The Chestertown Council on Tuesday approved the creation of a Task Force of Washington College and town representatives to develop a cooperative plan for the Chester River waterfront. The Task Force will be staffed by four representatives from the college and four chosen by Chestertown Mayor Margo Bailey to represent the town.
“I think this is such a great step…that we’re forming an equal footing alliance with the town and the college,” Bailey said. She announced the appointment of Councilwoman Linda Kuiper, Matthew Tobriner, Rebecca Flora, and Al Massoni to represent the town.
“This is a group to get together and see how we can blend and mesh the desires and needs of the two biggest landlords on the river,” Bailey said. “This is our only shot to get it correct. This is so important for our future, so it needs to be thought out well and planned well.”
The measure passed with considerable reservation and anxiety over whether council members should be allowed to observe the meetings of the Task Force–and whether the $200,000 gift the college pledged the town for the Sgt. John H. Newnam Armory in late 2011 should be under the control of the Task Force, as requested by Washington College President Mitchell Reiss.
Bailey wrote Reiss in December for the purpose of forming the Task Force. In a letter to Bailey dated Jan. 11, the day the two met in person, Reiss reiterated the talking points of the meeting that included his request to put the armory donation under the purview of the Task Force–chaired by Washington College Board Member John Moag.
Stetson objected to the use of the college donation in the Tasks Force’s budget and asked Bailey to respond to Reiss–striking any language regarding the donation.
Bailey reassured Stetson that only the council can approve how the donation is spent.
“They don’t do a budget, we do budgets,” Bailey responded. “Our money is controlled by us.”
Access to committee meetings an issue with Mumford-Pautz
Another sticking point in approving the measure came from Councilwoman Mabel Mumford-Pautz, who challenged Bailey that council members had the right to attend the proceedings of the Task Force, or any other committee working for the town.
Bailey initially balked at the idea and said the Task Force needed a “manageable number of people covering different disciplines, with the ability to talk freely among themselves.”
Mumford-Pautz fired back that she understood council members could not participate but insisted they had authority to observe the meetings.
“I want that permission,” she said.
A heated exchange ensued between Bailey and Mumford-Pautz over access to the Task Force’s deliberations.
Bailey eventually agreed to put a caveat in her response to Reiss–affirming that council members would be able to observe the meetings but not participate.
The Task Force was approved unanimously.
Below is a 14-minute video of the council’s discussions leading up to the vote. The spirited exchange between Bailey and Mumford-Pautz occurs at a little before six minutes into the video.
In attempt assuage the anxiety of the council and reaffirm the town’s domain over the armory donation, Councilman Jim Gatto introduced a motion during the ward reports to exclude the gift from the cash-on-hand totals introduced at each council meeting and track the money spent from the donation independently.
“I would like [the donation] to become a single line item…so that everybody in town, including the council, knows where it gets spent and when it is [spent],” Gatto said. “I want to keep track of it. It’s a very valuable sum the college is giving us [in exchange for the armory] and we should be held accountable to how we spend it.”
The motion passed unanimously.
Stetson lamented after the meeting that giving Washington College greater control of the gift would “essentially be giving the college their money back.” He said the original intent of the grant was to fund the Rails to Trails project and he wanted the funds targeted there.
The gift from the college was pledged after heated and bitter debate during the last six months of 2011 — when three council members demanded that Washington College give the town a substantial remuneration in exchange for the town’s option to buy the armory from the Maryland Department of General Services. The gift came to roughly 10 percent of the appraised value of the armory.
In other Washington College related business it was announced that Chestertown Town Manager Bill Ingersoll will receive the President’s medal from Washington College for his commitment to the Town of Chestertown, Bailey said.
Updated Jan. 28 at 4:55 p.m
Fletcher R. Hall says
Wow! What theatre.
A farce, a comedy or an Oscar winner?
Fletcher R. Hall
Chestertown
Petey S. Bestmom says
More like a Shakespearean tragedy. To see elected officials behaving like that is pathetic. The mayor should be able to maintain some measure of dignity. Interrupting, shouting, and general bullying/belittling . Mabel was raising legitimate talking points and deserved more respect than Margo showed.
If cat fights between council members are now what the citizens can expect to see it is indeed time to call for new leadership and a change in who is holding office.
Keith Thompson says
I’ve already written the 10-Minute play but there’s no way it could ever be performed at the Garfield Center’s “Short Attention Span Theatre”.
matthew weir says
This is the best news in a long time. The waterfront is Chestertown’s greatest asset. Thoughtful and creative development of that space is the most important development since William Smith came the Chestertown to build Washington College. I commend the Mayor and Council for the wise decision.
