Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout465 CorcoranMr. William Corcoran 2014 Susquehanna Road Abington, PA 19001 Re: 84 -123 -C STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION April 9, 1986 Order No. 465 Dear Mr. Corcoran: 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 hased are as follows: • I. Allegation: That as Chief of Police in Abington Township you are a public official or employee required to file a Statement of Financial Interests and have failed to do so as required by Section 4 of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 404, thereby violating said section and regulations promulgated thereunder, 51 Pa. Code 4.3. Findings: 1. You served as Chief of Police in Abington Township from October, 1982 to November, 1984. You had also served as Captain in the Abington Police Department from 1978 until October, 1982. 2. You did not file a Statement of Financial Interests prior to March, 1984. a. Solicitor Thomas E. Waters had ruled that you and the township were not required to file Statements of Financial ees of Interests. h. In March of 1984, he changed his opinion and you did file a statement hased upon that opinion. c. You also filed a Statement on April 30, 1985. d. Roth statements list Corcoran and Company as a source of income and a business in which you have a financial interest. Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 2 B. Discussion: As the Chief of Police in Abington Township, you were a public employee as that term is defined in the State Ethics Act. 65 P.S. §402; Coyle, 82 -013. This determination is specifically mandated by our prior opinion wherein this Commission determined that chiefs of police are public employees within the State Ethics Act. This result was set forth not only in our opinion of December 23, 1982, see Coyle, supra, but was specifically mandated by the regulations of the Commission which provide as follows: Section 1.1. Definitions. Public employee - -- (1) The term includes any individual: (A) who is employed by the Commonwealth or a political subdivision and who is responsible for taking or recommending official action of a nonmi nisterial nature with regard to: (I) contracting or procurement; (II) administering or monitoring grants or subsidi es; (III) planning or zoning; (IV) inspecting, licensing, regulating, or auditing any person; or (V) any other activity where the official action has greater than a de minimus economic impact; and (B) who meets the criteria of either subclause (I) or (II): (I) The individual is: ( -a -) a person who normally performs his responsibility in the field without on -site supervision; ( -b -) the immediate supervisor of a person who normally performs his responsibility in the field without on -site supervision; or Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 3 ( -c -) the supervisor of any highest level field office. (II) The individual is a person: ( -a -) who: ( -1 -) has the authority to make final decisions; ( -2 -) has the authority to forward or stop recommendations from being sent to the person or body with the authority to make final decisions; ( -3 -) prepares or supervises the preparation of final recommendations; or ( -4 -) makes the final technical recommendations; and ( -b -) whose recommendations or actions: ( -1 -) are an inherent and recurring part of his position; and ( -2 -) affect organizations other than his own organization. (ii) The term does not include individuals who are employed by the Commonwealth or a political subdivision of the Commonwealth in teaching as distinguished from administrative duties. (iii) Persons in the positions listed below are generally considered public employees. (A) Executive and special directors or assistants reporting directly to the agency head or governing body. (B) Commonwealth bureau directors, division chiefs, or heads of equivalent organization elements and other governmental body department heads. Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 4 (C) Staff attorneys engaged in representing the department, agency, or other governmental bodies before the public. (0) Solicitors, engineers, managers, and secretary- treasurers acting as managers, police chiefs, chief clerks, chief purchasing agents, grant and contract managers, housing and building inspectors, sewer enforcement officers, and zoning officers in all governmental bodies. (E) Court administrators, assistants for fiscal affairs, and deputies for the minor judici ary. Clearly, as set forth above, a chief of police is a public employee within the State Ethics Act. As such an employee, you were required to file Statements of Financial Interests in each year that you served in this position. Such filing requirement is specifically set forth in §404(a) of the State Ethics Act which provides as follows: Section 4. Statement of financial i nterests requi red to be filed. (a) Each public employee employed by the Commonwealth shall file a statement of financial interests for the preceding calendar year with the department, agency or bureau in which he is employed no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Any other public employee shal 1 file a statement of financial interests with the governing authority of the political subdivision by which he is employed no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. 