Divorce!

Did that title get your attention? The sad reality in this town is the fact that if Nancy and I were to be divorced, we could both serve on the town charter reform commission. Currently, we both can't serve since we are family. I love the way our town government is out in front promoting family values!

Originally, the question of family members serving together was brought up by our recently fired town manager. Although he proclaimed piously that he simply wanted to include more citizens on boards and commissions, many of us thought he was simply trying to exclude certain persons annoying to him and his agenda. Why the commissioners who fired this town finance wizard persist in this policy is beyond me. Could you imagine the uproar if the commissioners said that there can't be too many persons of color on a commission? Their position on the family is just as harmful to the social fabric.

Ridgely has come a long way in the 14 years that I have been serving on the planning and zoning commission. I'll never forget the debate on passing our first preservation guidelines which subsequently saved the endangered old homes on Central Ave. Yet, another town manager stood up and denounced us saying "ah hah, it is about preservation". Well, yes it was. I suppose he was trying to appeal to those who think preservation is a dirty word or would get in the way of developer profits.

A politician can appeal to our better or lesser angels. In Ridgely, the fallen angels local demagogues appeal to include the haters of anything old--everything from old homes to old trees. The difference between Ridgely and a Podunk is its traditions! It's sad the way our town is divided. The progressive coalition which protects the town's heritage, and small town quality of life, has barely won the last few elections and is always close to defeat by mediocrity.

Along with my wife, I have spent an enormous amount of time on this town over the years. There have been successes but only with constant vigilance. This has a price. I wonder how my daughter's life would be different if so many of my waking hours hadn't been spent worrying about the town? You don't want my services on the charter commission --well, throw me in the brier patch! I hereby resign all my other town commission positions too.

Of Charter Change, Couples Serving The Town, Awful Voting Choices; Impeachment

(click on to enlarge)

We received the above letter along with our outrageous water bill today.

Some people in town have forfeited their right to an opinion. One of them is Commissioner Epperly-Glover. WHAT RIGHT DOES ONE OF THE TWO COMMISSION SUPPORTERS OF THE $1.5 MILLION LOAN FOR DEVELOPMENT DISASTER HAVE TO TELL ANYONE HERE WHAT THEY CAN OR CAN'T DO?? THIS IS THE LOAN THAT PUSHED OUR TOWN OVER THE CLIFF. NANCY AND I WERE THE BIGGEST OPPONENTS OF THIS $1.5 MILLION IDIOCY!

Maybe the first charter change should allow for impeachment. There are a lot of people in this town who think you should be IMPEACHED for you actions regarding the $1.5 million. But that REQUIRES charter change. And, of course, you don't want both of us to serve on the charter change commission despite our many years of service to this town both together and separately as elected or appointed members of the town commission, planning and zoning commission, tree commission, rails to trails committee, parks and recreation commission, and historic commission.

By the way, when are you going to post your new family values proclamation on the town hall door -- no couples need apply? (For more info on the disastrous loan see my June 12th post.)

Thank You Kathy Smith

Kathy Smith faces personal problems that take precedence over the political. Three members of her family have cancer and our prayers should be with her. Normally, giving up an elected office is self defeating, but not in this case.

I can't thank her enough for her role in SAVING our town from bankruptcy. Had she not stood alone (very Churchill like) our already staggering financial meltdown would have been fatal. Can you imagine what would have happened if the town manager's pick would have beaten her in the '08 election? (They deny it now, but please remember who was out and about campaigning for the town manager party that year when you pay your outrageous water bills. Those folks deserve to dwell in the political wilderness forever!)

Although she can't be replaced, and we will all miss Kathy, I hope that the commissioners will appoint someone of her calibre to finish out her term. Thank you Kathy!

Town Meeting Report -- Commissioner Smith Resigns

Commissioner Kathy Smith has resigned her position as commissioner of Ridgely. There have been growing disagreements between her and the other commissioners. Although resigning my own planning and zoning commission position has tempted me, I do feel that elected officials should not resign and disregard all the supporters who put them in office -- sorry Sarah Palin. I know what a pain the job is. My late father in law, Paul Satterfield, advised against having anything to do with planning and zoning or town politics in general, observing that it's the best way to make enemies here....words of wisdom.

The scoop on Kathy will come in the Times Record interview due out Wednesday. In the meantime...the long awaited Ridgely Comprehensive Plan that protects our small town way of life was passed by both the planning commissioners and the commissioners. It took five years to craft this guideline for our town's future.

