Welcome to LoudounTimes.com
Loudoun Times-Mirror

Scathing account from Delgaudio aide released

A new political action committee taking aim at Loudoun County Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio (R-Sterling) was granted access to an eight-page statement from a former Delgaudio aide in Loudoun County General District Court Wednesday.

But it’s nothing the group, Read Advocate PAC, didn’t already have. And it’s not the only document they’re after.

Real Advocate, formed less than two weeks ago to reveal, among other things, what it sees as the truth surrounding the controversial Delgaudio, is seeking to make public any and all records relating to the complaint from the Delgauido aide, Donna Mateer. The eight-page document, which Real Advocate representatives had received previously from the Arlington and Loudoun Commonwealth attorneys, is a first-hand account from Mateer listing severe concerns and allegations against the Sterling supervisor.

Delgaudio is under fire after a series of investigative reports, including from the Times-Mirror, The Washington Post and LGBTQ Nation magazine, that alleged Delgaudio directed Mateer and other staff aids to raise funds for political elections, an action that goes against county policy.

But the account from Mateer released Wednesday went further, claiming Delgaudio was prone to verbal abuse against his aides, his colleagues on the board and various minorities.

The document, which in March passed through the hands of board Chairman Scott York (R-At Large), County Attorney Jack Roberts, Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney James Plowman and Arlington Commonwealth Attorney Theophani Stamos, claims Delgaudio was obsessed with the compilation and care of the “Igor” list, which was used to make appointments with potential political donors.

“Nothing was to take me away from the my Igor list project,” Mateer states.

Delgaudio “constantly put the other aides down verbally, the other supervisors down as well,” she goes on to note.

Mateer’s recount is expansive in its details of Delgaudio as an elected official, claiming the supervisor said he “didn’t have time for any of that” when it came to representing the people and the area they live in.

Referring to the other Loudoun supervisors, Mateer said Delgaudio commented they “were all idiots.”

“He told me that due to their political views, they were all idiots, and he was the only hope for Loudoun County,” Mateer states.

Mateer says Delgaudio was “extremely against homosexuals” and he “spoke about them with extreme hatred.”

“He also made racial remarks about Asian people, making fun of the way they speak, mimicking them. He called them names, as well as he did with Hispanic people and black people,” Mateer notes.

Compounding matters, the Sterling supervisors in his day job serves as the president of Public Advocate of the United States, a Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)-designated “hate group.” SPLC claims Public Advocate targets and ridicules the gay population.

Real Advocate officials also make claims Delgaudio used his office to fill the coffers of Public Advocate, through which Delgaudio takes a salary.

An obvious play on Delgaudio’s group, Real Advocate is composed of former Loudoun County Supervisor Stevens Miller, who was elected as a Democrat and is the lawyer for the organization, and Miller’s wife Liz. Local gay activists David and Jonathan Weintraub are also officers within the Real Advocate.

The political action group is also pushing for Delgaudio’s current colleagues on the board take action against Delgaudio by at the very least stripping him of his duties on board committees, and potentially calling for him to step down.

Liz Miller, who filed a Freedom of Information Act request Oct. 17 to Chairman York for information relating to the Delgaudio investigation, admitted her original request was perhaps too vague to receive all the supporting documents Real Advocate believes the chairman has in relation to the Delgaudio-Mateer case.

“I needed to be more broad,” Miller said Wednesday.

Stevens Miller claims York “has had piles of paper from Donna Mateer” beyond her initial eight-page statement for months. “But he only gave her statement to the commonwealth’s attorney,” Miller said.

“We’ll see that the rest of the evidence comes out, no matter how hard his board tries to whitewash the record.”

The Loudoun board has voted to hire an outside investigator to look into the allegations brought against Delgaudio, although Delguadio’s name was included in the official motion. Delgaudio also sits on the committee that is looking into implementing new county aide policies.

Miller said previously the board’s investigation is “an obvious attempt at a cover-up by an all-Republican board.”

“Real investigations name a subject, specify charges, and set forth deadlines. This board didn’t do any of that,” he said.

On Oct. 17, York said that specifics of the vote to investigate Delgaudio were not revealed because County Attorney Jack Roberts was tasked with hiring an outside investigator and details at the time of the vote were not available.

” … It’s not a sham. We’re investigating the matter and proceeding forward and if [Delgaudio] is guilty I’ll be the harshest one to come down on him,” York said.

-Assistant Editor Crystal Owens contributed to this report


Dear Supervisors:

As always, it was an honor to speak to the Board of Supervisors this morning.  You are our local government. It was also an honor and a pleasure to speak on behalf of all citizens who want an end to prejudice and bigotry.

I noticed that one of the speakers was a lawyer arguing for Delgaudio that the investigators had conflicts of interest that would lead to an unfair conclusion against him, whereas another spoke against the nature of the investigation, indicating it might be white wash favoring Delgaudio.

You may have noticed that I chose to largely ignore the investigation, though I mentioned it. My speech was about ethics, because that’s the foundation of good government.

