Showing posts with label Salisbury md politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Salisbury md politics. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

How Would I Vote? - The Fire Boat





As the issue stands now, I would not vote in favor of this boat. Mainly because the boat that is being considered would be better suited for Crisfield. Even though it is Stimulus money, I do not think it fiscally responsible to accept grant funds that are borrowed.

I do not disagree that we need a new fire boat and one that is suitable to our situation. We are the second busiest port in Maryland and there is quite bit of fuel that travels up our river. However, I believe there are other options that cost less and we should be looking at those.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

How Would I Vote? - The Old Firehouse

Despite the controversy surrounding this issue I would have voted for the sale.




I believe Palmer Gillis’ intentions are honroable and that he did not attempt to deceive anyone. There are strict requirements in this deal and everyone must understand that an educational component is required. Failure to adhere to the requirements will result in the building being forfeited back to the city.

The other aspect of this issue is that renovation costs could be between $500,000 to $1,000,000. There are very few who have the resources available to pull that off and Palmer is one of those few. He has a proven track record here in Salisbury and I hope we can all give him a chance to accomplish something that we all will benefit from.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Mike Calpino: Plan offered to motivate efficiency in government


It is popular in an election season to fill the airwaves and roadsides with platitudes and slogans, often promising to lower taxes and make government more efficient. Substantial proposals to accomplish these ends are, however, few and far between.

I believe campaigns should be about substance, so I present "The Wicomico Plan" -- the details of which can be found at http://www.electmike.webs.com/.

The core of the plan, in addition to an initial reduction in taxes, spending and regulation to encourage businesses and job creation, is to introduce an incentive for government employees to save money and reduce the size of government. Instead of each department having to spend everything in its budget for fear of having it cut, employees will be encouraged to save and managers inspired to streamline.

The vehicle for this change will be the promise of bonuses comprised of half of the money each department saves, equally distributed among all the members of that department and the other half being deposited in the rainy day fund.

This will motivate each department to work efficiently, save money, blow the whistle on thieves and eliminate unnecessary employees.

Once the fiscal year ends and the savings have been realized, the budget and attendant taxes can be reduced and the process begun again. After two or three years, we will finally have a county government that operates efficiently and effectively, and costs the taxpayers -- you and I -- a lot less.

Mike Calpino
Nanticoke
Calpino is a Libertarian candidate for Wicomico County Council, District 2. -- Editor

Saturday, August 28, 2010

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 2

I only have few a issues with this piece of legislation.  Mainly the loose determination of at or near the residence.  It is to vague because anybody could be near their cousin's house committing a crime, do we hold the person accountable who did not commit the crime or did not have knowledge.  It is a little to gray. 

Certainly if a place of residence is being used for criminal activity landlords need laws that help them get those people out quickly.  My concern is the use of "verified call for service" and that "a criminal conviction is not required to be in breach" is very shaky ground.  What if the individual has been falsely accused and it takes a year for them to go through the legal system?  In the process they get evicted and then the city could be potentially liable because of the law that was passed.  

That is my concern with the wording in this piece of legislation.  I think this is a good tool for landlords and property managers to remove people from their properties that engage in criminal activity.  It also needs to have protections in it for people who are found not guilty and/or people who are falsely accused.

Friday, August 27, 2010

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 1

I will go through Mayor Ireton's Neighborhood Legislative Package focusing on each piece one by one, offering my opinions.  I will begin with the most controversial issue.  My writing will be in blue, underlining is for items I am emphasizing concern.

Amortization Provision Eliminating Lawful Nonconforming Uses 

This legislation is intended  "TO ELIMINATE UNLAWFUL NONCONFORMING MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, CREATE AN AMORTIZATION PROVISION ELIMINATING LAWFUL NONCONFORMING USES THAT EXIST DUE TO THE CONVERSION OF SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS TO MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, AND ALLOW PROPERTY OWNERS TO RECOUP THEIR INVESTMENTS."  The ultimate goal of this legislation is simply to take neighborhoods that have had high conversion rates of Single Family homes into Multi-Family Units and reverse those homes back to Single Family homes.  As we go through some sections of this legislation, I will share some of my concerns.

Remember these next two paragraphs, which are explaining part of the reasoning behind this legislation.
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council recognize that the City of Salisbury’s records concerning zoning enforcement do not always provide sufficient data to determine the scope of conversions to unlawful multifamily uses and, in many cases, there exists no adequate means of determining which residences have been unlawfully converted to multifamily residential use subject to prosecution under the zoning ordinance;

WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council have determined that it is difficult for enforcement officials to ascertain which residences located in a single-family zone are lawful uses, unlawful uses, or lawful nonconforming uses and that attempting to enforce the zoning code on a case-by-case basis in this context would place an undue burden on the taxpayer;  It is important to understand their admittance of the difficulty of the government's inability to prove if a property is nonconforming.


Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Quote of the Day, Maybe Year

"Dramatics abounded Monday in Salisbury: Dramatic talk, dramatic allegations, dramatic innuendoes, dramatic declarations. Everything but dramatic action."


Daily Times Editorial Board

Click here to read the entire Editorial