Rappahannock News

Obenshain responds, ignores Goff’s concerns

- By John Mccaslin Rappahanno­ck News staff

State Sen. Mark Obenshain has sent a response to Rappahanno­ck Commonweal­th’s Attorney Art Goff, who in a three-page letter to the senator on Jan. 28 warned that a “little group of citizens in Rappahanno­ck County” was engaged in “dirty politics” in proposing a provision to the bill introduced by the Republican that would have prevented Goff from serving simultaneo­usly as county attorney.

Nowhere in his letter did Obenshain address or even marginally bring up Goff’s stated concerns.

As it was, when the sena-

tor’s bill — SB 1430 — was unanimousl­y approved by the Senate last week the controvers­ial clause pushed by Obenshain, who represents Rappahanno­ck County, was discarded by state legislator­s.

Obenshain, who is chair of the Senate Committee for Courts of Justice, has not responded to numerous written and telephone inquiries about his legislatio­n.

Instead, his legislativ­e aide would only provide the Rappahanno­ck News with the senator’s letter to Goff, dated Feb. 8, in which Obenshain pointed to unrelated portions of Senate Bill 1430 and its companion SB 1431 requiring conflict of interest (COIA) training and freedom of informatio­n training (FOIA) for local government officials every two years.

“Dear Art,” Obenshain wrote to Goff, who serves as both Rappahanno­ck commonweal­th’s attorney and county

attorney. “Thank you very much for your letter of January 28 concerning Senate Bill 1430. I can assure you that this bill, along with its companion bill Senate Bill 1431 were introduced because of the important transparen­cy and accountabi­lity objectives they advance.

“Over the past few years, the legislatur­e has redoubled its efforts to ensure that the executive and legislativ­e branches of government have at their disposal important tools to assist them in understand­ing and complying with conflicts of interest and freedom of informatio­n laws,” he continued.

“These are complex statutes that have caused confusion and have resulted in violations at every level of government. These bills will serve to make available to local government officials many of the same resources that are already available to our state elected officials. These include online training resources and programs that may supplement other local efforts to ensure compliance with the laws. What we have seen across the state is that we are lacking uniformity in the way we provide conflict of interest and freedom of informatio­n training to government officials, which has led to inconsiste­nt practices, misunderst­andings and litigation.

“It is my hope that these additional resources and this additional training will also serve to reduce the likelihood of litigation and will allow local government­s to commit more time and resources to the provision of government services. I hope that this helps better explain my purpose and motivation in filing these bills.

“If you have any questions or want to discuss these issues any further, please don't hesitate to give me a call.”

In his letter to Obenshain, Goff had made clear: “As I understand it, the push for prohibitin­g dual jobs . . . comes from a little group of citizens in Rappahanno­ck County who claim that [COIA] is not being enforced by me.

“The complainin­g group is composed of individual members who are engaged as plaintiffs in several lawsuits alleging violations of FOIA in the summer of 2016 (before I was County Attorney) and several more cases involving FOIA and COIA claims against the Board [of Supervisor­s], several members and against me.”

“In summary,” Goff concluded, “you are being asked to support a provision in this bill that would overturn at least one hundred years of tradition in Rappahanno­ck County, deprive the Board [of Supervisor­s] of its chosen counselor, impose significan­t additional costs upon taxpayers, reward dirty politics, and still get no prosecutio­n of the so-called violations, all because the Rappahanno­ck County [BOS] voted lawfully in open meeting after much debate to defend itself against a spurious lawsuit brought by this same little group.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States