After attending the City Council meeting on July 18, I left after watching the council dance around the issue of whether to elect the mayor separately.

It is, indeed, a sad commentary that we have a council that appears to be acting on behalf of the citizens. When the council does not want to make a decision, it goes to having a public hearing. 

When I, along with others, took time to meet with the subcommittee of the council to discuss how to move on electing our mayor, I assumed that a decision would be made by this committee and brought back to the full council for a vote. 

Assumption No. 1:  The subcommittee and Salisbury citizens would meet and discuss the best way to proceed with electing the mayor.

Assumption No. 2: The subcommittee would discuss what would be in the best interests of the city and its citizens

Assumption No. 3: The subcommittee would take the recommendation from the citizen input to the full council for a vote.

However, the assumptions have proven to be in error and a waste of the citizens’ time given the action taken by the council at the July 18 meeting.

This is supported by these examples:

Case-in-point No. 1: Discussion had taken place several years before relative to electing the mayor and also by the committee.

Case-in-point No. 2: For the last several months, the subcommittee met with citizens, and there was much discussion concerning different scenarios, including staggered terms, longer terms and district elections. 

Case-in-point No. 3: The overriding consensus was that the mayor should be elected separately. 

I would agree that making all of the changes discussed at the committee meetings would be a lot. However, if the council took one thing at a time, it would at least show that it’s willing to act. 

— DeeDee Wright

Salisbury