Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-535 KelleyMailing Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1 179 HAPRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 - 1610 April 26, 1982 ADVICE OF COUNSEL James R. Kelley, Senator 82 Senate of Pennsylvania Senate P.O., State Capitol Harrisburg, PA 17120 RE: District Office, Ownership of Building Dear Senator Kelley: This responds to your letter of April 13, 1982 in which you requested an opinion from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: You ask whether there is anything impermissable or inconsistent with the Ethics Act in use of a building which you or others would purchase as described below. Facts: You are, of course, an elected member of the Senate of Pennsylvania. You ask whether persons identified as A, B, and C who have been associated, not as partners, in the practice of law over 10 years may individually or as shareholders of the corporation, with or without the joinder of their spouses, purchase a building in various circumstances. Specifically, Individual A is a State Senator, Individual B is Counsel to a Senate Committee of which A is the Chairman (majority and minority) and Individual C is the person with whom A and B are associated in the practice of law as described above. Next, assuming that Individuals A, B, and C occupy part of the premises as law offices (approximately 1/4 of the total space) and assuming that other tenants occupy the remaining space" and that one of the "other tenants" includes the home (district) Senate office of Individual A (occupying approximately 1/4 of the total space), you ask if this arrangement would be permissable and not inconsistent with the Ethics Act. You also question whether this arrangement would be permissable or impermissable if only A and B participate in the purchase and or rental as described above. Discussion: As an elected public official you are, of course, a "public official" as defined in the Ethics Act and are subject to its provisions. See 65 P.S. 402. As a "public official" the main section involved in your question would be Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act. Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(c) indicates that a public official may not contract with the govermental body with which he is associated in an amount in excess of $500 unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process. State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania James R. Kelley, Senator April 26, 1982 Page 2 However, this Commission has previously decided that the provisions of Section 3(c) are not applicable to the rental of a legislative district office under the circumstances you describe. Specifically, in the Romanelli, 79 -006 Opinion, the Commission decided that where the rent for that building or district office is disbursed by the Chief Clerk of the Senate from the Senate home office account, that this contract would not be considered to be one with a "governmental body" as that term is defined in the Act. Therefore, assuming that the rental for the district office, in your case, is paid in the same manner as described above there would be no necessity for application of the open and public process set forth in Section 3(c) and there would be nothing impermissable or inconsistent with the Ethics Act in this arrangement. The second circumstance that you present which eliminates Individual C from the participation in the purchase of a building does not alter this conclusion. Essentially, the situation where Individual C would not be involved would present the same factual context and would compel the same conclusion. Conclusion: There is nothing impermissable or inconsist€:ht with the Ethics Act in the purchase of a building and the rental or use of the building as you describe above. 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 cc: Robert C. Jubelirer Samuel E. Hayes, Jr. Edward P. Zemprelli K. Leroy Irvis Sincerely, cia liAfre!e:eA.1e7C/ / Sandra S. Chr, stianson General Counsel