Sliding Into The Nomination?

Oxford, Maryland is a town full of stories. Some of the stories are wonderful tales of hardworking people who help each other out. Other stories are not as nice as they detail manipulation by people of means who discovered that a small town was a great place to bend events to their advantage.

People often tell me that I should write a book about Oxford. Maybe someday I will because the events that occurred in this town in the past 8 to 10 years have been fascinating and troubling.

There are events that show the irony of certain situations. One of those times occurred last week. Former appointed Oxford Town Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin announced that she would be jumping into the Talbot County Council race as a Democrat replacing a candidate who resigned from the race for personal reasons.

Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Truth Social, Gettr, Twitter

You may remember Ms. Botkin for a variety of reasons. She served on the Talbot County Board of Education from 2016 through most of 2023, leaving her term early for another office, Commissioner of Oxford. She also ran, unsuccessfully, for State Delegate in District 37B in 2022 losing to Thomas Hutchison and Chris Adams.

https://ballotpedia.org/Susan_Delean-Botkin?utm_source=copilot.com

It's the way that she became an Oxford Commissioner that provides the irony in her latest political move.

Democrat sources tell us Botkin volunteered to run after one of their candidates dropped out. They said she was a "unanimous choice" by the Democrats. In fact, Democrat Central Committee head Phil Jackson gushed about how excited he was! This replacement is legal and can be done according to election rules, but it strikes us as humorous that Botkin would be the one Dems would put on the ballot. It reminds us of how she ended up in a commissioner's seat in Oxford.

In 2023, Botkin, while still serving on the Talbot County School Board, ran for Oxford Town Commissioner against Katrina Greer and suffered an overwhelming loss in that election. Greer got 237 votes, Botkin 170, a significant margin in a tiny town like Oxford. This loss triggered the first time that Botkin avoided actual election results to get herself placed into an elected position.

The Planned Appointment and Resolution 2303

During that election against Katrina Greer, Botkin's supporters sensed in the late weeks that their candidate was going to lose. In fact, sources tell us that approximately three weeks prior to election day, Botkin seemed to cease campaigning. At the same time, they knew that Brian Wells, a commissioner during that time, was selling his home and moving out of town. They knew he would have to leave office.

The Oxford Town Charter at the time allowed the remaining Commissioners to appoint a replacement if another Commissioner dropped off the Commission prior to the end of their term. This part of the Charter was under challenge as over 200 residents signed a petition to change the Charter to provide a "special election" in that case. This triggered a referendum that the entire town would vote on. However, that referendum would not be voted on until the election between Botkin and Greer had been decided.

Botkin supporters were worried. They openly bragged on social media and political meetings that they had a "work around" if Greer won and Botkin lost. On June 27, 2023, right after the election, the "workaround" was completed.

The Commissioners meeting on June 27th was right in the middle of the Maryland Municipal League Conference in Ocean City. In previous years, the Commissioners didn't meet while that conference was going on as they would all be in attendance. Somehow, this year was suddenly different. Jaramillo actually came back from MML to conduct this meeting.

From the Town Minutes of June 27, 2023: (emphasis is ours)

President (Jimmy) Jaramillo stated that at the end of the prior week, Commissioner Wells notified the town that he would be resigning from his position as Commissioner effective June 27, 2023. Jaramillo thanked Wells for his service to the town and for his leadership and gave him the floor. Commissioner Wells stated that, as many already knew, his house was for sale for personal reasons and was now under contract, and as they were unable to find a smaller home available in Oxford, they had placed a contract on a house in Easton which would be closing soon. Wells thanked everyone he had worked with at the town, Commissioners and staff, adding that it had been a great learning experience. He also thanked those who had put him in office. He wished everyone the best of luck, including the newly elected Commissioner and whomever would end up taking his place, after which he stepped down from his seat.

It's noteworthy that Wells had not closed on his new home and would remain in Oxford long enough to allow Greer to be sworn in and take her seat and then participate with the remaining Commissioner in the decision about replacing him. What was the hurry?

