top of page


Since Dr. Calvin Ball declined completing The People’s Voice Questionnaire, we reviewed his local voting record to obtain information about the issues we believe are relevant to the questions he could have answered. We endorsed County Executive Allan Kittleman for reelection, not by default, but after analyzing Dr. Ball’s record on these issues.
Dr. Ball’s votes on various subjects, as noted below, especially regarding development in the County, were consistent across his terms on the County Council. Consistent pro-development votes added a lot of residential density to the County without appropriate infrastructure. There have been a few recent changes to more community-focused positions; however, this did not sway the assessment of The People’s Voice, given his long-term record, and his unwillingness to have his positions on these issues publicized by completing our questionnaire.
The following tables identify the item on which Dr. Ball voted: Legislation (Council) or Petition (Zoning Board); how he voted; and the impact of the legislation or petition. With regard to Council votes in the following tables, please note that specific Council Member votes are not available online prior to 2009.





The Council does a LOT of zoning work, which changes the rules of development (zoning regulations) and allows more types of development, higher numbers of residential units, and massive growth to the county population. Howard County has been subject to increased population growth without providing enough public service infrastructure for roads, schools, health facilities, or public safety. The County Executive, through the Department of Planning and Zoning, approves individual developments given current laws. The County Council (whose members also serve as the Howard County Zoning Board) control the rules of zoning/development, and can allow more benefits and more residential units to developments.

In addition, changing zoning from commercial to residential has been harmful over the years. It reduces tax income for the County, and creates more and more housing developments. In the tables below, “density” means a high number of allowance of new residential units being built. “Upzoning” means allowing a larger number of residential new units to be built than was allowed previously.

Zoning Board Decisions (2007 – 2017) 

One Zoning Board NO vote on residential unit increase ZB1068M unanimous ZB no vote. RED to RA15 Brantly 5/27/09

County Council Votes (2009 – 2018)


Each year, the County Council votes on a Resolution that reviews the maximum number of allocations (i.e., total residential units allowed to be built) from the general plan for each County region, and approves them. The County Council COULD reduce them if they desired to do so for a crowded region. The developer wait time for allocations is unlimited, unlike wait times for schools being crowded. Thus, allocations could be used as a real planning tool for pacing development, but is NOT. The ONLY Council person from 2009 to the present to say NO to this was Jen Terrasa in recent years. 


bottom of page