HomeMy WebLinkAbout763 McCloyIn re: Alfred A. McCloy
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
File Docket:
Date Decided:
: Date Mailed:
Before: Robert W. Brown, Vice
G. Sieber Pancoast
Dennis C. Harrington
James M. Howley
Daneen E. Reese
86 -037 -C
October 4, 1990
October 29. 1990
Chair
The State Ethics Commission received a complaint regarding a
possible violation of the State Ethics Act, No. 170 of 1978, 65 P.S.
401 et. seq. Written notice, of the specific allegation(s) was served
at the commencement of the investigation. A Findings Report was
issued and served, upon completion of the investigation, - which
constituted the Complaint by the Investigation Division. An Answer
was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. This
adjudication of the Commission is hereby issued which sets forth the
individual Allegations, Findings of Fact, Discussion, Conclusions of
Law and Order.
This adjudication is final and will be made available as a public
document fifteen days after issuance. However, reconsideration may be
requested which will defer public release of this adjudication pending
action on the request by the Commission. A request for
reconsideration, however, does not affect the finality of this
adjudication. A•reconsideration request must be received at this
Commission within fifteen days of issuance and must include a
detailed explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration should
be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code S2.38.
The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance
with Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a) during the fifteen
day period and no one unless the right to challenge this Order is
waived, may violate confidentiality by releasing, discussing or
circulating this Order. However, confidentiality does not preclude
discussing this case with an attorney at law,.
Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Act is
guilty of a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or
imprisonment for not more than one year, 65 P.S. 409(e).
ADJUDICATION
I. Allegation: Alfred McCloy as a member of the Board of Private
Correspondence Schools, violated Section 3A of the State Ethics Act;
Act 170 of 1978 which prohibits a public employee or public official's
use of office or confidential information gained through that office
to obtain financial gain in that you have voted to approve licensing
and re- licensing of various schools operated by firms with which are
associated as well as the licensing and re- licensing of administtive
and instructional staff of said firms.
II. Find'nc`s :
1. You served as a member of the PA State Board of Private
Correspondence Schools during 1981 and 1986.
a. The State Board of Private Correspondence Schools
merged with the State Board of Private Business
Schools and State Board of Private Trades Schools
effective 1987,
b. Upon the merger of these three boards, the State Board
of Private Trade Schools was created.
c. You have served on the State Board of Private Trade
Schools from 1907 through the present.
2. You were employed by Wilma Boyd Schools from 1976 through 1987.
a. Yoy were employed by United Schools from 3.987 until
1990.
3. You hove your own management consulting firm :
AID Apsggiatei, MO Pattie Place, Palm Harbor, Florida 34685.
4. The r- espontibilities for members of the State Board of Private
Corres ce aehOQls and the State Board of Private Trade
Schools ineiude but are not limited to: -
a . , Voting for the licensing and re- licens =ing of trade,
taohnical and oeTrespondence schools.
b. Voting for the 1 and re- licensure of agents and
ins staff for the sane.
5. The PA Department of EdVgation compiles lasts of agents,
administrative and instructional staff which are presented to the
board and,voted om in their entirety,.
a. Board members have no involvement in the preparation of
these tints.
6.
ou participated in matters related to Wilma `Qyd Schoe/ at
Mr. Alfred A. McCloy
Page 3
meetings of the PA State Board of Private Correspondence Schools.
a. September 28, 1984: You made a motion and voted to .
approve the new agent license of Rhoda Hairston.
Hairston is a representative of the Boyd Career School.
b. July 19, 1985: You voted to approve the followings
1. The re- licensure of travel Lab Division of
Wilma Boyd Career Schools.
2. The approval of the re- licensure of the
following agents from the Travel Lab
Division of the Wilma Boyd Career Schools:
Pamela Bechdol -
Thomas Callahan -
William Davis -
Diane Zollner -
Jan Full
Judy Gozur -
Eugene Melillo
Geri Talbot
Louise Morgan
Joyce Mowrer
Dorothy Quigley
Owen Slagle
c. You state that the above votes were rescinded after Dr.
Willard expressed his concerns and the matters were
subsequently #re- address[ed]" wherein you abstained.
?. At the meeting of the State Board of Private Correspondence
Schools held on September 13, 1985, you abstained from voting on
the re- licensure of Wilma Boyd Schools instructional staff.
8. it was a standard board practice to vote on complete lists of
Sehools and personnel.
a. Lists of agents and /or schools that were presented to
the Board would be voted on in the entirety.
b. You did not know most of the personnel contained on the
list.
c. This practice by Board members continued until Board
member James Willard objected to it. Since Willards
objection, care has been taken to assure that voting
conflicts by Board members do not arise.
d. You helped write the boards policy on abstention from
discussion and voting. This policy came about due to
alleged State Ethics Act violations by several board
members.
Mr. Alfred A. McCloy
Page 4
III. Discussion: As a member of the Board of Private Correspondence
Schools, Alfred McCloy, hereinafter McCloy, was a public official as
that term is defined under the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 402;51 Pa. Code
§1.1. As such, his conduct is subject to the provisions of that law.
