Charter Government

What the Heck does that MEAN?

By Teresa Bell-Stockman

Photos and Illustration by David Arthur

 

I can’t even remember what year in high school I studied government, much less what I learned. And, I’d bet I am not alone on this score, but likely have considerable company among the 137,680 registered voters in Frederick County.

So, as often happens when I hear terms like “charter government,” “checks and balances” and “home rule,” my eyes glaze over, and—al- though not to a Homer Simpson-drooling- and-daydreaming-over-donuts extreme—my thoughts do go elsewhere. 

Frankly, however, I should know what charter government is all about. That’s why this assignment was good for me.

So, here’s what I learned about a topic that’s both important and abstract—and hard to explain. Frederick County is currently governed by an elected, five-member board of commissioners that cannot legislate on many local matters without first going to the Maryland General Assembly in Annapolis for permission.

And that means, in a nutshell, that local is- sues important to Frederick County are aired and voted on statewide—much like local towns in the 1950s had to ask the state for permission to ban pig herding on its main roads. 

In Maryland, there are three forms of county government: Commissioner, which Frederick currently has; charter, which is where some people want to take our county, and code home rule, which is a hybrid of the other two (a county council with expanded, state-approved powers, but no formal charter).

Okay, so here’s a simple, if circular, definition of charter government: It’s a government established with a written charter that has been presented to the people of that county, put to a vote and passed.

But here’s the rub: The charter itself, which empowers charter government, is a complex document that sets forth the basic organization of that government—such as its executive and county council branches—and rules, powers, duties and limitations of that government’s operation.

One example of this complex organizational matter is the fact that, within charter government, the elected county council can draft and pass local legislation (the county executive actually implements it) only as long as it does not conflict with state laws. 

Why Charter Government for Frederick County? Why Now?

“We need to be able to make the rules that we live under,” Thomas Browning, owner of Locust Grove Farm in Mount Airy, tells the Frederick Gorilla. “That’s fundamental.”

Browning is one of 12 appointees (including three alternates) to an all-volunteer county Charter Board that has been tasked by Frederick’s Board of County Commissioners to write a charter document for the voters’ consideration. 

According to Blaine Young, BOCC president, Frederick County is at a crossroads, and the road Young thinks it should take is in the direction of a strong county executive, like that of the 10 Maryland counties—including Baltimore City, which has county-like standing— that currently have charter governments. Four- teen others have either commissioner or code home rule systems.

Additionally, all 12 county municipalities also employ a form of charter government, in that a mayor or a burgess performs executive functions and town councils do the legislative work.

“Charter government can certainly improve efficiency … and be more effective,” says Ken Coffey, chair of the Charter Board, “and be more responsive to the needs of the people of this county.”

Vice president of marketing and chief development officer for Frederick Memorial Hospital, Coffey also served as an alternate to the 1991 charter writing committee—whose charter recommendation failed to get voter approval in 1992—and believes this time may be the best, last chance for passing a charter for Frederick County.

“The current board of commissioners feels charter is right for the time,” Coffey adds, noting that the county delegation in Annapolis is also “primarily in favor of the concept because the workload of state government has grown so much.”

Coffey, too, believes that charter government better suits the needs of Frederick County, and he agrees with the Frederick County Chamber of Commerce, which thinks that charter government would benefit the local economy, create jobs and expand the tax base.

So why didn’t the charter initiative succeed in 1991—or similar initiatives in 1968, 1970 1983 and 2002?

“The unfortunate thing was that [the 1991 one] went to a special election,” recalls Bonnie Bailey-Baker, co-president of the Frederick County League of Women Vot- ers and member of the 1991 charter writing committee. “There was extremely low [voter] turnout.”

Established in 1960, the league is a non- partisan, issues-oriented organization that, ac- cording to Bailey-Baker, “just looks at [governance] functions” and tries to “educate ourselves primarily [but also] the public.”

It supports charter home rule for Frederick County on “good government” principles, Bailey-Baker says, but only if there is sufficient executive-county council checks and balances. 

“It’s all about checks and balances,” she explains. “How are you going to build-in the checks and balances?”

As such, the league will be taking a long, hard look at any new charter initiative for Frederick County.

“I think [the 1991] attempt failed because people didn’t understand it,” says Joan Aquilino, a local business owner, current member of the Charter Board and former member of the Frederick County Planning Commission. 

Aquilino, who also is an aide to state Delegate Kelly Schulz, believes that voters may vote against issues—such as a charter or code home rule recommendation—simply because of the people who support it.

