Prince William County board discusses draft collective‑bargaining ordinance and whether constitutional officers or detention staff would be included

Board members discussed a draft collective‑bargaining ordinance being considered by the Prince William County Board of Supervisors and asked whether detention‑center employees and staff who work for constitutional officers would be included in any ordinance.

A board member who identified themself as the author of the bill said the intent was not to exclude every employee who works in a constitutional officer’s office, and emphasized a distinction between positions of trust (who report directly to constitutional officers) and other staff. "I'm the author of the bill," the member said. "So when we stated constitutional officers, that didn't mean the offices where they work."

County staff and counsel described the ordinance‑ drafting process and legal constraints. A staff speaker summarized a legal interpretation: "constitutional officers ... are out of the power of the board of supervisors. So because they're out of the power of the board of supervisors, they cannot be forced into collective bargaining because they're constitutional officers," and listed constitutional officers (sheriff, commonwealth's attorney, clerk of the court) as examples of offices with separate authority.

Members noted that neighboring jurisdictions have taken other approaches — including Alexandria and Arlington — and said the county attorney, with outside counsel, is reviewing ordinances from other localities as the draft is developed. The draft ordinance has been discussed at the Board of Supervisors level but "has not been voted on," staff said.

Why it matters: whether county employees who work for constitutional officers (or detention staff more broadly) can be included in a local collective‑bargaining framework affects pay, representation and recruitment strategies discussed earlier in the meeting.

What’s next: the ordinance remains under development with the county attorney and outside counsel; board members said they will continue to discuss scope, implications for recruitment and whether additional outreach to elected constitutional officers is needed.