I am a 67 year old runner and conservative. I taught for 31 years and retired a few years back. In my life, I have coached and judged gymnastics, coached softball, and raised two amazing kids.
The National Education Association is always an entertaining group of propagandists. Their page often excoriates groups pushing for parental rights, demands taxpayers pay teachers ridiculously high salaries while allowing schools to ignore protecting teachers, and of course, pushed the myth of “book banning” by those mean old Conservative parents who don’t want their young children learning how to have anal, oral, and vaginal sex via a library book from the school library; a book that has graphic, pornographic pictures.
So, it is not a surprise that they are pushing “Right to Read” as their latest fundraiser, I mean, cause du jour. Here is a picture of their web page:
Their even clever enough to use the Solar eclipse in their one-page diatribe, a page filled with half-truths and total lies. The half-truths are lines like ” Organized pressure groups have used their power, and a long list of titles to wage an aggressive campaign to empty library shelves of all books instead of allowing people to decide for themselves what they and their children read. ” The dead giveaway of the half-truth is the phrase, “empty library shelves of all books.”
Funny, I never heard a call to get rid of all library books. What I heard was a call to get pornography, whether gay or straight, trans or “cis,” black, white, Hispanic, out of school libraries where young children could possibly check them out without their parents ever knowing. Imagine your third grader coming home with Penthouse Magazine in its heyday.
And there is a huge lie regarding the fact that effort to remove pornography severely impacted titles about LGBTQ+ Individuals and people of color. What are you trying to say here NEA? That the only books about LGBTQ+ and people of color involve pornography? I think there might be some people in those groups that would object to that.
One other lie is that the NEA doesn’t address books that promote or depict pedophilia. They skirt this issue because many of the books parents want removed involve pedophilia in the story lines and scenes. Either the NEA condones pedophilia or they have their collective heads shoved in a hole in the ground.
Strange huh?
Here’s the bottom line. When you see the National Education Association go balls to the wall to promote something, it’s not good for kids. Or teachers. Or anyone who is good and decent.
I guess using the eclipse was a good idea, since the NEA never gives the whole, true picture. They always block it with lies.
NOTES: If you want to see how pornographic these books are, look here to see just ONE of them: ( WARNING! Don’t let your child see these images.
This article was originally published on the Easton Gazette.
As the Maryland General Assembly ended Monday, many of the bills passed dealt with education. Most people don’t know which bills were passed, much less how these bills will impact them and their children.
House Bill 945/SB 771-Initial Teacher Certification: Almost everyone knows that Maryland is suffering a teacher shortage. In many jurisdictions, classes are crowded, teachers are teaching out of area, or classes are simply not offered or covered. This bill attempts to alleviate that problem by allowing more people to get certified. It will allow more people to move from another career into teaching. One of the problems of the bill is that it will also allow the State of Maryland to make certain changes to the skills needed to be a teacher. This might mean that your child’s teacher will be trained in counseling but may not have basic academic skills.
House Bill 1493-Public and Nonpublic Schools – Child Sex Offenders – Prohibition on In–Person Attendance: This bill, passed last minute by the Maryland Legislature, will be a plus for any child in a public or private school. The text of the bill prohibits a child from in–person attendance at a public school or a nonpublic school that receives State funds if the child has been convicted or adjudicated delinquent of certain offenses; requiring each local school system to provide alternative educational options for children prohibited from in–person attendance in a certain manner; and generally relating to the prohibition of in–school attendance by children convicted or adjudicated delinquent of certain offenses.
This bill was authored and sponsored by:
Delegates Mangione, Adams, Anderton, Arentz, Bouchat, Buckel, Chisholm, Fisher, Ghrist, Grammer, Griffith, Guyton, Hartman, Hinebaugh, Hornberger, Howard, Hutchinson, Jacobs, S. Johnson, Kipke, R. Long, McComas, Metzgar, Miller, M. Morgan, T. Morgan, Nawrocki, Otto, Pippy, Reilly, Rose, Schmidt, Stonko, Szeliga, Tomlinson, Valentine, and Wivell
Thanks to them, your child will not have to go to school and sit next to a dangerous felon. Thanks also to FOX 45 and Chris Pabst for reporting on the story that spurred this legislation.
Senate Bill 33-More Opportunities for Career–Focused Students Act of 2024: This bill will require that schools inform students about career opportunities and training, including apprenticeships in much the same way the inform them of post-secondary academic education. This is a plus for those students who don’t want to go to college but want to get career training/apprenticeships out of high school.
Senate Bill 738- Freedom to Read Act: Don’t let the title of this bill fool you. It is about the Progressive’s right to control local jurisdictions and school districts when it comes to books that will be in the libraries. It will also complicate the method for parents to challenge pornographic books that may be in their child’s school media center. It limits challenges to school library books to parents, students, teachers and school staff only, thus denying the tax paying public their right to determine what reading materials their tax dollars pay for.
Another interesting part of this bill is that it gives protection to school and county employees, librarians, that will keep them for being fired for refusing to follow county and school policies.
This means you will have to monitor the books your child checks out of the school and public libraries. But, in today’s times, this is nothing new.
HB 4-Institutions of Higher Education – Admissions Standards – Prohibition on Consideration of Legacy Preference or Donor Preference: If your child is going to a college that receives State funds, this bill prohibits certain institutions of higher education from considering a legacy preference or donor preference as an eligible criterion for admissions standards at the institution; and generally relating to admissions standards and institutions of higher education.
HB 76-Health Occupations – Pharmacists – Administration of Vaccines: This is another one of those sneaky bills that may sound good to a beleaguered parent who doesn’t want to schedule a doctor’s appointment for vaccines but this is another bill that can cause more trouble than it solves. The harm is in the wording because now children as young as three can get vaccines at your neighborhood pharmacy as long as their is an “adult caregiver” with the child. That may not always be a custodial parent or relative.
