This evening St. Michaels is holding a meeting that will be open to the public regarding the Annexation of the Perry Cabin property into the town. Should this happen, the already overflowing traffic load on St. Michaels Road will likely reach deadly capacity.

About a month ago, I noticed Evacuation Route signs posted on rt. 33 and laughed to myself because there is just one way in and one way out to the Bay Hundred and well, it’s just a simpleton’s sign and a waste of the taxpayer’s money don’t you think?

Now, consider this. If that development that is proposed between the Perry Cabin Condos and the Miles River Yacht Club, that is going to be in approximate square footage, TWICE the size of the existing town of St. Michaels, how in God’s name are any/all of us going to be able to evacuate should we ever need to?

This morning, approximately 8:00, there was a devastating accident on Rt. 33 at this PinCushion (Carroll’s Market), that completely shut down traffic in both directions for several hours. There was also the potential for more accidents to have occurred for those who turned around into other vehicles who were doing the same.

Development, or the addition of large group of residences or retail shoppes will only prove more and more dangerous to us all. The county must not allow St. Michaels to take control of this piece of property, because if they do, not only will the current town lose a lot of its charm, the competition for customers will increase and may even run struggling stores out of business. Additionally, that location is just going to forever and ever alter the ability for people who live below St. Michaels, to get in and out safely. Lastly, like the supermall at the top of St. Michaels Road that includes Target, Pet Smart and a host of other retail stores is going to clog that section of the “Bypass” irreparably, more traffic will come to rely on Glebe Road which simply cannot handle the additional volume either!

Get there tonight and make your voice heard! We need to really have safe, sane planning in our area instead of the rampant haphazard building that is going on now. There are too many lives already at stake.

Godspeed to those hurt in this morning’s accident.

Courtesy of The Island Flier:

After a two-month summer recess, the Village Center oard met last evening to hear County Planner George Kinney describe how nd when the village master planning process was going to begin. Councilman Dirck Bartlett and ounty Manager Andy Hollis also attended.

Mr. Kinney’s report was not encouraging. He as no budget to hire consultants, several mandated rojects have been added to his plate, one planner as left his staff, and efforts to hire an additional lanner so far have been fruitless. Therefore, no planning will begin in any village for many months. The County said they remain committed to eveloping village plans, but no one could say when.

Without village-specific guidelines in place, anything may be built anywhere that is not expressly prohibited under generic VC-zoning regulations.

If that makes you uneasy about what could happen—quite suddenly—to your village, consider writing a letter to the County Council. Tell them your concern. If you want the planning process to begin sooner rather than later, that might help them adjust their priorities.

This comes from the Island Flyer, a weekly publication based in Tilghman.

The County required that an independent consultant review the application by SBA Network Services, In. to contruct a tower near Donnell Jones Road in Sherwood. The report* concludes that there is a business and technical justification for the proposed facility (duh), but recommends that the County encourage or even require SBA to take steps to lessen the visual impact.

Among their suggestions (the independent consultant’s review) are reducing the tower height to 150′, switching to flush-mounted antennas, and exploring alternative technologies such as a  distributed antenna system, or DAS. (Designed for localized indoor applications such as a mall or a sports complex, a DAS uses small equipment boxes connected by cabling.) The report recommends that such an alternative “should at least be investigated”.

Now that the report has been received, the SBA application begins moving through the approval process again. The application is now on three agendas: Historic Preservation Commission (October 1); Planning Commission (October 3); Board of Appeals (October 20).

* The cost of the review study was paid by the applicant and is part of the public record; Copies of the 7-page report are available for $1.75 from the P&Z Office.

Interesting side note - the MEBA tower is now up (which I still cannot see from any point whilst driving the countryside) and I believe almost completed…this has been done in between the Sherwood Tower Controversy…unless I’m wrong, this tower went up without a hitch. Now, if they could only do that same thing for those of us below St. Michaels!!

Lisa Jones is still watching vigilantly as the machine grinds away… she sent me this update earlier last month: SBA officially filed the variance application for the tower on 5-31-07. The County will hold technical meetings prior to any public hearing but will keep you posted.

One note of irony for those of us in Bozman. Even if the Sherwood tower is approved we may or may not have any better coverage than we do now… and, even if the possible bumper antenna is approved for Wade’s Point, only those on the Sherwood side of Bozman road would get coverage - according to coverage maps presented in last winter’s cell phone meeting in Tilghman. So…perhaps we should have someone revisit the May Port Road location for us here in Bozman? Btw, it would not only mean cell phone coverage for all of us, but increased internet speed/access for those who are not on the Atlantic Broadband Cable coverage.

Next Village Center Board Meeting is slated for this Thursday evening at 7pm.

