County Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, Chair. Calls to order public hearing for Bill 26-009, Charter Amendment, Charter Section 207. Mr. Jan Giordano.

Thank you, Council President. Good evening. Thanks, everybody, for coming. I'm glad to see there's so many people here tonight. Whether you're for this Charter Amendment or not, your voices deserve to be heard. Unfortunately, except for Councilman Riley and myself, the rest of the Council did not want to, have this issue discussed publicly, period. So after I formally introduced the bill, it was immediately made to stop the introduction and prevent the public hearing. Think about that for a moment, folks. They did not want to hear your opinion. The People's Chamber, as some call it, was not going to allow the people to speak. Look it up. The meeting was recorded in April. Based on publicly available county charter language, these Maryland counties appear to have clear as prohibit prohibit prohibit and prohibitions against County Council members simultaneously holding another government paid office or employment while serving Anne Arundel County Baltimore County Howard County which is stricter than almost anyone Wiamaco County Dorchester County Frederick County Montgomery County Prince George's County Frederick County Cecil County and Baltimore City which also has stricter prohibitions against that so I think initially that This is a bill that only then goes to the public to vote on at the general election. So let the public weigh in on it, not seven council members who say whether this bill is going to be approved or not. That's not what this is about. This is about whether the bill goes to the public, and the public gets to look and vote on this thing. So you might have somebody here saying that, no, that shouldn't be. Well, the charter was set up in 1972. and people this charter was never uh challenged before so now it was challenged the supreme court came back and said uh the wording was ambiguous um so jacob is on there council pen councilman penman was on here but it still said the wording was ambiguous you know look if you're a police officer and you're retired you should be able to serve on here same thing with a teacher or something else but you shouldn't have served as a council person and get a job paycheck from the County and have your boss being the sheriff and the people, uh, that said, that's just same thing. Sorry. What the teachers, you know, the, if we change, if we cut any of the budget, it goes to the school. So bottom line is then Jacob will vote on the school budget unless he recuses himself. We got some amendments that are coming up tonight. So is he going to recuse himself because those budgets get cut and they go to the school, or is he going to vote on it? So, you know, he's voting on his own budget. Sorry, that shouldn't be that way. I'm sure we're going to have some people on the dais that are going to disagree. But the bottom line is bring it to the people and let the people vote. I see people out here, all kind of different people. You know, they're going to be for it and against it. It is what it is. But, you know, I'll – say that's it for right now, Council President. I'll reserve the right to come back.

Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Janitor Dunham. Ms. Emhoff?

Good evening. I just want some clarification if this is about conflict of interest or if it's about two paychecks for two jobs.

Well, if the funds are coming from the county and you're being paid by the county and you're also sitting and getting another job, then you shouldn't get two paychecks from two sources of the government. Whether it's being the county is fully funding the sheriff's office or DPW or the school, they shouldn't be sitting on the council at the same time they're employed by the county whether they're just a county employee or whether they're in the sheriff's office or the school so it's not necessarily about conflict it's like if someone were to be appointed to the council and they were to recuse their council paycheck You're mincing words. You shouldn't be sitting here because it's not just your paycheck. It's anything that you're voting on. And then you lose somebody's vote, your voice for somebody to vote. You're taking away people's vote in whatever that district is just because they want to recuse themselves. Right? That's what you're saying.

What you're saying is not two paychecks.

Not two paychecks from government-funded sources. And what you were just saying is if they've recused themselves. So if you're recusing yourself, then you're taking away somebody's right And that's those people in that district not to have legal representation.

What I'm saying is what if someone were to be appointed and then forego their council paycheck?

I don't know the answer to that.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Miss him off. Mr. Bennett.

Hello. Good evening. Just to clarify some of councilman Gian Giordano's comments, uh, you listed a series of counties. It doesn't appear to me that you have understanding of the charters in those counties or the legislative history of those counties. Because Anne Arundel County, that you just named, currently has a public school teacher who works in Anne Arundel County serving on their county council in Lisa Rodvian. Frederick County at one point had two public school teachers serving on their council at the same time, Jerry Donald. who still serves on their council, and their current county executive, Jessica Fitzwater, who was a council member for two terms before becoming county executive. You list them as model charters. Their charters allow for school teachers to serve on the county council. You bring up Baltimore County as an example. Councilman Marks, who serves on the Baltimore County Council, teaches right here in Harford County. Now, obviously, that's two different counties, but your legislation as written would not allow for anyone who works for an entity that receives state funding, which the Harford County Council receives state funding. So if your charter amendment applied in Baltimore County, Councilman Marks would not be eligible to serve on the Baltimore County Council, even though he works outside the county. If a council member worked in Cecil County Public Schools, according to your charter amendment, they would not be able to serve on the Harford County Council. Additionally, your charter amendment takes out the words Maryland and Harford and changes it to any state, any county budget, which means I could, or any council member could go get a job in Fairfax County Schools in Virginia, make that commute every day, and would be ineligible to serve on the Harford County Council. I could go be a firefighter in Prince George's County and serve as a paid firefighter, but because I work for an entity that receives county funding from any county, I would be ineligible to serve on the Harford County Council. The purpose of Charter Section 207 is to prevent a conflict of interest. It is not our right to diminish the rights of others unless there's an explicit purpose in helping prevent a conflict of interest. So that being said, I want to read a direct quote from the Supreme Court ruling, Bennett v. Harford County, because you've referenced it. I was key in researching that case, presenting an argument in that case, and I have read the ruling in that case many, many times. We ultimately conclude that, for the purpose of the applicability of Section 207, the Board is an independent entity, neither state nor county, and that Section 207 therefore does not preclude Mr. Bennett from simultaneously serving as a member of the Council and an employee of the Board. Second, and this is very important to the argument of conflict of interest, the doctrine of incompatible positions does not preclude Mr. Bennett's simultaneous service on the Council. and as an employee of the Board of Education because there is no present or prospective conflict of interest between the positions. There is no present or prospective conflict of interest between the positions. Neither position has the level of supervisory power over the other or the ability to hire, fire, or set the salary of the other. and none of the functions of the offices are inherently inconsistent and repugnant. The council's limited roles with respect to the budget and membership of the board are too attenuated from Mr. Bennett's position as a teacher to implicate this doctrine. Again, that's a direct quote. The Supreme Court did not rule simply, it's too ambiguous, therefore let him do whatever he wants. They said there's no conflict of interest. They said the Board of Education is an independent body. I receive one paycheck from Hartford County government. I receive another paycheck from Hartford County Public Schools that has its own HR that sends out its own checks. So just to be very clear on that. Chief Justice Fader expressed verbally during our argument, which I've encouraged you to actually watch it when you admitted to me that you had not watched this case. Chief Justice Fader expressed concern that even our current language of the charter that bars any Maryland state employee from serving on the council may be in violation of the Express Powers Act of Maryland because of how broad our current limitations are. He brought up you could go be mowing lawns for State Highway over in Cecil County and you're barred from serving on the Harford County Council because they're technically a state employee. And they brought up a 2006 Attorney General opinion that states any law that limits the rights of a citizen to run and serve in local government must be narrowly tailored as to limit as few people as possible from serving. Your legislation is substantially broader than the existing language, clearly crossing the concerning line described by Chief Justice Vader. Current language clearly states that a council person cannot have employment with the state of Maryland, Harford County, or any municipality within the county. You have chosen to remove the word Maryland from the section of the charter. You've chosen to remove the word Harford from this section of the charter. So now, any state, any county, any entity that receives county funding, that's tens of thousands of residents within Harford County that you are saying cannot run and serve our community. This bill, as written, would not just bar a member from being on the public school teacher in Harford County. It would also prohibit a council member from working in Cecil County Sheriff's Office. It would prevent someone from being a Prince George's County or Baltimore City firefighter. There is no legal argument that could be made that these types of positions are in conflict with Harford County government. This bill is so poorly designed and thought through that the amount of amendments it would take to make it be in a legally tenable position would require us to completely rewrite it. And for that purpose, and for the reason we rejected the previous bill, it's just not movable. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. Mr. Chandradana.

Thank you, Council President. So, Jacob, you're going to vote on amendments that affect the budget. You're going to move money from one area of the budget to another, which only goes to the school. So is that not a conflict of interest that you're going to be able to vote on your own budget when we move $5 million or $7 million in the next couple amendments that are proceeding forward? Are you going to vote on those amendments?

Rhetorical question or?

Oh, no, it's a question. Are you going to vote on the amendments when they're brought forward to move money from one part of the budget that goes then is going to go to the school? Are you going to recuse yourself? Because if not, then you're voting on your own information there with the school. It's a simple question.

Again, I would encourage you, Tony, to do certain... Jacob, yes or no?

It's a simple question. If you don't want to answer it, just say you don't want to answer it.

I am answering the question, Tony. I'm encouraging you to do some reading. If you read the Ethics Board opinion in my case with the...

So you're going to vote on the amendments?

Excuse me, Council President, can I secure my time without being interrupted? Absolutely. Thank you. I would never interrupt someone else. Before... I would encourage the council vice president to do reading and to read the ethics ruling that Hartford County's ethics board appointed by our county executive and affirmed by the council ruled in my case, which said it is not a ethics violation for me to vote on the county budget. And I would also encourage you to look at ethics rulings from across the state of Maryland, which has found that the board of education has an impact so broad across the entire county that any sort of vote on the budget is not impacting me individually in a way that's substantially different from the public as a whole. When we vote to increase funding to the Board of Education, it's not like it's going to a subcategory called Jacob Bennett's Paycheck. It's going to make sure that schools that impact tens of thousands of children when you add in their families, hundreds of thousands of residents are better served. And so there's no individual impact on me that is different than the public at large. And that's why I have permission to vote on budget items.

Yeah.

First of all, Jacob, I didn't say it was an ethics violation. You brought that up. The only question I asked if you were going to vote on the amendments that the money is going to go to the school and you answered that question. So thank you very much. I do have a letter here from the county executive that's in support of Bill 2609, which I'll read, says allow voters to clarify the qualification of council members as originally intended by the Hartford County Charter. Drafters of our charter wisely intended to prevent the employees of county-funded agency from also serving on the council, which has the power to direct taxpayer funding back to those same agencies. Since the charter inception more than 50 years ago, Section 207 has been interpreted to prevent such obvious conflicts of interest until the Supreme Court recently suggested clarification was necessary in a case involving a school employee. Given that nearly 60% of Hartford County's budget goes to public schools and law enforcement, totaling more than half a billion dollars. The charter clarification offered in Bill 26-009 is essential to unbiased stewardship of taxpayer funds. Otherwise, the county council could one day be comprised entirely of public employees voting to increase their own agency's budgets and burdening our hardworking families and taxpayers with skyrocketing costs and runaway tax increases. Just as someone seeking a bank loan should not serve on the Loan Review Committee, a grant applicant should not be selecting the grants recipients and a job applicant shouldn't help decide who gets hired. Bill 29-009 prevents such conflicts and helps to ensure council members work for our taxpayers and not any other way around. So again, If you don't like the bill, that's fine. I understand that. But you didn't like the first bill. You didn't even let the first bill come on the floor. So you're attacking this bill. You didn't even let the other bill come on the floor. The entire council, except for me and Mr. Riley, it was poorly executed, sabotaged, and that's what it was. So unfortunately, but still, it's the people that should be able to go to the ballot to vote on it, not the seven of us up here. Thank you, Council President.

You're welcome. Ms. Robert.

Yes, thank you, Council President. So saying that the people have the right to vote, I agree. When the people go to the polls and they voted for Mr. Bennett, Mr. Penman, they knew one was a teacher, they knew one was a law enforcement officer. That was their choice to put those individuals in this seat. The language that is written in this bill takes out Everybody. We have the state government, we have the county government, we have municipalities, we have everything. If you were a DSS social worker, you can't be a county council person. If you were the school bus driver, in which some would advise that the school bus driver, but the school bus driver works for the school system too, so how can they choose on the budget? So no, the school bus driver can't. Everybody at this point in this would not qualify unless you are A, a small business owner, B, independently wealthy, C, retired. But you can't be retired from the state government, the county government, law enforcement, school teacher, because the pensions are all supplementally in the budget. So therefore, you are closing a door that anybody can be on the county council and so where you're sitting at is a non-diverse group of individuals sitting on the council now i did my research 46 states 46 states allow law enforcement and school teachers to be on the county council four states do not These 46 states do have different languages in their bills that serve and show how that can work. And so it doesn't make conflict. The conflict, I find, is that ruling on the budget, $15 million, say, for example. Mr. Bennett's not making $15 million, right? You know, in looking at law enforcement budget, we're only going so far with that as well. The school system gets federal, state, and local money. It is up to them to figure out how they want to disperse that. Some may be going to school buses. Some may be going to teachers. Some may be going to classrooms. But us making the decision on the budget, we're looking at the overarching envelope of the budget and saying, okay, this is what you need to utilize this money for. But because we're making that decision does not mean that Mr. Bennett or Mr. Penman are saying, okay, well, now that we got an extra 5 million, my salary is gonna go up an extra 5 million. That's not how it works. He is not HR. He is not in charge of the money. And that is where I have the problem of what I'm seeing. People have a lack of understanding of what this is saying. This bill is so broad that it is making an open door of a Pandora box that it will be fought in court very often. And it is causing more legal issues than not. I understand what Council Member Giordano, sorry Tony. I can never get it right. I hear what he is trying to do. It's just not going about it with the right language, the right way. I don't think everyone's sitting up here double dipping. For example, and I'm going to say this to you. I'm a private practitioner, but if the school calls me tomorrow and says, we want you to contract and do therapy in our schools, am I double dipping?

And that's the question.

If someone asks you to insure something within the schools or within law enforcement, is that double dipping?

I can't do that.

So that's exactly...

They get their own insurance elsewhere.

