You're watching Open Agenda.
Welcome to Open Agenda on PAC 14, your
public access channel. I'm your host,
Mike Goldberg. I'm joined today by Joe
Venosa of Salsbury and Michael Langford,
also with Salsbury. Thanks very much for
being here, y'all.
>> Thank you.
>> Uh on this week's episode, we're going
to recap what happened at this past
week's county council meeting. Uh
specifically, we're going to talk about
the fire chief's association, uh their
possible participation in negotiating
future agreements with the city of
Salsbury Fire Department. And we're also
going to discuss the possibility of AI
data centers coming to Wycom County or
other locations on the Eastern Shore.
So, can y'all stick with us?
>> Definitely. Okay, we're going to be
right back after this break. Stick with
us. This is open agenda.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. I'm your
host, Mike Goldberg. We're going to
review what happened at the county
council meeting this past week. One of
the big things that happened was the
introduction of legislative bill 202605,
which is an act to amend chapter 39 of
the Wcomo County Code to recognize
Wakcom County Fire Chiefs Association as
a countywide organization representing
the fire chiefs of the volunteer fire
departments providing fire protection
emergency services within Wakama County
and to provide for his participation in
discussions and negotiations concerning
countywide fire service agreements and
policies. All those in favor of
introducing legislative bill number
202605 say I. I post. Motion is carried.
The introduction of legislative bill
number 202605 passes unanimously.
>> Joe, tell me what you think about this.
I know there were some concerns that
were expressed by Salsbury Fire Chief
Rob Frampton.
>> Yeah, Chief Frampton did speak and and I
thought he did a wonderful job at at
sort of laying out the concern.
>> Good evening, Mr. President, members of
the council. I'm Rob Frampton, fire
chief for the city of Salsbury Fire
Department. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak tonight on behalf
of the city of Salsbury regarding the
legislative bill 2026-05 that you
introduced. Uh at the outset, I want to
make one point very clear. The city of
Salsbury values and appreciates the
outstanding relationships that we have
with our volunteer fire departments
throughout Wcomaku County. Every day we
work alongside of them to serve our
residents as one fire service. We have
tremendous respect for the experience,
dedication, and commitment of our
volunteer partners, and we fully support
their ability to provide recommendations
on matters that affect the volunteer
fire service and their own fire
department budgets. However, the city
respectfully opposes the provision of
this legislation that authorizes the
county fire chief's association to
present suggestions or recommendations
regarding the county appropriation to
the city of Salsbury's budget. Our
concern is not about the qualifications
or the intentions of the fire chief's
association. It's about governance and
accountability. The Salsbury Fire
Department is the only municipal
combination fire department in Wakcomo
County. We operate under a completely
different governance and financial
structure than every other department in
the county. Our department manages an
annual operating budget exceeding $15
million as part of the city's overall
budget of more than 60 million. We
provide fire and rescue and EMS services
to our count community while responding
to more than 17,500 calls each year,
more than all the other county fire
departments combined. Preparing and
managing a budget of this size involves
much more than emergency response. It
requires balancing personnel costs,
labor agreements, municipal finance,
capital planning, pensions, health care,
fleet replacement, EMS operations, and
the shared funding responsibilities
between the city and and Wakamahoo
County. These are issues unique to
municipal government and require
decisions that extend well extend well
beyond fireground operations. Most
importantly, the city's budget is
responsibility of officials who are
elected and accountable to the citizens
of Salsbury. The mayor develops a budget
and the city council reviews, amends,
and adopts it. Those elected officials
answer directly to the taxpayers for
every dollar that is received and
appropriated. The city believes that
accountability should remain where it
belongs with those elected to govern the
municipality.
While other perspectives are always
welcome and collaboration is encouraged,
formalizing a role for an external
organization to make recommendations on
the appropriation to a municipal budget
creates a governance model that does not
exist for any other city department and
simply does not work. This position is
not intended to exclude our partners or
diminish their contributions. Rather, it
reflects the principle that each
governing body should retain
responsibility for its own budget while
continuing to work collaboratively with
our county volunteer partners on
operational issues that affect us all.
