HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-503 ShumakerTed E. Shumaker
235 Mumper Lane
Dillsburg, PA 17019
Dear Mr. Shumaker:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 1 71 08 -1 470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
January 3, 1997
97 -503
Re: Former Public Employee; Section 3(g); Department of Corrections; Director of
Grants and Special Projects; Consulting.
This responds to your letter of December 1, 1996 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 the Director of Grants and Special Projects following
termination of service with the Department of Corrections.
Facts: You are employed by the Department of Corrections as the Director of
Grants and Special Projects. You are considering leaving Commonwealth employment
and accepting a position with Anderson Consulting. Anderson Consulting presently
has a contract with the Commonwealth that involves designing a coordinated plan for
the exchange of criminal justice information between state agencies. You state that
as Director of Grants and Special Projects, you do not have any authority or direct
responsibility for automated data collection, storage or retrieval, nor do you have any
contact or control of the work presently being conducted for the Commonwealth by
Anderson Consulting. You further state that the contract with Anderson Consulting
was negotiated and is being administered by the Office of Administration without your
knowledge or influence.
You request an advisory as to any restrictions under the Ethics Law regarding
your acceptance of a position with Anderson Consulting.
Copies of your job description and job classification specifications have been
obtained, which documents are incorporated herein by reference. It is noted that your
job classification is "Executive Assistant."
Finally, it is noted that in a telephone conversation with Commission staff you
have provided the following clarifications. Although you have had involvement in a
process by which reimbursements are made to county governments for the
Shumaker, 97 -503
January 3, 1997
Page 2
reconstruction and refurbishing of County jails pursuant to a 1989 -1990 voter
referendum, your involvement with grants has been limited to seeking grants for the
Department of Corrections. You have had no involvement with grants involving private
entities, including Anderson Consulting.
Discussion: It is initially noted that you have inquired as to the restrictions that
will apply to you upon leaving Commonwealth employment, and accordingly, this
Advice is limited to addressing those particular restrictions of the Ethics Law.
As Director of Grants and Special Projects for the Department of Corrections,
you would be 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 § 1 1.1. 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(a) 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 the Department of Corrections 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.
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
Shumaker, 97 -503
January 3, 1997
Page 3
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.
The Ethics Law must be construed to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the
General Assembly under 1 Pa. C.S.A. §1901.
Based upon the above, the governmental body with which you will have been
associated upon termination of public service is the Department of Corrections in its
entirety. 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 the Department
of Corrections, Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law would apply and restrict representation
of persons or new employers vis -a -vis the Department of Corrections.
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
Shumaker, 97 -503
January 3, 1997
Page 4
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. Section 3(g) would also prohibit in general 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 pertain to
a contract which existed prior to termination of public service. Shay, Opinion 91 -012.
However, in the event of work performed on a contract already awarded and not
involving the unit where the former public employee worked, the name of the former
public employee may appear on routine invoices if required by the regulations of the
agency to which the billing is being submitted. Abrams/Webster, Opinion 95 -01 1.
Therefore, within the first year after termination of service, you should not engage in
any of the prohibited activities outlined above.
You may assist in the preparation of any documents presented to the
Department of Corrections. However, you may not be identified on documents
submitted to the Department of Corrections. You may also counsel any person
regarding that person's appearance before the Department of Corrections. Once again,
however, the activity in this respect should not be revealed to the Department of
Corrections. Of course, any ban under the Ethics Law would not prohibit or preclude
the making of general informational inquiries of the Department of Corrections 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.
Shumaker, 97 -503
January 3, 1997
Page 5
"Person." A business, governmental body, individual,
corporation, union, association, firm, partnership,
committee, club or other organization or group of persons.
In applying the definition of "Person" quoted above, the Commission has held
that the term includes a former public employee representing himself in providing
consulting services to his former governmental body. Confidential Opinion 93 -005.
Further, the term "Person" includes a new government employer which is represented
by the former public employee before his former governmental employer. Ledebur,
Opinion 95 -007.
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.
Having set forth the above, based upon the facts which you have submitted,
Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law would not preclude you from accepting a position of
employment with Anderson Consulting, but you would be required to observe the
restrictions of Section 3(g) during the one -year period following termination of
employment with the Department of Corrections.
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. Specifically not addressed herein is the
applicability of the Governor's Code of Conduct.
Conclusion: As Director of Grants and Special Projects for the Department of
Corrections, you would be considered a "public employee" as defined in the Ethics
Law. Upon termination of service with the Department of Corrections, you would
become a "former public employee" subject to Section 3(g) of the Ethics Law. The
former governmental body would be the Department of Corrections in its entirety. 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.
This letter is a public record and will be made available as such.
Shumaker, 97 -503
January 3, 1997
Page 6
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.
incerely,
p
Vincent J.‘fhopko
Chief Counsel