Laura Mitchell is the chameleon of the Salisbury City Council. She claims that she is a “moderate voice” who wishes to “listens to everyone”. Her actions since becoming a councilwoman tell a slightly different story. Mitchell appears to be a political opportunist who will do or say ANYTHING yet cannot back up her attacks on fellow councilmembers with something that even resembles a fact.
Mitchell’s swan song was Tuesday’s special session to vote on “The Bricks” project. Mitchell attempted to twist facts and weave stories from whole cloth while claiming that “she just wants to get along”. You can’t have it both ways. Attacking your colleagues without real evidence is not “getting along”.
Mitchell offered what she claimed to be a chronology of events leading up yesterday’s vote. Well … it was a chronology. It just wasn’t a FACTUAL chronology.
Like her pal Mayor Jim Ireton, Mitchell argues that the city council has approved “The Bricks” project multiple times. This is not true. Mitchell argues that each time the council agreed to move forward with discussion in a work session, this was somehow an approval. In listing each “approval”, Mitchell deliberately left out the fact that these were work session discussions. Near the end of her list, she inserts that the May meeting was a work session. However, she implies that the other “approvals” were actual legislative sessions and that these were “votes” (there were no real votes taken.
Using Mitchell’s “logic”, the council cannot continue discussion on any item without taking the risk of being viewed as committing the city to a particular action. This is not only ridiculous, but hypocritical. I wonder what Mitchell’s response would be if the council had refused to discuss Bateman / Olney Road (at Mitchell’s instigation)? She would probably have whined like the Mayor has.
THE CONTRACT
Mitchell took great pains to defend former council president Louise Smith and her execution of a contract regarding “The Bricks”. Mitchell states that it was “legitimate and appropriate” for Smith to sign the contract. Was it?
Maybe, but probably not. First of all, Smith attested that this contract had been “Approved by Council”. It wasn’t. Mitchell even had to admit this after the meeting.
Second, this contract was only legitimate if it cost the city nothing (it had to be under $25,000 or council approval is required). As we all now know, this contract is costing the city $75,000. It would only cost zero IF the city went through with the project. However, council had NEVER agreed to this. Mitchell knew this YET tried to claim otherwise. Mitchell’s credo seems to be, “Why state the truth when you can make cheap political points”.
CALLING OUT HER COLLEAGUES
Mitchell’s public mantra is that she “gets along with everyone”. She goes about it in an interesting way. Rather than debating an issue and agreeing to disagree, Mitchell prefers to play to the cameras and attack her colleagues in the press. Sure, I definitely see how that’s “getting along with everyone”.
… we’re doing that on a lot of projects and a lot of contracts and I think that is endangering a lot of our partnerships and our word, the value of our word as a city and it’s going to hinder our ability to get partnerships and grants in the future.In two recent Daily Times articles Mitchell states basically the same thing:
"I'm afraid this is stagnating the council and making the city's word useless," Mitchell said. "We had agreements, people acted in good faith on those agreements, and we need to do the same thing."
On Tuesday Mitchell stated basically the same thing on WMDT. There’s just one small problem. When I asked Mitchell to name ONE instance of the current council attempting to undo the actions of a previous council regarding a contract she couldn’t answer.
To be precise, Mitchell stated, “My head isn’t there right now. I’ve been working so hard on this Bricks thing. I’d have to go home and thing about it. I’ll call you this evening.
It’s 24 hours later and we have not received a response from Mitchell.
- You can’t argue that reversing or changing the actions of past councils is de facto wrong. Nearly every piece of legislation that council looks at is reversing or changing the actions of some previous council.
- You can’t use the two instances of PAC-14 funding and Poplar Hill Mansion as examples of the current council “unraveling the work of past councils” UNLESS you are willing to admit that you can never change the funding of any city department, agency, or partner. This is not only ridiculous, but eliminates the need for a city council.
