On July 14, the Talbot County Council weighed a simple question: who pays when new development drives up the cost of our roads, schools, and libraries — the developers and builders who profit from it, or the rest of us? Council President Chuck Callahan and Councilman Dave Stepp voted to shift that cost onto taxpayers' backs. They lost, barely, and residents should understand what they tried to do.
An impact fee, established in Talbot in 2005, is paid by developers so that new construction, as county finance officer Martha Sparks explained in the Star Democrat, "contributes to the public facilities it relies on" — "roads, bridges, parks, schools and libraries." Each year it is adjusted to keep pace with the direct construction costs of that infrastructure, which rose about 3 percent this past year. As Sparks put it, this is "not a fee increase in the traditional sense" but an "inflation alignment." When prices rise, someone must pay — and we all know how prices have risen lately, on everything. Here, it is either the developers or the taxpayers.
Stepp moved to waive that adjustment; Callahan seconded. Vice President Pete Lesher and Councilwoman Lynn Mielke voted no. Keasha Haythe was absent. The motion died on a 2–2 tie, and the fee keeps its value. It survived on arithmetic, not leadership.
The stakes are plain in the county's own words. "When fees are not adjusted to match rising costs," Sparks warned, "the gap between what development requires and contributes grows, and that gap shifts onto existing taxpayers." Lesher agreed: "Our existing taxpayers subsidize infrastructure; we socialize the costs."
Callahan's case? "I just don't like it." He called himself "not a big fan" of fees and punted the question to "the next council." That is candid, but from a sitting president it is an evasion — "I don't like it" is a preference, not a reason.
It is worth saying why that answer came so easily. Callahan is, by trade, a builder — a principal of West and Callahan, a general contracting firm in Easton. Although he does not develop new projects himself, some have questioned whether he should recuse himself from matters that may directly affect the profits of his peers in the construction trade.
Stepp's stated worry was the "unfairness to developers." A councilman is entitled to a background, but Stepp is elected to represent taxpayers, not contractors. On July 14, those interests sat on opposite sides of the same vote, and both men chose developers over the public.
Understand the real choice: who pays. Growth costs money. The only question is the address on the tax bill — the developer who profits from the new rooftop, through a reduced fee, or every household in Talbot, through higher taxes, year after year. Callahan and Stepp preferred to tax the people and called it relief. It isn't relief. It's the same bill, readdressed to you. One issue transcends party lines and unites most Talbot residents: smart growth. Talbot will keep growing, and growth will always carry costs. The real questions are who pays, who profits, and how we protect the quality of life that makes Talbot so appealing in the first place. Let's remember Lakeside, and the lessons it taught us.
This was a chance to lead. Lesher and Mielke took it by representing the people. Callahan and Stepp did not. When you vote, remember who is looking out for you, the county, and our future.
Brian Naranjo, St. Michaels — Candidate for Talbot County Council