Category: Caroline County

UPDATED & BUMPED: Donna Blanton to be sentenced today; will update. Donna Blanton gets life!

Richmond Times-Dispatch:

A Caroline County woman will be sentenced today after being convicted a second time of killing her state trooper husband.

In March, jurors recommended that Donna L. Blanton, 42, be sentenced to life in prison, one day after convicting her of first-degree murder.

UPDATE: The Free Lance–Star‘s headline on their site says the defense might request a postponement for the sentencing but the story doesn’t say anything about it. Consider this gem of stupidity from the story:

The jury recommended life in prison and today’s hearing will give the judge an opportunity to either dole out the jury’s recommendation or lower the prison sentence. He can not increase the time behind bars.

Uh, how in the hell do you “increase the time behind bars” above life in prison?

Does that mean — in this hypothetical scenario — that after Blanton dies, that the prison would retain her body for another twenty years?

Jesus Christ, that’s about the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen in The Free Lance–Star — and that’s saying a lot!

UPDATE: Donna Blanton gets life.

Caroline County man suspected of involvement in shooting at Ashland party turns himself in.

Richmond Times-Dispatch:

A 21-year-old man accused of firing a gun during a shooting incident in Ashland turned himself in yesterday to town police.

Vodell Dupree Tillman of Caroline County is charged with reckless discharge of a firearm and with firing a gun in Ashland.

Police said last week that while Tillman is accused of firing a weapon during the incident on Aug. 17, he is not accused of shooting anyone.

Weekly News Media Briefs – Week Ending August 23, 2008

From the Caroline County Sheriff’s Office:

On August 17, 2008, Deputy P.H. Blasiol responded to motor vehicle crash in Ruther Glen. After investigating, Charles J. Smithers, 59, of Ruther Glen was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and Driving on a Restricted license. He was held on a $1,000 secured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 17, 2008, Deputy J.K. Miller stopped Scott A. Roberts, 47, of Potomac, Maryland for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, Roberts was charged with Driving Revoked-DUI related. He was also served with an outstanding Capias out of Loudoun County. He was held on a $2,000 secured bond and a court date of August 20, 2008 was set.

On August 19, 2008, Sgt. R.L. Hixson stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, a passenger in the vehicle, David W. Monahan, 41, of Ruther Glen was charged with Possession of Marijuana. He was released on a summons and a court date of October 1, 2008 was set.

On August 19, 2008, Deputy G.J. Hamilton stopped Travon T. Thomas, 21, of Doswell for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, Thomas was charged with Driving Suspended and Defective Equipment. He was released on his own recognizance and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 19, 2008, Animal Control Deputy S.M. Jessee responded to Ruther Glen for an animal complaint. After further investigation, a Ruther Glen man was charged with three counts of No County Dog License. Keller was released on a summons and a court date of September

On August 20, 2008, Deputy T.P. Connolly was on patrol in the Ruther Glen area when he encountered Matthew E. Pribramsky, 22, of New Jersey, Amanda M. Hewitt, 20, of New Jersey, and Richard R. Barlow, III, 25, of Richmond. After further investigation, all three subjects were charged with Trespassing and were released on a summons. A court date of October 1, 2008 has been set.

On August 20, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood responded to Ruther Glen for a disturbance involving a firearm. After further investigation, Waverly T. Coleman, Sr., 42, of Ruther Glen was charged with three counts of Attempted Malicious Wounding, two counts of Felony Child Neglect, three counts of Brandishing a Firearm and one count of Reckless Handling of a Firearm. He was ordered held without bond and a court date of August 21, 2008 was set.

On August 20, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood was on patrol in the Ruther Glen area when he encountered Kevin L. Smith, 21, of Montpelier, Matthew A. Tate, 21, of Ashland, and Joshua J. Labarbera, 22, of Ashland. After further investigation, all three subjects were charged with Trespassing and were released on a summons. A court date of October 1, 2008 has been set.

