About a month ago, the Talbot Spy and the Avalon Foundation agreed to partner in providing the community with candidate profiles for those running for the mayor of Easton in the May 2 election.

Interviewed by the Talbot Spy editor Dave Wheelan, with the technical support of the Avalon’s Mid-Shore Community Television MCTV, these profiles center on three primary subjects; a candidate’s background, qualifications, and priorities if elected to office.

We think that our viewers will walk away much better informed on those critical themes, but will also recognize, as did the Spy and Avalon crew, that our community is all the more enriched by having such a unique collection of dedicated citizens among us.

These profiles are available for viewing in two different formats.  The first, appearing below, are edited versions similar to other Spy interview format where we limit the content to each candidate’s commentary. They average about 15 minutes in length. MCTV will be broadcasting these interviews in their entirety until election day and can also be watched on the Avalon website here. 

Megan Cook

Al Silverstein

Bob Willey (incumbent)

 

The Maryland House of Delegates passed a nearly $62.5 billion budget plan Friday, with nearly $1 billion in additional funding directed to state education reform efforts.

Gov. Wes Moore (D) included a $500 million payment to the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future fund on top of the required programmatic funding for the program, as well as $500 million for unspecified transportation projects.

By Danielle E. Gaines

The House version of the budget bill would shift $400 million from the transportation column and direct it to the Blueprint, for a $900 million influx.

The payments are intended to create a cushion in the education fund as the state prepares to increase public school funding by more than $3 billion annually at the end of the decade-long plan.

“One of the best things we can do to end child poverty is to make a down-payment on our Blueprint,” said House Appropriations Chair Ben Barnes (D-Prince George’s). “…I think this legislature can be proud that the commitments this legislature and this state has made to its children are being recognized and that we are going to stand by them.”

While the education fund was expected to have a $2.2 billion balance at the end of Moore’s fiscal year 2024 budget as proposed, the fund would have dipped to a near-zero balance in 2026 as state school funding obligations increased, according to earlier projections.

Overall public school funding in the amended budget proposal is $8.7 billion.

The budget plan passed by the House includes roughly $205 million in tax relief, about the same proposed by Moore earlier this year.

An anticipated $3.2 billion would be held in reserves, which is about $150 million less than the budget as proposed by Moore, but higher than limits set by the legislature’s Spending Accountability Committee.

The spending plan also includes several House priorities, including:

• $246 million for capital projects — nearly $137 million in new projects and $109 million shifted to the operating budget to free up state borrowing capacity.
• $100 million for transportation funding, about $400 million less than proposed by Moore.
• $40 million for the Cannabis Business Assistance Fund.
• $6.65 million to shift governance of the state’s beleaguered Maryland 529 college savings program to the Treasurer’s Office.

Some of the capital projects include $90 million for school construction, $25.7 million for improvements to the Baltimore City Convention Center, $25.7 million to Prince George’s County for the New Carrollton Metro project, and $18.5 million to Montgomery County for a bus rapid transit project.

Some House Republicans took issue with amendments that added $5 million to the budget to support abortion care and family planning services and $5 million in additional funding for the Maryland Office for Refugees and Asylees.

The budget now heads to the Senate for consideration, where the Budget & Taxation Committee finished work on its amendments Friday afternoon.

Early differences between the House and Senate spending plans include a $100 million difference on the Blueprint funding, which the Senate would direct to transportation projects. The Senate committee would also add $2 million that Moore and the House would have cut from the Broadening Options and Opportunities for Students Today, or BOOST, program, which provides funding for low-income students to attend private schools.

Budget & Taxation leaders are expected to present the committee’s spending plan to the chamber early next week.

Leaders in both the House and Senate characterized the differences in the budget plan as minor and expressed no doubt that the General Assembly will meet its April 3 budget deadline.

Roy McGrath’s federal corruption trial is on indefinite hold after the former aide to former Gov. Larry Hogan (R) failed to appear in court on Monday.

McGrath was expected to appear in a Baltimore courtroom for the first day of what was anticipated to be a two-week trial. Instead, U.S. District Court Judge Deborah Boardman issued an arrest warrant and sent the jury home.

McGrath, who spent about three months as Hogan’s chief of staff in spring 2020, faced eight counts, including wire fraud, theft and falsification of a government document stemming from his steps to secure a $233,648 severance payment from the Maryland Environmental Service just as he was joining Hogan’s staff. The payment was equal to his annual salary as head of the agency.

