[RP TownTalk] Signs on our northern boarder
Don Lynch
dlynch at garretroomstudios.com
Wed Aug 19 18:19:59 UTC 2009
I apologize.
You obviously do not understand the terminology.
There is an absence of a "letter to the editor" section, not the
existence of an editor.
Don
Vernon Archer wrote:
> Don,
>
> The editor-in-chief of the Town Crier is Kandese Alan who can be
> contacted at rptowncrier at comcast.net <mailto:rptowncrier at comcast.net>
>
> There has never been any significant break between editors in my
> administration. Roberty Oppenheim was in place when I took office.
> He was followed by Marita Novicky, with Kandese taking over after that.
>
> Vern
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Don Lynch
> <dlynch at garretroomstudios.com <mailto:dlynch at garretroomstudios.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Well this is indeed, a sad day for Riverdale Park.
>
> To receive word, late in this discussion, about a very important
> issue from one of the town's officials.
>
> We asked College Park about this issue and got an immediate
> response. It took a day later to hear from our own elected official.
>
> Now we hear that some officials are reciting the exact definition
> of transparency.
>
> Well, anyone educated in the civics, knows that there is a term
> called intent. Contracts, legal documents, etc. inherently have an
> implied clause called intent.
>
> To have transparency in government means that it is incumbent upon
> the leadership to keep its constituency informed.
>
> It is obvious to everyone in this town that this listserve, which
> was mandated by our town government, is a viable and valid form of
> communication.
>
> So now I'm quoting chapter and verse:
>
> *§3-2. Letters to the Editor.*
>
> (a) General Rule - The newsletter shall accept for publication
> letters to the editor from
>
> town residents who are not elected officials of the town. Any
> letter must include a name, address
>
> and telephone number of the person submitting the letter and be
> signed by that person. Any
>
> person writing such letters shall be limited to one letter of two
> hundred and fifty (250) words or
>
> less per edition of the town newsletter. Such letters must relate
> to administrative, regulatory or
>
> Legislative functions of the town, or be of some matter of unique
> concern to the town or
>
> its residents (e.g., obituaries, events of town groups or
> town-sponsored organizations, history of
>
> - 301 -
>
> Revised 01- 08
>
> the town, etc.). Such letters may promote a position on matters of
> public policy, but may not
>
> advocate support or opposition for any candidate for public
> office. Such letters shall be directed
>
> to the Editor-in-Chief of the newsletter and shall be printed in
> the next issue of the newsletter
>
> after it has been received.
>
> (B) Time of Submission - A deadline of the 15th day of the
> calendar month shall be set
>
> for any submission to be printed in the next edition. If a letter
> to the editor is received after the
>
> submission deadline, it shall be printed in the following edition.
> In the event multiple
>
> submissions are received for an upcoming edition, the
> Editor-in-Chief shall set forth two (2) full
>
> pages for such letters and if ample space is still not available,
> provide a written rationale for why
>
> some letters were printed and others were held to the subsequent
> edition. No letter deemed
>
> appropriate under the guidelines may be held for any reason for
> more than 45 days before
>
> publication.
>
> (c) Editing for Length and Content - In the event a letter exceeds
> the two hundred and
>
> fifty (250) word length, it shall be subject to editing by the
> Editor-in-Chief who shall shorten its
>
> length by removing or replacing words, but who shall not change
> the intent of the letter writer.
>
> In the event any portion of the content shall include curse words
> inappropriate for publication,
>
> the Editor-in-Chief shall have the authority to remove or replace
> such words at his or her
>
> discretion.
>
> ==========================================================================
>
> So, it seems that this administration is in violation of town
> ordinances requiring an editorial section of the Town Crier.,
> which has not existed for some time.
>
> I request that the ordinance staff serve this administration a
> citation to this effect which is proper under the balance of powers.
>
> It would be nice if for once this current administration would
> focus on the needs of this town.
>
> We recently had a business fail in town center and not one council
> member or mayor bothered to make a comment.
>
> Again, it is a sad day in Riverdale Park.