Commission President Jaramillo knew which section of the charter allowed the Commissioners to name Wells' replacement. He, and the other Commissioner, Tom Costigan, acted immediately. Neither of them were Greer supporters. More from the minutes:

President Jaramillo stated that Oxford Charter Section C5-15 instructs the remaining Commissioners, in the case of a vacancy, to appoint someone to fill that vacancy until the next regular scheduled election. Jaramillo stated the in the recent election there were two candidates with over 400 votes cast, there was a winner, and also a second place with 42% of the vote. Jaramillo felt that it was only appropriate to nominate the runner up representing 42% of the vote, Susan Delean-Botkin.*** Commissioner Costigan seconded the nomination, both voted in favor, and the motion carried. President Jaramillo requested Ms. Botkin come forward if she was willing to accept the nomination, after which he issued the Oath of Office to the newly appointed Commissioner. There were several members of the audience who expressed disappointment and left the meeting.

The quote from Jaramillo listed in the minutes is contested by multiple attendees at the meeting. It's alleged this was added by the Town Manager after the fact. When citizens asked why he picked Botkin as Well's replacement, Jaramillo was alleged to have said that on the spur of the moment, he was inspired to nominate Susan to fill the spot. (See Addendum for further information on that statement).

Conveniently, Ms. Botkin happened to be in attendance at that meeting so she could be sworn in right on the spot. It's almost like they told her to be there.

It seems the Commissioners couldn't take the time (one week) to seat Greer, the overwhelming winner, and then conduct a process whereby citizens other than Botkin could be nominated or volunteer to replace Wells according to the charter at the time. The Commissioners were also slow walking the referendum to change the process to a special election.

There were other reasons. The Commissioners had a resolution they wanted passed before Greer took office, Resolution 2303.

So they swore Botkin into office before the actual winner of the race, Greer, was sworn in. Here is the resolution regarding town retirement that they desperately wanted to pass and sign before Greer took office. This resolution was created to assure certain town employees would get better retirement under certain circumstances, specifically having ten years employment and having reached the age of 62 at the time of retirement. There was only one employee at the time who fit that stipulation when the resolution passed, an employee who wielded a lot of unilateral, unchallenged power in the town office. Notice how the resolution was altered:

Here is a screen shot of the signature page:

They scratched out Wells' name and printed Botkin's in and then she signed not more than five minutes after she was sworn in to her appointed office. Sound like collusion? Possibly. Was it a violation of Open Meetings Act which is state law? Also, possible.

The Maryland Open Meetings Act (OMA) is the state law that requires public bodies to conduct public business openly, with advance notice, accessible meetings, and publicly available minutes. It is codified in the General Provisions Article, Title 3 of the Maryland Code. The core purpose is simple: government deliberations must be visible to the public except in narrowly defined circumstances such as legal or personnel issues. Attorney General of Maryland - Open Meetings Act Quick Guide

The Commissioners knew this law. Certainly Ms. Botkin knew it as well since she had been on the school board. Yet they did not give adequate public notice of the business to be conducted during this meeting. The public didn't know a replacement Commissioner was about to be named. The only people who knew were the Commissioners, Botkin supporters, and possibly Botkin herself.

What were the Commissioners afraid of? Were the afraid that Greer would ask questions when she was seated? That she would cast a dissenting vote on Resolution 2303? Why didn't Botkin take the high road and refuse the appointment?

No matter the reason, this was a big middle finger from the Commissioners to Oxford citizens.

If you want to look for Resolution 2303 online, don't bother. It isn't in the list of resolutions and ordinances posted on the town's website. When we asked about that, we were told that Resolution 2303 wasn't on the original list when it was migrated over to the new website from the old site after the current town administration was put in place. Did the prior town management purposely hide Resolution 2303? Were they afraid citizens would see what they were up to? If it was not controversial, why hide Resolution 2303?

