§ 2-256. Advisory opinions.

(a)

Where a member of the public, unified government representative has a doubt as to the applicability of any provision of this division to a particular situation, or as to the definition of terms used here, he may apply in writing to the ethics administrator for an advisory opinion. The requesting party shall have the opportunity to present the facts at issue and the applicability of provisions of the division before such advisory opinion is made. The ethics administrator may seek the advice and assistance of the unified government attorney where interpretation of the law is required and input, review and approval from the unified government ethics commission. The ethics administrator and the unified government attorney shall each respond within a reasonable period of time.

(b)

No person who relies upon an advisory opinion rendered pursuant to this division may be found in violation of this division except where the person relying failed to produce or omitted material facts in the request for the advisory opinion.

(c)

Such opinion, unless amended or revoked by the ethics administrator shall be binding on the unified government in any subsequent actions concerning the unified government representative who sought the opinion and acted on it in good faith, unless material facts were omitted or misstated in the request for the advisory opinion.

(d)

Any advisory opinion issued at the direction of the ethics administrator shall be in writing and made available to the public upon request. However, the name of the person requesting the opinion, the names of the person or business entities mentioned in the opinion, and any factual information that would tend to identify the person or business entities shall be deemed confidential information and shall not be disclosed by the ethics administrator or legislative auditor.

(Ord. No. O-75-09, § 1, 10-1-2009)