HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-660 SiegelArthur B. Siegel, Esquire
511 Broad Street
Milford, PA 18337
Dear Mr. Siegel:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
December 5, 1988
88 -660
Re: Conflict of Interest, Municipal Authority, Secretary,
Appointment of Father as Treasurer
This responds to your letter of October 14, 1988 in which
you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the State Ethics Act presents any restrictions or
prohibition upon a secretary- collector of a municipal authority
relative to the potential hiring of her father as treasurer of
the municipal authority.
Facts: You state that you are the solicitor to the Milford
Borough Municipal Authority and you have telephonically advised
that you are asking the above question on behalf of the
secretary- collector of said authority. You state that the
authority supplies water to Milford Borough and parts of two
townships and that the position of secretary- collector is a part -
time appointive post with the responsibility of sending and
collecting bills. You state that the treasurer's job is also
appointive and consists of receiving and paying bills that are
approved at monthly meetings of the authority. You conclude by
requesting advice as to whether it would be a conflict for the
secretary- collector's father being appointed to the vacancy of
treasurer of the authority.
Discussion: As secretary- collector of the municipal authority,
the individual is a public employee as that term is defined under
the Ethics Act. 65 P.S. 5402; 51 Pa. Code S1.1. As such, the
conduct of the secretary - collector is subject to the provisions
of the Ethics Act and the restrictions therein are applicable to
him /her.
Arthur B. Siegel, Esquire
December 5, 1988
Page 2
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act provides:
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).
Under Section 3(a) quoted above, the State Ethics Commission
has determined that use of office by a public official to obtain
a financial gain for himself or a member of his immediate family
or a business with which he is associated which is not provided
for in law transgresses the above provision of law. Thus, use of
office by a public official to obtain a financial gain which is
not authorized as part of his compensation is prohibited by
Section 3(a): Hoak /McCutcheon, Orders No. 128, 129, affirmed
McCutcheon v. State Ethics Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. Ct. 529, 466
A.2d 283 (1983); Yacobet, Order No. 412 -R, affirmed Yacobet v.
State Ethics Commission, 109 Pa. Commw. Ct. 432, 531 A.2d 536
(1987). Similarly, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act would prohibit
a public official /employee from using public office to advance
his own interests; Koslow, Order 458 -R, affirmed Koslow v. State
Ethics Commission, Pa. Commw. Ct. , 540 A.2d 1374 (1988).
Likewise, a public official /employee may not use the status or
position of public office for his own personal advantage; Huff,
Opinion 84 -015.
Under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act quoted above, a public
official or employee may not serve the interest of two persons,
groups or entities whose interests may be adverse. See Alfano,
Opinion 80 -007. The Ethics Act, however, does not prohibit a
municipal authority from hiring an individual who is related to
an employee of that authority provided that the public employee
does not use public office to advance the job opportunity of
his /her member of immediate family or conversely use public
office to eliminate potential competitors for that position. In
this case the father of the secretary- collector is not a member
of his /her immediate family as that term is defined under the
Ethics Act; furthermore, it appears, and it is so assumed, that
the secretary- collector does not have any authority or input as
to the hiring vis -a -vis the position of treasurer. It is
expressly assumed for purposes of this advice that the secretary -
collector has not used public office to advance the job prospects
Arthur B. Siegel, Esquire
December 5, 1988
Page 3
of his /her father; in addition, it is assumed that the hiring
would be done by the board of the municipal authority and that
the secretary - collector in his /her position would not
participate as to the selection process.
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 secretary- collector of a municipal authority, the
individual is a public employee subject to the provisions of the
State Ethics Act. Under the facts and circumstances outlined
above, the Ethics Act would not preclude the hiring of the
secretary- collector's father by the municipal authority board to
a position of authority treasurer, subject to the qualifications
as noted above. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct
has only been addressed under the Ethics Act.
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 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.
S'
.0-
Vincent J. Dopko,
General Counsel