When elected officials waste your tax dollars your recourse is limited.  You can complain.  You can lobby your officials.  Ultimately, you can vote those persons out in the next election.  One of the wonders of our great nation is our willingness and ability to replace politicians with the ballot rather than the bullet.

Sadly, there are instances in our local, state, and federal governments when officials steal from the taxpayer – either through embezzlement or spending public monies that are not lawfully appropriated.  Do we resort to the bullet?  Of course not.  This is America; that’s what prisons are for.

During the fascist regime of the former Queen of Barrieland, Salisbury taxpayers witnessed a constant, and consistent, stream of spending public funds without lawful appropriations.  When current Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton ran for his present post he promised voters that this type of behavior would not be repeated under an Ireton regime.  Sadly, this has proven NOT to be the case.

At last Monday’s Salisbury council meeting, Councilwoman Terry Cohen presented a chronology of the illegal spending of almost $100,000 for a dump truck.  While the Barrie Comegys faction of council heaped abuse on Cohen, the Ireton administration has stood idly by and refused to accept responsibility for the lion’s share of this debacle.

Yeah, I know.  It’s not even $100,000.  When Jim Ireton proposes raising your taxes in a couple of months, I hope you’re still smiling.  These little boo-boo’s add up.

Some folks want the head of Councilwoman Louise Smith.  Sadly, I have to report that Smith’s share of the blame is minimal – in this instance.

According to Cohen’s documentation, Smith signed off on the contract for purchasing a 3 ton dump truck.  The award of bid was approved by council.  Yes, Cohen notified  City Administrator John Pick that she thought a budget amendment would be required.  Yes, Pick confirmed that one would be needed.  Yes, I’m confident that Smith received copies of these emails.

Here’s the rub.  It was Internal Services chief Pam Oland that affirmed on the contract that an adequate appropriation existed.  IF Pick notified Oland that a budget amendment would be needed, Oland is chiefly responsible and should forfeit her job.  IF Pick DID NOT notify Oland, then Pick bears the brunt and should be sacrificed.

Yes, Smith probably should have known.  However, Louise Smith is “dumber than a sack of hair”.  She can’t even follow her own council rules.  Oland and city solicitor Paul Wilber have provided Smith with adequate cover.  No one would like to see her hang for something like this more than I.  However, I believe that we are better than people like Smith and Barrie Tilghman.  Therefore, let’s hang her for something with a little more substance.

Some have pointed with glee to Wilber’s signature as proof to his complicity in this brewing mini-scandal.  If you are a longtime reader, you are well aware that Delmarva Dealings has never hesitated to express a negative opinion of Wilber’s supposed service to Salisbury’s taxpayers.  That said, it’s not Wilber’s job to check the budget every time he reviews a contract.  I’m assuming that this contract is legally correct (outside of the lack of a legal appropriation).  Therefore, Wilber did his job regarding this matter.  Regardless of how much abuse I would love to heap on Wilber for past sins, he doesn’t appear to be guilty of anything in this particular case.

SO – who is really to blame in the GREAT DUMP TRUCK DEBACLE OF 2010?  As noted above, the real blame seems to rest with either Pick or Oland.  Sadly, Ireton has decided to turn a problem into a full blown scandal.  Rather than finding out who is to blame, getting rid of the problem, and apologizing, my friend Jim has decided to take a darker path.

Much to their credit, Cohen and fellow Councilwoman Debbie Campbell refuse to vote for an ex post facto budget amendment.  As we witnessed in the infamous Chief Webster affair, Ireton lacks the intestinal fortitude to point out the culprit and dismiss them.  Now Ireton has a new toy for his public works department, purchased illegally with public funds.  The truck is titled and tagged.  It appears that Ireton is waiting things out until the fourth quarter so he can move the funds WITHOUT council approval.  This is where my friend Jim has lost my support forever.

OK.  Jim’s a nice guy.  Jim doesn’t like to fight.  I though Ireton told us that he would “speak truth to power”.  I guess that means anyone EXCEPT the despotic bureaucracy he inherited.  Ireton’s refusal to tackle this matter makes him NO BETTER than the tyrant he replaced.  Ireton’s version of fascism may be kinder and gentler, but putting a smiley face on despotism does not negate the tyranny.

I know – it’s ONLY A DUMP TRUCK.  As noted above, THIS IS AMERICA.  Contrary to the protestations of Ireton hero’s like Barack Obama, we are EXCEPTIONAL.  One of the principles that make America exceptional is our belief in the RULE OF LAW.  Without the rule of law, we revert to Thomas Hobbes’s “state of war”.  Without the rule of law, we are no better than some tin horn, third world dictatorship.  Is this Ireton’s vision for Salisbury?

Sadly, the evidence is mounting.  Taxpayers are already footing the bill so that one incompetent and possibly corrupt official is being paid to fade into the sunset.  Now monies are being spent without being appropriated.  Are we sure Barrie Tilghman didn’t just cut her hair and change her wardrobe?

Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton exercised his first veto today, by returning a resolution to “accept” environmentally damaged land fronting Lake Street and the North Prong of the Wicomico River.  For this action, Ireton deserves kudos.

However, beneath this issue lies a problem that is equally as serious as putting the taxpayers on the hook for an environmental mess of unknown magnitude.  This matter involves City Attorney Paul Wilber.  As noted in SbyNEWS, Wilber has had no problem with his lord and master (former mayor Barrie Tilghman) vetoing resolutions.  However, the city charter is pretty clear.  Resolutions do not require the mayor’s signature.  According to the Tilghman Times, Wilber has invented a power that gives him the power to decide whether or not a resolution is meaningful enough to require mayoral approval:

… Wilber said only resolutions which relate to significant action may be overridden. Recognition as significant city business is an opinion by the city attorney made on a case by case basis due to vague language in the city charter, Wilber said.

