Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-508 ZimmermanRandall E. Zimmerman Barron & Zimmerman 119 West Market Street P.O. Box 591 Lewistown, PA 17044 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783-1 610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL January 30, 1998 98 -508 Re: Public Official /Public Employee; Solicitor; Retained/Employed; Conflict of Interest; Immediate Family; Spouse; Secretary- Treasurer; Borough. Dear Mr. Zimmerman: This responds to your letters of November 3, 1997, December 11, 1997, and January 27, 1998, by which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employe Ethics Law presents any prohibition or restrictions upon a Borough's Secretary- Treasurer and /or its retained Solicitor where those individuals are husband and wife. Facts: You have been retained as the Solicitor of Mifflintown Borough in Juniata County for the past 19 years. You state that you are not an employee of the Borough, but rather, the Borough has appointed you as Solicitor on a yearly basis. Per a written agreement, you serve at will, and the Borough may terminate your representation at any time and for any reason: You generally attend four to six council Meetings per year and undertake other work as it arises for the Borough. You bill the Borough as the work is done and are paid on an hourly basis without any withholding being made. The Borough has recently hired your wife, Nancy L. Zimmerman, as a part-time Secretary- Treasurer. You state that the Borough hired your wife through normal hiring procedures that did not in any way involve you. You ask whether your wife's employment with the Borough creates a conflict of interest with regard to your continuing to represent the Borough. On behalf of your wife, you ask whether problems would arise for your wife under the Ethics Law based upon your service as Borough Solicitor. You note that your .bills are reviewed by the Council Members and that any checks issued to your law firm are signed not only by the Secretary- Treasurer, but also by a Council Member. Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 2 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. Your inquiry as to yourself as Borough Solicitor shall first be addressed. In 1997, the status of Solicitors under the Public Official and Employe Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. §401 el seq., was clarified by the appellate courts of Pennsylvania, In P.J.S. v. State Ethics Commission, 697 A.2d 286 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1997), appeal pendina, No. 0091 M.D. Appeal Docket 1997, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania .held, jnter a that the conflict of interest provisions of the Ethics Law do apply to solicitors who are public employees and are not just on retainer. However, in C.P.C. v. State Ethics Commission, 698 A.2d 155 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1997), based upon an analysis of prior precedents including Ballou v. State Ethics Commission, 496 Pa. 127, 436 A.2d 186 (1981), Maunus v. State Ethics Commission, 518 Pa. 592, 544 A.2d 1324 (1988), and P.J.S v. State Ethics Commission, 669 A.2d 1105 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1996), the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania set forth its view that a municipal Solicitor who is retained by — as opposed to being an employee of — the governmental body is not a "public official" or "public employee" as defined in the Ethics Law and is not subject to the conflict of interest provisions of the Ethics Law. The Court stated: ... [Tiflis court pointed out in P.J.S. that the General Assembly did not add or include "solicitors" in its definitions of "public employees" or "public officials" whose conduct is regulated by section 3 of the Ethics Act. id. As such, this court stated that it could not conclude that it was clearly the General Assembly's intent to include "solicitors," who are not normally full -time public employees, but more like consultants, among the class of persons required to comply with the regulations regarding ethical and professional conduct under section 3 of the Ethics Act. Id. Based upon our review of the pleadings in this case and our analysis of Ba//ou, Maunus and P.J.S., we conclude that CPC's conduct is not governed by the provisions of the Ethics Act and that he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. C.P.C. v. State Ethics Commission, supra, 698 A.2d at 159. The Court further stated, in a footnote: Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 3 We note that on July 3, 1997, this court issued its decision in P.J.S. v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, 697 A.2d 286 (Pa. Cmwlth. '1997) (P.J.S. /1), this court reiterated that the conflict of interest provisions of section 3 of the Ethics Act apply to solicitors who are public employees and not just on retainer. P.J.S. was hired as a full - time solicitor for the City of Erie, was placed on the City payroll, was paid a salary and received the same benefits as other employees of the City. Like the Commonwealth attorneys in Maunus, P.J.S.'s status with the City was that of an employee rather than a consultant on retainer or an independent contractor. Accordingly, this court determined that P.J.S. was a public employee who was covered by section 3 of the Ethics Act. The present case is distinguishable from P.J.S. // in that CPC is not a full -time, salaried employee of the borough who receives the same benefits as other borough employees. Rather, CPC is a legal advisor or consultant on retainer to the borough. As such, his conduct is not covered by section 3 of the Ethics Act. 11., at Note 10. The State Ethics Commission filed a Petition for Allowance of Appeal in the C.P.C. case, which Petition was denied. .No. 614 M.D. Allocatur Docket '1997 (Pa. December 2, 1997). The facts which you have submitted indicate that as Solicitor of Mifflintown Borough you are not an employee of the said governmental body, but rather are retained. Therefore, based upon C.P.C., supra, you would not be considered a "public official" or a "public employee" subject to the Ethics Law and specifically, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. However, a Solicitors are required to file Statements of Financial Interests. 