In short, make sure you can trust anyone left in charge of your child.
HB 200-Community Schools – Alterations: If you don’t know what Community Schools are, you will. These are schools in your school district that will be providing “wraparound services” to students who attend there and their families. These wraparound services include medical, dental, vision, expanded school-based health care centers, additional social workers, mentors, counselors, THERAPISTS, psychologists, and restorative practice* coaches.
Community schools provide family and community engagement and supports, including informing parents of academic course offerings, language classes, workforce development training, opportunities for children, and available social services as well as educating families on how to monitor a child’s learning.
They will enhance student enrichment experiences, including educational field trips, partnerships, and programs with museums, arts etc.
As a parent, some of this may sound great. One stop shopping for everything right? Well, first of all, these schools are specifically designed for certain areas with a high concentration of poverty. That means that not all students in a district will receive the same level of services as those provided in “community schools.”
Also, the idea of a mental health therapist having open access to your child should scare any parent as should the implementation of “restorative practices” which are mental health therapies for ALL kids whether they need it or not. Those who have behavior issues will not face consequences for their bad actions, but soft-spoken therapy and time out of class.
If your child is in one of these schools, monitor what you sign on enrollment and demand that you are notified about and give permission for any treatment, physical or mental, given to your child.
We’re not claiming that the staff have ill intent at these schools, but we support parents being involved in what happens to their child while in school .
There are more bills that will affect Marylanders more as they become law on July 1st. Next year, some of the bills that didn’t get through this year will be brought up again next year.
We encourage parents and taxpayers to know your local legislators, be involved in the political process, attend school board meetings, etc.
Here is the website to follow Maryland Legislation;
For people in education in Maryland, it may seem like deja vu. Last year at this time, education organizations were celebrating the block they put in front of a house bill that was the precursor to the above bill. It was a bill that would force local school systems to teach ALL sections of the State’s Health and Sex Education Framework or be faced with a fine from the Maryland State Superintendent.
The effort is part of what got the State Superintendent at the time, Mohammed Choudhury, released from his duties.
Many school boards, the Maryland Association of Boards of Education, and even MSDE itself protested the bill, as the drastic overreach it was. So, the bill went down in flames.
Not one to be deterred, Vanessa Atterbeary of Howard County, who was the sponsor of last year’s bill, brought an almost identical bill back this year. The only difference was this year, she wanted systems to disallow parental opt outs for the units on “Gender Identity and Sexual Preferences.” These opt outs would keep a child from participating in these units. We reported on her effort here:
Atterbeary was denied once again Monday when the legislature voted HB 558 into oblivion. Maybe SHE should be told, like Republican Kathy Szeliga was regarding her “Save Girls Sports,” bill, to “not bring that bill back again next year. “
Yes, that was mean girl Atterbeary who said that to Szeliga.
Karma exists. At least in this case.
Unfortunately, there are other bills that did pass in the Legislature that should not have.
This year the Legislature passed so many potentially harmful bills, many that deny parents their rights to control the education, health care, and exposure of their children to harmful topics.
One of those bills is HB76- Health Occupations-Pharmacists-Administration of Vaccines). It allows pharmacists to administer certain vaccines (Covid, Influenza vaccine, or a vaccine used for a public health emergency) to children as young as three.
Not so bad, right? Read the next paragraph and see if you can find the problem.
IF THE VACCINATION IS ADMINISTERED TO AN INDIVIDUAL UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS, THE PHARMACIST INFORMS THE CHILD VACCINATION PATIENT AND ADULT CAREGIVER WHO IS ACCOMPANYING THE CHILD OF THE IMPORTANCE OF WELL–CHILD VISITS WITH A PEDIATRIC PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER AND REFERS THE PATIENT TO A PEDIATRIC PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER WHEN APPROPRIATE.
If you can find the word parent or guardian in that paragraph, let me know. Picture a three year old being taken in with a babysitter and the parents don’t know.
Another toxic bill is the Freedom to Read Act, SB 738. This bill reads like this:
Establishing a State policy that local school systems operate their school library media programs consistent with certain standards; requiring each local school system to develop a policy and procedures to review objections to materials in a school library media program; prohibiting a county board of education from dismissing, demoting, suspending, disciplining, reassigning, transferring, or otherwise retaliating against certain school library media program personnel for performing their job duties consistent with certain standards; etc.
Those “certain standards”? Not local standards, but State standards which are probably aligned with the American Library Association. Don’t know who they are? Here is their website:
Some have recommended this law be called “The Freedom for Kids to Read Porn” Act.
A bill that has not passed is HB 1493/SB 1145, “Public and Nonpublic Schools – Child Sex Offenders – Prohibition on In-Person Attendance.” The bill is about: UPDATED!!! THE BILL HAS PASSED!!!
Requiring law enforcement agencies and State’s Attorneys to notify schools of certain information when a child is arrested for a sexual offense in the third degree; prohibiting a child from in-person attendance at a public school or a nonpublic school that receives State funds if the child has been convicted or adjudicated delinquent of rape or other sexual offenses; and requiring each local school system to provide alternative educational options for children prohibited from in-person attendance under the Act.
This means that a minor who has been convicted of rape would not be able to attend in-person in a public school or a school that receives funds. Seems right to me. Does anyone want a rapist sharing a classroom with their child? Here are the stories from FOX 45 that caused this bill to be brought to the Legislature:
While the bill has passed the House, it had not passed the full legislature by the last day of session. The bill was a late filing but seems unlikely to get through.
