The Ohio Ethics Law and Public Boards and Commissions Recorded Webinar Transcript

[00:04] Hi everyone. My name is Susan Willeke and I work for the Ohio Ethics Commission. Thank you so much for joining me on this recorded training about the Ethics Law, specifically as it pertains to people who serve on or work for public boards and commissions. I just wanted to start by saying “Thank you!” for your public service. If, in fact, you are an employee of a public board or commission, I just want you to know that your work, that your efforts, your expertise, and your talent make a difference in the lives of people who call Ohio home. So thank you so much for choosing public service as part of or all of your career.

[00:33] If, in fact, you serve on a public board or commission as a member, I also want to thank you in a special way, too, because I understand that the work that you're doing for that board and commission is likely in addition to your “real job,” so to speak, or other commitments in your life - businesses and other volunteer work and other things. So we know that you don't have to choose public service. So thank you for, again, using your time and your talents and your expertise and your experience over the years to provide wisdom and guidance, and to make sure that your board and commission is fulfilling its mission in the best possible, most effective way and within the confines of law.

[01:14] And speaking of the Law, that's why we're here today. I do want to spend some time talking about the Ohio Ethics Law today with you. In fairness, the law really is the same for everybody in public service, whether you've been hired, elected, appointed, if you are full time or part time or in management or not, or in a union or not. The truth is, we're all subject to the Ohio Ethics Law. So the Law doesn’t vary much depending on what public role that we hold. But what I would like to do is offer you kind of an overview of the Ohio Ethics Law and then make it more specific to issues or questions that could arise as someone serving on or working for a public board or a commission.

[01:58] We will give you lots of information in this webinar, but please understand that everything I tell you can be supplemented by so much more information on our website that I hope that you will visit later on. So with that, let's kind of jump in to what is actually in the Ohio Ethics Law, why the Ethics Law exists, and how the Ethics Commission can be at your disposal. Real quickly, before we do that, though, just to note, with your showing this recording at your board or commission meeting, etc., please make sure that you internally keep track of attendance as you need to. I will have no way of knowing that you watch. This is just a recording that we're giving to you, so hang with us. Enjoy this next, 50 or 55 minutes or so and make sure you keep records as needed.

[02:40] Okay, so first off, just always a hair on why this law is so important. In all fairness, this law was born out of a fairly significant national scandal. Some of you may have been alive in the 70s when the scandal known as Watergate occurred. But even if you were not alive then, maybe you've heard about it. You read about it in government class in high school. You've read books about it. In all fairness, it has never mattered to me when it comes to issues of the Ethics Law, what side of the political aisle that you lean toward. Either way is completely fine. This scandal, known as Watergate really was an unfortunate chapter of American history regardless of your background and your political leanings, because the eyes of the world were upon us for a less than positive reason.

[03:26] But I am a huge believer that good things can come out of difficult situations. I absolutely believe the silver lining that came out of the Watergate situation was, in fact, the creation of Ethics Laws all across the United States at the federal level, at the state level and it eventually even kind of bled into other parts of the world as well. Kind of this idea of, what are the boundaries and the guardrails for people in public service? This is not to suggest that everybody who enters public service is somehow bent toward wrongdoing. Not at all. It's just the reality that as long as people are serving in government - again, whether hired, elected or appointed, that we all bring with us our own outside lives, our own outside interests and families and financial concerns, etc..

[04:11] None of us cease to exist at the end of a public workday or at the end of your board or commission meeting. We all have our own outside interests. So a law like this one it has kind of twofold purpose. One, it does give us in public service those boundaries and guardrails, so that we know that we're operating safely within the confines of the law. I certainly want it to be one of my accomplishments in my life, to get through my life and my career without being convicted of a crime. So yay us! But more foundationally, the real intent and really benefit of this law is that it protects you and me, not just as people in public service.

[04:49] Yes, obey this law so you never do have to worry about being charged with a crime. But again, more broadly, it protects you and me as citizens. As fellow taxpayers. You absolutely have the right to expect that all government decisions or actions or expenditures, etc. are undertaken with the public's best interest in mind. Where you live, not just the state government that, that, kind of, serves our, all of us, but your county, your city, your township, your village, that public school district, that public library, that community college, etc.. You have the right to know as a citizen or as a taxpayer, that every time they move forward in a project, they they conduct an inspection or investigation, they issue grant money, they purchase things, whatever, you have the right to know that that action was undertaken with the betterment of the public in mind.

