Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-512 SacavageRobert B. Sacavage 44 North Oak Street Mount Carmel, PA 17851 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 February 4, 1981 ADVICE OF COUNSEL 81 -512 RE: Borough Council, Dual Employment, Municipal Authority Dear Attorney Sacavage: This responds to your letter of November 18, 1980, in which you, as a Borough Solicitor, requested an opinion from the Ethics Commission. Issue: You request Advice as to whether a member of a borough council may also serve as a member of a municipal authority in the same borough. Facts: You informed us that the President of your Borough Council is employed by the Borough's Sewer Authority as a laborer. The Sewer Authority is governed by a seven member board appointed by the Borough Council. The Authority's super- visor controls the labor crew of the Authority. Discussion: The President of a Borough Council is clearly a "public official" under the Ethics Act. Section 2 of the Act states that a "public official" is an elected official of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the state or any political subdivision thereof. While the Act applies to the President of a Borough Council there is no conflict of interest per se when a Council President is employed as a laborer by the Borough Sewer Authority. A conflict of interest exists when an individual represents two or more persons whose interest is adverse to each other. See Alfano, 80 -007. The Council President, as President, represents the Council; but as a laborer for the Sewer Authority he does not have such an antagonistic interest to the Council as to create an inherent contlict of interest. Section 1 of Act 170 provides, however, that public officials shall not present "the appearance of a conflict with the public trust." Therefore, the Council President should refrain from voting on appointments of sewer authority members as long as he is employed by the Sewer Authority to avoid the Robert B. Sacavage February 4, 1981 Page 2 appearance of a conflict of interest. The Borough Solicitor has already advised the President to abstain from voting on any matters concerning the Authority including appointments, contracts or other matters directly or indirectly relating thereto. This caution and direction by the Solicitor as to the Council President's vote will surely comply with the letter and spirit of the Ethics Act. The Council President should also place the reason for his abstention on the public record. Conclusion: There is no inherent conflict of interest in the President of a Borough Council retaining employment as a laborer with the Borough Sewer Authority. To avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest the Council President while employed by the Authority, should refrain from voting on appointments to the Sewer Authority and place the reason for the abstention on the public record. The Borough Council President should follow the advice of the Borough Solicitor and abstain from voting on Sewer Authority contracts as well as appointments and matters directly or indirectly relating thereto. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commis- sion, 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 Commission may be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. You should make such a request or indicate your disapproval of this Advice within the next 30 days. SW /rdp S ,jncerely, an.ra S. ristianson General C unsel