(B) No public official, public member, or public employee may make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use his office, membership, or employment to influence a governmental decision in which he, a member of his immediate family, an individual with whom he is associated, or a business with which he is associated has an economic interest. A public official, public member, or public employee who, in the discharge of his official responsibilities, is required to take an action or make a decision which affects an economic interest of himself, a member of his immediate family, an individual with whom he is associated, or a business with which he is associated shall:

1. (1) prepare a written statement describing the matter requiring action or decisions and the nature of his potential conflict of interest with respect to the action or decision;
2. (2) if the public official is a member of the General Assembly, he shall deliver a copy of the statement to the presiding officer of the appropriate house. The presiding officer shall have the statement printed in the appropriate journal and require that the member of the General Assembly he excused from votes, deliberations, and other action on the matter on which a potential conflict exists;
3. (3) if he is a public employee, he shall furnish a copy of the statement to his superior, if any, who shall assign the matter to another employee who does not have a potential conflict of interest. If he has no immediate superior, he shall take the action prescribed by the State Ethics Commission;
4. (4) if he is a public official, other than a member of the General Assembly, he shall furnish a copy of the statement to the presiding officer of the governing body of any agency, commission, board, or of any county, municipality, or a political subdivision thereof, on which he serves, who shall cause the statement to be printed in the minutes and require that the member be excused from any votes, deliberations, and other actions on the matter on which the potential conflict of interest exists and shall cause the disqualification and the reasons for it to be noted in the minutes;
5. (5) if he is a public member, he shall furnish a copy to the presiding officer of any agency, commission, board, or of any county, municipality, or a political subdivision thereof, on which he serves, who shall cause the statement to be printed in the minutes and shall require that the member be excused from any votes, deliberations, and other actions on the matter on which the potential conflict of interest exists and shall cause such disqualification and the reasons for it to be noted in the minutes.

(E) When a member of the General Assembly is required by law to appear because of his business interest as an owner or officer of the business or in his official capacity as a member of the General Assembly, this section does not apply.

ETHICS COMMISSION OPINIONS

Engineer, member of County Planning Commission, who is civil engineering designer and construction coordinator for engineering firm, would not be prohibited from serving on County Planning Commission if such service is authorized by local statutes or ordinances, and, if there is such authorization, there would be no violation for engineer to serve and for members of his firm to represent clients before county agencies in order to carry out functions of their profession. If Planning Commission specifically regulates operation of engineers in county, Section 8-13-730 applies to situation, otherwise it is not applicable. Upon determination that Section 8-13-730 does not preclude member of Planning Commission from serving, impact of Section 8-13-740 must be considered. If engineer does not serve pursuant to statute specifically providing for service of engineer upon Planning Commission, then these provisions apply. Commission finds that if county ordinances or regulations authorize that engineer serves upon Planning commission and that engineer serves pursuant to that authorization, Section 8-13-740 would not prohibit such person or individuals or businesses with which he is associated from representing clients before Planning Commission. To continued service, if allowed as mentioned above, Commission advises that provisions of Section 8-13-700(B) would apply, and advises that, if engineer is allowed to serve in accordance with above discussion, members of his engineering firm would not be prohibited from representing clients before Planning Commission provided members follow procedures of Section 8-13-700(B) on all matters affecting economic interests of engineering firm. Op S. C. St Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-072, Mar 25, 1992.

Where members of DHEC Board are health care providers, and DHEC registers health care providers for controlled substance prescriptions, monitors and takes enforcement action against violators, and health care providers register X-ray equipment which is subject to inspections, and there are no statutory requirements that Board Members be health care providers, members of Board who are medical professionals are not prohibited by Section 8-13-730 from serving on Board, however they are advised to follow procedures of Section 8-13-700(B) on matters affecting their economic interests. Commission finds that DHEC's regulation upon medical profession is de minimis. Since DHEC does not regulate specific way these health care professionals operate, Ethics Act does not preclude their service on DHEC Board. When conflicts of interest do arise, medical professionals serving on Board can and should follow safeguards provided in Section 8-13-700(b). Op S. C. St Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-091, Mar 626, 1992.

Architect would be prohibited from serving on design review board unless such service is authorized by statute or ordinance. If design review commissions in question specifically regulate operation of architects, Section 8-13-730 applies to situation, otherwise it does not. Upon determination that Section 8-13-730 does not preclude member of design review commission from serving, impact of Section 8-13-740 must be considered. Commission finding that if local county or city ordinances or regulations authorize that an architect serves on design review commission and that architect serves pursuant to such authorization, Section 8-13-740 would not prohibit that person or individuals or businesses with which architect is associated from representing clients before design review commission. Commission further advises that, if architect is allowed to serve in accordance with above discussion, members of his architectural firm would not be prohibited from representing clients before the commission, provided member follows procedures of Section 8-13-700(B). And, such member, if allowed to serve in accordance with above discussion, would not be prohibited from having jobs which require Board approval, but members advised to follow procedures of Section 8-13-700(B) when required to take official action or make decisions affecting those jobs. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-119, March 25, 1992.

