Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1455 GraeffIn Re: Todd Graeff, 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 06 -043 Order No. 1455 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 requested. 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. Graeff, 06 -043 Page 2 I. ALLEGATIONS: That Todd Graeff, a public official /public employee in his capacity as a Lieutenant of the Muhlenberg Township Police Department, Berks County, Pennsylvania violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) and §1104(a) when he used the authority of his public position to procure a private pecuniary gain by submitting invoices to Muhlenberg Township seeking payment for personal travel expenses, stating that the trip was related to his position with the Township Police Department and subsequently claiming compensation for time traveled while on personal matters not related to his public position; and also when he failed to file Statement of Financial Interest forms for the calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. II. FINDINGS: 1. Todd A. Graeff has served as the Lieutenant for the Muhlenberg Township Police Department, Berks County, since May of 2002. a. Graeff has been employed by the Muhlenberg Township Police Department for approximately eighteen years. 2. Graeff's job duties, as Lieutenant for the Muhlenberg Police Department, include the following: a. Assists in the planning, coordination, supervision, and evaluation of police department operations. b. Assists in the development of policies and procedures of the department in order to implement directives from the Muhlenberg Township Board of Commissioners. c. Evaluates staff performance and compliance with standards of work performance, ethical conduct, and integrity. d. Supervises and coordinates the preparation and presentation of assigned portions of the annual budget for the Department. e. Directs the implementation of the department's budget in assigned area. f. Plans for and reviews specification for new or replaced equipment in the assigned area. g. Approves purchase orders and invoices. h. Initiates department policy and overall personnel administration. 3. Graeff is directly supervised by the Chief of Police, Robert Flanagan. a. Graeff directly supervises approximately thirty sworn law enforcement officers. 4. Graeff, as Lieutenant, is responsible for performing all duties of the Chief of Police in his absence. 5. Graeff's duties as Lieutenant for the Department were also the subject of a proceeding before the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board in 1995. a. On July 12, 2005, the Muhlenberg Township Police Department Labor Graeff, 06 -043 Page 3 Organization filed a Petition for Unit Clarification with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, seeking clarification of a unit of police officers of Muhlenberg Township to exclude the position of Lieutenant. 6. On March 15, 2006, the parties submitted stipulations of fact concerning the job description of Lieutenant Graeff. The following job duties performed by Graeff were stipulated to: a. The making of all necessary decisions incumbent on the Chief of Police, including writing polices, administering discipline, budget formulation, and overseeing daily operations of the department. b. The development of policies and procedures for the Department in order to implement directives from the Muhlenberg Township Board of Commissioners, and the review of department performance and effectiveness and formulation of programs and polices to alleviate deficiencies. c. Supervises and coordinates the preparation and management, and directs the implantation of, Department budgetary matters. 7 The Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board issued a proposed order of unit clarification dated April 15, 2006, indicating that the job duties of Graeff, as Police Lieutenant, qualify him as a managerial employee and therefore exclude him from the Police Bargaining Unit. 8. In or about the fall of 2002, the Muhlenberg Township Police Labor Organization and the Muhlenberg Township Police Department entered into a Collective Bargaining Agreement covering the period of January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2006. a. The agreement establishes policies and benefits that would apply to all law enforcement officers employed by the township. 9. Article IX, Section 2, of the Labor Agreement establishes a reimbursement policy where the township will reimburse any officer up to $1,000.00 a year for costs associated with obtaining an Associate, Bachelor or Master's Degree. This policy provides as follows: a. The Township shall reimburse any officer for a maximum of $1,000.00 per year toward attaining an Associate, Bachelor, or Masters Degree in Criminology, Criminal Justice Law, Psychology, Sociology, Public Administration, and business Administration. Payment to be made upon receipt of a passing grade. Any other curricula will be reviewed on an individual basis to determine its relevance to the employees (sic) existing or potential township duties." 