MENU

Sections

  • Home
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Editors and Writers
    • Join our Mailing List
    • Letters to Editor Policy
    • Advertising & Underwriting
    • Code of Ethics
    • Privacy
    • Talbot Spy Terms of Use
  • Art and Design
  • Culture and Local Life
  • Public Affairs
    • Ecosystem
    • Education
    • Health
    • Senior Life
  • Community Opinion
  • Sign up for Free Subscription
  • Donate to the Talbot Spy
  • Cambridge Spy

More

  • Support the Spy
  • About Spy Community Media
  • Advertising with the Spy
  • Subscribe
May 14, 2025

Talbot Spy

Nonpartisan Education-based News for Talbot County Community

  • Home
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Editors and Writers
    • Join our Mailing List
    • Letters to Editor Policy
    • Advertising & Underwriting
    • Code of Ethics
    • Privacy
    • Talbot Spy Terms of Use
  • Art and Design
  • Culture and Local Life
  • Public Affairs
    • Ecosystem
    • Education
    • Health
    • Senior Life
  • Community Opinion
  • Sign up for Free Subscription
  • Donate to the Talbot Spy
  • Cambridge Spy
Archives

Recently Passed Fiscal Year 2023 Maryland Operating Budget Includes Historic Funding for Rural Communities

April 17, 2022 by Rural Maryland Council (RMC)

On April 11, 2022, the Maryland Legislature adjourned Sine Die. Among the session’s many accomplishments, the Legislature approved the Fiscal Year 2023 State Operating Budget which included $9,000,000 in funding to support the Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund (RMPIF) – 50% more funding than in previous years. The Rural Maryland Council would like to thank Governor Hogan for appropriating funds to support RMPIF, the Maryland House of Delegates and Maryland Senate for their support, and the numerous individuals and organizations that voiced their strong support for increased rural investment.

“We want to express our gratitude for these important and necessary funds that will be used to invigorate the economies in all of our rural areas,” said RMC Board Chair, John Hartline, “This record funding will expand the reach of our grant programs, allowing for even more positive impacts across rural Maryland and accelerating the recovery of our rural communities from the negative economic effects of COVID-19.”

The Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund targets investment to promote economic prosperity in Maryland’s traditionally disadvantaged and underserved rural communities by sustaining efforts to promote rural regional cooperation, facilitating entrepreneurial activities and supporting key community colleges and nonprofit organizations. This fund will support the Rural Maryland Council’s activities and the Maryland Agricultural Education and Rural Development Assistance Fund (MAERDAF) which provides capacity-building funds to rural nonprofit service providers. It will also support the state’s five rural regional councils, regional infrastructure projects, rural entrepreneurship development, rural community development, and rural health care organizations.

The RMPIF and MAERDAF grant programs have provided substantial amounts of needed opportunities and resources to our rural communities over the years. With the State’s investment, an additional $67 million in federal, local, and private funding has been directed into our rural areas. Overall, the RMPIF program between 2018 and 2021 has resulted in $124 million in economic impact and $40.9 million in employee compensation. The MAERDAF program has provided $12.1 million in additional economic impact and $4.4 million in employee compensation.

The two-phase online grant application process opens on Monday, April 25, 2022 and the Phase 1 – Letter of Intent will be due by Friday, May 20, 2022 at 11:59 pm. The Council will host four grant information sessions this Spring. These information sessions are important opportunities for participants to meet RMC staff and learn about the Council’s two grant programs. An information session will be presented by Zoom teleconference for those who cannot join in-person.

Date Location Address
Wednesday, April 20, 2022, 12:00pm to 2:00pm Zoom Teleconference Zoom Teleconference
Friday, April 22, 2022, 12:00pm to 2:00pm Tri County Council for Southern Maryland 15045 Burnt Store Road, Hughesville, MD 20637
Tuesday, April 26, 2022

12:00pm to 2:00pm

Thomas Welcome Center, Allegany College 12401 Willowbrook Road

Cumberland, MD 21502

Thursday, April 28, 2022

12:00pm to 2:00pm

Delmarva Community Services

The Harry & Jeanette Weinberg Intergenerational Center

108 Chesapeake Street

Cambridge, MD 21613

Monday, May 2, 2022

2:00pm to 4:00pm

Leading Edge Training Center 2002 Cedar Drive,

Edgewood, MD 21040

Learn more about the grant programs and register for an upcoming grant information session through the following link –  Grant Opportunities (maryland.gov).

The Rural Maryland Council (RMC) operates under the direction of a 40-member executive board in a nonpartisan and nondiscriminatory manner. It serves as the state’s federally designated rural development council and functions as the official voice for rural Maryland. The RMC advocates for rural communities and businesses across the state to flourish and to gain parity to their suburban and urban counterparts. The RMC envisions a future where residents in rural communities are achieving success in education and employment, have access to affordable, quality health care and other vital public services, and live in an environment where natural and cultural resources are being sustained for future generations.

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

Filed Under: Archives Tagged With: commerce, council, local news, Maryland, rural

Talbot Council Rejects Petition Seeking Repeal of Confederate Statue Removal

September 29, 2021 by John Griep

The county council voted 3-2 Tuesday night to deny a petition asking the council to change its mind on moving the Confederate monument off the courthouse lawn.

