Speech to Warren County Board of Supervisors 12-20-2011

Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, good evening,

The most effective way to defeat the good old boy regime is for citizens to reject its lies and “live in truth.” This means, first of all, telling the truth in answer to official propaganda, but also behaving as if ethical conduct — which most good old boys claim to respect — can not be taken for granted.

The State BAR Association observes, "A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation."

Doug Napier became full time County Attorney in July, 1998. The Board of Supervisors voted and signed a written employment agreement. Section 2-C of this agreement states: "[...] THE EMPLOYEE AGREES TO REMAIN IN THE EXCLUSIVE EMPLOY OF THE EMPLOYER [...] AND NEITHER TO ACCEPT OTHER EMPLOYMENT OR TO BECOME EMPLOYED BY ANY OTHER EMPLOYER [...]."

For the next 8 years County Attorney Doug Napier violated Section 2-C at least 269 times by accepting employment from private clients. I have provided you with a chronological list of courthouse records proving these 269 violations. My spreadsheet has red flags identifying Napier's private clients who had official business before the governing authorities of Warren County. My spreadsheet does not show the numerous times Napier's client Ron Llewellyn presented his business interests before Warren County agencies and boards.

Some authorities suggest Napier had permission to violate his employment agreement. This can not be true. The 1998 agreement was renewed in 2003 and contained the same Section 2-C prohibition. Where is this record of permission kept? Who authorized it? Why is it not in the public record?

Who nominated Mr. Napier to become Town Attorney? Was it Mr. Holloway? Was the Town Council aware of Napier's decades long history of attorney client privilege with Warren County, with developer Ron Llewellyn, and with Napier's most recent employer with offices at 35 N. Royal Ave?

It was Mr. Holloway who nominated Ron Llewellyn to a seat on the real estate-buying and selling EDA Board of Directors. Llewellyn is a risk to the public's best interests because he is himself a real estate buyer and seller. Joining Llewellyn on the EDA Board are a banker with millions of dollars to lend and a second land speculator also busily engaged in the buying and selling of real estate. Connecting these 3 EDA board member dots is a lawyer, Mr. Napier, who has a decades long history of providing these parties with private legal services. And, perhaps, private legal advice?

Why do governmental authorities create such high risk situations by appointing people as custodians of taxpayers money who are:
(A) people owed tremendous amounts of money
(B) who are people who owe tremendous amounts of money
(C) who are people with financial interests in those very activities they are supposed to be monitoring
(D) who ALL have shared a lawyer who now works at the very heart of government who has privately represented each of them.

What should we make of these 269 violations by Mr. Napier? The State BAR Association observes, "[...] It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to commit a criminal or deliberately wrongful act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law. [...] It is professional misconduct to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law."

I will reccommend to the Town Council they rescind its appointment of Mr. Napier, taking the first of many steps needed to restore good governance tied not to private interests, but to public interests. In such a heated convergence of private interests, all the recusals in the world are not adequate to protect the taxpayer from the good old boys.

Bill Pierceall

It is true - 99% of all lawyers give the other 1% a bad reputation.

This link connects to a better explanation of the problems being created by former Front Royal Town Attorney Tom Robinette, now Town Manager and Town Attorney for Onancock, VA.

http://www.opengovva.org/in-the-news-mainmenu-72/current-headlines-mainmenu-71/1562-redaction-for-obvious-reasons

This ongoing unethical conduct supports a local history of implanting an unethical culture of business and politics in Front Royal and Warren County. It will be no easy chore to uproot this deeply entrenched cronyism and corruption.

Yet another example is now being showcased for you. Consider the circumstances sufficient to force the resignation of Doug Napier from county public office. These same circumstances are now being overlooked by the Town Councilmen and their leader, Mayor Darr, when hiring this same offender for a town public office. Do the members of the Town Council consider these circumstances of past moral and ethical lapses have no bearing on his employment as Town Attorney? Were they seeking a Robinette clone?

Many of my contacts agree Robinette was the source of many problems for Front Royal. Perhaps the most egregious was his attempt to have fabrications of bribery brought against the town manager. As you may remember, this attempt involved the Richmond law firm of Troutman Saunders who was provided information verbally by Robinette seeking their written endorsement of wrongdoing. The information recollected later by Troutman Saunders seemed to be a description of a cherry-picked construct of misinformation intended to force a specific conclusion sought by Robinette.

Unfortunately, this real life scenario supports the often told joke - 99% of all lawyers give the other 1% a bad reputation.
**********************************************************************************
Here are the comments I made last night to the Front Royal Town Council:
Speech - Front Royal Town Council 12-12-2011

Mr. Mayor, Town councilmen, good evening.