It is great to see such support from the business community to ensure the future of the laptop program. I do hope that with this invigoration that improvements to the program will also be made.

I actually understand why however, the Council may have rejected the plan. I don’t believe it came down to a matter of fiscal issues, but more a matter of the functioning of the program. I also think that the way the press represented the issue as being about studies on the success of the program/improved test scores was a bit like an apple to a papaya comparison. Just my opinion.

Other county news - it appears that the Village Center Board is in a state of flux and does not have the definite support of the new council…will see where this progress goes.

for any parents who have children in Talbot County Public School that are also in the Special Education/504/IEP process, please visit: www.tcpsld.com

Share your experiences, questions, concerns. It is a resource that will grow with participation.

This letter to the editor was submitted to the Star Democrat on 5.22.07 — obviously the points made below are the real meat of the issue for students. They want to use laptops, but are so hindered by the lack of useful programs, consistent integration and compatibility, they do not want to use them. So, as I pointed out in an earlier blog, keeping the laptop program in place should not be the issue. What needs to be under scrutiny is how and when the laptops are utilized, and solutions that make laptops a viable and consistent complement to the curriculum.

The Letter:

I support the goals of the 21st Century Technology Initiative. Teaching our children to use computers and leveling the playing field so that everybody has the same tool (laptop) is in everybody’s best interest. I also have a problem with how the program has been implemented. I am one of a group of concerned parents. Somehow the program got started without a thorough understanding of how computers and networks work, or of how high school students view and use computers.

While the marketing program is a well-oiled machine, a lack of digital materials, text books (paper and digital), access to databases, teacher support and training, and the prohibition on the students to explore these machines due to security concerns points to inadequate system design and controls and to poor program design. Two years into the program, we have had only one class this year with a digital textbook out of eight classes taken. We can’t connect the laptop to our printer at home; we can’t print at school since the budget won’t allow for paper and toner.

When a technical problem arises with a laptop, the answer is to wipe the memory clean and return it to the student minus all saved work and class notes. We can’t log in from home to study or do extra work or catch up, we can’t check our grades or get missing assignments online.

These laptops may become expensive paperweights — minus the paper.

JACK UPCHURCH JR., Wye Mills

My last notes on the subject for the day:

One exemplary website that is dedicated to the integration of technology and education is: Edutopia - The George Lucas Foundation

The “21st Century Technology Initiative” as interpreted by Edutopia is light years if you will, from where we are in this county. They have realized that the manner of how kids learn is different from the way we did - the way that they perceive, receive, process and disseminate information is different. Please visit the Edutopia site - there’s much to gather from here.

If any of you just take the time to look around this site - you will see that the discussion our county is having is ridiculous. The County & TCPS need to be committed to the genuine proposition of  21st Century Technology. Laptops are only the first baby step, and these need to be working, reliable and compatible laptops, which are a genuine, integral tool and resource for learning.

Some within the school system are still calling that electronic box of controversy a “Word Processor”!! Does this give anyone a clue as to how outdated some things really are? Besides the minimal integration of a laptop for a small segment of the school system, there are few other innovations or methodologies currently in place on a consistent basis.

One more thought for the day - in the April minutes of the TCPS board meeting, any idea why they are discussing the need for an attorney to be present at the board meetings? Curious.

If you’re driving in the Bozman area, familiar signs of spring have returned - the flowers, the grass, the sunshine - but in our neck, most notably Casey, Sherry and their traveling fruit stand! Unfortunately they have become somewhat nomadic due to county regulations or red tape. They are simply selling healthy fruit and vegetables. Please look for them and support them. They are dear and what they offer is good for us all - and that includes the roadside chats!

In other news…the TCPS and county budgets have been in the headlines and on a neighboring blog quite recently. Honestly, I don’t know why the majority of the focus is on the Laptops and libraries. There is much, much more in addition to these two critical topics that need addressing, discussion and resolution.

But to the burning headline topics at hand…

I’m a parent and I have seen first hand what giving a laptop to a student can do. I know that it works and should have been put in his hands long before this year. One note, we no longer attend TCPS, but did purchase a laptop as it was a necessary item for our particular instance.

Laptops for ALL children in EVERY grade is what should be discussed. Radical? Perhaps, but if you saw recently on 60 minutes, “What if every child had a laptop?” it is plausible and even affordable. And we are far, far, far from a third world country. Yet when it comes to the lack of technology we have available to us here (cell phone coverage, broadband service and updated technology in our schools), we might as well be!

I and many I know have had their lives radically altered by computers - it has become a way of life for me and so many I know. And you want to know something? I have found I grasp information on a computer screen better than reading print and type three million times faster than I could ever write. (which is why these posts can be long winded sometimes) and I’m comparatively old.

