An Open Response to Chris Merdon

From the Washington Post

I find Chris Merdon’s recent “invitation” — via letter to the editor and certified letter to my home — to be rather disingenuous. In fact, we have already had numerous opportunities for public conversations about growth.We seem to have a candidates forum at least once a week, and growth is almost always a topic, if not the sole focus of the forum. We also have at least seven candidates forums that are on my schedule, including the televised League of Women Voters forum Oct. 11. I look forward to these opportunities for honest, substantive discussions on growth and other important issues, including education and public safety.

One recent forum was held by the St. John’s Community Association at the Miller Branch Library in Ellicott City. The sponsor provided six questions on growth before the forum. I attended this event, as did Stephen Wallis, and we engaged in a meaningful discussion with the community for 2 1/2 hours. Mr. Merdon dismissed this opportunity to publicly discuss the community’s concerns about growth and opted instead to spend the evening with major Republican donors at a fundraiser in Baltimore.

Going out of his way to put his invitation to a debate “on the record” while opting out of a public forum hosted by a community group makes me question his sincerity. That being said, if Mr. Merdon is in fact interested in an honest discussion rather than a political stunt, he can contact me anytime.

Ken Ulman
County executive candidate
Columbia

As I said in my previous post on this topic.

As to Mr. Wallis’ complaint that the issue has come up at every forum.  He is correct.  My problem is that it doesn’t get enough time or attention.  I think a one hour debate on growth in Howard County and only on growth in Howard County is a great idea. 

How much attention does it get in a forum?  Ten minutes?  Twenty minutes tops?  And that would be between all the candidates represented at the forum not just Mssrs. Merdon, Ulman and Wallis.

I hope they accept the invitation.  They can have it at my house if need be.

As to Mr. Ulman’s complaint that Mr. Merdon opted out of a debate?  Mr. Ulman opted out of the blogger candidate forum didn’t he?  He only had to respond from the comfort of his home or have a volunteer do it for him.  He didn’t have to show up in person.  Is Mr. Ulman saying that he has attended every single candidate forum (not counting religious holidays)?

Merdon missed one of what ”… seem[s] to [be] a candidates forum at least once a week, and growth is almost always a topic, if not the sole focus of the forum.”  Shared with how many other candidates in the room I must ask.

Maybe it is a “political stunt” as Mssrs. Ulman and Wallis claim.  Mr. Ulman chose to respond in kind.  Regardless, Merdon put himself on the record as saying he wants a public debate on the issue, and now Mr. Ulman did too.

This is progress.

Lets start negotiating the date, place, and terms.

HoCo Times Says Merdon is Right!

Even taken with salt, ‘time out’ Sensible

OUR VIEW Policy initiatives hatched in the heat of an election campaign bear extra skepticism as they inevitably bear a heavy political component.

But even with that caveat, we like Christopher Merdon’s idea of calling a “time out” in the planning process for the redevelopment of downtown Columbia.

This isn’t the first time that we’ve urged going slow, and county officials sensibly stalled the process after initially scheduling the final vote for June or July. Merdon, the County Council Republican running for county executive, has proposed putting off for a year any consideration of a finalized master plan for development in Town Center.

This delay would give an all-rookie County Council time to go to school on the intricacies of zoning policy and law before it weighs approval of what might be the zoning monster of the decade.

It would also allow for more complete study of traffic and other implications of various development scenarios.

And it will also give us time to get a better handle on the effects that the 22-story Plaza Residences — already approved and not subject to any rules set forth in the downtown plan — will have on the area.

It bears repeating that the redevelopment of downtown Columbia must be handled with the utmost care and responsibility.

It will have profound effects, for good or ill, not just on Town Center and Columbia but on Howard County as a whole. Doing it right demands public input and accountability, serious study and sober reflection.

It must not be rushed.

However politically timed Merdon’s idea might be, it also happens to be a good one.

WaPo HoCo Zoning

We have already heard these positions before in this Post article.

I would like to know more about this:

Meanwhile, independent candidate C. Stephen Wallis has said he wants to “depoliticize” the county’s Zoning Board by creating a panel of experts. The five County Council members also sit as the Zoning Board.

Wallis also says he would avoid controversial measures such as last year’s lengthy rezoning bill, which affected dozens of properties and sparked widespread community opposition. Residents argued that the council did not allow for sufficient public input.

“That would not come about on my watch,” Wallis said.

I think the Zoning Board needs work.  So I agree.

How can he avoid comp-lite?  As far as I can tell he can not.  He would be County Executive.  This is a County Council issue.  As County Executive he could veto the bill that came out of County Council.  I don’t think the issue here is public input on Comp-lite, I think the issue is the 18 properties that Ulman, Guzzone, Rakes, and Feaga snuck into the bill.

Mr. Wallis, the problem is NOT the process.  The problem is the people running the show who will not respect the process and work around the process at every possible turn.

I am not pleased with how anyone is characterizing or explaining this issue.  I am told it is to complex to try to explain.  It doesn’t capture voter’s interest because it is to complex.

To me this is real simple.

