Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-552 RudnitskyMr. Marvin J. Rudnitsky Rudnitsky and Woelfel 3 South Market Street Selinsgrove, PA 17870 Dear Mr. Rudnitsky: Mailing Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1 179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 June 3, 1982 ADMINISTRATIVE LETTER 82 -552 RE: Planning Commission Members - Employed by University in Township This responds to your letter of April 23, 1982 in which you, as solicitor for the Selinsgrove Planning Commission, resquested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Can an employee of Susquehanna University or an employee's spouse, who sits as a member of the Selinsgrove Planning Commission, discuss and /or vote on a matter before the Commission involving the University? Facts: The members of the Planning Commission are appointed, but not compen- sated. Certain members of the Selinsgrove Planning Commission also have a personal interest in Susquehanna University, which is located within the Borough of Selinsgrove. Among the Commission members are a full -time Univer- sity employee, a spouse of a University employee, and a pensioner who has retired from University service. The solicitor for the Planning Commission also serves as a part -time employee of the University. You note that future changes to the zoning ordinance now under consideration will have some impact on the University. Discussion: Members of the Selinsgrove Planning Commission are not currently considered public officials subject to the Ethics Act because they are not compensated, 65 P.S. §401 et seq. We will, however, present our non- binding views in relation to Section 1 of the Act which requires that public officials "present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust." 65 P.S. §401. The Ethics Commission recognizes that those Planning Commissioners who have a present personal interest in Susquehanna University face a potential conflict of interest when the Planning Commission addresses issues that directly affect the University. State Ethics Commission 6 3U3 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Mr. Marvin J. Rudnitsky June 3, 1982 Page 2 To dispel even the appearance of a conflict between their duties to the Planning Commission and their interest in the University, those interested members would be best advised to abstain from participation in Commission action directly relating to the University. For instance, those Commissioners would bs required to abstain from deciding changes to a zoning ordinance that would affect the University differently, more exclusively z:w' specifically, than it would affect other community institutions. See Coughlin, 79 -063; Mayes, 80 -005. The Commission has ruled that a pensioner is not personally interested in his former employer to the extent that abstention would be required on his part. Knox, 81 -009. Conclusion: Members of the Selinsgrove Planning Commission, who have a signi- ficant personal, financial interest in Susquehanna University, even though they are not currently considered "public officials" under the Ethics Act, they might best abstain from Commission action which relates to the University in a specific ray. This will sufficiently rebut the suggestion of both actual and apparent conflicts of interest faced by these Commissioners. The pensioner is not 1'e3tricted in his votes. Incidentally, I elected to respond to your inquiry in this non - binding manner, not under Section 7(9)(ii) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 407(9)(ii) becat'se t ese pe;'sons, at present are not within the purview of the Ethics Act. The State Ethics Commission is reviewing the status of appointed, non - compensated officials and will be able to discuss the possible inclusion of Planning Commission members at a later date. However, I though these suggestions as to abstention would provide current guidelines. BF /rdp 1,124x,v/7 aridra S. Chi^ sXianson General Nouns