Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3rd Qtr 2009 INDEX State Ethics Commission Quarterly Rulings for Third Quarter 2009 ADVICES (Ethics): 09-562 Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon an A, who in a private capacity is employed as a licensed [type of professional] with a [type of firm], with regard to participating in or voting on matters pertaining to appeals by citizen group(s) from the [type of municipality]’s approval of a land developer’s subdivision plans, requests by the developer for modification of its subdivision plans, or the repeal of an amendment to a joint municipal zoning ordinance which increased the density of development permitted for the land at issue, when: (1) the developer is partnered with a home builder to develop some building lots covered by the developer’s subdivision plans; and (2) the home builder is a former client of a former employer of the A. 09-563: Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon employment of an A following termination of employment with Commonwealth Agency B. 09-564: (Williams): Re: Whether as a Member and Vice Chair of the Board of the Capital Resource Conservation and Development Area Council, Inc., you would be considered a “public official” subject to the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., and the Regulations of the State Ethics Commission, and particularly, the requirements for filing Statements of Financial Interests. 09-565 (Kearney): Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon a district attorney with regard to hiring his son for the position of assistant district attorney. - 1 - 09-566: Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would present any prohibitions or restrictions upon you as a County A (“County”) Council Member with regard to participating in matters before County Council pertaining to bond issues for construction/renovation costs for two County projects, where a [type of firm] with which you are employed might bid on the construction/renovation proposals for such County projects. 09-567 (Hiscott): Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon a township supervisor with regard to participating in matter(s) before the township board of supervisors involving an individual and entities owned by or affiliated with the individual where: (1) the township supervisor filed a defamation lawsuit against multiple defendants, including the individual and an entity owned by or affiliated with the individual; (2) the township supervisor entered into a settlement agreement that resolved the lawsuit; and (3) the settlement agreement contains a confidentiality clause. 09-568 (Soubik): Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon a Human Resource Analyst 4 in the Governor’s Office of Administration with regard to simultaneously serving as a non-compensated Member of the Pennsylvania State Board of Massage Therapy. 09-569 (Wonderling): Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon employment of a Senator following termination of service with the Pennsylvania Senate. 09-570: Re: Whether a salaried solicitor to a [political subdivision] A would be considered a “public employee” subject to the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., where the solicitor does not receive employee health insurance or holiday pay, sick pay, or vacation pay from the [political subdivision], but the [political subdivision] makes deductions from the solicitor’s pay - 2 - for withholding and matches FICA and Medicare contributions; and if so, whether the Ethics Act would impose any prohibitions or restrictions upon the solicitor with regard to contracting with the A to provide legal services as to the A’s Bs, where the fees for the proposed legal services would be billed by the A as costs to persons involved in the B process; and whether, upon resigning from the aforesaid position, the former solicitor would be permitted to immediately enter into a contract with the office of the [political subdivision] A to provide legal services as to the A’s Bs. 09-571 (Bartkovsky): Re: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose any restrictions upon employment of a Construction Documentation Specialist following termination of service with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”). 09-572 (Gabriel): Re: Whether Ms. Sparacino, in her capacity as a School Psychologist with the New Castle Area School District, would be considered a "public employee" subject to the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (the “Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., and the Regulations of the State Ethics Commission, and particularly, the requirements for filing Statements of Financial Interests. OPINIONS (Ethics): 09-003 (Stafford): Re: Whether an individual employed by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”) as a probationary Transportation Construction Inspector under job code 10620 would, upon termination of service with PennDOT, be subject to the restrictions of Section 1103(g) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(g), pertaining to former public officials/public employees. 09-004 (Duncavage): Re: Whether an individual employed as an Administrative Specialist 2 with the City of Philadelphia under job class specification 2L17 would be considered a “public employee” subject to the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., and the Regulations of the State Ethics Commission, and in particular, the - 3 - requirements for filing Statements of Financial Interests pursuant to the Ethics Act. 09-005 (Morford): Re: Given the restrictions of the Charter School Law at 24 P.S. § 17-1715-A(12), which prohibit an administrator for a charter school from receiving compensation from another charter school or from a company that provides management or other services to another charter school, whether Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), would prohibit the Chief Executive Officer of a charter school from simultaneously serving for compensation as the part- time Interim Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools. 09-006: Re: Whether, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), a Member of the [Chamber of the General Assembly] (“State Legislator”) would have a conflict of interest with respect to the posting of a legislative video of the State Legislator on the Internet website “YouTube” where: (1) the video would be created and posted on YouTube by the [Chamber of the General Assembly], and (2) YouTube might provide a link to the State Legislator’s campaign video(s) as part of a YouTube-generated list of related video links; and if so, whether the use of exit notices or disclaimers would alleviate the conflict of interest. ORDERS (Ethics): 1519 (Kirpatrick): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an “Investigative Complaint.” An Answer was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. 1520 (Bolinger): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation - 4 - regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an “Investigative Complaint.” An Answer was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. 1521 (Elliott): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1522 (Gindlesperger): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. - 5 - 1523 (Halstead): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 allegation. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an “Investigative Complaint.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1524 (Vinokur): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1525 (Maritz): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent - 6 - Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1526 (White): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1527 (Snyder): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an “Investigative Complaint.” An Answer was filed and a hearing was held. The record is complete. 1528 (Stoudt): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 - 7 - Findings Report identified as an “Investigative Complaint.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1529 (Stahley): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1530 (Heintzelman): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1531(Glenn): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § - 8 - 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 allegation(s). 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 deemed waived. The averments in the Investigative Complaint are admitted and are set forth as the following Findings. The record is complete. 1395-2(Gobel): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 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 filed and a hearing was held. The record is complete. ORDERS (Lobbying): 1-L (McCombs): Re: Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of Pennsylvania’s lobbying disclosure law (“Lobbying Disclosure Law”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 13A01 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 filed and a hearing was requested by the Investigative Division. A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. - 9 -