Are members of the Baltimore County Council strangling development by running fiefdoms in their districts? Or are they using their power to give their constituents what they want?
WYPR’s Baltimore County reporter John Lee talked with News Director Matt Bush about councilmanic courtesy and why it’s coming up in a heated debate over future development.
Bush: In a nutshell, what is councilmanic courtesy and how is it used on the county council?
Lee: Basically, if there is a project in a council member’s district, the other members will defer to what he wants. So that council member calls the shots. If he likes the project, it gets a green light. If he doesn’t, it’s killed. At a recent Council meeting Nick Stewart with the good governance advocacy group We The People said councilmanic courtesy is scaring away developers which is creating a housing crisis and stifling the county’s economy.
Stewart: “It’s too hard because it’s not about the merits of the project, it’s about who you know, and more importantly it’s about whether you know your council member because they control everything that happens in their district.”
Lee: As you can well imagine Stewart’s comments did not sit well with members of the council. Republican Councilman David Marks took issue with Stewart writing in a recent opinion in the Baltimore Sun that council members are fiefdom chiefs. Marks called Stewart’s column a hit piece.
Marks: “He calls each of us fiefdoms, right? We are all elected by the voters. They entrust us to make decisions. But we should be overruled by council members not accountable to those voters. Is that what you’re saying?”
Stewart: “Councilman Marks, nobody does it this way. No one runs their jurisdiction in Central Maryland like we do it. Where we just choose to scratch each other’s backs councilmanic district by councilmanic district.”
I should hasten to add here that Nick Stewart is seriously considering running for Baltimore County Executive in 2026.
Bush: So why is this coming up now?
Lee: It’s about the URDL.
The URDL is the urban-rural demarcation line that splits the county in two parts. Land inside the URDL is easy to develop. It has county water and sewer. Outside the URDL is more rural and development is restricted. It’s why I-83 is such a pretty drive from Hunt Valley to the Pennsylvania line.
Councilman Marks fears future County Councils may chip away at that rural protection so he wants to enshrine in the county charter that it would take a supermajority vote on the council to change the URDL.
Plus, and this is why councilmanic courtesy is coming up, the council member in whose district the change to the URDL is being proposed, could veto it. In essence, that would enshrine councilmanic courtesy when it comes to the URDL in the charter which is the county’s constitution.
That troubled Councilman Julian Jones and he questioned Marks about it.
Jones: “Why can’t they, having been elected, having been given the power, have the opportunity to sit in these chairs and make the decisions?”
Marks: “If you preserve the original intent of the bill they absolutely will.”
Jones: “They won’t because you are going to put all of the power in one person’s hands and you’re going to make it more difficult to change.”
Marks: “And councilman, taking that power away from that person empowers people who aren’t accountable to those voters.”
Bush: So the Baltimore County Council is scheduled to vote on the URDL legislation Monday night. What can we expect?
Lee: Marks currently has the votes he needs to get the URDL legislation passed, which would then put the issue on the 2026 ballot for voters to decide. But Councilman Izzy Patoka says he plans to propose an amendment which if passed would jettison from the bill councilmanic courtesy when it comes to changing the URDL. Patoka says requiring a supermajority council vote is enough to make it hard to change the URDL.
