Op-Ed: What’s the Truth about Maryland’s HB 924? By Marc Castelli

“In general, Americans view ignorance, particularly of public policy, as a virtue”. (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols). Pretty harsh words, but if you review the tactic of panic that Chesapeake Bay Foundation recently used to push its agenda in House Bill 924, you might understand the relevance of the quote.

The oyster issue has been and apparently will always be driven by a select few using the media to achieve their goals, and who seem to find it difficult to separate fact from fiction or research a balanced story, for the benefit of their readers. It has become a tool of shrill advocacy and not for reportage. “Even the nature of coverage becomes complicated; social scientists have shown that repetition of a false statement, even in the course of disputing it, often increases the number of people who believe it.” (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols). “For Trump (and CBF et al.) shamelessness is not just strength, it’s a strategy”. (From the Editor, Time Magazine, 4-3-17). The modern media with so many options tailored to particular views is a huge exercise in confirmation bias. (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols). If the media consistently refuses to print the truth about oysters and oyster issues, it must have an agenda. What is it?

Many people and the media have been blind to a sea change in the attitudes of watermen towards science and expertise. Marine biologists have been slow to recognize a need to fill in the blanks of science with the empirical knowledge gathered by generations of watermen. In the past, it was the watermen who loudly voiced an outright rejection of science. Watermen seemed to claim that they knew everything there was to know about whatever resource they were actively harvesting. They thought that if a scientist tried to make a living from what he/she knew about a resource they would starve.

Empirical knowledge is powerful stuff, especially when one depends on it to make a living. But it is not the whole picture. On the other hand, scientists usually reject anecdotal information until oddly enough they quote it. HB 924 is an excellent example of this sea change. The bill’s purpose was to permanently set sanctuary boundaries. Its proponents used hysteria, experts quoting opinions about facts, partial facts, innuendoes, and falsehoods to push this bill. Most of our politicians, who we used to think of as guardians of truth, should have been protecting the truth. Instead, they caved into less than truth and non- truth. Now it is watermen who want to know where the science is.

The Baltimore Sun and Bay Journal keep referring to the OAC as predominantly made up of industry and industry-favoring members. “In fact, the commission is composed of 24 members. Eight members are either scientists or members of specific environmental organizations (CBF among them). Eight members are from the oyster industry. There are five legislators, two Maryland senators, two House members and one county commissioner. The remaining three are private citizens which include the two co-chairs”. (Letter to Sen. Miller from the OAC). Yet Mr. Wheeler (now a managing editor on the Bay Journal) insists on describing the commission as having,” half of its members as representing or sympathetic to the oyster industry”. Why does Mr. Wheeler persist in this mischaracterization of the OAC? He never once criticized the first OAC when it obviously favored the science and environmental side. The original OAC membership was heavily weighted towards the environmental and ecological side. The chair was the past president of WWF, then there was CCA and MSSA each had a seat, 1 from CBF, 1 from NOAA, 1 from ORP, 1 from Nature Conservancy, 4 seats from the U. of M, 2 scientists, 1 senator, 2 delegates, 1 real estate developer (!), 1 technocrat, I MWA representative and one sea food buyer (for a total of only 2 industry members). There is no comparison. The current incarnation of the OAC is far more balanced, and representative and any recommendations coming from it are more inclusive. It is clear that Mr. Wheeler has an agenda that is just an exercise in confirmation bias. What is his agenda? CBF and The Baltimore Sun both loudly “blamed” the DNR for having “created” the strawman proposal. In truth, the department serves only to facilitate meetings and conferences for the OAC. It has no seat at the table or sway in the discussions.

Apparently, CBF, U of M, CCA, RiverKeepers and school teachers did not like the legislature’s amendment of placing of the 2016 stock assessment bill’s (SB 937) process in the hands of the DNR. They wanted it controlled by the U. of M. and CBF. SB937 did not want to include any sanctuary oysters in the stock assessment. The bill was aimed at one specific user group, the industry, with no regard for facts. U. of M. and C.B.F. along with something called the Oyster Advocacy Group returned in 2017 with a vengeance to re-tweak that bill, which became HB 924. By sheer force of largely ignorant hysterics, they forced the more than compliant legislature to agree to circumvent the OAC and make the sanctuary boundaries for all 51 sanctuaries permanent. This despite a task assigned to the OAC by the legislature to review sanctuaries after five years. The department is now at that mark.

