Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-538 BeaserDear Mr. Beaser: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 April 2, 1981 ADVICE OF COUNSEL Lawrence J. Beaser, Esquire Blank, Rome, Comisky & McCauley Four Penn Center Plaza Philadelphia, PA 19103 RE: Former Employee, Administration of Contract 81 -538 This responds to your request of January 22, 1981. Issue: You request advice as to whether a client of yours, a former employee of the Philadelphia Water Department, an agency of the City of Philadelphia who was employed as Chief of Sludge Management may accept employement during the first year after he leaves employment with the City with a Corpo- ration known as Modern Earthline. You also request advice as to the extent of any contact that your client, Mr. Townsend, may have with the Philadelphia Water Department in relation to on -going contracts. Facts: Steven Townsend was a former employee of the Philadelphia Water Department, an agency of the City of Philadelphia. As such, he was employed as Chief of Sludge Management and his duties included the development and implimentation of policies and programs for sludge management and disposal. In this job he was involved in awarding and administering contracts, preparing specifications, reviewing contract proposals, and making recommendations on the award of these contracts, giving first level review to contractor payment vouchers and giving final approval to minor contractor expenditures. After terminating his employment with the City of Philadelphia, Water Department, Mr. Townsend accepted employment with Modern Eathline Companies. This Company (hereinafter Modern) presently holds a sludge management contract with the Philadelphia Water Department. Mr. Townsend works as a General Manager for Modern with overall supervisory Lawrence J. Beaser, Esquire April 2, 1981 Page 2 responsibility from multi -state operations. The position involves administration, discussion with scientists, tech- nicians, state and local officials and civic groups, planning work activities, management of personnel, main- taining accounting records, and preparing and submitting vouchers to the contracting agencies. In addition, the first year of Mr. Townsend's job with Modern could involve administration of contracts that Modern has with the Philadelphia Water Department, including some day -to -day dealings with employees of the Water Department on such matters as scheduling of work, submission of vochers, and obtaining of permits. However, it is expected that the majority of the activities performed by Mr. Townsend for Modern will involve no direct contact with the Water Department. In any event, during the initial year after he leaves the employment of the City, he would not engage in negoti- ations with his former employer concerning present or future contracts or otherwise attempt to influence his former employer. Discussion: Mr. Townsend is a "former public employee" as that term is used in Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(e). However, as a former employee, Mr. Townsend is not precluded from accepting employment with Modern. Cutt, 79- 023. Indeed, the Commission has as you indicate, clearly held that even as an employee of Modern Mr. Townsend could administer contracts that Modern has with the City Water Department. See Dalton, 80 -056. However, under Section 3(e) Mr. Townsend could not "represent" any person before the governmental body with which he had been associated during this one -year period. This means that while Mr. Townsend could administer a contract he could not prepare and submit bid proposals on behalf of Modern or allow his name to be used on a contract proposal as someone who would work on a Modern project within the one year after leaving the City's Water Department. See Kilareski, 80 -054. Thus, in relation to the administration of contracts and the incidental contact that Mr. Townsend may have with his former co- workers or other persons within the City Water Department, this contact is not totally prohibited. However, such contract should be limited to the administration of on- going contracts and future contracts with the City Water Department and should not include negotiation of any changes to on -going contracts or preparation of bid proposals as noted above as to future contracts. So long as the contract that Mr. Townsend has with his former employer relate to on- Lawrence J. Beaser April 2, 1981 Page 3 going contracts and are confined to ministerial matters of the type detailed in the "facts" portion of this advice, these activities may be undertaken by Mr. Townsend within the first year of leaving public employment as long as these contacts do not entail any attempt to influence his former employer. Conclusion: The activities of Mr. Townsend should be guided by the discussions set forth above as his activities occur within the one year period after he left employment with the Philadelphia Water Department. 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 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. SSC /rdp Si cerely, % Sandra S. Christianson General Counsel 131