Blog Archives
Important Poll
Stevens Miller (you know…the Dulles District Supervisor, who also ran against Tom Rust and lost) is in the news once again. This time, The Loudoun Independent has a poll asking who would be the first Loudoun County supervisor you would vote out of office. The last I checked Miller was leading the pack in being the most likely voted out. Ouch!
So, go vote today! Stevens Miller…not even for dogcatcher!
Stevens Miller Attacks Fellow Loudoun BOS Members
Today, in unusual fashion, Loudoun County Supervisor Stevens Miller (D-Dulles) attacks his fellow Loudoun BOS for not having a minority candidate in the final round of recruits for a new county administrator. He referred to other BOS members as being bigots.
Wow, with all of this name calling, one would think that Miller could have handled this situation better. Perhaps, he should focus on the educational backgrounds and the qualifications of the applicants before making such rash comments or attend hearings in person to help decide which candidates would proceed through.
Stevens Miller was more interested in running for the next office, instead of doing the job he was elected to do and helping with the hiring process for the next County Administrator.
Stevens Miller's Idea of Leaving a Legacy
So, how would you want to be remembered when you leave office? Would you want to be remembered for standing up for the people by fighting for what’s right or would you rather be remembered for improving the community at large?
The Loudoun Times asked each member on the Loudoun Board of Supervisors what their goals are for the remainder of their term. Stevens Miller wants to be remembered for a sign ordinance.
““If there’s nothing else that I leave behind as a supervisor, it’s a sign ordinance that is rational and reasonable,” said Miller, who is running for Virginia’s House of Delegates against Del. Tom Rust (R-Sterling).
Wow! A sign ordinance…that’s ambitious.
Dulles Planning Commissioner Attacks Scott York
In the continuing saga of the Loudoun County Planning Commission “absentee” scandal, we continue to find more interesting tidbits surrounding the Dulles Planning Commissioner. The recent tidbit is contained within this e-mail:
From: XXXX@loudoun.gov
To: YYYY@loudoun.gov
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:22:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Fwd: CTP-Roads in the Transition Policy Area
The question is where we want to guide residential growth. Wherever we place roads on the CTP that don’t exist is where the County is inviting residential rezoning applications to occur since we know the state will not fund them and developers will not proffer them unless they get suburban densities -which is not in compliance with our comp plan.Proposing expensive primary and secondary roads in areas that don’t warrant them doesn’t make sense to me. If a developer wants to come in and propose a Countryside Village why don’t we allow them to propose the road connection that would make sense for that sort of development. That sort of development probably would not require a street grid. Right now the by-right subdivisions in the Lenah area connect off Braddock and Lenah Road.
“What do you think of York’s proposal to take zoning ordinance review away from the Planning Commission?” Silly and misguided. Guess he didn’t take the PC training when he was a Commissioner.
Don’t you think it is silly and misguided to attack the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors for deciding to remove zoning ordinance review away from the Planning Commission? After all, there is a Zoning Department, which reviews all land use applications before they go to the Commission, and there is a provision for a Zoning Ordinance Review Committee. Why have another zoning commission? Scott York has been involved in Loudoun government for a long time, so why attack someone who knows the issues facing transportation, etc.
It seems to me that the Dulles Planning Commissioner would rather throw tantrums than work on the Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP), which will provide more roads and improvements.
The Loudoun Planning Commission Manifesto Continues On…
Last week, I mentioned about the Planning Commission manifesto that is taking place in Loudoun County. Well, I have decided to follow up with that post, and yes, there is more to this than what meets the eye.
Today, I would like to focus on an e-mail that was sent on June 25, 2009 from Sandra Chaloux, Dulles Planning Commissioner to the Catoctin Planning Commissioner that indicates her absence from a board meeting.
From:
To:
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:59:38 -0400
Subject: TONIGHT’S PC WORK SESSION
Erin,I don’t think I am going to go to the PC CTP work session tonight. No quorum tonight probably means no CTP PC public hearing in July.
Sandra
Now, why would Ms. Chaloux decide to abruptly announce her absence? Could it be that she was angered by the previous Planning Commission meeting, where a previous motion that she had made to delay the July hearing was denied? Whatever the reasoning behind Ms. Chaloux’s abrupt absence, there is indication that this particular hearing had no quorum due to an e-mail that was sent to several Planning Commission members urging them not to show up for a hearing that was to begin adopting a draft recommendation. According to Leesburg Today, the Planning Commission was scheduled to meet three times a week, along with Saturday mornings to review the Countywide Transportation Plan. The Board of Supervisors set a deadline to have the Planning Commission’s revised plan by September.
In the meantime, I guess we will see what happens on July 21, when the Board of Supervisors takes up the scheduling issues. However, I am still asking, is it ethical or right for a county employee to be absent from their appointed duties and still receive compensation?
The Loudoun Planning Commission Manifesto
Right now, scandal is brewing in Loudoun County, and no doubt, FOIA requests are being filed into why a planning commission member from the Dulles District sent an e-mail asking other board members not to show up at a meeting to discuss countywide transportation. The Loudoun Times-Mirror was the first to report about this scandal on July 1st after a June 25th hearing was postponed due to not having the necessary amount of participants to call a quorum. The same thing happened on June 27th. This meeting was discussing a transportation plan that would have created new roads in Loudoun, and now, it has been delayed until next quarter. Sounds odd, doesn’t it? Considering that the planning commission member in question was involved in an anti-growth environmental group.
For several days, there have been numerous statements that have been released regarding this email. Sterling Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio released a statement that appeared in the Loudoun Times Mirror on Thursday, July 2, 2009. Delgaudio said:
“Anyone who orchestrates the disbanding of any government meeting or causes a meeting to be cancelled through any effort is to be condemned. I ask the board of supervisors to investigate and find out exactly how 2 separate meetings of the Planning Commission failed to achieve a quorum and that the board of supervisors, if necessary restore a sense of confidence that the Planning Commission continues to function.
In response to the statement made by some that “its only two meetings” and “the transportation plan can wait until September”, I can only state that as far as my position: it is intolerable and not acceptable for anyone to purposely encourage dereliction in their duty to perform their responsibilities at scheduled meetings.
Additionally, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Scott York filed a FOIA request with Sandra Chaloux, the Dulles District Transportation Planning Board Member(Both the Washington Examiner and Loudoun Times Mirror have each filed a FOIA request as well into this matter) requesting any e-mails that she may have sent regarding the Planning Commission’s work session on the Countywide Transportation Plan.
This scandal only continues to unfold, but there are some questions that rise from this so-called manifesto. Is it illegal to tell a county employee not to show up to work (unless he or she has been terminated)? Can a county appointee or employee purposely not show up for a meeting, so there is not a quorum of members there to conduct a meeting? If anything, this is a shady way to govern.
