Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Md Troopers Assoc #20 & Westminster Md Fire Dept Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

20060228 Information you can use on annexation legislation

“Information you can use on annexation legislation”

February 28, 2006 By Kevin Dayhoff (1050 words)

To judge from the feedback on “Annex This” which appeared in The Tentacle on February 22, 2006, there is no doubt that issues concerning growth, development and annexation are a hot topic.

[February 22, 2006 – “Annex This” – “Once again the Maryland General Assembly is being asked to step between municipalities and county governments over an issue that threatens the peace and tranquility that should exist between them. This time another crisis is building over growth and development.”]

Many who responded had a fair point - we know how you feel, we want to make up our own minds on this issue – give us the talking points from both points of view, without any spin or commentary.

Okay.

First, to refresh your memory, Senate Bill 536 and its counterpart in the House of Delegates, House Bill 1239 are titled the “Annexation Planning and Procedures Act of 2006.”

The Fiscal and Policy Notes explain: “This bill provides for the implementation of a joint planning agreement (JPA) between a county and a municipal corporation, and sets forth provisions under which land may be annexed and developed by a municipal corporation. The bill takes effect June 1, 2006.”

As this column is being written, a hearing on SB536 is scheduled on March 1, 2006, in the Senate’s Education Health and Environmental Affairs Committee.

The House Environmental Matters Committee has scheduled a hearing on HB1239 for March 2, 2006.

One very good place to begin a thorough analysis of this legislation is to review the “Fiscal and Policy Note,” which is dated February 28, 2006. It can be found on the web at: http://mlis.state.md.us/2006rs/fnotes/bil_0006/sb0536.pdf. It is six pages long, so this column will not rehash what you can easily read for yourself.

The Feb. 6, 2006 Maryland Municipal League (MML) bulletin reports that in a meeting between the MML leadership and House Speaker Michael Busch, D., Anne Arundel County:

“Speaker Busch also indicated that he is monitoring the land use/growth issue and reassured MML that the Chairman of the Environmental Matters Committee Delegate Maggie McIntosh will not pass any legislation relating to growth or annexation that is not fair and balanced or more detrimental to one organization or another.”

The same MML bulletin reports on a meeting between Governor Ehrlich's new Director of Legislative Policy Alan Friedman and the MML Legislative Committee on Wednesday, February 1:

“When asked about the land use and growth issue, Mr. Friedman stated that, "The administration is sorry that MACo is going after MML." According to Mr. Friedman, it is obvious that growth is an issue and Maryland Department of Planning and Maryland Department of Environment have recognized growth issues. Mr. Friedman also said that the administration recognizes that planning is primarily a local issue and they are hopeful that the organizations can work it out.”

MML Legislative Chairman and Rockville Mayor Larry Giammo: “noted that it is unfair for the counties to attempt to shift the blame for crowded roads and schools to the municipalities and MACo's efforts to derail annexation are merely a smokescreen to hide the fact that counties are also responsible for controlling growth.”

As many requested, the arguments for both points of view (the MML and Maryland Association of Counties) are presented below – in their own words.

The Maryland Association of Counties’ website supports the legislation by stating:

“Annexation is increasingly becoming a mechanism to circumvent county land use policies and laws.

The problem has become more pronounced recently as developers more frequently partner with municipalities to annex large tracts for intense development. This practice arises from the existing annexation law denying county perspectives meaningful weight in annexation decisions.

To create a fair balance the existing annexation law must be refined to provide reasonable deference to adopted county land use policies and affected citizen concerns.

Annexations should be subject to all statutory Smart Growth standards now applicable to counties and development on annexed property should be consistent with county adequate public facility laws and zoning.

And, existing referendum rights should be extended to citizens living outside the annexing municipality, but proximate to the boundary of the property to be annexed, with a county having the ability to initiative a referendum not just in the property to be annexed, but also in the municipality.”

