This morning, with the passing of Congressman Elijah Cummings, the Cummings family, the Maryland Democratic family, and all the people of the great 7th Congressional District of Maryland are in our thoughts. 

The son of a sharecropper, Congressman Elijah Cummings dreamed of becoming a lawyer from a young age. When he was told he would never fulfill is dreams of becoming a lawyer because he was a slow learner and a poor speaker, Congressman Cummings persevered nonetheless. He died not just an accomplished lawyer, but as Chairman of one of the most powerful committees in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Talbot Democratic Party was honored with his presence last May at our annual Douglass-Tubman Dinner. The walls of the Armory shook with his impassioned rhetoric – he was an incredible orator. Congressman Cummings lived up to the high expectations fellow Marylanders Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman. He was a worthy speaker to our incredibly lucky audience.

We have lost a man of valor and uncommon decency.  His light shines in our world today, casting aside any darker place. And while our hearts may be heavier today, Congressman Cummings would not want us to stop and rest – he never did. 

Congressman Cummings valiantly fought the good fight; we rededicate ourselves today, and in his memory, to carry on his mission as a standard bearer for justice, equity, and respect for all who walk this land. His mother’s final words to him were “Do not let them take our votes away from us.” We won’t.

Scott Kane, Chair
Talbot County Democratic Central Committee

I believe that our 1st District Representative in Congress is out of step with the voters in our district. He just voted against H.R. 2203, a bill that would have banned the cruel practice of tearing families apart at the border, a practice which then leads to our government keeping separated children in pens and cages. I cannot believe that members of the 1st District of Maryland are ok with keeping children in cages. This practice is a stain on our country’s compassionate image and our legacy as defenders of freedom everywhere. We must do better.

Harris’ cruel stance even goes against the position of recently resigned, Interim Director of the Department of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan. McAleenan stated recently when questioned by NBC News about the family separation policy:

“its just not worth it. Really, a better system, as I’ve said many times, would allow us to detain families together during fair and expeditious immigration proceedings and getting actual immigration results from the court,” Kevin McAleenan, Director, Department of Homeland Security

We need a non-partisan, comprehensive immigration system that is fair and expeditious. This cruel practice of caging children will not make the U.S. safer, in fact I think it will do the opposite as it potentially radicalizes a generation of immigrants against the U.S. who one day will remember how they were mistreated. This is not who we are. We must show compassion toward these families. We must do better.

Harris voted against a bill that would have banned family separations. He brings shame on us all.  For more info visit here.

Call Harris’ office and voice your opposition to separating families and keeping children in cages. 202-225-5311. Call your clergy and civic leaders. This is a non-partisan issue. It’s time we spoke out against this cruel practice. Be it Republican or Democrat, it’s time for new leadership in the 1st Congressional District.

Seeking good governance,

Chris Koch
Easton

The basic problem is not the existence of short-term rentals — the basic problem is that they exist in residential neighborhoods.

Short Term Rentals in residential neighborhoods is a quality of life issue for its residents, not an economic one for Talbot County and a limited few.  

A quick web search shows that governments around the country are now getting a handle on this rental phenomenon and are changing regulations to help their full-time citizens and traditional lodging industry. A recent court ruling in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania said a Short-Term Rental is in fact a commercial use and should not be in a residential zone.

If the Talbot County Council wants to continue allowing Short Term Rentals in Residential zones, they must consider dividing STR’s into two classes of license.  One for a homeowner who would like to rent their principal residence (original intent for STR) and one for owners whose property is not their principal residence.

A Principal Residence STR, meaning that the owner lives in that home for more than half the year and pays income taxes to Talbot County, could be allowed to rent in any of Talbot’s residential zones.  After all they are a part of the community, they are neighbors and friends and if something should go awry, it would be handled quickly.

A second STR class owned as a second home or investment should have stricter regulations as this is now a commercial business and will reduce property values. These should not be allowed in neighborhoods like Bentley Hay, Rio Vista, Tunis Mills, Newcomb, Tilghman, Cordova or any of Talbots villages.

Lastly don’t think a licensed STR is only for vacationers, the only restriction in the law is that the lease must be for a minimum of 3 nights.  A business could obtain a STR license in any residential zone and rent to anyone for any reason.

Robert Haase
St. Michaels

On Saturday, June 8, 2019, Tom and I embarked on a journey that would take us to the University of MD Medical Center, Shock Trauma Unit. 

