Firm to present redevelopment plan for downtown Hagerstown
I am wondering who invited them to look at Hagerstown "over the last 6 or 8 weeks." Was it the last administration, or the new administration, or was it the Chamber of Commerce? I find it interesting that the Chamber hosted a forum just last week on public-private partnerships. Couldn't help but notice the little disrespect and taunt in the article towards the new administration: "In public session, little progress toward any type of plan for a major urban renewal project has been made since the city’s new administration took office last November, but Tuesday’s presentation could spark new interest considering the involved parties." I guess the HM and the Chamber are still pouting over the taxpayers and voters rejecting their Baltimore Street proposal.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Del. Neil C. Parrott seeking anonymity for petition signers
Del. Neil C. Parrott seeking anonymity for petition signers
When Maryland citizens sign a petition to request a referendum for a law that could be against what the majority of its citizens support, they don't expect to become a target of hate, but that is often what happens. Just read the hateful comments to this article for just a small sample of what may be aimed at those who sign a petition on a controversial issue. For this reason, a bill that promises anonymity for petition signers is critical to protect the citizen and the petition process provided by the Maryland State Constitution. It is at least as important as the privacy that is expected in the voting booth. Saddam Hussein would receive 100% of the vote in his scam of an election. Why? It was because of the consequences of voting otherwise. This is a basic American concept. Please support Neil Parrott in his effort to give every citizen a voice without fear of losing their job, being harassed and bullied, or fear of physical harm.
When Maryland citizens sign a petition to request a referendum for a law that could be against what the majority of its citizens support, they don't expect to become a target of hate, but that is often what happens. Just read the hateful comments to this article for just a small sample of what may be aimed at those who sign a petition on a controversial issue. For this reason, a bill that promises anonymity for petition signers is critical to protect the citizen and the petition process provided by the Maryland State Constitution. It is at least as important as the privacy that is expected in the voting booth. Saddam Hussein would receive 100% of the vote in his scam of an election. Why? It was because of the consequences of voting otherwise. This is a basic American concept. Please support Neil Parrott in his effort to give every citizen a voice without fear of losing their job, being harassed and bullied, or fear of physical harm.
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
METZNER DOES EPIC TURNAROUND ON NEW SUNS STADIUM
Hagerstown City Council Member Lewis Metzner (Democrat), one of the strongest proponents of the proposed new Suns stadium second only to past-mayor Robert Bruchey, did a complete turnaround at the mayor and council meeting, shocking many. This was the first time that this new mayor and council spoke publicly about the project since winning the election in November.
Metzner began by stating that he had been for the new downtown stadium all along, but not at any cost. He believes that the project would cost at least $25M wherever it is built. He said, "the Chamber of Commerce has sent us many nice things...everything but money." This was after the Chamber paid for a full page ad in the Herald Mail imploring the new mayor and council to proceed with the initial proposal. The logos of about 20 businesses, many not located in downtown Hagerstown, were displayed in the ad as a show of support for the project. He pointed out that none of them offered to invest money in the project. This is the second public criticism against the Chamber in one month, following the public rebuke by the Washington County Delegation for their lack of support in Annapolis.
Metzner went on to say that the previous proposal was expected to cost between $30M to $40M. He stated that not one member of the previous administration thought that it was possible without the phantom $15M donor. He surprised the room when he stated,
Council Member Kristen Alshire (Democrat), reiterated earlier statements that it comes down to affordability and reasonableness of cost for him. The new proposal to locate a new stadium on the East End depends on about half of the funding needed for the first proposal. He reminded everyone the terms presented by Suns owner Mr. Quinn: $3M form the city, $3M from the county, $6M from the state, $6M from the Suns, and $3M from outside investors. He noted that with the original proposal the cost estimates kept rising and the private investors never came forward. He stated that he would need to set a ceiling on the costs, and if the project exceeded those costs he would no longer support it. He would also need to see private investors coming forward.
Council Member Martin Brubaker (Democrat) stated that it will probably cost just as much to build on the East End as downtown (Munson agreed). He went on to say that since he thought the cost would be equal, he thinks that the stadium should be built downtown to spin off other investment. However, he admitted being discouraged that no outside private investors came forward, besides the phantom $15M donor, which would mean funding the project completely with public money. "...so it doesn't seem viable." Brubaker, in my humble opinion, later behaved in a manner unbecoming of an elected official when the mayor stated his position on the stadium.
