Washington Code 90.80.120 – Conflicts of interest
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
(1) A commissioner of a water conservancy board shall not engage in any act which is in conflict with the proper discharge of the official duties of a commissioner. A commissioner is deemed to have a conflict of interest if he or she:
Terms Used In Washington Code 90.80.120
- Appeal: A request made after a trial, asking another court (usually the court of appeals) to decide whether the trial was conducted properly. To make such a request is "to appeal" or "to take an appeal." One who appeals is called the appellant.
- Corporation: A legal entity owned by the holders of shares of stock that have been issued, and that can own, receive, and transfer property, and carry on business in its own name.
- Gift: A voluntary transfer or conveyance of property without consideration, or for less than full and adequate consideration based on fair market value.
- person: may be construed to include the United States, this state, or any state or territory, or any public or private corporation or limited liability company, as well as an individual. See Washington Code 1.16.080
- Remand: When an appellate court sends a case back to a lower court for further proceedings.
(a) Has an ownership interest in a water right subject to an application for approval before the board;
(b) Receives or has a financial interest in an application submitted to the board or a project, development, or venture related to the approval of the application; or
(c) Solicits, accepts, or seeks anything of economic value as a gift, gratuity, or favor from any person, firm, or corporation involved in the application.
(2) In the event of a recusal of an appointed commissioner, an alternate may serve as a commissioner on a board and may act upon the official board business for which the conflict of interest exists.
(3) The department shall return a record of decision to a conservancy board without action where the department determines that any member of a board has violated subsection (1) of this section.
(a) If a person seeking to rely on this section to disqualify a commissioner knows of the basis for disqualification before the time the board issues a record of decision, the person must request the board to have the commissioner recuse himself or herself from further involvement in processing the application, or be barred from later raising that challenge.
(b) If the commissioner does not recuse himself or herself or if the person becomes aware of the basis for disqualification after the board issues a record of decision but within the time period under RCW 90.80.080(3) for filing objections with the department, the person must raise the challenge with the department. If the department determines that the commissioner should be disqualified under this section, the director must remand the record of decision to the board for reconsideration and resubmission of a record of decision. The disqualified commissioner shall not participate in any further board review of the application. The department’s decision on whether to remand a record of decision under this section may only be appealed at the same time and in the same manner as an appeal of the department’s decision to affirm, modify, or reverse the record of decision after remand.
(c) If the person becomes aware of the basis for disqualification after the time for filing objections with the department, the person may raise the challenge in an appeal of the department’s final decision under RCW 90.80.090.
NOTES:
Finding—Intent—Severability—Effective date—2001 c 237: See notes following RCW 90.82.040.
Intent—2001 c 237: See note following RCW 90.66.065.