On this week's episode of Open Agenda (S2 E22), we discuss legislation that will provide the County Council with some level of oversight on certain county-issued contracts, and why this is necessary to provide a reasonable check and balance on the absolute authority of the County Executive and to prevent the misuse of your tax dollars. Additionally, we reveal how some Salisbury city council members are being kept in the dark on upcoming legislative matters, thus denying them opportunity to study the issues before casting their votes. We also address some troubling conflicts of interest involving certain members of the Planning and Zoning Board, and how this may be affecting the direction of growth and your tax dollars. Finally, we try to separate fact from fiction on immigration law enforcement actions that are purportedly taking place in our area (more to come on this in the near future). Tune in and be informed.
Open Agenda S2 E22 Runaway Contract Services Expenses and Splitting Planning Commissions
Show Transcript
Disclaimer: The following transcript was auto-generated and may contain spelling or contextual errors.
You're watching Open Agenda. Here's our
host, Joe White.
Welcome to Open Agenda. I'm your host,
Joe White. In this week's episode, we're
going to review the city council from
June 16th and the county council meeting
from June 17th, as well as answer a few
questions that we've been hearing in the
community about the ICE raids and maybe
local police agency involvement and what
what you should be thinking about if if
you encounter that out in the public.
So, in order to do that, I brought in
Dr. Joe Venosa from Salsbury, Mr. Mike
Goldberg from Delmare. Thank you,
gentlemen. Thank you. Always a pleasure.
So Joe, I think we have to start
chronologically with the city council
Monday, June June 16th. They just had
their latest meeting. Y um tell us once
again, I think Deshawn Dowy, the the
city council president was called out
for uh not putting something on the
agenda once again. Well, I'll begin the
way I began with my public comments at
the meeting. I said to them, listen,
this is by far the most entertaining
season of Salsbury City Council. Uh it's
the best unfortunately. Unfortunately, I
mean, we we laugh, but there are serious
issues, but but it's more laughing out
of sort of the peak frustration. So,
essentially, the meeting was set up
because there's going to be about a
month gap until the next city council
meeting um because of the holiday.
There's a holiday. There's also I I I
believe there's going to be a meeting at
Mako um and and so the city council is
going to be uh indisposed until I
believe middle of July. Okay. So, one of
the things that was put uh not on the
agenda um but was sprung at the last
minute before the city council meeting
was a proposed resolution just to adopt
um approval for the adopt a road program
which like adopt the highway adopt the
highway right and this is very common
very good idea that I think most people
would support not a controversial issue
at all here was the problem as soon as
it was brought up by the council
president desi it was immediately
questioned by council members Deal and
April Jackson as to why it was only
brought up then. The first I knew about
it was when we got it in the agenda. As
far as any um background on it, that's
all.
Same with uh every other item. There's
just a just an item that more details
will follow soon, but it is just to
resolve it so that uh this this could be
done.
I'm not picking, but how are we supposed
to adopt something if we don't know what
we're adopting? I mean, if we don't I
mean, I know it's simple to explain
you're adopting a road, but what entails
it is what we need to know. That's the
only thing I'm asking myself. I had I
hadn't seen the resolution myself. Um,
and I know you guys had been meeting and
I Yeah, I think it's a great concept,
but I hadn't seen I don't have a problem
with it. I hadn't seen the resolution
myself. So, yeah. Did you see what
members of the councils were asked to
come to to me? I I my thing is I'm so
tired of being left in the dark with
with things. I um just to add to what
councilwoman Jackson was saying um we
had not discussed this. This seems to be
a recurring issue
um where Councilwoman Jackson and myself
are left out of decisions that are made
by our president in collaboration with
maybe the vice president and Miss Gra.
I'm not accusing. I'm just saying I'm
not sure who's running this council. It
is not a one-man show or a oneperson
show. And April has brought it up again.
This happens too often. And if you don't
want us on the council, then talk to the
people that elected us. But keeping us
in the dark is unacceptable.