An all out shouting match then broke out between an irate citizen and the commissioners over the 30% waste water sewer rate in town. He was right! Unfortunately, the commission that is now in place didn't make the mess and is stuck with resolving an incredibly AWFUL fiscal problem. There can be no more layoffs to save money or the town will completely shut down. The only solution is for you and me to pony up and pay...sorry for this overall depressing news folks.

WWTP "Cancer" -- The Real State Of The Town Report

The following report is from the commissioner's meeting last night and sums up the dire straights our town is in. (click on report to enlarge.)

The Day Of Reckoning Has Arrived

I wrote the post below on March 15, 2008. Now, everything I feared would happen has materialized. There is no developer. We not only have the debt for the waste water treatment plant upgrade, but the former town manager's $238,000.oo deficit as well. And, don't forget this deficit preceded the global financial meltdown. It was made in Ridgely-- excuse me, Westover.

Our town's financial situation requires drastic action on the part of our commissioners. I want to remind everyone that commissioner Smith, and commissioner Gearhart before her, sounded the alarm to their apparently deaf fellow commissioners. Commissioner Mumford has been a vocal opponent of the fiscal foolishness long before being elected in April. Yet, the task of cleaning up after our former town manager has fallen on these two. We need to support both commissioner Mumford and Smith as they are forced to take drastic steps to salvage our town's finances.

No To Ridgely Roulette!

March 15, 2008

The residents of Ridgely should NEVER have to PAY FOR DEVELOPMENT. Yet, there is now a proposal before the Commissioners to borrow $1.5 million to improve our spray irrigation system because the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) won't approve plans for our Ridgely Park project until improvements are made. Paying back the loan could COST RESIDENTS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER WATER SEWER BILLS.Improving the spray irrigation system is an idea that has been around a few years. However, it was NEVER CONSIDERED AN EMERGENCY. Money to pay for these improvements was included in the Developer's Rights and Responsibilities agreement (DRRA)negotiated between the developers of the 403 home Ridgely Park development and the town. Ridgely Park was to pay for phase I of the spray irrigation upgrade prior to the issuance of their 185th building permit, followed by the funding for phase II of the new spray irrigation system.ONLY A FEW MONTHS AGO, OUR TOWN MANAGER WAS MAKING THE CASE TO MDE THAT OUR SYSTEM WAS FINE AND COULD ACCOMMODATE THE FIRST PORTION OF RIDGELY PARK AND SOME SMALLER DEVELOPMENTS TOTALING 247 UNITS.NOW, WE ARE BEING TOLD THERE IS AN EMERGENCY AND THE TOWN NEEDS TO BORROW MONEY ASAP. What has happened? How in only a VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME ARE WE FACED WITH AN EMERGENCY WATER SEWER PROBLEM? A letter to the town received from MDE dated February 15th stating that "any additional allocations should await the installation and successful operation of the newly configured spray irrigation system" highlights our problem. Some small developments totalling 27 homes are permitted but NO OTHER DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROVED UNTIL SPRAY IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE. This is the "EMERGENCY" and it means that it is obvious that the upgrade is to accommodate new development. This means that MDE grant funding is out of the question since there are no MDE grants made for development.The Town Manager's solution is the quick fix or a loan for $1.5 million. Such a course of action is potentially catastrophic. Our budget is already way off target and the loan will be added to what we already owe for our existing system. This, of course, is going to be done with in the context of a record housing market slump.Ridgely Park as noted above is contractually obligated to pay for the system upgrade. But, the agreement allows them 184 building permits for 184 houses on our current system BEFORE this obligation must be meant. Since MDE won't allow this, do we want to carry a $1.5 million loan hoping Ridgely Park stays through this point? If they walk, the debt is all ours.This piece of ground will eventually be developed. If Ridgely Park leaves town it would be a shame for the town. Ridgely Park is an excellent concept put forth by people who have pioneered smart growth and traditional neighborhood development in Maryland. These people and their plans respect our community. However, RIDGELY PARK NEEDS TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE and to make the improvements to our spray irrigation system FIRST, and not AFTER the 184th home.GOING INTO DEBT IS A HUGE GAMBLE FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVE HERE. THE TOWN MANAGER WHO PROPOSES THIS COURSE OF ACTION ONLY STAYS HERE A FEW NIGHTS A WEEK IN A RENTAL AND HASN'T BECOME THE STAKEHOLDER IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT WE HAD HOPED. He certainly won't feel our pain if he is wrong. In fact, the Town Manager can pick up and leave for another job anytime.The Commissioners and Ridgely Staff will be meeting with the Ridgely Park developers Monday, March 17th at the Ridgely House at 6:00 PM. Commissioner Gearhart is opposed to taking out the $1.5 million loan. The best solution would be for the developers to include all the payments for the spray irrigation upgrade FIRST and not after the 184th home. Then, of course, the town would not need a loan. This, in fact, is the only solution to our problem that puts the residents of Ridgely first.There are times in life when we all must take a stand. Let the Commissioners know that WE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE WANT THEM TO PUT RIDGELY FIRST. DON'T MAKE A $1.5 MILLION GAMBLE WITH OUR FUTURE. WE THE RIDGELY RESIDENTS DO NOT SUPPORT ANY LOANS FOR DEVELOPMENT!!

