Advisory Opinion 92-04-1044
Union-Employee's Immediate Family Member's Employer Doing Business with King County

ISSUE: DOES A KING COUNTY EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY MEMBER'S EMPLOYMENT WITH A PERSON DOING BUSINESS OR SEEKING TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE COUNTY VIOLATE THE KING COUNTY CODE OF ETHICS?

Opinion: The King County Board of Ethics is extremely concerned that a real and apparent fairness be maintained in the exercise of County responsibilities. Prior to making individual determinations as to whether or not a conflict actually exists, employees aware of a "potential conflict" should notify their supervisors pursuant to Section 3.04.037 which is designed to allow supervisors to resolve potential conflicts of interest before an actual conflict arises.

The following criteria are used by the Board in determining whether interactions with persons either directly or indirectly or because of an immediate family member's employment has the potential to create a conflict of interest:

1. If there is no business relationship between the person and the County, no conflict of interest would arise.
2. If there is a contractual relationship between the person and the person and the County there would be no conflict of interest unless the employee in question has responsibility for or participates in decisions or actions regarding the person or the business relationship between the County.

Advisory opinion ADV1042 sets forth the same criteria with regard to an employee's direct relationship with a person doing business with the County in the area of the employees responsibility or participation. In that context, a conflict inescapably arises if a County employee were to participate in or be responsible for the conduct of business with another person which also employs or compensates the County employee. The Board is not persuaded that the situation with regard to the employment of family members is quite so definitive. It is possible that the interaction may be sufficiently tenuous that no actual conflict would arise; however, the possibility of a conflict would certainly arise and in such a situation, the Board believes that the employee has a duty, pursuant to Section 3.04.037, to notify his or her superior of that possible conflict so that appropriate alternative decisions making mechanisms can be substituted.

The Board believes that the spouses and siblings of County employees can work for developers or contractors doing business or seeking to do business with the County. However, if an employee feels that the employment activity of immediate family members could constitute a conflict of interest, the employee should notify his or her own supervisor or appointing authority.

Statement of Circumstances: The Business Representative for a union representing County employees has solicited an advisory opinion from the King County Board of Ethics to determine the impact of the new Code of Ethics on its members. The union prepared a questionnaire for its membership to respond to. The ability of the spouse of sibling of an employee to work for businesses doing business or seeking to do business with the County arose as major concern of the membership. As set forth above, the question here involves whether the employment activity of an employee's family member could result in a violation of the Code of Ethics when the employment is with persons doing or seeking to do business with the County.

Analysis: Section 3.04.020 of the Code is explicit in prohibiting all employees from using their influence to grant special treatment or advantage beyond that which is available to every other citizen. The specific provisions of Section 3.04.030 which relate to this issue are primarily directed to ensuring that an employee's independence of judgment and action in the exercise of his or her County duties is not compromised by interrelationships, primarily financial in nature, between the County employee and persons doing business with the County, whether those connections are direct or indirect.

The primary area of concern in the Code is the existence of such interrelationships on the one hand and the area of responsibility or participation of the employee as part of his or her official County duties on the other. Pursuant to Section 3.04.030 ( R ) bona fide contracts of employment between a family member which are not intended to influence the action of the County employee are not conflicts of interest. They may however, trigger other provisions of the Code, which may limit the County employee's ability to participate or be responsible for the conduct of business with the employer of that family member.

Finally, Section 3.04.037 establishes a duty to notify a supervisor if a County employee becomes aware that he or she may have a potential conflict of interest. Following notification, the supervisory may designate an alternate decision maker.

AUTHORITY RELIED UPON

Section 3.04.020 Just and equitable treatment.

B. Obligations to Citizens. No county employee shall grant any special consideration, treatment or advantage beyond that which is available to every other citizen.

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 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 or seeks for others, directly, any gift, favor, loan, retainer, entertainment, travel expense, compensation or other thing of value form 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.

H. Is an employee, agent, officer, partner, director or consultant of any person doing or seeking to do business with the county, unless such relationship has been disclosed as provided by this chapter;

Q. Discloses or uses for the personal benefit of the employee or his or her immediate family any information acquired in the course of official duties which is not available as a matter of public knowledge or public record;

R. Acts as an accomplice in any act by an immediate family member which, if such act were performed by the employee would be prohibited by the provisions of subsections A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, M, N, O, or Q of this section, provided, however, that it shall not be a conflict of interest for such family member to enter into a bona-fide contract of employment which is not intended to influence the action of the county employee;

3.04.037 Duty to Notify Supervisor. Any employee who becomes aware that he or she may have a potential conflict of interest which arises in the course of his or her official duties shall notify in writing his or her supervisor or appointing authority of such potential conflict.

Upon receipt of such notification the supervisor or authority shall take action to resolve the potential conflict of interest, including but not limited to designating within a reasonable time an alternative employee to perform the duty which is involved in the potential conflict. The disposition of the potential conflict shall be stated in writing in files maintained by the supervisor or official may request an advisory opinion from the Board of Ethics before disposing of such potential conflict. (Ord. 9704 S 8, 1990).

ISSUED ON THE ____________________ day of _________________, 1992.

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

Members:

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

JPD:dwm

cc:

Tim Hill, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Robert Stier, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Legal Counsel, King County Board of Ethics
Rella Foley, Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints