The Coastkeeper took a long awaited vacation, came home totally relaxed, recharged, renewed, calm, focused and ready to get back to work.
Then I attended the Worcester County Commissioner's work session on Tuesday, Oct. 20 and all that stuff I mentioned in the first line was gone...poof....back was the brain strain, the twitchy eyeball, the muscle cramp just above that left shoulder blade.
How can elected officials, who are responsible for the well being of our wonderful Worcester County, be so off base, so uninformed, so willing to publicly flaunt their ignorance and incompetence??
The work session was for the purpose of the county staff to go over the recommended changes to the draft Zoning District Maps (based on public comments received during the open comment period this past June) with the County Commissioners- all part of the process as the County finally gets around to implementing the 2006 Comprehensive Plan.
For the past 3 months, county staff and the Planning Commission have taken time to go over every submitted public comment regarding the proposed new zoning code and the proposed zoning districts and they suggested changes when they felt your public comments warranted the change. Some public comments were debated at the numerous Planning Commission/staff meetings and it was deemed not appropriate to recommend any changes. And some changes just seemed to appear out of nowhere - like that off-site septic system exemption I mentioned in my previous posting, which is now in the code but wasn't there when the public was given the chance to review the new code and make comment.
I sat in on most of those Planning Commission work sessions. I watched and listened to the debates, the advice offered by county staff; observed the time taken to consider each request and come to a consensus.
Guess how many County Commissioners attended these meetings? ....and the correct answer is.....one. During a number of these meetings I observed County Commissioner Linda Busick taking notes, sitting there in the peanut gallery with the rest of us. Kudos, Commissioner Busick. Was my County Commissioner there, Mr. Church, at any time? .....and the correct answer is....no (that wasn't very hard, was it?)
So back to Tuesday, October 20, 2009. I could count the number of citizens in the audience observing this meeting on two hands. Good golly Miss Molly, did you ever miss the show of the year if you weren't there! If this county ever needed to have public meetings televised, or at least have a tape recording of every word said, Tuesday, October 20, 2009 was the day to do it. Folks, it was absolute chaos up there on the dais.
County staff had prepared a rather large packet of information, I believe a thick notebook, that had been given to the Commissioners in advance of these work sessions, to allow them to read and see what had been done over the past three months. (I'm sorry I have to keep saying County staff, but that's my only option these days. This new consolidated 'department' doesn't have a name. I can't refer to County Planning Director because we don't have one anymore. There is a new 'Director' and a new 'Deputy Director' but I don't know what they are Directors of... but when I refer to County staff I mean Director, Deputy Director, and their staff.)
It was very obvious from the get-go that most of the Commissioners sitting up there either did not have the book in front of them, or had not even read the book to prepare themselves for this meeting.
What was supposed to be a discussion about proposed changes to the Draft Zoning Maps to reflect the Land Use elements adopted by most of these VERY SAME COMMISSIONERS in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan became a chaotic, uncontrolled display of total ignorance of the subject matter and absolutely total ignorance of the job at hand.
Commissioner Cowger admitted (knowingly but more likely unknowingly) that AFTER the public comment period had closed he had discussions with land owners along Rt. 589 who want to see their parcels upzoned to a Commercial-2 District (not as heavy commercial as to allow big box stores, but almost.)
This is wrong on soooo many levels. First, Mr. Cowger, apparently some people in this county are allowed to continue the public comment period even now, when the rest of us adhered to the legally set deadline of June 12. And this might be a good place to note that while I was a good girl and adhered to the rules of the meeting President Gulyas set - no public participation during the proceedings - how is it that not a single Commissioner, and especially Ms. Gulyas, did not bat an eyelash when Mark Cropper, noted attorney to most every developer in the county, walked up ON TO THE DAIS during the meeting and whispered sweet nothings into the ear of County Attorney Sonny Bloxom??? I can only imagine what would have happened had I sauntered up to the dais and approached Mr. Bloxom during the meeting.
Second, Mr. Cowger, this is not about zoning parcels of land to accommodate the wishes of the property owner. This is about planning a balanced use of ALL the land in Worcester County to assure the land will provide economic viability for the County, pleasant areas to live in, protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and a use of the land that will assure us the same Worcester County we enjoy today (the same Worcester County citizens, stakeholders and County Commissioners pledged to protect in 2006) will be there for future generations.