I sincerely believe that Mitchell would best serve herself, and her constituents, by keeping her mouth shut for a few months. It makes it difficult for her council colleagues to want to work with her when they are under constant attack from her. What makes matters worse is that Mitchell’s arguments are false and I believe she knew so at the time she said these things.
One thing is certain, Mitchell will use ANY opportunity to exploit her cause when the press are around. Where I grew up we had a word for grandstanding political opportunists like Mitchell. I just can’t use it here. I don’t want Albero busting me for violating my own rules.
G. A. Harrison is the Managing Editor of “Salisbury News”. “Delmarva Dealings” appears each Wednesday and Sunday at SbyNEWS.com.
14 comments:
It has become painfully obvious, almost since day one following the election, that Laura Mitchell is the council's new problem child.
Someone once said - "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up."
"Mind is already made up." That is so true...Debbie,Terry and Tim have made their minds made up on all items. If somone disagrees you say they are a "problem child." I forgot this is Salisbury and you are no longer allowed to have your own thoughts. What a joke!!!!!!!!
G.A....if Terry,Tim and Debbie are such stewads of the City money why do they insist on the City paying for Council members health insurance? They are part time employees and some of the members don't even make it to all of the work sessions or meetings.
As for me I love to see people with different ideas...It's sad that you are so close to the three from Camden that you will do anything to protect them.
Anon 1308 -
First of all, I never said anything about Laura being a "problem child". Of course you can have your own thoughts. Just don't try twist facts and use that to attack people. That is precisely what Laura did.
As for the health insurance issue, is this the only example you can come up with of either one of these three wasting the taxpayers money? For starters, Tim has never voted on the matter. Don't let facts hold you up.
You love to see people with different ideas? What ideas? Granted, she has only been on council a short time. However, her biggest accomplishment to date is to grandstand to the press and attack her colleagues on council.
I probably wouldn't even have written about the grandstanding except that she deliberately misrepresents her colleagues and then tries to claim that she is all sweetness and light. Sorry, doesn't work for me.
Why is Laura Mitchell beginning to sound like Jim Ireton? Answer: Because they both have Chuck Cook telling them what to do, what to think and what is best for the city. Chuck Cook is a political legend in his own mind. Why didn't he run for office instead of being a campaign worker?
GA, Laura Mitchells greatest accomplishment since being on council was to remove the Lord's Prayer. This will be hung around her neck in future elections.
Anon 1338 -
I stand corrected. I wasn't really thinking of that as an "accomplishment". However, I'm willing to bet that she does.
Whenever Debbie Campbell and Terry Cohen were PIAs, as you called them, G.A., they didn't do it for the purpose of being a PIA and screwing up council business.
You have pegged Mitchell to a T. Watching PAC14, she comes in with tons of changes that the others didn't see until that afternoon. She lets everyone know that she had a special solo talk with the city attorney that changes things, blah, blah, blah.
I could be wrong from my limited view in TV land, but Campbell and Cohen always came up with some little turn of phrase that made the law or agreement better. Not this "look at me" stuff of Mitchell's. Besides, unless somebody knows something different, Campbell and Cohen always had trouble just getting a fair listen. Mitchell seems to be getting her fair share of being heard, even Shanie Shields is.
Sticky this post and the Op-Ed below it all day. This one confirmed what I thought I was seeing and the Op-Ed has more answers in that short space than just about anything I've seen.
B.
G.A....I'm not twisting ANY facts or attacking you!
I never said that you said she was a "problem child." The first paragragh was in response to 1st comment posted. You may want to re-read your post and mine! The second and third paragragh were directed to you and you didn't answer the question.
I realize Tim has not voted on the issue but we all know he rubber stamps anything Debbie tells him too!!
How about the idea to pay and extra 100 dollars to the tow companies for clean up? How about passing the "Bricks" project? How about the "Lord's Prayer"? These are just a few in the short time she's been in office.
