MENU

Sections

More

November 15, 2025

Talbot Spy

Nonpartisan Education-based News for Talbot County Community

Point of View Opinion

The Need to Call Out Gunsallus Falsehoods by Megan Cook

by

As someone who has worked hard to serve this community with honesty and transparency, I’ve always believed that facts should guide our public conversations, especially during an election. That’s why I feel compelled to address several misleading and outright false claims circulating in recent campaign materials. When falsehoods are left unchallenged, it risks becoming accepted as fact. Our community deserves better. These tactics are part of an effort not to inform or unite us but to stir fear and falsely influence voters. That’s not who we are in the Town of Easton, and it’s not how we should conduct ourselves.

One candidate, Frank Gunsallus, has claimed he is the only council member in 30 years to have gone “line by line” through the town budget. That statement isn’t just misleading, it’s false and is a disservice to the many council members, past and present, who have worked diligently every year to ensure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely. Every budget season involves careful review, discussion, and difficult decisions. Suggesting otherwise dismisses the thoughtful and responsible work of others who have taken that duty seriously, including myself when I served on the Council from 2009-2023.

The Inclusionary Zoning bill is still a work in progress, and no final version has been drafted. Since 2022, there have been numerous meetings and workshops with both the Town Council and Planning Commission. A dedicated task force, made up of volunteers who spent countless hours reviewing Easton’s housing needs, was appointed to offer thoughtful recommendations. That group is still finalizing its report. To claim the bill mandates high-density housing in every neighborhood is simply false and undermines the work of dozens of people trying in good faith to address a real challenge. The goal is simple: to make it possible for teachers, nurses, police officers, and others who serve our Town to actually live here. If an officer has sworn to protect and serve our town, they ought to be able to call it home.

The same flier accuses the mayor and staff of quietly ushering in development with little or no public input. That’s not only untrue, but it’s also an insult to the hardworking staff, the Planning Commission, and community members involved in every step of our public planning process. Nothing is being “snuck in.” Transparency and community input are cornerstones of how we operate. Claims to the contrary are simply false.

It’s also been claimed that I “recruited” three pro-mayor, pro-development candidates to run for Town Council. That’s false. Two of the implied candidates are already serving on the Council. One of them is running against Mr. Gunsallus not because of ideology, but out of concern over how meetings are managed, the lack of respect shown and civility, and communication breakdowns among council members. Mischaracterizing the motives of individuals who Mr. Gunsallus opposes is unfair and misleading. Voters should look for leadership that is respectful, collaborative, and able to work with others, especially when navigating difficult issues. That’s the kind of leadership Easton deserves.

It’s also been suggested that because I wasn’t born in Easton, I somehow care less or am less committed to this community. That’s not only wrong, it’s also deeply disrespectful. My husband and I moved to Easton 22 years ago for his job as a pediatrician and to be closer to his family. My work as mayor, as a former council member, and my involvement in projects like Project Idlewild, CarePacks, coaching sports, and serving on local boards and clubs, has always been about giving back to the place my husband and I chose to raise our family. And I’m far from alone. Many of the people who make meaningful contributions to Easton each day weren’t born here. What matters is not where someone started, but the heart and effort they bring to serving this town.

Easton is a town worth fighting for, not with fear or falsehoods, but with integrity, respect, and a commitment to the truth. Elections should be about ideas, accountability, and the future we want to build together, not personal attacks or misleading claims. I will continue to stand up for the facts, for our hardworking staff and volunteers, and for a community where we listen to each other even when we disagree. I encourage every voter to look past the lies, ask thoughtful questions, and choose leaders who value collaboration, honesty, and real public service.

Megan JM Cook is the mayor of Easton, Maryland

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

I Support Don Abbatiello for Easton Council President by David Montgomery

by

On May 6th voters in the Town of Easton will choose a new Town Council President. This is an election of exceptional importance, with two candidates who could not be more different from each other. For this reason, I have had to overcome my preference for neutrality in town elections.

I am endorsing Don Abbatiello for Town Council President.  I have had two years to observe how the candidates for this office conduct themselves on the Town Council. Additionally, I was fortunate to serve alongside Don, as interim President for several months in 2023.  Those experiences convince me that Don must be our new Council President.

Don’s calm demeanor, maturity, and integrity would make him stand out in any election. They have been particularly visible in the work of our Town Council. I have sometimes disagreed with fellow Council members, including Don. On those occasions, Don has always tried to find a middle ground on which we could compromise or an amicable way forward. Even when we disagree, he is always willing to engage with facts and rational arguments and to listen to my point of view. 

It may be selfish, but I look forward to having town meetings conducted by Don in an orderly, professional, and courteous manner. That is not what we have had for the past two years. We need a leader who builds good relations and communicates well with the Mayor and all members of the Town Council. 

Don’s dedication to our community is demonstrated by his 27 years of service as a high school teacher, 16 as an Easton firefighter (Fireman of the Year in 2025) and 6 years as Town Council member. I don’t know how he manages to fit all that into a day. Don does not strive for the limelight or try to be the center of attention on every occasion. He just works quietly and effectively to serve all of us.

Some are applying Party labels to candidates in this election, even though all elections in the town of Easton are nonpartisan. Don has not accepted financial support from either Party. He voluntarily disclosed campaign contributions, expenditures and names of contributors for this election, while his opponent has been hiding behind a promise to file a report at the start of next year. 

Don’s character, experience, qualifications and positions on policies affecting the town transcend party labels. He will not be indebted to any party or special interests when this election is over.

We are facing the prospect of devastating change if developers are given their way to build, build, build in Easton. My most important criterion for ranking candidates is their position on whether and how to slow that senseless growth. Don has spoken and voted consistently to restrain growth as long as I have known him. He has been more consistent on limiting proposed developments than anyone else on the Council, including me. 

Don and I have both questioned the proposed inclusionary zoning ordinance because it would be burdensome and have negligible effects. Neither of us wants taxpayers to bear the burden of subsidizing housing for some. I believe that under Don’s leadership, we will be able to find different, more constructive ways to deal with the cost of housing.

Preserving our town’s character, fiscal restraint, and strong support for public safety are my hallmarks of conservatism at the local level. I hope my conservative friends recognize that Don and I agree on all of these. In addition to his stance on growth, Don has worked hard to restrain spending while at the same time fully supporting our police and firefighters.

Don’s positions on all questions have been thoughtful and consistent. He thinks for himself and responds spontaneously, rather than reading prepared statements from notes. He has a clear set of principles that he applies across the board. Don does not vary his positions to suit the audiences that he is addressing or to garner votes. 

To sum it up, Don is the leader that Easton needs.

I am not endorsing Don lightly or even because we agree on everything. We have voted differently on issues that I think are important. But I have learned how destructive it is to make one issue a litmus test for support. When I compare Don to his opponent, I see an overwhelming difference in character, experience, and behavior, as well as clear and sound positions on critical issues for Easton. That makes Don Abbatiello my choice for Council President.

David Montgomery is the Easton Town Councilmember for Ward 3

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Maryland’s Budget Crossroads Demands Unity, Not Division by Patrick Firth

by

If there’s one thing Republicans and Democrats can agree on, it’s that Maryland is facing a budget crisis. But how we got here – and why it’s becoming so much worse so quickly – shouldn’t be up for debate.

Maryland’s economy has been relatively stagnant for years. According to the Maryland Comptroller’s office, our state’s economy grew just 1.6% between late 2016 and early 2023. Meanwhile, our neighbors in Virginia and Pennsylvania grew by 11.2% and 6.6%, respectively. The U.S. economy grew 13.9% during that same period.

This lack of growth was a ticking time bomb. In fact, economists have predicted since 2017 that this issue – a $3 billion structural deficit – was set to detonate this year.

While you may not like specific solutions in this budget – and it is by no means perfect – it is misleading to blame Governor Wes Moore for a budget shortfall that was predicted eight years before he was elected to office. It’s further misleading to point to a 2022 budget surplus because, like every other state, Maryland received a crucial financial lifeline from the federal government during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was convenient for the former governor, but not a long-term solution to Maryland’s ongoing budget issues.

Maryland also must face a stark reality: we will be hit disproportionately hard by the federal government’s workforce reduction priorities and bureaucratic consolidation. Whether you support this effort or not, our friends and neighbors on both sides of the Bay are going to be hit hard by these federal cuts. This does not even account for a stubborn inflation rate, ongoing and incoming tariffs, and a continuing rise to prices.

I’ve tried to read the latest budget proposal with a clear, unbiased perspective. It has things that both do and do not work for us on the Shore. It is not perfect, but it is a budget that can get us through very difficult times both now and ahead. It’s a sensible plan that balances $2 billion in cuts with $1 billion in new revenue. There are areas where all Marylanders may pay more in fees and such, but a significant majority of Marylanders will not see an increase to their individual tax rates. I think, given the difficult times ahead, this is an acceptable solution.

Real financial pain is on the horizon. Partially because of nearly a decade of economic stagnation in Maryland, partially because lawmakers have no choice but to accept an unpopular, but responsible, budget, and partially because of economically questionable decisions being made at the federal level. But I do have faith that we have the right individuals in charge in the State House and within the General Assembly – and that includes Del. Sample-Hughes’ thoughtful vote against the budget proposal in a symbolic gesture to support her constituents for a bill that would inevitably pass the House of Delegates.

The last thing I would contribute is that it is disingenuous to attack and sling mud at the lawmakers from the sidelines as they make tough decisions entering uncharted waters. There has never been a more important time to work together, across the political aisle, in search of and support for common-sense, bipartisan solutions that work for all Marylanders. And we citizens have a duty to remind our elected officials that they are sent to Annapolis to work together, to form partnerships, and to advance their constituents’ interests. Rather than “just say no,” perhaps our Eastern Shore delegation can begin conversations with their fellow lawmakers that begin with, “yes, and I need this for my constituents.” Maybe then they can be stronger advocates for our community. We all share the important value of securing a stronger, more sustainable future for our state and for the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

Patrick Firth is the outgoing chair of Talbot Democrats.