10. Article XXII, Section 5 and 6 of the Agreement provides for reimbursement of expenses associated with police - related training and the necessary approval that has to be obtained. a. "Section 5. An officer attending any police relating training course shall be reimbursed for all travel expense, lodging, meals, supplies and hourly wages for time spent at such courses." b. "Section 6. Schooling shall be approved by the Chief of Police and Commissioners prior to attendance of said school." Graeff, 06 -043 Page 4 11. Township police officers enrolled in a class for credit toward attaining a degree, as specified in Article IX, Section 2, were not eligible for reimbursement of travel expenses, lodging, meals, supplies, and /or hourly wages. a. Officers were only eligible for reimbursement of such expenses when attending police - related training pursuant to Article XXII, Section 5. b. Officers receiving the $1,000.00 per year reimbursement for degree related expenses could not submit for reimbursement individual training program courses related to the degree work. 12. From September 2002 through May 2005, Graeff was enrolled and taking courses towards his Master's Degree in Administration of Justice from Wilmington College, Wilmington, Delaware. a. Graeff annually received reimbursements from the township per Article IX, Section 2, of the Labor Agreement while enrolled at Wilmington College. b. Graeff received his 2003 educational expense reimbursement of $963.26 in August 2003. 13. On or around January 6, 2003, Graeff contacted Thomas B. Cupples, a Professor at Wilmington College, inquiring about a study abroad course in Ireland. a. Thomas B. Cupples, a former Special Agent in the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and then Assistant Professor and Coordinator for the Criminal Justice Program at Wilmington College, was the Professor who organized the study abroad course. b. The course is an elective, MAJ -6701 N Special Topic: Ireland Study Abroad. c. The trip was offered to all students of Wilmington College regardless of Major or Degree. 14. On or before February 1, 2003, Graeff paid a $600.00 deposit to Wilmington College to participate in the course. a. The $600.00 deposit was put towards the total cost of the trip. 15. Course MAJ -6701 N Special Topic: Ireland Study Abroad was an elective course, specifically selected by Graeff, to fulfill requirements of the Master's Degree program. a. Graeff was to receive (3) credits toward his Master's Degree for successful completion of the study abroad. b. The course was specifically related to the completion of the Master's Degree. 16. The course MAJ -670N Special Topic: Ireland Study Abroad was not eligible for reimbursement of expenses pursuant to Article XXII, Section 5 of the Labor Agreement since the course related to an elective course toward completion of a degree. 17. The cost of the Study Abroad Course in Ireland totaling $2,935.00 was determined as follows: Graeff, 06 -043 Page 5 a. Trip Cost $ 2,088.00 Registration Fee $ 25.00 Tuition $ 822.00 $ 2,935.00 18. In or about April 2003, Graeff discussed with Chief of Police Robert Flanagan his desire to attend the Ireland Study Abroad Course during the Summer of 2003. a. Graeff informed Chief Flanagan of the course cost but that he (Graeff) could not afford the total cost. b. Graeff inquired if the Township would incur some of the costs of the trip. c. Flanagan, during a Sworn Statement with State Ethics Commission Investigators, stated that he advised Graeff that the Township would pay only if the course was training on a topic of benefit to the department. 1. Flanagan informed Graeff that appropriate topics of training would include Police Administration, Terrorism or Accreditation. 2. It is Graeff's position that Flannigan suggested to him to claim the course was related to Terrorism in order to have the Township pay a portion of the travel expenses. d. Flanagan requested documentation confirming the course was on one of the appropriate topics. e. Flanagan agreed to approach the township about paying for one -half of the course provided the course was beneficial to the township. 19. During his conversation with Chief Flanagan, Graeff purported to Flanagan that the trip to Ireland was a terrorism training course. a. Graeff admits that he advised Flannigan that the course which he was taking concerned terrorism instruction, and that he did so based upon the prior conversation Graeff had with Flannigan. (See, Finding 18.c.2). b. Thomas B. Cupples indicated in a Sworn Statement that Graeff would have been unaware of the content of the course prior to receiving the course syllabus. 20. The Ireland Study Abroad Course, MAJ-6701N, did not include training on law enforcement topics, police administration, terrorism or accreditation, which would have been beneficial to the Police Department. a. The course was related, as an elective course of study, toward the attainment of a Master's Degree by Graeff. 21. On April 4, 2003, Graeff contacted Cupples via email requesting that an invoice be created indicating $1,500.00 was to be paid to the college for a Terrorist Training Seminar in Ireland. Graeff's request was as follows: a. "I was also wondering if there was a way you could send a separate bill for Ireland from the college. The chief has approached the Township about paying for a part of the trip and they have agreed to pay for $1,500.00 of the cost. The chief told them that it was a terrorist seminar to help them Graeff, 06 -043 Page 6 embrace the cost. So if possible could you get something typed and sent to me regarding it. List something about terrorist training and the cost of $1,500.00. They only pay ahead of time if they have something in writing. If you can't I understand, thanks either way." 22. Cupples' response to Graeff's email of April 4, 2003, agreeing to create the invoice, stated: "I will get an invoice for the Ireland Study Abroad: Terrorist Issues course. Do you need the figure of $1,500.00 or the full $2710.00 ?" 23. On April 19, 2003, Cupples directed an e -mail to Graeff and the other students taking the course, [with] a course syllabus outlining the trip and course goals. 24. The course syllabus contained the following information: a. Purpose: This course is a three credit multi disciplined travel program with a focus on criminal justice that is designed to provide the opportunity for the students of all majors to experience together the culture of Ireland and observe the outward manifestations of the signs, symbols, and traditions of the country that make it elite. Visits to the various attractions would provide numerous examples of the Irish cultural identity. All students will follow the same travel itinerary with the opportunity to focus on identified areas of interest. There will be 16 hours of class time on campus and eight hours of formal lecture in Ireland." b. Course description: "Student will experience a unique opportunity to learn about the culture, traditions, and the institutions of a foreign country through the combination of an academic and travel component that will be an enjoyable and enriching addition to the curriculum of all academic majors. The focus of the course will be on expanding the students [sic] horizons through selecting pre - travel research and readings that will give a more in depth understanding of the travel points, and enable the students to complete a critical review of selected reading materials based upon the travel observations and interactions with the citizens in the host country, and the other travelers under the guidance of the Professor." c. Cupples listed the instructional goals for the course in the course syllabus as follows: "Goal A: Students will develop an understanding and appreciation for the culture, traditions, and institutions of Ireland. Goal B: Students will develop an understanding of the political struggles that have plagued Ireland for the past four hundred years up to the present. Goal C: Students will gain an appreciation for the many cultural contributions to the world by the people of Ireland. Goal D: Participate in a tour of Ireland in which the students will visit sites that re- enforce [sic] the information that is presented in the classroom and reviewed in the assigned readings of the course." Graeff, 06 -043 Page 7 25. Nothing in either the course syllabus or course itinerary relates to terrorism training. a. Nothing in the course syllabus or itinerary related to law enforcement, criminal justice, or police administrative topics. 26. Cupples, in a Sworn Statement, stated that the course syllabus and itinerary are accurate accounts of what sites were visited and what information was taught during the trip. a. Cupples indicated that the trip was not terrorism training but rather a course on the history of Ireland. 27. On May 13, 2003, Graeff received an invoice dated May 9, 2003, for $1,500.00 from Cupples via fax. a. Cupples faxed the invoice to Graeff at the police department (610-921 - XXXX). 28. The invoice stated that the $1,500.00 charge was for "MAJ -6701 LN- Ireland Study /Terrorism." a. "Terrorism" was added to the invoice at Cupples' direction based on Graeff's request. b. The invoice was also mailed to Graeff's home address. 29. This invoice was prepared by Wilmington College's Student Financial Service Office. a. Cupples directed the Student Financial Service Office to make the invoice for $1,500.00 and to add "Terrorism" to the course name. 30. On May 13, 2003, Graeff submitted the invoice to Police Chief Robert Flanagan to forward to the Township Finance Director for processing for payment. a. Graeff attached a post -it note on the invoice that read as follows: "Please have township make out check to Todd Graeff. As I already paid the bill. Thanks ". 31. Chief Flanagan initialed the invoice indicating his approval and forwarded the invoice to Finance Director Randy Boone for payment. a. Flannigan indicated in a sworn statement that he approved and forwarded the invoice for payment based on Graeff's representation that the trip was terrorism training. Graeff admits that he advised Flannigan that the course which he was taking concerned terrorism instruction, and that he did so based upon the prior conversation Graeff had with Flannigan. (See, Finding 18.c.2). b. Flanagan informed Boone that the Ireland trip was terrorism training and that the $1,500.00 was the cost of the training. c. Boone processed the invoice for payment based on the information provided to him by Flanagan. Graeff, 06 -043 Page 8 d. Boone's role in processing the invoice was not to determine the appropriateness of the training, but rather to determine if the necessary funds required for payment were in the budget. 32. By submitting the invoice, Graeff suggested to Flanagan that the trip was a terrorism training course in Ireland. a. Graeff did not provide Flanagan with any course description or the course syllabus. b. Graeff knew /should have known that there was no terrorism training component scheduled as part of the Ireland trip based on the course syllabus and trip itinerary. 33. Muhlenberg Township check number 118212 was issued on May 28, 2003, to Todd Graeff in the amount of $1,500.00. a. Check number 118212 was approved as part of the Treasurer's report during a Muhlenberg Township Board of Commissioners meeting on June 16, 2003. 34. Graeff's duties as Lieutenant include the preparation of the Police Department's schedules. 35. On June 6, 2003, as part of his regular duties, Graeff changed the Police Department's schedule, placing himself on "SDS" for June 9 through June 13, 2003, and June 16 through June 19, 2003. a. SDS is an abbreviation for Special Duty School, which is a designation used by the Department to indicate that an officer is on paid training. b. The dates listed as training by Graeff corresponded to the time that Graeff was in Ireland. c. Graeff changed the schedule three days prior to the trip to Ireland. 36. Graeff made the decision to list his status as SDS so that he would be compensated by the Township while traveling to Ireland. 37. Graeff's use of the authority of his public position in scheduling himself for training resulted in him receiving $2,000.88 in compensation from the Township while in Ireland. Compensation total was based on the following calculations: a. Graeff's hourly pay $27.79 /hour * 72 hours $2,000.88 b. Nine days designated as training (June 9,10,11,12,13,16,17,18,19) at 8 hours each day. 39. From June 9 through June 19, 2003, Graeff attended the Study Abroad course in Ireland. 40. As a requirement of the course, Graeff was required to submit a daily journal, outlining his activities, and a reflection paper based on his observations and experiences. Graeff, 06 -043 Page 9 41. Graeff, in a Sworn Statement, indicated that the journal and reflection paper are accurate accounts of what occurred on the trip. a. Graeff's daily journal includes no mention of terrorism training or seminars. b. Graeff's reflection paper includes Graeff's thoughts on the culture of Ireland and the historic points of interest that were visited. 42. Following his trip to Ireland, Graeff did not present any information regarding terrorism to the Muhlenberg Police Department. a. The Muhlenberg Police Department does not have a counter terrorism task force. b. None of Graeff's job duties relate directly to counter - terrorism or terrorism prevention. 43. Graeff submitted expenses for the Ireland trip to the Department and Township as training not related to his Master's Degree effort. a. By claiming the trip was training - related, Graeff was able to receive reimbursement greater than the labor agreement allowed. 1. Graeff was reimbursed $1,500.00 while the education reimbursement was $1,000.00 per year. 2. Graeff also received an educational allotment of $963.26 in August 2003 unrelated to the Ireland trip. b. Graeff was also able to receive compensation of $2,000.88 by claiming Special Duty School and that the trip was related to his Township position and was for training purposes. c. Graeff submits that his request for reimbursement was not made pursuant to the labor agreement but was rather a management request for reimbursement. 44. On June 8, 2006, a hearing was held with the Police Commissioner, James Murray, Chief Flanagan, and Human Resource Administrator, Judy Zettlemoyer, in order for Graeff to answer questions regarding his trip to Ireland. a. When Graeff was asked about what portion of the trip related to terrorism training, Graeff responded as follows: The visit to the Academy in Northern Ireland, not so much terrorist training but more about terrorism in general." b. When Graeff was asked if and why he requested that the course instructor create an invoice indicating the trip involved terrorism training, Graeff responded as follows: "Yes I did. Like I said, it was a hot issue at the time." THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO THE ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING GRAEFF'S FAILURE TO FILE STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS. 45. As Lieutenant for the Muhlenberg Township Police Department, Todd Graeff was Graeff, 06 -043 Page 10 required annually to file a Statement of Financial Interests form by the May 1St deadline, containing information for the prior calendar year. 46. Graeff did not file Statement of Financial Interests forms with Muhlenberg Township for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 by the May 1 deadline of the following year. 47. Graeff was never provided a Statement of Financial Interests form by Muhlenberg Township. 48. During years when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with the Township, Graeff received compensation from Muhlenberg Township totaling $265,319.73. a. Year Amount 2002 $ 61, 866.19 2003 $ 65,252.57 2004 $ 67, 917.83 2005 $ 70,283.14 Total $265,319.73 49. During the time that Graeff served as Police Lieutenant for Muhlenberg Township, he also served on the Zoning Hearing Board for Penn Township. 50. As a member of the Zoning Hearing Board for Penn Township, Graeff was required to file a Statement of Financial Interests form by the May 1' deadline containing information for the prior calendar year. 51. Graeff filed the following Statements of Financial Interests filings with Penn Township as a member of the Zoning Hearing Board since calendar year 2001: [sic]. 52. Graeff realized a private pecuniary gain of $3,500.88 as a result of the use of the authority of his public position as the Lieutenant for the Muhlenberg Township Police Department when he knowingly misled the Township to receive reimbursement for a trip to Ireland and when he took actions to receive compensation for the days he was on the trip. a. Graeff received a private pecuniary gain of $1,500.00 as a result of submitting an invoice indicating a graduate course was terrorism training. b. Graeff received a private pecuniary gain of $2,000.88 as a result of his actions in changing the Department's schedule to indicate he was on paid training for the days he was in Ireland. III. DISCUSSION: At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Todd Graeff ( "Graeff "), has been a public employee 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 Graeff violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when, as a Lieutenant of the Muhlenberg Township ( "Township ") Police Department ( "Police Department "), Berks County, Pennsylvania, he used the authority of his public position for a private pecuniary gain by submitting invoices to the Township seeking payment for personal travel expenses, stating that the trip -- a trip to Ireland ( "Ireland trip" or "trip ") -- was related to his Township position, and subsequently claiming compensation Graeff, 06 -043 Page 11 for time while on the Ireland trip; and also when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. 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 /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. Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides that each public official /public employee must file a Statement of Financial Interests for the preceding calendar year, each year that he holds the position and the year after he leaves it. 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. Graeff has been employed by the Police Department for eighteen (18) years, and has served as the Lieutenant of the Police Department since May of 2002. As the Lieutenant, Graeff is directly supervised by the Township Chief of Police, Robert Flanagan ( "Chief Flanagan "). Graeff directly supervises approximately thirty sworn law enforcement officers. Graeff's job duties as Lieutenant include the following: Assisting in the planning, coordination, supervision, and evaluation of Police Department operations; assisting in the development of policies and procedures of the Police Department in order to implement Graeff, 06 -043 Page 12 directives from the Township Board of Commissioners; evaluating staff performance and compliance with standards of work performance, ethical conduct, and integrity; supervising and coordinating the preparation and presentation of assigned portions of the annual budget for the Police Department; directing the implementation of the Police Department's budget in an assigned area; planning for and reviewing specifications for new or replaced equipment in the assigned area; approving purchase orders and invoices; initiating department policy; and administering personnel. Graeff is also responsible for performing all duties of the Chief of Police in the Chief's absence. None of Graeff's job duties relate directly to counter - terrorism or terrorism prevention. The Police Department does not have a counter - terrorism task force. In the fall of 2002, the Muhlenberg Township Police Labor Organization and the Police Department entered into a Collective Bargaining Agreement ( "Agreement ") covering the period from January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2006. The Agreement established policies and benefits applicable to all law enforcement officers employed by the Township. The Agreement established a reimbursement policy where the Township would reimburse any police officer up to $1,000.00 each year for costs associated with obtaining an Associate, Bachelor or Master's Degree in Criminology, Criminal Justice Law, Psychology, Sociology, Public Administration, or business Administration. The policy further provided that any other curricula would be reviewed on an individual basis to determine its relevance to the employee's existing or potential Township duties. The Agreement also provided for reimbursement of expenses associated with police - related training subject to approval by the Chief of Police and Commissioners. Township police officers who enrolled in classes for credit toward attaining a degree were not eligible for reimbursement of travel expenses, lodging, meals, supplies, and /or hourly wages for time spent at such classes. Officers were only eligible for reimbursement of such expenses when attending police - related training. Officers receiving the $1,000.00 per year reimbursement for degree - related expenses could not submit for reimbursement expenses for individual training program courses related to the degree work. From September 2002 through May 2005, Graeff was enrolled and taking courses towards his Master's Degree in Administration of Justice from Wilmington College in Wilmington, Delaware. Graeff received annual reimbursements from the Township pursuant to the Agreement while enrolled at Wilmington College. In August 2003, Graeff received educational expense reimbursement of $963.26. On January 6, 2003, Graeff contacted Thomas B. Cupples ( "Cupples "), a Professor at Wilmington College, regarding a study abroad course in Ireland. Cupples, then Assistant Professor and Coordinator for the Criminal Justice Program at Wilmington College, had organized the study abroad course in Ireland. The course was an elective offered to all students of Wilmington College, regardless of Major or Degree. Graeff specifically selected the course to fulfill requirements for the Master's Degree program. Graeff was to receive (3) credits toward his Master's Degree for successful completion of the course. The course did not include training on law enforcement topics such as police administration, terrorism or accreditation, which would have been beneficial to the Police Department. The total cost of the course, including trip cost, registration fee, and tuition, was $2,935.00. On February 1, 2003, Graeff paid a $600.00 deposit to Wilmington College, which was applied to the total cost of the trip. In April 2003, Graeff met with Chief Flanagan to discuss whether the Township would incur some of the costs of the course. Chief Flanagan advised Graeff that the Township would pay for the course only if the course consisted of training on a topic of benefit to the Police Department, such as Police Administration, Terrorism or Graeff, 06 -043 Page 13 Accreditation. Graeff told Chief Flanagan that the trip to Ireland was a terrorism training course. Chief Flanagan requested documentation to confirm that the topic of the course was one of the appropriate topics and agreed to approach the Township about paying for one -half of the course. On April 4, 2003, Graeff contacted Cupples via email, and requested that an invoice be created for $1,500.00 to be paid to Wilmington College for a Terrorist Training Seminar in Ireland. Graeff's email to Cupples stated: I was also wondering if there was a way you could send a separate bill for Ireland from the college. The chief has approached the Township about paying for a part of the trip and they have agreed to pay for $1,500.00 of the cost. The chief told them that it was a terrorist seminar to help them embrace the cost. So if possible could you get something typed and sent to me regarding it. List something about terrorist training and the cost of $1,500.00. They only pay ahead of time if they have something in writing. If you can't I understand, thanks either way. Fact Finding 21a. Cupples responded to Graeff's April 4, 2003, email as follows: I will get an invoice for the Ireland Study Abroad: Terrorist Issues course. Do you need the figure of $1,500.00 or the full $2710.00? Fact Finding 22. On April 19, 2003, Cupples sent a course syllabus outlining the trip and course goals to Graeff and the other students taking the course. Nothing in either the course syllabus or course itinerary related to terrorism training, law enforcement, criminal justice, or police administrative topics. In a sworn statement, Cupples indicated that the trip was not terrorism training but rather a course on the history of Ireland. On May 13, 2003, Graeff received an invoice dated May 9, 2003, for $1,500.00 from Cupples. The invoice stated that the $1,500.00 charge was for "MAJ -6701 LN- Ireland Study /Terrorism." This invoice was prepared by Wilmington College's Student Financial Service Office. The word "terrorism" was added to the invoice at Cupples' direction based upon Graeff's request. On May 13, 2003, Graeff submitted the invoice to Chief Flanagan. Graeff attached a note to the invoice asking that the Township make the check payable to Graeff as he had already paid the bill. Chief Flanagan approved the invoice. In a sworn statement, Chief Flanagan indicated that he approved and forwarded the invoice for payment based upon Graeff's representation that the trip was terrorism training. Chief Flanagan informed the Township Finance Director that the course was terrorism training and that the $1,500.00 was the cost of the training. The Township Finance Director processed the invoice for payment based on the information provided to him by Chief Flanagan. The Township issued a check in the amount of $1,500.00 to Graeff on May 28, 2003, which was approved at a Township Board of Commissioners meeting on June 16, 2003. By submitting the invoice to Chief Flanagan, Graeff represented that the course was a terrorism training course. Graeff did not provide Chief Flanagan with any course description or the course syllabus. The parties have stipulated that Graeff knew or should have known that there was no terrorism training component scheduled as part of the Graeff, 06 -043 Page 14 Ireland trip based on the course syllabus and trip itinerary. As Lieutenant, Graeff was required to prepare the Police Department's schedules. On June 6, 2003, three days prior to departing for Ireland, Graeff changed the Police Department's schedule, placing himself on "Special Duty School" or "SDS" for June 9, 2003, through June 13, 2003, and June 16, 2003, through June 19, 2003. Special Duty