The above graphic is an AI generated image.
Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Truth Social, Gettr, Twitter, Youtube
I moved to Oxford, Maryland in 1975 to live near my then fiance, a lifetime town resident, A few years after we married in 1976 we purchased a small Nanticoke home in the "park area" of the town. It's a small rancher with three bedrooms and two bathrooms. It's the only home my husband and I own and have ever owned.
Almost 50 years later, we still live in that home modestly with our social security and my retirement income. We know something about Oxford as a community and its quality of life. Our neighborhood was a mix of retirees and young people. We all knew and helped each other as a true community.
So forgive me if I don't get teary eyed when people who live here but have multiple homes, many in other states, complain because they and others aren't getting the town services they want and that this ruins the community "feel" and quality of life in our town.
Please.
They have selective reasoning and most of it has nothing to do with reality. Oxford is currently a town where certain sections have severe flooding after a heavy rainstorm or an unusually high tide. This flooding is not just a tiny puddle in someone's front yard; it is the destructive kind of flooding that not only keeps people from being able to leave or access their homes but also causes damage to those homes.
It's also a problem that, after years of ignoring facts, needs to be fixed. The infrastructure and layout of parts of Oxford require repair, regrading, and some replacement. At the Tuesday, June 23rd meeting of the Oxford Commissioners, Engineer Wayne Messick explained work that would help mitigate flooding in the Tilghman, Stewart, Norton, Mill and Bank street area. It is a project that could cost millions of dollars if contracted out. (see link to the town agenda at the end of the article) The town would rather use our own maintenance department under Messick's supervision to complete the work. This will save money but will demand manpower hours.
This task is being done while the antiquated water meters in town are being replaced so that citizens have a way to accurately know how much water they have used and whether they have a leak or not. Replacement will allow customers to monitor their costs. With water costs rising everywhere this is something residents need. This project would cost approximately $800,000 if subcontractors completed it. Instead, the town has been using the town maintenance crew to do that replacement. Again, the project costs manpower hours but saves taxpayer money.
Oxford has a five-person maintenance crew. Many of us who are longtime residents know and understand that this crew, under the supervision of Maintenance Supervisor Mike Bell, works long hours each day. To do the two projects listed above will take their work eight hours a day for weeks on end to complete. And the town is up against a deadline for both projects which means they need to be completed quickly. Approximately six hundred new water meters need to be in by the end of July. Maintenance work on infrastructure to prevent flooding needs to be finished before December. Not an easy task and one that cannot be accomplished while spending entire days of the week collecting yard waste.
Like most things in small towns with limited resources, there are priorities that need to be decided, and some services either cut entirely or put on hold until work is done. That's where some residents of Oxford need to adapt to reality and face the inescapable fact that conditions and services sometimes need to change in communities, even in Oxford, Maryland.
For years we lived in a fantasy promoted by a former town office and commissioners who wanted to convince residents that Oxford was flush with money, and everything was just fine. They signed on to a beach "restoration" on the Strand which is now not only an eyesore but is actually causing sand to be washed away from the beach while the two "islands" appear to be deteriorating. The grant for the second part of this project, which was to prevent the Strand Road from flooding has been canceled because the contractor of the "restoration" did a bait and switch with the town. The town now has to undertake fixing flooding in the parking lot adjacent to the beach, preventing flooding on the Strand Road, and providing ADA compliant access to the beach itself using taxpayer funds.
The former town administration/commissioners also entered into a grant with the Federal Government to build a new wastewater treatment plant that was overbuilt and overengineered for a small town like Oxford. After it was built and put into operation, the town ignored required maintenance and removal of sludge, thus kicking the expensive can down the road to current administration and commissioners.
Replacing water meters has been on the agenda for years.
All the while, the town was providing residents with "freebies" such as lawn waste and junk removal. These were not really freebies as they cost the town crew manhours and money for hauling materials to dumps, etc. However, residents were lured into thinking that these removals were the "duty" of the town and a right for them as citizens.
In a recent speech at the Tuesday, June 23rd town meeting, resident Russell Gray articulated this attitude of expectation that he and some other residents may feel.