65 P.S. §404(a); Foster, Opinion No. 98 -002. Therefore, you would be required to file Statements of Financial Interests providing full disclosure as required by Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law, each year the aforesaid position as Solicitor is held and the year following termination of service in said position. Moreover, it is the State Ethics Commission's view that every "person" is subject to Section 3(b) of the Ethics Law. Foster, Opinion No. 98 -002. Section 3(b) of the Ethics Law essentially provides that no "person" shall offer or give to a public official, public employee, or nominee or candidate for public office, or to a member of such an individual's immediate family, or to a business with which such an individual is associated, anything of monetary value based upon the offeror's /donor's understanding that the vote, official action, or judgement of the public official, public employee, or nominee or candidate for public office would be influenced thereby. The State Ethics Commission has held that a Solicitor, though not himself a public official /public employee, may not engage in such conduct in his capacity as a "person." Foster, supra. Of course, 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 your inquiry in light of the aforesaid developments in case law. Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 4 Your inquiry as to your wife as the part-time Secretary/Treasurer for Mifflintown Borough shall now be addressed. As Secretary- Treasurer for Mifflintown Borough, your wife , Nancy Zimmerman, is a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics 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 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. "Immediate family." A parent, spouse, child, brother or sister. "Business." Any corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association, organization, self - employed , individual, holding company, joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal entity organized for profit. "Business with which he.. is associated." Any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, office owner, employee or has a financial interest. Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 5 "Financial interest." Any financial interest in a legal entity engaged in business for profit which comprises more than 5% of the equity of the business or more than 5% of the assets of the economic interest in indebtedness. "Contract." An agreement or arrangement for the acquisition, use or disposal by the Commonwealth or a political subdivision of consulting or other services or of supplies, materials, equipment, land or other personal or real property. "Contract" shall not mean an agreement or arrangement between the State or political subdivision as one party and a public official or public employee as the other party, concerning his expense, reimbursement, salary, wage, retirement or other benefit, tenure or other matters in consideration of his current public employment with the Commonwealth or a political subdivision. Section 3(f) of the Ethics Law provides as follows: Section 3. Restricted activities (f) No public official or public employee or his spouse or child or any business in which the person or his spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract valued at $ 500 or more with the governmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated or any subcontract valued at $500 or more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the govemmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated, unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process, including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded. In such a case, the public official or public employee shall not have any supervisory or overall responsibility for the implementation or administration of the contract. Any contract or subcontract made in violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within 90 days of the making of the contract or subcontract. Section 3(f) does not operate to make contracting with the governmental body permissible where it is otherwise prohibited. Rather, where a public official /public employee, his spouse or child, or a business with which he, his spouse or child is associated, is otherwise appropriately contracting with the governmental body, or subcontracting with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body, in an amount of $500.00 or more, Section 3(f) requires that an "open and public process" be observed as to the contract with the govemmental body. Pursuant to Section 3(f), an "open and public process" includes: (1) prior public notice of the employment or contracting possibility; Zimmerman, 98 508 January 30, '1998 Page 6 (2) sufficient time for a reasonable and prudent competitor /applicant to be able to prepare and . present an application or proposal; (3) public disclosure of all applications or proposals considered; and (4) public disclosure of the contract awarded and offered and accepted. Section 3(f) of the Ethics Law also requires that the public official /employee may not have any supervisory, or overall responsibility_ as to the implementation or administration of the contract•with the governmental body. 