HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-565 CrosswellMailing Address.
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 1179
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
June 20, 1983
Mr. William C. Crosswell
Morgan, Hallgren, Crowsswell & Kane, P.C.
P.O. Box 4686
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17604 -4686
Dear Mr. Crosswell:
ADVICE OF COUNSEL 83 -565
RE: Township Engineer; Township Planning Commission; Abstention
This responds to your letter of May 23, 1983, in which you, as Solicitor
for Warwick Township, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, requested advice from
the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: You ask whether the Township Engineer of Warwick Township may also
serve as an appointed member of the Warwick Township Planning Commission.
Facts: The Warwick Township Engineer would like to serve as an appointed
member of the Warwick Township Planning Commission. The Township Engineer is
also employed by a private engineering firm which, from time to time, prepares
and submits plans for private developers which require review by the Warwick
Township Planning Commission.
You state that the Township Planning Commission acts only in an advisory
capacity and has no approval or disapproval power with respect to either
development plans or re- zoning request, with such powers being vested solely
on the elected Board of Supervisors. In addition, you state that the Planning
Commission would not participate in the appointment or re- appointment of the
Township Engineer nor would the Township Planning Commission be involved in
setting his compensation. You further state that should the Township Engineer
be able to serve on the Township Planning Commission he would abstain from
voting on any plan prepared by the private engineering firm by which he is
employed and would make known to the public the reasons for his abstention.
Discussion: Initially, the Ethics Commission notes that, as a statutory
entity, its jurisdiction and its power are strictly limited to the authority
granted it in 65 P.S. 401 et. seq. Thus, it has no authority to interpret
and /or enforce the provisions of other codes, for example, the Second -Class
Tow,nship Code or the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, and this
Advice Should not be construed as clearance to act under other Commonwealth
laws.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg. Pennsylvania
Mr. William C. Crosswell
June 20, 1983
Page 2
The Pennsylvania State Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 401 et seq. was enacted to
insure the public that "the financial interests of holders of or candidates
for public office present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict
with the public trust." As Township Engineer your client is a public
employee /official and, is, therefore, subject to the requirements of the
Ethics Act. Bryan, 80 -014.
As you have indicated, the Township Engineer also works for a private
firm, as a public official /employee, the governmental body with which he is
associated is Warwick Township, which is separate and distinct from the
Township Planning Commission. In this regard, if the Engineer were to become
a member of the Planning Commission, his duties as Township Engineer and his
duties as a member of the Planning Commission could possibly differ to the
extent that a conflict or the appearance of a conflict of interest could
occur. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the Engineer's duties with
regard to both of his positions because while the Ethics Act was not designed
to preclude public officials or employees from engaging in several endeavors,
some restrictions must be imposed in order to insure the public that neither a
conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust exists or
arises during such service.
Some of the pertinent provisions of the Ethics Act include Sections 3(a)
and (b), see 65 P.S. 403(a) and (b), which provide that no public official may
use his public office or confidential information received through his holding
public office to obtain financial :gain for himself other than compensation
provided by law, and that no public official may receive any thing of value,
including the promise of future employment, on the understanding that his
official conduct will be influenced thereby.
As a Planning Commission member, the Engineer may be faced with the
situation where the Planning Commission will need to approve plans submitted
by the private firm (on behalf of developers) for which he works. While the
Engineer is merely an employee of that engineering firm, that firm is a
"business with which he is associated" under Section 3(a) of the Act. See
definitions, Section 2 of the Ethics Act also. The Engineer, therefore, must,
as you indicate he will, refrain from voting as a Planning Commission member
on any matter arising regarding the firm for which he works. If such matters
are presented to the Planning Commission members, the Engineer should publicly
disclose the extent of his involvement in the matter and abstain from
participation in discussions and votes on the matter. Such disclosure should
be made at a public meeting and be incorporated into the minutes of that
meeting. Sowers, 80 -050.
Mr. William C. Crosswell.
June 20, 1983 - =-
Page 3
Similarly, under the Commissions ruling in Sowers, if the Engineer
happens to vote as a Planning Commission member on a project and subsequently
obtains employment with the developer /person on whose project he has voted,
that subsequent employment should also be publicly disclosed. Further, the
Engineer as a Planning Commission member, having been subsequently employmed
by the developer /person upon whose project he voted, would be required to
abstain from official actions . vis -a -vis the employer which might be subject to
further official ,review or approval by the Planning Commission. Likewise, if
the Engineer knows his firm will seek or can reasonably expect to seek /obtain
work for or from the private developer /person whose plans are subject to his
official review, the Engineer should abstain and make the reasons therefore
public.
With regard to the Engineer's duties in his capacity as Township
Engineer, it should be noted that he would have to abstain from review of any
plans for the Township that he had voted on or approved as a member of the
Planning Commission because of the possibility of a conflict of interest
inherent in such action. The restrictions cited above as to when abstention
is required for the Engineer serving on the Planning Commission are equally
applicable to the Engineer when serving as Township Engineer.
Conclusion: As both a public official /public employee,. the Township
Engineer's conduct in relation to both his public posts and his private
employment should be governed by the guidelines expressed above.
Specifically, the Engineer in his capacity as Planning Commission member or as
Township Engineer must:'
1. Not use either of his official positions to obtain any business for
the firm by which he is employed;
2. not utilize confidential information gained in his official
capacities to obtain any business, promise of future employment,
etc.;
3. refrain from participating in discussions and votes on matters which
would directly relate to the clients of the engineering firm by
which he is employed and which are presented on behalf of persons or
developers who will seek, can be expected to seek, or have sought
the services of the engineering firm or to whom the firm has offered
its services with the respect to the specific projects subject to
the Engineer's review or approval;
4. refrain from participating in discussions and votes on matters wich
would directly relate to the engineering firm's clients which are
presented on behalf of clients from whom the firm obtained work on
matters subject to the Township's or Commissions
review or approval where the work was obtained subsequent to initial
review of the Township /Commission with the Engineer participating;
Mr. William C. Crosswell
June 20, 1983
Page 4
6. Not review, in his capacity as Township Engineer, any plans upon
which he passed in his capacity as a Planning Commission member.
If the guidelines as discussed above are adhered to, the Township
Engineer's concurrent service as a member of the Township Planning Commission
should constitute neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the
public trust.
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.
CW /rdp
5. Make public his relationship and that of the Engineering firm, with
any persons or developers who may come before the Planning
Commission or Township, and the reasons for his abstention as
required by Nos. 3 and 4 immediately above; and
Sincerely,
andra S. C stianson
General Counsel