Advisory Opinion 91-11-1031
Public Health/Conflict with Official Duties

DOES EMPLOYEE (OR A DESIGNEE'S) SOLICITATION OF DONATIONS FOR ISSUE: THE ANNUAL MINORITY/WOMEN'S BUSINESS AWARDS PROGRAM VIOLATE THE KING COUNTY CODE OF ETHICS?

Opinion: The Board does not believe the use of a consultant mitigates its original decision found in Advisory Opinion ADV1030 (Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration). We do not believe that the interposition of the consultant or going to another agency solves the problem of soliciting donations for the following reasons:

1. It would be impossible to maintain the complete insulation necessary to not affect the deliberative process. This is because of the possibility that the consultant's reporting could subsequently influence the opinion and/or future actions of County officials and employees. Solicitation by consultants or third parties would breach the appearance of a conflict of interest and such activity could also be perceived by businesses as indirect coercion.
2. Section 3.04.020(C) prohibits all King County employees from using the power and authority of their office in any manner to induce or coerce any other person to provide such county employee or any other perosn with any compensation, gift, or other thing of value directly or indirectly.
3. Even the creation of a wall established between the Consultant, County offcials, and employees would not be a firm enough separation to avoid information concerning the donor status of businesses to be disseminated to County officials and employees. The "wall" would not be enough even if it were to remain and be in existence during all formal and informal occurrences between the consultant, County officials, and employees or even if the consultant explained the existence of such a "wall" to any and all persons or businesses when soliciting or before accepting unsolicited donations for the event.

Statement of Circumstances: The Administrator of the Office of Civil Rights and compliance (OCRC) wants to know if a conflict with the new Code of Ethics exists by having their office oversee the annual minority and women's business awards event. The Office hires an independent consultant to promote the event. The promotion includes soliciting businesses to donate in-kind and cash contributions ot offset expenses.

FACTS

• A committee of the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance which includes the Purchasing Manager, the OCRC Administrator and staff, and the Director of Executive Administration and his staff selects an independent consultant hired to manage and promote the annual Minority/Women's Business Awards event.

• The event is held to honor the contributions of outstanding minority-owned businesses as well as pay tribute to businesses contributing to the success of the County's Minority and Women's Business program.

• Nominees for award recipients come from King County Departments.

• The independent consultant is not a King County employee.

• Normal duties of OCRC staff includes reviewing and approving affirmative action, 504, and minorities/women's business documents and status.

• The consultant solicits contributions from businesses that consists of both in-kind donations and cash. The contributions go directly to the consultant for use in the management and the carrying out of the event.

• All solicited donations are either consumed or used in the promotion of the event. Examples of previous donations include: Flowers, balloons, awards, hors d'oeuvres, banners, and printing.

• The businesses making the contributions all have the potential to contract with the County.

• OCRC, via the planning committee, obtains a weekly report from the consultant which contains expenditures, expected costs, and donations to date, which is in addition to the regular billing for consultant services. This includes an end of term final itemized budget report.

• County Executive Tim Hill sends thank you letters to sponsors of the event and letters of congratulations to awad recipients.

Analysis: It is clear form the inforamtion provided that any and all of the solicitations for the event are carried out by the consultant selected to manage the event and none of the contributions go to individual employees of the County.

The board of Ethics has already determined in Advisory Opinion 1030 (Martin Luther King Celebration) that the direct solicitation of funds for any purpose by county employees from persons whose activity is in the area of the employee's responsibility is prohibited.

In its analysis of this request regarding the legitimacy of interposing a consultant to conduct solicitation on behalf of the County, the Board of Ethics looked at:

1. The impact that the receipt of gratuities may have on the deliberative process, given the activity of the Office of Civil Rights and Compliance when it involves those persons doing business or seeking to do business with the County.
2. Implicit coercion by King County employees when seeking donations for County events.

The Board is concerned that no person or business in King County feels implicitly coerced to provide aid for government sponsored events because they were solicited by County government agencies. The broad scope of power and authority of King County agencies (especially those that interact with the public regularly) make it likely that the person or business solicited would feel coerced to donate to an event. This is most obvious in areas where agencies have direct authority over those being solicited. Additionally, Section 3.020(C) of the Code is designed to avoid implicit coercion.

AUTHORITY RELIED UPON

3.04.020 Just and equitable treatment.

C. Execpt 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 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 performanceof 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 meeitns which are informational or ceremonial in nature;

D. Accepts, directly or indirectly, any gift, favor, loan, retainer, entertainment, travel expense, compensation or other thing of value from 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.

A conflict shall be deemed to exist where a reasonable and prudent person would believe that the gift, compensation, thing of value, or more favorable terms, was given for the purpose of obtaining special consideratio or to influence county action ****