Prosecutors charge that McGrath also sought reimbursement for numerous expenses from the state and failed to claim vacation time while in Florida and on a Mediterranean cruise.

McGrath was expected to start the morning being re-arraigned, a technical process that would incorporate charges included in a superseding indictment.

Jury selection was set to begin at 9:30 following that brief hearing.

Under the terms of McGrath’s pretrial release, he promised to appear in court. Boardman said McGrath’s failure to appear violated those terms.

“Let’s hope he’s safe and there’s some mix-up,” she said.

The terms of McGrath’s pretrial release also required him to surrender his passport to the U.S. District Court clerk’s office in Fort Myers, Florida, near his home, in October 2021 and acquire no new passport. The order additionally required his wife to transfer a firearm and required McGrath to undergo “medical or psychiatric treatment as required by Pretrial Services.”

On Jan. 23, the requirement for medical treatment was stricken after a request from McGrath’s attorney.

Joseph Murtha, McGrath’s attorney, said he had attempted throughout the morning on Monday to reach his client and his wife.

“Most importantly, I’m concerned. I’m hoping he’s safe,” Murtha said. “These situations are very stressful, the uncertainty of going to trial can cause people to do things many people don’t think are appropriate. We hope that he’s safe.”

Murtha declined to discuss the contents of the conversation but said there was nothing unusual about his client’s demeanor.

“He and I always had a very professional, engaged conversation that were directly related to the trial,” said Murtha. “I looked forward to seeing him at 8:45 this morning.”

Murtha said silence from his client was unusual.

“He’s always been responsive,” said Murtha.

Murtha told Boardman and later reporters that he spoke to his client on Sunday afternoon. He said McGrath told him he planned to travel to Maryland that evening.

McGrath was supposed to stay in an undisclosed area hotel, though Murtha said it was unknown if he arrived.

McGrath’s travel plans appeared to be amorphous even for his attorney.

In a filing last week, Murtha told the court his client was planning on traveling to Maryland on Saturday.

“It was a change in travel plans based on flight availability as I understood it,” Murtha told reporters.

Around 6:15 p.m., Murtha confirmed that he had not yet heard from his client.

McGrath also faces pending state criminal charges relating to alleged illegally recorded private conversations involving senior state officials without their permission during his employment at the Maryland Environmental Service and as chief of staff.

By Bryan P. Sears. Danielle E. Gaines contributed to this report. 

Maryland’s Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to a bill that would prohibit a person from knowingly carrying a firearm onto someone else’s property without the property owner’s express permission and also would prohibit carrying a firearm within 100 feet of public places.

After a committee hearing last month, Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D-Montgomery) — who is lead sponsor of Senate Bill 1 and vice chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, which moved the bill to the Senate floor — said he realized “the bill was drafted way too broadly [and] could accidentally jam people up who are law abiding, responsible citizens and may be difficult to defend constitutionally.”

The bill is being considered after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that New York’s concealed carry permit law violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The court’s decision in New York State Police & Rifle Association vs. Bruen concluded that residents did not need a “good and substantial” reason to carry a concealed firearm.

Maryland also had required special permission to carry a concealed gun, but the state lifted restrictions in July to comply with the court’s ruling. However, then-Gov. Larry Hogan (R) said persons carrying a concealed gun would still be required to obtain a permit.

Currently in Maryland, a person cannot carry a firearm at many places that are public and where there are vulnerabilities or people at risk, including legislative buildings, state parks, school property or within 1,000 feet of a demonstration in a public place.

Waldstreicher’s amended version of his bill, labeled the Gun Safety Act of 2023, specifies that guns would be prohibited in areas where children and vulnerable individuals congregate, at government and public infrastructure sites and certain special purpose areas such as a stadium or theater.

Any person found to have knowingly carried a gun at these places would be guilty of a misdemeanor and face up to 90 days in jail, a fine up to $3,000, or both.

If found guilty of a second or subsequent offense a person could face 15 months imprisonment, a fine up to $7,500, or both. Those are the same penalties that a person would face if found guilty of carrying the firearm with the intent to “cause death or injury to another.”

Besides law enforcement personnel, the bill also would allow some other individuals to carry a firearm, including retired law enforcement officers in good standing, members of the military and members of Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC). 

A few amendments 

Before The Senate gave SB1 preliminary approval, it heard 14 amendments on the floor. A few were technical such as one offered by Sen. Cheryl Kagan (D-Montgomery) to add about two dozen co-sponsors to the bill.

