Development Attorneys Author Bills Benefiting Clients
Bill highlights access development lawyers have and community activists say they wish they had.
A law firm that raised thousands of dollars for two freshman Baltimore County council members wrote "significant portions" of a bill that could benefit a client seeking to develop a contested Bowleys Quarters marina.
The proposed legislation was introduced last month by Councilman David Marks and had a hearing before the full council on Tuesday. One of its provisions allows for developments to be built in rural areas of the county if any portion of the property has water and sewer service.
The proposed 36-unit condominium project on Galloway Creek in Bowleys Quarters is such a project. Its developers are represented by the Towson law firm of Smith, Gildea and Schmidt.
In an interview, Marks said the politically-connected firm wrote “significant portions” of the proposed legislation, which also seeks to overturn a portion of an April Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that requires planned unit developments to conform to the county master plan. Such a change would make it easier for developments to move forward.
Marks' acknowledgement of the firm’s involvement highlights access that development attorneys and their clients—who contribute significantly to council campaigns—often have. It's an insider's edge that some community groups say they have always suspected existed and that they themselves would covet.
"I'd like to see the council work with the community in drafting some fixes to these laws," said Alan Robertson, zoning chairman of the Bowleys Quarters Community Association.
The county's Planned Unit Development law is meant to allow for flexibility for mixed-use projects that are accompanied by a community benefit. In return, the county allows the projects to be built even though they run counter to original zoning.
Marks' bill also calls for creating a process for reviewing substantive changes to plans that were previously approved as well as creating public commenting periods and departmental reviews before the council approves the project.
"These are good things," Marks said.
Hours after being asked about Smith, Gildea and Schmidt’s involvement in writing the bill, Marks said he was going to withdraw the legislation.
"I'm looking at some other options but I don't want to discuss them," Marks said late Wednesday night.
Marks acknowledged his bill affected the Bowleys Quarters project. Last year an administrative law judge had sided with community opponents to the development and ruled that the project could not move forward. The county’s Board of Appeals on Tuesday voted to overturn the administrative law judge's decision.
The project is in the 6th Council District, which is represented by Councilwoman Cathy Bevins—who is not a co-sponsor on the bill.
"The timing was important," Marks said. "We didn't want to put the bill in while (the Board of Appeals) was deliberating but we also didn't want to wait too long because of the rezoning process."
He did not explain why he was sponsoring legislation on a project outside his district.
"All I can say is every council member had an opportunity to sign on to the bill," Marks said.
No one except Councilman Ken Oliver spoke in opposition to the bill during a hearing Tuesday.
Robertson said he was not even aware that the bill had been introduced.
"The bill was available on the county website for over a month," said Marks. He later said attorneys who drafted the bill had been in discussions with him for "three or four months before the bill was introduced."
Attorneys Wrote "Substantial Portion"
Marks initially declined to talk about the involvement of the law firm, saying only that he had consulted with "home builders" about the law.
He later acknowledged that the firm "wrote a subtantial portion" of the proposed bill but then declined to elaborate on which parts.
"I won't say," Marks said.
Ultimately, the councilman did acknowledge that the firm provided language for nearly all of the bill with the exception of amendments meant to increase community input and adding regulations to how changes to previously approved plans would be handled.
Marks, a former president of the Perry Hall Improvement Association, said he did not believe that community associations would look down on him for the law firm's involvement.
"I think people will look at the overall picture, the reforms made by the County Council and see that we made substantial improvements to the process," Marks said.
Bill Guts Challenge To Plan
Carroll Holzer, a Towson-based attorney representing the Bowleys Quarters Community Association's challenge to the condominium plan said the proposed legislation, if enacted, would end any possible appeal of the Board of Appeals’ Tuesday decision.
"It's a double-barreled effort to block communities out of the process," Holzer said.
"To me, it's not a good bill," Holzer said. "I'm very confused about why (Marks) is doing this for a project that is not in his district."
Holzer said he was disappointed but not surprised by the news that lawyers representing the project his clients oppose had a hand in writing the bill.
"Over the years, there have been development attorneys drafting bills for various councilmen," Holzer said. "There's always been lobbying but in this particular case, it seems more aggressive because (Smith, Gildea and Schmidt) literally drafted the law and handed it to a councilman to put it in while there was an ongoing case."
Connected Law Firm
The revelation that the Smith, Gildea and Schmidt was involved in writing the bill is the latest chapter in the story of the politically connected law firm.
In 2010, David Gildea and Michael Paul Smith were criticized for raising tens of thousands of dollars to help elect Cathy Bevins and Tom Quirk to the County Council. The two also raised funds for Gordon Harden, who lost in his bid for council.
