Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout26-565 Steckbeck 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 304 HARRISBURG, PA 17120-0400 ADVICE OF COUNSEL October 5, 2026 To the Requester: Jeffrey D. Steckbeck 26-565 Dear Mr. Steckbeck: This responds to your letter dated September 4, 2026, by which you requested an advisory from the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission (“Commission”), seeking guidance as to the issue presented below: Issue: Whether an individual who serves as both the zoning officer and the code enforcement officer for a borough would have a conflict of interest pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), with regard to performing the duties of either of his public positions in matters involving his extended family (i.e., his brother-in-law, sister-in-law, and second cousin and his wife’s aunts, uncles, and cousins), his friends, clients he provided services to when he had an engineering business, or borough officials. Brief Answer: NO. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, the individual would have a conflict of interest as the borough zoning officer and as the borough code enforcement officer in matters that would financially impact him, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. The involvement of an extended family member, a friend, a past client, or a borough official in a matter would not be a basis for the individual to have a conflict of interest under Section 1103(a) with regard to performing his official duties as to such matter. Facts: Yourequest an advisory from the Commission based upon the following submitted facts. Steckbeck, 26-565 October 5, 2026 Page 2 On May 9, 2022, Council for Cornwall Borough (“Borough”) appointed you as the Borough Zoning Officer. On May 14, 2023, Borough Council appointed you as the Borough Code Enforcement Officer. You serve in these positions as an individual 1099-NEC contractor and not as an employee, officer or owner of an engineering business or company. You and your wife live in a house that is located partly in the Borough and partly in West Cornwall Township. Members of your extended family who own property and live in the Borough include your brother-in-law, sister-in-law, and second cousin and your wife’s aunts, uncles, and cousins. You have many friends who own property or live in the Borough. Additionally, many clients that you provided services to when you had an engineering business own property or live in the Borough. Members of Borough Council and Members of the Borough Planning Commission, who all reside within the Borough, may at times apply for zoning permits for projects associated with their properties or be the subject of alleged violations of the Borough Code of Ordinances. Based upon the above submitted facts, you pose the following questions: (1) Whether you may ethically serve in the positions of Borough Zoning Officer and Borough Code Enforcement Officer given the familial, friendship, and past client relationships that you maintain within the Borough; (2) Whether there would be limitations or constraints that would compel you to recuse yourself from reviewing and approving zoning permit applications received from any members of your extended family, your friends, past clients of your former engineering business, or Borough officials; and (3) Whether there would be limitations or constraints that would compel you to recuse yourself from enforcing the Borough Code of Ordinances for any complaints or alleged violations involving any members of your extended family, your friends, past clients of your former engineering business, or Borough officials. Discussion: 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 material facts 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 material facts. Section1103(a)of the Ethics Act provides: § 1103. Restricted activities Steckbeck, 26-565 October 5, 2026 Page 3 (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 following terms related to Section 1103(a) are defined in the Ethics Act 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. “Authority of office or employment.” The actual power provided by law, the exercise of which is necessary to the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a particular public office or position of public employment. “Immediate family.” A parent, spouse, child, brother or sister. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act’s definition of the term “conflict” or “conflict of interest” (i.e., the “de minimis exclusion” and the “class/subclass exclusion”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, a public official/public employee 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. In each instance of a conflict of interest, a public official/public employee would be required to abstain from participation. The abstention requirement would extend to any use of authority of office including, but not limited to, discussing, conferring with others, and lobbying for a particular result. Juliante, Order 809. Conclusion: Steckbeck, 26-565 October 5, 2026 Page 4 In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Act to the instant matter, you are advised as follows. In each of your capacities as the Borough Zoning Officer and the Borough Code Enforcement Officer, you are a public official subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act. The Ethics Act does not prohibit an individual from holding public office or a position of public employment because of familial relationships, friendships, past or current client relationships, or business relationships that the individual may have. However, Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official or public employee from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you generally would have a conflict of interest as the Borough Zoning Officer or as the Borough Code Enforcement Officer in matters that would financially impact you, a member of your immediate family, or a business with which you or a member of your immediate family is associated. Your brother-in-law, sister-in-law, and second cousin and your wife’s aunts, uncles, and cousins are not members of your “immediate family” as that term is defined in the Ethics Act. The involvement of a member of your extended family (such as your brother-in-law, sister- in-law, or second cousin or an aunt, uncle, or cousin of your wife), a friend, a past client of your engineering business, or a Borough official in a matter would not serve as a basis for you to have a conflict of interest with regard to performing your official duties as the Borough Zoning Officer or the Borough Code Enforcement Officer as to that matter. Therefore, Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act would not prohibit you from: (1) reviewing and approving zoning permit applications received from any members of your extended family, your friends, past clients of your former engineering business, or Borough officials; or (2) enforcing the Borough Code of Ordinances for any complaints or alleged violations involving any members of your extended family, your friends, past clients of your former engineering business, or Borough officials. Lastly, the propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act. 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 received at 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 Steckbeck,26-565 October 5, 2026 Page 5 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