HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-569 WeeksRuby D. Weeks, Esquire
Four North Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
June 1, 1981
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
RE: Borough Authority, Employee /Operator
Dear Solicitor Weeks:
81 -569
This responds to your letter of May 11, 1981 in which
you as Solicitor of the Borough of Mount Holly Springs
requested an opinion from the Ethics Commission.
Issue: In your letter you request advice as to whether the
Borough of Mount Holly Springs can simultaneously employ as
the sewage treatment officer an employee of the Sewage
Authority Engineer.
Facts: The Borough Authority intends to employ a sewage
treatment officer who is a licensed operator. This indivi-
dual is currenly employed by the Sewage Authority Engineer,
but, we assume, does not own or hold stock exceeding 5% of
the equity at fair market value of this business. This
individual would be paid under a Federal Sewage Treatment
Improvement Grant and would in effect be in "training" to
operate the expanded sewage treatment plant as its licensed
operator.
The Borough would name this operator as the sewage
treatment plant operator for the plant leased by the Borough
from the Authority.
Discussion: Act 170 does not, per se, prohibit simultaneous
employment by the Borough of an individual who is currently
employed by the Sewage Authority Engineer. The Commission
has held that dual employment of an attorney, for example,
by different governmental bodies, such as the Borough and
its Authority, does not violate the conflict of interest
provisions of the Act. See King, 79 -034. By analogy, the
Act does not prevent an individual from serving as an
employee of the Sewage Authority Engineer and as the
licensed operator of the sewage treatment plant. Basically,
Ruby D. Weeks, Esquire
June 1, 1981
Page 2
the contract that would exist between the Borough and this
individual does not even raise any problems under Section
3(c) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(c). That section would
prohibit a contract between the Sewage Authority Engineer
and the Authority itself or a contract between the Authority
and any "public official" or "public employee" and a
business in which that employee owns stock or was a director
or officer.
Conclusion: The Ethics Act does not prohibit the employment
relationship which you propose even where the licensed
operator may also be currently employed by the Sewage
Authority Engineer.
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
Sincerely,.
ndra S. C
General C
istianson
nsel