To the Editor:
Do we want a County supervisor steeped in the integrity of the Army values, or one described by the following timeline?
2003: Candidate John Foust: “My opponent claims not to see the conflict of interest in serving in a position of public trust as Dranesville's Planning Commissioner while working for a land use lobbyist that represents developers and other special interests. I will avoid such conflicts and bring the highest standard of integrity to the job of supervisor. . . . I believe that only individuals (not corporations and other business entities) should be permitted to contribute to Supervisor campaigns.” (bit.ly/1MP4Uup)
2010: Supervisor Foust shepherds through the Board of Supervisors an amendment to the zoning ordinance and several additional measures on behalf of a Delaware corporation, Madison Building Associates LLC. (1.usa.gov/1PDAx7U)
2011: The next year, an election year, Supervisor Foust takes over $19,000 in donations from that same corporation, by far his largest campaign donor after the Democratic Party itself. (bit.ly/1gW6HPM)
2014: Congressional candidate Foust excoriates opponent Barbara Comstock for “a potential conflict of interest.” (http://bit.ly/1PxPuv4)
Did John Foust sell his vote in a quid pro quo? We can never know. Did he create his own “potential conflict of interest”? You decide. Did he create the appearance of a conflict of interest? Indubitably. Can we believe his lofty campaign rhetoric? No.
Griselda Farthing
Great Falls