Haddow Role on Strategic Planning Team Questionned

The Muckraker has received an anonymous letter from someone or some group raising concerns about the participation of Mac Haddow on the Prince William County Strategic Planning Team. We have tried unsuccessfully to determine the author of the letter. It is obviously solely an expression of opinion, but we have confirmed with a number of participants and observers that the views contained are shared by others, including by some bodies with whom the Strategic Planning group has met. Among the latter are those who feel that the group is pursuing agendas argued in the past by Gainesville Supervisor Pete Candland and Mac Haddow himself.

Essentially, the letter argues that Haddow is attempting to dominate the group and transform its mission. Rather than identifying citizen priorities for the next four years, it is alleged that he is instead trying to turn the group into an investigating fact-finding body that seeks to root out what he determines is local government corruption (if true we find great irony in this given Haddow’s past and his leadership of a cabal we believe to be at the heart of a great deal of corruption in Prince William County). In particular, the letter asserts that Haddow has been attempting to convince the group that the Strategic Plan process is actually an attempt by the county staff and colluding county agencies to manipulate the Board of County Supervisors and county citizens into raising taxes.

We’ve always been troubled by the penchant for some on the Board of Supervisors to appoint members of their staff to citizen groups. To us that seems to retard true citizen input and instead reflects a desire to monitor or steer the process. Those who wish to view the letter and draw their own conclusions may view an excerpt of it here (parts have been blocked by the provider to whom the letter was sent and who forwarded the letter to us). You may also follow the activities of the Prince William County Strategic Planning Team here.

Share

18 comments on “Haddow Role on Strategic Planning Team Questionned

  1. -

    You mention the problem that some Supervisors appoint members of their staff to citizen groups. If you look at the list of Strategic Planning committee members and take out county staff, there are only a few people who were not failed candidates in the 2015 elections, relatives of sitting officials or failed candidates, or staff members of elected officials. This is really bad. As Trump would say, “I’m sure some of them are good people” but shouldn’t this group be more independent of elected officials or wannabe elected officials?

  2. -

    Why not just publish the letter so we may see what it says?

    [Editor’s Note: Leveler, did you not read the full post? We did publish the letter. We provided a link to it and encouraged people to read it and decide for themselves? Not sure why you are confused.]

  3. -

    The BoCS really does not want citizen input they have their own individual and some collective(Candland, Lawson,Anderson and Supervisor Haddow) agendas. This is just another worthless board that the BoCS can point to, “…that’s what the citizens want…” what a joke.

  4. -

    Leveler is confused because they’re a member of the Haddow-Candland gang and never actually check the facts before commenting.

  5. -

    So wait…member of the strategic plan committee, co-chair of the joint Lawson/Candland budget committee, HOA president of Oak Valley, Candland office staffer and babysitter, director of Walk with Pete Charity, Felon, and full time DC lobbyist, and last but certainly not least…Sheriff of Nottingham.
    My only question is this…where does he find time to play ball on his illegal basketball court?
    He doesn’t look like he has that much energy!
    and does he even realize that EVERYONE knows exactly who he is??

  6. -

    I think it’s important to realize that Haddow really wants to be the one in office, not Pete. Whether it’s his past felony conviction, his questionable lobbying efforts or his personality, Haddow realizes he is not suited to running for office. But he wants to be in control so this is his way of shoving his agenda down everyone’s throat. It’s almost sad he is so obsessed with the county. I wish his vision for it would make it better but he only seems to know how to make it worse.

  7. -

    This is typical modus operandi of Mac Haddow. It is well known by longtime county employees that the only person ever to stand up to Haddow and his questionable actions was Candland’s first COS who had the courage and high ethical standards to stop his control of the Gainesvlle District Office. When Candland and Haddow realized they could not control this person and that this person was willing to lose their job by speaking up in defense of the residents of the Gainesville District, they asked this person to resign because they would not go along with the unethical,and controversial actions of Haddow who thought he was Candland’s COS.

