So, once again, Jaimie Zielger, Peter Candland’s wanna be pit bull, is going after me.
When I sent out the pledge for all candidates to sign in late July, what I received back from Peter Candland was a letter questioning the validity of Advocates for the Rural Crescent. I sent a hard copy letter in response immediately. In fact, I was forced to send a hard copy to his campaign address as Mr. Candland did not have the common courtesy to include a direct e-mail or a phone number. Let me add, that a current campaign worker for him has known me for several years.
Here is what was what was said on the not so truthful blog:
The ONLY basis for Ann Wheeler’s claim Peter Candland does not support protecting the Rural Crescent is Candland’s decision not to sign the Rural Crescent Pledge authored by liberal activist Elena Schlossberg-Kunkel. Candland asked for more information from Schlossberg-Kunkel about the organization and the political agenda being advocated by her, but got no response.
But Candland then got smeared with the false claim that he did not support protecting the Rural Crescent.
First of all, I have never smeared Peter Candland, I have simply acknowledged those who signed the pledge and their commitment to the Rural Crescent.
My response to Peter Candland was a brief letter in which I spent a significant amount of time gathering websites and newspaper articles from the past several years.
Dear Mr. Candland,
Thank you for response to our pledge request. We are not a 501c3 etc organization. Our community organization is just that, a community organization, dedicated to fiscal responsibility while preserving open spaces.
ARC was formed in 2001 and has had a voice in Prince William County for almost a decade. I have included just a few articles that my be helpful in understanding our role in land use issues.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dn?pagename=article&node=&cpmemtId=A43517-2003june27¬found=true
http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/jan/07/prince-william-groups-petition-supervisors-last-mi-ar-760703/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/07/AR2006100700390.html
http://www.pwconserve.org/issues/landuseplanning/south_market/lettersamples_usace.html
http://www.highbeam.cm/doc/1P2-378358.html
http://ww2.fairfaxtimes.com/cms/archivestory.php?id=169995
Sincerely,
Elena Schlossberg-Kunkel
Advocates for the Rural Crescent
So I am wondering, is Jaime Ziegler purposefully not sharing the truth about my response to Peter Candland, or is Peter Candland withholding information from Jamie Ziegler, because clearly, someone is not sharing accurate information.
If Mr. Candland is proud of his position on the land use, why does he feel the need to send his attack puppies after me. Stop talking about me for G-d’s sake and focus on what this county needs in order to thrive and maintain its unique characteristics.
Peter Candland needs to man up and stop letting Jamie do his dirty work. He is acting like he is running against Elena who is NOT running for office.
This is the only time in all the years I have lived in PWC, that I have seen a candidate go after and continue to go after a private citizen who never once commented on them prior to the Camp Candland attacks.
What planet does Candland live on and who is giving him such bad advice? No one in their right mind goes to so much trouble to make an enemy out of someone who wasn’t the enemy in the first place.
Prince William County needs smarter representation.
I may not agree with Elena on almost anything but I don’t see her as a person that doesn’t follow up or would attempt to smear someone.
Thank you Marinm 🙂
I’m going to agree with Moon. Never have we seen anything like this in all of our years. That’s a lot years folks. It would take a combination of several to equal the years we’ve been here. NEVER has a candidate gone after a private citizen the way Camp Candland has gone after Elena. Heck, most don’t make up such lies about their competition in a campaign. It’s a shame that there will be those in this county support this man blindly all because he has a R after his name. WAKE UP GAINESVILLE DISTRICT!! What’s going to happen when these same people his camp has lied about, need assistance from the supervisors office, if he were to be elected? The supervisor represents ALL in the district, not just the ones he “likes”. Please, DO THE RIGHT THING, Camp Candland and quit attacking private citizens.
Thanks Marin. I naturally agree with you.
Lafayette, I have never seen anything like it. I am trying to figure out which of the three jackasses involved are giving the new R candidate such bad advice. He is going to have to start being his own man and thinking for himself.
Tearing out after a private citizen again and again when that citizen did nothing to you is just plain stupid.
I just want to remind everyone that Peter Candland promoted this new blog on his facebook page as a means to “get out the truth”. If he does not want this blog representing him then he should make it clear that he does not agree nor does he promote the statements on this new blog that is promoting his candidacy and his candidacy alone.
Clearly they are in collusion or how else could there be a public statement that I never responsded to Candlands request for more information on ARC. Which, was ridiculous, as he had someone working for his campaign that had once complimented me on my committment to helping the community as a volunteer citizen. In fact, this person had been in my house when I had helped organize the first meeting to fight the power line coming through dense neighborhoods in the western end of the Gainesville District.
