Disgusting behavior by City of Falls Church leaders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Phil Duncan is the only candidate who wrote a letter of support, no? Although I believe he's done a good job as a council member, I can't bring myself to vote for him. The letter was an outrageous move on his part. However, at this point, the Falls Church FACTS people are being politically opportunistic by attempting to tar pretty much every cantidate not within their slate with the same brush as Duncan, just because they have similar political views. It's hateful and dishonest.

No, the issues is that there is a level of coziness, chumminess, and lack of accountability to stakeholders. The letter writing is the most egregious example of this. However, in other instances, there has been a lack of transparency in decision-making, from city development deals to building schools, underserved students, and parent school involvement. Cover up, lack of transparency, lack of accountability -- it is endemic. Once a group of people successfully hide from the sunlight, they become their own worst enemies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:wait, what?

"Their letters did not challenge the verdict but did seek a lesser rather than greater prison term for Gardner. "

Is it now disgusting to ever think a shorter prison term makes sense in a situation like this?

Yes, I think it is disgusting to seek to reduce a prison term for a convicted child molester and to wish for a speedier return to the community. Absolutely. Child molesters do not get reformed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Phil Duncan is the only candidate who wrote a letter of support, no? Although I believe he's done a good job as a council member, I can't bring myself to vote for him. The letter was an outrageous move on his part. However, at this point, the Falls Church FACTS people are being politically opportunistic by attempting to tar pretty much every cantidate not within their slate with the same brush as Duncan, just because they have similar political views. It's hateful and dishonest.

No, the issues is that there is a level of coziness, chumminess, and lack of accountability to stakeholders. The letter writing is the most egregious example of this. However, in other instances, there has been a lack of transparency in decision-making, from city development deals to building schools, underserved students, and parent school involvement. Cover up, lack of transparency, lack of accountability -- it is endemic. Once a group of people successfully hide from the sunlight, they become their own worst enemies.

I'm the PP and I think the biggest problem is incompetence, not cronyism, but I see your point. My answer is to vote for new blood: Hardy, Gill, Reitinger, Radcliffe. If you have a problem with the current leadership, there are new cantidates to vote for other than the FC FACTS folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a horrible situation all around. But one of worst parts is that certain candidates in our election are using these poor girls as part of their own twisted campaign strategy. Apparently, "Support the Girls" only means those victims aligned with Sam Mabry and Johannah Barry -- the little girl attacked at Cherry Hill park and the kindergartener at St. James are apparently worthy of being ignored, because they haven't factored into this group's concern at all.

This statement is incorrect. The families of the girls have stated very clearly that they feel (and there's plenty of evidence to support) people in positions of FCC power were putting their influential eggs in the basket the politically connected pedophile, to help him appear better than he was. RATHER than supporting and helping the victims and potential future victims, they chose to extol the virtues of a man who was a political leader, married to the former mayer and current councilmember, molested 10 year old girls and his niece, and had apparently made moves to find out about hiring a hit man (JEEZUS). All this was known and knowable to the letter writers before they wrote their letters. This suggests that people may indeed have gotten much too cozy in their political offices. Now they've been outed. And the families of the victims themselves have articulated very well what happened and what is going on, but only were allowed to do so after the gag order was lifted from them. And they did so quickly so that voters knew what was going on. Not surprisingly, they have VERY STRONG opinions about who is running and who should NOT be voted in.

The editor of the FCNP himself writes articles in favor of establishment politics in FCC, and wouldn't you know, he's also politically connected to establishment officeholders and is himself one of the pedophile-supporting letter writers. He and his newspaper are not objective news sources. He writes with a point of view and positions his pieces in such a way that people he attacks or makes insinuations about have to come out to defend themselves. Do you remember that line from the Sandra Bullock movie? Something like: "I know he/she didn't do it. I just want to hear him deny it." That's what the FCNP is doing -- articulating or insinuating untruths and then putting good people in positions of having to provide evidence and proof the newspaper is wrong. This is intentional and purposeful nasty journalism.

People in power (and those who support them) are afraid that they will be ousted. They do not want to appear ruffled and riled up, and they want to appear to rise above nasty politics. In fact, the FCNP paper is doing the nasty campaigning for them by authoring slanted, non-researched articles on city and school board incidents, issues, and candidates. And, in addition, some in power are using quiet channels of authority (e.g., re-writing policies, mis-interpreting policies) to get their own twisted little politics done. It is very underhanded and under the radar. People are trying to bring it to radar level, and it is very difficult to do. The parents of the victims themselves are among these people trying to air out what is actually very dirty laundry, and some are very wrongfully accusing them of underhandedness. You can see how twisted this is.

There are very good people with new to the political sphere who want to hold local leadership accountable at all levels -- moral, ethical, political, and procedural. Look for them.