“There’s a bogey man behind the curtain,” echoes former County Commissioner John (Lenny) Thompson Jr. 

Thompson, who served on the county board from 1998 to 2010, and as its president from 2002 to 2006, says that where charter or code home rule has failed in the past, those who op- posed it “feared a ‘dictator for life,’” in the form of a county executive. 

“We tried code home rule in 2002,”Thomp- son recalls, “and it failed 2:1.”

And Thompson’s thoughts on charter or code home rule’s prior failures? 

“Usually among the reasons charter fails,” he explains, “is that [supporters] have to get [the details] to the people.”.

In 1991, he recalls, the proposed charter was 50 pages long; and the stand-alone, special election doomed it to about a 10 percent voter turnout.

What Do the Voters Want?

It’s always a good idea to involve the public in any initiative for which you’ll need their support. And this, the Charter Board has done in spades—at town halls, Rotary clubs, library community rooms, focus groups and other public meetings. 

“We went out,” says Earl “Rocky” Mackintosh, local realtor and board outreach chairman, “and hosted almost 30 meetings with the com- munity.

 We got input, and now we are taking those thoughts and comments and incorporating them [into the charter-writing process.]” 

“This board is big on transparency, big on feedback and big on input,” adds Aquilino, also on the outreach committee, who notes that typically she gets questions about charter government’s nature, benefits, effects on current operations and meaning to the individual citizen.

But those kinds of questions really cannot be answered until the charter is written, although, Aquilino says, there may be one exception to that: Through- out the 30 outreach events, there seemed to be no issue with the Sheriff ’s Office continuing to operate as it now does.

Conversely, Aquilino adds, the public seems overwhelmingly in favor of term limits for elected officials.

Currently, however, the BOCC does not have term limits.

“I hear people are most concerned about the responsibilities and authorities of the executive,” Browning explains, adding that people are “afraid of the potential concentration of power.”

Considerable feedback also centers around a “strong” executive versus a “weak” executive, Aquilino says. She, too, is concerned about this feature. “If it is a weak executive,” she says, “it would be just like a county manager. We need somebody in Annapolis with power to make decisions on the spot.” 

Another hot topic is whether the executive should be elected at-large—as are the BOCC commissioners—or appointed by the county council, and, according to Aquilino, respondents are also registering “very strong opinions for and against the idea of council voting districts.”

Coffey believes that districts “give voters a chance to know whom they are voting for,” and thinks, citing the districting model that state delegates run under, that smaller areas would allow council candidates to mount more afford- able campaigns.

Browning agrees that a district-based model would give voters more of a chance for their voices to be heard and joins Coffey in holding that smaller voting districts would be more attractive to prospective citizen-legislators. Bailey-Baker, however, disagrees. “I personally believe that when [the voters] see the districts, they will oppose it. That’s what killed it last time.”

Drawing lines, she says, can be divisive.

Also coming in loud and clear from recession-affected citizens weighing in on charter is- sue, Aquilino says, is the question of how much a structure change will cost.

Browning said the board’s goal is to make charter government cost no more than com- missioner government, and, possibly, “make [it even] a bit more efficient.”

Voters are also afraid of any “extreme taxing authority,” Aquilino says. 

Victor Tervala, however, a charter government expert, consultant and author—hired by the BOCC to advise the Charter Board—says charter government adds no new taxing authority for the county.

“Tervala is an outstanding resource,” Coffey says of the Charter Board consultant, who has been attending its biweekly meetings since charter draft writing began. “He brings a lot of expertise to the table.”

Nuts and Bolts

In April, the board set forth its goals, including a proposed charter that provides for an efficient, effective and responsive government, including its checks and balances; establishes the duties and responsibilities of the executive and the county council; and promotes and encourages citizen participation.

“We are building a constitution,” Coffey says, that will be the “people’s document.”

The actual drafting of the charter, however, began only last fall, after briefing by Trevala on Cecil County’s new charter (2010), which will go into effect in November of 2012 when the first county executive is elected. 

“We are looking at Cecil, primarily because it is the newest,” explains Coffey, adding that the board is also examining the older charters of Howard and Harford Counties, which are closer to Frederick in size, demographics, urban areas and farmland.

“The issue with charter is that it is very difficult to get it [approved],” Tervala says, explaining that, in the past 35-40 years, only two counties have successfully passed a charter re- organization—Dorchester in 2002 and Cecil in 2010.

