As Tuesday's Salisbury municipal election approaches, certain things are becoming clear and more questions are being raised. Mayoral candidate Gary Comegys and his supporters are showing their desperation by disseminating the most vile and hateful trash about Jim Ireton; that is clear. The city's slumlords are throwing thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars to illegally benefit the Barrie Comegys ticket of Gary Comegys, Muir Boda, and Shanie Shields. District 2 council candidate Muir Boda continues to make statements which raise multiple questions. However, they can all be summarized by this - Would Muir Boda simply be a younger, more masculine version of Louise Smith if elected to council?
Remember back two years ago. Louise Smith ran for office promising to bring some financial sanity and accountability to Salisbury government. We were told that Louise Smith would ensure that the city's audits would be done on time and that city contractors would be held accountable.
What did Salisbury citizens receive? Over $10 million of taxpayers money was improperly accounted for. The city has yet to deliver an audit on time. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars have been thrown at contractors for change orders for the WWTP and we now know that it doesn't work. Smith's first two concerns as a council member were to cut a deal with Gary Comegys in order to be council president and to vote for a charter change enabling a 17% tax increase.
Much to my shame, I actively supported Smith's candidacy. While I like Boda personally, I'm not willing to make the same mistake twice. I'm a huge believer in the old adage:
Back to now. Muir Boda has run on a platform that claims he will bring "civility" back to the city council. He and his supporters claim that he will bring his "extensive knowledge and leadership" to city government. He claims that he will be a good fiscal steward of the taxpayers money. Is there any basis for these claims?
CIVILITY?
Boda claims that he would reach out to other members of council and form coalitiions. This sounds marvelous in theory. However, if you look at what actually happens on the Salisbury city council one thing is clear - the only way to actually accomplish this wonderful ideal is to act as a rubber stamp for the executive. Legislation is rammed through without vetting in a work session. Often it lands in the lap of council hours, or even minutes, before the start of meeting.
Therefore, if you take Boda at his word he is sitting on the horns of a dilemma. Either you rubber stamp the will of the executive or you demand adequate information. However, Boda implies that it is these demands for adequate information and refusals to appropriate taxpayers' money on the word of the mayor are not civil.
I am confident that Mr. Boda will claim that this is false. However, the record indicates otherwise. He would be hard pressed to find one instance of his opponent, Councilwoman Debbie Campbell, acting in any manner which meets the normal definitions of rude or uncivil behavior.
Boda's definitiion of incivility appears to be any policy disagreement with the executive. As such, we can only conclude that a councilman Boda would simply serve as a rubber stamp for the city's mayor, albeit a polite rubber stamp with a smile on his face.
In addition, Boda has a propensity for trying to have his cake and eat it too on this issue. While not using Campbell's name, he compared her (and others, like myself) to Saddam Hussein because Campbell believes that any entity (such as PAC-14) which receives large amounts of the taxpayers' money should be accountable to the taxpayer. He denies this through his unofficial spokesperson Jonathan Taylor but anyone who paid attention to Boda's interview with Phil Tilghman knows that this is accurate. Additionally, and more gravely, Boda allowed himself to become affiliated with the unofficial blog of the Barrie Comegys ticket - initially as an open contributor. This publication has committed every offense imaginable from publishing a picture of Joe Albero in blackface to gay bashing to simply posting lies (which are too numerous to post here).
Boda will undoubtedly argue that he can't be held responsible the actions of others. I would usually agree. However, his opponent has never written on Delmarva Dealings or Salisbury News. While I can only take responsibility for what I write, neither I nor Joe Albero have ever been guilty of the outrageous and scurrilous hate and fear mongering proffered by Boda's unofficial campaign blog. ... and I readily admit that Albero, and even I, have been outrageous in the past.
KNOWLEDGE and LEADERSHIP?
I am somewhat reluctant to tackle this subject at the risk of being accused of being mean. However, since Boda has made this a cornerstone of his campaign it does need to be examined.
