PVAs cleared in court decision

By BURTON SPEAKMAN
Glasgow Daily Times

June 18, 2009 12:09 pm

— The Barren and Hart County property valuation administrators were among several throughout Kentucky cleared of charges in a decision made June 15.
Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip J. Shepard ruled that the PVAs who have been charged with breaking state law by hiring family members had not violated any laws.
The Kentucky Executive Branch Commission had charged Barren County PVA Brad Bailey and Hart County PVA Vicky Reynolds along with nine other PVAs statewide with violating Kentucky Law by hiring family members to work at their PVA office.
The PVAs had argued that they were locally elected and therefore not state officials that would be under the purview o the commission, according to court records.
Judge Shepard agreed with the PVAs contention that their offices did not fall under the jurisdiction of the commission.
There were never any accusation that any of the PVAs relatives were not qualified for there position, nor was it argued they were being paid for work they were not doing, according to court records. The allegation was that simply hiring a relative was a violation of law.
“EBEC is a state agency that regulates the conduct only of state government officers and employees,” according to court records. “Second, the PVAs argue that the hiring of family members (or nepotism) is subject matter that is simply outside the scope of KRS 11 A.”
The statute contains a prohibition against actions to obtain financial gain for family members.
The commission did not charge that any of the PVAs acted in an unethical manner, according to court records.
The 11 PVAs had administrative charges formally filed against them on Sept. 28, 2008.
“If a relative hired by a PVA only payment for services rendered, rather than an unearned gratuity, it is difficult to discern from the plain language of the statute how the hiring of a relative could be construed to violate the KRS 11A.020.
The commission had never previously determined that simply hiring or recommending a relative for a position was a violation of state law, according to court records.
“A troubling aspect of this case is the attempt of the EBEC to change the rules after these PVAs had relied to their detriment on the Commission's prior interpretation of its statutory authority,” according to the decision. “An even greater concern is the Commission's attempt to impose this new interpretation of the law ex post facto, and to penalize PVAs for hiring decisions that were made prior to the time they were put on notice that the Commission had changed its position and concluded the ethics statute now bars nepotism of all sorts.”
Bailey declined to comment about the decision when contacted. Reynolds did not respond by deadline.