RSS

Tag Archives: Virginia

Part 2: Discussion on Bacon’s Rebellion and the Thomas Jefferson Institute’s

June 30th Bacon’s Rebellion Blog article “Establishing Transparency’s Bottom Floor for Virginia’s Localities” is a good followup on the THOMAS JEFFERSON INSTITUTE’S TRANSPARENCY PROJECT. It brings home the fact that the internet has provided a wealth of opportunity for citizen involvement and for governments to be open and empowering of citizens. The internet has opened doors for people to be involved in government in ways that were not dreamed of only a few years ago. Suddenly, access is available to more people, limited only by governments’ efforts to provide the information.

However, there are tremendous differences  between how jurisdictions handle this new era of ‘openness’. I have been looking at various websites around the State of Virginia for more than a year now. Some jurisdictions make it incredibly easy for information to be found. Other jurisdictions make finding some information easy and other information more difficult to locate. Still others, offer a lot of self-promotion to encourage the home buyer or business, but the ‘meat and potatoes’ of local government is all but missing in action.

I believe that the last paragraph of that blog clearly identifies some of the opportunities that are before us and within the hands of our lawmakers:
“If all of Virginia’s counties and school boards met these standards we would be a much more informed and aware citizenry, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Simply following through on these measures, while a significant upgrade over the hodge-podge collection of documents that passes for transparency throughout much of the commonwealth, doesn’t take full advantage of power of the internet. There are a lot of additional things that governments can do that enable their citizens to get much more out of online transparency. From video archives to real time data feeds, innovative governments are making themselves more open and their constituents better informed. Next issue we’ll take a look at what the best practices in this new online world look like.

I am looking forward to that next issue. I have some ideas of my own, first and foremost, that standards should be established for all jurisdictions (state, county, city & TOWN) and that those standards should be developed based, in large part, upon citizen input. Let the people who will be using the devices have a part in determining what is needed, not just the lawmakers. Find out what people want. Oh, yeah. That’s what government is all about anyway, right?

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 2, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Who is watching Transparency in Virginia? (I’m not alone here!)

There’s a kewl blog out there that I read called “Bacon’s Rebellion“. There have been a couple of recent blog articles there that relate to my FOIA focus. (It’s not long before the 4th of July, FOIA’s birthday, will arrive and I will be back on topics of local interest….anybody wondering what my I’ve been working on besides FOIA information:)

Anyway, on June 16, 2009, the blog article “Shining a Spotlight on Transparency” was rolled out. I had to check my audio to be sure I didn’t miss a drum roll because it sure deserved one! The opening two sentences set the tone: The legitimacy of government is based on the consent of the governed. As owners of our state government, every citizen of Virginia is entitled to full and complete information about how their government acts and what their Representatives do.

Wow! That pretty much says it for the backbone of the FOIA at all government levels. WE are the government. Government is not just elected officials and fancy buildings! It is “WE THE PEOPLE”. The government works for us, not the other way around.

The article then goes on to discuss recent events in Federal FOIA and Virginia FOIA. I really like the way that it is pointed out that accessibility to information alone is NOT enough. That information MUST be in a format that citizens can understand. We do not need tools that we can’t use. We need consistently organized, understandable information. Clothing information (or cloaking, if you prefer) in a manner that make it available but not useable is atrocious.

It is further noted, that the THOMAS JEFFERSON INSTITUTE is initiating an awesome project. They will examine the current FOIA practices of jurisdictions and use that data to develop standards and best practices. This concept could bring a degree of uniformity to jurisdictions that would be a tremendous service to citizens. I know that every jurisdiction wants to keep its “individuality” but there is no reason why they can’t do that while still having uniformity in those areas that all jurisdiction have in common. It’s too bad that the study will not include Towns, but perhaps that is coming.

This has particular interest to me as it could apply to the internet. If every jurisdiction used a certain part of their website that was consisten across all jurisdictions but allowed for independence in other parts of the website. It would make it so much easier for citizens. We are becoming such a mobile society, with people moving several times during the course of their lives. If there were some degree of uniformity, it would be so much easier for citizens to access information.

