Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comment Social Media topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenters press board on vigil controversy and proposed park renaming

King George County Board of Supervisors · September 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Residents spoke at length about a vigil for Charlie Kirk and a social‑media post by a Brooks family member; one speaker urged renaming Shiloh (CDL) Brooks Park to 'Patriot Park' while neighbors urged caution and fact‑finding before action.

During public comment at the King George County Board of Supervisors meeting, several residents raised concerns about a recent vigil for Charlie Kirk and a social‑media post by a member of the Brooks family.

Lee Robotham (James Madison District) said the community had experienced a "double standard" on free speech and asked the board to investigate the social‑media post attributed to the Brooks family; he proposed renaming Shiloh (CDL) Brooks Park to "Patriot Park" to honor what he described as patriotic values and said he could provide a copy of the deleted post. Robotham urged accountability for statements he characterized as hateful rhetoric.

Neighbor Terry Morgan (Shiloh District) responded during public comment that the post was made by a family member, not Supervisor Sydell Brooks, and cautioned against hasty action based on hearsay. Morgan said immediate, unilateral steps could be divisive and urged the board to research who specifically authored the post before taking any formal actions.

James Shaw, a citizen journalist, also addressed the board, urging vigilance against misinformation and thanking the board for their service. The board did not take formal action on the park‑renaming suggestion during the meeting; the matter remained unresolved in the record and would require staff follow‑up or a formal agenda item to advance.