I wasn’t sure what to think about the meeting when I found out who the speaker would be, but Wayne Strausburg turned out to be an interesting guest who had a lot of things to say.
Of course, we attended to our usual opening business, but the bulk of the meeting dealt with the prospective changes to our county Charter from the committee of fifteen interested citizens – three of whom were in the room – headed by Strausburg.
Wayne explained his role as speaker would be to relate the process and entertainment of ideas that the Charter Review Committee (CRC) would review on their way to making recommendations to County Council. As head of the group, Strausburg wanted to have a “consensus” on proposals because “we don’t take changes to the document lightly.”
And proposals weren’t just coming from the committee or County Council. Wayne stressed that there’s plenty of opportunity for public input, whether through attending one of the regular semi-monthly CRC meetings or the county’s website. Suggestions which come through the website go to county administrator Matt Creamer, who compiles and summarizes them for inclusion at the appropriate point in the process.
That process is now a line-by-line summary of the existing document. But originally, Wayne noted, the parameters needed to be set. The two key decisions in determining the direction in which the CRC would go were establishing that the County Executive form of government would remain for now, as would the current composition of County Council as a five-district, two at-large member group. Still, “nothing is off the table,” said Strausburg, including term limits for county elected officials. All they would do is make recommendations to County Council, who would “act as they see fit.” Any surviving recommendations would then be subject to voter approval.
Something I didn’t know about our charter is that it was patterned after Harford County’s charter, which also set up an executive form of government. “We have a very strong executive charter,” said Wayne, who in the interest of disclosure revealed he had originally opposed both the executive form of government and the current revenue cap.
Yet Wayne bent over backwards to be fair to all sides, stating “we don’t want to impose our wills on the voters” or make “arbitrary requirements” for holding office.
Obviously there were a number of questions from the audience, with several commenting about the current executive form of government and its costs. But the CRC includes a number of members who worked on it a decade ago, and it was felt then that the system lacked the ultimate accountability of a single leader, and the County Council administrator (an unelected position) served as the de facto county executive. So they sought the change and the voters adopted it.
Others fretted about the idea of citizen input and transparency, with one suggesting an elected county auditor position. County Councilman Bob Culver, though, spoke glowingly about the current internal auditor, Steve Roser, and the work he has done. However, it is an idea for the committee to consider.
The other key issue which provoked discussion was term limits. While the CRC decided against the idea – member Marc Kilmer explaining his belief that we should limit what officeholders can do, not how long they can serve – we also found out that the previous incarnation of the CRC a decade ago recommended term limits to County Council but the then-Democratic majority rejected the idea.
All told, Wayne presented a balanced and interesting progress report on a process which will go on well into next year. He didn’t see any pressing issues which would require a 2012 vote, but insisted there was a “drop-dead” date in place in case something came up. It’s more likely we would see any Charter change votes coming in the 2014 election.
Shifting gears, Dave Parker gave the Central Committee report. Dave detailed our role in finding a successor out of “six outstanding candidates” for the late Bob Caldwell in Council District 4, and assessed the current 30 day Charter rule for replacement of a Council member as “tough” to comply with. (It will be looked at as a revision, since the question also came up about replacing someone who’s unaffiliated.)
Dave yielded a portion of his time to allow Cathy Keim to speak about Election Integrity Maryland and their effort to recruit poll watchers for the next election before wrapping up with comments about the convention (and my bylaw proposal) and a reminder about the upcoming Lincoln Day Dinner in February.
Mark McIver chimed in with a report that organization is underway for Andy Harris’s 2012 re-election campaign.
County Councilman Joe Holloway added a comment about putting together a redistricting committee and the prospect of collective bargaining for the Sheriff’s Department.
Delegate Charles Otto was late to arrive, but pledged to be of assistance if he could for Wicomico County’s redistricting effort since Somerset County had “serious changes” to their districts thanks to a state law which required prisoners to be counted as part of their home county’s population rather than as part of Somerset County. He also criticized the prospects of a 15 cent per gallon gasoline tax and the revelation that the agency for whom the sales tax increase on alcohol was intended carried over $25 million from the last fiscal year. He also stated that two of the first school construction projects were changing two Howard County high school fields over to artificial turf.
With a few other minor items out of the way, we concluded our regular meeting schedule for 2011 shortly afterward. We’ll convene next on January 23, 2012 to begin the process of electing new officers.