I watched incredulously as the Commissioners began to debate, argue and interject their views about this parcel, and that parcel, and actually NAMED property owners....oh my gosh, they were actually talking about how to zone parts of this county because 'so and so' owned the property.
This meeting was no longer about land use planning and zoning. It was now about 'how can we accommodate this person and that person?'
What was so amazing to me is that everything the Planning Commission and County staff had prepared for them, which served to answer a lot of their questions, was totally ignored. Some Commissioners did not even have these documents in front of them. How incredibly rude, how incredibly inconsiderate to those who had prepared them. How flat out IRRESPONSIBLE to the citizens of this County!!!
Worse - the reality is this, these elected officials who are going to vote on a new Zoning Code, Subdivision Development Regulations, Commercial Development Regulations and a new Zoning District Map don't have a clue what is in there. They haven't read it.
And you know what is really laughable, if one can laugh at this point? I'm willing to bet next week's pay check that every single one of our County Commissioners has at one time or another complained that our Congress is about to vote on a Health Care Bill that the elected officials in Congress have not read.
Ok, I guess at this point some of you are wondering about the title of this blog post? Here's the reason: on October 20, 2009 during a County Commissioner work session I almost shouted out at the top of my lungs "stop this madness! It's embarrassing!"
I truly did, in fact I felt I was so close to getting out of control I had to leave the Commissioner Chambers, go outside, bang my head against the cement pillar at the top of the steps, and talk aloud to myself like some homeless person in San Francisco (you know what I mean - you're on Columbus and watching some guy having a conversation with another homeless dude across town on Van Ness who is also talking into his shirt.) I literally had to talk myself down, get composed, and go back inside to take my seat and adhere to the rules, and not say a word.
And now I can close my very public diary, hit 'publish', and go to bed. But I haven't slept well since Tuesday, October 20 and I don't expect to sleep well tonight. There is much to research, attorneys to consult, and strategies to plan with my Board. There is serious trouble in River City folks and we need to pay attention.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
Important County Commissioner meeting Oct 20
The COASTKEEPER wants to remind you about the County Commissioner work session Tuesday Oct. 20, at 1:30 pm at the Govt. office building in Snow Hill.
The October 20 work session will be to review the revised ZONING MAPS, based on input that was given to the County during the Public Hearing in June and based on your written comments.
The Planning Commission is submitting some very good changes to the proposed zoning districts, particularly more protective zoning for the Sinepuxent Road and Holly Grove Road areas, which are the headwaters to three very important creeks (Ayers, Trappe, Herring.) Based on ACT’s comments and yours, this area will now see a larger land area protected as a Resource Protection District.
We are also pleased with the inclusion of more protective language/text regarding our impaired waterways and the development along these waterways.
Significant changes have also been recommended for the Rt. 611 corridor and for South Point, and also down in the Stockton area.
Thanks to unprecedented public participation and support, Assateague Coastal Trust is generally pleased with the revisions being proposed to the Draft Zoning Code and Land Use Map.
Those of you who live in the South Point area might want to review this observation made by County staff to the Planning Commissioners regarding the revised E-1 zoning districts in South Point and along the Rt. 611 corridor:
"Even though the requested retention in the E-1 Estate District is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the staff and Planning Commission have no objection to doing so and would therefore recommend that the E-1 Estate District be retained in the MD Rt. 611/South Point area. However, the citizens do need to realize that in the next planning period the E-1 Estate District will need to be abolished and another zoning designation placed upon the area. The citizens should give serious consideration to what type of zoning classification is most in keeping with the area without creating extensive non-conforming lots or uses or having unanticipated adverse impacts to themselves".
While it’s humorous that County Staff uses this instance to note the E-1 District is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan when it was County Staff that recommended the Commissioners RETAIN the E-1 zoning, it should also be noted the 2006 Comprehensive Land Use Map adopted by the County does indeed indicate a zoning district designation for the eliminated E-1 districts – look at the 2006 Land Use Map - all E-1 districts have been reverted to an Agricultural designation. Furthermore, if you read the ‘Watershed Characterizations’ in the land use section of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, there is a very clear direction on what should be done!
At recent meetings with County staff, Ed Tudor has pointed out that perhaps residents in current E-1 Districts might not like to have a chicken house built next door to them. If you read the proposed zoning District definitions, you will see that the Proposed A-2 agricultural zoning district and the current E-1 zoning District share the same allowed uses, including poultry operations, animal waste storage lagoons, aquaculture operations, and other agricultural uses, and while the A-2 District might allow for a more commercial use these are by special exception only, so the public would have an opportunity to question those uses.
