Harken back to the days of the great landfill scandal.  After Sheriff Mike Lewis caught the criminals and States Attorney Davis Ruark sent them to jail it was discovered that the miscreants would be collecting full county pensions.  Shame on us.

By law, nothing could be done about the problem at hand.  However, Wicomico’s county council did take steps to make sure that such an event wouldn’t occur in the future.  If a county employee was found guilty of defrauding or otherwise stealing from the taxpayers they would forfeit the county’s contribution to their pension.

Last year it was discovered that a Wicomico County Board of Education (WCBOE) employee was defrauding the taxpayers (or if you are a lefty – “stealing form the children”).  I’m sure it wasn’t the first time; nor the last.  Assuming that this woman is convicted and sentence to jail, she will be eligible to receive her full pension.  Shame on us again?

Maybe.  The WCBOE bureaucrats read the paper.  Hell, thanks to their “special relationship” they practically run it.  But, I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as to why they didn’t pass a resolution similar to the county’s soon after the county passed their new pension rules.  However, in early December of last year the Wicomico County Council sent a letter to superintendent John Fredericksen asking that they adopt a similar resolution.  Almost four months have passed.  NOTHING.

If the WCBOE doesn’t act, then the next time an employee is discovered stealing from the taxpayer, the fault will lie squarely on Fredericksen and the board.  Perhaps Fredericksen, et al, will argue that their collective bargaining agreements wouldn’t allow them to pass such legislation.  But wait, I thought that it was all “FOR THE CHILDREN”.

Tomorrow – Part I of The Big Field Trip, our expose of waste, fraud, and abuse in the WCBOE Travel Budget

The Delaware Board of Medical Practice will hold an emergency meeting today to vote on the emergency suspension of Dr. Earl Bradley’s license to practice medicine.  Bradley, a Lewes pediatrician, has been charged with the rape of 9 children and is suspected of molesting at least 100 children over the last decade.

Bradley is being held in the Delaware state prison in Smyrna in lieu of $2.9 cash bail.  Because Bradley is considered an “imminent danger to the public”, the Board chose to undertake an “expedited investigation” and hold today’s hearing.

"Even though someone is incarcerated, tomorrow they might not be incarcerated," said James L. Collins of the Delaware Division of Professional Regulation.

… or poverty … or just about any other social ill.

That was the mantra of the ‘60’s and ‘70’s – at least among the liberal elite.  Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) surely ranks as one of those.  That must be why he’s pushing a bill to coddle gang members rather incarcerate them.

From the Daily Press:

Scott said calls for tougher sentencing do not address the continuing cycle of gang crime. "The research is absolutely clear. … Mandatory minimums are a waste of taxpayer money," said Scott, who contends that the public wants the attention shifted to prevention.

Scott’s Youth PROMISE Act — Prison Reduction through Opportunity, Mentoring, Intervention, Support and Education — involves steering federal grants to local agencies or groups that can demonstrate they use proven methods to prevent young people from joining gangs or turning to crime.

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) has withdrawn his support of Scott’s legislation precisely because Scott refuses to include tougher sentencing guidelines in the bill.

When will the left learn.  Citizens want more police, not more social workers.

Attend this evening’s Salisbury City Council meeting.  During public comment ask this simple question:

Will you continue to support the rising crime rate or will you take action against crime, starting now?

Let the Barrie Comegys bloc – Gary Comegys, Louise Smith, and Shanie Shields – know that you want change!  This means letting Police Chief Allan Webster go and putting someone in the job that is more concerned about fighting crime than attacking Mayor Jim Ireton and Councilwoman Debbie Campbell.

  When Jim Ireton was running to be Salisbury’s mayor there was no question that crime was a TOP concern of voters.  Things don’t seem to have gotten much better since his election.  At Tuesday’s meeting of the Salisbury Crime Taskforce Ireton provided some hint as to his solution for the crime problems – GRANTS.

While Jim’s FRIENDS – Frank Kratovil, Barbara Mikulski, Ben Cardin, and Barack Obama – may be doling out taxpayer dollars by the bucket full, at some point in time Ireton is going to have to DO SOMETHING about fixing the problems facing Salisbury.  That means Ireton needs to understand that crime is one of, if not THE BIGGEST problem facing his once fair city.