So that's exactly... And it's covered by the county. What I'm saying...

Mr. Janitor Dennett. So, Sergeant Penman retired before he sat on this seat. He knew if he won, he had to retire to sit on this seat. So, to bring that up, and then secondly, the first bill that I brought forward that Megan looked at and said was okay, you referenced 47 emails in the Aegis. They asked for a Freedom of Information Act, which they got, and they found that the 47 emails came mostly from the Hartford County Education Association. It was most of those people that sent an email. So for you to say 47 people, Trump, 240,000 people that should be able to vote on this thing was just inexcusable to say 47 people, and you went by the 47 people. But You know what? I understand. It is what it is. I understand about this bill. I'm just bringing it forward. So, um, and thank you for the conversation. I certainly appreciate it.

Mr. Riley. Okay. Just so you know what happened last time, Tony tried to bring this forward and it got squashed by the rest of the council. I personally think this debate is good. That's the reason why I second it last time, so everybody could hear all sides of what's going on. Second, I don't have any problem with conflict of interest, two paychecks. Whether it's a police officer, a teacher, a janitor, I have no problem with that at all. What the problem I do have is why aren't we taking it to the voters? To me, that's the only point. Let the voters decide. We know in the history of Harford County, there's never been a teacher that has served on this council. Because the court across the street, and they even did it in Jacob's case, they decided that, hey, he could not serve. He had to take it down to Annapolis before he could get that overturned. Because it's been just Those judges over here breathe, live, work, Harford County, Harford County knew. That's the reason why Sergeant Penman stepped off. That's the reason why I stepped off. And so I just want to make sure everybody's on the understanding of how it got to where it is today. We would not be having this debate if Tony would have not brought this back. And I don't know why anybody on this dais would not want the people to decide. I mean, we're representing people, so why not allow those? Then we won't have this, well, should they, shouldn't they let the people decide? That's what it's all about, and that's the reason why I agree that we should go forward with this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Riley. Ms. Hollins?

Thank you. I will say that when the voters elect a person for this position, they are making the decision. They know if you're a teacher or a cop or a realtor or whatever it is that you are. Um, so I do think that the voters are deciding. And, um, as far as the bill goes, it's extremely broad and if cops and teachers can serve in our community, they should be able to serve on the council. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Siles.

Mr. Bennett, just a quick factual clarification. The initial judge in my case was not from Harford County. They brought in an outside judge from Howard County because Harford County judges didn't think it was appropriate for them to take the case. So to Councilman Riley's point, I just wanted to clarify that no Harford County judge ever ruled in my case.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. And then for me, you know, I always say the council keeps fantastic records. We can go back years past and we can check people's voting records. So, Mr. Giandradano, in 21, you voted in the same process against term limits the same way we did the other night against your bill. Mr. Wagner made the motion. Mr. Bula seconded and you voted along with everyone else on the council for the same process. I don't know why you're making such an issue of it. Uh, it has happened again, multiple times. It's a part of the process. Um, the thing that I'd like you to do for me tonight is defined double dipping because you voted for retired county employees. come back here and work part-time. Is that double-dipping? They're getting two paychecks from the county? They're getting a retirement and a check? Not a retirement. They're not?

I just said not retirement. Okay. So you're saying that back in 2021... I think that's the date, yes, sir. ...that a bill was brought forward and squashed before it got out on the public floor?

Yes, sir. Mr. Legge, am I correct?

Yes And you voted in favor And then again for me, I just think the bills too restrictive We've seen the involvement by mr. Bennett and

time and time again, how he stands up for all kinds of legislation across this dais. Doesn't matter whether it's party-lined, doesn't matter what it is, if it's for those citizens, the best for the citizens, he supports it. And I agree with that. And I support that with all of us. This division on this council started December 5th, 2022. And we all know why. And I think it's time for this to stop. I have no problem bringing this to a vote. You want the citizens to hear and vote? That's what we're going to do tonight. We're going to have a public hearing tonight. We have, I think, 33 speakers signed up. I'm going to let everybody go to the three minutes. We're going to sit here tonight, and we're going to hear from the speakers.

What's different, Council President, about tonight than a couple weeks ago when you didn't want to?

You have said three or four times. You have made a point. To say that you wanted the citizens to speak. Mr. Riley just backed you up on that. So tonight we're going to hear the citizens speak. So my question to you is, why wouldn't you let that happen two weeks ago?

I just explained it. Okay.

I just explained it.

So tonight you're good with it, but two weeks ago you weren't.

I just explained it. Okay. You've made an issue out of this. Mr. Riley just backed you up. So tonight we're going to go the three minutes, and that is my call. Good. According to our rules and procedures, it is my call as council president.

Mr. Riley. Let's not fool ourselves. The people that are going to speak tonight do not represent all of Harford County. So, again, I'd like to have a fair playing field. All of us represent probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 20,000, 25,000 voters. And so even if we have 2,000 people speak tonight, that is not a representation of the voters of Hartford County. And so all I'm saying is, again, I don't have any problem if you're a janitor, if you're a police officer. It doesn't matter to me. I'm just saying, why don't we let the voters decide? And so don't give this, well, we're going to let the voters talk tonight. Yes, you are going to let some of the voters talk tonight, but you're not going to let the encompass of most of the voters speak tonight. But if you take it to the ballot box, there you will have most of the voters who will speak, whether pro or con.

So you're right. The people that took the time to sign up to show up are here tonight to speak, and we're going to hear from them. We also have had people call. We've also had people email, as you're aware. So we've heard from them. And this is the process that we have in place. This public hearing is for this bill. And this bill will run through the process. It'll get voted on at our next meeting. And whatever the process is, if you guys don't like the outcome, maybe you like the outcome.

I don't know. I don't have a problem with the outcome. What I have a problem with is you misstating that the voters will decide because of the speakers that are in this room. I'm not misspeaking. I'm talking about the speakers that are here tonight. All right. Which is a very small percentage of voters.

But it is the factual. Everyone had an opportunity to sign up and speak here tonight.

Everybody has an opportunity to vote.

These are the folks that have signed up to speak. Okay? Anyone else? Mr. Bennett.

And for the record, we have a representative democracy. We all have districts that put us here. We don't have a direct democracy where every bill that comes across us has to go to the community at large. You know, people tried that in the past at the beginning of democracy and found it to be incredibly inefficient. We have a process where that first step in the process so that we represent the communities that we represent when we cast a vote. And then if the communities don't like the votes that we cast, then they have a process to put someone else in our seat.

Mr. Bennett. I understand what you're saying. I'm not going to argue this anymore, but you were elected. She was elected. I was elected. So was he. But there's two people in this dais that weren't elected by the people. Okay.

But they elected the central committee that chose who replaced them.

We decided who replaced them. Let's get it right. Let's again, have a fair playing field. Let's speak to the public so that everybody understands. We decided who sat in those two seats.

The central committee elect that was elected by the community at large. then sent us three candidates that we chose from.

Is there three people in each one of those seats over there, Mr. Bennett? Come on.

Let's just move on. Your point's well made. I know. Ms. Dixon, do we have anyone signed up?

We do, Mr. President. I believe we are at 32 this evening.

OK. So again, I'm going to ask you to please be respectful of the speakers. We want to have the recognized speaker speaking. I don't really want to hear from anyone else so that we can get through this as quickly as possible. And we are going to stay at the three-minute level. Call your first speaker.

Jerry Eaton, followed by Christy Crawford-Smith, Crystal Ruffinock, and Hunter Baker.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip.

My name is Jerry Eaton. Zip code is 21014.

Whenever you're ready.

Good evening, Council President Vincente, council members, and members of the public. My name is Jerry Eaton, and I serve as the president of the Harford County Deputy Sheriff's Union. I'm here tonight in strong opposition to Bill 26-009. I want to call this bill exactly what it is. It's a targeted attempt to silence working public servants and prevent certain people from having a voice in local government. Bill 26-S009 specifically singles out employees of the Sheriff's Office and the Board of Education while also broadly attempting to block county employees and public servants from serving on the county council. This is not reform. This is exclusion. The councilman says the bill is about ethics and conflicts of interest. Hartford County has ethics laws. They have disclosure requirements. They have public accountability already built into the government. If the conflict exists, there's already legal mechanisms to address it. What this bill really does is it tells our deputies, our correctional officers, our teachers, our school employees, and other public servants that all their firsthand experience somehow disqualifies them from public office. And frankly, that makes no sense. The people who understand public safety the best and staffing shortages and budget realities and school conditions and emergency response, these are the people that are doing the jobs every single day. This legislation would remove experienced voices from the ballot and replace them with career politicians, business interests, individuals who have far less understanding of how a government actually operates. And I also want to be honest about the timing and the optics here. The sheriff's office has become an easy political target anytime the budget is discussed. Deputies are asked to work longer hours, deal with staffing shortages, respond to public demands, and still somehow they're portrayed as the problem when they choose to participate in public service outside of their regular duties. Serving your community as a law enforcement professional should not strip your rights away to serve as an elected official. Public service should encourage civic participation, not restrict it. Nobody questions business owners, insurance executives, politically connected individuals from serving in office while they maintain their own outside interests, but somehow deputies and teachers are the problem? The double standard here is impossible to ignore. At the end of the day, voters should decide who represent them, not artificial barriers created to keep certain groups out of office. If the citizens of Harvard County believe a deputy sheriff or a teacher or a correctional officer or any county employee is the best person for the job, they should have the right to elect that person. This bill weakens representation, it limits voter choice, and it punishes public servants simply because of where they work. I strongly urge this council to reject this legislation. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Let's no applause, please. Name and zip.

Good evening, Christy Crawford-Smith, 21132. I'm here to speak in opposition of Bill 26009, otherwise known as the revised double-dip bill. This bill is extremely discriminatory and chooses who can and cannot serve the community based on their chosen career path. Some legal experts have already indicated that this bill alone would be unconstitutional. So if passed, I think it's safe to assume the county will spend years in court trying to settle this out. This bill is so poorly worded that I'm not even sure the maker realizes what's being presented. With that said, picture it, Hartford County, 30 years from now, our resident decides after a long career in public service that they would like to make a difference in a new way, only to learn that they are barred from serving on the council because of a bill that was drafted in 2026 without any forethought about excluding people who are collecting a pension after a career in public service. Another problematic example is using the term any county or state entity. So that means a social worker who is employed by DSS in, let's say, Baltimore County but also resides in Harford County cannot serve on this council. Or a teacher who works for Cecil County Public Schools but resides in Bel Air would also be barred. Here we are once again wasting everyone's time deciding on an unnecessary bill that has been decided in the courts twice. Both Mr. Bennett and Sergeant Penman prevailed in their suits. But we know why we are here tonight, because those two people are not very well liked by our county executive. He has sent someone else to do his bidding. This bill is not about a conflict of interest, it is a target. Conflict is virtually unavoidable. It exists for everyone who is a business or property owner, also those with immediate family members or spouses who work for the county government, HCPS, the library, or any part of public safety. Having a child who attends HCPS could be viewed as a conflict. Perhaps holding insurance contracts for HCPS bus contractors whose funds are included in the budget may be viewed as a contract or conflict as well. Even the term double dipping is inaccurate. Having two jobs actually should result in two salaries. Someone who dedicates their career to public service has a salary negotiated and ratified long before this budget ever is released. If someone has a problem voting on individual salaries, why does the council get to vote on a budget that includes their own salaries every single year? And previous councils have even voted on amendments to increase their salaries. What's next? Will we see similar legislation drafted that excludes people based on their religion, race, gender, or country of origin? It is the responsibility of the voters to decide who they want to represent them, not some half-wit bill that was drafted out of vengeance. The last time a similar bill was submitted, you voted no, most of you at least. And we are still here talking about the same tired issue. Only this time it's worse, because this bill was so poorly written that... it's excluding the majority of working people in this county. So I'm urging you to vote no once again. And let's put this issue to rest so Harford County can finally move forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, ma'am. Name is it?

Crystal Rufinat, 21014. I am a third-generation resident and educator of Harford County. I want to start by saying thank you to all of the council members who voted against this bill under its first introduction. I first want to speak from the educator perspective. Educators are professional, hardworking, and committed to something greater than ourselves. We must work well with others to be successful. We are often required to learn new things at a moment's notice and sacrifice because we do not have the time or the resources needed. Councilman Bennett has done an outstanding job in his role, as have educators across the 46 states in our great country that see the value in our service. This bill also eliminates the opportunity for thousands of others to serve. those in law enforcement, those who work for a nonprofit, or those who work for a government-funded entity or a nonprofit in another county. This bill unfairly targets thousands of citizens, and it isn't about double-dipping. This bill is part of a movement to sow division amongst the citizens of Hartford County. Councilman Jan Giordano, you can't even be respectful to your fellow council members. I strongly disagree the majority of Harford citizens are dishonest and care more about themselves than their community. You say take it to the voters. It's so poorly written and you clearly don't even understand the implications of your own bill. You want citizens to dive into this without the legal and legislative resources that council members have. Even if it was written well, we don't have the time and the resources you do. This is part of what we elected you to do. I want my council member to be impacted by the decisions that they make. I value having a council member who directly serves constituents in their nine to five. Most run for office to make a difference. I also reject the idea an educator can't care about public safety or that a law enforcement officer wouldn't want funded schools. I believe the greatest threat isn't a conflict of interest but elected officials who are out of touch with the experience and the needs of the citizens of the county they serve. Elections reveal what elected officials are willing to compromise. You can't build a government or legislation on the premise you're serving constituents who are self-serving and don't care about their community. If you truly believe that, go somewhere else where there's better people and go live and run for office there. I believe the spirit of this bill reflects the values of its maker and not those of District C or Hartford. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Name and zip, sir.