Given Wilber’s approach to interpreting law, I’m surprised that the Obama administration hasn’t nominated him for a federal judgeship.

There is another problem.  This “resolution” really isn’t a resolution at all.  While calling the property acquisition a “donation”, it is really a purchase.  Under the terms of the agreement with the current owner, the city is to pay off a $50,000 mortgage.  Real estate purchases must be approved by ordinance, requiring two readings and a public hearing.  Unless I am mistaken, Wilber (or an attorney from his office) drafts or approves EVERY piece of legislation.  Therefore, it appears that Wilber now seems to believe that he works not for the mayor (certainly not for the citizens of Salisbury), but for City Administrator John Pick and for the Barrie Comegys party.

Ireton should immediately seek an independent legal opinion.  If, as I believe it will, that opinion concurs with the opinion that this was a purchase and not a gift, Wilber should be dismissed IMMEDIATELY as the city attorney.  Since Wilber is not a department head (like Ed Baker is for Wicomico County), Ireton does not need city council approval.

Ireton’s action today, was the right thing to do.  It was also legally questionable.  This needs to be cleared up ASAP.

“There’s a statistical theory that if you gave a million monkeys typewriters and set them to work, they’d eventually come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. Thanks to the Internet, we now know this isn’t true.” – Ian Hart

It was, however, almost inevitable that Jonathan Taylor would eventually write something that was semi-literate AND that most reasonable individuals (at least those in Salisbury and its environs) would agree with.

Taylor argues that Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton is wasting taxpayer money by requiring department heads to attend press conferences.  IF Ireton is requiring the presence of these department heads, I agree wholeheartedly.  The only reason I say IF is because I don’t know that he is; but, like Taylor, I suspect it.

Ironically, Taylor seems to only take umbrage with city department heads taking part in events supporting entities which he doesn’t like, such as Urban Salisbury.  He certainly didn’t express any problem with almost all of the third floor city payroll showing up to the police station on Thursday.  That’s OK, because SPD chief Allan Webster is Taylor’s hero.

My view is a tad more austere.  I certainly don’t have a problem with Ireton doing press conferences.  How else is he expected to promote his views and agenda?  However, why was it necessary to have the city clerk, the city administrator, the assistant city administrator (whose position, I would argue, is redundant), along with myriad other city employees?  If these good folk don’t have enough to keep them busy 40 hours per week, then Ireton can save the taxpayers some of their hard earned cash and merge (or eliminate) some positions.  Ditto for the Urban Salisbury dog and pony show.  Ditto for any other press event.  If someone is needed because they are going to speak, fine.  Obviously, Webster’s presence was appropriate at yesterday’s event in front of SPD’s headquarters.  John Pick?  Brenda Colegrove?  Lore Chambers?  I don’t think so.

Sure, I can understand that Ireton is new at the job and may be taken away with some of the trappings of the office.  Unfortunately, this country and our community is in the midst of a recession.  People are loosing their jobs every day.  Yet, those same people will be expected to pony up cash they can ill afford to spend for city taxes.  Therefore, every time Ireton (or any other city official) deems to hold a press conference they should think about little things like what it is costing the taxpayer.  Every program discussed needs to be viewed under the same harsh light.  If city employees have time to attend photo ops, we need to ask if we actually need that many people on the citizens’ payroll.

Salisbury mayor Jim Ireton needs to do two things soon:

• Get someone to teach him how to handle the press
• Have a long sit down with his city attorney and have the confidentiality of personnel matters explained to him.

After two days of bad reporting by the Daily Times, the one person who looks the worst in this matter is Ireton.  Starting with Friday’s claim:

… Mayor Jim Ireton said earlier Thursday the document does not exist.

"I’m not getting in the middle of Terry Cohen, Debbie Campbell and The Daily Times," Ireton said. "I don’t have anything to do with it."

Jim, never tell a reporter that “nothing exists”.  Don’t even deny the existence of little green men from Mars.  Try something like, “To the best of my knowledge…”.

To add insult to injury, Ireton had to embellish for Saturday’s piece:

"I would rather your paper compare me to being a liar than violate employee confidentiality," he said. "It is employee-related and is privileged and confidential because it’s a personnel matter."

Good lord man, were you high while talking to the press?  For future reference, remember two words – NO COMMENT!

Jim Ireton is a friend.  To the best of my knowledge I’ve never criticized him publicly.  I also understand that dealing with the media is an art; it is also a skill which will take some time to develop.  Everybody has to learn.

However, there are some things that simply cannot be allowed.  One of them is for the mayor, or his staff commenting on a personnel issue.  It opens the city up to needless litigation, potentially costing the taxpayers money, and most important – IT’S WRONG!

Let’s try a few of these next time Jim:

No Comment.

The city of Salisbury does not comment on personnel matters.

If you really feel like spreading you wings and saying more than you should:

Gee Laura, (or insert other reporter’s name here), what you’re describing sounds like a personnel matter to me.  You know that we’re just not allowed to discuss those things.  Sorry.

It’s really not that hard.  Now what you have is a newspaper article floating around with “liar” on the same line as Ireton’s name.  You have a group of functional illiterates claiming that Ireton is a liar and you have more critical readers simply shaking their heads.  Ireton needs to remember that he’s no longer dealing with a crew of eight year olds (admittedly, most of critics are no smarter).