From realizing a small round red mark on the front of Tom’s left front ankle at around 1:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., our lives changed immensely. At first look it appeared that Tom had somehow hit his lower shin on something while fishing that morning. As time passed, after about an hour or so, it was clear that wasn’t the case. After a quick trip to Your Doc’s In on Rte. 50, we then went to Easton Memorial Emergency Room. There it was discovered that Tom had contracted vibrio vulnificus disease, sometimes referred to as “waterman’s disease”. During the short time between 1:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Tom’s lower leg was fully engaged by the disease and as a result shortly after midnight, we were both transported via medivac to Univ. MD. Med. Center, Shock Trauma.  

We were met by a team of four infectious disease doctors ready to operate on Tom and five well skilled nurses who all knew exactly their roll in this operation and all went to work. During the hours between 1:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. on Sunday, June 9th Tom underwent surgery to remove the area of infection of his leg  Fortunately, the disease had not infected his muscle or bone and therefore surgery was less invasive than could have been.  On Tuesday, June 11th Tom had a further surgery by a soft tissue team in order to address any further cleaning of the affected area.  Tom was “asleep” from late Saturday night, June 8th until the evening of Wednesday, June 12th such a blessing as he did not have to experience the pain associated with this virus. 

For the next ten days Tom was treated for infection and problems related to vibrio e.g. kidney, liver, and heart issues all temporary and due to this virus. On Saturday, June 22nd Tom was transported to Encompass Rehabilitation Center in Salisbury to undergo physical and occupational therapies and was there until Monday, July 8th when I brought him home.

Wednesday July 10th a visit back to Univ. MD Med. Center Shock Trauma clinic, Tom had a dressing change that just turned everything around for us. He had had a port with an evacuation pump to help keep his wound clean, that was removed. Also, skin graft was scheduled for Friday, July 26th where skin from Tom’s thigh was taken to cover the wound.  All professionals are amazed by Tom’s recovery. There were several check ups at the Shock Trauma following skin graft procedure.

Wednesday September 3rd turned out to be our last visit to Univ. MD Med. Center Shock Trauma clinic.  Tom has been given permission to resume his life as usual with the understanding that his wounds will be covered while working outside and no sun exposure.  

The residual effect on Tom’s left eye, having developed an infection and a cataract, continue to be treated with a cataract operation planned in the future.

This account of our experience is sent to encourage anyone who experiences redness or rash following contact with brackish water to be sure to seek professional attention.

Tom And Marie Davis
Talbot County

Two weeks ago 21 volunteers, many who are members of the St. Stephen’s AME church in Unionville, spent a morning picking up bags and bags of trash along Unionville Road. How disappointing today to drive down the road and see what a mess was left after the County mowed the ditches. Might it be a good idea if they picked up the trash and then mowed?

And how disappointing that we live in this beautiful area but have people who disrespect this beauty and the land by throwing trash out their car windows. Has anyone heard of someone being fined $1,000 for littering?

If only there was a way to solve this problem!

Agent 8 (00 Unit)
Talbot Spy

These comments are submitted in the context of the upcoming public work sessions by the Short Term Rental Review Board and the County Council regarding short term vacation rentals in Talbot County.

There has been an unwanted short-term rental home in our community for the past four years. We have experienced many of the same problems other neighborhoods have in terms of extra noise, traffic, strangers, disrespect and discourtesy. We have found the complaint process to be onerous, time-consuming, convoluted, hard to fathom, and frustrating. Despite the code 190 changes, STR monitoring remains the “job” of neighbors, some of whom have no idea where to start. There have been some improvements due to the diligence of the Short-Term Rental Review Board. However, much remains to be done.

Access to our community is via a one lane private drive. Maintenance of this private road is shared among the homeowners who use it. There is a posted speed limit of 10 mph but no means of enforcement. Traffic on our road has increased in numbers and speed due to the STR; turnarounds in our driveway at the end of the private road have definitely increased. Renters are frequently unfamiliar with the courtesies required on a one lane private road with people, bicycles, vehicles, dogs, etc., sharing the road. On several occasions, while walking my dogs or biking, I have had to jump off the road into the ditch next to it in order to avoid a car that was zooming towards or out of the STR driveway. It can be downright dangerous. Promises have been made to post “rules of the road” in the STR. It is unknown whether that has happened, but this issue requires more than a wink and a nod. STR owners and managers must point them out and renters must read them. They should be part of the lease.

