Top Republican joins criticism of Hamilton

Criticism of Del. Phillip Hamilton's relationship with Old Dominion University took on a bipartisan flavor Friday when the House of Delegates' top Republican proclaimed himself "deeply disappointed."

Democrats were already piling on Hamilton. E-mails released Thursday by ODU showed he was angling for a job with a teacher training center at the university before and during the time he was shepherding the center's startup funding through the legislature.

Once those e-mails surfaced, ODU and Hamilton, a Newport News Republican, said they had mutually agreed to cancel Hamilton's $40,000-a-year contract.

A statement Friday from House Speaker William Howell of Stafford County, leader of the GOP's majority caucus, made it clear that Hamilton is in trouble with his own party as well.

"I am deeply disappointed by what I have learned this week about past actions by Delegate Hamilton regarding the creation and funding of a teacher center at Old Dominion University, which ultimately ended up hiring him," Howell's statement said. "I believe he certainly did the right thing in resigning his position at ODU and is correct in accepting full personal responsibility for his role in this very unfortunate situation."

What happens next is unclear.

In an e-mail to supporters, Hamilton apologized for creating an "appearance of impropriety" but insisted that his sponsorship of startup funding for ODU's Center for Teacher Quality and Educational Leadership was not based on any promise of employment. Accusing his Democratic re-election opponent of orchestrating the controversy, he vowed a vigorous campaign to keep his seat, which he has held for 20 years.

The Virginia conflict-of-interest law bars lawmakers from accepting money for services performed within the scope of their legislative duties. Enforcement of that law is the province of Attorney General Bill Mims, a Republican, and a five-member House ethics advisory panel.

David Clementson, a spokesman for Mims, declined to comment Friday on whether Hamilton is under investigation.

The ethics panel is empowered to investigate complaints of unethical behavior by lawmakers, but the proceedings of the panel are made public only at the request of the lawmaker who is the subject of the complaint. If a violation is found, the panel produces a public report.

It could not be determined Friday if any complaint has been filed against Hamilton. Even if one is filed, the facts of this case may not constitute a clear violation of the law, said Roger Wiley, a Richmond lawyer who has lectured extensively on Virginia's conflict-of-interest law.

To get a conviction, Wiley said, a prosecutor would have to prove there was a pre-existing deal between Hamilton and ODU promising him a job before the funding measure was introduced.

Wiley said he can't remember a lawmaker ever being convicted under the statute.

"They're tough cases to prove, because the law is difficult to understand," he said. "And not everything that the voters perceive to be a conflict is a conflict under the law."

Ethics complaints against members of the General Assembly are rare, said Division of Legislative Services director E.M. Miller, who recalled about 10 being filed in the 20 years he has held that job.

The last ethics inquiry to become public was the mid-1980s investigation of former Norfolk Democratic Sen. Peter Babalas, Miller said.

The facts in Babalas' case were vaguely similar to Hamilton's. Babalas cast a committee vote that helped Landbank Equity Corp., a mortgage company that paid him $65,000 in legal fees.

Babalas was censured by the Senate for his actions but acquitted in Richmond Circuit Court on two criminal counts of violating the conflict-of-interest law. He died in 1987.

Bill Sizemore, (757) 446-2276, bill.sizemore@pilotonline.com

Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com