Roberts to Brief Supervisors on Holiday Displays
Committee asks county attorney for private briefings on holiday displays proposed for the courthouse grounds.
Photos
After receiving a May 14 report from the Loudoun County Courts Grounds and Facilities Committee (CGFC), members of the Board of Supervisors’ Finance/Government Services and Operations Committee (FGSOC) asked that County Attorney Jack Roberts brief board members privately about the holiday displays the CGFC is considering.
CGFC Chair Clint Good briefly outlined his committee’s preliminary recommendations for county-owned holiday displays on the courthouse grounds, including a Christmas tree, crèche, menorah, Santa with sleigh and reindeer, wreaths and garlands. The recommendations include such details as the size and locations of the proposed displays.
FGSOC members had few questions or comments about the appearance of the proposed displays. Leesburg District Supervisor Ken Reid said he preferred that the displays be close together, rather than scattered across the courthouse grounds.
Much of the discussion focused on legal concerns and a May 8 closed session in which Roberts gave the CGFC legal advice.
“This is an area with a lot of legal land mines,” Roberts said when asked about the closed session. He said he would like to have a similar opportunity to meet with board members, either in closed session or in individual briefings. Such briefings are legal as long as no more than two supervisors meet with staff at one time.
Supervisor Shawn Williams said to Roberts, “I guess the question I have would be … when Clint comes back and recommends the crèche and menorah, things of this nature that do have a religious element to them, you have vetted those against the case law, against the Attorney General’s—those have been vetted legally.”
“I would like to meet with each of you, give you my candid thoughts on the pros and cons of various approaches,” Roberts replied.
FGSOC chair Ralph Buona said there would not be sufficient time to hold a closed session before the CGFC makes its final recommendation in June. He asked Roberts to give the supervisors private briefings.
FGSOC member Scott York said he was concerned about the CGFC’s May 8 closed session, and that some members of the public and press had been locked out of the building while the closed session was taking place.
Roberts assured York members of the public were invited back into the room in time to hear the CGFC certify that the closed session was held legally. He suggested the committee hold future meetings in the County Government Center, where it would be less likely the public might be locked out of the building after regular business hours.
Ann
11:15 am on Tuesday, May 15, 2012
There's more to the winter holidays than what they propose to symbolize here. A fuller display would include Kwanzaa and the Winter Solstice... And, if we are marking the December holy days here on the courthouse lawn, shouldn't we be marking others' seasons, as well? A large part of our population in Loudoun is comprised of other religions and traditions. I am wary of the implications of this display as apparently being proposed.
Long Time Loudouner
11:22 am on Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Why is this issue still cluttering up the agenda of the BOS yet again???? Can we please put this to bed by saying NO DISPLAYS, just put up some holly and lights and be done with it?? There are much, MUCH more important issues that need addressing than this fiasco. I pay these people to focus on the REAL ISSUES, and the courthouse holiday display non-issue has been taking up WAY too much of the BOS time over the past several years. What a major waste of time and taxpayer money to be focusing on this non-issue.
Lonnie H.
11:50 am on Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Well Carolyn, how else are they supposed to maintain the hoopla over the made-up "war on christmas" otherwise? And the campaign donations that fake war helps create.
You're right of course.
I didn't see any mention of the Flying Spaghetti Monster display, they better allow that and/or the Invisible Pink Unicorn if they're gonna have Santa and a Nativity :-)
I didn't see words about a nativity, but they have a picture of one so I'm gonna assume one'll be approved.
Jim Barnes
11:59 am on Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Lonnie, "creche" is another word for the nativity scene. I'll be clearer about that in the future.
John Mileo
9:36 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Why isn't it clear to everyone as to what the Board of Supervisors is trying to accomplish, which as Chairman York has repeatedly (and OPENLY) stated, is to mirror what is done each year by the Federal Government on the Ellipse.? It should also be apparent to all that by virtue of the fact that Christmas Day (December 25) is a National Holiday that is also recognized by the Commonwealth of Virginia and Loudoun County...the same as Memorial Day, Independence Day and Martin Luther King Day, to name just three others, it becomes kind of the focal point for the displays and what is being celebrated, by default.
Why does ONLY the Christmas Holiday celebration cause some people to utter the rallying cry of “inclusion?”
