HomeMy WebLinkAbout25-547 Davis
PHONE: 717-783-1610 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION FACSIMILE: 717-787-0806
TOLL FREE: 1-800-932-0936 FINANCE BUILDING WEBSITE: www.ethics.pa.gov
613 NORTH STREET, ROOM 309
HARRISBURG, PA 17120-0400
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
November 3, 2025
To the Requester:
Leanne Davis, Esquire
25-547
Dear Ms. Davis:
This responds to your email received Monday, October 13, 2025, by which you requested
an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission (“Commission”), seeking guidance
as to the issue presented below:
Issue:
Whether Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”),
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), pertaining to conflict of interest, would impose prohibitions or
restrictions upon a Police Sergeant with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Policewith regard to
engaging in fundraising or other activities on behalf of a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation,
the Pittsburgh Mounted Partners Fund, while on-duty or off-duty as a police officer.
Brief Answer: NO. Upon review of the submitted facts, thePolice Sergeant with the
Pittsburgh Bureau of Police, who performs only the duties of a Police Sergeant as set forth
in the official position description for that position, is not a“public employee” as that term
is defined by the Ethics Act, and therefore thePolice Sergeant is not subject to the conflict
of interest restrictions of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. Consequently, the Ethics Act
would not impose prohibitions or restrictions upon the Police Sergeant with regard to
engaging in fundraising or other activities on behalf of the Pittsburgh Mounted Partners Fund
while on-duty or off-duty as a police officer.
Facts:
As Executive Director and Ethics Officer of the Ethics Hearing Board of the City of
Pittsburgh (“City”), you have been authorized by a Police Sergeant with the Pittsburgh Bureau of
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 2
Police, Robert Stehle (“Sergeant Stehle”), to request an advisory from the Commission on his
behalf based upon the following submitted facts.
In 2017 the City reestablished the Pittsburgh Mounted Patrol Unit (“Mounted Patrol Unit”),
which had been eliminated in 2003 due to a severe financial crisis. Despite a successful revivalof
the Mounted Patrol Unit, in late 2024 City Council voted to defund the Mounted Patrol Unit for
2025 as part of a City-wide effort to trim spending. The primary reason cited for City Council’s
decision to defund the Mounted Patrol Unit was its annual cost, which was estimated to be
approximately $500,000. However, as a result of advocacy by former public safety officials and
a public show of support for the Mounted Patrol Unit, the defunding of the Mounted Patrol Unit
was delayed.
In response to City Council’s decision, the Pittsburgh Mounted Partners Fund (“Mounted
Partners Fund”) will soon be incorporated as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization for the purpose of
covering costs of the Mounted Patrol Unit that the City is no longer willing or able to finance,such
as expenses related to horse care, equipment, training, and facilities. The establishment of the
Mounted Partners Fund is the result of the efforts of a coalition of citizens, businesses, and former
public safety officials. The Mounted Partners Fund will solicit donations and other forms of
support for its mission from private sources, including corporations.
The questions posed by your advisory request are as follows:
(1) Whether Sergeant Stehle is a “public employee” subject to Section 1103(a) of the
Ethics Act, pertaining to conflict of interest, and if so, whether the Mounted
Partners Fund is a business with which he is associated as a result of his
involvement in its creation; and
(2) To the extent that Sergeant Stehle is subject to the conflict of interest restrictions
of Section 1103(a):
(a) Whether it would be permissible for Sergeant Stehle, as an on-duty police
officer either in uniform or plain clothes, to participate in fundraising,
community events, or administrative tasks involving the Mounted Partners
Fund;
(b) What ethical guidelines would apply to Sergeant Stehle, as an off-duty
police officer either in uniform or plain clothes, when he would be
volunteering with or acting as a representative of the Mounted Partners
Fund; and
(c) Whether it would be permissible for Sergeant Stehle to use his official rank,
title, or authority to solicit donations or other forms of support for the
Mounted Partners Fund.
