ADVISORY OPINION NUMBER 1061

SWM/CAC Membership

ISSUE: WHETHER IT WOULD BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IF APPLICANTS TO THE SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ALSO WORK FOR CONSULTING FIRMS WHICH DO BUSINESS OR SEEK TO DO BUSINESS WITH THE SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT?

OPINION: To ensure fairness in deliberations, impartial judgment in decision-making, and equal access to participation for all interests represented on the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Board recommends that consultants serving on the committee excuse themselves from formal and informal deliberations and from voting on any recommendations, actions, or decisions which might affect the economic welfare of the organization with which they are affiliated. Failure to do so would constitute a conflict of interest. Furthermore, any attempt by members of a Citizen Advisory Committee to do business with the County with respect to a project or program on which they advised may raise a more serious question under the Code of Ethics and should be referred to the Board of Ethics for an Advisory Opinion.

STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES: Ordinance Number 10187 establishes the Surface Water Management Program and amends KCC 9.08.030(A) to read:

"The committee shall act in an advisory capacity to the director on matters concerning surface and storm water management and may submit independent recommendations to the county executive and county council. The committee shall review, advise and make recom­mendations regarding matters such as general program focus, program levels and financing, and policies on surface and storm water issues.''

KCC 9.08.030(B) also requires that committee members represent a cross-section of those affected by the Surface Water Management Program, "including private citizens, and commercial, community, and environmental organizations."

ANALYSIS: In Advisory Opinion 10 2 the Board looked at a similar issue involving the King County Commission for Marketing Recyclables. Thisopinion reinforced the definition of "county employee" as including "members of county boards, commissions, committees, or other multi-member bodies," and that an employee should not:

…engage in or accept compensation, employment, or render service for any person or governmental entity other than King County when such employment or service is incompatibJe with the proper discharge of official duties or would impair the independence of judgement or action in the performance of official duties."

The fact that the Citizens Advisory Committee not only acts in an advisory capacity to the Director of Surface Water Management, but that it may also submit independent recommendations to the county executive and county council raises serious concerns whether sufficient safeguards exist to prevent the undue influence of consultants on the committee who already do business with the County or who are seeking to do business with the County.

References: King County Code of Ethics, sections 3.04.017 and 3.04.037; K.C.C. 9.08.030.

ISSUED THIS 17 th DAY OF February, 1993.

Signed for the Board:____________________________________________________________________

Dr. J. Partrick Dobel, Chair

Members:

Dr. J. Partick Dobel, Chair
Rev. Paul Pruitt
Timothy Edwards, Esq.
JPD/mag

cc:

Tim Hill, King County Executive
King County Council Members
Quentin Yerxa, Deputy prosecuting Attorney and Counsel to the Board of Ethics
Rella Foley, Director-Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Virginia Kirk, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Jim Kramer, Director, Surface Water Management
Pat Johnson, Acting Public Education Assistant, Surface Water Management