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. In app lY 9 in the above provisions of the Ethics Law to the circumstances which you have submitted, 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. As the husband of the Borough's Secretary/Treasurer, you are a member of her immediate family. Therefore, as Secretary/Treasurer for Mifflintown Borough, your wife would have a conflict of interest in matters involving a financial benefit for you and /or your firm. Such matters would include, but would not be limited to, payments to you i r , 98- 508 Janus 0, 1998 Page 7 and /or your firm. In each instance of a conflict of interest, your wife would be required to abstain from participation and to fully satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 3(j) as set forth above. Furthermore, with regard to contracting or subcontracting involving you /your firm and the Borough, in light of your wife's status as a public official with the Borough, the requirements of Section 3(f) would have to be observed where such contract or subcontract would be valued at $500 or more. Parenthetically, although the contracting in question would not be prohibited under the Ethics Law provided the requirements of Sections 3(a), 3(f), and 3(j) are satisfied, a problem may exist as to such contracting under the respective code. In the instant situation, the Borough Code provides as follows: §46404. Penalty for ; personal interest in contracts or purchases Except as otherwise .provided in this act, no borough official either elected or appointed, who knows or who by the exercise of reasonable diligence could know, shall be interested to any appreciable degree either directly or indirectly in any purchase made or contract entered into or expenditure of money made by the borough or relating to the business of the borough, involving the expenditure by the borough of more than one thousand dollars ($1000) in any calendar year, but this limitation shall not apply to cases where such officer or appointee of the borough is an employe of the person, firm or corporation to which the money is to be paid in a capacity with no possible influence on the transaction, and in which he cannot be possibly benefited thereby either financially or otherwise. But in the case of a councilman or mayor, if he knows that he is within the exception just mentioned he shall so inform council and shall refrain from voting on the expenditure or any ordinance relating thereto, and shall in no manner participate therein. Any official or appointee who shall knowingly violate the provisions of this section shall be subject to surcharge to the extent of the damage shown to be thereby sustained by the borough and to ouster from office, and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1000), or not exceeding one hundred eighty days' imprisonment, or both. 53 P.S. §46404. Since such contracting may be prohibited by the above quoted provision, it is suggested that you seek legal advice in that regard. This Advice is limited to addressing the applicability of Sections 3(a) and 3(f) of the Ethics Law. It is expressly assumed that there has been no use of authority of Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 8 office for a private pecuniary benefit as prohibited by Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. Further, you are advised that Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide in part that no person shall offer to a public official /public employee and no public official /public employee shall solicit or accept anything of monetary value based upon the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the public official /public 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 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 Rules of Professional Conduct. Conclusion: Based upon the submitted facts that as Solicitor of Mifflintown Borough, you are retained by — as opposed to being an employee of — that Borough, you would not be considered •a public official /public employee subject to the Ethics Law. Consequently, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law would not apply to you in the said capacity as Solicitor. However, all Solicitors are required to file Statements of Financial Interests pursuant to Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law. Furthermore, Section 3(b) of the Ethics Law applies to all "persons" including "persons" who happen to be Solicitors, regardless of whether they are public officials /public employees; As Secretary/Treasurer for Mifflintown Borough, your wife, Nancy Zimmerman, is a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. As Secretary/Treasurer for Mifflintown Borough, your wife would have a conflict of interest in matters involving a financial benefit you and /or your firm. Such matters would include, but would not be limited to, payments to you and /or your firm. In each instance of a conflict of interest, your wife would be required to abstain from participation and to fully satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 3(j) as set forth above. The restrictions of Section 3(f) of the Ethics Law must be observed as to any contract or subcontract valued at $500 or more involving you /your firm and the Borough. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed' under the Ethics Law. It is suggested that legal advice be obtained with regard to the possible applicability of the Borough Code. Pursuant to Section= 7(11), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, arid 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. Zimmerman, 98- 508 January 30, 1998 Page 9 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. cerely, fi Vincent J.: +opko Chief Counsel 7