Very well said. I am an FCC resident and NP. I've never really cared about nor paid attention to city politics, but I am disgusted by the FCNP and many of those currently in charge.

I do think the "We Support the Girls" thing is getting increasingly politicized. But the pp who keeps asking about other abuse or assault cases in FCC consistently ignores the fact that this case is the only one where Duncan et al weighed in. So an opposing voice is needed. I'm not sure who I'm voting for yet. Definitely not Duncan.

[Anonymous]

But if you only want to vote for new blood, the math doesn't work in the council race. There are three seats available -- and Sam and his henchmen and -women knew this when they publicized those letters. So anyone voting for just Hardi and/or Tarter is effectively increasing the tally for Mabry and/or Barry as well. The FACTS crew wants people to bullet vote like this so that their own candidates can come out ahead.

If you really want to keep Sam Mabry and his dirty tricks off council (when he bothers to show up, that is -- last time around he missed 30% of the meetings), you need to cast a vote for Phil Duncan as well as Letty Hardi and Dave Tarter.

Think of it as a vote for a new elementary and high school, a better downtown and better long-term financials for the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But if you only want to vote for new blood, the math doesn't work in the council race. There are three seats available -- and Sam and his henchmen and -women knew this when they publicized those letters. So anyone voting for just Hardi and/or Tarter is effectively increasing the tally for Mabry and/or Barry as well. The FACTS crew wants people to bullet vote like this so that their own candidates can come out ahead.

If you really want to keep Sam Mabry and his dirty tricks off council (when he bothers to show up, that is -- last time around he missed 30% of the meetings), you need to cast a vote for Phil Duncan as well as Letty Hardi and Dave Tarter.

Think of it as a vote for a new elementary and high school, a better downtown and better long-term financials for the city.

What is it about Sam Mabry that makes you think he's about "dirty tricks?" I've seen that word batted around, but I have no evidence for this based on fact. rather than "I don't like him" non-information. Can you name FACTUAL things that make him a dirty trickster?

[Anonymous]

I'm not that PP and don't say that Mabry is a "trickster", but I do think he has cynically mischaraterized the positions of his opponents. I also think is absolutely using the Duncan letter writing incident in an utterly unfair way against Hardi and Gill, who had nothing to do with any of it. And it's weird to me that as part of his campaign for City Council he is repeatedly digging at Gill, who is not running for that office. He implies on his website that Hardi and Gill are part of a team with Duncan. It's just nasty and I can't believe that he is remotely good for the city. Reasonable minds can and do differ about development in the city, but Mabry and the other Falls Church FACTS people aren't reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if you only want to vote for new blood, the math doesn't work in the council race. There are three seats available -- and Sam and his henchmen and -women knew this when they publicized those letters. So anyone voting for just Hardi and/or Tarter is effectively increasing the tally for Mabry and/or Barry as well. The FACTS crew wants people to bullet vote like this so that their own candidates can come out ahead.

If you really want to keep Sam Mabry and his dirty tricks off council (when he bothers to show up, that is -- last time around he missed 30% of the meetings), you need to cast a vote for Phil Duncan as well as Letty Hardi and Dave Tarter.

Think of it as a vote for a new elementary and high school, a better downtown and better long-term financials for the city.

What is it about Sam Mabry that makes you think he's about "dirty tricks?" I've seen that word batted around, but I have no evidence for this based on fact. rather than "I don't like him" non-information. Can you name FACTUAL things that make him a dirty trickster?

I've been lurking on the FCPost for years (he only recently handed over the reigns to Ira). Every article he published just reeks of old school dirty politics. I guess the same could be said for the FCNP, but Benton isn't running for office.

Blaring headlines, misrepresenting facts, never acknowledging or apologizing when proven wrong, smears those he disagrees with. I don't know him personally (and his last stint on council was before my time) but he just comes off as super slimy. Basically Fox News on steroids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not that PP and don't say that Mabry is a "trickster", but I do think he has cynically mischaraterized the positions of his opponents. I also think is absolutely using the Duncan letter writing incident in an utterly unfair way against Hardi and Gill, who had nothing to do with any of it. And it's weird to me that as part of his campaign for City Council he is repeatedly digging at Gill, who is not running for that office. He implies on his website that Hardi and Gill are part of a team with Duncan. It's just nasty and I can't believe that he is remotely good for the city. Reasonable minds can and do differ about development in the city, but Mabry and the other Falls Church FACTS people aren't reasonable.

