Progressive Cheverly


Home
Up

Progressive CheverlyLetters and Testimony to our Public Officials


Progressive Cheverly has sent letters to our Governor, State Senator and Delegates, County representatives, and testified before Maryland's General Assembly, including:

Previous Letter Topics:

 

--  Living Wage  --  Instant Runoff Voting  --  Healthy Maryland Initiative  -- 
Public Campaign Financing  --  Death Penalty Repeal  --  Valid Marriage Act 


Written Testimony to the Economic Matters Committee

February 20, 2007

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we offer the following written testimony in support for Living Wage legislation (HB 430). We are pleased that Delegates Ivey, Niemann and Ramirez from the 47th District who represent us are co-sponsors.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County. We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.”

Located in Cheverly, we recognize the vital importance of this legislation to our community and our region. We observe how private companies who are beneficiaries of generous state procurement contracts have failed to provide a living wage to the workers in our community and region where a working family needs to make an income of more than 40 thousand dollars per year to minimally sustain the family and afford the basic conditions of life – food, housing, clothing, transportation and medical care.

While many might perceive the town of Cheverly as a being populated by those who can afford the comforts as well as the basics of life, this is clearly not the case for all of our neighbors. The most recent U.S. Census data reflects that 636 households in Cheverly earn less than 40 thousand dollars a year. That represents almost 30% of our neighbors. Moreover, almost a third of those households (95 of 636) earn less than 20 thousand dollars a year, and many are single-parent families headed by an unmarried woman.

In the end, the community as a whole is affected by low wages. When workers don't earn a living wage, the community and citizens of the region as a whole end up paying for it through health care, food and other subsidies for low-income residents. Greater burdens are placed on institutions such as the Prince George's Hospital Center and through outlays to our social welfare system that is taxpayer supported.

The living wage legislation is a step in the right direction, since it requires employers that hold or gain state contracts to pay a just, living wage. This is especially important for those that employ workers who have what are considered to be – but sometimes are not – low skill jobs.

Sincerely,

_________________________                  ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Catherine Smith, Co-chair

 

{ -back to top- }


 

February 15, 2006

Honorable Paula C. Hollinger
Chair, Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee
Miller Senate Office Building, 2 West Wing
11 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Senator Hollinger:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for Instant Runoff Voting (SB 292) when it comes before your committee.  The measure calls for establishing an instant runoff method for casting and tabulating votes in the State after voters have had the opportunity to rank order their choices among candidates.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, in line with the values in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

Instant Runoff Voting (SB 292), which was introduced by Senator Pinsky, accomplishes several beneficial effects for Maryland's voters. In all single member district contests, the winning candidate will always have an absolute majority of votes.  In a democracy, the rule of the majority is the supreme tenet; IRV ensures that the election process more accurately measures voters’ true wishes. 

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) also permits the voter to cast their ballot for their true first-choice.  A voter no longer has to weigh their choice by a “lesser-of-two-evils” standard.  Casting a second choice ballot does not harm their true and sincere first choice, as the second choice does not count unless the first choice has lost.  This will increase voters’ sense of buy-in to the electoral process and thus increase voter interest in the electoral process and expand voter participation.

Instant Runoff Voting will also force candidates to appeal to a wider spectrum of voters.  A candidate cannot afford to employ negative campaign strategies to attack other rivals, as they must maintain a broader appeal to attract second choice votes. 

Finally, Instant Runoff Voting will suppress the distorting influence of “spoiler” candidates while at the same time benefiting viable third party candidates.  Spoiler candidates who represent marginal interests will be quickly eliminated and stronger candidates will survive the subsequent rounds of IRV until a majority choice has been made.  This process actually boosts the cause of third-party candidates.  Since the demeaning label of spoiler is removed, and they can muster many second-choice votes, a third party candidate actually enjoys greater consideration by voters.

