The General Assembly is taking welcome steps forward regarding ethics reform. It also is stumbling. Legislation reduces the cap on gifts from $250 to $100, and erases the dubious distinction between tangible and intangible gifts, described by The Times-Dispatch’s Markus Schmidt as “travel, meals and entertainment.” Both moves deserve applause. The ethics package does not create an independent commission to investigate questions related to ethics and to enforce rules governing conduct.
The move deserves a jeer. An independent advisory panel does not go far enough.
Times-Dispatch
The sequel to the General Assembly's 2014 theatrical performance over ethics reform opened this week, with lawmakers reprising familiar complaints and showing righteous indignation before begrudgingly approving new bills.
Virginian-Pilot
One day in early in January, a wealthy fox climbed the front stoop at a chicken farmer’s house and rapped on the door. The farmer opened it and saw the critter standing there. “Yes?” he asked with a smile. “These past few months I’ve been keeping an eye on your henhouse,” the fox said. “Your watchdog isn’t doing that great of a job. I can help.” The farmer paused. “Are you serious?” he asked. “Why are you suddenly so interested in my coop’s security?” The fox shivered. “It’s kind of cold out here,” he said. “Aren’t you going to invite me in so we can discuss it? Have you forgotten all the donations I’ve made to this farm since 2009?” So the farmer stepped aside, pulled the door open and the fox trundled in. If the scenario above sounds improbable, consider what’s happening right now in the Virginia General Assembly. It revolves around Dominion Resources, the commonwealth’s biggest electric utility.
Dan Casey, Roanoke Times
You’d think it might get the attention of our state legislators, as well, if not on the merits, then because of the possibility that if they vote for it, come re-election time, their opponent could rightly claim: “Delegate Flugelhorn voted to cancel your refund; now it’s time to cancel Delegate Flugelhorn.” Except, oh, that’s right, we forgot: Because of gerrymandering, most legislators won’t face any real competition. They do, however, get lots of money from the utilities. Dominion is typically the biggest campaign contributor in the state — giving out $800,000 in the most recent cycle, along with $52,000 for lobbying, i.e, the wining and dining of legislators. One is tempted to say that the bill’s sponsor, state Sen. Frank Wagner, R-Virginia Beach, ought to be more properly styled as R-Dominion Resources. (Some of you may recognize him as the same legislator who sponsored the bill that gives natural gas companies the right to walk over your land to survey for a pipeline even before the “public need” is established.) Wagner also owned $10,000 to $50,000 worth of Dominion stock until last week; he sold it, he said, so it wouldn’t look like he would benefit from the legislation. Some wish he’d have kept his stock and gotten rid of the bill.
Roanoke Times
Our concerns are more about local municipal and elected official websites. Most of them aren't user-friendly. Augusta County has a visible meeting calendar, but sometimes we have found agendas not posted 48 hours before a meeting and agendas not downloadable on Google Chrome. According one page of the website, citizens can't pay any county bills online. Another page gives directions for doing so. Waynesboro has an easy-to-find municipal calendar and agendas and minutes section. Staunton posts detailed meeting agendas, but they are several clicks from the homepage. If there's a published calendar for council and commission meetings, it's hidden deep in the website bowels. The site's geographic information system is strong. Most local officials who have websites do not address specific votes on their websites. It's simple 21st century communication: Representatives, put your votes on the Web for all to see and back up the key ones with sound explanation. Stay open to phone calls and personal meetings, but in truth know that more and more constituents are engaging via the Web.
News Leader
The official position of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors on the need for changes in policy after the shooting of John Geer by police in Springfield in August of 2013 appears to be that this is the first time police policies have been a problem: “Policies for handling police-involved incidents, which served us well for decades, were inadequate in this complicated situation.” Police-involved shootings have resulted in excruciating obfuscation and delay by Fairfax County Police dating back more than a decade. In this editorial, we refer to two high-profile cases, but these are not the only cases where police secrecy had caused incalculable pain to families while damaging the credibility of the police and other county officials. And this issue is not limited to Fairfax County. Alexandria and Arlington use similar approaches to limit public access to information. Most Northern Virginia residents think very highly of their police. We are very safe here. People understand that sometimes mistakes happen, that sometimes force is needed, and that sometimes police will exercise deadly force. What they are unlikely to accept is secrecy that shrouds mistakes, and failure to take responsibility for explaining events of deadly force.
Connection Newspapers
[Tuesday] was one of the most dispiriting days in the history of the General Assembly. That’s unusual because Capitol Square is usually an ebullient place, where advocates, lobbyists, lawmakers, Governors and other assorted crackpots mingle freely.The Senate ethics bill is a 110-page leviathan, which is about one hundred times longer than it needs to be. Within its dense prose, it prohibits gifts or benefits to lawmakers with a value of over $100 and also requires lawmakers to disclose all sources of income and the income received – which should make for some interesting data. Really all it needs to say is — “No one shall give or receive gifts intended to influence a public official in his official capacity. A gift over $100 from a person with business before the state is presumed to be unlawful.” Having said all that, the official belly-aching about the bill was a bit much. We asked for this duty. Going in, we knew the salary ($18,000) and the office allowance ($15,000) and we also knew the level of public scrutiny. We do it anyway, and if we didn’t — somebody else we be right there. John Watkins (R-Chesterfield), one of the most respected voices in the Senate, made the point that the best and brightest won’t seek public office with these types of mandatory disclosures. But who said they’re seeking it now?
Sen. Chap Petersen, Ox Road South