Ethics Advisory
Opinion No. 112
January 4, 2007
Issued
By: City Attorney’s Office
I. Issue:
May a city employee accept a hunting trip from a city vendor where the employee has no involvement in the selection of vendors?
II. Inquiry
A city employee advises that he has been invited to go on a hunting trip to be paid for by a company that does business with the city. The employee advises that he considers the sales representative to be a friend and that he, as a city employee, has no role or responsibility in the selection of vendors by his department. He inquires whether he may accept the invitation to the hunting trip.
III. The Ethics Code - Gifts
A. Receipt of Gifts or Benefits
The Ethics
Code contains two rules which regulate the acceptance of gifts by city
employees. The first restricts gifts
given with the intent to influence or reward a city official or employee for
official action:
A city official or employee shall not solicit, accept, or
agree to accept any gift or benefit for himself or herself or his or her
business:
(A) that reasonably tends to influence or reward official
conduct; or
(B) that the
official or employee knows or should know is being offered with the intent to
influence or reward official conduct.
Ethics
Code, Section 2-45(a)(1).
The second
rule restricts gifts from specific sources, regardless of the motivation for
the gift:
A city official or employee shall not solicit, accept, or
agree to accept any gift or benefit, from:
(A) any individual or business entity doing or
seeking to do business with the City; or
(B) any registered lobbyist or public
relations firm; or
(C) any person seeking action or
advocating on zoning or platting matters before a city body,
save and except
for
i) items received
that are of nominal value; or
ii) meals in
an individual expense of $50 or less at any occurrence and no more than a
cumulative value of $500 in a single calendar year from a single source.
Ethics Code, Section 2-45(a)(2).
In this inquiry, there is no
indication that the hunting trip is being offered for the purpose of
influencing or persuading the city employee in matters of contract
selection. Accordingly, the prohibition
in Section 2-45(a)(1) would not apply.
Section 2-45(a)(2), however,
restricts employees from accepting gifts from city vendors regardless of the
intent of the gift donor. The employee
has pointed out that he has no personal involvement or responsibility in the
selection of vendors for his department.
For purposes of these gift rules, however, the key issue is whether the
gift donor is a city vendor or contractor, not whether the employee has any
involvement in the award of city contracts.
Because this gift is being provided by a city vendor, the employee is
subject to the restrictions.
There are some two exceptions regarding
gifts from these restricted sources in Section 2-45(b)(1) and (b)(12): Section 2-45(b)(1) provides an exception
for:
A gift to a
city official or employee relating to a special occasion, such as a wedding,
anniversary, graduation, birth illness, death, or holiday, provided that the
value of the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasion and the relationship
between the donor and recipient.
Section 2-45(b)(12) provides an
exception for:
Lodging,
transportation, or entertainment that the official or employee accepts as a
guest and, if the donee is required by law to report those items, reported by the
donee in accordance with that law, up to $500 from a single source in a
calendar year.
As discussed above, the employee
considers the sales representative to be a personal friend. However, under the facts of this inquiry, the
hunting trip is being paid for by the company, not by the sales representative
as an individual. Further, although
Section 2-45(b)(1) does allow the receipt of gifts from friends who happen also
to be restricted donors, the gifts must relate to a special occasion and be
“fairly commensurate with the occasion and the relationship between the donor
and recipient.” From the information
provided in this inquiry, it is not established that the sales representative
is offering the gift in connection with a special occasion, or that the
employee and the sales representative have a personal friendship outside their
interactions involving the city in which gifts of this type are customary or
typical. In addition, the fact that
the company is paying for this trip rather than the sales representative
further indicates that this gift is not personal in nature. Accordingly, the exception in Section
2-45(b)(1) does not apply.
Section 2-45(b)(12), however, would
allow the employee to accept lodging, transportation and entertainment accepted
as a guest of the vendor up to a value of $500. The phrase “as a guest” requires the
employee to accompany the donor to the event.
As described, the employee would accompany the company’s representative
on this trip, so that requirement would be satisfied. Therefore, the employee may accept the
hunting trip under Section 2-45(b)(12), so long as the value of the trip does
not exceed $500. It is the
responsibility of the employee to inquire about the fair market value of the
gift. If the value does not exceed $500
and the employee chooses to accept the gift, the employee must comply with any
applicable gift reporting requirements.
B. Reporting Gifts and
Benefits
The Ethics Code not only regulates
the receipt of gifts from certain sources, but also whether the benefit must be
reported. These are separate
requirements. A city employee may be
authorized to receive a gift, but may or may not be required to disclose it.
There are two disclosure
provisions. First, all officials,
including board members, and executive-level staff are required to submit a
full annual financial disclosure report.
Ethics Code, Section 2-73. Some
other designated staff members, the “specified employees,” are required to
submit a one-page annual gift report.
Ethics Code, Section 2-78. The
remaining employees are not subject to financial disclosure requirements. For individuals who file financial
disclosure or gift reports, they must report the receipt of gifts with more
than $100, regardless of their source.
There are exceptions, though, for
the types of gifts or benefits that must be included in the report:
(1) lawful campaign contributions which are
reported as required by state statute or local ordinance;
(2) gifts received from family members within the
second degree of affinity or consanguinity;
(3) gifts from an individual based on personal
friendship who during the preceding three calendar years: a) has
not done or sought to do business with the city; b) has not sought city action on any issue
before the City Council or any city board or commission; c) is
not associated with any business or entity that has done or sought to do
business with the city; and d) is not associated with any business or entity
that has sought city action on any issue before the City Council or a city
board or commission;
4) gifts received
among and between fellow city employees and city officials;
5) admission to events in which the reporting party
participated in connection official duties;
and
6) payment of or
reimbursement of travel and accommodation expenses accepted in connection with
official duties which have been reported [on a travel report];
Ethics Code, Sections 2-74(n) and
2-78. As discussed in the preceding
section, under the circumstances of this inquiry, the gift would not be treated
as a gift from a personal friend.
Accordingly, if the value is greater than $100 and the employee is
subject to either of these reporting requirements, the gift must be listed on
the employee’s disclosure reports.
IV. Conclusion
Under the circumstances of this
inquiry, the employee may accept the invitation to participate in the hunting
trip so long as the value of the trip does not exceed $500 and the employee
accompanies the donor or its representative as a guest. He must also comply with any applicable gift
disclosure requirements.