The petition for rescission called on the Talbot County Council to introduce a resolution to rescind its Sept. 14 decision to relocate the monument to a Civil War battlefield in Virginia.

Shortly after the petition was read, Councilman Corey Pack made a motion to deny the petition, which was seconded by Councilman Frank Divilio.

Councilwoman Laura Price took issue with the rapid pace of the process.

“I thought we were just having discussion because now the first person to get to make a motion … nobody else has an opportunity to make a motion,” she said. “I thought we were just discussing and asking questions at the moment. But like the game show, we have to press the button fast enough.”

Price and Council President Chuck Callahan reiterated concerns from the Sept. 14 meeting at which a council majority voted to approve the administrative resolution to relocate the monument on the same night it was introduced and without first having a public hearing. Callahan and Price had voted Sept. 14 against relocation; Council Vice President Pete Lesher joined Divilio and Pack in voting for moving the statue.

Council members split along the same lines over the motion to deny the petition.

“I think public process was important, is still important. And I certainly would have liked to have seen this resolution go through a public process, especially with information that has that has come to light,” Price said. “Again, I guess I didn’t hit the buzzer fast enough, because I know the way this motion to deny is going to go down. It’s been motioned, it’s been seconded, it’s going to go the same way as the vote did two weeks ago. And once again, the public is going to get shut out of this process. And I wholeheartedly disagree with that.”

Callahan agreed.

“So it’s kind of a shame that the public didn’t get the opportunity to do this. And it’s not the right way to go, in my opinion,” he said. “And I guess we’re just gonna keep moving forward.”

Pack, as he did Sept. 14, said the county council had opportunities to hold public work sessions on the Confederate monument “(a)nd it was not, it was not, was not done. So I think it’s not fair, it’s not appropriate, to now say that the public has been shut out. So that I just take issue with that characterization.”

But Price argued there was a difference between a public work session and a public hearing on a bill or resolution.

“We’ve heard about the entirety of the subject for the last year and a half when people come,” she said. “And I appreciate them coming and speaking at the end of you know, at the end of our meetings, absolutely. We’ve heard from it. And we know that nobody’s opinion was going to change.

“But when there is a bill or a resolution on the floor, I believe in transparency and a public process to come and have your three minutes to speak to the council in this setting, as opposed to just a work session,” Price said.

The three residents who filed the petition for rescission were among several people who spoke during the public comment period of the Sept. 28 meeting.

Lynn Mielke, David Montgomery, and Clive Ewing questioned the process and asked at least one council member to ask the county attorney to draft a resolution to rescind the monument’s relocation.

Mielke said a May 28 legal opinion from the county attorney outlined the process, “which is that a council member … can introduce a resolution or ask the attorney to write a resolution consistent with the request of the petitioner, which is what we thought we would get a vote on today, not to be railroaded by an out-of-order motion to not consider the petition.

“It was wrong. It was the wrong process,” she said. “I think it was out of order under Robert’s Rules of Order.

“And I can only think of the saying that democracy dies in darkness. Well the sun’s setting on Talbot County,” Mielke said.

Ewing said he was “exceptionally concerned regarding the lack of transparency to adopt the administrative resolution to relocate the Talbot Boys statue out of state.

“The manner of how this action was accomplished brings into doubt the legitimacy of the process, which is why I and others have petitioned this council to rescind this administrative resolution,” he said. “I’m baffled why the majority of the council continues to disregard the input of and the questions from so many in the community in this matter. I am baffled why there was even a vote tonight on that, when all that was requested was that a single council person instruct the attorney to draft a resolution.

“I’ll humbly submit that that vote was taken out of order. Alright, I’d ask y’all to revisit that. And I think after this meeting, you certainly can direct the attorney to do just that,” Ewing said. “There’s no doubt there’s powerful forces most if not all, from outside the borders of Talbot County that have found their way to influence this council. Of course, local councils like this one, are intended to represent the interests of the actual local citizens, not third parties, not Annapolis, politicians, certainly not the well-connected individuals who have chosen Easton and Talbot County to fulfill their own vision and interpretation of history.

“I thank the members of this council who have acted in good faith and resisted the meddling of those who have targeted this county for their latest political or social cause,” he said. “For the remainder of the council, I certainly hope you will reconsider if it is truly in the best interest of the community at large to send this monument out of state. I submit to you that the vast majority of Talbot countians believe this monument dedicated to Talbot County men must remain in Talbot County.”

Montgomery said the petitioners “will submit the petition again, a new petition for a new number and ask the same thing and hope it’s dealt with properly procedurally, but maybe we could just move forward.

“All it takes is for one county council member in an open session or in writing to ask the county attorney to draft a resolution in form and substance like the petition requested,” he said. “So I would just like to ask one member of the county council to make that request between now and the next meeting.”

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: confederate, council, monument, removal, Talbot County

Talbot Seeks OK for Confederate Monument Removal; Statue Supporters Ask for Relocation to be Rescinded

September 28, 2021 by John Griep

Talbot County has filed its application seeking approval from the Easton Historic District Commission to relocate the Confederate monument from the county courthouse grounds.

The county’s application for a certificate of appropriateness was filed Monday, Sept. 27, the deadline for applications to be on the historic district commission’s Oct. 11 meeting agenda.

