Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-543 WoodsCharles J. Woods 2404 Bellevue Road Harrisburg, PA 17104 Dear Mr. Woods: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL March 30, 1995 95 -543 Re: Former Public Employee; Section 3(g); Director of Administration; Liquor Control Board; Loaned Employee; Office of Administration. This responds to your letter of March 6, 1995, 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 a Director of Administration for the Liquor Control Board (LCB) and a Director of the Central Management Information Center (CMIC) for the Office of Administration (OA) following termination of service with the Commonwealth. Facts: While you were Director of Administration for LCB, the incoming and outgoing Secretaries of Administration requested that you serve temporarily as Director of CMIC until a permanent director was selected. You performed both your LCB and CMIC duties from June 1994 until your resignation of both positions on March 3, 1995. During your temporary assignment with OA, you remained on the LCB payroll. You accepted an employment offer from Arthur Andersen & Co., SC, Andersen Consulting, which does work with dozens of public and private sector clients. You seek advice from the Commission regarding your former Commonwealth employment and the requirements of the Ethics Law. Discussion: As the Director of Administration for LCB and the Director of CMIC for OA, you were 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 descriptions, 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 Woods, Charles J., 95 -543 March 30, 1995 Page 2 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 became 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 bodies with which you were associated while working with LCB and CMIC 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: 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, we must conclude that the governmental bodies with which you were associated upon termination of public service would be LCB and OA. 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 Woods, Charles J., 95 -543 March 30, 1995 Page 3 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 with LCB and CMIC, Section restrict representation of and OA. first year after termination of service 3(g) of the Ethics Law would apply and persons or new employers vis -a -vis LCB 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 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 bodies with which you were associated are LCB and OA. 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 Woods, Charles J., 95 -543 March 30, 1995 Page 4 "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; 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 LCB or OA. However, you may not be identified on documents submitted to either entity. You may also counsel any person regarding that person's appearance before LCB or OA. Once again, Woods, Charles J., 95 -543 March 30, 1995 Page 5 however, the activity in this respect should not be revealed to either entity. Of course, any ban under the Ethics Law would not prohibit or preclude the making of general informational inquiries of LCB or OA 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 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. 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 Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Law. Conclusion: As the Director of Administration for LCB and the Director of CMIC for OA, you were considered a "public employee" as defined in the Ethics Law. Upon termination of service with LCB and OA, you became a "former public employee" subject to Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law. The former governmental bodies are LCB and OA. The restrictions as to representation outlined above must be followed. The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law. Woods, Charles J., 95 -543 March 30, 1995 Page 6 Further, 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 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. S'ncerely, O Vincent J. Dopko Chief Counsel