The Easton Town Council covered considerable ground this week, but three issues stood out: a sharp debate over tax relief for the Neighborhood Service Center, disagreement over accessory dwelling units, and a move toward a temporary moratorium on data centers.
The most spirited exchange came over a request from the Neighborhood Service Center for several tax and fee abatements. Councilmember Dr. David Montgomery questioned whether Easton should approve individual requests without first establishing a broader policy, warning that tax abatements ultimately shift costs to other taxpayers.
Councilmember Maureen Curry objected to Montgomery’s description of the request as coming through the “back door,” while agreeing that the town needs a more comprehensive policy on affordable housing assistance. Rev. Elmer Davis Jr. argued that Easton has granted abatements before and questioned how serious the town is about affordable housing if it is unwilling to provide meaningful financial support.
The council ultimately held off on a vote and asked staff for more information about previous abatements and possible townwide policies.
A second debate centered on accessory dwelling units, or ADUs. Maryland legislation requires local governments to allow the smaller residential units on properties where single family homes are permitted, forcing Easton to revise its zoning ordinance.
The disagreement was over how easy they should be to build. Town staff proposed changing ADUs from a special exception to a permitted use. Davis and Montgomery favored keeping the special exception process, arguing that neighbors deserve notice and an opportunity to comment. Montgomery also questioned calling ADUs an affordable housing tool when nothing requires the units to be offered at affordable rates.
Councilmember Robert Rankin defended ADUs as one of several ways Easton could address its housing shortage, particularly for families and older residents. Curry offered a personal example, saying she would like the option of building a smaller unit for herself and letting her nephew and his family live in her existing house. But she also said she would not want to do it without informing her neighbors.
Another issue just arriving on the council’s agenda could become much larger. Easton is considering a 12 month moratorium on new data centers while the town develops zoning rules governing them. A companion ordinance would formally define data centers and establish standards for their operation.
One resident immediately supported the moratorium, citing concerns about electricity use, cooling, noise, and the potential quality-of-life impact of large data centers, particularly those serving artificial intelligence operations.
One other issue worth watching came during the council’s earlier code workshop. Members discussed whether Easton should require photo identification in municipal elections. Montgomery supported the idea as an election integrity measure, while other members worried about discouraging turnout or preventing legitimate voters without identification from casting ballots. Staff acknowledged that it did not know whether any other Maryland municipality had such a requirement and agreed to research the question.
A Spy review could find no Maryland municipality currently requiring every voter to present photo identification in order to vote in a municipal election. There is, however, an interesting Eastern Shore precedent. Hurlock proposed a photo ID requirement for town elections in 2011, prompting opposition from the ACLU of Maryland and the Dorchester County NAACP, which questioned whether the town had the legal authority to impose it.
That history could make Easton’s discussion more significant than a routine election code change. If the council moves forward, one of the central questions will be whether a Maryland municipality has the legal authority to impose a photo ID requirement beyond those contained in state election law.
Watch the full meeting here.
4 Responses
The state has no right to come through the back door and allow ADU’s on properties which now hold single family dwellings. This is who is coming through the back door to destroy local zoning. This is not a solution to affordable housing, this is a neighborhood wrecking ball.
In 2025, for the first time, Oxford required a photo ID to vote. A member of the Election Board was required to ask their spouse for a photo ID.
In 2026, proof of residency such as a Talbot Couty voter registration card seemed sufficient, but an ID was required.
Apart from the issues at stake – this story is excellent reportage. Many thanks for your fine work.
The Talbot County Branch of the NAACP is deeply concerned about the Easton Town Council’s discussion of requiring photo identification for municipal elections.
We agree that every resident deserves elections that are secure, accurate, and worthy of public trust. However, election security and voter access are not competing values. Any policy intended to strengthen confidence in our elections must be supported by evidence, consistent with the law, and designed with a clear understanding of how it will affect the people required to comply with it.
A photo-identification requirement may appear simple on paper, but its human impact can be significant. The Council must consider how such a requirement could affect older adults, residents with disabilities, working families, people with limited transportation, and eligible voters who may face challenges obtaining or updating identification. No qualified Easton resident should lose access to the ballot because of an unnecessary administrative barrier.
Before advancing any proposal, the Council should clearly identify the specific problem it is attempting to solve, present evidence that Easton’s current election safeguards are inadequate, obtain an independent legal review of the Town’s authority, and conduct a transparent voter-access and equity assessment. Residents must also have meaningful opportunities to participate through public hearings, community listening sessions, and accessible public education.
Easton’s own election code states that its election provisions should encourage voter registration and citizen participation. That principle should guide this conversation.
At this stage, the Talbot County Branch of the NAACP urges the Council not to advance a blanket photo-identification mandate. Instead, we encourage the Town to bring together election officials, community organizations, civil-rights advocates, disability advocates, older residents, and voters from every ward to examine the issue openly and responsibly.
Public confidence is strengthened when election rules are clear, consistent, evidence-based, and inclusive. The right to vote is fundamental, and decisions affecting that right must begin with the people whose voices and participation are at stake.
The Talbot County Branch of the NAACP stands ready to participate in this process, educate our community, and work constructively with Town leadership to protect both election integrity and equal access to the ballot.