There are many bills that never even got a chance to be voted on by the full legislature. In other words, they died in committee. These were bills to Save Girls Sports, to require that parents know about and give permission for their children to be given mental health treatment in school, to allow school choice, to prevent obscene materials from being displayed to minors, to prohibit sexually explicit materials in school libraries, and to allow homeschool students to dually enroll in college under the state grant system like public school students can.
One bill that did pass and is a good thing is SB 1026 the County Boards of Education – Budgets – Notice (Transparency in Education Spending Act). This bill would adopt a uniform budget reporting form for all districts in the State and would require a certain audit to be sent to the county council or the county commissioners; and generally relating to the budgets of county boards of education.
In other words, school board budgets must now be reported in specific and standard way.
Overall, it has been the kind of legislative session we would expect in deeply blue Maryland. Over 2700 bills were proposed. We only covered a few here. As usual, a few crumbs fall to those who support parental rights and Conservative values, while most of the bills that would truly reform the system are DOA in committees. Harmful bills like last year’s Juvenile Justice Reform pass with flying colors and turn our state into a sanctuary for juvenile crime.
As of the writing of this story, Governor Moore has yet to sign any bills into law. That will be the real test for some of these bills who made it through the general assembly. But we don’t expect he will stand for parents. He hasn’t yet.
If you ask most parents if their child’s school is okay, the answer you get is likely to be “yes.” Yet, every day we see headlines about poor student achievement, out of control students disrupting the classroom and attacking teachers and students alike, and inappropriate content being taught to young children.
Where is the disconnect between what is going on in schools and what parents think is going on in schools? Is it an intentional or accidental disconnect? Or is it both?
Most parents I talk to nowadays are extremely busy between working to provide for their families, ferrying children from school to activities likes sports, and doing household duties that must be done to maintain a healthy standard of living for their children.
They don’t have much time left to take a deep dive into what is going on their child’s classroom much less their school or school system. They rely on teachers and district personnel to communicate with them. Sadly, teacher communication either doesn’t happen at all or is skewed to specific purposes such as discipline issues or poor classroom performance relating to the parent’s child. It’s not that teachers don’t want to keep parents in the know, they have no time either. In some cases, teachers are told to restrict their interactions with parents to as little as possible.
District communication, on the other hand, is often used to publicize all the “happy news” of the school system. No Superintendent wants to send out information that highlights district failures. Occasional extreme incidents such as school lockdowns or threats are generally limited to the schools involved. State test scores are revealed as required by the State.
So, again, parents generally don’t know what is going on in their child’s school. They look at their child’s grades and based on that, determine whether things are “okay.” If their child is getting A’s and B’s, all is well. If not, well that’s the child’s fault and not an indicator of something going wrong in the school or school system. So, they are blissfully unaware of what might be going on.
To be fair, some schools are actually “okay.” Smaller rural schools seem to be less susceptible to the radical influences of administrators/educators who promote gender ideology or divisive politics.
Others such as larger urban schools may not be. Recently, in our county, two students were arrested for assaulting a teacher and a school manager. Parents and teachers recount incidents of students being assaulted in the hallways by other students. Still, busy parents may not know exactly what is happening in their child’s classroom.
What can they do to be informed?
Stop relying on classroom grades to inform you of whether your child is learning or not. Sadly, grade inflation has infected most U.S. classrooms. Teachers are told to make sure students succeed despite their actual performance or work. In many schools, failing grades don’t even exist anymore because administrators and education “experts” think they harm students’ mental well-being. So, students who should not pass from one grade to the next fly through the system and end up graduating without being able to read or do math. Instead, parents should ask for their child’s standardized test scores and then compare to his/her grades. If grades are high but your child is achieving below grade level, you know there’s a problem. At that point, ask for a conference with your child’s teacher and the administration of the school to see where the disconnect occurs and determine what needs to be done to fix it. Be aware that unless your child has learning disabilities, the school will not be inclined to offer extra tutoring or help since they are too busy dealing with students who have been determined to be in a subgroup they are targeting for improvement OR for those who are further behind than your child. If that is the case, then you may need to find additional tutoring on your own or supplement your child’s learning yourself.
Listen to your child. This is something parents don’t always do. Again, when you’re busy driving kids from activity to activity it’s sometimes easy to miss what they are talking about. So many parents find things out through what they hear from their children. One parent described how she learned that her kindergarten child was learning that boys aren’t necessarily boys and girls are necessarily girls from her classroom teacher. A grandparent was told by her grandchild that “boys can have babies” because teacher said so. Other parents learn about violence in the schools or that their child is afraid to go to the bathroom during the day because boys are in the girls’ bathroom or vice versa, all because they listen to their child. There is an art to listening and encouraging your child to talk to you about these issues. When you DO hear something, follow the chain of command in the school to confirm. If you think someone in that chain is not being honest, keep going UP the chain.
Learn to be the pesky parent. I can’t tell you how many parents tell me they don’t want to be “that parent” and that is why they don’t go into schools, don’t ask questions, and don’t participate in their child’s education. Being a parent is about raising your children to be good, productive adults who will be able to support themselves and their families as adults. This is NOT a task for those who are worried about public perception. Once you had that child, you made a silent process to fight for that child. This does not mean you hover like a helicopter parent or that you don’t allow your child to fail, to have her feelings hurt or to struggle, but that you will be there as the adult when the child cannot handle issues on her own. ASK QUESTIONS and when you get answers, keep asking questions. Responsible, professional educators who truly want what’s best for children will get it.
Attend any school board meetings, school board work sessions, administration information sessions where you can hear from and interact with the Superintendent of Schools, and school board members etc. These meetings are often long and boring, but you can learn so much about the “nuts and bolts” of what goes on in your district’s schools. If there is time for public comment, use that when you want to speak about what is going on in schools. Know the rules of speaking and stay within those rules.
