Charles County Citizens for Accountability, Responsibility, and Ethics

06/09/2026

UPDATE: Southern Maryland News Net reports that Simms was released on unsecured bond on June 8. (Link in comments) It is not clear why the two news sources have such different information.

The BayNet reports that County Commissioner President candidate Vontasha Simms is currently jailed without bond.

LA PLATA, Md. — A Democratic candidate for Charles County Commissioner President is being held without bond ahead of a July hearing in Charles County District Court in connection with a November incident at a La Plata park-and-ride. Vontasha Romechia Simms, 58, of La Plata, is charged with disorde...

06/03/2026

Who does Ralph Patterson represent when he votes on data center policy? Is it the citizens of Charles County? Or is it the Data Center Alliance of Southern Maryland, a pro-Data Center group where Patterson holds a seat on the steering committee?

District 4 Commissioner Patterson (who is running unopposed in the primary to retain his current seat) is the ONLY elected official on this committee. Other government representatives on the committee include Economic Development department staff. These departments are designed to advocate for job and tax growth, but the staff have no voting rights on policy. They can only make recommendations to the elected officials who vote on matters.

Do you think D4 Commissioner Ralph Patterson’s seat on a pro-industry board advocating FOR data centers – while Charles County is considering zoning to allow data centers - is a conflict of interest?

List showing Patterson’s role on the committee: https://mdtechcouncil.com/data-center-alliance-of-maryland-appoints-steering-committee-to-guide-public-engagement/

NOTE: Since the purpose of this page is to advocate for the qualities of accountability, transparency, and responsibility, it generally avoids specific policy positions and has not taken a position on data centers themselves. The concern here is the possible conflict that could impact voting on data centers.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1arp8WQ1DX/

CHARLES COUNTY, Md. — Charles County Commissioner Vice President Ralph Patterson’s participation in a statewide data center advocacy coalition is drawing attention as county leaders continue debating the future of data center development and zoning regulations. Patterson has been listed as a mem...

05/30/2026

Which Commissioner went on a TOUR about DATA CENTERS and signed an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) to do so?

County Attorney Wes Adams corrects County Commissioner President Reuben Collins:

Collins: “I kept hearing that individual commissioners have signed Non-Disclosure Agreements, which is absolutely false.”

Adams: “Hang on, before you say that exactly…I am aware of a commissioner who went on a tour about data centers…it was in a different jurisdiction, and as a part of that tour, was required or was asked to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement.”

Shortly after those comments, Attorney Adams states that a Commissioner signing an NDA would be subject to disclosure under a Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) request.

Informed St. Mary's reported earlier this year that Commissioner Ralph Patterson is a member of the Data Center Alliance of Maryland’s steering committee.

The discussion above took place on May 19, 2026 during the commissioners’ discussion about citizen legislative proposals, proposal #18.

Watch the full meeting here - this clip starts about 1:30:35 (-4:50): https://reflect-charlescountymd.cablecast.tv/internetchannel/show/1745?channel=1

Read about the Data Center Alliance of Southern Maryland: https://mdtechcouncil.com/data-center-alliance-of-maryland/

Read Informed St. Mary's article about Data Centers in Southern Maryland here: https://www.informedstmarys.com/news/regulating-data-centers #:~:text=Southern%20Maryland%20members%20include%20Julie,County%20Board%20of%20County%20Commissioners

05/27/2026

INSPECTOR GENERAL CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD – Part 2 of 3 – How will members be selected?

The OIG legislation (link below) describes in detail the process and composition of the Inspector General Citizens Advisory Board (IG Board).
• The IG Board is a non-political entity
• The IG Board will consist of seven (7) citizen members. Members will serve 5-year terms.
• The County's Department of Human Resources will advertise and coordinate applications for the IG Board.
• The nominating process is intended to provide an independent cross-section of citizens having backgrounds relevant to the work of the IG.
• Interested citizens can apply online, and Human Resources will screen applicants to determine eligibility (see our post “Part 1 of 3” for qualifications)
• A list of qualified applicants will be developed, and Board members will be RANDOMLY CHOSEN by the Chair of the Charles County Ethics Commission.

