Loudoun Democrats Respond to Delgaudio Committee Ban

The LCDC gives its support to the board for taking action as investigation continues.

The Loudoun County Democratic Committee issued the following statement today regarding the Loudoun Board of Supervisors’ removal of Eugene Delgaudio (R-Sterling) from standing committees.

The move, which received a response from Delgaudio’s attorney, denies Delgaudio a vote in board committees, but does not bar him from attending meetings.

Here is the full LCDC statement:

Last night, the Loudoun Board of Supervisors stripped Sterling Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio of his committee assignments. LCDC Chair Evan Macbeth made the following statement in response to this action:

“Serious allegations of wrongdoing were lodged against Sterling Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio last March, and revealed to Board Chairman Scott York within days. Chairman York sat on those allegations for six months, revealing them in public only after the Washington Post splashed them across the front page in September. At that time, the Loudoun County Democratic Committee called for Delgaudio’s resignation and, failing that, called for York and the Board to strip Delgaudio of his Committee assignments. The Board ignored our calls and rallied around Delgaudio.

As the allegations against Delgaudio simmered and garnered continuing media attention – investigations were started and stopped, York admitted he hid evidence – the LCDC continually called for Delgaudio to be stripped of his Committee assignments. The Board stood silent.

[Editor’s note: York explained during a town hall meeting that he had not turned documents over to investigators because he assumed they would receive their own copies.]

In mid-November, one Supervisor – Shawn Williams from Broad Run – agreed with the LCDC, and proposed to take action. He was shut down by York’s procedural move. No other Supervisor joined with Williams and stood against Delgaudio.

Now, four months after the serious allegations surfaced publicly – 10 months after they landed on York’s desk – the Board finally has moved against Delgaudio, failing to assign him to any Committees for 2013.

While I applaud the Board’s actions, the delays and excuses of the past four months have raised a cloud of suspicion that the members of the Loudoun Board of Supervisors care more about their personal power and political allegiances than they do about good government and the appearances of improprieties.

I want to believe this action against Delgaudio marks the beginning of new era for this Board, but experience warns me not to get my hopes up.”

Jonathan Erickson January 03, 2013 at 08:42 PM
More blather until CA Stamos comes out with her finding. I am sure that the democrats are hoping for the worst for Eugene. Just goes to show seletive forgiveness. My hopes are up also but since the main political parties are republican and democrat I am sure that I am in for a disappointment from both. If Eugene were to be removed would there be a special election or would York choose someone to replace Eugene. There it is the cure being worse than the disease.
Marcus Aurelius January 04, 2013 at 12:42 AM
I hope that a special election is called after Mr. Delgaudio is dismissed for malfeasance. We need to end the shame that he has brought to Loudoun.
joe brewer January 04, 2013 at 12:12 PM
Mr. Aurelius you have to dig deeper then just Delgaudio if he is found to have broken the law. There should be a non-profit attorney pac that reviews the supervisors every year. I see the Toll Brothers wants to change the Belmont Executive Center from commercial to residential so they can add 460 houses. This was investigated, debated, proffered, had public input and voted on now they want to change and I say NO WAY!
Anthony Fasolo January 04, 2013 at 09:01 PM
I applaud the action of the LCDC and would also like to correct the Editorial Comment you made in this article. Chairman York said at a town hall meeting held in the county building, that I attended, that he thought that someone making more than $100K (the investigator) would call HIM to see if there was more information!"..not that he assumed that they received their own copies (please check with his office again). Tony Fasolo
joe brewer January 05, 2013 at 10:18 PM
Sure is a lot of applause for a nothing done statement. Nothing new was brought up just a rehash but excuse me I'll wait for the standing ovation to die down. Delguadio VOTED to assign the committees to the others with hopes the board will commence with a hearing to either charge him or clear his name. The LCDC has requested that Degaudio resign but have no proof yet of any wrongdoing. Typical bullying tactic.
Satchmo January 06, 2013 at 02:40 AM
Umm, joe. If anyone is bullying anyone it's the unanimous party vote to strip Delgaudio from any influence. I don't think that type of 100% agreement would be possible without some significant backroom justification.
joe brewer January 06, 2013 at 08:58 AM
Pending a hearing and CA Stamos's report what would you think Eugene should do. He voted to have himself removed to avoid any conflict while awaiting the report from CA Stamos. Makes sense to me to put this matter into a holding pattern. . The LCDC has made requests that he resign do they know something we don't if so what? As is from the Mateer statement I think you will have trouble unseating Eugene. If there is more that we are not privy to then let the chips fall where they may but we all await the report and recommendations from CA Stamos. The LCDC, the Miller's, the Weintraubes and assorted others are praying Stamos finds something to charge Eugene with to validate their partisan rush to judgements.
Dusty Smith (Editor) January 06, 2013 at 05:14 PM
I just didn't think the word "hid" demonstrated what I heard. But you I understand why you made your point.
David Weintraub January 08, 2013 at 11:01 PM
I don't think that any rational person can take seriously the claim that Eugene voted with all the other supervisors to strip himself of committee appointments in order to "avoid embroiling the entire board in another controversy," do you? When has Eugene ever seemed interested in avoiding controversy, or embroiling the board in it? Controversy, the more prurient the better, is what pays his salary. Eugene should have resigned long ago, for reasons having nothing to do with the current possible criminal indictment, or barring that, the unethical misuse of his office. He won't resign now for the same reason he never has before. He can't tell the difference between right and wrong, nor does he care about anything but enriching himself. The evidence for that is abundant.
Marcus Aurelius January 09, 2013 at 12:18 AM
Brian Fox January 09, 2013 at 04:03 AM
Eugene's antics on this board has been an embarrassment to this county for far too long. I understand that he is an elected official and we have had numerous opportunities to find a more suitable replacement for him but for better or for worse he has had a lot of financial backing. In my opinion it has been for worse. It is time for him to fade away and for us to move on.
David Weintraub January 09, 2013 at 03:51 PM
Yes, York provided an explanation for why he failed to turn over the documents at that town hall meeting. The question is whether that explanation is believable. I would point out that we are being asked to believe that York is just "a simple carpenter" to whom it didn't occur that he was expected to share what he had in his possession with prosecutors, AND at the same time, that York is qualified and knowledgable enough to have recognized evidence of criminal wrongdoing in those same documents. Doesn't that strike you as a contradiction? I think, given the totality of the evidence, that the characterization of his actions as "hid" is accurate. None of this would ever have come to light without the work of independent journalists.
Satchmo January 09, 2013 at 06:55 PM
David, add to the question of believing York's explanation as his omission was just the product of a simple carpenter....York had the chance to fix that error/omission when the initial CA response came back and said more documentation was required if charges were going to be justified. York could have seen that as a clue all the documents weren't provided subsequent to the initial CA opinion. He chose a second time not to forward the documents.
joe brewer January 09, 2013 at 07:08 PM
It does seem that Ca Stamos out to kick Yorks butt at the least for his measured response. He should be under investigation for obstruction.
Marcus Aurelius January 10, 2013 at 06:12 AM
Measured response---hah! The only thing York measured was the easiest way to protect a fellow Republican. Unfortunately, York forgot the the old carpenter's saying, "Measure twice, cut once!" EJECT EUGENE! (and get joe a ruler!)
joe brewer January 10, 2013 at 12:27 PM
I see Dopus Aurelius is up to his usual. Your bright and shinning moment went down with your porcelin popper comments. Leave the tape measures to the big boys and keep trying to get your head out of there.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »