ADVISORY OPINION 1066

DDES/Boeing Conflict of Interest

ISSUE: WHETHER KING COUNTY EMPLOYEES MAY ATTEND TRAINING COURSES SPONSORED BY A PERSON WHO DOES BUSINESS WITH THE COUNTY?

OPINION: The Board recognizes that while both the public and private sectors have a real and bona fide interest in well-trained and well-qualified personnel, sometimes the nature of the forum used to achieve this objective creates a potential for conflict. In this case, the forum constitutes a gift and is being sponsored by a person who does business with the County. In Advisory Opinion 1016 the Board concluded that individual agencies or organizational units of County government are prohibited from accepting gifts. However in an amendment to this opinion (1016A), the Board recognized that King County as an entity may accept gifts by motion of the County Council. Participation in these training courses is also exclusive in the sense that it is targeted to city and county building representatives and does not include other businesses which might also benefit from inclusion. The benefits of participation are therefore distributed on an unequal basis and the possibility and perception of unequal treatment exists. The Board advises that DDES employees decline the invitation from Boeing because there is real potential for a conflict of interest. An acceptable forum would be one that could not be interpreted as constituting a gift and one that would be impartial and open to all.

STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES: The Department of Development and Environmental Services (DDES) has received an invitation to send its Technical Plan Review staff to three specialty training courses sponsored by the Boeing Corporation. The courses will be taught by a private instructor hired by Boeing. There is no fee for attendance and representatives from building departments in other cities have also been invited. The Board of Ethics has been asked to determine whether it would violate the Code of Ethics to allow these employees to attend these training courses.

ANALYSIS: In Advisory Opinion 1033 issued in 1991, the Board was asked to decide a similar case. At that time a Plans Examiner was invited to attend a one-week seminar sponsored by Boeing. There was a fee involved for this attendance. The conclusion of the Board in that case hinged on two issues: the level of responsibility of the employee and the value of the seminar to the County. Although the employee was found to be responsible to the extent that attendance would have violated the Code of Ethics, the Board determined that, "If King County deemed an educational seminar or like event to be beneficial and pays the fees involved, employees can attend and leave with informational materials pertinent to their jobs." However, in this same opinion, the Board clearly stated the view that in no circumstances may an employee review plans submitted by a person who does business with the County if trained by that person.

The present case before the Board involves more complex issues which both include and reach beyond level of responsibility and value to the County. These issues revolve around the answers to several important questions:

1. Because no fees are involved, can the training courses be considered gifts?

2. Could participation in these courses lead to an expectation of special consideration or treatment? If so, could fair and impartial judgment be undermined?

3. Could participation also lead to the perception that one business has a competitive advantage over other businesses?

4. Would participation result in a real or perceived conflict of interest?

After careful discussion of these questions, the Board decided that the specialty training courses offered by Boeing constitute gifts and definitely have value attached to them. This value extends beyond purely monetary considerations and encompasses the possibility that attendance by King County employees will create a shared understanding between those employees and the Boeing Corporation. The potential impact of this understanding is significant, particularly because the entire Technical Plan Review staff has been invited to attend. On the one hand, such an understanding might foster the perception that Boeing could receive special consideration from the County that Boeing has a competitive advantage over others who either do or seek to do business with the County. On the other hand, the fact that responsible employees are being trained by a person who submits plans back to them for review could seriously undermine fair and impartial judgement in the decision-making process.

References: King County Code of Ethics, sections 3.04.030, subsections C and D. See also section 2.80.010.

ISSUED THIS ___________ DAY OF _____________, 1999.

Signed for the Board: _____________________________