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

The Political is Personal: Reflections on DEI by Margaret Andersen

by

As the women’s movement was unfolding in the late 1960s, all across the country women gathered in small, informal groups called consciousness raising (CR) groups—conversations that helped us identify the societal origins of problems we were facing in our individual lives. Domestic violence, rape, job discrimination, illegal abortion, the lack of birth control—you name it: These were experienced as personal problems, but their origins were in society and required political, not just personal solutions. For so many of us in my generation, “the personal is political” was a rallying call–a call for change not just in our personal lives, but in society and our social institutions.

This was a time (and it wasn’t that long ago) when there were no women in what we studied in school. Colleges were places where women could only wear dresses. Blue jeans, which became the symbol of a generation, were forbidden on campus—until women revolted. Blue jeans were a symbol of the working class and wearing them, as suggested by SNCC (the activist group, Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee), was a symbol of solidarity with the working class. Women demanded their rights—on campus, at home, at work: everywhere! 

We embarked on a course of compensatory education, trying to learn through any means necessary all that had been left out of what we were taught. There were few studies about women; even medical science routinely excluded women from research samples. When I was in graduate school (where I had no women professors), what we learned about women came from newsprint pamphlets, our CR groups, and whatever we could put our hands on that taught us about women’s history, lives, artistic contributions, and everyday experiences. This was the birth of Women’s Studies—or what is now often called gender studies.

My compensatory education had to offset all I had not learned about women, about people of color, about LGBTQ experiences—in other words, my education excluded more than half the world’s population. Ironically, the term “compensatory education” at the time usually referred to what was perceived as inadequate education for people of color in racially segregated schools, but we all need an education that teaches us about the full range of human experience.

As time proceeded, our efforts to “integrate” education by including the work, experiences, and contributions of women, people of color, immigrants, and LGBTQ people became institutionalized in women’s studies programs, ethnic and racial studies programs, LGBTQ studies, and—yes–diversity initiatives: the now demonized DEI!

Now the assault on so-called DEI feels like a punch in the gut to me. I have devoted fifty plus years of my education and the education I have passed on to others in the interest of an inclusive, not exclusive, curriculum. Scholarship in these diverse areas of study has flourished and people have learned that having more inclusive educational and workplace settings actually improves performance for ALL groups. What is it that is so threatening about DEI that powerful interests are now trying to wipe it out of every institution?

I’ll hazard a guess that most opponents of so-called DEI cannot tell you what it is. Of course, many of us have sat through boring workshops intended to raise our awareness of “DEI.” A lot of us have raised our understanding of what changes—both personal and political—are necessary to achieve a more fair and equitable society—in all its dimensions. To me, DEI is just about that—respecting and understanding the enormous diversity of people living and working all around us; desiring more equitable (just plain fair) opportunities for people to achieve their dreams; and being inclusive, not exclusive, in how we think and who we think about—and value.

I take the current assault on DEI as a personal affront—an affront on all I have worked for over fifty plus years as a professor, author, and college administrator. The time is frightening and, like many of my friends, colleagues, and family members, most days I just want to crawl in a hole. I feel powerless to change the retrograde actions that are happening all around us, every day. But the changes I have witnessed in my own lifetime are vast and should not be taken for granted. We must speak out even when it feels like there are big risks in doing so. 

Even putting these thoughts in print feels scary given the retribution that is now all too common. But I ask you to remember: I am your neighbor, might have been your teacher, am not a criminal. I am an American and love my country, as I hear you do too. But before you post some nasty comment to this letter, I ask you also to think about whether you want your child, your friend, your neighbor to grow up in a country where we learn little, if anything, about people’s experiences other than our own and where powerful interests ask you to ignore the hard work of so many who fought to bring you a more inclusive, just, and open society.  

I also ask you to deeply care about anyone, maybe in your family or friendship network, who loves a lesbian or gay daughter or sibling, even when the coming out process asked them to change everything they thought they knew. Love those who cherish and embrace a trans member of the family even when their old beliefs were upended by this reality. Love those who have fully welcomed an interracial couple and their children into an otherwise all white family. Care about anyone from an immigrant background who came to this nation to seek a better life for themselves and their children.  Know their experiences; don’t believe the myths.

To all of you, my heart is with you even as I rage! 

Dr Margaret L. Andersen is the Elizabeth and Edward Rosenberg Professor Emerita, Founder and Executive Director of the President’s Diversity Initiative, University of Delaware, who lives in Oxford.

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

New report reveals value of resource conservation for Shore businesses by John Horner

by

I consider it a privilege to live and work in a place so many Marylanders associate with vacations, retirement, recreation, and quiet retreats. But as good as our parks, rivers, beaches, and charming towns are for those very activities—the Eastern Shore is equally a place of everyday living and hard honest work, schools and small businesses, boat builders and watermen. At Easton Utilities, we are invested in it all – whether we’re powering the air conditioning in a vacation home so that a young family can escape a summer heat wave, keeping the lights on in a farmer’s winter workshop, helping a local restaurant cook with natural gas, or providing high speed internet to a long-awaited new healthcare facility.

It’s easy to see how a utility company economically benefits the residents and visitors of the Shore. But all of our services would be irrelevant if not for the benefits provided by our water, woodlands, clean air, wildlife, fertile soil, beaches, and abundant seafood. These natural resources offer more than an admirable landscape and deep cultural identity, they drive our economy. Eastern Shore Land Conservancy (ESLC), in collaboration with the Delmarva Restoration and Conservation Network (DRCN), recently released a report titled, “Economic Impact of Natural Resources Conservation on the Delmarva Peninsula.” This comprehensive study highlights the undeniable benefits of the Eastern Shore’s natural resources.