@Moon-howler
I’d say someone needs to do a little “dusting off” and do the right thing and quit giving bad advice. Just my two cents.
Candland has not made any substantive statement of support for the Rural Crescent. We have only heard generalities that leave him all the weasel room for maneuvering that is needed to provide his rubber stamp vote for whatever Stewart, Covington and Nohe tell him to do.
He doesn’t have to sign the pledge, but he needs to state that he supports the current zoning and Comprehensive Plan, the ten-acre lots for residential development, and that he opposes bringing sewer into the Rural Crescent.
Sitting back and letting his and Stewart’s minions create a straw man out of Elena to attack is disgraceful. He knows very well what ARC is, and how it and Elena have worked with other groups and individuals in the community for over a decade to try to maintain some semblance of sensible development in Prince William County. Many of those groups and individuals who have worked with Elena are Republican and consist mostly of Republicans.
At this point I can only conclude that Candland is a hypocrite and liar, who, just like Stewart, Covington and Nohe, will do and say anything to get elected and serve the interests of the developers and real estate people who pull their strings.
@theseus 🙂
Hmmph, I guess Candland and his proxies only want the voters in the Gainesville District to know half the truth, or all but the “inconvenient truth”. Sounds like a page out of the wrong team’s handbook (well at least the wrong team for me).
I’ll match my Republican/Conservative credentials (and I mean credentials in the literal as well as figurative sense) against anybody in the Candland camp. That being said, this may be the best example of the worst side of “GOP” politics and strategy that I have seen in some time. Candland’s representatives and the blog that he has in essence endorsed have gone out of their way to misrepresent the truth, attack constituents and even attack those who they likely should be attempting to bring into the fold. Continued post primary attacks against Martha Hendley are not only counter productive but point to a substantive lack of maturity and political accumen on the part of those running his campaign. I hear over and over again that Peter is a nice guy unaware of these tactics and incapable of supporting them, I wouldn’t know he hasn’t bothered to talk to me. Regardless whether he is saint in all this, ultimately he is responsible for the actions of his “staff”.
The tone and substance of many of those actions gives me grave cause when considering what that portends for his future in office. If these actions continue without denouncement from Candland himself, I will have to surmise that he has no substance and is merely a puppet of his handlers.
To that end, it is interesting that his friendly blog that ascribes to truth in the Gainesville District, can’t handle documented truth. Certain campaign finance figures were posted in the comments section and subsequently removed by the administrator. Guess the truth is a good thing unless the truth hurts. To that point consider the following number from VPAP, look for the common denominators and draw your own conclusions as to where he is likely to stand on development in the Rural Crescent (if you need a starting point Google Ghadban and Avendale).
Mary Ann Ghadban
$2,500 Stewart for Prince William County Board Chair
$1,000 Candland for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$500 Covington for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
Nova Building Industry Assn
$1,000 Candland for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$1,000 Covington for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$1,000 Nohe for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
Apartment & Office Building Assn
$500 Candland for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$500 Covington for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
National Capital Land & Development Corp
$1,000 Covington for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$900 Jenkins for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
$500 Candland for Prince William County Board of Supervisors
As someone who at one time used these sorts of tactics in the course of a political campaign, or driving an agenda, I can tell you exactly why they have made Elena the focus of the discussion, rather than the actual issue itself: Elena is their strawman. Instead of addressing the issue, signing the pledge, etc., the tactic is to change the frame of the discussion. Attack the organization pushing the issue, by insinuating that there is a deeper, more insideous agenda. Even better if you can attack the leaders of the organization. Use every other issue or organization the leader is or has been involved with, to paint the person to conform to the narrative you are crafting.
Our system of government and law is adversarial by design. Competition of interests is supposed to produce stronger, better results. These tactics are used and misused as a method of furthering those interests. One could say a pledge is a tactic to pin someone into a position that doesn’t allow them to change their minds, based on changing circumstances. Others can say that failure to sign a pledge is sign of a lack of commitment, or unprincipled “non-dedication”. We’ve seen this demonstrated in this very thread. Stewart, Covington and Nohe are essentially called “unprincipled” because they refused to sign the pledge. “Unprincipled” doesn’t mean “They have different principles, views, etc.” It means they lack principles. I don’t think that is an accurate description. “Pro-development” might be more accurate, and is in fact, a principle. It just happens to run counter to the ARC principles.