Waldstreicher also added that a person cannot a carry or transport a handgun at a building “currently” used as a polling place.

Although Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-to-1, Sen. William Folden (R-Frederick) had two “friendly” amendments passed.

Folden, a Frederick police officer, said the first amendment would expand who could carry a legal firearm for protection. As an example, he said the amendment would allow a woman in a walking club who has a legal firearm to carry it for protection against an estranged spouse. The second amendment would ensure that a person would not be charged if a firearm accidentally gets exposed “not as a show of force, but as an inadvertent act.”

Meanwhile, an amended bill sponsored by Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, received a 15-7 vote in that committee Wednesday.

As filed, the bill would expand disqualifications for possessing a regulated firearm and increase requirements for issuance of a handgun permit.

The House bill would also double three fees: a wear-and-carry permit from $75 to $150; a renewal or subsequent application from $50 to $100; and a duplicate or modified permit from $10 to $20.

Estimated state revenues may increase from $8.7 million in fiscal year 2024 to $14.1 million by fiscal year 2028, according to the fiscal note.

Power to prosecute police misconduct could move to AG’s office   

The Senate also voted 27-20 Thursday to allow the Maryland Attorney General’s Independent Investigations Division prosecutorial power. The measure now moves to the House of Delegates.

Sponsored by Sen. William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery), the legislation would repeal a requirement that the investigations division report findings in police-involved deaths to the local state’s attorneys, who would decide whether to prosecute. It would give the division exclusive rights to prosecute, unless the attorney general requests that the state’s attorney does so.

The bill would also require the division to investigate police-involved death or injuries to any individual.

By William J. Ford

Efforts to bring a four-day workweek pilot program to Maryland is over at least for this year.

Sponsors of the House and Senate bills withdrew the legislation amid concerns it would institutionalize a 32-hour work week. Costs of the five-year pilot program and engrained attitudes concerning the traditional 40-hour work week appear to have derailed legislation for this year.

Del. Vaughn Stewart (D-Montgomery) held out hope of study by the state Department of Labor, which lawmakers could still require this session through a budget amendment.

Stewart maintained a move to a shorter work week “is the future” for Maryland businesses.

“I think, if we can get this budget language, that there has been a huge step taken this session,” he said.

Stewart pulled the bill Monday prior to a vote by the House Economic Matters Committee because of concerns that it might not pass because of the costs — just under $1 million annually to establish a five-year business tax credit program. The Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Shelly Hettleman (D-Baltimore County) was also withdrawn.

Instead, Stewart hoped to create a study by the state Department of Labor. Once the study is complete, supporters could take another run at the proposal before the end of the current term, he said.

House Economic Matters Committee Chair C.T. Wilson, (D-Charles) said shortening the workweek but paying for 40-hours raised some eyebrows among committee members.

“I think a lot of people from both sides of the aisle are a little bit nervous about the messaging and what’s next,” said Wilson. “Sometimes it’s not the bill itself, but what are ramifications and what the next step is going to be in business — is this just the first phase in normalizing a 32-hour workweek? I think a lot of people were a little concerned about that.”

The traditional 40-hour week dates back to 1940 and an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

By Bryan P. Sears

Wilson said his committee had planned to move the bill with a four-day 40-hour work week before it was withdrawn. The chair said the public may have had a difficult time accepting a 32-hour work week even if were not a mandate.

“The practicality of a 32-hour workweek is really, really hard to get people — my generation and above — to discuss or think about, you know,” he said.

Even so, costs continued to be a factor as lawmakers brace for potentially bad budget news from the Board of Revenue Estimates later this week.

House Bill 181 and the identical Senate Bill 197, described Hettleman as “a little carrot for businesses,” proposed the creation of a tax credit program for businesses interested in a shorter workweek. Workers participating in the program would not see a reduction in pay from the standard 40-hour week.

The bill would provide an annual tax credit of $10,000 each for businesses implementing a four-day, 32-hour work week for at least 30 employees. A company would be eligible for the credit for up to two years.

The state Department of Labor would be required to collect data on the program and report annually to the governor and legislature. The pilot program would have expired in five years.

The bill also required the governor to set aside funding annually. The costs of the program were expected to exceed $900,000 annually including tax credits and administrative costs at the Department of Labor.

Shorter work weeks are growing in popularity in Europe and among some tech companies. Shifts in work attitudes related to the COVID-19 pandemic have left employers looking for ways to lure new workers or retain veteran hires.