Knowledge
Typical of several letters of support for Boda is this one from former county councilman Marvin Long. We needn't discuss Long's performance on county council to evaluate whether or not he is a good judge of Boda's qualifications.
As someone who never attended a city council meeting or work session prior to his candidacy, how can we seriously believe that Boda offers in depth knowledge of the workings of Salisbury government? If you get past the platitudes and actually listen to the few times which Boda has made substative comments, you quickly realize that his "extensive knowledge" of city government consists of a weekend course at the Barrie Comegys School of Municipal Governance along with reading the abridge edition of Bubbanomics.
Boda claims that county and city monies derived from the franchise fee are "not the taxpayers' money". If we agree with this argument we must also agree with the equally bizarre propositions that renters do not deserve city services because they do not DIRECTLY pay property taxes; or that monies collected from the lodging tax really belong to the people who stay in hotel room and do not belong to the county's taxpayers.
Boda has argued repeatedly that the now infamous 4-2 (4-3?) ordinance caused rental properties to be spread throughout the city. The claim is that enforcement of this ordinance caused an increased demand for the number of rental units. This argument may found in chapter 6 of Bubbanomics.
There are only a few problems with this specious argument. For starters, all of the existing rental properties were grandfathered. Therefore, no additional demand could possibly come due to this law. Perhaps Mr. Boda meant to argue that what the city really needed was MORE illegal conversions. Given that his friend Barrie Tilghman never allowed the law to be enforced to begin with, that argument doesn't hold. There have been ample illegal conversions since the passage of 4-2 and it's amendment to 4-3.
I honestly don't wish to ridicule Mr. Boda. He seems like a fine young man. He is no doubt bright. However, Muir needs to understand a basic concept - there is a distinct difference between intelligence and knowledge. You can be the most intelligent guy in the world, yet not possess knowledge of a particular subject because of lack of experience, training, or education. Unlike Boda's unofficial spokesperson Jonathan Taylor, who is void of both intelligence and knowledge, Muir needs to take the time to learn a little before he should claim to posses the answers to the city's problems. Barring that, he merely provides more evidence to my argument that Boda would be a simple rubber stamp for a Comegys administration (or lackey of an incumbent councilman Comegys).
Leadership
I know that Boda is a youth group leader at his his church. Unfortunately, that is not the kind of leadership needed in city government.
Leadership is not only the ability to work with others. It is also the willingness to stand firm despite the will of the majority - when you know that you are right. It would be unfair to say that this is where Boda falls short. We simply don't know. He has no public record. However, this appears to be another case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
Boda criticizes Mrs. Campbell for "120 NO votes". Let's put that in context. Almost everyone of those votes falls into one of three categories:
One of the cornerstones of Boda's campaign is the claim that he will be a good fiscal steward. If this is the case, then why is he criticizing Campbell's votes against wasteful government spending? Again, there seem to be a few flaws here, but Muir certainly isn't showing "leadership" by any normal or normative definition.
Does Boda believe that appropriating money without adequate information is a good idea? If he does, then he fails on the third leg of his campaign stool - fiscal stewardship. If he doesn't, then why is he criticizing Campbell?
The answer to these three questions is apparant. It's not that Muir Boda is a bad guy. This is just what he was taught at the Barrie Comegys School of Municipal Governance and he simply doesn't know better.
However, there is one thing that is obvious. IF Boda currently possesed the type of leadership ability necessary to be an effective legislator he would not have fallen into this trap.
Another point on a slightly more personal note. As we have witnessed during this campaign, Boda's supporters and his dear pal Jonathan Taylor have engaged in some pretty horrendous behavior. We have heard everything from accusations of Jim Ireton's moral unfitness to be mayor to implications that Boda's opponent had engaged in an immoral behavior.