Not once did the CBF or its followers use any facts or science to prove the point that all sanctuaries were in danger, which was shamelessly insinuated. Despite numerous requests from only a handful of senators and delegates during the senatorial hearings, the CBF, U of M and the other groups did not produce one iota of hard fact to prove their case. “The collapse of the relationship between experts and citizens is a dysfunction of democracy itself” (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols). Nor did the remaining senators request the proof. They just knuckled under to the wide spread Trump induced panic of losing federal bay clean up funds. Instead of respecting the procedure the CBF and its surrogate, The Oyster Advocacy Group, did an end run on the Oyster Advisory Commission, which was discussing the sanctuaries as tasked by the legislature.

The OAC is a state-mandated commission appointed to find solutions to the oyster issues of Maryland. Watching our country’s and now our state legislature’s slavish adherence to partisan divisiveness has been a major disappointment for me. House Bill 924 did expose one thing. It proved to the Maryland watermen that the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate have only been paying lip service to the idea that Maryland’s sea food industry is important. Dialogue between experts and laypeople is essential to a functioning democracy. The politicians believe that their own and the bill’s supporters biased opinions are as relevant if not more important than informed views. “Studies show that those with the least knowledge are the most confident in their opinions”. (The Death of Expertise ,T. Nichols)

I was told many years ago when I was a believer in our system of legislative representation, that if you are explaining something to a legislator, you are losing.” Sentiment against experts is what influenced the Brexit vote and the election of our current president”. (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols). If our elected legislators, in chambers composed of Democrat majorities, would realize that they are as guilty of the political power shenanigans our president is they might have walked away from the bill or at least allowed for the strawman proposal to proceed for discussion in the OAC, where it might have survived, been modified ( toned down), or even ended. But the process was obstructed and abruptly ended.

The OAC proposed portions of sanctuary areas in the Upper Chester River and the Upper Patuxent. Both had few oysters but had the oyster bottom that was going fallow. A majority of industry members initially wanted to open up portions of the big three sanctuaries, where tens of millions have been spent. There were many emotional discussions in the OAC about the infeasibility of such an action. Ultimately watermen realized that when the federal government steps into Maryland waters and spends its budget on restoration, the federal government controls that river. The state of Maryland loses control over it. County oyster committees were asked to submit ideas about other sanctuaries. Few responded. Some committees came up with unrealistic ideas while others respected the process and sent in workable ideas that in part became the basis for the OAC plan. Not just the industry but each group represented by members in the OAC was asked to present proposals based on constituent input. Ecologists, environmentalists, restorationists, replenishment advocates all presented proposals.

Having gone through difficult and sometimes very contentious small group meetings and full membership commission meetings the OAC arrived at a compromise that would in effect add millions upon millions of oysters to just a few tributaries that have barely functioning ignored sanctuaries and have none of the big dollar investments. If the CBF had truthfully represented the proposal, the politicians would have seen that it was to improve only six of the 46 remaining sanctuaries. This would have been accomplished by taking certain low-yield areas and creating what would be hybrid harvest reserves. The change would involve planting oysters in perpetuity in exchange for the ability to sequentially open and close 4 zones for harvest. This harvesting would be supervised and done in a severely limited fashion. The watermen would plant after each harvesting, and pay for these oysters with their own funds. What can possibly be wrong with adding millions upon millions of oysters each year to the Bay and tributaries at no expense to the state? CBF alarmist Prost, and Chester Riverkeeper Hardesty refused to recognize the benefits or acknowledge that not one of the Big Three (of the planned 5) sanctuaries would have seen any such redrawing of boundaries. They would proceed unaffected by the OAC proposals. Nor would they benefit from the perpetual planting by the industry that had been proposed. Those areas were never on the table for change. The bill’s supporters refused to acknowledge the benefits of this plan to the ignored sanctuaries. It could have been used to benefit many of the 46 remaining sanctuaries that do not get any planting, bar cleaning or active management.