While it is understandable that concern exists regarding the $200,000 donation Washington College gave to the Town and how it is to be spent, I would urge the council to ask how many jobs will be created through using the money to complete a rails to trails leg versus developing a the new face of such an important, historic town. The waterfront will be an engine to drive tourism and investment, creating jobs and improving lives.
Finally, under the leadership of John Moag, the project is sure to be a success.
Kevin Shertz says
Matt said: “While it is understandable that concern exists regarding the $200,000 donation Washington College gave to the Town and how it is to be spent, I would urge the council to ask how many jobs will be created through using the money to complete a rails to trails leg versus developing a the new face of such an important, historic town. The waterfront will be an engine to drive tourism and investment, creating jobs and improving lives.”
And, Mr. Weir, as both a member of the Washington College Board and the owner of the Fish Whistle property, you have a direct financial interest in the outcome you describe. Let’s not dance around that fact.
The rails/trails project would link a blighted area of this Town — the upper High Street region — to the downtown via an easily navigated route for visitors and tourists. This is far more likely to spur overall economic opportunity than allowing a sub-set of the population — the well-fed, white part of the population — to sashay about a three block radius which is already in far, far better economic shape than the bulk of Chestertown.
Keith Thompson says
Thing is though, if the waterfront development is successful in bringing in more investment and increases the tax revenues, it then can pay for revitalizing the blighted areas. Rails to trails should be something that results and benefits from economic development, it is not something that you should build an economic development program around.
Kevin Shertz says
Totally disagree, Keith: if Rails/Trails enables properties otherwise considered infeasible for realistic development, it has “done its job.”
This is no different than the Interstate Highway or rural electrification… projects completed for the greater good rather than the select few. The waterfront is an important component but I think its pecking order has been greatly over-consdidered relative to other aspects of economic health of Chestertown.
Keith Thompson says
Simply, what has the greater potential to draw people downtown to spend money? The waterfront has the better potential to draw people to the downtown, largely because it builds off the town’s history and heritage as a riverfront town. I see Rails to Trails as much more likely a resource that people will use when they get downtown.
Kevin Shertz says
I’d prefer if Chestertown didn’t simply exist as an economy that’s dependent on “money from elsewhere” — tourism — to survive. People come to the riverfront, say, “gosh that’s pretty,” and then go home again. What keeps them coming back? You come here, look at a lot of attractive old buildings, peruse a shop or two and maybe have a meal, but what makes you want to come back? It’s all-too easy for a visitor to say, “yes, I’ve been to Chestertown,” and not feel the need to go back. The mentality in general seems that we’re frozen in time and so that’s what we are — a moment frozen in time that does not necessarily be relevant to the larger world.
Let’s be clear: the waterfront project is important, but it’s no silver bullet for fixing what ails the community. There is no silver bullet… no singular fix that makes everything better.
We are, though, also shackled to an institutional mindset in this community that somehow things will fix themselves just as soon as it becomes the late 90’s-early 2000’s again. Look no further than the “Andy’s Replacement Study” for evidence. The fact that it’s even referred to in those terms proves the nostalgia factor is the priority. Andy, I believe, has moved on… why can’t Chestertown? Why isn’t this being discussed in the terms of replicating the qualities the The Mainstay in Rock Hall enjoys and how they can possibly be applied to the context of Chestertown?
I’ve come to the conclusion that Chestertown simply has to hit bottom — hard — before we see positive change.
Keith Thompson says
Kevin, I don’t think the waterfront is the magic bullet either, but it is one thing that Chestertown has that many communities don’t have (Middletown doesn’t have a waterfront). The college is another thing Chestertown has that many communities don’t have (Middletown doesn’t have one). The best economic plan is to take advantage of your strengths. I do agree with you that Chestertown needs to have more than “money from elsewhere” such as in tourism to survive. I think tourism is a small part of the equation but if the idea of attracting people downtown is important, it’s more important to give town residents a reason to come downtown and spend money (or even spend money in the shopping centers on Washington Avenue). I think there also needs to be an understanding that Chestertown is more than the downtown, and it may not actually make sense to have the downtown be a commercial center (something the exit of two downtown bank locations perhaps illustrates and perhaps Rock Hall’s example of having their waterfront as an entertainment/recreation destination is a plan that would fit for Chestertown). Chestertown’s biggest economic challenge is to figure out how to keep their residents from going to Middletown and spending their money there. There is this “we don’t want to become Middletown” fear of growth that is unwarranted in Chestertown which is unwarranted because Chestertown isn’t undergoing a quick influx of population moving around the town which is what forced Middletown to rapidly grow a decade ago. There must be an understanding that the Chestertown economy doesn’t exist in a vacuum and it must figure out how to compete against the world around it, especially much-hated Middletown. Rock Hall is figuring this out, so why can’t Chestertown?
matthew weir says
Kevin, Your point is well taken. Clearly, linking parts of Chestertown is important. As in anything, though, prioritizing is necessary. The community needs to decide what is more important, jobs that result from improving the waterfront and as a result of the increased tourism that comes to town because of the new waterfront or linking parts of town via a bike path.