The PROCESS for making the selection is complex but diverse. Generally:

First, a list of qualified applicants will be presented to five categories / groups (detailed below). Each “group” has the opportunity to nominate a specified number of people from the list (we’ll call that a shortlist). Finally, the Ethics Commission Chair will randomly select one or two members from those shortlists, and those who are randomly chosen will be the Board members.

In all cases, the organizations who select names for final consideration will not be known to the Ethics Chair. For clarification, the board members are not representatives of the categories / groups noted; rather, nominees are chosen by these “categories / groups.”

Group 1: Active Civic Organizations – Determines 2 IG Board members. The Ethics Chair will provide the list of qualified applicants to (4) active civic organizations (e.g., Rotary, American Legion, Kiwanis, etc.). Each of those contacted organizations will forward one name to the Chair, for a total of four names. The Ethics Chair will randomly select 2 of those to be IG Board members.

Group 2: “Employers/Business” – Determines 2 IG Board members. The Ethics Chair will provide the applicant list to 4 business-related entities: Chamber of Commerce; Military Alliance Council; Farm Bureau; and UMD Charles Regional Medical Center. Each of those organizations will forward one name to the Chair, for a total of four names. The Ethics Chair will randomly select 2 of those to be IG Board members.

Group 3: Commissioners (BOCC) – Determines 1 IG Board member. Each District Commissioner will nominate from the applicant list one person who has ALSO completed the county’s Citizen Academy, for a total of four names. The Ethics chair will randomly select 1 of those to be an IG Board member.

Group 4: Law Enforcement – Determines 1 IG Board member. The Charles County Sheriff and Charles County State’s Attorney’s Office will each nominate from the applicant list one person who has a law enforcement and/or legal background, for a total of two names. The Ethics chair will randomly select 1 of those to be an IG Board member.

Group 5: Government Operations – Determines 1 IG Board member. The County Administrator and Director of Fiscal Services will each nominate from the applicant list one person who has a background in financial and/or government administration/operations, for a total of two names. The Ethics chair will randomly select 1 of those to be an IG Board member.

Read the detailed description of the IG Advisory board selection process, see Page 12 of the legislation, Section 194-10, here:
https://charlescountymd.granicus.com/services/legistar/download/pdf/3982061/OIG_Bill_01.12.2026_EWA__2026-02-06_FINAL.pdf

05/24/2026

CHARLES COUNTY INSPECTOR GENERAL CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD – Part 1 of 3

The County Commissioners (BOCC) approved an Office of the Inspector General (IG) on Tuesday, 5/19. $800,000 has been allotted in the FY 2027 budget (which starts 7/1/26) for the Office. OIG legislation goes into effect in early July. But before hiring an IG, the Inspector General Citizens Advisory Board (IG Board) must be created.

In 3 posts regarding the Inspector General Citizens Advisory Board (IG Board) we will cover:
1. Board member Qualifications;
2. How Board members will be chosen; and
3. Duties of the board

Qualifications:
• Members must be county residents at least 25 years old.
• Persons PROHIBITED from applying include those who have been ANY of the following during the past 5 years:
o An elected official; a county employee; a board or commission member; a candidate for public office (including central committee).
o Anyone convicted of a felony and certain other crimes.
o A county contractor or vendor
• Other persons prohibited from applying:
o An external recipient of county funds or services (including board members)
o An elected official’s spouse, parent, child, or sibling
o An officer, staffer, or employee of any political party organization
o A lobbyist
o An attorney who appears before a county board or commission

To read the complete description of qualifications, see Page 12 of the legislation, Section 194-10:
https://charlescountymd.granicus.com/services/legistar/download/pdf/3982061/OIG_Bill_01.12.2026_EWA__2026-02-06_FINAL.pdf

05/23/2026

2026 Commissioner Attendance through April

We are pleased to provide you with a detailed description of County Commissioner Attendance through April, showing for each meeting who was present in person (IP), virtually (V) or not present (N).