Instant Runoff voting does all this without the added expense or confusion of conducting subsequent run-off elections. Since the bill will not take effect until 2007, ample time can be afforded to enable our current electoral process to manage the intricacies of IRV without costly alterations.  It has been implemented successfully in several jurisdiction, including San Francisco, Cambridge MA and even locally in Takoma Park.  It's a true win-win situation.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Senator Paul Pinsky, 22nd District
Senator Gwendolyn T. Britt, 47th District
Delegate Doyle L. Niemann, 47th District
Delegate Rosetta C. Parker, 47th District
Delegate Victor R. Ramirez, 47th District
 

{ -back to top- }


February 16, 2006

Honorable Peter A Hammen
Chair, Health and Government Operations Committee
House Office Building, Room 241
12 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Delegate Hammen:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for the Healthy Maryland Initiative (HB 441), which was introduced by Delegate Hixson, when it comes before your committee. We are pleased that Delegates Niemann and Parker who represent us are among its co-sponsors.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

Our state faces a healthcare crisis.  For those of us with insurance, a sense of urgency may be lacking.  But for the thousands of uninsured Marylanders, the consequences of going without adequate healthcare are dire.  The Healthy Maryland Initiative is a step in the right direction.

Tobacco is one of the contributors to poor health in Maryland.  Taxing cigarettes and other tobacco products by $1 per pack will have some deterrent effect, which by itself will help the residents of our state.  And, by conservative estimates, such a tax would raise at least $155 million per year.

This money could be spent to improve healthcare access for thousands of Marylanders.  Currently, only parents of children enrolled in the Maryland Children’s Health Insurance Program who subsist on 30-40% of the poverty level are eligible for Medicaid coverage.  By directing $100 million to expand Medicaid eligibility, all parents up to the full poverty level could be included.  Legal immigrant children and pregnant women could also be covered. 

In Cheverly, home of the Prince George’s Hospital Center, we are acutely aware that inadequate health insurance coverage affects whole communities.  Our hospital faces chronic budget shortfalls because so many of its patients lack health insurance.  If we are to have a stable healthcare system, reliable ways to fund it must be instituted.  The Healthy Maryland Initiative is one way to move in that direction.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Delegate Sheila Hixon, 20th District
Senator Gwendolyn T. Britt, 47th District
Delegate Doyle L. Niemann, 47th District
Delegate Rosetta C. Parker, 47th District
Delegate Victor R. Ramirez, 47th District

 

{ -back to top- }


February 16, 2006

Honorable Sheila E. Hixson
Chair, Ways and Means Committee
House Office Building, Room 131
12 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 - 1991

Dear Delegate Hixson:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for the Public Campaign Financing Act for Candidates for the General Assembly (HB 1054/SB 569), which was introduced by Delegate Cardin, when it comes before your committee. We are pleased that Delegates Neimann and Parker who represent us have co-sponsored the bill.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

This piece of legislation has fittingly been labeled the “Clean Money” bill. We find that name to be quite appropriate since its aim is to clean the taint of special interest groups and large corporations with deep pockets from being able to shape electoral outcomes and pressure legislators through their large donations to political candidates.

Modeled after successful efforts in Maine and Arizona, this legislation would significantly reduce the corrosive impact of big money on elections and the legislative process.  Experience in those states shows that, while this legislation would open up the playing field for more competition, incumbents that are responsive to their constituents are not at risk under a public financing plan.

It is time to end the inordinate amount of influence that is held by special interest groups and corporations. Citizens of Maryland have made their preference for public financing of campaigns clearly known. A poll conducted this last summer by Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies found that 73% of Marylanders support Arizona-style public funding of campaigns.