Hunter Baker, 21001. Good evening, council president and county council. As a candidate for county council district D and a teacher for a non-public school, this bill likely would not prevent my candidacy, but still I don't support the bill. While the intent appears to be to clear up confusion in the charter, the outcome is disenfranchisement. It is also a political attack on a sitting councilman that would force him to choose between his career in public service on the council and his career as a teacher. It makes sense to have a separation of powers within local government. But the justification for this bill assumes, though, that a county council person who is a deputy or a teacher is voting on their own pay. In the case of both, that is not the case. Setting a department's budget is not the same as giving oneself a raise. Both positions have their own internal pay scales determined by years of experience in contract negotiations. In both the Bennett and subsequent Penman cases, the courts determined that in the current charter, these types of employees are able to hold elected office concurrently with their day jobs. Preventing working class people from being able to hold elected office is the wrong direction for our county to go in. After researching bills and policies like this across the country, this one stands out as uncommon. Many local charters leave carve outs for educators, even if they are a bit more restrictive sometimes about deputies and police officers. And sometimes they come with a clear list of topics that educators should recuse themselves from voting on. If conflicts of interest stem from the council's primary employment, perhaps the council should not be permitted to have other jobs or income streams while on the council. With salaries set to the median income of the county, Public service should not be restricted to independently wealthy citizens with flexible schedules. Perhaps there should be greater focus on conflicts of interest moving forward. There is room for conflict of interest for insurance salesmen, real estate agents, retirees with pensions, contractors, business owners, homeowners, and more. This bill misunderstands double dipping. Typically, this refers to someone getting paid twice for the same work through holding dual offices or collecting a pension and a salary from the same source. Yet someone working and getting paid for working two jobs is where the issue is? Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Noah Hutton, followed by Candace Hart, Ron Stuchinski, and Terrence Rogers.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip.

Noah Hutton, 21227.

Hello, my name is Noah Hutton. I was born and raised in Hartford County and have now made an intentional decision to teach at Edgewood High School for the last 11 years. I'm here to speak against Bill 26009. I'm pleading the county council honors the court's ruling and stops trying to prevent elected officials from running due to their public service positions, such as educator and police force. Individuals in these positions have daily experiences that inform them of the supports that are needed throughout this county. If they are fairly elected, their voice and position should be respected and honored. These individuals should not be prevented from completing their elected duty and speaking up for who they represent. They should not need to defend themselves repeatedly after being fairly elected. We should be focusing on actual problems the county is facing and Like the budget challenges many county institutions such as HCC, HCPS, and HCPL have been dealing with for years. Why should a few elected officials be able to silent the voices of citizens by preventing and removing elected officials from the office that speak for those citizens? I'm not an expert on what would be considered an ethical conflict of interest for a county council member. But judges much more educated on the topic than me have have sided with the public service workers twice. Please focus on how we can work together to improve and bring our county together and not divide and disrupt the work elected officials and public service workers are completing every day for others. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Name and zip, ma'am.

Candice Hart, 21085. Mr. President, if I may, I just want to, for the record, I do not have her address on file. Do you need it? I can give it to you when you get a chance. Okay. Respond to the email I sent you. That would be great. Okay.

Good evening. My name is Candace Hart and I am a resident of Harford County and a candidate for the house of delegates in district seven B I'm urging the council not to advance bill two 6 0 0 9 in its current form. This issue is not new. It has already been directly addressed by Maryland courts. including in Bennett versus Hartford County, where the court held that public employment such as teaching does not automatically create a disqualifying conflict of interest for serving on the county council. That decision reflects an important principle. Conflict of interest must be based on actual direct financial or decision making conflicts, not simply the category of employment someone holds. My concern is that this bill moves away from that standard and instead treats broad categories of public service as disqualifying. That raises the question of where the line is drawn between genuine ethical conflict and simply having experience in public service. Ethics rules should address real conflicts when they occur, not exclude entire groups of qualified public servants from serving in elected office. For those reasons, I am urging the council not to advance this amendment and allow time for a narrower and more clearly defined approach. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Hold up. Stu to hold up till they get a seat. Whenever you're ready, sir.

Ron Stuchinski, 21001. Let me start by saying first, Jacob, I have no problem with you.

I think you've done a great job. I'm starting right there, just so you know.

That's how I personally feel.

Good evening, council members. I'm here tonight to strongly urge you to support Bill 26-009 and allow the voters of Harford County to decide the issue for themselves. We continue to hear the argument that the voters directly already decided. That's simply not true. District F elected a council member, Mr. Bennett, who openly challenged Charter 207. That is undisputed. But voters in District A through E never had any opportunity to weigh in on what has now become A court mandated reinterpretation of the charter. And let's be honest about what that is. This is a change from the previous interpretation and application of the charter itself. Whether you agree with the court ruling or not, the reality is that more than half of the county had absolutely no voice in this decision. That is not how major charter issues should be handled in a representative government. If this council rejects the bill, you're not protecting democracy, you're limiting it. You're taking away the public's ability to decide an issue that directly affects them. This decision is bigger than any one council member, bigger than political affiliations, and bigger than the council itself. That is exactly why this question belongs on the ballot, where the voters, all the voters, can decide. We've already seen bad faith behavior surrounding this issue, including Ms. Robert's rejection of the bill and attempts to influence the process behind the scenes, such as the school union president mobilizing 47 emails through her email list, coincidentally, all received by counsel within 24 hours of the rejection. That only reinforces why transparency and genuine public input matter. I also want to address the attacks against Councilman Tony Gee. Frankly, I find it absurd that a small business owner who insures a bus company is somehow being accused of double dipping. If that is now the standard, then virtually no one with a private sector career or business relationship could ever serve on his council. The real issue is not operating a business or providing service in the private sector. The issue is whether someone is directly receiving a taxpayer-funded paycheck. Those are not the same thing, and pretending that they are is misleading and intellectually dishonest. At the end of the day, this should not be about protecting political interest or controlling the outcome. It should be about trusting the voters. If you truly believe in representative government, then let the people decide. Thank you, Jim, for saying exactly what most of us think. That can't be here to say it today. Most of these people up here speaking are the ones that themselves benefit by voters not having a voice, and most I've never seen here before ever in my time coming to council. So who do they represent exactly of the 240-plus K residents? Ms. Imhoff, you said that what if they forego their paychecks, right? The problem is, forego the paycheck or not, they still vote on where our money goes regardless. So that's how that works. Most of these speakers aren't even speaking on the issue at hand, which is let the citizens vote. Please pass Bill 26-009 and put this issue on the ballot where it belongs, with the people. Thank you.

Thank you. Evening, sir. Name and zip. Good evening.

Terrence Rogers, 21009.

And again, I'm sorry, Mr. President. I will need the address on file when you have a chance.

Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Again, my name is Terrence Rogers. I'm a candidate for sheriff. But I rise today because I am a concerned constituent of this county. I rise today in concern for this double-dip bill. After reading the bill, again, it is so badly written. that it is not funny. It targets those who have committed their lives to service, to answering our calls in times of crisis, and to coming to our rescue and teaching our kids. And that is a slap in the face. This cannot be a political issue. It is very clearly personal. And we cannot bring personal issues here in these council chambers. Again, it targets those who have been pulling us out of crisis. They deserve more honor and respect than that. They stand in the gap in between where policy is made and where policy is experienced. And so we have to allow their experience to be put to use. I had three minutes, but I'll only use a minute and 30. I would ask that we would reflect and answer these questions rhetorically but reflectively. How many lives have you saved? How many people are still alive because you performed life-saving measures? How many missing kids or vulnerable adults have you recovered? Let's ask the question, how many screaming mothers have you consoled after letting them know that their children are dead and no longer coming home? How many kids have you fed breakfast because they do not have food at home? How many kids have you had to redirect, pull their attention back into the learning environment because they stayed up all night listening to their mother and father fight at home? How much money have you had to take out of your pocket and decorate your classroom to make sure kids have a shot at success? These people deserve a seat on the dais. And so I ask that you take your hands off of them. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Monica McHale, followed by Ronnie Davis, Michelle Christman, and Charles Hagan.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip.

Monica McHale, 21015. At first when I heard this bill, the idea of no double dipping sounded good in theory. But after listening to tonight's arguments and discussion on my way here, I decide to not support this bill. As a federal employee, there is something called the Hatch Act in which we are not able to run for office while holding a position. You cannot run for a partisan political position while being a federal employee. And I believe the same goes for the state. But as for the county, this case has been decided on twice by the judicial system, which is a branch of our government. We have three, legislative, executive, and judicial. We as a county, even if we revised our charter, are not authorized to supersede the state of Maryland. It's not authorized. This discussion that we're having today should really be sent to your delegate, should be taken up in a state legislature, not really the county. And it has been decided on twice by judges who are not ignorant people, who have a law education, who get appointed to office in many cases, and they are very well educated people just as we are here. And before you choose a council member or anybody to be your council member, in the very least, you should know their jobs. I know my council member. I can ask Alexa about my council member. I can say, Alexa, what does Tony G do? has an insurance company, AAG, hires 16 employees, according to Alexa. Not sure if it's an accurate statement. I can tell you what his earnings are, but that's, you know, public, it's a lot more than a policeman and a teacher, just to say that. But you should know these things prior to voting on your council member. You should be aware of their jobs prior to voting on your council member. And from what I've seen, I do believe people have the right to say what they want to say, as Councilman Riley has expressed, and I do believe we need to make informed choices. But the fact is, again, we are part of the state of Maryland, and this needs to be uniform standard across the state of Maryland on who is eligible and what agencies can be excluded from running for office. I don't think it's up to us to supersede the state of Maryland. Our elected officials are constantly fighting with each other, and when you look at it from a different perspective, you may see it as the private entity or the bigger fish might be trying to shoe out the smaller fish, if you want to call it. You have to take it and do your homework. We are citizens. We need to do our jobs, and we need to know who our council people are that represent us. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Name and zip, please.

Ronnie Davis, 21014. Good evening, council president and council members. I stand here tonight to support the right of teachers, public officers, police officers, firefighters, and other public servants to serve on our county council. A council should represent the people of this county, and that means having voices at the table from every part of our community. As a Rotarian, I often think about the rotary four-way test. Is it the truth? Is it fair to all concerned? But two parts really stick here. Will it build goodwill and better friendships, and will it be beneficial to all concerned? Excluding or discouraging public servants from serving on the council does not build goodwill. It creates division and sends the message that the very people who dedicate their lives to serving this community somehow should not have a voice in leading it. And it is a beneficial to all concerned. I would argue no. Teachers, police officers, firefighters and other public servants are among the people who know this county best because they speak with the residents every single day. Teachers hear directly from families about the struggles they face. Police officers and firefighters see firsthand where communities need support and resources. These professions are built around listening to and serving citizens, not selling something to them. Business leaders absolutely deserve representation as well, but they should not be the only perspective representatives, we may not really know how and what their business is, and if there's a conflict of interest. A strong council comes from balance, diversity of experience, and real community connection. And frankly, the argument about double dipping is ridiculous. Public servants are taxpayers, residents, parents, volunteers, and citizens of Harford County, just like everyone else. Serving on a council is not a special privilege. It really is a public service. We should want experienced, community-minded people stepping up to serve, not creating barriers to keep them out. If we truly want representative government, then we need councils made up of people who understand the daily realities and needs of our citizens from multiple perspectives. And as far as taking this to the ballot box, I've seen many of these types of issues taken to the ballot box, and they're written in language that make it difficult to understand as its legalese. So people many times ignore the question at the ballot box or upset after as it wasn't what they thought it was. Is a ballot decision the way to really go? This should not be about politics. It should be about fairness, inclusion, and building a council that truly reflects the people of Harford County. And that is why I'm against bill 26. Oh nine, the double dip bill. Please vote. No. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Good name.

Is it, um, hi, I'm Michelle Chrisman 2 1 1 3 2. Uh, thank you so much for having me this evening. I appreciate your time. Um, I am running for Maryland house of delegates, 35 a Hartford and Cecil county, Maryland. I'm also the legislative chair for the Harford County Republican Women. Today, Maryland received a warning shot we cannot afford to ignore. Standard and Poor's just downgraded our state's bond outlook from stable to negative. That doesn't happen by accident. It happens when spending grows faster than revenue, when structural deficits pile up, and when policymakers delay tough decisions. Right now, Maryland is staring at a projected $598 million shortfall next year, ballooning to more than $3.4 billion within just a few years. Spending is growing at 5.6% annually, while revenue lags behind at just 3.5%. That gap is not sustainable, and the bond markets know it. When Annapolis feels pressure, they don't tighten their belts first. They shift costs to counties like ours. That's why this moment matters so much for Harford County. Harford County's proposed FY27 budget recognizes this reality. It prepares us to absorb potential cost shifts without raising taxes on hardworking families. That's responsible leadership. Now let's be clear, this is not the time to pile on more spending. Public schools are already seeing a 9.2% increase. Education is important, but so is fiscal responsibility. If we ignore the warning signs now, we will be forced into painful tax increases later. And at the same time, we have to ask serious questions about accountability right here at home. Public servants like my dad who committed his life to service as a retired volunteer firefighter of 61 years who saved more lives than our county could even measure. EMS personnel, police officers and teachers absolutely should have the opportunity to serve on the Harford County Council. They bring valuable real world experience our community needs. Ten years from now, my children who are sitting over there may want to be a teacher, EMS personnel, police officer, and sit on the same Harford County Council. My children should have the opportunity to serve our community just like you are today, and I do thank you for all of your time and service. When taxpayers are tightening their belts, The last thing we should see are policies that allow for financial arrangements that erode public trust. Government should live by the same standards families do. Earn honestly, spend wisely, and be accountable for every dollar. This is a moment for conservative leadership. It means living within our means. It means preparing for what's coming, not pretending it won't arrive. And it means protecting taxpayers, not growing government. Maryland has been put on notice. The question is whether we will listen and lead. or continue down a path that risks higher taxes, more debt, and less accountability. In Harford County, we must choose discipline, we must choose responsibility, and we must choose to put taxpayers first. And I thank you very much for your time and have a great evening.