There was a reason the 2006 Comprehensive Plan called for the elimination of the E-1, which the current County Commissioners have refused to deal with, and the reason was because most of our E-1 zoning districts are in the flood plain, Critical Area, or resource sensitive areas. Up-zoning these remaining E-1 Districts to higher density uses is not sound land planning if they are located away from public services such as water and wastewater, so the Comprehensive Land Use maps recommended an agricultural zoning designation.
You can read Mr. Tudor’s full comments to the Planning Commission on the ACT website, here. The zoning map comments are located near the end of the document. ACT does not have a copy of the most current recommendations from the Planning Commission to the County Commissioners, however this document is fairly representational of those recommendations.
Assateague Coastal Trust agrees with Mr. Tudor’s assessment that the citizens in the E-1 Districts should give serious consideration to the zoning designations during the next Comprehensive Planning round of re-zoning. This is only a year away, ironically, since it has taken the county so long to get around to implementing the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. ACT will keep you updated on the next round of zoning updates so you, the public, can have adequate time to become involved in the process.
Meanwhile- A show of citizen support at the Commissioner’s work session on October 20 will help ACT keep the pressure on so the Commissioners will accept the Planning Commission recommendations and not try to weaken these recommendations.
I know it’s difficult to attend these day time meetings on a work day. And we are sorry we don’t have a way to post actual word for word transcripts so the public could read what was said and what happened at these public meetings.
Perhaps someday, with enough citizen input, the County will schedule these types of meetings for the evening so that greater public participation or observation may take place. Or perhaps one day the County will actually consider live video presentation of their public meetings on a public access cable channel! Something to push for during the next election cycle??
Thank you again for your participation this past summer in the drafting of our new zoning code. We made some significant changes for the better and we need your help to keep the County Commissioners committed to keeping these changes!
The October 20 work session will be to review the revised ZONING MAPS, based on input that was given to the County during the Public Hearing in June and based on your written comments.
The Planning Commission is submitting some very good changes to the proposed zoning districts, particularly more protective zoning for the Sinepuxent Road and Holly Grove Road areas, which are the headwaters to three very important creeks (Ayers, Trappe, Herring.) Based on ACT’s comments and yours, this area will now see a larger land area protected as a Resource Protection District.
We are also pleased with the inclusion of more protective language/text regarding our impaired waterways and the development along these waterways.
Significant changes have also been recommended for the Rt. 611 corridor and for South Point, and also down in the Stockton area.
Thanks to unprecedented public participation and support, Assateague Coastal Trust is generally pleased with the revisions being proposed to the Draft Zoning Code and Land Use Map.
Those of you who live in the South Point area might want to review this observation made by County staff to the Planning Commissioners regarding the revised E-1 zoning districts in South Point and along the Rt. 611 corridor:
"Even though the requested retention in the E-1 Estate District is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the staff and Planning Commission have no objection to doing so and would therefore recommend that the E-1 Estate District be retained in the MD Rt. 611/South Point area. However, the citizens do need to realize that in the next planning period the E-1 Estate District will need to be abolished and another zoning designation placed upon the area. The citizens should give serious consideration to what type of zoning classification is most in keeping with the area without creating extensive non-conforming lots or uses or having unanticipated adverse impacts to themselves".
While it’s humorous that County Staff uses this instance to note the E-1 District is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan when it was County Staff that recommended the Commissioners RETAIN the E-1 zoning, it should also be noted the 2006 Comprehensive Land Use Map adopted by the County does indeed indicate a zoning district designation for the eliminated E-1 districts – look at the 2006 Land Use Map - all E-1 districts have been reverted to an Agricultural designation. Furthermore, if you read the ‘Watershed Characterizations’ in the land use section of the 2006 Comprehensive Plan, there is a very clear direction on what should be done!
At recent meetings with County staff, Ed Tudor has pointed out that perhaps residents in current E-1 Districts might not like to have a chicken house built next door to them. If you read the proposed zoning District definitions, you will see that the Proposed A-2 agricultural zoning district and the current E-1 zoning District share the same allowed uses, including poultry operations, animal waste storage lagoons, aquaculture operations, and other agricultural uses, and while the A-2 District might allow for a more commercial use these are by special exception only, so the public would have an opportunity to question those uses.
