Murphy takes heat for bucking connector friends

Commissioners, rest of delegation blast his stance

Friday, Aug. 21, 2009

Published in the Independent Aug. 14, the letter was addressed to Shari Wilson, secretary of the MDE, and expressed Murphy's desire to distance himself from a meeting held earlier this month where frustration was voiced by his fellow legislators and the county commissioners about the department's lack of a decision to approve or reject the plan to finish a cross-county highway that cuts through six acres of sensitive natural area.

Those in attendance at that August meeting were Charles County commissioners' President F. Wayne Cooper (D), commissioners' Vice President Edith J. Patterson (D), Commissioner Reuben B. Collins II (D), Commissioner Gary V. Hodge (D), Commissioner Samuel N. Graves Jr. (D), Sen. Thomas "Mac" Middleton (D-Charles), Del. Murray D. Levy (D-Charles), Del. Sally Y. Jameson (D-Charles) and several county staffers including Planning and Growth Management Department Director Chuck Beall, Planning Director Steven Ball and Jason Groth, chief of resource and infrastructure management for the county.

The county leaders eventually went into executive session, where they discussed legal options to address the stalemate without the presence of the press or members of the public.

"It's consistently been stated this should not be an ‘either or' argument. Both are needed for balance. I prefer the state to continue along what it is required to do — playing by the rules," Murphy said in defense of his letter. "[The connector] is such an important project, and I generally believe in open conversation and disclosure. I feel it was the way it should have been done, and would have been the right thing to do. Citizens are frustrated when they've been consistently locked out. I didn't want to be seen as being a part of that."

In the context of the connector's planning, Cooper argued Murphy hasn't been a part of the process at all.

"Delegate Murphy, unlike his colleagues in the delegation … has up to now been silent on his position," Cooper wrote in a letter to the Independent Monday.

As connector advocates see it, the county has been accessible and available when it comes to information about the permit and planning process behind the connector — an effort that's been in the works since the 1990 Charles County Comprehensive Plan outlined the development district and laid the foundation for future infrastructure in the northwest portion of the county.

"The road has been designed using best practices for protecting the environment, and the county commissioners have stated on numerous occasions their intent to adopt best practices for future developments to prevent environmental damage to the Mattawoman Creek," wrote Levy in a letter to Wilson from him, Middleton and Jameson, dated Aug. 17. "In our view, growth will continue to be located in the Mattawoman Creek because it is [in] the development district and not because of the road."

But whether the county will be able to continue that effort once the connector is finished is the question that's become the catalyst for many recent protests, polls, press conferences, and ultimately the letter from Murphy's desk.

"As an elected official, I take seriously my responsibility to represent my constituents regarding this potential project," Murphy wrote. "The results of a recent poll indicate that the majority of residents do not support this highway based on the price tag of tens of millions of dollars of county funding and the potential negative impact it will have on the Mattawoman watershed as well as the Chesapeake Bay."

In his letter, Murphy said he encouraged Wilson and the department "to resist any attempts to influence your decisions based on anything other than what can be supported by sound and defensible data."

"I do not support the cross-county connector because it is about facts. Give the process a change to present the findings," Murphy said Tuesday morning. "Without information I don't support it. You can have a goal, but you need to let the process define what that outcome is going to be."

Connector supporters, however, say they've consistently provided that data, but the Maryland Department of the Environment keeps piling on new requests.

"Unfortunately, the enormous body of evidence compiled by Charles County over the past 20 years supporting the need for the Connector … is matched by a growing body of evidence that the State's decision process on this project has been tainted by the political influence of a small group of opponents," wrote Hodge in an e-mailed response to Murphy's letter to the Independent. "We would be pleased if the MDE had followed its ‘standard process,' as Delegate Murphy put it, instead of changing the rules and placing costly new burdens on the County to appease a small group of no-growth extremists who want to control local land use policy and the future of western Charles County."

Currently, the final three phases of the highway between Middletown Road and Route 210 have not begun as the county awaits approval from the MDE and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Cooper said the county has spent more than $650,000 completing environmental impact studies.

Not only is a climbing price tag an issue, but another reason given to finish the connector is safety issues on Billingsley Road.

Notoriously narrow and winding, Billingsley Road West of U.S. 301 has been the scene of innumerable car accidents, the most recent incident only a few weeks ago, when a motorcyclist traveling the road lost control of his bike and died after the crash.

"It's discouraging," Cooper said. "How many more lives do we need to lose to protect endangered leaves?"

Though neither the county nor state wants a lawsuit, Cooper said that, looking at another two years of time and money spent on surveys and answers, it would be more cost-effective to let a judge make a decision on the future of the connector.

"To continue the delay is unacceptable," Cooper said.

Collins said he could not speak directly or imply any legal options on the table, but commented that the county thus far "has contributed tremendously to try to resolve the concerns raised by MDE."

"Getting feedback from the delegates is important because they are tied more closely to the state," Collins said.

"Everything [Murphy] said he was for [he said] we were against, and that's never been the case."

Middleton — also in attendance that important August day — said one plan shared between him and the delegates was to approach Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) and Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown (D) to discuss the connector's status.

"I expect the governor is going to call on his departments to see … whether the concerns of the county have merit," Middleton said. "[The county] has done everything it can to protect the environment. It's good to have environmental concerns. It makes us all mindful."

A call to Wilson's office was returned by Jay Apperson, a spokesman for MDE.

"We have received hundreds of e-mails and letters … a vast majority of which have a strong intention for preserving the Mattawoman Creek and its tributaries," Apperson said.

"We consider advocacy to be a critical part of the state's efforts to preserve the environment and we appreciate any [information] from various sources. In the end [the department] will make a decision in accordance with state law."

msomers@somdnews.com