Advisory Opinion No. 2009-37

Rhode Island Ethics Commission

Advisory Opinion No. 2009-37

Re: The Honorable Susan D. Menard

QUESTION PRESENTED

The Petitioner, the Mayor of the City of Woonsocket, a municipal elected official, requests an advisory opinion regarding whether she may purchase a used automobile that had formerly been leased by the City for her official use.

RESPONSE:

It is the opinion of the Rhode Island Ethics Commission that, based on the facts as represented, the Mayor of the City of Woonsocket may purchase a used automobile that had formerly been leased by the City for her official use.

The Petitioner is the Mayor of the City of Woonsocket ("the City").  She represents that for the past three years the City has leased a 2006 Buick LaCrosse automobile ("the automobile") from General Motors Acceptance Corporation ("GMAC") through a local dealer, Simon Chevrolet-Buick ("Simon") for the Petitioner's use in her official capacity as Mayor.  The Petitioner informs that the lease expired on June 19, 2009, the automobile was returned to Simon, and that she is now interested in personally purchasing the automobile for her private use. 

In her original letter requesting an advisory opinion, the Petitioner stated that the dealer had offered to sell her the automobile for Thirteen Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($13,800), a figure that the Petitioner described as being both "fair market value" and "the same as would be offered to any similarly situated member of the general public being given the option to purchase a motor vehicle following the expiration of a lease."  However, in a subsequent telephone conversation with Commission Staff, the Petitioner clarified that she was not being offered an end of lease purchase option.  Rather, the City had returned the automobile to Simon, who then purchased it from GMAC at auction and was now offering it for sale to the general public on its used car lot.  The Petitioner represents that Simon is not offering her any discount on the purchase of the automobile that is not available to any other member of the buying public.  Given these representations, the Petitioner asks if the Code of Ethics prohibits her from purchasing the automobile.

The Code of Ethics prohibits any public official or employee from having an interest, or engaging in any business or transaction, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of her duties in the public interest.  R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(a).  A public official may not use her position to obtain financial gain, other than that provided by law, for herself, a family member, her business associate or employer.  R.I. Gen. Laws § 36-14-5(d).

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 36-14-5009, public officials and employees are prohibited from accepting a gift, including any "special discount," valued at over twenty-five dollars ($25) from a person or business that has a direct financial interest in a decision that the official or employee is authorized to make as part of her official duties.   Commonly called the "gift regulation," Regulation 5009 reads, in pertinent part:

No person subject to the Code of Ethics, either directly or as the beneficiary of a gift or other thing of value given to a spouse or dependent child, shall accept or receive any gift(s) or other thing(s) having either a fair market value or actual cost greater than twenty-five dollars ($ 25), but in no case having either an aggregate fair market value or aggregate actual cost greater than seventy-five dollars ($ 75) in any calendar year including, but not limited to, gifts, loans, rewards, promises of future employment, favors or services, gratuities or special discounts, from a single interested person, as defined herein, without the interested person receiving lawful consideration of equal or greater value in return.

Commission Regulation 36-14-5009(b).

It is the opinion of the Ethics Commission that the Code of Ethics, including Regulation 5009, does not prohibit the Petitioner from purchasing the subject automobile from Simon based on the facts as represented by the Petitioner.  Even if we were to assume arguendo that Simon is an "interested person," in that the dealership has a financial interest in the City's decisions relative to the lease or purchase of vehicles for use by City employees and officials, the facts do not indicate that Simon is offering the Petitioner a gift or special discount on the automobile that is not available to others.  The Petitioner expressly states that the automobile is currently being offered for sale to the public, and that she will pay the same price that any other member of the buying public would pay.  Under such circumstances, this transaction appears to be one made in the regular course of business with the dealer receiving lawful consideration of equal or greater value in return.  Accordingly, based on all of the above it is the opinion of the Ethics Commission that the Code of Ethics does not prohibit the Petitioner from purchasing the subject automobile.

Code Citations :

36-14-5(a)

36-14-5(d)

Commission Regulation 36-14-5009

Keywords :

Gifts