Montgomery County officials are weighing whether county employees’ taxpayer-funded vehicles are really necessary or just a costly perk. The county pays for 359 take-home cars — which includes 259 unionized employees and 96 unionized managers — as well as 1,371 public safety vehicles, but county officials began questioning the economic sense of those vehicles a few months ago.
The issue “has been a difficult one for the administration because vehicles tend to be highly prized,” Councilman Roger Berliner, D-Bethesda, said in a June meeting.
Now Chief Administrative Officer Tim Firestine is asking every county department to explain why its employees cannot perform their jobs without county-funded cars.
“Some people said they have cars because they go to a lot of evening meetings,” he said. “That’s not going to make it anymore.”
However, some county employees need cars to do their work, Firestine said. “We’re not eliminating take-home cars.”
Employees who get to keep their cars would need to start reimbursing the county for their “commuter mileage” — the mileage between home and work — since people without take-home cars have to pay for the costs of traveling that distance. Only about six employees do that now.
The county also is weighing giving employees who need a car a few days a week a monthly stipend instead of an actual car. Firestine said this system, used for managers and directors, is similar to Fairfax County’s.
Gino Renne, president of the county’s Municipal and County Government Employees Organization, said that still seems excessive.
“The average county employee doesn’t have that benefit,” he said. “There is no argument for anyone who is paid that well above the market, i.e., management, to be given additional compensation.”
However, the allowance system would not be sufficient for the “rank and file” employees, he said. “The allowance may on the face of it appear to be fairly reasonable, but in reality it will significantly cost the county employees another reduction in their wages.”
Councilman Hans Riemer, D-at large, said he still needs to be convinced that proposed changes will sufficiently cut unnecessary costs.
“I see some loopholes you could fit a whole fleet of cars through,” he said.
When asked if he would give up his take-home vehicle, County Executive Ike Leggett asked, “Well, how do you expect me to get around?”
He said it is more cost efficient for him to drive his county-funded 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee than for the county to pay for around-the-clock security. Leggett has a part-time security detail.
But Firestine said he would give up his own take-home car — a 2007 Chevy Tahoe — in exchange for a monthly take-home stipend.
