More News

A group of New Market residents requested Friday that the Maryland State Ethics Commission review the town's exemption from the state's public ethics law.

The town was granted the exception in 1981, when it was only .58 miles in area, had only 306 residents, and a budget of only $25,472, according to the written request submitted by then-Mayor Frank Shaw.

State ethics laws require municipalities to create guidelines for lobbying, conflicts of interest, and financial disclosure for public officials. Town leaders reasoned at the time that because of the town's small size, those laws would be an unnecessary burden.

The State Ethics Commission agreed, writing in December 1981 that implementing the law "would create an unreasonable invasion of privacy, would significantly reduce the availability of qualified persons for public service and that the requirements were not necessary to preserve the purpose of the Ethics Law."

The town has been exempt from the ethics law since.

But Clayton Magee, who has lived in Sponseller's Addition since 1982 when it only had a few homes, said the town has grown enough that it should no longer be exempt.

When he moved there, the town consisted only of what people would now call its historic district, and about six homes in Sponseller's Addition, he said. Now the town includes new subdivisions, including Brinkley Manor, Royal Oaks, Marley Gate, the Orchard and the Adventure Park USA. New Market has also included land in its growth area that at full development would significantly increase the town's population. He said that the group of residents, which calls itself Citizens for Public Ethics in New Market, does not question the character of the town's elected and appointed officials, but that the ethics guidelines help governments work more effectively and keep leaders out of trouble.

The group includes R. Craig Harlow, Ed and Mabel Henley, Jim Jamieson, Clayton and Nancy Magee, Diana and Frank Pucino, and Caroline and Haley Tate. "If some guy comes up to you and gives you a fifth of good whiskey, should you take it?" Magee asked rhetorically, saying that ethics guidelines would spell out whether or not town officials should accept gifts from lobbyists.

He said he could not imagine why the request would be controversial, and said that having the ethics guidelines spelled out would be a win-win for town officials and residents. "When people have good, organized guidelines, everything functions better," Magee said.

Magee said he was involved in town commissions and boards from the mid-1980s to the early-2000s under mayors Frank Shaw, Rick Fleshman, and Winslow Burhans III, and knew them all to be good people.

But he said that ethics regulations were "an idea whose time has come" for New Market.

Burhans questioned the objectives of the group, saying that he thought it had more to do with preventing the annexation of the 262-acre Smith-Cline property on Boyers Mill Road, which the town recently added to its growth plan to consider for a possible future annexation.

Burhans said adding the property to the growth plan does not make annexation definite, but that annexing the property would give the town its last viable option for a northern bypass from Boyers Mill Road to Md. Route 75.

Traffic from Boyers Mill Road flows along Main Street, causing traffic problems that could eventually lead to gridlock. Burhans considers the bypass to be the best option to reduce traffic.

He said Jim Jamieson, a Chevy Chase attorney who prepared the request for the Citizen for Public Ethics in New Market and who opposed the town's previous attempt to annex the property, is continuing to "ratchet up tensions" between residents who were for and against the annexation. Jamieson refuted that statement. "This is not about Smith-Cline. This is about the application of the State of Maryland's public ethics standards in local municipalities," he responded in an e-mail to The Gazette.

Magee said he had not dealt with Jamieson much prior to working on the request, and denied involvement in efforts to block the annexation of the Smith-Cline property.

Magee said because Jamieson owns land outside of New Market, he could be affected if the town annexed additional property, and therefore had a right to be a part of the discussion of town matters.

Burhans disagreed that growth in New Market had radically changed the town since 1981. With the addition of new subdivisions from the mid 1980s to the present, the town has only about doubled its residents, Burhans said.

"The scope of the town's business has not changed since 1981," he said.

Burhans said a dialogue about ethics would be positive, but tax money would be better spent on coming up with traffic and safety solutions for Main Street.

"I don't see where ethics law is going to solve [traffic problems]," he said.

Councilman David Price said he was concerned about legal fees that would result from an ethics review, and said the review could be used to intimidate the Town Council.

"Is this truly three households in New Market concerned about ethics, or is it part of an intimidation practice to prevent [the council] from doing the town's business?" he said.

He agreed with the ethics commission's 1981 ruling that requiring the town to create ethics provisions could limit the number of people who would be eligible to serve on town boards. "We have a hard enough time filling boards as it is," he said.

Robert Hahn, executive director of the State Ethics Commission, said that the commission regularly reviews requests and other correspondence at its monthly meetings. The next one is scheduled for Aug. 13, he said.

If the commission decides to review the request — which it might since the town's exemption was granted more than 20 years ago — it would notify the town 60 days before it made a decision, Hahn said.

During that 60-day period, town leaders would be able to comment on the review, he said.

E-mail Christian Brown at chbrown@gazette.net.