“This is the future,” said Stewart.

“I know it sounds utopian and to some people it sounds crazy to say that companies that tried this didn’t have a profitability loss but I think a lot of the experience of companies that have tried this so far flies in the face of that preconception,” he said.

 

Andrea Chamblee believes stronger wear and carry gun permit laws could have prevented the shooter who killed her husband, John McNamara, and four of his Capital Gazette newspaper colleagues, from possessing a firearm on June 28, 2018.

Chamblee, a volunteer with Moms Demand Action’s Maryland chapter, said Wednesday that the shooter legally purchased the long gun used in the killings, despite a history of violence and “lackluster attendance” of anger management classes.

She was testifying before the House Judiciary Committee in support of stronger gun laws in the state.

“He was able to obtain a gun, and in doing so he changed my life, our lives and our town forever,” she said during the slightly more than two-hour hearing. “The emphasis on this bill is simple: making sure that permits needed to carry firearms are issued only to responsible gun owners. These are important safeguards because we know that more guns in more places only increases the likelihood of an argument or disagreement escalating into a shooting.”

Compared to a Senate hearing on a gun carrying permit bill Feb. 7 when several hundred people flooded Annapolis, about 20 people testified Wednesday on the bill sponsored by Del. Luke Clippinger (D-Baltimore City), chair of the committee.

The bill was borne from last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down New York’s law that restricted carrying concealed guns in public. Clippinger’s bill proposes to change portions of Maryland law to set out objective standards for so-called concealed carry prohibitions.

The Supreme Court ruled last year that a person no longer needed to demonstrate a special security need to obtain a license to carry a concealed gun in public, saying the requirement violated the Second Amendment. The decision in the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen — known colloquially as “Bruen” — affected gun laws in Maryland and several other states in addition to New York, where the law was challenged.

Currently in Maryland, a person cannot carry a firearm at places including legislative buildings, state parks, school property or within 1,000 feet of a demonstration in a public place.

Clippinger’s bill proposes that certain individuals should not be allowed to possess a handgun, including those on supervised probation after being convicted of a crime punishable by one year or more of imprisonment, fugitives from justice, individuals who suffer from a mental disorder, or “a habitual drunkard.”

According to a fiscal note analyzing the bill, as of Jan. 20, there were nearly 114,000 active handgun permits in the state. The figure is up from 26,199 at the end of 2021.

The document summarizes how it “generally” takes less than two days to receive results from a FBI criminal history record check and about 90 days to process, investigate and issue a permit.

The legislation proposes to double three fees: a wear-and-carry permit from $75 to $150; a renewal or subsequent application from $50 to $100; and a duplicate or modified permit from $10 to $20.

Estimated revenues may increase from $8.7 million in fiscal year 2024 to $14.1 million by fiscal year 2028, according to the fiscal note.

“We haven’t raised the fees since 1992,” Clippinger said.

Estimated expenditures to fund 55 new positions in the Maryland State Police would be $4.3 million. The funding would pay for salaries and fringe benefits for employees to vet permit applications, vehicles, computer programming and other equipment. The amount would increase to $5.4 million by fiscal year 2028, according to the note.

In addition, every permit owner would have to renew it every two years. Those exempt from this requirement include law enforcement personnel, current and former military personnel and a qualified handgun instructor.

Michael Burke, a member of the board of directors of the guns rights group Maryland Shall Issue, said doubling those fees and a regular two-year renewal “is analogous to a poll tax.”

“You’re charging a fee for a constitutional right,” he said.

Mark Pennak, president of Maryland Shall Issue, said some provisions in the bill, such as a requirement for state police to review permit applications, is already a requirement. Just as Pennak testified in the Senate hearing earlier this month, he warned that a future lawsuit could challenge the legislation.

“You are going to invite an awful lot of litigation…” he said.

Senate version

A Senate version of the legislation presents a different approach, with a focus on where people can possess firearms versus those who can own them.

Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D-Montgomery) sponsored legislation labeled the Gun Safety Act of 2023. He presented an updated version at a bill hearing earlier this month before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

The bill still seeks to prohibit a person from knowingly wearing, carrying or transporting a firearm within “highly sensitive places” such as schools, hospitals and libraries. Other proposed off-limits locations include theaters, polling places, zoos and shelters utilized by “homeless individuals.”

Waldstreicher, vice chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, said in a brief interview Wednesday that work continues to refine his bill and integrate some of Clippinger’s ideas into the Senate version.

