This weekend Greg Bassett wrote an editorial that really threw me for a loop and I'm sure those of you who read it felt the same way.
Here we have a business sharing their alleged wisdom towards what is right and wrong about Downtown Salisbury. Let's just take a look at the Daily Times involvement in this matter.
First of all, they sold their Downtown building. Not only did they sell it, they sold it to PRMC who no longer pays taxes on that property.
Mr. Bassett goes on to rag on Debbie, Terry & Tim, the Council of no's. Well Greg, you, (the DT's) DID endorse them this last go around. You make no mention of subsidized housing units Downtown nor did you mention that the former City Council's for the last 30 years rejected this idea as well.
Mr. Bassett goes on to IMPLY that these ideas should be up to the Council. He said, "That was pretty surprising to me, because I wasn't exactly aware that the council majority actually possessed any plans, viewpoints, goals, wishes, dreams, ideals, notions and hopes for Downtown Salisbury."
No Greg, the Council is the LEGISLATIVE body. Their responsibility is to accept or deny and again, the past 30 years worth of Council's DENIED such Downtown ideas as well, yet we're just not hearing personal attacks on those Council Members.
Mr. Bassett continues by saying, "And I guess I'm wrong for thinking this, but it seems to me that even if the council does have downtown-grandization (I made up that word) ideas swimming in their brains, these same folks have no ability, true determination or public support to get to any of those ideas implemented -- nonexistent though they are."
You are wrong for thinking that. IF any of the Council Members wanted to run for Mayor, I'd say they'd have a LOT more citizen support than you would ever have Mr. Bassett. So I'd say their support is a whole lot greater than you attempt to imply. The ONLY difference is, YOU wouldn't publish those better ideas even if they sent them in to you AND they were great ideas. The Daily Times only agenda is THEIR agenda.
Mr. Bassett then said, "Let's try this in words anyone can understand: Don't politicize Downtown Salisbury -- come together and fix it."
And just what exactly are YOU doing Mr. Bassett? This coming from a guy who has watched the company he works for go from 200+ employees down to what now, 12?
"Leaders are generally known to throw out a list of goals, and then seek public consensus on which goals should be addressed in which order. Leaders are measured by their ability to lead the completion of these goals. It's a leadership thing."
And the local MSM goal seems to be the same as the Mayors, throw a FIT and write nasty things about people implying this is actually the Council's job and not the Mayor's. The Council said NO to affordable, subsidized section 8 housing on waterfront parking lots Greg. It was a PACKAGE and it was turned down because of this.
"The epitome of indecision is the current state of the Downtown Plaza. Is it a plaza, is it Main Street? -- It's half dead and half alive."
You know what Greg, maybe you should get off your lazy corporate butt, (I'm being nice) and actually come down to the Plaza and see that it's actually 80%, (if not more, seriously) full/occupied. Once again the Daily Times tries to lead people into believing whatever they say is true when in fact it is not.
"Salisbury's leaders have a job to do on downtown. They're not doing it. Things will only stay that way, it seems, until the public makes them."
As did 30 years worth of past Council's Mr. Bassett. Just because someone comes up with a plan he "stole" from 30 years ago to current doesn't mean it is the right plan. Again, you removed your business from Downtown. You have reduced your employees by 90% and as a FAILING business now attracting other newspapers to compete I seriously doubt ANYTHING you have to say would hold any real weight to it.
So, that being said Mr. Bassett, in all your years of wisdom, why didn't YOU take that opportunity to offer your suggestions for Downtown? You sit on the outside criticizing people of some pretty horrible things, yet you offer no solution, other than to abandon Downtown yourself.
You make absolutely no mention whatsoever of my plans/ideas/proposal for Downtown. Instead you act as if Jim Ireton's "stolen" plan is the best ever. Mr. Ireton's plan removes property from the tax roll. His plan would decrease ALL property value even lower than it already is Downtown. His plan eliminates most of the parking Downtown that will be vital once the Downtown is revitalized.
I also did not read a solution from Mr. Bassett on how we're supposed to unite the Council. I guess Mr. Bassett still feels the Daily Times has some power left in them to influence this Council into doing what Mayor Ireton wants. Perhaps Mr. Bassett is trying to make good on the recent alleged phone scandal and is simply putting out there what the Mayor wants the public to see. Desperate people do some pretty desperate things.
Now let me say this. I believe we would ALL enjoy seeing Downtown full of foot traffic and people spending money. I believe that this can be accomplished with a lot of hard work. I believe we need to visit successful Downtown areas and learn from their decisions. Using the easy out by selling off parking lots and bringing in grant money is the wrong avenue. Yeah, I've already heard from some local developers bitching because the Council said NO. While I respect these developers, I disagree with them simply because THEY are the ONLY ones who would benefit from Mayor Ireton's proposal.
Again, I want ALL of you to think about the following. How many student housing units, affordable housing and section 8 housing units have been built in the last 6 years. The answer is, A LOT! Now, how many new homes have been built in Salisbury in the last 6 years. The answer, NOT MANY. Are we now in the market majority of entitlement housing?
Mr. Bassett and Mr. Ireton, this is Salisbury, Maryland. It is not Harlem. I do NOT believe the citizens want to see an inner city built here in Salisbury. I also don't think ANYONE has forgotten what happened to Crisfield, Maryland. We already have an abandoned high rise on Fitzwater that reminds us of what Crisfield looked like only a few years ago. Their answer was all section 8 housing. Our economy has NOT turned around. I will NOT allow any such project to be proposed to this Council or ANY other Council. If we ever want to climb out of this depression we'll need to do so utilizing the WATER FRONT PROPERTY we now own to our ADVANTAGE, if we ever choose to go that route.