We strongly suggest that STR licenses should be granted only to applicants whose houses have public access. Put another way, a short-term rental license should not be issued if the property is located on a private road or drive or offers use of a shared pier without written approval from all property owners responsible for shared maintenance of said road, drive, or pier. It should not be the County’s prerogative to expand other homeowners’ risks, responsibilities, and expenses to enable the financial gain of nonresident owners and, increasingly, investors. As it stands now, neighbors get all the negatives associated with STRs and STR owner/investors get all the positives.

Donna and Bill Dudley
Easton

Did you know that Short-term rentals (STRs) have been permitted in Talbot County for almost 20 years? Over the last 10 years, STR licenses have increased at an alarming rate, for example, so far according to a Planning & Zoning document as of August 7, 2019, 142 licenses have been issued, a 58% increase from 2010 when 90 were issued.

As we sit here today, no one (not Planning & Zoning, not the STR Board and not the Talbot County Council) has an accurate count of all the STRs existing in Talbot County, let alone whether they are legal or illegal.

The above rate of growth is scary. But, it is not the scariest thing about STRs! Listen to the story about the FROG and the pot of water. It goes like this:

If the frog is put into a pot of boiling water, it will jump right out!
However, if the frog is put into tepid water which is then brought
slowly to a boil, it will not perceive the imminent danger
and will be cooked to death.

This story is often used as a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of people to react to or be aware of sinister threats that arise gradually rather than suddenly.

This is exactly what is happening in Talbot County with this rapid growth of STR licenses. The three FROGs already in warm water are: Talbot County residents, those that have bought second homes in which to retire and our tourism economy. The temperature is rising. Our Next Step 190 legislation is to be respected for its efforts, but it has miles to go before a balanced temperature is found. In this small community, there are overlapping interests, many of which feel their interests are being ignored. Property rights and the character of their neighborhoods are being pushed aside while non residents (and pure investors) and the generation of more income and tourism to Talbot County is being favored. Talbot Count needs a timeout so that a better balance can be restored for the long-term health and well being of this great County in which we all live.

It is often argued that property rights are sacrosanct. Yet, zoning has always existed to balance property right with citizen rights. Having an STR on your property is NOT an ownership right. It is a privilege granted by the County. This grant comes with important responsibilities including: operating the license according to all the rules of the Code, respecting the rights of property owners surrounding the STR, and the preserving the character of the neighborhoods in which the STRs are located. If these are not followed, the character of the neighborhoods will break down and the fabric of our County will suffer.

So, I ask the STR Board and the Talbot County Council to declare a MORATORIUM (of at least 6 months but no more than one year) on the issuance of any new STR licenses. In the meantime, the STR Board can deal with STR renewals. This moratorium time can be used to provide at least the following benefits for the County and its 37,000 residents:

Time to determine how many STRs actually exist, whether legal or illegal, and develop rigorous enforcement of and consequences for those who do not comply. The enforcement burden should not fall on the neighbors.

With that in place, pursue the illegal ones and either bring them into compliance or shut them down with appropriate fines and other action allowed by the Code.

Sanction those legally licensed STRs that are “out of compliance,” such as, noise level and when an approved occupancy capacity is exceeded.

Fix the broken STR complaint systems so that they work easily and equally well for both neighbors who live near STRs as well as those who rent the STRs.

Provide accurate online information accessible to all such as an electronic mapping system so the STR Board and others can knows how many STRs exist and their location and accurate, online lists of all applications.

Clarify the notification requirements: for when the STR applications are made and when the STR Board hearings on applications will take place; so all interested parties may attend and be heard. Consider holding STR Board meetings between 5 and 7 PM and encourage written statements to give working people more opportunity to be involved.

Clarify the roles of both the P & Z staff and the STR Board vis a vis renewals e.g. inclusion of complaints received by Resident Agents, criteria for determining duration of licenses .

Allow the STR Board and County Council time to answer the question: Why don’t we follow the good lead of Talbot County towns like Easton and St. Michaels when it comes to rules regarding licensing and controlling STR operations? Why should there be different rules about STRs depending on which side of the #322 By-pass you live on?

Modify the role of the P & Z staff. Next Step 190’s regulations have shifted the discretion to grant new STR licenses to the Short Term Rental Board and should give that Board the power to determine which renewals come before them.

Recent publicity, nationwide and international, about STRs has raised the alarm. For instance, the Long Island Hamptons, which we are purported to resemble, is beginning to have the feel of an Ocean City. Thankfully we are not there yet. However, the purchase of the largest Talbot County vacation rental company by an Ocean City business is a great concern.

