Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-523 HaistedJohn S. Halsted, Esquire Chester County Solicitor's Office Courthouse, 2 N. High St., Ste. 150 P.O. Box 2748 West Chester, PA 19380 -0991 Dear Mr. Halsted: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 (717) 783 -1610 1- 800 - 932 -0936 ADVICE OF COUNSEL March 12, 1999 Re: Conflict; Public Official /Public Employee; County Commissioner; Private Employment or Business; Bank; Regional Advisory Board; Retirement Funds. This responds to your letters of February 18 and 22, 1999, by which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether a county commissioner is prohibited or restricted by the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. §1101 aeg., from being employed by a business in a private capacity in addition to public service. Facts: As the Solicitor for Chester County ( "County "), you have been authorized to request an advisory on behalf of a County Commissioner. A local bank ( "the Bank ") is interested in appointing the Commissioner to a compensated position on its Regional Advisory Board, which Board advises the Bank's Board of Directors on general regional issues which might have some impact on the Bank or banking - related issues. The Bank is the custodian of the County's retirement board funds. You state that the bank has no investment authority over these funds, but "receives cash as dividends which is invested until it is transferred to the Asset Manager who purchased the Security which yielded the dividend." You ask for an advisory from the State Ethics Commission as to whether the Commissioner in question may accept appointment to the compensated position on the Bank's Regional Advisory Board. Discussion: It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 1107(10) and 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§1107(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 Pa.C.S. §§1107(10), (11). An advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requestor has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts. FAX: (717) 787 -0806 • Web Site: www.ethics.state.pa.us • e -mail: ethics @state.pa.us 99 -523 Halsted, 99 -523 March 12, 1999 Page 2 A County Commissioner is a public official as that term is defined under the Ethics Act, and hence the Commissioner is subject to the provisions of that Act. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act provides: 65 Pa.C.S. §1102. Section 1103. Restricted activities. (a) Conflict of interest. - -No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a). The following terms are defined in the Ethics Act as follows: Section 1102. 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. The term 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. "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, officer, owner, employee or has a financial interest. Section 1 103(j) of the Ethics Act provides as follows: Halsted, 99 -523 March 12, 1999 Page 3 Section 1 103. Restricted activities. (j) Voting conflict. - -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. 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(j). In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Act to your inquiry, you are advised that Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act does not prohibit public officials /public employees from having outside business activities or employment; however, the public official /public employee may not use the authority of his public position — or confidential information obtained by being in that position — for the advancement of his own private pecuniary benefit or that of a business with which he is associated. Pancoe, Opinion 89 -011. Examples of conduct that would be prohibited under Section 1103(a) would include: (1) the pursuit of a private business opportunity in the course of public action, Metrick, Order No. 1037; (2) the use of governmental facilities, such as governmental telephones, postage, staff, equipment, research materials, or other property, or the use of governmental personnel, to conduct private business activities, Freind, Order No. 800; Pancoe, supra; and (3) the participation in an official capacity as to matters involving the business with which the public official /public employee is associated in his private capacity, such as the review /selection of its bids or proposals, Gorman, Order No. 1041. If the private employer or business with which the public official /public employee is associated would have a matter pending before the governmental body, the public official /public employee would have a conflict of interest as to such matter. Miller, Opinion No. 89 -024. In each instance of a conflict of interest, the public official /public employee would be required to abstain from participation and to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j). The County Commissioner would have a conflict as to any matters that came before the County involving the Advisory Board in that it is a business with which the Halsted, 99 -523 March 12, 1999 Page 4 County Commissioner would be associated as that term is defined under the Ethics Act. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, the County Commissioner would also have a conflict of interest as to the Bank. This conclusion is based upon the State Ethics Commission's rulings in Bassi, Opinion No. 86- 007 -R, and Woodring, Opinion No. 90 -001. In Bassi, Opinion No. 86- 007 -R, the State Ethics Commission held, inter alia, that a County Commissioner (Edward Paluso) could not enter into a lease with a municipal authority, where one of the members of the authority (Norman Carson) was a county employee directly responsible to the commissioners of the county, unless the execution of the lease was accomplished after an open and public process, with the authority member abstaining from participating in the review and award of said lease, and the county commissioner abstaining from participating in any matter relating to the authority member in his position as a county employee. The