The EASTON GAZETTE made an inquiry about the resolution not being posted and got this answer:

The resolution you mentioned does not have a policy attached. It looks like they reference changes directly in the resolution without actually amending the policy and reattaching it.

We will investigate further to see what effect that may have on that town policy.

Slow Walking The Referendum for special elections in case of a vacancy

Shortly after Greer was seated, the Oxford Town Charter was changed to require special elections for mid-term replacements of Commissioners. It was passed in an overwhelming vote, thus preventing the town ever having to endure a sham appointment again.

Not without a fight. Both Commission President Tom Costigan and Appointed Commissioner Susan Delean Botkin had come out publicly against the referendum. In fact, Botkin said although she had initially signed the petition supporting the referendum to allow a special election, she then denounced it. This was shortly before she was appointed. Her explanation, according to sources, “It’s complicated.”

Of course she changed her mind. She couldn't support special elections for empty Commissioner seats if she had an idea that she would be appointed. Costigan specifically said at a town meeting prior to the vote on the referendum:

Costigan encouraged everyone to read the information on the website and to understand what is being proposed, stating that what we have now is an orderly system that has been tested and works. He feels this change to the Charter has been sold to many residents as being more democratic and that it will lead to a better and more professionally run government, stating that if he believed that, he would support it and would offer a resolution support to that effect. But he does not believe that and offered, at the public’s convenience, to discuss all the reasons he feels the citizens would not be well served by this charter change, saying that not only does he feel it is a bad idea, in his opinion it is being fostered by a few individuals with their own undisclosed agenda. He recently began outlining the dozen or more problems that could arise with this proposed change, and he would be happy to share his concerns with the citizens as we move forward in this process. After careful consideration he feels that citizens will see that this is a solution in search of a problem.

Those "few individuals" with the "undisclosed agenda" included an overwhelming majority of residents of the town, including the author of this article. The referendum was a slam dunk.

It's no wonder that those three Commissioners, ignoring a petition of 200 Oxford residents, proceeded to continue to "slow walk" the vote on the charter change to have special elections until July 18th. Greer, of course, when seated, was outvoted 2-1.

This appointment became a turning point in Oxford's history as it showed the lengths people would go to in order to retain power in the town.

Botkin's actions as town commissioner

During her year on the Oxford Commissioners, here were some of Delean Botkin's actions:

1. Opposed hiring a search firm to hire the replacement for the retiring town manager, Lewis. Instead, she and Tom Costigan allowed Lewis do the search and background check herself. Botkin thought it was too expensive to do a national search with a search firm. This led to the town hiring a man with a history of indecent exposure to children:
   • From the 2/27/2024 Oxford Town Meeting Minutes: Greer preferred to have someone come in and speak to the commissioners on the hiring process to include community involvement, with the community having say in how they are managed. Delean-Botkin felt that the management position was already detailed in the job description and as identified in the town charter. Greer stated she had envisioned a nationwide search involving the community, stating there were town citizens with experience who could provide insight, after which it could be determined if the town wanted to hire a recruiter, as they are available from MML. Greer stated the hiring of a town manager is the most important decision the Commissioners would make and she wants to see the community involved in the process, and she proposed the Commissioners have a workshop to receive information from professionals in order to discuss the process further. Delean-
     Botkin did express her concerns with a town of 600 residents conducting a nationwide search at a cost of $25,000 to $30,000, based on her experience in similar processes. It was determined that a workshop would be arranged for the Commissioners to receive input and discuss the matter.
   • More Comments from Botkin Opposing a Search Firm: at the Town Commissioners meeting on 03/26/24: Commissioner Delean-Botkin stated as someone with experience in utilizing a search firm for government employment, and after researching other eastern shore communities who have used a firm for similar positions, she found some were satisfied with the process, while others who ended up hiring locally were not, she was not sure it was the right direction. The second concern was transparency, and she did not feel that using a recruiting firm would be any more transparent than the Commissioners conducting a search themselves, considering that they are now keenly aware of the transparency issue. That didn't age well as detailed in the following articles from THE EASTON GAZETTE:
   • Oxford Citizens Discover Troubling Allegations About Newly Hired Town Manager Prompting His Immediate Dismissal - The Easton Gazette;
   • Oxford Commissioners Admit: "We Were Wrong" - The Easton Gazette