FIRED!!!

The Ridgely town manager was sent back to Westover at the commissioner's meeting tonight. Specifically, it's because of his failure to honor his contract and live here. As most of you know there are about 238,000 other reasons too.

All I can say is please never let us have to go through this again. The problems could have been solved a couple years ago. We the taxpayers of this town will pay a heavy price for more town management than we bargained for. At $80,000.oo, do we really need a town manager? Maybe it's time to reconsider the whole idea of the town manager.

God bless our courageous commission majority of Kathy Smith and Dale Mumford for the stand they have taken!

Town Meeting Report

With a quick goodbye, former commissioner Hunter left the Ridgely House and Dale Mumford was sworn in. The crowd enthusiastically welcomed him and the change that he represents.

It was then on to the department and commission reports. After his report, commissioner Smith praised our new police chief Gary Foster for the changes he has implemented. Cathy Schwab reported that the Ridgely Historical Society raised $1547.00 over the past weekend with the 2nd annual Old Time Ridgely Days Festival in the Railroad Park. In addition, she reported on plans to establish a weekly farmers market in town in the very near future. Robin Eaton and public works were roundly praised and thanked for their efforts on behalf of the Ridgely Arbor Day activities.

The town manager's report elicited questions and opinions starting with the problem of bringing leachite from the new landfill to our waste water treatment plant. Strong opposition to this exists and few support the measure pointing out that any gain in revenues is cancelled by the risk. Martin Sokolich pointed out the fact that the spray fields are near the little league fields and wondered how we could justify such a risk to Ridgely's children. Commissioner Mumford expressed opposition to the idea worrying that we might find out too late about the hazardous makeup of the leachites after harm had been done to the town. Former commissioner Gearhart requested an info meeting on the issue.

Ridgely Park was finally declared dead and the Developers Rights and Responsibilities Agreement came into question. Dale Mumford asked whether or not it should be voided. Town manager Mangini then said he'd consult with our attorney. I added there was no need since Jack Hall, the town attorney, has already advised the planning commission in a memo to void it. This will be on the next planning commission agenda.

Joanne Stepp asked about administering the grant for the renovation of the train station and commissioners Smith and Mumford said they were considering the whole question of the project. During the planning commission report it was also pointed out that the train station has been added to the Ridgely Historic district which currently includes only the Ridgely House. Commissioner Smith said we needed more grant money to successfully complete the project. I added that the Historic District designation would aid in that quest.

Other issues includeed the reappointment of Leo Stepp to the Economic Development Commission but he declined a second term on the Tree Commission. And, there was some discussion of the biding process to get a better deal for our trash pick up. Finally, proposed ordinance #321 which provides for the town to take responsibility for the streets in Lister Estates was tabled and what bond the town still has from the developer will be held for the time being.

Major issues regarding the budget, the $238,000 deficit, personnel,as well a charter reform remain and will certainly dominate town meetings in the weeks ahead.

The Problem With Write In Votes

This question of write in votes entered into our election because of our town manager's comments in last Wednesday's Times Record. I can't begin to count how many people asked me what he was up to. I told them I didn't know exactly but that everyone should come out and vote even though the election was uncontested. Only 18 people voted in our last uncontested election and it would be easy for a stealthy write in effort to end up with more votes. The town manager's comments galvanized those supporting Dale Mumford to come out and vote and not allow some last minute write in scheme to undermine our election.

Here is the problem with the whole write in possibility. Elections are only fair if certain conditions are met. They must be open and follow a predictable timetable so that the voters know who is running and what skills and views candidates possess. Whether there is a formal debate or a campaign with flyers and door to door visits, this amount of time allows voters to a get acquainted with candidates. Providing this time and opportunity to the electorate is one reason why there are deadlines to sign up to run for an office.