It could also save a ton of taxpayer’s money! Part of the website would be prepackaged saving development costs and making it easier for employees to use. The remainder of the website could be used as the jurisdiction wishes to promote its unique features and events. It would also make it easier and more cost effective for small jurisdictions to have a website.

The article closes with this: By providing usable data governments allow citizens to improve their quality of life and make government more efficient.” What a wonderful concept! Increase efficiency of government while improving citizen access. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

The 2nd of these 2 articles will be discussed tomorrow.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 1, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Focus on the Virginia Coalition for Open Government

Just a couple of years ago, I was pretty darned ignorant on the FOIA. I knew it was there. I had heard it mentioned somewhere along the way, but it had no real meaning for me. As I became interested, I started looking around on the internet. I really do not intend to ‘plug’ one resource over any others, but The Virginia Coalition for Open Government website and the help they provided via email and telephone, those have been the best resources for me.
The Coalition for Open Government is a non-profit agency dedicated to keeping government ‘openness’ growing. They do not sit back and assume that what is available is enough. They work to expand the parameters of openness, while simultaneously helping to empower citizens in making the current law work for them. They are also a 501c3 organization so any donations made are tax deductible.

If you have never made a FOIA request before, and would like someone to help you through the process, you will find all the resources that you need right here at the Virginia Coalition for Open Government website.

Rather than recreate the wheel, you can use their frequently asked questions (faq) section for some explainations and definitions in plain English (very little ‘legalize’ is used). On the page with the FOIA itself, there is even a copy of the form for carrying your request on to district court if need be (directions for filling it out are also there).

The FOI Citizen’s Guide is where I really got my start. This document pretty well takes you through the process of learning what your rights are under the FOIA. Basically, it provides information on what it is you are entitled to and how/when the government agency is required to respond. It also provides information on what your rights are as pertains to public meetings.

One of the links on their pages will take you to their bank of newsletters. You can find a lot of information. They work hard to provide you with information concerning recent FOIA related events, evaluations of the FOIA process, bills that may be coming up concerning FOIA, FOIA bills in the legislature, and some of the not-so-good things that have happened relative to FOIA.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on July 1, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Using FOIA resources can save you money!

What would happen if you went to the Town/City/County in Virginia where you live and you asked for certain documents, and you were told that the they could not give you the documents that you requested.

  1. You could do one of several things in response:
  2. You could walk away and just give up. (Free)
  3. You could  read the FOIA codes for yourself to see if you should get access to those documents. (Free)
  4. You could contact the Virginia Coalition for Open Government and request they provide you with some guidance. (Free)
  5. You could contact the Virginia FOIA Advisory Council for an opinion. (Free)
  6. You could simply contact an attorney to see if legal action is appropriate. (Fees are often charged for that initial contact just to find out if you have a case.)

Let us assume you make the decision to get some research done before you invest any money in attorney fees. You take the steps to contact either #4 or #5 above, giving them ALL of the information you can on your situation. Either one (or both) come back with information that reveals that you do not have the right to access to what you have requested. Now, you at least know what you can or cannot do, and it has cost you no more than a little time.

On the other hand, if #4, #5, or both of them advise you that you do have the right to that information, you may now wish to proceed to an attorney and pursue legal actions to obtain the records that you request.

There is one very good reason to do your homework before you jump into a ‘writ of mandamus’ seeking a Court order to have your jurisdiction give you the requested information (provided at the Marion Brechner Citizen Access Project website):

Definition: Attorneys’ Fees, Requestors (Public Records)

Capsule:

If a court finds a public body violated the open records law by denying the inspection of a record, the requester of the record shall be entitled to recover “reasonable” attorney’s fees from the public body. The fees are to be awarded if the requester “substantially” prevails unless special circumstances would make an award “unjust.” A court may, among other things, consider the reliance of a public body on an opinion of the attorney general or a decision of a court that “substantially” supports the public body’s position. VA. CODE ANN. § 2-3713.D (2007).

In other words, if the jurisdiction has violated FOIA, you have the right to have the jurisdiction pay your legal fees. The Court does have the right to evaluate those fees and, if you have gotten a bit exorbinate, hiring Benjamin A. Civilette, whose rate is $1000.00 per hour, I think you can count on the Court reducing the awarded amount substantially.