That fact that you, the Mayor, the other Council members or I don't like the ideas doesn't mean they aren't valid to her and the people she represents.
Again, I say...if people don't agree with Debbie, Terry, and Tim you say they are "grandstanding."
I watch the meetings and attend them...grandstanding is exactly what Terry and Debbie do on a regular basis!!! What is good for the goose is good for the gander!!!
Stop twisting my words!!!!!!
Laura Mitchell bumped her head years agp. She has these special moments as we all know.
She has even admitted sometimes when she goes off , she doesn't remember half the things she says.
We are talking far leftttttt.
Laura Mitchell is a disappointment; and makes little to no contribution to the betterment of Salisbury.
Anon 1418 -
I stand corrected about the "problem child" statement. However, you are twisting facts and attacking Campbell, Cohen and Spies. You have a right to do that, but that doesn't make it right. If you want to go after someone, try a little evidence.
Example - what is your basis for claiming that Tim Spies rubber stamps anything Debbie tells him to? I have already seen him disagree with Debbie a few times already. Do they think alike? Yes. That is why people who support Campbell and Cohen also supported Spies.
Passing "The Bricks" project was not Laura's idea. To make that claim is not only laughable, it is even contrary to Laura's own arguments in Tuesday's meeting. The Lord's Prayer? I wasn't going to pick that scab; but if you want it, you can have it. The extra $100? Be my guest!
BTW - Ideas are ideas. They are all valid in one sense, but they can not be invalid. Therefore, to call an idea valid isn't saying anything.
Also, she is supposed to represent the entire city. She may be elected from District 2, but she is supposed to represent everyone.
As for "grandstanding" - I never said that she was "grandstanding" because she disagreed with anyone. I said that she was "grandstanding" because she claims to be one thing and acts another. She attacks her fellow council members in the press. That wouldn't be so bad, except that she doesn't have the facts to back up her accusations. Worse, she does it and then tries to portray herself as "Susie Sunshine". Doesn't work for me. If it does for you, then let her keep blowing smoke you know where.
I will admit that both Debbie and Terry have done a bit of "grandstanding" while on council. However, their's is of a different kind. They are usually trying to get a point across and I have never seen them lie. They don't run the media and attack their fellows on council either.
Laura on the other hand has attacked her fellows on council. Her charges have been baseless at best, false at worst. As to whether she did so deliberately, only her conscience knows for sure.
Oh, I almost forgot ...
You claimed that I never answered your question about wasting taxpayer dollars. Here's an abbreviated answer. If you really have followed the city council over the years you shouldn't need more examples:
$1.2 million - Robins Ave. Lift Station
$2.5? million - Sassafras Meadows
Putting cops on furlough (which costs the city more money than not furloughing them and is bad for public safety)
TIF's for the old mall and the NE Collector
Granted, they weren't successful; but they fought the good fight. If you really had been following the council you wouldn't even think to question their bona fides on this issue. You might disagree. You might complain about something else. You would never dare to question their commitment to spending tax dollars wisely.
Cohen and Campbell differ on votes also. They don't always agree, however I've never seen either one have a hissy fit to the other. Life goes on Jimmy and Laura, life goes on fortunately.
Very true, 7:25. The person complaining about them being from Camden and calling Tim Spies a rubber stamp makes me sick. I don't live in Camden and I voted for all three of them because they are intelligent and have common sense! I've seen Terry Cohen in my neck of the woods as much as anyone in Camden I'll bet. Tim Spies has been a resource to many neighborhoods without ever asking to get his name in the paper.
The Camden bashers can go suck eggs. If the voters didn't want three people from Camden, they wouldn't have elected three people from Camden. Those three sure didn't get elected only by Camden.
who is she? where did she come from? What makes her qualified to be a council member? (never heard of her before this last election)
look at mitchell's bodice. she needs to cover the great divide. but then she doesn't approve of the Lord's Prayer, so why would she?
Post a Comment