So, President, we're talking about
transparency. Yes. Let's be transparent
and bring it in open session and discuss
the items open session and not behind
closed doors holistically, which is why
again there are no details published yet
because we're just to discuss it here is
idea from the from the public. Let you
all know we discuss it of what what is
it we would like. But but I mean I'll
bring up an option of or the the
communities and I knew exactly nothing
about that before it was brought to me
at at at budget. I knew nothing about
that about what the the Westside
Community Center were the potential
there. You sitting right here telling a
lie. You sitting right here telling the
lie cuz I came to you and told you and
asked you to come to the thing. Wait a
minute. Oh, I don't like these things
and I said to you I like to get back on
track and wait a minute. Well, let me
finish what I'm getting ready to say
like you do everybody else. Let me
finish my statement. I came to you and
told you and you said, "Oh, no. That's
your baby."
And then nothing else. No, don't do it.
Don't do it. Don't do it. Council member
Dashield basically says it seems like
the council's agenda is run only based
on what the council president wants or
what he does in collusion with two other
members. And a really good point was
made that, you know, ultimately uh other
people in the city elected all of the
members. So by leaving out other members
of the council on something even so
seemingly basic and trivial as this, not
trivial, but non-controversial,
uh it's actually disservice to the
constituents and to the voters. Well,
because the same body was also voting to
separate, as the county council is too,
the the planning and zoning commission.
Yep. Uh, and I want to get to some
comments you made there as well. We'll
um have some discussion on the Salsbury
Planning Commission. I know we'll we'll
work with administration on this. Um,
just seeing um as as the as the county
has moved forward and it looks like
they're they're buttoned up with their
version of their of their planning
commission and the separation there. So,
as you mentioned, uh, a decision was
jointly determined between the city and
the county to dissolve the Salsbury
Comico planning commission to have
individual planning commission. The city
does need to finalize a planning
commission in its membership over the
next couple of months or we will be in
this holding pattern come September. I
heard something that Mr. Robert Taylor
said, "One of the suggestions I've made
in the um proposed language I've sent
you this afternoon
um is the mayor and city council shall
endeavor to appoint to the commission
members having different backgrounds who
are not involved as investors or
otherwise in active or potential
development of real estate in the city
or in an organization that advocates or
proposes policy regarding such
development or the city's regulation
thereof. In other words, let's have an
independent council and if we're going
to have a planning commission,
um I think there's some things that we
have lost focus on and that is the
affordable housing. When the developers
come in, we don't put stakes in
anything. We just let them go ahead and
build what they want to build cuz this
is our city and we need to hold these
developers feet to the ground. I'm
serious. I am so sick of seeing
developments go to ruin. Any current
member of the current planning and
zoning shall be eligible for this. Are
we going to be pri prioritizing them as
far as selection? Are we going to be
prioritizing them by by where they live
if they live in city versus outside of
the city? Because we do we are allowing
um at least three members
are required to live inside of the
boundaries but the other four are not.
But I don't think you need to just move
everyone over just because they were on
it. Now they're in the new one. Yeah.
Why are we separating? I mean, are we
separated because we want to or are we
separated because the county is I think
it's mutual for us just uh um they had
decision points um that they wanted to
move their commission a different
direction. Um and we have the ability to
now run ours. One thing I would implore
the council to to please do is to have
some stipulation in there regarding
conflicts of interests. One of the
consistent concerns that we've seen at
the planning and zoning commission is
the fact that several organizations that
have vested financial interests in these
projects have their members voting and
do not recuse themselves. There was a
meeting here several months ago where a
5-hour meeting on one of the projects
occurred. The planning and zoning
commission apart from having four
members on the greater Salsbury
committee who wouldn't recuse themselves
also didn't even allow discussion when
Councilman Holloway who was on the
commission asked for it. So I think one
of the things you near seriously need to
consider doing is at least having a
mechanism where that has to be vetted
somehow. If there is a member in a city
of 30,000 there's bound to be. But if
there is a member who has some kind of
connection to a developer or a company
that they have a actual enforceable way
to trigger a recusal. But the Salsbury
City Council is in the process of
separating planning and zoning. It's
been a combined committee. Yep. Uh
definitely we've raised that we've had
some ethical concerns. U there's you
know there there seems to be a very
scripted way that they've gone about
their business lately. Yes. But if you
have the same lack of transparency for
something that's not controversial, how
are you going to have trust in that
institution when you're up against
something that is very controversial?
