HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-582 PhiferDavid F. Phifer, Chief Counsel
Office of the Chief Counsel
Department of State
307 North Office Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
July 3, 1984
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
84 -582
Re: Physician, Medical Educational and Licensure Board and State Athletic
Commission
Dear Mr. Phifer:
This responds to your letters of May 1, 1984, and May 17, 1984, in which
you, on behalf of a certain individual requested advice from the State Ethics
Commission.
Issue: You ask whether a particular person may concurrently serve as a
member of the Board of Medical Education and Licensure and as a Commissioner
of the Pennsylvania State Athletic Commission.
Facts: As Chief Counsel within the Department of State, on behalf of Dr.
Richard C. Lyons, M.D., you request advice from the State Ethics Commission as
to the above identified question. Specifically, you indicate that Dr. Lyons
currently serves as a member of the State Board of Medical Education and
Licensure, hereinafter, the Board. Dr. Lyons was so appointed by the Governor
pursuant to 71 P.S. 122. Under the provisions of the statute applicable to
this Board, Dr. Lyons is compensated for his services at the rate of $30 per
day, while actually engaged in work of the Board. The duties of the Board are
set forth in the Medical Practice Act, Act of July 20, 1974, P.L. 551, 63 P.S.
421.1 et seq.
A Commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Athletic Commission, hereinafter
the Athletic Commission, wishes to recommend Dr. Lyons to the Governor for
appointment of to a vacancy on the Athletic Commission's Medical Advisory
Board. This appointment would be made pursuant to 4 P.S. 30.401 et seq. The
members of the Medical Advisory Board, hereinafter the MAB, are appointed by
the Governor to serve a term of four years except when filling a vacancy in an
David F. Phifer, Chief Counsel
July 3, 1984
Page 2
existing position. Members must be duly licensed to practice medicine in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and must have at least five years experience at
the time of appointment. Each member of the MAB is paid $35 per day plus any
reasonable and necessary travel and other expenses incurred in the performance
of his or her duties in accordance with 4 P.S. 30.401 - 30.403.
The functions of the MAB are to assist the Athletic Commission in
preparing and submitting recommendations to the Athletic Commission for
approval of standards for the physical and mental examination of boxers and
wrestlers in order to safeguard the health of these individuals. The MAB also
makes recommendations to the Athletic Commission with respect to the licensure
of physicians who are qualified to make examinations of boxers and wrestlers.
Additionally, MAB members may also be called upon to perform other
consultant - related duties as the Commission finds necessary in accordance with
4 P.S. 30.404.
Discussion: Insofar as this physician, Dr. Lyons, currently serves as an
appointed official who receives compensation, he must be considered a "public
official as that tens is defined in the State Ethics Act. Accordingly, his
conduct must conform to the requirements of the State Ethics Act. We will
discuss the requirements of the State Ethics Act further below. First,
however, we must indicate that the jurisdiction of the Ethics Commission to
render opinions and advices is strictly limited by the Ethics Act.
Accordingly, although you request us to do so, we cannot render an opinion as
to whether the simultaneous appointment of Dr. Lyons to these two entities,
constitutes a conflict of interest within the provisions of 4 Pa. Code
7.151(1). We will, however, proceed to review this question in light of the
responsibilities and duties of Dr. Lyons under the State Ethics Act.
There is no provision of the Ethics Act nor any opinion of the Ethics
Commission which declares that simultaneous service with two entities such as
you describe here, constitutes an inherent or per se conflict under the State
Ethics Act. Essentially, the Ethics Commission has concluded that a conflict
of interest exists when an individual represents two or more persons whose
interests are adverse to each other. See Alfano, 80 -007. Under the
circumstances as you have outlined them and given the duties and
responsibilities of members of the Board and the Athletic Commission, we do
not perceive any inherent conflict of interest if Dr. Lyons were to
simultaneously serve in the positions you describe. This is because the
interests of the Board and the interests of the MAB of the Athletic Commission
do not appear to be adverse to each other, given the duties and
responsibilities of each of these entities.
Of course, should there be circumstances under which the interests of or
the decisions which Dr. Lyons would be making as a member of the Board or the
MAB of the Athletic Commission would be adverse to each other, he should, in
an individual case, consider abstention as an alternative to participation in
David F. Phifer, Chief Counsel
July 3, 1984
Page 3
such individual decisions or matters. However, on a general basis, neither
the State Ethics Act nor the opinions of this Commission indicate that such
simultaneous service would be, per se, prohibited or represent a conflict of
interest within the meaning of the State Ethics Act.
Conclusion: There is no inherent conflict, any appearance of a conflict
under the State Ethics Act, nor any opinion of the State Ethics Commission
which would prohibit the simultaneous service by Dr. Lyons as a member of the
Board and the MAB of the Athletic Commission as outlined above.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this 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, providing the
requestor 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 request that the full Commission review this Advice.
A personal appearance before the full Commission will be scheduled and a
formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be
made, in writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice
pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
SSC /na
Si ncerely,
4
andra S. Christianson
General Counsel
cc: William R. Davis, Secretary of the Commonwealth
James Binns, Chairman