Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Removal Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council sets high bar for IG removal and preserves hearing option with confidentiality safeguards
Summary
Council agreed removal should be for specified causes (misconduct, persistent failure, conduct prejudicial to administration of justice, malfeasance, felony conviction) and that the IG should receive a written explanation and the option to request a hearing; personnel matters would be handled confidentially unless the IG elects otherwise.
Howard County Council members coalesced around a cause‑based removal standard for the Inspector General and discussed process protections for a terminated IG. The chair read proposed causes and the council favored a list that includes "misconduct in office, persistent failure to perform the duties of office, conduct prejudicial to the proper administration of justice, malfeasance or conviction of a felony" rather than a broad catch‑all.
Outside advisor David McClintock advised the council on common practice: "they would present the inspector general with a written reason, justification, explanation ... and the inspector general would have the option of requesting a public hearing." Councilmembers agreed the written explanation should be delivered confidentially and handled in executive session; the IG may choose to make the matter public by requesting a hearing but confidentiality for parts of work product could be preserved where permitted by law.
