Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-605A WimerDan P. Wimer, Esquire City Ruilding - City of New Castle, PA 16101 Dear Mr. Wimer: Mailing Address, STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 114701 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 Octohe r 20, 1986 SUPPLEMENTAL ADVICE OF COUNSEL • 86 -605 -A Re: City Councilmemher, Participation in Loan Grant, Interest in Loan Proceeds This responds to your letter of October 2, 1986, wherein you have indicated that certain facts, as set forth in the original Advice of Counsel, No. 86 -605, were incorrect. Fact: On September 23,- -1986, Advice of Counsel, No. R6 -605 was issued, to you regarding the issue of whether a memher of city council may participate in the council's decision to grant' a low interest loan to a memher of a school district hoard of directors in the district where the city councilmemher is employed as a teacher. As additional facts, the advice indicated that the school hoard president was seeking the low interest loan in order to purchase a local tavern. Your revised letter of October 2, 1986, indicates that the school hoard president is the current owner of that tavern and that a third party has applied to city council seeking the low interest loan in order to purchase the tavern from the president of the school hoard. Thus, you indicate, the school hoard president would not he the applicant for the funds hut rather would he the ultimate recipient of the funds. You have requested the further advice of the Commission in order to determine if this new factor would, in any way, alter the original Advice of Counsel. Discussion: The new information would indicate that the city councilperson would not he actin in a manner that directly henefitted his employer, i.e. the school director. However, it should he pointed out that Section 1 of the State Ethics Act provides as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The Legislature hereby declares that puhlic office is a puhlic trust and that any effort to realize personal financial gain through puhlic 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 State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Dan P. Wimer, Esquire October 20, 1986 Page 2 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. In addition, the State Ethics Act sets forth additional restricted provisions in Section 403(b). Section 3. Restricted activities. (b) No person shall offer or give to a public official or public employee or candidate for public office or a member of his immediate family or a business with which he is associated, and no public official or public employee or candidate for public office shall solicit or accept, anything of value, including a gift, loan, political contribution, reward, or promise of future employment based on any understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the public official or public employee or candidate for public office would be influenced thereby. 65 P.S. 403(b). The above sections of the law, of course, are cited not in order to indicate that there has or will be any violation of the State Ethics Act in this respect, but merely to review the question that you have presented in light of the new information. Clearly, under Section 1 of the State Ethics Act, it would probably be the better practice for this individual to abstain from participating in the award of this low interest loan even though it does not directly benefit his employer. There is no doubt that the funds will go to purchase the tavern owned by the school director. The city councilperson obviously is aware of where the funds will ultimately be disbursed. Additionally, the fact that this city councilmember has, just recently, been appointed two new'positions within the school district could create substantial questions within the above provisions of the law. As such, and in order to avoid any adverse impact from such a vote, it would still be recommended that this individual abstain from participating in the council's award of this low interest loan to the third party who will purchase the bar from the school director. Dan P. Wimer, Esquire October 20, 1986 Page 3 Finally, the above advice is also given in light of Section 403(d) of the State Ethics Act, which allows the Commission to address other areas of possible conflict as cited in the original advice. Because of these sections of the law, it would be the better practice for this city councilmember to abstain from participating in the city's granting of this particular loan. J1JC /sfd Very ly'yours, obin J o rno Ge - al Counsel