Posted by Phil Lee (216.250.238.145) on October 05, 2000 at 21:06:
Emotions run high at debate in Essex
Ruppersberger jeered over Balto. Co. condemnation law; Notes spark disagreements
-----------------------------------------------------------------
By David Nitkin and Joe Nawrozki, Sun Staff
Venturing into the epicenter of a raging debate on urban renewal last night, state Del. James F. Ports Jr. fanned the flames of government discontent while Baltimore County Executive C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger was repeatedly jeered as he explained his vision for aging waterfront communities.
The latest in a series of debates on Ruppersberger's renewal plans arrived in Essex last night, and an emotional crowd of 250 at Kenwood High School held little back as the two elected officials traded swings that landed on other politicians.
At the end of his 30-minute presentation on his renewal plans that are the subject of a November referendum, Ruppersberger was booed so loudly by about half the audience that Ports, of Perry Hall, asked the crowd to show respect.
SENATE BILL 509
Senate Bill 509 is a law passed by the state legislature in April that allows the condemnation of 300 properties in three Baltimore County neighborhoods. The legislation provides for the county to negotiate with the owners for purchase of the properties. If no purchase price can be agreed to, the county could use eminent domain to take them at a court-determined price. The county intends to sell the land to private developers, with the purpose of revitalization.
The properties are located in the Liberty Road corridor on the county’s west side, in Dundalk and in Essex and Middle River, where opposition from local property owners has been vehement. Opponents have gathered 44,000 petitions, enough to force a November referendum on the law.
County Executive C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger has made the revitalization of eastern Baltimore County an important goal of his administration and, with that end in mind, helped push the bill through the General Assembly. He has been its principal defender in an increasingly noisy public debate proceeding the referendum. Opposing him are an array of local property owners and interest groups challenging the need for the law and questioning the economic power it presents to Ruppersberger and his political allies.
But the call for civility didn't last long. Ruppersberger later criticized Del. Diane DeCarlo for not taking the debate stage herself, since she - and not Ports - represents the area where land could be condemned. "I know you're here, but you're not up here," Ruppersberger said, after DeCarlo called her presence from the audience.
Ports lashed out at County Councilman Vincent J. Gardina, who represents Essex and did not attend the debate, calling him and Ruppersberger "mudslingers" as they question the integrity of Senate Bill 509 opponents.
Still, when the two-hour debate ended, Ports and Ruppersberger shook hands and smiled. Again refusing to answer questions during the debate, the executive was surrounded by a crowd of about 25 condemnation-law opponents, engaging in heated exchanges as cable television crews packed their equipment.
Kenny Scudder, who makes his living polishing stainless steel, went almost nose to nose with Ruppersberger over Scudder's rental property at 1700 Old Eastern Ave., which could be purchased. "We will have our livelihood ruined," he told Ruppersberger.
After a long conversation with Ruppersberger, Jean Siegrist, a former resident of the now-demolished Riverdale apartment complex, said the executive "did not change my view. I will vote against Senate Bill 509."
Ruppersberger proposed the condemnation plan in January, pushing the idea through the General Assembly without notifying owners whose properties were singled out in the bill for potential purchase. The proposal calls for large-scale renewal projects in Essex-Middle River, Dundalk and Randallstown.
Opponents mobilized quickly and gathered enough signatures - more than 44,000 - to force a November referendum on the law. The two sides disagree sharply on the law's need and impact, and repeated their main arguments last night.
Ports and his allies argue that a strong economy could help revitalize aging neighborhoods without government resorting to condemnation. They say that parts of the law set a statewide precedent and that Ruppersberger was curiously selective in choosing which properties to include and which to leave alone.
Ruppersberger says that drastic action is needed to prevent further decline. He says the condemnation authority is on the books in most other urban jurisdictions and the same tool should be available in Baltimore County.
Last night's event took a bizarre turn when opponents of SB 509 began handing out short, type-written notes asking some supporters of the bill to move. "Please relocate yourself to another area in the auditorium," the note said. "If you do not leave on your own, we will be forced to move you."
As those passing out the notes almost came to blows with some who received them, opponents said the message was an analogy to SB 509: Like those with good seats in the auditorium, landowners in the condemnation zones don't want to move.
Both sides tailored their presentations for the Essex audience.
"Can anyone say we're not in trouble when the east side of the county lost almost 70,000 manufacturing jobs?" Ruppersberger asked. "Can anyone say we're not in trouble when family incomes in Essex-Middle River are $12,000 a year less than the rest of the county?"
Ports played a videotape of portion of an earlier debate, hoping to poke a hole in the executive's argument that only the addresses listed in the bill are subject to condemnation. The clip shows Ruppersberger saying more property cannot be added "at this time."
Inside the sweltering Kenwood auditorium, security was heightened for the debate, with extra police directing traffic and conducting crowd control. Plainclothes officers worked inside the auditorium.