By using the Virginia Coalition for Open Government website’s Opinions section, you can find out if there are any cases similar that the jurisdiction could be basing their argument on, thus finding  out if there are any cases where the jurisdiction was “substantially supported” in a similar case.

Doing these things will certainly not guarantee that you get your legal costs reimbursed, but you can increase the likelihood of that happening. A little bit of homework could save you a lot of money!

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 28, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council.

The Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council is a State of Virginia agency that focuses on Freedom of Information Issues. This source is available to individuals, public officials and the media. They also serve by providing advisory opinions which are published and are a searchable internet resource for anyone with a FOIA question.

Their Advisory Opinions section can be viewed in chronological order or in a searchable database. The chronological order is a good way to review recent trends (if any) while the searchable option allows you to look for a specific topic. Using searchable, I checked under the word “erosion” and found this neat bit of information indicating that when an investigation is performed related to land-disturbing activities where the ‘owner’ has violated some form of the erosion and sediment control laws, the name of the complaintant does not have to be released by the investigating agent. That information can be withheld as part of the records causing the investigation.

Another interesting find there was under the search for “Planning Commission”. This involved the presence of Town Council members at a Planning Commission Meeting who participated in the discussion about business upon which they would likely have to act in the future. In this case, the meeting should have been advertised as a Joint Public Hearing. Another part of the question answered dealt with the appointment of Town Council Members on Planning Commission Subcommittees. Some interesting discussion is found in the document, and some good ideas of what is and is not allowed to happen in public meetings.

Another good one I found deals with Committee Meetings (notice and minutes) and FOIA violations that occurred involving this. The discussion is thorough and sites relevant FOIA laws concerning notice requirements of all committees. It further clarifies that any committee or group formed to perform a delegated function or to advise the town is subject to FOIA. Regular meetings, special, and emergency meetings all require notices. That notice time frame is a minimum of 3 WORKING days (excluding the date of the meeting as well as holidays and weekends) for regular meetings, and at the same time that members of the group are notified of special and emergency meetings. In addition, anyone who has requested notice of meetings should have been noticed. Requesters of notices can be contacted through email or telephone if the requestor agrees to this. (So if you are someone who wants to be noticed, you can get it through the mail, or you could ask the town to call you instead – it is not required that they provide this service but it may be something they will consider for people who do not have internet access but have requested notification and the timeframe is such that mail service just would not work). It also clarifies another question that I have been asked recently. The committees themselves are not required to take minutes except where membership of the committee includes a majority of the governing body.

So there ya have it. A great resource to look up information on FOIA that may be of particular interest to you. If you have a question about the way a meeting was conducted, whether or not you were allowed to be in the meeting, what documents you have a legal right to obtain or view, here is one good place to find an answer.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 25, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Ever wonder what Virginia Courts have ruled in FOIA cases? Or, how FOIA is being changed?

Well, the Virginia Coalition for Open Government is THE place to look. There are 3 blue squares at the top of their screen labeled: Virginia’s FOIA, In the News, and …Etc. Directly under each of these is a description of the offerings held there. Under Virginia’s FOIA there is one section on FOIA opinions from state courts. Click on “Court Opinions” in the dropdown menu and you will be provided with a list of Court opinion links.

Perhaps one of the best know current issues involves BJ Ostergren where it was ruled the person could continue to publish the Social Security numbers of prominent persons, but not private ones. This was done by Ostergren to protest the laws allowing land records containing full social security numbers to be published on the interenet. (One of those good for the goose, good for the gander moments!)

Another link under the Virginia’s FOIA is the 2009 Legislative Roundup. Here is where you can see bills that newly activated, are in front of the Governor for signing, or at the legislature being worked on, that will affect FOIA and your rights.