On August 20, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood was on patrol on the Ruther Glena area when he encountered Denise M. Lewis, 39, of Richmond, Justin M. Snead, 22, of Mechanicsville, and Danyel K. Hirschler, 23, of Richmond. After further investigation, all three subjects were charged with Trespassing and were released on a summons. A court date of October 1, 2008 has been set.

On August 21, 2008, Deputy S. Mullane stopped Michael C. Green, 46, of Hanover for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, Green was charged with Felony Habitual Offender, Drinking While Driving, Altered/Forged License Plates, Improper Registration, Fail to Obtain Registration and Unauthorized Use of an Inspection Sticker. He was held on a $3,500 unsecured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 21, 2008, Deputy C.M. Hall responded to Bowling Green for a report of an assault. After investigating, Antonio J. Wilson, 39, of Woodford was charged with Assault and Battery. Deputy G.J. Hamilton arrested Wilson on August 23, 3008. He was held on a $2,000 secured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 22, 2008, Deputy T.P. Connolly was on patrol in the Ruther Glen are when he encountered Karly R. Loan, 28, of Glen Allen. After further investigation, Loan was charged with Trespassing. She was released on a summons and a court date of October 1, 2008 was set.

On August 22, 2008, Deputy C.M. Polliard stopped Christopher M. Scott, 28, of Ruther Glen during a Project Checkpoint Strikeforce checking detail. Upon further investigation, Scott was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol-2nd Offense, Drinking While Driving, Possession of Marijuana, Obstruction of Justice and Illegal Window Tint. He was released on a $3,000 secured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 22, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood was on patrol in the Ruther Glen area when he encountered Dana N. Philpy, 32, of Richmond. After investigating, Philpy was charged with trespassing. She was released on a summons and a court date of October 1, 2008 was set.

On August 22, 2008, Deputy P.E. Ford stopped Sonya E. Weaver, 43, of Hanover during a Project Checkpoint Strikeforce checking detail. Upon further investigation, Weaver was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and Refusal to Submit to a Test. She was held on a $1,500 unsecured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 22, 2008, Sgt. R.L. Hixson stopped Theophilus E. Rollins, 27, of Hanover for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, Rollins was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol-2nd Offense and Driving Suspended-DUI related. He was held on a $1,500 secured bond and a court date of September 5, 2008 was set.

On August 23, 2008, Sgt. S.L. Cary responded to Ruther Glen for a Disturbance. Upon further investigation, Eli L. Shirley, 35, of Ruther Glen was charged with Assault and Batter, Destruction of Property and Threats by Phone. He was released on a $2,000 unsecured bond and court date’s of August 29, 2008 and September 2, 2008 were set.

On August 23, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood responded to Port Royal for a disturbance. Upon further investigation, Caleb A. Brooks, 19, of no fixed address was charged with being Drunk in Public and Underage Consumption of Alcohol. He was held on a $1,000 secured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

On August 23, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood was on patrol in the Ruther Glen area when he encountered James R. Hulo, 38, of Ruther Glen and Jennifer A. Kulp, 25, of Ruther Glen. After further investigation, both subjects were charged with Trespassing and were released on a summons. A court date of October 1, 2008 has been set.

On August 23, 2008, Sgt. R.L. Hixson stopped Dewayne L. Coates, II, 25, of Spotsylvania for a traffic violation. Upon further investigation, Coates was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol, 2nd Offense. He was released on a $1,500 unsecured bond and a court date of August 29, 2008 was set.

On August 23, 2008, Deputy C.A. Heywood was on patrol when he encountered Lance D. Boldon, 30, of Ruther Glen. Upon further investigation, Boldon was charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. He was released on a $1,500 unsecured bond and a court date of August 27, 2008 was set.

Caroline County Sheriff’s Office Wrap Up

According to Sheriff Tony Lippa, Caroline Deputies made 10 drug arrests, 5 DUI arrests, 8 domestic violence arrests, and 120 other criminal arrests during the past week. The deputies served 261 civil papers, issued 287 traffic summonses, handled 4 motor vehicle crashes, responded to 36 alarm calls, and dealt with 9 juvenile offenders. The Sheriff’s Office Communications Center dispatched 627 calls for service and handled 2,033 telephone inquiries. The CCSO also logged 55 calls assisting outside agencies and had 253 self-initiated calls.

