By Adam Pagnucco.

In the last two budget cycles, one of County Executive Marc Elrich’s priorities has been to restore the People’s Counsel, a position existing in county law that has gone unfunded since 2010.  The county council has so far not gone along with the idea.  So one state senator has intervened in the dispute, introducing a local bill that would mandate the filling of the position and “adequate funding” for it.  That is sure to provoke fireworks in Rockville.

First, I wrote about the history of the People’s Counsel last May.  The position was created in county law in 1990 and first funded in 1999.  Sec. 2-150 of the county code contains its purpose statement, which reads:

Informed public actions on land use matters require a full exploration of often complex factual and legal issues. An independent People’s Counsel can protect the public interest and promote a full and fair presentation of relevant issues in administrative proceedings in order to achieve balanced records upon which sound land use decisions can be made. In addition, a People’s Counsel who provides technical assistance to citizens and citizen organizations will encourage effective participation in, and increase public understanding of and confidence in, the County land use process.

As a president of my former civic association, I found the People’s Counsel of that time, Martin Klauber, to be a useful resource as we engaged with Holy Cross Hospital on its expansion plans 15 years ago.  His office was defunded during the Great Recession but it was never repealed by statute.  Elrich has tried to restore its funding in the last two budgets but the council has declined to approve it.  The issue provoked a confrontation between Council Member Will Jawando and one of Elrich’s assistants last May in which Jawando alleged that the administration was using a cloak of racial equity to stop development by bringing back the People’s Counsel.  And so the office remains in limbo, still enshrined in county law but unfilled and unfunded.

Enter Senator Ben Kramer, who does not shy away from legislative controversies.  Last year, Kramer was the author of two state bills branded by opponents as “power grab bills” that would have transferred some authority over Park and Planning to the county executive.  The bills followed a blow-up at the planning board that ultimately proved to be much ado about nothing, but that did not stop Kramer from exploding at the council and accusing the council of lying.  Those bills ultimately resulted in a joint work group that has produced a few proposals now working their way through Annapolis and Rockville.

Kramer lets it rip in the council hearing room last year.

Kramer’s new bill would resolve the People’s Counsel dispute by mandating its appointment and funding in state law.  The bill states that the county executive shall – not may – appoint the People’s Counsel subject to a number of qualifications.  It also states that Park and Planning “shall include in its annual operating budget proposal adequate funding for the People’s Counsel” and that the county council “shall approve funding for the People’s Counsel as provided for in the Commission’s budget proposal.”  Again, note the use of “shall.”  Kramer is not inclined to grant the council any latitude in blocking the restoration of the office.

Now local officials like state mandates about as much as they like cockroaches in the bathtub, but let’s acknowledge that there are many of them.  Perhaps the most expensive one is the state’s maintenance of effort law setting requirements for county funding of public schools.  The fact is that in Maryland, the counties are the creatures of the state and possess authority only to the extent that the state grants it.

That has not stopped the county attorney from alleging that Kramer’s bill violates the state constitution.  A council packet scheduled for review today contains this quote from the county attorney:

The Bill creates an impermissible public local law because it mandates that the Council fund a position in full, at whatever rate the Commission proposes (p. 4 lines 10-11), thereby violating the Home Rule Amendment by interfering with the budgeting and appropriation discretion and authority vested in the Council.

Kramer is seeking an opinion on the issue from the state Attorney General, creating the possibility of dueling legal advice.  That wouldn’t be the first time that has happened.

While the lawyers poke around in their dusty tomes, the real question here is likely to be political.  The council has not demonstrated an appetite for restoring the People’s Counsel and a pending bill would replace it with a new office.  The issue is further rooted in longstanding disagreements between Elrich and the council over land use.  (Remember Thrive 2050?)  The state legislators who will decide the fate of Kramer’s bill can recognize a political food fight when they see one.  Will they want to stick their heads up as the pies fly this way and that?  We shall see.

In the meantime, this site renews its appreciation for Senator Kramer, a reliable generator of eyeballs for us.  Long may he serve!