AND, IF you don't like it, DON'T vote for me.
26 comments:
I happened to be in Easton this weekend and had the opportunity to ride thru their "downtown". Easton's always had a vibratant business friendly atmosphere downtown complete with many eating locations as well as a balanced mixture of business, entertainment, and gov't office locations. The lifelong resident that was showing me around, stated that due to the local economy they have taken a huge hit downtown. My point being...even in a town that's always had a vibrant downtown....times are difficult at this time. Even more reason that a collective effort would be required to continue the improvement and enhancement of our downtown sector.
This is why you'll have our votes. No one believes anything the daily rag puts out there any more. I read this yesterday and almost spit up my coffee. I was so angry at Bassett. He ruined my entire day.
look forward to hearing your interview with Don Rush!
Joe, I urge you to try and arrange for current downtown business owners to go before the mayor and council to share their vison of a vibrant downtown. I'm sure any business owner downtown would agree, low income housing is not the answer.
If you can arrange that, I will gladly show up at that meeting in my Joe Albero for mayor t-shirt, and further, encourage all who think Ireton's plan stinks to come wearing their t-shirts too!
We would need to keep this on the down low until the last minute, because if Ireton hears we are coming he just won't show up.
I read Mr. Bassett's article twice and there was so much double talk there was little I could comprehend. Maybe that was his intention...
Joe, FYI Bassett wasn't the final say in the move. There were many factors as to why that decision was made, one of them being enviromental issues.
Joe who would want any thoughts from a man that sunk a compny down the crapper. 200 down to 12 says it all.
Sorry,Bassett says it all in this few sentences!!
"Wait, I have to read that again.(OK,I'm dense-just ask my wife and any of my public school educators.) Hold on. OK I'm back. Can anyone explain to me what the heck that means?"
Didn't Forrest say something about "stupid?? Or did he say something about stupid is as dense is????
USN-RET
12:35
Just what were those enviromental issues? Had they been polluting the river all those years?
The DT isn't even good enough to serve as back up toilet paper.Literally....
The DT's won't publish your ideas because they blow Iretons away.
If you check Md Property Tax records I think you will find the Daily Times rented the building from THOMSON BRUSH MOORE NEWSPAPERS INC who sold it in 2000 to GANNETT CO INC and Gannet sold the building in 2008 to PRMC. You fail to address that Gannett calls the shots for the Daily Times and many other newspapers across the country.
Now as far as Bassett, he addressed his opinion on the Editorial page. This editorial is Greg Bassett's opinion. Agree with him or not he has just as much right to state his opinion in the Daily Times, as you do on this blog.
Mr Bassett did not claim to have a plan or solution for downtown but I note you do. Instead of blaming the paper, Mr Bassett, Mayor Ireton etc for not coming to you for your plan why not go to Mayor Ireton or/and the Council with your plan. I have never understood in all your blogging career why you believe people should come to you.
2:29 Why not?
Wll somebody please make Bassett go away? He is pitiful. His editorial is very poorly written and certainly reflects poorly on the DT. If the new boss wants to resurrect this paper, get rid of Bassett or at the very least shut this fool up.
@ 2:29 Why would Joe go to the Mayor with a plan and do his job for him while he openly states he will be running for Mayor in the next election? That makes abou tas much sense as working for free....even though Bassett is welcome to state his own opinion you would think an unbiased reporter would have said at least something to defend the council and the treatment they have recieved. Or offer up anything to improve the current situation.
"We would need to keep this on the down low until the last minute, because if Ireton hears we are coming he just won't show up."
You could start by not stating your intentions publicly dontcha think?
Don't worry owlbero. If you even run (which I seriously doubt), you'll be luck if you get 90 votes. Wanna bet smarty?
Joe, one of my biggest concerns with politics (at all levels of government) is the corrupting influence of money on the system.
I heard Liarton spent close to $35,000 last time to "win" the election.
I'm curious if you plan on fund-raising or will you self-finance your campaign?
I would like to do-do on his head.
Bassett was ugly and immature. A perfect reflection of what our nice community has now become. He and the lousy newspaper he runs (into the ground) have long been part of the problem that runs people off from our town. Now, all of that is just MY opinion, which is just as valid as his. The bias was just dripping from his fangs, I mean, fingers on that little rant.
The solution appears to be to just bicker, complain, gripe, tattle tale, whine, accuse, for the next 9 months, while waiting for Albero to be elected, and downtown continues to decay.
Joe You gotta have a fundraiser so can come. Show them how it is done.
Nothing more than an attempted hit piece on the council majority-I guess in his mind he's thinking he's really gotten them back good now for the brilliant public smack down he and the DT's took the other day.
Personally it sounded to me like the ramblings of someone who had a few too many.
Anon 12:29 Your an idiot if you didn't understand the article. Maybe you wrote it!
I tend to agree with 12:29, 7:18.
There was all kinds of unnecessary verbiage (double talk) added to this editorial. It's a deceptive writing to mean something it does not explicitly say.
It's Bassett's way of trying to get in the last word after he was publically humiliated last week.
2:29, when egos are involved, you get the answer to your question. And to 4:08, if someone really has a workable plan, and really cares about the city, the issue of who gets the credit for it wouldn't matter. If Joe has the traffic he says he has, everyone will know where the plan came from. Waiting to share the plan because of who gets credit is about politics, not helping Salisbury.
Post a Comment