Ireton’s inexperience can allow us to forgive his foible.  However, that does not explain why city administrator John Pick is commenting to the press on this matter:

"There were several documents that went to the mayor." But he would not elaborate on the nature of the documents, citing personnel confidentiality.

Pick supposedly has over 30 years experience at this.  What is his excuse?  There is no reason to comment – period.

Displaying the cowardice to be expected of someone who attacks children, Barrie Comegys stooge Jonathan Taylor failed to show up for the Salisbury Ethics Commission show trial precipitated by his own actions.  While thousands of taxpayer dollars were wasted in this spiteful and ridiculous action, Taylor (who already lives on the generosity of taxpayers) hid from view while Barrie Comegys stalwart Lynn Cathcart was on hand to take notes for the wannbe “Powers That Be”.

To be fair, the Ethics Commission ran a fairly clean meeting.  The attending members:  Donna Forgash, Norman Lyster, Bob Gladden, and Fran Kane all asked valid, thoughtful, and polite questions.

While several people at the hearing asked the same question, “What the hell are we doing here?”, the Ethics Commission serves a theoretically important role.  It has been suggested that the board should have examined the complaint prior to today’s hearing and ruled that it was frivolous.  However, if a complaint had been filed against Barrie Tilghman, Mike Dunn, Gary Comegys, or Louise Smith and the Commission had done so (ruled it frivolous in a private meeting) I would be one of the first to scream fraud and cover-up;  so would many of the same people asking that question today.

Was the complaint frivolous?  It turns out that it was.  Councilwoman Terry Cohen made a presentation that not only proved the claim specious, but shamed City Solicitor Paul Wilber for his complete incompetence on these matters.  While not named specifically today, Cohen also proved Councilman Gary Comegys to be a liar, a fool, or both.  You’ll have to decide.

We need to remember that Comegys has repeatedly argued that health insurance was never part of the city council’s compensation and that the city never had a policy on the matter.  Now we all know that this is not true.  However, the argument wasn’t helped by acting Ethics Commission chair Bob Gladden’s admission that he received healthcare coverage as a member of council 15 years ago.  Comegys, et al, have also argued that voting on the budget was OK for him because he wasn’t taking advantage of the healthcare coverage and the city’s Salary Review Commission took care of any ethical problem with voting for his own salary as part of the budget.  However, Cohen provided evidence that the Salary Review Commission did consider healthcare as part of the council’s total compensation when making their recommendations to council.  They also looked at retirement and life insurance benefits (which Comegys does take advantage of).  Most importantly, Cohen provided evidence that Comegys, as well as the other members of council, voted on a resolution accepting the Salary Review Commission’s recommendations.  Therefore, if Cohen was guilty on this count all other members would also be guilty of a similar violation for voting on the Salary Review Commission’s recommendations.

Oh, but it gets even better.  Cohen provided evidence that CareFirst (the administrator of the city’s healthcare plan) does not make a distinction between elected officials and full time city employees.  According to CareFirst, the city would have to enact legislation changing the current policy in order to make that change.  Isn’t that what Mayor Jim Ireton, Cohen, and Councilwoman Debbie Campbell were arguing all along?

It gets better still.  Remember Comegys argument at the last council meeting that Ireton didn’t have a right to change the budget ordinance?  I actually agreed with him.  As Cohen demonstrated, and Comegys evidently agrees, the council’s job is to set policy.  It is the Mayor’s job to administer that policy.  Therefore, former Mayor Barrie Tilghman’s attempt to end council healthcare coverage through the budgeting process was an illegal act.  The council would have needed to make a change to the city’s personnel policy (see the paragraph above).  Therefore, if Comegys’ statements at the last meeting were genuine, he must agree that Tilghman acted illegally and we all know that he would never want to do anything illegal.  Right?

The piece de resistance -

I would warrant that everyone, with the possible exception of the sub-70 IQ Jonathan Taylor crew, would agree that the city of Salisbury has no right to take any action contrary to the Maryland state constitution.  Cohen produced a section of the state constitution that specifically prohibits the increasing or diminishing of any legislator’s compensation during their term.  For Jonathan, et al, “diminishing” means reducing or cutting.

Of course we would expect the Jonathan Taylors and Lynn Cathcarts of the world to argue that this section did not apply to municipal office holders.  To bolster her claim, Cohen also produced an advisory AG’s opinion for the city of Westminster which specifically addressed these issues.  Westiminster asked if they could add healthcare and retirement benefits for their city council.  The AG’s opinion stated that retirement benefits could be added in the middle of a term since they were not compensation for the purposes of the Maryland constitution.  However, healthcare could NOT be added since this WAS COMPENSATION.

IF healthcare is compensation; AND
IF the Maryland constitution prohibits the increasing or diminishing of compensation during a legislator’s term;  AND
IF city council members are legislators (which they are according to the Salisbury charter);  THEREFORE

It is a violation of the Maryland constitution to do what Barrie Tilghman proposed.  We also need to remember that Tilghman was not alone in this attempted illegal act.  Both Comegys and Councilwoman Louise Smith began conspiring with Tilghman a year ago to do this.  Unfortunately for them, their arrogance prohibited them from attempting what was obviously political retribution in a manner that would have been legal (but would have shown them to be the spiteful brats that they are).

