A Political Panorama - Part I
One of our loyal readers forwarded this from a friend of his. It makes interesting reading. A second part is to follow. When I receive the second part I will also link to a PDF file with the whole essay since I am sure some of you will want to save it.
SALISBURY, 2005 – A POLITICAL PANORAMA (Part One)
2004 had been a year of political promise keeping by the “Dream Team†majority of the City Council who were elected from District 2 in November 2003. Almost immediately thereafter they began to annex property, totaling hundreds of acres, at the request of developers and gutted the residential rental regulations by doing away with comprehensive inspection of rental property and decreasing the licensing fee as requested by landlords. Joined by the fourth member from District 2, Michael Day, the majority acted in harmony with the Mayor – a rare exception involving her proposed “food tax,†which the Council rejected, after initially endorsing it, following strong public outcry.
Despite the suggestion in the media of a calm and orderly City government, among City residents there was substantial dissatisfaction over concessions to developers and landlords and growing suspicion that such matters were being decided by private discussion among the Council members, who seemed to disregard and sometimes disdain public comment at the meetings. And the majority had yet to keep the promise to rescind the “4 to 2 law†or substantially restrict its scope, made in exchange for political support by landlords during the 2003 election.
Thus, by year’s end many could sense that in 2005 things would not remain as placid as they may have appeared to the casual observer. What became a year of real political ferment began with business as usual.
Prelude To The Election
At a work session of the City Council on January 3, the Mayor presented a long-awaited very lengthy diatribe on the 4 to 2 law that has reduced the number of unrelated adults who may occupy a home in the single-family neighborhoods. Among other dubious points, Barrie Tilghman wrongly accused the resident homeowners who had proposed that protection against rooming houses as having “touted†it as the sole solution to the problem of over-occupancy in rental units. Although she cited various problems perceived by her or the City Attorney, Tilghman stopped short of stating that the 4 to 2 law should be repealed. Her recommendation was ambiguous but seemed to be that the law should be limited to only a few neighborhoods by means of an “overlay district.â€
Not surprisingly (in light of an imminent City election) neither the Council nor the Mayor suggested any immediate action to change the 4 to 2 law.
In early February, shortly after the filing deadline for the election had passed, the Mayor announced that a salary review committee that she had appointed without public notice had recommended that the salary for that office should be increased by 150% to $25,000 per year and the salary of the Council members should be doubled (100% increase). The committee had conducted its proceedings without any public notice or participation, although it had invited Mayor Tilghman and the Council’s president, Michael Dunn, to appear before it. Both the secret process by which the Mayor’s committee had been formed and operated and the huge salary increases drew widespread criticism – and some suspected that the process had been manipulated by the Mayor so that the proposed salary increase would not be made public until after the deadline to file as a candidate in order to run against her.
The City Council promptly passed the pay raise ordinance on first reading, but a City resident (Patrick Hannon) notified the Maryland Open Meeting Compliance Board about the situation and requested that it take emergency action to avoid enactment. In late March the Council asked the Mayor’s committee to quickly reconvene for the purpose of compliance with the Maryland’s Open Meetings Law, whereupon the committee simply rubber-stamped its earlier recommendation.
An Eventful Election
On March 1, as the pay raise fiasco was unfolding, Barrie Tilghman faced two opponents in the mayoral primary, including a relative newcomer to Salisbury (Michael Della Penna) who was eliminated with 20% of the vote. A longtime City resident, Donald Long, received 35% of the vote to Tilghman’s 45%. Voter turnout – 16% of registered voters – was the lowest on record.
After his bare bones campaign, in the general election on April 5 Long received 40% of the total vote, which was one of the lowest on record. Although Tilghman got 60%, it was hardly a smashing victory in light of the facts that Long did little more than speak at several public forums and that he was outspent and out-advertised by Tilghman by a much greater margin that in her narrow victory over Duke Shanahan in 2002. Tilghman may have been hurt somewhat when it became known shortly before the election that she was supporting before the General Assembly (in her role as the Maryland Municipal League’s president) the “food tax†that she had previously asked the City Council to endorse.
The really interesting race was that for the District 2 seat then held by Michael Day, a longtime Tilghman ally who once again attempted to ride her coattails. He was challenged by Deborah Campbell, a proponent of neighborhood revitalization for many years, who ran after the Council’s president (Dunn) pointed advised her neighborhood association to replace her as its spokesperson.
From the outset it was clear that the Day-Campbell contest would be heated. The Daily Times’ article about her filing to run contained a comment by Day that Campbell, the former head of the Salisbury Neighborhood Housing Service, was a “one-issue candidate.†But Mr. Day soon learned otherwise, as Ms Campbell conducted an active campaign, in which she addressed numerous issues, including growth and development and fiscal policy, both in the public candidates’ forums, in door-to-door and neighborhood meetings and on an Internet website.
