Howard County Board of Appeals hears public feedback on proposed rules of procedure

The Howard County Board of Appeals convened a public feedback session on Jan. 30, 2025, to solicit comments on a preliminary draft of updated rules of procedure and practice, hearing from three public witnesses and noting that the draft will later be submitted to the Howard County Council for review and approval.

The board said the draft rewrite — the first such review in more than three decades — began in March 2024 and has already had at least one public feedback session in July 2024. Vice Chair Lynn Fiercobb told attendees the board is still awaiting a legal sufficiency review and will incorporate submitted comments before forwarding amendments to the County Council.

In testimony, Stu Cohen, president of the Howard County Citizens Association, said the public had worked from a December 20, 2024, draft but later discovered a January 17, 2025, revision had been posted, creating confusion about which version public comments addressed. Cohen said the draft runs to about 59 pages, that definitions moved from an appendix into the main body, and urged the board to explicitly state whether time periods are calendar days or business days. “It caused a lot of heartburn,” Cohen said, adding he submitted written comments and expected the board to review them.

Resident Chris Oliva told the board he intends to submit a marked-up redline and urged the rules to reference the Howard County Administrative Procedures Act by name. Oliva focused on standing for appellants and oppositions, saying the draft should more clearly define when an opposition has standing to participate and asking the board to clarify the concept of a petitioner’s “case in chief” versus an opposition’s participation.

Joel Horowitz of Columbia provided line-by-line concerns about organization, terminology and compatibility with the county charter and existing county code. Horowitz flagged multiple items including the proposed use of alternate board members (which he said may not be authorized by the county charter), the need to mirror ex parte and other procedural language used by the zoning board, inconsistent references to filing deadlines and business-day computations, and unclear instructions on the number and format of copies to be submitted for technical reports and exhibits.

Board members and staff responded on the record that the December and January drafts would be reconciled, that the changes between those drafts were largely stylistic (grammar, page numbers and formatting) and that the board had not yet completed its legal sufficiency review. The board administrator confirmed the public and staff submissions will be reviewed and incorporated where appropriate before the package goes to the County Council.

Procedural business taken at the meeting included approval of the Board of Appeals meeting minutes from Jan. 23, 2025. The motion passed on a roll call with the named members recorded as approving.

The board closed the public portion after hearing the three witnesses and said it will continue reviewing written submissions. Vice Chair Fiercobb indicated there may be further opportunity for public comment before the draft is sent to the County Council but did not set a date.

The meeting concluded with the board adjourning the session.