Category Archives: Land Use

GOVERNOR O’MALLEY’S ENTRY INTO THE CONTEST TO FIND THE MOST GERRYMANDERED DISTRICT IN AMERICA

Click here   Dist_3 to see the most gerrymandered district in America.

Dist_3 Contiguous and compact? Not hardly!

Dist_3We invite anyone to find a more Gerrymandered district in America than the third Congressional district in Maryland.  The Governor had one purpose in mind in creating this new map and that was to put in play a congressional seat currently held by a Republican and thus help President Obama, thereby proving his worth to the National Democratic Party.

Submit your entries and we will see if anyone is more Machiavellian in their use of raw political power in furthering their political objectives than the Bully from Baltimore has been in his recent redistricting.

O’Malley, again, takes hard questions

By Annie Linskey, The Baltimore Sun

A plan by Gov. Martin O’Malley to require the state’s energy utilities to invest in wind power is the latest item in his legislative agenda to face skepticism from an ordinarily receptive General Assembly.

O’Malley fielded tough questions Thursday about a package of incentives for the wind energy industry from members of the House Economic Matters Committee, who said the plan would cause everyone’s energy costs to rise while funelling profits to a small group of developers.

The governor already had run into resistance in other areas.

continue here

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-wind-omalley-agenda-20110303,0,3202061.story

INVEST (IN ALL OF) MARYLAND

The Upper Shore Regional Council, along with the Mid-Shore Regional Council, Tri-County Council for the Lower Eastern Shore, Tri-County Council for Southern Maryland and the Tri-County Council for Western Maryland and the Rural Maryland Council have requested an amendment be made to Senate Bill 180 and House Bill 173, titled, InvestMaryland.

As you are aware, InvestMaryland encourages the development of public-private partnerships to fuel venture capital investment and grow the state’s knowledge-based industries. It is expected to stimulate up to $100 million in venture capital investments and create thousands of jobs.

The Regional Councils and the Rural Maryland Council are concerned that the vast majority of investments resulting from this legislation will be made within the urban and suburban core of the state between Baltimore and Washington, D.C. The Eastern Shore, Western Maryland and Southern Maryland will likely not benefit from this legislation in any appreciable manner. To help ensure that our Maryland communities have the same economic development opportunities that other areas will have through InvestMaryland, we propose that the bill be amended to provide that 12.5% of the revenues raised through InvestMaryland be appropriated to the Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund (RMPIF). The RMPIF was authorized in 2006 after the General Assembly recognized the dire need for more state investment in our uniquely challenged rural areas. The proposed amendment will match the 12.5% set-aside for minority/urban small business financing in the InvestMaryland legislation as introduced.

To date, the RMPIF has never received an appropriation. It was authorized as the economy began to deteriorate and such investment became fiscally impossible. However, rural areas have continued to struggle with low employment, high poverty rates and crumbling infrastructures. As the economy begins to improve and the state begins to create new economic development opportunities like InvestMaryland, it must not forget its rural communities and the tools it already has in place to make targeted investment that will help address these persistent developmental needs.

The overall objective of the Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund is basically the same as that proposed in the InvestMaryland legislation, but targeted to rural areas. It creates an environment for retaining and creating jobs that leads to economic prosperity. RMPIF will expand economic opportunity, build local and regional capacity, leverage or augment development funding from other sources, engender private investment in rural-serving projects and programs, and improve/protect the rural quality of life. It will also promote intergovernmental cooperation in rural regions as well as public/nonprofit collaboration on community projects and service delivery. And it will support entrepreneurial activity, help small or fledgling businesses succeed and develop regional infrastructure.

For these reasons, the state’s five Regional and Tri-County Councils, which represent 15 of the state’s 18 rural counties, respectfully request that InvestMaryland be amended so that 12.5% of the revenues raised through InvestMaryland be appropriated to the Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund (RMPIF). We believe that doing so will ensure that the legislation stimulates economic development across the entire State of Maryland.

Background:
Currently, more than 25% of the state’s population lives in the state’s 18 designated rural counties located in the Western, Southern and Eastern Shore regions. Many of these communities, especially in the more remote regions, have higher rates of poverty and unemployment and lower rates of income and educational attainment than their metropolitan and suburban neighbors. Six rural Maryland counties currently qualify for the state’s distressed jurisdiction economic development assistance program due to especially high unemployment rates. Many rural communities face a host of difficult challenges relating not only to persistent unemployment and poverty, but to an aging population and an out-migration of youth, an inadequate access to quality housing, health care and other services, and a deteriorating or inadequate physical infrastructure. Local governments, educational and health care institutions, and private nonprofit service providers in rural areas are struggling to respond effectively to all these growing challenges.

