Of course his position changed, it always does. His word is worthless. I could not sit at the table with you without vomiting . I use the car "mostlly to drive to meetings"... Really, what does that mean? Your decision to take the car was not a reluctant one, it was HYPOCRITICAL ... Like your entire existence. Does your wife do your voting on legislation? Can't believe your sorry self is blaming your wife for your flip-flopping on your political stances.

Mr. Sears - do all 7 councilmembers have county cars?

Do they all get Grand Cherokee's? Why aren't they issues Smart Cars?

Don't look at me, I'm only gonna use the car sparingly...the same car that in my campaign I insisted I was against and would not take. You know the truth, my damn wife made me get it or else. She also thought it would be a good idea if I wrote a blog about it to explain that she made the decision for me. So hold her accountable, not me. Just remember, my decision to take the car was a reluctant one....jst like when I promise my vote and change my mind at the last minute.... That was my wife too

They ought to put "Blow and Go" intoxilocks on all county vehicles.

WOW, running out of campaign promises David. The old bait and switcheroo job, and we fell for it. You should be ashamed. We recognize a preemptive strike when we see it. Well honey, I waited 2 years, no one will ever know. WELL WE KNOW. And your promises are nothing but lies....typical

Surely Councilman Marks, does your decision to advise your constituents you have accepted a County Vehicle "recently" have anything to do with my PIA request to Mr. Kamenetz and Mr. Mohler? Surely you are aware that I made this PIA request concerning council people driving County owned vehicles several days ago. Is this another case of getting your proverbial hand caught in the "cookie jar" then fessing up? Your acceptance of a County vehicle and spilling the beans so to speak is truly a remarkable coincidence, or is it? Just when did you change your campaign promised, what type and year is the County vehicle and when did you start driving this vehicle.
Do you support identifying such a vehicle with appropriate County markings and SG license plates. And is it appropriate for any council person to be driving this County vehicle, with is wife (or anyone else) at 2:30 a.m.

It was his wife's decision to fess up...after all, she made him accept it, reluctantly

You people are being ridiculous. I get that David reneged on a campaign promise, but the egregiousness of the reneging needs to be considered in the totality of the circumstances. David makes 54k a year and has a family. His wife is a teacher. This is his only job. It makes sense for him to take the car - everyone else gets one, it would benefit his family - let him take it. David isn't getting rich off of the perks of being a council member - that is for sure. It is not his PT side gig to rake in an extra 54K and milk the job for all its worth. This isn't legitimate criticsm. Its petty. If you have a problem with David as a councilman, make some substantive arguments.

He is a HYPOCRITE. So since this is his only job (sad) then we show look past his lies and deceit. Nope

"Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing"

Everyone on the County Council faces uphill battles everyday. It is a tough system that doesn't serve the County the way it should. It's members, do their best within the rules they have been given. Mr. Huff included. He has a problem and he is human- lets see how he handles his life and decide next year if he should be re-elected to represent his district's interests. Mr. Marks, he is human too. He is learning and living a public life for the sake of his district. Like the rest of us, life goes on and changes constantly. We all grow and change along the lines of our life- good and bad. To take a county car or have the county reimburse me for mileage (plus) is irrelevant to me. Those are the options WE have given the County and its employees- if WE don't like it, then stop complaining from the sidelines and go change it. We need more doers and less complainers. Marks is clearly a doer.

@Stuts: Your posts lately attacking Mr. Marks do more to hurt the Patch than your nemesis. Mr. Marks doesnt decide to sell county land, the County Executive does with the advice of Fred Homan and Arnold Jablon. Mr. Marks is forced to do the best with those decisions- including where THEY decide the relocation is going and how and to whom County land will be sold. Your "beef" should be directed elsewhere. There is no loss of property values and increased noise associated impacting West Towson as you describe. The Palisades owner supports the potential relocation and he and his residents are most closely affected. There appears to be a lot of positive momentum in Towson created by a lot of people and organizations. Its seems the community is coming together. You seem so out of touch.

Come on Stuts, you know Marks is only responsible for the positive stuff, nothing negative. All the negative is Kamenetz, Homan and Jablon, not Mr. Flip-flop. Hey Marks, I have a question for you...when was the last audit report issued by the Auditor's Office which the Council has direct oversight of? Do you know the average salary of that crew? Do you have any idea what they even do? Could pave a lot of roads with that waste of taxpayers money. FYI, last audit 2 1/2 years.

JD it doesn't. The numbers wont add up today or in any real estate market. Selling the land isn't about paying for air conditioning OR some sweet heart deal for a developer. That is just the fodder both sides of the concern have fixated on. There are better ways to add and pay for air conditioning and there are better ways to use many parcels of government owned land. The two are not related unless someone goes out of their way to sell you something and distract you from the real issues. You can not fix the problems you create with the same thinking used to create the problems in the first place. But there are those in power of the purse-strings and wedded to political careers that will not budge. So therefore, we are left with waste, poor decisions, apathy and mis-guided discussions on chat boards.

Your husband is a hypocrite and has proven it on more than one occasion. Your husband did exactly what Jack Friese said... He got caught in another campaign lie and was trying to explain before it gets reported. I am a man of my word, it would be nice if people that I voted for were the same. Again, if your husband can't afford to be a Councilman, then have him get another job. But please, tell him to stop campaigning on a bunch of lies.

This was a good story until I got to the comments. Slandering or assassinating someone's character while hiding behind an anonymous persona is childish, but using someone's wife and, in particular, their children? Really?

A waste of tax payer money. These folks are public servants. They do not deserve cars paid by our taxes. That's ludicrous .

Steve Kolbe, Marks brought his wife into it and she made a comment about her children thatt she later rescinded. No one said a word about their children except Stephanie Marks. On the other point, dont campaign on something you're not gonna follw up on.

They need to be accountable and follow the same rules as other County employees. If a County employee needs to be somewhere for the County, they use their own vehicles to get to their work site. They then get a County car to go only to the work site. It is monitored and if you go somewhere else you are disciplined. If you go over the speed limit you are disciplined. If you idle the vehicle more than 5 miles, you are disciplined. When you are done with the assignment at that site you bring the car back to the workplace and use your own car to get home. You do not take it home. You cannot have passengers in the car except County employees. You cannot go into another county or city without prior permission. If you choose to use your own car instead of a County car you are reimbursed for the mileage for business only. You assume the risk to your car and insurance and if you get in an accident it is your problem. If any County employee other than Councilmen were caught drinking in a County car they would be fired.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

I don't know how much the Councilman earned in his prior position, but it may be that his current salary is insufficient to permit the purchase of a second car in his family at this time. If that is the case, his acceptance of a county car to be used exclusively for county business does not bother me at all notwithstanding his prior statement. Alternatively, he could have leased a car if his finances permitted it and bill the County back for mileage at the permitted rate (which I have no idea what that is) and that may or may not have covered his monthly lease rate. In a more perfect world, all families could own and maintain 2 cars. If, however, it is beyond someone's financial capability to do so at a certain time, I dont think they should be penalized for it if their circumstances change. Reading this article, it appears that he figuratively ran his personal car into the ground on County business.

No I am not incorrect FIFA. You assume the liability by using your own car when there are pool cars available.

K Blue if he cannot afford a second car on that salary then he needs to cut things. Most County workers do not make that salary in a full time position and manage to have 2 cars. I have no problem with his using a County car for County business but to use a County car for personal use is not acceptable. The citizens are paying for that car and the gas used. If another County worker (as he is one) cannot afford a car can they have one too?

At first glance it would seem like just another perk of the job to get a car, but when half of your job entails driving from requested event to requested event, showing up at hearings in Parkton, driving back and forth from Towson to actually show up at your community organization's meetings in Dundalk, etc., it makes a lot more sense that they either be given a car or be reimbursed for that travel. If the county feels it's cheaper to just let them use a county car than to pay them 55 cents a mile, or whatever, then that's a wise way to use public funds. Count it as a necessary evil 1) if you want people on the council who aren't necessarily wealthy or willing to take a vow of poverty and 2) if you want them to actually be able to get out into the community without having to decide whether your small organization is "worth" the trip. Either way, it's not a regular commuter job for sure.

No County employee is allowed to use a County car for private use and neither the Executive nor the Council should be allow to do this either.

Oh, the intoxication (no pun on Huff) of power. It is so common, and has been an issue for as long as humans have organized. A person becomes a leader, the sudden 'importance' feeds their ego, they begin to feed themselves on the perks of the position, and before you know it, the seduction is complete. It happens more than it doesn't. I am sure Marks and Huff and others have come into office full of grand ideas about 'change' and than begin to convince themselves that maybe they were 'wrong' about certain changes. I know Huff also campaigned against the use of the county owned cars because the incumbent, McIntyre, had wrecked a few. So they are hypocrites, but did we really, deep down expect this new crop to be that much different? I do commend Mr. Quirk, who's district does NOT include the county seat, and probably has to do some of the farthest driving from his home to Towson. In any event, we can vote this group out, change the laws of county owned cars, but I guarantee a new group will come into the office, and the whole cycle of the seduction of power will begin again, and they will avail themselves to whatever perks they can, and compromise their initial positions in order to survive - reelection - which means money - which means developers . At least with Marks, the man does work. You may not agree with everything he does, but you can't criticize him for being lazy. But in my opinion, acting outraged by a politicians' hypocrisy, is a form of hypocrisy itself!

Sad as it is,the negative comments made by so many of your readers,are the very reasons good people do not run for public office.Mr. Marks gave up a very good salary with the Federal government to seek the councilmanic office being vacated by Gardina.A great federal nine to five position ... no nightly visits to community meetings, listening to citizen complaints,innumerable meetings with constitutents... and with restrictions imposed by the County Charter,no opportunity to be employed in any way with the feds,state or county agency.Don't forget... the County Council is a part time position.Anyone familiar with the position is fully aware it that it cannot be done on a part time basis ..This councilperson takes the job seriously. Any one of those complaining about his voting record ,or the county car, are free to give up their jobs to seek one paying far less,taking considerable time away from the family,and run for the office.This guy has done a terrific job,and deserves re election.op your whinning.

Tom, you are correct. After reviewing travel expenses it probably cost effective to provide a car. BUT, travel expenses would limit it to official business only. Providing a car does not.

Bring back :
Dale Anderson. At least he kept the long arm of the federal government out of baltimore county