Every one has a right to an opinion. They should also attempt to gather some facts before they express it. This was (again) the case in two op-ed’s in today’s Daily Times which criticize the Salisbury city council over their recent budget vote. Both the DT and my friend Muir Boda should do a little fact checking before expressing opinions based on politics rather than fact.
The Daily Time’s editorial (I presume by Susan Parker) argues in favor of Mayor Jim Ireton’s spending priorities. That’s fine. However, the criticism of council used as “evidence” for this argument is based on multiple false assumptions.
The DT argues that Ireton’s plan to furlough police officers is “fair”. I would argue that the citizens who are victims of crime don’t care much about fair. Furloughing officers actually costs the city more money because of increased overtime. There is also a problem with Ireton’s (and apparently the DT’s) populist misconception that all public employees are created equal. Any city with Salisbury’s crime rate needs MORE, not fewer, officers on the streets.
The DT also argues:
In addition, the propensity of this council to spend its time revisiting decisions made by previous councils is alarmingly reminiscent of the situation a decade ago, when Lavonzella Siggers was council president and a massive backlog of work resulted from an apparent inability of that council to make decisions and move forward.
A prime example: The Bateman Street / Onley Road intersection needs to be upgraded. The city agreed to upgrade it. The high school is the least of the reasons why that project should already be under way. Delaying it now amounts to kicking the can down the road for someone else to deal with. Putting it off is a dereliction of duty on the part of the council.
First of all, this council is working diligently to eradicate the logjam of old business left by the Barrie Comegys council. Second, it was the PREVIOUS council which rejected the Ireton / BOE plan for Bateman Street / Onley Road. This council agreed to re-visit the matter at the request of the mayor. Unless the DT is arguing that the city council should be a “rubber stamp” for the Ireton administration, there is zero merit in their complaint.
In a related Letter to the Editor, two time council candidate Muir Boda is playing fast and loose with his facts.
Boda agrees with abolishing police furloughs. He attacks the “process” and “lack of communication” with the mayor’s office. Muir should do a little research.
There were TWO public hearings on the budget. He seems to ignore the first. Technically, this is fair because the mayor’s office (NOT the council) failed to meet the advertising requirement. This is why a second hearing was needed. Any “lack of communication” come from the mayor’s office, not the council. If Ireton cannot get what he wants, he simply refuses to answer questions. Worse, he forbids city employees from doing so as well. This is evidenced by the recent cancellation of a scheduled meeting between the city attorney and the council. This was strictly for the purpose of keeping council up to date. However, Ireton would rather play the role of a spoiled child than the office to which he was elected.
Boda decries the “rush” to override the veto:
I am also concerned that the council was so quick to schedule an emergency session to override the mayor's veto. This was not an emergency; June 30 would have been considered an emergency, not June 8. There still would have been plenty of time to for the council to reach out to the mayor to work on getting the budget to a point where all could have agreed.
Check your facts. The budget had to be passed by June 15 (NOT June 30). Any override vote would have been scheduled for the regular council meeting to be held on June 13. However, because Councilwoman Shanie Shields had already gone against her own word and voted against the budget, a meeting had to be scheduled to assure the presence of all four council members who did vote for it.
Because councilwoman Debbie Campbell had to leave town on business, waiting until Monday would have been disastrous – unless you only care about upholding the mayor’s veto. That’s politics, not process.
Boda also argues that the council should not have voted on the budget immediately after a public hearing. I would agree. However, that is a political decision. It is not a public policy decision. The few amendments which came forward that night were of a technical nature to keep the budget in balance. They had nothing to do with spending priorities.
Both the Daily Times and Boda should be honest in their criticism of the Salisbury council. Their arguments are political ones that they attempt to wrap up in the paper and bows of “public policy”, “spending priorities”, and “transparency”. While I may not agree with all of council’s polices, or priorities, there is no question that they are attempting to do what is right for the taxpayers of Salisbury. As for transparency, any criticism of that is so ridiculous as to make even the least informed citizen laugh. These criticisms smack of political opportunism and nothing more.
G. A. Harrison is the Managing Editor of “Salisbury News”. “Delmarva Dealings” appears each Wednesday and Sunday at Noon on SbyNEWS.com.
19600903
18 comments:
The Mayor needs to stop acting like a whiny petulant child whenever he doesn't get his way. He also needs to get off the Downtown kick. Downtown will never be a major retail center again and everyone needs to get over it. It can be a successful home to small local shops and businesses, but there needs to be more of a residential component to support it. As for Onley Road, well gee - just because somebody in the past said to spend money, well I guess we better spend it! All that work on College Avenue and the side streets nearby was done to support school traffic. College Avenue has always been the main traffic access to the school since day one, and that time and money would not have been spent on College Avenue if it were not intended to remain that way.
