HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-569 JohnstonGlenn Johnston
c/o Timothy P. O'Rielly, Solicitor
322 Boulevard of the Allies
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222
Dear Mr. Johnston:
Mailing Address.
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 1179
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
June 29, 1983
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
RE: Township Employment, Commissioner's Son
83 -569
This responds to the communication of Daniel M. Kelly, Secretary of
Elizabeth Township, in which he, with your concurrence, as communicated
through your solicitor's letter of June 24, 1983, has presented certain facts
and requested advice of the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: The question is whether you, as a Township Commissioner, can
participate in selection of your son as a Road Department employee of the
Township.
Facts: You currently serve as a Commissioner in Elizabeth Township,
hereinafter, the Township. The Township is in the process of selecting an
employee for its Road Department. It is proposed that the Township will make
its final selection at the meeting on July 5, 1983. The selection of the
Township has been narrowed downed to two men: Glenn Johnston, Jr., and Robert
Greenawalt. Each man received four votes from the eight Commissioners
present. It should be noted that Glenn Johnston, Jr. is your son and you
seconded the motion for hiring Glenn Johnston, Jr. When questions were raised
as to whether or not this action was proper under the Ethics Act, no further
action was taken, and it was suggested that the Solicitor should be prepared
to offer an opinion or solicit same from the Ethics Commission for the next
meeting to be held at which the final decision would be made on this
appointment.
Glenn Johnston, Jr. is not a dependent child of Commissioner Glenn
Johnston. Glenn Johnston, Jr. is 29 yers old, married, and has three children
and resides in a home other than that of Commissioner Glenn Johnston.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Glenn Johnston
June 29, 1983
Page 2
Discussion: As an elected Commissioner, you are to be considered a "public
official" as that term is defined in the Ethics Act. Consequently, your
conduct must conform to the requirements of the Ethics Act. Specifically, the
Ethics Act requires that your conduct must present neither a conflict nor the
appearance of a conflict with the public trust. In interpreting the
provisions of the Ethics Act, in light of the questions presented, we must
first look at Section 3(a) of that Act as follows:
(a) No public official or public employee shall use his
public office or any confidential information received
through his holding public office to obtain financial gain
other than compensation provided by law for himself, a
member of his immediate family, or a business with which
he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a).
In accordance with this provision, no public official may use his public
office or his vote as a public official to the - benefit of a member of his
"immediate family." The term "immediate family" is defined in the Ethics Act
as a spouse residing in the official's household, or a minor dependent child.
Obviously, Glenn Johnston, Jr. is not a member of your "immediate family" as
that term is defined in the Ethics Act, because he is neither a minor, nor
dependent, nor residing in your household. Thus, the strict provisions of
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act would be inapplicable to further review of this
question.
However, the Commission has also concluded, in certain circumstances,
that the provisions of Section 1 of the Ethics Act require a broader
interpretation and application than to be strictly limited to the regulation
of a public official vis -a -vis his "immediate family." Specifically, in
Leete, 82 -005, the Commission concluded that a County Commissioner could not
sit on a Salary Board and vote for the salary of her brother as Director of
the County Planning Agency, without engaging in conduct which would appear to
conflict with the public trust. The Commission concluded that as a Salary
Board member, the County Commissioner should not vote to set the salary of her
brother in order to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Similarly, in this situation, even though it would not strictly pose any
problems under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act as narrowly construed, the
application of the concepts contained in Section 1 of the Ethics Act would,
under this Commission precedent, require you, as Commissioner, to abstain from
participating in any manner in the selection process of this road worker where
your son is subject to review and appointment.
- Glenn Johnston
June 29, 1983
Page 3
Thus, in response to your specific question, under the Commission
precedent set forth above, you, as Commissioner, may not nominate your son for
the position, may not second the nomination to this position if another
Commissioner nominates Glenn Johnston, Jr. for this post, and as you may not
vote for the appointment of your son to this position. Likewise, since the
choices already been narrowed down to two individuals -- either your son or
another individual -- either your son or another individual -- you should
likewise abstain on the decision to appoint or not appoint the other
individual. This conclusion stems from the fact that if you as Commissioner
were permitted to vote against the other individual, you would in essence be
in a position to, by defeating the other individual's chances for employment,
insure that the position would be available for your son. This Commission has
concluded that the ability to effectively deny all other applications where a
limited source of funds are available so that an official may effectively
insure the availability of funds for his corporation's project or application
is intradicted under the Ethics Act. See Coploff, 83 -005. Similarly, your
ability as Commissioner, in this instance, to deny employment to the other
applicant could be viewed as an attempt to insure the availability of that
position for your son.
Conclusion: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 1 of the Ethics
Act and to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest with the public
trust as required by that Section, as a Commissioner, you should abstain from
participation in any manner in the selection process including but not limited
to discussions, making motions, voting, etc., under the circumstances
outlined 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 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. hristianson
General Counsel