Patrick County’s Board of Supervisors tackled issues of transparency, personnel, and community concerns during its meeting on Monday, Dec. 9. Among the most debated items was the decision to vacate a $1,294.71 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) charge incurred by The Enterprise newspaper.
The motion to vacate the fee, introduced by Dan River District Supervisor Andrew Overby, passed in a 4-1 vote after a lengthy discussion.
Overby, who won a special election in November and began his term at the December meeting, wasted no time addressing transparency concerns, adding to the meeting agenda a discussion on FOIA processes. He also asked for a discussion regarding County Administrator Beth Simms to be held in closed session.
The motion to amend the agenda passed 4-1, with Blue Ridge District Supervisor Steve Marshall abstaining.
Overby questioned County Attorney John Fitzgerald and Assistant County Administrator and FOIA officer Donna Shough about the FOIA process, specifically why a recent request from Debbie Hall in her capacity as editor of The Enterprise, was sent to Fitzgerald for review.
“Normally, we do send them through the county attorney unless it’s something very, very basic,” Shough said.
Fitzgerald said there was a question for him as to what should be produced. “So, I conducted a review of the documents to determine whether anything should be exempted. We made certain redactions, and produced as much as was required,” Fitzgerald said.
“When you do a response to a FOIA request, you’re required to note the exemptions on the request” when information is redacted, as is required by law, Overby said.
Fitzgerald said he didn’t note exemptions; Shough added there were redactions, with no exemptions noted.
Overby said that doesn’t follow the requirements of the law.
“I wasn’t aware that we needed to note where the redactions” were, Fitzgerald said, and asked for specific examples.
“I don’t have them in front of me, but I’ve reviewed them and there were several areas where there were redactions and there were no notations at all. So, I’m just wondering why it was redacted,” Overby said.
“You’re our legal counsel. You don’t know that you’re supposed to put an exemption or a redaction?”
Fitzgerald asked Overby to point him to the part of the Virginia FOIA Code he referenced.
“You’re the expert on the Code, right,” Overby said.
“You’re the one telling me that I’m supposed to provide the exemption,” Fitzgerald said.
Overby then asked Fitzgerald what work he did for the 6.2 hours noted on the invoice sent to The Enterprise.
“What I just described. I reviewed the documents, determined in comparison with the Code about what can be exempted, or what should be exempted, made certain redactions, and then provided those to Mrs. Shough,” Fitzgerald said.
“So, you knew that there were redactions to be made, you made the decision to redact items for certain reasons, but you didn’t put why they were redacted on the response,” Overby said.
Fitzgerald said that was correct.
Overby noted a duplicate FOIA request was submitted by Marshall in his personal capacity.
“Why was Mr. Marshall not charged the same amount, or a split amount, between what Ms. Hall requested and what Mr. Marshall requested,” Overby asked.
Because she didn’t respond to Marshall’s request, Shough said she’d have to check with Amy Walker, who also is a designated FOIA officer.
Overby then made a motion to vacate Hall’s FOIA charge of $1,294.71. Clayton Kendrick, of the Mayo River District, seconded the motion.
“I don’t want the FOIA process to be weaponized” or used as a deterrent for people to request information, Overby said, calling the charges unreasonable.
Marshall then asked for debate on the motion. Doug Perry, chairman, and of the Smith River District, agreed, adding that he thought the board needed to know all the particulars about the issue before voting. Perry added that he didn’t think the board needed to vote on the issue that night.
Marshall said the board should at least debate it.
“There’s lots of reasons, lots of times that funds are expended unnecessarily. Attorney fees are $190 an hour. One of the most recent ones that kind of shocked me was a former supervisor, who over Mr. Overby’s campaign decided that I was a sitting supervisor, and I left my constitutional rights, and especially my First Amendment Right to Freedom of Expression, at the door. She caused the attorney, the subject of Mr. Overby’s campaign, to be asked where I had the legal right to have an opinion and publish an opinion. I believe it was at least an hour billable, it’s $190 that went to your campaign. Not from you directly, but now that’s my definition of money not well spent,” Marshall said.
