A Harford County Council member who also worked as a sheriff’s deputy must give up one of those jobs — and the state’s highest court has now decided which one.
The Supreme Court of Maryland ruled Tuesday that Aaron Penman cannot serve on the Harford County Council while employed as a deputy sheriff. The court’s order, issued the same day oral arguments concluded last week, reverses a lower appellate court and upholds the county’s position that the Harford County Charter bars the dual role.
What happened: Penman won a seat on the County Council in the 2022 general election. Before taking office, he resigned from the Sheriff’s Office, believing the county charter blocked him from holding both jobs. Then, in August 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in a separate case — Bennett v. Harford County — that a teacher employed by the county school board was not barred from also serving on the Council. Following that ruling, the Sheriff rehired Penman.
The legal fight: Harford County filed suit in July 2024, arguing that a deputy sheriff is different from a teacher and that the charter still bars Penman from serving in both roles. A circuit court judge agreed with the county. An appellate court reversed that decision in April 2026, ruling the charter did not block Penman.
Penman was removed from the council in February 2025 following the earlier court proceedings. Alison Imhoff occupied the seat during his absence.
After the April 2026 appellate ruling, Penman was reinstated in June.
The county appealed again, and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments November 4.
The rule at the center of it: Section 207 of the Harford County Charter bars a sitting Council member from holding “any other office of profit or employment in the government of the State of Maryland, Harford County, or any municipality within Harford County, except a position held by virtue of being a Council member.” The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a deputy sheriff’s position falls squarely under that ban.
What the county says: The Harford County administration, led by County Executive Bob Cassilly, had urged the Council to remove Penman before filing suit. The Council did not act. According to the administration, Penman told voters before his election that he would retire from the Sheriff’s Office if elected, then reversed that position after winning. Cassilly also says Penman introduced legislation while on the Council — including a charter amendment county officials say was designed to expand the influence of the deputies’ union and other county-funded state employees over the county budget process — and that those bills have been invalidated by the Supreme Court’s ruling.
What comes next: The Supreme Court ordered its mandate to take effect immediately. The court directed the appellate court to uphold the circuit court’s original ruling from January 10, 2025, which declared Penman’s dual service unlawful. The court also ordered Penman to pay court costs. A full written opinion explaining the court’s reasoning will be filed at a later date. The seven-justice panel that decided the case included Chief Justice Matthew Fader and Justices Watts, Booth, Biran, Gould, Killough, and Senior Justice Lynne Battaglia.
Penman did not seek reelection, and his term was already scheduled to expire Dec. 7, when the new council takes office.