Thoughts on Louise Smith and fireworks

The subjects are correlated because the thought of Louise Smith advocating a tax increase created fireworks!

Actually, I began this as a comment on Salisbury News but as I kept writing I figured I just might as well post it here. Plus this way I can expand my remarks because there is a relationship between the passion exhibited by a few on both subjects.

This is pretty much what I was writing in response to Salisbury News. I edited it more as I went along for this post.

You may smell a recall petition under way; however, be advised that even if everyone who voted for Louise signs a recall petition, you’re still not even halfway to the required number of signatures for it.

The hard-working volunteers who tried to overturn the 14% tax increase (a tax hike that directly sucks money out of the pockets of Salisbury residents) could only get 18% or so of the voters. I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t try to recall Louise Smith (I’m certainly disappointed in her actions as an outside observer), just don’t expect a massive groundswell of followers.

I think we in the blogging business overestimate the number of people who care about an issue or support a candidate because we as a group tend to be extremists when it comes to caring about certain things. We’re growing in the number of people within our sphere of influence, but not yet to the threshold necessary for that kind of change. This is made more evident when the forces of the mainstream media stack against us or take a stance on neither side.

I do have to play devil’s advocate to my own argument in one small way though. Part of the surprise about the immigration bill controversy was the amount of vigor exhibited by a group that was reasonably small but vocal – just compare the number who were passionate about that bill and aware of the ramifications of it versus the number who followed the jailhouse exploits of Paris Hilton on a daily basis.

But I think there’s just not the passion there to remove Louise Smith despite her advocacy of the 14% property tax increase – most people are just going to chalk this up as SOP for Salisbury city government and shrug.

And then we have the on-again, off-again saga of the Salisbury Jaycees fireworks show. I’ll credit the group that Joe Albero acted as part of with attempting to restart this event after the plug was pulled, only to find out the breaker box was gone. As I noted on Robinson’s show, a lot of people thought the government should step in and save the show. It’s become a topic of wailing and gnashing of teeth in these parts over the last day or two, almost as if the residents of Salisbury were entitled to a fireworks show by right.

I’ll give John Robinson credit for stating the obvious – if you really want a fireworks show, the Shorebirds are providing 19 of them this season, including one July 3rd. If it has to be on the Fourth one can go to Ocean City and catch two simultaneous shows, or down to Crisfield to see fireworks. Joe also pointed out Hebron is doing a show that night as part of their carnival. I guess it’s the attitude some feel (not necessarily Albero, Shorebirds GM Chris Bitters, et. al.) that a governmental entity needs to step in and save the day that bothers me.

I’ve been in and around a number of organizations who have solicited community and business support for whatever endeavor the group is trying to accomplish, and it’s a very difficult job to sell support for your charity or organization regardless of the cause. (Those of you with kids, think about how sick you get of the kids having to become junior salespeople to support the PTA, Little League, the soccer team, or what-have-you.) It’s not like the people of Salisbury in particular or Americans in general aren’t generous and charitable (far from it) but we have our wallets tapped in so many ways by entities we can’t live easily without – the electric bill goes up, gas prices increase, but most of all the cost of running our various levels of government continues to spiral out of control without them ever questioning their priorities or considering “doing without.” Witness the 14% tax increase when an alternative budget was presented, or (from the Sun) the “doomsday budget” the state’s pushing as part of softening up opposition to yet more tax increases.

And it’s community groups like the Jaycees that feel the pinch, as their cost of doing the fireworks increases in a like manner. Consider not just the cost of fireworks, but security, fire protection, liability insurance, and other costs of regulatory compliance. Back in 1967 these costs were nowhere near the factor as they are 40 years later. Nowadays if the unthinkable happened and a fatal accident occurred because of the fireworks it’s most likely the local Jaycees would be wiped out financially in civil court, or find insurance for future events impossible to obtain.

The cost of liability insurance is what scares me most about having the fireworks return in 2008. For all of the corporate donations, the most important one might be some local insurer picking up that coverage gratis.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.

3 thoughts on “Thoughts on Louise Smith and fireworks”

  1. Even if only 18% of the registered voters in SBY were found to sign the tax referendum petition, that’s still more than turned out to vote, and many more than voted for Louise. The problem with a recall petition is the time constraint on collecting the signatures. Given more time, say 2 months, there is no doubt that Louise would be history, and same goes for Her Majesty, Mayor Tilghman.

Comments are closed.