Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-596 Hoden ADVICE OF COUNSEL July 12, 2010 Sherry Morian President Quality Engineering Solutions, Inc. 405 Water Street P.O. Box 3004 Conneaut Lake, PA 16316 10-596 Dear Ms. Morian: This responds to your letters dated May 19, 2010, and May 24, 2010, requesting an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission. Issue: 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 Civil Engineer - Transportation following termination of service with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”). Facts: As President of Quality Engineering Solutions, Inc. (“QES”), you have been authorized by John Hoden (“Mr. Hoden”) to request an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission on his behalf. You have submitted facts that may be fairly summarized as follows. Mr. Hoden was employed with PennDOT as a Civil Engineer – Transportation until he retired from Commonwealth employment on January 22, 2010. You have submitted a copy of Mr. Hoden’s official PennDOT position description, which document is incorporated herein by reference. It is noted that said position description provides that Mr. Hoden was a member of a highway design team in the Plans Unit of the Engineering Office of Engineering District 1-0 (“District 1-0”). A copy of the job classification specifications for the position of Civil Engineer – Transportation (job code 1112T) has been obtained and is also incorporated herein by reference. On February 16, 2010, QES hired Mr. Hoden as a Highway Designer. In his position with QES, Mr. Hoden works as a roadway designer on bridge and roadway projects under the supervision of a licensed engineer. You state that Mr. Hoden has not and will not be working on any PennDOT projects that he was previously involved with as a PennDOT employee. You further state that Mr. Hoden will not be signing any documents and that his name will not appear on any documents other than invoices from QES billing his time for work he performs. Morian, 10-596 July 12, 2010 Page 2 Based upon the above submitted facts, you ask whether, pursuant to the restrictions of Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act, Mr. Hoden’s name could appear on invoices submitted by QES to PennDOT. Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 1107(10) and 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11), advisories are issued to the requester based upon the facts that the requester has submitted. In issuing the advisory based upon the facts that the requester has submitted, the Commission does not engage in an independent investigation of the facts, nor does it speculate as to facts that have not been submitted. It is the burden of the requester to truthfully disclose all of the material facts relevant to the inquiry. 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11). An advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requester has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts. In the former capacity as a Civil Engineer – Transportation for PennDOT, Mr. Hoden would be considered a “public employee” subject to the Ethics Act and the Regulations of the State Ethics Commission. See, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102; 51 Pa. Code § 11.1. This conclusion is based upon the position description and the job classification specifications, which when reviewed on an objective basis, indicate clearly that the power exists to take or recommend official action of a non-ministerial nature with respect to one or more of the following: contracting; procurement; administering or monitoring grants or subsidies; planning or zoning; inspecting; licensing; regulating; auditing; or other activity(ies) where the economic impact is greater than de minimis on the interests of another person. Consequently, upon termination of employment with PennDOT, Mr. Hoden became a "former public employee" subject to Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act. While Section 1103(g) does not prohibit a former public official/public employee from accepting a position of employment, it does restrict the former public official/public employee with regard to “representing” a “person” before “the governmental body with which he has been associated”: § 1103. Restricted activities (g) Former official or employee.-- No former public official or public employee shall represent a person, with promised or actual compensation, on any matter before the governmental body with which he has been associated for one year after he leaves that body. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(g) (Emphasis added). The terms “represent,” “person,” and "governmental body with which a public official or public employee is or has been associated" are specifically defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 1102. Definitions "Represent." To act on behalf of any other person in any activity which includes, but is not limited to, the following: personal appearances, negotiations, lobbying and submitting bid or contract proposals which are signed by or contain the name of a former public official or public employee. Morian, 10-596 July 12, 2010 Page 3 "Person." A business, governmental body, individual, corporation, union, association, firm, partnership, committee, club or other organization or group of persons. "Governmental body with which a public official or public employee is or has been associated." The governmental body within State government or a political subdivision by which the public official or employee is or has been employed or to which the public official or employee is or has been appointed or elected and subdivisions and offices within that governmental body. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. The term "Person" is very broadly defined. It includes, inter alia, corporations and other businesses. It also includes the former public employee himself, Confidential Opinion, 93-005, as well as a new governmental employer. Ledebur, Opinion 95-007. The term "representation" is also broadly defined to prohibit acting on behalf of any person in any activity. Examples of prohibited representation include: (1) personal appearances before the former governmental body or bodies; (2) attempts to influence; (3) submission of bid or contract proposals which are signed by or contain the name of the former public official/public employee; (4) participating in any matters before the former governmental body as to acting on behalf of a person; and (5) lobbying. Popovich, Opinion 89-005. Listing one's name as the person who will provide technical assistance on a proposal, document, or bid, if submitted to or reviewed by the former governmental body, constitutes an attempt to influence the former governmental body. Section 1103(g) also generally prohibits the inclusion of the name of a former public official/ public employee on invoices submitted by his new employer to the former governmental body, even if the invoices pertain to a contract that existed prior to termination of service with such governmental body. Shay, Opinion 91-012. However, if such a pre-existing contract does not involve the unit where the former public employee worked, the name of the former public employee may appear on routine invoices if required by the regulations of the agency to which the billing is being submitted. Abrams/Webster, Opinion 95-011. A former public official/public employee may assist in the preparation of any documents presented to his former governmental body. However, the former public official/public employee may not be identified on documents submitted to the former governmental body. The former public official/public employee may also counsel any person regarding that person's appearance before his former governmental body. Once again, however, the activity in this respect should not be revealed to the former governmental body. The Ethics Act would not prohibit or preclude making general informational inquiries to the former governmental body to secure information which is available to the general public, but this must not be done in an effort to indirectly influence the former governmental body or to otherwise make known to that body the representation of, or work for, the new employer. Section 1103(g) only restricts the former public official/public employee with regard to representation before his former governmental body. The former public official/public employee is not restricted as to representation before other agencies or entities. However, the “governmental body with which a public official/public employee is or has been associated” is not limited to the particular subdivision of the agency or other governmental body where the public official/public employee had influence or Morian, 10-596 July 12, 2010 Page 4 control but extends to the entire body. See, Legislative Journal of House, 1989 Session, No. 15 at 290, 291; Sirolli, Opinion 90-006; Sharp, Opinion 90-009-R. The governmental body with which Mr. Hoden is deemed to have been associated upon termination of employment with PennDOT is PennDOT in its entirety, including but not limited to District 1-0. Therefore, for the first year following termination of Mr. Hoden’s employment with PennDOT, Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act would apply and restrict “representation” of “persons” before PennDOT. Having set forth the restrictions of Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act, you are advised as follows. During the one-year period of applicability of Section 1103(g), Section 1103(g) generally would prohibit the inclusion of Mr. Hoden’s name on QES invoices submitted to PennDOT. However, if Mr. Hoden would perform work for QES on PennDOT contracts that existed before he terminated employment with PennDOT, and if such contracts would not involve the “unit” of PennDOT where he formerly worked, specifically District 1-0, Mr. Hoden’s name could appear on routine invoices submitted to PennDOT as to those particular pre-existing contracts if required by the regulations of PennDOT. See, Abrams/Webster, supra. The ability to include Mr. Hoden’s name on invoices subject to the aforesaid conditions would not impact the applicability of Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act as to other activities. Based upon the facts that have been submitted, this Advice has addressed the applicability of Section 1103(g) only. It is expressly assumed that there has been no use of authority of office or employment for a private pecuniary benefit as prohibited by Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. Further, you are advised that Sections 1103(b) and 1103(c) of the Ethics Act provide in part that no person shall offer or give to a public official/public employee and no public official/public employee shall solicit or accept anything of monetary value based upon the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the public official/public employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has been or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete response to the question presented. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the Governor’s Code of Conduct. Conclusion: In the former capacity as a Civil Engineer – Transportation for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”), John Hoden (“Mr. Hoden”) 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. Upon termination of his employment with PennDOT, Mr. Hoden became a "former public employee" subject to the restrictions of Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act. The former governmental body is PennDOT in its entirety, including but not limited to Engineering District 1-0. Section 1103(g) of the Ethics Act would restrict Mr. Hoden from engaging in any activity that would constitute prohibited representation before PennDOT for one year following termination of his employment with PennDOT. The restrictions as to representation outlined above must be followed. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act. Pursuant to Section 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, an Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, provided the requester has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Morian, 10-596 July 12, 2010 Page 5 Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may appeal the Advice to the full Commission. A personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion will be issued by the Commission. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be actually received at the Commission within thirty (30) days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code § 13.2(h). The appeal may be received at the Commission by hand delivery, United States mail, delivery service, or by FAX transmission (717-787-0806). Failure to file such an appeal at the Commission within thirty (30) days may result in the dismissal of the appeal. Sincerely, Robin M. Hittie Chief Counsel