Please do not take this to mean I approve of using the strawman tactic. I don’t, and have made a deliberate decision to no longer use it. But, if you put yourself on the stage, as I have done in the past, as Elena has done, don’t be surprised when if a segment of the audience decides to throw a few rotten eggs at you. I have taken the time to get to know Elena, and on the issue of the rural cresent, I am in agreement with a “slow growth” principle. I stop at “no growth”. What I find very odd, and still can’t quite reconcile, is the owner of “the other blog” (as if stating the name will invoke some bad ju-ju), happens to be in support of limiting growth in the RC too, and has been vocally critical of two of the three electeds named above, for this very reason. I am 100% convinced that the reason Elena is on the receiving end of so much flak from “the others” (just playing by the rules here) has nothing to do with the issue of preserving open-space, and everything to do with the history surrounding the Rule of Law Resolution. It would appear that the strawman tactic is working, but I have to wonder who is being influenced, and who is doing the influencing. Strawman: Crude, but effective.
Jaimie Zielger is a liar and a coward.
@Mom
“I’ll match my Republican/Conservative credentials (and I mean credentials in the literal as well as figurative sense) against anybody in the Candland camp.”
If you really feel this way, might I suggest dropping the screen name? Not to create a secondary thread here, or sidebar discussion. I chose to drop my various “nom de guerre” as I felt my comments would be more credible, if people really knew who was writting them. Plus, it forced me to be a tad more thoughtful, and respectful of other’s views. Lastly, my comments are backed by my “street creds”. I have to say, it has been a liberating experience. No need to make a big announcement. Just start posting as you.
@Steve Thomas
Dropping the screen name is not quite that simple at this moment.
I’m glad you have noted the inconsistencies in the “other blog”, truly interesting given its criticism of other BOCS members and the commonalities of the contributions. Of course there are a multitude of other “connections” between the Candland Camp and those BOCS members, connections which I am sure the blogmaster is blissfully unaware.
@Steve, Elena has left the building for a while so I will step in.
Thank you for your insight. What I find incredibly foolish is the fact that Elena never attacked Candland. She positively acknowledged those who signed the ARC pledge and simple said nothing about those who did not.
That is when the attacks began. To this date, she has not derided any of the candidates who chose not to sign.
It just seems incredibly foolish to attack a private citizen who isn’t attacking you. As far as other roles go, it appears to me to be just childish.
As most people can attest to, we have pretty much stayed out of the supervisors race, and with good reason. It serves no purpose at this stage of the game. The voters of PWC are capable of making up their own minds.
We aren’t giving the other blog any free advertizing. It isn’t like they are Voldemort. I just don’t believe in giving star power to fleas.
Steve,
Very extensive explanation of political tactics, all true and all sad. Then you for your experiential perspective. I would add that I am a passionate advocate for smart land use, from a fiscal perspective, but also a conservation perspective.
Having grown up in Fairfax County, I have come to the love the diverse landscape of Prince William County, in fact, that is WHY we moved, to get out of Fairfax, and yet, I see the same policy being implemented from Fairfax. Prince William county is a unique and beautiful place, it has room for both urban development AND preservation, it isnt an either or paradigm.
I am for growth also, but in the areas that make sense.
almost out of the building 😉
Lafayette! I too wish people would DO THE RIGHT THING……….
@Steve Thomas
Steve, I agree with much of what you wrote, but disagree that use of the straw man tactic against Elena has anything to do with the Rule of Law Resolution. The tactic worked when they used it to get Candland nominated over Martha, and appears to be working against Ann also.
However, the goal is political power rather than prevailing on illegal immigration. Corey has said in private that he doesn’t care about illegal immigration. It was only an issue that worked for him. The real goal here is to build a power base to propel Corey’s career. He has aligned himself with development interests. He wants their money and their support to move into higher office. They are powerful in Virginia and have delivered for other politicians. Corey has to deliver for them to remain in their good graces and that means producing results in Prince William County. If he succeeds here, he’ll be considered for promotion. In order to succeed, he needs a compliant Board.
He struck a deal with Jenkins over redistricting and other things Jenkins wanted to get Jenkins to ensure that the Democrats did not nominate a viable challenger. He and his developer cronies already had Covington and Nohe marching in step. Maureen votes whichever way the wind blows or for whomever offers her the best deal. Witness Avendale. Stirrup, May and Principi could be marginalized on most issues (you need only 5 of 8 to win).
