Today’s front page story in the Daily Times regarding Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton’s new “Slumlord of the Week” policy fails to answer several questions:

1. Is this “policy” meant to accomplish anything?
2. Why doesn’t Ireton actually do something to fulfill his campaign promise “to ‘close loopholes’ in the city’s municipal codes and get crime out of neighborhoods”?

IF Ireton was actually doing something to close these loopholes and to actually enforce the spirit, as well as the letter, of the city’s zoning laws that would be one thing.  Instead, we have seen one woman loose her rental income because of zoning (last Sunday’s DT), but we’re not seeing any progress in taking care of the scores of non-conforming uses in the city.

Ireton isn’t pushing the issue in the appropriate forum – the city council – because he knows that the “council majority” of Gary Comegys, Louise Smith, and Shanie Shields are owned by the city’s slumlords.  Instead of exhibiting a backbone, my friend Jim is doing what liberals do best – making a show without accomplishing anything.

Does he really believe that a slumlord is going to be shamed?  It’s time for a little reality check Jimmy.

Because Ireton is unwilling to stand up to either the Barrie Comegys bloc on council or the bureaucracy within his own administration, Salisbury’s citizens are being forced to pay for Allan Webster’s six month paid vacation, watch city officials spend money that has not been appropriated, and now they are being given a “show” rather than real solutions to the rental problems that have faced Salisbury for years.

In just over a month, Ireton will present his first budget.  I am confident that it will include a sizable tax increase.  I can’t wait to see what kind of show Ireton will put on to justify that “policy” as well.

Jim needs to learn that the people who elected him expect solutions, not a “show”.  Jim needs to learn that voters want him to DO SOMETHING rather than just claim to “feel their pain”.

While the legal, over-the-table cash from Salisbury’s major and minor slumlords continues to be heaped upon the head of the Barrie Comegys ticket – Gary Comegys, it’s the illegal, under-the-table money that I find most interesting. Billing themselves as “a group of concerned rental owners”, a group of anonymous slumlords has spent thousands of dollars on a mailing to benefit the candidacies of their chosen ticket – Gary Comegys, Muir Boda, and Shanie Shields.

Little more than baseless lies, this mailing appeals to fear:

If you don’t vote for Comegys, Boda, and Shields we’re going to raise your rent!

What’s sad, is that this appeal defies all reason. Gary Comegys and Shanie Shields voted for a double-digit property tax increase less than two years ago. This seems fine with Salisbury’s slumlords. No, they are concerned about an increase in the landlord registration fee?

Why? The reason is a simple one. Slumlords are frightened that they may actually have to obey the law if Comegys, Boda, and Shields lose. This could actually cost them far more than the property tax increases sure to come under a Comegys administration with a rubber stamp council composed of Muir Boda, Shanie Shields and Louise Smith.

So what if a few folks die because rentals don’t meet the fire code? There will always be more people to pack into rentals. Who cares if slumlords take single family residences and illegally convert them into de facto boarding houses? The demise of our city’s older neighborhoods just means that slumlords get their properties at a cheaper price.

C’mon, they wouldn’t just make this stuff up. Would they?

Let’s see. Jim Ireton has stated emphatically that he isn’t interested in raising landlord licensing fees. Cynthia Polk hasn’t spoken out on the issue. Contrary to the claims put forth by these “concerned rental owners”, Debbie Campbell has never advocated a “per bedroom tax”. All three have stated that they weren’t interested in revisiting the “4-2” fiasco.

What are these claims based on? Two things. First, the authors are scurrilous liars who care no more for the truth than the price of bread. Second, back in 2006 Mrs. Campbell distributed a letter to the other council members which stated that taxpayers should not subsidize developers or landlords.

Imagine that! Debbie Campbell spoke out AGAINT TAXPAYER MONEY SUBSIDIZING DEVELOPERS AND SLUMLORDS. She opposed it prior to her election to council, she has consistently done so while on council, and I’m willing to bet that she’ll be speaking out against these subsidies AFTER she leaves council.

