Politics has become a game of “take no survivors”, a game I find very discouraging when critical issues must be resolved between differing parties. The Rural Crescent, since its inception, has been a unique tool, not just for land use, but an opportunity to bring Republicans, Democrats, and Independents together, united together, even if only on one issue. For me, the RC is a tenuous bridge builder between people from different ideological perspectives.
What Peter Candland has demonstrated is a complete and utter lack of understanding of why land use can be the one issue that brings people together. Does Peter Candland prefer to make enemies? Does Peter Candland prefer to just dismiss people who he believes are Democrats? Honestly, I am shocked. Isn’t democracy based on differing views? If everyone believed the same or were bullied into silence, would that be a representation of the Democracy our founding fathers created?
The purpose of the pledge is to allow the community to clearly understand where the candidate stands regarding his or her commitment to the Rural Crescent. Space is provided for clarification, should the candidate care to elaborate. All communication with candidates is posted on the ARC website. The pledge sheet only contains two components:
- Vote to support the Rural Crescent’s current 10 acre minimum residential zoning.
- Oppose the expansion of sewer within the borders of the Rural Crescent as outlined in the current Prince William County Comprehensive Plan.
As anyone can see, those are the only 2 items to support. There is no hidden agenda and there is absolutely nothing about abortion or immigration, legal or illegal, in anything having to do with Rural Crescent affairs.
I honored those who demonstrated their commitment to the Rural Crescent at a press conference on August 4. At no time did I denigrate anyone who did not sign. In fact, the only person who has been negatively singled out is Corey Stewart for breaking his commitment to the RC.
Suddenly I have found myself embroiled in a dust-up between 2 of the candidates in the Gainesville District and that I have been made the object of derision by local blogger Greg Letiecq. Now a new person has logged on to get in the act–one Jamie Zeigler with her new blog which has been posted on Peter Candland’s Facebook page. She is also uninformed regarding facts and has attempted to assassinate my character.
My hope is that PWC Gainesville District residents will not fall for these childish games. We need elected public servants who are interested in sound policy creation. We need public servants who understand that their constituents are people who hold many differing views.
In local politics, we need Supervisors who are committed to implementing land use policies that are common sense, that improve everyone’s quality of life, and who will not dismiss their fellow residents because they happen to have differing views.
As far as I can tell, given the recent events by Peter Candland, he is not that candidate.
Heads you lose/Tails you lose. What on earth are they thinking?
Why would any candidate go poke a stick in a hornets’ nest like this Candland campaign has done? We were sitting here minding our own business when along comes a spider and stirs all this up.
If Candland wins the primary and goes on to win the general, he can count on having me overlooking his every move. I live in the Gainesville District. I am also not alone. I believe MoM has made a similar promise. There are others. Patty, Chris, are all community activists who are not happy with the animosity shown to those not in lockstep with Team Candland. We don’t bully easily.
I can’t understand why he wanted Elena or me as enemies. It is of his own doing. No one in their right mind goes this far out of their way to make an enemy.
Before his campaign went out of their way to poke us with a stick, I had no feelings about him one way or the other. I am not even sure I would have bothered to go vote in the Republican primary.
Mr. Candland you have a great deal to learn about picking and chosing your battles. You have gotten some very poor advice.
Team Candland has not hit a homerun.
Candland is following the Corey Stewart playbook: Say some outrageous things so that you attract people’s attention, then say (or do) some even more outrageous things to demonstrate your “leadership” capabilities.
“Watch out now, take care, beware of greedy leaders. They’ll take you where you should not go.” – George Harrison (Beware of Darkness)
Why use words at all?
One aerial shot, like Roger Snyder did for the News & Messenger, of the new football fields in the Rural Crescent, and you either vote for that kind of thing, or you don’t.
Dumb question, but can the Rural Crescent be protected under the National Park Service, the way Prince William Forest Park is? That used to be forest and African-American farms and a mine, wasn’t it?
