The Ethics Board advises that an agency official not, while the individual
continues to serve, enter into an agreement for employment with a lobbyist or
with an organization that employs a lobbyist. An official may, however, short
of receiving or accepting a promise of future employment, explore possibilities
for and circumstances of future employment or business relationships.

The Ethics Board advises that a legislator and spouse may accept the offer of
free membership in a not-for-profit organization that is not a lobbying
principal as long as there is no benefit from membership apart from receiving
the organization’s newsletter and membership cards of unexceptional value.

The Ethics Board advises that a lobbying principal not give or sell its sports
stadium luxury box tickets to an elective state official, candidate for elective
state office, state agency official, or legislative employee.

The Ethics Board advises, consistent with laws it administers, that:

(1) a state agency may use state resources in connection with its
      hosting of a convention of a national organization in Wisconsin;

and

(2) state public officials associated with the agency, and the agency’s
      employees may not, either orally or in writing, personally solicit
      contributions from a lobbyist, an employee of a lobbying
      organization, or an employee of a business or organization that is
      regulated by or does business with the agency.

The Ethics Board advises:

that a salaried state public official not represent an individual for
compensation in a legal claim against a state authority, its
employees, or employees of the state.

The Ethics Board advises that:

(1) Consistent with statutes administered by the Ethics Board, a public
      official may negotiate terms and conditions of employment with a new
      employer, even a lobbying principal, after the effective date of the official's
      resignation from the official's state agency even though the official is
      scheduled to continue to receive salary for accumulated vacation and
      sabbatical leave until a later date.

(2) The revolving door provisions of §19.45(8)(a) prohibit a state public
      official's representing a private organization for compensation before either
      the agency or board with which the official was associated as a state public
      official prior to one year after the official's resignation.
 

The Ethics Board advises that a not-for-profit foundation not furnish an
annuity to the director of a state agency in response to its concern about the
director’s level of compensation and retirement benefits.

A village trustee should not participate in the discussion, consideration, or
vote on a proposal to ban or regulate a business activity in the village in
which the trustee is engaged unless the trustee can demonstrate that the
trustee's official actions will not result in a substantial financial gain, or
avoidance of a substantial financial loss, for the trustee's business.

Except in the uncommon instance in which the teacher's appointment is for a
specified term or at the pleasure of the appointing authority, a public school
teacher is not a local public official covered by §19.59, Wisconsin Statutes.

In an instance in which a teacher is a local public official, the teacher should
consult with the school district's legal counsel to review the specific circumstances
to determine whether §19.59 restricts participation in a program
open to teachers whose benefits include lodging and meals in connection with
a training seminar in another state, the provision of certain equipment,
reimbursement for released time (with prior approval), expense
reimbursement for presentations (with prior approval), and lodging and
meals in connection with an annual reunion.

Apart from the limited exceptions contained in §19.56(3), Wisconsin Statutes,
the Ethics Board advises that a judge either not partake of free food and
drink not available to the general public or pay the higher of the fair value of
such food and drink or the ticket cost of the event.

The Ethics Board advises, consistent with laws it administers, that:

(1) a division of a state Department may use state resources in
      connection with its sponsorship of the annual conference of an
      association of state regulatory agencies;

(2) the Department’s employees may not solicit contributions to help
      host the conference from a lobbyist or a lobbying principal or from
      individuals or entities that are likely to be materially affected by
      laws or rules which the Department is called upon to interpret or
      apply or that do business with the Department;

(3) the Department’s employees may solicit attendance at the conference
      by any person other than a lobbyist or a lobbying principal;

and

(4) the Department’s employees may prepare and send written notices
      of the conference to lobbyists and lobbying principals.

The Ethics Board advises that a lobbying principal include in its semiannual
report to the Ethics Board the time an individual, who is not a
lobbyist, spends on the principal’s behalf participating, and preparing to
participate, on a committee established by a state agency to formulate
recommended changes to state statutes.

(September 24, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that, consistent with the lobbying law:

   (1) a legislator may direct a letter to a lobbyist asking the lobbyist to ask
         others to endorse the legislator’s candidacy or to provide volunteer personal
         services to the legislator’s campaign such as erecting yard signs, delivering
         campaign literature, and stuffing envelopes (but not business or professional
         services); and

   (2) a legislator not direct a letter to a lobbyist asking the lobbyist to ask others
         to make a campaign contribution to the legislator’s campaign, except
         between June 1 and the day of the general election in the year of the election
         and then, if the legislator is running for reelection to the legislature, only if
         the legislature has concluded its final floorperiod and is not in special or
         extraordinary session.

