Baltimore County Council Public Meeting and Legislative Session - December 24, 2025
Baltimore County Council Public Meeting and Legislative Session - December 24, 2025
The Baltimore County Council convened a public meeting on December 24, 2025, beginning with a presentation from the Department of Housing and Community Development on the county's first-ever housing needs assessment, followed by a regular legislative session. The council heard public comments, debated multiple bills, and voted on fiscal matters.
Housing Needs Assessment Presentation
- Director Terry Hickey, joined by Deputy Policy Chief Joel Beller and Data Analyst Rex McGrother, presented the key findings of a comprehensive housing needs assessment conducted with Guide House Consulting and the University of Pennsylvania. The assessment revealed a severe shortage of housing for low-income households: approximately 19,000 units missing for households at or below 30% of Area Median Income (AMI). 80% of those households are cost-burdened (paying more than 30% of income on housing). 55% of all county renters are at least moderately cost-burdened, and 29% are extremely cost-burdened (spending over half their income on rent/utilities). The assessment also identified a misalignment between housing stock and household sizes: 65% of households are one- or two-person, but only 37.5% of units are studios or one- or two-bedroom. Additionally, 32% of housing units were built before 1960, and 85% are at least 25 years old. The county added over 10,000 units with three or more bedrooms from 2013-2023 while losing 2,165 larger households. The presentation highlighted the cascading effects of these shortages, including overcrowding and increased homelessness risk.
- Council members asked questions about the mismatch between development trends and actual demand, the challenges of aging housing stock (e.g., HOA infrastructure, accessibility), and the need to coordinate housing with other policies like schools and infrastructure. Director Hickey emphasized the need for a collaborative, data-driven strategy but stated that specific solutions would vary by district.
Consent Calendar
- The council approved the journal for the November 3, 2025 meeting.
- Bills 79-25, 80-25, and 81-25 were enrolled as passed. Bill 77-25 was returned unsigned by the county executive.
- The following appointments/reappointments were confirmed unanimously: Mark Travers (Agricultural Preservation Advisory Board), Brenda Stromer (Agricultural Preservation Advisory Board), Katie Rouse, Celisa Jefferson, Dr. Tokoya Farrakhan (Community Reinvestment and Repair Commission), and Derek Johnson (Planning Board).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Several speakers, including Anita Bass (virtual), Taft Mangus (virtual), Joel Paley (virtual), Nicole Devorek (virtual), Julie O'Hanian (virtual), and Robert Jackson (virtual), urged the council to make permanent 14 part-time librarian positions that were at risk of elimination after June 2026. They criticized the library board and prior administration for using funds on anti-union legal efforts and stressed the importance of adequate library staffing. Council members responded by suggesting the speakers engage with the county executive during budget season and noting upcoming budget hearings.
- Kelly Madigan (in person), outgoing Inspector General, proposed two specific amendments to the Inspector General statute: adding the word "direct" to allow direct access to records, and clarifying that IG reports are not personnel records. She referenced the Blue Ribbon Commission's recommendations. Council members thanked her for her service and acknowledged the difficulty of creating the new office.
- Tim Fasenbaker (in person) strongly opposed any sanctuary policies for undocumented immigrants, citing public safety concerns and potential loss of federal funding (approximately $500 million). He referenced specific crimes involving undocumented individuals. Councilman Patoka, who had introduced two "Trust Act" bills earlier that evening, responded by stating his motivation was rooted in love and welcoming the stranger.
- Peter Richkiss (in person) expressed support for Councilman Patoka's bills and thanked outgoing IG Kelly Madigan, urging the council to adopt all Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations.
Discussion Items
- Housing Needs Assessment: The session opened with a detailed presentation (see above) followed by council discussion. No formal action was taken, but the presentation set the stage for future housing policy.
- Bill 88-25 (Property Tax Credits for Eligible Port Property): This bill, sponsored by multiple council members at the request of the administration, provides a tax credit for a strategic partnership between Trade Point Atlantic and a major shipping company to build a private container port. Two sets of amendments were debated and passed:
- Amendments by Councilmen Crandall and Urtell (co-sponsored by Marks) to clarify payment mechanics, dividing required payments into a property tax portion and a supplemental payment during early build-out, with a 10-year cap from construction commencement.
- An amendment by Councilman Young requiring the county and applicant to enter into a reporting agreement within six months, including planning updates and regular reports (at least every 10 years) on valuations and tax savings, with notification to the council if savings exceed 95% of taxes due. Councilmen Crandall and Jones spoke passionately about the project's history, job creation (up to 8,000 jobs), and the partnership's community benefits (e.g., turf field, land donation for a park). Councilman Marks noted bipartisan support for economic development. The bill passed unanimously.