You know, that’s just what we don’t need – elected officials who are consistent in their approach to public policy and don’t hesitate to make a decision or take a stand. We need people like Muir Boda, who talks about the need for civility while comparing his opponent to Saddam Hussein. We need people like Shanie Shields who “ain’t never seen no wasteful government spending.” We need people like Gary Comegys who vote to raise water and sewer rates and then reverses himself when the public finds out (thanks to Debbie Campbell) that Comegys’ justification for the increase was based on a total lie (or was it gross incompetence?).

Gee, maybe those “concerned rental owners” are right.

… With a Unique Blend of Rhetoric and Substance

Anyone who attended Jim Ireton’s announcement that he was running for Mayor had to be impressed.  Ireton’s well thought out speech hit on the major problems facing Salisbury and Ireton presented common sense solutions to solving them.

The most important thing to note about Ireton’s speech was an almost unique blend of persuasive rhetoric and substantive policy recommendations.  Ireton accomplished this because he is truly passionate about Salisbury and in solving the problems facing a once great city.  There was nothing “over the top” about anything he said.  Instead Ireton focused attention on 5 issues:

• The Wicomico River

• Growth and Development

• Housing

• Fiscal Policy

• Crime

Ireton’s approach is well studied, without any rash proposals.

One item that I was particularly happy to see mentioned was the Tilghman administration’s incessant use of subsidy:

when we use taxes from small businesses to subsidize the creation of their competition…

This quote appears to be directed at enterprise zone tax credits.  I am a HUGE proponent of enterprise zones.  However, the Tilghman administration (along with her infamous “council leadership”) have taken a lazy, ineffective approach to a great concept.

Rather than draw enterprise zones in areas where they are needed, and remove the areas which have flourished, the Tilghman – Comegys approach has been one of continually adding areas to one big enterprise zone without trimming off areas where it is no longer needed.

The Tilghman – Comegys approach has lead to tax credits for condos (which are not permitted under the law), a Walgreen’s drug store on Salisbury Blvd. and a hotel at the north end of the city.  None of these were in blighted areas that enterprise zones were originally designed to benefit.  Ineffectual corporate welfare, rather than genuine attempts at economic development, has been a standing policy of the Barrie Tilghman / Gary Comegys / Louise Smith (nee Mike Dunn) school of misgovernance.

Another great idea advocated by Ireton is that of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO).  By giving developers a choice – either delay development or contribute to the construction of needed infrastructure – existing residents and businesses are not forced to subsidize new residents or competetors.

A genuine APFO for Salisbury would also put the Wicomico County government in a corner on this matter.  To date, County Executive Rick Pollitt and the swing votes on the Wicomico County Council have used Salisbury as an excuse for not passing a county APFO.  It is a valid argument given Salisbury’s current zeal for annexation and residential development.  However, a strong APFO in Salisbury takes away that excuse and would force Pollitt and the County Council to take a stand.

It should, however, be noted that there were several areas where I believe Ireton’s approach was deficient.  While his proposal for cleaning up the Wicomico River sounds good, there is a gaping hole in the area of how to pay for it.

While Ireton devoted a sizable percentage of his address to fiscal policy, there was no mention of tax policy except for one brief reference to the subsidy our small businesses provide to new competetors.  Granted, given that the Tilghman administration is unable to even balance the city’s checkbook it would be unwise to take a no tax hike pledge.  We have no idea what type of rat’s nest will be uncovered upon Barrie Tilghman leaving office.

There is no question that an Ireton administration would help to make Salisbury more economically viable.  However, I wish he had directly addressed economic development in his speech.

While I wish that he had included a few other items (as mentioned above), there was only one item in Ireton’s speech which gave me pause for concern.  Regarding the Wicomico River, Ireton states:

We will … require that all development be environmentally and economically sound …

Hopefully, this was just a rhetorical device (just as I love alliteration).  I, for one, do not believe that it is the place of a municipal government to judge the economic viability of any project.  The state and federal governments have more than enough regulations on the books to police the environmental impact of any project.

