Notes from Rural Tier Hearing

Meeting Notes posted on this site are NOT OFFICIAL MINUTES, but can give you different perspectives of what is happening in the county. More meeting notes can be found here. Newspaper reports about meetings can often be found in Newsletter archives - a brief description and a link to the story are in weekly e-newsletters.

Sept. 25, 2006 at the County Administration Building

The place was packed, standing room only in the hearing room with people crowded in the lobby outside of the hearing room to hear the speakers on a loudspeaker. I presented my testimony (number 54) and had to leave at about 9:15 or so. While I was there, not a single person spoke on behalf of the SMA or CB75. Delegate Vallario asked for a show of hands for those opposed -- every hand in the place went up. What was most striking is that dozens of farmers, nursery and horse establishments spoke against the SMA and the CB75. Many pointed out that the package contains many serious restrictions that would prevent people from making a living farming . This list of restrictions is incredible. No farm stands. No home offices. No trucks. No sale of implements. No farm stands. No guest houses (bed & breakfasts?).

Moreover, because farmers use the equity of their land to borrow against, they fear that that the proposed 25 acres zoning will prevent them from getting the loans they need to operate. A majority of speakers requested that their land be exempted from the OAS zoning. (This can be done via letter, apparently with a deadline of October 17. I am trying to get more info on this and will send it out.)

Let me also report that the bill was opposed by residents with lots of every size. Farmers with 120 acres, residents with 15 acres, etc. Noteably, the Mattaponi Basin Citizens Association opposed the bill -- its representative Lazlo Payerle described the group as predominantly smaller landholders.

I testified that small-middle size landowners have 3 strikes against them (1) too small to suddivide (2) too small to break off parcels for children (3) too small to qualify for PDR. Some people like our family specifically invested in our property for our retirement. No one should not be put in a position where we have to sell their entire property and their move in order to have an adequate retirement. Also, I would not be permitted to move my office to my home. Home offices should be encouraged as a way to allieviate traffic congestion, save gas and prevent pollution -- not to mention more time to enjoy ourselves.

When you think about this bill and SMA its absolutely bizzare. Its called Agricultural Zoning and is opposed by everyone at the hearing connected to agriculture. The right approach is clearly one that provides incentives of many kinds. We should have a number of wonderful farm markets. CSA's like Scott and Tanya's should receive grants from the county. Grant money could be used to get agricultural interns from our local high schools. The deteriorating parts of Brandywind could be turned into a beautiful market center. Imagine stands of flowers, honey, fresh baked goods, and displays that highlight the history and beauty of our area. Perhaps a beautiful new town center (lets give the developers an opportunity to do something good for a change).

With the right kind of programs from the county we can make local agriculture blossom. The answer is not the draconian and taking hand of a detached government, but the creativity and imagination of the people.

The reason, why the County's package is so absurd and has so many opponents. Is that it was crafted in a vacuum. There was very little true public involvement -- meaning a real process such as a design charrette that involves the public in the crafting of the very approach, it means looking at the rural tier, not as one block to be painted green on a map and zoned 25, but looking at the Rural Tier as a living, diverse community endowed with abundant natural resources and spirited people -- people with real knowledge and ideas. A design charrette unites people around a consensus for a vision. Real process can deal with our problems (rampant growth, crowded highways, overcrowded schools, lack of security services, etc.) in ways that don't create new hardships.

There is only one way that CB75 and the proposed SMA can be enacted -- and that is against the will of a vast majority of the citizens who live in the Rural Tier. If for no other reason, but for the sake of real democracy, we need to stop the bill and SMA.

However, we can't stop there. We need to ensure that our problems are addressed in a very different way. The best thing about the bill, is that it has created an explosion of interest in the rural tier. Lets take this energy and do something much better.

I am looking to join with people who want to support a new public involvement approach. Let me know.

- submitted by Henry (Hank) Cole

New -> Civic Associations in Prince George's County

Looking for Prince George's County History? Click here for PGHistory.org
Looking for the official Prince George's County web site? click here