Educate yourself. Learn what different terms, acronyms, and abbreviations mean. The more you know about these, the more you will be able to understand what is happening in schools and WHY it is happening.
Be prepared for good or bad news. If you want to be intellectually honest, understand that either can be true. If it’s good news, don’t stop digging. If it’s bad news, don’t stop digging.
In today’s times, parents have to be more aware than ever. Their children’s well-being and education depends on it.
Don’t take anyone’s word for it. Find out for yourself if your child’s school is okay.
Jan Greenhawk is a former teacher and school administrator for over thirty years. She has two grown children and lives with her husband in Maryland. She also spent over twenty-five years coaching/judging gymnastics and coaching women’s softball.
Appointed Commissioner Botkin claims a consultant is lying.
Anyone who has participated in volunteer or public organizations knows about Roberts’ Rules of Order. It’s all that “stuff” about how and when people can start meetings, adjourn meetings, make motions, vote etc.
Roberts Rules of Order was initially written in 1876 by Henry Martyn Robert, an engineering officer in the regular Army. Without warning he was asked to preside over a public meeting being held in a church in his community and realized that he did not know how. He attempted to run the meeting and it was a disaster. He realized he knew nothing of parliamentary law, so he did research and created one of the best-known guides to running public meetings.
Roberts’ Rules of Order has been updated many times since then. You can find information on the book here:
It was a set of rules to bring decorum and order to meetings.
While many meetings are run using Robert’s Rules of Order, many don’t strictly follow the rules provided in that guide. They either use rules from their own town or municipality or State procedures. Maryland does not require the use of Robert’s Rules of Order by default in meetings.
Appointed Oxford Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin decided to read about meeting processes at the Tuesday, March 19th Commissioner’s meeting using a quote the Oxford Town Charter. What she read did not directly come from Robert’s Rules of Order. However, suggestions for public comment are covered in Robert’s Rules of Order.
Botkin made it very clear to the citizens of Oxford last Tuesday at the meeting that she wanted order and decorum at town meetings. Seems ironic coming from her.
Why? She has been rude and dismissive to citizens, consultants and fellow Commissioners in meetings.
In a February 27 meeting, she insulted a property owning, tax paying citizen during his public comment asking why he was unable to get a report he requested from the town. He said he was raising his daughter in Oxford, prompting Botkin to call him a liar and a part time resident. She used the second description as if that was equivalent to being a leper. In a small town like Oxford, that term is sometimes used as an insult from full time residents, implying that the part timers have no rights. However, part time residents pay the same taxes as full-time residents and are due the same respect. We have rarely seen so much vitriol from a public official towards a citizen in a public meeting setting.
Was the citizen animated in his comments? Absolutely. Was he rude? No. And, even if the Commissioners thought he was rude, public officials should hold themselves to a higher standard. Clearly not the case here. He wasn’t even trying to have a “debate” with them. He was asking for information and wondering why it is so hard to get information from the Oxford Administration.
The next instance was her interaction with a consultant at a town workshop prior to an open meeting, demanding he face her when talking and then calling him a liar too. She called him a liar because he said he was not trying to get business from the town. I guess if you don’t say what Botkin wants, that’s her “go to” accusation.
It was after that workshop that she decided she needed to address public participation and decorum in meetings. She read this from the Town Charter:
All meeting [meetings] of the Commissioners shall be open to the public, and the rules of the Commissioners shall provide that residents of the Town shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any meeting in regard to any municipal question.xydoc/1 (oxfordmd.net)
Then she went on to say this: “Public comment is not a debate, it’s not a question-and-answer session or discussion. If after public comment a commissioner wishes to clarify a matter they may do so. “
She stated that comments will be limited to three minutes.
This practice was not confirmed to have been adopted by the Town Commissioners in a prior open meeting. Neither Commission President Costigan nor Commissioner Greer stated that they had discussed and accepted Botkin’s meeting decorum proposal. Maybe they don’t have to. However, there is nothing in the Town Charter that imposes the limits stated by Botkin. The State does not require Roberts Rules of Order be used in civic meetings either. In fact, Roberts’ Rules of Order suggests but doesn’t require this citizen comment format either.
Oxford Charter rules say, there will be a “reasonable opportunity” for citizens to speak during public comment. They say nothing about interaction with Commissioners and/or staff at meetings nor a time limit. So, why the change? Shouldn’t the town Charter determine the format? Shouldn’t there have been a discussion among the Commissioners and then a consensus relayed in a statement from the Commissioners through President Tom Costigan?
As has been made clear in the past year, a majority of our Town Commissioners, unlike prior occupants of those offices, don’t like answering questions. If you look over any minutes from 2010 to 2023, you will see plenty of conversations between citizens and commissioners throughout the notes. And, not all of these dialogues seemed particularly friendly. In fact, some of them were downright testy. Past Commissioners didn’t seem to mind robust public debate and discussion. They were able to conduct town business and embrace lively input from the citizens of the town.
Why doesn’t a majority of this set of commissioners want to answer questions? Has their lawyer advised them not to, just like she did in the meeting at the Oxford Community Center a little over a year ago? Do they not know the answers to the questions? Are they afraid of the answers? Who knows. Whatever it is, when you cannot clearly and simply answer a citizen’s question or concern (outside of legally protected information), you may want to resign.
The new rule limiting dialogue has clearly been put into place to protect our town officials from having to respond to citizens. While other, larger bodies may routinely implement this practice to save time, a “teeny tiny little town” like Oxford (as Ms. Botkin likes to call it) shouldn’t have that much of a problem answering direct questions and having a dialogue with citizens within reasonable time limits. When else are ALL citizens, not just a privileged, selected few, supposed to get that opportunity?
