Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout80-596 RudolphTO: DISCUSSION: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 February 21, 1980 ADVICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL Edward Rudolph Advice # 80 -596 Rudolph, Seidner, Goldstein, Rochestie & Salmon 2137 Galloway Road Bensalem, PA 19020 RE: Authority Member Entering Into a Lease Agreement With an Engineering Firm of the Same Authority FACTS: On January 29, 1980, Edward Rudolph, Solicitor for the Bensalem Township Authority, requested an informal opinion from the State Ethics Commission. He advised that an authority member as landlord entered into a lease agreement with an engineering firm of the same authority, as tenant, and rented office space for $300 per month. The issue is whether the leasing of an authority member's realty to an engineering firm, also employed by that authority, would constitute a conflict of interest and be barred under section 3(d), or be subject to the "open and public process" requirements of section 3(c), 65 P.S. 403(c). Unless there is some - evidence, and there is none in the facts, that the lease was entered into in exchange for some personal favor as a member of the township authority, no conflict of interest exists by reason of the lease. Section 3(c) relates to a public official dealing with the authority directly, and not dealing privately with a contracting party to the authority. The Commission recognizes that authority members are often business people and are likely to deal on a day -to -day basis with other employees of the authority or with individuals which come before the authority. No such dealing is prohibited by the State Ethics Act. Edward Rudolph February 21, 1980 Page 2 CONCLUSION: DRM /rdp -2 It is not a violation of the State Ethics Act for an authority member as landlord to enter into a lease with an engineering firm which is employed by the authority. 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. DAVID RITTENHOUSE MORRISON Chief Counsel