I do not agree with you that the rails to trails is like the rural electrification program or the highway project. If that were the case, you would see bikes parked all over Chestertown. Further, the bike shop would be busy with repairs and sales. Not everyone bikes. And, Kent County is so rural that biking is not always a realistic option.
I think you have hit the nail on the head with regard to the name of the Andy’s revitalization issue. Clearly heart strings are stuck in the past. But, tourism is all that Chestertown has to offer right now. That means people are going to come and go. The challenge is to find a way to get them back. That will come from offering a quality experience with nice scenery, nice people, god restaurants, shopping and history.
Finally, you love to hit on the Fish Whistle issue and that I am a trustee of Washington College. As I have said before, you are right on both counts. My involvement with these two entities has no bearing, though, on my desire to see Chestertown recover from the mess it is in and to see the lives of the residents improve. Further, as I stated on the Spy article regarding PNC closing on High Street, when did the profit motive become a bad thing?
Eliott Bruce says
Key to waterfront development is your resturant as an anchor. Should be able to expand by moving the marine store to high street and building out your deck .It was my understanding Kirby owned property.
James Rattle says
This video is profoundly disturbing. The shrillness of Councilwoman Mumford’s comments and behavior is an embarrassment to both her and to the town of Chestertown. The town requires a certain level of maturity from its elected officials when discussing issues related to town government. This level of paranoia, mixed with an almost childlike political philosophy, is discouraging for all who wish for Chestertown’s future. She should resign.
Keith Thompson says
I agree with you that this video is profoundly disturbing, but I think that Mabel Mumford-Pautz (and Jim Gatto in defense) are essentially correct here. All town council members should have the ability to be involved in decisions that directly affect the town and shouldn’t be subservient to appointed committees who are not directly accountable to the voters.
James Rattle says
There is no way a committee of this type will be effective if Gatto, Mumford and Stetson are in the room. Let the committee do its job. Linda Kieper will let them know how things progress.
I just wish one of these council people would start doing something. All they do is complain. Is there one an example of any of them doing something on their own? One initiative? One creative moment to help solve the problems of Chestertown. What has Munford done for her ward, of Stetson in his ward. They just still and waste people’s time.
Chestertown wake up, you are not beng served well.
Keith Thompson says
James, perhaps the biggest problem is that there are far too many committees. Several months ago there was the mayor’s Chestertown Initiative to look into bringing business downtown. What ever happened to this? Have they made any reports or released any findings? Were they involved in bringing in the music store, fitness center, etc.? If they were, I would them to be touting their results. Now there’s a new committee looking at developing the waterfront with the college? I would think this would be something that would be a part of the Chestertown Initiative, but apparently not since now there’s a new committee. Of course, such a committee should have been formed after the marina purchase and not a year later.
How does all of this tie in with that “charette” thing they had a few years ago? I don’t recall hearing anything that came out of that. When the busking at the Farmer’s Market became an issue last June with the artisans group and the musicians they invited to play running into flak with the town about playing for tips, the town announced they formed a committee to handle music at the Farmer’s Market. In late September when the busking issue was on the town’s mayor and council meeting agenda (which then couldn’t be addressed due to the letters from the ACLU and the Rutherford Institute) the committee said they were prepared to present their plan in October. Even though the busking issue has supposedly been resolved, as of now the artisans group is in limbo because they don’t know if they are still handling bringing in musicians or if the town is now doing it…or if this is a free for all and anyone can play.
Perhaps the reason why the town council members aren’t doing anything for their wards is because they keep waiting for all of these committees to report back to them.
Dave Wheelan says
Hi Keith,
As far as the Downtown Development Committee goes (which I have been coordinating), I can give you some information. And, no, none of the new businesses started recently in downtown were the result of the committee’s work.
The projects that the committee is focused on for the first year are:
Farmers Market Study (report to be submitted at the end of February to Town Council)
Andy’s Replacement Study (report to be submitted next month to Town Council)
Minority Retail Study (still forming)
Micro-business Study (in progress)
As they say, Rome was not built in a day, and I suspect these committees, like the one I serve on, will need time to show any real results, but keep the faith. The good news is that a number of thoughtful people, with an extraordinary range of skills and gifts, really care about the town’s future. My bet is we’ll find some answers to these challenges sooner rather than later.