For those reasons, the city of Salsbury
respectfully requests that the council
remove the provision authorizing the
county fire chiefs association to
provide recommendations on the Salsbury
Fire Department's budget appropriation
from the county and preserve the city's
authority over its own municipal
budgeting process. Thank you for your
time, your consideration, and your
continued support of public safety
throughout Wcom County.
>> Thank you, Chief Ramper. [applause]
>> Um, essentially, I think the crux of it
is that this now kind of radically
alters how the city and county, or at
least it would theoretically radically
alter how the city and county would
negotiate the fire service agreements.
But it would also add an an element into
the negotiation that is my understanding
would actually violate the charter. Uh
that's at least what what the chief
implied and what others have noted. So
um to some of us who who live in the
city, it would seem that it it perhaps
is a way of of slanting the table a bit
more toward the county in future
negotiations. But whether or not that's
even legal is a open question. Um now I
want to say this cuz I also spoke
myself. I'm not against having the
chief's participation to some extent
because it has been very important. Um
there have been some really important
contributions that many of the fire
companies have have made. But I guess
when it comes to making a vote formally,
I think that that opens the door to
something else that uh is of pretty big
concern to a lot of us that are in the
city. Uh certainly at least people that
are in my neighborhood, you know, that
are paying double taxes anyway. Um this
is something that I think um hit people
by surprise and not in a good way. Um
that's at least my take on it for now.
>> Well, the uh the Ssbury Fire Department
[clears throat] manages a budget of
about $15 million annually. And if the
fire chiefs from the um from the
volunteer fire companies, they don't
have any responsibility for those funds.
That is a responsibility of the council
and mayor. So, Michael, tell me, do do
you see a problem there where people who
are not even going to be party to the
contract actually having some say over
what happens contractually between the
fire chief's association and the city?
Yeah, I exactly your point that like $15
million budget that um I guess like when
you're actually do you know running a
business and you're looking at an
operational account and you're and
you're managing something um it we're
not capricciously deciding oh I'm going
to do this aspect or that aspect like
these have to be spent right this is all
for public health and safety so that 15
million there is like a responsibility
for that it's not um oh we want to
allocate some of this money to this over
here or we'd like this like and
especially considering it's it's
Salsbury citizens taxpayer money, right?
It's not county residents taxpayer money
because we're being double taxed, right?
So that 15 million is from like city
coffers. It's not it's not the county's
money. So the fact that I'm not against
the county again there being some kind
of agreement, but that agreement should
be them telling us what they need from
us and then, you know, and making a fair
agreement that way, not not um demanding
anything. Well, and and to that point,
even if you disagree on whether or not
uh the fire chief's association and the
fire companies have more of a say,
because the actual legal financial
negotiations, at least in our charter,
are between the executive office and the
city of Salsbury. Council disapproves
it. um it would sort of make their
participation a moot point anyway
because in the end the two parties that
are doing the negotiation are different
entities, right? They're they're not the
fire chief's association. They are the
executive, the city of Salsbury and then
the council would approve it or not.
>> Yeah.
>> Well, the chief's association doesn't
really have a legal dog in the hunt. I
can see relying on them for opinions,
for consultation. Absolutely. the
impacts of this policy or this, you
know, funding.
>> And I think Chief Frampton spoke to
this. Um I I think he he went out of his
way to to to emphasize that this is not
um a push back against the fire chiefs
per se. It was you're taking away a
mechanism of negotiation and process
that is that is laid out legally.
>> Yeah. in the charter and you're bringing
in something that actually has some
pretty big significant changes that also
may not hold up leg legally.
>> Yeah. I mean the the way the way that
$15 million gets determined is that an
executive whether it's the county
executive or the Salsbury mayor in the
case that 15 million um sets a budget
line item and then the council uh
approves it. So that that's the legal
framework of how the decision gets made.