There was a reason the 2006 Comprehensive Plan called for the elimination of the E-1, which the current County Commissioners have refused to deal with, and the reason was because most of our E-1 zoning districts are in the flood plain, Critical Area, or resource sensitive areas. Up-zoning these remaining E-1 Districts to higher density uses is not sound land planning if they are located away from public services such as water and wastewater, so the Comprehensive Land Use maps recommended an agricultural zoning designation.
You can read Mr. Tudor’s full comments to the Planning Commission on the ACT website, here. The zoning map comments are located near the end of the document. ACT does not have a copy of the most current recommendations from the Planning Commission to the County Commissioners, however this document is fairly representational of those recommendations.
Assateague Coastal Trust agrees with Mr. Tudor’s assessment that the citizens in the E-1 Districts should give serious consideration to the zoning designations during the next Comprehensive Planning round of re-zoning. This is only a year away, ironically, since it has taken the county so long to get around to implementing the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. ACT will keep you updated on the next round of zoning updates so you, the public, can have adequate time to become involved in the process.
Meanwhile- A show of citizen support at the Commissioner’s work session on October 20 will help ACT keep the pressure on so the Commissioners will accept the Planning Commission recommendations and not try to weaken these recommendations.
I know it’s difficult to attend these day time meetings on a work day. And we are sorry we don’t have a way to post actual word for word transcripts so the public could read what was said and what happened at these public meetings.
Perhaps someday, with enough citizen input, the County will schedule these types of meetings for the evening so that greater public participation or observation may take place. Or perhaps one day the County will actually consider live video presentation of their public meetings on a public access cable channel! Something to push for during the next election cycle??
Thank you again for your participation this past summer in the drafting of our new zoning code. We made some significant changes for the better and we need your help to keep the County Commissioners committed to keeping these changes!
Monday, October 12, 2009
Promises and Threats
In an article posted Oct 1 on delmarvanow.com a reader, "Hadley", said this about the resignation of Sandy Coyman, Planning Director for Worcester County: "Developers & Realtors, draw up those contracts; contractors, man your backhoes; carpenters, fire up those air nailers and skill saws: Happy Days are here again, Kelly is "liaising” with tech stuff and keeping track of ID badges, and ding-dong, Sandy’s gone. Kathy P and other Coastal Bay Untrustworthies-- cry me a river."
On Oct. 8, Mr. Coyman was quoted in a Worcester County Times article, referring to the 2006 Worcester County Comprehensive Plan, "A comprehensive plan should really be a compact between elected officials, county government and the citizens to let them know where we are all trying to go and how to get there, its something to be taken very seriously."
Both of these quotes explain what has happened in Worcester County.
If you attend Commissioner Meetings in this county you would know that County Counsel Sonny Bloxom and County Commissioner President Louise Gulyas didn't respect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. They both said publicly that "a plan is just that, a plan, and plans are made to be changed." Gulyas supported the dissolution of the County Planning Department.
On their lead, Commissioners Purnell, Church and Cowger joined the effort to break this compact between the county and its citizens in favor of assisting a few businessmen who wish to further jeopardize the future of Worcester County for their own monetary gain.
On Oct. 8, Mr. Coyman was quoted in a Worcester County Times article, referring to the 2006 Worcester County Comprehensive Plan, "A comprehensive plan should really be a compact between elected officials, county government and the citizens to let them know where we are all trying to go and how to get there, its something to be taken very seriously."
Both of these quotes explain what has happened in Worcester County.
If you attend Commissioner Meetings in this county you would know that County Counsel Sonny Bloxom and County Commissioner President Louise Gulyas didn't respect the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. They both said publicly that "a plan is just that, a plan, and plans are made to be changed." Gulyas supported the dissolution of the County Planning Department.
On their lead, Commissioners Purnell, Church and Cowger joined the effort to break this compact between the county and its citizens in favor of assisting a few businessmen who wish to further jeopardize the future of Worcester County for their own monetary gain.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
I Bottle My Own
While paddling on Pamlico Sound yesterday I drank cool tap water from my water bottle and thought I should post a note on my blog about why I fill my own water bottle each day.
![]()
During the 2009 WATERKEEPER Alliance annual conference, the COASTKEEPER viewed a 2008 Sundance Film Festival documentary selection “FLOW– How DidA Handful of Corporations Steal OurWater?”, an investigation into what experts label the most important political and environmental issue of the 21st century.
