Year 2008 -- Position on Shoppes at Apple Greene

My position regarding the Shoppes at Apple Greene is that the current set (as of early November 2008) of plans last presented by the developer are inconsistent with the valid concerns expressed by the residents of Apple Greene. I look forward to seeing the next iteration of plans.

Clearly, reasonable people may disagree without being disagreeable. As President of DACCA, I faithfully represented the position of keeping public water and sewer out of Dunkirk. The rationale was consistent with the view of sustaining the rural character of northern Calvert County.

The County Comprehensive Plan and the various Town Center Master Plans envision focusing commercial development within the town centers. These were the rules that were established. This type of development is intended to assist the county small business owners who as we all know are the ones who create employment to the betterment of all.

In my view, it is beneficial to the entire community that the Shoppes at Apple Greene develop sooner rather than later as that will help employment (jobs) particularly during the current economic downturn.

Because of the lack of public water and sewer in Dunkirk, the commercial property owners will install privately owned and maintained water and sewer systems.

Because the initial plans of the commercial development did not appear to accommodate the concerns of those most affected (Apple Greene residents living adjacent to the town center), I sought and will continue to seek a solution that is acceptable to both the residents and developers. That solution is not yet achieved.

It is my experienced belief that an optimum solution can be found, but only by the working together in good faith on part of both the residents who have property rights and the commercial developer who also has property rights.

An alternative path consisting of just opposing the commercial development within the town center, in my view would result in the worse possible outcome for the residents. This alternative would likely result in prolonged legal tussles between the residents and developers. In the end, the developers might end up doing only what is optimum for their development without taking into consideration valid concerns of the residents.

I believe reasonable people agree with my view of charting the correct path of good faith dialogue between the residents and developer seeking a solution that is acceptable to both.

Year 2008 -- Whose Books Anyway?

Some might conclude the following books are/not (you select) appropriate for the Children's books section within the Calvert County Library System:

--- A dark comedy about Nathan Buford Forrest and followers demonstrating their 'nurturing' of minorities;

--- A documentary about non-union teachers preaching Christianity and proselytizing Islamic children into a "truer faith";

--- and a heart warming story depicting Pro-life leaders gently confining a pregnant woman (who wanted an abortion) until delivery of her child. At issue is diversity (of views).

You can view that each of the above stories promote good in nature and teach about subjects in life that may not be available to children at home. Yet, a minority of parents might find such material objectionable. It's like the saying "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

As taxpayers, these parents fund the Library and deserve to have their views understood. Perhaps a minority of parents believe controversial topics best remain within the Library, but at a more suitably categorized location.

Here in Calvert County, "And Tango Makes Three" book intends to demonstrate to children that having 2 dads is perfectly acceptable. Some parents made requests for relocation of the book to an Alternative Family Section (as in moving elsewhere in the library; not removing as in censorship).

Such a simple request was met with the wrath of an all powerful authoritative autocratic government. This minority of parents were denied reasonable accommodation by powerful government authority.

In spite of outside influences such as the ACLU mounting a "false flag" operation erroneously claiming censorship, citizens still have the right under the U.S. Constitution "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Look for a petition to be circulated.

The Library needs to rethink its position and then create an improved process to make reasonable accommodation for alternative views. It, its contents, and the employee salaries are provided by the taxpayers such as those parents who requested that reasonable accommodation.

Update: December 3, 2008. It appears the library is attempting to provide parents with some additional guidance to assist what their children view. We'll see...