I would be wrong to question the sincerity of Muir's beliefs as a Christian. Therefore, I can only question his fitness as a leader if he permits friends, advisors and supporters to engage in seriously questionable behavior without some form of rebuke or denouncement. This has obviously not occured because the behavior has not only continued, it has worsened as we approach Tuesday. Yet, Muir continues to be the beneficiary of illegal campaign expenditures, he continues to take support from people engaging in a panoply of lies and character assasination and continues to accept the "help" and support of an individual who has shown himself to be a moral bankrupt.
Is this leadership?
A GOOD FISCAL STEWARD?
We have pretty much covered this in parts I and II. However, to recap:
Boda, like Louise Smith before him, has no public record. We can only take him at his word. Therein lies the problem.
No, I am not accusing Boda of being a liar. There is no evidence of that. What I am stating is that there is too much evidence that Boda would be a Comegys tool on council whether Comegys is elected mayor or not. Comegys' fiscal record is well known and not something to be proud of. In addition, we have Boda's criticism of Campbells votes againt a property tax increase, against water and sewer rate hikes and against myriad examples of wasteful and ineffective spending by the Barrie Comegys team.
While I have no doubt that Muir Boda INTENDS to be a good and faithful steward if elected, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Without an adequate knowledge base, without the leadership qualities required to stand firm against the wrong current, can we expect Muir Boda to succeed as an effective city councilman?
Remember back two years ago. Louise Smith ran for office promising to bring some financial sanity and accountability to Salisbury government. We were told that Louise Smith would ensure that the city's audits would be done on time and that city contractors would be held accountable.
What did Salisbury citizens receive? Over $10 million of taxpayers money was improperly accounted for. The city has yet to deliver an audit on time. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars have been thrown at contractors for change orders for the WWTP and we now know that it doesn't work. Smith's first two concerns as a council member were to cut a deal with Gary Comegys in order to be council president and to vote for a charter change enabling a 17% tax increase.
Much to my shame, I actively supported Smith's candidacy. While I like Boda personally, I'm not willing to make the same mistake twice. I'm a huge believer in the old adage:
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Back to now. Muir Boda has run on a platform that claims he will bring "civility" back to the city council. He and his supporters claim that he will bring his "extensive knowledge and leadership" to city government. He claims that he will be a good fiscal steward of the taxpayers money. Is there any basis for these claims?
CIVILITY?
Boda claims that he would reach out to other members of council and form coalitiions. This sounds marvelous in theory. However, if you look at what actually happens on the Salisbury city council one thing is clear - the only way to actually accomplish this wonderful ideal is to act as a rubber stamp for the executive. Legislation is rammed through without vetting in a work session. Often it lands in the lap of council hours, or even minutes, before the start of meeting.
Therefore, if you take Boda at his word he is sitting on the horns of a dilemma. Either you rubber stamp the will of the executive or you demand adequate information. However, Boda implies that it is these demands for adequate information and refusals to appropriate taxpayers' money on the word of the mayor are not civil.
I am confident that Mr. Boda will claim that this is false. However, the record indicates otherwise. He would be hard pressed to find one instance of his opponent, Councilwoman Debbie Campbell, acting in any manner which meets the normal definitions of rude or uncivil behavior.
Boda's definitiion of incivility appears to be any policy disagreement with the executive. As such, we can only conclude that a councilman Boda would simply serve as a rubber stamp for the city's mayor, albeit a polite rubber stamp with a smile on his face.
In addition, Boda has a propensity for trying to have his cake and eat it too on this issue. While not using Campbell's name, he compared her (and others, like myself) to Saddam Hussein because Campbell believes that any entity (such as PAC-14) which receives large amounts of the taxpayers' money should be accountable to the taxpayer. He denies this through his unofficial spokesperson Jonathan Taylor but anyone who paid attention to Boda's interview with Phil Tilghman knows that this is accurate. Additionally, and more gravely, Boda allowed himself to become affiliated with the unofficial blog of the Barrie Comegys ticket - initially as an open contributor. This publication has committed every offense imaginable from publishing a picture of Joe Albero in blackface to gay bashing to simply posting lies (which are too numerous to post here).