“That’s tax dollars that go to pay for that information, and is that what we want to put our tax dollars towards because somebody has to take their time to go through all those emails, to go through everything that’s been submitted. That’s time that somebody works through lunch, that’s time that somebody has to work overtime to get that information in that short period of time, so that bill is acquired through somebody’s work,” he said.
Overby said that is part of the job for county employees and the county attorney.
Perry said it takes away from employees’ daily duties.
“I understand that, but they’re not going to receive the funds,” Overby said.
Perry said the county has to pay for that work and the overtime hours worked.
“So, you’re saying that anybody that would do any of this work has a packed schedule where they could not do this work without incurring additional costs. I just don’t believe that,” Overby said.
Perry asked how long the county has to reply to a FOIA request, and was told it was five business days.
(However, the FOIA statute provides the county an opportunity to request a five business day extension – which was done in this case.)
“If you had weeks to work on it, then I’m sure they could find the time,” Perry said.
“I just don’t want the FOIA process to be used as a deterrence for people to request information. I don’t think that the charges that were accessed were commensurate with the work that was done. I don’t believe that we got our money’s worth from the county’s attorneys to do that job if they couldn’t even site the requirement for the redactions,” Overby said.
The first email, Kendrick said that he saw about the price stated there would be a cost of $200 minimum.
“If it’s going to jump from $200 to almost $1,400, there probably should have been some notification to see if they wanted to continue with it, or a little better estimate on it,” Kendrick said.
Jonathan Wood, vice-chairman, and of the Peters Creek District, asked Hall if she was given any notification that the FOIA charge would be north of $1,000.
“I was not, and I checked multiple times for updates,” Hall said.
Marshall said he’s very concerned if the board starts spending taxpayer dollars on every FOIA request.
“Our job here is not to be stewards of a group that has a bone to pick, we’re stewards of the taxpayer money. So, taxpayer pays the money, we should handle that responsibly. If we were to write this off, and have the taxpayers pay it, I think it’s irresponsible,” Marshall said.
Overby said that neither the county nor the board need to weaponize the FOIA process to prevent FOIA requests. “And I think that’s more of what this represents. I don’t see where the charges make sense for the information that was produced,” Overby said.
Wood said he largely agreed with Overby, but still believed there should be a charge as someone has to do work to complete the FOIA request. “I definitely think we should have made notification when we jumped from $200 to $1,294,” he said.
“I also think this going along with the fact that if we are being transparent, we would not be getting flooded with FOIA requests,” Overby said to the applause of the audience.
“The main reason that this FOIA was requested was to shed light on situations that are being conducted behind closed doors, or individually between certain members of government. If things were being conducted in the open, this FOIA request would have never been requested in the first place,” Overby said.
Perry then called for the board to vote.
Overby, Kendrick, Wood, and Perry voted yes; Marshall voted “No.”
Wood said he voted yes, “simply until we establish a better way of charging, so it seems more equitable for everyone.”
While he initially wanted to vote no, Perry said he voted yes as “where they (The Enterprise) wasn’t informed and that excessive was blindsiding.”
In other matters, the board:
*Heard an apology from Perry about comments he made during the November 18 meeting. “Both the editor and the employees for referring to them as a tabloid, and I do apologize for that remark,” Perry said.
*Heard from Ed Pool about the actions of some board members and the county administrator. Pool said over the last 18 months many have witnessed disturbing trends of some board members abandoning the desires of their district constituents in favor of commercial interests while never producing any chain of liability documentation from manufacturers.
Thus “potentially creating extreme legal liabilities which would cost this county millions if not tens of millions of dollars in legal fees alone in order to pursue damage recovery,” he said.
Pool said residents have also witnessed the county administrator moving legitimate Planning Commission functions to be handled by an outside consulting firm, whose talent pool he notes would not have made it through first round screening process in any organization he’s either worked for or led as a senior executive.
