Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout436 PievskyHonorable Max Pievsky House of Representatives Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 6230 Everett Street Philadelphia, PA 19149 Re: 84 -46 -C I. Allegation: 11\ STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION November 25, 1985 Order No. 436 Dear Mr. Pievsky: 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 follows: That you, as a member of the House of Representatives, violated Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(a), which prohibits the use of public office or confidential information gained through that office, by having your staff, who are paid by public funds, work on your political campaign. A. Findings: 1. You are a member of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and, as such, are subject to the provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 170- 1978). 2. You were a candidate for re- election to the House of Representatives in 1984. 3. Your legislative office is located on Bustleton Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Payroll records of the House of Representatives show that Holly Fisher was employed as your legislative assistant on January 1, 1984. She was employed only for one month. 5. Esther Lodek, Gilbert Rothvarg, Robert Greenfield and Dolores Kelley are employed at your district office. Honorable Max Pievsky . Page 2 Novemher 2.5, 1985 6. There is no evidence that these employees of your district office were used for campaign meetings or that office resources were used for campaign purposes. 7. Modern Mailers Inc., Philadelphia, Pa, mailed campaign material for you as follows: a. March 17, 1984, 2.0,569 pieces at a total cost of $430.92 less a postage credit of $112.27 for a net cost of $318.65. This bill was paid for by check #187 dated April 18, 1984. The check was on the account of "Friends of State Representative Max Pievsky," and was signed by Esther C. Lodek. b. March 23, 1984, 20,330 pieces at a total cost of $2080.00. The bill was paid by check #172 dated March 23, 1984 on the account of "Friends of State Representative Max Pievsky," and was signed by Esther C. Lodek. B. Discussion: As a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives you are a publlc official as that term is defined in the State Ethics Act. 65 P.S. .$402. As such, your conduct must conform to the requirements of the Act. The Ethics Act provides generally that: Section 3. Restricted activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall use his puhlic 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). We have previously ruled that within this provision of the law a state legislator may not employ the legislative district office, employees or facilities in aid of a re- election campaign. We are still firmly committed to that position because it represents the behavior the public has a right to expect from its public leaders. See, Cessar, 82 -002. Here, however, we have found no supportable evidence that your legislative office was used contrary to the principles of that decision and as a result, we find no violation of the State Ethics Act. Honorable Max Pievsky Page 3 C. Conclusion: You did not employ the facilities, personnel, or offices of your legislative position in the conduct of your re- election campaign. We, therefore, find no violation of the State Ethics Act. 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). JJC /sfb By the Commission Hebert . Conner Chairman November 25, 1985