HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-581 Feeney,% ATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
June 14, 1988
Mr. Michael F. Feeney, Chairman 88 -581
Office of Commissioners of
Berks County
Reading, PA 19601 -3584
Re: Conflict of Interest, County Commissiorier, Contracting with
County
Dear Mr. Feeney:
This responds to your letter of May 5, 1988, in which you
requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the State Ethics Act presents any prohibition
upon a County Commissioner from entering into contracts with the
county under the Job Training Program Act whereby various
businesses, of which the Commissioner is a major stockholder,
would train unemployed individuals.
tcts: You state that as Chairman of the Berks County Board of
,:ounty Commissioners, you would like to enter into three
contracts under the Job Training Program Act (JTPA) whereby one
of your businesses, of which you are a major stockholder, would
train three unemployed individuals. You then advise that the
funds received under JTPA offset the wages and the cost of
training unemployed individuals. After stating that the funds
are not a profit or financial gain to the company providing the
training, you note that JTPA regulations do not prohibit such
transactions when a public official's /employee's business is a
party. You state that the contracts are in excess of $500;
however, you then express your view that the Ethics Act requires
that the contract be publicly disclosed and bid and that the
Ethics Act would supersede Section 1806 of the County Code. You
conclude by requesting advice as to whether such contracting is
permitted under the Ethics Act.
Discussion: Initially, it should be noted that a County
Commissioner is a "public official" as that term is defined in
the State Ethics Act. 65 P.S. §402. As such, his conduct must
conform to the requirements of that law. Huff, Opinion 84 -015.
Mr. F1ichz : F. Feeney
June 14, 1988
Page 2
Generally, the State Ethics Act places nc. per se or absolute
prohibition upon a public official's employment in a business
that :ontacts with his governmental body.
The Act does, however, provide as fc.]iows:
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).
Within the above provision of law, no public official may
use his position or any confidential information obtained therein
in order to obtain a financial gain for himself or a member of
h s immediate family or a business with which he is associated.
The Act defines business with which one is associated as follows:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Business with which he is associated." R. ;: y
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.
Since you are a major stockholder in these businesses, then
you would be associated with such businesses as defined under the
Ethics Act.
The Commission has determined if a particular statutcry
enactment prohibits an official's receipt of a particular
benefit, then that official's receipt of such a prohibited
benefit, in and through his public office, would also be a use of
his office in violation of the Act. The Commission has been
called upon, on various occasions, to determine whether a
specific benefit or financial gain is prohibited by law. See,
Allen, Advice 86 -518. In order to determine whether a particular
benefit or gain is strictly prohibited by law, the provisions of
the enabling legislation of the governmental body in question
mast be reviewed. In the instant situation, the County Code
provides as follows:
Mr. Michael F. Feeney
June 14, 1988
Page 3
51806. County Officers Not to Be Interested
in Contracts
No elected or appointed county officer
shall be in any wise, either directly or
indirectly personally interested in any
contract to which the county is a party, cr
in the construction of any public work or
improvement made or undertaken under the
authority of the county commissioners, or
receive any reward or gratuity from any
person so interested. No such officer si111
purchase directly or indirectly any property
sold at a tax or municipal claim sale
Any person violating the provisions of this
section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,
and, upon conviction, shall be sentenced to
pay a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars
($500) and may, by decree of the court, be
removed from office. 16 P.S. 51806.
The County Code does not appear to contain any exception ' --�
the above provision that is applicable in the instant situatio.
This Commission has, in the past, determined that where a public
official owns, operates, or has a vested financial interest in a
business; entity, the public official or his business entity -'oul
be prohibited from receiving compensation for providing sexiices
or transacting business. See Weaver, Opinion 85 -014. A. s/ich,
and based upon prior rulings of this Commission, you as a Cot.n•Ly
Commissioner would appear to be prohibited from receiving any
funds from the county for services rendered or in relation. to .thy.
three contemplated contracts. Because that financial gain
appears to be prohibited by law, then your receipt of this
financial gain in and through public office, would also appear t,
be prohibited by Section 3(a) of the State Ethics Act. See,
Fvda, Order 438 -R.
In addition to the foregoing, the State Ethics Act provides
as follows:
Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act provides:
(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
Micnael F. Feeney
June 14, 1988
Page 4
5% of the equity a 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 relation to the above provision of law, the State Ethics
Commission has generally determined that this provision is a
procedure to be used when a public official or employee contracts
with his own governmental body in excess of $500. Bryan, Opinion
80 -014; Lynch, Opinion 79 -047. The Commission, however, has also
determined that the above provision of law is not a general
authorization for a public official to contract with his own
governmental body where such is otherwise prohibited by law. The
above provision of law would not authorized that transaction.
Additionally, if a particular code prohibits a public official
from being interested in a contract, this provision would not
allow that interest. Further, it has been determined that
Section 12 of the Ethics Act or any other provision would not
supersede the respective Code in this regard. See Amer, Advice
87 -654.
Parenthetically, where contracting is otherwise allcwed or
where there appears to be no expressed prohibition to such
contracting, the above particular provision of law would require
that an additional procedure be utilized when such business is
transacted. This procedure, the open and public official is
otherwise appropriately contracting with his own governmental
body in excess of $500. This open and public process would
require:
(1) prior public notice of the employment or contracting
possibility;
(2) sufficient time for a reasonable and prudent
competitor /applicant to be able to prepare and present
an application or proposal;
(3) public disclosure of all applications or proposals
considered and;
Mr. Michael F. FE.:aLey
June 14, 1)88
Page 5
(4) public disclosure or the contract awarded and offered'
and accepted. See, Canto ::, Opinion 82 -004.
Thus, in the event that contracting would be allowed, the
above process must be employed. Lastly, it must be noted that
the propriety of the proposed course of conduct has only been
addressed under the Ethics Act.
Conclusion: As a County Commissioner, jou are a public
official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act. Based upon
the information provided herein, the Ethics Act would prohibit
you through your businesses from entering into contracts with the
County. Your receipt of such compensation for yourself through
the business with which you are associated would he a financial
gain that is strictly prohibited by law. Such would, thus, be
received in and through public office and would not be in accord
with the State Ethics Act.
Parenthetically, in the event that there had been no such
prohibition upon the receipt of this compensation, then the
Ethics Act, generally, would not have precluded in and of itself
this contracting possibility. However, you could not participate
in any actions relating to the award of the contracts and all
contracting or business transactions must be accomplished
through an open and public process as set forth above.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been
addressed under the Ethics Act.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice 33 a co&plete
defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the
Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct .In any other civil
or criminal proceeding, providing the requc =tos: has discloses'
truthfully all the material facts and commit._d the acts
complained of in reliance on the Advice give -1.
such.
This letter is a public record and will be mach- a r lay iE w
Mr. 7, Feeney
June 14, 438
Page 6
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if yon have any
reason to caallenge 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 §2.12.
Sincerely, l
Vincent J. Dopko,
General Counsel