[05:42] You should never have to wonder something like this: “Um, did my three township trustees vote that way because that's what was right for the township, or because it financially benefited themselves?” This is the law that says objectivity is required in how government operates. This is not to say that everybody in public service can always be 100% objective at all times. That's not possible. It's not kind of how human beings are made. I admit I am not always objective. If you were to say something unkind about a member of my family, I'm probably not going to be very open minded and objective. I might get a little defensive pretty quickly. I confess that.

[06:23] But that sometimes lack of objectivity that I may have in my life doesn't make me unfit to have a public job or a public office. All it means is that I'm required, under this law, to recognize there may be times in my years of public service that I might not be able to act on a specific matter or issue or case or proceeding, that I may have to recuse or abstain. That if, in fact, something comes before my public board that would somehow more uniquely impact someone in my family, or my own finances, my outside business life, that I would step away, that I would remove myself. You have the right to know that's what the law says, so that you and I can conduct our careers accordingly and make sure we're safe under the Ethics Law, but more foundationally, you have the right to know as a citizen or as a taxpayer, that's how those other governments are operating as well. You have the right to know that if in fact, you go to a restaurant this weekend, you have the right to know the last time that city or county health department inspected that restaurant, you have the right to know that inspector wasn't also an owner of that restaurant or related to the owner, etc.. So you have the right to know that governments behave and operate objectively, even if sometimes people in government would be challenged being objective all the time. That's why this law gives us those boundaries of when we're going to step back or remove ourselves.

[07:42] So if we’ve talked about the actual “why” of the Ethics Law, this is, if you will, kind of the “who” of the Ethics Commission itself, where you can seek guidance, assistance, help. I understand that when we glance at this partial list of our statutory responsibilities, that your eyeball might catch that word “investigation” first, and I certainly appreciate that. I understand that it's kind of interesting to hear these stories and these cases and investigations. But at the end of the day, I've always said that the Ethics Commission would much prefer that the investigative part of our office would be the least busy. We would so much prefer that the advice, education, training, communication instead be the ones who are always busy. Certainly, that is not to speak in the pejorative about my colleagues here at the Ethics Commission or in the investigative world. They do their jobs well, they do them thoroughly. They do them professionally, even with compassion, sometimes when that's warranted. But at the end of the day, we would prefer that instead of getting investigated, that before acting on a potential conflict or other ethics issue, that someone in public service would instead come to us and say, “Would this be okay? How should I proceed? Would this be problematic under the law? If this, then that?”

[09:00] That's where we are equipped and thrilled to help people in public service do the right thing before a potential violation has occurred. The really good news about the Ethics Commission being 50 plus years old is that we have five decades of advisory precedent that already exists on our website. You can go to our website, use our search engine, put in a few key words, and chances are, something that you have a question about, you’re already going to find on our website. Take advantage of that. My job as someone who oversees the education, communications and training is to take that more legal language and make it very approachable, in the vernacular, so people in public service know what the Law does or doesn't say. This is not to dissuade any of you, by the way, from reaching out to the legal counsel that your board or commission already may work with. If you have a city law director, if you're with the state and you work with an assistant attorney general, I will never dissuade you from working with those folks. I just wanted to let you know all the resources that are available at your fingertips. Okay, so we talked about the “why” and the “who.” Here's the “what” of the Ohio Ethics Law itself. Here are the areas of the law that I would like to cover in this recorded training today. In all fairness, there are other parts of the law that we won't have time to get real deep into.

[10:14] But again, please know there is so much more on our website, that you can do a very, very deep legal dive, spend all kinds of time learning more about the Ethics Law, and reach out to us with questions you have afterwards. But for now, here are the primary areas of the law that I want to cover. So we'll just kind of hit them once at a time, one at a time, and we will start with conflicts of interest. I have often said in my years at the Ethics Commission that I think this phrase “conflicts of interest” has kind of taken on very ominous undertones, somehow suggesting that someone has violated the Ethics Law simply because they may have a conflict of interest. And that's simply not accurate. Conflicts of interest happen with some regularity in Ohio. It's simply indicative of the fact that people in public service do, in fact, have lives of their own.

[11:11] It is not beyond the realm of possibility that if I work for the Ohio Board of Pharmacy, for example, that I could have a sister who's a pharmacist in the state regulated by that board. I'm sure that has happened over the years. In all fairness. Is that a conflict of interest for me? Sure. But is that a reason for me to panic? No. What it means is, I will never act on that conflict of interest. If in fact, I work for the board of pharmacy and my sister is a pharmacist, it doesn't mean my sister has to stop being a pharmacist in Ohio. It doesn't mean I have to quit my job at that board. It means that I will never, in my public position, attempt to intercede or act on her behalf, or be her carrier of information, that anything that comes up before that board that kind of touches my sister's life or her career as a pharmacist, I would simply stay out of it.