At Tuesday’s meeting a member of the taskforce asked Ireton what was the status of a grant Salisbury applied for to replicate a highly successful crime initiative in Annapolis.  Ireton’s reply was a song an dance about how “competitive” the application process was and how applicants were being “scored”.

“What will we do if we don’t receive the grant?”, asked the member.

Ireton’s response?  “Well, I guess we’ll just have to apply for another grant.”

WRONG ANSWER!  If this program is worth going through the hassle of applying for the grant, and it is truly effective AND if it will only cost approximately $150,000 to implement, then I’m quite sure that Ireton can find budget cuts to fund such a program.  In fact, this is basically what councilwoman Terry Cohen told Ireton.

There are two problems in this scenario.  The first is that Ireton just doesn’t get it.  His record to date seems to be one of “Let’s spend the taxpayers’ money”, but he’s certainly not very big on getting results.  The other problem is that Ireton lacks the courage to put someone in charge of the police department who will get results.

“Jim’s Friends” could lavish millions of dollars on Salisbury, but would the taxpayers actually see results as long as Allan Webster remains in charge of SPD?  Given Webster’s overall record and his seeming desire to spend more time attacking elected officials than fighting crime, I seriously doubt it.

Ireton needs to wake up and smell the coffee.  The citizens who put him in office will just as quickly throw him out without concrete RESULTS!.  Salisbury voters aren’t interested in press conferences and ribbon cuttings.  While cleaning up the river may be an important issue to many, it is strictly second tier when a majority of city residents can hear gunfire at night.

Jim Ireton defeated Gary Comegys in last spring’s mayoral election because he wasn’t Barrie Tilghman.  Unfortunately, that’s precisely what the citizens currently have – Barrie Tilghman in a coat and tie.  The people running the city are the same, and Jim Ireton is only there half a day to supervise them.  Of course, Ireton doesn’t appear to have the backbone to tell them what to do anyway.

Start with doing something concrete about the crime problem Jim.  Voters don’t care about grants.  They care about results.  Don’t come asking for a tax increase next spring without something to show for your efforts.

On days like this I am reminded of a comment made by my friend and Red Maryland colleague Brian Griffiths.  It was something to the effect that more things appear to be written about Salisbury town government than most cities 10 times its size.  He’s right.  I’m one of many culprits; but at least I can be thankful that I’m not in the idiot pen with the Tilghman Times and the Barrie Comegys crowd.  Case in point – TAPEGATE.

The Story -

It all began in early July.  Salisbury police chief Allan Webster thought that the town’s new mayor, Jim Ireton, might send him packing.  Fair assumption given Webster’s record and the city’s less than stellar crime statistics.  Ireton had made both an issue during the recent mayoral campaign and Webster attacked Ireton in the Tilghman Times on multiple occasions.

To save his job, and reportedly to pad his pension, Webster went on the offensive by publicly attacking Ireton’s two allies on council – Debbie Campbell and Terry Cohen.  Unfortunately, Ireton’s bungling of the matter appeared to make Webster and his cronies even more brazen.

To date, Webster has asserted (on several occasions in collusion with the Tilghman Times) that his rights were violated, that city personnel policy was circumvented, that the Salisbury taxpayers should foot all of his potential legal bills, … and that he was was somehow being persecuted as a “whistleblower”.  What makes this so amusing is that it was either Webster or someone acting on his behalf that provided copies of the documents (which Webster claims are damaging to his reputation) to both the Tilghman Times and to the house blog of the Barrie Comegys party.

Webster’s claim of “whistleblower” status is based (if one can call it that) on a purported investigation of Councilwoman Campbell.  Webster claims that Campbell has possession of police surveillance footage supposedly taped about 12 years ago when Mrs. Campbell was the founding Executive Director of Salisbury Neighborhood Housing Service.  TAPEGATE!

The Bit Players -

While this appeared to start out as a means for Webster to keep his job (Webster must have believed that Ireton possessed the requisite sand to sack him) this matter quickly degenerated into something that was no longer amusing, but embarrassing, to anyone living in or around Salisbury.  While the Young and the Restless may be taped in California, the Old and the Nasty was doing a location shoot on Delmarva.  Barrie Tilghman was back in town.