Political affiliation with Tilghman and the Dream Team seemed to be a liability for Day. Against public criticism he was forced to defend measures such as the food tax as well as his opposition to the 4 to 2 law and comprehensive inspection of residential rental units. He and Campbell also had distinctly different positions on whether developers should pay greater impact fees and annexation requirements to provide the infrastructure required for growth.
Both Barrie Tilghman and the Dream Team members of the Council were vocal supporters of Day and, together with him, engaged in what may be Salisbury’s first episode of negative attack-style politics by elected officials, at least recently. In a front-page article in The Daily Times shortly before election day, Campbell was portrayed as unfit for public office by derisive comments, primarily by Day and by Michael Dunn, who predicted that things would change for the worse if she were elected. Dunn accused Campbell of engaging in “conspiracy theories†and having “a very relentless style†and an enemies list – no doubt some readers thought that Dunn was describing himself. Cathcart also fired at her: “There’s nothing (Campbell) has done in the past that makes me feel she could do things in the same spirit as the Council.†Those “things†were not suggested or specified in the article, however.
The general election on April 5 was so close that it was not certain until the absentee ballots had been counted that Campbell received 25 more votes than Day, who promptly told the media that his defeat would not affect future prospects of the 4 to 2 law because the Dream Team members had already decided how they were going to proceed with it.
In the race for the District 1 seat the incumbent, Lavonzella Siggers, also was defeated – but by an even narrower margin (4 votes) – by Eugenie (“Shanieâ€) Shields. In that contest Tilghman and the Dream Team supported the winning candidate, and Ms. Shields was also supported by landlords. Nevertheless, Ms. Siggers may have been defeated by the disclosure shortly before the election that she has improperly assisted voters in filling out absentee ballots.
In response to a “straw vote†ballot question 53% of the voters favored elimination of the primary election. Subsequently the Council has discussed possible change in that regard but has taken no action.
Post Election Blues
Before the successful candidates began their terms of office, the “old†Council adopted the increased salary recommended by the Mayor’s committee after the City Attorney advised that it could become effective for the Mayor if it were adopted before she actually began her next (third) term. Thus, Barrie Tilghman received an initial ($5,000) increase this year and will receive a similar increase next year and also in 2007, when the Mayor’s salary will become $25,000 per year and the increased salary ($10,000 per year) will take effect for the two Council members who were elected this year (Campbell & Shields – who did not participate in the vote) and those who are elected in 2007 to the seats now held by the Dream Team members (Dunn, Comegys & Cathcart – who voted for the pay raise).
Shortly after the two new members of City Council took office, the Dream Team majority renewed their effort – no doubt deferred during the election campaign so as not to hurt the Mayor and Mr. Day – to modify the 4 to 2 law. In June they pushed through an ordinance to postpone the “sunset date†(July 1, 2005) when homes with more than 2 unrelated adult occupants would have been required to comply with the reduced limit. Their stated reason for doing so was that the City Attorney felt that making landlords comply with the law would be unfair because it would reduce their rental income, as well as the Mayor’s comments on the law [mentioned above] , including her recommendation that only certain single-family neighborhoods should be protected from conversion of homes to rooming houses by landlords. When the ordinance was adopted, Shields sided with the Dream Team and Campbell voted to require compliance with the original sunset date, which had been set when the 4 to 2 law was passed over two years earlier. Residents who supported holding to that sunset date were displeased that the Council’s president did not allow full public comment on the ordinance to postpone it.
******************************************************************************
In a future installment, the political upheaval in Salisbury that occurred in the second half of 2005 will be recounted.
//END Quantcast Code
2005 could become a watershed boundary in Salisbury politics. That Michael Day, running with the support of Barrie Tilghman and the other three Council members in District Two, was defeated really says something about the public sentiment toward them. Don’t be deceived by Tilghman’s victory over Donald Long, who didn’t present a credible alternative but still got a sizeable (anti-Tilghman) vote.
If the “Dream Team” members of the City Council seek reelection in 2007, they could be in for a rather rude surprise.
Whether and how Dunn, Comegys and Cathcart will respond to the wake up call delivered by Deborah Campbell remains to be seen, but the fact that they now have adopted some of the policy advocated by her during and since the election suggests that the Dream Team may be getting the voters’ message, albeit belatedly
What an accurate and well articulated recap. I will watch for the second installment. It is a shame that there isn’t some way to put the 2 together and get wider distribution of the material. It’s certainly not what is published in the paper.
This synopsis hits the spot — and it shows us the real Mike Dunn, not the one that the Daily Times is trying to portray with the stuff about him that it ran on Christmas & yesterday.