I understand that sometimes citizens get passionate and emotional in meetings which is their right. If they become threatening, abusive or violent, then they must be cautioned and possibly removed. That was not what happened in either of these cases where Ms. Botkin started hurling insults. In the second case when Ms. Botkin demanded the consultant face her, she was the one being rude to a person who was asked to present to the Commissioners AND the citizens and was merely fulfilling that request. That’s not how you treat invited speakers and consultants.
In my 30 years as a teacher, administrator, and coach in the school system and a National Chairman of a major sports organization, I had never witnessed comments to the public by an elected official anything like those comments by appointed Commissioner Botkin. At the very least, if anyone in an official capacity did display that kind of behavior in public or in private, they would have been required to apologize to the citizen or, in some cases, resign their position. Rightly so. Citizens and taxpayers are their constituents and public officers need to treat them professionally and politely.
Shouldn’t Ms. Botkin apologize?
I don’t put the total blame on this particular appointed official although she should know better having been President of the Talbot County School Board before she resigned her position early to be appointed to the Oxford Town Commissioners. She is merely a place holder in her position on the Commissioners, appointed to fill the spot to promote an agenda until an election could be held later on this Spring. In a recent circulated email from a sworn official of an important Oxford Committee, this was clearly stated; “Susan (Botkin)* was appointed after it was realized that the elected commissioner (Katrina Greer)* might represent a small, effete constituency.” *Names added for clarity.
Interesting. They, whoever appointed Botkin, decided they knew better than a voting majority of citizens and appointed the loser of an election because they didn’t like the results or the winner. She is doing exactly what the group who appointed her wants her to do, silence citizens.
Banana republic anyone?
You see, the people behind the scenes running our town, like other actors in our state and country, are running scared. Citizens are demanding answers, transparency, and accountability, and the “power brokers” don’t like that. We hear it in many different local towns and communities. Whether they are afraid of unethical activities and practices being exposed or are afraid of repercussions from the people who control THEM, public officials simply don’t want citizens to know the truth. And, believe me, there is much to be uncovered. Like any scared creature, they fight back in the most virulent way possible to protect the power they have and to keep hidden all of their flaws and mistakes.
And it just gets worse when they encourage the sending of nasty emails, forced repercussions on citizens, and attempts to destroy the reputation of those asking for clarity and transparency.
Not only that, but the powerful Oxford elite also encourage other citizens to complain that those asking for ethics in government are the ones who are wrong, who are harmful. We have fellow citizens in our town telling us shut up, leave, or mind our own business. Some of those fellow citizens have legally been sworn into powerful town committees such as the Ethics Committee but find it okay to attempt written intimidation of citizens to make citizens stay quiet. Seems unethical to me, what about you?
You see, they think they are better than us, that they have the moral high ground in defending the indefensible. They claim to be the victims while the whole time they are victimizing and bullying those who speak up. They even go as far as to demand the citizens stop putting in public information requests because truth costs too much money. Unless THEY want answers. Then PIA’s are fine.
It’s a typical authoritarian tactic, claim victimhood in order to shut down free speech and inquiries. It won’t work.
In the long run, we support running town meetings by Robert’s Rules of Order and having decorum. But the town should adopt ALL of the rules that apply if they want to adopt rules for citizen comment. This includes modeling courtesy and respect and encourage members of the public to do the same. The rules and courtesy must apply to all citizens, not just the favored few.
The Oxford Strand Shoreline has been in the news recently because of the controversial nature of the restoration that seems to be doing more harm than good to the iconic landmark.
The following pictures of the Strand were taken on Friday, March 15, and show alarming erosion that appears to be occurring at a higher pace than prior to the work which brought in tons of sand that now seem to have disappeared.
Here is a picture of the Strand prior to the “restoration:”
Here are the pictures today after the restoration has been “settling” for a couple of months:
Not exactly the way it was supposed to work or the picture we have of this project when it “worked.”
Some will say that the “living shorelines” haven’t been established yet and that is why it looks this way. Based on these pictures, where will the plants be planted, in front of the sand? Behind the erosion? Where did all those tons of sand go?
The Town is sticking by the project, sending emissaries out to local “information” nights to tell people that they aren’t seeing what they are seeing.
Trouble for them is, we aren’t blind. We see the damage and we see the time and money wasted while other parts of town that NEED true flood relief are ignored.
And we have Commissioners calling citizens liars. They are shaming the wrong people.
For more information on this project, read these articles:
This story was originally published on the Easton Gazette
March 14, 2024
From Left to Right: Town Lawyer Lindsay Ryan, Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin, Commissioner Tom Costigan, Commissioner Katrina Greer, Town Manager Cheryl Lewis; Front Table: Donald J. Borut, Carol Kachadoorian, Virtually: David Duetsch
The room in the Oxford Town Office was packed Tuesday afternoon as the Town Commissioners conducted a job search workshop for a replacement for the Town Manager Cheryl Lewis who is retiring as of July 1.
To say that Lewis’s tenure as Oxford Town Manager has been controversial in the past few years is an understatement. Recent questions about events such as the firing of town maintenance staff, the sudden retirement of the longtime police chief and questions about how his successor was hired, nepotism in hiring, work on the iconic Strand Shoreline, and inquiries about why financial auditor’s concerns for seven years were ignored have caused citizens to become active in voicing their concerns about her actions and the actions of the Town Commissioners.
When Lewis announced her retirement a few weeks ago, Commissioner Katrina Greer suggested the town bring in a consulting firm to advise in the hiring process for the new Town Manager, citing the engagement level of Oxford citizens and need to find an extremely qualified person for such an important position in the town.