It is highly unlikely that Webster is sufficiently devious or clever to wage the type of war we’ve seen against Ireton, Campbell, and Cohen.  However, the suspicions of many were raised when her thought to be former lackeys at the Tilghman Times began quoting her on the matter.  Email correspondence between Webster and Tilghman was handed over to the paper and Tilghman’s house blog.  Is Barrie Tilghman making another power grab after her chosen were humiliated in last spring’s elections?

True to form, the Tilghman Times ignored facts to print supposition from Webster and the Barrie Comegys party.  Unfortunately, Ireton’s refusal to take a stand on this matter has done little but harm his own credibility.

Was There A Crime? -

A credible newspaper would check to see if an actual crime had been committed prior to running a front page story claiming that an elected official is suspected.  However, in the evidently still Land of Barrie we don’t have a credible newspaper.

According to one of Barrie Tilghman’s emails provided to the Tilghman Times:

"My next step, barring an explanation/discussion with you is to contact the (Wicomico County) state’s attorney with the information or conceivably the (Maryland) Attorney General’s Office that did the investigation in the (former Police Chief Colbourne) Dykes matter. I do not want to have to do that either as mayor or former mayor," Tilghman’s e-mail said.

Evidently neither Webster nor Tilghman followed through on this thinly veiled threat.  The reason was simple enough; either would have been laughed out of State’s Attorney Davis Ruark’s office.  As Ruark notes:

"Assuming a crime has been committed at some point 12 years ago, the statute of limitations has run … and therefore it does not appear there would be any validity to any criminal offenses at this point,"  he said.

IF Webster were even marginally competent, he would realize this.  Short of murder (which has no statute of limitations), I am unaware of any crime that could be prosecuted after twelve years.  Therefore, by his own admission, Webster was wasting police resources in a crime-ridden city investigating an offense that probably wasn’t a crime twelve years ago but certainly cannot be prosecuted now.

Remember, that is ASSUMING a crime took place 12 years ago.  Even if that were the case, Mrs. Campbell wouldn’t be guilty of a crime.  Again, by their own admission, Webster and Tilghman claim that Campbell may have been given the mysterious tape(s) by a member of SPD.  That’s a pretty strong defense, unless they are now claiming that Campbell participated in a conspiracy.  They should go ask Davis Ruark how hard it is to prove a conspiracy count.

If It Couldn’t Get Any Sleazier -

The Barrie Comegys party is never content with simple innuendo or mere accusation.  No, why merely attack someone when you can go after their families.  For this you need a special kind of scumbag; someone who makes Richard Nixon’s 1972 dirty tricks squad look like the Merry Pranksters.  You need Jonathan Taylor.

Taylor is a special kind of Barrie Comegys acolyte.  Utterly void of any morality and possibly deranged, Taylor is the kind of surrogate people like Barrie Tilghman and her ilk simply drool over.

The tape that Campbell is accused of nabbing was supposedly a surveillance tape of her offices at SNHS.  This was done because of a series of break-ins at their offices.  What does Taylor claim?  It’s a “sex tape”.

The Videotape would contain something damning to Debbie Campbell and that’s the reason it has disappeared. Joe if you are that interested in this rumored sex tape i’m (sic) sure you can get one cheaper over on the corner of Church street.

Is there any evidence of this?  No.  Is this anything but the most rank speculation?  No.  But that doesn’t matter any more than the fact Campbell has children matters.  Given Taylor’s position as the house blogger for the Barrie Comegys party, I’m beginning to smell the faint scent of hypocrisy when people like Salisbury councilman Gary Comegys decry the public discussion of his failure to pay child support.

The State’s Attorney for Wicomico County has already noted that there isn’t a crime to be prosecuted.  So, what does Taylor do?  He speculates that Campbell will be indicted.

Fortunately, very few people read Taylor’s trashy version of events (according to Alexa).  Admittedly, no one with even the basest mammalian intelligence would actually believe this person.  However, a subset of his small readership will.  Let’s take a related example:

Take last year she was afraid to tell Jim and Terry she was going to the Andy Harris fundraiser because she wanted them to think she was with them in the political world. She told her little savior boy Joey to not take any pictures of her so no one would know she actually went. These are facts. This time she is going to make sure she has Jim protect her so she can maintain her little fake innocent act. If you have ever seen her opposite side you would see what a lying and manipulative bitch this woman is.