With all due respect to Campbell, her much briefer testimony before the Ethics Commission was a bit anti-climatic.  Cohen had pretty much covered every point.  Given the thoroughness of Cohen’s evidence and the strength of her arguments, any opinion of this body other than a blanket absolution will provide more evidence of Tilghman’s evil influence.  Remember, every member of this body was hand-picked by Tilghman.

As noted at the beginning, the Ethics Commission appeared to act properly.  However, I am concerned about a few matters that need to be addressed by the current administration.

• Why was Lore Chambers present at the meeting, and on the taxpayers’ dime?  If she doesn’t have enough work to do, perhaps Mayor Ireton will heed the argument of many that her position is redundant.

• Why didn’t the Ethics Commission follow the guidelines provided to Cohen and Campbell by City Adminstrator John Pick?  I don’t fault the commission members for this.  This screw-up clearly falls in the laps of Pick and Wilber.

• Why was the public required to leave the meeting during their deliberations?  … and why was John Pick permitted to take part in those deliberations when he is neither a commission member nor the city’s legal advisor?  (more on this below)

If you are a regular reader, you know that I have a hang-up about rules.  If you’re not going to follow them, don’t bother having them.  While I don’t agree with the Ethics Commission being allowed to deliberate in secret, I understand the argument.  I still think that it is wrong.  However, to allow Pick to take part in those deliberations is clearly wrong and lacks a valid argument in its favor.

What is most disturbing about this matter is Pick’s answer to my question as to why he was in there:

I was there to smooth out the process.  I was a resource.  I helped them make their decision.

First of all, it is not his place to HELP them make their decision.  It is not Wilber’s place either.  Pick had no business in a closed session.  Wilber’s job is to answer legal questions.  Unfortunately, given the way Cohen shamed Wilber over this matter I even question his competance to do that.  However, the job of the Ethics Commission is to reach their own conclusions based on the evidence before them.  Given the evidence that choice is crystal clear.

Given that Gladden is already on the record stating that NO ethical violation occurred I would be interested to know why Pick and Wilber both appeared to be trying to convince the Commission of something.  We’ll just have to wait and see what their written opinion is.

PooGate Continues …

In the wake of Monday’s news that the city’s new waste water treatment plant (WWTP) may be an $80+ milliion white elephant, new facts come to light that raise far more questions than provide answers.  It appears that Salisbury Mayor Barrie Tilghman holds the city’s taxpayers and ratepayers with less regard than even I thought … or that even then Tilghman was trying to hide the truth about the WWTP from the public.

Citizens need to think back about a year when Tilghman and her rubber stamp council majority of mayoral candidate Gary Comegys, Shanie Shields and puppet-in-chief Louise Smith voted to hit water and sewer ratepayers with an increase of 50% spread over several years.  We have learned that prior to this the Tilghman administration was contacted by a company offering their services in managing the city’s WWTP.  That company SPECIFICALLY mentioned the proposed rate increases and offered its services with the expectation of saving ratepayers money.

This comapny, Severn Trent Services, is a national firm that manages water and sewer plant throughout the country, including operation and maintenance.  Locally, they manage Lewes, Delawre’s new WWTP.  They contacted City Administrator John Pick (the same man who sat mute while his boss made the ridiculous claim that his correspondence regarding this matter was “privileged” when it clearly wasn’t marked so) and made special note that they wished to make a proposal to the city regarding management of the new WWTP that would save ratepayers money.  The company also noted that they had BEEN sending Tilghman information over the past several years.  The Tilghman administration made no attempt to pursue the matter.

Why would Tilghman refuse to discuss a proposal which could save it’s citizens money,  potentially provide better service, and relieve the city of one more operational headache?  That’s what “enquiring minds want to know”.

Over the years we have noted Tilghman’s apparent contempt for the people she claims to serve.  We have noted her great desire to grow the size of the city’s bureaucracy.  Therefore, it is conceivable that her refusal to discuss this matter with Severn Trent was simply additional evidence of Tilghman’s desire to grow the size of the city government.

However, there is another possible explanation.  Perhaps Tilghman didn’t want to hold discussions with Severn Trent because then she might  have to explain why she doesn’t want to save money for the taxpayers and ratepayers Salisbury.  Perhaps Tilghman knew LAST YEAR that these “fundamental problems” existed with the WWTP and that they would come to light if forced to contract with a firm like Severn Trent.

Unfortunately, we’ll never know.  History has taught us that we cannot depend on Barrie Tilghman and her minions for something as basic as the truth.  Consequently, we ride into a city election with the Barrie Comegys team crossing their fingers and hoping that they will continue in power so that the blindfold may be kept on the eyes of the public.

How much will the taxpayers and ratepayers of Salisbury have to pony up in order to fix this mess?  We won’t know until AFTER a new mayor and council are elected.  By then it could be too late.  The fiscal consequences to this once fine city are potentially staggering.  The potential impact on economic development is even greater.  Of course, this administration was never particularly interested in that anyway – unless we’re talking residential development.

The debate over PAC-14 continues.  The only question that remains is whether or not the Wicomico County government will kowtow to the wishes of Salisbury University and continue to hand over tax dollars without any oversight.

Saturday, the Daily Times published an article describing the current state of PAC-14 fiasco.  From Greg Latshaw’s piece we can surmise that the Barrie Tilghman administration is in lock-step with SU in their desire to hand over hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to a self-perpetuating board that has no responsibility to the taxpayers and will receive no oversight.  Despite the fact that both the city and county attorneys agree that the current board (one whose majority is appointed by the Salisbury and Wicomico governments) is the true governing body of PAC-14, Salisbury City Administrator John Pick claims:

However, City Administrator John Pick said the board of directors “basically doesn’t exist,” because it was appointed as an interim board.

