Ethics Board rules

A. Introduction

Public resources are entrusted to legislators and legislative employees to further the
public interest. Appropriation of public facilities, equipment, services, and
personnel for personal benefit can undermine this trust and impedes the proper
performance of government's work. At the same time, legitimate need exists for
limited exceptions to this rule. Where use is incidental, infrequent, involves de
minimis or no cost to the state, does not interfere with performance of official
duties, and is reasonable in light of legitimate needs and expectations of the public
work force, neither the public trust nor government efficiency suffers to any
significant degree. This rule defines the circumstances when such limited
exceptions are appropriate.
Adoption of this rule is based on the premise that all legislators and legislative
employees will use good judgment to protect public resources and to fulfill the
obligations stated in the policy of the Ethics Act: "State officials and employees of
government hold a public trust that obligates them, in a special way, to honesty and
integrity in fulfilling the responsibilities to which they are elected and appointed.
Paramount in that trust is the principle that public office, whether elected or
appointed, may not be used for personal gain or private advantage." This trust is
grounded in the personal responsibility of each legislator and employee.

B. Purpose and Scope

This rule provides guidance on the proper use of state resources. It is not intended
to cover every situation that could arise regarding such resources. Further
clarifications may be sought from the board.
The Senate and House of Representatives are encouraged to adopt policies
applying these principles to their unique circumstances. Nothing in this rule is
intended to limit the ability of the Senate and the House of Representatives to
adopt policies that are more restrictive. However, violation of a more restrictive
Senate or House of Representatives policy will not necessarily constitute a
violation of RCW 42.52.160, but will constitute a violation of Senate or House of
Representatives policy.

C. General Rules

(1) Legislators and legislative employees may not use public resources including
any person, money, or property under the legislator's or employee's official control
or direction or in his or her custody for the private benefit or gain of the legislator
or employee or any other person except on an incidental and infrequent basis as
provided in these rules. This prohibition does not apply to the use of public
resources to benefit another person as part of the legislator's or employee's official
duties.
(2) If there is no actual cost to the state or the cost is de minimis, if there is a public
benefit, and if the use does not interfere with the performance of official duties,
then infrequent and incidental use of state resources for private benefit may be
permissible.
(i) The cost to the state is de minimis if the actual expenditure of state funds
is so small as to be insignificant or negligible.
(ii) A public benefit under this rule may be direct or indirect, such as
improving employee morale or activities that improve the work-related job
skills of a legislator or employee.

D. Special Qualifications and Limits

(1) A legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of any state
property which has been removed from state facilities or other official duty
stations, even if there is no cost to the state. Use of computers which have been
authorized to be taken out of the office for official purposes is permitted as an
exception to this rule, to the same extent as personal use of such computers is
permitted when located in a state facility or other official duty station.
(2) A legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of any state
property which is consumable such as paper, envelopes or spare parts, even if the
actual cost to the state is de minimis.
(3) A legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of state
computers or other equipment to access a computer network or other database for
personal use unless there is no cost to the state and the use does not interfere with
the performance of the legislator's or the employee's official duties. Legislative
electronic mail and internet uses which do not incur charges are examples of uses
which meet the no-cost test.
(4) In general, a legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of
state resources and then reimburse the legislature so there is no actual cost to the
state. However, the Board recognizes that in some limited situations, such as
legislators or employees working at remote locations, a system of reimbursement
may be appropriate. Any system of reimbursement must be established by the
Senate or House of Representatives in advance and must result in no cost to the
state. To be valid under this rule a reimbursement system must be approved by the
Board.

E. Guidelines and hypothetical examples.

(1) Questions to ask yourself:
(i) Will my personal use of public resources result in added costs or any
other disadvantage to the legislature? Am I using this resource in order to
avoid personal expense?
(ii) Are my supervisors aware of my personal use of public resources? Do I
feel a reluctance to discuss this subject with my supervisor or my fellow
employees?
(iii) Am I confident that my use of legislative equipment will not
compromise the security or integrity of legislative information, software, or
the legislative information network?
(iv) Are public resources being used for purposes that could be embarrassing
to the legislature by creating an appearance of impropriety?