Remember the Caroline County Board of Supervisors and their secret subcommittees?

Read the previous coverage here.

Well, Colonial Beach has done the same thing as Caroline County (The Journal Press):

The Spring of 2008 witnessed the Town of Colonial Beach ushering in a new regime – three new council members, Burkett Lyburn, Ronald “Sparky” Ridgely and Karen Payne; and one new mayor, Fred Rummage. Almost immediately the composite of the Council changed again when Council Representative Linda Crandell resigned and Planning Commission Chair, David Coombes, was appointed in her place.

As one would expect with a new council and mayor at the helm of Colonial Beach, changes have been made and some of them not necessarily for the better. What was once a fairly open style of government has been slowly moving towards the side of privatization.

One of the largest and most notable changes that has occurred is the eradication of the three-person committee. Whereas previously the Town of Colonial Beach had been utilizing a three-person committee made up of Council members, and on some committees members of the public as well, to oversee particular areas such as public works and public safety, a single member is now being designated as being “responsible for the oversight of”.

The reason this is of such importance is because of the number 3; three council members together in one place discussing council business constitutes a meeting which means that it must be advertised and the public must be allowed to attend. This is so that government business, the government business of Colonial Beach, is discussed in an open forum that provides residents the opportunity to make themselves aware of what their government is doing.

This also makes it possible for journalists to attend and obtain information and relay it to the public, again so citizens are aware of what their government is doing. This is specified in 2.2-3700 of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; “By enacting this chapter, the General Assembly ensures the people of the Commonwealth ready access to public records in the custody of a public body or its officers and employees, and free entry to meetings of public bodies wherein the business of the people is being conducted.” A committee of one, in theory, might not have to make the public aware of when they are conducting business.

The reason for this thought might be perhaps because the term “meeting” under 2.2 -3701 Definitions under FOIA, is designated as “the meetings, including work sessions when sitting physically, or through telephonic or video equipment pursuant to 2.2-37-8 or 2.2-3708.1, as a body or entity, or as an informal assemblage of (i) as many as three members or (ii) a quorum, if less than three, of the constituent membership, wherever held, with or without minutes being taken, whether or not votes are cast, of any public body.”

This change to one person committees, however, is also of note, because at this year’s Town Council’s FOIA review session conducted by the Town Attorney, Andrea Erard, the Mayor joked that the FOIA was the reason he had established things this way. On August 14th Agenda #52-08, Resolution – Approval of Mayor’s Monitoring Appointments of Town Council Members was voted and approved.

Almost immediately after approving the monitoring appointments, the mayor appointed a committee of two, Steve Kennedy and Sparky Ridgely, to look into complaints regarding the public works department. And although no jokes were made about this committee being able to meet in private and fly under the radar, the assumption is there. So it needs to be remembered that this two-person committee, just as the oversight positions, was voted into being by the rest of the council, in other words, approved by the public body itself, to conduct business on its, the council’s behalf.

The vote that was taken establishes this two-person committee, just as it did the oversight positions, is an extension of the public body, thereby making them public bodies themselves. It says so, again in 2.2-3701 under the definitions for FOIA; “Public body” means any legislative body, authority, board, bureau, commission, district or agency of the Commonwealth or of any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, including cities, town and counties, municipal councils, governing bodies of counties, school boards and planning commissions; boards of visitors of public institutions of higher education; and other organizations, corporations or agencies in the Commonwealth supported wholly or principally by public funds. … and (ii) any committee, subcommittee, or other entity however designated, of the public body created to perform delegated functions of the public body or to advise the public body. It shall not exclude any such committee, subcommittee or entity because it has private sector or citizen members….”

