Citizens for Purcellville

10/07/2026

The pre-trial hearing for Ben Nett’s computer tresspass case is now rescheduled for 1pm on October 15th.

Should this hearing again be continued it is unlikely that the motion could be heard prior to the scheduled trial start date of October 26th, given the fact that only one addition day to hear motions is available after the 15th.

This is for the court to consider the request by Nett and his attorney to have unrestricted access to the Grand Jury “transcripts, reports, and other materials”.

This would be an uncommon allowance for a criminal defendant. Nett’s team previously had controlled/supervised access to this information prior to his recall trial, however the novel nature of that legal proceeding created an unusual circumstance.

As of this morning, the Loudoun County Circuit Court records system does not indicate any additional filings by Commonwealth Attorney Eric Olsen on this matter that would indicate his position, however the lack of a filed brief by Mr Olsen may indicate that he is not planning on contesting the issue given certain timelines required by the court.

Per court policy, Mr. Olsen’s office would have until tomorrow (October 8th) to file a brief with the court if intends on opposing this action.

10/06/2026

Last minute reminder, Loudoun County personal property taxes are due today!

09/30/2026

The pre-trial hearing in Ben Nett's Computer Trespass trial scheduled for tomorrow, October 1st at 1pm has been "Continued Generally" (postponed to a later date).

We do not know when it will be rescheduled, but we were told by a credible source that it will possibly now be held on Thursday, October 15th.

09/29/2026

Because we can't have nice things, we've locked the page commenting down temporarily.

Sorry for the inconvenience or if it seems like we're taking a playbook from the 2025 Town Council playbook. Our intent is not to shut down constructive conversation or even critical comments.

But there IS a point where criticism becomes disruptive, and simply put, I would rather eat dinner with my family than deal with ongoing social media drama caused by one individual.

So for now we're limiting comment so that I and the other moderators don't need to spend continuous energy and effort to delete posts by an individual that was previously banned.

We'll be back to normal in a little while. In the meantime, feel free to send a DM if you really need us or want to meet for that cup of coffee. -J

Send a message to learn more

09/29/2026

FULL TRANSPARENCY, because I feel it's important.

Citizens for Purcellville today blocked Darla Kohl from our page. It's apparent that nothing we were going to say or do was going to satisfy what had become an insatiable attempt by a previously unknown individual to rile us up, call into question our motives, or otherwise work to sow disharmony. Unlike an elected official, we are NOT bound by first amendment protections, and we don't want the actions of one disruptive individual to detract from our efforts.

As the Director of Citizens for Purcellville, I'm not afraid to stand up and reveal who I am personally, nor am I afraid of making my own personal viewpoints known about how I feel about the candidates. HOWEVER, the individuals that are associated with the efforts of this organization have worked very diligently to separate our own personal opinions from the information and materials we present through this platform.

Citizens for Purcellville has made every effort to be as transparent in our actions as possible (even to the point of reporting our financial details to a far greater extent than necessary).

I readily admit that we might come up short from time to time, but the intent of this effort is NOT to directly oppose or endorse any particular candidate or slate, or to campaign on any individual's behalf. THIS is why did not disclose an affiliation or opposition to any of the candidates on the November ballot in when we filed as a Political Action Committee.

I have been asked "Why start a PAC? Purcellville doesn't need a political organization for local politics!?"

The formal entity behind Citizens for Purcellville was started because I personally wanted to make sure that we were following the law. I realize that seems to be a novel concept in local politics over the past 18 months. The threshold for mandatory reporting and registering as a political organization is very low. The reality is that the website that I created in 2025 that tracked the salary paid to suspended town manager Kwasi Fraser met the definition of "influencing elections" and nearly met the financial limits for mandated reporting.

As a group, we wanted to ensure that funds collected and spent to provide information that could be construed as influencing an election were properly documented, reported, and any concerns about legal liability were addressed for those individuals involved.

The folks behind this effort have worked diligently over countless hours to research, analyze, and provide factual information with as neutral a point of view as we can provide. We conscientiously work to remove our personal bias to the greatest extent possible. We acknowledge that sometimes, we're going to miss.

Over half a dozen individuals began the effort of this group way back in March by discussing a candidate forum. Since then the effort has grown.

We worked hard to identify areas where we could be seen as biased when holding a candidate forum and attempted to address each and every issue we identified, including issues that prevented successful forums in past elections, but despite the effort, we were immediately castigated by the Mayor and the Blue Ridge Leader for being biased against them. There was never even an attempt to meet us in the middle in good faith by half of the candidates.

Likewise, the same slate of candidates in this election have refused to engage in any meaningful manner, instead choosing to use their media connections to write high-profile op-eds to discredit our efforts.

Unknown supporters (some of whom simply popped up this past year with no real history or presence in any groups, aka possible bot/imposter accounts) have called into question our motives and accused us of being biased. Some have even threatened to report our efforts to the State Board of Elections.