“Rather than having a board, which is a step down or two from the real authority of the city, county and Salisbury University, we should get together without them,” Pick said.

As a key member of the Tilghman administration, Pick has never been particularly concerned with the truth; only with doing the bidding of his master.  Note that Pick claims that the board “basically doesn’t exist” despite the fact that both the Salisbury and Wicomico County governments have adopted the by-laws, thereby making the current articles and by-laws the governing documents of PAC-14.  Pick also states that “we should get together without them (the board)”.  That’s pretty funny John.  You HAVE been getting together without them for over a year.  Of course, truth is merely a convenience with the Tilghman administration.

Since John Pick doesn’t do anything more complicated than visiting the men’s room without permission from Mayor Barrie Tilghman we can be confident that Tilghman endorses handing over PAC-14, and Salisbury tax dollars, to a group wholly unaccountable to the voters.  Since a majority of the Salisbury city council are effectively slaves to Tilghman, we can be confident that Salisbury will agree to hand over PAC-14.

Fortunately the by-laws state that, once adopted by a majority of the partners, they can only be amended by a unanimous vote of the three partners.  However, we can’t be assured that a majority of the county council won’t support handing over a valuable public resource to a group of unelected and unaccountable individuals – many of whom will have a distinct political agenda.

It is a safe bet that the three Democrat members of council will agree to this proposal.  To date, they have refused to buck the local Democrat power structure on anything.  Those people seem to be supporting the proposed changes.

Just as important as any final result is the answer to several quesitons.  As the Daily Times notes in this morning’s editorial:

PAC-14 has a board of directors that has not convened in two years, but
the board chairman has assembled a hand-picked group in the drafting of
new by-laws for the board of directors; that group is also seeking
permission to incorporate PAC-14 as a nonprofit. That permission came
in 2002 from city and county authorities, but SU never approved the
request.

As best as I can tell, SU’s approval was not needed.  Wicomico Councilman John Cannon has been quoted several times stating that the current board is “dysfunctional”.  This may be so, however Cannon is not in a position to really know.  To the best of my knowledge he has attended the same number of board meetings that I have – ZERO.  Yet, Cannon and others from the county government have met with SU representatives (and PAC-14 Board Members) Betty Crockett and Jerry Waldron.

These individuals (Crockett and Waldron) have been less than honest with the Wicomico County government and the public.  It is Crockett who has arbitrarily refused to call board meetings.  At last week’s Wicomico Council meeting Crockett refused to answer pointed questions from Councilwoman Stevie Prettyman and Waldron flat out lied to the council when asked who appointed the now infamous “Transitional Taskforce” (it was appointed by Crockett, Waldron and Pick).

We can only speculate what agenda is driving these events.  However, since SU and the Tilghman administration appear to be in lock-step, we need to hold County Executive Rick Pollitt to his word that the county will only recognize the legally appointed board of directors.

Should PAC-14 be incorporated as a 501-c3?  Of course they should.  Both governments have already approved legislation to enable that.  Should the SU plan to siphon thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars and put them under the control of a board unaccountable to the voters be adopted?  Absolutely not.

Unfortunately, the public won’t have much access to the decision making process.  Friday morning, the “partners” are due to meet again.  To the best of my knowledge, the meeting will not be televised on PAC-14.  I fully expect a room full of proponents FOR the SU proposal.  Unfortunately, those of us that work to pay for this foolishness can’t always drop everything to attend these meetings.

… Should Ratepayers and Taxpayers Fund an Organization With No Accountability?

NO! NO! NO! Is that clear enough for everyone?

Does that mean that the public shouldn’t fund PAC-14? Of course not. Since certain people like to accuse Delmarva Dealings and similar venues of only focusing on the negative, our fifth and final installment focuses on positive solutions to solve this problem.

Bring In Some Sunshine

Before either the Salisbury Council or Wicomico County Council should even consider voting on this issue, several things need to occur. The first is to open up the process.

A public meeting should be held in the evening to allow all interested parties the opportunity to hear the proposed plan and to ask questions. ALL parties responsible for this fiasco need to be in attendance. That includes Betty Crockett, Jerry Waldron, John Pick, Louise Smith, Barrie Tilghman, Rick Pollitt, John Cannon, Ted Shea, Mike Goodson, the representative of the Buske Group, and of course Mike Pretl and any member of the “Transitional Task Force” that wants to attend. Of course the meeting should be televised on PAC-14.

My apologies to Louise, Rick, John (Cannon) and Ted. I happen to believe that they are all fairly innocent in this matter. Unfortunately, John Pick named them all in a public meeting and they should be there to both answer questions and defend themselves if one of the other parties tries to lay partial blame on them again.

If any party – particularly Ms. Crockett and Mr. Waldron – aren’t interested in attending, both councils should simply refuse to give further consideration to the matter of a fee increase. It would be in everyone’s best interest if they did attend, because simply holding off on the fee increase doesn’t address several other problems.

Assuming that a meeting is scheduled, these folks need to provide honest answers to honest questions. Such as:

• Why was the board circumvented?

• Who approved PAC-14’s budget for the last couple of years since the board evidently hasn’t?

• Why weren’t both executives and councils made aware of the fact that the board hadn’t approved these budgets? (in a rare moment of weakness I’m going to give Barrie Tilghman the benefit of the doubt on this one)

• Why should money from the taxpayers and Comcast ratepayers go to an organization that is not to be directly accountable to the public through our elected officials?