You have submitted a copy of a City position description (“the Position Description”) for
the position of Police Sergeant with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police, which document is
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 3
incorporated herein by reference. The Position Description notes that a Police Sergeant supervises,
directs, plans, and monitors the work of assigned police officers and civilian personnel. Per the
Position Description, the duties of a Police Sergeant include:
Assigning duties to police officers;
Ensuring that non-emergency operations are handled safely and efficiently as
explained in Bureau of Police rules and regulations;
Ensuring that incidents and special operations are handled efficiently and safely as
explained in Bureau of Police rules and regulations to ensure the preservation of
life and property;
Allocating personnel to ensure that employees are appropriately assigned to tasks
and preparing personnel for special circumstances;
Observing subordinate performance to identify strengths and areas of needed
improvement, conducting formal and informal performance evaluation sessions,
and providing feedback to subordinates for recognition of performance strengths
and weaknesses;
Interpreting, enforcing and explaining rules and regulations that govern the
activities of Bureau of Police personnel;
Ensuring that Bureau of Police personnel are properly trained to carry out their
assigned duties;
Reviewing, preparing, and maintaining logs, records, memos, reports and other
field and administrative documents and correspondence used in the course of
performing the job; reviewing documents prepared by subordinates or other
personnel for completeness and accuracy; and reviewing and authorizing personnel
requests and integrating information from multiple sources into summary
documents;
Communicating or coordinating activities with Bureau of Police personnel and
individuals from other agencies to accomplish work objectives and discuss issues
of mutual concern;
Performing and supervising all police activities conducted to ensure the safe and
legal operation of vehicles on the road;
Performing and supervising police activities occurring while responding to all types
of offenses;
Performing and supervising police activities occurring as part of initial criminal
investigations, such as obtaining and analyzing information, collecting physical
evidence, and participating in the judicial/administrative process;
Performing and supervising police activities occurring for the purpose of
apprehending, restraining, arresting, transporting, and detaining suspects to be
taken into custody according to the law and Bureau of Police policy; and
Participating in court cases, interacting with attorneys, and assisting with the
facilitation of the legal process.
Position Description, at 3-4.
Discussion:
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 4
It is initially noted that pursuant to Sections 1107(10) and 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11), advisories are issued to the requester based upon the facts that the
requester has submitted. In issuing the advisory based upon the facts that the requester has
submitted, the Commission does not engage in an independent investigation of the facts, nor does
it speculate as to facts that have not been submitted. It is the burden of the requester to truthfully
disclose all of the materialfacts relevant to the inquiry. 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1107(10), (11). An advisory
only affords a defense to the extent the requester has truthfully disclosed all of the material facts.
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, which applies only to public officials and public
employees, provides as follows:
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(a) Conflict of interest.--No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of
interest.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a).
The Ethics Act defines a “conflict” or a “conflict of interest” as follows:
§ 1102. 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.
The term 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.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee generally
is prohibited from using the authority of public office or confidential information received by
holding such a public position for the private pecuniary (financial) benefit of the public
official/public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which
he or a member of his immediate family is associated. A business with which a public
official/public employee is associated includes any business in which the public official/public
employee is a director, officer, owner, employee or has a financial interest. See, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 5
(definition of the term “business with which he is associated”). The definition of the term
“business” as set forth in the Ethics Act includes a non-profit organization. See, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1102; Rendell v. State Ethics Commission, 603 Pa. 292, 983 A.2d 708 (2009).
The Ethics Act defines the term “public employee” as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
“Public employee.”Any individual employed by the
Commonwealth or a political subdivision who is responsible for
taking or recommending official action of a nonministerial nature
with regard to:
(1) contracting or procurement;
(2) administering or monitoring grants or subsidies;
(3) planning or zoning;
(4) inspecting, licensing, regulating or auditing any
person; or
(5) any other activity where the official action has an
economic impact of greater than a de minimis nature
on the interests of any person.
The term shall not include individuals who are employed by this
Commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof in teaching as
distinguished from administrative duties.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
The Regulations of the State Ethics Commission similarly define the term “public
employee” and set forth the following additional criteria:
(ii) The following criteria will be used, in part, to determine whether
an individual is within the definition of “public employe”:
(A) The individual normally performs his responsibility in the field
without onsite supervision.
(B) The individual is the immediate supervisor of a person who
normally performs his responsibility in the field without
onsite supervision.
(C) The individual is the supervisor of a highest level field
office.
(D) The individual has the authority to make final decisions.
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 6
(E)The individual has the authority to forward or stop
recommendations from being sent to the person or body with
the authority to make final decisions.
(F)The individual prepares or supervises the preparation of final
recommendations.
(G) The individual makes final technical recommendations.
(H) The individual’s recommendations or actions are an inherent
and recurring part of his position.
(I) The individual’s recommendations or actions affect
organizations other than his own organization.
(iii) 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.
(iv) Persons in the following positions are generally considered public
employes:
(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.
(C) Staff attorneys engaged in representing the department,
agency or other governmental bodies.
(D) Engineers, managers and secretary-treasurers acting as
managers, police chiefs, chief clerks, chief purchasing
agents, grant and contract managers, administrative officers,
housing and building inspectors, investigators, auditors,
sewer enforcement officers and zoning officers in all
governmental bodies.
(E) Court administrators, assistants for fiscal affairs and
deputies for the minor judiciary.
(F) School superintendents, assistant superintendents, school
business managers and principals.
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 7
(G) Persons who report directly to heads of executive, legislative
and independent agencies, boards and commissions except
clerical personnel.
(v) Persons in the following positions are generally not considered
public employes:
(A) City clerks, other clerical staff, road masters, secretaries,
police officers, maintenance workers, construction workers,
equipment operators and recreation directors.
