The Rout of the Board of Supervisors
By Greg L | 2 June 2012 | Prince William County | 18 Comments
A little while ago Supervisor Peter Candland surprised the Board of Supervisors with a proposal to eliminate supervisor’s political slush funds. Initially, I thought it might be a bit of a fight to get supervisors to give up the pots of taxpayer money they use to purchase political goodwill, but is increasingly looking like there’s going to be a stampede of them rushing to rescue their reputations by getting on the right side of this issue. Embarrassment as a political weapon is still a very powerful thing. Thinly-veiled threats work pretty well, also.
These slush funds, which are comprised of the leftover money annually allotted to each supervisor to maintain their district offices, carry over from year to year and can amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. It gets doled out, usually in small contributions, to various charities, schools and other interests where supervisors can obtain personal recognition for their support. Several examples coming to light in recent days demonstrate the enormous potential for abuse, which has to start raising questions about whether some supervisors might face criminal indictments as a result of their diversion of taxpayer dollars into personal campaign activities.
Bob Pugh recently wrote to the board mentioning this incident, which comes dangerously close to the line of criminal activity:
An excellent example of this unethical practice is the recent Boys and Girls Club Steak n Stake Dinner. This is a fine organization worthy of support as a community partner. However, three members of the Board used discretionary funds (the taxpayers’ money) to purchase $1,000 table sponsorships under their own names. I watched the video of the event on the “Potomac News” website and saw those three Supervisors recognized as donors, and saw family members, friends and supporters of those Supervisors in attendance. Other elected officials were present at the dinner who did not use taxpayer funds to gain personal recognition in such a manner.
The Sherrif of Nottingham blog points out another incident where Supervisor Frank Principi proposed spending $1,550 of taxpayer funds to effectively buy campaign advertisements for each of the members of the board on the grounds of the Potomac Community Library.
To quote the Library Foundation, the “brick patio offers a lovely way to elegantly display your family name, remember a loved one or promote the name of your business on an engraved brick.”
So what exactly was going through the minds of the individual Supervisors when they were evaluating the merit of this expenditure of taxpayer funds?
Does the phrase “promote the name of your business on an engraved brick” come to mind.
Of course, the only business would be to promote themselves for reelection.
This activity quite conceivably violates a number of civil and criminal provisions of the Virginia Code in addition to being a shocking breach of ethics. As the contrast here as consolidated into a nearly binary black-and-white picture, Delegates Scott Lingamfelter and Rich Anderson are issuing public statements opposing the existence of these funds along with a declared intent to make them unlawful during the next session of the General Assembly. In the face of such widespread opposition to these funds, it is increasingly unlikely that any of the supervisors will have the political tone-deafness to vote to sustain them — not even John Jenkins.
“I don’t think it’s right to provide politicians with money that they can hand out or expend on just about anything they want”, said Lingamfelter. “While I know they have to put each item before the board for a vote, most times this is just a formality. A more disciplined approach is required”, he added.
Lingamfelter does not think there is any legal wrong-doing associated with what has transpired thus far in Prince William but feels that the current system is inappropriate. “Frankly, the current system smells bad”, said Lingamfelter. (emphasis added)
Notice the subtle warning here? No one had been mentioning violations of the law before, but now in a press release Lingamfelter is answering a new, previously unasked question that he decided was important to raise, even if no one else was. Why even bring it up? The rather simple answer here is to remind the members of the Board of Supervisors that if they don’t get their act together on this, there’s likely going to be an investigation coming up to determine if there’s enough evidence to issue an indictment. Drop the funds now, and the issue becomes moot. Vote to keep these funds, and the next party interested in all this is going to be some Commonwealth’s Attorney from downstate on a mission to figure out where the stink is coming from.
Checkmate.
Still, it’s well worth your time to appear at the next Board meeting this Tuesday afternoon. Our elected officials always benefit when constituents demonstrate that they’re watching what’s going on. This has only lasted as long as it has, and become so outrageously bad, because our elected officials didn’t think the public was paying attention, or didn’t care enough about it to have the issue influence their vote. That has clearly changed, and the opportunity for us all to get better government is the certain result.
Tweet This
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
18 Comments
Leave a Reply
Views: 809
Loading ...
I think the supervisors who have used taxpayer money to buy memorial bricks with their names on it or used public money to buy tables for themselves at fancy dinners should reimburse the county using their campaign accounts. If not they should be prosecuted for embezzlement.
I agree with Anonymous. The Sheriff brought some shocking revelations to light (and I don’t think he’s done yet). The public should be reimbursed.
Perhaps an independent prosecutor should be appointed to see just how far this misuse abuse goes! I frankly don’t trust our County Government (elected or appointed) to do an honest and thorough investigation.
Perhaps this is a job for the Commonwealth AG?
“It ain’t over ’til its over.”
If we want to see this to the end, we have to show up on 5 June. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting with Pete Candland a couple of times and speaking at one of his town halls. When it comes to fiscal responsibility, he’s the “real deal”. I haven’t seen that in a while.
I certainly appreciate Delegates Lingamfelter and Anderson supporting Supervisor Candland and the residents of Prince William County on this. They ’stepped up” when we needed them, and we won’t forget.
See you all in the PWC Board Room on 5 June.
