HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-513 Hutchinson
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
March 31, 2014
David K. Hutchinson
1006 Golfview Avenue
State College, PA 16801
14-513
Dear Mr. Hutchinson:
This responds to your letter dated February 5, 2014, 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 prohibitions or restrictions upon a school director,
who in a private capacity is employed with the Pennsylvania State University (“Penn
State”), with regard to voting on the sale of a property owned by the school district
where Penn State would be the purchaser of the property.
Facts:
You request an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
based upon the following submitted facts.
You are a School Director for the State College Area School District (“School
District”). In a private capacity, you are employed with Penn State.
The School District owns a property (“the Property”) on which the College
Heights School Building (“the School Building”) is located. The School Building is
currently underused and is unnecessary for future School District plans. You state that
the School District has initiated the procedure to sell the Property pursuant to the
requirements of the Public School Code. You further state that the actual purchaser of
the Property is not yet known but might be Penn State.
The narrow question that you have posed is whether you would violate the Ethics
Act if you would vote on the sale of the Property where Penn State would be the
purchaser of the Property.
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
Hutchinson, 14-513
March 31, 2014
Page 2
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 further 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 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.
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
Hutchinson, 14-513
March 31, 2014
Page 3
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.
"Business."
Any corporation, partnership, sole
proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association,
organization, self-employed individual, holding company,
joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal entity
organized for profit.
"Business with which he is associated."
Any
business in which the person or a member of the person's
immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee or
has a financial interest.
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 the term "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
Hutchinson, 14-513
March 31, 2014
Page 4
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.
In applying the above general principles to the instant matter, you are advised as
follows.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held that in order to violate Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee “must be consciously aware
of a private pecuniary benefit for himself, his family, or his business, and then must take
action in the form of one or more specific steps to attain that benefit.” Kistler v. State
Ethics Commission, 610 Pa. 516, 528, 22 A.3d 223, 231 (2011).
Penn State is a business with which you are associated in your capacity as an
employee. See, Novak, Opinion 91-009. 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 or Penn State.
In particular, you would have a conflict of interest and would violate Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act in your official capacity as a School Director by voting on the
sale of the Property where Penn State would be the purchaser of the Property if: (1) you
would be consciously aware of a private pecuniary benefit for Penn State that would not
be de minimis; (2) your official action would constitute one or more specific steps to
attain that benefit; and (3) your voting would not fall within either of the statutory
exceptions of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act.
As noted above, in each instance of a conflict of interest, you 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.
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.
Conclusion:
As a School Director for the State College Area 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) in a private capacity, you are employed with the Pennsylvania
State University (“Penn State”); (2) the School District owns a property (“the Property”)
on which the College Heights School Building (“the School Building”) is located; (3) the
School Building is currently underused and is unnecessary for future School District
plans; (4) the School District has initiated the procedure to sell the Property pursuant to
the requirements of the Public School Code; and (5) the actual purchaser of the
Property is not yet known but might be Penn State, you are advised as follows.
Penn State is a business with which you are associated in your capacity as an
employee. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you generally would have a
Hutchinson, 14-513
March 31, 2014
Page 5
conflict of interest in matters before the School District School Board that would
financially impact you or Penn State. In particular, you would have a conflict of interest
and would violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act in your official capacity as a School
Director by voting on the sale of the Property where Penn State would be the purchaser
of the Property if: (1) you would be consciously aware of a private pecuniary benefit for
Penn State that would not be de minimis; (2) your official action would constitute one or
more specific steps to attain that benefit; and (3) your voting would not fall within either
of the statutory exceptions of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act. In each instance of a
conflict of interest, you 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. 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.
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