Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout93-558 GambleSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL May 5, 1993 The Honorable Ron Gamble 93 -558 House of Representatives 302 Main Capitol Building House P.O. Box 174 Harrisburg, PA 17120 -0028 Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Member of House of Representatives, Certificates Received from Airline for Overcharges on Tickets Purchased for Legislative Business, Use of Certificates to Purchase Tickets for Future Legislative Business. Dear Representative Gamble: This responds to your letter of April 20, 1993, 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 Member of the House of Representatives from using certificates received from an airline for overcharges on prior tickets, purchased for legislative business, to purchase future tickets for future legislative business. Facts: In your duties as a State Representative, you frequently fly to and from Pittsburgh and Harrisburg on U.S. Air. There was a recent law suit and a proposed settlement to compensate those who were overcharged for airline tickets from 1988 through 1992. It is your intention to file a claim form in an effort to receive the certificates being issued by the Airlines Antitrust Claims Administration for use toward future ticket purchases. You have already-been reimbursed by the Commonwealth for the prior tickets. It is your intention to use the certificates toward the purchase of future airline tickets which you will acquire for legislative business only. You state you will deduct the certificate amount from your requests for reimbursement. Since you will proceed to file your claim by the June 1,'1993 deadline, you request that the Commission review this situation and The Honorable Ron Gamble May 5, 1993 Page 2 rule upon it. Discussion: As a Member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, 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: 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: Section 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 associated. "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 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. 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 anything of monetary value based upon the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the The Honorable Ron Gamble May 5, 1993 Page 3 public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has been or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete response to the question presented. The Ethics Law quoted above specifically provides in part that a public official may not use the authority of public office or employment to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. As to the issue you have posed, the Commission considered a similar matter involving frequent flyer credits in Stefanko, Opinion 90 -015. The issue in Stefanko was whether the Ethics Law imposed any prohibitions or restrictions upon public officials from personally utilizing airline tickets received by the accumulation of frequent flyer miles from trips relating to official business. In that case, the frequent flyer program allowed frequent flyer credits to be given only to the individual who actually made the flight and earned the credit. The airline did not allow for the transfer of credits to the employer regardless of whether the employer was a private employer or a governmental body. Stefanko held that under Section 3(a) the public officials would be prohibited from personally utilizing air travel frequent flyer credits which were accumulated while travelling on official business because such action would constitute a use of authority of office for private pecuniary benefit. Were it not for the exercise of such duties and responsibilities which necessitated travelling on business in an official capacity, then the individual could not accumulate such credits. In this case, likewise, the receipt of certificates to be used for the purchase of future airline tickets would not occur but for the exercise of the duties and responsibilities which necessitated travelling on business in an official capacity. Stefanko further held that while the officials may continue to accumulate frequent flyer credits, they may not redeem the credits for use on a personal trip. Stefanko also held that the Ethics Law would not restrict the officials from utilizing the bonus certificates for a future trip which relates to official business. Therefore, since you have stated that you will deduct the airline certificates from your request for reimbursement as to legislative business, any certificates received in connection with official travel, paid for by the government, for use toward the purchase of future airline tickets, would not be prohibited. Such utilization would be permitted under the Ethics Law since the usage would be for official legislative business. The Honorable Ron Gamble May 5, 1993 Page 4 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 Legislative Code of Conduct. Conclusion: As a Member of the House of Representatives, you are a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law prohibits a public . official from using the authority of his office or employment to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself. Certificates for the purchase of airline tickets received by you in connection with official travel, paid for by the government, may be used for the purchase of future airline tickets for official legislative business. 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 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 in writing and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 513.2(h). ncerely, incent i. Dopko Chief Counsel