Advisory Opinion No. 2008-30 Rhode Island Ethics Commission Advisory Opinion No. 2008-30 Re: Richard A. Yacino QUESTION PRESENTED The petitioner, a former Program Manager for Assisted Living Residences in Rhode Island, and former Chief of Compliance, both for the Rhode Island Department of Health (“DOH”), state employee positions, requests an advisory opinion as to what restrictions the Code of Ethics places on him in his new position as a part-time pharmacist at Rhode Island Hospital (“the hospital”). RESPONSE It is the opinion of the Ethics Commission that the petitioner, a former Program Manager for Assisted Living Residences in Rhode Island, and former Chief of Compliance for the Rhode Island Department of Health (“DOH”), state employee positions, must abide by the relevant “Revolving Door” provisions in the Code of Ethics for the first year from the date of his severance from state service in his new position as a part-time pharmacist at Rhode Island Hospital (“the hospital”). The petitioner represents that he was an employee of the Rhode Island Department of Health for approximately fourteen years and ended his state service on May 2, 2008. As an employee, he served in the position of Chief of Compliance and most recently served as a Program Manager for Assisted Living Residences in Rhode Island. He states that over the years as an employee of the DOH he conducted hospital inspections, but that it has been at least four to five years since he has done such an inspection. He states that since retiring from state service, he has accepted work at Rhode Island Hospital on a per diem basis, working one day a week as a pharmacist at the hospital. He emphatically states that in this new capacity, he has absolutely no interaction whatsoever with DOH and will not. He further states that he will not be representing himself or others before DOH for any reason. Finally, he states that if any situation should arise at the hospital involving DOH, for example, if the Board of Pharmacy should come in to do an inspection while he is there, which petitioner represents is an extremely remote possibility, he would remove himself from the situation immediately. Under this set of factual circumstances, the petitioner requests an advisory opinion as to whether any provisions of the Code of Ethics are implicated, given his past state service with the DOH. Pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e)(1) and (2), the petitioner may not represent himself or any other “person” before any state or municipal agency of which he is a member or by which he is employed. A “person” is defined as an individual or business entity. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-2(7). R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e)(3) further provides that the petitioner may not act as an expert witness before his agency with respect to any matter the agency’s disposition of which will, or can reasonably be expected to, directly result in an economic benefit or detriment to him, a family member, business associate or any business by which he is employed or represents. Subsection 36-14-5(e)(4) extends these prohibitions for a period of one year after the petitioner has officially severed his position with his former agency. The legislative intent of this “revolving door” language presumably is to minimize any potential influence the former public employee may have with his former agency. Finally, R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(b), (c), and (d) prohibit the use and/or disclosure of confidential information acquired by an official or employee during the course of, or by reason of, his official employment, particularly for the purpose of obtaining financial gain. In the past, the Commission consistently has concluded that under the very strict, but very clear, language of section 5(e) public officials and employees may not represent themselves or others before their own agency or board before the expiration of one-year from their date of separation. See A.O. 2006-13 (the former Director of Nurse Registration and Nursing Education for the Office of Health Professionals at the DOH and the current Vice President of Clinical Affairs for the Hospital Association of Rhode Island may interact with the DOH on matters involving clinical affairs issues provided that: 1) she does not represent herself or HARI before the DOH for the purpose of influencing any judgment that the DOH may render involving said clinical issues; and 2) she does not disclose confidential information obtained during the course of her state employment); A.O. 99-125 (finding that a former Department of Health employee or his firm should not appear before his former Division in variance hearings for a period of one-year following the date of his official severance of employment with that agency). Although the Commission has concluded that individuals subject to the Code may not represent themselves or others before their own agency or board prior to the expiration of one-year from their date of separation, that prohibition does not extend to the performance of ministerial acts. See A.O. 98-5 (DHS Casework Supervisor in the East Providence Long Term Care Unit could accept private employment that may involve contact with the DHS so long as contact with East Providence Long Term Care Unit is ministerial in nature for a period of one-year from the date of separation). In the facts as described by this petitioner, his per diem work as a pharmacist at Rhode Island Hospital does not appear to run afoul of the Code of Ethics, provided, as described above, he does not represent himself, the hospital, or anyone else, or act as an expert witness, before the DOH until one year has passed since his severance from state service. The petitioner is encouraged to seek further guidance from this Commission if and when he has occasion to have dealings with his former agency, the DOH, within the one year period following his severance from state service. Code Citations : § 36-14-2(7) § 36-14-5(b) § 36-14-5(c) § 36-14-5(d) § 36-14-5(e) Related Advisory Opinions : A.O. 2006-13 A.O. 99-125 A.O. 98-5 Keywords : Revolving Door