Popular Posts

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

Ireton’s Veto Speech – Overview

My friend, the Mayor of Salisbury, gave one barn burner of a speech this afternoon. Seriously, if you are a fan or student of rhetoric you should request a copy of the prepared text. As I told Jim after the speech, “I didn’t agree with much, but it was one hell of speech.”

That said, Ireton’s speech was long on rhetoric, long on accusation, and short on substance. FYI – we’ll get to the substance tomorrow morning.

The part of Ireton’s speech which stunned me the most was his accusation of micromanagement. First of all, this was taken directly from the bag of tricks loved by his (former?) enemies – Barrie Tilghman and the Dream Team. Secondly, the statement was ridiculous on its face.

Ireton cited the following areas where he claims that the council has attempted to micromanage:

  • Urban Salisbury
  • PAC-14
  • Humane Society
  • Department Heads
  • Mayor’s Office

PAC-14 and the Humane Society are nothing more than funding issues. In both cases the city was bound (by ordinance or contract) to fund both entities at certain levels. In the case of PAC-14, the city overpaid them for years. Rather than ask for the money back, or forgive it, a previous council chose to increase the funding formula. This council has simply decided to go back to the previous funding formula (20% of the franchise fee from Comcast). This isn’t micromanaging; this is deciding how much money to appropriate.

With Urban Salisbury, Ireton is distressed that the council would dare appropriate money AND tell Urban Salisbury how to spend it. Is he advocating that they simply appropriate monies into black holes?

To be honest, I don’t have a clue what Ireton is talking about regarding department heads. Before Ireton was elected mayor, he well understood that the council’s three primary duties were to legislate, to appropriate, and to provide oversight. Now that Jim sits in the big chair, it appears that he believes council should rubberstamp legislation, rubberstamp his budget, and don’t even think about oversight.

As for the Mayor’s Office, again, I’m not sure to what he is referring. Some believe that he is upset that the council dared ask questions about the administration’s failure to advertise the first budget public hearing. While John Pick offered a sincere apology, the council still wanted to know why it took four days to notify council that the error had occurred. Is that really “micromanaging”.

Jim gave us a real barn burner this afternoon. I just wish that he had the facts on his side.

THIS POST IS "STICKY". NEW POSTS BELOW.

30 comments:

  1. Very funny this morning I saw 4 or 5 city workers and 2 city trucks at that intersection just walking around picking up trash and just kind of walking around. I guess now I know why, setting the stage for JIM BO this afternoon for his speech. I am really surprised no sod was put down.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I hope that this stays at the top in the morning.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It may. However, I plan on having a second piece up in the morning which links to this one.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ireton has proven to be a bumbling idiot. Worse than Tilghman.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Definitely repeat this in the morning and have it with the new one. I had no idea what happened today until I read Salisbury News. Thank goodness for you guys!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I hope that this stays at the top in the morning.

    June 7, 2011 10:20 PM
    Blogger G. A. Harrison said...

    It may. However, I plan on having a second piece up in the morning which links to this one.

    June 7, 2011 10:27 PM

    G.A., do us all a favor and quit posting that Copy and Paste crap. Keep it local. PLEASE!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ireton is a Functional Idiot!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon 2304 -

    Can't do it. You're not the only reader. A lot of readers respond to what you call "Copy and Paste" crap.

    Do you think I like spending hour after hour putting that stuff up? First I have to read it and hope that I found items that readers will like.

    Guess what? Doesn't matter whether I like it or not. It's my job and I happen to like my job. I just don't like that part of it.

    I don't like Anonymous comments either. Should I simply bar them? No, because we're here to serve our readers and our advertisers. Our readers definitely want the option to do Anon comments. You obviously like them, so we are trying to accommodate you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. GA --

    Pass the kool-aid, please. Don't you recognize BS when you can see and smell it?

    Why were Dr. Freddy and that zoning guy (and other public employees) doing there -- don't they have things to do?

    How much did Ireton's caper cost the taxpayers?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anon 0002 -

    Valid questions which will be addressed. I still don't understand your "Kool-Aid" comment.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If Jim Ireton is your friend, better watch your back so you don't get a knife in it like Cohen and Campbell did today.

    Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon 1213 -

    Get real! What's he gonna do? Other than attending meetings and meeting each other outside of city government we travel in different circles. He's a Dem. I'm not. He's a self-identified liberal. I'm not. I don't do any business with the city of Salisbury.

    I write about his performance as mayor. Sometimes we agree. Sometimes we don't. He gets a little pissed at me sometimes. We still manage to be friendly. Plus, my wife and kids think as much or more of him than I do.

    Don't read stuff into things that are not there. Too many of us want to put horns and a tail on people we disagree with. If I followed that path, I'd lose half of my friends on the Eastern Shore.

