People seek advice from the Board every day. Over the course of a year, we field hundreds of requests for guidance from current and former City officers and employees, candidates for City elective office, campaign contributors, political committees, lobbyists, principals, and gift-givers. The Board and Staff provide guidance both through formal, written opinions and through informal guidance, which can be provided over the telephone, in person, or via email.
Over the course of FY2020, the Board and Staff have worked to make both formal and informal advice more accessible to the public. These efforts included publishing a topical index of Advisory Opinions and launching an Advisory Opinion Search. We initiated an Advisory Opinion Mailing List for those who want formal opinions delivered to their inbox. Monthly General Counsel Reports now include an overview of informal guidance activity and trends, as well as a sampling of notable informal guidance provided in the preceding month. These Questions of Note, as well as other ethics information, are now available and searchable through a blog-based archive at EthelKnowsEthics.blogspot.com. Throughout FY2021, Board Staff will continue to explore new ways to make the products of our advice work available and user-friendly.
Formal, written opinions issued by the Board or the General Counsel provide detailed analysis of the application of the ethics laws to the specific facts provided by a requestor. Requestors are entitled to act in reasonable reliance on advisory opinions issued to them and not be subject to penalties under the laws within the Board’s jurisdiction as long as they have not omitted or misstated material facts. Requestors can choose to receive a non-public advisory opinion, which in its published form is redacted to conceal facts that are reasonably likely to identify a requestor.
A total of thirteen formal opinions ⎼ six Board Opinions and seven General Counsel Opinions ⎼ were issued in FY2020, the most since FY2013. Electronic copies of each opinion are available by using the links in the menus below.
Board opinions generally address questions that require interpreting one or more of the ethics laws for the first time.
The Board's General Counsel issues opinions applying and explaining the ethics laws in situations where the result is clear from the law or regulation, or where the Board has already provided a relevant interpretation. The Board does not deliberate on or approve General Counsel opinions, although a requestor may appeal a General Counsel Opinion to the Board.
Application of Ethics Code Conflict of Interest Restriction to Official Action on Legislation Affecting Parking Facility Regulation and Real Estate Tax Abatement Program
Application of ethics rules to City employee's application for and acceptance of subsequent employment funded by a City contract
Application of Home Rule Charter Section 10-107(3) to Elected Official
Application of the City's political activity restrictions to sale of a product used by campaigns for elective office
Application of restrictions on interests in City contracts and representation in City transactions to outside business owned by City employee
Application of Home Rule Charter to Employee Who Applies for Appointment to Judicial Office
Application of Political Activity Restrictions to Executive Branch Employees Temporarily Assigned to the Office of City Commissioners
Ethics restrictions that apply to a former City employee who is an attorney
Application of Post-Employment Rules to Proposed Post-City Service Work
Application of Political Activity Restrictions to Participation by City Employee in Partisan Political Group's Activities
Application of Post-Employment Rules to Work with Philadelphia-Based Consulting/Lobbying Firm
Conflict of Interest Rules and Membership on City Board
Application of Ethics Code Conflict of Interest Restriction to Official Action on Legislation Affecting Parking Tax and Fire Suppression System Workers
Informal guidance makes up the majority of our advice work. In FY2020, Board Staff responded to 1,411 requests for informal advice. That number, however, only tells part of the story. Advice requests range from complex legal analyses that could stand on their own as opinions if requested to straightforward password reset requests for our filing systems, and everything in between. Over the course of FY2020, Board Staff has put an increased emphasis on identifying and understanding trends in informal advice requests. These are not performance measures ⎼ Staff cannot control how many requests are received ⎼ but an attempt to enhance our ability to plan training programs, create pertinent educational content, and plan for shifts in our workload. We will continue to refine these data analysis and visualization efforts in FY2021.
Total informal guidance responses give a high-level snapshot. Compared to FY2019, the major decrease was in Financial Disclosure and Campaign Finance. Some of this was likely a result of pandemic-related closures. The absence of a City election in FY2020 also significantly decreased Campaign Finance requests.
Note: All FY2020 charts include July 2020 Financial Disclosure data due to the extended filing deadline.
To get a clearer picture of informal advice workloads, we began tracking guidance responses more closely by both topic and type. Separating out filing-related requests (in yellow) gives a better sense of which items are handled primarily by Compliance Staff, while advice (in blue) is mostly handled by General Counsel Staff. Filing requests far outstrip advice requests, but often take less time to resolve.
A similar visual summary is included in the monthly General Counsel Report to give the Board a snapshot of advice work for the preceding month as compared to the calendar year. Find monthly snapshots here.
Plotting advice requests by general topic on a monthly basis gives an unsurprising result: a huge spike centered on the Financial Disclosure filing deadline. Despite this skew, over time the month-by-month changes may tell us more about fluctuations in our other programs.
In February 2020, General Counsel Staff started tracking the time to respond to advice requests. (This data does not include requests for filing assistance.) While this only represents part of FY2020, the data thus far confirms that ethics questions (Conflicts, Contracts, Gifts, Political Activity, Post-Employment, & Representation) generally take longer to respond to than questions related to Campaign Finance or Financial Disclosure.
Parsing ethics guidance by topic has been another focus in FY2020. While some topics are estimated for the early part of the fiscal year, the consistency over the second half of the year suggests that there may be overall trends in which topics tend to generate advice requests.
The four charts in the carousel compare monthly advice requests in our four most popular topics to overall ethics informal guidance. These graphs reflect a drop as the pandemic unfolded and an uptick as remote work activity geared up. Over time we also expect to see other trends, such as an increase in gifts requests around the winter holidays.
The comparison between FY2019 and FY2020 reflects the difference between fiscal years with and without a City election cycle. It also illustrates a nearly even breakdown between advice and filing guidance.
Campaign Finance guidance shows fairly predictable spikes around pre- and post-election filing deadlines.
Comparing FY2019 and FY2020 Financial Disclosure data poses an unusual challenge. The pandemic meant that the Board did not hold in-person filing assistance sessions or take walk-in questions in FY2020. The Board also launched a new filing system with improved usability. It appears that the combination of these changes resulted in fewer requests for Financial Disclosure advice.
Because the filing deadline for Financial Disclosure is close to the end of the fiscal year, the month-by-month data does not tell us much. The vast majority of Financial Disclosure guidance was filing assistance provided between April 1 and July 31 of 2020. This is notably different from the advice-to-filing request ratios for Campaign Finance and Lobbying.
While lobbying disclosure deadlines were not affected by the pandemic, the overall number of lobbying guidance requests was down significantly in FY2020. Unlike Campaign Finance, there is no obvious cause for this drop off. Similar to Campaign Finance, however, the advice and filing requests are fairly even.
Overall Lobbying guidance requests peaked around the filing deadlines, with the annual reporting creating the largest jump in requests.