This was an excellent post!!
Thank you GA for your view of what is in the DT's today.
Well Said, GA. Might I ad, I am glad to have your sharp pen posting along with Joe's.
Your ability to make a well constructed point with logic and facts casts a long shadow on the pretenders out there, including the so called main stream media in this town.
Cheers.
How can the DT accuse anyone of transparency when they routinely REFUSE to sign their Op/Eds?
Further, how do their writers justify not signing their Op/Eds? Where does that policy come from?
Bota's editorial made me real glad that Laura Mitchell got more votes than he did.
Excellent post. After reading this garbage from the daily times, combined with the Boda's I wanna be on the bandwagon tooooo letter, it is obvious that Jim Ireton has pulled together his team of enemies to bash the new council, but really Terry Cohen. It officially started with Ireton whining to the paper about long meetings right after the swearing in. The messages are all the same from Ireton and these folks - Shanie Shields, Muir Boda, the daily times, Ireton. Your post really brings that to light.
Wish like hell Bob Caldwell had gotten in. Ireton has conned us all and he's willing to smear others to get what he wants. A real combination of Louise Smith and Barrie Tilghman.
I think that in the short time that this council has had together, they've done a lot of work, and done it well. Cranking stuff out the door as quickly as possible isn't its job. Making good and forward thinking decisions based on research and observation is. This sometimes requires that past decisions be reexamined.
In all reality, SBY news could take the advice of your post. There have been many posts that were not factually based, and posted based on rumor.
7:19 said...
This sometimes requires that past decisions be reexamined.
-----
Yes they do and Ireton only seems to have a problem with it when it doesn't suit him. The old council said a big fat NO! to Only Road. Cohen and the new council said let's see if there is some way to get this resolved. Maybe the new council should have told him sorry we don't revisit old decisions on that one.
Ireton is spitting in the face of a council trying to work with him. His foes must be loving this, using his ego against him. He'll be a one-term mayor, you watch. Either he'll be such an ass even Mike Dunn can beat him or he'll cut and run. Ireton can take his sister Shanie with him. I just pray Debbie Campbell runs again or else we'll be stuck with Boda who showed his true colors again.
7:19 - how true and well said.
Speaking of Jim Ireton, while I was listening to the city councils work session on mpg is appears Jim Ireton sent the email while on the clock with the Wicomico County Board of Education. If that is the case then the Board Members need to dig into this and find out why is doing City business while getting paid by the County taxpayers. I am sure this is happening all the time and no one has called him out on it yet.
Listen to where Shamey blasts Cohen and Campbell and states where she wished her term was over. She is so F*N stupid I guarantee Ireton set her up and used her just like Barrie Comegys did.
http://www.ci.salisbury.md.us/CityClerk/BriefingBook/6911.mp3
Anon 1701 -
To be fair, a paper's lead editorial is supposed to represent the paper's "editorial board" and usually isn't signed. Personally, I don't have a problem with that UNLESS you have someone like Erick Sahler writing an editorial regarding the WCBOE.
I still would love to know who wrote the now infamous "Jihadist" editorial. Unless Susan Parker looks me in the eye and tells me she wrote it, I'll never believe it. While I disagree with her often, I know her to be better than that.
*****************
Anon 1940 -
Point to one that I have written which did not disclose the fact that it was a rumor or "someone said". There's the difference. You, as the reader, share in the responsibility. If I disclose where a claim comes from, you have to decide whether or not to give it weight.
In this post I pointed to items that were represented as FACT and that were simply not true.
You have a ton of nerve asking someone to check the facts prior to reporting. Hypocrites.
anonymous 5:43, LOL, and you're anonymous. Too funny!
I knew G.A. would be all over that BS editorial as soon as I read it- great job! Facts are;we need cops,and school buses have no business anywhere but College Ave.
Ireton appears to be imploding, and not so gradually. Attacking, no, smearing the council majority, his former allies, is reprehensible.
Funny how the Daily Disappointment, formerly and not so fondly known as the Tilghman Times, now favors Ireton. I guess the editorial board simply kisses the ring of whomever is mayor.
Cohen and Campbell are the best thing to happen in this town in decades- Thanks for your vision and leadership,ladies!
Boring!
Post a Comment