January 25, 1999

KING COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS MEETING NOTICE

When: Monday, January 25, 1999; 4:30 p.m.

Where: E224 King County Courthouse Conference Room

1. Approval of Agenda. (2 minutes)

2. Approval of Meeting Minutes of November 23, 1998 and January 9, 1999. (4 minutes)

• Information and Telecommunications Services - personal use of cellular telephones under work related circumstances

6. Draft Ordinance Related to Consultant Disclosure. Discussion. (15 minutes)

cc: Ron Sims, King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
Duncan Fowler, Director–Ombudsman, Office of Citizen Complaints
Sheryl V. Whitney, Director, DIAS
James J. Buck, Acting Deputy Director, DIAS
Carl A. Johansen, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Linda Greenough, Acting Planning, Finance & Administration Manager, ITS
J. Thomas Ranken, President, Harborview Board of Trustees
John A. Coulter, Executive Director, Health Sciences Administration, University of Washington
Margi Wadden, Special Assistant to the Executive Director/CEO, Harborview Medical Center
Jane Guiltinan, ND, Clinic Medical Director, Bastyr University

Minutes of the January 25, 1999 Special Meeting of the King County Board of Ethics

The January 25, 1999 special meeting of the King County Board of Ethics was called to order by Chair Price Spratlen at 4:30 p.m. Board members in attendance:

Others in attendance:

1. Agenda. Mr. Carlson moved the agenda be approved; Rev. Pruitt seconded the motion and the agenda was approved.

2. Approval of Meeting Minutes of November 23, 1998 and January 9, 1999. Mr. Carlson moved to approve the November 23, 1998 and January 9, 1999 meeting minutes ; Rev. Pruitt seconded the motion, and the minutes were approved.

3. Advisory Opinion #1161. Ms. Clemens briefed the Board on the facts relating to the request from Information and Telecommunications Services regarding whether county employees may make personal use of county cellular phones under certain job related circumstances without having to reimburse the County for the associated costs. Ms. Greenough confirmed the facts as presented by Ms. Clemens, adding that this request was prompted in part because cell phones are used more widely by county employees today, and some of those employees work on a 24 hour on-call basis for mission-critical computer functions.

Mr. Carlson asked how similar calls were handled up to now? Ms. Greenough explained that agencies required phone log reviews and reimbursement for personal calls. Mr. Carlson stated his position remained that this is a management issue, and asked why one would charge an employee for making such a work related call. Judge Feinsod supported that position. Chair Price Spratlen stated that yes, this is a management issue, but it is also important for the Board to issue an opinion for clarity. After additional discussion, Rev. Pruitt moved to accept the draft advisory opinion which found no reimbursement was required under narrow and specific work related circumstances; Mr. Carlson seconded the motion, and the advisory opinion draft was unanimously approved. Chair Price Spratlen and Ms. Clemens thanked Ms. Greenough for attending the meeting.

4. Request for Advisory Opinion Ms. Clemens briefed the Board on the status of the multiple requests for advisory opinion regarding potential conflict of interest for Dr. Jane Guiltinan and other current trustees on the Harborview Board. She drew the Board’s attention to letters she addressed to all requesters asking for clarification and confirmation of those requests. Following receipt of those letters, Mr. Ranken, President of the Harborview Board, and Councilmember Fimia withdrew their requests, while Mr. Coulter, Executive Director of Health Sciences Administration, University of Washington, confirmed his. Ms. Clemens also referred to two documents included in Board packets: first, the Prosecuting Attorney’s recent opinion on the issue; and second, Advisory Opinion 1081, November 1993, which offered guidelines to board members who found themselves in situations where conflict of interest might exist. Those guidelines included full disclosure and recusal from participation in those situations.

Mr. Carlson asked Dr. LoGerfo about Mr. Coutler’s reference to not looking at the issue as a matter of law, but as an ethics issue. He asked Dr. LoGerfo if the ethics code is not law? Dr. LoGerfo clarified that that they wished to look beyond the technical, legal aspects of the issue, to doing what is ethically right. Mr. Carlson suggested coupling the guidelines of opinion 1081 with the Prosecuting Attorney’s opinion, which found that neither Dr. Guiltinan’s employment with Bastry University nor her relationship to another HMC Board member, disqualified her as a matter of law from serving on the HMC Board. Mr. Johansen agreed, stating Dr. Guiltinan could use opinion 1081, and apply it to situations as they arose. Judge Feinsod stated he is pleased with the way this entire issue has played out. He noted the Board had received criticism for not acting swiftly enough to requests, but felt the Board had acted appropriately in first carefully assessing its jurisdiction over the matter, and then in not usurping the Council’s prerogative in determining eligibility of board candidates. He also commended the Council for turning to the Prosecuting Attorney for legal guidance. Judge Feinsod noted that it would now be appropriate to turn back to the Board of Ethics if someone wished to determine conflicts of interest on a fact-specific, case by case basis. The Board agreed that the burden was primarily on the board member to disclosure and recuse if he or she felt there was a conflict.

