Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20-001 ConfidentialPHONE: 717-783-1610 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FACSIMILE: 717-787-0806 TOLL. FIRM 1-800-932-0936 FINANCE BUILDING WEBSITE: wwmethics.pajoy 613 NORTH STREET, ROOM 309 HARRISBURG, PA 17120-0400 OPINION OF THE COMMISSION Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair Roger Nick Melanie DePalma Michael A. Schwartz Shelley Y. Simms 0 1 0 0 1 IPJAI-MLYIMIMMMIVAE, I To the Requester: This responds to your letter of August 12, 2020, by which you re ,nested a confidential advisory opinion from the State Ethics Commission ("'Commission . ISSUE: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., would impose prohibitions or restrictions upon [name and title] (the "Public OfficiaT),­w`ith regard to having a non-fiction book published regarding his personal life and career, where: (1) the Public Official would receive payment(s)[compen,sation for having the book published, including an advance and, potential royalties based on book sales; (2 portions of the book would encompass the Public Official's experiences as a public opicial; (3) the book would include chapters discussing the Public Official's service in public office including issues that the Public Official faces now; (4) the book would relate public policy positions the Public Official held during his career in the private sector to present controversies, in which he has been involved; and (5) the book would include decisions the Public Official has made while in office. III. FACTUAL BASIS FOR DETERMINATION: On behalf of the Public Official, you request a confidential advisory from this Commission based upon submitted facts, the material portion of which may be fairly summarized as follows. The Public Official has entered into a contract to have a book published about his life and lessons learned from childhood to the present, including during a [number of years spanning decades] career as a [type of professional] ] in A and B issues and during number of years constituting less than a decade] in public office. You state that the ublic Official's life and career have been spent trying to [type of effort]. You state that the Public Official has been known for decades for [type of work], and that on several occasions prior to taking office, he has spoken, been interviewed by media, or taught about A and B issues. Currently, the Public Official is frequently referred to as a C in the Confidential O inion, 20-001 cto er Page 2 D. You state that the Public Official secured the book contract in an arms -length marketplace transaction with a certain commercial publisher that is national and international in scope, for commercially reasonable terms including an advance and potential royalties based on book sales, with publishing expected to occur in [year]. The book was not/would not be prepared using any official staff or resources. Additionally, the book would not contain any confidential information received through the Public Official's holding public office. You state that the book would include as its primary themes [themes], and A and B issues. However, portions of the book would encompass the Public Official's experiences as a public official. The book would include chapters discussing the Public Official's service in public office including issues that the Public Official faces now, connecting such issues with his experiences prior to public service and continuing discussion of the issues that have animated his life and career. The book would relate public policy positions the Public Official held during his career in the private sector to present controversies in which he has been involved. The book would include decisions the Public Official has made while in office. Based upon the above facts, the question presented is whether the Ethics Act would impose prohibitions or restrictions upon the Public Official with regard to having the proposed non-fiction book regarding his personal life and career published. In particular, you seek confirmation that no forbidden honorarium would result. By letter dated August 24, 2020, you were notified of the date, time and location of the executive meeting at which your request would be considered. You submitted a letter brief dated September 16, 2020, and commentary at this Commission's executive meeting held September 23, 2020. You assert that the instant matter resembles this Commission's adjudication in Sims, Order No. 1769. You state that the Public Official's proposed book would not be targeted solely to the Public Official's jurisdiction, and "the overwhelming number" of sales would be elsewhere. Finally, you state that this Commission's opinion is sought to ensure compliance with the Ethics Act. III. 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 requester based upon the facts that the requester has submitted. In issuing the advisory based upon the facts that the requester has submitted, this Commission does not engage in an independent investigation of the facts, nor does it speculate as to facts that have not been submitted. It is the burden of the requester 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 requester has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts. As [title], the Public Official is a "public official" as the Ethics Act defines that term, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, and therefore he is subject to the restrictions of the Ethics Act. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest: § 1103. Restricted activities (a) Conflict of interest. --No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. Confidential Opinion, 20-001 October 1 ,0 Page 3 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a). The term "conflict" or "conflict of interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 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. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act's definition of the term "conflict" or "conflict of interest," 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, the Public Official would be prohibited from using the authority, of his public office or confidential information received by holding such public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the Public Official himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official/public employee from accepting an honorarium: § 1103. Restricted activities. (d) Honorarium. --No public official or public employee shall accept an honorarium. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(d). The Ethics Act defines the term "honorarium" as follows: § 1102. Definitions "Honorarium." Payment made in recognition of published works, appearances, speeches and presentations and which is not intended as consideration for the value of such services which are nonpublic occupational or professional in nature. The term does not include tokens presented or provided which are of de minimis economic impact. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. The question of whether a given payment is an honorarium prohibited by Section 1103(d) is determined by an application of the statutory definition set forth in the Ethics Act, not by the mere label that may have been attached to the payment. Fiorello, Order No. 1363; Confidential Opinion, 14-007; Confidential Opinion, 01-001. Confidential Opinion, 20-001 0_C_t0_I5e_r__f4, 2U20 Page 4 The statutory definition of "honorarium" generally includes payments that are made in recognition of speaking engagements/presentations, appearances, and published works, but excludes such payments if: (1) they are legitimately intended as consideration for the value of such services; and (2) they are undertaken in the public official's/public employee's private professionaF or occupational cappacity and are not related to the public position. Fiorello, supra; Confidential Opinion, 14-007; Confidential Opinion, 01-001. In Baker, Opinion 91-004, we set forth criteria for determining whether the exclusion Rn He statutory definition of the term "honorarium" applies in any given instance, which criteria include the following: the private occupation of the public official/public employee; the expertise of the public official/public employee in the area; the history of activity in the occupation prior to public service; the purpose for the invitation; the capacity in which the public officiallpublic employee is invited; the subject of the speech, work or presentation; the group spoken to and the composition as to members or non-members of the group; the purpose for gathering the group; the amount of the fee relative to the services performed; the source of the invitation; the event at which the speech is given; the subject matter of the speech or published work as compared to the normal subject matter dealt with by the occupational/professional group; and any other relevant factors. In appplying these criteria in Baker, we held that a Senator with a Bachelor's degree in Political Science as well as a aiV�st-e-Ts degree and Ph.D. in Government, who was an assistant professor and faculty associate, taught political science at Temple University, authored/co-authored numerous publications involving political science and government, and had previously served as a panelist or speaker at several professional and civic meetings and conferences, would not be prohibited from accepting a $500 fee for speaking as an academic expert to marketing representatives on the subject of legislative priorities for local government at a seminar where the marketing representatives were meeting with academics, state and local officials, and private sector executives. We determined that under the factual circumstances, the payment would be nonpublic occupational or professional in nature and not an honorarium. Baker, supra. In Sims, Order No. 1769, issued earlier this year, we applied the Baker criteria in a case invofving payments received by State Representative Brian Sims =Sims") for speaking about LGBT issues and legislation. Sims private occupation was that of a paid professional speaker/lecturer on LGBT issues. Sims' expertise in civil rights/diversity/LGBT issues was founded on his own story, educational background, knowledge, experience as an attorney, experience as a leader of LGBT organizations, and years of experience as an LGBT activist and paid speaker on LGBT issues prior to his election to public office. Sims' history of activity in the occupation prior to public service was extensive, and the purpose for Sims' invitations to speak was to explain his own experiences and the lessons that he learned in a way that others could learn some of those lessons. The capacity in which Sims was invited to speak was as a gay, prominent civil rights activist. Sims' status as a public official was part of his title but was not the reason he was invited to speak. The subject of Sims' presentations included his own experiences and his extensive knowledge regarding LGBT issues. The status of LGBT-related legislation was only a small part of a much larger speech, and LGBT-related