In its application, the county said a council majority had adopted an administrative resolution to relocate the statue to the Cross Keys Battlefield in Harrisonburg, Va.

The town’s historic district guidelines allow the historic district commission to “approve the moving of historic resources if it finds ‘that it is not in the best interests of the Town or a majority of its citizens to withhold approval,'” according to the county’s narrative in support of removal.

“For profound reasons, it is not in the best interests of the Town of Easton (the ‘Town]) or a presumed majority of its citizens to withhold approval of the County’s’ removal of the Statue from the County Courthouse grounds,” Talbot County said in its narrative. “The Statue, dedicated in 1916, is a Confederate monument on the County Courthouse grounds that commemorates individuals from Talbot County who served in the Confederacy during the Civil War.

“As is well known and highly publicized, the Statue’s presence on the County Courthouse grounds has generated significant controversy and division among many citizens of the County, including citizens of the Town,” according to the narrative. “By way of example, the County is currently defending litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland filed by certain individuals, governmental agencies, and entities who seek to have the Statue removed. Thus, the County Council seeks to relocate the Statue from the County Courthouse grounds.”

The county said its intent is for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation “to take possession of the Statue where it can be displayed on the Cross Keys Battlefield on the ridge where Maryland troops fought, including troops from Talbot County.

“The Statue can then be repurposed as a monument to all Maryland troops engaged at the battle of Cross Keys with additional interpretation added,” according to the narrative. “The Cross Keys Battlefield is private property; however, it is open to the public year round. Thus, the Statue can be preserved and viewed in a better historical context along with other monuments commemorating the Civil War.”

The county also said moving the statue “to another location outside the Town’s Historic District will not change the general character of the County Courthouse or the Town’s Historic District as a whole. The historic character of the County Courthouse will remain intact, and the Statue’s relocation does not affect any other historic sites, buildings, or other structures in the Town’s Historic District.”

Historic District Application Packet (relocation of Talbot Boys Statue)

While the county is working through the administrative process to relocate the Confederate monument from the courthouse lawn, opponents of its removal are asking the county council to change its mind or accept a Talbot County site for the monument.

Lynn Mielke, David Montgomery, and Clive Ewing, longtime advocates for keeping the statue at its current location, have petitioned the council to rescind the administrative resolution calling for the statue’s relocation to Virginia. The petition for rescission is on the council’s agenda for tonight’s meeting.

Members of Preserve Talbot History, meanwhile, are looking for a suitable site for the monument in Talbot County and have asked the county council for greater transparency on the matter.

In a Sept. 23 press release, the group said the county council needs to answer these questions:

1. Has the cost of moving the memorial been estimated, and on what basis?

2. Is there a written commitment from some individual or organization to pay that cost?

3. What is the basis for claim that no one in Talbot County would accept the memorial?

4. Was any request for proposals to take the memorial ever posted?

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: confederate, council, historic district, monument, statue, Talbot, Talbot County

Council Votes to Move Talbot Boys, But Fight May Not Be Over

September 15, 2021 by John Griep

Although the county council voted 3-2 Tuesday night to move the Confederate statue on the courthouse grounds to a Civil War national historic district near Harrisonburg, Va., advocates for keeping the monument at its current location, or at least in Talbot County, say the fight is not over.

During public comments near the end of Tuesday night’s meeting, Preserve Talbot History’s president said the foundation that leads the preservation efforts at the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District said in a Tuesday afternoon letter that it would only accept Talbot’s monument “if it will not and cannot stay safely here.

“They’re not welcoming this statue as something ‘Oh, this is fantastic, we always wanted to have the Talbot boys statue in the corner here,'” David Montgomery said. “They’re taking it because they’ve been assured that we’re going to tear it down, melt it, or put it in a warehouse. Those are their conditions. That should have been made clear to the council when this proposal was set up to vote….”

The Sept. 14 letter from the executive director of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation says the foundation’s position is that monuments should remain in their original location whenever possible and that an attempt should be made to relocate the monument in Talbot County if it is removed from its current location. If the monument must be moved out of the county, the foundation said it remained “committed to its offer to become its permanent steward….”

According to the email headers The Spy has viewed, the letter was emailed at 3:49 p.m. Tuesday and sent to all five county council members. The Spy does not know when it was actually received by the council members, whose meeting Tuesday night began at 6 p.m. with the discussion of the administrative resolutions concerning the Confederate monument beginning at about 6:37 p.m.

The full text of the foundation’s letter is below:

Talbot Boys Monument

 

The letter refers to the foundation’s monument policy, which is posted on its website:

SVBFMonumentPolicy

 

Montgomery also challenged the process by which the relocation vote had occurred.

“(T)his was done in such a surreptitious manner, that won’t be forgotten,” he said. “A policy decision like this should not be made through a procedural maneuver that eliminates not only public comment, (but also) the time for this council to review thoroughly, to know what the battlefield … looks like, to know what the arrangements are for moving it, to know how that can be done safely, even to know whether the base is going to go along with it or not. All that’s missing…. No matter what the legal cover… this was a fundamental policy decision.”

Montgomery said sincere efforts should be made “…to find a place in Talbot County for this memorial … if this council is determined to take it out of its current place.