[12:07] Now, in all fairness, if you serve on a board or commission, I understand that for many of you there is almost sort of this built in conflict of interest, because very often people are asked to serve on these boards and commissions because of their expertise in that field, in that industry. In fairness, it would be kind of counter intuitive and not very effective if we did not allow any physicians to serve on the Ohio Medical Board. That doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? We need that expertise and the industry knowledge there.

[12:41] So to some degree, if I were a physician and I were asked to serve on the medical board, yeah, to some degree, there is that built in conflict of interest following me in. Again, that's not a violation of the law. We do have this phrase that we use a lot in Advisory Opinions, that we use that phrase a “definite and direct impact.” If, in fact, in my role, my hypothetical role on the medical board, (that's pretending that I'm a physician here) if I am acting on something, a rule package, a decision, an application process, whatever, that sort of impacts every single physician in Ohio the same way, there is this across the board, uniform impact. I would not have to recuse even if I'm part of that larger group, right? If I serve on an EMS board but I'm also an EMS provider and we're talking about CEU finances or fees, etc. I wouldn't have to recuse for those discussions just because it might increase the fee that I pay when I go to take a CEU class. It's only when someone in our world is more definitely and directly implicated that this law would say recusal is required.

[13:58] Here are the categories that we would say, if these folks, myself, is somehow more uniquely impacted or singled out, someone in my family, someone that I have a business relationship with in my private outside life, now I am required to remove myself. Not something that impacts everybody in that industry equally, but rather, again, someone in these categories that's more uniquely implicated. So for example, we would not say to, oh, I don't know, some board or commission that's talking about infrastructure changes in a community, we would not say to them, well, you're not allowed to be part of these infrastructure discussions because part of it's talking about, you know, enhancing a city park and you take your kids to the park to throw a ball around or a Frisbee. That's absurd. That impacts everybody equally.

[14:49] What if, however, we're talking about expanding a park and expanding that park would mean that I, as a board or commission member, have the opportunity to sell property that I own to the Parks and Rec department. That's different now. Or a member of my family could sell their property. That's different. They are more uniquely singled out or impacted. That's when we would say as a board member, as a commissioner, as a staff member, recusal is statutorily required. Not just suggested or recommended, but mandated under this criminal law.

[15:23] Let me just give you a feel here on this slide what recusal kind of looks like. I think sometimes people believe that recusing or abstaining from the final step in the process is sufficient. “Well, yes, I have this conflict so I will abstain from the vote.” Certainly, recusal includes those final steps, but that's not the totality. If in fact, in your years of public service, if you do in fact have a conflict of interest, this is the part of the law that would say I have to step away from everything. The formal parts and the informal parts. Things in writing or things verbal. Not only will I not sign off or vote or advocate or lobby behind the scenes or make recommendations or approve it or deny it, it means I won't even have a hallway conversation with a colleague about it. If in fact myself, my family, or someone in my outside business life is definitely and directly impacted. Again, more singled out or uniquely impacted. So I have mentioned we have some Advisory Opinions that date way back to 1974 on our website. I'd like to highlight a few of those for you. Like I said, the law is relatively, equally applied to everybody in public service, but I mentioned I’d like to point out a few Advisory Opinions and issues that board and commission members and their staff have found especially helpful to look at or review.

[16:52] One of the first ones I wanted to talk about impacts, again, folks who, in addition to their public service, do have some outside business, some outside life. Again, we recognize you may have been appointed to your board or commission because of your expertise. We certainly don't want that not to be put to good use. What we can't have happen is that someone use their public role to get some unfair advantage, benefit, etc., again, for themselves, their families or outside business associates. So for example, let's say that, you serve on this board or commission or you work for that board or commission, but you also have this relationship with this other outside company or organization who might be seeking public funds, public grants, maybe tax abatements, loans, etc..

[17:39] That's not extremely uncommon that those scenarios could arise. What needs to be common, though, is our commitment to stepping away or recusing when some of those situations arise that involve those companies that we have relationships with in our private outside lives. So here's when we talk about advice, here's just a snapshot of our advice, advice page on our website, that you can find all kinds of things there. You see the search engine, you can find all kinds of things. The first one I wanted to mention, this is not only one of my favorite Advisory Opinions, it's probably one of those that I send out the most often.