Since I first began at Easton Utilities, we have made sustainability a priority. Our Easton Sustainability Campus is constantly developing new innovative ways to pursue our sustainability mission of conserving natural resources in a way that is economically viable. Located at our Enhanced Nutrient Removal (ENR) Wastewater Treatment Facility, this campus also houses our cost-effective 2 MW solar array which was significantly grant-funded by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). In fact, our ENR Wastewater Treatment Facility’s exceptional performance regarding nitrogen and phosphorous discharge concentrations has resulted in additional grant funding year over year from MDE. These funds are reinvested in the wastewater facility for ongoing operations and maintenance undertakings in order to continue optimal performance.

In addition, from our annual tree planting initiative to our pollinator habitat, we remain committed to enhancing the quality of life in our beloved coastal communities by making environmental stewardship a priority and seeking out cost-effective projects which can help us to address the needs of both our place and our people.

Now more than ever, ESLC’s economic report reveals just how critical conservation efforts are if we want to preserve our beautiful peninsula home and unique way of life. Land conservation anchors environmental stewardship; it’s a cornerstone for preserving the Eastern Shore’s cultural heritage and its economy. By safeguarding Delmarva’s natural resources, we ensure that future generations can experience the beauty, traditions, and productive, meaningful work that define this unique region.

In my role as the President and CEO of Easton Utilities, I am ever mindful of what drives the Eastern Shore quality of life for both our employees and our customers. This new report shares in numbers what we all feel daily: the natural resources of the Shore keep us afloat. I am confident that Easton Utilities, through our partnership with the Town of Easton and Mayor Megan Cook, will continue to do everything in our power to conserve our precious region while providing for our community, and now with an even greater understanding of the essential value of our natural resources.

John Horner is the president and CEO of Easton Utilities

The report can be read here.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Presidential pasts and an impending future by Steve Parks

by

Former president and now president-elect Donald Trump will be inaugurated again – this time to a non-consecutive second term. (The first since Grover Cleveland, elected in 1885 and 1893.) Although I was disappointed, to say the least, about his victory over Vice President Kamala Harris in November, it is clear that Trump was elected fair and square by millions of Americans I disagree with regarding his fitness for office.
Despite my severe doubts based on his first-term presidency – two impeachments resulting in party-line acquittals and four felony charges: two blocked by judicial stall tactics, another by a prosecutor’s personal indiscretion, plus one conviction with no penalties allowed – I had no choice but to respect the results and give the winner the benefit of aforementioned doubts. I say “no choice” because without evidence of anything but a straight-up electoral Trump victory meant to me – as it should to any American who believes in democracy – that he is our once and now-again president. Others I respect on the losing side upheld that rightful interpretation of constitutional law. Harris conceded the next morning. And she fulfilled her constitutional duty as vice president and president of the Senate to confirm the electoral count on Jan. 6. Remember that date, anyone? Hakeem Jeffries, minority leader of the House of Representatives, gaveled his announcement of the final count to the applause of mostly the winning side. Nothing wrong with that. But compare this entirely peaceful transfer of power to that of the MAGA mob, egged on by Trump, on the same date four years ago.
Still, Trump is about to be our next president. And he was among a rich and rare assemblage of colleagues on another historic day just last week. Trump and three other former presidents, plus President Joe Biden, sat together as a far more exclusive club than the “Saturday Night Live” five-timer host club. But it was the centenarian of the hour, 39th President Jimmy Carter, whose funeral stood as a still-living memorial to the great man in the flag-draped casket – a fallible human of unassailable character, decency, integrity and the belief I have now and always did that Jimmy Carter never lied to us. All the eulogies were authentically moving and real. No embellishment necessary. One of my favorites was the bipartisan tribute read by Gerald Ford’s son Steven because these former presidential election rivals and best friends for the rest of their lives, agreed to write each other’s eulogies. Carter outlasted Ford by 18 years.
I can apply none of those accolades to the man about to take his second oath of office I doubt he will keep for a minute. I say that because I’m certain he will never take the step that could redeem himself and his idolaters: Tell the truth about the 2020 election. Are we to just pretend that he’s not the one who tried to “steal” an election? – campaigning before and after the votes were counted that it was “rigged.” It’s an impossible feat considering all the states, counties, and municipalities, not to mention the thousands of precincts you’d have to line up to pull off a stolen national election. And never mind there is zero evidence of such a widespread possibility in 2020. If Donald could bring himself to announce, or at least imply, at his inauguration in front of the president who once defeated him that, yes, Biden won that election, just as he – Trump – won this one, he could obliterate the fact-free obsession that has divided America for more than five years. Confession is good for the soul and would be for the country he now leads. Again. But Trump will never do that.
Too bad for all of us on either side of his contagious lie. You won in 2024, Mr. Trump. Mr. President. And no one seriously challenges that. Why would you contribute to keeping the country divided against itself as you did when you lacked the simple courtesy of attending Biden’s inauguration? Sore loser, for sure. Why would you now be a sore winner as well? Just to get even? Surely, you can’t expect to run again. Make the best of this term for yourself, your legacy, and for all the rest of us.
Jimmy could be watching you, Donald. But you don’t seem to care. You think Carter was a loser. But so were you in 2020. Be a man and admit it. Put an end to all the personal strife you brought upon yourself as a result. And all of us fellow Americans, too. Then get on with being the best president you can be for a more united USA.
Make America Grateful Again – grateful to be who we are when we’re all working together.
Steve Parks is a retired journalist now living in Easton.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Gov. Wes Moore: Now’s the time to fix our fiscal crisis