“These actions clearly demonstrate the lack of managerial experience, which is gained by years of work experience, not conveyance of title, resulting in the Fifth Estate being forced to file a FOIA request revealing how serious the internal disagreements have been. The press, when dealt with openly and fairly, is an ally,” he said.
Pool said he now fears the FOIA process is being weaponized as a means of obfuscating the public’s right to know. “A clear sign in the breach of representative government and the creation of adversarial relationships which never ends well for any of the parties involved,” Pool said.
He also requested a cap limit on FOIA requests of $22.50 per hour, a full forensic audit of all county books for the last seven years, full background checks for all senior management including the board members, with the press reviewing and publishing all results from Pacer system searches and other public sources as deemed necessary, and a formal public apology to The Enterprise for “previous open comments of a derogatory or possible slanderous nature.”
*Heard from Trena Anderson about the actions of the board. She said only a fascist mentally attacks citizens and refuses free speech.
“Public servants aren’t dictators. They owe constituents explanation. Two members of this board constantly display disdain for citizens and taxpayers. You weren’t elected to do whatever you want. You were elected to listen to your constituents, represent their desires, and to be held accountable for your actions and decisions,” she said.
Citizens have the right to have a say in public process. Policies and decisions should be developed in the public arena, not in private texts or emails, Anderson said.
“For your information, every one of those texts and emails are owned by the citizens of Patrick County. There is absolutely no reason for private texts and emails relating to any county business,” she said.
Noting there are two supervisor meetings scheduled every month, Anderson said the second meeting is a work session, and supposed to be used for discussions between the board and the county administrator.
She asked why the work session is rarely held.
“Discussion of issues is the backbone of creating public policy as well as public trust and transparency. One of the FOIA’d texts” by The Enterprise “states, ‘I know we can’t meet as a group, but we do need to talk about things before an open meeting.’ He then says, ‘We do need to come up with a way to talk.’ The answer to that is to hold your work meeting monthly. Nothing is to be withheld from the public,” Anderson said.
Another quote in the texts was particularly upsetting, Anderson said of “’My personal opinion, why should we expect any staff to invest here if they are going to be talked about/treated like this.’”
Anderson said every resident in the meeting room is invested in the county, and some are forced to deal with the disdain from some county employees and board members.
“This is our home. We pay the taxes! We pay your salary and perks! What a truly disrespectful thing to say. Every head of every department should be required to live here and ‘invest.’ That increases the tax base and keeps our tax money here in Patrick County,” she said.
Anderson added, “the verbal assault” on resident Galen Gilbert after last month’s meeting “was despicable,” adding that she believes the offending supervisor should be removed from the board “immediately.”
*Heard from Karen DeCapp, who spoke about the May 13 public meeting where the county budget was discussed and many board members felt more work needed to be done on it.
“The county administrator went over the budget. One BOS (Board of Supervisors) member noted many things on the page had been decided to be taken off during a committee meeting, i.e. common-sense detail- HVAC maintenance going with a lower bidder than a higher one. The current CA (County Administrator) said the budget was the result of more than three months of work and its intention was for the best for the county, both now and in the future,” she said.
DeCapp noted the ambulance did not make the budget and that only one supervisor commented on this. At the September 18 meeting, she said Facilities Director Mike McGuiness said the top item on the County Administrator’s priority list was uniforms.
When concerns were raised about a paid vehicle and residence of a new hire, which DeCapp said are legitimate concerns directly affecting residents, “inner texts were revealed and the CA texted ‘My personal opinion, why should we expect any staff to invest here if they are going to be talked about/treated like this.’
“Suddenly, the best for the county fell into oblivion,” DeCapp said, adding that administrator’s contract stipulates that her salary must increase each year, as is granted to other county employees, and that all communications of supervised county employees must solely go through her.