Council Member Penny Nigh (Democrat) gave another perspective on the downtown-or-not-downtown argument when she asked City Engineer Rodney Tissue what was the distance between Municipal Stadium and the city line. He stated that it is 4,000 feet or 3/4 of a mile. She said simply, "Keep it on the East End." She reminded everyone that the Suns originally offered to invest $6M, but have since lowered that amount to $3M, and that the county rescinded funding that was promised when the project took a turn towards the East End. Nigh said, "Mr. Quinn needs to figure it out now."
Mayor David Gysperts (Democrat) said that he thinks all options need to be on the table and that "the downtown site remains on my menu of options." Most opponents of the downtown site thought that he was against it during the election. Then the mayor stated that he liked the old hospital site for the stadium. This is when Brubaker mouthed to the audience, "Is he crazy? Is he drunk?" Gysperts went on to say that he is no engineer, but he did not think that the rubble issue at the hospital site would be a problem. He said, "it is literally 4 blocks from the original site and we do not need 65 more townhomes downtown."
At this point I had to leave for another meeting, but as I was leaving I heard Metzner say that wherever the stadium is built they need to do things differently than the previous administration (he was a member). He wants this administration to be more transparent and keep the public informed every step of the way. What a novel idea. I like it.
Metzner began by stating that he had been for the new downtown stadium all along, but not at any cost. He believes that the project would cost at least $25M wherever it is built. He said, "the Chamber of Commerce has sent us many nice things...everything but money." This was after the Chamber paid for a full page ad in the Herald Mail imploring the new mayor and council to proceed with the initial proposal. The logos of about 20 businesses, many not located in downtown Hagerstown, were displayed in the ad as a show of support for the project. He pointed out that none of them offered to invest money in the project. This is the second public criticism against the Chamber in one month, following the public rebuke by the Washington County Delegation for their lack of support in Annapolis.
Metzner went on to say that the previous proposal was expected to cost between $30M to $40M. He stated that not one member of the previous administration thought that it was possible without the phantom $15M donor. He surprised the room when he stated,
"We don't have the funding to meet the demands of the Suns. They came to us demanding a new stadium and we jumped to their demands! They are demanding a new stadium by April 2014 and that just isn't possible."Metzner revealed that there are other teams who have asked to play in Hagerstown who are willing to play at the Municipal Stadium. He said that if the people want to revitalize downtown than lets build a stadium there.
"But if it's about baseball lets give them baseball. Maybe that will mean another team because we just can't meet the demands of the Suns. Maybe if we submit an RFP [Request for Proposal] it would lessen the demands."The conversation started when the mayor asked each of the council members to state where they stood on the stadium. Council Member Munson (Republican) started by categorically stating that he is against a downtown stadium. He said that he knocked on 9,000 doors talking to at least 4,500 people and only 55 were for the stadium downtown. He stated that the people did want to keep the Suns and did want a stadium, but not downtown, and he was going to do what he told the people he would do if he were elected.
Council Member Kristen Alshire (Democrat), reiterated earlier statements that it comes down to affordability and reasonableness of cost for him. The new proposal to locate a new stadium on the East End depends on about half of the funding needed for the first proposal. He reminded everyone the terms presented by Suns owner Mr. Quinn: $3M form the city, $3M from the county, $6M from the state, $6M from the Suns, and $3M from outside investors. He noted that with the original proposal the cost estimates kept rising and the private investors never came forward. He stated that he would need to set a ceiling on the costs, and if the project exceeded those costs he would no longer support it. He would also need to see private investors coming forward.
Council Member Martin Brubaker (Democrat) stated that it will probably cost just as much to build on the East End as downtown (Munson agreed). He went on to say that since he thought the cost would be equal, he thinks that the stadium should be built downtown to spin off other investment. However, he admitted being discouraged that no outside private investors came forward, besides the phantom $15M donor, which would mean funding the project completely with public money. "...so it doesn't seem viable." Brubaker, in my humble opinion, later behaved in a manner unbecoming of an elected official when the mayor stated his position on the stadium.
Council Member Penny Nigh (Democrat) gave another perspective on the downtown-or-not-downtown argument when she asked City Engineer Rodney Tissue what was the distance between Municipal Stadium and the city line. He stated that it is 4,000 feet or 3/4 of a mile. She said simply, "Keep it on the East End." She reminded everyone that the Suns originally offered to invest $6M, but have since lowered that amount to $3M, and that the county rescinded funding that was promised when the project took a turn towards the East End. Nigh said, "Mr. Quinn needs to figure it out now."