(B) Law clerks, court criers, court reporters, probation officers,
security guards and writ servers.
(C) School teachers and clerks of the schools.
51 Pa. Code § 11.1.
The following terms are relevant to your inquiry and are defined in the Ethics Act as
follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
“Ministerial action.” An action that a person performs in a
prescribed manner in obedience to the mandate of legal authority,
without regard to or the exercise of the person’s own judgment as to
the desirability of the action being taken.
“Nonministerial actions.”An action in which the person
exercises his own judgment as to the desirability of the action taken.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Status as a “public employee” subject to the Ethics Act is determined by an objective test.
The objective test applies the Ethics Act’s definition of the term “public employee” and the related
regulatory criteria to the powers and duties of the position itself. Typically, the powers and duties
of the position are established by objective sources that define the position, such as the job
description, job classification specifications, and organizational chart. The objective test considers
what an individual has the authority to do in a given position based upon these objective sources,
rather than the variable functions that the individual may actually perform in the position. See,
Phillips v. State Ethics Commission, 470 A.2d 659 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984); Eiben, Opinion 04-002;
Shienvold, Opinion 04-001; Shearer, Opinion 03-011. The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
has specifically considered and approved this Commission’s objective test and has directed that
coverage under the Ethics Act be construed broadly and that exclusions under the Ethics Act be
construed narrowly. See, Quaglia v. State Ethics Commission, 986 A.2d 974 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010),
Davis, 25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 8
amended by, 2010 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 8 (Pa. Cmwlth. January 5, 2010), allocatur denied, 607
Pa. 708, 4 A.3d 1056 (2010); Phillips, supra.
The first portion of the statutory definition of “public employee” includes individuals with
authority to take or recommend official action of a nonministerial nature. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Likewise, the regulatory criteria for determining status as a public employee, as set forth in 51 Pa.
Code § 11.1 (“public employee”)(ii), include not only individuals with authority to make final
decisions but also individuals with authority to forward or stop recommendations from being sent
to final decision-makers; individuals who prepare or supervise the preparation of final
recommendations; individuals who make final technical recommendations; and individuals whose
recommendations are an inherent and recurring part of their positions. See, e.g.,Reese/Gilliland,
Opinion 05-005.
Conclusion:
In applying the definition of "public employee" and the related regulatory criteria to the
submitted facts as to the duties of the position of Police Sergeant with the Pittsburgh Bureau of
Police, the necessary conclusion is that Sergeant Stehle is not a "public employee" as that term is
defined in the Ethics Act. The Position Description is the sole source of submitted facts as to
Sergeant Stehle’s job duties as a Police Sergeant. Based upon an objective review of the Position
Description, Sergeant Stehle, as a Police Sergeant performing only the job duties set forth in the
Position Description, is not responsible for taking or recommending official action of a non-
ministerial nature with regard to any of the five categories set forth in the Ethics Act’s definition
of the term “public employee.”
Because Sergeant Stehle is not a “public employee” as that term is defined by the Ethics
1
Act, he is not subject to the conflict of interest restrictions of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act.
Consequently, it is not necessary to determine whether the Mounted Partners Fund is a business
with which Sergeant Stehle is associated, as such a determination would be relevant only if the
conflict of interest restrictions were applicable to him. Accordingly, you are advised that the Ethics
Act would not impose prohibitions or restrictions upon Sergeant Stehle with regard to his
solicitation of donations or other forms of support for the Mounted Partners Fund, his involvement
in community events on behalf of the Mounted Partners Fund, or his performance of administrative
tasks pertaining to the Mounted Partners Fund at any time (i.e., whether on-duty or off-duty as a
police officer) or in any capacity (i.e., whether in uniform or plain clothes).
The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act; the
applicability of any other statute, code, ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct other than
the Ethics Act has not been considered in that they do not involve an interpretation of the Ethics
Act.
1
The only provision of the Ethics Act that applies to Sergeant Stehle is Section 1103(b), which applies to everyone.
Section 1103(b) of the Ethics Act provides, in pertinent part, that no person shall offer or give to a public official/public
employee anything of monetary value based on the offeror's or donor's understanding that the vote, official action or
judgment of the public official/public employee would be influenced thereby.
Davis,25-547
November 3, 2025
Page 9
Pursuant to Section 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, an 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, provided 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 available as such.
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you
may appeal the Advice to the full Commission. A personal appearance before the Commission
will be scheduled and a formal Opinion will be issued by the Commission.
Any such appeal must be in writing and must be actually receivedat the Commission within
thirty (30) days of the date of this Advice pursuant to 51 Pa. Code § 13.2(h). The appeal may be
received at the Commission by hand delivery, United States mail, delivery service, or by FAX
transmission (717-787-0806). Failure to file such an appeal at the Commission within thirty (30)
days may result in the dismissal of the appeal.
Respectfully,
Bridget K. Guilfoyle,
Chief Counsel