65 P.S. 404(a). As a result of the foregoing requirements, your failure to file Statements of Financial Interests in 1982 and 1983 was not in accord with the State Ethics Act. See Metzler, No. 389. In the instant situation, however, we do not believe that any penalties or assessment should be attached. This i s so specifically i n light of the fact that your failure to file said statements was a result of the opinion of the township solicitor. When the solicitor realized that you were a public employee within the purview of the Act, you were immediately informed and thereafter filed Statements of Financial Interests in accordance with the Act. We, thus, believe that your failure to file was occasioned by your good faith reliance upon a solicitor's opinion. We do, however, believe that in order to be in compliance with the State Ethics Act, you should file Statements of Financial Interests for the Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 5 period of time that you served in office. As a result, we believe that you should file a Statement of Financial Interests for your service during 1982 which is to include the financial information covering calendar year 1981 and you are further required to file a Statement of Financial Interests for your service in office in 1983 which is to include information for calendar year 1982. Upon the filing of these statements, we will take no further action in relation to this matter. C. Conclusion: As a Chief of Police in Abington Township, you are a public employee within the purview of the State Ethics Act and thereby required to file Statements of Financial Interests. Your failure to file Statements of Financial Interests for your service in that position in the years 1982 and 1983 was not in accordance with the State Ethics Act. Due to the factors set forth above, however, we will take no further action in this matter if you file Statements of Financial Interests as set forth above. Your Statements of Financial Interests should he filed with this Commission within thirty (30) days of the date of this order. - II. Allegation: That you, as Chief of Police in Abington Township, failed to report as sources of income or business interest on your Statement of Financial Interests, certain businesses which contract with the township, thereby violating Section 4 and 5 of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. ($404 and '5405, which requires reporting of sources of income in excess of $500 and a listing of any office, directorship, or employment and of any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. A. Findings: Findings 1 -2 are hereby incorporated by reference. 4. In addition to your positions with the county you were self employed with Corcoran and Company Incorporated. a. You are certified as a VASCAR Instructor. h. You state that during off duty time, you contacted clients of System Innovations Incorporated to offer your services in the training of police officers in the VASCAR System. c. You also offered to provide training - free of charge - to the Abington Police Force should they purchase a system. 5. Abington Township never contracted with VASCAR. 6. Abington Township has had no dealings with Systems Innovations Incorporated. 7. You have a contract agreement with Systems Innovations Incorporated that you will train police departments where they sell VASCAR equipment. Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 6 8. You submitted a report to the township commissioners of the relationship between Corcoran and Company Inc. and Systems Innovations Inc. 9. Thomas E. Waters, Solicitor for Abington Township, reviewed your report and wrote to R. Bruce Wall, President of the Abington Board of Commissioners. He reported that you and some other township police force members conducted training on VASCAR systems on your own time and Corocran and Company also provided training in the use of the intoximeter but found no violation of the township Ethics Code. B. Discussion: Generally, the State Ethics Act filing requirements mandate that certain information be included as part of a Statement of Financial Interests filing. Included in the information to be filed are the following: Section 5. Statement of financial interests. (b) The statement shall include the following information for the prior calendar year with regard to the person required to file the statement and the members of his immedi ate family: (5) The name and address of any person who is the di rect or indirect source of i ncome totalling i n the aggregate of $500 or more. However, this provision shall not be construed to require the divulgence of confidential information protected by statute or existing professional codes of ethics. (8) Any office, directorship or employment of any nature whatsoever in any business entity. (9) Any financial i nterest i n any 1 egal entity engaged in business for profit. 65 P.S. 405(b). We must now review this particular situation in light of the filings that were made by you in 1984 and 1985. Those filings indicate that you included your private business enterprise, Corcoran and Company Incorporated in all three categories noted above. We further note that this particular company did not conduct any business with Abington Township. It's further noted that while your private enterprise did, i n fact, have dealings with another corporation that was engaged in the sale of speed detection devices, this entity with which you were associated also did no business with Abington Township. As a result of your inclusion of your private business enterprise on your Statement of Financial Interests and as a result of the fact that neither your private business nor the business with which you were contracting, Systems Innovations Incorporated, had dealings with Abington Township, we find no violation of the State Ethics Act. Mr. William Corcoran April 9, 1986 Page 7 C. Conclusion: There was no violation of the State Ethics Act in that you included on your Statement of Financial Interests your ownership and association with Corcoran and Company Incorporated. 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). By the Commission, G. Sieber Pancoast Chai rman