Mayor David Gysperts (Democrat) said that he thinks all options need to be on the table and that "the downtown site remains on my menu of options." Most opponents of the downtown site thought that he was against it during the election. Then the mayor stated that he liked the old hospital site for the stadium. This is when Brubaker mouthed to the audience, "Is he crazy? Is he drunk?" Gysperts went on to say that he is no engineer, but he did not think that the rubble issue at the hospital site would be a problem. He said, "it is literally 4 blocks from the original site and we do not need 65 more townhomes downtown."
At this point I had to leave for another meeting, but as I was leaving I heard Metzner say that wherever the stadium is built they need to do things differently than the previous administration (he was a member). He wants this administration to be more transparent and keep the public informed every step of the way. What a novel idea. I like it.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
IMPROVED STADIUM PROPOSAL STILL A BURDEN TO TAXPAYERS
The mayor and city council have changed. The proposed location of the new Suns stadium has changed. The process seems to have changed. The public funding and crony Capitalism continue.
Majority owner Bruce Quinn finally addressed the mayor and council yesterday. He began by reading a lengthy prepared statement at an amazing speed, followed by a lot more fast talking that was hard to follow. The mayor and council had the advantage of a handout of the presentation. Council member Munson requested a copy of his written opening remarks. Just to be clear, I am not insinuating the negative connotation of a "fast talker." The man just talks fast!
He began with the obligatory congratulations on the election. A special thanks was given to council members Metzner and Brubaker for standing with him from the beginning and continuing to support the project. He even had a "mom story" for council member Nigh...she didn't look moved by it or impressed.
He then said he would give a 9-month summary of events, as if any of us needed one. He started with the word "misconceptions" and that always raises a red flag with me. That usually means nobody bought the intended perception. Right off he intimates that the Washington Nationals would not allow the Suns to play at a renovated Municipal Stadium. That is not true. They will not allow use of Municipal Stadium in its current state, but they are open to using it if it were upgraded.
He wanted to make a few things clear:
1. The Suns owners offered no advice on the location of the Baltimore Street site.
2. The Suns were not involved in any way with the mystery donor.
3. The Suns provided no input of the first rendering of the site on Baltimore Street.
4. The Suns have incurred $200,000 in legal fees on their own behalf and on behalf of the City as well.
5. The City has not done its part by applying to the Maryland Stadium Authority (MSA) for funds.
Admittedly, I am no expert on sports, sports facilities, or the MSA. I just wanted to know if applying for funds from them is applying for taxpayer money. It doesn't state that anywhere on their website, but after several on-line searches, I think I am safe in saying yes it is taxpayer money. The only site that clearly states that is Wikipedia:
The Suns, via Mr. Quinn, is now proposing the East End as a site for a new Suns stadium. Congratulations to those community activists who fought hard to protect their neighborhood! He said it would remedy the blight on the East End and I agree. I did find it a strange argument to say in the original proposal that we will take this "great prospect" out of one neighborhood and place it in another in order to revitalize it. Anyway, he wants the city to demolish Municipal Stadium, demolish the Municipal Electric Light Plant (MELP), and perhaps buy or gain use of the 1st Urban Fiber plant. He wants a new multi-use facility (Suns stadium) near the old stadium site. According to Quinn, "these are all things that the city needs to do anyway."
When he spoke of the proposed financing of this new vision, he was talking so fast that I need to purchase the DVD of the meeting so that I can capture all that he said. I wish that I had a copy of the handout. The Herald Mail printed some figures, but I've learned that I can't rely only on them for information. I do know that he said that he is willing to put up the initial $3M to get things started. Thank you Mr. Quinn! So very generous of you.
Most of the council discussion was between known proponents council members Metzner and Brubaker. There were no surprises there, except for the repeated call for open public meetings going forward. Council member Munson stated that during his door-knocking campaign the public expressed displeasure with site location, but that all wanted to retain the Suns. Council member Nigh remained silent, and I would have like to have heard from her.
I was really waiting to hear from council member Alshire who is known for his thoroughness of research, thoughtful consideration, and conservative financial practices. This is what he said,
Mr. Quinn did have some remarks about the Suns being a business that should get special treatment from the city:
In summary, I like the proposal. I think it would be a fantastic opportunity to clean up the East End in a big way. I'm not convinced that restoration of Municipal Stadium isn't the better and less costly idea. According to their website, the MSA encourages historical restoration. I remain firm that the Suns business should provide the majority of the financing with private investors joining them in the associated cost and risk of this project. The city will make money on the taxes and utilities just as they do on every other business in Hagerstown. The taxpayer doesn't have the money, not on any level of government, and should never bear the risk associated with private investment.