We hope that your committee will make a favorable report to the House of Delegates.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair 

Cc: Delegate Jon S. Cardin, 11th District
Delegate Doyle L. Niemann, 47th District
Delegate Rosetta C. Parker, 47th District
Delegate Victor R. Ramirez, 47th District


February 16, 2006

Honorable Paula C. Hollinger
Chair, Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee
Miller Senate Office Building, 2 West Wing
11 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Senator Hollinger:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for the Public Campaign Financing Act for Candidates for the General Assembly (SB 569/HB 1054), which was introduced by Senator Pinsky, when it comes before your committee. We are pleased that Senator Britt who represents us has co-sponsored the bill.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

This piece of legislation has fittingly been labeled the “Clean Money” bill. We find that name to be quite appropriate since its aim is to clean the taint of special interest groups and large corporations with deep pockets from being able to shape electoral outcomes and pressure legislators through their large donations to political candidates.

Modeled after successful efforts in Maine and Arizona, this legislation would significantly reduce the corrosive impact of big money on elections and the legislative process.  Experience in those states shows that, while this legislation would open up the playing field for more competition, incumbents that are responsive to their constituents are not at risk under a public financing plan.

It is time to end the inordinate amount of influence that is held by special interest groups and corporations. Citizens of Maryland have made their preference for public financing of campaigns clearly known. A poll conducted this last summer by Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies found that 73% of Marylanders support Arizona-style public funding of campaigns.

We hope that your committee will make a favorable report to the House of Delegates.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Senator Paul Pinsky, 22nd District
Senator Gwendolyn T. Britt, 47th District

 

{ -back to top- }


February 16, 2006

Honorable Joseph F. Vallario, Jr.
Chair, Judiciary Committee
House Office Building, Room 101
12 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Delegate Vallario:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for Death Penalty Repeal (HB 809/SB 349), which was introduced by Delegate Kelley, when it comes before your committee. We are pleased that Delegate Parker who represents us has co-sponsored the bill.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

We recognize a preponderance of evidence that the death penalty is ineffective and inequitable.  People of color are grossly over-represented on death row, a result of bias in prosecutorial decisions, jury selection, quality of legal representation, and other factors.  For example, recent statistics show that nationally over 80% of murder victims in cases resulting in an execution were white, even though only 50% of murder victims overall were white.  A recent study by the University of Maryland corroborates that this kind of bias certainly exists in Maryland.  A single example: All but one of the 7 men on Maryland’s death row were convicted of killing white people.

Questions of innocence hover over the death penalty issue.  Since 1973, over 120 death row inmates in the U.S. have been released with evidence of their innocence.  Issues of youth and mental incompetence, and the arbitrary way these factors are taken into account, further cloud any sense of moral certitude that death penalty advocates can claim.

The death penalty is expensive and ineffective, surely a sign of government waste that is not only irresponsible, but also tragic.  The vast majority of criminologists refute the purported deterrence effect of the death penalty.  In a 1996 study, 84% of criminologists discounted the deterrence effect.  In reality, the murder rate is highest in the South, which accounts for more than 80% of our executions nationally.  Clearly deterrence is not working.  In purely practical terms, the death penalty is expensive, costing far more per prisoner to implement than a life sentence without parole.

Perhaps most important for a civil society, the death penalty dehumanizes those who must enforce it, and those of us who abide it.  A recent article in the New York Times reports on research conducted by psychologists at Stanford University on the effects of executions on prison staff. The researchers concluded that those who participate in execution teams exhibit high levels of "moral disengagement," which one of the researchers described as the "ability to selectively engage and disengage our moral standards."  The death penalty degrades all of us.