- Bill 89-25 (Bond Ordinance): The administration presented a $358 million bond authorization for various capital projects. Technical amendments to update project costs and funding sources were passed. The bill passed unanimously.
- Bill 90-25 (Zoning Regulations, Honeygo Area Sidewalks): Sponsored by Councilman Marks, this creates an exemption from sidewalk construction requirements for areas near the Hueberger Trail in Perry Hall. Passed unanimously.
- Other Bills: Bills 82-25, 83-25, 84-25, 85-25, and 86-25 (various budget items and services) were each amended as needed and passed unanimously. Bill 87-25 was withdrawn.
- Fiscal Matters: Two contracts (Urban Development Solutions and three contracts for on-call HVAC services) were approved unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- The housing needs assessment presentation was informational; no formal vote was taken. The data will be released publicly with an executive summary to drive future collaboration.
- Bill 88-25 (port property tax credits) passed unanimously after two amendments were adopted. The legislation is seen as historic, enabling a private container terminal with billions in private investment.
- Bond ordinance (Bill 89-25) and all other bills passed unanimously.
- The council confirmed six appointments to various boards and commissions.
- Councilman Patoka introduced two bills (Trust Act related) that will have work sessions on January 13 and 27, 2025, with final reading on February 2, 2025.
- The council acknowledged that the February 2, 2025 legislative session will likely be the last in the current chambers due to renovations expected to last through October 2025.
Meeting Transcript
Do I need to repeat all that? You gotta make me do that, right? The council is h okay, I will do it. Council is holding this public meeting to give the county's Department of Housing and Community Development an opportunity to provide the council and the public information related to housing needs in Baltimore County. We are joined today by housing and community development director Terry Hickey. Mr. Hickey, we are pleased to have you and your staff before us today and hear your presentation. The floor is yours. Thank you, sir. We're gonna give you I know you can see it myself. We're gonna give you paper copies that uh in an effort to save county funds. We ran off at black and white. So when we talk about colors on the slides, you'll want to look at the screens. But that'll give you a chance to play along cliff. Tom printed in color. So I do want to let you know, we save several dollars of coffee. Except some of the graphics we won't be able to understand. Right. We're off to a good start. Um and I do just want to acknowledge Joel Beller uh is here with us, our deputy policy chief, uh, who's gonna keep us moving forward, and Rex McGrother, who is our data analyst, who when you start asking really deep, weedy statistical questions, we're gonna defer to him. So we'll start with the beginning. Um again, just want to thank you for having us here. This long time coming, actually exciting discussions. The county's first ever official housing needs assessment. You know that the topic of housing is a growing public concern around the country. It's something we talk about in this room and in county government often, but too frequently in these conversations, we've relied upon national or regional studies or anecdotes, and we thought that for a problem of this scope and magnitude, we want to have a chance to look closely at our own numbers. We want to be able to talk and lead with facts, and really what we hope to do here is to put the numbers out front, let that drive a public conversation. We really thank you, giving us the opportunity to do it here. Hopefully, folks are um listening in. We want to make this data public and hopefully generate positive collaborative discussions about housing and the need in the county. So a little bit of framing. Um, what is the housing needs assessment? If you have the whole version, it's a little over a hundred different slides, so it's fairly weighty. When we do release this on the county website, we'll have a short executive summary to go along with it. And obviously, don't get too worried. What we're gonna show you tonight is a hyper-condensed version. We won't go through all a hundred slides, I promise. It's an analysis of the county's current population and housing stock. It's a projection of how the county's population will likely change over the next 10 to 15 years. It's an assessment of the current housing stock's ability to meet the needs of current residents, and it's an overview of potential changes that may be needed for the county's housing stock to meet the needs of current and future residents. To get this done, we collaborated with Guide House Consulting and prominently the University of Pennsylvania's housing initiative at Penn to conduct the assessment over the last several months. I think you all know this, but just to say for the public, DHCD largely has framed the housing discussion around the VCA, for better or worse, which we know is not a housing strategy. While work remains ongoing to ensure that the terms of the agreement are met, the agency recognizes that a comprehensive collaborative strategy is necessary to guide housing production efforts beyond our March 2028 deadline. We have to have a real plan. We have to have real numbers. I'll bottom line it up front, and then we're gonna hit on some key findings in the report. I'm not gonna shock anybody by telling you that the assessment shows the county faces a housing challenge. There are some things in here though that I think give a lot of context, make these numbers more relatable, uh may even be a little surprising, but we know there's not enough housing to meet current need, nonetheless, future projected needs in the county. And even maybe more interesting when you dig into the numbers is our existing housing stock is not necessarily aligned with the current population and households living in the county and specifically not where we're going. So it's easy to say we have a shortage, but we may also have a misalignment.
openpublica.com