“I hope the move the monument will support that objective. They’ve said all along that all they want to do is move the monument and find another place in Talbot County for it,” he said.

Lynn Mielke, who has supported keeping the monument at its current location, said she has been involved in the issue since 2015.

“And I would suggest that it’s not over yet,” she said.

Mielke said her main reason to speak Tuesday night, however, was to share “… an observation that I’ve made over those years, as well as tonight. That observation is of the residents of Talbot County. And how no one’s come and torn down the monument. No one has defaced it or put paint on it. It’s been courteous and … the protests for its removal is very consistent with what the founding fathers had saw in terms of peaceful protest and sharing opinions.

“Tonight, for instance, there were the Move the Monument people and there were the Preserve Talbot County history people (outside the courthouse). And everyone was courteous to everyone else…,” she said. “The Move the Monument people were handing out snacks to everyone. And I guess it sort of reminded me of, if you read the history of Culp’s Hill, the Battle of Culps Hill, where we had Talbot Countians both on the Confederate side and on the Union side fighting each other. But when the battle was over, they helped each other.

“The battle here is not quite over but I would hope that until it is, and even when it is, that each side will respect the other and show them that grace that I observed tonight and I have observed over the last few years,” Mielke said.

The Confederate monument on the Talbot County courthouse grounds. Photo by John Griep.

Others had harsher words for Frank Divilio, Pete Lesher, and Corey Pack, the three councilmen who voted for the resolution to relocate the statue.

Michelle Ewing called Divilio “duplicitous” and said “… thanks to you and Corey (Pack) and Pete (Lesher) our county will forever be divided.”

Clive Ewing agreed.

“Obviously, I’m disappointed in how the council went about advancing the Talbot Boys resolution to a vote tonight,” he said. “Transparent government is the best government and you have left a lot to be desired.

“This action does nothing to advance understanding and unity in this county,” Ewing said.

Shari Wilcoxon said “… this is a very sad day for Talbot County to be swept up in the same horrific Marxist idealism that’s going on throughout our country…. It’s really a frightening step, it’s frightening what’s going on in our country, and it’s a sad day that’s going on here in Talbot County….”

Speakers who supported efforts to move the statue from the courthouse grounds said it took courage to make that decision.

“I saw an awful lot of courage here tonight, tremendous courage, because it takes a great deal of courage to have a change of heart,” Keith Watts said.

“You talked about respect, and being respectful. And I think it’s so important for the community, whatever the outcome was tonight, to continue to respect each other. Because we all live together,” he said. “There are certainly individual acts of courage on each and every single person’s part that’s here tonight, both in the audience and on that dais…. I think that you can take some solace in the fact that you did what you felt was in your hearts.

“Whether I agree with that, or not, it doesn’t matter so much as to continue to look at each other, listen to each other, and respect each other because we all live together,” Watts said. “And I think we all, in our own ways, have Talbot County’s best interests at heart. Always…. So thank you for your candor. Thank you for your courage. Thank you for bringing us to this point. And thank you for leading us from here because now it’s the way forward.”

Richard Potter, president of the Talbot County NAACP, thanked Divilio.

“Thank you for your courage tonight. I appreciate that. I appreciate you and your diligence in trying to find a peaceful solution to this issue,” he said. “I know tonight was difficult. And I’m pretty sure the days ahead will be difficult. But that’s leadership.

“One of the quotes that I leave this council with is one from Winston Churchill: ‘Mountaintops inspire leaders, but valleys mature them.'”

The NAACP and others had filed a federal lawsuit to require the county to move the Confederate monument from its position on the lawn just outside the Talbot County Court House.

Divilio said he submitted the resolution to relocate the statue to the Cross Keys battlefield to put an end to the divisive debate and to ensure the monument is preserved.

“If the Talbot boys make this move, they will help tell the story of the Civil War and how communities and families were divided, unfortunately, much as we are today,” he said. “Cross Keys battlefield is an appropriate new home for the Talbot boys where the monument will be cared for with respect, and be part of the teaching history for generations to come.

“Throughout this process, it has been very important to me that the Talbot Boys be treated with respect,” Divilio said. “And if the decision was made to move it, there needed to be a new location identified that would be able to keep it and maintain it for the long term. Unfortunately, no such option existed locally and I feared the situation would evolve much like it has in other parts of this country and the courthouse grounds would be vandalized and the Talbot Boys would be destroyed.

He said the simple answer to questions about why the statue is being moved out of the county is that “no one wanted it. No one wanted to subject themselves, their business, their organization, or their government to the backlash from agreeing to accept the Talbot Boys on their property.

“The Talbot Boys issue has divided our community for too long and has sidelined many other important things the county council and county government needs to address,” Divilio said. “I believe that moving the Talbot Boys to a historically appropriate place of respect, and allowing our community to move forward is the best for Talbot County. It is time to bring this resolution to a close so we can shift our focus to rebuilding our relationships and coming together to build a 21st century Talbot County.”

Council Vice President Pete Lesher commended Divilio, who has previously voted to leave the monument at its current location, for his “diligence in identifying and securing an honorable and appropriate destination for the statute.