For my son, it has created a means for him to be able to learn and more importantly, communicate what he has learned. Had we stayed with TCPS, he still would not have a use of laptop full-time and potentially would have to wait 2 more years. Given the fact that there are so many programs out there which are able to assess progress and adjust teaching, I honestly do not understand why this is even a question - it would be to the best advantage of each individual child. Even the typing program Mavis Beacon which is available at Staples for $10 adjusts its lessons according to the user… is this making sense to anyone?

Provide laptops and updated versatile programs and I strongly believe many things would improve! Take a cue from the many on-line programs available now through colleges - it is not something that we should be arbitrating, deciding who gets and who doesn’t or wondering if it’s successful.

Please know this is not a support letter for Karen Salmon or her being an “innovative” thinker. This is in support for the many, many children in this county who need an alternate means of learning and this has proven to be the key in many ways.

In terms of teacher pay increases - attracting quality teachers to our area…most of them will open one of the homes for sale books and realize that no matter what you pay them, $400,000 for a place to live just doesn’t work on a teacher salary. So that’s a moot point unto itself.

But for the ones on staff - yes they need raises so they can continue to afford to live in this county or afford to drive here to work. And…provided you give all the tools to the teachers, not have them afraid to lose their jobs because of “testing” results, and make them want to stay on the staff - to be able to be the best teachers possible, I’m sure the attrition rate might even decrease?

With regards to the library - I haven’t really read too much detail on the subject, but my “man on the street” opinion is that this is something that would benefit from a “technology” overhaul in that I don’t think a new building in a new location would be in order, but a renovation and/or expansion would be in order. The last time I was in the library, I noticed that it did feel kind have a 70’s feel to it with computer stations right in the middle and not enough of them. As this building is not that old in all honesty, it could be retrofit with newer layouts and technology upgrades. Think up - it could be done.

Last thing on the digital soapbox for now…the Hospital needs to stay open and where it is. The shore needs more hospitals (not more acres of doctors offices) and I don’t know why it has to be an either or proposition. If you go to Baltimore, it sure seems like there’s one within 5-10 minutes of another. Given we are rural there should be a hospital at least in each of the major towns in each county - one in Denton, one in Centreville, one somewhere in Queen Anne’s County - ideally right on Rt. 8 at the Industrial Park, one in Chestertown, etc.

We live 1/2 hour from EMH. God forbid we ever needed it and Shore Health decided to go to Queenstown or Stevensville it might be too late. And on a Sunday? - HMPF! The population, the traffic and the accidents are all on the high speed increase (rise just didn’t seem adequate), and feasible access to emergency care should be a logical next step.

The Hospital SHOULD NOT under any circumstances be closed - if not for the emergency and health aspects, then for the economic ones. There are many I know who work for the hospital in one capacity or another and am quite sure a drive to the Island would not be easy to justify for many. One more thought - if you do move the hospital towards the bridge, then it will attract the Western Shore workers (who are paid more) thereby decreasing the availability of decent paying jobs for residents of the shore. (and increasing commuter traffic).

There’s more in the cooker, but thought as the are the primary hot buttons of note lately, I would add my two cents. And go visit Casey & Sherry! You’ll find them either at the head of Bozman road or down in Wittman on the corner of Pot Pie and 33.

Has it really been November since the last posting? My how time flies when you are up to your eyeballs! Well, only a few short pieces of news worth posting for now.

The VCB has scheduled meetings the first thursday of the month at 7pm at the county offices. It has been decided for now that the VCB will address each village in terms of immediate development issues or topics. Gary Crawford from Tilghman Island has sent the following updates.

More will be posted as it happens and is merited. Meanwhile, read on…

LINK REPORT: Planning & Zoning

January 30, 2007

Today, Rachel Papkin and I visited the Planning & Zoning Department. We met with George Kinney, Planning Officer and head of the department. He introduced us to all the staff and gave us an overview of everyone’s responsibilities. He described the office work-flow, from initial application to final approval by the Planning Commission.

We asked lots of questions, concentrating on those issues we thought would be of most interest to the VCB. P&Z is a big shop and there is much to learn.

The main job of P&Z is to ensure that what is done by landowners on Talbot County lands conforms with applicable laws and ordinances, both state and county. In this regard, they interact with Departments of Environmental Health and Public Works, as well as the MD Department of the Environment, and various other city, state and federal agencies.

P&Z also has an enforcement arm: Bob Graham and Brett Ewing.

The Site Plan Review Process

Applications coming in to the P&Z Department follow established review procedures. Some structures, including most residential and small accessory commercial development, do not require a site plan. Projects that do require a site plan undergo a careful review process.

The site plan review process begins with a preliminary screening, then the matter is put on the agenda for an upcoming meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and copies of the application are sent to all TAC members to study. The TAC then meets to discuss the application. If problems are found, the application goes back to the applicant for additions and corrections.

