When the Majority Become the Majority

Josh Shields – Director, Citizens for Purcellville
September 23, 2026

This topic is something that I’ve been contemplating since shortly after Susan Khalil resigned from the town council last month, but couldn’t quite express the way I wanted to until I started thinking about last night’s (September 22nd) Town Council meeting.

Specifically, I’ve been contemplating how when a major shift of power occurs, it often changes the dynamics of transactional relationships, particularly between members of each opposing “faction” or viewpoint.

With Susan’s resignation and Ben Nett’s suspension, the group of elected individuals dubbed “Team Mayberry” finds themselves down from a four member majority to a two member minority. At best the council could be split 3-3 (with Bertaut, Luke, and Dean as one side of the equation and Rayner, Wright, and Stought as the other), but more likely than not, the split will fall 4-2 (this is just my own hypothesis based on what I know of Brian Dean’s prior campaigning).

Any time there is such a shift, it is often the nature of the “new majority” (aka former minority) to want to make big changes and enact new policies or controls that solidify their new found status as the “ruling party”. But often this comes at a cost.

When Team Mayberry first took over as council majority, they immediately sprung into action, and at a dizzyingly fast pace did exactly that. In the first meeting held by the new council, they fired the town manager. They installed a political ally as the new town manager (without competitive interview or any formal hiring process). They voted to end the discussion about annexing property north of Rt 7 once and for all, denying the application for annexation of 117 acres which is now the county approved Valley Commerce Center.

In the weeks and months that followed, another flurry of votes to impose their new found power: they transferred money from the meals tax towards utilities, lowered utility rates against expert advice, fired town staff, reorganized council liaisons to advisory committees (removing engaged political opponents from their desired and effective roles), removed town support from the Virginia Main Street program, and voted to disband the police department.

Often, these actions were justified as “the will of the voters,” despite large turnouts and public opposition at public hearings and town council meetings. 

In many cases, they were done on short notice, without staff reports or prepared analysis, let alone proper due diligence by the council members themselves. Again, “it’s the will of the voters” we heard.

Our town has suffered from these impulsive, quick, and reactionary decisions that were made. We now face larger utility increases than we would have had rates not been lowered. Our financial reserves have been drawn down by 7 figures. Our town’s credit rating has been lowered, resulting in higher borrowing costs to the town. Two of the town’s public officers, Vice Mayor Nett and Town Manager Fraser have been indicted for felony charges.

Nothing good came of quick, impulsive changes by a new majority.

Last night, one of the action and discussion points of the meeting was about revising and updating the town’s Official Charter. For those of you who don’t know, the Town Charter, is the legal document that is formally approved by the state legislature. 

This document establishes the town as an official and legal entity, infers certain legal authority and responsibilities, and also outlines the town’s governmental functions, structure, and administration. It also includes certain restrictions on how the town operates or requirements that must be met within specific deadlines.

The new council majority of Rayner, Wright, and Stought originally discussed a major revision and it was stated by more than once council member that this effort shouldn’t be “piecemealed”, but rather a comprehensive update. An expedited timeline for revising the charter, preferably in time for the next General Session of the legislature, was also mentioned.

Meeting this timeline would require a rewrite of the underlying founding document within the next few weeks.

As the discussion progressed, staff and our town attorney (as well as Mayor Bertaut and Council Member Luke), expressed concern about rushing the process, given the number of hours that staff will potentially be required to assist, and how a rushed process can result in unintended consequences.

I can’t agree more.

While  I understand that there are problematic clauses within the charter (such as the residency requirement and residency timeline for a town manager), I also don’t think that less than two months is adequate time for a comprehensive rewrite of the document upon which our town is foundationally created.

Our town’s residents and stakeholders deserve the opportunity to to provide input, and town council members need to take the time to conduct due diligence on this issue (as well as many other decisions).

While I believe that the likelihood of rash and snap decisions has been greatly diminished with the change of majority, I would like to point out to the new majority that just because you CAN, doesn’t mean you SHOULD. 

Correct the most important issues quickly, but while still following the proper process and engaging with staff, residents, and other stakeholders.

Then, let’s remove the pressure of a self-imposed deadline and write a solid update to the charter that will stand firm on a solid foundation and serve the community for years to come.