Tempers Flare at JCC Supes Meeting

By Desiree Parker Tuesday, September 20, 2011

The contentious relationship James City County supervisors Jim Kennedy and Jim Icenhour have had for years spilled over into the public realm at last Tuesday’s board meeting.

During the board’s closing comments on the issue before the vote, Icenhour accused the board’s Republican majority of being inconsistent with their support of property rights and fiscal conservatism, and argued the majority has been defending private interests over the public interest. (See the link to Icenhour's comments, scroll to 2:34:57; Kennedy's comments follow).

He called for Republicans to be replaced, saying, “I think we can expect another 3-2 vote on this one. Our citizens have told us they don’t want this rural land developed in an EO zone but we haven’t listened. A local government that doesn’t listen to its citizens needs to be replaced.”

Kennedy was clearly upset by Icenhour’s comments, calling his statements a “campaign speech,” campaigning that he said after the meeting was on behalf of Icenhour’s fellow Democrat Supervisor John McGlennon.

Icenhour said at the meeting the planned Mooretown Road extension that will cut through the area targeted for the EO zone was planned specifically for the zone, which Kennedy called “an outright lie.”

Kennedy told Icenhour that, though he had criticized the board extensively, “I haven’t heard a solution to any of those problems from you in four years.”

Regarding Icenhour’s suggestion that Republicans didn’t care about property rights when it came to the EO zone but had made an issue of loss of property in other cases, Kennedy retorted that during the 2007 Ironbound Square redevelopment process, “you had no problem taking 300-foot buffers from people even though you faced a room full of people very much like this that opposed it… you elected to approve it.”

Kennedy also accused Icenhour of being a keystone of the politicking on the board for the last four years.

When asked Thursday if he felt his remarks were out of line, Kennedy said he did not. “I stated I was upset, and I addressed everything he and Mr. McGlennon mentioned that night” point by point, he said. “I don’t see how addressing accusations and allegations is wrong.”

He said he was just fed up with ongoing accusations from Icenhour.

When asked if she thought it would have been appropriate to gavel either of the men due to their comments Tuesday, Board Chairman Mary Jones said, “as Chairman I am not going to limit a Supervisor's ability to set the record straight.  If it had been necessary to use the gavel, I would have. It was not.”

Icenhour said Thursday that he did not feel his comments were out of line. He felt Kennedy’s comments were “over the top, a little out of line, but that’s what I’ve come to expect from Mr. Kennedy. I’ve developed a thick hide. This is not the first time he has addressed me directly from the dais.”

Icenhour cited the code of conduct and said he aimed to stay within it with his comments Tuesday, though Kennedy has argued on previous occasions that Icenhour hasn’t always behaved accordingly.

Though the two men rarely see eye to eye, they will have to continue to work with one another, at least for another several years. Kennedy is running unopposed in his district in this year’s election, and Icenhour’s term doesn’t expire until 2013.

Kennedy said Tuesday night he was disappointed in the board for its politicking. Icenhour agreed after the meeting, saying, “He was right in that instance. I don’t think that partisanship will let us work together.”