Howard County public hearing draws broad support, detailed concerns for proposed Office of Inspector General

Council member Liz Walsh’s companion bills (CB47 and CB48) to establish an Office of Inspector General dominated public testimony at the Howard County Council’s July 1 legislative hearing, drawing long lines of speakers urging creation of a watchdog office while pressing for specific changes to preserve independence.

The bills, read into the record by staff, would create an OIG with investigatory authority to probe alleged waste, fraud, abuse and illegal acts involving county government. Council member Liz Walsh, the bills’ sponsor, told the council the measures are modeled on neighboring jurisdictions and designed to balance independence and oversight: “We think the time is long overdue, but certainly now is the time to act and get this office established,” Walsh said.

Supporters from civic groups and professional watchdogs said the county needs an independent investigatory office. Isabelle Mercedes, who identified herself as an inspector general with long experience, urged the council to act and said the office “pays for itself, and it pays for that with the trust and the integrity of the people.” The League of Women Voters, Howard County Citizens Association and other organizations similarly recommended passage with technical amendments to strengthen expertise and procedures.

Testimony mixed praise with detailed drafting concerns. Several speakers, including former county executive Alan Kittleman, urged the council to design an appointment process and advisory board that would make the office appear and operate as nonpartisan. Others recommended tighter limits on who can serve on the advisory board, explicit expertise requirements and clearer thresholds for removal. Residents and advocates suggested shortening vacancy timelines, requiring written justifications for budget changes, and ensuring whistleblower protections.

The bills’ scope also prompted debate. Some testifiers said the OIG should be able to investigate entities that receive county funds, which could include the Howard County Public School System; Chair Young cautioned that oversight of the school system may be legally constrained and that an MOU or other agreement could be required. Walsh responded that the drafts intentionally use broad language and that the office’s reach would be clarified through legal review and future implementation steps.

Officials and practitioners suggested operational safeguards: require the office to follow authoritative IG standards, provide access to independent counsel, clarify staff and pay-grade authority for the office and protect a baseline budget so funding cannot be arbitrarily reduced. Several speakers recommended a bipartisan or multi-pronged appointment path so no single elected official could dominate the advisory board selection.

Council members heard appeals from community activists who tied the need for an IG to past local controversies and a desire to restore public trust. Jake Burdette of Our Revolution said the office could help “root out special-interest influence” and urged the council to pass the bills even if some details require later amendment. Civic leaders also pushed for prompt certification and staffing so the office could begin investigating priority matters.

No final votes occurred at the hearing; the session provided public input and technical suggestions for revisions. Council members indicated they would consider amendments to clarify appointment mechanics, budget protections and the relationship between the OIG and existing audit and ethics functions. The council’s legislative session for final consideration was scheduled for July 29.

The public hearing showed broad community momentum for an inspector general while producing a detailed list of drafting fixes officials must resolve to meet concerns about independence, expertise and operational authority.