HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-510 TaylorJames A. Taylor, Esquire
Murrin, Taylor, Flach & Horan
Attorneys at Law
110 East Diamond Street
Butler, PA 16001 -5999
Dear Mr. Taylor:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
February 2, 1995
95 -510
Re: Simultaneous Service, Regional Municipal Authority and
Township Water Authority.
This responds to your letter of December 29, 1994, in which
you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law imposes
any prohibition or restrictions upon a municipal authority member
from also serving or being employed by another municipal authority.
Facts: Mr. William Weaver is a Member of both the Breakneck Creek
Regional Authority (BCRA) and Adams Township Water Authority
(ATWA), two Authorities organized by the Supervisors in Adams
Township, Butler County, Pennsylvania. BCRA is a municipal sewer
authority organized under the Municipality Authorities Act of
Pennsylvania and the ATWA is an Authority organized under that Act
to provide water to Adams Township. The BCRA is comprised of five
member, two appointed by Mars Borough and three appointed by Adams
Township. The ATWA is comprised of five members, all of whom are
appointed by Adams Township.
You have submitted two letters from residents of Adams
Township requesting the resignation of Weaver citing a conflict
under Section 10(d) of the Municipality Authorities Act. After
stating that you have determined that no violation exists regarding
that Section of the Municipality Authorities Act, you ask whether
Weaver may be required to resign from both the BCRA and ATWA.
Weaver is the owner of Weaver Master Builders which does
business in Adams Township as a home construction business. In
addition, Weaver is involved in the partnership, Mars Land
Associates, in which he is one of six partners who own
approximately 50 acres in Adams Township. Weaver and his wife own
a house and lot in Mars Borough in which office space is used by
Taylor, James A., Esquire, 95 -510
February 2, 1995
Page 2
his company. Lastly, Weaver's wife is an agent for the Prudential
Preferred Realty with offices in adjoining Cranberry Township where
sales agreements are often negotiated for property in Adams
Township. You conclude by requesting advice as to the propriety of
Weaver continuing to serve as both a member of the BCRA and ATWA.
Discussion: As Municipal Authority Board Member for Adams
Township, Weaver is a "public official" as that term is defined in
the Ethics Law and hence he is subject to the provisions of the
Ethics Law. 65 P.S. §402; 51 Pa. Code §11.1.
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 under the Ethics Law:
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.
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
Taylor, James A., Esquire, 95 -510
February 2, 1995
Page 3
any thing of monetary value and no public official /employee shall
solicit or accept any thing of monetary value based upon the
understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the
public official /employee would be influenced thereby.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law to the
question of simultaneous service, there does not appear to be any
real possibility of a private pecuniary benefit or inherent
conflict arising if Weaver were to serve both as a public
official /employee on the boards of the two Authorities. Basically,
the Ethics Law does not state that it is inherently incompatible
for a public official / employee to serve or be employed in such
positions. The main prohibition under the Ethics Law and Opinions
of the Ethics Commission is that one may not serve the interests of
two persons, groups, or entities whose interests may be inherently
adverse. Smith Opinion, 89 -010. In the two public positions
outlined above, Weaver would not be serving entities with interests
which are inherently adverse to each other.
Turning to the question of conflict of interest, 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. Should a situation arise where the use of
authority of public office /employment or confidential information
received by holding the above public positions could result in a
prohibited private pecuniary benefit, a conflict of interest would
arise. In each instance of a conflict of interest, Weaver would be
required to fully abstain and to publicly announce and disclose the
abstention and the reasons for same in a written memorandum filed
with the appropriate person (supervisor or secretary who keeps the
minutes).
As to the question you have posed regarding whether Weaver
would be required to resign, you are advised that the Ethics Law
does not require the resignation of Weaver. In fact, the Ethics
Law does not empower the Commission to direct the resignation or
removal of a public official /employee from office. However, even
though Weaver is not required to resign, he as an Authority Board
Member would have a conflict as to a number of situations: matters
involving Weaver Master Builders that would come before either
Authority, matters involving his partnership Mars Land Associates
that would have matters pending before either Authority, matters
involving Prudential Preferred Realty which is a business with
which a member of Weaver's immediate family is associated and
matters involving his or his wife's clients who have matters
pending before either municipal authority. See Miller, Opinion 89-
024; Kannebecker, Opinion 92 -010.
Taylor, James A., Esquire, 95 -510
February 2, 1995
Page 4
Lastly, 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 Municipality
Authorities Act.
Conclusion: As a member of two municipal Authorities, Weaver is a
"public official" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. As
a public official /employee, Weaver may, consistent with Section
3(a) of the Ethics Law, simultaneously serve as a board member on
two municipal authorities, subject to the restrictions, conditions
and qualifications set forth above. Weaver, however, would have
a conflict under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law involving any
businesses with which he or his spouse are associated as well as
clients of those businesses. In such instances, Weaver must
observe the disclosure requirements of Section 3(j) of the Ethics
Law. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed course of 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 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 FAS 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 . Dopko
Chief Counsel