Local commentators and a financial analyst on Open Agenda said Wicomico County’s proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) contains large, vague line items and relies heavily on uncommitted funding, a structure they warned could let county executives reallocate money after approval.

"It is not above boards. It is not transparent. It lacks the detail necessary for it to be a cogent, coherent document," said Mike Goldberg, who described the CIP process as a banker would view it: requiring more study and independent analysis. Goldberg said roughly 48% of projected CIP funding is listed as "other" or to be determined, leaving the county dependent on unspecified sources.

Why it matters: The CIP is a multi-year statement of capital priorities and funding. If large allocations are placed in broad or discretionary categories, officials and outside analysts said, it becomes difficult for the public and council to assess which projects are funded and whether promised work — on schools, emergency services or infrastructure — will be completed.

Panelists flagged three concrete concerns. First, school safety: school system presenters described a top-tier estimate of $1,600,000 to equip multiple buildings with weapons-detection units and related staff; the county executive’s CIP lists $2,000,000 for the project, a $400,000 gap that panelists said creates an opportunity for reallocation. An unnamed presenter summarized the school scope as "29 buildings, 52 entrances, 67 total units" and noted those were top-level estimates intended to avoid underbudgeting.

Second, first responders and emergency services appeared underfunded in the CIP. Joe White, calling himself a fiscal conservative, said, "We are spending the money faster than it's coming in," and panelists pointed out the plan includes little to address equipment and operational needs raised by local fire and EMS personnel.

Third, long-range water and sewer planning drew scrutiny: speakers noted a $15,000,000 out-year allocation for water and sewer projects affecting small communities — including Parsonsburg, Del Mar and Allen — where residents may lack representation on decision-making bodies. A county consultant explained Parsonsburg’s septic-elimination concept depends on connecting to Pittsville’s wastewater treatment plant, which has roughly 50,000 gallons per day of capacity and would require years of upgrades before full hookups.

Speakers also raised process issues: the panel said the county routinely moves projects between years, uses budget amendments after adoption, and lacks an independent financial analyst for the council. Mike Goldberg and others argued the CIP would be more useful if it were integrated into the budget process and informed by a completed fiscal audit; Goldberg described repeated delays in audit timing and said producing the CIP without a clear view of looming costs — including an unspecified collective bargaining expense with the sheriff’s department — makes accurate multi-year planning difficult.

Council oversight and transparency were recurring themes. Panelists warned that a large "miscellaneous/other" category and discretionary contingency amounts weaken public accountability and make it harder to track whether priorities agreed by the council and executive are implemented.

What’s next: Hosts said they will revisit the CIP as budget season continues and the fiscal audit is released. No formal votes or motions were recorded in the program’s discussion; the broadcast summarized concerns raised at the January 6 council meeting and urged public attention to audit timing, clearer funding sources, and representation for communities affected by major infrastructure projects.