“For generations, the voices of Talbot County’s African-Americans were unheard and ignored too often,” Lesher said. “Now that they have allies across racial, ethnic and economic divides, we are beginning to hear them and give them new respect. It is clear that the presence of this statute on the courthouse square would continue to rankle. Tonight’s move is simply overdue.

“The monument is a misrepresentation of history, suggesting an inflated number of Talbot County residents fought against Maryland and against the United States in America’s new birth of freedom,” he said. “In fact, Talbot County voted overwhelmingly for pro-Union candidates to a potential secession convention that never met. This monument is simply not good history.

“And this statue shows a young Confederate soldier, not in surrender, but going off to war in his fresh uniform to fight a lost cause,” Lesher said. “In this Excelsior portrayal from Longfellow’s poem, he is ennobled, heroically prepared to give his life to preserve a way of life that was economically sustained through enslaved black labor.

Councilman Corey Pack agreed and noted the primary goal of the Confederacy was to maintain slavery.

“(W)e may not know individually why those men went to fight, perhaps because their friend down the street was going off to fight, perhaps because they were bored, perhaps because they truly believed in what the Confederacy stood far, we don’t know. But what we do know is the overarching umbrella that the Confederacy stood for,” he said. “And that was most notably the enslavement of black people. And no matter how you cut it, had the Confederacy won, that would have continued on. Written within the documents of their articles of confederacy is for the continuation of slavery….

“So we know what the Confederacy stood for. And these statues that came about at the turn of the 20th century was basically to glamorize that lost cause movement of the Confederacy, that although they fought and lost, they fought for a noble cause.

“I believe this is the right thing for Talbot County, I really do, I really do,” Pack said. “I believe that this is not erasing history, it’s just relocating a statue to another location where it can live out its days and if persons want to go travel and see it at that location, they’re free to do so. But to have the statute out front, that glamorizes a time and a period with not everybody who’s free, to have a statue out front, which still has the the draped flag of the Confederacy, to have that CSA on the buckle of that young man. And knowing what that stood for is not appropriate for this date and time.”

Councilwoman Laura Price had a competing resolution drafted calling for a Union statue and the names of Union soldiers to be added to the existing Confederate monument. But she said Tuesday night that she would not be offering that administrative resolution because she felt the public should be allowed to comment at a public hearing.

“Moving it out of the county is one thing, moving it out of the state is quite another,” she said. “And as I stated, the reason that I’m delaying my resolution is because it does deserve public feedback. And there are some people out there who maybe are supportive of moving the monument, but don’t support moving it to Virginia.

“I would ask you to have a proper public hearing and let people talk about (it). You’re the only one who looked and you alone are deciding to move to Virginia,” Price said. “And I think there’s a lot of people who would be supportive of moving the monument that don’t want it to go to Virginia. So I do have a problem with that….

“I’d much rather have compromise and try to … figure out if we can do another solution. But if this is going to be the solution that passes here, the people, all of the people deserve a proper public hearing…,” she said. “I believe that this is wrong. And it’s not anything to do with my opinion, whether it should stay as is, become a unity, or go, has nothing to do with that, it has everything to do with process.”

Council President Chuck Callahan noted Divilio had had a change of heart on the issue but “I can tell you I’m not there.

“I feel it’s a mistake. I think it’s a mistake, moving it from here,” he said. “I’ve always been very open minded. And I’ve told everybody I’ve been open-minded through the years, you know, could we find a place, could we find a place? I’ve always really been open minded to listen to everybody….

“You know, if we were going to move it, I would love to have the opportunity for the public to have input on where we’re going to put it,” Callahan said. “I really do, I think it’s important…. So I really feel like … if we were to make that decision that this is gonna move, it would have been really great if the public had the opinion on where it was going to be moved at.”

Pack took some issue with Callahan’s remarks about giving the public an opportunity to speak.

“I just want to say for clarification, you know, we’ve had opportunities to engage the public….,” Pack said, referring to requests from the Talbot NAACP and religious leaders to meet with the council to discuss the issue. “We’ve had opportunities to engage the public. We’ve turned down invitations to engage the public.

“Our attorneys from Baltimore City, high-powered attorneys that come consult this council, (said we should) engage the public, and we chose not to,” he said. “So you can’t say to this man now you’re (not) going about (it) the right way because you didn’t include the public. We had opportunities to do so. And the majority chose not to. That’s not fair to now say to him, he hasn’t engaged in the public. When you had opportunity to do it, we did not.

“That’s your opinion,” Callahan replied.

“That’s a fact,” Pack said.

It was unclear whether the approved resolution only provides for the relocation of the statue of the young Confederate soldier atop the base or to the entirety of the monument including statue and base. The resolution as drafted and approved Tuesday night solely refers to the Talbot boys “statue,” and never mentions the word “monument,” but council members spoke about the “monument” when discussing the resolution. The dedication “To the Talbot Boys” appears on the base.

In a Wednesday afternoon email, Divilio indicated his intention with the resolution was to relocate “all of it.”

The draft administrative resolution may be read in its entirety below.

DRAFT_Administrative_Resolution_-_Relocation_of_Talbot_Boys_Statue_-_September_2021

 

Key moments from Tuesday night’s discussion may be seen in the below video, which is about eight minutes long. A full video of the county council meeting may be viewed and/or downloaded at https://talbotcountymd.gov/About-Us/County_Council/council-meeting-video.

