HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-537 LloydRobert S. Lloyd
56 Alexanders Court
Newtown, PA 18940
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
March 31, 2006
06 -537
Re: Conflict; Public Official /Employee; Township Supervisor; Business With Which
Associated; Business Competitors.
Dear Mr. Lloyd:
This responds to your letter of March 1, 2006, by which you requested advice
from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: Whether the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65
Pa. .S. § 1101 et seq., would present any prohibition or restrictions upon a Township
Supervisor who in his private capacity is employed by Verizon, with regard to
participating in matters involving Verizon or Verizon's business competitors.
Facts: As a recently elected Supervisor of Wrightstown Township ( "Township "),
you request an advisory from the State Ethics Commission based upon the following
submitted facts.
In your private capacity, you are employed by Verizon as Manager of Circuit
Provisioning. You state that your job duties with Verizon include management of circuit
design and testing and management of supervisors and specialists. You characterize
your employment position as a "middle management" position.
In your capacity as a Township Supervisor, you would often be called upon to
review, deliberate and vote on land development issues that would include cell tower
co- locations by Verizon and its competitors, as well as cable franchise agreements
sought by Verizon and its competitors.
You ask whether you would have a conflict of interest in participating and voting
as to the foregoing matters given your employment with Verizon.
Discussion: 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 material
Lloyd, 06 -537
March 31, 2006
Page 2
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 of the material facts.
It is further initially noted that, pursuant to the same aforesaid Sections of the
Ethics Act, an opinion /advice may be given only as to prospective (future) conduct. If
the activity in question has already occurred, the Commission may not issue an
opinion /advice but any person may then submit a signed and sworn complaint, which
will be investigated by the Commission if there are allegations of Ethics Act violations by
a person who is subject to the Ethics Act. To the extent you have inquired as to
conduct that has already occurred, such past conduct may not be addressed in the
context of an advisory opinion. However, to the extent you have inquired as to future
conduct, your inquiry may, and shall be addressed.
As a Township Supervisor, you are a "public official" subject to the provisions of
the Ethics Act.
Sections 1103(a) and 1103(j) of the Ethics Act provide:
§ 1103. Restricted Activities
(a) Conflict of interest. —No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict
of interest.
(j) Voting conflict. —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 recording 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 provided herein.
65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), (j).
The following terms pertaining to conflicts of interest under the Ethics Act are
defined as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public
official or public employee of the authority of his office or
Lloyd, 06 -537
March 31, 2006
Page 3
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.
"Business." Any corporation, partnership, sole
proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association,
organization, self - employed individual, holding company,
joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal entity
organized for profit.
"Business with which he is associated." Any
business in which the person or a member of the person's
immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee or
has a financial interest.
65 Pa. C. S. § 1102.
Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official /public employee is
prohibited from using the authority of public office /employment or confidential
information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary 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.
Subject to certain voting conflict exceptions, Section 1103(j) of the Ethics Act
requires a public official /public employee with a conflict of interest to abstain and to
publicly disclose the abstention and reasons for same, both orally and by filing a written
memorandum to that effect with the person recording the minutes or supervisor.
Sections 1103(b) and 1103(c) of the Ethics Act provide in part that no person
shall offer to a public official /public employee anything of monetary value and no public
official /public employee shall solicit or accept anything of monetary value based upon
the understanding that the vote, official action, or judgment of the public official /public
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 1103(f) of the Ethics Act provides as follows:
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(f) Contract. - -No public official or public employee or
his spouse or child or any business in which the person or
his spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract
valued at $500 or more with the governmental body with
Lloyd, 06 -537
March 31, 2006
Page 4
which the public official or public employee is associated or
any subcontract valued at $500 or more with any person
who has been awarded a contract with the governmental
body with which the public official or public employee is
associated, 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. In such a case, the public official or
public employee shall not have any supervisory or overall
responsibility for the implementation or administration of the
contract. Any contract or subcontract made in violation of
this subsection shall be voidable by a court of competent
jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within 90 days of the
making of the contract or subcontract.
65 Pa. C. S. § 1103(f).
Section 1103(f) does not operate to make contracting with the governmental
body permissible where it is otherwise prohibited. Rather, where a public official /public
employee, his spouse or child, or a business with which he, his spouse or child is
associated, is otherwise appropriately contracting with the governmental body, or
subcontracting with any person who has been awarded a contract with the
governmental body, in an amount of $500.00 or more, Section 1103(f) requires that an
"open and public process" be observed as to the contract with the governmental body.
Pursuant to Section 1103(f), an "open and public process" includes:
(1) prior public notice of the employment or contracting possibility;
(2) sufficient time for a reasonable and prudent competitor /applicant to be
able to prepare and present an application or proposal;
(3) public disclosure of all applications or proposals considered; and
(4) public disclosure of the contract awarded and offered and accepted.
Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act also requires that the public official /employee
may not have any supervisory or overall responsibility as to the implementation or
administration of the contract with the governmental body.
In applying the above provisions of the Ethics Act to the instant matter, your
employer, Verizon, is a business with which you are associated. Pursuant to Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you would be prohibited from using the authority of your
public office or confidential information accessed by being a Township Supervisor to
financially benefit Verizon. See, e.g., Smith, Order 1147; cf., Schuckman, Advice 01-
594. You would also be prohibited from using the authority of office as a Township
Supervisor to effectuate a detriment to Verizon's business competitors. See, Pepper,
Opinion 87 -008.
Having set forth the above parameters, you are further advised that land
development issues or cable franchise agreements that would financially impact Verizon
would generally present a conflict of interest for you. As to matters involving a business
competitor of Verizon, you would be prohibited from using the authority of your office as
a Township Supervisor to effectuate a detriment to such business competitor.
In each instance of a conflict of interest, you would be required to abstain fully
and to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Section 1103(j).
Lloyd, 06 -537
March 31, 2006
Page 5
The requirements and prohibitions of Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act would
have to be observed when applicable.
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. Specifically not addressed herein is the applicability of
the Second Class Township Code.
Conclusion: As a Supervisor for Wrightsville Township ( "Township "), you are a public
official subject to the rovisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics
Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. Your employer, Verizon, is a business with which you
are associated. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, you would be prohibited
from using the authority of your public office or confidential information accessed by
being a Township Supervisor to financially benefit Verizon. You would also be
prohibited from using the authority of office as a Township Supervisor to effectuate a
detriment to Verizon's business competitors. Land development issues or cable
franchise agreements that would financially impact Verizon would generally present a
conflict of interest for you. As to matters involving a business competitor of Verizon, you
would be prohibited from using the authority of your office as a Township Supervisor to
effectuate a detriment to such business competitor. In each instance of a conflict of
interest, you would be required to abstain fully and to satisfy the disclosure
requirements of Section 1103(j). The requirements and prohibitions of Section 1103(f)
of the Ethics Act would have to be observed when applicable. Lastly, the propriety of
the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Ethics Act.
Pursuant to Section 1107(11), 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 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.
Sincerely,
Vincent J. Dopko
Chief Counsel