Dr. LoGerfo stated there were two issues involving conflict of interest: 1) Harborview and Bastyr University are competing organizations; and 2) a Bastyr trustee, who sits on the Harborview Board, would prevent Dr. Guiltinan from exercising independent judgement. Mr. Carlson stated that the principal would know if they had a conflict; Dr. LoGerfo stated only through a lie detector could anyone be certain they were not unduly influenced. Councilmember Fimia described the County Council process of determining Dr. Guiltinan’s board eligibility, and stated they did not find a conflict on either points. First, Bastyr University and Harborview are not equal in size nor do they frequently compete. Second, the current Bastyr trustee and Harborview board member is not Dr. Guiltinan’s boss, nor does Dr. Guiltinan report to her. In addition, since both Dr. Guiltinan and the Bastyr trustee would have to recuse on the same issue, independent judgement is a non-issue.

The Board discussed the issue of functionality of a trustee who must recuse themselves from many issues. Judge Feinsod asked about reasons and procedures to remove board members. Councilmember Fimia stated she believed the Executive would send legislation to the Council to remove the ineffective member. Mr. Howell, just arrived, asked Dr. LoGerfo if the Bastyr trustee was ever questioned about potential conflict when she was appointed, or had she ever had to recuse herself from any of the situations identified in Mr. Coulter’s letter during the 4-5 years she has served? Dr. LoGerfo did not have information to answer those questions. Mr. Howell then moved, that since the Board did not see a substantive issue of conflict of interest at this time, to decline Mr. Coulter’s request to issue an advisory opinion. Judge Feinsod seconded the motion.

Before the vote, the Board discussed the issues further. Mr. Carlson stated the central issue was for the principals to know when conflict of interest exists and to act accordingly through disclosure and recusal. Mr. Johansen summarized Mr. Coulter’s position as stated in his letter: Dr. Guiltinan’s status or position at Bastyr University created a pervasive conflict of interest situation, and she would therefore be an ineffective trustee since she must recuse herself from virtually every vote and discussion. Dr. Guiltinan spoke on the two primary issues raised by Dr. Coulter. First, there are many levels of authority between Bastry staff and the trustee; and second, Harborview is a large county hospital and any comparison they are equivalent or suggestion of competition between it and Bastyr is not accurate. Rev. Pruitt stated that recusal, which is a significant avenue to prevent conflict of interest, lies within the conscience of the individual on the board, and must be taken seriously.

The Board returned to the motion to decline to issue an advisory opinion made earlier and voted unanimously to approve. It also reiterated that opinion 1081 provides good guidance, but they are always open to revisiting the issue should it prove inadequate. Judge Feinsod commended Ms. Clemens’ outstanding work in communicating with all parties and Ms. Clemens in turn acknowledged Mr. Johansen’s collaboration on the effort. Chair Price Spratlen thanked both Ms. Clemens and Mr. Johansen for their contributions. Chair Price Spratlen and Ms. Clemens thanked Dr. LoGerfo, Dr. Guiltinan and Councilmember Fimia for their attendance.

5. Financial Disclosure Programs. Ms. Clemens introduced Ms. Leslie Leber, the newly hired financial disclosure coordinator. Ms. Leber briefed the Board on the disclosure program status, including brown bag informational sessions for board staff and department coordinators. She noted the program was well underway and information and education sessions well received. Ms. Leber distributed financial disclosure forms for Ethics Board members to complete and return. Board members welcomed Ms. Leber and Chair Price Spratlen invited her to attend further meetings.

6. Draft Ordinance Related to Consultant Disclosure. Mr. Johansen briefed the Board on the draft ordinance and its purposes, which include correcting a referencing inaccuracy made previously and clarifying certain language and definitions. After brief discussion, Mr. Carlson moved to approve the draft ordinance related to consultant disclosure for forwarding to the Executive and King County Council for their consideration and possible action. Judge Feinsod seconded the motion, and the motion was approved unanimously. Mr. Johansen and Ms. Clemens will draft a letter for Chair Price Spratlen’s signature and, upon approved, will forward the letter and documents to the Executive and Council.

Chair Price Spratlen thanked everyone for attending. At 6:08 p.m., Mr. Carlson moved to adjourn the meeting; Judge Feinsod seconded the motion; the motion was approved unanimously and the meeting was adjourned.

Approved this _______ day of _______________________, 1999 by the King County Board of Ethics.

Signed for the Board: ________________________________________________________________

Dr. Lois Price Spratlen, Chair