Features - Crónicas

The Baltimore City Council and its restructuring

Having served the citizens of Baltimore as a member of the Baltimore City Council for more than 25 years, I am keenly aware of a need to “right-size” this legislative body. I served as a member of President Sheila Dixon’s Commission which studied the issue of Baltimore City Council size and recommended a restructuring resulting in fewer members.

However, having served the citizens of Baltimore as a member of the Baltimore City Council for more than 25 years, I firmly believe that the citizens are best served by a City Council comprised of multi-member districts.

Unfortunately, because of a ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals removing Question Q from the ballot, the option of a smaller, yet multi-member-district Baltimore City Council is not available to Baltimore City voters. Baltimore City voters must decide between a smaller Baltimore City Council (Question P) and a multi-member-district Baltimore City Council. I wish that were not the case, but that is the reality which we face.

In the final analysis, my strong and longstanding opinion that single-member districts would be detrimental to the work of the Baltimore City Council – and, therefore, to the citizens of our city and the future of our city – leads me to oppose to Question P and urge voters to do the same.

Why such a firm belief in multi-member districts? Others, including Mayor Martin O’Malley and City Council President Sheila Dixon, have spoken of the Balkanization that could occur with 14 single-member districts. My dictionary says that to Balkanize is to “divide into small, often hostile units.” Hostility can be only counter-productive at a time when crucial decisions are called for. Hostility can lead to only dire consequences with ramifications for decades to come. Is this best for the citizens of Baltimore?

What I believe is best for the citizens of Baltimore is fewer districts with multi-member representation. To be truly effective legislators, City Council members must represent a greater number of people. They must be exposed to diverse opinions and weigh those points of view in order to determine be best course of action. The narrower focus that 14 districts would create could, in the worst-case scenario, lead to an inability to produce any consensus on any issue facing Baltimore City and, as a result, an inability to create meaningful legislation.

Baltimore City is not comparable to other jurisdictions in Maryland. Baltimore City is the economic generator for the State of Maryland. Baltimore City has a daytime population of some two-million. Baltimore City is home to the Port, to the Convention Center, to medical and educational institutions which attract a worldwide clientele, to the bulk of the tourist industry. We must create laws that encompass all of these. That requires a global perspective, not the tunnel vision that 14 single-member districts could easily bring about.

Intra-district issues are also of concern. In a single-member district, there is only a single place for constituents to turn for help. There is only a single opinion or mind-set that will determine what is and is not accomplished; what moves forward and what does not; what, in other words, is best for the community. Again, I do not believe that is what is best for the citizens of Baltimore.

I hear talk of accountability. There always has been accountability and there always will be accountability – at the ballot box. Voters can always reject a City Councilmember they feel is not responsive or representative. Having single-member districts does not change how that is accomplished.

In an ideal world, voters in Baltimore City would have more of a choice in this election than either Question P (creating 14 single-member districts) or the status quo of six three-member districts. In my ideal world, voters would have an option of seven two-member districts to consider. That can still happen.

Let’s think hard about what is best for Baltimore in the long run. We do not have to hastily vote for just anything, regardless of its merit, that will change the status quo merely for the sake of change.

Give the Baltimore City Council an opportunity to pass another bill that accomplishes both goals of a smaller Council and multi-member districts and present that to the voters in the next election. Such a bill will be introduced if Question P is defeated.

I urge Baltimore City voters to realize that Question P is not the solution they are seeking and to vote against it.