[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6633460,"mediaKeyId","2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21","parentId",2664398,"title","Senate Executive Nominations Committee advances multiple nominees; several appointments held for further review","audioSeconds",474,"startMs",6406000,"endMs",6880000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21&start=6406&end=6880","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21/thumbnail_6406000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6633460/Maryland/Senate-Executive-Nominations-Committee-advances-multiple-nominees-several-appointments-held-for-further-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6633460-76c8987f00dbbb21b825e88cbb07e401/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149932&Signature=I33cw374TfFyuPARxGm-XPGYhLQrz2UPD93K08SjTVelrK1HZwPQ8PSXyAJ8V2JUZKCcIsu4R~GGEIsE9l5bvn92zzweIjCbjF0wqJ0ZMU5gOPZaWaAMHhAc1B7jHdCOdb2c5FsPgobs5itano0i1ZiC7Esj-UCmUHuSSwjg0Ysjzg9tcDniJL3N0TkAHUQWQbE0ebq8IR7z4By08Rc3M5Xdw12VFMTaLsVx~WWCESEIMftYxEF6RCuFB3AzxKdB0kbnb7ANhRa28vDPkThrg6q9wTwDcDGLWee32Kx8P9tdmy7HsN2ZvqA5wonWHfk1qZoat~Cywu07tFfB3nZ-Qw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Maryland General Assembly - Executive Nominations","date","2025-03-17T23:20:31.403Z","article","The Senate Executive Nominations Committee on March 17 voted to report favorably on a large group of gubernatorial nominees and tabled several others for later consideration.

What the committee acted on: The committee approved a motion to advance nominees 1–32 and the slate of S1–S44 and L1–L30 as presented at the hearing, with specified exceptions that were held for additional review. According to remarks during the session, the motion excluded several nominees who were being rescheduled or held: nominee numbers 8 and 18 did not appear and were being rescheduled; other holds cited during floor discussion included numbers reported in the hearing record as 10, 11 and 21 (the committee announced those numbers during the floor exchange). The committee chair moved the larger slate and the motion passed.

Recorded outcome and tally: Meeting remarks indicate the broader motion to move the slate forward passed; a roll-call on a related motion was recorded as passing with 12 yeas. The committee discussion included multiple requests to hold specific nominees for additional review and a brief debate about the process for holding nominees.

Notable procedural points from the hearing: Senators debated whether nominees from local districts should be given extra time when county colleagues requested it. One senator asked for a roll-call vote on holding a specific nominee; another moved to approve nominee number 16, which was taken up and approved by roll-call (the meeting record indicates the committee vote passed with 12 yeas on that item). Several senators said they had met privately with nominees; others asked for more time for direct meetings.

Holds and next steps: The committee identified several nominees that will be rescheduled for later hearings or otherwise held for additional review. The hearing transcript records multiple separate holds and at least one motion to separate a nominee from the general slate. Committee staff will publish the official committee report and a final roll-call record for the full slate when available; those documents will list each nominee and the committee’s formal recommendation.

Vote at a glance (committee action as announced during the meeting):
- Motion to advance nominees 1–32 and S1–S44 and L1–L30 (except nominees listed as held): Passed (committee announced motion passed; tally reported in discussion as 12 yeas on a related roll-call).
- Nominees held for rescheduling/review (as stated aloud during the session): Nos. 8 and 18 (did not appear), and additional holds cited in-floor as Nos. 10, 11 and 21 (to be rescheduled or reviewed). Committee staff will confirm exact hold list in the official minutes.

Context: The Executive Nominations Committee considers many gubernatorial appointments across state boards and commissions. On March 17 the committee heard nominees for health, education, fisheries, corrections, university system boards and multiple state advisory panels. Several nominations generated substantive policy questions during questioning; others were presented with brief remarks and no questions.