Family member of a school board member may be hired by school district, provided member of school board does not cause employment to occur or participate in employment of family member. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-134, March 25, 1992.

School board members who have family members employed within school district may vote on general salary increases for school employees, but may not participate in salary raises for family member in question which are not general salary increases. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-134, March 25, 1992.

Family member of school board member may continue as employee of school district without violating Ethics Reform Act. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-134, March 25, 1992.

Public employee is not prohibited by Ethics Reform Act from running for and holding elective office. However, employee would be advised to follow procedures of Section 8-13-700(B) if required to take action in one position which affects her service in the other position. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-137, March 25, 1992.

County councilman who is on board of directors of company may participate in council decisions regarding which projects should be put out for bid, such participation not being prohibited by this section since all contractors would be equally affect by such contract. However, councilman's firm is prohibited from contract with county if councilman is authorized to perform any official function on contract through writing or preparing specifications, accepting bids, awarding contract, or other action on preparation or award of such contract regardless of whether he follows provisions of Section 8-13-700. However, where from facts submitted it appears that county council is not authorized to perform official function, as defined in Section 8-13-775, with regard to contracts, such official functions being performed by County Administrator, councilman's company would not be prohibited from bidding on contracts. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-142, March 25, 1992.

Police officers may utilize uniforms, weapons, and like equipment in off-duty security work in accordance with Section 23-24-10, when properly approved by law enforcement agency and governing body and when no additional public expense would be involved. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-154, May 27, 1992.

Director of Environmental Certification Board is not prohibited from engaging in off-duty employment in voluntary licensing of water distribution and wastewater collection personnel, since his agency does not regulate voluntary licensees in question. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-157, May 27, 1992.

Council members who are school district employees or who are married to school district employees may participate in deliberations and votes concerning school district budget issue, since their interests are no greater than that of all other school district employees generally. However, members are advised that issues directly affecting their own economic interests to greater extent than that of other members of school district employee group would necessitate following procedures of Section 8-13-700(B). Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-201, June 9, 1992.

City council member is not prohibited from participating in deliberations and votes on matters affecting contract to company in which council member's son is a principal, since council member's son, being adult emancipated person not residing in council member's household, is not within definition of "immediate family" within meaning of Section 8-13-100. Op S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-214, June 9, 1992.

Representative of Charleston Branch Pilots' Association would not be prohibited from serving on Commissioners of Pilotage for Port of Charleston since relationship is mandated by statute. Pilot representative would be required, however, to follow provisions of Section 8-13-700 on matters affecting his personal economic interest or those of Association to greater extent than those of other pilots. One-time conflict statement is not sufficient but rather statement describing each potential conflict and its effect on representative's economic interests would be required. Op S. C. St Ethics Comm., SEC AO92-092-033, Dec 18, 1991.

Provided he complies with recusal provisions of Section 8-13-700(B) on those matters affecting his employer's economic interests, bank employee may continue to serve as School Board Chairman even though county does business with Chairman's employer. Pursuant to Section 8-13-775, Chairman may not have economic interest in contract between County and bank with which he is employed if he is authorized to perform official function relating to contract. Op. S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO94-002, July 21, 1993.

Former DHEC employee who is currently employed by Budget and Control Board would not be prohibited from providing certain part-time consulting and engineering services as long as such work is not part of employee's official responsibilities and is performed in accordance with off-duty employment guidelines. With limited exceptions, however, Section 8-13-740(A)(6) would preclude employee and any business with which he is associated from representing clients before other state agencies. Op. S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO94-003, July 21, 1993.

Despite public member's association with firm that submitted lowest bid on commission project, Ethics Reform Act does not prohibit this firm from being awarded contract, provided it is awarded in accordance with Consolidated Procurement Code and commission member complies with recusal provisions of Section 8-13-700(B). Op. S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO94-008, September 15, 1993.

County road supervisor would not be prohibited from serving on county transportation committee; however, should transportation committee be required to take action that distinctly affects his own or county's economic interests, road supervisor may be required to comply with recusal provisions of Section 8-13-700(B). Op. S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO94-010, October 20, 1993.

Textbook publishing company may furnish books and other teaching materials for trial use in classroom setting, provided the donation is not intended to influence public official's, public member's, or public employee's official responsibilities. Rather than serving as actual members of textbook adoption committees, teachers who have used publisher-donated texts should appear before these committees to present their findings and recommendations. Section 8-13-720 prohibits publishing companies from compensating those teachers who utilize donated texts and related materials for trial use in their classrooms. Op. S.C. St. Ethics Comm., SEC AO94-014, January 19, 1994.