House Bill 924 was a reaction to this misunderstood and mischaracterized proposal. Its sponsors had members who were party to the decision to create a strawman proposal that would benefit all user groups. Then the panic mongers stepped in. The Baltimore Sun’s reporters raised the temperature with outrageous and misleading headlines about DNR approval of the destruction of sanctuaries by opening hundreds of thousands of sanctuary acres for harvesting. The panic mongers went ballistic over the proposal to redraw two sanctuary boundaries. CBF cried foul in the Bay Journal and the Baltimore Sun which printed articles and opinion editorials that went even further to mislead the public. CBF actually posted a misleading alert to all of its members and the public about the loss of habitat, and sanctuary oyster bars represented by the random harvesting of sanctuary oysters. Just as false was the claim that some of the most productive sanctuaries were at risk from this proposal. CBF and its progeny The Oyster Advocacy Group then sent the very same hysterical outburst to the governor. “Experts contribute to the problem when they comment publicly on issues outside of their areas of expertise”. (The Death of Expertise, T. Nichols)

We the public have been sold a pig in poke by the CBF and have been ill served by a majority of our elected legislators. This embrace of self-righteous ignorance bodes ill for all of our futures. Below is a list of questions that were asked at the Senate hearing but were never answered. Some were not even allowed to be heard. These questions are on the record as having been ignored.

Maybe you the readers can ask CBF, the Baltimore Sun, The Bay Journal and the Oyster Advocacy Group why they chose rhetoric, hysteria and, false facts, to stop a project that would have benefitted all user groups?

1. Where is the evidence that would prove the sanctuary boundaries were scientifically drawn? What were the parameters used in deciding the boundaries? Why should they be considered sacrosanct?

2. How much money have River Keepers, the CBF, the U. of M. spent on actively managing the 46 other sanctuaries in Maryland?

3. Why did CBF do an end run on its own co-members who sit on the OAC by going to the state legislature to stop the OAC’s strawman proposal?

4. Where is the hard science to prove that Harris Creek Sanctuary is such an unqualified success? Why was this even brought up at the hearing? Harris Creek was never included in the OAC proposal.

5. Why did the chair of the Senate Environmental Committee keep stating that she was waiting for the stock assessment survey to come in before any further discussion on hybrid harvest reserves/sanctuaries would be heard? What special knowledge is she expecting that would prove the OAC process (mandated by the legislature) should be halted?

6. Why was the just completed DNR annual fall oyster survey pointedly ignored by the Senate committee?

7. Why do all of the environmental and ecological groups feel that proposing, even more, studies instead of acting on the mountains of information already available is a good strategy?

8. Why do politicians feel that voting for more surveys and studies is good public policy? Perhaps it is that there is no political risk in constantly proposing more studies. The chair of the Senate committee hearing the bill plainly ignored the volumes of already available information in order to do the more politically expedient solution of waiting for the results of one more study. Why?

Marc Castelli is an artist who lives on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

Christine Lagarde at WC Commencement: What Comes Next?

Editor’s Note: Christine Lagarde, the International Monetary Fund’s Managing Director was Washington College’s Commencement speaker on Saturday for its 234th graduation ceremony. Here is her remarks in their entirety.

Thank you, President Bair, for your very kind introduction.

Your leadership of this school – especially your commitment to alleviate the burden of student debt – is a model for higher education. You are a trailblazer in your own right, and your passion for Washington College is inspiring.

President Bair, Board of Visitors & Governors, faculty, and administration, thank you for this honorary degree of Doctor of Laws. I am proud to be your most recent alumna!
Graduates – it is a privilege to be here with you, the class of 2017!

To your families, your friends, your professors – congratulations. No student can get here on his or her own. This is your moment to celebrate as well.
I would like to begin by posing a question.

Has anyone here seen or listened to the Broadway show Hamilton?

As a former Finance Minister, the idea of a musical focused on the life of a Treasury Secretary is appealing to me. I hope this is the start of a global trend!
In the musical, a question is asked that seems particularly appropriate to raise at graduation. In one scene, King George quizzes General Washington right after the end of the Revolutionary War – and sings these lines…

Don’t worry! I will not sing them! But I may ask WACapella for some help.

So, the King sings:

‘What comes next? / You’ve been freed / Do you know how hard it is to lead ?’ [1]

It is an intriguing question – What comes next?

I imagine that from the time you were young, just like my two sons, you were asked some version of ‘What comes next?’

When you are in middle school, people ask if you are excited to start high school.

In high school, people – and by people, I mean your parents’ friends – ask what college you will attend and what your major will be?

