Friday, October 23, 2009

Candidate Douglas Walker responds to political attack

Douglas Walker

Douglas Walker

DOUGLAS WALKER(R) is running for Roanoke City Commissioner of Revenue against incumbent Sherman Holland (D). Hank Bostwick of the Star City Harbinger went to great lengths uncovering what he perceived as unsubstantiated claims of improper operation and audits of the Commissioner of Revenue’s office during Hollands tenure. The audits went back to 2005. His defense of Holland and disparagement of both the media and the city auditor, Drew Harmon is hard to follow. It would have been easier for the layman to comprehend had he summarized a defense of Holland without disparaging others. To give some balance I’ve posted Walker’s response.

The Roanoke Times reporter Mason Adams did an excellent investigative article  in May 2008 – CLICK HERE for a coherent understanding of events.

Douglas Walker responds in an email:

Over the past several months I have learned quite a bit about the political process, I guess the final missing piece was an attack on my character. In his article Hank Bostwick basically calls me a liar for citing numerous reports from credible media sources and the municipal auditors office, as far as that goes I will deal with him after the election. Hank’s desire to call into question the integrity of Keith, Drew and myself is somewhat confusing, but I probably shouldn’t expect much more from such an obviously one sided journalist. Mr. Bostwick and Mr. Holland have the same amount of real world experience running a business, so the fact that they share opinions isn’t hard to believe.

With respect to the Commissioner’s office, the facts haven’t changed. There have been no audits since Mr. Harmon was asked not to return in 2005. We need a commissioner that embraces the ideals of open government, and does not hide behind technicalities to diffuse claims of wrongdoing. My Campaign is about offering the citizens of Roanoke a chance to have a capable business minded leader serve them. I have made no personal attacks against Mr. Holland and don’t intend to do so. These facts about the Commissioner’s office came out long before I was running for office. I would summarize with these thoughts:

 1) If you are happy with the way our city government is being run then vote for my opponent.

 2)If you want a Commissioner who ignores suggestions for improvement and responds “you shouldn’t have been checking up on me” when an audit reveals serious inadequacies, then vote for my opponent.

 3) If you want someone who is committed to a transparent office, which will welcome performance reviews and audits, then vote for me.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Douglas Walker

Posted By Valerie Garner

Categories: Election 2009, Politics, Roanoke City Politics

Tags: ,

Comments (8)

Hank Bostwick

October 23rd, 2009 at 7:58 PM    


Please point out any inaccurate statements in the Harbinger article.

If you can’t stand the heat, don’t come in the kitchen.

If your entire platform consists of disparaging someone for something that never even happened, then you should expect to be criticized for it.

If the Code of Virginia is too difficult to understand, then perhaps another line of work should be considered.

You can’t change the basic facts:

1. An audit within the scope of the law was conducted.

2. Protected records were disseminated without authorization.

3. An unchecked list of inactive business licenses was published online without Mr. Holland’s input.

4. The actual list of inactive licenses was some 300 entries shorter than the list published on WDBJ7.

5. Not a single media outlet has let Mr. Holland tell his story.

The truth has a way of wiggling its way through to the light of day.

SCH diligently followed the Onzlee Ware story to completion. Every single one of our conclusions has been substantiated by the SBE. Time will demonstrate our accuracy in regards to Mr. Holland as well.

Mason Adams’ article in The Roanoke Times essentially substantiates our conclusions on SCH.

We can’t make this stuff easy. So if it is too complicated to understand, just read it over and over again until you get it.

I believe in you.

Val

October 23rd, 2009 at 8:08 PM    


Hank,

Don’t post comments left on your blog copied to mine. If Mr. Woodrum wants to comment here he is welcome. Mr. Woodrum may not appreciate it.

Hank Bostwick

October 23rd, 2009 at 8:42 PM    


My apologies, but again, I thought this was a blog.

Roanoke Voter

October 23rd, 2009 at 11:55 PM    


This is what everyone really needs to know, Hank Bostwick’s impartiality as a “journalist” is non-existant. I have dealt with him several times and while he claims to be a champion of the truth, I would say he wouldn’t let the truth get in the way of him defending someone he considers an ally. His hilarious defense of Holland is reason enough for me to vote for Walker. I challenge you to find a credible journalist that regularly associates with him and respects him as a “fellow reporter”. And Hank, if this post upsets you then maybe you should get out of the kitchen. Harmon’s audit raises serious questions about Holland’s office, if you had any credibility you would grill Holland about those findings and report on that. What a joke, period, end of story.

Hank Bostwick

October 24th, 2009 at 12:50 AM    


First of all, I can’t believe I’m up this late.

Second, anonymous bloggers lack credibility.

How is Sherman Holland my ally exactly? I don’t get it.

While I appreciate that you believe I have so much influence, I promise you, no one really takes me seriously.

But, what is hilarious about the defense? I wasn’t going for humor.

Long, complicated, technical, pathetic, perhaps, but hilarious? The adjective just doesn’t fit.

What has been obscured in the various accounts, RV, is that the audit–within a scope permissible under law–did in fact reveal problems with the office, problems that stemmed as Mason Adams reported and Harmon quoted “the limited functionality of the [computer] system.”

It has since been replaced as Adams also reported.

Harmon’s audit was originally authorized to assess the functionality of the assessment systems in the Revenue Office, but somehow things went south and eventually an unauthorized or allegedly improperly authorized data file was emailed to the media.

His office did not fail to bill hundreds of thousands of dollars as alleged. End of story.

Go to bed, RV. You’ll think clearer in the morning.

Roanoke Voter

October 24th, 2009 at 10:01 AM    


Hank-
1) I can believe you were up that late, you are so self absorbed you were waiting to see if anyone commented on your post.

2) Anonymous posts are encouraged by most blogs. It keeps you from being able to personally attack me.

3) Holland is a Democrat (disgrace to his party) and therefore an ally. I have seen enough of your reporting to know you really don’t care about anything but party affiliation.

4) I never said you have any influence, actually I would argue the opposite. I would agree about the being taken seriously part.

5) It is hilarious because your conclusions are the opposite of a certified CPA, and public auditor. Furthermore your conclusion rely on documents provided to you be the very office you are defending. Not sure if you have ever performed an audit, but typically you don’t ask the person you are auditing for their assistance/opinion.

6) Long, yes. Complicated, no. Technical, a little. Hilarious, clearly.

I disagree with your conclusions, to attempt to pass them off as facts is irresponsible. As a concerned voter I have valuable information about this office, I am not very concerned about how it was obtained (you claim illegally). Again, we disagree, but Harmon’s findings carry much more weight than your opinions.

It’s morning, and I would agree I am now thinking much more clearly.

john m.

October 26th, 2009 at 11:35 PM    


How can Valerie be a member of the City Democrat Committee when she is openly supporting a Republican in this race? This disqualifies you Val.

Val

October 27th, 2009 at 12:31 AM    


This is not an endorsement of either candidate but defense of auditor and other media as well as distortion by SCH.

This is not a political website though my leanings are well known.

Comments are not moderated. Notify any abuse at info@roanokefreepress.com put ABUSE in the subject and the offensive post.

Leave a Reply