Thank you, ma'am. You're welcome. Good evening, sir.

Name and zip. Chaz Hagen, 21014. Thank you, council members and president of the council, for your time this evening. I'm a retired HCPS employee and worked in the school system for 28 years, 18 as principal of Hartford Tech and South Hampton Middle School. And I've continued to work as a substitute in the school system. I'm working tomorrow. In addition, I'm running for county council seat that Mr. Giordano I said that right every time I practiced it today, but not now, that he's giving up to run for council president. To the point, I do not support the double dipping bill. I actually don't even like the term because it carries a negative connotation, except when applied to ice cream cones. Then I actually prefer it. So I'll use the term dual employment. There should not be a penalty for working for the county. Over 7,200 people work for the county and the school system combined. That's 4.5% of the voting population and 5.4% of the working population of the county. So we're just going to eliminate them as possible council members. No custodians, water and sewer workers, teachers, secretaries, permits and licenses, parks and rec employees, deputies. So what next? If you're president of the local rec council or any community organization that receives money and or consideration from the county, would they be eligible to vote on anything? I understand the concern is great relative to conflict of interest. That is why we need to elect trustworthy people. And again, I do not support the bill. My second point, Kind of goes to what Mr. Gian Giordano said. When he brought this up, he was shut down immediately. And I'll tell you, watching it was a little upsetting. It looked orchestrated. It looked orchestrated by the rest of the council when he was trying to bring this issue forward. The vote went down quickly down the line to the councilman, who would directly be affected by the bill. Did he recuse himself from that vote? No. Did the council president say anything about that? No. So not doing so, that was a perfect example of what could be a possible conflict of interest voting on whether this bill should even go forward or not when it concerns you. So the way the vote proceeded was exactly the way we need to worry about conflict of interest by council members regarding anything. The actions, in my opinion, were in complete disagreement with their stance which shouldn't happen. To me, it was very puzzling. Stopping the reading of the dual employment bill by someone affected by the reading voting on it, I just, again, just didn't understand. It seemed to be a conflict to me, and it's the appearance of impropriety. I do appreciate everything, the discussion, and I really wish that discussion would have happened last time. because I think many people would have had a better understanding. I appreciate knowing everything that you said about the ruling. That is government working. That is us talking to each other, and that's what we need to do. Again, my last piece is very simple. I'm against this bill. Have a great day. I planned for two minutes, but I still went over that. Thank you, sir.

Jessica Riley Hammond, followed by Dionne Gunthery, Dominic Heath, and Ann Hartig.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip.

Jessica Riley Hammond, 21015. Good evening, council members and council presidents. I want to speak on Bill 26-009. First, I want to address the term double dipping because I think it's misleading. Double dipping means someone is being paid twice for the same job, and that's not what's happening here. These individuals are doing two separate jobs and are paid for each one accordingly. Second, I understand the argument that this should go on the ballot for voters to decide, but voters have already decided. They decided when they elected these individuals to office. Constituents knew who these candidates were, what careers they held, and they voted for them anyway. If someone believes that presents a conflict, they are free to vote differently, but the voters have already spoken. This issue has already been litigated multiple times at taxpayer expense, and the courts have ruled these individuals are eligible to serve. If this amendment passes, there is a very real chance taxpayers will once again be paying to relitigate the issue that has already been decided simply because some did not like the outcome. And I'll say this. I find this bill to be the opposite of conservative. If we're talking about conservative values, those are usually limited government, fiscal responsibility, and trusting people to make their own decisions. This bill does the opposite. It creates more government involvement and revisiting who is who is eligible to serve after voters have already made their choice and may cost taxpayers more money to defend in court. And the language in this amendment is broad and vague, leaving far too much open to interpretation about who it could impact now and in the future. The voters have already spoken and the courts have already ruled continuing to revisit this issue. feels less about addressing a conflict and more personal than principled. At some point, we have to respect the decisions that have already been made. I trust the people of Harford County to choose their representatives, and I believe those choices should be respected. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Call your next speaker.

Dionne Guthrie, followed by Dominic Heath.

Name and zip code, please. Deon Guthrie, 21085. I rise also to the citizens of our county have a right to vote on this issue. This is a major issue, and I'm listening to both sides, and both sides have some very good arguments. The problem is that this thing has been litigated, it's been in Annapolis, it's been under the Supreme Court, Appellate Court, everything else. If we remember For I don't know how many years, this was actually a law in Harford County. I remember Slutsky, when he got elected to the council, he had to give up his job as a teacher. And we've had a number of people that happened to. And this has been resurrected now. And they just focus on, for the most part, it comes up, it's the teachers and the deputies. But there's also a lot of other people in the county that could be affected. Janitors, there's all types of other people. And I agree with Jim Riley. I think that in order to really get to feel the people, I know there's a lot of people in here who feel like, well, the public out there, you know, they're not stupid. They're not dumb. You can't say that the people out there don't know how to vote and you're afraid to let it go to the people because they're not going to vote the way you want them to vote. Well, if they don't vote the way you want them to vote, you know, then your job as elected officials and sitting there on council, you know, you have to do what the public wants, regardless of your own personal opinion. You certainly have a right to have your personal opinion, and you have the dais to give your opinion, and that can sway people one way or the other. But for us to sit back and continue this argument, it's not fair. Just like the other gentleman said, I mean, the amount of people here is an eyedrop compared to the entire county. The entire county is 267,000 people. You have approximately 86,000 Republicans, you've got 68,000 Democrats, and you have, don't forget, the 45,000 independents. Now, do we want to turn our back on them? Should one council member sitting up there have a right And that's what happened the last time. Though it took five, any one of them five that changed their mind, the thing would have went forward. So why does one council member have the right to deny over 100,000 people the right to vote? That's what you're doing. Think about that. doing this bill one way or the other. I'm not standing for or against it. What I'm standing for is the citizens of our county. One council member should not have authority and a right to tell 100,000 voters out there that you don't have a right to vote. So give them that right. I understand everybody's argument. And you always hear it, you know, they're afraid that the public is not going to vote their way. Well, this is a very difficult decision. It's been actually in the county for umpteen years, and I'm through.

Thank you, sir.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip. Dominic Heath, 21047.

All right. Good evening, council members and fellow community members. I am here in opposition of this bill. I've spent the last couple days trying to figure out how to broach this subject with all of you. First, I thought about the emotional route. Focusing on what I believe the council should consist of. To me, the council should be a governing representative of the community. They are the governing body of our community after all. Why should it not be made up of all types of people? Why would we seek to exclude valued members of the community from serving on the council that has a large impact on their life? So then I focus on the facts. Fact is, HCAPS teachers are not government employees. Another fact is that this has already been ruled on by the Supreme Court of Maryland. They said, quote, the doctrine of incompatible positions does not preclude a teacher employed by the Harford County Board of Education from simultaneously serving as a member of the Harford County Council. The court then, in fact, applied a canon of construction favoring candidate eligibility to resolve the ambiguity. The court itself has said that the ambiguous language should be corrected, but as their interpretation was favorable, why would our correction of this ambiguity not be as such? They did not see this as an issue, or they would have ruled unfavorably. As the court said, quote, there is no present or prospective conflict of interest between the positions. The councilman has said this is about double dipping, but that's implying that something illegal, improper, or sinister is happening, when in reality the courts have already ruled that that is not what is happening here. Now, I have read this bill. This would exclude not only current positions, persons from serving on the council, but would also exclude any future persons still collecting a paycheck or pension from any branch of government. You made sure to call out the Sheriff's Department and Board of Education. Why do you want to exclude important members of our community? I constantly hear criticism from older generations that no one wants to work anymore. Why are we going after folks that want to work two jobs for our benefit? Who cares if it goes to one person? The county still has to pay two positions. This is not a cost-saving effort. At the end of all this, the fact is this. This is voter suppression. Why do you feel the need to limit who can even run? The people should have the opinion to vote for who they want, and the voters have made their choice. And the fact is, you don't like the result. So rather than win in the voting booth, which we know you can't, you are choosing to exclude. When ambiguous language is interpreted in a narrowing fashion to remove a subset of people from eligibility to even run, you are removing our choices as voters. And that fact is voter suppression. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, ma'am.

Hi, my name is Ann Hardig at 21015. I'm here to provide input on the proposed double-dip charter amendment. At first glance, the amendment seems to have good intentions. to protect residents' interest on council decisions. With reflection and further review, I can't help but also look at the implications of this amendment if approved. First, many people work two or more jobs to make ends meet or to supplement their income. So saying it's wrong or prohibiting county residents to hold two county jobs and reap the rewards seems unreasonable and wrong to me. If they do work, they should be entitled to the pay. Second, limiting the scope of qualified candidates who apply and want to serve in the county denies many employed residents who are aspired to serve the opportunity to directly affect the decisions which impact their own community. Time constraints and intersecting interests of working people already reduces the applicant pool of people seeking to engage to mostly selected, retired, and independently financed persons. Despite their best of intentions to serve, these same folks cannot be as intimately familiar with the nitty-gritty of many issues coming before this committee. Different people from all types of public service employment bring different experiences and ideas to the discussion table. All are valuable to making informed decisions for the betterment of Hartford County. Why would we want to further limit the people varying expertise from civic engagement in our community? While concerns of conflicts of interest are valid, perhaps the answer is not to bar these from participating. but to encourage them to share their knowledge by running for council member positions, but also hold them procedurally accountable to recusing themselves from votes that directly impact their profession and rigorously apply sanctions or punitive remedies for violations of ethics and procedure. Please join me in supporting people who want to serve this county by opposing the double-dip amendment and installing procedural safeguards which encourage compliance. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.

Matthew Brown, followed by Jeffrey Beck and Tina Graff.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip. Matthew Brown, 21015. Matthew Brown. Hello, everybody. I'm sure you used to hear me, someone who's being a county executive candidate. But also, let's talk about this double-dip bill for what it is. The definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting things to change. That makes you crazy. And the worst part about this is I've already stood up here and had to re-educate the idea of government. Here's a fun fact. Even with the 260,000 people who live here, the 220,000 that actually can vote, They voted for representatives to represent them in legislation that they craft based on the people who put them in positions of power. So they are speaking for the people who put them there. But let's speak to something else when it comes to the idea of double dipping. As someone said earlier, this is all my predecessor's attempt to come down onto a different branch of government. Let's talk about that double dipping. A legislation based around a loss feud by using a member of the council to do it, that's double dipping. Having issues within the sheriff's office and the sheriff inviting them and coming down to one of their workers, that's double dipping. When it comes to the fact that this has been litigated into court, now two to three times, that's triple dipping. I don't want to think about what kind of mismatch of food you get when you triple dip. In relation to that, let's look at all the attempts to talk about this. And I ask those who are members of District C, there's a lot of staunch regulars in this room. Name me one thing or raise your hand if you recall any legislation Tony G has championed more. Can you think of one before this one? And think about why you can't. Jacob Bennett, in just four years, in the first time running, you could name like four or five. The man's in the forefront. The double-dip effort clearly can beat the single-dip, or lack thereof, of Tony G. And when it comes to the real people behind this, you can look at it across social media. You've got Silly Pay, you've got Citizens Against Jacob Bennett, Citizens Against Joseph Bostel, you've got Thomas Orden, and everyone's favorite group, Turnbull, Brockmire Law Group, who in this entire time of infecting our county have made over 120 posts over the various legislations and issues in our county from the school to the county. Here's the thing though. Who's the one who tried to appoint their brother, a disbarred lawyer, to the county ethics board? Current administration, my predecessor. Who's the one who wasted taxpayers' dollars on two lawsuits? My predecessor. Who's the one who spent almost double the amount of money in this election while also holding back funds to the school system? I believe that when it comes to the idea of double dipping, can you single dip your job first? And also, when it comes to everyone's favorite law group, I love the comment on the fact that they commented last week about having a list. Someone in the county office forming a list of potential malcontents. Last time I checked, on April 28th, they made a list of all the candidates they reached out to about the Hartford Glen fiasco that was a nothing burger. Last time I checked, if you say one out of 27, I think that's counting, which makes it a list, and I thought lists were bad. I just want some integrity. I want some consistency. But you'll get that from me when I win. Thank you.

Go for it.

Name and zip, please. Jeffrey Beck, 210-85, Joppatown. Greetings, good evening, Council President Vincente and members of the council. Thanks so much for holding this public hearing, although it kind of seems like it might be a stump speech for campaigns. I won't, though. I'm going to focus on the issue at hand. It's important to note that holding office, especially elected office, public office, is honorable. So is being a teacher. So is being in law enforcement. Over the past month or so since the prior bill was introduced and rejected soundly immediately, I've talked to a lot of people. I've heard a lot of comments. I've seen a lot of comments on social media. One of those comments focused on, excuse me, barring any county employee from any county from serving on the county council. That's not how I read the language of the bill, but by all means. There's six other people up there besides Mr. G. Offer an amendment. Let's fix what we see as a problem. I've seen many people say that many professionals participate in decisions that affect their fields. And where should we draw the line? What's double dipping? Where does the conflict of interest end? The conflict, I believe, as far as this bill is concerned, ends at one taxpayer funded paycheck. That should be the line. It makes sense to me. More importantly, we've seen comments about the will of the voters. The will of the voters happens at the ballot box. Yes, it happened in 2022 when five of you were elected. We saw what happened to one of you. This bill, as far as I read it, wouldn't unseat anybody currently holding office. It wouldn't preclude anybody else in this audience or anywhere in this county from running for office. It would... preclude them from serving if elected. Or they would have to pause their other job, whatever that job may be that gets a taxpayer funded paycheck. If we care about the will of the people, we should let them decide at the ballot box. There's been enough conversation, pro and against, for this topic, whether you want to call it double dipping, conflict of interest, I don't care what we call it, there's been enough conversation and enough arguments made on both sides, good arguments on both sides, send it to the ballot box, put an amendment in that clarifies the language to keep everybody happy, and send it to the ballot box and let the people choose. This charter, this bill doesn't amend the charter just by virtue of introduction. It's got to be voted on by the dais, favorably, four to three at a minimum, to then go to the ballot. Doing so is leadership. What happened the last time that this bill was attempted at 26004 was not leadership. Someone asked about foregoing a paycheck. That person would still be putting on things that affect their agency. To the point of teachers, No, they don't control the teacher budget, but we hear every year that the school doesn't get enough money. They're going to have to eliminate teacher positions. What happens when one of those positions is someone serving on the council as well? That is a conflict of interest. Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am. Name is Zip.

