HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-561 CalarieDear Mr. Calarie:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
April 28, 1981
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
Lee J. Calarie, Esq.
310 Market Street
Kittanning, PA 16201
RE: Police Officers, Dual Employment
81 -561
This responds to your letter of March 19, 1981, in which
you, as attorney for the Shannock Valley Regional Police
Department, requested an opinion from the Ethics Commission.
Issue: In your letter you requested advice as to whether the
Ethics Act prohibits a Shannock Valley Regional Police Depart-
ment Officer from running for District Justice.
Facts: You told us that the Shannock Valley Regional Police
Department (Department) serves Rural Valley Borough and Cowan -
shannock Township Municipalities in Armstrong County,
Pennsylvania. The Department also serves Dayton Borough on a
contract bases. A police officer in the Department has filed
the petitions necessary to run for office as a District Justice.
The District Justice's magisterial district encompasses all the
municipalities served by the Department. If elected this
Officer would resign from the Shannock Valley Regional Police
Force.
Discussion: Initially, we note that the jurisdiction of the
Ethics Commission is strictly limited by the Ethics Act. This
opinion addresses the impact of the Ethics Act on the situation
you describe and does not consider the effect of any other
enactment which might regulate the officer's conduct.
The Ethics Act does not prohibit a police officer from
running for a post as a District Magistrate, there is a
conflict of interest when one person represents'two parties
with adverse interests, Alfano, 80 -007. The officer of the
Department and the position he seeks as District Justice do not
have adverse interests that would prevent the officer from
retaining his job with the Department while running for a
District Justice.
Lee J. Calarie, Esq.
April 28, 1981
Page 2
The officer should bear in mind that if elected, he may
not use confidential information received through holding
public office that is, a District Justiceship, to obtain
financial gain other than compensation provided by law for
himself, his immediate family, or a business with which he is
associated. 65 P.S. §403(a). Further, Section 3(b) of the Act
provides that no one may offer anything of value to a public
official, in this case a District Justice, based on any under-
standing that the Justice's official acts would be influenced
thereby. 65 P.S. §403(b).
Conclusion: Act 170 does not prohibit a police officer from
running for District Magistrate.
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.
SW /rdp
Sincerely,
�dra S. C. istianson
General C.insel