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

Filed Under: 1 Homepage Slider, 2 News Homepage, News Portal Highlights, News Portal Lead Tagged With: civil war, confederate, council, county, monument, move, removal, slavery, slaves, statue, Talbot, unity

Plaintiffs Seeking Confederate Monument Removal Say Talbot’s Response is ‘Shameful’

August 17, 2021 by Spy Desk

Talbot County’s arguments that Black people do not have “standing” to pursue a court challenge to a monument to white supremacy on the county courthouse lawn are “outrageous,” “shameful,” and “willfully blind,” plaintiffs suing for the monument’s removal argued Friday in court papers.

The plaintiffs are seeking a court order to remove the Confederate monument and in a strongly worded legal filing outlined the cruelty, pain, and anguish actually inflicted by the monument and the county’s dismissiveness toward Black people’s concerns, according to a press release from the ACLU of Maryland.

“It is unfortunate,” the plaintiffs’ filing begins, “but all too predictable” … “that in responding to the complaint in this case about the unlawful Confederate statue on its courthouse grounds, defendant Talbot County presents the viewpoint of a majority white legislative body as though it were fact, while avoiding any serious effort to confront the cruelty and illegality of its conduct toward Black people. …

“In characterizing the response of Black residents to the Talbot Boys statue as merely offensive, the County ignores the unique place of Black citizens in the eyes of the law, and reveals how little it knows (or cares) about the impact that racism and the legacy of slavery in this country and in its own backyard have on its Black residents.”

The filing includes sworn statements from the plaintiffs detailing the actual injuries they suffer from their forced encounters with the statue.

Plaintiff Kisha Petticolas, a Black attorney who has spent her entire legal career in Talbot County, first as a judicial clerk, then as the county’s first Black assistant state’s attorney, and since 2011 as the only Black public defender at Office of the Public Defender’s Easton office, says the county is flatly wrong it its claims that the statue is merely offensive to her. In fact, she says, the personal anguish she experiences on account of the statue is like a “knife lodged in her soul.”

“To say that the statue pains me every time I walk by it is an understatement — it is a trauma I have had to endure many times weekly throughout my 15 years of practicing law in Talbot County. The statue causes a pain that cuts deeply; one that I have learned to swallow every time I walk into the courthouse. The statue has created a wound that never truly gets the chance to heal.”

Talbot County NAACP Branch President and individual plaintiff Richard Potter strongly agrees:

“Seeing the statue over and over throughout my life has not dulled the pain of what the statue represents. In fact, it has amplified the pain I feel, the longer that the statue remains on the courthouse grounds while the world and society’s views on Confederate statues begin to change around it. It is a thorn in my side that becomes more imbedded, more painful, and more infected with the passage of time.”

Speaking on behalf of the plaintiff NAACP, organizational and community elder Walter Weldon Black, Jr., a former president of both the Talbot NAACP Branch and the Maryland State NAACP, said:

“[T]he presence of the Talbot Boys monument is outrageous and reprehensible, as discrimination stifles people’s ambitions while it closes the doors of opportunity. When Black people are made to feel as a second-class citizen by white society, they believe they are unable to achieve, as white society will not accept them.

“This symbol of white supremacy at the courthouse — maintained by County edict as the highest monument at the courthouse — combines with the fact the staff at the Talbot County courthouse is almost completely white to send a clear message to those looking for fair opportunities at the courthouse, whether be in employment, public services, or for justice through the court system, that they are unlikely to find fairness or equality of treatment there.”

The lawsuit contends that Talbot County’s homage to white supremacists and traitors to the United States and to the State of Maryland cannot remain on government property because it is not consistent with the core promise of the Fourteenth Amendment: Equality to all Americans under the law.

The Maryland Office of the Public Defender, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Petticolas, and Potter are represented by attorneys Daniel W. Wolff, David Ervin, Kelly H. Hibbert, Suzanne Trivette, Tiffanie McDowell, Alexandra Barbee-Garrett, and Ashley McMahon of Crowell & Moring LLP, and Deborah A. Jeon and Tierney Peprah of the ACLU of Maryland.

Go to the ACLU’s website to view the response brief, other legal documents, and additional information at https://www.aclu-md.org/en/cases/opd-et-al-v-talbot-county.

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: ACLU, confederate, council, lawsuit, monument, naacp, Talbot, Talbot County

Talbot Council Proposes $112.5M FY22 Budget

April 16, 2021 by John Griep

This video is about 31 minutes long.

The county council has introduced a $112.5 million budget for the coming fiscal year, up substantially from this year’s $96.5 million budget.

But much of the increase is slated for long-delayed capital projects, including $5 million set aside for a new public safety center. The center would house the Talbot County Sheriff’s Office and related agencies.

All five members of the Talbot County Council introduced the Fiscal Year 2022 budget. Public hearings on the budget, which is Bill 1473, are set for 2 p.m. Tuesday, May 4 (to be held virtually) and 7 p.m. Tuesday, May 4, in the Easton Elementary School cafeteria at 307 Glenwood Ave.

Written public comments may be emailed to [email protected] or mailed to County Council, Courthouse, South Wing, 11 N. Washington St., Easton, MD 21601. The public is encouraged to submit written comments by Monday, May 3.