In college, other people – usually your boyfriend or girlfriend’s parents – ask what job you will have when you graduate – or, perhaps, if you will go on to grad school?
If so, what school? Law, medicine, business? Trust me, the questions do not go away.

1. Saying ‘I Don’t Know’

We are all asked the difficult question of ‘What comes next’ at various stages in our lives.

What I would like to suggest to you today – and I will share a little of my own story to illustrate the point – is that it is ok, in fact it is often wise, to say ‘I don’t know’ when someone asks you, ‘What comes next?’

Saying ‘I don’t know’ is one of the hardest things to do in life. At the IMF, my team never wants to tell me they do not know – although I can tell if they are guessing!
We have all been trained from a young age to have an answer at the ready. But the reality is that the answer is not what matters most – it is knowing how to find the answer that is key.
Your education – this wonderful, complex, classical, liberal arts training – has given you the foundation you need to begin to solve the puzzle of ‘What comes next?’
In what ways?

The first is your skills – your academic experience has taught you how to think critically. It has opened your eyes to fields of study you might never have otherwise explored and to diverse voices whose opinions will help shape your world view.

The second is your values – your time at Washington College, and the legacy of Washington himself, have instilled in you the importance of public service, of serving others before serving yourself.

Finding the way to apply your skills, and keep them in line with your values, is the question in front of you. And if you can answer that question, you will have also begun to answer the question of ‘What comes next?’

2. Your Skills – Learning How to Think

First, your skills. You have surely heard the critique of a liberal arts background; that the training does not prepare you for the ‘real’ world, where a student educated in engineering and coding is far more desirable than one who can recite Aeschylus from memory.

As the child of a classics teacher, I take some personal offense. As a lawyer, who now leads the International Monetary Fund, I can tell you this criticism misreads the evolution of the economic landscape.

The future, your future, is one where technology, automation, and artificial intelligence may eventually supplant humans in a variety of tasks – from retinal scan payment systems to machine-made hearts and lungs to, one day, perhaps, even robot lawyers. Of course, some say lawyers are robots already – but that is a different conversation!

Two-thirds of today’s children will have jobs which have not been invented yet. [2]Studying Aeschylus, not to mention a little Sappho, Brontë, and Dylan – while cultivating an interest in design – is what allowed Steve Jobs to see the Walkman and dream of the iPod. This renaissance education is your comparative advantage in the years ahead.

Many of the founders of this country, who were lawyers, businessmen, and farmers by training, could also recite orations from Pericles by heart. Those polymath skills not only gave their revolution historical context, it informed the society they hoped to build.

Your school embodies their vision and has instilled in you a love of knowledge. Success for your generation requires a commitment to life-long learning and an understanding that today is a milestone in your education, but it is not the end.

The truth is that college has taught you how to learn, not what to learn. Many of the most valuable lessons have come from outside the classroom. You have done more during your four years than study music, history, theater, literature, and science.

And no, I am not just talking about the ‘War on the Shore.’

I am talking about developing empathy and perspective. These are the in-demand tools of the future. And Washington College has trained you well.

In your four years, you have shared late nights at the Miller Library and long weekends by the Chester River. In those moments, I hope you have had your ideas questioned by your peers and gained insight from their life experience.

There is an old proverb: ‘ Only a fool wants to hear the echo of his own voice.’

Remember that maxim as you go forward into your first job or on to graduate school. If everyone in a room agrees with you, you might be doing something wrong. Seek out those who disagree with you, learn from them, and try to understand their world view.

When I was 17 years old, I left France, my home, as part of a scholarship program designed to bring people from different backgrounds together. I attended Holton-Arms School in Maryland. To be completely candid, it was a bit of a culture shock for me. But I learned more about France in my first year in America than I had learned in sixteen years of studying French history and literature.

I had to step away to gain perspective. I interned on the Hill, answering phones, opening mail, and translating correspondence for constituents who spoke French. Every now and then I felt a bit like Tocqueville – an intrigued French observer of American democracy.

I realized that, to help someone solve a problem, you must understand how she sees a problem. I took that lesson with me – from my practice as a lawyer to serving in the French government.
It is a perspective that I brought with me to the IMF, where our 189 member nations are united by the idea that through cooperation we can maintain economic stability and prosperity for the world.

