Amherst supervisors postpone code of ethics decision

AMHERST — Because of concerns over how its proposed language could affect interactions with county employees, the Amherst County Board of Supervisors did not pass a code of ethics Tuesday.

After holding a public hearing on the proposed policy, all five supervisors voted to postpone adopting the document. The proposed code urges public officials, elected and appointed, to engage in behavior that reinforces the public’s confidence in the integrity of local government.

Supervisors Don Kidd and Chris Adams said they supported the code but not a section in it that requires board members to contact county staff through the county administrator or department heads. The section, according to its current draft form, also seeks to prohibit board members from interfering with the county’s administrative functions or duties of employees.

“If we adopt this draft in its entire form, then our hands would be tied to hold people accountable as we were voted in to do,” Adams said.

Kidd said the section removes “checks and balances” by not allowing the board to interact with department heads. It would also take away employees’ rights as taxpayers to interact personally with elected officials, he said.

“And I don’t think that’s fair,” Kidd said.

Supervisor Ray Vandall said he was concerned about employees contacting supervisors to voice grievances without first going to the county administrator.  “There’s some things in here we need to work on,” Vandall said of the proposed code.

Frank Campbell, a Madison Heights resident who is running for election to the District 5 seat on the board against Chairman Leon Parrish, opposed the code during the hearing.

“A piece of paper is not going to make a man honorable,” Campbell said.

Bill Peters, a county resident, spoke during the hearing and voiced opposition to the section in the code addressed by Adams and Kidd. Peters felt it violates the spirit and intent of the Freedom of Information Act, and he said placing restraints on supervisors’ access to county staff is “just as obnoxious and shortsighted as if you attempted to place these restraints on the rest of the community.”

Supervisors agreed Tuesday to further discuss the code, along with several other matters, during an Oct. 5 workshop.

In other business:

- The board received a letter from the Attorney General of Virginia stating that the office would not investigate a county matter that led Rodney Taylor, the former county administrator, to resign in April.

The matter dealt with an alleged leak of confidential information to a local attorney involving a former county employee under criminal investigation — Taylor was accused of implicating a board member of leaking the information.

The board in June authorized an investigation into the leak, which County Attorney J. Vaden Hunt has said “may or may not have given rise to an obstruction of justice criminal act,” but it has not yet provided any results. Hunt did not investigate to avoid a conflict of interest, and the commonwealth’s attorney in Amherst and Virginia State Police declined to look into it.

The Sept. 9 response from the Attorney General of Virginia, signed by G. Michael Favale, chief of special prosecutions and organized crime, said the office “cannot supersede or interfere with investigations into local matters.”

The board was seeking the aid of the office to prevent spending county funds to hire private legal assistance in the matter. Several supervisors have vocally opposed spending taxpayer dollars to further proceed, though some citizens have personally asked the board to keep moving forward.

Parrish said the board would likely further discuss its next option during the Oct. 5 workshop.