HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-538 O'ConnorWilliam D. O'Connor
701 Atkinson Lane
Langhorne, PA 19047
Dear Mr. O'Connor:
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
April 18, 2008
08 -538
This responds to your letter dated March 8, 2008, by which you requested advice
from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65
Pa. .S. § 1101 et seq., would present any prohibitions or restrictions upon a school
director with regard to voting on the issue of whether to close a particular middle school
in the school district, where: (1) the school director's daughter serves as a long-term
substitute teacher at one of the school district's three other middle schools; and (2) the
school director's daughter is in a pool of teachers who are eligible to fill the next vacant
school district position that requires a certain teaching certification.
Facts: As a School Director for the Neshaminy School District ( "School District "),
located in Langhorne, Pennsylvania, you request an advisory from the Pennsylvania
State Ethics Commission based upon submitted facts that may be fairly summarized as
follows.
The School District School Board ( "School Board ") is considering the possibility
of closing the Neshaminy Middle School due to a decrease in enrollment. The
Neshaminy Middle School is one of four middle schools in the School District. The
Neshaminy Middle School currently houses grades 6 through 9.
Your daughter serves as a long -term substitute teacher in the School District.
She currently works at a middle school other than the Neshaminy Middle School.
You have submitted a copy of a letter to you dated March 6, 2008, from Louis T.
Muenker, D.Ed. ( "Dr. Muenker"), Assistant Superintendent /Director of Human
Resources for the School District. In said letter, Dr. Muenker states that your daughter
is currently serving with the School District as a long -term substitute teacher in a
Language Arts capacity, in which capacity she is certified to teach grades 7 through 12.
Dr. Muenker notes that per the School District's contract with the local teachers' union,
your daughter has been placed in a pool of teachers who hold the same certification
(hereinafter referred to as the Pool "). Dr. Muenker states that assuming the teachers in
the Pool receive satisfactory evaluations, they will be given right of first refusal for any
future openings within the School District. Presently the Pool includes your daughter
and five other teachers.
O'Connor, 08 -538
April 18, 2008
Page 2
Dr. Muenker notes that the School District is not anticipating significant
retirements or resignations in the area of certification held by your daughter. Dr.
Muenker states that "[i]n the event that a [School District] middle school would close,
there is a chance that the probability of available positions would be less than if all four
middle schools remained open." March 6, 2008, Letter of Dr. Muenker, at paragraph 4.
Dr. Muenker further states that under any circumstances, since your daughter does not
have a contract with the School District, she would only be offered a position if there
would be one available and she would be determined to be the most qualified
candidate.
Dr. Muenker further states that your daughter's performance during her long -term
substitute work, as compared to the performance of others in the Pool, would be the
primary factor in the School District administration's determination of whether your
daughter would be selected to fill the next vacancy.
You state that you are confident about your objectivity and you are interested in
participating with the rest of the Members of the School Board in deciding the issue of
whether to close Neshaminy Middle School. You state that you are aware that there
could be the potential for a conflict of interest. However, you state that you don't believe
that a conflict exists because your daughter currently is not a contracted employee with
the School District, and she would have a "similar remote chance of employment" with
the School District regardless of whether the School Board would decide to close or not
to close Neshaminy Middle School. March 8, 2008, Letter of O'Connor, at paragraph
paragraph 2.
Based upon the above submitted facts, you ask whether you would have a
conflict of interest with regard to voting on the issue of whether to close Neshaminy
Middle School.
Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 1107(10) and 1107(11) of
the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11), advisories are issued to the requester
based upon the facts that the requester has submitted. In issuing the advisory based
upon the facts that the requester has submitted, the Commission does not engage in an
independent investigation of the facts, nor does it speculate as to facts that have not
been submitted. It is the burden of the requester to truthfully disclose all of the material
facts relevant to the inquiry. 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11). An advisory only affords a
defense to the extent the requester has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts.
As a School Director for the Neshaminy School District, you are a public official
subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act.
Sections 1103(a) and 1103(j) of the Ethics Act provide:
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(a) Conflict of interest. - -No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict
of interest.
