.jpg)
Lexington City Council last Thursday unanimously approved an amended code of ethics for the city, updating the code section regarding of conflicts of interest.
The issue had been discussed previously in work sessions in January and February, with Council member Leslie Straughan requesting the code be amended to remove language prohibiting members of any of the city’s boards and commissions from participating in discussions or votes on an issue if there was a situation which created “the appearance of a conflict of interest” above and beyond instances where they would be required to recuse themselves due to meeting the state’s criteria for having a conflict of interest.
Straughan’s concern was that the language was vague with no clear definition of what constituted an appearance of a conflict, and that the ambiguity of the code had created situations in the past where some members of Council were telling others when they could or could not vote on an issue.
Updated language for that section of the code was drafted by interim city attorney Jeremy Carroll and presented to the council at its February work session.
That language referenced Virginia’s State and Local Government Conflicts of Interest Act, and used that as the sole guide for what did and did not constitute a conflict of interest, as well as allow for exceptions that could permit members with a connection to an organization to participate in discussions and votes on issues impacting said organization.
To further clarify whether the city could have additional requirements beyond the state code for conflicts of interest, Council member David Sigler contacted Stewart Petoe, the executive director of the Virginia Conflict of Interest and Ethics Advisory Council, for guidance. Petoe’s answer was that the city could not deviate from the state code, citing “multiple court cases and rulings” to that effect.
“I appreciate the executive director answering my multiple emails about what we may or may not be permitted to do,” Sigler commented prior to the vote.
Before moving to adopt the amended code of conduct, Straughan commented that the code “reads much better” and that it was “a much better policy than we had before.” She also thanked members of Council for being willing to discuss the issue.
“I know it wasn’t popular,” she said. “I brought it up because I felt like that it was poorly written and it was vague. I know we were getting some push back on even discussing it, so I appreciate [Council] moving forward, and then we find out that we were in violation of the state code, so I’m glad that we have a much better policy in the end.”
