<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Kathy<br>
<br>
I applaud your response to the burden placed on the residents of
Riverdale Park of over regulating by our Town Officials. Did you
know that a Council member in 2010 was planning to introduce an
ordinance concerning outdoor drying of laundry. The Council Member
wanted to prohibit clothes-lines.<br>
<br>
The proposed ordinance (2014-OR-01) was only made public within the
last several days. Now it is on the agenda to be voted on by the
Council at the Monday night meeting. When I suggested that the
Riverdale Park Council should table this ordinance and ask for
comments from the residents, I heard no response except a spin by
one of our elected officials.<br>
<br>
I believe that any regulation should be driven by a need or public
safety issue. When I asked the sponsor of this ordinance to specify
the need or public safety issue, I was given the following response.<br>
<br>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>I still do not follow the continued
statement in regards to public need or safety concern. I would
direct you to read Section 301 – General Powers of our Charter
that delineates the reasons ‘why’ Ordinances may be passed that
expand well beyond public need and/or safety:</b><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<b>
</b>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>§ 301: General Powers</b><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<b>
</b>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>The council shall have the general power to
pass all such ordinances not contrary to the Constitution and
laws of the State of Maryland or this charter as it may deem
necessary for the good government of the town; for the
protection and preservation of the town's property, rights, and
privileges; for the preservation of peace and good order; for
securing persons and property from violence, danger, or
destruction; and for the protection and promotion of the health,
safety, comfort, convenience, welfare, and happiness of the
residents of and visitors in the town. All legislative powers
that may be exercised by the town under the laws and the
Constitution of the State of Maryland are vested in the council.</b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> <br>
</o:p></p>
J. Holmes<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Subject:
</th>
<td>[RP TownTalk] Chain link fences- my thoughts</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Date: </th>
<td>Sat, 1 Feb 2014 06:40:13 -0800 (PST)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">From: </th>
<td>kathy galleher <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kgalleher@yahoo.com"><kgalleher@yahoo.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Reply-To:
</th>
<td>kathy galleher <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kgalleher@yahoo.com"><kgalleher@yahoo.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">To: </th>
<td>towntalk <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:towntalk@riverdale-park.org"><towntalk@riverdale-park.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times
new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:14pt">
<div style="color:rgb(0, 0,
0);font-size:18.6667px;font-family:times new roman, new york,
times, serif;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;"><span>I
don't want to wade into the back-and-forth in yesterday's
listserv, but I would like to share my thoughts about the
ordinance itself. I can't make it to the meeting this
Monday night, so I wrote my councilman but in case others
are reading, but I wanted to share my input. I am against
the ordinance banning chain link fences in back/side yards.
If I had lived here in '98 I would have objected to banning
them in people's front yards too!</span></div>
<div style="color:rgb(0, 0,
0);font-size:18.6667px;font-family:times new roman, new york,
times, serif;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;"><br>
<span></span></div>
<div style="color:rgb(0, 0,
0);font-size:18.6667px;font-family:times new roman, new york,
times, serif;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;"><span>I
really value a minimal approach to regulation- one that sets
up the town to serve everyone's common good while leaving
them at maximum liberty as to how they carry out their daily
activities, as long as it doesn't infringe on the well being
of others. Things like lawn maintenance and house painting
all are in that middle zone- what makes for enough liberty
for one person and yet maintains a nice-looking
neighborhood. But </span><span><span>I'm really opposed to
regulations that enforce one group's aesthetic values on
everyone else. Several family members live in 'better
off' neighborhoods and </span>I shudder at the level of
Home Owner Association interference I see (what color your
shutters can be).</span><span> The chain link ordinance is
an example of this kind of over-reach of regulation. The
explanation offered notwithstanding, I really can see no
legitimate interest that the town has in what kind of
materials people choose for fencing in their back yards and
side yards. I think it's inappropriate to legislate this.<br>
</span></div>
<div style="color:rgb(0, 0,
0);font-size:18.6667px;font-family:times new roman, new york,
times, serif;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;"><span><br>
</span></div>
<div>For what it's worth, I WANT to live an an economically
diverse neighborhood, where people who are better off and less
well off live together. I cringe when people are throwing
around 'makes the neighborhood look impoverished'. I hope
that we are a welcome community for both rich and poor and not
be embarrassed if one neighbors car or fences (?!) indicate
they don't have a lot of money. It doesn't mean they won't
keep their houses beautiful and be great neighbors. It just
means they don't have a lot of money. If people need fences, I
don't want to burden them with additional expenses for what
seems like a silly aesthetic preference.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 18.6667px;
font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif;
background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;">Personally,
I think that the current trend in my neighborhood (permitting
6 foot high wooden slat fences) does more to deteriorate the
'neighbor'hood than a chain link fence ever could. When we
can't see each other, we don't meet each other and talk. My
fantastic relationship with my next door neighbor flourished
because we have a 3.5foot chain link fence in our backyards,
and would strike up a conversation when working in the yard.
My friends live in a tightknit community in NE in rowhouses
where only chain link separates the back yards. He talks
about how important the permeable fences have been to a sense
of community. SO I realize not everyone will share my point
of view on this, but I actually VALUE having chain link fences
(yes, yes, I know, ... the other materials proposed could
still permit conversation). My preference: Please don't
legislate against them further.</div>
<div>Sincerely</div>
<div>Kathy Galleher<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>