One last danger I want to point out for our friend, the Frog. Here is a site for an article about Sedona, Arizona: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/07/27/vacation-rentals-killing-arizona-city-locals-say/1846713001/, where a citizen has identified the next step in what I would call Runaway STR Abuse…a contractor buying up land for the purpose of building large houses to be used (from the very beginning) solely as STRs. Locals there feel helpless as vacation rentals overrun them.

This is actually happening in Talbot County. I understand that there is a pending new STR application for a rental whose building is under construction. Could Talbot County become the next community that regrets allowing an unfettered proliferation of STRs?

Give the moratorium serious consideration. After all, who wants to have the same experience as the frog?

Howard E. Snyder
Easton

It is early Sunday morning, August 4, 2019.  Yesterday families in El Paso Texas and Dayton, Ohio woke up and they had fathers, mothers, kids, grandparents, aunts, uncles and friends.  This morning, at least 30 of those families are grieving because they don’t have those fathers, mothers, kids, grandparents, aunts, uncles and friends.

So I am writing to you early on this Sunday morning to ask you to do something to make sure other families, today, tomorrow, the next day don’t have to begin grieving too.

You are an elected leader.  Your constituents elected you to take on the many problems our country faces, propose solutions, and enact laws that might begin to address them.

Today, not tomorrow, not the day after, you have to address the problem of gun violence in our country.  You have to ban assault weapons, demand background checks for every gun purchaser, and improve mental health care.  You must also begin impeachment proceedings to replace a president who denigrates as “vermin” anyone whose heritage is different from his own and encourages violence against innocent people who are immigrants, just as your parents were.

In 1962, Bob Dylan asked a question that I am now asking you.  “How many deaths will it take till he knows that too many people have died”? Will 20 people in El Paso do it?  Another 9 in Dayton? 3 in Gilroy?  Why didn’t 20 kids and 7 of their teachers in Newtown get the message across to you?  Or 11 people in Pittsburgh? 17 in Parkland?

How many deaths will it take until you know that too many people have died and you decide you decide to use the power your constituents gave you to do something about it?

We’re waiting for an answer, Congressman Harris.

Linda Cades
Kennedyville

Shame on you, Representative Andy Harris.

The President recently tweeted that four of Harris’ colleagues in Congress, three of whom were born in the United States and the fourth a naturalized citizen, should “go back…to the crime infested countries from which they came.”

Rather than condemn this racist rhetoric, Harris told reporters that there was perhaps a misunderstanding, that the President may not have meant countries but rather congressional districts or cities.

This disingenuous reply reveals the extent to which our congressman is willing to twist himself into knots to go along with anything that the President does or says, no matter how divisive and harmful.

As a coalition of progressive groups on the Eastern Shore, we believe that Harris has lost sight of what makes America truly great—its diversity and the opportunity it extends to those yearning to be free.

He also seems to have forgotten his own background. Like many of us, Harris is a child of immigrants. According to the public record, Harris’s own Hungarian father and Polish mother emigrated to the United States in 1950 as stateless refugees. The United States took the Harris family in, allowing them to thrive here, eventually raising a son to be a U.S. Congressman.

Given his own experience with the American dream, why would Harris be willing to look away when the President questions the rights of other immigrants and children of immigrants to participate in the political life of the United States? Sadly, the answer seems to lie in Harris’s acceptance of the racial division that Trump sows in his tweets and at his rallies.

One key difference between Harris and the four Congresswomen targeted by Trump is they are women of color. That makes Harris’ response doubly shameful. He represents the district where Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman began their struggles for racial equality. He should know better. We call upon him to uphold the real American dream – equality for all—and condemn hateful and dangerous comments from the members of his own party, including the President.

Dr. Harris, it is your moral responsibility and civic duty to hold the President accountable when he seeks to sow racial division. You represent all of the people in your district, whatever their origin and however they arrived in this country. You need to recognize that whatever policy disagreements there may be, this is no way to act.

Denice Lombard
Indivisible Dorchester
Indivisible Worcester
Kent and Queen Anne’s Indivisible
Talbot Rising

People who know me, realize that I seldom write a Letter to the Editor, in fact in the last 10 plus years on the Talbot County Council, I probably have submitted maybe one. This is because I believed that most issues would be worked out over the course of time or the topic just didn’t warrant a written reply. But recently, the Talbot County Council received an opinion from the Open Meetings Compliance Board (OMCB/the Board) that has such far reaching implications as to how elected officials can communicate with one another, that I simply cannot stay quiet. The Board’s over-reaching decision will “dramatically” harm the day to day operation of local governments across the State of Maryland. No one is objecting to transparency in government, but the question is at what expense to impede the legitimate operation of local governments?

