The Washington attorney general routinely publishes notice of an opportunity to comment for opinion requests that we receive from the heads of state agencies, state legislators, and county prosecuting attorneys if we anticipate publishing a formal opinion in response to the request. We do so in order to provide members of the public with a chance to provide any legal analysis that they would like us to consider as we develop our opinion. In preparing any comments, please be aware that our opinion will provide our considered legal analysis of the question presented, and therefore comments that address the interpretation of the law are more helpful than comments that express an opinion as to what the law should be.

If you are interested in commenting on a request listed in this volume of the register, you should notify the attorney general's office of your interest by February 13, 2019. This is not the due date by which comments must be received, and we will consider any comments we receive before we complete our opinion. However, if you do not notify the attorney general's office of your interest in commenting on an opinion request by this date, the opinion may be issued before your comments have been received. You may notify the attorney general's office of your intention to comment by email to OpinionComments@atg.wa.gov or by writing to the Office of the Attorney General, Solicitor General Division, Attention Jeff Even, Deputy Solicitor General, P.O. Box 40100, Olympia, WA 98504-0100. When you notify the office of your intention to comment, you may be provided with a copy of the opinion request in which you are interested, information about the attorney general's opinion process, information on how to submit your comments, and a due date by which your comments must be received to ensure that they are fully considered.

If you are interested in receiving notice of new formal opinion requests via email, you may visit the attorney general's web site at http://www.atg.wa.gov/ago%E2%80%90opinions for more information on how to join our AGO opinions list.

Opinion Docket No. 19-01-02

Request by Pacific County Prosecutor Mark McClain

QUESTION(S):

1. Does the continued employment in the Sheriffs Office of the Sheriffs spouse as a 911 Telecommunicator constitute a beneficial interest in a contract under the supervision of a municipal officer, in violation of RCW 42.23.030?

2. Should the Sheriffs Office Policy regarding siblings be regarded as applying to a brother-in-law relationship?

3. If this policy applies to a brother-in-law relationship, would the Sheriff hiring his brother-in-law constitute granting a special privilege or exemption to another, in violation of RCW 42.23.070(1)?

4. Does a judicial finding that an individual violated RCW 42.23.030, and order to forfeit office, constitute a finding of malfeasance, such that the individual is disqualified from holding public office in this state?

5. Is a business agreement by a County Commissioner leasing a business to a relative, and precluding the County Commissioner from receiving any profit from business with the County, sufficient to avoid violating RCW 42.23.030?