After reading this “panorama” I must thank Mr. Dunn for causing Ms. Campbell to run for Salisbury’s City Council. But let’s not forget that he has trashed her before, during and after the election — and that he likes to brag that he has brought peace and harmony to City government (what a joke — I’m sick of it).
Dunn must think that we believe whatever he says, and The Daily Times does its part to help him pull it off by trying to make him look like “Mr. Nice Guy” (I’m sick of that and his photograph, too).
Dunn’s personal attacks on Debbie Campbell both before and during the election campaign and his disdainful attitude toward her since then has exposed his real character to the public. Usually, with help from The Daily Times, he looks like the second coming of Ritchie Cunningham, but in private his modus operandi in respect of anyone who differs with him is vicious.
It’s truly regrettable that Lynn Cathcart sometimes follows in Dunn’s wake, as she did in smearing Ms. Campbell during the election. Comegys does that, too, but it’s to be expected in his case.
Didn’t Tilghman & Dunn do a bangup job of maneuvering with perfect timing in their pay raise shenanigan?
First, secrecy until the committee’s recommendation has been made — after it’s too late to file as a candidate.
Then, the do-nothing city attorney does nothing to have it comply with the public meetings law — but someone blows the whistle.
At that point it seems to be over — probably because Barrie did badly (45%) against two lightweightweights in the primary election.
But, after the general election — voila, it’s one of the last atrocities of the old (Day & Siggers) Council.
It’s true in Salisbury — you can’t beat City Hall — that’s why I’ve moved elsewhere and won’t be coming back, except to shop.
i just hope for the sake of those still in Salisbury that Dunn doesnt get big ideas and try to run for mayor.I would hope voters are smarter than that but he seems to have alot of big money buddies,primarily the slumlord elite who he was clearly looking out for this past year.Someone needs to vote them all put except for Campbell,who seems to be the only council member who cares about the quality of life in Salisbury-Shields isnt a crook like the rest of them,but shes too soft for this office
PLEASE — Make that a “Pretty Please”
Do not show this “panorama” about Salisbury politics to The Daily Times… or we will start seeing Mike Dunn’s picture every day, not just a couple times each week.
http://www.reallifejustice.blogspot.com
Don’t miss these headings posted today!
Either Urine Or You’re Out
An Apology And Explanation
Badges? We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Badges!
AIN’T THIS BLOG GREAT?
Now there’s a written record of their (mis)deeds for reference if Dunn or any of the other “Dream Teamers” decide to run for reelection. They have about ruined our town by doing whatever their corporate sponsors (landlords & developers) demand. It’s too darned bad we didn’t can Barrie Tilghman this year, and that Duke Shanahan wasn’t here to do it.
I seem to recall a group of Salisbury citizens trying to get the Mayor to pay for her shinanigan’s with the Cities money and a certain city attorney. Unfortunately, this group was set up with a retired judge who was part and parcil of the game! This council, except for Lady Campbell, is riding for a quick exit, if the people of this city have any sense at all. You can’t make comment at council meetings, can’t show up with protest signs, you are gaveled down if you take issue with King Dunn and his Court, and even the electricity is somehow involved with these pathetic local politicians. Election time is coming again and I am sure resurection day will join in on the problem!!
There wasn’t anyone willing or credible enough to run against her Hoppin. Then again there was that Pizza guy!
Dear Insider:
I voted for Mike Della Penna (”that Pizza guy”), who had his head and heart in the right place. Didn’t vote for anyone for mayor in the general election.
Dear About Face:
Please give us the details on Tilghman’s shenanigans, the “certain city attorney,” and “retired judge” that you mentioned but did not identify.
I never suggested Mr. Della Penna didn’t have his heart in the right place. Like most, I simply could not remember his name. Thank you for reminding me. If I’m correct, I believe he was fairly new to this community and simply couldn’t gain the local support needed to hold that post. I’ve not heard or read a word about this man since he ran for Mayor and it might be nice if you let readers know if the man is still living in the area and if he is doing well?
On another note, Debbie Campbell would probably make one of the greatest candidates the entire Eastern Shore has ever had the pleasure of being a part of. Unfortunately Debbie is also a provider in her home and probably wouldn’t be able to financially run the City of Salisbury at the current pay scale.
This is also why so many citizens are so concerned as to how involved the Mayor and her husband are within all this new development going on. There’s certainly a conflict of interest going on here but they would never admit this up front. However, they have never denied it either. Things that make you go, hmmmmmm?
The idea that there’s even a question out there referencing this matter is a serious issue and problem. I also find it interesting whenever the Mayor feels she’s being attacked she runs right to the local newspaper and tells her side of things with a Letter to the Editor. This problem has been out there for quite a while and she has yet to defend it. hmmmmmm?