Initially, it is noted that Section 5 of Act 9 of June 26, 1989
provides, in part, as follows:
"This amendatory act shall not apply to
violations committed prior to the effective date
of this act, and causes of action initiated for
such violations shall be governed by the prior
law, which is continued in effect for that purpose
as if this act were not in force. For the
purposes of this section, a violation was
committed prior to the effective date of this act
if any elements of the violation occurred prior
thereto."
Since the occurrences in this case transpired prior to the
effective date of Act 9 (June 26, 1989), we must apply the provisions
of Act 170 of October 4, 1978, P.L. 883 to determine whether the
Ethics Act was violated.
Under Section 3(a), quoted above, this Commission has determined
that use of office by a public official to obtain a financial gain for
himself or a member of his immediate family or a business with which
he is associated which is not provided for in law transgresses the
above provision of law. Thus, use of office by a public official to
obtain a financial gain which is not authorized as part of his
compensation is prohibited by Section 3(a): Hoak /McCutcheon v. State
Ethics Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. Ct. 529, 466 A.2d 283 (1983); Yacobet
v. State Ethics Commission, 109 Pa. Commw. Ct. 432 531 A.2d 536
(1987). Similarly, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act would prohibit a
public official /employee from using public office to advance his own
interests; Koslow v. State Ethics Commission, 116 Pa. Commw. Ct. 19,
540 A.2d 1374 (1988). Likewise, a public official /employee may not
use the status or position of public office for his own personal
advantage; Huff, Opinion 84 -015.
The allegation before us is whether McCloy while a member of the
Board of Private Correspondence Schools violated Section 3(a) Of the
gthics Act as to voting to approve the licensure or re- licensure of
various schools or agents thereof when he was associated with
businesses which operated the schools.
In the instant matter, McCloy served on the Board of Private
Correspondence Schools from 1981 through 1986 when that Board merged
with. the State Board of Private Business Schools and State Boards of
Private Trades Schools which merger became effective in 1987.
Mr. Alfred A. McCloy
Page 5
Part of McCloy's duties on the. Board was to vote on the'
licensure /re- licensure of schools and their agents or staff. Such
action occurred when the PA Department of Education compiled and
submitted lists for groups of agents and staff for Board actiona.., The
Board members had no involvement in the preparation of the lists
At a September 28, 1984 meeting of the Board, McCloy made a motion
and voted in favor of the approval of Rhoda Hairston' as aE:
representative of the Boyd Career School. In addition, McCloy voted'
to approve at a July 19, 1985 meeting of the Board the re- 1iceTsure of
the travel Labor Division of the Boyd. Career School as well:. as the re-
licensure of six agents therein. McCloy did not-know most of the
individuals named on the list.
The Boyd Career School was a "business with which....(MtTliayl was..
associated" since he was employed by the School" between 7E and 1987.
The term "business with which he is associated is defined under the
Act as follows:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Business with which he
business in which the person
person's immediate family is
owner, employee or holder of
is associated." Any
or a member: of the
a director, officer,
stock. 65 P.S. §402'.
In applying Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act to the instant. matter,
we find a technical violation. McCCaayfdid make a motion or which
constitutes a use of office. A £inanciai gain resulted as to the
business with which he was associated though the licensure/re-
licensure of agents ' of that business. Obviously such action enabled
the School to continue to function anditherreby received tuition or
fees through its operation. The compensatiion -is other than provided
by law because there is no provision in. law which allows for the
voting to approve the licensing or rel'iicensing of agents of the
business with which the public official: is associated.
We do note that at a September 13,. 11985 meeting, McCloy abstained.
In addition, he abstained on the: "re- adtress of the action taken at
the September 28, 1984 and July 197, t98 meetings. Additionally,
McCloy did not realize a personal financial gain as a result of his
actions. Lastly, the practice of voting. on group listings of
schools /agents has been discontinued so as to avoid vetting conflicts.
In light of the above and the totality of the facts and circumstances
in this case, we will take no further action
Mr. Alfred A. McCloy
Page {6
IV. Conclusions of Law:
1. Alfred A. McCloy as a member of the Bogard of Private
Correspondence Schools was a public official subject to the
of the Ethics act.
2. A technical violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act occurred
when McCloy made a motion and vdt€d•to approve'the licensure /_re-
iicensure of agents of the Boyd Career School at a time when he was
associated with that business.
In re: Alfred. A. McCloy
File Docket: 86 -037 -C
: Date Decided: October 4. 1990
: Date Mailed: October 29: 1996
ORDER No. 763
1. A techn''ca1 violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act
occurred when Alfred A. McCloy as a member of the Board of
Private Correspondence Schools, made a motion and voted to
approve the licensure/re-licensure of agents of the Boyd
Career. School at a time when he was associated with that
business.
2. In light of the fact that there was no financial gain
realized and the totality of the facts and circumstances,
this Comtissi" "oh.will take no further action in this case.
BY THE COMMISSION,
ROBERT W. BROWN, VICE CHAIR