“The taxpayers of PC, 20 percent who live under the poverty rate, must fork up $500 for a vehicle, pay for both a tablet and laptop to use outside the office, and have enrollment and membership dues paid for in at least four organizations, with all travel included,” DeCapp said. “I’d argue with these stipulations” and further bolsters to “power aren’t necessary. Need it really be said, BOS you have been relegated to being an underling?”
As residents voice their concerns about the lack of common sense and the failure of county leadership, DeCapp said they are shouted down, disregarded, and faced with anger.
“Take heed and consideration to the hardships of this county and your own standing – your anger is displaced,” she said.
*Heard from Galen Gilbert, who discussed his passion for Patrick County.
“My family’s been here since the 1700s, so I’m very passionate about this county. and like I said, we need to have transparency across the board from the administrator, the employees, we need to know whom works for who around here,” he said.
Needless to say, Gilbert said the November 18 meeting was over, he was told by a member of the board “that they hoped I had the *alls to say what I said when the county administrator’s here, and I will. I just got to the age now where I don’t have that filter between my head and my mouth, and I will tell you what I think,” he said.
Gilbert said he also learned that a supervisor was discussing his disability in public.
“If you want to know what my disability is – come talk to me. I’ll tell you … If you want to know about me, call me. I’ll talk to you. I’ll give you the time, because that’s the way we work things out with communications,” he said.
At this point in time, Gilbert said some of the communications he sees are disgusting.
“We need to be upfront with everybody in the county because we all pay taxes, whether it’s personal property or it’s your land (real estate),” he said.
*Heard from LeeAnn Seeley, who said what she witnessed at the November 18 meeting was disgusting.
“I think a lot of us were upset with some of the behaviors that went on, the rudeness that goes on, the communication, or the lack of communication, that goes on between this board and the citizens of this county,” she said.
Seeley believes the county should be a county of integrity, where residents are proud to live, and with supervisors who direct the county.
‘I’m not real proud, honestly. Before I stepped into this meeting I just happened to be on the phone with a girlfriend, who’s a resident of this county. I said I’m going to the board of supervisors meeting, and she said, ‘I heard they’re pretty rude to everybody.’ That’s the word on the street. That’s sad, that’s what people are thinking, that ain’t good, that’s not why you should be up here,” she said.
Seeley said residents have the right to free expression during public comments. “We shouldn’t be judged on it, and I feel that we are judged. That we’re a group of ‘oh-no,’ and that is not right. We’re here for everyone’s good,” she said.
*Heard from Mike DeCapp regarding the county’s budget and the hiring of new administrative management positions in the county’s strained financial climate.
*Heard from Rhonda Pruitt and Chris Hughes about the Patrick County Community Food Bank. Both requested the board consider the Food Bank’s request for funds for next year.
*Heard an update on the Blue Ridge Parkway from External Affairs Specialist Leesa Brandon and on Mabry Mill from Chief of Administration and Chief of Staff Rachel Stasny.
*Scheduled the board’s reorganizational meeting for Monday, January 6 at 6 p.m. in the third-floor court room of the Administration Building.
*Approved amending the fiscal year 2023-2024 budget with an increase of $494,000 in local funds for the Child’s Service Act (CSA).
*Approved a bid to Hiatt Construction for security needs for the Patrick County Circuit Court building. According to an email sent from Jones, the work will cost $50,958 with $30,292.95 coming from interest earned on American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. About $20,665 will be from reserves should there not be enough fiscal year 2025 revenue to cover the work.
*Appointed Michael Tatum to the Planning Commission for the Dan River District.
*Appointed Kevin Smith to the Public Service Authority (PSA) for the Dan River District.
*Denied the request for a dangerous dog vaccination fees ordinance and moved that a resolution be prepared to direct animal control officers to seek reimbursement for vaccination and care through the court system.
*Discussed the request to ask the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to include Virginia news in local media.
*Discussed the 2025 board retreat and suggested topics.
*Approved the Nov. 2024 meeting minutes and bills, claims, and appropriations.
*Heard the administrator’s report from Shough.
*Heard the supervisors’ reports.
