HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-633 GallagherSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
December 2, 1994
John A. Gallagher, P.E.
Assistant District Engineer, Construction
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of Transportation
200 Radnor- Chester Road
St. Davids, PA 19087
94 -633
Re: Former Public Employee; Section 3(g); Assistant District
Engineer- Construction; Highway District Engineer I; PennDOT.
Dear Mr. Gallagher:
This responds to your letters of October 31, 1994, and
November 7, 1994 in which you requested advice from the State
Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law
presents any restrictions upon employment of an Assistant District
Engineer- Construction classified as a Highway District Engineer I,
following termination of service with the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation.
Facts: You are presently employed by the Pennsylvania Department
of Transportation (PennDOT) as an Assistant District Engineer -
Construction in PennDOT's St. Davids Office, District 6 -0. You
intend to retire on December 30, 1994 and you plan to go to work
for a consulting firm in the Philadelphia area. For the last
fifteen years, you have worked exclusively in the St. Davids
District 6 -0 Office and you were never assigned to any other
District Office or to the Central Office in Harrisburg.
You request an advisory from the State Ethics Commission
concerning the applicability of the Ethics Law to your plans. You
state that it is your understanding that subsequent to December 30,
1994, you will be considered a "former public employee" under the
law and that you may not represent anyone on matters with PennDOT
in the St. Davids District for a period of one year. You ask
whether this restriction applies to other PennDOT districts or to
the Central Office. You ask whether you would be permitted to
perform work for municipalities if they are using federal or state
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 2
transportation funds. Finally, you ask whether, if you were to
work for a consultant and the consultant had inspection personnel
working for PennDOT in various districts other than District 6 -0,
it would be permissible for you, in your new job responsibilities,
to monitor these inspectors working for PennDOT if you did not
visit them at the project site but met with them at a neutral site.
You state that your time would not be charged to any PennDOT
project for the initial one -year period.
You have submitted copies of your job description and job
classification /specifications which documents are incorporated
herein by reference. It is noted that you are classified as a
Highway District Engineer I.
Discussion: As an Assistant District Engineer- Construction
classified as a Highway District Engineer I for the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation ( "PennDOT "), you are
considered a "public employee" within the definition of that term
as set forth in the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law and the
Regulations of this Commission. 65 P.S. §402; 51 Pa. Code §11.1.
This conclusion is based upon the job description, which when
reviewed on an objective basis, indicates clearly that the power
exists to take or recommend official action of a non - ministerial
nature with respect to contracting, procurement, planning,
inspecting, administering or monitoring grants, leasing,
regulating, auditing or other activities where the economic impact
is greater than de minimis on the interests of another person.
Consequently, upon termination of public service, you would
become a "former public employee" subject to Section 3(g) of the
Public Official and Employee Ethics Law. Section 3(g) of the
Ethics Act provides that:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(g) No former public official or public
employee shall represent a person, with
promised or actual compensation, on any matter
before the governmental body with which he has
been associated for one year after he leaves
that body.
Initially, to answer your request the governmental body with
which you have been associated while working with PennDOT must be
identified. Then, the scope of the prohibitions associated with
the concept and term of "representation" must be reviewed.
The term "governmental body with which a public official or
public employee is or has been associated" is defined under the
Ethics Law as follows:
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 3
Section 2. Definitions.
"Governmental body with which a public
official or public employee is or has been
associated." The governmental body within
State government or a political subdivision
by which the public official or employee is or
has been employed or to which the public
official or employee is or has been appointed
or elected and subdivisions and offices within
that governmental body.
In applying the above definition to the instant matter, the
necessary conclusion is that the governmental body with which you
will have been associated upon termination of public service will
be PennDOT in its entirety, including but not limited to District
6 -0. The above is based upon the language of the Ethics Law, the
legislative intent (Legislative Journal of House, 1989 Session, No.
15 at 290, 291) and the prior precedent of this Commission. Thus,
in Sirolli, Opinion 90 -006, the Commission found that a former
Division Director of the Department of Public Welfare (DPW) was not
merely restricted to the particular Division as was contended but
was in fact restricted to all of DPW regarding the one year
representation restriction. Similarly in Sharp, Opinion 90- 009 -R,
it was determined that a former legislative assistant to a state
senator was not merely restricted to that particular senator but to
the entire Senate as his former governmental body.
Therefore, within the first year after termination of service
with PennDOT, Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law would apply and
restrict representation of persons or new employers vis -a -vis
PennDOT in its entirety, including but not limited to District 6 -0.
It is noted that Act 9 of 1989 significantly broadened the
definition of the term "governmental body with which a public
official or public employee is or has been associated." It was the
specific intent of the General Assembly to define the above term so
that it was not merely limited to the area where a public
official /employee had influence or control but extended to the
entire governmental body with which the public official /employee
was associated. The foregoing intent is reflected in the
legislative debate relative to the amendatory language for the
above term:
We sought to make particularly clear that
when we are prohibiting for 1 year that
revolving -door kind of conduct, we are dealing
not only with a particular subdivision of an
agency or a local government but the entire
unit..." Legislative Journal of House, 1989
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 4
Session, No. 15 at 290, 291.
Therefore, since the Ethics Law must be construed to ascertain
and effectuate the intent of the General Assembly under 1 Pa.
C.S.A. §1901, it is clear that the governmental body with which you
have been associated is PennDOT in its entirety, including but not
limited to District 6 -0.