[18:15] It is a marvelous overview, or kind of CliffsNotes, of all the things that people in public service cannot do when they do have these outside businesses, outside business interests. It goes from everything from: I can't use public time, public equipment, the copy machine, the, you know, laptops, cell phones, public time. I can't have staff work on things for me in my private life. Private business. I can't use a uniform. I can't use the authority of my position, client list, contact information; I cannot use my public role to try to expand clients, benefits, advantages, profits in my private outside life.

[18:57] We have to keep those separate, even if that's why you were chosen to serve on this board, because you are, you've been asked to serve on the Underwater Basket Weaving Commission, because you are an expert in the world of underwater basket weaving. That's certainly legitimate, that they wanted your expertise and knowledge. What you cannot do, though, is now use that position to benefit your outside underwater basket weaving company, or employees or clients, or get new clients, etc.. You can't use the email address that may have been issued to you to get clients, or to reach out on behalf of your private business. We have to keep these parts of our lives completely separate.

[19:39] I did want to mention 2009-04 because in all fairness, this kind of gets to that, the uniform across the board impact. In all fairness, if you serve on some public body or you work for a public board or commission, this is not to say that as a citizen, you are never allowed to take advantage of some of the same programming or opportunities that any other citizen could. We certainly don't want to cut you off from also being able to access information from the public library just because you serve on the public library board. However, what we would remind us of is any time that's this, this issue, this case, this preceding this discussion, this matter before your public body does, in fact, more uniquely single out, again, ourselves, our families, our outside business associates, that under penalty of criminal law, we are required to completely recuse ourselves.

[20:31] Now, this next area of the law known as representation, it is a different statutory citation than conflicts of interest. I still think they go together, though, hand in hand enough that I wanted to mention that next. It is really common that people who work or serve boards or commissions that again, you have this outside career, maybe you're an attorney, maybe you're an architect, maybe you're an engineer, so on and so forth.

[20:56] It is not terribly uncommon, then, that your life outside that public board might normally be representing people or clients in the same field that you serve on that board. This is a restriction, though, that reminds us that we cannot have some client pay us to represent them before our very public body. Now, that certainly could be represent as in, I'm verbally representing them at a hearing or at a, you know, some sort of a meeting, etc.. It certainly can mean that, but it can mean even more behind the scenes in that, even something as simple as, if I do, in fact, I serve, as a county engineer, etc., that I have an engineering business in my private life, I can not prepare paperwork, etc. applications, that will then be pending before the very public body I serve.

[21:49] Even recusal doesn't help me there. I couldn't prepare, like, let's say that I served on the Environmental Review Appeals Commission, right? For the state of Ohio. I can not prepare briefings or, you know, paperwork, etc. for some outside paid client if that information will then end up before ERAC, that public state board that I serve on. Even if at that board meeting, I say, “Well, I'm going to recuse myself.” Even that doesn't help. I can not represent that outside paid client, etc. before a public body I serve, in writing or verbally as well. I recognize that this information I have brought up probably generates even more questions in your mind at this point. But again, that's where we say, look at our website, reach out to us, you can talk to one of our advisory attorneys, etc.. Again, we'd be thrilled to help you do the right thing rather than ever have to investigate anybody after the fact.

[22:45] All right? We will move on now from conflicts of interest to a part of the Ethics Law that I've often thought people sometimes assume won't apply to them. Maybe not in the sense of, “Oh, well, I they don't have jurisdiction over me,” but more in the sense of, “Yeah, we don't get offered lots of gifts and things that's kind of not our reality.” I always joke that if that's your reality, that I share that with you. Believe me, I understand. I work for the Ohio Ethics Commission. People send remarkably few presents to the Ohio Ethics Commission, so I completely understand where you're coming from.

[23:24] But yet this is still an area where we receive lots of questions in speeches that I give, lots of questions arise here. We get lots of advisory requests. So to be fair, this is still a very legitimate part of the law for us to spend a few minutes on. You will also see two statutory citations here because to be fair, that first one, 102.03(E), that does apply to people in public service hired, elected or appointed, that, this will apply to you and me in the things that we can't do. 102.03(F) is kind of the other side of that, you know, tennis table, right? Of, if I'm, if I could get in trouble for taking certain gifts, the giver of those gifts can also be held liable as well. That would be 102.03(F). So let's talk about this part of the Ethics Law. I first will acknowledge two things that the Ethics Law does not say. Number one, the Ethics Law does not say that every gift on planet Earth is illegal. It actually doesn't say that. But in all fairness, it also doesn't give a specific dollar amount.

