HomeMy WebLinkAbout725 ZadloMr. Joseph A. Zadlo
c/o Harvey A. Sernovitz, Esquire
24th Floor Packard Building
111 South 15th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Re: 87 -117 -C
Dear Mr. Zadlo:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF TICE COMMISSION
Order No. 725
Before: Helena G. Hughes, Chair
Robert W. Brown, Vice Chair
W. Thomas Andrews
G. Sieber Pancoast
James M. Howley
Michael J. Washo
Date Decided: September 26, 1989
Date Mailed: September 28, 1989
The State Ethics Commission received a complaint regarding you
and a possible violation of the State Ethics Act, No. 170 of 1978, 65
P.S. 401 et. seq. You were notified in writing as to the
commencement of the investigation and as to the specific
allegation(s). The investigation has now been completed and a
Findings Report was issued to you which constituted the Complaint by
the Investigation Division of the State Ethics Commission. An Answer
was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is now completed.
This Order of the Commission is hereby issued which sets forth the
individual allegations, findings, discussion and conclusion as
follows:
I. Alleaation: That you, Assistant Building Inspector for
Marlborough Township, Montgomery County, violated the following
provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 170 of 1978), when you were
awarded an architect contract for design of plans for a municipal
building addition without an open and public process:
,Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act provides:
(c) No public official or public employee or a
member of his immediate family or any business in
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 2
which the person or a member of the person's
immediate family is a director, officer, owner or
holder of stock exceeding 5% of the equity at fair
market value of the business shall enter into any
contract valued at $500 or more with a
governmental body unless the contract has been
awarded through an open and public process,
including prior public notice and subsequent
public disclosure of all proposals considered and
contracts awarded. Any contract made in violation
of this subsection shall be voidable by a court of
competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced
within 90 days of making of the contract. 65 P.S.
§403(c).
A. Findings:
1. You performed consulting services, of a specialized professional
nature, from time to time on behalf of Marlborough Township between
approximately October 1983 and July 1984.
a. In September 1983, the Township was having a problem on
Route 29 and its regular building inspector could not handle
that problem.
b. The township supervisors requested your services in
connection with that problem as a result of his expertise
and knowledge of building codes and experience in performing
such services for other municipalities.
2. Minutes of the_ Marlborough Township Board of Supervisors' meeting
for September 26, 1983, contained the following information:
Appointment: Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo, Engineer for Chambers
Associates, discussed his findings in our building code
which would pertain to citing buildings at P.V.P.S. Lengthy
discussion with the solicitor, Supervisors and Mr. Zadlo on
procedures, legal obligations, due process and other items
pertaining to subject along with time period involved. Mr.
Simon suggested the first step is to appoint Mr. Joseph A.
Zadlo to a position and have him sworn in. On motion duly
made and seconded to appoint Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo to the
position of assistant deputy building inspector for
Marlborough Township carried unanimously.
3. Chambers Associates, Incorporated, 831 DeKaib Pike, Center
Square, Pennsylvania is a consulting engineer and surveying firm.
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 3
a. You were associated with this firm as a consultant working
on special projects as needed.
b. Chambers Associates has served as Marlborough Township
Engineers.
c. You are not an engineer and have never held yourself out to
be an engineer.
d. You services in connection with this project were re dared
to Chambers Associates, a licensed engineer for the
Township, on a consulting basis. Your services were billed
to Chambers Associates and were paid by Chambers Associates,
on an hourly basis.
g.
a.
e. You received no compensation directly from Marlborough
Township for these services.
f. In anticipation of the need to have you testify in court in
connection with this project, you were assigned the title of
"Assistant Deputy Building Inspector." No such position or
title had previously existed in the Township.
You had no duties, responsibilities, authority or function
except with regard to this special project.
4. You performed no services for the township, with the exception of
the professional services in connection with the new administration
and police facility, between July 1984 and August 1987.
5. You are a Licensed Architect in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
operating under the title of Joseph A. Zadlo /Architect, 107 Old Oak
Tree Road, Lansdale, Pennsylvania, 19446.
6. During 1985, the Township Supervisors were contemplating the
construction of a new Police and Administration Facilities Building.
At the request of the Supervisors, you prepared rough sketches of the
proposed facility.
7. You, in 1986, were appointed to be the architect for the new
facility.
Your services as architect were not solicited through a
public bid process because contracts involving personal or
professional services are specifically exempted from the
contracting procedures set forth in the Second Class
Township Code.
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 4
8. John Chambers advised that the Marlborough Township Supervisors
initially approached him to do the design work for a new Police and
Administration Facilities Building, but he referred them to you.
Building design work was beyond the purview of his professional
expertise and was not covered by his liability insurance.
9. Records of Marlborough Township contain a description of the new
Marlborough Township Municipal Building. This descriptive analysis,
in part, provides as follows:
a. In 1985, the Marlborough Board of Supervisors purchased
11.2 acres of property adjoining the maintenance building
for $35,000. You, architect, created plans for the new
building which were submitted to the State Authorities.
Approval was received in July, 1986. Contracts were drawn
and the bidding process completed in time for a September,
1986 ground breaking.
10. The contract for the construction of the Police and
Administration Facilities Building contains the following information:
a. Date: December 15, 1986.
b. Owner: Marlborough Township.
c. Project: New addition, Police and Administration
Facilities.
e. Architect: Joseph A. Zadlo, 107 Old Oak Tree Road,
Lansdale, Pennsylvania, 19446.
11. Your bills for architectural services were submitted on a
periodic basis, generally monthly. The Township Supervisors have
stated that your bills were reasonable and customary for like
professional services.
