Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Baltimore County administrator orders legal review of Human Relations Commission, pledges training and in‑kind support
Summary
County Administrative Officer DeAndrea Walker told the Human Relations Commission the Office of Law will review the commission’s founding articles, citing inconsistencies and missing records, and that the county will provide targeted training and limited in‑kind budget support while a consultant-assisted review proceeds.
Get email alerts on the Governance Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Baltimore County Administrative Officer DeAndrea Walker told the Human Relations Commission on Nov. 13 that the county has begun a legal and organizational review of the commission’s founding articles and bylaws, after finding missing historical documents and inconsistent language in provisions that appear to grant the commission powers — such as subpoena authority — without the legal infrastructure to exercise them.
Walker said she directed the Office of Law to analyze the commission’s charter and the bills that created it (some provisions dating to 1963) and to identify conflicts among Articles 3, 11 and 29. She also said the county will compare Baltimore County’s commission structure to similar jurisdictions and likely contract a consultant to ensure any regulatory changes are implemented correctly and do not expose the county to legal risk. "We want to protect the commission," Walker said, "and protect the county and make sure that whatever rulings you all are making, that they have the legal standing behind them."
Why it matters: commissioners learned the HRC may have statutory language that grants investigative tools but lacks the legal staffing or procedural safeguards to exercise those powers now. Walker said that gap creates potential liability for the county if the commission issues sanctions or subpoenas without Office of Law support.
Walker said the county will continue to accept complaints but will partner with subject-matter experts — including DHCD and the Maryland Commission on Civil Rights — and the Office of Law to advise on rulings. She described a two‑track approach: (1) a near‑term operational fix that pairs the commission with experts for case advice and continued complaint intake, and (2) a longer legal rewrite of the commission’s articles that would require legislative action. She said an initial comparative analysis of peer HRCs is expected within 30 days and that biweekly follow‑up meetings with Office of Law and staff are planned.
On budgeting and support, Walker explained county procurement and budget rules prevent informal transfers between department line items, and she said the county has not approved any board or commission for more than $5,000 in its operating budget. She urged commissioners to submit formal budget requests in January for FY27 consideration and offered in‑kind services now (printing, staff time, assistance from the county print shop) to support ongoing outreach and events.
Commissioners requested training before they review discrimination complaints. Walker and county counsel cautioned that AI tools such as ChatGPT are not reliable legal authorities for discrimination determinations; counsel recommended relying on HUD statutes, federal regulations and case law and on formal training and legal advice when issuing rulings. Walker committed that the county would cover the cost of training and work to build an internal training portfolio so new commissioners could receive consistent onboarding without consulting each time.
The commission also learned it currently has four vacancies and four appointments that expire Dec. 31, 2025; Walker said the appointments office is working on reappointments and replacements. She offered a draft "skeleton" of bylaws and examples from other authorities to help commissioners prepare amendments.
Next steps: the county's Office of Law will produce an initial analysis within approximately 30 days; Walker said any statutory or charter changes will likely require a bill and at least 60 days for legislative processing. Meanwhile the commission will continue to receive complaints with expert advisory support and prepare formal budget requests for January.
Quote: "When we assigned or selected members to be on the commission, do we make sure those different members had the background and the expertise?" Walker said. "That's why it's so important ... so that if you are doing subpoenas, if you are holding public hearings ... there's a liability associated with that if we don't have the proper training."