by

On Wednesday, I will release my proposal to balance the state budget. For the third year in a row, we will not raise the sales tax or the property tax. Through reforms in the tax code, nearly twothirds of Marylanders will get a tax cut, and we will lower the corporate tax rate and focus on making Maryland more competitive and business-friendly. Additionally, our plan cuts spending by $2 billion. These bold actions are needed to prompt the kind of economic growth this moment requires and demands.

These arenʼt easy decisions. Our budget responds to two storms that are swirling around our state. The first storm is a fiscal crisis nearly a decade in the making. Under the former administration, state spending increased by 70% in the seven years before I took office, while our economic growth flatlined. We were spending, but we werenʼt growing. Emergency COVID money from the federal government papered over a structural deficit that had been predicted by experts since 2017. Now, we face the worst fiscal crisis in at least 20 years — worse than that of the Great Recession. The second storm is a stark new policy direction from the Trump-Vance Administration that threatens to disrupt Marylandʼs economy, which is already deeply reliant on the federal government.

In partnership with the General Assembly, it is our responsibility to help Marylanders weather these two storms and emerge stronger. We are guided by a single, clear principle: Build an economy that grows the middle class and gives everyone a pathway to work, wages and wealth. We will achieve that goal by creating jobs; prioritizing regulatory, procurement and permitting reform; and making it easier for businesses to choose Maryland, grow in Maryland and stay in Maryland.

I will propose new state investments in our ports and manufacturing, as well as leading industries to make Maryland the capital of innovation in quantum, cyber and artificial intelligence. With extraordinary assets on the leading edge of American ingenuity — like U.S. Cyber Command, federal labs and world-class universities — there is no reason why Maryland shouldnʼt already lead these areas. But while we are asset-rich, we have been strategy-poor. Our budget applies the right strategy to ensure Maryland wins the decade.

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Maryland’s fiscal apocalypse by Clayton A. Mitchell, Sr.

by

Maryland’s State Budget is teetering on the brink of an unprecedented financial collapse. The refusal to address formula-driven mandatory and entitlement spending threatens to thrust the state into a cycle of automatic “runaway” deficits, culminating in a financial “Extinction Level Event” in the near future. Despite the gravity of this crisis, political leaders have shied away from the structural reforms necessary to restore fiscal stability. Without bold action, Maryland’s taxpayers face a perilous future.

At the heart of Maryland’s fiscal woes is the rigid structure of formula-driven mandatory spending. These formulas mandate funding levels for key programs, such as education and Medicaid, irrespective of the state’s revenue performance. 

The failure to redefine and adjust the mandatory and entitlement spending based on economic realities is not a trivial oversight; it is a catastrophic misjudgment that will surely lead to a financial collapse from which there is no recovery. The state’s budget will collapse under its own weight—not due to inadequate taxation, not by trimming the discretionary budget, but because of otherwise well-meaning mandatory spending formulas whose costs become prohibitively unsustainable as they approach reality. Senate President Bill Ferguson underscored this reality, acknowledging that entitlement programs constitute the bulk of the growing deficit. Yet, political leaders have made little progress in reforming these spending mandates.

The illusion of fiscal health under the Hogan administration was largely sustained by federal COVID relief funds, which artificially created budget surpluses. These one-time funds masked the structural deficit and deferred difficult financial decisions. However, with the federal COVID money now evaporated, the true extent of Maryland’s budgetary challenges has come into sharp focus. Moreover, the upcoming Trump administration is likely to scale back discretionary federal spending, which has traditionally bolstered Maryland’s economy due to its reliance on federal contracts and agencies. This reduction in federal support will further exacerbate the state’s financial challenges, leaving Maryland ill-prepared to weather the storm.

Another significant drain on the state’s resources is Governor Moore’s commitment to “climate investments.” While addressing climate change is a noble goal, it is fundamentally a national and global issue, not a state-specific one. Maryland’s taxpayers should not be saddled with debt for initiatives that will have a de minimus impact on global climate trends. Prioritizing these expenditures over addressing the budget crisis is fiscally irresponsible and diverts attention from urgent structural reforms.

The recent Gonzales Poll reveals that a majority of Marylanders oppose tax increases to address the budget deficit. More than three-quarters of respondents oppose increases in income, property, and sales taxes. Even among those who strongly approve of Governor Moore’s performance, a significant majority oppose new taxes. This opposition underscores the political peril of pursuing tax hikes without first addressing the state’s spending problem.

While commendable as a good first “baby step”, Governor Moore’s recent proposal to save $50 million through government efficiencies is a drop in the ocean compared to the nearly $3 billion deficit – a deficit that is projected to double by 2030. While symbolic gestures like streamlining laptop procurement and reducing underutilized state vehicles are commendable, they fall far short of the comprehensive restructuring needed and do nothing to adjust mandatory spending. 

