|
Date published: 12/18/2002
CIRCUIT JUDGE John Scott Jr. may have done more yesterday to preserve order
in Fredericksburg than police or the National Guard. With the stroke of a pen,
he may have quelled the riotous politics that spilled into his courtroom when
former Councilman Gordon Shelton and two cohorts sued five City Council members,
whose success they despise, for alleged violations of Virginia's open-meetings
law.
The intent of the suit, surely an augur of serialized harassment, was anarchic:
The plaintiffs, who drip enmity for the council majority, sought to prevent
a duly elected city government from governing, thereby depriving voters of
the political choice they made in rejecting Sheltonism and electing the five.
Judge Scott ordered the three--Mr. Shelton, Anthony Jenkins, and Patrick Timpone--to
pay $8,000 of the defendants' legal expenses, suggesting that the judge failed
to appreciate the three's flowering of civic-mindedness. What were the results
of this altruism on behalf of the public's right to know?
Of the original 18 counts lodged against Mayor Bill Beck and four fellow councilmen,
17 came to nought. Judge Scott found three of the five members in violation
of a single count of stygian Freedom of Information law regarding e-mails.
His ruling on this count, which touched on messages about city appointments,
created new case law that, while plausible, may be overturned. (Mr. Beck's
lawyer will appeal.) The judge imposed no fine on the violators--Mr. Beck,
Vice Mayor Scott Howson, Councilman Matt Kelly--whose intentions he found innocuous.
Councilmen Tom Fortune and Billy Withers were deemed wholly blameless. This
epic triumph of justice will cost the city treasury about $82,000 in legal
bills. Do the suers understand how grateful Fredericksburg taxpayers feel toward
them?
Judge Scott protected the interests of both taxpayers and voters when he granted
the defendants' plea that Mr. Shelton, et al. be made to pay attorney fees
for some of their more preposterous accusations. "The only way," stated
the defense, "to stop the filing of bad-faith claimsis to demonstrate
that Petitioners are not entitled to a 'free shot' at their elected officials.
The people of Fredericksburg should not be forced to underwrite the cost of
Petitioners' litigation folly."
Defense attorney Howard Stahl's depositions of Messrs. Shelton, Jenkins, and
Timpone reveal the appropriateness of the word "folly." Hear Mr.
Shelton's earnest responses to the charge that all five defendants met illegally
at Maury School:
Q: Can you identify anyone who is going to say that Beck was at Maury?
A: Not off this list; no.
Q: Off any list?
A: We get lots of calls.
Q: Who have you gotten calls from on this case?
A: Probably thousands of people.
Q: Well, let's start listing them.
A: No; I can't remember them, it's so many of them.
Q: Let's start listing the ones you know.
A: (interjecting) No; I'm not going to name anybody not being able to name
them all.
Here is Mr. Jenkins on the charge that the five conducted a secret meeting
to discuss the city homeless shelter:
Q: Have they [Messrs. Shelton and Timpone] revealed to you the name of any
person who has knowledgeabout this meeting that you have alleged?
A: I don't recall.
Q. Mr. Jenkins, I'm asking you, that if your life depended on it and someone
said to you, Mr. Jenkins, what do you know about this stuff that you've charged
these men with; and you were going to give an answer, what would your answer
be?
A: I'm not sure.
Of course, $8,000 means more to some people than to others. There is more
than enough money in the pockets of the public's arch-enemies to fund mischief
in assorted varieties, and a larger supply than three of those in whom vindictiveness
runs a photo finish with buffoonery. But Judge Scott has served notice that
mischief comes with a price, which next time, if there is a next time, should
painfully increase.
Date published: 12/18/2002 |
