HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-519 McCluskeyJ. J. McCluskey, Esquire
North Eastern National Rank Rldg.
Hazelton, Pennsylvania 18201
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108-1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
Fehruary 27, 1986
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
86 -519
Re: Township Supervisor, Son, Township Employee
Dear Mr. McCluskey:
This responds to your letter of January 17, 1986, wherein you requested
the advice of the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether there is any prohibition under the State Ethics Act upon the
employment hy the township of the son of a township supervisor.
Facts: You have requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission in
relation to a township supervisor who you represent. You indicate that the
son of this supervisor was hired as a township road employee. This occurred
approximately four years ago. You have asked whether or not employment hy the
township of a son of a supervisor is in violation of the State Ethics Act.
You have not indicated what, if any, action the township supervisor has taken
in relation to his son's appointment or in relation to the fixing of the
compensation for this individual.
Discussion: As a township supervisor your client is a public official as that
term is defined in the State Ethics Act. 65 P.S. 5402. As such, his conduct
must conform to the requirements of the Act. Sowers, 80 -050.
Generally, the State Ethics Act provides as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(a) No puhlic official or public employee shall use his
puhlic office or any confidential information received
through his holding puhlic office to obtain financial gain
J. J. McCluskey, Esquire
February 2.7, 1986
Page 2
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).
Within the above provision of law, a puhlic official, such as a township
supervisor may not use his puhlic position in order to obtain any financial
gain for himself or for a member of his immediate family. He may not use
confidential information for similar purposes. The State Ethics Act defines
members of immediate family as follows:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Immediate family." A spouse residing in the person's
household and minor dependent children. 65 P.S. 402.
If the son of this particular supervisor is not a minor dependent residing in
the supervisor's household, then he would not he a member of the supervisor's
immediate family as set forth above. Thus, within that provision of law,
there would appear to he no prohibition upon his activities.
The Ethics Act, however, further provides that the Commission may address
other areas of possible conflict. 65 P.S. &403(d). The parameters of the
activities encompassed by this provision of law may generally he defined by
referring to the intent and purpose of the State Ethics Act. The Act was
promulgated in order to insure the public that the financial interest of their
officials do not conflict with the public trust. See 65 P.S. &401. Thus,
this Commission has previously held that a supervisor may not, without
occasioning a conflict of interest, serve one or more interest that are
adverse. See Alfano, 80 -007. This Commission has previously issued opinions
indicating that a county commissioner, for example, could not sit on a salary
board and vote for the salary of her brother as di rector of the county
planning agency. See Leete, 82 -005. The Commission affirmed this finding in
a subsequent opinion whererefn the Commission determined that a public official
may not vote for the appointment of his adult son to a position of employment
within a county. See O'Reilly, 83 -012. Similarly, the Commission has held
that a township supervisor may not continually vote on matters that operated
to benefit his adult daughter who was a township employee. See Cumherledge,
No. 216 -R. Thus, in these previous opinions and rulings, it is clear that
while the son of a township supervisor may serve in a position of employment
within the township, the activities of his father should not operate to
benefit the son financially. It is, therefore, advised that this supervisor
should not participate in any matter relating to his son. The township
supervisor should abstain fran any matter relating to the appointment or
compensation of his son as a township employee.
1. J. McCloskey, Esquire
Fehruary 77, 1(486
Pape 3
Finally, you requester) the advice of the State Ethics Commission as to
the applicahility of any statute of limitations which would preclude an
attempt hy the present hoard of township supervisors to terminate the son's
employment. This Commission is not empowered to address that issue. As a
result, we will not offer any advice in relation to that matter.
Conclusion: A township supervisor should not participate in any matter
relating to the appointment, employment, of his son as a township employee. A
township supervisor similarly should ahstain from any actions that could
operate to henefit his son. Such ahstention would he required under the
State Ethics Act which empowers this Commission to address areas of conflict
of interest generally. The Ethics Act presents no ahsolute prohibition upon
the employment of the son of a township supervisor as a township employee.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any
enforcement proceeding initiated hy 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 he made availahle 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 he scheduled and a formal
Opinion from the Commission will he issued. Any such appeal must he made, in
writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
Sincerely,
ohn J. >ontino
Geneā¢. Counsel