HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-597 KulikJoseph M. Kulik, Esquire
Kennedy Township Office
121 Lorish Road
McKees Rocks, PA 15136
Dear Mr. Kulik:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
September 2, 1986
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
Re: Municipal Official, Partnership, Municipal Solicitor
86 - 597
This responds to your letter of August 11, 1986, wherein you requested
the advice of the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the law partner of a municipal.official may be appointed as
the municipal solicitor.
Facts: You have requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission on behalf
of yourself and your law partner. You advise that you currently serve as a
municipal official as a member of the governing body of a municipality.
You further advise that you are a practicing attorney in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania and currently are engaged in the practice of law in partnership
with another individual. Your law partner is seeking the position of
municipal solicitor for the municipal body on which you serve. You have
advised that, in relation to this particular situation, an arrangement will be
transacted whereby all of the fees to the municipal solicitor will be placed
into a segregated bank account. All of the work for the municipality will he
performed by your partner and, as a result, you will receive no funds
whatsoever from the municipal body on which you serve and you will perform no
work as a private attorney for that governing authority. You have advised
that, in all other respects, the partnership will remain intact and that you
will share, on a partnership basis, in all other fees generated by the
partnership. You have requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission as
to whether there would be any prohibitions upon you as a public official in
the instant situation. Specifically, you have asked if you may vote for the
selection of a solicitor and, if so, may you vote for the selection of your
law partner.
Joseph M. Kulik, Esquire
September 2, 1986
Page 2
Discussion: It is noted, at the outset, that generally the State Ethics
Commission may not regulate the conduct of attorneys or the practice of law.
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Bar Association v. Thornburgh, 62 Pa.
Commw. Ct. 88, 434 A.2d 1327, (1981); Affirmed 498 Pa. 589, 458 A.2d 613,
(1982). Additionally, part -time municipal solicitors are not public employees
within the purview of the State Ethics Act. Ballou v. State Ethics
Commission, 56 Pa. Commw. Ct. 240, 424 A.2d 983, (1983).
As a municipal official, however, you are a public official as that term
is defined in the State Ethics Act and your conduct must conform to the
requirements thereof. 65 P.S. §402; Blaney, 84 -003.
The State Ethics Commission has addressed issues similar to the one
presented herein on several occasions. See, Cantor, 82 -004; Fields, 82 -006;
Mohan, 85 -587.
In Fields, the Commission specifically set forth various guidelines in
relation to a municipal officer's duties when his partner serves or hopes to
serve as the municipal solicitor. The Commission indicated that the sections
of the State Ethics Act applicable in such a situation are as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(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).
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(c) No public official or public employee or a member of
his immediate family or any business in which the person
or a member of the person's immediate family is a
director, officer, owner or holder of stock exceeding 5%
of the equity at fair market value of the business shall -
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, including prior public
notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals
considered and contracts awarded. Any contract made in
violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court
of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within
90 days of making of the contract. 65 P.S. 403(c).
Joseph M. Kulik, Esquire
September 2, 1986
Page 3
Section 1. Purpose.
The Legislature hereby declares that public office is a
public trust and that any effort to realize personal
financial gain through public office other than
compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust.
In order to strengthen the faith and confidence of the
people of the State in their government, the Legislature
further declares that the people have a right to be
assured 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.
Because public confidence in government can best be
sustained by assuring the people of the impartiality and
honesty of public officials, this act shall be liberally
construed to promote complete disclosure. 65 P.S. 401.
Generally, the Commission has determined that law partners, serving as a
municipal officer and solicitor respectively, would not constitute a per se
conflict of interest in violation of the State Ethics Act. The Commission did
rule that in order to abide by both the intent and spirit of the State Ethics
Act, as set forth in Section 1 thereof, the municipal official must abstain
from the municipal body's review and decisions regarding the appointment or
reappointment of its solicitor as well as in relation to actions pertaining to
litigation activities which would increase fee payments to the solicitor. In
addition to requiring such abstention from voting on this matter, the Ethics
Act would not preclude the acceptance of the position by the law partner.
Under the restrictions of Section 3(a), of course, the municipal officer
could not use his office or any confidential information obtained therefrom to
obtain a financial gain other than the compensation provided for by law for
himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he is
associated. The State Ethics Act provides that business with which one is
associated is defined as follows:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Business with which he is associated." Any business in
which the person or a member of the person's immediate
family is a director, officer, owner, employee or holder
of stock. 65 P.S. 402.
The Act further defines the term business as follows:
Joseph M. Kulik, Esquire
September 2, 1986
Page 4
Section 2. Definitions.
"Business." Any corporation, partnership, sole
proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association,
organization, self - employed individual, holding company,
joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal
entity organized for profit. 65 P.S. 402.
