Rosemary Zacher is a resident of Dover.
I recently read various pieces in the Daily State News, titled “It’s time for accountability in capital city,” “Dover councilman looks back on storied life” and “As Dover election approaches, changes needed”. As a Dover citizen, I am not here to criticize or make personal attacks on any one person. But I am going to express my dissatisfaction with the current conditions of the city and its leadership.
Let me first start by saying, we, the citizens of Dover, cannot keep going down the wrong path to more destruction. The crime rate has increased considerably in the last four years, and our property taxes and utility fees continue to rise every year. Essential services have been cut, and you sometimes have to wait 20 minutes for the police to respond when you call them or have to beg to get your street cleaned, leaves picked up or potholes filled by the Public Works department. Further, there seems to be a lot of wasteful spending on projects in the Downtown Development District that will not resolve the current havoc. I can go on and on, but to me, it’s the same old song and dance.
Taxpayers are getting no help from City Council, with members increasing utility fees, service fees and municipal taxes. And those couple of council members who are actually interested in affecting change are regularly blocked at every turn or have thrown up their hands in disgust. It is obvious, when attending council meetings, that some representatives are not prepared and do not answer citizens’ questions, like Mr. William G. Faust Jr. noted in the Opinion he wrote. We need people on our City Council that will listen to us. To me, it is so ridiculous that those on council hold themselves to this higher standard, yet forget most of them have a plank in their eye.
Dover has a wealth of talented and experienced citizens who could effectively serve in office; the city doesn’t need professional politicians who mistakenly believe that they hold a vested property interest in their elected positions. Mediocre results by the current council make it clear that a legally mandated turnover in officeholders is required. Two terms should suffice for the mayor and council members, with at least six years off between holding the same office again. All candidates should promise to support legally limiting the terms of the mayor and council.
City Council seats should be filled with new faces, not the same old status quo. And remember, now more than ever, registering and voting is not only a right but a necessity.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