The Fraud and Abuse Whistle Blower Protection Act – this serves to protect employees that report Fraud and Abuse (bet you figured that out by the title, eh?) Unfortunately, it sees to only apply to people employed by the State. It includes a long list of records that are excluded from FOIA as part of that process. These are specific to the investigation involved and the records that would normally be available to the public are not affected.
Remote access to land records: Prince William County may establish a pilot program assessing fee. This newly adopted Act provides for charges to be attached to the online records by the general public. Not only is there a fee for viewing, there is an additional fee to download images similar to the existing copying fee. (If the internet was suppose to help people get easier access, this one is a real slap in the face to citizens. Sure, all those companies that access these types of things can afford the related fees. Not all citizens can do so. One of the things already keeping people away from documents is the cost. This looks like a great way to insure that big business gets the information that many citizens cannot afford. Healing the digital divide by making information available while then turning around and setting it up so that it replaced by an economical divide is one giant step backwards. One of the biggest reasons to use the internet is because often citizens do not know what it is that they need. It can require hours of looking at information. Having it available on the internet means that that can be accomplished without tying up employees to help for hours or even days at a time, helping the person. How is it saving money, or generating revenue, to charge for something that is saving worker time and money (paper, ink, copy machines all become the cost of the person/group looking rather than the taxpayer). I personally hope this one is put to the curb after the trial period, or significant modifications are made to insure that ALL citizens, regardless of income level, have the same degree of access. A sliding scale fee comes to mind. Ironically, the required report on this pilot study only requires a summary of the level of participation, costs, and revenues. Nothing is in place to determine who now finds themselves without access or how much has been saved in personnel and processing by having the data online in the first place.
Expenditures; annual report thereof provided by school board to be made available to public.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That § 22.1-90 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows:

§ 22.1-90. Annual report of expenditures.

Every school board shall submit at least once each year to the governing body or bodies appropriating funds to the school board a report of all its expenditures. Such report shall also be made available to the public either on the official school division website, if any, or in hard copy at the central school division office, on a template prescribed by the Board of Education.

That is just a sample of some of the information you can find on this website. More discussion is coming. In the meantime, look for yourself. Don’t count on someone just telling you the way things are…check out the facts. (Darn, there I go again, slipping into that Christiansburg Town Council area again. Just wait until after July 4th! I’ve got a lot of time to make up and a lot of articles ready to be posted.)

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 23, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Virgina FOIA Evaluation … more on the low scores.

The University of Florida plays host to the Marion Brechner Citizen Access Project. This is another one of those sites that evaluates states on the basis of how much ‘sunshine or shade’ exist in the government. You can look at the information on a particular state, compare two states or look at one category of the law over all 50 states.

While I was going through all the offerings of this site, I found something so simple that I had overlooked it previously. As I am now in the stage of discussing Virginia FOIA, I thought it might be worth discussing now: the definition of Public Records. This site gives the following definition of Public Records in Virginia:
The Virginia Freedom of Information Act defines “public records” to mean all writings and recordings that consist of letters, words or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostatting, photography, magnetic impulse, optical or magneto-optical form, mechanical or electronic recording or other form of data compilation, however stored, and regardless of physical form or characteristics, prepared or owned by, or in the possession of a public body or its officers, employees or agents in the transaction of public business. Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3701 (2002).

Some interesting features arise when you look at the State of Virginia and how it scored on public access of records. The site uses a scale of 7 to evaluate these.

7 = Sunny – completely open
6 = Mostly Sunny – mostly open
5 = Sunny with clouds – somewhat open
4 = Partly Cloudy – neither more open nor more closed
3 = Cloudy – somewhat closed
2 = Nearly Dark – mostly closed
1 = Dark – completely closed

Some of the lowest scores for Virginia included:

  • Political caucuses of state legislature which are not considered to be openmeetings
  • Hardware and Software Requirements:  policy-makers protect public access to computers when designing government computer sytems
  • Internet, Regulation of Professionals: information about the licensing or regulation of doctors, lawyers, etc. be online
  • Private Schools: no reference to private schools exists within open records laws.

Of particular interest to me was the score of 3 (Cloudy – somewhat closed) on Open Meetings, Informatl Meeting (Public Meetings) that I believe serves as a major loophole for government to circumvent the right of citizens to know.

The gathering of employees of a public body shall not be deemed a “meeting” when the purpose of such a gathering does not include the discussion or transaction of any public business and the meeting was not called or prearranged with this purpose. VA. Code Ann. § 2.2-3701, Va. Code Ann. § 2.2-3707 (G) (i) (2007).

Okay, so 3 or 4 Town Council Members meeting to go for long walks or work out together at the Rec Center, when no one else is around are likely to avoid discussing business? Come on…give me a break. All they would have to do to prevent any sense of impropriety would be to be sure that someone else was there????