>
> Don
>
> ================================================
>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Vernon Archer wrote:
>> To all concerned about the signs marking our boarders, and
>> related issues,
>>
>> Having had the time now to clarify with our public works
>> department exactly what transpired regarding our sign in the
>> proximity of our boarder with College Park I will share the
>> following relevant facts:
>>
>> The town had worked an agreement with College Park sometime prior
>> to June 2005 to place our welcome sign slightly within the
>> boundaries of College Park. This was a courtesy from College Park
>> not a permanent right. When CP decided to follow the example we
>> set some years ago and place signs on there boundaries, they
>> removed our sign, withdrew their permission to post our sign on
>> their territory and returned the sign to us.
>>
>> Riverdale Park's public works is systematically refurbishing all
>> of our town signs that need it--not just the boarder welcoming
>> signs, but all signs--as time and resources allow. Our welcome
>> signs went up in the proximity of 10 years ago and have shown the
>> ware so are being refurbished. I mistakenly assumed that the one
>> that came down on College Park's boundary was removed by RP
>> workers, but in fact it was removed by CP workers--this level of
>> detail as to who actually physically performs tasks that are
>> directed by me to be carried out are rarely reported to me in
>> detail for what I assume are obvious reasons, I just want the
>> signs cleaned up and looking good.
>>
>> Public works informs me that this sign should be back up, in its
>> new location within the boundaries of Riverdale Park by the end
>> of next week.
>>
>> I thank Audrey Bragg for volunteering to beautify the new
>> location and Mr. Addison will contact you directly to coordinate
>> with you.
>>
>> There also seems to be some confusion about the property
>> ownership along our boarder with CP. The property to the
>> immediate south of Albion Street is owned by WMATA, not the
>> Cafritz interest. The Cafritz property is solely within the
>> boundaries of Riverdale Park--at least in the proximity of Route
>> 1. I cannot swear the the Cafritz family does not own property in
>> CP in the area, whoever the "Cafritz Property" that is currently
>> zoned for single family houses that they wish to rezone and
>> develop in a mixed use fashion along Route 1 is entirely within
>> the boundaries of Riverdale Park.
>>
>> I certainly do not have time right now to give a complete review
>> of where the Cafritz effort to gain rezoning stands. However, it
>> is safe to say that all four relevant governments, Prince
>> George's County, Riverdale Park, College Park and University Park
>> are waiting, and have been waiting for some time now, for the
>> Cafritz team to come back to us with a revised traffic
>> impact mitigation plan that is acceptable. Until this happens
>> there in no possibility of the rezoning that the Cafritz seek
>> ever being granted.
>>
>> Lastly, I wish to remind all of you that "Town Talk" is not an
>> official means of giving information to the public. Transparency
>> as defined by state law and town charter comes from two sources:
>> 1) reports in public meetings (which all are invited to attend
>> and participate in); and 2) reports and postings published in
>> periodicals of general circulation--such as the Town Crier and
>> The Gazette. I ordered the creation of Town Talk to facilitate
>> the free flow of information to the public and I think it
>> definitely helps to keep the public informed, but it is neither
>> the correct way to report problems, nor is it reasonable to
>> expect quick or flawless answers to every question or concern
>> every subscriber has.
>>
>> That being said, I hope that any concerns about the marking of
>> our northern boundary are now satisfied, but if not please
>> bring questions or comments to the next work session on August
>> 31st at 8 PM at Town Hall.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Vern
>> --
>> Vernon Archer, Mayor
>> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TownTalk mailing list
>> To post to the list, send mail to TownTalk at riverdale-park.org <mailto:TownTalk at riverdale-park.org>
>> TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org <mailto:TownTalk-request at riverdale-park.org> is for automated subscription processing only
>> http://riverdale-park.org/mailman/listinfo/towntalk
>>
>> For more information about Riverdale Park, visit http://www.riverdaleparkmd.info <http://www.riverdaleparkmd.info/>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Vernon Archer, Mayor
> Town of Riverdale Park, Maryland
More information about the TownTalk
mailing list