Official record and follow-up: This article reflects committee statements and the hearing record from March 17; the committee’s formal vote tallies and the official list of nominees advanced or held will appear in the committee report and the Senate journal.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","EXN Committee Session, 3/17/2025 #1","oneSentenceSummary","The committee moved to report favorably a broad slate of gubernatorial nominees and tookholds on a small set of nominees for further review. A roll-call on a contested nomination produced a 12-yea result on that item during the March 17 meeting.","taxTitle","Executive Nominations Committee, SENATE, SENATE, Committees, Legislative, Maryland","taxId",15093,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6633465,"Albrecht Chesterfield defends record and answers questions about local board experience during State Board of Education nomination",113,2839000,2952000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21&start=2839&end=2952","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21/thumbnail_2839000.jpg","/articles/6633465/Maryland/Albrecht-Chesterfield-defends-record-and-answers-questions-about-local-board-experience-during-State-Board-of-Education-nomination","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6633465-e18bbb51e924f7ba43615c4bedf15f5e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149932&Signature=ktZkv0w7~sAsD3oppj5GZElrL1l-KYh5ZfhkEmDz5FZNTJgq0DWr9GP1tum1GsrfWfZ2Nixk-LoMxOMPw0z-4YLOnmW~kzRl2tbrSNDk6Mu3MkULuH2r-f-K6XFSN-9lSH~PURySaXKphsNrjS3PcZyo4lzRgBwA6FKqrQgGRkUFjgIx3NlNOnqUg4h6CysjedbIixUfu3PoOy8uGtr1Ymg1rv150ngVffIJozyKqTqv9J~eFHpxjThSfyRiaH9ediAduoj8S0hhtQc5Ht9GSsdeo~aeQy6EXtsPHCBOb-ok3ELTQ~QF6Tahw2JMfWZjQX~O224ZoV2HPIOHlcCw-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Albrecht Chesterfield, a candidate for the Maryland State Board of Education, appeared March 17 before the Senate Executive Nominations Committee and faced extended questioning about his K–12 experience and a local property dispute that was raised during the hearing.

Chesterfield, who presented a long career at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore and has served in multiple university administrative roles, told the committee he is still completing a doctorate and said, “I haven't gotten that doctorate degree as yet, still working on it,” adding wryly, “Soon to be.” He described a decades-long career in higher education and as executive director of the Chincoteague Bay Field Station.

Why it matters: The State Board of Education helps shape K–12 policy across Maryland. Senators from rural counties pressed the nominee about direct experience in K–12 settings and asked about a civil matter involving a neighbor that surfaced in the record.

On K–12 experience: Chesterfield told senators he served about a year on the Somerset County Board of Education after a gubernatorial appointment and worked as a substitute teacher there. In response to questions about how that experience prepared him for the State Board, he recounted prior roles in higher education and local educational service but acknowledged that most of his career has been in higher education administration.

On a neighborhood dispute and public concerns: When questioned about a peace-order or property-line dispute with a neighbor, Chesterfield said the matter was a property-line disagreement that involved re-surveying and court filings. “There was just a property dispute,” he told the committee, adding he had reached out and expressed concern when a neighbor’s husband had health issues.

Support, letters and endorsements: Senators spoke in support of Chesterfield, noting recommendations and letters from former colleagues and local officials. Several senators reported meeting with him in advance and said they had positive impressions; others asked for more time before voting, which led to floor debate over whether to proceed with his confirmation that night.

Committee action and context: Committee members debated how the nominations process and holds should be handled when local senators request additional time. Ultimately, after floor discussion and a roll-call on a related motion, the committee proceeded with several other nominations; the nomination for Chesterfield was taken up and advanced by vote later in the session.

