LTM Endorsements – Serving Two Masters

By Loudoun Insider

Oh man are the LTM endorsements a schizophrenic mess!  It’s really hard to fathom what they are doing unless you know the two main guys controlling the “newspaper”.  The endorsements are broken up in several parts on the website – Board of Supervisors here, School Board here, Constitutional Officers here, House of Delegates here, and State Senate here.

The head honcho of the LTM and its parent company Arcom Publishing is Peter Arundel, son of Nick Arundel who ran the paper for ages.  The senior Arundel was a founding member of the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) and a huge fixture in Fauquier and Loudoun horse country.  This is why you see the LTM endorsing the trainwreck that is Andrea McGimsey along with PEC stalwarts Kelly Burk and Jim Burton, and former PEC board member Malcolm Baldwin.

Then you have Bill Dean, President of MC Dean and OpenBand and buyer of many supervisor candidates this election season.  Dean bought the Loudoun Independent that current LTM editor John Geddie’s father ran for years, then merged it with the LTM and got a seat on their Board of Directors.  By some accounts Dean’s money is what is keeping the LTM afloat and he wields considerable power there, especially over Geddie, who has been under his thumb since the dying days of the Independent.  This is why you see the LTM endorsing the entire slate (minus one) of MC Dean money recipients, including Eugene Delgaudio, Ralph Buona, Suzanne Volpe, and Matt Letourneau.  The only exception is Janet Clarke, who was beaten out by PEC favorite Jim Burton.  But not to worry, Dean makes up for that by directing more MC Dean money to Clarke then to any other BOS candidate as a consolation prize.

Then to top it all off, we have a nod to the Old Loudoun GOBGN, of which the elder Geddie was a card carrying member of, and the endorsement of a Sheriff under FBI investigation in Steve Simpson, and  a See No Evil (as far as the GOBGN goes) Commonwealth’s Attorney in Jim Plowman.

Hey, at least this exposes the LTM for what it is.


  • liz says:

    Here’s how I see their endorsements:

    1) Every incumbent running was endorsed except Comstock.
    2) Every BOS candidate MC Dean donated to was endorsed except where there was an incumbent running against them.

    I love some of their endorsements but others just leave me scratching my head. Did they throw darts?

    Due to the frankly incomprehensible endorsements there, the only one I’m thrilled by is Joy Maloney’s. I’m so glad that she’s gotten enough traction to have gotten an endorsement from a major local news outlet.

    Otherwise? It’s hard to get excited about their endorsement of Mitchell over Black when they endorsed Delgaudio.

  • BlackOut says:

    One only needs to look at the McGimsey endorsement to realize the entire list of endorsements is suspect.

    How a newspaper that is a block away from the BOS chamber and has covered McGimsey for four years; can with good conscience see her as being worthy of another term is dubitable.

  • Member, McGimsey Aides Support Group says:

    Also, don’t forget the Educate Loudoun/Telos/Chamber connection. Anyone wonder why Educate Loudoun is sponsoring a chamber school board candidate forum?

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Nicholas Graham told me a while back that they were going to do a story on the McGimsey aide controversies. Somehow it never materialized. I would bet Arundel nixed it. This “newspaper” has never had anything negative to say about Mcgimsey. Ever.

  • I like John Geddie, Jr., and won’t second-guess his motives. What I will say is that it would be nice if the LTM would specify who, by name, made these choices.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I’m not usually a fan, but Paradox13VA has a great post at Blue Virginia about the MC Dean-LTM-GOBGN nexus:

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “Nicholas Graham told me a while back that they were going to do a story on the McGimsey aide controversies.”

    Where is Graham now?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Looked at the BlueVa diary, and couldn’t get past the notion that MCDean is primarily a “developer” “building developments” so they can run OpenBand.

    Ummm, can anybody anywhere point to a PUD, mixed use, residential or commercial by right that MCDean has “developed”? Since when are they a land developer?

    I know in some tinfoil hat circles anyone you don’t like is called a “developer”, but it DOES have a specific meaning, you know?

  • liz says:

    VPAP has MC Dean Building Intelligence listed as Engineering/Engineers, and McDean, Inc. listed as General Contractors. I think that those two industries are commonly lumped in with Developers.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Graham left to do something that pays more.

    MC Dean is worse than most developers in terms of raping their buyers.

  • Lloyd says:

    Schizophrenic is the perfect word to describe it, LI.

    Most make some sense (not that I agree, but at least I see their point), but Simpson and McGimsey???? Really?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Liz, as I said, what are they developing?