Candland’s campaign is crumbling under the weight of their lies and the attacks they’ve made. First, to cover up Candland’s refusal to support the Rural Crescent they attack Elena, and all other candidates, Republican and Democratic, who signed the pledge. All Candland had to do was state clearly that he supports the current 10-acre zoning and opposes sewer throughout the Rural Crescent. He won’t because Wally and Corey have already briefed him on the developments he will be expected to vote for as supervisor in exchange for their support now. His weasel-worded statements on the RC so far are pure B*** S*** and the detector is flashing wildly at the moment.
Wally and Marty are at least honest enough not to claim to support the Rural Crescent, when they obviously don’t. Candland is stepping into Corey’s shoes making outrageously wild lies and hoping people buy his claims.
Now, he’s caught in a lie about his (non) particpation on Stirrup’s budget committee. He and his minions are attacking everyone in sight on that also. Seems they are blaming this one on another Republican who’s not even in the Gainesville district saying that Coles candidate Bob Pugh was behind it. Pugh was also on that budget committee, as were many others. I spoke with him and he wasn’t behind this. “Mom” presents a pretty good summary over at Virtucon on what’s really going on.
Even Virtucon’s Riley, one of Candland’s supporters, is backing off from these crazy accusations now. Read the latest posts. I’ll credit Riley with honesty for not buying Candland’s budget committee claims anymore after he finds out what the facts really are.
How does Candland expect to function at all on this board if somehow he wins after dissing all Democrats, and targeting so many of his fellow Republicans? It’s the lies and cover-ups that get candidates anyway – look at Nixon and Watergate, and Clinton and Lewinsky. Candland should not have lied about the budget committee in the first place, and then should not have attacked other Republicans attempting to cover up those lies.
I hate to have to ask, but what is the big deal about the Rural Crescent? I just don’t really get it.
When I lived out West (which I miss terribly), Open Space was a big deal. Counties and municipalities would purchase land between home developments or between cities to preserve open space for all to enjoy.
There were also established wilderness areas or old growth forests where the land was purchased by the state and no development at all is allowed.
As far as I can tell, the rural crescent serves neither purpose. It seems elitist in that there is no benefit to the public at large and it limits rural living to those few who can afford 10-acre lots and high development costs.
Why should anyone who does not live in the immediate vicinity care about this? if anything, it would appear to reduce county tax revenues compared to what would be expected if modest development were allowed.
Those seem like very good questions and ones I have asked myself. I live close to town on a quarter acre so why should I give a rat’s ass.
If housing developments aren’t going in then less infrastructure will be needed-fewers schools, no new libraries, fewer roads and less traffic congestion.
Other than that, I really don’t care. When I look out my windows, I am not going to see rolling hills and pastures. However, my developed land is going to cost lots more because I am close to town and have municipal water, sewage, sidewalks, etc.
Anything that cuts down on taxes is my friend. There is no way a house with a couple kids who need to be schooled is going to be contributing to the tax base. That house is a user, not a giver and no chance of breaking even. Most houses with even one kid don’t break even. So, it makes sense to have land that isn’t going to be developed, by decree.
I am sure Elena can fill you in far more than I can. She has worked with this stuff for a decade.
@Kelly,
I love the west too. I have never lived there but I have visited a lot and would consider moving if it weren’t for family.
People in the west hate BLM. I never heard of that agency until my friends in the west started bitching about it.
@Kelly3406
This link has all your answers.
It includes candidate responses.
http://pwconserve.wordpress.com/2011/08/19/rural-crescent-attracts-attention-strong-support/
Thanks, MH. I will read this site, although I have checked out some of the other rural crescent web sites and find their explanations to be very vague.
You are absolutely correct about the extreme dislike of the BLM in the west.
Locally elected officials should focus on local issues that affect local constituents. They are all part time to begin with so they shouldn’t have any time to address anything but quality of life here in PWC.
As a resident, I would encourage those in a magisterial district fortunate enought to have a choice as to who to vote for for BoS to look for those that are focused locally. I am in a district where the incumbent is running uopposed.
I agree, Juturna. I’m very glad we have so many choices in Gainesville. However, for me there’s one and ONLY one for Gainesville, and that’s Martha.
