Campaign Materials of HoCo Candidates Omit the Required Authority Line

The candidates running for the Howard County Council and the Howard County School Board are asking the public to put their trust in them. They are asking the public to let them determine where to spend $1 billion budgets. Yet, dealing with the issues on the Council or School Board are complicated and often legalistic. There are often complicated laws, rules and regulations which must be followed. This takes reading and research.

Some of the Howard County candidates are violating the state laws on authority lines on campaign materials and webpages. One candidate has experience with prior campaigns while the others are naive freshman candidates for the Council and School Board. Either way the failure to include the authority line shows a lack of attention to detail, a lack of commitment to do the reading and research necessary to run for elective office, and a lack of a close group of trusted friends and advisers to assist with the campaign. One Council candidate in particular seems naively unaware of the rules–no authority line appears on their signs, materials or website.

Perhaps, at a future time I might identify these candidates or tell them of their legal violations, but for now I will just make this statement. Perhaps, someone will tell these candidates to cure these violations.  For me personally, because I am being asked to put my trust in these individuals to help run Howard County, the failure to follow the relatively easy requirements of Maryland election law is disqualifying.  I will not be voting for these candidates.

 

AUTHORITY LINES
Generally
Each item of campaign material must include an authority line, set apart from the other printing or content of the campaign material. The authority line must state name and address (unless the address is on file with the State Board) of the person who is responsible for the production and distribution of the campaign material.
Campaign material includes signs, buttons, letters, tickets, solicitations, radio and television advertisements, websites, social media accounts, bumpers stickers and paraphernalia such as pencils, hats and t-shirts.
The authority line for a public financing committee must contain:
 The name of the Treasurer; and
 The name of the campaign finance entity.
If the material is too small to permit the inclusion of all required information in a
legible manner, the material need only contain the name and title of the treasurer.
The Office of the Attorney General has stated that almost no material is too small to permit inclusion of the complete authority line. Accordingly, every effort should be made to include the entire authority line.

https://campaignfinancemd.us/PEF_Summary_Guide_EDITION_MAY_2017_final.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#hocopolitics

Advertisements

HoCo Charter is Better in Case of Death of County Executive

In the wake of the tragic death of Baltimore County County Executive Kevin Kamenetz, a comparison of the Charter provisions in Howard and Baltimore Counties shows that Howard County is much better prepared to deal with the unfortunate circumstance of the death of an Executive. In fact, the Baltimore County Charter is actually ambiguously vague on who serves as acting Executive immediately after a death.

The Howard County Charter Vacancy provision covers all causes in which the office of Executive may become vacant including death, (resignation and forfeiture of office if the “Executive ceases to be a registered voter of the County or is convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude.” Section 302(b)(3)).  Section 302 (f) states that the Chief Administrative Officer immediately serves as acting Executive until the County Council appoints a new Executive within 30 days.

Howard County Charter Section 302. – The County Executive.

(f) Vacancy. Whenever for any cause the office of the Executive shall become vacant, the Chief Administrative Officer shall serve as acting Executive until a new Executive shall be appointed. The office of County Executive shall be filled by resolution within thirty days by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Council. The person so elected by the Council shall possess the same qualifications for the office as provided in Section 302(b), shall belong to the same political party as his or her predecessor at the time of the Executive’s most recent election (unless his or her predecessor was not a member of a political party) and shall serve the unexpired term of his or her predecessor and until his or her successor shall qualify.

The temporary absence or disability provision applies if the Executive is away from the County perhaps because of travel to New York to meet with bond agencies, family vacation, or disabled due to illness.

(g) Temporary absence or disability. The Executive shall within thirty days upon taking office, designate in writing the Chief Administrative Officer or other appointive officer to perform the duties of the Executive during the latter’s temporary inability to perform by reason of absence from the County or disability. Such designation shall be filed with the Administrator of the Council. Any such designation may be revoked by the Executive at any time by filing a new designation with the Administrator of the Council. An Acting Executive shall have the same rights, duties, powers and obligations as an elected incumbent in said office except the power of veto.

In contrast, the Baltimore County Charter does not explicitly provide that the Chief Administrator Officer automatically serves as acting Executive in case of death, resignation, failure to stay a registered voter, or criminal conviction. Baltimore County’s statement on the Impact of Government says in part “The Baltimore County Charter stipulates that, when the County Executive is unable to fulfill his duties, the Chief Administrative Officer serves as Acting County Executive until the County Council appoints someone to fill out the remainder of his or her term.”  Yet, there is in fact no such provision applicable in the case of the death of the Executive in the Baltimore Charter for the temporary appointment of the Chief Administrative Officer. By its actual terms, Section 402 (b) states that in a vacancy there is no Executive until an appointment is made by the County Council. There is no 30-day deadline as in Howard County, which some in Baltimore County seem to be allowing for an unlimited amount of time. On the other hand, the absence of a deadline implies that the Council should act expeditiously to fill the vacancy caused by death.

