Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1454 BayleIn Re: Louise Bayle, Respondent File Docket: X -ref: Date Decided: Date Mailed: Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair John J. Bolger, Vice Chair Donald M. McCurdy Paul M. Henry Raquel K. Bergen Nicholas A. Colafella 07 -058 Order No. 1454 1/28/08 2/15/08 This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission. Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was filed and a hearing was waived. A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulation of Findings is quoted as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission is issued under the Ethics Act and will be made available as a public document thirty days after the mailing date noted above. However, reconsideration may be requested. Any reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within thirty days of the mailing date and must include a detailed explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code § 21.29(b). A request for reconsideration will not affect the finality of this adjudication but will defer its public release pending action on the request by the Commission. The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with the Ethics Act. Any person who violates such confidentiality commits a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, may be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year. Confidentiality does not preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law. Bayle, 07 -058 Page 2 I. ALLEGATIONS: That Louise Bayle, a public official /public employee in her capacity as a Member of Council for Wattsburg Borough, Erie County, violated Section 1103(a), of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a), when she used the authority of her office for private pecuniary gain by participating in discussions and actions of council resulting in the hiring of her daughter for the position of borough secretary /treasurer and when she participated in actions of council approving compensation and payments issued to her daughter. II. FINDINGS: 1. Louise Bayle has served as a council member for Wattsburg Borough, Erie County, from June 26, 2006, to the present. a. Bayle was initially appointed to complete an unexpired term at the June 26, 2006, borough meeting. b. Bayle has not held any officer positions on the board (i.e., President or Vice President). 2. Wattsburg Borough is governed by a five - member council and a mayor. 3. Voting at Wattsburg Borough meetings routinely occurs via a group aye or nay vote after a motion is made and seconded. a. Roll call votes are taken when finances need to be approved. 1. Minutes routinely reflect how each specific member voted. b. Any abstentions or objections cast are specifically noted in the minutes. c. Minutes of each meeting are approved for accuracy at each subsequent meeting. 4. Council is provided a listing of monthly bills to be approved for payment at the regular monthly meetings. a. Bill lists also detail payroll expenditures for approval. 5. Bills approved for payment represent all those bills received by the borough between monthly meetings. a. Borough checks are usually written prior to the actual approval being granted by council. b. Checks are occasionally signed at the borough meetings. 1. Instances exist in which various checks are issued prior to a borough meeting so that late fees are not incurred. 6. Council president, vice president, and secretary /treasurer have signature authority over Wattsburg Borough accounts. a. Bayle does not have signature authority over the borough's accounts. 7 In late August 2006, borough Secretary /Treasurer Laurie Preston resigned. Bayle, 07 -058 Page 3 8. On or about September 4, 2006, the borough advertised the vacant secretary/ treasurer position in The Erie Times News. a. Six resumes were submitted to the borough in response to the advertisement. 1. Resumes were submitted by Sherri Huntley, Fern Boleratz, Ashley Fry, Richard Kreider, Linda Majczyk, and Barbara Minnich. 9. Julie Devlin is Louise Bayle's daughter. a. It is common knowledge in the borough that Bayle is Devlin's mother. 10. Bayle contacted Devlin on or about September 12, 2006, to inform Devlin of the vacant secretary /treasurer position. 11. After Bayle informed Devlin of the position, Devlin submitted a cover letter and resume to the borough on or about September 12, 2006. a. Devlin's cover letter was generated on September 12, 2006. b. Devlin's cover letter was stamped received by the borough on September 13, 2006. 1. Devlin's resume was enclosed with her cover letter. c. Devlin submitted a cover letter and resume as a result of Devlin's telephone conversation with Bayle. 12. On or about September 13, 2006, Devlin was interviewed for the first time by council members Carl Stull and Karen Merkle. a. Bayle contacted Devlin via telephone to inform her when to report to her interview. b. Bayle was not in attendance at this interview. 13. On September 16, 2006, Devlin was interviewed for a second time by Bayle and council members Kathy Reitinger, Karen Merkle, and Carl Stull. a. Bayle contacted Devlin via telephone to inform Devlin when to report to her interview. b. Bayle was present during her daughter's interview, but did not ask any questions. 