Forgive me. I digress. I said I would write about FOIA through July 4th, not the Town of Christiansburg, but the Town of Christiansburg government IS subject to FOIA. If state FOIA laws need to be changed in order to prevent this type of perception, then so be it.

It should be noted that out of all the 50 states, Virginia is 7th highest on this score. None of the states scored more than Partly Cloudy (neither more open nor more closed). Nebraska’s law has a bit more strength when it specifically says:

Informal meetings, chance meetings and social gatherings “shall” not be used for the purpose of circumventing the Open Meetings Act. Neb.Rev.St. § 84-1410 (4) (2006).

South Carolina expands on this:

No chance meeting, social meeting, or electronic communication may be used in “circumvention of the spirit of requirements” of the open meetings requirements to act upon a matter over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. Code 1976 § 30-4-70 (c) (2007).

Nebraska and South Carolina are the highest scoring states in this category. The lowest scoring states (Nearly Dark) are Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, and Mississippi.

To get back to Virginia FOIA law itself, our resident experts are (in my opinion) the Virginia Coalition for Open Government. In particular, a great starting place for learning about FOIA and what it can mean to you as a citizen, they post a FOI Citizens’ Guide online. They have a lot of other useful and necessary information available that I will discuss more in following articles.

The FOI Citizens’ Guide provides an overview of the rights of citizens including direct links to the relevant state codes. It also provides information on how to enforce your rights. Take some time to check out this site and while you’re wandering around on the internet, you might want to check out the Citizen Initiative for Transparency site that is now available. You may find some interesting links and resources there as well.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 23, 2009 in Citizen Participation, FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Virginia is one of the top10 states when it comes to transparency!

This bit of information comes from something called the Sunshine Review‘s SunshineOnline webpage – The My Government Website Project. This is a wiki-based project where information is available on government WEBSITE transparency for states but including county, city and school districts. It is a work in progress, with more data coming in all the time. It encourages citizen participation by having citizens do the evaluations (available on their website). It is a fairly simple process and is fully explained. Although they place the State of Virginia within the top 10 states for open government, DO NOT assume that status holds for all jurisdictions within the state.

Interesting information about Virginia Counties includes based upon this sites evaluative criteria:
Only 3 counties do not maintain an official website: Craig, Lee, and Mecklenburg.
Of the 95 counties and 39 city counties (which are included at this source)
Budgets: 35 post full, 32 post partial, and 25 post no information
Public Meetings Notices: 42 include all notices of public meetings, 42 provide partial information, and 8 provided no information.
Information on elected and administrative officials: 74 provide all information on both sets of officials; 14 provided only partial information on elected officials, and 17 only partial on administrative officials. Only 1 county provided neither.
Permits and zoninginformation: 77 provided all, 5 provided partial, and 10 provided none.
Audits: 38 provided all information, 10 provided partial, and 44 provided none.
Contract with county vendors: 13 provided full information, 26 provided partial, and 53 provided none.
Disclosure on taxpayer-funding lobbying membership: 19 provided full information, 0 provided partial, and 73 provided no such information.
How to request public records (FOIA): 6 provided full information, 12 provided partial, and 74 provided none.
Tax information: 66 provided all, 9 provided partial information, 17 provided none.

A table providing information on each individual county for the above parameters is available at one of their links. A quick look and I saw that the data might not be current. One of the recent changes to Virginia State Law is that jurisdictions with a website are now required to post budgets online. If you live in or work for one of these jurisdictions, it may be worth the effort to go to the site where you can update information. As I noted previously, this is a work in progress and is being updated. YOU can be a part of the process.

All of these are based on those documents which are part of the public’s right to know and are covered under the FOIA. If you wish access to any of these documents, a FOIA request should provide it for you. Given that each FOIA request cost taxpayer time and money to receive, research, and produce the request, and the fact that most jurisdictions barely have the staff to handle routine business, it would seem that more jurisdictions would put forth a dedicated effort to provide these documents on their websites, saving money and reducing staff workloads for other projects.

