HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-600 OckerDear Ms. Ocker:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
September 7, 1994
Jacqueline K. Ocker, Secretary
Paradise Township
Paradise Township Municipal Building
RD 1, Box 490A
Cresco, PA 18326 94 -600
Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Township Supervisor, Use
of Authority of Office, Confidential Information, Vote,
Business with which Associated; Parent and Subsidiary
Corporation, Customers of Employer.
This responds to your letter of August 5, 1994 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 a township supervisor
with regard to official action involving or affecting a corporation
or its parent company, where the township supervisor's employer
sells and rents large construction equipment to the parent company
and its subsidiaries, from which transactions the township
supervisor receives commissions.
Facts: As Secretary for Paradise Township in Monroe County,
Pennsylvania, you request an advisory on behalf of Charles E.
DePue, Jr., a Supervisor of Paradise Township. Mr. DePue is
employed as a salesman by Medico Industries, a large construction
equipment dealership. Mr. DePue has done business, both past and
present, with Haines and Kibblehouse, Inc., and its subsidiary
companies by selling and renting construction equipment to them.
Mr. DePue profits from these sales by commissions he receives from
his employer.
There is an application to expand an existing stone quarry in
Paradise Township from thirteen acres to in excess of one hundred
seventy acres. You have submitted contradictory facts as to the
identity of the applicant. You initially stated that the applicant
is Paradise Materials, Inc., a subsidiary of Haines and
Ocker, Jacqueline R., 94 -600
September 7, 1994
Page 2
Ribblehouse, Inc. You subsequently indicated that the applicant is
Haines and Ribblehouse, Inc., itself.
Additionally, Paradise Township is currently reviewing its
code of ordinances, particularly its mining ordinance, under the
curative amendment process outlined in the Pennsylvania
Municipalities Planning Code. A new mining ordinance is being
prepared as to which Mr. DePue would be voting as a Supervisor.
The proposed mining ordinance would seek to regulate or limit some
aspects of Haines and Ribblehouse's quarrying operations.
Based upon all of the above, you request an advisory as to
whether it would be a conflict of interest for Mr. DePue to vote on
the approval or disapproval of the application to expand the
existing stone quarry operation, and further whether it would be
ethical for Mr. DePue to vote on any ordinance which may attempt to
limit or strictly regulate the way Haines and Ribblehouse's
quarrying business is conducted.
Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 7(10)
and 7(11) of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. §5407(10), (11), advisories
are issued to the requestor based upon the facts which the
requestor has submitted. In issuing the advisory based upon the
facts which the requestor has submitted, the Commission does not
engage in an independent investigation of the facts, nor does it
speculate as to facts which have not been submitted. It is the
burden of the requestor to truthfully disclose all of the material
facts relevant to the inquiry. 65 P.S. SS407(10), (11). An
advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requestor has
truthfully disclosed all of the material facts.
As a Township Supervisor for Paradise Township in Monroe
County, Pennsylvania, Mr. Charles E. DePue, Jr. 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:
Ocker, Jacqueline K., 94 -600
September 7, r994
Page 3
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
particular public office or position of public
employment.
"Business with which he is associated."
Any business in which the person or a member
of the person's immediate family is a
director, officer, owner, employee or has a
financial interest.
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
been or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a
complete response to the question presented.
Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law provides as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities
(j) Where voting conflicts are not
otherwise addressed by the Constitution of
Ocker, Jacqueline K., 94 -600
September 7, 1994
Page 4
Pennsylvania or by any law, rule, regulation,
order or ordinance, the following procedure
shall be employed. Any public official or
public employee who in the discharge of his
official duties would be required to vote on a
matter that would result in a conflict of
interest shall abstain from voting and, prior
to the vote being taken, publicly announce and
disclose the nature of his interest, as a
public record in a written memorandum filed
with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting at which the vote is
taken, provided that whenever a governing body
would be unable to take any action on a matter
before it because the number of members of the
body required to abstain from voting under the
provisions of this section makes the majority
or other legally required vote of approval
unattainable, then such members shall be
permitted to vote if disclosures are made as
otherwise provided herein. In the case of a
three - member governing body of a political
subdivision, where one member has abstained
from voting as a result of a conflict of
interest, and the remaining two members of the
governing body have cast opposing votes, the
member who has abstained shall be permitted to
vote to break the tie vote if disclosure is
made as otherwise provided herein.