Stewart wants a reliable vote in Gainesville so he backs Candland. His nightmare would have been if Hendley, Lawson and Pugh had won their primaries, and both May and Principi were reelected. That’s five solid votes against his developer puppeteers. They pulled out all the stops to win. Create a straw man out of Elena and link her to Hendley to ensure Candland wins. Ensure Pugh didn’t much of any financial support (Nohe spent over $40k of his developer money to win the primary). Lawson was their biggest challenge but they squeaked through on that one, largely because Lawson’s dad had serious medical problems at the height of the campaign and she had to go out of town. That action shows her integrity putting her family above political ambition.
Not a single primary candidate who wasn’t backed by development interests won last month. They’ve bought and paid for a Board that will embark on turning PWC into Pottersville (remember, “It’s a Wonderful Life?”) Corey doesn’t plan to be around here much longer. With this Board, he will be able to deliver everything his puppet masters demand, show his ability to produce, and almost certainly get their backing and support for higher office.
Welcome to Pottersville.
@Elena
Elena,
No thanks neccesary. I think we agree on much regarding the need to preserve open-space, and I am sure that once we screen a certain film, we will agree on much, much more. It is important to have passion about things we feel, important. That is why I enjoy the debate here. Lot’s of passionate arguments. The thing is, real victory comes from having the superior argument, not in destroying the one making the argument. There is always someone else who can pick up the banner and move forward with it. Defeat the flag, and you deny anyone from pushing the agenda, because you have already defeated their argument.
@Theseus
“Steve, I agree with much of what you wrote, but disagree that use of the straw man tactic against Elena has anything to do with the Rule of Law Resolution.”
Just calling it as I see it. It’s no secret I was heavily involved in the whole debate. I developed much of the HSM strategy, and used the strawman tactic to great effect. Prior to the ROL debate, Elena wasn’t even on any of our political radar screens. She is/was viewed as one of the leaders of “the opposition” once MWB/WWP was defeated on the field of public opinion. She has remained a target ever since, and her involvement in the ROL debate, her portrayal in the 9500 Liberty film, her replacing Nancy Lyall as the press “go to” for quotes whenever a story was written that involved illegal immigration in any way, fosters this image. The “other blog” frequently refers to this time as part of the narrative. The narrative is designed to discredit whatever argument Elena is making, whatever issue she is supporting or opposing. This narrative is that Elena is an “uber-liberal/border-line communist”, and nothing she says should be given any merit, because of this.
I should know. I helped create the original narrative, and for this and other things I personally appoligized to Elena, and asked for her forgiveness, which she graciously granted. I think it important to call this out. I can say, Elena does not hold grudges, is reasonable and willing to engage in respectful debate with anyone, even me. We may not agree, but it never gets personal. She (and Moon) also appologized for the narrative developed about me, on this blog, even though the apology was (rightfully) for the comments of those posting comments, and not for anything they had personally written. Just because I like Wagner, doesn’t make me a Nazi.
But I understand that you may have a different perspective. Since I do not know who you are, I can’t try to put myself in your shoes, to see if I would see things the same way. I will ask, how do you explain the obvious incongruity of “the other blog’s” position? Both oppose runaway growth in the RC. Both are vocally critical of Nohe and Covington for their pro-growth policies. “The other” doesn’t vocally oppose Stewart, and it’s pretty clear that as long as Stewart’s main issue is illegal immigration, this will not change. On the issue of the RC, Elena and “the other guy” should be natural allies, as they desire the same outcomes. Trace it back to see where their histories collide, and you will find the ROL. Occam’s Razor: The simplist explanation is usually the correct one.
Steve – good question. Agree with him or not, Greg believes sincerely in what he says as opposed to our beloved Chairman who just looks for sound bites and photo opps that might get him votes. I honestly think Greg is being used as have been many others, and he will also be thrown under the bus as soon as he is no longer an asset. I don’t think Corey considered Greg’s attacks against Nohe or Covington as amounting to much of a threat because, especially in the case of Nohe and his mountain of developer money, Corey wasn’t much worried either would lose. Martha represented a real threat in Gainesville so that’s where the effort went, and where the attacks on Elena served the greatest purpose. Note also that no one associated with Corey other than Greg was attacking Covington and Nohe. All were attacking Hendley and using Elena as the straw man to help Candland win, and are now using the same tactics to go after Wheeler.
Recall also that during the Avendale debate, Greg, Elena, Moonhowlings and BVBL were allies. That didn’t make any difference, however, beause Corey already had Jenkins, Nohe and Covington behind him. Some deal was struck that got Caddigan to change her vote. Whatever happened behind-the-scenes trumped anything BVBL or MH was saying, and Corey just ignored the blogs. Same in the recent primary election. Greg was useful in helping defeat Hendley. His support of Lawson and Pugh was seen as having no effect. In the end, Corey and his crew called all of this exactly correct.