Majority owner Bruce Quinn finally addressed the mayor and council yesterday. He began by reading a lengthy prepared statement at an amazing speed, followed by a lot more fast talking that was hard to follow. The mayor and council had the advantage of a handout of the presentation. Council member Munson requested a copy of his written opening remarks. Just to be clear, I am not insinuating the negative connotation of a "fast talker." The man just talks fast!
He began with the obligatory congratulations on the election. A special thanks was given to council members Metzner and Brubaker for standing with him from the beginning and continuing to support the project. He even had a "mom story" for council member Nigh...she didn't look moved by it or impressed.
He then said he would give a 9-month summary of events, as if any of us needed one. He started with the word "misconceptions" and that always raises a red flag with me. That usually means nobody bought the intended perception. Right off he intimates that the Washington Nationals would not allow the Suns to play at a renovated Municipal Stadium. That is not true. They will not allow use of Municipal Stadium in its current state, but they are open to using it if it were upgraded.
He wanted to make a few things clear:
1. The Suns owners offered no advice on the location of the Baltimore Street site.
2. The Suns were not involved in any way with the mystery donor.
3. The Suns provided no input of the first rendering of the site on Baltimore Street.
4. The Suns have incurred $200,000 in legal fees on their own behalf and on behalf of the City as well.
5. The City has not done its part by applying to the Maryland Stadium Authority (MSA) for funds.
Admittedly, I am no expert on sports, sports facilities, or the MSA. I just wanted to know if applying for funds from them is applying for taxpayer money. It doesn't state that anywhere on their website, but after several on-line searches, I think I am safe in saying yes it is taxpayer money. The only site that clearly states that is Wikipedia:
The Authority is a public corporation of Maryland which is authorized to issue tax-exempt bonds for financing its operations. The proceeds from the sale of those bonds and any other revenues collected are deposited in the Maryland Stadium Authority Financing Fund.Mr. Quinn then rattled off a list of expenditures that the Suns have paid as if we should be grateful that he is maintaining his own business environment. That works for a lot of people, but I think those expenses are to be expected. Even if Municipal Stadium is in bad shape, and we all know it is, surely he knew that when he bought the Suns and afterall, he only pays $1 annually in rent.
The Suns, via Mr. Quinn, is now proposing the East End as a site for a new Suns stadium. Congratulations to those community activists who fought hard to protect their neighborhood! He said it would remedy the blight on the East End and I agree. I did find it a strange argument to say in the original proposal that we will take this "great prospect" out of one neighborhood and place it in another in order to revitalize it. Anyway, he wants the city to demolish Municipal Stadium, demolish the Municipal Electric Light Plant (MELP), and perhaps buy or gain use of the 1st Urban Fiber plant. He wants a new multi-use facility (Suns stadium) near the old stadium site. According to Quinn, "these are all things that the city needs to do anyway."
When he spoke of the proposed financing of this new vision, he was talking so fast that I need to purchase the DVD of the meeting so that I can capture all that he said. I wish that I had a copy of the handout. The Herald Mail printed some figures, but I've learned that I can't rely only on them for information. I do know that he said that he is willing to put up the initial $3M to get things started. Thank you Mr. Quinn! So very generous of you.
Most of the council discussion was between known proponents council members Metzner and Brubaker. There were no surprises there, except for the repeated call for open public meetings going forward. Council member Munson stated that during his door-knocking campaign the public expressed displeasure with site location, but that all wanted to retain the Suns. Council member Nigh remained silent, and I would have like to have heard from her.
I was really waiting to hear from council member Alshire who is known for his thoroughness of research, thoughtful consideration, and conservative financial practices. This is what he said,
"It comes down to two things: limitation of resources and reasonable fairness."Mr. Quinn had this deer in the headlights moment and stammered that he'd have to think about that for a minute. [Wait, is somebody actually stopping to think? Where is the unconditional love? Wasn't expecting intelligent discussion. What do I do?] Council member Alshire went on to say that the limitation of resources was satisfactory to him if the project proceeds on the East End and if the city continues to build on an education theme in the Hagerstown core. As far as reasonable of fairness he did not think that the cost of the original proposal was reasonable nor the financing of it fair. The cost kept escalating and private investment was not forthcoming. The proposed cost of the new proposal seems more reasonable to him. However, he would like to see the city's $400,000 contribution divided between the project and the city's core. In addition, he would need at least one third of outside private investment (currently missing from this proposal) before he could vote to proceed. The Hagerstown TEA Party's stance is that it should be 100 percent privately funded, but council member Alshire's statement is at least a move in the right direction. Unfortunately, with the required expediency (before the 1st pitch of next season) I don't get the feeling that the mayor and council as a whole will hold out for that one third if it doesn't materialize. I think that Metzner, Brubaker, and Munson will be the key players in this arena.