The Moore Administration’s reliance on outside consultants, such as Boston Consulting Group, further diminishes the credibility of these efforts. Not only will the consulting firm receive 20% of any identified savings, but this agreement could cost taxpayers up to $15 million over two years. This expenditure – which has been billed as a measure to save money- epitomizes the mismanagement of resources that has plagued the state.

In a December 11, 2024, opinion article in Center Maryland, I called upon Governor Moore to “reorganize Maryland’s bloated bureaucracy” for the first time in over 50 years before considering tax increases. This reorganization should include revisiting mandatory spending formulas, recalibrating spending mandates to align with the state’s fiscal realities, addressing unfunded pension liabilities that loom like a ticking time bomb, and eliminating redundant programs through a thorough review of state operations. Recent proposals that have been quietly suggested by legislative leaders such as Senate President Bill Ferguson – such as raising the capital gains tax – fail to address the structural deficit and punish success, should be outright rejected. 

Maryland is at a crossroads. The state’s leaders must confront the hard truths about its fiscal trajectory and embrace meaningful reforms. Without immediate decisive action, the combination of formula-driven spending, evaporating federal support, and misplaced priorities will lead Maryland toward a financial catastrophe. The time for half-measures is over; the state’s fiscal survival depends on bold, transformative leadership.

Clayton A. Mitchell, Sr. is a lifelong Eastern Shoreman, attorney, and former Maryland Department of Labor’s Board of Appeals Chairman.  He is co-host of the Gonzales/Mitchell Show podcast, which discusses politics, business, and cultural issues.

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Consent first, investigate later by Aubrey Sarvis

by

The Senate Armed Services Committee has scheduled a hearing for January 14th on the nomination of Pete Hegseth to be the next Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding that most committee senators have not been afforded an opportunity to see Mr. Hegseth’s F.B.I. background check or discuss with the nominee their concerns about reports involving sexual assault and harassment, a drinking problem, and mismanagement of two small veteran groups the nominee supervised. Usually a nominee for Secretary of Defense is eager to seize an opportunity to sit down with every senator on Armed Services to address allegations and alleviate any serious concerns. Not this time. This new approach is not consistent with how this committee exercises its advise and consent role.  Someone doesn’t want the Senate looking too closely at this young nominee’s background, recent behavior, and slim qualifications. The question is why.

Trump and incoming Vice-President Vance would have the Senate and American people believe there is nothing disturbing here and nothing more to learn about Mr. Hegseth’s fitness to serve in this critically important post.  Indeed, earlier this week the President-elect in a private caucus meeting with Senate Republicans apparently implored them to stick with him and Pete Hegseth, but he did not address any objections leveled against Mr. Hegseth’s nomination.  Last week Mr. Vance e-mailed me, and no doubt thousands of other veterans who had voted Republican at one time or another, “Patriot, They can’t go after President Trump and me.  We already beat them in a landslide! That’s why they’ve focused their efforts attacking a proud veteran like Pete Hegseth.”  Vance did not refute any of the arguments against the nomination, but he did ask me to sign Hegseth’s official letter of support that would soon flood senate offices.

Trump and Vance are making a weak case in behalf of this troubling nomination: senators should trust us and do as we ask. That isn’t the balance of power the framers of our Constitution had in mind. A president nominates, but he doesn’t get to manage the Senate process or dictate the vote outcome. Yes, historically, most senators have been inclined to vote for the nominee a president picks unless there are compelling reasons to object.  A refusal by the White House and a nominee to address and refute serious allegations would certainly be a compelling reason to vote against any nominee. Perhaps a review of the brief history of another troubling nomination for Secretary of Defense might be in order.  

In 1989, Republican President George H. W. Bush nominated the former Republican Chairman of the Senate Armed Services, John Tower of Texas, to be his Secretary of Defense. Opposition to the Tower nomination wasn’t about getting President Bush or embarrassing a credible nominee many respected.  Opposition to the Tower nomination went directly to concerns about the nominee’s excessive drinking, womanizing, unacceptable behavior towards women, and blackmail. In1989 the senate did not enjoy holding one of their own to the same standards they demanded of other nominees, but they could not deny what was before them in plain sight. What unfolded in public view over weeks was painful and could have been avoided by Mr. Tower withdrawing, but Tower insisted he had no problem with drinking or women, confident he and the Bush White House would prevail. After hearings and floor debate, the senate, having refused to be rushed or flattered or cowered did its job.  It did not consent to the Tower nomination, and Dick Cheney became Secretary of Defense which pleased most Republicans enormously. 