Nowhere in there are there like a fire
chief's association. I don't think that
they shouldn't have a say, but their say
is here's what we need to do, right? And
then like like it's not um it's not
telling they're they're not
operationally running the thing. I mean,
this is not people's caprice. This isn't
just like like it's just the
>> fire chiefs don't have any management
function here. You know, is the
>> and they don't have large I mean, they
have small budgets, but they do these
fundraisers. Again, not against the fire
chiefs in the county, but they just have
a very different animal with nonprofits.
They're structured as nonprofits,
501c3s. Like they're not they're not a
um municipal municipality or even the
county government. They're they're
they're something else.
>> And I certainly got the sense that Chief
Frampton wants to hear the input from
he's not trying to lock them out. He
just doesn't believe that they have any
legal authority here over the budget. uh
how that budget is allocated or the you
know how the more than 17,000 calls for
service are handled uh by the by the
Soulsbury Fire Department on an annual
basis
>> and having a fidiciary duty, you know,
to people like they don't have that as
like members of this nonprofit. They
don't have a duty to the taxpayers from
where they're at as pirate chiefs.
>> So, I mean they're not there to again
they can't set a line item on the
budget. I think it'll be good though
because it's my understanding that there
will be a work session on this in the
future. I believe in August and I'm
curious to see
>> the it's public hearing. I'm sorry.
Okay. So, yeah, they work session
Taylor said that about these.
>> Good evening. Robert Taylor, the county
resident. Uh I came to speak on the two
bills that have been discussed a good
bit from here at the podium already, but
I do want to speak at some length on the
uh bill regarding the uh fire service
and negotiations with the city in
particular.
I want to ditto everything the chief
said, Chief Frampton. Um, I think I'd
even go a little bit further than that.
Uh, I don't think that there should be
any group that has any special entree
into discussions that would include the
volunteers.
Uh, the code now gives them a say, too.
It's not as significant as what the
chiefs say would be under this bill, but
it's there. Uh, and it's no more logical
than if the Salsbury Fire Department had
the right to negotiate regarding
what the volunteers are going to get
from the county. This just doesn't make
sense. It's terrible policy.
Um,
the the chiefs, the volunteers, Chief
Frampton can come just like he did
tonight and speak. Can always do that in
these negotiations. They don't need to
have anything in the code or the charter
that gives any group any special
privileges in this regard. But let me
say this. There hasn't been, as far as I
know, on either of these bills any work
sessions, have there? Did I miss
something? There's been no discussion by
the council tonight as to why they're
even being introduced. What's the
purpose? Now, there's been some
substantive comment from the podium by
the chief and others, but why don't we
have is there going to be a work session
on this or are we just going to do this
willy-nilly? What's the purpose of of
doing something like that? Let's have
work sessions on bills, not just these,
all bills. That was actually what was so
concerning about all three bills is that
there was no work session proceeding,
which is the procedure of how you get
legislation passed is you you have a
work session in which you propose
legislation and and and we all kind of
know this isn't good enough, right? And
we and so the point is not to rip it
apart, but to make it better,
>> you know what I mean? Before we go to
this legislative session, but August
4th, if I'm if I'm is
>> Yeah, that's that's that's the date that
>> that's August 4th is there will be a
public hearing on these these bills.
>> I'm curious who he'll show up for that
as well, just just to see. But but but I
I do think this does tie in to this
broader issue and then um I don't want
to beat a dead horse on it, but you know
the fact is we're still in a situation
as of you know today is B basically
we're at the end of the first week of
July. Um we still don't have a fire
service agreement between the city and
county for the upcoming year. Uh we've
had the SWAT analysis for several years
and that's basically sat now in in in
stasis. Um
>> why has that SWAT analysis and and would
you explain to everybody what SWAT
stands for?
>> Uh a SWAT analysis you have to
conceptualize it in this way. It's
basically the second stage of a
countywide strategic plan. In this case
for emergency services uh it officially
stands for strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats. Okay. Now the
thing about that is this is about
framing you know what we would actually
do uh in in in terms of the priorities
that we need for these emergency
services. But the issue here is that we
don't actually have an action plan to
follow it up. So a strategic plan, a
SWAT analysis without an action plan
that's tied to it is basically just a
wish list. And right now in our county
we have been in a very stagnant
environment with this wish list for a
couple years. And my perspective and and
I think others would share this is that
that is probably the bigger priority uh
rather than sort of adding another
convoluted approach to sort of how the
city and county deal with the fire
service agreement.
