Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1405 GouldIn Re: John Gould, Respondent File Docket: 05 -042 X -ref: Order No. 1405 Date Decided: 6/23/06 Date Mailed: 6/30/06 Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair John J. Bolger, Vice Chair Donald M. McCurdy Paul M. Henry Raquel K. Bergen Nicholas A. Colafella This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission. Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. § 401 et seq., as codified by Act 93 of 1998, Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was not filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter 11 of Act 93 of 1998, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., which essentially repeats Act 9 of 1989 and provides for the completion of pending matters under Act 93 of 1998. This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission is issued under Act 93 of 1998 and will be made available as a public document thirty days after the mailing date noted above. However, reconsideration may be requested. Any reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within thirty days of the mailing date and must include a detailed explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code § 21.29(b). A request for reconsideration will not affect the finality of this adjudication but will defer its public release pending action on the request by the Commission. The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Chapter 11 of Act 93 of 1998. 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. Confidentiality does not preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law. Gould, 05 -042 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That John Gould, a (public official /public employee) in his capacity as Superintendent of Schools of the Morrisville School District, Bucks County, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his office for a private pecuniary gain, including but not limited to submitting expenses for reimbursement by the school district for travel related to his outside business interests as a consultant for Classroom Connect. II. FINDINGS: 1. The Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission received a signed, sworn complaint alleging that John Gould violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998). 2. Upon review of the complaint the Investigative Division initiated a preliminary inquiry on September 29, 2005. 3. The preliminary inquiry was completed within sixty days. 4. On November 23, 2005, a letter was forwarded to John Gould, by the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission informing him that a complaint against him was received by the Investigative Division and that a full investigation was being commenced. a. Said letter was forwarded by certified mail, no. 7004 0750 0002 8074 7353. b. The domestic return receipt bore the signature of John Gould, with a delivery date of November 25, 2005. 5. Periodic notice letters were forwarded to John Gould in accordance with the provisions of the Ethics Law advising him of the general status of the investigation. 6. The Investigative Complaint was mailed to the Respondent on May 8, 2006. 7 John Gould served as the Superintendent of the Morrisville Borough School District from July 1, 1998 until approximately July 7, 2004. a. Gould's prior work experience included serving as the Curriculum Director for the Montgomery County IU, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum for the Norristown School District and involvement with the Shared Vision portion for the Commonwealth's Link to Learn program for the Governor's office under the Ridge Administration. b. The main purpose of the Shared Vision portion of the Link to Learn Program was to advocate and assist in the acquisition of computers for School districts. 1. Gould performed this function prior to working for the Morrisville Borough School District. c. Could [sic] currently is employed as the Superintendent of the Northwestern Lehigh School District. 8. Gould had an employment contract with the Morrisville Borough School District covering the period July 1, 1998 through June 30, 2003. Gould, 05 -042 Page 3 a. Gould's employment contract included language on leave accrual and professional development. 9. Gould's employment contract with the district provided him with district paid educational travel expense reimbursement up to $1,800 per school year. a. This benefit is contained in Article IV, Section F of the contract. b. Specific contract language is as follows: The duties of the employee require his presence at numerous meetings, conventions and conferences in order that he can maintain awareness of current program problems and information. His attendance at seminars, workshops, in- service programs, school activities and graduate education programs is necessary to maintain the knowledge and skills required of his position. The employer considers the expenses involved in such activities to be directly related to his duties and appropriate for reimbursement. Expense reimbursement for such activities shall be paid in accordance with procedures described in the applicable school district policy, but in no event shall said reimbursement exceed $1,800 in any school year." 10. Gould's continuing education travel was not required to be submitted to the Morrisville Borough School Board for approval. a. Gould would record leave used as professional leave on his official district leave records when traveling for continuing education. 11. Travel expense reimbursements for the Superintendent are handled by way of a standard district travel reimbursement form. a. Travel reimbursement forms include line items for the date of travel, destination, purpose, and number of miles. b. Travel reimbursement forms require the employee's signature certifying that the information is true and correct. c. The district's business manager is also required to sign the reimbursement form. 12. Classroom Connect 8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 400, Brisbane, CA 94005 was a company whose purpose was to sponsor "conferences (to) bring prominent educators and renowned thinkers together to discuss how technology and the internet can be integrated into instruction and to coach educators in the use of technology in the classroom." a. Classroom Connect had been holding conferences throughout the country between approximately 1994 and April 2004. b. During that period approximately eleven (11) conferences were held throughout the country. c. Classroom Connect conferences offered keynote speakers, general sessions, hands -on labs and special pre- conference sessions relating to integrating technology into the classroom. 13. Gould has been involved with Classroom Connect since approximately 2000. Gould, 05 -042 Page 4 a. Gould was employed as the Superintendent of the Morrisville Borough School District on a full -time basis while performing services for Classroom Connect. b. Gould's involvement with Classroom Connect included serving as a consultant, participating in leadership workshops and giving Keynote addresses. c. Gould came to be involved with Classroom Connect as a result of interaction he had with Rem Jackson of Classroom Connect as part of the Commonwealth's Link to Learn project. d. Gould's involvement with Classroom Connect did not conflict with his responsibilities to the Morrisville Borough School District. 14. Classroom Connect utilized Gould's knowledge of integrating technology into the classroom. a. Gould's knowledge in this area was a result of his involvement with the Link to Learn project for the Commonwealth. 1. This predated Gould's employment with the Morrisville Borough School District. 15. Rem Jackson served as the Vice - President of Professional Development for Classroom Connect. a. Jackson was responsible for identifying and selecting speakers /presenters to appear during Classroom Connect seminars. b. Speakers used by Classroom Connect were hired by Jackson as independent contractors. c. Daily compensation for contractors was determined based on an individual's experience, knowledge and qualifications. d. Jackson would enter into a contractual relationship with speakers used for Classroom Connect seminars. e. Classroom Connect issued 1099 miscellaneous income forms on an annual basis to those individuals who provided contractual services for them. 16. Classroom Connect's compensation to Gould for his services depended upon the nature of the services provided. a. Gould was compensated at a contractual rate of at least $800 per day. b. Gould's compensation was consistent with other speakers used by Classroom Connect. c. Gould was annually provided with a 1099 miscellaneous income form documenting income received from Classroom Connect. 17. Gould was compensated by Classroom Connect for his attendance at a conference held in Long Beach California, November 6 -9, 2000. Gould, 05 -042 Page 5 a. Gould received compensation totaling $5,512.86 from Classroom Connect for his attendance at three (3) conventions during 2000 including the November 6 -9, 2000 conference. b. Classroom Connect records do not break out fees paid per event paid in 2000. c. Gould received at least $800.00 per Classroom Connect convention where he appeared as a speaker. 18. Leave records maintained by the Morrisville Borough School District confirm that Gould utilized annual leave on all dates he performed services for Classroom Connect during the November 6 -9, 2000 conference as noted below: a. Day Leave Used Monday, November 6, 2000 Vacation Tuesday, November 7, 2000 Vacation Wednesday, November 8, 2000 Vacation Thursday, November 9, 2000 Vacation 19. Gould submitted a travel expense reimbursement form to Business Manager Victor Orlando for payment on or about November 20, 2000. a. This reimbursement request was in the amount of $1,156.26 and was for a Classroom Connect Conference November 6 to 12 (2000). This request included the following itemized breakdown of expenses. 11 -6 to 11 -12 Classroom Connect Conference New Holland - San Diego - Anaheim, CA Airfare $ 750.00 Car Rental $ 205.86 Hotel $ 119.00 Meal $ 51.40 Airport Shuttle $ 30.00 $1,156.26 20. Gould's reimbursement request was signed by Orlando on November 20, 2000 and Gould on November 20, 2000. a. Orlando's signature on the request meant that all supporting receipts for the trip were submitted. b. Orlando as business manager was a subordinate employee to Gould. c. Orlando did not have the authority to question Gould's expenses provided that proper supporting documentation was provided. 21. Gould did not seek reimbursement for all expenses associated with this trip. a. Receipts attached to his reimbursement form show the following total expenses compared to those amounts Gould sought reimbursement for. Expense Actual Amount Amount reimbursed Alamo Car Rental $ 221.50 $ 205.86 Radisson Hotel (1 night) $ 131.50 $ 119.00 Airport Shuttle $ 30.00 $ 30.00 Delta Airlines $1,230.00 $ 750.00 Gould, 05 -042 Page 6 Blue Point (meal) $ 51.40 $ 51.40 $1,664.40 $1,156.26 b. Gould's actual receipts were $508.14 more than he was reimbursed for. c. Gould did not submit receipts for meals or lodging beyond those identified above. d. Gould was reimbursed by District check number 16892 in the amount of $1,156.26 issued on December 14, 2000. 