The Board finds that the employee may not contract with either an independent trainer or a community-based agency if the department has a contractual relationship with those persons because the employee has official duties and responsibilities for the contractual process and therefore could incur a conflict of interest. In one instance, the employee has been asked by an independent trainer to provide training for various community agencies and groups both inside and outside King County. In another situation, the employee has been approached directly by agencies which subcontract with the department to provide training within the County. The type of training the employee would provide is substantially the same training the employee provides in an official capacity for the County. In addition to identifying and adapting curricula, developing training packages, and conducting training sessions, the employee also has significant responsibility in the contractual process for training.
Responsibility is primarily a function of work activity.
In Advisory Opinion 1019 the Board defined criteria for whether or not an employee may be considered responsible under the Code of Ethics. In this particular instance, the employee is responsible and participates in County actions through the RFP process, the negotiation of subcontracts, and by providing technical assistance for awarded contracts. Advisory Opinions 1019 and 1039. By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.