KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND
COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S

PUBLIC HEARING -

Code Home Rule Bill No. 7-2001

A Public Hearing was held on Tuesday, May 29, 2001, at 11:00 a.m. in the County Commissioners' Hearing Room, County Government Center, Chestertown, Maryland on Code Home Rule Bill No. 7-2001 which is: an Act to repeal and reenact with amendments Section 68-8 A (5) (6) of Chapter 68 of the Code of Public local Laws of Kent County (1994 Edition) title "Boats and Boating"; subtitle "Mooring Application Requirements"; to repeal and reenact with amendments Section 68-9 B (2) (b) of said chapter, subtitle "Permitted Moorings" establishing a 100' access way to riparian owner piers; Section 68-10 G of said chapter, subtitle "Mooring Requirements" changing the date for removal of boats from commercial moorings for waterfowl season to November 1; to add a new Section 68-11 "Mooring Renewal" to said chapter, changing the date for renewal of registrations for commercial mooring buoys to even years; changing Section 68-11 to 68-12 "Noncompliance" with amendments; changing the date for submitting renewal applications to December 1 in the renewal year, reorganizing certain sections, adding a provision for notice of expiration of registration date, and setting a deadline for comments to be received on the renewal of commercial moorings.

County Commissioners Ronald H. Fithian and Larry B. Beck were in attendance as well as Ernest S. Cookerly, County Attorney, Herschell B. Claggett, Willard Parker II, Esq., representing Mr. Claggett, Harris P. Murphy, Esq., representing Mr. Claggett, Mr. And Mrs. John Patnovic, Worton Creek Marina owners, C. Daniel Saunders, Esq., representing Mr. and Mrs. Patnovic, Carter Stanton, Director of Public Works, members of the media and 26 interested persons. Commissioner W. Michael Newnam, was not in attendance due to a business commitment at his employment at Verizon.

Notice of the public hearing was read into the record by Commissioner Fithian. He then advised that the Commissioners' Office would be accepting additional correspondence on this issue until June 1, 2001. Commissioner Fithian advised of the rules for testifying and read the proposed local law in its entirety which was recommended by the Public Landings and Facilities Board.

Commissioner Fithian announced that Commissioner Newnam will have the opportunity to listen to the recording of this hearing prior to the Board making a decision.

Mr. Parker testified first advising that it is his feeling this proposed legislation was ill-conceived and took away the riparian rights of landowners. He stated that this law would confiscate the rights of property owners and give it to special interest groups, i.e. marinas. Mr. Parker advised that such a law would attempt to negate the State law relating to hunting rights. He noted the goose population is growing and reiterated that hunting regulations provided for hunting seasons prior to November 1 and with mooring buoys still in place at that time, landowners would lose the right to hunt according to State law. Mr. Parker urged the Commissioners not to take action. It is his feeling that the proposed law contains serious challenges.

Brynja Booth, Esq., representing Dr. and Mrs. Smack, presented photographs of theproperty and advised that they had discussed mooring buoy issues with the Public Works Department prior to purchasing the property. Ms. Booth advised that Dr. and Mrs. Smack purchased 85 acres on Worton Creek to use for hunting purposes as well as to restore a historical house. Although hunting was not an issue, the commercial moorings were an intrusion. She also made an analogy comparing the matter to a zoning issue and the right to be heard. Ms. Booth requested the Commissioners to vote against Code Home Rule Bill 7-2001 since it is her opinion that the proposed law provides serious legal implications.

Dan Saunders, Esq., representing Mr. and Mrs. Patnovic, Worton Creek Marina owners, testified that Worton Creek Marina agreed there are problems with existing law, however, he had issues with comments made by other counsel. The proposed amendments to the law were not put in place by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) as Mr. Parker alluded. He stated that DNR amended waterfowl hunting regulations in warm weather seasons and advised that in 1980 when the current Kent County law was passed, waterfowl hunting seasons were not known. The County was authorized by the Department of Natural Resources to regulate mooring buoys within the County's boundaries. Subsequent to 1980, there have been amendments by the Department of Natural Resources to create warm weather hunting seasons for waterfowl which has created a problem with existing law.

Mr. Saunders advised that moorings cleared by November 1 allowed for use during the majority of the boating season. He stated that hunting the shoreline was not a riparian right and the right to hunt is not a given right. Mr. Saunders elaborated that hunting was a right only when it was safe to do so. He stated that the right to unconditionally hunt the shoreline was absurd. He further observed that the Worton Creek channel was heavily used and there was not a time when it would be within regulations (relating to safety) to hunt the shoreline. Mr. Saunders requested the Commissioners to amend the law as proposed.

Harris P. Murphy, Esq., representing Herschell Claggett, and Tyler Johnson, of Kings Grant Preservation, testified that his client is opposed to the proposed law as it would interfere with land/riparian rights. Mr. Murphy alleged a conflict of interest with the County Attorney and Douglas Edwards, Chairman of the Public Landings and Facilities Board (PLFB) relating to this matter. He advised that Mr. Edwards is an owner of a marina and Mr. Cookerly's representation of the PLFB, and possibly may represent Mr. Edwards and Chestertown Bank, who is financially involved with Worton Creek Marina, as well as the Commissioners and states these circumstances establish a clear conflict of interest.