(September 5, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that a school board member whose spouse is
employed as a teacher by the school district:

   (1) not participate in negotiations, discussions, or votes on the teachers’ contract;

   (2) may vote on the district’s budget if the school board has already entered
         into a contract that establishes teachers’ salaries and benefits for the
         period covered by the budget but may not vote on the budget if the
         budget will substantially affect teacher salaries or benefits;

   (3) not participate in negotiations, discussions, or votes on the terms of
         another union’s contract if it will affect the terms of the teachers’ contract
         in other than an inconsequential manner;

   (4) may participate in a disciplinary or similar matter affecting another
         teacher if the action does not result in a school board member’s spouse
         obtaining a substantial benefit or anything of substantial value from
         such decision;

   (5) may participate in decisions affecting class size, teaching hours, other
         general school district policy decisions if the effect on the school board
         member’s spouse does not differ materially from the effect on other
        teachers.

The Ethics Board advises that a school board member who is covered by the
school district’s health benefits plan not participate in consideration of the
terms of that plan or the award of the district’s health benefits contract.

(September 5, 1997)

A legislator may use a library service offered to legislators by several public
libraries only in connection with his or her legislative duties and
responsibilities.

(June 27, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that a state public official associated with a state
agency (1) not invest in a privately owned company unless the investment
opportunity has been offered independent of the official’s public position and
(2) not use information gained through the official’s public position, that is
not available to the public, or has not been made public, as a substantial
basis for the official’s personal investment in a privately owned company.

The Ethics Board also recommends that other individuals associated with the
agency follow this advice.

(June 27, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises:

A lobbying organization may, consistent with the Ethics Code and lobbying
law, furnish food and drink to state officials at a reception if:

   (1) the organization can demonstrate its genuine attempt to attract the general
         public to the reception;

   (2) the reception is open to the public on the same terms it is available to state
         officials without the purpose or effect of the manner of invitation conferring
         an advantage on a state official greater than that available to the general
         public; and

   (3) either: (a) the organization sets and collects from each state official the
         greater of: [i] the established charge or ticket price, if any, charged others for
         the same or comparable benefit , [ii] the organization’s cost of acquiring the
         goods or services the organization provides, or [iii] the market price of the
         recipient’s independently acquiring like benefits; or (b) the reception is
         unrelated to state officials’ discussion of state government processes or
         issues initiated by or affecting state government.

(October 8, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that a legislator not accept from a local government
that is a lobbying principal reimbursement of expenses the legislator
incurred in traveling to Washington, D.C. on the local government’s behalf to
meet with the state’s Congressional representatives to lobby for federal
money for a local project.

(November 25, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises:

(1) that a lobbyist may administer a conduit and sign conduit checks and
      transmittal letters; and

(2) that a lobbyist may sign a conduit check and transmittal letter conveying
      a campaign contribution to a partisan elective state official or candidate for a
      partisan elective state office only between June 1 and the date of the general
      election in the year of a candidate’s election and to a legislative candidate
      during that period only if the legislature has concluded its final floorperiod
      and is not in special or extraordinary session.

(November 4, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that:

(1) Both state and local officials may participate in a round-trip train
     excursion that celebrates a lobbying organization’s 10th anniversary;

(2) The lobbying organization should not furnish refreshments to elected
     state officials or to state agency officials whose responsibilities relate to rulemaking;
     and

(3) Local public officials and non-elected state officials whose responsibilities
     do not involve state rule-making may pay for and partake of the food
     and drink that is offered in connection with the proposed event. The official
     should pay the greater of [i] the established charge to others for the
     refreshments, [ii] the organization’s cost of providing the refreshments, or
     [iii] the fair market value of the recipient’s independently acquiring like
     items at a comparable event.

(October 9, 1997)

The Ethics Board:

(1) advises that the Ethics Code does not require an appointed official of a state agency toresign if the official runs for election to
public office; and (2) reaffirms the advice given in 1997 Wis Eth Bd 7.

1. You have asked about the propriety of an appointed official of a state
     agency establishing a committee to explore running for election to public
     office.

2. The matter about which you have asked is a personnel matter not
     governed by Wisconsin’s Ethics Code. Nothing in the Ethics Code requires
     an appointed official of a state agency to resign if the official runs for election
     to public office. Whether the official may simultaneously retain his
     position with the agency and seek election to a government position rests in
     the discretion of the official’s appointing authority.

