The following is an op-ed piece from Councilman David Marks.
On Monday, August 4th, a majority of the Baltimore County Council rejected the County Executive’s choice for Inspector General. I opposed the nomination. In all my years as a Councilman, I have never seen such opposition to an appointment—and support for the current Inspector General, Kelly Madigan.
I received emails and phone calls from Baltimore Countians of all political persuasions, many of who have never contacted our office. It’s clear this issue struck a nerve and sent a message: Baltimore Countians expect their government to be honest and transparent, and they want an Inspector General empowered to ferret out waste, fraud, and abuse.
Ms. Madigan will now remain in her position, hopefully until she is renominated for a second term.
Now it is time to ensure that she has the resources and power to fully carry out her mission. That is why I am sponsoring a resolution to urge the Maryland General Assembly to extend the Inspector General’s jurisdiction to include Baltimore County Public Schools, which receives around half the county budget.
When this idea was first discussed in 2021, the Maryland General Assembly refused to take action because some legislators argued there are already audits in place. The Maryland Department of Education exercises control over local school systems. A string of controversies, however, shows the need for much stronger scrutiny at the county level. Our children have been impacted by a ransomware attack, bus delays, and numerous other incidents that point to inefficiency in the system.
It is also time to reform the process for selecting the Inspector General. That is why I am cosponsoring Councilman Izzy Patoka’s legislation to amend the county charter to create an independent panel that will review future candidates for this position.
Below is the statement I read at the August 4th Council meeting:
“In all my years as a Councilmember, I have almost always voted for the County Executive’s nominees, even when those nominees share divergent views than mine. I believe the County Executive deserves the opportunity to surround himself or herself with capable, qualified men and women who can operate government and carry out the Executive’s goals as endorsed by the voters who elected that Executive.
This, however, is a different case.
First, the nature of the office of Inspector General. This is not an office envisioned as a direct report to the County Executive.
And second, the level of public attention. I have received emails and phone calls from Baltimore Countians of all political persuasions, many of who have never contacted our office before. They have almost all been of one opinion: Ms. Madigan deserves to be reappointed.
The County Executive’s nominee, Ms. Walker, has deep credentials in federal service, a career that merits respect and appreciation. Had the state legislature acted on the County Council’s recommendation to create a regional water authority, Ms. Walker would be a perfect candidate to head up that type of entity. But ultimately, it is clear to me that Ms. Madigan has done nothing to not deserve reappointment.
Article 3, Title 14 of the county charter outlines the process by which the County Executive can recommend the removal of an Inspector General before their term has expired: “The cause of removal shall be stated in writing and a public hearing held on the removal.” Although Ms. Madigan’s term has been completed, she is basically being recommended to be removed—yet this Council has never been told why.
This is a Council with a history of supporting qualified candidates of all backgrounds.
The County Executive has a long record of public service, but on this issue, many of us simply disagree with her recommendation.
Ms. Madigan deserves a second term as Inspector General.”