The evening started with Carol Kachadoorian, a resident of Oxford, explaining her experience and her role as the moderator for the discussion. She has extensive experience in town management and has lived in the town for twelve years.
She then introduced Donald J. Borut, the former Executive Director of the National League of Cities, the nation’s oldest and largest national organization representing municipal governments. Donald J Borut has more than 40 years experience in municipal government and organizational leadership in the public interest sector. He served as the Executive Director of the National League of Cities from 1990 – 2012. Prior to his NLC appointment, he was Deputy Executive Director of the International City Management Association (ICMA).
She also introduced David Duetsch, a seasoned city manager with over 40 years of experience, who has held significant roles in municipal administration in Bowie, Maryland and Springettsbury Township in Pennsylvania. He has been the recipient of national awards. He is currently employed by Mercer Group Associates, a group that conducts candidate searches for many jurisdictions.
After explaining that the purpose of the workshop was for the consultants to share their expertise and advice with the town to define the characteristics of candidates for Town Manager who would have skill sets that would work for the Oxford Community, Karchadoorian then explained the ground rules for the session stating that it was intended as a civil discourse and participants should: refrain from judging others’ comments, respect everyone as equals, add to the conversation, and speak one at a time. She also said that the topic of the session was to develop the process for the search and NOT to discuss candidates for the position or the current Town Manager.
Mr. Borut then began discussing the process, facing the crowd as he spoke. Ms. Botkin interrupted abruptly, ” This is a Commissioner’s workshop, WE are the ones who you need to interact with and you’re talking out to the audience and we can’t see your faces.”
Mr. Borut apologized, turned toward the Commissioners and continued. He explained the benefit of help in the search and the need for a defined, professional process. As an example, he said that if one broke their arm, it would heal. But, it would heal much better with an orthopedic doctor’s services. He also championed clarity and transparency in the search. He stated that this could be the biggest decision in the tenure of the current commissioners.
Mr. Deutsch, who participated remotely, described how the town may want to conduct the search and possibly develop a brochure to advertise the position. The brochure would include a profile of the town, a description of the duties of the town manager as well as possible pay and benefits. He also shared that towns similar to Oxford typically had twenty to forty applicants, but that the applicant pools are not as deep as they used to be.
Appointed Commissioner Botkin interrupted again, ” Excuse me, I just wanted to be clear. You’re kind of selling us your services. I want to be clear on that.”
“No, he’s actually not,” Katchadoorian replied, to which Botkin answered, ” That’s what he said.”
Then Katchadoorian explained, ” He is sharing his experience, he is not asking you to hire him.”
“That’s not what he said,” Botkin stubbornly replied*.
Commissioner Greer continued the discussion describing how engaged the Oxford community is and wondering about if there could be community input into the process. Deutsch said it could be included.
When specifically asked about fees for the service, regardless of which firm provided them, Deutsch said it would probably be in the mid $20,000 range a far cry from the $50,000 Botkin had predicted at a previous town meeting.
Commissioner Costigan asked about whether the town may have to pay relocation expenses for candidates who lived in other states. Deutsch said that could be part of any negotiation.
When asked to explain the pro’s and con’s of using a search firm for the hiring, Mr. Borut said that cons could be the fee, but this would be one of the most significant appointments the town would make and engaging a professional would be of great value.
“$20,000 for a small town is a lot of money,” added Botkin. *Writer’s note: In 2023, the town had income of $6,339,000and annually has a budget that is close to that amount.
Deutsch explained that the time frame for hiring could be 90 to 120 days. He also said the town could have a talent pull of 50 to hire from.
“The answer is not an “Indeed” search where you get a lot of chaff and not much wheat,” said Duetsch.
The workshop closed with several questions from citizens and a reminder again from the consultants that this would be the most significant appointment this group of commissioners might make.
Writer’s Note: Appointed Commissioner Botkin is on the record as being against conducting a broad search for candidates, expressing doubts that a small town like Oxford could attract from outside the local area. It was pointed out to her that the town has approximately $30 million of grants, which may make it attractive. She expressed multiple opinions against this workshop in the past.
So much has happened in the last eight years. We have had two presidential elections, a pandemic, a gubernatorial election, and the Baltimore Orioles have become contenders.
Another thing happened in those years. The 2016 Oxford Stormwater Management and Shoreline Protection Master Plan was created. But somehow it was not available to the public on the Oxford Town website until recently.
Last week, it miraculously appeared on the Oxford Town website after resident Scott Rensberger’s countless attempts to get a hard copy. He confronted the Town Commissioners and Manager about his frustration at a town meeting on Tuesday, February 27, 2024.
The study is 71 pages long and contains descriptions of different problem areas throughout the town and proposed solutions, a timeline, and a cost breakdown for each project. The copy published on the website was labeled, “draft,” meaning there might be a final copy somewhere. It’s also possible that the Commissioners never signed on to the plan thus keeping it in limbo.
After a cursory review of the document, there doesn’t appear to be anything so complicated that it could not have been put on the Town website immediately when it was completed in 2016 and then left there alongside other plans from the past decade:
The list above shows all the plans including the recently added 2016 study.
At the very least, it should have been readily available to anyone who asked. Perhaps, as has been the answer about unavailable town policy documents in the last year, this was an “oversight. Maybe it was not posted because it was merely a draft. However, if that was the reason, why didn’t the Commissioners and Town Manager just say that when citizens asked for a copy or asked why there was no copy posted?
Usually, when government doesn’t make certain information public, it is because they don’t want people to know about it. Maybe it exposes a mistake or something town management or government is hiding.
