Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Closed Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Howard County council votes to enter closed session for legal advice on council officers
Summary
A council member moved and the council voted to close a special meeting under the Annotated Code of Maryland to obtain legal advice regarding council officers; the council said it will reconvene in the Banneker Room for a public hearing on Council Bill 58 20 25.
Get email alerts on the Closed Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A committee member moved Monday that the Howard County Council close a special meeting "in accordance with section 3 3 0 5 b 7 to obtain legal advice on a legal matter," and the council approved the motion, the transcript shows.
"I move that this meeting be closed in accordance with section 3 3 0 5 b 7 to obtain legal advice on a legal matter," the committee member said, according to the meeting record. After the motion was seconded, the administrator called the roll: Vice Chair Jones responded "Yes," Miss Young responded "Yes," Miss Rigby responded "Yes," and Mister Youngman responded "Yes." The motion to close the meeting under the cited provision passed.
The council then adjourned the special meeting to go into a closed session "to obtain legal advice" and said members would reconvene in the Banneker Room for a previously scheduled public hearing to hear testimony on Council Bill 58 20 25. The presiding speaker told online viewers the livestream would end and the meeting recording would stop.
The action recorded in the meeting was a formal motion to close the session under the Annotated Code of Maryland; the transcript identifies the legal basis by number but does not provide additional details about the legal issue beyond the general subject "council officers." The second who supported the motion was not named in the transcript. The roll-call votes recorded in the transcript list Vice Chair Jones, Miss Young, Miss Rigby and Mister Youngman as voting in the affirmative.
The meeting record did not include debate, public testimony or further detail about Council Bill 58 20 25 in the portions provided; the council said it would hear testimony on that bill after the closed session.
