Public Hearing Scheduled for English Language Ordinance

The controversial proposed ordinance will be up for public discussion at the end of the month.

The County Commissioners of Carroll County will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, Oct. 30 at 7 p.m. at the New Windsor Community Center, Community Meeting Room, 1100 Green Valley Road in New Windsor to hear public comments on the proposed Ordinance designating English as the official language of Carroll County.

Copies of the proposed resolution are available on the County’s website (ccgovernment.carr.org).

Also See:

  • Proposed English Language Ordinance Goes to Public Hearing
  • Commissioners to Weigh Making English the Official Language in Carroll County
  • Comment: ‘This law will be an embarrassment to Carroll’
Judith M. Smith October 17, 2012 at 02:29 PM
I gave up an afternoon of gardening to attend the BOC session where this ordnance was first proposed...went out of my way to ask both Howard and Steve Powell (separately) whether my comments could be held at the time this particular issue was going to be discussed...as the "public comment" section of the agenda is now held at the beginning of each session. Keep in mind that the original agenda as published only mentioned the item itself which was buried deep into the afternoon session...so the several people who were, like me, giving up an afternoon for this one issue. My request was denied. Therefore we had to wait for a very long time after we each stood at the mike and said our opinions...so we waited, and waited, and waited. Finally the item came up and in comes our County Attorney and a young lady to sit at the table facing the commissioners at the front of the room to present the ordnance. This women was actually giving a formal presentation as a representative of "Pro English", an organization that is hyping this subject. She was NOT on the agenda..had been asked by Haven to do this a day or so before this agenda item, and yet, was not required to present her point of view at the same time the rest of us had to...and she was not limited to the 3 minutes that is standard.for the rest of us minions. Three other people had come in to the meeting late but were denied the same opportunity to speak. The rules only need to be followed if convenient I guess...
Buck Harmon October 17, 2012 at 02:54 PM
I would say that if things really did go down this way another ethic's violation occurred. Not surprised... Shoemaker really is bad news, it's not just because I don't like him either...
Judith M. Smith October 17, 2012 at 03:45 PM
You can watch it unfold by going to that afternoon session...and toward the end of the meeting, I was really pretty ticked off and was told a few times that I was out of order...I expected that security was going to be called as loud as I got... It is bad enough that this Board has decreed that questions can be asked...but will only be answered at the Commissioners' leisure by email or telephone...in other words without public scrutiny. They have set their own rules without the public's input..and if you don't attend these meetings, you would not be aware of how they have drawn another unchallenged layer between themselves and the voters. Am curious, Buck, why do you consider this incident as a violation of ethics as outlined in the Ethics regulations?...some of these members are definately ethically challenged, but it may not be against the regs. I'm still burning about this and dislike being perceived as a nutjob by this Board....as if this gal and her organization's point of view isn't nutty...
Buck Harmon October 18, 2012 at 12:03 AM
Judith, Based on your description of the way things unfolded at this particular meeting I would say that the BOC discriminated against you and your right to be heard regarding this issue. To openly discriminate against a concerned citizen could be viewed as unethical behavior. Elected official public servants should never discriminate ...let alone discriminate in a public meeting. Also by making their own rules as described should never be tolerated or allowed in my opinion. They create the fine line and then walk it ....not at all ethically sound behavior, whether it can be tagged to a particular law or not...
JoeEldersburg October 22, 2012 at 02:25 PM
Judy, the rules didn't apply to the Pro English lady because her organization promotes xenophobic bigotry and the fact that our Commissioners would give such extremism a platform is exactly the reason citizens should be concerned. For those who believe the lie that this is not an action which has racism at its roots, they might be interested to read the Wiki on the founder (John Tanton) of Pro English, the so-called advocacy interest group that promotes this particular agenda. Pasted from the link below... "Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists, promoted anti-Semitic ideas, and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a “neo-Nazi organization.” He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites. At one point, he wrote candidly that to maintain American culture, “a European-American majority” is required." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tanton


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »