Advisory Opinion No. 2005-40 Re: The Honorable Anastasia P. Williams QUESTION PRESENTED: The petitioner, a legislator serving in the Rhode Island House of Representatives, a state elected position, requests an advisory opinion regarding whether she may participate in House deliberations and voting on legislation that authorizes Family Child Care Providers to engage in collective negotiations with state agencies, given that she is a licensed but non-active Family Child Care Provider. RESPONSE: It is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that the petitioner, a legislator serving in the Rhode Island House of Representatives, a state elected position, may participate in House deliberations and voting on legislation that authorizes Family Child Care Providers to engage in collective negotiations with state agencies, notwithstanding that she is a licensed but non-active Family Child Care Provider. The petitioner is a member of the Rhode Island House of Representatives ("the House"). She represents that for approximately eleven (11) years she has held a license through the Rhode Island Department of Children Youth and Families (DCYF) as a Certified Family Child Care Provider to receive payments through the state's Starting RIght Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP). The CCAP is a program administered by the Rhode Island Department of Human Services that provides financial assistance for authorized child care services rendered to eligible children by approved child care providers. Notwithstanding her licensure, the petitioner states that she has never utilized the license to participate in CCAP as a Family Child Care Provider. Rather, the petitioner states that she is a full-time employee of the City of Providence and has no immediate intention of utilizing her child care license. The petitioner states that there is legislation known as the "Rhode Island Family Child Care Providers Business Opportunity Act" ("the Act")[1] that recently was passed by the General Assembly but vetoed by the Governor. She represents that the Act would authorize Certified Family Child Care Providers, numbering approximately 1,300, along with Noncertified Family Child Care Providers to engage in collective bargaining with DHS and DCYF. The petitioner states that it is likely that the Act will return to the House for further discussion and a vote to override the Governor's veto. Given these representations, the petitioner asks whether she may participate in the House's discussion and vote to override the Governor's veto. Under the Code of Ethics, a public official is prohibited from using her public position or confidential information received through her position to obtain financial gain, other than that provided by law, for herself, her family, a business associate or employer. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(d). A public official may not have an interest that is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of her duties in the public interest. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(a). An official will have an interest in substantial conflict with her official duties if it is likely that a “direct monetary gain” or a “direct monetary loss” will accrue, by virtue of the public official’s activity, to the official, a family member, employer, business associate, or a business that she represents. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-7(a). It does not appear that the petitioner stands to be financially impacted by this legislation, notwithstanding her licensure. The petitioner states that although she is licensed as a "Certified Family Child Care Provider," she does not utilize her license, does not participate in the CCAP program, and has no plans to do so in the reasonably foreseeable future. A review of the Act indicates that the proposed right of collective bargaining will apply only to child care providers "who participate in the CCAP," and that only such participating providers will be required to pay a monthly fee to their bargaining representative. Until and unless the petitioner makes use of her license and participates in the CCAP program, or expects to do so in the reasonably foreseeable future, there is no indication that the petitioner stands to be financially impacted by the passage or defeat of the Act. Accordingly, it is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that the petitioner may participate in the House's deliberations and vote on the issue of whether to override the Governor's veto of the Rhode Island Family Child Care Providers Business Opportunity Act. Code Citations: 36-14-5(a) 36-14-5(d) 36-14-7(a) Related Advisory Opinions: 95-94 Keywords: Private Employment