Elections must also be ordered following procedural rules. Voters and candidates must be citizens and live in the jurisdiction where they vote or want to hold office. There must be time to verify such information to avoid election fraud. This is yet another reason for election deadlines for both those seeking office and voting.

Write in initiatives contradict and undermine the whole notion of a fair, open, and ordered election. Sure, sometimes they are simply protests and some of us may have used write ins to thumb our noses at a poor choice by writing in good 'ole Mickey Mouse. However, an organized and last minute write in effort is nothing less than a sneaky refuge for scoundrels too unqualified to stand for office and the public scrutiny elections bring. Such initiatives not only undermine democracy, they don't count. In Ridgely, our charter omits any mention of write in votes, therefore, rendering them invalid. However, charter or not, IF a write in effort garnered more votes, it could have ended up in court, delaying the swearing in of the legitimate registered candidate. Considering Ridgely's pressing problems this would have been a disaster.

In January, Dale Mumford, registered to run for commissioner. Over the months since January, he went all over town talking to all kinds of Ridgelyites. Clearly, no one saw fit to challenge him legitimately and register by the April 17th deadline. I think that most people in town are satisfied with his qualifications and saw no reason to run against such a man. I don't doubt that there were some town manager cheerleaders in town who didn't like this. However, clearly a decision was made on their part not to register and challenge Dale because it was clear that their position was bankrupt(about $238,000.00 to be exact).

Things worked out this time because of voter vigilance. However, this problem has hurt other towns nearby such as Hurlock. There they amended their charter to correct these kind of shenanigans. Ridgely has a whole host of issues with its charter that need to be addressed to ensure that our town maintains a government by and for the people of Ridgely.

Dale Mumford Wins With Unprecedented Turnout

Commissioner Kathy Smith congratulates the new Commissioner.

Dale Mumford won 83 of the 92 votes cast in Today's election. It's unprecedented for so many to turn out for an uncontested election. The write ins were divided among many and no effort to deliver a last minute write in campaign materialized.

God bless Dale as he joins Commissioner Smith to restore sanity to town.

Vote For Dale Mumford

Dale Mumford is the man we need in this time of crisis for our town. He is running unopposed but we should still turn out and vote. Let's let everyone know he is the people's choice. Let's also honor all of those who have made great sacrifices protecting our right to vote. Freedom isn't free and we need to affirm those who have stood up for our freedom. We also need to affirm our appreciation for Dale Mumford being willing to take on the tough task of straightening out our town. Vote Monday at the Ridgely House between 1:00 and 7:00 PM.

Real Change Comes To Town

Dale Mumford is running unopposed for Ridgely town commissioner. The deadline for anyone else to register passed at 4:30 Friday and this talented and capable man will fill the empty commission seat in two weeks. Congratulations and thank you for taking on such a task during these tough times for our town.

Also, thank you Kathy Smith for standing up for our town. The cavalry has arrived, and I'm sure that together, you and Dale are going to put things in Ridgely House back in order. With the the town financial crisis (which preceded the global crisis) looming, this change couldn't have come any sooner.

Another change is coming to town too. For the past week, our town manager has been under consideration for the position of town manager of Onancock, VA. Delmarvanow.com, a news blog, has been following the story for over a week now. Yesterday, the town picked someone else for the position but our town manager was on the right track with such a move.

"The times they are a changing" and Ridgely is once again back in the hands of its citizens.

Linda Tripp Redux With Billy Burke In Pocomoke City

Linda Tripp's recordings of Monika Lewinsky led to the impeachment proceedings against former President Clinton. Afterwards, she was charged for violating Maryland's wiretapping laws in what has been termed "the most disgraceful, transparent campaign of politically motivated vengeance in recent American history". In an irony of disgraceful proportions she was the only actor in this drama to face criminal charges. To most of us she was a heroine who blew the whistle on our debauched former president.

Fast forward 10 years to today and nearby Pocomoke City. Stephanie Burke and husband Billy are political activists running a blog critical of the town administration. Stephanie also ran for town council against the local machine backed apparatchik. She was defeated last Tuesday by an unprecedented and overwhelming absentee ballot campaign supporting the town machine. The ballots have all been seized by the State's Attorneys office and an investigation of voter fraud is under way.