Here is a copy of the minutes from the 2/27/24 meeting:

Botkin's "advice" allowed the Town Manager at the time to do the search for her replacement, including a flawed background check. Eventually, the town hired a man who was found to be a sex offender. It was such a bad situation that the Commissioners had a meeting at the Oxford Community Center so that Commission President Tom Costigan could publicly apologize.

After that debacle, the town finally engaged a qualified search firm as Greer had suggested and hired the current Town Manager, Holly Wahl.

Shutting down free speech and insulting oxford citizens

2. It wasn't just that Botkin seemed to oppose sound hiring practices, but she also didn't like giving the citizens the right to speak, something she continued to try to repress throughout her one-year stint as an appointed Commissioner:

Meeting Decorum For You, Not Her! - The Easton Gazette

As you can see in the above article, Botkin did NOT like being questioned in a meeting. The particular citizen she insulted was constantly asking questions and demanding transparency, specifically from the Oxford Town Office. That really bothered Botkin.

She also voiced disdain for an Oxford taxpayer, Scott Rensberger, just because he chose to have a second home in Oxford. She derisively called him a "part timer" and implied he didn't have the same rights to speak as everyone else.

botkin did do some good things:

Is it fair to say that Botkin did nothing good as an appointed Commissioner of Oxford? Probably not. She did bring cookies to meetings occasionally. She helped with Christmas Dock Tree setup and take down, cleaned brush at the Conservation Park, advised citizens to get flood insurance, favored control of cannabis dispensaries in town, announced upcoming events, and wore a headset during meetings so we could all hear what she had to say. Not a huge resume' for someone wanting to be on the Talbot County Council.

But here she is again, volunteering to take someone else's candidacy, avoiding part of the actual election process, and trying to "slide" into public office. That's not unheard of as we have recently seen on the state and national scale.

However, it seems to be a pattern with some people and that is slightly concerning. I mean, after all, if Botkin wanted to be a county council person, why didn't she just run in the first place and participate in the primary?

You decide for yourself who you wish to cast your vote for.

Addendum: The following letters/emails were from Oxford Citizens regarding the Botkin appointment as town commissioner. We have deleted their names to provide them privacy, but felt that these give us context and a look into how many citizens of the town felt about the appointment at the time:

Citizen Number 1-Support of the Special Election-

We attended the meeting of the Oxford Commissioners on June 27. Admittedly, we found it somewhat painful to watch Susan Delean-Botkin, the loser of the recent Commissioner election, being sworn in as a new Commissioner while Katrina Greer, the winner of that election, sat unconsulted and powerless in the audience. We were chagrined by the fact that this action would not have occurred but for the decisions of two Commissioners ending their Oxford service that very day, one resigning and the other retiring. As discussed below, the third Oxford Commissioner simply chose to ignore the apparent view of voters in the recent Oxford election. The actions taken at the meeting were entirely lawful. The problem, as reflected in a subsequent Star Democrat press account, was not who was put in office, but how she was put in office.

The appointment of Delean-Botkin must be viewed against the backdrop of a petition that was signed months ago by more than 200 Oxford voters (considerably more than the 20% required by the Maryland Code). The petition would amend the Oxford Town Charter to provide that vacancies on the Commission will be filled, not by appointment, but by special election. What prompted this proposed amendment and why has it generated strong views pro and con?