Many of the FACTS people know what's going on, and sometimes what's going on is that some people in leadership don't really know what's going on. It's not just that people reach different conclusions based on "the data." It's that sometimes there isn't enough actual data demanded and shared with the public by leadership to warrant well-informed conclusions about very important things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if you only want to vote for new blood, the math doesn't work in the council race. There are three seats available -- and Sam and his henchmen and -women knew this when they publicized those letters. So anyone voting for just Hardi and/or Tarter is effectively increasing the tally for Mabry and/or Barry as well. The FACTS crew wants people to bullet vote like this so that their own candidates can come out ahead.

If you really want to keep Sam Mabry and his dirty tricks off council (when he bothers to show up, that is -- last time around he missed 30% of the meetings), you need to cast a vote for Phil Duncan as well as Letty Hardi and Dave Tarter.

Think of it as a vote for a new elementary and high school, a better downtown and better long-term financials for the city.

What is it about Sam Mabry that makes you think he's about "dirty tricks?" I've seen that word batted around, but I have no evidence for this based on fact. rather than "I don't like him" non-information. Can you name FACTUAL things that make him a dirty trickster?

I've been lurking on the FCPost for years (he only recently handed over the reigns to Ira). Every article he published just reeks of old school dirty politics. I guess the same could be said for the FCNP, but Benton isn't running for office.

Blaring headlines, misrepresenting facts, never acknowledging or apologizing when proven wrong, smears those he disagrees with. I don't know him personally (and his last stint on council was before my time) but he just comes off as super slimy. Basically Fox News on steroids.

*What misrepresented facts?
*What was he proven wrong about and didn't apologize for?
*What are the smears he has stated?

All I see are asserted conclusions.

[Anonymous]

Also I am so curious how FACTs/FC Post got the email list of all school parents.

We all thought it was through an FOIA filed last year but the school district says they never fufilled that request. None of these parents opted in for their email blasts. At least the FOIA would have been legal (if unethical, to use for political purposes and putting email lists on an opt-in list). But now I'm curious how they got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if you only want to vote for new blood, the math doesn't work in the council race. There are three seats available -- and Sam and his henchmen and -women knew this when they publicized those letters. So anyone voting for just Hardi and/or Tarter is effectively increasing the tally for Mabry and/or Barry as well. The FACTS crew wants people to bullet vote like this so that their own candidates can come out ahead.

If you really want to keep Sam Mabry and his dirty tricks off council (when he bothers to show up, that is -- last time around he missed 30% of the meetings), you need to cast a vote for Phil Duncan as well as Letty Hardi and Dave Tarter.

Think of it as a vote for a new elementary and high school, a better downtown and better long-term financials for the city.

What is it about Sam Mabry that makes you think he's about "dirty tricks?" I've seen that word batted around, but I have no evidence for this based on fact. rather than "I don't like him" non-information. Can you name FACTUAL things that make him a dirty trickster?

I've been lurking on the FCPost for years (he only recently handed over the reigns to Ira). Every article he published just reeks of old school dirty politics. I guess the same could be said for the FCNP, but Benton isn't running for office.

Blaring headlines, misrepresenting facts, never acknowledging or apologizing when proven wrong, smears those he disagrees with. I don't know him personally (and his last stint on council was before my time) but he just comes off as super slimy. Basically Fox News on steroids.

I couldn't agree more. I have also lurked since the beginning of the FCPost and I find it amazing that the people behind it can say with a straight face that the FCNP is biased (it is) but not see that the FCPost is the same or worse.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to know how Becky Smerdon isn't more "on the radar" for FCC School Board. I know she's a FACTS candidate, but let's face it, her experience in education is beyond what any other candidate possesses. A PHD in education and 20 years working analyzing data in school systems nationwide.

Erin Gill will be another Justin Castillo, rubber stamp as FC Post said, but there is no doubt she's personable.

How could you be offended by supporting the girls? City leaders stood up for a man who sexually abused them while they sat in court brave and alone. Why wasn't Phil Duncan on their side? It is mind-boggling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know how Becky Smerdon isn't more "on the radar" for FCC School Board. I know she's a FACTS candidate, but let's face it, her experience in education is beyond what any other candidate possesses. A PHD in education and 20 years working analyzing data in school systems nationwide.

Erin Gill will be another Justin Castillo, rubber stamp as FC Post said, but there is no doubt she's personable.

How could you be offended by supporting the girls? City leaders stood up for a man who sexually abused them while they sat in court brave and alone. Why wasn't Phil Duncan on their side? It is mind-boggling.

Because despite the PhD she made an incredibly poor judgment call aligning herself with the FACTS group early on as a newcomer. She lost credibility by association in addition to initiating legal action against the schools.

[Anonymous]

I don't see how initiating legal action causes her to lose credibility. In any normal world, when a school system is doing illegal things, a lawsuit or petition would be the logical step in pursuit of justice and promoting fairness, no? What would you say is so wrong about legal action against a board who illegally acted?