First Timer Says:
December 28th, 2005 at 9:17 am
>Dunn’s personal attacks on Debbie Campbell both before and during the >election campaign and his disdainful attitude toward her since then has >It’s truly regrettable that Lynn Cathcart sometimes follows in Dunn’s >wake, as she did in smearing Ms. Campbell during the election. >Comegys does that, too, but it’s to be expected in his case.
Thats not fair talking about me like that. I’m gonna tell mare dingle barrie that you all is picking on me. You wait til next lection, dingle will be countie execative, and I be mare, and my buddy duncan donut be my new boss da guvner.
Patience, patience.
Salisbarrie will again be Salisbury.
Remembering back even further than these posts and comments, Mayor Barrie was elected because she was a neighborhood advocate and one of us, as opposed to the bunch who formerly ran Salisbury’s government, who were primarily business owners and executive-types. It seems to be that some people will never be happy with whoever is in charge, no matter who they are or what they do. If ordinary citizens don’t fill the bill and business people have a conflict of interest, who’s left? It’s the American way to critique our government, but that should include a balance that is most certainly not evident here by any means. Blogs are no more accurate or representative of truth than any other media, maybe less so because they can say anything without being held legally accountable. If that changed, it would force real balance into blogs and they could then become a legitimate and reliable source of news, maybe.
Is this blog site ever coming back?
Serenamax, you made a point you may not recognize: that the Mayor was elected when she represented different things. She is not representing the things (or the people) for which she was elected. Therefore, she oughta go away. Seems her interests and priorities lie elsewhere now, and they ain’t with the “common folk.”
Yep, we all need a balance of info, and I ain’t saying the powers-that-be aren’t doing anything right at all. But I don’t think it’s enough to compensate for what they are doing, in a way that grinds against what democracy stands for.
As for the blogs, sometimes they get things wrong or incomplete, but they are sure quicker to accept and admit correction than that folded horsepatoot that calls itself a daily newspaper. The blogs have brought things to light that the paper has covered up.
Take that ADA violation business. That story flared up here on this blog. The Daily Crime said not a word until the heat was high enough. Then they tried to take credit for exposing the story (that article didn’t say a word about violatin’ the law, it was all about inconvenience and the Crime jeered the elderly like they were 20-somethin’ couch potatoes).
As for never bein’ happy, all it takes fer me is feeling that my interests as a citizen come first, even if I disagree with an official’s position on something.
I don’t see that here, nor do most of the folks I talk to who want pretty much the same thing I do — honesty, integrity, caring about the citizens and not sellin’ us out to the money interests all the time.
The City’s leaders are the most disrespectful bunch to citizens I’ve ever seen (love that PAC14 broadcast), the Mayor even jumps line on her own staff to make comment, and the County Council just doesn’t seem to get anything done.
Time for a change all the way around. I’d like to see some of the citizens that have been fightin’ City Hall run for office, like the Campbell gal did. Some good ideas comin’ out of them, and we need more folks like her, ones that think we can be a great area without becoming another suburb of DC.
Just this ole dog’s two cents.
–CD
Serenamax - It is interesting that when Barrie lived in her old neighborhood (Camden) she led the opposition against the home across the street from hers obtaining legal authority to be operated as a bed and breakfast, citing too many cars parking there, too much traffic and impacts that would be negative to the neighborhood. That home and yard covered an entire city block. After moving from the neighborhood to Sumpter Point, a highly regulated planned residential development where rental signs aren’t even permitted on lawns, she worked tirelessly to see that landlords could convert even the smallest home in a single-family neighborhood into a rental to 4 unrelated people even though that use was not permitted by existing law. Documents at the court house support claims that the Bank of Delmarva, which owns Hanna Kremer, TILGHMAN (husband of Barrie) Insurance provided financing for a number of thse investment properties.
On Barrie’s watch our crime statistics have soared - 3rd highest in the state for gun crime and 20th in the nation for crime rate. Department heads are heard making comments like “we wouldn’t want the developers to get sitcker shock”, meaning let’s subsidize the poor developers with the hard-earned tax dollars of our citizens a little longer.
What about the FACT that the city failed on numerous occasions to file the appropriate documents with the state for annexations? What about failing to advertise an annexation like the Hearn property? What about Barrie knowing that the annexation was flawed and not advising council? Where would we be if those pesky citizens Barrie has such disdain for hadn’t exposed the problems?
The Mayor is responsible for the administrative affairs of the city. A leader leads by example. Maybe this little glimpse into Salisbury’s winding, or should I say crooked, path to a point where citizens are crying out for change helps to shed some light.
It’s 2006, when do we get to see the second installment?