Tina Graf, 21050. My name is Tina Graf and I'm here tonight to voice my strong opposition to bill 26-009, aka the double dipping bill. Double dipping by definition means the act of receiving a benefit or compensation twice. Only a moron would not comprehend that working and being paid for two jobs is not double dipping. And why wouldn't we encourage our public servants to serve on our council if their constituents voted them in? What a sad state of our county. With all the pressing issues plaguing this council, Mr. Jan Giordano has chosen to waste my time and my taxpayer dollars trying to eliminate Jacob Bennett from the council, knowing this has been heard by the Maryland Supreme Court not once but twice and has already been decided in his favor. Mr. Giordano, why didn't you propose this two years ago when you met with each one of the HCPS unions, including myself, to help us advocate for our budget to be fully funded? Why didn't you suggest this when you voted to appoint Mr. Bennett as the liaison to the Board of Ed? Why didn't you do this four years ago when Jacob was elected and our county executive barred Jacob from attending a formal inauguration ceremony alongside you? Wouldn't that have been the perfect time? I do find it a bit shady that you've remained silent until just months before an election. Additionally, contrary to what you believe, I feel very well represented by my appointed councilwoman in District B. I sent an email and came to speak tonight. If people cared, they would have also done this. The tagline of some of Mr. Giandradano's social media posts read, one job, one paycheck, loyalty to the taxpayers. I have to chuckle as only a simpleton would not realize that one job equals one paycheck, but two jobs would equal two paychecks. Even more concerning is that most HCPS staff have to work two jobs because our county executive does not think education is a priority. And I, too, am a taxpayer, me and my 5,500 educator friends. Mr. Giangiordano, you stated your bill was about restoring trust, transparency, and accountability. Residents deserve confidence that decisions made by the council are independent in the best interest of Hartford County, not influenced by personal financial ties. If that's truly what you believe, how about looking at your own conflict of interest in sharing HCPS school buses? You've said, and I quote, you have no influence on setting or approving contractor payments, which is kind of like Mr. Bennett having nothing to do with our budget. If we want to dig deeper on conflicts of interest, how about looking at a councilman's daughter who was the head of HR for Harper County government? You want to do something even better to restore trust? How about proposing a bill to not allow a felon to run for county council? The same felon that you claim was the one to initially propose this bill. so while all of you are all up in arms about data centers and double dipping i'm still working in a school with no drinking water and no idea how we will survive a 15 million dollar budget deficit but go on with your double dipping bill thank you vern white followed by danny paez douglas phillips and fred circus i don't think miss white is here

Then it would be Danny Paez.

Hello, Danny Paez, 21040. Thank you. Good evening, council. I want to loudly announce my disapproval of Bill 26-009. I'm asking you as the council to vote now. OUR CONSTITUTION STARTS WITH WE THE PEOPLE AND THAT PRINCIPLE SHOULD GUIDE HOW WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY. THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CHARTER THREATENS TO RESTRICT THE VERY PEOPLE WHO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY BY LIMITING THEIR EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL GOVERNMENT. MANY OF OUR Harford County residents travel outside our borders to work, to pursue careers, and to support their families. They choose here to live because they love this county, this community, and its way of life. This bill, by prohibiting council members from receiving monetary benefits from any other county government, position unfairly restricts the freedom of individuals to seek employment and serve in multiple capacities. It could discourage talented, dedicated people from running for office, knowing that their outside employment might directly disqualify them or lead to conflicts. Moreover, this undermines the very spirit of public service. Many of our leaders are hardworking individuals who juggle multiple roles to support their families and contribute to society. This restriction could limit the pool of qualified candidates, reduce diversity of experience, and ultimately weaken the representation and governance of our communities. We should be encouraging active participants, not creating barriers that exclude capable individuals. Let us remember that public service thrives on openness and opportunity, not restrictions that could diminish the richness of our leadership. I urge you, my fellow residents and decision makers, to consider the implications of this bill carefully. We must preserve the rights of our residents to work, serve, and participate fully in our community without unnecessary restrictions. To be clear, every four years, we the voters get to decide who we want to represent us on the council. The people decide when we vote in June and once again in November. We make these decisions. Saying this bill is for the voters to vote is inaccurate. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Good evening, sir. Name and zip code, please.

It's Douglas Phillips. It's 21028 Churchville, Maryland. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the Council, and fellow citizens. I'm going to really try hard not to repeat some things that have been said, but I do want to pick up with the last speaker talking about we the people. So the Constitution, of course, was framed. Our Constitution was radical specifically because it limited the powers of the government. In Article I, Section 6, James Madison, who wrote it, actually prevented people from holding dual offices and having dual employment something called the emoluments clause i don't want to go too far into that but it was a fundamental part it is important enough that the constitution includes it now we talk about maryland here so i i shudder to think what annapolis or the democrats in annapolis would want to do to a county like harford county if we trusted them to have to provide our ethics laws and tell us what we can and can't do Going back to the Maryland Supreme Court, what do they actually do? I do appreciate, I strongly believe that Mr. Bennett is well-versed on it. It shows a lot, sir, that you read that. And your quotes are accurate. But the overarching picture was that they were saying that we need to clarify and lay out exactly what we want, who can serve. They told us to go ahead and clarify it. The role of a Supreme Court or any appellate court is not to decide the issue. It's more so to point out where the weaknesses may be and kick it back. So I would argue that we should be going and addressing that ambiguity. Now, who should do that? Seven members of the council. It's great. The look last time was not so good. I don't want to beat that out. I think the point was made. Rejecting it upon introduction really limited the ability to have a debate and have what we're having here today, which I consider to be pretty valuable, the actual discussion, hearing all sides. And lastly, I would say that... Allowing the voters to decide this gets to the most pure and best way to decide this. We can educate them. There can be a robust debate. And the voters themselves are the taxpayers. They are funding our government. It takes a lot. To take that away from them would be a big mistake. So I do encourage you to support this bill. And if you wanted to offer amendments to it, I think we've talked about it would take a lot of amendments perhaps. But if you wanted to do so, at least put it in front of the people. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, sir. Name is it.

Good evening. Fred circus to 10 47. I'm in favor of the double dip bill. I've seen several council members vote on issues in the past that directly affects their other jobs. They have not recused themselves as the previous candidate just mentioned. Uh, Jacob Bennett voted and did not recuse himself from the prior issue. Um, that's an example. Um, I'm not against teachers or law enforcement officers. I am a law enforcement family. I feel that there are too many potential conflicts of interest. I feel that employees that work for the state or county should not be serving on the county council since they could be voting on issues that directly affects their primary job. I don't feel that the constituents are going to be fairly representative if we allow this to occur. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Regina McCartan, followed by Jason King and Henry Gibbons.

What was the first name again?

Regina McCartan. Jason King, followed by Henry Gibbons.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip.

Jason King, 21014. 250 years ago, our founding fathers set in motion a series of events that would forever change the course of human history. These great men forged the Declaration of Independence, separating us from Great Britain. Most, if not all, of these men were common people with regular jobs who would eventually serve as local, state, or federal government officials. Here are a few. Benjamin Rush, Continental Congress, educator. John Witherspoon, Continental Congress, two terms, New Jersey State Legislature, educator. George White, Continental Congress, Virginia House of Delegates, educator. James Wilson, Associate Justice Supreme Court, educator. John Adams, President of the United States, educator, teaching Latin in Worcester, Massachusetts. Fast forward to the present. Richard Slutsky, former council member, educator. James Riley, current council member, former police officer, and HCC educator. The bill that you are currently trying to introduce would prevent any of these individuals from being a public servant in this county. Mr. Gian Giordano, as a member of local government, you should be advocating for people to get involved with public service and not discourage citizen involvement. How can you sit on the stage at the local high school graduations, look at the students in the crowd who want to go into law enforcement and education, smile, shake their hands, and tell them they can't serve on the county council? If this bill is introduced, you will be doing a disservice to the thousands of hardworking citizens in Harford County. As mentioned many times tonight, the Supreme Court of Maryland has already made a ruling and Jacob Bennett versus Harford County, that the doctrine of incompatible positions does not preclude a teacher employed by the Harford County Board of Ed from simultaneously serving as a member of the Harford County Council. I encourage you not to endorse this bill. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Good evening, sir. Name is it? Hi. Henry Gibbons, 21040. Good evening, Mr. Council President and members of the council. I'm actually proud to have been the chair of the Democratic Central Committee that sent you the three applicants from whom you selected Ms. Robert up here on the dais. I come to you tonight in opposition to Bill 26009, an overly broadly written piece of legislation that if enacted would further restrict the pool of talent available to fill the seats in which you all sit. In a county where 11,376 of its residents, or almost one out of 17 of its 193,000 registered voters is already restricted by the Hatch Act, Mind you, these are some of our most service-minded, engaged, and administratively competent citizens are already restricted from running and holding partisan political office due to the Hatch Act's prohibition on such activities by federal employees. Is it really a good idea to further narrow that talent pool by excluding an additional class of motivated and qualified candidates? Between all of the new and unambiguous cases involving HCPS, Harford County Sheriff's Office, and explicitly spelled out in the proposed amendment, not even counting the more egregious cases that Mr. Bennett and Ms. Roberts cited earlier, the total percentage of citizens restricted from running would rise from about 6%. to almost 10% of the registered voters in the county who would be unable to run for office. That's not a narrowly tailored restriction. That is a hatchet taken to some of our most engaged citizenry's ability to participate fully in the machine of our representative democracy. I urge this council to reject this woefully crafted bill. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Pam Deemer, followed by Katie Balserman, Aravinda Pillalamari and Bill Montaneri.

Good evening, ma'am.

Good evening. Pam Deamer, 21014. I oppose Bill 26009 and urge the council to reject this bill. I believe the voters should decide who they want to represent them. The voters spoke when they voted for Mr. Penman and Mr. Bennett recently, and Mr. Slutsky and Mr. Craig in the past. This bill will eliminate any person with a state or local government service background. As written, this bill expands people who would be blocked from running for office far beyond what any reasonable person would want and would lead to lawsuits. Stop wasting time and taxpayer money on issues that have already been decided by the courts and the voters. This attempt to limit the voice of the people of Harford County in choosing who they will represent is undemocratic and unnecessary. Please vote no on this bill. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Good evening, ma'am.

Katie Bosserman, 21014. Sorry, forgot. Nervous. I thought I was just signing up to come in. So all I can say is I am in opposition to this bill. Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip.

Good evening. Uh, my name is Aravinda Pelelimari zip code is 2 1 0 1 4. Um, good evening, uh, members of the County council and, uh, members of the community. If the process of passing this bill number has been mentioned multiple times. Um, if the process of passing this bill requires us to question the basis of representative democracy, the legitimacy of the people, who came to speak or phone, email, public comment, we have to wonder what is the purpose of having a county council or public comment. It is in fact easier for a constituent to call or email and freely say what they think than to go and vote on a referendum. So the criteria for sending something to referendum has to be something else and not one that dismisses voters' ability to use existing processes or question their legitimacy when they do exercise it, either because they're just a few people out of thousands or when there are a large number because they belong to a union protecting workers who serve the public. While introducing this bill, Councilman Gian Giordano implied that someone working in public service would have a bias towards funding these services and that that would burden the taxpayers. That, however, reveals a bias against public services in line with a bias against public education, which has been rearing its head to the detriment of the community. One could as well argue that well-funded public services beyond fulfilling the responsibility of our society to provide these services to all members of the community, regardless of their own wealth or income or the amount of taxes they pay. but it also saves people money they would otherwise have to spend out of pocket. Therefore, raising the budget for public services is only a burden if those services are not up to par. When they are delivered at high quality, fully funded services benefit the community, and therefore decisions should depend on the merits of the services and the needs of the community, which those working in those services would and should have a say in. Therefore, I oppose Bill 26-009, County council members live in Harford County and are thus impacted by every decision the council makes. Any line of work comes with skills, perspective, and biases. Council decisions on the budget impact various people, and unless there is a specific conflict of interest, there is no reason for that person to recuse himself or herself, and certainly not a disqualification for the office. When Harford County Public Schools budget is being voted on, this benefits teachers, students, staff, and the community as a whole. The impact on a specific teacher is not different from the impact on the public as a whole, and therefore it is not a conflict of interest. If anything, the expertise in education brings a valuable perspective. If voters felt otherwise, they would say so at the time of voting. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip. Bill Montnary, 21015. I did not read the bill, so what I'm going to say, I think, is pretty clear. Excuse me if I'm not making a whole lot of sense. I've been sick for four days. Nothing you guys are going to get. It was food poisoning, so don't worry about that. Yeah. I do want to kind of point out one thing really, really quickly. Somebody jumped up here and said some of the founding fathers, I believe, they were teachers and they were helping found the country and they were working with the government. Just to clarify a small point, they were not getting paid. They volunteered to do that. A student of American history, a student of the Constitutional Revolution, everything else. I've been studying that since I've been the age of 12, and yeah, they didn't get paid. They volunteered. Anyway, a conflict of interest is a conflict of interest. I kind of jotted this down while I was sitting here. Even if you give up a council paycheck, you are still in conflict due to the employment by that county's governmental department. because you have active employment and can be under influence from your employing department. It's kind of common sense. This is, in my opinion, this is pretty simple and pretty easy. I know a lot of people have been trying to obfuscate the issue by throwing everything, including the kitchen sink in there, but I don't think we need to do that. Government gets its power from the consent of the people. That's where government's power comes from. Put this to a vote by the citizens of the county, Do that. That's all you got to do. Everything else doesn't matter. Put it to a vote by the citizens of this county. Full stop. End of discussion. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

The last speaker this evening is Megan Fitzgerald.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip, please.