Correct. And if you watch especially the
public comments and a few comments that
both the mayor and other city council
members uh made during the meeting,
you'll see that one of the big concerns
about the proposed setup of the new
planning and zoning commission is are we
going to have a majority of people from
the city? As it stands right now, the
proposal says only three have to be from
the city. So you could have on the
city's planning and zoning. Correct. So
on the Yeah. So on the city's planning
and zoning commission as it stands right
now, it's my understanding is that a
minimum of three have to be city
residents. So even the makeup of of of
the board and who is um allowed to be on
it was questioned and I think right now
they're going to go back to the drawing
board on some of those basic
requirements. Now I I I mean I want to
get your perspective, Mike. I mean, you
covered back in November the planning
and zoning when it was still a combined
entity, county and city, the the meeting
for the text amendment to increase the
density in the downtown business
district. That was a long meeting. I
remember we left you there with a camera
and uh there was a lot of public
comments, but then there was very little
discussion. So, when you hear a citizen
like Joe bring up that there's concern
about this the makeup of the the meeting
and and and you live outside the city of
Salsbury, so you don't have a dog in
this fight necessarily. I mean, what
what do you Well, not necessarily, but
look, you got to keep in mind that when
Salsbury sneezes, the rest of the county
catches the cold. Okay. You know, we're
we're we're connected, you know, and you
know, or catches or catches my tax
dollar. Well, exactly. You know,
Salsbury is the economic hub of the
county. So, even if you, you know, live
uh, you know, way out yonder, uh, it's,
uh, you're still going to be affected.
You know, overall economy will be
impacted. A and, you know, to that
point, I don't think anybody is
necessarily against the idea of having
non city residents on these commissions,
but it would seem that maybe you should
have a majority of the people like who
live in the city be on those
commissions. I think one of the one of
the counters that some people will say
is, "Well, there's just not a not a lot
of qualified applicants or talent." I
think that's often used as an excuse to
sort of maybe fill people on those
commissions who otherwise have their own
agendas because this was my big critique
of the other part of the proposal is
that there doesn't seem to be as right
now in the in the proposal any specific
guardrails toward conflicts of interests
and ethics. Well, what kind of
guardrails would you want to say? Well,
I said in my public comments, if you go
back and watch it, is one of the things
that needs to be addressed, is an
upfront uh way of making sure that
business conflicts of interests by
potential members are prevented from
occurring. Because one of the things
that we've seen at least recently is the
planning and zoning commission that
currently exists which represents both
the count both the county and the city
is largely been stacked with a faction
that has gone out of its way to give
preferential treatment to members who
are in the greater Salsbury committee. I
in my comments brought up the fact that
at the last big planning and zoning
meeting when this density amendment was
voted on um that you had four members
who had to some extent either personal
or financial connections to that
decision and they all refused to recuse
themselves. Well, and Mike again you
were at this meeting u there didn't seem
to be a pause in the in the in the
proceedings to consider all the public
comments at that time. So when you hear
someone like Joe say, "Hey, look, we
need to put guard rails up." Uh because
you and I are about to cover this in the
on the county side. U do do you do you
feel the same sense of uh Absolutely.
Absolutely. uh you know the the planning
and zoning commission is heavily stacked
with members of the uh uh greater Ssbury
committee and their decision in the
instance that you're talking about it
was pretty clear that their their
decision was pre-anned. It had already
been made for there was no debate. Uh
the u the public comments uh were
completely disregarded. the uh their
decision was clearly scripted. Um you
know, we have an organization supposedly
a civic organization that wields far too
much power in this county. They they are
almost a shadow government and I find
that to be, you know, very dangerous.
Well, why don't we take a break because
I mean this same subject spills over the
next day at the county council meeting
and we can cover that along with a lot
of their other business. So great. So
stay with us. When we come back, we're
going to cover the county council
meeting from Tuesday, June 17th. Stay
with us. We'll be right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. So the
county council had their own meeting the
very next day on Tuesday, June 17th. And
at least to start, they they started
with the same uh issue of planning and
zoning. Um but gentlemen, before we get
into that, uh I do think we want to say
congratulations to Mr. David Enis. Uh
he's been appointed and and approved as
District 3 county councilman to replace
Shane Baker. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. He uh he
referred to himself as either the the
utility player or the DH for county. I
think more like a utility player for
those out there. I mean who may not know
David Andis. I mean he was on the county
council back in 20201. Uh finished out a
turn as an appointed county councilman.