Thursday, Pocomoke City police raided the Burkes home, seized all electronic equipment, and arrested Billy for "wiretapping". It seems that Billy recorded a public rant by the town mayor on the town hall steps. He sent the recording to the State's Attorneys office as evidence of wrongdoing by the town administration. Clearly, he didn't feel he was violating any state law by recording statements in public because he then sent that recording to the State's Attorneys office.

It sure looks like the Linda Tripp case of "politically motivated vengeance" all over again. There is, however, one even more troubling difference. Linda Tripp did wiretap over the telephone as it's commonly understood. The Burkes recorded an elected official in a public area.

Between their blog and run for office the Burkes are a mortal threat to the Pocomoke machine. Their fight for good and open government is gaining ground and we can only hope that their efforts and suffering will bring about much needed change in Pocomoke City.

A Victory In The Fight Against Eminent Domain Abuse

Eminent domain abuse is one of the most insidious crimes against citizens of towns nationwide. Runaway town spending forges an unholy coalition between developers and their municipal administration allies. Together they try to fatten tax roles by condemning middle class homes to make way for upscale development. Citizen groups fighting this abuse have faced all kinds of obstacles from their respective municipalities and developers including "slap" lawsuits. Well chalk one up for the good guys this time. The following is from the Institute For Justice http://www.ij.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2656&Itemid=165 .

March 30, 2009

Arlington, Va—Evidently you can fight city hall—and fight private developers who use city hall’s power, too.

In an order issued on March 26, 2009, Judge C.L. “Buck” Rogers of the Circuit Court for Sumner County, Tenn., vindicated the right to protest government abuse by dismissing the libel lawsuit brought by Richard Swift, a developer who is a former member of the Clarksville City Council, and Wayne Wilkinson, a member of Clarksville’s Downtown District Partnership, against members of the Clarksville Property Rights Coalition (CPRC). Swift and Wilkinson sued the CPRC because its members criticized them for supporting Clarksville’s controversial redevelopment plan, which authorizes the use of eminent domain for private development. In a newspaper ad, the CPRC noted that both Swift and Wilkinson are developers and said, “This Redevelopment Plan is of the developers, by the developers, and for the developers.”

The court ruled, “Debate on public issues shall be uninhibited [and] wide open. . . . Accusing a public official or public figure of using their political influence to obtain a benefit for others or themselves or favoring their supporters is not defamation.”

“The court’s decision is a tremendous victory for everyone who speaks out against the abuse of eminent domain,” said Bert Gall, a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, which represents the CPRC in defense of their free speech rights. “The decision puts thin-skinned politicians and developers on notice: If you file a frivolous lawsuit against people just for criticizing your public actions, your case will swiftly be thrown out of court.”

Across the country, in places like Renton, Wash., and Freeport, Texas, there has been an ominous trend of politicians and developers using frivolous litigation to suppress the speech of home and business owners who oppose the abuse of eminent domain for private development. The CPRC’s victory in Clarksville resoundingly reaffirms that the First Amendment protects that speech.

“I am thrilled that the court reached the right decision to protect my right to free speech,” said Joyce Vanderbilt, a member of the CPRC. “Swift and Wilkinson tried to bully us with this lawsuit, and the court just told them that they should never have brought it in the first place.”

“We won this fight not just for us, but for every home and business owner who gets sued just for speaking out against eminent domain abuse,” said Pam Vandeveer. “I’m glad that this is still a free country.”



Jerry Martin of Barrett, Johnston & Parsley in Nashville serves as local counsel for the Clarksville Property Rights Coalition.

It Can Get Worse

Toblog has been chronicling the growth and consequences of unelected non-resident executive power in Ridgely. We now have a $238,000.00 budget deficit from a town administration that acts as if the town government is meant to be one that is "by and for the employees". There is hope here, however, that we the residents are about to finally put things back in order in the "Ridgely House".

The problem is national in scope with the best example of the worst case, eminent domain abuse in New London, Connecticut, capturing national headlines. There to keep the administration money go round rolling, middle class homes were condemned to make way for upscale condos to fatten the town's tax roles.

Closer to home we have a deteriorating situation in Pokomoke City. Just how bad things can get is outlined below in a post from another DelMarVa blog, the Pokomoke Tattler. (The "Tattler" is linked to Toblog daily on the "Links To The World" sidebar.)

Pokomoke Tattler -- March 25, 2009

"Did You Ever Wonder How Much the Pocomoke City Manager Makes Per Year?

This is question that I have been asked time and time again: How much does City Manager Russ Blake really make?

Now lets put this into perspective…If he were the Manager of local store or company, it would be absolutely NONE of our business.

