HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-008 Buffington(` r`
, •
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION
oECIOEp 2 0 1986
MA I L E [ ,G„
Ms. Frances A. Buffington 86 -008
4171 -E King George Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17109
Re: Former Public Employee; Staff Assistant, House of Representatives;
Governmental Body
Dear Ms. Buffington:
This responds to your appeal of the Advice of Counsel (86 -563) issued
May 21, 1986.
I. Issue:
Whether the governmental body of a Staff Assistant in the House of
Representatives includes the party policy committee for the purposes of the
one year representation restrictions of the State Ethics Act.
II. Factual Basis for Determination:
On May 8, 1986, you requested the advice of the State Ethics Commission
regarding any restrictions that would be imposed on you by virtue of the State
Ethics Act upon your termination of service with the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. Pursuant to your letter of request, you advised that you were
terminating your position with the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on or
about May 20, 1986,.
While working with the House you were employed as'a Staff Assistant with
the State House of Representatives Republican Caucus assigned to the Office of
Republican Field Services. In this position, you generally were responsible
and served in the capacity of preparing publications involving: the analysis
of important roll call votes; hackground papers on selected issues and state
government; periodic policy reports reviewing important issues from a party
perspective; a weekly summary of hills reported from twenty standing House
committees; summaries of important issues before the House; trends and public
policy; how such trends effect the state and a manual regarding how to run a
district office and handle constituent problems.
Ms. Frances A. Buffington
Page 2
In addition to the foregoing, you were involved in monitoring weekly
newspapers regarding items of interest and were further involved in staff
visits to district offices in order to improve constituent services. An
individual in the position in which you served was also involved in assisting
new legislators with the implementation of effective constituent service
programs. Each staff member, in this respect, was assigned a number of
freshmen legislators to assist. You advise that in relation to this
particular function, you were not a member of the staff when the current first
term legislators took office and you were, therefore, never assigined any
specific members of the House of Representatives to assist.
In your position you reported directly to the director of legislative
field services. This individual reports to Representative Kenneth Brandt who
is chairman of the Republican Policy Committee. You advise that you were
never assigned to work with any specific members of the House of
Representatives.
On or about May 20, 1986, you terminated your position with the House of
Representatives in order to assume the position of Assistant Director of
Governmental Relations with the Pennsylvania Builders Association. On May 21,
1986, Advice of Counsel, No. 86 -563 was issued generally outlining the
restrictions set forth under the State Ethics Act on the activities of former
public employees within the one year period following their governmental
service. 65 P.S. §403(e). That advice indicated that the restrictions as set
forth in the Act, the regulations of the State Ethics Commission and previous
opinions of this Commission, were applicable -to you in your dealings with the
Office of Republican Field Services, the Office of Representative Brandt and
the Republican Policy Committee. On or about May 27, 1986, you appealed the
Advice of Counsel specifically as it related to the expansion of your
governmental body to the Republican Policy Committee. As part of your appeal,
you indicated that during your employment with the House of Representatives
you had no specific contact with the Republican Policy Committee members, you
attended no policy committee meetings and without exception, the work you
completed for the policy committee never carried your name or signature. As
such, you have requested that the full Commission review the previously issued
Advice of Counsel in order to determine whether your governmental body would
include the Republican Policy Committee.
III. Discussion:
- Generally, the previously issued Advice of Counsel sets forth the
relevant restrictions that are placed upon former public employees by the
State Ethics Act. As noted in that advice, the Ethics Act provides as
follows:
Ms. Frances A. Buffington
Page 3
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).
The Advice of Counsel, as a preliminary matter to determining the nature
and scope of the restrictions that were placed upon you, reviewed the concept
of "governmental body" in order to determine the extent to which such
restrictions would apply. In this context and as set forth in the advice, the
State Ethics Commission has previously ruled that the governmental body with
which an individual is deemed to have been associated during his tenure of
public office or employment, extends to those entities where he had influence,
responsibility, supervision, or control. See, Ewing, 79 -010; Kury v.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State Ethics Commission, 62 Pa. Commw. Ct. 174,
435 A.2d 940, (1981). The determination as to whether a particular official
or employee exercises the type of influence, responsibility and control as set
forth above is garnered from a review of the individual's duties and
responsibilities as set forth in their letters of request, their job
descriptions, and their classification specifications. A review of the
information presented in the instant situation, clearly indicates that you
exercised authority, influence and control in relation to the Office of
Republican Field Services. The information provided by you in relation to the
instant appeal, however, also indicates that you exercised no such influence,
authority, responsibility, or control in relation to the Republican Policy
Committee. You had no specific contact with the members of said committee and
attended no policy committee meetings. You further indicate that the work you
completed for the policy committee never carried your name or an indication
that it was prepared by you. As such, we believe that the previously issued
Advice of Counsel should be modified to the extent that it expanded your
governmental body to include the Republican Policy Committee.
ti
Additionally, we note that your position with the House of
Representatives you reported to the director of the legislative field
services office. That individual reported to Representative Brandt, who is
the chairma- of the Republican Policy Committee. You apparently did not
directly report to or have any influence, control or supervision within the
office of Representative Kenneth Brandt. Therefore, we also believe that the
Advice of Counsel should be modified insofar as it extended your governmental
body to the office of Representative Brandt. As such, and based upon the
foregoing, we believe that the one year representation restriction set forth
in the Ethics Act and explained in the previously issued Advice of Counsel
would be applicable to your activities insofar as they related to the Office
of Republican Field Services. We do not believe that your governmental body
would extend to the Office of Represenative Brandt or the Republican Policy
Committee. In all other respects, the Advice of Counsel is affirmed.
Ms. Frances A. Buffington
Page 4
IV. Conclusion:
The governmental hody of a Staff Assistant employed by the Pennsylvania
State House of Representatives Repuhlican Field Services Office is the Office
of Repuhlican Field Services. The previously issued Advice of Counsel, No.
86 -563 is hereby modified insofar as it determined that the governmental body
included the Office of Representative Kenneth Brandt and the Repuhlican Policy
Committee. The Advice of Counsel is affirmed in all other respects insofar as
it indicated the representation restrictions applicable under the State
Ethics Act.
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.
This letter is a public record and will he 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 Commission,
G. Sieber Pancoast
Chairman