Maryland can stake a higher moral ground while still supporting a just and effective criminal justice system.  It is time to take Maryland out of the business of state-sanctioned killing.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Delegate Daryl Kelley, 26th District
Delegate Doyle L. Niemann, 47th District
Delegate Rosetta C. Parker, 47th District
Delegate Victor R. Ramirez, 47th District


February 16, 2006

Honorable Brian E. Frosh
Chair, Judicial Proceedings Committee
Miller Senate Office Building, 2 East Wing
11 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Senator Frosh:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support for Death Penalty Repeal (SB 349/HB 809), which was introduced by Senator Gladden, when it comes before your committee. We are pleased that Senator Britt who represents us has co-sponsored the bill.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

We recognize a preponderance of evidence that the death penalty is ineffective and inequitable.  People of color are grossly over-represented on death row, a result of bias in prosecutorial decisions, jury selection, quality of legal representation, and other factors.  For example, recent statistics show that nationally over 80% of murder victims in cases resulting in an execution were white, even though only 50% of murder victims overall were white.  A recent study by the University of Maryland corroborates that this kind of bias certainly exists in Maryland.  A single example: All but one of the 7 men on Maryland’s death row were convicted of killing white people.

Questions of innocence hover over the death penalty issue.  Since 1973, over 120 death row inmates in the U.S. have been released with evidence of their innocence.  Issues of youth and mental incompetence, and the arbitrary way these factors are taken into account, further cloud any sense of moral certitude that death penalty advocates can claim.

The death penalty is expensive and ineffective, surely a sign of government waste that is not only irresponsible, but also tragic.  The vast majority of criminologists refute the purported deterrence effect of the death penalty.  In a 1996 study, 84% of criminologists discounted the deterrence effect.  In reality, the murder rate is highest in the South, which accounts for more than 80% of our executions nationally.  Clearly deterrence is not working.  In purely practical terms, the death penalty is expensive, costing far more per prisoner to implement than a life sentence without parole.

Perhaps most important for a civil society, the death penalty dehumanizes those who must enforce it, and those of us who abide it.  A recent article in the New York Times reports on research conducted by psychologists at Stanford University on the effects of executions on prison staff. The researchers concluded that those who participate in execution teams exhibit high levels of "moral disengagement," which one of the researchers described as the "ability to selectively engage and disengage our moral standards."  The death penalty degrades all of us.

Maryland can stake a higher moral ground while still supporting a just and effective criminal justice system.  It is time to take Maryland out of the business of state-sanctioned killing.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Senator Paul Pinsky, 22nd District
Senator Gwendolyn T. Britt, 47th District

 

{ -back to top- }


February 16, 2006

Honorable Joseph F. Vallario, Jr.
Chair, Judiciary Committee
House Office Building, Room 101
12 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

 Dear Delegate Vallario:

 On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support in defeating the Valid Marriages Act (HB 1393/SB 690) if it comes before your committee.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

The proposal to amend Maryland’s Constitution, sponsored by Delegate Eckardt, calls for a public referendum in the general election of 2006 to amend the Maryland Constitution, specifying that: “only a marriage between a man and a woman is a valid marriage in this state.”  The bill comes to you after the House of Delegates has already defeated a similar effort to amend Maryland’s Declaration of Rights, HB 48. As you and your committee members know well, the House Judiciary Committee voted against this bill after hearing five hours of testimony. The full House of Delegates also voted to sustain the unfavorable committee report.  We believe that no further deliberation is required or desirable for this legislative session—especially when the matter is still under review by our judiciary.

Why, then, should the General Assembly be taking up a new version of an amendment that has been previously rejected? We can only surmise that proponents of this bill hold little regard for the legislative process of the General Assembly. It is apparent that such a call for further discussion of the matter of equal marriage protections for gay and lesbian Marylanders is simply a matter of politicizing an issue of justice that is still being adjudicated by our Courts.

This proposed amendment comes at a time when the Circuit Court in Baltimore has found Maryland’s 1973 marriage law unconstitutional in Deane and Polyak v. Conaway. We recognize the value of honoring the judicial process of ongoing deliberation in this matter. The amendment to the constitution represents an intrusion into the proper working of our judicial branch of government.  We are hopeful that the ongoing deliberation of the judicial branch will ultimately come down on the side of equal justice for all citizens of Maryland when the Court of Appeals makes its decision. That is the proper forum for judging Constitutional issues. It is not the place of the legislature to interfere with the judiciary.