If the city is subsidizing a project, then judging economic viability is a legitimate concern.  However it is my sincere hope, and understanding, that an Ireton administration would not be engaging in the myriad forms of corporate welfare which the Tilghman administration engages in with the support of Ireton’s chief rival Gary Comegys.

While Jim and I are at polar opposites of the national and state political spetra, there is no question that Jim Ireton would make an excellent Mayor.  He is passionately concerned about the future of Salisbury.  He is a good and honorable man.  IF the voters are wise enough to elect him AND a council that shares the same concerns, Salisbury residents and businesses face a much brighter future.

The Daily Times campaign to elect Barrie Comegys Mayor of Salisbury continues.  At least the paper put today’s piece of tripe on the op-ed page as opposed to their previous piece of mis-statement and fabrication which was portrayed as reporting.

Today’s piece, purportedly authored by the Barrie Comegys himself, was laughable in its inaccuracy.  It appears as if Comegys is taking the platform of Councilwoman Debbie Campbell’s re-election campaign and simply substituting his own name for Campbell’s:

Together we can make our streets safer.

Comegys has opposed almost every effort to reduce crime in Salisbury and increase funding for law enforcement.  Citizens need to be reminded that it was Comegys who was in full agreement with the Tilghman administration in closing all police substations (except in the area where the Mayor and her husband own commercial property).  The man who claims to support “community policing” was the man who gutted the concept in Salisbury.

Together we can strengthen our neighborhoods.

Comegys has consistently opposed legislation to strengthen single family neighborhoods.  He has, however, been a staunch ally of the city’s slumlords who have helped to decimate the city’s neighborhoods.  In his last re-election campaign, it was Comegys’ allies in SAPOA (the slumlord’s guild) who mailed their tenants in a successful attempt to intimidate those tenants into voting for Comegys. (It’s pretty frightening when you are told that voting for certain candidates will cause you to be homeless).

Together we can make government more efficient.

Comegys has consistently fought efforts to make city government more efficient and more responsive to Salisbury residents.  In addition, for a life long government employee to claim insight into “efficiency” is simply ridiculous on its face.

Together we can enhance our environment.

Under Comegys’ watch we have seen the Wicomico River become infamous as “Pooh River”.  He has steadfastly fought all attempts to make the city more accountable for their role in polluting the River.

Together we can make Salisbury an even greater place to call home.

There is no question that Barrie Comegys will make Salisbury an even greater place to live IF your idea of a great home is:

• Higher Taxes

• Higher Crime

• Reduced City Services

• Continuing Environmental Degradation

• More Bureacracy

• Fewer Jobs

In his run for re-election in 2007, I gave Comegys a great deal of credit for standing by his record.  While I disagreed with Comegys on most issues, I respected his willingness to take responsibility for his actions.  What we are seeing this year is a concerted effort by Comegys and his pals at the Daily Times to make up a story out of whole cloth.

This year, I think we can look forward to a long campaign of deceit and fabrication.  While not surprised, I am genuinely saddened at the complicity of our local paper in this ridiculous tale.

As a resident of Salisbury’s Johnson Lake neighborhood (who was victim of an attack in her home) discovered Monday night, the majority of the Salisbury City Council “feels her pain” when it comes to crime. She just shouldn’t expect much to be done about it.

The woman who appeared before the Salisbury Council claims that she can identify her attacker. Unfortunately, it appears that the police didn’t do enough investigating to secure a conviction. I wonder what would have occurred if the attack had been a few blocks north in the home of Councilman Gary Comegys or Salisbury Mayor Barrie Tilghman?

No, these are the types of things people have come to expect in a future “All-America City”. Perhaps if money was spent on crime prevention rather than bottled water, tents at the Tawes Clam Bake, or applications for the “All-America City” competition. Perhaps Tilghman and her husband could buy some property in the neighborhood. Then Johnson Lake could get its own community organizer and police sub-station.