Corey is a master manipulator, and his ease with lying makes him ever so much more effective. He knows he won’t get everything he wants, such as getting Greg to endorse Covington and Nohe, but he knows how to balance everything out and play people to get what he wants in the end.
My rule in politics is to follow the money. VPAP data say it all. That, combined with an ease with lying and hypocrisy, is the explanation for any seeming incongruities.
Moonhowlings, Elena, Moon, et al were never allies with BVBL. Having the same goal does not necessarily make groups allies. @Theseus
I believe the blog in question at the moment is the blog that Candland referred people to on his facebook page.
Let’s call it the Candland authorized blog, for the sake of argument. The CAB blog. There ya go!
I just read the post from yesterday on the CAB blog. Note the following quote:
“I am just a country bumpkin myself, but if you sign a Pledge that says you will ‘oppose’ any expansion of a sewer line within the Rural Crescent, how does that allow for anything other than a ‘slow or controlled growth’ position?
So the ‘TRUTH’ is that Ann Wheeler wants to tell those who are ‘no growth’ advocates that she supports protecting the Rural Crescent and certainly would not allow any of those dastardly sewer lines to be installed; and wants to tell the ‘smart growth’ advocates that she fully supports them whenever they agree it would be smart to allow for some development; and then there is that pesky problem of true ‘controlled growth’ advocates who could support a new sewer line if the character of the Rural Crescent is protected and it reasonably supports a needed infrastructure addition.”
They are clearly setting Candland up to be a stooge vote for Corey’s developer friends. Sewer in the Rural Crescent has been Covington’s Holy Grail ever since he was first elected. Stewart, Nohe and Jenkins are strong yes votes also. Candland gives them a fifth.
Candland can say he supports the Rural Crescent all he wants. However, if you see someone repeatedly chowing down on steak while proclaiming that they are a vegetarian, you know how much credibility to give them.
I guess Jamie Zeigler has a job waiting in the soon-to-be-created Prince William Ministry of Truth (1984, anyone?). He’s already created the Gainesville Truth Squad to get the action rolling.
Again, PWC, welcome to Pottersville.
My heart is lifted today, thanks to all for your support.
I’d feel better if your wallet were lifted today, say a round for the house.
We, as posters to blogs which cover politics, are probably more involved than most local voters in issues that extend beyond schools, transportation, and parks. I’d venture to say that dirty campaigns do more to turn people off both to politics in general and specific candidates who employ those tactics. Those types of campaigns can also energize the opposition. I’m generally apolitical but the nastiness of Greg’s blog and how the immigration issue was handled in PWC made me get involved when I ordinarily wouldn’t have. Part of that involvement was spurred by having grown up in the segregated South and having seen the bigotry play out.
Most women don’t care for these personal attacks – particularly on their home turf. People of different parties and opinions share more at a local level – school issues, transportation, park space, outdoor activities, neighborhood clubs. The negative bad boy image doesn’t pay off as well locally. It may energize your opposition.
In Gainesville in particular neighborhoods are being sold as upscale. It’s not exactly a place you expect a brawl or having constituents, who after all are neighbors, singled out for abuse.
Don’t things have to go to the planning commission before they go to the BoCS? That appointment will certainly confirm or deny things
I am not sure I understand your question, NoHype. Would that be for the ministry of truth appointment?
@NoHype
Items do go before the Planning Commission before the BoS. However, the BoS does NOT have accept or follow the PC recommendation. Also, if the applicant doesn’t like the outcome of the PC, they can appeal their “case” to the BoS. I do agree, the appointment will confirm or deny where one stands on land use issues. It’ll be interesting to see the appointment for the Gainesville District. We’ve been fortunate to have Martha on the PC representing the GD. With a pro-developer board we will look like Fairfax before long, paved over and built-out. What a shame.
It seems as though an “apology” has been issued.
Gotta love this…”Ms. Schlossberg-Kunkel can do and say whatever she pleases — this is a free country.” WTH-she doesn’t need their permission/blessing to exercise her right!!
Lies are still being told. Elena didn’t support public funded abortions. Furthermore, I wrote the post on Indiana Planned Parenthood. it dealt with medicaid payments having nothing to do with abortion.
Additionally, Elena does not oppose the immigration resolution as it now stands. In fact, she worked rather hard to get it to where it is now. That is all just a smear campaign. Camp Candland has no clue what she supports or opposes. Strawman politics. Any time a strawman paradigm is used, the person doing it has weak underpinnings.