Coffey, however, is optimistic. “I think the process we are using is a good one,” he says.

He believes that the board has already come to a rough consensus on a five-member council, elected from five districts and designated ac- cording to population, and a full-time executive alongside part-time council members. 

Other proposals under consideration include four-year terms and term limits for both executive and council positions.

And if the draft charter stipulates an elected county executive, Thompson thinks that it will be written to ensure a strong one.

“We’ve never had a one-on-one race here before,” he says, adding that he could “live with a five-member council, elected at-large. But he fears that a weak council will inevitably be con- trolled by a strong executive.

“It will be the executive’s responsibility to administer the government,” Coffey says.

Accordingly, Tervala says, the executive is also responsible for the county budget, although the council would vote on that budge—as well as fulfilling its legislative duties.

Charters, however, regardless of their initial formulation, usually contain 10-year review provisions—and that likely provides reassurance to many.

All that said, what kind of laws can a county council enact? 

One example, Aquilino says, can be found in the bottle return bill Frederick County proposed in its 2010 legislative agenda. 

Mired down in the state’s failed attempts to legislate recycling, however, it went nowhere.

Another example concerns planning and zoning.

Under charter home rule, a county can legislate and handle its own planning and zoning issues, Aquilino adds.

Summing it all up, Tervala says that under charter government “most [local] things can be handled locally,” including, for example, public safety, fire and rescue, internal affairs, payroll and how taxpayer dollars are spent “[Under charter government] you have control over the size of your local government,” Tervala explains, “and control over your finances…Before charter home rule be- came available, there wasn’t a general grant to counties to handle internal matters, and if they wanted to go into debt, they had to ask the state delegation [to raise the matter in Annapolis].”

In effect, then, charter government means more local control over local issues.

Simplify, Simplify, Simplify— and Work Together

The devil is in the details—and de- tails are what constitute government.

And that is the conundrum currently facing the Charter Board.

The Charter Board must be accurate, fair and balanced, and include in its product all the relevant minutia while tying up all the loose ends, so as to keep the government running smoothly—and transparently. 

Oh, and the document setting all this out must be simple.

“Keep it simple,” says Mackintosh. “[Otherwise] somebody will say ‘I don’t understand this,’ and vote against it.” 

Charter Board member and former assistant Frederick City attorney Debra Borden agrees. “Keeping things as simple as possible better informs people,” she says. “We are writing this document to last for the next 100 years or more.”

And Aquilino is hoping for a draft charter that is both simple, accessible and user-friendly. “We need to take charge of our own destiny,” she says, suggesting that the best vehicle for accomplishing this is a user-friendly draft charter. 

As for Coffey, he assures that the board will “try to educate the citizenry to the greatest ex- tent possible what charter government is and what it can do.”

And, adds Browning, “[another] key to this is making people comfortable with change.”

Both considerations, arguably, converge at the principle that equates good government with balanced power.

Accordingly, Aquilino thinks there is more accountability with charter government, and that a strong county executive, working along- side a strong council, is the embodiment of the concept of checks and balances. 

“It is going to take some give and take from both branches,” Coffey ex- plains, noting that the executive may nominate citizens to local boards, but the council may be given the power to confirm such appointments. “Politics by definition,” he says, “is the art of conflict resolution.” 

Tervala agrees, characterizing this dynamic as a “symbiotic relationship.”

“The executive does not want the council to interfere with the government’s day-to-day affairs,” he says, “but the council establishes policies under which the executive works.

And the council can take a broader look as to what the county needs for the long-term. It’s a cooperative effort,” he adds. “It’s always a balancing act.”

“[But] the power is with the voters,” Aquilino adds. “We [therefore] can’t write a charter that leans one way or another. We have to write a fair and balanced document that will allow voters to [decide].”

So, for the charter to succeed—and there appears to be bipartisan support for it in the county—it must be perceived as non-partisan and without any personal or political agenda, Bailey-Baker says.

Then, the next step will be to present it to the Board of County Commissioners.

“They [the BOCC is] not to make comment,” Browning explains. “They’re only obligation is to get it out to the public.”

 According to state law, the charter must be written within 18 months of Charter Board’s creation, and Tervala thinks the board will present the document on time to the commissioners around the second week of August 2012.

The commissioners are then required to publish it twice—with 30-90 days between publications—in a general circulation paper. 

And, finally, the voting public will get its crack at the proposal, not at a special election, but on Election Day, November 6.