From the MML point of view, again, in their own words, in the beginning of February 2006, the MML explained its position on planning for growth:

“To better control growth and encourage mutual land use communication and cooperation between municipalities and counties, MML supports the establishment of joint municipal-county planning agreements and the development of growth boundaries around both incorporated and unincorporated population centers. This ensures that all parties are in agreement pursuant to future population allocation between incorporated and unincorporated areas.”

The MML continued by saying:

“According to MACo, growth boundaries should be established ONLY around incorporated cities and towns. Why shouldn’t counties also be required to establish growth boundaries around unincorporated areas such as Towson, Silver Spring, Bethesda, Waldorf, Kent Island, Columbia, Crofton, Germantown, Beltsville, Catonsville, Ocean Pines, Glen Burnie, Edgewater. MACo’s bill would do nothing to address out of control growth around these and other unincorporated population centers in the State.”

“Counties are not required by law to establish growth boundaries in county comprehensive master plans. Shouldn’t growth around unincorporated population centers also be accountable, responsible and subject to public input and scrutiny? If it makes sense for municipalities to establish growth boundaries, why shouldn’t counties also be required to do the same?”

“It is important that a distinction be made between annexation and growth. The issue is not annexation - the issue is growth. Restricting annexation will not restrict growth. Growth will simply occur in rural areas of the State on well and septic systems instead of around existing population centers on wastewater treatment plants.”

Finally, the MML offers this information:

“In 1990, excluding Baltimore City, 2.7% of Maryland's total land mass was located inside municipal borders. As of the year 2004, that percentage has increased to 3.3% in total land mass located within municipal boundaries. This represents an increase in total municipal landmass of just over 0.5% in the past fourteen years.”

There you have it. Both sides, in their own words.

This legislation, will at some time in the future, affect almost each and every Tentacle reader. If you have profound feelings about this legislation, now is the best time to weigh in.

Contact information on the Senate Education Health and Environmental Matters Committee is found at: http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/msa/mdmanual/05sen/html/com/02eco.html.

Contact information on the House Environmental Matters Committee can be found at: http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/msa/mdmanual/06hse/html/com/04env.html.


Kevin Dayhoff writes from Westminster. E-mail him at: kdayhoff(at)carr.org

####

Saturday, February 25, 2006

20060224 Kelly’s Dream Deferred by Kevin E. Dayhoff

Related:

Another Case of Cronyism in the Ehrlich Administration by Progressive Maryland: Gov. Ehrlich has been called on his cronyism once again, this time in Allegany County. His nominee for Allegany’s District Court bench, friend and former colleague Del. Kevin Kelly, has been judged unfit for the job and summarily rejected by a judicial nominating commission made up of the governor's own appointees. The Allegany lock, The Baltimore Sun

Or find it here: 20060218 Another Case of Cronyism Progressive MD

Baltimore Sun: 20050828 Politics fills space around judicial vacancy by David Nitkin and Jennifer Skalka

20060217 “Vacant judge position filled” By David Nitkin

Vacant judge position filled Ehrlich picks Cumberland solicitor for seat that had been empty since 2004 By David Nitkin Sun reporter February 17, 2006

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. has filled the longest judicial vacancy on a district court in Maryland, but not with a friend from the General Assembly who wanted the position.

*****

Kelly’s Dream Deferred by Kevin E. Dayhoff February 24, 2006

On February 16, it became official that a longstanding friend of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., conservative Western Maryland Democratic Del. Kevin Kelly, would not have his name submitted to fill the judicial vacancy of the District Court of Maryland for Allegany County.

In the political arena where disappointment is frequently greeted by silence and friends who stare at the floor, folks often don’t heed what Martin Luther King once said: “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

Many Tentacle readers are aware of the hard work of Delegate Kelly and were disappointed to learn that he was not to be referred to in the future as Judge Kelly.

As a newly minted elected municipal official in the late 1990s, I have fond memories of those folks who were friendly and helpful as I tried to unravel the byzantine rituals of the Maryland General Assembly. Perhaps, first among equals in that helpful group was Delegate Kelly.

Most members of the Frederick and Carroll County delegations were very supportive.

