Last night, during what should have been a moment of unity and integrity, seven members of the New Castle County Council voted against Resolution 25-150 — a symbolic measure to support the audit of Tyler Technologies. Voting for it wouldn’t have changed the audit’s scope or cost the county a dime. It simply would have signaled that all council members stand together in support of transparency and accountability.
Instead, the public got mockery, defensiveness, and outright contempt.
For hours, residents who showed up in good faith were laughed at, dismissed, and ridiculed by the very people elected to represent them. Rather than engage with the content of the resolution — or with the people affected by the issues behind it — councilmembers made the night about their hurt feelings and bruised egos.
Councilman David Carter called the public “uninformed” and accused them of “b*tching”, referring to public criticism as though it were nothing more than background noise. Rather than listen, he lashed out. Rather than lead, he insulted. And yet he wasn’t alone.
Councilman Tim Sheldon complained that people were confused about the process and accused those supporting the resolution of grandstanding. But how is the public supposed to be informed when our elected officials choose to mock questions rather than answer them? Instead of clearing up confusion, he read aloud emails from senior citizens and laughed at their misunderstandings — a shameful moment that speaks volumes.
Councilwoman Janet Kilpatrick, meanwhile, seemed personally offended that she received “cut and paste” emails from her constituents — suggesting that they wasted a month of her summer. She noted that council usually takes a break this time of year and complained about having to deal with “what’s come across her desk.”
She joked about how the community “ruined their summer,”
Her words made one thing crystal clear: she views civic engagement as an inconvenience.
How did we get here — where elected officials believe it’s beneath them to hear from the people who elected them?
Others whined that they weren’t “included” on the resolution or that “social media influencers” knew about it before they did — as if that somehow justified voting it down.
Let’s be honest: a unanimous vote would have sent a powerful, unifying message — that the council, as a body, supports accountability, even if they disagree on the details. Instead, the majority fractured that message and made it personal.
What I witnessed in that room wasn’t just dysfunction — it was an unchecked circus.
To the six council members who voted in favor of Resolution 25-150: thank you. You showed the kind of leadership and respect that your position requires.
To the seven who didn’t: the public is watching. We saw how you responded to five days of polite civic engagement — with eye-rolls, insults, and defensiveness. We even watched a few pay more attention to their phones during public comment. And we won’t forget.
We asked you to stand with us. You told us our voices were a burden.
But here’s the thing: we’re not going away. These meetings are recorded. The video will be made public. And those emails you complained about? Expect more of them.
Because if last night made one thing clear, it’s this: you don’t take the public seriously — so now we have no choice but to keep showing up until you do.