School, or SDS, is a designation used by the Police Department to indicate that an officer is on paid training. The dates listed as training by Graeff corresponded to the dates that Graeff was in Ireland. Graeff listed his status as SDS so that he would continue to be compensated by the Township while in Ireland. Graeff received $2,000.88 in compensation from the Township while in Ireland, calculated as set forth in Fact Finding 37a. Graeff attended the Study Abroad course in Ireland from June 9, 2003, through June 19, 2003. As a requirement of the course, Graeff submitted a daily journal outlining his activities, and a reflection paper based on his observations and experiences, which were accurate accounts of his trip to Ireland. Graeff's daily journal does not mention terrorism training or seminars, and Graeff's reflection paper includes Graeff's thoughts on the culture of Ireland and the historic points of interest that he visited. Following his trip to Ireland, Graeff did not present any information regarding terrorism to the Police Department. In 2003, Graeff was reimbursed $1,500.00 for the Ireland trip in addition to a separate educational allotment of $963.26 that he received in August 2003, which was unrelated to the Ireland trip. By submitting expenses for the Ireland trip to the Police Department and the Township as training and not related to his Master's Degree effort, Graeff received reimbursement in excess of that allowed by the Agreement. The costs for the Ireland trip were not eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the Agreement. The parties have stipulated that Graeff received a private pecuniary gain in the total amount of $3,500.88. This amount includes $1,500 which Graeff received as a result of submitting an invoice indicating that the Ireland trip was terrorism training, and $2,000.88 that Graeff received as a result of his changing the Police Department's schedule to indicate that he was on "SDS" during the time he was in Ireland. As a Lieutenant for the Police Department and as a member of the Zoning Hearing Board for another township (Penn Township), Graeff was required to annually file Statements of Financial Interests ( "SFIs ") by May 1, disclosing information for the prior calendar year. Graeff failed to file SFIs with Muhlenberg Township for calendar years 2002 through 2005. For calendar years 2002 through 2005, Graeff received income from Muhlenberg Township in excess of $1,300 annually, such that Graeff was required to disclose Muhlenberg Township as a source of income on SFIs filed for those calendar years. 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: 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 Graeff, 06 -043 Page 15 Employee Ethics Law 65 Pa. C.S. 1103(a) occurred when Graeff submitted travel invoices to the Township for payment on his behalf indicating that a trip to Ireland was related to his position with the Police Department; b. 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 Graeff when he claimed compensation for time traveled on personal matters not related to his public position; and, c. That a technical violation of Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law 65 Pa. C.S. 1104(a) occurred in relationship to Graeff's failure to file Statements of Financial Interest for the calendar years of 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. 4. Graeff agrees to make payment in the amount of $3,464.14 in settlement of this matter payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. If Graeff has not already done so, he agrees to file Amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 with the Muhlenberg Township Police Department with a copy of each forwarded to this Commission. 5. The Investigation Division will recommend to the State Ethics Commission that it take no further action on this matter and make no specific recommendation to any law enforcement or other authority to take action on this matter. However, this will not prohibit the State Ethics Commission from initiating appropriate enforcement action in the event that Graeff fails to comply with this agreement for the Commission order or cooperating with any other authority who may choose to review the matter further. 6. Graeff agrees to waive his rights to an evidentiary hearing and appellate rights without prejudice to so proceed in the event that the State Ethics Commission does not accept this agreement. Consent Agreement, at 2. We initially determine that as a Lieutenant for the Police Department, Graeff has been a public employee subject to the Ethics Act. Graeff's job duties, detailed at Fact Finding 2, which included approving purchase orders and invoices and performing all duties of the Chief of Police in the Chief's absence, would clearly bring Graeff within the Ethics Act's definition of "public employee," and therefore, the restrictions and requirements of the Ethics Act applicable to public employees. In applying Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the stipulated Findings, we find that there were uses of authority of office on the part of Graeff. But for the fact that Graeff was a Lieutenant with the Police Department, he would not have been in a position to submit travel invoices to the Township for payment on his behalf for the Ireland trip. Such