No sooner than the ink dried than Corey Stewart emailed out a message regarding the hotly debated discretionary funds:
Dear Friend,
I wanted to be the first to let you know that today the Prince William County Board of Supervisors voted to eliminate discretionary funds from our budgets.
During my tenure as Chairman, I have always looked at ways to decrease the size of government and increase transparency. I am pleased that the Board was able to reach a consensus and agree that these funds were not in the best interest of the county or its taxpayers. It also should be noted that we have put into place tighter controls on how Board members staff their offices or enter into contracts with outside vendors for constituent outreach. These amendments were added to make sure the Board is beyond reproach.
While leading the Board, I have been proud of the financial management of this county. This is reflected in our three AAA bond ratings, a budget that has been reduced by $143 million, and tax bills that are 30% lower than the rest of the region.
Prince William County is a model of how conservative government should work.
It is also an example of the success a locality can have when they adhere to conservative principles. Prince William County is ranked #1 in job growth in Virginia and #3 in the country. The county also saw its median income jump by more than $3,000 making us the 9th wealthiest county in the nation.
It is not an accident or coincidence that we received these accolades; it is because of the fiscal discipline exhibited by not only this board but previous boards.
I look forward to continuing to serve as your Chairman of this dynamic and diverse county.
I am not happy with the end result because I don’t understand it. In the usual PWC BOCS manner, Pete Candland’s Resolution was slammed through….like a dose of salts as the old folks used to say. Supervisor Jenkins attempted to attach several amendments to it. He succeeded. Supervisor Candland seemed to want something a little different. I got the distinct impression he wanted to set up a few “thou shalt nots,” and let us go home and talk to our families, friends and neighbors about the new restrictions and try it all on for size. But that was not to be.
If we no longer have discretionary funds, what do we have? How do we just stop doing one thing and offer no replacements? What Supervisor Candland meant as food for thought and a few stop gap measures all of a sudden became a full course meal. It was as though he disturbed a grizzly bear encampment. The bears rose up on their hind legs and fought back with great fury.
I was withholding judgement. I wanted to see what our options were. That was not to be.
What impressions did you all have? Did I misread it? Please share. What were your impressions of the day’s events.
******* Beware of unintended consequences.******
*** Note: Corey used his Corey for Lt. Gov. Stationery for this announcement rather than the Chairman of the Board of Supervisor Stationery. Isn’;t that what some of this is about? Corey….psssst!!!! You were acting as chariman today, not as the Lt. gov.
The Sheriff is taking his much deserved victory lap. funny, he and I had some of the same impressions, especially about meanness.
http://sheriffofnottinghampwc.blogspot.com/
Here is what Marty Nohe’s notice about today’s events says:
Dear neighbors-
I am writing to update you on the Board’s actions earlier today to eliminate the practice of using excess office funds to provide funding to not-for-profit groups. You had contacted me previously expressing your opposition to this practice, so I think that you will be pleased to know that this afternoon, the Board of County Supervisors voted unanimously to amend our rules of procedure to eliminate this practice, as well as to put strict limits on the amount of unspent funds that can be carried over from one fiscal year into the next. I am thankful that Supervisor Candland introduced this proposal, because it gave us the opportunity to address a long standing community concern in a manner that also led to Board consensus.
Perhaps more importantly however, I am very pleased to announce that the Board also agreed to incorporate my proposal to also reduce the budget of each District Supervisors’ office budget by $20,000. This has been very important to me and to my colleague Supervisor May, because it means that the Board truly brought reform to the way in which we utilize the funds allocated to us by the taxpayers. The proposal that Supervisor Candland brought to the Board today was an excellent start, in that it looked to reform the way in which Board members spend our budgets. But I have long felt that to address only HOW the money is spent fails to address the more fundamental question of HOW MUCH we spend. Today’s vote, with this amendment, took that important additional step to actually reduce the amount of money that each Supervisor is allocated annually, to bring our overall spending under control. Moreover, it also returns $140,000 of the taxpayers money back to the general fund to be used for other more important community needs, or to reduce the size of future budgets.
Furthermore, the Board also added amendments recommended by Supervisor Jenkins to bring the policies that govern Supervisors’ office aides more in line with the policies that apply to all county employees, to include a restriction against Board members allowing their staff to build up excess overtime pay; to prevent Board members from using County funds to hire political consultants as employees or contractors; and to ensure that Supervisors comply with the County policy on nepotism. I want to thank Supervisor Jenkins for suggesting this additional layer of transparency and accountability by proposing these amendments.