Smith is the son of former County Executive Jim Smith. Gildea served as a law clerk to Jim Smith during his time as a Baltimore County Circuit Court judge.
Michael Paul Smith joined Gildea's law firm last year after his father left office.
Jim Smith also works for the firm. In 2010, Jim Smith campaigned door-to-door for both Bevins and Quirk. He also transfered $129,000 in cash from his own campaign to Bevins, Quirk and another Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for the council.
Attorney Involvement 'Not Unusual'
Community activists like Robertson and Donna Spicer, a Loch Raven resident, have long suspected the involvement of law firms representing developers when it comes to shaping development law.
"I've never had an direct proof of it but there was little doubt it happens,"Spicer said.
Still, Spicer said it was hard to criticize development lawyers for "having an open line to the council when I have one too."
Spicer said she frequently emails and calls councilmembers with her thoughts on various development bills but acknowledged that she's never been asked to draft a bill at the county level.
Robertson said he also had never been asked.
"The last time they asked will be the first time they ask because it's never happened before," Robertson said.
Councilman Ken Oliver, a Randallstown Democrat, agreed.
"It's not unusual for an attorney to draw up a bill you and he have discussed and mutually agree upon and then for the council member to introduce that bill," Oliver said. "What is unusual to me is that (Marks) introduced a bill for a project that is in another district and the councilmember who represents that district didn't sign off on it."
Oliver was the only member of the council to speak out against a portion of Marks' bill during a hearing Tuesday.
"It's a good bill but I am concerned about the part that allows a PUD (in rural areas)," Oliver said. "We've never done that."
Oliver said he has introduced bills that were drafted with the assistance of development attorneys.
One example of that was a bill that would have exempted the Metro Centre at Owings Mills project from most major development regulations.
The bill was drafted with the assistance of lawyers at Venable including Robert Hoffman and David Karceski, according to Oliver.
Hoffman did not return a call from a reporter seeking comment.
Oliver withdrew the bill before a scheduled May 24 vote but said he planned on reintroducing the bill in June.
Marks Announces Withdrawal then Reverses Course
Several hours after being questioned about the involvement of Smith, Gildea and Schmidt, Marks said he was withdrawing the bill. He said he hoped to re-file the bill Monday night—minus the provisions affecting the Bowleys Quarters project.
But late Wednesday night, Marks said that withdrawing the bill might not be a possibility.
"Even if I took my name off it, Tom Quirk is a co-sponsor and could move forward with the bill," Marks said.
Tom Henry
8:26 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
I didn't see Bryan Sears extensively reporting on the open space bill or the many good things Councilman Marks has done. But, when it's time for a hit piece, he knows what photo to put up. Why aren't Councilmen Oliver and Quirk's pictures up there, when they are sponsors of the same types of bills? Shame.
K Blue
9:18 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
I dont consider this a hit piece. It reads like a recitation of facts and a confirmation that development attorneys were instrumental in the drafting of this particular bill (and Oliver's bill) something long suspected but not documented or admitted. Personally, I dont have any problem with developers proposing legislation, just like I dont have a problem with animal activists, community activists or specialized task forces/committees/organizations proposing legislation. That being said, the question we should all be asking is whether this is a good bill which furthers mixed-used projects with a community benefit or not and whether there are sufficient safeguards for public input and review to thwart abuse. I am surprised that Bevins did not sign on to this bill but frankly, I am encouraged that Marks is among the sponsors as he seems to have his pulse on development and zoning issues not only in his own district but in neighboring districts as well.
OpenEyes
8:52 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Is it any surprise that the County Council does what ever the development community wants? Their contributions taints the Council's ability to make unbiased decisions. This is just another example of this problem. How much money do they receive? In 2011 alone, councilperson Quirk received just over $30,000 from the development community. What's worse is that because of all the attention to this problem, the development community is adopting new strategies attempting to cloak their influence. One example is a controversial developer, Whalen Properties, appears to funneling money to Quirk through various sources including $4,000 from Steve Whalen's daughter Kathleen Fleschner, $1000 from Darryl Hitt and $2,500 from Ronald Hickernall both Whalen employees. Even Steve Whalen's personal trainer, Michele Mandel, gave Quirk $2,500. Oddly enough, all but one of these individuals live outside Quirk's district and all have no prior history of political giving. Whalen Properties, however, has made generous contributions to most of the other council members and County Executive directly. No big surprise that Quirk put through a Whalen PUD, widely opposed by the community.
Buzz Beeler
9:42 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Open Eyes, where ya been? With good information like that (if factual) it should have been out there long ago.