The question arose with the OMCB about whether emails between elected officials in Talbot County constituted “a meeting” where a quorum of the Talbot County Council participated.  Members of the Talbot County Council over the course of two days had contacted each other to discuss a matter pending before the Maryland General Assembly. Those discussions were not in the form of a “group” email, but in fact were one on one, just as if the members had met over a cup of coffee. This is a practice which has happened countless times over the lifetime of the Talbot County Council and indeed happens every day throughout the State of Maryland and across the nation. For the OMCB to conclude that elected officials talking to each other “one on one” constitutes a meeting of the elected body is absolutely preposterous! 

Elected officials must have the freedom to speak to each other to flush out ideas and gather a better understanding of each member’s position. Since the creation of sub-categories of government – counties, cities and towns – it has been an understood practice to have independent deliberations of those elected officials. I can’t believe when the General Assembly created the Open Meetings Compliance Board, it could have imagined that the Board would be so far reaching as to consider communications between two elected officials as constituting a meeting of the elected body.  

In fact, in 2016 during its annual meeting, the Board discussed whether the Open Meetings Act should be amended by the General Assembly to address electronic communications. But instead of taking the matter before the proper authority, the OMCB chair “suggested” to the members of the Board that “the Board may discern whether the public body is using email as a means of conducting business and interpret the Act accordingly.” 

Open Meetings training has been presented at State and Municipal conventions for elected officials since this 2016 Board decision, but never has the Board communicated its intentions to consider electronic communications within its purview. Nor has the Board ever sought direction from the General Assembly as to whether the “suggestion” of the Board chair was in fact correct. I believe that the OMCB is using Talbot County in an attempt to further their own agenda to prevent the use of electronic communication by local elected officials. For the OMCB to use a made-up violation of the Act to further its own political agenda is shameful. If members felt so strongly about the use of electronic communication, then they should have gone to the General Assembly for a change in the law, as they started to do in 2016. In fact, in a 1996 Opinion of the Attorney General, it was ruled that the exchange of emails between members of a planning commission spanning over two days, were not simultaneous communication and thus not considered to be a meeting. 

In the Board’s most recent letter to the Talbot County Council, it did not stop with redefining a meeting and a quorum. The Board went further to state that a public body cannot assert its administrative function when independently discussing whether to give an opinion on matters before the General Assembly. This means that whenever a Council member picks up the phone to call one another to get their opinions on a piece of legislation, they must first announce that they are calling the other members of the Council and then invite them to listen in on the call. I think telephone party lines went out of style in the 1950s. The Board went further with its conclusions, stating that communications spanning over a 24-hour period constituted “near-simultaneous electronic discussions, among a quorum.” 

A decision of this kind will nearly cripple most elected bodies and will severely limit the free exchange of ideas and deliberations between members. Citizens trust public officials to gather the best information they can when making decisions about their welfare, whether this information is gathered in a public setting like a meeting, or with the public official talking with his or her colleagues to better understand an issue. Conducting business today is based on the convenience of the technologies available to us.  

The Talbot County Council has taken every precaution to make sure it is in compliance with the Open Meeting rules and procedures. The Council has already made adjustments to the announcement of its Closed Session agenda items to stay in compliance of the Act. The Council prepares signed Statements for Closing the Meeting of each Closed Session in accordance with the Open Meeting Act and as Council President, I assure that only those items stated on the Closed Session agenda are discussed. As required, the Council gives notice of their Closed Sessions and welcomes a member of the local press to sit in on the beginning of the Closed Session vote, to hear openly the items on the agenda to be discussed. The Council has also included a brief summary of the Closed Session deliberations at the end of the Open (public) Session minutes. In my 10 plus years as a member of the Talbot County Council, there has never been a deliberate attempt to evade the Open Meetings Act or to deceive the public trust. This Council, and Councils before, understand the importance of an open and transparent elected body and working with County staff have always taken steps to ensure we stayed in compliance with current law. 

This decision by the OMCB will not just negatively affect Talbot County, but every county and municipal body in the State of Maryland – we all will suffer from this gross over-reach. Clearly, this issue warrants further examination by the OMCB and the Maryland General Assembly if elected officials in our towns, cities and counties are to be able to do their jobs in an efficient manner. 

Corey Pack
Easton