Don’t expect much support from Tilghman’s council crew. Demanding that something be done would be “micromanaging” according to Comegys. Of course, he is planning on running for Mayor next year.

According to Councilwoman Shanie Shields, these folks shouldn’t get in an uproar. It’s not like we’re Detroit, Baltimore, or Philadelphia.  Your periodic home invasion shouldn’t be of much concern.  Murder isn’t murder unless it’s random.

Councilwoman Louise Smith will just continue to nod, and do what Comegys and Tilghman tell her to do. That’s the price she paid for the center chair.

While we can’t expect much to be actually accomplished in this matter – Councilwomen Debbie Campbell and Terry Cohen are in a minority and are the only two actually willing to tackle an issue like this – we can expect this to be a campaign issue.

Ryan Ewalt – who recently moved back to Salisbury from North Carolina – is rumored to be the Tilghman / Comegys bloc’s chosen opponent for Campbell next year. His speech Monday night may just have been the unofficial kick-off for a campaign.

I guess we’ll find out soon enough if Ewalt will be the new poster child for SAPOA.

Did you know that Salisbury taxpayers have their own “community organizer” on the payroll? As the Daily Times promotes National Night Out in Salisbury, certain salient details are left out of the perfunctory puff piece.

When appearing before the Wicomico County Council a couple of months ago, Ms. Michelle Parks was described by Barrie Tilghman acolyte Lore Chambers as a “community organizer”. Ms. Parks is on the city payroll.

In the past, when a neighborhood held a “National Night Out” event it was usually a volunteer effort. Of course the city is expending plenty of tax dollars in attempting to revitalize the Church Street / Doverdale area of Salisbury. Why have people take responsibility for their own neighborhood when you can throw tax dollars?

Councilwoman Louise Smith, who never had an original idea in her life, has been persuaded by certain folks to be the “poster princess” for this effort. Then you have Chambers and Parks. Where is Salisbury Mayor Barrie Tilghman?

While I have accused Tilghman of many things, being stupid isn’t one of them. Tilghman appears to be quietly hanging out in the shadows as your tax dollars are spent in an attempt to take area residents by the hand and get them to take responsibility for their own neighborhood. While police substations are closed elsewhere around Salisbury, Church Street gets to keep theirs. While street repair is ignored elsewhere, money is spent in Church Street / Doverdale.

Is this because Barrie Tilghman has such a big heart? Perhaps. Or is it because Tilghman and her husband Matt have a sizable investment in commercial property in the area? Hmmm…

Salisbury Mayor Barrie Tilghman’s “State of the City” address on Monday provided us with a glimpse of how a truly devious mind works. For several years Tilghman and her “Dream Team” promoted the idea of a revitalization of the “North Prong” area of the city. The unstated goal has seems to be the gentrification of the West Side of Salisbury. To those of you not familiar with the term, gentrification usually has the end affect of driving the poor black folks (and Latinos) out and replacing them with nice, well coiffed white folk.

To date Tilghman and her minions have been unsuccessful in their pursuit. Their desire to subsidize developers through a Community Development Corporation (CDC) have been a bust. Too many of the unwashed see it for what it is (a bureaucratic boondoggle designed to consolidate Tilghman’s power while funneling city funds to her friends). The state has, so far, refused to fund Tilghman’s attempts to push a large portion of the minority community out of the city. Oh, what to do?

To get around this little problem Tilghman has devised a brilliant solution! The North Prong project is no long an economic development issue. It is now an “environmental disaster”! Tilghman is now seeking federal funds, with the help of Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), and Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (?-MD).

I have to give the old gal credit. No one can slap lipstick on a pig like Barrie! By relabeling her little scam an “environmental issue”, she may be able to get the funds she desires. She may also be able to attract some of the more moderate tree huggers to her cause (Tilghman already seems to have the radical WET crowd firmly in her pocket).

Peeling off some of the opposition is key to her plan. She’ll need help for STEP 2 of her minority eradication program.

