ADVISORY OPINION 1068

Assessor/Conflict of Interest

ISSUE:WHETHER PREVIOUS CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS PRESENT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR AN EMPLOYEE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS.

OPINION: It is the Board's opinion that whenever a previous client of an employee in the Department of Assessments is in a position to appeal to the Board of Appeals and Equalization there is a potential conflict of interest. But when an employee has previously worked as a private consultant on a project that is subject to appeal to the Board of Appeals and Equalization and participates in anyway in the appeals process, there is a conflict of interest.

STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES: A private consultant has been appointed to a position in the Department of Assessments. As a consultant, and prior to appointment, the employee had contracted to provide several clients with either appraisals or representation during a single appeal before the Board of Appeals and Equalization. The Board has been asked to determine whether these contractual relationships present a conflict of interest with the employee's official duties.

ANALYSIS: Prior to appointment, the employee in this case took several actions to avoid a conflict of interest. All pending appeals were disclosed to the Department of Assessments and clients were referred to another appraisal consulting firm. In addition, the employee notified these clients that he was no longer involved in either consulting or appraising activities.

The employee's actions were reinforced by the Department of Assessments which also instituted measures to prevent a conflict. The department designated an alternate decision making authority to prepare and present the County's response to any appeal from a client who had contracted with the employee. In the event that the employee, as part of the appeals process, would be called upon to testify on condemnation cases, Local Improvement Districts (LIDs), or previous appraisals, the Deputy Assessor was assigned to handle these cases.

Although both the employee and the Department of Assessments took steps to prevent a conflict of interest, these steps were not sufficient to remove the appearance of a conflict of interest. In fact, the very nature of the employee's profession as a private consultant engaged in conducting appraisals necessitates involvement in an appeals process which directly involves both the employee and his present department.

In such a situation, section 3.04.030 of the Code of Ethics applies. This section provides that an employee in the Department of Assessments has a conflict of interest if that employee directly or indirectly:

"Has an interest in any property being considered for revaluation by the county board of appeals and equalization or has a personal interest or connection with another person's petition for revaluation." [emphasis added]

In this particular case, it is also the Board's understanding that there may be a continuing contractual relationship between the employee and his former clients. This understanding is based on a letter of objection sent by the employee to the Board of Appeals when that

References: King County Code of Ethics, sections 3.04.030, 3.04.037, and 3.04.040.

ISSUED THIS ___________ DAY OF _____________, 1999.

Signed for the Board: _____________________________