[24:35] There is nothing in 102.03(E) or (F) that states, “Hey, as long as this thing of value is worth less than this amount of money, then you're okay.” We don't have a specific dollar amount like that. For those of you who have been around government, especially state government, long enough to think “I thought there was a dollar amount? I thought that was, you know, a thing that we couldn't take more than X amount of money.” You know, in all fairness, there have been Executive Orders over the years, Executive Orders, just meaning the policy of that seated governor, some of you may have been around long enough to remember past Executive Orders that may have said, yeah, don't take anything worth more than, you know, 20 or $25. That's perfectly fair if that's in your memory banks. In fairness, that dollar amount was never in the statute. This statute, 102.03(E) and (F) have never actually stated a specific dollar amount. If you are thinking of your financial disclosure form, if you are in fact a filer, please don't think of that dollar amount when deciding whether or not you can take a certain gift. That is a dollar amount designed to help you figure out whether or not you're even allowed to accept the gift.

[25:47] If you're not allowed to accept the gift under 102.03(E), there should be nothing to disclose later on the form, so I don't want you to think about that dollar amount. That's more for gifts that you were allowed to accept, but that you had to disclose the name if you’re a filer. First, though, whether you're a filer or not. We all first have to determine, am I even allowed to accept it? And that's what we're going to do under 102.03(E). In a nutshell, what this part of the law says is that you and I, in public service, regardless of our public position, we are not allowed to solicit, or even to accept, even if you don't solicit, you're not allowed to accept something of value that is both substantial and improper.

[26:26] That's what you see on this slide right here. Let's just break down those words fairly simply. I like starting with the second word first, improper. All that means is that there are certain givers, offerers, if that's a word. People who are saying, “Hey, I'll pick up the tab for lunch or I've got an extra ticket to that game,” who are the source of these things of value. You can see on this slide there's only four categories that make someone an improper source to us as people in public service.

[27:01] The first two, I've always kind of liked to smoosh them together for simplicity, to call them vendors or want to be vendors. These are the companies that are already selling goods and services to our public entities. Maybe it's something large, like a, you know, whole new computer, you know, set of laptops for everybody, or it's something really small, as in, you know, the Ethics Lady broke her mouse. Can we get her a new one? It's $6. Whatever. Right? Anytime someone sells goods and services to our public office, they are an improper source to us. Or even seeking to. Maybe they're submitting bids. Maybe they are advertising. Maybe they're calling us up saying, “Hey, can I talk to you about our widgets?” So current or wannabe vendors are considered improper sources of certain kinds of gifts - hang on there.

[27:52] That third category, anybody in our regulated community, let's pretend that you do in fact work for the Ohio EPA. You work for ODNR, you, you inspect places under the Department of Health's jurisdictions, etc., that you, in fact, have this regulated community that your office does have regulatory authority over. You issue licenses, you issue permits, you inspect, you do investigations. No one is suggest that your regulated community are bad people, but they are going to be considered improper sources of certain kinds of gifts.

[28:27] We'll get to that in the next slide. And then the last category, someone who has a specific or a vested interest in matters, issues, decisions, so on, pending before our public board. Maybe the public board that you serve on is a zoning board. And let's pretend that I really want to build my underwater basket weaving business in your community, but I can't until your board approves my rezoning request for this piece of property. Well, I'm not doing business with your board. My company doesn't exist yet, and I'm not regulated yet. Because, again, I haven't constructed my business yet. But I clearly have a vested interest in something pending before your public body. Now that makes me an improper source to you.

[29:12] Again, this is not to conclude that all the citizenry in Ohio, or companies or vendors or people that are regulated by a public body are improper people, or that we're assuming they have an improper motive. No, but what the law here is saying is that these folks would be improper sources of gifts that we are, in fact, going to call substantial. Now, I mentioned when we started our gift conversation that there are plenty of things in the world that are not considered substantial. I'm just curious in your career whether it was in the public or the private sector, how many of you have encountered kind of gifts that sort of look like these? Do you know what I mean? The kind of promotional, a little bit trinket-y tchotchke kind of sort of things. The pens and pencils or the ball cap or maybe a little thing of, I think I even have one, like some sanitizer here from some conference I spoke at. Right. Maybe a coffee mug with a company logo or some really modest food item. One time this vendor picked up my tab for, I don't know, a donut or a cup of coffee or something. Or some company sent to your office at the holidays the tin of cookies or a little cheap box of chocolates, things like that.