Megan Fitzgerald 21009. Good evening council members and again thank you for your service. I'm speaking in opposition of Bill 26009. It's truly about having diverse representation on the dais. The way the bill is written significantly reduces the type of people that can run for office and thus weakens citizen representation. If business owners whose livelihood is directly connected to the decisions the council makes to serve on the county, I'm sorry, is directly connected to the decisions the council makes, and serve on the county council, how is that a conflict of interest? How is that not a conflict of interest? The council also makes decisions about property taxes. So does that mean that property owners cannot serve as well? The annual budget the council votes on includes their own salaries. That's okay, but an educator or a police officer can't vote on a budget that includes the salary from their actual career? This doesn't make sense. To the question, why shouldn't this bill go to the general election, it's a great question. Because frankly, Hartford County continues to have a growing homeless population that continues to be criminally underserved. a public school system that can only claim its success through the selfless hours resources and energy provided by our education staff and certainly well beyond the compensation provided by our repeatedly underfunded budget my question for you is how does this bill serve our most needy and most vulnerable people in harford county the answer is it doesn't How can you sit up there knowing how so, so many of our citizens are hungry, are homeless, and need representation that supports their efforts to get out of poverty and not be compelled to redirect the focus to efforts that uplift vulnerable communities in Hartford County? You know, each of us here tonight has the luxury of being here. How many of us are going to sleep in our car tonight because that's the only place we have to sleep? Seriously, all the discussion about the voice of the people distracts from the fact that we need to stay focused on the needs of our neediest. As citizens, please give us the respect and credit for being informed when we go to the polls. I desperately, desperately want to look up there and see people of worth and humility and dignity and personal fortitude. And pushing this as far as you are, this doesn't inspire me with that. And that's so unfortunate.

Okay. Is that the last speaker?

That is it, Mr. President.

All right. This will conclude the public hearing on Bill 26-009. It will be taken up at our next meeting. We're going to take a ten-minute recess. Good evening. Chair calls the order of legislative session day 26-017. I would ask you to please join us in standing for the pledge followed by the opening prayer by Council Member Robert.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Dear Lord, we come together this evening asking for wisdom, patience and understanding as we serve our community. Help us approach our work with open minds, respectful dialogue and a shared commitment to doing what is best for the people we represent. As we reflected on Memorial Day yesterday, we pause to remember and honor the brave men and women who gave their lives in service to our country. May their sacrifice remind us of the importance of unity, selflessness, and service to others. In moments when negativity and political division can become distracting, guide us to rise above conflict and focus instead on cooperation, thoughtful leadership, and the greater good. Help us listen with respect, speak with kindness, and lead with integrity as we continue to look out for and serve the needs of our entire community. Amen.

Council, may I have general consent to move item 5 on the agenda and return to 4 thereafter? Yes. Thank you. Five, consideration of petitions, applications, appointments, and nominations. Council appointments. Council, as you know, Ms. Brooks is leaving us at the end of June, and the Personnel Committee has been interviewing for her replacement, and the Personnel Committee has identified someone for this position. I'd like to bring them here before the full council. And we have identified from within Mr. DeLauder from the auditor's department. Mr. DeLauder, how about coming forward here? So thank you, Brad. We've had, like I said, several that we interviewed from outside, and then we were made aware that Brad had some intentions of moving forward. He's been with us 10 years in the auditor's department. He is a certified public accountant, a certified internal auditor, and he has a bachelor's degree in accounting. While throughout the process, in speaking with Ms. Brooks, she's extremely confident in his ability as our next county auditor. So, council, it's up to us. And what I would like to do is have a motion, please.

Council President, I move to approve the appointment of Brad DeLauder.

Second.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. It's been moved and seconded. And now it's time for discussion. And I would like to just start briefly by saying that in my time on this council, which is like the time that Mr. DeLauder's been here, he's been extremely efficient. He has been extremely knowledgeable, willing to help with any research that we are looking for, any information that we're looking for, and has been a great team player within that auditor department. Mr. Jan Giordano.

Yeah, so I was initially disappointed to hear that Brad wasn't interested in the position and then was excited to hear that he changed his mind and he was interested in this position. It made things a lot easier, so I'm glad that he stepped forward, and I'm glad to make this motion to appoint Brad as the auditor. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Bennett?

Yeah, I want to echo that. We had some very impressive resumes come to us with people who have experience auditing very large agencies. But not only do you bring internal experience that is great for us because we know your skill set and not only are your technical skills sound, But your communication, your writing is all amazing. You're so collaborative with us as a council every year setting up meetings and asking us where do we see potential risks or security concerns that we want you to be working on. And I look forward to you being the one who comes before us each year throughout the year to give us updates. So again, I'm really happy that you're stepping forward in this. I say it all the time, but it's the people who work in the office who are going to stay after we all leave. And so it's important that we have good workers here in the council building to help set our county in a good direction, and I'm confident you'll be able to do that.

Anyone else? And your effective start date is going to be July 3rd.

That's correct, yes.

Anything else that you'd like to add before we determine your future?

I appreciate all of these compliments. I only wish my wife was so nice. I will say to Crystal, Ms. Brooks, my current boss for another 30 plus days, she created the office from scratch and I don't want to change anything. just adapt to what's coming forward and keep it going. So I look forward to that. Thank you very much.

And she's at her daughter's graduation or she would be here this evening. She is. She is. She did make me aware of that. And I think Crystal's been here, what, 14 years? So you've been here almost as long. So I'm looking forward to it. And Ms. Dixon.

Mr. President?

Aye.

Mrs. Robert? Aye. Mrs. Emhoff? Aye. Mr. Giandradano? Aye. Mr. Riley?

Aye.

Mrs. Bull-Sottles? Aye. Mr. Bennett?

Aye. There being seven votes in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the appointment is hereby approved. Congratulations. Thank you.

You can go back in the corner. Back to the corner. Okay.

Uh, Harford Living Treasure.

May I have a motion, please? Council President, I move to approve Henry Peden as a Harford Living Treasure. May I have a second?

Second. Thank you, Mr. Riley. It's been moved and seconded. To approve Mr. Peden as a Harford Living Treasure. Is there any discussion? Guess not. Ms. Dixon.

Mr. President. Aye. Mrs. Robert. Aye. Mrs. Emhoff. Aye. Mr. Giangerdano. Aye. Mr. Riley. Aye. Mrs. Bulsadles. Aye. Mr. Bennett.

Aye. There being seven votes in the affirmative, zero in a negative, the appointment is hereby approved. Mr. Peten, would you please join Mr. Giangerdano and anyone else that you'd like to bring with you?

Testing. Testing. I learned how to say Peden's name a little earlier. He said it rhymes like Sweden. So this microphone maybe is not working too well. Let's see if we can get it. Whereas Henry C. Peden Jr. has dedicated his life to preserving Hartford County's history, genealogy, and heritage through more than 200 published books, articles, and historical works, earning widespread recognition and numerous historical, numerous historical and genealogical honors for his extraordinary contributions to the preservation of Maryland's cultural legacy and where as born in Baltimore City in 1946, Mr. Peden made Hartford County his home in 1975 after graduating from Kenwood High School, serving his country in Vietnam and earning Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts degrees from Towson University, later settling in Edgewood and Bel Air with his wife, Veronica Clark-Pedan, and whereas Mr. Pedan has provided decades of leadership and service to organizations including the Historical Society of Harford County, Harford County Genealogical Society, Maryland Genealogical Society, and Save the Aberdeen Railroad Station, Inc., STARS, enriching the cultural and history legacy of Harford County through his lifelong commitment to preservation, research, and public service Now, therefore, we, the County Council of Harford County, Maryland, on this 26th day of May, 2026, to hereby salute Henry C. Peden, Jr., a Harford living treasure, and be it further known that his lifetime experience and contributions to the Harford County community will provide a permanent record which will recall the past, inform the present, and guide the future of Harford County, and that his memories and history will be recorded for Harford County public library oral historian and will become part of the oral history collection of the library. Now it's your turn, you get to say something.

Thank you for this.

Okay, how's that?

Very good.

Thank you indeed for this high honor. I want to thank Jim Crismer. for nominating me, and for the Cultural Arts Board for approving that nomination. I want to thank my wife, Veronica, and my son, Clint, for their love and support, and my good friend, Jack Shagna, and his wife, Signy, for their support as well. I've always said, you know you're getting old when you start receiving Lifetime Achievement Awards. But I've received several, but this is the icing on the cake. Thank you very much.

I'm going to have everybody move in towards the center. Could I have the four of you in the front? We're going to shift over this way. Just a smidge more this way. I'm going to take a picture on three. One, two, three. One, two, three. One more in case you blink.

One, two, three. Thank you.

Agenda number six, special presentations.

We have none. Seven, approval of minutes. Public hearing May 19th, 2026. Legislative day 26-016, May 19th, 2026. Are there any corrections to the minutes? There being no corrections, the minutes stand approved. Eight, introduction and consideration of resolutions. We have none. Nine, introduction of bills. We have none. 10, introduction and consideration of amendments. Ms. Robert, please read amendment number three to bill 26006.

Amendment number three on page nine, line 16, strike 15,433,348 and substitute 13,858,348. Thank you. Ms. Imhoff, please read in amendment number four to bill 26006.

Amendment number four on page eight, line 18, strike 2,642,035, oh, 35, and substitute 2,142,035.

Thank you. Due to timing, all four of these amendments will be considered this evening. Amendment number one, annual budget and appropriation ordinance. May I have a motion, please? Ms. Sottles.

Council President, I move to approve amendment number one.

May I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms. Imhoff. It's been moved and accepted. Is there any discussion? Ms. Dixon?

Mr. President? Aye. Mrs. Robert? Aye. Mrs. Imhoff? Aye. Mr. Giangerdano? No. Mr. Riley? No. Mrs. Bulsadles? Aye. Mr. Bennett?

Aye. Being five votes in the affirmative, two in the negative, Amendment 1 to Bill 26006 is hereby approved. Ms. Silas, please read Amendment 2 to Bill 26006. Motion. I'm sorry.

Council President, I move to approve Amendment Number 2.

Thank you. You have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms. Robert. Let's move to the second to approve Amendment Number 2. Is there any discussion? Ms. Dixon?

Mr. President? Aye. Mrs. Robert? Aye. Mrs. Imhoff? Aye. Mr. Giandradano? No. Mr. Riley? No. Mrs. Bulls-Bottles? Aye. Mr. Bennett?

Aye. There being five votes in the affirmative, two in the negative, Amendment 2 to Bill 26-006 is hereby approved. Ms. Robert, Amendment Number 3?

Move to approve amendment number three to bill number 26 dash zero zero six.

Thank you. May have a second second. Thank you, Ms. Sottles. It's been moved and seconded to approve amendment number three. Is there any discussion? Mr. Jan Giordano.

Did you have one?

Go ahead. Okay.

Um, yes. The reason behind it is, um, in looking at this budget, um, and getting some information from our auditor. In FY24, that line item was budgeted for $7,738,627, and it was only expenditure of $4,522,985. In FY25, $9,967,634 was budgeted, and only $5,062,961 was spent. And then in FY26, budgeted is $9,093,960, and currently, to date, only $4,021,998 has been spent.

Thank you, Ms. Robert. Mr. Jandredana?

I will pass.

Okay. Mr. Bennett?

You know, I think this is a great, this amendment's a great example of fiscal responsibility. You know, when we looked at budget versus actuals during our four days of budget work sessions, it came to light that in just the portion of the budget that is directly monitored and controlled by the administration, we over budgeted by roughly 10% of the $300 million that's set aside for those functions of government, which means $30 million is said to be spent on things that never get spent on. And that's been consistent over the years. So I think it's important that our taxpayers don't have their money stored away repeatedly in overfunded accounts, but that money goes to action to support the services community members rely on and expect when they pay their property and income taxes.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. Ms. Imhoff?

We have to vote.

We haven't done anything. I'm sorry. I'm moving on. I'm going to do them all together. I know. I know. All right. So we have a motion and a second. Ms. Dixon.

Mr. President.

Aye.

Mrs. Roberts. Aye. Mrs. Emhoff. Aye. Mr. Giordano. No. Mr. Riley. No. Mrs. Bolsadles. Aye. Mr. Bennett. Aye.

There being five votes in the affirmative, zero in a negative. Amendments 3 to Bill 2606 is hereby approved. Ms. Imhoff, please give me a motion on number four.

I move to approve amendment number four to bill 26-006. Thank you.

May I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms. Robert. I move and second to approve amendment number four to bill 26-006. Is there any discussion? Ms. Imhoff.

This amendment is to the law department budget to reduce legal services by $500,000, which includes $150,000 of contractual services, and $350,000, which is approximately what the council cut last year.

Thank you. And also, one of our amendments, our first amendment, was to cut our council attorney's and people's council budget by a quarter of a million as well. So, any other comments? Mr. Bennett?