Buck Harmon
9:26 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
When we are trapped in a greed driven society that is full of bad law and worse law makers, the citizens lose. Guys like Quirk, Marks and the Smith family thrive...while plastic shack development runs rampant. Bad job good ole boys, you're true colors are really glowing...
What the hell is going on here David Marks??
Buzz Beeler
9:34 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Tom, the warning sings were posted along the highway back in the last election. The media warned of the dangers involved in these issues.
Bryan's job is to report on breaking stories which he did. You are correct in your assessment of Quirk, but you forgot Bryan's quote of "... Tom Quirk is a co-sponsor and could move forward with the bill," .
The first two PUD's Quirk submitted were at the behest of Jim Smith who walked him into the council.
Beneath the headlines are far more serious issues that were discussed in many of these articles. I'll list one and let you be the judge.
http://redmaryland.blogspot.com/2010/06/potential-ripple-effect-of-jim-smiths.html
OpenEyes
10:05 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Buzz,
Would I lie?
Quirks most recent campaign finance report (follow the link and type in Tom Quirk, at Committee Name box, then hit search. Look at the 01/11/2012 Annual report) where all of the people are listed giving the said amounts: https://campaignfinancemd.us/Public/ViewFiledReports?theme=vista
Kathleen Fleschner's Facebook page list Steve Whalen as her father: http://www.facebook.com/kathleen.fleschner.7
Whalen Properties Contact us page: listing his employees referenced above as well as Mark Fleschner, Kathleen's Husband.
Michele Mandel's work bio where Whalen post's a recommendation: http://www.merrittclubs.com/fitness/security/michele-mandel.html
Buzz Beeler
11:31 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Open Eyes, I have to say that for the record. Keep it coming. Someone has to take on the blogs being posted by the county and state, although I don't think they are stopping the bleeding. Hemorrhaging might be as be a better choice of words.
Arbutus Town Crier
7:43 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.
Thomas Jefferson
Arbutus Town Crier
9:36 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
A look back: As Benjamin Franklin left the Pennsylvania State House after the final meeting of the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787, he was approached by the wife of the mayor of Philadelphia. She was curious as to what the new government would be. Franklin replied, “A republic, madam. If you can keep it.” USA has transformed:Republic, Democracy, and currently Despotism- LQQK IT UP lhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotism
In the United States Declaration of Independence, the British government is cited to have been reducing the American people under absolute despotism: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".
Bart
10:14 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
It is curious that Marks' picture leads this article, since he and Quirk have proposed the bill, and I am always suspicious of anything that has been touched by ANYBODY named Smith.
That being said, attorneys have always aided our representatives with the wording of bills, and laws. Everybody agrees on that point.
Marks amended the bill for the better of the citizens of the County. As Donna Spicer so well put it, she, and many other Community activists also have Marks' ear. He listens and does his level best to help them. He also works very hard to reach compromises to benefit the greatest number of people.
This "involvement" is not so shadowy as the article would have us believe, and I'm sure all the good that Marks has done for the Fifth District, and the County will eclipse this dust-up in no time.
Kim Ruark
5:04 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
I agree that Marks is a straight-forward, fair guy. He is looking out to do the right thing, amd should not have been bloodied in this shady way.
BCalvert
11:10 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Bryan, why did you only list 3 of the 5 council members that Jim Smith BOUGHT during the 2010 elections? Let me list them for you. Tom Quirk, Cathy Bevins, Vicki Almond, Ben Sutley, and Gordon Harden. Boy, if he had his way and all 5 had won, the supermajority on the council would reign supreme. It's no wonder then why this whole Solo Cup redevelopment is such a hot issue over in Owings Mills. Vicki threw her support behind the redevelopment of the site long before the "public process" was over. And who is trying to redevelop the Solo Cup site? None other than Greenberg Gibbons. And who represents Greenberg Gibbons? None other than our very own Jim Smith. Seems like there is a pattern here, and those of the "Jim Smith 5" who were elected, seem to have their votes in the bag on the rezoning issue at the old Solo Cup site.
Bart
9:03 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Jim Smith is walking, talking slime. Sorry. I'm usually not like this. But everything he touches is tainted.
Arbutus Town Crier
7:39 am on Sunday, June 3, 2012
BCalvert, The people have noticed, and want change from self serving Representatives believe they know whats best for us. WE want a Representatives that serves the peoples. Talk of the town now!
BrownGirl71
12:41 pm on Monday, June 4, 2012
Peel back the layers, and there's that name again... Jim Smith.