22. Gould was entitled to educational travel reimbursement of up to $1,800 per school year per his employment contract. a. b. c. d. Gould had two (2) education travel reimbursements during the 2000 -01 school year. Gould received a reimbursement payment in the amount of $636.00 approved by the board on September 27, 2000. Gould's $1,156.26 reimbursement detailed above was approved by the board on December 13, 2000. Both reimbursements combined totaled $1,792.26. 23. Gould's reimbursements received of $1,792.26 during the 2000 -01 school year were $7.74 less than he was entitled to per conditions of his employment contract. 24. Both reimbursements Gould received during the 2000 -01 school year were approved by the Morrisville School Board. a. Gould's reimbursements were included on monthly bill lists. b. Bill lists are voted on in their entirety by a single motion. 25. Gould's reimbursement from the school district partially covered expenses incurred to attend the Classroom Connect conference. a. Gould separately received compensation from Classroom Connect to serve as a speaker at the same convention. b. Gould did not seek reimbursement for all of his meal and lodging expenses. 26. Gould did not disclose Classroom Connect as a source of income received in excess of $1,300 on his Statements of Financial Interests form filed on April 2, 2001 for calendar year 2000. a. Gould filed an amended SFI for calendar year 2000 with the State Ethics Commission on July 1, 2004 which included Classroom Connect as a source of income. 27. Gould received a travel expense reimbursement in the amount of $1,156.26 from the Morrisville Borough School District to attend a Classroom Connect seminar, November 6 -9, 2000 in California. a. Gould attended the conference as both an attendee and a presenter. Gould, 05 -042 Page 7 b. Gould received compensation from Classroom Connect of at least $800.00 to speak during the conference. b. Gould did not claim for reimbursement from the district all expenses incurred on the trip due to his participation as a presenter on one of the days of the conference. III. DISCUSSION: At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, John Gould (Gould), has been a public employee subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law 26, 65 P.S. § 401 et seq., as codified by the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 93 of 1998, Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., which Acts are referred to herein as the "Ethics Act." The allegations are that John Gould, as Superintendent of Schools of the Morrisville School District, Bucks County, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his office for a private pecuniary gain, in submitting and receiving expense reimbursement by the school district for travel related to his outside business interests as a consultant for Classroom Connect. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act quoted above, a public official /public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. The term "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 9 of 1989/Act 93 of 1998 as follows: Section 1102. 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. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official /public employee 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. Having noted the issues and applicable law, we shall now summarize the relevant facts. Given that Gould did not file an Answer to the Investigative Complaint, we again note that the averments are now admitted as Findings of Fact. Gould, 05 -042 Page 8 Gould, who is currently the Superintendent of the Northwestern Lehigh School District, was the Superintendent of the Morrisville Borough School District (MBSD) from July 1, 1998 to July 7, 2004. While employed by MBSD, Gould's employment contract provided for educational travel expense reimbursements up to $1,800 per school year. A condition for reimbursement was that Gould's duties required his presence at meetings, conventions, conferences, to maintain his awareness of current program problems and information; and at seminars, workshops, in- service programs, school activities and graduate education programs to maintain his knowledge and skills required of his position. Because Gould's MBSD related travel was not required to be submitted to the Board for approval, he could record the leave as professional travel and submit a Travel Expense Reimbursement (TEV). In a private capacity, Gould has an association with Classroom Connect, a company that sponsors "conferences (to) bring prominent educators and renowned thinkers together to discuss how technology and the internet can be integrated into instruction and to coach educators in the use of technology in the classroom." See, Fact Finding 12. Since approximately 2000, Gould has served as a consultant, participated in leadership programs and made keynote addresses for Classroom Connect. Such activities did not conflict with his duties with MBSD. Classroom Connect utilized Gould because of his knowledge on the subject of integrating technology into classrooms. Classroom Connect compensated Gould for the services that he provided. Gould typically received compensation at a contractual rate of $800 per day. Gould also received at least $800 when he appeared as a convention speaker for Classroom Connect. In November 2000, Gould attended a three day conference in Long Beach, California, sponsored