DUBOIS: The newly seated DuBois City Council is again facing questions about conflicts of interest, this time involving Dick Whitaker, who was elected to council following municipal consolidation and is currently serving a two-year term after finishing lower on the ballot in the seven-member race. Prior to consolidation, Whitaker served as a Sandy Township Supervisor. The concern centers on his simultaneous service on the board of the Treasure Lake Property Owners Association (TLPOA)—a private homeowners association governing a gated community that exists within the DuBois area.
At issue is not whether Whitaker’s service on the TLPOA board is improper in the abstract, but whether holding both roles at the same time creates recurring or structural conflicts under Pennsylvania law—particularly when city decisions may intersect with the interests of Treasure Lake residents, property values, services, or agreements involving the association.
The governing law: Pennsylvania’s Ethics Act
Pennsylvania’s Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.) applies to all municipal officials, including city council members. The Act begins with a core principle: public office is a public trust, and officials must avoid divided loyalties and private influence.
Under Section 1102, a conflict of interest exists when a public official uses the authority of their office, or confidential information obtained through that office, for the private pecuniary benefit of themselves or a business with which they are associated. The statute further defines a “business with which a person is associated” to include entities—including nonprofit organizations—where the individual is an officer, director, employee, or otherwise has a significant connection.
Why a private HOA board seat raises questions
TLPOA is a private property owners association that governs a large, gated residential community. While often structured as a nonprofit, an HOA can still be implicated in Ethics Act analysis when a public official’s actions could reasonably be seen as benefiting the association or the official personally. The law does not require proof of wrongdoing; it focuses on the potential for pecuniary benefit and the use of public authority.
For a city council member, that potential can arise in multiple routine contexts, including—but not limited to—public safety coordination, road and infrastructure decisions, municipal services, planning matters, or any agreements or policies that may affect Treasure Lake property values or operations.
Disclosure and recusal obligations
The Ethics Act provides a narrow remedy when a conflict arises: disclosure and abstention. If a matter before council would create a conflict, the official must publicly announce the nature of the interest before the vote and file a written disclosure for the record, then abstain from participation.
However, ethics guidance has long emphasized that disclosure does not eliminate a conflict; it merely acknowledges it. Where conflicts are predictable and recurring, repeated recusals can impair effective governance and signal a structural problem rather than an isolated one.
Influence beyond the final vote
Ethics analysis in Pennsylvania is not limited to roll-call votes. Council members can exert influence through agenda setting, discussion, timing, and informal leadership among peers. Even where an official abstains from voting, participation in deliberation or procedural decisions can still raise concerns if the matter affects an associated organization.
Why DCED scrutiny can matter
These issues also matter beyond local optics. When municipalities seek state or federally administered funding—often through the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED)—they are typically required to identify and manage real or apparent conflicts of interest. Federal grant rules incorporated into DCED programs require written disclosures and prohibit participation in decisions where conflicts exist. In some cases, DCED requires formal waivers supported by legal opinions from municipal solicitors affirming compliance with state and federal law.
A council body with unresolved or recurring conflicts may therefore face additional scrutiny or administrative hurdles when pursuing grants or economic development programs.
A second conflict identified on the same council
Whitaker’s situation is not occurring in isolation. Earlier this month, DuBoisLIVE examined a separate, unrelated conflict question involving Shirley Dahrouge, who serves as a paid executive of Downtown DuBois, Inc. while also holding a leadership position on city council. That analysis focused on nonprofit employment intersecting with council authority. The two cases are distinct in facts and legal posture, but together they mean two members of the seven-person council have had conflicts publicly identified—a circumstance that heightens concerns about governance, recusals, and public confidence during the city’s early post-consolidation period.
The transparency record
Pennsylvania’s ethics framework relies heavily on transparency. Candidates and officeholders are required to file Statements of Financial Interests, disclosing positions held with organizations that may intersect with public duties, and must update those filings annually. Compliance with disclosure and recusal rules is central to any assessment of whether an official has met their legal obligations.
The bottom line
Dick Whitaker’s dual service as a DuBois City Council member and a TLPOA board member raises legitimate, law-based questions under Pennsylvania’s Ethics Act. The concern is not hypothetical: when a private HOA exists within the city’s orbit and a council member helps govern both, conflicts can be frequent and foreseeable.
Pennsylvania ethics standards are designed to prevent divided loyalties and to preserve public trust. In situations where conflicts are ongoing rather than occasional, ethics guidance commonly points to a clear choice—serve one role or the other—to avoid perpetual recusals, administrative complications, and erosion of confidence in municipal decision-making.
