Baltimore County Council attorney takes blame for ‘failure’ of violating Open Meetings Act

Brooke Conrad

The Baltimore Sun

February 12, 2025

The Baltimore County Council attorney is taking the blame for a controversial Jan. 3 meeting in which the county’s new executive was chosen out of public view.

The panel’s legislative counsel, Thomas Bostwick, said he “did not fully comply” with the state’s Open Meetings Act because he didn’t provide notice of the Jan. 3 meeting or make the meeting open to the public. The meeting included the selection of Katherine Klausmeier for county executive, replacing Johnny Olszewski, who was sworn into Congress the same day.

“Beyond the embarrassment this oversight has wrought, I continue to hold myself to a higher standard and will ensure that we take appropriate measures to be deliberate and intentional in complying with the Act, and to always view compliance through a lens of more and not less transparency and public access,” Bostwick wrote in response to two complaints sent to Maryland’s Open Meetings Compliance Board.

In the letter, Bostwick said that, prior to the Jan. 3 meeting, he had “communicated with individual Councilmembers” about who they would choose as the next county executive. Knowing they had reached a “unanimous informal consensus,” Bostwick suggested the council make an announcement prior to the council’s formal vote that was originally scheduled for Jan. 6.

But due to an impending snowstorm that threatened to interfere with the Jan. 6 meeting, Bostwick wrote that he “believed it was necessary to bring the Councilmembers together to discuss weather-related issues, as well as to confirm the continuation of the Council’s County Executive selection process for the Legislative Session date.” Bostwick scheduled that meeting for Jan. 3 at 2 p.m.

During the Jan. 3 WebEx meeting, Bostwick wrote that he “opened” the meeting, which was followed by a “closed” session, during which the county executive selection was discussed, and then the meeting was “re-opened.” However, Bostwick said he “failed to recognize that the meeting was a ‘private’ WebEx, as opposed to a ‘public webinar.’” Bostwick also acknowledged failing to post prior notice of the meeting.

Bostwick took the blame for the compliance failures on himself, saying “the Councilmembers relied upon my direction and did not play any role in scheduling or convening the meeting beyond their attendance.”

Bostwick also said he “recognizes the vitally important purpose such notice and access to the open portion of the meeting serves in ensuring public confidence and transparency in the institutions of government, as well as accountability when actions fall short.”

Anne George, a member of Baltimore County’s Democratic State Central Committee, criticized the council for holding discussions about Klausmeier and other matters in private instead of holding more public debates.

“They want to have consensus among everybody. They love that because that looks like they’re bipartisan, or nonpartisan, or whatever,” she said.

Last week, council Chair Mike Ertel told The Baltimore Sun the Open Meets Act violation was “an honest oversight” and that council members didn’t know they were violating the act. He and Council Member Izzy Patoka also described “individual” discussions among members, leading up to the Jan. 3 meeting, about who should serve as the next executive.

Towson resident Peta Richkus, who formerly served as secretary of the Maryland Department of General Services, said council members “should know … what the restrictions are about how they operate, and they should certainly be getting advice from their counsel as to what is or is not the proper procedure.”

She added, “It’s a little bit like, ask for forgiveness, not permission. That’s sort of the modus operandi,” she said.

In 2021, Bostwick previously admitted to giving faulty advice to former Council Member Cathy Bevins regarding her purchase of a home outside of her district. Bostwick told Bevins the county charter only requires a representative to live in their district for two years before an election — although it requires them to remain in their district throughout their time in office.