Advisory Opinion 97-04-1155
Public Health/Conflict with Official Duties

ISSUES: WHETHER AN EMPLOYEE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH MAY MARKET A TRAINING PROGRAM RELATED TO HER OFFICIAL DUTIES TO COMMUNITY MEDICAL PROVIDERS?

Opinion: County employees may develop and market training programs, provided such development and marketing is done on the employee's own time and using the employee's own resources. However, even under such circumstances a county employee may have an appearance of conflict when marketing a training program related to the area of his or her official duties and responsibilities on behalf of the county. In this case, this appearance of conflict may be overcome if the employee waives receipt of compensation for the program from agency clients or from providers within the department's service delivery area.

Statement of Circumstances: A WIC nutritionist assigned to the Seattle -King County Department of Public Health has developed a training program designed to better educate community medical providers about the WIC program. The employee used her own time and personal funds to develop the training program. As news of the training program spread, the county employee was approached by the state WALWICA organization, which asked to purchase the program and distribute it to all WIC clinics throughout the state; however, WALWICA could not pay for the program's development costs, estimated at approximately $5500. Instead, the employee proposes to sell the presentation to WIC clinics, with the endorsement of the WALWICA organization.

The training program includes publicly available information from a variety of sources, and the employee states that she has never used the program while representing the Department of Public Health. The employee has asked the Board to determine whether marketing her WIC training program to community medical providers would create a conflict of interest?

Analysis: The Board accepts that the training program was developed by the employee on her own time and using her own resources, therefore subsection 3.04.020 of the Code of Ethics, which prohibits the use of county resources or funds for personal convenience or profit, would not be violated. With regard to the specific issue of whether a county employee may market a training program when the subject of the program is directly to the official duties and responsibilities of the employee, the Board has some concerns.

The county employee in this case serves as a WIC nutritionist. The official duties and responsibilities of this position include: coordinated client care with health care providers and making referrals to appropriate services; developing and presenting information to clients individually, in classes or to community groups on nutrition and related topics; developing and implementing nutrition standards for targeted populations such as prenatal and high risk patients; acting as in-house nutrition expert for all providers and staff; and, serving as a liaison with food access and subsidy programs. These duties and responsibilities, combined with the employee's acknowledgement that there was "no budgeted money [within the department]"for her to develop the training program, clearly creates an appearance that the program is related to the official duties of the employee.

The Code generally prohibits acceptance of anything when such acceptance may be related to official position or official responsibilities. For example, subsection 3.04.020 C of the Code of Ethics provides that:

Except as authorized by law and in the course of his or her official duties, no county employee shall use the power or authority of his or her office or position with the county in a manner intended to induce or coerce any other person to provide such county employee or any other person with any compensation, gift, or thing of value directly or indirectly.

While subsection D states that

No county employee may ask for or receive, directly or indirectly, any compensation, gift, or thing of value, or promise thereof, for performing or for omitting or deferring the performance of any official duty, or action by the county other than the compensation, costs or fees provided by law.

In Advisory Opinion 1127, the Board considered an analogous case in which a county employee developed a seminar on his own time, and wanted to offer the seminar for compensation to members of the general public and industrial clients. In that opinion, the Board agreed that as long as the employee did not promote or market his seminar during the conduct of official business, there would be no concerns under the Code. However, the Board found that the "employee's ability to financially benefit and further a private interest" was enhanced by his official position. The same standard applies to this case.

The Board believes that the appearance of conflict with the employee's official duties may be overcome in this instance if the employee agrees to waive receipt of any compensation for her training program within the service area of the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health.

References: King County Code of Ethics, section 3.04.020 A, subsections 3.04.030 I and K; Advisory Opinion 1127.

ISSUED THIS ___________ DAY OF ___________________, 199__.

Signed for the Board: Dr. Lois Price Spratlen, Chair

Members:

Rev. Paul Pruitt
Ron Carlson
Lembhard Howell

LPS/mag

cc:

Ron Sims, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Rella Foley, Interim Director-Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Robert I. Stier, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney and Counsel to the Board of Ethics
Dr. Alonzo Plough, Director, Seattle-King County Department of Public Health
Jayne Kauzloric, Public Health Service Supervisor, White Center Public Health Center