RICHMOND, Va.— Ken Dufty of Wardtown has filed with the Virginia appeals court a request to review a controversial zoning decision that allowed high-density residential development in rural Northampton County, following an appeal filed by a local resident who argues the county board exceeded its authority.
Kenneth Gordon Dufty of Exmore filed the appeal with the Virginia Court of Appeals in June, challenging a February decision by the Northampton County Board of Supervisors to rezone 3.15 acres from a mobile home park to a hamlet residential district. The rezoning allows developer Dimitri Hionis to build up to five houses on the property in the county’s southern agricultural tier.
The case centers on whether local governments have the authority to effectively abolish land use controls and zoning restrictions. In April 2024, the county board approved the rezoning after stating that developers “can build whatever they want on their property as long as it fits” and that the county “has no control over that.”
Dufty argues this approach violates Virginia’s Dillon Rule, which limits local government authority to powers explicitly granted by the state legislature. He contends the decision contradicts the county’s own 2009 and 2020 comprehensive plans, which prohibit creating new hamlet districts in rural areas.
The Northampton County Circuit Court dismissed Dufty’s initial lawsuit in February 2025, ruling he lacked standing to challenge the decision. The court refused multiple requests to include the full administrative record from the county’s planning process in the case file.
“If a county government is able to deny a plaintiff the right to petition his sitting government for a redress of grievances…simply because the address on his license does not please that local government, we not only have lost our democracy, we have embraced anarchy,” Dufty stated in his appeal brief.
The controversy has divided the county’s planning commission and drawn opposition from hundreds of residents. During public hearings, former county officials and residents testified that the rezoning violated established land use practices designed to preserve the county’s rural character.
Dufty told the Mirror, “As I said to the Court of Appeals, as well as Judge Lewis….this case has nothing to do with a development on Cedar Grove Drive. It has everything to do with a local government making a land use decision that will set a negative precedent in this county forever if it stands…and their act is in direct contravention to the Dillon Rule of Land Use law…..Board of Supervisors of Arlington County v. Countryside Investment Company, 258 Va. 497 (1999), is just one of a half dozen examples where the Supreme Court states that the local government only has the express authority to decide land use issues within the boundaries that it is given, namely the legislative authority. So last May, I had two choices., hide under the couch and wait for John Coker and Dixon Leatherbury defecate on the the Dillon Rule of land use governance and set the new standard where a developer can do anything they want anywhere with no fear of reprisal….unless someone happens to live within the 2000 foot “zone of speciality, or do what I did on December 22, 2015, and exercise my First Amendment Right to Petition my government for a redress of grievances.”
County officials defended the decision as addressing workforce housing needs, though planning consultants noted the rezoning came with no conditional requirements limiting house prices or sizes.
The Virginia Court of Appeals has not yet scheduled oral arguments in the case. Dufty is seeking to have the circuit court’s dismissal overturned and the case remanded for a full jury trial with access to complete county records.
The outcome could have broader implications for local zoning authority and citizen participation in land use decisions across Virginia.
This ruling feels like a very sneaky and classist way of saying, ‘Back off—you’re not important here, you’re not “qualified” to speak up,’ even though they are a resident, a long-time citizen, and a keen observer. It’s a dismissal based on arbitrary gatekeeping rather than any real lack of connection or stake.
What has actually happened here is that the district court established a new Virginia standard for standing in cases where as here, elected public officials arrogate unto themselves power to toss laws, rules, regulations, and in this case, the Northampton County Comprehensive Plan in the toilet.
The court’s Order in this case states that “After considering the Parties’ written submissions, the exhibits attached thereto, and the arguments presented by the Parties, the Court finds that Defendant’s (Northampton County BOS) Plea in Bar and Renewed Motion to Dismiss are well-taken because Plaintiff (Ken Dufty) has not alleged sufficient facts to establish standing to bring this action, and THEREFORE It is hereby ordered that the Board’s Plea in Bar is Sustained and It is furthered ordered that the Board’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and It is hereby FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and stricken from the docket.”
“The Court notes Plaintiff’s exceptions to the Court’s Ruling.”
So, according to the plain wording of that Order, Ken Dufty’s suit against the BOS was dismissed with prejudice to Ken Dufty because he did not allege sufficient facts to establish standing to bring the action against the BOS for tossing the Northampton Comprehensive Plan in the toilet!
So how many more facts would he have had to allege to get standing?
Five more?
Ten more?
We don’t know, and more importantly, Ken Dufty doesn’t know, because the court never bothered to say, making it a guessing game for anyone thinking of bringing an action against the Northampton County BOS, which is a travesty of justice.
So, that Order could well be construed as being Impermissibly vague!
Your comment underscores the exact danger this Order now poses for public accountability. By dismissing the case with prejudice for “insufficient facts to establish standing,” without identifying what facts would have been sufficient, the court effectively cloaked the BOS in immunity—not based on the merits, but on a procedural technicality wrapped in ambiguity.
You’re absolutely right to suggest the court seemed more inclined to shelter the Board’s actions than to uphold the rights of the citizens to question whether those actions violated the Northampton Comprehensive Plan—a legally adopted document that the Board is bound to follow, not discard.
The end result is not merely a loss for Ken Dufty—it’s a chilling message to every resident of Northampton County: “You may not be allowed to challenge your government’s overreach—not because you’re wrong, but because you didn’t guess the secret formula to be heard.” That is not how justice is supposed to function in a democracy.
This ruling doesn’t protect the law; it weaponizes legal procedure to insulate power. And that’s exactly what makes it dangerous.
So grateful for this publication—it shares news and insights the others won’t touch.
It also could be said that the district court was more concerned with protecting the lawlessness of the Northampton County BOS than defending the rights of the citizens of Northampton County to challenge that lawlessness in a court of law.
Clelia Jane Sheppard says @ June 29, 2025 at 2:47 pm: This ruling feels like a very sneaky and classist way of saying, ‘Back off—you’re not important here, you’re not “qualified” to speak up,’ even though they are a resident, a long-time citizen, and a keen observer.
It’s a dismissal based on arbitrary gatekeeping rather than any real lack of connection or stake.
ME: It’s a dismissal that sends a strong message to the residents of Northampton County, the BOS of Northampton County, and the developers who want to develop Northampton County.
The message to the Northampton County BOS is “fear not, the court has your back!”
The message to the developers is similar: “Do whatever it is you want to do, fear not, the Northampton County Comprehensive Plan is dead and the court will make sure it stays that way.”
And the message to the residents of Northampton County is get back down in your basements where you belong, and don’t you dare try to question the absolute authority of the BOS in Northampton County, Viginia!
“You want protection of law – go somewhere where it exists, because it don’t exist here!”
Sad but true. The Northampton BOS has proved to be the friend of the well-heeled, affluent, and land-rich gentry of the county. It looks after whatever interests those elites have, whether it be deer and bird hunting, development, or any other special use they request. Conversely, the BOS has also shown itself to be prejudicial to any individuals those wealthy elites single out for whatever reason.