I once teased a Supervisor (not from my district) when he cheered on his little league team that had his name of the back of all of their uniforms as Supervisor X by saying, “Shouldn’t their uniforms say Prince William County Tax Payers on the back of them?” As a former School Board Member I was approached to sponsor teams, dinners, etc. The little donations I was able to make always came from my personal account or my campaign account. I wish I would have been able to give more, but did what I could. The PWC School Board doesn’t have any slush funds and has never taken a raise (not during my time in PWC at least.) Not sure what the Supervisors make now, but your School Board members make $12,000 a year.
@Julie Lucas, and (since we are talking about taxpayer money), which Supervisor would that be (who had his name on the back of the shirts). I’d like to “tease” him a bit myself.
Ms. Lucas:
Please do me the honor of sending me an email to give me some hint of where I might go to see these uniforms for myself. I would be most grateful.
The Sheriff of Nottingham
sheriffofnottinghampw@gmail.com
Could this be the Supervisor? http://www.eteamz.com/colesll/sponsors/
I’ve heard rumors of Supervisors scouring Prince William County with magic markers, crow bars, chisels, and paint to remove heir names from things we paid for. I doubt they will remember them all.
Not to worry, we won’t forget.
This stuff is against the law in VA Code 2.2-3103. I think it’s a class one misdemeanor unless you can prove they knew they were breaking the law.
Someone get Paul Ebert on this quick (like he’d ever do a damn thing about corruption).
Great work on this Greg L and everyone else who raised this issue over and over again until people finally started paying attention. Forget Ebert doing anything about it, he’s as worthless as the rest of the political hack local Commonwealth’s Attorneys.
This might get Cuccinelli enough attention that maybe he’ll look at it as well, but he’s basically done nothing in regard to public corruption, just like McDonnell before him. Virginia’s political elites don’t police themselves very well, if at all.
[Ed note: The VA AG probably does not have the legal authority to intervene, conduct an investigation or file charges in such a case. His authority is very narrowly defined.]
I believe a strong argument can be made that it meets § 18.2-112.1. Misuse of public assets; penalty.
A. For purposes of this section, “public assets” means personal property belonging to or paid for by the Commonwealth, or any city, town, county, or any other political subdivision, or the labor of any person other than the accused that is paid for by the Commonwealth, or any city, town, county, or any other political subdivision.
B. Any full-time officer, agent, or employee of the Commonwealth, or of any city, town, county, or any other political subdivision who, without lawful authorization, uses or permits the use of public assets for private or personal purposes unrelated to the duties and office of the accused or any other legitimate government interest when the value of such use exceeds $1,000 in any 12-month period, is guilty of a Class 4 felony.
Would have to make the argument that a Supervisor is a full time position and that after they received “approval” from the other “guilty ” parties at board meetings they knowingly directed the funds to be used for their personal gain - campaigns, meals, memorial bricks in their AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBER names, etc. Might be a sporting prosecution but I bet there is enough evidence to make it worthwhile.
I’m guessing a lot of our Supervisors recognize this as their last term… and a couple might just resign rather than endure three more years of public humiliation and scrutiny. That “buying things with your husband or wife’s name on them” with tax money is pretty offensive (although buying things with your own name on item is bad enough).
And… Mrs. Jenkins… what could she have possibly been thinking to abuse her husband’s office and reputation so badly! When a Supervisor’s family starts treating “our stuff” like “their stuff”, its time to go.
Thanks, Sheriff… we would have never known.
Great work Greg….and Al and all others who have brought this to light. THIS is worthy work and worthy of concern (as opposed to worrying about a donated piece of art work in the Museum Lawn). Kudos on getting public support behind the removal of these funds…
Dear Paul Ebert:
In lieu of paying my $5,323 PW real estate tax directly to PW coffers, I instead plan on donating it to the Boys and Girls Club and endow a restroom in your name and honor.
Thank you!
I agree, the “slush fund” must go…and I’ve advised all supervisors of my feelings. At the same time however, the outrage amazes me. For those who have paid any attention at all, this has been going on for years and years. I’ve known of it and like most of those who comment so voiciferously, I’ve not peeped a word to my Supervisor…or any of the supervisors about it.
Yes, let’s stop it, but the current supervisors didn’t implement the process and if they’re willing to put an end to the practice, “good on them”!
…and Supervisor Candland, “good on you” for raising the issue. However, I do believe that with just a little forethought, you could have achieved the same result with your colleagues in a quieter, more team-oriented manner. Heroism is great, and we all love our heroes, but cooperation and team-work are effective and admirable traits within the BOCS.
Freedom:
Under normal circumstances I would heartily concur about working within the system.
But the hard reality it is that far too much goes on with the Board behind closed doors, and the collegial system has led to the current status of “entitlement” by a group that with, a wink and a nod, sends out tax money on its way to the charities of their choice all for the nefarious purposes that have been well documented.
We need less teamwork and far less “cooperation” among this band of robbers. A hearty tip of the pint to this young lad Candland.
My vote is for Candland to remain independent of these thugs until they change their behavior.
The Sheriff
The reform shouldn’t stop at the County level, let’s have Delegate Lingamfelter and Anderson introduce true reform legislation by limiting the gifts that they take from businesses and special interest groups as well as limit campaign contributions to $100 per donor, PAC or special interest group. Funny how they want to limit government spending unless it benefits them. Come on Scott and Rich practice what you preach.
At least some of you PWC Republicans aren’t going down with the ship like too many Loudoun Republicans do. In their minds any Loudoun Republican can do no wrong, simply because they’re “Republicans”. Both county’s Republican parties are full of self serving a-holes.
Well done, PWC BOCS!!!