Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Recusal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses recusal for member who applied to be executive director; no formal suspension enacted
Summary
The Baltimore County Redevelopment Authority debated whether a sitting member who has expressed interest in its executive director job should recuse himself from recruitment and budget discussions; legal counsel advised stepping aside on matters related to hiring.
Board members raised ethics and fairness concerns after a sitting member, David Green, indicated interest in the authority’s executive director role. Members debated whether Green should temporarily stop attending meetings that develop job details or budget items that could give him an advantage over outside applicants.
John, the authority’s legal advisor, advised that a sitting member who is a candidate should not participate in decisions relating to the hiring and should avoid voting on any matter concerning the position. “My advice would be for Mr. Green to sign off on or at least temporarily leave a meeting,” John said. He added that if a member does not vote on the matter and steps aside from discussions, the ethical concern is reduced, though the situation can be “a little messy.”
Board members proposed different approaches. Some asked that Green voluntarily recuse himself from recruitment and budget committee meetings where specifics about salary and posting would be discussed. Others urged a narrow approach: step out only when the topic relates to the hiring or to sensitive budget details. The chair called for county counsel and staff to contact Green and discuss options; county counsel said the board could ask but does not have unilateral authority to remove a member.
By voice, members took an informal show-of-hands to gauge support for a temporary pause of Green’s participation on hiring- and budget-related items; the count met only five votes in favor of a stricter suspension during discussion, and the board attorney said five votes were insufficient to force removal. The chair and counsel agreed to reach out to Green to request a voluntary recusal for the most sensitive discussions and to provide him with written guidance on the board’s expectations.
Ending: No formal suspension or removal vote was taken. Counsel and staff will contact Mr. Green to request a voluntary recusal from recruitment- and budget-specific discussions until the hiring process advances; the board will revisit the question if Green declines to accommodate the request.
