pay a special, super-high, punitive rate (like $10,000 per acre or higher) and stay private.

If their privacy and exclusivity mean that much to them and their members, well, that privilege should be one they have to pay a premium for.

Why should they pay more to stay private? Is your back yard open to the public? I agree with not paying less but not more..

Basically pp is saying that fair would be taxing them like other business if they are a public accommodation, and if they want to not be a public accommodation they can pay more for their exclusivity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hope this legislation goes through. These country clubs aren't public green spaces, and they can just raise the rates on their ultra rich members to pay their fair share of taxes so that they're not paying lower rates than Montgomery County residents.

Offer them a choice: they can pay their fair share of tax rates PLUS open up to the public, OR, they can pay a special, super-high, punitive rate (like $10,000 per acre or higher) and stay private.

If their privacy and exclusivity mean that much to them and their members, well, that privilege should be one they have to pay a premium for.

Why should they pay more to stay private? Is your back yard open to the public? I agree with not paying less but not more..

Basically pp is saying that fair would be taxing them like other business if they are a public accommodation, and if they want to not be a public accommodation they can pay more for their exclusivity.

Step 1 is getting them to be taxed like any other business (something that was voted down by the Maryland House of Delegates in August 2018). Then if people want them to be taxed more than other businesses, they can take that up as a separate issue, but I don't see that happening, given that they've had this preferential tax position for so long (I assume country clubs and their members are big donors to campaigns.)

[Anonymous]

I just want them paying the same per square foot of property as a homeowner does.

No more. But no less, either.

If they can't do that, well, that's not my concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want them paying the same per square foot of property as a homeowner does.

No more. But no less, either.

If they can't do that, well, that's not my concern.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

I wonder where Elrich is in this?

I can’t really see him being a friend of the country club set

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder where Elrich is in this?

I can’t really see him being a friend of the country club set

No, but he believes in preserving open space and is not a fan of the build-everywhere Greater Greater Hogwash agenda. Country clubs are open space that their members pay for. A tax break is a relatively modest public price for trees, green lungs and habitats for wildlife, particularly close to otherwise dense areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder where Elrich is in this?

I can’t really see him being a friend of the country club set

No, but he believes in preserving open space and is not a fan of the build-everywhere Greater Greater Hogwash agenda. Country clubs are open space that their members pay for. A tax break is a relatively modest public price for trees, green lungs and habitats for wildlife, particularly close to otherwise dense areas.

Those are all compelling reasons to preserve those open spaces, and turn them into parks that everyone can enjoy, rather than just fat old white guys with $1,000 putters.

[Anonymous]

One day, places like country clubs won't exist.

And that day will be amazing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people would like to tax country clubs into bankruptcy and then use the land for low income housing.

That would actually be an incredibly useful thing to do with that otherwise useless land. There is a crushing shortage of affordable housing in Montgomery county. Offering housing options for low income earners close to places where many of them can find work would be a huge boon. It would cut down on pollution as many would have access to public transit or could simply bike or walk to work. Being closer to employment would also reduce time wasted commuting, and allow low income parents to spend more time with children.



Chevy Chase Club is 190 acres. Imagine the number of lower income families that could benefit from high-density affordable housing in that location. Many of these people would be within a short distance of the businesses and homes were they are working jobs right now.

What is a silly statement! I certainly favor more affordable housing, but placing affordable housing in the most expensive inner suburbs makes little economic sense. Moreover, if you did so, those neighborhoods would be destroyed, as those residents would move out. The County already has a higher tax burden than DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't think anyone is going to because their private golf course closed. That's asinine.

And even if they did, someone would buy their home. No net loss of population or business.

Why do you think a country club is a necessary thing to have around? You seem to think they serve some critical function. Guess what? The only function they serve is being a place where old racist white men play golf and make deals about how to screw over everyone else.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Moreover, it is private property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't think anyone is going to because their private golf course closed. That's asinine.

And even if they did, someone would buy their home. No net loss of population or business.

Why do you think a country club is a necessary thing to have around? You seem to think they serve some critical function. Guess what? The only function they serve is being a place where old racist white men play golf and make deals about how to screw over everyone else.

Stupid statement here. Yes, people would move. Neighborhoods would decline. Property taxes would decline due to lower assessments. DC is only a short distance away, and it already has a lower tax burden. Get real. There already is a huge financial incentive for inner MC residents to move to DC. Save taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely 100% agree.

I'm not a CC member. So tax the sh!t out of them!!!!!

I am not a member of your church, school, organization, so tax the shit out of them. Get a life.