Baltimore County Council Chair Julian Jones faced criticism from numerous government officials and watchdog groups Tuesday for his efforts to curtail the Baltimore County Inspector General’s investigative powers.
Jones, a Woodstock Democrat who has been the subject of two previous inspector general investigations, circulated an amending bill to council members last week, less than two hours before the Baltimore County Council was set to pass legislation enshrining the inspector general’s office into the county charter and expanding its ability to access records during an investigation.
The council voted to postpone a vote on the legislation to its Dec. 18 meeting.
The Office of the Inspector General, led by former Deputy State Prosecutor Kelly Madigan, is tasked with rooting out fraud, waste and corruption in county government.
At a work session Tuesday afternoon, Madigan, Baltimore City Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming, Deputy County Legislative Officer Kimmie Routson, county residents and observers told the council they opposed Jones’ amendments. Jones also gave his first public statements since the draft became public last week, which he defended as a “check” on the inspector general’s office.
His amendments would create an oversight board, ask the watchdog agency to potentially reimburse the legal fees of county employees cleared of wrongdoing, and require the inspector general to submit reports to the board before publication, which Cumming called “shocking” and “unheard of.”
A new version of the bill published Monday would require a judge’s approval for the inspector general to subpoena non-county records during an investigation, and allow residents to serve on the oversight board who have expertise in taxes or law and who are faculty members at the University of Maryland law school and Morgan State University.
“The amendments do not weaken the powers of the inspector general, but strengthen them and give some level of checks and balances to the office,” Jones said. “I believe in transparency and some level of accountability.”
Specifically, he said he opposed, on constitutional grounds, the inspector general’s ability to subpoena outside county records, like contractors’ bank statements and emails, during an investigation.
“When we think about information, information can be extremely dangerous, if it leaks out to the wrong people,” Jones said. “People have committed suicide because their private information is made public.”
Madigan said subpoena power was a regular tool used by inspectors general across the U.S., and that there was a “formula” for how she ran her office: “I disagree with this idea that an inspector general is running loose and issuing subpoenas. In fact, it’s false.”
She pointed out that the Blue Ribbon Commission on Ethics and Accountability, which County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr., a Democrat, convened to offer recommendations to her office, previously considered an oversight board and recommended against it in order to ensure her office remained independent.
“You can call [the board] whatever you want. I don’t support it,” Madigan said. “It’s not consistent with best practices, and it’s an infringement on independence.”
Council members Izzy Patoka, a Pikesville Democrat, and Wade Kach, a Timonium Republican, said they would oppose efforts to hamstring the agency. Other members did not offer their thoughts. Mike Ertel, a Towson Democrat, told The Baltimore Sun he did not believe Jones had enough support to pass his amendment.
“I’m not going to vote for the amendment,” Patoka told Jones during the hearing.
Jones demurred when Patoka asked if he had reached out to any potential oversight board members, or to name which council members he said he had consulted while drafting the amendment.
“If you’re not going to vote for it, don’t worry about it,” Jones said to Patoka.
The council chair did not provide copies of his amendments to Olszewski or Madigan before last week’s meeting, where he told The Sun that it was “fake news.”
The League of Women Voters of Baltimore County, Common Cause Maryland, and the Association of Inspectors General, an industry group, all issued statements in support of the inspector general and opposing any legislation that would undermine the office’s ability to “perform its work in an effective and independent manner.”
The association previously defended Madigan and her office when Olszewski drafted legislation in July 2021 that would have instituted an oversight board and required her to ask county officials for permission before launching an investigation. That bill was never introduced.
Joanne Antoine, the executive director of Common Cause Maryland and a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission, said Jones’ amendments were a “slap in the face” to everyone who had worked on the commission.
“These amendments are disrespectful, not only to myself and others who served on the commission but to the taxpayers who invested in our work,” she said. “The last-minute weakening amendments being proposed by Council Chair Jones not only undermine the purpose of the office, but shield the bad actors seeking to use county resources for their own interests.”
“If he refuses [to withdraw his bill], we urge the County Council to reject the amendments put before them and support the effort to create a truly independent OIG with the resources it needs to be effective.”
Residents also mostly spoke out against Jones’ amendments.
“Mr. Jones, I have appreciated some of your work in our community,” said Towson resident Rose Kinder. “Your effort to restrain the inspector general has been sustained, egregious, and damaging to your reputation.”
Retired county employee Whitney Dudley said the amendments would stifle the inspector general’s ability to “expose wrongdoing by upper level management directors, bureau chiefs, department heads, et cetera” and protect workers like her.
“An example would be the exposure of the paving of a private alley at the direction of a county administrator,” Dudley said. “Several county employees expressed concerns and highlighted the misstep of this action and they were silenced.”
Jones was cited in two inspector general investigations in 2022. One was for directing public works employees to use public funds to repave a private alleyway at the request of its owner, developer Wayne Gioiso, who previously donated to Jones’ campaign. The other was for using his government email to improperly solicit campaign donations.
After the meeting, Jones said he would not impede the original legislation from passing if his amendments failed.
“No, I won’t kill the bill entirely,” he said.
Jones sponsored the original legislation at Olszewski’s request, and did not oppose nor make any amendments to those bills before last week.
Olszewski’s original bills would more formally establish the three-year-old inspector general’s office as a county agency and insulate it from attempts to dismantle it by requiring public hearings and written notice to any reduction to its budget.
Jones also dismissed a previous news report stating that the council had violated the Open Meetings Act by informally caucusing before last week’s meeting. He referred to it as a “private discussion,” and that “from time to time, I need to speak to council members one-on-one,” and that at no point was there a quorum of council members.
Patoka also denied that any formal meeting had taken place, referring to it as a series of “brief discussions throughout the day,” while Ertel called it a “five-second huddle” outside council chambers.
The council will vote on the legislation during its session on Monday.
