HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-568 SmithDear Mr. Smith:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PA 17120
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
May 26, 1988
88 - 568
Kevin Hopkins Smith, Esquire
Route 113 At Yellow Springs Road
Chester Springs, PA 19425
Re: Former Public Official; Section 3(e); Borough Council; Legal
Representation of Clients; Non -Legal Representation of
Clients
This responds to your letter of April 5, 1988, in which you
requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: You ask whether the Ethics Act presents any restrictions
upon your potential employment following your termination of
service with the Borough Council.
Facts: In your advice request you state that you are currently
serving a four -year term as a Borough Councilman in the Borough
of Phoenixville, hereinafter, Borough. You then state that you
will be moving outside of the Borough and will be resigning your
position at the end of the month. You also advise that you
maintain a sole proprietorship for the practice of law and that
you almost exclusively represent one real estate developer who
has not yet been involved in a project within the Borough. You
then express your concern regarding the limitations upon your
representation of this client in the event that he would be
interested in purchasing any real estate with the borough. You
specifically inquire as to whether the Ethics Act would restrict
your representation as an attorney of this client regarding the
following activities: consulting with the Borough's zoning staff
as to subdivision and zoning requirements, the availability of
municipal services and the municipality's attitude towards the
development proposal; advising your client of the results of the
above discussions so that he could consider that information and
deciding whether to purchase realty; representing your client
before the Borough's planning commission and discussing matters
with the various Borough consultants such as engineers,
architects and the solicitor; representing your client before
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 2
the borough zoning hearing board regarding such matters as
variances; special exceptions, etc.; representing your client
before Borough Council regarding zoning changes and subdivision
approvals and representing your client and working out disputes
that may arise with the Borough staff during the course of the
development of a project. You then ask whether the above
inquiries would have the same or different results under the
Ethics Act if you were to be a principal in the real estate
ventures rather than as an attorney representing a client.
Discussion: As a councilman for the Borough of Phoenixville, you
are a "public official" as that term is defined under the Ethics
Act. As such, your conduct must conform to the provisions of
that law. 65 P.S. Section 401; 51 Pa Code 51.1.
You are probably aware of the case entitled Pennsylvania
Public Utility Bar Association v. Thornburgh, 434 A.2d 1327, 62
Pa. Cmwlth. 88 (1981), affirmed per curiam 450 A.2d 613, 498 Pa.
589•(1982) which deals with the applicability of. Section 3(e) of
the Ethics Act to attorneys in the regulation of their practice
of law. However, you seek clarification of the question of the
applicability of the Ethics Act to your situation and any
restrictions that might be placed upon your conduct with respect
to your practice of law and new work and /or employment.
In light of the recent decision in Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission Bar Association, supra, where the Court held
that Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. §403(e), was an
impermissible intrusion upon the Supreme Court's authority to
regulate an attorney's conduct, the State Ethics Commission has
applied this decision to mean that there are no prohibitions
under Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act upon your conduct insofar as
that conduct constitutes the practice of law.
Therefore, insofar as your conduct before the Borough in
particular, the agency or entity with which you were associated,
would constitute the practice of law, Section 3(e) of the Ethics
Act cannot be applied to restrict that proposed activity.
Particular reference should be made to the decision of the
Commonwealth Court at Footnote 7, 434 A.2d at page 1331 - 1332.
In this note, the Court indicates that any activity in which the
- attorney proports to render professional services to a client may
only be regulated by the Supreme Court. The State Ethics
Commission, therefore, must conclude that to the extent that you
would represent a client, as a lawyer, before the Borough or
otherwise, Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act Would not operate to
bar such activity.
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 3
If, however, the activities that you intend to undertake
do not fall within the category of the practice of law, the
prohibitions of Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act might be
applicable. Activities which might be considered, by the
Commission, not to constitute the "practice of law" or to be
undertaken in the capacity as lawyer- client, might include
activities such as lobbying and negotiating on contracts.
However, it is assumed for the purposes of this Advice, that you
intend to undertake these in the capacity of lawyer- client, that
these activities would constitute the practice of law, and that
the provisions of Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act pursuant to the
mandates of the Supreme Court's ruling would, therefore, be
inapplicable.
In any event, you should be advised that your activity, even
if Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act were to be applicable, would
not regulate your conduct, except with respect to the Borough --
the "governmental body" with which you are "associated."
Therefore, any representation which you might undertake with
respect to a client or employer before any entity other than the
Borough would not be restricted by Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act
in any event.
As can be seen from the above, Section 3(e) of the Ethics
Act would not restrict your activity as an attorney representing
a client regarding the six activities that you have set forth in
your letter. However, if you were to become a principal in the
real estate venture, then clearly you would not be in an attorney
- client situation and the restrictions of 3(e) of the Act would
apply to you.
Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act provides:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(e) No former official or public employee
shall represent a person, with or without
compensation, on any matter before the
governmental body with which he has been
associated for one year after he leaves that
body. 65 P.S. 5403.
As previously noted, the governmental body with which you
were associated while serving was the Borough. Therefore,
within the first year after you would leave the Borough, Section
3(e) of the Ethics Act would apply and restrict your
"representation" of persons or new employers vis -a -vis the
Borough.
