Ohio Ethics Commission issues advisory opinion in Georgetown PD matter
By
-
The Ohio Ethics Commission has issued two advisory opinions related to conflicts of interest and public contracts.
The first advisory opinion was issued to the City of Upper Arlington which had inquired whether members of the city council could participate in council discussions or decisions regarding a change in the city’s health plan.
The commission determined that because the change would apply to all individuals in a class of city officials and employees in a uniform manner and that it would be speculative to assert that the financial interests of any council member would be affected positively or negatively by the change, the council members would not be prohibited from participating in the discussions or decisions regarding the health plan.
• The commission also upheld an opinion issued in 2010. In that opinion, the commission concluded that, although she had been hired by a previous police chief, the current police chief of the Village of Georgetown, would be prohibited from increasing his wife’s work hours at the village police department since that would alter the terms and conditions of his wife’s employment and secure a benefit for her.
The commission received a request to reconsider this opinion. The commission noted that the relevant statutes and advisory opinion upon which the 2010 opinion was based remain valid and relevant. Therefore, the commission affirmed that the 2010 opinion stands as issued.
In other business, the commission reviewed financial disclosure statistics and complaint reports and received an update on commission public outreach and communication efforts.
Finally, in executive session, the commission heard a confidential report on complaints and pending investigations concerning alleged violations of the Ethics Law and related statutes and litigation.[[In-content Ad]]
The first advisory opinion was issued to the City of Upper Arlington which had inquired whether members of the city council could participate in council discussions or decisions regarding a change in the city’s health plan.
The commission determined that because the change would apply to all individuals in a class of city officials and employees in a uniform manner and that it would be speculative to assert that the financial interests of any council member would be affected positively or negatively by the change, the council members would not be prohibited from participating in the discussions or decisions regarding the health plan.
• The commission also upheld an opinion issued in 2010. In that opinion, the commission concluded that, although she had been hired by a previous police chief, the current police chief of the Village of Georgetown, would be prohibited from increasing his wife’s work hours at the village police department since that would alter the terms and conditions of his wife’s employment and secure a benefit for her.
The commission received a request to reconsider this opinion. The commission noted that the relevant statutes and advisory opinion upon which the 2010 opinion was based remain valid and relevant. Therefore, the commission affirmed that the 2010 opinion stands as issued.
In other business, the commission reviewed financial disclosure statistics and complaint reports and received an update on commission public outreach and communication efforts.
Finally, in executive session, the commission heard a confidential report on complaints and pending investigations concerning alleged violations of the Ethics Law and related statutes and litigation.[[In-content Ad]]