Resident alleges DHCD director pressured family to cancel $50,000 loan; advisory board moves to closed session

At the Oct. 23 meeting of the Howard County Inspector General Advisory Board, Kathleen McKenna testified that the director of the county Department of Housing and Community Development pressured her family to surrender a $50,000 rehabilitation loan and sought to have them sign a document that McKenna said would cancel the loan.

"The director of DHCD is currently attempting to coerce my family into surrendering a valid $50,000 RRR loan contract that was executed, between ourselves and the county on 06/02/2025 in the DHCD offices," McKenna told the board. She said the director returned the executed documents with a watermark or marking of "void" and later asked them to sign a document described as a confirmation that they "understood that the loan had already been canceled," language McKenna said would actually cancel the loan.

McKenna said she and her husband, Steven McKenna, have documentation and that two relatives who are lawyers reviewed the promissory note and told them the note contains no provision allowing unilateral cancellation. She said she feared signing the document would extinguish their current loan and that she was reluctant to do so unless she could sign new loan documents simultaneously. McKenna provided the property address as 3843 College Avenue, Ellicott City, MD 21043 and asked the board to intervene with the county executive's office or the county solicitor to pause any action until the matter could be investigated.

Board members asked clarifying questions about the timeline and mechanics. The chair said the board would "certainly look into it" but noted the advisory board has limited investigative power while the inspector general office is vacant; members discussed that complaint intake currently goes to the county auditor until the IG office is operational.

Howard County Office of Law counsel Amanda Milos, who joined online, told the board that in addition to moving into closed session to consider personnel issues the board should specifically close under the statutory exception to consult with counsel to obtain legal advice about the citizen's complaint. "In addition to moving the closed session to consider personnel issues, you would also want to consult with legal [counsel]," she said.

Chair Salem then moved that the meeting be closed "in accordance with Maryland Code General Provision Section 3-305(b)(1) to discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation and performance evaluation of an appointee over whom the Board has jurisdiction, as well as to discuss the issue that was brought up this evening," and amended the motion to add consultation with counsel under subsection (b)(7). The motion passed on a roll-call vote; the chair instructed staff to call the vote. Votes were recorded as: Chair Salem — yes; Raschka — yes; Quisenberry — yes; Stomm — yes. The chair then adjourned the open meeting and ended the livestream.

The board did not disclose additional investigatory steps or findings during the open session. The board moved the matter into closed session for further consideration and consultation with counsel; no further public business took place after that vote.

Next steps and status: the advisory board said it would seek legal guidance and coordinate with relevant county offices; the public record from the open session does not indicate any immediate enforcement action or that any county official has admitted wrongdoing. The complaint and any subsequent investigation or referral will be handled outside the open meeting.