Every ten years County Council goes through Comprehensive Rezoning.  Comprehensive Rezoning is the legislative process a County uses when it is deemed appropriate that all or a significant portion of the County is to be rezoned.  For up to one year after Comprehensive Rezoning the Council (not the Executive) and review ONLY what they did in Comprehensive Rezoning – thus the term comp-lite.

In March 2005 the County Council (minus Merdon) allowed 18 properties to be added to the Comprehensive Rezoning process in the comp-lite process.  Howard County law does not permit that – it is clear that it doesn’t permit that to happen.

The only person who can say they objected and voted against this was Merdon.

One of the principles that this Country is founded on is Private Property Rights.  Balancing private property rights and development with the needs of the larger community is difficult.  Laws and processes were developed to provide such balance.  We can argue whether the laws or processes are perfect (they certainly are not) but that matters very little when those charged with ensuring the integrity of the process refuse to do so.

This first issue about zoning and development in Howard County is not the process.  It is secondary to elected and public officials refusing to enforce and follow the process.  We could have a perfect process but what good is it if elected officials, like Ken Ulman, won’t respect the process?

The problem is certain members of the current county council, an absentee County Executive, and a staff of directors running the show on the 3rd floor of the County Complex.  These people think they can do what ever they want.

Elect Ulman and we get more of the same.  Mr. Wallis you are not convincing me that you understand the REAL problem.  Don’t throw the process out, throw the bums out.  Chris Merdon understands what is really going on and will clean the house.

Here is my sound bite on Comp-Lite.

We have laws and processes to protect private property rights and balance the needs of the community.  We can surely improve those laws and processes but it matters little if our elected officials refuse to uphold those laws and and by doing so ignore the rights and protections of the citizens, and their primary responsibility to uphold the law.

When offered the opportunity to uphold and respect those laws and refusing to do so says more about a person than their campaign for elected office.

House of Delegates District 9A – Forum

This is a long one.  5,800 words… 

Question: What are your positions on particular items regarding Election Day reforms for the state of Maryland? Specifically, please address the issues of early voting, voter identification at the polls using photo ID or documentation, and a voter verified paper trail for all votes cast.

David Osmundson (D) 

We should do everything possible to encourage people to vote and to participate honestly. Republicans have offered several ways to suppress voting. There should be equal opportunity to vote and there should be sufficient polling places that operate efficiently. In Maryland, they ask you several questions that would make fraudulent voting next to impossible. Nationally, there has been something like only 52 cases of prosecuted fraudulent voting cases in the last 5 years. The Republicans are trying to keep people who tend to vote Democrat at home. We need verified honest voting in Maryland. Early voting encourages people to vote if they are busy on Election Day.

Gail Bates (R)

I support use of photo ID and a verified paper trail for voters. Voters should vote in their home jurisdiction or by absentee ballot. If appropriate controls are in place, I would support 1 day of early voting as is done successfully in North Carolina.

Warren Miller (R)

On the issue of early voting, while it is a practice adopted by other states Maryland’s problems with the “E-Poll” books and the lack of a state wide e-voter list display is why I am opposed to early voting at this time, I was also disappointed at the Legislatures Liberal leadership’s refusal to allow early voting locations at military bases in Maryland.

We need to adopt a voter identification standard in Maryland; the opportunity for voter fraud with the current system is well documented.

I supported a verified voter paper trail and was dismayed when the liberal majority in the State Senate killed this initiative.

I thought this might be a boring question.  The answers tended to liven it up.  I didn’t know that the General Assembly didn’t allow early voting locations to be placed on military bases.  I knew the leadership picked all the early polling locations – remember the Washington Post editorial “Tilting the Vote” on this?  I also support some type of voter identification and a verified paper trail.  Remember Ellen and Parris?  It was a fiasco and in reality it made Florida look good.

I don’t oppose early voting as long as we can model a successful effort in another State.

I think Gail and Warren offer a balanced perspective.

As for David’s comments.  I wish he would elaborate on the several ways that Republican’s have attempted to suppress votes.  As to sufficient quantity of polling places.  I agree and this is the first time I ever heard anyone imply (I think he was implying) enough do not exist.  I have voted in Maryland for 12 years.  The only question I have ever been asked is “How are you today?”  and “May I please have your name?” .  I offer to spell my last name without being asked.  Perhaps David will tell us what those questions might be.  Now, Republican’s don’t want people to vote Democrat anymore that Democrats want people to vote Republican.  That doesn’t mean that their is an organized suppression going on.  The only type of voter suppression going on is inflammatory accusations like David’s – they suppress my desire to vote for him.   Lets be honest here.  Do your really really think Republican’s want to disenfranchise people anymore than Democrats?  I don’t believe Republicans or Democrats want to disenfranchise anyone.  I think bad people want to and they might on occasion be a member of this party or that.

As for people who are too busy to vote on Election Day.  Many States make it a holiday.  It doesn’t help much.  Additionally, they can vote absentee.  I did this year for the first time in 24 years of voting.  If people need an alternative to voting early what is wrong with absentee ballots – it gives one a paper trail and they can vote from the convenience of their home.

Question: