Investigation is necessary

“Virginia has a reputation for good government and I want to keep it that way,” said Del. William J. Howell, speaker of the Virginia House.

It is actions by Del. Phillip Hamilton that spurred Mr. Howell to launch an ethics investigation.

The question: Did Mr. Hamilton violate conflict of interest law when he sought a job at a planned teaching center Old Dominion University and then later used his legislative influence to direct $500,000 toward creating that very center?

If the $500,000 allocation wasn’t deliberate influence peddling, then it was at least irresponsible ignorance of the law.

Any legislator should make every effort to know and understand the laws, including ethics laws, that apply to his position of trust.

Freedom of Information requests by two newspapers uncovered the following facts:

ODU planned to open a Center for Teacher Quality and Educational Lead-ership.

Mr. Hamilton and ODU began discussing a job for him at the center.

Several months later, via his powerful position as a legislative budget negotiator, Mr. Hamilton directed $500,000 in tax money toward the center.

Since it opened in 2007, the center has paid Mr. Hamilton $40,000 a year as a consultant.

Until e-mails uncovered by the FOI request proved otherwise, Mr. Hamilton denied he had been in discussion with ODU officials about a job prior to obtaining state funding for the teacher center.

In one e-mail to ODU, Mr. Hamilton reminds officials that he soon would be leaving a $38,000 a year position with Newport News city schools and needed to replace that income.

An e-mail from one official to another said: “Phil must feel he will get money ... and is ensuring that he has a home to go to. ... [I]f you recall, he only wanted a small part time deal.”

After news of the e-mails became public, Mr. Hamilton and the center ended their association.

Speaker Howell asked the House Ethics Advisory Panel to investigate; the panel is an independent group of five non-legislators.

Mr. Howell and Mr. Hamilton are Republicans.

If the panel decides that further action is warranted, the next step is a hearing, which Mr. Hamilton could choose to have held behind closed doors. However, any violations that were found would be made public.

If the hearing decided that Mr. Hamilton violated not only the House ethics standard but also potentially the conflict-of-interest law, further action would be turned over to the attorney general.

House Democrats say the investigation should be assigned to the House Privileges and Elections Committee, which must hold its meetings publicly.

We agree that since the issue appears to be a possible violation of law rather than of internal ethics, the hearing should be pursued by the higher entity — the House committee.

However, we commend Speaker Howell for taking action quickly, after the e-mails were revealed, in calling for the investigation.