HomeMy WebLinkAbout93-555 TaylorJames A. Taylor, Esquire
Murrin, Taylor, Flach & Horan
110 East Diamond Street
Butler, PA 16001 -5999
You have been
Township to opine
insurance benefits
State Constitution
Law.
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
April 30, 1993
93 -555
Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Township Supervisor,
Employee Supervisor, Township Paid Insurance Benefits.
Dear Mr. Taylor:
This responds to your letter of April 13, 1993, in which you
requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law
presents any prohibition or restrictions upon second class township
non - employee supervisors obtaining township paid insurance
benefits.
Non-
Facts: As Solicitor for Oakland Township and Center Township, two
Second Class Townships located in Butler County, Pennsylvania, you
request an advisory from the State Ethics Commission.
The Pennsylvania Legislature recently passed Act 157 of 1992
which authorizes non - employee supervisors to receive township paid
insurance benefits. You are also aware that Article III, Section
27 of the State Constitution prohibits any increase for
compensation of elected officials during their term in office.
requested by both Center Township and Oakland
as to whether the receipt of township paid
would violate Article III, Section 27 of the
or the Public Officials and Employees Ethics
Based upon the above, you request an advisory from the State
Ethics Commission as to the propriety of the above proposed action
in light of the Second Class Township Code, the Pennsylvania
Constitution, and this Commission's rules and regulations.
James A. Taylor, Esquire
April 30, 1993
Page 2
Discussion: It is initially noted that your request for advice may
only be addressed with regard to prospective conduct. A reading of
Sections 7(10) and 7(11) of the Ethics Law makes it clear that an
opinion or advice may be given only as to prospective (future)
conduct. If the activity in question has already occurred, the
Commission may not issue an opinion or advice but any person may
then submit a signed and sworn complaint which will be investigated
by the Commission if there are allegations of Ethics Law violations
by a person who is subject to the Ethics Law.
As a non - employee Supervisor for Center Township or Oakland
Township, the Supervisors are public officials as that term is
defined under the Ethics Law, and hence they are subject to the
provisions of that law.
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law provides:
Section 3. Restricted Activities.
(a) No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that
constitutes a conflict of interest.
The following terms are defined in the Ethics Law as follows:
Section 2, Definitions.
"Conflict or conflict of interest." Use
by a public official or public employee of the
authority of his office or employment or any
confidential information received through his
holding public office or employment for the
private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member
of his immediate family or a business with
which he or a member of his immediate family
is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict of
interest" does not include an action having a
de minimis economic impact or which affects to
the same degree a class consisting of the
general public or a subclass consisting of an
industry, occupation or other group which
includes the public official or public
employee, a member of his immediate family or
a business with which he or a member of his
immediate family is associated.
"Authority of office or employment." The
actual power provided by law, the exercise of
which is necessary to the performance of
duties and responsibilities unique to a
James A. Taylor, Esquire
April 30, 1993
Page 3
particular public office or position of public
employment.
In addition, Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide
in part that no person shall offer to a public official /employee
anything of monetary value and no public official /employee shall
solicit or accept anything of monetary value based upon the
understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the
public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is
made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has
been or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a
complete response to the question presented.
In reviewing the question posed, this Advice is limited to
whether the Supervisors may receive insurance benefits under the
Ethics Law. Although this Commission does not have the express
statutory jurisdiction to interpret the Second Class Township Code,
it is necessary in this case to review 53 P.S. 05515 to the extent
that it impacts upon the Ethics Law regarding the issue of whether
the Supervisors would be using the authority of office to obtain a
private pecuniary benefit for themselves.
The Second Class Township Code provides for participation by
supervisors in insurance plans as follows:
(1) Supervisors and their dependents
shall be eligible for inclusion in group life,
health, hospitalization, medical service and
accident insurance plans paid in whole or in
part by the township. No policy of group life
insurance shall contain any provision for the
accrual or deferral of a cash surrender value,
loan value or any other nonforfeitable
benefit, in addition to or beyond the face
amount of insurance, that shall inure to the
benefit of the supervisor, any beneficiary or
any other individual having an insurable
interest in the life of a supervisor. Such
insurance, however, may contain a provision
that when the insurance, or any portion of it,
on a person covered under the policy ceases
because of termination of employment or the
termination of the insured's term of office,
such person shall be entitled to have issued
to him by the insurer, without evidence of
insurability, an individual policy of
insurance on any form customarily issued by
the insurer at the age and for the amount
applied for if: (i) such amount is not in
excess of the amount of life insurance which
James A. Taylor, Esquire
April 30, 1993
Page 4
ceases because of such termination; and (ii)
the application for the individual policy is
made and first premium is paid to the insurer
within thirty -one days after such termination.
Participation by supervisors shall not require
auditor approval. Such insurance shall be
uniformly applicable to those covered and
shall not improperly discriminate in favor of
supervisors.
53 P.S. §65515(c)(1).
It is clear that on the face of the above provision that in
order for a Center Township or Oakland Township Supervisor to
participate in Township paid insurance benefits, the insurance
shall be uniformly applicable to those covered and shall not
improperly discriminate in favor of supervisors.
It is further clear on the face of the above provision of the
Second Class Township Code that the types of insurance benefits in
which Supervisors and their dependents are eligible to participate
are group life, health, hospitalization, medical and accident
insurance. There does not appear to be any authorization in the
Second Class Township. Code for any other type of township paid
insurance for supervisors and their dependents.
In considering the above provision to the extent that it
impacts upon the Ethics Law, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law
prohibits the use of authority of public office /employment or
confidential information received by holding such a public position
for the private .pecuniary benefit of the public official /public
employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business
with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not prohibit the Center
Township or Oakland Township Supervisors and their dependents from
participating in Township paid insurance benefits which would
conform to the express requirements of 53 P.S. §65515.
A postscript is necessary so that this Advice is not
misconstrued. First, as noted above, the Commission's jurisdiction
is limited to interpreting the provisions of the Ethics law.
Therefore, although you sought an advisory in light of the Second
Class Township Code, the Commission's rules and Regulations, and
Article III, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, this
Advice does not and cannot offer any interpretation as to whether
the proposed conduct would violate other laws such as the Second
Class Township Code or Article III, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania
Constitution.
The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed
James A. Taylor, Esquire
April 30, 1993
Page 5
under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other statute, code,
ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than the
Ethics Law has not been considered in that they do not involve an
interpretation of the Ethics Law. Specifically not addressed
herein is the question of whether the receipt of such insurance
would improperly discriminate in favor of the supervisors or
whether the insurance qualifies as to types allowable under the
Second Class Township Code.
Conclusion: As Township Supervisors for Center Township or Oakland
Township in Butler County, Pennsylvania, each Supervisor is a
public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law.
Section 3(a) of the Ethics law would specifically prohibit the
Supervisors from using the authority of office to obtain a private
pecuniary benefit for themselves where such private pecuniary
benefit received would be contrary.to the express requirement of
the Second Class Township Code, 53 P.S. 565515. Section 3(a) of
the Ethics Law would not prohibit the authorization of Township
paid insurance benefits in which the Supervisors and their
dependents would participate, as long as those benefits conform to
the requirements of 53 P.S. 565515. Lastly, the propriety of the
proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law.
Pursuant to Section 7(11), 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.
This letter is a public record and will be made available 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 appearance before the Commission
will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be
issued. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be received at
the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code SI3.2(h).
cerely,
Vincent J. Dopk
Chief Counsel