Ohio Ethics Commission issues advisory opinions
By
-
At its meeting this week, the Ohio Ethics Commission issued two advisory opinions related to potential conflicts of interest.
In Advisory Opinion 2011-07, the Commission determined that a public employee’s spouse can accompany the employee on work-related travel, provided that there is no additional cost to the public agency.
The employee or his spouse must pay transportation, meal, and personal expenses for the spouse’s travel, and any extra costs incurred in connection with the spouse’s travel.
The Commission also discussed an opinion request regarding a Commissioner of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) who also serves as a member of the board of directors of a nonprofit organization.
The PUCO Commissioner inquired if he can participate in a case before PUCO if an association of which the nonprofit organization is a member has intervened in the PUCO case. The opinion concludes that provided he does not hold a fiduciary position with the association, and that the nonprofit organization he serves has not taken positions on the cases in which the association has intervened, the Commissioner is not prohibited from participating in the PUCO’s consideration or decisions on the cases.
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]]
In Advisory Opinion 2011-07, the Commission determined that a public employee’s spouse can accompany the employee on work-related travel, provided that there is no additional cost to the public agency.
The employee or his spouse must pay transportation, meal, and personal expenses for the spouse’s travel, and any extra costs incurred in connection with the spouse’s travel.
The Commission also discussed an opinion request regarding a Commissioner of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) who also serves as a member of the board of directors of a nonprofit organization.
The PUCO Commissioner inquired if he can participate in a case before PUCO if an association of which the nonprofit organization is a member has intervened in the PUCO case. The opinion concludes that provided he does not hold a fiduciary position with the association, and that the nonprofit organization he serves has not taken positions on the cases in which the association has intervened, the Commissioner is not prohibited from participating in the PUCO’s consideration or decisions on the cases.
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]]