Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-586 SacavageMr. Robert B. Sacavage Solicitor Central Region Training Services, Inc. 905 Juniper Street Shamokin, PA 17872 Dear Mr. Sacavage: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 July 10, 1984 ADVICE OF COUNSEL 84 -586 Re: Central Region Training Services, Incorporated ; Private Industry Council; Board of Directors; Public Officials; Statement of Financial Interests This responds to your letter of April 17, 1984, in which you, as Solicitor of Central Region Training Services, Incorporated, requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: You ask whether the members of the Board of Directors of Central Region and Training Services, Incorporated, and the members of the Private Industry Council are public officials, and if so, whether they are subject to the financial disclosure requirements of the State Ethics Act. Facts: You are the Solicitor of Central Region Training Services, Incorporated, hereinafter, CRTS, which is a non - profit corporation that serves the administrative entity for Service Delivery Area 12, established by the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry pursuant to the Job Training Partnership Act of 1982. You state that in reviewing the Job Training Partnership Act and the guidelines established by the Department of Labor and Industry, you have found no clear indication as to the applicability of the State Ethics Act or the open meetings law to the various persons who comprise the Board of Directors of the non - profit corporation (CRTS) and the Private Industry Council (PIC). In your request for advice, you described Service Delivery Area 12 as being comprised of the counties of the Columbia, Montour, Northumberland, Union, Snyder and Juniata. The County Commissioners from each of the six counties which have formed CRTS have also appointed a Private Industry Council (PIC) consisting of 13 individuals from six counties, none of whom are elected public officials. The PIC unlike CRTS is not incorporated. Subsequent to its formation, the PIC entered into a contract with the elected officials and with CRTS, authorizing CRTS to perform the functions of the administrative entity under the act. Mr. Robert B. Sacavage July 10, 1984 Page 2 The corporate Boar°dof Directors of CRTS consists of one Commissioner from each of the six counties. The Board meets from time to time to give direction to the administrative staff of CRTS and you indicate that because CRTS is private and non- profit in nature, the Board meetings are not held in public. The CRTS's administrative staff consists of an executive director, an assistant executive director and other persons who handle activities related to planning, finance, job development and training. The PIC meets from time to time to give direction to the CRTS's administrative staff. You indicate that you have advised the PIC that its meetings should be public because the Council consists of members appointed by elected officials and also because the PIC has decision- making powers for the disposition of public monies. Contact with the Executive Director of CRTS on June 7, 1984, verified that neither the Executive Board of CRTS nor the members of the PIC receive compensation, except for reimbursement for expenses. Under these facts, as you have presented them, you ask the.Ethics Commission to decide whether the members of the. CRTS Board of Directors and the members of the PIC are to be considered public officials subject to the disclosure provisions of the Ethics Act and the Sunshine Law. Discussion: Initially, the Ethics Commission notes that as a statutory entity, its jurisdiction and its power are strictly limited to the authority granted it in 65 P.S. Section 401 et seq. Thus, it has no authority to interpret and /or enforce the provisions of other codes. For example, the Sunshine Law and this Advice should not be construed as a determination under other Commoowealth laws, codes, or regulations within the Ethics Act. The applicable provisions of the Ethics Act are contained in 65 P.S. 402, and read: Section 2, Definitions. "Public official." Any elected or appointed official in the Executive, Legislative or Judicial Branch of the State or any political subdivision. thereof, provided that it shall not include members of advisory boards that have no authority to expend public funds other than reimbursement for personal expense, or to otherwise exercise the power of the State or any political subdivision thereof. "Public official" shall not include any appointed official who receives no compensation other than reimbursement for actual expenses. 65 P.S. 402. Mr. Robert B. Sacavage July 10, 1984 Page 3 Further, the Ethics Commission has promulgated regulations which define "public official." (See 51 Pa. Code 1.1) The regulations illustrate that the Commission has interpreted the term "public official" as used in Section 402 to include, in part: Public officials (i) any elected or appointed official in the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the Commonwealth or any of its political subdivisions. ...(iii) Persons in the offices listed below are generally considered public officials: ...(F) all persons appointed to positions designated as officers by code, charter, or the like of the commonwealth or a political subdivisions. 51 Pa. Code 1.1. The regulations go on to define "political subdivision" as: Any county, city, borough, incorporated town, township, school district, vocational school, county institution, district, and any entity or body organized by the aforementioned. 51 Pa. Code 1.1. Taking these definitions and regulations into consideration, we would conclude that if these members of both the Board of Directors of the CRTS and the PIC are otherwise within the definition of "public official ", they are public officials even when serving the PIC or CRTS and as such, are subject to the financial disclosure provisions of the Ethics Act. However, because these persons are appointed and receive no compensation, except for expense reimbursement, we find them excluded from the definition of "public official ". We recognize that the Supreme Court's ruling in Snider v. State Ethics Commission, 436 A.2d 593 (1981) cast some doubt as to the extent of this exclusion in the definition of "public official ". However, the State Ethics Commission has not applied the Snider ruling to any appointed, uncompensated group of persons other than to the school directors at issue in Snider. Accordingly, there is no precedent or regulation which would draw such other uncompensated appointed persons as the members of CRTS or this PIC into the purview of the definition of "public official ". If such a ruling or regulation is promulgated you will be so advised, in advance, of its effectiveness by way of notice or publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Mr. Robert B. Sacavage July 10, 1984 Page 4 Conclusion: The members of both the Board of Directors of CRTS and the PIC are not to be considered "public officials" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act, and they are not required to file a Statement of Financial Interests. Pursuant zo 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 full 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. SSC /;na Sincerely, C Sandra S. Christianson General Counsel