This is not to say that all council business has been conducted in secret, Vice Mayor Trish King has opted to hold her economic development group meetings on the third Tuesday of the month at Town Center, Council Member Burkett Lyburn has also kept the public forum for Public Safety and Dave Coombes holds the Planning Commission meetings in public as well, but how about when he meets to handle a special assignment? And what of those representatives in charge of the budget, roads, water and sewer? When and with whom have they been meeting?

According to Maria Everett, with the Virginia Freedom of Information Act Advisory Council, “These committees of one, or two, composed of council members, are subsets of the larger body created to advise and as such all their meetings should be advertised and open to the public.” They do not however have to keep minutes. Everett said that if the intent was to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, the effort has been unsuccessful. The advisory council can be reached at (804) 225-3056.

It should be noted that these changes have occurred on the heels of a campaign where multiple promises, in fact portions of campaign platforms, consisted of pledges towards transparency and openness of government.

How many state laws did the Caroline County BOS violate when they gave themselves pay raises?

At the beginning of the 2008 calendar year a 2% pay increase went into effect for the Caroline County Board of Supervisors (BOS).

At the beginning of July 1st — the beginning of the 2008/2009 fiscal year — the budget adopted by the board increased their pay by 5%.

That makes a total of a 7% increase in six months in their salary to $18,693.20 per head for two nights of work a month.

In the same budget, a proposed 5% increase for county employees was reduced from a 5% merit pay increase to a 2% cost-of-living increase.

That means for a member of the county staff, unless they make more than $61,650 a year, not only did they receive a lower percentage increase — they also received a lower absolute (dollar) increase as well!

Not only that, but as the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported in 2006, the supervisors for Caroline received $10,000 more per year than the supervisors in King George and Westmoreland County (which have comparable populations)! (link)

From my look through of the Code of Virginia, I see two different sections that involve the salary of a board of supervisors, § 15.2-1414.2 “Salaries to be fixed by board; limits; reimbursement in addition to salary” and § 15.2-1414.3 “Alternative procedure for establishing salaries of boards of supervisors; limits; fringe benefits”.

§ 15.2-1414.2 states, in part, the following:

The annual compensation to be allowed each member of the board of supervisors of a county shall be determined by the board of supervisors of such county but such compensation shall not be more than a maximum determined in the following manner. Prior to July 1 of the year in which members of the board of supervisors are to be elected or, if the board is elected for staggered terms, of any year in which at least forty percent of the members of the board are to be elected, the current board, by a recorded vote of a majority present, shall set a maximum annual compensation which will become effective as of January 1 of the next year.

[…]

No increase in the salary of a member of the board of supervisors shall take effect during the incumbent supervisor’s term in office; however, this restriction shall not apply to boards of supervisors when the supervisors are elected for staggered terms nor to corrections to the above listed compensation.

§ 15.2-1414.3 states, in part, the following:

In lieu of other provisions of law, the boards of supervisors of the several counties may establish annually, by ordinance, and pay in monthly installments each of their members an annual salary pursuant to the following procedure and schedule:

1. On a date determined by the board of supervisors, not earlier than May 1 nor later than June 30 each year, the board, after public hearing pursuant to notice in the manner and form provided in §§ 15.2-1426 and 15.2-1427, shall establish by ordinance the salary of its members for the ensuing fiscal year not to exceed the maximums herein set out.

2. Counties within the following population brackets shall be allowed to set salaries for board members not to exceed the following amounts:

Population Annual Salary

[portion of table omitted]

15,000 to 24,999 5,500

[portion of table omitted]

The maximum annual salaries herein provided may be adjusted in any year or years, by ordinance as above provided, by an inflation factor not to exceed five percent.

Based on my reading of these two sections of state code and after doing searches for both “15.2-1414.2” and “15.2-1414.3” on Google to see how counties have used them, the sections work the following way: § 15.2-1414.2 allows a county board of supervisors to set their pay to any amount as long as it is an election year when at least 40% of the board is up for election. This must be done before July 1 of the election year and will not take affect until January 1 of the following year.