Many years ago when bigots verbally and physically attacked blacks and jews, law makers and jurists often stood back, saying that because they themselves didn’t publically attack minorities, they were not bigots.  But their inaction and quiet talk allowed the bigotry to move forward.  Their unwillingness to take a moral high ground caused great harm, as much as if they had been the one throwing stones.

The question I ask you, with respect, is “What is the difference between a bigot like Mr. Delgaudio and law makers who enable his bigotry?  What is the difference between a bigot and citizens who do not take a stand against bigotry?”  My answer is that the difference is a matter of degree.

I call on the Chairman as the at-large Supervisor, and thus the officer who represents us all, as well as the BOS as a whole, to take a moral stand and strip Mr. Delgaudio of all of his committee positions and leadership roles. Otherwise, you are simply enabling bigotry by giving Mr. Delgaudio a public platform upon which to attack an innocent minority. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation, which is indeed a very serious matter, Delgaudio’s hate speech is enough for the BOS to take the action I have recommended.

I am asking you this as a Loudoun citizen and an American.  Republican, Independent or Democratic.  It matters not.  Bigotry has no place in Loudoun government.  Please take action today to remove this stain upon the honor of the BOS and the county.

Larry Roeder,  the Dulles District

So if I’m reading this correctly,  York withheld information from the Arlington CA,  yet he is quoted as saying that he would be the “harshest one to come down on him” [DelGaudio].  That’s so YORK.

Even the most rabid teapot can’t come up with a way to stick up for Delguadio and not actually mention that the charges are serious.  Yes. He’s done but let’s make an example of him so the other 8 who sit next to him and cover things up get the message.

Shiloh, absolutely. If she hadn’t been honest and brave, nobody would know.

And, I would add, brave.

Actually, calling her a disgruntled employee really isn’t fair until the entire story comes out.  It sounds to me like she is a former employee who was asked to do something she felt was of questionable legality and, to protect herself, her fellow employees, and other future employees possibly put in the same position, spoke out.  That is far from disgruntled.  That’s honest.

Actually, Chris, if citizens hadn’t pursued this case, we would still all believe that the Arlington County CA had found no evidence of wrongdoing, when the truth is that she never had a chance to see any evidence.

Let’s compare what Scott York claims the Arlington CA said with what she actually said.

York: “The Arlington’s Commonwealth Attorney did not recommend pursuing any charges against Mr. Delgaudio.”

What she actually said (per documents obtained through FOIA) is that the statement of a former employee ALONE was not sufficient evidence to recommend pursuing any charges against Mr. Delgaudio, that one would need corroborating evidence “such as phone records.”

Donna Mateer provided Scott York with those records. At his own request. But Scott York did not provide those records to either commonwealth’s attorney, before or after the Arlington CA made this statement about needing such records.

As for your other concerns, this case has nothing at all to do with marriage or other ballot issues, and only tangentially to do with gay rights in general: Ms. Mateer reports that Mr. Delgaudio used hateful language attacking gay people and other minority groups in front of his aides (which is hardly a stretch, given the hateful language he uses about gay people in public), and there is the possibility that he was using county resources to raise funds for his outside hate group, which uses predominantly anti-gay rhetoric in its fundraising efforts. That group really doesn’t do anything with the donations it receives other than funnel them into Mr. Delgaudio’s pocket.

What we know is this: Mr. Delgaudio has admitted on the record directing his aides to do fundraising. He claims that the fundraising was for a charity, but that’s not what the evidence we have seen so far shows. The three potential donors interviewed by the Post say that’s not what they were approached about.

Man, Delgaudio sure does think about gay people a lot. It seems to be on his mind constantly. Weird right?

Is this about Supervisor Delgaudio potentially misusing his office, or the supervisor’s support of traditional marriage and other family issues?

I’m asking because the Board of Supervisors is investigating the former, while Real Advocate, which has injected themselves prominently into the discussion, is comprised of people obsessed with the latter.

You have Stevens Miller, who is apparently still mad at DelGaudio for opposing a gay rights policy he proposed when they were both county supervisors, his wife, and the Weintraubs, two gay rights activists. (When I say gay rights activists, I mean those who advocate for homosexual rights, not those who are both homosexual and activists. Not knowing them personally, this may or may not be the case.)

Right now, the investigation stands at one disgruntled employee and some serious accusations. I wish that people would let the investigation run its course, hear what Supervisor Delguadio has to say, find out if there is any evidence to back up Ms. Mateer’s allegations, and let the chips fall where they may.

Real Advocate jumping into the fray right now, while the investigation has barely begun, sure gives the impression that issue-activists are trying to litigate what they couldn’t achieve at the ballot box.

Oh, that Eugene and his wacky, “unsettlingly conservative” antics. Maybe now we can thrown in “unsettingly racist” as well.

That LTM endorsement from last Fall’s election is looking worse and worse each day.

So has an outside investigator been hired?  No word on that, or are they just trying to burn through the pultry 15k in headhunter fees?

Post a comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments express only the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of this website or any associated person or entity. Any user who believes a message is objectionable can contact us at ltmeditor@loudountimes.com.

More News

The Loudoun Times-Mirror

is an interactive, digital replica
of the printed newspaper.
Click here for all e-editions.