Boda will undoubtedly argue that he can't be held responsible the actions of others. I would usually agree. However, his opponent has never written on Delmarva Dealings or Salisbury News. While I can only take responsibility for what I write, neither I nor Joe Albero have ever been guilty of the outrageous and scurrilous hate and fear mongering proffered by Boda's unofficial campaign blog. ... and I readily admit that Albero, and even I, have been outrageous in the past.
KNOWLEDGE and LEADERSHIP?
I am somewhat reluctant to tackle this subject at the risk of being accused of being mean. However, since Boda has made this a cornerstone of his campaign it does need to be examined.
Knowledge
Typical of several letters of support for Boda is this one from former county councilman Marvin Long. We needn't discuss Long's performance on county council to evaluate whether or not he is a good judge of Boda's qualifications.
As someone who never attended a city council meeting or work session prior to his candidacy, how can we seriously believe that Boda offers in depth knowledge of the workings of Salisbury government? If you get past the platitudes and actually listen to the few times which Boda has made substative comments, you quickly realize that his "extensive knowledge" of city government consists of a weekend course at the Barrie Comegys School of Municipal Governance along with reading the abridge edition of Bubbanomics.
Boda claims that county and city monies derived from the franchise fee are "not the taxpayers' money". If we agree with this argument we must also agree with the equally bizarre propositions that renters do not deserve city services because they do not DIRECTLY pay property taxes; or that monies collected from the lodging tax really belong to the people who stay in hotel room and do not belong to the county's taxpayers.
Boda has argued repeatedly that the now infamous 4-2 (4-3?) ordinance caused rental properties to be spread throughout the city. The claim is that enforcement of this ordinance caused an increased demand for the number of rental units. This argument may found in chapter 6 of Bubbanomics.
There are only a few problems with this specious argument. For starters, all of the existing rental properties were grandfathered. Therefore, no additional demand could possibly come due to this law. Perhaps Mr. Boda meant to argue that what the city really needed was MORE illegal conversions. Given that his friend Barrie Tilghman never allowed the law to be enforced to begin with, that argument doesn't hold. There have been ample illegal conversions since the passage of 4-2 and it's amendment to 4-3.
I honestly don't wish to ridicule Mr. Boda. He seems like a fine young man. He is no doubt bright. However, Muir needs to understand a basic concept - there is a distinct difference between intelligence and knowledge. You can be the most intelligent guy in the world, yet not possess knowledge of a particular subject because of lack of experience, training, or education. Unlike Boda's unofficial spokesperson Jonathan Taylor, who is void of both intelligence and knowledge, Muir needs to take the time to learn a little before he should claim to posses the answers to the city's problems. Barring that, he merely provides more evidence to my argument that Boda would be a simple rubber stamp for a Comegys administration (or lackey of an incumbent councilman Comegys).
Leadership
I know that Boda is a youth group leader at his his church. Unfortunately, that is not the kind of leadership needed in city government.
Leadership is not only the ability to work with others. It is also the willingness to stand firm despite the will of the majority - when you know that you are right. It would be unfair to say that this is where Boda falls short. We simply don't know. He has no public record. However, this appears to be another case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
Boda criticizes Mrs. Campbell for "120 NO votes". Let's put that in context. Almost everyone of those votes falls into one of three categories:
- A vote against raising taxes, rates or fees.
- A vote against wasteful government spending.
- A vote against a particular bill because the administration refused to provide adequate time and / or information to make an informed judgment.
One of the cornerstones of Boda's campaign is the claim that he will be a good fiscal steward. If this is the case, then why is he criticizing Campbell's votes against wasteful government spending? Again, there seem to be a few flaws here, but Muir certainly isn't showing "leadership" by any normal or normative definition.
Does Boda believe that appropriating money without adequate information is a good idea? If he does, then he fails on the third leg of his campaign stool - fiscal stewardship. If he doesn't, then why is he criticizing Campbell?
