OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Rules and City Government Committee Meeting - March 5, 2026

City CouncilThursday, March 5, 2026
BodyAnnapolis, Maryland
SessionCity Council
DateThursday, March 5, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:22:36

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

I call this meeting to order.

0:03

Uh today March 5th, 2026 at 6 33 p.m.

0:11

Uh, let's have some roll call.

0:12

Alderman uh Brooke Shandemeyer.

0:15

Okay, Alderman Frank Thorpe present.

0:19

Awesome.

0:19

Is there uh before we make a motion actually to um approve of the agenda?

0:25

Um I will entertain a motion to add ID 5426, which is employee relations discussion to the agenda.

0:32

Um we have with us Claudia Barber today, and she uh was supposed to be on our agenda.

0:37

So is there a motion to add this to our agenda?

0:40

So moved.

0:40

Second, thank you.

0:42

All in favor okay.

0:46

Um I also have um on our agenda um one twenty-six, which is the property tax child care centers.

0:57

Uh we are going to look into that.

1:03

Okay, we're gonna look into uh that in a bit.

1:05

So um let's move forward.

1:07

Uh is there a motion to approve of the minutes from our last meeting on uh February 5th, 2026?

1:13

So moved.

1:14

Okay, second.

1:15

Second.

1:16

Awesome.

1:16

Uh all in favor of that, thank you.

1:18

All right.

1:19

Okay.

1:20

My first uh piece of legislation for the afternoon, the evening uh is 0126 property tax child care centers, family child care homes, and large family child care homes.

1:32

Um now I'd ask, I know we just received some information on this earlier today.

1:40

Uh we were thinking that uh we would have another meeting uh if we can to invite uh the persons to speak in front of us if you don't mind.

1:49

Yeah, I'm I'm sorry.

1:50

I was na not successful at uh doing that today, and I'm sorry.

1:56

Oh no, no, come on, you do a lot.

1:57

We appreciate you.

1:58

Thank you very much.

1:59

Um as long as it's okay and there's no super rush on this, no deadlines that we have to meet.

2:04

Um would love to see if we could postpone this.

2:07

Um to to give some more time.

2:10

I have to do that.

2:11

To do so.

2:11

Okay.

2:12

Do you mind sharing with us?

2:14

Look, we're not gonna get new information.

2:17

Um it's on the agenda for final vote after getting out of finance committee on Monday.

2:24

Um I think what they're going to say is the same things that I have been saying that this was passed by the state.

2:31

It's a good legislation, it's going to come forward.

2:33

I've put forward an amendment um to address some of the issues with the fiscal note after digging uh deep dive into what the actual property taxes that these folks will be paying is and um I just don't see a point in delaying it.

2:53

Okay.

2:56

Well, before I speak, um is there would you like to say anything, Alderman Thorpe at all before I say what I would say?

3:03

Okay.

3:04

Well, uh, we did say that we would have someone come forth before us before we made any found decisions, and saying that those people did not come uh due to scheduling.

3:13

I don't think it's right uh to just move forward on this if there's no pressing uh need for it at this very moment.

3:19

And it also gives us more due diligence to be able to uh get the research that we received earlier this afternoon to really dive into that.

3:26

Um it's not that that this isn't a good piece of legislation or the amendment isn't a positive one.

3:35

I just uh would say that we should hold off on moving forward before we do uh what we said we would.

3:42

Um that's that's why I'm sharing that.

3:45

Do you think it would be uh um a harm to wait?

3:49

Uh or is this just a preference?

3:52

It's a preference, and if we're gonna keep waiting on if we can coordinate schedules with a bunch of volunteers from the county to pass legislation, uh it's we're not gonna get anything done.

4:06

Um we have had the policy analyst look into this.

4:14

Um again, this is something that has been pushed forward by the Anne Rumble County delegation for the city of Annapolis and Anne Rondo County.

4:23

Um I just think kicking it down the can another month is just a waste of time.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Elections███████████████████████████████████35%
Personnel Matters██████████████████████████████30%
Child Care Tax Credit████████████████16%
Public Engagement███████7%
Procedural████4%
Racial Equity████4%
Budget Equity Analysis██2%
Technology and Innovation1%
Public Safety1%
Summary of Proceedings

Rules and City Government Committee Meeting - March 5, 2026

The Rules and City Government Committee of the Annapolis City Council met on Thursday, March 5, 2026, at 6:33 PM in City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order by Chair Alderman Smith-Brown and adjourned at 9:00 PM. Members present: Alderman Smith-Brown, Alderman Schandelmeier, and Alderman Thorp. The agenda was amended to add ID-54-26 (Employee Relations Discussion).

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Agenda: Moved by Alderman Thorp to adopt as amended to include ID-54-26 (Employee Relations Discussion). Seconded. Carried on voice vote.
  • Approval of Minutes: Moved by Alderman Schandelmeier to approve the February 5, 2026 regular meeting minutes (RCG 2.5.26). Seconded. Carried on voice vote.

