HEY SALISBURY: WANNA LOWER YOUR TAXES?

The City officials to call are Jim Ireton and Laura Mitchell. Here’s why.

They think that charter amendments should be made only after extensive public notice, discussion and referendum vote, And, if the referendum petition is not supported by the required 20 percent of the registered voters, they want the amendment put to referendum anyway. You probably have heard their incessant whining about the recent charter amendment in regard to the City attorney, for which they are still agitating for a referendum vote even though it fell short.

If that amendment goes to referendum, then so should the 2007 charter amendment, made at the request of Barrie Tilghman, that raised the City’s property tax rate to allow for the double-digit tax increase that she wanted and is still in effect. That amendment was adopted by the Council without much advanced public notice or discussion at its first regular meeting after the 2007 election by a vote of 3 (Smith, Comegys and Shields) to 2 (Campbell and Cohen). In fact, Barrie Tilghman waited until after the election to request the charter change or the tax rate increase.

And, just like the latest amendment that Ireton and Mitchell are trying to stop, the 2007 amendment became the subject of a referendum petition drive that fell short of the required support. But, if memory serves, that effort, organized by the late Bob Caldwell, came even closer to the mark (and without the active support of the mayor or the Daily Times).

So, if Ms. Mitchell and Jim Ireton continue to agitate about the latest amendment of Salisbury’s charter, they should expand their whining to include both the 2007 amendment mentioned above – as well as dozens of other charter amendments that have been made by prior city councils with little public notice or opportunity for public comment.