Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout93-531 GoodJohn E. Good, Esquire John E. Good Associates 331 West Miner Street West Chester, PA 19382 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108.1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 ADVICE OF COUNSEL March 29, 1993 93 -531 Re: Conflict, Public Official /Employee, Township Supervisor, Employee /Supervisor, Compensable Duties. Dear Mr. Good: This responds to your letters of January 14, 1993, February 11, 1993, and February 22, 1993, in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law presents any prohibition or restrictions upon a township supervisor who has been appointed road master and laborer, with regard to being compensated for maintaining township vehicles and construction equipment, and checking disposal permits and operating a backhoe at the township central trash disposal site. Facts: As Solicitor for Honey Brook Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania, you seek an advisory on behalf of Mr. Donald Johnson, a Township Supervisor. A question has arisen as to whether a Township Supervisor may be employed by the Township as a part -time mechanic to perform mechanical work on Township police cars and in addition perform certain laborer functions in connection with the Township park. You present the following factual scenario with regard to Mr. Donald Johnson: Mr. Johnson, at the reorganizational meeting of the Board of Supervisors, was appointed road master and laborer of the Township. His labor responsibilities include maintenance of Township vehicles including construction equipment such as backhoes, Township trucks and maintenance on Township police vehicles. Mr. Johnson further carries out the normal duties of a road master. In John E. GoOd, Esquire March 29, 1993 Page 2 addition, in his capacity as a "laborer," Mr. JOhnsbn is involved with construction activities for the Township recreational park and maintenance activities in that regard. Further, as a laborer and equipment operator he assists in the trash disposal in the Township. The Township has a central trash disposal site located at the Township building. Mr. Johnson oversees that trash disposal by checking permits and operating the backhoe from time to time in order to compact trash which is put in a large receptacle and is then disposed of by other licensed haulers at a licensed disposal site. Letter of February 11, 1993, at 1. You state that the Township is familiar with Section 410 of the Second Class Township Code which in essence prohibits a Township Supervisor from holding any other appointive or elective position except secretary- treasurer and road master. You note that Section 515 of the Township Code permits a Supervisor to be employed as a superintendent, road master or laborer, and that it would appear that the use of the word "laborer" is not necessarily restricted to a laborer on the roads. You further state that Section 410 is somewhat ambiguous in that presumably a laborer is not an "elective or appointive office or position." You indicate that it is fairly common practice for a Township Supervisor to be appointed as laborer or employee on non -road related work functions. You recognize that the Supervisors' wages or salary must be approved and fixed by the Township Auditors. You point out that Mr. Johnson's hourly pay has been approved by the Township Board of Auditors as required by the Second Class Township Code. You believe that the scope of duties as outlined above is perfectly appropriate for Mr. Johnson to carry out. You state that you have so advised the Board. However, you state that the Department of Community Affairs has advised one of the Supervisors that a Supervisor may not hold any other position except goad master and laborer and that the laborer classification is related to road work only. You do not read the Township Code in that respect and disagree with the Department of Community Affairs. Nevertheless, because this issue has been raised by the Department of Community Affairs, the Township is desirous of making sure that everything is being accomplished' in accordance with applicable law and pursuant to the State Ethics Law and the regulations and opinions developed thereunder. John E. Good, Esquire March 29, 1993 Page 3 You have reviewed the State Ethics Commission's findings in Henderson, Order No. 818. You believe that Henderson does not address the specific_ that exists in Honey Brook Township regarding the duties outlined above. Based upon the above, you request an advisory from the State Ethics Commission. Discussion: As a Township Supervisor for Money Brook Township in Chester County, Pennsylvania, Mr. Donald Johnson is a public official as that term is defined under the Ethics Law, and hence he is subject to the provisions of that law, Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law provides Section 3. Restricted Activities. (a) No public official or public :employee shall _ in conduct that constitutes a coflict of interest. The following terms are defined in the Ethics Law as follows: Section 2. Definitions. "Conflict or conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict of interest! does not include an action having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. "Authority of office or employment. The actual power provided by lava, the eliefcise bf which is necessary to the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a particular public office or position of public employment. John E.° Good, Esquire March 29, 1993 Page 4 In addition, Sections 3(b) and 3(c) of the Ethics Law provide in part that no person shall offer to a public official /employee anything of monetary value and no public official /employee -shall solicit or accept anything of monetary value based upon the understanding that the official action, or judgement of the public official /employee would be influenced thereby. Reference is made to these provisions of the law not to imply that there has been-or will be any transgression thereof but merely to provide a complete response to the question presented. Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law provides as follows: Section 3. Restricted activities. (j) Where voting conflicts are not otherwise addressed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania or by any law, rule, regulation, order or ordinance, the following procedure shall be employed. Any public official or public employee, who in the discharge of his official duties, would be required to - vote on a matter that would result in a conflict of interest shall abstain from voting and, prior to the vote being taken, publicly announce and disclose the nature of his interest as a public record in a written memorandum filed with the person responsible for the minutes of the meeting at which the vote is taken, provided that whenever a governing body would be unable to take any action on a matter before it because the number of members of the body required to abstain from voting under the provisions of this section makes the majority or other legally required vote of approval Unattainable, then such members shall be permitted to vote if disclosures are made as otherwise provided herein. In the case of a three- member governing body of a political subdivision, where one member has abstained from voting as a result of a conflict of interest, and the remaining two members of the governing body have cast opposing votes, the member who has abstained shall be permitted to vote to break the tie vote if disclosure is made as otherwise pfovided herein: if a conflict exists, Section 3(j) requires the public official /emplo ee to abstain and to publicly disclose the abstentioft and . reasons for same, both orally and by filing a written ine i6fandthn to that effect with the person recording the John E. Good, Esquire March 29, 1993 Page 5 minutes or supervisor. In applying the above provisions of. the Law to' the circumstances which you have submitted, the Commission's decisions in Sitek, Order No. 817, and .Henderson, Order No. 818, - are applicable. In Sitek, Order No. 817, Sitek, who was a township supervisor and a township employee, was alleged to have received compensation not related to the duties of road master or laborer. In 1990, Sitek had performed 358.5 hours of work on building repairs and renovations, 15 hours of census survey work, and 12.5 hours of trips to the surplus store. The sole violation which the Commission found pertained to the hours of work conducting a census survey, which the Commission found would be part of the administrative duties of an elected supervisor. In Henderson, Order No. 818, Henderson, who was also , a township supervisor_and a township employee, had been compensated in 1990 for Working 213 hours as to the computer, 13 hours on a census survey, 464.25 hours on building repairs /renovations and 138.75 hours as to general office duties. In 1991, he was compensated. 3_ hours as to the computer, 4 hours as to meetings, and 1 hour as to the building. In reviewing the various duties which Henderson 'had performed, the Commission found that some duties, such as worAcing the municipal garage, appeared to be related to the position of employee /supervisor and therefore no violation was found as to such activities. On the other hand, activities such as budget, financial and computer activities, clearly related to duties of the office of supervisor, and consequently a violation of Section 3(a) was found as to the receipt of additional compensation for performing such activities. In applying the above Commission decisions to the facts which you have submitted, the duties of maintenance of Township vehicles and construction equipment; maintenance activities for the Township recreational park; and operation of the backhoe at the central trash disposal site to compact trash would appear to be properly related to Mr. Johnson's duties as an employee /supervisor such that compensation for performance of same would not be prohibited under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. However, the duty of "overseeing" trash disposal by checking permits would appear to be within the administrative functions performed by Mr. Johnson in his capacity as a Township Supervisor, and therefore, he could not be compensated as to that function. The propriety of the proposed conduct only been addressed under the Ethics Law; the applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than the Ethics Law has not been considered in that they do not involve an John E. Good, Esquire March 29, 1993 Page 6 such. interpretation of the Ethics Law. Conclusion: As a Township Supervisor for Honey Brook Township in Chester County, Pennsylvania, Mr. Donald Johnson is a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Having been appointed road master and laborer, Mr. Johnson's duties of maintenance of Township 'vehic and construction equipment; maintenance activities for the Township recreational park; and operation of the backhoe at the central trash disposal site to compact trash would be properly related to his duties as an employee /supervisor, such that compensation: for performance of same would not be prohibited under Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. However, the duty of "overseeing" trash disposal by checking permits would be within the administrative functions- performed by Mr. 'Johnson- in his capacity as a Township Supervisor, and therefore, he could not be compensated as to that function. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Section 7(11), this Advice is a complete defense in any •enforcement proceeding initiated by the ,Commission, and evidence of, good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requester has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made Finally, if you disagree with this Advice . or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance: be - fore the Commission will be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be in writing and must be received at the Commission within 15 days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 52.12. - Vincent . .-Dopko Chief Counsel available as