Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout79-066 CarterTO DISCUSSION: • STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 306 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 OPINION OF THE COMMISSION November 7, 199 Louis J. Carter 23 Wiltshire Road Philadelphia, PA 19151 RE: Uniform treatment of public employees and public officials FACTS: 79 -066 On October 3, 1979, Louis J. Carter, former Commissioner of the Public Utility Commission, wrote this Commission inquiring as to whether a public official must file a Financial Interest Statement for the year which he has left office. Mr. Carter noted that Section 4(d) does not make such a requirement of public officials, but does require public employees who leave their position to file for the year they have left their position. The issue is whether public officials and public employees shall be held to the same reporting requirements under Section 4 of Act 170. Specifically, should both public employees and public officials file Financial Interest Statements for the year after they heave office? Section 4(a) states: Each public employee employed by the Commonwealth shall file a statement of financial interests for the preceding calendar year with the department, agency or bureau in which he is employed no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Any other public employee shall file a statement of financial interests with the governing authority of the political subdivision by which he is employed no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Louis J. Carter November 7, 1979 page 2 of 3 Section 4(d) states: No public official shall be allowed to take the oath of office or enter or continue upon his duties, nor shall he receive compensation from public funds, unless he has filed a statement of financial interests with the commission as required by this act. It is noted that Section 4(d) does not specifically state that public officials must file Financial Interest Statements for the preceding year, yet Section 4(a) does. If we were to literally construe the statute as to require public employees to file for the preceding year, but not public officials, we would be holding public employees to a higher standard than public officials. There does not appear to be any rationale or purpose in holding public officials to a lower standard. To hold one group to a higher disclosure standard may impose problems relating to equal protection under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Further, we note the Legislative Journal, September 19, 1978, on page 3002 reports the following statement by Representative Cowell: ...May 1 is the deadline for current public officials, public employees, incumbents when you say public officials, public employees. ...For instance, the date that I would normally have to file is May 1, except in those years when I seek reelection and I would have to file prior to filing my nomination papers, my petition papers.... Thus it would appear from the discussion of the Act when it was passed that public officials were covered in the same manner as public employees are covered. We also note that Section 2 of the Act makes the Governor an "executive level state employee." Thus, it would appear that any paid public official is also a public employee as defined by the Act. Louis J. Carter November 7, 1979 page 3 of 3 Equal filing requirements for both public officials and public employees would ease administration of the Act. In addition, it would relieve the Commission of the burden of having to differentiate between a public official and a public employee, or'dzciding whether a person is both. Different regulations would likewise have to be drafted for each of these three categories. Section 1 of the Act provides guidance in the event of an ambiguity in the Act. It states, "...[T]his act shall be liberally construed to promote complete disclosure." To treat public officials differently would result in less disclosure. CONCLUSION: All public officials, as defined by Act 170, are also public employees and are covered by the same standards. Counsel is directed to prepare regulations imple- menting this opinion. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(i), this opinion 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 cormitted the acts complained of in reliance on the advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. 4 (SEAL) AUL S ITIi, Chairman