Meetings
 
Agenda Item
Docket No. 14-265
 
Print
RE:
Advisory opinion request regarding whether the Quad Area Community Action Agency may accept $15,000 from Tangipahoa Parish at a time when Parish Councilman Ronnie Bankston is an employee.
Facts:
Mr. Sibley stated that the Quad Area Community Action Agency (Quad Area) is a non-profit community action agency serving seven parishes. Mr. Sibley has been assured by Councilman Bankston that he will not to vote on the budget if Quad Area is to receive funding from the Parish. Further, Councilman Bankston is a salaried employee of Quad Area and not an officer, director, trustee, or partner. Councilman Bankston is a part-time employee.

Mr. Bankston works 20 hours per week. Mr. Bankston's position is 100% compensated from a Community Services Block Grant and his salary will not be affected in any way if the Parish awards Quad Area the funding. Furthermore, there are no current contracts between Quad Area and Mr. Bankston or any company in which Mr. Bankston possesses a controlling interest.

Comments:
In docket number 1995-008, the Board found Mr. Bankston in violation of Sections 1111C(2)(d) and 1112B (3) &(5) of the Code. In 1995, Mr. Bankston was not only employed by Quad Area as "the Tangipahoa Parish Coordinator," he was also serving as a Tangipahoa Parish Councilman.

The Board determined that, Mr. Bankston voted on several occasions on the Parish budget which included an appropriation of Parish Funds to Quad Area in violation of 1112(3) &(5).

Mr. Bankston was found in violation of Section 1111C(2)(d) for receiving compensation from Quad Area at a time when Quad Area had a business or financial relationship with the Parish.

Mr. Bankston's company, Lounges, Inc. was found to be in violation of Section 1111C(2)(d) for providing compensated services to Quad Area while Quad Area had a financial relationship with the Parish. Lounges, Inc. was a company in which Mr. Bankston was a fifty percent owner. Lounges, Inc. leased three buildings to Quad Area in 1995. Mr. Bankston has since sold his interest in Lounges, Inc.

Mr. Bankston appealed the Board decision to the First Circuit based on the defense that Quad Area was not a "person" under the Code but rather a governmental entity. The First Circuit agreed and found no violation. The Board applied for Writs to the Louisiana Supreme Court which reversed the First Circuit decision and held that Quad Area was a "person" under the Code. Mr. Bankston and his company Lounges paid all fines associated with the prior case. Quad Area does not currently receive any funding from Tangipahoa Parish.


Mr. Sibley submitted this request with Mr. Bankston's knowledge and approval in advance of any potential violation seeking the Boards opinion.

Law:
La. R.S. 42:1111C(2)(d) prohibits a public servant or legal entity in which the public servant exercises control or owns an interest in excess of twenty five percent, from receiving any thing of economic value for services rendered to or for any person during his public service unless such services are neither performed for nor compensated by any person from whom such public servant would be prohibited by La. R.S. 42:1115(A)(1) or (B) from receiving a gift.

La. R.S. 42:1115A(1) prohibits a public servant from soliciting or accepting, directly or indirectly, any thing of economic value as a gift or gratuity from any person or from any officer, director, agent, or employee of such person, if such public servant knows or reasonably should know that such person has or is seeking to have a contractual, business or financial relationship with the public servant's agency.


La. R.S. 42:1112A states that no public servant, except as provided in R.S. 42:1120, shall participate in a transaction involving the governmental entity in which he has a personal substantial interest of which he may be reasonably expected to know involving the governmental entity.


La. R.S. 42:1112B(3) states that no public servant shall participate in a transaction involving the governmental entity in which, to his actual knowledge, any person of which he is an officer, director, trustee, partner, or employee has a substantial economic interest.

La. R.S. 42:1112B(5) states that any person who is a party to an existing contract with such public servant, or with any legal entity in which the public servant exercises control or owns an interest of over twenty five percent, or who owes any thing of economic interest to such public servant or with any legal entity in which the public servant exercises control or owns an interest of over twenty five percent, and who by reason thereof is in a position to affect directly the economic interest of such public servant.

Advisory Opinion 82-02-D provides a limited exception to the prohibition contained in La. R.S. 42:1111C(2)(d). That opinion makes La. R.S. 42:1111C(2)d) inapplicable to public servants who meet all of the following criteria: 1) the public servant must be regularly compensated by the non-governmental employer pursuant to a uniform standard (i.e., a salaried or wage-earning employee), 2) the salary of the public servant is unaffected by the business relationship between the non-governmental employer and the agency of the public servant, 3) the public servant owns less than a controlling interest in the non-governmental employer, and 4) the public servant is neither an officer, director, trustee or partner in the non-governmental employer.


La. R.S. 42:1120 provides that any elected official, who is required to vote on a matter in violation of La. R.S. 42:1112, must recuse himself from voting. The elected official is not prohibited from participating in discussion and debate concerning the matter provided that he verbally discloses the nature of the conflict or potential conflict during his participation in the discussion or debate prior to any vote being taken.

Recommendations:
Adopt the proposed advisory opinion.




Assigned Attorney: Suzanne Mooney
 
 
ATTACHMENTS:
Description:
2014-265: Advisory Opinion Request
2012-458:
1995-008 Opinion
2014-265- Additional Information
2014-265- Draft Opinion (2)