Mr. Gray stated his dismay that the Commissioners, in order to get vital work done, have "suspended" yard waste collection for two months, TWO MONTHS, beginning on July 1. In Mr. Gray's mind, this is taking away something that has made Oxford "special:"
One of the things that has always distinguished Oxford from many other communities is the level of municipal services provided to residents. Other communities such as Annapolis, Easton, and St. Michaels continue to recognize the value of leaf collection, yard debris removal, and bulk pickup services because they understand that these services contribute directly to the quality of life, appearance, and character of their towns.
He compares Oxford to other communities such as Annapolis, Easton, and St. Michaels. He claims that the "free" services were part of what brought him here. So much to unpack with that idea.
The comparison to Annapolis is ridiculous. Since Mr. Gray mentioned it, here are the facts:
Annapolis is a city of approximately 40,000 people with a Department of Public Works of 97 people at a yearly cost of $8.2 million dollars. On a yearly basis, trash and yard waste collection costs residents $392 ($32.68 a month). This means the cost is approximately $15,680, 000 a year, which is covered with resident fees, not tax dollars.
Average Monthly Utility Bills in Annapolis, Maryland — Full Cost Breakdown (2026) | Utility Rates
Annapolis has very strict rules as to how yard waste, etc. must be collected for removal:
Yard Trim Collection | Annapolis, MD
SIDE NOTE: Waste bags were suggested at the June 23rd meeting as a possible way to cut down time on Oxford's yard waste removal. Some residents were very upset that they may have to do that.
Let's look at Easton:
Easton has a population of 17,000 residents and a Department of Public Works of 30 plus people.
In Easton they charge a municipal fee for refuse collection. They only do leaf collection for the entire town in the fall (Mid-October through January). For all other collection times debris must be bagged and called in for scheduling pickup. They have many restrictions - limbs must be less than 4 inches in diameter, less than 4 ft long; the fall loose leaf collection must be raked to the curb (not street) and separated from limbs, twigs, rocks.
For a comparison to Oxford, Easton "suspends" lawn waste and leaf pickup for EIGHT MONTHS out of the year.
St. Michaels:
St. Michaels has a population of approximately 1000 residents.
Lawn debris collection takes place on Tuesday morning. Branches should be bundled and tied and
not exceed 5’. Loose yard waste must be in containers or bags clearly marked “yard waste” or “leaves.”FY 26 St. Michaels spent $261,500 on contractual services (not town staff) for trash, recycle, lawn and leaf and bulk.
So far, these cities and towns provide yard waste pickup DURING CERTAIN TIMES and under STRICT RULES and/or with PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.
Let's dig deeper into other small towns:
TRAPPE:
Trappe has approximately 1,000 to 1500 residents.
Trappe picks up 2 times per year and residents must sign up and pay for bulk pick-up. Leaves must be tied and in bags with trash pickup. Limbs must be tied and no wet leaves will be collected.
Yard waste is NOT collected year-round.
ROCK HALL
Rock Hall has 1200 residents
This town doesn't collect yard waste AT ALL.
The town’s official policy is very clear: Monday trash collection will NOT pick up any yard waste, and residents must take all yard debris to the Nicholson Drop‑off Center in Chestertown. This is a 15-to-20-minute trip from Rock Hall.
The Nicholson Drop-Off Center does not charge for yard waste deliveries.
There is a fee for BULK Trash Drop off.
CENTREVILLE:
Centreville has approximately 4700 residents.
Yard Waste. $55 per quarter for trash and waste as separate fee.
Yard waste is collected by Downes Lawn Service. Yard waste pick-up will begin on Monday, March 16, 2026, and will continue for the year until December 7, 2026. Yard waste pick-up will not occur from mid-December through mid-March. *This is a pause in yard waste pick up of three and a half months.
Trees, limbs or branches should be placed curbside (not in the roadway) by 6:00 a.m. Mondays. Yard Waste pick-up will not occur during mid-December, January, February, and mid-March.
Branches may not be longer than 3 feet. Logs and bundles of branches may not weigh more than 40 pounds. Leaves and grass clippings shall be in baskets, cans, or containers, which shall not exceed 40 lbs. They shall not be placed in gutters nor streets. A maximum amount collected will be 10 bags.