While some Oxfordians have talked about making this Charter change for a long time, there can be little question that the current proposal is a response to recent events in Oxford, particularly the forced retirement of the Town’s 30+ year police chief. The Commissioners offered no explanation for this action and made it impossible for the
“retired” police chief to say anything by requiring him to sign a non-disclosure agreement as a condition to receiving any retirement benefits. This event triggered a strong response from Oxford citizens and led to vocalization of other Town issues. These issues include hiring practices, the transparency of employee compensation, communication between the Commissioners and citizens, the dramatic growth of the Town’s budget and efforts to address rising water levels, including frequent high water due to strong tides and storms.

When this Charter proposal was initially submitted to the Town Commissioners there was no positive response. This led to a group effort to utilize the petition procedure for amending municipal charters set out in Section 4-305 of Maryland’s Local Government code. An ad hoc group of Oxford residents collected over 200 signatures supporting elections to fill Commissioner vacancies, considerably more than the 20% requirement in the Maryland code. When presented with the signed petition, the Commissioners had three options. They could: (1) by resolution adopt the requested change and amend the Town Charter following a required public hearing; (2) put the amendment to the voters at the next regularly scheduled election on June 20; or (3) schedule a separate special election on the referendum. The existing Commissioners, who have indicated their disapproval of the proposed Charter amendment on the Town’s website, elected to “slow-walk” the petition by opting for the third option. designating July 18 for that special election.

By a vote of 237 to 170 Oxford residents elected a new Commissioner on June 20 to replace the current president of the Commission whose term is expiring. The new Commissioner supports the proposed Charter amendment; her defeated opponent (who had originally signed the petition requesting the amendment) announced that she was now opposed to its adoption. If the proposed Charter Amendment had been voted on during this regular election it would likely have been approved and what took place at the June 27 Commissioner’s meeting would not have happened.

1. Public Meeting in Advance of Vote Must Hear All Sides. The Town Commissioners in office when the Charter Amendment was proposed oppose its adoption. One Commissioner spoke out extensively at a Commission meeting against the proposal and the Oxford Town website sets out various concerns about its adoption. It appears that the existing Commissioners intend to utilize the “information meeting” scheduled for July 14 to further communicate their arguments against its adoption. Hopefully the public hearing on the proposed amendment will reflect both sides, but that is not assured, and this letter seeks to make the case for adoption of the new Charter provision.

2. Vacancy Election Provision Is Not Uncommon. The suggestion on the Oxford website that filling a Commissioner vacancy by special election is unnecessary because Oxford holds Commissioner elections annually and therefore requiring a special election is out of step with the practices of other Eastern Shore Towns is simply wrong. The following towns provide for vacancies on town governing bodies to be filled by special elections where there is a substantial remaining term of the vacated member or more than a specified time before the next regularly scheduled town election: Trappe, Berlin, Cambridge, and Centerville.

Vacancies on Trappe’s Town Council are filled by special election unless the vacancy occurs within 90 days of the date of a regularly scheduled Town election. (Trappe Town Charter § 205)

Vacancies on the Town Council of Berlin are filled by special election if the vacancy occurs 180 days or more before a regular election. (Berlin Town Charter § C6-14 C)

Vacancies in the office of commissioner of the City of Cambridge are filled by special election for the unexpired term unless the vacancy occurs within four months of the next regular election. (City of Cambridge Charter § 3-16)

Vacancies on the Centreville Town Council are filled by special election if the remainder of the term is more than six months. (Centerville Town Charter § 414)

3. Filling Vacancies in Practice. How would the provisions noted above apply to the recent circumstances faced by the Oxford Commissioners where a Commissioner resigned with a year remaining in his term in office. In each of the above jurisdictions, such vacancy would be filled by special election. The proposed Charter Amendment is clearly in keeping with the practices of other Eastern Shore towns.

4. Selection by Two People vs. 600+. Unlike Oxford which has only 3 town Commissioners, towns that permit vacancies to be filled by vote of the remaining council members typically have 5 or more members, thus ensuring a broader citizen representation in selecting persons to fill a vacancy.

