Advisory Opinion 92-09-1054
Citizens Committee/Law Firm Affiliation COI

ISSUE: DOES THE FINANCIAL BENEFIT OF A KING COUNTY CITIZENS COMMITTEE MEMBER GAINED BY VIRTUE OF HIS LAW FIRM'S REPRESENTATION OF A CLIENT VIOLATE THE KING COUNTY CODE OF ETHICS?

Opinion: Similar to the situations which arose in ADV1031 and ADV1002, the Board sees no mechanism to insulate this committee member from a potential conflict of interest in view of the provisions of the Code of Ethics. So long as this committee member's law firm benefits financially from the committee's deliberations and decisions, a conflict of interest, whether real or apparent, exists. The Board concludes, therefore, that so long as the law firm represents an interested property owner, the King County Code of Ethics compels this committee member to disqualify and recuse himself from all deliberations relating to establishment of the trail right-of-way and, therefore, whether the property in question will or will not be acquired by the County.

Statement of Circumstances: A member of the Office of Open Space Citizens Oversight Committee is also a partner in a law firm, which has been retained to represent a client whose property may be acquired by the Open Space program. The particular problem involves decisions related to locating a portion of the county's regional trail system. Depending on the particular right-of-way chosen by the county for this trail, the particular property at issue here may be purchased. The question presented to the Board of Ethics is whether continued involvement by the committee member in deliberations involving this project under the circumstances described above would violate the King County Code of Ethics.

By ordinance, the Citizens Oversight Committee involved here has an important role in the planning, designation, and prioritization of projects within the county's Open Space program. Currently, the committee is developing a recommendation for the location of the trail right-of-way which will have an impact on a number of properties, much in the same manner as the establishment of a county road right-of-way.

A member of the committee is a lawyer and a partner in a Seattle law firm, which has been retained as legal counsel by an individual whose property is located in the area under consideration.

Therefore, the committee member has appropriately sought direction from this Board regarding his continued involvement in the planning process described herein. Based on the information provided to the Board, it appears that the committee member himself has no personal involvement with the representation of the property owner, but that the possibility of at least a nominal financial interest may exist because of a distribution of any fees received by the firm for such representation among the partners in the firm.

Analysis: This request raises two issues: the first involves the possibility of a financial interest in the committee's deliberations, arising from the retention of the committee member's law firm by a property owner whose property potentially lies within the trail right-of-way. The second issue is whether that financial interest can be separated from the deliberations, the committee, and this committee member, in particular, must conduct concerning the location of the trail right-of-way and, therefore, the acquisition of any specific properties along that right-of-way.

The relevant provisions of the Code of Ethics do not address the degree of financial interest a County employee must have before those provisions are affective. KCC 3.04.030 (D) describes the interest as "beneficially interested, directly or indirectly" and "any compensation." Similarly, KCC 3.04.030 (E) refers to "a financial interest."

A member of this Committee, which was established by County ordinance and has specified and significant authority with regard to Open Space program, is a county employee within the definition contained in KCC 3.04.017. The member's involvement in the sitting decisions at issue here qualify as "participation" within the code definition found in KCC 3.04.017(J), notwithstanding the fact that the county council retains final authority for the decisions.

AUTHORITY RELIED UPON

3.04.017 Definitions.

D. "County employee" or "employee" means any individual who is appointed as an employee by the appointing authority of a county agency, office, department, council, board, commission or other separate unit or division of county government, however designated, but does not include employees of the county's judicial branch. The term "county employee" also includes county elected officials and members of county boards, commissions, committees, or other multi-member bodies, but does not include officials or employees of the county's judicial branch but does include employees of the department of judicial administration. J. "Participate" means, in connection with a transaction involving the county, to be involved in a county action personally and substantially as a county employee either directly, or through others through approval, disapproval, decision, recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise.

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;

E. Participates in, influences, or attempts to influence, directly or indirectly, the selection of, or the conduct of business or a transaction with a person doing or seeking to do business with the county if the employee has a financial interest in or with said person.

ISSUED ON THE ____________________ day of ____________________, 1992

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

Members: Dr. J. Patrick Dobel, Chair
Timothy Edwards, Esq. JPD:dwm

cc:

Tim Hill, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Robert Stier, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Civil Division, and Legal Counsel to the King County Board of Ethics
Rella Foley, Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Jim Greenfield, Director, Office of Open Space