Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-576 SnipesSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 June 11, 1981 ADVICE OF COUNSEL Samuel M. Snipes 81 -576 48 South Main Street P.O. Box 354 Yardley, PA 19067 RE: Conflicts of Interest, Township Police, Township Code Enforcement Officer Dear Mr. Snipes: This responds to your letter of February 26, 1981, in which you, the Solicitor of Falls Township, requested an opinion from the Ethics Commission. Issue: In your letter you request advice whether the Ethics Act prohibits a police officer from remaining on active duty while running for the office of District Justice and whether the Act prevents a code enforcement officer from running for the office of Supervisor while remaining on active duty. Facts: You informed us that you are the Solicitor for Falls Township, Bucks County. Falls is a second class township. One of its police officers desires to run for a position as a district justice. The Township code enforcement officer seeks a Supervisor's post. The Township Board of Supervisors wishes to require each of these individuals to take a leave of absence during their campaign. Discussion: Initially, we note that the jurisdiction and authority of the Ethics Commission is strictly circumscribed by the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. §401 et seq. This Advice is limited to the effect of the Act on the situation you describe and will not discuss the impact of other statutes or case law. Man erial or policy decisions remain, of course, at the discretion of the Supervisors. The Ethics Act does not proscribe public employees from running for political office. There is nothing in the statute that requires a public employee to take a leave of absence while runnin,g for a political office. The Act does, however, impose certain restrictions on the conduct of candidates for public office and public officials. Samuel M. Snipes June 11, 1981 Page 2 Specifically, the Act provides that no person shall offer or give to a candidate for public office and no candidate for public office shall accept anything of value, including a political contribution, based on any understanding that the vote or official acts or udgment of the candidate for public office would be influenced Hereby. 65 P.S. §403(b). The police officer and the code officer must not accept anything of value based on any understanding that their current duties or their services as either District Justice or Supervisor would be influenced thereby. This prohibition is directed at the conduct of candidates for office but does not prevent a public employee from seeking public office. n As a District Justice and a Supervisor the two individuals you mention would be public officials with the meaning of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. §402. The Act states that no public official or employee shall use his public office or confiden- tial information received through holding public office to obtain financial gain for himself, his immediate family or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 4.03(a). The policeman may not use his status as a police officer or his post, if elected as a District Justice or confidential infor- mation obtained in either position to obtain financial gain. Similarly, the code enforcement officer may not use his position as enforcement officer, if elected, or as Supervisor or confi- dential information to obtain financial gain. Section 3(b) of the Act prohibits a public official or employee from accepting anything of value based on any under- standing that his official acts would be influenced thereby. 65 P.S. §403(b). The prohibition applies to all offices held, thus the policeman and enforcement officer may not accept anything of value based on any understanding that their acts as police officer or enforcement officer or as District Justice or Supervisor, if elected, would be influenced thereby. Further, Section 3(c) provides that no public official or employee, or a member of his immediate family, or any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, officer, owner or holder of stock exceeding 5% of the equity at fair market value of the business shall enter into any contract valued at $500 or more with a governmental body unless the contract is awarded in an open and public process. 65 P.S. §4.03(c). Therefore, the requirements of Section 3(c) apply to contracts with all the governmental bodies with which a person is associated. The police officer would be deemed associated with two governmental bodies - the Township police department and if elected the District Justice's Office. The code enforcement officer would be deemed associated with the Township as an enforcement officer and if elected, as a Supervisor. Samuel M. Snipes June 11, 1981 Page 3 Conclusion: The above discussion only addresses the require- ments of the Ethics Act. The Act does not require a public employee to take a leave of absence before seeking a public office. A police officer and a Township code enforcement officer need not take a leave of absence before running for public office as a District Justice and Township Supervisor respectively. The statute proscribes acceptance by a candidate for public office of anything of value based on any understanding that an official action would be influenced thereby. Persons holding two public positions must observe the Ethics Act in both positions, as a police officer and a District Justice, if elected, or as a code enforcement officer and, if elected, as a Township Supervisor. No ublic official or employee should use any of his public office(s) or confidential information received through public office(s) to obtain financial gain. Nor may tie public official or employee accept anything of value based on any understanding that any official act would be influenced thereby. The public official, his immediate family, or a business in which he or a member of his immediate family is a director, officer or holder of stock valued at greater than 5% of the equity at fair market value may contract with any governmental body with which the official is associated only if the contract, valued at more than $500, is awarded through an open and public process. 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 tacts 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 Si cerely, Z ee/4-.4'52 ra . M r stianson General C. nsel