Considering that the two Republicans on the Howard County Council were only willing to permit two of the Charter Review Commission's 16 proposed amendments on the ballot, CDC might have lucked out in getting one of the two we supported past them. Four affirmative votes were needed for approval of any such amendments, so the minority on the Council had the veto power in this instance and they used it repeatedly and with little comment after seeing their own tax cap amendment revised to the point that they were unwilling to support it. Council member Merdon expressed a concern about not wanting to confuse the voters with too many questions. But 13 of the 16 proposals were so non-controversial that nobody at all testifed against them at the hearing held in June. It seems unlikely that the voters would have had all that much trouble understanding more than just two of them come election time.
The one of CDC's that they were willing to join the three Democrats in supporting would permit the Council by ordinance to provide for special elections to fill vacancies in their body. It will be on the ballot in November along with one that enables the Council to remove any of their appointees to county boards or commissions.
Among the 14 that failed to get past the Republican roadblock was the other one that CDC had supported in testimony at the hearing. It would have required successful referendum seekers to obtain the signatures of five percent of the county's steadily increasing total of registered voters instead of as little as 5000 signatures. Our concern was that, as time passes, getting that 5000 would become steadily easier and eventually too easy. But apparently, some people like it that way.
There could conceivably be a third ballot question for county voters. But that would only happen if those pushing for a tax cap succeed in getting 10,000 signatures on their petitions. We'll soon know if they've succeeded.