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 the studio with me today
is Michael Langford from Salsbury. Thank
you.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> Dr. Joe from Salsbury. Thanks for coming
in,
>> gentlemen.
>> So, I I want to talk about the Salsbury
City Council meeting. They moved this
one up to December 15th for the holiday.
>> Um there's going to be a few more weeks
before the before the next city council
meeting. There wasn't a lot on the
agenda, but there was some discussion
about how to move forward with the with
the agendas, whether or not they were
going to have four meetings a month or
two meetings, which we've seen both in
the in recent history. And then also,
there was a little bit of a clash among
city council members when we got around
to the council comments, right?
>> Yeah.
>> So, uh, can we we'll have that
conversation? All right. Yeah.
>> So, stay with us. When we come back,
we're going to discuss the city council
meeting from December 16th.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. In the
studio with me now is Mr. Michael
Langford from Salsbury. Thank you.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> Dr. Joe Vanosa, thanks for being here.
>> Thank you, sir.
>> So, I want to talk in this segment about
the Salsbury City Council this past
Monday. Uh there wasn't a lot on the
agenda as is typical for the end of
December. Uh they did discuss uh
potentially going back to having one
meeting every week.
>> Yeah. Uh so one one week would be a work
session and the alternate week would be
a legislative session just like they had
before Shawn Dowy moved away. Um and and
that was done most likely to accommodate
Shawn not living here when they went to
just two meetings a month.
>> That seems fairly evident at this point.
>> A discussion on moving the council
meetings back to the weekly meeting work
sessions. First and third Mondays are
the legislative uh sessions and the
second and fourth Mondays would be uh
hold on hold on the first the first and
third are the work sessions. The second
and fourth are the legislative sessions.
Um we've had a lot of conversation about
this. Um the mayor's office has reached
out. We've had a brief conversation
about it. I said I'd like to put it on
the agenda for the council to talk about
it. Um, if I'm not mistaken, and Nick
and and Mayor Taylor helped me out, but
the part of it is during the work
sessions with staff time. Um, it's the
costly with overtime, compensation time.
>> Yes. So, an example would be if we have
something that one of the council
members would like uh us to have a
director here to discuss. Um, we've had
instances in the last couple months
where that's 9:00 at night before that
discussion's happening. Um, we're not
asking them to go home and come back.
So, a lot of times they just continue
working. Um, I think it would make it a
lot more efficient if that work session
meeting would be on a separate uh Monday
and that that's where we are with
administration.
>> We had that arrangement before and it
did work fairly well. Mayor, did you
want to add any more into that? Well,
you know, I I always felt like it worked
better. Um, and that we had, you know,
there were shorter meetings. You know,
we get 9 o'clock, 10 o'clock. There's a
lot of public comment. We get busy.
There's a multitude of ordinances,
whatever. It can get lengthy. And I
think um I think we can do a little more
quality discussion when we were kind of
shortening an earlier meeting. You know,
everyone's kind of head in the game and
I think it's easier on everybody,
including our staff. So, that's just my
two cents. Um, but if we're going to do
go back to every Monday, then I think it
should be 6:00. I think the people the
we have to give the people the the
citizens that we represent an
opportunity. Even if they don't come,
they have that opportunity to be here. I
also agree with April at the 4:30 is
could be a crunch. So if you can make it
5:30 something like people could come
from work something like that and that
would possibly help alleviate
>> what 4:00 is the end of the day for most
of the staff or is it 4:30 5:00
>> 4:30
>> 4:30 okay yeah
>> I it is our recommendation to do every
Monday um what time I will leave that up
to you guys
>> so then mayor's office you have no
problem with like a 5:30 start time you
don't see that okay cuz I agree that
4:30 is too early.
>> I was going to say it's fine with my
schedule, but I do think this requires
an amendment to the rules. So, we would
need to put it on a work session to um
make the edits to the rules. And so, are
we moving forward with that with just
changing the time um and or are we also
going to address remote participation?
>> Both. I have the Zoom meeting access
discussion on the January 12th work
session. Um interesting because I don't
think it makes sense to amend the rules
for the meeting change time and then to
amend them again if we're for the remote
participation.
>> All right. So we'll keep the Zoom
meeting access discussion for the 12th
and then
>> so the resolution so we could do a work
session and just do one reading. So we
can maybe at that work session discuss
when it will become effective. Set a
date in February for that.
>> Does it have to be on the 12th? Can we
decide tonight since we're in a work
session already to whether or not we
want to include Zoom?
>> You could. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> We are in we are all in favor of the
Zoom option with um further exploring of
the account and the security of the
account. So then it's done and the time
is set. We're good to go. So, we would
put the resolution on for
uh
the 12th,
>> correct? And then it would be passed at
the following legislative session,
assuming
>> 26.
>> Yeah. Assuming everybody is in agreement
with those changes. Yes.
>> When when will that come back up? When
will they actually make that change or
vote on making that change? So they were
talking about uh I guess having the
attorney draft legislation for that and
then there's a the clerk was speaking to
the difficult um the aspects of
[clears throat] however the agendas are
created is through some company software
and with the holidays it's dubious as to
whether or not we'll be able to contact
them and alter uh those forms in order
to go to the weekly format because
they're templates basically and then
they just send them the agenda items
that then get put into that template if
that makes sense.