We believe that discrimination has no place in Maryland or the United States.  We also believe that the Maryland Constitution must continue to ensure equal treatment of ALL Marylanders and not single out a group of people for discrimination. Moreover, we are offended by the effort to politicize a matter of justice by subjecting a basic civil right to a referendum.  It thereby perpetuates discrimination against a particular group of Marylanders as a matter of constitutional law. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Delegate Adelaide Eckhardt, District 37B
Delegate Doyle L. Niemann, 47th District
Delegate Rosetta C. Parker, 47th District
Delegate Victor R. Ramirez, 47th District


February 16, 2006

Honorable Brian E. Frosh
Chair, Judicial Proceedings Committee
Miller Senate Office Building, 2 East Wing
11 Bladen St.
Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991

Dear Senator Frosh:

On behalf of the members of Progressive Cheverly, we are writing to enlist your leadership and support in defeating the Valid Marriages Act (SB 690/HB 1393) if it comes before your committee.

Progressive Cheverly is based in Cheverly, Prince George's County.  We are working to revitalize democratic politics at the grassroots, especially in the commitment to the values addressed in our mission statement: “to promote economic fairness, social justice, basic human rights, civil liberties, a sustainable environment, a tolerant society and world peace through a more informed political dialogue and active participation in civil society and the democratic political process.” 

The proposal to amend Maryland’s Constitution, sponsored by Senator Haines, calls for a public referendum in the general election of 2006 to amend the Maryland Constitution, specifying that: “only a marriage between a man and a woman is a valid marriage in this state.”  The bill comes to you after the House of Delegates has already defeated a similar effort to amend Maryland’s Declaration of Rights, HB 48. As you and your committee members know well, the House Judiciary Committee voted against this bill after hearing five hours of testimony. The full House of Delegates also voted to sustain the unfavorable committee report.  We believe that no further deliberation is required or desirable for this legislative session—especially when the matter is still under review by our judiciary.

Why, then, should the General Assembly be taking up a new version of an amendment that has been previously rejected? We can only surmise that proponents of this bill hold little regard for the legislative process of the General Assembly. It is apparent that such a call for further discussion of the matter of equal marriage protections for gay and lesbian Marylanders is simply a matter of politicizing an issue of justice that is still being adjudicated by our Courts.

This proposed amendment comes at a time when the Circuit Court in Baltimore has found Maryland’s 1973 marriage law unconstitutional in Deane and Polyak v. Conaway. We recognize the value of honoring the judicial process of ongoing deliberation in this matter. The amendment to the constitution represents an intrusion into the proper working of our judicial branch of government.  We are hopeful that the ongoing deliberation of the judicial branch will ultimately come down on the side of equal justice for all citizens of Maryland when the Court of Appeals makes its decision. That is the proper forum for judging Constitutional issues. It is not the place of the legislature to interfere with the judiciary.

We believe that discrimination has no place in Maryland or the United States.  We also believe that the Maryland Constitution must continue to ensure equal treatment of ALL Marylanders and not single out a group of people for discrimination. Moreover, we are offended by the effort to politicize a matter of justice by subjecting a basic civil right to a referendum.  It thereby perpetuates discrimination against a particular group of Marylanders as a matter of constitutional law. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Doyle or John Rebstock, Co-Chairs of Progressive Cheverly's General Assembly Committee at (301) 386-9297 or email to TerrenceDoyle@msn.com  or JohnRebstock@msn.com.

Sincerely,

_________________________                      ________________________
David Thorpe, Co-chair                                  Madeleine T. Golde, Co-chair

Cc: Senator Larry Haines, 5th  District
Senator Gwendolyn T. Britt, 47th District

 

{ -back to top- }

 


© 2009-2013 Progressive Cheverly      Progressive Cheverly is an independent citizens’ organization with no affiliation to the government of the Town of Cheverly.
Last modified: 05/18/13