Example 1: An employee makes a local telephone call home every afternoon
while on break to make sure the employee's children have arrived home safely
from school. This is not an ethical violation. There is no cost to the state and since
the call takes place on the employee's break it will not interfere with the
performance of the employee's duties.
Example 2: An employee operates an outside business. Every day the employee
makes or receives five to ten business calls using a state telephone. All of the calls
are local calls. This is an ethical violation because the employee is running a
business to make money using public resources.
Example 3: An employee posts a notice to sell a used car on the office bulletin
board. The notice gives the employee's home telephone number for those interested
in inquiring about the car. This is not an ethical violation. There is no cost to the
state and posting the notice will not interfere with the performance of official
duties since those who want to inquire about the car can call the employee at home.
Example 4: Once a year, during a two-week period, an employee sells candy bars
to support a youth soccer team. The employee leaves the candy bars in an
employee common area and employees may buy the bars at their leisure. This is
not an ethical violation. There is no cost to the state and the transactions do not
interfere with the performance of official duties.
Example 5: Every spring a group of employees meet at lunch time to organize an
agency softball team. The meeting is held in a conference room that is not needed
for agency business during the lunch hour. This is not an ethical violation. There is
no cost to the state and since the meeting takes place during the lunch hour it does
not interfere with the performance of the employees' official duties.
Example 6: An employee is taking a night school class and after working hours
uses a legislative computer to do homework. The employee prints the homework
using the office printer and personal paper. The appropriate official of the Senate or
House of Representatives has determined by advance written approval that the
class will enhance the employee's job skills. This is not an ethical violation. The
use of the office computer and printer will result in some cost to the state; however,
the cost is negligible. Since the class will enhance the employee's job skills there is
a public benefit and, since the activity takes place after working hours it will not
interfere with the performance of the employee's official duties.
Example 7: After working hours an employee uses the office computer and printer
to compose and print reports for a private business using personal paper. This is an
ethical violation. The use of the office computer and printer will result in some cost
to the state. Although the cost is negligible, the employee cannot use public
resources with which to operate any portion of a private business.
Example 8: An employee is in the legislative intern program and is a student at a
state four-year university. When time is available, the intern uses a legislative
computer to work on a paper as part of an assigned school project. The intern also
communicates occasionally with the supervising professor regarding the project
using email. This is not an ethical violation. The internship program is a
combination education and work experience which is specifically designed by the
legislature to combine academic and professional experiences. The use of work
time and resources is not sufficient to interfere with legislative duties, and there is
a stated public benefit.
Example 9: Legislative equipment includes a video tape player. One night an
employee takes the machine home to watch videos of a family vacation. This is an
ethical violation. Although there is no cost to the state an employee may not make
private use of state equipment removed from state facilities or other official duty
station.
Example 10: Two employees use the legislative computer network to play a game
of chess via electronic mail during their lunch hour. This is not an ethical violation
because there is no cost to the state and the game does not interfere with official
duties.
Example 11: A legislator conducts stock trades on a state-issued laptop computer.
This is an ethical violation. While conducting a stock trade may not interfere with
the performance of legislative duties, the legislator may not use public resources to
make money. However, occasional viewing of general stock market activity would
fall within the de minimis use exception.
Example 12: For convenience, while unable to access a home computer during the
legislative session, a legislator establishes an e-mail account with a private Internet
provider for the receipt of personal e-mails on his or her computer. This is not an
ethical violation, so long as, (1) there are no actual costs to the State for
establishing or accessing the e-mail account, and (2) the personal e-mails received
or sent from the account are not campaign related and (3) account activity does not
interfere with the performance of legislative duties; and (4) the account is not used
for private gain.
E. Private Use of Public Resources for Campaign Activity
A legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of state resources for
any campaign related activity. Such a use of state resources is not authorized by
this rule and may also be prohibited by RCW 42.52.180, subject to the exceptions
in RCW 42.52.180(2) regarding normal and regular conduct of an elected official's
office and certain permissible communications about ballot propositions.

E. Private Use of Public Resources for Campaign Activity

A legislator or legislative employee may not make private use of state resources for
any campaign related activity. Such a use of state resources is not authorized by
this rule and may also be prohibited by RCW 42.52.180, subject to the exceptions
in RCW 42.52.180(2) regarding normal and regular conduct of an elected official's
office and certain permissible communications about ballot propositions.