Needless to say, my career didn’t prepare me for every aspect of this position. Nearly every day on the job, there is something new. A new crisis, a new acronym, a new ‘on the one-hand, on the other other-hand…’

I almost feel as if I am back in law school – I read all the time, ask questions, challenge assumptions – and learn.

As Abigail Adams once said, ‘ Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence .’ Learning does not stop at commencement, it begins anew, and requires a ceaseless curiosity about the world.

This is the gift of your college education, and this is the training which will pay dividends throughout your life.

3. Your Values – Public Service

And yet, the training by itself is not enough. How will you use your training?

This brings me to my second point: values, and specifically the value of public service.

Public service comes in all shapes and sizes. It encompasses far more than working in government. It might mean volunteering, community activism, or joining a parent-teacher association.
Public service is about applying your values no matter what job you have. For me, one of those values has been gender equality. It is something that I have fought for my entire life.
Okay, another question. How many of you have gone on a job interview recently? That’s good – I hope it went well! I am sure your parents hope so too.

So, I will tell you my own first job interview story.

When I was coming out of law school I interviewed at a law firm in France. The conversation went well but towards the end one of the interviewers told me I could never become a partner at the firm. ‘Why?’ I asked him. ‘Because you are a woman,’ he replied. Well, I walked out of there and never looked back.

And then, what did I do? Believe it or not, I asked myself, ‘What comes next?’

I took a deep breath. I thought about my training as a lawyer and about my values. I was determined not to let this experience hold me back. But I was also under no illusion about how difficult the journey would be.

Eventually, I found a law firm that promoted diversity and creativity. I joined Baker McKenzie in 1981. Later in my career, I changed my working hours so I could have Wednesday afternoons off to spend more time with my son.

At first, it did not go over well with some of the partners. But the partners adapted. I became a partner myself. The culture shifted. In 1999, I had the honor of becoming the first female chairman of the firm.

But what was true in 1981 is unfortunately still true today. In many countries, women are either prevented from entering the workforce through legal restrictions, or they are discouraged from working by expensive childcare and inadequate maternity leave. I asked myself, what role could the IMF play in helping solve the problem?

At the Fund, we see ourselves as firefighters – providing financial assistance in times of need so nations can help their citizens. We also see ourselves as doctors – checking up on countries and guiding them to improve their economic health.

Thinking outside the box, our talented economists began showing member nations that women’s economic empowerment could reduce income inequality and help all businesses succeed.

Progress is slow, but we are making a difference. So far, we have done gender-related work in 22 countries. In our new program with Egypt, for example, we are exploring ways the government can increase funding for public nurseries and improve commuter safety. The goal is to provide women more opportunities to find employment.

I am proud that gender equality is now a mainstream part of IMF analysis and I am grateful for the intelligent, dedicated women and men with whom I have the honor to work every day.
President Bair, I know you share my commitment to gender equality, and it is a part of your life’s work. I was so pleased to learn that Washington College is planning a major celebration to mark the centennial of the passage of the 19 Amendment, which gave women the right to vote in this country.

4. Applying Your Values

This is what I mean when I say you must take your values with you. Whether your career is in the private sector or in government, public service is a calling, not a job description.
By choosing Washington College, each of you has stood up and said that public service is important in your life. The values of this institution come directly from Washington himself; his example serves as the inspiration for your honor code. You have made a promise to help others and now you must follow through.

Think about what matters most to you – is it climate change? Homelessness? Improving education? Whatever it is, fight for it.

· If you are entering investment banking, find out how your company’s philanthropy is being managed.
· If you are trained as a nurse, find out how your hospital assists people in the community without health insurance.
· If you aspire to be a journalist (god bless!), use the power of the pen to investigate how your city is rebuilding its public transportation system.

Do not be surprised when you meet resistance. If you pursue public service with zeal, you will inevitably run into skeptics throughout your professional life.

But, as Clara Barton, the founder of the American Red Cross, once said, ‘ I have an almost complete disregard for precedent, and a faith in the possibility of something better .’

The lawyer in me hesitates at Ms. Barton’s disregard for precedent, but the rest of me appreciates her point!

Do not be limited by what has or has not been done before. Become creative champions for your values in ways large and small throughout your career!

Constantly look for opportunities to make progress in every position you hold.
Allow me to give you one minor example, from this speech, actually.

This morning I have referenced the Greek poet Sappho, Charlotte Brontë, Abigail Adams, and Clara Barton.