STEP 2 involves a new “task force” that Tilghman has established. Their first charge will be to replace the “Fitzwater Street townhouses” with “Workforce Housing”. Translation – she wants the city to take over those row homes west of the Perdue plant and replace them with housing that will sell for somewhere between $150,000 and $250,000. Who will be living there? It certainly won’t be any of the hourly workers at the Perdue plant.

Of course this brings us to STEP 3. Tilghman didn’t discuss this while telling her little story. STEP 3 will be coming up with a way to get Perdue to leave the city. Why? You can’t have a Yuppie heaven on the West Side with that big ol’ smelly chicken plant. Who wants to buy a $400,000 condo that overlooks those steam pipes? Forget how much Perdue pays in taxes and how many people the company employs.

Again, I have to give credit to Tilghman. She has done a masterful job of re-packaging her boondoggle. She may even get her funding.

Whether its two, five, ten, or fifteen years down the road the poor folks of the West Side will be able to thank Barrie Tilghman and Shanie Shields as they are being evicted from their homes.

cross posted at Salisbury News

Technorati Tags: Maryland, Salisbury, politics, Salisbury politics, Barrie Tilghman, Shanie Shields, environment, affordable housing, neighborhoods, redevelopment, Barbara Mikulski, Ben Cardin, Wayne Gilchrest

A goodly number of citizens spent Tuesday evening at the Youth & Civic Center in a meeting that permitted proponents and opponents of the aptly named Crooked Oak land purchase to share their thoughts in front of the County Council and on PAC-14. The County Executive did not attend. Some spoke long, and some spoke short. Folks were polite and respectful to each other. The council members listened but made no comments.

Thanks are due to the council members for their presence and attention, and for providing the opportunity for all who wished to speak to do so.

I didn’t try to run a scorecard, but in my opinion, opponents outnumbered proponents both in the audience and at the podium.

Some of the themes as I heard them (none are verbatim). Any topical omissions are my fault and inadvertent:

Pro

Do it for the kids; more ball fields are needed; most proponents touched this point. My assessment of their interest: Most wanted more play space nearer to where they live and this spot is the closest one mentioned to date.

It will draw tourist dollars to motels and restaurants.

I’d rather look at a park than a housing development.

It’s free, in largest manner, by way of a state grant program.

Won’t be developed until proposed Westside collector road is completed.

Mr. Mackes stated the county has made a conditional offer for the parcel for about $1.8 million based on two appraisals.

Con

The land is not a good type of soil for recreation uses.

Access roads are tar & chip, narrow and with many difficult features for drivers.

Proposed cost per acre is grossly overpriced; about 3 times more than other farmland in a close radius to the parcel.

Country lanes will turn into congested expressways, especially before and after ballgames.

I moved here (the Westside) to have a quiet, rural lifestyle; this will alter it for the worse.

Cost to develop and maintain proposed park is unknown and no effort has been made to offer any estimate to the public.

County has a $10 million unfunded backlog of roads repairs and maintenance.

County already has 58 parks.

Pirates Wharf parkland has not been developed during the past decade and it’s not that far away.

Funds will be available for a purchase of a different parcel, at a later date, if council chooses. No requirement for a hasty decision.

Other parks have a number of maintenance issues that need to be addressed before we add to the parkland inventory.

Funds could be used for ag preservation programs that would yield much more actual open space.

Several farmers and a retired engineer with decades of soils experience in the county stated the soils there are not a good match for the projected new use.

Even if the purchase is ‘free’ due to the cash coming from the state, it represents abuse of all the taxpayers to grossly overspend.

Will remove the parcel from the tax rolls; by comparison, even if only 11 houses are built there, they will provide significant tax revenue.

Other parcels comparable in size and offering variety of features Crooked Oak does not have are for sale. Two property owners shared details of their nearby parcels that are for sale. Price per acre county plans to pay is beyond their wildest dreams; almost 4 times more per acre according to one of the prospective sellers – Call us, please!