We’ll forgive the bad syntax.  Calling Campbell a “bitch” merely helps to prove my point; so we’ll let that go as well.  It’s the lying and / or sheer stupidity that I can’t stomach.  The event in question was a fundraiser for a congressional candidate.  Perhaps Taylor is too obtuse to understand that when you give money to a federal candidate you have to fill out a form or card providing your personal information.  This info becomes a matter of public record.  As for Jim (Ireton) protecting Campbell, she hardly needs protection.  If she did, I doubt that Ireton would be providing it; as I’ll discuss in the next section.

Beyond providing more evidence that Taylor is everything he claims Joe Albero to be (but fortunately isn’t), times a factor of 100, why bring this sleazy Albero wannabe into a relatively serious discussion?  His ties to the Barrie Comegys bloc help lead us to the conclusion that Tilghman, Comegys, and Webster are using an on-the-dole, judgment-proof sociopath to slur a woman who is possibly the most popular elected official in Salisbury.  Taylor’s penchant for lies and his willingness to go after Barrie Comegys opponents AND even their children speaks volumes about the people who once led Salisbury (and wish to once again).

The Real Culprit -

Sadly, neither Barrie Tilghman, Gary Comegys, Allan Webster, the Tilghman Times, nor even Jonathan Taylor are the real culprits in this disgusting little morality play.  The real culprit didn’t even do anything.  In fact, it is the inaction of Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton that makes him the chief culprit in this sad little affair.

We should forgive Ireton for bungling this matter in the beginning.  Ireton is not the kind of guy who likes to get into arguments.  He was fairly new to the job.  Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to be the kind of person capable of leading his employees either.

After weeks of being attacked in the press, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the source of the attacks was Webster.  Yet, Ireton proved incapable of keeping a muzzle on his own police chief.  At least Barrie Tilghman didn’t have that problem while she was mayor.

We also need to remember that Ireton ran for office with crime as a leading plank in his platform.  While Ireton and some of his pals may have deluded themselves into believing that “cleaning up the River” was the key issue in his election, a close analysis of the election returns shows that it was crime, taxes, and fiscal responsibility that were the top issues in that race.  The only Salisbury voters who would be upset with Ireton’s sacking of Webster would be the Barrie Comegys bloc on council (Webster can’t vote in Salisbury elections).

Some of Jim’s pals argue that he can’t fire Webster because the Barrie Comegys gang would overturn him.  Possibly, but doubtful.  In a city racked with crime, Webster has admitted to wasting police resources investigating an elected official when nothing could be prosecuted even IF there was a crime.  During a summer with shootings on a scale that seems to rival Charm City, Webster has spent his time waging a little vendetta against two councilwomen and (at times) the mayor.  Even if these events hadn’t occurred, Webster’s record as chief literally SCREAMS for a change.  Besides, CHANGE is what voters wanted.  If not, we would be calling Gary Comegys “Mr. Mayor”.

Gary Comegys is many things.  Stupid isn’t one of them.  While Louise Smith and Shanie Shields may back Webster in a showdown, Comegys wouldn’t want to risk a re-election run with the city’s current crime stats AND his having been responsible for Webster keeping his job.  Even if he did vote with the rest of the Barrie Comegys gang, Ireton would be lauded by the people who put him in office for FINALLY having taken a stand on something.

Jimmy’s not stupid either.  Why then does he continue to back Webster while the he savages Ireton’s political allies?

It has been a poorly kept secret for some time that Webster wants to run for Somerset County Sheriff.  It has been rumored that Ireton has made a deal with Webster to keep him on until Webster declares his candidacy (as a Democrat) in 2010 when Webster would resign.

Honestly, I don’t know that this is true.  However, Ireton has already been caught using his office for partisan political purposes.  As someone who is quite fond of Jimmy and who wishes him nothing but success, to say that I would be disappointed if this were true is a gross understatement.  His job is to run the city AND keep the promises he made to Salisbury voters last spring.  This includes change.

****************************

There you have it – TAPEGATE!  We can only hope that before he gets too settled in, Salisbury’s new mayor will do what it takes to stop this nonsense AND prevent it from occurring again in the future.  If not, voters may soon be pining for those goose-stepping days of the Tilghman administration.