    “Take the case of Loudoun developer and cable company owner MC Dean. MC Dean and company has spent twenty years building developments in Loudoun”.

    They ain’t building houses, but I understand your point.

    However, I think some of the one-notisms fall flat, particularly in this economy–not everyone who creates or markets a product used in the home is a housing developer, even if it has been convenient for some to campaign that way.

  • liz says:

    Barbara, were they not part of the Greenvest push to create a development down in your neck of the woods? I thought they were part of that whole group of developers.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I don’t remember that but wouldn’t doubt it – were they going to tie up all those developments in their multi-decade exclusive deals as well?

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Good to see you back in town, Lloyd!

    Both of those ridiculous endorsements can be explained by the two head honchos. Schizophrenic indeed.

  • Dave Nemetz says:

    Why does it matter whether M.C. Dean is a developer or not? It’s not germane to the issue, which is that the BOS is going to have OpenBand’s franchise renewal up for a vote next year, Dean has been lining the campaign coffers of all of the Republican candidates, Dean sits on the board of the LTM, and the LTM is implicit in their endorsement of all but one of the recipients of Dean cash who are running for the board.

    The whole thing reeks.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Liz, not to my knowledge. They may have been interested in seeking to pursue contracts there had they gone forward, but “developing” information systems IN a development can only happen if there IS a development. They are not in the Van Metre development at Stone Ridge, which is a smart community in Dulles South that predates the Greenvest proposal.

    They were not involved in the land development proposals because they don’t develop land via land use applications.

    That’s why that quote from the diary surprised me: it appears that even Paradox has taken on faith the meme that they MUST be a developer. They therefore “build developments”.

    As I said, I understand the one-notism, but in some cases it isn’t credible, and I think this is one of them. The bulk of their business is not even providing communications in developments, so while in the case of Openband there is the contract with the developers of those communities, it still doesn’t make them the developer of the community.

  • Member, McGimsey Aides Support Group says:

    Isn’t VanMetre part of the MC Dean umbrella? If so, then that might make them developers. Does anyone know?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    mmasg, nope. Family owned for over 50 years, sorry.

    MCDean is engineering, energy and IT infrastructure, not land DEVELOPMENT, and not “building developments” for twenty years in Loudoun.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Here what Barbara isn’t telling you, which is fine. She doesn’t owe you anything.

    From MCDean’s website:

    OpenBand of Virginia, LLC (OpenBand) is a wholly owned subsidiary of M.C.Dean, Inc., and a licensed telecommunications carrier. OpenBand is a converged services provider, offering broadband communications packages throughout the Mid-Atlantic.

    OpenBand teams with land developers and builders to design and build Smart Neighborhoods. These new residential communities reside on a custom designed communications infrastructure.

    Van Metre has an ongoing agreement with OpenBand:

    In 2001, Broadlands developer Van Metre reached an agreement with OpenBand that allowed the carrier to provide service to the residents of the Southernwalk at Broadlands and Lansdowne on the Potomac for at least 25 years, with an option for an extension of up to 75 years.

    Two others, Lansdowne Village Green and Leisure World have similar contracts. The Lansdowne Village Green HOA said in September it was also considering filing suit against OpenBand.

    So, MCDean is not a developer. They have agreements with developers — like builders, realtors, etc. Judging from the term of the agreement and what subscribers are paying, these agreements would seem to be lucrative.

  • Erika M. Cotti says:

    MMSAG – Technically yes and no. In 2001 Van Metre created a company with OpenBand, it’s called Broadlands Communications (BC). BC was filed with the VA SCC as a foreign corp entity, since it was originally incorporated in Delaware. As stated this is a joint venture between Van Metre Homes & OpenBand Communication – as detailed in the Operating Agreement between Van Metre & OpenBand.

    Barbara – while I am inclined to agree with you that MC Dean “Building” Intelligence may not be considered a traditional “developer”, they in fact have several North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) & Standard Industrial Classification System (SIC) codes which identify their services in the developer/real estate category.

    In fact several of MC Dean & OpenBand’s IDIQ contracts have NAICS/SIC codes that classify as “in-side wiring”, which are in fact categorized as building development.

  • Erika M. Cotti says:

    Forgot to add:
    IDIQ = Indefinite Duration Indefinite Quantity
    CLIN = Contract Line Item Number

    And several of McDean’s POs state CLINS that are classified in the NAICS system as real estate/development.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    As I said: infrastructure.

