9 Comments Email Article Tweet This Share

The gloves are off.

Three members of the Hanover County Board of Supervisors—one with 16 years tenure and the other two completing their 11th month—didn’t hold back Tuesday when the expenses associated with a planned two-day retreat stirred what had been an otherwise routine meeting.

On a 5-2 vote, Chairman Aubrey M. “Bucky” Stanley of the Beaverdam District; Elton J. Wade Sr., Cold Harbor District; Robert R. Setliff, Chickahominy District; G. Ed Via III, Ashland District; and Deborah B. Coats, Mechanicsville; outnumbered Vice Chairman John E. Gordon Jr. of the South Anna District and Henry District Supervisor Charles D. McGhee in agreeing to cancel the retreat.

Via, who was elected to the board in November 2007, opened the discussion, saying the Strategic Vision Retreat should be cancelled “due to the economy.” The retreat was scheduled for Dec. 3 and 4 at the Owens & Minor building.

The estimated cost was $15,000, including Strength Development Inventory (SDI) costs at $20 per person for 31 invited guests.

Noting the nearly $15,000 cost for consultants, Wade agreed with Via, saying the retreat should be cancelled.

Setliff referred to the costs based on a commitment to the speakers. He also said the retreat would “not be beneficial without all of us there. I think possibly we shouldn’t do it.”

Gordon said the cost had “already been encumbered” and the county was “already committed” and had “invested money.”

“There is no more important time, critical time to discuss our plans for the future,” Gordon added.

“It is incumbent upon us to provide leadership,” said McGhee. “Those not planning to attend probably need to most.”

“We as a board need this retreat,” saying it “does not function as a cohesive board.”

Wade said the retreat had been “called without my knowledge and several other members. I don’t know what this retreat’s going to be.”

Like Via, Coats accepted her seat in January. The usually quiet and only female on the board proved her mettle this week when she said “Three board members are dominating and leaving the rest of us out. I have asked questions, I have called. We have been left out and I don’t appreciate it.”

She said the supervisors “need to get together and decide a plan; we need to work together as adults and stop the division of taking sides.”

“It’s not right, not effective, and not good for Hanover County,” Coats said.

Setliff defended himself, saying he was “not dominating, [I] have not done that, [I] don’t feel a need to do that.” He also said he found it “regrettable to hear a charge like that” (of three people dominating the board) and it would be “impossible with seven [members].”

Wade said he could provide examples of “planning without everybody’s knowledge.” He said he expressed an interest in serving as vice chairman and told Gordon, Stanley and Setliff “last year right after the election.”

He said he was “turned down because Martha Wingfield supported me in the last election.” Wade said “personally that hurt me,” pointing out he had served on the board for 16 years.

Wade said his allegiance is to the county and his constituents. “I feel that this board has had a clique,” but that he had “no animosity” and “we’ve got to work together.”

Saying he was “disappointed,” Stanley said the retreat proposal had “not turned out to be what I thought it would be.”

Gordon said he had been so “set aback by what I’ve heard that I don’t know what to say.” He did say “perceptions and realities are often in conflict. My perception is this board has accomplished much—not one, two or three individuals. Each person sitting at this table. Each of us equally share in the work done of this board.”

Like Setliff, he said “the math just doesn’t work,” with three people being in charge.

With Via, Wade and Coats firm in rejecting the retreat, Stanley said it appeared that McGhee, Gordon and Setliff “most likely” would attend.

McGhee countered, citing the “furtherance of this county. We’re elected to lead this county, despite the antics of some of my colleagues.”

Gordon then addressed Stanley, saying “My understanding is you were on board.” He also talked about the “importance of everyone being in attendance at this retreat.”

“If we’re not going to have unanimous participation, then I think we should postpone it,” Gordon said.

“We’re wasting taxpayer money by not having it, rather than having it,” said McGhee.

Wade said he would “stay in my own district with my constituents” if the supervisors did not “get on the same page. We have not always been on the same page.”

“I think maybe we need a cooling off period,” said Setliff.

Via said it was a “good board, we have the ability to talk to each other. As a group, our administration needs to pull this together for us.”

He said they didn’t “need somebody from outside to come in and tell us what we’re doing right and doing wrong. We need to get together amongst ourselves.”

When Stanley asked for a motion, McGhee and Gordon made the motions to have the retreat.

After his and Gordon’s votes fell to the other five supervisors, McGhee asked County Administrator Cecil R. “Rhu” Harris Jr. what kind of monetary “waste” it would mean to the county. Harris said the two consultants had been “asked to block off two days of their business opportunities.”

Gordon said he would be willing to pay a seventh “of this misstep so the citizens of Hanover County don’t have to pay it.” McGhee also said he would “pitch in his seventh as well.”

An overview, presented at the Nov. 12 meeting, listed the goal as “facilitated discussion amongst board members on long-term visionary goals for the county.”

John Nalbandian and Carol Nalbandian, who serve as consultants and trainers for local governments, had been contracted to facilitate the retreat.

Topics to have been addressed include: “Getting to Know Each Other (‘Ice-breaker’),” “Attributes of the High Performance Governing Body,” and “Strategic Planning.”

Due to the Thanksgiving holiday, the supervisors met on Tuesday rather than the regular Wednesday date.