HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-568 HuyettScott L. Huyett, Esquire
Attorney at Law
538 Elm Street
Reading, PA 19601
Dear Mr. Huyett:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
June 2, 1994
94 -568
Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Private Employment or
Business, Borough, Municipal Authority, Mayor, Mayor as
Masonry Contractor Working for Authority.
This responds to your letter of May 4, 1994, in which you
requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether a borough mayor is prohibited or restricted by the
Public Official and Employee Ethics Law from working with, being
employed by or associated with a municipal authority.
Facts: A Berks County Borough has caused a municipal authority to
be organized under the Municipal Authorities Act of Pennsylvania
which authority owns a sanitary sewage collection system and waste
water treatment plant that was constructed in the mid 1960's.
Though the system is operated by Shoemakersville Borough by virtue
of a lease, financing for the design and construction of the system
was handled by the authority on a lease back basis. When the
authority determined to expand and upgrade the system in 1994, bids
were advertised.
Since the Mayor of the Borough is not full time, and is self
employed as a masonry contractor, a general contractor who is
interested in bidding on the authority project has asked the Mayor
to submit prices to him for masonry work on the project. The
general contractor would incorporate into his bid on the contract
the price he received from the mayor who would be a subcontractor.
Since the specifications of the project call for the disclosure by
the general contractor of the names and addresses of the proposed
subcontractors, the Mayor's business name would be disclosed.
Although the Borough Council directs the activities of the
Huyett, Scott L., Esquire, 94 -568
June 2, 1994
Page 2
Borough, the Municipal Authority and the Borough are separate and
independent local agencies. The only legal effect that Borough
Council has on the authority is to direct the types of projects the
authority may undertake. The Borough also appoints the members to
the Municipal Authority. No appointments on the authority are due
for renewal or replacement until the end of 1994 with memberships
staggered by years. The authority is bound by law to award the
contract to the lowest bidder and hence there is no discretion
other than in determining responsibility.
The Borough Mayor is responsible for the day to day operations
of the municipal police force and is empowered to accept or veto
ordinances adopted by Borough Council subject to an override vote.
The Mayor may also vote to break a tie in Borough Council. The
Borough Council legally does not vote on the award of the contract
for the proposed work for the sanitary sewage system.
After reviewing the Ethics Law and other statutes, you seek an
advisory as to whether in the future the Mayor may participate in
the proposed work in a private capacity. You have advised the
Mayor that he may not conduct any lobbying activities even though
the authority is bound by law to award the contract to the lowest
bidder. Lastly, you seek an expeditious response since there is
work to be done at present and the Mayor is able to give the
project his attention.
Discussion: As a Mayor for the Borough of Shoemakersville, he is
a public official as that term is defined under the Ethics Law, and
hence he is 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
Huyett, Scott L., Esquire, 94 -568
June 2, 1994
Page 3
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
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 judgement of the
public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is
made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has or
will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete
response to the question presented.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law to the
instant matter, we note that Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law does
not prohibit public officials /employees from outside business
activities or employment; however, the public official /employee may
not use the authority of office for the advancement of his own
private pecuniary benefit or that of a business with which he is
associated. Pancoe, Opinion 89 -011. A public official /employee
must exercise caution so that his private business activities do
not conflict with his public duties. Crisci, Opinion 89 -013.
Thus, a public official /employee could not perform private business
using governmental facilities or personnel. In particular, the
governmental telephones, postage, staff, equipment, research
materials, personnel or any other property could not be used as a
means, in whole or part, to carry out private business activities.
In addition, the public official /employee could not during
government working hours, solicit or promote such business
activity. Pancoe, supra. Similarly, Section 3(a) would expressly
prohibit the use of confidential information received by holding
public office/ employment for such a prohibited private pecuniary
benefit.
Thus, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not bar the Mayor
Huyett, Scott L., Esquire, 94 -568
June 2, 1994
Page 4
from being a subcontractor as to the project of the Municipal
Authority. However, as a public official, the Mayor would have a
conflict in any matter before Borough Council concerning the
municipal authority expansion project where through his
participation, such as voting to break a tie, he could reasonably
and legitimately anticipate through such action that he would be
able to obtain a subcontract on the municipal authority expansion
project as a masonry subcontractor. See Amato Opinion, 89 -002.
For example, if Council were deadlocked on the issue of whether to
go forward with the project or deadlocked on the issue of how
expansive the project should be, the Mayor should not vote to break
a tie in such issues if he could reasonable and legitimately
anticipate that by voting in favor of the project or its expansion
that he would receive a subcontract on the municipal authority
project.
In such cases as noted above, Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law
would require not only that the Mayor abstain from participation
but also file a written memorandum to that effect with the person
recording the minutes.
In summary, the Ethics Law would restrict the following:
1. The use of authority of office to obtain any business in
a private capacity;
2. utilization of confidential information gained through
public position;
3. participating in discussions, reviews, or recommendations
on matters which relate to the business /private employer
which may come before the governmental body and in such
cases publicly announcing the relationship as well as
filing a written memorandum as per the requirements of
Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law. Brooks, Opinion 89 -023.
The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed
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 applicability of the Borough Code.
Conclusion: A Borough Mayor is a public official subject to the
provisions of the Ethics Law. Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would
not preclude the Mayor from outside employment /business activity
subject to the restrictions and qualifications as noted above. In
the event that a matter concerning the project came before Council,
and the Mayor would have a conflict and he could not participate
and he would have to comply with the disclosure requirements of
Huyett, Scott L., Esquire, 94 -568
June 2, 1994
Page 5
Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law as outlined above. 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.
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 appeal the Advice to the full
Commission. A personal appearance before the Commission will be
scheduled and a formal Opinion will be issued by the Commission.
Any such appeal must be in writing and must be actually
received at the Commission within fifteen (15) days of the date of this
Advice pursuant to 51 Pa.Code §13.2(h). The appeal may be received
at the Commission by hand delivery, United States mail, delivery
service, or by FAX transmission (717- 787- 0806). Failure to file such
an appeal at the Commission within fifteen (15) days may result in the
dismissal of the appeal.
cerely,
cent Dop o
Chief Counsel