    For which there are no deals unless there is a development to put them in.

    The Blue Va diary has them as developers who have been “building developments for twenty years”. That implies major housing development, at least around here, does it not?

    I’m sure that the codes are accurately classified for the work they do, but they don’t own Van Metre corp, and they don’t assemble land and rezone it into housing for the purpose of installing their infrastructure.

  • Erika M. Cotti says:

    Barbara – It’s a silly meme that you are driving here. It is also a well known tactic of yours; when the discussion moves towards a substantive dialogue, you come in and decided to change topics. What does it matter if McDean is or isn’t a developer?

    The topic at hand is the Loudoun Times Mirror endorsements.

    As stated by others, here are the facts:
    1) You have a paper who’s minority owner, Mr. Bill Dean also happens to sit on LTM’s Board of Directors.

    2) The same minority owner, Mr. Bill Dean has donated over $25,000 towards 4 candidates vying for a seat on the 2012 Board of Supervisors:

    Vople received $6,500 from OpenBand CEO, President & VP
    Bouna received $6,250 from OpenBand et all
    Clarke received $6,250 fom OpenBand et all
    Letourneau received $6,000 from OpenBand et all

    3) And now the LTM has endorsed some of the very same candidates who received thousands of dollars from the same minority owner of their paper.

    I think you are the only participant on this blog who does not see the inherent problem with the endorsements. And that is rather unfortunate.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I think the endorsements are either a product of the differing fields of view at the paper, or that they are merely picking who they think will win.

    Erika, I find it interesting that obviously incorrect info is on a statewide progressive blog, because “developer” is such a milked meme that it has become ridiculous. I doubt the author is doing anything more than exhibiting that HE has heard the meme enough to have absorbed it as true.

    I did not introduce the subject–LI linked to the diary.

    It has a mistake, which you graciously not-quite acknowledged in that there IS a joint venture with a developer, but they do not actually…develop land. That doesn’t make Dean the parent company of Van Metre as mmasg seems to think, nor does it make them a land developer simply because it is a useful pejorative.

    In the attempt to make the private contract a countywide electoral issue, info has been blurred to the degree that here, some think Dean owns Van Metre, and in other threads, some think that the private easements of the private contract are on public land, and thus subject to board action.

    While the incorrect info may be seen in some quarters as helpful to swaying votes, it won’t change what will be settled in court.

    And I am far more concerned about what may come to us all in the form of candidates who are elected on incorrect and emotional information–it happened in 07, remember?

  • Erika M. Cotti says:

    Barbara – Please allow me to correct your statements.

    It is a fact, not conjecture: there are multiple private blanket easements on public land/right of ways in Southernwalk. These easements were not readily available via the County’s LOLA system. It took the SW HOA hundreds of hours searching thousands of boxes in the County warehouse to track down the actual paper trail.

    Based on the POLE Act & Public Policy; prior to public dedication a party is prohibited in placing a private easement on public land, it is known as an encumbrance. And any such encumbrance must be disclosed, presumably to the County’s Planning Commission & ultimately to the BoS. It is uncertain if the applicant disclosed this encumbrance.

    While you are correct that the HOA contracts are a private contract, OpenBand unequivocally utilizes public land. Like it or not, it is a County issue.

    As for 2007 election, I am not sure why you would bring it up, as it is not germane to the topic at hand.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    They do not use exclusively public land–there is that matter of the easements between those governed by the franchise and the homes themselves, isn’t there? As pointed out here in another thread by Mr. Miller.

    We had the same issue down here with the gas explosion in the late 90s; amazingly enough, until there was that incident in SR, there were state regulations governing gas lines in the utility easements, and from the walls of structures IN. There were none governing the area between the lines and the outer walls.

    Maybe you too will change state law, and I understand that getting as much buzz/pressure as possible is important for that.

  • broadlands boy says:

    LTM called the Sheriffs race correctly in that Simpson is by far the best choice. BTW LI the Sheriff is not being investigated by the FBI, don’t know where you got that from.

  • Ed Myers says:

    The sheriff is being investigated by the D.O.J.

  • broadlands boy says:

    Isnt the DOJ investigating the complaint from some guy who sued because he was trying to get into the womens self defense class put on by LCSO? That one will get tossed out of court too.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Oh they are actively investigating, broadlands boy, I know that for a fact. They have spoken to at least three people I know in the last two weeks, which is after Simpson’s bullshit pronouncement that he has been cleared. I wonder where you got your information – let me guess, the target himself. Not a very reliable source in this instance or any other. The FBI doesn’t make pronouncements that people are cleared.