by Classroom Connect and received $5,512.86 for his attendance. Gould utilized annual leave from MBSD to attend that conference. Upon Gould's return, he submitted a TEV in the amount of $1,156.26 for the conference that was signed by the MBSD Business Manager, a subordinate employee to Gould. Although Gould's travel expenses for the trip totaled $1,664.40, he submitted a TEV for $1,156.26, which was $508.14 less than his actual receipts. In that Gould was entitled to educational travel reimbursement up to $1,800 per school year, a prior TEV in the amount of $636 plus the $1,156.26 for the Classroom Connect convention brought his total expenses for that year to $1,792.26. Both of those TEVs were approved by the MBSD Board as part of monthly bill lists that were voted on in their entirety by a single motion. As to the November 2000 Classroom Connect conference, Gould's reimbursement from the MBSD covered only part of his expenses. Gould received compensation from Classroom Connect to serve as a speaker at the convention but he attended the conference as both an attendee and presenter. Of the compensation that Gould received from Classroom Connect for that convention, at least $800 was paid to him as a speaker at the conference. Having summarized the above relevant facts, we must now determine whether the actions of Gould violated Section 1103(a) of Act 9 of 1989. In applying Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the above Fact Findings, there were uses of authority of office on the part of Gould. But for the fact that Gould was MBSD School Superintendent, he would not have been in a position to attend the November 2000 conference of Classroom Connect. In so doing, Gould was able to submit a TEV in the amount of $1,156.26 to the MBSD for partial reimbursement of his travel expenses. In this regard, Gould's contract with the MBSD allowed for a reimbursement up to a maximum of $1,800 per school year for requisite attendance at meetings, conventions and conferences vis -a -vis duties that related to his position as Superintendent. Gould's actions of attending Gould, 05 -042 Page 9 the Classroom Connect convention and submitting for partial reimbursement on his TEV were uses of authority of office. See, Juliante, Order 809. The actions of Gould resulted in a pecuniary benefit to him in the amount of $1,156.26. The receipt of that reimbursement by Gould was a financial gain to him in that he did not have any out of pocket expenses to the extent that the MBSD partially reimbursed him for his travel expenses to the Classroom Connect conference. The question now becomes whether that financial gain was authorized in law. If the financial gain were not authorized, it would be compensation other than provided for by law and a private pecuniary benefit contrary to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. However, if the financial gain were authorized, then it would not be a private pecuniary benefit and as such would be consonant with Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. From the Findings, it is established that Gould may travel for work related duties and receive reimbursement up to $1,800 per school year as the MBSD Superintendent. However, any travel by Gould that would not be encompassed within his duties as MBSD's Superintendent would be in the nature of private business endeavors and would not be subject to reimbursement. In this case, Gould has a business relationship with Classroom Connect where he has acted as a consultant or speaker at its events. As to the November 2000 conference by Classroom Connect, Gould attended both as a speaker and as an attendee. Thus, different arguments could be made as to Gould's trip: that he attended the Classroom Connect convention pursuant to his business relationship with that company, that he attended as part of his duties as MBSD Superintendent or that he attended for both of those reasons. In that we are limited to finding violations of the Ethics Act in only those cases where there is clear and convincing proof, we do not believe that it is definitively established in the record before us that Gould received an unauthorized financial gain. Given the fact that Gould was an attendee as well as speaker and given the fact that he only submitted for partial reimbursement of expenses on his TEV, we must conclude that Gould did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act regarding the partial reimbursement of expenses by the School District for travel to a Classroom Connect convention based upon the lack of clear and convincing proof. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. John Gould (Gould), while Superintendent of Schools of the Morrisville Borough School District (MBSD), Bucks County, was a public employee subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989 as codified by Act 93 of 1998. 2. Gould did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act regarding the partial reimbursement of expenses by the School District for travel to a Classroom Connect convention based upon the lack of clear and convincing proof. In Re: John Gould, Respondent ORDER NO. 1405 File Docket: 05 -042 Date Decided: 6/23/06 Date Mailed: 6/30/06 1. John Gould, while Superintendent of Schools of the Morrisville Borough School District, Bucks County, did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act regarding the partial reimbursement of expenses by the School District for travel to a Classroom Connect convention based upon the lack of clear and convincing proof. BY THE COMMISSION, Louis W. Fryman, Chair