Baltimore County Charter Sec. 402. – County executive.

(b) Vacancy. Whenever for any cause the office of the county executive shall become vacant, the same shall be filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of the total number of county council members established by this Charter. The person so elected by the council shall possess the same qualifications for the office as hereinabove provided in Section 402(a) hereof, shall belong to the same political party as his predecessor (unless his predecessor was not a member of a political party) and shall serve the unexpired term of his predecessor and until his successor shall qualify. (Bill No. 80, 1978, § 1) (Approved by voters Nov. 7, 1978; effective Dec. 8, 1978)

Baltimore County is proceeding under its temporary absence provision and the Administrative Officer is serving as Acting Executive. However, death is of course neither “temporary” nor is it a “disability.”

(c) Temporary absence of county executive. During the temporary disability or absence from the county of the county executive, the county administrative officer shall serve as acting county executive. If both the county executive and the county administrative officer are temporarily disabled or absent from the county, the director of the budget, as the acting county administrative officer, shall also serve as acting county executive, unless the county council designates the head of another office in the administrative services, or the director of public works to serve as acting county executive. If a county executive fails actively to perform the daily duties and responsibilities of his office for a continuous period of six months, his office may be declared vacant by the affirmative vote of a majority of the total number of county council members established by this Charter, and such vacancy shall thereupon be filled in the manner above provided in Section 402(b) of this Article. An acting county executive shall have the same rights, duties, powers and obligations as an elected incumbent of said office, exclusive, however, of the power of executive veto. (Bill No. 80, 1978, § 1) (Approved by voters Nov. 7, 1978; effective Dec. 8, 1978)

While Baltimore County is giving the language of their Charter the broadest interpretation to allow its Administrative Officer to serve as Acting Executive, this is not explicitly authorized, especially when compared to the language found in the Howard County Charter. The Baltimore County Council should clear up this ambiguity by appointing an Executive as soon a possible. In addition, Baltimore County should use Howard County’s Charter as a template and approve a Charter Amendment to specifically authorize an immediate Acting County Executive in case of death.

Is It Time Yet to Talk About Sandy Hook?

So after the latest school shooting in Parkland, Florida, the Republicans and the NRA will probably once again say it is too soon to talk about gun safety measures. OK, for the sake of argument, it is too soon. The victims have to be mourned. The community has to grieve. But now after more than five years since the school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, is it time yet that we can talk about what to do about that incident?

Change.org Petition: Protect taxpayer dollars. Charge developers market-based school surcharge fees.

 

Howard County has been undergoing unmitigated growth for many years. This unmitigated growth has resulted in school overcrowding.

This overcrowding has occurred to the extent that some schools are close to 140% over-capacity.

For 30 years, the school system has dealt with overcrowding by adding portable trailers for classrooms. Currently, there are 224 portable classrooms.

The County manages growth through the adequate public facilities ordinance (APFO). The school overcrowding occurred because the school-capacity standards do not prevent overcrowding.

The County Council has introduced legislation that will help the County manage growth better by making the capacity standards stronger.

While the school capacity standards are weak, the County also charges very low school-surcharge fees that help defray the cost of new school construction.

The new Hanover Hills Elementary School cost $57,000 PER STUDENT to build.

According to the County’s own reports, developers pay an average value of $5,138 PER UNIT to build a new home.

The fees are not market-based. Neighboring counties charge five to six-times the fees charged by Howard County with stronger school capacity standards.

In order for the County to raise these fees, it needs to obtain State-enabling legislation to pass in Annapolis.

This bill is introduced by the Howard County State Delegation. The bill as introduced does not allow the County to charge market-based surcharge fees. It also allows overcrowding in schools provided developers pay a fee.

This is wrong.

Let your State Delegation know that you want the County to stop subsidizing developer profits. Further, this bill introduced by the Howard County State Delegation needs to be changed to enable the county to charge developers market rates so every additional child has a permanent seat rather than allow overcrowding for a fee.

Pass the State-enabling bill that will allow the County to charge market-based rates and prevent overcrowding.