It’s ironic that Democrats believe that foreign terrorists should receive all of the rights and consideration of a US citizen while many of these same people don’t blink at the mistreatment of US citizens housed in our correctional facilities.  No, I’m not soft on crime.  I don’t even think these people deserve to have TV and other recreational activities  I also don’t believe that they should be abused by the very same people charged with guarding them.

The Caesar Rodney Institute has just released a new report, Rogue Force, outlining more abuses at Delaware’s own little version of Attica circa 1971.  Abuses at the Sussex Correctional Institution are well documented.  They are currently under a federal consent decree to straighten out their act.  Evidently they aren’t doing too well at accomplishing that goal.

Who’s been in charge of the Delaware prison system for almost 20 years?  Democrat administrations.  But wait!  I thought it was us evil Republicans who were brutal, fascist thugs.  Isn’t that why the Obama administration wants to give all of these rights to terrorists?

Calling for tougher sentences on drug dealers and tougher sex offender registration laws, former Virginia AG Bob McDonnell unveiled his plan for public safety.  We can expect Democrat opponent Creigh “Me Too” Deeds to present his plan as soon as his Xerox machine warms up.

We all know that Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley thinks that taxpayers exist merely to be squeezed to pay for more wasteful spending.  But what about St. Marty, the champion of the poor and the oppressed?  Of course that must be true.  He is a Democrat after all.

We need to remember that O’Malley is a politician, first and foremost.  He’d probably sell his kids for the right number of votes, so kicking poor people out of their homes is a walk in the park if you want to be governor.

That’s what happened in Baltimore under Mayor O’Malley.  Using federal tax dollars to dismantle public housing, rather than improve it, O’Malley forced poor city dwellers out of their homes in an attempt to reduce crime.  Then O’Malley pretended shock when courts forced the counties to pick up the slack.

Now O’Malley is the guardian of over $44 million in new federal housing money.  Let’s see what he does now.

It’s doubtful that Salisbury’s Daily Times will win a Pulitzer anytime soon.  That said, they seem to be sinking to lows that may exceed their own dismal record.  The question is whether the staff of the Daily Times is lazy, incompetent, or attempting to influence local government through intimidation.

This morning’s article about a mysterious “report” on Salisbury police chief Allan Webster not only fails to meet any standard of truth, it doesn’t even meet a standard of accuracy.  The article even admits that it is based on “rumor”.  Given that the reporter, Laura D’Alessandro, was unable to confirm any of these rumors, I am shocked that any newspaper would run such a story anywhere, much less on the front page above the fold.

To set the record straight, there is no “report” co-authored by Salisbury councilwomen Debbie Campbell and Terry Cohen.  Not only do both ladies deny this, there is no evidence to support the existence of such a “report”.  It is true that both members, separately, sent letters to Mayor Jim Ireton.  Campbell sent a one page letter to Ireton expressing the concerns of both herself and constituents regarding the performance of Webster.  Cohen sent a letter to Ireton covering concerns and complaints of constituents based on a meeting that was held and Ireton had been unable to attend.

D’Alessandro’s approach to this was both slipshod and reckless.  In an attempt to garner reaction from Campbell she first asked if councilwoman Campbell “had filed charges” against Webster.  When asked what was the source of this bizarre allegation, D’Alessandro replied that one of her editors had “read it on a blog”.  While I’m glad that the management of the Daily Times takes time from their busy schedules to peruse the local blogosphere, I would suggest that they pick more credible sites to read.

Campbell did not respond to D’Alessandro’s repeated inquiries about “rumors” that seemed to change by the hour:

“First of all, I don’t respond to rumors.  More importantly, when it became apparent that this was little more than a “witch hunt”, I declined to take part.”

If D’Alessandro had taken the time to do a little research and ask the right questions, she may have uncovered facts, rather than put her name to nothing but innuendo.  However, that was never the goal of the Daily Times. Councilwoman Cohen did respond to D’Alessandro’s inquiries:

“Salisbury can use less media drama and more attention to issues.  Where Chief Webster is concerned, I’ve done my role as an elected representative of the people and relayed concerns to Mayor Ireton.  By charter, it is the mayor’s role and at his discretion to decide what comes next.  There is no action or inaction that is newsworthy right now.”