Next steps: The committee advanced the nominee by roll-call during the meeting; final confirmation requires action by the full Senate.","Albrecht (Chet) Chesterfield, nominated to the State Board of Education, faced questioning from senators about his K–12 experience, a recently noted local property dispute and the short length of his Somerset County board service before the committee advanced his nomination.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6633470,"Mina Seshamani, Hopkins-trained physician and former federal Medicare official, appears before Executive Nominations Committee",322,85000,407000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21&start=85&end=407","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2664398-953a7340fb8f388b5a8f7753bfb0ef21/thumbnail_85000.jpg","/articles/6633470/Maryland/Mina-Seshamani-Hopkins-trained-physician-and-former-federal-Medicare-official-appears-before-Executive-Nominations-Committee","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6633470-773cc9cae62e720a379c371bdf599a3a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149933&Signature=HKsKXi5-w2b5lAK9BVb1EyJzNbB6ACWpCjZvdTlClBSEtQ0U1GJTIhjtY87DXUnDXkpm4AhjMhwaejIxHVHewJUx~V-3E-P~EuJ4wRa5t4WB8V88C2vWQWTxigZJM9aPkta-H0Lda6bc-82CZ6-Z-9d0FcKoypijN94M46QYf~1C7NpFfj-nlvqXjLmjI53m5-6r3ZY12~wQOgLrsAADOAkR6yR-33bvYY0suckZh5VvNYd~StMf-3dtpDKGPTv9137AQASDgWZ1-3vAb3kvGU5z0BbmgX7b0iISKw5zg~cQ0WfCYoSaCW43LBTcfdrK4dJGXMbJ4EY1FzkcJvEr7A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dr. Mina Seshamani, nominated by Gov. Wes Moore to be Maryland’s next secretary of health, told the Senate Executive Nominations Committee on March 17 that she would pursue a data-driven, community-focused approach if confirmed.

Seshamani, a Hopkins-trained surgeon and Oxford-trained Ph.D. economist who most recently led Medicare policy work at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the Department of Health “cares for Marylanders working across the myriad of experiences and settings that impact someone's health.” She told the committee, “We are all greater than the sum of our diagnostic codes,” and said she wants the department to “protect and improve the health of all Marylanders through a thoughtful, data driven approach.”

Why it matters: The nominee spoke at a moment of federal and state uncertainty for health funding and payment models. Committee members pressed her about the future of Maryland’s signature payment reforms and about potential federal cuts to Medicaid funding — issues that would shape how the department manages access and budgets.

On payment reform and the AHEAD model: Committee members referenced the state’s AHEAD model and recent federal actions affecting other payment models. Asked what would happen if the AHEAD model were withdrawn or altered, Seshamani said preserving Maryland’s innovative payment arrangements is a priority and emphasized engagement with hospitals, physicians, patients and federal partners. “I think if the AHEAD model were to go away, it would certainly cause market disruption because it would be a significant change to payments for the State of Maryland,” she said, adding that maintaining the model requires active federal engagement and input from local stakeholders.

Seshamani described her Medicare work — including changes tied to the Inflation Reduction Act — as experience she would draw on in the state role. She highlighted efforts to expand Medicare payments for community health services, care navigation, caregiver training and integrated behavioral health as examples of how payment policy can support population health rather than episodic care.

Budget and Medicaid concerns: When asked about the possibility of federal cuts to Medicaid, Seshamani acknowledged she had “no crystal ball” but said rapid, close coordination among state and local stakeholders and data-driven decision-making would guide responses aimed at maintaining access and quality for vulnerable Marylanders.

Local health departments and implementation: Senators emphasized the strain on local health departments and the turnover in health officer positions since the pandemic. Seshamani noted Maryland’s hybrid state-local public health governance and said she would seek to leverage local expertise as “extenders” of the department’s work, citing the importance of local partnerships to implement federal changes — for example, communicating vaccine cost changes to older adults so they actually receive benefits.

Background and remarks: Senator Sarah Love introduced Seshamani, citing her roles in federal Medicare leadership and at MedStar Health. Seshamani thanked Governor Moore for the nomination and acknowledged budget pressures the department faces. She closed by thanking family in the gallery and saying she looks forward to committee questions.

Next steps: The committee followed Seshamani’s appearance with questions from multiple senators; confirmation would require a favorable committee report and subsequent action by the full Senate.","Dr. Mina Seshamani, nominated by Gov. Wes Moore to lead the Maryland Department of Health, told the Executive Nominations Committee she would pursue data-driven, community-focused approaches and stressed the need to protect state payment models such as the AHEAD initiative while acknowledging budget uncertainty and federal policy risks.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate Executive Nominations Committee advances multiple nominees; several appointments held for further review

Albrecht Chesterfield defends record and answers questions about local board experience during State Board of Education nomination

Mina Seshamani, Hopkins-trained physician and former federal Medicare official, appears before Executive Nominations Committee