Is a ‘political’ email sent with county government resources worth a $5K fine?

Political contributions from developers and perceived conflicts of interest were hot-button topics in Anne Arundel County’s primary elections, and County Councilman Nathan Volke is keeping those issues alive headed into the November election.

The Pasadena Republican, who’s widely expected to win reelection in November, hopes to pass a suite of three ethics bills that would affect county elected officials.

The first would empower the county ethics commission to impose fines on officials who break the rules. The second expands definitions for conflicts of interest for council members, which would limit who could vote on what, and the third would prohibit developers from making political contributions when the council is considering certain legislation.

Volke said he thinks all three will pass. The County Council is only scheduled to meet three times before the November election, and new members will take the oath of office in early December.

“It’s doing the work,” Volke said.

Council Chair Julie Hummer, a Laurel Democrat, said she’s “fine” with Volke’s bills, but she would have preferred a more “holistic” look at the county’s ethics code, which she may propose next year.

A $5,000 ethics fine

Perhaps the meatiest of Volke’s three bills would allow the county Ethics Commission to impose a civil fine of up to $5,000 for any county employee or official who violates the public ethics law.

The Republican said one of the reasons he introduced the bill is because of what he called repeat violations of the ethics rules by outgoing County Executive Steuart Pittman, who’s also the Maryland Democratic Party chair.

In an interview, Pittman said his office is always “very careful” about what’s included in the newsletter.

“Everybody understands that it is my responsibly as county executive, through county channels and otherwise, to share my views about issues before the council and before the county,” he said.

In 2020, the Ethics Commission responded to complaints and concerns that the county website used the phrase “Build Back Better,” which was associated with Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. Though the county said it began using the phrase before it was widely associated with Biden, the commission advised the county to stop using it to avoid even the appearance of politicization.

In 2024, after Pittman wrote in his county executive’s newsletter that he would travel to Baltimore to endorse then-state Sen. Sarah Elfreth for Congress, he was warned against using language that “could be interpreted as an attempt to bestow political favor on a candidate for public office using county supplied and owned resources.”

And in 2025, the commission publicly reprimanded Pittman for using the newsletter for partisan political activity, after he wrote about the off-year election results.

Last week, Pittman used his newsletter to call out Volke, criticizing him for introducing multiple amendments to the zoning bill less than 24 hours before a County Council meeting. He called most of Volke’s amendments “nonsensical.”

“This is serious stuff, and every member of the County Council should take it seriously. Fortunately, a majority of our Council does,” Pittman wrote.

Volke said Pittman uses his government newsletter as a “bully pulpit” and called last week’s message a direct attack.

Though Pittman critiqued Volke’s zoning amendments, he said he supported the ethics bills — and defended what he wrote last week.

“To say I can’t use his name when talking about his legislation is, you know, an attempt by him to play the victim,” Pittman said in an interview Tuesday.

Michael Botsaris, the county ethics commission’s executive director, said the board reviewed Pittman’s email and found no issue with it.

Conflicts of interest and disclosures

A second Volke ethics bill covers conflicts of interest, expanding the definitions in the county code to preclude council members from participating in some legislation.

It expands the list of organizations — such as employee unions — in which membership would qualify as a “presumed conflict of interest” for council members. The bill also includes council members’ immediate family for presumed conflicts of interest.

For example, a council member who is a teacher would be precluded from voting on legislation or budgeting concerning education; a council member also would be limited if their spouse was a teacher.

The bill would have affected Councilwoman Lisa Rodvien, an Annapolis Democrat who was a teacher for part of her time on council, but she’s not running for another term. Rodvien declined to comment on the bill, saying she was advised to recuse herself.

In the past, Rodvien said that the ethics commission advised her that she could vote on matters affecting all teachers, but said she should recuse herself if it affected a smaller group. For example, Rodvien, who was a music teacher, could vote on teacher compensation but not on stipends for after-school activities.

The other bill is a “boiled-down” version of a broader bill on developer donations that failed to pass earlier this year, Volke said. Sponsored by Rodvien and supported by Pittman, that bill would have barred developers with pending projects from making any donations to county elected officials.

“This is a more realistic version,” Volke said.

The legislation requires developers in the county to submit affidavits itemizing any contributions to county elected officials or campaigns they made in the 12 months leading up to submitting an application for development in the county. It also prohibits developers from making any contributions whenever the council is working on comprehensive or countywide zoning.

During the Democratic primary for county executive, County Councilwoman Allison Pickard, who won, was critiqued for a perceived closeness to developers. One of her opponents, James Kitchin, ran with public campaign financing, rejecting contributions from developers.

Pickard and County Councilman Pete Smith, who also ran in the primary, both received about $98,000 during the 2023-2026 election cycle from developers and connected industries, according to a Capital Gazette analysis. (Volke received about $52,000 during that time period.)

Pickard has said repeatedly that her campaign funding decisions don’t affect her governing style.

Volke said he was not accusing any council member of behaving inappropriately or being influenced by developer money. But the public sees developers making political donations, he said, and he wants to avoid the appearance of impropriety or conflicts of interest.

“Let’s put in some rules for all of us,” Volke said.

Pittman said this bill was not as “comprehensive” as the one he supported earlier in the year, but called it “a step in the right direction.”

The Anne Arundel County Council is scheduled to meet Monday.