They do not provide information on towns in Virginia, but I have a very reliable source indicating that there is something similar being developed for the Towns of Christiansburg as well. However, would it be needed at all if the State Legislature would simply develop standards that denote these basic documents be posted on all websites. One little statute would end the problem, save money, and free up worker time.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 20, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Virginia State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act

Recently, there has been a bit of discussion on the laws concerning conflict of interests. This topic is covered in the Virginia State Codes as the “State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act.

By going to the Legislative Information System website’s code of Virginia Searchable Database, you can view or have a report which contains the particular code section sent to you email address. I have had a copy on file for quite some time now, and I last updated it in December. So, I went ahead and submitted a request for the latest “unofficial version” (although updated constantly, the only actual official version is the hard copy).

I’ve set the copy that I received on June 7, 2009 in a .pdf format for others to access quickly. You can find the document on MyVAResources.com. Click on the Issues and News link to go to that page. Right now, the link to the pdf file is the 3rd major heading down that list. (Take a moment to look around. You might find something else of interest.)

The Conflict of Interests Act you find is a 41 page document.

§ 2.2-3100.1. Copy of chapter; review by officers and employees.
Any person required to file a disclosure statement of personal interests pursuant to subsections A or B of § 2.2-3114, subsections A or B of § 2.2-3115 or § 2.2-3116 shall be furnished by the public body’s administrator a copy of this chapter within two weeks following the person’s election, reelection,  employment, appointment or reappointment.
All officers and employees shall read and familiarize themselves with the provisions of this chapter.
(2004, cc. 134, 392.)

The reference to § 2.2-3115 specifically identifies the local government officers and employees referenced in the above statute and adds some more information concerning the responsibilities of those individuals.

§ 2.2-3115. Disclosure by local government officers and employees.
A. The members of every governing body and school board of each county and city and of towns with populations in excess of 3,500 shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in §2.2- 3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

The members of the governing body of any authority established in any county or city, or part or combination thereof, and having the power to issue bonds or expend funds in excess of $10,000 in any fiscal year, shall file, as a condition to assuming office, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3118 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15, unless the governing body of the jurisdiction that appoints the members requires that the members file the form set forth in § 2.2-3117.

Persons occupying such positions of trust appointed by governing bodies and persons occupying such positions of employment with governing bodies as may be designated to file by ordinance of the governing body shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in §2.2-3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

Persons occupying such positions of trust appointed by school boards and persons occupying such positions of employment with school boards as may be designated to file by an adopted policy of the school board shall file, as a condition to assuming office or employment, a disclosure statement of their personal interests and other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3117 and thereafter shall file such a statement annually on or before January 15.

B. Nonsalaried citizen members of local boards, commissions and councils as may be designated by the governing body shall file, as a condition to assuming office, a disclosure form of their personal interests and such other information as is specified on the form set forth in § 2.2-3118 and thereafter shall file such form annually on or before January 15.

C. The disclosure forms required by subsections A and B shall be provided by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to the clerks of the governing bodies and school boards not later than November 30 of each year, and the clerks of the governing body and school board shall distribute the forms to designated individuals no later than December 10 of each year. Forms shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years in the office of the clerk of the respective governing body or school board. Forms filed by members of governing bodies of authorities shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years in the office of the clerk of the governing body of the county or city.

D. Candidates for membership in the governing body or school board of any county, city or town with apopulation of more than 3,500 persons shall file a disclosure statement of their personal interests as required by § 24.2-502

E. Any officer or employee of local government who has a personal interest in any transaction before the governmental or advisory agency of which he is an officer or employee and who is disqualified from participating in that transaction pursuant to subdivision A 1 of § 2.2-3112 or otherwise elects to disqualify himself, shall forthwith make disclosure of the existence of his interest, including the full name and address of the business and the address or parcel number for the real estate if the interest involves a business or real estate, and his disclosure shall be reflected in the public records of the agency for five years in the office of the administrative head of the officer’s or employee’s governmental or advisory agency.

