2001 Executive Ethics Board Advisory Opinions
2004 v 2003
v
2002
v
2001
v
2000 v
1999
v
1998
v
1997
v
1996
v
Opinions by Subject and Statute
| Advisory Opinion | Subject | Issue | Summary of Board's answer | RCW and/or WAC | Cross Reference |
| 01-01 |
Post-State Employment |
1. Can a former Director of the Department of Personnel (DOP) apply for, compete for, and complete consulting work for state agencies under an ongoing Consultant Request for Proposal program (Consultant RFP) that is administered by DOP, but was created and independently funded prior to the former Director's employment at DOP? 2. Can a former DOP Director provide human resource consulting services to state agencies, i.e., perform work that was similar in nature to the service provided by DOP to those state agencies? 3. Can a former Director of DOP apply for, participate in and, if selected, contract with state agencies under pre-qualified personnel investigator or human resources consultant lists that are maintained by the General Administration agency? |
1. Yes. The two year prohibition against obtaining a beneficial interest in a contract that was expressly authorized or funded by specific executive action in which the former Director participated, under RCW 42.52.080(2), is not violated if the former Director did not participate in the executive action that authorized and funded the Consultant RFP program. 2. Yes. Assuming that the post-state employment consulting services would not require or induce the disclosure of confidential information and the former Director did not participate in an agency's decision to contract for such services, the former Director may perform post-state employment consulting services that involve the services similar in nature to those provided by DOP. 3. Yes. Assuming that the post-state employment consulting services would not require or induce the disclosure of confidential information and the former Director did not participate in an agency's decision to contract for such services, the former Director may apply for, participate in, and contract under a list of pre-qualified consulting services providers that is administered by the General Administration agency. |
RCW 42.52.080 | 00-07
|
| 01-02 |
Membership In Non-State Organizations That Are Affected By State Agency Decisions Conflict of Interest |
1. Is it a violation of the Ethics in Public Service Act for state agency permit decision makers to also be members, i.e., pay dues and receive newsletters, of an environmental organization that periodically sues the agency over decisions made by the decision makers? 2. What is the meaning of "member" under RCW 42.52.030(3)? 3. Which organizations, in which state employees hold memberships, are considered persons who participate in transactions with the state under RCW 42.52.030(3)? |
1. Generally No. Limited membership, i.e., paying dues and receiving an annual newsletter, is not an interest in the organization that clearly conflicts with the discharge of a state officer's or state employee's official duties as a state agency decision maker, which is prohibited under RCW 42.52.020. In addition, the rights and obligations that are created by the agency decision maker's limited membership in the organization are not clearly distinguishable from non-members or customers of the organization. 2. Under RCW 42.52.030(3), a "member" is a state officer or employee who holds a membership interest in an organization that is clearly distinguishable from non-members. 3. Organizations
that apply for a permit or who hold an existing and competing right
which must be considered by the agency when making a permit decision
and are considered persons who participate in the "transaction with
the state" under RCW 42.52.030(3). This group does not necessarily
include organizations that may have legal standing to later contest
agency permit decisions in court. |
|
|
| 01-03 | State Employee's Outside Business Relationship With An Agency Vendor |
1. Does the Ethics in Public Service Act prohibit a Washington State Lottery (Lottery) District Sales Representative (Sales Representative) from establishing an outside business relationship with a Lottery vendor (Lottery Vendor) when the Sales Representative's duties include making discretionary decisions regarding distribution of the Lottery Vendor's products? 2. If the answer to question (1) is yes, would the Ethics in Public Service Act still prohibit the outside business relationship if the Sales Representative waived receipt of any profits or royalties generated by sales of the Lottery Vendor's products in the State of Washington, but retained intellectual property rights for sales outside the State? |
1. Yes - Under the outside business relationship, the Sales Representative would receive compensation from a person, namely the Lottery Vender, who holds a beneficial interest in a State contract over which the Sales Representative exercises discretionary authority. Such an outside business relationship is clearly prohibited by RCW 42.52.030(1). 2. Yes - The Sales Representative would maintain a business or professional relationship with the Lottery Vender while exercising discretionary authority over the distribution of the Lottery Vender's products. Such an outside business or professional relationship would conflict with his official duties, in violation of RCW 42.52.020. | ||