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 4
The Ethics Act would not affect your ability to appear
before agencies or entities other than with respect to the
Borough. Likewise, there is no general limitation on the type
of employment in which you may engage following your departure
from the Borough. It is noted, however, that the conflicts of
interest law is primarily concerned with financial conflicts and
violations of the public trust. The intent of the law generally
is that during the term of a person's public employment, he must
act consistently with the public trust and upon departure from
the public sector, that.individual should not be allowed to
utilize his association with the public sector, officials or
employees to secure for himself or a new employer, treatment or
benefits that may be obtainable only because of his association
with his former public employer. See Anderson, 83 -014; Zwikl,
85 -004.
In respect to the one year representation, the Ethics
Commission has promulgated regulations to define "representation"
as follows:
Section 1.1 Definitions.
Representation - -- Any act on behalf of any
person including but not limited to the
following activities: personal appearances,
negotiating contracts, lobbying, and
submitting bid or contract proposals which
are signed by or contain the name of the
former public official or public employee.
51 Pa. Code 51.1.
The Commission, in its opinions, has also interpreted the
term "representation" as used in Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act
to prohibit:
1. Personal appearances before the governmental body or
bodies with which you have been associated, (that is the
Borough), including, but not limited to, negotiations or
renegotiations on contracts with the Borough;
2. Attempts to influence the Borough;
3. Participating in any matters before the Borough over
which you had supervision, direct involvement, o responsibility
while employed by the Borough;
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 5
4. Lobbying, that is representing the interests of any
person or employer before the Borough in relation to legislation,
regulations, etc. See Russell, Opinion 80 -048 and Seltzer,
Opinion 80 -044.
The Commission has also held that preparing and signing a
proposal, document or bid, or listing your name as the person who
will provide technical assistance on such proposal, document, or
bid, if submitted to or reviewed by the Borough, constitutes an
attempt to influence your former governmental body. See
Kilareski, Opinion 80 -054. Therefore, within the first year
after you leave the Borough, you should not engage in the type of
activity outlined above. (The Commission, however, has stated
that the inclusion of your name as an employee or consultant on a
"pricing proposal," even if submitted to or reviewed by the
Borough, is not prohibited as "representation." See Kotalik,
Opinion 84 -007).
You may, assist in the preparation of any documents
presented to the Borough so long as you are not identified as the
preparer. You may also counsel any person regarding that
person's appearance before the Borough. Once again, however,
your activity in this respect should not be revealed to the
Borough. Of course, any ban under the Ethics Act would not
prohibit or preclude you from making general informational
inquiries of the Borough to secure information which is available
to the general public. See Cutt, Opinion 79 -023. This, of
course, must not be done in an effort to indirectly influence
these entities or to otherwise make known to the Borough your
representation of, or work for your new employer.
Finally, the Commission has concluded that if you are
administering an existing contract as opposed to negotiating or
renegotiating a contract, your activities would not be prohibited
by the Ethics Act. See Dalton, Opinion 80 -056 and Beaser, Advice
81 -538.
In applying the above to the six questions which you pose in
your capacity as a principal in a real estate venture, Section
3(e) of the Ethics Act would not restrict your consulting with
the borough's zoning staff regarding subdivision and zoning
requirements since that is information which is available to the
public. However, in terms of specific requests regarding the
borough's attitude toward a development proposal, this would
relate to your specific representation as a principal of a real
estate venture and such activity would be prohibited by Section
3(e) of the Act. As to your second inquiry regarding advising
your clients on this information, Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act
would not restrict such discussions since the prohibition of
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 6
Section 3(e) relates to your representation before your
governmental body but not as to discussions with the client. As
to your third and forth inquiries, Section 3(e) of the Ethics
Act would not restrict your activities in this regard since the
planning commission and zoning hearing board are not your former
governmental body which is the Borough. Lastly, as to your fifth
and sixth inquiries concerning representing a client, which would
not be in an attorney /client situation as you have posed it
before the Borough regarding the zoning matters or working out
disputes, this is clearly an activity which would be prohibited
by Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act as noted above.
Section 3 b of the Ethics Act •rovides:
(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 employee or candidate for public
office would be influenced thereby. 65 P.S.
S403(b).
Section 3(b) of the Ethics Act must be referenced in order
to provide a complete response to your inquiry. Under Section
3(b) of the Ethics Act cited above, which a public official or
employee must observe, a public official or employee must neither
offer nor accept anything of value on the understanding or with
the intention that his judgment would be influenced thereby. It
is assumed such a situation does not exist here. This Section is
referenced not to indicate that any such activity has been or
will be undertaken but in an effort to provide a complete
response to your inquiry.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been
addressed under the Ethics Act; the applicability of any other
statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct
other than the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do
not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Act.
Conclusion: As a borough councilman, you are to be considered a
"public official" as defined in the Ethics Act. Upon termination
of your service with the Borough, you would become a "former
Kevin Hopkins Smith
Page 7
public official" subject to the restrictions imposed by Section
3(e) of the Ethics Act. As such, your conduct should conform to
the requirements of the Ethics Act as outlined above. Your
governmental body for the purpose of the one year representation
restriction is the Borough.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been
addressed under the Ethics Act.
Further, should you terminate your employment or service,
as outlined above, you are reminded that the Ethics Act also
requires you to file a Statement of Financial Interests for the
year following your termination of service.
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.
such.
This letter is a public record and will be made available as
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 former 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 52.12.
S cere ly,
Vincent 3. Dopko,
General Counsel