HomeMy WebLinkAbout81-009 KnoxWallace J. Knox, Esq.
120 West Tenth Street
Erie, PA 16501
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
June 24, 1981
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION
II. Factual Basis for Determination:
RE: Section 1, Section 3(a), Township Commissioners
Dear Mr. Knox:
I. Issue:
You request advice as to whether:
1. A former employee of a corporation may_vote as a
Township Commissioner to accept a settlement of a tax
dispute between the Township and the corporation?
81 -009
2. Two current employees of a corporation may vote as
f
Township Commissioners to accept a settlement of a
tax dispute between the Township and the corporation?
The General Electric Company (GE) owns 345 acres of land
in Erie County; the builidings on this land are devoted to
various industrial uses. GE has appealed its tax assessment on
the property. The taxing bodies affected by the appeal are
Erie County, Irogois School District and Lawrence Park Township.
The real estate tax paid by GE accounts for 60% of the real
estate tax revenue collected by the Township.- In pre -trial
proceedings expert appraisal witnesses indicated that the
result of a trial would be unfavorable to the Township and the
other taxing bodies. Therefore, the taxing bodies and GE have
proposed an agreement to settle the tax assessment dispute.
This agreement must be adopted by the Lawrence Park Township
Commissioners. There are five Commissioners: two are not
employed by GE, one is a retired GE employee and two are
currently employed by GE in middle- management posts.
Wallace J. Knox, Esq.
June 24, 1981
Page 2
II1. Applicable Law:
Section 1. Purpose.
The Legislature hereby declares that
public office is a public trust and that
any effort to realize personal financial
gain through public office other than
compensation provided by law is a
violation of that trust. In order to
strengthen the faith and confidence of the
people of the State in their government,
the Legislature further declares that the
people have a right to be assured that the
financial interests of holders of or
candidates for public office present
neither a conflict of nor the appearance
of a conflict with the public trust.
Because public confidence in government
can best be sustained by assuring the
people of the impartiality and honesty of
public_officials, this act shall be
liberally construed to promote complete
disclosure.
Section 2 "public official"
Any elected or appointed official in the
Executive, Legislative_or Judicial Branch
of the State or any political subdivision
thereof, provided that it shall not include
members of advisory boards that have no
authority to expend public funds other than
reimbursement for personal expense, or to
otherwise exercise the power of the State or
any political subdivision thereof. "Public
official" shall not include any appointed
official who receives no compensation other
than reimbursement for actual expenses.
1V. Discussion:
There can be no doubt that the Township Commissioners are
"public officials" within the meaning of the Ethics Act, 65
Y.S. 401 et. seq., and must conform their conduct to the
requirements of the statute. The purpose of the statutory
standards of conduct is to insure the integrity of public
servants by eliminating even the appearance of a conflict of
interest.
The Ethics Commission has said that a conflict of interest
exists when an individual represents two or more persons whose
interest is adverse to each other. Alfano, 80 -007. In this
Wallace J. Knox, Esq.
June 24, 1981
Page 3
matter, the Township and GE have adverse interets. The
Township's interest is in maximizing GE's assessment and its
own tax bill. A Commissioner may not represent both interests.
Two of the Commissioners are not employed by GE and
therefore are free to vote on the agreement. The former GE
employee has no present connection with the company and may
vote on the controversy. The two Commissioners who now work
for GE must, however, abstain from voting on this matter.
In Coughlin, 79 -063 the Ethics Commission held that "It is
the duty of any member of the Township Council... to abstain
from participation in a matter submitted by an employer.of that
public official," because such participation presents an
appearance of a conflict with tie public trust._ Similarly, in
Stewart, 79 -070 the opinion of the Commission allowed public
officials to vote on routine bills submitted by the officials'
employers because these ordinary payments are not contested.
In the facts you describe the importance and the extraordinary
nature of the dispute between GE and the Township make the
absolute avoidance of even an appearance of a conflict of
interest imperative. _Accordingly, the two Commissioners
employed by GE must abstain from voting on the agreement
between GE and Lawrence Park Township.
V. Conclusion:
Township Commissioners are public officials subject to the
Ethics Act. A Commissioner who is employed by a company that
is party to a dispute with the Township must avoid the
appearance of a conflict of interest and abstain from voting on
a settlement between his employer and the Township. A
Commissioner who has retired from the company which is party to
dispute with the Township and two Commissioners who are not
employed by the company may vote on the settlement between the
company and the Township.
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 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.
PJS /rdp