The dog and pony show needs to be kept to a minimum and the focus should be on answering questions. The ones noted above are just a partial list.

Bring Back the Board

Let’s assume for a moment that both councils and the public seem to be in broad agreement that some off-shoot of this plan (to be discussed below) should be implemented. If for no other reason than legal niceties, the real board of directors needs to be brought back to carry out a few tasks:

• Betty Crockett and Jerry Waldron should be made to resign and two replacements from SU should be appointed.

• A new board chairman needs to be elected. This person should not be from SU since they have an obvious agenda – even if we can’t determine its exact nature. Additionally, it was the SU representatives who seemed so hell bent on going around the real board to implement this takeover.

• The board could then choose to approve a new plan, or not. THEY would then make a recommendation to the “partners”.

Demand Some Accountability

These folks are asking that millions of dollars be given by taxpayers and ratepayers over the next decade. A little accountability to the public shouldn’t be too much to ask. I’m willing to bet that the vision that these folks are willing to admit to isn’t much different from what the rest of us want. The big difference is that the public deserves some accountability.

No Cuban Elections! No self-perpetuating boards. No rump meetings of “members” who pay for the right to vote! As Mr. Pretl should know, the poll tax has been unconstitutional for some time.

Let’s assume for a moment that Pretl’s number of 15 board members stands, as well as his change from three (3) to four (4) “partners”. I would suggest the following board make up:

• 4 members of the public to be appointed by the County Executive and confirmed by the County Council.

• 1 member of the County Council, chosen by its members – Stevie Prettyman currently holds that position.

• 3 members of the public to be appointed by the Salisbury Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.

• 1 member of the City Council, chosen by its members – Debbie Campbell currently holds that position.

• 3 members of the public chosen by Salisbury University.

• 3 members of the public chosen by Wor-Wic Community College.

These persons should be appointed to one year terms with the ability to be re-appointed.

Yes, I know that this may not seem “fair”. However, the county puts up the largest share of cash, followed by Salisbury. At this point we don’t know what role Wor-Wic would play in this new scheme. At least under this method, we can hold our elected officials responsible for the actions of a majority of the board.

Demand Open Government of PAC-14

To the best of my knowledge, PAC-14 would not be subject to the open meetings law. Therefore it needs to be placed in the by-laws that the board would hold themselves to the same standards of the open meetings law:

• All meetings would be open to the public and publicized on PAC-14’s website. An agenda must be made public prior to the meeting as well. I bet that the Wicomico County Council would even let them meet in the council chambers. PAC-14 could even televise the meetings – just as they should every other appointed body that meets in those chambers.

• There would be a required period of public comment and the board should attempt to answer questions – provided that it doesn’t turn into a free-for-all.

• Minutes must be taken, and approved at each meeting.

• The meetings should be recorded. Not a problem if they were televised from the council chambers.

• Any proposed changes to the articles of incorporation or by-laws MUST be approved by both the city and county governments by legislation. If they want to make any changes subject to unanimous approval by the “partners”, that’s OK but a bit impractical.

Make PAC-14 Raise Its Own Money

This new, and hopefully improved, PAC-14 should have to do some fundraising. Both councils should make it a condition of annual funding that a certain percentage of PAC-14’s funds be raised from sources other than the “partners” (meaning the taxpayers) in order for public funding to continue.

I’m not advocating that PAC-14 be shut down if they miss their goal by a few grand. However, there are myriad opportunities to raise money from the public outside of franchise fee revenue and our cable bills.

The Community Foundation is an active participant in PAC-14. They would be a potential source of funds. There are other grant-making institutions. Individuals would be happy to contribute, particularly if they felt some involvement short of actually producing programs. PAC-14’s current program of promoting itself is nice and could be improved. Additionally, televising board meetings may make the public feel more involved and therefore more likely to contribute.

It works for public television and NPR. Why can’t it work here?

KEEP IT LOCAL

It should be mandated that ALL programming be produced locally. I don’t want a local version of LinkTV (a left-wing satellite channel). Preventing re-broadcast of feeds from others sources would help prevent this.

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

Well, that’s it folks. I hope you found the past week interesting. I appreciate your time and patience.

If you really care what happens to YOUR public access channel, I would suggest calling you county council members as well as your city council members if you live in Salisbury.

PAC-14 is a great institution. It can be better. The proposal currently under way is not the answer. We need to demand a different and more open way!

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

If you missed any of our previous posts, you can find them here:

Monday – How Will YOUR Money Be Spent?

Tuesday – Who Will Decide HOW This Money Will Be Spent?

Wednesday – Why Are They Meeting In Secret?

Thursday – Why Do They Refuse to Answer Any Questions?

Thanks again.

… Why Do They Refuse to Answer Any Questions?

I’m going to start with the short answer –

Because they don’t want you to find out what they are doing!

But don’t stop there. You’ve been patient since Monday. Today is when we finally get to the real meat and potatoes of what Mike Pretl, Betty Crockett, Phil Tilghman, Jerry Waldron, John Pick and their merry band of pranksters have planned for OUR public access channel – PAC-14.

Today’s post is long. So pour a cup and sit back.

Today we’re going to look into:

• What’s the Agenda?

• Who Will Control the new, but not improved, PAC-14?

• How Will They Control It?

• How Will This Harm Me?

What’s the Agenda?

I have to admit that I’m not totally sure. There is no question that Salisbury University (or Betty Crockett, individually) has an agenda. Whether it’s to control programming or to have control over another pot of money, or simply just the human desire for CONTROL – I’m not sure.

