Mark Conway’s removal from the Public Safety Committee introduces another level to a dispute already playing out in court and potentially headed to Baltimore voters. Inquiring minds like to know
Political fights disappear after a news cycle, but others keep getting bigger and bigger. Why? Because they touch something people understand instinctively. They know when something sounds WRONG!
Who watches the people in power?
Baltimore City Councilman Mark Conway’s removal as chairman of the Public Safety Committee would normally be an inside-City-Hall story. Committee assignments change. Council presidents reorganize. Members clash. That is politics.
But this one comes with baggage.
Council President Zeke Cohen removed Conway from the post Thursday and named Councilman John Bullock as his replacement. Cohen said the change was about leadership, collaboration and refocusing the council’s work. Conway sees it differently. He says he was singled out because he has been outspoken about the independence of Baltimore Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming and critical of colleagues who, in his view, have not done enough to protect her office.[1]
Two very different explanations. No established finding shows that Conway’s reassignment was retaliation. However, we can read between the lines. Still, the timing makes certain that the decision will be viewed through the larger fight over the inspector general.
That fight has been building for months.
Cumming sued the city after the Scott administration restricted her office’s access to city systems and records. City attorneys have argued that some of the material the inspector general sought may be protected by attorney-client privilege, confidentiality laws, or restrictions under Maryland’s Public Information Act.[2]
The inspector general’s position is clear: Her office cannot function as an independent watchdog. When the government being investigated controls the flow of information needed to conduct investigations.
That is the heart of this dispute.
In August, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Pamela White rejected the city’s motion to dismiss Cumming’s lawsuit. White also rejected the argument that the inspector general’s subpoena authority is simply another form of a public-records request governed by the Maryland Public Information Act. Her order required the city to respond to outstanding subpoenas and allowed the case to move forward.[3]
The city later sought reconsideration. White denied that request as well.[4]
None of that means every legal question has been settled. The litigation continues, and the city has maintained that legitimate privilege. Confidentiality issues remain. However, the court rulings strengthened the inspector general’s position that her subpoena authority has an independent legal foundation.
Baltimore’s charter itself gives the Office of Inspector General responsibility for investigating fraud, financial waste and abuse in city government. It also specifically gives the inspector general authority to subpoena documents, records and other materials.[5]
Now Conway wants voters involved.
Earlier this year, he proposed a charter amendment that would make the inspector general a co-custodian of city records. The proposal was intended to give the office more direct, independent access to records needed for investigations. The measure failed to advance to the 2026 ballot.[6]
Conway is now pursuing the petition route, striving to put the issue before voters in 2028.
Maryland’s Constitution provides a path for that. Article XI-A allows Baltimore charter amendments to be proposed by petition. 10,000 valid signatures are sufficient to complete such a petition.[7] Then possibly finally the taxpayers of Baltimroe City will get some answers.
That changes the nature of the argument.
This is no longer only a fight between the inspector general and the mayor’s law department. It is no longer only a disagreement among City Council members. If Conway gathers the required signatures, Baltimore voters could eventually decide how the city charter should define their watchdog’s access to government records.
Both sides have legitimate concerns. Government lawyers have a responsibility to protect legally privileged or confidential information. An inspector general also has a responsibility to investigate government without improper interference.
Those responsibilities can collide.
What Baltimore needs now is clarity.
City officials should be able to explain precisely what information they believe must be protected and under what legal authority. The inspector general needs clearly defined powers that allow the office to investigate waste, fraud and abuse effectively. And disagreements over those powers should be decided through law, the courts and, where appropriate, the voters.
Conway’s committee chairmanship may eventually become a footnote in Baltimore politics.
The larger question will not disappear nearly as easily.
When government creates an independent watchdog, the important test does not come when everyone is getting along. It comes when the watchdog starts asking uncomfortable questions and City Hall does not like the answers.
Endnotes
1. The Baltimore Banner, “Baltimore council shakeup: Conway removed from key public safety post,” September 10, 2026.
The Baltimore Banner report
2. The Baltimore Banner, “Mayor Scott is using ‘aggressive’ legal methods in dispute with inspector general.”
The Baltimore Banner report
3. Baltimore Brew, “Judge rules in favor of Baltimore’s inspector general, denies city’s motion to dismiss,” August 14, 2026.
Baltimore Brew report
4. CBS News Baltimore, “Judge clears way for Baltimore inspector general to access city records,” August 24, 2026.
CBS News Baltimore report
5. City of Baltimore Law Library, “Charter of Baltimore City, Article X, §4: Office of Inspector General: Powers and Duties.”
Baltimore City Charter provision
6. CBS News Baltimore, “Baltimore councilman introduces bill to ensure inspector general’s access to records,” March 31, 2026.
CBS News Baltimore report
7. Maryland General Assembly, Constitution of Maryland, Article XI-A, §5: Local Legislation.
Allison Clark writes on state fiscal policy and good governance for Direct Line News.
Direct Line News is a Maryland-based free-access publication committed to the Republican reform tradition.
About The Author