Having informally surveyed other commencement addresses, I realized that far too many quotes come from famous men, and not nearly enough come from famous women. So, we are beginning to shift the balance today!

You see, you never know when you will find an opportunity to promote the values you believe in.

Conclusion – What Comes Next?

Let me conclude by returning to the music of Hamilton.

Immediately after King George asks ‘What comes next?’ he presses the point by saying:

‘You’re on your own / Awesome / Wow / Do you have a clue what happens now ?’ [3]

Well, Washington and his countrymen were not on their own. And they had an idea about what would happen next. The same is true for you, the students of Washington College.

Remember that you do not have to answer the question of ‘What comes next?’ right away.

Take a breath. Be confident that you have the foundation to find the answer.

Trust that your training and your values – along with the support of your family and friends – will guide you, and serve as a lighthouse in the journey of your life.
That has been true for me, and I trust it will hold true for you.

Shore Shakespeare to Present “A Midsummer’s Night Dream”

To sleep, perchance to … Dream?

Shore Shakespeare is delighted to announce its forthcoming 5-county tour of Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream.  Written in 1596, this magical play has been in production constantly ever since!

Lovers and faeries, magic and mayhem, pageantry and poetry, A Midsummer Night’s Dream has it all!  Directed by Christian Rogers and produced by Shelagh Grasso, the production highlights the talents of Patrick Fee, Avra Sullivan, Brian McGunigle, and Colleen Minahan, with Christine Kinlock, Heather Oland, Robbie Spray, Troy Strootman, Lindsey Hammer, and Greg Minahan.  They are joined by Josh Hanson, John Terebey, Jane Terebey, and Sarah Gorman.

Choreography and original music are by Greg Minahan, with Magic direction by Ian Flinn.  Costumes are designed by Barbi Bedell.

A Midsummer Night’s Dream opens on June 2nd with three special performances at Adkins Arboretum in Ridgely, MD.  Tickets for these performances are $15 and may be purchased directly from the Arboretum’s website.  Proceeds benefit the Arboretum and Shore Shakespeare Company.

Our Free Tour of performances opens with performances on June 9th and 10th at 6:00 pm at the Oxford Community Center in Oxford, and Idlewild Park in Easton on June 11th at 3:00 pm.  Then it’s on to Cambridge, with a performance at Long Wharf Park on June 16th at 6:00 pm, and two performances on the Cray House lawn in Stevensville, on June 17th at 6:00 pm and June 18th at 3:00 pm.  The tour concludes with two performances at Wilmer Park in Chestertown, on Friday, June 23rd at 6:00 pm and Sunday, June 25th at 3:00 pm.  Complete information and directions to all venues are available at Shore Shakespear’s website.

All tour performances are free and open to the public.  Donations in support of Shore Shakespeare are certainly welcome!  A donation of $15 per person is suggested but never required.  As an affiliate of the Mid-Shore Community Foundation, all donations are fully tax-deductible.

 

David Reager and John Seidel Join CBMM Board

David W. Reager, Esquire, and John L. Seidel, Ph.D., recently joined the Board of Governors of the Chesapeake Bay Maritime Museum in St. Michaels, Md.

David W. Reager, Esquire

John L. Seidel, Ph.D.

Reager is a founding and managing partner of the law firm Reager & Adler, PC, in Camp Hill, Pa., supervising the real estate, business law, and estate planning practice areas. He formed the firm in 1979 after serving as an assistant attorney general with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for five years. His education includes a BS and MBA from Pennsylvania State University and a JD from Temple University School of Law.

Reager was chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Fredricksen Library and currently serves on the Board of the Center for Independent Living of Central Pennsylvania and the Camp Hill Community Foundation. When not working, he enjoys sailing, painting and gardening.

Seidel is the Center for Environment & Society Director and the Lammot du Pont Copeland Associate Professor of Anthropology & Environmental Studies at Washington College in Chestertown, Md. Prior to joining the faculty of Washington College in 1998, he worked in the private sector as the lead underwater archaeologist for R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, one of the largest cultural resource management firms in the nation. He also taught at Rutgers University and the University of Maryland College Park, and his work has taken him from the U.S. to the Middle East and Central and South America. His current research focuses on the relationships between humans and their environments in the Chesapeake Bay region and the development of an environmental model for archaeological site locations on the Eastern Shore.

