Minutes 04-14-2022-Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

13 of how much funding to give to individual outside agencies is most likely covered by this prohibitive language. Violation of this law is a Class 1 misdemeanor. The prohibition does not extend to nonprofits or other entities that are created by the state or a local government. This is a prohibition on individuals engaging in activity while serving as elected officials rather than a prohibition on the BOCC itself, and ultimately it will be up to covered commissioners to determine for themselves whether they may be in violation of the statute. As noted above, the statute requires covered commissioners to recuse themselves from voting on these matters presumably because each individual commissioner is in the best position to know on what outside boards that Board member sits. Although there may be other ways to address this issue, four options in order of the ease with which they may be implemented include: 1) BOCC members may resign positions as directors, officers, or governing board members of any nonprofit covered by the new law if that nonprofit receives outside agency funds from or otherwise contracts with the County. 2) The BOCC approves 1.2% of general fund county revenue to be awarded to outside agencies and authorizes the County Manager to allocate the funds. If the BOCC does not agree with any allocation, that allocation could be addressed through a budget amendment at which time a commissioner with a conflict could be easily excused or recused. This would eliminate direct involvement in an award by a covered commissioner. 3) An alternative suggested by the UNC School of Government is to adopt "a practice of stripping non-profits from (the) general budget ordinance and then including those nonprofits later via budget amendments. That procedure allows conflicted-out board members to vote on the general budget ordinance but recuse themselves from amendment voting." Similar to the first two options, utilizing this approach would eliminate the risk to individual board members. This could be done at the same meeting at which the budget is adopted because North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 159-15 allows amendments, with few limitations, at any time after the budget ordinance is adopted. 4) Another alternative suggested by the UNC School of Government is to "vote on pieces of the budget in stages prior to adopting the final budget ordinance. While these votes are not binding, they allow the board to make individual policy decisions as they work through the budgeting process. This preliminary vote process offers a potential strategy for handling conflicts arising from a member's financial interest in a particular budget provision. Under this approach, the Board would take a preliminary (nonbinding) vote on the budget provision that involves the Board member's interest and excuse the interested member from voting on it. If the matter passes, then it can be incorporated into the final version of the budget ordinance. When the board member later votes on the final version of the budget ordinance, it will be clear from the preliminary vote that the member's vote was not necessary to approve the provision that involves his or her financial interest." This approach still carries risk due to the fact that impacted commissioners are still voting on the problematic item even though they earlier recused themselves. The new law prohibits any involvement.