Yes. Uh and uh his wife Bonnie Andis
serves on the board of education. She's
elected to the board of education,
right? And he served on numerous
commissions and, you know, panels
throughout the He's on the board of
appeals now. Yes. Yeah. Very
civic-minded guy. And I'm glad that our
county council is whole once again.
Yeah. Um, so let's talk about from the
flip side of the planning and zoning.
Uh, you know, we said, we said in the
last segment, the city council splitting
planning and zoning from the county. The
county is also splitting from the city.
U, they had a public hearing. Uh, no one
got up to speak. uh and they did vote to
go ahead and continue this process to
split. But again, Joe, uh to your point
earlier, uh are you looking for there to
be some guard rails put up? It would be
nice. Again, my my concern and it isn't
necessarily confined to only the Greater
Salsbury Committee, although I think
right now that is a lot of the concern
that some people in the community have
is that any entity, any influence, uh
could wield tremendous power in a way
that is not necessarily in the public
interest uh if there aren't those
guardrails put in place. What if we flip
the script a little bit about something
that was said earlier by by Mike when
Salsbury sneezes the the county gets a
cold and you were talking about how many
folks from the it had to be in city of
Salsbury to be on their planning
commission. What if the county planning
commission is very heavily Salsbury
centric almost a reverse reverse? Yeah.
Uh could this lead into maybe not not a
fair representation of rural interest
for the county cuz the county still is
made up of Allen and Palville and
Willards and Parsonsburg. Yep. Yep.
Well, just as we we have councilmatic
districts when you within the county, I
I think that the planning and zoning
commission should also be represented by
districts. That way everybody every
geographic region of the county has a
say. But if you have a concentration of
people from one geographic sector, yeah,
well, you know, that's very We don't
want all those Pittsville people, you
know, we we've heard about those
Pittsville and Parsonsburg people. To be
fair, I'm a Partisburg person, but
they're not as good as us Delmare
people. Well, you know, you say that and
and I actually agree with your context,
but if you look at the new se the seven
new districts that we're going to use in
the next election, only only one of them
only one of them will definitely not
have someone from Salsbury in it. six of
the other technically speaking. Yeah.
You could have you could still have six
people from Salsbury and they represent
each of those. Yeah. Yeah. Uh which is
honestly one of my fears as as a rural
resident that uh that you would ever
even if someone from my district was
from the city of Salsbury, that wouldn't
bother me. Uh but I wouldn't want the
whole county to be represented by people
who only live in Salsbury. I agree. You
may have to do like a lottery, you know,
and just from the
confirmation of uh the deputy director
of administration. This was uh this this
was maybe very offcript in a way. There
was uh the county executive put forth
two different options in this situation.
Um the executive presented the county
council with two applicants, one for one
position only. Uh as that's been done,
the council then has the obligation to
put the uh uh both candidates on the
agenda and we have to vote. Um we don't
want to give the perception that the
council or the council president is
dictating what may or may not go on the
agenda. Uh one submitt would have been
fine uh since two submitts were
requested, two submitts were put on the
agenda and two submitts submitts were
discussed. So, but what's interesting
about the person they selected, Steven
uh Lincoln, is he is not from Wakcom
County, does not live here, and that
would mean that he is not eligible to
succeed uh Bunky Luffman as our director
of administration if Bunky decided to
retire to do a different job or or just
leave the area. The other the other main
topic is they introduced legislation
that would require the county executive
to get approval for professional
services like a contract labor but not
like a laborer but like someone uh I
think the main the main example of this
is Wayne Strawber who who has been the
director of administration in the county
under Bob Culver. uh retired back in
2020. Mhm. Was hired by the county
executive to specifically work on the
SWAT analysis. Mhm. The SWAT analysis is
done. Mhm. We've maybe messed that up at
this point, but that's a different show.
