|
November 17, 2011, School Law Bullet Number 78
Alarm Raised Over Rumored Auditor General Ban on Board Food
By: and
Alarms have sounded over rumors that the Pennsylvania Auditor General (“AG”) has made food illegal at board meetings. A Special Investigation Report of the Reading Area School District was drafted by the AG in October 2011. The following memorandum will address the legality and implications of the AG’s findings and conclusions regarding the provision of meals for school board meetings, administrative meetings, and social events.
Summary of the Report
At this time, the AG’s office has not released the October 2011 report and does not consider any of the findings or conclusions of the report to be final or immediately enforceable. To the AG’s dismay, the report became available to the public via an article in the Reading Eagle, which can be found at the following link: http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=34360.
The AG’s office maintains that the draft opinion attached to this link was inappropriately “leaked” to the Reading Eagle. The AG’s report is, therefore, only valuable for its indication of how the AG interprets the School Code and school districts’ accounting responsibilities, particularly with respect to school board spending.
1. Allegations
The AG’s report was initiated by FBI reports made during an ongoing criminal investigation of the Reading School District. The report contained the following two allegations against the district: (1) The administration used the Food Service Department to “lavishly cater meetings…and other events at a significant cost to the taxpayers”; and (2) The Superintendent used the district credit card for personal expenditures and to purchase meals from outside catering vendors.
2. Findings
In his preliminary draft opinion, the AG found that the Reading School District’s Superintendent was using public funds for, among other things, a meal at Applebee’s restaurant totaling $309.37 and Arner’s Restaurant totaling $193.49, shopping at Boscov’s totaling $2,628.28, and MAYO Classic Catering totaling $18,416.85. The AG particularly noted the lavished nature of the menus for meetings, including one dinner menu in particular that included salad, entrees, sides, and desserts. Also, the Reading Food Services Department catered board meeting and social events with “jumbo lump crabmeat.” In a span of 3 ½ years, the Reading School Board spend $76,000 on catered meals.
In his preliminary draft opinion, the AG made two findings with corresponding conclusions.
Finding #1: The Superintendent and other high-ranking Reading School District officials used the district’s Food Service Department and commercial caterers to provide over $76,000 of catered meals for the school board meetings, administrative meetings, and social evenings. This spending was considered “wasteful and abusive of taxpayer funds.”
Conclusion:
• According to the AG, catered meals at board meetings are not necessary because board members can eat before or after the meeting or bring their own meals to the meeting.
• The opinion does not speak to the reasonable meals provided for extended meetings.
Finding #2: The extravagant meals were hidden from public knowledge via posting the expenditures as supplies rather than purchases.
Conclusion:
• The AG believed that the district’s business manager knowingly concealed the extravagant meals from public disclosure via categorizing the expense as “supplies.”
• The Superintendent failed to exercise due diligence to ensure that the expenditures from the district’s general funds were accurately reflected on the Annual Financial Report
Bottom Line for Districts
At this time, the contents of the report are only preliminary and have not been released to the public. This analysis is based upon a preliminary draft report that is not in effect at this time, according to the AG’s office.
This preliminary report pertains to unreasonable and unnecessary meals that cost in excess of $76,000, many of which were provided socially and utilizing outside catering. It is our opinion that, pursuant to the School Code, schools are permitted to provide reasonable meals that are necessary to sustain school board members and other administrators during extended meetings.
Even in the preliminary report, there is nothing that would contradict the legality of reasonable meals being provided at extended school board meeting out of necessity to sustain board members and administrators. As acknowledged by the AG in his report, the School Code requires school board members to hold regular meetings. 24 P.S. § 4-421; see also 24 P.S. § 3-319. Under the long-standing common law principle that applies to political subdivisions (including school districts), sometimes called the “Rule in Dillon’s Case,” political subdivisions have only the express powers they are granted by statute and those powers that are reasonably necessary to carry out those express powers.
For voluntary board members who may be coming from a full day of work to a 4 to 6 hour night meeting, a sandwich and a cup of soup is a reasonable expense. “Jumbo lump crabmeat”—not so much! Therefore, it is necessary and, thus, impliedly authorized by the School Code to provide reasonable meals during more extended meetings when such meals are necessary for the health and reasonable comfort of those in attendance. See 24 P.S. § 2-211 (school districts are authorized with all powers necessary to enable them to carry out the provisions of this act).
If you have any questions regarding this issue, contact your legal counsel or the Education attorneys of KingSpry.
* This School Law Bullet is meant to be informational and does not constitute legal advice.
|
