State's Ethic Act
February 22, 2008

Bills are moving quickly from the House of Delegates to the Senate, and vice versa, so many interesting measures often go unnoticed. One such bill makes some substantial changes to tighten the state’s ethics laws.

House Bill 4524, which was adopted by the House 99-0 last week and sent to the Senate, was recommended by the Ethics Commission and makes several substantiative and procedural revisions to the state Ethics Act.

The following are some of the changes.

* The provisions for staying a proceeding against a public official or employee who is a candidate for public office would be revised. Current law allows postponement of any proceeding 60 days prior to an election, if a probable cause determination has not been made the public official or employee can request a stay.

The new language would preserve the 60-day time period for the written request but would allow the board to proceed to a probable cause finding up to 30 days prior to the election.

* The proposed law also would expand the prohibition against being employed by a regulated business to include employment by vendors or contractors when the public servant exercises authority or control, including selection of the vendor or contractor.

Currently a person cannot have an interest exceeding 10 percent ownership, or receive more than $30,000 in profits. This would be revised to prohibit an interest of more than $1,000 in profits or benefits a year, or an interest as a creditor if the amount exceeds $5,000.00. This part of the bill also provides that if a public official or employee has a interest in a contract he or she may not participate or influence a government decision affecting this interest. Further, if the public official has an interest in a contract he or she is precluded from voting or using influence to affect a government decision.

* The bill would extend the time period for limitation for practice before a board or agency when the person was previously employed at that board of agency, from six months to one year.

No public official or employee would be able to seek employment or be employed by a vendor. Persons exempted include those involved with bid specification, conducting inspections, approving vendor payments or other similar actions.

* The bill would add an exception to the general prohibition against use of office for private gain: the use of bonus points acquired by use of frequent traveler programs, as long as the their acquisition does not result in additional costs to government. Currently, the frequent flyer miles are lost.

* A new section of law would be created that would establish limitations on voting for public officials, excluding members of the Legislature, when the official or an immediate family member owns more than 5 percent interest in a business directly affected by the vote (legislators are bound by their own, separate rules regarding recusal). Further, when an institution is involved in consumer lending, if the person is directly involved in approving a loan request in the last 12 months, he or she would have to recuse him or herself from the vote, if the amount of the loan exceeds $15,000. Further the person would not be able to vote on a personnel matter involving a relative or appropriate of government moneys to a non-profit if an immediate family member is employed by that non-profit.

The public official would be permitted to vote if the interest affects them as a member of a class, rather than as an individual; or the business is a publically traded company when the persons or his or her immediate family own less than 5 percent and he or she discloses that interest. The person would be expected to excuse him or herself from the discussion and all aspects of the decision making process.

I welcome and appreciate your input on these or any other legislative issues. Write to House Majority Leader Joe DeLong, Building 1, Room 228-M, 1900 Kanawha Blvd. E., Charleston, 25305, or joe@joedelong.com, or call 304-340-3220.