HomeMy WebLinkAbout381 SchallMr. George Schall
5 Mcllrath Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15229
Re: 84 -182 -C
Dear Mr. Schall:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
May 1, 1985
Order No. 381
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. The individual allegations, conclusions, and findings on which
those conclusions are based are as follow:
I. Allegation: That you, a zoning board chairman, violated Section 3(a) of
the Ethics Act which prohibits a public official's use of public office or
confidential information gained through that office for personal financial
gain by having your driveway paved and paid for with public funds.
Findings:
1. You served as the Zoning Board Chairman and as such are subject to the
State Ethics Act.
2. On August 9, 1983, the Ross Township Commissioners notified Northern
Industries that they were selected to pave Mcllrath Drive. This notification
told Northern Industries to do the paving only within the limits of the line
of the "Tait survey" which had recently been completed.
3. Your drive and those of two other neighbors were not leveled at this time.
4. You had asked Mr. Ray Hale, Ross Township Superintendent of Roads, not to
pave your driveway entrance until the next year because you were doing some
remodeling and feared that the trucks might crack your new pavement.
Subsequently, you asked Mr. Hale to level your driveway.
Mr. George Schall May 1, 1985
Page 3
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).
y th- Co mis
EMS /na
He - rtl B. Conner
Chairman
Mr. George Schall May 1, 1985
Page 2
a. Mr. Hale states that neither action was unusual and that it was
common practice for the township to level the'entrance to driveways whenever
they paved the street.
b. The township solicitor also stated it is not improper for the
township to use equipment and personnel to level the entry to a driveway.
c. The chairman of the board of commissioners also stated that it is
normal for the township to perform this activity.
d. There are no standards for the amount of work needed to level a
driveway entrance and it appears that this decision is one made by the
superintendent of roads.
5. As chairman of the zoning board, you have no authority to direct township
employees in their work for the township.
6. There is no evidence that you used your office as zoning board chairman to
influence the township to pave the entrance to your driveway.
II. Discussion:
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.
We find no evidence that you used your office or attempted to use your
office to have the entrance to your driveway leveled. In addition the
chairman of the township commissioners, the solicitor and the road
superintendent all state that leveling of driveway entrances is common
practice when the township paves a street. tinder these circumstances, we find
no violation of the Ethics Act.
III. Conclusion: We find no violation of the Ethics Act under these
circumstances and will take no further action.
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