If a conflict exists, Section 3(j) requires the public
official /employee to abstain and to publicly disclose the
abstention and reasons for same, both orally and by filing a
written memorandum to that effect with the person recording the
minutes or supervisor.
In the event that the required abstention results in the
inability cif the governmental body to take action because a
majority is unattainable due to the abstention (s) from_ conflict
under the Ethics Law, then in that event participation is
permissible provided the disclosure requirements noted above are
followed. See, Miakar, Advice 91- 523 -S.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law to the
circumstances which you have submitted, pursuant to Section 3 (a) of
the Ethics Law, a public official /public employee is prohibited
from using the 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
Ocker, Jacqueline K., 94 -600
September 7, 1994
Page 5
with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated.
Medico Industries, as Mr. DePue's employer, is a business with
which Mr. DePue is associated.
Based upon prior precedents of the State Ethics Commission, it
is clear that Mr. DePue would have a conflict of interest in
matters pertaining to his employer's customers, including Haines
and Kibblehouse, Inc. ( "Haines and Kibblehouse ") and those of its
subsidiaries which do business with Medico Industries. See Miller,
Opinion 89 -024; Kannebecker, Opinion 92 -010.
Turning to your specific inquiries, it must be noted that the
facts which you have submitted are contradictory and incomplete.
First, you have submitted contradictory facts as to the
identity of the applicant which seeks to expand the existing stone
quarry in Paradise Township. You initially identified the
applicant as Paradise Materials, Inc., but you subsequently
inquired as to whether Mr. DePue could vote on the approval or
disapproval of the application of Haines and Kibblehouse to expand
the existing stone quarry operation.
Second, you have submitted incomplete facts because you do not
indicate whether Paradise Materials, Inc. itself does business with
Mr. DePue's employer. This is a material fact because parent and
subsidiary corporations are separate corporate entities: mere
status as a subsidiary corporation of Hanes and Kibblehouse would
not place Paradise Materials, Inc. into a customer relationship
with Mr. DePue's employer so as to give rise to a conflict of
interest. See, Confidential Opinion, 92 -003; Lowery, Advice 93-
559.
Given that the facts which you have submitted are inconsistent
and incomplete, this advice may only provide the following limited
guidance to you.
Mr. DePue would have a conflict of interest in matters
involving Haines and Kibblehouse and /or any of its subsidiaries
which do business with Medico Industries. If Paradise Materials,
Inc. is a customer of Medico Industries, Mr. DePue would have a
conflict of interest as to that corporate entity.
Mr. DePue would have a conflict of interest as to the
application to expand the existing stone quarry if the applicant is
a customer of Medico Industries, or if a customer of Medico
Industries is otherwise directly involved.
Finally, based upon your factual representation that the
proposed mining ordinance would seek to regulate or limit some
aspects of Haines and Kibblehouse's quarrying operations, and given
Ocker, Jacqueline K., 94 -600
September 7, 1994
Page 6
that Haines and Kibblehouse is a customer of Medico Industries, Mr.
DePue would have a conflict of interest as to matters which would
affect those quarrying operations, including but not limited to
such ordinances and /or amendments.
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 Second Class Township Code.
Conclusion: As a Township Supervisor for Paradise Township in
Monroe County, Pennsylvania, Mr. Charles E. DePue, Jr. is a public
official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Mr. DePue's
employer, Medico Industries, is a business with which Mr. DePue is
associated. Mr. DePue would have a conflict of interest in matters
before the Township pertaining to customers of Medico Industries,
including Haines and Kibblehouse, Inc. ( "Haines and Kibblehouse "),
and those of its subsidiaries which do business with Medico
Industries. Mr. DePue would have a conflict of interest as to the
application to expand an existing stone quarry in Paradise Township
if that application has been made by a customer of Medico
Industries, or if a customer of Medico Industries is otherwise
directly involved. Mr. Depue would have a conflict of interest as
to matters, including but not limited to ordinances and amendments,
which would involve or affect Haines and Kibblehouse's quarrying
operation. 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 513.2(h). The appeal may
Coker, Jacqueline 1C., 94 -600
September. 7, 1994
Page 7
be received at the Cammissio* by hand delivery, United States
mail, delivery service, or by FAX traua Lssion (7LT- -787 -0806) .
Failure to file such. an appeal at the Commission within fifteen
(Z5) days nay result is the dismissal of the appeal.
Vincent \TI. Dopko
Chief Counsel