BALANCING PUBLIC DUTY AND PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY: WICOMICO COUNTY COUNCIL'S LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY DEBATE
Wicomico County, MD - The Wicomico County Council Meeting, held on May 20, 2025, featured a noteworthy speech from Wicomico County Council Attorney Bob Benson.
During this meeting, Mr. Benson publicly responded to a letter from Wicomico County Executive Julie Giordano. Giordano's letter sparked discussions as it criticized certain council members, including Mr. Benson, raising concerns about the use of taxpayer-funded time for activities deemed "legally questionable and potentially unauthorized activity."
The implications of the letter and finding out that this letter existed, prompted an inquiry by Eastern Shore Undercover® under the Freedom of Information Act, which allowed for the acquisition of copies of the letter and relevant expense reports from Mr. Bob Benson.
These documents illuminated the expenditures of public funds for Mr. Benson's research, which concluded with his opinion that a council member held legislative immunity against a private citizen, who had filed civil and criminal charges against this council member.
The complexity of the case increased when documents from Benson's office, asserting immunity for a council member from civil and criminal charges, were emailed to Eastern Shore Undercover® owner Earl Campbell on the morning of a court hearing.
Mr. Benson clarified that his actions were conducted on behalf of the County Council. Despite his explanation, legal and ethical concerns were raised about the boundaries between public council matters and individual accountability.
The memo submitted by the council highlighted the principle of "Legislative Immunity," which traditionally protects legislators from lawsuits for actions within their legislative duties. However, the debate continues over whether this immunity should extend to personal matters occurring outside of the council's formal sessions.
The definition of "Legislative Immunity" is "a legal doctrine that protects legislators from being sued for all actions taken in the sphere of legitimate legislative activity."
While there is consensus that council members should be free from legal repercussions, regardless of whether civil or criminal, in matters involving county business, many would agree that actions taking place outside of council sessions, particularly those between a council member and a private taxpaying citizen, between the hours of 10:00 PM and 3:00 AM, should be held to the same standards as any other individual in the county.
I think most would agree that matters that take place that do not have anything to do with council matters, should not provide automatic immunity, regardless of their political status or title they hold.
This situation has ignited a broader discussion within the community about the appropriate use of county resources and the limits of legislative immunity. It raises important questions about the fiduciary responsibilities of council members, and their legal teams, as well as the principle that public service should remain distinct, and separate from personal interests.
Should county taxpayer dollars be used for matters like this? Should county-funded attorneys be utilized for personal issues involving council members, when those council members have hired private attorneys? And should county council members be granted immunity for matters unrelated to county council business?
Enclosed Documentation:
-Letter From Wicomico County Executive Julie Giordano (2-Pages)
-Expense Report from Mr. Bob Benson (2-Pages)
