With the 2026 General Election approaching, Frederick County voters will soon decide who will represent them on the next County Council. On Monday, August 10, the Frederick County Chamber of Commerce partnered with the Frederick County Building Industry Association (FCBIA) and Frederick County Association of REALTORS (FCAR) to give voters an opportunity to hear directly from the candidates seeking those seats.
Nine candidates participated in the County Council portion of the forum, representing races for district and at-large seats. Candidates were asked the same questions, giving attendees an opportunity to compare their perspectives on some of the most significant issues facing Frederick County.
The conversation covered housing affordability, data centers, economic development, workforce needs, development regulations, relationships with municipalities and businesses, the structure of county government and more.
Here are some of the major themes and differences that emerged from the discussion.
Growth, Affordability and the County’s Priorities
When asked to identify the most pressing issues facing the next County Council beyond data centers, candidates repeatedly returned to several themes: affordability, housing, education, taxes, responsible growth and public trust.
Democrat Louisa Conklin, a candidate in District 1, emphasized rebuilding trust with residents and involving them more directly in decisions affecting their communities. She identified housing affordability and education as two significant concerns, pointing to rising housing costs and pressure on Frederick County schools.
In District 2, Democrat Jamie Shopland emphasized public participation in growth decisions, funding for special education, housing needs and preparing the local workforce for technological change. Republican Dan Iampieri focused heavily on property taxes, arguing that rising assessments and tax bills have made Frederick County increasingly unaffordable. He also called for expanded senior tax relief and raised concerns about transparency and the use of closed-door meetings.
In District 4, Democrat Kavonté Duckett (incumbent) identified housing affordability, education and ensuring that the county government workforce reflects the community it serves. Republican Chaz Packan also highlighted property taxes and government transparency as major concerns.
In District 5, Democrat Johnny Mercer focused on responsible growth, housing needs, preservation of farmland and green space, and education. Republican Mason Carter (incumbent) emphasized affordability, public safety and government transparency.
Among the at-large candidates, Democrat Renee Knapp (incumbent) identified property tax stabilization, housing and transportation infrastructure as priorities, while Republican Jack Felton emphasized farmland preservation, taxes, schools and affordability.
Different Approaches to Housing Affordability
Housing produced some of the clearest differences among the candidates.
Several candidates argued that lowering property taxes should be part of the solution. Iampieri, Packan and Carter each supported reducing the county property tax rate, with Iampieri and Packan also emphasizing additional tax relief for seniors.
Other candidates focused more heavily on increasing or diversifying the county’s housing supply. Shopland discussed allowing smaller homes, exploring workforce housing opportunities and revisiting the county’s Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit program. Duckett also called for reviewing the MPDU ordinance and pointed to work involving accessory dwelling units as another potential tool.
Mercer emphasized examining regulations and development processes to reduce unnecessary costs while ensuring developers follow through on commitments to provide affordable housing.
Knapp argued that Frederick County already has extensive research and recommendations concerning housing and should focus on implementing those strategies collaboratively rather than continually returning to the same discussion.
Conklin proposed rent stabilization as an immediate tool for helping renters remain in Frederick County. While she did not support an across-the-board property tax reduction, she expressed support for targeted property tax credits for seniors and residents struggling to remain in their homes.
Data Centers Remain a Defining Issue
Unsurprisingly, data centers generated some of the strongest discussion of the evening.
Candidates generally supported limiting the geographic footprint of data center development, but differed considerably on whether the county’s current approach goes far enough and what should happen next.
Shopland described her advocacy surrounding the issue, including support for the referendum effort, and called for stronger independent oversight of county government decisions.
Packan said he supports limiting data centers and raised concerns about projects near schools and residential areas, calling for monitoring of water and air quality.
Duckett defended the county’s decision to establish the Critical Digital Infrastructure overlay, describing it as the right decision at the time while acknowledging that regulations should continue to be revisited.
Mercer said he supports keeping data centers below 1% of the county but would prefer an even smaller footprint and a return toward the map recommended by the Planning Commission. He also argued that community benefits should be considered alongside the economic benefits of the industry.
Carter supported concentrating data centers in a defined area rather than allowing them to proliferate throughout the county. He called for strong regulations involving screening, setbacks, noise and generators.
Knapp similarly supported maintaining the overlay and emphasized continually updating regulations as technology and information evolve.
Conklin was more critical of using the countywide percentage as the primary measure, arguing that the concentration has a much larger effect within District 1. She called for extending the current pause on development to allow more time to address issues including water use, grid demand and regulations.
Iampieri took one of the strongest positions against the existing approach, saying he would seek to repeal the CDI overlay and questioning whether the long-term tax revenue from data centers will match earlier expectations.
What Should Drive Frederick County’s Economy?
Candidates were also asked to identify Frederick County’s greatest economic opportunity over the next decade and whether expanding the commercial tax base could reduce dependence on residential taxpayers.
The answers reflected several different visions.
Duckett pointed directly to data centers as a major economic opportunity, emphasizing jobs, apprenticeships and career opportunities already being created locally.
