Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-631 PetrusoDear Mr. Petruso: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL December 1, 1994 John D. Petruso, Esquire Fuller, Kinnunen, Petruso, Gamble, Fabian & Hall Attorneys at Law 373 Center Street Meadville, PA 16335 94 -631 Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Borough Council Member, Fire Company Serving Borough, Use of Authority of Office, Business With Which Associated, Volunteer Fire Department, Firefighter, Fire Chief, Fire Police Captain, Officer of Fire Company. This responds to your letters of September 19, 1994, October 24, 1994 and October 28, 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 borough council members who also serve as firefighters and /or officers in a fire company which serves the borough with regard to matters concerning the fire department such as budget matters, repairs and expansions to the borough -owned building housing the fire department, and appropriations for the fire department. Facts: As Borough Solicitor for the Borough of Saegertown, Crawford County, Pennsylvania, you request an advisory on behalf of four members of Borough Council who also serve, in varying capacities, on the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department. You state that the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department is not an official department of the Borough. It does, however, receive the statutorily mandated assistance from the Borough including Workmen's Compensation coverage and, you believe, any fire company state funds that are restricted for distribution to the Firemen's Relief Associations. The building where the volunteer fire department is housed in Saegertown is owned by the Borough. The Borough budget for the year 1994 made the following appropriations on behalf of the fire department: Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 2 Alarm $ 150.00 Training 600.00 Telephone service 500.00 Miscellaneous 100.00 Electric 1,200.00 Gas 2,200.00 Sewer 244.00 Building repair 1,000.00 Building electric 2,000.00 $7,994.00 In addition, the Borough also included in the budget a donation to the volunteer fire department of $8,000.00. The total budget for the Borough for the year was $186,755.00. The Borough routinely provides repair services to the volunteer fire department for maintaining the building. Presently, there are four members of Council who are affiliated with the volunteer fire department. One of these individuals is also the Mayor. Of the four, one is the present Chief of the fire department, another is the Fire Police Captain, and the other two do not hold any offices at the present time. However, one of the two non - officers was Fire Chief last year. At least three of these four Council Members routinely respond to fire calls and all regularly attend meetings of the fire department. It is your understanding that none of these individuals are paid as members of the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department, nor do they receive any benefits such as mileage. The Council Member who also serves as Mayor has served eleven years on Council, first as a Council Member and now as Mayor. The other three volunteer firemen are Council Members with full voting power and have served on Council for fifteen, five and one year respectively. These individuals provide hundreds of volunteer hours training, raising funds, and responding to emergencies for the department. Based upon the above facts, you seek advice concerning the following issues: May the Council Members who serve the volunteer fire department participate in discussions and votes on matters that may indirectly affect the volunteer fire department such as repairs to the Borough -owned building where the fire department is housed, appropriations to the fire department and purchase of additional real estate earmarked for expansion of the fire department building? May such members of the volunteer fire department secure Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 3 proposals for repairs to be performed on the building which is owned by the Borough and used by the volunteer fire department? May such members of the volunteer fire department participate in discussion and voting upon specific matters that may come before Council that affect the volunteer fire department including, but not limited to, budget matters. 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. 5407(10), (11). An advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requestor has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts. In their respective capacities as Borough Council Members and Mayor for the Borough of Saegertown in Crawford Country, Pennsylvania, the four individuals on whose behalf you have inquired are all public officials as that term is defined under the Ethics Law, and hence each of these individuals 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 is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict of interest" does not include an action having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 4 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 partnership, enterprise, organization, .11 Any corporation, sole proprietorship, firm, franchise, association, self - employed individual, holding company, joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal entity organized for profit. "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 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 Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 5 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 of 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, Mlakar, 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 with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Depending upon the circumstances in a given case, a fire company may be viewed as part of a governmental body such as a borough, or as a private entity meeting the definition of Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 6 "business" as set forth in the Ethics Law and above. If a fire company is part of the governmental body in which the public official /public employee in question serves, it may generally be said that a private pecuniary benefit to the fire company alone would not present a conflict of interest for the public official. Only if there were additional circumstances, such as if the public official /public employee or a member of his immediate family would also derive a private pecuniary benefit, could there be a conflict of interest. If, on the other hand, the fire company is a "business," there is the potential for a conflict of interest solely based upon a private pecuniary