Discussion Items

  • O-1-26 Property Tax – Child Care Centers, Family Child Care Homes, and Large Family Child Care Homes: Acting City Manager Buckland and Assistant City Attorney Leonard answered questions. The ordinance would create a real property tax credit for child care providers who own their property, with a maximum of $10,000 (amended to $4,000 per Amendment 1 from Alderman Schandelmeier). Alderman Schandelmeier argued for immediate passage, citing state-level research and the need to address the child care crisis incrementally. Alderman Smith-Brown and Alderman Thorp preferred to wait for a presentation from state or county child care experts, as requested at the prior meeting. Alderman Thorp noted the lack of a comprehensive child care policy to compare this tax credit against. The committee voted to postpone the legislation to the next meeting (April 2, 2026) to allow for such a presentation. (Note: The agenda lists sponsors as Schandelmeier and O'Neill; the minutes add Smith-Brown as a sponsor.)
  • ID-44-26 Future Election Discussion: Representatives from the State Board of Elections (Jared DeMarinis, State Administrator), Anne Arundel County Board of Elections (David Garreis, Director; Richard Siejack, Deputy Director) presented. Key points:
    • History: The city-county relationship evolved from informal agreements (2009) to complex contracts. The 2025 election cost the city approximately $220,000 ($76,000 for equipment lease; $150,000 for county staff and services).
    • Options for future elections: (1) Continue off-cycle elections (odd years) independently, renting equipment from the state and contracting services from the county. (2) Join the state ballot (even-year election), which would eliminate direct costs but require following state rules (no ranked-choice voting, no non-citizen voting, etc.) and cede control over polling locations and voter outreach. (3) Conduct an all-mail election (off-cycle) using a private vendor, piggybacking on the state's mail-ballot contract.
    • Ranked-choice voting: Feasible with state equipment for ballot scanning but requires separate procurement for tabulation and voter education; state and county cannot support this function.
    • Syncing permanent mail-in lists: Requires state legislative change to allow city to access the state's permanent mail-in voter list for off-year elections.
    • Staffing: The city's election staff (three people plus board of supervisors) is insufficient for the workload; the county provided 120 election judges and 10 canvassing teams in 2025.
  • ID-54-26 Employee Relations Discussion: Claudia Barber, Employee Relations Administrator, presented concerns about the integrity of the city's employee relations and investigation process. She reported patterns of delayed/stalled investigations, use of outside law firms focused on employer defense, and lack of formal policy standards (e.g., performance improvement plans without clear authorization in city code). She emphasized that outdated personnel regulations (from the 1990s) contribute to inconsistent outcomes. Alderman Smith-Brown and Alderman Thorp discussed the need to update the personnel rules and regulations, but noted that individual personnel cases are an executive function, not a legislative one. Assistant City Attorney Leonard cautioned against investigating individual complaints in open session. The committee agreed to wait for the new HR Director to be hired before pursuing formal updates to the regulations, though staff indicated the new hires are already aware of the issue.

Key Outcomes

  • O-1-26 (Child Care Tax Credit): Postponed to the April 2, 2026 meeting by a voice vote (motion by Alderman Thorp, seconded). The postponement is contingent on securing a presentation from state or county child care experts.
  • Future Elections: No formal vote or decision was taken. The committee will continue discussions, with a focus on evaluating the cost–benefit of joining the state ballot versus maintaining independent elections. The city attorney will research the feasibility of legislative changes needed to sync voter records.
  • Employee Relations: The committee will request that the incoming HR Director prioritize updating the personnel regulations. A motion to request an investigation into past six-to-twelve-month employee complaints was not pursued, as it falls outside legislative authority. No formal action was taken on a task force or consultant proposal.

Meeting Transcript

I call this meeting to order. Uh today March 5th, 2026 at 6 33 p.m. Uh, let's have some roll call. Alderman uh Brooke Shandemeyer. Okay, Alderman Frank Thorpe present. Awesome. Is there uh before we make a motion actually to um approve of the agenda? Um I will entertain a motion to add ID 5426, which is employee relations discussion to the agenda. Um we have with us Claudia Barber today, and she uh was supposed to be on our agenda. So is there a motion to add this to our agenda? So moved. Second, thank you. All in favor okay. Um I also have um on our agenda um one twenty-six, which is the property tax child care centers. Uh we are going to look into that. Okay, we're gonna look into uh that in a bit. So um let's move forward. Uh is there a motion to approve of the minutes from our last meeting on uh February 5th, 2026? So moved. Okay, second. Second. Awesome. Uh all in favor of that, thank you. All right. Okay. My first uh piece of legislation for the afternoon, the evening uh is 0126 property tax child care centers, family child care homes, and large family child care homes. Um now I'd ask, I know we just received some information on this earlier today. Uh we were thinking that uh we would have another meeting uh if we can to invite uh the persons to speak in front of us if you don't mind. Yeah, I'm I'm sorry. I was na not successful at uh doing that today, and I'm sorry. Oh no, no, come on, you do a lot. We appreciate you. Thank you very much. Um as long as it's okay and there's no super rush on this, no deadlines that we have to meet. Um would love to see if we could postpone this. Um to to give some more time. I have to do that. To do so. Okay. Do you mind sharing with us? Look, we're not gonna get new information. Um it's on the agenda for final vote after getting out of finance committee on Monday. Um I think what they're going to say is the same things that I have been saying that this was passed by the state. It's a good legislation, it's going to come forward. I've put forward an amendment um to address some of the issues with the fiscal note after digging uh deep dive into what the actual property taxes that these folks will be paying is and um I just don't see a point in delaying it. Okay. Well, before I speak, um is there would you like to say anything, Alderman Thorpe at all before I say what I would say? Okay. Well, uh, we did say that we would have someone come forth before us before we made any found decisions, and saying that those people did not come uh due to scheduling. I don't think it's right uh to just move forward on this if there's no pressing uh need for it at this very moment.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com