HomeMy WebLinkAbout80-541 UrlingTO:
FACTS:
Mr. Urling has asked:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
February 23, 1980
ADVICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL
C. John Urling, Jr., C.P.C.U.
Vice - President
Claude R. Martin Company
P.O. Box 595
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Advice 1/ 541
RE: What Constitutes "Representation" Under Section 3(e)
On February 22, 1980 the State Ethics Commission received
from C. John Urling, Jr. a letter dated February 18, asking for
an informal opinion of the Commission advising as to what
constitutes "representation" under Section 3(e) of the State
Ethics Act.
Mr. Urling was previously associated with the Department
of Labor and Industry.
He advised that he has been asked by the Pennsylvania
Self - Insurers' Association to review the budget of the Bureau
of Workers Compensation and to submit to the Association an
analysis of that budget with any recommendations he may have.
In order to carry out that task, it will be necessary to obtain
information available to the general public from members of the
bureau and the Secretary of Labor and Industry, as well as the
Budget Officer of that Department.
(1) Whether he may make such a review.
(2) Whether he may make the review after personal contact
with members of the department and members of the bureau.
(3) Whether he would be permitted to send a copy of his
report to the Pennsylvania Self- Insurers' Association to
the Bureau of Workers Compensation.
C. John Urling, Jr.
February 23, 1980
Page 2
DISUCSSION:
The issue relates to the definition of "represent" in the
revolving door bar rule set forth in Section 3(e), 65 P.S. 403(e).
Section 3(e) of the State Ethics Act states, "no former
official or public employee shall represent a person, with or
without compensation, on any matter before the governmental body
with which he has been associated for one year after he leaves
that body."
The purpose of this section is to prevent recent associates
of a governmental body from using their personal influence with
individuals with whom they were previously associated in order
to gain special treatment. The Commission has held that routine
request for information generally available to the public does
not constitute representing a person before the governmental body.
CONCLUSION:
Therefore, Mr. Urling may obtain information from the
governmental body for which he was associated providing that
information is available to the general public; he may ask
questions about generally published material of members of the
Department of Labor and Industry, and he may also furnish the
Department of Labor and Industry and any subdivision of it, any
material which he writes for any person.
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.
DRM /rdp 2
DAVID RITTENHOUSE MORRISON
Chief Counsel