GAZETTE COLUMN: "TRICKY DICK" BLACK IS BACK by John P. Flannery

“There he goes again” – former Delegate Dick Black, though he should know better, he just can’t curb his characteristic impulse to go too far.

Black is running for the newly formed 13^th State Senate District, covering Loudoun and Prince William Counties, after winning the Republican primary.

The State Senate District was newly created following the census, constructed to be “Republican leaning” but the Democratic Senate Candidate, businessman Shawn Mitchell, a combat veteran, garnering wide support, is giving “Tricky Dick” a run for his money and the inside skinny is a real contest with the electoral outcome in doubt. 

Some may remember how Tricky Dick lost his seat in the General Assembly to then challenger - and now former Delegate David Poisson (Pwa-zon).

Among other campaign miscalculations, Dick repeatedly, and intentionally, mispronounced Poisson’s name as “poison.” 

Dick’s arrogance confirmed his inadequacy as a public official, like when Dick handed out plastic fetuses to members of the General Assembly, proving he just goes too far.

After his humiliating defeat, Dick lusted after a political comeback; he thought to move his residence so he could run for Congress, then he thought to move his residence to run for a different State Senate seat, and, finally, he chose “us” – we lucky few – so he could “represent” us in the General Assembly. 

Dick’s latest political over-reaching gaffe concerns his knowing distortion of a business law dispute that Mr. Mitchell’s counsel defended and settled.

Dick has an extensive background in the law.  He was trial counsel in Fort Hood, Texas, a Staff Judge Advocate supervising 40 attorneys, and the Director of the Criminal Law Division at the Pentagon. 

This suggests that when he mischaracterizes the details of Mitchell’s law suit, he is exploiting the public’s unfamiliarity with litigation to his political campaign advantage.

Here are the facts: Mitchell settled a business dispute with his former Manassas employer, Parrish Services, Inc., who claimed that Shawn had violated an agreement not to compete.  Shawn’s counsel responded in pleadings that the agreement had not been violated.  Each side made counterclaims against the other and these pleadings are public and in the court file in the Prince William Circuit Court. 

While the pleadings are public, the settlement is not. 

By law, we are not entitled to know the terms of settlement and the parties may not discuss them either.  

But we can infer that, despite the Parrish Services’ claim of unlawful competition, that Mitchell’s continuing business suggests either the parties agreed that he did not compete or that his ongoing competition is permissible.

In a blast campaign e-mail on September 30, 2011, Black nevertheless wrote “details of Shawn Mitchell having been sued by his former employer … are burning up the internet.”  Black published elements of the Parrish Services’ original claims but not a word about Mitchell’s defense, or the settlement in March 2011.

In a 2^nd blast campaign e-mail on October 3, 2011, Black did it again; he wrote “[i]t is no wonder that when Mitchell was sued by his last employer they said …” and then he repeated what Parrish Services claimed, remaining mute about Mitchell’s defense or counterclaim, and nothing about the fact that it had been settled six months earlier.

Surely Mr. Black’s vast legal acumen encompasses an understanding of what it means to settle a case and dismiss the suit.

It is also curious that Parrish Services of Manassas contributed $1,718 to Mr. Black’s campaign on August 31, 2011.  Could this be a different Parrish Services in Manassas than the one that sued Mr. Mitchell?

In any case, we can see Black hasn’t learned to curb his desperate excesses.

No matter.

I just know we’ll do a whole lot better with Shawn Mitchell as our State Senator.

# # #

GAZETTE COLUMN: MANIPULATE LOUDOUN! by John P. Flannery

What School is supposed to be about.

_____________________

There’s a relatively new group in town.

They call themselves “Educate Loudoun!”

Now doesn’t that sound arrogant?

These folk are going to “educate” us about what we want and need in Loudoun County.

This Johnny-come-lately group sprung into existence at the sound of the first spring peepers – and now they presume to commend who should be our school board members in the upcoming election.

They say they are a political action committee (“PAC”) that’s going to contribute to right-thinking candidates.

The blogs are alive with the sound of gossip about this group and the message is clear - Caveat Voter!

Let’s deconstruct this group and find out what makes it tick

It was founded by the current School Board Chairman, John Stevens (Potomac), who no doubt expects to be endorsed by the PAC he created when he announces, any day now, to succeed himself. 

Another founder, who has underwritten this group, is Telos, a hi-tech government contractor.  I want Telos to tell us how it hopes to “help” us.  Telos’ CEO John Wood has contributed about a third of the funds, at $5,000, that make up the PAC’s war chest. 

On their web site, Mr. Wood explains that he sees our educational system as “a catalyst of economic growth,” that shall encourage families “to move here and stay here,” because of the “long term investment” that “Educate!” reportedly supports, meaning an accelerated building development of even more schools than presently scheduled. 

In other words, they prefer that hard-earned and scant tax payer money from our property assessments underwrite infrastructure (roads, electricity, water, etc.) favoring even more development in a county struggling to recover the home asset value we’ve lost in the ongoing recession.  Overdevelopment can only dilute our most important asset, the value of our homes.

One commentator, Erv Addison, wrote a recent letter, stating that he might support this group if they meant charter schools when they said “new public school choices for all families.”    

When Mr. Addison asked “Educate!” what they really supported, he learned that the “Educate!” founders couldn’t agree.  Nor could they say whether they were for performance pay for teachers.  I would oppose the group if they support charter schools or performance pay.  But neither of us can dispel the group’s enforced “ambiguity and uncertainty” - as Mr. Addison aptly described their stonewalling practices.

Mr. Wood claimed he suffered no disqualifying conflict of interest in advancing this group, not while Telos employee, Robert Dupree, was a school board member (indeed, the Chairman), nor now while Telos employee, Ralph Buona, is a Republican candidate for the Board of Supervisors.

County-wide, Telos and Mr. Wood personally have contributed a total of $7,050.00 (on 10/23/10, and on 3/31/11) to Scott York’s campaign coffers.  That contribution is 15% of York’s entire fund-raising effort.  (Interestingly, Mr. Wood’s contribution bore an Illinois home address.  Tell us John that you’re a Loudoun resident (and this is some oversight)). See Campaign Report - http://inter4.loudoun.gov/Default.aspx?tabid=344&fmpath=/Electoral%20Board/2010%20Campaign%20Finance%20Reports.

Incidentally, it appears that, on the same day, March 29, 2011, that Telos contributed $213.18 in catering costs, Mr. York received an additional $6,150.00 in checks dated that same day from, among others, William Hazel, the Lansdowne Development Group, and the Virginia Investment Partnership.  Did you host a fund-raiser, John, in order to impress upon Mr. York your concern about education?

Telos won’t tell us plainly what they really want.  But it appears that it’s about asphalt and development rather than much having to do with educating our young.  Voters and candidates would be well advised to steer clear of this group.