Fulton County Commissioner Lynne Riley refused to swear to tell the truth at her ethics hearing Thursday. Her silence could prove costly.
Six Fulton Democrats have ensnared the Republican from Johns Creek with a creative ethics charge that is one for the political textbooks. They contend Riley violated her oath of office to protect the interests of Fulton County by joining north Fulton secessionists who want the legislature to break off the wealthier section as its own county and take with it much of the tax base.
Her lawyer, state Rep. Wendell Willard, R-Sandy Springs, said Riley would only testify without the threat of legal repercussions. "She is not here to be sworn," he said.
Looking surprised, Fulton Board of Ethics Chairman Donald Edwards refused, saying the board wanted testimony that was "reliable and trustworthy."
"That is the whole purpose of the oath," he said.
Riley, R-Johns Creek, was meeting with the board Thursday for a fact-gathering hearing to determine whether a now nearly year-old charge should require a full hearing with the possibilities of sanctions.
Six state legislators -- Rep. Tyrone Brooks, D-Atlanta, Rep. Ralph Long, D-Atlanta, Rep. Rashad Taylor, D-Atlanta, Rep. Joe Heckstall, D- East Point, Rep. Virgil Fludd, D-Tyrone, Rep. Roger Bruce, D-Atlanta -- filed a complaint in July that Riley violated her oath of office by joining an organization "committed to recreating Milton County at the expense of Fulton County."
The legislators also said Riley's membership appeared to be a conflict of interest with her role as a commissioner. They said she should have resigned her commission seat, which pays $40,446, a year, if she wanted to join the advocacy group that was directly opposed to the commission position that the county remain intact.
Some of the legislators testified in April. Riley and Willard didn't attend that hearing because Willard said that as a state legislator the law allowed him to have all such matters continued until three weeks after the General Assembly adjourned.
Willard, who chairs the House Judiciary committee, said his interpretation of county policy was that sworn testimony was not required at a "probable cause" hearing but only at the full hearing to determine if a violation actually occurred. He also questioned whether the 2009 complaint was legitimate because the rules required that the complaint be sworn and while it was notarized, he contended five of the six signatures were computer generated.
Citing Riley's recalcitrance, the board, which had four of seven members present, voted there was probable cause to believe she committed an ethics violation. Edwards said a full hearing will probably be in June to decide if Riley actually violated her oath of office. If history is a guide, a conviction won't bring much of a penalty. While the board has the authority to issue a $1,000 fine, a public reprimand or refer a matter for prosecution, it has seldom if ever done so, Edwards said. "Most of our business is advisory opinions," he said.
Edwards said he wished Riley had elected to testify, noting it was her opportunity to head off the full-blown hearing
"We would have preferred to bring some finality to the issue, which is now approaching a year," he said.
About the Author
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/ajc/FTAF5ZMCDZD5ZJ5SZ2U3Z5O2VI.JPG)