(j) Voting conflict. - -Where voting conflicts are not
otherwise addressed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania or
by any law, rule, regulation, order or ordinance, the following
procedure shall be employed. Any public official or public
employee who in the discharge of his official duties would be
required to vote on a matter that would result in a conflict of
interest shall abstain from voting and, prior to the vote being
taken, publicly announce and disclose the nature of his
interest as a public record in a written memorandum filed
O'Connor, 08 -538
April 18, 2008
Page 3
with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting at which the vote is taken, provided that whenever a
governing body would be unable to take any action on a
matter before it because the number of members of the body
required to abstain from voting under the provisions of this
section makes the majority or other legally required vote of
approval unattainable, then such members shall be
permitted to vote if disclosures are made as otherwise
provided herein. In the case of a three - member governing
body of a political subdivision, where one member has
abstained from voting as a result of a conflict of interest and
the remaining two members of the governing body have cast
opposing votes, the member who has abstained shall be
permitted to vote to break the tie vote if disclosure is made
as otherwise provided herein.
65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), (j).
The following terms are defined in the Ethics Act as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public
official or public employee of the authority of his office or
employment or any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for the private
pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate
family or a business with which he or a member of his
immediate family is associated. The term does not include
an action having a de minimis economic impact or which
affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general
public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or
other group which includes the public official or public
employee, a member of his immediate family or a business
with which he or a member of his immediate family is
associated.
"Authority of office or employment." The actual
power provided by law, the exercise of which is necessary to
the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a
particular public office or position of public employment.
"Immediate family." A parent, spouse, child, brother
or sister.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official /public employee is
prohibited from using the authority of public office /employment or confidential
information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit
of the public official /public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a
business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.
In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public official /public employee would
required to abstain fully from participation. The abstention requirement would not be
limited to voting, but rather, would extend to any use of authority of office.
O'Connor, 08 -538
April 18, 2008
Page 4
In each instance of a voting conflict, Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act requires the
public official /public employee to abstain and to publicly disclose the abstention and
reasons for same, both orally and by filing a written memorandum to that effect with the
person recording the minutes. In the event that the required abstention results in the
inability of the governmental body to take action because a majority is unattainable due
to the abstention(s) from conflict under the Ethics Act, then voting is permissible
provided the disclosure requirements noted above are followed. See, Pavlovic, Opinion
02 -005.
It is noted that the above statutory definition of "conflict" or "conflict of interest"
contains two exclusions, referred to herein as the "de minimis" exclusion and the
"class /subclass exclusion."
The de minimis exclusion precludes a finding of conflict of interest as to an action
having a de minimis (insignificant) economic impact. Thus, when a matter that would
otherwise constitute a conflict of interest under the Ethics Act would have an
insignificant economic impact, a conflict would not exist and Section 1103(a) of the
Ethics Act would not be implicated. See, Kolb, Order 1322; Schweinsburq, Order 900.
In order for the class /subclass exclusion to apply, two criteria must be met: (1)
the affected public official /public employee, immediate family member, or business with
which the public official /public employee or immediate family member is associated
must be a member of a class consisting of the general public or a true subclass
consisting of more than one member; and (2) the public official /public employee,
immediate family member, or business with which the public official /public employee or
immediate family member is associated must be affected "to the same degree" (in no
way differently) than the other members of the class /subclass. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102; see,
Kablack, Opinion 02 -003; Graham, Opinion 95 -002 (citing Van Rensler, Opinion 90-
017); Rubenstein, Opinion 01 -007. The first criterion of the exclusion is satisfied where
the members of the proposed subclass are similarly situated as the result of relevant
shared characteristics. The second criterion of the exclusion is satisfied where the
individual /business in question and the other members of the class /subclass are
reasonably affected to the same degree by the proposed action. Kablack, supra.
In applying Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the facts that you have
submitted, you are advised that your daughter is a member of your "immediate family"
as that term is defined in the Ethics Act. Therefore, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the
Ethics Act, in your capacity as a School Director, you would generally have a conflict of
interest in matters that would financially impact your daughter. In each instance of a
conflict of interest, you would be required to abstain fully from participation. The
abstention requirement would not be limited to voting, but rather, would extend to any
use of authority of office. In each instance of a voting conflict, you would be required to
abstain fully and to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics
Act.