The answer to these three questions is apparant. It's not that Muir Boda is a bad guy. This is just what he was taught at the Barrie Comegys School of Municipal Governance and he simply doesn't know better.
However, there is one thing that is obvious. IF Boda currently possesed the type of leadership ability necessary to be an effective legislator he would not have fallen into this trap.
Another point on a slightly more personal note. As we have witnessed during this campaign, Boda's supporters and his dear pal Jonathan Taylor have engaged in some pretty horrendous behavior. We have heard everything from accusations of Jim Ireton's moral unfitness to be mayor to implications that Boda's opponent had engaged in an immoral behavior.
I would be wrong to question the sincerity of Muir's beliefs as a Christian. Therefore, I can only question his fitness as a leader if he permits friends, advisors and supporters to engage in seriously questionable behavior without some form of rebuke or denouncement. This has obviously not occured because the behavior has not only continued, it has worsened as we approach Tuesday. Yet, Muir continues to be the beneficiary of illegal campaign expenditures, he continues to take support from people engaging in a panoply of lies and character assasination and continues to accept the "help" and support of an individual who has shown himself to be a moral bankrupt.
Is this leadership?
A GOOD FISCAL STEWARD?
We have pretty much covered this in parts I and II. However, to recap:
Boda, like Louise Smith before him, has no public record. We can only take him at his word. Therein lies the problem.
No, I am not accusing Boda of being a liar. There is no evidence of that. What I am stating is that there is too much evidence that Boda would be a Comegys tool on council whether Comegys is elected mayor or not. Comegys' fiscal record is well known and not something to be proud of. In addition, we have Boda's criticism of Campbells votes againt a property tax increase, against water and sewer rate hikes and against myriad examples of wasteful and ineffective spending by the Barrie Comegys team.
While I have no doubt that Muir Boda INTENDS to be a good and faithful steward if elected, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Without an adequate knowledge base, without the leadership qualities required to stand firm against the wrong current, can we expect Muir Boda to succeed as an effective city councilman?
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=17154890-9a51-8c0f-9c18-4384453bb248)
8 comments:
Boda has not only criticized Mrs. Campbell for her "120 no votes", he has also very strongly implied that those votes indicate an inability on Campbell's part to get along with her fellow council members. As a result of such statements, I agree with your assertion in this article, G.A., that Boda has demonstrated a lack of leadership ability and possibly a few character flaws.
In addition, I would also submit that the utterance of such asinine statements by Mr. Boda indicate a lack of ability to think logically. If he is criticizing a "no" vote merely because it was a "no", that's as illogical as if I were to say to a friend, "I can't believe Senator Cardin voted no back in February." My friend then says to me, "What was the vote on?"...to which I reply, "I don't know, but he votes no way too much. That guy can't get along with his fellow Senators." My friend would think me irrational at best, just plain stupid at worst.
While I don't (necessarily) think Boda is stupid, I DO think such irresponsible statements cast his logical thinking ability into a dubious light. And a council member who cannot think logically is exactly what we do NOT need more of...the current three (Comegys, Shields, and Smith) who share that trait are quite enough. One more like that is one more than Salisbury can stand.
As for Boda's contention that Mrs. Campbell can't get along with her fellow council members, I only wish I had the chance to ask him in person on a televised interview some pointed questions like, "How would you react if you had to file FIAs in order to get access to the same documents council majority gets - MERELY BECAUSE THEY PERSONALLY DISLIKE YOU AND WISH TO IMPEDE YOUR ABILITY TO DO YOUR JOB ON COUNCIL?" I'd also like to hear his response to, "Sir, how would you deal with something like Resolution 1672, which was designed to change the council’s Rules of Order to limit debate at council meetings? How would you go about working harmoniously with fellow council members on a resolution like that, knowing that it is directed specifically towards you and one other council member? Would you vote yes on it in order to show how well you get along with others on council?” Or how about something like, “How would you as a councilman effectively represent the interests of your constituents – not the Mayor, but your constituents – when the Mayor throws proposed legislation in your face at the last minute and council’s Rules of Order then limits your debate time to…ohhhh let’s say 10 minutes total per motion?” I wonder just how much stuttering and blather would be forthcoming to such questions?