However, City Manager Russ Blake works for the City of Pocomoke City, Inc., and because this is a governing body that receives State and Federal money, you and I have every right to know just how much our city employees are being paid.

Since we were told by the former City Finance Director that Russ Blake would routinely tell her to ADD another $1000.00 to his paycheck for his yearly raise; a raise that was not voted on by Council, but decided upon by HE, HIMSELF our interest has definitely been pricked.

Or how about having his water bills regularly adjusted on his rental properties? Yes, this is something that was witnessed numerous times as well.

All of these questions and all of these statements made me wonder !

So a couple of weeks ago a Freedom of Information Act request, was submitted to the City Clerk, asking for this information.

Guess what the City’s response was????

Please deliver a deposit check in the amount of $1,618.oo to cover the costs the clerical costs of finding and sorting and redacting information billed at $30.00 per hour.

Thirty three years of Un-Elected dictatorship, and you and I cannot fire him, but we can’t even find out how much this person makes, how much he gets taken off of his water bill, how much he expenses on an annual basis….NOTHING, without giving them even more money.

This is our money that we have paid through our taxes year after year, this should be available to any citizen at anytime that City Hall is open during normal business hours.

We the Citizens of Pocomoke City are helpless to change this unless we demand that our Council Members change the Charter so that the City Manager does not have complete and final say and rule over everything in our City.

We must demand that they change it so that the City Manager answers TO the Mayor and Council!

At this point in time Russ Blake answers to NO ONE!"

Why The Town Is In Trouble -- Bull Buster III

In today's "Times - Record" our town manager is quoted as saying that "the housing crisis led to a decrease in revenue for the town". This is very misleading. Our problems preceded the global financial meltdown and THE HOUSING CRISIS HAS NOTHING WHAT SO EVER TO DO WITH THE DIRE STRAITS RIDGELY IS IN. It is true that part of the problem has to do with the fact that few developer fees are being collected because little is being built. HOWEVER, this is because the town simply doesn't have the sewer allocation to build which is why the town is upgrading its waste water treatment plant. The waste water treatment plant upgrade is meant to accommodate the planned and approved Ridgely Park development. This project could not go forward last year when the Maryland Department of Environment wouldn't sign off on it because of inadequate sewer capacity. Stop the spin and admit the mistake.

Further, the article is full of very deceptive numbers about "new" sources of revenue that will lead to a balanced budget. Where are the 58 housing permits the town manager speaks of? If they are out there somewhere, they are not for 2009 and will have nothing to do with this year's fiscal fiasco.

The bottom line is this. Spending was out of control at the same time revenues were down due to our sewer capacity problem. The commissioners passed balanced budgets which were not adhered to. AND, THE BUDGET SHOULD NOT BE BASED ON DEVELOPMENT REVENUES NOT YET PAID. OUR PROBLEMS IN RIDGELY ARE MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE OF RIDGELY TO ELECT COMMISSIONERS WHO WILL FIX OUR PROBLEM ASAP.

Toblog Bull Meter Busted After "State Of The Town Address"

My poor bull meter short circuited shortly after the town manager's "State of the Town Address". Therefore, this edition of Bull Busters will have to proceed on its own to cut through the largest amount of bull seen in Ridgely since my brother in law(a dairy farmer)fertilized my vegetable garden in 1996.

I can't even figure out where to begin. We can dismiss fluff that's irrelevant to Ridgely like our town manager's story about the vice-president, his failed congressional campaign (who cares?) or "30 years of municipal experience". (Although we might ask were they like the Ridgely experience times 30?)

First and foremost, the "address" is an attack on the people of Ridgely for electing Kathy Smith commissioner last year. She is mentioned early on under the Rubik of the "crisis" that "intensified after the municipal election of 2008". Duuh? Do you mean when Kathy won? Thank God someone else noticed that all is not well in our ship of state. She is also cryptically referred to as "those who criticise need to fully comprehend what they do to morale"..."all we have to do is look at our police department". In fact, I wonder if Kathy has replaced the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) as the town manager's favorite bogeyman? If only he could blame the global economy too. We, of course, know he can't because Ridgely's situation has preceded the global financial meltdown.

Back to the police. We have two less police officers because we can't pay them. We can't pay them because of poor management decisions. Besides the budget deficit, we lost county tax differential money because we weren't really maintaining a 24/7 force as the town manager claimed.