Kinda Neutral

Several folks deeply attached to Pemberton Hall urged against any consideration of locating ball fields there.

My Take

The parcel is fatally flawed by the nature and methodology used to advance its purchase.

Pretty shocking to have two citizens offer their sizeable nearby parcels for consideration; both sounded like they would have received serious consideration in any kind of an objective selection process. Which never happened.

“Do it for the kids” is a lame argument and avoids looking at the underlying realities. Additional park space may be a really fine idea, but it should be planned for on a countywide basis rather than ginned up as an ad hoc proposal to bail out a failing development.

Kilbirnie has been in place over 20 years and recreation areas were in place there from the get-go. Many, many other developments across the US have been incorporating these features – for decades before that. Slack, negligent oversight of our local planning and approval processes for years have enabled most developers to give lip service or less to development centered recreation features that would meet many of these recreation needs within walking distance of the residents. Development centered recreation features are both Smart and Green.

One of the elephants in the room is that its very, very clear this proposal would have been DOA had funds for purchase been coming from the county coffers.

Mr. Mackes stated he’d been looking for a parcel close to this area for 10 years. The county routinely advertises for things it wants to buy. An enormous amount of property has changed hands on the Westside over the last ten years. It never occurred to him to put an ad in the paper? I do get offended when you insult my intelligence, even though I wasn’t at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

How was it possible that he overlooked the property’s availability in April 2006 for $667,000? All that’s changed on the parcel since then is the seasons, yet now we’re asked to pay 3 times the April 2006 value, or twice the ‘flipped’ value in December 2006 of $900,000; pick yer poison! Ooops; something has changed in the last two years – real estate has crashed, so naturally we’d want to pay 3 times more!! Still reading? Head spinning yet?

Oh, by the way, apparently among the comparative properties professional appraisers used to justify the jacked up price were golf courses in Delaware. Thank goodness we have the opinions of the pros; no telling what kind of crazy comparatives ‘amateurs’ (aka taxpayers) might have come up with.

Dear Council, please turn back this botched proposal. Its inception, composition and timing reek.

If, in your judgment, there is a need on the Westside, or the rest of the county, for more park space let’s have an open, transparent dialogue regarding what citizen needs and desires are (waterparks, mud hops, swimming pools, skateboards, driving ranges, shooting clays, playing marbles, etc), and where its desirable to look for opportunities to purchase or improve. Work with the Executive to make a plan and share it with citizens. Look fairly in accordance with transparent guidelines at all parcels folks wish to sell. Then put the plan into motion. All of our schools have some outdoor areas and many seem mainly unused after school hours. Add lights and yer good to go. And then, if you want some, or all, of this parcel, rest assured it will still be available….at a fair price.

Closing thought: Just because we already have a park named Pirates Wharf doesn’t mean we should spend money like drunken sailors!

When large numbers of residents on Salisbury’s West Side are forced to leave their homes thanks to proposed “rehabilitation” of the area along the North Prong of the Wicomico River they should ask Councilwoman Shanie Shields if they can move in with her (in her non-city home on Jersey Road). Monday night the Salisbury City Council voted (with Shields in the majority) to fund a “strategic plan for the revitalization of the North Prong”

There is no secret that the Tilghman administration wants to turn the North Prong (and adjacent areas) into “condo city”. Personally, I don’t think it’s such a bad idea. Of course I don’t live there and I won’t be displaced. Who will benefit? The slumlords, who will see the values of their property rise ten fold (or more).

Where will these people go? I guess that’s not Shields’ problem. It appears that Mrs. Shields won’t be on council much longer anyway, due to her impending exodus from the city.

Technorati Tags: Maryland, Salisbury, politics, Salisbury politics, Shanie Shields, development

Powered by ScribeFire.

