HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-595 KopkoEdward E. Kopko, Esquire
Law Office 200 Mahantongo Street
Pottsville, Pennsylvania 17901
Mailin Address.
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 1 179
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
December 7, 1982
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
RE: Demolition Work, Schuylkill County
Dear Mr. Kopko:
82 -595
This responds to your letter of November 22, 1982, in which you requested
advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: You ask whether a county employee can perform demolition work for a
private enterprise within the county.
Facts: Your client, Mr. James Davidson is employed by Scuhylkill County as
the Demolition Coordinator for the County. His duties and responsibilities
require that he demolish publicly owned buildings in the County as a salaried
employee of the County.
Mr. Davidson has been contacted by the Greater Pottsville Savings and
Loan, hereinafter the Bank, to perform demolition work on a privately owned
bank building. Mr. Davidson's services are requested by the Bank because of
his expertise in the area of demolition and because his activities with the
County have made him known as a demolition expert to the Bank.
Discussion: Assuming that Mr. Davidson, as the County Demolition Coordinator,
would he considered a "public employee" in the purview of that definition as
set forth in the Ethics Act (65 P.S. 402) we will review your question as to
the propriety of this proposed employment. The Ethics Act contains no provi-
sion which would preclude the employment you propose. Specifically, the
Ethics Act does not preclude or prohibit a public employee from securing work
outside of that which he performs for the public entity he serves. This is
true notwithstanding the fact that this employment is in the same area of
expertise as that which he renders to the County, in this case. So long as
the interest that Mr. Davidson was serving as a public employee are not
adverse to those that he would be serving in his private capacity as
demolition expert to the Bank, the Ethics Act would not prohibit such an
arrangement. See Alfano, 80 -007. In the instance you present, there does not
appear to be any such adversity of interest.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Edward E. Kopko, Esquire
December 7, 1982
Page 2
Of course, Mr. Davidson could not obtain this employment through the use
of confidential information required while serving the County and that does
not appear to be at issue here. This restriction is merely referenced for the
sake of completeness. See 65 P.S. 403(a). Likewise, the fact that the Bank
recognizes Mr. Davidson as an expert in the demolition field because of his
activities with Schuylkill County does not, per se, preclude Mr. Davidson from
contracting with the Bank.
Conclusion: The Ethics Act does not prohibit this public employee from
engaging in or being employed as a private demolition expert for the Bank.
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 will be scheduled and a formal
Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be made, in
writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
SSC /rdp
Sincerely,
Sandra S. Chris ianson
General Counsel