To that end, a few minutes ago, I amended our formal Statement of Organization. I did this out of concern to protect the individuals who are involved in this effort, and particularly to protect myself and my family.

Our amended Statement of Organization now lists Citizens for Purcellville as formally opposing the following individuals:

Christopher M. Bertaut (Candidate for Mayor)
H. Sam Brown, Jr (Candidate for Member Town Council)
Greg F. Paris (Candidate for Member Town Council)
Hank J. Speckhardt (Candidate for Member Town Council)

We will NOT formally endorse or support any candidate, and we are committed to continuing to ask the uncomfortable questions, regardless of who the candidate or elected individual may be.

We realize that this action may cause us to lose some legitimacy in our efforts or otherwise call into question our motives. This action might cause us to lose followers, supporters, or even some members of the team working behind the scenes. This was not an action that I take lightly, and it was one that I hoped to avoid.

Regardless, the end goal of those of us contributing to the Citizens for Purcellville effort is to provide information to the voters or Purcellville and to attempt to provide a counterpoint to the endless stream of misinformation that is introduced into our local politics.

Information that by its nature does not necessarily cast favorable light on some of the candidates in this race, but that doesn't necessarily make it biased. As the saying goes, "The truth only hurts if it should."

We will continue to put in the work to provide information in as neutral manner possible and let the VOTERS to decide. And I remain willing to meet with anybody that would like to have open and genuine discussion about issues in town.

Sincerely,
Josh Shields - Director, Citizens for Purcellville

09/29/2026

This is Josh.

Putting out an open invite to any local resident, voter, business owner, or any other individual (except Ben Nett) that’s interested in having an open, in-person conversation at a public location in Purcellville about what is going on in town.

Bring a friend. Let me know your thoughts. Feel free to call out where you think I’m wrong. Tell me about what your concerns are. Let me know what you support, what you disagree with, and what your vision of the town is.

Coffee is on me. I’m free all day tomorrow.

Let’s build relationships instead of throwing stones at each other.

09/28/2026

It's been a few rough weeks for the Citizens for Purcellville team. Various challenges for our team including family and work issues, travel, time zones, aging parents, health issues and what seems to be a non-stop influx of drama.

Sometimes we feel like we're shouting into the wind... other times it seems like we're arguing with bots (maybe we are)... But thank you to our supporters who continue to offer words of encouragement and support our efforts.

We'll keep on keeping on. Please help us make the countless hours and late night rallies worth it by liking, following, and sharing our posts!

09/28/2026

Ben Nett Legal Updates - September 28, 2026

While Ben continues to create social media videos and send out AI generated campaign mailers (something he appears to be getting good at doing in his free time), the wheels of the legal system continue to grind behind the scenes.

We're STILL working to providing a comprehensive Ben Nett Legal Summary... but in the meantime, there have been a few developments this that have come to our attention and we thought they were notable.

On August 27th, the Town of Purcellville filed 'Respondent's Demurrers, Plea in Bar, and Answer' in response to Ben Nett's lawsuit against the town to be reinstated. In this filing, the town asks the court to reject Nett's attempt to enforce the grievance-panel decision and separately argues dismissal of his claim that the town breached a "Process Agreement".

On September 17th, Commonwealth Attorney/Special Prosecutor Eric Olsen, filed a 'Motion for Leave to Intervene - Rule 3:14' in response to Ben Nett's lawsuit against the town to be reinstated. In his filing, Olsen requests the Circuit Court permit him to become a party to Nett's lawsuit specifically so he can defend his November 2025 determination that the grievance-panel decision should not be implemented because the process and determination of the panel "was not consistent with Purcellville's written grievance policy", "was not consistent with the Commonwealth of Virginia's Written (and codified) State Grievance Procedure", "was not consistent with Law and Policy", and "was erroneous."

On September 25th, Attorneys for Ben Nett filed a 'Notice of Demand for Jury Sentencing'. In this document, Nett "gives notice of his request that the jury ascertain punishment for any offense for which he may be convicted." This was filed in regards to his upcoming trial on four felony counts of Computer Trespass / Illegal use of a law enforcement database to gather identifying information.

A pre-trial hearing has been set for the court to consider a 'Second Motion To Release Special Grand Jury Transcripts, Report, and Other Materials' that was filed by Mr Nett's attorney on September 17th. This filing requests additional access to the Grand Jury transcripts and evidence prior to his upcoming trial. This hearing is scheduled for 1pm on October 1st, although we have heard that there is a possibility it could be delayed to another date. (As of this post, it remains scheduled for 10/1).

Finally, the Circuit Court has set a hearing date of September 20, 2027 (next year) for the court to hear Demurrer and Plea in Bar arguments in the civil lawsuits between Ben Nett and Sara Lombraña, LaDonna Snellbaker, and Diana Hays.