Crockett, along with her cohort Jerry Waldron, has gone out of her way to shut out the existing board. Budgets aren’t being properly approved. Public funds are being improperly used. People don’t normally do these types of things without a reason.

The Wicomico County government is being kept in the semi-dark. The only public official who seems to have a finger in this pie is Salisbury Mayor Barrie Tilghman – through her minion John Pick.

I don’t know Phil Tilghman, so it’s hard for me to speculate on exactly what his agenda is. However, the consensus seems to be that Tilghman has a distinct political purpose in the takeover of PAC-14. If I knew that Tilghman was a political ally of Mike Pretl, I would fall in this camp as well.

This leads us to Mike Pretl. There is no question that Pretl has an agenda and it is not a mainstream one either. As we noted Tuesday, Pretl is a champion of myriad left-wing causes. Whether in his role as President of the Wicomico Environmental Trust (WET), or his membership on the board of the Maryland Healthcare for All Coalition we can all count on Mike to take a stand for the socialist cause.

Pretl’s extreme left worldview is possibly the link that we have with Salisbury University’s agenda in this matter. Simply take a look at the board of directors for WET – 25% of the current board have SU email addresses and we don’t know how many more have some relationship with the institution.

Leftists (I won’t call them liberals for fear of insulting my liberal friends) have certain things in common. Among them are the desire to control institutions and DICTATE to US (the poor, stupid, common individual). Another is to make us poor, stupid, common folk like us pay for their (the leftists’) folly. They do these things because it’s for our own good – so they claim.

This is Pretl’s agenda – and possibly SU’s. I won’t question their motivations. I question their ACTIONS and their METHODS.

PAC-14 has a board. PAC-14 has by-laws. If they want to change things, let them follow the same rules that you and I have to follow.

Who Will Control the New, But Not Improved, PAC-14?

The short answer is – Mike Pretl and his pals at SU. But wait… there’s more.

This is where I’m really disappointed in Mike Pretl. Ever since this began, I’ve been warning folks that I’ve discussed this with that Pretl would not make the same type of fatal errors that he made when attempting his takeover of the Wicomico Neighborhood Congress board. (Yes, I know he’s president-elect but the WNC has a solid, “bi-partisan” board). I didn’t think that he would do something like his now infamous “distributive justice” shtick again.

I was wrong. I watched Mike Pretl announce on TV, “we will choose the board (of PAC-14)”.

Of course that’s just the beginning. After Pretl and his pals pack as many allies as possible on the initial board, they are just beginning. There next step will be to hold an ELECTION IN CUBA.

After a two to three year period, it will be time to choose a new board. If you saw Pretl on PAC-14, and listened carefully, you witnessed the unveiling of a plan for FULL AND TOTAL CONTROL OF PAC-14.

How Will They Control PAC-14?

According to Pretl, the “members” will elect all future boards. Who are the “members”? No, don’t confuse these with the “partners”. According to Pretl, the “members” will be people from the community who, after paying a “nominal” fee, will have voting rights in the new, unimproved PAC-14.

Sounds pretty innocuous, doesn’t it? Raise a little money for the station. Get some community involvement. Sounds great! And just in case too many of my type decide to squeeze the trigger on a check for that “nominal fee”, Pretl and his politburo have a backstop – the NOMINATING COMMITTEE.

Let’s go back to today’s question – Why Do They Refuse to Answer Any Questions? As with all things, the devil is in the details. The merry pranksters want the guaranteed funding from a cable rate increase, plus funds from the city and county, secure before they reveal their new set of proposed by-laws and articles of incorporation. This is precisely why Mike Goodson kept dodging questions at the July 15 Salisbury council meeting. While anything can get approved in Salisbury with Barrie Tilghman’s blessing, I don’t think that the Wicomico County Council, or the County Executive, will want to hand over millions of dollars over the next decade to a group that is not accountable to the taxpayers.

Remember the “partners”? Under the Pretl plan, they won’t have much influence. Pretl announced that the proposed board structure would consist of 15 members. Only four of these members would be appointed by the “partners”. AND there will be a new “partner” – Wor-Wic Community College.

Translation – elected officials will only appoint TWO members of a 15 member board, but YOU WILL BE PAYING THE FULL FREIGHT!

Back to the NOMINATING COMMITTEE. Expect to find in the new by-laws a provision that either:

1. Only persons put forth by the nominating committee can receive votes for the PAC-14 board. or ….
2. There will be a huge hurdle to overcome in order to nominate persons from the floor.

In other words, expect the new PAC-14 board to be elected in the same fashion that members of the Cuban National Assembly are elected. You can vote for who they say, or not vote at all. At least with PAC-14 I don’t think you’ll be shot if you don’t vote.

Pretl and his pranksters will argue that this is how things are normally done at non-profits. It is true that this is done quite often. However, PAC-14 is not your normal non-profit. Most, if not all, of its funding comes from the taxpayer – either through Salisbury, Wicomico County, or SU.

Once this action is taken, don’t expect any sunshine either. Even though the Pranksters envision a publicly funded entity, it will not be subject to the Maryland Open Meetings Law. If you do decide to keep up with their goings on, they will be under no obligation to tell you when meetings are (other than the annual membership meeting) nor will they have to offer you the opportunity to comment. They certainly won’t have to answer any questions. Of course Louise Smith and her cohorts on the Salisbury Council don’t answer questions either.

How Will This Harm Me?

In one sense it won’t. I know, this doesn’t help my case; but I’ve got to be honest. If you don’t care how your tax dollars or part of your Comcast bill are being spent, don’t worry.