§ 15.2-1414.3 allows a board to set their salary outside of an election year to a maximum ($5,500 in Caroline County’s case based on the 2000 census). It also, apparently, allows the board to adjust their salary’s up 5% each year, even salaries that were set pursuant to § 15.2-1414.2 (at least other counties have used § 15.2-1414.3 to do that). This must be done between May 1 and June 30 and goes into affect the next fiscal year.

The use of § 15.2-1414.3 to increase the board’s salary would require the adoption of a ordinance according to state law. It is required when adopting an ordinance for the county to hold a public hearing pursuant to §§ 15.2-1426 and 15.2-1427.

I see several errors in the way the board has increased their pay:

  1. For the pay raise beginning on January 1, 2008, the board did not vote on any matter involving board pay — except for the 2007/2008 budget — specifically before July 1, 2007 pursuant to § 15.2-1414.2 according to their minutes.
  2. However, the vote on the budget couldn’t be considered a vote authorizing a pay increase beginning on January 1 due to the fact that the board went over budget for salaries in the 07/08 budget year due to the 2% pay increase beginning on January 1.
  3. The 5% increase that started on the July 1 — the beginning of the 08/09 fiscal year — was clearly done in violation of state law: To use the 5% inflation adjustment available to boards pursuant to § 15.2-1414.3, the county must adopt an ordinance establishing their pay with a 5% increase between May 1 and June 30. To adopt a ordinance, state law requires a public hearing to be held. No such ordinance was adopted and no public hearing was held.
  4. Besides the obvious illegalities involved, there’s also the morally wrong aspect of a board increasing their pay — while increasing taxes by $0.05 per $100 assessed during a struggling economy — while also only giving county staff a 2% pay increase.

You know, one of the supervisors on the previous board lost their reelection campaign last year partly due to the continuous pay increases implemented by the board.

Maybe next time all of ’em will get voted out.

Caroline juvenile arrested, man wanted in shooting at Ashland party.

Richmond Times-Dispatch:

Authorities have arrested a 15-year-old Caroline County boy in Sunday morning’s shooting in Ashland, and they are searching for a 21-year-old man.

Police charged the teenager with malicious wounding in the shooting, which took place shortly after midnight in the 300 block of New Street. They did not release the boy’s name because of his age. He is being held in a juvenile detention facility, police said.

Town police are looking for Vodell Dupree Tillman of Caroline. He faces charges of reckless discharge of a firearm and of firing a gun in Ashland.

I have a question: Who was taking care of the 13-year-old?

The Free Lance–Star:

A Ruther Glen woman was charged last week with five counts of animal cruelty after her pet dachshunds were found dead and decomposing in kennels at her Caroline County home.

[…]

[Caroline County Commonwealth’s Attorney Tony Spencer] said the dogs were found dead in kennels on Gaylord’s Meadows Farm Road property and two other dogs were found alive, but severely dehydrated.

[…]

Spencer said that during the civil hearing, Gaylord told the judge she had been out of town and left the dogs in the care of her 13-year-old daughter.

She testified that she came home to find the dogs dead, even after reminding her daughter daily to feed them and provide them with water, Spencer said.

Uh, child neglect, anybody?

More on the State Fair and the gazillions it will be bring into the county.

Gary Wilson in his infinite wisdom said that hotels and other businesses will bring in money to the county…

What hotels and other businesses?

The only hotels that have been built that are going to be around the State Fair are in Hanover County!

The majority of people that go to the State Fair are going to take Interstate 95 to Route 30 and go to the State Fair that way.

If that’s the case, they will not pass a single business in Caroline County except for the fair itself.

If they opt to stay the night, it’s going to be at a hotel in Hanover County. The closest hotel or major business in Caroline County to the fair is at Carmel Church.

Further, if someone wanted to set up a hotel or business on the east side of the fair inside Caroline County, they would need water and sewer treatment.

The lucky bastards at the State Fair are going to get their water and sewer via Hanover County via Caroline County.

If the fair goes bankrupt, Caroline County will be responsible for the bill due to the way the deal was set up. Apparently, Hanover County has a brain and doesn’t trust the State Fair as far they can throw them.