In the 2016Oxford Stormwater Management and Shoreline Protection Master Plan, the following areas of Oxford are the first four in the proposed mitigation plan/ schedule. For each area, the developers of the plan, George, Miles and Buhr LLC, Architects and Engineers, listed when each problem area should be addressed: Causeway Park, (Years 1-4) Historic Banks Street, Historic Tilghman Street, Historic Mill Street (Years 4-6) and Jack’s Point. (Years 6-8). These priorities are listed in the chart on pages 65-66 in Table 13-1. Remember, the plan was developed in 2016.
Other areas, Morris/Caroline Street, the Historic District, the Strand (parking lot) are listed as “future.” The other two phases of the Strand are listed as “unassigned.”
In a statement during the February 27, 2024 town meeting the Town Manager was talking about how to use $600,000 of ARPA funds that must be used by the town or lost. She mentioned “re-doing” the 2016 Oxford Stormwater Management and Shoreline Protection Master Plan study which identified town flooding needs and what can be done. She then remarked that town needs as stated in the 2013, 2015 (she might have been referring to the 2016 plan since we cannot find a 2015 plan) studies have been “climate influenced” and have changed.
Lewis stated that the areas that were looked at in those earlier studies had flooding problems then but aren’t having the same problems now. This is interesting since it seems that the same sections of town mentioned as priorities in the plan, the Causeway, Tilghman Street, Banks Street, Mill Street, and Jacks Point are the ones listed as critical areas for flooding then and are still flooding in 2024. Eight years ago, it appears that the creators of the study recommended that these areas be addressed first.
One area that is NOT mentioned as an immediate need in the 2016 Oxford StormwaterManagement and Shoreline Protection Master Plan is specifically the focus on the preservation of the Strand Beach, a controversial project being completed now. Protection of the Strand Beach is a recommendation as a side note for preventing flooding at the Strand parking lot, but it is not the priority. Even the Strand Parking lot is listed below other area needs. Somehow this high visibility grant-funded project of restoring the Strand Beach did a leapfrog over more critical areas of town. Does the Strand project get the town and its administration publicity about preventing erosion with “living shorelines” and green solutions? Does it curry favor with the Md. Department of Natural Resources and the National Wildlife Foundation while leaving a huge portion of the town underwater? Was this project the only one the town could get grants for?
These are questions only the town can answer. However, when people ask, the town doesn’t want to answer and chastises those who ask or town staff launches into a long, rambling, defensive explanation meant to obfuscate and delay.
Perhaps the town didn’t want anyone to realize that the main focus of the Strand Project had nothing to do with real flooding problems in the town and actually was in opposition to the 2016 Oxford Stormwater Management and Shoreline Protection Master Plan. Maybe that is why the 2016 Oxford StormwaterManagement and Shoreline Protection Master Plan was hidden away for so long. The old saying is “out of sight, out of mind.” Again, it’s a simple question with a simple, direct answer.
Refusing to give answers is inexcusable, particularly when you have people in Oxford who are suffering with their homes being damaged and destroyed by flood waters every year. People have a right to know what these studies have revealed and WHY the town went in another direction. The assumption is that these people will be angry about the answers, and they probably will be. But isn’t it better to take that chance and tell the truth?
In isolation, the actions of the town regarding the 2016 Oxford StormwaterManagement and Shoreline Protection Master Plan may not seem like a very big deal. However, this is a lack of transparency the town has practiced continuously over the last year. It is a troubling pattern of non-transparency every citizen should be concerned about, whether they support the town management and officials or not. Maybe people don’t care or want people to stop asking because it doesn’t affect their lives.
They should remember, if they can shut people out on this issue, they can do the same on an issue that might affect the lives of others, including them.
Additional Notes: This is not the first time that town documents have disappeared and reappeared in Oxford.
Jan Greenhawk is a former teacher and school administrator for over thirty years. She has two grown children and lives with her husband in Maryland. She also spent over twenty-five years coaching/judging gymnastics and coaching women’s softball.
This article was originally published on at eastongazette.com
“THIS IS THE MOST UNTRANSPARENT TOWN I’VE EVER SEEN.” – Oxford Resident Scott Rensberger
Oxford Commissioners Delean Botkin and Costigan Prior to February 27th Meeting
It’s been a little over a year since citizens crowded the Oxford Community Center and demanded more transparency and accountability from the Town Commissioners and Town Office regarding the sudden retirement of the Police Chief as well as other issues. It’s clear that the town has not done enough to address those demands.
When everyone walked into the Oxford Town Meeting on Tuesday, February 27, 2024, they probably didn’t expect what happened that night. But what happened will remain in citizens’ memories for a very long time. It could impact how the town operates in the future.
The meeting started with the usual business and progressed to department reports from Maintenance Supervisor Matt Ozman and Interim Police Chief Phillips. There was new business about an ordinance that would affect building codes and CRS ratings. There was information about grants available, the town budget, an RFP for software, new personnel hiring, and announcements about upcoming events.
After the business of the meeting was almost over, Commissioner Katrina Greer stated that the town needed to investigate the best way to manage Town Manager Cheryl Lewis’s departure on July 1 and the best way search for a new town manager.
Greer offered options, stating that the town needed to be careful in replacing Lewis who has been in place for twelve years. She offered the possibility of using the Maryland Municipal League as a resource, getting community involvement, and even conducting a nationwide search since the town manages some thirty million dollars of grants. As Greer said, this could be the most important decision the Commissioners can make and one that could impact the town for years.
Appointed Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin said that conducting a nationwide search would cost the town $50,000. A citizen in the audience yelled out, “that’s horses***.”A short argument ensued until Tom Costigan halted the interchange, asked people to be respectful, and agreed to the idea of having a community workshop for citizens and commissioners to determine the needs and considerations when making this hire.