Well, let me spare Mr. Boda the embarrassment by stating the hard, logical facts as they are: Just as G.A. has suggested in this article, you cannot have your cake and eat it too, Mr. Would-Be Councilman. If you were elected, you would end up either kissing the behinds of council majority and rubber stamping whatever they put before you OR you would have to question, debate, discuss, and (sin of ALL sins) vote “no” way more than you think you would. That’s just how it is, sir. You can criticize Mrs. Campbell for not “getting along” all you want to. It doesn’t change the facts of life with how things are on that city council as it now exists.
On the subject of things such as wisdom and the ability to make sound choices, I will merely point to your association with the likes of Jonathan Taylor, which I feel says a lot in itself. As G.A. has noted in his article, you choose not to disassociate yourself from a “man” of his low level – a “man” who makes scandalous (to put it mildly) accusations against Mr. Ireton and Mrs. Campbell – a “man” who thinks that creating ludicrous (and often obscene) Photoshop pictures of those he despises is an intelligent, effective, and acceptable form of political discourse due to his inability to compose two coherent, typo-free sentences in a row – a “man” who is so stupid that he can’t even issue his idle threats without resorting to wearing a mask on camera. Mr. Boda, this association of yours ALONE tells me about all I need to know about your wisdom and ability to make sound choices.
No, when I stop to add up all the points I’ve made in this post – and the thought provoking ones made by G.A. in his article – the answer I come up with is crystal clear.
That answer is NOT a vote for Muir Boda.
Boda = wolf in sheep's clothing!
HE must work at Barries Fruitland WalMart.
You lie down with dogs,you are going to get fleas......
Boda has shown that he is using the same playbook as Louise Smith. He cozied up and acted like a supporter of Debbie Campbell's, all the while planning to undermine her.
G.A., you might not want to say it, but I will: This is not Christian behavior. It is deceit. I don't know what church Boda learned this from, but my church taught me not to be deceitful.
Everything out of his mouth has been Gary Comegys. Like Louise Smith, he's lied about not being aligned with anyone.
Lying isn't Christian. I resent people who use my religion to justify their lies. Barrie Tilghman, Louise Smith and Shanie Shields all like to spout how Christian they are.
Really. What would Jesus say? I miss my old Pastor Evans. He would have plenty to say about this!
1:47 ANON - excellent question: What would Jesus say? I don't know, but for some reason the following quotes come to mind:
"You will know them by their fruits..." (Matthew 7:16)
"A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit." (Matt. 7:17)
As 1:47 pointed out, Boda has practiced lies and deceit. Are these "good fruits?"
And if they're not good fruits, wouldn't that mean that Boda is a bad tree, according to Jesus?
Just a thought.
I just read Boda's comments in the Daily Times today. They made me MAD! According to this holier-than-thou know it all, all our problems are due to not getting along. He's the one who needs to grow up. Let him try having a different viewpoint than his handlers. Then we'll see how he feels about he's treated.
MY biggest problem is crime and lousy spending, not whether the council members drink together.
Check this out:
1. Top problem
Overall the top problem is the all or nothing attitude many have in government. Taking one representative's political decision and making it personal is a failure of one's fiduciary responsibility as an elected official. Each representative is required by the electorate to work with all on the council and to work with the Office of the Mayor in a respectable manner.
2. Government divide
YES. The tiresome divisiveness must end. The citizens elect adults to serve as representatives, yet the actions and words over the years have been very immature. If officials can leave the personal vindictive attitudes out of government and focus on what is best for the City, then we can begin the healing process.
This guy hangs with vile blogger guy?
Hippo-crites!
Manure Scrotum actually looks more like Louise with a bald head, I mean she already has the beard. ROFLMAO
Post a Comment