Turning now to the scope of the restrictions under Section
3(g), the Ethics Law does not affect one's ability to appear before
agencies or entities other than with respect to the former
governmental body. Likewise, there is no general limitation on the
type of employment in which a person may engage, following
departure from their governmental body. It is noted, however, that
the conflicts of interest law is primarily concerned with financial
conflicts and violations of the public trust. The intent of the
law generally is that during the term of a person's public
employment he must act consistently with the public trust and upon
departure from the public sector, that individual should not be
allowed to utilize his association with the public sector,
officials or employees to secure for himself or a new employer,
treatment or benefits that may be obtainable only because of his
association with his former governmental body.
In respect to the one year restriction against such
"representation," the Ethics Law defines "Represent" as follows:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Represent." To act on behalf of any
other person in any activity which includes,
but is not limited to, the following:
personal appearances, negotiations, lobbying
and submitting bid or contract proposals which
are signed by or contain the name of a former
public official or public employee.
The Commission, in Popovich, Opinion 89 -005, has also
interpreted the term "representation" as used in Section 3(g) of
the Ethics Law to prohibit:
1. Personal appearances before the former governmental body
or bodies, including, but not limited to, negotiations or
renegotiations in general or as to contracts;
2. Attempts to influence;
3. Submission of bid or contract proposals which are signed
by or contain the name of the former public
official /employee;
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 5
4. Participating in any matters before the former
governmental body as to acting on behalf of a person;
5. Lobbying, that is representing the interests of any
person or employer before the former governmental body in
relation to legislation, regulations, etc.
The Commission has also held that listing one's name as the
person who will provide technical assistance on such proposal,
document, or bid, if submitted to or reviewed by the former
governmental body constitutes an attempt to influence the former
governmental body. In Shay, Opinion 91 -012, the Commission held
that Section 3(g) would prohibit the inclusion of the name of a
former public official /public employee on invoices submitted by his
new employer to the former governmental body, even though the
invoices pertained to a contract which existed prior to termination
of public service. Therefore, within the first year after
termination of service, you should not engage in the type of
activity outlined above.
You may assist in the preparation of any documents presented
to PennDOT. However, you may not be identified on documents
submitted to PennDOT. You may also counsel any person regarding
that person's appearance before PennDOT. Once again, however, the
activity in this respect should not be revealed to PennDOT. Of
course, any ban under the Ethics Law would not prohibit or preclude
the making of general informational' inquiries of PennDOT to secure
information which is available to the general public. This must
not be done in an effort to indirectly influence the former
governmental body or to otherwise make known to that body the
representation of, or work for the new employer.
In addition, the term "Person" is defined as follows under the
Ethics Law:
Section 2. Definitions.
"Person." A business, governmental body,
individual, corporation, union, association,
firm, partnership, committee, club or other
organization or group of persons.
In Confidential Opinion 93 -005, the Commission held that
Section 3(g) precludes a former public official /employee from
providing consulting services to his former governmental body for
a period of one year after termination of service in that the
prohibition against representing a person includes the former
public official /employee representing himself.
Furthermore, Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 6
in part that no person shall offer to a public official /employee
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.
In applying the above principles to the three specific
questions which_you have raised, as noted above, the restrictions
of Section 3(g) would apply with regard to PennDOT in its entirety,
including but not limited to all PennDOT districts and the Central
Office — not just District 6 -0.
Secondly, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not restrict
you from working for a municipality simply because it is using
federal or state transportation funds. Funding sources have no
bearing upon the applicability of the restrictions of Section 3(g).
Finally, as to your third specific inquiry, it is not clear
from the facts which you have submitted whether the inspection
personnel are working for the consulting firm on PennDOT projects
or are actually working for PennDOT. This Advice shall assume and
shall be expressly conditioned upon the assumption that these
inspection personnel are working for the consultant and are not
working for PennDOT. Based upon this assumption, Section 3(g)
would not prohibit you from monitoring these inspectors simply
because they are working on PennDOT projects. However, in
performing your job duties, you could not engage in prohibited
representation of the consulting firm before PennDOT. Thus, for
example, it would indeed be advisable to meet with your employer's
inspectors at a location and in a manner which would not indicate
to PennDOT personnel your employment by the consulting firm and /or
your involvement in any project.
Finally, it is parenthetically noted that your assurance that
your time would not be charged to any PennDOT project for the
initial one -year period would not be necessitated by the Ethics
Law. The Ethics Law would not preclude your . employer from
invoicing your former governmental body for your services. Rather,
the Ethics Law would preclude any indication on such invoice of
your identity. In Shav, supra, this Commission did not preclude
Mr. Shay's new employer from billing for his time, but rather
precluded his employer from including his name on the invoice to
PennDOT. To the extent PennDOT may require the inclusion of names
on invoices, such a dilemma results from those requirements rather
than from the requirements of the Ethics Law.
Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been
Gallagher, John A., 94 -633
December 2, 1994
Page 7
addressed under the Ethics Law; 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 Law. Specifically not
addressed herein is the applicability of the Governor's Code of
Conduct.
Conclusion: As an Assistant District Engineer- Construction
classified as a Highway District Engineer I for the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation ( "PennDOT "), you are
considered a "public employee" as defined in the Ethics Law. Upon
termination of service with PennDOT, you would become a "former
public employee" subject to Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law. The
former governmental body would be PennDOT in its entirety,
including but not limited to District 6 -0. The restrictions as to
representation outlined above must be followed. The propriety of
the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law.
Further, should service be terminated, as outlined above, the
Ethics Law also requires that a Statement of Financial Interests be
filed for the year following termination of service.
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 actuallv
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.
Vincent . Dop'ko
Chief Counsel