    ReplyDelete
  13. How can you fail to understand what Ireton was referring to regarding "micromanaging department heads?". Everyone knows he wanted Leatherbury as the police chief but the council voted against his wishes which forced him to select Duncan.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'd like to micro-manage jimbo!
    I didn't vote for him. You can have him.
    (To be clear I voted a write-in rather than gary)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous said...

    If Jim Ireton is your friend, better watch your back so you don't get a knife in it like Cohen and Campbell did today.

    Just sayin'.

    June 8, 2011 12:13 AM

    You are exactly right. That bumbling idiot just hurt his career by stabbing Debbie and Terry in the back. That moron has screwed everyone that supported him in his bid for office. When I say everyone I don't mean those clowns he call friends from Rehobeth Beach. His political career is TOAST!!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jim Ireton for Mayor!!


    Mayor of Rehoboth Beach Delaware...that is. Jim pack your bags and make the beach your full time home. You are done in Salisbury.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Interesting choice of location for the "speech". So no one would attend???

    ReplyDelete
  18. Your opinion - not mine. I, for one, was pleased to see the Mayor take a stance against the two Cs and the T. I did not believe he would ever do that. I give him credit for explaining his position on the veto and mostly agree with him. All of this is probably a moot point as the council can ignore Jim's veto and probably will. Jim Ireton truly loves and wants the best for Salisbury

    ReplyDelete
  19. 7:33 If micromanaging got us Chief DUncan (and I don't think it is micromanaging) I/m sure glad that it happened. Our chief is the best thing that has happened to Salisbury in quite a while. Ireton's "position" on vetoing the budget was full of falsehoods and unsubstantiated acusations. He took a play right out of SAPOA's book - don't worry whether it is true, just say it and hope it sticks. Did you attend any meetigns or read the budgets? If so, what are your favorite points?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Seems that Ireton has problems with intelligent women. He actively supported both C's in elections, now that they aren't the rubber stamps he wants, he has problems with it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. We have had a council of 3 left wing liberal democrats in the past few years. If it takes micro managing to pull us back to the real world , then so be it.
    When we are talking about money , the only way to budget is to be precise and accurate. If that is micro managing , then it is good.
    The days of spending like "drunkin sailors" are over.

    ReplyDelete
  22. GA:

    Do you realize that you described Ireton perfectly --

    "Too many of us want to put horns and a tail on people we disagree with."

    ReplyDelete
  23. How ironic, when one of his own departments the neighborhood housing code compliance division, micro manages properties and tells the property owner what they want done to the properity, not what the properity owners knows what needs to be done, to include entering persons homes, even if it is a rental

    ReplyDelete
  24. the understanding with PAC 14 was always at 30% or 1.5 of the 5 percent that the city was collecting in franchise fees... that was the original intent. when the city noticed the ordinance had a typo of 1/5... they corrected it. your claim of PAC 14 taking more than they should have is fabrication.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anon 1217 -

    Where did you come up with that one? I was at the meeting where both bills were passed. In the passage of the first bill, everyone was in agreement on 1/5 (20%).

    Let's assume that this dubious assumption were true. Why was the city still sending checks for 30% when the law clearly stated otherwise (typo or not)?

    Sorry, you lose on this one. The law read 20%. It was only AFTER it was discovered that PAC was being paid 50% more than allowed for by law that the previous council changed the law.

    Seriously - where did you come up with this?

    ReplyDelete
  26. When CT Webster was on council the franchise fee was increased by 1% (I believe from 4% to 5%). He advanced legislation to disignate the 1% to PAC 14. Until the overpayments during the Tilghman, DUnn, Cathcart, Comegys years - a practice that went on for several years in violation of the code - they had received the promised 20% year in and year out. GA is aboslutely right that rather than fix the mistake the previous council increased the amount in the formula and changed the legislation. this simply returns to a range between 20 & 30% based on what the city can afford. 12:17must have the same
    (mis)information sources as Ireton.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 7:03 & 7:06

    Your Rehoboth references are nothing but thinly veiled bigotry.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ireton's micromanaging the Mayors office is in reference to Lore Chambers. He wants to have her reclassified and given a big fat raise while the worker bees suffer furlough days. Lore Chambers is a glorified community organizer and a pet of Barrie Tilghman's. She wouldn't be in her position now if not for Tilghman.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anon 12:02 IMO Dr. Freddy was there because he is Jim Boy's employer and I'm sure Jim Boy had to put on a show for him to prove he is working hard to get that intersection funded so Dr. Freddy can run buses down Onley Road. Jim Boy probably assured Dr. Freddy that this was a DUNN deal.

    ReplyDelete
  30. That roadis already a cluster, why add 100 school buses?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.