Anonymous wrote:"Investing in a single politically-appointed individual the power of judge, jury, and executioner without any input from law-enforcement officers or delineated qualifications for such individual constitutes an undue burden for those who protect and serve the community."

This is the reason I support his veto on this. As an Arlington resident, he absolutely made the right choice.

That's right, if it isn't the same ole, same ole something might change for the good and we can't have that.

Anonymous wrote:"Investing in a single politically-appointed individual the power of judge, jury, and executioner without any input from law-enforcement officers or delineated qualifications for such individual constitutes an undue burden for those who protect and serve the community."

This is the reason I support his veto on this. As an Arlington resident, he absolutely made the right choice.

Youngkin is not an Arlington resident. Do you mean, "As an Arlington resident, I think he absolutely made the right choice."?

I thought this position was already created and is already overseen by the county manager, who obviously is not a law enforcement officer, and where qualifications already are not delineated. I don't understand how what you say above is any different from the already existing situation, so exactly what did the veto accomplish besides get in the way of local control over local functions (something republicans are supposed to be loathe to do but I guess not when it's a county who hates you repubs will dabble).

"Investing in a single politically-appointed individual the power of judge, jury, and executioner without any input from law-enforcement officers or delineated qualifications for such individual constitutes an undue burden for those who protect and serve the community."

This is the reason I support his veto on this. As an Arlington resident, he absolutely made the right choice.

there was some nonsense about seeking accountability for the police means we need to better support police...but it was in support of this?

I'm so damn confused. What exactly is the argument on any of this?

Anonymous wrote:So sloppy.

that is so on brand for republicans

Well, we were suing him over the mask stuff. Maybe that hurt his feelings. Seems like he doesn't like us and we don't like him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Yes, because that will make the auditor more independent than if they answer to the county manager.

Sounds like more boated government jobs.

It’s one job that already exists.

No need to waste your time, Republicans don't care about pesky things like facts that stand in the way of their narratives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Yes, because that will make the auditor more independent than if they answer to the county manager.

Sounds like more boated government jobs.

It’s one job that already exists.

So sloppy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Yes, because that will make the auditor more independent than if they answer to the county manager.

Sounds like more boated government jobs.

From a governance perspective, having the auditor report to five elected politicians rather than to an appointed county manager doesn't sound like an improvement. The county manager still reports to the board and can be questioned about the work of the auditor vis-a-vis the oversight board.

Good for Youngkin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Yes, because that will make the auditor more independent than if they answer to the county manager.

Unless the county board stacks the committee with sycophants and appoints a similar auditor. A strong argument could be made that an auditor can't do their job if they are busy trying to please five bosses. If the county board doesn't like what the county manager is doing or appointing, they can replace the county manager. The position is hired, not elected.

Anonymous wrote:The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Yes, because that will make the auditor more independent than if they answer to the county manager.

The county board appoints all the members of the oversight board. You also want them to appoint the "independent" auditor?

Youngkin used his first veto as governor to target a bill that would have allowed the Arlington County Board to appoint an independent auditor to oversee the Community Oversight Board, which handles civilian complaints of police misconduct in Arlington. The oversight board already exists, and already has an auditor that reports to the county manager. The only charge this bill would have made would be to give the county board, rather than the county manager, oversight over the auditor. The county manager is the top law enforcement official, though, so having the auditor be under the supervision of the board rather than the manager would allow for an independent auditor and a stronger oversight board. These kinds of local charter bills are usually completely uncontroversial formalities, and haven’t been vetoed in at least a dozen years. But then we got this guy.

In his press release celebrating the veto, Tweedledumkin showed that he has no clue whatsoever how this oversight and auditor process works, and instead blindly vetoed the bill to make a divisive political statement about supporting law enforcement. Contrary to his press release, Arlington (like many Virginia localities) already has an oversight board with an auditor; the only change this bill would have effected would be who the auditor answers to. The oversight board already has the ability to make binding disciplinary determinations, and the auditor already is required to be a non-law enforcement civilian. Yet Youngkin seems to believe that his veto has somehow stopped any of this from happening. Showing once again that Youngkin has no clue how Virginia’s system of government works, and no interest in learning.

https://www.governor.virginia.gov/newsroom/news-releases/2022/march/name-929639-en.html