Before attacking a private citizen over something totally stupid, Camp Candland needs to stop sneaking over here and pulling out information they don’t even understand. Johnny come latelies if you ask me.
And that was not really an apology. They have Elena’s email address. They can post an apology here, for that matter, if they were truly sorry.
Hence, the quotation marks. They really are unbelievable and are indeed Johnny Come Latelies!!
It reallly is pathetic that they must stoop to this. I sure don’t recall Stirrup, or any other cadidate having to initiate a “truth squad”. Middle school mentality at it’s finest in the Gainesville District.
I still see no point in trying to stir up something with someone when they aren’t messing with you.
I might have told, YOU, Lafayette, who I was supporting in the Republican primary but I never mentioned it on the blog, nor did Elena. We decided several months ago to stay out of the frackus.
How foolish to start a war with a blog, when the blog doesn’t want to go to war. I am just taken aback by the juvenile behavior and the politial naivete.
The Planning Commission is going to be another problem. No way will Candland reappoint Martha or Corey reappoint Gary. We’re going to lose two of the strongest members who were willing to stand up to the developers on behalf of the citizens. Kim will still be there, but she’ll largely be a loner like Mike will be on the Board.
I don’t think the Planning Commission will review appointments such as the new PWC Ministry of Truth. Jamie is a slam-dunk to get that job anyway. He has demonstrated outstanding skills in that area.
I am trying to square the ARC with organizations like LOCCA-PELT, MIDCO,The Dale City Civia Association, The Prince William Trails and Streams Coalition, Friends of the Occoquon and the Committee of 100 all of which seem to hold public meetings, publish minutes, etc. but nothing similar seems to be available for the ARC.
I agree that attacking a private citizen is absolutely wrong and the attack on Elena is absolutley wrong. Further, I believe that much of the attack has its roots in Elena’s strong stand agains HSM and the original “Rule of Law”. But I must also must say that I did not see Candland’s letter as “letter questioning the validity of Advocates for the Rural Crescent”. He did ask some straight forward questions, most of which were not answered in Elena’s reply. As I said in the beginning, it is hard to square the ARC with many of the so called “civic organizations” that exist here in Prince William County; however, I am basically for the Rural Crescent and slow growth but absolutely opposed to no growth.
And BTW, I have tried to find this quote but have not been able to do so: “The ONLY basis for Ann Wheeler’s claim Peter Candland does not support protecting the Rural Crescent is Candland’s decision not to sign the Rural Crescent Pledge authored by liberal activist Elena Schlossberg-Kunkel. Candland asked for more information from Schlossberg-Kunkel about the organization and the political agenda being advocated by her, but got no response.
But Candland then got smeared with the false claim that he did not support protecting the Rural Crescent.”
I suppose this was somewhere on Greg’s blog, but I couldn’ t find it. Would someone please enlighten me? I rarely look at his blog because I simply don’t have time to read the trash that he puts out but I guess it does appeal to a certain segment of our fair citizens who revel in the scatalogical garbage he publishes. I must ask why is it so wrong to not mention him straight out? What do you have to be afraid of?
Candland was not ‘smeared’ by us. If he wanted further information, Elena provided her email address, her snail mail address and her phone number. It seems to me that if a candidate really wanted additional information, he should have contacted Elena, rather than making up bull crap about her and misstating her position on topics unrelated to the Rural Crescent.
I doubt that Candland is very familiar with all the ‘who shot John’ of the immigration debate. He had other people feeding him that. He just chose 2 areas he doesn’t know jack about to do his cheap shots. I will be glad to sit down with him and go over our pro choice position if he would like. George, I am sure you could provide even further input. Candland won’t do that though. He might learn something.
Elena is not running for office. Candland is free to sign or not sign. Neither Elena or I criticized him for not signing. We are not responsible for the sparring between candidates. However, Candland blamed his failure to sign on the bogus accusations against Elena rather than dealing with real issues. I suspect that was so he could hop into the pocket of King Corey and cave in to the developers if it suited his political needs.
Finally, it is just plain stupid to start a political fight with a constituent who is not fighting with you. Candland got some bad bad advice from someone.
@George
No one is avoid mentioning bvbl. This isn’t about bvbl. It is about anther blog. I am not going to publish their website. Why should I give anyone lying about Elena free advertizement? It isn’t going to happen here.
This is not a Voldemort situation. This is a “no free lunch” issue.
George, those organizations are 501(c) organizations. ARC is not. There is no money involved with ARC so no tax status is necessary.
