The grants audit that could not be completed
The county's internal auditor told council she had attempted an audit of grant management — evaluating controls over how grant money is used, tracked and reported — but could not reach a conclusion or make recommendations because she never received the supporting documents she asked for. She said she requested the same set of support documents for 52 account lines (combinations of organization, object and project codes in the county's Munis system) in a request dated June 9, 2025, followed up in January 2026, and received none of them. She also reported that, apart from the accounts on the list management provided, there appeared to be 311 accounts with matching object codes carrying a combined revised budget of $33,245,281.66 that were not on the list she was given. She cautioned that budgeted is not the same as spent, and that some of it may involve encumbrances rather than grants.
Her reading of management's written response was that the county considered her requests deficient because senior finance staff were not copied — even though, she said, she had been told at the entrance conference to route requests through the grants administrator rather than individual departments. The chair of the county's audit committee submitted a letter dated June 9, 2026 criticizing management's responses to audit reports; one passage read aloud argued that if finance senior management had to be included in every audit touching money, "all audits would be stalled for eternity." The auditor said she was willing to accept blame for any miscommunication if it produced the documents, and that she has begun recording entrance and exit meetings.
Council reaction was uniformly frustrated but split on remedy. Councilman James Winn first suggested a closed session; Holloway and Council President John T. Cannon objected that this was not a personnel matter and should be handled in the open. Vice-President Jeff Merritt said he wanted the matter resolved by the last meeting in November, "however that has to happen," including by subpoena. Holloway pressed for sending both this audit and the earlier purchase card audit to the Maryland Office of Legislative Audits, saying the council did nothing after the prior gift card matter. Hastings countered that the state would likely want a specific allegation rather than an absence of records, and suggested first requesting copies of the grant reports the county must already file with state and federal grantors — a point Councilwoman Shanie Shields raised as well. Cannon said he preferred a separate work session on each audit, with a forensic audit also on the table, and cautioned members against sending anything to the state on county letterhead without council action. Shields also rejected management's suggestion of personal bias, noting the auditor did not know anyone in county government when she was hired.
Public comment: data centers, Hickory Mill, and the executive's conduct
A District 2 resident distributed research urging the county to adopt data center legislation before proposals arrive, citing Harford County as the first Maryland county to prohibit them and Montgomery County's moratorium. He said a single medium-sized data center can use as much electricity as 100,000 homes — more than double the number of homes in Wicomico — and that construction jobs largely disappear once a facility opens. A District 7 resident echoed the request and suggested a fall charter amendment adding "guardrails" for when the council encounters obstruction; he also reported that more than 110 special needs athletes finished the Wicomico Challenger League season at the Henry Parker Complex.
A resident speaking on the Hickory Mill biorefinery made three requests: that inspections resume to confirm the existing stop-work order is being followed, that council pass emergency legislation establishing zoning rules for waste-to-energy projects, and that Maryland Department of Agriculture representatives be brought to a public town hall. She said MDA is helping the project's developer find a new site, pointed to a county letter of support issued in April to a similar project, and alleged the grantee failed to meet grant requirements, submitted inaccurate zoning information, built using funding tied to an expired air quality permit, and had property listed for tax sale.
The president of the Wicomico County NAACP said audits are normal and welcome in any organization she has served, questioned county tax dollars being used to join a federal immigration lawsuit, renewed a call for a third-party salary study, and said the Police Accountability Board still lacks a coordinator despite qualified applicants. Another resident criticized the county executive and two administration directors attending a retail conference in Las Vegas as a poor use of taxpayer money given that retail growth follows other sectors, and asked council to review security in the council chambers after the executive posted a photo holding an AR-15.
Legal opinion on the executive–sheriff dispute
The council's attorney read a prepared opinion based on the two publicly posted letters. The county executive's letter alleged a sheriff's deputy showed or distributed nude photos of her and asked for a revenge porn investigation; the sheriff's response said he had been shown the photos privately by a deputy and warned that any investigation would require review of the executive's personal and county phones. The attorney said sending nude images to a consenting adult is likely not a crime in Maryland, that revenge porn requires distribution with intent to harm and a reasonable expectation of privacy, and that the only inquiry the council could authorize would be whether county equipment was used — which would require a subpoena, a forensic expert, and likely a lawsuit to enforce. Censure under the charter requires repeated substantial charter violations; forfeiture of office requires a felony or moral turpitude conviction. Neither threshold, he said, is met. Holloway said he had hoped council would stay out of it; Merritt said the news would make it harder to recruit businesses and families and to fight for the county in Annapolis.
Landfill, dredging and the state's finances
The deputy director of public works reported that cell seven construction is on schedule: Allan Myers was awarded the contract in February 2026 at $5.5 million against roughly $10 million budgeted, with substantial completion due August 17 and final completion October 1. Dynamic compaction of the cell floor began May 29 and runs four to six weeks. A waste excavation of 19,000 tons — about two months of the landfill's intake — was finished in nine days, avoiding an anticipated million gallons of leachate hauling, and two on-site stockpiles passed geotechnical testing, cutting imported fill costs. Cell seven adds 1.6 million cubic yards and about five and a half to six years of capacity; horizontal expansion across Brick Kiln Road carries $8 million in the 2029 capital plan. Councilman David Ennis pressed on whether skipping the power line relocation, once estimated at $14 million, will cost more later; staff said yes in theory, and that the county will never reach the site's full 60-year potential without closing the road.
On dredging, contractors have removed enough material that the county reported 372,000 cubic yards of capacity against the 300,000 the Army Corps of Engineers required before committing to dredge, with a current Sharps Point phase about half complete and due July 25. The county has applied for roughly $12 million through the Roots to Resilience program to move toward immediate beneficial reuse of dredge material for marsh restoration, working with Ducks Unlimited, the Nature Conservancy, US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Maryland Port Administration. Taylor described a comprehensive water and sewer plan update to run in tandem with the county comprehensive plan, both targeted for 2027, with new maps gridding the entire county and an effort to shrink Wicomico's priority funding area "comment areas," reportedly the largest in the state.
The Maryland Association of Counties delegation told council the state is facing a general fund gap of about $2.5 billion that could grow toward $4 billion, with revenue growth running under one percent. Their warning to counties was that the state's usual solution is to keep the service and invoice the county — pointing to the erroneous conviction bill the council had just paid that morning as an example. They also said MACo opposed a data center planning bill (HB 1411) as an intrusion on local land use authority, and expects the state to set data center standards before counties do.