Keith Thompson says
Dave, thanks for the reply and my comments aren’t intended to be directed at the folks like you working in these committees. My concern is that some of these committees seem to be packed by the mayor with people in order to rubber stamp her agenda and that the work of these committes is hidden from the public and from members of the town council. For instance, I can probably think of several people who would love to have volunteered to be on such a committee and would have a lot of input to add, but were not asked. That seemed to the gist of Mabel Mumford-Pautz’s argument with the mayor and perhaps something that should not have been addressed in a mayor and council meeting in front of the public and the cameras, but I think she is absolutely correct to be concerned.
Kevin Shertz says
If this report is actually called “Andy’s Replacement Study,” it’s dead on arrival.
Cripes, people. Can’t we close the casket and move on?
If this community is just waiting for 2009 to return, it’s going to be sorely disappointed.
Keith Thompson says
Good point…there is already an establishment in the Andy’s location that has the potential to be everything that Andy’s was, but the town residents for the most part don’t support it (and I think we know why). The only way it is even possible to have another “Andy’s” is if Andy owns and runs it…otherwise, trying to create something specific (like an Andy’s) can make you overlook other opportunities that may be knocking on your door. Often what you don’t say “no” to is far more lucrative than that you do say “yes” to. Let the ideas come from the bottom up rather than trying to force them from the top down (like trying to create another Andy’s). I seriously doubt that Andy’s was a success because some town leader said “what this town needs is a great local bar and live music venue”. Andy’s was a success because of Andy Goddard and because of the heart and soul she put into her establishment; the public simply responded.
Kevin Shertz says
I can report that the only elected people I ever heard from regarding the microbrewery — after I said it was not happening in Chestertown back in October 2012 — were Jim Gatto and Linda Kuiper.
D LaMotte says
Mr. Rattle, You are so correct. I am shocked at the buffoonery displayed by a couple of the Council members.
Tom Dignam says
Remember the World Cafe?
https://chestertownspy.com/2010/06/16/world-cafe-participants-creates-new-future-for-chestertown/
Fletcher R. Hall says
Unfortunately it appears your observation has real merit.
The last time I saw such a display was when former Baltimore Mayor Shelia Dixon pounded her shoe on the council table. She was then a councilwoman.
Now she is a disgraced former mayor.
The residents of Chestertown should be asked to watch this video as Harry eid urged members of the U.S. Senate to see the film, Lincoln. Not sure either group would learn much.
Fletcher Hall
Chestertown
Gren Whitman says
@ Hall
Ahem, Baltimore’s ex-Mayor Dixon spells her first name “Sheila.”
Then a councilwoman, Dixon exhibited her shoe-pounding skills 22 years ago, in 1991, which, as one measures political years, is several dozen lifetimes ago and thus a weak comparison.
And it’s highly doubtful that you “saw” her 1991 “display”; more likely, you read about it.
Eh?
Gail Regester says
As a downtown resident with a substantial investment in my home– the whole issue of the waterfront development concerns me greatly. I don’t see anyone on this committee that will stand up to the pre-conceived concept that we need an “Annapolis” tourist area to save our downtown stores. To hear the mayor say that Wilmer Park is underutilized is more than disturbing. It is the only open green space in the town at the river that can accomodate events of any size and the thought that we need to structure our children’s play continually is one of the problems of today’s society. We sure don’t need that pimply mounded playscape that was pictured in the December meeting. The park is great space for impromptu play which is how I frequently see it being used. Perhaps we should ask how many permits were issued last year by organized groups to use the park. We should also ask how much time and money would be spent by our town crews maintaining those mounds. As for the fight (excuse me–the verbal exchanges) –hooray for Mumford, Stetson, and Gatto for bringing up the point that consultation with council members would have been nice to have been done before dumping the committee as a completed group in their laps and then telling them that they no say in the matter but to just approve it. Keep up these exchanges instead of just occupying a seat. P.S.–a note to Mr. Thompson—you made good points in your Friday morning broadcast, but it did not need to last through my entire ride from Chestertown to Middletown to buy the household necessities that can not be bought in our Chestertown stores.
Keith Thompson says
Gail, thanks for the show critique and your points are well taken. Not to make excuses, but since my normal Friday morning guest cancelled and I had nothing prepared for a back-up, I was “winging it!”. I do thank you for listening. 🙂
Stephen Moore says
I can’t believe how the mayor treated the council. Regardless of the merit of an idea, they’re democratically elected representatives, and you treat them respectfully. The mayor acts like they’re a threat to her dictatorship. I hope she watches a recap of this display, and is appropriately ashamed. Were I a large corporation like PNC, I wouldn’t want to do business here either.