I’ve collected the mail today and the box was full of campaign flyers. The interesting thing is, as I’ve stated, we get two of everything(two last names). We got four flyers. However, one flyer from Candland only went to my husband. This particular one, was the one that seemed to lie the most. He seems to think Martha’s against new schools, what a fool. She’s against poorly planned/placed schools. Then we have that she’s again improvements for playing fields. Wrong, AGAIN!! I truly am embarrassed for our county and our district because of these low-blow/ball tactics.
Then we have that she’s *AGAINST* improvements for playing fields.
Correct me if I am wrong but didn’t Ms. Schlossberg(sp?) host a fundraiser for Corey Stewart in the last election? If you hold fundraisers for Republicans than how can you be a leftist?
@True Lib
I belive it was for the “special election” in 2006. I do agree with you.
Kelly,
I am just beat tired, but I recommend you do some research on the Rural Crescent. It isn’t “elitest” by any stretch, in fact, most of the Rural Crescent is “built out” in various lots sizes, much less than 10 acres. There are few large tracts left, but not many.
I don’t necessarily think farms are seen as elistist. The farms in PWC are pretty farm-like more so than estate-like. I think I am trying to say working farms. Loudoun County, Clark County, even some parts of Facquer, not so much…some of those are quite estate-like.
Laf,
You are correct, it was in 2006 I held a fundraiser , but Corey had my support even when he was an Occoquan supervisor.
Cindy, sections could be designated “conservation areas” by local governments and be afforded protection, although not on the same level as NPS or VA State. But the intent would still be the same…shoot, even private citizens can get a designation of their land as a conservation area.
I just asked in the wrong place. Cindy, will you repost the aerial shot of the new soccer fields?
@Lafayette
at first I thought five candidates was a bad thing but after the events of the last few days I think more choices turned out better since it exposed some truths.
NoHype, it certainly told me that I needed to go out and vote rather than ignore a primary. I would like to have the two best candidates to chose from in Novemeber.
Because of the antics of the Candland campaign and because they felt it wise to draw us into whatever ails them, I have been on the phone making calls. It isn’t a good idea to forget the ‘in-town’ crowd. Team Candland also should realize the’ in-town’ folks ARE the old Gainesville District, even though I don’t think Mr. Candland knew that when he first decided to run for office, since he only mentioned serving Gainesville and Haymarket. Well, that works for me. Perhaps the Coles District supervisor can pick us. Coles at least knows we exist.
@NoHype
I really want this primary to be over. I’m glad for the “expose” we’ve seen over the past days. There are a few Martha Hendley signs in my neighborhood. I’ve yet to see another candidate’s sign around here. Oh wait, I’ve seen some Candland signs illegally placed in the Sudley area. Oh, and I have the pictures to show it. Fairfax allows signs to be placed in medians, but PW does NOT. I guess that’s just another example of him getting bad advice and NOT doing the right thing.
Candidate Suzanne Miller has really shown both personal and political integrity on her facebook page, Citizens for Suzanne.
Ms. Miller defended her oponent Martha Hendley:
“My fellow candidate & pillar of the community for nearly 4 decades, Ms. Martha Hendley, released a campaign ad stating a FACT: “Candidate Peter Candland refused to sign the “Advocates for the Rural Crescent” pledge.
I got a robo-call on my answering machine today from a gentlemen who said “… Martha Hendley is engaging in a personal attack campaign against Peter Candland…”
Miller also called for Candland to man up. Since when is stating a fact a negative attack?
Team Candland speaking publically about Elena with opinions based on untruths seems much more of a negative attack to me.
I also noticed that Mr. Candland is encouraging people to just walk in and vote on at the Office of Voter Registration on election day so they can get their vote counted first.
Mr. Candland might want to review voting rules. In order to do that, you have to certify that you meet the qualifications for voting ‘away from home.’
That office has to handle many special requests and help people with disabilities. Why add to their work load, especially when most people can just go to their regular polling place?
Cherry picking the Rule of Law?
Information from Office of Voter Registration.
Good for Suzanne Miller! Check out her Facebook Page, Citizens for Suzanne Miller. She excoriates Peter Candland for suggesting that Martha was on a “personal attack” campaign against him. I guess when you point out that someone did NOT sign the RC pledge you are “attacking” someone?