F. In addition to any disclosure required by subsections A and B, in each county and city and in towns with populations in excess of 3,500, members of planning commissions, boards of zoning appeals, real estate assessors, and all county, city and town managers or executive officers shall make annual
disclosures of all their interests in real estate located in the county, city or town in which they are elected, appointed, or employed. Such disclosure shall include any business in which such persons own an interest, or from which income is received, if the primary purpose of the business is to own, develop or derive compensation through the sale, exchange or development of real estate in the county, city or town. Such disclosure shall be filed as a condition to assuming office or employment, and thereafter shall be filed annually with the clerk of the governing body of such county, city or town on or before January 15. Such disclosures shall be filed and maintained as public records for five years. Forms for the filing of such reports shall be prepared and distributed by the Secretary of the Commonwealth to the clerk of each governing body.

G. An officer or employee of local government who is required to declare his interest pursuant to subdivision A 2 of § 2.2-3112 shall declare his interest by stating (i) the transaction involved, (ii) the nature of the officer’s or employee’s personal interest affected by the transaction, (iii) that he is a member of a business, profession, occupation, or group the members of which are affected by the transaction, and (iv) that he is able to participate in the transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. The officer or employee shall either make his declaration orally to be recorded in written minutes of his agency or file a signed written declaration with the clerk or administrative head of his governmental or advisory agency, as appropriate, who shall, in either case, retain and make available for public inspection such declaration for a period of five years from the date of recording or receipt. If reason able time is not available to comply with the provisions of this subsection prior to participationin the transaction, the officer or employee shall prepare and file the required declaration by the end of the next business day. The officer or employee shall also orally disclose the existence of the interest during each meeting of the governmental or advisory agency at which the transaction is discussed and such disclosure shall be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

H. An officer or employee of local government who is required to declare his interest pursuant to subdivision A 3 of § 2.2-3112, shall declare his interest by stating (i) the transaction involved, (ii) that a party to the transaction is a client of his firm, (iii) that he does not personally represent or provide services to the client, and (iv) that he is able to participate in the transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest. The officer or employee shall either make his declaration orally to be recorded in written minutes for his agency or file a signed written declaration with the clerk or administrative head of his governmental or advisory agency, as appropriate, who shall, in either case, retain and make available for public inspection such declaration for a period of five years from the date of recording or receipt. If reasonable time is not available to comply with the provisions of this subsection prior to participation in the transaction, the officer or employee shall prepare and file the required declaration by the end of the next business day.
(1987, Sp. Sess., c. 1, § 2.1-639.14; 1988, c. 849; 1995, c. 495; 1996, c. 526; 2000, c. 317; 2001, cc.
217, 844; 2003, c. 694.)

This is only part of this particular code, but it is the part that seems most relevant in light of current discussions. You will note, if you read the entire document, that the law is fairly specific and detailed in application. Where most of our recent controversy has arisen, it has not been a matter of the law, but rather one of perception. You do not have to be doing something wrong for someone else to deem your behavior wrong in their belief system.

Someone can operate entirely within the law, and yet still earn the ire of those who see the actions as being ‘wrong’. Laws are intellectual, perceptions are often laced with emotion. Read the Act for yourself so that you know the facts and what is required. Then, look at those who go beyond the minimum requirements of the law to how their behaviors may be perceived….that is good leadership.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 8, 2009 in FOIA

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Win, Lose, or Draw…the Sage Lane Saga. Cul-de-Sac’s going extinct?

By holding onto the cul de sac, perhaps Sage Lane will become a historic site. One of the few remaining cul de sac’s in Virginia.

Silly of me to think that? Not so. Anybody who has been keeping up with changes at VDOT knows that cul de sacs have become an endangered species in Virginia. And, to be honest, it is good planning to do so. Read some of the material for yourself because it may affect how future developments are done around Chrisitiansburg.

VDOT Projects and Studies: Secondary Street Acceptance Chapter 382

Virginia Bicycling Federation: Virginia Bans Cul de Sacs

Washington Post: In VA., Vision of Suburbia at a Crossroads

Planetizen: Virginia Bans the Cul-De-Sac in New Subdivisions

autoblog: Whither Suburbia? Virginia all but outlaws cul-de-sac construction in face of traffic costs

Greater Greater Washington: Virginia’s new street connectivity regulations: the specifics

There is a lot more information out there. To find it simply do a google search using: virginia law new cul de sac.

Hope that get’s you through coffee and a danish this morning.

EmailFacebookGoogle BookmarksGoogle+LinkedInShare
 
Comments Off

Posted by on June 4, 2009 in Land Use

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,