HomeMy WebLinkAbout85-004 ZwiklMr. Kurt D. Zwikl
The Merchants National Bank
of Allentown
702 Hamilton Mall
Allentown, PA 18101
II. Factual Basis for Determination:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BU.'LDINC3
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
March 20, 1985
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION
85n004
Re: Former Public Official; Section 3(e); Representation
Dear Mr. Zwikl:
I. Issue:
Whether you may serve on the Beard of Directors of a non-profit
corporation if you previously served in that same capacity as a member of the
Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
Until December, 1984 you served in the Pennsylvania House of
Representatives. You currently hold no public office or employment. As a
member of the House of Representatives you were appointed by the Speaker of
the House to serve on the Board of Directors of Keystone State Games Inc.,
hereinafter, the Corporation. The Corporation is a nor- profit entity which
oversees the general operation of the Keystone State Games program. This
program was initiated by a resolution of the House of Representatives (No.
235, session of 1980) and was created to foster a citizens - supported program
of physical fitness and amateur athletic competition. Funding for the program
is obtained from State government, industries, corporations, individuals and
service organizations, The Corporation is primarily responsible for raising
the necessary funds. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania appropriates $50,000 a
year for the program. This is a general appropriation to the Pennsylvania
Department of Health, earmarked for the program. The Board of Directors
functions as the policy making body of the program, and it includes
representatives from industries, corporations, education, health and
Mr. Kurt D. Zwikl
March 20, 1985
Page 2
government. From the information forwarded to the Commission, there are 21
members of the Board. Two of these individuals are members of the State
Senate and two are members of the House of Representatives. The members of
the board are not compensated and receive no reimbursement for expenses.
Finally, it should be noted that on January 10, 1984 Advice of Counsel,
No. 84 -503, was issued to you generally outlining the restrictions imposed
upon you as a former public official within the purview of the State Ethics
Act.
III. Discussion:
As noted above, you have previously been advised as to the nature and
extent of the restrictions imposed upon former public officials by the State
Ethics Act. The content of that Advice will not be restated at this time, but
we will incorporate that document herein, by reference.
The Ethics Act generally places no restrictions on the type of
employment, husiness or service in which a former public official may engage.
The only restriction imposed by the Act on such person is as follows:
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(e) No former official or public employee shall represent
a person, with or without compensation, on any matter
before the governmental body with which he has been
associated for one year after he leaves that body.
65 P.S. 403(e).
As can be seen from the foregoing, the Act restricts your activities
insofar as they may constitute representation before the governmental body
with which you were associated. In the current situation, the Commission
finds that in sitting as a board member in your capacity as a private citizen
as opposed to that of a legislator, you are not representing any person or
entity before your former government body, i.e., the House of Representatives.
See; e.g., 80 -044; 80 -057, Seltzer.
In reference to this situation the Commission reminds you that your
conduct in relation to your position on the Board must comply with the
guidelines set forth in our previous Advice. For example you may not, within
the one year period, represent the Corporation before the House of
Representatives in its effort to obtain funding or in relation to any other
matter. Additionally, you should be mindful of your dealings with those
members of the Board who currently serve in the House of Representatives.
Your activities in relation to these individuals must he in their capacity as
board members and not in their official positions. Anything to the contrary
may fall within the 3(e) prohibition.
Mr. Kurt D. Zwikl
March 20, 1985
Page 3
Finally, with relation to whether this situation presents a conflict of
interest, the Commmission notes 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 cannot 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 public employer. See Opinion No.
83 -014, Anderson. The law, however, cannot be read so as to prevent former
public officials from continuing to voluntarily serve the public's interest as
in the current situation, upon the termination of one's offic'al position.
IV. Conclusion:
You may, within the purview of the Ethics Act, serve on the Board of
Directors of the Corporation. Your conduct in relation thereto must be in
accordance with the guidelines set forth herein. Additionally, this opinion
only outlines your obligations under the Ethics Act and does not address the
requirements, if any, imposed by any other statute, code or regulation.
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 of the advice given.
JJC /sfd
This letter is a public record and will be made available as such.
Finally, any person may request within 15 days of service of the opinion
that the Commission reconsider its opinion. The person requesting reconside-
ration should present a detailed explanation setting forth the reasons why the
opinion requires reconsideration.
By the ommissi
HER RT B. CONNER
Chairman