May 25, 2005

KING COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE

When: Wednesday, May 25, 2005, 1:30 p.m.

Where: Bank of America Tower

701 Fifth Avenue, 34 th floor

Conference Room, Suite 3460

Seattle, WA 98104

Note change of day and time from usual schedule

AGENDA

1. Approval of Agenda

2. Approval of Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2005.

3. Collaborative Relationships with Ethics Agencies. Discussion.

4. Request for Advisory Opinion. Use of county resources.

5. Meeting with Executive. Report from Chair.

6. Staff Report.

• Staff Informational Response Summary
• 2005 Financial Disclosure Program -- compliance status
• Recognizing King County Board and Commission Members - update

7. Pending Appeal Hearing. Update.

Upon advance request, reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities

are available by calling 206-296-1586 or TTY Relay: 771

ALTERNATE FORMATS AVAILABLE

Minutes of the May 25, 2005, Special Meeting

of the King County Board of Ethics

The May 25, 2005, special meeting of the King County Board of Ethics was called to order by Chair Price Spratlen at 1:39 p.m. Board members in attendance were:

Lois Price Spratlen, Ph.D., Chair

Roland H. Carlson

Margaret T. Gordon, Ph.D.

Rev. Paul F. Pruitt

Jerry Saltzman

Others in attendance:

Catherine A. Clemens, Administrator, Board of Ethics

Alan Abrams, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney and Board Counsel

Wayne Barnett, Executive Director, Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission (SEEC)

Cynthia Hickey, Management Analyst, Wastewater Treatment Division, Department of Natural Resources and Parks (WTD, DNRP)

Tricia L. Crozier, Chief Administrative Officer, King County District Court

1. Approval of Agenda. Mr. Carlson moved and Mr. Saltzman seconded that the Board approve the proposed agenda. The Board unanimously adopted the motion.

The chair asked for introductions from those present.

2. Approval of Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2005 . With minor revisions, Rev. Pruitt moved and Dr. Gordon seconded that the Board approve the April 19, 2005 , meeting minutes. The Board unanimously adopted the motion and the minutes were approved.

3. Collaborative Relationships with Ethics Agencies. Ms. Clemens briefed the Board on emails received from the executive directors of the Washington State Legislative Ethics Board and the Washington State Executive Ethics Board in which they declined on behalf of their boards to participate in the joint Statement of Common Principles. Dr. Price Spratlen stated that the Board would continue to encourage participation, but will proceed with the initiative. Mr. Barnett stated that the SEEC is willing and able to continue its participation. It was determined that Dr. Gordon and Mr. Saltzman would re-draft the Statement, based on input from Board members and staff. Comments should be sent to Dr. Gordon no later than June 10, 2005. The new draft will be distributed at the June 20 meeting.

Mr. Barnett left the meeting at 1:55 p.m.

4. Request for Advisory Opinion. Ms. Hickey briefed the Board ; she was representing the requestor, Don Theiler, director of WTD, DNRP. A county employee working at the West Point Treatment Plant wishes to commute to work in his personal electric vehicle. He has not yet purchased the car. To maximize the life of the battery, the employee wishes to plug his vehicle into an outlet at work. The division director states that such recharging would not interfere with normal working operations, and that the cost would be nominal, or about $6.00 per month; the director would prefer not to request reimbursement in order to avoid administration of a de minimis amount. He wishes to accommodate the employee's request since he believes it is in keeping with the department's mission of environmental stewardship.

Chair Price Spratlen asked if the department would pay for the electricity, and if so, what the cost would be. Yes, and the division also generates electricity; the cost is estimated to be $.25 - $.50 per day. Ms. Hickey stated that WTD encourages reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Carlson noted that there were two problems: 1) this is a hypothetical case since the car is not yet purchased; and 2) this requests is for just one person. Management should communicate this policy for all employees. Mr. Abrams stated that the cost might be de minimis on an individual basis, but expansion of the program is of concern. Before undertaking such action, written policy should be in place. Dr. Gordon noted that if many employees signed on to this benefit, such a concept should be rewarded. Mr. Abrams agreed, but underscored the need that the project be sanctioned by written policy, since the county may not have unilateral decisions for one department only. Ms. Clemens noted the inequity of benefits being awarded on an ad hoc and individual basis versus county-sanctioned benefits to all employees; she noted the employee bus pass as a comparison. Mr. Saltzman asked how many employees might be accommodated. Depends upon the facility; decisions would be made on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Saltzman noted that scarcity of spaces for electric cars that would allow just a few to take advantage of the offering might violate the fair and equitable treatment provisions of the Code of Ethics.