    This is all above and beyond the ridiculous DOJ investigation started by Ed Myers.

    Barb, I don’t think MC Dean are developers per se, but they are closely allied with them, and in fact are in joint venture corporations with them in the communities where they hold their exclusive arrangements that are so antithetical to American values. They suck.

  • mosborn says:

    I don’t see anywhere in the Bluevirginia post where anyone put the word “land” in front of “developer”. Or PUD, mixed use, residential or commercial.

    Are we just having a semantic argument about the definition of “developer” to get off the topic of the Appearance of Corruption?

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    You know when Barb rushes to a thread to defend someone who is IDed as a developer, you are cutting pretty close to the bone.

    Her defense and attempt to sidetrack is the best evidence you can have that what BV saiys is actually true.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    mosborn, don’t you know everyone is a developer?

    I quoted the diary before: “Take the case of Loudoun developer and cable company owner MC Dean. MC Dean and company has spent twenty years building developments in Loudoun”. Not “building infrastructure in developments”. “Building developments”. Either the author has accepted on faith, or wants others to do so.

    Eric has referred to Sheila Johnson on a website where he’s campaigning for Burton from Catoctin as a “developer”. Yes, self made billionaire with a doctorate, concert musician status, sports owner, philanthropist, and so on–she is building an inn on ger property in Middleburg, so all she is now is a “developer”.

    Overuse of tenuous pejoratives does little for credibility, guys. And there is enough difficulty trying to make this a countywide issue that dressing up the complex facts in sloganeering of this caliber doesn’t do much for the effort.

    But have at it, guys. Knock yourselves out.

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    Sheila johnson is really no developer argument in response to a post about who actually contributes the most to the In Support of Community Service PAC (Janet Clarke’s #2 contributor right behind OpenBand MC Dean). Those being:

    Brambleton Group L.L.C. – Real Estate Development – $9500
    Johnson Sheila C. – Self-employed – Entrepreneur – $9000
    Total Development Solutions LLC – Real Estate Development -$5000

    Notice the technique? Pick one detail and argue some technicality (even if it is wrong) in order to distract from the primary message of the thread/post. That being that many of the Republican candidates are being funded by parties with significant financial interests in the outcome of the election – and , yes, most of those interests involve development projects and related subjects. Does the issue sound familiar? It should – it was played out in a similar manner just six years ago. And who defended the likes of Snow, Tulloch, et al back then (using the same tactics)? Why, Barb Munsey, of course.

    As to her sideline point?

    This byline in a 2005 pro-Sheila interview pretty much says it all:

    “Sheila Johnson: Middleburg developer, Mystics owner, media mogul and mom”

  • “Notice the technique? Pick one detail and argue some technicality (even if it is wrong) in order to distract from the primary message of the thread/post.”

    Exactly, Eric – I would only add to your description “and when that derailment fails, include false insinuations about the individual with whom you are arguing, hoping they’ll feel forced to respond to nonsense.” It’s the same pattern over and over, with very little variation. I think most people see right through it by now.

    The degree of the reaction here does tell us a lot – and I suspect there is much more to say about certain Van Metre projects. Chickens coming home to roost, much?

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Well David, it ceratinly seems to be your method, re Catoctin revolving around gay rights in Sterling. Are you ever going to answer the question on your blog about your comment at LTM, and say WHICH transgendered woman from Sterling was denied an open funded position with the county because Eugene used an impersonal pronoun in a hypothetical situation?

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    Wow, Barb, I think that is an all time record at grasping at straws to change the subject. Impressive even for you.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Actually Eric, before David reenters the fray with a me-too attack in the form of projection, I wish he’d elucidate on how that detail he has magnified into a specific real woman at the LTM is somehow special, unique and totally different from what he accuses me of doing?

  • Paul Tompkins says:

    Allow me to share with this group a concept for using endorsements to really figure putt the best candidates that we have used successfully in four states:


    Figure out who the Republicans are endorsed by the Democrat media and which Democrats are endorsed by the Republican media.

    So, applying this test, see what Loudoun Republicans are endorsed by the Washington Post. Loudoun Times Mirror, etc and what Democrats are endorsed by the Washington Examiner, Washington Times, etc.

    Anyone done this analysis? LI, Lloyd, Barbara?

  • Re: my comment concerning Barb at 1:46, it should now read “..respond to incoherent nonsense.”

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I do take note of that, Mr. Tompkins. Reading the Post is still a must for research purposes, even if we no longer buy it.