The Senate Armed Services Committee should adopt the Tower approach to take up the Hegseth nomination. Today, senators cannot deny the stonewalling going on as they wrestle with a nomination riddled with many unanswered questions. The committee should afford the smooth-talking television personality Hegseth a full and fair opportunity to refute serious allegations and silence his critics. Pithy and evasive answers must be challenged.  Most senators, Democrats and Republicans, would like to vote for the nominee.  But before the clerk calls the Hegseth vote each senator should ask if she or he is willing to take a chance on a nominee with thin qualifications who has a reported history of excessive drinking and repeated abusive behavior towards women, the very nominee, who, if confirmed, will make war and peace and national security recommendations to Congress and the President, and manage the largest workforce in the U. S. government. Senators must be able to answer in the affirmative they are confident this nominee will protect all service members from sexual abuse and harassment while also insuring women have the same opportunities for advancement as their male counterparts.  Women make up 18% of the force and some of our services are already not meeting their recruiting goals.  To declare, as this nominee and former junior officer has done, that some fields should not be open to women hardly encourages more women to sign up. 

Today there remains a serious sexual harassment and sexual abuse problem in every branch of our armed services, as well as a persistent drinking problem.  This is no time to confirm an individual to lead our armed forces and Defense Department civilians who may be seriously challenged in managing his drinking and conducting himself appropriately with women in social and professional settings.

Every senator on the committee should ask this nominee if he has now or ever had a serious drinking problem or a problem behaving appropriately with women at work and socially. The nominee’s answer must be clear and consistent with how he has conducted himself in recent years at work, socially, and at home.  Thirty-six years ago Senator John Tower, the former Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, insisted he had no problem with drink or women, but hearings and a record complete with credible witnesses revealed otherwise.

 A few sitting senators such as Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Chuck Grassley of Iowa recall the ill-advised Tower nomination very well. Senator Grassley may want to share that history with his colleague, the junior senator from Iowa, Joni Ernest, an Army veteran, who sits on Armed Services and cares deeply about women in the ranks.  Soon she may have to vote on the Hegseth nomination. It could well be the most impactful vote Senator Ernst will ever cast.

Aubrey Sarvis is an Army veteran and retired United States Senate counsel and corporate lawyer now living in Chestertown 

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Analysis: Moore’s delicate balance as the session gets under way

by

Gov. Wes Moore (D) addresses the Maryland Senate on the first day of the 2025 session, as Senate Preident Bill Ferguson (D) looks on. Photo by Bryan P. Sears.

Gov. Wes Moore (D) made the scene across Annapolis Wednesday, as tradition dictates for governors on the opening day of the General Assembly session.

He started the day at a forum sponsored by The Daily Record, presided over a meeting of the Board of Public Works, visited both chambers of the legislature for their inaugural floor sessions, met with reporters individually and in a press gaggle, and dropped by several receptions sponsored by lobbying firms and interest groups.

At each event, Moore displayed his usual irrepressible optimism about the future of Maryland, and hailed his “partners” in the legislature and advocacy community. But he also struck a sober note, highlighting the state’s challenging fiscal picture and the uncertainty over the impact the incoming Trump administration could have on the state’s fortunes.

What was notably missing from Moore’s multiple presentations, on day one of the 90-day legislative session, was a specific or defining agenda for the next three months, or a list of priorities.

Some of that will take form next week, when the governor releases his annual budget proposal. With the state facing projected deficits of almost $3 billion, Moore said Wednesday that he’s planning for $2 billion in cuts and that he’s asked state agencies to go line-by-line through their budgets and “find these inefficiencies.”

“You’re going to see them come from a collection of buckets,” he told reporters at a news conference.

Two sources familiar with the administration’s thinking said one of the largest single cuts would be a trim of about $110 million from the University System of Maryland.

Sources familiar with the budget proposal also said it will likely include what was described as a “Maryland Stadium Authority model for major IT projects.” Details were not available and it is unclear if that model would be a standalone agency or rolled into another existing department such as the Department of Information Technology.

Even if Moore achieves his targeted cuts, that would leave about $1 billion of structural deficit for fiscal 2026 unaccounted for. But he repeated his mantra Wednesday that “the bar remains very high” for tax increases.

Echoes of Hogan

As for the rest of his agenda, Moore said it will fully develop later rather than sooner, given the transfer of power about to take place in Washington, D.C.

“Over the next 90 days, we need to figure out what’s going to happen with the new federal administration,” he said in an interview Wednesday. “And that’s a huge factor.”

Moore is now halfway through his four-year term — a fact that seemed to almost surprise him when a reporter mentioned it. He came into office with a lofty agenda, vowing, among other things, to eradicate childhood poverty, reorder the state economy, build the Red Line in Baltimore and confront climate change.

Progress on those fronts has been incremental, and now Moore and other policymakers will be preoccupied by “the two storms,” as he describes them — the deficit and the incoming Trump administration. But Moore is undaunted and said Maryland’s potential will not be diminished.

“I inherited a tough economy, right?” he said in the interview with Maryland Matters. “I inherited an economy that was in a fiscal crisis, I inherited an economy that was in a multibillion-dollar structural deficit. So it’s not like that has changed — I inherited that. That was my day one reality. I think about what we’ve been able to navigate in those first years despite these choppy waters.”

Throughout the day, Moore took some not-so-subtle jabs at his predecessor, former Gov. Larry Hogan (R), without naming him.

“I inherited a structural deficit that was the largest we’ve seen in two decades,” he said during The Daily Record event. “That was completely papered over by [federal] COVID money. We didn’t actually address the structural issues.”

It’s a time-honored tactic for governors to blame their predecessors for the state’s fiscal condition and economic climate they inherited: Hogan routinely criticized his immediate predecessor, former Gov. Martin O’Malley (D), practically until the day he left office.