Mr. Quinn did have some remarks about the Suns being a business that should get special treatment from the city:
"The Suns team is more than a business. The Suns provides income to at least 100 other businesses. The new facility will be more than a Suns stadium; it will be a recreation center for the city."I think there are similar businesses and projects that could stand equal to the Suns in that regard and I still think that they should not receive public funds in order to enrich their business and themselves. Mr. Quinn stated that he is not in it for the money. Really? He claims to have never made a cent on the Suns. That sounds like a bad investment to me. He claims he doesn't care if he ever makes a cent of off the Suns. Can we get that in writing?
In summary, I like the proposal. I think it would be a fantastic opportunity to clean up the East End in a big way. I'm not convinced that restoration of Municipal Stadium isn't the better and less costly idea. According to their website, the MSA encourages historical restoration. I remain firm that the Suns business should provide the majority of the financing with private investors joining them in the associated cost and risk of this project. The city will make money on the taxes and utilities just as they do on every other business in Hagerstown. The taxpayer doesn't have the money, not on any level of government, and should never bear the risk associated with private investment.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
WASHINGTON COUNTY DELEGATION REBUKES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
I attended the Washington County Delegation Pre-legislation Forum hosted by the Washington County Chamber of Commerce (COC) this morning. I am sure that I was not the only one expecting it to be a rather dull Q&A session where the audience asks the questions and the delegation attempts to provide answers. Certainly, the Democratic-leaning COC expected to control their meeting. Instead, the meeting turned into what one man at my table laughingly called "a blood bath." It was nothing short of a skillful takeover, or maybe in football terms, an interception. I almost stood up and shouted!
First, this was the first time that "Hagerstown TEA Party" appeared on my name tag. It used to be fun being incognito as just Jane Doe citizen at these events, but I guess my cover is blown now, so I did fill in the Organization blank on the registration form this time. I have to give the person in charge of name tags props though for putting in parentheses "non partisan." It's usually assumed that us TEA Party people are just an arm of the Republican Party. I'm doing my best to dispel that myth. I have heard many Republicans and Conservatives say that they avoided the COC events because they are so partisan. On their website their vision statement says, "To be the preferred advocate and recognized voice of business in the greater Hagerstown-Washington County area." It is supposed to be unaffiliated with any party, but it is widely thought of as an arm of the local Democratic party. This could be a topic for another blog post.
Only Senator Shank, Senator Edwards, Delegate Serafini, and Delegate Myers attended. I didn't expect no-show Delegate Donoghue to attend, but I was disappointed that Delegates Parrott and Hough were not there. Turns out Delegate Hough was at the hospital being introduced to his new baby girl! With only four of the delegation in attendance, I wondered if there would be anything to blog about at all. It didn't take long to see that this was going to be more fun than I've had in a long time!
The delegation skillfully took charge of the meeting. The chairman of the Delegation, Andrew Serafini, spoke first. He introduced himself as a business man and "financial guy" and stated that the state, and really every level of government, is faced with a huge challenge in regards to budgets, debts, and deficits. His only hint of the direction that this meeting would take was to say,
"These forums are where we all need to have open discussions about our challenges. Here is where we may disagree on issues, but when we get to Annapolis we have to be coordinated and speak with one voice."Delegate Myers came to the podium next and things started to get interesting! He began with an acknowledgment that now that the election is over business people know what they can expect for the next four years. He stated that he expects Congressman Delaney to work with our delegation and to be seen in Western Maryland. He said there are big issues ahead, but locally he expects one will be the revitalization of Hagerstown and how a stadium may be part of that process. Then he made everyone sit up and listen when he said,
"We don't have the cooperation of the chamber. We are Republicans that represent a Conservative area of the state. All of us received over 70 percent of the vote in this area and we must represent those who elected us. We are here, so you need to work with us. We need a report from the COC on issues and we don't get one. The COC Chair should be present in Annapolis and is not. The COC lobbyists should be at our weekly meetings and are not. We need cooperation with this COC."I still didn't see the takeover coming. I expected that any minute the guy with the mic would be taking questions.
