Another Front Page Advertisement
Saturday’s “Tilghman Times” has run yet another front page advertisement for their lord and master, the Barrie Tilghman administration. As we witnessed at last Monday’s city council meeting, the Committee to Re-Elect Her Majesty is now in business. While I didn’t see an authority line, this attempt to show how tough the Tilghman Administration is on her slum lord buddies is one of the first in an undoubtedly long line of propaganda pieces disguised as news articles.
I have to give author Katherine Crowell kudos for style. This piece was masterful in the way it intertwined three separate stories:
- Barrie Tilghman is tough on slum lords.
- The plight of the poor widows that are inferred to be the bulk of Salisbury slum lords.
- Since the slum lords are really sympathetic characters, the city must now come up with some means to alleviate their unjust suffering.
It’s almost perfect. My compliments to the advertiser.
Technorati Tags: Salisbury, politics, salisburypolitics, housing, slumlords, BarrieTilghman, GaryComegys, TilghmanTimes, Gannett, media, DelmarvaDealings
Sphere: Related ContentIf you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Considering the Louise Smith scam they must have a brilliant political strategist, no one saw that swindle coming.
I find it incredible thay ANY landlord was not aware of licensing & registration fees & their deadlines. While it does happen sometimes, to forget to pay is no excuse. If you did forget, then pay up. Consider it a cost of doing business & suffer the loss of those fines. (which would amount to about 3 mos. rent @ 500 per unit for 3 units.) This loss does not HAVE to be passed onto the tenant. It’s certainly no reason to sell your ownership. Surely the properties involved are worth much, much more.
However, bringing the unit up to “code” is another matter, entirely & in some cases a much more expensive & lengthy process. (such as the lead cert.) But, it must be done, so they must “bite the bullet”. Another cost of doing business.
To my mind the landlords should be responsible for their tenants care of the property. And if an old car needs to be hauled away, so be it! (years ago, a neighbors son wasn’t allowed to keep an old car he was fixing up parked on the street in front of the house. (which they owned, but we’re designated “historic” & HAVE to keep up the “code”.)
There are a lot of good landlords busting their butts to “keep up”, and it does seem like a huge fine. Surely, there are avenues for appeal & all the “lords are treated the same. Hopefully the good guys & the “mom & pops” will be able to cope. But they will have learned a valuable lesson.
Kudos to the “worker bee” Mr. Stevenson for the attempt. But, how can this campaign have any positive effect when the old mall owners are getting away with murder at taxpayer expense? The “bee” has admitted to “enforcement” difficulties in the past.
It is my belief the “bigger lords” want it all & will do anything to get it and get away with it.
One cannot help but notice the conspicuous absence of diatribe from a certain “mean” blogger regarding reader comments in this article.
Is he running for mayor already?
Aren’t the penalties being imposed because these lamdlords have failed to even register under the licensing law? If that’s so, this comment is right on the mark.
Remember that many of the landlords advertise in the Daily Slime.