Think of an organization you and I both are members of. No money involved, like minded people who share information……
We could start an organization called PWC Winery Advocates. We could amass like minded folks. We could start a news letter about new wineries within a 50 mile radius and we could do information sharing on line regarding prices, ease of access, special accommodations, parking, you name it. We could arrange special times when all the PWCWA’s would go meet up at the winery.
I don’t mean to be glib. But ARC is about 10 years old and has evolved from citizens wanting to protect the Rural Crescent. Elena didn’t start it. She kindly took over the communications to like minded people. I feel certain she would gladly turn it over to anyone else who stepped up to the plate.
@Moon-howler
I agree that Candland or at least his hencmen are dodging the real issues and have decided to cone in on Elena–wrong, wrong, wrong. But the question now is how to fight this. I am not sure this is the forum but I am not sure what the forum is. What does it cost to take a a full page ad in the local fish wrap and simply lay out the facts? There might well be a few folks who would contribute to such an effort. And has anyone ACTUALLY walked up to Candland and said, “Let’s talk”? Or has it all been slinging chicken manure at each other over the internet? Obviously that has not been very effective if Candland or his mouthpiece has not been shut down.
@Moon-howler
If you are unwilling to name the other blog, how are people to join in the battle? Seems like a head in the sand position to me. But what do I know? Ju t an old man trying to sort the white from the black part of the chicken sh* t.
@Moon-howler
Yes, I suppose some of the organizations are 501c3 organizations and yes we could start the PWCAW group–not a bad idea–but my point is that the ARC wants to act like it is some thing like LOCCA-PELT or MIDCO. If so, then it needs to be willing to share more about itself–otherwise it begins to look like it is an organization of one–does anyone other than Elena ever speak up or represent ARC? I am not trying to fight Elena, but I am not willing to accept that ARC is anything more than a NIMBY group unless it opens itself up to public scrutiny.
@George S. Harris
I really think the Gainesville District/western PW could benefit from a civic association. I know Connie Moser has done wonderful things in Dale City with the Dale City Civic Association. Our district has high density to mountain living, yet we do have a lot in common and should be working together with our neighbors with issues we face as a district/area of the county.
I would like to add there are some in my neighborhood that have been treated badly(harrassed/bullied) by one henchwoman. Luckily this was done behind the scenes and not in a public forum as has been done to Elena. Both are VERY wrong, they are private citizens that could become constituants that Candland would represent if he were to win the election. I also, am concerned that our concerns will fall on def ears, given the behavior we witnessed during the primary.
I did take the time to speak with Candland when he finally made it to the hood. Even though I was fully aware of the tactics being used by his “campaign manager/staff”. I still take grave exception to his initial email announcing his running for supervisor. Which, by the way was done before John Stirrup announces he was running for state sentor. Then in closing of his email. He said he wanted to make Gainesvile/Haymarket a great place to raise your family. Well, what about the “in town” people? Did he not know what neighborhoods are in the district? Was this an elitest attitude?
Lafayette, you have expressed some really valid concerns. The bullying is a serious issue. And yes, it is very wrong. I am not so sure I didn’t witness another form of bullying but the jury is still out. I also believe that someone we know what almost stalked.
I am searching to find something I have in common with Gainesville/Haymarket.
@Moon-howler
I think we’d all like to see our schools without trailer and/or opening above occupancy. I believe we all would like to have the easiest commute possible around town and to work. We share the same supervisor and live in the same county. Just a couple things off the top of me head. More later…Checkout a note on my FB wall that a friend wrote about living in PW for the past 44 years. It was quite an accurate description. imo
I trhink what Lafayette is saying regarding a Gainesville District/western PW Association like LOCCA-PELT or the Dale City Civic Association or MIDCOPW would be a great idea but in doing so, it would be a good idea to absorb the ARC since it is in western PWC. It would mean publishing what it is, what it does, having meetings, publishing minutes, electing officers, making sure the BOCS knows of your existence and if you are going to collect dues and that sort of thing, the consider 501(3)c status. If you can rope in people who have served on various boards, committees, etc. that gives additional “creds”. As you have seen in the past, the BOCS turns to LOCCA-PELT on many issues in that part of the county. That’s what you want with this group–something that is not a one trick pony as the ARC is. The ARC may be 10 years old, but it is perceived as being a one person show since it has no “charter”, no meetings, no minutes that are open to the public.
As to the bullying, if you have witnesses and you are not reporting it to the police–SHAME, SHAME, SHAME.
