Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-536 LewisDear Mr. Lewis: Mailing Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 April 30, 1982 ADVICE OF COUNSEL Mr. Donald E. Lewis Office of District Attorney Crawford County Meadville, PA 16335 RE: District Attorney; Apointment as Special Advisor to County; Reassignment of Duties 82 -536 This responds to your letter of April 8, 1982 in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: May a County District Attorney, during his tenure in office, accept from the County Commissioners a position as Special Advisor to the County on Matters of Crime and Public Safety ", consistent with the provisions of the Ethics Act? Facts: You state that you are the current District Attorney for Crawford County, Pennsylvania, a sixth class County. You were elected in November 1979 and took office in January, 1980. In the past few years you have been active in the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association's efforts to gain support for legislation providing for full -time status for Ditrict Attorneys for sixth class Counties. It appears, however, that the legislation will not be forth- coming in the near future. Because of this, you are examining possible alternatives, by which the same effective result could be reached. The Crawford County Commissioners, with whom you have conferred, have informed you that, dependent upon passage of such a law and upon a salary acceptable to them, they would, at your request, vote to make the position full -time. On April 7, 1982 Mr. David Heckler, Project Director of the Pennsylvania District Attorney's Association, advised you that the County could hire you to assume a position as Special Advisor to the County on Matters of Crime and Public Safety. While this job falls within your field of expertise as a career prosecutor, it would nevertheless be a special position. Technically, your duties as Special Advisor would be in addition to the duties you currently carry out as District Attorney. State Ethics Cor uni6zicr 308 Fine, .;;e nuilding e F;arr:s►�urg, Pennsylvania Mr. Donald E. Lewis April 30, 1982 Page 2 In your opinion, following a discussion with the Crawford County Commis- sioners, the Commissioners will appoint you as Special Advisor if an agreement regarding salary can be reached. Discussion: The Ethics Act, 65 P.S. §401 et seq., defines public official as: "Any elected or appointed official in the Executive, legislative or Judicial Branch of the State or any political subdivision thereof." As an elected District Attorney in Crawford County, a political subdivision, you are a public official for purposes of the Ethics Act. See Rendell, 79 -007. Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act states in part that no public official ;half enter into any contract valued at $500 or more with a governmental body unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process. In vouis situation, the governmental body with which you are associated is the County. The Commission, however, does not perceive your acceptance of additional eut :e , under the title of Special Adivsor, to constitute an example of "contracting with a governmental body" as that term is described in Section 3c). Rather, as Special Advisor, you will in effect be re- assisgned duties which you have the potential to perform now as District Attorney. This arrangement presents no conflict of interest that would violate the Ethics Act, nor does it fall within the realm of contractual agreements subject to the Section 3(c) open and public requirement. Conclusion: As discussed above, a District Attorney may perform additional services, for the County in which he serves, under the title of Special Advisor without violating the letter or the spirit of the Ethics Act. The proposed arrangement, geared to make the position of District Attorney in Crawford County full -time, is merely a re- assignment of duties, not an independent, distinct contract as contemplated by Section 3(c) of the Act. 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. BF /rdp Sincerely, S 'ndra S. Chfistianson General Counsel