This documentary deals with the increasing privatization of the world’s disappearing fresh water supply and brings to the forefront how politics, human rights, pollution and in some cases downright theft of aquifers is all tied up in this industry. Not to mention the other issue, which is the millions of plastic bottles ending up in our landfills each year.
Inspired by this wake up call, the Assateague COASTKEEPER took an idea from the NY/NJ BAYKEEPER Program and ordered up a batch of stainless steel re-usable water bottles that declare “I BOTTLE MY OWN.”
Now you too can own one of these beauties! Each bottle comes with a carabiner clip and a little compass. Please send $15.00 (which includes S/H) to ACT, PO Box 731, Berlin, MD 21811; or stop by the ACT office in Berlin and pick one up for $12. Not only will you be helping to save the world’s fresh water supplies, you can also help to promote the Assateague COASTKEEPER Program! Order yours today. ACT hopes to bring a special viewing of “FLOW” to our watershed this fall. Watch our website and your emails for an announcement.
Less Plastic - More clean water!
This documentary deals with the increasing privatization of the world’s disappearing fresh water supply and brings to the forefront how politics, human rights, pollution and in some cases downright theft of aquifers is all tied up in this industry. Not to mention the other issue, which is the millions of plastic bottles ending up in our landfills each year.
Inspired by this wake up call, the Assateague COASTKEEPER took an idea from the NY/NJ BAYKEEPER Program and ordered up a batch of stainless steel re-usable water bottles that declare “I BOTTLE MY OWN.”
Now you too can own one of these beauties! Each bottle comes with a carabiner clip and a little compass. Please send $15.00 (which includes S/H) to ACT, PO Box 731, Berlin, MD 21811; or stop by the ACT office in Berlin and pick one up for $12. Not only will you be helping to save the world’s fresh water supplies, you can also help to promote the Assateague COASTKEEPER Program! Order yours today. ACT hopes to bring a special viewing of “FLOW” to our watershed this fall. Watch our website and your emails for an announcement.
Less Plastic - More clean water!
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Quiet time
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Co-Opting the Message
Last week 1000 Friends of Maryland launched their newest campaign around land use, a campaign targeted at Maryland's agricultural lands. Their goal is to keep farmers 'farming' and stop the continued sell-off of our rich agricultural lands to subdivision development.
A worthy goal and one vested in their mission statement. Unfortunately their media materials contained some language that I would like to debate.
A section of their publication stated "The growing divide between the agricultural community and the environmental community threatens to further alienate farmers in the public eye. The most volatile area of conflict has been around regulations on runoff from poultry farms, and there are indications that the divide may become more pronounced as the EPA and states struggle with failed bay cleanup goals. 1000 Friends of Maryland can help to bridge the divide among interest groups and communities in all parts of the region..."
Now besides the fact I met with these folks prior to the publication of these materials and I thought we had specifically addressed this language, the fact that they could not tell me how they planned to 'bridge' this gap leaves me disturbed. The reference to environmental laws and regulations as the reason for this great divide brought to mind a column I wrote for the ACT newsletter about a year ago.
And so I have dusted off that old 2008 column and post it now on my blog, because it is still so very relevant!! Read on......
I recently represented Assateague Coastal Trust at a one day retreat of Eastern Shore environmental groups, hosted by the MD League of Conservation Voters. Our goal for the day was to find a way to strengthen our influence in Annapolis by coming together as a unified voice for the Eastern Shore.
Not surprisingly, WATERKEEPER Alliance's effort to bring about more transparency in the CAFO permitting process quickly became a topic of discussion among a few of the groups and at first I was not bothered by direct and indirect comments on the perceived folly of our effort.
I became increasingly alarmed as the other environmental advocates spoke using expressions like "partnership with the farmers" and "protecting the family farms." What alarmed me about this discussion was not that these land conservation advocates needed to work cooperatively with our Maryland farmers, but rather that these environmentalists had been using the very phrasing developed by the poultry industry to fight regulation.
If you've ever heard the term “co-opted” used and didn't know exactly what it meant, this was a perfect example. One way or another, these environmental groups had been duped into speaking the language of the Poultry industry, language that seeks to dissemble and misrepresent the issues that we as environmental groups must pursue. By using this language, these people were unwittingly supporting the very group that fights so hard to prevent the regulation necessary to protect our drinking and recreational waters.
