Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout80-539 SaxionTO: FACTS: DISCUSSION: Maxine Saxion RD #3, Box 74 Apollo, PA 15613 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 February 27, 1980 ADVICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL Advice # 539 On February 1, 1980, Mrs. Maxine Saxion wrote this Commission asking for an interpretation of the State Ethics Act. She advised that the Supervisors of Kiski Township advertised the need of a Tax Collector to fill the unexpired two year term of the present elected Tax Collector. They requested that anyone who was seeking this position had to file a Statement of Financial Interests in advance of the appointment. On December 14, 1979, three of the many applicants were interviewed, and at that time Mrs. Saxion presented her Financial Inrerest Statement to the Board of Supervisors. She advises that she was informed she would not have to present the form at the present time, and that the Board of Supervisors would advise her as to when it would be necessary for her to present the form. A special meeting was called on Janaury 31, 1980 personally informing and inviting all of the original applicants to the meeting with exception of Mrs. Saxion. The purpose of the meeting was to appoint a Tax Collector. Mrs. Saxion stated that the Township Solicitor advised that Mrs. Saxion had intended to file, and her being mislead as to filing procedure should not prejudice her application. The Supervisors seemed to disagree with their attorney and suggested an executive meeting. The attorney then reversed his ruling without really explaining why. They decided that the three individuals who were interviewed on December 14 and who attempted to file were disqualified because a Financial Interest Statement had not been sent to Harrisburg 10 days prior to the meeting. The issue is whether Section 4(c) of the State Ethics Act applies to the appointment of a Tax Collector of a township. Maxine Saxion February 27, 1980 Page 2 Section 4(c) of the State Ethics Act states as follows: "Each candidate for public office nominated by a public official or governmental body and subject to confirmation by a public official or governmental body shall file a Statement of Financial Interests for the preceding calendar year with the Commission and with the public official or body that is vested with the power of confirmation at least 10 days before the public official or body shall appove or reject a nomination." The appointment of a Tax Collector is not subject to confirmation, therefore Section 4(c) does not apply at all. Pursuant to regulation 4.4(c), "any person appointed to a township or borough office not subject to confirmation shall file a Statement of Financial Interests only with the borough or township secretary by May 1 of the year appointed or within 15 days of appointment after May 1." Therefore, the State Ethics Act only requires the filing of a Statement of Financial Interests by May 1. Section 11 of the State Ethics Act specifically provides that "any governmental body may adopt requirements to supplement this act, provided that no such requirment shall in any way be less restrictive than the Act." Therefore, the decision of the Board of Supervisors to require a filing a Statement of Financial Interests with them as a precondition for appointment to a political position, is not prempted by the lesser requirements of the State Ethics Act. The appointment of a Tax Collector is not equivalent to letting a contract for tax collection services, therefore it would appear that the appointment of a Tax Collector is a political decision, and the township can adopt any procedure they wish in deciding who they wish to appoint. Thus, if they appointed someone other than Maxine Saxion, there is no violation of the State Ethics Act in doing so. CONCLUSION: Mrs. Maxine Saxion in no way violated any aspect of the State Ethics Act, and was not required under State Law to file a Statement of Financial Interests with the State Ethics Commission or with the township. A township is free to adopt their own ethical standards which may be more restrictive than the State Ethics Act. Maxine Saxion February 27, 1980 Page 3 DRM /rdp -2 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 disclsoed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the advice given. A personal appearance before the Commission and a formal opinion will be issued upon your request if you feel this reply does not suffice. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. cc: Timothy Geary, Esquire lam' D'•ID RITTENHOUSE MORRISON Chief Counsel