But Wayne Strawber is still being uh
paid to the tune of like in open
checkbook now over $30,000 for a period
of of work. This is someone who's
retired. code to add a new subsection
requiring county council approval by
resolution for any contract for
professional services and to define
professional services for that purpose.
The council is trying to get more
transparency in contracts that are going
out. We're finding out that we are
during the um budget process we are
funding positions in each of the
departments and um we're finding out in
all honesty we're finding out third
through third parties um that there are
other uh contracts out there or people
who are actually helping to assist with
that department. So we're trying to
wonder exactly uh what efficiencies are
being created. uh when you're paying
over $100,000 for a position in a
particular department, you're expecting
that person to run the department. And
when you have consultants that are
constantly coming in who are also
managing those departments, uh the
council just wants a better idea of how
we're spending the taxpayers money.
Actually, Mike, you were you were at the
at the Yeah. contracts for professional
services should there should be a very
um well-defined scope of work and when
that scope of services has been
satisfied then that contract should end.
You having worked for uh civil
engineering firms uh I can tell you that
your your your scope is defined when the
job is done you're done. You get paid
and you get paid and you're you're
you're done. Um, so I this this was very
I do not understand what the county
executive's objections to this are. I I
I get the sense that um it's a her
desire is to continue to perhaps be able
to funnel money, you know, to some
favored people who are influential. Um I
wanted to comment on legislative bill
2025-08.
I want to take a moment to remind this
county council of November 5th, 2024,
excuse me, 2024, the day that question A
failed. For those who may have
forgotten, question A proposed
eliminating the executive branch of
government and reverting to the council
form of government.
The voters of Wakamako County spoke loud
and clear and they do not want the
council to be the sole governing
authority. What I don't believe they
anticipated was that despite that clear
message, this council would seek to
circumvent the will of the people.
using legislation to chip away at the
inherent authority of the executive as
outlined in our charter. This is not
only a blatant disregard for the voice
of our constituents but constituent but
it sorry it constitutes an abuse of
power and a dangerous backdoor erosion
of the balance of government. I want to
thank the department of law for your
detailed and well-reasoned review of
legislative bill 2025-08.
I want to uh express my full agreement
with your conclusion that the bill is in
direct conflict with the Wakcomo County
Charter egregious egregiously oversteps
the council's authority and I urge this
council to withdraw this legislation or
at a minimum return to the table for a
full and public work session that allows
for transparent input and collaboration.
If withdrawal of this legislation will
not be considered, I am respectfully
asking the council to consider four
amendments. Yeah, I don't I don't uh I'm
just going to say I just don't think uh
this is necessary. We have a county
executive form of government now and uh
I don't I think this is kind of like
taking away from that. Guess I'll
respond to the county executive's um
comments. We've had concerns about some
of the money being spent. If you go into
open checkbook, you'll see that she's
been hiring a consultant that was
supposedly I thought at one point in
time just doing work for one department
and then seems like it's going to other
departments. I think that was the um
would progress this to be put on the
agenda. It's got many department heads.
Most of these people make over $100,000
a year. Probably welld deserved. But um
to have a a one consultant that um is
just tired to I don't know really don't
know what he did what he's doing. So I
think that's what instigated this. Well,
Mike, she she specifically brought up
question A and and there's no doubt in
anyone's mind that our our vision of
question A was for it to pass. We've all
were fine with the fact that the voters
decided by a relatively small majority.
uh you know, you're talking about 2,000
votes either way, but they've they've
elected to have a county executive. But
I want you to speak a little bit about
what those checks and balances should
look like versus what they're they're
trying to administer. I think that her
uh the fact that she brought up question
A as being an issue is entirely
irrelevant. Uh no point in relitigating
question A. The people of Wcomo County
made their decision. I don't necessarily
agree with the decision, but they've
made their decision. Isn't that the
irony that it still lives in some
people's heads who were even on quote
the winning side? Well, I think that she
she's painfully aware of just how close
it was. I mean, you know, 47% of the
people, more than 47% of the people uh
voted for question A. Um, so I not only
do I not think it's relevant, but
somehow I it's clear to me that the
county executive believes that she
should have sole authority. uh this
legislation will u help to um uh
mitigate that authority to some extent.
