By Debra Messick

CAMBRIDGE -- The Dorchester County Council meeting room was overflowing Tuesday as the public had a chance to comment on eight recommended charter changes.

“I was very glad to see citizens show up to discuss the proposed charter changes," said Council President George (Lenny) Pfeffer. "We will now have staff work with our attorney to prepare language for a resolution for each of the proposed changes. We will then introduce them as resolutions and have another comment period for the public to express their concerns before we pass the resolutions and send them to the State Elections Board for inclusion on the General Election Ballot in November.”

Among public officials offering their views were Cambridge Mayor Stephen Rideout and Dorchester County Register of Wills Terry Wheatley.

Rideout spoke in favor of the recommended change to the current Charter residency requirement for the positions of County Manager and Finance Director.

“During the hiring process, we can give more points to someone who wants to live here,” Rideout said. But he also maintained that someone living in Trappe, who is located closer to Cambridge than someone on Hooper’s Island, shouldn’t be excluded.

Another speaker was Eugene Lauer, who had been involved with drafting the initial charter through Dorchester Citizens for Better Government.

“Speaking for myself, having been a county administrator, most of us want to work and live in the same place but sometimes things happen and we simply aren’t able to,” Lauer said.

Allen Nelson of East New Market, Charter Commission Review Vice President, also spoke on behalf of removing the residency requirement.

“I feel very strongly about it. The count should have the power to hire the best individual for the job. I’ve heard those that argue that they have to be invested in the area by living here. But if they moved here for the position, they may be renting, not paying taxes,” Nelson said.

Wheatley registered her view on keeping the residency requirement, saying “I love Dorchester County; I’ve been a taxpayer working since age of 13 and have lived here for 69 years. I resent someone coming in and getting an excellent job and not paying taxes. Also, how can the county manager be on call 24/7 when he’s not living here?”

Mill Street resident Cheryl Hannon agreeing with Wheatley, said, “The residence requirement should be required, both jobs have so much power, dealing with tax rates, staffing and governing, those appointed as County Manager and Finance Director need to also be subject to the ramifications of those decisions.”

Hannon, citing issues the county has had with submitting financial reports, asked why the county needed to move the Budget Due and Adoption date back two weeks.

Pfeffer explained that the delay would allow all the agencies whose input they need to create the budget to get all their material to the council. This would give more time to the Board of Education, which has to meet additional numerous required deadlines of its own, he said.

But an equal or greater number of those gathered were there to speak out in strong opposition to action announced during the Feb, 20 meeting regarding Interim Trail Use Request.

Among the three sections of state-owned rail line discussed, it was the Cambridge Secondary Inactive Section from Linkwood to Cambridge (USRA 168) which concerned the majority of those speaking during the March 19 meeting’s final public comment segment.

During the meeting, Pfeffer reassured property owners concerned about crime, trash, and other anticipated problems, that council “didn’t want your land.”

“The State of Maryland owns the property that the rail lines sit on," he said. "The train companies contacted the state and said they were not planning to use the tracks any longer. The State offered Dorchester County the right of way for use of the track property. This is a common practice where the counties then put walking/bike paths along those tracks. At our meeting, we heard from numerous property owners that are not in favor of the county turning those old rail lines into this kind of usage.”

First to speak were Dee and George Windsor of Mt. Holly Road, who told council they were deeply concerned about the Cambridge Secondary.

“Both of our families have owned their properties for over 100 years. The house I grew up in has been home to five generations of my family. Our community has very deep roots,” Dee Windsor said.

She cited a similar debate in Caroline County, resulting in landowners regaining property rights. She also referred to a 2014 US. Supreme Court 8 to 1 ruling in favor of private landowners.

“We will be reclaiming our right of way and easement; the railroad tracks on them are now our private property. There will not be rails to trails on our private property in Linkwood Maryland,” she said.

Several other speakers referred to detrimental activities they fear would increase.

“I see criminal activity, a person threatened me; my concerns are the trash, criminal activity, and dirt bikes running up and down the tracks," said Wilson Todd, Jr. of Beaver Neck Road.

Lisa Phillips noted problems with Easton’s Rails To Trails.

“There’s all kinds of crime, but even if law enforcement gets called, they can’t catch them. I moved to the country and bought my house there so I didn’t have to deal with the city stuff; I don’t want the trash, crime, and the people in my yard.”

Erick Windsor told Council that he was intimately familiar with the Linkwood area, and has experienced similar criminal activity and people trespassing through his property along with that of family, friends, and neighbors. “My family has been in the Linkwood area for 175 years; the only thing that should be going through that right of way is a train,” he said.

Brian Nabb of Beaver Neck Village, who attended the meeting with his brother, said that while it may have been intended as a positive, there was a lot of unknown about what the government was going to do. “I received a letter like the Windsors did from a Missouri attorney, asking about the land. It could be anything. We don’t want to be railroaded out of our rights,” Nabb said.

The next County Council meeting is set for Tuesday, April 2, 2024.