Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-573 MeixellDear Mr. Meixell: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL July 17, 1990 Mr. John K. Meixell 90 -573 // 1047 Dreher Avenue Stroudsburg, PA 18360 Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, School Director, Former Teacher, Blue Cross /Shield Benefits. This responds to your letter of June 5, 1990, in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law presents any prohibition or restrictions upon a school director from receiving Blue Cross /Blue Shield Benefits as a former teacher in the school district. Facts: You are a newly elected school director in the Stroudsburg Area School District, having previously served for thirty -five years as a teacher within the same district. As part of your retirement package, you will receive Blue Cross /Blue Shield coverage until you reach the age of sixty -nine. The issue of whether you have a conflict of interest has been raised since you will be the recipient of health care benefits for - -the next nineteen years which will be paid by the school district. Although you do not believe that you have a conflict, you have temporarily relinquished your benefits for medical coverage under the CODA provisions. You also enclose a copy of a letter from the school district solicitor which references your receipt of the benefits and advises you that under Sections 322 and 324 of the School Code, you are required to make an election to relinquish the benefits if you desire to continue to serve as a school director. You also enclose one sheet of the current contract relative to the conditions for the receipt of medical benefits. Discussion: As school director for Stroudsburg Area, School District, you are a public official as that term is defined under the Ethics Law, and hence you are subject to the provisions of that law. Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law provides: Mr. John R. Meixell Page 2 Section 3. Restricted Activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. The following terms are defined in the Ethics Law as follows: s ection 2. 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 a ssociated. "Conflict" or "conflict of interest" 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 or 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. In addition, Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide in part that no person shall offer to a public official /employee anything of monetary value and no public official /employee shall solicit or accept any thing of monetary value based upon the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgement of the public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete response to the question presented. Mr. John K. Meixell Page 3 Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law restricts a public official from using the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself, a member of his immediate family, or business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. In addition, the definition of conflict quoted above has a specific exclusion therein. Thus, if the exclusion is applicable in a given factual situation, then there would be no conflict of interest under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. A conflict does not exist if the action has a de minimus economic impact or affects to the same degree a class consisting in the general public or a subclass consisting of an occupation industry or other group which includes the public official. In this case, it appears that you are part of a class or subclass consisting of teachers who receive medical benefits when certain conditions are met under the contract. It is noted that you would be affected to the same degr�ee as a class consisting of the general public or a subclass cons 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. Therefore since you would be within the class of teachers who receive these benefits who would be in a class /sub- class, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not restrict such activity provided you are in a class /sub -class consisting of more than one person and provided you are affected to the exact same degree as all other members of the class /sub- class. Davis, Opinion 89 -012. Therefore, subject to the above qualifications, you would not have a conflict relative to medical benefits which you receive as a former teacher pursuant to a contract between the school district and teachers. The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than the. Ethics Law has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Law. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the School Code. Conclusion: As school director for Stroudsburg Area -'chool District, you are a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. A conflict would not exist as to medical benefits which you receive as a former teacher provided you are in a class /sub -class consisting of more than one person and provided you are affected to the same degree as all other members of the class /sub -class of teachers. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Section 7(11), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and Mr. John K. Meixell Page 4 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. such. This letter is a public record and will be made available as 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 in writing and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code S2.12. cerely, Vincent 7. Do ko, Chief Counsel