Sparks fly as LCBOS majority declines to vote on Umstattd’s travel policies | News

Umstattd’s draft policy, first released in July, would have discouraged guests from attending international trips; required that the itinerary, the list of all people traveling and the estimated cost of the trip be approved in advance by a vote of the full board; required a “full accounting” of the expenses that were paid for with tax revenue; and restricted board members and staff who use tax revenue to “fly the equivalent of economy or the cheapest available option, whichever costs less, regardless of the length of the flight,” stay at “moderately priced hotels or equivalent lodging” and stay on the trip “for the shortest period of time required.”

But Randall said a vote to adopt those rules would conflict directly with the Sept. 5 resolution sponsored by Supervisor Koran Saines, D-Sterling — Umstattd was the only dissenting vote — to study other jurisdictions’ travel policies and determine best practices. Umstattd’s proposal “sends the staff down a different path than Mr. Saines’s motion sent them down,” Randall said.

“Thank you, Madam Chair, but this does not send staff down a different path,” Umstattd said.

Kershner agreed. “I do feel like this is its own standalone motion,” he said.

Randall said she had tried to reach Umstattd to give her the opportunity to speak with County Administrator Tim Hemstreet and County Attorney Leo Rogers about her motion before the meeting.

“Supervisor Umstattd, if you look at your phone, I sent you a text this morning at 8:50 asking were you available to talk. I did not hear back from you at all,” Randall said. Because Umstattd didn’t respond, Randall said, she gave Umstattd the chance to speak with Hemstreet and Rogers during the meeting. Umstattd declined.

During the supervisors’ comment period, Umstattd said she was “not surprised” that her motion was turned down.

“The problem is, this keeps this issue — and the unflattering image that we have gained as a county and a board through this issue — it keeps it going,” she said. “It keeps it going potentially now for months. Certainly, it keeps it going into November. If we had taken a position to regulate ourselves tonight in a very reasonable way, and demonstrated fiscal frugality and responsibility, I don’t think we would now be looking at the potential that Richmond will do it for us starting in January.”

Umstattd continued, “There is already written legislation to limit Loudoun’s ability — potentially other counties in the state’s ability — to use certain kinds of funds for travel, including potentially the transient occupancy tax and the restricted transient occupancy tax. Given that both our Republican and Democratic state Senate candidates in this area have indicated an interest in regulating this county’s overseas travel expenditures, I expect that there would be bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate for reigning in Loudoun.”

During his comment period, Saines defended the sister city trips — he participated in the delegation to Ghana — and said that they “followed the current travel policies that we have in place.” He also questioned Umstattd’s assertion that the General Assembly would regulate Loudoun’s travel policies.

“The General Assembly doesn’t even have policies like we have,” he said. “… So what policies are they going to dictate to us when they don’t even have their own policies?”

Saines said that WJLA, the network that criticized the sister city trips in a series of articles by reporter and former Trump administration political appointee Nick Minock, has been “promoting an agenda” by reporting on the trips “all summer long.” He said Umstattd was “grandstanding” rather than providing amendments to his Sept. 5 resolution.

“If you truly wanted to recommend some changes to our travel policy, when I brought my motion last week, you could’ve made some friendly amendments to that motion to add in your items — which I thought you were going to do — but you did not,” he said. “I think tonight all you did was grandstand, and you knew what you were doing. … You decide to do your grandstanding today, and then make threats. And I don’t take kindly to threats.”

Randall said that Umstattd’s motion to update the travel policies without having staff study them first is “outside of our norm” and “didn’t make any logical sense to me.”

“If we want to look at a policy that we want to change … we ask the staff to go out and take a look at it and come back with recommendations,” Randall said. “That’s our norm. That’s our policy. There’s never been a time when one person writes up the policy, brings it to us and says, ‘Vote on this.’”

Randall said that she wants to look in to and discuss the board’s travel policies, “but it doesn’t come from one supervisor,” she said. “It comes from the study that the staff does.”

“Sometimes people want the answer, and sometimes people want the issue,” Randall continued. “I actually want to get to the answer, if there’s an answer that we need to change.”

In her closing comments, Randall said to Umstattd, “I will always call you first. I will always reach out to you first. I will never try to bring anything to the board to make you look any kind of way. You are my colleague, and you will get that respect from me. If you never give it to me again, you will get it from me.”

Gary Katz, the Republican candidate for chair of the Board of Supervisors, issued a statement criticizing Randall’s decision and said that Umstattd and Kershner “acted with tremendous integrity.”

“Last night, Phyllis Randall showed the electorate that her moral bankruptcy knows no bounds,” Katz said in the statement. “By killing Supervisor Umstattd’s motion, she has signaled her intent for the ‘burglars to solve the crime,’ and we all know how that will end. This ‘study’ conveniently returns after the election, leaving voters in the dark.”

Throughout the board’s two public comment sessions on Sept. 19, only one person spoke in favor of Umstattd’s motion to adopt travel policy guidelines. While some spoke on other issues, the majority of commenters spoke in favor of the county’s sister city program or generally in support of the Board of Supervisors.