    Nice diversion David: I’m talking about your imapassioned comment at the LTM that Delgaudio “called a woman” it, and then moved on to infer she was a resident of Sterling.

    That’s quite a leap from using an impersonal pronoun in reference to a hypothetical person or situation, and someone (I don’t know who) in the comments called you out on it.

    From there you retreated to calling people immoral and saying Sterling needed to decide how they will be perceived (by you).

    It’s kind of like that little projection natter of focusing on a detail–you have focused on a pronoun that has grown into quite a narrative, and apparently a whole transgendered woman in Sterling.

    I’ve asked you to document that, and I can understand your avoidance/attack in re that dilemma. There is no specific transwoman in Sterling who was not only turned down for a county job, but publicly abused by Delgaudio.

    Walking that back will take some twisty turning for sure.

    Better just say crazy B who ought to shut up is spouting such gibberish! Just like my obnoxious guineas!.

  • As I said, incoherent nonsense which is your own invention and an attempt to change the subject. Your continued volunteer work for an amoral user in another district does not merit further comment. Carry on.

  • BlackOut says:

    Barbara, there is no excuse for Delgaudio’s hate filled actions! You’re playing semantics with the issue. Who cares if there is a woman in Sterling. Delgaudio said “it”! He has a thick foundation of evidence supporting that he believes “it”. It baffles me when people give Delgaudio the benefit of the doubt or excuses when this comes up.

    Do you think he is doing society a favor for his hate filled day job denegrating a portion of our society? It’s beyond fighting for “family values”, it’s attack oriented, there are individuals on the other side of his whip snapping. He plays on the fears of others to get cash. It is beyond me how people can look the other way from this. I do not see it as a roll your eyes at the clown and let him go. A vote for Delgaudio, or support for Delgaudio is complicit.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    David, as I have pointed out to you before, I am not volunteering in Sterling.

    Is this “gibberish”?: “If you recall about a year ago, he sent out an email to constituents referring to a woman applying for a job as “it.”” “The bottom line is that a person who thinks and says that some of his constituents are not human should not *have* constituents.” The impersonal pronoun in the hypothetical situation has now apparently become a specific woman from Sterling who applied for a job, as you have posted at LTM?

    Colleague, I would suggest that David is playing semantics for all its worth, because the original usage was imprecise on whether he meant the hypothetical person, or the situation.

    It is far more useful to say it was not just a hypo-person, but ALL people in a set of categories, and now apparently a specific woman who lost a job because of it.

    It is also useful to claim that anyone who does NOT attack him for this is defending him, or volunteering for him, or a set of other toss offs that aren’t exactly true, but they sound like it in campaign lit.

    I am not volunteering in Sterling.

    There were no documented cases of sex, gender, orientation, identity discrimination in Loudoun, as noted from the dais, when Miller brought it into the board room (and I mean the policy, not the woman from Sterling) as part of a statewide activism push when McDonnell did not reissue Warner and Kiane’s executive orders, which THEY did because the GA has to create protected classes. We now have a specific woman from Sterling who applied for a county job and was called “it” by Eugene, which is doubly awful because she is one of his constituents?

    Not me with the word games, sorry.

    David does not allow others to define HIM, yet never seems to miss an opportunity to define THEM.

    He does not define me, my actions or opinions, anywhere but in his own opinion.

    And I’d really like to know who that woman in Sterling who applied for the job is, with some documentation. Not of the word it, but of the actual human being who lost a job, and is a Sterling constituent.

  • This straw man is not exactly news. The email in question has been documented, quoted, and easily accessible since last January. Of course the woman in the email is hypothetical, she always has been. You are the only one who seems confused about that.

    I don’t know what you call what you keep doing for Mr. Delgaudio.

    Off topic, sorry LI.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I know the person in the email is hypothetical, as is the situation in which the hypothetical person is placed. I’m asking about the woman in your posts at LTM.

    I’m talking to you about your use of language, and the fact that you seem to think that disagreeing with some of your usages is “doing something for him”.

    I don’t think you’re really off topic in discussing it David, because you are disagreeing with one of the endorsements in the topic.

    As is your right.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Barb, if you want to battle David over comments he made somewhere else, please take that battle to that location.

  • […] members of which live in your district and elsewhere, the object of that slur is those real people. Do I also need to point out that the pool of blood in this image is hypothetical? Can we expect you to demand to know whose rainbow blood that is, or do you recognize it as […]

Leave Comment