New documents on these topics have been uploaded to our Ben Nett legal documents drive for any individuals who might wish to review them. We will post direct links in the comments below.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1VAUF1jnFFaW27W2AFIX60__k8HWislUL?usp=sharing

09/28/2026

CORRECTION TO TOWN COUNCIL CANDIDATE FINANCE REPORTING

We're incredibly embarrassed to issue a correction to our finance report for the six town council candidates. In yesterday's posts, we INCORRECTLY stated:

"Kevin Wright, with the exception of a single $99.00 cash contribution from an unknown donor, is wholly supported by Erin Rayner’s campaign funds."

This statement was not factual and we have corrected the report to read:

"Kevin Wright, with the exception of a single $99.00 cash contribution from an unknown donor, is backed by in-kind donations, primarily self funded (52.5%) with significant contributions from Erin Rayner’s campaign (41.1%)."

Kevin is the most significant contributor of funding to his own campaign. We apologize to Councilman Kevin B Wright for the confusion and thank him for his understanding of our error.

Thank you everyone for your understanding as we work to provide factual information and data analysis.

09/27/2026

We have compiled and analyzed the Campaign Finance Reports of the six Purcellville Town Council Candidates. The extensive 27 page report and analysis can be downloaded in PDF format here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WAVQw1YbjXgYNuI9WzOgu_1tXrAJUlQQ/view?usp=sharing

We will also be posting this information to our website as a blog post in the upcoming day or two.

These were our final conclusions, however we invite you to share your own in the comments:

FINAL ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Review of the six candidates presents a widely varying range of fundraising and campaign finance strategies.

Three of the candidates (Brown, Paris, and Speckhardt) appear to rely wholly on direct support and funding from either Mayor Bertaut or Ben Nett. Tying them directly together as a consolidated slate.

Kevin Wright, with the exception of a single $99.00 cash contribution from an unknown donor, is backed by in-kind donations, primarily self funded (52.5%) with significant contributions from Erin Rayner’s campaign (41.1%).

Mitch Seipt and Paul McCray have worked as independent candidates, each raising their own funds and working separately from either of the mayoral candidates. This would appear to indicate that while they may be aligned with other candidates philosophically on certain issues, they are each independently working towards their own election.

Seipt and McCray both report identical in-kind contributions for political consulting from a Leesburg based consulting organization, so there may have been some collaboration between those two candidates, but there is insufficient evidence to determine if they both received identical services (or possibly met with the consultant together.)

The reporting made by Greg Paris’ campaign is the most troubling of all six candidates, with potential campaign finance violations and the potential for civil penalties as a result of contribution omissions. While it is likely that omissions in contributions was unintentional, it is troubling that timely action to correct these discrepancies has not yet been taken. Despite the candidate being made aware of possible violations, it would appear that amendments to reports have not been filed.

The nature of in-kind reporting would seem to indicate that the Bertaut slate of candidates has outspent the other three opposing candidates, however it is important to recognize that “common spending” is reported as separate and equal income by each campaign. A single mailing collectively supporting the Bertaut slate that might cost a one-time expenditure of $3,200 would be reported as an in-kind contribution by each campaign. This results in an inflated combined expense total of $12,800 vs the single $3,200 actual cost of the single mailer.

The reports would indicate that there are two distinct campaign-finance models in the race: Consolidated slates and independent fundraising.

The Bertaut slate appears to be wholly united both in financing and platform ideology.

Rayner and Wright also appear to be closely aligned in financing and ideology (based on established voting record since January 2025).

Seipt and McCray have focused much more effort into grassroots contributions and individual contributions, with both of these campaigns reporting a significantly deeper base of supporters (32 different finance sources for Seipt and 17 sources for McCray).

Removing in-kind contributions: Seipt reports the highest cash contributions: $4,059.00. McCray comes in second with $2,642.00.

When adjusting “paired in-kind contributions” for proportionate share, the candidates come out in this estimated order for total income/support (cash + in-kind contributions):

Seipt: $4,379.00
McCray: $3,512.67
Speckhardt*: $2,380.63
Brown*: $2,380.63
Paris*: $2,380.63
Wright: $1,469.12

*Estimated total expenditures by the Brown, Paris, and Speckhardt campaigns considering consolidated expenditures and previously reported campaign finance reporting discrepancies.

Many hours or research, fact-checking, and writing go into these articles. We appreciate your likes and shares! If you feel that there is benefit from our posts and work, please consider making a small contribution via the donate link on our website: www.CitizensForPurcellville.org

Welcome! This grassroots effort was created in response to all of the events over the past year in Purcellville, VA. As we approach the upcoming election, a group of citizens felt it critical to help educate and inform local voters about the candidate and issues that our town faces. We feel it is of...