A Legislative Proposal Authorizing Local School Boards to Remove the Superintendent

The debate over Superintendent Foose’s contract often involved a discussion of Maryland law which gives a local school board the authority to hire a superintendent while only giving the State Superintendent the authority to remove the local superintendent. Attempts in the 2017 Maryland General Assembly to pass a bill giving the authority to terminate the superintendent to either just the Howard County Board or to local boards statewide were not successful.  One problem with these bills were that they would have retroactively changed the terms of existing the contracts of superintendents which were predicated on the power to remove residing with the State Superintendent.
 .
The employment contracts tend to reference and incorporate provisions of the state Education Article. With that in mind, I crafted legislation which would apply to future contracts by giving a local school board and the prospective superintendent the ability to agree that the local board would have the authority to remove.
Article – Education §4–201.  
(e)    (1)   The State Superintendent may remove a county superintendent for:
(i)   Immorality;
(ii)   Misconduct in office;
(iii)   Insubordination;
(iv)   Incompetency; or
(v)   Willful neglect of duty.
(2)   Before removing a county superintendent, the State Superintendent shall send the county superintendent a copy of the charges against the county superintendent and give the county superintendent an opportunity within 10 days to request a hearing.
(3)   If the county superintendent requests a hearing within the 10–day period:
(i)   The State Superintendent promptly shall hold a hearing, but a hearing may not be set within 10 days after the State Superintendent sends the county superintendent a notice of the hearing; and
(ii)   The county superintendent shall have an opportunity to be heard publicly before the State Superintendent in the county superintendent’s own defense, in person or by counsel.
(f)   On notification of pending criminal charges against a county superintendent as provided under § 4–206 of this subtitle, the county board may suspend the county superintendent with pay until the final disposition of the criminal charges OR MAY  REMOVE THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (G).
 (G) (1) IF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT AND COUNTY BOARD EXPLICITLY PROVIDES FOR REMOVAL BY THE COUNTY BOARD, THE COUNTY BOARD MAY REMOVE A COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT BY A VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE TOTAL MEMBERS AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO VOTE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR:
(I)  IMMORALITY;
(II)  MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE;
(III)  INSUBORDINATION;
(IV)  INCOMPETENCY; 
(V)  WILLFUL NEGLECT OF DUTY;
(VI) MATERIAL BREACH OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT; 
(VII) PENDING CRIMINAL CHARGES; OR
(VIII) PERMANENT DISABILITY OF THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT WHICH RESULTS IN THEIR INABILITY TO SUBSTANTIALLY PERFORM THE ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF HIS POSITION WITH OR WITHOUT REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS BECAUSE OF ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY FOR A CONTINUOUS PERIOD LASTING LONGER THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE MONTHS; 
(2)   BEFORE REMOVING A COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT, THE COUNTY BOARD SHALL SEND THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT A COPY OF THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT AND GIVE THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT AN OPPORTUNITY WITHIN 5 BUSINESS DAYS TO REQUEST A HEARING.
(3)   IF THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT REQUESTS A HEARING WITHIN THE 5 BUSINESS DAY PERIOD:
(I)   THE COUNTY BOARD PROMPTLY SHALL HOLD A HEARING, BUT A HEARING MAY NOT BE SET WITHIN 5 BUSINESS DAYS AFTER THE COUNTY BOARD SENDS THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT A NOTICE OF THE HEARING; AND
(II)   THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT SHALL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD PUBLICLY BEFORE THE COUNTY BOARD IN THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT’S OWN DEFENSE, IN PERSON OR BY COUNSEL

HoCo Delegation Bill 11-18 Could Have Made Foose’s Buyout Millions More

The Howard County School Board agreed to a $ 1.65 million settlement to buyout Superintendent Foose’s contract.  Had the legislation proposed by Howard County Delegation Bill 11-18  Howard County Board of Education – Superintendent of Schools – Term Length, Ho. Co. 11–18  been in effect, the cost of the buyout could have been orders of magnitude larger.

The bill proposes to remove the 4-year limit to superintendent’s contracts just for Howard County. It states “IN HOWARD COUNTY, THE COUNTY BOARD SHALL DETERMINE THE LENGTH OF THE TERM OF THE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT.” There are no limitations to the School Board’s power. Had this legislation been in effect when Foose’s contract was renewed she could have been given say a 20-year contract. What would the buyout had been then–$7, $8, $9 million.

Once again your legislators have not clearly thought through the consequences of  proposed legislation. There must be some limits on the length of the contract; else another arrogant and out of touch school board could give a extremely long-term contract to a superintendent which will leave the former superintendent with a cozy retirement and the taxpayers of Howard County holding the bag.

In addition, because the term of the Howard County superintendent need not begin on July 1, it is unclear how to apply the other dates referenced in the law.

Tell your delegation representative to amend HoCo 11-18.