Evening star., 1953-02-01
Recreation Tax
Plan Opposed
In Montgomery
County Council
Foresees Fight
In RuruI Areas
By chorIes L. Hoffman

An ambitious proposed county
wide recreation program for
Montgomery County that would
cost taxpayers $485 900 a year is
drawing mixed and strong reac-
tionS.
The program presented to the
county council by Recreation Di-
rector Forest Gustafson would
mean an eight cent recreation
tax in its first year. This rate is
based on a sharply increased
assessable base expected to be
$500 million by July /.
What's more significant is that
this recreation tax would be
county -wide-Something entirely
new to upper county farmers and
communities. Even members of
the county council are not opti-
mistic about rural residents
willingness to accept any such
tax.
The program at this point is
purely theoretical. The county
although it has a recreation de-
partment-at present has no
overall recreation program.
Has Had Own Program.
The heavily populated subur-
ban area has had its own recrea-
ton program for some years.
Residents support it through
flve-cent tax, three cents of
which goes for the operation of
the program. The remaining
two cents is earmarked for re-
tirement of bonds issued for rec
reation center acquisition and
construction.
The suburban program is oper-
ated by the Maryland-NationaI
Capital Park and Planning Com
mission.
The county and the planners
until few months ago were ne
gotiating a transfer to the county
of the suburban program. Nego-
tlations were cut off, however,
when the county refused to dis
close the anticipated cost of its
program.
Mr.. GuStafson's program was
drafted on the premise that the
county would be successful in
abolishiug the bi-county COM
mission and putting the Mont
gomery County planning, park
development and recreation work
under the thumb of the council.
Cites County Authority.
County Attorney, David Mac
donald. who drafted the general
assembly bill to abolish the COM
mission, yesterday pointed out
the county would still have au-
thoriy to levy up to seven cents
(the present park tax rate) for
park acquisition, development
and maintenance. ...
Although Mr.. Gustafson's pro-
gram does not deal with park
lands, he points out that subur-
ban residents would pay two
cents in addition to the overall
tax rate for retirement of bonds
issued by the planning commits
sion.
Mr.. Gustafson has declined to
compare the cost of his program
with that now. administered by
the planning commission. First,
he points out his is countrywide.
Second, he says the planning
commission has been able to
transfer funds so that the ac-
tual f1ve-cent tax rate does not
present a. clear picture of the
suburban programs cost.
The. proposed program is a
extension of the planning COM
missions activities which are re-
ported to cost about $233, 900
this year.
The program would include
swimming pool construction and
operation. The planners now
have no swimming pools in their
recreation centers or parks.
Wants 4 Swimming Pools.
Mr.. GustafSon said he wants
four swimming pools constructed
in the next three years. Each,
he said. would cost $3.50, 900 and
would include a SO by 100 foot
pool, bathhouse facilities to
handle 600 persons, and a large
sun deck area.
In the first year he proposes a
$150,000 swimming pool in the
Silver Spring area plus con-
Struction of a recreation center
in Wheaton at a cost of $125 900.
These would be paid for out of
surplus funds of the planning
commission.
In the same year, he proposes
another swimming pool in the
Upper County area. This pool
along with construction of three
Fairgrounds and acquisition of
recreation center areas would
cost the county out of that years
current budget some $685. 900.
In the second, third, fourth
and fifth years of the capital
program, the county would build,
respectively. a mid-county col
ored swimming pool, a Bethesda
pool, a 5000, 900 mid-county COM
munity center including a gym
nasium, and a small 100000
community center in the Glen
Echo area.