>> And again, it's not the city taxpayers
responsibility to make up for whatever
shortfall the county executive is giving
to the fire chiefs, right? So like it's
kind of this misdirection to me in the
sense of like this over complication.
And I wanted to comment on uh while we
don't have a fire service agreement,
that's because the county executive has
been served a letter from the mayor that
has been released about being build for
services. So now we're just going to be
current. We we're not going to recoup
like losses that that that money is
gone. That time has passed. But moving
forward, um they'll be build for
services rendered to the county.
>> And I think the deadline for that was
July 5th, if I'm not mistaken, according
to the mayor.
>> Yeah. Moving forward.
>> Moving forward. Yeah. I mean, it hasn't
it's in progress now.
>> It's in progress now.
>> But if the city and the county do not
come to an agreement here, the the
consequences of that, from what I
understand, could be that the city fire
department will no longer be able to
provide services outside of the city
limits.
>> Well, currently it's going to be that
they're going to be build for them. And
then if they refuse to pay, then it's
like it's an invoice for services
rendered that you can go to a court and
they're gonna and the county will be
forced to pay it. It won't be their
choice anymore. It'll be the court's
determination that this is legal because
it's services rendered. Like nobody
agreed like the fact that we had a
county fire agreement that had such a
discrepancy on the city for the city
taxpayers is just absurd when they're
again double taxed. Like the city
shouldn't be holding the stick here,
>> right? Understand.
>> That's our perspective as city residents
certainly. I mean, again, others would
counter that, but regardless of how you
feel about it, the fact that we haven't
gotten to an agreement, um, I think in
large part because the executive office
just just has once again dropped the
ball on it, I think that speaks to the
bigger problems that we have. And so, I
would like to see movement on those
issues before we even muddy the waters
with this other plan that may not even
be legally binding. No, I mean this is a
leadership issue coming out of the
executive's office and I think when it
comes to public safety that it's
extremely important that this issue is
is dealt with. Any idea what's holding
up the SWAT analysis after you know a
couple of years which ties into all of
this? Of course
>> there there's been a lot of theories and
back and forth about you know framing
cost responsibility. you know, again, I
I think the problem is, as I see it, um
the county executives's office hasn't
really proactively pushed it. Uh they it
seems to be in a position where each
side of the government is more or less
waiting for the other to take
initiative. Wasn't the deputy director
of administration, Steve Leaken, who was
hired, you know, about one year ago,
wasn't he supposed to be the liaison
between emergency services and the
executives's office to to get this stuff
taken care of?
>> That's my understanding, or at least
that's how uh his position was in part
framed, you know, after he was hired.
And and yeah, to your point, it's it's
been a year and we're still in a
situation uh where nothing has got has
gotten done. Um,
>> he did have time to go to the Las Vegas
though with the executive for, you know,
>> you know, maybe they were working on a
SWAT analysis there, but what happens in
Vegas apparently stays in Vegas.
[laughter]
>> I have no doubt that they were working
diligently on that while they were in
Las Vegas. We're going to take a little
break and we'll uh when we come back,
we'll discuss more of what happened at
this past week's county council meeting.
Stick with us. Don't change that
channel. We'll be right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda here with
Joe Venosa and with Michael Langford,
both of Salsbury. We've uh just finished
discussing the some of the topics that
were uh brought up at the council count
county council meeting this past week,
but there's a few other uh issues of
concern that will be coming up in the
near future. And one of which which is
uh getting a a lot of talk are the uh
artificial intelligence AI data centers
that uh there seems to be a very
significant push on a statewide level to
bring these to various locations in
Maryland County perhaps included. Um
we're concerned about this I think
because there's there's several issues
associated with uh with AI data centers.
Uh, Michael, could you uh uh give us a a
quick rundown of what some of those
concerns might be?