Several of the other names that quickly come to mind when I think of friendly folks who went out of their way to lend a hand were: Del. Brian R. Moe (D., Anne Arundel/PG); Del. Bennett Bozman (D., Wicomico/Worcester); Del. Norman H. Conway (D., Wicomico/Worcester); Sen. Donald F. Munson (R., Washington); then-Del. Charles McClenahan (R., Somerset, Wicomico & Worchester); and Judge Paul G. Goetzke, then Annapolis city attorney.

Always quick with a smile and a joke, Delegate Kelly went out of his way on several occasions to help when I barely knew the difference between the House Environmental Matters and Economic Matters Committees.

Many had lost track of this current sideshow, since the judicial vacancy for the District Court of Maryland for Allegany County has been unfilled since the fall of 2004. It was announced last Friday that Delegate Kelly was passed over for H. Jack Price, Jr., the city solicitor for the mayor and city council of Cumberland since 1990.

[…]

Read my entire column here: Kelly’s Dream Deferred by Kevin E. Dayhoff February 24, 2006

20060224 Kelly’s Dream Deferred by Kevin E. Dayhoff

####

Monday, February 20, 2006

20060217 “Vacant judge position filled” By David Nitkin

Vacant judge position filled

Ehrlich picks Cumberland solicitor for seat that had been empty since 2004

By David Nitkin Sun reporter February 17, 2006

Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. has filled the longest judicial vacancy on a district court in Maryland, but not with a friend from the General Assembly who wanted the position.

The governor has named H. Jack Price, solicitor for the city of Cumberland since 1990 and a private practice lawyer, to a seat on the Allegany County District Court.

Price, 50, fills a vacancy created when Judge Paul J. Stakem announced his retirement in 2004.

[…]

Kelly submitted his name to a nominating panel but was found not qualified for the position. After meeting in December 2004, the panel submitted three names to the governor, but Ehrlich waited until yesterday before announcing the selection.

Meanwhile, criminal cases backed up in the district court - to the consternation of many courthouse veterans.

[…]

Read the entire article here: Vacant judge position filled

20060217 “Vacant judge position filled” By David Nitkin

####

20060218 Another Case of Cronyism Progressive MD

Another Case of Cronyism in the Ehrlich Administration by Progressive Maryland

Retrieved February 18, 2006

Gov. Ehrlich has been called on his cronyism once again, this time in Allegany County. His nominee for Allegany’s District Court bench, friend and former colleague Del. Kevin Kelly, has been judged unfit for the job and summarily rejected by a judicial nominating commission made up of the governor's own appointees. The Allegany lock, The Baltimore Sun

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed.kelly04sep04,1,3587363.story?coll=bal-opinion-headlines

http://progressivemaryland.org/page.php?id=1136&subid=1122

Related: 20050828 Politics fills space around judicial vacancy by David Nitkin and Jennifer Skalka: Politics fills space around judicial vacancy Some say Ehrlich wants friend on list of nominees; Allegany seat empty since 2004 By David Nitkin, Sun Staff, August 28, 2005

20060218 Another Case of Cronyism Progressive MD

Monday, February 06, 2006

20060205 Pocomoke City State of Pocomoke City report by Mayor Michael McDermott


Pocomoke City State of Pocomoke City report by Mayor Michael McDermott

State of the City Report

By Michael A. McDermott, Mayor

(Downloaded February 5th, 2006)

As we turn the corner into 2006, it is good to review the progress of the city with a view toward the future. 2005 was a year of changes which impacted many aspects of Pocomoke City. The coming year will see further changes and transitioning, but my commitment to an open, approachable government will continue to guide our actions.

Last spring, we had just over 500 dwelling units at some stage in the development pipeline. That number has grown to 750. All of this projected, planned growth is identified as in-fill development (all built within the current corporate limits requiring no annexations). The types and styles of the housing will range from town houses and duplexes to larger, single family homes. It represents a good mix of available housing for families at various economic levels.

The focus on in-fill development is in line with the concepts being outlined by our updated Comprehensive Plan. The draft plan has been presented to the Planning and Zoning Board and is currently under review. The board is hopeful the plan can be presented for public comment by early spring. Following the adoption of the plan, the city will move into a review of current zoning templates now in effect to see if any will require modification.