DCMerkle
11:14 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
My take. David Marks will listen and if he has been listening to the lawyers that drafted this plan and if he has noticed that something has changed in what he has been told, then that tells me even he sees something not quite right. I don't see him backing something that was explained to him one way and then it seems to have changed in now what he is being told.
Buzz Beeler
11:49 am on Thursday, May 31, 2012
I will say this, as as rookie cop I made mistakes, but I learned from them. I suggested he stay as far away from the rest as possible and avoid the SOP (standard operating procedure) and set his own course.
That is what true leadership is all about. There will be more battles to fight and some are coming from the east side. The alarm just went off and now it's time to get up and go to work.
Buzz Beeler
12:07 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
FIFI, that was a good one.
Fair Play
12:39 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Another example of legislation being introduced to benefit Gildea and Smith's client occurred last year. After losing his case in court due to his proposed building being too large to meet the definition of a farm stand, the law was changed to remove the size limit. Voi-la! Problem solved!
Same situation with accessory, or "in-law" apartments. Lost the case in court--changed the law. Gildea and Smith are kings! Development lawyers rule (the County Council)! Who can say no to that kind of money?
Buzz Beeler
1:20 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Fair Play, you missed a couple - Yorkway, Fort Howard; how many characters am I allowed in this reply. Oh yeah, not enough in this box.
Terry
2:49 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
How much do the residents of 21227 and 21229 have to pay Quirk to get something done! You know, there is a whole federal prison wing just waiting for these guys. Do they really think their above the law? The Feds are never to busy to take on sleazy local politicians.
Bryan P. Sears
3:45 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
A comment left by user Jim21236 was removed because it violated Patch's terms of use policy concerning false or misleading information. The terms of use can be reviewed here: http://towson.patch.com/terms
Bart
7:57 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Good call, Bryan! Thanks.
Bart
8:00 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Mike really stepped in it this time. And to think I believed he was beginning to get over his temper tantrum. I can't trust him ever again.
Terry
5:53 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
FIFA, I live in District 1 and everything wrong with county government is here. If you don't live in 21228, you're like the walking dead! It's like a weekly show that they can only show on HBO. It's that bad.
Terry
6:42 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
I'll vote for that! It is the truth.
Buck Harmon
7:44 pm on Thursday, May 31, 2012
Once you get into the grey...you're in it to your elbows...
Again, What is going on here David Marks ??
Voter
8:53 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
Frankly, I'm shocked to learn that David Marks is seemingly involved in the same old Political back door system. Why in the world didn't the Council Person who represents the District propose the Bill? Oh Ya..... it's a plan that the people in that District didn't want, so that Council Person traded some favors with other Council Persons to sponser the Bill so the District Council Person can say "I didn't do it".
The whole thing stinks..... it's EXACTLY what is wrong with the way Politics operates now-a-days.
Buck Harmon
9:26 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
We all know that David Marks follows these posts, I can only wonder why he has no comment with regard to the dark cloud that he chooses to ride...
Tim
9:58 am on Friday, June 1, 2012
Exactly. Most people don't start out this way in office. Every rookie goes in with ideological ideas. I'll fix the machine. It won't affect me.
However It just grows on them, slowly, subtlety, like cancer.
Remember, David was the one who wanted to force mandatory term limits. He was shouted down for it by the rest of the Council. Think about that.
It doesn't matter who you are, the system will rot your soul over time.
What seperates one politician from another is this: What good can they actually do while they are in the swamp?
In this sense, David has done an excellent job thus far. Anyone expecting any politican to be completely above water in getting any kind of meaningful work done is kidding themselves.
Politics by its very nature is about manipulation of others. Intellectually, fiscally, psychologically.
K Blue
1:30 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
I dont know for sure, but I strongly suspect that this bill would have been introduced by someone on the Council with or without Marks' sponsorship. By introducing the legislation, he (and Quirk, the co-sponsor) have greater opportunity to control what is in the bill from the start, rather than introducing amendments as nonsponsors which may or may not been approved. The article states that "Marks' bill also calls for creating a process for reviewing substantive changes to plans that were previously approved as well as creating public commenting periods and departmental reviews before the council approves the project." I am curious whether that information would have been in the bill introduced if Marks had not sponsored it. Some persons on this board appear focused on the negative aspects of his involvement, but I am choosing to look at the positive.
Bryan P. Sears
1:58 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
KBlue: To answer your question, that language you referred to appears to be the portion of the bill developed by the council. Marks has had a particular interest in the public comment and posting and online access. Quirk had an interest in having departmental review prior to the council approving because of the situation with the Thistle Road PUD that he tried to revoke after reading county agency reports that said the project did not qualify as a PUD.