Upon further discussion, Mr. Carlson moved to decline to issue an advisory opinion on the request because, under King County Board of Ethics Procedures for Issuing Advisory Opinions, the Board has previously issued an opinion on the issue or substantially the same issue; instead, the Board offers an oral decision that employee use of county resources at the West Point Treatment Plant would constitute a violation of K.C.C. 3.04.020 prohibiting such use that is not official business, but is for personal convenience and that which is not available to the general public; and that should DNRP wish to allow such use, it should work with the executive office to make this benefit available to all county employee rather than the few who know of the allowance.

Mr. Saltzman suggested another version of the motion that, in place of the executive office making this benefit available to all employees, the division should create a pilot program for this initiative with a specific term of 18 months for review by WTD, DNRP and the Board of Ethics. Mr. Carlson accepted this version as a friendly change to his original motion; Mr. Saltzman seconded the motion and the motion was unanimously approved.

Ms. Hickey thanked the Board and left the meeting at 2:26 p.m.

5. Meeting with the Executive. Chair Price Spratlen briefed the Board. On May 9, she met with Executive Sims, Dr. Gordon and Mr. Tanaka, CAO and Director of the Department of Executive Services. They discussed the re-appointment of Dr. Gordon; the collaborative relationships with other ethics agencies regarding the Statement of Common Principles; the Ethics Awareness Campaign; ethics education for directors, deputies and managers; and recognition of King County board and commission members. She stated that the executive was complimentary of the work of the Board, and that he was supportive of the education effort. She directed the administrator to discuss the matter with Mr. Buck and Mr. Tanaka, learn how this will be accomplished, and report back at the June meeting. She also asked that the next quarterly meeting be scheduled now.

6. Staff Report. Staff Information Response Summary. The ethics administrator issued eight (8) written staff informational responses (SIR) from April 14, 2005 , through May 10, 2005 , as requested by employees and elected officials of King County . The summary is intended to inform the Board of Ethics of the number and range of topics of the SIRs. Ethics issues addressed by the responses included: Use of county resources -- email; post-employment; receipt of gifts -- free attendance at paying event; use of county resources -- conference room for benefit of charity (3); use of county resources -- cell phones; and solicitation -- donations of sick leave/vacation accruals. 2005 Financial Disclosure Program--Compliance Status. As directed at the April 19 meeting, the ethics administrator sent a Board-approved show cause letter to all six employees and 12 board and commission members who had failed to file. A sample letter was attached along with a list of recipients. As of May 25, all but one board member had filed or been accounted for. Rev. Pruitt moved that should the member not filed within ten days or by June 4, the Board should notify the appointing authority of the failure to file and request that the member be removed from that board or commission as provided for under KCC 3.04.060; Mr. Carlson seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Chair Price Spratlen expressed appreciation of Mr. Abrams for suggesting the show-case letter that so clearly supports the law and policy. Recognizing King County Board and Commission Members--update . The matter was moved to the June meeting date.

The Chair recognized Ms. Crozier. Ms. Crozier stated that she is she is working on a District Court Code of Ethics and wished to mirror the King County Code of Ethics. She appreciated observing the ethics Board and how it functions. The Board members welcomed her and thanked her for her attendance. Mr. Crozier left the meeting at 2:45 p.m.

7. Pending Appeal Hearing. The Board received a memo from Presiding Officer Carl Johansen stating that the prehearing conference had not yet been scheduled due to continuing work by the attorneys for the respondent and ombudsman; we remain in compliance with the timeline in the procedures. Mr. Johansen will remain in contact as matters progress.

Ms. Clemens reported on recent reappointments and confirmations for Dr. Gordon and Rev. Pruitt and distributed an up-to-date list of members and terms. She also distributed the most recent Tri-Annual Report from the Office of Citizen Complaints--Ombudsman.

Finally, Ms. Clemens suggested to the Board that they issue guidelines for employees and managers when potential conflicts of interests arise. Under KCC 3.04.037, Duty to Notify Supervisor, this is a legal requirement, but all steps may be overlooked. Ms. Clemens advised that by issuing guidelines in the form of an advisory opinion, the guidelines would have a permanent place in the body of Board opinions and serve as a valuable education tool. Mr. Abrams agreed. The Board directed the administrator, in consultation with Mr. Abrams, to draft materials for Board review at the next meeting.

Chair Price Spratlen asked Mr. Abrams if any prohibition existed for employees to make contributions to campaigns for the election of county officials. Mr. Abrams will provide a response at the next meeting.

Dr. Gordon moved and Mr. Carlson seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. The Board unanimously approved the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 3:04 p.m.

Approved this 20th day of June, 2005, by the King County Board of Ethics.

Signed for the Board:__________________________________________________

Dr. Lois Price Spratlen, Chair