| 01-04 |
State Officer's Outside Business Relationship with an agency that they oversee. Financial interests in transactions Assisting in transactions |
1. May the Washington State School Director's Association (WSSDA) issue personal service contracts to officers of the Association or members of its board of directors to provide training services to school boards and school board members? 2. If WSSDA may issue personal services contracts to its officers and members of its board of directors for training services, what provisions should the Association take to handle the execution and administration of those contracts? 3. If a consultant with a current contract becomes an officer or member of the board of directors in November, may that person continue to serve under their contract, which they had no role in approving, until the end of the contract's term in summer of the next year? |
1. Generally no - Compensated Association officers may not financially benefit or otherwise perform work on projects funded by a contract that the Association Officer approved. Such an outside business relationship is prohibited under RCW 42.52.120. Certain uncompensated Association officers, however, may perform work on projects that were not approved by that Association officer. 2. The Association should establish policies and procedures that prevent Association officers, who participated in the execution or administration of a training services contract, from also performing work on those contracts. 3. Yes - So long as the Association officer does not participate in the administration of the contract or supervise those who will administer the contract. |
||
| 01-05 | Is there a gift subject to the limitations in RCW 42.52.150 when a person gives a state officer or employee a ticket to a sporting event, concert or other performance and the officer or employee pays the person for the face value of the ticket? | Yes. There is a gift if the event is sold out or the ticket entitles the officer or employee to special accommodations, such as seating in a private suite that is not reflected in the price of the ticket. |
|
||
| 01-06 |
Confidential Information Post-State Employment |
1. May a former Department of Ecology (Ecology) employee, who participated at various levels in selected parts of Ecology’s dangerous waste program permit at the Hanford Federal Facility (Hanford Site), assist a Department of Energy (DOE) contractor in its compliance with the Hanford Site dangerous waste permit? 2. May a former Ecology employee who participated in selected parts of Ecology’s dangerous waste program permit at the Hanford Site, share his or her discussions with an Assistant Attorney General (AAG) regarding the Hanford Site dangerous waste permit with a DOE contractor? |
1. Perhaps. If the former Ecology employee participated in a specific Hanford Site unit’s dangerous waste program permit, then he or she may not assist a DOE contractor to comply with that unit’s section of the overall Hanford Site permit. Such conduct would violate RCW 42.52.080(5). 2. No. The content of a discussion between the former Ecology employee and an AAG regarding the Hanford Site dangerous waste permit may be subject to attorney-client privilege and would not be available to the public upon request. Sharing confidential information with a DOE contractor, after state employment, would be improper assistance in that transaction, a violation of RCW 42.52.050(2) and (3). |
||
| 01-07 |
Definitions Gifts Limitations on Gifts Use of State Resources |
1. The Ethics in Public Service Act limits the receipt of gifts by state officers or employees. Does a state agency violate the gift limitations if it receives funds, which will be used to offset the cost of "official" travel by agency officers and employees, from a person it regulates or a person who contracts, or seeks to contract, with the state agency? 2. If a state agency receives funds from a regulated person or a person who contracts with or seeks to contract with the agency, what guidelines or polices should state agencies adopt before accepting such funds? |
1. No. In EEB Advisory Opinion 96-01, the Board advised that RCW 42.52.140-.150 gift limits do not apply to gifts to the state or its agencies. In general this is true even if the source of the gift to the state agency may include persons regulated by the agency or those who contract, or seek to contract, with the state agency. In reaching its conclusion, however, the Board has serious concerns about the appearance of a state agency receiving gifts from a person regulated by the agency or a person who contracts, or seeks to contract, with the agency. 2. The Board provides policy guidelines that address the appearance that gifts are made to influence pending agency decisions, potential violations of the gift limitations, and the potential misuse of funds received for the purpose of providing "official" travel. |
RCW 45.52.010 |