Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout341 EmeryMr. Chester Emery Huntingdon County Sewerage Enforcement Officer Star Route Mill Creek, PA 17060 Re: No. 83 -82 -C STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION September 28, 1984 Order No. 341 Dear Mr. Emery: The State Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a possible violation of kt 170 of 1978. The Commission has now completed its investigation. The individual allegations, conclusions, and findings on which those conclusions are based are as follows: That you, a Huntingdon County Sewerage Enforcement Officer, also work for Mr. Bernard Wright, who is a self - employed building contractor, and that you grant sewerage permits to projects of Mr. Wright and that this is a violation of Section 3(a) or ?(b) of the Ethics kt, 65 P.S. 403(a) and (b) respectively. A. Findings: 1. You were employed as a full -time Sewage Enforcement Officer by the Huntingdon County Sanitary Administrative Committee ( H.C.S.A.C.) You had been employed in that capacity since 1974 and as such are a public employee subject to the Ethics Act. 2. The records of the H.C.S.A.C. confirm the following: a. The H.C.S.A.C. was formed in 1979. The Committee was created under the authority of Pct 537 of 1/24/66, P.L. 1535 - PA Sewage Facilities Pct. Chester Emery Page 2 September 28, 1984 b. The H.C.S.A.C. was formed to administer the provisions of Act 537 for the participating municipalities of Huntingdon County. c. The H.C.S.A.C. consists of one public official from each participating borough and township. The public offical may be Township Supervisor, Councilman or Borough Mayor. d. All municipalities located in Huntingdon County, with the exception of Wood and Spruce Creek Townships, participate in the H.C.S.A.C. e. The H.C.S.A.C. main functions are to receive sewage permit applications on a county -wide basis and issue sewage permits for systems that are in compliance with Act 537. 3. You were hired pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1. Employees. of the H.C.S.A.C. By -Laws. 4. Your duties consisted of accepting sewage permit applications, inspecting sites by performing various soil composition tests and insuring that the proposed sewage systems are in compliance with Department of Environmental Resources' regulations and Act 537. You are solely responsible for approving applications and issuing the sewage permits. You are not required to have this work approved by any members of H.C.S.A.C. a. You were also responsible for conducting on -site inspections and if violations were found, it was your responsibility to file a summary action against the property owner and person installing the system. 5. You are not and never have been an employee of Bernard Wright, a self- employed contractor and member of the H.C.S.A.C. 6. The Department of Environmental Resources conducted an investigation into the administration of the Sewage Facilities Act in Cass Township and Cassville Borough and found the following violations involving Bernard Wright. a. A home under construction by Steven Wilson in Cassville Borough was located on property owned by Glenn Wright, brother of Bernard Wright. Bernard Wright was the contractor. An unpermitted, illegal sewage system was installed. The Department of Environmental Resources recommended to the H.C.S.A.C. that summary action be filed against the home owner, Steven Wilson, and Bernard Wright. Chester Emery September 28, 1984 Page 3 b. Summary action was filed against home owner Wilson by you and a hearing is scheduled for December 1983. c. No action was taken against builder Bernard Wright because you were not certain that Wright installed the unpermitted system. d. The Department of Environmental Resources did not believe you were negligent in your duties by not being aware of the violations on the Wilson property. 7. Records of the H.C.S.A.C. confirm that no sewage permits were issued in the name of Bernard Wright during the period from January, 1979 through October, 1983. 8. There is no eviaence that you have a financial interest in the homes on which Mr. Wright worked. B. Discussion: Sections 3(a) and 3(b) of the Ethics Act state: Section 3. Restricted Activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall use his public office or any confidential information received through his holding public office to obtain financial gain other than compensation provided by law for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a). (b) No person shall offer or give to a public official or public employee or candidate for public office or a member of his immediate family or a business with which he is associated, and no public official or public employee or candidate for public office shall solicit or accept, anything of value, including a gift, loan, political contribution, reward, or promise of future employment based on any understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the public official or public employee or candidate for public office would be influenced thereby. 65 P.S. 403(b). Chester Emery Page 4 HBC /jc September 28, 1984 You were not employed by Mr. Wright and you are not associated with him in a business. We find that you have no financial interest in the homes on which Mr. Wright worked and no evidence that you used your office or confidential information for financial gain. Therefore, we find no violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics kt. We have also found no evidence that you accepted, solicited or offered anything of value with the understanding that your official action would be influenced and, therefore, find no violation of Section 3(b). The Commission is also responsible for reviewing circumstances in which public officials and public employees are involved in light of Section 1 of the Ethics Act. We found no evidence of a business relationship between you and Mr. Wright or financial interest on your part in the homes on which he worked. In addition, we do not find that these circumstances would have a reasonable public believe there was an appearance of a conflict with the public trust between your public and private interests and conclude that you did not create the appearance of a conflict of interest with the public trust. C. Conclusion: We find no violation of Section 3(a) or 3(b) of the Act or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the public trust and will take no further action on these allegations. 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 be made available as a public document 15 days after service (defined as mailing) unless you file documentation with the Commission which justifies reconsideration and /or challenges pertinent factual findings. See 51 Pa. Code 2.38. 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 $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e). the r. • t nner Chairma