Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout534 BradleyMr. William P. Bradley 415 Revere Drive Monroeville, PA 15146 Re: R5 -n7n -C near Mr. Bradley: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Order No. 534 DEC! DED NOV 19 1966 MAILED - 56 The Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a possihle violation of Act 170 of 197R. 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 you, a member of the Monroeville Council, violated Section 3(h) of the Ethics Act which prohihits a puhlic official from soliciting or accepting anything of value and also prohihits any person from offering something of value to a puhlic official with the understanding that the official action or judgment of the puhlic official would he influenced when you offered to accept the application of Mr. E. Timothy McCullough for membership to the Zoning Hearing Board if he would withdraw his candidacy in the 1985 primary election. A. Findings: 1. You currently serve as a member of the Monroeville Borough Water Authority. 2. From 1970 to 1973, you served as a member of the Monroeville Borough Council. Prier to that time, you served as the chairman of the Democratic party in Monroeville and you currently still serve as a Democratic committeeman. 3. During the 1985 municipal primary election, F. Timothy McCullough was a candidate for Monroeville Borough Council. 4, Mr. McCullough was seeking the Democratic nomination for the position of Rorough Councilman in Monroeville. 5. •loseph K. Rurton was also a candidate for the Democratic nomination to the Monroeville Borough Council during the May, 1985 municipal primary elect inn. Mr. William P. Bradley Page 2 6. The third candidate for the Democratic nomination to the Monroeville Borough Council was Mike Kelly. Mr, Kelly was running as the endorsed party candidate. 7. Mr. McCullough has stated that on or about March 25, 1985, you contacted him and informed him that he would be appointed to the Monroeville Borough Zoning Hearing Board if he would withdraw from the primary election contest. 8. Mr. McCullough has stated that Joe Burton, the other candidate during the primary election was offered the Democratic party endorsement for borough tax collector in return for his withdrawal from the borough council election contest. 9. Mr. Burton did, in fact, withdraw from the borough council election contest and instead ran for the position of borough tax collector. 10. Mr„ Burton has stated that you had never asked him to withdraw from the borough council election contest. a. Mr% Burton has advised that at no time did you ever make any kind of offer to him in return for his action as a candidate in the 1985 municipal election. 11. Elizabeth B. Keller, Chairperson of the MonroevLle Democratic Club, has advised that she requested that Mr. Burton withdraw from the borough council race. a. Ms. Keller indicated that she would have never asked you to talk to Burton in that this :ype of activity was reserved for her position as party chairperson. 12. Ms. Keller advised that it was her decision to request Mr. Burton to run for tax collector instead of councilperson. 13. You stated tat you were approacied by Mr. McCullough's father and asked if you would help to obtain a position for his son on one of the boards or commissions in Monroeville. a. You advised Mr. McCullough's father that all the boards were filled at the time of his request. Mr. William P. Bradley Page 3 b. You further indicated that you advised Mr. McCullough's father to have Mr. McCullough file for a position on all the boards in which he was interested. 14. You stated that you did call Mr. McCullough during the primary election and asked him if he was seriously considering running for borough council. a. You further stated that Mr. McCullough indicated that he was serious for running i n this election. b. You stated that you informed Mr. McCullough that if he wasn't serious, that you may be able to help him get an appointment to the Zoning Board. 15. You stated that you made this call to Mr. McCullough on behalf of his father who had asked you to assist Mr. McCullough in obtaining a position. a. You have advised that you did not offer Mr. McCullough anything in return for his action as a candidate in the municipal election of 1985. 16. Earl McCullough, E. Timothy McCullough's father is deceased. B. Discussion: The State Ethics Act provides as follows: Section 3. Restricted activities. (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, includi ny a yi fL; 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). Within the above provision of law, it is clear that no person may offer to any candidate for public office anything of value based upon the understanding that the official action or judgment of the candidate would be influenced thereby. As a person, you would be within the above provision of Mr. William P. Bradley Page 4 the State Ethics Act and, therefore, subject to the jurisdiction of the State Ethics Commission in the instant situation. While a number of questions are raised in the current matter, i ncl udi io whether tie offer of appointment to a zoning hearing board in return for a candidate's decision to withdraw from an election race is a "thing of value" within the above provision, we do not believe that we have to reach these issues. This is so specifically in light of the fact that we believe there is insufficient evidence t° indicate that a violation of the State Ethics Act has occurred. The only information that has been provided are the statemerts of Mr. McCullough who had asserted that you, in fact, made the aforementioned offer to him. Other than Mr. McCullough's statements, there is no other evidence that indicates such occurred. Because of the limited amoun� of information available and because there is no other evidence to indicate that such indeed occurred, we do not believe that there is sufficient information available to indicate that any violation of the State Ethics Act has occurred. As such, we do not believe that there has been a violation of the Ethics Act. C. Conclusion: The information available is insufficient to indicate that a violation of the State Ethics Act has occurred. As such, we find that you did not violate Section 403(b) 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 4' °;ich justifies reconsideration and /or challenges pertinent factual findings. See 51 Pa. Code 2.38. Daring 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 Chairman