[30:27] Now, in all fairness, if your office, if your board or commission chooses to err on the side of caution and say, “Hey guys, let's not even take those nominal types of gifts, that's perfectly fine. But in the eyes of the Ohio Ethics Law, I just wanted to let all of you know, as taxpayers, that we are not spending your tax dollars opening a full blown criminal investigation because one of your staff members one time accepted a coffee mug with the company logo on it, with some Hershey Kisses and a little paper bow on the front. That's not where we get to this level of substantial or actually illegal under the Ethics Law. Again, if you choose not to take these things, more power to you. But in the eyes of the Ethics Law, these are not a violation of criminal law.

[31:17] When we start talking about those substantial things of value examples that you may have heard of in the past, here's just a few. This is not an all encompassing, all inclusive list. Just a few examples. I have been with the Ethics Commission for nearly 20 years now, and in those 20 years I have heard of everything from oh golly, cash to expensive gift cards to expensive meals, bottles of wine bottles, bottles of bourbon, travel expenses, golf outing, jewelry, appliances, construction on someone's home, furniture, trips to Broadway shows, all kinds of tickets to ballgames and things of this nature.

[32:01] Yes. Here's where we're going to say that is substantial in the eyes of the Ethics Law. Again, not a dollar amount, but think about some of those nominal, de minimis, the little one time someone picks up your tab for a sandwich and a Diet Coke. If if the gifts that you ever receive stay in that category or below, you're going to be pretty safe under the Ethics Law. When we start getting into this world, we are talking about actual crimes under the Ethics Law. Do not allow one of those vendors, the regulated companies, the potential vendors, etc., do not allow them to gift you with these kinds of things.

[32:37] Now again, if in fact you are a financial disclosure filer and your best friend who is an orthodontist living in Indianapolis now says to you, “I have two tickets to see Hamilton when that traveling Broadway show comes through Indianapolis, you want to go with me?” Now, let's do that evaluation. Chances are, your best friend, who's an orthodontist in Indianapolis has nothing pending before your public board. If you can, genuinely say “No, she has absolutely no interest, no matters, no business, no vending, no regulation, nothing dealing with our board. She's not even in Ohio!” Then, yes.

[33:20] Could you take that gift? Yes. But what are you going to do if you're a financial disclosure filer, you're going to disclose her name. If, in fact, the person offering you that ticket to Hamilton, though, is regulated by your board, they are a sales person to your board, they’re a company rep that represents their company to you. Right? There's no disclosure to be found because the law would say that is substantial and from an improper source, the answer is “No.” You can't even accept it. There should be nothing to disclose. Again, if you have lots of questions on this area of the law as well, please do check out our website. In the gift area of our, the Education part of the website where we have all kinds of fact sheets, not only do I have like a, you know, frequently asked questions about gifts, I have sub-chapters, everything from donations to discounts to attending conferences, etc.. We have a lot out there that can guide you into doing the right thing under the Ethics Law. If you can't find what you're looking for, let us know. But do peruse our website at your leisure when you get a chance, because we really want you to be familiar with all the wonderful resources that really are available to you, to help you do the right thing under the Ohio Ethics Law.

[34:31] Okay, so we've covered conflicts and representation. We've covered the gift part of the Ethics Law. The next part of the law that I want to spend a little bit of time on is one of the areas of the law where we do find a felony provision. So here you see 2921.42(A)(1). This is the first felony provision that we are discussing in this training. Now, in all fairness, it can seem a little confusing at first because when we talk about not acting on a public contract violation, the categories look a lot like the conflict stuff that I showed you earlier, doesn't it? And in all fairness, conflict of interest violations are first degree misdemeanors. Don’t let the word misdemeanor throw you, we don't want a first degree misdemeanor on our record. But nonetheless, if in fact, I really was, a city health department official and I inspect the restaurant that my sister owned, that would be using the authority of my public position to secure a thing of value in this hypothetical, a passed inspection for a member of my family. Bad idea. First degree misdemeanor. Don't do it.

[35:37] But in this part of the Ethics Law, we see it as a fourth degree felony. Because in all fairness, in this part of the law, I would be using the authority of my public position, regardless of what it is, to attempt to get a public contract, read: public money, either for myself, a member of my family, or an outside business associate. So, in all fairness, let's say that I do work for a, um, economic development board for the city of Anywhere, Ohio, I work for the board or I serve on the board, and we, in fact, are going to bring in a painting company to help us with some downtown beautification projects to do an economic spurt and growth in that downtown, encourage people to come downtown.

