Wait, food trucks were illegal? Anne Arundel County approves zoning fix.

The Anne Arundel County Council approved an amendment to a comprehensive zoning reform bill that addressed the concerns of the county’s food truck operators, but a flurry of amendments introduced by one council member could put the bill at risk.

For more than a year, Anne Arundel County staff and council members have worked on a bill amending and updating the county’s zoning code.

Janssen Evelyn, the county’s deputy chief administrative officer, said at Monday night’s council meeting that the bill was an overdue cleanup of the county’s patchwork zoning code.

“It is not a vehicle for sweeping new policy,” Evelyn said.

Despite the county administration’s assertion that the bill is not a policy overhaul, some have been concerned with how changes to the zoning code would affect their specific industries. Notably, food truck operators came out in droves in previous weeks, saying the original bill would have hobbled their ability to operate in the county.

Posts on social media suggested that the county zoning bill would make food trucks illegal and harm other industries, including agriculture.

Food trucks do not appear in the county zoning code, meaning they’re not technically permitted on private property, though they may operate on public roads.

Councilwoman Lisa Rodvien, an Annapolis Democrat who’s not seeking reelection, worked with food truck operators to tweak the language and make it more palatable. The intent of the bill was never to limit food trucks’ ability to operate in the county, she said.

County Executive Steuart Pittman, in a newsletter sent Sept. 25, explained that his administration wanted to update the zoning code so food trucks could be permitted on private property without the “paperwork burden” of applying for conditional use certificates.

At Monday night’s council meeting, food truck operators and others representing them spoke in favor of the amended language that would allow food trucks to continue operating mostly as they already do.

“We support clear, reasonable rules,” said Brad Oswald, who owns Tiki’s Tuk Tuk food truck with his wife.

The amendment adds food trucks to the county zoning code and gives them the ability to operate on private property until 9 p.m. up to four days per week.

It also changes food trucks from “conditional” to “permitted” use in several county zones, meaning operators would not have to apply for conditional use permits to sell in certain areas.

Though the food truck amendment passed unanimously, the zoning bill itself could be at risk.

The bill, introduced in July by Council Chair Julie Hummer, a Laurel Democrat, on behalf of the Pittman administration, came after the county’s Office of Planning and Zoning completed a comprehensive review of the zoning code and recommended changes.

Council members can amend the bill, but each amendment must be approved by council vote. If a bill is amended during a legislative meeting, it cannot be voted on that same day because it has to go back out for public comment.

Monday night’s meeting, which went beyond midnight, should have been the last chance to amend the bill because the current council only meets one more time, on Oct. 19, before the election of a new council. But there were so many amendments that the council didn’t have time to discuss, take public comments and vote on them all.

Hummer said in an interview that she won’t predict whether the bill will pass but said there’s a real risk it won’t.

“It’s the last chance to vote on it,” Hummer said of the Oct. 19 meeting. “We do not carry over any unfinished legislation into the next session.”

Republican Councilman Nathan Volke, of Pasadena, introduced many of the undiscussed amendments.

They included measures that would have removed definitions for terms such as “hospital” and “hotels” from the county zoning code. One of Volke’s amendments that didn’t pass would have removed the County Office of Planning and Zoning’s discretion in administering and interpreting the zoning law.

Pittman said Volke’s amendment about planning and zoning not being able to interpret the code was “the holy grail for developers.”

“Imagine a world in which developers and land speculators get to decide how the zoning code applies to their property,” Pittman wrote in his weekly email newsletter.

“It was disappointing to see my Republican colleagues attempt to filibuster this bill solely for political points,” Hummer said.

During the meeting, Rodvien called it “very disappointing” that Volke introduced so many amendments to the zoning bill, accusing him of attempting to “run out the clock.”

“We wasted a lot of time with conversations that he [Volke] could have had ahead of time,” Rodvien said in an interview Tuesday.

Evelyn, the deputy administrative officer, said the Pittman administration opposed most of Volke’s amendments, calling them “frivolous.”

Volke pushed back, asking that everyone at the meeting remain professional.

“Oh trust me,” Evelyn retorted, “I’ve kept it professional during this circus.”

In an interview Tuesday, Volke said the zoning bill should have been done in “smaller pieces.” He said it would be “fine” if he was blamed for the bill not passing.

While he doesn’t enjoy seeing the work of county staff who worked on the legislation go to waste, Volke said he thinks it would be better for the next council to tackle zoning changes “in more bite-sized pieces.”