action was a use of authority of Graeff's public position (see, Juliante, Order 809), which resulted in a private pecuniary benefit consisting of the partial reimbursement by the Township of the costs for the Ireland trip. The private pecuniary benefit inured to Graeff himself, who was not entitled to attend this particular course at Township expense. Accordingly, we hold that Graeff violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he submitted travel invoices to the Township for payment on his behalf indicating that a trip to Graeff, 06 -043 Page 16 Ireland was related to his position with the Police Department. In addition, there was a use of authority of office on the part of Graeff in altering the Police Department's schedule to place himself on "SDS" while he was in Ireland. Such use of authority of office resulted in a private pecuniary benefit consisting of Graeff's receipt of compensation from the Township during the time that he was traveling in Ireland for personal purposes unrelated to the work of the Police Department. Accordingly, we hold that Graeff violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed compensation for the time he traveled in Ireland on personal matters not related to his public position. Cf., McGraw, Order 1397; Munford, Order 1390; Espenshade, Order 1387. Turning to the allegation regarding Graeff's SFIs, the parties have stipulated that Graeff failed to file SFIs with the Township Police Department for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. Accordingly, we hold that a technical violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Graeff failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 with the Township Police Department. Graeff has agreed to make payment in the amount of $3,464.14 in settlement of this matter, payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. Additionally, to the extent Graeff has not already done so, he has agreed to file amended SFIs for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 with the Township Police Department with a copy of each filing forwarded to this Commission. 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 of the parties, Graeff is directed to make payment in the amount of $3,464.14 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this adjudication and Order. To the extent Graeff has not already done so, Graeff is directed to file amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 with the Township Police Department within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this adjudication and Order, providing full disclosure as required by the Ethics Act and specifically listing the Township as a source of income, and to forward a copy of each such filing to this Commission for compliance verification purposes. 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. Todd Graeff ( "Graeff "), as a Lieutenant of the Muhlenberg Township Police Department ( "Police Department "), was at all times relevant to this matter a public employee subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. 2. Graeff violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he submitted travel invoices to Muhlenberg Township for payment on his behalf indicating that a trip to Ireland was related to his position with the Police Department. Graeff, 06 -043 Page 17 3. Graeff violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed compensation for time traveled on personal matters not related to his public position. 4. Graeff technically violated Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the calendar years of 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. In Re: Todd Graeff, Respondent ORDER NO. 1455 File Docket: 06 -043 Date Decided: 1/28/08 Date Mailed: 2/15/08 1. Todd Graeff ( "Graeff "), a public employee in his capacity as Lieutenant for the Muhlenberg Township Police Department ( "Police Department "), violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he submitted travel invoices to Muhlenberg Township ( "Township ") for payment on his behalf indicating that a trip to Ireland was related to his position with the Police Department. 2. Graeff violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed compensation for time traveled on personal matters not related to his public position. 3. Graeff technically violated Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the calendar years of 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. 4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Graeff is directed to make payment in the amount of $3,464.14 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this Order. 5. To the extent Graeff has not already done so, Graeff is directed to file amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 with the Township Police Department within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this Order, providing full disclosure as required by the Ethics Act and specifically listing the Township as a source of income, and to forward a copy of each such filing to this Commission for compliance verification purposes. 6. Compliance with Paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Order will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Louis W. Fryman, Chair Commissioner Raquel K. Bergen did not participate in this matter.