Senate Edwards spoke next. He's a likable, funny kind of guy that serves District 1, which only includes a small portion of Washington County. He travels a long way to participate in events in our county. He probably hasn't had to participate much in the political tug-of-war that goes on here, but he didn't go without admonishing the Chamber on one point. He said that he attended a three-hour public meeting last night in Allegheny County and that he has a good relationship with the Allegheny County and Garret County Chambers of Commerce. He suggested that this Chamber should work closer with those two bodies, since people often come from those counties to spend money here. He also asked those in attendance to "speak up" and let this Chamber know when it doesn't agree with the State Chamber of Commerce. He then named a few important issues that he sees as being important this year: the structural deficit, transportation funding and sharing the burden (gas tax, mass transit tax, or mileage tax), broadband coming to Western Maryland, slots, and the management of natural resources.
Senator Shank officially took over the meeting and went full offense! First he commended the Chamber and other related groups for consulting economist Anirban Basu to address our "profound problems", calling him brilliant . Shank then referred to a chart that ranks states in regards to being business-friendly and pointed out that Maryland ranked significantly worse than our neighboring states and even worse when compared to Virginia. He stated that the numbers are disturbing, and that since we do border other states, many businesses have relocated to those states due to increased taxes and regulations. He said that the business climate here is just "wrong." Then he said to the Chamber,
"What are you going to do about these things? This delegation has been rated 100 percent as voting in favor of businesses. We are doing all that we can do. What are you going to do? You may say, "Shut up Shank, because if you say these things we won't get our share." I reject that and the COC should also! Work with us. The alternative is to give up, let businesses continue to leave, but keep our hand out to the state for handouts. We can't continue down that path. "Shank went on to say,
"We have great potential here. But I have to ask this COC, What is your mission? Your mission statement says advocacy. We need you to show up in Annapolis, write, and testify. I have begged you with little to no response regarding the proposed gas tax."He listed several bills that they fought for in support of business (too quickly for me to note). This was a Conservative blogger's dream! I was taking notes as fast as I could. He also stated that they were able to kill bad bills that would have been bad for business. He finished by saying,
"Can we continue without you? If advocacy is truly your mission, I hope that you have an aggressive strategy and that you will be an aggressive advocate. Together we can do this."I looked around the room and some were as elated as I was, but many were scowling. This was completely unexpected and well...wonderful! This is the kind of dialog that has to happen, in public, to get everyone off of the partisan treadmill and working together. Call them out! Are you with us or against us? The Frederick Chamber of Commerce supports their Delegation. They work together and work through disagreements to get things done. Why invite your elected officials to your forums for a charade if you are not going to work with them? By this time there was only time for two questions:
Question 1. Gay McGovern [name provided by someone at my table who was visibly in pain] made a statement before asking her question. I do not know if she is affiliated with the Chamber or a business owner. Her statement leads me to think that she is affiliated with the administration of the Chamber. She said,
"We have provided no report? I thought that we have. We thought that we were communicating. I don't know why our lobbyists are not attending your meetings."That seemed a very weak defense, but a defense none the less. Then her question,
There is money that should be coming to our county and it's going to go somewhere else. [He just said that he rejects that philosophy!] Do you have specific suggestions for improving communication?Answer 1. Shank: We used to receive FAXs from the COC and this helped us directly on bills and issues. We need a report from you on where you stand on issues. I have asked for this at every level from committees on up and behind closed doors. Maybe asking publicly will make a difference. Myers: In Frederick County the COC lobbyists attend the delegation meeting every week. We are going to get our fair share. I want to hear from you weekly. Step into our offices and say hello. Killing bills that will hurt businesses is important also.
Question 2. Mary [last name unknown] said that she had attended a meeting where she heard a disturbing comment and it was that Montgomery County is the economic driver of the state and as Montgomery County goes so goes the state. How do you counter that in Annapolis?
Answer 2. Edwards: They try to run the state. He said that he has been told in a committee that "you are getting enough" when asking for a $100,000 and then two seconds later Montgomery County asked for millions and got it without any discussion. They try to take over the Marcellus Shale issue as an environmental issue. He repeated his earlier recommendation:
"We have to be in close communication with Allegheny and Garret county governments, that is, respectful communication. We have gotten a fair amount. Please send testimonial to Annapolis, especially when you don't agree with the State Chamber of Commerce."