3. The Ethics Board reaffirms its recent opinion addressing a like
     matter, 1997 Wis Eth Bd 7; and commends it as a guide for the agency.

(September 26, 1997)

The Ethics Board advises that a legislator not advocate for, or participate in
discussions, deliberations, or votes on funding a state contract with a
foundation in which the legislator’s spouse is executive director. If the
biennial budget appropriates money to the foundation, the legislator may
participate in debate, discussion, and voting on all other budget issues, and
vote on the budget itself.

(April 10, 1997)

A member of a state board should not participate in the consideration of
issues on which the member lobbies on his or her employer’s behalf or on
matters, which affect those issues. If conflicts arise only occasionally, they
may be satisfactorily addressed by abstaining, but when a conflict is
regularly occurring and substantial, the conflict’s cure can come only from the
board member divesting himself or herself of public position or of the private
interest that conflicts with public responsibilities.1

We also advise that a member of a state board not, on behalf of his or her
employer, lobby state government on issues before, or affecting the state
board.

The person or persons on whose behalf a town attorney sought the Ethics
Board’s advice are entitled to keep the Board’s opinion confidential. Whether
the attorney directed the letter to the Ethics Board on half of the Town, or on
behalf of the Town’s chair, is a question of fact the Board cannot resolve.

The Ethics Board advises that a state public official may proceed with a plan
to have another solicit assistance for operation of the official’s agency to the
extent, but only to the extent, that the official could undertake the
solicitation directly. Whether directly or through another acting at the
official’s behest, the official may not solicit contributions of money, goods or
service either from a lobbyist or from an organization that employs a lobbyist
or from anyone if either the contribution or the failure to contribute could
reasonably be expected to influence the official’s action or judgment or be
considered a reward for the official’s action or inaction.

The Ethics Board advises that a town chair should not simultaneously
participate in Town decisions concerning services provided to the Town by a
company owned by the same individual that owns the company of which the
town chair is an employee.

The Ethics Board advises that in general, neither the Ethics Code nor
lobbying law restricts your employment in the circumstances you have
described. The only restrictions are (1) that you not receive any payment
from a lobbyist or from an organization that employs a lobbyist (including
the local governmental unit if it is a lobbying principal) (§13.625, Wisconsin
Statutes); (2) that you be able to demonstrate that you have not used the
prestige or resources of your office to obtain or to perform consulting work
(§19.45 (2), Wisconsin Statutes,); and (3) that you not represent the local
government or consultant before a state agency unless it is a ministerial
matter or a contested case which involves a party other than the state (§19.45
(7), Wisconsin Statutes).

The Ethics Board advises that an agency official should pay a lobbying
organization on whose board of directors the official serves for any food, lodging,
or transportation the organization furnishes the official in connection
with serving on its board of directors. Because the official’s state agency
encourages its employees to participate in the organization’s activities,
routinely permits employees to participate in those activities without the
need to take leave time, and reimburses employees’ expenses for those
activities when it can, it appears appropriate for the agency to reimburse the
official for those costs. The lobbying law is not an obstacle to the
organization’s reimbursing the state agency for those expenses.

A legislator should not accept money from a private organization to affect the
laws of other states and simultaneously participate in legislative discussions,
consideration, or votes in Wisconsin on the same issues. The legislator may
cure the conflict between the private employment and governmental
responsibilities by forgoing one of those relationships. Short of eliminating
the conflict, the legislator may mitigate it by withdrawing from legislative
discussions, consideration, or votes on public policy issues in Wisconsin which
the legislator is being paid to affect elsewhere.

The Ethics Board advises that:

Neither the lobbying law nor Ethics Code will be an obstacle to state officials
taking advantage of the terms of the State of Wisconsin’s agreement with
Microsoft that provides state employees with discounts on the purchase of
computer products for home and personal use.

The Ethics Board advises that a state agency may accept a grant from a
company that employs a lobbyist for an agency program initiative.

The Ethics Board advises that a member of the Village’s governing board
may participate in the consideration or decision about improvements the
village will make to the village’s sewage system and the financing of those
improvements as follows:

1. If the sewer improvement does not personally and substantially benefit
      the property interest of a village trustee, the trustee is disqualified
      neither from participating in the designation of the sewer improvement
      nor from determining how the improvement’s cost will be met.

2. If the sewer improvement personally and substantially benefits the
      property interest of a village trustee, but the improvement also confers a
      substantial benefit on all or a sizeable portion of the village’s property
      owners, the trustee is disqualified neither from participating in the
      designation of the sewer improvement nor from determining how the
      improvement’s cost will be met.

