Advisory Opinion No. 2017-19 Rhode Island Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion No. 2017-19 Approved: May 23, 2017 Re: M. Teresa Paiva Weed QUESTION PRESENTED: The Petitioner, a former member of the Rhode Island Senate, a state elected position, who served as President of the Senate from 2009 through March 2017, requests an advisory opinion regarding the application of the Code of Ethics, particularly its post-employment/revolving door provisions, to her new employment as the President of the Hospital Association of Rhode Island. RESPONSE: It is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that the Petitioner, a former member of the Rhode Island Senate, a state elected position, who served as President of the Senate from 2009 through March 2017, is prohibited by the Code of Ethics from representing her new employer before the Rhode Island General Assembly for a period of one year after leaving public office. However, the Code of Ethics does not prohibit the Petitioner from representing her employer before any municipality or the executive or judicial branches of Rhode Island government. The Petitioner was first elected to the Rhode Island Senate (“Senate”) in 1992 and has served continuously since then. She served as Senate Majority Leader from 2004 through 2008, and she was elected by her peers to serve as President of the Senate from 2009 until her resignation on March 23, 2017. On May 1, 2017, the Petitioner began her new, full-time employment as the President of the Hospital Association of Rhode Island (“HARI”), a statewide trade organization that advances the interests of its member-hospitals through advocacy, representation, education and other services.[1] The Petitioner notes that, in particular, HARI serves its members by representing their interests before agencies of national, state and local government, including the Rhode Island General Assembly, where it appears through duly registered lobbyists. The Petitioner states that she is aware that the Code of Ethics imposes certain restrictions on her ability to represent her new employer’s interests before the General Assembly, and she represents that she will neither appear nor represent HARI’s interests before the General Assembly during the one-year period following her resignation from the Senate. However, she seeks guidance as to her ability to interact with other governmental entities, including municipalities as well as the executive and judicial branches of Rhode Island government. The Code of Ethics contains several “post-employment” and “revolving door” provisions that apply to current and former public officials in various circumstances. The instant request for an advisory opinion involves the application of section 36-14-5(e) (“section 5(e)”) of the Code of Ethics, which provides that “[n]o person subject to the Code of Ethics shall . . . [r]epresent any other person before any state or municipal agency of which he or she is a member or by which he or she is employed . . . for a period of one year after he or she has officially severed his or her position with said state or municipal agency[.]” R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e)(2), (4). In previous advisory opinions, the Commission has applied section 5(e) to both members and employees of the General Assembly. Most recently, in Advisory Opinion 2017-9, a former legislative fiscal analyst for the Senate left her public office for a new position as Director of Policy for the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council. The petitioner was directed to refrain from appearing before either chamber of the Rhode Island General Assembly for a period of one year after the date of her severance from her position in the Senate. However, she was instructed that the Code of Ethics did not prohibit her from representing herself or other persons or organizations before the executive branch or its departments. Similarly, in Advisory Opinion 2004-4, a former Special Assistant to the House Majority Leader of the House of Representatives sought advice as to whether, upon leaving his public employment, he could represent private businesses as a lobbyist before the Rhode Island Senate and certain executive branch agencies. Applying section 5(e), the Commission opined that although the petitioner would be permitted to lobby the executive branch immediately upon his severance from his position with the House Majority Leader, he was required to wait one year prior to lobbying either chamber of the General Assembly. See also A.O. 2003-2 (State Representative who was privately employed by the American Lung Association was prohibited by section 5(e) from lobbying or otherwise representing his employer before either chamber of the General Assembly). The Commission has also applied section 5(e)’s post-employment lobbying restrictions to persons serving in other branches of Rhode Island government. See, e.g., A.O. 2006-56 (Chief of Staff/Legislative Director for the Office of the Attorney General shall not engage in lobbying the Office of Attorney General for a period of one year, but may engage in lobbying the General Assembly and federal, state and municipal governmental agencies upon severing his employment with the Attorney General); A.O. 2005-6 (former Legislative Director for the Governor may engage in lobbying of the General Assembly as well as state and municipal agencies other than the Office of the Governor); A.O. 2003-56 (former Director of Legislative and Governmental Affairs in the Office of the Lieutenant Governor may lobby the General Assembly and other state agencies in his new private employment, but shall not lobby the Office of the Lieutenant Governor for one year after leaving his employment there); A.O. 2003-32 (former Director of Administrative Records in the Office of the Secretary of State may lobby the General Assembly and other state agencies in his private employment, but shall not lobby the Office of the Secretary of State). In the instant matter, the Petitioner is aware that the Code of Ethics prohibits her from appearing, lobbying or otherwise representing HARI before the entire General Assembly until a full year has passed from the date of her resignation from the Senate. The Code of Ethics does not prohibit the Petitioner from having purely personal or ministerial interactions with General Assembly members or staff, provided that such interactions and conversations do not involve General Assembly decision-making over matters involving or financially impacting HARI or its members. However, the Petitioner is cautioned to be mindful of section 5(e)’s limitations any time she interacts with her former colleagues or staff over the next year. Prohibited interactions could occur at a restaurant, on the phone, in an email or in any social or political gathering where the Petitioner interacts with a General Assembly member or employee to advance HARI’s interests or legislative agenda. It is the content of a discussion, rather than its venue, that is most relevant in applying the Code of Ethics’ revolving door/post-employment restrictions. Notwithstanding the above, the Code of Ethics does not prohibit the Petitioner from representing HARI or its members before other state or quasi-public agencies in the executive or judicial branches of state government, or before any municipalities or agencies thereof. This Advisory Opinion is strictly limited to the facts stated herein and relates only to the application of the Rhode Island Code of Ethics. Under the Code of Ethics, advisory opinions are based on the representations made by, or on behalf of, a public official or employee and are not adversarial or investigative proceedings. Finally, this Commission offers no opinion on the effect that any other statute, regulation, ordinance, constitutional provision, charter provision, or canon of professional ethics may have on this situation. Code Citations: R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e) Related Advisory Opinions: A.O. 2017-9 A.O. 2006-56 A.O. 2005-6 A.O. 2004-4 A.O. 2003-56 A.O. 2003-32 A.O. 2003-2 Keywords: Lobbying Post-Employment Private Employment Revolving Door