That’s when a resident of the town, Scott Rensberger, asked to speak publicly. Rensberger is an internationally renowned investigative reporter and photographer and created this video about flooding in Oxford:
Scott strode to the front of the room with a clear purpose and stated his name and address.
” I wasn’t going to say anything today but I got all riled up. I love this town,” he started. He then reminded President of the Commissioners Tom Costigan that Costigan had yelled at him at the last meeting when he asked a question. He asked that Costigan be more respectful this time. He also thanked the Commissioners for their time, acknowledging the difficulty of their jobs.
Rensberger has a lengthy resume as an award-winning investigative reporter and photojournalist. You can see his work and accolades here:
“I’m trying to figure out this town,” he said. ” I’ve been writing the Commissioners and the Town Manager with fairly simple questions. They don’t respond to me. I don’t know how to get answers and I wish someone would tell me how.” He described his experiences visiting and living all over the world and the United States. “This town is the most non-transparent town I’ve ever seen. I can’t figure it out. It’s 600 people, it’s so easy.”
“When I Google St. Michaels, Dewey Beach, Rock Hall, all these places, their websites are so open.” Rensberger stated. Then he went on to suggest that people Google Rock Hall to see what he is talking about. He explained that the Rock Hall website posts a great deal of information including town expenditures as small as the money spent on gas by the town’s police cruiser.
“I turn on this one (Oxford’s website) and I’m going to sit there all night long trying to figure out anything,” he marveled. “It shouldn’t be this hard.”
Rensburger stated that he asked for the name of the engineer who’s coming to his property to study what is going on with the flooding on his property and he wasn’t given that name. He also said he asked for the 2016 study on the town flooding but he can’t get it. (Writer’s note; we could never find or get it either.) He described a drainage pipe under his property that hasn’t been cleaned for forty years.
In a 2013 report on flooding in Oxford, Rensburger said that a study in the report pointed out that his neighborhood was a “poor Black community”, and that the town was basically “allowing water to run down there.”
He paused briefly.
Reading notes from his phone, Rensburger asked the audience if they had ever heard of Silver Spring, Maryland, a community 130 times larger than Oxford. He pointed out that their Town Manager is paid $50,000 less than Oxford Town Manager Lewis. The same applies to Old Town Alexandria which is 300 times larger. “Our Town Manager is by far the highest paid Town Manager in Maryland,” he explained.
At this point, appointed Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin loudly interrupted Rensburger. ” Sir, you are out of line. I have responded to you and I have the emails. I see your stuff and it says you live here and you’re raising your daughter here. You’re not. You’re a part timer.” Botkin accused Rensburger of being a liar.*
Rensburger answered that he is not lying and had asked for the 2016 Study and hadn’t gotten it. Botkin held it up, waved it, and said, “It’s available and it’s your problem if you don’t have it.”
As the two continued back and forth, Commissioner Costigan broke in, silenced Botkin, and told Rensburger to continue. He did, detailing that the current Maintenance Supervisor, who Rensburger said is a good person, is the nephew of Cheryl Lewis’s long time “partner.” He mentioned that two maintenance employees are currently tenants on Lewis’s significant other’s property. He discussed the fact that Lewis’s daughter, the former town planner made $86,000 a year. In comparison, the newest hire for that position, a woman with years of experience, was hired as a planner for $50,000 to $70,000 a year.
Rensburger also pointed out that in the past few years the town had two employees, Maintenance Supervisor Scott Delude and Chief of Police Pat Maxwell, who had a combined 48 years of experience, who had vanished as employees with no valid explanation.
As he finished, Rensburger quietly returned to his seat. Commissioner Costigan said he would get Rensburger the name of the engineer.
There were additional public comments. One resident applauded Commissioner Greer’s suggestion that the town conduct an extensive, careful search for a new Town Manager. Another questioned a recent building permit and if it would be affected by new FEMA regulations.
The meeting was then adjourned as the Commissioners again went to a closed meeting for “legal and personnel matters.”
Writer’s Notes: The Friday edition of the STAR DEMOCRAT included a story about this meeting and the town manager search, but, as is typical of the publication, the reporter failed to report on Rensburger’s comments. This is not unusual, because it seems the reporter, Maggie Trovato, is more interested in describing the viewpoints of the town government and not the views or statements of the citizens. One wonders if she has been engaged to be a press release writer for the town. Or maybe the STAR DEMOCRAT is afraid that Rensburger, a renowned investigative reporter, is competition for them.
Additional Comment: * This is the second time in two meetings that appointed Commissioner Botkin has aggressively addressed citizens during and after meetings and made demeaning comments implying that those citizens did not have the right to be heard or have the same level of service from the town. The previous incident was when she told me that I had a bad attitude and that is why I don’t get information from the town. Her comment to Mr. Rensburger implied that “part time” residents who are property owners do NOT deserve the same consideration of the town. She also called him a liar. Is this proper behavior for a public official?
Perhaps Botkin should be reminded that there is NOTHING in the Town Charter or laws that allows town employees, administration, or elected officials to deny or discriminate against residents, full or part time, or refuse to give them the same respect and service they give everyone. Perhaps this is the reason Ms. Botkin did NOT get elected to office and had to be appointed.
More Info:
A Reminder about Oxford’s propensity to go to CLOSED MEETINGS:
It seems it is time for government and administration in Oxford that believes in transparency, fairness and accountability. This is something that could be said about MANY levels of government.
Jan Greenhawk is a former teacher and school administrator for over thirty years. She has two grown children and lives with her husband in Maryland. She also spent over twenty-five years coaching/judging gymnastics and coaching women’s softball.