Um it's my observation that with the
amount of power that's vested in a
single person in the county executive.
We've seen that that power has been
abused and not just under the current
county executive but in past county
executives. So, I think to put we need
some checks and balances on on on that,
you know, you can't have one person
exercising all of this authority. Um,
the people may have voted for question
A, but they did not advocate for
conferring the executive with absolute
power, right? And that's what the
executive seems to want. And to
paraphrase a old friend of the show,
Josh Hastings, ultimately the council
does have the power of the purse, right?
They're the ones who approve the budget
in the end. Now they That's the way it's
supposed to work. It's supposed to work.
So theoretically, what this resolution
does is it simply continues, right, a
defined role of the legislative branch.
But the the current county executive,
she stated in her public comments, her
her review of this legislation was that
the law department uh has issued a
review, a written review saying that
this violates the charter. I mean like
this is the same law department that
also said that the Matt Lizel hiring was
also okay. Right. Right. Listen, I
anything that the executive believes in
and wants the law department that works
for her will say. So that's how it
operates because you know Mr. Wilbur
not, you know, um nothing on his
character necessarily, but they're
answerable to her. So,
and that's indicative of the amount of
power that's ultimately vested in one
person. The c the uh county attorney
does not truly represent the people of
Wakcomo County. The county attorney
represents the interests of the county
executive. Uh the county council's uh
attorney uh Mr. Benson has a very
different view on this than
Mr. Wilbur does and his well he had a
different view of the Matt Litel thing
and he and on a lot of other things too
and he won the appeal of that and I
think we found that Mr. Benson is uh
more prone to representing the interests
of the people of this county rather than
the executive alone. I guess the real
question that we as the public are going
to wait on is does the executive want to
throw more taxpayer money into a
frivolous lawsuit? Oh, a lawsuit is
definitely going to come if this pass. I
mean, and there's no way that it
doesn't. Yeah, but but again, it shows
you the priorities like given what we're
dealing with. Um, how much do we spend
on the Matt Lizel lawsuit that she that
she brought against the county? Exactly.
How many lawsuits is is she going to
bring against her own people that you
and I, all of us, the taxpayers, are
going to, you know, pick up the tab for?
And and and one ironic point just to
maybe close on this that I that I think
we we really need to examine too is in
her comments uh during her public
comments she made the point that it
would sort and again I'm paraphrasing
but it would sort of create an
atmosphere of fear and intimidation
among some employees who don't follow
the guidelines of this resolution. I
think if you talk to a good majority of
employees right now, uh, fear and
intimidation has been something that
they've lived with for unfortunately
several years under this current regime
and that was well documented in the
audit by the internal audit. So, so that
so that's not a good argument in
reality. Um, and even for previous
county executives, you can make the
argument, right? Because how hostile was
it when Bob Culver gave uh his
girlfriend, who was the unapproved
director of finance at the time, a raise
and then forged documents? I mean, that
was hostile and and I think that that
was part of why we were so for question
A, but again, that's passed. So, this is
just checks and balances that keep it
from happening again. You know, the
county council has the authority to
advise and consent when it comes to the
appointment of senior, you know,
appointed officials, you know, directors
and such, but they but the county
council does not have the ability to
impeach for misfeasants or malfeasants
um uh at the state level, at the federal
level. The legislative body does have
that authority. And one of the biggest
arguments that the executive was making
against question A is that our local
government needs to more closely mirror
the structure of the federal government.
But it does not uh you know they there
is no power of impeachment. Uh bills to
raise revenue are originating in the
executive's office rather than in the
legislative branch as we do at the
federal level. our county government has
never, you know, been structured, you
know, in a fashion after the federal
government. Well, and even more so, um,
what this new resolution would do, I if
you look at it, is it would actually
bring us more in line with what other
with with what other county executive
forms of government in Maryland have,
which is more oversight. Like I always
brought this up during the the question
campaign when Andrew also Brooks was
running for Senate. She at the time
right as county executive and I think
Prince George's County Prince George's
County she had more regulations on what
she can do in her office than our
executive in Waco County. Yeah. I think
we could take a time machine back 25
years and go to those charter committees
that were setting up the executive
branch when it was when it was voted.
