Laura Mitchell Grandstands Until Asked to Back Up Claims

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”.

THE APPROVALS

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”.

This also has proven to be Mitchell’s greatest mistake. She makes these grand pronouncements, but has nothing to back them up with. During debate at Tuesday’s meeting she states:

… 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.

However, in my conversation with Mitchell she did have to admit a few things:

• 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.

So again Laura, WHERE are you examples of the council attempting to abrogate contracts?

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.

STICKY POST! NEW POSTS WILL SHOW UP BELOW THIS ONE UNTIL 3PM.