Advisory Opinion No. 97-73

Re: Richard S. Humphrey, Esq.

QUESTION PRESENTED

The Petitioner, Special Counsel to the Tiverton Planning Board on a single matter, with no history of or expectation of representing that Board in the future, requests an advisory opinion as to whether he may represent private parties before the Tiverton Planning Board and/or other municipal agencies.

RESPONSE

It is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that the Petitioner, Special Counsel to the Tiverton Planning Board, may not represent private clients before the Tiverton Planning Board during the time frame that he is representing the Planning Board in the matter at issue here. R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e) provides that a person subject to the Code of Ethics cannot represent him or herself or other persons or entities before an agency in which he/she is a member or is employed. Additionally, Commission Regulation 36-14-5008 provides that public officials cannot act as an agent or attorney before any agency over which they exercise fiscal or jurisdictional control.

In this matter, the Petitioner is representing the Tiverton Planning Board in one special matter. Historically he has not represented the Planning Board, nor is there an expectation that he will do so in the future. The Petitioner has represented that he is unclear whether he will have any private matters before the Planning Board before the expiration of one year from his termination as counsel for the Planning Board on this matter or whether the Planning Board may request his assistance in other matters. Based on these representations, previous advisory opinions, and the provisions of the Code of Ethics, the Commission concludes that the Petitioner may not represent private clients before the Tiverton Planning Board during the time frame that he is representing that Board on the single matter at issue here. Nor, during that time frame, may he represent clients before other agencies in the Town of Tiverton over which the Planning Board exercises fiscal or jurisdictional control. We do not address whether the Petitioner must wait one year from the termination of his representation of the Planning Board to represent private clients before the Board given the specific facts of this matter. The answer to that question likely will depend on the nature and extent of the representation in the single matter at issue here, as well as the issues before the Planning Board with respect to any future private clients. However, we advise the Petitioner that if he wishes to represent private individuals prior to the expiration of the one year term, he should seek further guidance from the Commission.

The Petitioner also represents that his representation of the Tiverton Planning Board is isolated and he does not have any duties or responsibilities with regard to the Tiverton Zoning Board of Review, Town Council, or the Police Department. Therefore the Commission also concludes that the Petitioner may appear before other Tiverton agencies provided the Planning Board does not exercise fiscal and jurisdictional control over them. Finally, the Petitioner may represent individuals in court proceedings. See R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(e); Commission Regulations 36-14-5008.

Code Citations:

36-14-5(a)

36-14-5(e)

36-14-7(a)

36-14-5008

Related Advisory Opinions:

96-88

96-22

91-88

89-73

89-36

88-24

88-08

87-10

Keywords:

acting as agent

revolving door