The budget includes a 1-cent increase above what is allowed under Talbot’s property tax cap. Voters okayed a measure allowing for the rate increase in the November election.

The county’s proposed real property tax rate (outside of incorporated towns) is $0.6529 per $100 of assessed value. The county rate is slightly lower for properties in the town limits of Easton, Oxford, Queen Anne, St. Michaels, and Trappe.

Angela Lane, the county’s finance director, said Tuesday that the general fund budget is 16.56% higher than this year’s, but most of the $16 million increase is for capital projects, capital outlay, and equipment purchases.

Operating expenses would increase less than 4%, she said.

Talbot County Manager Clay Stamp said the strategy for the FY2022 budget included capital projects and retention and recruitment of county staff, particularly in public safety — the sheriff’s office, detention center, and emergency medical services.

“When you look at the budget, we’re looking at a … modest increase in the operational line item of the budget, and clearly an investment in our capital improvement projects,” Stamp said. “(T)he capital improvement program is an investment into our future and frankly a number of the projects in this are long overdue and need to be addressed, and just merely by engaging this level in this program we are trying to … stimulate economic development as well.”

Council Vice President Pete Lesher said the county council made a commitment when asking voters to change the tax cap.

“And we said, where there is a critical need is in … public safety, and it’s both in the capital needs with the construction of the sheriff’s office on the horizon, but also … the recruitment and retention of our officers and the aspects of this budget that have to do with public safety salaries, not only sheriff’s office but in emergency services and so forth, all of those public safety functions,” he said. “We’re making a real commitment.

“(T)his I believe is a responsible and sustainable budget, and is fulfilling — as we made that commitment to the public — those critical functions and funding them going forward,” Lesher said. “We heard from the public that these are important, these need to be funded. And we’re true to our word here, this is where this money is going.”

Councilman Frank Divilio said he was nervous about such a big increase.

“I know that we’re making some huge improvements, both in traffic and safety and in all departments, but it comes at a time when money isn’t just freely flowing, if you look around and businesses are either closed or hiring right now, it’s a very odd time,” he said. “And I am very nervous because I know we still have the road to recovery to come out of this and we’re not … there yet.

Councilman Corey Pack said council members knew that long-delayed capital projects needed to be funded.

“Several of us knew that these capital expenses were going to come due, and we’re going to have to step up and pay for them,” he said. “I think the way that this budget is set up, yes there is a large increase, but we look at the operational side … less than a 4% (increase)…, and that’s the part that keeps eating, the operational side.

“But it’s not reckless spending, and it’s not an increase just for the sake of increase…. We had to do some things on the capital side that we knew that we’re gonna have to pay,” Pack said. “We had to do some things on the operational side when it comes to retention and recruitment and keeping good quality people here. So, this is the price you have to pay to do business in the 21st century.”

Councilwoman Laura Price recalled her first year on the council “when we had to cut a budget and slice and dice and it was painful because the county had, … in the two years prior, … used $17 million in fund balance.”

She noted capital projects require separate approval after budget passage.

“(P)eople need to know that any capital spending requires a whole separate bill to truly authorize the expenditure,” Price said. “So it’s ready to go, but we haven’t, you know, spent that yet.”

Bill 1473

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: budget, council, Talbot County, tax rate

Transgender Day of Visibility is being recognized March 31 in Talbot County

March 30, 2021 by John Griep

The Talbot County Council voted unanimously to recognize the International Transgender Day of Visibility, described by Wikipedia as an awareness day “dedicated to celebrating transgender people and raising awareness of discrimination faced by transgender people worldwide, as well as a celebration of their contributions to society.”

This video is about 10 minutes long.

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: awareness, council, discrimination, Talbot County, transgender, visibility

Easton Council OKs Mail-in Ballots for Town Elections

March 16, 2021 by John Griep

The town council voted unanimously Monday night to allow mail-in ballots for town elections.

Ordinance 758 amends the town’s code to allow any qualified town voter to vote by absentee ballot rather than in person. The current code limits absentee ballots to those who may be absent for any reason from the town on any election day, or who may be unable to vote due to illness, disability, or emergency reason.

All five members of the Easton town council voted in favor of the ordinance after a March 15 public hearing. Easton Mayor Robert Willey signed the ordinance that night and it becomes effective April 4, in time for the town’s regular May election.

The new law requires an application for an absentee ballot to be submitted to the town clerk no later than the Tuesday preceding a town election.

Completed absentee ballots must be received by the town by mail or in person by 8 p.m. on election day in order to be counted.

Regular town elections are held every two years on the first Monday in May. This year’s election will be for council president and for council members for the second and fourth wards.

Easton Ordinance 758 Absentee Ballots

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: absentee, ballot, council, Easton, election, mail-in, mayor, vote

Stamp Will be New County Manager as Hollis Set to Return to Nonprofit Sector

November 12, 2020 by John Griep

County Manager Andrew Hollis is stepping down at year’s end to return to the nonprofit sector and the county council has named Clay Stamp as his replacement.

The Talbot County Council announced the news in a Thursday morning press release.

Andy Hollis

Hollis has served a total of 17 years as county manager — from 1999 to 2010 and again from Dec. 15, 2014, until he leaves the post on Dec. 31, 2020.

