Rather than continuing to rubber-stamp unaffordable benefits, unsustainable perks and an inequitable arbitration system that have bled Montgomery’s budget, Ms. Ervin, joined by nearly all her council colleagues, has tried to restore some balance, and some sanity, to county finances. In fact, they’ve had no choice: There is little support for further tax increases in what is already one of the most heavily taxed localities in the region.
Nonetheless, the union, seeing Ms. Ervin’s shift as a betrayal, has unleashed a despicable smear campaign, accusing her of corruptly colluding with a developer to clear the way for a new Wal-Mart to be built in Aspen Hill. In public comments and on the Internet, the union suggests that Ms. Ervin stands to personally profit from “a special deal” with Wal-Mart.
MCGEO’s assertions are ugly, dishonest and absurd on their face. For starters, there’s not a speck of proof behind them. Ms. Ervin hasn’t even said that she would support Wal-Mart, which would require rezoning approval. In fact, she’s pushed legislation requiring Wal-Mart to negotiate with neighbors over what amenities it would pay for before the project gains final approval.
MCGEO itself, along with its affiliated unions and political action committee, has given Ms. Ervin some $15,000 during her races for elective office. By contrast, she received just $1,200 or so in the same period — of a total of $269,000 — from principals in the Lee Development Group, which is seeking rezoning for the new Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart itself has not contributed to Ms. Ervin’s campaigns.
Despite that, MCGEO, in an online attack campaign called TheRealValerieErvin, asked: “How much does [sic] Valerie Ervin, the Lee Development Group and Wal-Mart stand to make from their special deal?” And, in a slanderous remark to marylandreporter.com, Mr. Stewart, the union head, accused her of a “pay-to-play attitude.” He offered not one fact to substantiate his accusation.
Ms. Ervin says that she has discussed possible legal action with the county attorney in response to the union’s campaign, which she believes is aimed at intimidating the entire council. Whether or not a lawsuit is the right move, there’s no doubt that the union’s tactics are beneath contempt, and a discredit to the honest, hardworking county employees the union purports to represent.
Loading...
Comments