Again, this is another example where when we made this cut last year, there was no reduction in services, no cut in pay to the law department, no cut to the number of people working in the law department. And this year, when the law department was scheduled to come before us as a council, the director of the law department did not show up. It's the first time any of us know in the history of this county that a director for a department refused to come before the council and talk to us about their budget. Um, so with that in mind, there's no justification to increase that department's budget when they can't even come and present a rationale to us. So I think it's, uh, again, financially good stewardship to say, let's keep it at where it was this past year. Cause it seemed to work just fine.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. Anyone else? Mr. Riley.

Again, I got to correct a record. The director did not come. In fact, we got the county executive that came here to justify this budget. You can't get any higher than the county executive. Again, you can tell it's an election year. Let's just keep everything so that the public understand what's going on. Thank you. Anyone else?

Ms. Dixon.

Mr. President? Aye. Mrs. Robert? Aye. Mrs. Emhoff? Aye. Mr. Giandradano? No. Mr. Riley? No. Mrs. Bullis-Sottles? Aye. Mr. Bennett?

Aye.

There being five votes in the affirmative, two in the negative, Amendment 4 to Bill 2606 is hereby approved. 11, call for final reading of bills. We have none. 12. Enrollment of bills, none. 13 unfinished business, none. 14, new business. Council letter of opposition. Public Service Commission case 9874, Chrome Hill Solar, LLC. Ms. Emhoff, I'm going to let you speak to it, but then I'm going to go to Mr. Riley because it's in his district.

So this past week I was actually able to attend the CAB meeting for the Jarrettsville-Norrisville Community Advisory Board where several members of the community gave some really informative presentations of some really concerning projects that are being proposed for Harford County, especially northern Harford County. These presentations gave information, brought information to light that really kind of highlight that our county is not, we're moving full steam ahead in projects that we are not available for and not prepared to handle. We were able to hear from the fire chief up there who shared that the proposals for these projects, the people presenting them, have not discussed their safety concerns with the local fire departments, their significant environmental concerns, and therefore, while I was sitting at the CAB meeting, I reached out to the council president's office and explained that We as a council need to present our opposition to these ever-growing projects that really just are not conducive to our way of life and the environmental needs of our county.

Thank you, Ms. Imhoff. Mr. Riley. Yes, this has actually been going on for a couple months. Ms. Imhoff just happened to attend. And I already wrote a letter in opposition. I'm not opposed to the whole council writing. But we've been fighting up in the northern part of the county because, again, the General Asylum down there in Annapolis, they decided to take control over our zoning laws. And so we're trying to do everything we can. I happen to know the chair of the Public Service Commission. He's a big liberal down there in Annapolis. He's now on this as the chair personally. Hopefully we'll get some movement on this, but this has been going on for a couple months, and I appreciate the whole council coming together to put this letter.

And if I may, Mr. Giannigrana, before I go to you, I did receive a call from Patty Hankins asking us to consider a full letter prior to the meeting, but I was at a Good Scout event, so I could not go to that that night. I understand the county executive sent a letter as well, so this will be a unified front opposing this.

So definitely in favor of the full letter, but as what's happened before, we turned down a solar farm a couple years ago and the PSE Commission overrode us. So if they don't change the laws down in Annapolis and the Democratic-controlled body of Annapolis doesn't stop shoving solar farms down our throats, they're going to continue to put these on. There's a couple more that are filed. that are on the way in Hartford County. The federal tax credits expire on July 4th. I hope this letter can do something. Unfortunately, I don't know how powerful it's going to be. Unless we get some help on getting this changed in Annapolis, they're going to keep pushing until they have solar farms take over all of our green land and pay the farmers a lot of money. It's the same thing, hopefully, that they don't try to do with with data centers where they try to do the same thing. Even though we're going to wind up putting a ban in, they might come back with something else and that just scares the hell out of me. Thank you.

Anyone else? Mr. Bennett.

Mr. Bennett. Mr. President, I just want to, as I listen to this conversation, it reminds me about three years ago when we had our warehouse legislation and I prepared an amendment to that legislation that would have required industrial rooftops of these large industrial buildings to be solar ready so that solar could be placed over top of that gray space instead of green space. And I advocated then that if we did not take such action and emphasize the use of industrial space for solar production, that we were leaving our green space vulnerable to these pressures. Because Annapolis is gonna continue to push for us to build up our electrical infrastructure and to emphasize renewable energy. But we as a local government can do our part to emphasize that that belongs over top of gray space over green space. Unfortunately, that amendment that I put forward three years ago failed three to four. And so instead of emphasizing the use of industrial space for solar panels and rooftops for solar panels, we're continuing to see this pressure for green space to be used, and that's unfortunate.

Thank you, Mr. Bennett. Mr. Jan Giordano.

So I talked to Rich Truitt who got Annapolis not to include putting solar on roofs moving forward, which allows us to make a stronger case for going back to revisit that. Any building maybe built at 250,000 square feet or more, we could put something on there that says they have to put solar on their rooftops. That's something that looks like maybe we'll introduce down the road. Thank you, Council President. Thank you.

Anyone else? May I have a motion, please?

Council President, I move to approve the Council Letter of Opposition.

May I have a second? Second. Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. I move and second it to approve the Public Service Commission letter. Is there any more discussion? Ms. Dixon?

Mr. President? Aye. Mrs. Robert? Aye. Mrs. Emhoff? Aye. Mr. Giordano? Aye. Mr. Riley? Aye. Mrs. Golsadal? Aye. Mr. Bennett? Aye.

There being seven votes in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the letter of opposition is hereby approved. Fifteen comments and input from attending citizens. Do we have anyone signed up?

We do, Mr. President. We have nine this evening.

Okay. Again, just as a reminder, you get three minutes, and just please be respectful of the speaker.

Good evening, sir. Name and zip code, please. Yeah, it's John Varveris, 21084.

First of all, thank you for allowing this forum, Council President Vincente, and also all the council members. And thank you for your unanimous vote. I come here to speak about the solar project, Chrome Hill Solar, in opposition to it. And obviously you all are well along with that. I've sent each of you an email. Several of our community have sent you a number of letters and things, and I appreciate I respect that you've been responsive. Some of you have sent your own letters into public comments. Other of you have responded to my emails, and others have spoken publicly at the community advisory board meetings. So, again, thank you for all that. I was going to call to action three things for you. One was a unanimous support of this letter, so that's one done. The other is to strongly word the opposition letter. Obviously, I don't know what that letter looks like, We all know that there's already been an act that the state has usurped your authority with respect to planning and zoning that they can step into what you all have declared as agricultural land. So to just mention that again as the only item is not enough. We've been fighting hard to try to make 47 public comments. We've had 1,600 people, over 1,600 on our petition. We've held two community meetings with over 240 people in direct opposition in our local community. So we have been doing a lot of work, but there are 16 items, my last request is there are 16 items mentioned in the PSC application for Harford County to respond to and to manage or approve various forms of a role. Those are the things that you all can additionally attack. For example, there's a Carroll County case, and I'll give you the case number. is 9735, where they actually won in opposition to a solar facility out there. And what helped win it was it's a view shed and glare study problem. So just like many of our neighbors, myself included, we sit up on a hill at a higher elevation. We're in this as far as the solar farm facility is going. So we will have full view of this no matter what buffers they put in and how tall the trees they put in. Many of my neighbors are in the same situation. The viewshed analysis in the document is woefully short. It doesn't even consider anybody directly adjacent to the property that has an elevation issue. There are problems with the application. We were successful in getting a two-tier Department of Natural Resources delayed and thrown out as not being valid. So we've been doing a lot of work. Again, there are 16 things mentioned in the application that you all could help assure get addressed. And the earlier you do it, our goal is to get the application delayed as long as possible so we can continue to fight with the state level, the positions at the state level. So one thing, the last thing I would request is that in the case that was won, 97-35 in Carroll County, the county executive attended hearings, the county attorney had an active role in these hearings and responses, and the county actually hired an external litigator to help them.

Sir, your time is up. So Mr. Riley will take the lead on your other request. This is a copy of the letter that we just supported tonight. Ms. Beery, will you give him that letter, please?

Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip code, please.

Debbie Rainer, 21050. I have a 72-acre farm. I've lived there 45 years. We have the champion white ash tree of Harford County on that property, and we are facing the same nightmare. However, ours is divided into three smaller sections, so we may not even be able to get to the PSC. It may go straight through. So you may be hearing a lot from us for help. I'd like to request three things tonight. It's not just one solar farm. It's many solar farms. So would the county council... Please create a committee whose focus is to unite all communities fighting solar industrial complexes into a united front to address this disaster. It's going to take more than just one of us at a time. Second, would you consider changing the tax code on these industrial solar complexes from ag use tax rate to industrial use tax rate? make it less inviting. And then the third would be, would the county initiate immediate legal action against the industrial solar complex entities to delay any project activity? Ocean City, Maryland succeeded in delaying the offshore wind farms until such time as it became monetarily foolish for them to proceed. We just have to stop it. It's just going too fast. So I appreciate your time and this opportunity.

So to answer your questions, ma'am, Mr. Riley is already working on one of those issues. The committee should be formed by the administration across the street, no different than they did with impact fees or anything else, and a member of this council will gladly serve on it. But it should be started across the street. Okay, so I would reach out to the county executive if I were you. Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

Call your next speaker, please.

Logan Tawson.

Call your next one.

Monica McHale, followed by Tom Rainer and Verna White.

Good evening, ma'am. Name and zip again, please.

Monica McHale, 21015. I wanted to start off by thanking some of our council people for their integrity. This relates to Mrs. Imhoff. I saw that she posted that she had accepted a $2,000 sponsorship from Mountain Branch, which she returned, I guess because she said, when you know better, you do better, as it can cause a conflict of interest with the data center controversy. And I'm looking for our county executive, to do something similar so that way he can adjust his integrity and credibility back to the county and its members of the community. The tentative amount, I believe, or alleged amount that I saw on social media is about $5,000, but I've heard $5,500. And I'm looking for integrity to be restored. It's as simple as returning a monetary donation and not accepting it on behalf of someone that could be posing a conflict of interest for the data centers. I'd also like to suggest that the entire county council seems to be internally fighting, and it's really frustrating to me to witness that, and I expect my council to do a little better. Just do a little better for the public. Keep your public and your constituents as your key focus, not personal agendas. I originally came here over Costco, and that was one of my first meetings for coming here. And I was really adamant also about Abingdon Woods at the time, which was really big. And I'm really glad of what's happened with Abingdon Woods and how we've slowed down the destruction. But destruction was done and trees were put back as part of a settlement. I'd like us to consider putting Costco not on that 34 acres across from Palm Tree still. It really truly bothers me when I drive from Bel Air to Bethesda from my job every day. And I can tell you where all the potholes are, the big ones. all the roadkill that's fresh daily that I know is on the roads. And when I call DPW, the response and the turnaround time is not always great because I'll see them for a few days on the road before they can sometimes get to them if they ever get to them at all. But I'd really like us to consider, instead of putting it there, really consider maybe putting it where the mall is, maybe where the Macy's was, where there's already infrastructure. And it's going out of the county's line to work with the city of Bel Air, but I really don't want to see that 326 acres really ever developed. And to hear that, it might be a better location for some people because it's right off the exit. And in fact, one of the council people, I'm really disappointed with that. So I'm hoping that that we keep our green space, that you hold the constituents goals in your minds when you serve them. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Just one piece of clarity here. This council is not fighting with one another. This council has open discussions and sometimes they get heated, but we all work together every day. So I just wanted to clarify that for you and the citizens.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

Name is it Tom Rainer, two 10 50. Good evening to the County council and everyone here tonight. Thanks for giving me this opportunity to voice my opinion. I also live on that 72 acre parcel with my wife, Debbie. And I am vehemently against installing commercial solar arrays with fenced perimeters on agricultural land for many common sense reasons. First off, we can't eat solar panels. So why don't we put them on commercial areas where they belong? Number two, solar panels are very inefficient at this time. They capture about 20% of the solar energy they're exposed to and require a lot of space to generate minimal electricity, which will make large solar arrays on agricultural land actually obsolete in the near future. At that time in the near future, solar collection efficiency will improve to the extent that most residential homes will produce all the energy they need with a minimum number of solar collecting devices, which may or may not be solar panels. Number three, commercial solar arrays with fenced perimeters on agricultural land decrease the value of residential homes where they are installed. Commercial solar arrays with fenced perimeter disrupt the ecological balance where they are installed. Commercial, number five, commercial solar arrays with fenced perimeter on agricultural land destroy the natural beauty of the viewscape. During the lifespan, this is number six, during the lifespan of the solar array, which is approximately 25 years, there is a strong possibility the chemical components of the solar panels will pollute the ground and watershed where they're located, especially during decommission and removal of the solar array. All that being said, I would ask the County Council to consider teaming up with other counties in Maryland to form a coalition of counties to keep the state from steamrolling over the county zoning regulations and forcing the counties to accept commercial fence solar arrays on agricultural land. There is strength in numbers and where there is a strong will, there should be a strong way to stop this. And I believe the majority of Marylanders would support prohibiting commercial solar arrays with the fencing on agricultural land. I also understand that we, the people, have to do our part to support the counties by bringing this overreach of authority by the state of Maryland to the attention of our friends, neighbors, and acquaintances to put pressure on the state to rescind this flawed policy. I do appreciate what the council is doing so far with writing the letter. Everybody helps. Thank you for your time this evening.

Thank you, sir.

Verna White, followed by Chrissy Flataw, Bill Villacopoulos, and Ryan Burby.

You're next, ma'am. Name and zip, please.