Delegate Serafini closed the meeting stating,
"I hope that this has been the start of a dialog."
Me too!!!! However, by the body language and small talk in the room, I have my doubts. I was surprised that Chamber president, Brien Poffenberger, remained silent. It appears he was still short on words for the Herald Mail interviewer. I wonder if this is going to be one of those situations for him where he thinks of things he should have said...long after it matters anymore, or if he is feverishly writing his defense of the Chamber and himself as president in an op-ed for the Herald Mail. One thing I do know, if he writes it, it will get published.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/hagerstownteaparty/
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
A NEW BALL GAME IN HAGERSTOWN
The new mayor and city council were sworn in last night. The air felt a little thinner in the council chamber. The thick stifling smog of arrogance was replaced with humble gratitude. It is a new beginning. The salesman has left the building.
I feel like I can take a big sigh of relief knowing that the frenzied secret actions of the previous administration have come to a screeching halt. Although two of the council members who back the new stadium, its public funding, and its controversial location remain, the four newcomers either oppose it or approach it with some skepticism. This new administration could still vote to proceed exactly as previously proposed, but I am relieved that it will be at a slower pace and I believe that it will be a more transparent process.
I have never been against a new stadium. Myself and the Hagerstown TEA Party (who I represent on this issue) have been against any public funding for this project and the appearance of crony capitalism. If the Suns invest most of the cost of the project and find private investors to join them, by all means, lets build a stadium! Others though are vehemently against the new stadium for various reasons: the location, or they want to save Municipal Stadium, or they are against the large price tag (regardless of the funding source) in this bad economy, or they do not believe it will revitalize downtown...just to name a few. Unfortunately the process became more of an issue than the project.
I do not gloat that Mayor Bruchey lost the election. I voted for him every time that I had a chance to vote for him, that is, except for this election. I used to cheer him on as he rode down South Potomac Street in the Mummer's Parade. I agreed with him more often than not and I am grateful for his service.
It was his leadership on this issue that changed everything for me. I understand that things had to move quickly at the start due to the possibility that the Suns could move to Winchester, VA. I also understand that perhaps there may have been cause for some secrecy concerning negotiations. I am sorry, but in my opinion that is where things quickly got out of control. The public was not informed about choices. The public was instead notified of decisions already made on their behalf. That was a huge flaw in the process from the start! The Ripken Study was taylor-made to promote those decisions, which were 1.) Municipal Stadium will not be renovated, 2.) a new multi-use facility will be built, 3.) it will be located at Baltimore Street and Summit Avenue, and 4.) it will be funded primarily with public funds.
The Ripken presentation was the sales pitch that was the start of a concerted effort of the mayor and council, the city staff, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Herald Mail and various other groups to sell those decisions to the public with the mayor leading the way. This brought out the salesman in him. There is nothing wrong with being a salesman, and as mayor it is an asset to be able to sell your city. It was wrong to try to sell a pre-conceived $37M project to the taxpayers. The taxpayers should have had a say regarding those four decisions before they were made. Many were saying, "They aren't listening to us. They've made up their minds. They don't care what we want." No one was invited or allowed to present alternatives or facts that contradicted their sales pitch. Everything was geared towards that sell: the Ripken Study, the Municipal Stadium tours, the one community meeting with the questionable "facts." Most of the questions went unanswered that night.
I found the whole process offensive and exhausting. The arrogance and outright disdain expressed by some for those who dared to oppose was hard to watch and hard to take. Now I feel like we can focus on the project and not the process. We may even wind up with a multi-use faciltity, built on Baltimore Street and Summit Avenue, paid for mostly by the taxpayer. Just treat the taxpayer with respect and honesty (THE SUNS OWNERS REFUSE TO PLAY AT MUNICIPAL STADIUM) and give all of us a chance to state our case and I will accept whatever the outcome. I may even go to a game. I may even like it.
I feel like I can take a big sigh of relief knowing that the frenzied secret actions of the previous administration have come to a screeching halt. Although two of the council members who back the new stadium, its public funding, and its controversial location remain, the four newcomers either oppose it or approach it with some skepticism. This new administration could still vote to proceed exactly as previously proposed, but I am relieved that it will be at a slower pace and I believe that it will be a more transparent process.
