As much good as the Northampton Board of Supervisors does, after looking at the online documents and listening to the voice recording, they badly fumbled a simple citizens safety request at their Sept. 14 meeting.
The citizens of a waterfront neighborhood at the very end of a branch of Nassawadox Creek, who had been experiencing high-speed boaters, applied for a no-wake zone. Mr. Kruck, one of the petitioners, said that the petitioners were concerned for family safety while boating, kayaking, and canoeing, and concern for the speeders’ contributions to shoreline erosion in a shallow creek. Picture evidence of both was presented. The citizen petitioners noted that approval of the no-wake zone would cost the county nothing and that the petitioners were required to bear the cost.
The board seemed confused and more concerned about who would police speeders, and that if this no-wake was approved, there would be more applications put before them. This is sad.
Supervisor Mapp made two outlandish statements. She first said that if approved, no-wake would slow boaters down while going between point A and B, with B being the end of the creek. Ha! That seems to be the point of the petition.
Also, Supervisor Mapp seemed to suggest to the petitioners a vigilante approach to solving their problem by chasing and stopping boat speeders. Mapp’s suggested vigilante approach in this day and time would likely cause conflicts, or get someone hurt or put in jail. This showed a true disregard by Supervisor Mapp for solving a for public safety issue.
Only one citizen objected — a person who also has the last name of Mapp. This citizen said that he knew more about what was going on in the waterfront neighborhood than anyone else, even though he said he was not a resident. He refuted the picture evidence of speeding boaters and the effect of speeders on shoreline erosion, even though he admitted recently having installed a shoreline protection project. This is most confusing!
This was a true fumble by the Northampton Board of Supervisors, who decided not to vote on the issue. Logic says that a no-wake at the end of a shallow creek costing the county nothing, enhances public safety! Come on, supervisors!
Petitioners you should REAPPLY; this no-wake benefits us all.
R. A. Masursky,