Attacking The Responsible Minority

Tuesday evening’s Salisbury City Council meeting was as close to choreographed as you can get without a dress rehearsal. There were a few perfunctory resolutions to be handled. There was a small change to the agenda to vote on whether or not to post the management letter from the city’s audit on the city website. Then the fun began.

Council President Louise Smith had moved the public comments to the end of the meeting (despite the rules calling for them to be at the beginning, in true Mike Dunn fashion). Knowing that the Mayor’s crew had arranged to have plenty of vocal zoo staff and supporters there to deride Councilwomen Campbell and Cohen, Ms. Smith simply couldn’t control herself. Since the vote on the management letter was off script, Louise kept fumbling the ball and tried to not hold a vote. She simply couldn’t control her gleeful anticipation for the expected onslaught against the only two fiscally responsible members of council.

Supporters of the 17% tax increase lined up to provide their take on why the city taxpayer needs to spend more, not less, on the Zoo. Oddly enough, the greatest comment of the night was presented by former Salisbury councilman Bob Caldwell, who was not part of the Tilghman / Smith show. A subsequent post will provide the full text of his comments. They are simply too compelling to be buried with other discussion.

We were treated to citizens claiming that ANY cuts to the zoo’s budget were too much. This despite the fact zoo funding has doubled in the last decade while staffing has risen 75%, while the number of animals under the zoo’s care has actually dropped.

Ms. Smith could hardly contain herself while she orchestrated the proceedings. Rather than calling on citizens in the order which they signed up to speak, it appears that Ms. Smith was given instructions at the beginning of the meeting as to which “Zooies” should speak at different portions of the meeting. The most amusing speaker of the whole evening was Smith friend, neighbor and campaign manager Eleanor Mulligan. As a self identified Bush Republican, Ms. Mulligan explained to the assembled audience that we need the tax increase because it simply wouldn’t be fair to cut one department more than another. I wasn’t aware that the government budgeting process was about making government employees “feel” better. I thought it was about setting spending priorities and delivering services to the taxpayers in the most efficient manner possible. Boy was I wrong. I had always believed that Democrats took the attitude that tax money was a bottomless well from which to draw on. I find it ironic that nominal Republicans like Ms. Mulligan, Ms. Smith and Zoo Commission Chair Ron Alessi have absolutely no quarrel with increasing the burden on the taxpayer for non-essential spending while not hesitating to cut funding for essential city services.

As the evening wore on, several themes became apparent. One was that Mrs. Campbell and Mrs. Cohen had dared to advocate cuts in spending without consulting with the zoo staff. This is ironic because almost every time you ask a department head what can be cut from that department’s budget the answer is almost always “Nothing!”. Wait, I get it. Council members are supposed to ask Jim Rapp what can be cut. When he says nothing, they are supposed to take his word for it.

Another theme was that the zoo provides service to all strata of the community, and in an extremely cost efficient manner. I am absolutely sure that the taxpayer is receiving value for EVERY dime spent by the Salisbury Zoo. When Zoo Director Jim Rapp and other zoo staff went to Washington for a Congressional reception I’m sure that this was essential to the Salisbury taxpayer. I’m sure that the 75% staff increase over the last decade is absolutely necessary for the mission of the zoo. This simply provides more evidence for the argument that the Barrie Tilghman approach to budgeting is one of BUREAUCRACY over PUBLIC SAFETY. PORK over SERVICES to the taxpayer.

The zoo bureaucracy’s solidarity with the poor and downtrodden was evidenced by Mr. Rapp’s insistence that the zoo should never charge an admission fee; even a minimal one. People argued that the city would have to hire people to collect the money. What about the volunteer greeters? Some citizens argued that the more economically disadvantaged segments of the community would no longer be able to enjoy the zoo. I found it strangely odd that there weren’t any po folks, like me, advocating to exempt the zoo from any cuts in their budget. I always find it amusing when the well off claim to know what’s best for the poor, since the poor are evidently too stupid to know what’s best for themselves. Where I come from we have a term for those types of folk - Limousine Liberals.

We’ll just have to see if these arguments really take hold with the Salisbury taxpayer. Since the majority of council doesn’t have the political gravitas to stand with the taxpayer, even if that means cutting positions in some departments we can only hope that the petition drive is successful. Then the “council leadership” will have to explain why maintaining the decade long growth in the zoo’s budget and staff is more important than funding public safety salaries and positions.

Technorati Tags: Salisbury, politics, salisburypolitics, zoo, SalisburyZoo, LouiseSmith, BarrieTilghman, fiscalpolicy, taxation. governmentspending

Sphere: Related Content