Mercer and Conklin highlighted life sciences, biotechnology and related industries as areas where Frederick County could capitalize on existing strengths while potentially creating economic value with less environmental impact.
Knapp described data centers as an economic opportunity the county already has, but cautioned against becoming overly dependent on that revenue. She also discussed their potential to support workforce development and other investments.
Other candidates placed greater emphasis on improving Frederick County’s overall business environment rather than selecting particular industries. Carter argued that government should reduce regulatory and permitting barriers and make it easier for businesses to invest and create jobs.
Packan similarly called for lower taxes and reductions in government spending, while Iampieri pointed to the cost of doing business in Maryland and the importance of maintaining strong schools to attract residents and employers.
Shopland advocated for continued economic diversification, pointing to advanced manufacturing and other industries while emphasizing the need to prepare for rapid technological change.
Building Frederick County’s Workforce
There was considerably more agreement when candidates discussed workforce development.
Candidates broadly supported Frederick County Career & Technology Center, Frederick Community College and stronger partnerships with employers.
Mercer emphasized expanding CTC offerings and preparing students for emerging industries. Carter strongly advocated for increasing CTC’s capacity and supporting apprenticeships and other career pathways outside a single centralized facility.
Knapp similarly discussed apprenticeships and the need for education and workforce programs that connect residents with opportunities in the trades.
Duckett called for additional CTC funding while also emphasizing direct conversations with employers to determine what skills they need and then creating apprenticeships, internships and other programs accordingly.
Several candidates also stressed that four-year college is not the only route to a successful career. Packan highlighted trades and blue-collar work as essential to the economy, while Shopland spoke about her own nontraditional educational path through Frederick Community College and Hood College.
Conklin additionally raised agriculture as an important part of workforce development and suggested partnerships with institutions such as the University of Maryland and 4-H programs.
Development, Schools and the APFO
The county’s Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, or APFO, generated another significant discussion.
Several candidates agreed that the current system should be revisited, though they differed on what changes should look like.
Carter argued that the fact that similar concerns were being discussed four years after a previous candidate forum indicated the system was not working effectively. Knapp also supported reevaluating the APFO and finding a better balance between predictability for the development community and the infrastructure needs created by growth.
Shopland called for a comprehensive review of the ordinance, school construction funding, housing density and permitting costs.
Conklin was more cautious about relaxing the APFO. She argued that overcrowded schools are precisely why development restrictions exist and said she would support changes that require development to contribute adequately toward the school capacity it creates.
Packan pointed to overcrowded schools as a reason to slow development and expressed support for a development moratorium until infrastructure can catch up.
Duckett called for bringing stakeholders together to examine not only school capacity but also impacts on roads, transportation and other infrastructure.
Transparency, Collaboration and County Government
Government transparency appeared repeatedly throughout the evening, particularly when candidates discussed the relationship between the County Council, County Executive, municipalities, businesses and residents.
Duckett argued that stakeholders affected by legislation should be brought into the process before legislation is drafted rather than being asked for feedback near the end.
Mercer called for stronger collaboration between the county and its municipalities, while Carter emphasized respecting municipal autonomy and improving government transparency.
Knapp discussed the Council’s role in bringing municipalities, businesses and nonprofits together to find common ground.
Shopland pointed specifically to the need for stronger communication with municipalities when county decisions could affect their growth plans.
Packan again emphasized transparency, public access to decision-making and an open-door approach to constituent concerns.
Candidates also discussed whether Frederick County’s charter provides the right balance of authority between the County Executive and County Council.
Conklin said she would like the Council to have the ability to increase budget funding, rather than only reduce proposed expenditures. Packan similarly argued that the Council should have greater legislative and budgetary authority.
Others focused on the Council’s staffing and analytical capacity. Knapp suggested additional staff could help the Council evaluate increasingly complex budgets and legislation, while Duckett noted that expanding the Council’s budget authority would also require substantially greater staff capacity.
Shopland argued for a more robust Council structure, including additional staff and independent auditing capacity, to strengthen the legislative branch as a check and balance.
Looking Ahead
Although the candidates differed on how Frederick County should address many of these issues, the forum demonstrated the range of choices voters will have before them this November.
Questions surrounding growth, housing, taxes, economic development, infrastructure and the role of county government are interconnected. Decisions made by the next County Council will have lasting implications for Frederick County’s residents, businesses and overall quality of life.
The Frederick County Chamber of Commerce thanks FCBIA and FCAR for partnering with us to provide this opportunity, as well as each of the candidates who participated.
This recap highlights only a portion of a wide-ranging conversation. We encourage Frederick County voters to hear directly from the candidates and consider their complete responses before casting their ballots.
Watch the full 2026 Frederick County Candidate Forum on YouTube
The Frederick County Chamber of Commerce does not endorse candidates for elected office. The Candidate Forum and this recap are intended to provide information and encourage an informed and engaged electorate.
Frederick Chamber Insights is a news outlet of the Frederick County Chamber of Commerce. For more information about membership, programs and initiatives, please visit our website.