3. If the sewer improvement produces a substantial or personal benefit to
      the trustee’s property interest that is not common to all or a sizeable
      portion of the village’s property owners, but the village assesses the
      improvements’ costs to the property owners who are the beneficiaries of
      the improvement, the trustee is disqualified neither from participating
      in the designation of the sewer improvement nor from determining how
      the improvement’s cost will be met.

4. If the sewer improvement produces a substantial or personal benefit to
      the trustee’s property interest that is not common to all or at least to a
      sizeable portion of the village’s property owners, and the village assesses
      the improvements’ costs to all of the village’s property owners or at least
      to property owners who do not benefit from the improvements ordered,
      the trustee should not participate in discussions and actions that have
      as their goal the transfer of the costs of the sewer improvements to the
      trustee’s property to others in the village.

The Ethics Board advises that a state public official may serve as the
honorary chair of a charitable event sponsored by a lobbying principal for
which the official will receive no compensation and will pay the cost of dinner
and golf.

The Ethics Board advises:

For state and local government officials
Neither a state public official nor a local public official should accept or
purchase a ticket or admission to an event or access to a loge, skybox,
or other premium area unless the official can clearly and convincingly
demonstrate that at least one of these conditions obtains:

     • The ticket, admission, or access is offered for a reason unrelated
          to the official’s holding or having held a public office;

     • The ticket, admission, or access is available to the general public
          on the same terms and conditions as available to the official; or

     • The ticket, admission, or access is without pecuniary value.

In addition, for state officials and organizations that employ
lobbyists

A lobbying principal should not give, sell, or furnish or arrange for
another to give, sell, or furnish to an elected state official, legislative
employee, candidate for state office, or agency official a ticket or
admission to an event or access to a loge, skybox, or other premium
area unless the ticket, admission, or access is available to the general
public on the same terms and conditions or the ticket, admission, or
access is without pecuniary value.

An elected state official, legislative employee, candidate for state office,
or agency official should not accept or purchase from a lobbying principal
a ticket or admission to an event or access to a loge, skybox, or
other premium area unless the ticket, admission, or access is available
to the general public on the same terms and conditions or the ticket,
admission, or access is without pecuniary value.

In addition, for state officials and lobbyists

A lobbyist should not give, sell, or furnish or arrange for another to
give, sell, or furnish to an elected state official, legislative employee,
candidate for state office, or agency official a ticket or admission to an
event or access to a loge, skybox, or other premium area unless the
ticket, admission, or access is without pecuniary value.

An elected state official, legislative employee, candidate for state office,
or agency official should not accept or purchase from a lobbyist a ticket
or admission to an event or access to a loge, skybox, or other premium
area unless the ticket, admission, or access is without pecuniary value.

Limited exception

To the extent that an official's participation in an event is in furtherance
of substantive or ceremonial governmental responsibilities appropriate
to the official's government office so as to be clearly and convincingly
for the benefit primarily of the state or a local government
and any private benefit is merely incidental, then an individual or
organization may provide admission to or accommodation at the event
and a state or local public official may attend the event without
payment or on terms not available to the general public.

The Ethics Board advises that in the case of a local official who has been
elected to serve on the board of directors of a municipal mutual insurance
corporation by a government approved process, to represent the local
government’s interests on the board, §19.59, Wisconsin Statutes, does not bar
the official from participating in the local government’s consideration, discussion,
or votes to award a contract to or change government policy to permit
the purchase of services from the corporation.

The Ethics Board advises that:

In the case of a county board supervisor who has been selected as a member
of an insurance company’s board of directors by the company’s organizer, the
supervisor should not participate in county board consideration, discussion,
or votes to award a contract to the company or to change county policy to
permit the purchase of services from the company.

The Ethics Board advises:

The responsibility for the care and use of grant funds lies in the first instance
and primarily with the state agency that receives a grant. The agency’s
officials have broad discretion to identify the agency’s interests and the
means to further those interests.

   1. State public officials. An agency’s state public officials should strive to
        assure that the agency’s expenditures related to an out-of-state event are
        not for their own personal advantage except to the extent any personal
        advantage is merely incidental to the officials’ specific activities at
        particular events in furtherance of substantial, well-articulated business
        purposes of the agency, in contrast, for example, to expenditures for undefined
        or ill-defined or tenuously related “representational” responsibilities.