05/20/2026

Last night, the commissioners approved creating an Office of the Inspector General, making our county the smallest jurisdiction in the state to have an IG. Fiscal staff estimate the first year’s cost around $700K.

This effort was led by Commissioner Collins, who has campaigned on the slogan, ART, an acronym for Accountability, Responsibility, Transparency. Collins, along with the board majority, previously voted not to release the 2nd Sargeant Report and voted down legislation to remove a commissioner for cause.

Supporters of creating the OIG claim it will provide much-needed transparency and save the county money. Several sources indicate an OIG provides taxpayer savings in much larger jurisdictions, but the county provided no analysis estimating what savings could be expected in Charles County.

In Howard County, the newly hired IG is struggling to gain access to requested documents, and provisions in State law are part of that debate. Meanwhile, Baltimore’s IG has been struggling to gain document access for a long time.

Citizens who opposed Charter in 2024 will recall that the OIG was the single most expensive element of that defeated effort.

The OIG has been approved, and we hope it will truly provide the transparency and savings promised. Keep paying attention, Charles County.

The Charles County commissioners took their next step in providing residents with accountability and transparency by unanimously approving the creation of an office of the inspector general during a public

05/17/2026

A month ago, we posted the observation that Mark Belton is still listed on the County’s website as Administrator, despite the 2nd lawsuit being settled. Southern Maryland News just reported on the subject, here.

Keep in mind that a 3-Commissioner majority can control Board decisions. And we already know that Collins, Coates, and Patterson continue to withhold information to the public (case in point - the 2nd Sargeant Report).

On what basis is it legal, though, for the Board to conceal from the public what the public is paying for on an ongoing basis?

Charles County government still won’t say if Mark Belton will return to work or remain on paid administrative leave, which he has been on for at least three years.

04/21/2026

TONIGHT – Citizens have submitted 20 different proposals for legislation they’d like to see the county enact, and the Commissioners will hear from those citizens this evening. Topics include several proposals on Data Centers, as well as Commissioner Attendance, Performance, and Investigations.

The list pictured shows the names of each legislative proposal and the name of the person submitting it.

A link to the entire packet (includes the complete proposal) is available here:https://charlescountymd.granicus.com/services/legistar/download/pdf/4038249/2026_Local_Legislative_Proposals.pdf

You can submit comments here: https://www.charlescountymd.gov/Home/Components/FormBuilder/FormBuilder/f60ab7781abc436680b9f091fe49dc99/1447?loadingmode=PreviewContent

Watch the hearing live here: https://www.charlescountymd.gov/services/media-services/charles-county-government-television/ccgtv-live-stream

Or watch the hearing later here (should be available within a couple hours of hearing’s end): https://reflect-charlescountymd.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/?channel=1

04/15/2026

Despite Mark Belton’s lawsuit against the County being settled now for $550K, Belton’s employment status has not been publicly addressed.

Yesterday’s county press release included the remark, “…he (Belton) retains the right to file a lawsuit in the future if a breach occurs.” That wording suggests that Belton is still employed by Charles County Government, because how can breach of contract occur after en employee is separated from the employer?

As of this morning, the county’s website still shows Belton as County Administrator, and Deborah Hall as Deputy Administrator (she has also been Acting County Administrator since 2023).

Questions: Are the taxpayers still paying for Belton to remain on Administrative leave through the rest of this commissioner term? Was the settlement intentionally structured so that the 3 commissioners who tried (illegally) to fire Belton are prevented from selecting their preferred replacement while they still hold the majority, essentially getting their way in the end? What other questions do you have?