2009-12-09 Board of Ethics Minutes

Home

possible so that if an ethics agency reviews an issue, it will have discretion to make determinations on a case -by -case basis. Maui County's ethics provisions are very general, and its charter is much like that of Hawaii County. Its code, however, is not very specific, which leaves room for the ethics board to make determinations based on the specific conduct involved. Ethical matters will often turn on one little fact. The Board members agreed they liked the "Provider's Standards of Conduct Declaration." Ms. Nicholson said the current Contracts section specifies that the County cannot enter into a contract with a business in which a County officer /employee has a controlling interest, but it does not include spouse or children of the County officer /employee, which is good. Ms. Gentry suggested that language be included stating that if the contractor or County questions whether there could be a conflict of interest, an advisory opinion be gotten ahead of time from the Board. Ms. Nicholson pointed out that it wouldn't work for sealed bids. Most people making sealed bids do not want to advertise that they are planning to bid. Ms. Nicholson said she felt that the Contracts section should be basically kept as is, but they should consider adding language to address the officer /employee's relationship to what he's bidding on, as there should not be a direct relationship. The Board discussed how an officer /employee who has a controlling interest in a company should be barred from contracting with the County if the contract is with the employing department, as the relationship is too close. This situation is what the emailed public testimony was about and can definitely have the appearance of a conflict of interest. However, it is difficult to define or delineate what makes a relationship too close, and whether it would include spouses, dependent children, and departments. Ms. Nicholson questioned whether an officer /employee's spouse or dependent children should also be barred from contracting with the County if it falls within the same department. Such language is not in the current Contracts section. Ms. Schoen pointed out that dependants and spouses are specifically mentioned in the Definitions section, where "financial interest" includes the individual, the spouse, and dependent children; and in the Conflicts of Interests section, where it states that no officer /employee shall take official action directly affecting, in subparagraph (3), a business or undertaking in which a close relative or household member has a substantial financial interest. Ms. Nicholson noted that if an officer /employee is barred from bidding on a contract in his own department, financial interest is not even addressed. Ms. Gentry said having a controlling interest could also bar the contract. Ms. Nicholson wanted to find words for Section 2 -85(a) to say that a contract shall not be entered into if the contractor is employed by the department which is seeking the services. However, the spouse or dependent children could do so, which would again cause the perception of conflict. She suggested that Ms. Schoen do the wordsmithing. 7