HomeMy WebLinkAbout444 ClarkMr. William S. Clark
237 East Sheridan Avenue
DuBois, PA 15801
Re: 84 -166 -C
Dear Mr. Clark:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
December 6, 1985
Order No. 444
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, a member of the DuBois Area School Board, voted to
award contracts to, and the district contracted with Hallstrom Construction
Co. (where your wife is a stockholder) to provide goods and services without
engaging in an open and puhlic process in violation of Section 3(c) of the
Ethics Act.
A. Findings:'.
1. You have servedas a Director on the nuRois Area School Board since at
least 1979. As an elected official you are subject to the provisions of the
Ethics Act.
2. Hallstrom Construction Company, located in DuBois, PA, has been involved
in the building proSrams of the DuBois Area Schools dating hack to the late
1960's.
3. Records of the Corporation Bureau confirm the following information:
a. Corporation papers were filed for Hallstrom Construction Company,
P.O. Box 585, 109 N. Brady Street, DuBois, PA, 15801 on Octoher 20,
1978.
h. 500,000 shares of common stock valued at 51.00 per share were issued.
c. Incorporators listed:
A.R. Hallstrom, Kiwanis Trail, DuBois, PA, 15801
Jane Kring, 15234 Luzerne Street, Ext., Johnston, PA.
Vernon fuckworth, R. D. Grampian, PA.
Mr. William S. Clark
Page 2
N. Teplica, 424 Washington Street, Saltsburg, PA.
Cary Vetro, 28 Lincoln Drive, DuBois, PA.
Robert Hallstrom, 28 Lincoln Drive, DuBois, PA.
December 6, 1985
d. Address change to Kiwanis Trail , DuBois, PA., on May 13, 1982.
4. Your wife is not listed as stockholder in Hallstrom Construction Company.
a. This has been confirmed by interviews with officials of Hallstrom
Construction Company.
b. Your wife's father was an original owner of Hal lstrom Construction
but he divested himself of his interest before 1978.
5. No evidence has been developed that either you or your wife are
shareholders in Hallstrom Construction Company.
B. Discussion: As a School Director for the DuBois Area School District you
are a public official as that term is defined in the State Ethics Act. 65
P.S. X402; See Snider v. Thornburgh, 469 Pa. 159, 436 A.2d 593, (1981).
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(c) No public official or public employee or a member of
his immediate family or any business in which the person
or a member of the person's immediate family is a
director, officer, owner or holder of stock exceeding 5%
of the equity at fair market value of the business shall
enter into any contract valued at $500 or more with a
governmental body 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. Any contract made in
violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court
of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within
90 days of making of the contract. 65 P.S. 403(c).
Neither you nor your wife are a director, officer, owner, or holder of stock
exceeding 5% of the company equity. While your wife's father was an original
owner of Hallstrom Construction, he relinquished his interest in this business
prior to the time that you became a school director. There is no evidence
that either you or your wife received any interest in this company. As a
result, we find no violation of Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act.
C. Conclusion: You did not violate Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act where
neither you or your wife are an officer, director or stockholder in a
construction company that contracts with the school district where you serve
as a school director.
Mr. William S. Clark
Page 3
II. Allegation: That you, a member of the DuBois Area School Board, violated
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act by voting to award contracts and pay bills of
Hallstrom Construction Company where you are an employee and where your wife
is a stockholder.
A. Fi ndi ngs :
6. You are a union electrician working from local #5 of the International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
a. You have been employed as an electrical foreman assigned to Hallstrom
Construction projects.
b. Your employment began prior to your election to the DuBois Area
School Board.
c. Hallstrom Construction Company officials confirm that the company
hires only union employees and that you have been one of those
employees. You have worked exclusively for Hallstrom projects.
7. The DuBois Area School District makes purchases from Hallstrom
Construction Company on a regular basis for electrical supplies, steel
products and labor.
8. Minutes of school board meetings confirm you voted to pay the following
bills on the fo l i owi ng dates:
flay 7, 1981 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
Hay 28, 1981 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
June 25, 1981 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
September 24, 1981 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
January 28, 1982 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
March 24, 1982 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
May 27, 1982 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
June 29, 1982 - 0621 Hallstrom Const.
0650 Hallstrom Const.
0621 Hallstrom Const.
August 5, 1982 - 0621 Hallstrom Const.
- Contracted Serv. /Opr. $ 92.56
- Contracted Serv. /Opr. $ 705.00
- Quote $ 8.50
- Wasson School
Sykesville quote
- Contracted Serv. /Opr.
- Contracted Serv. /Opr.
- Contracted Serv. /Opr.
- Opr.& Maint. Sup.
- Contracted Serv. /Opr.
- Opr.& Maint. Sup.
- Opr. R Maint. Sup.
Carpeting, Sr. High
School
Decemher 6, 1985
$ 249.94
$1,044.00
$ 2.2.6.32
$ 276.32
$ 414.52
$ 100.00
$ 265.07
$1 ,428.50
$3,675.60
Mr. William S. Clark
Page 4
September 23, 1982 - 0621 Hallstrom Const.
0650 Hallstrom Const.
December 2, 1982 - 0650 Hallstrom Const.
April 28, 1983 - 0621-22671 Hallstrom Const. - Opr. & Maint./
Sup. (steel rib
paneling)
June 23, 1983 - 0621 Hallstrom Constr. - Opr. & Maint. /Sup.
23439 (steel rib
paneling)
August 30, 1983 -
February 2.4, 1983 - 0650 -22153 Hallstrom Const. - Contr. Serv. /Opr.
May 24, 1984 -
June 28, 1984 -
October 4, 1984 -
- Opr. & Maint. Sup.
- Contr. Serv. /Opr.
- Contr. Serv. /Opr.
Decemher 6, 1985
$3,742.88
$1,977.08
$ 39.68
$3,740.74
$5,453.74
$5,104.08
0650 Hallstrom Electric - Contr. Serv. /Opr. 248 $ 92.60
February 2, 1984 - 062.1 Hallstrom Const. for - Opr. & Maint. /Sup. $ 531.95
Hallstrom Electric. 1691
0650 Hallstrom Const. for - Contr. Serv. /Opr.
Hallstrom Elec.
March 27, 1984 - 0650 Hallstrom Const. for - Contr. Serv. /Opr.
Hallstrom Electric
0621 Hallstrom Const. - Material De.
0621 Hallstrom Const. - Electrical
0621 Hallstrom Const. - Opr. /Maint.
December 4, 1984 - 01 -2600 Hallstrom Constr. - Hallstrom Elec.
Statement
$ 100.63
$1,648.53
$ 27.56
$ 79.92
$ 182.46
$ 201.30
4. Purchases of goods and supplies made from Hallstrom are the result quotes
sought by the maintenance superintendent of the DuBois Area Schools. He has
the authority to get quotes and commit the district to expenditures for these
purchases.
5. The school board also sought bids for a steel purchase on October 2.6,
1982. You ahstained from voting to approve the Hallstrom hid on December 2,
1982.
6. The maintenance superintendent advises that the only hill related to your
employment would have been the bill in the amount of 53,740.74 approved at the
February 24, 1983 meeting.
Mr. . William S. Clark
Page 5
a. The actual date of service was January 18, 1983 and was for
electrical maintenance and repairs.
b. 52,470 of that bill was for repairs made by you to the lighting panel
in the high school auditorium.
1. You were assigned to that project because you are the Hallstrom
electrician most familiar with the system. You originally installed the
system prior to your term as a school director.
c. The remainder of the bill was for use of the Hallstrom stage -lift and
your labor to replace mercury -vapor lighting.
7. You have worked on a number of Hallstrom projects not related to the
DuBois Area School District. You state that your income or employment status
is not dependent upon the DuBois School District contracts with Hallstrom
Construction.
a. DuBois School District provides only a small part of Hallstrom
Construction Company's total business.
B. Discussion:
The Ethics Act provides that:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(a) 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 husiness with which
he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a).
Business with which one is associated is defined as follows:
Section 2. fefinitions.
"Business with which he is associated." Any husiness in
which the person or a member of the person's immediate
family is a director, officer, owner, employee or holder
of stock. 65 P.S. 402.
flecemher 6, 1985
There is no doubt that as an employee of Hallstrom Construction you were
associated with the business and you may not, therefore, use your public
position to obtain any financial gain for that company.
tie must review the instant matter from two distinct positions regarding
any action by you to award husiness to this company as well as your vote to
pay hills for completed work and purchases.
Mr. William S. Clark
Page 6
December 6, 1985
The evidence indicates that during your term as a school director, the
board only reviewed, voted upon and awarded one contract to Hallstrom
Construction. This occurred on December 2, 1982 and the minutes of the board
meeting reflect that you abstained from voting on this matter. We note that
this particular action by the board was a purchase of goods rather than the
acquisition of services. You did not perform any work with relation to this
purchase and, therefore, you did not receive any financial gain as a result
thereof.
We do note that the Ethics Act prohibits the receipt of financial gain
through the use of public office other than the compensation provided by law.
The Public School Code generally prohibits a director from transacting
business with the school district. 24 P.S. .53 -324. Additionally, even where
that code allows a director to have an interest in a contract, certain
disclosure requirements must be met in order for the gain to be "provided for
by law." 24 P.S. §7-751(e).
Based upon the foregoing, we have determined that you took no action as a
director regarding the award of any contract to Hallstrom or initiating the
purchases of goods therefrom.
We now turn to your approval to pay bills relating to these purchases.
Generally, you had no direct personal or financial interest in these
purchases. You did not and were not to receive any part of this money.
Abstention is usually required when the financial interests of the official
are direct, "immedi ate and particular. See Krier, 84 -002; Reckner v. School
Disctict of German Township, 341 Pa. 375, 19 A.'l_d 402, (1941). As such, we
have previously determined that school directors may vote upon routine
payments of bills which are not in dispute or which are obligated under
contract. Stewart, 79 -070. None of the bills in question were in dispute or
contested and you were not involved in the award or initiation of these items.
We, thus, find no violation of the Ethics Act.
We must note that the intent of the Ethics Act is to insure that the
financial interests of public officials neither conflict nor appear to
conflict with the public trust. 65 P.S. §
In the instant situation you voted to approve a bill on February 24, 1983
in the amount of $3,740.74. This bill related to work performed by Hallstrom
to the lighting panel in the auditorium. You performed this work for
Hallstrom and were ccmpens ated therefor. We believe that in the instant
situation, you should have abstained on the approval of this particular bill.
Such action would effectively insure that the intent of the Ethics Act was
implemented. Public officials must be sensitive to the public perceptions
created by their activities and act so as to create public trust rather than
mi strust.
Mr. William S. Clark
Page 7
C. Conclusion: You did not violate the State Ethics Act when you voted to
approve the payment of routine uncontested bills submited by a construction
company for which you performed electrical services. You did not vote on or
approve the award of any contract to that company.
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 thicTirce , 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 S1,000 or imprisoned
for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e).
By the Commission
erber- B. Conner
Chai rman
December 6, 1985