[36:26] And I'm very excited about this project A) because I believe in it, but B) I'm also excited because, let's say my sister owns a painting company in the area. Now, in all fairness, 2921.42(A)(1) would not prohibit my sister, who in this hypothetical is not a public employee or public official, from pursuing that opportunity. What it prohibits is me as the public employee or public official from getting involved at all, that I would have to stay completely out of it, that not only would I not vote on my sister getting that contract, that I would say to my sister in advance, “Hey, good luck. I mean, deep down on my heart, I'd be thrilled for you if you get that painting contract with the board, but you're on your own. I am not putting in a good word for you. I am not talking you up. I am not talking down your competition. I am not advocating, lobbying, I am not stopping by people's offices to recommend. I'm not hand delivering bid spec responses. I'm not, again, even going to have a casual hallway conversation about this. Again, fourth degree felony here. There's a lot of things I will do for my family, folks. Being a convicted felon is not on the list. Okay. So certainly if it is my family member, I must recuse 100%. Stay completely out of it.

[37:52] Same is true if it's a business associate. Let's say instead of a sister. I work for the Economic Development Board and part time I work for a professional painting company. And my boss who owns that company, she wants to go after that contract with the city or the board. Same thing applies here. It doesn't mean that I have to quit either job. What it does mean though, is that I will not be a conduit of information for either one, sharing information or questions back and forth. That I will not advocate for them or “Let me just let me just stop by my executive director's office to let him know what a great company this is.” No, that recusal is not only statutorily mandated, it's also very protective of me, of that public board member or employee.

[38:36] Now, we're clear here that recusal is helpful and statutorily required. Yes, absolutely. I will tell you, every once in a while you're going to encounter in the Ethics Law situations or parts of the statute where recusal doesn't solve the whole problem. We're going to talk about one of those right now. Do you see the word “self” on this screen? We have a problem there with “Oh, I'll just recuse myself.” Now, in all fairness, I think we can all unanimously agree that it would be a very bad idea for me if I served on the economic development board and I own a painting company, that it would be a very bad idea, wouldn't it? If I use the authority of my public position to secure a public painting contract for my own company with my own board. Right? Bad idea. Fourth degree felony, bad idea.

[39:20] But the mistake that people sometimes make is that they'll assume that recusal works in that scenario, as it truly does work when it's our family or outside business associates. Not so when it's ourselves. There is a fairly specific prohibition here under the Ohio Ethics Law and related statutes that, in a nutshell, simply tell us that, as people in public service, we should never be selling goods and services to the very public body we serve. Whether we work for it or serve on the board, we should not be in a selling or vending relationship to that public entity. If it's at a local level, maybe it would be painting the economic board if it's a state level, you know, “I shouldn't be selling my consulting services to the very state board that I serve on.”

[40:09] We do have lots of information about this on our website. I would note if you are with a state board or commission, you're also going to want to look at the representation restrictions in 102, as well, because it's even stricter for state board or commission members or state employees in terms of being able to meet any exceptions at all. Because to be fair, there are exceptions to this part of the law. It's more along the lines of what if there's nowhere else to get this supply or service? I'm just going to ask you, though, all not to jump to the exception. In your mind just go with the general prohibition that we should not have our own public entities as clients in our private lives. If in fact you do serve on a state board or commission or you work for it. I would note that it is possible to sell goods or services to other state boards or commissions or agencies. There is paperwork that needs to be filled out. Check out our website because again, we’d much rather help you do that in a really legal way. But in general, just assume: my own board/commission, I am never going to be a vendor there. Okay? Okay, if in fact you have questions again, check out our website. I'm not selling things, but I would like for one moment to go back to the violation of securing public contracts for our families.

[41:36] There is one violation that does still seem to rear its ugly head on a relatively regular basis. So I just want to talk about this one one more. And this is specifically for our families, and it is the issue of trying to secure a public job for members of our family. This is not a prohibition against someone in public service recognizing that a member of their family may want a public job. It's not illegal for members of our families to pursue public jobs. What is illegal is for us to help them obtain them. Here is our definition of family under the Ohio Ethics Law’s interpretation. (Spouse/domestic partner, Sibling, Parent/step-parent, Child/step-child, Grandparent, Grandchild) In fairness, I would note that things like our children or our stepchildren or parents, etc. even if those folks do not reside in our homes, if your children are grown and flown, that's perfectly lovely. They are allowed to pursue public jobs. You just can't help that happen.

