The George Howard Building, headquarters of Howard County government, in Ellicott City. Howard County government photo.
Role models and good examples can be hard to find in state and local government. That is why it is worthwhile to highlight the constructive manner in which elected officials in Howard County worked with county residents to craft a charter amendment establishing a new, independent Office of Inspector General (OIG). Howard County voters overwhelmingly approved the amendment on Nov. 5.
On the same day, Baltimore County voters approved a charter amendment ensuring the independence and efficacy of the existing Baltimore County OIG. The histories of the charter amendments, however, couldn’t be more dissimilar and provide an opportunity for a comparison of how the political cultures in the two neighboring counties affect governance.
That comparison shows why what happened in Howard County is an example for Baltimore County to emulate. It’s a lesson on how progress is made toward good government when elected officials are not consumed by self-interest and are willing to focus on the best interests of their constituents – a lesson that elected officials and residents in Baltimore County should take to heart.
The momentum toward an independent OIG in Howard County began with a bill proposed by Councilwoman Liz Walsh in July. The public and other members of the County Council quickly became engaged in discussions about the proposal, and all five members of the Council embraced the idea of establishing the OIG by charter amendment rather than by ordinance to guarantee its independence from both branches of county government.
County Executive Calvin Ball commended council members for “reaching bipartisan consensus” on the proposal. Now that the amendment has been approved, legislation already drafted can be introduced to flesh out the details of what in my opinion is a model governing structure for an OIG.
In contrast, the Baltimore County OIG was conceived in partisan politics and almost died in infancy because it threatened the status quo in the county. Al Redmer announced early in his campaign for the Republican nomination for county executive in 2018 that he would establish an OIG to end the “culture of corruption and cronyism” in county government. On the Democratic side, Johnny Olszewski was running against Jim Brochin, who made ending the “pay to play system” with builders and developers his primary theme.
Not to be outdone, Olszewski promised that he also would establish an OIG. He followed through on that promise when elected. The first time an investigation by the OIG hit too close to home, however, the office came under fire from Council members. Then Olszewski tried to strip it of its independence and powers.
After an unsuccessful attempt by his chief of staff to bully IG Kelly Madigan into allowing him to control the OIG’s access to records, Olszewski had a bill drafted that would have eviscerated the OIG. Madigan told the media she was not consulted about the bill and opposed it. Olszewski was unprepared for the intensity of the public backlash against his proposal that followed.
Chastened, he didn’t introduce the bill and instead formed a commission to make recommendations on the structure of the OIG. The charter amendment passed earlier this month was the eventual result.
Why the differences in the courses of events in the neighboring counties, and what is the takeaway for the residents of Baltimore County? In my opinion, the differences lie in what I’ll refer to as the Index of Soft Corruption. The more soft corruption there is, the higher the index and the greater the resistance by elected officials to good government measures.
The term “soft corruption” refers to actions that, while not illegal, are intended to gain political power or personal benefit rather than to advance the public interest. It is influence-peddling every bit as harmful as the cash-in-white-envelopes criminal corruption for which Baltimore County once was known.
For the Baltimore County Council, soft corruption is inherent in the unusual amount of power individual council members wield over land use decisions within their own districts through the much-maligned practice of “councilmanic courtesy” and in deals brokered with landowners that critics decry as legislative “spot zonings.” For Olszewski, who will move on to Congress in January, it manifested itself in a series of “special arrangements” with cronies and political allies.
The Index of Soft Corruption in Baltimore County is exceptionally high. There’s no easy fix, but things will change only when voters keep in mind that the character of elected officials counts and insist that candidates for county executive and county council commit themselves to genuine reform.