   2. Spouses, companions, and family members. With rare exception, the
        public purpose doctrine and §§19.45 and 19.46, Wisconsin Statutes, foreclose
        officials from authorizing the travel of their spouses and other family
        members to events at state expense, even if the source of the public funds
        is a grant rather than taxes. An expenditure for this purpose merits close
        scrutiny.

   3. Others. Because officials subject to the Ethics Code may not use their
        positions to obtain unlawful benefits for others, the Ethics Board
        encourages them not to authorize the payment of expense for travel for
        employees, employees’ spouses, and others except as those expenses are in
        connection with specific activities at particular events in furtherance of
        substantial, well-articulated business purposes of the agency.

The Ethics Board advises that :

1) Under §19.59, Wisconsin Statutes, the village trustee whose property
      abuts the property that is the subject of the company’s rezoning
      petition, and who is an employee of the company, should not participate
      in discussion, debate, or votes on the petition;

2) Section 19.59, Wisconsin Statutes, is unlikely to restrict the village
      trustee who is an employee of a company that sells supplies to the
      company seeking the rezoning to vote on the petition; and

3) Section 19.59, Wisconsin Statutes, is unlikely to restrict the village
      trustee who owns a company that, in the past, has done business with
      the company seeking the rezoning to vote on the petition.

The Ethics Board advises:

Laws administered by the Ethics Board are not an impediment to the
Legislature’s reimbursing a legislator for costs the legislator incurred to
purchase supplies for his or her legislative office.

The Ethics Board advises:

A legislator should not accept compensation from an organization that
employs a lobbyist even for services the legislator has provided to the
organization; and

In the case of two affiliated organizations, one employing a lobbyist and the
other not, a legislator may accept compensation for services from the latter
only if the organization can demonstrate that it acts independently of its
affiliate.

The Ethics Board advises:

Neither the Ethics Code nor lobbying law appears to restrict a legislator’s
working as a consultant to a company that is a broker-dealer that assists
institutional money managers in identifying investment opportunities.

The Ethics Board advises:

A legislator is free to commence a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of a law
and to seek and retain legal counsel to represent himself or herself.

If a legislator wants to join an existing lawsuit, the Ethics Board recommends that
the legislator direct a letter to the Court asking that he or she be permitted to join
the plaintiffs as a party or as amicus curiae, representing himself or herself.

The Board further advises that a legislator not permit a lobbying organization to
pay or arrange for legal services for the legislator.

The Ethics Board advises:

If a county’s contract with a union will provide a significant precedent for a
union contract in which a county board supervisor has a personal financial
interest, then the supervisor should not participate in negotiations,
discussions or votes on the former. If the effect of the county’s contract on the
contract covering the supervisor is merely conjectural or inconsequential, the
supervisor may participate in decisions concerning that contract.

An association is a lobbying principal subject to Wisconsin’s lobbying law if
(1) it reimburses a member for lost wages in connection with lobbying on the
association’s behalf and (2) the member communicates with state officials
other than the legislators from the member’s own district, on more than 4
days in a 6-month reporting period.

A lobbying principal may not, consistent with the lobbying law, reimburse its
members’ campaign contributions that are furnished at a time not permitted
to the principal.

(February 25, 1997)

Wisconsin's lobbying law poses no restriction on a lobbyist representing
clients in negotiating a purchase of land to a state agency on a contingency
fee basis unless the matter is associated with adoption, modification, or
repeal of a rule or the Legislature’s consideration of an appropriation
earmarked for the purchase of the land at issue, or an agency’s development
of such a legislative proposal. OEB 92-21

May 12, 1992

Section 19.45, Wisconsin Statutes, does not prohibit a legislator from publicly
opposing a proposed private project or from representing a person before a
department if he or she receives no compensation therefore beyond the salary
and other compensation or reimbursement to which the legislator is entitled
by law, and neither the official, the official’s family or an associated
organization will financially benefit from the defeat of the proposal. OEB 92-
19

April 28, 1992

A law firm should not purchase meals for officials of the local units of government
the firm represents (nor should a local public official accept) unless,
and only to the extent that, the local government would otherwise bear the
official’s expense and the governmental units' obligation to bear the expense
is expressly authorized by, and in accordance with, established written
criteria. OEB 92-17

April 27, 1992

The Board advises that statutes administered by the Ethics Board do not
prevent a state legislator from using legislative staff and facilities to communicate
with the news media about the legislator's lawsuits against the
State of Wisconsin concerning issues involving the operation of state
government. OEB 92-15

March 27, 1992