>> Um, so I I'll tell you too what I see I
agree with you that there's a big push
statewide. So what I see across the
state is essentially that you have
legislative legis people in the
legislative body or in the government
who are campaign supported by a lot of
these business people, these developers,
right? And so they're now introducing
legislation, change of language into
like planning and zoning commission
meetings in various counties across the
state. And basically how people respond
to this now determines where they're
going to go in the future. Because it's
like if there's a bunch of push back,
they're going to be like early on to
just changing like language and defining
where these things can be built in just
a very rudimentary way before they're
even being built.
>> If there's that push back, those
companies are not going to go there.
they're going to take that as feedback
from the market that we're going to make
more money over here, right? Where
there's less resistance to what we're
trying to push through and do with the
data center. So, I just see this as kind
of like a
>> um yeah, it's just they're introducing
it all over and then based on how it
goes, you know, certain people will push
back and then the places that don't,
those are the places where there will be
data centers.
>> Well, I think um to
>> see that pattern.
>> Yeah. Well, and and to add on to that
point, Michael, it's it's a really good
point that that pattern, I think, is
based on the fact that uh the impetus
for building these data centers in
places like the Eastern Shore or Western
Maryland is the fact that we have a lot
of open space and land. And uh Mr. Jim
Atkins out from the west side in
district 2 spoke really eloquently about
this because he did. Data centers are
large industrial facilities that can
occupy hundreds of thousands of square
feet [snorts] while only employing
30 to 50 people, full-time people.
Maryland currently has four counties
that have either banned or have a
moratorum on data centers.
We talked uh at the last council meeting
about power consumption. A large data
center can consume 80,000 to 100,000
average homes.
Since 2018, Maryland has retired 6,000
megawws of power generation in the
state.
While they've retired 6,000 megawws,
they have only
added new 1,600 megawws.
So we have seen a significant decrease
in the past 8 years. Uh water usage is a
major problem. Uh data centers depending
on their size can consume anywhere from
60 million gallons per year to 110
million gallons per year. Uh we're
sitting on top of the Paleo Channel
which according to the geological
surveys has an estimated 7 billion
gallons of storage of water.
So uh thankfully it's a infinite number
that can keep refilling itself. But if
it didn't think about it this way, the
Paleo Channel with a large data center
would be emptied in 3.8 years. we would
have no water on the Eastern Shore,
drinkable water.
Noise pollution uh is a definite
problem. Federalsburg uh Mako sat here
two weeks ago
and told you they didn't think that uh
the Eastern Shore was ripe for data
centers. And lo and behold, the very
next day, Federalsburg announces that
they're having a public hearing about
putting a data center in Federalsburg.
So, so much for that belief.
Uh, they say that in order to have a
data data center, you need electricity
and water, which you do, but you also
need land. Metropolitan areas don't have
a lot of land. We do, and we need to
protect it. So, I would ask hopefully
that uh at the meeting in Feblesburg
next week
on I believe it's the 17th
uh that we have some people there
listening to them, seeing what they have
to say. And if we don't feel that we can
ban data centers in the county, maybe we
need to work on legislation that would
limit the amount of water usage that
they have, the amount of electricity
that they can have, the zoning that they
can be put in, uh the noise that they're
allowed to put out to the public. Uh we
may not be able to ban them, but maybe
we can put enough restrictions on them
that they won't be interested in this
county. Thank you. He he laid out not
just the general trajectory of what
they've been doing, but actually the
effects of these data centers on our
energy costs, our our our threats to the
water supply, the paleo channel. Um, and
and I think people really need to
understand the ramifications of just
what one data center could do. And I
think as you see a a a backlash against
them nationally and even at the state
level um I think more people are going
to get um involved in these discussions
because
even though we're not seeing them right
now if the doors left open we could see
some really fundamental changes that in
my opinion aren't going to be very
helpful to the county.
>> One one of my biggest concerns is the
electrical consumption which is going to
be enormous. Interestingly, we don't
generate any electricity in Maryland
anymore. All of these imported now.