>> So, this is going to take a couple
weeks.
>> So, it'll Yeah, it'll probably January,
February, but there's no specific
timeline quite yet, but it seems the
intention is to go back to the weekly,
which is how it's always been.
>> And Joe, we we've heard different sides
of the argument. Some some folks seem to
think that having less meetings allows
more of the public to attend, but also
having 48 meetings a year would give
more public the public more
opportunities to to put their input in.
Right.
>> Yeah, it's an interesting choice. Um, I
think at this point, I mean, this is
just my personal perspective on it. I
think the schedule now is probably
sufficient given what they deal with or
don't deal with. Um, and again, you
always have the option of of of calling
special meetings. Um, I I have to admit,
considering the lack of legislation that
has historically come out of the city
council, at least in its current
iteration, I think 48 meetings a year is
is quite ambitious for not having done
much.
>> Yeah. Um, you know, I I've had a chance
to talk just in the last 24 hours to to
people who feel both sides of the way.
At least they're going to debate this
out in public, which is always what we
want them to do, right?
>> Yeah.
>> Um, so the other topic that came up
yesterday was during the council
comments, we actually got a chance uh to
really get a sense for how April Jackson
felt about being nominated and
unanimously voted as vice president. But
what I want to say is last week I felt
bad and I couldn't say what I really
wanted to.
But what took place last week
was terrible,
it was really terrible. I wasn't
satisfied with the outcome of what
happened
with the new elected or appointed
person. Not that it's nothing against
you, Melissa. Please don't take this at
heart, but what I want to say is I
called you twice to talk to you
after you were appointed and you and
before you got sworn in and you never
contacted me, but you spoke to everybody
on this council
by phone, but by some weird way, you
nominated me to be the vice president.
Okay. Now, what I want you all to know,
I don't need
to have a title to do what I do.
A title doesn't make me or break me.
Before I became a city council person, I
was working steadfast in my community
and in the city of Salsbury and Wcomo
County. So, don't take it lightly
because I know what happened and I know
how it happened
because Sharon was first asked to be the
vice president. See, I'm going to set
the record straight. She was asking me
and when she declined, it was me. You're
not satisfying me by doing stuff like
that. I'm not that person. I'm a real
person. And see, I'm going tell you
something. God spoke to me then told me
hold my peace and he fight my battle.
But I have to get this off my chest
because I am tired of people thinking
that people are crazy, stupid, and dumb
and don't know what's going on around
here. What you all did, you should be
ashamed of. I'm going to let it go
there. Merry Christmas, happy new year,
and all the rest of the good stuff. I
just had to get it off my chest because
y'all know what was Y'all know it was
wrong. You know it was wrong. You know
it wasn't. I'm done. Yeah,
>> we mentioned in our uh our show last
week that we felt like she was surprised
um maybe by the way it went when you
watch her reaction
>> and Melissa how I remember saying about
how Melissa was kind of quick to jump
the gun. Angela wasn't even done with
opening the floor for nominations before
she had nominated April which we said
was telling. Well, this week we found
out more. Well, I think she like a lot
of us felt the whole process was in some
ways disingenuous. Um I think she felt
insulted
I would say right in terms of as to how
it played out as far as um you know the
lack of transparency and and council
members going to her and specifically
making that point because as we found
out there was somebody else who had been
approached for the vice president role.
>> Yeah. Sharon Deile, right?
>> Correct. and and and Sharon's made it
known that she's not looking for that
leadership role, especially with this
kind of cabal of
>> very open about that. Yeah.
>> Yeah. No, that was shocking to me. And
then the the response so and then um you
know, April spoke about the lack of
transparency in dealings and that like
she was the only council member who had
not spoken to Miss Holland prior to her
being appointed, right? And um and then
Miss Holland's retort was well I only
had one missed call.
So I
>> from April Jackson
>> from April Jackson.
>> Council one Holland.
>> Sure. Um Miss Jackson I won't go into
that um here. Um I did I have one missed
phone call from you um and a voicemail.
Um I'm not going to get into that. I
hope everyone has a wonderful holiday.
Enjoy the time with your families.
um and just take a break and relax while
you can. Thank you.
>> I I you know, thus kind of admitting
that both that she had not in fact
reached back out to April and that April
had in fact in good faith reached out to
her, I don't know, the tone was one that
that was off. I'm not sure what she was
trying to demonstrate there, but other
than corroborating what you know, April
said.
>> It pretty much confirmed what
>> Miss Jackson said.
But look, let's put this in another
context, and I brought this up in last
week's show. Uh Melissa Holland is the
one who nominated April Jackson to be
vice president.
>> Yeah.
>> So, if you follow this logic out, she
hadn't spoken to her. She had never
served on the city council with her.
>> And [clears throat] yet, she felt
strongly enough to nominate her for vice
president. If you don't think that that
doesn't mean this was scripted, then uh
you your head is really into the sand
and I'm not going to be able to help you
with that. So,
>> yeah, I agree. the the footage speaks
for itself.
