Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-614 BigleyDear Mr. Bigley: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL November 2, 1995 Jonathan P. Bigley, Senior Associate W.A. Hawkins & Associates 240 North Third Street, Suite 900 Harrisburg, PA 17101 95 -614 Re: Former Public Official /Public Employee; Section 3(g); Executive -Level State Employee; Section 3(i); Special Assistant to Governor; Governor's Office. This responds to your letter of September 29, 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 Special Assistant to the Governor following termination of service with the Governor's Office. Facts: Having made the transition from Commonwealth employment to private employment, you request an advisory as to whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law places any restrictions upon your ability to represent clients before the Governor's Office, the General Assembly, and any administrative agency. You have previously served the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as follows: Special Assistant to Governor Robert P. Casey, July 1994 - January 1995; Deputy Secretary for Legislative Affairs, January 1991 - July 1994; and Assistant to the Secretary for Legislative Affairs, May 1989 - January 1991. Prior to your service in the Governor's Office you served several members of the House of Representatives, from January, 1985 to May, 1989. You are presently a senior associate with W.A. Hawkins Associates. W.A. Hawkins Associates is a government and corporate affairs firm which represents businesses and non - profit organizations before the Governor's Office, the General Assembly and any administrative agency. Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 2 Finally, you note that in addition to your government service, you were admitted to the bar of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on May 24, 1995. Per the Governor's Office, there are no job descriptions, class specifications, or organizational charts for you in your former position. A chart has been prepared indicating that while you served as Deputy Secretary for Legislative Affairs -- your next -to -last position -- you reported to the Secretary for Legislative Affairs. No information has been provided as to your specific duties as Special Assistant to the Governor. Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 7(10) and 7(11) of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. § §407(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. § §407(10), (11). An advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requestor has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts. As Special Assistant to Governor Robert P. Casey, you were a public official /public employee within the definition of these terms 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. In addition, since you were an executive -level state employee as that term is defined under the Ethics Law, you are subject to the requirements of Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law, infra. 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 Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 3 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. "Executive -level State employee." The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, cabinet members, deputy secretaries, the Governor's office staff, any State employee with discretionary powers which may affect the outcome of a State agency's decision in relation to a private corporation or business or any employee who by virtue of his job function could influence the outcome of such a decision. 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(g) of the Ethics Act provides that: Section 3. Restricted activities. (g) No former public official or public employee shall represent a person, with Higley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 4 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. Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law provides: Section 3. Restricted Activities (i) No former executive -level State employee may for a period of two years from the time that he terminates his State employment be employed by, receive compensation from, assist or act in a representative capacity for a business or corporation that he actively participates in recruiting to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or that he actively participated in inducing to open a new plant, facility or branch in the Commonwealth or that he actively participated in inducing to expand an existent plant or facility within the Commonwealth, provided that the above prohibition shall be invoked only when the recruitment or inducement is accomplished by a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth to the business or corporation recruited or induced to expand. Under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law quoted above, a public official /employee may not use the authority of public office/ employment or confidential information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family, or business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. In applying Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law to the proffered facts, Section 3(a) would prohibit you from using the position or emoluments of your public position or confidential information to advance an opportunity of private employment. Once again, it is not suggested that you have engaged in such conduct and the foregoing is provided to give a complete response to your inquiry. Having set forth the above principles, the factor of how your status as an attorney impacts upon the application of Sections 3(g) and 3(i) shall be addressed. Pennsylvania Public Utilities Bar Association v. Thornburgh, Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 5 62 Pa. Cmwlth. 88, 434 A.2d 1327 (1987), aff'd., 498 Pa. 589, 450 A.2d 613 (1982), dealt with the applicability of Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act of 1978 to former Commonwealth attorneys in the practice of law following termination of public employment. In the cited case, Commonwealth Court held that Section 3(e) of Act 170 of 1978, the predecessor to Section 3(g) of Act 9 of 1989, was an impermissible intrusion upon the authority of the Supreme Court to regulate the conduct of attorneys: We conclude that Section 3(e) of the Ethics Law is an impermissible intrusion by the legislature into an area reserved by the Constitution to the Supreme Court and one where the Supreme Court has acted to regulate the conduct of attorneys . . . . What is clear is that the Supreme Court has acted pursuant to its exclusive authority and that action effectively annuls the legislature's attempt to regulate the same conduct as it pertains to lawyers. Id., 434 A.2d at 1331. This Commission has interpreted the above decision to mean that there are no prohibitions under Section 3(g) of Act 9 of 1989 upon the conduct of former public officials /public employees who are attorneys insofar as their conduct constitutes the practice of law. Spataro, Opinion 89 -009. Subsequent to the above decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Maunus v. State Ethics Commission, 518 Pa. 592, 544 A.2d 1324 (1988), considered the issue of whether publicly employed attorneys could be required to file Statements of Financial Interests. The Court ruled that such a reporting requirement was permissible, noting that the Ethics Law provision did not conflict with any court rule as to the conduct of attorneys: Employers in the private sector may properly adopt professional and ethical standards and in pursuit thereof, may require certain conduct of its employees, including attorneys, without running afoul of this Court's supervisory authority over the bar of this Commonwealth. Any intrusion upon the power of this Court to prescribe general rules governing the practice, procedure and conduct of judicial proceedings is viewed with the greatest of skepticism. * * * Our conclusion is buttressed by the fact that the financial disclosure requirement imposed by the Ethics Act is not incompatible with any of the rules applicable to attorneys in this Commonwealth. Higley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 6 Id. at 1326, 1328. Most recently, in Confidential Opinion 95 -003, the Commission reviewed the above authorities in considering the restrictions of Section 3(i) upon a former executive -level state employee who was an attorney. The Commission concluded as follows: . . . [T]o the extent that there is judicial