Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13-542 Croom ADVICE OF COUNSEL June 4, 2013 Diane Croom 827 Drinker Turnpike Covington Township, PA 18424 13-542 Dear Ms. Croom: This responds to your letter dated April 26, 2013, by which you requested an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon a school director with regard to voting on a labor contract with the bargaining unit for the school district’s teachers, where the school director’s son is employed as a teacher with the school district and is a member of the bargaining unit. Facts: You are a School Director for the North Pocono School District (“School District”). Your son is employed as a physics teacher with the School District, and he is a member of the bargaining unit (“Bargaining Unit”) that represents the School District’s teachers. The Bargaining Unit has approximately 220 members. The School District School Board and the Bargaining Unit are currently negotiating a labor contract. You state that to date, you have recused yourself from attending any meetings or receiving information pertaining to labor contract negotiations. The narrow question that you have posed is whether the Ethics Act would permit you to vote on a labor contract between the School District and the Bargaining Unit. Discussion: 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. It is initially noted that, pursuant to the same aforesaid Sections of the Ethics Act, an opinion/advice may be given only as to prospective (future) conduct. To the extent Croom, 13-542 June 4, 2013 Page 2 that your inquiry relates to conduct that has already occurred, such past conduct may not be addressed in the context of an advisory opinion. However, to the extent your inquiry relates to future conduct, your inquiry may and shall be addressed. It is further initially noted that this Advice is limited to addressing the narrow question posed. As a School Director for the School District, you are a public official as that term is defined in the Ethics Act, and therefore you are 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 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 Croom, 13-542 June 4, 2013 Page 3 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. The use of authority of office is not limited merely to voting, but extends to any use of authority of office including, but not limited to, discussing, conferring with others, and lobbying for a particular result. Juliante, Order 809. In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public official/public employee would be required to abstain from participation, which would include voting unless one of the statutory exceptions of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act would be applicable. Additionally, the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act would have to be satisfied in the event of a voting conflict. 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; Schweinsburg, 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; 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. Croom, 13-542 June 4, 2013 Page 4 In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Act to the instant matter, you are advised as follows. Your son 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, you generally would have a conflict of interest in matters before the School District School Board that would financially impact you, a member of your immediate family such as your son, or a business with which you or a member of your immediate family is associated. You are further advised that Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act would not prohibit you from voting on a labor contract between the School District and the Bargaining Unit subject to the condition that the class/subclass exclusion would be applicable as to any impact upon your son. See, Davison, Opinion 08-006 at 5. (The submitted facts do not enable a conclusive determination in that regard.) It is parenthetically noted that with regard to the collective bargaining process, the Public Employee Relations Act provides as follows: § 1101.1801. Conflict of interest (a) No person who is a member of the same local, State, national or international organization as the employe organization with which the public employer is bargaining or who has an interest in the outcome of such bargaining which interest is in conflict with the interest of the public employer, shall participate on behalf of the public employer in the collective bargaining processes with the proviso that such person may, where entitled, vote on the ratification of an agreement. (b) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section shall be immediately removed by the public employer from his role, if any, in the collective bargaining negotiations or in any matter in connection with such negotiations. 43 P.S. § 1101.1801. Since the State Ethics Commission does not have the statutory jurisdiction to administer or interpret the Public Employee Relations Act, it is recommended that you obtain legal advice as to any potential impact of that Act. The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act; the applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the Public School Code or the Public Employee Relations Act. Conclusion: As a School Director for the North Pocono 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. Based upon the submitted facts that: (1) your son is employed as a physics teacher with the School District, and he is a member of the bargaining unit (“Bargaining Unit”) that represents the School District’s teachers; (2) the Bargaining Unit has approximately 220 members; (3) the School District School Board and the Bargaining Unit are currently negotiating a labor contract; and (4) to date, you have recused yourself from attending any meetings or receiving information pertaining to labor contract negotiations, you are advised as follows. Your son 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, you generally would have a Croom, 13-542 June 4, 2013 Page 5 conflict of interest in matters before the School District School Board that would financially impact you, a member of your immediate family such as your son, or a business with which you or a member of your immediate family is associated. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act would not prohibit you from voting on a labor contract between the School District and the Bargaining Unit subject to the condition that the “class/subclass exclusion” contained within the statutory definition of “conflict” or “conflict of interest” as set forth in Section 1102 of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, would be applicable as to any impact upon your son. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the Public School Code or the Public Employee Relations 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. 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