The institute should seek a formal opinion from the attorney general regarding whether the exemptions created for working groups from conflict-of-interest laws are intended to exempt them from the conflict-of-interest provisions that apply if the recommendations of an advisory body are adopted routinely andregularly by the decision-making body to which they are made.
The institute states that it has given careful consideration to our recommendation and has decided that it is not appropriate to implement it at this time. The institute states that in almost three years of operation and approval of four rounds of grants, the committee has never routinely or regularly adopted the recommendations of the institute's working groups. Until the time that such a pattern is detected, the institute believes the question we raise is hypothetical and not appropriate for submission to the attorney general. However, the institute states that it will continue to monitor the committee approvals for such a pattern and will reconsider our recommendation if such a pattern emerges. (See 2008-406 p. 198)
†Response Type refers to the interval in which the auditee is providing the State Auditor with their status in implementing recommendations made in an audit report. Auditees must submit a response regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year or subsequent to one year.
*Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.