I was provided draft legislation that shows that the rest of the bill was provided by others. Councilman Marks told me late Wednesday that Smith, Gildea and Schmidt provided that language.
K Blue
5:01 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
Thanks. I remember the Thistle Landing PUD situation and how the Council revoked its own revocation, so the language that Quirk added make perfect sense (at least to me) to prevent that from happening twice. The language added by the Council pertaining to public commenting periods makes perfect sense to me as well.
Ann Miller
12:44 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
What also troubles me is that our councilmen are lobbied for months by special interest groups, long before the public hears a whisper about any controversial legislation. By the time it gets to public input, which is a joke, all decisions are already made. Why can't our councilmen gives the public a heads up about legislation being considered, as soon as it starts being considered? The obvious answer is that they don't want to be bothered with the public. Development issues, the transgender bill, etc. The more controversial, the later the public hears about it.
Buzz Beeler
2:02 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
Tim, some good points. The term rookie is appropriate in the learning curve aspect of the political journey.
David will have a chance to showcase his abilities and judgement in the coming months over some very hot zoning issues, a sort of the pedal to the metal issue.
I'll forgo my judgement until then. I say that because of the cast of characters involved in these productions. Like Hollywood, the same faces show up again and again using the same old script outline, which by LA standers works as long as the money keeps rolling in.
PMM49
5:06 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
Sure, none of that money affects any of them. Do you ever see me of them leave office less well off than they were when they went in? Now, another seemingly good Councilperson gets sucked in by a system that allows scoundrels with their own relentless self interest at heart to control the process.
Buck Harmon
5:18 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
David Marks...Please tell us what on earth is going on here, you are normally quick to respond, are you doing something that could be questionable here?
Does the Smith family have something on you? Are you beginning to dance to a different beat? This is NOT sound public service...
Bart
7:18 pm on Friday, June 1, 2012
Oh Buck, give it a break. This whole thing is a whole lot of nothing. Heck, the news has come out just in the last hour or so that the owners of The Colony have backed down from their plans to grow, due to Marks' suggestions and recommendations. Does that sound like the workings of somebody in the developers' pockets? In my neighborhood's eyes, he is excellent at public service.
He lives and breathes this stuff!
Buck Harmon
6:59 am on Saturday, June 2, 2012
bart...It would take Marks about as much time to provide answers as it did for you to make yet another pointless, nameless comment. Marks has responded to concerns with regularity on these blogs, but seems to be avoiding this one..I want to hear the truth from him. Could care less about the Colony.
SAB
9:27 pm on Sunday, June 3, 2012
David Marks is no longer fighting for the community. He mislead our community with a re-zoning issue of ~15 acres. He played 'dumb', telling us he couldn't down-zone this area; however, he could down-zone all area's around this. Later, per Donnell Ziegler, there was no reason this area could not have been included in Marks' down-zoning proposal. Could it be the multiple campaign contributions to Marks, Gardina, and Kamenetz from the involved developer, engineer, lawyer AND lawyer's wife?? As usual, the community loses. The Patch needs to post more regarding political contributions to keep the voter's informed.
Buck Harmon
7:56 am on Monday, June 4, 2012
LET'S HEAR YOUR RESPONSE DAVID MARKS... you're really missing the mark here...
Lily
12:19 pm on Saturday, June 9, 2012
Developers routinely over develop without thinking at all about the big picture and sustainability. It's one of the biggest "tragedy of the commons" problems we have in today's society is that the developers seem to be able to control community planning in way that can harm the community and over develop the area.
It's completely appropriate for people to be as involved and concerned about these issues more so than even who is president. Communities should be able to oppose broad scale expansion of their community. Developers shouldn't be able to end run the community simply because they have money. They should find ways to engage in meaningful dialog and deal with the communities concerns. If they did that more they might not have so much opposition through every step.
FIFA_archived
12:26 pm on Saturday, June 9, 2012
Lily, somehow the developers are the "bad" guy? Developers, like any other interest group, look out for their own interests. The system is set up to pay the politicians. The SCOTUS says it is okay to pay the man. Developers will.
Lily
6:29 am on Monday, June 11, 2012
I don't believe I said that developers are "bad" in the sense that they are evil or anything. Someone has to build when building is needed. I simply disagree with some of their methods. Just because a person can do something doesn't mean they should. Issues like sustainability do matter and I think politicians are bad at their job if they only pay attention to the people who pay them and not to the interests of the community at large. I also think it's bad when the people on the zoning board are the actual developers as I've read of happening in some areas. Whatever happened to the ideal of "good public policy"?