This same call for "inclusion" does not occur with any other celebrated holiday in the United States, be it a secular one or religious based or nationally recognized or not. I cannot recall an outcry from people who are not of Irish descent insisting that one of their own sect be appointed the Grand Marshall of the St. Patrick Day Parade, or members of the KKK dressed in their white hooded outfits while holding up Confederate Battlefield flags insisting that they be allowed to participate in a Martin Luther King Day celebration. So, again...what makes the treatment of Christmas Day so different?
John Mileo
9:39 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Due to content length constraints I was unable to complete my remarks just posted which were to include: Shall the vegans and vegetarians begin protesting that the Turkey is the recognized icon of the Thanksgiving Day, another National Holiday, and therefore insist that its display be accompanied by a stalk of broccoli, under the call for "inclusion"?
Just how far should this concept should be carried?
Finally, in response to Lonnie H's "war on christmas [sic]" remark, in Loudoun County there is no "War on Christmas,” but instead, there is an apparent "War on Christianity." Just read Larry Mendoza's remark as posted on the NOVA Atheists web page where he states “…I feel there is a need to stand up to christian [sic] tyranny… "
TravisW
12:19 am on Thursday, May 17, 2012
Mr. Mileo,
I do not know you nor will I pretend to. I appreciate that you are serving on a county committee and that you are burdened with an unenviable task. No matter the result there are bound to be those who are upset with the outcome. I will add that recently I joined the NOVA Atheist website and I have attended some of NA’s meetings. I have met Mr. Mendoza and a few other members but I do not really know them either. I’m not here to speak on their behalf but rather for myself. It is my hope that this post will provide some insight.
To your comment about why Christmas alone should be inclusive. The simple fact is that of all of the observed holidays Christmas is the only one that is seen as a religious occasion. That paired with the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution creates a tension as to exactly how much involvement government should have in the celebration of the event. Let me clarify that I do not oppose Christmas as a national holiday given the large number of Americans that celebrate it but I do stress that any government participation should be secular. Let me further clarify that even without the Establishment Clause it would still be the right of any citizen to speak in opposition to any government policy that they disagreed with.
Respectfully,
TravisW
12:21 am on Thursday, May 17, 2012
For my benefit I ask this question of anyone that may read this, what makes Christmas so special that Christians feel compelled to portray the religious aspects of it on public property? I haven’t heard anyone declare there being a problem with Christian churches using their own property for this.
John Mileo
2:51 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
Travis, I wish to thank you for your well thought out response and for the respectful manner in which you have communicated same, which unfortunately is a far cry from the majority of the comments I have been reading from those who offer an opposing viewpoint. I also wish to make it clear that I do not oppose anyone's right to express his or her opposing viewpoint but do wish that they would do so in a civilized and dignified manner rather than with malice and insults, as many are currently doing.
As for the display of a nativity scene or crèche on public property, I don't believe that anyone can ignore the fact about the origins of Christmas. With that in mind, and inasmuch as our federal, state and local governments have opted to recognize Christmas Day as an official holiday, with the closing down of all non-essential government operations (including the Loudoun County Courthouse), I do not understand the objection on placing on the lawn the very display the represents the holiday's origin.
Running out of space. See next comment for continuation.
John Mileo
3:04 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
Travis (continuation). But out of respect to those who cry out that such an action is a violation of the Establishment Clause, we are attempting to tone-down, if you will, some of the religious aspects of a typical crèche by not including such components as: angels and the Latin wording for "Glory to God in the Highest." In addition to this, and in attempting to keep in line with the guidelines handed down by our Commonwealth's Attorney General, and in accordance with case law, we are ensuring that an adequate number of secular items are on display.
With all of this controversy over the creche, what I simply do not understand is why are the same folks who are voicing their angry objections about it , are silent when it comes to the public display of the Jewish religious symbol for Hanukah, "The Menorah," which in the case of the one on the national ellipse is alit each year by a Lubavitch Rabbi. And mind you, Hanukah is not even a recognized as a government holiday! There appears to be somewhat of a disparity here, in my view; By the way, I am not advocating the start of any such protest but simply pointing out the obvious biasis that exist!
Please also recognize that Board Chairman York is simply attempting to mirror, so to speak the major holiday displays that are on the ellipse.
In closing, I again want to thank you for the dignified manner in which you have presented your position and I do wish you well.
Respectfully,
John Mileo