The town manager's salary and benefits package would pay for two officers. If given the choice, I bet most Ridgely residents would choose to hire back two officers and let the town manager go. Good police are are a lot more useful to the citizens of this town than the architect of a $238,000.00 deficit.

Another issue taking up a lot of ink was Zeb Brodie. I'm very happy that we have an investor in town opening new businesses. However, the "embarrassing, and frustrating experiences" which the town manager says that the investor went through are 100% of the town manager's making. The town manager knew what the planning and zoning ordinances required. Yet, chose to ignore them and "streamline" a process for approval circumventing our citizen planning commission. Our planning commissioners (being residents) knew that there were questions about the Cyber Ridge proposal. I think that the town manager must have known that there would be controversy too. Had normal procedure been followed, the business could have opened a couple of months before it did. As it turned out the planning commission took the heat on this and other issues orchestrated by our very own town manager. Mr Brodie, welcome to Ridgely. I'm sorry for the rough introduction to our town but the town manager doesn't live here. We who do live here, however, appreciate your businesses.

Finally, let's talk trash. How is it that we have to pay more and more and reinstate the trash fee which the town manager identifies as a culprit for our money woes? Denton's new contract is charges $4.95 per household. Ridgely is $6.95 and going up. Why can't we use the same company as Denton? More customers might lower the rate from this provider even more. We pay the town manager a huge salary to figure out such questions.

I have to hand to the town manager, he had to work pretty hard on his "Address" (on our dime) to turn our town's financial "sow's ear into a silk purse". Unfortunately for us, the reality of having to pay for so many mistakes undermines any amount of lofty rhetoric. Next year we should do away with this pretentious pomposity and save the taxpayers some money.

The "Address" ends with "unless someone has another idea or another plan, I do not intend to abandon the "kitchen" while the soup is still on and work needs to be done". There are so many ideas and other plans from so many citizens in Ridgely that would return our town to sanity that they can't be listed here. The "kitchen" isn't only too "hot" (because of the town manager), it's about to burn the rest of the house down. He can have his home in Westover, but let us have our town back and put Ridgely's financial fire out.

(Please note that the "Address" can be obtained at town hall. For some reason, it hasn't been posted as is usual on the town website. I guess I'd be embarrassed if I wrote so much bull too.)

The Election In Ridgely And Bull Buster Part I

Today's "Times-Record" announced that the Ridgely town election filing deadline for candidates and voting times are "to be announced". Hmmm...our Charter is very clear on the filing deadline. It's 10 days before the election. This year the election will be on April 27th. In recent elections the polls have been kept open longer than the Charter prescribes. I'm not sure how this came about but it's a good idea. The Charter, however, does say that the polls are open between 9 and 5.

I have to wonder about all this "to be announced" confusion so near to an election. As many of you know, a few weeks ago the town manager presented some proposals to change the Charter election rules. The proposals raised suspicions among many and nothing more was done. It would now be impossible to make any change before the election.

This year I will not let the whispering campaign that emerges every Springtime here in Ridgely go unanswered. I've heard some whoppers over the years as election time approaches. My first BULL BUSTER concerns the strange story that Ridgely's financial woes (which preceded the global economic crisis) are the result of some "snitch" calling the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE). This "call" supposedly stopped our Ridgely Park development. First, even if there was a "call", MDE can't withhold permits without good cause. They had plenty of cause with or without a "snitch" since the town already had to use stream discharge at times when our waste water treatment plant (WWTP) couldn't handle the load. We simply could not handle a new development and the town has now embarked on a $1.5 million WWTP upgrade to accommodate future development.

MDE saved the citizens of Ridgely from a massive sewage spill. MDE also saved us from the massive fines that accompany WWTP failure. If there is a "SNITCH", he or she is a HERO who saved the town citizens from management miscalculations. But I think the whole story is BULL. MDE was just doing their job. They deserve a thank you.

BULL BUSTERS will always ask these questions. Who would start such a rumor? And, who might benefit from such a story? In this case, all signs point to a town manager and his allies trying to explain away the town's abysmal financial situation.

Eastern Shore Freedom Of The Press Case Part II

The Maryland Supreme Court case concerning a local developer and local bloggers is put into perspective by the following article.

In defense of anonymous Web posters

By Marta Mossburg
Examiner Columnist | 3/3/09 5:19 AM

Zebulon J. Brodie, an Eastern Shore businessman, may not enjoy having his Dunkin’ Donuts called “dirty” any more than I like being called a “tool” by anonymous Web posters, but he better get used to it.