He served as an elected member of the county council during the gap in his tenure as county manager, including one year as vice president. During that time, he also worked as assistant chief operating officer for Delmarva Community Services from 2010-12 and as executive director of Londonderry Retirement Community from 2012-14.

Hollis was the county’s assistant planning officer from 1985-89 and St. Michaels town manager from 1991-99.

“Andy’s efforts have made our job all the easier, and his counsel has been greatly appreciated,” Council President Corey W. Pack said in a statement. “He has gone above and beyond in fulfillment of his duties. The council wishes him all the best as he closes this chapter in county government and enters the nonprofit sector.”

“It has been my greatest honor and privilege to serve the citizens of Talbot County,” Hollis said in a statement to The Talbot Spy. “I consider the county incredibly fortunate to have someone of Clay Stamp’s caliber step into the position. In addition the county’s department heads are well equipped to carry on and second to none in dedication to our citizens and their needs.”

Clay Stamp

Stamp, who currently serves as the county’s emergency services director and assistant county manager, will be county manager effective Jan. 1. He previously has served as county manager on an interim basis.

Stamp served 27 years as the emergency management director for Ocean City, Md., and has served in several senior level state positions in emergency management and homeland security.

“Clay’s demeanor, attitude, and approach to day-to-day operations will serve the council, the county, and its employees well,” Pack said. “He will assist the council as it deals with a variety of challenges in the years to come, in both the budgetary and legislative arenas.

“The budgetary responsibility of the county council is one of its most important functions. Clay has been a part of a number of previous budget processes, and that historical knowledge will be invaluable,” Pack said. “In general, Clay’s past service, as both county manager and director of emergency services/assistant county manager, will allow this council to continue moving forward with the job of doing the people’s business.”

“I am most appreciative of this opportunity given me by the county council,” Stamp said in a statement. “It is both a privilege and an honor to step back into the position of county manager to serve the citizens of Talbot County. This council is a group of dedicated, experienced, and enthusiastic individuals who work for the betterment of the county. I again appreciate the opportunity to be a part of it.”

Stamp also notes that the quality of the county’s department heads is second to none, and that it is a privilege to again work
with them in providing public service of the highest level.

“Andy Hollis has done a terrific job as county manager, and has set the bar high with his team’s many accomplishments,” Stamp said. “I look forward to working with Andy and the department heads in what I anticipate will be a very
smooth transition as the new county manager.”

Per the Talbot County Charter, the county manager is appointed on the basis of education and professional experience in executive and administrative affairs, and is the chief administrative officer of the county. Under the direction of the Council, the county manager directs and supervises the administration of all agencies of the county government, except as
otherwise provided by charter or by law.

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: andy hollis, clay stamp, Corey Pack, council, manager, Talbot County, Talbot County Council

Mayor, Ward 2, and Ward 3 Races in Cambridge Head to Dec. 1 Run-Off Elections

October 20, 2020 by Spy Desk

Roche earns Ward 1 seat, Cephas wins in Ward 4, Malkus unopposed in Ward 5

Cambridge Mayor Victoria Jackson-Stanley will face Andrew Bradshaw in a Dec. 1 run-off election.

The incumbent mayor got 40.62% of the vote on Oct. 17, Bradshaw had 27.79%, La-Shon Banks Foster had 19.27%, and Robert S. Larimer had 12.32%.

Since no mayoral candidate won 50%+1 of the vote in the first round, the two candidates with the highest vote counts move on to the run-off election. The same process occurred in Wards 2 and 3.

In Ward 2, incumbent Commissioner Donald Sydnor (38.84%) will face Lajan Natasha Cephas (30.28%) in the run-off election. Paul F. Baiers Jr. had 16.93% of the vote and Tyzann Meekins had 13.94%.

In Ward 3, Gary T. Gordy (39.24%) and Jameson Harrington (30.59%) move on to the run-off election. Harrington barely edged out Duane Farrow, who had 30.17% of the vote. Harrington had 144 votes to 142 for Farrow.

Brian Roche, with 61.59% of the vote, was elected commissioner in Ward 1. Sharon B. Smith had 26.81% and Tom Bradley had 11.59%.

With only two candidates in Ward 4, Sputty Cephas (51.14%) narrowly defeated incumbent Dave Cannon (48.86%).

Chad Malkus was unopposed in Ward 5.

Election officials verified the results of the Saturday election on Monday, beginning the process at 10 a.m.

The Dec. 1 run-off election will be held from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Chesapeake College center in downtown Cambridge. It will be a mail-in election, with all previously registered voters being mailed a ballot during the first week of November. Voted ballots may be returned by mail or dropped off on Dec. 1 at Chesapeake College.

City Manager Patrick Comiskey will discuss the election at 7 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 21. View the program here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTChlDYAnxg

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

Filed Under: 2 News Homepage Tagged With: 2020, Cambridge, council, election, mayor, run-off

Next Page »

Copyright © 2025

Affiliated News

  • The Chestertown Spy
  • The Talbot Spy

Sections

  • Arts
  • Culture
  • Ecosystem
  • Education
  • Mid-Shore Health
  • Culture and Local Life
  • Shore Recovery
  • Spy Senior Nation

Spy Community Media

  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Underwriting

Copyright © 2025 · Spy Community Media Child Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in