HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-623 WheelerWilliam J. Wheeler, Esquire
1200 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
RE: Section 3(e), Restrictions, Representation
Dear Mr. Wheeler:
Mailing Address:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 1 179
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
September 8, 1981
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
81 -623
This responds to your communication of September 10,
1981 in which you requested advice from the State Ethics
Commission.
Issue: -r You request information relating to your duties and
responsibilities under the Ethics Act if you are deemed "a
public employee."
Facts: You advise that you are a former Assistant Attorney
General who voluntarily terminated employment with the
Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs, Department
of State, in February of 1980. You indicate that on July 1,
1980 the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs
executed service purchase contracts with you to obtain your
services as a Hearing Examiner for the State Osteopathic
Board and for the State Board of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers,
Dealers, and Salesmen.
During the time you were under such contract with the
Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs you actually
served as Hearing Examiner on only two cases, one being
assigned from the State Osteopathic Board and one being
assigned from the Motor Vehicle Board. Neither of these .
hearings involved complex or extended litigation on which
you devoted an above - average amount of time. You intend to
submit a resignation and /or to terminate your contract with
the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs and to
cease operating or being available as a Hearing Examiner for
both Boards as of September 24, 1981.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building 0 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
William J. Wheeler, Esquire
September 8, 1981
Page 2
After such termination of services, you desire to
represent respondents appearing before the State Motor
Vehicle Board. During your tenure you had no access to
confidential information relating to agency (enforcement)
files.
Discussion: The main question presented is whether you may
be considered within the definition of "public employee"
under the provisions of the Ethics Act. All public employees
are required to conform their conduct to the requirements of
the State Ethics Act. In regard to "former public employees"
the particular prohibition in question here relates'to
Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act. This Section provides that:
No former official or public
employee shall represent a person,
with or without compensation, on
any matter before the governmental
body with which he has been associ-
ated for one year after he leaves
that body. 65 P.S. 403(e).
In reviewing this question the main consideration is
not the mechanism by which you were paid (Service Purchase
Contract) but whether you serve in a position of public
trust and are thus within the scope of the concerns of Act
170. See Massiah- Jackson, 80 -036 and Morris, 80 -039. In
these cases the Commission expressed the opinion that
individuals could not escape application of the Ethics Act
based solely on the premise that they serve under Service
Purchase Contract as distinguished from those employees who
are "regular compliment" employees. If, in fact, there is
little substantive difference between the services rendered
by a person under Service Purchase Contract and the full -
time hearing examiner within the Bureau then the Commission
would conclude that these individuals (on Service Purchase
Contract) are "public employees" within the coverage of the
Act. Similarly, if your relationship to the Bureau was
such that we must deem you to be a "public employee" you
would become a "former public employee" upon your termi-
nation of service with the Bureau.
The Commission has established serveral criteria in
considering and reviewing the question of whether an indi-
vidual should he considered a "public employee." These
criteria include the history of compensated service, the
expectation that the individual will continue in the
capacity in question, whether the compensated services are
William J. Wheeler, Esquire
September 8, 1981
Page 3
identical to or similar to services that would ordinarily be
performed by an elected or appointed official or employee,
whether or not the services performed are similar or identical
to those performed ordinarily by full -time employees, the
degree of supervision by the agency, and whether the indivi-
dual performs compensated services for a number of agencies.
Massiah- Jackson, supra.
In addition, in relation to hearing examiners within
the Department of State the Commission has adopted a "rule
of thumb" that any individual serving one of the boards
within the Department of State, Bureau of Professional and
Occupational Affairs as a Hearing Examiner who serves on
more than two assigned cases within the reporting period
should be considered a "public employee." See Sciotto, 81-
596.
Thus, since you have not been assigned more than two
cases within the period in question we conclude that you are
not to be considered-within the class of "public employees."
Consequently, upon your termination of your relationship
with the Bureau, you would not be a "former public employee"
subject to any of the restrictions contained in Section 3(e)
of the Ethics Act. The Ethics Act, therefore, would not
preclude your representation of individuals before the State
Motor Vehicle Board even within the first year after your
termination of services with that Board.
Finally, I note that there is no outstanding prohi-
bition related to• your service as a former Assistant
Attorney General, since that service ended in February,
1980. The one -year prohibition that would have related to
your service as a former Assistant Attorney General expired
as of February, 1981.
Conclusion: Upon the facts you presented and using the
criteria previsously established to determine which indivi-
duals fall within the classification of "public employees ",
we find that you are not a "public employee" subject to the
restrictions applicable to a "former public employee"
contained in Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act. Accordingly,
you may, upon your termination of your contract as a Hearing
Examiner as of September 24, 1981, undertake to represent
clients before the State Motor Vehicle Board.
William J. Wheeler, Esquire
September 8, 1981
Page 4
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.
Sincerely,
ndra S. Ch stianson
General Co sel
SSC /rdp
cc: Stanley Miller, Commissioner
Bureau of Professional & Occupational Affairs