Mr. Town Attorney Napier, I continue to wait for your answers to the 6 questions I placed before you at Councils public meeting November 28th. Silence is not a viable strategy to solve any problem.

Mr. Napier, don't you find it troubling not a single Councilman rose during that November 28 meeting to speak in your defense?

More troubling is this continued silence. Most troubling is your conflict of interest statement in the matter of Ron Llewellyn and his company, Heptad. Your statement was not dated. What kind of attorney prepares a document declaring a conflict of interest and fails to date it?

Worst of all, Mr. Napier, you were expected to provide proof the Warren County Board of Supervisors gave you their written permission to violate your written employment agreement to become employed by private sector clients during your tenure as full-time Warren County Attorney. May I expect this written permission will be dated and part of the Warren County Board of Supervisor's meeting minutes?

Tied for the honor of 'most troubling' is lack of leadership in this matter by Mayor Darr, whose campaign rhetoric promised if elected Mayor he would get the Town Council under control, support the Town Manager, and not be influenced by outside special interests
.
Which of you Councilmen will admit to being under the control of Mayor Darr? Which of you can rise to defend the leadership of Mr. Darr and the allegations against Mr. Napier?

With regard to the circumstances surrounding Mr. Napier's abrupt resignation in 2006 as Warren County Attorney, if those circumstances were sufficient to motivate demands for Napier's resignation from public office, certainly they weigh against hiring him for another? Do the members of the Town Council consider these circumstances of past ethical lapses have no bearing on his employment as Town Attorney?

Mayor Darr, which Good Old Boy's special interests have you ignored?

Mr. Burke, as Town Manager you have my deepest sympathy for being caught between a rock and a hard place.

Mr. Holloway, on the recent occasion of your conversion to the Democratic Party, would you take the opportunity of giving us your views concerning the principles of ethics and how they apply to the issues I raise concerning Mr. Napier's qualifications to the position he now holds?

Mr. Lauder, will you make a campaign promise to create and follow a Code of Ethical Conduct to guide town employees, other Councilmen, and yourself?

Mr. Tharpe, will you be the first to tell us your views concerning employment agreement violations by Mr. Napier?

Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, as bad as things stand today, the silence of crickets guarantee it can only get worse.

Front Royal Town Council Speech 11-28-2011

Mr. Mayor, Council Members, good evening.

In my email to Town Attorney Napier dated 15 November 2011, and copied to the Mayor, Councilmen, Supervisors, and undisclosed citizens, I asked Mr. Napier to provide a copy of his employment agreement with his most recent private employer, the law firm of Pond Athey Athey & Pond. Mr. Napier is not obligated to provide this agreement, but providing a copy would confirm or deny Mr. Napier's private and public sector employment agreements both prohibit employment by anyone other than the employer.

The same email also asked Town Attorney Napier 6 important questions. As it appears Mr. Napier temporarily chooses to remain silent, I will now repeat those 6 questions for the public record.

Mr. Napier:

1- While you are presently employed as Front Royal Town Attorney, will you practice law on behalf of Pond Athey Athey & Pond and/or any of its past, present, or future clients? Do you anticipate receiving compensation for your legal services?

2 - While you were employed as Warren County Attorney from 1998 until your abrupt resignation without notice in 2006, were you ever employed by anyone other than Warren County? If so, did you receive compensation for your legal services?

3- During the time period 1998-2006, were you ever Co-Council with any member of any law firm on behalf of any client other than Warren County? If so, did you receive compensation for your legal services?

4- During the time period 1998-2006, did you ever appear before any tribunal, court of law, or government agency as Co-Council with any member of any law firm, including Pond Athey Athey & Pond? If so, did you receive compensation for your legal services?

5- During the time period 1998-2006, did you maintain a private business office separate and distinct from your government office at 220 Commerce Avenue? Did you ever counsel private clients inside your government offices?

6- Do you claim your employment agreements with Warren County allowed you to accept employment by someone besides Warren County? If so, please explain how Section 2C of these agreements allowed you to practice law on behalf of other employers.

Mr. Napier, my questions are not rhetorical. They all point to legal, ethical, and moral components of the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct that apply to all members of the Virginia BAR Association.

As a public servant, should you choose to remain silent and not answer these 6 questions, please invoke your 5th Amendment rights on the grounds your answers may tend to incriminate you. Otherwise, stop stonewalling.

Again, I ask, while you were employed as Warren County Attorney from 1998 until your abrupt resignation in 2006, were you ever employed by anyone other than Warren County? If so, did you receive compensation for your legal services?

Thank you.