[42:48] Okay? If in fact, a sibling, a spouse an adult child, parents, etc. your domestic partners, if in fact they want to pursue a public job, you certainly may wish them well. Or if you want to show them the website where public jobs are posted for the state or local government. If you're just showing them that website, that's certainly public record and available to all, that's fine. Beyond that, please don't hand-deliver resumes. Please don't stop by HR on their behalf. Please don't stop by that supervisor's office on their behalf. Please do not contact the Executive Director and ask for a courtesy interview for your relative. Please do not write them character reference letters, etc.. Do not talk them up. Do not talk down their competition. Don't ask to see the other resumes. Pretty much anything I can think of here or you could think of just don't do that, all right?

[43:43] I would note, see that bottom bullet point there? If you have more extended relatives: your nieces, your nephews, aunts, uncles, cousins, in-laws, those folks, that's when we're going to ask, do they live in your home? If it's a niece who does not live in your home - in fairness, under the Ethics Law, we would not have a legal case against you if you did, in fact help her find a public job. I understand why you might still choose to recuse, because it simply meets that sort of newspaper test as well. I certainly appreciate that. But when, the residency thing only comes into play if it's one of those extended relatives, if it’s your kids or grandkids or parents or your spouse. We're not going to ask that residency question. You just have to stay out of it all together. All right? Again, I know I'm probably bringing up more questions than you even thought up to answer or ask, but again, check out our website or give us a call. The very last thing that I wanted to spend some time on here is, what's called the post-employment - you will also hear people refer to it as the revolving door statute.

[44:46] This is essentially sort of a cooling off period that for the vast majority of us in public service, there's this one year cooling off period. The exception here is for anybody with the Ohio Casino Control Commission, whether you work for that commission or serve on the commission, if you are a former board member or attorney hearing examiner with PUCO. All right? Or my last category is folks who exercise discretion in the solid or hazardous waste fields. For all of you, Casino Control, PUCO or solid or hazardous wastes, you all have a two year cooling off period. For the rest of us, the vast majority of us in public service, there is this one year cooling off period that in a nutshell says in that time frame, we can't represent - right? Communicate on behalf of our outside clients or bosses or agencies or companies, etc.. If I retire from the Ethics Commission and I go work for the underwater basket weaving business. In my first year, after I exit ties with state government in Ohio, I would not be able to represent, communicate, on behalf of my new company or board or commission, etc.. I wouldn't be able to communicate on their behalf to anybody in government in that first year, if in fact, I would be discussing something that I had been involved in at my old job.

[46:15] So let's say, for example, excuse me, let's say, for example, I left the Ohio Ethics Commission, let's say that I had served on that board, as many of you serve on a board, I leave the Ethics Commission board, let's say that first year would simply say, I can't reach out, not just to the Ethics Commission, but to anybody in public service in that first year to communicate on my outside company or business or job or boss or client, etc.. I can't reach out to anybody in government to discuss on their behalf something, some case, matter, proceeding, issue, situation, legal case that I had somehow been involved in when I served at that board at that commission. The idea of this prohibition is always to protect the public. That what we don't want to have happen is let's say that I leave the Ethics Commission, and in that first year, I'm immediately on the horn going, “Hey, former colleagues and friends, you know that rule package we were working on? Yeah. Now that I'm on this side of the fence, I see why they hate that. Could we maybe switch directions?” We can't even have that influence with former colleagues, etc..

[47:21] If any of you are in the HR world - this is not mandatory, so don't worry that you haven't been doing it if you haven't - if someone is stepping off a board or commission, or they're severing their employment with the state of Ohio, if you do some sort of exit packet for them, if you would be willing to include our post-employment fact sheet on our website, that could be very helpful. The liability here is on that former employee or board member, not on the board or commission, but to be fair, if you just want to have an extra cautious person who is exiting, it can be nice to include that information. If you are serving on a board or commission or serve for a board or commission where you come into contact with information that is statutorily confidential be aware this one year or two year, period does not apply there. As long as that information is statutorily confidential, we must keep that in confidence, regardless of where life takes us.

[48:18] All right. I mentioned it before one more time. There's all kinds of questions that may have arisen in your mind as a result of this recorded training. If so, here is how you can reach us. There's our website. That is our main line phone number. We would be thrilled to help you do the right thing under the Ohio Ethics Law. So with that, one more thank you for your public service and thank you for letting me be part of your professional development. I hope this has been helpful, even if it didn't answer every question, which a training like this is never going to, I hope it at least opened a door for you to know that you can come to the Ethics Commission knowing that your information that your question will be treated with respect, with, with promptness because again, we really believe in what we do. We believe in what you do. And it would be our great honor and privilege to help you do what you do so well every day, with ethical principles at the heart of it all. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful rest of your day and, uh, be ethical everybody. Take care. Bye bye.