Once passed by the TAC, the application goes onto the agenda of the Planning Commission, for approval. Some applications are reviewed by the PC more than once. Ultimately, all site plans arrive at a special session of the Planning Commission called the “Compliance Review Meeting” (CRM), where final decisions are made.

(Recently a fast-tracking provision has been adopted, whereby site plans applications that are straightforward and complete upon submission may go directly to from TAC to the CRM for approval. This is to prevent complicated applications from delaying easy ones.)

Notes for VCB members

1) While we don’t need to know the details of the review process, we may want to be able to answer questions from village residents about the general sequence of events.

2) We should skim through EVERY one of the TAC Agendas sent to us by Martin. And the Planning Commission Agendas sent to us by Debbie Moore. In addition, we should check the website at last weekly to look for updates. The TAC agenda is our earliest warning.

3) Public notice is NOT given when an application is first received. An advertisement is placed in the Star-Democrat newspaper21 days prior to the PC hearing, and signs must go up on the property 15 days before the PC hearing.

4) TAC meetings are open to the public but the public is not invited to testify. The public may comment at meetings of the Planning Commission.

Village Planning

A new task for P&Z is to oversee the drafting of village plans, as called for in the 2005 Comp Plan — when directed and funded by the County Council to do so. Mr. Kinney has asked for $130K in the next FY to develop plans in four villages. We briefly discussed the Village planning process about which Mr. Kinney spoke to the VCB in January. I made two suggestions:

(1) That the VCB ought to discuss which villages they feel are most in need of protection from current or impending development, and pass these recommendations to Mr. Kinney.

(2) That, instead of other villages simply waiting their turn while the first 3-4 begin the process, it might be better to take advantage of the extra lead-time by beginning the “vision” discussions and exploring the possibilities

GIS System

Long-Range Planner Martin Sokolich showed us the new GIS System, which links aerial photos with property ownership records, zoning designations, and many other data records. For privacy reasons the GIS is not available on the web-site, but P&Z can do maps and look-ups for VCB members upon request. It is very impressive.

Foster holds onto lead
By SARAH ENSOR PEARCE
Star Democrat - Staff Writer
November 14, 2006

EASTON — If results hold, a former Talbot councilman will be returned to office, while one of four incumbents seeking re-election will not get another term.

The Talbot County Board of Elections counted 205 provisional ballots Monday, with another 40 to 50 absentee ballots to be tallied Friday.

Monday’s count did not alter results in Talbot County’s contested races.

Republican Dirck Bartlett still led in the Talbot County Council race for five seats with 8,007 votes. Incumbents Thomas G. Duncan, a Democrat, and Peter A. Carroll, a Republican, followed with 7,640 and 7,549 votes, respectively. Carroll and Duncan were re-elected to their second consecutive terms — Duncan previously served on the county council before a stint as Talbot County sheriff.

Former councilman Levin F. “Buddy” Harrison IV, a Democrat, who received 7,383 votes, also will return to the council. The race for the fifth seat remained close, with Democratic incumbents Philip Carey Foster and Hope R. Harrington separated by 75 votes — Foster had 7,353 to 7,278 for Harrington. But the lead should be sufficient to return Foster to the council for a third term.

Republican challengers Corey W. Pack received 6,192 votes, followed by Al Silverstein with 6,035 votes and John General with 5,698 votes. Owen Wormser, a Democrat, trailed with 4,241 votes. There were 124 write-in votes.

Each of the Talbot County Circuit Court judge candidates received 82 provisional ballot votes. Judge Sidney S. Campen Jr. retained a commanding lead, with 9,047 votes to 5,841 for Jo Ann Asparagus.

Robert F. Burris remained in the lead by 23 votes in the Talbot County Board of Education District 3 race, with 780 votes to Mary-Beth S. Goll’s 757. Sandra E. Kleppinger, with 1,150 votes, still led Rev. Daniel G. Higgins Jr., with 841 votes, in District 7.

In District 1, Gloria Y. Farrare still led Steven P. Harris, with the totals standing at 589 and 496, respectively. District 4 candidate Monica Heinsohn, running unopposed, had 1,384 votes.

Carville “Don” Duncan and incumbents Donald E. James and Jacques T. “Jack” Baker Jr. remained in the lead for the three orphans’ court judge seats. They had 7,264 votes, 7,093 votes and 7,085 votes, respectively. Challengers Harvey E. Smith Jr. and Ronald L. Frampton had 6,466 and 6,101 votes, respectively.

Register of Wills Alice W. Anderson has 9,922 votes, leading James K. Camper who has 3,305 votes.

The board of elections is to begin counting the remaining ballots at 9 a.m. Friday.