Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-584 MillerDennis Miller, Director Community Relations & Information Services Mansfield State College Mansfield, PA 16933 Mailing Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1 179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 November 8, 1982 ADVICE OF COUNSEL RE: Wife, Graduate Assistant, Section 3(c) Dear Mr. Miller: 82 -584 This responds to your letter of October 18, 1982, in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: You inquire as to the propriety under the State Ethics Act of hiring your wife as a graduate assistant in your office. Facts: You serve as the Director of Community Relations and Information Services for Mansfield State College. It has been your practice during each academic year to rely upon a graduate assistant to do much of the news and publications writing in the Community Relations and Information Services Office. During the summer of 1981 the graduate assistant hired for such a purpose worked on departmental recruiting publications. During the summer of 1982 you recommended that the graduate assistant be retained to work on four issues of the publication called "Views ", an admissions recruiting publication which is sent to prospective college students. Typically, the graduate assistant who is hired for this work is retained for a few weeks during the summer to perform these special projects or to do routine work that frees your time for more substantial projects. During the summer of 1982 you recommended that your wife, Linda Miller, be hired to per- form this function. Your wife is a graduate assistant and had developed contacts on campus during the year which would be beneficial to the perfor- mance on this job. In addition, your wife has the required qualifications to perform the work in question. Your wife was retained on a service purchase contract which amounts to or encumbers the sum of $200 for the performance of this task. In the process of preparation and approved of this contract you signed this contract as the approving authority in the initial approval process. State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Dennis Miller, Director November 8, 1982 Page 2 Discussion: For purposes of this response, we will assume that you are a "public employee" as set forth in the State Ethics Act. As such, your conduct must conform to the requirements of the Ethics Act. The requirements of the Ethics Act that most specifically apply to your question are found in Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act which provides as follows: c) No public official or public employee or a member of his immediate family or any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, officer, owner or holder of stock exceeding 5% of the equity at fair market value of the business shall enter into any contract valued at $500 or more with a governmental body unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process, including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded. Any contract made in violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within 90 days of making of the contract. 65 P.S. 403(c). As can be seen from this provision of the Ethics Act any contract in excess of $500 between the members of a public employee's immediate family and the governmental body with which the public employee is associated would have to be awarded only after an open and public process had been followed. In this case, since the amount of the contract in question is $200, the specific provisions of Section 3(c) and the requirements of an open and public process would not apply. The only other provision of the Ethics Act which might be impacted by the actions undertaken here would be Section 3(a) of the Act which states that: (a) No public official or public employee shall use his public office or any confidential information received through his holding public office to obtain financial gain other than compensation provided by law for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a). In relation to Section 3(a) the Commission has indicated that no public official should participate in or vote on the appointment of a member of his immediate family or to participate in the establishment of that person's salary. This is particularly true where the recommendation or vote would be cast to the particular, if not the sole, benefit of the member of the immediate family. Leete, 82 -005. In addition, the public employee should not participate directly or indirectly in the decision or recommendation to Dennis Miller, Director November 8, 1982 Page 3 approve, review, renew, the contract or the hiring of his or her spouse. Cable, 81 -542. It would be advisable, in order to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, for you to have refrained from any recommendation or approvals to the employment of your spouse. However, given the short duration of the contract in question and the amount of the contract in question we do not believe that your actions per se, constitute a violation of the Ethics Act. Should the same situation arise in the future, however, you must remove yourself from any decision, recommendation or approval process by which your spouse would be employed by your governmental body and in particular, by the Office of Community Relations and Information Services where you serve. Conclusion: Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act is inapplicable because the amount of the contract in question here did not exceed $500. Therefore, no open and public process was required before this contract could be awarded. However, you should have refrained and should for the future refrain from participating in any manner in the decision making process, approval of, or recommendation or selection process of hiring your spouse as set forth 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 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 /rdp S'ncerely, andra s C r'stianson General Counsel