However, since this didn’t jibe with the story they wanted, Cohen’s quote did not find its way into D’Alessandro’s article.  That is why we were treated to this little ditty by Salisbury’s own Nobel laureate, Councilman Gary Comegys:

“Here we go again,” said Council Vice President Gary Comegys. “I heard that a six-page document outlining complaints against the chief, exists but I can’t comment on its contents because I haven’t seen it. Those two council people (Campbell and Cohen) are acting outside their duties and scope as council members.”

Forgiving the poor use of punctuation, Campbell and Cohen were NOT acting outside their “duties and scope as council members”.  It is their RESPONSIBILITY to meet with constituents and forward any concerns to the mayor.  It is the mayor’s duty to take action if and as he sees fit.  However, I can understand why Comegys would think this given that he has spent six years doing little more than rubber stamping the will of former mayor Barrie Tilghman and attacking the character of anyone who disagrees with the policies or folly of the Barrie Comegys party.  At some point in time Comegys may understand that it is the duty of council members to LEGISLATE and PROVIDE OVERSIGHT.  Perhaps when Comegys publicly disagrees with the man who crushed him at the polls this spring he can be reminded of his own words.

INTIMIDATION

In reality there was an ulterior motive to the Daily Times’ little exercise in rumor mongering.  This was an obvious attempt to intimidate Mayor Ireton.  Almost 25% of D’Alessandro’s piece is devoted to discussion of an event that occurred seven years ago and involving a Salisbury city council of which no member currently serves in office.  However, mention of these past events was needed to throw out the figure “$100,000“.

This is the reported cost to the taxpayer of that council attempting to oust Webster in 2002.  Why was the cost so high you might ask?  While this is only speculation, I would venture that this was due to:

• The usual legal efficiency of city attorney Paul Wilber    and…

• The fact that then mayor Barrie Tilghman persuaded the council to pay all of Webster’s legal fees.

By implying that Ireton might be wasting taxpayer dollars if he dismisses Webster, the paper is simply attempting to protect an acolyte of Barrie Tilghman’s.  Given that the nickname of the paper has been the Tilghman Times, this is not surprising.  For years, the paper has been an advocate of nearly every policy, harebrained scheme, and general wasting of tax dollars which emanated from Tilghman’s office.  They have also made assassinating the character of Tilghman’s critics an actual “stock in trade”.  In fact, one of the surest methods of securing promotion at Gannett’s local arm has been to relentlessly attack her opponents, particularly Campbell.  Just ask (now) editors Joe Carmean and Laren Hughes-Hall (both now editors).

During the Tilghman years we could expect almost as much objective coverage of Salisbury government as we could of the Wicomico County Board of Education (WCBOE).  However, at least in the case of the WCBOE there was good reason.  The public information officer of the WCBOE is the wife of Daily Times Managing Editor Erick Sahler.

I can only infer that defending a Tilghman acolyte with scurrilous rumor mongering has become a reflex reaction over at the Daily Times.  Why else would they continue to support the likes of Allan Webster.  During his tenure we have seen Salisbury become one of the most dangerous cities (per capita) in America.  He has refused to take part in any solution that was not of his own making or for self-aggrandizement (e.g. the Crime Taskforce).  While there are two unsolved murders, this year, Webster has time to pitch stories to the newspaper.

A MOLE IN THE GOB?

There remains one question in this little play, one which Councilwoman Cohen so presciently termed “media drama”.  Who turned over Campbell’s and Cohen’s private correspondence to Mayor Ireton?  Given that both letters were hand delivered to Ireton, how did Webster see them (if he saw them)?

Perhaps Ireton, being the good grade school teacher that he is, called Webster in for a little chat?  If so, that would be fine.  Of course, we should then ask why Webster wanted to go public with a private personnel issue.

If not, someone in Ireton’s administration leaked the information to Webster.  The most likely suspects would be City Administrator John Pick, Asst. City Administrator Lore Chambers, the city’s HR chief, or DIS chief Pam Olan (who is responsible for HR, finance and procurement).

I certainly don’t know, but Ireton would be wise to find out (and quickly) who can be trusted in the Mayor’s office and who can’t.  It’s going to be difficult for Ireton to do his job if his subordinates are always attempting to undermine him and his office.