    Haddow and Candland has this very sick need to control everything and everyone around them. I remember seeing Candland meeting with a county employee in a restaurant and Haddow in a creepy way was sitting at a table all by himself watching and staring at their table. [Edited out.]

    These are very sick individuals who pawn themselves off as above the law because of who they are.

    There is a story one of their church members has said that Haddow once tried to con his way out of a speeding ticket in Utah when he was a low level elected official by telling the cop because of his position he was not allowed to give him a ticket.

  8. -

    This is standard procedure for Haddow. He tries to bully people in his HOA, at the Chamber of Commerce, on county committees, and in Candland’s office. It’s not just by his personality. Everyone knows that they risk being defamed on the Sheriff of Nottingham blog if they cross him or sued. Haddow makes a big deal about how he is “known to sue”, so it takes unusual courage to stand up to him.

  9. -

    I’ve seen first hand how Haddow controls Candland. At events he’ll take Candland aside if he doesn’t like what he’s doing and berate him and tell him what to do. While Candland is on the dais you can sometimes see Haddow nodding and pointing as Candland looks at him for direction. It’s disgusting to watch.

  10. -

    This is the way he controls weak-minded people like AWOL Anderson (even when she’s there she’s not really there). First he makes her feel she owes her election to him by having Earnie Porta smeared with lies on the Sheriff of Nottingham blog and by Lawson. Then he knows she’s clueless about any county issues so he has Candland and Lawson spoon feed her what they want her to say. If for some reason she doesn’t go along she knows she will get torched on the Sheriff of Nottingham blog. She’s neither smart enough nor honorable enough to stand up to him. This is how he exerts control. He puts up weak minded, unethical people that become dependent upon him. His whole career is built on this.

  11. -

    The analysis of @AWOL Ruth Anderson is right on the money. Haddow did the exact same thing with Jeanine Lawson. She was also clueless about most issues (you can see this even today when she asks nonsensical question at the BOCS). Haddow made her feel both beholden to him and afraid of him by smearing her opponents Scott Jacobs and Eric Young on the Sheriff blog.

  12. -

    There are lots of similarities between what Jeanine Lawson did to Scott Jacobs and what Ruth Anderson did to Earnie Porta. Both Jacobs and Porta were by far more knowledgable and reasonable on every issue, in addition to being two of the nicest and most unselfish people you’re likely to meet. Lawson and Anderson worked with Haddow and Reece Collins to smear them both with lies on the Sheriff blog and elsewhere. It was real dirtball stuff. The difference with Anderson is that she served in the military. It’s hard to believe that someone who wore the uniform could act so despicably.

  13. -

    The military is like any other large organization. There are great honest people in it, and dishonest, unethical people. Ruth and Rich Anderson are among the latter. They don’t understand or never absorbed the principles of honor the military tries to instill in people.

  14. -

    @Anonymous
    “The military is like any other large organization.”

    This is true. The Andersons are a part of the subset of people in the military who feel that because they wore a uniform the rules of ethical and honorable behavior do not apply to them in civilian life. That’s why Rich Anderson expressed support for the idea of only people who have served in the military having the right to vote. They wore the uniform but never gained an understanding of the values they are supposed to be defending.

  15. -

    Don’t give Lawson a pass. The same thing is true of her, maybe even worse than the Andersons. She’s a very conservative evangelical Christian, but the hypocritical type that doesn’t even try to act like a Christian. She rationalizes that anything she does, no matter how unethical, is okay because of her alleged devoutness.

  16. -

    I don’t think Ruth Anderson is evil. I talked to her about her tactics and positions and she basically said it was the only way she could get elected.

  17. -

    @Anderson Friend
    Is that really your defense of Anderson’s conduct? “It was the only way she could get elected.” I think that says all you need to know about her.

  18. -

    This is really unfortunate. I’m counting at least 4 people other than himself that Haddow controls on the strategic planning group. That is way too much power for one person on a group like that and will basically mean whatever they produce will have little credibility with the BOCS or the informed public. That’s a shame for the honest people on it who are working hard to produce something useful.

Comments are closed.