@George S. Harris
George, you are the only person who thinks that. The people who have been involved with land use issues in the sounty don’t perceive ARC as being a one person show or a one trick pony. They consider it to be an organization of advocates of the rural crescent.
Why is it that you want them to become a 501(c)3? I can’t think of a single reason why they should do this. Help me out.
Lafayette, thanks. I was at a loss. You are right. The trailers are for different reasons but they are still trailers. It is hard for me to see that we have much in common.
@George, not all bullying is of the illegal nature. Some of it is just mean and hurtful.
I really doubt that I am the only person who thinks the ARC is a one trick pony. What else do they advocate for? Please enlighten me. Other organizations like LOCCA-PELT, MIDCOPW, and on and on, have a charter setting forth what they are, why they are, who they are, they hold public meetings, they publish minutes, they are visible. As I noted, LOCCA-PELT has enough clout that the BOCS comes to them on issues and seeks their advice, counsel, etc. Is that happening with the ARC? If, please enlighten me. I bet you Connie Moser can tell you jot and tittle about who, what, when, where with the DCCA and is more than willing to do so. That does not seem to be the case with the ARC–it still appears to be a one person, one trick pony show. If they want to be important, they have to expand the scope of what they do. Otherwise it is NIMBY–pure and simple. I don’t want to fight about this, I really would like to help, but I have seen nothing to convince me. TAke another look at what Lafayette is saying–she is on to something–she honestly is.
How about the Purcell Road Project? Is that NIMBY? Is this where I stand up and say I don’t care if someone wants to reroute I-66 though Purcell Road because it isn’t affecting me?
A civic association is not the same thing as an advocacy group. It is very easy to see why most county residents simply do not get involved any more. Pretty soon they will not even run for office. Who could blame them?
Actually, no one is talking about ARC but you and some loser blog-keeper no one has ever heard of before who is serving as a wanna be pitbull for a political candidate.
Since this is half Elena’s blog and she has devoted at least 10 years to protecting the rural crescent, I am going to ask that this topic go to facebook or pitbull’s blog. I am not going to provide the space for what amounts to Elena bashing here. Take it elsewhere. Final words on the subject.
Well, that’s just grand. I have plenty to more to say on the subject of a civic association. And NONE of it has to do with ARC and/or Elena.
Why wont you say it?
Let me share the history of ARC for those that are not aware of a huge land use fight in 2003. There was a CPA initiated for a parcel of land in Haymarket called Greater South Market, there was a coalition of citizens that banded together, we had wash post coverage primarily. I was the voice for ARC. To this date, Greater South Market is the only develepment of that size to be defeated by citizen participation. THAT is why ARC became such a force in protecting the Rural Crescent. I have had private discussions with develpers on rezonings per the request of personal phone calls from Supervisors.
If I didn’t know better, I would swear the Prince William Conservation Alliance was responsible for the demise of Greater South Market, but what do I know.
http://www.pwconserve.org/who/index.html
An organization does not need to be a formal entity to accomplish its goals. If ARC intended to endorse candidates, it would need to register as a PAC, submit reports, etc. It is not that. It intends to organize people of like mind around issues of mutual concern. I know for a fact that ARC has gotten behind candidates from both parties only because of their stance on particular issues.
South Market is one success ARC can claim. Brentswood was another. In 2006 many citizens with different political persuasions got together to defeat this monstrosity that would have brought over 6,000 residential units to western PWC. ARC joined forces with Prince William Citizens for Balanced Growth and others to fight this.
However, it was only a partial success. Brentswood was not completed defeated. It was only deferred. It remains on the County’s Development Application Processing Schedule. One of the people who has a huge interest in this project gave Chairman Stewart $25,000 (it’s in VPAP). Given that we appear to be headed for a Board controlled by development interests, including Candland, we are likely to see Brentswood and many other such projects appear rather soon after the new Board is seated in January. PWC, and its citizens and taxpayers are in for a rough time given what’s likely to happen in the election. Development interests have poured huge amounts of money into this election because PWC is targeted as the residential component of the DC metro area. They are going all out to ensure they get a Board that rubber stamps whatever they want.
ARC may want to join forces with others such as PW Citizens for Balanced Growth – not for the reasons George is alleging, but to combine forces and be more effective for what’s coming our way.
Brentsville, Gainesville and parts of Coles will be ground zero. Covington and Nohe are coming back (Nohe’s Democratic challenger has been doing nothing and has raised virtually no money). If Wheeler can’t beat Candland, we have a developer-backed troika. Moreover, as others have observed, Candland has an evil henchwoman to do his dirty work. Everyone, it’s going to get bad. Be prepared.