Yeah. Um we would say listen you need to
do better. Uh you're don't let us down
because I I I do feel like they've let
us down. Well, they've had the
opportunity just but the last time
around the charter review committee made
no recommendations. It doesn't take a a
political scientist to examine our
charter and see that it is very weak
that most authority is conferred on the
county executive. It it will be
interesting to see in the future, you
know, whenever the next um commission is
formed to reassess the charter, not only
who will be on it, but what changes will
be made, if any, on that. Well, we need
to make some changes on the the
composition of the charter review
committee. Yeah. It needs to be very
broadbased and and not not blue ribbon
by someone else's standards. Just maybe
more blue collar and and and and get it
so that hey, does this does this make
sense to a you know regular person? It
shouldn't be a done deal before the
actual a done deal. Yes, I understand a
done deal. So, one other thing I want to
cover. I want to take a break. Um, we've
had a lot of folks reach out to us about
the perceived involvement of our local
police agencies in the ICE raids. Uh,
want to address at least what the
sheriff's departments let us know, what
we've heard, and and what we plan to do
as far as coverage. So, you guys good?
Yes, sir. All right. So, stay with us.
When we come back, we're going to talk
about some of the local policies and
involvement with the ICE raids. So, stay
with us. We'll be right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. I'm your
host, Joe White. We wanted to take some
time to address some of the concerns
folks have reached out to us about
regarding the ICE raids and uh maybe
even what is perceived as some local
involvement. So, in order to talk about
that, Dr. Joinosa stuck around. Minister
Mike Goldberg. Thank you. Sure. So,
first off, we we have we have seen a
press release from the Wakamako County
Sheriff's Office that says that they are
actually not involved and our
understanding is that local law
enforcement is not allowed to actually
enforce immigration standards. Is that
accurate? Correct. Okay. Correct. the
genesis of a lot of the concern apart
from the filtering in or excuse me the
um that's the wrong word apart from the
uh just osmosis of issues happening in
other states and at the federal level
though have been some specific issues
that emerged last week that created a
kind of buzz on social media. Okay, one
of them were initial reports by some
that ICE agents had had entered into
Prince Street Elementary School. Okay,
now for the record right that is not
legal. ICE Asians do not enter into
schools. Um, but there were reports of
that. And one of the big uh upshots of
that was that dozens of parents, I know
this for a fact because I spoke to
teachers and um former students who have
siblings in the school said that many
parents basically showed up out of in a
panic to get their kids out. Okay. Um
because the fear was that their kids
would be targeted. But as far as we
know, this actually did not happen. No,
that that did not happen. Now, there
were apparently uh multiple raids in the
neighborhood around Prince Street, okay,
very close to the school. So, again,
there is a difference between it
happening in a school and by a school,
but nevertheless, that same atmosphere
of concern and fear is easy to kind of
um Well, and and look, we're not going
to use our show to debate policy on
immigration or or ICE raids, but we did
at least because people reached out to
us, we did at least want to relay the
information we have. But Mike, we are we
are in the process of of having some
local law enforcement folks come in to
speak with us just about what folks
should do if they're approached, right?
Yes. Yeah. So, Joe, that was one of the
other subjects you brought up to me was
that there are perfectly legal citizens
in this in this community who have who
have been stopped to and their and their
legal status has been questioned.
Correct. Do you know what they're
supposed to do if they're if they're
asked? Well, again, I'm not a a lawyer
by by any means. Um, but essentially,
um, you know, if you are stopped and
there is a reason that is given to you
specifically why, you can always ask,
you know, why am I being pulled over or
what's the nature of, you know, am I
being detained? Um, and you do have to
comply obviously with certain aspects of
identification, but not necessarily
providing documents that people don't
always have. For example, um if you are
walking on the street and you don't have
your wallet or your license, you don't
you do not have to identify yourself if
you don't have that material. Not
everybody carries a passport on them or
in the case of my wife when when she was
an asyle, you know, her her papers. Um,
and I think there is for a lot of people
in the community, particularly the
Latino community, at least from what
I've heard, is that you have people that
are that have either grown up here or
are legal residents who feel that they
are being either profiled or stopped uh
as part of this broader drag net um
approach. And that has created
regardless of what you feel about the
issues, it's created a real sense of
fear and concern that now on social
media um has reached a point where
people are actually um giving and
sharing videos about where they might
see agents and other law enforcement.