Trash/Recycle/Yard Waste | Centreville MD
It's interesting to note the common themes in these different towns and cities. Many pause pick up of yard waste for months during certain times of the year. Most require strict regulations on how yard waste is presented for pickup (bagging, boxing, etc.) and size limits. Several hire separate contractors to do the pickup and charge additional fees to taxpayers. The costs of the yard waste collection ranges for these cities from $120,000 for smaller municipalities to over $15,000,000 for Annapolis. The Annapolis cost is covered via charging citizens.
No wonder Mr. Gray loves Oxford's pickup service. It's free.
Except it's not. It's at the expense of other members of the Oxford community who will have to continue to put up with antiquated water billing and flooding of their homes so that lawn waste can be removed year-round for others; lawn waste such as rose bush branches, grass clippings, weeds, etc.
Did we say this is a TWO-MONTH PAUSE in pickup? That's what it is.
Mr. Gray went on to say:
These programs are more than a line item in a budget. They are one of the visible signs that residents receive value for their tax dollars. They help maintain attractive streets, alleviate stormwater flooding from clogged pipes, assist bay restoration issues related to drainage, and overall, preserve property values . The service also supports many residents who may not have the financial or physical ability, equipment, or transportation necessary to dispose of debris on their own.
His statements prompt several questions about the "value for their tax dollars" and how he wants to maintain "attractive streets." Are flooded streets in different areas of town attractive? Do they bring value to our town?
I remember it was just a few short years ago that Mr. Gray was complaining that the flooding on Morris Street near his home was detracting from the beauty of the town and his beautiful tulip filled front yard. A stormwater drain was then placed right in front of Mr. Gray's home.
Perhaps we should ask the residents of the Tilghman, Stewart, Bank, Norton, Mill Street as well as those in Jack's Point and the section near South Morris Street and Pier Street if they think flooding makes their neighborhoods attractive and more valuable.
Does flooding preserve property values for ANYONE in town? Ask any honest real estate agent/realtor and they will tell you it doesn't.
How about a water meter billing system that no longer works accurately? Is that a strong selling point for Oxford?
And, isn't the whole point of our maintenance crew working on various flood mitigation projects to remediate the clogged pipe systems and drainage issues that Mr. Gray mentions? According to Mr. Messick, the engineer working for the town, it is.
How about the point of elderly residents who don't have the ability etc. to collect yard waste. Won't these same residents be negatively impacted by incorrect water bills and flooding?
Which brings us to another part of Mr. Gray's statement.
Many of us moved to Oxford because of the sense of community and the high quality of life that the town offered. Unfortunately, over the past two to three years, many of us have experienced what feels like a series of takeaways. Whether each individual decision was justified or not, the cumulative effect has been a growing perception that services are being reduced while expectations on residents continue to increase. The shrinkflation of reduced services while still paying the same tax amounts also could be considered a hidden tax increase.
He talks about the "community" and "high quality of life" that Oxford offers. We need to clarify some terms.
Here is a definition of the word "community:"
"a feeling of fellowship with others, as a result of sharing common attitudes, interests, and goals"
The word "freebie" is not part of the definition.
Despite his best efforts, Mr. Gray cannot make free town services equal community.
It's funny that Gray mentions that these so called "takeaways" occurred in "the past two or three years." That timeline strangely coincides with the departure of certain town personnel who either by intent or incompetence, misrepresented the financial status of Oxford to our detriment.
His statement also lines up with when certain Commissioners were elected who are focused on being good stewards of Oxford taxpayer dollars and who are intent on not letting the town go into insolvency while still taking care of critical issues and needs. They are not afraid to make hard choices and are doing so.
He mentions "shrinkflation" of town services while the town charges the same taxes. That's just plain stupid. The commissioners are actually trying to keep taxes down while making sure they meet town priorities and provide truly meaningful services such as flood prevention and accurate water costs/billing.
More from his statement:
If the current programs require adjustments, I encourage the Commissioners to explore reasonable alternatives before considering major reductions or elimination. More time should be spent reviewing what our neighboring communities do with this specific issue. If you have already done so, I don’t believe you would have made any of the significant changes you voted for last night.
It would also be helpful if you could share a list of critical infrastructure projects that the public works team would be doing (and for how long) that would keep them from maintaining this valuable service.