14. Bayle participated in informal discussions with council members to determine who should be hired as the new secretary /treasurer. a. During the interview process, Bayle informed council members that her daughter was qualified to perform the duties of a secretary /treasurer and was interested in applying for said position. b. Bayle made it known to council that she felt her daughter was the best candidate for the position. Meeting Bavle's Official Date of Bill Amount Check Date Actions List A • • roved Number 11 -06 -06 Voted 10 -31 -06 ', 591.08 8241, 8258 12 -04 -06 Seconded, Voted 11 -30 -06 $ 609.09 8267, 8278 01 -02 -07 Motioned, Voted 12 -31 -06 $ 769.74 8282, 8302, 8316* 02 -05 -07 Motioned, Voted 01 -31 -07 $ 352.79 8321, 8330 ** 03 -05 -07 Motioned, Voted 02 -28 -07 $ 530.36 8345, 8351 04 -02 -07 Motioned, Voted 03 -31 -07 $ 603.91 8370, 8363 05 -07 -07 Seconded, Voted 04 -30 -07 $ 631.79 8383, 8396 06 -04 -07 Abstained 05 -31 -07 $ 760.06 8401, 8423, 8427 07 -02 -07 Abstained 06 -30 -07 $ 577.03 8435, 8453 08 -06 -07 Abstained 07 -31 -07 $ 474.02 8460, 8467 09 -04 -07 Abstained 08 -31 -07 $ 533.56 8483, 8496 10 -01 -07 Abstained 09 -30 -07 $ 506.64 8501, 8515 Bayle, 07 -058 Page 4 c. As a result of the informal discussions, council decided to offer Devlin the position. 1. No official vote was taken to hire Devlin at that time. 15. Bayle contacted Devlin via telephone on September 22, 2006, and offered Devlin the vacant position. a. On said date, Devlin accepted the position of borough secretary /treasurer. 16. On September 26, 2006, Devlin began working for the borough as secretary /treasurer. a. Devlin was not officially appointed into her position until the October2, 2006, borough meeting. 17. At the October 2, 2006, meeting, Bayle voted in favor of appointing Devlin as the secretary /treasurer. a. Minutes reflect no dissenting votes and /or abstentions made in regard to Devlin's appointment. 18. Wattsburg Borough employees are required to complete biweekly timesheets to memorialize hours worked for payroll purposes. a. The borough employs only a secretary /treasurer and a maintenance employee. 19. The biweekly timesheets do not require a council member's signature to indicate approval. a. Payroll is approved when council votes to approve the bill lists (refer to Finding #3). 20. Bayle participated in the approval of bill lists that identified payroll issued to Devlin as shown in the chart below: * Check numbers 8282, 8302 and 8316 total $768.84, not $769.74. ** In January 2007, Devlin was issued two payroll checks (8321, 8330) that totaled $552.59, not $352.79 Bayle, 07 -058 Page 5 a. Devlin received $7,138.97 * ** in payroll wages during the time frame of November 2006 to October 2007. b. From November 2006 to May 2007 Bayle voted to approve seven bill lists totaling $4,287.66 * ** in payroll wages issued to Devlin as detailed above. * ** [These amounts are accurate based upon the correct check amounts as noted in Finding 20 above.] 1. The aforementioned total notes the correct amounts received by Devlin and not the totals listed on the bill lists. aa. The totals listed on the December 31, 2006, and January 31, 2007, bill lists are incorrect regarding payroll wages for Devlin due to typographical errors. 21. Bayle received a Notice of Investigation on or about May 29, 2007, informing her that she was being investigated by the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission. a. Bayle abstained from the process to approve payments to Devlin subsequent to receiving the Notice of Investigation letter. 1. Devlin has received $2,851.31 in payroll wages since that time. 22. Bayle did not sign any of Devlin's payroll checks (refer to Finding #12). 23. Devlin either cashed or deposited all payroll checks received from the borough into her bank accounts maintained at Northwest Savings Bank, Wattsburg, PA. The following findings relate to Bayle's use of office to provide her daughter with a raise as the borough secretary /treasurer. 24. In late 2006, council held approximately three meetings to discuss the budget for the following year. a. At these meetings, council discussed providing the [Borough] employees with wage increases. b. Bayle attended these meetings on a regular basis and participated in discussions held. 25. On December 29, 2006, a special meeting was held to discuss and approve the 2007 budget. a. At this meeting it was decided that Devlin and Tim Parke, maintenance worker, [would] receive wage increases. 26. Bayle made the motion and voted to approve the 2007 budget that included Devlin's raise. a. Devlin's wage increased from $9.00 an hour to $10.00 an hour. b. Devlin was to receive approximately $7,500.00 for performing her duties as secretary /treasurer per the established 2007 budget. c. Devlin received an 11 % raise approximately four months after she was hired Bayle, 07 -058 Page 6 by the borough. 27. The budget approved by council on December 29, 2006, also included a raise for Tim Parke. a. Parke's wage increased from $8.00 an hour to $10.00 an hour. b. Parke has been the borough's maintenance worker for approximately three years. c. The two dollar raise Parke received was the first raise that Parke received throughout his tenure with the borough. 28. Council did not vote to provide Devlin and Parke with their raises until the February 5, 2007, borough meeting. a. On said date, Bayle motioned and voted for Devlin and Parke to receive their raises retroactive to January 1, 2007. 1. The motion, which passed unanimously, increased the aforementioned employees' wages to $10.00 an hour each. 29. Bayle stated the following during a sworn statement provided to a Commission investigator on October 10, 2007. a. Bayle informed Devlin of the vacant secretary /treasurer position and told Devlin to submit a resume for said position. b. Bayle contacted Devlin to inform her when to report to her interview. c. Bayle did not leave the room during her daughter's interview. 1. Bayle did not ask her daughter any questions during the interview. d. Bayle informed council that Devlin should be hired because Devlin is educated, tough, and needed a job. e. Bayle called Devlin to offer Devlin the secretary /treasurer position. f. Bayle voted to hire her daughter as well as provide her with a raise. 1. Bayle stated that Devlin deserved a raise because Devlin "works hard" and has the "office running the best it's ever run." g. Bayle admitted that she is guilty of violating section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. 