Financially, the city is on strong footing. A Reserve Fund was established in December at the recommendation of our Accounting/Auditing Firm. Our debt service is not impaired and investments made by the city in the way of infrastructure, improvements and planned growth have created a positive cash flow for the city. We have been able to cut the tax rate in half on manufacturing equipment and look forward to additional reductions in the future. Creating a positive environment for commercial and industrial growth to flourish will remain a primary focus in the coming years.

In the spring, we will see the Mid-Atlantic Institute for Space and Technology locate their offices in our Industrial Park. Other tenants are expected to follow as Pocomoke City develops as an incubator for space based and other advancing technologies. This is one of the biggest opportunities projected in the region, and it is right in our own backyard. We will work closely with Worcester County and the Department of Economic Development to create and maintain a strong environment conducive for this emerging technology.

2006 will see a concerted effort to improve city parks and establish new opportunities for recreational activities. Upgrades include a large bandstand, improved Nature Trail, and a potential joint venture with Worcester County which would develop land around the 4th Street MAC Center as a park. We are also exploring the creation of a Skate/Bike Park to meet the needs of our community.

Citizens can look for continued and growing opportunities to be involved in the governmental process in the coming year. There will be public meetings addressing the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning process. There will be meetings scheduled to receive input on the Skate/Bike Park concept and development. Efforts will be made this year to establish a community organization called Friends of the Park which will act as a vehicle to assist the city with improvements, upgrades, and beautification of our current park facilities. We will continue to work together with the Pocomoke Garden Club and the Downtown Association to further this process.

There will be efforts targeting neighborhoods with specific needs. Neighborhood meetings and clean up times will be encouraged and developed with the city providing assistance in the process. We will look for ways to help and encourage citizens as they work to strengthen and beautify their individual neighborhoods.

County requirements and our moral responsibilities will find us aggressively pursuing recycling with our city refuse. We will need the assistance and compliance of our citizens to insure that our costs for disposal remain static as we increase the percentage of recyclables in our weekly collections. Citizens will be kept abreast of any required changes before they occur.

2006 will see the further redevelopment of our downtown core. This will include restaurants, eateries, and other enterprising business drawn to our beautiful river front. At center stage should include the grand reopening of the MARVA Performing Arts Theater slated for early summer.

If the city were a convertible, I would tell you to “hold onto your hat!” The best is yet to come, and the future of Pocomoke City never looked brighter.

For more information on the happenings in Pocomoke City, please visit our website at cityofpocomoke.com.

Sunday, February 05, 2006

20060203 HoCo Hayduke: New protocols on nonfunctioning traffic lights

HoCo Hayduke: New protocols on nonfunctioning traffic lights

February 5, 2006

I have not read the “new policy,” however, one of the obvious questions that comes to mind are staffing issues. Does the Howard County police department have enough officers to address all the intersections that may be impacted by a widespread power failure?

Is this an opportunity to utilize non-sworn, but trained safety personnel such as a “police auxiliary” or fire police?

There are reports that LED traffic signals require much less electricity. Perhaps the battery back-ups are the way to go? Then again, what is the fiscal note for retrofitting existing traffic signals with battery back-ups?

Clearly, as traffic congestion increases, this is an growing public safety issue... Meanwhile our hearts and prayers are extended to the families of the teenagers...

HoCo Hayduke

Friday, February 03, 2006

New protocol...

It won't bring back Scott E. Caplan and Theresa E. Howard, but it's a sensible policy that could save lives in the future.

In a change ordered after two teenagers were killed at a nonfunctioning traffic light in Columbia last month, Howard County police will require officers to stay at nonfunctioning signals until they are fixed or until a stop sign or another temporary device is taken to the scene.

The county also is moving ahead with plans to test its first battery backup system for traffic lights, which can keep a signal running for up to eight hours after it loses electrical power.

Read more: Click on HoCo Hayduke or go this article here: New protocol...