Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout593 DochinezMr. Joe Dochinez 207 5th Street California, PA 15419 Re: 85 -157 -C STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Order No. 593 DATE DECIDED: August 31, 1987 DATE MAILED: September 8, 1987 Dear Mr. Dochinez: The Ethics Commission has reviewed the allegation(s) that you have violated the Ethics Act, Act 170 of 1978. The nature of the alleged violation(s) is as follows: I. Allegation: That you, a Mayor in the Borough of California, violated Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act which prohibits a public employee qr public official's use of office or confidential information yained through that office to- obtain financial gain by using official California Borough letterhead when writing to constituents for your re- election campaign. A. Findings: 1. You were selected Mayor of California Borough in 1981. As an elected public official, you are subject to the provisions of the State Ethics Act. 2. You were a candidate for re- election in both the primary and general elections of 1985. 3. As part of your campaign for re- election you circulated letters to borough residents soliciting, support for the upcoming election. a. These letters were dated October 30, 1985. b. Three letters were sent -, each with a different message. c. All of the letters were printed on stationary with the Borough of California seal letterhead listing "Office of Mayor Joseph Dochinez." d. Two of the three letter types also contained a disclaimer at the bottom, noting "paper provided by candidate." One letter did.not. Mr. Joseph Dochinez Page 2 4. Information obtained from Calilfornia Borough disclosed the following: a. When you took office in 1982, stationary was ordered for you which listed your title, name and telephone numbers. No stationary was purchased since that time. b. The stationary used by you, in your 1985 campaign, was slightly different from that which was ordered in 1983, Omitted from.y.our campaign stationary were the telephone numbers. c. The borough secretary who is responsible for one of two keys to the office and for maintaining control of supplies,,office equipment, invoicing and checks stated that, to the best.of her knowledge, you did not use borough equipment, supplies or personnel to prepare for your campaign literature. 5. California'Borough uses three types of stationary for official business. a. Official stationary used by council contains only the borough letterhead, address and telephone number. b. The Police Department stationary being the heading California Police Department. c. Stationary ordered for you in 1983 with borough letterhead and your name.in the left hand corner and telephonq..number in.the right hand corner. , 6. You furnished a copy of receipt #2828 from the Roscoe Ledger dated October 28, 1985. The receipt was itemized as follows: a. 300'Political letters $11.79 1000 Campaign cards 40.10 500 Political letters 21.40 Tax 4.72 Total 83.42 b. The receipt is marked "pd" October 29, 1985. c. Joe Cowen, - owner of the Roscoe Ledger, confirmed that the receipt was authentic and that, to the best of his recollection, you paid by check. 7. By correspondence and interview with an Ethics Commission investigator, you provided the following information: Mr. Joseph Dochinez Page 3 a. You were elected Mayor in _1981, began r s,ervi ng in 1982 :and sought re- election in 1985. b. You were well aware of the restrictions imposed upon candidates by the Ethics Act of 1978. c. When you decided to seek re- election in 1985, you were -informed that you could use your letterhead provided you make the purchase and make a statement indicating same.' d. The stationary used for campaign purposes was purchased from the Ledger on three separate occasions, but you were only,billed once, that being on October, 1985. e. Some of the letters were:mailed while others were handed, out personally on October 30, 1985, and after, up until the genera: election. f. The telephone numbers on your official stationary were incorrect or you might have used them on the campaign stationary. Generally, the State Ethics Act provides as follows: 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). You did not initially put the disclaimer on the campaign letters,.but . you added the disclaimer once you realized there could be a problem.. h. You denied use of borough employees, equipment or supplies to prepare and send the campaign letters. i. You thought that it was perfectly legal for you, as Mayor, to uoe format of your official stationary since you already held the office of Mayor, and you paid for all the material. B. Discussion: As a Borough Mayor, you are a public official wi -n,tre purview of the State Ethics Act and, as such, your conduct is subject; to t°he- restrictions enumerated therein. 65 P.S. §402; Davis, 84 -012., Within the above provision of law, no public official may use his public position in order to obtain any financial gain for himself or a member of his immediate family or for a business with which he is associated. Mr: Joseph Dochinez Page 4 In matters regarding similar factual situations, the Commission has, in the past, placed certain restrictions upon a public official's activities in relation to election campaigns. At the outset, it should be noted that the Commission has previously held that a public official may use the Commonwealth seal, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, as well as his official title on .stationery supporting election campaigns. See, Williams, No. 76. It should be further noted, however, that since the issuance of the Williams order, the Commission has generally placed various restrictions, upon the use of such items by a public official. For example, the Commission has held that a public official may not use his Commonwealth telephone as a contact point for fund raising activities or for election campaign activities or other personal financial endeavors. See Street, 81 -005; Dorance, No. 456. Similarly, a public official may not use the Commonwealth mailing systems and postage meters, for the dissemination of election or other campaign materials. Rappaport, No. 126; McGlatchey, No. 130. Any elected public official may not use his district office in order to conduct campaign activities. Cessar, 82 -002. The Commission has held, as noted above, that a public official may use his official title in support of certain private endeavors. See Golden, 80 -051. In Fee, 86 -546, we further outlined the parameters of the restrjctions imposed by the Ethics Act on the type of conduct currently under review. We, therein stated that the following guidelines should be observed: 1. Use of a facsimile of the official seal; the official letterhead, and your official title is permitted. 2. All stationery containing the aforementioned items should set forth a disclaimer indicating that the stationery is not official stationery and has been paid for with private funds. 3. You may not use the address of your offices nor the phone numbers as contact points. 4. The purchase of the stationery in support of your campaign should not be made through the government body and you may not take advantage of any special rates accorded to the muncipality by any printing company for the purchase of supplies. -5. You may not use the official mails or postage for dissemination of this material. 6. Finally, the content of the letter should not indicate or leave the impression that the letter is an official governmental document or part,of your official function. Mr. Joseph Dochinez Page 5 Areview of the facts in the instant situation lead us toeconclade that there „has been no violation of the State Ethics Act. Specifically, the stationery that you used in aid of your-re-election was paid for with your own funds. While you did use your official 'title as mayor and the seal of your office, a notation was placed on most .6f, the distributed letters indicating that you had paid for the stationery. It noted, that this disclaimer could have been more prominently displayed -and should have been `on all of the distributed material. No public emp1 oye.es or funds werte used to prepare or distribute the materials. Finally,, there was no use of the specific office address or telephone numbers as contact points for your - campaign. C.F. Panto, 547 (office used as contact point for campaign activities). Based upon the foregoing, we find that there -was no violation of the State'- tthics Act. C. Conclusion: There was no violation of the State Ethics Act when you distributed a re- election campaign letter using your official title as Borough Mayor and a facsimile of your official letterhead in that no public funds, or employees were used in said distribution and, in that the letters contained `a disclaimer that they were not paid for with public funds. Additionally, neither your office location nor office telephone numbers were listed as contact points for your campaign. It is noted, that in the future, your disclaimer should be more detailed and on all distributed material of this nature. 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, I,LL fie' G. Sieber Pancoast Chairman