Chrissy Flatow, 21085. Good evening, my name is Chrissy Flato, and I stand here as a lifelong resident of Harford County and as someone who loves this land deeply. Many of us grew up reading The Giving Tree, a story of a tree that gives and gives until there is almost nothing left. At first, the boy takes apples, then branches, then the trunk. Each time, the tree says, and the tree was happy. But by the end, the tree is only a stump, still willing to give, but with nothing left to offer. Tonight, I ask you to consider, how much more can Harford County give? Between data centers, best facilities, and industrial scale solar, how much more can our land and our people be asked to sacrifice before the damage becomes permanent? Our rural communities are not an endless resource. Our farmland is not a blank canvas for industrial expansion. Our neighborhoods are not buffers for corporate infrastructure, and we all know this truth. Industrial buildings have been zoned away from residential neighborhoods for a long period of time for good reason. Heavy industrial uses bring noise, vibration, traffic, pollution, 24-7 lighting, and risks that simply do not belong next to homes, farms, schools, or rural communities. Zoning exists to protect public health, safety, and quality of life, not to be bent whenever a corporation asks. And the truth is simple. This land is owned agricultural. The land around it, agricultural and residential. Yet, we are being asked to transform peaceful rural communities into industrial corridors, as if the people who live here and the land itself can absorb endless impact without consequence. In The Giving Tree, the boy never stops to ask what the tree needs. He only asks what more he can take. And that is the moment we are living in now. Our land has given its apples, our farms, our open spaces, our clean air. It has given its branches, our roads, our infrastructure, our community stability. And now we are being asked for the trunk. But unlike the tree in the story, we have a responsibility to say enough. We have a responsibility to protect what remains before we are left with only a stump, before our rural character, our agricultural heritage, and our community well-being are cut down in the name of industrial development. Hartford County is generous, Hartford County is resilient, but Hartford County is not inexhaustible. I urge you, honor the zoning, honor the people who live here, and honor the land that has already given so much. Please protect our agricultural and residential communities from industrial encroachment before the giving becomes taking, before the stump is all that's left. Thank you, and I have copies of this book for each of you.

Thank you, ma'am. You can give the books to Ms. Dixon. Thank you. How much are the books? We're already questioning how much the books are worth. Call your next speaker.

I'm going to let you say that.

Hello. Good evening, sir. Name and zip? Bill Vasilekopoulos, 21085. So I'm here tonight to talk to you about a couple facts. There are 3,100 counties in the United States. There is one county in the entire United States that has a total ban on data centers, and that county is Marshall County, Indiana, with a population of 46,000. Hartford County has a population of 266,000. Marshall County has 70% of the land mass as farmland. Hartford County has 23%. The general fund of Marshall County is $46 million per year. The general fund here in Hartford County is $816 million a year. The 75 mile radius population for Marshall County, Indiana is 4.5 million people. The 75-mile radius from Hartford County is 14 million people. By creating a ban, you're not creating a ban on data centers. You are creating a ban on infrastructure, technology, and growth for the economy and national security and everything else that is involved here. You're creating a ban and a hindrance on the emerging tech sector that's here in Hartford County. hopefully growing even more. What we've proposed instead of a band is set standards for this county that will protect the citizens, protect everyone involved, set the standards, for example, and you have them and I will reissue them again to you tomorrow morning along with our community benefits agreement that we propose behind the meter power generation generation that has the capability of putting energy back into the grid, zero public water use, strict noise limits, generous setbacks, no PFAS chemicals in any part of the data center, and other improvements or setbacks or legislation that you would require. And as far as the community benefits agreement, this is something that the developer, me, would give back to the county, guarantee union jobs, growth in the college as well as other things. Another protection that I am announcing tonight and I announced before is property value protection. I am committing to paying the property taxes for the surrounding citizens of the property for 10 years. So boarding and immediate neighbors, I will pay their taxes annual Hartford County property taxes for 10 years. This is more than generous to go along with everything else involved that the county is obligated to in collecting taxes from the data center as well as community benefits agreement that help grow, and I emphasize grow, in this emerging technology economy that is in progress. Your time's up, sir. Thank you.

Agenda number 16, business from council members. Oh, I'm sorry. Good Lord, how could I forget you? Sorry about that.

Unfortunately, council members, many people do. Or maybe fortunately. I'd like to thank Mr. Bill for his courage because... You know, speaking in favor of something that everyone hates is truly a courageous thing. Name and address. Oh, my name is Ryan Burby, and I live at 1701 Mountain Road in Joppa 21085. I got to tell you guys, the disenfranchisement in this county, the constant attacks on working people are really getting disgusting. All right? So you have a couple choices. You can continue down that lane. Let's explore that. Let's just get rid of the whole council. Let's just point Mr. Bill, county regent. I'm sure he will look out for all of us. Let's get rid of the school board. We can have the county executive appoint a superintendent who can look out for all of us. Let's get rid of all the zoning. Let's get rid of every single regulation, every single block to anyone making money at their own risk. benefit at our loss. Because that's what's kind of going on. Okay, the problem with the data center thing is the water. You have to protect folks' water. It's not happening. And it's not just the data center you have to worry about, it's everything that comes afterwards. You have to protect people's right to representation. Look at the council. You should see some alarming details. Number one, the two largest population centers are not exclusively representative. Their votes have been diluted so that basically no one from Aberdeen will ever get elected to council again, unless they're a Republican. The folks from Edgewood aren't even incorporated. They get stepped on every single budget year And the folks from Have the Grace, their vote's diluted too. Fortunately, Mr. Bennett is popular enough that he can rise above, but hey, we got an imp who wants to remove that from the voters' hands. The second thing that you can do, something you can do to correct all this is, number one, don't even consider this bill. Postpone it indefinitely. Table it. Object to consideration. Because I assure you, I assure you, just as I'm telling the voters in District C, if by some miracle Tony G happens to win the primary, please, someone who works for the schools, anyone.

Mr. Burby, you're talking about that bill, and that bill just had a public hearing. I'm sorry.

Please, folks, consider, after the primaries, running a petition campaign. You don't have to run in the primaries if you run a petition campaign. You just have to get enough people to sign your petition. It has to end, okay? We can't continue to just honor special interests, and whoever's county executive, their cronies get it, and whoever's on the council, their cronies get it. You've got to rise above, folks, and you all are good people. Thank you so much.

There are no more speakers, Mr. President.

Thank you. 16 business from council members. Mr. Riley, you're first today.

I know I'm usually long winded. I'll be short tonight. Congratulations to all the graduates of 2026 in Hartford County. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Riley. Ms. Sottles.

Thank you. This upcoming Saturday, May 30th from 11 to 2 is the Ironbirds competition. Fun Fest kicking off their season. It's a free community event for families and residents to enjoy. You can get tickets online. And I'd also like to congratulate all the recent and upcoming graduates for Hartford Community College and the high schools. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Siles. Mr. Bennett.

Hello, good evening. Good to be with you all this evening. I was honored to attend Parris Mill High School's graduation earlier today, along with many of our council colleagues. That's a school that really touches many districts. I was in the fourth graduating class. My brother was in the first graduating class and so it was really fun to be able to see the 17th graduating class today. I want to thank everybody who came out tonight both for the hearing and for the meeting itself. I also thank those who email and call. I always say you know your government works as well as you make it work and so having people engaged

having people holding us accountable makes the best outcome for the community so again just thank you all so much have a good night thank you mr bennett miss robert yes good evening and congratulations to all the graduates i will say specifically on wednesday may 20th i attended the p-tech and homeland security assembly and awards at jabba town and they had 23 graduates in the cyber security and homeland But what's even better is the next day on May 21st, I got to watch them all accept an AA degree at the Hartford Community College. And so what a great experience to watch them go through high school and come out with an AA degree. And Thursday, May 21st, I also attended the International Baccalaureate Ceremony at Edgewood High School. There were 37 students that participated in that program. And I'm amazed, last year, I thought they couldn't top it, but this year they did. They received over $30 million in merit scholarships to go to college. That is absolutely amazing. And then today I attended Swan Creek graduation and Patterson Mill High School graduation this afternoon. Just a reminder, on Monday, June 1st, is the Edgewood-Joppatown CAB meeting, which will be at the Southern Precinct at 6.30 p.m. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Robert. Ms. Imhoff?

Good evening. So I obviously had the opportunity to attend the Jarrettsville-Norrisville Community Advisory Board on May 20th. On May 21st, I had the honor of celebrating the achievements of the students at Harford Community College commencement ceremony. I was actually able to attend both ceremonies. On May 22nd, I attended the Harford County Humane Society board meeting and also had the pleasure of celebrating the graduates of both C. Milton Wright and harford tech and then earlier today i had the opportunity to attend the patterson mill high school graduation the graduation season is not over yet and i look forward to attending several additional ceremonies this coming week graduation season is an exciting time as we recognize the accomplishments of our students and support their families and teachers to all of our young graduates congratulations on your incredible achievement Your hard work and commitment have brought you to this milestone, and I wish each of you continued success as you pursue your future goals and opportunities. As far as upcoming events, tomorrow is the Folsom Community Advisory Board meeting at 630 at the Veronica Chenoweth Center. On Saturday, May 30th, the Magic of Science Fair and Family Festival will take place at the Discovery Center at Water's Edge from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. For anyone who's never attended, it's a really great event. It brings in all of our community partners from the Toon Center at Towson University and Hartford Community College to our partners at APG and various other community partners to really kind of instill the interest in science and engineering and things like that for our young students. Additionally, on June 3rd at 9 a.m., the Development Advisory Committee will meet at 220 South Main Street here in Bel Air. One of the agenda items is a property located in District B at 1803 Harford Road in Folsom. The existing... owner of the property is trying to transition their current facility from a, uh, building that is used for to provide mental health services for people in recovery. And they are asking the county at this stack meeting to give them permission to turn it into a residential, um, treatment center. So anyone who's of interest, I encourage you to please look it up. The DAC meetings are open to the public, and you are welcome to give commentary there as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Imhoff. Mr. Janitor Dannett.

Thanks, Council President. So I was at the CAB meeting up in Jarrettsville, obviously about solar and also data centers. And also, big deal is the battery storage. That's also another problem. They want to put battery storage where there's no access to water and that if the batteries catch on fire and the chemicals will run into the Deer Creek. So we're looking at that as well. Did C. Milton Wright and Patterson Mill. I was able to be on the stage and get my nieces their graduation certificates, Lily and Sammy Chittum, so congratulations to them. Did the Memorial Day ceremony in the town of Bel Air. And then military appreciation lunch at Top of the Bay in Aberdeen. But also, Costco. I've been working with Costco for... That site originally was going to be a senior housing. It was going to be Johns Hopkins. It was all during COVID. We looked at that. We proved it. Then next thing you know, somebody came around and said it was a possibility of being Costco. I've talked to Costco in length, told them that there was other locations out in the county. The Bel Air location, they do not own. That's owned by another... Somebody else owns that. That's not big enough. They don't want to go there. They do want to go in Bel Air. I don't want them there. So I've told them that... On the new traffic study, they had to do new traffic study because the old traffic study wasn't that good. I brought up to the county about the widening of the lanes, the truck traffic at nighttime, anything to look at that. I even told Costco, you know, they've got money. I said, look, if you come and you build it, I'm not going to give any special exceptions. You're going to have to finish every interchange, and I think that's to the tune of $20 million. I think the traffic is going to be horrendous there. I don't agree that it should be there. Maybe somewhere else in the county, and the guy said, look, if they don't come here, then they're not going to come here. I'm fine with that. There's a Costco in Weishmarsh, and there's a Costco in Delaware. I know they bring a lot of jobs and a lot of income, but the amount of traffic that they're going to bring is just horrendous. So just to give you an update on that, I've talked, you know, every now and then I'll find out what's going on with that and where that's at. So right, pardon? I don't think they're gonna do, they don't want that. They don't know what they want, but you know, so at that point. Furthermore, I introduced this bill because the first bill that I introduced was less restrictive. But in order for this bill to be heard in a public hearing, it had to be substantially different. So, you know, all you people out there that are going to complain that you did complain, it had to be substantially different so we can have a public hearing on the bill. That's what my intention was, to have a public hearing. I'm glad we had a public hearing. But that doesn't mean I can't go back and amend it to the original bill. But this is the issue. It should have been heard. We should have not shot it down. Seven people shouldn't have done that. I'm sorry. You know, you've heard other people out here. The citizens had the right just because. aaron penman won his election he retired from the police he didn't stay on the police when he came on here he retired on the police jacob didn't retire he was still a teacher it went to the court the supreme court and whatever and he and he wanted to finally get in seated but coach slutsky also retired before he got on this seat okay so nobody says that you know, a teacher's not good or a police officer's not good. It's just that if you're government getting two government paychecks at the same time, that's what our charter said in 1972 and it's never been challenged until now. So other counties are going to look at challenging that as well and they're going to look at changing that. So I had to bring something forward that we can have a conversation, and it had to be materially different. So whether you like it or you don't, we had to have this conversation, and I'm glad we did. So that's all. Thank you, Council President. Absolutely. Thank you.

17, business from the president. I have to advertise the adequate public facilities advisory board meeting Monday, June 8th, 2026, 6 p.m., second floor of the multipurpose room. Again, graduations, I pride myself on attending every graduation, but unfortunately this morning I had a calendar mess up and I missed Swan Creek's graduation. And tonight was Aberdeen's, which we can never do Aberdeen's because it's a council night. But I wish them all well, proud of all of them. When you sit through a graduation and you listen to them speak, it's amazing. And then also had the pleasure and the honor to attend the Good Scout Award event with Ms. Tamara Rush. She is the founder and CEO of Tenex Technologies. She established that in 2014. Employees over 300 professionals across 16 states. Extremely well deserved. And then finally, I don't know, tomorrow I'll participate and present at the Harvard Leadership Academy. And then finally, Memorial Day ceremonies. I had the great honor to work with the members of Post 128 in the flag-placing ceremonies, and then participate at Harvard Grace as well. So with that, we'll adjourn this meeting. Thank you.