Seidel is a past president of the Maritime Archaeological & Historical Society, and has served on the Chestertown Historic District Commission and Maryland Historical Trust Board of Trustees. He lives in Chestertown with his wife, Liz, and enjoys boating, SCUBA diving, travel, reading, and music.

 

 

 

 

Tracey

Recovery: State of Maryland Launches Special Web Portal on Drug Epidemic

The Hogan-Rutherford administration today launched “Before It’s Too Late,” a new web portal designed to provide resources and raise public awareness of the rapid escalation of the evolving heroin, opioid, and fentanyl crisis in Maryland.

“For nearly three years, our administration has been focused on combating the heroin and opioid crisis from every angle, including prevention, treatment, and recovery,” said Governor Larry Hogan. “This new web portal is another tool to raise awareness and provide critical resources to all Marylanders so that we can save thousands of lives, before it’s too late.”

The new website, BeforeItsTooLateMD.org, is a one-stop shop for individuals, families, educators, and health care professionals to get the educational resources they need to prevent this epidemic from spreading—because education goes hand-in-hand with prevention. This public awareness effort also includes a social media presence on Facebook and Twitter.

“Education and public awareness go hand-in-hand with prevention, and are an essential component of our efforts to turn the tide in this heroin and opioid crisis,” said Lt. Governor Boyd Rutherford. “The Before It’s Too Late portal will provide addicts, family members, educators, and health professionals with the resources they need to get help, understand the disease of addiction, and reduce stigma, in order to save lives.”

The “Before It’s Too Late” tagline is derived from a PSA the governor released featuring actor Michael Kelly in March. The launch follows the Regional Opioid and Substance Abuse Summit, which featured Governor Hogan, District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser, and Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe as speakers, and the first-ever Maryland Heroin and Opioid Educational Forum for students at Westminster High School in Carroll County, hosted by Lt. Governor Rutherford.

In March, Governor Hogan declared a State of Emergency in response to the heroin, opioid, and fentanyl crisis ravaging communities in Maryland and across the country. This declaration activated the governor’s emergency management authority and enables increased and more rapid coordination between the state and local jurisdictions. The governor also announced $50 million in new funding to address the crisis, as well as the appointment of the governor’s senior emergency management advisor Clay Stamp to lead the Opioid Operational Command Center, which is mobilizing all available resources for effective prevention, treatment, and recovery.

Rep. Andy Harris Working to Defund NPR

Current Magazine, a division of American University School of Communication, is reporting that Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), who railed against public media content during a House subcommittee meeting in March, wants Congress to defund NPR and the Independent Television Service.

During CPB President Pat Harrison’s testimony on public media’s federal funding request, Harris accused CPB of pushing an “agenda” with ITVS films such as The New Black, a documentary about the African-American community’s debate over gay marriage. Admitting he had not seen the films, Harris also cited Kumu Hina, focusing on a Hawaiian transgender woman, and Baby Mama High, about a pregnant teenager. All of the films he mentioned were funded by ITVS and aired on Independent Lens, PBS’s documentary showcase.

Read the full story (warning paywall exists) here.

 

 

 

Rep. Andy Harris Will Vote Yes on Latest Version of Obamacare Replacement

House Republicans have an updated bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare, and Rep. Andy Harris has told The Hill  (thehill.com) that he will be voting for it. The updated bill includes a key amendment from that would allow states to opt out of some ObamaCare rules, including provisions on minimum coverage requirements and allowing insurers to charge more based on individuals’ health.

Those changes were designed to win over conservatives like Harris, a member of the House Freedom Caucus The new legislation has been backed by the Freedom Caucus and outside groups including the Club for Growth and FreedomWorks. A mix of centrists and conservatives objected to the earlier ObamaCare bill, forcing GOP leaders to call off a planned vote. No Democrats are expected to vote for the measure, meaning Republicans can only afford 22 defections.

For more on this story, please go here

 

 

David North completes Final Year as a Commissioner for Easton Utilities

David J. North has completed his twelfth and final year as a Commissioner for Easton Utilities. Since 2005, Mr. North has been providing strategic direction and oversight for both operations and management. In his last two years, he served as Chairman of the Commission. “I have thoroughly enjoyed watching Easton Utilities grow and succeed amidst the ever-changing economy and landscape in our community,” said North. “Above all, I cherished the opportunity to work with such an extraordinary organization that simply shines with pride and professionalism from top to bottom in all departments.”

David North and Hugh E. Grunden

Mr. North helped position Easton Utilities for a strong future by recognizing the importance of infrastructure investment and exceptional customer service. “As a lifelong resident of Talbot County, David’s sincere commitment to the success of our organization and this community has been unwavering,” stated Hugh E. Grunden, President and CEO of Easton Utilities. “Both Easton Utilities and the Town of Easton thank him for his significant contributions.”
Easton Utilities is a community-owned, not-for-profit utility and telecommunications company operating the Electric, Natural Gas, Water, Wastewater, Cable Television, and Internet services for the Town of Easton and portions of the surrounding area. Visit www.eastonutilities.com for more information.

Chesapeake College Announces President Barbara Viniar’s Departure; Former President Stuart Bounds to Become Interim

The Chesapeake College Board of Trustees has announced that Dr. Barbara Viniar’s term as President of the College will conclude on July 1, 2017. The Trustees appreciate Dr. Viniar’s efforts on behalf of the College over the past nine years and wish her well in her future endeavors.

Dr. Stuart Bounds has been appointed Interim President of the College effective July 1, 2017. Dr. Bounds retired from the College in 2008 after 11 years as president. Since retiring as President, Dr. Bounds has remained active in the community college field, both as a consultant and as an adjunct professor of political science at Chesapeake. The Board is delighted that Dr. Bounds has agreed to return to the College in this interim role and believes that his executive experience at Chesapeake and deep understanding of the Mid-Shore community will be a great asset to the College and to the Board during the transition period.

The search for a new president of the College will commence this summer. The Board will engage and consult with the College community, the College’s five supporting counties and other key stakeholders in the development of a plan for the search, and in the evaluation and selection of the sixth president of Chesapeake College.

Chesapeake College has provided 50 years of outstanding service to the Mid-Shore community and the Board is committed to finding an exceptional community college leader to guide the College into the future. With that leadership and the extraordinary talent and resources within the College and throughout the community, the College’s role as the primary provider of higher education and workforce training in the region will continue to expand and, thereby help to ensure a bright future for the Mid-Shore.

Easton Port Street Project Focus on Affordable Housing in May

PLACE, a non-profit community builder which acts as a nonprofit developer for cities and other municipal or nonprofit entities, will conduct a preliminary feasibility analysis of the affordable and innovation housing portions of the Port Street Small Area Master Plan in May.

Working with a steering committee formed by the Easton Economic Development Corporation, PLACE will involve key stakeholders in a series of host meetings and focus groups between May 9 and 11, 2017 in Easton.  The focus groups will address financial, quality of life, and housing and environment and will involve community leaders, elected officials and business representatives from each of the three areas. A Public Forum will be held on May 10 at 6 p.m. for the entire community to discuss the vision for the project, provide examples of similar developments around the country and describe the economic impact and other beneficial outcomes.  PLACE will then present their findings from the visit to the stakeholders on the next day.  A further goal is for PLACE to determine its capacity and appropriateness to provide development services for the Port Street Small Area Master Plan affordable housing and innovation pieces.

Through the Port Street Small Area Master Planning process, the community has identified the retention and development of affordable housing on Port Street to be a key priority.  Easton is currently generally underserved in affordable housing.  Affordable housing currently available on Port Street is in disrepair and will require significant investment in the short term.  The community has also been very vocal in their requests for supportive retail, environmentally sensitive development and healthy food options created through a market and/or gardens.

The Port Street Small Area Master Plan also calls for live/work spaces that would appeal to creative professionals and millennials.  The PLACE team has extensive experience in developing new models for urban neighborhoods that demonstrate radical innovation in environmental design, live/work hubs for creatives and creative businesses, job creation through retail and manufacturing, affordable workforce housing, and supportive housing for the most economically distressed.

According to Tracy Ward, “The Easton Economic Development Corporation has identified the development of affordable housing as a priority project that could advance the overall goals of redeveloping Port Street and Easton Point due to the potential to harness market forces and the availability of existing infrastructure.  The economic impact of this project to the Town of Easton would exceed $20 million.”

For further information about the Public Forum on May 10, 2017, 6 p.m. at the Easton Firehouse on Creamery Lane, contact Tracy Ward at (410) 708-6932.