I trust that this is welcome news to you, and I hope that you will join me in thanking my colleagues for supporting policies that ensure the highest possible level of transparency and honesty in the way in which County Government is managed. If you have any questions, or if my office can assist you in any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time.
Yours-
Marty Nohe
I don’t see how Mr. Jenkins’ amendments are a slam against Mr. Candland but I’m not politically astute like other commentators on here.
As always, the devil will be in the details.
Martin E Nohe
Coles District Supervisor
703-792-4620
County Mailstop EA707
Corey has sent out another email I am told, the Stewart Sentinal. I don’t think he used the word ‘conservative’ as many times.
I wonder if he read the blogs for a reaction.
The Sheriff had a great deal to say.
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-state-of-nova/post/prince-william-board-mostly-eliminates-discretionary-funds-but-not-without-some-political-weirdness/2012/06/05/gJQAnZMrGV_blog.html
Apparently I am not the only one who just thought the entire thing was strange and somewhat mean.
One thing that really really bothers me…..Super. Jenkins amendments were new. Did our BOCS just approve them, vote on them, without even reading them? How come there is no brain time? No time to read, think, consider pros and cons, etc?
No wonder they pray before meetings. Its all slap dash governance. Don’t they consider anything or weigh the pros and cons? Do they think about the impact of any of this stuff?
I am actually outraged over this entire meeting. Pete Candland is just getting his feet wet, sure, but he brought an important piece of legislation to the floor, in the right way. They obviously had met and discussed because they were lying in wait for him like a room full of Grizzly bears, all reared up on their hind legs.
They adopted new legislation which they apparently had never seen before, or had they seen it before? Is that legal? I suppose if they passed it around 2 by 2 it was legal.
But that is not good governance. The Jenkins amendment(s) also had nothing to do with what Pete was addressing. I firmly believe that there should have been some turn around time. The supervisors should have had a week to think about them and the public should have had time to respond, at least at citizen’s time. Candland’s “bill” could have waited a week. For God’s sake, we have waited some 30 years….what’s a week more.
The amendment preventing a supervisor from hiring campaign workers is just plain stupid also. Who cares. I suppose Ernestine will be exempt???
I give the BOCS an F on this one. There was NO legitimate reason to slam dunk the resolution with those silly ass amendments (yes, silly ass)through today, unless of course, everyone is right and it was to punish Pete Candland. Then it all makes perfect sense.
Read the damn bill and then THINK about the damn bill.
At least this is a beginning to accomplish a much needed proccess of real transparency. I think Peter Candland handled this a very professional manner and deserves praise for taking this issue on so early in his “career”. I have always been a proponent of complimenting people when they do a good job.
In case you haven’t seen them, here are the Jenkins amendments:
In the interests of government transparency and being prudent with taxpayer dollars, I would like to propose the following amendments to ensure that we are respectful of taxpayer dollars while avoiding the appearance of any impropriety:
• No Board Member will either pay or incur a legal obligation to pay overtime or allow incurred comp time to Board office employees.
• No Board Member will employ or retain any full-time or part-time employee on the County payroll who owns, is employed by, or is a contractor to any company which offers services for hire or is retained by the political campaign of that Board Member.
• No Board Member will engage or retain any vendor services using County funds where the vendor has been or is retained by the political campaign of that Board Member.
• Every Board Member will follow section 6.10 of the County Personnel Manual, Nepotism, in hiring employees and managing Board Offices.
In addition to the transit of Venus, another celestial event happened today. The Earth ground to a halt and began counter-clockwise rotation. What caused this event?
Greg L agreed with the Washingtin Post. If that wasn’t strange enough, I agree with both Greg and the Washington Post on this issue. Greg said:
When we get this kind of celestial alignment, something is definitely off kilter. I might even go so far as to say Totally agree to Greg.
Perhaps this is the time to also salute the bravery of Supervisor Candland for sticking his head into the mouth of at least 5 hungry grizzlies. That action was not for the faint of heart.
The Jenkins amendments seemed to appear out of nowhere…at least nowhere that the rest of us want to go. They have nothing to do with Supervisor Candland’s Resolution, that I can see.
Now the question becomes, who were they meant to gouge? Corey? Candland?
The next question becomes, why did the supervisors approve them? Pete was correct to reject them and they had better not come back to haunt him either. I will have his back on that one. He explained why he voted no. He opposed them being attached without proper review. He obviously is not in favor of nepotism as someone suggested. That is just bull.