And and this is I think the big issue is
that it's very easy and understandable
to get local law enforcement, whether
it's the city or the county and ICE
agents conflated because to a person who
is fearful, who doesn't know the
specifics,
it's the same thing. Yeah. Um it's not
there is no difference. There is no
difference in terms of where you're
coming at from a from a position of fear
and and concern. And and so I think
having law enforcement on here would be
great to clarify what are the policies,
what are the roles, and what can people,
whether they're citizens or residents,
you know, what are their legal rights.
So Mike, you you see there's a lot of
misinformation on social media and and
we've we've we've circled back with this
with just some of the other local
policies and and and and
discussion there. I mean, what's your
sense when you when you see some of
these videos online? Is it is it easy
for you to believe it? Is it is the
information does it seem like it does
like Joe says conflicts? I I think
there's a lot of hysteria out there
right now. What's being reported on
social media? We don't really know just
how true it is. Um you have to be very
careful about judging what you see on
social media. So we've heard Yeah.
But um I we do need to keep in mind that
in my opinion it's very unlikely that
local law enforcement has any
significant involvement uh in the raids.
It's federal law. Local law enforcement
is not authorized to enforce federal
law. They may enforce a detainer if
someone has been um arrested and is uh
on for some other reason and they become
aware that uh that there is a federal
charge for illegal immigration or
something else then you know they are
required to to hand that person over uh
to the federal authorities. uh to what
extent that is happening, we have no
idea. And I think it's part of the
issue, too, is uh I think there's a
concern that there hasn't been a lot of
clarity
um about the local agency's roles. Now,
to my knowledge, I could be wrong, but I
don't know if the sheriff's department
or the city of Salsbury or any other
municipal agency in law enforcement has
issued clarification about their roles.
I believe the sheriff's department has.
They did put out a statement on
specifically on the Prince Street School
issue and they and I think they had at
the very bottom a a sort of brief uh
mention that they don't assist in in in
those. Yeah. I mean, that's what I
that's what I read and I mean, look, as
a as a local taxpayer, I mean, our
sheriff's department is here to enforce
our our state and and local laws. Sure.
Uh I I wouldn't want it to be on us as
local taxpayers to have to ask our
sheriff's department. has already
already spread mighty as is. This is the
great irony and of the nature and we
don't have to get into it but but you
know uh yeah it's not traditionally
local law enforcement's job to enforce
immigration anyway and they physically
can't. Yeah. Uh but again the perception
of people in the community could be
different especially if from their
perspective there isn't really like a
clear um articulation. Like again I'm in
the city of Salsbury. I could be wrong,
but I haven't heard yet any specific
notice particularly in Haitian Creole or
Spanish to people in those communities
what their role as local law enforcement
is. Well, maybe that would be a good
solution. I think this is this is a time
for transparency and clarity to say,
"Hey, listen." Communication.
Communication is key. Yeah, absolutely.
If any of those agencies, whether they
be a small municipal one or even city of
Salsbury or the sheriff's maybe get get
as much information out there as
possible. One thing that has always
guided our show, I think the public
knows this, is that we've always been
big believers in transparency for the
public and that goes in all different
directions. And I think one of the big
dangers of that misinformation on the
Prince Street school rate is that it
really did scare and frighten people who
unnecessarily unnecessarily. No parent
should have to have that fear of running
into a school out of their I understand
that fear very much. Uh but but there is
a difference between what was reported
and what actually happened. And I think
getting a handle on misinformation
can be helped when agencies actually
give the clarification. Well, thank you
both. I appreciate it. And we are
working hard to get someone on the show
to talk specifically about the local
side of this. So, so stay stay tuned to
a f future episode for that. Well,
thanks for watching this episode of Open
Agenda. We'll be back next week with
another new episode.
I know what I'm doing, man.