Of course — according to the same terms of that agreement — the pipes that will provide services to fair can, in no way, be used to provide water or sewer treatment to anyone except for the fair.

That means anyone hoping to start a business on the east side of the fair in Caroline County is SOL (and I’m not talking about the Standards of Learning).

And hey, look, another de facto monopoly for Hanover County. Bravo.

And then there’s the problem of inadequate infrastructure in the area.

The majority of the people going to the fair will be coming from Interstate 95 to Route 30. Route 30 at the fair, and to the west of the fair, has been expanded to four lanes.

What about east of the fair?

It’s the small crappy road it’s been for years.

What happens when people from the Middle Peninsula and the Northern Neck go down Route 30 and there’s 10 mile backups?

I’m sure the home owners are going to love the fact that won’t be able to get out of their driveways in that area.

No new businesses in those areas either!

And what about Carmel Church?

If Carmel Church is where the all the money making for the County is going to occur, where’s the infrastructure to handle all those people?

Hell, the I-95 exchange at Carmel Church can’t handle the traffic it gets now — something the people at The Free Lance–Star should know since that fact gets readily pointed out during Board of Supervisors meetings.

How is the exchange going to handle 60,000 more people?

And why is it the county wanted a special tax on admissions at the fair — presumably to offset the costs associated with fair — which has yet to pass in the General Assembly even five years after the fact (link)?

*Sigh*, there goes what little respect I had for The Free Lance–Star.

There wasn’t much left, of course.

The word “fawning” as defined by Merriam-Webster:

1 : to show affection -used especially of a dog
2 : to court favor by a cringing or flattering manner

The word “puff piece” as defined by Wiktionary:

1. A journalistic form of puffery; an article or story of exaggerating praise that often ignores or downplays opposing viewpoints or evidence to the contrary.

This, however, sets a new level for fawning puff piece about the State Fair.

I guess the paper was too lazy to go out and find anyone that might have any opposition to the fair.

Does The Free Lance–Star think that Caroline County residents are too stupid to handle a back and forth debate in a news article?

After all, I’m sure all those reporters and editors at the paper think Caroline is full of banjo-playing yokels. You know, I don’t think I’ve ever actually seen a banjo in person — much less one in Caroline County.

But anyway, the paper is usually too busy talking about the important and pressing issue of the use of golf carts in subdivisions.

I’m sure Caroline residents were dying to read that article.

Here’s the basic point of this fawning puff piece: The State Fair of the Virginia will bring in gazillions of dollars to the county and anyone that says otherwise is a idiot.

Hmm…didn’t people say the same thing about the Fredericksburg Expo Center?

And what’s happening with that now?

Oh wait, the Fredericksburg Economic Development Director said the expo center was “horribly underutilized” and just like everything else, they needed government subsidies — specifically $50,750!

That was in July 2007.

In January 2008, the Fredericksburg City Council was considering giving the Expo Center another $225,000 a year for three years. The only thing that stopped that from happening was Kalahari expressing interest in buying the Expo Center.

I’m sure all those other business owners in Fredericksburg would love some subsidies thrown their way as well.

But I have a feeling they’re not holding their breath in the mean time.

I noticed the reporter for The Free Lance–Star was too lazy to go ask the Caroline County Sheriff’s Office how much it was going to cost to police that area during the fair: The very objection that Sheriff Tony Lippa brought up when the county was first considering the fair and which the supervisors opted to completely ignore.

I noticed the paper didn’t bother asking what the cost of fire/rescue services for the fair were going to be.

Specifically, a fire marshal was supposed to be hired before the fair was to begin: Still waiting on that.

Also, Director Fuzy had requested equipment specifically for the fair and the Emergency Services Commission opted to remove those items from their budget.

Also, in the mean time there won’t be a cell phone tower in the area since Caroline County’s “consultant” — who has a clear conflict of interest — wants Hanover County to have a monopoly over the area.

Oh, I’m curious, how many people have been down to the current state fair grounds?

It reminds me of a certain song by Elvis Presley: Is that what that area of Caroline County is going to look like after 40 years of the fair being here?