Do you ever get angry when you see someone throw trash on the beach at Assateague? Would you stop someone from dumping waste oil down a storm drain? Do you think it's OK for people to throw garbage from their car windows?
The fact is, the issue that seemed to alarm them the most was that WATERKEEPER wanted the poultry industry, like every other individual and industry in the country, to obey the laws which were written to protect the environment. This is what WATERKEEPER Alliance is asking the state to do by requesting transparency.
This is not new law or new regulation, it is simply saying, "You must tell us what you are doing." For too long now the poultry industry has been exempted from the same requirements that other industries must follow; providing specific information on how they handle runoff and waste.
Then there's the persistent myth of the "family farm." I've been to family farms, I know farmers who run their own operations on their own land, and I know the difference between that type of operation and a factory farm (which are family farms about as much as the Sopranos were a "family").
The poultry industry likes to portray these issues as hurting the family farmer when the real truth is that the poultry industry itself is more of an enemy to the family farm than any current form of state or federal regulation. The advantages they seek for these businesses, things like tax breaks, environmental waivers and zoning exceptions uniformly advantage only the largest corporate operations.
In fact these advantages the corporations seek usually result in an unfair competitive advantage for the large operations, an advantage that all too often results in the loss of family farms as profit falls and costs rise.
So don't tell me that by fighting to make others obey the same laws we all have to obey I'm hurting someone. And don't tell me that by protecting the water you play on, swim in, fish in, and drink I'm somehow doing the devil's work.
A worthy goal and one vested in their mission statement. Unfortunately their media materials contained some language that I would like to debate.
A section of their publication stated "The growing divide between the agricultural community and the environmental community threatens to further alienate farmers in the public eye. The most volatile area of conflict has been around regulations on runoff from poultry farms, and there are indications that the divide may become more pronounced as the EPA and states struggle with failed bay cleanup goals. 1000 Friends of Maryland can help to bridge the divide among interest groups and communities in all parts of the region..."
Now besides the fact I met with these folks prior to the publication of these materials and I thought we had specifically addressed this language, the fact that they could not tell me how they planned to 'bridge' this gap leaves me disturbed. The reference to environmental laws and regulations as the reason for this great divide brought to mind a column I wrote for the ACT newsletter about a year ago.
And so I have dusted off that old 2008 column and post it now on my blog, because it is still so very relevant!! Read on......
I recently represented Assateague Coastal Trust at a one day retreat of Eastern Shore environmental groups, hosted by the MD League of Conservation Voters. Our goal for the day was to find a way to strengthen our influence in Annapolis by coming together as a unified voice for the Eastern Shore.
Not surprisingly, WATERKEEPER Alliance's effort to bring about more transparency in the CAFO permitting process quickly became a topic of discussion among a few of the groups and at first I was not bothered by direct and indirect comments on the perceived folly of our effort.
I became increasingly alarmed as the other environmental advocates spoke using expressions like "partnership with the farmers" and "protecting the family farms." What alarmed me about this discussion was not that these land conservation advocates needed to work cooperatively with our Maryland farmers, but rather that these environmentalists had been using the very phrasing developed by the poultry industry to fight regulation.
If you've ever heard the term “co-opted” used and didn't know exactly what it meant, this was a perfect example. One way or another, these environmental groups had been duped into speaking the language of the Poultry industry, language that seeks to dissemble and misrepresent the issues that we as environmental groups must pursue. By using this language, these people were unwittingly supporting the very group that fights so hard to prevent the regulation necessary to protect our drinking and recreational waters.
Do you ever get angry when you see someone throw trash on the beach at Assateague? Would you stop someone from dumping waste oil down a storm drain? Do you think it's OK for people to throw garbage from their car windows?
The fact is, the issue that seemed to alarm them the most was that WATERKEEPER wanted the poultry industry, like every other individual and industry in the country, to obey the laws which were written to protect the environment. This is what WATERKEEPER Alliance is asking the state to do by requesting transparency.
This is not new law or new regulation, it is simply saying, "You must tell us what you are doing." For too long now the poultry industry has been exempted from the same requirements that other industries must follow; providing specific information on how they handle runoff and waste.
Then there's the persistent myth of the "family farm." I've been to family farms, I know farmers who run their own operations on their own land, and I know the difference between that type of operation and a factory farm (which are family farms about as much as the Sopranos were a "family").
