HJR 31: Joint Subcommittee Studying
the State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act
June 18, 2002
Richmond
The joint subcommittee is charged with reviewing
(i) the definitions of "personal interest in a contract" and "personal
interest in a transaction," (ii) the requirements for filing disclosure
statements, and (iii) rules regarding the disqualification of officials
from participating in a transaction when a conflict exists. In addition,
the charge includes the review of any other areas of confusion or inconsistency
in the application of the Conflict of Interest Act.
Conflict of Interest Act
The act became effective in 1987 as a part
of ongoing legislative efforts to develop proper and workable standards
of conduct that could be applied fairly and uniformly to state and local
officers and employees. The intent of the act is to ensure citizen confidence
in public bodies and to eliminate situations in which preference or undue
influence could come to bear in the operation of government.
The process of developing the desired standards
is consistently wedged between two principal needs. First, the need to
have high standards of conduct to govern the actions of public officials
and employees in order to guarantee that the performance of their duties
would not only withstand public scrutiny but also foster public confidence.
Second, the need to have clear and well-understood standards to govern
such conduct so that public officers and employees could be judged fairly
and so that citizens who undertake public service would have a fair understanding
of what is expected of them in terms of continuing their private careers
or business interests while fulfilling their public service. The current
act seeks strike a balance between these two needs.
Issues
After the overview, members of the joint
subcommittee discussed examples of situations raising conflict of interests
issues. Two issues generated significant discussion. The first focused
on whether it was proper for a member of a local governing body, who is
also a schoolteacher, to vote on the budget for the school board. The
second issue involved whether an option to purchase real estate amounted
to an interest in real estate that required disclosure under the act and
if so, how such disclosure should be made. Delegate Marshall noted that
it was a similar issue involving a local land use advisory entity in his
district that led to the introduction of the resolution to create the
joint subcommittee.
Scope
The joint subcommittee members also discussed
the appropriate scope of its inquiry. There was consensus among the membership
that lack of a recent review of the act, coupled with the continuing evolution
of the operations of state and local government, necessitated the inclusion
of a wide range of issues pertaining to the proper application of the
act.
The Prince William County Attorney, appearing
on behalf of the Local Government Attorneys Association (LGA), stated
that the LGA was in the process of performing an extensive review of the
act with its membership. The review would include a survey of the LGA
members regarding problematic areas of the act and suggestions for changes,
a summary of conflict of interests laws in other states, and a compilation
of reference materials pertaining to the act. The joint subcommittee members
agreed that the work of the LGA would be extremely beneficial and should
be included in the future work sessions of the joint subcommittee as it
moved towards determining recommendations.
The next meeting of the joint subcommittee
will be held on August 22, 2002, at 1:00 p.m. in House Room D of the General
Assembly Building in Richmond.
Chairman:
The Hon. Robert G. Marshall
For information, contact:
Amigo R. Wade
Division of Legislative Services
THE
RECORD
Privacy Statement
| Legislative Services | General
Assembly |