Baltimore County Council Expansion Referendum Results: Most Precincts Reporting

Last updated Wednesday at 1:32 a.m.

BALTIMORE COUNTY, MD — The Nov. 5 Baltimore County Council expansion referendum results are nearly completely tallied. The ballot question will decide if the council should expand from seven to nine members.

With 242 of the 243 precincts reporting, here is the preliminary vote breakdown, as reported by the Maryland State Board of Elections:

• For council expansion: 60.33%
• Against council expansion: 39.67%

For full coverage of the election in Maryland, click here.

Council Expansion Referendum Explained

Proponents think the council expansion would improve representation. The county population has more than doubled since the County Council structure was established in 1956. That's left each voter with less power in elections today than they originally had nearly 70 years ago.

Backers also believe adding two council seats would produce more diverse districts with more diverse candidates than the currently all-male, almost all-white council.

Opponents unsuccessfully challenged a proposed district map that accompanied the legislation sending the County Council expansion to a referendum. Some saw the map as a compromise to ensure Republicans have a chance in the predominantly Democratic county.

Others saw the map as an overstep made without public hearings. Supporters countered, reminding them that the proposed districts could be redrawn by Oct. 1, 2025, if necessary.

The Baltimore Sun reported that "Democratic state legislators and the ACLU of Maryland have hinted at a lawsuit." They argued that the map violates federal civil rights law by diluting the voting power of residents of color by splitting mostly-Black districts.

Democratic council members frustrated with the maps then filed legislation to repeal them.

The Baltimore Banner said the bill to revoke the suggested maps failed in early October, however.

Randallstown NAACP President Ryan Coleman said the County Council expansion "moves us forward. This is progress."

"This is how you get things done — by compromising and making bridges," Coleman said in a July 2 press release. "This legislation gives the county hope of more diversity and the efficiency to meet Baltimore County needs."

The County Council on July 1 reached a bipartisan agreement to send the two-seat expansion to a referendum this fall. Republican council members agreed that the proposed new district maps were fair. The same ballot question will also ask voters if council members should be paid a full-time salary, rather than their current part-time pay.

Council Member David Marks (R-Upper Falls) said the two-seat expansion "gives both political parties a fighting chance across Baltimore County."

Democrats currently have a 4-3 advantage on the council.

The proposed new map "guarantees five democratic council members, and you guarantee four Republican seats," State Sen. Charles Sydnor (D-District 44) told WYPR.

The Baltimore Banner said the measure passed 5 to 1 with Pat Young (D-Catonsville) as the only nay and Julian Jones (D-Woodstock) as the lone member not present at the meeting. Young said he voted no because he would prefer 11 council members instead of nine.

Democratic County Executive Johnny Olszewski applauded the expansion. He thinks it would "empower voters and allow their voices [to] be heard on expanding the County Council — providing a more responsive and equitable government."

"Should voters approve Council expansion, I strongly encourage Councilmembers to provide a more responsive, equitable and inclusive map-drawing process," Olszewski said July 2 on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Because the referendum would amend the County Charter, the council needed five votes to send the ballot question to the voters.

The Banner said the Democrats had to compromise with the Republicans to reach this threshold. The GOP worried the new maps would carve out some of their districts or hurt their election chances. The Republicans all felt comfortable with the compromise and voted for the expansion referendum.

"We needed a sweet spot to make this happen," Council Chair Izzy Patoka (D-Pikesville) told The Banner. "We came up with this configuration."

Patoka later co-sponsored and voted for the legislation to repeal the maps.

WYPR reported it would cost Baltimore County an extra $1.4 million annually in staffing and supplies to add two council members. It would also require a one-time payment of $12.2 million to create offices for each new council member and their team, The Banner said.

Council members would become full-time employees if the resolution passes, bringing an undetermined pay raise. The Banner said the council chair currently makes $77,000 annually, and the other members make $69,000. It's not clear how much full-time council members would make, but Montgomery County's full-time council members earn over $156,000 per year.

There was also a separate, unsuccessful push to add four seats to the council instead of two.

WYPR said the grassroots four-seat expansion effort, orchestrated by Vote4More, was trying to gather 10,000 signatures by the July 29 deadline to put it on the general election ballot. It would've competed against the two-seat expansion referendum, but the four-member addition measure ran into complications.

The Baltimore Sun reported that the Board of Elections discarded nearly 3,000 signatures during the review required under state law.

Election officials said those signatures lacked the signers' middle initial or middle name, WYPR reported.

Vote4More submitted 1,400 supplemental signatures, but The Sun reported that they didn't meet the state requirements.

"What hurts me is that getting them so excited, I can't deliver it," Vote4More Chair Linda Dorsey-Walker said, according to WYPR.

Voter Reactions

Patch interviewed voters Tuesday at Perry Hall High School, a polling site with a melting pot of political orientations.

Conservative Noreen Kennedy voted against the expansion.

"Extra politicians, I don't think they're good for anybody," Kennedy said.

Joe Rodriguez, who voted for all the Republicans on his ballot, was also against council expansion.

"I think the number that we have is good enough. We don't need extra parties on it," he said.

The council expansion push was spearheaded by liberal leaders, but Democrat Ralph Porras saw it as a power grab. The 84-year-old Army veteran pointed to larger districts that have fewer representatives.

"They can't run it with less?" Porras questioned. "I wasn't born yesterday."

Third-party voter Anas Aqeel agreed with that logic.

"I don't see the need to increase when other counties have the same number of council members," Aqeel said. "I would prefer to have this money put in other projects."

Shelby Fleming, who voted straight Democrat, favored expansion.

"The more opinions, the better. It couldn't hurt," she said.

John Douglas, a registered Republican and split-ticket voter, supported the expansion to break up the "clique-ish group" of "top-heavy" current council members.

"An additional two members would make it a little more balanced one way or the other," Douglas said. "I don't like party-line voting."

Related:

• Baltimore County Council Expansion Maps Won't Be Changed Before Vote
• Baltimore County Council Expansion Referendum: What To Know
• Push To Add 4 Seats To Baltimore County Council Fails: Reports
• Referendum Will Settle Baltimore County Council Expansion Debate

This is the exact wording of the referendum that appeared on ballots:

Sections 201, 204, 206, 207, 522, 601, and 1201 of the Baltimore County Charter are amended to: increase from 7 to 9 the number of Councilmembers and Council Districts; make membership on the County Council a full-time position for purposes of determining compensation; provide for an equal number of Board of Appeals members as the number of Councilmembers, and that no more than two-thirds of the Board of Appeals members may belong to the same political party; increase
from 7 to 9 the number of Council appointments to the Planning Board; provide for an equal number of members of a councilmanic redistricting commission as the number of Councilmembers, with each Councilmember nominating one member and subject to Council confirmation; provide that redistricting of Council Districts may only occur: before October 1, 2025, after each decennial U.S. Census, or during the year after ratification of a Charter amendment changing the number of Council Districts; and increase from 6 to 8 the number of affirmative votes required for the Council to approve a legislative act that proposes a ballot question to terminate the Charter and return the County to a county commissioner form of government.