HomeMy WebLinkAbout112 HinishMr. Howard C. Hinish
Bedford County Commissioner
R. D. #4, Box 484
Everett, PA 15537
Re: #82 -11 -C
Dear Mr. Hinish:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
April 19, 1982
No. 112
The State Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a
possible violation of Act 170 of 1978. The Commission has now completed its
investigation into these actions and finds an appearance of a conflict under
Act 170.
are:
The individual allegations and findings on which our conclusion is based
I. Allegation: That as an elected County Commissioner you used your public
office and voted to acquire through the County an arc - welder as surplus
government property that would be used by County CETA workers to improve
property of a business with which you are associated.
Findings:
1. You serve as a Commissioner of Bedford County.
2. You served since 1963 as General Manager of the Everett Railroad,
hereinafter the "Railroad," and since 1953 you have served as a member of the
Railroad's Board of Directors.
3. Sometime in March, 1981 the Director of the On- the - Job - Training (OJT)
program working for Southern Alleghenies Planning & Development Commission of
which Bedford County is a part, approached the Railroad as to its potential
use of OJT trainees.
4. Preliminary, informal discussions were held as to what type of work might
be available with the Railroad for OJT trainees.
5. Discussion focused on the acquisition of a welding machine that could be
used to train persons to perform welding for the Railroad.
I lk
Howard C. Hinish
April 19, 1982
Page -2-
6. Through the offices of the CETA Director for Bedford County with whom the
OJT program might be coordinated, a welder was located.
7. The welder in question was a U.S. government surplus item which was
available for transfer /purchase by a political subdivision through the
Pennsylvania Department of General Services.
8. With the approval of the other two County Commissioners (Alva Hostetler
and Gary W. Ebersole) you arranged to acquire the welder.
9. The welder was shipped to Bedford County as of December 22, 1981 and was
placed on Railroad property although all parties agreed that the welder was
"owned" by the County.
10. Following shipment, a bill for $150.00 for shipping costs was presented
to the County.
11. At the Commissioners' regular meeting of January 19, 1982, you made the
motion to pay this bill; Commissioner Ebersole abstained but the motion, as
seconded by Commissioner Hostetler, passed.
12. Subsequently, the Everett Railroad reimbursed the County for this
$150.00.
13. The welder has been officially "transferred" on "paper" to West
Providence Township although it remains physically located on Railroad
property at this time.
Discussion: The Ethics Act applies to you as an elected public official. The
Ethics Act requires that you avoid actual as well as the appearance of any
conflict between your private interests (here the Railroad) and your public
responsibilities as County Commissioner. In this regard, it would have
produced an actual conflict had you used your public office to acquire the
welder for the wholly private use of the Railroad. Here, however, the
acquisition of the welder was to serve a public (OJT or CETA) purpose.
However, the OJT or CETA purpose /programs were not clear or certain or
completely public and the public could logically perceive that the welder was
to be used by the Railroad for its purposes. You arranged and voted for the
acquisition of the welder and hence, it aapeared as if you were using your
public office for the gain of the business ,Railroadrwith which you are
associated and which you serve as Director and Manager.
In such circumstances, where the County was acquiring something of value
- -the welder--which would be used to the eventual benefit of the Railroad, you
should have removed yourself from all discussions, decisions and votes
relating to this acquisition. Failure to do so amounted to an appearance of a
conflict of interest.
Howard C. Hinish
April 19, 1982
Page -3-
Conclusion: Your participation in the project and acquisition of the welder
under the circumstances found amounted to an appearance of a conflict of
interest. However, assuming that no further participation occurs and that no
actual use of or "gain" is derived from the welder by the Railroad, the State
Ethics Commission will take no further action in this matter.
Our files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with
Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a). However, this Order is final
and will become available as a public document within 15 days unless you file
documentation with the Commission which justifies reconsideration and /or
challenges pertinent factual findings. During this 15 -day period, no one,
including the Respondent unless he waives his right to challenge this Order,
may violate this confidentiality by releasing, discussing or circulating this
Order.
Any person who violates the confidentiality of a Commission proceeding is
guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than $1000 or imprisoned
for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e).
PJS /jc
Sincerely,
— liu /
Chairman