Advisory Opinion 91-10-1030
Martin L. King Celebration

ISSUE: DOES EMPLOYEE SOLICITATION OF IN-KIND DONATIONS AND CASH CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE ANNUAL MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR CELEBRATION CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE KING COUNTY CODE OF ETHICS?

Opinion: Because of the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance's responsibilities regarding the ability of businesses to have contracts with the County, Section 3.04.030 (C) of the new code prohibits solicitation of contributions from such persons.

The Board finds that County agencies and employees with decision making power over persons who do business or may seek to do business with the County should not solicit gratuities from such persons.

The Board further concludes that individuals responsible for overseeing contracts shall not accept or solicit donations from persons who do business or are seeking to do business with the County.

Statement of Circumstances: The Administrator of the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance has solicited an advisory opinion from the King County Board of Ethics to insure that his staff's role in the organization of the annual Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration does not constitute a violation of the King County Code of Ethics. Organization of this event includes the annual solicitation of donations including in-kind and cash contributions from businesses. The businesses making the contributions all have the potential to contract with the County. The contributions are made to the County, not to any single King County employee.

FACTS

• The annual King County Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration is held for the purpose of commemorating the achievements of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a slain Civil Rights activist and scholar.
• The event is held during the month of January during the noon hour for two or three consecutive days.
• The event is organized by the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance. An Affirmative Action Specialist and a Compliance Specialist are the primary organizers.
• Normal duties of OCRC staff includes reviewing and approving affirmative action, 504, and minorities/women's business documents and status contracts, investigating alleged violations of the County's Affirmative Action ordinances and recommending or imposing sanctions on persons found to have violated such ordinances.
• A committee consisting of representatives of various County departments assists the OCRC staff in organizing the event.
• At least one other County employee has participated in promoting the event by designing mobiles and the theme poster.
• OCRC staff solicits area businesses to provide flowers, cookies, and beverages for the event.
• County departments give money or pay bills incurred for the event.
• The County is the primary underwriter of the event.

Analysis: The question for the Board to resolve is whether employees who are responsible for administering contracts should be soliciting donations from persons who subsequently could appear before them.

The Section 3.04.020 C of the Code specifically prohibits county employees from using 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 other thing of value directly or indirectly.

The Board notes that the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance is an integral part of the County contracting process in that the office staff reviews and approves or disapproves affirmative action, 504, and minority/women's business documents, investigates possible violations of the County's Affirmative Action Ordinances and has the authority to recommend or impose sanctions on persons found to have violated such ordinances.

There are certain restrictions and requirements found in the new code that the County has always used regarding employee interaction with persons who do business or are seeking to do business with the County. The Code in Section 3.04.030 speaks of a conflict of interest when employees are responsible. It specifically says that:

"A county employee shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest if the employee directly or indirectly:

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, seeking to do business with the county for which the employee has responsibility or with regard to which he or she may participate ***

The job responsibilities of OCRC staff appears to satisfy the requirements of "responsibility" or "participation" as it relates to a conflict of interest in the new Code.

AUTHORITY RELIED UPON

3.04.020 Just and equitable treatment.

C. 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 with any compensation, gift, or other thing of value directly or indirectly.

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:

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;

ISSUED ON THE _____________________ day of _____________________, 1991

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

Members:

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

JPD:dwm

cc:

Tim Hill, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Robert Stier, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Rella Foley, Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Jesus Sanchez, Director, Department of Executive Administration ATTN: Teresa Cronin, Administrative Assistant, Department of Executive Administration
David Leach, Manager, Purchasing Agency
Terry Koyano, Compliance Supervisor, Office of Civil Rights and Compliance
Debbie Brockway, Affirmative action Specialist, Office of Civil Rights and Compliance
Rita Lee, Compliance Specialist, Office of Civil Rights and Compliance