benefit to the fire company, because the fire company is then an entity separate from the governmental body. The issue is whether the fire company is a "business with which [the public official /public employee] is associated," as that term is defined in the Ethics Law. That definition would include any business for which the public official /public employee or a member of his immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee, or has a financial interest. Among the most significant factors in determining the status of a fire company is the degree to which the fire company is funded and controlled by the governmental body, See, 53 P.S. §65704, or alternatively raises its own funds and governs itself. In this case, for the two individuals who do not hold officer positions with the fire company, the status of the fire company is irrelevant. Even if it were a "business," the fire company would not be a business with which these individuals are associated as that term is defined in the Ethics Law. A conflict of interest under the Ethics Law would only arise for these two non - officers of the fire company as to matters where they as individuals, member (s) of their immediate families, or businesses with which they or member(s) of their immediate families are associated (not the fire company) would receive a private pecuniary benefit. As for the other two individuals on whose behalf you have inquired, the status of the fire company is significant. These two individuals, serving as the Chief of the fire department and as the Fire Police Captain are officers of the fire department, and therefore the fire department could very well be a business with which these individuals are associated within the definition set forth in the Ethics Law. Based upon the facts which you have submitted, it would appear that although the Borough provides some financial and operational support to the fire company, the fire company is not a department of the Borough and is not controlled by the Borough. Under the particular circumstances in this case, the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department would not be viewed as part of the Borough of Saegertown. It would be viewed as a business with which its Chief Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 7 and Fire Police Captain, who also serve on the Borough Council, are associated. Before addressing the specific issues which you have raised, it is noted that to the extent any of these four members of Council would receive a private pecuniary benefit from official action as to the fire department's Workmen's Compensation insurance or relief funds, the exceptions to the definition of "conflict of interest" include official action "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 . . . a member of his immediate family . . .." 65 P.S. §402. Conditioned upon the assumption that these individuals would benefit from the fire department's Workmen's Compensation insurance or official action as to relief funds to the same degree as the other firefighters and /or officers, these individuals would not have a conflict of interest as to such matters in that they would be within the aforesaid exception to the definition of conflict of interest. As to other matters, however, conflicts of interest could arise for these two Council Members who serve as Chief and Fire Police Captain for the fire department. These matters would include repairs to the Borough -owned building where the fire department is housed, the purchase of additional real estate earmarked for expansion to the fire department building, securing a proposal for repairs to be performed on said building, appropriations to the fire department, and budgetary matters affecting the fire department. Thus, as to each of your three specific inquiries, conflicts of interest would arise for the two council members who serve as officers of the fire department in each instance where a private pecuniary benefit would result for the fire department. For example, to the extent that the Borough maintains, repairs, and /or expands the building housing the fire department, the fire department would receive a private pecuniary benefit by not having to expend funds for these or alternative facilities. In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public official /public employee is required to abstain from any participation of any nature and to publicly disclose the nature of the conflict, both orally at the public meeting and in a written memorandum filed with the secretary to be placed with the minutes. 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. Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 8 Conclusion: As Borough Council Members and as the Mayor for the Borough of Saegertown in Crawford County, Pennsylvania, the four individuals on whose behalf you have inquired are all public officials subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Based upon the facts which have been submitted, the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department would not be viewed as part of the Borough of Saegertown, but would be a business with which the two members of Council who serve as fire department officers are associated. The fire company would not be deemed to be a business with which the other two members of council are associated, in that they are firefighters but not officers. Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would restrict all four individuals from official action whereby they would receive a private pecuniary benefit individually or for member(s) of their immediate families or for businesses with which they or member(s) of their immediate families are associated. The class /subclass exception to the definition of conflict of interest would apply in instances where the private pecuniary benefit derived would be to a class or subclass affecting these individuals to the same degree as the other firefighters and /or officers. The two Council Members who are officers of the fire department would have conflicts of interest in matters which would result in a private pecuniary benefit to the Saegertown Volunteer Fire Department. In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public official is required to abstain from any participation and to publicly disclose the abstention and the reasons for same, both orally and by filing a written memorandum to that effect with the person recording the minutes. 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 be received at the Commission by hand delivery, United States Petruso, John D., 94 -631 December 1, 1994 Page 9 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, Vincent J Dop Chief Counsel I/ 6 4 5