In Thursday’s Tilghman Times, Salisbury Police Chief makes an excellent argument for shutting down police substations in Salisbury and replacing them with a “mobile substation”. On Friday, we were treated to a letter to the editor from Mr. David Ganoe applauding the Salisbury PD for its “mobile substation”. Bill Duvall admits that Webster’s argument is so persuasive as to make the debate over the closing of the Smith and Cecil Street substations virtually a “no-brainer”.

Mr. Duvall follows up with the very prescient question, “What am I missing?”

What he and many others are missing is the disingenuousness of Chief Webster’s argument. IF Webster’s argument were sound, why is the city keeping the Church Street substation open? IF Webster’s argument were sound, why are there not more police truly on the streets versus merely driving around in patrol cars?

Webster makes the argument that officers IN substations are not officers on the streets. True enough. However, the Chief would have us believe that officers driving around in patrol cars are the same as officers walking or biking through a neighborhood. Prior to Chief Webster’s tenure in Salisbury officers who had to spend time in the station to do paperwork were often directed to do that work at one of the substations. This allowed the substation officer(s) to be walking throughout the neighborhood and building relationships with the residents. This isn’t accomplished in a patrol car.

Community policing works. That is a proven fact. Community policing is NOT officers in patrol cars. If the Chief were serious about his department having a true presence in communities throughout the city his gussied up ice cream truck would be but one tool in solving the city’s crime problem. Unfortunately Webster seems to believe that his ice cream truck is a substitute for community policing.

The mobile substation is a great idea. It can be dispatched to areas of the city where a permanent substation may not be necessary, but where an occasional beefed up police presence is necessary. Mr. Ganoe’s letter is a case in point. Mr. Ganoe lives off of Onley Road in an area dominated by student housing. I can understand Mr. Ganoe’s delight in seeing the mobile substation in his neighborhood. However, this also proves that Webster’s argument is full of holes.

Let’s assume that on a given Saturday night there is a flood of calls for North Camden, Princeton Homes and Mr. Ganoe’s neighborhood. With the substations closed where will the “mobile substation” go? Does Chief Webster fancy himself Solomon? Does he plan on cutting the ice cream truck into three pieces?

It also shows that the primary purpose of the “mobile substation” is that of a high tech paddy wagon rather than part of a community policing strategy. This is not a bad thing. As Mr. Ganoe’s letter points out, this is a great tool to keep a lid on loud student parties. It also serves to make residents feel more secure because they can see a police presence.

Will it have an effect on property crime or drug related crime? Doubtful. If the ice cream truck pulls onto a street, the dealers will simply move six block down and two blocks over. Their customers will just follow suit. It’s basic drug trade economics Al. The demand will follow the supply.

I am also concerned about the overall lack of leadership coming from the Chief and Mayor Barrie Tilghman in fighting the overall crime problem in Salisbury. This was really brought home this week during a conversation I had with a woman from Attleboro, MA. It seems that her husband is a field training officer with the Attleboro PD. During our conversation I found out a few things that caused me to do a little research.

Attleboro has a population of over 43,000 people. That is about 78% more people than Salisbury. Attleboro has a police force of 77 officers. That’s 12.5% FEWER officers than Salisbury has. Let’s compare crime stats:

Obviously manpower isn’t an issue. What is? Perhaps we need to look at motivation at the top. As previously mentioned, the Church Street substation isn’t being closed. I have suggested in the past that the Mayor may have a political motivation in punishing the Camden and Princeton Homes neighborhoods. Of course you only need to read the Tilghman Times to realize that the Mayor has invested a lot of political capital in the Church Street / Doverdale area of Salisbury. Mayor Tilghman now has Councilwoman Louise Smith tied into the success of the area as well. If the “mobile substation” was so effective as a crime prevention tool, why isn’t that substation being closed as well?

The answer is simple. Barrie Tilghman wants a drop in crime in that area and wants to take the credit. She and Webster will tell the public that it is because of their new policing strategy. Of course we can’t count on the media to ask tough questions like, “Isn’t the substation a factor in that drop in crime?”.

Technorati Tags: Salisbury, politics, salisburypolitics, police, crime

Powered by ScribeFire.