Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout247 BruceMr. Robert Bruce School Board Member Greater Johnstown School District 516 Oakland Avenue Johnstown, PA 15902 Re: No. 83 -18 -C Dear Mr. Bruce: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION November 1, 1983 Order No. 247 The State Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a possible violation of Act 170 of 1978. The Commission has now completed its investigation. The individual allegations, conclusions, and findings on which those conclusions are based are as follows: I. Allegation: That you as a member of the Greater Johnstown School Board seconded and voted on a motion by the school board accepting a proposal settling a teacher strike and that your wife is employed as a teacher in the Greater Johnstown School District and that this action is a violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act. A. Findings: 1. You are a Director of the Greater Johnstown School Board, having been elected in November, 1981 and as such are a "public official" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act. 2. Carolyn Bruce, your wife, is employed as a Reading Specialist at the Johnstown Junior High School and is a member of the Teachers Union. 3. Teachers in the Greater Johnstown School District went on strike September 13, 1982. Robert Bruce Page 2 November 1, 1983 4. At a Board meeting of the Greater Johnstown School District on September 22, 1982, motions were made to terminate Blue Cross /Blue Shield and dental benefits and life insurance benefits for teachers of the bargaining unit. You abstained from voting on either motion. 5. You were not a member of the negotiating team of the Greater Johnstown School District. Negotiation sessions were held in private and only members of the School Board negotiating team were privy to the key issues. 6. At a special School Board meeting on November 5, 1982, on a motion by board member Arcurio and a second by board member Petry, the Board approved the filing of an injunction request against the striking school teachers. The Board approved the motion unanimously; you voted. 7. At a special Board meeting on November 9, 1982, you made a motion to accept the teachers' contract as is and to include a change in the dental and vision benefits. The motion was defeated 7 to 2. You voted for the motion. The Board then voted to accept the teachers' contract as is except for the economic re- opener, and the vision and dental benefits. The vote was 8 to 1 to approve the motion. You voted with the majority. 8. At a Board meeting on December 6, 1982, a motion was made by board member Miller and seconded by you that the Board present a number of items to the teachers. a. A motion was made to table the above motion, it was defeated by a 5 to 4 vote and you voted to defeat it. b. The original motion was passed by a 5 to 2 vote with one abstention; you voted in favor of the action. 9. The meetings and board actions cited in Findings 6, 7, and 8 involved a final contract. 10. You did not participate in negotiations processes involving the teachers' contract. a. Hazel Burkholder, School Board president, contacted the State School Association for an opinion on whether you had a conflict of interest because your wife was a teacher and a member of the the bargaining unit. b. The legal department of the State Association said that you could not participate in discussions or negotiations pertaining to the teachers contract but could vote on final approval. Robert Bruce Page 3 c. You were excluded from negotiations and issues surrounding those negotiations because of that opinion. d. The strike issues were presented to Judge Creany of the Cambria County Court. B. Discussion: Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act states: 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). As a public official, you are prohibited from using your office or confidential information gained from that office to obtain financial gain other than the compensation provided by law for yourself, members of your immediate family or any business with which you or your immediate family is associated. The Ethics Act defines "immediate family" as a spouse living in the official's household and minor dependent children. The Commission has ruled that where a relative of a public official would be particularly benefitte by wage, salary, or benefit increases, the public official must abstain from participating in that action. Leete, 82 -005. Thus you are required to abstain from voting to grant your wife any compensation or benefits which would benefit only her. However, nothing prohibits you from voting on contracts or other policy measures that would affect teachers as a group and in which the only benefit received by your wife would be that which would be received by all teachers. Stewart, 79 -070. There is no evidence that your wife received any benefit other than those given to the teachers as a group. And, you did not participate in negotiations. Under these circumstances, we find no violation of Section 3(a). The Commission must also consider Section 1 of the Ethics Act which states: The Legislature hereby declares that public office is a public trust and that any effort to realize personal financial gain through public office other than compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust. In order to strengthen the faith and confidence of the people of the State in their government, the Legislature November 1, 1983 Robert Bruce Page 4 An appearance of a conflict of interest can be avoided by insuring that the public has a full opportunity to be aware of the public official's personal interests and official actions. It was public knowledge that your wife was a teacher in the bargaining unit. In addition, the School Board president asked for and received a legal opinion on your potential conflict of interest and you followed the mandates of that opinion. These facts were generally known. You did not create an appearance of a conflict of interest with the public trust in your actions involving the contract between the greater Johnstown School District and the teachers of that district because your interest and actions were generally known and you did not participate in official actions which did or could have uniquely benefitted your wife. C. Conclusion: You did not violate Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act or create the appearance of a conflict of interest with the public trust by your actions during contract negotiations and agreement between the Greater Johnstown School Board and the teachers in that district. Our files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a). However, this Order is final and will be made available as a public document 15 days after service (defined as mailing) unless you file documentation with the Commission which justifies reconsideration and /or challenges pertinent factual findings. See 51 Pa. Code 2.38. During this 15 -day period, no one, including the Respondent unless he waives his right to challenge this Order, may violate this confidentiality by releasing, discussing or circulating this Order. Any person who violates the confidentiality of a Commission proceeding is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e). PJS /jc further declares that the people have a right to be assured that the financial interests of holders of or candidates for public office present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. Because public confidence in government can best be sustained by assuring the people of the impartiality and honesty of public officials, this act shall be liberally construed to promote complete disclosure. 65 P.S. 401. By the Commission, 64: Paul J/ Smith Chairm n November 1, 1983