In relation to the instant situation, you have advised that you will be
receiving no funds from the partnership distribution agreement that have been
obtained from the municipal government with which you are associated. In this
respect, all of the funds will be received and paid to your law partner. The
fact, however, that you will be receiving no funds from this particular
arrangement does not negate the fact that you are "associated with" this
particular attorney and that the law of partnership generally is a business
with which you are associated. As such, even though you receive no funds
directly or indirectly from the municipality on which you serve, the
provisions of the State Ethics Act, would still appear to be applicable in the
instant situation. As such, you must abstain from participating in any matter
relating to the municipal government's selection of a solicitor and in
relation to any matters regarding litigation which would increase fee payments
to the solicitor, once selected, if it is your partner.
In addition to the foregoing, the State Ethics Commission has further
determined that the provisions of Section 3(c) of the State Ethics Act would
be applicable in the instant situation.
Generally, Section 3(c) provides as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(c) No public official or public employee or a member of
his immediate family or any business in which the person
or a member of the person's immediate family is a
director, officer, owner or holder of stock exceeding 5%
of the equity at fair market value of the business shall
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, including prior public
notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals
considered and contracts awarded. Any contract made in
violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court
of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within
90 days of making of the contract. 65 P.S. 403(c).
In the instant situation, if the award of the solicitorship to your
partner would result in his obtaining $500 or more, the open and public
process should be followed. The Commission has determined that, in holding
the open and public process provisions of Section 3(c) of the State Ethics
Joseph M. Kulik, Esquire
September 2, 1986
Page 5
Act, applicable to personal service contracts such as that between the
municipality and its solicitor, such was done with the realization that these
contracts may have to be handled differently from the usual requirements of
the municipal code. Typically, municipal codes exempt the personal or
professional service contracts from bidding requirements. See, Borough Codes,
53 P.S. §46402(d)(5); City Codes, 53 P.S. §12671, (First Class), 53 P.S.
§23308.1 (Second Class), 53 P.S. §36901(d)(5) (Third Class); Incorporated
Towns, 53 P.S. §53202(d)(5); and Township Codes, 53 P.S. §56802(d) (First
Class), 53 P.S. §65802(e)(5) (Second Class). However, the purposes for these
exemptions has generally been to free the municipality from mandatory
acceptance of the lowest bidder. Commonwealth v. Tice, 272 Pa. 447, (1922).
The purpose of this exception, from the bidding requirement, is manifestly
different from the purposes of the Ethics Act in general and Section 3(c) of
the Ehtics Act in particular. Cantor, 82 -004.
The purpose of the Ethics Act, as expressed in Section 1 of the State
Ethics Act, is to strengthen the faith of the public in their government.
Section 3(c), in this case, requires and open and public process in the award
of contracts by a municipality to its own public officials or employees,
their wives, etc. It is obvious that adhearance to the open and public
process of Section 3(c), if applied to personal professional contracts as well
as to contracts for goods, will help alleviate the fear that insiders, public
officials and employees, their spouses and businesses, are favored in such
employment. Given the fact that the legislature clearly demonstrated an
ability to write exceptions for personal professional service contracts and
other codes did not do so in the State Ethics' Act, but we must conclude that
the application of Section 3(c) to such contracts was intended by the
legislature.
Applying Section 3(c) to such contracts effects the clear language of the
Ethics Act as well as implementing its purpose. In this interpretation and
application, we do not imply or find a requirement in Section 3(c) that the
formal bid process, with the legal advertisement, etc., is required. Nor do
we find that the municipality, in such circumstances, will be obligated after
the open and public process is met to award the contract to the lowest bidder.
Compare American Totalisator Company v. Seligman, 27 Pa. Commw. Ct. 639,
(1976). As stated previously by this Commission, a reasonablness test is to
be applied in determining whether an open and public process requirements of
Section 3(c) have been met. Howard, 79 -044. Thus, before any public
employee, official, his immediate family or business as described in Section
3(c) is awarded, a personal /professional contract by the municipality he /she
serves, there must be; (1) prior public notice of the contract and
possibility; (2) sufficient time for a reasonable and prudent competitor to be
able to prepare and submit a proposal /application; (3) public disclosure of
all proposals /applications considered; and (4) public disclosure of the
contract awarded or offered /accepted.
Joseph M. Kulik, Esquire
September 2, 1986
Page 6
Conclusion: The State Ethics Act presents no absolute prohibition upon a
municipal official's partner serving as the municipal solicitor. The
municipal officer must abstain, however, from participating in the municipal
body's decisions regarding the appointment or reappointment of the solicitor
and regarding matters pertaining to decisions which would increase fee
payments to the solicitor. This is so, even in light of the fact that the
municipal officer will receive no fees directly from the municipal governments
agreement with its solicitor. The fact that the municipal officer is
associated with this particular business entity, requires adherence to the
provisions of the State Ethics Act. In additon to the foregoing, if you, as
the municipal officer, stand in the relation to the business as outlined above
in Section 3(c) of the State Ethics Act, any contract in excess of $500
between the municipal body and the solicitor must be awarded after an open and
public process.
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.
Si
Jolfn Co o
Ge - al Counsel