Baltimore County residents will vote Nov. 5 on whether to expand the County Council, preserve the Office of the Inspector General, institute term limits for planning board members, and borrow $600 million in bonds. There is also one statewide question on the ballot, Question 1, that asks voters to enshrine the right to reproductive health care in the Maryland Constitution.

Citizens can propose ballot questions if they collect at least 10,000 signatures from registered county voters. The county council can also put questions on the ballot if five or more council members agree. A simple majority of voters is needed to pass charter amendments.

Question A

The seven-member Baltimore County Council is asking to expand to nine members starting in 2026 and establish council members as full-time positions. The county population has grown threefold and diversified since adopting its charter-style government in 1956. Expansion advocates, including Council Chair Izzy Patoka, say adding members would better reflect that growth by offering more chances for women and people of color to run for public office.

The county, Maryland’s third-largest, is 50% female and 47% people of color. The council, which has considered expanding since 1978, is made up of six white men and one Black man.

The ballot initiative itself, which Patoka sponsored, has attracted controversy because it includes a draft map that creates two new districts in western and eastern Baltimore County. Councilmen Pat Young and Julian Jones, who represent the west side, said the process for drafting the map was not public and only passed after Patoka struck a deal to receive votes from Republican councilmen Wade Kach, Todd Crandell and David Marks.

Kach, Crandell and Marks accused Patoka of trying to renege on an agreement making the map permanent, which they said would allow Republicans to maintain seats on the majority Democratic council. On Monday, the council voted down a bill from Young that would have struck the map Patoka drafted.

The ACLU of Maryland and state lawmakers have threatened a lawsuit. They argue the expansion map process violated federal and state law by not including public input and would illegally shift appointment power over the county school board from the state legislature to council members.

Patoka, Kach and Councilman Mike Ertel say if the initiative passes, the council will undergo a public commission process to draft new district boundaries. Olszewski endorsed Vote4More, but has largely stayed out of the fray. He said in a statement Thursday that he would support expansion despite his reservations about the current proposed council map.

Question B

Baltimore County Inspector General Kelly Madigan is asking voters to enshrine her office into the county charter, which would officially establish it within county government and eliminate the ability to defund or change the agency without voter approval.

Olszewski first created the watchdog office in 2019 as the Office of Ethics and Accountability to root out fraud, waste and corruption in county government; it later became the Office of the Inspector General. The County Council voted to send Question B to voters last December. Madigan said she wants to be reappointed when her five-year term is up in January.

Despite some initial friction, Olszewski supported Madigan when Jones tried to introduce a series of last-minute amendments that would have drastically curtailed her investigative powers.

Some of Madigan’s most high-profile investigations have been of county politicians, including Olszewski and Jones. In 2021, she cited Olszewski’s top aides for intervening on behalf of a wealthy developer who wanted to build a “tennis barn” on his property. Madigan also cited Jones for directing Public Works officials to repave an alleyway owned by one of his donors using county funds. More recently, Marks, Kach and Crandell asked Madigan to investigate after The Baltimore Sun reported in July that the administration gave a secret payment to the brother of Olszewski’s friend, a since-retired county firefighter who was seeking transfer service time to his county record so he could receive a larger pension.

Question C

The council is asking voters to allow them to approve all appointments to the Baltimore County Planning Board and limit members to three, three-year consecutive terms. The planning board currently has 15 volunteer members who make recommendations about issues like zoning, land use and the Baltimore County Master Plan. The county executive currently appoints eight at-large members, and each council member appoints an individual member to represent their district. On Monday, the council confirmed C. Scott Holupka as chair.

In a Sun commentary in April, Marks complained that the council could only confirm the planning board vice chair and chair, preventing the public from having “no input on how 13 of the 15 members are confirmed.” He and the council voted earlier this year to amend the charter to allow them to confirm all nominees to the planning board, rationalizing that the board is currently “too pro-development.”

The council passed legislation this year increasing the fees that developers must pay when constructing in overcrowded areas, and overrode Olszewski’s veto of an ordinance that curbs development in overcrowded areas.

Zoning and land use are perennial topics of concern but have taken on more urgency as the county faces a housing crisis and overcrowded schools.

Questions D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L

Questions D through L ask county voters to allow Baltimore County to borrow $600 million to finance ongoing projects like updating school buildings, senior centers and firehouses; making sewer improvements; and obtaining easements to preserve parkland. The ordinances are for individual projects for bonds ranging from $4 million for road improvements to $331 million for constructing and modernizing school buildings.

The request, which Olszewski announced during his budget message in April, was $250 million more than initially anticipated due to inflation. The county is also bracing for potential deficits in light of the state’s budget woes.