I have never been against a new stadium. Myself and the Hagerstown TEA Party (who I represent on this issue) have been against any public funding for this project and the appearance of crony capitalism. If the Suns invest most of the cost of the project and find private investors to join them, by all means, lets build a stadium! Others though are vehemently against the new stadium for various reasons: the location, or they want to save Municipal Stadium, or they are against the large price tag (regardless of the funding source) in this bad economy, or they do not believe it will revitalize downtown...just to name a few. Unfortunately the process became more of an issue than the project.
I do not gloat that Mayor Bruchey lost the election. I voted for him every time that I had a chance to vote for him, that is, except for this election. I used to cheer him on as he rode down South Potomac Street in the Mummer's Parade. I agreed with him more often than not and I am grateful for his service.
It was his leadership on this issue that changed everything for me. I understand that things had to move quickly at the start due to the possibility that the Suns could move to Winchester, VA. I also understand that perhaps there may have been cause for some secrecy concerning negotiations. I am sorry, but in my opinion that is where things quickly got out of control. The public was not informed about choices. The public was instead notified of decisions already made on their behalf. That was a huge flaw in the process from the start! The Ripken Study was taylor-made to promote those decisions, which were 1.) Municipal Stadium will not be renovated, 2.) a new multi-use facility will be built, 3.) it will be located at Baltimore Street and Summit Avenue, and 4.) it will be funded primarily with public funds.
The Ripken presentation was the sales pitch that was the start of a concerted effort of the mayor and council, the city staff, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Herald Mail and various other groups to sell those decisions to the public with the mayor leading the way. This brought out the salesman in him. There is nothing wrong with being a salesman, and as mayor it is an asset to be able to sell your city. It was wrong to try to sell a pre-conceived $37M project to the taxpayers. The taxpayers should have had a say regarding those four decisions before they were made. Many were saying, "They aren't listening to us. They've made up their minds. They don't care what we want." No one was invited or allowed to present alternatives or facts that contradicted their sales pitch. Everything was geared towards that sell: the Ripken Study, the Municipal Stadium tours, the one community meeting with the questionable "facts." Most of the questions went unanswered that night.
I found the whole process offensive and exhausting. The arrogance and outright disdain expressed by some for those who dared to oppose was hard to watch and hard to take. Now I feel like we can focus on the project and not the process. We may even wind up with a multi-use faciltity, built on Baltimore Street and Summit Avenue, paid for mostly by the taxpayer. Just treat the taxpayer with respect and honesty (THE SUNS OWNERS REFUSE TO PLAY AT MUNICIPAL STADIUM) and give all of us a chance to state our case and I will accept whatever the outcome. I may even go to a game. I may even like it.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
I AM VOTING FOR...
Today is Election Day! I am excited to exercise my right to choose who I want to represent me on every level of government. I think that since I blog my opinions, I sort of owe transparency on my voting choices. I have always voted Republican since Reagan's 2nd term, except for in local elections. My involvement in the TEA Party since 2009 has changed me in that I am more open to other parties if they are the better candidate! This is how I plan to vote:
President
Mitt Romney
U. S. Congress
Roscoe Bartlett
U.S. Senate
Dan Bongino
Questions 4, 5, 6, & 7
NO
Mayor
David Gysperts
City Council
Jonathan Burrs
Larry Bayer
Kristin Alshire
Penny Nigh
Lewis Metzner
Non-partisan City Council Election
NO
I think that this city council will be a perfect balance of intelligence and experience with temperaments that will challenge one another enough to fight for the right outcomes, but not cause gridlock. I hope that my Republican friends can forgive me for not voting straight party. Locally, it just doesn't make sense. That said, I think that we still need to know the party affiliations because it gives us insight on how they may govern when it comes to budgeting, spending, borrowing, and government regulations, etc.
However you vote...please vote today!
President
Mitt Romney
U. S. Congress
Roscoe Bartlett
U.S. Senate
Dan Bongino
Questions 4, 5, 6, & 7
NO
Mayor
David Gysperts
City Council
Jonathan Burrs
Larry Bayer
Kristin Alshire
Penny Nigh
Lewis Metzner
Non-partisan City Council Election
NO
I think that this city council will be a perfect balance of intelligence and experience with temperaments that will challenge one another enough to fight for the right outcomes, but not cause gridlock. I hope that my Republican friends can forgive me for not voting straight party. Locally, it just doesn't make sense. That said, I think that we still need to know the party affiliations because it gives us insight on how they may govern when it comes to budgeting, spending, borrowing, and government regulations, etc.
However you vote...please vote today!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)