HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-500 ConfidentialSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
January 11, 1996
96 -500
Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Township Commissioner,
First Class Township, Compensation, Increase, Act 57 of 1995.
This responds to your letter of December 8, 1995 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 a township
commissioner from voting on an ordinance which would increase the
annual salaries of the township commissioners.
Facts: As the Solicitor for Township A, a first class township,
you request advice on behalf of three members of the five member
Board of Commissioners, specifically, Commissioner B, Commissioner
C, and Commissioner D.
By Act 57 of 1995, the Pennsylvania General Assembly amended
the First Class Township Code to provide that township
commissioners in townships with a population of 15,000 or more but
less than 25,000 may receive an annual salary of $4,125. Act 57
was signed by Governor Ridge on October 31, 1995. It is effective
December 30, 1995.
Township A has a population of 16,425 according to the 1990
Federal decennial census. At the December 4, 1995 regular public
meeting, the Township A Board considered the adoption of an
ordinance which would increase the annual salaries of the Township
Commissioners from $3,300 to $4,125, the amount authorized by Act
57. You have submitted a copy of the Ordinance which is
incorporated herein by reference. The Ordinance was passed by a
vote of 4 to 1 with Commissioners B, C, D, and E voting in favor of
adoption. Commissioner F voted against adoption.
Confidential Advice of Counsel:, 96-500
January 11, 1996
Page 2
You state that Commissioners B, C, and D will be eligible to
receive the salary increase commencing in January, 1996 under the
authority of §603 of the First Class Township Code since they were
reelected to the Board in November, 1995 and will assume a new term
of office on the first Monday in January, 1996. Section 603
provides:
Elected officers of townships shall receive such
salary, compensation or emoluments of office as may from
time to time be fixed by ordinance of the township in
accordance with provisions of section 703. Any change in
salary, compensation or emo uments of office shall become
effective at the beginning of the next term of the
elected officer. Appointed officers and employes of the
township shall receive such compensation for their
services as the township commissioners shall prescribe.
53 P.S. §55603 (Emphasis added).
At the time they voted on the Ordinance, Commissioners B, C,
and D stated that, although they were voting in favor of the
Ordinance, they would not accept the increase in compensation
during their terms which begin in January 1996 if doing so would
constitute a conflict of interest as defined in the Ethics Act.
You state that the other two Commissioners are ineligible for the
increase during their current terms pursuant to §603 of the Code.
Before the vote on the proposed Ordinance, you provided the
Board with a non - confidential written opinion pursuant to Section
9(g) of the Ethics Act. You have submitted a copy of your Opinion.
You note that the Ordinance would not increase the
compensation of any specific commissioner, rather it would increase
compensation for the entire Board. You further state that Section
603 of the First Class Township Code requires that salaries be
established by ordinance which would mean that no other person or
entity could establish the Board's salary except for the Board
itself.
The first question which you have posed in your request for an
advisory is whether it would be a conflict of interest for
Commissioners B, C, and D to accept the compensation authorized by
Act 57 and the Ordinance and whether such compensation would be
considered a private pecuniary benefit under the Ethics Law. You
note the legal authority cited in your Opinion which you have
submitted, as well as the decision of the State Ethics Commission
in McCabe, Opinion No. 95 -001.
The second issue which you have presented involves Section
3(j) of the Ethics Law. You state that if Commissioners B, C, and
D were to abstain from voting on the Ordinance because of a
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 96 -500
January 11, 1996
Page 3
possible conflict of interest, there would not be enough votes to
establish a quorum and a majority. You ask whether these
Commissioners could accept the increase despite any conflict of
interest, since their votes would be necessary to establish a
quorum and a majority.
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 Commissioners for Township A, Commissioners B, C, and D
are public officials as that term is defined under the Ethics Law,
and hence they are 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 minimus 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
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 96 -500
January 11, 1996
Page 4
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.
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
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
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 96 -500
January 11, 1996
Page 5
written memorandum to that effect with the person recording the
minutes or supervisor.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Law to your
inquiry, the first issue which you have raised, the question of the
propriety of Commissioners B, C, and D receiving the proposed
increases to their salaries, relates to Section 3(a) of the Ethics
Law quoted above. Where salary increases are provided for ky law
and you have indicated that in this case they have been provided
for by law -- they do not constitute a private pecuniary benefit.
The acceptance by these Township Commissioners of a salary increase
which has been authorized by an Act of the General Assembly would
not transgress Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law.
However, you are cautioned that 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. The Ethics Commission does not have jurisdiction to
interpret the First Class Township Code or Act 57 of 1995.
Similarly, this Advice does not address the question of whether the
receipt of the salary increase would be permissible under Article
III, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, since the Ethics
Commission does not have jurisdiction to interpret constitutional
provisions. For your information, Article III, Section 27 of the
Pennsylvania Constitution provides as follows:
§27. Changes in term of office or salary prohibited
No law shall extend the term of any public officer,
or increase or diminish his salary or emoluments, after
his election or appointment.
There is some case law which appears to suggest that
Pennsylvania courts have interpreted the above Constitutional
prohibition to apply to laws of the General Assembly as opposed to
ordinances of municipal bodies. However, it is recommended that
the Commissioners on whose behalf you have inquired obtain legal
advice in that regard.
In light of the above analysis, the second issue which you
have raised need not be addressed.
Conclusion: As Commissioners for Township A, Commissioners B,
C, and D are public officials subject to the provisions of the
Ethics Law. Under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law, there is no
prohibition upon Commissioners B, C, and D from voting for and
receiving an increase in compensation which has been authorized by
an Act of the General Assembly. Lastly, the propriety of the
proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law.
Confidential Advice of Counsel, 9 -500
January 11, 1996
Page 6
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 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.
Inc rely,
Vincent J. Dopko
Chief Counsel