I'm not sure if Gray was away at his second home when the Commissioners discussed the budget, explained alternatives for yard waste collection, or what the infrastructure projects were and their timelines, but these were discussed extensively in just about every meeting in the last three months. There are some residents who don't seem to truly listen at meetings or just ignore information because they don't like the truth.
As for the data from neighboring communities, we shared it above.
Gray goes on to talk about "expediency" and repercussions:
Expediency does not always deliver the best results, especially when the repercussions have not been identified. The public provided you with guidance in the recent survey where 77% said that continued collection was extremely important and 65% said that they would be willing to pay additional costs. That message should have been reflected in your vote last night.
Regarding his comment about "expediency," I think he may not have heard that the meter replacement and infrastructure projects are on a timeline. If Oxford doesn't get them done, we will lose funding. That is a repercussion the town can't afford. The expediency in the choice of tasks stems from those timelines.
As for those who want the waste collection based on a town survey, I would challenge Gray that the survey results DID inform the commissioners so that they instituted a TWO MONTH PAUSE, not the permanent cessationof lawn service collection that he falsely claims. They voted to have a TWO-MONTH PAUSE in yard waste collection to allow town crews to complete vital projects listed above while town management considers alternatives to address yard waste collection.
As for those willing to pay additional costs to keep this collection going, that's great. Many of us, even those of us on limited incomes, already do that with our lawn services who take yard waste with them when they go.
There is a problem with the survey, however. The flaw is that it neglected to ask people to make a choice regarding priorities. What's more important, flood mitigation, accurate water bills or yard waste collection? It would be interesting to see what citizens say.
The bottom line with all of this is that Russell Gray is attempting to appeal to resident emotions, claiming residents are victims of a town government that only considers spreadsheets and numbers. He tries to say that the only way Oxford can have "community" and a "high quality of life" is by providing free yard waste and junk collection.
He doesn't seem to mind that using old water meters leads to many residents not being able to know, control and budget their water usage or see a leak when it occurs. This is a spreadsheet AND an emotional issue because it impacts the financial status of many, especially those on limited incomes.
Even worse, he doesn't seem to care that many in our community, our neighbors, our town, live in fear of flooding every time we have a big rainstorm or a high tide. This is both a spreadsheet AND an emotional issue also. It is a major issue on both counts. Some statistics:
According to FEMA between 25% and 55% of Oxford residents live in areas that will experience meaningful flooding impacts over the coming decades. 60–70% of Oxford residents will experience access or service disruption during major coastal flooding events.
This range is grounded in FEMA flood‑zone data, NOAA sea‑level‑rise projections, and Talbot County’s historical flood‑loss records. It reflects direct property impacts plus indirect impacts like road closures, utility disruption, and tidal nuisance flooding.
FEMA reports that nuisance flooding costs residents $150 -$300 per year, This includes landscaping damage, crawlspace mitigation, mold prevention and small repairs. Moderate flooding can cost $800 - $3200 per year with flooring damage, HVAC and appliance replacement, and structural fixes. Major flooding costs, per incident, $20,000 to $80,000 per year. These costs do not include flood insurance costs.
That may not mean much to those who live out of the flood zone, but in reality it will affect the property value and "quality of life" of all of us.
Oxford can and will figure out yard waste collection. Other towns have done it. Taking a two-month pause is minor. Effective governance means separating what is loud from what is important. Governance fails when attention is spent on the incidental instead of the consequential. While some find yard waste removal valuable, flooding and accurate water metering is consequential.
And while Mr. Gray would love to make issues like yard waste collection a determining factor of the charm and community of Oxford, a recent review of community input on the Oxford Comprehensive Plan shows that people rate sea water rise and flooding and infrastructure as priority issues in town.
Most choose Oxford because of its beauty, small-town charm, and friendly people.
Yard waste removal isn't even on the radar.
2026-03-24-OxfordCompPlan---PC-Approval-Draft
To quote Teddy Roosevelt, "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
That's what this commission and town administration are doing. That may not please everyone, but it is the right thing to do.
SIDE NOTE: Congratulations to Commissioner Katrina Greer who was re-elected with 196 votes. Twenty-seven ballots were rejected.