regulation, Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law cannot be applied to restrict an attorney in the practice of law as to his employment, his receipt of compensation or his representation of clients. It is clear from the PUC Bar Association case that the restriction of Section 3(i) as to an attorney vis -a -vis representing clients is inapplicable. The only other restriction imposed by Section 3(i) relates to employment or the receipt of compensation. Under the principles of the PUC Bar Association and Maunus cases, such employment An An attorney or the receipt of compensation (fee) as an attorney are matters on which the Supreme Court has promulgated rules of conduct. Accordingly, the restrictions of Section 3(i) are not applicable to attorneys in the practice of law. If, however, the activities intended to be undertaken do not fall within the category of the "practice of law," the prohibitions of Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law would be applicable. An activity which would not constitute the "practice of law" would be employment by a business /corporation as a non - lawyer and acting in a non - lawyer capacity, as for example a lobbyist. However, assuming that the activities intended to be undertaken are in the capacity of an attorney, such activities would constitute the practice of law and the provisions of Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law, pursuant to the mandate of the Supreme Court's ruling, would not be applicable. Andrews, Opinion 90 -018. Confidential Opinion, 95 -003, at 6 -7. The facts which you have submitted do not reveal whether your proposed representation would constitute the practice of law. Therefore, this advisory will necessarily be limited to providing general guidance to you. Based upon the above precedents, if and to the extent that your proposed conduct would constitute the practice of law, neither Section 3(g) nor Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law would apply to restrict you. If and to the extent that your proposed conduct Higley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 7 would not constitute the practice of law, the restrictions of Section 3(g) and Section 3(i) would apply as detailed below. Excluding your status as an attorney, the applicability of Section 3(i) turns upon whether you actively participated in recruiting or inducing a business /corporation to open or expand a facility or branch in Pennsylvania via a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth. A very detailed review of Section 3(i), both in terms of analysis and application of the phrase "actively participated" is set forth in Confidential Opinion 94 -011. In Confidential Opinion 94 -011, the Commission held that the restrictions of Section 3(i) apply with respect to a new employer as well as its clients. Section 3(i) would not restrict you from employment with W.A. Hawkins Associates provided you did not actively participate in recruiting or inducing said firm to open or expand a facility or branch in the Commonwealth through a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to said firm. Likewise, Section 3(i) would not restrict you from performing work for client(s) of W.A. Hawkins Associates provided that in your former public postion, you did not actively participate in recruiting or inducing such business(es) or corporation(s) which are now client(s) to open or expand a facility or branch in the Commonwealth through a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. As for Section 3(g), upon termination of public service, you became a "former" public official /public employee subject to Section 3(g) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law. In applying Section 3(g), the governmental body with which you have been associated while working with the Governor's Office 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 Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 8 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. 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 body with which you were associated upon termination of public service would certainly include, but would not necessarily be limited to, the Governor's Office in its entirety. Based upon the extremely limited facts which have been submitted, and which fail to provide any indication of your specific duties as Special Assistant to the Governor, this Advice cannot conclusively determine whether your former governmental body would extend beyond the Governor's Office. Therefore, you are advised generally that your former governmental body would also include any and all boards, commissions, agencies and /or other entities or bodies politic as to which you were a member or acted in the Governor's stead, or otherwise exercised influence, discretionary authority or control. See, Freeman, Opinion 91 -010; Confidential Opinion 94 -011. 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. See, also, Sirolli, Opinion 90 -006; Sharma, Opinion 90- 009 -R. Therefore, within the first year after termination of service with the Governor's Office, Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law would apply and restrict representation of persons or new employers vis- Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 9 a -vis your former governmental body. 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; 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 Higley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 10 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 your former governmental body. However, you may not be identified on documents submitted to your former governmental body. You may also counsel any person regarding that person's appearance before your former governmental body. Once again, however, the activity in this respect should not be revealed to your former governmental body. Of course, any ban under the Ethics Law would not prohibit or preclude the making of general informational inquiries of your former governmental body 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 and /or client. 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. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other Higley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 11 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 Governor's Code of Conduct. Conclusion: In your former capacity as Special Assistant to Governor Robert P. Casey, you would be considered a public official /public employee and an executive -level state employee subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Neither Section 3(g) nor Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law would restrict you to the extent your proposed activities constitute the practice of law. Furthermore, Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law would not restrict you from employment with W.A. Hawkins Associates conditioned upon the assumption that you did not actively participate in inducing or recruiting said firm to open or expand a facility or branch through a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Under Section 3(i) of the Ethics Law, you would not be prohibited from representing, receiving compensation from, or assisting client(s) of W.A. Hawkins Associates conditioned upon the assumption that in your former public position, you did not actively participate in inducing or recruiting such business(es) or corporation(s) which are now client(s) to open or expand a facility or branch through a grant or loan of money or a promise of a grant or loan of money from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Upon termination of service with the Governor's Office, you became a "former" public official /public employee subject to Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law. The former governmental body includes the Governor's Office and any and all boards, commissions, agencies and /or other entities or bodies politic as to which you were a member or acted in the Governor's stead, or otherwise exercised influence, discretionary authority or control. The restrictions as to representation outlined above must be followed, to the extent that such representation does not constitute the practice of law. 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 Bigley, Jonathan P. 95 -614 November 2, 1995 Page 12 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 thirty (30) 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 thirty (30) days may result in the dismissal of the appeal. Sin rely, Vincent J. Dopko Chief Counsel �o