1. Bayle reported that after being notified of the allegation, she abstained from any actions that might benefit Devlin. 30. Devlin received a total financial gain of $7,138.97 to date via Bayle's official actions to hire Devlin as the borough secretary /treasurer and to provide Devlin with a wage increase. a. From November 2006 to May 2007 Bayle approved $4,287.66 in payroll wages issued to Devlin. Bayle, 07 -058 Page 7 b. From June 4, 2007, to October 1, 2007, Bayle abstained on votes approving $2,851.31 in payroll wages issued to Devlin. III. DISCUSSION: As a Council Member for Wattsburg Borough ( "Borough ") from June 26, 2006, to the present, Respondent Louise Bayle ( "Bayle ") is a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. The allegations are that Bayle, as a Council member for the Borough, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she used the authority of her office for private pecuniary gain by participating in discussions and actions of Borough Council resulting in the hiring of her daughter for the position of Borough Secretary /Treasurer, and when she participated in actions of Borough Council approving compensation and payments issued to her daughter. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official /public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest: § 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 term "conflict of interest" is 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. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official /public employee from using the authority of public office /public 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. Bayle, 07 -058 Page 8 As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are reproduced above as the Findings of this Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein. Bayle has served on the five - member Borough Council since June 26, 2006, but has not held any officer positions on the Board. At Borough Council meetings, Council members routinely vote via a group aye or nay vote after a motion is made and seconded. Meeting minutes routinely reflect how each member votes, and note abstentions or objections. Monthly bills and payroll expenditures are presented to Borough Council for approval by roll call vote at the regular monthly meetings. The Borough Council President, Vice President, and Secretary /Treasurer have signature authority over the Borough accounts. The Borough has only two employees, the Secretary /Treasurer and a maintenance employee. These employees complete biweekly timesheets of hours worked for payroll purposes. Payroll is approved when the Borough Council votes to approve the bill lists. Bayle has a daughter, Julie Devlin ( "Devlin "). It is commonly known through the Borough that Devlin is Bayle's daughter. In late August 2006, the Borough Secretary /Treasurer, Laurie Preston, resigned from her position with the Borough. On September 4, 2006, the Borough advertised the vacant Secretary /Treasurer position in The Erie Times News. In response to the advertisement, the Borough received six resumes from individuals other than Devlin. On September 12, 2006, Bayle contacted Devlin to inform her of the vacant Secretary /Treasurer position. As a result of that conversation, Devlin submitted a cover letter and resume, which were received by the Borough on September 13, 2006. On September 13, 2006, Bayle contacted Devlin to tell her to report for an interview on that date. Bayle was not present at the interview. Bayle subsequently contacted Devlin to direct her to report for a second interview, which was to be held on September 16, 2006. Four Borough Council members, including Bayle, were present at Devlin's second interview. Bayle did not ask any questions at the second interview. During the interview process, Bayle and the other Borough Council members informally discussed who should be hired as the new Secretary/Treasurer. Bayle made it known to the other Borough Council members that her daughter was qualified and interested in the position, and that she felt her daughter was the best candidate. As a result of these informal discussions during Devlin's second interview, Council decided to offer the position to Devlin, although no official vote was taken at that time. Bayle contacted Devlin on September 22, 2006, and offered her the position of Borough Secretary /Treasurer. On that same date, Devlin accepted the position. Devlin began working for the Borough as the Secretary /Treasurer on September 26, 2006. Devlin was not officially appointed to the position until later, at the October 2, 2006, Borough Council meeting. At the meeting, Bayle voted to appoint her daughter to the position of Secretary /Treasurer. In late 2006, the Borough Council held three meetings to discuss the 2007 budget. At the meetings, the Borough Council, including Bayle, discussed wage increases for the two Borough employees. At a special meeting held on December 29, 2006, Bayle made a motion and voted to approve a budget which included a one dollar per hour raise for Devlin and a two dollar per hour raise for the Borough maintenance worker. At the February 5, 2007, Borough Council meeting, Bayle made a motion for Devlin and the Borough maintenance worker to receive their raises retroactive to January 1, 2007. Bayle, along Bayle, 07 -058 Page 9 with other Borough Council members, voted unanimously to approve the retroactive raises. From November 2006 until receiving a Notice of Investigation from this Commission on May 29, 2007, Bayle voted on seven occasions to approve bill lists that included payroll wages issued to her daughter, totaling $4,287.66. After May 29, 2007, Bayle abstained from further approval of payments to her daughter. From May 29, 2007, when Bayle first abstained from voting on the bill lists, until October 2007, Devlin received an additional $2,851.31 in wages from the Borough. From November 2006 until October 2007, Devlin received a total of $7,138.97 in wages from the Borough. Bayle did not sign any of her daughter's payroll checks, as she did not have signature authority over the Borough's accounts. During a sworn statement provided to a Commission investigator, Bayle acknowledged, inter alia, that she had violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case. The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations as follows: 3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the above allegations: a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Bayle's participating in discussion and actions of council which resulted in the hiring of her daughter for the position of borough secretary /treasurer; and b. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when Bayle approved an increase in compensation and payments issued to her daughter, an immediate family member. 4. Bayle agrees to make payment in the amount of $1,200.00 in settlement of this matter. Said restitution to be made in monthly payments of $50.00 per month for twenty -four (24) months, made payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission with the first payment due thirty (30) days [from] the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 5. The Investigative Division will recommend that the State Ethics Commission take no further action in this matter; and make no specific recommendations to any law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter. Such, however, does not prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's failure to comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to review this matter further. Consent Agreement, at 1 -2. In applying Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the stipulated facts, there were numerous uses of authority of office on the part of Bayle. But for the fact that Bayle was a Borough Council member, she would not have been in a position to participate in the Bayle, 07 -058 Page 10 discussion and actions of Borough Council which resulted in the hiring of her daughter to the position of Secretary /Treasurer. Most significantly, Bayle: (1) told the other Borough Council members during the second interview of Devlin that Devlin was qualified for the position and that she (Bayle) felt that Devlin was the best candidate for the Secretary /Treasurer position; (2) offered Devlin the position; (3) voted in favor of appointing Devlin to the position; and (4) participated in approving payroll checks issued to Devlin. All such actions were uses of authority of office (see, Juliante, Order 809), which resulted in private pecuniary benefit(s) consisting of compensation from the Borough to Devlin, Bayle's daughter. Further, Devlin, as Bayle's daughter, is a member of Bayle's immediate family as that term is defined under the Ethics Act. See, Section 1102, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Accordingly, we hold that Bayle violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, participated in discussions and actions of Borough Council which resulted in the hiring of her daughter for the position of Borough Secretary /Treasurer. As for Bayle's actions in making a motion and voting in favor of increasing her daughter's wages, such actions were uses of authority of office. These actions by Bayle resulted in a private pecuniary benefit to Bayle's daughter, Devlin, consisting of an increase in Devlin's compensation. Accordingly, we hold that Bayle violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, approved an increase in compensation and payments issued to her daughter, an immediate family member. We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth the proper disposition for this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis and the totality of the facts and circumstances. Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement, Bayle is directed to make payment in the amount of $1,200.00, to be paid in monthly payments of $50.00 per month for twenty -four months, made payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission with the first payment due thirty days from the issuance of this adjudication and Order. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Louise Bayle ( "Bayle "), as a Council Member for Wattsburg Borough ( "Borough "), from June 26, 2006, to the present, is a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. 2. Bayle violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, participated in discussions and actions of Borough Council which resulted in the hiring of her daughter for the position of Borough Secretary /Treasurer. 3. Bayle violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, approved an increase in compensation and payments issued to her daughter, an immediate family member. In Re: Louise Bayle, Respondent ORDER NO. 1454 File Docket: 07 -058 Date Decided: 1/28/08 Date Mailed: 2/15/08 1 Respondent Louise Bayle ( "Bayle "), a public official in her capacity as a Council Member for Wattsburg Borough ( "Borough ") from June 26, 2006, to the present, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, participated in discussions and actions of Borough Council which resulted in the hiring of her daughter for the position of Borough Secretary /Treasurer. 2. Bayle violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Borough Council Member, approved an increase in compensation and payments issued to her daughter, an immediate family member. 3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Bayle is directed to make payment in the amount of $1,200.00, to be paid in monthly payments of $50.00 per month for twenty -four (24) months, made payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission with the first payment due thirty (30) days from the issuance of this Order. a. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. b. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Louis W. Fryman, Chair