“My hope is that some of the Senate’s ideas will similarly be integrated into his [Clippinger’s] work product,” he said. “I think the end goal is [to have] a solid, comprehensive work product that addresses gun violence in the post-Bruen world. This is our moment to address this decision. I think the entire Assembly, including both committees, have an obligation to act.”

One similarity between the Senate and House versions are that background checks would be done by the Maryland State Police.

Both bills would permit those younger than 21 to carry a firearm if hunting with an adult, participating in marksmanship or other organized training, if they’re serving in the military, or if it’s used for employment, in self-defense or against someone trespassing in a residence.

The Senate version notes an applicant who seeks a concealed carry permit must be endorsed by four people who are “reputable, not related to the applicant by blood or law” and have known that individual for at least three years before the date that person submits an application.

As of Wednesday afternoon, the updated Senate version hasn’t posted online.

By William J. Ford

At an October 2022 meeting with residents of Pine Street in Cambridge about possible development in the area, someone said to City Manager Tom Carroll, “We’ve been talking about this for fifty years. When are we gonna do stuff?”

“That resonated with me,” Carroll reflected, “because, as I look at Pine Street, there are some beautiful structures and beautiful homes, but there’s still a lot of blight and there’s still a lot of need. We’ve got a long way to go, in partnership with the community and the residents of the neighborhood and the property owners.”

It wasn’t always this way. When Cambridge prospered as a factory town in the first half of the 20th century, Pine Street—one of the oldest continuously occupied African American neighborhoods in Maryland—prospered, as well. During the 1930s, busy black-owned businesses lined the streets, and the music scene at several local nightclubs was the most vibrant on the Eastern Shore.

But too many people relied on Phillips Packing for their livelihood, and the company’s downfall in the fifties caused African American unemployment to skyrocket. This led to civil unrest, and a fire in the summer of 1967 wiped out much of Pine Street. Things were never the same after that.

Still, Carroll thinks a lot of what’s currently happening in the area is positive. Habitat for Humanity is building eleven homes on Wells Street, and renovations near completion on Cornish Park at 701 Douglas Street. Recently, ground was broken for the Pine Street Community Market, which is scheduled to open in August.

Perhaps most significantly, the city will be applying on March 14 for a $4 million federal grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. If this is successful, Cambridge will spend the next two years investing a considerable amount of money in the Pine Street Historic Neighborhood District, possibly as much as twenty to thirty thousand dollars on each home that participates in the program. The investment would go to such things as lead abatement, plumbing repair, heating, weatherization, and hygiene. Owner-occupied homes as well as rentals would be eligible.

Another aspect of this project would involve job creation. Lead abatement is a trade that requires certification, and the city government would hire and train people from the Pine Street area for the job. They would then have a career with a living wage, since a lot of homes on the Eastern Shore need lead abatement. Additionally, the city would bring on several local individuals for community outreach and grant management.

“We’re building capacity and employing people directly from the neighborhood to make the neighborhood better,” explained Carroll. “So, we’re very optimistic about this grant, and that’s kind of my lead focus right now.”

He will learn this summer if Cambridge is to get the grant. In the meantime, the city is partnering with the state to pay for the acquisition of the old Club Dujour & Eatery on Chesapeake Court, which is right across the street from where they want to build ten to twelve single-family homes through a project called HOW (Home Ownership Works). The club is seen as an impediment to the housing endeavor.

“You wouldn’t want to buy a single-family home right next to a club that has hundreds of people going there on a summer Friday or Saturday night,” said Carroll. “So, it’s a project where we feel like buying the bar, eliminating that from the neighborhood, is an improvement to the neighborhood because it strengthens the single-family homes there.”

While housing is the major focus now, there is also the prospect of bringing new minority-owned businesses to Pine Street. Carroll is optimistic, but he says, “The challenge is that there’s not a turnkey-ready piece of property where somebody could just move in and open a coffee shop or a bar or a barbershop. Some of the property that would be suitable for commercial would need a significant investment today.”

Toward that end, Cambridge is involved in a “land bank,” which is where the city acquires specific property and holds on to it until such time that it can partner with neighborhood businesses that would revitalize the area.

“Pine Street is in need of significant investment and work, let’s agree on that,” said Carroll. “But that’s the rewarding work. The opportunity for the city and the neighborhood to come together and do something in partnership that’s restorative, that’s healing, that creates economic opportunity for the people who live there, who deserve it, that’s what I’m excited about.”