Commission stated, inter alia: ... we cannot ignore the fact that Mr. Carson is an authority member and has influence and control over authority decisions. In this respect, Mr. Carson, by voting on the final adoption of a lease, would be voting on a matter directly related to his employer. Even though that employer is another governmental body, we have held, in the past, that a public official may not vote or participate in a matter if it somehow relates to a financial interest which he may have. See, Welz, 86 -001. In the instant situation, Mr. Carson would be called upon to determine the advisability of renting property for the authority. The property which they are seeking to rent is owned by the individual or one of the individuals who currently supervises him and controls his public employment with the county. As a result of this, Mr. Carson, as an authority member, should abstain from participating in any matter relating to this particular lease. See, Bassi, 86 -007 at 3. The Commission further stated: Mr. Paluso as a county commissioner, is, in part, responsible for the general supervision of Mr. Carson. Mr. Carson, on the other hand, is an authority member in a position to grant Mr. Paluso a lease which results in Mr. Paluso receiving a financial gain. It may be difficult for the public to perceive how Mr. Paluso's actions as a county official, would not somehow be influenced by this potential leasing arrangement. It may be argued that Mr. Paluso, in dealing with Mr. Carson, to date, has done so in order to effect the favorable outcome of this lease. Additionally, it could be argued that Mr. Carson voted in favor of the lease in order to advance his position as a full -time county employee. The above factual scenarios, while hypothetical in nature, nonetheless create the types of conflicts of interest that are to be addressed by this Commission. 1t.. at 4. In Woodring, Opinion No. 90 -001, the State Ethics Commission reviewed a similar situation. Jesse Woodring, Chairman of the Sunbury Authority, had applied to the City for a rehabilitation grant through the Federal Rental Rehabilitation Program (hereinafter, the "Program "). Kenneth Pick, who was employed as the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority (chaired by Woodring) also served as the Community Development Coordinator for Sunbury. In the latter capacity, Pick was administrator in charge of the Program for the City. Pick's functions included Halsted, 99 -523 March 12, 1999 Page 5 administering the Program, reviewing all applications, and determining eligibility. The Commission stated: . . we are concerned that Mr. Pick, who is an employee of the Redevelopment Authority of which you are Chairman, has the duty of reviewing all applications and determining eligibility in his capacity as Community Development Coordinator for the city. In particular, the potential exists, given the employer - employee relationship between the Redevelopment Authority and Mr. Pick, that your application might be reviewed in a more favorable light than other applications. To forestall such a situation, you must not participate or take any action as to Mr. Pick if your application is approved and you receive benefits. Bassi, Opinion 86 -007. In addition, Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law would require you to publicly note that you would have a conflict as to any matter involving Mr. Pick. In addition, you must file a written memorandum to that effect with the person responsible for recording the minutes. Woodring, Opinion No. 90 -001 at 6. As was the case in the Bassi and Woodrinq rulings discussed above, the facts which you have submitted reflect that in his public position, the County Commissioner exercises authority over the Bank. In a private capacity, the Bank is in a position to appoint the County Commissioner to a compensated position on the Advisory Board. Therefore, for the reasons enunciated in Bassi and Woodrinq, supra, the County Commissioner would have a conflict of interest pursuant to Section 1 103(a) of the Ethics Act in matters pertaining to the Bank. In each instance of a conflict of interest, the County Commissioner would be required to abstain from participation and to fully satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 1 103(j) as set forth above. Under the facts which you have submitted, Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act would not preclude the Commissioner from outside employment with the Advisory Board but in his capacity as a Commissioner he would have a conflict as to matters involving both the Advisory Board and the Bank. This Advice is limited to addressing the applicability of Section 1 103(a) of the Ethics Act. It is expressly assumed that there has been no use of authority of office for a private pecuniary benefit as prohibited by Section 1 103(a) of the Ethics Act. Further, you are advised that Sections 1 103(b) and 1103(c) of the Ethics Act 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. The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act; 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 Act. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of the County Code. Halsted, 99 -523 March 12, 1999 Page 6 Conclusion: A Commissioner for Chester County is a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. §1101 gt sgsl. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act would not preclude the Commissioner from outside employment subject to the restrictions and qualifications as noted above. In that the County Commissioner would have a conflict as to both the Bank and Advisory Board, the Commissioner would be required to abstain and to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act set forth above. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act. Pursuant to Section 1107(11), an 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, provided 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. 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. rely, Vificent J. opko Chief Counsel