A. Ford Hall, Sr., Georgetown Yacht Basin, testified that he felt the publication of renewals was excessive. He stated that liquor license renewals were not published and compared to liquor regulations, the publication of mooring buoy renewals would be burdensome. He stated that the out of service date for mooring buoys is proposed for November 1; he commented that the date for moorings to be returned to the water (opening date) was not delineated. Mr. Hall stated that to remove the mooring buoys prior to November 1 would place a hardship on the marina/boating industry which is part of the economic engine for the County. Mr. Hall also made the comment that the transferability of mooring buoys permits need to be restored.

Charlotte Staelin, owner of 340 acre farm near to Georgetown Yacht Basin. She stated that the moorings were "grand fathered" in 1980 and was concerned of the marinas having a more weighty balance than landowners. She requested the Commissioners not to pass the local legislation and advised that ramifications of the law are not fully understood.

P. Tyler Staelin, son of Charlotte Stalin, testified that he had an interest in his family farm and requested the Commissioners not to pass this legislation. The existing law provides a 100' right of way to the channel, however, there is no mention of this in existing law. He concurred with comments made by his mother and reiterated the need for balance of use.

Helen Gustavino, representing Island Point Farm on Davis Creek, urged the Commissioners not to pass the bill due to potential effects on hunting rights.

Herschell B. Claggett, owner of 340 acres on Worton Creek, testified that he was very disturbed and upset that he has had to defend riparian rights as well as endure the expense incurred during that process. He stated it is his feeling his property rights are being stolen from him and that placing moorings is not a given right. Mr. Claggett stated that the issue is " his rights versus squatters rights". He stated that the County refuses to enforce regulations despite Judge Price's orders. He irately told the Commissioners that the law was absurd and would not endure judgement in a court of law. Mr. Claggett advised that he bought the property to hunt and although he has lived in the area, he is being treated like an outsider.

Mike Slattery, representing Maryland Sportsman Association, advised that they oppose the passage of the proposed law. He stated that he believed it to be reasonable for a riparian landowner to have the ability to hunt the shoreline of his property. He was of the opinion that it was a matter of fairness and that the hunting season occupied only one third of the year.

Tim Lambert, President of the Maryland Sportsman's Association, testified that he is disturbed to be defending hunting rights and is opposed to any change that affected those rights.

Bradley M. Morris, President, Kent County Farm Bureau, testified that he is opposed to laws that diminish income for farmers by prohibiting/limiting hunting.

Edwin R. Fry, testified that the farming industry is also an economic engine, like marina businesses, and believes this proposed amendment to the law would adversely affect landowners.

Brennon Starkey, representing Starkey Farms, testified that their farm is dependent on revenues from hunting and believes that a "good neighbor" policy was in order to respect both needs.

Patricia Grieb, landowner and marina business owner, requested the Commissioners to make a reasonable change and not be forced into a decision that could have long lasting ramifications.

John Patnovic, Worton Creek Marina owner, testified to apprise the Commissioners that Mr. Claggett was requesting the ability to hunt public waters, put his decoys in public waters and shoot over public waters. He stated that besides Mr. Claggett, hundreds of people want to use waterways and he cannot personally preclude all other uses. There needs to be a balance established for use. When waterfowl hunting season was placed in the Ordinance, in 1980 the season began on November 1. Now the Waterfowl hunting season date has changed to earlier dates. He requested the proposed law be passed as written.

W. Robert Virgin, realtor, testified that he was in sympathy of landowners and pledged his support and urged the Commissioners not to pass the proposed bill.

Ray Clark, owner, Green Point Marina, testified that he has been on Worton Creek prior to 1980 and with as many acres as Mr. Claggett owned, suggested he could find somewhere else to hunt for two weeks. He stated that Green Point Marina does not pull boats until as late as December 25. Mr. Clark commented that by mandating mooring buoy permits be renewed every two years, it would only ensure a disagreement every two years rather than resolve the problem. He stated that riparian rights ensure access and likened the purchase of waterfront acreage on the Chesapeake Bay to purchasing property on the biggest State Park on the East Coast. He suggested the proposed law be amended to include a beginning date for use of mooring buoys.

The following testimony was given in summary of the arguments presented.

Mr. Parker presented hunting regulations for 1980 to prove the State hunting seasons were and have been prior to November 1. He stated that the renewal of mooring buoys are not excessive and were more akin to zoning regulations than liquor licenses. Mr. Parker reported that it appeared as though more rights were given to hear a variance, than an infraction against riparian rights.

Ms. Booth testified in summary that the public waters/land/parks are State owned and the ability to hunt is a State law rather than local law.

Mr. Saunders requested that Commissioners review the seasons for boating and hunting and find a way to address the overlap in use. He stated that the matter was not an issue of hunting rights, it is about removing mooring buoys; the fact is that landowners do not welcome commercial mooring buoys. He advised that it would be disastrous to review/publish mooring buoys as it would invite litigation. It is his feeling that the proposed law is not changing the existing law but clarifying its intent. There is a desire by some to limit use of mooring buoys at several marinas and need to recognize this would be a disaster to Kent County and urged that appropriate measures be taken.

Correspondence was received from Delegate Wheeler Baker, George F. Johnson, Robert M. Hewes, III, Helen Guastavino, and William Leager, Sassafras River Realty, Limited, in opposition to the proposed law.

This hearing was taped for reference and adjourned at 12:25 p.m.