Furthermore, shame on Peter Candland for not knowing that the Office of Voter Registration is NOT INTENDED to be used to “count your votes early”. Mr. Candland is apparently suggesting that people not vote in their regular precinct but instead overwhelm an office intended for special circumstances!
How incredibly unprofessional and inconsiderate of the people who need to vote early, either because of their own personal special needs handicap or a logistical inability to vote on Tuesday.
From Peter Candland:
Get your vote counted first! Stop by the Office of Voter Registrations and Elections today in Old Town Manassas. The address is 9250 Lee Avenue. You can go right in and vote from 9AM- 5PM today!
Hmmmm I think that the comment about voting at the Office of Voter Registration on primary election day has been taken down. Good. That office is not equipped to get slammed by the public. In a general election there are a steady stream of people going through there. Some of those people coming through need more than a little assistance.
The rules on Saturday are no different than the rules on Monday or Tuesday. It is great for people who need to use it, but there are rules and you have to affirm that your reasons for being there meet the state criteria.
It does indeed appear that they took the voting comment down. I couldn’t help but notice there’s been NO activity on their wall since Saturday. Hmmmm
I hope those that went to “have their vote counted first” had a good reason for voting early. I can’t imagine they(Candland Clan) would encourage voters to go to the office and affirm to a lie about their reason for voting early. Well, with the lies we’ve seen, they might.
Looks like the Candland camp is thinks it’s a close race for the primary tomorrow.
Peter Candland for Supervisor
Tomorrow is the Republican Primary for Gainesville Supervisor! Please tell your neighbors and friends to come out and vote for Candland for Supervisor. Every single vote counts in these close elections.
2 minutes ago
Judging from Candland’s most recent mailer, his comments regarding the Rural Crescent and understanding the concerns of Westgate/Sudley can be politely described as little more than lip service.
It’s clear he either doesn’t understand or has chosen to ignore the relationship of the Rural Crescent to land use applications be they by private develpers or as part of a public facilities review. As if often the case, land use applications and particularly public facilities reviews place members of the Planning Commission and the BOCS in lose-lose situations. The lights at the park off Cathairpin are a perfect example. One is forced to choose between the “needs” of the children and the quality of life for those who live nearby. Regardless which way any member voted, they were sure to anger some group. Personally, given the location of the fields and that many fields within the development area had not yet been provided with lighting I understand why the timing of that improvement was questioned. Vote for it and the residents are angered, vote against it and the little league administrators are angered. Lose-lose, fortunately, most of the Planning Commissioners and BOCS members understand that and regardless their personal feelings make the hard decisions.
Similarly, the mailer leads me to believe that Candland would have voted in favor of Avendale, solely for the purpose of attaining the ball fields. I guess that’s why he won’t answer the question regarding how he would have voted and makes his written statement little more than lip service.
Lastly, his comments with regard to the schools indicates he either doesn’t understand the impact of recent School Board actions or simply doesn’t care about the Sudley/Westgate communities. I believe Lafayette can speak to that from an impact standpoint and I suspect that she would agree that I have more than shall we say a passing knowledge about the technical aspects and reasons the School Board withdrew their (illegal) appeal.
His campaign advisors really need to think those mailers out before they send them, it doesn’t look good when an attack on your opponents record actually calls into question your own campaign assertions.
Excellent post, MoM. I agree with your summary. You have the ability to see both the forest and the trees on most of these issues.
Candland wants to get rid of trailers for classrooms. One clear way to do that is to limit the number of housing developments in the Rural Crescent. Another way to to get rid of trailers is to just keep overcrowded classrooms. Many schools cannot even get trailers.
None of the candidates are interested in Sudley/Westgate which is very much a part of the Gainesville District. I have mercifully gotten almost no political mailers. A quick drive through many of those newer developments tells me that they have higher density than we do over here in the older neighborhoods. That condition should not exist!!!
Wait until some of these new folks running for office find out what perpetual pains in the ass live over here in Westgate/Sudley. Surprise!!!
Laughing my a$$ off at someone over on bvbl whining about Martha”s negative lit. Nice attempt at a fake Cantland Clan, If they were so offended by negative they wouldn’t”t be roosting there in the first place.