The poultry industry likes to portray these issues as hurting the family farmer when the real truth is that the poultry industry itself is more of an enemy to the family farm than any current form of state or federal regulation. The advantages they seek for these businesses, things like tax breaks, environmental waivers and zoning exceptions uniformly advantage only the largest corporate operations.
In fact these advantages the corporations seek usually result in an unfair competitive advantage for the large operations, an advantage that all too often results in the loss of family farms as profit falls and costs rise.
So don't tell me that by fighting to make others obey the same laws we all have to obey I'm hurting someone. And don't tell me that by protecting the water you play on, swim in, fish in, and drink I'm somehow doing the devil's work.
Monday, September 28, 2009
IMPORTANT WORCESTER COUNTY MEETING OCT 6
Please be advised! The Planning Commission has turned over a 'final draft' document of the revised County Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Map (based on public comment submitted this summer) to the County Commissioners.
The Commissioners will hold two work sessions to review these changes and prepare to adopt a new Zoning Ordinance, new Zoning District Map, and new Subdivision Regulations. The first is Oct. 6 at 1:30 pm in the Government Office Bldg. in Snow Hill. The second work session will be Oct. 20 at 1:30pm, same location.
It is imperative concerned County citizens attend these work sessions to listen and be seen**. No further public comment can be made and these work sessions, while open to the public, will not be open to public comment.
Through Assateague Coastal Trust, ACT attorneys and I helped to draft our written comments earlier this summer and they were submitted to the County by ACT's President Jim Rapp on behalf of the ACT Board of Directors.
Many of our comments regarding identification of impaired waterways, incorporation of better TMDL protective language, a more protective zoning district for the Holly Grove Swamp, (which in turn will protect the water quality of Herring, Turville, Trappe and Ayers Creeks,) were indeed drafted into these new documents.
In addition, per our comments, improvements to various definitions regarding environmental resources and environment features were written into the code. However, despite our pressure the County chose not to address the abolishment of the Estate Zone, nor did it chose to deal with another progressive Comp. Plan program - Transfer of Development Rights - to keep commercial development in the commercial zones.
I have to admit I was greatly surprised by this. After all, there was a huge hullabaloo in June after the public comments were received by Permitting Dept. Director Ed Tudor and assistant Phyllis Wimbrow (yes, it was Permitting Staff writing the new Code, not Planning....go figure.) And then of course, just after the public comment period, the entire government structure was overthrown and Permitting became King, with Planning and Environmental Programs kicked out of the sandbox.
Wimbrow publically berated ACT, the Coastkeeper, Maryland Coastal Bays Program and even the Maryland Department of Planning (!) during the June Planning Commission meeting, accusing us of not knowing what we were talking about.
Well, I'll admit I don't have an undergraduate or post graduate degree in Planning....but wait, neither do those two!
Oh, but I digress. Let me get back on track.
So imagine how thrilled I was to find some of our suggested language drafted into the revised code and subdivision regs.
My issue at this point is new language in the revised draft of the Code that now specifically exempts Rural Cluster Subdivisions and Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions from the previous requirement to contain all their wastewater treatment on-site.
Offsite septic waste disposal systems and off-site location for drain fields is not good! There are a number of these in the county already. If they aren't providing a great location for people to drive down the dirt access road into the woods to dump their garbage, these off-site systems are prone to lack of monitoring, inspection and maintenance. Which means pollution to our streams, creeks and groundwater.
Another problem with this new language in the Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions is that if off-site sewage disposal is allowed, the lot size is allowed to be smaller, which can potentially increase the number of lots to the maximum of 20 allowed. If the septic sewage had to be treated on each lot, the lots are required to be larger, thus limiting the total number of houses built.
Look folks - if the land you want to put a housing development on cannot handle the waste generated by the occupants - then it should not be allowed to be developed into subdivisions!! End of story.
That's why we are supposed to have 'growth centers' - because there are PUBLIC SERVICES within these growth centers. That's why Worcester County's Comprehensive Plan specifically designated 'growth areas', and these were not in the middle of our rural woods and agricultural lands.
If you agree with me - call your County Commissioners. And don't let them tell you it's too late to comment..."the public comment period is closed," they love to use this cop out.