5. Technical Issues With Petition Can Be Addressed. Various technical concerns are voiced with respect to implementing the proposed new vacancy election provision. These include timing issues for registration of new Oxford residents, proximity to regular Oxford elections, the applicability of absentee voting provisions. It is our belief that these and any other technical issues that may be identified can be addressed once the citizens of Oxford vote to go forward with elections to fill Commissioner vacancies. Why do we say this?

First, the Oxford Town Charter provides ample authority for the Commission to address election issues that are not contrary to what is in the Charter. Section C4-1 of the Oxford Charter provides “The Commission shall have the power to pass all such ordinances not contrary to …the Charter as it may deem necessary to the good government of the Town …” Section C4-2 provides that the Commission “may pass all necessary ordinances. All the powers of the Town shall be exercised in the manner prescribed by this Charter, or if the manner be not prescribed, then in such manner as may be prescribed by ordinance.” If Oxford citizens vote to approve the filling of Commissioner vacancies by special election, the Commission should have ample authority to address any technical issues.

Second, even if it could be argued that a necessary technical change is somehow contrary to the voter approved election mandate, something that we view as highly unlikely, the Commission has the authority by simple majority vote under Maryland State Local Government Law to itself adopt a corrective amendment to the new Charter vacancy provision. Section 4-304(a)(1) of Maryland’s Local Government Code provides “The legislative body of a municipality may initiate a proposed amendment to the municipal charter by a resolution that … is adopted in the manner as other resolutions in the municipality by a majority of all the individuals elected to the legislative body.” Such resolution would require a public hearing but would not require another vote by Oxford citizens.

The Choice for Oxford Voters. The petition signed by more than 200 Oxford citizens presents voters with a clear choice for the vote on July 18. Going forward: do we want vacancies on the Oxford Town Commission to be filled by the remaining two Town Commissioners (assuming there are two) or by vote of the 600+ citizens of Oxford. The extraordinary record turnout for the recent Commissioner election (over 65% of eligible voters) indicates a strong appetite for voter involvement in the important issues facing the Town and its elected Commissioners. The proposed Charter Amendment should be adopted.

supportive response to the above email: (Again, names have been removed)

I recall your well-framed question to the Commissions at the end of the meeting this week. Two of the three Commissions rudely interrupted you as you spoke and, in the process, advanced two lies. Susan said you were incorrect to say that she did not support the referendum. You reminded her that at the Men’s Breakfast, she said she signed the referendum but no longer supported it. She then reluctantly admitted you were correct and mumbled something about, “it’s complicated.” Jimmy interrupted your description of the process saying you were wrong, and turned to the town lawyer for support but she said you were correct. Jimmy’s crowning achievement for his tenure in office was his statement saying the appointment had not been planned but after Brian’s resignation, on the spur of the moment, he was inspired to nominate Susan to fill the open spot. I would like to have a video clip of his statement.

Facebook post from a botkin supporter against the referendum for a special election:

What is corrupt was the frantic, slap Dash effort to ram through a resolution to end this policy once it was understood that Mr. Wells was planning to sell his home and move from Oxford. I recall well, the high pressure sales job quickly to sign on.”

facebook post in response to the above comment:

Let’s just think about this. A group of plotting voters in Oxford foresee that one of the Commissioners intends to put his house on the market. They foresee a prompt sale. Not only that, although that Commissioner has lived in three Oxford houses these plotting voters figure that this time the Commissioner will move elsewhere and feel compelled to resign his office. Turns out their prediction comes to pass. So what do they propose to do? Well if the plot succeeds the Commissioner vacancy will be filled by a special election where all Oxford residents have an opportunity to select a new Commissioner. Can you imagine anything more corrupt? Much worse than the chicanery that in five minutes replaced the resigning Commissioner with the loser of the recent Commissioner election. Still better, the winner of that election had no say because she was not yet sworn in.

** We apologize for the poorly written narratives of town minutes. We copy and paste them exactly as they appeared in the officially written record.

NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!