Advisory Opinion 91-07-1024
Appeals/Equal Husband's Occupation

ISSUE: WHETHER OR NOT AN EMPLOYEE'S HUSBAND'S OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITY PRESENTS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN VIOLATION OF THE KING COUNTY CODE OF ETHICS?

Opinion: After reviewing your appended letter and the information gathered through your discussions with our staff, it does not appear that circumstances surrounding the occupational activity of your husband would be brought to the attention of the Board of Appeals/Equalization. The Board's findings are follows:

1. The husband is not seeking to do business nor is currently doing business with the county and has never been awarded a County contract in the spouse's area of responsibility.

2. Individuals solicit the expertise of the employee's husband on their own. The employee does not promote her husband's business on county time nor at any time while in the performance of any official duty.

3. The employee (wife) has no vote on the Board of Appeals/Equalization and does not substantially participate or recommend policy to the Board.

Therefore, based on the information provided and given the intent of the King County Code of Ethics, we believe that in this matter, there is no violation of the Code of Ethics.

Statement of Circumstances: The Clerk/Manager of the King County Board of Appeals/Equalization has solicited an advisory opinion from the King County Board of Ethics generated by her husband's occupational activity as a computer consultant. In his profession, he occasionally provides system development and programming services to persons who come before the Board on property assessment appeals. For example, he may develop a computer program to enable a department to put their payroll process on line. Persons solicit the husband's expertise on their own and he does not provide information regarding the Board of Appeals/Equalization nor the County. The husband has never bade on County contracts, nor has he or his business been retained by any County organizational unit on a contractual basis. The husband's business has nothing to do with the County Appeals of Equalization Board. In addition, the wife who is clerk/manager to the Board has no vote on the Board and does not participate in policy deliberations.

Analysis:

AUTHORITY RELIED UPON

3.04.100 Board of ethics - Authority. A. Whenever requested by a county officer or employee, or whenever it deems it in the public interest, the board of ethics shall render advisory opinions, in writing, concerning questions of ethics, conflicts of interest, and the applicability of the code of ethics. Copies of the opinion shall be delivered to the ombudsman, the county executive and all members of the King-County council. Such opinion may also be released to the public at the discretion of the board with such omissions as may be necessary to protect the confidence and privacy of county officers or employees. A written copy of the board's opinion shall be delivered to the officer or employee requesting the opinion.

3.04.030 Conflict of interest. No county employee shall engage in any act which is in conflict with the performance of official duties. A county employee shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest if the employee directly or indirectly:

B. Is beneficially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract, sale, lease, option or purchase that may be made by, through, or under the supervision of the employee, in whole or in part, or accepts, directly or indirectly, any compensation, gift or thing of value from any other person beneficially interested therein;

C. Accepts or seeks for others, directly or indirectly, any employment, travel expense, service information, compensation, gift or thing of value on more favorable terms than those granted to other county employees or the public generally, from any person doing business, or seeking to do business with the county for which the employee has responsibility or with regard to which he or she may participate, provided that this subsection shall not apply to the receipt by elected officials, or by employees who are supervised directly by an elected official, of meals, refreshments or transportation within the boundaries of King County when given in connection with meetings with constituents or meetings which are informational or ceremonial in nature;

D. Accepts, directly or indirectly, any gift, favor, loan, retainer, entertainment, travel expense, compensation or other thing of value from any person doing business or seeking to do business with the county when such acceptance may conflict with the performance of the employee's official duties.

A conflict shall be deemed to exist where a reasonable and prudent person would believe that the gift, compensation, thing of value, or more favorable terms, was given for the purpose of obtaining special consideration or to, influence county action.

ISSUED ON THE ______________________ day of _________________, 1991.

Signed for the Board: Dr. J. Patrick Dobel, Chair

Members:

Timothy Edwards, Esq.
Dr. Judith Woods
Dr. J. Patrick Dobel, Chair

cc:

Tim Hill, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Bob Stier, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Rella Foley, Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Jesus Sanchez, Director, Department of Executive Administration