However, if you do care, there are plenty of problems and a great deal of potential harm that can be done to you and your community.

It’s unlikely that there would be any near-term efforts to place stringent controls on programming. I’ve heard some folks complain that Pretl would start producing shows for WET and some of his other lefty causes. So what? Just because I disagree with his politics doesn’t mean that he doesn’t enjoy the same freedoms as you or I.

A potential programming issue would arise IF they were able to source enough programming to fill most, or all, of the available slots. Then we could have a problem.

Let’s assume that I started to do a weekly show. A Pretl-controlled board would be foolish not to air it, but they could make sure that it only aired at 2AM on a Sunday morning.

Of greater concern is the prospect of a flow of programming designed to impact local political decisions, or even elections. Again, the First Amendment applies to the left as well it does to you or I, but a PAC-14 board dominated by people like Mike Pretl could be a grave concern. This is also where Phil Tilghman could come into play.

I already know the counter-argument to this: The board won’t be making decisions on what airs, etc. What little I know of Mike Goodson leads me to believe that he’ll do whatever he’s told by these folks. And Goodson will be making those decisions.

Another counter-argument is that no one watches. WRONG! I was shocked to find out how many people watched a Salisbury City Council meeting when Salisbury News and Delmarva Dealings did a joint live blog of a meeting last June. There was little advance announcement of the event and there were 815 people on the live blog, All of them were watching the meeting on PAC-14 or on PAC-14’s videostream. We can only guess how many others were watching.

Just think of the damage that could occur if voters are receiving only one point of view.

There are other potential problems, but there is one glaring concern:

DO WE WANT OUR LOCAL PUBLIC ACCESS CHANNEL, FUNDED WITH OUR MONEY, CONTROLLED BY A GROUP THAT IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC? Whether we agree with their political views or not?

Tune in tomorrow for the last installment -

Should Ratepayers and Taxpayers Fund an Organization With No Accountability?

… Why Are They Meeting In Secret?

Do you want the short answer?

BECAUSE THEY’RE HIDING THINGS!

OK, now you can stop reading and go finish your coffee. OR… you can stick around and try to find out who’s hiding what.

First, we need to dispense with the question of whether or not they really are meeting secretly.  The answer is ABSOLUTELY!

What’s unfortunate is that some, maybe most, of the participants don’t even realize that the public is being kept away from these meetings. It is only a few that are adamant in keeping outsiders at bay.

Mike Goodson

In at least one case – mine – they are accomplishing this by a convoluted version of the old “bait and switch”. In early June I was made aware of some of the shenanigans occurring at PAC-14. The first person I attempted to contact was Mike Goodson. Mike was REAL forthcoming.

You would have thought the man was a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. Literally, the only thing that he would confirm was his name. I think that he only did that because I had looked his home number up in the phone book and spoke to his wife. Perhaps if she hadn’t admitted that Mike Goodson was her husband, he might have tried to hide that from me.

Goodson wouldn’t confirm any meetings. He certainly wouldn’t tell who was at these meetings. His answer to everything was, “You’ll have to ask the ‘PARTNERS’”.

“Who are the ‘PARTNERS’”?

“You’ll have to ask the ‘PARTNERS’”.

That’s right Mike. I’m going to ask the “PARTNERS” who the “PARTNERS” are!

The man wouldn’t even tell me what entity paid his salary. I just love transparency in public agencies.

Jerry Waldron

With no luck at PAC-14, a friend suggested that I call Salisbury University CIO Jerry Waldron. On the surface he seemed a little more forthcoming, but…

To cut to the chase, Waldron initially admitted that there were meetings. He admitted that there was a “Transitional Task Force”. He admitted they had met. When asked if I could get a list of the members the answer was first – NO – then – MAYBE.

When asked if I could attend the next meeting of the “Transitional Task Force” I was first told NO, then “I don’t know”.

Needless to say, I never got a list from Mr. Waldron. He was never forthcoming about being on the board – and being involved in circumventing it.  I have yet to be told when the “Transitional Task Force” is meeting. And I don’t know of anyone outside of this dirty little guild who has been invited to attend.

This whole affair stinks and we probably need to start with the head …

Betty Crockett

I wouldn’t know Betty Crockett if she walked in and sat next to me while I was writing this. She may well be the kindest, sweetest person on earth.  She is also up to her neck in this fiasco.

As we noted yesterday, there is no question that PAC-14 has a legally appointed board of directors. The last time I checked, Ms. Crockett was the chair.

Yet, she has worked tirelessly to go around her fellow board members (except for the SU representatives) and dismantle the board. Budgets are being submitted to the Salisbury and Wicomico County governments without approval by the board. No one from the county was aware of this. No one from the city, with the POSSIBLE exception of John Pick was aware of this.  Yet, Betty Crockett appears to be at every meeting.

Your tax dollars are being spent by an entity that has gone outlaw; and the gang boss is an SU vice president.

I can understand why these people are meeting in secret. If no one knows, no questions will be asked. I don’t think these folks wanted the public to know that PAC-14 has become a rogue operation. Unfortunately it has. No one admits to being in charge. Tax money is literally being taken under false pretenses. And, as we’ll see tomorrow, the parties who are supposedly responsible are diving under furniture to avoid answer questions.

Scream at me all you want, but at least Mike Pretl is willing to stand up and take a hit for the team. The rest of these sissies are hiding under their beds.

Tune in tomorrow for Part IV – Why Won’t They Answer Any Questions?