HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-613 ConfidentialSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
October 7, 1997
97 -613
Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, School District, School Director,
Transportation Services Contract, Bus Line, Bus Driver Instructor, Allegations,
Work for Bus Line.
This responds to your letters of September 12, 1997 and September 23, 1997
by which you requested confidential advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law presents any
prohibition or restrictions upon a School Director with regard to the proposed extension
of a contract for transportation services where the School Director is paid by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for providing driver instruction services to bus drivers,
assigned to him by the Intermediate Unit, which drivers may include employees of the
bus line that serves the School District.
Facts: You have been authorized by Mr. A to request an advisory from the State
Ethics Commission on his behalf. The issue involves the proposed contract extension
for transportation services between Bus Line B and School District C. Mr. A is a
School Director for School District C. You have submitted the following as the
material facts.
Mr. A has told you that he is not employed by Bus Line B, that he does not work
for Bus Line B, and that he is not paid by Bus Line B. However, Mr. A does work 20
hours per week once or twice a year instructing drivers for school bus licensing. Mr.
A has been providing this service since 1982. The Intermediate Unit assigns drivers
(some of whom may be employees of Bus Line B) to Mr. A's class which usually lasts
one week and is conducted at different locations, such as High School D. Mr. A gives
a test to the drivers who must also successfully complete the CDL test before they can
operate a bus. Mr. A is paid by the Commonwealth for this service and receives no
compensation from Bus Line B.
You further state that at a March planning session, one of the School Directors
indicated that there were witnesses who would testify that Mr. A has been working
on busses at Bus Line B. There were also indirect references to Mr. A inspecting or
cleaning busses for Bus Line B. You state that none of those allegations have been
established.
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 97 -613
October 7, 1997
Page 2
Based upon the above, you phrase the issue as whether Mr. A is employed by
Bus Line B in any capacity or is "conflicted out" with regard to the proposed contract
extension for transportation services between Bus Line B and School District C.
Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 7(10) and 7(1 1) of the
Ethics Law, 65 P.S. § §407(10), (11), advisories are issued to the requestor based
upon the facts which the requestor has submitted. In issuing the advisory based upon
the facts which the requestor has submitted, the Commission does not engage in an
independent investigation of the facts, nor does it speculate as to facts which have not
been submitted. It is the burden of the requestor to truthfully disclose all of the
material facts relevant to the inquiry. 65 P.S. § §407(10), (11). An advisory only
affords a defense to the extent the requestor has truthfully disclosed all of the material
facts.
Consequently, the advisory context is not a forum for resolving factual disputes.
To the contrary, factual disputes may only be resolved by this Commission in the
context of the investigative process whereby this Commission reviews the conduct of
public officials /public employees to determine whether the Ethics Law has been
violated. In contrast, an Advice — and this Advice in particular — assumes that the
material facts have been accurately submitted by you and Mr. A. In other words, this
Advice assumes that Mr. A is not employed by Bus Line B, that he does not work for
that bus line, and that he is not paid by that bus line. To the extent the letter of
inquiry has omitted any material facts, or to the extent the facts have been misstated
or misrepresented, this advisory will not afford a defense to Mr. A.
As a School Director for School District C, Mr. A is a public official as that term
is defined under the Ethics Law, and hence he is 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
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 97 -613
October 7, 1997
Page 3
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.
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 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 been or will be any transgression thereof but
merely to provide a complete response to the question presented.
Section 3(f) of the Ethics Law provides as follows
Section 3. Restricted activities
(f) No public official or public employee or his
spouse or child or any business in which the person or his
spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract
valued at $500 or more with the governmental body with
which the public official or public employee is associated or
any subcontract valued at $500 or more with any person
who has been awarded a contract with the governmental
body with which the public official or public employee is
associated, 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. In such a case, the public official or
public employee shall not have any supervisory or overall
responsibility for the implementation or administration of the
contract. Any contract or subcontract made in violation of
this subsection shall be voidable by a court of competent
jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within 90 days of the
making of the contract or subcontract.
Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law provides as follows:
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 97 -613
October 7, 1997
Page 4
Section 3. Restricted activities
(j) 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.
In each instance of a conflict, Section 3(j) requires the public official /employee
to abstain and to publicly disclose the abstention and reasons for same, both orally and
by filing a written memorandum to that effect with the person recording the minutes
or supervisor.
In the event that the required abstention results in the inability of the
governmental body to take action because a majority is unattainable due to the
abstention(s) from conflict under the Ethics Law, then voting is permissible provided
the disclosure requirements noted above are followed. See, Mlakar, Advice 91- 523 -S.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law to the circumstances which
you have submitted, pursuant to Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law, 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.
In participating as to the proposed contract extension for transportation services
between Bus Line B and School District C, Mr. A would clearly be acting in his
capacity as a public official and he would also clearly be using the authority of his
public office. However, a conflict of interest under Section 3(a) would only exist if Mr.
A would use the authority of his public office 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. Based upon the facts which have been
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 97 -613
October 7, 1997
Page 5
submitted, there would not be any private pecuniary benefit flowing to Mr. A himself
or a member of his immediate family. Moreover, the mere fact that employees of Bus
Line B may take a course taught by Mr. A — under circumstances where Mr. A is
assigned such work by the Intermediate Unit and is paid for such work by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania — is insufficient in and of itself to establish that Bus
Line B is a business with which Mr. A is associated. On the other hand, business
relationships between Mr. A and Bus Line B could establish a conflict of interest. That
is why this Advice has emphasized the fact that advisories from this Commission are
based upon the facts as submitted and do not afford a defense to the extent material
facts are omitted, misstated, or misrepresented.
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 a School Director for School District C, Mr. A is a public official
subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Based upon the facts which have been
submitted, Mr. A would not have a conflict of interest under Section 3(a) of the Ethics
Law with regard to a proposed contract extension for transportation services between
Bus Line B and School District C. A conflict of interest under Section 3(a) would exist
if Mr. A would use the authority of his public office for the private pecuniary benefit
of himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which or a member
of his immediate family is associated. Where the facts as submitted are that Mr. A is
not employed by Bus Line B, that he does not work for Bus Line B, and that he is not
paid by Bus Line B, the mere fact that employees of the said bus line may be among
various bus drivers who take a course taught by Mr. A under circumstances where
Mr. A is assigned such work by the Intermediate Unit and is paid for such work by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania — is insufficient in and of itself to establish that Bus
Line B is a business with which Mr. A is associated. This Advice is based upon the
facts as submitted and is conditioned upon the assumption that all of the material
facts have been truthfully and accurately submitted. 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 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 1. The appeal may be received at the Commission by hand
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 97 -613
October 7, 1997
Page 6
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.
ncerely,
Vincent J. opko
Chief Counsel