Tag Archives: Shawn Williams

Eugene Delgaudio’s Identity Crisis

Posted on by |

A chastened Supervisor E. Delgaudio listening to the public demanding his censure (photo J. Flannery)

Sterling Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio lost his ever-present orange hat, his open smile, his false swagger and his law suit when he tried to prevent the Board of Supervisor from having a hearing last Wednesday on what Mr. Delgaudio did or did not do to abuse staff and misuse and mingle County resources with his gay-bashing hate group and his campaign fund-raising activities.

Mr. Delgaudio said he wanted to know before last Wednesday’s meeting what the Board’s specific charges were.

The Board listed five charges, with the help of Board Member, Mr. Shawn M. Williams, drawing principally upon the 8-page statement filed by Ms. Donna Mateer, a former staffer (submitted last March)(that Mr. Delgaudio has had ever since), and the recent critical grand jury report (June 24, 2013)(that didn’t indict but did plainly identify various kinds of official misconduct by Mr. Delgaudio).

Mr. Delgaudio wanted an opportunity to respond.

Chairman Scott York called the Board into a Committee of the Whole in public so that Mr. Delgaudio could.

When given the opportunity, Mr Delgaudio lost his voice.

Mr. Delgaudio carped, sniveled and complained that he needed more time. Continue reading →

No more endearing hugs. Darn.

Posted on by |

In light of yesterday’s WaPo story by Caitlin Gibson, I think it’s safe to say that the lovefest between Scott York and Eugene Delgaudio has indeed run its course.

[Delgaudio attorney Charlie King] is probably just drinking the same clown juice that Delgaudio is, because I have no idea what the heck he’s talking about,

said York in response to King’s statement. In that statement, distributed to the media after the board unanimously stripped Delgaudio of his standing committee appointments at its first 2013 business meeting, King tries to suggest that this is all about York, that York has a “pattern” of alleging misconduct, ignoring the fact that Mr. Delgaudio is the subject of a criminal investigation.

A divorce settlement is pending, we hear.

As many have pointed out since the investigation began, and long before it was handed over to the special prosecutor, it is standard procedure to place an individual under investigation on suspension pending resolution of the matter. At the very least, Real Advocate and others argued, Mr. Delgaudio should be barred from shaping revisions to the county’s aide policies. Supervisor Williams attempted to call for stripping Mr. Delgaudio of these duties back in November, but was thwarted by York, allowing him to participate in the Finance, Government Services and Operations Committee making those revisions. Now it appears that York is the sole target of Mr. Delgaudio’s wrath, at least publicly.

Continue reading →

Holiday display solution moves forward

Posted on by |

According to the Leesburg Today, the Finance, Government Services and Operations Committee is recommending that the Courthouse Grounds Facility Committee “be directed to work up a plan for seasonal display sponsored by the county government” that would replace the increasingly contentious “limited public forum” policy in place for the past three years.

The solution is essentially identical to what was proposed by former Supervisor Miller at the end of last year, but was not adopted because the display spaces for that year had already been assigned, and in some cases, displays already erected.

Supervisor Shawn Williams (R-Broad Run), an attorney, noted that there are two different Supreme Court cases that show there is legal precedent for such a step.

“Essentially what they decided to do in those cases was you could put up a secular display, a Christmas tree, fine…Things that weren’t of an innately religious value,” he said, noting there also was a case of a nativity scene put on a courthouse’s steps, and that the court ruled that was going to far. “The tough work will be in deciding what the government-sponsored seasonal display is. I think we do have some good guidance from two Supreme Court cases. If we put out a secular display, we should be fine.” [My emphasis]

Continue reading →