The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled last week that newspaper Web sites, blogs and other sites do not have to give up the identities of anonymous posters except under well-defined circumstances.

Good. Call those people cowards or jerks or liars, but their speech should be protected in the same way that all other speech is under the First Amendment.

As the decision from the state’s highest court notes, “anonymity or psuedonymity has been a part of the Internet culture” from its beginning. It has also been a part of U.S. culture from our founding.

Anonymous pamphleteers railed against political leaders in party newspapers, “the Republicans with a scurrility that even modern bloggers rarely achieve,” wrote Myron Magnet in the most recent issue of City Journal.

Democracy depends on people speaking their minds to thrive. And in this era of newspaper closings, forcing Web posters to reveal their identity would effectively shutter the “comments” section on most sites, limiting speech even more.

Imagine a United States where the government or a powerful person or company could demand the personal information of account holders on newspaper sites or Internet providers as in China. It sounds far-fetched, but a Maryland trial judge could have made that situation much more likely.

Many postings do nothing to inform and elevate the populace by most standards – unless you count speculation on celebrity relationships and nasty personal attacks against members of the opposite political party in that category. But perceived quality of work should not be the deciding factor of whether someone’s comments deserve anonymity.

As Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, “Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry.”

This does not mean that writers should always be given a free pass, however. As Walter Abbott found out, the First Amendment does not protect threats to criminal action. The Parkville, Md., man was convicted in October of writing an e-mail to Gov. Martin O’Malley that said he would strangle him. Abbot was given a suspended sentence of six months’ in prison and two years’ probation.

But that was not the case here. Brodie, the developer with a Centreville Dunkin’ Donuts, wanted the names of anonymous posters writing on a forum run by Independent Newspapers Inc. He claimed they defamed him in their comments about his restaurant.

The Appeals Court decided that Brodie did not correctly identify the posters who made those comments, negating his claim to their names. But the court went farther by outlining a process judges should follow “to balance First Amendment rights with the right to seek protection for defamation.”

It found that a plaintiff must make a reasonable attempt to notify anonymous posters that they are the subject of a subpoena; give the posters time to respond; transcribe the comments exactly as written by the posters; and show how those comments have defamed him or her. The court also found that judges must balance First Amendment rights against the strength of the evidence against them.

That makes sense. Those tests follow ones made in other courts and standardize how Maryland courts should look at claims instead of dealing with them on a case by case basis.

Next time Brodie and those like him would be better served by marshalling supporters to advocate for his cause instead of using the courts to try to skewer a few random Web posters.

In his case, scrupulously maintaining a clean restaurant would have been the best means to combat accusations a minute portion of the population read in an online chat forum instead of publicizing them through a lawsuit.

While those scrutinized by bloggers and other posters may not like what people write about them, tolerating mean accusations, even false ones, is better than silencing the voices of Marylanders. Truth, like lies, needs voices to spread.

Examiner columnist Marta H. Mossburg lives in Baltimore.

Eastern Shore Freedom Of Press Case Decided In Favor of Bloggers!

from baltimoresun.com

Maryland's Court of Appeals today issued a decision protecting the identity of three anonymous Internet posters and, for the first time, offering guidelines for state courts to follow in libel cases before unmasking online commenters.

The opinion and instructions stem from a defamation lawsuit filed by Eastern Shore developer Zebulon Brodie against three unknown Internet posters and Independent Newspapers Inc., which runs an online community forum.

The posters had written critical comments about the cleanliness of a Dunkin' Donuts that Brodie owns in Centreville.

The Appeals Court concluded that Brodie was not entitled to identifying information about the posters, even though they used the forum to criticize him and his business, because he misidentified which usernames made the offending statements.

The five-step process the court adopted for future cases was borrowed from a New Jersey court and outlined in today's 43-page majority opinion. It seeks to help trial courts "balance First Amendment rights with the right to seek protection for defamation" by suggesting they:

• Require that plaintiffs notify anonymous parties that their identities are sought.
• Give the posters time to reply with reasons why they should remain nameless.
• Require plaintiffs identify the defamatory statements and who made them.
• Determine whether the complaint has set forth a prima facie defamation, where the words are obviously libelous, or a per quod action, meaning it requires outside evidence.
• Weigh the poster's right to free speech against the strength of the case and the necessity of identity disclosure.

A five-page concurring opinion by three of the seven judges accepts steps one through three but asks for clarification on step four as to how prima facie nature should be shown and outright rejects step five as "unnecessary and needlessly complicated."