Tensions Escalate In La Plata As Council Censures Mayor, Moves To Reshape Her Role

LA PLATA, Md. — A disagreement over who should represent La Plata on a state transportation coalition has grown into a broader fight over power, procedure and the mayor’s role on the Town Council.

In recent weeks, Mayor Jeannine E. James has been censured by the four other council members. She has challenged that action and increasingly found herself on the opposite side of a series of 4-1 council votes.

Now, the council is considering charter changes that would remove the mayor’s authority to call special meetings and end the mayor’s automatic role as president of the council.

Councilman Tyjon C. Johnson, who proposed the change, has also publicly questioned James’ performance in that role. During the council’s latest discussion, he told James, “You continue to lack good judgment as presiding officer.”

That criticism adds a personal dimension to the proposed charter change. During the Aug. 18 meeting, Johnson described the mayor’s role as presiding over meetings, serving as the ceremonial head of government and carrying out other duties granted by the council. He is now proposing a change that would remove the mayor from the presiding officer role and allow council members to select a Council Chair instead.

Censure Followed MDOT Dispute

The council voted 4-1 Aug. 18 to censure James over her handling of an invitation to participate in the Maryland Department of Transportation’s Safer Maryland Coalition.

MDOT initially invited James directly on June 11. But on July 20, MDOT Senior Advisor Vinn White told Town Manager Chuck Stevens the department was open to an arrangement involving either the mayor or a council member.

The council then voted 4-1 to nominate Councilman Paul C. Guttenberg. Stevens notified MDOT at 7:39 a.m. July 29. Nine minutes later, James emailed MDOT leadership and the lieutenant governor’s office, arguing that the council’s selection did not align with the intent of the original invitation.

On July 31, MDOT told Stevens and Guttenberg the invitation was not transferable.

The council’s censure resolution says James’ intervention led members to “reasonably believe” her actions resulted in MDOT reversing course. The records provided do not include a statement from MDOT saying her email caused that decision.

During the Aug. 18 debate, Johnson emphasized that decisions belong to the council collectively.

Legal Authority Also Disputed

The Aug. 18 meeting became contentious over whether the council had authority to discipline or censure another elected official.

James asked Town Attorney Todd Pounds to identify where the charter gives the council jurisdiction over another elected official.

Pounds said the authority fell under the council’s “general regulatory powers.” When pressed, he acknowledged that specific censure authority was not expressly stated in the charter or Rules of Procedure.

James argued that neither the charter, town code nor Rules of Procedure authorizes censure of an elected official.

The council approved the resolution 4-1.

Mayor’s Duties Could Change

The dispute is now moving into the town charter.

A proposed charter amendment, introduced by Johnson, would remove the mayor’s authority to call a special council meeting and eliminate language stating that the mayor serves as president of the council.

Under the proposal, special meetings could instead be requested by the town manager or a majority of council members. The mayor would still be allowed to participate in council discussions and vote on all issues before the council.

The proposal would also remove the current process for appointing an acting council president when the mayor is absent.

A Council Chair elected by council members would take over the presiding officer role through companion legislation that includes Ordinance 26-19, which rewrites the town code’s presiding officer provisions, and a revised set of council Rules of Procedure establishing how the Chair is chosen.

Johnson has previously outlined his view of the mayor’s authority. During the Aug. 18 censure discussion, he said the mayor has “three distinct roles”: presiding over meetings, serving as the ceremonial head of government and carrying out other powers or duties granted by the council.

“That’s the mayor role,” Johnson said, adding that it is not “some glorified executive role.”

The debate became more pointed during the Aug. 25 meeting.

James questioned language in the proposed changes that refers to the future presiding officer as “he.”

“That would conclude that if a female elected official is serving, she will never have an opportunity to be chosen as president of the council,” James said.

Johnson rejected the suggestion that the proposal was about gender.

James questioned why the town should make the structural change midterm rather than wait for its next organizational meeting.

“This appears less like a governance improvement and more like a personal—” James said.

“It is,” Johnson interjected.

“Well, that’s good that you have put that on the record that it is personal,” James responded.

Johnson later clarified what he meant.

“When I say personal, it’s personal because I believe that you lack the judgment to be presiding officer,” Johnson said.

He pointed to several examples of what he described as problems with James’ handling of meetings, saying she had failed to hear or act on motions, ignored points of order and did not consistently rule on those points before allowing debate to continue. He also referenced an earlier agenda dispute in which a proposed item was removed after a legal question was raised, saying the issue reflected what he viewed as a broader pattern during his term on the council.

Johnson said the proposal was about creating a presiding officer who is accountable to the council and ensuring meetings operate efficiently.

Councilman Paul C. Guttenberg addressed the gender-specific wording after the exchange, saying it was an oversight rather than an intentional exclusion. He noted that the ordinance elsewhere states that “all members of the town council, including the mayor” are eligible to serve as chair and said the wording should be updated to be gender-neutral before the legislation is finalized.

What Happens Next

A public hearing on the charter amendment is scheduled for Sept. 8, when the council may also act on the companion measures, including a resolution setting the initial election of the Council Chair.

If adopted, the charter amendment is projected to take effect Oct. 28. Under the companion timeline, residents would have an opportunity to petition for referendum before the council elects the first Council Chair on Nov. 10, with the new presiding officer taking over Nov. 24.

Taken together, the censure, proposed charter changes and repeated 4-1 votes point to a growing divide inside La Plata Town Hall.

---