Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout85-581 MascaraDear Mr. Mascara: State Ethics Commission 308 Finance Building P. 0. Box 11470 Harrisburg, Pa. 17108 -1470 September 10, 1995 ADVICE OF COUNSEL 85 -581 Mr. Frank R. Mascara, Chairman County Commissioner Courthouse Square, Room 702 Washington, PA 15301 Re: Conflict of Interest, Redevelopment Authority, Acquisition of Property located near Property owned by County Commissioner This responds to yuour letter of August 14, 1985, wherein you requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether any restrictions or conflict of interest is presented by the Ethics Act on a redevelopment authority's acquisition of a property that is located near a property that is owned by a county commissioner. Facts: You currently serve as the Chairman of the Washington County Board of Commissioners. The Washington County Redevelopment Authority, hereinafter the Authority, is the agency designated by the Washington County Commissioners to implement community development projects within the county. The Authority is governed by a five - member board, the members of which are appointed by the county commissioners. You indicate that the Authority has expressed an interest in acquiring five properties in Charleroi, Pennsylvania for the purpose of constructing a parking lot. You own two property's which are located across the street from the proposed site. There is the potential that as a result of the Authority action, the value of your property may be enhanced. You finally indicate that the general redevelopment plan has been in progress since the late 1960's and has continued throughout the years. You now seek the advice of the State Ethics Commission regarding your duties and responsibilities under the Ethics Act. Disussion: As a County Commissioner, you are a public official as that term is defined in the State Ethics Act and your conduct is, therefore, subject to the requirements thereof. 65 P.S. §402; Steinman, 84 -006. Mr. Frank R. Mascara September 10, 1985 Page 2 The Ethics Act provides that: Section 3. Restricted activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall use his public office or any confidential information received through his holding public office to obtain financial gain other than compensation provided by law for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a). Generally, within this provision of law, you may not participate in any manner, in activity that would result in your receipt of financial gain. As a county commissioner, you must abstain from any discussion, vote or other participation in the decision, of what properties the Authority will purchase in this situation. This would be required even though your gain may be indirect. While we are aware of the fact that this is generally an Authority decision, we note that the board of county commissioners appoint the Authority members and also has approval authority of the general redevelopment proposals. 35 P.S. §1710(i). Because of these powers and duties, you must abstain from participation in the consideration of this matter. The above result would also be in accord with the overall intent of the Ethics Act. The Commission may address other areas of possible conflict. 65 P.S. §403(d). Fritzinger, 80 -008; Yaw, 85 -011. The parameters of the type of activity encompassed by this provision are generally reviewed in light of the preamble to the Ethics Act which enunciates the legislative intent of the Act. A public official or employee, pursuant to this provision, is to ensure that their personal financial interests present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. 65 P.S. §401. Such a conflict may exist where an individual represents one or more adverse interests, Alfano, 80 -007, where an individual serves in positions that are incompatible or conflicting; Nelson, 85 -009, or where such an official or employee accepts compensation to which he is not entitled. Domalakes, 85 -010. In the instant situation, such a conflict or the appearance of such a conflict could arise if you were to participate in a matter as a public official that indi rectly benefitted you financially. The Authority as noted, previously is not purchasing your property and, as such, we see no other restrictions under these factors. Mr. Frank R. Mascara September 10, 1985 Page 3 Conclusion: There is no prohibition upon a redevelopment Authority's acquisition of property located near property owned by a county commissioner even if said acquisition may indirectly benefit that commissioner. As a public official, however, the commissioner must insure that his conduct comports with the requirements of the State Ethics Act as outlined above. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this 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, providing the requestor 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 request that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be made, in writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 2.12. JJC /sfb Si ncer John J. . VI no Gene Counsel