legislation had been a significant focus of Sims' work prior to taking office. The General Assembly was a "backdrop" against which Sims described his interactions with Members of the General Assembly. Cf., Confidential Opinion, 14-007. The groups spoken to were mainly college students and members of academia. Occasionally Sims spoke to a business group. The purpose for gathering the group was to educate the listeners to LGBT issues. The amounts of the fees relative to the services performed did not appear to have been out of the ordinary. The source of Sims' invitations were people involved in arranging speakers for colleges and business groups. The events at which the speeches were given were LGBT-related events. The subject matter of the speeches was typical for college/business groups interested in LGBT issues, especially during certain times of the year when LGBT awareness was emphasized. None of the appearances which were Confidential O innion, 20-001 cto er Page 5 the subject of the Sims matter occurred within the physical boundaries of Sims' legislative district, and only afeew occurred in Pennsylvania. Under the unique facts of the Sims case, Sims' occupation prior to taking office was providing paid speeches on L= issues, which included references to related legislation. We held that Sims did not violate Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(d), as to the allegation that he solicited and/or accepted honoraria in association with appearances/presentational speeches, as the payments he received for his appearances/presentations/speeches were consideration for the value of such services which were nonpublic occupational or Rrofessional in nature, and therefore were excluded from the Ethics Act's definition of `honorarium." We cautioned that had Sims' speeches been more focused on legislation or his legislative duties, the outcome of that case would have been different. In Confidential Opinion, 14-007, we held that --subject to the condition that the transaction in question in t at Opinion would be an "arms -length" marketplace transaction for commercially reasonable terms --the compensation a State Legislator would receive from a publisher for authoring a book about his public and private life would not constitute an honorarium where the relevant facts included, inter alia, that: (1) portion(s) of the State Legislator's proposed book would relate to his experiences as a State Legislator but would not include any confidential information received through his holding public office; and (2) the portions of the book relating to the State Legislator's experiences as a State Legislator would be only a fraction of the overall work encompassing both his public and private life, and in those portions, the General Assembly would be more like a `backdrop" against which he would describe his interactions with Members of the General Assembly and staff on a personal and professional level than the story itself. In contrast, in Confidential Opinion, 18-004, we found a connection/nexus between a State Legislator's proposed book and the State Legislator's public position as a State Legislator where: (1) the subject matter of the proposed book was a legislative to (2) the proposed book would contain the State Legislator's proposal(s) and his suggestions for potential legislative changes that would aid in improving the subject topic/concern; and (3) the proposed book would likely discuss pieces of legislation authored by the State Legislator or other State Legislators. We held that any payment(s) to the State Legislator in recognition of the book --including but not limited to royalties from sale(s) of the book --would constitute prohibited honoraria pursuant to Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act. In applying the above precedents to the submitted facts in the instant matter, you are advised that to avoid transgressing Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(d), reference(s) bya public official/public employee to his public position in the context of a paid speaking engagementlpresentation, appearance, or published work must be limited to a mere 'backdrop" --that is minimal and incidental and not a subJ'ect matter of the paid speaking engagement/presentation, appearance, or publis'Tied work. A mere backdro provides a setting without providing subject matter content. For example, merely identitpjiing the public office or anecdotally describing one's relationships with other public officials without delving into the activities of the public office would constitute a mere backdrop. In the instant matter, even if the Public Official's proposed book would be "primarily" about the Public Official's non-public life, as you suggest, the following facts establish that the planned references in the book to the Public Official's public office would not be limited to a "mere backdrop," but rather, would constitute subJJ'ect matter(s) of the Fook: (1) portions of the book would encompass the Public Officials ex enences as a public official; (2) the book would include chapters discussing the Public Official's service in public office including issues that the Public Official faces now; (3) the book would relate public policy positions the Public Official held during his career in the private sector to present controversies in which he has been involved; and (4) the book would include decisions the Public Official has made while in office. Confidential Opinion, 20-001 cto er 4, 2020 Page 6 You are advised that under the submitted facts, the Ethics Act generally would not prohibit the Public Official from having a book published about his private life, or ---from a private perspective —A and B issues, his private [type of work], and [themes]. However, pa ment(s)/compensation relating to the book would constitute prohibited honoraria if references to the Public Official's public office would go beyond a mere "backdrop" to such matters as it appears these subjects currently do based on your submissions. For example, payment(s)lcompensation relating to the book would constitute prohibited honoraria if the Public Official would include as a subject matter of the book the activities of his public office, such as decisions the Public Official has made as a public official while in office. 