HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-554 Finnerty
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
November 12, 2014
John P. Finnerty, Esquire
Dougherty, Leventhal & Price, L.L.P.
75 Glenmaura National Blvd.
Moosic, PA 18507
14-554
Dear Mr. Finnerty:
This responds to your letters dated September 19, 2014, September 23, 2014,
and October 2, 2014, by which you requested 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 prohibitions or restrictions upon a township
supervisor, who is also the police commissioner for the township police department,
with regard to assisting the officer-in-charge of the township police department with the
scheduling of police officers where he (the township supervisor/police commissioner)
would not receive any compensation for doing so.
Facts:
As Solicitor for Pittston Township (“Township”), located in Luzerne County,
Pennsylvania, you have been authorized by Township Supervisor Steven Rinaldi (“Mr.
Rinaldi”) to request an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission on his
behalf. You have submitted facts that may be fairly summarized as follows.
The Township currently does not employ a Police Chief. Mr. Rinaldi is currently
serving as the Police Commissioner for the Township Police Department (“Police
Department”), and he does not receive any compensation for his services in that role.
The collective bargaining agreement between the Township and the union representing
the Township police specifically authorizes the Police Commissioner to perform
scheduling for the Police Department in the absence of a Police Chief. The Officer-In-
Charge of the Police Department is currently performing all police officer scheduling
duties for the Police Department. If Mr. Rinaldi would assist the Officer-In-Charge of the
Police Department with the scheduling of police officers, Mr. Rinaldi would not receive
any compensation for doing so.
Based upon the above submitted facts, you ask whether Mr. Rinaldi would be
permitted to assist the Officer-In-Charge of the Police Department with the scheduling of
police officers.
Finnerty, 14-554
November 12, 2014
Page 2
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.
It is further initially noted that, pursuant to the same aforesaid Sections of the
Ethics Act, an opinion/advice may be given only as to prospective (future) conduct. To
the extent that your inquiry relates to conduct that has already occurred, such past
conduct may not be addressed in the context of an advisory opinion. However, to the
extent your inquiry relates to future conduct, your inquiry may and shall be addressed.
As a Township Supervisor, Mr. Rinaldi is a public official subject to the provisions
of the Ethics Act.
Sections 1103(a) and 1103(j) of the Ethics Act provide:
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(a)Conflict of interest.--
No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict
of interest.
(j)Voting conflict.--
Where voting conflicts are not
otherwise addressed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania or
by any law, rule, regulation, order or ordinance, the following
procedure shall be employed. Any public official or public
employee who in the discharge of his official duties would be
required to vote on a matter that would result in a conflict of
interest shall abstain from voting and, prior to the vote being
taken, publicly announce and disclose the nature of his
interest as a public record in a written memorandum filed
with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting at which the vote is taken, provided that whenever a
governing body would be unable to take any action on a
matter before it because the number of members of the body
required to abstain from voting under the provisions of this
section makes the majority or other legally required vote of
approval unattainable, then such members shall be
permitted to vote if disclosures are made as otherwise
provided herein. In the case of a three-member governing
body of a political subdivision, where one member has
abstained from voting as a result of a conflict of interest and
the remaining two members of the governing body have cast
opposing votes, the member who has abstained shall be
permitted to vote to break the tie vote if disclosure is made
as otherwise provided herein.
65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), (j).
The following terms related to Section 1103(a) are defined in the Ethics Act as
follows:
Finnerty, 14-554
November 12, 2014
Page 3
§ 1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest."
Use by a public
official or public employee of the authority of his office or
employment or any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for the private
pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate
family or a business with which he or a member of his
immediate family is associated. The term does not include
an action having a de minimis economic impact or which
affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general
public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or
other group which includes the public official or public
employee, a member of his immediate family or a business
with which he or a member of his immediate family is
associated.
"Authority of office or employment."
The actual
power provided by law, the exercise of which is necessary to
the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a
particular public office or position of public employment.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act’s definition of the term
“conflict” or “conflict of interest,” 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, a public official/public employee is
prohibited from using the authority of public office/employment or confidential
information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit
of the public official/public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a
business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. The use of
authority of office is not limited merely to voting, but extends to any use of authority of
office including, but not limited to, discussing, conferring with others, and lobbying for a
particular result. Juliante, Order 809. In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public
official/public employee would be required to abstain from participation, which would
include voting unless one of the statutory exceptions of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act
would be applicable. Additionally, the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j) of the
Ethics Act would have to be satisfied in the event of a voting conflict.
Sections 1103(b) and 1103(c) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(b), (c),
provide in part that no person shall offer or give to a public official/public employee
anything of monetary value 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.
Having established the above general principles, you are advised that absent a
private pecuniary benefit contrary to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act or an improper
understanding contrary to Section 1103(b) or Section 1103(c) of the Ethics Act, the
Ethics Act would not prohibit Mr. Rinaldi from assisting the Officer-In-Charge of the
Police Department with the scheduling of police officers.
The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics
Act; the applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of
conduct other than the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an
interpretation of the Ethics Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of
the Second Class Township Code.
Conclusion:
As a Supervisor for Pittston Township (“Township”), located in
Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, Steven Rinaldi (“Mr. Rinaldi”) is a public official subject
Finnerty, 14-554
November 12, 2014
Page 4
to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65
Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. Based upon the submitted facts that: (1) the Township currently
does not employ a Police Chief; (2) Mr. Rinaldi is currently serving as the Police
Commissioner for the Township Police Department (“Police Department”), and he does
not receive any compensation for his services in that role; (3) the collective bargaining
agreement between the Township and the union representing the Township police
specifically authorizes the Police Commissioner to perform scheduling for the Police
Department in the absence of a Police Chief; (4) the Officer-In-Charge of the Police
Department is currently performing all police officer scheduling duties for the Police
Department; and (5) if Mr. Rinaldi would assist the Officer-In-Charge of the Police
Department with the scheduling of police officers, Mr. Rinaldi would not receive any
compensation for doing so, you are advised that absent a private pecuniary benefit
contrary to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act or an improper understanding contrary to
Section 1103(b) or Section 1103(c) of the Ethics Act, the Ethics Act would not prohibit
Mr. Rinaldi from assisting the Officer-In-Charge of the Police Department with the
scheduling of police officers. 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
.
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