Ethics Commission
1207 Quarrier St.
 Charleston WV 25301
(304) 558-0664
WV toll free: 1-866-558-0664
fax (304) 558-2169
Office hours: 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

An Association seeks regulatory action from the Board. The Association has submitted a complete and appropriately documented application and made an oral presentation before the Board. It now asks the Board to travel, at the Association’s expense, to the geographic area affected by the application, so the Board members may "survey" the area and "discuss" the application with Association members.

The rules governing the process by which the Board considers the application neither contemplate nor mandate a site visit and the Board has previously declined such requests for an interruption of and departure from established procedure.

The Ethics Commission ruled that the Ethics Act’s prohibition against accepting gifts from interested persons prevents the Board from accepting the Association’s offer to pay its members’ travel expenses.

Further the Commission noted that Agencies must follow their established rules and act impartially. A substantial departure from established procedures, made at the applicant’s request, raises a question about the agency’s impartiality. To those opposed to granting the Association’s application such a trip would be evidence of agency bias. Particularly where, as here, the Association pays the cost of an exceptional and nonessential "discussion."

The county school system maintains an Internet web site which contains, among other school-related information, a photograph and brief biographical sketch of several of the Board’s members. With an election approaching, the Board added a brief biographical sketch of each of the four candidates for a position on the Board, including the incumbent Member.

The Commission ruled that it would not be a violation of the Ethics Act for the Board to provide the candidates, including the incumbent candidate, a direct link from the Board’s Internet web site to their own, campaign-oriented personal web sites, so long as challengers and incumbents are given essentially equal treatment.

The Agency is hosting the annual conference of a regional association. While the conference is primarily a business event, the agenda includes social events geared to spouses and children, in addition to conference delegates.

The Ethics Commission found the conference’s workshops and business meetings, designed to enhance the skill and professional competence of Agency personnel, provide an overriding public benefit sufficient to justify the use of Agency personnel to schedule and coordinate conference events - both business events and those social events which are an integral part of the conference.

The Commission ruled that it would not be a violation for Agency personnel to be paid for time spent scheduling and coordinating conference events, including those providing entertainment and recreation.

The State Commission was established by the Legislature to carry out a mandate imposed by federal statute. The State Commission works through subordinate planning districts at the local level which are operated by planning committees whose members are appointed by and report to the State Commission.

The planning districts collect information, prepare studies and develop plans. Some have experienced difficulty hiring local people to do this work because many of those with the necessary qualifications are serving on the planning committees. The Commission asks if local district committees may hire their own members to do this work, or must contract with those outside their jurisdiction. The Ethics Commission ruled that neither the local planning districts nor the appointed planning committee members are covered by the provisions of WV Code 61-10-15.

The Ethics Act prohibits public servants from being a party to, or having a financial interest in, a public contract, purchase or sale which their public position gives them the authority to award or control. However, the Act makes special accommodation for part-time appointed officials by providing that they may escape the outright prohibition, if they have disclosed their interest in the matter and have been recused from considering and voting on the transaction.

The Ethics Commission said it would be a violation for planning committee members to give a fellow member preferential treatment or unwarranted consideration in awarding contracts. It also cautioned that special care is needed to prevent any suggestion of favoritism in proceedings which result in a contract between a planning district and one of its committee members.

Finally the Ethics Commission noted that nothing in the Ethics Act prevents an agency from establishing more demanding ethical standards than the minimum ethical standards of the Ethics Act. While an agency may not lessen the standards of the Ethics Act, it may add rules and regulations it deems necessary to accommodate potential problems or situations unique to the agency and to preserve the appearance of propriety in the conduct of agency business.

The Governor, the Senate President and the Speaker of the House are honorary co-chairs of West Virginia Celebration 2000, a statewide promotional project. It is a public / private initiative governed by public officials and private citizens and supported by both public funding and private resources. Private sector volunteers and a private, for-profit fund raiser are soliciting financial support for the project from the private sector.

The Ethics Act prohibits public servants from soliciting gifts, unless the gift is for a charitable purpose. The Commission ruled in an earlier opinion that Celebration 2000 is not a charitable activity and public servants may not solicit financial support for it.

The Governor, Senate President and House Speaker recognize that they may not actually solicit financial support for the project, but each would like to encourage those in the private sector to support it. They asked if they could send a letter to private companies and individuals to facilitate the solicitations being made by the private volunteers and paid fund raiser.

A draft of the letter they propose sending out mentions their positions as co-chair, gives a brief description of the project and concludes with "I hope you will consider joining us in this important and worthwhile project." The letter thanks them for their interest and support, but makes no direct solicitation of funds.

The Commission’s advisory opinions have defined "solicitation" as seeking to obtain something by direct persuasion or by petitioning persistently. The Commission found that a letter in essentially the same form from any of the officials would not constitute a prohibited gift solicitation and would not be a violation of the Ethics Act.

The opinion did not endorse direct personal solicitation or "arm twisting" by the officials, but is confined to their written solicitation of public support for Celebration 2000, which will benefit the public generally, even if it is not a "charitable" purpose.

The Agency will convene a conference designed to encourage the use of technology in the operation of government and in delivering government services to the public. The conference will revolve around an exposition or trade show affording access to the products of more than one hundred technology-related vendors.

The Agency asks if it may sell vendor registration fees at several increasingly more costly levels commensurate with increasing levels of service and presence at the conference. The registration fees will be used to underwrite the cost of the conference.

The Agency asks if this plan is consistent with the Ethics Act’s prohibition against the solicitation of a gift. The Commission ruled that selling advertising does not constitute soliciting a gift, unless the advertising charge is merely a contribution in disguise or the advertising, on its face, renders no real benefit to the advertiser. The solicitation of commercially defensible registrations, which offer reasonable value for the fees paid, is not a violation of the Ethics Act.