Beyond ‘Good Old Boy’ Governance:  Dr. Jamieson Calls for Fair Play

At the April 15th Board of Supervisors meeting, Dr. Jamieson explained that his motivation to run for office was “to turn the page on the EDA scandal era”. He went on to describe the good old boy style of governance that enabled the EDA scandal to happen, saying that our “county government was known to have operated largely through long standing relationship networks with supervisors who were also developers, landowners, attorneys, and others in partnerships that managed to thrive through county decisions.” “A time when who you knew mattered more than how much sense things made or if it was legal.” He concluded “that approach didn’t end well and we are still paying the price”.

Nearly every library in the State and Country has a public library board. Dr. Jamieson explained that it is his responsibility to uphold fair processes. He went on to explain that, “to exempt them [Samuels Inc.] from this is to accept a private monopoly control of public services paid for with public funds.” Dr. Jamieson then encouraged Samuels Inc. to participate in the public procurement process and submit a bid.

It is important for every citizen to understand that Samuels Inc. has NOT been removed as our library provider. They have been invited to start participating in the manner legally necessary to run our public library according to the rules and norms most everyone else, everywhere else, already follows. It is time to end the exaggerations and misinformation with the intent to cause chaos in the community.

At this point we must decide as a county, do we want to MOVE ON from the EDA-era methods of governance or do we want to return to how things were always done and risk losing another $21 million?

To watch the full video of Dr. Jamieson’s comments you can go to the 28 minute mark of the meeting video. https://warrencountyva.new.swagit.com/videos/340249?ts=1684

Melanie Salins
Warren County, VA

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the letters published on this page are solely those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Royal Examiner’s editorial team, its affiliates, or advertisers. The Royal Examiner does not endorse or take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or validity of any statements made by the authors. The Royal Examiner has not independently verified the statements and claims presented in the letters. Readers are encouraged to exercise their own judgment and critical thinking skills when evaluating the content. Any reliance on the information in the letters is at the reader’s own risk.

While the Royal Examiner makes every effort to publish diverse opinions, it does not guarantee the publication of all received letters. The Royal Examiner reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, length, and adherence to editorial guidelines. Moreover, the Royal Examiner does not assume any liability for any loss or damage incurred by readers due to the content of the letters or any subsequent actions based on these opinions.

In submitting a letter to the editor, authors grant the newspaper the right to publish, edit, reproduce, or distribute the content in print, online, or in any other form.

We value the engagement of our readers and encourage open and constructive discussions on various topics. However, the Royal Examiner retains the right to reject any letter that contains offensive language, personal attacks, or violates any legal regulations. Thank you for being a part of our vibrant community of readers and contributors, and we look forward to receiving your diverse perspectives on matters of interest and importance.