12. During the period when you were rendering architectural services
to the township in connection with the new police and administration
facility from approximately August 1986 through July 1987, you had no
other relationship with Marlborough Township, rendered no other
services of any nature to the township, nor received any compensation
from the township directly or indirectly.
13. Invoices from Joseph A. Zadlo, Architect, 107 Old Oak Tree Road,
Lansdale, Pennsylvania to Marlborough Township regarding services
rendered in relation to the new Administration and Police Facilities
Building indicate that the township was billed as follows:
Mr. Joseph A. Sadie
Page 5
Invoice Date
August 19, 1986
October 8, 1986
December 12, 1986
February 4, 1987
March 16, 1987
April 8, 1987
May 6, 1987
July 7, 1987
Amount Comment
$9,386.00
$2,465.17
$1,891.24
$2,128.75
$ 960.69
Principal's time, support
time, state fee, travel and
printing expenses.
Principal's time, support
time, field construction,
printing /reproduction
expenses.
Principal's time, support
time, field construction,
printing /reproduction
expenses.
Principal's time, support
time, field construction.
Principal's time, field
construction, printing
reproduction expenses.
$ 958.58 Principal's time, field
construction, printing
reproduction expenses.
$ 567.50 Principal's time, field
construction.
$ 515.94 Principal's time, field
construction,
reproduction /printing
expenses.
Total: $18,873.87
14. Minutes of the Marlborough Township Board of Supervisors'
meetings indicate approval of the following expenditures to you for
the construction project:
Expenditure Number Date Amount
3133 09/09/86 $9,386.00
3199 11/10/86 $2,465.17
3273 12/08/86 $1,891.24
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 6
Expenditure Number Date Amount
3360 02/09/87 $2,128.75
3429 04/13/87 $ 960.69
3484 05/11/87 $ 958.58
3532 06/08/87 $ 567.50
3627 07/13/87 $ 515.94
Total: $18,873.87
a. You admit receipt of payments from the Marlborough Township
Board of Supervisors in the amounts as outlined above.
15. In approximately August 1987, your professional consulting
services were again requested by the township in connection with a
special project. From August 1987 through approximately June of
1988, you rendered professional consulting services to the township
totaling approximately twenty hours for the entire project. The
rendering of these services was at the specific request of the
Supervisors and was not pursuant to any appointment or employment
relationship.
16. You have never been an employee or public official of
Marlborough Township.
17. You have never been an officer, director, owner or holder of
stock in Chambers Associates, Incorporated, nor has any member of
your immediate family.
18. You have never been an officer, director, owner or holder of
stock in the business of Frank Zadlo, nor has any member of your
immediate family.
B. Discussion:
The allegation in this case relates to whether you, as a Deputy
Building Inspector, violated Section 3(c) of the Ethics Act quoted
above regarding the award of an architectural contract for the design
of plans for the municipal building addition without an open and
public process.
The township was desirous of constructing a new Police and
Administration Facilities Building. John Chambers was initially
approached for the design work but he declined because the project
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 7
was beyond the purview of his professional expertise and he was not
covered by liability insurance. At the request of the supervisors,
you prepared a rough sketch for the proposed facility since you are a
licensed architect. In 1986, you were appointed architect for the
new facility. You prepared plans which were submitted to the
Commonwealth and approved in July, 1986. Your bills for
architectural services were submitted and approved on a periodic
basis. During this time, you had no other relationship and received
no compensation from the township.
In order to determine whether a violation of the Ethics Act has
occurred, it is necessary to make a preliminary determination as to
whether you are a public official /employee under the Ethics Act.
In the instant matter, you were appointed to the position of
Assistant Deputy Building Inspector on September 26, 1983, but you
were only appointed for one specific matter relating to a problem
that the township was having on Route 29. In this capacity, you
performed consulting services between October, 1983 and July 1984.
Your services were rendered to Chambers Associates, a licensed
consulting engineer for the township. You were not an engineer and
received no compensation directly from the township for the
utilization of your testimony in court proceedings regarding this
particular project. Your title of Assistant Deputy Building
Inspector had never previously existed in the township and you had no
duties or responsibilities except as to that particular project.
It is clear that you were only retained for one specific project
through the firm of Chambers Associates, Incorporated, of which you
are neither an officer, director, owner or holder of stock. Thus, you
provided very limited consulting services in this case relative to
that one project. For the purposes of that project, you were
nominated as Assistant Building Inspector even though said position
never existed in the township.
Therefore, based upon the facts of this case, it is clear that
you were in the position of an independent contractor providing
consulting services. You would not be a public employee as that term
is defined under the Ethics Act. See, Status of Enaineerino Firm -
Opinion, 80 -014; Rosters v. State Ethics Commission, 80 Pa. Commw. Ct.
43, 470 A.2d 1120 (1984). Since you are not a "public employee" under
the Ethics Act, the complaint against you is dismissed.
C. Conclusion and Orders
1. As a one time Assistant Building Inspector providing consulting
services for one specific project in Marlborough Township, you are
not a "public employee" under the Ethics Act.
Mr. Joseph A. Zadlo
Page 8
2. The complaint against you is hereby dismissed.
This Order is final and will be made available as a public
document fifteen days after issuance. However, you may request
reconsideration which will defer public release of this Order pending
action on your request by the Commission. A request for
reconsideration, however, does not affect the finality of this Order.
A reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within
fifteen days of issuance and must include a detailed explanation of
your reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity
with 51 Pa. Code 52.38.
The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance
with Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a) during the
fifteen day period and no one, including yourself, unless the right
to challenge this Order is waived, may violate confidentiality by
releasing, discussing or circulating this Order. However,
confidentiality does not preclude you from discussing this case with
your attorney at law.
Any person who violates 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, 65 P.S.
409(e).
By t e Commission
4
%J ,J
elena G. Hughes
Chair