Wow! The Council need six weeks instead of four weeks to read a Bill about Ethics. I guess they need their lobbyist friends to help read the hard words for them.

John-- what a big surprise-- the Baltimore County Council backing away from strong ethics reform!!! I'm shocked!!!!!! I can't wait to see how they water down what Kamenetz tried to get passed. Read my lips: eithics good. Delay disgusting.

So I wake up this morning to see that MY county council is going to try and weaken changes to Baltimore County's ethics laws. I've never really been involved in any elections, but I swear if they weaken this bill at all, I will start a recall campaign to get rid of the entire bunch. I mean it. I am going to the Board of Elections this morning to find out how to recall council members. I can't take it anymore.

Perhaps they need to hire a tutor to help some on the Council understand it. It is sad that some are so dense that individual instruction may be necessary. Hope they pass it soon before its is outdated.

It appears that I am the only one who thinks this delay is a good idea. I read the proposed bill and there are quite a few things missing that I think should be included. I also thought that the bill was unnecessarily verbose. This is sweeping legislation. Time and care should be taken to make sure it is right and easy to read so there can be no doubt what it means.

They are probably waiting for Sen. Curry's case to finish before they decide to do something on the ethics bill. They wouldn't want to jump the gun on anything.

What is perplexing is why did Kamenetz draft of up an ethics bill without any input from those who would vote on it. It would be effective if they were all on the same page and did their homework, in order the teacher is not giving a lesson to an empty class.

The council has work sessions and you might think the county executive would attend one, especially since this a major challenge that needs to be addressed.

I think this reminds me of another place as in Capital Hill and that big white building where nothing gets done.

If council and ececutive work together as a team then they don't set themselves up for this type of scrutiny which is often negative considering the medial attention these types of issues generate.

The bill was written by the County Attorney. That's his job.

There is nothing negative about tightening up ethics laws. No matter how you try to spin it.

Is that the same county attorney that signed off on the Yorkway Development?

Time to break out my tinfoil hat again.

Nolan,

Where does it mention weakening the ethics law? If anything, it is trying to strengthen it. I applaud the delay because the Council members need to thoroughly read it since they weren't consulted on it at all. Better safe than sorry.

Boys come on now. The only reason the Council is delaying this is so they can try to pull a fast one. Who are they kidding? They would have had one month to study the bill and make changes. If they can't understand a bill in one month then we are in a real mess. Oops, I guess we are in a real mess. Memo to Council members: you won't get away with this. Memo to CE: if they cut the heart out of this bill-- VETO it. Take them on-- the people are with you.

Oh, there's that broad brush again! Some people here are so full of conspiracy theories, criminal economic development and ulterior motives it'll make your head spin. Hey, wait, maybe that's exactly what's wrong with them! (The spinning heads)
I have no doubt that the reason the Council delayed the vote was so that they could really look it over, discuss, imagine possible problems. Wow, maybe they just wanted to get it right the FIRST time.

Good for them!

Some of you as clueless as the councilmembers you are shilling for. A bill is introduced routinely by the County Executive ("By Request"). The Council then begins the Legislative process of reviewing the bill for the next four weeks, including a work session. The Executive does not attend the legislative branch's work session (nor, Buzz, does the President attend legislative sessions of Congress). The Council has a full month to review the Bill and offer any amendments, etc. No Councilman was going to read the Bill before introduction, because they never do! The only reason this Ethics Bill was pulled was because these councilmembers are worried about what the bill says! Not because they want to improve it, but because they are worried about what their financial disclosures might say, now and in the future. There is nothing awkward about the way the bill is written, unless someone feels awkward about passing an ethics bill. The council should be closely examined on every step they take to water down this bill. That is what this is all about!!

With the approval ratings of Congress at all time low levels why would either Mr. Kamenetz, or Council Chairman Olszewski -- who supported Kamenetz in the election -- risk this type of scrutiny on a bill of this magnitude?

It is just one more example of the constituents frustration with the functions of government, or lack thereof.

You put in the time and effort to craft a bill such as this, but forget the most important part, which is the passage of that bill. If you take the combined length of government service between Kamenetz and Olszewski it's over 30 years. One would think that during those years this same bridge has been crossed before without falling over the side and getting all wet.

Blah, Blah, Blah This is about the Baltimore County Council not Congress. More conspiracy theories.

Once again , you are full of crap, Bueller. If you took the time you spent riding a desk doing nothing productive and added it to a Rookie that would be more time then Olszewski/Kamenetz have spent in government service.

Calmdown, the president regularly meets with various members of Congress especially when lobbying for the passage of key legislation that defines their agenda. I'm sure that during the crafting of the health care bill there were many meetings up until the time of the crucial vote.

Key members of Congress are briefed on particular matters as we saw in the Bin Laden take down. Problems occur when members of either party stand fast on their party agenda and comprise is improbable. Remember Dutch and his attempt to capitalize on that issue.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382649/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Photo-Obama-watching-special-forces-shoot-him.html

Both offices of the executive and council members are located in the same building. I think regardless of the various issues a meeting of the minds could have avoided this public spectacle. I just makes sense to iron these issues out before opening Pandora's box. As the saying goes make sure all of your -- ducks are in a row.

I don't think they need another Nancy Pelosi moment.

Public spectacle? All they asked for was time to make sure it was a good bill.
Nancy Pelosi moment? You're talking in circles.
And, so what if Kamenetz and Olszewski have a combined 30 years in office? You brag of your 39 years as if you're some kind of super hero. They must be doing a pretty good job in office, they keep getting reelected, or is there something nefarious going on there, too. Their constituents must like them. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't make them criminals.

Now you are quoting a news article in a British paper about killing Bin Laden all the while bringing up Nancy Pelosi???

Dude, you have lost any shred of credibility you thought you had.

Your quote: "All they asked for was time to make sure it was a good bill." Another quote that you made answers your own question: ".... reviewing the bill for the next four weeks, including a work session."

How much time would you allow? I would think a month is sufficient. The reference to the number of years in government involves the experience to handle matters such as this. These elected officials are not rookies.

I never alluded to being a hero of any kind. As far as talking in circles, if you were informed you would understand the reference to Pelosi.

I respond when someone like you makes a reference without any qualifying quotes to back up those claims.

Show me a quote where I referred to anyone being a criminal? You made the reference so why don't you back it up, or is it something you have knowledge of?

Beeler, that's not my quote. The rest of your diatribe doesn't deserve a response.