HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-613 SiffinDear Mr. Siffin:
Medina Address
State Ethics Commission
308 Finance Building
P. 0. Box 11470
Harrisburg Pa. 17108 -1470
October 17, 19R6
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
Mr. Clifton M. Siffin
R.D. #1, Rox 1310
Clarendon, PA 16313
Re: Township Supervisor, Spouse, Hospitalization, Non - Township Employee
1.
86 -613
This responds to your letter of Septemher 15, 19R6, wherein you requested
the advice of the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the spouse of a township supervisor may he placed on the
township group hospitalization program, at her own expense, when she is not a
township employee.
Facts: You have requesters the advice of the State Ethics Commission as the
Chairman of the Mead Township Roam of Supervisors. You had previously
requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission in relation to similar
questions. 86 -502. You have indicated that a current memher of the township
hoard of supervisors has recently retired as a township employee. This
individual still serves as a memher of the hoard of supervisors. The
individual, who has retired, no longer is in need of participating in the
township group hospitalization program in light of the fact that he has
reached retirement age and, consequently, is covered hy medicare. You have
advised, however, that his wife, who is not a township employee, is still in
need of hospitalization coverage. You have advised that the township hoard of
supervisors desires to place the wife, of this township supervisor, on the
list of eligible township employees for the purposes of providing group
hospitalization coverage to her. You advise, that while she would he placed
on the township roles for group coverage, she is not a township employee. You
further advise that the premium payments for this individual would he provided
for hy her. No township funds would he utilized in this respect. The
placement of the individual, on the township group hospitalization program,
would result in this individual receiving hospitalization benefits at a group
rate which, in effect, results in a financial gain to this individual in the
form of reduced premium payments. You have requested the advice of the State
Ethics Commission regarding this situation.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Mr. Clifton M. Siffin
October 17, 1985
Page 2
Discussion: The question that has been posed, in the instant situation, may
only he addressed within the purview of the State Ethics Act. The Commission
will not address this issue or the advisahility of this expenditure in light
of other codes. Generally, township supervisors are puhlic officials within
the purview of the State Ethics Act. Sowers, 80-050. In a previous advice of
Counsel that was issued to you, Siffin, R6-5112, the general requirements of
the law, insofar as it relates to the provision of township insurance henefits
to township supervisors and employees was clearly set forth. That law will
not he reiterated in this' advice, however, the contents of that advice are
incorporated herein hy reference.
Generally, the State Ethics Act provides as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(a) No puhlic official or puhlic employee shall use his
puhlic office or any confidential information received
through his holding public office to ohtain financial gain
other compensation provided hy law for himself, a
= member of his immediate family, or a husiness with which
he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a).
Within the ahove provision of law, a township official, such as a supervisor,
may not use his position in order to ohtain a financial gain for himself or a
memher of his immediate family. A memher of one's immediate family is defined
as follows:
Section 2. nefinitions.
"Immediate family." A spouse residing in the person's
household and minor dependent children. 65 P.S. 402.
In the instant situation, if the township supervisor were to participate
in approving the placement of his spouse on the township group hospitalization
plan, when she is not a township employee, such would he allowing her to
ohtain a financial gain other than the compensation that is provided for by
law. As a township employee, she is generally not an individual who would he
permitted to participate in such a program. Ry participating in the allowance
of his wife to he placed on the group program, thereby receiving a reduction
in premium rates, this supervisor would he using his official position to
allow his wife to receive a financial gian other than the compensation
provided for hy law. Thus, it is clear, that the township supervisor who
still serves on the hoard of supervisors, may not, to any extent, participate
in permitting his wife to accept or receive this henefit.
Should this township supervisor, however, ahstain from participating in
the awarding of this henefit to his wife, then the Fthics Act would not appear
to prohihit the conduct set forth in your letter. Specifically, the wife of
Mr. Clifton M. Siffin
Octoher 17, 1986
Page 3
the township supervisor is not an official and is not subject to the
requirements of the State Ethics Act. Additionally, the township supervisor,
by ahstaining from participating to any degree in this matter, would not he
using his puhlic position in order to ohtain a financial gain. Thus, it-would
appear as though hy ahstaining from participating in this matter, the official
would not he using his position in violation of the State Ethics Act.
Not addressed in this advice, is the issue of whether this activity is
permissible within the purview of the Second Class Township Code. Advice
regarding the appropriateness of this activity, within that particular
provision of law, must he addressed hy your township solicitor as such would
not involve any interpretation of the State Ethics Act.
Conclusion: The State Ethics Act would require that a township supervisor
ahstain from participating in allowing his spouse, who is not a township
employee, to participate, even at her own expense, in the township group
hospitializatinn program. This is so in light of the fact that hy allowing
this individual, to participate in such a program, the individual involved,
who is a member of the supervisor's immediate family, would he receiving a
financial gain other than compensation provided for by law. The State Ethics
Act would not appear to prohibit the receipt of this benefit hy the wife of a
township supervisor where her spouse ahstains from such participation. 'His
ahstention should, of course, he puhlicly noted and recorded. This advice
does not address the advisahility and permissibility of this activity within
the purview of other codes such as the Second Class Township Code.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any
enforcement proceeding initiated hy 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 puhlic record and will he made availahle 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 appearances hefore the Commission will he scheduled and a formal
Opinion from the Commission will he issued. Any such appeal must he made, in
writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
Sincerely ,
ohn J. e 0 lno
Oeneral�Counsel