>> Yeah. So, it's coming from Pennsylvania
and elsewhere
>> and there certainly are no power
generating stations here on the Delm
Marva Peninsula
>> uh in the Maryland portion at least. So,
the the cost of of building the
electrical infrastructure necessary to
support these AI data sets will be
enormous. And actually there's one other
point there too that we don't talk
about. And if you know a lot of people
in the contracting business like I do or
who work at the university in
maintenance and facilities, they're also
going to tell you that one of the other
side effects of this explosion of data
centers nationally and certainly
regionally is that it's led to a
shortage of other supplies that other
developments are needed. So for example,
copper, right? large scale industrial,
you know, scale copper,
>> um, you know, even fiberglass just from
building the the data
>> and the other rare earth mineral rare
earth minerals. So, so the the irony is
that it not only has some serious
economic and environmental impacts
locally that we can play out or see play
out right away, but it's actually going
to create more of a shortage of other
things that are going to be needed for
the other kinds of development that we
need like buildings where people will
live or refurbishing um you know a
building on campus at Salsbury or
somewhere else. you know, there there's
a multiplier effect here on on supply
shortages that that we just don't have
as part of that conversation.
>> And where you have a lot of largecale
computers, it also requires a heck of a
lot of water to keep those computers
cool. We don't have any lakes, natural
lakes in Maryland. We don't have any
reservoirs here on the Eastern Shore
that I'm aware of. So, where does the
water come from?
>> Paying channel. And it's my
understanding that it would, and again,
I believe Mr. Atkins said this uh but
others have said it too. I I I also
think if just one data center could take
away our supply of the payload channel
within 3.8 years and I think that's why
people really need to get become aware
of what data centers could represent as
a threat to the area.
>> How do we replace that water for for for
consumption? and and you can't you're
going to import, right? And so now the
cost is going to go up just like the
electricity being imported then our
water and and imagine I mean um 30 years
ago when you dug a well you just had to
go 50 ft. Now it's 70.
>> Mhm.
>> So like that's before this happens. How
deep will you have to you know we have
failing septics in the county and you
have to dig wells deeper which costs
more money to homeowners. it's getting
harder to maintain outside
[clears throat] of the city water sewer
uh the grid system for people to
maintain. This seems like it make it
even harder on homeowners um outside the
city even.
>> And I've also read that there's a lot of
ambient noise that is associated with
these data centers. So you're going to
hear hum in the background.
>> I've heard up to 80 dibels.
>> 80 dB.
>> So you're talking like live living next
to a highway kind of thing.
>> Absolutely. And of course the irony is
minimal actual job creation long term
because I think uh I think Jose Cafino
said this at a city council meeting but
once they're built they basically have
skeleton crews. Yes.
>> You know 50 maybe 80 people per center.
So if you're looking at the economic
impact overall it I don't say that's
particularly beneficial to a community
like ours.
>> I don't think it is either. I mean the
construction jobs are [clears throat]
temporary jobs. Once it's built it it's
built you know it's done. And as with
the offshore wind projects that have
been proposed for Ocean City, I I'm I'm
afraid that the uh the permanent staff
that will operate these data centers
will be imported talent. So I'm I I just
don't see how it's really going to
benefit current residents of Wcomo
County.
>> I agree. That's my concern as well is
like um who who's going to qualify for
these jobs. So I imagine a lot of them
are specialists, right? As far as um
whether it's an IT or whether it's some
kind of specialist technician, some kind
of engineer, we don't need a data center
that's going to employ hardly anybody
that's just a specialist.
>> I am concerned that Federalsburg has
apparently scheduled a public hearing
for the future construction of an AI
data center. What do you think about
that?
>> Well, I believe that some county
officials will be attending that meeting
and I and I believe some private
citizens will also be attending uh that.
So, uh,
>> I just hope we don't mortgage our future
in this county for something that I I
think is is pie in the sky. Do we need
AI data centers? Absolutely. Is why
Kamico County or even the Eastern Shore,
the place to construct them? I
personally I don't think so.
>> Joe, Michael, thanks very much for for
being here and we're going to be back
again soon with another new episode of
Open Agenda on Pack 14. We'll look
forward to seeing you then.
I'm your host, Julie Girardano. Now that
messed me up. [laughter]
