The upcoming election will determine not only who controls the Talbot County Council, but also who sets its growth agenda and how much influence developer donations may have on its decisions.
Consider what happened this summer.
On June 4, developer Scott Wagner wired $12,000 to the Talbot County Republican Central Committee. That same day, the local GOP spent $12,000 on candidate mailers. Weeks later, four Republican County Council candidates, including Dave Stepp and Frank Gunsallus, reported receiving $2,600 each in in-kind mailer support from the party.
Just weeks after the primary, Stepp, an incumbent council member, made a motion to waive the automatic inflation adjustment on developer impact fees, a move that would directly benefit developers like Wagner. Council President Chuck Callahan seconded the motion, despite warnings from the county finance officer that freezing the adjustment would harm county finances.
After a brief debate, the motion failed on a 2-2 tie when Pete Lesher and Lynn Mielke voted no. Callahan, however, called impact fees a “burden” and suggested the “next council” should re-evaluate them. “I just think it’s nickel-and-diming people,” he said.
The failed motion drew media attention and prompted Wagner to publicly defend freezing the annual fee adjustment. He purchased a full-page newspaper ad and wrote an op-ed in the Talbot Spy arguing that the automatic increases were “not legal” and reporting that he had paid $841,773 in impact fees and other development costs for a project near Easton Airport.
The episode offers a preview of what’s at stake on November 3. With all five council seats up for election, whichever party wins at least three will control the majority and likely select the next council president, who plays a central role in setting the agenda. Callahan, a Republican, needs just one additional vote to advance such a proposal on the five-member council.
But Wagner’s contributions are only part of a larger campaign finance story.
Follow the Money
Campaign contributions are legal, and donations alone do not establish improper influence. But when developers contribute tens of thousands of dollars to political campaigns, voters have every reason to examine the connection between political funding and public policy.
Scott Wagner, his wife Tracy, and one of his business entities have contributed $34,000 to the local Republican Party so far this election cycle, according to state campaign finance filings. That makes him the party’s largest donor over the past four years. A former trash company owner and Republican politician from Pennsylvania, Wagner and his family own the Oaks Waterfront Hotel near St. Michaels and an industrial park near Easton Airport. He also has sought zoning approval for a proposed 365-home mixed-use development outside Easton that has encountered resistance during the local planning review process.
Frank Gunsallus, now running for County Council, has also received substantial financial support from development interests, sometimes indirectly. During his 2023 campaign for Easton Town Council president, Gunsallus benefited indirectly when Wagner funded thousands of dollars in mailers criticizing his leading opponent, former Mayor Bob Willey, who lost. During his unsuccessful reelection campaign in 2025, Gunsallus received $5,000 from developer Thomas Mitchell, who owns multiple commercial properties and businesses in Trappe. Those interests could be affected by future council decisions concerning the controversial Lakeside at Trappe development.
While Dave Stepp has not reported substantial developer donations in his reelection campaign this year, he did report a $6,000 contribution from a local utility contractor when he ran for office in 2022. After taking office, Stepp voted in favor of change orders worth more than $100,000 for a large sewer contract with the same contractor.
None of these contributions, by itself, establishes wrongdoing. Collectively, however, they raise legitimate questions about the influence major financial supporters may have on decisions affecting Talbot County’s future.
Putting Talbot’s Interests First
Impact fees illustrate why these questions matter. When new development requires additional infrastructure and public services, someone must pay. Freezing the annual inflation adjustment means those fees lose purchasing power over time, potentially shifting more costs onto existing taxpayers.
Talbot County faces difficult decisions about growth, infrastructure, and public spending. Those choices will become even more consequential as reductions in state and federal funding place additional pressure on county finances.
The campaign finance filings reveal substantial support for Republican council candidates and their party from development and construction interests. By contrast, Democratic council candidates have relied primarily on contributions from individual supporters, rather than large donations from development interests.
The next council will make major decisions shaping Talbot County for decades. Voters deserve to know whose interests will guide those decisions.
Developers have every right to support the candidates they prefer. Talbot voters have every right to ask what they expect in return.
Michael Davis
Talbot County