What’s noteworthy about Moore is that in many ways, he is promoting an agenda that isn’t dissimilar from Hogan’s, whether it’s holding the line on taxes, pushing to grow the state’s economy to generate more revenues, boosting the state’s business climate, resisting spending mandates, scaling back certain regulations, and reforming procurement practices and other government programs. And he’s been more vocal about these priorities as the state’s financial condition worsens.

“We’ve got to make it easier for businesses to come to our state and thrive and grow and grow,” he said during his news conference.

Moore, like Hogan, does not always communicate his positions to lawmakers in advance.

Two years ago, he surprised Democrats in the House and Senate with a call to end the automatic increases on the gas tax tied to inflation, but that policy remains intact. In December, he caught lawmakers off guard again when he called for the General Assembly to pass a bill to allow beer and wine sales in grocery stores and other retail outlets and have the measure on his desk by the end of session.

The bill is not one of the governor’s priorities. On Wednesday, however, he chastised lawmakers who so far appear to be digging in against his call.

“It’s not even my bill,” Moore said during The Daily Record event. “I just think the General Assembly should listen to the people on this and I think they should do the work.

“And when they do the work, I think they will come to whatever they believe to be the right solution that addresses all the concerns, all the questions. But I just think all the people in the state of Maryland have been speaking fairly clearly on this and the General Assembly has not heard it,” Moore said.

It wasn’t like Hogan once comparing the 90-day session to spring break for irresponsible lawmakers, but the comment did not soften the stance of some legislators.

“I think the House and Senate are listening to the people and small-business owners,” said Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City). “The issue that the people are most worried about is closing the $3 billion deficit, appropriately.”

House Economic Matters Chair C.T. Wilson (D-Charles), whose committee has jurisdiction over liquor issues, said he “takes great umbrage” at Moore’s comments.

“We have done the work in the past,” he said. “While it might be new to him and his administration, it is not new to the General Assembly. It is not new to me as chairman. It is not new to me as a member of the Economic Matters Committee.

“I take umbrage to the fact that somehow, some way if we don’t come to his solution, we haven’t done our work — because we do our work,” Wilson added.

Wilson described himself as a supporter of Moore’s but said the governor’s approach on the issue of expanded alcohol sales “seems shortsighted.”

“It’s like you’re picking a fight with people that can fight and have just as many rocks as you do,” Wilson said. “We are an equal branch of government … and I pray that the governor realizes that we do our job and take our job seriously.”

One clear difference between Moore and Hogan: Hogan killed the Red Line, in 2015, and Moore has been working to revive it. During his news conference Wednesday he did not say what kind of mode of transit he’s seeking or how he thought potential federal funding would be impacted by the new Trump administration. But Moore was steadfast in his insistence that an east-west transit connector is vital to the economic health of the Baltimore region.

“You cannot have economic mobility if you don’t have physical mobility,” he said.

‘We’re thinking about what is possible’

Some Democratic lawmakers, after eight years of Hogan, said they’re surprised that Moore hasn’t offered them more guidance or a concrete agenda for them to consider early in the session.

“I think that would be helpful,” said Del. Pam Queen (D-Montgomery), who co-chairs the legislative Study Group on Economic Stability. “You would think, because we’re all of the same party, we’d have more of that, especially in difficult times.”

Queen, who has been in the legislature since 2016, said the third year of a term is often when a governor and his administration become more sure-footed and assertive with the legislature, “so this is the year when you’d expect that kind of thing to happen.”

Ferguson said it makes sense to see what the early policy moves are out of the Trump administration and the all-Republican Congress before fully advancing a legislative agenda in Annapolis.

Del. Regina T. Boyce (D-Baltimore City), vice chair of the House Environment and Transportation Committee, said that even as they wait for a more comprehensive agenda from the Moore administration, lawmakers are intent on moving their own priorities.

“We’re thinking about what is possible with the budget,” she said. “As Speaker [Adrienne] Jones says, we won’t balance the budget on the backs of education, on the backs of health, on the backs of transportation, and ultimately, on the backs of poor people. We’ve got to ensure that we’re funding our priorities and keeping the promises we made.”

Moore told Maryland Matters that the progress his administration has made in the past two years gives him hope for what’s possible under the challenging conditions the state is facing now.

“We’ve really been able to break the back of violence and homicide in Baltimore and across the state and have real momentum to be able to go further now and get more done,” he said.

“That we’ve been able to go from being 43rd in the country in the state on unemployment to having one of the lowest unemployment rates in our country, because of the investments we’ve made, and also the investments in trade programs and apprentice programs. That we were able to lead in a time of absolute crisis in one of the largest and sustained maritime tragedies in our nation’s history and know that the bridge is being to be rebuilt on our watch with federal funding,” he said.

Asked, as he looks ahead to the changing of the guard in Washington, what the Democratic “resistance” ought to look like, Moore replied, “I haven’t put much thought into it. I say, ‘I’m not the leader of the resistance, I’m the governor of Maryland.’”

by Josh Kurtz and Bryan P. Sears, Maryland Matters
January 8, 2025

Maryland Matters is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Maryland Matters maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Steve Crane for questions: [email protected].

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.