The Rural Maryland Prosperity Investment Fund would provide grants and business reinvestment funds to organizations, local governments, and institutions of higher education who are working in support of four specific areas:

(1) Rural regional planning and development assistance, by targeting support to the state’s five rural regional planning and development councils and other multi-county economic efforts. The rural regional councils over the last six years have leveraged a modest state investment totaling about $8.4 million in operating funds to nearly $186 million in other funding sources such as federal and philanthropic funds for economic development projects and programs;

(2) Rural entrepreneurship development, including programs and activities undertaken by nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher education. Many rural economic development professionals are increasingly embracing entrepreneurship as an effective strategy for growing the tax base, expanding economic opportunities, and creating sustainable local economies in communities where citizens are typically poorer, older and more isolated from markets. Unfunded programs such as the Maryland Rural Enterprise Development Center and the Eastern Shore Entrepreneurship Center would be eligible to apply for important rural business development aid;

(3) Regional infrastructure projects that directly involve two or more units of local government, not to exceed 25 percent of the total cost of any particular project. These projects could include multi-jurisdictional water, wastewater, transportation, workforce housing, health care and commercial/ industrial facilities – the big ticket items that small communities often do not have the financial ability to address on their own; and

(4) Rural community development, programmatic assistance, and education, with funds to be divided equally between the existing Maryland Agricultural Education and Rural Development Assistance Fund (MAERDAF), which supports rural-serving agricultural and community development nonprofits, and the Rural Maryland Council, a federally recognized State Rural Development Council which functions as a statewide rural program and policy development coordination entity.

RMPIF would be administered by the Rural Maryland Council, an independent state agency which operates on a nonpartisan, collaborative basis, and consensus-oriented manner in providing assistance to rural communities and industries. RMPIF grants would be awarded on a competitive basis by the existing MAERDAF Interagency Grants Review Board. This Board is made up of representatives from six state agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Business and Economic Development, Housing and Community Development, Health and Mental Hygiene, and Natural Resources as well as the Rural Maryland Council. The MAERDAF Interagency Grants Review Board has been successfully awarding grants since 2001.

I will try to reach all of you over the next few days to discuss this proposal and would greatly appreciate your thoughts and suggestions.

Thank you, John

John A. Dillman III
Executive Director
Upper Shore Regional Council
410-810-1375

Most Frederick County lawmakers oppose bill limiting septic systems

From Frederick News Post

By Meg Tully
News-Post Staff

ANNAPOLIS — Responding to calls from farmers and builders groups, Frederick County lawmakers are opposing a bill that would limit development in rural areas by banning septic systems. The lone exception is Sen. Ron Young, a Frederick County Democrat who said this week he would support the legislation.

As proposed by Gov. Martin O’Malley, the bill would prohibit septic systems from being used in subdivisions of five lots or more. It would also prevent farmers from further subdividing their property after they subdivide it into more than one lot. Young believes the bill would have a big impact on the environment. Septic systems put 10 times as much nitrogen into the ground as sewer treatment does, he said. The state has spent billions upgrading sewage treatment plants, but septic systems are still being built. In Frederick County, more than 35 percent of buildings are on septic, Young said. “It becomes a very serious environmental problem,” he said.

Under the bill, developments would either have to hook up to a public sewer system or have a smaller sewage treatment plant to serve houses. The Frederick County Farm Bureau and the Frederick County Builders Association oppose the bill, as do Frederick County delegates Galen Clagett, Donald Elliott, Patrick Hogan, Michael Hough and Kelly Schulz, and Sen. David Brinkley. Delegate Kathy Afzali could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Hogan, a Republican, plans to lead the fight against the bill in the House Environmental Matters Committee. The proposal has far-reaching consequences beyond restricting septic systems because it includes provisions limiting subdivision on all properties, he said.

continue here

Rural officials say big-city brethren are off base

From The Gazettee

ANNAPOLIS — Rural lawmakers believe colleagues in urban and suburban districts might be overstepping their bounds in pushing legislation across county lines.  Although urban-rural conflict is nothing new in the State House, some say it is more pronounced than ever before.  Democratic lawmakers, who largely hail from the central part of the state, are trying to make Maryland increasingly urbanized, conservative legislators say.  They point to bills that, while sponsored by urban and suburban legislators, would largely impact rural districts. The rural lawmakers say the measures would strangle industry, growth and history in those areas. . . .

Del. LeRoy E. Myers Jr. (R-Dist. 1C) of Clear Spring said the septic proposal targets rural districts where farmers depend on eventually subdividing their land and runs counter to the concept of One Maryland — a theme coined by former House Speaker Casper R. Taylor Jr., the man Myers defeated in 2002.  “The state is driven by people who grew up with a concrete front yard,” Myers said. Others are worried that the influence of urban legislators even threatens the rural heritage of outlying counties. . . .

Del. Michael D. Smigiel Sr., however, is taking the jurisdictional conflict off the Senate floor and, alongside Sen. E.J. Pipkin, has launched a blog entitled “The War on Rural Maryland.”  Smigiel and Pipkin, both District 26 Republicans from Elkton, first published the blog earlier this week. It cataloged as grievances actions by O’Malley and urban lawmakers that affect rural regions.  “We started looking at all the things that have been going on for the last year or so,” Smigiel said. He accused the Maryland Department of the Environment of trying to take over growth management from the counties, called the state’s Geographic Cost of Education Index, a funding formulate that allocates money to counties where the cost of education his high, unfair to rural areas and decried O’Malley’s proposal to ban septics as a governmental takeover of rural lands cast as an effort to clean up the Bay.

“This has nothing to do with protecting the Bay,” Smigiel said. “That’s a nice little slogan you throw out there. It has to do with controlling land use.”  O’Malley has peppered his recent speeches with references to a united “One Maryland,” but Smigiel believes the governor considers the rural regions an afterthought.

“Every time I hear it, it’s an insult,” Smigiel said. “There is no ideal ‘One Maryland’ here. If there’s ‘One Maryland,’ it’s their Maryland.”

click here for full article