>> No. And then then the final tip of the
hat was uh council pres president
Blake's uh [gasps]
bringing up the word fraud into the
conversation which uh April had, you
know, spoken I think to the fact of like
a letter of the law but not the spear of
the law being followed. Yeah. Right.
>> Not fraud
>> but had not accorded the discourse. So
it felt very telling about again the
unscrupulous nature and the scriptedness
of the proceedings. Um, and as you can
see in our work sessions right off the
bat, uh, election reform important, uh,
an appointment process conversation. Um,
and of course the Monday meetings. Um,
but we do have that election reform.
There's going to be lots of discussion
about that. And I think we're going to
be, um, scheduling a lot of town halls
throughout the city to to kind of get a
lot of feedback from from that and
thoughts um, plus some research. a lot
of research and and smite other ideas
maybe we haven't even thought of yet. I
don't know. Um I think talking about the
appointment process, the appointment
process was followed. Um the way that
the charter laid it out and all the
appointment processes that I went
through um and talking about there's two
different things. Being upset about the
appointment process is one thing or
wanting a a charter amendment to do
something else besides the appointment
process is a total different thing than
say that it was fraud. Uh that's a
pretty big word. Um there was no fraud.
It was actually
>> really did surprise me like when she
specifically went out of her way to use
that term.
>> Yeah. Especially when it's not been
brought up.
>> It's not been brought up. Excuse me. Um
what what's going on here? Um yeah, it
says a lot. the uh the and let's not
forget the the the bigger scope here is
like Miss St. Farard, she actually never
got to have an interview. J. Michael
Mitchell has stated that he felt like
his interview process was flawed. He's
put in PIA requests to find their notes
and what communication was happen.
>> This our our concern was the lack of
transparency, maybe not the lack of
results,
>> but then this this this argument is
still going on. It has not been resolved
and that's the one thing the community
wanted.
>> Correct. And it is my understanding
speaking of a lack of resolution that as
of today which is December 16th I
believe uh Miss St. Farard has not been
given a straight answer as to why or
what she did incorrect in the process to
not even merit an interview.
>> Yeah. And to be disqualified at the last
minute is got to be frustrating because
you're you're you're trying to serve
your community. Whe whether you think
she should be on the city council,
whether you would vote for if there was
a special election, it's not it's
inconsequential. Someone took the time
to put their hat in the ring and was not
given the same level. And and if if if
not, then why, right? You know,
>> and that's that's exactly it. If you're
if she's disqualified, then just merely
state the disqualifying factor.
>> Yeah. I do it all the time with uh
people applying for an apartment. I I
these people following like that are
public officials that can't follow due
process to get a result. Yeah,
>> that's I mean this is just this is
supposed to be like standard form of
>> that's like the bare minimum you can do
is just to explain well here is the
process that was not followed if that is
the case
>> and explain it. Yeah,
>> it's been what 2 weeks now. I
>> I can tell people your credit score
isn't here, your income level isn't
here. I can tell them why they're
disqualified.
I don't like the cut of your
she deserves that straightforward answer
of hey why didn't wasn't I given this
opportunity like other people I mean
it's her right
>> what when what is the next uh city
council meeting
>> I believe January 12th afternoon so uh
quite
>> six o'clock okay so stay tuned then and
and hopefully the the community will
stay engaged and hold these folks
accountable
>> so thanks for watching this segment of
open agenda we'll be right back.
Thanks for watching this episode of Open
Agenda. We hope you have a merry
Christmas. We'll be back later this week
with another new episode.
>> Man, that was good. We don't need Joe
Venosa.
>> Nope. [laughter]
>> Michael Langford, 1026 Arthur Court. Uh
so I just want to commend you guys voice
support for going back to the weekly
meetings. Um to me it comes down to uh
basically 50 chances a year if you go
weekly for the public to engage with
elected officials versus 25. You know
it's just more opportunities things will
happen. People will get ill kids will
get sick you know so people will plan to
come and not be able to and everything
that people come like on the um for the
legislative sessions you know they might
not comment on something on the agenda
so they they can come another time. So I
just think it's good to have more
opportunities for people to engage. Um
and I think doing the consist just as
somebody who does events um for a living
consist setting the consistency of the
time helps people show up and be able to
rely upon the thing the 4:30 to 6 before
people and
If you didn't like the way in which the vacant Salisbury City Council seat was filled or how its officers were elected, you're going to love the Friday, December 19 edition of OPEN AGENDA (S2 E78). We show you the video clip of Councilwoman April Jackson publicly chastising certain other Council members for their deceitful actions leading to her being elected Vice President. Council President, Angela Blake, gave a rather defensive response with an apparent Freudian slip that was seemingly self-implicating. We also question why certain candidates who applied to fill the vacant Council seat were denied an interview without explanation. I can only say that the secrecy with which this Council operates is deeply concerning. The Council also discussed returning to weekly meetings rather than only meeting twice per month, and you'll get some insight as to why meetings were changed to bimonthly in the first place. Some folks have expressed support for weekly meetings and some are opposed. What do you think?
