In our relatively autonomous form of county government, you generally have the last word. You represent us not only by enacting our laws, you appoint our County Attorney, our Planning Commission, and the members of our county boards and committees.
You’re making changes to our Comprehensive Plan, too, although your process has offered little opportunity for public input. Our Village Board members recall a very different process, and working closely with our Planning Commission. Now we must be “open to possibilities.”
We have been concerned by your suggestions, though. The Talbot Spy video interviews were appreciated, particularly your acknowledgement, Mr. Pack, that “Our Comprehensive Plan is a guide. It is not an ordinance and it is not legislation.”
This may seem relatively inconsequential, but it’s important because your lawmaking is a slightly different process. It would be helpful if County Attorney Pullen weren’t advising us that you’re making these changes because “only elected officials can make laws,” and we weren’t being told by Mrs. Williams that our Plan will be “passed as legislation.”
It’s not a law, though. It’s guidance, and Maryland Code provides compelling reasons to allow our Planning Commission to do its job. Our Land Use Article not only clearly describes our Comprehensive Plan as guidance, in cases of dispute, Maryland Code prevails – and mandates that our Plan is revised and amended by our Planning Commission.
Our County Charter was amended to allow our Council to make recommendations, but it also states clearly that our rights must be exercised in accordance with the laws of the State of Maryland.
Unfortunately, you appear to many of us to be hijacking the role of the Commission. On your website you are describing the Planning Commission as making recommendations, and the Council as accepting, modifying, or rejecting each item and inserting the approved items into to our Comprehensive Plan. That’s making the revisions.
You were right, Mr. Pack, to suggest that your process might be explained better; but it’s not difficult to imagine how we might have achieved this role reversal. What you are doing now may seem right and natural, since it is pretty much how your business of lawmaking is conducted.
When things are this broken, though, it’s time to get out the toolbox and get back to basics. It shouldn’t be too much to ask of our lawmakers to make lawful decisions. Our government hasn’t made it easy by separating the responsibilities of making revisions and granting approval, but this process was obviously designed to keep the lines of communication open and our development future out of the hands of just a few. Once it’s built, it’s hard to tear down.
We will continue to have back and forth and disagreement. That’s unavoidable and may even be a good thing; but we must recognize there is a reason for this process, and while the Council’s preferences are part of the equation, they are not necessarily deciding factors. For example, deleting the words “smart growth” or substituting the word “promote” for “preserve” may alter intent only slightly, but even our intent was meant to be determined by more than a few.
In any case, Mrs. Williams has pointed out that your changes will make little difference since we currently have an abundance of land zoned and waiting for development. So why are we putting ourselves through all of this, indeed?
This may be too much to hope for, but calling upon the Village Board to help us in reach consensus might be a sign of good faith; and restoring final draft authority to our Commission would go a long way toward restoring our trust and confidence. You must approve our Plan, but it in this case it seems your approval would be based upon our Plan meeting its stated goals and legal requirements – once your recommendations have been considered, of course.
You’ve announced that your next work session will be taking place on Monday, February 29 from 4-6 pm at the Easton High School cafeteria. Judging by the venue you have selected, you may be expecting a crowd. We hope to convey the message that we support the efforts of our Planning Commission and our Comprehensive Plan’s goals of preserving our quality of life and promoting sustainable growth.
Carol Voyles
Sherwood
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.