This specific language that gives an exemption for off-site sewage disposal for Rural Cluster Subdivisions and Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions was not in the draft of the Code we, the public, were given. Therefore we were not able to comment on it. Tell them that.
And go to the meeting on Tuesday, October 6 at 1:30pm in Snow Hill at the Govt. Building behind the Courthouse. If our elected officials do not see their voting public out in the audience, who will they see?
(**and now the disclaimer - the Coastkeeper is out of the state on Oct. 6. But several representatives from Assateague Coastal Trust will be in attendence. I'll be back in time for the second work session.)
The Commissioners will hold two work sessions to review these changes and prepare to adopt a new Zoning Ordinance, new Zoning District Map, and new Subdivision Regulations. The first is Oct. 6 at 1:30 pm in the Government Office Bldg. in Snow Hill. The second work session will be Oct. 20 at 1:30pm, same location.
It is imperative concerned County citizens attend these work sessions to listen and be seen**. No further public comment can be made and these work sessions, while open to the public, will not be open to public comment.
Through Assateague Coastal Trust, ACT attorneys and I helped to draft our written comments earlier this summer and they were submitted to the County by ACT's President Jim Rapp on behalf of the ACT Board of Directors.
Many of our comments regarding identification of impaired waterways, incorporation of better TMDL protective language, a more protective zoning district for the Holly Grove Swamp, (which in turn will protect the water quality of Herring, Turville, Trappe and Ayers Creeks,) were indeed drafted into these new documents.
In addition, per our comments, improvements to various definitions regarding environmental resources and environment features were written into the code. However, despite our pressure the County chose not to address the abolishment of the Estate Zone, nor did it chose to deal with another progressive Comp. Plan program - Transfer of Development Rights - to keep commercial development in the commercial zones.
I have to admit I was greatly surprised by this. After all, there was a huge hullabaloo in June after the public comments were received by Permitting Dept. Director Ed Tudor and assistant Phyllis Wimbrow (yes, it was Permitting Staff writing the new Code, not Planning....go figure.) And then of course, just after the public comment period, the entire government structure was overthrown and Permitting became King, with Planning and Environmental Programs kicked out of the sandbox.
Wimbrow publically berated ACT, the Coastkeeper, Maryland Coastal Bays Program and even the Maryland Department of Planning (!) during the June Planning Commission meeting, accusing us of not knowing what we were talking about.
Well, I'll admit I don't have an undergraduate or post graduate degree in Planning....but wait, neither do those two!
Oh, but I digress. Let me get back on track.
So imagine how thrilled I was to find some of our suggested language drafted into the revised code and subdivision regs.
My issue at this point is new language in the revised draft of the Code that now specifically exempts Rural Cluster Subdivisions and Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions from the previous requirement to contain all their wastewater treatment on-site.
Offsite septic waste disposal systems and off-site location for drain fields is not good! There are a number of these in the county already. If they aren't providing a great location for people to drive down the dirt access road into the woods to dump their garbage, these off-site systems are prone to lack of monitoring, inspection and maintenance. Which means pollution to our streams, creeks and groundwater.
Another problem with this new language in the Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions is that if off-site sewage disposal is allowed, the lot size is allowed to be smaller, which can potentially increase the number of lots to the maximum of 20 allowed. If the septic sewage had to be treated on each lot, the lots are required to be larger, thus limiting the total number of houses built.
Look folks - if the land you want to put a housing development on cannot handle the waste generated by the occupants - then it should not be allowed to be developed into subdivisions!! End of story.
That's why we are supposed to have 'growth centers' - because there are PUBLIC SERVICES within these growth centers. That's why Worcester County's Comprehensive Plan specifically designated 'growth areas', and these were not in the middle of our rural woods and agricultural lands.
If you agree with me - call your County Commissioners. And don't let them tell you it's too late to comment..."the public comment period is closed," they love to use this cop out.
This specific language that gives an exemption for off-site sewage disposal for Rural Cluster Subdivisions and Consolidated Development Rights Subdivisions was not in the draft of the Code we, the public, were given. Therefore we were not able to comment on it. Tell them that.
And go to the meeting on Tuesday, October 6 at 1:30pm in Snow Hill at the Govt. Building behind the Courthouse. If our elected officials do not see their voting public out in the audience, who will they see?
(**and now the disclaimer - the Coastkeeper is out of the state on Oct. 6. But several representatives from Assateague Coastal Trust will be in attendence. I'll be back in time for the second work session.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