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 otther than the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics Act. IV. CONCLUSION. Based upon the submitted facts that: q) [name and title] (the "Public Official") has entered into a contract to have a book published about his life and lessons learned from childhood to the present, including during a [number of years spanning decades] career as a [type of professional] in A and B issues and during [number of years constituting less than a decade] in public office; (2) the Public Officials life and career have been spent tryin to [type of effort]; (3) the ublic Official has been known for decades for [type of work; (4 on several occasions prior to taking office, this individual has spoken, been interviewed by media, or taught about A and B issues; (5) currently, the Public Official is frequently referred to as a C in the D; (6) the Public Official secured the book contract in an arms -length marketplace transaction with a certain commercial publisher that is national and international in scope, for commercially reasonable terms including an advance and potential royalties based on book sales, with publishing expected to occur in [year]; (7) the book was not/would not be prepared using any official staff or resources; ((8) the book would not contain any confidential information received through the Public Official's holding public office; (9) the book would include as its primary themes [themes], and A and B issues; J10) port►ons of the book would encompass the Public Official's experiences as a pubic official; (11) the book would include chapters discussing the Public Official's service in public office including issues that the Public Official faces now, connecting such issues with his experiences pnor to public service and continuing discussion of the issues that have animated the Public Official's life and career; (12) the book would relate public policy positions the Public Official held during his career in the private sector to present controversies in which he has been involved; (13) the book would include decisions the Public Official has made while in office; and (14) the book would not be targeted solely at the Public Official's jurisdiction, you are advised as follows. As [title], the Public Official is a "public official" as the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act") defines that term, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, and therefore he is subject to the restrictions of the Ethics Act. Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act's definition of the term "conflict" or "conflict of interest," 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), the Public Official would be prohibited from using the authority of his public office or confidential information received by holding such public position for the frivate pecuniary benefit of the Public Official himself, any member of his immediate amily, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(d), prohibits a public official/public employee from accepting an "honorarium" as the t ics Act defines that term, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. To avoid transgressing Section 1103(d) of the Ethics Act, Confidential O inion, 20-001 cto er 4, 2020 Page 7 references by a public official/public employee to his public position in the context of a paid speaking engagement/presentation, appearance, or published work must be limited to a mere "backdrop' —that is minimal and incidental and not a subject matter of the paid speaking engagement/presentation, appearance, or published work. Under the submitted facts, the Ethics Act generally would not prohibit the Public Official from having a book published about his private life, or —from a private perspective —A and B issues, his private [type of work], and [themes]. However, pa ment(s)Icompensation relating to the book would constitute prohibited honoraria if references to the Public Official's public office would go beyond a mere "backdrop " to such matters as it appears these subjects currently do based on your submissions.For example, payment(s)/compensation relating to the book would constitute prohibited honoraria if the Public Official would include as a subject matter of the book the activities of his public office, such as decisions the Public Official has made as a public official while in office. Act. The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Pursuant to Section 1107(10) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1107(10), the person who acts in good faith on this Opinion issued to him shall not be subject to criminal or civil penalties for so acting provided the material facts are as stated in the request. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Aic he CommissionOas . Colafella Chair