Turning to your specific inquiry, you are advised as follows.
The class /subclass exception would not appear to be applicable to the factual
scenario you have presented. Under the submitted facts, members of the Pool would
not be "similarly situated" due to the ranking /selection of the Pool members based upon
performance.
You are advised that if you would vote in favor of closing Neshaminy Middle
School, such vote would not form the basis for a conflict of interest under the Ethics Act
because any resulting financial impact upon your daughter would be in the nature of a
financial detriment.
O'Connor, 08 -538
April 18, 2008
Page 5
However, a vote against closing Neshaminy Middle School could form the basis
for a conflict of interest for you. The question of whether such a conflict of interest
would exist would hinge upon facts that have not been submitted.
For example, the submitted facts do not indicate whether the closing of
Neshaminy Middle School could impact your daughter's continued service as a long-
term substitute with the School District. The submitted facts do not indicate to what
extent contracted teachers from Neshaminy Middle School would be in competition with
teachers in the Pool for any vacant positions in the School District. The submitted facts
also do not indicate the order in which the teachers in the Pool would be offered a
position based upon performance.
Because the submitted facts are insufficient to conclusively determine whether
you would have a conflict of interest as to a vote against closing Neshaminy Middle
School, this advisory must necessarily be limited to providing the following general
guidance as to that aspect of your inquiry. If a vote against closing Neshaminy Middle
School would be reasonably anticipated to result in a private pecuniary benefit to your
daughter, such as by preserving her ongoing service as a long -term substitute for the
School District or by enhancing her prospects of obtaining a full -time position with the
School District, then pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you would have a
conflict of interest and you would be prohibited from casting such a vote or otherwise
using the authority of your public office to advance such an outcome.
The ropriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics
Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the Public School Code.
Conclusion: As a School Director for the Neshaminy School District ( "School
District "), you are a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. 1101 et seq. Your daughter, who
School as a long-term substitute teacher in the chool District, is a member of your
"immediate family" as that term is defined in the Ethics Act. Pursuant to Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act, in your capacity as a School Director, you would generally
have a conflict of interest in matters that would financially impact your daughter. In
each instance of a conflict of interest, you would be required to abstain fully from
participation. The abstention requirement would not be limited to voting, but rather,
would extend to any use of authority of office. In the instance of a voting conflict, you
would be required to abstain fully and to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section
1103(j) of the Ethics Act. Under the submitted facts, if you would vote in favor of closing
Neshaminy Middle School, such vote would not form the basis for a conflict of interest
under the Ethics Act because any resulting financial impact upon your daughter would
be in the nature of a financial detriment. A vote against closing Neshaminy Middle
School could form the basis for a conflict of interest for you, depending upon facts that
have not been submitted. If a vote against closing Neshaminy Middle School would be
reasonably anticipated to result in a private pecuniary benefit to your daughter, such as
by preserving her ongoing service as a long-term substitute for the School District or by
enhancing her prospects of obtaining a full -time position with the School District, then
pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you would have a conflict of interest and
you would be prohibited from casting such a vote or otherwise using the authority of
your public office to advance such an outcome.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the
Ethics Act.
Pursuant to Section 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, an Advice is a complete defense
in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith
conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, provided the requester has disclosed
truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the
Advice given.
O'Connor, 08 -538
April 18, 2008
Page 6
This letter is a public record and will be made available as such.
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any
reason to challenge same, you may appeal the Advice to the full
Commission. A personal appearance before the Commission will be
scheduled and a formal Opinion will be issued by the Commission.
Any such appeal must be in writing and must be actually
received at the Commission within thirty (30) days of the date of this
Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code § 13.2(h). The appeal may be
received at the Commission by hand delivery, United States mail,
delivery service, or by FAX transmission (717 - 787 - 0806). Failure to
file such an appeal at the Commission within thirty (30) days may
result in the dismissal of the appeal.
Sincerely,
Robin M. Hittie
Chief Counsel